w H I ^ Q P jus ffflAi*' . ^THOR .,>• ill / TV * i am XI, £*55? E 4 :h ■■12H / /;■ r®"" •• . s v li \ J( * Rare book — COLLECTION Bx 4 & fuch as Diuinity can affoard no greater, or which is the rruefenfe of Gods word , or how great the authority of the Churh and Fathers ought to be ; therefore with them , Catholiks proofs in points of dodrin, albeit in truth they be Theological demonftrations, take licle effed . Wheras on the other fide Catholique proofes in matter of Fad, are not only Theolo- gicall,buc alfo(that I may fo fpeake ) Mathe¬ matical! demonftrations, becaufe they confift of one principle which is grounded not only Vpon the foundations of Diuini y , to wit the word of God together with the expofitio of the Church and Fathers,but alfo is manifeft by the light of i eafon: which kind of principles thefe are 9Th*t Gods Church hath alwayes bin: that it it one: that it i the aunrientefl of all Churches: that it is a%ayes vifible : hath aitoayes Payors, and the like: And of another principle, which may be tryed by ourfenle and experience, as that the fprefayd properties agree neither to the Procef- * 4 ftants Eth.tl The preface to the Reader. tants nor to the Anabaptifts, nor to any hers- ticall company. And therfore chefe kind of de- jnonftratians jnoiie epen the ruoft obftinatc Jieretiques,and arpeuidenteuen to the moft ig¬ norant and y nlearned perfons. 3. And hence arifeth a fiftcaufeof handling rather queftipns of Faft thenofdoctrin^becaule the fruit of debating thpfe queftions is reaped with more facility and of far more .Forwheras few butdiuines do themfelues perceauethe true jneaning of the teftimonyes of Scripture wher- with the queftions of do,ftrm are debated;as the {rue meaning of the law, few but lawyers the- felues do fee; all perceaue the meaning of thofe teftimonyes wherwithahe queftions of fact are fyift.ty- difputed,whovyillaffoard an attetiueeyetofee, $cat.txtr-0reare'to foeare.And heerupo Cafaubon wrore, ^Baron!' that for to infmuatc into the mind of the Reade r Any Opinion ncfo in controner fie, Baronius hi for yes are of D. Fl^pi-greaterforce jhen Bellarminesdifpntes. And fay4 gnic, alfofometyme.asone moft worthy of credit, who heardhim,told me, that whiles he read Bellarmines deputations, he began to doubt of all Religion, but whiles he perufed Baronius Annales,he felt himfelfe by little & Jittle drawn towards Papiftry: which thing miglht wel haue befallen him and fuch others, not becaufe Car- dinall Bellarmine proueth lefte foundly, for the fixture of the matter, the truth of Catholik Re7 |igi°^ The preface to the Reader. ligioninqueftionsof dodrine, then Cardinal! Baronitis doth the fame in queflions of Fad,but becaufefuch is the nature of the teflimonyes , wherewith the truth of Catholike fayth in que- ftionsofdodnncisproued , that they arc lefTe euidentthen the teftimonyes wherewith the Catholike truth in matters of Fad is proued , and alfo haue many thinges which feeme to be contrary and repugnant to therp . Whereupon it falleth out that forne hearing or reading con- trouerfies of dodrine difputed between Catho- likes and Heretikes, and not beingableof the- feluestodifcern betwixt truth & ihew of truth, either follow neither party, but become vncer~ raine or Atheiftes, or content with any fhew of truth take that part to which any affedion of their will doth draw them .Whereas none by hearing or reading controuerfies of Fad;becorn« meth not more confirmed in the Catholik faith or more auerted from herefy . And therefore Tertullian counfailerh vs, not to difpute with Vr*fcrip. Jlcretikes out of Scripture, by which que- »*• ftions of dodrine are difputed, but aduifeth vs to appeale to antiquity, fucceffion,and fuch like which concernequeflions of fad. 4. Laftly, though the fruit of difputing both thofekind of queflions were equall, yet fith the Author,by order of nature,goet h before thing whereof he is Authour, according to * ? the M*. The preface to the Reader. the order of Nacure we ought to increate of the Author of Proteftancv before we difpute of Proteftancy it felfe» For (as well fayth Tercul- 34J llin ) toothing but God alone kloithout beginning IvhichhoVr much it gotth before in the {late of all giB i # on* t hinges Jo much ou^ht it to go before in the handling ofthem,that the flate may beknoxne. And other where: Nothing u knolone before the beginning* knolone. Wherfore 1 will begin my hrft ditpure concerning the Proteftant Religion of the Au- thour thereof : Yet before I do rhat,1 cauft fet downeand determine whata Proteftant, or the ProteftAnt Church and Religion is, and what is neceffary for one to be a Proteftanc, and dil- couterthe vncertaincy ofProteftants . And this much touching the matter which I haue made choice of to handle in this little worke and the caufes thereof. 5. As for the manner wherwith I vnder- taketodifcuffe this cjueftion of Fad, whether Luther was the firft Author Sc beginner of the of Prose- Proteftanc Church, and Religion, Ipurpofeco proueit only out of thcconfeflions of Luther himfelfe, and of the three forts of Proteftants, to wit5 Lutherans, who profefleto follow Lu¬ ther in all points of dodrine; Sacratnentaries , who notorioufly diflen? from him touching the real! prefence of Chrifts body in the Sacrament* our Eriglifh Proceftams, who differ front / both Why proued only out of Pros &wtif The preface to the Reader • eo'the both the former at leaft in difcipiint & gouer- ^ merit of their Church : becaufe this kind of , a proofe out of their owpe w ordes I find to be [ftnml both neceflary and moft effedtuall with Protc- ftanrs . Neceflary, becaufe of this queftion 0fpa&^ neither the Scripture, or the Fathers N€C€^ir7" \olfc fay any thing, as alfo, becaufe, feeing Pro- tjwwji teftants deny parc of the fcripture , and m- terpretethe reft as they pleafe,and will not ^ ftand to thefentenceof the Church ,Councelsf \ or Fathers,account reafon Sophiftrie, &con- temme the teflimonies of Catholique writers A ' they haue left nothing but their own cofeflios M hy which we may dflpute with them .And! s,Audi pray God they do giue place to their own moft .bjiDil frequent and moft plaine confeflions , and not Wi delude them by voluntary and fritiolous inter¬ pretations ;for then hope may be, that there ittilw- wilbe fome end of thefe controuerfies. At leaft we (hall reaps this profit by this labour, that Mflofik by it fhall be manifeft to all, that either Protef- [purpolb tants will beare no teftimony , admit no ludge- sofiA inent, no not their owne, which is a moft eui- rotita dent argument of a moft defperat caufe$ or that illowU they fhall be condemned by their owne verdid jCflWWi gc fentence; or laftly that there can be no forme icfiifk pf fpeech fo plaine, no words fo cleare, no fen- ^ W0\ tence (o manifeft , which they with their faig- fitk ned figures 6c d^uifes will not wreft, fjruftrate * bob and The preface to the Reader. and delude; which is in effect to diunull al kind of proofc which is taken out of words or teiti- iiionies whatfoeuer. For 1 will bring (o plaine teftirnonies of theirs,as plaine can fcarceor not at all bedeuifed; I will bring(o many,as them- ielues will require no more ; i wili bring fo weighty , as thetrdelues will demaund none more weighty?! wil bring them alio moll freely and often iterated and repeated; laftly I will bring not only thofe which ind.ijredtly and by conlequence proue chat which I would ,buc thofe alfo,Sc thaccfpecially 6c ofteneft, which chre&ly t edify that which they arc brought to confirme . Wherfore either they will not delude thefe words of theirs , or they wil delude ail wordes whatfoeuer; And either they will not refufe thefe their owne teItimonies ajid con. feftions>or they will reiedt all teftimonies and Judgements whatloeuer , which is in effed to confefle that their caufeis mod defperate and mod worthy to bereieftedand condemned of all. Maftef '^'sm^era",° ofproofeisinoft efc fetoaV, tua^ >^or can be of greater force ro con- uince a man, then his owne iudgernent and acknowledgement of the truth? Surely vnlefTe a g rea(6.Inan wl^Pr°fc^e himfelfe to be en enemy of " truth,and of the number ofthem who fee good arid follow bad a he muft needs imhrace that truth oiesii The preface to the Reader • truth which himlelfe contefleth. Experience alfo fheweththe fame For when our Sauiour By could neither by infinite miracles nor euidentneflC€* fcriptures ftop the mouthesof the Iewes ,he fo conuinced them out of their owne words, that (as the Euangelift writeth ) they anfxeared him ^ not a tyord nor from that day any durst aske him a queflion And the Donatilts, when they made aniweare to the Cathobkesargumecs taken out of fcripture , were fo intangled in their owne h£t touching the Maxim nulls as ( fayrh S . ( d) Auguftine (they eucr more flood dumbe at that, C tu And now weiee, that Proteftants are tongue- tied at no(ort of bookes fo much ,as at thofe, which arecompofed of their owne teftimonies. This manner of dealing vfed the holy Fathers Bv the againft the Pagans,as is to beefeen in Clement, Fathers. Tertullian , Qrigen , Cyprian , Arnobius , i aftantius r A uguftin,and others; and againft heretiques alfo, as appeareth in the fayd S. Au- guftin . S . Hierome, and others, mod often , and the fame they moll highly commend . For thus writeth (eJS . Denis of Alexandria: It % „ ^ f 1* I Ttf pl/ ^ helpethme much, that I can dtfproue them cut of -^ j 7< Ct thetr tftonewordess S . (f) Gregorie Nazianzen : 6. It is the great eft cunntn? and tyifdome of/peach to hind ( the Aduerfary ) loith his owne nordes . * * And (s) Tertullian , or Nouatian : It is a ^)Ve frong kind of proofs 9 Schick it taken of the ad 2?;»ix«5* uerjarj The preface to the Reader. uerfary, that truth may heprouedeu e by the enemyts /Tertullian : 1he aduerfaryes teflimony is eftfoones neceffary * A - gaine: / mnfl fir ike them With their oWn weapons* inWhich (fayth he ) I haue the greatefl hope of victory. S Chry- (p)Rom, foftome(p)alfo:Wemuflconuincethem bythis, 5. m epiji, When "tie turne their owne ill fayings againfl them- **ltc* felues, as often asWe make tbofe who Were the fa- moufeH amongfl them, their accrfers . And la- ftly fq) S. Auguftine the moft: fortunate cham- fq) Lib, t* pion of the Church agamft heretiks feeing that tont VtttL the Donatifts could beeuidently conuinced by their ownedealing with the Maxitninifts, ex- horteth The preface to the Reader • borteth Catholikes to let alone all other kind of arguments, and ftill to vrge this only : Remem¬ ber (fay th he ) this only feci of the OA ex mint (Is , ca(l this in their feces, anfacrc to d obieflions by the CMeximinifls alone And (* ;againe: / *toill not leaned ^ this only fail *tohhh God hath put before their eyes toc<^*1 Hop their mo'tthcs, end to emend them if they be wife, or to confound tht m if they remayne ob/tinete. And in like manner, when he fawj that the Donaciftscaufe was quite ouerthrownc by that faying of theirs: Neither one caufe doth pre itidice Another, nor one perfon another, he thus fpeaketh vntoCatholiques: (*)l requettyou, 1 befe.chyou - . for Chrifisfake, that you remember it tjfeake it, *% ^ ^ andhaue it euer in your mout'es .There could not jpoftoU be pronounced on our be halfe, a briefer, furer, and plainerfentence Thus you fee how greatly tho Fathers efteeme of this kind of dealing with he- retikes, and how earneftly thcv vrge vsforto vfeit. 7. And Proteftants ought the more to allow this kind of proceeding with them , be- caufe they much commend it, and preferre it before all others. Luther: There (x) is no flrongcr proofe,then his o^oneconfeffton,\hoisaccujed,9 his teflimony againH himfelfe. And againe: No(*) (u; inc. t. men can conn nee a Iyer better then by his own Voords.1• Heihufius \The (x) fhortfff way of alto conuince an frftib.i* aducrfaryis thetwhLbis taken out of his o tone con»Ccm*. Tbepreface to the Reader . wrote before their Religion was rifen, & ther* foreweanfwerethat of theai,whieh S* Hierotn anfwered of the ancient Fathers, who liued be¬ fore Anus appeared: Before Arms (fayth he) a- . rofe in Alexandria like a noon-tide Diuell, they [pake contr. fome things innocently and not fo warily ,Hvhich • not efcape the obloqttie ofcertainepernerfe men And which S. Auguftin anfwered of S. Chryfoftom when the Pelagians alieadged his teftirnony. Difcourpng (fay th he) in theCatholike Church, he ^ *'co£* thought not that helots other^oifevnderftood None ' loos yet troubled ^nth fuck a queHion\y$u not yet tangling^ he (pake more fecurely. But the Proteftats which we produce liued al afterthac proteftan- cy was both bred and hatched , & after the Ca- tholike fay th had for many ages (hincd through out the world, and therfore could not be igno- rant what wordes of theirs might make for the Catholike fayth , and preiudice their owneCaflander caufe. Another difference is, that none of the Erafmus. Catholikes whofe teftimonyes Proteftants al- Agrippa". leage againft vs, is accounted of vs for a rtian Marfii of fent extraordinarily of God, and much leffe for , a Prophet, Euangelift, or Apoftle .Nay ,many of them are obfeure writers, and of fmall or no reckoning among vs, fome of them are not held PaberSta- for Catholikes of vs,and fome of them euen by Pukn(ls, theiudpments ofProteftants themfelues are our °"^1" r. i cm r nUSUra- open enesiyes . But the conrefiions or faythtius, ** which i (c) Httmf. tid fC, 4 . ir^Camp. (f) Lolloq. ji idebnr. Scbu'fiib , Catal. if. Hunkts pntfat, ttber.arbic, (g) lib" 4. de Ecclef.c.s. ep. 6. dial, cum T ryphon. ^ ugu/tM decihit. thryjoft . bom. 26.1'tf 2. CortCy¬ ril. 1,6. in Julian t (i) Hifr. ec»f. gitaw*. jlrnbro!. ferm. 5. dt 6anUis. Hilar. 1.1. <2T cenlure of the catholike Church, which to be ^ the mind & difpofition of all Catholiks,Procet ftanrs themfelues confefle.For thus writethD* icenon /nj W hi taker: This is the condition\ this the con (n)Cow/r. fent of the Poptjh Church, that all hang theirfalua-*. $. $. t.8. isoto tl9n Vp0n me mm > xWfubmit t hemic lues t a one iCoinT mans judgment. A nd D . (°) M orto'n / Is there a- fsi ny Papist that thinkes any decree of the Pope can he aiM ^ contemned cr broken without cryme or hereby f ( * Citfcll Which fieh it is fo, in vaine do they obiedt any tociffl Cacholikes words againft the Catholike fay th. signal For either they are not contrary thereto, or if recall w they be, they are already reuoked , recalled and lionet difanulled by himfelfe. But the mind and pro- leteSiit ceeding of Proteftats is far-ether wife,who (iib- ;te,atbl ic& not their opinions to the Judgment of the mM Church, bucas they thinkethat Hie may erre> client fo will they hold their opinions notwithftan- es,anft ding her fentenceto the contrary- and therfore the book iuftly may we produce their teftimonies againft pajei.oi their owne Church . dthemot The fife difference^ which is much to be ifeencrf noted, is, that Proteftants alleadge Cathoiik iJiolif1 yvauefles in matters of dodrin P in w hich forwe # * * } tynus ! The preface to the Reader ♦ ti^cont .* tymcsby reafonof the oblcunty oi-che matter a EauftiCtf, man may chance to erreSc fhpjor els in fuch mat¬ ters of fad ,as were in times or places far diftanc frpm them, fo that themfelues could not fearch thetrutb,but belieued the reports of others.Such aqueftion is that of Poptloane ,in which Pro- teftantscite no Catholike author which lined not fomcages after that tin3e,wherin Poptlom is fayd to haue beene. Or if they produce any Catholike Author in any matter of fad, the truth wherofhe might haue tried,either he is of no credit, or the matter is fuch, as it cur neth to no preiudice of the Catholike faith.But we heer produce Proteftants in a matter of fad , 8c fuch a matter as they could moft eafily know. For what was more eafy, then for Luther and |iis fellowesto try either then or euer fince,whe- ther , when he firft began, there was in the world any Proteftaat company , whether it were y ifible , whether it had Paftours, and the like ? For who can thinke, that only the Prote- ftanc company could lye fo clofe hid > that nei¬ ther in all Luthers time or euer fince> eithert he being,or the eftate or condition, or place or Paftours, or any thing at all therof eould be efpiedputof fo many Argufes, which now in pne whole age haue fifred all corners of the world to find it out ? And befides, this is fuch \ qufftipnqfFad yppu thg decifip|i therof m The preface to the Reader. an end may be made of allcotrouerfies betwee- mi\. ne Catholikes and Proteftants. For ( as 1 layd liftatit before ) if Luther be the Author and beginner bid of rhePforeftant Church ^ it is certaine , that it is not the Church of Chrift , nor to be folio* . chPra. wed of Chriftians, but to be forfaken & dete- oie* Mb fted. To which I ad now, that if Luther himfelf opeki & iuch ^ (o many learned & famousProteftats inceii! as i baue cited, do by many wayes, & fo plain* ly confeffe, that Lutherwas the Author therof, Wjiiii it cannot be doubted # but that He was in truth win the Author of it Fori alleadge not men of tl.htii fmall credit among Proteftants , but fuch as are ittl of greateft authority with them ;nor a few , filjfb but many 5 nor of one nation alone, but of Lotiii diuers , to wit , Germans, Italians >• French , Fnglifh, Scottes , Flemings and others; nor wsinit Proteftants ofonefort or (e& ^Jbut of all three wMtfi namely Lutherans,Sacrareetaries and Englilh is,,dt Proteftants. So that they could not beare falfe tlePwii witnaffe in this matter either for wat of know- jilittt ledge , bccaufe they were many and learned & )gjikii of different countries , and moft diligent in ,rplic55 fearching the matter, and the matter it felre fefflUlr moft eafyj nor for want of good will towards [,flowii thecaufe,becaufe they were all moft earrneft ers0ftl Proteftants. And to refbfe the teftimonies of jjjfucli fuch witnefles ina matter of facf, in theirowne time ,foeafy to beknowne^andfo diligently j! ** fearched Note* The preface to the Reader. (carolled of them , what other thing is it, then obflinatjely torefufe to know the truth of this matter fo important to be kno wne, and wher^ by may b$ made an end of ail contentions in Religion ? Wherforelet Proteftants fay as they plea(e,that in queftipns of dqdrine they will not depend vpon Luther, Caluin ,or any one, or all their dodours together , but vpon the (capture alone: Neuertheles in matter of fa (ft , wherof the fcripture faith nothing , fuch as this ;s (for the Scripture telleth not vyhat was the (late and condition of the Proteftant Church yvheti Luther began,in what place it was, what Paftoqrs it had, who faw it, and the like) either they muft confefle, that they refufe all triall 8c knowledge of fo important a trqth , or they muft giue credit to the depofition of (ufficient witnefTes , And if euer men were or can be fufficiet witnefTes of any matter of Facft,Luther andthofeProteftants vyhich here I produce, are fufficient witnefTes of that which 1 bring them for to teftify . And thus much touching the canfe why I proue Luther to haue been the founder of Proteftant Religio only by the tpfl j. WM° rDOn*c§°fProtcfttin^ rnsn y ip . As for the reafon why I alleadge fo ProreOa" many Proteftants,that is,that it many appeare, rvc"a?e l^al^ not the priuate teftimony offome one allied, orfeyythsgenerall confeatofthsm alitor ?! mm ^ atleaft the common fentence of many of them. ' J11 And if I feeme to any Cacholike ouer tedious in ^ heaping vp fo many teftimonies of ProteftantsM 1011511 I pray him to cofider,that I write not this book j to Catholikes to confirme them in the Catholic ke faith , who I know to that end doe not need lIW the teftimonies of Proteftants^ but that I write (poult icpartly to Catholikes, for to furnifli them to®, with ftore of Proteftants teftimonies to ftopp 'cWi their mouthes, and to Ihew them that they are twisili right Hcretikes, that is, condemned ( as the Kk{ Apoftiefpeaketh ) by their owne iudgement, was^li to which end a few teftimonies of theirs would fe)eitk not fuffice.Andtherforetofuch as intend this illtnl ^nd the multitude of teftimonies will not be i.onif troublefome . For who, that indeauoureth to flulcKS yaquilh moft obftinate enemies, will complain oruni of the abundance of good foldiers wherof he j^Liitk may make choice ? And if I had rehearfed only profa fome few teftimonies, and named the places iclilk where the reft may be found ,fome would haue itoDcbj cauilled, as M . Iewel did againft D. Harding, etai that I had cited dumbe witnefles.Befides,feing the iudgments of men are diuers,it may fall out, that what kind of teftimonyes feem ftrong fic lUgst forcible to fomef others acount but weake and jfjppt litle to the purpolejand therfore it was behofull, fome 01 that there (hould be as it were a ftore-boufe of Proteftants teftimonies, that cucry one might '! **$ take tp}Lib. T be preface to the Reader. take what weapon he thinketh fitteft for him., & vfe it againft them . But efpecially I gathered thelc teftimomes of Proteftants for the Prate- ftants themfelueSjthat by their owne mens iud- gement I might withdraw them from their errour. And t her fore I was not (o fearfuii to bring too many for Catholikes, as careful! to prouide inough for Proteftants . In which I client. 8 cou'd hardly offend by muitirude. For as S (p) (r) hb i. Vigil faith: Mans mindpofjeffed^ith the errour of am$. lou. afalfe opinion ,is hard andflo^ to ■ ercetue truth, fiis tum* Ttoitbhdty many witmfesfo cucr it be vrped t her to. * merit „ Oras(q jTercullian writeth .much talke in matter (t) CPbi. of edification is not fouie if at any time it be foule. Z Anjl (£) S-Hieroni: delay is nolofe^henby delay defer ipt.C' the victory is more affured W her upon S.AUguftm si. feci. counlaileth ys, not to regard and delay what- * m loeuer, fo we bring good proofs of what we ?ofn4» .f. fay and (UJ write that M . Brierly in his ceofhis Proteftants Apologie , although it he fluffed way .c. 7. with all kind of Proteftants teftimonies, hath cont^Cref. ^rouS^c hutafew teftimonies. And asS .(*) Te, 8 Auguftin faith of the Donatifts 4 they are ready Cy* Epifl* to deny wvbat they can. Or as S (y) • Hierome ^^. fpeaketh; Shutting their eyes deny what they de Eccle[\ ^ould were hot. For what could be more in- <^>8.4*ipudsntly denyed^ then that which D.f2) Field deny^ch The preface to the Reader • >r f denieth that when Luther began a the publique * K and generall face of Religion in the Wefterne c ^10:; Church was Papifticall? Thefe men need haue wmi their mouthes Ihut , and their eares ftopt with onuk multitude of teftimonies . tor as (*) Caluin hfiii faith J it is the part of kicked & furious obHsnac'te, (*) W*. cwol to difcredit fo many and (o authentic all t eft monies. liiil! Or as an (fc) other fayth : if in a matter of great orjsH importance one only^itnes^erealleadgcdfrhatplace Synt% all pretext of ifl tk not receauing the truth is taken away. In fo great Aim certainty of fo many witnefjesa hefto is there fo great titkji loue ofdarknes, that they open not their eyes to fee m the light t To which I add that faying of Vanus fSAUjilS in (c) Cicero : Either thefefyitnejfes willfuffice > (c) ttb. t. Iclaywk ornothinglvillfujfice. Neuertheleffejchac 1 might definibus* ifriitl both fome what cafe the wearines of Catholikes itMOijt in reading fo many teflimony es, and better fet ojjkfc before the eyes of Proteftants the force of their trly inS teftimonyes, I doe for themoft part roarke in yi themargent thofe teflimonyes which aremoft fljgSjlii forcible, & after I haue recited them all,Igather disS,} the force and fumme of them togeather which ytti he may read, who loatheth to runne ouer fo .Hieror paany. Whym*~ 0 is, I bring alfo diuers teftimonies of the ny fame Proteftants, efpecially of Luther , that it e® fj U pay appeare^that that cpnfeflion flipf not from fam« mS, led " ' aiJecec tledeui fkvery wii j tttyi ym The preface to the Reader • him vnawares ana vnaduifediy, but that it was his conftant lodgement, if there can be any conftancy in hcreukes.For I remember that ( a) 'w * Beza , for to couer Gal u ins foule contradi&ios lalechmt ^imfelfe,w rore » As tf&t t^dt which one hath prafdt,' vvrttten briefly tn (omephce, ft were to be gathc- •bfput . red what he thought of euerypoint of dochtne. I ;ru f graunt notwithstanding , thac 1 haue brought lny ' ft uxT\* *orae teftimonies which are notfo clears, as of .V &mderi themfelues they would conttinct the matter; ^ Yet fuch they are as ftrengthen thofe that are ^ cleare , and of them receiue light • For as in gathering an artnie not only ftout men but alfo fome other are chofen, who may increale the MtflW ftrengthof thofe that are ftout,and likewife may be encouraged by them; fo it fareth alfo in gathering teftimonies .Neither yet did I gather all that occurred;but only fuch asfeemed more to the purpofe. It will alfo delight the reader to fee how fome Proteftants plainly and roundly confefte the truth, others deale more craftily & clofely, and in them he fnal efpy that difference ft) lib. He which5. Auftinfnoted between Celeftius, pec cat.cri- and Pelagius, of whomehe write th, that bet gin. *, u. more ope .this more clofefe more obstinate this more fdfe.he more free, this more Vtly . If any aske how it fell out,that Proteftats fhould giue fuch plain teftimonies againft their own caufe; I anfwere, that there were many caufes heerof. Firft the e- widence indi I hshjM p,k(i ijtm.h bother c lilies arc life that twli here ah thia^t The preface to the Reader . uidece of truth, which makcth its enemies, yea the deuils themfelues fometimes toconfefle it; cr0Ht' The very coyners of/yes(hyth(f)S.Bz£\l)cfte»tyms catchffoith the euidence of truth 3 as \oith afnare, tuen againft their^ilisdowitnesit. Agaiae ,It is the nature of lyes t$ betray themfelues, like (g) as COnt.Mar. Tertul-lian yvriceth : Theeues commonly It due feme thing behind them^tihkhIt^rayeth thtm . For as (H) In fa- S. Auguftirie (h) faych : It is incredible > that he fljouldnot he taken by lyesf^ho lyeth to take others. 9ont% Eunm Oras S. Bafil fij hath :So ititythat emit is not 0*)l» only contrary to good hutalfoto it felfe . And th er (kj him felte • There is no hi ret ike , \ho is not "j.Genef. found offpirit nail men to (peak ag intthimfelf in his (1) %/>• lyes. And els where : This happeneth to tht kicked, aith t 'cm \ho marie and . obferue. For there ffcapeth fome word from them r.q^.c. with which they arc taken. The fame confeffe (1) & :8* Caluin,(mJ Beza, (lx) Whitaker , and others r*^* Another caufe is, becaufc Proteftants ( as here, c. deEmb. tiquesare wont to do,and (°J themfelues con- Hojpm. feffethat they pradifeit) accommodate their^fcolio^ fayingsand dodrineto time, place, and occa- Mdtb foi. (ions, & therfore vtter thofefayings which we ^ here alleadge > before whome and when they thinck they will make to their purpofe ; but^u##* where Tbe preface to the Reader . where they fee they will hurt their caufe, either they deny them, or feeke by friuolous and fond (p) Lib expofitions to auovd and delude them. So the *dDortdc. Donatifts ( as (p) A uguftin notech) would not confefle that, which would haue confounded them, when the Cathohkes vrged it, but after token an other point to a s in handling«A fourth caufe may be giuen , that as the Scorpion affor- deth a remedy for her fting, and of the vipers flefhismade the counterpoyfon-fo God hath ordayned , that herettques affoard fufficienc meanes to refute their errors \ Neither yet therfore • 14. i84* ®7* 30), !*• SI9, vlt. till 33. tu, 21. ttS. 3*. £19# 3f« £3*« X). #33 • 5. tjt. £9. 16«. 5» £36. ir. a77* *4i 290. J*. £95* vlt. i®5. vlt, Jo9. 3&. 3*6. s8< Sutliueinhisfirft bookc of the Church 3 and/#. 2.cap. 9, M.Perkins in his reformedCatfaeliquc to¬ wards the cnd,Caluin in his book againft the Chaun- tcroiXion5a£^4in hisofthenotes of the Church* .. Troteslants exclude PaptFls. 5C am. 51 the Confeftion of Saxony in tiic Chapter of the ' Church, and many others do reckon diuers articles, ^ forcuery one whereoftbey pronounce Papiftsto be ^ out of the Church. And becaufc their opinion bcrc- ?t0, : in is well inough knownc, and hereafter alio we , 1 (hail haueoccaho to fbcw how haynoufly they ceil* l3nc:! dtmnc the Popedoms or Papiftry, I will bcerc rc- 1 ' hearfc no more of their fay ings touching this point. 1 ! The like fentencc they fometymes pronounce of the Anabaptiftsand Arians. For thus fpeaketh the con- Anabap- fcflion of Aufpurg Cap. 9* They cendemnethe Jnabap~tl&*• tifis, who difalloiv the baptiflhe of infants, and thinly them to bfii ypAiie£ witimt baptifme. And t he Confeflion of S w i t - mm zcrlaud cap. 10. We condemne the Anabaptifis, who deny tacit tj:at infants ought to be baptised. The fame is manileft by Ijtki thcEnglilh Confeffion c. g8.5c by the Con fell on of . «tj» Bade c. 24 & others. Of Arians they giuc this ver- Anwnfc lacPipS di^t in theforfayd Confeflion of Aufpurg in the fir ft I to article: T bey condemne all benfiet rifen agair.fi this article :fito ("of the Trinity ) as the Manic bees, A nans, Emomwn &c. rt? And in like fort the French Confcffion art. 6. the inbuilt Eoglifb arc.i. the onfent of Poland,and othersj in i/iW fornuch as in England the Protcftants hauc burnt iMfCb'i fomc Arians. Iff.tf 3. Somctymesalfo they thruft out all here- DbwiiS! tickes. For thus writeth Luther in his explication of Heretiks the C reed. Neither Gentile, lew> Heretike, or any (inner is Lutheras. Wjty (aued, vnlejfe be make attornment with tire Church, and in aU W things, thinke, do, and teach the fame. And the Magdc- M burgians in the preface of their 6. Century: Neither $0 lleretikes, nor deuifers or patrons of fanatic All Gpimn s, are of Chrifl, but they are of Antichrifl, and of the diuell, and apper- jtf to taine to Antichrifl and the diuell: they are the imp 0 fume and iCtd the plague of the people of God. The minfftcrs of the Prince tt( , A z Elcdor Lib* i. 4 ? rote slants exclude Here tikes. Ele^or of Saxony in the Conference held at Ald- burg?in the 3. writjCafloutof the Church all >VVh& (lay they) wittingly and willingly defend fuch corruptions of dottnne, at haue byn condemned by the lawfull iudgmcntand confem of the Catholics Church. And the Mini'tiers of the Duke of Saxony in the 4. writ of the fayd Confe- rence> pronounce this fcntcncc: VVhefoeuerthey are , that do do ak^and defend corruptions of the word of God, that ts \ofthe articles of faythy after they bauebyn admonished^ we iudge not to be true members of Cbriji, vnleffe they repent. And Vrbanus Regius, one of the firffc and chcitclf fcho- lersof Luthery in his Caccchihnc fayth: All Heretikes are out of the Church. T he fame tcacheth Schuildburg, a principal! fupcrintcndent amongff the Lutherans in his Catalogue ofherefics , and many others. As for Sacra- the Sacramentaries,thusprofcllcth the French Con- metaries . fcflion in the 6.article : We dete(l all, Seels and herefies which haue bynreieded by the holy Fathers, as S.Hilary, S. A- thanafe,S. AmbrofcyS.Cyrill. Whereupon Sadeei in bis preface of his anfwereto theabiurcd articles, fayth: Our Confefsion of fayth condemned) all Heretikes. Like wife thcContcflion ofBafle in 24.articie writcth in this fort: We driue away all, whofoeuer diffenting from the (0- ciety of the holy Church, do either bring in, or follow firange & wicked dottrines. And Peter Martyr in his Common places ,in the title of hcrctiks: This in fumme I will fay, heretikes are not other wife to be dealt with ally then tnfdells & liwes* Caiuin alfoin his 2. booke of Inlfitutions cap. 15. number. 1. RightlyAugufin denyethHeretikeno haue the fame foundation with the godly albeit they preach the mmeof Chrijl. And in his inftru&ion againfi the Li' bcrtines: That we may fpeakeproperly, Heretikes are noton< ly like to woluesor theeues, but much worfe.Bcza in his book of purulhing Hcrctiks: Jf one termeHeretikes faithlefft apoflataS) Protestants exclude Here tikes * 5 C a p. i. Apofiatas, he shall gme them their due title. Andagalne; Here tikes affirms chrijl in word) and deny him indeed. Jiasusiii hi* y.Controuerfy and dpi. pag.Anheret?ke y condemned by lawfuH judgement, and actually cap out of the Church, is not of the viftble Church; nor of the inttifibk neither > actually or apparently, fo long as be remainetb in that ft ate . PqUnus innis 7. bookc which he tcrrncth Syntag¬ ma, cap. 5. Heretikes, whiles they rem dyne fitch are not mem¬ bers of the Catboiique Church. And V orltius in bis An- u-bcllatmin pag.zp. The Ghojpellers do eflean Antuhriff in common to be cuery here tike who oppojeth himfelfe eythtr openly and plainly >or clofely and indirectly to Chrifl and his do¬ ctrine. And in the 121. pag. There is no comrouerjy be- tweene vs and our aduerfines touching heretikes, Schifmatihes and Apofi at as properly and truly fo called, that the}' are all wea¬ ther out of the Church of Chrifl. Thus forraine Proce- fiants. In England, hisMaieRy in hisepilllcro Car- EngltQi dinal Peron written by Cafaubon: The Kingdom* mh and detefieth tbofe, who either ham departed from the tan 5' fayih oj the Catholikp Church, and are become heretikes .or from the Communionand are become Schifinatikes. X he Apolo¬ gy of the Church of England p-art.$.diuif. 5. VVe con¬ demns allfortesof theold hcretiks,as the Ariansphe Eutichians &c. and shortly, all them that haue a wicked opinion either of God the Father >or of Chris!, or ofthe holy Ghoji, or of any other point of Chriftian Religion: for fo much as they be confuted by the Gb off ell of Chrifl we plainly pronounce them for damnable and deteflable perfons} and defy them eucn to the dwell. DAVft i- taker in the preface of his Controueriies; if we be he¬ retikes > it is reafon they should warns all their s to fly from vs < And Controucr.2. qucftion. 1. cap. 4. That he proueth heretikes and Apofl at as and Schifmatikesmt to be members of the true church maketh nothing againfi vs. None of our men wr taught that» The like he hath queftion 5,cap. 1. A 3 and Lib, t. 6 Vrotc&ants exclude Scfri[mat ikes* and iS, D.Suciiucin his tint bookcof tnc Church cap.i. Heretikes are not of the Church . D. Morton in his Apology i.part, i.bookccap. 3 affirmeth>that Here- tikes are not to be accounted of the ! hutch in truth but in name, not indeed but equmcaUy: Finally 1). White in his way 10 the Church pag tic* . All beretick* teach the truthinfome things, arJyet ire deny them to be the Church of God. And in ' the defence of the fame way cap.8. fc&.i. there is little or no difference betweene the Diuetl and an Apoftata,or Here- tike- ^ 4. The fame ccnfure they (ometymcs glue elude Sciifmatikes, asappcarcth by the words of bis Schifma- Maicfty,D. Whitaker , and Vorliius already rehear- tiks. fed. Befides, Lueherin his great Catcchifaie com. y. pag.foS.affTrmcth the fenfe of that article ,7 he torn, nitmmoj Saints, to be this: I Iclieue that there is on earth alitle Congregation of Saints,agreeing in all things without fcttts or Schifmes. And McknCfhon in his book agaioffc Swenfeild tom«2.pag*2or. Neither is there more then one Church, the Spoufe of Clniftf.neither d'oih this company c off. si of diners Secies. Salomon Gclncrus in his Common placcsthe 24.placeof the Church : C at keliks arc oppo¬ site toSchifmatikes <& keretiks. The fame tcachech Schuf- fcfburg in his 8. tome of the Catalogue of hercrikes, pag. 72d. 727* Amongfl the Sacramenfarics, the Sa-rame Swifzersin their ConfefIjan,3rticic ij.do thus pro* ranes, fcflc: VVe fo mucbefteemtt.be Communion with the true Church of thrift, as that we teach, that thofe cannot Hue before God 9 who communicate net with his true Church. And the French Protelkntsin theirs,article 2d. VVe bclieue, that none can lawfully withdraw tbefofcities from the affem- Mies. Bu|jjmger in his Epitome or Compendium of fayth 6.bbokc, n. cap: They be out of thts Church, who Vpon emy or contentionfepurate the wfdues from i:er,& without '< " ' - ' - cauji Lutheras. Troteftantsexclude SchifmAtikes. 7Cap. i, OmwI11 caufe will batte fame thing peculiar to themfelues. Mufculus itviiifij aiioin hiscoaimon places, in the citicofthechurch: rtmfc The vnitj of Heretiks and Schifmatikes it b aft Ard and d hided* winy. Truej entier, and Catholike vnity is not among Schifmatikes. hiiwavf® And in the title of Schifmatikes: A Schifmaiikeputteth ttntltti[u himfelfe in daunger of leffe of his faluatipn, in departing from jil liiij \ the Communion of the flocks of the Lord. Tor by that departure, :rb(iiM he ts not only feparated and diuidedfrom that Ecdefiafiicalland Ito/Uitl ext email fociety of the fay thfull, but alfofrom participation of thebioudandjpirit of Chrifi. Caluin iikewife in his trea- tjmm tifeofthcneccftityofreformingthcChurch iVVedo oidi ellii profeffe the vnitj of the Church, fuch as is defcribtd bj S. Paul, jIj rekit. to be moll deare vnto vs • and we accurfe all them, that shall any fctdf, wayviolateit. And in his Fourthbookeof Inftitutions Icjlkd chap. 1. numb. 2 : Vnlejfe vndercbrifi our head, we bevnited K Hini to all the reft of bit members, there is no hope for vsof theeuerla- M inheritance J or we cannot kaue two or three(Chuxchcs) ioolf if vnlejfe Chrifi be tome in pieces. And num. 4. Out of ihe lap tl}e Churcb there it no faluation > departure from thence it aU wayespernicious. Againe nurn.io : Cod maketb fogreataC" sColwi cvunt °f the Communion with his Church as be holdeth him for a III fff renagate andfugitiue> wbofoeuer obfiinatlyfeparatetb himfelfe ifli'Scftiif- from any Chnfiian (octet), which retainetb the true vfe of the fto A w°rd and Sacraments, Andheaddeth,thattbcforfaking tjrjCSj{|{ of the Church , Is the deniall ofGodand Chrifi. The like otkf dodtrinc hedeliucrcth in his Catcchifmc, vpon the i.Cor.cap.i.and other where Polanus in his Thefes ttiilifri paff.i.Fay th : ScbifmaticallCburchesareto be for fallen. And Bucanusinhisp!aces,loc.4i. of the Churchsqucft. 0lfi ^.auouchcthSchifmatiksta be out of the Church, ^ and que ft. y .that they are not vmmallya Church, that is, they hauenotthetruenatureofa Church. The fame ^ fayth Danatus in his trcatife of Antichriftcap. 17. Jthtt And in his 3. booke of the Church cap. 5. writeth- »\i " " A 4 ,hus! >4!" 1 ■. /\ Lib. i • 3 V rote (I ants exclude Schifmatikes * thus: Scbijmaitkes actually excommunicated andcaf! out of the.Church byUwjuUjaucttce,aretio more of tkevifilleChunh. For (lay ch he) the matke that yon be oj the vifihie uhurch, u this, that yott outwardly ppfeffe the jay fh^, and communicate in Sacraments withthereft of we Church.Kca^d there is a Church of God; in fo much that if any for fake thai Church ,it cannot be doubted, but that heis out of the Church. Fifraiiy,Chaniier in hisepi- illeto Armand,excludeth Schifmatikes out of the Church , becaufc (fayth he) they want tbefweerity of the Fn^lifh Saiwwehiil Amongft our Englifh Proteftants, his "protefEts *n hisforefayd epiOleto Cardinall Peron • . All thofe tcftirAGnies of Amp (I in,prove only this, that there is no hope offi! nation for thofe, wholeaue the Communion of theCa- thohkt Church 5 which the King willingly graunteth. D. W h i- tak'cr i TrotefiantsexcludeSchifmattkes. 9 Cap. i. taker in his 2. controller. 5.queit. 6.cap.faytb: It ts fuljey that hereticalI and Schifmancall Churches be true Glmr- thes. Againe; The Catbolike Churchconfiftetbnot of diuided9 but of vnitedmembers. And cap, 2 : The true and Catbolike Church is that, whichconfiftetb of Catholiks.D. Fulke in his bookeof tjbclucccffion of the Church : VVhatauailedit them toeterndfaluationy to haue byn found in Religion and do¬ ctrine ,fring they were cut of from the Communion of the true church tin which alone faluat ion ts, and from her true head? VVhatikilletb it whet her one yh ring drawne bj herefyor Schijme, from the body of Cbrift, be fubietl to euerlafiing damnation? D. Humtrey in bis anfwcrc torhc 3, rcalon of F.Cam- pian: We confeffe, that he is vndone, who is feparatedfrom the follow ship of the Church. And D.Feild in his firft bockc of the Churchy cap. 7; The name of the Catbolike church is appljed to diflinguisb men holding thefaytb mvn'ity, from Sc fmatiks• A ft d i o h i s 2. book c c.2. hc fay th, t h at Schifmatikcs are notCathnlike ChriCtians. Thus wc fee how Protefhnts fomctjmes do reach,that the true Church ccnfiftcthofCaithoJiks,& of mem¬ bers vnitcd not dcuided, that it hath no Schifmes or Sc&s; That Schifmatiks are not Catholiks , that their vnicy is not true, nor Cacbciike, thatthcir Churches ought to be forfaken , that they are not Vniuocally C hurchcs,rior true Churches, that they are not members of the true Church, but out of the Church,altogeatber out of the Church,arid a&ually neither of the viliblc nor inuifible Church ,and that this is an vndoubtcd truth: which cofcflion of theirs trrnft be well noted and kept in mind, for thereby is ouerchrowne (as we (ball fee in the 2• booke) their only argument wherwith they cndcauour to proue, .» that their Church was before Luther, and alfo is de¬ faced their only eflentiall mark of findingthc true A 5 Church, I i :H Lib. i. 10 V rote Ft ants exclude Church,by the truth of do&rinc. For Schifmatikcs (as we lhall heater hem confelle in the 2.bookc)hoid trucdo&rinc, and ncuertheics^as here they acknow¬ ledge) are not oFthc true Church . They ex- ?• like manner they do commonly de- elude barre from their Church, all fuch as deny any prin- tbofethat cipallor fundamental! point offayth- Mciandhon deny any jn his bookc of common places in tnc title of the fundame- Church; They are not members of the Church whopertina- tal article. cjoujijmaintdineerroursoppofite tothe foundation. And in his an 1 were to the Bauarian articles; Saints may baue er- routs, but not fuch asouerthrow the foundation. Inhisttxa- menof thofcthatarcto rake orders: Agreement in the Luiheih, foundation, is a thing tiecejj'ary to the vmty of the Church. And vpon the j .cap.of the i.epiftic to Timothy; The foundation ish eld in the Church , otherwife there should be no Church at all. And in his 79. propofition , tom.4; It is moft certaine, that thofe companies are not the Church of God, who either are alt oge at her ignorant oj the G bo [pell ,orimpHgne feme article of the foundation> that u , fome article of faytb or doctrine of the decalogue > or mai Maine open idoh. Chctnni- tiusin his common places pa. 3. title of the Church: Neither can theft be acknowledged for the true Church, who imbr ace fundamental! errours. And the Lutherans in the conference at Ratisbon, Scf. 14. Mutter in his Ana- lyFsoftfecConfcffionof Aufpurg, Gcfncrinhis24. place , Adam Francis in his 11. p!acc,and other Lu¬ therans commonly agree, that the Church cannot eve Fundamentally, or in the Foundation. And the Confcdion ef Saxony giucth this note, to know who are in the Sacramc- Church: Thofe who held the Foundation. As for Sacra- taries, nfentaries, Caluin irt his 4. bookc of Inftitutions cap.s.num. 1: So fooneas a lye bath broken into the cajlle of Religiont the f mm of mejfarj dottrw u mated, the vfe of Sacra* Deniers of Fnndment all articles* u Cap. ^CU Sac r anient s is fallen, certainly the deft ruction oj the Church en- cW iU€t^>eueti M a wans life is loft, when his throat is cut, or his vi« tall parts deadly wounded. And foone after: ltitcertainc, 011 that there is no Church, where lyes and errour haue gotten to the { ■ toppe. And cap. 19. num. 17 : Withoutdoubttbe Churchof lunUki ^hefaythfud muft agree in all the heads of our religion. Sadccl ^ in ft is anfwcrc to the Thefcs held at Pofna cap. j 2 : I thinke the matter is thus to be defined by the word of ^ God, that if any in what Churchfoeuer diffent in the four,damn ' J of fayth, and be obftmate in their errour\: juch appertain^net to y |f" the vnity of the Church. The like he hath in his anfwcrc 1 to Arrhure,cap . 12. Vefinus in his Catechifmc jW!f: qucft. 54. cap, 4: The whole Church erreth not, nor wholly % nor in the foundation • Polsnus in his Thefis of the Church layth : The Church erreth not in the foundation. The fame tcachcth Zanchius in his treatifc of the ,0IJ# Church c.7.Lubbcrtus in his2 bookcof the Church c ^ Vorftius in his Anti-bcllarmin pag. i^.Buca* W ruis in his 41. place, and other Sacrarnentaricscom- 4^ monly. And with them herein agree our Englifb Englifli •CtitK' Proteflants.For thus fayth his Makfty iti hisepiftlc Proteftats lc® to C ard inall Peron: The Churches are vnited in vnity of Cta),J fayth anddoclrine, in thofe heads which are necejfary tofalua- whip //e fcripturc cap. 7, fed;* 8. and cap. 11. fed.} M.Perkins in Ifis explication otchc Creed :.lf any man or Church, retake, or defend) obftkatly> or of milfnil ignorance, a fundamental! err our, we muflnot account them anymore Chrifliam or Churches. D.Sutiiue in his iir(t bookc of the Church cap. 1: Thofe blemishes tab away the name of the true Church, which are againfl the grounds of fayth. D'.FeM in his 2. booke of rhe Church cap. 3: Purity free from fundament all and effentiall errour, is nece(fat tip required in the Church. D. Morton in the 1. parr ot his Apology, bookc 2. cap 38: Purity of detinue in funda¬ mental! principles offayth, is required to the being and conjlitu - tionof the Church. And in his anfivcrcro the Prote- ftancs Apology 1.4.c.;.Scd, 5: The dcniall of fundamen¬ tal dotirines, doth exclude men from faluation, and difamubth the name of the Church in thegakfayers. D. White in his way to the Church pag. 110 : We do not think? euery company to be the true Church, that holdeth only fome points of the true fayth: but it is requifue that the foundation be holden. And in his defence ot the way cap. 1 7: A fundamental! point is that which belongs to thefubfiance offayth, and is fo tie- etffary that there can be no faluation without the knowledge and explicite fayth thereof. And furely they all, and at ail fymes, ought to affirmc this, feeing they deliuer truth of dodrine , as an cffcnciaJl markc of the Church, which they mud needs vndcrfland (andfo Vorltius in his Anti-bellarmio pag.i48.exprcffcth it) of true dodrine in fundamental! points. And this tfeeir dodrine touching this matter, I earncftly commend to the memory of the Reader, bccaufc it is neceflary to find out, what a Probands, and a]fo isonc of the grounds, whereby it may appearc, that . . >^SSSSSS8SB8SSB^v Dcniers of any article. 13 Cap, u that there wasno Protcftant Church before Luther* bccaule before him there was no company which held ali the lame fundamental! points of do&rinc which Prcteftants do hold . 6 . Finally^ they fometyms (hut out of their -phey ex- C hurch all thole, who deny any one point of fayth, cjutje au beitfurtdamcnjali or other. For thus writeth the A- that deny pology of thcConfeflion of Aufpurgc : ThcChurchof any arti- Cbriji is notamongthemyvho defendnaughty opinions, contrary °f totbe Ghojpell. And Luther in hiscpiltle to Count Ai- bcrt :lt js not hough , ij in other things be confeffc Chrijland his Ghofpell. For who denieth Ckrifi in one article or word, de~ tikth him , who is denied, in all, becaufe there is but oneChrifl» Lutheras. the fame in all his words. And vpon the 17 .cap. of Deu¬ teronomy : Faith fufferetb nothing, and the word tolerateth nothing, but the word muft be perfectly pure, and the do fir ine alwayesfound throughout. And vpon the 17. cap. of S. Matthew: Fayth muft be round , that is, be lieuing all articles, though (mall ones, For who btlieueth not one article rightly. be¬ lie uetb nothing righly, as lames fayth , Who offendeth in one, it guilty of all: and fo who in one article doubt etb or belicueih not (at lea ft obilhatly) diffoluetb the tawdries oftbegraine, andfo can do nogood. And vpon the 5. cap. to the Galathians; Indemnity a [mall err out ouerthroweth all the doftrine.Dottrine u hhe to a Mathematicallpointftt cannot be deuided, that is, it cannotfuffer either addition or detraction.And when Zuin - glius and his followers dehred of the Lutherans to beefteemed as their brethren jMelan&hon fas FJof- pinian reporteth in his Sacramentarian hiftory fol. 81.) roughly faj/d vntothem: We meruaile with what con* fciencethey can account vsfor brethren, wbeme they iudge to j erre indotfrine. And againefol.82. Luthergrauely(pake vnto them, faying: he greatly merueiled bow they could hold him for a brother} if they thought his doUrine to be vntrue. And the fame Lib. V' 14 Vmefiants exclude fameMelan&hon togcather with Brentius writcth thus to the Lanrgrauc: Perhaps Chrifliansywhoare en* tangledin fome err our, which they do not obflinatly defend, may he tolerated at brethren* but they which not only bring falje do¬ ctrine into the Church, but alfo maintaine it > are not to be ac¬ knowledged for brethren. And againc Melandhonin his cxamen of thofe who arc to take ordcrs,toni. 3. There are in that company (of the Church) many who are not Saints > but yet agreeing in doctrine. The Dcuines of Wittccnbcrg in their refutation of the orthodoxall confenc pag. 73: Like as he who keepeth the whole law and offendetb in one (as lames the Apofllewitneffeth) is guilty of all: fowhobelieueth not one word of C hrift, albeit be jeeme to beliue the other arti¬ cles of the Creed* yet belteueth nothing, and is to be damned as incredulous. for eueryberetike did not impugne eucry article of fayth, but commonly each of them of purpofe impugned [ome one or other ywbomeneuertheks the Church iusily condemned as he- rettketyftbey pertinaimfl) flood in their err our s. Schuflfd- burgalfo in his3.tam.0fthe Catalogue of Heretiks, pag. 8 5. Christian fay this one copuUtiue* and who denietb one article of fayth ycalleth in doubt the whole body of the heauenly doctrwe. Which he rcpcatcth againe in the next pag. And tome 8. pag. 361 » The Lutherans do fly him* who de- praueththe doctrine of truth in any article whatfoeuer* And in his2.bookeofCaluinifticall diuinity,artic!c 1 :VVe are cer tame by the teHimony of Gods word, that an err our in onefalfe do time* obfttnatly defended, maketh an here tike, for S.Cbryfoftome rpon the epi&le to the GaUtbtans fayd mofl tru¬ ly ytbat be corrupted the whole doctrine who ouerthrowethitin the leafi Article. AndAmbrofe wrote rightly to the Virgin Deme- triasy That be is out of the number of the fayth fully and hath no part in the inheritance of Saints, who dtfagreeth in any thing Sacraro£- from the Catholike truth. Thus the Lutherans .Peter ftries. Martyr in his cpiftlc tp the ftraungcrs in Engiand torn. Venters of any article i y C a p. & tom.2.1oc.coI.i;6 : Weanjwcre 9adthe wordsof God, at fane forth at thy proceeded from him9areofequaU waight and authority) and there)ore none may receiuethis, and reiett that at falfe. lames faytb boldly ^whofmneth in one, becommethguilty o) all. r hat j if it bane place in keeping of the commandements, is alfo true in points of faytb* Sadeei in his index of lurrias Repetitions pa g. 806 : Ifayd, that it was no true Churchy which teacbetb dotlrine repugnant to the written word of God. And his Maiclly in his Monitory epiftlepag. 97.in Englifh^ Latin: I call God to wttnes, that I hold him not for a Chriflian PtQteftftf who in this learned age belieueththat. (to wit, that Enoch and Eiias arc to come.) And D.Morton in hj# an- fwerc to the Protectants Apology lib. 4. c. 2.fc&. 3. after he had fayd, that in a Church, albeit corrupted with errour and fupcrfticion, yet if it do not ruinate tbc foundation, the erroneous 6c fupcrftitious pro- fcflbrs may be faued , adddeth: Which notwitkftanding we mufi fo vnderftand, as that the errour andfuperfition do not proceed from knowledge but from ignorance, which ignorance is not affehed butftmple. Thus we lee that Proteftants fom- tymesconfcfTc that truefayth is like a graioe, or Ma¬ thematical! point, w hich cannot be parted * thatthe articles of fayth are one copulatiuc, and cannot be deuided, that who fo obftinatly denieth one article, bclicuctb, truly, none • that the obftinate deniall of any one poynt of fayth is (ufficicnttodamne »or to make an hcrctik, and no brother of thcfaythfull, oc member of the Church . And finally, that (he is no true Church , who willfully maintaincth anyone thing repugnant to the Ghofpeliorword of Cod. Which indeed is moft true , and is the dotfrine of the holy Fathersand Catholiks.and I would to God Protcftants would constantly ft and vnto it. 7; By aU, which hath bynrehearfed in this chapter v s Lib. i. 16 F rote Hants exclude chapter out of Proteftants, itappcareth how many fortes of Chriftians , Protcftants do fdmcty fines ex¬ clude out of the Church, namely Papifts, Anabap- tifts, Arians, al Hcreriks, all Sehifmariks > all thole, who deny any fundamental! point of fayth , and fi¬ nally ai who obltinatly deny any point whatfocuer of fayth, or of the word of God. And bow many thingsthey (ometymcs require to the making and beingof a Prorcftanf, to wit ,that he bdicuc ail and cuery point of their fayth, and obftinatiy diflent in none. To which their do&rine , if they would(as! haucfayd) alwayesCQnfhntly hand, if would eafily sppeare,firft how Imali a company the Protcftants Church is, and how little it is fpread through the world,and much leffe Catholikc or vniucrfal,fccing there is no Prouince ,nor fcarf^any citcy, in which all Proteftantsagrce amongh themleiucs in al points of their dodrine. Secondly it would eafiiy appeare that the Procdlanc Church was neucr before Luther, fccingthere is no apparence, that before him there was any company of Chriftians who in all points ofdodrinc agreed with Protcftants. But Proteftars (as I fayd in the Preface) accommodate their: do- they fay: We are all foldscrs wderone dercbrift.c^r$* Anc* Luther in hiscpiftleagainti the Anabap- tilbOs Caluinin hisbookcagainft the Chaunter of Lions, andD. Whitekcrin thcplacehcrciftcrcited The ker- coniclTe ) writcth : Thai in Popery u true Cbrijlwatj) eel of )'e4 tbe kfrijeli of Chrifliamty, and many pirn and great Saints* Chriftia- Aga i nc: lj Chnfmniif be wider the Pope, then is mufi be the i»ity in My and member of Chrift. And vpon the 28, chapter of Popery. Gcncfi*; VVe confejfe, that there it a Church among the Pa* pifts, becaufetbey bane Baptifme, absolution ^ the text e] the Ghuffeu^ and many godly men 4re hmngthem. Caluin in ius l4o.epiliicto Sozin: lthinl^l bancfufficientlyproued.tbat in Popery there remaynetb fome Church, albeit baife deftroyed, and if you will, broken and deformed. And vpon the 2. •yhe "Body chap, of the 2 epifile to the ThctTaloriiaos; Iconfeffe ofChnft n -j {j}e teftnpie 0fg0(i t in w\}ich the Fife rtdeth\ and be ca&eih it the very (anftuary of God. And, dc vera-reform, pag. ^a^me "332. ay th, that S Paul afjimctb that Anthhrtji (whom he |fines* w ill banc to be the Pope ) shall jit in the temple of God. And lib.de fcandalis pag. 103: in themidefl of Gods tenU fU. And lib.com. Precentorcm pag. 272 zlnthevery fanftuaryof God, And Rcfponf.ad SadoIct:l»t/je»ttVdf 0/ Gods fafsftuary.Surcly thh is to graunt, that the Ro- mane Church, in which the Pope fittethj is the very ternplearid very fanftuary of God; And in his an* fwcarc to Sadoleum deny not thofc to be Gharthes of Cbrift, ^ include *9 Cap.J* drift „ which you goueme. 1b n;s 4. bookc of Infii us- l , tioos,chap.2.jnum.ii.hcfa)th, that among Papitis ' ' Gods couenam remayntdinuioUble. And num. iz We deny ^ot fit ^ not, that there are Churcfys among them* Neither atny we, killed. r,j r but there n mum Churches vndefhu ft he Pope he mean e t b ) tyranny, bttt whuh he hath aim ft kdiedAmnm in hiybpok of the Church , carp. 17 writecb that the Popilp j; ^'1 Church,^ fane&s it bath that tihicb hbngeihtsthedefui- 1 k! 1 tkn of a Cbitrch, jHi church -y that it hath notgmn vp the 1Uilf; gheft, that it hdtb all dmiue things, and of Gods part is yet the y**/ct lM li cbttrih. Z jnchiu£ in the preface of his bookc of the c* * J11" nature of G od ; Satan euen in the very Roman Cbuuh could ,c¥) m bring all things to that pap , that it should no more halt the T:c forme of* Christian Church. And taonc after; VVbere- jwjiiiii tbe %mun church is yet the Churfb of Cbrift. Pkfsy liipitit -n |1js bookc of the Church 2-chap. auouchcth, that ^Sfch,i mp tbc j^oman Q hnrch is the Spoufc of Chrift , is not 0 rl itliiiiji yctforlaken of him, that as a Mother, fhc bcarecb * uikioM chtjdrc& t0 God (which he repeaterh ^gainfcin the 4frd,ii jo chap.jthat Ok rctaincch life , and that the name U • Wm o\ the Church ought no more to be denied to herd yponir then the name of a nianyritoa liuingman . Bucati ijoiite jn his4T. place of £heCburch?queft.$: Theajfcmblusof Vapidsare Churches,# a man wfefted withlfprofyor be fides bis iictofij wiltes, doth wtUaueio be a man. Polanns in his firll part Ui(wtiomk and Thcfisofthe Church : The Roman Church trhly is a iMffefffiiJ church *y becAttfe Antichrifl fitteth in the Cbmch. And in his Syntagme of diuinity lib. 7. c. 8 : thefrefent Rowan Church is yet the Chmcb of Chrift: Serauia in his defence of the degrees of niinif!crs»pag.^o: the Roman Church % fjjjtM5, is a Church, and mark^ what I fay more, she is our mother , i» IjjrtYfl) dome and by whom, God did regenerate yi. And pag. 31; i in lib I he cotseuant of God remayv.eth t his day in the latin Church* tCtoM BojiTcul in his confutation of Spends pag.d : lifx* aft B * elude Lib. i. 20 F rot eft ants fometymcs elude not the Reman Church out oj tbcvmuerfaU Church. 1 acknowledge her to be yet irtihc couenant oj God which he rcpeatcth oftcntymcs.And pag 12: The Roman Church, is the Church of God. Pag 19 : It ts a member of the vniuerfai Yet the Glwrch.p.iS$:it uyetthe Chuuh,Spoufeand temple of God. Church And pag. 821: We deny not , that the Roman C hunhtsthe Spoufe & Church of Ufits Chrifi, redeemedb) him* Vorftius in his temple of An ri~ bell arm in p. 18 8:1 he vulgar Roman church hath net God. jei fop an fpirituall life, is not yet openly deuerccd pom C hrijl. And Peter Martyr in his cpiitlc to Bullingcr, vvri- Yetaliue. teth5that hegauecounfailc, that thePapilU & they (hould not call one thcothcr Hcrctiks ,butaccoi nt themfelues for brethren AsforEnghft Protcftanis, his Maicfty in his (peach to theParlamenr, anno Englih 1605.9. of Noucrnbcr, and put forth in print ,fpea- Proteliais keth ihvss :VVedoiufllyconfeffeyhatmanyPapPls, efpecially our forefathers, laying their only trufl vpon Chrtfi and his me¬ rits, may be, and oftcntymes are faued • detefting in that point, , and thinking the cruelty of Puritans worthy of fire? that will ad¬ mit no jaluation to any Paptft. And in hisepilMcto Cardi¬ nal! Pen n : The Rowan, the Greekjfrc Churches, are mem" hers of the Catbolike Church. And D.Andrews in his Members Xortura Torti cowards thccnd>(peake?h thusto the tho ike : VVe are content to call you members of theCatholike Church. Church, though not found members % Hooker in his $. book of Ecclcfiaiticall policy pag. 128 : We gladly acknow- Of the ledge them ta beoftbe family of lefus Cbrifl And lib.f.pag* family of 1 ^ : T®7 should acknowledge fo much neuerthelesfliU due to Chrift. the fame Church ( ofRomcj astobeheldanireputeda pan oftbehoufc of God, a limine of the vifible Chuuhof Chrifi.D. Coucl in his defence of Hooker pag. 68.fayth : Wo affirmethtmof the Church of Rome, to be partsoftbe Church of Chrift, and that thofe that Hue and dye in that Church, may mwithfianding be faued. D. Barlow in his 3. fermon ad Ckrum; PapiAs roav be faued. May be faued • Note, include Papists. 21 C a p. t Cterurn: The learneder writers do acknowledge the Church of Rome. to be the Church ojGod. Ad.Bunny in his rrcatife of Pacification, let1.18 : «>/?*( Papifts& Pro- rcftan ts) may ittflly account the other to be none of the Church of God. V Ve are nofemail Church from them, nor theyfrom vs. D Some againit Pcnry in diucrs placesauouiccth. That Papifls are not altogether aliens from Gods couenant* That in the iudgement oj all learned men , and all reformed Churches, there is in Popery a Church, a Mtmjfery, a true Cbrifl: If you think that all the Popish feft which dyed in the Popish Church, are dunned, you thinkabfurdly, and dijjentfrom the iudgement of the learned Protefi ants. D.W hit nHzr u\ his fourth controocrfy qucft. 5.cap. 5 cailcth the Papfts Chu rch, the temple of God, more then half eMad, and alncft decayed. And thattemple,wherein the Apoltlelav.h, that Antichrift (hail fit , and which he affirmcth to be the Roman Church , he termeth the very Chant of God, the true Church of God, the focuty.of the faythfulL^he liuely temple compofed o[liuelyjlones-Juch as are the faythfull & the eleft. And he addech: There ts aitootig them_(Papihs) fame Minifiery and fome preaching of the wordy which dttilt* lejfeaffordethfaludtion vnto fome. And as the giftes of :Gcd are Without repentance; [0 the couenatit which God made with Cbrijtianpeople> ts Mt quite'broken.Andcont. 2.tjucft. 5. q0(js cap.iy.afrerhchad confcffed > that Luther had fayd, uenant that in Popery are all the goods belonging to Chri- with Pa ftians,thckeycs , the office of preaching, true Chri- pifts. ftianity.and the very kcrnell of Chrifhanity- he ad¬ der h: Thefe things are indeed among them. M. Powell in hisi.bookeof Antichrift,cap.2.graunteth the Ro¬ man Church to be the true Church, albeit with ft new kind ofdjftin&ion he deny the Popifh church. AndD Rainoldsin his y.Thcfis, albeit he fay that the Roman Church be more then ficklyand wcair, ^ B 3 - y.i co- ' *- **3 Trotc$Unts[ometymes yet he dares sot lay that 4be is quiWitead. And D, White in his way,p. 352. fay tin i'hat Popery inasmuch Oi it diprcih from y-s i, is not ro be imagined by vs to be another C.hurchdtftinctin plate and countries from the true Cburth of Qbrift 1 bat we a fir me u to be a contagion > raging in the midji ofthe Clmcb ofchrifi it filfe. And is his defence c. 37. pag+%yytlneuer denied theChurchof Koine to be thevijtble C hurchof God, wherein our amcejhrsprofijfed the 1 ruth, and were fitted. And cap. 41 .pag. 408 : Projefjing the Chureff ef Romsitfilfe in all ages, to banc byn therifibk C bunh ojGod. iafl'Iy D. Hall in his Rome irrcconcHiabiclect. 1. layth, that the Roman Church u x uue vfible Church, but not found, and ihatpt differcrh from thfc Proreltanc G hui Chr As the'tful^ fiom the whole, Heereto 1 add«,(h it qftentyoics they call the Roman Church their Mo¬ ther j which'-bath borne them' to Chriftwc Osa«l rcbearfe hereafter, & chat before Luthers tyme they feeke their Church iu Popery , and amongfttbe Pa-; pifts. < ' ■»2. Secondly | proouc this fame out of that which diuers tymcs they gtauntj that the Roman That Pa-Church holdcth all the fundamental! articles of pifls hold fayth , which t-hemfelues commonly teach (as hcrc- ihc fgun- aftcr {hall be shewed ) to- fufficc to make a Church, dation of jheii CoafcfliotscftAufpurg in the 2 t\ chapter ta) ta. - h2fh thefc wodts- This is almoft the fimme of dottrine among vs, in which as it may fee we , there is nothing winch differeth from fcripture, or from the Catholike Church, or Lutheras.yjp^i^jRoman Church ,fofarre as ft appeareth by writers. All. the-diffent'ton is about feme fewabufes 5 which bane Crept into G hutches without cert aim authority. W hereby wc fee The fume chattthe hrft and auncienteft 'PiWefUnis, publik- offaith so iy profiled j that they differed not from the Ro- PopeT* ujsnQhurch ia th^fifmmeqf dodrine ybut that all • * - * :: h~H>-' • • . •• their Lib. i. 14. Vroteftffltsfometymes ThustheLutbcrans. Ot tnc Sacramcntaricsjutrius cncrame- in his y.controucrfy Jib. cap. 19. wriretb thus of arics. P*pifis»Jbiitherans, and Caluinilb: VVc agreeinthe eJfgpfwS foundation.Zarichiu$ in hbforefayd preface: hfientiall Indefpiteofthe Diuclltbat Cbmb (of Rome) hath kept the idati principal!grounds of fayth.Boy ffeui alio in his forenamcd c nfurarion pag.79 : We acknowledge that it if pure in the cheife articles of Qhrifiian Religion. And Vol ft ins in hi* rinKpali A n t i - beilar mi n pag. x8S.lt is manifejf that there are ma- ounos ny in that company (of Papifb) who rightly hold the funda- of ia)th . mcntaU point s ofour Religion. And of the Eng! i/ include Papijls. t y c a p. a KjlitJ offayth, we agree with them. Laitly D. Hall in his forc- layd bookc layth , that the Romanc Church is one The fub* 'Jfffisil touching the common principles offayth. Thole things which she ftantiaU holdeth together with vsy make a Church. As farre as she holdcth artic*es * thefoundation ,she is a church. to,fN 5. Thirdly, the fame point is proued, by that ^he 'fm they grauntfomc to befaints, whom they acknow- kdgcaifoto haue liued and died Papifts •ForolS. Bernardsholines thus writeth Luthervpon the 4»cap. difcfo to the Galathians: Bernard a manfo hol/ipious chajt,&c. The Apology of the Confetfion of Aufpurg in the , , chapter of anfwere to the Argutneti : Antony>> Bernard, pAy(ornJ ntKhi Francis, Vominicketand other holy Fathers. Brentius in his ptpiftsbe %! Apology for the Conkffion of Wirtcnbcrg pag. 297: faints„ ipolicj! I iudge Bernard to haue byn a man indued with great pie ty,and Mm,] to Hue now happily with Cbrijl, Caiuin in h is 4. bookc of imi# inft itutions c. 7.011m. 22: Gregory and Bernardholy men. ildinfei, Vorftius in Anti-bcllarmin pag. 181: VFegrauntBer* nardindeed to haue byn pious. Lubbertin bis o.bookeof imW the church c.7: We tbink^Bernard to haue byn truly My. W,D,& D.W hi taker cont.;.queft.f .c. 14:1 take Bernardto haue plfjf byn holy indeed. And D.Morton in his Apology part.2. Mr )rb.2.c. 2 ; : I confeffe Bernard was a Saint. And as plainly dutijlf do tbey confeffe that he was a Papi A:. For thus Lu- fiiijtU thcr in the placcnow cited: Let vs imagine that Religion vftiim and difcipline of the ancient Ropery to flourish now, and to be ob- ilbliM firued with that rigour» with which the Fremiti, hieromet rl'ji/ft Auguflin, Bernard, Francis, and many others obferued it. A nd U|i)l in hisbookc of abrogating Mafic: Bernard, Bonautnture% f0 Francis, Domimckc»with their followers, not knowing the Pope, l/tof* < &id honour his Kingdeme; belieuing all things thereof to be good Will andiufl,and of God. The Magdcburgians in their 12. DJjii Century col. 1657. fpeake thus of him : He worshipped 0ti the GodofMaozim (they mcanc the mafic} tillthelaft mo- . , J ■ > - B 5 went Lib- i.i6 TroUjlantsfamtymes went ofhis life. And in the ocxtcwiumnc : Hemsamofl eager defender#} the feat of Antictortft-. Mtl&n&bon in his bookc of the Church ,a»d vpon the 14, cap. to the Romanes: He yelded t» many cnours to the Abufes of the Majfe, tot be Popes power, tovowtr, to the worship of Saints. Danasusin hlscontroucrtieSjpag. jig.fayth :Be ap- pronedthe Popery. M.lcwcllin his defence ofthc Apo¬ logy 21. art. diuif.8 pag.450: Bernardtpasamomk, and lining in 4 tynte of fucb corruption s and being car yea with the tempejl andvulence ofthe fame ,mufi &c. Bale in his a.eeiu . tury of writers pag. 177: He incteafed the authority of the bishop of Rome y At much# he could. O .Fcild vpon the 14. . or S.Matthew 2 Bernard wm decerned with the errcur of Pt~ tm Paper ioriiy. And D. Whitaker in his aafwerc to the 7. rcafon or Father Csmpian: Rernardyvhomc alone your church in nun}] tans hath brought forth j holy man. Arid 1$ his4. controu«rfy ooke cap. 3. and notwithftanding dare not fay, that they be damned, yea.confcfTethem to be faued.Luther in his bookc of priuate maflfc enquireth , what is to be thought of our auriccftbr-s who haae founded innu¬ merable Ma Acs ^and anfwerech :1 cannot tell certainly. But vpori the 41.cap, of Gcnells, he layth : Doubtleffe mMiytiiuibyn fjucdvmet Popery. And vpon the 5,or S. Matthew :'Iither*do tec condemns the Cbyifdam uho lined Qur p0. vndmhs' Pope. Brent ius in the preface ot hisRecognLpifh fore- 1 ton : We doubt net, bm that many haae ebuyned truefalua fathers tioH Hi Fcftfj. ofeabder i n hi * Manual engliCbed : FF^faued, do wccondmneourgodtyaMcjloYi who lined intjme of Popery. Zuihgliusif) his a£fce*ofto adiudgt our anceftws, to damnation. And D. White in hit defence pag. $5 6 ; / ticner denyed t he ch urch of R me to be the vifiblechitrcbof God, wherein our anceprspeffejfed the true faith arid were faued . Bat bow could our Popiibanccftors be not damned, how could they be faued, vnles they were in the true church ? out of which eucn Protc Aants themfclues conkflc,that there is nomination) , , but only damnation. confeffe 4. Fourthly I prooue that ProtcAants cati-true mif. not deny Papifts to be of the true Church, bccaufe (ion and fhey oftentymes both by word and deed ackneW- Payors in ledge rheyocauonaudMiffionofPopiflj Palters,to Popery- •* 0 "r~~ * '* ' be Lib. j. 28 ? rot eft a,nts fometymcs be lawfall and luificicnc to make a rruc Paftour of the Church .Luther vpon the y. cap.of S.Matthew: We confefje that amongfl Papifis are pulpits, Baptifme, Sacra* ntents, and all other things belonging to Apcfiolicad vocation and funttion. And in his bookc oi priuate mafic; Therere* rn me thin Popery,Vocation, Ordination, Mini]} cry of tWword, and kyyes to bind andloofe. Againc: Christ hath conferued his Mimjteryvnder Popery. And as is before cited: There is all Chrifiiangood in Poperytihe kcye*> the charge of .preaching &c. lobn Regius inconfiderat. Cenfurx pag. 93: Although it be true that the Popish mini fiery was depraued with [unary traditions and deuifes of men ,yet had it thofe things which were tsecejfary to faluation. Buecr in Rom 8. pag 427.telling Vsby what authorityandright hcptcachcd Protc- ftantifme, fay th : I badbylawjull meanes already attayned the charge to preach Cbrift, and to teach thofe things which he commanded. lunius lib. fingulari de cccief.cap.17: God calleth the church wherein Popery raignetb, by his (pint, by his word, by the publike inftrument of that holy marriage by the mimfiery>by (acred affaires&aftions. On Godspart thefe things are apparantlyin that church. Plefsy lib.de Ecclcf. cap.n. p. $61. The vocation (of our men) is the fame that they (the Papifts) boafi of Pag. $62 : Our aduerjaries and ourfrfi mi* ttifters had the fame EcclefiafiieaH calling. Boyffcul incon- futat. Spondxi pag. 486: If isnoreproach for our Pafiors to haue iffued out of yours ^ or, at you fay, to haue bad their voca* tion from yours. Moulinslib.i.dc vocat.cap. 5. pag. 20. endeauouring to vphold the calling of their firft Re¬ former!, fayth : They haue that calling which is ordinary in the church of Rome Pa.21 : They had their calling of the Pope* cat*. 9-pag. 3 6: They haue the fame ordinary catling which our aduer(trieshaue. And Iib.2.trad. 1. cap. 1. pug. 172; The calling they had in the church of Rome , fufficed to bind them to preach. And pag. 173: Their emmiffm was no other then the. ordinary m itomj include Tapijls > ap c a 2* vuuhcwf wdtMrjcharge ♦ Serauia in dclcn. Grad. minifLcap. 2» lK% Pag'3i.FF* notto thwkeyWatfaihe church of Rome VK«ja,' ecclefiajiicall mimftery ts decayed. an# p*g»3 y.iiikenot their to.'tto frowardnes, who acknowledge no mini-fiery in the church qf rjof to#! Rome, but deeme ah th at is there,dittelish. ibid: Bez.a doth ex - tojfliil agitate Popish orders ouer much, wherein J feare leafl he pre- ditlmij. iudueagoodcaufe D*AVhitakcrcohtr.4 qucihycap.^ :fni% ps- 682 : The Papists haue jome fort of mimftery. and jomc Hi'% preaching of the word, which doubtles auaileth many to fatua- ii wiijffl *ion and other where (as is before cited) Among the Pa- frith ftf* thereare the keyes, the office of preacbtngt&c. m.Bell in his firit bookc or the Popes iunerall cap. 5. affirme.ch icntdp:; had rcic&ed only thcaccidcntsot his Popilh y^u orders, but rctayned thefubftance ftill. m.Mafon in ihiiijib's 5-bookcof the ordination of minifters, cap. 12, inuri fajtfa j popilh ordination confutes of two (liifron parts, to wir,of power to offer facrifice, & of power wf^j to adminiftcr the word and Sacraments, and albeit hcrcie&ech the former, yet the later hcapproues, as ccjt( (!?i t h a t wherein true mimftery cenfifteth. sadecl refpon. ad (1yj| artic. abiurat. 61. And Vorftiusin Anti-bellarmm idJi pag. 177* teach the fame- and fo muft all others do, ftulitii wil0 bold the million ofLutber and their firft mini- r fters to haue byn ordinary, and rcceiucd from the Life Papifts: which opinion moft Proreftants do now follow, retracing, vpon better aduife their former Si ^dcrtion, & confcffing that the million of their new Reformers, w^sriot infubftanccextraordinary.And | jf| tbeir deeds and anions do no leffc declare their ap- ^ probation and cftecmc of the million andPailorall ^ | charge which is in the church of Rome . For as flifi' jurr»*n reporteth lib.2.dcEcclef.cap.$.and Luther " , ■ intimatcth tom.i.cpift. ad Bohdmos, when thcCa- jh ^holike Bifhops eiuc ordcis.the Hulfites of Bohemia m — - - ftcalc Li b «i • 1° m fntcflwts [ornetymts licalc in priuilyamong the red. 1 he Lutherans alfo made futeto thecdatsofthe Empire, that their mi- Sliders might rccemeordcrsfrqm thcbilhops ofMiL fiiaand Nurhburg. Andinartic. 10. Sanaicaid.rhey profeCfe thus: 1/ the bishops ( of the church of Rome ) would truly execute their office .and looke carefully to the church And word of God% it might be permitted them togtuc orders voto rs and out preachers. You may addc hereunto j that nei¬ ther Luther nor any Reformer cife euer fought other ordination* then what they hadreceiucdof Papiib- and that in the beginning of Qucenc Elizabeths raignc, the (uppolcd Prelates carncftly befougbr a Catnoiike Biiliopco confecratethem. Andeucnco this day * if any renegatc Pried ioyne himfelfc ro the ProteftantSjthsy order him nor anew, butdeemc him fit for their rninideriall funxdion , by vcruaeof theordcrs he receiucdof Papids. Now if Papifls haue true Midion , true paftorall charge, and true Tmewiif. Padors,furcly t^cy haue,alio the true churchy it be- flonand ingimpoffible,that the church (bould be fcucredfro Paftors the true Paftours^or that the keyes of beaucn which infepara- are in the true Padcurs hands, Ihouid be out of the h!?{t6P* church, or that the power to remit iinncs, the pfc- ' rogatiue of true Paftoors, fliol.d be where the church is not. Nay, the Protedants thcoifelues confclle as much • Luther torn.4. in cap. 4. Ofesefol. 295: True his, that the Miwftery is only in the Church. Mclan&hon torn. 1. Lutheri difputdc Ecclcf.P0lit.f03.485: The ordination of Mint ft m is one of the peculiar gift es ofthe Church. CaluinliLdeneccf. reform, gecicf. P^g. $7:Thisove nafmis Osgood as thoufands, that it bo fo bath shewed himfelfc Menemy to true dottrine, hath loft all authority in the Clmcb. p.Whiraker ad demonftrat 18. Sandcri; Out of the fkurch there km otherfcate but the [eat oferrour^fpeflilence. include PApijls* ;i C a?. s« andtuerldflingdefruition. the lame teacbech Sadcel ad taiti Sophifru. 1 urrianloc.io.D. Feildin his ubookcof the church cap. i4.and others. ca^ 5. Filtiy it is cuident by the do&rinc of the An Sacramcntarics, who hold that the children of Pa- ^ndren Mhtk pilisarein the coueoant of God,and cftateoflalua- fauedby wfei gj< n s through the fayth of their parents 5 and may tbc fayth htbjj therefore be baptifed : much more then muff they of their teach,that the parents themfcluesarc for theirowtie parent®* MPtf- fayth in thccouenantof Godandeftateoffaluation 5 ilia^ which could not be, were they not in the Church. (Mwjii The antecedent is mamfeft by the faying of many hit Proteftants. For thus writerh Luthcrlib. de capr. ifofc Babylon.rorr.a. foi. 77; Here 1 jay th at which all fay, that v.butdsi infants areholptnby the jay th ofthem which offer them. C alum ibfVciu in bis Catechifme cap. dc lege: GodexsendetbhU hunt/ ow iffy (9 farre vnto the faythfuR, that for their fake he ugocd to their< irgc,.di children s not only bleffng their affaires in this wm Id, but alfo cfcutd;tt fandifying their foulei, that they may be accounted of bis flacky Iktatl Contt. Scructum. pag.^01; VVe thin^tbat there will be bti£i)i vfe of Baftifwe vntiti this promtfe, J wiU be thy Gad and of thy [| Mi fed, be apprehended by fayth •, but entry one apprehendeth it not !M,tkff only to him[elfe} but alfo to bis iffue. Bezapart.a.Rcfpon.ad iqctlictfo ada Montisbel. p^g. n S: Parents through Gods graced* ^could, apirehendgrace by true fayth^ascording to the formeof tbe Co- zfoLiSfli uetmiioswell totheir pojlerit/en totbemfelsees. Which he Milan! oftcn-tymcsrcpcatcth. And like wife in Confrf.cap. i(,foL^| andcap.y,fedyp.and pag.126 M.Perkins MfcCto Sacramento Baptifmi torn. 1. col. 846; Others fay, . iJi that the fayth of the Parents is alfo the fayth oftheir children, (Mkmf; thetymejqf their infancy or childhood, and that becauft parents Me Chd ^ by their fayth apprehend the promife both for themfelm and i • om hi for *fy*r ckildremVVbicb opinion feemeeb to metbe-jitiefi of *S. rifrfc The like he fayth iacap^Galat. The fc^aelelikc- "" A • ; ■" **»fc V 31 Trotestwts fometymes ^ - . ( wifcis vndoubtcd.For it the fayth of Popifh parents *'■ ? be of force toeftablifh their vcrychildrcninthcCo- '0 J ^ ucnant of God and eftatc of faluation , chough itre- iidc not in them, norjac t heir ad; much more doth JtD,anj itcltabiiih the parents chcmfclucs , whohauetbat " n: fayth in them , and whofc ad it is. Nor do the in- f * fiances D. Morton brings againft it in his anfwere 21 to the Protcftants Apology , lib. 4.cap, 6. make any \ thing to the purpofc ♦ as that in cafe of neccflicy an hcrecicall Pricft or Schifmatikc may abloluc from finnes^andanInfidcll adrainiftcr Baptifme. Againc: That iffuch as were free of a citty and are araigncd ®fereafon ,(hould haue ifluc alter their condemns- tion, their children neucrthcles (hall cnioy the title and right of cittizens, whereof their parenrs were Vm> dcftitutc. ThcfecxanapIcs(I fay) arenotto thepur- pofe jbccaufe he, who is ey ther baptized by an 1 nfi- * dell, or abfoloed by an hereticall Pried, enters not r1^'1 into the couenant of God and eftatc of faluation for wfa ought that is in the perfect which baptizcth orab- hike foluceh him $ but for the Sacrament of Baptifme or Pennance, which he rccciucth indeed by the others Vfh adminiftration > bat hath it in himfelfc. And the M»ii fonncofatraytorisnotmadeaCittizen, inregafd of any thing that is in the father alone, but for his ' ^ owne birth which appertaincs to himfelfc, though MCI11 bis Father be author tbereof.ButtheSacramcntaries '{Uii teach,that thechild of a Papift is in the couenant of kbn God and eftatc of faluation , not for his owne fayth '*jct (for they fay he hath none) but for rhcbeliefeofhis pij( father; which is no way pofliblc yi£the fame fayth | 'tofflf be not of force to worke the like effed in thefathcr I IM himfelfc; feeing it belongs farremore to him , then K™ic to his child , and therefore muft fooner giuc him in- 41, tcrjft I , ' ■ J indnsk Tafifts. 3 3 c a p. 2, tcreliia the conenant, then the child that is defcesi- UinthtCp ^cd or him.For how can the fathers hchctehy hold ^ongly on cheproraifcs and coucnant of God for his chil- hnoieej drcn, and cannot do it for himlcifc ? Win 6. Tfode aiicgacioBs demonftrste, that by the Thefums ^rdotfe Confeffion protdiants, theftarkeft Papifts ^ PtQ«* uKunfuj. (ffich as are of bdiere that the malic,thePopespri- U.imlu([ macy ? and a!I things elle of h i s are good, v prigb c a n d ^^[4^ iinc«||ii ot God )anfoldiersvnderCkrijl, t&ayattainetofaluation, pspiits.^ aiciif m) be Saints • yea that there are among them both many and ifciji ir€4t Saints. That there is in the Church of Rome what fo is ne- itbiijji eefaryto faluum, the fumme of fayth , the ground-work? the :if confo tfjauiall ground-it-orke, the primipall grounds of fay th, the coiojii,: (heife articles, the fundament ail heads, the meeffary heads, the r jm P*rts»r',)e Ghjpeli offdilation, the kermll ofChrijlu- lotto® nit},and all ChriftwigGod. Laitly that the Church of idM Rome, Is alimmeand member of the vniuerfall Jwcb, of the t(|,(Wii Cat bo'ike Church, a member of the true Church, and is eft he 'filtiiiii tm'lj of Ufm Chip ^ that it is mother to tha children of God» jiy I, that it u the Church of God ,the temple of Godyhebody of Chi ifl9 :Bipi thcSpoufe ofChrift, that it abides yet in the coucnant, is not yet of, or put away , v. not yet killed, but isyet aim . Which Ifc.ll Wofds plainly import that the Roman or PopiCb n jg Church isa true Church in thcfightofGod. y, 7. But is it credible, that fuch as makeprofet g([j} fion of Ghriftian religion, ihould mount to that 6 * 'jV. height ofimpicty, as dare toreicd&diuorce ch*rn« J. felucs, from that Church which they confcfTcrc- mayncsyctin thecouenantQfGod,&; which Chrift ° ,hath not yetreicded * Is ic credible, that they fears 1j^ not to impugnc, to make bitter inuc&iucs , to dflf- yi gor|c curfes and execraf ions againft her,w h o m t he y '! (j(; acknowledge to bethcir Mother, which bore them mdJ toChrifir, to be the Church of God, tobcthebody *! C and Lib. s . 14 fret eft antsfimetjmes and Efpeufecf Ciuilif What can be npore lewd ani ampiousjthen to rage and raileagainli their ownc mother, againfi the Church of God,againfi the very body and Efpoufe of Chrift ? What ttrang and mon~ firous biindnes is it, not to perceiuc, that whiles they confeflcthc church of Rome to bethcchurch of God Elpoofc of Chrift.thcy acknowledge their owns to be the Synagogue of Antichrift and {trum¬ pet ofthc- Diuell? Ipr Chrift cannot haue two E- fpoufes, repugnant each to other • Now theProrc- fiant church and church of Rome arc parts Co op- polite, as can neucr make one. For theyiarrc and dif- agree maincly in diners weighty points, as namely touching the canon and exposition of the Scripture, touching facrifiec and the Sacrarhcnts, touching the Worfbipof God, & his Saints* touching the m-ancs to obcaineremifllon offinnes, and many the like. Whereupon Bezain Confel.cap./.fag.yd: VVe 'Jjfent (fay th he) from-the P4f$h About the) veryfutnm offaluatti. And others fay noleflc , aslbalibe foe wed hereafter in thc2.bookeand 6.cap: if ours be true Religion [fay th Tib t cot. S-Auguftin to the Donatilh which yet came nearer Gaudx.iu Cathoh'ksrhcn Protcflantsdo ) yours k [tiperftitii?». Agai ne; ifour communion be t'e Chut eh ofChriftjms u not lib. r. je Ghrfit Churchyfor that is but one, which fo eitcr it be. And in lapt. c.u. another place; When they approve that Church, which (at u mahifeft) we communicate with all, and the) do not , by that lib ad Do- their teffimony they acknowledge them flues convinced, and nt. toft, giue you vlaine not ice {if you be wife ) what you ought toforgoe$ CudAt and what it behouesyou tocleaue to and retaine. And S,Cy- pr*ao t* pi file 76: if the Church were on N Qua: us fide, it won tsot with Cornelius. Kum.4. 8. ThcProtcftantsnow and ehm perceiueas much, when they accrtainc vs ( as hath byn ftcwed J. 18 IncludeFapiJIsI ^Cap, iathe firS chapter,) that who fo fcucrcth himfelfc from any psrticuier congregation* which is a true Church, excludes himfelfc wholy from the church, Caluiii faw it,when o.ho wrote thus: We cannotgraunt them(PapiJh) that they are the church,but the necejjity offubieciio & obediece will befall vsjftkey be churches the power oj the keye s is in their pofiffiiH 1fthe) be chunhesjhat ' prowife of Chriil: VVhatfoeucrye bind on earth shall be bmd in heauetii takes effecttn them, M. Perkins pcrcciucd it to9 when in hisexp!icati6 of the Creed coi.794.be fcyd: ~ . , •»/•/•( -1 •/1 - J , tjanchius Aslong as art) ctJurchjorJakes not Cbitjt, we may not withdraw jj'b f and brotherly that hy^was of religious antiquity thought abundantly ftficten:. And D, >Vhifakercoiic.4.qfcielLi.c.2. pag„ 527 : God forbid that they should be no longer of the number of the faythftli. who are in (ome points of a contrary opinion, fo they affent in the cheije and principal! and neccjfary matters. And for as much as the Proteitants opinion herein is well knowneffor whe it is obic&cd Ynfo them,that tbcirchurche'difagree points of fay th, thisferucsthcmforcxcufcj? thi ik itnecdleffcto alleagcany more of their fayirg*. He that will may lookcthe Confcflion of Saxony cap. dc Heclef. Luther torn. 7. lib.de not. Ecclcf.fol. 149. Mdan&hon tom.4.in ca.3-1.C0r Kemnitim i.parr. Examinis tit.de bonis opcribus pag. 332. Zuinglius tom.i«inPrefat.!ib,deProuident.Caluin.4. Inftirur. cip i.4.i2.andcap,2. 4-i« Btzaepiff.2. Zancbius in prcfat.lib. denatura Dei.Hofpin, part.i. HifterJihi j.csp.2. Vorftius in Anti-bellarmin.pag. ntf.and others moc. And as their judgements aredifFe;cne touching frotdunts require title taftyth. 3 7 C a r. touching the ruijciaaitatdii articled t4 laytH^ fo in determining who arc to be accounted members of their Church their opinions are vnhke. Same ct the fay, that the fumme, the chcifc and principal! heads or sa) eh,and all things necciTary to be bdieucd arc comprized ;ti the Aportlcs Creed. The principal! beads of .f*yth((aytft Caltiin *Jniiitat. c.jd.^.y are jet down*m ^ tbeCreed. And it is fas D. Whiukcr fayth lib. j.dc Scr'ipimdc&p^.k&.i.) ahftoftbe cheijeheadioffayih.lt mtaiites (fayth M. Perkins in his Reformed Catholik cal. 47 6 ■ ) all points of Religion which we are ntcejjmly to be- lieuc. Hcfiiiiigius in Syntagmatc pag.196: It contains* the ground work of the whole frame of Religion. V r fin us in Cat bee hcli : Thefummo] thofe things which the G be (ft 11 propofeth vnte vs to bclieue,thatwe may be partakers of Gods to* {tenant, is comprehended in theJpo/iles Creed. Partus lib. 1. tie luiiTicat.cap 9. hath theic words p In the Creed is Uyd open the fimme of that dotinns, which we mufi belieue to fahutim. The lame tcachcth Linker torn.7. in 25 ly 111- bol. iol.i^S.Confeffid Paktinain initio, prefat. Syn- tagmaf.Confcf.theFrcnch CatcchifmejBrentitii in Prolegomen i s, pag. 2 44.Th e C a rcc h i foe of He id 1 e- berg part.2'.-Bellinger in compendia hdeiiib.d«cap. 2. and torn. 1. decad. 5.Term. 2. Polanusin Anaiyll. Catcchifoi Bafie. BoyfTeu! inefoifutat. Spondei p. lo.Raynolds in Apol. Thcf. pag. 241. Carle rob in Confcnfutra$.deEcclcf c.p.Tkcfame isintimaccdi by Zanchiuslib i.cpiR. pag.219.and by Mufcuiusin iocistir.dcEcclcf.pag ^op.Ybefcmen then, if the U- cjuekoftheir dedtrine be corrcfpondent to the ptc- rnifes ,muft needs acknowledge, that the profeffion of the Apoftlcs Creed, though icyncd wirhthede* ny^li ofwhatfocucr other articles of fayfofufficeth to make a Protefontjand a limme of their Church, C 3 And L13. i. 3 8 Prote slants require ht e tofayih . And forr.e of them itieic be who conic Ikit. tor Bui- linger iib.ciLcap.il. fol.8 3. faytb : AR that wkcomprife Beliefe in the 11. articles, u the tine and Chrtftian [apt, vino which cf the whofocncr fleaneeb, hebeluueih right , u apprcued of God. is Apo^les iujlifad, araimadepart tier o]eikrUjitng liic , Calum coik, •r-knt to* ^cmi^Pg&>659 ; Tbeconfej'ston oj fayih cent a) nc din the A- Ulfctation* fdned 5 ought to be inoughjoruk mode ft Chripans. A at! . Jliufcuios in the place hit quoted < They are wonderjud vnrcafsnablc andvmdiiifcd 5 who not content with this belief* i ex ail of the fay tbjnil, that they belt cue jet other things which are neither Mentioned in the ApojilesCresd, nor in bapiijme. Arc- tiusin iocis part 3.(01,67 ; The articles neceffaryto falm~ tpn are thofe, which the Creed hath jet vs dome. As jor the reft, fhice the matter cannot be dec ide d, variety of iudgemntsmufl be borne with all. Polanus alio in the place before cued? T he'fe articles (of t he Creed.) if they be vnfajnedlybellcRed fhffice topurchafe fAuatm $ nor is it required we shjuldbehetie .oughtbejides.And Hail iuiuj Runu i:rreconciUe&. i: We are all one and the [me Church, as many as in any part of the earth worship Icjta Chrifi the only Sonne 0j God and Saviour of the world, and prefect the fame common beliefe cowprifedin the Creed. fhe 2. SomcoFfhera will hauc thegrcund?of Creeds 9 fayth to be contained in the Creed j asPkfsyiib.de Eccitf.c.5;. HereuponMarke Anfonydc Dominisin con^l.fnx pro feel,pag. 18. & 20. fayth :Refiore peace and charity to all Chrijiian Churches, which projeffe ChrisTby the ejfemi all cogrti fames of beliefe. Others ad to the Creeds the 4.gcn*rall Councels or leaft one of thcrn5 as D. ^ Andrews in Refpcnf. ad Apol. Bellareiin.cap.i.pag. c fz : I hat which is fet downe in the Creeds and 4 .general! court- (yrce cellsy is tors afufuientobieel of faytb. And in Tortura neraff° 1 orti 12 7 *. Nor do welighily difcerne and try herefy by c juuccIs. other :mk-ft ne^then by exminingtrhether it be repugnant to \j . . V -■ ' . ax? Prctesiaxts require title ts fajtb, 3 9 C a p. j. M) of the three ancient tret us, or ^ancicm gencr and beliefe in Cod the b ather j and in the Sonne, and holy Ghoil nd they uujl to be fatted by the Sonne of God and bis death; albeit they adioynt a number ofthsirowne wicked forgeries jhdy are mtwithflaftding parts and members of the tmiaerftU Church. The 'nvinifters of the fcattercd Church of the Netherlands in fua narrat. psg.,7i: Prof e (Ti o N 0 mat; can, not ought togiuifentmein the Church of an others uf'Chriil. condemnation, of whome it it not publikely fnownc, that he is fallen apvai pom the foundation of the Apo folic all Conjejjiont yttCredby the mouth of Feter. Oecolampadius cpiihad PbfefKo fihicctKm a pud Hofpin. part. 2. PIift0r.fbi.n2: We < • V Q 0 iic are gladly a t peace wit hall thofe that confejfe with vs and teach i >:> dsai l epic clttijl t rue God and t rue man in vniiy ofper fen. A n d B u- mari. ccrits apud cundcm foL %4:Whofo preach the fame Chri(l frith vs, we account than ours, what cfiimate foener they make 0jvs.B*£$ dciib. n0tisEcckf.pag.3c; We fay it is a true , . Trot eft ants require lit le to fay tb. 41 Cap. i* definition of the true Churcm, whether generally ccnfidered or in "J !i f particuler, wherein it is jajd to be a company which acknowled- ;^«i geth om Samnr. For (lay th he J this alone u the only ground- ^ ('1' wor kef that fpirituall boufe of God 5 Chrifi lefus u thefeule of jed,.e "one '!: that mytficdtt body, the only rule and fquare of that building. Sauicur* "4 And the Ccmicfttonol Bohemia arsic. 8. defines the l!,ill5Sii Caeholike Church to be all Chriftians, That are affo- dated in one belie fe concerning Chrift and the holy Trinity. The w 1 The Contcflion of Bafkanic. 5. hath thisaffcrtion: cf Ghrift ftft We belieut the holy Chriftian Church &c. Wherein all thofe and the '^m® oreCittixjens,that confeffe IefustobeChrifi, tbelambeof God Trinity* which taketh away tbejipnes of the world, and ihew openly the ■ fame beliefe by worfyofcharity. Acontius 1.3. Stratagem. Satanat p&g>ixf concludes that nothiogelfc is neccil « farily to be bclieucd ,but That there it one God and Chrift BC|jCfe ^ hu Sonne, made man and r a?fed f rem the dead ; and that ftlua- onc Q0d '« tm is pur chafed by hit name 5 and not by any other name, nor by 8c ChrifL & the works of thelatp. And Luther vpan cbe/.of Matb. folJo. clofcth vpall with this epilogue: the head and fumm of Chriftian doCtrine is this: that God fent and gam his ThatGod Sonne,bywhmtalonehepardonethonrofjences9at2ddothiuftt- faueth by im:; fy and faue vs.This(fayth hc)andnothing clfttit behoues thee Chrift. nfceW ftmely to beUeue. Sornctymc to bciiencthcir article of Mff iuftification byonly fay th is as much as they require The only in a iimrncof their Church, or think needfull tofrticle of ■mM faluation. Luther fom.7. trad.in ^.fymbol. fol.140: I haus found by experience, that wbofo bane truly and fincenlyt10? * jdicfifi belieued that principal! article of Chriftian fay tb concerning le- cct :f0lfj fus Chrift, though they bad their erroursandfaults, hatte at laft ifoidi notwubflaming bjnfaued. And rem.4. in cap. 42. Ifaise jaMI? ^bLi'7'8 : if we abide in this article, we are fecurefrom here- j , * VfgthI fies^ndretaine remiffion offmnes • whichpardoneth our wea\- ie~ier'ffc ,fftkl4 nes ™ tinM duett es and belie fe. A n d in cap. 45. fol.» 00: hello Hack U0 >V vho ft belmttb this article, it rut of danger for cuerfalling into fol. 77. lift C5 error, Vrottftmts require title to fay th. 43 C a ?. 3- Do nor thele men go about toexpolc the Church & meancsotfaloation vnto fcorncand mockery AVhac lew or 1 urke did cuer make his Synagogue io com¬ mon? 4. Albeit the former allegations do fnffi. Proreflatt ciencly conuiiice, that when Protcftants calculate challenge chclftnmtsknd membersofthcir Church, they take, thofethat to make vp the number # fucb as renounce the very eu® fundamental! articlesof their btiicfc; yet to makcit moreeuident,and to prcucnt all colcurof doubt, I cjeg^ will addc other proofcjbefides. And firfi wchauc in thisbchalfe thcirownc Confcffions.ForBczalib dc Notis Ecclef. pag.45. teachcth plainly, that fomeer- tours men in feme fundament all heads of fajth, may creep into the Catholike Church, And D.Whirakcr cont. 2.qucfi-4. cap.3-pag.490: it Umanifcfii that the true Church may erre for a tymt eueninneceffary points. The like hath Hutterus in Anaiyfi ConfcUionis Auguftanas pag.45 3. and In- r.iusdoth intimate as much lib-3.de Ecclef. cap. 17• D.Whirakeragainecont 2.queft.t cap.iy:VVegather9 that the Church mayfor atymeftp arac frem the truth etten in feme fundament all points, and be notwithflandingfafe. And Zanchmslib. r. cpill.pagi 221. will not hauc vsfor- fakcany copany onoccafionof faife opinions, which % ftvarueftotn the groundwork^] faytb. D. H all like wife in fua Roma irrcconc.fedi.i.faytbjthat the true Church may foflcrfuch crrours, As bydcdttftmandconfcqtience dfroy the foundations of belief*.D|,Fulke in h is ferm. vpo the Apocalips, hauing made this objection to bim- fclfc,thacfeingthcChurch istheEfpoufeofChrift, it cannot be,thathcfuffcrcd it to be poffcffcdfo ma¬ ny ages with damnable errors 3 anfwcarcs it in this manner : What ? Cbrift himfelfe hathfayd: that the errors offalfe Prophets should be exceeding great, in as much as the very st*9i Lib. t. 44 TysteJl&ntsinclude elect, if it might Ic,should be lea into errour. A n d li b. dc Sue- cei.Eccici.pag.122. he fay th : Itfocmesnot fitting retak$ from tbc Grecians tlse name 0] a Church, vv home tsotw ith- itatiding he cohtelfech to be ehfnared with grictious cr to rs. No w a gr i'eu ou s csrr0 u r (a ccord i n g f o D. W h i. takcicoat.2.q*acil4 cap.T.)diJf»lues the foundation, and may therforebeirriKed fundamentally M.Perkins in-bis ex¬ pedition or the Creed, coi.75*0: When An en our is repu¬ gnant to the foundation,either directly or byheiejjdryconfequi me it it proceed of mahjtih, he in whoms it is, eught to be reputed a member 0] the vniuerfall Church. And vpon i- GalaEvi: 1/ a Chnrchthroughfrailtyfdlimo enourt although it concern the foundation, notmthjiandwgii renuynesyet a Church, as u sen.tine by the example of the GaUthians. And vpon the epifiicof Iudev.19 . TheChtirchof Galatia thruughwea!^ nefftremoued'h fife vnio another Gkcfpell, and erred in the foundation ,yet Paul wriieth to it as to the Church of God. D. WiiietatHntKth the fame in bisSytiopliscsuu^.q.;. pag. 104. And Mdan<51hon totxi.2.'iib« de Eccl. pag. si^.touchcfhfhc fame firing when helayrh: Tbe true Churcbitfelfe may haue err ours which elf cure and darken the articles of fayth. And com 4,10 cap. 9. Rom: Go&ga* theretbalwayesfome company, in which the foundation is kept, femetymcsUffepure, fometymesmore. D.White in his way pag.111: Some articleslyingtn the very foundatmrnay he he- Heuednot foclearly. Nay (ometymes they dareauoucb, that thofc very Corinthians thatdenyed therefor- region , and thofc Calatians alfo that changed the Ghofpeli ofChrifl into another GhofpeH, were of Zutfar.m the Church.For thusthrSwitzcrsConfeffion c. 17; txert* Gz- We are not ignorant,what wanner of Churches thofc of the Co* lat.foLii$, rimhians and Galathiansirere in the dpo flies tyme: whichthe Terhms Apoflle accufeth of man) and grieurn crimes. and yet ternietb CQCich* ifafaij churches of t hrift. Aad Caluin 4. Inftttuf* cap.it T>e?jkrs effuvdAmextaHArticles* 4? Qa%> j* eap. 1. 4 27 : Mojt grciaom finttes fofjejjc jometymes whole Churches. The Apofiajy of the GalaMans was no fmali offence • the t orintbum were Uffe excujMe then they ^ uowbeit neither oj them are excluded from tbt Lords mercy, badccl in hisan- iwere ad IhcL Poinao. cap. 12. p«g, 866: The Gala- thiam and Corinthians , though corrupted with err our, and di{ Agreeing each from other about the cheijegrourJcrork of be* lieje, and that not concerning the manner but touching the nut" ter itfeljc, retained not withfi ending the nameofa ti m C burch. And hence heg3tbcrah,that the debase and diugre- iiicnt betweenetbe Lutheransand Caluinifbcon¬ cerning the Eucharift, doth not let either of them from being of the true Church • 5« The deeds of the Lutherans and Sacramcn- raries y-.\d vs a fccond kind of proofe.For the Ekdf o« r^ii or milde Lutheran* in coiioq. Aiaeburg. fcripto 3 cafl thcmfeluc.*, Teliowes and companions gfthe fame Mi- Lutherls mflery fe'doip cittiz^ensand fellow- foldiersot thole of Saxo profefle D) or rigorous Lutherans: of whome notwirbftan- J.hfatth*" ding tcripro 6.pag. m.thrygiue this cenfurc:Thejt bxue skewed thmftluesto diffent from our Churches in thefoun - ^ dattcn. Aga ioc : We will make it euident, that they impugne the ftrndannntaU doilrinc. And Icripto 4. pag. 4: Our opt* mon is that we df [agree not about impertimenf matters only .or things of no confequence ; but about the maiueand cbcifefi mat- ters. And fcripto 7: This one thing they Ay me at, and bend all their endeanms to vttdemine andouertmne the groundwork offauingdottrine. And peg. 374. they complainc that thofe of Saxony dooftentr) out ef them, that they are worfo then any idolaters. And the Sacramcmarics in Praefat. Apoioget. Orthodoxiconfenfus, write thus of the Lutherans: Theyhw.thithertofufferedawengthtm,fuchM call in quef ion the tioiirine of iuftification, of original ftnne, of free wtd^of the GhofpeH P of the Uwand yfe thereof, of cbriftt lefcm ItlSk J SheftmS- ttaries challenge Luthcras. And yet fav they differ fan- dametally Horn the. 4^ TreteJIants include defcent into bell, of bit per fin, of the election of Gods children and many other articles of no[mall moment j which things they eeftlyput vp 5 beuufe all thefc go vnder the name of Lutherans. Now that thcSacramcntarics likewifeacknowicdg the Lutherans for their brethren , is apparent by the Apology of the Church of England , by the confcnt of Poland, by the preface of the Syntagme of Confef. fions, by the Conferences ofMarfpurgand Morn- belgard, and other pu'olikc writings and rcgiftrcd a&s:and yet they fee and openly cxclaimcagamft their crrours in fundamental points of fay th. Of Lu¬ ther thus writcth Zuinglius fcom.2.Refp. ad Luther. fol.401: We iudge thee aworfefeduttour, impoflour, and dc- nyerof Cbrijf, then was Manion bimfelfe. And £01,4350. Lu¬ ther as jet, is entangled and flick* faft in two err ours exceeding griemus ,andin moft foule ignorance.Of Melan&honthus iayth Caluinepift. 18; : Either be openly impugnetb true doctrine in the cbeifefi beads, or elfe bidetb bis meaning craftily or not very boneflly. And epift. 179. he complainetfa that Mcian&hon ettdeauourcth to ©ucrthrow bis do- <3rincof prcdeftination: Without which (tayth knowledge of Gods free and vndefsrued mercy is ytterlylcfl. The like hcfayth,cpift.i4T. Sturtnius lib. dc Ratio- He incundx Concordiae,fayth plainly, that the Lu¬ therans do pluckjp the foundation pfcbriflian Religion. And Buliinger in fundamentofirmo writcth .that the very infidelity of the J ewes and Gentils is by the Lutherans brought into the Churches. Curcus in Excgcfi Sacraracntaria pag.91: Surely the ccntrouefy (between the Lutherans and Sacramentaries) is concerning the foundation.T h e Sa- Cramentarics in the Preface of the Conference at Mulbrun fay, that the Lutherans. Teareinptecesani adulterated? articles of the incarnation, of the true humane \u* t*r#&c» Which articles (fay they ) m Chriftian man can Ms * Centers effnndamentaliarticles. 47 « a *« £ dfasff bat arc thegrotwdworkjf fdluanon, And in the fore- fay d prcUce: They arc at variance , not about the Lords fup- ftr only, but touching the per fen of fbrtfi, touching the virion of ha ditiiue and humane nature, touching the vbiquity oj his body and corporall maniucatm thereof common both to good and bad» touching hie afcending vp to heaueu , and buptivg at the right bdtta 0; hu Father: of all tbefe pointsthej contend, and that with fuck exceeding heat of deputation, m that old berefies not a feu?, ■ long fine e abolished and condemned , begin agawe to lift vp their bead at if they k ere recalled from bell. The like they bauc ibiaera in Prolcgomenis.Oi: the controtierfy vvbick it bet weenc the Lutherans & Sacramentaries about the real! prefenceof Chnfts body in the Eucharift , Martyr in locistonn. 2. p. 156. giucs this judgement: The contention and difference therein cornerncs the cheife heads of Religion. Caiuin epift.292.fi> rh, that the opinion of the Lutherans doth, Ry mifebeiuous luglitigs and Lgitrdi* mains ouerturne the principles offayik, Be za in his 5. epift. that if Hejlroyetb the verity of t hrifs body. And epift.Sr, that it recaUeib from bell the folly and doting en ours of Mac- em and Enriches.Queer citca by Hofpin.part.2. Hift, fol.84 ; It folio well) thereupon > that thrift U not true man, Parous in cap.^GalatJet^Hcn.^T^m is nothing men direftly oppeftte to CImflian Religion, then to thmk.that the body ofchrifi doth indeed lye hid really ruder the bread, and that the fame u truly caters with the mouth. Sadcel.in trad.de Con* iundione &c.pag. £69.tbat it cuertfoon ethtke ttfien** tare of the true body and blond of Chrift. Which thing ( fay tk he) we jiill lay to their charge. And trad.de Sacramen* talimanducationcpag.2 6. that it is amrd(fefiils.pag9 267: That it trams after it idolatry. And psg.2 68: that 6 cannotft and with the verity of Chrijls body. Hofpin.part.2. citat. fol.2. that it ii the foundation of Tafijlry. Andfel. 181: The baft did filUr whichfuffaimth d wtefok blended and & i • 48 Trouffants wind* and difordered heape ofabuftt, and all the bread-worship which hath rnder the Popedomebyn deurfed and brought in. Lauatc- *us lib. dc diflid.Eucftar.fol.7. that it is the foundation of the Popedome. Cureus in Spongia, tha tionyhe firengtbt the throne of the God Uaordm, ... pish jlate. And Vrfinuxin Catechifm. qucft. Oxnap 3. ; long a* the opinion of tkecorporaUprefence is cr.atn:nti" ftmrk traines after it idolatry and a acrid of mils. Fy o r< t b dc m e [*es ^ /blip: bclicre, who think the maintenance of an opinion tiicirC« which ( as thcmfelues profeffe^ ouetthrowcth the 1 c hbeLttb principal! articles ©f Cftriftian fayth, drawcsaftcr(a') Be?* ttCraji it idolatry, and moft foule hercfiesjlayeth the fouaWonf w:lm dation whereon Antichriftianity is railed -y of io*P?j9"''"* ii,vkk fleighc confequence as it ought not to difiolue fra-(tsf 'idjd fernity and Communion . "Wftatregard of fayth or^fcaluito ulvillt faluation may we think thefe men hauc ? There is4 fn[tit.eQ Ipjpj) yet another pointof Luceranifme touching the vbi 17 p. 17. tfOh qaity , or prcfcmcc of Chrifts body cucry whererc- (c)'Ho/p; itrml proved of theSacratnentarics, and held in extreme^/Par-*' .jjPKd diiflike-5ofwhich theylikewifeexciaimc:ibatitisft)W Ver~. ipldlfl j°ri^andcompofed0flutycbianifme and Neftorianifme: that icEdd: tbehercfiesoj (b) Marcionand Eutycbes jea well nigh (c) all old ?g2t ' thiicfi' kefefiei are by it rat fed againe from hell; that it jubuerteth the (e> Sadat. wf m whole (d) Creed • that it takes away the (CJ cbeife beads of Cbri- de & fm&sligmi & that there v[cant any one article efcbrifiim humfpai* | D kdiefc %i3 • x . 50 Vrotcflants include beliefe which it doth not nterly abolish. And yctthcfc fclfe (f) S fun jame. ^1C Puritans their brethren allow not cfths tail diffe- bookc of common prayer, but boldit to be full of{*)cer~ rice zmogruptions and all abominations , and teach that Proreftants them. (bj wickedly mangle and wrefl the Scriptures, that tbeyhaueno (orfNhit- fa pjflours , that they haue not a true Church, yea not fo much &$■<**&• M the outward face of a Church $ and that they exhort the Com tiit'l 7T °f ^a7^ment wn^ Pnfeft (d) hatred to deteii the prcjem flats ,5~ * of the Church 5 that no (e) Jew, no Turke, no Papift, could pof* (i.>3 'b reft flbly haue jpokfii more fpitejully oftheir Church and fate, and ad Ichecias. that theyfteke to shake 9nay to ouertlmw the (f)foundations, (c)Ke/p. grounds, and pillars of their Church. Finally, chat thcPu- nf pjg.6. sitixnswill not account the Vroteftants their (5) brethren, and acknowledge Pori- ThPazl tans for brethren and fellow- labourers inthe Lords (g)K>fp* ' haruefl.ln Scotland like wife ( as his Maiefty witnef- tuijekedas, fcth) That which was CateclnflisaU doctrine tn one afftmbly, Bancrofts was hardly admitted for found and ertbodcxe in another • and furueyc,jj yet thefe aflcmblics excluded not one another from theChurcb. What can be therefore more clcarc and Oxonref cu^cnt >c^cn ®^at b°fh t!^c Lutherans andSacri- ad°Milienl nicntarics acknowledge (when they lift) thofc to be Confer, ad members of their Church, who deny fundamental! Hampton articlcsoftbeirfayth? Court, p. 6. A third proofc maybe drawnc from the 44. Protcftants demeanour and carriage towards the Fathers* r Ecmers cffnndmentalUrtteles. f i C a p. 3. ^ Fathers, whometney ciaimcandchalicogc for their a„ fdlow-cicrzcns, and yccconfeifeplainly (toomir ^^hefa- Wfe what they acknowledge concerning other points) t^ers ^ ' that they were of a contrary beiiefein the article of fentfun- Iuftificatioa by folc fayth, wherein (as (hall be here- damcjally bill, after fhewed) they fay theloulc,thcfuaimc,and dc^ from the* Mfllj! finitiorioiProteftancifmccoofilicch.Luthcr tom.i* jnthearf 'W« colloq. German, a pud Cocciutn tom. i.pag.131: In 0f iMItlli, which errour (that works ioyncd with fayth do iufli- cation by A fy) were many of the Fathers. And com.y.iqcap'^Galat, oolyfaitb, m £01.358. hciayth, thatof the difference, which he Win efpied between rhcla w and the Ghofpcli, as that the will); Jaw taughtiuftificarion by works, the Gfeofpciiby ]M/:< fole beliefe, There is nothing to be found in the work} of ths iM eld Fathers. Augujlin held it in part, Hieromeand the reft knew fcftyk it not Mclandhontotn. 1. in Dominicans Trinuatis ajifli p * g. 8 9 ; It is msruatle, that the ibetfe Doclourt had no know - q<[ ledgeoftheiufiiceoffaytb. forn.2.lib.deEcclel.pag. 134: Cbryfofiome reckons vp many wayes and means s to obtains re* ,limit! miffm offinnest a alines deeds, teares and other works. T he Ccntunatoursof Magdeburg, cenc.3.cap. 4.col. 79. &feqq.(ay , that the Dolours of the third age Maka nriito works s the caufeof ouriufiicein Gods fight. Cent.4.C.4.col. ikft)K' 191: In this article of iufiificatiou this age reuolted who!] a in;A fan* t he doctrine of the Apofi let. A n d C en t. 5. \ n Prcfar. ,p.; they fay ofthe Father?of that age: Chryfoftomc and 0S the rcfiduc attribute iuflice vnte works, they make works the ttreaties offaluatiou, and afcribe iufiificatiou either in part, or |0!,rii, formally, or wholly vntoworks-Gcrlachius tom. 2,difput. 13: The ancient Fathers would haue the is/Mice, life, andfalua* /iipi tionof a Chriftian man confix in obfsruing Gods commaunde- tnents as Hilary > Origen, Tsrtullian >Fufebius, Cbryfofieme, piri#1 Au*gtifiine, cfr.Kcmnitius in locispart 1.rit.de luftifi- Jjt cat.pag.24j, fay th that t}ic Fathers Intermingled feme* w D 1 tjmti 158569' JL i b. I. 52 Trot eft ants include cymes and entwyned the dochine of good workcswub the article ofiuftifuatm, fometymes plied and bended the Article of iuftifi*. cation to good works. And part. 2. tit, de lcgcpag.106: if the Fathersdifputesbe all lay d together ythefjmme $j them is this in effcft, that fwneand infirmity of ndtweit mansjefcd by the lawyotheendwemay [earch out a Phifitian,by whofegraceh may be Jo healed, as it be able to fatisfyandfuUf lithelaw, and fo mbefaued. And ibidem in orat.deie&ioneParruni *hefume Pag*3^c ^ay ^ of S.Cyprian , He had a fundament all ev* of the fa- r9ur' Andpag.4. of S. Hilary: Be held an erroneous opium thers do- touching the foundation,Calnin all'olib.cont.Vcrfipciiciti drine is pag.3 y 3: Three mainepoints ofourfayth, to wit, the corrup- iuftifica- {ion of our nature, free and vndejerued iujlif cation, and Cbvtfts tionoy fri/ftheod, are fo darkly and obfeurely touched in the ancient tfi %©rks, mjters, that no certainty can be drawne thence. Againc; We shall neuerlearne by the Fathers, how we may be reconciled to God,how the obedience of Chrift is freely and vndeferuedly rr- futedours. Martyr inlociscit.defcripturacol. 1432; Other Father sthink^good works much auaileable to iujfificattom Hofpin. incpift.dcdicat.parc.i.Hillor; ABtbcFaiberf well nigh do now and then fprinkle and cafi on with all the lea- nen of good works, and attribute iujlif cation to them, either in part, or formally orwboly. Pareus 11 0.4,dc I ullifka t,c. 12 2 The Fathers both Greeks and Latin efpeciaby thofe that wrote before the Pelagian bickerings, fancied oner much, andtookctn greataliking to the Philofophers doctrine, concerning the iuflifi- cation oj worcks. Finally M'Perkins in Problcro.cap de I u ft i he a t .fay t b, t h a 11 h e 2. fayth: They are frAntique andbcfideihemfelueswhogo about to fcuer the Churchcorporally from beretikes. Hsmingius in Syntag. Inftitut, pag. 192 : In the outward fociety of the Church, are many heretiks and Scbifmatify. Salomon Gcfoer iniocis ioc. 24: Are heretiks then in the Church ? By any manes> Brentius in Prrefac. Rccognit; Chriftgiuestwt oner the confer nation of his sheep in the middeft ofherefies, but they mufti be fuelsas do not quite takeaway the foundation and Miniftery.ReiinccciusiQm.q Armatur.cap.6.pag. 35: We affme there areheretiqueseuen in the true Church. Hut- tcius in Analyfi ConfclLAuguft.pag.425 : Neither were her efts without the territory and limits of the true Church. Plcftyin his bookeof the Church cap. 2-affirmcth plainly, that all heretical!and Scbifmatuall congregations are truly the Church. And ib id. pag. 2 5. he fay th: Although par* ticuler C burches be in/efled with herefies, from top to toe,neuer» thelejfe the) arepartsofthe vnmrjall Church at long as they pro* fejfcthenamc of Chrift. Moulins in his Bukkrof fayeh part.i.fctft.S^ : An heretical! Church may be faydto be a true Church, euen as man blemished with a canker or infetted with the plague is mtwithftandinga true man. Sonis Rcfponf.ad Spondeum c.io.pag.3 6 5. Heretiks are withinthe Church. Lubbcrtlib.z.de Eccicf.cap. 3: it ismanifeft3thatbere¬ tikes aretfome as yet inthe vifible Church,(ome aljo in the church «/ifoefc#.funiuslib. 3. dc Ecclcf.cap. 4 iHeretiksab- folutely are of the Church, rnlejfe they be fucb as ouer throw fun¬ damental! articles of religion. Bullingerteachctfa the fame Qab.r Dccad. 2*feriRc 8< and it is the common doctrine of * * D 1 the *>4 T rote ft ants Include Bereiiks. ti)cPfofcflants, who (as is before proucd ) exclude none from being members of rlieir Church > that deny only fuch articles as are riot fqndarnecail.Hovf Zih.dtcar-bcitlamc of them vpon heretical pyiuiledgef as Fcrtulli- ne Chrifti.an fpeakcth ) will riot bauclucb called hcrctiks ,be- **£»}$• ing indeed more afhamed of the name then of the thing it fclfe. Zanchius likcwifelib. i.epift.adDu- dit. pag. 150. fayth, chat heretical), and Schifindtuallfetts are within the Church. Tilenus in Synrag.diiput. 14: Heretiks. euen thofe that fubuert the foundation, and Scbifma* tikj in regard of outward Communion,arein the Church ji'J ei¬ ther oftbemfelues they go to the enemies fide, or are cafl out by the lawful)iudgemerit of the Church. And D. Feild in his firft bookc of the Church cap. 14iSeingGodgatteibe fewer of the keyes and the difpenfatien of his word and Sacra' mm*, only to his Church , ifHercttks be not of the Church, t hey do not then baptize. And cap. 7: They that are partakers of the beauenly calling , and fanttified by the profejfion of dittine truths and the vfeof the meancs off dilation, arc of very diners fortes • as beretikes, Scbifmattkf, hypocrites, and thofe that pro* feffe the whole fatting truth in vnity and fincetiiy of a good and fanttified heart .Ad thefe are partakers of the heaucnly calling, and fanttified by the profefsion of truth, and confequently are all in fome degree and fort of that focietyo/ men , whome God cat* ietbeut vntobwfdfe.&fcparatethfrom Infidels,which is right* lynmedthe Church. D.Whi'takcrcontr.4. qucft .y.c.j. pag 679: Allbcretiks are within theClmrcb. Hooker in his 5. booke of Eccldia/Hcall policy pag. 128 : We wuft acknowledge euen beretikes them fellies to be, though a may me d part ,yet apart of a vifeble Church: Againe: If an Jnfidell should purfue to death an beretikeprofeffing Christianity only for Cbrijiun Projeffion fake, could we deny vnto him the honour of Martyr dowel By which words it is plaine, that they admit hcrcriks not only into the vi/ible . * Churchy frtteftants include Heretiks 1 C a p. g. Church , but into the jnuiiihk«lfo,or company of tbceied and predominate to (aluation. AndD.An* drc we in his anfwere to Beilarmincs Apology capw 5.pag* 12 r. denyeth that the words, Catlwlikand Hw+ tik*itcoppofite- wherefore vnlcflc he will debarre and (hut out forne Catholiks from the Church > ho qauft needs giue admittance to heretiks ? feingby his ©woe vcrditf they may be Catholiks. D .White in defence of his way cap. 38. pag. ^ 67; T befecondfortof the militant Church are hypocrites and vnfiund members, that are not called effectually ,but difobey the truth whereof they make profeffmffuel) are heretiks,fcbifmatiks &c. T ouching their acceptations of Schiimauks „ bebdes what hath byn already allcaged SD. Feild in his firft booke of thq Church cap.i3,writeth thus; The departure ofSchifma-They uks it not fuel) t but that, notwithstanding their fchifmejhey ^challenge and remaine parts of the Church of God. Junius irt the pJace^MIU" before quoted layeth clayme to thofe Sehifmaukcs,1 VTho (fay th he) feuer not them[elues from the whole Church but only from apart thereof. But D.Morton in the 1. pare ofliis Apology lib.i.cap.i.fayth abfolutely without any acceptioti or rcftraint at all: Schifmatikj are of the CtoW;.Andlib.2.cap.io.pag.288:F4n4««s(fayrh he) andfebifmes do not betokenthe falfe Church. And D.Willet in his S ynopfls cont.2. que(t. 3. pag. 104.: VVe fay that Schifmatihsyihoughthej holdfomefdfe points of doctrine,yet if their errours he not fundament all, and if they retains the purity of doctrine in all points meffary to faluation,andtbe adminifira¬ tion of the Sacraments, may make aparticukr Church by them* /ek/«.Thcfcarc their acknowledgements touching Hcrctikesand Schifmatikcsin generall. Letvsnow Theyae- dcfcend to particularities, and fee the courteous ad* know- Biiffion they giue tofomc of them by name . ledge the 8. The Crccianiand other EaftcrncSch if- caans- D 4 matiks, SwiEo 1.5 £ frotejlant/ inch*de Heret'iks. ipfttiks ,yca hcrctiks to , tor the molt p art, find that fauourattneir hands, as they vouchfafcto account them members of their Church. His Maitfty epiih ad Card. Pcron pa. 15 hath thus: The Churches of Rome, Greece, Antiocb ,Aegip$, Ac thieftafM^couy, and others more are members of the C at ho like church. D. W hue in defence ©f his way e. 37*pag. 555 : The vifible churches of Greece» Aethiope, Armenia) and Rome, with the naiiom comayned tfa r- in9hauc in them the true chttrcbof God9wherm men may be faued.D, Morton in his anfwere to thcProultants Apology lib,4.cap.2. fed. 7. fay th, that the AiTyrhn Churches keep the true foundation of Chnllian fayth • Thcfamc, (efpecialiy of the Grecians )tca- cheth Luther torn.2.lib. decaptiu. Babyloa. fol.65. 6c in AlTertart,37.fohii4.Iuriiuscoi3r. 4 lib.4. cap. d.Sddcei.Rcfponf. ad rhehP0lhah.CAp.12. D.Whi- takerhb. 7.cont. Duracum fed 3. Rucanus loco 41# qucft.y D.Feildlib.^.deEcckf.cap,^.&28.D.Fu!ke de SucceOi.pag.i 20. SurhiiiproTorturaTortie.15. and others. p. And fornctymes they are not kffefree-hat¬ ted towards weftcrnc hcretiks. Melandhon in locis a Maraiio cditistif.deEcclef. pag. 491. writeth,that twogiries, who were burnt (as he fay th ) for Ana- They baptifme, held tht foundation of fay thy and died in a good Con* challenge fejfm. And Zuinglius torn. 2. lib, dc Author, fedsf. the Ana- foh J34.& fea.exharting his felJowcrs, nottoreuolt baptifts. from hisdodrine, for the debatesand quarcjsbc- tween the Profeftatns and the Anabaptifls, callcth bot b parts mo/l learned and fonnesofthefame Father.Neither Mufttbou (layth he ) gtueany man way to shake and weaken thy fayth, although thou fee that men ofthegreatefl learning mouc difputes3andfall by the earesjwitb much eager wffe of con* iinim pouching externall matters (he meauci baptifme ) but Prot eft antsincludeHeretiks. 57 C a*. 3 Mt let this he rather thy fed) af perfuafton, that by the Sonne of God we are all made formes of the fame Father. Againc: Nei¬ ther am I wont to jpeakc thefe things, for that I am (0 greatly moued with the baptijme of children. And ibidem lib. de Bapnlmotol.96. he layth , that baptifme is amatter of ceremonyt which the church may omit or tak/e quite away. Oe- coiaoipadius in his 2 beokeefepiftksp. 363. bapc s Imc is an externail thmgt which by the law of charity may be difpenfedwitball, And Mufculm in loch tit de hasreii p?g.6o5. reckons the Anabapciftsamongll thole, who (lay sb he) keeping the foundations of fayth, about fecotidary „ matter shaue fallen into misbehefe. And Bucanus ioc.41.dc Ecclcf.queit. 5. auoucheth plainly, that Anabaptihs are a Church, Like as a man attainted with leprofy or out of his wittytsa man. Hi^Maicftyepiil.adCard.Peron pag„ aydayth ; Some reckon baptifme among thofe things, which whether we bane or want, the matter u not great. And Da Whitakcrcont. 4. queft. 7.cap.2. pag. 716.fayth we may abltainefrom baptifme,fo there benoeontept. and fcandall intbefadf. Finally D.Morton in his infwcrcto theProtcftants Apology lib, 4. albeit ira thcd.chapter hemakea doubt whether Anabaptifts retaine and hold the foundation, yet in the 2.cap. fedhio fpeaketb thus: The Anabaptifs excludeProtcttantf and all different profeffms from the hope offpirituall life,yet do not Proteflantmdge the fate of entry Anabaptift to befovtterly defperate.We fee how they teach that Anabaptifh hold thefoundation9and deny but an externail, fecondary, and cere* moniall matter, and fuih as may be omitted }fo it be don without fcandall' that Anabaptifs andthemfelues are femes of the fame Father, that they are in the fate ojjdluatien, and that they are a church'as a man tainted with leprofy ts aman. Now con- ccrningthc Arriansofthefe tymcs, M.Morton in bis feaokc ef the Kingdomeof Ifrscl,and the Church D1 ~ Pa£» Ln. i. ^ 5 ^nabaptisis eutd ArUifs. Andthe Pa»'P4* auouchcth plainly ,chac rhcir Churches art Arri&ai, t0 Dc accounted the Churches of God, Sscaufc (fay th h t)tbej bold the found,ttionsf the Ghofpell. Hooker in his of Ecclcfiaftieali policy pag. 181. wrifcth debar}* l^us; The Ariam in the reformed churches of Poland &c. Nay Vykiuk. *®rac r^e Protcftancs lay claymc to that old hcrc- tike Aerius, for that he agreed with thern in dcnyall pAga^i* of prayer for the dead, and lorne other points-yet Parent?™ that he was flaincd with Arianifme, S. Epipharjius, in[ft/iruSi whoiiued in thofc tymes hxr./j. and S.Auguftin Gall.p. ty. 5$. fwitnefTes whole credit herein can no w ay be impeached) do plainly tedify. They lay I0# Lallly they forbcare not fomctymcs to chalIcn£c ^or l^c^1 ownc»as wcrc :^cir Pro&ft ^^y^enemiesjasiscertaincby their chyme to thcPapiftj jnici* ' and Grecians, who condemned and branded their do&rine with the marck of herefy. And the Sacra- In Ce*cil9 tncntarics pretend a right to Luther and the Luthe- Trid In ' rans,howbeit it is well known,that both the Mailer Cmfurd and thefc& hauediuers tymes ccnfurcd and condcm- Qtkm . ncA their dodrinc by name, as in theConftflions of Aufpurg, Mansfcld , Antwcrpc, & that of Sucucland fct forth anno iy63 .in the bookc ofConcord,in the , visitation of Saxony, and elfc where itappcarctiu And that in the Conference of Marpurge and MonN bclgard they gaue them the rcpulfe and flatly refufed to admit them for brethren. Nay, as Lauathcrui Writcch lib, dcdiffid.Euchar.anno 1556 :There bm bynmany Synodesheld(by the Lutherans) wherein they con* {idted what way they might take to quell and nukje an end of tha Sacramentariei. And they (hew thofameencroaching defirc in perfonall Chimes. For Illyricus in his Ca¬ talogue lib. ip.col. 1917, cnrolleth amongft his wit* aeffes Cii&houaeus, an carncft and vehement aducr- _fary Their prof eft enemies. Cap. {• fary both of Lurhcra-nd Occolampadius. D. Hum- frey in vita luclli claymcth hrafmus, for a main- tayncrand Champion el the truth. M. box vouch- T^inolhh (afeshima place in hiskalcnderot ProuLtanc Sam;*, ude idout* and Vcrhcrden fets his pourtraiturc anaonglt rheca^,*. Worfhicsand Pairs of their religion. Vorltius in Ap¬ pend. Refponf. ad Sladum pag. 136. accouotcih him one of his ownc , that is { laytb he *) one of the reformed. D.WhitakerConfr.^qucft^.cap.}.pag.693 l*fth: Ii is moft apparent that Erajmui thought the fame 0) religionthat we do. And yctEralmus birolcirchb.j6.epiit n.pro- klfcrhjthathcacknowiedgethnot Luther,and itn- pugneth openly both him and his do&rinc. And (a« Amldorfjus writrth in cpilt.apud Lutberum torn 2. fol.4$/.):Thc[ummeof Erafmrndoftrineit tbiiithatLutbeti dottrine is bereft}. Otho BrunJeifiusin his anfwere to Erafmus fpunge , layth thele things to his charge : Thou mike ft proteftation neuer to haue conuerftation or fellow* ship with tiiofte men, who imbrace the ghofpell vndcr I nth en name. Againc:It» we'dknowne andconfeft, that ojfto many enemiesoftbe( Protdhnt) ghofpell y noone euerdidit more harme then thou. Hutterus inExpoliular.Holpin.parf. 2.Hiftor.fol.72.lames Andrew lib.cont. Hofiump. no. D James I. dc corrupt. fcriptur£& Patrum pag. 66. and others, fay the like of him. D. Humphrey ad Rar. ^.Campiani will haue King Henry 8. to haue byn a member of their Church. D. Fulkelib. conf. Heskins. & Sander. fe£t. 82.fayth , fee was a member of the Catbolike church of CbrifL And D. Andrews in Refcv ad Apoil.Bellarm.cap.i.faythrH*was a true defender of the trtiefayth. Buccr epiil.dedicat.Comaient.dd Rom: H embraced the pme Ghofpell of Chrijl reletting tbofe forgeries of men which are repugnant toil. And yet, it is molt ccr- taine uhat hclbarpiy perlecutcdand purfucd Protc- V " — f - "" ftants tL x*. x. 60 Fret eft ants imlti del delators • {lanes Ciien vnto death. And as Meian&bon wrltcth to hinrs in cpitt. torn. 4: He opprejjhd the truth then appea¬ ring andshewing it felfe . And as CanahdenCayth in Ap- paratu Annaiium Anglic. Proteflants he burnt for here-* tikes. OfCharle^Scuitctusin Conc.lecuiar.pag/o, writcth thus: It is knownebyvndoubteddcmwflratm, that Charles if.departed this life trufting to the fame comfort am the famtfeytb.which Luther drew from the [acred tpelfprings > and broached to the people, (I a m e 3 A n d r e w s 1 i b.co n r. H o fi u m pag.2 3 3.bath the 1 ike) and yet in the fame fermon p. % 7. he fay th; To this alone be bent his whole endeauours, that be might pluckyp the Lutheran religion by therootes. M Doue in his bookcof Recufancy will needs perfuadev*, that BdlarminchimfelfcisaProtefiant,orat lead no right Papilt. Whatmeruaile is it , ifchcfc men befo hardy as to challenge the ancient Fathers,feing they arcnotaihamcdto claimcin this manner their pro- feffed enemies fuch as arc knowne to all the world, tndareyetaliue. that Trot eft ants fometymes acknowledge Idolaters, Infidels y Anthbrift himfelfe, and Atheifts t§ be members of their C hnrcb* CHAP. IV. r. *jri Hat they fometymes confcflc idolaters are ?f©tc!lit« X members of their Church, is cuidcnt.Firft Sjafcnle f°r*hat they refufenot to rccciuc Papills, (asw* o aters, ham heard beforcj in exclamations and outcriesa- gaind vvhofe idolatry, their tongues and penncsarc itt mod a worke,for to their worfiiip of the Eucba- Sain^jj of images, of rcii^uesj they afford no mildcfi Troteftants include Injidelsl 6% C i!t. 4i milder name. Andfccondiy it appeareth bythcit © wne words. For M. Hooker in his ^booke of Ec- clcfiafticall Policy pag.12 6.fay th: Chriftians by external frofejfion the; are all, whofe markf of recognifcance hath in it thofe things which we have mentionsd^yeaalamgh the) be im« piom Maters , wicked heretikes, per[ons excmmuntcablt. A game: Thofe whofe knee* were bowed vntoUaal, euen they wcrealjo tf theviftble Church of God. Boyflcui in Contur. p.822 anfweriogtothcpiaccwhereSpondcusobic-» ded that if the Church of Rome be an IdolatrcfFe, (as Boy fTcui had auouchcd) it is not the C hurch of Chriff; makes this reply: And why not as well as 1fr aeli And D. WhicakcrCont. 2.qucft. 3.cap. $«pag, 47^. faith: Although this err our (Idolatry in adoring the calfe) were mofgrimm, yet it deftroyed not the whole nature of m Church. 2 . That they fomctymes comprize alfo Infi- And dels in the Church, is rnanifcftj firft bccaufe they af- IafidelS® 4 htmc that fuch may be faucd^For M.Fox in his Mar- tyrologe pag. 495. rcportcth that a ccrtaine Prote- ffant Martyr w hole learning piety&zcalc he great¬ ly commendeth, taught that a Tmket Saracen, or any Malmmetanwhatfoem may be [amd -yfhe truft in one God ard keep his law. M.Balc in his 6 Century pag.464.bids y$ beware that we condenwenot rashly any Turkea And Zuin- glius torn. 1.lib.de prouid.fol. 370. fay th: It isnotvni- uerfaUj true>tbat who fo hath nofayth is damned, Againe: As for the damnation of vnbelieuers it is meant only of thofe, whs heardanddidnot belieue. And torn.2. dedarat.de pcccaft. ■ orig.fol.u8: Thisfaying (who fo doth not bclieuc fbaU be condemned) muft in no wife be ahfolutelyvnderfood, but ^ee^Qm^ it is to be vnderfiood of thofe»who hatting heard the ghojpell would not belieue. And ibidem in cxpofit.fidcifol.55p, Corner |hcfajtb,thatinheau€nChriftiansihaUtBisct!nafly ~ " ~r~ t" fe«athcm& Trite ft ants include Infdels. euennew ax thu tymcin regardtheyareprcdefikats and in refpett oj God ^ but they are not yet of Gods C hurch appa^ remly, and in refietl of ys, for at much as they lackey el tboft marks, whereby God doth heereshew ys men who are of the church. And Cont.^iib.^.cap.iz :The true definition of the true church is thd: The company and multitude of thofe > whoins God hathchofen to faluation. And Iunius lib. 3. dc Ecclc Leap./: Paul was alwajesof the church according to pre> defiinMion-Jrom which (fayth he ) the churchtakftb her be* ingt or formal definition} but not according to the out ward forme of the church. What can be more apparent, then that tcefemcn teach, that the predominate arc members of the church according to the true being thcrof and in the fight of God>cucn during the cymeof their in¬ fidelity . 4. Thirdly this foljowctb neceffarily vpon that which they teach concerning infants fcfpecially fuch as arc dcfcendcd from fay thfuil parents) depar- tingthis life vnbaptized. For they affirmc, that the children of the fay thfuil arc a&ually in theChurcb, as the French Confeffion article^: T ogeather with the parent t God accounted alfo their offpring in the church. And the Zuitzcrs cap. 20: Why should not they( the childrca of the fay thfuil) be ingrafted by facred baptifme, wbe an Geds prefer fojfejfion and within kit church? Caluin in lit- ftruft.cont. Anabap.art. 1: Vnfpettedinfants are inthe Communion of the cburchbefore they come forth of their Mother 1 wombe. And Partus lib.;.deluftificat cap.4.pag.884S Caluin en good reafon determined> that the children of the churchy are borne cittiuns of the church. Their dodtrinc al¬ fo hath the fame ifluc, who teach that infants (at leaftwifc the ehiidrca of the faythfull) arc faucd 7 withcat hi* x. ^4 Tret efiants include Infidels. without baptifmcy as the Protelhnts in the colle^j Ratisbon.And Zuinglius torn,z.Dcciarat.dc peccar. orig.fol.119: CovccrnwgCbrifttans children we are ajjuredy that they are not damned for original! firm, of others we haste not the like affurance: howbeit, to con ft fa ingenuoufh, the opinion we taught heretofore, to wit, that we ought not to tudge rasuiy of beatbem children, feemes toys the more probable Vorltius 111 Anti-bdianBine pag.542 : Zuinghw and fonts otherghef- pcllersauouch, that all children whatfoeuer are by the grace of Cbrifijaued • others fortbemoft part hold, that at It aft wife dk the elect y whether extract from faythfull or other parents do euen vnbaptizedattaine to faluation. W hereof he fa vt h; The opi¬ nion of thefe later k farelytbe fafefl • and yet the frjt opinion it probable inough and ought not to he rashly condemned. No w a* D. Whitakcrfayth Cont.z.qucft i,cap.y.8c 6: Alltbat are faued are really and actually in the church And D. Mor¬ ton parM-ApoUib.x.cap.4 :To be of the cbttrchtnpojfibi- tityjujjicetb not to faluation. Lubbercus lib. z.detccicf. cap.2; Neither can anyonebe faued except he be actually and really in the church. Whence Martyr in i.Cor.y.ioiiyy. f a y t h: /nfatits muft of necefsity appertaine vnto the church,feing there u no faluation without it. They teach morcouer,that Inrancs haucno fayth, and confequcnrly that they are infidels, whence it enfucth that they account *c ording ^onrK ^^els to kc a&uaily of the church. Caluin^ eoCprote- ^ftttut. cap.16. §. 19 :1 will not lightly affir me, that they (infants) are endued with the fame fayth we find in our (clues. And $.(eq. he fayth : Infants are baptized [or future repen¬ tance and fayth. Now if they dye before they are of year es, God reneweth them by the vertueofhis fpirit, which we do not com¬ prehend, in fuch manner as himfelfe alone knowetb how to bring topaffe.Lihxont. Serust. pag. 647. he fayth, chat rbac fcntence of the Scripture : VVhofoeuerbelieuethnot in the $me of God abidetbjn death j and the wrath of God remayneth rpm Infants without all faith 0ants. h. * TretdUnts include Infidels. q a p. 4, ?/ becaufeit ts recei¬ ved byfayth. To infants it is communicated by a fpeiidi manner* Bucer in cap. 19, Martftadpiag.404: Paul fay th that fajtb commeth by hearing the wordpr cached , and hi the fame fort all the Scripture fpeabyitM jayih.Seitig therefore infants beare not the word preached, they cannot haue this kwddffdyih.Ritt cut of that tt hat infants want fay lb, nothing Uffe can be concluded, then ( whichfome tbwke} that therefore they cannot pie afe God.In¬ fants are bluffed by the grace of God and merits ofchift; Put if they be taken hence in their infancy, they shall know God and reape felicity by fome other knowledge then fay th. Mufcultis in locistir.de baptifmo: Infantshaueyet nofayth. Againe? Infants are Jaued by Gods elefthn, though they betaken out of this life riot only vnbaptrmed, but euen before they haue fayth. Bcza in ConfeiT. cap.4.fed:.48 :Itdothnotappear etovs that infants are endowed with that habit of fayth,which 1 was required to the receiving of the matter and effect of the Sa~ pQ muc^ craments, nor is it likely that they are. And in coiloq.Mon- as the usbcLp *g.407 Wherefore, though the chiidrtnof thefayth- habit of full want faytb ,yet is not baptifme vnprofitable to them. And fay tb. parr.t.Refponf.ada&aMonusbci. pag. 124; Alleit in¬ fants haue no fayth of their owne, efpecially aftuall 9 yet rightly are ihey baptised according to the forme of the Geuenani > I will be thy God9andofthy feed, which is apprehended by the par ents to themfeluesand their children. And pag. 129 : J confejfe that fayth is required, that infants comprehended in the Covenant maypleafe God-Jut i deny, that they can or ought 10 be endowed mtbtbeir owne fayth inherent in them, DaneusL4.de bap- fiftn© cap. 10. pag.268. propofcth to himfclfe this queftion; What is the fayth which in baptifme we require in infants ? and anfwererh : None. Vrljnus in defer-f. ar¬ gument* Bczx, God recmsth infants into the Chttrch with- E out 6& TrotcftAnts indndt Infidelsl ewtfiytb.PctcrMinyrin i.Cor.7#pag.94 :SewgtUh$d, Ij Scripture doth not tell we, that infants bdteue,ertbfje mix a* (Us are wrought in them,neither fee I that it is necejfaiyfor their faluatm, 1 ibinkjt is inough that they be thought to be fined %be- (aufe by election and predefiination they belongto the people of God y& are endued with the holy Ghofi, who U the Author of faythyhope, and Charity. Perhaps they will anfweare out of Ah* guslint opinion> that they are faued by%e fiytb oj others jo wit 9) their parents. But the Prophet fayth that entry one is (aued by bis ownefayth,not by other mens fayth Wherefore we anfwere woreeafiljy who exatt exprefie and acluaU fayth inthofe that are efyearesy but in the children of Chrifiuns, who are brought to be ChrifenedyWe fay fayth is begun in its principle & root }becaufo theyhaue the holy Ghofi firm whence Moth fayth and other ver¬ mes do fiow. DAVhitaker Conr.2.qucH.<5.c.^.pag.56^; Bapt ifme doth not in fife any fayth or grace into infants .And hclaytb plainly, chat infants bane no fayth. And lih.8. conf. Durxum fed. 77 : Albeit in the Sacraments fayth which receiueth the word ofpromife, be neceffiry,yet that fiytb is not needfullin infants, Albeit it be not to be doubted but the ho • ly Ghofi cjfcftudly worketb in them after aficret and wonderfiS W4«tf*r.M.Ptrkin.sdepr£dclHnar.tom.i.coJ,i49 : in- fants which dye in the Couenant.webelieue to be fatted bytenour .of that Couenanty but they were not chofeu for fiytb of according V to fay thy which yet they had not- And in fcric caufar. Cap. ^ 35 : Elected infants dying in the wombeor fo'one after they he iorne,arc faued after a hidden and vnfpeakeelh manner in- graftedin Chrifi by the fpirit of God. Luther torn.6. in cap, 25.Gen.foI.322 tVnbaptizedinfintsbaue no fayth. Mclan- dhon in locis fit.de baprifmo to.3 M.ii$ umofi truejhat fayth is required in aU that are of years. But conccr* rnfanti n;ng infants (fay ih he) the matter is other wifc.Kcra* 'd nuius part.t.Exam.tir.dcbaptifm.pag. 89. tcllethv* thatfojEc ProtcfUntsarcof opinion^* infinu are in• dct$ ?> cleft Ant4 include Injidds* 7 C a f . 4* deed fatted bj the grace of God, but without Jajth. Nor doth thctr faying chat the feed or root offaythjoreifcati inciinatibn or difpofition to fayth f w hich form of them aflrnneinfaimto hauc^ help them anything itall,both bccaulcScharpccont.r. dc luftifi.grauu- tcth that thisfecd cm wither baue the k?ewledge nor Apply* in0 of tbepromifet, and therefore it not Protdtanc faith, and bccaufeMufculusin locistit.de fide art. 7. con* feffcth, that they difiiuguish and put a difference betweene faytb and this bidden feed. Now if it be no fay th, it ma* kcth not himfaythlullin whomcitis.Andlaftly be- caufefas themfelues acknowledge^ they are nota/Tu- rcd, whither infants haue any (uch feed or no. For Caluinlib.^cap.j^ y.cit: Whether the) bane at aft any knowledge like vntofajthyhlwofe rather toleaus it vndetemi- ncd. Andhcaddcth,thatthe manner of chcirrencw- ingh knewne to God alone. Tothefe allegations you may addc, that M. Perkins in his Reformed Cat ho- like con t. id.fayth , a man may befaued by a defire t# bane faytb: And Hcucrthelcffe confefleth that,this dc- fire u notindeedfayth. And in 2.GaIaf«coI.£r: Gedaccep* tetk the will and defire to belieuejor beliefe it felfe. No w as Jongasa manhathnotfayth buconlyadefirethere¬ of,he isaninfidci. 5. You might think, that hauing madethii grauntoffaluation to infidels,their liberality wold reft here,and not pafTcthcfc bounds $ but they go yet Pfoteftata further, and beftow it fotnetymes cuen vpon him ^ challenge whometbey fwcarc^cabclicucasan article of their AQUC^ fay th (and that with as great certainty and afiurancc as they bclieuc God is in htaucn,or Chrift is the Meflias) to be that notable Ancichrifi foretold in Scripture. For thus writcch M.PowcIUib.dc Aoti- eiuifto Cap.3j.pag.g38 ;1 will in no wife fay9thataU the E » ftp** JLxs. i» 68 TrotcH&nts includentichriIf* Popes from the tyme wherein Papiftry was fir ft reuealedtoh Amichriftianhy^are damned. Howbeit in the beginning of his booke he makes this protcftation :*! folentntly take God to record, that I as certainly know the Bishop of Rome to be that great Antichrift) and the Popish church te be the Syna¬ gogue of Antichrift, as 1 know God to be in the htauem, cr lefua Chrift to be the true Jtfejfias promifed to the Fathers. D.Whi- takeriikcwifecont.4.q 5. cap.. 3* pag.694.fayth : Lei ys cry aloud and [were by htm who Hues for euer, that the Bishop of Rome is Antichrift. And to D. Sanders la ft demoofrra- rion that the Pope ffc not Antichrift pag. 799: We may take that me ft [acred and mo ft true oath,and [weave by him who hues for euer >ibat the Bishoppe of Rome u the very Ami~ Chrift. And ncuerrhcleffe in bisanfwerejo the firft dc- monftration he fay th with M. Powell: I will not fay, that from the tyme that Papiftry began to be AntichtiftiAnityihe Popes themftlues haue byn all damned. And both hccap.cif* psg. <$79. & 6S1. & other Proreftants ordinarily af- firmcthat Antichrifts Sea (lialbc in the true Church, a* wrong the company of thefaythfuU, and that he fliallbeartr- tiz.cn) and inhabit ant, and P aft our ofthe Church. To whom I pray will thefe men deny faluation, or a place in their Church , who graunt it vnto Antichrift the fwornc enemy of Chrift, whome thcfcripcure it felf ffylcrb: Chvfts adnerfary }tbentan of [m, the forme ofperdi- tmt I fee not why they (hould henceforward vp- ferayd vs With Antichrift , ftnee they thcmfelucs clay me him for a member of their Church. 6. It is alfo ccrtaine, that they challenge A- rhcifts. For Illyricus in Catal. lib. 9.col. 1916. D, erhat they Humfrey rcfponf.ad Rat. 3. Camp. M. Fox in his challenge Ads printed anno 15-96. pag, 64.6. allot that Atheifl Machisucl an honorable roome among the wirncftes and maincayners of the truth • And Luther spud Aianlitirs fretclldnts include a thrift si 6? c a*. Manlium in ioc.tir.dcEccl .pag^Si. (ayth ©f Valla, that he gaue pUce to none hut Epicure himfolfo , endprofejfed openly, that he held opinion? repugnant to the foundation of faytb. Ncucrthe'eflc the fame Luther refponf. ad Louan.& Colen.tom.2.foI.^8. writcththusof him: Val 4 in my iudgement wm either a remanent fparke> or fotne few ell ef the primitiue Church»whofe like m eonjiamyatii vn~ japed wale oj ChrtfiUn fayth Italy or the whole Church had net for many ages. One Epicure then in Luthcrs iudge¬ ment was the remanent fparkc,and fcweli ©f the Church. . that femesymes frotcUdnts dcceunt dM theft their brethren > ^ohe vnderthe nme *fthriftidns tppofe themjelues any Vey dgdinft the Fcpe. \ C H A P. V. f. Hat Prntcftantsfometymes acknowledge J. all thofe for members oftheir Church, who Vnder the name of Chriftians do any wayoppofe themfclues againftthe Pope,f prouc: Firftbecaufe fonre of them 'do openly fo profeflc. For (as Kc twice reporteth iniociscit.deEcclef.pag.ua^S'awe/rfWtfffra Church to be a ruble of aH Setts, of Anabaptijls tSacrAmenta* ries,Swinefeldum, And other$,[othey be not Papifts.Knd Ca. pito in Caluin.cpift.d.Swj* bane brought in a liberty jsif oil were of the Gbofpells fide, whofoeuer haue catt of the Popes y^.Mufculusalfo inlocistit.decjena pag^a.fayth; 1 imuraceall for brethren in the Lord, hotpfoeuer they dijAgree from me or Among themf dues, At long as they wayntaine not the lephh impiety „ Secondly! feecaufe they profcfic, fhas Ej ■ tk* K, I j. 1.7® Tratetfants include the end of their preaching was toIefTcnthcauthon- For what xy of the Pope 5and Bilhops , and to be contraryto endLu. them. For thus Luther writeth of himfeUecprft.ad therand Frcderic.Elc&.tom.i.fol. 330:Tbf Isclcfiapcall tyrdnnj hisfeU j, Hg!J7 treaknedandbr oaken > whichonlj i furpojeam writing. prTached ^ra5 Slcidan lih.^.rcporteth, He wiiteth >tbattheEc* ' defiafiicall tyranny h now wtakned,(? that,that done wot his defigne at thefirfLAnd epilh ad Waidcnfcs in Holpin. parr 2.fol.8.hcfayth, that heimpttgned tranfttbftantiatm cnlyforennyofthePapiSU . And in parti a ConteiT. a pud eundcmtol.i^.that he impugned theEIcua^ion only to fpitetbe Papifts. Caluin 4. lriltitut.cap.io.^.t.fayth: The end of our contention is, to bridle that infinite and barbarous , Vo. ijiniony which tbofe, who would be accounted Pafim, haue rfurpedouerfoules. Zuingliusiib.de Au&or.Sedit/om, SUtoJ. 12 5. affirrnet h, that there is a fort of Protcfuts, which for no other caufe do bears the doctrine of the GhofpcR., then bccanje they extremely hate the Popedoms, and cnuy Papiflsthtir felicity and glory. Buccr lib.de regno Chrifti cap. 4 ; Thegreateflpart 0} menfeemt to haue fought only theft things of tbegbofpell, Fir ft that they might shake oj the tyranny of the bio* wane Anticbrijl, and of the falft Bishops o c. Luther alfo tom.2. German* foi.22.tcllcth what wasthcendof the Sacramcntarics & Anabaptifts.-Ifrfcirt (faythhe) that fometmbrace Anabaptifttse for this only end^that ft they may fpite the Bishop of Rome, euen as the Sacranientartes do onlfin hatred of the Romish Bishop, deny that there is any thing in the facrament beftde bread and wine. Of the new Arianiend thus writeth Zinchius lib. 1.cpifl. pag. 154: Our Asians haue determined toouerturnefrom the foundation what" fecuer is in the church of Rome. And what end Illyricus bad, thus tciJcth D. Whitakcr ad Rat. 8. Campiani: iRyrtctti went farther then be should sdil tbinkjo be the further offyomjou^wkome be bated* 2. Third- 1 xyiUcnmitiU the Toft. 71 Oaf* 5. a. Thirdly, bccaule they call the departure v from the Pope and Popifii do&rinc, the foundation, a goodpart,and tbefumme of the Protefam buildup Sadt cl R «• lponf.ad Arthu.cap. 12 : Protefiants agr c em thisfounda¬ tion > that the Church ought to be reformed out of the uordef God> and that Popish erroursmuft be remould cut of the Church. Srrauta epilt. dcaicat ad £pi(c. Anglix: It u to be wondered, bow much altnoft all the Reformers picafi themflue* tn this point, that the/ will baue nothing common with the church of Rome. Grotius apud Homiurnin Spccimsne&c: Neither can J forebear e to shew the fount aine and offpring of this and other calamities • VVe thinfithdt we are fomuch the purer, the further wegofrempoints of Romish dctlrine without any difference. Vcrgcriusdial. 1. pig. 20 : VVe hope, that short 1/ all matters will be compofed. VVe could do, b/ Gcdshdpe, that which fie wed thecheifeftof atland the bar deft and well nigh impoffible, that u , pull ourfiluesafid ridde vso) the Papiftsty~ ramy. Wherefore nothing u to be doubled, but we shah cmpaffa other matters of Itfft moment. For a good foundation is layd ,/ca 4 good par toft he building is fit vp. A nd Zu i n gl i us R e fpon f. ad Biili.tom. 2.fol. 2^u When oneobiedkd vmo him the diflention amongft the Sacramcntarksirt expending Chrifls words of the fupper, aniwerefb g No man ought U be offended with this diuerfitj, more then with the difference among man/ c apt aims, who go a bout to conquer 4 Tertull * caftle, whiles one wouldbaue it battered, another vndermmd, PYtf c^u and a third would haueit fialed. Pot aU agree to deftrey the Athanaf. cattle, the difference is only about the way, not about tbefummc ofihematter And foconcludeth, thatif any Sacramc- taries hauc erred, They erred (fayth he) in the letter not in Qftphonr. fpirit, inthefummethey agree all. The furamc therefore j&ugujlji* wherein all Protefiants agree , is tooucrtbrow the Tfal.Qv. PepifhcaHle,and Catholikcfayth, (in whichalf becanfc they deferibc} paint, 8c name a Protefhnt by departure from the Pope and Popifti do&rinc. The Confeffion of Wittenberg in Prefat. defcribethProtdlants to be Such, oehauechan¬ ged in their Churches akjnd of (Popish) doftrine > which bad bynvfed for man) yeares, and fame other ancient ceremonies. M.Perkins in the Preface or his Reformed Catholik, fay th : By a Reformed C4tboli( fo hetertmth-a Prote- llantj) t^dcrjhtnd anyone ,1bat holds the fame necejfary heads of Religion with the Roman Church,yet foot he pates of and re¬ tells ail errors in doctrine, whereby the fayd religion ts corrupted. D AVi'lkt in the Preface of his Syncpln : A Proteflant is he tlhit profejfith the ghefpeU of JefmCbrift, andbathrenoun¬ ced the mifdi&ton of the Sea of Rome ^and the forced and vnna* ttir all obedience to the Pope. Scbuifelburg torn. 13.Cat.il. H&rcr.pag.23: A Lutheran ortrtieChnflian is he, whohath fettered himfelfe from Papifls &c. And com. 8. pig. 363: T rue Lutherans are they who Unbrace the doctrine of theghof- pell wmendingVopishabufes. You fee how in all thctede- fcriptibnsof a Protcifant, the deniall ofthe Pope and PopiQidodrinc is put as a certaioe difference, Whicji corfcurreth rothemalunganddiftingui$ung cfa Protcftant from all others. Hereupon D. An¬ drews Apol. Cent. Bellarm. cap. 1. fayth: Sauingthh that tiicy will not (alfa catainc Popifli errors ■ c/ill enemies to the Tope. 71 C a*, J# ^5t!i cr ro rs a n d a b u fesj our fajth is no other then jours is, or ought m lobe. And he addeth,that rhey call their religion re- formed , onlybecaufe it is purged from certme dcuifes and Wtln corruptions, which had crept into tt, And faytb, that Baccr wPtopli and Peter Marty t didonlyplitck_rp certaine cockle,which Pa- i^ii pifis badfowed.ln like fort Boylfeui in his Confutati- ww. ^n ot Sponde pag. 724. fay th: Take away jour Popery & 'tojfiiilk that which dependetb thereof, and you and we shall be but one church, becaufe we shall haue but one Confeffion of fajth. 'ipiintil Moreoucr PlcfTy in the forefront of his myltery of itPoptjnl iniquity 3 paintcrh a Protellant with a torch in Mnbgi hishand, (cttinghrc to the tower of Babylon, by iikit which he vnderilarideth the Popedomc . And fi- 11 ally Luther in cxempl. Thcol. Papiif. ton?,2 .foL tmm 401. ralleth hirnfclte an Anti-papifi, as of his prin- cipallend or effice?atid fayth>that he was called by titaPre diuine reuelation todeftroy the Popes Kingdom.D, ittpjluis Humfrcy alfo termcth Ochinus a flout Ami-papift, Wiiflfi as if to be a Protelhnt and an Anti-papifl were ail iiffifi one. i;^?4 4. Fiftly, becaufe the fame opinions which in iidm- Papiftsthey dctcft 5 in other who arc opposite to the iM» Pope, they diffcmbic or extenuate. Lubbert. lib. r. n.ijM Replicar. cap. 4. fayth: The Lutherans dijpute not with vs 1 about the Canon of Scriptures, nor we with them. And lib. 4. dcCondi, cap. vlt: We contendnot with the Churchesof Saxony, which keep images in the Churches. And yet they dltWclt' eagerly againft Catholiks about theCa- non of fcripturcs, and images. The Scots in their gc~ ,gC0i iieral Confeffion profefle to deteft Popery ,for main* ijj{oiliii| fayningthe real! prefcocc of Chrifts body in thcEu- jjpjjji. charift,for making the figne of the C rolfe, for deny- 'ng infants without baptifmc to be faucd. And in Lpj their other Confeffion c.2Z.tbcy fay they fhunnc the ffin By CcfflRiU" i. 74 frote ft Ants insl*4e Communion of the Popifti Church, bccaufe her mi- ^ujfdtwVi- nilicrsarc notMiruftcrs of Chrift, bccaufc ifce pa- pu>*xon. cnittccb women to chriftcn in cafeofneccility p»d Luurgi*, yctdifTcmble, that the Lutheran Proteftants allow ail thefc points j «nd that the EiigiifoProtclUnuad- et lUmpt. m*c PopiAPricRsforfufficientminiftera^omraaifd Court. the making of the croffc in baptifrnc,& aa i S o w v- (») Lmko mensbaptifmeiu cafe ofncccffityj but becaukthey cr Erafiw arc3gairift the Pope , a» well as the Scots, their op- htSchuJJJ* pofiuon to the Pope, like folcfaytb coucrethalhsnd C*ihi*' nukcrft that the Scotsimputc not thefe matters to them. And if at any tymc the Catholiks do fet before l\. ofthe fheireyes the errors or diffamonsamongft them, ei- Church thcr they impudently (*J deny fcbem or greatly cxtc- tap.x 4, nuate them, laying ,tha t the) 4re not about the (bj found*- (b) JpoLtmtnot of (c) weighty matters, #/ light matters} hot if the (d) ~**§A7k • MAtur ^Mt °f ^3S m*mer> °f(c) things indifferent ,cf I knew not (c) tt. w^t xitle$%MdpAAUjonl)oSurely i imagine, tap.8 ^ *' as thcyfa* »that ail linnesin the cleft faythfullare fd)Buctr venial!, but in others all are morrill: fo they deeme, $*$cbuffel. thatallcrrorsin thofcthat are oppose to thePopa fib ctt.Cai* are vcniall and light • but inPapiftsallare haynous white rat. and mortall. So much the altcrationofthe perfon eouwd.p. changeth the cafe with them. Hereupon QJEI'za- cna(^Cf*>no* *kat ^ fhould be treafon for any Monitor. OJ1€ to difTuadc fro that religion which (hehadellr if) Mart, hliilicd, vrilcfTeit were done with intention to in¬ fo he. tit, ducehim who was difluaded , to theobedienceof AtEuihtr. thcBishop of Rome, And hereupon alfofomcof f.ti.Hofp them openlyprofeffe,that they more cftcemcTurkl part.* jq , t{jcn Papiffo . forfoorh bccaufe the Turkc agrecth 'at with them in hatred of the Pope and Popery, in re- *£risfdi. *Pct^ whereof they litrJcregard the confent in the tefc *d wjflcrics ofthc Trinitj! and incarnation and Paf- Mrtfm, £on f ^ enemies t§ the Tope. 7j C if. ;« ^ £on, ani other articles of Chriftunfayth. Sixtiy H they make the forfaking of Popery an cuidentargu- p men t of true religion, and oppolc their confcnt thcr. Ilsili in,asa fufficient cloake to coucr all their diflcntions l! i in other matters.ZuingliusPrcfat.Ecclefiaft.tom.r. <°li fol. 59 : It is an evident argument of true Religion amongyou9 fcw tbatyou cafl cut all tbefiltbof (Popifh) idolatry and bridle the wwitilj fioathfull company of Prieftsand put tbemfrom the c httrch, And tl|tk«i| when Cardinal! Hofius obic&cd to Proteftants their disagreement about the Eucbarift, lames An¬ ita® is dtcwsinhisanfwerepag ^.fayrh : What is this dif~ In what sioltfe fention to you Papifts ? Be it we truly difagree in this point, yetPro l€ itfjfe in that we e[pectally agree, that with one mind we impugneyourc fpecilJJf i Popery astrue Antichrifiianifme. And Brenfius in the Pre~*&rec* -; face of the fame booke: Other wife with one confcnt they ,1 fight againfi Popery. And to the lame obicdion Caluin in.ConfAr* Holland. pag. 576 fayth thus :True»9 «djfe yet with one confcnt we all teacbltbat( Popifb)idolatry is to be : t detefcd.ln like manner Bcza in Hofpin. part. 2. Hift. 1fol.300 : I confeffe • yet in this we all agree with raited minds ;ii# to impugneyour tranfubftantiation.SedccltlCo Rcfponf. ad •njiiujii" Sophiim.Turriani pag.562: Tetneuetthclejfethis mylitle iiftpi fake be witnejfe with bow conioyned firengthaU our Chur- ,^(j| (ha dofet vpon the Popish errors. And in indicc Rcpcf.pag. ^y5! 80$ i ltb well that all they who conioyned them[ekes to the re- r ;.v:l formed Cburch}witb one confcnt reittt the Popes Primacy .And D. Whitakcr Contr.2.quefl 5. cap. 8. pag. 521: Tet in t the meane tyme we all agree againfl the Pope. And in this 0 vnity of theirs to be againft the Pope, tbey greatly ^ triumph. His maicfty in his monitory cpiftlep. 174: 'r^c ■ Almofl the halftpart of the Chrijlian world iegon out ofBabylon. f j AndD.Andrcwsrefponl. ad Apol. Bcllarm. cap.14: jnifiin dtlmojl Mfe °fthe Chrifian world is fo fane rnited in one pro - j feffmtac that tbej are gen out of Babylon. And When Bcca- 1 i " N nus lis. i. 76 fret eft ants include mis had found fault witci him jbecaufc hefayd tTh$ Kwg ofgreat Britany and theKings ofDenmircl^aridSweden mtb the Princes of Germany who are of one belief e with him% area part of (he Lords flock,-, bccauLchc KingsofDcjj- fnarckand Sweden be Lutherans, and therefore are not of one beliefc,with the King of great Britany j Burhili in defence of him cap. 15, anfwereth: That, who are of one beliefe with King lames, is put in steed oj who mthhitnrefufetobevnderthe P^V.Thcy meane theo,rhac »li thofe are of ojfic belief with them,and be pa; c of the Lords flock, whorcfufe to be vnder the Pope. Which kind of vnity is that, which his Ma icily in bis declaration againfl: Vorftius noted fdcrericjues to keep , faying pag.49 : There are in Hungary and Bohemia innumerable Heretics, who agree together only in hatred of the Pope. But not only Herctiks, but alfo 1c wes, Turcki and Infidells agree with Protcflancs in c0s poirjr. An excellent vnity lurcly ,8c worthy of ChriAians, wherein they (hall hauc fuch partners and fcllovvcs. Seaucnthlyl proucit ,bccaufe when they be asked, Who were Protcftants before Luther,they produce no other then fuch as were aduerfaries to the Pope. Illyricus being to make a role of witnc ffcs,darcs not call them Protcftants or witneffes of the Proteftanc BJiti* truth,but (imply witneffesof tketruth, or witness whore* claymed againfl the Pope and Popish errors. And i n the Pre¬ face profefTeth, that he gatherech, as farrc as he cold, all thofe, who in any fort did before Luthcrjgittf*- ftimony to the truth of C hrift againfl the errors and furies of An- tichrift. And L20.col.1951.after he had brought forth fllIhiswitncfTcs,hc fayth of them thus :They deftred a fabler manifeftatm of the truth, which at Ufl (fay th h e j we in this fixteentb agehaue obtained. That is, his witneffes at- tamed not to the knowledge of Proteftant truth. Which J y AllenemiestctheVye. 77cap. fi Which was reucaled but in the fixtcenth agc.Neuer- sj<#; ehcicfle they Teemed witncflcs good inough for illy- r (( ricus, bccaufc in Tome fort they were oppofitc to the do^nncand deeds of the Pope. Bcza alio lib. cfeno- jjI,1 tisEcclcT.pag.8o. when he had obie&cd to faimTclf, J. that in former tymes their Church was not vifibic, snfwercth ilfay, that from the Apojllcs tjme there wae Qe[|; fcarce any age, w which asfoone as this Antichnft (the Pope) ' began to put out hit head > God did not raifefomc> who oppofed tbemfaluesagawjlbu tyranny. And to the fame queifioa • thus anfwearcth Sadeciin Rcfutat.art.di. Pofoan. r1' pag 851: We are ready to shew, that there was no age, in which there were not fame, who rtprouedyour falfe Church. ^ Surely thcfc men imagine Proreftancy roconfift in '! ©ppolition to the Popeand Popery, or they fay no- ^ thing to rhe queftion prepofed . Likcw ife D. Whi- tarkcr Cdnf.i.qucft. 3. cap.2-pag.474. proueih,that u thcProteftant Church hathalwayes byn in Popery* , becaufc therein haucbyn forne, w ho though they com- ^ 1 munkatcd with Papifts3yet before death tended their opinions; %A which kind of proofe fuppofcth , that it fufficcth to low, aProtcftantto rciedtPopifh opinion*. W® y. You Tee thcn5 that thechcife ringleaders of icliw the Proteffants confeffc, that theirs and their fol« Atfuj lowers end was to abate the authority of the Popcj iini (},at thCy deeme the forfaiting of the Pope to be the talks foundation, a good part, arid furnme of the Profe- Jiiwf1 flant buifding^that they account the IcauingofPo- lifuitf pcry an euident argument of true religion; that they ouglit» define, dcfcribc, paint, and name a Protcftant by op- Tkjlf11 pofition to the Pope; that they fay their faith diffc- •(bit)* reth not from ours, but in denyailoffomcofoutar- itncl' tides; that they deny , diffemble , and extenuate |g0 Jfffaatfoeucr they diilikc in thofe, who arc adacrfaries r i9 |ii> 1.78 Tritc fonts include to the Pope*,that they oppofc their content in ippai fition againtt the Pope as a buckler againft allob- ic&ions about their diilcntions in other articlesj & finally that being bidden to produce Protectants be¬ fore Luther , they name fuch as any way oppofed thcmfcluesagainlhhe Popc.Whatdo all rhcfc things declare, but that which ionic of them fayinplaine words, chat the Protcftant Church is arable of ail fedts which arc not Papiftf. 6. But out of all things which haucbynfayd 11 in tbisand the former chapters. Firft we fee, what What grcat power Protcftants take to themfelucs,that ac- folioweth cording as they plcafc they include, or exclude the cf all hi- lame men outof theChurch • Who will not (to vfeS. therto Auguftins words}fearethefemen.who baue received fuch fayd. wonderful! power ouer men. Secondly we fee, that they lib Z'ont *%*atc|k«°ldhcf€tikst w^° (asTcrtullian fayth) Crefcon c Make pedctgenerdttj with all, and with whome dtttifion u their •o. " ver)For{asS.Auguftin notcthftbediuellhathftir- Trxfeript. ^ed vp heretikes: clicucdat 'caft til their fundamental! articles, \^iRenemies to the ?$fe. fpC **•]$* %«t that there wereaiwaytslomc,** w(ai they fpcake) oypojedthemfelues againfl the Pope or bit errors, whether they wcrcotherwifc SchifmatiKs,Hcrcciks, infidels, of Athcifts.Of which kind of men I deny not but tfaera hauc byn aiwayes fomc rable,buc none but a mad man will fay, that it was the holy Church & fpcufc , of Chrift. Sixtly wefechowlitle Protcftatsaccount of their Church, fayth,and rcligionjand bclicucno- thing Icffc then that it is the church of God, or fay c la ©fCnrift. For whodoubrcth,butSchifmc, hercfy, infidelity, Atbeifmc, are moft peftilent plagues and infernal J darkneffe dirc&ly oppofitc to ccclcfiafticall Communion and fayth,whicharc the forme, life,& fouie of the Church f And who can imagin,chat he can affociateand ynite together formes focontrary asarclightand d^rkiKfie,life and death , truth and lies ? or chat the fociety in darkneffe,lies,and death, as are the focieticsin Schifmc, Hcrefy,and infideli¬ ty, can become one with rhefociety in light, life, 66 truth, as the Church is/ Ifthcrforc fcrieufly they be- licucd their Church to be the church of Chrift, they would neuer tbinkc,thar fticce uld become one Wirk the fociety in Schifme, hercfy ,«nd infidelity • And this fomctymcs Protcftantsthemfclucs perctiuc. Foa Brcntius in Appcndice Recognit.thus fpcake ti to the Sacramcntarics, when they dcflrcd to be held for brethren of the Lutherans,w home yet they ctm* demned of hercfy: If the/ iudce our opinion to be impim* with what face do they defire to ioyne themfelnes with that Church which mmtayneth itnpiow doftrine, and to be held of her for brethren? What fellowship (fayth Paul) is thereof in-* fiice with iniuflice ? or what Common of light with darkneff?* or what agreement of Chrifi with Belial for what for the fayth- ftill with tkehfiitll I Wherefore if tbej defire this [merely M *• $0 Troteflants include in earnefl; they manifefly shew, that they make mockery of r$* ligion3 as if it skilled not which one follow,(o he may paffe his life peaceably and quietly. In like manner thofc ot Wicccn- bcrgcin their Refutation of the orthodoxallcontenc pag.63 6. fay : VVt cannot wounder inoUgh3thatfeing thej not only atcufe the dottours of our Church of horrible and damned herefies, but alfo haue long fince condemned them, to wit3 of A- riamfme3 Nejhriatujme^ Eutichiam(me3 Marciomfme^ Maui- cbeijme> and the Momtbclites herefies • neuerthelefje they dare account vsfor brethren and defire our brotherhood. Who that is carejtM of piet) and truth can perfuade himfelfe, that thefe Seftmafters doinearneft handle religion! For if we be fuchas we are indged of them3 our friendship and fraternity is to be de- tefiedyiot dktkji God (as they tcrmc him ) that with only fpccialioc ^h([nth peculiar fayth he bciicuc fomc thing belonging t© Ihttkii. himlclfc,to wit, that he is iuftified inChrift,or(as totlxfo they vfc tofpeake) that with fayth he apprehend rpoDiie. Chrifts iuftice,and apply it vnto him elfin partica- fcW l«r. And to a viiibleProteftant in fight of men it is in (ufcffoiH hkc fort neccfTary, that he profeffc himfclf to bdieuc jwTBor- vvithfuch afaych that heis iuftified in Chrift • For Want example For Luther to hauc hyn a true Protcftanc before God, it is nccdfull that he hauc truly bclieucd '(ikikj himfeifc to be iuftified by only the torefayd fpeciall {iouli fayth, which he had of his own iuftice^ which faith fljffW they call fpeciall or particuler , becaulcit was parti- hjuinl culer to Luther,no man being bound to bciicuc Lu» tlur to be iuftified befides bimfeifc. And for Luther ppf to hauc byn a vifiblc Protcftantin the fight of men, l^{ it was needful in like manner to haue protcflcd hi ni¬ hil to b*uc bclicued that he wasiuftified by only th« ink f*Yd ^yth. The fame I fay of Caluin and ofeucry ^ Protcftant in particuler. That according to their doehine it is moft ncccffary to a Protcftant that he bciicuc hirofclfe to be iuftified by only fpeciall fayth 0 is tmnifcft.Firft bccaufetfeey teach, that a man is iu¬ ftified by only fpeciall fayth, wber with he belieucth F font- Lib, 1.82 'SptkktS fayth forncthing belonging tohimlcirc alone, not by a® vniucrfaUor Catiioiikc tayth whereby he bcireueth the myltcrycs of Chrifiian religion common it) ail, and which eucry one mud bciieuc, for this fayth they call hilloricali ,and fay it may be in luch asare not iult, yea in hipocrites and Dcuifis. Seing there¬ fore in their opinion no man is a true Proteant isi the light of God , but only he rhsc isiufi, nor any iult but who hath a fpeciallox pcculiarfay th w here¬ with he app'rehendeth Chrilh iufiicc to himfclfc,ic is mapt felt, thataccordingto their principles,none can be a trueProreflant before God , vnlclfe he hauc the foreuyd fpeciaii fayth - and in like manner that iionecanbea vifible Protcllant before men^vnlefTc heprofcflc to bciieue iudificacion by only Ipeciail fayth ^bccaulenonecan beaccountcdto be of any re¬ ligion, vnleffe he profeffe to bciieuc thofc mcancs of ©btayningiuflificationand remiflion of fins,which thatreiigion teachcch. Caiuin 3. Inftir.cap.2-4-16: None ^°ne ** a m but be, who with a folidperfuafm favthfull Ge^ huetb htm% affureth hmjelfe ofall thirty from his good" withouc n€i &c. And he Ly th ; Without, this, Chrijltanity fpeciall fiandethnot. And in Rom. 1. v .7 : Hence we gather, that fayth, none do rightly account themfluesfaythfull, vulitfe they certainly affureth emfelues that God lembtbew. M. Perkins in bis « cxpofiticn of the Creed col. 780 : No man can belieue f th' bimfelfe to be a member of the Church , vnlejfe he firmely and accordino €tfta*nb fcrfuadedthat be is predejl mated to eternali life. B c- to Prote- fidesCaiuin in his litlcCatecbifmccap.dc fide defi- ftants. iiiftifying fayth, to be a certuiueavd sltdfaft knWr ledge of our heauenly Fathers goodwill towards vs. 1 belike T&rttw /.X. definition he hath ^.Inltit.cap 2. 4.2, Luther in cap. deluflif. 4.Ioelistorn.4. and generally ail Lutherans and Sa- tap.u, cramcacarics,except that where fome define it to be a know* Necefjary to* V rot eft ant* 2; C a p, ^ a knowledge, others lay it is an aliurance or confi¬ dence of GodsLuour. Hence it is maniteft,that they account none a iuft or faythfull man, ynleilc hehauo a fpccialifaythof his iuititicaciou and Gods fauour towards htm. 2. Secondly I prone the fame out of diucrs commendations ol Protcftants touching the neccf- iiry and excellency of this article. For Luther fom.i. indilp.fol.410.fayth: Inyainebe belienctb otherarti- cUs, who denietb that we are iujlified by only fayth. A nd torn. 2.1jb.conr.MiiIam fol. 390. tie fay th, that this article The is tbefammeofhis deftrine andGhojpell* And lib, de votis-Suainie. ioi. 278. that this« the definition of a CHriJIUn, who b du¬ mb to be i a fit fed by the only works of Cbrift alone, without his The De- owne. Tom 3.in Pfalm.Grad.k)!. 573: Ph-at the only knowledge ot this article conferuetb the Church. And fol. y 76-that it is the famine of Clmftwj doctrine, the [untie The S u&» which light net b the Church, which falling the Churchfdlletb. Tom«4.in cap.53.IlaiaH0l.200.hc writctb,tbat it is as it were the foundation on which the Gofpell relyeth, end which alonediUmguuhethhis rehgicn from aflotberi. Fol.201. that i t is life the iiuely fountaine whence all t re a fines of diuitie wife ■ dome do flow, and the foundation of all the Church and C hi- -f0^ ilunity. And Prcfar in lonam, that it lithe chcifc of dacion. Clmjiian doctrine }and the famine of all thefaipture. Tom. 5. Prcfat. in Galat.fol. 269. he affirntcth , that iris the only rockjof the Church, And 27; *• Who boldctb not this arti - The rock/ cle, are (fay t h he) either lewes> or Turks> or Papifis, or He- rctiqucs. And foi.274>that in this doctrine atone the Church is made and confifieth, And fol. 333. he plainly confcf- ferh, rhar it. is his only defence, without which (as he fpea--pj1ft;r kcth) both we and heretics togeathcr tpithvs, had long fincedcfca£*c perished. Tom.6. in cap.2 i.Gcnef.fol.2d5.be termcth it thecheipft article off ay th. And cc m-7.cpiit.ad Liu qn es F 2 fol* Lib. i*$4 SpecUS faytk foi.499. auowchcthjthai it is the only way to beanen, and The only thefumme of Cbrijlian life. And finally in the hrlt article vay • concluded at Smalcaid; In this ar title are and confift ad which in our life we teach, witmffe, and do againjt the Pope 9t he Diuell) and all the world. This and much more writcth Luther in commendation of the neccflity and ex¬ cellency ofthcarticlctouchingiufhhc-ition by only fay th. And of the contrary beiiefc concerning iufti- fication by works torn.5.in cap.3. GaUr.fol.^y/. he fayth : It ktbefthckof aUeuills. Arid in cap.4.foL 402: That it uketh away the truth of the Gkojpcll, Jaitb, & cbr :j$ himfclfe. ; • With Luther herein agree the Lutheran?. For the Confcfii'on of Aufpurgcap.de difcrimincci- i>orufn,faytb, that tkisarticie is the proper do3rine$f the fbojfctl.And the Apology rhcrofcap. dc iuitificar.thac it is the principalI place of Cbrijlian doctrine. And cap. de pcenit: the cbeiftfi place and piincipalUfi article about which they fight with their aduerfariss -^nd the knowledge where] they account mofineceffary to all. The Co nL (lion of Saxony , that this article being extinguished, there it uo difference be¬ twixt the Church and otbtr men . Tfee Conieffi on of B o- T^c.Jmchcmia, t hatthi article is held of them for ihecheifeU oj all, as Chrirtia- W^} *^iefummeofaUChrittianityandyiety.The vniucr- my and ^fy ®£Wittcmberg. torn.2. Lutheri. fol. 248 : It it the piety. cbeifeft article oftbegbofpeU.The Miniftcrs of the Prince Elc&our in Colloq. Aldeburg. pag. 1. fay, if>at this Article is as it were the fumvie and L{1 end, to which all the other articles do lookynto. And thofc of the D. of Saxopy pag.i^.affirmejthat as long as this doctrine flandetkyLtt* tberftandetb yyea Paul, yea God. Th is doftrtne falling> L uther Thiffal- fatietb yPaulfalleth yGodfalletb-andallmen are necrffarily ling, God damned. Thofcof Magdeburg in SIcidan lib.21.cali ialicth. thij article the flay of faluaiion, Mclan&hon torn. 2. Luther! The Bul- wtrck. Nacjfarjt t$ a ?r He Bant. S^Cap. 4. Lutheri fol^od.cerrncthicrfc chetft(t article. Kcmnicc pare. i.Ex*men. tit. dc Juftiticaf. pag.231; Tbecheifcfi pUct. And in iods part# 1. tit.de Iuitificat. pag. 216. wnteth, that it alike the cattle andprincipallbulwarckyf all Chriftun doctrine ana religion. Lobechius difpuc.22. pag. 515. »ddeth, that it isone of the cbetfrf points of our fayth, becaufe theprore amipoape of Chrijiiamty is contayned therein9 and ontt hangeth the hinges 0) our fduathn. Scnuffelburg. to na H • C at «< I. h xxct. 3 ffi rmct h ,i11o be the cheifeft article, wherein confiftetb our fil nation and which is the bead of out re¬ ligion. Finally (to omit other Lutherans) Brcnrias in Apoiog. Wictcmocrg. part,^pag.yoj.fayth^that the The ef- gjftntiaU difference betwixt a Pr&teflant and a P dpi ft is, that of fentiall the Proteftant religion thefe are the fir ft princ iples: Thcjcripmrl differed • Chrijl the Sonne if God crfaytb or affurance ofGodsfaimr to¬ wards vsfor Cbrifts fake. 4. Ndtocr do Sacramentaries diflcat here¬ in from the Lutherans, For rbe Confcflion of Bailc auouchah it to be the ftrft andcbetjeft point in Ettangelica'd doctrine. The Frcnch'CoaMTarr.i#. calteth it thefoun* m dxtion. Zuingiius in Ifagcgc fol. 268. fayth it is the fummeof the GbofpelI Buccr Rcfponf. ad Abrinccnf. pag. 612. And Gdaltcr Prefat. in loan.write, that about this article is aim oft all the whole fubftan.ee of difpute with them and Papifts.Bulimger in Compencl. lib-; 5. cap. 1. termer h it th t cheifeft point of holy, EuangelicaR.and Apeilo- luatldottrine. AndiibXcap.8 : Thehigheftandibeije/lbead gfCbrifttan doctrine andoffayth. Peter Martyr in locis tit. dc Iu(iif.col. Ti. s s d k tfic forcfayd article of Iufliticarioii 13 by only fa.yth, it is alio neccfTary tothema- kingof a Proteftant or a member of the ProtclUut "r'nl df all the fundamental! P°*ih'tsbf Praccftancy ,either explicitly or implicit- * iy,lothathe ob(Knatly deny no one of them'. This is manifcff.Firffbecaufc( as P Chewed before cap. i ) ir is the common opinion of Protcfiants, that all thofc arcout of'the Church, whofocuer deny one umt* ftindamcfttall article . Againc, becaufc themleiueg fay,that the name of a fundamental! article doth in- finuate, that it fuftaineth the Church as the founda¬ tion fuihincth the houfe, Befides, all ProtefUnts af- figne truth or purity in dodrine for the mark of the Church , As the Confeflion of Aufpirg cap. 7. The Eng!i(h Confeflion cap.iy.TheSuitzerscap.deEc- clct. and other Protcftants commonly; and their Truth meaning is, that it is tbecfTcntiall marck.Whcrupon tdcntiall £* Whitakci,Controucrf.2.qucft.y.eap.i7.pag. 54T. to the faytfa, that it uabfolutely neeefiary and the (fentiallmarck^ Uiuidb, And at Rat. 3. Campiani, that it itthejibftanttJlntU. M is Ma ief!y in his eplfile to Cardinal! Peron , that c • *' ktstbefxbfiantiallfrrmtcfthe Chirr fc.CAluin.cpift. 190. Tfa NeceJfarj to a Trot eft Ant. C At. jfl The purity ofdoctrine u thefoule ofthe Church. And the fame la> Sidcti aa SophiUjj. i urriani loc. i. Author dc Eccici.in Dansopag.iozp.Vorltiusin Antibcilarm. pag. 145. D.WjIlet.coiit.z.queft'j. p«g. 102. Yea D. Morton part. 1. Apoi. lib. 1. cap.6. aliirmcth5that Trot eft am s account the truth of Euange Ik all astir in the cbetjeft and almoft onlyejfmuU infep arable AndperpetuaUmarck^of the church. And nencc it procccdeth ,tftat they put the ti ut.n or parity of dodtrine in their definition of the Church as an cilcntialipartthcrcof- as the French Conic (lion cap.27.Thc Magdcburgians Cent. 1 .lib* 1. cap.4 coi .140, Mdan&hon torn. 1 in cap. 16.Mat- thx,, D. Whitaker Cont.2. queft.y.cap. 20. pag 552. Sadcci ad Sppbsfm. .furriani loc.21. and others commonly. Bur this purity of do&rincifit mull be in any articlts,cfpccially it mull be in thole which •refundamental's ismanifelt, andthc Proteftanrs dograunr. For thus write,th D.Morton part.i.ApoL porjtf ^ lib.i.cap^S . Purity in the fundament all principles offayth is neceffaryto thebeing and making of the Church. And D.Feild tal points lib 2.de Ecclcf.cap.g: Purity front fundament dU tmur, it effentiall tieceffarily required to a Church* And the like hath Vor- to the ifiuslib.cit.pag.148.Nay tfecEnglifli Confeflion art. Church. 19* defineth the vifible Church of Cbrifcto bed congregation of faytbfull men in which the pure word of God is pre Ached and the Sacraments duely miniflred according to Chrifis ordinance in al thofe things that of necefjity are requifite to the fame, hnd his maidiy ep.cin It is needfull that the churches he vnited amg w . themfelues in vnityeffaith and deftrine in thofe points .which are ^J g Mcejfarjtofaluatien. And hereupon diners Proteffants c igfsutii deny thole Corinthians who denyed the Refurre- hJeEccl. dHon, and thoic Gaiathians, who otiertorncd the c.i. More. Gholpell of Chrift, to haue hyn members of the ,Apol.U%m Church jbccanfcthcy denyed a fundamcntall point "p.#, F 5 poiat Lis. x> 99 ' rundament all articles, pointofChriftsun fayed. Wncrctorc vnleflTc Prote- italics will deny their common dodirine in th'ismn^ —x ter, tciedr tntir ownc definition of the Church , cdf sway their only markeofthe Church , and ieaue ho markc of her at ail, they cannot auopchgnyonc'to hapebvna Protcifam, who difieiitcd from them in •ny fuqdamenrallpoint ofdoctrme. 2. It any one fay, that although he, who denyeth any fundarnehtall. point of BrofelUocy, cannot be of the vifiblcProtcftantChurch, yet may he be of their inuilible C hurch: I anfweare, that (as fballbe (hewed hereafter }therectn be no Church vyhich kinuifiblcinpi'ofcflian offayth,howlecucr it be inuifiblc in iuitice and predomination ; and therefore none can be of the inuiiiblc Church, who is not alto of the viliblc . Againc Protcllants will haue none to be ofthc inuilibleChurch ,butfuch as are iufLBut how is heiufl, who denieth Godsfaitft, and makcth him a Iyer,and chat in a principal! point of religion ? Befidcs,Proteftants fay ,that none can be a member of the inuifible Church, vnlcfls he be aifo a member ofthc vifibie Church , if fo conue- niently he may. 3, Moreover the holy Fathers rooft frequent- jily ,and fornetymcs alfo Proteihntsthernfelnes,do titer lib.^ feach, that it is necefTary to a faythful and belittling tot. T^uffi. tfuii, that he deny no one article offayth, and mdeh /.«fcicffea fundamental! or principall article. Finally, hf*r. t$< q Protcftants are wont to laugh at Catholiks if they 1X'm ?':f-'Prouc any Father to haue byn a Papift, bcca-ufc he %'f tCl hcldfomcfundamcntallpoint of Papiftry. For thus Mafiltuj'invvriCct^1 Parcus lib. r.de amiff.gratis cap. 1: ftitri- Tbcodor. dicti lorn for birn to cmlude $. Aupjlm to bane hp a Papift, be* Ulnw,i9*cdufc in this mom be agreed with them lejfcthem ifpu in- 111. Whhhbefundament all lie one of them. And that therefore ProtefiUntscan no way challenge an)/, who rek&edany one ot their . fundamental! and principal! articles. It remaynetli wcfctdownetbe fundameotalldrriclesof Pro^ baptifms* fcliancy, bccaufc Proteftants thcmfclues agree not *4, herein,butas S.Auguflin fayd , that the D.onatijfh did,concerning iiniacs which they would hauero exclude men out of the Church • fo Proreftants, in a flrange fafoion diilinguifh the fundaments]! points of their fayth , deuifingrulcs of diifin&ion amongft tfecrnjiiot out of the fciipcurcs but out of their ovvne heads. Which be the fundament all heads of Vrotettaucj. i . _ ' ' . 1 CHAP. VIII, x. H at we may determine wisich be the fern* JL damentall articles of Protcftant religion, Mow We muft firfU (hew, that all Protcftants profeflc to re- much ^ cciuc the Confcflion of Aufpurgc , at lead in the *rt5£tf^*tS principall and fundamental! articles thereof. Of the eheConf Lutheran Protcftants this is tnanifeft. For in their tofAufp. * conference at Aldeburgboth parties of them agreed to admit it for a raleof their difpatation. And ibi¬ dem pag. 404. thole of the Ele&ora fide do fay: We referre our [elites andiolooke vnto the Confefslonof Aufpur*,M to tbe foundation of religion next after the word of God . And The fou- other Lutherans in Zanchiusin Supplicat.adScnat. datiofli of Argentinenf. pag. 70. do appoint, that Ubetaugbtac* Religion, cording fa the Confeftion ofAufpurge, prefented to Charles the 4&1(9 j$}Q,andthc Afilogj thereof[ubferibed at XumbeYg,and that \ ticks of Tret eft Ants • p] C A *. f« that it be the fquare and rule of aU religion in all articles. He* h Shutius iib.de prefcnt.corp.Chrifti in csloaffirmcth, fqugrtf ^ that amongii the Luthcransafl that are promoted tode» rciijgio%w gtces and cure of joules, do fweare to the Confeffion of Aufpurg and the Apology thereof. The famctcftiiycthLobechius ^ idiip. i, p«g. j 2. and as Lauathcrus addeth 40001530; fw€jJf The lathes of the miner fit) of VVittetnberg dofir eighth forbid ^ to defend any opinions which are contrary to this Confeffion. Hcfbufiusaliohb.cii.writeth, that the authority thereof ^ ought to be mofl holy ammgfi all godly men. Wcftpbaius cont. autj,or|tr Laskuna atfimcth,that it contained) thefumme of dottrine hereof founded in the word of God, Erncftus Regius in vita Vr- mo& bani, that it is the fquare and rule of controuerfies in the ly, Cfcarrh. Lobcchius lib. cit. that it is the rule of faythand doctrine diftinguishing the orthodoxall Church from the hetero- C&tafoetfe doxail, Reiiicccius inarcnatura tom. i.eap. 28. iffir- thef&nao mah9 that it was injpiredfrm heauen.and written by infiinft of do. oj the holyghoft. Nay fomc Lutherans,(as teiiificth Laf- ftrinc# itusepiit. ad Regcm Poionia:)fayd, that they would rd- tber doubt of the doctrine of'Paul, then of the Confeffion of Auff The Rult fttrg. And with the Lutherans herein confpirc thc°f ftyth* Sacramcntarics. For asBucer confeffed in the Con* ferenccof Ratisbon: The Froteflantscondemne ad writings, fnfpired which are repugnant to the Confeffion of Aufpurge and the Apolo• froheaufa gythereof, Caiuin admonit.Ylt.ad Wcitphalum pag. 797. fay th : Touching the Confeffion of Aufpurg 1 an/were Surim thus, that as it was published at Ratisbon, there u not one word an»oi$4§i in it contrary to our doctrine. And epift.i^.fayth^that he wittingly and willingly fubferibedtoit, Bcza cpift.i- wri- tet h in this fort: I define thofeto be our Churches, which hold the Confeffion of Aufpurg , the Trench Confeffion &c. And Apol.T.conf.Saintcmpag.297: Neither is the Confefioro of Aufpurg fuchjds any pious mantnay rciett ir.Zanchius loc. cif. rccciucd the Confeffion of Aufpurge at the fquare 4ni J, ib« x .p4 Which le fundamental! and rule of alldottrine,And as Vorlhus wricctb Rcfponf. adcpilt.Parcipag. 91: In the vniuerfityof Heddelbergtbey vftutof&eare torn Confeffion^t to that of Aufpurg. Or as D.Wfticakcr afHrmeth Cont.2. auelt. $ cap. 5. pag, ' 50 y. The Cenfejsicn of Aufpurg is received of all Protefiams, ynltffe perhappm be in one word or two, rather then in any opi¬ nion. And in iruih tcingaii SacramentariesprokiTe to hold the Lutherans,(whofollow- the Confeflion of Aufpurg) tor their brethren in Chrift ,and befldes, when we obicct vnto them their diftention in mat- tcrsof fayth >they appeaie vnto their harmony or fyntagmcof Confeffions,amongft which the Con- feffien of Aufpurgis placed, as do thofeof Gencua Prcfar.Syntsgmatis, the SwitzersPrefat. fuxCon- fcff.Bezaepift.u Sadcellndice Repctit.TurriaF) pag. 808. and refponf.ad ThefcsPofnan.c.n. Vorftius in Antibcliarm. pag. 168. D.Feildlib.g. dcEcclcf. cap. j2.&:42.D.Wbitakcr Conr.z.qucft.y cap 8.pag.521* D.Andrews Refponf. ad Apol.BcIUrm.c.i.D.Puikc dcSuccclT pag. 287. & 504. £). White in his w ay to the Church pag 138. and others commonly. When as (I fay) theSacramecaricsdo thus,they muftneeds kpprouethe Confeflion of Aufpurg, at Icaft in all the principal! and fundamental! points thereof. Forfl hope) they will not hold thefor brethren in Chrift, whome they fee to diffent from them in fundamen- tall points of Chriftian fayth j nor fay, that thofe Confcffionsagree, which arercpugnant in the very foundation of bclicfc. VVhieh 2. But thisConfeflion of Aufpurgfo generally thecofefT recciued , and of fo high account with Proteftants, of Aufp. aswehaue rchearfed , hath fct downe and declared accouteth w|^:h be the fundamental! points of Proceftancy. lad^ticlea ^or kcgiuaing thereof islet this title; Theprjv- v^Articks of ? rote si ants. 05 C a?, S. dpattanidts j&nd after that many ProceClanticall opi¬ nions aie rchcarkdjthusitfayth of thcm.cap.2 i.Thu The fume ts the jwmtt of the doctrine which u ddmred in our Churches. ofProtefo AocUhervvardnamingcerunic coucrouctiics.ot hi- doctrine . diligences, Pi)giirriagcj,oC the like, it fay th pfthcm; T be ft kjnd of matters we \uue let pajfc, that thoje things which me the cjneif eft in this catife might be eaficrly knowne. Againc: ChelfeCI thofi things only are rehearfed, which were ncccfjmvtobetok. P0Imt • And finally j We would prejent ihefe articles before wrnuny in which oar Confefsion might be extant, and tbefumme of their nc«® gob,kirn who teach vs9might be faerie. And in another eci- cc ar?" tionot this Conledioh in Melandlhon.toa1.25. thus is written inthc end thereof: vVe haue compnfcd the (ummcoj Euangelicall deblrinenecejfarj to Churches Where- Seme of tore, vnielle Protectants will reiedt their firitand do&nne moft raaiefticailConfcllian of Aufpurg, theymuft nece*ai7* nccdsconfeffethat the articles thercofarcthefumme of Protectant dodtrinc,thc principal articles of their faytb, are tbey only, which arc ncceilary to be told, and diefumrnc of Euangelicall de&riuc ncccffaryto Churches. But furely luch arc fundamental! arti¬ cles. 3. Neither doth the fay d Cf nfeCIion alone, but alfo many other great Protcftants acknowledge the articles of it to be fundamental!. For thus hath the Apology of chat Cohfcffionin Mclandbon com. 3.fel.91 : We haue cvmprijedin the Confefsion of Aufpurgal- Truth1 moft tbefumme of all Cbriflian dobtrine. And Mcjan&hon neceffary himfelk in rheprcfacc of that Apology wrircth5thatto the that Confcfiion is truth neceffmy to theChurch. And like- Church, wife in the preface of his 3. tome: I gathered together the heads of confefsion, cemprifmg almofl tbefumme of the dobtrine of our Churches The whole forme of the Confefsion was after fent to I uthcwrote backj bat he had read and allowed this C OH* In* Which be fundament aR Confefsion. And torn.4. Rciponf.ad Staphylam pag» $ i7.layth,that the Confefsion (of Aufpurgj contaynetbtbo whole body ofdotttine. And in Prcfac. 2. torn. Ltttben; Tht fummof doctrine which our Church f reached if publicly whole bo comprehended tn the Confefsion of Aufpurg. Likcwiic the D. dy of do- of Witctnibcig in the prefaced hnConfcflion fpea- ftriiw* king of the Confcflion of Aufpurg (ayth thus: Wo commanded our preachers towritetbe fummeof their do firme* And the Miniffcrs of thcElc&or incoiloq.Aldcburg Ccrip.j.pag«2i.fay: We doubt not but the jummeoj doctrine re Healed from heauen is dextr oufly,plainly, and mjtftveedy contajned tntheCcnjefsionof Aufpurg. And pag.Icq : With the Confefsion of Au{purgwe comprehended the fummeotdo- Mrine.K cmnice Prasfat.lib. dc ccena: The fummeoj bote* feme dettrine is comprehended in the Confefsion of Aufpurg out oj she word of God. Wcftphalusdcfctif.akera cont. JL^f- kuro fayth j It containcth inbriefethefummeofCbriftun doftrtne. lames Andrewsiib. cont. Hofium pag. 22: The fumtne of pious doctrine is contained in theConfejsionof Jufpurg Finally the Lutherans (as the Sacramcnu- ricsot Ncwftad write in Admonit.delib.Concord. ®*0IC# cap.4.pag.ndj doplaceintheroleofberetiks as erring in the foundation of fayth and jaluation, all thofe who find any fault with the confefsion of Aufpurg}or difient from it in any article. And as touching the Sacramctuariesthcirifclu€s,rhc Palatin Ccnkflion pag. 198. fayth thus: TbatS Which be fundamental! C kUYche$\ And foonc after: Itu true do chine and necejfarj to the Church. And Hofpin pare.2. Hift.to].2i5.fayti:i, thai the compofersof this Con&flion auouch this in (ummt^that that writing contajmetb dear I) andfundamental!} the prim fall articles of cbriftianfaytb, and dofirine of Sacra* mentsinftitutedoj Clnift.Otit he pieafcict him take the according Confellion ot Strasburg,which in tbc end thus wru to the Co- tcth of the articles thereof :TbeJe are the cbeife points, in fethon of gpfajj m men bane jomcwhat gone ft om the common dofirine of trJU urS the Clergy, Qveifetnc Scott 1 ft) general Co cfTio.wher- j. in thus fpeake the Scots: We belieue, confeffe 5 andf'ub- to thc Gd fcr^e*An^ me before God and the whole uw Id> that this on- feffion of i* 4je (ri*e Clmfiian fa;th} which pleafcth God, and bwigetb Scotland, faluatm to men, which u now Uyd open to the world and recti- uedof diuers Churches and Kingdoms, efpecklly of the Scottish Church. For thelc Conftftionsdo uffirmc, that their articles are pmcipaU neceffary to the Church, and their do- ttrine the only true thrift tan definite which brwgeth faluatioru But furclyfuch articles be fundamental!. Therefore the articles of thefe Confcflions be fundamental] ar¬ ticles in Proteifancy .Andconfequcntly 5 chat a man be accounted a Protcflant according to the iudge- merit of ttiefcConfeffions^it isnccclTary,thathe pro- fcHe their articles. Or finally let him make choice of According^eBohemian Confellion, in the Preface whereof it to the Co* is wiiccnthus: VVe imbraceand hold ad things which belong fethon of to the true Church, and without which she can be no where on Bohemia, earth. For without doubt fuch things arc fundamen¬ tally 6. But if any will not admit either the arti¬ cles of the Confellion of Aufpurg or of Saxony ( which arc Confefsionsof Lutherans,) nor the arti¬ cles of the Confcfsions of Strasburg or Scotland (which are Confefsions of Sacracncntarics) nor ^Articles of Vrdtejlamy* $ but 'ia denying their faytb^as alio bccaufe nan c,it. fheyare °fniore authority amongft Protcilanrs, and Ht%a eptft. finally becaufe thcmftlaes require vs fo to do. it^ainoldm 7. Let it be therefore aflured and Iledfaft, that frauds, according to the iudgement generally ofallProtc- ftants it is ncceflarily and before all matters required Whatne-10 a Pretcftant that he belicue lufiification by only cefTary to fpcciaJ! or particulcr fayth , becaulc this is the fouic, ftant^ ^5 definition and *n a Proteflant- and morccucr faccordingtothe judgements ©f the forcfayd Con- fcfsionsj that he be lie ue at leaf: virtually and impli¬ citly all their articles, and wittingly deny none of them, becaulc as w e fee they arc fundamental! arti¬ cles of Proteftancy, w ithout which one cannot haue the whole eflence orfubftancc of a Proteftant, nor + bean entire and abfolutc Prorcftant, but only in Wefpcalt partancjin fome fort. And we (as hath byn often vho^are Jtr«at here only of an entire and abfolutc Pro- Prote flats tcftant,fuch asatieaft hath all the fubflantiall parts only in ofa Protcftanr, and endeauour to prouc that Lufher part, was the author of fuch a company and of fuch a faith Who is a Troteftanp. r o i C a p, £* and religion, a^d regard not whither thatbefore his cynic there were any, who wereProtehants only in part and in Tome lort, and held only fome parr of Fro reliant religion , but not the "whole fubtiancc thereof. And hereupon wc frame an inuincible ar¬ gument, to prouc that there was no rruc Proteftant or Protellant church before Luther.Euery true Pro- y^e telftnt bclicucth Iullification by only fpeciall faith,rsitionof v and at leaf! virtually and implicitly bciieucth the ar- a true ticks of the Confefsion of Aufpurg, or of Saxony, Protcftat. Scotland, Str«sburg,or Bohemia. But there vvasno man ,no Church before Luther who thus belieued. Therefore no trueProteftant or Proteftantchurch. The Maioris the very definition of a true Protc- ftacu, gathered partly out of the common dodrinc ©fall Proteftants, partly out of the forcfayd Con- fefsionsof their fayth ; The Minor being ocgadue is fufficicntly manifefi,by chat neither Luther, nor any in his tyme9 or to this day could produccany one man orcompaoy w ho before Luthers preaching hadbeiicncd in that fort. This foundation therefore touching che cfiknccand fubilance of a Proteftant and Proteftant Church being iayd, to wit, that he only isatrueabfoiutc Proteftant, who bclieueth lu- ftificacion by only fpeciall fayth, and theforcfayd ©tber fundamcntall points of Proteftancy ,and that the Proteftant Church is a company offuchbclie- ucrs, and the Prorcftant religion fuch a beliefe and worlhipofGod willendcauourin this next book out of Proceftants teftimonies and Confefsions to prous ,that Luther was the firft beginner of their Church and Religion. The end of the firft Booke • Lib, 2»X02 THE SECOND W. ;; B O O K E. Of the Author, or Beginner of the Prote. ftant Church and Religion. Proteflats confeffe their reli¬ gion was CHAP. I. M I ~ - • ■ 1 That T rote Bants confejje that the fubftance of their C hurch and Religion tyas peri- fhed *tohcn Luther began.• He firfi derconflraticn, where- with we will proue, that Luther was the author arsdfirft beginner of the Protchant Chinch and re¬ ligion w*e villi take out of Protc- ftants Cotifcfsions ©fthefubftan- tiall deftrutfion of their Church, ^eriiiVpd. religion &priiici|wU article of lufUfu^tion by only f&yth> Heretofore perished* io3• c a p. il fayth,before Luther aroic. For of the definition of the r fayth and religion thus writcth Luther himfelf tam.j.Propofir .62. fol.;75 \Certaineitts that our Ap$~ Ttaticail Bishops raigmng, Godsfaythperished* And lib.de Periflied* Capriu.Bab) Ion.torn, a'.fbl.^f: Tbe Popes tyranny hath many ages agineextinguished the fayth. And lib. de abrog. Extmgui- MiH.toi.249. hefayfhto theCatholikcs: Ye bane ex- tinguishedtbe Ghofpeli. And lib. dc pijs ccremon js fol. 7; alias £9; ; The doctrine of the ghofpeli lay defiroyedby oeftfoyed humane traditions. Tom.3.in pfalm. 1. fol. 126: What thinkeft tlm was in the Church > but a whhlc wind of Gods wrath} by which we werethrufiintofo matiy^fo different^oin* (enfant, fo vncertainc^and tlwftinftniteygloffesof Lawyers} and Chrift al- opiniwof Dcuinesi& in the meanetyme t hrift being altogea- togea'ther tUrvnktiowne , Humbling two many quicks finds ygulfes ,and vcknown (naves ofcenfchncewerekncckttogether. And in pfalm. 22. i ol.; 45 : Chrift together with fayth is now extinguished. A n d chrift and foj.548 :Faytblyetb extinct. And in pfalm.51.fol.4'do: fayth ex- The former age could neither vnderftand norfoundly teach the ringui- greaieftandweightieftpoints. Pr&fat. in pfalm. Grad.fol. • 509 : God puMetb contempt (0 as he plainly taketh away his word, whereof Popery is a notable example, in whic b we fee it A1 know- hathfo fallen out. And fol. 5 68 : Fayth it felfewas plainly ex- ^ X»i%Tom.4«Prxfat. Ecel.foi.i: Thefehvclesof Demies „ j3^vex, hauewholy extinguished mofl affured fayth in chriU jogeathcr with all the knowledge ofChrift. Tom. 5. in cap. 2.Gal at. fol ;06: The P aft ft swhh their impious and bUfphemous do ^ot 0rjy Urine haue not only obfewed, but (imply luue taken away the obferned Gho/peU, and ouerwbdmed Chrift. A nd fol ; 2 2 tChiflsghof■ but Fro - pel! being oh (cured yea truly oner whelmed, / be Pope &c. In c. p I y. t a ke n 4. fol.; 7 6 : This mofl common and mofl rectified opinion of the away. yncertainty (ofthe rcmifsion of finnes) wets furelyan ar- chriftfhut fide of fayth in all Popery therewith truly they oner whelmed out of the 4bt definite of fayth, deftroyed fayth> and shut Chrift out of the Church., G 4 Church. Lii. 2.104 Trot eft ant Religion Churcb-Fol. 400: The tope. bat* vu a ly extinguished Chrt- flianllberty. In cap.i. Petri: The fine ere kyu/wUdge of jaytb was cxiintt. In cap.75.1. Cpr» ioi.i 54; V\uhout our helpe Without ^)ei ^ n€ner learnt one °f ri)e Ghofpell. Ar»ci toi. j 41: Luthtr Jhey had not kyiownt one me oj the Gojptll vnleffe by.our labour notone andfindyit hast byn brought forth into the world. I om. o. m word or cap .3. Gcnci.ioI.45 : hotejome doctrine was by little and Gh °( * iT e exttn^* lBC^P*4« tolf 57: The light of the word was ex* 0 tinguished by wicked Popes* In cap. 17. toi. 199 ; Thai I may fay allinone word the Pope hath truly bnryed Chvjl An 4$, toi. 64 3 : The Pope hath obfeured >nay dejir&jed the do&rine of fayth. in cap. 49.fol.660 ; The Pope bath truly obfeured tve Chrift tru doftrine and taken away the Picmifes, that we knew not what iy buried, cbyifi was.Fol.66.6 : Be hath extinguished tbeGofpell*Tom. 7.iib.de Miffa fo). 250 : The knowledgeofchrijt was truly abolished and deflroyed This ye lapifisye cannot deny, .the mat¬ ter it fclfeproclaimed) it.. And toi.2 3 1' all true Worship of Know- Goti being extinft from the bottom &c Epifhad Frcdericutn ledge cf Eie&orcm foj.506: The Popeof Rome hath mosl plainly voo- ChriQ ted out the Ghofpell truly opprejfedand ouenhrowne. lib. conf* rnaly de- paparum iol.469 : Fayth was weakened, choaked, and ex* ftroyed. ti^ished, and Chnflianliberty hfi.Th 11 s plainly (peakcth Luther almoft in ail his Latin tomes of the iubflan- Gbopeh deftr.n&ion of his fayth and Ghofpell before plainly l^at ^as fcjth.)-'be brought it agaioe into the rooted Wot Id.To which headdethin his 7. Dutch tome in out. his admonition to the Germans: This abomination woe { increafed Jo y that they blotted out and fupprefl the words of this Sacrament.and fayth3 fo thai neither a letter, nor point of them remaynedmall Popery, in allmaffes, and bookes . Thus Lu¬ ther, 2. In like manner the Protcftants in Sleidan lib, r.foJ.2 5 8 : The Pope made laws, by which true knowledge WM-viterly eppreffed. Melancifecn £0*11.2. Luthcri foL 191: heretoforeferifhed. 105 Cap. i. jyn Scholafiicall diuimty beingreceiued, faythwasdeflroyed, J»||il* In Unite; In former ages menbad extinguished the light of God. religion, ornii A n d 1.1 n It 11 u t. ca p. 11. $. 9 : At any age ince true religion Will wasdrQwnedandouertbrowm.$.lni\it\it.cth, that the necefsity to leaue the Roman nity bu- tikiI Church was, That the light of diuine truth was extinft, the ne * ifilli wordofGod buryed&c . And p. 130. criaketh this fpeach twin vnto God in defence of his torfaking the Roman ^ 6 Q£ ffi, Church:! here were not a few profane opinions, which euen jj0&rine by the ground ouerihrew the cbeijeft points of that do ftrinc,which ouer_ lii; # thou dtddejl deliuer vnto vs by word. Lib.de neceff. R cfor. throw ne tlljijtfij pa.49: VVhenthewordof God was choakedwkb thefefo ma- from the fiting tiy & fetbickdarkytjJeSi Luther tfeptforth&c. psg:tz:lSioneTOOt' frayed to God with ajfared fayth that isinearneft, neither could lIn they, for chrifl bt ing buryed in that manner as he was &c. R e- Word of lp©nf. ad Ycrfipcll. pag.358: T hey haue extinguished the iylplii doclmeofjaluatian Jn Plycopan. pag. 388 : Thewordof Ui God being ended by penterfe vfe andflotb now returnetb to light. [pita In Rom.ii.vcrf.2 2: The truth was takenaway. Sadecl.de 'ouf. jjgl yocat.Minift.pag.552: God [uffered that light to be put out ^ (jjjUiii which should perpetually hane ligbtned vs ingcuerning our life. purc WGIV taiiim Crifpin Pr^fat. opcrum Occolampadij: Both the do- s drive of faluation andpiety were taken aw ay, they banishedout nj{hed. miilll1 °f x^e Church all pure worship of God. Cclius fccundus Ca- jk[j, riodcamplitudineregnt Dei lib. 1. pag. 33: Andfoby-Yruc title and litle true Chrifl was taken out of the world, and Antu Chrifl fa- joSli drift put in his fieed. And Hqfpin. part. 1. Hiftor. Iib.4. ken out a0I pag,291. writcth,that after 800.yeares after Chrifl the of the lilt tyhtpftbefolefomt axdtmdoftrine began tobe darned,ri/!woridt V V GS Heret&i the like occaiidn i lj I should fpeakethus, they would refftandctj, m t je that i fpeake not truly, thought not truly. For in thefe words, ifpecjner.Ci they mrrfpoken by other}, they would imagin no other me a- 9, rung,thenthat,whichin theforefayd(Protcii2msJ tbeywid mtvndtrfland. 4* Neither write they cthcrwifeof the de. Froteftatt ftrudion of their principal! and moll fundamental! confeffe article of I unification by ©nlyfayth. For thus thetheir tun* Confefsioii of Anfpurgcap. 20: When the doctrine of a't# fayth, which ought tobefrmipall in the Church, lay fo long vn- per * known? <64 all mull needs conjejfe that there was a moft profound filence of the iuFlice offaytb, thai in fermom only the xuflice of wot kswasfpoken of in Churches &c. And rit.de bonis ope- ribus $a%.2^ tintymespafl certaineabfurd opinions horri „ bly cm whelmed this doftrine, in which the vnlearncdfaigned ouerwhel that men did fatufythe law of God.In the mear.e tyme there was me great filence how Chrift u to be apprehended by faytb* And pag, 27: The was no word of fay th which is neCtjfatyfor remijsion of pines . And pag. 19: ln tymes pafl there was great flence in C hu rc \m of the exenifes offayth. AndFtx fat. A p6\.Ccn~ fdl Aug^fldn Meisn&hon torn, ^.fol.27 : Ml Chur¬ ches , MonaflerieSffchocleS) briefly all bookes of late divines,, were No I£ai3 before mute of the lufliceoffayib. No want aught ftnnestobefor- gfaenby fay thin Chrift, Sacraments were impioufly profaned} C5mfors° after that opinion\ that they iultify by the work wrought, was ynknown receiued. And this opinion did wholy opprejfe the doctrine of faith, Pradat.Conf.Saxonix: AU thiscomfort, which is neceffa- ry to euevy one, how a man Conner ted to God is iuftifed^as vn- known The Protcffant Princes and Cities in Sleidan lib.nAol.z40: The contention is about the doftrineoffayth, and of the true knowledge of God, which is the cheifeft head of Chrifiian life and of pure religion. And it cannot {fay they)£* - detiyed, that this doctrine was vtterly extir.fyand a new dottrm brought Lib. 2. i©8 YroteHantsfundamental! brought in, And Lb. i3. aoL 304 : It cannot be denyed, that' there was no word taught oj receiuing grace by Chnjt 0] remif* fion offinnes. Luther in CarcchiUio Maiori tom.5 to'» no ma be- 6 2 7 : Popery targuing , fayth wholy neglected and obfenred was Ikacd iu- ln pdifm plight. No man btlieucd Cnrtjt to be a Lord, pjho had fliScation recomdedn to the Father without our worcty. Tom; 7. in c. without 5,M*cci«*i.roi.2 3 : The Popish company faying nothing of the works. iheifeiiarticle ofiujiification by faythin Chrift &c.hud m 3. Sy mbol. toi. 140.1 baneobferued, that all errours, berefics, and all impiety came into the church principally,becauje this ar¬ ticle,or this part of Chriftian jajth in lefus Chrijt was dejpifed and negle cted ,0m terly loft» And in thcEpitaphe grauen Vpon Luchcrs tombe is this verfc : Bereftoredto the mrldtbe difference loft before. which is meant ot thedif- fercncc which Luther taught to be between thelaw and the ghofpeli, that thelaw tcacheth iuilification by good works, the ghofpeil by only fayth, without which difference Luther profeffeth chatChrifliani- ty cannot hand. And in his table taikes cap. de marts he thus (peakech ; Shew meoneplaceofiuftificationof fayth in the decrees, in the decretals, in the Clementines, in all the Cocciu* to* jummes and fentences, in all thefermons of Monies, in thefiatu- t»P4S*llJ7 tesof Synods, in all the Pojlilles , mall tiitrome, Gregorie&c. Thus affurcd Luther was, that before he preached, of this principail article of iuftification by only fayth,there was no news in the whole world. y. The fame confeffeth his Copcmatc Mclan- &hon,who tom.2. Refponf.ad Clerum Colon.pag* c?6.hath thefc words: The doftrineof pennancewas otter* whelmed, t here was no word of fayth by which remiffm offinnes is to be receiued; and pag. 97 : The doclrine of true inuocation andoftheexercifes of fayth lay dead. 1f any (fayth he)denie, that ft ch was the ft ate of the Church be may be difyroued not on¬ ly by testimonies ofimeft men 9 but alfo by the booty* of Monty** )S if ill Arrhleperifbed. i op C a p. jI And pag.99: There was no [peach of the hope of free mercy. Andhb. devfuintegti Sacramcnnpag.188: ibePopes hattedeflroyed the true tioftrine offayth. Ana the fame Mc- jandthonor Canon tn Chronicoiib.4. pag, 418.& fcq; Thefe errours being fltled and eftMshed bypublike autho¬ rity, drew after them a great mine, wherewith they wholy de¬ ployed thedoflrine of luftice before God , and pee remiffion of fumes. And pa g 439 : Scboole diuinttyqute trampled and extinguished the leaft fparkles of pure dettrtnt, touching the law, Jke lead thegho/pell fayth andtufiifcamnbefore God.hno pag 48 5: ^ ^^ They baue quite taken away the difference betweeve the law and the gho/pell. Vigaud.hb.de boms & mahs Germanise: The difference betwixt the law and thegbofpeli was quite blotted out after the Apofllestym.T ht MagdcburgLnsPrcf.Cen- blotted tur. 1 t). The doctrine offayth without works was extinct. The out; matter it felfe shewed ,that pure doctrine was vtterly pfprefl. Kemnice in locis part.2,nt.de Iultificat pag.^d; In all ages the light of hole fome doctrine touching tuffiffcation frtl decayed, after more and more obfeured, and laftwat plainly loft and extinguished. And pag.2^4 : in out tyme Godhathrefto Plainly red the doctrine of iufhffcation out cfmofl tkicffdarkntffe, And left, Huraius Prsefat'lib.dclibcro arbit: The article of lufti- f cation was by i uther brought into light of out of the more tlsen Chyme rian Aarkneffe of former ages• Thus the Luthe¬ rans. 6. The like Confcfsion make the Sac^amcn- tarics.For thus writcth Caluin Rcfponf.ao Sadelet. pag.125 : We fay, that dottrinef of Iuftification by only fay th ) washy you blotted out of the memory of men. Lib de om 0y Neccfr.Rcf0rm.pag.4d; The vertue of fayth wasvtterlyex- memory-. tintt j the benefit of Cbrifl deflroyed,mansfaluation outrthrown. And lib.de vera Rcform.pag. 322:Bytbefe,tbe Apofioii- Comrp- catt doftrine was corrupted, nay deflroyed and abolished. I ezlc- ted, nay susdc bcllo E uchar, foL 2 4. The doctrine of iuflificAti and at Onlynam l*fitobc vttcrly oppreffedin Popery. finally M. Foxinhis of Chrift Acts printed 16 io.pag.59i.fayth:I«r/^ later day tithe remained only name of Chrift remayned among Cbrijhans. As touching fayth, the end,and the vfeoftheUw, of grace and iufttf cation by fay thy of liberty of a Chrijlian man, there was no mention nor anywordalmofl fpokenof Thus both Lutheran and Sa- cramentary Protcllants confeflc, their do&rine of iullification (in which as wc haue fccne they affirinc ihcdciinition ,hfc, fouic, and all points ot a Protc- liant to confift) to haue pcriihed, byn extinguished, horribly ouemhelfncd,vani(bccl out of the church, fio fpark thereof to be found, the light therofcieanc put out, and vtccrly cxtind, before Luther itarc Tp. Andconfcqueotiy they mull needs alfo confcllc, that the fubftanceofthcir Church and religion was pcriihed,which could not be without chcioule, lire, definition and fummc thereof. Protects 7- Neitherdo they leffeopenly confeffe that eonfefle their Church was perifhed♦ For thus fayth Luther that theirlib.de Captiu.Babylon,torn.2.fol 76: Euttiowfayth charf|1 being not fv of en of the Church is extinguished by infinite laws of fern e . > and ceremonies. Refponf. ad Catbarin. fol. 140. after he had fayd rhat the Church is concerned, formed* home, nourished and conferned only by the vecall word, he ad- Extingui" dcth : By the Pope and Papifts the recall ghofpell being choaked ihea. aniextintt, was filem through all the world Tom. 3. in pfa I, 17J0I.285 : And now that common fort of preachers reprobate what propofetb it to vs in the Church of the deeds of Saints, but Name on foMefmallworfs, mid faith being extinguished there become ly of the nothing but heathenishfuperftiiionwhere once the C hurch of God Church was, the name only of the Church left, the fubftance quite loft. left. In pfaim.22.fol. 332; Tbit day ruder the Popes dominion tfou Heretofore periled. ihCap, il there is net left $nc tr«ce o] tut Church whichapp ems. And to. 6.incap.49.Gcncl.tol. 666: The Pope hath extinguished & T"e order fw allowed vp the Church. Caluin Refponf. ad Sadolet. °flhe pag.132: The matter came to that ptjfe , that itwaswanifeft and euident to the learned and vnlearneA, that the true order of Pealne * the Chuuh then perished , tkeKingdome ofcbrijl was throwne ^ downe, when this domimon{o£ the Pope) wasereded.^, In- j,." ftituf.cap.3 f Rafter he fayd that Apoftics ,Euange- lifts, Prophets were inftnuted only for that ty me downe. when Churches weretobcfctvp>er to be drawne from Moyfes to Chrift, he addeth: God rau State of fetb apostles, or at leafi Euangclifts. For there was need of fuch thecburch to reduce the Church jrom the reuolt of Jnticbrifl. The Freeh int^rrup- CoBfef ion art. 31: In ourdayes the (Ute of the Curcb beingxt^ interrupted ^God taifed vpfome extraordinarily which might re/lore the decayed rumes oj the Church. Or as ir is in the French copy: In ourdayes when theUate oj the Church was Cburchto ititerruptcd.Godraifed vp fome after an extraordinary manner> be fet vpa that they might fet vp the church a new which was in mine and new. dcfolation.But furciy that church,w hich was in ruinc and defolation, & lo as it needed to be fet vp a new, Slaughter wasfubftatuially fallen. Danscus in lib.Auguftinidc of the hatrefibuscap.95 : About theyeareafter Chriftspaffiots 574? , TIn: flaughter, plague and tyranny of the whole Church began, ^nur^ which afterward vtterlydeftroyedtbe Kingdome of drift, And lib.^.dc Eccicf.cap.3: The Church was in banishment 350. yeares. Arenas in lecispart.^.fol.zy.hauingfayd that yltCr]- Luther was immediaciy fent of God, addcch: God deftroyed then vfethimmcdiat vocation, when there is no Church founded, or bauing byn founded is fo degenerated, that the only shadow of her remayveth. Chaflan.in locislib.2.dc Ecclcf.pag. cburchoc 151 :lt ufalfethat the Churchshallneuer be 6roJ^«o/.SadeeLonly ha* Iib.de vocat. oftentyms fay tb, that the Church was dowther* corrupted, decayed, mrthrome, and her foundation shaken and of! oust** Lib* 2 • i r z TroteUmtChurch ouemrncd. And p.555, enat corcitorc her we mtift do, as men vfc 10 do in renewing that building which is quite fallen. And in Refutat. Thef.Pofnaa.cap.8: When Popish erroursbadpojfejfed almoft the whole world, nor The there appeared openly true fruits of the Church, nay nor true lean Church nes-^we fay the Church wasin one or two. BoyfTcul in Con- oneor ^urat* Spondsei pag.741: It istruethat all the Church wai two. corrupted, all adulterejfe, all Idolatrejfe.Sohimas in Mctho- do ThcoLpag. 212: About the tjmeof Gregory thegreattbe Church degenerated more and more%vmitl at lafl it loft all purity and plainly fell to dot age, yea to madnes, and in the Weft ended in Popery > and in the Eaft in Kahometifme. D. Whitakcr Controucrf, 2.qudt.5.cap 6.pag.yi2 : As meadow* building fallen, that who willrenew it buildeth not in the old feu- dation becaufe it is loafed and not found, butlayethfomenew jou~ A new dation - fo it was done in the renewing of the Church (by Lu^ foundatio therj. Behold chcold foundation of the Church pat of the ^ away, and a new layd . And pag. 5 io.hefayth.that I ^rca before Luther the (fate of the Church was fallen and ' * quite ouerthrowne, and the church decayed & ouer turned. And quae(t. 5. cit. pag-528 : Luther tooke vpon himto reftore religion corrupted. And Controucrf. 4. qucft. 5. cs p. 12. pag. 681: Ho at la ft the Curcb was opprejfed & extinguished. D. Fulkeia hisanfweretoafalfeCatholikepag. 5^. The true Church failed immediatly after the Apoftles tyme. D.Morton.Apoi.part. 1. lib.2.cap. 25. Protectant mini- Nothing fierswere rat fed to jet vp againe the Church being pitifullyfaU in the [en. The Apology of the Englilh Church part.4 cap. P*urc^ 9. diuif. ; ;For thefe men now after they baue left nothing re¬ sumes ntayning in the church of God that hath any likrieffe of his church, jet will &c. Ibidem cap. 14. diuif. 1. & 2: Long agoe hath the Bishop of Rome willed to baue the whole church depend vpon himfelfe alone; wherefore it is no meruailt though it becleaue And part. 6. cap. 1 7. diuif. 1. & 2. Vyhep Heretofore periled. i r 3 C a P. x* When we likewife faw>tha 1 all things were quite trodden vtider foot by thefe men, and that nothing rtmapud in the temple oj The only God but pitiful! fpoiles and dec ayes, we reckoned it &c. M. F o jc oame of See,cu:The Church being degenerated from the Apoflolikein-tnc. jiitution aboue all meafurejejeruing oriljthe name of the /p j jlolike Church butfarre from the truth thereof in very deed> did V0(^ld falmoalkindof extreme tyranny&c. An® MXartwrigh? out /rom 10 D. Whitgirts defcnC pag. 2 r7 : When Antichriflhadgrohd rooted out the Church euenfrom the ground. La Illy Orhious one of thcfourefalfe Apoftlesot England hath the c words: Conftdering how Chrifi by his wifedome potier^good Coc cm to, ties, badfoundcd, builded fit led 3 his Church , with his bloud wit- * fag $8r. shed it, with his holy fpint enrich d it, and at hfl feing a quite QpI£e menhrowne^l could not but meruaile, °.u r 8. To thefe their plaine Conftffions oh the 1 r0%ne * entire dcftfu&ion of their Church we may add that commonly they fay, that Eiias the Prophet did far°^ajtS think, thatthe Church badfayled inbistyrne, and Em2*' that befides himfeife thqrc was no fayfhfull man or thought member of the Church. Luther lib. dc MiiTa tom^.thc-church fo 1.2 3 7 : Elias thought the whole church of pod to haue byn ex Was peri- tintf that himfeife was left alone, and the only Chrifi ion. Beur- &ech lin in Refutat Socicap:^ : Elias iomplaineth before God, that befides himfeife there was neuer aGodljmanremayning, Lobcchius difpot.ThcoLio: Elias thought the Church had holy perished, Zuinglius lib. de vera & falfa {dig. cap. de Euchar : Elias thought that he was alone, Pe ter Martyr in Rom. 11; Elias thought that piety was perished, and that all SaMs were cut of in Ifraei Caluin in Aond. art.i 8. Par if: E lias thought himfeife alone to re maim of the Church, And in Rom. cap. i^.y, 2 : He thought that in his nation religion and worship of God bad perished. He condemned the wholenation befides himfeife of impiety He imagined that he had bynleftalone, Kcckermaa lih.^.Syfteru XhcoL pag. H 38 y: LI s. i. m 4 TroteBants Church 589: lias belieucd that he alone remained oj the people of if2 7del > who could be fay4 to be actuary a member of the true Church. Luboert \ib.6 x^p.^.Eliastbougbr that befideshim- felf ether e rimaynedmmwbo was truly turned to God. Riucr. in Epuome ControucrLtract. i.fet.37 : Elias thought that he had remayned alone. Vorftius in Antibcllarm, pag.134; Elias thought that of the true worshippers of God he alone remayned. BoyfFeul in Confutaf. Spondee* pag. 247: Eliasthought that he was the whole Church of God N*y Poianus part, 3. Thcf.de Ecclcf. fay ch plainly in his jowne p er Co n, t h a t thechurcbfailed in thus his tyme. The Apology of the Englifli Church par t.4.ca p. 12. djuiC, 7 .&.2.fa\ .h: VVher was that Church then when Ely the Pro* fhet fo lamentably and bitterly made hu mone. that only Limfclfc was left of all the whole world, who did duel) and truly worship Godt And M.Icwciin Dcfe. Apol.parc.4.c.4.diu!(.2. Elias thought all the godly in ifrael had byn flme and not one left aline. D.Fulkcad Cauiilat.Stapieioni: It felltoElias, that be feemed to be left alone of aft the number of the Godly, whichftncerely worshipped God.M.Hooker in his^bookc of Eccicf. policy pag. 12 6: hetookeit as though time had not bynremaynwgintbe world any befideshimfelfe, that caryed A true and an vpright hart towards God, with care toferuehim according vnto bis holy will. D.Sutclife lib.1. deEcch cap. 6, pag*9 5: T/jf church in Eliashisdayesdid feemeto himfode- ftroyed,tbat bethought he bad byn left alow. D. Whs taker Cont.2 qucft.g.cap. 3. pag. 476 : Eliasthought the whole Church of the faytbfuU was perished in his tyme. Elias belieued that none remayned befides himfelfe. Elias thought that he alone was left atrue worshipper of God* And pag. 47 y: Elias fayd that he was alone left the truefeiuant of God1 difpucc not now, how falfly they impofevpon Elias this blas¬ phemous opinion of the church pcrifhing or defini¬ tion, only I noc^ how vndcr the name and aurho- Heretofore perijhcd. 115 C a p. i. rity oftbatgreat Prophet,th.cy teach that the church may periih, which lonictymcsthcy arc albamcd to auouch in their ovvnc names. 9. Moreouer they teach, that the Church may confiltofone or t wo, which is in effed and in other Words to fay,chat it may perifh. Luther lib. de nous Ecciel. torn. 7. fal. 248 : T bis is calledthe CbriJIhnfacie ■ ty, & it is nee efry that there be alwayet [neb men in the world, raay r' albeit of them there be oruytwo or three > or children alone. Arc-ot 0r)1>. tius ialocispart. 3. tol. 50: Any number }tlmgbncuerft children* fmall, Jufficeth to the Church for externpll matters. I urs i us cont.4. lib. 3. cap. 16 : Twomen order edtotvards God are Q? any a Church. D. Whitakercont.2.qucft.3.cap. 3. pag^-^nu^er. It is falfe, which he Jayth, tint two men cannot ma a Cbmcht Andpag.feq hcgraunteththatProreiiaimre^cb that Of two ecb man is a feuerall Church. And pag. 478:1 fin the nwtl only. jorlornetymes of the Church there be one or another fayttifuu feruant of God, it is hough. W h ich a 11 o B uca i us 1 a uh i oc. I f one or 4i.dcfcccicf.red.14.Nay Luther in cip.7'Ccn.tom.cwa. 7.foJ.io7.layth: If I weretheonly man in the whole world who did hold the word 91 aloneslmid be the church. And Of one Riuet. in Epitom.Cont. traft.i, (zd1.27.Tbe Church ai^ac* fubfifletbm euery one of her members. Finally they think, that their Church and religion (hall not always j*rore^:s endure. For thus Luther writcth incap.2.Mathaei^^ tom.4. fol.438 : We cannot comfort our fe lues fo as the Pa * fills do, with that confutation >th at the Church shall not perish, ofthcic^ For whafoeuerwecaftour eyes we are ditterfly terrifled,the fib Chtarch, ryof Satan and tfie world is extreme, wherewith he endemou- reth to extinguish this dotirine. But the Popes Imftywdtbat with full mouth, that the Church shall not perish. I a ca p. 55.1 faias fol.226; There is danger leap it shortly fail out, that the word beagaine taken from vs. Tom.3.in pfalm.gr ad. fol. 489. al.as5oS : The Pope obfiir,e.tly keepeththofe prbmifes> with H z which A m Lib. i♦ 116 VroteUants Church. :v \ which Chrifl did comfort bis followers, that he would he with them to the end oj the world. That S. Peters boat although %t be in danger, shall tieuer be drowned. But the true (Protdtat) Church to which alone that was fajtd, doth not jo belieue that, mrfocheare vpherfel/ewith thetruflof thoje promtfes, Kcm- nicc in iocis part. i. tit. de Iultifieat.pag. 216:1 often tremble that Luther oftcntymes (1 know not with what abode) repeatetb thofe words> This doctrine after my death shall be dar- nedagainc.The Gonfeflion ot Mansfcld : Itiseuident what shall follow at length t to wit, a horrible dejlruttion of pure doclrittef which fuddenly we shall leefe beyond aH expectation. The Magdcburgians Prsefat. Cent. 5 : The reuealed truth is already perished,and that vpon thefuddaine, what re- maynethbut vtter abolition of true religion? Caluin in his Catechifm: lam fo doubt full touching poflerity, that 1 fear ce dare ibinke thereof. Author Praefat.in Syntag. Confcif; We haue cattfe to fear e, that matters will returne to the darke- nejfe of former tymes. AndPcuxusin Mifcdlanea Vriini pag.^y.faytfa 5that all good and wife mcndocafiiy perccioe, that thfrchangcth ewer their heads fome dreadful! night and darckneffc.M. IcWcllin his fcr- mon in cap. 1. Ag^xi: This Ghofpell whichye now loath, shall be taken from you. D.Wbitakercont,2 qudi5.es p. 4-PaS*5°3 • That which he fifth that neither Lutherans nor Zuinglians nor Caluwip shall Ujl euer, is vficertaine. And iafily D. Morton parr. x. ApoJ. lib. 1. cap, 3 i»fay th : Tmcftdnts fay not 5 that their Church cannot faile: Thus ye fee that Protcftatm cannot comfort themfelucs that their Chifrch (hall not peri lb, that they donot be- licuc that they (ball net be drowned s that a horrible dcftru&ion and vtter abolition of their dodfrincis to follow , that they dare fcarce thinkc of pofterity, that it i s vncertaincwhcther they arc to laft for euer, they bslicuc not that their Church cannot Con- C AP. Note. Heretofore perijhed. 1i7 Confider now diligently (good reader) Firit how not few but very many Protestant writcrshau.c confcilcd that their Church and religion was then perifhed when Luthcrbegan . Secondly , that not 1. obfeure writers,but the moil famuusamongO: them. Thirdly,thac they haue not feidome confefTed it, butoftcntymcs. Fourthly, that not inobfcurcor general! termes only , but in plainc and moll parti- 4' culcr words. Laftly, chat not only in their contenti¬ ous writings againft their aduerfarks, or in their firmans to the people (in which (peaches femevfe 10 fpcake hyperbolicaiy) but aifo in their moil fober and temperate writings,as in thofc wherin they de- liner their do&rine or relate hiflories, in their com¬ mentaries vpon the fcripture, in their Confeffions of £ayth,and in their fpcachcsvnto God himfelf. Be it fo ,that one or two, or fotnc few in heat of content tion Xhould haue hyperbolically (ay d , chat their church and religion waspcri&ed without meaning fo. But that fo many, and fo great mailers, foohen, and in fo many kinds of writings, fo plainly and fo parcicuJerly, fhould fay that their Church and reli¬ gion wasperifbed, and yet not mcanc fo; cannot be fayd, vnlcffc we will grauntthat fo many 6c fo great Maiflcrs ofProtellants in fo great a matter haue de¬ cerned their Readers, and haue written one rhinge and meant another , and that their meaning is not to begathered out of their owne moil frequent and moll plainc words ,vttered in all kinds of writings, butoutofourfancieand pleafure. What (zsTcttul- ^ lian fay th) weane they otherwife then they write, maften of ScorPiC'lu deceit net of truth? io» If any demaund, how i ccamc to pa ITe, that Protdlants ihould fo often and fo plainly fay, H 3 that A I y h t b . 2 • i t 8 frote Hants Church that their Church and i eligion was pcrilhcd before W her for Lqher appeared,! anlweatc ,that there were many Proteftats thereof. Fir ft becaufc it was lo euidcnt, that Church1" Church and religion was riot at ail when Lu- was peri- ^rr began, that ( asthcrnfelueshaue con failed )they fhed; cannot dm) it. it cannot be denyect. if any deny it be ma) be con. r. uinced, Ail merimuft confdjje it, The matter it felje proi Uimeih Kttm.14. proucth"it.And finall/that it is tnamfcfi both to learned and $.j. vnlcarned. Secon dly, they faydio lor to moue men to 2« hatt the Pope and Papitis, w home they affirmed to 3. hauedeftroyed the fayth and Church. Thirdiy,for to purchafc thcloueofthe people, as who had rc« ftorcd to ihern againc the Church and Religion 0 f ourthly, they fayd fa for to excufc their preaching and play ing the Paftours without ordinary calling, as if loifboth when they began, there had byn no church Which could guicthemcomiffion. Finally^ as phrancike men fo Protcftants fornctvmes arc in good firtesjin which they fee and conic fT the truth. B u f a to t h c r ty rn c sw he 0 C 3 f ho I i ks 0 u to f t h i s peri- fbing anddeflru&ion of their Church and religion do inferre, that it is not the Church or religion of Match. 16. Chriil,againft w hich fas he hath promifed)fhegafs of heli thall not preuaile , but fomc other Church 6c religion cither firft began by Luther, or elfarcftored and renewed by him after that it wasfubflantialiy penffied and ddlroyed - then they mollify and glofc shcir former fayings/dcuifa ftrange &; violent fenfes oftheir w ords, and cucry wayfeekeeut (bifecsand fleiglics whereby they may auoyd the force oftheir owncteftimoaics, which wc ffiall rchearfeand re¬ fute in the nexechapter. * - 7k " > hi; Heretoforepcrifhed. r ip C a p. 2 The Troteftants Jhiftes for to delude their fore fay d Confefsions touching the fubflant talldecay of their Church ami Religion refuted • CHAP. II, 1. A Lbeit theforcfaydconfcflionsofthcPro- jt\ tenants touching the fubftantiall decay of their Church and religion before t,utherarofe,bc fo plainc and euident,as we may well fay with Tcrtul- lian: V Vho will not acknowledge thefc rather then expound the? Ve tyjitr* Yetbccaufc theobftinacy ofhcrctiks h(ogreat,as it C«2I» may befooner oucrcomethcn perfuadcd>&: is wont to feck out ail drifts to auoyd the force etoen of their o-wne words, I will hcarc fee do wne their fhifts and confute them. 2. Their firftfhift is,that theforenamed Pro- Theftgrft tcftants by the words of fayth yreligm, and the like, ihift. when they fay that they periihed, did not meaue the inwardfaythofthe heart, as if no man in his heart had held the Proteftant fayth or religion, but only the outward profcfTion thereof, and lo meatic only, that the outward profeftion cfProtcilancy was pe¬ ri (hcd,or that none profefled if J graunt indced^that fomtyme they fpeakeofout ward profeftion of faith, butfhis commcthall toone purpofc. Bccaufe the Thaf tbey profeftion of faith can no morcperifti in the church, fav if- then the fayth it felfe,as hereafter we (hall proue by W2lf ^ the confeffions of Proteftants them ft lues. But that P£n'*led • they fpeakenotalfo of the inward fayth, or of fayth it felfe, is mo ft falfe. Firft, bccaufe they fay fo with- r- pat all pi:Qofe? neither can they profit otherwife H 4 then Lib. 2*120 TroteHantsfbiftsrefused. then becaufe perhaps the tame Proteilaiits haueo- thcr where fay d the contrary, which kind of proofc Lib.r>c \lt we hereafter thew to be nothing' worth. Againeitis 2. credible ,vnlcfTc one will bclieue w hat he lift, that by (o many words ot light > clarity ,nligion^wor ship of God, tYUib 9f Godpfapbi t&t knowledge, knowledge ajfaytb, C/jm- flianfkytb, knowledge of Cbrift, as they haue vied and vvc repeated, they meant not tay th it fafe, but only the outward profeflion offaith.Beiides.thcy fayd plain¬ ly, Tbat none belkued tobeiuslifed without wojkcs. That the doctrine of I unification byfaytb > was blotted out of the memory Cap.u mi. Qfm£n% tbathofejbme truth perished from earth, and that it was E*a.3»4,5v6 jai^nfrem men, that Chrisiwas buryed and taken out of the world arid the Church, that all (ProtdVant j conjchiion was vpknou||> that without Luther oneiot bad not fan knownet that the knowledge cft-hrrfl, the knowledge of/ay tbfayled, and laft- ly that Chiiflwasnot vnderflood but viterijvnkyiowne.Which words aremanifdliy (poken & meant of true or in- wardlayth.I addeaifo,that it is a rule of ciuil law Luther de approucd by Luther and Protcftants, chat who cold nbrog m'tf. fpcakclcatcly, and yet fpakeobCcurely, (hould haue tsr e tjl.ad his words expounded againfl him. Seeing therefore ^rir'n ^rofc^ants hauc fpoken farrc more clearly, if ct mj/ri k meant only that oarward profeffioof faith torn.4..O-. / - J , r ,, it* j tal h as clearly appcarctb by their former words.andalfo by thefeof D. Wbitakerloc.cit.pag. What 469 1 Heme hegather eth^not asour aduerfaries do, that the vi- Protcfiats fible Church shall neuerfaile, but that faytb shall neuer faile in m eane by tbe whole, but that to the end of the world Chriftian religion shal frhechurch Yemtynein Tbis([aytb he) is the very thing u h:cbwe J" &MdM4pie.Yefceplainly, that whenthey fay the fscjcpcrffS- church cannot faile, they only mcane that fay th can- " not vttcrly failc,but that it (hall bcal wayes in fome. Wherein thereisnocontradidion tothatwhich 0- therwifcthey teach,that the Church canfaile, be- caufcfayth and the Church are different things^nci- thcr doth fay th in whomc foeucr, and in how few focuer, make the Church. Wherefore if they bemad men and no C hriftians, who fay that the Cathoiike Church may faile, or thatthe Church is nottodurc forcucr (asD.Whitakcrhimfcifcfaythcap. 1.&2. cit.)ccrtainly thefeProteftantsarcfuch. For whiles they fay, that the Church may be brought to one or two, and thataii Paftors m3y perifti; they manifeft- ly fay indeed and effed, that both the Cathoiike and ^ ^ ail kind of true Churches may faile. Morcouer I proue 3 that they mcanc that the true Church was b ib ♦ 2-124 Trotejlantsjhifts Refuted\ upon D-Whitakcr Contr«ueff.2. qucft.;.cap.i.pag. 46d.fayth : Thefcriptures moft plainly teach, that there will he no end of the Kingdoms of Chrift. And ad Demo nj i ra r. 17. Sandcri: VVbat other tiring is the temple of Godi but the C burcbof Chnft, which is built wiihUuely ft ones ? Arid M. Powell lib.i.de Ancicarifto cap. 3 : The Church is defi¬ ned 1 .Tim. 3. to be the temple of God. Hereto wc may add, that Ochim fay th, that that Church which Chrift foun* ded, washed with his bloud7& enriched with his holyfpirit, Kum.%. (which vndoubccdly is the true Church jwasviterlji cleftroyed.Finally bccaufethcy fay, tharElias thought that there was not remayning one pious man behdes , himfeife, that he was the only Chrillian, the only true worfhipper of God, which was leftaiiue, and aduall member of the true Church . Scingrherforc they will make E lias to thinkefoof the true church, ofthefamealfo ought themfeiues to bcvndcrffood, whovfc to draw arguments out of Elias his words • cfpecially when as they fay, that it fufficetb if there be. one or two faythfullmen in themoft forlorne tymcs of the Church, which they mud nccdsmeane of the true Church which chcy will haue toconlift only of the fay thfuli feruants of God. That they 4. Their third Ihifc may be, that when they meane of fpeakcofthcdeflru&ion of the Church, tbcymeanc the vai- not Qf the vniucrfall or whole Church, but of fame part*culcr, or part of the Church. But this is eaiily Church. rcfute(j. pirft becaufe (as wc haue rehearfed) they fay there was a jlaughter of the whole Church, that all the Church was corrupted , all became idolatrous, that fcarce the name of Chrift unity was left, that none belieued, that not one iotof the ghofpeU bad byh hnowne without Luther > that the whole know- ledge of C brill, all pure worship tall true religion was abolished« Secodiy bccauk % adcr the name of Elias they plain- LI b . 1. x 2 6 Trot eft ants fhifts Refuted. tned Chriflt Ghoffell: rbey baue not only obfeured, but abfolu- Xib.ude tely taken away theghofpell.Suiciy (aa S. Augultin laych) ftccdt. fad) \qn{L 0j fiords needs no Expofitor but only a reader. 1 n like mer• c. 4. fortolner Proccttancsfay of chesrfayth or ghofpctl, that it was banished. cafl out,extinftyended,choak^d, buryed, Kum. t.j. obfeured tillit was vtterly extinguished, that it perished from the earthy and vanishedontoj theClmrch. They add alio, that it was wholy oiterturncd, vtterly-extinft, quite changed into idolatrieiy ouenumedfrcm the rooty and that there was an vtter Abolition> an extreme fallingaw ay, and full deftruclion of it, fo that notfo much as one litisJparke could be found, but it was quite extinct, & fcarce the name of Christianity was left. 6. Bciidcs of chcir principal! and moll fun¬ di.* ^j/damcntail article oiluftiticaticn by only faytb they 1 ' fay, t h a t lay long vnknowne, that there was prof omd filence of it, that no man taught it, that it was neglettedylojlyblotted out, extinft, and horribly oppr eft, that it was corrupted, nay extinct and abolished, that no man belieuedit, that it was vtterly ex¬ tinft, plainly loft, quite loft, wholy fuppreffed, wholy oppreffed. wholy trampled, wholy dasht out, vtterly blotted out, quite ex¬ tinft y quite taken away^ quite neglected and blotted out of the memory of men , and not only obfeured but quite extinguished. But if this do&rinc were fo cxcin&asnomanbc- Ikucd it, and blotted out of mens rncmoty, furcly not only the Profcdion of their fay th but alfo their fayth itfeife was vtterly periihed • and confcqucnt- Jyalfo rhcir Church, whereof this arcicleis the life, foulc, futnme, definition, and all. &um. yt 7m Of Church a!fothcyfays that it banished fayled,was oppr effed,ex:inttyOuer turned, fallen, wholy fallen a that it fell to AntiJmjl, that the old foundation thereof was remoued, and a new layd y that the order of the Church pe¬ rished that there was a Jlaughter of the whole Church, that Chnfis Kingdoms was throwne dowr.e& razed to the ground, that m Troteftantsjhifts Refuted. ^ 12 7 C a? • %• that in the temple of God there was nought but pittsfuU ruines, that the Church was from the foundation rooted out and ouer* throme by theground, and that where it once was there remay- ned only the name Jbefttbfiance being quite loft. Surely either by thelc mariner ot fpcacbcsislignificdafubftantiaU dcilru&ion, or that cannot be plainly fignifyed by any manner of words. Befidcs the formes of fpeach do more clearly fignify a fubftantiai deftru&iojn>the thofe whichProtcliantscondcmncin fomc herctiks. For Caluiolib.cont.Seructum pag.t^.condcmneth Seruetfor faying, that there had byna long banishment of the Church from the earth, and that she had byn dmertmut of the world. And yet as we fee Danasus fayth,thau/;r Church was banished . Powell, that all true religion was ba~ tf;d;ed.D.Fuikc>rhat tbftruc dottrine cffaluation wasdr'tuen out-And Crifpin, that all true worship of God WMdriuen out D.W'UitakerCont.2.qucft.:.cap.3.pag.47i;and otherwhere, condcmneth the Donatitisand other Herctikcsfor faying,that the Church perished3 and yet Balcfayth that holelomc truth perished from the earth. And Lobcchius vndcrEliashisnamcjtbatr/itfC/jarrh quite perished. Moreoucr they fay ,thac the Church may be reduced to one or two> which is indeed to fay that the Church may fubflantially pcrifb, for the 1* Church is defined to be a company or multitude in theEngiifh Confeflion article 19. in the French art. That the 27. in thcSuitzersart.17. and in the Fiemilharf. 27* Church But one or two are not a ccmpany.Whcrcupon Da« nasus lib.^.de Ecclef.cap. id.fayth: It is written of Vlpim the Lawyer in the ciuill lawjhat at leaft three per font are requb om* red to make a Cofttdge 3 and if to a Collcdgc much more to the Church. And Lubbcrt lib. 2. Rcplicat. cap. 3. fay th plainly, that one man makes not a Church. And Po- lanusinSyntag.lib.7*cap. x; Oneman;t1wughneuerfa W/i Lib. z. 128 Protefiants(i)iftsRefuted* bob,cannot he a church . Beurlin aifo in Refur.Soti: NeU ther do we call the folitude of one man, which worshipped God, the Church. And D.Whitaker.lib. 1 deScriptura cap. 11 .Scct.4. How can the Church be in one, feeing the very name of the Church doth fignify a company or multitude ? If therefore there be but one, there is no Church. For the Church cannot be t 1-hrr iwdgiwdtohebut in many. And much Idle can one or JfV part cvvo be the CachoHke Church, that is (as the Protc- i.c.i.FulL thcmfelucs expound it) the Church fpred de Succef. throughout the whole world»becaufe one or two p>$9.Be?a cannot be fpred throughout the world. Whereupon in Catecb. the Scots in their Confedion cap. 18. fay , that twbor c:S'®re*c' three make not the vniuer[all Church. And Zuingiiuslib.de in ro e&' vera falfa rclig.tom. 2. foJ. 192 : Who [ayes that the Cburchftgnifieth fome few, erretb, like to him who fayth that people fignifeth the King. Surely it fliould be a notable flock which confifted of one or two (hcep,a worthy Kingdomc which had but oneortwo fubic&s,and a ftrange Catholike or vniucrFall Church which contayned but one or two faythfull pcrfons. What ? can the gates of hell prcuaile fb farrc againft the Church,asthey can reduce her to oneortwo Chri-^ ftiansfWhatothcrthingis thi$,thcnto fay thatthc Charch can perifli? For feing the Church cannot be imagined but in company or multitude, who fayth that the Church can be brought to one or two,doth indeed fay the Church can be deftroyed. 8 . If any reply, that S. Auguftin vpon the 12 S.pfalme fayth that the Church was oncein Abel alone, and Tertuilian.Iib. dcpcenit, cap. 10. the Church if in oneortwo • I anfwere, that S.Auguftin there by the Church vnderftandeth thofe only, whomc the fcri- ptureby name hath canonized , as it hath Abel; for oth^rwifc itis manifeftjthatin Abelstymc, there "" J — " yverc r f •. ( ' ' ' : ' ' - v ^ V' ; • 'fir . "} " ""T"ll ■ Tret eft ants fhifts Refuted. 12 9 C a p. 2. Were others that were otchc Church bcfidcsbim- fcifc* to wit Adam and Eue. And Fcrculiian by the Church vndcrflandcth ,not the Catholikeor vni- ucrfall C hurch as we do , but any number of ChrT. ftians, fucfo as were thofe donaefficaii Churches, Which S.PauUometymcsfalutcd. p. The iaft refuge may be> that what Protc- Hants haue fayd of the dcitrudion of the Church and fayth, they meant not of their ownc Church and fayth, but offarne others. But this is a fond ihitc.For hdf, as I haue shewed, they meaner he deltrud ion of the true Church and fayth . Eyther therefore their Church and fayth is not the true but falfr, ot eifc they meane of their ownc. For the true Church and fayth is but one,as the Apoftlefayth Ephcf.4: One God,one fayth. hnd tbcNyccn Crecdilbelieueone churcb. S.Cypnan iib.deynit: One GodyOneChriftiOneChurchf and one fayth. S.Hilary ad Constant: VVh4tfoeuer is be- fides one fayth, is not fayth but treachery. And S.Lcofcrm.^ dcNaduic: Vnlefjeit be one it is no fayth. Nay Luther lib. conc.Papatum torn, z.fol. 461: Chriil knowethnottwo kinds of vnlike CburcheSybutone only Clmch.Cduin4.lnlt. cap. 1. $.2: We cannotfindtwo or three churches vnlejfe Chrifi beplucktinpeeces. And in his Catechifme: As there is one head of the faythfull, fo they mufl all be vnited in one body, that there be not many Churches, but one only. And hereupon in- ferrcth Sadccl in Rcfutar.Thef.Pofnan.art.6i. that what is fayd of the true Church, is fayd of theirs. Seeing (fay t h he) the true Church is one and not many, as often as the truth of doftrine shineth openly, fo often we fay the true Church and ther- fore our Church was vijible. Secondly bccaufc (as we haue feene) they fpeake of the deftru&ion of their moff principall article of iuftificatio by onlyfaitb,which ihcy affirmc to be thelife, foule, and furnmeof their I Church. Lie. 5.13a Tret eft Ants fhifts Refuted Church. Thirdly becault mcy cttlooncs fpeakeof the dcftru&ion of thcGhofpcil :but by the name of the GhofpcR they mcane their ownedodtrine ,asby the name ofrGofpeliers they vndciltand thctnlclucs, as hereafter (hall appeare. Finally, bccaulc they pro- fcfle chat by the name of a Protectant, Lutheran, or Caluinilt they vnderftand a true Chriftian. Sadcel lib.de peccat.rcmiff.cap. 1 :Ours,that is the true cMlian Catbohkesopinion. D. Fulkelib.de SucccfT. pag. 186 :1 will neuer deny that lewell was a noble Proteftant, that is a Chriftian* And ad Cauiilat, S taplct: The community of Cbnftians.wbomeye call Proteftants. Huttenin Expoftul. CUm Erafmo : Againfl Lutherans , that is maintayners of the lm/;.Schuflelburgjom,7. Catal.hceret.Papv}: A Lu¬ theran or true Chriftian, is &c. And lib.2. Theol. Caluiu. fob 13 i: Lutherans,that is true feruants of Chrift. Beza cont. Illy ricum pag.i 6 8: We ferceiueno difference betweene S ti¬ er am entarie sand Cbiiflians. Hofpiman part. 2«Hiftor. foI/384; Tbe Smmentar'usy that is theortbodoxatt. And D ananas cont. Bcllarm. pag. 311 iTbeCalumfls f that is Cbriftuns. pag. 16p : A Caluimft,that is, a godly man* 10. Wherefore out of all which baih byn fayd in this and the former Chapter , I thus make my hrft demonftration to prouc that Luther was the Author and hrft beginner of the Proteftant Church and religion, if the Proteftant Church were not at att when L uther began, he was the author thereof i But it was not at all: Therefore he was the author of it. T he Ma ior or firft pro¬ portion iseuident. For if it were not at all when Liuher began, he was the beginner of if. The minor ismanifeft by the forefayd Cofeffions of Proteftants, wherein they plainly fay,that it was fubftantially periled. • /: Trot eft ant religion. ijt cap, 3. Tbat euery man fello toed a Church and religion different from the Prof eft ant before Luther aroje. CHAP. III. ) „ _ ' < , . „1#; 7-. ' ' ■ . _ ». i, 'T,H e fecond dcmanilration wherewith we JH will prouc Lurher to hauc byn haue byri the Author of the Proteltant Church and religion wc Will take from the Proteftancscortfcflions, that vvbe Luther firft beganal the world and cucry man im- braced a different religion . Lather in the Preface of bis firll tome : Here fee euen by my cafe 5 how hard it is to get ^rhewhole out oferrours which are confirmed bjthe example of the whole world. world, and by long cuftome as it were changed into nature. And to. 2. rhis is written in his Epitaph ; O he shewed Long th e when all the world was ouerwodmed with darkenejfe. And cuftome, lib.i. decaptiuit. Babylon, foi. 72. being to write a- ga in il MaOe , he fay th : Neither let it tnoue thee , that the whole world hath the contrary opinion and cuftome. Andfol. d8 : There ualmoft this day nothing more recciued or mote few led in the Church, then that Mafeua facriftee. Aga i ac ; 1 fit ^ naB- vpon a thing •; wbkh being approued by the cuftome of fo many § 1 ' ages and confent of ail, is fo ingrafted 5 rts.it is needfull to change almott the whole face of the Church. A-ddib. de abrog, £onf;,nt Mi IT, fob 144 : how often did my trembling hart quake 5 and 0f all, reprehending me obieUted that their fit ongeft arJ only argument: Ait thou only wife y what did allerre, were fo many ages igno- Qnjy j u- rant< Behold how Luthers heart or conscience did ther wile, tell him chat he alone knew Proreftancy, and that for many ages all were ignorant of it. A nd in his ta¬ bic Calkcsjioh 10; Jbefe cogitat ions were very trouble feme I z tome; Lib. 2.132 Heretofore none held to me: Thou only baft the pure word of God, aUotherswant it, Andlib.cit. deMifla rol. 247: The common people without doubt are mofifuUyperfuaded^lrat admen are holpen by Maffess for it feemetb incredible, that all the world jhould be [0 {orfallen of God. Andfol. 2 5 6: It feemes incredible to them ythatLu- ther alone should be wife. Contra Cochl&um fo^oS; The Sophiftersand Monks bane feduced the whole world to trufi m rhewholc Tom .$.in pfai.82.fol. 481: In tymcsp aft the whole der the n" wor^WM vn^ert^ePoPesF>omnion. Tom 5. in 4. Gahr. Pope. fol.; 8 8 :1»former ages Paul was vnknown to the whole world. Tom.6.in cap.n.Gencf.fol. 130 : The wicked mpottour (fo hcxcrn T rote si ant Religion. 13 3 C a p. il Topesandfchooles. Lobcchiusdi!pt;t.2 5> :Tbe Roman ty~ yanny bath ouer whelmed the Church and held the Cbrifiian The world in tbraldome. Huber. in Antibtliarm.iib. 4. cap. Chnftiais 3. Our Church hath anew forme not vfed at that tyme when xvor^» the Popepojfejpdall.Movgeltcm trad.de Ecciei.pag.145: The whole 1 bnflian world knoweth that before Luthcr ail chur¬ ches were oner whelmed with more then Cymmerian darknejfe. All .Hitherto the Lutherans. churches* 3. Anrcongft the Sacramcntarics Caluin 1. Inftitur, cap.z All, euen to the common people are em- eue to hued with this principle that man bath free will, Lib. 4.cap. ccm" 18. 18 : The Abomination of Maffe prefered in a golden cupfe hath madefo drun^e all Kings and people ofthe earth from the highest to the low eft that they put the whole hope of their JaL peo„. miminitakne. Which very words are repeated by on earth " Lobechiusdifpuf.z^. and by Hofpin.epiE.dcdicat. from the i,part:Hiftor. andparf.2 foJ.25. And the feydCai- high eft to ninlib. 4.cic.cap 10.^.5: The whole world was coueved the low eft: mthdtnofl tbick^mift of ignorance. And lib.de Ccen. pag. 10: Withbowthick^a mift of darknes wottbeweijdbefeiged* Againc :VVhen Lutner began to teach he fo handled the nutter of the [upper, as that,what belongeth to t he corporal! pr efence the feemea toleaue fuel) its allihenreceiued* And lib. dt Nect ff. Reform, pag. 46: It is mamfeft that the whole world was , , . \ bewitched withtbefe wicked opinions before Luther appeared. ^ ^ ^ oie AndRefponf.ad Sadoief. pag. 130: All things were ft uft with pernicious err ours. T here was none which truly efleemed that onlp facrifice{ of Chrift; none which fo much as dreamed of his eternall Prieflhood and the interceffm which dependeth 0 thereupon, none refjted in bis only inflice . But now whereas all Earned didput their tru/l in good work* when they went about by good words to pur chafe thy (God he fpeaketht o) grace, to ob- taine iuslice, to purge theirfinnes, to fatisfy thee. Ad which (fayth hcj do dash out and annihilate the yertue of the croffe of I | Chxifi. JL.IB. 2.1^4 He re to fore none held thrift. Refponf.ad V uiipu. p*g. 254: Setng the whole AH the Wefterne t hurch as he calies it defendeth objlinatly all theim* v.'efterne piety which we-iujily detefi &c. And epilt. 141: We are ^. j z -- - - ~ -- - t / * ^ w ' ^ j —r ' ' t llrc 4 compelled to wake afeparationfrom the whole wo) Id. Buccr lib.dc vi & v4u Miniderij pag. 602 : ltuplaineytbat for many ages paft God retfealed to ru nation the doltnne oj ourjaU nation y and all things belonging to his Kingdome fo far re ashe hath don in our age : Librae Concord.pag.66o : This error of the real! prefence preiuiled with all Nations of the whole world. D^nxas lib.de ArstichnHo cap.2 6: At length An¬ tic brift and his doctrine ouercame^ all men holding their peace & shamef ully and bajelyfubmitting them/elites vnto him vntill lolm VV hie far ofe who jlcuily oppofed bwsfelje againjt him.Scidan cptft.ccdicat. Hilior: The he^iming^ot Proceilancy) One" only fender and almoft contemptible , arid one only bare the ha* man. tredand brunt of the whole world. Bibiiander Oraf.ad P r in cipes Germ: We put it as a thing ktiowtie by it jelfe Al people moflcle are and out of all doubt, that after Gregory the great his from the death the Pope of Rome was Antichrifly who with his abomna- firft to the ttonsbldjphetoies and idolatries did fo befot all Kings and people laft. - from the firft to theUft > that they became mote bloiktshthcn brutebeafls Zuingliusiib.de vera Scfalfarclig.cap. de xhewhole Euchar : I thinknonun will deny this that we allran to mafic Chrdlen ' ° afaC7C^refu£e* Daniel Gamier.epift.49: Trrourpof- dome. ,, ejjea notonc or two fmall parcels ybut Apofiafy turned the very whole body away from C hrift. HofpimPrcefai.part.2. H1- flot: from Gregories tyme no man flroue againfl fuperflitior„ but all added and put to what ftrength each one could.- And ep. dedicat. part. 1: This moft gr^ffe and more thin Cymnurun d.irkneffe endured in the whole Chrifium world thefe 6. hundred V!ssf} /carslaftpa/l* Viretusin Ho pin. parr. 2. foh 224*. The None Er.oce againfi: Chriiitan chrifiian Nation vtterly bewitched as it were with for" Nationi. ceries and alienated from God and true religion &c. Pi£ rat. Syntag, CcnfeiT; When all was cottered with moft gr fife (titkncjfi ■ Tmeflant Religion. i % 5 C dai'kneffoof ignorance and idolatry. Cuahcr,Pr who we faw bad blinded the worldfor many ages, His Maieliy in his Monitory epiftlepag. 37: Intbofe ages a thicker and more blind ignorance of t ruthpofeffed the world. Pag. 100; How ma¬ ny ages was the Chiflian people held in fogreat blmdnes and ig¬ norance ofbolefomedoctrine. And pag.160: Adarcknight of Popishdoctrinepojfijfedtbeworld. D. Whitakcr € cmc, 2. q. 3«pag.4 67:1 be plague (of Popery; atlafl went through the whole world. Pag,468: That Antichrifiians plague raged through all parts of the world, and through all vifible Churches• And Cont<4.qu£ft.5.cap.3.pag.684:lnt)iyespajlno re* ligton had place in Churches but Papifiicall. D. H umfrey ad Rat.;. Campiani; At length all left the fellowship oj the Church. M.Perkins in Expofit. Symboli: During the jpsceof 900. yeares the Popish herefyJpred it folfe ouer the whole world. And D. White in his way pag. 3 52.com- parcth Popery before Luthcrs tyme to a leprofy, which (fayth he )jpoJfeffetb euery part of man. And in his defence cap. 37. he fayth : 1 affirme Papacy to be a leprofy breeding in the Church fovniuerjally ,that there was no vifille company ofpeople appearing to the world free from it. And whe* I 4 ther A P. & eue- meber Chritl, LI b , 2.13 £ Heretofore none held. ther any company at all, knowne or vnknowm were free from it wholy or tjdt> I neither determine % nor greatly care. M. !e wel ferm.in cap.i t. Lues pag. 208 : WftenS the world the people Priefls and Princes were oner whelmed with ignorance, ivbcnthe word of God was put out of fight -.when all (choolss, Priefls, Bishops Kings of the world were fworne to htm (the Pope) that whatfoeuer hetookein hand they should vpboidit: When whofoeuer had muttered againji himjnufi straightway haue hyn excommunicate & put to moll cruel death as Gods ene- jwy.'M. Fox' in his A£t s p. $91: All the whole world was filed and ouer whelmed with errors and darknejfe. And finally D, Bancroft in hisfurucy c.4 pag 60. hath thefc words: A! people Both the Friefis of all fortes and likewifethe people became in from the tyme to be fo drowned irtihepuddlesof Popery ,all of them together toppeto jrom toppe i0 tfje toeyforgetting &c. > oc* 5/ By thefe 'eonfeffions of Proteftants we fee plainly , that 4//the wefterne Church, all Europe, all Chrifiian Churches, the whole Cbriftian nation ? the whole body of the Churchy the whole world fall,' all without exception, all alike, all euen to the la ft, alleuento the common people, all Kings andpeople from the first to the Uft, all Priefls and people from top to toe, all andeuery one were ouer whelmed with P0- fishand more then Cymmerian darknejfe. Secondly we fee, ch a r no manftroueagainfl Popery, no man admonished, no man taught >no man belieued , no man fo much as dreamed of that Which is the cheifeft and moftprincipall point of Proteflancy, but tone only, and Luther alone was wife. Thirdly that the cafe Was luchforfo many ages, for doo, yea for 900.years lafi paft. Fourthly that it is fo manifeft, that as tbcmfcl- uescbnfeffc the wholeChriflianworldknowethityitiscon- fejfed, manifeft by it felfe, moft cleare, and out of all doubt, and no man in hts wittescan deny *7. To all which if you add» that very many, and moft famous Proteftants,of- ecntym€$,moft plainly, moft freely, and in all Jtind m TroteUant Religion. 157 Cap. 3 i of writings haue confeilcd fhis, ye (hall moftcui- dently perceiuc, that vnlcflc it be heretic at! licence (as Libucont Tcrtuilian fpeakcth)or by fome diuelishpriuiledge (asS. marc.cletvs do it. fible to %• Firft therefore, touchingtbeinuifibility^^S^i of l zbi %. j42 The V rote Hants Church of thcProtcftant Churcb before Luchcrs tyme, Pro- tenants confelTc.thatit was iniaifibletoPapifts, to enemies, to the world , and to all that were not of it. For thus faytfa Sadeel in his Refutation of the 6i.ar~ tide pag.^ 38: We deny not that the Godly men lurcked vnder Popish darkneffe •andwegiue God thankj,tbat juch perfons}fa- Inuifible ati^ cmPan^h were for a tyme inuifible and vnknowne toPapith. t0 l^e PoPe an(*a^ ^ Catchfoles, feing they were for a long tyme lil^ejparckles corned with much ashes. 1 he fa me he fay th in his anl were to Arthurcap.8. and to the Sophifmesof Turrian loco 10. and to the Repetition ot them pag. 7o6.Danaeusin his bookeof Ancichriftcap.38. wri¬ te th : That there wer everyfew Protectants and thofe dwelling vnknown in wildernefjes, and alfovnknowne to others, Junius in 111* 4. toothers, booke of the Church cap. 5. fpcaketh thus of Prote¬ flants before Luther: They profelfed their faytbamongft themfelues,butnotbefore dogges& wild bcafswho wouldrunne vponthem. D. Whuakcr Conr.2.quad!. 2.cap.2. pag. 45 8. Was it (t he Protcflant Cburch)manijejl to all? No: but to thofe only who had eyes. And pag. 468 : There was no Koowne true Church on earth 9 which appeared to all. And quell. 6. ©niy to caP '2-Pag 359: VVe care not for their ohie cling folit ude vnto JProteftats vs. For we are not ashamed to haue recalled our Churth out of this kind of Jolitude. D . Fuikc to the Cauillations of Stapleton : The whole forme of the Church was for feme ages vnknowne to the vngratejull world. And in his booke of lucccffion pag. 118 : They conUffed Christ , but nit alwayes before bereiiky *, but before them elues and the Church. And in his notes vpon the 11.cap. of the Ads: )f lay vifible you vnder ft and that which ts feene and knowne ro the whole world -y it is not true> that the Church was alwayes vifible. D.Morton in the i.part of bis Apology booke 1,cap. l^.faych: They profeffed jccreilynot pub likely. D. Whirc ju Bis way to the Church p ag.^5: T bat they profefftfamng Heretofore imfihle] 14 3 C a 44 ihemfelues. Ofiandsr in his Manuel pag«y9 ilnihevifible Church of Rome there was the inuifibk company of beUenentiid- den tothe eye of the world. Caciius fccundus Curio in his bookc or the lardgncsofthc Kiftgdomcot God, pag. 212: It came to pajje that for many 7 cares the Church lay bid$ and that the citti^em of this Kingdome could fcarce, or not at all be dtfeernedfrom others .And the Scots in their general! cdoreflion : VVe fay, that this is the only true Chrijiianfaytb, which isnow reuealedto the world. Thus the) acknowicdg that before Luthcrg tym Pro tenants were vnknowo tothcPope and hisofficers, to their enemies, to the world, to all othersbefidesthcmfeiues, could not be decerned from others, lurckcd in defertcs, in dark¬ ness,like fparkiesvndcr much albes, profcfTcd not their fayth before the world , or their aducrfarics, but at moft before themfelues, and were known on- ly to thole that had eyes, that is, to thcmfclucs. 3. The fame alfo they meanc, when they j~frev teach that the church ofGod may beinuifiblc to thete2C|; t|,at world, and all that are outof it.Iunius in his 2.bookthecbnrch of the church cap. : VVe conclude that the outward forme majr be and vifible shape of the Church, may jo in common vanish, that wiuifiMt it cannot be pointed at orperceiuedofthe world. And againe:to The Church is ofteniymes couered and inutftble tothe world* w or " And cap, 16: The vifible fashion of the Church may be hid and' . failefrom thevngratefull world. And in bis Theological! r , T hefes ca p .41: Sometymcs the church appear eth to thefatth f full alone fometymes itisknowne to fonte godly per font* Mjlo world* eueryone. Befnage in bis bookc of the (late of the vili— blcand innifiblc Church,cap. 4: The Church is mtal~ wayes knowne to the world. Sonis in his anfwtrc to Sponde cap. 2. pag. 32 : God [ometjmesuketb away the faceof the Church from men* Lubbcrius in his 3. bookc of the Church sap.4 .* VVe affrme thai the Church may be ~ - ' ' ' , drium Lib. 2* 144. The TroteHants Church driuen to thofe flraights, that it may lye bid from the world and perfecutors. And cap.6 :VVe deny that she is alwayesvifible to the world $ which he rcpeatcth againccap.7.Riuetin his Epitome of Controucrfiestreatifc i.fed:. 37 : It happen?tbfometymes that the Church hath byn inuifible>or rather bidden fometymesfrom the eyes of perjecutors,fometymes from the eyesofthefaythfullthemjelues,to wit of fome andtbemajl of them . 13. Woitaker Controuerf.2.queft.^. cap. 3. pag.474: We fay, that the church may be conferuedin fofew^ that it appeare not to the world. And quaett. 5. cap.6. pag. 508: It is moftfalfe, that the Church shall alwayes be kpowne, and manifesto the world.D. Fulkc to Staplccons Cauil- lac.BuUwgev, Alphonfe, Cbytreus, Marlorateandall thereft> do acknowledge that the Church by the defence of Chriji shalbe protetted in the dejert, that is in places remote from the fight and accejfeof the wicked. Againe: The Church isnot alwayesap- parent to the multitude of the wicked. And in his bookc of Succcffion pag. 19: if is not doubted, whether the Ecclefiafii- caS fucceffion of perfons and places ought fometymes to be vifible to the world,but whether at alltymes. And pag. 21: Sometyms the Church is vnkpowne to the world. Pag.42: God would fometymes prouide for the Church in this fort ,in fr ikjngher e- nemieswith blindnes, that they could not find her. And pag. 129. The external! policy of the Church is vnknowne to the world, that is, to the enemies of the Church. And pag. 3 66: J afjirmethat the Church is fometymes vnknowne to the world. D. White in his way to the Church pag. %6:Theque- flion is only of the outward Ilate 0} the Church, whether it be ai¬ re ay vifible to the world ornot^thatin euery age thofe congrega¬ tions may be dtfeemed and pointed to, which are the true Church; Tor we fay not. Pag. 8 7 : T his number may be very [mall, and their projeffionfo fecret amongfl them[eluesytbat the world, and fuch as louemt the truth shall not fee them, they remayning jo bidden %&s if they were not at all. And pag. 97. Tbc Cburch Heretofore inuifible. v 14 5 C a f • 4. itkBttlh ^ or become inuifiblefometymt, fo that the world can- notfeeit»D.Morton in the 1. part ot hisApoiogy,hb. Wiuttii 1 • caP*1 ^ : Pnteftants fay the Church is not alwa) es known* Protefi ata i.lo ft,27; allthefaytbfully nor to her enemies. And this he tcrmcth proper Nfywi t^FProPer dejenceof Proteftants.And cap.i 3 : When Prote-defence, )(Mimih flant fa7> tb* Church isfometymes ecclipfcdlike the mconeyhey ktltb m€*ne that she is brought fmetymes to fo few , that it ts not pij cap (eerie but °f thole , which are in her, but not openly knowne by iiktiin kit, b£r vifibilitjy rites , or vifible Succefficn, or to all the faythfull D. capj!, Wilittin his SynopiisCont.2 queft.i.pag,67; num- Uc her oJfaytbfuUpeople hath byn alwayes in the u oi Id, but not *l~ iplctonsCauE wajfeit0 wor^ Againc^lfby vifiblethey vndtrfiatd ttridfh ^dt K vifible, we fay it if not fo alwayes vfible to mlm the world.Thus we ice that for tomaintaine thejnui- m £blluy °J'he'[c^cy ,cacb -!lf ■,be ,ilmf forme of the Church of God may vanifh,may Jy hid, may faile from the world,is often taken away from men by God , is vnknownc to the world. That the Si! Church fomctymcs is vnknownc or appearcs nor vi* if10 fible to the world , foirict)me knowne only to the faythfull, & yet not to all fhem neither, but to fomc and the fewer of them, and that neither, by any via¬ ble rites, nor by vifiblefuccc (lion, and that this kind 5 of do&rinc they tcrmc the proper defence of Prote¬ ftants, to wit, for to defend the inuifibility of their Church before Luther. Which kind of defence hath neither truth nor probability, and though it had , dpi'lb yet would it not fuffice to defend theinuifibility of their Church before Luthcrs tymc, when it wasin- ffjtthlit uifible not only to the wotld, to enemies, to ftraun- wd0 gcrs, to fotnc or moft of the faythfull • but to all and that the Church may be vnknownc, no t only to the world, but alfoto fomc ormoft of the faythfuih Laftlythat the true Church may be knownctwo WayeSjOne way tobethetruc Church of God, an The true Puerto be knownediftindly from aii other Chur- Church chesjas.G'hrift wasknowne to be the McfTiasonly difcerned by bis difciplcs, but yet he was knowne dillincHy from all from all other men by thcIcwcs.And thefcriptuici? other knowne to be the word of Cod onjy byChrifti.ns, Churches but isknownediltin&ly from other writings by In? r*firl l h^els.And inChriflst)mc hiscompany was known 11 c 8" to be the true Church of God, only by thefaythfuiJ, but knowne diftindly from all other companies or Churcheseuenby Infidols* And the lame we fay of bis Church from his tyme vntoourdayes,thatitif and euer wasknowne to bethetrue Church of God, only ofrhefaythfulI,butknownand feencdiftind- ly from all other Churchescucn by the world & In¬ fidels. And of his kind of knowledge and vifibility, wherewith the true Church is knowne and vifiblc notonly tothcfaythfull, butcuen roInfidel$,andof the oppofitc ignorance or inuifibility vvefpeakein this matter , and Proteftants alfo, as appearerhby their teftimonics already rchearfcd,& (hall yet more by tfeofc which we (ballrepeat hereafter. 7 thV^ 5* Furfhcr more therefore Proteftants do not Church only teach that their Church may and hath byn in- was fim- uifiblc refpediuely ,that is, to this or that kind of plyinuifi-men,(as we hauc already heard,) but alfo they Die. graunc, that it may be fimply and abfolutdy inui- fible. .triu Heretofore inuifible. r 4 7 C a p. 4* tit fible.Luthcrvpon the20.pfaim.com.3 fof.493: The tnott church was and abode in ropery 5 but truly fo hidden, to one jttit appearance , shejcemtd to be no where Seemed ' ljtoi at all. A nd v pen the pfalm.22. foI. 344: T/;e Ctoc/;w to be no ji| brou jit into the dujl of death, fo that no where there appeared) where, wtitti *nJ shew or trace oj her. And vpon tbcfirftchap. of Mi- Gol(! cheas torn. 4. fol.434: In the former ages there was no true No era ee it! (4, forme oj religion extant. The Magdeburghnsiu the. pre- f church tJjji face or their 1 o. Century: It is very bard to find t where & aPPeafecb Hi which the Church was in this age. Like wife in the Preface tiifi; of the 11. Century : Eucry where was datknes neither durfi ;5rmc the Church mutter any thing, G -r ia c h i u s i n h i s 2 2. d i fpu r. ^vam° ofthcChurch psg.927.writeth,tbat bdcrcLuthcr: The true Church withdrew it felfefrm the eyes & fight of men f into lurking boles, and hidher fclfe in darkntfife. Zuingiius in p hisfupplication co the Bilhop oi Conftarcce, fom. 1. i^y fol. r 20: Thebeaueiilydoftrine lay a long tyme kid . Hofpi- nian in the epifiie dedicatory of the firftpartof his g H i (lory : From tbeyeare 1200. vntill the ye are 1 y 5. the Church lay miferably ouerwhelmeitas it were, with a mvjl deep jlj, and moftjlrongdeluge. Caluin in the Preface of his In- fit ftitut ions : God peimittedtbat in former ages there should be -jH nofaceofthetrue Church extant.And addcch ofhisowne Nofaceof ,, - dodrine: It lay a kngtymevnknomieandbnryed. Againcahechurch T, For fome ages all things were drowned in deepdarkyyes. And extant. ,, vpon the 2 ^.chapter of the Ad s vcrf. 6.hc fay th ; The Church was bidden from the eyes of wen. And in his Pre¬ face vpon Ilaias: Touchtngthcouewardshew of the churchy 0 nothingfor many ages appeared, but defoUte and confufed waft \on all fides. Bczb in hisbookof the notesofche church pag.99: The Church lurked inthewildernes. Pareusin his V,, 4.booke ofgracc and freewill cap. 6: InConftantinet , tyme the church began to way fu^to death; mtwithjlandhg the \ Qatholikf Chunhremayned. But where? In thedefericas in the K 2 world Lib. 2.148 The VroteHants Church world withdrdwne from the eyes of men* Sadcel in his frea- tiic of the vocarion of Miniftcrs pag. 533 '.After the Church had a long tyme lurked, the Lord called her at this tywe Could into light. Voycn in his Preface of Catalog. Do&; The not be true viftblc Church could not be difcerncd: no trail of Gods grace difcemed. appeared in his Church . The Apology of the Engiifh Church part.4.cap.4.diuif.2.fayth, ftar^o.yearts agoe truth fir [I began to fpring, vnknowne at that tyme and vnbeard Vnheard o/.D.Humfrey vnto the g.reafonof F.Campian pag. of. 286: Why the picture of the Church in thefe later tymes cannot befeeneofouraduer far lessordrawneof vs &c.And pag.2,88: if the only names oj our Fathers were extant, who eythtr b; tea- Not fo »or monishing. or writing, did help the Church ofebritt, much as we should fee another ranckand progrejfeof the Church, another their fucctffm of Bispops, another picture ofProteftants .And pag. names ex- 291: And yet they will obiett that our Church was hidden, tantf wkichtbey nowherefufferedaltue. D. Whiraker Controu. 2. que ft. 5. pag. 479 : When they aske of vs, where was our Church in tymes p aft for fo many ages, we anfwere, that it was in a clofe wilderne(fe> that is, that, it was hidden, lay fecret,fled the fight of men. And queft.5.c.3.pag.499:I«r/tfr/wg/)t the fayth out of darknejfii wherein before it lay drowned. A nd cap.4. pag.502 : Our Church wastheny butyouwillfay, it vidble mt f'jen • therefore was it not ? No. For it 11 ' lay hidin the wildcrneffe. M, Perkins in hisexpofition of the Creedcolum. 788 : We fay that many ages paft before this our age, that vniuerfall defection ouerwhelmed almoft all the Not worldy and that our Church was not vifible at that tyme. M. vifibie. Sa*c > *n i*Ccntury of the writers of Briranny cap.41 From Phocas vntill the renewing of the Ghoftell, the do*. Urine of cbri/l lay fo long in lurking holes. M.Downham in his2.bookeof Anticbrift cap.2: Thegener4Udefeftionof the vijible)Church began to worke in the Apoftles tyme. M. Powell in his 1. book of Antichrift c%tfrOut religion Heretofore imtifihle. 149 C a ?, 4. U)1 longtyme vnknowne andburyed. And M.CoxChancei- vojcnown lour of Oxford in KingEdward 6. tymc exhorting ^^uiied, the vniucrfity men to Proteftantifme, biddcth them plucky out truth lying long tyme lurking in Tropbonius den tie. Thus clearely and thus many wayes they hmply and abfolutciygraunt, that their Church was inuifiblc yoknowne arid buryed before Luther arofe. 6, The fame alfo they intend, when they fay, that the Church either was,or can beinuifiblc, teach the For they woiild neucrfay fo, vnlcfTe they knew that Church fuch was the condition of their Church before Lu- may be ther began. Luther Vpon the 90. pfalm. torn. fhnply 495: Svmetpnes theCbutch was mojl we a kg and fo difperfed *nuI^C| 45 it appeared nowhere. Huttcr in his Analyfis of the Gontcflion of Aufpufgpag.448:lf u cert nine that it may JsJo where fall out, that the true Church may ly bidden, and her vifible appeare. forme not at all tymes appeare tq the eyes. Her bra n b in his Compcnd. of diuinity, placeof the Church,pag. 502. writet h: That thefaytbfulI fomaymes appeau nut to the eyes^uenofthe Godly. Kcmnifius in hiscommon places ™ottotj e fitwheepifticsof the Apolfles pag.yS :Sometymcs the ^dlyV6 true Church (another baflard company prevailing and overtop¬ ping )dotb fo as it were ly bid, that Ellas may fay, I ami ft alone. Gerlachius in his 22.difputeof the Church, pag.94d :N ofurely ,if at fome tyme the Church kpot feme with wporall eye therefore she is not. Caluin in the Pre¬ face of his Inftitutions: Sometyme God taketh away the outward knowledge of hit Church from the fight of men. Some¬ tyme the Churchhath no apparent fome. And in histreatifc of the true Reformation of the Church pag-2 32 : The Church fomttyme lyetb hid, and fiieth thefight of men. A n d i n his Antidote of the 18. article of the Vniuerhty of Paris. We gather, that the Church is not at all tymes fweft U the eyes of men, at the experience of many ages witnefeth* K | Againc * TheProtejunts church Againo; Eli as thought himjelje only left oj the Church • fa!fly indeed 5 but that is apiooje, that she may lyefo hidden. And 111 iris4. bookcof Inftimtioiiscap.i, 3. hcaffirmeth, thafit is not needful! to fee or to fecie the C hurch , and that the may paiTc our knowledge. Beza in his Confeffion cap. 5^.9 : Dinerstymes the. Churchfeemetb to <*j hutepenshedvtterly. Junius in hh 3 'book of the church cap* 16 : The Church shallneuer end, but shall lye hidden, ac¬ cording to her vifible for me, Cbaflanio in his common p'acesioc.2. oft be. Church pag. 14S : The Church is not alwayes vifible, Danacus in his j.beoke of rhe Church o p. 2. Bcllartntne will haue that only to be the Church which is vijille which is mo ft falfe. Cap. 12 : God oftentymes will haue fs,r " . fome vifAlf Cfmch on earth, and often tymes none. Vdben there vi fibfe-$ no church >t ben this precept (of a d i o y n i n g h i rh fc 1 f Church» to Church )cea[sth. And cap. 13 : Beflamineldou* On earth, tretb to prone the true Church of God on earth to beilwayes vi¬ fible. That being mo ft falfe &c. And cap. id; Wefayx weaf- fifme, we amuch that the Church may fo faile on earth, net that there is none at all> but that there is none in reffctt ofvs, that is > of men, that there be none vifible to vs on earth. Againe: S. Paul inferrethgenerally that the whole Church maylauetobevifi- hie. And lib^.cap. 8; The true Church mayfometymesfills to be vifible* Sonis in his anfwcrc to Spondecap. 21 fag. 3 3: Godmakeththat the Church isnotalwayes vifible• Pic fly Mornayin his bookc of the Church cap. 1: Oftentymes the good come is hidden vnder the chaff without Any may haue appearance of the Clmcb. Potanus in his Antibellarm. to be vifl- Coilcdgc difpuf.34 ; The vifible Church may faile.Buca- ble. \ i rtu s in his common placesiec. 41. fc&. 9: It oftentymes happeneththat there isnocompany of men extant which publike* The vifi- lyand viftlly worshipped) God purely ± And led. 12: Thereis blecburch ^ayes on earth [ome.number winch worsbippeth ChriJlpiouJly% may fade. tjm number is net alwayes vifible. TrcJcatius in his 2* t' •«< t books The Whole Church Heretofore inuifihle* i C aP. 4. booke of Theological! Inltituuonsmakcth rhis title of one Chapter:; That the vifible chunk may fayle againfi iulUrnnne • Hy perius in his Methodcofdiuinity lib, 3.pag 548 : Whiles Elias wandred be re and there, there ap¬ peared no faceofthe Church, Sadccl in his refutation of trie 61. article pag. 531: They are decetued who tinnkthere ts no Catholtke Church, vnlejfetbey meafure it with their eyes. And pag.535; The true church may be conferued without any vifiblefhte. And in his repetition of SopbiftiKspag. 61 o: It ts pLitie> that the Church is not fo to be tyed to any out- ward forme wlwfoe tier, that it ought to be denyed to be a VV antettt Church, as often as that forme shall not be extant And o fvb- cation of Miniltcrs pag.543 : The Churchfometynte wan* teth the external!forme. Againc: It is cleare that the Church h 4thfometymes byn without vifible and per final!fucceffm. Pag. 550: Mens wickednes doth fometymes take from vs the vifible face of the Church. And againc : It is fometymes [o darkned, that it appearethnot to our eyes. Scharpc of iultificauon xbewhoIe Cont.5: T he vifible Church as fuchnsay perish. Themembers vifible of the vifible Church may perish 3yea the whole vifible church. as Church fitch. Baftingius vponthc Catcchifmc, title ofthcrnaX Pc~ Church, pag. 22 7: Without doubt ineaery age things baue11^1* byn fo troubled, as likeagraine>couered with ftraw3 there ap¬ peared no face of the Church.Vo r it i us i n h i 5 A n t i bel 1 a r m. pag 133:^ litle before the calling of-Abraham, no where ap¬ peared any vifible Church. And pag. 13 6: Hereupon it follow- tth. that the vifible church of Chrift not only in a great party butTjsew|10ie alfo taken whole in her vttermofi extent wayfor fome tymefaile vlfib]e from the truefayth>and be wholy darkened. The outward church church of Chrift may perish. And pag. 424: Neither did Chrift pro- may faile. wife, that he would abfolutely and perpetually hinder the per i- sbingand corruptionof the outward Church.The Flemmi ngs Confeflion article 27: The Church in the eyes of men for fometymefeemetb as extinguished. And Nappcr vpon the £ 4 xi.chap* IB* t. ijj i The frotell ants C hu rch 3 r.chap.ofthe Apoc.pag. 186 : The) ene, who think^that the true Church is alwayesvifible . Andvpon 12.cap.pag. 195 : The vifible Chi rch wholj itnbraced the errors of merits, of indulgences &c . And Propofit. 20. pag.41: The true Church was inuifible, and the true knowledge of God (e couered with darkntjfe, that none could vfibly enter. f bus ioraine Proteftancs. Of our coutrynun D. Whitakcr Contr, S.queft cap.2. pag. 470: Sometimesebfeurit)tnoft of atl belpetb the church, lor at jome tyme she could not be faje, vn- Ufjeshe lay bid. And cap^.pag.474 : Wefajthat fometyme the Church ma) auoydtbe fight of men,& bide it fclfe in corners. Cap. 1,pag. 466: VVeconfcjJc, that eusr morethere is on earth fome number of them% whopioufly worship Cbrifi, & bold ihetrue fayth and religion tbut we fay that this number is not al- ^ wayes vifible. Their (Papilb) opinion is> that there is euer more ^ x on earth a vifible church. It may fall out that there cannot be fetid vifible* out am'^wne atiytrut *n&cen*wevifible church. Andcap. 2 .cif.pag. 468 : Our aduerfary wouldproue, that there u as alwafes in the world fome vifible church. Ab d pag.469.-tta* infer retb(Dttii$ the Carthufian) not as our aduerfaries do, The vifi that the vifible chun b can neuer perishfOr that there is euer more biechurch bale world fomevifille church, hut that fayth shall neuer perish Pe" wholy 5 but that Chrifiian religion shall fiill perfeuer in fome to the end of the world. T/j£( fay th Whitakcr) isplainlythat which we fay and defend. M.irke h ow plainly he profef- feth, that they do not tench,that the vifible Church Note. csnnotperifli, or thatthircis afwayes fome vifible Church on earth, buto&ly that fome ihallalwayes beiicuc the Chrifiian religioP.Thcfaniedo&rine he tcachcth pag.470.473.475.47d.and479.Andq.d. cap.2. pag. 559. And in hU third boolfeagainft Do- rxusfed. 5. 6.7. n. M Perkins in his problem, title of the church : The ancients do acknowledge, that the church on earth is not alwajes rifibU. D. WlUce in hi* Synopfia Cone* Heretofore inutfible. 155 cap. 4. Cont.2 q i*pzg.6?:Vlfe fay the church is not alwaysattual- u.Cip,pj| ijf vifible to the world: nay it may fomctyms be Jo bidandfecret Wwffliti that the members ktiow not one another. Agaiae : In the dayes in EJiag Hi: % 0) Ettas the church was not vifible• And qucft.2.pag. 74: A tymenot f<¥ |sfo» vifible church we define, to be a congregation of men, amongft vifible# * fen whome the word is truly preached, and the Sacraments admi- MkiConi niftred.Such a church bath not alwayes byn, neither can we be 'Mtjinftfi affured that it shall always be found vpon the earth. There was 4 tyme when as the vifible church failed vpon earth. This inui- The vifi- ijijtltojii fibiliry of the Protcftant Church , which I bauc hi* blechurch ^Itl/tim thtrto proucd by their manifold Confeflions,I will failed# ttmtkii alfo prone by fequelsoue of other their fayings.Firlt fycbif,#!, therefore D.Morton in his Apology part, i.book. 1. mlm cap. 31. difliketh not thcfc words of Bcllarmine; tiktim f rote ft ants when they fay the church cannot faileor perish^meane kmuhji the inuifibible church. And many of them in expreffe iktiMf words deny, that the Promifesof perpetuity, which p #,«;/ in the fcripture arc made vntothechurch, Math. 16. f™the* 8 djn^jk and otherwhere, be made to the vifible church. D. prcmifei nr, Whitakcr Cont. 2.queft. g.cap. g. pag. 468 : It is tnoft belong niton faVe> that it is the vifible church, againft which the gates of hell not to the MM n°tpreuaile . And DaneusCont.4. lib. g. cap. 1 g. vifible pag-717: There (Math, id.) is not meant the vifible church. Church. To whome aflenteth D.Willct in his Synopfiscont. Ujkfi 2.qucft.2.M.Powell of Antichriftlib.i.cap.io.Beur, ;r||§i linin his Refutation of Sofus,cap. 53. Moulins of the vocation of Minifters lib. 1.c.4.& in his Buckler bcijIU parr#i.pag.49# And D .Morton lib.cir.cap.ig.addcth ^ that thole three places Math. id. &vlr.and pfal. 47# |j Which promife the perpetuity of the Church # Are protcfl-fc to# one °fthm vnderflood> almft b entry father> of the only bclieuea Lt! company of the eleft, w hich the Protetfants call the in- not the , 0 uifiblc Church . Bcfidcs, they all generallyicach,that vifible ?j (j hy the Catholike Church, which they profeffe to church* ■i 7 if/ v' ' rt'" ' £ % ' " bclicuc i J 4 The Prof eft ants Church belieue in the Creed, they mcanc not the vifiblc Church, but only theinuifrble. Luther in hi? booke of abrogating Ma fTe,tom 2X0I.247: VVho shall shew vj the holy church, feeing it u bidden in jpirit, and is only belieue d, according# Ibelieuethe boljchurib Zaing\iu$ in his expli¬ cation of the 11. article: Thecburcb, which cotififieihof thofe which are knowne to God alone, in that which u c p'/ofejft in the articles ofour creed. Dansuslib.cit. pag. 713: 1 he quejlionis of the true church of God whereof tt u faydin tht creed: I belieue the holy church. BdUrmine will haue it to he the vifMe,vvedenyit' The like he fayth pag.789.717.718. and 725. Vorftius in his Antibeliarm.pag. 144: vVe profeffe not in the creed to belieue the viftble church, but the it, ui- fible.D.Whitaker lib. 3. agairrft Duiasus led. vlt: ton fee what Catholike church we belieue, not the rifible multitude of Chriftiam, but the holy/company oftheelett. X he fame he faythConM.qucff.2.cap.2.BrcntiusinProlcgomi- «is pag.2. and otherscommonly. Furthermore f hey fay, that the vifiblc Church is not the true Church in the fight of God. For Caluin in his 4. book ofln- They fay ftitutionscap.i.^. 7. and the reft graant, that both thevifible w icked and reprobate Chriftians may be of the yiiT- Church is blc Church , bur deny that they can be of the true true Church in the fight of God. Nowfurcly if the vifi- Church Church be neither the true Church in the fight before God, nor (he to whuine he hath promifedpcrpe- Cod. tuity, nor the which Protectants do belieue. what reafon can they haue to belieue that the vifiblc Church (hallalwayes rcm3yne,or( which is all one) that theChurch (hall be alwayes yifible. Againc, their common do&rinc is, tha t preaching of trucdo. tfrineische note of the vifible Church- for fotea- cheth theConfcftlon of Aufpurgcap. 7. thcEngliflt Confcffion arffc* zo. and all the reft. To which bi« r~ Maiclty Heretofore vifib'e. 15 f C a *. 4* Maicfty in hiscpilLto Cardinall Pcron^. Whita- ker Contr.2.q 5.C.17.D.Morton parr. 1. ApoIJ.i.c. 6.M. Wilice in hisSynopfis Conr.i.queft.j.pag.ioi. Sadcci to TurriansSopbifmesloc.5. Vorftius in An- tibeilarm.pag. i45»and othcrsdo addc, that it is an ellentiallnoteofthc vifible Church. And it is mani- fcfi that they mult fay fo, becaufethcy vie todeftno the vifible Church, to be a company, wherein ike pure word 0] G odii pre ache d,& the Sacrarnentsr tghtly admimftred. Forio ir is defined ol the EnglifbConftflion and of Sadeeilib.cit.ofWhitaker quell. y.cit.cap.2c.ofM€- iadhontom.i.in cap. iy.Matth.and ofothcrsgene- rally. But before Luther there wasnopreachingof Protcflanrifme, as wc (hall hcarc them conic fife cap* /.therefore there was then no vifible Protcftent Church. Finally ,fofnetymes they fay that not only preaching of the word, but that aifo a lawful! mini- fiery -or,that not only what true preachingfoeucr, but aifo fuch as is made by a lawfull Miniftcr, of the Word , is of the cfTenceand fubflanceofthc vifible Church. For thus writcthD.WhitakerCont. 2.q.y. cap. 19. pag. 550 ' Stapleton fayth, that the preaching of the Gbofpell by Uvvfull Minijkrs is the proper noteofthe churchj and we jay no other wife Andpag. 551. That he confejjeth true pHAcbingbj a Uvvfull Minis! cry to be a note of the church yis no other thing then that we fay and defend. The like hath Sa- dec! in the place how cited; and the S witzcrs Con- fcflion cap.i 7. puttcth lawfull preaching for the chic- feft note of the church-yCzluin 4.Inftitut,cap.2. 4.1. for dperpttuallnotet8z the conclusions defended at Gcncua pag.845.for an ejftntiall note thereof. But before Luther there were no ProtcftantMiniftcrs at all, as we (hall hereafter hcare the ProtcftantsconfcfTc.Thcreforc no vifible ProtclUnt Church, .r g. By Lib. 2.15 6 The Vrotesiwt Chureh. 8. By that which hath byn rchcarfcd, it Is Summeof nunifcft> that very many and very famous Protc- the fore- ftatlfs |jaue 0fteiv and plainly confcffcd that when fe^onT" Luther came.fnft(as they fpeake) tstbe Gbojpell, the Protcftanc Church and religion was not viable,lay hid, lurked ,lay in the wildcrnes, in lurking holes, indarknefle, in T rophonius his denne, was buryed, Was vnknowne, vnheard of,appeared to none, cold not be difecrned: Her image could not bcfeene,no Chew of, bclides a huge fpmlc did appcare ; no face, no faftion , no trace of her was extant, and flie was fohid,rhathe who would iudgeaccording to the outward (hew, would think her to be no where : Andthat this is fomanifeft, as that the experience of many ages bearcth witrics thereof. With what words,I pray you, could thev fay that their Church was altogether inuifible, if they hauc not fayd it in thefe ? p. Moreoueritismanifeft,thatforto main- Caine their inuifible Church, they do teach, that the Church may be vnknowne to the godly, & to thofc who arc ofit-that it may be not vifible,not appeare, nbt be fcenc by corporall eyes* that the external! knowledgetherof may betaken from men , chat it may confift of no apparent forme, be without any vifible condition, without vifible fucccflion, and deftituteof outward forme . That the viiible face thereof may be taken from vs, that it may feemeto hauevtterlypcrillicd, that the vifible Church may perifh, the outward Church perifli , that it may wholy leaue to be vifible , and the whole vifible Church perifh, and finally that there be no true Vifi¬ ble Church in the world. io. Bcfidcs,it is cJearc,tfiat they teach, that not I - ■ V HeretoforetnmfiW. 157C ap. 4* hot only fomcpart of the vifible Church, but alio (as they fpeakc) the whole and all the vifible Church may pe¬ rish, and that it may fall out that there he none> none at u*gratl all, no vifible Church in the world. Certainly (as S# A u ft in & kb.arb0 fpeaketh) thefe words need no witty interpreter , but only an c• 8. attent hearer. 11. Whereby alfo it is euident , that D. Froteflats White in the defence of his way cap. 38 .and 4o.fayd vn truly, that Pro tenants imagine not the Church to " haue byn at any tyme fimply inuifibic. For as we haue beard, they oftentymes profeffeopenly the con¬ trary. Vn truly alfo D. Whitaker auouchcth C01U.2. qucfi.3.cap.2.pag.472. that we (launder them,when we fay they makcfucha Church, asfometymcscan be (cene of none. For as hath byn fcenc ,many , and Num&f* heamongif therclt, haue taught fo. But D. Whita¬ ker by the name of a vifible Church, vnderftandcth not a company vifibly profefliug their fayth, but one or two,orfome few vifible men,who keep their fayth fecrctly in their harts. But this , is not the church to haue byn vifible, but the men to haue byn vifible. Befides that, it isinougbfor vs, that the Proteftant Religion and manner of wor (hipping God was before Luthcrs tyme altogeather inuifi¬ blc, and only fccret in the hearts of fome few. For thence it will follow, (as ftiali appearehereafter ) that it is not the religion of God, which can neucr be kept fo fecretand inuifible.Vntruly alfo fayth Ju¬ nius Cont4.1ib.^,cap.iarc\ of Proteslants. But this Bul- Warckis built of him without all foundation, and is manifcflly ouerthrownc by the former Confcfli- ons.D'Feild fayth they meanc not, that the Church is wholy inuifible, at any ty me *ybut that it is not al¬ wayes robecflcemcd by outward appearance. But what more manifeft, then that they teach that the Church may be wholy inuifible, as appcarcrhby Ykc thcirjwords already rehcarfcd,and (hall yet more ap- Protect pcarcbyandby? Church xi. For they not only confeffe that their impoQi- Church was altogcathcr inuifible before Luthet ble to grofc, but alfo they afHrmc , that it is a mod vniuft baue byn an(j jmpUdcnt demaund, torequcft them to (hew iC *€C0C# before that tymc. Huuerinbis AnalyfisoftheCon- Impudentfcflionof Aufpurgpag.448 : It is an impudent demmdof Ocmauad. the Rommfii^to requejl to baue shewed vnto them fuck a church i» Heretofore inuifibte« t y p C a t»4« in firmer Ages, which touching the publike mimslery and vifible forme, agreed in all things with Luther. For we haue demon- fraud that the true Church then lay bid* D.Fuike in his bookc of Succcffion pag. 19 ; But you bid me bring forth thofieleil ( Protcftants) which iay hid through all the world. Good God howvniuft a thing doyoudemaundjbatj should bring Vniuft. fofthtkem > whome i /ay lay hid ? And Sad eel to the Repe¬ tition of VurrianiSophifmes pag.766 iButlpromifid not a* you fay, that I would anfweare to this yourqueftion > where thofiinuifihle remnants lay hid ? as if I had not fifficiedy anjweared, when I fayd that they lay hid bytbevnfearcbeable mnfaik of God. And in hisanfwcrctoThcfcs Pofnan, cap. 8. He will haue them to haue layncfoclofcly, tiiat it cannot bcknowne what they did. And in his bookeof Vocation of Minifterspag.551 t Atlaflcame tbatgenerallApofiafy, which the Apofile foretold. For then the outward light 0} the Church being quiteextintt, there remay- Only (ha- tied the only shadow and name ofthe vifible Church. T he fame ^ow aifo intimatcrh Picfly Mornay in the Prcfaceof his Myftery of iniquity, when he fayth :VVe are not bound church. to shew the Church, it fufficeth that God knew his owne .And John Regius in his Apology pag 176 :Tou deny that Luther found a company of his (eft. 1 fay there was an ecclefiafli- c all company of true religion, and which agreed with Luther in all points. But when the lefuits vrge to shew a follower of reli¬ gion > they would that Luther shew, that which implietb, and jmpjjej prone the inuiftbleto be vifible. Nappervpon 12.cap.Apo- to bevifi- cal. pag. 2 94: From theyeare ; 16. God with drewbis vifible We. Church from the open affemblies of men, tothehearttofpartuu- ler men, and from that tyme the Church lay bid and was inuifi- fcfe.Thcfame he faytbjpag.188 : But if fo it be an im¬ pudent and vniuftdemaund tobaue their Church fhcvvcd beforeLutjier, ifit werewithdrawne from open affemblies to the hearts of (ome.ifhcr outward Vthe Lib* 1*160 The Trotejlant Church light were quite cxtindt, and the only (badow and name oi the viable Church rcmayned, and laftiy if it implycd contradiction that (he (hould be (hewed; it is moil euident, that (he was al t ogcat her inuifible. The fame alfo they intimate, when they fay', that the Church either hath byn at any tyme, or may be thus inuiiiblc. Luther vpon the 90. pfalme torn .3. foi.495:Tb* Churcbwastben (inElias tymt)butfo hid- Church ^ u WM nQ ipfofg ^ but in fa fight 0f Go^ pCrjus jn bufTothe ^Methodcofdiuinity,lib.5. pag. 349: VVasnottbe fight of trHe Church At that tyme( ofEiia$) altogeatber inuifthle to God. men,andknowneto God alone* The S witzers Confeflion cap.17: The Church bidden from our eyes, andknownetoGod Knowne only, doth often fly the iudgement of men. Bcfnagcin his to God bookc of the itate of the vifibic and inuiiiblc church, alone. cap.4: The Church iseftfoneskrtowneto God aim. Son is in hisanfwcrcto Sponde cap,2.pag.p; We fay the ft ate of the Church is fuch, as is fometymes known to God alone. And D. Whitakcr Conc.2.queft.$.cap, 3 pag. 47S :VVefay that the externall Hate oj the Church doth ceaje,and that the fayihfull and godly may he fo fcattered, that they worship God Worlhip only in heart and mind. But who fccthnot»,thatitim- bearum* P^ct^ manifeft contradidion, that a Church which j * is no where but in the light God, which is knowne to God alone, which flycth mansiudgement, and which worfliippcth God only in hcartandmind9 M fihould be vifible or feenc of man ? Jong the If any aske them, how many ages their ProteftatsChurch was rhusinuiiiblc? Luther vpon the i.eap. Church to the Galat. torn. 5. fob 214. fayrh that (belay hid tvasinui- abouc 300.years. To whomc commethncerc Da- fible* pxus in his 3. book dcRoman.Pbnrif.cap.8.faying, tbeChurch was in banishment 3 yotyears. ButLuther better thinking on the matter,in hi^ bookc of the - — — - - Popery L i b . z* 16 z Illy view his witneffes % hauc rseucrthelcfie confcffcd, that Jtthat tymc no fischvifibie Church appeared . Befides, bcihalilay that , without ail either ditiinc or humane tcftimo- ny; which to do of cymes before his age , is to play the Prophet, or rather the mad man. For it is not the part of a man in biswittcs, toaffirmc withoutall kind of ccllimony, efpecially fuch a thing and fo manifeftly falfe,asthat fo many, and fuch kind of men,as had molf need to affirme it, were ncuerthc- Ie(fc forced to deny it. That it wantcth ail fufficicnt humane teflimony is euident, bccaufc neithcrthe forefayd Proteftants, nor any yet to this day, could bring forth any fufficicnt witnefic, who woulddc- pofc that he had fccne fuch a Church before Luthcrs reuolt. That alfo it isdeftiturcof diuine tcftimony, is manifeft by what hath byn before rcbearfed. For Protcfiants(aswc hauc heard ) teach, that thepro- mifes of perpetuity, w hich in the (cripturc are made Sup.num. to the church,are made only to4he inuilible church, 7. that is to a focietyof men incle&ion and luftificati- on, out of which Church they exclude the repro¬ bate and wicked; and not to the vifibic Church, that is, tothcfociety in Profcflioiroftruedo&rinc and lawfull vfe of Sacraments. And in truth they mo ft needs (ay fo, fith they commonly teach, that the inuifible Church , whereof the ele&and iufl alone are members, is the true Church before God: and that thevifible Church, whereof the wickedfc reprobate may be members, isbut a C hureh in fight of men *that is a fliadow and outward (hew of the C hurcb. And it is cleare, that God promifed perpe¬ tuity tothat Church only, which in his fight is the true Church ; and not to her which is Ho Church, but only in fight of men, When as I fay they teach that Were no Trotcfiants. %6$ c a p. 4* that God promilcd perpetuity and continuance on¬ ly to the Inuifible C hurch, out of bis promifes they cannot inferrc, that the vifible Church hath or thai!^ etier continue. Of wbome therefore(that I may vfc S. Ahguftins words) ha/t thou heard tbiil whence diddeft^j } e thou Uarne it ? where hatt thou read it for 10 belli ue it ? where- upon ha ft thou prefumedfor toaffirmcit, where there U neither any authority nor reajoti ? If Protelfants cry out, that is moil abfurd, to fayinElias his tymc there wasC0W? t ^ any Church vifible amengif the Gcntils befide the^,' 'Synagogue,whichnow after fomany thoufandsof years we cannot name $ how much more abfurd ought they think if, to fay that before Liithcr arofc^ there was a viable Proteifant Church, which ycc none neither of that Church » noroutof i^ncithcf at this ty me* nor at that, could eucr namej? W 15. It being thus msnifeft , that Luthct '5 ; was the Author of the vifible Proteftant Church,it folio wcth like wife that he was the authorof all and Willi £yCry Protcflant Church. For (as (hall be (hewed hereafter) there can be no fucb iriuifible Church as Proteffants mcane, that is, fuch as bclkucth and joiita worfliippeth God only in hart and mind , and no inlisW way profciicth outwardly her faych and religion* joiil]itiil|i Yet before we come to that, we will faifl refute ilittP thofc, who when they confider how abfurd a thing [WlP it is to affirme fuch an inuifible Church, efpecially for (o many ages,they begin to fhuflc and either fend vs to others,orthcnifeiucs name vs fucb, asorilyiri iHfailP part or in fomc fort held Proteftantifme, but imbra- ^ro|(5| ced not all the fdbfiantiall points thereof, and there* fore were but halfe Proteftants.Forto vs it fufficeth0 that wc (hew Luther to hauc byn the Author and beginner of whole and trueProtcftaius/uch as held L a all Lib* t. 164 lllyricmhis^oitneffes all points that arc n:ccfTary to the making of an ab^ folucProteftant. 4 Ihofc confuted who fay there were fomt vifible Protestants when Luther arofe. e H A P. Ve f T* QOMEProfcftants, when we askc of them Wfcjtt J} who wcjctbe viiibleProteftancsbeforeLu- m* Jn~ thcr began, do not chcrnfeiucs name any, butfendvs cus was, ^ i]lynCUSorM.Fox.Sopiaycth D.Whitakcrlib.5. € II a Dur^us fedf. 12.and lib.7.fedt.i D.Fulke of JstMurg Succeflion pag. 324. SchufTciburg in 8. torn, of his htofp.part Catalogue of Herctikspag.365 .Vorftius in his An- tfel T04. tibcliarm.pag.159. Lubbcrtiib.5.oftheCburchc.2. be^aepifl. and others: Thcfcmcn do maniftflly (hew tbatthe- Hjnttfat.Xelucs know not of any fuch vifible Proteitanrs. For s6they would neucrlay the burden of atrfwering this Vjtint ^ ght fend vs, for the anfwereofthisfo important de jdmtff. deniaund ,elfe they would ncuer hauc referred vsto grat.cap.1 j||yrjcus orM.Fcx. Foriliyricusin theiudgemcnt iv.tUncib* o£ mop Pfotcftants both Lutherans and Sacramen- litikiin t3"es >wai a vagabond, a bell bound, an heretike, a Manicbee, ji mid. deceitfull,a lyar, an impoftor, afalfifier, a CauiUer, afclaiwde- kcfajjtlb* rer,afinguUr inuenter offclaunders, a fycopbant in bis owniud- ffdft.x gement, impudently bUffbtmm, a hoacber of doctrine which dsjmmt. fcingetk in Ep'tcurifme and mortality of the foule:and ouer- hc* p.tos. tjjYQfpetb all reigion 5 and who had nothing to impugns truth wit),all) Were no Protectants. 1^5 c a p. 5. withaUybefides an audacious ignorance ^ and avery diuilesh jpiiit. This and much more write thcProteftants tncm- feiucs otlliyricus- wherefore to lend vstolucha man , is plainly to confeflc that they know no man ofcrcdit to w home they may rcferrevs, Andofthc iikcftuffe is Fox, a molt impudent patcherof iycs3 who in his falle MartyroLogc propofeth thccucs, tray tors, forcercrs, murderersof themlelucs, Ana- baptifts,Papifts .profciTed enemies,and feme chert aliue, lor Protcftant Martyrs, as Alien Cope fheweth in thefixt book of hisdialogues.Bcfide,thole whom Iliyricus nameth before Luther, himleifc dares not cai P rote ft a n ts, bu t V Vittitjfcs of truth y be ca u fe for foe c h they dillikcd fomcdodtriucor fad of the Pope. And fuch witnciles alfo they are,aslomc of thern be Popes themfeiues, as (s) Pius 2.fomc famous Papifts, as (b) ^ Peter Lumbard, and Gratian, whomc himfelfe cai-) )h*>] lU leth the (c) Pillars of the Religion of the Roman Amidnift, snd fayth they renewed Popery euen from the foundation^ .lomcprofefTed aduerfarics of Protects,as (4)Cikh»(d)Lib.i9> toueus-fomc of the holy Fathers, who(as before was fcene) condemned the very fcuie and fummc of Proteftancy fomc thofe, w ho only dillikcd the cor¬ rupt mannersoffomePopes,asRichard Hampeili• c fomc Athcifts,as (*) Machiauell-fome who any way ff [ap* (s) gainfayd either the doctrine or deed of any Pope. Surely for Iilyricusto bring fuch witneftes, after he (g) Viaf had fcarched in aI) corners, and raked in ail chancls,C^/. doth tmnifeftly bewray , that there can no true Protcftants be found before Lutherstymc. For Iliy¬ ricus , though neuer fo impudent, would hauc byn afbamed to haue bragged of (uch filly wirneffes, if h e could haue found any true Protcftants whatf euer« peftdes, fuch fcilq wesa may be only fayd to haue byn JL 3 Prore- / 3L % ThefVddevfss Protcftants ,andcanno way be prctied tohauehyn fimply and abfoJutely Protcliants,(uch as wefpeakc of. And wecarenot whom any one may fay tohauc Tom s, byn Proteftants (iov as Luthtt hyth > what is more erf} then to fayxw thing?) but whome he can prone & con- uiucc tohauc byn fuch - without which his faying is but voluntary and ridiculous, and the beliefe ther- pf ralh and vnreafonablc • 2. And as for thofe? which M.Fox producerb for Protefhnts before Luther, they Iiued in the year pfour Lord 1^21, as himfclfc writcth pag.749. in fthc cditipn of 1596.that isyin the 4. year ot Luthers new preaching, and we asjccfor Protedants before Luther. Beficfesthey all abiurcd their faytb,as him- fclfc confeiTeth pag.75 o.and foone after dyed for for- jrovv, or lingered awaywith fhame $and weaske for Brqtcftcrs not Abiurcr$. Morcouer no one of them is fptindtphauc held thatchcifc and fundamental! ar- tficlcof Protcftancy of luftification byfpcciaiifaith, dbcic.asFox wrijeth pag.yyoiThcre was fuch dili¬ gent inquifition made as that no article could be fo fecrctiy taught srnongfl them but it wasdifcouercch Wherefore thefc wretched Abiurers were no Prote- ftats, but fome reliqucs of the Wiclififts or Lollard^ Whereof we will intrcatanone . Thewai- V Others fay , that the Waldcnfcswerethe denf®s vifiblc Proteftants before Luther? rifing, but there is ^yere no «o apparent reafon to fay, that they were true & ab- Protects foIuteProtcftants,to wit, fuch asheldalltbe whole fubflanceneceffary to a Proteftant.For firft, there is no wnferbcforcLuehers tymewhofayth that they hclicucdeo be itiftified byonlyfayth, Neither can fnyfijcb thing be gathered » either put of their own 91 ou? of the writings of Catboliqufs Were no Proteftants. , x&7 Cap. y, 'Wk againft fh?m at thofe cymes. And liiyrlcus in his Ca*. Mfptil taiogue of witneftesprintcdatGcncua 1597.11b. 15. (ijtulu pag. 544. wriccch their opinions out ©t an ancient iliiy Cachohque writerjand pag. 559.out of Aensas Sil- tytjj uius, and pag. 539. relatetb their Confeftion out of Mjsljjj, Sieidan,and himtclfc pag^jd.reckoncth i^.of their iijfil articles, of which he harh thefc words :Tbefcarethe Articles oj the VValdenfes albeit others part them into more bran oxptofej ebes>and wake them more. But in none of them is theie i^L. any trace ot only iuftifying fay th. The fame I fay of [L,,, theirConfcffioo which thefayd Illyricus hath in his Catalogue printed at Gensua 1526. yea there col. ,4^. 1832* hcfaych,that HufTeand HleromeofPrage did ^ add vntothedodhineof the Waldcnfes the article of ,tt|^ freeiuftification by onlyfayth, as (fayth he) Syluius ,f^ intimatctht wherein albeit he belye both Huffs and )0k;!d. Hierome &alfo Syluius, becaufc neither they knew Num.y* of any fuchiuftification,( as fhall ffraighr appears ) neither Syluius intimateth any fuch matter- yet u clearly bewrayeth, that the waldenfes belicue'd not ■ |(L iuftification by only fay tb. Moreoucr Luther (as we fhali now rehearfc) confefleth that the Waldcnfes 1 knew nothing of his imputatiue iuftjee by only .f! fayth : How then can they be fayd to haue byrs true Bl and abfolute Proteftants, who wanted the very foul, ,, fumme, and definition of a Protcftant ? Secondly they not only belieued not iuftification by only ^ fayth , but bciicued the contrary $ that is,to be iufti- )% fyed by good worb. For thus fayth Luther ot th m ' in his table-talkes cbap.of Suermcrs; The Walitvfes For"* are yiy workmen and belteue mt that fayth without works dab Coccita wft if? ,and know nothing at all of iwputatiue ittftitf. And !0'L i JScnnec Morgcnftcrn in his treatifc of the church p. ! l?4'*Pcafcc*hthus vntothem : Teecenfirmtihediftrm " hi v ^ ' 4 3Lib. The VVddenfes \of Amichrijl,touchinggoodworfaiujtificMoijy&i. Andthe- Lloesin their Apology pnoted at H^no w togeitber with thchillory of Bohemia p3g,2 5^. plainly (hew, that they bciicue a man to be lultibcd by fay th» cha¬ rity ,hope ,penance, and works of mercy , and do lay : That rfeuout prayer doth purge, and pcnnance cleanje a man. 4. Thirdly, the Waldenfes are condemned of Protelhnts, fJoth Lutherans and Sacramemaiies, Mclandlhon in hisCouofailcs parr.2.pag. i>2. vvri- Tfut. tcthj: I rekyce that you agree with v s in thefumme of dottrine. Orthod, I know the Waldenfes are vnlike. And in Car ions Chro- Confenfm nidc printed at Pans M57. hefayrh that they [owed £^•413. errors 'denyed all oatbes,and all forme of prayer,beftdei the Lords prayer . Morgcnftern in his fornamed bookc pag, 79, giucth this verdicf of them : They haue proudly negh bled the light of doctrine which is kindled from hcaiien in thu age • cjr haue with tooth and natle by writing among their own wen fa-? tretly defended thofe mottgroffc errors, which in the year 1523, tperedifoueredbyAatber.BcfidesSdnecer (as he repor¬ ted)) affirmed, that they badgrojfe errors,and fuchas were unto be borne withalL Leonicus Antifiurmiiisaifo in Danxus in bis ao( were to his Sonde pag. 1516. pro- nounccth them to be impious 5 and Schuffclburgin his 3. tome of the Catalogue of herctiks pag i88.rcic- £tah them as herctiks. Camcrarius in his bookc ef the Church in Bohemia, Poland,&c.pag. 273- wri" teth thus: VVecanjay that the Waldenfes wereneuer one with our Churches, nor our men would euerioyne thenifelues to them . Whereof he giiieth chcfc tworeafons: becaufe the Waldenfes would not haue extant any publike declaration of their fay t h *?and for peacefake did vfc the Popifti rnafTe. Tor thefe two canfes (fay th h c) our wen did not ityns thwfelites (q them, neither did thej think, that they "' j. ' tould Were no ProteJIants. 169 Gat* f* esuldfo do, with good ctmfcience. Caluin alfo cpifl. 278. thus variccth to the Waldcnfcsthemfclucs :VVe abide in one opinion], that the forme of your C otijejfion cannot be abfo- luely admitted without danger. And M. lcwcli alfo in de¬ fence of the Apology part.pag.48. fayth plainly of the AibigenJes: They aye none fljewi.D.Humfrcy to the third Realop of F.Campian pag.371 : They are not wholyours. And Qfiandcriis his 13.Century lib.r. cap. 4-Pantalcon in hisChroniclcpag.p8.&Mtian&hcn in the forcfayd Chronicle of Carion, reckon them a- mongft hereriks: But the Aibigenfes were all one for religion wicb the Waldcnfcs, as D. Fulkc fayth in ihefc words, lib. deSuccefT. pag. 2$7,:Jbat epiflU of the Arch-bishops, dothprone that the Aibigenfes & VValdenjestvero all one. The lame alio canfclfeth liiyricus in his Cata¬ logue in 4. to.pag.536. Where alfo pag.ydi.hefpea- kerhinthis lost: r he VValdenfesoy Aibigenfes. Yea the Waldcnfesthemfducs ,in the Bohemian Cohfcffion (it it be theirs) do infinuate that they are condemned of the Sacramencaries ,whcrasthey fay in the ^.ar¬ ticle, that they, who deny the fupper oftheLord to be the true flefh and bloud of Chriffido call thcot Idolarcrs, Antichriff ,and men branded with the markc of thebcaft. Refidcs Ulyricus in his forcci- tcd catalogue writeth,that the Thaborites, who in¬ deed (fayth he) followed the opinions of the Wal- denfes, were gricuoufly vexed and pcrfccutcd of Rokcfana and ether Huffitcs. Wherefore ,fith Pro- teftants commonly challenge the Huffitcs for their brethren, they ou^htnot toclaime alfo the Waldcn- fes, whofe do&rijne the Huffitcs did pcrfccutc. Cer¬ tainly the Confeffion of Bohemia ( which is fayd to be theirs) doth plainly diftinguiflvthem from Pro- $efents,cfpccialiy from Sacramcntaries, For art- 2. they / Lib. 2. jjo The fFatdenfes they fay '.Vfe mujl keep the cowman dements in hart & deed. Art. 5. that thole which repent mult conleffc their iinnes toa Prieft, and askcabfoiution of him. Arc. 9. thatPricfts ought to be tingle. Art. u* that Sacra¬ ments arencceilary to faluation. And art.ij.tlmthc Eucharift is the true body of Chrift , as (fay they) Chrift plainly fay th : This is my body- of which wordj we ought to belictie the plaine ienle, not cic- diming to the right or left. Whereupon itisnomcr. nayle,that Caluinin his249.epiftle denicth it ro be la wfuil for a Chriftian roan , to imbrace the Wal- denfes Confeffion, in thefe words : Confidtrj/ouwhe¬ ther it helawfuiifor a Chnftian man to imbrace the forme of theConfeffion ( of the Waldenfcs) whowiihoutany dtjiin- Ilion bind vp all in one bundell of damnation, who prmfely con- feffenotytke bread to be prefently the body of Chrtfi. surely wq think^not. 5. Fourthly I proue the fame, becaufc the Waldcnfeshold many errors, which the Proteftants condemne. Illyricusin his forefayd Cataloguepa^. 545'.relatcth out of an ancient writer aboue 300* years agoe, that they taught, that a Pricft being in mortaliiinnecoldnotconfccrate thcEucbarift; that eusry oath is a mortall finnej that they^iifallovved matrimony. And lik wife out of Aeneas Syluius,that they fayd it was law full for cuery one to preach $ &£ that he who was guilty pf mortall finnc, was not not capable ofany fccularor ccclcfiafticall dignify. Neither auayleth itany thing,that now in the Co- ftffion of Bohemia (which is fayd to be the Waldcn- fes Confeffion) there is found the article of unifica¬ tion by only fayth, bccaufc that Confeffion waspre- fentedin the yearc 1^5. as the very title thereof de- cUrethjdc iq the Preface ipeatiQa h rqade of Charles j.Emperour^ i Were no T rote Hants. lyi cap. 5* $•Etiipcrot.tr, which w as after Luther had preached iornc years. Asaifobecaulc Hofpinian part,2.Hiftor. fol.i i .fayth, char the Waldcnfa ConUflion was re- sacram£. uewed or rather corrupted by tbcSacramentaries, as tarfcs the Wajderifes thctidducs fay in the Preface of their hauecor- Confcftion printed anno 1538,, as witnefteth Schuf. rupted felburgjlib.z.Thcoi.Caiuin.art.d.foi.yy. Morcouer the Wal- lilyricus in his Catalogue in fol.cok 1502. writcth, - that after Luther was knowne > the VValdenfes did greedily 0 e fm chafe greater knowledge. Morgcnftcrn in his foreiayd booke pag.79. faytb, that they borrow the befl part oj their dottrinefrm the Lutherans. And'D, Fulkc in his booke ot Succeftion pag. 360. that they learnt of tbofeofBajle, to amend certains errors, which the) had receiuedfrom their an¬ cestors . Why then (hall we not think, they recciucd thedodrineofiuiiification by only fayth from Lu¬ ther £efpccially flth (as I befor fayd) there is no men¬ tion of it atrjongft them in former tyrnes ? Againe lurgeuicius in the j.chsp.of his warre of the y.ghef- pdi,afErmcth that the Authors of the Bohemian Confeflion do profeflc in the beginning thereof,that they would neurr conioync tbemft lues to the Wal¬ dcnfes* and therefore the Bohemian Conftffion is not the Waldcnfes Confcftion.Nor albeit therein be mention of iuftifkation by only fayth ,can it be in¬ ferred , that therefore the Waldcnfes did belteucit * Finally (asI haueofrenfayd and itmuft bealwayes inculcated) I regard not, whomc anyone fayth to haue byn Proteftants, but whom he proucth to haue byn fuch. l^cithcr whome hecan prouc to haue byn Proteftants in part and in fornefort $but whomc hs can prouc to haue byn abfolutcly and wholy Pro¬ teftants,atlcaft for the fubftanceof Prot^ftancy.Nei- will it a&aailc any whjr9tQcomplainc$ that we / " ■" " " " haue L i b . 2.17 2 T& Vficlifills haueburnt the writings of the Waidenfes, by which they might proue that they were true Protcifanrs. Forif they haucnot wherwithallto prouechey were true Protectants, they in yainc do feigne it. Bolides, we asked of Luther & his followers to produce one man, Waldenfian or other, who had byn atrucPro- teftant, before Luthers preaching ^ for which end there was no need of writings, but of iiuing men. Wiclif 6. >In iikefort I proue that Wiciiffe and his was no followers were not true and abfoiutc Proteftanis. true Pro- becaufethc Wiciififtsarc by name condemned fceftsnt. togeather with other heretiks-ofProtdiants in their Apology of the Confeffion of Aufpurg, chap, of the Church in thefc words: Wekaue plainly inoughfayd in dm Cwfeflion, that we dtfalow the Denatish and Wiclifijls, Secondly becaufc neither in V/iclifsbookc, nor of any of his fchoilers, is there any fignc of foic iuliify- ing fayth- neither did euer any Catholikc writer contend with them thereabout. Thirdly ,bccaufcas Melan&hon writethin hiscpiftlcto Myconiusinhis I.torn, printed at Bade pag. 416: wiclif neither vnder- flood) nor held the itfiiceoffaytb. YcaHulTe hisprincipall follower, (as yvclhatl anon rchcarfe) belicucdthat works did iuftify. And Wiclif himfclfc in Thomas "Walden.tom j.tit.i.cap./.bideuery one hope in the proper iuftice of his life, and men totrulf in their merits: which thing alone doth fcparatchim farre inough from the Proteftaotscampe. Fourthly, be- caufe the Wiciififts are reckoned amongft Hcrctiks of many Protcftancs, as of SchuiTeiburg torn. 3. Ca¬ ts!. pag.t^o. of Kemnice in fundamcntis Ccenx pag. 314. of Pancalcon in his Chronicle, and of Matthias Hoe difpur.27. they are termed mcfimonfirout mongers. And D.Cay in his 2. books of the antiquity pf Cam¬ bridge, Were no Troteflants* 17 j Cap. $s bridge, obicð Wicliifcto theOxfordmen, as* ffaine of their vniuerfity. Fiftly wiclif taught di¬ ners things, which Protcftants diflikc. Afldtootnic thcfc things which Cathoiikcs obicd vntohim Rokelana Prince of the Hufficcs , in his difpucc,M ant;£ with Catholiks before the Kingof Bohemia, hath UPlionuma thefe words : Thefe are the articles ofwidtf: That tithes are mare almes: That the Clergy ought to hake no auillgo¬ vernment : if a K ing be in mortail fwne, that he is m more a King: Which laft article Ofiandcr in his 15. Ccmu- rv rcpeatcth thus; There isnotemporall Lord,no Prelate , no Bishop, whiles he u in mortailfinne. And Melan&hora in his forefayd cpiiitc : Wiclif doth plainly, [ophiJiicaQy andfeditioujly wrangle vponciuill dominion. And in his de¬ pute of tnc right of Magiilrats : Wiclif is mad% who, thinfeththe wicked to ham no Dominion. And in his Com¬ mentaries vpon Arilfotles Politiqucs iWiciif would ham thofe, who bane not the holy gbofl > to loofe their Demi* won* So that I meruaiic how D. Andrews in his anfwcrc to the Apology of Bellarmine , couid fay- that it isa fclaunder, that Wiclif taught fo^ when as not only Catholiks, butcucn Huffites and Pro- tciiantsdo affirms it. Moreouer Wiclif (as Ofian¬ dcr reporteth in the place aforecited ) didconderonc la wfuil oathes, and taught, that ail things fell out according to abfolutc neccflity. And Mclan&hon in his fayd cpiftlc giucth this fentence of him; 1 bane lookcdintoVVicliftbut I bane found in him many other errors, by which one may iudge of bis jpirit. He at aU vnderftood not, ^ . lc^e nor held the iufticeoffaytb. He fondly confounded) the ghojpcll £ and politique affaires-, would haue Priejls tobaue nothing 'pro- f0je per. &c. And in h is common 'places chap, of Fccle- fialhcall power: That fuperfiition of Wiclif is perniciom and feditious, whi ch driueth the miniffcrs of the Church to leg- tfi* |£». The gory, and ienyeth that it u lawfull for them to hold any thing proper. M.Scow alfoin his Croniclc anno 1376. wri¬ te^ > that he taught thsLtyNeitherKingnorlaymanc9uld giue Any thing to the church for perpetuity. FinallyW ad ianus in his fifi book of-the Eucharilt ,pag,i68. confefTcth Huffites l^ac ^ many things befoul/ erred. no Prote- 7m Huffc likcwifc and his partners we llants, prouc, not to haucbyn true and abfolutc Protc- iianrs, Firft, becaufc it cannot be proued, that they held theforefayd article of iuftification byon* ly faych, and the other fundamental! points of Pro- tenancy. Secondly, becaufe Huffc is by name rc« ic&cd of Luther, who in the defence of his ^.ar¬ ticle torn. 2. thus writcth of him : tie agreeth not with me. tie gone not alitleto the idol of Rome. He feemeth not to repugneagainft the Popes Monarchy. And vpon the 2. pfal. torn. 3. fol 295 : Huffc did not condcrnncthefacri.. ficc ot Mafle, as wedo. And vpon the 9.chapter of Ifaiastom 4. fol. io8.hefayth ,that Huffc held a do&rineraoft pcftilcnt, moil [pernicious, horrible, and whoiy impious, yea very diuelifh. A rid in his Lypdcali difpace rom.i.fol.;26o:I know, and that very well, that an euill Prelate it not to he reietted ,and therefore J damne the article of tiujfe. And both there an J other Tom.i.foi Where, oftentymes denieth himfelfctobca Bohc- je.*9i. ' mian, by which he meant an Huffitc. And in *9i.i$io histablc-talkes chapter of Sucrmcrsfayth : Huffebe* lieued that amis with f ay th do iuftify *, w h i c b po i n t alone Huffe be-cxeludeth him from the number of Proreftants. lieae not And in the chapter of Antichrift : tivffe departed not fole faith, one iot from the Papitts, but onlyreproued vices and naughty life• Which alfo affirmcth HieromeofPrage, Huffc his fellow, inM. Fox, vpon the 11.chapter of the ApoCfth Whcrctlfo M.Foxhinffeifewritecb,tb3t - Huffc Were no fveteftantt. 177 c af. 5. Huffc agreed with the Papiits touching tranfub- ffantiation, Malic, Vowcs> Prcdcftination. Free will, formed fayth , caufc ot iuftification, and me¬ rits of works: which plainly declare bow litlc he ' held of Protcftancy.Lattly when Bellarminc wrote, that there was not in the world , when Luther be¬ gan,any religion butPaganifmc,ludai(mc,Maho- tnctifmc, Grccifme, Ncltorianifmc, Huflites hcrc- fy > and the Romanc fayth *, D« Whitakcr Cone* 2. queft.y.cap. 3. pag.502. denyefh thcfcto haue byn all- For (fayth he) our Church was then. In which words he profeflcththeProfeftants to be a different church from the Huflites. Iuniusalfo lib. 4. deEcclcf.cap. 6.aeknov\lcdgerh thatlomc Procefiant deny Hufli¬ tes to be of their Church. And Luther vpon the 53.Chapter of Ifaiastom.4.fol.2 2o. thus writerb: There is no religion in the world which receiueth this opinion of iujlifi cation (by only fayth) And we our felues in priuAtedo fcar.t bdieue it, though we publicly defend it. By which words he lhewcth,tbat neither Huflytes,nor Wal- denfes, nor any C hriftians befldes Proteflants, and Icarcethey alfo, do bclicuc the principal! and mofi fundamental! article of Protdhmcy, howfoeust openly they profcfle it. th*t I-!? • 17tf I5 The Church netierimtjible. That the Church cannot hefo imrfible, as Pre* tejt Ant ccnfejje t' eirs t o ha tie byn be- fore Luthers tyme, CHAP. VI, ' ■ . '• ' v - • i ' • \ ■ t x. T5V the name of the Church, wc vndcrltand 13 not (as I fay d before) only the men, but men fociatcd, or the focicty of men, in the fayrh & wor- Ihip of God. Whertore that a church befayd viiible, not only the men,but their worlhip of God rnuft be vifibie-Neithcr by this wordviftble,do 3 vndcrftand here, that only which can bcleene. but whatfotucr is feniible-according both to the vulgar phrafe of fpeach, wherewith we fay : Seehowit (oundetb, as S# Auguftincnoteth , and aifo after the phrafe of fcrip- r^V'/r turc> therein »as the fame holy Doctourobfcruetf: AU (enfible things are called vifible. And Proteftants, fas is before fhcwed)do confcfle that before Luthers riling Zih% de ^eirChurch was limply inuifibSc ,and vnLcnc of mor Ma- anyyeither of thofc within or without her. And nc- mcb.Ctxo, ccfTarily they mult fay fo, hccaufe they can name none at all, who before Luther arofe> did fee a com¬ pany of men, who profeffed to bclieuc iuftificatioa by only fay tb, and the reft of the fundamental! prin- — ciples ofProtcftancy: yea they affirmed, that it was 4***n*lu{0 inuilible, as it implyed contradiction tohauc byn icencof any. % That the 2# ^at Church Militantorliuing Church 00 earth cannot hfilo inuilible,I prouc- firft, becaufc cannot be it is againft an article of fayth of diuers Protclhnts. imiifible* And if perhaps any hereupon imagine, that cither prcce* The Church neuer inutfthle. 177 C a p. 6. Proteftants ncuer graunted the contrary ,or that if they did graunt ir» their tcltimouics againft therofcU wes arc not to be accepted ^lethim read what here¬ after I write couching that matter, in the Iaft chap¬ ter of this booke. Wherefore in the Confeffion of Saxony cap. 15. they profeffein thhfoit tGodwillbaug the Mim fiery of the gkofpell to bepubiike , he will not bauetbe Voice of tbegbcfpgll 10 be shut vp only in comers -3 but willhaue it beard of all mankind. Therefore he will bauepublike and femely meetings and in them he willhaue the voice of the ghofpell to found. He will alfohaue thefe fame meetings tobewitnefjesof the Confefjion and fcparationoj the Church from the fecit and opinions of other Nations. God will haue bis Church to be feene and hear d in the world, and will haue bet deuided by manypu- blik, marks from other people. And the fame they repeajt in the Content of Polony'cap.de Ccena. And the fame Confi flion of Saxony cap. of the Church : We fpeake not oftheChurch. as of a PUtonicallidaa %butwe shew a Church, which may be (eeneand heard. The eternatl Father w-i'd haue his Sonne to be beard in all mankind. Wherefore we fayjhat the Church is in this life a vifible company ^rr.Sccod- ly it is again ft their ownc dcrinitionsof a militant pmtefHta Church. For the ferefayd Confcffion of Saxony de-definitoa fiaeth the Chutch in this life to be a vifible compa- of the ny.TheMagdeburgiansintheir i.CcnturyIib.i.c.4.^burchi col. 170.de> thus write: The Church may be thus defined: The Church in this life, is a company of thofie, who imbrace the The [mere dottrine of the Giroffiell, and rightly vfe the Sacraments.G ynr^ And the very fame definition giueth Meian&honthiS 1 e* 1001.4.1*0 cap.31. ad Tionpag. 398.Hutterusin his Anaiyfisoftheconfeflion of Aufpurgpag.444.faith: This Churchyvhicb isfayd to be^andto bebelieued, is not a Pla* * ^rcjl tonic all idea , but the vifible company of thofe , that are called. ^kh we ^anchius alfoin his crcatife of thcChuich cap. 2: ueiiew M The" lib. 2.178 The Church neuc*tmifibie. The militant Church u thecompauy of the elect, and truly fayth* Church ftili, profiling the (ante fajttb, partaking the fame Sacraments, militant. &c.Hereof properly (peake the faiptures, when they call the Church the jpoufe of Chrift >11% body of Chrift, redeemed wtth the blond of Chrift y founded vpona rock> Gerlachius torn. 2- D i fput.2 z : Defining the Church, as it is on earth, we fay that Church ^ congregation ofmen, who called by the voice of the G k/- ©a earth, t&,be*re the wordofGod^andvfe the Sacraments wfiitutedof .Chrift, 3. Thirdly it is againft the properties and markes of the true Church aligned by the Protc- ftants themfclues, to be altogcather inuifible. For thus their Confcflion of Aufpurg cap.7: The Church of T^e Chnjl properly (0 cdilcd, bath her marks, to wit, pure doctrine, Church &c% 1 ^onfc^Ionc^Saxony cap;i2: The true church is difcernedfrom other nations, by the voice of true doctrine: and lawful! vfe of Sacraments. The French Confcfsion avt. The true 2 ^ . yyg fr€fyue tjjat tjK truc church ought to be difcernedwitb aur c * grgat care Wherefore we affi?meout of the word of God, that the Church is the company of the fay thfully who agree in ] olio ic¬ ing the word of God, and imbracingtrue religion: wherein alfo they daily profit* growing and confirming tbemfelues mutually in the ]e are of God. TheConfeisionof theLow Coun¬ tries art. 2 if they be taken away. And D Feild in hisi.book oftbechurcU iriff cap.11 ; We fayt that that (ociety wherein that outward pro- Mi* feSm tfthe ttufb of God is pi efef ued ,u that true church of GoJ9 K|n(t &c. Finally to omit the words of others, the fame J(}j|j teach Wigand in his method of do&tmc cap. 19* ^ Gefner in his 24. place of the Church , The Magde- Mifr burgians in the Preface of their 6.Cetury, HefhuFus in cap* 1.1. ad Cor.Sotcrius in his method, title of ^ thcjchurch ,Pclargus in his Compend. of diuinity loc.j.Sohnius in hisThefisofthcChurch,Bullin- gcr in his Catechifme fol.44. Aretius in his places part.foh 50. Thefcs of Geneua difput. 74, Thus5nmmeo^ ^ . thoufceft (good reader} that according to the mani prote(F foldiudgetnentof Protcftams, apartofthedefini- former 1 .1 tion ,ofthecffcnccathcmarkoofthcChurchinthisCbfeffibs. ' ' Mi life. Lib. 2. i 8 o The Church neuer imifibli. life, of the Church miiitanr, of the Church which is bclieucd, of the proper Church, of the Church whereof the Scripture properly fpeakcth, when it callerh her the fpoufe of Ghrili, the body of Cbrift. of the true Church , of the Church properly fo ter¬ med , and finailyof the Catholike Church that (I fay, it is of the definition and eiTcncc,a markc of this church, to be a vifiblc company profiling the faith, partaking the Sacraments , mutually confirming thcrnfeluc$,and thatothcrwifc it isr asthey fay ]but a carcafifcofthe Church. Wherefore it implieth ma¬ il if e It contradiction, that there fhould at any tyme hauc by n a true Church, and not a vifibiccompany; bccaufc nothing can be without all its effentiall parts. The Proteftant Church therefore, which fas we head) was before Luthcrs tymealtogeathcr in- uifibie,was no true and proper Church , but (to vfe their tcrmes) a Piatonicall idara , or a carkalTc of a Church. If any reply, that when Protcfiants affirms theforefayd definitions, properties, and marks of the true Church* they mcanc notby thenameof the true Church that which is (imply andabfolutely the true Church , but that which is che true vifiblc Church-1 aske, why then do they limply call it the true Church, if they do not fomeane? why arc not their wordscontormablc to their meaning? Bcfidcs, the Church whtrofthcygiucthcfprefayddcfinitios and marks, they cali not only the true Church, but alfo the Church properly fo termed , the fpoufe and bodyof Chrift,tbeCathoiikcchurch,andfuch like, which cannot agree to any, which is but a Church in appearance only, and in the fight of men, but on¬ ly to that which is the Church in very deed, and in the fight of Cod. Further more ,accordingrothe opinion The Church neturtmifible. iEi C a?. 6, opinion otProtcftanrs tkcfc two ttrmes True and Vi~ fible , in the nature ot the Church do one deliroy the other* as thefetwo > True and Painted ,cxciudc each other m the nature of a man. Fot tiicy imagine that the true Chuvch is a fociety in fomcthing that isisi- uiiiblc, to wit in iuihfication and predeftinarion , Wherupon they deny any iii or reprobate Chnffians to be of the true Church . Wherefore, ashefhouid fpeake fondly , whofr.culd lay A true painted man *(os according to their ovvnc opinion, they fpeakc as fondly, when they fay The true vi fible Church.But as we can only fay, the true pidure of a man, attributing the word True, to the picture, not to the man;(o they fiiouid only, The true appear awe or shew of the Churchy g - uiogcheword rrw.cothethew , nottothe Church itlclfe. But they are aChamed to fpeak fo3leaf| when they inquire the marks of the true vifibjc Church, it Why fhouid appcarc, that they fecke not the marks of the Protefiats true Church indeed, but only of the fbcw , {hadow, iomtyme or lhapc of the Church . And vcc in very truth tb fecke but the marks of the thadow of the church. For the inuifibie Church ,cdnfiftingoniy of the iuftand (^urc^ cled, which alone they will baue to be the truethetrue Church* hath no ccrtaine mark*; elfe we ihould Church, know certainly who werethe iuhandcied. And this themfciucs confeffe* for thus wrireth D.Win- takcr Cone. 2. qucfr. 5. cap, 8 : The queficion is not of the Protects mark* of the inuifibie Church . Againe : We jajthe marksof giue.no theCatholike Churchfiimplyfio called, are knowne to God alone, marks of And D.Humfreyto ^rcafon of F.Carnpian pa. 281. fayth that the marks do not reach vnto the nature 0}the true *ve Church. And the reafon is manifefi, brcaufe(as I nurc* * fayd) otherwife wc Ihould know who were the iuft and ckdt. M % 4. If call the J yifible vifibie The Church neuerinuifible. 18 $ C a r. & Church, nor b^cauic this Church or fociety is oi it fclf the true church or the focicty inltituted by Cod, butbecaufcalvvaycA in,orvndcrit there is the true Church , to wir the focicty in iufticc and predejH- nation^ by rcafon that in cuery company of them that profcfictrue do&rine and rightly vfe the Sacra- ments, there are fome, who are fociatedand vnitcd in iuiticc and predeftination. Which D. Whitakcr intirouteth,vihcnConc.2.qucft.4. cap.1pag.485. he fay eh: The vifible Church, which holdetb and prof tffeth true fayth , U the true Church only of the part ofthe elett and piedt - fimated:\ anfwcre,that this fuppofctb a thing doubt- full, and perhaps falfe. For whatccrtainty can there be, thatineucty particulercompany ofthem who profefle the truefay th & rightly vfe the Sacraments, there is alwayesa copany oftheiuftandeled*, when as Chrilt fayth ; Man} are called but few arechofen, cfpc- cially, if (as Protcftants fay} one or two make a church. SurelyDanxus Cont.4.pag. 68?, fccmerh to deny this,faying: rhefe v:fible companies arefometymcsa part of that (true,) C hurebjometymesnone. But admjt that in euery company of true profeflbrs there be always a company of iuft and eletft, what rcafon were this, to tcrmcthefociety inprofeffion of true fayth , the true Church, if in deed thcfocicty in iuft ice 3c prc- deftination be the only true Church. This would fufficeto fay, that the apparent £hurch could ncutc be feparated from the true Church, but nottocall that focicty the true Church, which indeed is only the out ward appearance of the true Church. And much IcfTc would it fuffice,fto call it the church pro¬ perly fo termed, the fpoufc and body of Chrift, the CathoJikcChurch, the Church which we profcfic |o bcliqw 5 as thcProtefiants haue termed the vifible M 4 Church. L t b. % | i g4, The Church never inuif&le. Church.Neither Can tbde epithets or namcsbegi- ncn to any other focicty, then to that which bath the true nature and fuhltancc of the Church indeed; bccaufc they fignify as properly and exprcfly that only Church ;as fbecao he ixprc&edot vs by any Words whatfocuer . And iith Protcflanrshaueginen them all to the vifiblechurchy they mull needscon- feflcthat ibce hath the nature and fubhance of the very true Church indeed; and conftcjuentiythatan inuifible Church is no true Church indeed. 6* Fourthly I proue that the Church cannot Fro ats bcinuihblc > bccaureoftentymesProteltantsciocon- fay^haT5 The Apology of the Confr ffion of Ausburg thechurch chap.of the Church; The Church is principally the {ocieiy cannot be offajthandof the holy Ghojiitt the hearts, which jet hatb hex inuifible, outward mar kesjhat she may be hnowne. Luther vpon the 4.chap. ofGenefis torn.6 fol. : The Churchn asneuer jo voyd of external) marks, that it could not be not kpowne where God was certainly to be jourj. And vpon yi.pfalm.tom.;. foi. 474 : For Chrifi will not lye hid in the world, but will be preached^ not between wals, but vpon tbehoufe top,Mclan- ^thon vpon the n.ofD^nicl tom.2.pag 511: Itune- ceffary, that the Church be a viable company, Againc; We (eignenot an inuifible church, like to a PUtonuad idea. And in the Preface of his 3.tome, herhinkethitfoabfurd to put an iruiflble Church ,as he faytb ; Towhatten- Not?- det)i that perdigious(peach; which denyeth that there is anyvifiu ftruous to Me Church. We aiuft needs confcffe a vifibie Church, fay the And vpon the g.chap.i'Tim. tom.4.pag. 398 tOtbert Church (Qy th he) Jettingafide wholy the extemail sl ew, do freak? of was inui- an towifibig church> as of a Platonic all idaa, which is nowhere feene or heard. Kemnice in his common places title of the Church cap. 3 : God will haue vs to know, where and which is the C burcb, I here fore she mtifl be knowne, not to God T,he Church neuer imiifihle. 185 cap. 6* ml}, but alfo to vs ^ and thief upon is defined to be the vifible com¬ pany of them , wtoo embrace the Gmfipell ofchrtft, and rightly vfe the Sacraments-. lames Andrews in his book againlt H ofius pag.i 10 :VVe are not ignorant 5 that the church mufl be a vtfible company of teachers and hearers. A game: The church is , and ts called a company of men, chojen of God, in which the wordof Godfoundeth incorrupti&c.Hunvtivt$ in his rrcatifc of Freewill pag. 91: God in all tymeshath placed his Church as in a high place, and hath exalted it in the fight of all people and Nations. Huticrmhis Analybs of the Confclllon of Aulpurg, pag.420 : Tbeehft xnnot the whole C kmc b, no if you fit eaht only of the true church • For the church confifleth not only of inward fay thin Chrifi, but al[o of the outward admimfitration of the wore & Sacraments. Now as fane as this in outward rite is performed*, fo farte the true Church truly is vifible. Bcurlm 111 the Preface o^fois Re¬ futation ot Setus :l confrjfr the C hurch of Chrifi is alwayes to be acknowledged v frible. And he addttb, that all con- kfTc the fame. The fame doctrine is faughf byGcf- nerloc 24. by Adam Francis in his 11". place, and by other Lutherans. Amongft the Sacramentarks thus Writcth Vrfin in Prclegomcnis ad Cafechcfin pag.2: t he Church mufl needs befeene in this world, that the eleft may know vnto what company they tnuft adioyne thcmftlues in this ///*.funiusCont.4.1ib. 3.cap. 13. affirmcthjthat it is impiousto fay that the Church can whoiy want a vifibleforme.Keckerman in the g.bookof his Theo- logicall fyiieme writcth, that the Church mufl always be fenjible, that other nations may know to what church they ought to adioyne themfelues; and that Confeflion of fin- cere dodrine can neuerfaile whoiy, nor the vifibic C lurch w holyerre .Dan^us in hisbookeof the vifi¬ ble Church dareth tofay,that who denieth the true church of God ,and that vifible, to bane byn from the beginning of the M 9 world, Lib. 2* 1S6 The Church neucrimifihle world, he without doubt shewed) btmfelfe to be ignorant in holy ftnptu/e. Amongiloiir EogiithProtclianuM.Hooktr in his j.bookc ofEcclt fiaiticeiipolic) pag. 126 :God batlfhadeuer-Cjy tuersballluue/ome Church vifible vpon earth. D. Fcild in his %. bookc ot the Church cap. 10: For feing the Church is the multitude oft em that shall befaued, and no man can befaued vnleffehe make Con ejjion vniojaluation {for fayth hid in ihe heart and concealed doth not fufjice) it can¬ not bey but they that are of the true Churchy tnitjt by profejfion of the truth makeihemftluesknowneftrifuel) fort that by their pro¬ fejfion and prattife thejmay be difcernedfrom other men. And D. White in defence of his Way cap^pag.^yo.-I ac¬ knowledge the providence of God, who hath left therccordsof biliory to conftime ourfaytb\ and jreelygraunt our religion to be falfej if the c out inuallde[cent thereof from Cbnft cannot by {ucb record besbewed. Moreouer at fomctyms they not only Coatcffe that the Church isalwaycsvifiblcjbutalio graunt that the fcripturcceacheth the fame intholc parables of the barnc and the net. For out of them Protects Caluin4.Inditut.cap. 1. $ 1;. inferrcth that the Lord confefle prenounceth} that the church shall be vexed with this euill till the that the ^ ie burdened with the mixture of the wicked. affirmeth fame opinion isD. Whitaker Coot. 2 qucfr. that the 3«cap.2.pag.47i. and others. But that church which Church is contayneth the wicked, is the vifible Church, for alwayes thcinuifiblc they will hauc to hold only the good, vifible. The Scripture therefore tcftifieth that the vifible Church (hall cucr be. Yea Protelfantsnow and then take it fo ill, that it fhould be fayd, that they teach that the vifible C hurch periihed for many ages,that D.Sufliue in his anfwcrc to Exceptions cap.7. fay th that Beilarminclycth in faying fo.And D.Whiraker loc cit.pag 472.fayth,w tpunder them > when we affime fbey put fitch a Churchy at atfotpetymes cm be (tent of none. The Church neuer inuifihk. 18 7 C a P. & And faytb, that in this matter there is no controucr- fy about the thing, bur about the manner, to wit.no qucltion whither the Church be al-wttycs vifible or no,but in what manner it is vifible^ becaufc forfooth we will hauc the Church ro be at ail tymes vifible ckarly, and of ail men ^ and they will hauc it to be atfomctymes vifible but oblcurely, and of few. The like fayth Kemnicc in his Common places title of the Church cap.Rcincccius in the 4. tome of his Armourcap.8.and D. Morton inthci. part of his A- pology lib. r. cap. 13, But yet that in this matter we neitherbeiy norfclaunder chem,ismanifeltby what we hauerehcarfcdin the 4. chapter before going in the 5. number, and thole that follow. To which I add 1 that Caluin in the Preface of his inftirurions fettcch the ftate of this quellion betwixt vs & Pro- tcftants in thefe words; Vfon this binge hangethour con- irouerfy, that they (Pap ids) will hauctht. forme of the church so appeare and be vifible at all tymes : On the contrary we fay, that the church may confijl of no apparent forme. And 1 would to God, that Proreflants would conftantly agree, which vs in this matter ofdodrinc, that the church of God isalwaycs vifible to fomc, either ofthofc that arcinit, or out of it* that the debate might rcmaine only about the matter of fad, whither the Proteftat VVhy^ Church before Luther appeared, were fecnc of any Proteflats either Protcftant or other. But Proteftants ftanding contradift betwixt truth and lyes,whiles they confider thena- thefelues tureof the Chnrcb of God, efpecially as it is deferi- ?™ bedinferipture, confefle that itmuftneeds bevifi- ly^^he* hie,not only to her children but to othersalfo. Put chureh. when they look back vpontheftate and condition ofthcirowne church before Luther began,are com¬ pelled to deny the fame, 3s before we mpft cuiden tly {hewed; Li b• 2* 18 8 The church nuer tnuifiWe. tbcwcd : which thing alone, it it were well corfi- dercd, would difcoucr fufficientJy>thar in their own Confciwnces they acknowledge their Church not to be the true Church otGod. _ .r.... 7, Fiftiy.f proucthatthcChurchcannctbe Inumbili - .r', 1 c • , , tveotrarv lnu,hblc, becaule tnai were contrary to tneends tor to the^ Which the Church was in {lieu ted or God: whereof ends of one was, thatrnen fbouid worthip him after thaten- the tier manner of woifhipwhich man isto giuc, which Church, is to honour God not only w ith heart and mind,but alio with tongue and deed,asit iseuident -and Cai- uin in his Confutation of a Hollander, many wayes proucth that the Church mull: render to God, not only inward but alfooutward woribip. But an in- uiiibJc Church worlhippcth God only innearrand mind, as Whitakers words arc. Another end of the Church is to feed her children with the w ord and Sacraments, tocorrcd: and gouemctbcmby di(cs- pline, and to defend them from enemies-as alfo is nianifeft and fcripture teachcth. Which offices, a Church, which neither feeth her children, nor is fcenc ofchem, cannot performs. Likewifeanother end is to conuert the world , and tbofc who arcout of her, to the fayth and worffiip of God» which fhecan no way do, if neither her do&rine nor ex¬ ample be fcenc of them. And yet as Luther fayth vponthe fixechapterof Ifaias torn. 4.fol. 234: The Cburcb is in perpetual! prattife of comerting others to the faJtb- Itmifibilfc* SiK^Iy» it is againft the nature ofafocicty ty againftofmenamongftthemfciucsjfor to be inuifible. For thenature 3S men confift ofa body which is vifibie bytheco- of human |0tirs> andofafoule which is fcenc by thcadfions focieties, tplCrcof. f0 jc ]s neceffary that the fociety in which they The Church neuer inuiftbk. \ 8p c a p , 6, they ioyne, be vilible , either by u tcife > or by fome other thing. Whereupon well faydS.Auguilio: Men Luxi.iot* cannot toyne in any religion true oy falfe^vnlejfe the) be bound to- ge at herb) [owe fellowship ofvifible fignes or Sacraments. And trieiamc{coiifdIechGcrlachiU6 in his23.d1ipuf.0Uhc Church Fag.995.haying: We willingly con{ejfe &gramt9 that the church cannot be> except there bejome outward and vt~ fible fignescommon communion andpayticipationwhereoffo- ciety amongjl men mayconjift. And kauencty it is contra¬ ry to the example of aii other focieties amongft men whither religious or prophanc, whereof none con- fiUcth in a thing which is altogcathcr inuiflblc>ai:d whereby the members of that fociety cannot be knownc the one to the other. 9. Scauentbly,ir is contrary to thcconti- Agaiuft nuance and conferuation of the Church on earth to theperpe- be vifible, For if the Church which was in rhefor^ tuity of rncr agehad not byn tecncof that which is in thiVbe age,how could the Church of this agehaucrcceiucd cbureh, the fayth f Wc asketherefore,how the Pcotcflant Churchot our age learned the fayth of the Church ©fan other age, if in the ages before Luther the were fo inuifiolc as youhaue heard them confcfTeiPro-, tcftants feared with this qucftionlikc men with a thunder clap, leapc a funder, and cucry one anfwca-* reth , not what heknowcth or can proue, but what fecmeth to him kaft abfurd , that hereby wc may pereciue^hatall their talke of their Churches being before Luthcrs ty mc, is but as the fcriprure fayth,fa¬ bles and vainc fpeaches, orfancics and fidions of men, fpcaking without either tcftimony or rcafon. Somcof them fay, that before Luther their Church receiued the fayth immediatly from God alone. d«- ring Popery ( fayth Boyffcul in his Confutation of Sponde Lib. 2 i tpo The Church neuerfouiftble. protectant S P°n<^ Pa8*75) *bt holy Gboft taught faytb without a pre* CharclL C^et'^*arnt a^° intimate IuniusCont.4.1ib.j.ca. taught !?• M. Perkins in bis expoiition of the Creed Col. tniracu- 788. The Author of the church in Danseus Opufcles Joufly. pag.io2?.D.Fulkof Succeffion pag^ 20. and others, who lay, that the C hurch VVm propagated and receked faytb by extraordinary meaneu And they aifo, who write, that their Church was prcferued miraculoujly ,mruek loufly, by wondrous meanei3or by me ere miracle; as Luther of priuatc Mairctom*7.!oi 24o.Caluin4. Inftit.cap. 1. 2. Sadccl ad Rcpetit. Sophifm. Turriani pag. 765 DanxusofAntichriftpag. 1021.& Sonisagainlf Spond^cap. 2. pag, 36 . But this their alfcrtion they neither do, nor can proue othcrwile, thenbccaufe Cod can in fuch manner prefcruc tbcchurch. 10. Thou feeh (gentle reader) vpon what a Vainefoundation this imaginary church is built, for thefpaceofmanyages, in whichir lay inuifiblcand lurckingin holes & corners. For they confciTc, that for many ages it was not feenc of any man; and if at any tymc they confciTc not fo much in words, in deeds they confe/Te it al wayes ; bccaufe they can ne- ucr name any, whom they can proue to haue feenc it informer ages;and ncucrthelcs they will,that foral thofcagcs it learnt their fay th miraculoufly andim- mcdiatlyfrom God alone. When wcaskc teflimony hereof, they produce neither diuine nor humane Worthy ofcredit;whcn wedemannd proofc, they v -v giuevs no other then this, thatGod could fo teach Jntibel. • A* if God did,or doth'all that he can do. Wc fpcakc of an effed, or a matter of fad, of Gods Fulked* will; and they anfwerc of his power. Whenweaf- SucceJ.pa* firrac any thing,they cxad demonftrations, that it, 74® pUinc tcftimonies of Scripture, or at Icaft pregnant proofes The Church neuerinuifibU. i$i Cap, & proofes deduced thence. And when they affircnca matter of fo great weight and fo incrcdible^as is that the church was fo many ages taught her faith ofGod alone, they w ijl banc vs to bciicue if, not only with¬ out any teftimony of God or man, but euen contrary to the tcilimony of them bcth,fcrone filly fophifme, ridiculous to the very children, and/coined euen of theenfeiues in other matters, as (hall by and by ap~ pesre. Surely that 1 may vfe Saint Auguhins Words: Tbey feeme to tbink§> that they have vot to do with men, but as c if the f were metre be*fts, who heare the or read their writing tley abujt the ignorance or dulnejfe of the m, or rather their blind• nesojmind Or as Caluin ia h: Thefemaftersneedhauea J bear d of Oxen , if they would haue auditors to whome they may on("c°1** perfwade. what they will. But to their Argument 1 fay with Tet tullian againf* Praxeascap. ro: Surely nothing is hard to God. But ij in our prefumptms we will fo rashly vfe ibts [entente t we may j eigne any thing of God j as if he bad done, it becaufe he could do it. But we muft not btlieue he hath done that, which he hath not, becaufe he can do all things: but we muft feeke whether he hath dene it or no. Lu t her a 1 fo vpo n t h t 46.cap.of Genefistom.6 fol.di4»faitb:Godcangouerne the church by the holy Ghoft, without the Mimftcry^but he will not do this mm dtatly. And vpon the $z .chap.fol. 4545 Be could by the holy Ghoft inwardly enlighten the hearts and ]or~ giuefwnes without the Minifteryoftbe word and Minifters; but he would not. And rhe Confeflion of Suirzerscap. 18: God by his power can immediatlygather a church of men, but he choferatber to deale withmen by the miniftery of men. Caiuin vpon ;.chap. 1. Cor. v. 6: Nothing bindereth God that he may not infpire fayth into men afleep; but be hath otherwife de- termined) to wit that, that fayth should come by hearing. A nd vpon i.chap.nf S.Lukc v. 37: Theyraueperuerfely who imagine ofGodsfown without his word. It h a dangerous difpute what Lib* 2* tgz The Churchneuerinuifille* what God can do, vnleffe withall we find what be will do. And 4 lnU1tut.cap.17 24.be faytn : We Hike not here what God could, but what he would do. The like words he hatii cap. 1.$.5.116.2.cap 7. pag 5-andde veraEeclcl.Rc- lorm.pag.526.Bcza in the2. partof hisanfNvereto the Adtsof the Conference atMontbelgardpag. 97; An argument taken from the power of God needeth no anj werei, Vnlefjt htswid aljoappeare to vs by his word. The Author of the orthodoxall confent in the Preface : It is ridP culoustovrge the omnipotence of God, where we know not hie fleafure, Sadecl ot Sacramental! manducation pag. 272.fetterh downcchisasa Thcoiogicaii principle: We maynotin diuinity argue pom the omnipotent) of God, vn- leffe Ins will be before declared by bts exprep word, Let Pro- teUants thcrforc produce Codsexprcfle word,wher- in he fayth,that he hath, or will for many ages mi- raculouflyby himfclfe alone teach the Church her fayth.Danjens alfo in his 4.bookedeamilT.grat.cap. 35 : It lule amileth toprvue Gods power, vnlep las willaljobe froued.And D. Whitakcr conU2.qudt.6. cap.i p.617: What a kind of argument is this? This maybe done, becanfe no¬ thing is impoffible to God, therefore it is done,or (ometymshatb lynl Doth,our fayth rely vponfuchfoundatiom'i Finally Ca- faubon in his7.Excrcifatio»againilBaronius: It is a faying of the Fathers that Gods power is the refuge of Htretikes, Thnsthou fecit how vaine,euen by the Protchants Judgement, is this proofc of the Churches learning immediatly from God. They are wont to fcoffe at the Miracles done by Saints, albeit we proue them by fufficicnttcftirnooy of man: &tbcrofelue$fcigne a continual! miracle, yea foroany miracles, as fhey fcigoe men, whomc they fay for many ages learnt their fayth immediatly of God 5 which they can prouc by no fufficient teftimony, either of God or man* The Church neuerinuifil le> 193 C ap. 6% man. Yea wc wiiimoftma*ittuiy hcrafterdifprouc ir.Herel will only netc,thactriofeProteflanc5fccrnc Co haue byn TomeEnthufiaib or beatseniy Prophets, is Luther Icoffingly termed fomc, who in his cyme challenged luch immediat learning from God ^ and Chat the Proreilaius themfdues do (ometymcscon¬ demn c this 'immediar learning from > as Faraa- ticall, Anabaptiltical!, Sucnckfeldwn ,and Enthu- fiahicall. 11. The Confeffion of Aufpurgnt.?.(as Protects Fabririus relateth out of the originail copy)fay?h reie&iiai* thus : They condcmne the Anabaptifts and others, who thinly mediat that the holy Ghoji cometh to men without the outward word, tabbing Martin Luther vpon Gcncfisrom. 6.fol. nj ; The °f God. holy gbofi doth not teach new nueUmns befides the minifte- ry ojtbe word , according at tlx Enthufiafis and Anabaptifis true FanaticaU Dochurs do dreatne. And in the 8. art. of S ma lea id : In this we moft constantly ftand, that God will not otherwise dealt with n then by the vocallwordand Sacraments. SchufTelburg alio in the 10. com. of his Catalogue pag.^o.rchcarfeth it is an errourof Suenckfeld,that men maybe faucd without the outward word of Godand Ministry.AndMclandfchon in hisanfwerc to the Bauarian Articles torn, 3.101.372. affirmetb, that it is the opinion of Suenckfeld and the Anabap* tills: That Godcommunicatethhimfelftemen without the mi" nifleryoftbeword.Kctnniccin the 2-partofhisexamen title of the Sacrament of Orders pag. 391 Uufllywe difallow of Enthufiafis and Anabaptifis. who imagin the exercife of the outward minislerynot tobe needfull. And ritieol Pen- nance pag. 3 id: The Enthufiafis are condemned, who feigne that God forgiuethfinttes immediatlyt and without the vfeof the tniniftery.D. WhitakcrCont 2.^11^.3 c. 11.pag.328s VVewbolyreicftreueUtmStWhich arebefides the word, as Fa- N MAtha&9 1,ib. 2.194 The Church neuer inttifible• statical!, Anahapttfttcali and altogether hereticall. And in his i.bookc of the Senprure cap.;, feci, 1. pag. 44 expe# «o woreimmediat reuelation. It is (0. And he ad- derh,ihat Protefiants hilTe out aiithofe who pretend thelekindof rcuelations. And in the 2. book cap. 10. fcd-,4: Why are the Anabaptifls heldfor Heretiksfif the church do know matters offayth without all external! meanes by the on¬ ly inftincl of the holy Glwft f Parcus in his 3 booke de lu~ ' ftificat.cap.j : The exception which theymake offpeciaUreue- Ution^ts a meere it ft. For befidestbe Prophets, Apoftla> & fome few Apoftolicatt men, God doth not dealt, nor hath dealt with fpeciallreuelatioiu'ybut with ordinary, and wilibaue the Church to be content with the word and the holy Gboft worki ng in the hearts of thefaythfull. And cap.tii.Godwill not haue his chnnh to be taught and confirmed by Entbufiafticall reuelations • but by hearing of his word and ordinary vfe of the Sacraments. Final¬ ly Beza in the Conference of Monthelgard pag.407. fay th: That we haue no tcftimony in fcriptme of extraordinary meanesof infufwg fayth. Bcfidcs, it was the tafhion of both old and new hcrctiks t© boaft of fpeciall rrue- lacions.Of old hcretiks witnefTcth S.Augulhn in his bookc of herefics 5 and Cafuin in his boekc of true Reformationpag.322.Of Muofter, CaroJ/lade,and the Sacramentarics Luther teftifieth ffee fame rpon thc22.ofEfai# tom4.fol.280. OfGrntiIis,Caluin in his bookeagainft him. Of Scorcke,Maniius in his Commonplaces pag. 48; . Of Pcucer and Bergius, SchulTelburb.lib. 4. Theol. Caluin art. i.pag*i72. „ thatlmay fay nothing of Luther, Zuinglius, and Caluin. t'rausht l2'°tflers th«refow t«ch that theProteftant b° ordi- charch before Luther, tec«iut7 : Or (as Brentius fpeaketh in his Apology of the ConteL iion ofWittenberg pag. jo-fjtbey differ m the veryprinci- fie s: or (as Beza writcth in bis Conteflioncap^.pag. 56) In the very fummeof [aluation. And asD.Whiuker ev & Po* a®rmcch in hisoration that the Pope is Annchnit, perv quit # mre repugnant to Proteftantifme, then boat to cold, oppofite. blackjo white. How then is itpoflibiethat chcy (houid haacicarnt Proteftancy of Papifts, who teach loco- trary do&rinc.Laftly bccaufe Proteflants cbemfdues deny it. For Luther vpon the Gradual! pialnics torn, g.fol. 516. thus writcth ; In Popery there was neuer beard one pure word offinne, ofgrace> of the merit ofthrift .And to). 568: Vnder the Pope ail pulpits, all Churches did found out no- thingbut wicked doctrine. And in cap.2.ad Galar. torn 5. foi.297: Seeing Papifts know not what fayth is tit is impoffble that tfiey should hatte fayth, and much Up teach it to others. And the Apology of the Conftflionof Aufpurg in the Preface: No man taught, that firms were remitted by fayth in Chrift. C a I u i n 4. In ft i t. ca p. 2. $. 2. fa y t h, t h a t i u Popery the doctrine without which Chrijlianity cannotft and, was all bury ed & cafl out. And iaRefppnf.ad Vciflpelktn ThcClurchneuerinuifiblc. i I prone that the Church could Nothing not be inuifibie, bccaule there is nothing which can cf n ma^e make that the Church prefeflcnot her fay th. For if ^j-ch any thing, moil of all perlccution . But as the wa- inUifi^le» tcrs did lift vp the Arck of Noe, which was a figure of the churchy fo do pcrfccutions raife vp the church, and make her more knowne. And as the hcauenin day cyme ail Ihincth , but at might glitrcrcth in the Itarrcs, fothe church in tymcof peace flouriJheth in all her members, but in tyme of pcrfccutien is molt glorious in her conftant loidicrs. And there arc many and molt excellent teftimoniesof the holy Fathers, how that the Church is by perfecution made more pure, more famous, and more pkntifull ,vt hich one may read in SS.Iuftin,Irenaeus, Tertuilian, Grego¬ ry Nazianzen , Hilary , Ambrolc, Hierome , Augu- ftin, Leo, Theodorcre, Gregory the great, & others, I according to my purpole will alleagconly thetc- ftimoniesof Protcliants. Luther vpon the 1. pfi.lmc torn. 3. fol. 125:1 hefaythfull, whiles they are kilieddo en - trcafe, while they are diminished do multiply. And vpon the $.ot Kaias torn. 4. fol. 84: The Church umadefruithfuU with the bloud of the Godly, and increafetb. C a I u i n a ga i n It Scruet. pag.5 95: The true and proper church rifng vttckr per~ femmtflouri$bed vnder the Came. The like he iuih \ pon N 1 the JL jb^s. tpi The Church neticr wuifible* ' tbc 2.Tim.cap.2.and Philip 1. Lubbcit iib^.dcEc*. del. cap. i: The true Chunk grew vnder fufff ringperfecuti- cns. And (He Apology ot tne tnghlh Church in the end: This flame the wore ii is kept downe, jo much the more with greater force and strength doth it brea he out andfly abroad, XX Fulkeof Succcfiion pag. zjj : I acknowledge that the Church u(o fane from being extinguished bythcperfccHtionof the materiallfword, that Igraunt itgiuetb her occafion to delate and extend her bounds. For fo7 asTertuUidn faythwcll ythe blond of Martyr sis the feed of the ChurchThis all that are not jlar ck^ blind do fee to haue happened to our Church. For how much the time Anticbrijl ragett with fire and (word}fo much the more fa¬ mous she became. And D.Whitakcr Cont.2 qucft.5,cap, 4. pag. 501 : Fcrfecutions deflroy not the Kingdmeof Chrifl? but make it more jamom. And Conr 4,queit,5.cap.2.pag. 669: When tyrants raoed again ft the church, religion fu fired m loffe^yea then mojl of allflourished How then could the Protellant church, if it were the true church ofGod, become inuifibie before Luther arofc, by pcrtecu- cion? iy, Jfany reply, that this istrue of violent petfccunonof the heathens, but not of perfections jby fraud Sc deceit,as is-the perfection of Antichrift, which made the ProtcfUnt Church in former (txm$ Co become inuifibie ; I anfwerethat firft hefpeaketh Voluntary without ail proofc. Againe,that theEn- glifh Apology and D. Fulkcfpea ke namely of Anti- chrifb perfection, meaningtbc Pope, which they fay ha:b flnceLmberstyrne made their church more famous. How then could it before his tyme make ie inuifibie ? Moreotier, thcfcriptureand holy Fathers teach, that Ancichrift (hall rage mod cruelly again ft the Church: and Proteftantsaffirme that the Pope, whgipstl)$y will haiictobcAndchrift/hatb byn fo cruell The Church neuer inutfihle. i o \ C a p. 6. heard of in the world ^ how much more ought they 10 think the fame of the C hurch of God? 17. Lattly I prouc that the Church of God could not be inuifiblc, becauie thereupon would en- Abfurdi - fue many and great abfurdities. For fuft, if the tiesfollow blcChurch ftiould faiie, it is manifeft that it is not in"" the Church of Chrift, againft which he hath pro- rnifed,that the very gates of faeJl (hall notpreuaile. o^^h. And if it begraunted, that the vilible Church is not the Church inftituted by Chrift, it muff needs be but a humanefociety instituted by man.How then thold it come to pafic ,thatonecannot befaued, vnicfichc bein the vifible Church, iffo he can be, as common¬ ly alt Proteifants do teach?Who contcmncaliordi* nances of men as vnneceffary to faluation, why mak they fuch account of this humane inftitution?At the laft the Protelfants banc felt this mifcbeife,as ye may fccin Caiuin in his3. homily in his Opufclcs pag. 548. andDanarusi.n hisbookcof the vilible chuich- Where they bring manyreafons to prone, that it is ncccflary to be of the viilblc church. But fcing them- felucsdo teach that the vilible church is not the true Church in the light of God and confcqucntly a hu¬ mane inftitutiori,how can they proue,that God bath commaunded, or men can appoint lo Itri&Iy to ob- fcrue this one humane Inftitution, vndcr paine of damnation ?Another inconuenicncc is,that Chrifts promifes touching thecontinuanceofhischurch arc expofed to the laughter and mockery of f ewes and Infidels. For lith (as the Law faytb,and Protcftants acknowledge) among men,there is noother account made of things that appcare not, then of things that arc not-what man will rcafonably perfwadehim- fclfc8thatChrifts Chtuehfaathcuer continued in the world. w If % f ll;I R in. i. 202 The Church tr uer tvuifihle. world > if £he for many ages appeared in no one cor¬ ner of the world ? Surely this fccmeth fo incredible, that I think not, thatany man well in his wittes bc- lkucthit,howfoeuer for todefeod the Protcftants Church he may fay it. But farewell rather fuch a Church which cannot be defended but by luch im¬ probable paradoxes. 18. Thej.iticonuenicnceis, that thcchurch ©fGodriioold haue byn much more miferabic then hath bynthcSynagogue of thelcwes, eucnfincc it hath byn forfaken or God . For the Synagogue hath euerfincc ChrifU ryme byn vifibievnto the world, and profcflcdherfayth both before her owne and o- lib.tz.cot. thcrs. The Iewsbnationfayth S.buguiiin) whether vridcr fauft.c.u. Pagan or Chriftian Kingsybatb not loft the feneofber lawyer* with it is diftinguishedjrom other nations and people. I ht lame teltiheth S.Hiiromc epiit. 129. ad Dardan. And Pe¬ ter Martyr iu his Common places title of thelcwes $.47: The Hebrews, albeit fubdued of the Romans, jet neuer tooke their lawes> rites and cuslomes y they keep their own jet at well as they c an. And Sadeei in his Anfwerc to rhefci Pofnan.cap.8.graunteth the fame. And the Mag Je- burgiansin cucry Century makcfpcckJI mention of thelcwes. To thisfome Proteftants fay,that it is no meruaile that the extcrnall condition of the Church Junius & was morc miferable the of the Synagogue Bur who- Daneut I. foeucr (hallread the Propheficsof the glory and am- 4.deEccl. piitudeof the Church, will think this ftrangc. But befides, not only the externall, but alfo the internal! ftate of the Church was more mifcrable then the Sy- nagoguc, if the Synagogue darftin all ages,euen be¬ fore her enemies, profeflfe her faith •, and the Church of Chrift for long tyme durft mutter nothing eueii before h^r q wa? children $yea (as we ihail hereafter hear* The Church neuer tnuifikle. i o % c a *. 6. hearcthcProteftancs teach)adored Antichrifl, and obicrucd Antichriftian and idolatricali rites & wor- ihips.The^inconuenicnce is5that it wc lay that the Church may be, and yet not be fcenc of any, wc giue occafton to epery new ftart vp hcretik.to fay,that his church hath cuer byn; neither can wc refute this his dotage, vnlefic we do maintainc that the church mult be eucrmorc viable,& profeffe her faith^which fas we hauc feenc)Profcltants themfclues do fuppofe, when they prouc that any Church or company hath not byp in former cymes, 19. Out of ail which hath byn fayd in this chapter,itappearcth cuidcntiy,that whither wc put the forme of the Church in lomc vilible thing or in- uifibh 7 whether we fay that the only eled and tuft be of the church or not they alone * of what kindfo- cuer (I fay) the forme of the Churcb be, and whoio- cucr be of the Church (of which matter I dilppt not now;itiseuidentI fay,thatthcChurch of God ne¬ uer is at any tymc, but fhe profeffeth her fay th be¬ fore her children and before the world - and conse¬ quently that the Church her profeflion of fayth , or (which comes all to one) thatthe Church according to her profeflion offaytb.iseucrmorc vifiblc, or fen- fiblc, which fufficcthto ray purpofc • becaulebefore Luther arofle, there was no Church vifiblc in profef¬ lion of Proteftant fayth • Wherefore I frapiemy^, demonftration for toproue Luther to hapebyo the Author of the Proteftant Church in t his fort; When- foeuer the Church she is vifiblc m profeflion of her faj/th:(whe^ thcr this profeflion be an cflentiall forme, or a pro¬ perty or accident infeparablc) But the Proteftant C hurch mmediatly before Luther arofe was not viftble in profefsion of Jserfajtb; J for efore immediate before Lmfovsfo was not at Lib. 2*204. The Church neuer inu'tfihle. all. Andhy his preaching became to be: Therejore he was the Au¬ thor thereof.The Maioror ftrft ptopoiinon ofthcSyl- iogil'mc iscuidcnt by all that hath byn (ayd in this chapter. And the Minor or fccond proportion by ail the verbal! Confeffions which wehaue rcheafedin the former chapter5& by rcail confelfions ot all Pro- teftants whatioeucr j who neither in Luthcrstymc nor tince,could bringforthany man worthy of cre¬ dit, who had fceneany company profiling Prote- ftancy before Luther began topreach it. Then the which yet nothing bad byn morccafy to do, efpe- ciaily in Luthcrs tymc,if any fuch company had byn extant. That Protectants confejfejhat before Luther their Church had no Protejlant Factors. CHAP. VII. j. ,TI H s 4.dcmonftration for to proue that L«- JL tber was the Author of the Protellat church and Religion, we will take out of thatProtcftants acknowledge their Church bcforchistymc to haue wholy wanted Paftors,Firfttherefore theyconfefle, Proteftats that their Pallors in former tymes were vnknownc Pallors to the world, and to Proteftants thcmfelues. D.Fulk ---inhis bookcof Succeflion pag.id: God bath raifedvp u; Qr|c- # Paftors in all ages, how footer they were vnknowne to the world. And pag.22 :1 deny (fay th he) this Succefston (of Pallors^ tobe alwayes notorious to the world. And in his anfwere to Staplcrons Cauiliat :who will acknowledge that she alone is the true Cbureb}wbo can shew her Paflots in a contipuad juccef- Nt> Protectant TaHors before Luther. 205: C a*. 7. Jtora? D. Humfrcy to 3.Regionot F.Campian p. 288. con/eflcth, that not io mucins the namesof the Pa¬ yors, who taught their Church, were extant. D* Whitaker Cont.2 qucft.f.cap.tf.pag^ 508.thus wn« tech : What tbetii was the fuccejsionofour Pajkrsalwaycs vi~ fible? No. For this is not needfull* Though therefore our Patfors were not m tymespajl manifeji, neither can we name then, jet ww tob^' tveake. And cap«ib.hc affirrncth this lay ingjo be false: Succefsionof doctrine cannot bedcuidedfrom fuccefsion of per font. And cap;2 j.layth : Succefm offaytb may be with-* out fuccefsion of dotlrine • and fuccefsion of dotlrine without juc- tefiono] per font. D. Fulke iib.de Succef. pag. 219: Ted euen the very publike preaching of the word maybe Clientfor a tyme < and the Church being depriued for a tymeofthis ordinary tneanesofherfaUiaiion.maybepreferuedfolongofGod . And D.whitc ip his way to the Church pag. 07: All .the ex* ternall goulfnment of the Church mayxome to decay} in that the kc all and perjonall Succefnon\ofthe Pafi or s may be interrupted. And pag.403: For tlycextemail Suctcfiion we care not-, it is (ufficient that in dottrwe tbeyfuccedcdthe Apoflles andprimitiae Churches, and thofe faytbfull witmffes. which in all ages fmce ini ■ braced the fame. O 5. By TrcteBmt VmJIq befer. Luther. 111 c a & ?* Borers of tbeghofptll 9 fir ft (d J preachers hf(beghojpell) firfi re- , , t ■ i- JlwuifthtbwItof Qo.l,Apojtles and £ ^ 6. Finally i prouc that there was no true ( a Protcltant preacher before Luther, out of thcrcaii. Cofeftionotail Protcftarits. For none of them ail can mife by any futfkicntteftimony or argument prouc, tmi there was any fuchPaftor. Wherefore this i*r$j9»ly affirmed and fondly belieucd. Either prone (fa y.tu fciv fr^ ' full ian) that whUhtlm belieuefttor if thou proue ft it not, iw m a'rc c i [ (in gteji thou btlme #i? And that common argument : fc theirs, where with they vfc to prouc, that they had a Church and Paftorsat all tyrhes ,becaufcthey bring the Scripture to proue their do&rineto be ttucj we (ball hereafter (hew to be a flnoft vainc Sophiime. And bcfidcs tbcrnfclutsdoouerthrow it,in teaching ::n as we hauefeene, that the Church may be without m:' Paftors • wherby it would npt follow that the) had iw Paftors,albeit they could by t#c Scripture proue that (li before Luther they had a Church . Mercouertuen 0 thofe wbocodeauourto narncfomcProtcftanr pfca* :!i0 chcrs or Paftors before Luthers tymc,do plainly Hie w 0 that there was no true and abfolutc Protellant Pa* 0 11 or,to wit fuch as taught iuftifkation by only faith, 0 and the reft of the fundamcntall opinions of Protc* 01 fUncy. For the Apology of the Church of England 0 pag.ioj.fayth, That theygaut not [ode are a light, but light* nedasit were fomeJftarck^ The Confeflion of Saxony cap. 11 : t ha t they ioyned ftuble vnto t he foundation. Cruci- ji'ikt gerand Rorariusin Luthcr.tom.i.fol.ioi: That they hadfomelitle light.D.F Me ofSv&cctf pag.^i: Tktfper* ^jji baps in all points they knew not the ApofolicaU defame .And IK0 D.Whitaker deScriptura lib.2.cap.8.fcdr.vit ^ foeucT they were em ironed with moft grtjp darknefp , yet the? tM held fome francs of truth }and shewed them to odors. And % O % What - L ib. 2.21-3 The ChurchmuerYttbout Paflert ] what other thing 1 pray you is this, but to confeflty that fuch were but Protcftantsin pattand infome fort t Yea they name fomc > whomc they confcfTcto banc reprehended onfy certaineabufcs amongft the Papifts , 3b Mclandhon in his Anl were to the Baua- rian articles tom.^.foi; 369. andlliyricusinbisCa- talogue jib.iy.cohtcffcoi Hilten . it remayncth yet for the -accomplilhing of this demonfttarion*, that Weaifo icw by the ConfcflionsofProtejhnts,that the true C hurch of God can neucr want Paftors ,as they haue confcflednheirs to haue wanted for the fpacc bf fome ages". 1. That the iirtk Church cannot beloHhout Tailors. \ •:toil • «f nif' *; ••' f% * ?\ w r % * -i 1 ' bd I JPfi t. CHAP. VJII. tli 1*11 H at the C hurch can ncuci bp vyithout Pa* flors, I proue fir It out of the Confcffionsof the Rrotcftant faith.For thus proftffe they to bdicuc in the Confcflion ofSaxpny cap.„u: Tta Sonne of God luthgiuen wimfters of the Gfwjpcll vnto the Church, to the end it do not quite perish. Againe; Hetrouldbauealwdjesa com- f any in mankind, in which the Sonne himjeife appointed and con firucd the Mini fieryofkeeping and fir eating hit doctrine• The Gonfcdion of Sjuft^ers cap. God hath alwayes vfidminifters for tofitlc and gather him aChurcb, and alfofor to gouetne and prefirtiett >4nd vfitb the fame now, and further mdvfi them whiles the Church shall be on earth. 1 he French C onfeflion array iV.Ve belieue the Church cannot confijl tf it haue not Vafiors^ who haue the office of teaching. 1 be Con- fcffiomof thciow Countries art.io; FF* belieue that the • true . The Chwchnener without Pastors. zr^C a r. $• true Church ought t o be gouerned and ruled bp hat Jpirituaiipv■*. hey, which God hath taught in his word, jo that there be Pafiors andmimjtcrunit. And the Confeliion of Strasburg; sung i he L hutch is the Kingdom oj Godtn hath dwersfunll'mt oj mint fen. 2. Secondly I proue it, bccaufc for the church to be without Paiiors,isto w an t fomc part of the cf- knecand definition giuen by the Proieftantsthem* fciucs. For Luther Proportion x5.to.i,fol. 385. thus defineth a Church : It is a number of baptized perjons and belieuers ruder one Bailor. And tom.2.foi. 366. hefayth : Ihepubltke MiraUerycf the word wheteb) the My ferns of God are dijpenjed, mufi be inftttuted by holy ordination > as the. thing which in the Church is thecbeifefi andpmcipallefl of all. Kenr- nicc in hisCommon places title of the Church pag, 146 : The Church confiftetb of Pafon and learners. Geiia- chins in his 22. Difput. pag. <,66 : The Church tsnot a company meeting by chance or difordered > but called by the voice of thecryert of the word {or tobeare the doftrineof the GhcjpelL Caiuin 4.lnftitur.cap. 2. ^.y:The Minifery ts the cht ifefi ftnew and foule of the Church. Bezaofthc Notes of the Church pag. 9 : By the name of the Church properly ta¬ ken , it ii cert aine that not only Baft or s but alfo Jlocks are vnder* Jioad. luniusCont. ^.lib.ij.cap. 15: God infiitutedor- ders in the Church , for the ejjentiall outward conf tuition therof.D. Whicaker Conr.2. queft. 5.cap.6. pag.508: The Church cannot fubfijt without Paflors of whom e it ts taught. Tor dotlrine doth make and constitute the Church, and is her foule andlile. And cap, 18. pag 546: The Church is no other number, then that which boldeth the pure pre aching of the word and right vfe of the Sacraments. And cap.17.dag 541; £;»- cere preaebmg oj the word and law full admmflratm of the Sa¬ craments do make the church • in fo much as wherfoeuex they be, there the Church & y and whcxe.thejbe not, the Church is not. O $ D.Feild a iti? fii i i I I II:'! f I JLi b . j. 214 The Church neuefbithotit Pa/lors. D.Fcildin bis2.bookcoi(hc Cr*urch cap.6:t he Mi-* tiifteryof Paftorsand teacher sis abfolutelyand ejfent iatlynectjja- 1; to We being of the Church. Arid li b. r. cap. 10:8 eliar mm labour eth in v awe in prouing that there is and alwayes lutbbjn a vijible Church, and thai net confiftwg effome few [caitend Cbtipam without eider of Mimftry or vfe 0] Sactaments-Jor all this we domoft willingly yield vnto. Yea the Philoluphcrs by the light of reaton pctceiued, rbttff is impofibie ther Should be a Common wealth without Magiftrates. 1 hi* fame aJfois manifcit by many other definitions which Protcftants bapc made of the C hurcb, and we hauc jreheatfed them before , in which they place true preaching and administration as eiTcntiall parti; of f he true Church j which yet cannot be without Pa¬ yors. 3. Bcfides,this wereagainftRedefinitions of the Church giuen by the holy Fathers. For thus writeth S.Cyprian cpift. 79: The Church is the pcopte Ynited to the Pricft> and the ftockjleauing to the Pa[lor. And this he proucth out of thotc words of our Sauiopr Math. 16: Thou art Peter , ayd vpon this roc^wihl build m) Church. S. Hicrome alfo in his dialogues againit tne Lucifcrians; It is no Church which hath no Prreft. S. Igna¬ tius in his epift.ad Trallianos: Without theft (Pricfts) the elect Church is not} uo congregation without theft .no meeting af Saints* And whereas Danasus lib. 4. de Ecci. cap.8. fayth, that thefc Fathersdehneonly a vijiblecburch, that auaiieth nothing: becaufe indeed there is no Church on earth which is notvifible in profeffion pf faith. Againe?Paftors fhall beatkaftof theeflence ofthe yifible Church,and confcquently the Prore- fiant Church, which before Luther wanted P^ftors, was no viable Church. Furthermore, S.Cyprian proueth his definition ou? ofthofc yvordf ofChrift The Church w Her without Patters. Jailors. For S. irenachtf iayth that hereby he c^n- louri^crh hcretjks,and that this is a molt iuii demo- ilracion.S.Auguitine writcrh.that eh is argument of iucceffion held him in the Church, S. Achandius callcrh it a notable and admirable argument. And Sadeel himfclfc loc*cir* fayth rhaf with this battering X Amine S, Cyprian did ejbeeially vanquish the Nouatians, Ana -Peter Martyr in his Common placestir. deSchil- marc, writeth thatX Auguflines argument taken from lbs fttcceffm of P 4 ft or i was very cuidm againjl the Donatifis. Froteftats 4' Thirdly i prone that the Church cannot conftfle be without Pallors, becaufceftfoooestheProtdtars receility* confcflc it. Luther vpon 10. chap.of Gcndis torn. 6, Payors fol. 12 5 I The Church cannot conjijl withoutcsntitmllvfc of the word. A nd of the Notes ef the Church rom.7. iol. i y i: The Church cannot be without Paflors Mebncthon v- pon the i.cap.of Marh-rom.i.fol'Zjk: GodwiiUlwares haucfoniepublike Mmficry, He will notfuffertbepublih mini* fiery to be destroyed, A nd in cap. 16. pag-489 : Thereu no Church wbcrethere is no true Mini ft try. And ibidem in his fermon vpon the rock pag 176: The Church is built vpon the Mini faery. And torn.T.in loC.cap.de Eeclelioi.227: We mull not (eigne a Church without the Mintftry. And cap. de nuroefo Sacranientoruro fol.3 34; "J he ASinijhy can- start t quite defiroyed ■ And in bisdifputeof hee'eiiaft. policy torn, r .Liithcri fob 442: The Church cannot exill, ihiI mini fary being extinguished. Kem nice in hisCommon places tit. or the Church cap. 4 : There arepromijes ex¬ tant of theferpctauU conflation of the Miwjltyinihe Church, Gerlachius Difput. 22. pag. 940: Thepuhlik* Minifltjis alwajes conferued. lames Andrews »gainltHo(ius pag. 330: $0 men denieth that the Church cannot be without Bi¬ shops Occoiampadius vpon the 62.cap. of Ifaiaspag. ^05: Gofaraijeth v? at allt)met APojllesand preachers, PoL- nus The Church neuer without Ptiters. 27C nusin his Syi-uagme lib. 7.cap.11 : The furMion of ordi¬ nary Mwiflers after the Ecclefiafticali order is one fit It d} isper¬ petual! y ami to endure to the end of the world. Caluin 4. In- ftirur. cap.2. $.4: For neither tie light and heal ofthe Snunc* nor meat and drincl^ are fo nccefftry to cherub and fuftaine the pejent It je, as the Vaflorall juntticn is for toconfer ue the church or; earth, And 4. 3 : GodhaibfetUdfoieun the way ofgouer- rung and holding hu Church by uimfttrs. And 4 4: t he chutcb an neuer want Paftorsand teachers .Bcza dc Not;* Eccltf. pag,6o: The church can neuer want either theftedof the word, or faring, or footers. Vorftius in Antibellarnv pag. 1972 The GhojpeUers acknowledge the 7. other orders tobeperpetuaU in the Church, to wit, Paftors, Priefis\ and Deaccns.D. Whii iak«rcont.2.qurIt.|^cap.z.pagi469:1 mfwere that there wore aim ay a Paftors and tbeepc,and that there shall be eui r Pa¬ yors to the end of the world. And qucft.y.cap.tf.pag. 508:1 conjeffe the fuccefsion of Pasiorsto be necejfary. Againt: 1 an- feere that the Church cannot (land without Paftors. D. Fulke dc Succcf.p3g.22*.I graunt that the fucceffmof Paftors is tie- ceffary in the church, A ad pag.9 5: The true defame of Chrifi and the Apoftles neuer wanted cryers. D. White in defence of his way cap.3 5. pag. 381: The t Iwcb shall never want Paftors. And hisMaidty in his Monitory cpiffjc pzg. 61 : Neither can hell ft and without feme order and diftinfaon. The Diueh are deuidedinto Legions and batte their Princes, how then can any company on earth ft and which is confufed an ddifor¬ dered without all difference of orders or dignity. You lec how confuted a thing Protcilants account the Church to be without Paftors , and that they fpeafce far other-, wife ofThe Church, when they confider the true na¬ ture thereof, then when they looke vponthe condi¬ tion of their owne Church in former tyrnes before Luther. Neithcrdo they only (ornetymesconfefTc that the Church cannot be without Pallors, but aifo O y acknow- L i b . i • 218 The Church neu r Vithout Paftors. Scripture ac^now'€^ge *bat Scr.pcurc ao h teach lo. F?rthus requireth, Mclan&hoo in histordayd diljpurcfoi.4S3 ; VVIffU Payors. tbe Cfjurcb is , there mtijl needs k lawjull ordination oj Mm- Jlersy which ordination u one oj the properties of the Church, according to that of the 4 chap, to the Epoejians: He bath gtutn faslors&c. Kemnicc in the 2. pare ot his cxamen tic. dc Sacra ncnto ordinispag. 192 : The Sonne oj God him- felfe will conferueintbe Church wttij per pet u all c ailing the Mi- wjlry oftbofe who teach the Ghojpcli. Sojayih Paul tpbef 4. Caium.4 luftitut. cap.3. $ n Intbejewords (Ephcl.4) he shewtth the Miniflry to be the chafe ftnew, wherewith the faythfull hung togeather in one body, and wfwuatetb alfo that the Church cannot otberurife be jaft, vnleffe it be propped with theft helps Sy in which God would place he7 fafety. T uciikc he hath in cap.4-Epher.and r.Cor.cap.6.aod n.and \ .Tim. cap.j.D Whitakcr Conr.2»qucft.5.cap. 19. pag. 545): Tbisplaceof Efay cap. 59; Mrfpirit&c. shea fib that the true (reaching of the word shall be perpetuall in the Church. D. Whitgtft in bis Anfwerctothc Admonition pag.17: The place of Mat hew 9. shewtth that Ministers are necepryin the Church. D.Fulk ad Cauillat. Stapl: Tou do that which is done already, whiles youproue out of the Apoflles writings that the continuance of the Pajlorsand Doctors is of no Up certain¬ ty, then the continuance ojfayth and dottrine. And dc Succtf. pag.180: The Scriptures prcmjeperpetua'J fucctjfion of Pajlors and Doftors. Preaching 5. Fourthly Iprouc this famebccaufcPro- neeeifary teftants fomctymcsdo teach, that preaching( which tofayth. .cannot be done without Paftors) is ncceffory to in¬ graft fay th in men. For, as before wc rehcarfcd>thcy condcnine the Anabaptiftr and Sucnckfcidians in that they teach, that men can come to fayth with- outpreaching. And Luther torn, i.fol.54. writcth that the adminiftmion of the word fey aPriefti* M ncedfmi TheChurchneuerloithoutPallors. 21? Cap# 8. ftccdfuiiror faich. And CoDt.Caccrin iom.2.fol.i40. fa^cb^chat by the vocall word the Church is correct- ued, formed , noqrifbed , begotten, and confcrucd. And de initicuendis Mini (Iris foi. 372: Seingnbe church u brought forth, nourished, and confer ued by the word of God > it ii mantfeji that she cannot be without the word • or if it be with¬ out the word, that itleauetb to bed Church. in cap. 17.Io- anniscom.5. toi. 203: For God hath not determined to con- feme them (t he fay th tull) without outward meanes, albeit he could doit. Aifo vpon the i.chap.ot Zacharias: Although God can teach men the Ghofpell without ferment ,yet he will not doit. And of the Notes of the church tOfD.7#foi. 149: What could or would the people of God belieue, vnhfjethe word of God founded there. Meian&hon in Jocisrojr).}. cap.dc ii hero ar b.foi. ^11: God gather eth a true Church by the voice offbeGbofyellandnot other wife. Ktm nice in the 2. part of imexamen tit. deSacranientoordinkpag. 391;God by bu certaine counjcll hath determined, that be will dijpcnfe thofe things which belong to the matter of our faluation, notim- mediatly bymfufing new and peculiar reueUtiom into the minds of men without any meanes.> but by the outward Miniflry of the word.Caiuio.4 Inftitut.cap.i. 4.5: Bowbeit Gods power be not tyedto outward meanes, neuertbeles be hath tyed vs to the ordinary meanes of Preaching, Many areputht on by pride, dtp. daine and emulation to per (wade themfe lues that they can profit tnoughby priuate'reading and meditating. And 4.4 : The knowledge of ber (the viilbie Church) it profitable xovs\yc* neceffary,for we cannot come to life vnlefje she conceiue vs in her worn be, bearers, nourish vs with her duggs. And in 1. Tim. ca p.y.T he office ofpreaching which God hath left in his church, ii the oryiy inftrument of truth , that it go not out of mens minds. The Minislery of the word being taken away God truth will fai downe. Beza epift. 20: It ii chart that fayth cometh of he a• vipgiAndtbercferepreachingmuflgoebeforefayth. Tayein hil Li®. r/^2® TheChttrchneucrwithout ?allots. his Enchiridion difput. 66 : the neceffityofecclefiaflicd Mmiflry appearetb in thai without it we can m know the word of God ^07 bis will therein reutaled vnto vs. D. Whisker iib.i.de Scriptura cap.p (cet.9<. pag. 106: The minify being taken away, neither jay.tb, nor C haruy, nor obedience, nor an) venue will remaynt [afe. And cap-*. led. 6. pag, 37: We cannot at all belieue without the Mmiflry of the church. And lib,3 cap.15 Udt.20.p1g.47 8:1 affirme, determine, and hold: that there u no entrance to faiuatien without the Mi- nijtryoftke word, Agaioe: by the Mtmftry oj Pastorswe be- lieue the Scripture, neither is it to be hoped that without this Mtmftry fay th can grow inoitr minds. And cap. 5, feet. 2:1 lonjejfe tije Mtwfiryof the Church to be mojl necejftry. And Conc.2 .qucit.^.c-ap, 19.pag.550: VVcneuer cometofaytb without preachingol the word. D. Fuike dc Succef pag.^o: The peoples Jaluation cannot be procured without preaching. And pug 162: No Chriliian will deny preaching oj the word to be ncuffaryjor the edification oft he church. JVLLa timcriii his (crmons foi. 38 : Takeaway preaching and take away filuuion. Foi. 99; The office of preaching is the only ordinary meane, whereby God hath determined to fane vs. M. C a r t vv- righc in M.Hooker lib.5. of Ecclriiailicali policy p« 41: Reading may fet forward, but not begin the worke of jalua- lion yfayth may be nourished therewith, but not bred; herein mens attention to the Scriptures and their /peculation oj the crea¬ ture sof God haue like efficacy> both being of power to augment, but neither to effect belie fe without fet mons. And the Puri¬ tans in D. Wnicgifrs Anfwcre to the Admonitions: Reading is tiofeedingvHow then could there beany Pro- telfant Church or fay th at ail before Luther, when (as We heard before^ there was thenno Prcteftant Scripture Poacher ? And in like fort fomctynicsthcyconfcfTe, reqaireth tbarrhcScriptureitfclfeteachcth.tHatpreachingis preachiag neceffary to haue faytb,The CbafeffiohofAulpurg. cap. m nz The Vtoteflstnt Church sbeweth that true peaching oft he word iballbe perpetuallin the Church, M. Perkins in his cxpofition of the Creed col. 78 7:1 anfwere that place Rom. i o. Faith if of heating,to be vnderfloodojiftflifyintfaytb. So chat neichcrthc Viiibic nor inuifibie Church could cuer hauc byn without preaching. 6, Out of all that hath byn fayd in this and the former chapter I thus make my fourth demon- ftration,forroprouerhat Luther was Author of the Proteftant Church . if be fore Luther the Protejlant Church had no Paftors> she was not then at all: But then she had no Pa- Jfors at all: Therefore then she was not at all: And by him she came to bane both Proteftant Pajlort and sheep: T her fore by him sbe bad her beginning . The Maiot is cuident by thole Conftffionsof Proteftants which we haue rehear fed in this chapter-and the Minor by tbofccharwercxc- peatcd in the former. That the Trot eft ants Church and Religion before Luthefty# no where C HA P. IX. r5. H b firfl demonftratlon, for to proue that i Luther was Author of the Protcftat church Proteftlts «nd Religion, (hall betaken from want of pJacc^ro name not ^it, that it was no where before Luther began. And the place, th,*s I probe, firft,bccaufc they oftcntymes (ay, that beforcLuthers tymc their Church was in the defcrr, in darknes, in lurking holes, in Trephonius denne j ncucrthelcsrhcy fell not where thisdefert,this dark¬ nes jtflis lurking hole, this denne was. Secondly fomcof them confcllc, that they know not where their not fa P fptry. %%i C a p. fl their Church was in cyme pair.D. Whitaker Gent. 2. qucft. j.cap. pag. 475 : They are angry witbpj thatKadwnot we cannot shew , and at it were feint with our finger the place* where our church was in lymtt paft. The iamcinfinua~ teth Sadecl ad Repctit. Sophifm. Turriani pag. 766. faying ,that heanfwercd this queftion ,VVheu there Church lurked) when he Uyd, T bat it lay hid by the vn* jearcbeabl* iudgement of God • as if he Jeyd: it Jay fociofc hid ,that it cannot be knowne where it lay. Aifo D. Hail in his Rome IrrcconciJeablc fe$. 1, vbw he calleth this our demaund , Where their Church lurked% an idle demaund of Pettifogger?. But that ir isno idle demaund, is manifeft. For tirli, what man in his yvmafccth not, that the,who is pretended to be the Gathoiikc Church, that is,fpred ouer the World, was not at all, if no place can be found where (he w as for many ages. Againe,becaufc the holy Fathers and Proteftants tbemJelues demaund this of here*- tikes. Whs are yee (fayth TcrMiUiaif)when,and whence came ye? where lurkedye fo long? Againc;Zrr them bring forth 37# #3*' the e'Jpring of their Churches. S. Athanahus: Whence came thefe thingif yea what hell bath vomited them out? And S.Au- f % Ni- guftinc; Where appeared DonatmfOutof what groundjfirung cen byrwd. he? Out of what feaarofe he? from what heauenjell he f And avdwhere it theme Church. Wherefore it is no idle but a raoft ne- ccflary thing, to know where the Church is: and if Protcftants immediatly before Luther arofc,knew not where the Church was j it muft needs follow that JLx b. 1. * The FrcteHnnt Church that (he was not the true Church. Cathdlika 2. Thirdly I prodc it, bccaufceucnthofc who alwayts Cake vpon them to tell where their Church wasin a*ked former tymes, do (hew indeed, that they know no was the P*acc where Hie was. For as M.Icwci faythart.i. di- proteftant u^*7# P3^*1 o: Eckiui, Pigbm, Hofiui and others Ime often Church. cr7e^ out 4 maPie ln their booketand pulpit sphere was pur re¬ ligion before Luther fir ft began to preach* And that the fame hath byndemauttdedby Cathoiiks, confelTcth Pe¬ ter Marryrin locistit. dedifccfluab Ecc). Rorn.col, J492. Bcza de Notis Ecclcf. pag.;8. andinhisi^2. / quchion.D.Whitakcr Cont.i.qucft.^.cap.j.M.Pcr- kinsin his Reformed Carholik rra6t.22. cap, 1. and others. And it is manifeft by the writings &fpcachcs ofali Catholikcs.Yca Luther in cap.19. Ifaiar torn.4. foJ. 125. writcth, that this was our tirfl argument a- gainfl them, and will be our laft : Art thou alone wife, or doe si thou ihitike that all our aunceflours faw nothing ? Did all thofe, who were before thee, erre ? Bccau fe he faw, that this argument did molt preffe him,and that hccould ncueranfw^reit. Let vsfec therefore, what they an- fwerc to thisour firft and lafl demaund fo often and , with fuch eatnefhicflc and fo great crycspropofed of VS.D.WhitakcrconM.queft.^.cap.a.propofctb their Protects an^wcrc theft words: StapUmfajtb, that Calm and anfvverc. wc f*7it1ut the true Church was in Popery, but that Pope)) was not the church; That indeed we all fay. And the fame in fub- ffanccanfwercth Luther lib.defcru.arbir.tom.2.fo. 4$8.in pfalmosgraduates co.3.fol.589. Andde M'lTa priuara torn. 7.^1.236. lames Andrcwes cont, Ho- fium pag ;id.Herbrand in Compend. Theol.loc.dc Eccl.pag 502.Hunnius Prxfat.tra6f.dc lultific. Hfu- berusin Anfibcilarm.lib.4 cap.2. Hutrerin Analyfi Confcflf.Auguft.p.447. Gcriackius difput. 22. p.952. Lobe chic I 7he Pfoteftmt Church Hot in Vofety. say C a p. p, Lobcchiusciiip.io.p4g.zo2. Gdncrus ioc.24.Rd- nccciusiib.4. armature cap, 3. And among# the Sa- cramentaries Caluin 4.lnitit.eap.2,4.11 • Peter Mar* tyr, Bcza, and M. Perkins ioeis cic. Sadcci in Rcfuc. ThciPofnan; cap. 8. Polanus part.3. Thcf.de Ecci. Daneus de Anticdriilo cap. vlt Junius lib.4. de Ecch cap,i Ifcnut. cap.2. a iptakcthia this fort pf his Pre re- flants, Wiion c he imagined in Popery : Inwbmc^ii ■things are Jo out oj order: as were may rather fecme the face of Babtlon thenoj theciuyof God, By, vyha:: appearance'then judge they,.when then lay that t!)eir Church was in •" k • Popery» 4. 3».xdy,I prone that thcProeeftan? chbrch \yhsi Was nor in Popery ^by the Pt-rfans.whom they chal- fc!ncj Gf ieuge,Luther cont. Carerin. cdm-a. foi.140. wu: th Perfcm:; thus : I V here ye fee no gbufftd, as we fee none in the Synagogue th ef chaL of the Papi(h> there doubt Us a m Chunb, vn'ejfe you except in- ^efnge' * fonts amljimpU folke. And iol. 155: whome in all the world hath not the Popejubdtted, except perhaps infants and fi'dy per- infants 8c ftriS) ftaeabyan vnknowne CounfdU. M. Bale Cent. i. cap, hdy ones, 74,writeih, that their Church iinec Phdcas'thc E.m- perours cyme, Was in lurking bole sand among ft idiots Uchius difpur, 2 2.fayth that infants were nofmail part fdiot*, of their Church Oluncjtr icc.cu.pag. 65. that th stymie a great part. And as Lobcchius addcth'difpu t. 10. pag. 202: rhenobleftpart. A worthy Church vndoufatcd- ly, which Lor many ages contided of infants, idiots, and Inch iiiiy pcrfons. And they more fiily who giue credit to fo Lilly an affirmation of Proteftants with¬ out ail proofc pand they moftfiliy ofali whorclin- quifhing the Catholtke Church,adioynethcrnfelues to fuch a childifh and (iliy Church, To ffilily affirmed r and without proofe.Seaucothly Protdiants thcmfel- ties do plainly profefTe that the entire fubftancc and c (fence of their Church yvas not in Popery, bur only fomc part thereof. And we, (as hath byn often fayd) r fpeake not of a Church ill parr, or in Tome fort, hut f> a or a Lib. 2 • 228 The Frot eft ant Church not in Foperj> of a Church which hath ail thccifeutkli andfub* ftantiail partes, and may be limply and abfoluttiy eflenee oftearmcc*a Church. Caluin 4.1nfhtut.cap. a. after he a proteftat ^d'liyd $.1. that it is ccrtainc there is no Church Church w^frc andfallity hauc gotten the vppcr hand} he not in Po- ftraight fay th $. 2: Setnghutters go (0 vndcr Popcry, We p cry. may gather hou? much of the Church remaymeth there. And ad- deth , that vndcr Popery. That dochine without tvbub ChriftianitjJlandeth not3 is all buryedand thrnji out. And Rc- fponf. ad Sadoler.pag. 12 8. w riteth : That in Popery there Scirfe any aPPearet^ Scarce anyfeattered and tome remnant t of the church. remnants. ^ctcr Martyr in iocis tit.de dilccflu a Rom. Ecci. col. Only 149 3 : ^ow there are left among Papifts only fomerubbuh and rubbiQi, farcelsofold walles,togeather&c. Sonis Help, ad Spon- dcum cap. 2. pag. 3 2 : Amicbrift hath left nothing in all the ' But old building, but [owe old wah. Saded Pracfat. lib. de V erbo wals, fcripto: The Roman Church isfo depraued and corrupted, that whiles we[eeke the Church, in the church we are forced to be- Only holdonly ashes ofthe Church. The Apology of the Church aihes. of England part.^cap.p.diuif 3: Thefe men now haue left nothing remaining in the Church of God that hadanyli^ehtfte Nought of his Church, And part. 6.cap. 17. ditiif nVVhenwtfaw but ruins, that nothing remayned in the temple of God but pmifullJpoilet anddecayesywe&c. Finally Luther in Pfain1.22.tom.;. No trace, fol. 132. fayth, that in Popery there was no trace of the Church. And inpfaIm.17.fol.285: r bey haue brought mat* Name on- ters to fuchpajfe, that where the Church of God was heretofore> • there is nought but heathenish fuperftition and the name only of the church remayning^tbefubftance is quite loft. The fame al- fo mcanc thofe, who fay that in Popery were feme fmall footftcps, fomc reliqucs, and parcels of the church,albeit they had not thiscxclufiuc terme,0;;//. But if in Popery the doftrine without which Ciari-j| flianiry cannotHand wcrcwholy buryed and tout* out $ The ? rote Si Ant Church not in Popery. 219 out; If therein (carfc appeared rornc parcels of the Church, only afhes thereof were fccne- if nothing reoiayned but old wals, rubbifh and ruines; nothing cntircandliketoaChurchjand the name onlyre- mayning,thcfubftance were quit lolt,doubtlcs there was noabfoluteandtrue Proteftant Church in Po¬ pery,but only in part and in fomc fort. Which Da- neusplainly intimaterh when hefaith Conr^.lib.^. cap. i;.pag. 58 7: Some foot fiefs of the Church remaynt yet in that (Pop ifh company, as if the ruines of 4 houfe cajl downe and the bare walls were called a houfe equivocally. Or as Caiuin fpeaketh Rcfponl.ad Vcrfipellem pag. 357; In fame part the Proteftant Church was heretofore in Pope- V* 5. ThatI maythereforegathcrtogcatherall that Protcftants fay of their Church in Popery befor Lutherstymc; Concerning the perfons whereof it confided >rhey were infants, idiots, filly ones, and perhaps not they neither $ Concerning the fubftace, it wasonly ruines, rubbifh , old walic^ afhes, and nameonly of the Church. Concerning the number, it was (a) Very (mall, flenderr cliques, few remnants, and \^\U*her fcAXce a few teliquesfo f'mail reliqucs, one or two perfons. T o u - ching theplace wherein (he was, that was lurking holes, orrathernone at all. For fo fayth D. Whitaker kt.y.fd, Conf.2. quefi. ;.cap.2. pag>4.6$:Thebolyandpiousmen 234,0 weretogeather with their Paftors differ fed into this or that place dtfpm. without any cert aine aboad or Succefsion. And queft. cap. ^ 4. pag. 505: Our men were intymes pall [cattcredbere and there. Touchingthe dateot their Church, that was (^quitcfallcn downe. Mouchingthc face or (hew " v&ett thereof, that was rather of Babylon then of Abe rttj Vpj- Church . As for the Condition, it was affli&cd of mn 13. Aj}ti$hrift9Withfauadge domination ,wasmi(cra- (by.upx.o. P 3 M.y , Willi The Trot [I ant Church net in T of cry. 2 31 C a p. % the com naundement of God , chat ail pious tm«i fhould goe out of Popery. If then Popery be the Sy¬ nagogue of Satan and Anfichrift, & worfe then any hcreticall, Tirrkifb, or heathenith company; or any ether, whom all the diuels which all rheircunning could raile; If all pious men ought to trcmbieat the hearing of the name thereof, and rather Hue in a de¬ left then therein; If finally it be the Commandemet or God, that all godly men Should goe forth of Pope* ry, how came it copafTe , that in former tymes the godly (forfooth) Proceftants liucd in Popery, and in Popery aionc, & that for lo many ages ? Would god¬ ly mcnabid in that company? and only in that com¬ pany, and fo long tyme, which was the worft that could be, before which they (hold haue preferred the wildernes,haue shaken at the name thereof,fk were commanded to come out from thence byGodsex- prtfle comma nderocor f Surely theProtePantsrauft not only haue byn children and fimple,butal(o im- piousand vngodly. What! could nor,or would not the fpoqfe of Chrift iurke for fo many ages, but in the ftcwesof thediuell? Could Chrift be nowhere, but with AntichriP? Would only Antichrift for fo many ages affoard Chrift and his church a harbour or lurking place ? O Jlraightes (fay th S. Auftine^ O in- i tjemor% credible ab[mditm\ For what greater Praights, what MankL c more incredible abfurditycan there be, the to thruft *§'*** were fr Antique , do tbrujlinmofl grojje abfur dines for to defend their errors, for God iufilypumsbetb their pride and objtinacy which fucb giddinejfe. 7. Ninthly,I argue, andaskc what is the P 4 meaning 7 r — ^ TheVroteflant Chufctynottn Vcpcry. roeaningofthc torelayd ridk: rbe church u asm Popery but Popery tpasnot the Church. Firft,! fuppoje tint by Po- pcry hccrc, fljcy mcanc not ( as did Boyffeul)popifli dodrinc; as if the fenfe were, that theProrcttant Church confjftcd of Popifhdodtrioejas we fay that the Popifli Churph conflikth (?o wit formally] of Popiflido&rine^thelewifti Church ofIudaifmc,£c the Turkifhof Turcifrue^becaule this fenfe were too far from thcqucftion, which ccmaundeth the place, and riot rhc forme, or do&rlne of ihe Proteftant church in former tyms. Ecfides, it were too too ab- furd to fay that the Protefiant Church coo£(kth in the contrary do&rinc, which heconckmnech.Sup- pofingthcrfore,that hereby Popery they vnderltand fhc company of Papifb, their meanipg cannot be, that their Church was in the company of Papilk5as sna multitude ofmep among!! whom they liued on¬ ly , but did no Way participate of their dodrine or Worftiip; both becaufc in this manner, it had byn knownc toPapifts, which notwkhlbnding they Turcifmc,&: the like, iftheyliueamong Icwesor Turcks^ which isfoab- furd as Protects deny their meaning to be fuch. For thus Beza cpift. le.queft. 4: The Church was in Poperyt which can no way befayd of the Turks. And M. Perkins lib, cit. aftcrhefayd that the Church was long tymein Popery, addcrh, V I'hich cannot be like wife fayd of T urkjand other Infidels> that the Church was confer ued, or that yet any hidden Church is confer ued among.thm • Neither can their meaning be,tbat the Proteftant church was in tymcs pafl in Popery,as a part in the whole,to wit,becaufc 1% confi/iedoffotircth^tbcliiucd both Protcftancy • inJ I-xb. 2. 234 The Vroteflani C hurchnot in Popery. their inu ilible Church ccnfiiicth. 8. Tcuthly I argue by enquiring the man* lier, how the ProtcRant church in former tymswas in Popery-to wit, whether it profeffed the fubftance oftbe ProtcRant fayth, or no : and whether itcom- municatcd with Papifts in their Popifh worthipor nor? ProteRants, like men vncertaine anTwcrccii- ucrfly to thisqucfiion. D.WhirakerConr.2. queft.j, cap. pag. 474. faveb : Our Churches were ulwayem the tniddell of Papish churches, diftmft from Papif.sin Communion Cont Tar- *n<* ProfcIfm' ^ut fk*s's hoonc refuted . Firfl, becaufe mnlca.fi,n cannc>r be ptoucd. And to cajl out words and prove imgbt, ** what isit(ss S. AuguRin faytfy buctjddote? Bcfidcsif the ProtcRant Church had profeffed Proicftancy, (he had byn knownc toPapiRs; and the fame had alio byn if (he had not communicated with them. For as D« Andrews writeth of the Cathoftkes in England: They come not to fcruice t they he are not fir mm > they refnfe to take the Communion» without this 07 any other oat h one may know them to he Papijls. B ut flic was not knowne to Pa- piRs, bceaufe not only all PapiRs, but aHo Prate- ftanrsdeny that.Befldcs otherwifc Catholiks would not hauc fo carncRiy enquired of ProteRants, where their Church had byn heretofore.Moieouer Catbo- likes badperfccured them as they pcrfecuted Luther, fofooneas be was knownefora ProfcRanr. Lafily, bccaufc ProteRants cannot name any PapiRs, who knew of their Church beforeLuthers tyme. Others thcnjforefay^tharthofe imaginary ProteRants pro¬ feffed their fayth, if not at other rymes, vet at leaR at the point of death. D . Whitafcer loc. cit. pag. 47?: Many at the po:nt of death, if not before , profejfed their fayth. Thefame fayth Luther of priuatc-Mails torn. 7. fol. 2 j/. and Lobschl isDiiput.io, To which D.White TheFr defiantChurch not in Fopery. 255 cap. J* in derence ofhis way cap. 4^3^.424 addcth ,thac they renounceth Pafijhy aljo in the agony of their ccnfcience* And Hunnius before cued, not knowing what cer- £ a j r> I y to dcterrriiiic,fay th: that they did either openly gir d at Papijky, or fecretly with them [dues deleft ity or at le aft tn the laji ex amen of tentatiom (the (table of err oar being fired) did hold the foundation offaluation. But to I pea kc w itti S, Au- guitm: Who fay tb this, but he that fayth what he will, and will Hb.$* cont9 nothearewhat istrae? They fay that in the Scriptuic alone that laying of Pythagoras Schoiiers(he fay d it) taketh place. But if they vied not this Pythagoricall priuiledge, they would be more dumhe then tribes, ^ What man or diueli told them this profeffioof their men at the houreof death ? How learnt mey that , which at that tyrnc no man could fifty out ? Againe, if Only at the hourc of death they profefled Pro- tcffancy , they were Protectants no longer then they fay a dying- and cohfcqueotly the Protcftant church endured no longer then fome of her children were dying. A flrange Church certes, that lined no longer then her children dyed- noi af any ry rue drew breath, but whiles they gnie vp tbegbofl. Where¬ fore they find out oth er dcuifes to fay, that thofe fei¬ gned Protcftants communicatedwith Papifb and profefled their fay fh in things I aw full"as in Bap- tifme, reading of the Scriptur,and fuch 1 ike- but not in thingsvnlawfull.ThusRcinecciusin the 4, romc of hisarmoureap. 4. Thou feeftreader „ that as thefe Protcflants had their being only by thefe mens irna- ginationsjfo they did, or did not, what,or in what rnannerthey will ham them. O greatfiibnhftiy, (that I may cry out which S. Epiphamnsfofthem , whovtter thefe things? fo manifeft it is, that this is a shop rather ofiuglers, then ofthofe whs bans the shape of tk promtfe of life and ojfvn- dsrjlan- v " ' i : 1 ' ILii. 2> 2 $6 The Troteftdnt Church was not in Popery. derftanding. For who belidcshisowneimagination, told Remcccius, chac thofe Protectants decided thus theirCommunion withPapifts? whobeiidcshim- felfcheard cucr offach a halfe-communion ? 9. Wherefore others of them do abfoiutcly fay, that their imaginary Protcilant Church in Po- How im P«y communicated w ith Papifts.and profeflcd their pious fayth .For thus writeth Luther in pfalrmGrad.tom. their 3• fol.568: The Church vnder Antichrifi had no true Minifies) church in or worship but was forced to keep the very Babylotiicall and hea- Popery thenish rites of Papifts• The fame he intimatcth torn. 7. lib.dcMiffa priuatafoI.236.&237.and lib conf.Pa- patum foI.45<>.Oiiandcr aifo in the epilL dedicatory of his 8. Century fayth of thofe Proteftants,that 4/- though from their heart they difallowed the Popish errors, yet they durjlnot profeffe their owne opinions \ but negletted not the ex- ternall rites, and were carry ed away with the common cujlome as it were with a torrent, for to do thofe things which others did • rvhofe weakneffe (fay t h he) Goddid beare withal! and pardon. And the fame pardon Luther dc MifTa priuira fol. j37.bdfowerh vpon them faying: Nofinne could hurt them-,but God mutt pardon the miferable,afflicted, oppreffedand captiue Church. Thus thefe men haue Gods pardon in their hands, that when they plcafe , God mud par¬ don thofe, who all their lifetyme denyed their faith and ferued Antichrift and idolatry. Junius alfo lib.4. deEccl.cap.y.fayrh, that the Church in former tyms was all one with the Roman. A gainc: She communicated with the Roman Church in worship of God euery where, fo long as she was fuffered to communic stein pure worship, in right fayth, and good confidence. Forfootb the Synagogue ot Antichrift, (as they account the Roman church^vfeth pure wor- (hip, or the Church of Chrift comrnunicateth with her in right fay th3and good coafcicncc. And P.Whi- 1. 2< 1 o. Eptftay* Bfij}. s. 238 V rote Bant Churchleasmt in Popery. of God ( which the Protcftants wiilhauc theirs to be) for many,ages denyed her faytb,profcflcd infide-* lity,forfookChrift, worfhipped Antichrift, orto vfctheir owne words, Didvfe very Babjlonicall and An- tichrijlian rites was corrupted with pernicious do ftrineypropha- ned with f acrilegious impiety, and out oj whichgodlines was ba¬ nished ? God jorbid (laych S.Cy prian) that a company ojjal* len perfom should be called the Church. A game: God forbid, & his mercy and inclinable power neuer permit, that a company of fallen perfom be called the Church. And Beza himlcllc: The Church is a community of Saints} not a company ej excommuni¬ cated or facrilegioutperfons. And thai! we think ,rhaf be¬ fore Luther arofc the Church of God for many ages was nothing eifc bur a company of fallen, facriicgi- ous* hypocrites* denycrs of Chrift,a»d worlhippers of Antichrift ? Is fuch a company the holy Church ? Is the Communion of fuch, the Communion of Saints which we bclieue in ourCrccdfls fuch a fo- ciety the fpoufe and myfticall body ofChrift, the wife of the larnbc, the Kingdom ot God? Surely apt Church for prorcftants, and a tit company* to which the forfakers of the Catholike Church may adioy ne themfclucs, and moft worthy to be cfchewcd & de-~ tcfted of all that loueChrifts or their ownc honour. For who is he,cither pious orwell in his wits*who will make himfelfe of that company which for ma¬ ny agesconfifted all oflapfcd Hypocrites,denyers of Chrift,and worfhippcrs of xAntichrift.? The whole Scriptures and Fathers (ay that the fpoufe ofGhrift ishoneft and chaft, and cannot bedeflowed.But this protcftant harlot did for many ages proftituceher fdfe to Antichrift, 10. Moreouer this kind of company which thus communicated with Antichrift and profeffed his |>ib. 2. 240 7& Vrot fiant Church^>asnotin Popery. FFe d*8p ill men to belong to the Church, which is the body of Chrifi. M.Pcrkins in hiscxpofition of the Creed col. 795:^8 illmancannot be a member of the Church. Ada Fran* cis loc. 11. dc Eccl; III men are only in name members of the Church. And finally Mulculus in locistit.de Eccl.pag. 299 : Not fo much as the name of the Church ought to begiucn to the wicked. But they who were fuch as the Prote¬ ctants betore defcribcd, were no Saints, were not iuft, were notfan&ificd - but ill, wicked, hypocrites, ifcuer there were any : therefore they could not be the true Catholike and proper Church before God. FurthcrmoreProteftants vfc to teach,that thofe who communicate with Papiftsdocut themfclucs from the true Church. The French Confeflion att.28: We thinl^all thofe who adioyne themfelues to thefe (Popiih) aclions and communicate with thema dofeparat themfeluesfrom the bo- dy of chrifi. Luther in cap. 13.Genel. torn.6 fol.163: Who acknowledged the Pope for mafter, he hath no part with Chrifi. And in cap.28.fol.396 : if the Pope mufi be wor- sbipped, Chrifi muft bedenyed. And de Miffa priuata rom. 7. fol. 47 5: VVhofoeuer is vnder the Pope and obeyed him can- »0f£e/4«ed.CaluinagainltScrucf.pag. 607 : Is it not a profanation of thefacred vnity> to profejfe one God and faith with an impious and prophane company? And Refponf.ad Vcrfip. pag. 3 62: How wicked andfoule treachery is it to abide in that facrilegiotts company ( ofPapifts) ? And D. Whitakcrad Rat. 3. Campiani: None abide with the lambe in themoun- taine% who baue any commerce with Antichrifl. A nd C alu i n in Confutat.Hollandi&lib.dc vitandisfuperftitio- nibus, bringcth many proofes to Ihew that the faith¬ ful! may not communicate with the falfc Church, and thcrto citcthtfye letters of Mclan<5thon,Bucer, peter Martyr,and thofe of Zurich : and thcfamcis commonly taught of protcftants. How then did not 1 thofe Tre vroteftmt Gimrchwas not in Popery. 24 ? C a? • 9< thole procettancs leparau (hcmiciU.s no o cat body of Cbnlt ? bow were ihcy faucd, who juhconies pad communicated with Papifb? How were they laucu Vnleflc God bsanacccpcour o> pcrfoas and cyrK>*,chat he wjlicut ol lome from his body£and horn nope o£ faiuation, who communicate wun Anucfarm, and not othcr^ac tscieand nor in former tymc.s Agah , nofeltduii reach that the Church outturn profc .*e her ra y t h, a r beiiiic 11 be ce111 man i cs be fore r.cpea f cb, the preface of the Conuflion of Saxony lay tii: I hey thai are dmaunded muft needs te'd the dottrme. A n 11 he i o- feffipn or Bohemia arc. 2: i h*/ teach, that they muft vn- doubt edl) be he ue all the articles of the Creed, and conftjfe them wiihthemouth. Luther in 1 Petri cap.2.tc»m*5 to 4645 ljanynow,astheEmperouror other Prince should askeme my fayth,l muft plainly con tffe it to him. AnddeStxu. Arbic. tom.ifol 4$z: Truth ana doctrine muft alwave i be preached openly, and neuer kept fecret orcrookt andturnd awry D F . lid lib i.dcfc cCii.cap.lo: For eing the c hurch ts the multitude of them that shall he jaued vnlefje he mak co'effw vmofaluatm > for faytb bid in the heart and concealed doth sotjujficeyt cannot be but they that are of the true Church muft by the profejfton of the truth make themfelues knowne in fuel) fort that &c. A id the preface of the Symagmc oi^oxifefikms .* When euery one ought ,ac cor ding to the Apofiles precept,glue a reafvnof his hope bow much more the Church* AndD Whi taker C o n c.4-q ue ft, 6 x a p 2. p a g: 6