The conuiction of noueltie, and defense of antiquitie. Or demonstratiue arguments of the falsitie of the newe religion of England: and trueth of the Catholike Roman faith Deliuered in twelve principal sylogismes, and directed to the more scholasticall wits of the realme of great Britanie, especially to the ingenious students of the two most renowned vniuersities of Oxford & Cambrige [sic]. Author R.B. Roman Catholike, and one of the English clergie and mission.

THE FIRST PARTE OF THE CONVICTION CONTAINING THE IMPVGNATIVE ARGVMENTS .

THE FIRST PRINCIPAL ARGVMENT .

AND for confutation of the English Religion which I assume for the firste parte of my disputation beginning with the name Catholike , I argue in this manner .

All Religions which are not Catholike , are false Religions .

But the Religion now publiklie professed in England is not Catholike .

Ergo the religion nowe publiklie professed in England is a false Religion .

In the Maior , & conclusion of this Sylogisme there is no difficultie , neither can the aduersa●ies denie them . The minor onelie is in controuersie , & it I proue with another Sylogisme in the manner following .

All Religions which are not vniuersall , ge●erall , or common , are not Catholike .

But the Religion now professed in England is not vniuersall , generall , or common .

Ergo the Religion now professed in England is not Catholike .

That the Religion is not Catholike which ●s not vniuersall , generall , or common is clea●elie demonstrated by the signification of the worde Catholike which importeth vniuersallitie or generallitie , according to the vse which euen our aduersaries themselues make of it : Who in their Bibles for the Latin wordes ●pistola Catholica , translate & put in English , the generall epistle of Iames , Iude &c. Not to stand vpon the ancient authoritie of sainct Augustin & other Fathers , & Councels , who when they speake of the true Church , or faith , ●se the name Catholike in that same sense , as after shall appeare . And by this the maior propo●ition of the second Sylogisme is sufficientlie ●roued to be true . Now touching the minor ●o wit that the Religion publiklie professed in England is not generall , vniuersall , or common , 〈◊〉 likewise proue by distinguishing all the diuers kindes of vniuersallitie which according either to Philosophie , or moral doctrine can be imagined , & by conuincing that none of them agree to the Religion of England ; which I prosecute in this manner .

All vniuersallitie in Religion is either in the matter or material obiect of faith , or in the time , place , & persons that professe it : or els in the rule or reason which directs them in the faith , & profession of it . For proofe & declaration of all which particulars , & that none of them be founde in the Religion of England , it is to be supposed as certaine that the worde vniuersall signifieth not onelie generallitie but also vnitie , so that the thing which is vniuersall must be one in itselfe as well as common to others : that which not onelie the vsuall acception of the worde doth shewe which by Aristotle & the rest of the Philosophers both ancient & moderne is commonly taken for vnum in multis , that is one thing in manie , or one common to manie : but also the verie etymologie & sounde of the same word doth plainely declare . Yea & the ancient Fathers also affirme the same in those places where speaking of the vniuersallitie of the Church in place , they say the Church is one , and yet dispersed ouer the whole world . Lib. 2. c 2. As doth S● Augustin against the epistle of Gaudentius . Where vsing the testimonie of sainct Cyprian among ●other words of his he relates these . Vnum ca●ut est , & origo vna , vnamater foecundis successibus copiosa . She ( meaning the Church ) ●s one head , one origen , Maieres n●stri Catholicam nominarnus vt ex ipso nomine ●stenderent quia per t●tum est . De vnit . Eccl. cap. 2. one mother replemished with frutefull successes . And in the second chapter of his booke of the vnitie of the Church ; he saith , that our ancetors called ( the Church ) Catholike to the end they might shewe by the name it selfe that she is in whole . In like manner Vincentius Lyrinensis in the third ch. of his booke , to the vniuersallity of the Church ioyneth consent , or vnion . And Venerable Bede vpon the 6. chap. of the Canticles affirmes that the Church is called Catholike , quia per omnes mundi partes in vnapace , in vno Domini timore aedificatur . That is , because it is planted or built in all partes of the world in one peace , & one feare of God . And thus it plainely appeares that the worde Catholike , or vniuersall , whatsoeuer els it includes , yet it must of necessitie haue vnitie in that generallitie which it signifies .

This being supposed as a trueth which euen our aduersaries cannot resist . I proue against them first that there is no vniuersallitie in the matter or obiect of their Religion , with this argumentation following .

All religions which are not one , & the same in matter or obiect which Christ , & his Apostles preached , wante vniuersallity in obiect , or matter .

But the Religion professed in England at this present , is not one , & the same in obiect or matter which Christ & his Apostles preached .

Ergo the Religion professed in England at this present wantes vniuersalitie in obiect or matter .

The maior of this Sylogisme is iucluded in the supposition before declared at the least in parte : & graunted euen by our aduersaries as I suppose , it being nothing else in sense , but onelie that the particular obiects or matters which a Catholike or vniuersall beleeuer imbraceth by faith ; are one , & the same doctrine in euerie point , which God hath reueiled , & the most vniuersal Church proposeth to be beleeued by all persons in the vniuersal orbe . And this appeares most true especiallie if we consider that the doctrine or obiect or anie Religion cannot be conceiued to be vniuersal except it be taken in this forme & manner , in regard that in this sorte , & not otherwise , it attracteth or draweth vnitie from the founder , & so hath the propertie of being one , without which vnitie it cannot possible be one and the same in manie , in which neuerthelesse the total nature or essence of vniuersalitie consists .

Now touching the minor or second proposition of the same Sylogisme , I proue it in this manner ; first , because the Religion which our Saulour , & his Apostles preached was vniformerlie , & indistinctlie one & the same both in matter & forme , I meane both in obiect or matter of faith , & in the assent of faith itselfe , & therefore the Apostle Ephes. 4. as he affirmes there is one onelie Lord or God , soe doth he in the same tenor affirme there is one faith . Vnus Dominus , vnafides : meaning that faith is one as well obiect as in acte . And yet this is otherwise according to the doctrine of the English Church , whose professors distinguish the obiect of their faith , in to fundamentals , & not fundamentals ; which diuision of theirs cannot possible stand with vnitie , as both natural reason and common sense most plainelie teach : And consequentlie the matter or obtect of the English faith cannot be one , & the same with the obiect or matter of that religion which Christ & his Apostles deliuered to the vniuersal world , in which true Religion there is no parte nor partial which is not truelie and propethe fundamental , & to be vniformelie , & vniuersallie beleeued vpon for feture of eternal Saluation , according to that formidable commination of the supreme Iudge himselfe who without anie diuision or distinction pronounceth sentence of condemnation against all such who obstinatelie erre in their assent of faith to anie matter by him , Qui vere non ●rediderit condemnabitur . Marc. V●● . 〈◊〉 ●●ntes 〈…〉 omni● qua●unque mandaui vobis . Math. 28. & his Apostles reueiled to his Church , & by here for such proposed to the people , how smale soeuer it may seeme to bee in it owne nature or condition , & how necessarie , or vncessarie it is in it selfe to saluation , in regard that it being once deliuered for true by God who cannot lye or deceiue , it is reallie inuested with the same formal reason and motiue of credibilitie , which the most noble & sublime obiect or matter either humane , or diuine can haue , that is with the infallibilitie of the prime reueiling veritie , to which all faith & credit is due , & necessarilie to be truelie & intirelie adhibited vnder paine of eternal punishment .

Secondlie I proue the same Minor proposition ; because the obiect or matter of the Religion published by our Sauiour , & his Apostles hath annexed vnto it a certaine relation or reference of vniuersalitie to all those particular persons to which it is to be preached , that is to all people which were , are , or will be in the world till the consummation , or day of iudgement , which relation is grounded in the ordinance & commaunde of Christ himselfe to his Apostles sayeing : Marc. vlt. Euntes in mundum vniuersum praedicate Euangelium omni creaturae . Where by the wordes all creatures is vnderstanded all nations or people , as sainct Mathew more plainelie declares in the same passage of his Gospel where thus he relates our Sauiours speech . Euntes docere omnes gentes . And likewise S. Gregorie commenting the same text giues an ingenious exposition of it to the same purpose teaching that by those wordes : omni creaturae : is ment all men ; for saith he , Sed omnis creaturae nomine signatur homo . And in the same place he addes an other explication of the same wordes yet more plaine & cleare for this our purpose saying , that by the name of euerie creature , all nations also may be signified . Potest etiam creaturae nomine , omnis natio gentium designari . So that it is voyde of controuersie that the Religion which Christ & his Apostles preached hath this relatiue , or respectiue vniuersalitie of obiect , or matter : of which contrarily , the English Religion is quite destitute in regarde that , at the least , for the space of 9. centenarie of yeares togither partely by some of the pretended reformers , & partely by euidence of fact , it is conuinced not to haue ben preached in anie parte or partial of the vniuersal world in all points as it is now professed in our English nation . A matter so cleare & manifest by the testimonie of all histories both of those former times & ours ; that I neuer heard of anic of the professors of it , who either in writing , or priuate discourses , or publike sermons , hath absolutelie auerred it to haue ben preached without interruption euer since the time of Christ , & his Apostles .

And thence it proceeds that for the auoiding the force of this or the like probation , I conceiue not what other refuge they can haue then to say , that notobstanding the obiect or matter of their Religion neyther is at this present , nor hath ben in all precedent ages taught or preached : yet that in respect their Religion is the same which was preached by the Apostles , & their successors in the first fiue hundreth yeares after the lawe of Christ , it may be tearmed vniuersal in obiect or matter euen at this present , especiallie supposing it is not the multitude of beleeuers which makes the obiect or matter of Religion vniuersal , but the totalitie , or latitude of the doctrine it selfe , as being in all points the same which Christ deleuered to his Apostles to be preached to all nations .

But to this I replye , it is no solution but a miere cuasion of the former argument . Yet I confesse that if it were true and solid , the pretended reformers had reason to applaude it as a most compendious and easie course for the maintaining of their new Religion . But the trueth is that this can not stand in vnitie with the doctrine , & faith which our Sauior deliuered to his Apostles , & they to the rest of the world , which was not to continue onelie for some d●i● , monethes , or yeares , but vntil the verie ●nd or consumation of the world . And therefore Christ our Sauior to those wordes of the text of sainct Mathewe : Euntes docete om●es geutes , going teach yee all nationes , presentlie for conclusion of his speech he added , & ●●centes eos seruare omnia quaeeumque mandaui ●obis & ecce ego vobiscum sum omnibus die●us vsque ad consummationem seculi , teaching them to obserue althings which I haue commaunded you , & behold , I am with you all dayes to the consumation of the world . In which wordes is included not onelie vniuersalitie of ●atter , but also perpetuall continuation of time , supposing it was vnnecessarie for Christ to haue promised his contiuual assistance to his Apostles except the Religion which he deliuered vnto them had ben necessarily to be perpetuallie preached in all times without interruption euen till the day of Iudgement , in which respect it implyes that relation of vni●ersalitie which my former argument con●udes ,

And to this I ioyne Secondlie : that the other ●rte of the maintainers of the English faith ●ho enterprise the defence of the visibilitie of there Religion in all ages , are yet farther out ●f square then the other . In regarde by this ●●eanes they enter in to a taske which ( as the ●ustration of their tryall in that particular ●ath alreadie giuen experience ) they will ne●er be able to performe . By all which it is euidentlie appeares that the English Religion hath no such relation or respect vnto all future times intrinsecallie included in it obiect , or matter : or if anie reference it had , it was of such temporarie , & smale continuance that it quite lost it by the way in all that vaste space of time which passed betweene the Popedome of sainct Gregorie , & the Apostacie of Martin Luther .

Thirdly I yet farther adde , that the defenders of the English faith assume false & abuse their hearers when they so commonly affirme that their Religion is the same which was taught & preached by Christ & his Apostles , which I proue because it doth not indeed agree in all particulars with the obiect & matter of the faith & doctrine which Christ & his Apostles published to the world as manifestly appeares by comparing some seuerall points of them both & conferring the one with the other . For where can the nouelistis finde either in the scripture , Fathers , or authenticall historie that Christ & his Apostles taught that those onely bookes of scripture ar Canonicall which the Church of England holdes for such ? or that Christians ar iustified by that faith onely by which they beleeue their sinnes are remitted & the iustice of Christ applyed vnto them by the faith same , & that euerie one in particular is bounde so to beleeue , & that this faith onely is necessarie & sufficient to saluation ? or wher doe they finde that Christ & his Apostles preached that the onely written worde is necessarie & sufficient to saluation ? where doe they reade in scripture or Fathers that the visible Church planted by Christ increased by the preaching of the Apostles , & continuated by a disinterrupted succession of Pastors can erre in faith ? that ther is no Purgatorie , nor place of satisfaction either in this world or the next for lesser sinnes , or the paine due to greater ? or that in the Sacrament of Eucharist the bodie & bloud of Christ at not contained & receiued other wise then figuratiuely & by faith alone ? I knowe they can shewe vs none of these seuerall propositions either in scriptures , or doctors of the Church , or by anie authenticall historie or relation that the same haue ben taught by Christ or his Apostles . I am assured that all they can performe in this case , is to produce certaine textes of scripture which to the ignorant sorte of people may seeme to haue resemblance with those their positions , but none soe plaine that without detortion of either sense or wordes or both , or without their owne fallatious illations & consequences , can possible containe anie such doctrine . For example for their solifidian iustification or their iustification by faith onely , they alledge diuers passages out of the epistles of S. Paule , as that man is not iustified by the workes of the lawe but by faith , & that faith is reputed to iustice , & yet none of those shewe that faith onely iustifies & much lesse doe they mention or insinuate that peculiar faith of remission of their sinnes by which the professors of the English Religion beleeue they ar iustified : that which is euidently convinced by the tenor of the texts then selues in which neither of the partes of the former position is contained but added by the expesitions & glosses of those who violently drawe the scripturs to their peruerse purpose . And the like practice of the Nouellists may easily be discouered to be vsed in the rest of the seuerall propositions aboue rehearsed , in Bellarmin & other Catholike Controuertists , who professedly confute the newe doctrine of the sectaries of this present age to whom I remit the reader for more exact discussion of the same , supposing this place is vncapable of more large proceeding .

And hence it appeares that the professors of the English faith must needes confesse that according to the premisses here breefely declared & confirmed the matter & obiect of their Religion doth not agree with that doctrine which Christ & his Apostles planted & published , which is the Minor proposition of my second silogisme aboue propunded , & the verie same I here intend to conuince . And now to the confirmation of the instance , I responde : I graunt the multitude of beleeuers doth not cause & formally constitute vniuersallitie in theobiect of Religion : neuerthelesse if comparing one Religion wit an other it is discouered to be apparently certaine that the one hath euer had a greater multitude of professors in all tymes & places since the first fondation of the true faith , then the other , yea & that the one hath had a greater number of faithfull persons for manie ages together , when as the one had none at all : In this case I say it is manifest that the multitude of beleeuers doth euidently argue the Religion so beleeued & professed to be no other but that same Religion which was first founded by Christ our Sauior with his promisse of perpetuall visibilitie & cantinuation ; & with multiplicitie of faithfull people , & consequently that it onely hath vniuersallitie in matter & obiect : & that on the contrarie the other Religion which can shew no such multitude of professors , but is notoriously defectiue in this particular , hath not anie vniuersallitie at all in the seuerall points of doctrine which it teacheth them to beleeue . And now this may suffice to demonstrate that ther is no vniuersallitie to be founde in the obiect or matter of the English Religion .

The second kinde of vniuersallitie of Religion is in tyme , which I proue not to be had in the English Religion in the forme following .

That Religion wantes true vniuersallitie of tyme which hath not ben visibly extant in all tymes since the true Religion was first founded .

But the Religion of England hath not ben visibly extant in all tymes since the first foundation of true Religion .

Therfore the Religion of England wantes true vniuersallitie of time .

The maior is most certaine & maintained by many of the professors of the English faith if not by all . Yet because they are not wholely vnited in this point as farre as I can perceiue by their doctrine , & because of those whoe maintaine the visibilitie of the Church , fewe or none of them graunt that the Church hath ben alwayes since the times of Christ so visible as the Romanists hould it to haue ben , that is with visible Pastors & teachers and a visible flock or congregation of people assignable in all ages and times : therefore I will proue it first by plaine texts of Scripture , then by authoritie of ancient Fathers , & first that the true Church is absolutely visible , then that it is perpetually visible .

The absolute visibilitie of the Church is ●aught in all those places of Scripture which speake of the Church as of a knowne congregation or companie of people , as S. Math. Die Ecclesi● confirma fratr●t tues . Pasce oues meas . Pascite qui in vobis est gregem Dei . the ●8 . tell the Church . S. Luc. 22. confirme thy brothers . ●ohn . 20. feede my sheepe . 1. Pet. 5. feed the flocke 〈◊〉 God which is among you . S. Paul 1. Cor. 15. Affir●nes that he himselfe did persecute the Church . And most commonly his Epistles are directed ●o the Churches as to the Church of Rome , Corinth , Ephesus . And finally ther is scarce ●nie mention of the Church in the whole Bible wher the visibilitie of the same is not plainely signified , & therefore it is compared to a citie vpon a mountaine Math. 5. In illo monte est qui impleuit orbem terrarum . — nunquid sic ostend . mus Ecclesia● fratres ? nonne aperta est● nonn● manifesta ? &c. Aug. trac . 1. in r. ep. loan . according to the exposition of that place made by S. Augustin in his booke of the vnitie of the Church the ●4 . & 20. Chapter . Of which inuisibilitie ther are likewise plaine texts in the second chapter of Isaias , & the fourth of Micheas : where conformable to the cited wordes of S. Math. the ● woe Prophets affirme , that ther will be in the latter Dayes a mount aine prepared , the house of God . Which wordes Sainct Augustin most perspicuously interprets of the Church of Christ .

Also ther is a verie pregnant place to this putpose the 61. of Isai . where speaking of the people of God the Prophet saith , all that shall see them shall know them to be the seed which God hath blessed . Euangelizare pauperibus mi sit me , &c. Luc. 18. Which wordes Christ himselfe in the fourth of S. Luke doth plainely insinuate to be meant of his Church in regarde he applies some of the precedent words of the same chapter of Isaie , to himselfe & the propagatior of the same Church by his preaching .

And according to these & the like phrase of Scripture the ancient Fathers doe commonly speake of the Christian Church . S. Augustin in his second Booke against Cresconius Saith thus . Extat Ecclesia cuncta clara atque perspicua , Cap. 36. quippe ciuitas quae abscondi non potest supra montem constituta . The Church is all cleare & perspicuous , as being a citie which cannot hiden be placed vpon a mountaine . And S. Chrysostome in hi● fourth homilie vpon the 6. chap. of Isaias hath that memorable sentence . Facilius est solem extingui quam Ecclesiam obscurari . The sunne m● more easily be extinguished then the Church obscured .

I could alledge most plaine words to th● same purpose out of the rest of the ancient Doctors : but because those twoe alone are of segreat authoritie that they ought to satisfie ani● vnpartiall iudgement in matter of testification of the sense & doctrine of ancient time touching this point , therefore I esteemed 〈◊〉 supersluous to produce their seuerall sentences .

Perhaps some of our aduersaries will say the doe not denie but both scriptures and Father doe teach in generall that the Church is visible : yet they denie that scriptures & Fathers reach that it must necessarily be visible in all ages & times , but rather that like vnto the noone it suffers Eclypses and defects by perseeution , or by other meanes .

To this which is a miere voluntarie euasion as anie one of iudgement may easily perceiue , I answer first that supposing both the sentences of scriptures & Fathers of the visibilitie of the Church are generall , absolute , & without limitation , it is manifestly conuinced that their meaning could not be that the Church is visible onely for a time , or at certaine times , and not perpetually , by reason that according to ●he common rule of interpretation generall wordes are to be vnderstood properly , & with ●ll their extension as long as noe inconuenience followes thereof , as certaine it is & apparent that none can followe of the continuall visibi●tie of the Church , wheras on the contrarie both manie & great in conueniences insue of the want of the same , as after shall be decla●ed . Neither can anie one place either of scripture or Fathers be produced by the opposers of this doctrine in which anie such limitation of the sentences of the Fathers is contained either ●n wordes or sense , or in anie other sorte so ●lainely as by the generalitie of the foresaid Phrases of Scripture & ancient Doctors all re●riction is excluded .

Secondly I impugne the same euasion for that if it be once graunted that the Church is not alwayes visible , then it followes that in the times of the inuisibilitie of the same , there are no visible Pastors nor preachers to minister the true word & Sacraments to the people , yea & that there are no such people in the world , & consequently that thereis noe Church either visible or inuisible , by reason that a Church whether we feigne it to be visible or inuisible essentially consists of people , which people , are in like manner essentially visible as muchas corporall , nor can they if they would , be visible except it be either by miracle or else by arte magique , or some such vnlawfull meanes . Nay more if they were once inuisible either by miracles , arte , or nature , how can it be knowne but by ther owne testimonie that they euer were truely extant ? to which neuerthelesse noe man can prudently giue credit especially in a matter of such importance .

And thus we see that out of this one absur●itie of the want of visibilitie in the Church a thousand others doe followe , as that ther are vivisible Pastors & yet inuisible , that ther are visible people & yet inuisible , that ther is a Church yet noe Church . And if our aduersa●ies say ther are true Pastors , true faithfull people , & a true Church , & that ther wants onely a true profession of faith in the Pastors , people , & Church . Then I replie first ; it is manifest that if ther be no prefession of faith in neither Pastors , people , nor anie parte of the Church , then can it not possible be a true Church or the Church of the Predestinate as they will haue it , but a Congregation onely or companie of timerous & cowardly people which dare not professe their faith , Ore autem confessio fit ad salutim & consequently not the Church of Christ in which not faith onely but also profession of faith is necessarie to saluation according to the doctrine of the Apostle saying that , with the hart we beleeue vnto iustice , Rom. 10. but with the mouth coufesion is made to saluation .

And howbeit I conceiue that the defenders of the inuisibilitie may instance & say that profession of faith is not required to the essence of the true Church , & by consequence that it may subsist with internall faith onelie : neuerthelesse I reioyne to this , that althou' I should grant profession of faith in metaphisical rigor to be no essentiall parte of the true Church , yet is it so necessarilie annexed to the true Church as it neither is nor euer will be founde without professors : neither is there anie authority either of scriptures or Fathers whereby it can be proued that anie such true Church euer were or euer will be consisting of internall faith onelie . But all those places which I haue aboue alledged both of the absolute visibilitie of the Church & necessitie of profession of faith to saluation required by the ordinance & commaundement of Christ manifestlie convince the contrarie . Well may our aduersaries out of their accustomed temeritie & spirit of contradiction against the Roman Church , & because they haue no other meanes to maintaine the subsistance of their owne new Congregation , affirme & teach that internall faith alone without profession makes a true Church yet no iudicious man will euer be persuaded but that position is assumed by them mierlie for the aduantage of their owne ill cause which without the vse of it or some such other of like nature , cannot possible be defended in the controuersie whether the true Church be ours or theirs . To omit that if no externall profession of faith be required to the true Church , it is impossible to conceiue how anie man could euer come to knowe that such a Church as consisteth of internall faith onely , was euer extant in the world any in parte of time since it was once planted & established by our Sauior & his Apostles . And yet admit that it is not wholely impossible to conceiue the possibilitie of a true Church without the attribute of externall profession , yet this is but a Metaphisicall case grounded onelie in the discourse of him who so conceiueth it , & by consequence it is not secure for anie man to venture his saluation vpon it , as being either plainelie false in it selfe , or at the least verie subiect to error & fallibili●itie : but euerie prudent man ought rather to followe the tenor of speach of the scripture & Fathers in the places before alledged , & particularlie the sentence of sainct Augustin in the ●1 . chapter of his 19. booke against Faustus . In nullum nomen religionis seu verum seu falsuu● coagulari homines possunt nisi aliquo signaculorum vel Sacramentorum visibilium consortio colligentur . Where he affirmes that men cannot be congregated or assembled together vnder one name of Religion , vnlesse they be tyed together with some consorte or socictie of visible signes , or Sacraments : In which wordes althou' he makes no expresse mention of profession of faith as required to a Church , yet doth he in effect affirme the same in other wordes teaching the communication of Sacraments to be necessarie to the constitution of a Church : Which communication of Sacraments is profession of faith in one of the highest degrees , as no man can denie .

And now hauing sufficientlie confuted the foresaid euasion of our aduersaties touching the visibilitie I will yet further adde positiue proofes of the perpetuitie of the visible Church .

First therefore I proue it by those places of scripture which affirme that the Church of Christ shall neuer perish ; as math. the 16. Porta insert non praualibuut aduersunam . The Portes of hell shall not preuaile against it . Where we see the Prophecie & promisse of our Sauior touching the perpetuitie of his Church , is generall & without limitation of time : & he speakes here of the same Church of which those places of scripture speach which declare it to be visible which I haue alreadie cited to that purpose ; & for the aduersarie to limit these wordes to the inuisible Church as if Christ had meant that the gates of hell shall not preuaile against his inuisible Church onelie , is a miere voluntarie explication of their owne inuention repugnant both to the text itselfe & reason : to the text in regarde that all the words & circumstances of it demonstrate that Christ speakes of his visible Church either onelie or cheefelie , as is the gouernement of the Church by sainct Peter , which Church was to consist of men whose sinnes the same Peter had power promised him to binde & loose , & that vpon earth , all which particular● sounde nothing but things visible .

Now the foresaid explication of our aduerfaries is also contrarie to reason . First for that supposing Christ planted such a Church vpon earth in which there were to be alwayes visible pastors & preachers to administere the Sacraments , Ephes. 4. 1. Cor. 12. Act. 20. Luc. 12. & teach , & publish the Gospell , as the scriptures testifie : And supposing he did not onelie commande vs to haue his faith , but also to professe his name before men , it is most absurde to imagin that he would , or did not vse his prouidence in the conseruation of the same visible Church in all times & occasions , as well as the inuisible Church if anie such he had established in the world .

Secondlie the same exposition is against reason in respect that by that limitation of our Sauiors wordes which our aduersaries vse , they giue vs to vnderstand that Christ promissed much , but performed little or nothing of importance in this particular . For if he assisted his Church so weakelie that for the space of manie yeares together the members of it were driuen to conceile their faith which neuerthelesse he himselfe obledgeth them to professe in all occasions , surelie he did not onelie come farre shorte of his promisse , but also in a certaine manner contradicted himselfe & deceiued them . And if for the gates of hell to haue so fare much vrged & vexed the Church as to haue le● all the members thereof with a bare secret ; & dissembling faith onely without anie professing , or vse of Sacraments for the space of manie succeeding ages , is not absolutelie to haue preuailed against it , & consequentlie that Christs wordes are falsified : then certainelie neither had they ben falsified in case hell gates had so farre preuailed as quite to extinguish euen the professors themselues , yea & by an impossibilitie to haueleft faith alone hanging vpon the hedges for want of other subiect all which sequels being most absurde & yet consequent to our aduersaries glosse vpon the wordes of scriptures aboue cited , they euidentlie argue the falsitie of that their construction .

An other pregnant place for the perpetuall continuation of the visible Church , is that of the 4. to the Ephesians : where the Apostle saith that Christ appointed Pastors &c. Ad consummationem Sanctorum donec● occurramus omnes in virum perfectum . That is , he appointed some Bishops , other pastors , & others Doctors &c. To the consummation of the Saints till we meet all into the vnitie of faith & into aperfect man : That is vntill the day of iudgement . Vpon which place sainct Augustin in his 12 booke of the Citie , hath large discourses to this purpose in the 16.17 . & 18. chapters . And the trueth is that Christ himselfe hauing in this speciall manner designed such persons for gouernors & teachers in his Church till the end of the world , doubtlesse his meaning was not that they should be such dumme dogs as the establishers of the inuisibilitie doe affirme them to haue ben in their imaginarie Church for a long time together : But his diuine will & pleasure was they should be custodes Ierusalem qui tota die & tota nocte non tacebunt in perpetuum . That is Christ would haue them such watchmen or keepers of Ierusalem ( that is to say the Church ) as shall not be silent till the end of the world in no time , nor vpon anie occasion Which perpetuitie of the visible gouernement of the Church is grounded in the perfection of Christs diuine prouidence & mercie towardes the members thereof for whome of his infinitie goodnes he pleased to haue the way to saluation continuallie open : Which otherwise if the true Church had ben at anie time hidden or inuisible as at the least some of those against whome I nowe dispute will haue it , then it could not possible haue ben so : Yea & manie thousands or rather millions of men had liued & dyed out of the state of saluation as being impossible for them to finde & enter into the true Church all that space of time in which it is feigned by them to haue remained inuisible or out of knowledge .

And thus much for the impugnation of that parte of our aduersaries which defeds that the true Church is not perpetuallie or in all differences of times visible : the absurditie of which doctrine diuers of the defenders of the English Church of later standing aduertiseing , & also because they find it not so plausible to their auditors as they could wish , they haue ventured vpon another course , indeuoring to shewo that the same Church & Religion which is now established in England hath ben alwayes visible in the world from the time of Christ & his Apostles euen till this present : Which manner of proceeding of theirs altho' it is much more difficult & hard to be defended then the other now confuted , & that by this meanes the maintainers of it doe but incidere in syllam , that is by auoyding of one incouenience they fall in to a greater : Yet because they persuade themselues they come nearer to the marke of prouing their Church to be Catholike in this respect as well as the Roman Church hath euer ben , ( which indeed they might performe if they were able truelie to proue their visibilitie ) therfore I will breefelie demonstrate that they haue no such visibilitie as is necessarie to the constirution of the true Catholike Church as they pretend .

Wherefore to come to the purpose & the more clearelie to conuince my intent , I frame this Sylogisme against the visibilitie of their Church .

That Church wantes perpetuall visibilitie which cannot produce some visible professors of their doctrine in all points & in all ages since the time of the Apostles till this present .

But the Church of England cannot produce some visible professors of their doctrine in all points & ages since the tyme of the Apostles to this present .

Therfore the Church of England wantes perpetuall visibilitie .

The maior is not denyed by our aduersaries , the minor hath all the difficultie & that I proue .

And inprimis that the defenders of the English faith can produce no scripture for this point is most certaine and euident for that this is onelie a matter of fact which succeeded since the scriptures were published . By occasion of which the reader may note that those professors of the English religion who in this manner defende the visibilitie of their Church doe not proceed consequenter to that other negatiue principle of theirs to wit that nothing is to be beleeued by faith but which is either expressely or by necessarie illation contained in the scriptures , which generall rule of theirs in this case is manifestlie defectiue for that in it neither scripture nor deduction or consequence of scripture can seruo their turne in this particular .

And if they replie that they can proue their visibilitie a priori , by scriptures by those places which teach perpetuall● visibilitie in the Church , then I say that this is not the matter now in question but a subtiltie to delude the reader , for the controuersie is whether they can proue their visibilitie a posteriori , that is whether they can yealde vs anie authenticall profe or testimonie whenby it may certainelie appeare that the Religion now professed in England hath ben in deed perpetually visible in in all ages as the scripture & Fathers aboue alledged affirme the true Church ought to bee , otherwise they doe onely suppose their Church is the same which is described in the scripture , but proue it not . Neither doe we aske them to she we vs that such a Church in generall ther is in the world as the scriptures doe mention , but we vrge them to demonstrate that their Church in particular hath the propertie or attribute of perpetuall visibilitie as the scriptures requires to be founde in the onely indiuiduall true Church of Christ : & till they can performe this they neither speake according to the sense of scriptures , nor satisfie vs in our demaunde .

Wherfore I proue the minor proposition of of the argument aboue framed , because no authenticall historie can beproduced in which it is related that this Religion of England now commonly ther professed , beleeuing & maintaining that ther ar but 22. bookes of Canonicall scripture onely . That they ar to be expounded by the spirit of euerie priuat person . That man is iustified by faith onely . That ther ar onely two sacraments instituted by Christ . That the bodie of Christ is giuen , receiued , & eaten in the Sacrament in a spirituall manner that is by faith onely : finally I say that for testimonie of that these & diuers others of the 39. articles of the English Religion haue ben taught or preached in all ages since the tyme of Christ & his Apostles in anie Kingdome , prouince , towne or yet in anie one corner of the whole world tho' neuer so abscure , ther is not extant anie kinde of recorde : And therfore it is incredible in the highest degree that anie professors of it can be produced in euerie seuerall age since the foundation of the true Church of Christ : for that if anie such had ben in anie tyme or place for so long a space together , it is as certaine as it is certaine ther hath ben in all that successe of tyme sunne , moone , & starres in the firmament , or fishes in the sea , that some writer or other would haue made mention of the same . And if Historiographers be so curious & exact in this nature , that ther was neuer anie conuenticle of sectaries so smale or obscure but it hath ben noted & related by some of them , much lesse could such a Church as our English Nouellists pretend theirs to be , haue lurked so closse as that no mention of it should be founde in histories or recordes of former ages before the daies of Luther . It is not absolutely impossible to conceiue that Christ might haue established an inuisible Church in this world at the least for a tyme , but that he should haue ordained his church with pertetuitie of visible pastors , & yet that neither their names , seates , parishes , or any other monument of them either dead or aliue , can be produced to make it visibly appeare that they were professors in all points of the same Religion which now is professed in England , this I say is aboue all admiration neither can it possible seeme credible to anie sounde vndestanding , on mature iudgment .

Secondly I proue the same minor , for that diuers of our English aluersaries hauing of late vsed the vttermost of their power & industrie in this particular , yet haue they not come neare the performance of their purposes , but in lieu of produceing professors of their Religion in the seuerall ages of the Church , they cast in to their Catalogue either such as haue ben flatly against them in diuers points in which they differ from the Roman Church , or such as haue ben condemned for heretikes in tymes past , & that partely euen for doctrine contrarie to some of the articles of the English faith as appeares for example in wiclef & Hus , Maledicta ergo doctrina Wiclef quo considere iubet &c. Wald. p 3. c. sep . & seq. of which the first defended , that more confidence is to be placed in mans owne proper merites then in humble prayer : that a preist in mortall sinne cannot validly baptize , that for Ecclesiasticall persons to haue possessiones is contrarie to scripture . The second neue●idenyed the reall presence , nor merit . Or els those whom the defenders of the English faith dusigne for members of the same , were such as because they speake some thing doubtfully in onely some one point of the Roman doctrine ( of which rake is Presbiter Bertrame ) they puti●hem in their list as if they were wholely & intyrely theirs . Notobstanding they are knowne to be quite apposite vnto them in all the rest of their faith & profession . The which how pore & inconsiderate a shifte it is , the iudicious reader will presently perceiue & condeme their weake & false proceeding .

Lastely for confirmation of the impossibi●itie of euer prouing the perpetuall visibilitie of ●he Church of England , it may be added that King Iames who was the greatest & most ●amous defender of the newe Religion that ●uer writ , as it seemes considering better this ●oint then others that follow him , was so warie 〈◊〉 circumspect that he would neuer cast him●elfe into this most dangerous gulfe , as ap●eares by his Monitorie in which altho' his whole drift was to proue his owne Church to ●e the true Church of Christ , yet did he make ●o expresse mention of the visible Church more ●hen of the inuisible , but onely proceedes 〈◊〉 generall termes & without distinction , as ●oulding it impossible to maintaine the visibi●●tie of it in all former tymes & ages , for which ●●ason he prudently declined that contro●ersie .

And in deed the trueth is that who soeuer he 〈◊〉 that shall vndertake the taske of prouing ●erpetuall visibilitie in anie of the pretensiue ●●formed Churches , will be no more able to ●rforme it then an infant were able to rowle ●siphus stone , or accomplish the labors of Hercules . whence it is consequent that 〈◊〉 aduersaries what soeuer they pretend , true● want vniuersalitie of tyme in their Church whether they defend it to be visible or in●●sible , which is that same which the maior & minor , of my second sylogisme aboue proposed doe affirme , & which may suffice for thi● parte of the discourse I here prosecute .

Now touching the other twoe Kyndes o● vniuersallitie to wit of place & persons , they ar so annexed one to the other , that they a● morally speaking either all one , or at the lease out of the negation of the one , is necessarity inferred the nagation of the other . For example if it be true that the religion of England neither is nor was in euerie place of the world , it thence infallibly falloweth that it neither i● nor was in all persons of the world : as in like manner it also followes , that if it was not for manie ages together in anie place of the world it is also manifest it was not for the same spac● of tyme in anie person in the world , & by reason of this connexion betwixt the vniuersallitie of place & persons , I will treate of the● both vnder the name of place , supposing for certaine that whatsoeuer defect of vniuersallitie of place shall be discouered in the English Religion , the same defect is found to be i● they muersallitie of persons & professors of it And here also I giue the reader notice by th● way that when the Romanists exact of their ●duersaries onely to produce some professors ●f their Religion in euerie seuerall age , they ●se no smale fauor towardes them in that man●er of proceeding , in regarde that to conuince ●heir Church to haue ben perpetually visible , ●roperly speaking , they ought not onely to ●nde out some few persons of anie sorte of ●eople what soeuer , but they ar obledged in ●eason to shew a perfect order or Ierarchie of ●cclesiasticall persons to haue ben continually 〈◊〉 their Church , for that both the visible Church of Christ was so planted in the world ●y him selfe , & also progated by his Apostles : 〈◊〉 more ouer because the Romanists defacto ●an shewe the same to haue ben perpetually in ●●e Church & Religion which they professe , ●hat is in that Church of which haue euer ben ●eades or Cheefe Pastors the Popes of Rome ●y continuall & ininterrupted succession from 〈◊〉 . Peter who was the first Bishop & Pope of ●hat most famous seat .

Now this being supposed I proue ther is no ●niuersallitie of place in the Church of En●land by this silogisme following .

Ther wants vniuersallitie of place in that Religion which in all points of it doctrine nei●her is nor euer hath ben preached or profes●ed in all or most places of the world .

But the Religion of England in all points of it doctrine neither is nor euer hath be● preached or professed in all or most places 〈◊〉 the world .

Ergo the Religion of England hath no v●uersallitie of place .

I proue the Maior , first by the etymolog● or prime signification of the word vniuersa● which as I haue alreadie aboue declared importeth one in manie or rather one in all , a● appeareth in humane nature abstracted which is not onely one & the same in manie , b●● also participated in euerie particular or indiuiduall person . And altho' it is true that vniuersallitie of Religion as being onely a morall matter , can not be vnderstood with so much metaphisicall rigor as in naturall things it vseth to be taken : yet for the verification of such generall sentences as we finde both in scripture 〈◊〉 Fathers , it must of necessitie be accepted with as great latitude as morally can be imagined For example if ther be anie doctrine in the world which for the space of almost 16. hundreth yeares neither is nor hath ben preached taught or professed in either all , or at the least in most places of the world , then doubtlesse can that vniuersall proposition of the Apostle● into all the earth hath the sounde of them gone forth & that of S. Augustin . She ( the Church ) is like vnto a vine diffused or spred in euer●● place , neuer be truely verified of it : & consequently such a doctrine can not be truely said 〈◊〉 haue such vniuersalitie in it as scripture & ●athers require to the onely true Religion , & ●hich in reason can not be iudged lesse then ●at in all the for said great number of yeares , ●either is at th●s present , or hath ben in times ●ast preached & professed generally at the least 〈◊〉 the greater parte of the world if not in euerie ●arte therof .

And touching the vniuersalitie of persons ●hich as I declared before is either included or ●ecessarily connected to the vniuersalitie of ●ace , it is a matter so cleare & apparent that 〈◊〉 is not to be founde in the English Religion ●ther for the time paste or present , that euen ●●e cheefe of the professors of it dare not auer●e it to be vniuersal in that nature , as is mani●est by the authoritie of King Iames himselfe ●he Salomon of their sect . Whoe althou' he la●oreth much in his booke to Christian Princes 〈◊〉 persuade them he defendes no other then ●he Catholike faith , yet in the end of the same ●e is forced to confesse that ( notobstanding he ●●cludes in the number all the professors of the ●retended reformation euen in other countries ●●gge & ragge ) yet they doe nor by much a●ounte to so manie as professe the contrarie , ●hat is the Catholike Roman doctrine , & Re●gion : preached & practised in so manie seue●all nations & places of the of the vniuersal orbe . In so much that if anie of our aduersari●● were so impudent as to conteste or repugn● to so plaine a trueth , Regina Austri , I meane euen the Infidels & Iewes will be readie to rise & proteste against him in the day of Iudgement .

By which and the rest I haue deliuered , it is clearely consequent that the English Religion ( especially if it be intended as it is singular & different in diuers points from the rest of the pretensiue reformed congregations ) cannot possible with anie coulor of trueth , be named Catholike or vniuersal in number of persons ; supposing that according to the doctrine of Fathers , & the common acception of the worde among Christians , this appellation or sacred surname agrees onely to that Christian Religion which hath generalitie of persons as well as of tyme , place , obiect or matter , which generalitie cannot possibly be conceiued but in order or with relation to the greater number of beleeuing professing Christians , as being quite repugnant to reason that the lesser parte of a anie multitude or total number should be named either general or common , & much lesse reason ther is it should obtaine the most ample and vaste denomination of vniuersal especially where both parties are extant & remaine in the same present time .

But perhaps our aduersaries will say that to ●he verifying of those & the like generall sen●ences of scripture & Fathers , it is not necessarie ●hat the true Religion either is or hath ben alreadie diffused ouer all or most partes of the world , but it is sufficient that it will be preached in all or most places before the end of the world , & so altho' this hath not ben verified in the English Religion as yet , neuer the lesse it will be so extended in the tyme to come .

To this I replie that altho' ther is some varietie among diuines about● the sense of the place cited & some other places of scripture to the same purpose to wit whether they be vnderstood of the Apostles onely or of them & their successors , In omnem terram exiuit sonus corum &c. Rom. 10. as also whether they signifie the tyme present or future , & finally whether they be verified in all rigor or onely in a common morall manner , neuerthelesse I finde they all agree in that the Church of Christ hath ben alreadie so farre extended either by the Apostles them selues , or at least by them & their successors , that it may be truely affirmed to haue ben long since diuulged , & planted in the whole world defacto , & not in power or virtually onely , euen according to the sense of the foresaid wordes & other places of scripture which speake in the future tense , as appeareth plainely by the wordes of S. Paule in his first chapter to the Colossians , wher he affirmes that euen in his tyme the Gospell was come vnto hem , also it is ( saith he ) in the vniuersall world & doth fructifie , & increasens it doth in them . Which words I say are so cleare that ther is no place of tergiuersation or replie in this particular , but that according to them it must of necessitie be graunted by our aduersaries ( except they will plainely contradict S. Paul & the scriptures ) that the foresaid extention of the faith of Christ doth not expect the time to come , but is alreadie made as much as serueth for explicating & verifying of the same S. Paul to the Romans before related , whose words in my iudgment are manifestly coū●nced , at the least in a cheefe parte , to be vnderstood in the present tense by those otherwords of himselfe in the epistle to the Collossenses euen now by me related , which doubtlesse containe a plaine exposition of the former , as appeares by the comentarie of S. Chrysostome vpon them saying of the Church of Christ . Adest vbique , suporat , & ob●inet vbique ; praestat vbique .

And altho' I am not ignorant that both ancient Fathers & moderne diuines teach that ( as S. Hierome speakes vpon those wordes . Pr●●●● dicabitur Euangelium hoc in vniuerso mundo ) the complement or conclusion of the preaching of the Gospell in euerie place shall not be performed before the consummation of the world , as being a precedent signe therof : neuerthelesse as this is true in it selfe , so it in no respect ( speaking absolutely ) contrarie to the vniuersalitie of the Church which at this present is & in times past hath euer ben , as is euidently conuinced by the writings of the same ancient Fathers & moderne diuines who most frequently teach that the true Church of Christ was sufficiently spred in the world to make it vniuersall euen in their owne primatiue ages , as their wordes by me rehearsed in diuers places of this treatise , clearely testifie : who also if they had liued in these present dayes might with farre greater reason haue affirmed the same of the Roman church in which then owne bookes manifeste them to haue liued as partes & members , being nowe much more extended then at that time it was .

And certainely for the defenders of the Church of England to imagin that altho● their Religion hi●herto hath not ben vniuersall in the world , yet that hereafter it will be vniuersall before the end of the world , is both voyde of probabilitie & ridiculous .

First because it is the nature of true Religion to bring zeale & feruor with it especially in the begining as appeareth in the Apostles & their successors in the first ages who not obstanding all the impediments that the deuill by humane wit , & malice could contriue , yet d●d they extend & propagate the faith of Christ in diuers nations & kingdomes both remote & barbarous . Wherefore if the Religion of England had ben the true faith of Christ doubtlesse it would by the professors of it haue ben long since so extended & dilated that it should not need to be brought to those streits as to fetch their vniuersalitie from the verie end of the world .

Secondly because the nature of the Religion of England is such that it hath no conuenient meanes for propagation of itselfe in the whole world , inregard that those to whome the charge of preaching & teach the same is committed , are men that are all either actually tyed to wiues children , & posteritie or els liue in expection , & & desire of those temporall , or transitorie commodities , & scarce euer dreame of extending their Religion farther then their owne seuerall Parishes : yea & their doctrine it selfe teaches them that either they must all marie of necessitie as some of them maintaine , or at the least that it is more expedient , & secure for them to marie then to lead a single life : supposing which particulars it is morally vnpossible for them euer to preach their faith to all nations ( as Christ commaundeth ) with such clogges at their heeles as are wife , children , & posteritie .

Thirdlie it is certainelie knowne that since the Religion of England was established in the forme & manner that now it is in , the professors of it neuer went to ante foren nation purposely to preach their faith , & much lesse haue they euer taken anie generall course for the conuersion of infidels by anie mission of Ministers , or by other meanes . Or if anie of them haue trauelled into strange countries ( which are knowne to be verie fewe in number ) it hath ben onelie , or cheefely for temporall respects as for that they haue ben silenced in their owne countrie for preaching some extrauagant errours , or els for some other crime or publike offence committed ; or perhaps some pore vnbenificed , ignorant , & threedbare fellowes who for want of meanes to maintaine themselues , resolue desperatelie to trye their fortune in an other place onelie for that respect & not for charitie or zeale of reduceing people to Christian Religion . And if perhaps they finde anie pore blackamore , or other barbarian that heareing the name of Christians , desires to be of their Religion , yet these false Apostles proceed so superficiallie with them , & giue them so smale & ill instruction , that it is to be feared that after they haue baptized them on their fashion , they still remaine as black as they were before both in bodie & soule . Nay their deuotion is so could in this nature , that they themselues are ashamed either to write or to brag of it , as experience doth teach for that there is not anie booke extant that e●er I could heare of , in which it may appeare that they haue performed anie notable matter in this particular . The discalced Carmelits at this present hane obtained Bishops for their mission in Persia euen by the Kings permission as I am informed . Whereas yet on the contrarie histories are full of the infinit number of Infidels which the professors of the Roman Church haue conuerted & dayly conuert to the Christian faith both in the Oriental & Occidental Indies & other places , & that with losse of their liues & whatsoeuer other comodities they haue in this world , as is manifest especiallie in the foure Orders of Mendicants & the Iesuits , who not obstanding innumerable difficulties , still continue their annuall Missions ordained to that same end & purpose of propagating Catholike Religion in all countries & nations .

Lastelie I say that for the professors of the English faith to say , that their Religion will be extended thro' the whole world before the day of Iudgement is mierlie their owne prediction , to which no man of mature iudgement ought to giue credit except they first proue themselues to be true Prophets which in my opinion they can no more performe then they can proue the descent of their pedegree from sainct Michael the Archangell . And thus wesee plainelie that the English Religion as now it is professed being destitute of all meanes to propagate it self : as hitherto it neither is nor euer was vniuersall in the world , so neither can it be imagined with anie probable coulour of reason that euer it can possible in future times come to be spred ouer all the nations of the whole world as according to scriptures & Fathers the true Church ought to be , & the mator of my former Sylogisme doth affirme . And not to insiste anie longer in this matter , I in like manner proue the minor proposition of the same argument by the same reasons which I haue vsed for the proofe of the foresaid mator , which if they be duelie applied to the English Religion they will plainelie demonstrate , that the Religion of England neither hath ben , is , nor euer will be preached & published in all partes of the world & consequentlie that it hath not vniuersallitie of place which is that which the conclusion of the argument doth containe .

It is true I further conceiue that the professors of the English faith as men disposed to cauille , may yet once againe replie , & say that in regarde their Religion is the same with the Religion of the Apostles , therefore it hath the same vniuersallitie which the Apostolicall Religion hath .

But to this I reioyne anser firste that I haue shewed before that the Religion now prosessed in England doth differ in diuers points from the faith of the Apostles , the particulars of which difference I haue before specified , as is that of iustification by faith onelie , the deny all of the reall presence & the rest .

Secondlie I say that this replie is that kinde of absurditie in disputation which the Logitians call petitio Principij that is , when that is assumed by the disputant for a true & certaine Principle which ought to be proued as being the verie matter in question , & so this is onelie an euasion of the aduersarie which hath no more force them his owne authoritie giues it , which is none at all .

And now by this & that more which hath ben sayd touching the vniuersallitie of place & persons , it is most apparent that the English Religion hath no such attribute & consequentlie that it is defectiue in that nature .

Wherefore hence I passe to the last gender or kynde of vniuersallitie which is that of the generall rule of faith , of which there be two sortes , the one is nothing els but the word of God as it is contained in the scriptures or diuine & Apostolicall traditions . The other rule is the visible Church by whose authoritie we come to knowe certainely & infallibly the true sense of the worde of God , & all those things which his diuine maiestie hath reuailed as matter of faith to be beleeued by all sortes of people , or otherwise necessarie to saluation .

Tract . 1. Suarez de fide disp. ● . sec. 2. fine . And of these two rules ( which some diuide in to three or more thou ' in my opinion not so properlie & conuenientlie ) the second which is the authoritie of the Church is commonlie called in the schooles regula proponens , that is a rule or way by which the prime reuailing veritie or diuine authoritie which is the formall obiect & foundation of supernaturall faith , is immediatelie applied vnto beleeuers , And altho' if indeed the worde of God were so cleare that euerie one by reading the wordes of scripture , or Apostolicall traditions as they are sett downe in the Councels or other recordes of the Church , could not but vnderstand them in a true & vniforme sense , the first of those two rules might suffice alone , yet because the scriptures are obscure & difficult in their vnderstanding as both themselues & experience testifie : & also because out of the imperfection of nature mens iudgements often times disagree in matters of doctrine & practice , therefore besides that speachlesse rule , ( I meane in decision of matters of controuersie ) there was necessarie another liuing & vocall rule by which the true meaning of the first & prime rule which is the worde of God , might so infallibly be declared vnto them as all doubts & scruples excluded , their mindes & consciences might safely rest in euerie point of faith by it proposed without anie further question , or tergiuersation .

Now to come to the purpose , in that first foundation of faith which is the authoritie of God as he reuaileth matters to his Church , & without which true faith cannot stand , the defenders of the English Religion agree with the Romanists , as also they agree with them in the first of the two rules , at the least so farre as concernes this controuersie , that is they hould Gods worde to be a rule of faith as the Roman Catholikes hould : But the difference is in that our aduersaries will needs haue the worde of God to be the scripture onelie , & that interpreted by the spirit of euerie priuate person who reades it , & consequenter they hould this onelie for their rule proponent by which the diuine authoritie is applied to euerie point of faith in the beleeuers .

Whereas on the contrarie we Romanists beleeue & vse the authority of the most vniuersall Church as the infallible applyer of Gods reuailing veritie vnto vs in all matters of faith & manners . And in this rule vpon which all certaintie of faith dependes quoad nos that is for as much as toucheth the beleeuers or credents , I here proue that the English Religion wanteth this vniuersallitie as well as the rest of the obiect & circumstances aboue discussed the which I demonstrate in this forme of argument .

That onelie proponent rule of faith his vniuersall which is one & the same in all or at the least in the greater parte of beleeuers .

But that which the professors of the English Religion hould for their proponent rule of faith is not one & the same in all or the greater parte of beleeuers .

Ergo that which the professors of the English Religion hould for their proponent rule of faith is not vniuersall .

The maior of this Sylogisme is euident by the definition of vniuersall , which according to the doctrine of Philosophers is one in all if it be taken in rigor of Logike , or as the Metaphisitians vse the worde . Or at the least it signifies the greater parte if it be accepted onely in a morall sense , as here I take it . From which declaration of the word vniuersall is collected no lesse cleare & conuincent proofe of the minor proposition which affirmeth that the proponent rule of faith in the professors of the Church of England is not one & the same in all , or yet in the greater parte of beleeuers . That which I she we first , because the priuate spirit of euerie professor of the English Religion which is the onelie immediate rule of saith they professe to follow in matters of faith as the verie sounde of the worde doth declare , is peculiar to those that haue it . & not common to all , therefore it cannot possible be generall or vniuersall .

That the spirit by which the professors of the English Religion interpret the worde of God is peculiar to some onelie & not common to all such as exteriorly professe the faith of Christ it is manifest in that it neither passeth into other countries with conformitie in all points of beleefe to all the rest of the pretended reformed Churches as appeareth in the controuersie of the real presence with the lutherans , the inamissibilitie of grace , In his booke directed to Christian Princes . the point of Predestination , free will with the Arminians : nay nor yet doth it agree with the spirit of all the inhabitants of England it selfe , as both King Iames doth plainely suppose wher he graunteth ther ar manie Puritans in his Realme besides Papists & Protestants : & also experinental knowledge doth manifest the same , it being certainely knowne & generally confessed on all sides that those three sortes of people be not gouerned by one vniforme spirit , but euerie one by their owne rule of faith , the rule of the Romanists being one & common among them selues in all places of the world , but on the contrarie the rule of the Protestants , & Puritans , being diuided & seuerall both in their owne countrie & out of it , both among themselues & also from the Catholikes wheresoeuer they be : which diuision both from themselues & others is an infallible argument that they haue no vniuersallitie in their propounding rule of saith . That which yet more plainely appeares & is confirmed by a worke lately published by a Protestant Doctor ( his name I doe not remembers ) who describes seueral sectes of Puritans or pure Caluinists all different both among themselues & from the English Protestants . Which diuersitie of sectes cannot stand without a different spirit or rule of faith .

Secondlie I proue the spirit of the professors of the English religion is not one & the same in all or the greater parte of credents , because it is not that spirit by which the visible Church hath ben in all times , places , & persons successiuely gouerned without interruption , ergo it is not an vniuersall spirit but onelie particular & priuate . The antecedent of this argument is certaine for that if it were the same , it would be founde conformable & subordinate to the spirit of the greater parte of the Christian Churches , & the Religion of England would be agreable to the Religion of the same Churches both in doctrine practice & gouernement , which neuer thelesse we see to be contrarie & repugnant vnto them .

Thirdly , the spirit of the maintainers of the present Religion of England is not conformable to the spirit of their antecessors for aboue nine hundreth yeares together at the least , therfore it is not vniuersall . That the spirit of the maintainers of the present Religion of England is not conformable to the spirit of thir ancestors , I proue by the authoritie of all historiographers & wirters euen the pretended reformers them selues who haue either expressely testified or at the least not denyed but that in all this space of tyme euen vntill the dayes of King Edward the Sixt which is not yet a hundreth yeares , the Masse & reall presence was generally approued , the communion vnder one Kynde practiced , Altars & pictures vsed in Churches with honor & reuerence . Purgatorie & prayer to saints taught & allowed , & finally all the points of doctrine & manners betweene the Romanists & Anglicans now controuersed were publikly professed , all which neuerthelesse is at this time condemned & quite renounced & abandoned by the professors of the present English faith . Of which both they & we are eye witnesses at this day . Which two things can not possible be done by one & the same spirit of God in regarde they ar quite apposite & contradictorie in them selues , & consequently the spirit of those who professe to tepugne to that same doctrine which they know & acknowled their predecessors to haue imbraced as sound & pious & conformable to the worlde of God , so manie former ages successiuely , cannot be conceiued to be an vniuersall spirit , but priuate & proper to them selues .

Fourtly the spirit of the preachers & teachers of the English Religion is quite different from the spirit of the doctors & writers that haue adhered & abeyed the Roman Church , in euerie seuerall age , as is manifest to those who read them & compare their workes with the writings of the pretensiue reforming doctors of our tymes the doctrine of those that haue writ euen from the first Centurie of yeares imediately following the Apostles being sprinckled with pietie & deuotion towardes the saints in heauen & especially the virgin Marie , as their sermons , Homilies vpon their feasts , & other their workes doe testifie , of which matter good store is to be founde especially in S. Basil , Cyprian , Chrysostome , Hierome , Ambrose , Augustin . Gregorie , Damacene , Bernard , & the rest of the Roman diuines which haue writ euer since , euen till this present tyme , in whome also ther is frequent mention & comendation of miracles operated by the saints & their reliques : none of which particulars appeare in anie of the Writings of the professors of the English Religion , but rather in their bookes & ordinarie sermons they indeuore most ernestly to persuade the people that they ought not to hearken after anie such matters , but hould them either for false & superstitious , or at the least for idle , superfluous & impertinent , & so we clearely see by this that the spirit of the English professors is contrarie to the spirit of the whole torrent of the most learned & renowned men of all ages past euen to this present day ; & consequently it can not be generall , common or vniuersall , nor a true spirit , except the owners of it will condemne the contrarie spirit of the most learned , iudicious , & pious men of all ages since the tyme of Christ & his Apostles to haue ben false & erroneous , & theirs onely the reight spirit of God . Which is the highest degree of temeritie that can be imagined .

Lastely . In practice of virtue & exercise of good life the spirit of the preachers & teachers of the English Religion now professed , is disagreeable to the practice & exercise of virtue of the doctors & pastors of the Roman Church in all succeding tymes since the first foundation of the same : a great parte of whose writings ar replenished with rules & driections for prayer & contemplation , mortification of the bodie & inordinate passions of the soule , by fasting , vse of hereclothes , disciplines , prostrations , acts of obedience , & resignation of their willes to the commaunde of superiors , vowes of obedience , chastitie & pouertie , monasticall institutions , solitarie life of monkes , Anachorites & Ermites , & other Religious conuentuall men & women , & finally with all other meames which possible could be imagined as either necessarie or conuenient for the exercise of a religious & virtuous course of life . None of all which or at the least verie little is to be founde in the bookes of the teachers of the English Religion , or heard in their publike sermons or priuate exhortations .

And altho' it is true that some of them as it seemes moued with emulation of the Romanists ( who euen in this present age labore much in that kinde as our aduersaries cannot denie ) haue published some thing in the nature of prayer or deuotion , yet is it in such a manner as they reduce the exercise of a Christian life either to the exercise of faith onely or cheefly , excluding or at the least not inducing to externall workes of Pennance and mortification of the bodie . Or els they proceed in such a newe fashion ( as being onely sutable to their owne newe Principles of faith & manners ) as neuer was heard in anie age of the world before the dayes of Luther .

That which doth particularly appeare in a certaine newe worke lately published & intitled . The handmaid of pietie , which neuerthelesse hath not one dramme of true pietie or one sparke of that spirit which hath reigned in the visible Church since the the first plantation of Christian Religion : which booke not obstansting it hath the name of a Mannuall yet is it not conforme either to the Mannuall of S. Augustin , or anie other euer vsed hitherto among Christian people : but forged in the anthors owne proper braine , & consisting of such froathie spitle as fell beside the pulpit when he made his preach●ngs , full of pedantik termes & affectation as the worde supparte & others , & as the verie first words of the title plainely testifie which are in Latin to make it more admired : & dedicated to a falsely supposed Patronesse of his religion . whome altho' the world did winne for a smale time , yet it neuer peruerted her noble & constant iudgement , whoe now hath returned to her ancient home with farre greater glorie vnto it then it lost by her absence .

And that which is more vntolerable the profane minister with his feruor & deuotion he now & then mingleth a lye or a paradox . As page 617. where speaking of the fast of lent , he affirmes . That those of his profession place not Religion or the substance of Gods worship in fasting or feasting , as saith she the Papist , doe . And in the page following he saith in his owne name & in the name of his brother Puritans . We hold not fasting to be a worke pleasing to God . And yet in his page 609. he grautes that to fast religiously at some time is Gods commaundement . And pag. 611. that lent fast is partely religious & ordered by the Church for religious endes & bindeth the conscience mediately : which larring positions of this grand Doctor I am not able to reconcile . And yet for a parte of twelfe dayes deuotion he putteth the payment of tithes , which indeed is a deuotion far more profitable to himself then pleasing to others . All which particulars doe manifestly declare that whatsoeuer apish imitation these fellowes vse in writing some fewe bookes of deuotion & prayer , yet is their spirit quite contrarie to the common spirit of the vniuersall Church , & wholely vertigenous , extrauagant , & peculiar to themselues .

And to this the like may be added of their Church seruice & forme of administration of Sacraments as may be seeme in their booke of common prayer , which , as it manifest to them that read it , doth notably differ from all the Lyturgies & publike formes of prayers & pastorals that euer were vsed in the Church before the preachings of Luther , not onely in the manner of administrating the Sacraments and seruice , but also in some substantiall points of them both . Their being not anie mention in the booke of common prayer of either annointing with Chrisme in Baptisme , or of extreme vnction of the sicke : nor of consecrarion of the Eucharist , or absolute commaunde to receiue it , but onely with condition or rather with expresse order or precept that ther be a whole congregation that is some persons more disposed to communicate with the infirme partie besides himselfe , & that otherwise he must haue patience & take his iourney to an other world without his Viaticum . Neither is it ther ordained directly that that the Communicants shall vse the homologesis , or Sacrament of Pennance consisting of contrition , confession , & satisfaction as a necessarie preparation to the communion , except onely in in case they finde their consciences troubled with anie weightie matter , & that when they are at the point of death : contenting themselues at all other times of their receiuing the Lords supper with a generall confession onely ; made either by one of the communicants , or by the ministerin the name of the rest . The contrarie of all which particulars are neuerthelesse found in all Lythurgies , Missals , & Directories of former times , in all places of the Christian world , as may be seene in the Ierarchie of Sainct Denis , & the Roman Order , of which euen the newer of the twoe was practiced in the Church at the least 80● yeares agoe .

But now to conclude hauing passed throu all the seuerall kindes of vniuersalitie that can be imagined with an exact discussion of the nature & properties of the same , & finding none of them in the Religion now publikely professed in England : & besides this , it being certaine both according to the doctrine of the ancient Doctors of the Church & moderne diuines that the worde Catholike is the same that vniuersall , Lib. 2. c. 38. generall or common as is apparent by S. Augustins responsion to Petilianus wher he saith that the name Caetholicū signifies secundum totum : Lib. 2. c. 2. as also against the epistle of Gaudentius . Teacing that the Church therfore is called Catholike of the Greeke worde because it is extended throu' the whole world . This I say being infallibly true , it doth by necessarie conclusion follow of the premisses that the English Relilion is not Catholike , but a priuate conuenticle or Congregation in which true faith is not founde , & in which by consequence no saluation can be hoped or expected for such as obstinately seperating themselues from the vnitie and vniuersalitie of the most vniuersally receiued Religion liue and die in it . And this may suffice for the declaration & confirmation of my first ptincipall argument or demonstration .

THE SECOND PRINCIPAL ARGVMENT .

MY second principal argument which proueth the falsitie of the English Religion is this . That Religion is false which hath a false or at the least an vncertaine Canon of scripture .

But the Religion of England hath a false or at the least an vncertaine Canon of scripture .

Ergo the Religion of England is a false Religion . The Maior doubtlesse is graunted by our aduersaries . The minor which they denie , I proue . And for the proofe of it I suppose that the true Canon of scripture can not be knowne but by some externall authoritie or meanes distinct from it selfe whether it be the iudgement of euerie faithfull person assisted by the diuine spirit as manie of our aduersaries affirme , or whether it be the declaration of the Church assisted by diuine inspiration of which it shall be disputed in an other place . More ouer these meanes or this authoritie must be infallible otherwise it can ingender no such certainetie in the myndes of the beleeuers touching the matter in question , but they would remaine still doubtfull of the same . And the reason for which this externall authoritie is thus required to the knowledge of the iuste quantitie of the written worde of God & for the distinguishing of the true partes of the same from the Apochrypha & doubtfull , is because that as the scriptures doe in no places affirme & declare them selues either in totallitie 〈◊〉 parte reflectiuely to be the true worde of God deliuered by Christ & his Apostles , so they much lesse auerre these determinate bookes or partes of the Bible & no other , to be the onely true authenticall scriptures .

This being now supposed as certaine on both sides , I proue the foresaie minor to wit that the Church of England hath a false , or at least an vncertaine Canon of scripture by an other silogisme in this manner .

That Canon of scripture is false , or at the least vncertaine which disagreeth from all other Canons that euer were in anie Christian Church before the dayes of Luther .

But the Canon of scripture vsed nowe in England is disagreeable to all other Canons that euer were in anie Christian Church before the dayes of Luther .

Ergo the Canon of scripture vsed nowe in the Church of England is a false or at the least an vncertaine Canon .

In the Maior of this silogisme ther is no doubt . The minor I proue by comparing the Canon of England with those seuerall Canons which according to the diuersitie of opinions in that point among some of the ancient Fathers in former tymes , ar founde to be three in number , howbeit of those three ther was one which was euer more commonly receiued then the rest , to wit that Canon which in the Councels of Florence & Trent was defined to be infallible & is that same which at this present the Roman Church vseth reiecting all other for Apochryphall & inauthenticall .

Now the first of those three Canons or Orders of diuine volumes consisteth of those bookes of which ther was neuer anie doubt made but that they be sacred & Canonicall . The second order is of those of which ther hath b●n alwayes doubt neither hitherto ar receiued by the Church , to wit , the third & fourth bookes of Esdras & the third of the Machabies . The third order containeth those bookes of which ther hath ben doubt in former tymes . Which ar Hester . Iudith Tobias . The two first bookes of the Machabies . The Ecclesiasticus , the booke of wisdome & the Prophet Baruch . Which belong to the old Testament . And in the new Testament the epistle to the Hebrewes . The epistles of S. Iames & Iude , the second of S. Peter , & the second & third of S. Iohn with his Apochalips .

Nowe that the Canon of the Church of England doth not agree with the first order consisting of such bookes of scripture as of which no doubt hath ben euer made , it is most euident for that in their Canon of the old Testament is included the booke of Hester of which doubt hath ben made by Melito , Nazianzene & S. Athanasius : & in the new Testament they admit the epistle to the Hebrewes & the Apochalips ( to omit others ) of which neuerthelesse doubt hath ben made , of the first by origen , & of the second by Eusebius , which was also quite omitted by Cyrill & Nazianzene , nay & that which is more to this purpose , Luther did expressely reiect them both with the epistle of S. Iames.

Touching the second Order or Canon , ther is no need to bring anie proofe , in regarde it is well knowe that the Church of England doth not admit the two first bookes of Machabeis , & much lesse doe they allowe of the third as likewise neither they allowe the third and fourth of Esdras .

Lastely touching the third & laste Order , they admit Hester into their Canon as by the sixt article of their new Creed doth appeare , but they reiect Iudith , Tobie , the Machabeis , Ecclesiasticus , & the Prophet Baruch : And yet as I said before Hester was doubted of at the least by Melito , Nazianzene & S. Athanasius : & contrarily of the booke of Iudith it is confessed by sainct Hierome that it is read to haue ben numbred or counted among the holie scriptures by the Councell of Nyce , which booke not obstanding is expresselie excluded out of the English Canon of the old testament as the foresaid article of theirs doth declare .

And in the Canon of the new Testament they put the epistle of S. Iames & Iude , the second & of sainct Peter , the second & third of sainct Iohn & his Apocalips , which yet in former times by some authors of accounte haue ben either quite excluded from the Canon , or at the least held for doubtfull . So we see that our English professors differ & dissent in their Canon from all the seuerall Canons of scripture that either they themselues or anie other can imagin to haue ben in the world in anie former age , yea euen from the Lutherans them selues whome neuerthelesse they vse to rancke among their brothers at the least whensoeuer they make for their purpose & aduantage against the Romanists .

Further more if perhaps they say they haue the true Canon of scripture because they haue the same bookes of the old Testament which the Iewes by infallible authoritie held for Canonicall : And the same bookes of the new Testament which the Roman Church houldes for Canonicall . Then I demande of them first how they come to know that their Canon is iuste the same with that of the Iewes neither more nor lesse , & how they be assured that the ancient Iewes who onelie & not the moderne Iewes , were the true people of God & by him guided & ruled , by what infallible meanes I say doe they knowe that those Iewes excluded those same bookes of the old Testament , out of their Canon as Apochripha which the Roman Church holdes for Canonicall ? To wit Iudith , Tobie , Sapience , Ecclesiasticus , Machabies . And I vrge them thus . Either they had that knowledge from the Iewes themselues , or from the scriptures themselues , or by tradition of the Church , or by the spirit or inspiration of God . From the Iewes they could not possible haue certaine knowledge of the canon . For that altho' their authority were once infallible in receiuing the true Canon of scripture either in itselfe or by the assistance & prouidence of God : yet after the coming of Christ & his establiment of the Euangelicall lawe , that infallible authoritie of theirs ceased , & so by them no infallible knowledge of Canonical scriptures could possible be from thence deriued vnto the Church of Christ : Nay neither was it suteable to the dignitie of Christ & his Church that the Iewes should interpose their authoritie in that nature .

Secondlie from the scriptures themselues it is cleare our aduersaries could not receiue infallible knowledge of the Canon of the old Testament in the manner before declared , because neither the old nor new scripture doth testifie that those onely bookes are Canonicall which the English Catalogue includes : neiter doe the writers of the newe Testament cite places out of those bookes onelie , but also out of either all or at the least some of those which peculiarly the Roman Church aloweth for Canonicall , & which I haue aboue rehearsed . For Ester is cited by sainct Augustin in his epistle to Edicia : Epist. 199. & before him by sainct Chrysostome in his third Homilie to the people of Antioch , & Origen defendes for Canonicall euen those last chapters of Hester of which some doubt hath ben made euen by some Romanists . Baruch is most frequentlie cited by the ancient Fathers vnder the name of Hieremte , as particularlie may be knowne by sainct Augustin in his 18. booke of the Cittie & 33. chapter . Yea & diuers of the Fathers produce Baruch by name . Cyp. l. 2. contra Iud. cap. 5. As sainct Cyprian who cites those wordes of his . Hic est Deus noster &c. And in his sermon vpon our Lords prayer he cites the Epistle of Hieremie contained in the last chapter of Baruch : Lib. 10. cont. Iulian . sainct Cyrill also cites the same Baruch by name . The like doe S. Hilarie in the preface of his commentarie vpon the psalmes sainct Clement Alexandrine , Lib. 2. Pedag . cap. 3. E●seb . lib. 6. demonst . Euang. cap. 19. sainct Ambrose in his first booke of faith & second chapter . Eusebius cites his third chapter , adding that , nothing ought to be added to diuine vo●●●s . By which wordes he declareth Baruch to be diuine scripture ; as also doth Theodoretus in expresse wordes & commenteth vpon the whole booke . Serm. de ele●m . Tobie is cited & approued for scripture in which the holie Ghost doth speake by sainct Cyprian . Sainct Ambrose calles the same booke Propheticall scripture . Inl. de Tob cap. 1. The like doe sainct Basil in his oration of auarice , & sainct Augustin in his booke intitled speculum , Iudith is mentioned by the great Councell of Nyce as sainct Hierome testifies . D●uin . nom. c 4. Sap●ence or the booke of wisedome is alledged by ancient S. Denis , & the same doe Melito in his epistle to Ones . sainct Cyprian , Lib. cont . Iulian. in his booke of the habit of Virgens , & sainct Cyrill calles it diuine scripture , sainct Augustin also calles it Canonicall in his first booke of Predest . the 14. chap. Ecclesiasticus is cited by Clement Alexandrine , sainct Cyprian , Epiphanius , & Ambrose as diuine Oracles , & sainct Augustin calles it diuine scripture produceing those wordes : Altiorate ne quaesieris . In lib. ad Oros . contra Priscil . The same Fathers with Gregory Nazianzene cite the Machabies as appeareth by sainct Cyprian in his exhortation to Martyrdome the 11. chapter . Nazianzene in his oration of the Machabies , sainct Ambrose in his second booke of Iob the 10.11 . & 12. chapters sainct Isidore in his sixt booke . First cap. sainct Augustin in two seuerall places alowes of these bookes & often times citeth them . As in his 18. booke of the cittie of God . Chapter 36. & in his second booke against the epistles of Gaudentius , & chapter 2.3 . All which is a conuincent argument that those bookes out of which the foresaid places are cited in this manner & by these ancient & graue renowned Doctors are Canonicall & of as great authoritie as the rest how beit they might otherwise haue ben vnknowe for such to the Iewes both in regard that as the lawe of Christ is more perfect then the old lawe was , so it ought in reason to haue more perfect knowledge of the worde of God as likewise it hath of diuers other misteries of faith , then the professors of that lawe had : as also for that as in the lawe of Christ there are other matters of faith , manners , & gouernement then were in the time of the old testament , so might it be necessary for the greater confirmation of Christs doctrine & discipline that some of those bookes which were not knowne to the Iewes , should be declared to Christians for Canonicall scripture .

Thirdly from tradition of the Church the English Canon could not possible receiue authoritie , first because the maintainers of it denie the authoritie of the visible Church to be infallible , & consequentlie it is cleare the Canon of scripture cannot haue sufficient warrant from it . Secondlie . It is most apparent that the Primatiue Church was not certaine in some of the first ages whether all the bookes of the old Testament which the English Church houldes for Canonicall were in the Canon of the Iewes , which vncertaintie still remained vntill the Councell of Carthage celebrated in S. Austins time determined the matter . Against which English Canon are also authenticall witnesses Mileto , Cham. lib. 〈◊〉 Camone cap. 14. ● . 1. S. Athanasius & Nazianzene of which at the least the two latter authors to wit Athanasius & Nazianzene ( euen according to the graunt of Daniell Chamier one of our most peremptorie aduersaries ) doe omit the booke of Hester in the computation of their Canon of the old testament whome altho' Chamier doth reprehend for the same , Cham. lib. 5. de Can. c. 14 n. 1. yet is he so impudent & vn●nindefull , that in another place of the same booke he numbreth both the same Athanasius & Nazianzene as defenders of his owne Canon which neuerthelesse includeth Hester as the English Canōdoth . Cap. 11. n. 4. So that it remaineth most euident there was no such certaine tradition in the Primatiue Church as could make the English Canon as they now vse it , infallible , the whole Church at that time hauing determined nothing iudicially aboute that particular : & consequentlie it is manifestlie false for the professors of the English Religion to affirme that they haue the tradition of the Church for proofe of their Canon . To which may be added that our aduersaries in maintaining their Canon by tradition , they should proceed preposterouslie in respect that whereas in all other points of doctrine they relect the authoritie of traditions as insufficient & contrarie to the worde of God , or at the least as vncertaine : yet in this particular of the Canonicall scripture which is one of the most important points of all other , & vpon which all the rest of Christian faith dependes , they would offer to relie vpon the same .

And altho' our aduersaries , & particularly Daniell Chamier , doe labor euen till they sweate in prouing their Canon to be the same with the Canon of the ancient Iewes , yet doth not one of the ●●thors that haue writ since the matter was determined by the Councell of Carthage , exclude from the Christian Canon those bookes which the Roman Church did receiue for Canonicall euer since that Councell . And how be it S. Hierome is he that of all antiquitie doth fauore our aduersaries in this particular point : yet besides that he writ before the matter was determined by Pope Innocentius the first & the Councell of Carthage : neuerthelesse as he doth not soe defend the Canon of the Iewes but that he admitteth of the authoritie of the first Councell of Nyce in receiuing the booke of Hester in to the Canon of the Christian Church : so doubtlesse if he had liued in succeeding tymes , he would haue done the same touching the rest of the bookes of the old Testament which were afterwardes added by the foresaid Councell of Carthage & other since that tyme . To omit that the professors of the pretended reformation neither proceed consequenter to their owne Principles if in establishing of their Canon they follow the authoritie of Fathers whome they make account to be subiect to error & deceipt , neither doe they deale securely in casting the maine foundation of their faith vpon the authority of one onely man , especially considering that S. Hierome out of an inordinate opinion & affection he had to Ioseph the Iew , not onely in this but also in some other points of doctrinesuffered himselfe to be caried somat' beyond the limits of reason tho' neuer beyond the limits of the true Catholike faith . And yet I here desire the reader to be aduertised that this which I haue vttered touching the agreement of the English Canon of S. Hierome , is onely by way of concessiue supposition in fauor of my antagonists with whome I dispute euen vpon termes of this liberall graunt : persuading my selfe neuerthelesse that the Canon of the old Testament which S. Hierome rehearseth in his Prologue , is not taken by him for the onely true authenticall Canon of the Christian Church , but onely his meaning is to relate the number of those bookes of the ancient scripture according to the most common opinion of the Iewes of his tyme . That which is manifestely conuinced by the authoritie of the same S. Hierome in the like case touching certaine chapters of the Prophet Daniel , of which altho' in his preface to that booke he once affirmed them not to be of authenticall authoritie , yet afterwardes in his second Apologie against Rufinus , he declareth his meaning in the foresaid Prologue was not to signifie his opinion in that particular , but onely to relate the doctrine or saying of the Iewes . Now this being so , it is plainely certaine that our aduersaries of all the ancient Fathers haue not as much as one S. Hierome vndoubtedly in fauor of their Canon , but onely the authoritie of the Iewes .

Secondly our aduersaries cannot haue recourse to the spirit for the approbation of the Canon of the old Testament : first because if they relie vpon this , they ought to proue it before to be the true spirit of God which moueth them to beleeue their Canon to be of infallible authoritie , & that either by some other Canonicall scripture , or by some other conuincent reason or motiue as by miracles , sanctitie , or by other externall testimonie , otherwise they them selues can neither safely relie vpon it , nor we can iustely giue credit vnto it , for that it is manifestly declared in the authenticall scriptures them selues that ther be euill spirits as well as good by which men ar moued , yea & that same spirit which seemes good is often tymes discouered & knowne to be the spirit of the common animie who the more easily & coulerably to deceiue & delude , doth transforme him selfe in to an Angell of leight notobstanding he is darkenes it selfe .

Finally that spirit by which the defenders of the Iudaicall canon ( for so our aduersaries suppose theirs to bee ) proue the authoritie of it , is contrarie as well in other points of faith as in this , to the spirit of the most visible & florishing Church in all ages , neither is it common & generall & conformable to the greater parte of Christians , but extrauagant , singular , priuate & particular to them selues as I haue shewed in my precedent argument , & consequently it can not be the spirit of God , but an ill spirit , a familiar , a bee in a box , to which who soeuer doth obey & followe will doubtlesse be led at the length in to a laberinth of errors wher he will perish without redemption .

More ouer for as much as concerneth the Canon of the new Testament , for our aduersaries to say they haue it from vs , is a verie pore shift , & considering the want of authoritie which they hould to be in our Church as being in their opinion of no credit in other matters of faith , yea plainely erroneous & Antichristian , it doth thence manifestly follow vpon their Principles that their Canon can not possible haue infallible certainetie in regarde that the whole grounde on which such certaintie depende this supposed to be the authoritie of our Church which they neuerthesse peremptorily auerre not onely to besubiect to error , but also to haue alreadie erred in diuers points of faith . Frome whence & from the rest which hath ben inculcated in the proofe of the minor of my second silogisme the consequence both of it & my first silogisme doth inauoydably followe to wit that the Religion of England is plainely false as not hauing anie certaine & infallible rule wherby to know the true Canonicall scriptures of the old & new Testament .

THE THIRD PRINGIPAL ARGVMENT .

MY third principall argument against the English Religion I frame in this manner .

That Religion is false which hath not the true interpretation & sense of scriptures .

But the English Religion hath not the true interpretation & fense of scriptures .

Ergo the English Religion is a false Religion . The maior can not be denyed by our aduersaries . The minor in which onely the question consisteth , I proue first on t of their translations of the Bible in to the English tongue of which that most famous defender of the new English faith King Iames of great Britanie in the publike assembly had by his authoritie as Hampton Courte the yeare 1604. sitting as President Cathedratically pronounced that he had neuer yet seene anie Bible ( qnid adhuc egemus testibus ) reightly translated into the English tongue . And altho' the same King Iames for that reason caused an other newe translation to be made in which some thing which were in the former editions are amended & corrected , yet I find by one of them which I haue my selfe printed at london the yeare 1608. that it containeth still diuers of the same errors which were in the first translations of which the King himself did complaine : as appeareth by the second chapter of the Acts. Vers. 27. Wher for the wordes , non relinques animam meam in inferno , that is in plaine English : thou wilt not leaue my soule in hell , the foresaid Bible hath thou will not leaue my soule in graue , vsing also the verie same translation vpon the wordes of the 16. psalme , out of which they ar cited by the author of the Acts of the Apostles . That which is done by the professors of the English Religion for no other end then that those who please may freely defend their negatiue position of the reall discent of Christ in to hell ( as Beza ingenuonsly confesseth in his annotation vpon this place ) the affirmatiue of which neuerthelesse the Apostolicall Creed doth expressely teach vs . In which passage our aduersaries shewe both extreame great partiallitie & great impudencie in regarde that in the Greeke text which they them selues most superstitiously professe to follow , hath the worde 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 in this place which by the septuagint is put commonly for the worde sheol in Hebrew , & as it is also by them selues translated in other places of scripture , & as S. Hierome doth in like manner turne the same worde 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 in to infernus in Latin , in English hell , throu' the whole Bible .

And altho' Daniell Chamier in his booke vpon Christs descent in to hell not daring to deme this manner of translation to haue ben made by the septuagint & S. Hierome , Tom. 2. Pantrat . l. 5. cap 5. doth somat● murmure & grumble at them for the same as if they did often times detorte the Greeke & Latin wordes to the sense of the Hebrew with neglect of the propertie of the language : yet this is but one Doctors opinion , & if he had more to alledge of his owne sect it were no great matter , for that by the common iudgement of the whole Christian world those twoe sacred Translaters farre surpasse in knowledge of the scriptures all the Doctors that euer were or will be of his faction tho' they esteeme themselues neuer so wise & learned .

And suppose the Septuagint & S. Hierome doe in deed frequently followe the sense rather then the propertie of the Hebrewe words , what offence commit they in that ? Nay then what commendation doe they not rather deserue ? in respect it is a generally knowne rule of the best Translators not to tye themselues to the wordes but to the sense . As on the contrarie what reprehension is not due to them whose cheefe studie is with neglect of that sense which those ancient expositors who haue gone before them both in time , virtue , & learning , to inuent & violently drawe newe interpretations of Scripture out of the Etymologies & first imposition of wordes according to the verbal sounde and not according to the common acception of them , which yet is the common practice of the Nouelists of these our dayes as is most apparent euen by that particular passage which I haue in hand that is the place aboue cited in the second chapter of the Acts , thou wilt not leaue my soule in hell . Lib. 5. de descen . Christ . c. ● . n. Aboute which Daniel Chamier hauing turned himselfe euerie way , & tossed all the dictionaries he could finde for his purpose , yet could he not finde one author more ancient then Iohn Caluin his great master and first founder of his Religion , whoe teacheth that either in this place or in anie other place of scripture according to the proper & ordinarie vse , the word 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 doth signifie the bodie carcasse , or life , & the word 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 the graue as he & his fellow partners will needs haue them to signifie , & as they vsually translate them in their Bibles , excepting onely Arias Montanus if he be truely cited by Chamier , In Idiotismis He● braeis . how be it himselfe grauntes that in the cited place of the 16. psalme the Hebrewe wordes in steed of which the Septuagint putteth 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , doe signifie the soule & hell which is all that we can desire . For if the Hebrewe text be the fountaine of all true translations as all the Nouelists will haue it , neither can their translation of this place be true nor ours false , for that theirs according to our aduersarie Chamiers , dissents from the Hebrewe & ours agrees .

Diuers other places of the English Nouelists corrupted translations might be produced , as that of the 26. of S. Mathewe , wher for Hymno dicto in the Latin & hymnizantes in the Greeke , they translate , when they had sung a psalme . In the 28. of the Acts : ouerseers for Bishops . And in the ninte chapter of the first to the Corinthians . Haue we not power to lead about a wife , where they put a wife for a woman as if all woman were wiues . And in the first chapter of the second epistle of S. Peter , they leaue out the wordes , by good workes , which neuerthelesse are founde in diuers Greeke copies , yea & Caluin himselfe grauntes that if they be not expressed in the text , yet they are subintellected or vnderstood .

And to this may be added by the way that altho' it is not ill of it selfe to translate the Bible into vulgar languages if it be done truely & sincerely & by the authoritie of the Church or her cheefe Pastor , yet by these few examples we may learne how greately the word of God is abused by false translations , & how farre the trueth is preiudicated by such partiall proceeding , supposing that all the foresaid places as they are by them turned in to the English tongue doe fauore diuers points of their new doctrine wheras on the contrarie they expressely make against it if they be truely trāflated . And particularly those wordes of their sixtineth psalme , thou wilt not leaue my soule in graue , are so absurdely contrarie to sense & so extrauagant in the phrase & manner of speech as the like is not to be found in anie translation that euer was extant euer since the scriptures were first published in vulgar tongues euen among the pretended reformers themselues . But now this may suffice for examples of false translation of the scriptures vsed by our aduersaries , & for the first proofe of the Minor of my silogisme aboue framed .

Which I further proue secondly for as much as concerneth the exposition of the scriptures , because the manner of interpretation which both our English professors & also the rest of the pretensiue reformers vse , is scarce in anie thing coformable to the exposition of the ancient Fathers & Doctors of the precedent ages as it ought to be according to the rule of S. Augustin in his second booke against Iulian where in the begining he faith the Christian people ought rather to adhere to the Fathers then vnto those which teach the contrarie : & towards the end of the same booke he addeth thus : that which they ( to wit the Fathers ) found in the church they hold , that which they had from their Fathers , they deliuered to their sonnes . But our newe interpreters as they are in their positions , so are they in their expositions of the worde of God singular & full of affected apish imitation of the Iewish glosses : neither doe they scarce euer alledge anie other expositions or constructions then those of Rabbi Salomon . Rabbi Kimchi , Aben Ezra & the rest of that rabble . Notobstanding they cannot be ignorant , but that some of them were either Scribes , Phariseis , or Saduceis if not all , of whome it may be presumed with reason that they frame their expositions more commonly according to their owne false traditions than according to the true sense & meaning of the lawe . By which proceeding the reader may consider how impossible it is for our aduersaries to satisfie their consciences in the deliuerie of such doctrine as dependes vpon so vncertaine & fayleable groundes ; & in how miserable a case that flock is which hath his instruction in matters of saluation from such Pastors as partely out of the writings of those profane Iewes & enimies of Christ , partely also by their owne industrie coine new sense out of the old , obstruse , decayed significations of wordes which they find in pedantik humanists Lexicons & Dictonaries , neglecting the common current acceptions & Ecclesiasticall vse of the same . By all which the conclusion of my proposed argument doth appeare true & sound which is that the Professors of the English faith haue no certaine and infallible interpretation & sense of the diuine scriptures , & consequently their Religion must needs be voyde of trueth .

THE FOVRTH PRINCIPAL ARGVMENT .

MY fourth principall argument I propound in the forme following .

That Religion is false which hath a false rule of faith .

But the English Religion hath a false rule of faith .

Ergo the English Religion is a false Religion .

The maior is not denyed by our aduersaries & therefore it needs no proofe : And it they should be so refractorie as to denie it : It is conuinced by the verie leight of naturall reason which teacheth that the ruled followes the nature of the rule so that it cannot possible be streighter then the rule it selfe , no more then a boton can be round if the moulde be square .

Now that the English Religion hath a false rule of faith which is the Minor of my silogisme , I demonstrate thus by an other silogisme .

The Religion of England hath for the rule of faith scriptures interpreted & expounded by euerie particular member of their Church .

But the scriptures interpreted & expounded by euerie particular member of their Church , is a false rule of faith .

Therefore the Religion of England hath a false rule of faith .

That the scriptures expounded by euerie particular member of the Church is a false rule of faith I euidently proue , because the true rule of faith is of it owne nature certaine , common , & knowne to all beleeuers , not priuate , vnknowne , & certaine to him onely who hath it . Otherwise no man can certainely & infallibly knowe what it is except himselfe & consequently none but he onely can followe it : wheras the true rule of faith is such as euerie one is bounde to knowe & imbrace vpon perill of his saluation .

Secondly I proue that this English rule is false because it is subiect to error the maintainers of themselues confessing that no man can infallibly interpreter the scriptures so that his expositions euen in the greatest matters of faith be vndoubtedly true & certaine in such sorte as he can infallibly persuade others that they are according to that sense which the holye Gost intended when he dictated them to the diuine writers . For confirmation of which I further adde that our aduersaries commonly teach that not onely euerie particular & priuate person may erre in faith but also the whole number of Bishops 〈◊〉 Prelates of their Church assembled in a Synod or Councell . Out of which it is infallibly consequent that their rule of faith is not certaine either in it selfe , or at the least not to others : neither can others lawfully follow it for the same reason that it is vnknowne vnto them & subiect to error , & deceipte . Besides altho' the professors of the English Religion should denie this same , 1. Cor. 2. yet is it conuinced & concluded by scripture it selfe saying , for what man knowes the things of a man but the spirit of man which is in him ?

Thirdly if the English rule of faith were not false to wit scriptures expounded by euerie member of the Church , it would thence necessarily followe that ther were no need of prechers & teachers in the Church of England to propose & declare the worde of God vn the people , because euerie particular man & woman that can read the Bible can sufficiently vnderstand & expounde it them selues at the least for as much as concernes their saluation . And for the ignorant sorte which can not read , it were also in vaine for them to haue preachers in regarde they can propose vnto them no other rule of faith then scriptures expounded by their owne particular spirit , which neuerthelesse euen according to their owne doctrine is fallible & subiect to error & by consequence obledgeth no man to followe it but rather to auoy de it by all meanes possible .

Fourthly I proue the same , because this rule of our aduersaries serues no mans turne but his owne who hath it , & that but vnto wardely , neither doth it obledge others to beleeue it , neither is it one & the same , but as manie as ther be people in the whole Church of England all which is most absurde & repugnant to the nature of true faith which ought to be one in all the Christian world , certaine , in fallible , & binding all persons to embrace it by diuine precept & commaund which neuerthelesse could not be such if the rule which it followeth were not one without all multipllcation & diuision . And to this may be ioy ned for conclusion of the proofe of this argument that which I haue deliuered touching our aduersaries false translation & erroneous manner of interpretation of diuine scriptures .

THE FIFT PRINCIPAL ARGVMENT .

MY fift principall argument in order to proue the falsitie of the English Religion is this .

That Religion is false which hath not a perpetuall & disinterrupted succession of Bishops & Preists deriued from the Apostles .

But the English Religion hath not a perpetuall disinterrupted succession of Bishops & Preists deriued from the Apostles .

Ergo the English Religion is a false Religion .

The maior proposition is so certaine and cleare that our aduersaries a the least all or most of those of the Protestant faith can not denie it . And if perpaps anie of them or anie other Sectaries should be so frontlesse & imprudent as to denie it , they ar manifestly conuinced by those places of scripture which proue the perpetuitie of the gouernement of the Church of Christ in generall . As in the fourth to the Ephesians , where it is affirmed that Christ gaue to his Church Pastors & doctors that is Bishops & Preists to the consummation of the saints vnto the word of the ministerit & that to rule , gouerne , & feed the flock of the Church vntill the consummation of the world . And the Prophet Dauid in his 47. psalme faith that God founded his citie ( that is the Church as S. Augustin expoundes it ) for euer . And surely if God established his , Church for euer as truely according to this he did : it can neuer want Bishops & Preists for that if it should want them , then it were no more a true Church according to the saying S. Hierome . Wher ther is no Preist ther is no Church . In which word sacerdos Preist , Contra Luciferianos . he includeth also Bishops as being cheefely Preists , & those without whome no Preists can be made of ordained . sainct Cyprian also in the second epistle of his fourth booke towardes the end teaches that the true Church cannot stand without Bishops & Preists . And sainct Augustin saith plainelie that it is the succession of Preists ( by Preists he meaneth also Bishops ) which keepes him in the Church . Contra part . Donat. And in his epistle 165. & vpon the psalme against Donatus , he chalengeth his aduersaries the Donatists to number the Preists which haue ben euen from the seat of sainct Peter , & see who hath succeeded each other in that Order of Fathers , in which Order of Fathers ( meaning the Popes whose names he specifiech in his epistle to Generosus euen from S. Peter to Anastasius who was Pope in his time ) because he findeth not one Donatist , therefore he concludes that their Religion is false & not to be followed . So that the reader may plainelie perceiue by these authorities ( of which kinde manie more might be alledged if need were & the place did admit anie larger discourse ) that the ancient Fathers held the want of succession of Bishops & Preists for a common & infallible argument of the falsitie of that Religion which not obstanding whatsoeuer other colores of truth it might seeme to haue by pretext of scripture or otherwise , was destitute of the same . That which is sufficient for the proofe of the mator of my Sylogisme in case anie of the defenders of the English Religion should haue the face to denie it .

Wherefore hence I passe to the minor to wit that the English Religion hath not a continuall & disinterrupted succession of Preists & Bishops derined from the Apostles , which I proue first : Because it is certaine by the testimonie of all writers of those ages that frome the time of sainct Gregorie Pope of Rome who sent sainct Augustin the Monke into England to plant the then professed Roman faith ther were no other Preists or Bishops but such as had their authority deriued from the Roman seat , & such Bishops onelie as were ordained & consecrated with the same matter & forme of Order & with Vnction , Miter , Crosier & other such ornaments & ceremonies as the Church of Rome actuallie vseth at this day . Nay nor yet in the time of Wiclif or since is there anie mention in anie historie , writer or recorde either Catholike or Protestant of anie kinde of eyther Bishops , Preists , or ordination of the same , vsed in England before the Reigne of Edwarde the sixt . Wherefore altho' we should graunt the Patrons of the English faith that their Religion was professed in England in more ancient times as they pretend ( the contrarie of which neuerthelesse is as certaine as it is certaine there is no mention of it in anie more ancienthistorie or recorde then the dayes of Edward the sixt ) yet is it manifest that it hath had a notable interruption in the succession of Bishops & Preists to wit for the space of 800. yeares at the least euen according to the confession of our aduersaries : And consequentlie it is euident that it hath not a continuall & disinterrupted succession of Bishops & Preists deriued from the Apostles .

Secondlie I proue there is no coutinuall & disinterrupted succession of Bishops & Preists in the English Religion deriued from the Apostles . Because altho' we should admit that in the time of King Edward by reason of the immediate succession of his newe Religion to the Religion of his Father Henry the 8. at whose death we doe not denie but there were true Bishops & Preists lefte who might perhaps for as much as concerneth the essence of the Order ( thou ' not lawfullie ) either haue consecrated others , or they themselues haue serued in the Church according to the newe forme of the same , ( which fact I need not here dispute but omit as vngranted ) Neuerthelesse it is certaine & graunted by both parties that euen in this there was another plaine interruption , & that within a verie shorte time vpon the succession of Queene Marie to the Crowne in here brothers place , who exauthorizing all that newe brood of Bishops & Preists , reestablished the Roman Religion in the same forme & with such Prelates & Preists as had ben in the Realme in all former times , as not onelie all written histories & recordes , but also some eye witnesses who then did see the change , & being yet aliue can at this daye testifie the same . So that euen in this particular manner the newe Religion of England hath suffered an interruption in the succession of Bishops & Preists .

Thirdlie . I proue the same minor proposition because at the time of the last change of Religion at the death of Queene Marie , all the Roman Bishops were deposed & depriued of their dignities excepting onelie the Archbishop of Canterburie whose seat was vacant by his death ; & others were put in their places by the authoritie of Queene Elizabeth & here parleament : who neuerthelesse were such as did not agree either in vocation , mission , or Ordination with their predecessors : as appeareth particularly in Master Parker who not obstanding he was the cheefe of them as being Archbishop of Caterburie & primate , yet is he confessed by Master Mason a minister & professed defender of the newe clargie of England , to haue ben the first of 70. Archbishops since fainct Augustin that receiued Orders & consecration without the Popes Bulles , & the rest of the ceremomes vsed in the ordination of all those 70. that preceded him . And the same he might haue said of the newe Bishops of these dayes comparing them with all that longe space of time .

The which difference in the manner of consecration altho' it were alone sufficient according to the doctrine of the Roman Church to exclude the ordained from true succession as being at the least schismaticall in itselfe & contrarie to the practice of ancient times euen before the dayes of sainct Augustin the Apostle of our countrie , as both the writings of the ancient Fathers ( which I will produce in an other place ) & also some ancient authenticall histories or recordes of the Realme doe testifie : Yet euen according to the Principles of the English Religion there is an essentiall defect founde in the same , in regarde that Master Barlowe , who●s by the foresaid defender of the English ministerie reported to haue ben the consecrator of Parker , had neuer anie consecration himselfe . Or if he had anie , he was made Bishop , ( if not Preist also ) onelie according to the forme diuised in the time of Edward the Sixt , & confirmed by Queene Elizabeth the eight yeare of her Reigne . That which I suppose Master Mason himselfe doth not deny . Which forme as it is set in their Rituall or manner of making Bishops , Preists , & Deacons , printed at London 1607. as being neither founde in scripture , nor conformable to anie other forme of consecration euer vsed in any Christian Church since the Christian Religion was founded , the persons consecrated or ordained according to the tenor of it , cannot possible betrue Bishops preists or Deacons , & by necessarie consequence neither Master Parker nor anie other of his fellowe Bishops could receiue true Order or consecration as being ordained both by one that had no power of Order himself , nor yet did cousecrate them with the same essentiall matter & forme which hath ben commonlie vsed in the Christian world in ancient ages : But onelie according to that new forme which as Master Mason confesseth being deuised & authorized onelie by King Edwarde & Queene Elizabeth who had no power to alter the forme of Ordination practiced generallie in the Christian Church before their times , could not possible giue them Apostolicall power of ordination , & consequentlie they had no continuall disinterrupted succession in that nature deriued from the Apostles , which is that by the minor of my argument I intend to conuince .

Peraduenture our aduersaries will replie & say . First that the whole essentiall matter & forme of Order consisting of imposition of handes & the wordes , receiue the holie Ghost were applyed to Master Parker & the rest of the ministrie in their ordination , & the Roman rites or Ceremonies onelie omitted , which neither make nor marre the substance of the Order .

But to this I reioine first that this doth not cleare Master Barlowes consecration of which there being no authenticall register or recorde extant , he cannot be esteemed to haue ben a true Bishop , & consequenthe he had no power to consecrate others , & so Master Parker supposing he had the true matter & forme of Episcopall Order applied vnto him , yet could he not be true Bishop for want of authoritie in his ordainer , who could not possible giue that he had not himselfe .

Secondlie . It is false that those wordes , receiue the holie Ghost , with imposition of handes onelie , are the whole matter & forme of consecration of Bishops , for that neither scripture , Councels , nor Fathers , nor the ancient practice of the Church , doe teach the same : but rather on the contrarie , it is manifest that another forme of Ordination was vsed in the primatiue Church as doth appeare ) to omit other authorities ) by the wordes of sainct Ambrose vpon the 13. chapter of the Acts of the Apostles . Where expounding those words , Ieiunantes , imponentesque ●is manies : He saith that imposition of handes is mysticall wordes , where with the person elected is confirmed to this worke receiuing authoritie ( his conscience bearing him witnesse ) that he may be bould in our Lordes name to offer sacrifice to God . By which wordes , the reader may plainelie perceiue that in sainct Ambroses time there was more required in the matter & forme of consecration of Bishops then imposition of handes onelie with those wordes receiue the holie Ghost , to wit some other wordes by which the person ordained receiueth power to offer Sacrifice , which wordes neuerthelesse were neuer vsed in the consecration either of Master Parker or anie other of the Bishops or ministers of the English Church as by them themselues is confessed who by necessarie sequele must also needs confesse the same Bishops & ministers to be essentiallie defectiue & voy de of true ordination .

Thirdlie according to the storie of the Nagges head tauerne as it was related by Master Neale some time professor of languages in Oxford , who was a man that both by reason of his ancient yeares , as also for the meanes he had to know the trueth as being imployed about this same busines by Bishop Boner then deposed & prisoner , ought in all reason to be credited : Master Parker was not ordained at all by Master Barlowe but by Master Scorie who by reason he had she name of Bishop during the Reigne of King Enwarde , ( & because Master Kitching being a true Bishop tho' then deposed with the rest of the Catholike Bishops of Queenes Maries time , partelie out of scruple of conscience , & partelie for feare of Excommunication menaced towardes him by Bishop Bonner , refused to consecrate the newe superintendents , ) vndertooke the worke in the foresaid Tauerne where a meeting was made to that purpose , & Scorie causing them all to kneele , he tooke the Bible & laid it vpon them bidding them take authoritie to preach the worde of God sincerelie , who without anie more wordes or deedes all escaped Bishops of the new fashion : And Master Parker hauing either better fortune or better fauor then the rest , for his parce he got the Archbishoprie of Canterburie and the primacie of England . The others being seased according to their seuerall lots and election of the Queene .

Whence it clearelie appeareth that by which soeuer of these formes Master Parker & his fellowes were consecrated , yet they haue no true Canonicall ordination neither according to the scriptures nor according to the ancient practice of the Church , & by vnauoidable consequence they haue no true succession deriued from the Apostles , but as an ancient Father saith of other heretikes of his time , so we may say of them , that succeeding to none they are prodigiouslie borne of themselues . Cypr. 〈◊〉 . de simpl . Prael . And sainct Cyprian of others saith in like manner that without anie lawe of ordination they preferre themselues , & assume the name of Bishops not hauing the Episcopate coferred vpon them by anie . Both which sentences may verie aptelie be applyed to our nominall Bishops of England who as I haue declared receiue their Bishopries without law full authoritie .

Yet notobstanding all this which hath ben said , perhaps some of them will insiste further in their owne defence & say that althou' they haue no personall succession , yet they haue doctrinall succession from the Apostles in respect they maintaine the same doctrine which the Apostles & their successors in the primatiue Church preached & tought .

To which I anser that this is the common euasion of those onelie who defend the inuisibilitie of the Church , but it doth nothing auaile those who pretende to defend the continuall visibilitie of the same as they doe against whome I now dispute . Secondlie whosoeuer maintaines this , It is but a miere shif or cloake wherewith to couer the nakednes of their new borne Religion , which if it had not falselie disguised itselfe with the Apostolicall robes it could not for shame haue appeared in publike by reason of the great deformitie it hath in doctrine .

Thirdly . If the English Religion hath succession of doctrine & not of persons , wher was it from the fift or sixt hundreth yeare till the dayes of Luther . Was it in men or in beasts ? In beastes they will not say for the auoyding of their owne shame . And if it was in men , then showe vs wher , & when those men liued , otherwise we will giue no more credit vnto our aduersaries wordes then we doe when they crye out & say it is Apostolicall doctrine but proues it not , as ordinarily they do both in their bookes & preachings .

Peraduenture they will say their Religion was neither in men nor beasts but in bookes they meane in the bookes of the old & newe Testament . But this is yet more false & absurde then the rest , for that doctrine inuolued in bookes can not make succession , succession being and order or series of things imediately following one & other , which order doctrine meluded in papers or partchement can not possible haue as being one & the same obiect of faith , & quite indistinguible in it selfe , & can be onely intentionally or obiectiuely distinguished or deuided by the persons in which as an accident it is subiected & receiued . Besides . All the tyme that those fantastikes imagin their doctrine to haue ben continually successiue in the Bible , if they them selues or at least other their companions in sect were not , as ther confesse , howe can they knowe at this present that anie such bookes or doctrine was then in the world when themselues were not . If they say they haue that knowledge from the Romanists , then say I why doe they not also giue credit vnto the same Romanists in other matters of faith , as particularly in that point of the number of Canonicall scriptures , & of the true sense of them as they ar applyed to euerie Controuersie betwixt vs & them during that long space in which ther were none of their Religion extant , among all which points of difference ther is none more important then that of the infallible knowledge of those diuine bookes ( which the Romanists had in their custodie all the tyme of their aduersaries non existence ) to be the onely true authenticall worde of God . So that for these men to affirme they haue all wayes had a doctrinall succession from the Apostles without a personall is a miere Puritanicall dreame , & a Chymericall conceite & paradox of their owne forgeing , an Idea of Plato abstracted onely by distracted myndes .

Finally for proofe that the English Religion hath no true Preists & Bishops I adde , that our Sauior ordained his Apostles not onely to preach his worde but also to remit sinnes & offer sacrifice according to those two texts of scripture : 〈…〉 . 22. whose sinnes you shall remit they shall be remitted . And doe this in my remembrance . Wherfore our aduersaries the profess●rs of the newe Religion of England whoe haue not all this specified in the forme of their ordination canot possible according to diuine institution & trueth of the scriptures , be iudged to receiue either of the twoe powers when they are created Ministers , & so they cannot in ●●is other respect truely be called Preists , & Bishop but onely by force & virtue of that sophisticall & ridiculous conse●●ence , they haue benefices & Bishoprikes , therfore they are Preists & Bishops . And yet besides this , I haue one other argument . So vrgent & forcible against our aduersaries that it alone is sufficient to conuince euen the most obstinate iudgements that the pre●●●iuereformed clergie of England bath no authoritie power , or ●ud●●sdiction to preach or reache the Gospell , & consequently that they ar not true Pr●●sts nor Bishops . I lay the foundation of my argument vpon the whole streinth of ●at diuine Principle of S. Paule . Quomodoprae●●abum nisi mittantur ? how shall they preach ●●cept they be sent ? which as being an expresse ●●xt of scripture is receiued by both parties for ●infallible trueth . I contriue my silogisme in ●is manner .

Those who haue no mission want authoritie ●ower , or Iurisdiction to preach & teach the Gospell .

But the newe English clergie hath no mission .

Ergo the newe English clergie wantes ●uthoritie , power or Iurisdiction to preach ●ne ●otpell .

The maior proposition is so plainely con●ained in scripture that I am persuaded euen the most pure Caluinist or Caluinian Puritan dares not absolutely denie it .

For proofe of the minor I suppose & agree with my aduersaries that ther are two onely genders or kyndes of mission . Viz. Either ordinarie or exterordinarie . This agreement so supposed I argue thus

If the professors of the English Religion haue mission it is either ordinarie , or exterordinarie .

But the professors of the English Religion haue neither ordinarie , nor extraordinarie mission .

Ergo the professors of the English Religion haue no mission .

That the professors of the English Religio● haue no extraordinarie mission I need not labor● to proue in regarde I knowe , excepting thos● of the Puritan faction , extraordinarie missio● is not maintained by our aduersaries . And i● anie either Puritan Anabaptist , or other sectarie will auerre is mission to beexterordinari● them for the same reason that he defendes it to b● extraordinarie he is bounde to proue it by extraordinarie meanes , he must shoue his paten● or letters of ordination brought from heaue● & firmed with the broade seale of miracles , prophecie , or other manifestly diuine testimonie , or else it is to be reiected as counterfeit euidence , forged to deceiue & cousen simple & ignorant people with euident preiudice to their eternal saluation . And so leauing this as a fictitions of the founders or inuenters of it voyde of both diuine & humanane authoritie neither giueing anie satisfaction to mature & solid iudgements , I passe to the ordinarie mission which our aduersaties most commonly pretend , & will manifestly proue they ardestitute of it , because as exterordinarie mission can not be obtained but by exterordinarie means , so neither can ordinarie mission be had but by ordinarie meanes . Now this supposed I proceed thus in forme of argument .

Ordina●●e nussion can be receiued of those onely who 〈◊〉 by conti●●all succession of Bishops & Preists from the Apostles .

But the professors of the English Religion ●ue not receiued their mission from those ●ho haue continuall succession of Bishops & Preists from the Apostles .

Ergo the professors of the English Religion ●aue no ordinarie mission .

The minor proposition in which alone the difference & controuersie may seeme to stand if ●nie ther be , I proue because those who succed from the Apostles in the foresaid manner & of whome the professors of the English faith against whome I now dispute , confesse they receiued their mission if anie they haue , ar ●either from the Popes of Rome , or such others as deriued their authoritie from that seat .

But now it is a fact clearer them the cleare light of the clearest day that neither the Pope himselfe , nor anie other who deriued his authoritie from him did euer conferre anie mission , power , inrisdiction , or authoritie to preach teache , or minister sacraments vpon anie of the professors of the English Religion : that which ●demonstrate by this dilemma . For all those who can be imagined to haue giuen anie mission to the professors of the English faith at the tyme of change of Religion , either they were Roman Catholiks at that present , or not if they still remained Roman Catholike then is it infallibly certaine they would neuer haue offered to giue mission are power to them whom they held for heretiks an enimies to their own faith & profession : yea & if they had attempted anie such matter , their attempte had be voyde in regarde the Roman Church by virtu● of her Ecclesiastical canons anulles all such collation of iurisdictionarie power to heretikes And according to this it is herby apparently concluded that the professors of the English Religion neither one way nor other could possible receiue anie mission , power or authoritie to preach the Gospell or minister sacrament after their manner at their first admittance to the ministrie .

It is true Doctor Cranmer from whome the Bishops and ministers of the English Religion alledge they immediatly had their mission , is supposed to haue had the caracter of Episcopall & Presbyterall Order , yet supposing by reason of his seperation from the faith & obedience of the Roman Church ( from which he receiued all the power of order & iurisdiction they pretend ) he was depriued of iurisdiction : I ingenuously confesse my iudgement is conuinced by force of argument that they cannot possible haue anie ordinarie mission of Episcopal or Preistlie function , for the preaching of the worde of God & administration of the Sacraments either according to diuine or Ecclesiasticall institution .

And I know indeed sonne of our aduersaries ●ot manie monethes paste after a long time of deliberation hoping to satisfie their owne restesse mindes an others in this their most important busines produced certaine new founde registers for testimonie of their predecessors ordination . But in my iudgement the authoritie of them is so suspicious that they ought not to moue anie prudent vnderstanding . And if they were authenticall why did they conceile them till this present time in which no man vrged them in anie speciall manner to bring them to leight ? Whereas yet they haue so often since the change of religion demaunded ben to shewe their letters of ordination in other occasions .

Moreouer , suppose their registers were neuer so true & authenticall : yet since they doe not testifie that their ordination was in matter , forme , & authoritie of the ordinators perpetually vsed in the Catholike Church , they neither satisfie vs in our demaunde , nor yet are they sufficient warrant either to the consciences of those that vse them , or those who relie vpon the effect of them in their reception of the Sacraments . Neither surely are those registers of anie greater force for iustification of the ordination of our English pretensiue reformed clergie then the writings of an vsurarie contract iustifie an vsurer in his recept of money in that vnlawfull manner which they declare . And so I conclude both for this & the reasons aboue alledged & particularly for their most apparent defect of vocation , & mission , that their case is verie considerable yea & lamentable both in respect of themselues , & in regarde of those whose soules are by their owne misfortune committed to their charge , & gouernement . And this may now suffice for the declaration & confirmation of this my fift cheefe & generall argument which concludeth the faith of England to be an erroneous & false Religion .

THE SIXT PRINCIPAL ARGVMENT .

MY sixt principall argument is this .

That Religion is false which hath no true adoration or worship of God proper to him onely .

But the English Religion hath no adoration nor worship of God proper to him onely .

Ergo the Religion of England is a false religion .

The Maior must of necessitie be graunted by the professors of the English Reignō least otherwise they destroye & amhilate the verie life of all Religion which is the worship or adoration of one onely God with such honor as is proper & due vnto him as both diuine faith & leight of nature doe teach : yea & doutlesse the trueth of this proposition is contained in the first commaundement which doth not onely exclude the pluralitie of Gods & their adoration , but also includeth that worship which is due & proper to one onely God & not to anie creature or oother entitie whatsoeuer . And for this cause God himself in other places commaundes : Dominum Deum tuum adorabis & illi soli seruies . Thou shalt adore thy Lord thy God & serue him onely . And , honorem meum alteri non dabo . I will not giue my honor to another : wher God calles it his owne honor because ther is a kinde of honor due & proper vnto him onely & not common to others . And now this precept being grounded in the lawe of nature , the naturall instinct of reason doth likewise suggest the same , so that no rationall creature can denie it .

Nowe the Minor of my silogisme in which all or the greatest parte of the difficultie consists I proue it by an other silogisme in this manner .

That Religion hath no true adoration or worship of God which hath no exercise of a true & proper sacrifice or oblation .

But the Religion of England hath no exercise of a true & proper sacrifice or oblation .

Ergo the Religion of England hath no true adoration or worship of God .

The Maior of the latter silogisme in case it should be denied by our aduersaries , & proue first by scripture & then by testimonies of ancient Fathers to wit that true Religion cannot stand without true & proper worship of God by frequent vse or exercise of a true & proper sacrifice .

And altho' this might be sufficiently proued by a generall induction drawne not onely from the practice of the vniuersall world in all ages as well in the professors of the true God of which the old Testament giueth euidence as also from the false religion of all sortes of Idolaters , Gentils & Paganes . Yet because I knowe the Nouelists out of their presumption & impudencie will not stick to denie the consequence I will omit to persecute this manner of argument , & onely insist in those authorities of Scripture & doctors of the Church which immediatly conuince the same to be true also in our Christian Religion of the new Testament .

My first proofe of scripture I take out of some certaine places of the Prophets , which notobstanding they seeme to belong to the old testament yet in realitie they appertaine to the newe as being predictions of the state of Religion in the same . To which purpose the Prophesie of Malachie is most plaine for the future practice of a proper & generall sacrifice in the new Testament , affirming . That the Lord of Hostes saith this . I haue no will in you ( meaning the Preists of the old Testament ) nor will I receiue an offering at your handes for from therising of the sunne to the setting my name is great among the Gentils , & in euerieplace is ther Sacrificed & offered vnto my name a cleane oblation , because my name is great among nations . Thus farre the Prophet . Now the wordes & circumstances of this place so plainely demonstrate that the Prophet Malachie speakes of some kinde of sacrifice which was not then or euer before vsed in anie time or place but was to be vsed in the new testament , that our aduersaries least they should be conuinced of error in their Religion for that it hath no externall oblation to God at all , they finde no other refuge then to feigne that the Prophet speaketh onely of the metaphoricall sacrifice of prayer & good workes . Which interpretation of theirs altho' it were neuer so true ( as it is most clearely false ) yet is it little sutable to other positions & practice at least of Caluinists , Vid. Dan. Cham. as that good works are sinnes in themselues yea & damnable if God did not mercifully perdon them : & that they are not pleasing to God . Nay prayer & good workes are so litle & couldly practiced among them all that if ther were no other sacrifice in the world , doubtlesse God almightie should , by them especially , be verie couldly serued .

How be it that cleare it is out of the related text that Malachie treates not of anie vnpropersacrifice . First because it is euident that he prophesied of such a future sacrifice as should be more proper & pleasing to God then thesacrifices offered in the time of the old lawe which neuerthelesse being properly and truely sacrifices altho' in other respects defectiue , that which should succeed vnto them could not in comparison of them be esteemed more proper & pleasing sacrifice to God then they were , if truely and properly it had not ben a sacrifice .

Secondly . The Hebrewe text with the cleane oblation ioyneth incense which coniunction of both those rites togither doth manifestly shewe the Prophesie to be of an externall rite & oblation to God , & consequently a proper sacrifice .

Thirdly . It is plaine by the wordes of the text that the Prophet speaketh of such an externall ritie as mayntaines the greatnes of Gods name euen among Gentiles & infidels , which prayer & good workes onely cannot effecte by reason they ar neither so apparent & knowne among them , nor so publike a testimonie of the maiestie of God as sacrifice is without which his diuine renowne , magnificence & soueraintie would be extinguished in people in processe of time .

Fourthly true & proper sacrifice is an essentiall parte of a true & proper Religion & a maine distinctiue signe from vn proper & false Religions , & of such a one the Prophet treates as is both different from the sacrifice of the Gentiles yea & of the Iewes them selues : now prayer & workes ar common to euerie Religion euerie one according to their seuerall manner .

And to this declaration of the text I adde the expesitions of all those ancient Fathers who haue applyed this place of malachie to the Eucharist as to the onely & proper sacrifice of the newe Testament ther being not one extant in all antiquitie who hath deliuered anie contrarie sense of it , or that hath explicated it of prayers or workes alone . S. Iustin martyr who liued within the compasse of the second age , speaketh plainely to this purpose citing the wordes of the prophet , Dialogo c● Tryphone . in which he affirmes that malachie foretels a newe oblation to succeed the sacrifice of the Iewes , saying . De hostijs quae ipsi ( deo ) à nobis Gentibus vbique offeruntur id est Eucharistiae , tum predicit cum ait , à nobis nomen suum gloria affici vobis autem pollui . Which is this in English . God by Malachye the Prophet ( for in this manner Iustin speaketh in his precedent wordes ) doth prophesie of the hoastes or sacrifices which are in euerie place offered by vs Gentils ( meaning conuerted Gentils ) that is of the bread of the Eucharist , & likewise of the cup of the Encharist , when he saith that his name is glorified by vs but polluted by you , meaning the Preists of the old Testament .

Now since this renowned martyr both particularly declares that the Prophet Malachies prediction is meante of the Eucharist , & supposing he further affirmes the same Eucharist to haue ben offered by the Christian Preists of his tyme in all places , yea & that therby the name of God is glorified : it is extreame want of iudgement or rather plaine madnes in our aduersaries , to denie that the Prophet speaketh of a true & proper sacrifice .

And althou the same Father in his precedent lines doth insinuate that the Eucharist is a gratiarumaction or rendering of thankes for diuers benefits receiued by Christians at the handes of God as the creation of the worlde & the memorie of their Redemption & other of that nature : yet those or the like causes of the offering of the Eucharist doe no more diminish the nature of a true sacrifice included in the same , then hostia pacifica the hoaste of pacification did cease to be a true oblation or sacrifice because it was offered by way of thankes giuing for benefits receiued , or els to obtaine new fauors & graces of God almightie . By which also the friuolous euasion of kemntitius & other Nouellists appeares to be voyde of force while they endeuoure to illude the streingth of this most pregnant testimonie for the proofe of the Euchariticall sacrifice of the lawe of Christ , for that reason to wit because the author of the same testimonie in the same place affirmes our sauior to haue comaunded the Eucharist to be celebrated in remembrance of his death an passion , as if the one & the other could not be included in the same action either according to diuine scripture or naturall reason , neither of which is founde repugnant but rather most conformable & agreeing . Lib. 4. cap. 32. Eum qui est ex creatura pa nem accepit , & gratias egit dicens . Hoc est corpus meum & salicem similiter qui est ex ca crentura qua est secundum nos suum sanguinem confessus est & noui Testamenti nouam docuit oblationem . Quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis accipiens offert Deo in vniuerso mundo ei quialimenta nobis prastat primitias suorum munerum de quo & in duodectm Prophetis sic Malachias prasignauit . Lib. 4. cap. 32.

S. Irenaeus in like manner being one of the same standing testifies that the Prophet Malachie did presignifie the Eucharist in those same wordes which he cites & saith . That bread which is made of a creature he ( that is Christ ) tooke & gaue thankes saying this is my bodie . And likewise the chalis which is of a creature which is according to vs , confessed it to be his owne bloud , & taught vs a newe oblation of the newe Testament , which the Church receiuing from the Apostles offers to God in the vniuersall world to him who giues vs for nourishment the primicies of first frutes of his giftes , of which Malachie one of the twelue Prophets did so presignifie . Lhaue no pleasure in you . And that sainct Irenaeus speaketh not of an vnproper Sacrifice as Kemnitius & some other sectaries doe cauille , is most euident by other wordes of his towardes the end of the same chapter , where he addeth that the former people that is the Iewes shall cease to offer to God : Yet neuerthelesse that in euerie place a pure Sacrifice is offerred vnto him , & his name glorified among the Gentils .

More ouer in his 24. chapter he saith that one kinde of sacrifice is reproued by God meaning the sacrifice of the Iewes , to which the sacrifice the of Church succeedes . By which discourse & particularlie by those wordes which he saith of Christ , noui Testamenti nouam docuit oblatiouem , that is he taught a newe oblation of the newe Testament , it is clearelie conuinced that this holie Father by the worde oblation could not possible vnderstand almes as our aduersaries contendes because altho' it be in some sorte an oblation to God , yet is it neither newe nor proper to the newe Testament onelie , but common to both old & newe as the scripture it self doth most frequently teach & inculcate . More ouer this place of sainct Irenaeus did so farre conuince the iudgement of Caluin in this particular that like the deuils which according to the relation of the Euangelist , acknowledged Christ against their wils , he confesseth him to haue expounded it of the Masse iuste as the Romanists of later times vse to interpret & applie it , & hath no other refuge then plainelie to contradict the foresaid ancient Fathers exposition in this impudent & audatious manner sayeing of the Roman diuines . When they obiect the place of Malachie to be vnderstood so ( of the Sacrifice of the Masse ) by Irenaeus , & the offering of Melchisedech in like manner by Athanasius , Ambrose , Augustin , & Arnobius : it is breefelie ansered , that the same writers doe in other places also interpret bread the bodie of Christ , but so ridiculouslie that reason & trueth constreineth vs to dissent from them : thus this saucie Nouellist , speakes of his betters , whose pride & bouldnes the Centurists imitate treating this same point in their third Centurie , as if they were the onelie men in the world borne for reason , & not those rather who immediatelie succeeding the Apostles did infinitlie surpasse them both in virtue & knowledge of Christian doctrine & true sense of Gods diuine worde & institution .

Tertullian declaring the sacrifice prophecied by Malachie against Marcion , Sacrificium purum gloria , scilicet , relatio & benedictio , & laus , & hymni &c. Lib. 3. Contra Marc. alluding to his wordes saith thus . In euerie place sacrifice is offerred to my name , & pure sacrifice viz. of glorie relation & benediction , prayse & hymnes &c. In which wordes the entyre tenor of the Masse is breefelie described thou ' soma't obscurelie as the custome of this author is . By relation he vnderstandes the Epistle & Gospell , by benediction the consecration , by praise & himnes the glorie , prayers & other spirituall passages contained in that misterie . And altho' this author in an other place of this same booke doth affirme the place of Malachie to be vnderstanded of sacrifice of praier , & in his booke against the Iewes , of spirituall not of terrene sacrifices : Yet in neither place doth he deny it to be truely interpreted of the Eucharist : But in the first place he calleth it a spirituall sacrifice because it was instituted by the diuine spirit & not by humane inuention : as also for that it is not ministred in that carnall & grosse manner in which the Iewish sacrifices were ministred by effusion of bloud , by fire & knife , but by benediction & consecration as such a pure oblation ought to be handled & celebrated . In the second place Tertullian onelie interpreteth one parte of the sentence of Malachie to wit the word incense which is in the Hebrewe text , of prayer offered to God . But the other wordes , oblatio munda , he expoundes of the sacrifice of the Masse , in the place nowe cited . To which if we adde an other place of the same author in which he speaketh of the Eucharisticall sacrifice , De Oratione cap. 14. all tergiuersation must necessarily cease in anie indifferent minde touching this authors true meaning . For thus he saith . Will not thy station be more solemne if thou assiste at Gods Altar . Hauing receiued & reserued the bodie of our Lord , both the one & the other is safe , the participation of the sacrifice , & the execution of the office . By which wordes it is manifest that ancient Tertullian could neuer denie the Sacrament of the Altar to be a proper oblation who here so absolutelie affirmes it to be a sacrifice celebrated in the Altar .

S. Cyprian liuing within the third hundreth yeare in like manner cites the same place of Malachie in the 16. chapter of his booke against the Iewes to proue that which he putteth in the title of the same chapter , to wit that the ancient sacrifice is euacuated & a new on celebrated , which newe sacrifice can be no other than the Eucharist , which onely & no other is new in respect of the sacrifices of the old Testament .

The next in Order & age is Eusebius who liuing in the beginning of the 400. Lib. 1. demonst . Euang. cap. vlt. yeare interprets this place of Malachie in the same sense , sayeing . We therefore sacrifice vnto the most high God a sacrifice of laude : We sacrifice a sacrifice Deo plenum , full of God : And bringing an odoriferous sent with it , & a sacred or Sacrosainct sacrifice , we sacrifice after a newe manner a pure or cleane sacrifice according to the newe Testament . Where it is plaine that Eusebius applies the place of Malachie to the solemne sacrifice of the Masse , which is performed by prayer & oblation & therefore called by his a sacrifice of laude , & which onelie can be truelie said to be full of God by reason of Christ whome it containeth , & which onelie can be called truely the sacrifice of the new Testament , & affirmed to be offered in a newe fashion . All which particular & speciall circumstances no man of iudgement or common sense can applie to prayer or almes onelie .

S. Chrysostome in his commentarie of the psalme 95. hauing cited the wordes of Malachie addes his exposition of them saying . Behould howe copiouslie & clearlie he ( Malachie ) hath declared the mysticall table which is the incruent or vnbloudie hoaste : & furthermore he calleth the sacred prayers which are offered after the hoaste , pure Thymiame or odoriferous perfume . Comment. in Malac. Thus S. Chry sostome of the Prophet Malachie .

S. Hierome altho' by the worde incense he vnderstandes prayer , yet the worde pure ohlation he commonlie interpreteth to be the oblation of the Eucharist : as also did sainct Irenaeus before him in the place cited . Which exposition is as fit for the Romanists as can be imagined supposing the Masse includes both prayer & pure oblation or sacrifice . And the same I say of sainct Augustin & who soeuer els of the Fathers interprets the foresaid worde in●ense in the Prophecie of Malachie in that manner .

Moreouer sainct Augustin both in his 18. Cap. 35. Cap. 23. & 19. booke of the Citie vseth the same place of Malachie for proofe of the cessation of the Iewish sacrifices & exercise of the Christian sacrifice by the Preists of Christ according to the Order of Melchisadech , for thus he discourseth against the Iewes in the first of the two places cited . I haue no will in yee nor offering will I receiue at your hand . For from the rising of the sunne to the setting my name is great among the Gentils : & in euerie place shall be sacrificed , & a pure oblation is offerred to my name . This sacrifice since we see it offered in all places from the rising of the sunne to the setting by the sacerdoce or Preist function of Christ according to the Order of Melchisadech : but the sacrifice of the Iewes ( to whome it is said , I haue no pleasure in you ) they cannot denie to haue ceased , why doe they yet expect an other Christ since this which they reade prophecied & see accomplished could not be fulfilled but by him . It is true sainct Augustin speaketh not so plaine in the second place as here he doth , neuerthelesse he alludes to the same place & in the same sense .

Theodoret also comments vpon this same place of Malachie in the same sense & in most plaine wordes , teaching that according to the prediction of Malachie in lieu of irrationall hoastes is now sacrificed an immaculate lambe .

Lastelie sainct Damacen & Rupert agree to Dam. de fide lib. 4. cap. 14. Rupertus in Com. Malach. the rest in the exposition of the place of Malachie whose wordes altho' most plaine I doe not cite because I knowe the Nouellists m●st commonlie reiect their authoritie as not being writers of the first fiue hundreth yeares . In which how little reason they haue to proceed in that manner with learned & graue authors I will not now discusse : onelie this I say that I doubt not but anie indifferent reader will absolutelie condemne them of extreame temeritie in offering to resist such an armie of old soldiers as I haue here placed in battill aray to feight against them . And hence I passe to the producing of testimonies of the new Testament for proofe of a proper sacrifice in the lawe of Christ .

Christ in the fourth chapter of the Euangell of sainct Iohn , affirmeth that the houre is now come when true adorers shall adore the eternall Father in spirit & truth : & neither in the mountaine of Samaria nor in Ierusalem as he said immediatly before : Garizim in which place the worde adore signifies to sacrifice as in diuers other places of scripture it doth & particularlie the 22. of Genesis where Abraham preparing to sacrifice is sonne saith to his seruants . Expect here with the asse I & the boy makeing haste thither after we haue adored will returne vnto you . Where it is cleare that the worde adore cannot signifie anie other adoration then that which Abraham was aboute , that is the sacrifice of his sonne . The likeplace you haue Iohn the 12. of certaine Gentils who ascended in to the temple to adore in the feast day . And the Eunuch come to adore in Ierusalem the 8. of the Acts. In comment . Malach. 1. In fine according to the iudgement of Theodoret & Rupert , this place of sainct Iohn alludes to that other of Malachie aboue cited & discussed & hath the like sense . Which perhaps these two authors receiued from Eusebius who affirmes the same in his first booke of his Euang. demonst . & sixt chapter . & thence it is consequent that this place is vnderstanded of the Eucharist as the place of the Prophet is , that is in a proper signification of sacrifice .

And other principall proofe of a proper sacrifice in the newe Testament is deduced from the institution of the Eucharist the 28. of sainct Mathew the 14. of sainct Marke the 22. of S. Luke & the 11. chapter of the first to the Corinthians , in this manner & forme of Sylogisme .

A proper sacrifice is an externall oblation of some sensible & permanent creature consecrated & changed by mysticall ryte or Ceremonie by a lawfull Preist , for the a knowledgement of the diuine maiestie & supreme power & dominion of God .

But Christ in his last supper made such an oblation when he instituted the Eucharist .

Ergo Christ in his last supper offered a proper sacrifice when he instituted the Eucharist .

In the maior there is no controuersie betwixt vs & our aduersaries as I suppose , or at the least I persuade my selfe they will not much stand vpon it . The minor I proue by an other Sylogisme .

Christ in his laste supper being a lawfull Preist according to the Order of Melchisadech offered his owne bodie & bloude to his eternall Father vnder the sensible formes of bread & wine commaunding his Apostles to doe the same .

But this is a true & proper sacrifice .

Therefore Christ offered & commaunded his Apostles to offer a true & proper sacrifice in his last supper .

The maior of this latter Sylogisme I proue because except Christ had not offered in this manner in his last supper he had neuer performed the function of a true Preist according to the Order of Melchisadec . Neither had he properlie verified & fulfilled the figure of the Pasquall lambe . Nor could he haue truelie affirmed his bloud in his last supper to be the bloud of the new testament if he had not offered then both bodie & bloud in sacrifice .

Moreouer the Euanglist S. Luke relating the institution of the Eucharist vnder the forme of wine affirmes our sauior to haue vsed these wordes . This chalis is the new Testament in my bloud which is shed for you . Iuc. 22. In which wordes both the worde shed which is the present tense , as also the relatiue which : which ( according to the Greek text which our aduersaries most esteme & followe ) must of necessitie haue relation to the present sheding of the cup , or chalis : & like wise those wordes for you , manifestly conclude that our sauiour did then in that solemne action of his last supper , sacrifice his bloud : & the same is of his bodie of which the same S. Luke saith in the present tense which is giuen for you : yea I say all the circumstances plainely demonstrate to all vnobstinate mindes that Christ did truely & properly sacrifice his bodie & bloud when he instituted & deliuered the Eucharist to his Apostles with an expresse commaundement to doe the same . And hence it necessarily followes that tho Eucharist is a true & proper sacrifice of the new Testament , as often as it is celebrated by Preists according to the institution & precept of Christ .

An other argument to proue that the Eucharist is a proper sacrifice I frame thus .

That is a proper sacrifice in which a victime or hoaste is receiued as a thing offered of giuen for the receiuers in honor of God .

But in the Eucharist the victime or hoast of Christs bodie & bloud is receiued as a thing offered or giuen for the receiuers in honor of God .

Ergo the Eucharist is a proper sacrifice .

In the maior there is no doubt as I conceiue . The Minor in which the controuersie standes . I proue first because S. Luke affirmes Christ to haue said . This is my bodie which is giuen for you . Cap 22. And the like he saith of the chalis in the manner aboue declared according to the phrase of the Greeke text . And according to this sense of the Euangelist S. Augustin in the 9. booke & 13. chapters of his confessions , relates that his mother day lie serued the Altar in which she did knowe the holie victime or hoaste to be dispensed or ministred . Now that ther is oblation in the Eucharist , the verie nature of the matter doth plainely argue , for that where a victime or hoaste is , ther of necessitie must be immolation as being correlatiues the one in respect of the other , yea and immolation necessarily includes oblation for the sanie reason of correlation : & moreouer both these are included in consecration which by the power of Gods worde maketh present the bodie and bloud of Christ in such a manner as they may be decently & conueniently consummated by participation of the Sacrament .

And in this sorte the Eucharist included all those conditions which a proper sacrifice euen according to our aduersaries at least the Lutherans , ought to haue . First the substance of the hoaste or victim . Secondly a certaine ryte or action of offering prescribed by God , which is the celebration of the Eucharist instituted by Christ in the forme described by the Euangelists & the Apostle S. Paule . 1. Cor. 1. Thirdly the person offering deputed by God to that function which is the Preist . Fourthly . The same intention of offering or the same end which is appointed by God in his worde that is to the honor of God & for the representation of the passion of Christ . Neyther is it necessarie that all these particulars be contained in the Institution in expresse wordes , but it is sufficient that they be included in it in some intelligible manner . Otherwises it followes that the passion of Christ had ben no true & proper sacrifice because he vsed not the wordes offer or sacrifice when he suffered vpon the Crosse , which sequele I am persuaded our aduersaries will not graunte .

Diuers other places of scripture ar alledged by Bellarmin & other diuines for the proofe of this point , but for the auoy dance of prolixitie , I will conclude with that onely of the 13. chapter of the Acts. Where for the ordination of S. Paule & S. Bernabe it is related that the Apostles were ministing to our lord & fasting . Now to minister to our lord can not consist either in prayer onely , or in singing uf psalmes , which needed no Kynde of ministration more then opening their mouthes & hartes : wher as yet the worde ministere doth necessarily include some externall ryte more than that as the Greke worde 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 doth clearely denote , & signifie . And therfore Erasmus a great fauorit of the Nouellists doubted not plainely to translate , for the wordes ministantibus Domino , sacrificeing to God .

To the authoritie of scriptures , I will here adde such testimonies of ancient Fathers as I haue not yet cited , & such as being within the compasse of the fiue priuatiue ages clearly testifie the Eucharist to be a sacrifice S. Cyprian saith thus , who is more Preist Dei summi of the cheefe God th● our Lord Iesus Christ , Lib 2. ep. 3. who offered sacrifice to God the Father & offered that same which Melchisedech offered to wit bread & wine , that is his bodie & bloud . Which wordes ar so plaine that they forced the Centurists to confesse of this Father . That he affirmed the Preist to performe the office of Christ , & offer sacrifice to God the Father . Now if according to S. Cyprian the Preist performes the office of Christ & offers sacrifice as the Centurians confesse of S. Centur. 3. col. 83. Cyprian doubtlesse it is no other but the Eucharist which he offereth . Vice Christi fungi . — Magdeburg . Centur. 3. or 4.

The glorious martyr S. Hypotelicus in his oration of Antichrist , introduceth Christ saying to the Prests of he newe Testament in the day of Iudgement . come you . Rashops & Preist who dayly immolatedor facrificed my pretions bodie & bloud in the world .

S. Ambrose vpon the psalme we did se ( saith he ) the Paince of Preists coming vnto vs . Wi did se him & heare him offering for vs his bloud . Let vs Preists followe him that we may offer sacrifice vnto him for altho' we be infirme or weake in merit , yet ar we honorable in sacrifice , for altho' Christ doth not at the leaste as they conceiue , now seeme to offer , yet he is offered on earth when Christs boilie is offered . Yea & he is manifested to offer in vs whose wordedoth sanctifie the sacrifice which is offered .

S. Gregorie nyssene in his first oration vpon the Resurrection hath these memorable wordes . For inthat ineffable secret , & to men inuisible manner of sacrifice , by his diuine ordinance he doth prcoccupate the violent brunt , & offers him selfe for vs being both victim & oblation , both Preist & lambe of God . When did this happen ? when he exhibited his bodie to be eaten & his bloud to be drunken by his familiar freindes .

S. Chrysostome in his 24. Hom. 2. in postertorem Epist. ad Tim. Circa fine . homilie vpon the first to the Corinthians speaking of Christ saith that he commaunded himselfe to be offered iusteed of brute beastes . And in another place he speaketh thus . The sacred oblation it selfe whether Peter or Paul , or of what merit soeuer the Preist is who offers it , is the same which Christ himselfe gaue to his disciples , & which now also Preists d●e make , this hath nothing lesse them that . Why so ? because men doe not sacrifice this , but Christ who had consecrated it before .

S. Augustin in diuers places of his workes , but most clearely in his second sermon vpon the psalme 33. of our sauior saith thus in plaine termes . He ( Christ ) instituted a sacrifice of his bodie & bloud according to the order of Melchisadech . Nostrum sacrificium non solum Euangelicis sed etiam Propheticis libris demonstratum est . And conformable to this the same S. Augustin in his 49. epistle affirmes the sacrifice of vs Catholike Christians to be demonstrated not onely by the Euangelicall but also by the Propheticall bookes . Also in his 20. chapter of his 17. bookes of the Citie of God : he hath most expresse wordes to the same purpose , which because they are somat large & otherwise well knowne , I omit them to be viewed by the reader if he please .

S. Leo the great also one of the writers of the fift age , in his seuenth sermon of the Passion teaches that the sacrifices of the old lawe yealded or gaue place to the sacrifice of the Eucharist as the shadow to the bodie . His wordes at these . Wherfore to the end that the shadowes should yeald to the bodie , & images to the presence of veritie or truth , the ancient obseruance is taken a way with a newe sacrament : one hoaste is changed in to an other , bloud doth exclude bloud , & the legall sestinitie while it is changed , is fulfilled . And some lines after he addes : but Iesus knowing certainely his counsell , & being vndaunted in the ordinance of has Father , did consummate the old Testament , & instituted the newe Pasque for his disciples being set to eate the mysticall supper , when in the Courte of Carphas it was consulted how Christ . should be put to death , he ordaiding the sacrament of his bodie & bloud did teach in what manner an hoaste was to be offered to God . Epist. 81 , Ad Discorum . And the same Father in an other place ordaining that more Masses then one be celebrated in one & the same Church when one doth not serue by reason of the multitude of the pleople , saith thus . Our will is that when the solemnitie of afeast hath drawne such a multitude of faithfull persons together as the Church can not receiue , let then the oblation of the sacrifice be vndoubtedly reiterated or repeated . since it is a thing full of pietie & reason that so often as the Church is filled with newe people so often an other following sacrifice be offered . For it must needs be that some parte of the people be depriued of their deuotion if the custome of celebrating one onely Masse obserued , they onely that come first may offer the sacrifice . Thus this ancient & graue Father , in whose wordes oblation & sacrifice of the Masse ar three seuerall tymes repeated .

Isichius or Hesichius who liued aboute the same tyme hath these wordes touching the same matter . Lib. 2. in Leuit. c. 8. Our lord being at supper with his disciples first with the figuratiue lambe , afterwardes offered his owne sacrifice . Lib. 2. in Exod c. 6.

Rupert in like manner speaketh of the same sacrifice saying . Our lord being in the agome of his Passion , first immolated or sacrificed him selfe to God the Father with his owne proper bandes taking bread &c.

Now to conclude , since the testimonies of these Fathers & doctors of the primatiue Church ar both most ancient as being all included in the circle of the first fiue hundreth yeares next succeeding to the time of Christ & his Apostles , Et quidem ipsam actionem canae Dominica & quidem ipsum corpus & sanguīno in cana à veteribu● vocari sa●risicium o blationem , hostiam , victimam &c. Kemnit . pag. 788. & also they being so plaine & pregnant that a cheefe aduersarie was forced to confesse that ther is frequent mention in the ancient writers treaking of the Eucharist , of the wordes , sacrifice , oblation , hoaste , victim , to which may be added that the same Fathers in like manner vse the wordes altar & Preist verie commonly , all which ar so fit for the purpose of signifiing a true & proper sacrifice , that no writer either diuine or profane could euer inuent other more significant & apte , as it vndoubtedly appeares for that their writings manifest that they neuer vsed anie other wordes or phrases when they treated of the nature & vse of a proper sacrifice : since this I say is so apparently true I ernestly request of my reader to consider how voyde not onely of reason but also of common sense the sectaries of this our present age may iustely be iudged & how shamelesly obstinate they be who denie that to be a true & proper sacrifice which is as plainely affirmed to be such both by scripture it selfe & the true Interpreters ther of as in wordes & phrases they possible could declare to humane sense & vnderstanding . And with this I conclude the proofe of the maior of my sixt & last argument framed directly against the English Relion , & hence I passe to the second parte of my treatise in which I will positiuely demonstrate by six other affirmatiue arguments the truth of the Roman faith nowe professed in the greater parte of the Christian world framing & compounding my silogismes of the contradictorie propositions to those which I haue vsed before for the confutation of the English faith , in this insuing manner .