A BOOK ENTITLED: THE ENGLISH Protestants Recantation, in matters of Religion. WHEREIN IS Demonstratively proved, by the writings of the principal, and best learned English Protestant Bishops, and Doctors, and Rules of their Religion, published allowed, or subscribed unto, by them, since the coming of our King JAMES into England: That not only all general grounds of Divinity, are against them: But in every particular chief Question, between Catholics & them, they are in error, by their own judgements: Divided accordingly, into two parts: whereof the first entreateth of those general Grounds: The other of such particular Controversies. Whereby will also manifestly appear the vanity of D. MORTON Protest. Bishop of Chester his book called Appeal, or Answer to the Catholic Author of the book entitled: The Protestants Apology.  Psal. 126. v. 1. 
Except our Lord build the house, They labour in vain that build it.  With Licence. 
Anno 1617.   

TO ALL HIS WELL-BELOVED COUNTRYMEN, ENGLISH PROTESTANTS, especially persecutors of the Roman catholic Religion.  
DVely and most friendly I remember my service, and best love unto you. In maladies and diseases desperate usual remedies will not ●uer: in controversies, those that be (and wrongfully) distressed, when equal trial will not be granted, must accept unequal, or none at all. Your late commended history of the world, recommendeth unto us, for most true, this sentence▪ nothing can be a more excellent wittnessinge, then where an Enemy doth approve our cause. Your D. Morton doth testify as much, and no man will deny it; neither this that followeth, that in controversed questions, and their trial, no condemnation is more approved, then where men in their own cause, are condemned by their own judgement. Thus in our laws confession of wrongs and evil behaviour, is conviction; And in matters of Religion a Recantation. But without some high commanding cause how shall we find such enforceinge and forced witness? Balaam his Ass spoke not of himself, nor caiphass of himself did prophesy. And in English Protestant Religion, where every one is made a judge over all, that will gain say him in their conceits, no man will suppose, or once Imagine that any one will be found among them, to give sentence against themselves, whom they value and esteem at so high a rate above all the world beside, especially for the church of Rome, which they hate and persecute so much. Yet because no other means is left, I must build upon this unlevell grounds, and come for judgement at such a Consistory, only to take what they shall give, and have nothing, but what they please to allow. Which I hope will be that which is expressed in the Title of this book, the same to which they have all sworn, or subscribed, ratified, or confirmed, printed and published for their doctrine and Religion. I dare not go higher to the days of Queen Elizabeth, nor bring the testimonies of Protestants in other countries, least I receive for Answer, as others have done, that they stand not upon what foreign and former Protestants have taught: which though it be a vain and only cavillons' exception to be at variance, or defiance with them, in faith, of whose church (as they name it) they would be members: yet to avoid all suspicion and colour of evasion, though never so frivolous. Because no protestant may deny, but that is their protestant Religion in England, under our King, supreme head styled of that Church, which he by his laws, and proceed, with their Consents and assenting hath here established, and this their Bishops and Doctors by oath or subscription have since then confirmed, and by their published printed writings defended, or maintained, or by their Religion ought so to do; I will only insist, in this their own privileged, and allowed testimonies, and authorities. And assume by them, to prove not only, that all grounds of Religion in general, do prove and maintain the doctrine of the church of Rome, and condemn this protestant Religion; But further, and demonstratively to manifest; by true consequence, that in every chief question between this Protestant's and Catholics, they are in error, and we in truth: Which will be more than evident demonstration against D. Morton Protestant Bishop of Chester his Appeal or pretended Answer to the Catholic Author of the Protestants Apology. And therefore being confidently assured, that I have truly and fully performed, what I undertake by their so great advantage, as to make them both witness and judge in their own cause, I presume (as it is) so to name this Book: The English Protestant's Recantation, in Matters of Religion. I wish it were as easy, (and no more difficult labour) to bridle their wills and Appetites, from liberty, overmuch love of this world, and wanton delights thereof, as it is to demonstrate to their understandings, that they be in error: many men are able to do this. But God and themselves must reform the other; which of his great mercy I most humbly beseech him to grant, That they which so long time have only talked of Reformed Churches, and Religions, may come to the true, and real practice of reformation, both in mind and manners. Which I hope they may the soener attain unto, if they shall duly consider how fowl and deformed the face of this their new doctrine is, even as it is pointed by their own colours, and pencil. That which remaineth, as my only suit to you, is this: not to be regardless of your best good, not wilfully to err from the way of truth, to esteem of the sacred Religion of the Church of Rome, as the greatest enemies to it, and friends to you shall conclude it worthy, and let myself and labours enjoy your love, as we shall deserve it. And so I shall ever rest.  
Your most wellwishing Contriman and friend, Author of this Book.   

THE ENGLISH PROTESTANST RECANTATION: IN MATTERS OF Religion: THE FIRST PART.  

CHAPTER I. PROVEINGE BY ENGLISH Protestant writers, since the beginning of his majesties Reign in England, that the true Church of Christ is of Infallible judgement: The Protestants not so: and so not the true Church.  
BECAUSE the chiefest and most general controversy in Religion, in this time, between the Catholics of England, and their Adversaries their country persecutors, and Innovators, is concerning the true Church of Christ, which, where, with whom, and what it is: what be the properties, true notes, signs, qualities, authority, office and command of it, I will first begin with that Question: In which I argue thus.  
Whatsoever Company, Society, consistory, judgement, or Authority, is in time of difference about Religion, most necessary to be know, followed, and obeyed, and is the company of holy ones, the household of faith, spouse of Christ, the pillar and ground of truth, whose communion is to be embraced, directions followed, and judgement to be rested in, must needs both be privileged from error, and to be obeyed in Matters of controversy: But the true Church of Christ is such: Therefore free from error, and to be obeyed in this business. The Mayor or first proposition is evidently true, otherwise God hath bound man to follow and embrace heresy or error, of necessity he must be damned without all hope of salvation, except heresy, false opinions, error, or infidelity, could bring to heaven, which is against the holy Scriptures, true Religion which by no possibility can either be untrue, or uncertain, being revealed by God himself, and against the light of reason itself, that men under penalty of damnation, should be tied to be obedient to that sentence, for obedience whereof, they were likewise assured to be damned, which is to accuse God, most merciful, of the greatest Tyranny.  
The Minor or second proposition is proved and the first also in this words of D. Feild. 
D. Feild. epist, dedicat. before hi● books of the Church.  There is no part of heavenly doctrine more necessary, in this days of so many intricate controversies of Religion, then diligently to search out, which among all the societies of men in the world, is that blessed company of holy ones, that housthold of faith, that spouse of Christ, and Church of the living God, which is the pillar and ground of truth: That see they may embrace her communion, follow her directions, and rest in her judgement. Hitherto the words of this Protestant Doctor, by which is evidently concluded the most certain truth of those two Propositions in the Argument before; But to avoid all frivolous objections and distinctions of these men, concerning the Church general, particular, triumphant, militant etc. He plainly affirmeth, that this supreme and infallible judge is the present militant Church in times of controversies: as is demonstrated by this his words: Which among all the societies of men in the world, is that blessed company of holy ones, etc. Where his words, societies of men, and, in the world, are manifest testimony, that he assigneth the present militant Church on earth, and no other, to have this supreme, and infallible, authority, and judgement, to decide controversies. which is also proved by all the rest of the Protestant citations, in this chapter hereafter. And if their words were not so clear that they cannot be wrested otherwise: yet the Question itself doth make it manifest: for all the faithful people that ever were, and be now in many thousands deceased, out of this life, cannot now be assembled in a council to give sentence. And much less can they that are not yet borne, be so gathered together, to pronounce judgement: and yet all this belong unto, and are, or shall be members of the universal Church. further this is convinced by his cited words: That household of faith: which cannot be possibly meant but only of the militant Church. For in the triumphant Church, seeing God in himself, and truly and perfectly knowing without belief all sacred mysteries, faith, as the Apostle saith, is evacuated in them, and turned into knowledge, and as for those that are not yet borne, though hereafter in their time ordained, they at truly to believe, yet now they neither have faith nor knowledge of any thing, nor any other quality or any being at all. Thirdly this is evident also in his last words: Embrace her communion, follow her directions, and rest in her judgement. Which Protestant's will not, and cannot mean of the triumphant Church: and by no possibility can either be understood, or verified of the true believers to come hereafter, and not yet produced into this life; for this as yet having no essence, or being for themselves, can have no communion, give no directions, nor pronounce judgement for us, now extant to embrace and follow. And this is invincibly further proved in the Arguments followeinge. Therefore secondly I argue thus.  
That which hath Authority in controversies of Religion, to define what is true, and good, to overrule all inferior and particular judgements, and bind all men to believe and embrace the definitions thereof, must needs be of Infallible judgement, and have the supreme and highest power to command, and no man to disobey it: But the true Church of Christ is such: Therefore it hath Infallible judgement, the highest power on earth, and may not be disobeyed, but in all things to be obeyed by all people. The mayor proposition is evidently true: for Authority is to be obeyed by all subjects: otherwise it were not authority. And there were none to command, non to be obedient. And definitions in matters of faith, as they must be most certain, undoubted, and infallible, as every article of faith is, and of necessity must needs be: So they are as firmly to be believed, and professed, except we will be Heretics, and obstinately incur damnation. The second proposition is thus proved by D. Covell, who writeth of the Church in this 
Covell. def. of hook pag. 30.  words: That whi●h by her ecclesiastical authority, she shall probably think, and define to be true, or good: must in congruity of reason over rule all other inferior judgements whatsoever. And to them that (out of a singularity of their own) ask us, why we thus hang our judgements on the Church's sleeve? we answer with S●lonion, too are better than one; For even in matters of less moment, it was never thought safe, to neglect the judgement of many, and rashly to follow the fancy and opinion of some few. Hitherto this Protestant doctor, directly proveinge the second proposition, for which he is cited: which also is confirmed by the Arguments following.  
Thirdly I argue thus: whatsoever hath authority from Christ, to approve the scriptures, to be a special ground in the matter of scriptures, to publish and command to her children, in Matters of Religion; is the highest judge and of Infallible judgement: But the true Church of Christ is such: Therefore it is the highest judge, and infallible in judgement. The Mayor proposition is evidently proved, and confessed before, and of all men cannot be excepted against by Protestants, commonly attributeing the highest, and (consequently) infallible judgement to the scriptures: for if they have their allowance and Infallibility, so much as belongeth unto us and our knowledge, from the authority and approbation of the Church: The Church so giving them allowance, and warrant of Infallibility, must needs be as much, or more Infallible, at least concerning us, in which manner we dispute, according to that Rule of Logic, Propter quod unumquodque tale, & illud magis. That which is the cause why any thing is so, is rather so itself. Which is evident thus, in this case. For if the scriptures, so much as appertaineth to our knowledge, have not approbation and Infallibility of truth, but at they at approved and published for such by the Church: This Church which so giveth them such allowance, and warrant of Infallibility, must needs likewise be infallible, which though it needeth not confirmation, being justified by a Maxim in the light of nature, may yet for Protestants be further made manifest by the Protestant Author of the Assertion: who to prove the ministry of England to be no true ministry, 
Assertion An. Dom. 1604. pag. 277. 218.  doth make demonstration of it in this manner: The Queen's Royal Majesty being never capable of any part of spiritual power, The same could not be derived from her parson, to the Archbishopps and Bishops. Nemo potest plus juris in alium transfer, quàm ipse habet. No parson can transfer more authority unto an other, than he himself hath. And thus much concerning 
Covell. count, Burg. pag. 60. Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 442.  the first proposition.  
The second is thus proved by D. Covell, and D. whitaker's, cited and allowed by him in this words: The Church of Christ according to her authority received from him, hath warrant to approve the scriptures, to acknowledge, to receive, to publish and command unto her children. Mr. Wotton witnesseth the like in this manner. The judgement of the Church, we are so far from discrediting, that we hold it for a special ground in this matter of scriptures. Therefore that judgement which may in no ways be discredited in the greatest matter, must needs be infallible. For every witness that is fallible may justly be discredited, in such business especially.  
My fourth Argument is this: whatsoever doth support and sustain the truth, in which, and no where else the truth is preserved, which is a diligent and wary keeper of Christ's true doctrine, committed unto it, chaungeinge nothing at any time, diminisheinge nothing, adding nothing, not loseing her own, nor usurping things belonging to others, must needs be of Infallible judgement, and free from error: But the true Church of Christ is such: Therefore it is infallible in judgement, and free from error. The first propositions is evidently true: for truth once committed unto one and continually so supported, sustained and preserved, without change, diminution, addition, loss or usurpation, must of necessity and Infallibly still be truth: for neither truth nor any thing else so maintained, and kept unviolable, can by any possibility be overthrown or altered. The second proposition is thus proved by this Protestants: Mr. Ormerods' 
Ormerod. pict. pap. pap. 93.  words be thus: The Church is called a pillar, because it is like unto a pillar. For as a pillar doth support, and underprop a building, and maketh it more stable firm and strong: so the Church doth sustain, and support the truth: for the truth is no where preserved but in the Church: D. Sutcliffe 
Sutcliffe against the 3 conuers. pag. 79.  approveth this sentence: Christ's true Church is a diligent and wary keeper of doctrines committed to her, and changeth nothing at any time, diminisheth nothing, addeth nothing superfluous, looseth not her own, nor usurpeth things belongeinge to others. Therefore Christ's true doctrine committed to the true Church, and continued and preserved long time in the Church of Rome, Christ's true Church (as this Protestants grant in the next chapter, must needs still be there and that still the true Church of Christ: because that ever preserveth, and never looseth, or changeth the truth, nor any part thereof, fundamental, or not fundamental.  
lastly in this Question I argue thus: whatsoever Society, or Company hath authority in controversies of faith, and out of it there is no salvation, remission of sins, or hope of eternal life, must needs be infallible in judgement, free from error, and only to be obeyed in such things, above all other Consistories, Conventicles, or private parsons: But the true Church is such: Therefore Infallible in judgement, free from error, and so to be obeyed. The first proposition is evidently true: otherwise men were some times bound to be Heretics, or believe errors, because authority is to be obeyed, and not resisted: and Heretics might be saved, or God our most good and merciful Lord and Saviour compelleth and necessitateth man to be damned, which be evident blasphemies.  
The second proposition is proved by these English Protestant's: first their book of Articles, to which they all swear or subscribe, 
Book of Articl. articul. 20. reconfirmed by his majesty Field. pag. 69. Covell def. of Hoocker pag. 76.  defineth thus: The Church hath authority in controversies of faith. D. Feild hath this sentence. There is no salvation, remission of sins, or hope of eternal life, out of the Church. Like is the judgement of D. Covell and others. And thus much of the Infallible, highest Authority, judgement, Commanding and binding power, of Christ's true Church, in general. Which can be but one, as that Article of our Creed. I believe the holy Catholic Church: not Churches. teacheth us. And these Protestants in their Articles define it: 
Artic. 19  A congregation of faithful men etc. not congregations: And thus comment upon it: ●here 
Rogers up. their Articl. pag. 86. 88 89.  is but one Church. And prove it by these scriptures. Rom. 11. 5. 1. Cor. 10. 17. 1. Cor. 12, 12. 13. 27. Rom. 12. 4. 5. Gal. 3. 28. and add thus: all God's people agree with us in this point. And city for it, the Protestant confessions of Helvetia, Boheme, Gall. Belgia Aug●st. Wittenb. Suew. And these Protestants before have so taught us, when they define, or descrebe it always in the singular number only, by these their names and distinctions, blessed company of holy ones; household of faith; spouse of Christ: Church of the living God pillar of truth: etc. And in all verbs, relatives or demonstratives of it, so singularly speakeing of it, as, her communion; her directions: her judgement: her Children: her Definitions: hath warrant to approve; to publish, to command: is a diligent keeper of doctrines, committed to her, changeth nothing, diminisheth nothing &c. Which by no possibility, can be verified of the Protestants, either in England, or any other nation; none of them in particular, or all together, having, claiming, or pretending either infallibility in judgement, to warrant any one article in controversy: but voluntarily and generally teaching, that Thesis' general●● est: it is a general 
Morton Apol. part. 2. pag. 315. willet Antil. praef. engl. & pag. 71. 120. 150. 4●. pref. to the Read. in Antil. Arti●l. of Relig. art. 21. Relation of the state of Religion cap. 47. etc. Comm: upon the Articl. of Engl. Protest by Mr▪ Rog. in pref.  Maxim, there is none in their Church, whose judgement is of Infallible authority. Neither Prince, Parliament, council, Ministry or their Church hath any privilegd from error, but they have, and do err in things pertaining to God. Neither challenge any jurisdiction general, to bind others to their Religion: but absolutely confessing The Protestant are without any means to take up their controversies. No Prince with any pre-eminence of jurisdiction, above the rest: no Patriarch one or more, to have a common Superintendance or care of their Churches. And their public comment upon their Articles, to which they have all subscribed, assureth us, is to be so, for relating unto us, how in the beginning of their Revolt from the Church of Rome, to persuade the world, they laboured by all means they could, to come to unity among themselves, as in the true Church it must be; Crammer and others used all devices, and calvin wrote unto him, saying: That might his labours stand the Church instead, ne decem quidem Maria, it would not grieve him to sail over ten seas, to such a purpose. But this proved a work of much difficulty, if not altogether unpossible in man's eyes. Where they well might have left out their addition (if not) and have plainly said without any exception, as it hath plainly proved, that it was altogether unpossible, in man's eyes, especially in the common order of proceed among them which by their own Relation, was this: That every kingdom, and free state, or principality, which had abandoned the Religion of Rome, should divulge a brief of that Religion▪ which among them was taught, and believed. Whereupon (as this men tell, came forth the several Protestant confessions, or Religions of the several Protestant Congregations, of Wittemberge, Ausburge, Bohem Sueve, Scotland, Helvetia, France, Belgia, Basile, Saxony, England in their 39 Articles, etc. among whom, even those of England itself, what contradiction there is, even in matters, by their own doctrine, fundamental, and essential in Religion, demonstration is lately made, by this same manner and method, by their own authorities, and will be also manifest in this work. And yet 
The Answ of Orford ●● the 1000 pet. Articul. 19 & 21.  this men, which say, they are the learnest ministry in the world, and definitively condemn all Churches, as jerusalem, Alexandria, Antioch, and Rome, and general councils themselves of error, and may not plead Ignorance for themselves, to excuse them from error. Neither can they with the least pretence of truth affirm, their acknowledged lying, and erroneous Church, to be the true Church of God, except they will also most blasphemously teach, and maintain, that prima veritas, and eternal truth is eternal 
August. lib. de mendas.  falsehood; or with the damned Priscillianists, that God in his Revelations to his Church, and in the holy scriptures, hath delivered lies, and errors, commanding us to believe them. For they have before assured us, that the true Church of God warily keepeth all doctrine committed to her, changeth, dimini●heth addeth, loseth, usurpeth nothing. Therefore this changing, diminishing, loseinge, and usurping Church of Protestants, cannot be this true Church of Christ, by their own doctrine. And as material essential and fundamental it is in Religion, concerning the true ground and fowndation of faith, and as great a falsehood, to say, in the meanest, or least point of faith, that truth is error, God a liar, or his Church a seducer; as so to affirm in the greatest, and most concerning mystery of Religion. The true grounds, and fowndation of true beleeveinge, equally weakened, or overthrown in the one, as the other. And the first proposition which our Catholic Priests, and brethren, prisoners at Wisbych, offered to the vice-chaunceller of Cambridge, and that university, that is, Ecclesia protestantium non est vera Christi Ecclesia, The Protestant Church is not the true Church of Christ, is here sufficiently questioned, and by themsels not long since more then sufficiently demonstrated, to b● Pul●●●a propositio, really 
Demonstrat. of Recuse dem. 2. 3. 4. etc.  and sincerely a true proposition, and not scoffingly, as he pleaseth to parenthesize. And so will be defended, or proved, by those propownders of it. As also their second proposition (for of the third in his proper place) d●tur externus judex in rebus fidei: there is an external judge in matters of faith: will be maintained: not only in such sense, as the University of Cambridge, according to the nature of their Church, and Religion granteth, that is, fallible, and deceitful: But as our Brethren according to the nature of true Faith, Religion, and the true Church; infallible, intended it, and still offer to make it good, for the Roman Church ever since the time of Christ, and so hereafter. When our English Protestant university for their so lately (as they term 
Vicech: of Camb: D. Carey his letter. Aug. 7.  it) reform Church, and light of the Gospel, are driven to this Answer in these words: Your second question is affirmative, averring an external judge, in ma●ters of faith: If you understand a judged infallible in his sentence, we deny what you affirm: otherwise we gainsay not your assertion. Which in their own meaning above remembered, is pulchra propositio, for their Illuminated Church: which will have no judge▪ or judgement in matters of faith, (above all things most infallible, and certainly true) except we will allow it, for an Article of faith, or an infallible truth, that the judge and judgement must be fallible, and deceitful. And the Religion and faith so adjudged, and propownded to be followed, and with divine faith to be believed, against the nature thereof, to be false, erroneoes, fallible, or deceitful: for such as the judge is, the judgement, and difficulty adjudged, must needs be. And yet further one scruple more there is in this business; which because Cambridge is now busied enough, against poor prisoners without books, I wish that Oxford could resolve: how it can stand with the Integrity, and sound doctrine of a Reformed Church, and spoken consequenter, like a learned university, to grant, as they have done, and must do by their Religion to this day, that there be, and must be so many Supreme, and Independent judges, and heaps in their Church, as I have before remembered from themselves, Religions, Churches, several and different Confessions, or Professions of Faith, every one absolute of itself, and without dependence of any other: and to use their own words, Without any means, to take up their controversies, no Prince with any pre-eminence of jurisdiction above the rest: no Patriarch, to have a common superintendence or care of their Churches. 
Their let: sup. Aug. 7.  And yet now the university of Cambridge having (as they writ) warrant from our King, to accept our Priests challenged (God grant they perform their warrant) joineth with them in this position, datur externus judex: there ●● an external, or, one external judge in matters of faith. If there is but one external judge, for judex external, and external judge in the singular number, is but one, than those Churches or Church of theirs which from their beginning have had so many supreme judges, and judgements cannot be the true Church of Christ, which (as now the grant) hath but one. And if their former both doctrine and practice of many such judges, is true, than their present doctrine, and grant, of only one, is false, and inferreth a false Church. But I leave them to our Priests at Wisbych. Only here I will add: because they have now allowed one external judge in matters of faith, in the true Church, to whose judgement all must be obedient, otherwise he is not to be named a judge: they must also against their own limitation, allow that his judgement is infallible, otherwise the whole Church might err, which D. Feild 
Feild. pag. 203. l. 4. cap. 5.  with privilege denieth in these words: We think that particular men and Churches may err damnably: because not withstanding others may worship God arright: but that the whole Church at one time cannot so err: for that the Church should cease utterly for a time, and so not be Catholic, being not at all times: and Christ should some times be without a Church. Therefore the University of Cambridge by warrant from our King, alloweinge the one, and D. Feild with public applause in the name of all English Protestants, as his words (we think) are witness, attesting the other, and all English Protestants before assureing us, that they and all their Churches, do, or may thus err, they cannot have, or be this true Church of Christ: And because there is no other in any probable judgement left to be free from such damnable erring, but the Roman Church, because there reason telleth us, the Church cannot cease, but be Catholic in all times, and Christ cannot be without a Church: This external and Infallible judge is in the Roman Church, and that this freed, from damnable error, is the true Church of Christ but of this in the next chapter.   

CHAPTER II. WHEREIN DEMONSTRAtion is made by these English Protestant Doctors themselves, writing, or allowed as before, since the beginning of King JAMES, his Reign, in England, that the Roman Church is the true Church of Christ.  
NOw it will be no difficult thing to prove even by this Protestants themselves that the Roman Church, that I mean, which submitteth itself to the jurisdiction of the Pope of Rome, as the vicar of Christ, Successor to S. Peter and supreme head thereof, is the true Church of Christ: for being generally granted by Protestants, that either their conventicle and congregation, or the Church of Rome is the true Church of God, and their claim and title thus shamefully by themselves excluded and overthowne, it must needs follow by just consequence that the Roman Church, is that blessed company of holy ones, household of faith, spouse of Christ and Church of the living God, privileged with such Immunities, and commanding power, as is declared, and by English Protestant's ascribed to the true Church, in the former chapter: whereupon the Protestant offerres of conference speak of themselves, and 
Offer of conference pag. 16.  their cause in these words: If the ministers be in●●●or, they protest to all the world, that the Pope and the Church of Rome (and in them God and Christ jesus himself, have had great wrong, and Indignity offered unto them, in that they are rejected, and that all the Protestant Churches are Scismati●all in forsakeinge unity and communion with them. And a little before speaking of some positions 
Offer sup. pag. 11.  among them, offered then to be disputed. They writ in these terms: divers of the propositions are such, that if the ministers should not constantly hold and maintain the same against all men, they cannot see how possibly, by the Rules of divinity, the separation of our Churches from the Church of Rome, and from the Pope the supreme head thereof can be justified. But to m●ke particular, and direct probation, of the is Catholic doctrine, by these Protestants, I argue thus, from their own divinity, in the 2. Article of their Religion of 
Articles of Relig. articul 12. & artic. 19  the necessary and unseparable (by them) union of faith and good works, and their definition of the true Church in their 19 Article subscribed unto by all English Ministers, and it is in this manner. Whatsoever Church hath in great multitude, men virtuous, learned, fraught with the love of God, and the truth above all things, men of memorable Integrity of heart, and affections, preaching much both of faith and piety with wonderful zeal and spirit. That must needs be the true Church of Christ But the present Church of Rome is such: Therefore it is the true Church of Christ. The first proposition is evidently deduced, from those two Articles of their Religion, and cannot be denied. The Minor proposition consisteth of the express words of their Protestant Relator of the 
Relation of the state of Religion ●ap. 48.  state of Religion: and so nothing remaineth to be further proved.  
My second Argument is thus framed: where The outward state and glory of the service doth engender, quicken, increase, and nourish inward reverence, respect and devotion, which is due unto sovereign Majesty and power. Where deeds of charity be exceeding, the life of some of their Religions incomparable in severity, where there is excellent order of government, singular helps for increase of godliness, and devotion, and profiting of virtue. That is the true Church of Christ: But the present Church of Rome is such: Therefore it is the true Church of Christ. The Mayor proposition is manifestly true, by Protestants in their Article of the Church in these words: the visible Church of 
Articul. 19 sup.  Christ is a congregation of faithful men, in which the pure word of God is preached &c. in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same. All which are contained in the first proposition. The second is their own express words, 
Relation of the state of Religion c. 9 c. 22. c. 26. c. 48.  written and published of the present Roman Church by their Relator of Religion for confirmation of both which Arguments, the same Protestant Author not ignorant of so many differences in Religion between the Roman Church and them, persuading an union between them, only requireth Catholics to give over five things, all dispensable, and not any 
Relat. c. 48.  one of them, essential, as he teacheth. Which is as great testimony as a true Protestant can give to the true Church, for their common doctrine (to defend their manifest errors) is this, that the true Church may er in matters not essential, and fundamental. The words of D. Willet 
Willet Antil-pag● 43. Art. 19 Feild. of the Church Sutcl. against D. Kell. D●●● persuas. Wotton pag. 28. Middles. p. 201. powel consid.  at these: to errors of doctrine, which are not fundamental, even the true Church of Christ is subject. So their book of Articles of Religion, so D. Feild ordinarily in his books of the Church, so D. Sutcliffe D. Dove one of their Bishops, Mr. Wotton, Mr. Middleton, Mr. powel, and all the rest, that made Protestants and Puritans but one Church do and must acknowledge. And the benefits which this Protestant Relator assureth his brethren to find by union with the Roman Church, he setteth down in these terms: they shall find excellent order of government, singular 
Relat. sup.  helps for increase of godliness and devotion, for the conquering of sin, for the profiting of virtue. Which be all the happiness, that the true Church can give, or man enjoy in this life. For all our combat is to conquer sin, to have virtue, godliness, and devotion, and whosoever hath obtained these things, cannot doubt of heaven, which is only prepared for people endued with such graces, to which if we add his excellent order of government, no property of the true Church is wanting. And yet the scruple of this Protestant Relator, for those five things also, shall be fully satisfied even by himself, and his fellow Protestants, that in them also as in the rest, the Church of Rome maintaineth the truth, and Protestants 
See part. 2. cap. 9 10. 11. 12. 13.  be in error, as will appear in the second part of this work, in the chapters here cited.  
Thirdly I argue thus: No Church wanting the supreme and byndeing authority over all others, (which their Bishop D. Bilson, D. Feild, D. Morton, D. Sutcliffe etc. affirm to be a general council) can be the true Church of Christ, and consequently (because there is of necessity one true Church, that which enjoyeth it, is the true Church of Christ: But neither any Protestant, or other Church, besides the Church of Rome, hath, or can have this supreme binding authority: Therefore that only is the true Church of Christ. The Mayor proposition for the supreme binding authority, to be in the true Church, is evidently true: otherwise no controversy could be decided, nothing in Religion warranted for truth, nothing condemned for Heresy. For where there is no such bindeinge, and commaundeinge authority, to be obeyed, or resisted, there can be no truth believed by authority, nor any obstinate resistance unto it, which as D. Covell, Mr. Ormerod and other Protestants 
Covell exam. pag. 202. Ormer. dial. 2. etc. Feild. pag. 228.  tell us, is required to heresy. Now that this supreme binding authority is only in a general council, by these Protestants, is testified by D. Feild in these words: The supreme and binding authority, is only in Bishops, in a General council. So the Protestant Bishop of Winchester, D. Bilson, so D. Morton, D. 
Bilson Survey pag. 85. Mort. part. 2. apolog. pag. 340. Sutcliffe against D. Kell. pag. 41. 4. 102. Protest. Demonstrat. cap. 2. etc.  Sutcliffe with others. The second proposition is evidently of late demonstrated in the book Entitled Protestants Demonstrations, where manifest proof is made by these Protestants themselves, that they are so far from ever having a General council of Bishops, that their English Protestant's neither have, nor can have true and lawful Bishop, Priest, or Minister among them of their creation. And if by impossibility they could have Bishops, yet that they cannot have any such council is wittnessed by their Relator in these words: which I have also 
Relation c. 47.  cited before: The Protestants are severed bands, or rather scattered troops, each draweinge dyvers way, without any means to pacify their quarrels, to take up their controversies. No Prince with any pre-eminence of jurisdiction above the rest: no patriarch, one or more, to have a common superintendance or care of their Churches, for correspondency and unity: no ordinary way to assemble a General council of their part, the only hope remaining to assuage their contentions. And in their public gloss, upon their book of Articles, they 
Rog. upon the ●ooke of Articl. in praefat.  acknowledge, this thing so unpossible, in their Religion, that they could never with all means they made, bring to pass to have any meeting of Protestants, to come to unity among themselves, but every Protestant State and Country, hath a several Confession, or Profession in Religion. As also those several Confessions witness. Where we see, that it is a thing so unpossible for these men to assemble a General council, which they teach is, to consist of all Professions, that they cannot do it, for their own poorte, as the words are, nor have any other means among them of jurisdiction, to decide controversies: when contrary wise of the Roman Church he speaketh 
Relat. sup. cap. 47.  in this manner, in the same place. The other have the Pope▪ as a common Father. Adviser and Condu●●●● to them all, to reconcile their jars, to appease their displeasures, to decide their difference, above all things to draw their Religion by consent of Cowncells, to unity. Neither can any Protestant say, that this is spoken of this Relator, considering the present states of those Churches, and is only so in that meaning Object. and not absolutely and generally true: for it is both absolutely, and generally true, Answ. and even by the nature and doctrine itself, of those Religions; for the Roman Church maintaineth for the Pope, and he for himself claimeth as Successor to S. Peter, Superiority, and Commaundeinge Authority, in the whole Christian World, in spiritual causes: which no Prince, Parliament, Presbytery, or other Regent among Protestants, doth out of their own temporal confines, and Government, as is plainly set down in the Relators sentence, and freely acknowledged by all Protestant writers.  
My next Argument is this: That which is a congregation of faithful men, in the which the pure word of God is preached, and the Sacraments duly ministered, in all things requisite, is the true Church of Christ: But the Roman Church is such: Therefore it is the true Church of Christ. The Mayor proposition consisteth of the English Protestants definition of true Church set down in the Articles of their Religion, in these words: The visible 
Articles of Relig. art. 19  Church of Christ, is a Congregation of faithful men, in the which the pure word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be duly ministered, according to Christ's ordinance, in all those things, that of necessity are requisite to the same. The second proposition supposeing their former doctrine only requireing in the true Church points of essential, fundamental and necessary doctrines, which is also expressed in this Article, 
Relation of Relig. cap. 48. Covell def. of Hock. pag. 68:  is proved before; and further by these Protestants. Their Relator writeth in these words: The Roman Church still keepeth inviolable, the fowndation of Religion. D. Covell writeth thus: toucheinge the main points of Christian truth, they (of the Church of Rome) constantly persist in them. Their Bishop D. Dove supposeing their Religion for true, which 
Dove persuas. pag. 11.  they do or should hold, writeth in this manner. In fundamental points of doctrine, the greatest papists in the world agree with us. Concerning Sacraments, he alloweth, that according to our definition which is more limited, and saict then that of Protestants. There be as many as we teach, (which be seven) and this shall not breed any such I are between us, 
Dove sup. pag. 27. 28.  that therefore we should refuse to communicate together. Which no man in conscience can say, if he supposeth us to be in error. For his own words be these: This proposition is undoubtedly true: no Heretics nor Schismatics are to be communicated with all. And to give all contentment even to those Protestants, which do not allow their own Articles, in this doctrine of the notes of the Church, but to speak in D. Covells' words: add discipline the third note, and of as much necessity: although 
Covell against the plea of the Innocent pag. 21. 56.  for his own opinion he affirmeth with their recited Article in this manner. There be but two essential notes of the Church, the true preacheing of the word, and the right administration of the Sacraments. The Relator hath told 
Relat. 6. 48.  Protestants before, that this Note is in the Roman Church. Wherein (to use his words) Protestant's joining with it, shall find excellent order of government, singular helps for increase of godliness, for the conquering of sin, for the profiteinge of in virtue. And their B. 
Dove persuas. pag. 29.  Dove speaking of the late council, of Trent, hath these words: In that council of Trent, they set forth such wholesome Canons, concerning Discipline, as were fit for a reformed Church. Therefore by these Protestants nothing is wanteing in the Church of Rome, that belongeth to the true Church of Christ: neither any thing superfluous used in these things.  
Further I argue thus: Whatsoever Church is not Heretical, or schismatical, is true and Orthodox: But the Church of Rome is neither Heretical nor schismatical: Therefore Orthodox, and the true Church of Christ. The Mayor proposition is evidently true: for as the true Church of God was ever called Orthodox, and Catholic, so the Impugners obstinately either in understandeinge, denyeing the defined doctrine thereof, or in will resisteing the Superiority, and true Authority▪ were Heretics and schismatics. The second proposition is proved, by their before cited Protestant Bishop Daue, offereinge 
Dove sup. pers.  Catholics to communicate with Protestants, without any change of opinion in Religion. And yet that neither Heretics, nor schismatics, are to be communicated withal, he hath before wittnessed in these words: This proposition is undoubtedly true; no 
Dove sup pag. 5.  Heretics nor schismatics, are to be communicated withal. And he giveth us security, That by no possibility (according to the Argument of General Cowncells before) The Church of Rome can be at any time adjudged Heretical: his words be these: No Church can be condemned and adjudged Heretical 
Dou● sup. pag. 14.  by any private Censure: but it must be public: a General council, as he there expoundeth himself, which Protestants never had, nor possibly can hereafter have, as they have granted.  
My next Argument is this: All that allow the present Greek Church, to be the true Church of Christ, and yet further acknowledge, that the Church of Rome consenteth with the same Greek Church, except in some few things, in which they also hold, that the Roman Church teacheth the truth, and the Greeks' be in Error, must needs acknowledge the Church of Rome, to be the true Church of Christ: But these Protestant writers of England do Thus: Therefore they must allow, that the Church of Rome is the true Church of Christ. The Mayor proposition is evidently true, for the comparative degree in all things includeth the positive, and addeth an increase unto it: as better, or more good, more white, more virtuous, more true, etc. do include goodness, whiteness, virtue, truth etc. and increaseth them: Therefore that Church which is more true, then that which is affirmed to be true, must needs be granted to be the true Church of Christ.  
The second proposition is proved by these Protestants first their present Protestant 
D. George Abbot against D. Kill pag. 63. Feild. l. 3. cap. 5. etc.  Archbishop of Conterbury, and D. Feild allow the Church of Greece for true. The Title of D. fields chapter hath thus freed it from the contrary, in these words: It no way appeareth that the Churches of Greece are Heretical, or in damnable Schism. And again: all these holdeinge the Rule of faith, and beleeueing all those things, that are on the peril of eternal damnation to be particularly and expressly known, and believed: we account them in the number of the Churches of God, and doubt not but innumerable living and dying in them, are, and have been saved. Now if we consider the differences between these two Churches, of Rome, and Greece, we shall find the chiefest to be about the procession of the holy Ghost, whether from the Father alone, as the Grecians contend, or from the Father and the Son, as the Church of Rome teacheth: and whether in the Sacrament of the Altar leavened or unleavened bread, as the Roman Church, teacheth, is to be consecrated. And in both these the Protestants of England consent with the Church of Rome, as appeareth by those words of the Creed: Who prooceedeth from the Father and the Son, allowed and used by them in the one, and their practice in the other. If Protestants will add contention for supremacy, most of them confess, that it never belonged to Constantionple in Greece, whose name was not, when Rome enjoyed it: And the present Grecians themselves acknowledge, the highest dignity in Rome. And in the next chapter I am to prove the supremacy of the Pope of Rome, over all the world, for this place it sufficeth that the recited D. Feild telleth us, absolutely it was 
Feild. l. 3. of the Church c. 1.  but intruded and usurped by the City of Constantinople, to be accounted superior, greater, more honourable than any of the rest, and the chief Bishop of the whole World, because his City was the chief City of the World. Which as he saith, he challenged because he was prouse and Insolent. Now how these Churches agree in other questions, that be between Protestants and us will appear in divers chapters of this treatise, and is contained in the censure of the Grecians against Protestants: 
Hieremias Patriarch, Constant. in censura etc. Relation of Relig. c. 53. or 54.  and as in plain words confessed, by the Protestant, Relator, who speaketh of them in the Greek Church, in this manner. With Rome they concur in the opinion of Transubstantiation, and generally in the service, and whole body of the Mass, in praying to Saints, in auricular confession, in offering of sacrifice, and prayer for the dead, and in these without any, or with no material difference. They hold Purgatorij 
Cap. 55.  also, and worshipping of pictures. For the form and ceremonies of the Mass, they much resemble the Latins. Their liturgies he the same that in the old 
Cap. 53. or 54.  time, namely S. Basils', S. Chrisostomes', and S. Gregory's translated, without any bendeinge of them to that change of languadge, which their tongue hath suffered. In sum, all those opinions which grew into the Church, before that separation, between the Greckes and Latins, and all those ceremonies which were common unto both, they still retain, as their Crosseings and Thapers with others. Therefore if this Church of Greece is not to be condemned, as these Protestants teach, much less can the Roman Church be condemned by them, but must needs remain the true Church of Christ.  
Thus I argue again: That which was the true Church in the time of Luther within an hundred years, by the confession of Protestants, wherein as in the true Church of Christ, Christianity, Baptism, Ordination, and power of Ministry were received, and which brought forth of renowned Kings and Queens many Saints in heaven, and many most learned, holy, and virtuous Doctors, and Popes themselves, and yet of that faith, which the present Church of Rome now teacheth, must needs be the true Church of Christ: But the present Roman Church is such, by these Protestants: Therefore by them, it is the true Church of Christ. The first proposition is evidently true for if (as before by these Protestants there is no salvation out of the true Church so many glorious Saints and holy ones, Kings, Queens, Popes, and Doctors, that could not be excused by ignorance, much less made glorious in it, could not have gone to heaven. Now supposeinge, that every Church, true, or false, consisteth of the head, and other members, of him, or them, that rule, and those that be ruled, of the shepherds and sheep, Bishops, Priests, and those under their charged. Thus I prove the Minor proposition of the Church of Rome consisting of the Pope supreme head Bishops, Doctors, Priests, and other members D. Feild writeth thus of this Church: The Roman and Latin Church continued the true Church of God even till 
Feild. pag. ●2.  our time. Therefore why was it refused by them? or how, not since changed, can it be now otherwise? again he writeth in these words: We doubt not but the Church in 
Feild. pag 182.  which the Bishop of Rome exalted himself, was notwithstanding the true Church of God: that it held a saveing profession of the truth in Christ, and by force thereof, converted many country's from error to truth. Therefore the doctrine of it being truth, it must needs be the true Church. He further acknowledgeth with D. 
Feild. pag. 72. Covell def. of Hook pag. 73.  Covell and others, that Luther and the rest of his Religion, ●ere baptised, received their christianity, ordination, and power of Ministry, in that Church, as the true visible and apparent Church of Christ He telleth us further that divers of the Roman Church even of the best learned be 
Feild. pag. 182.  saved and saints in heaven. Then the unlearned need not fear to follow their guides going before, and theacheing them the way to heaven. D. Willet writeth thus: it is 
Willet Antilog. pag. 144.  not denied by any Protestant, but many renowned Kings, and Queens of the Roman faith, are Saints in heaven. And speakeing of the King's Mother, that glory of late Princes, Q. Marry of Scotland. He attributeth unto her, and her Religion, that of the Roman Church, such holiness and truth, that it prevailed with God not only for herself, but her same also: his words be these: The child of 
Willet Engl. pref. to the K. before Antil. Sutcliffe Ans to the lay pet. pag. 34.  such prayers, and tears, cannot possibly fall away. D. Sutcliffe acknowledgeth the schoolmen so far and famously to be Papists, (as they term Catholics) that he nameth them especially Pope Innocent the third, Thomas Aquinas, Scotus, Albert, Durand, the most renowned in schools, particular Agents of the Roman Church, and foretops of Popery, and joineth them in that sense with the late Doctors of the Church of Rome, defendeing in their writings the doctrine thereof, harding, Allen, Bellarmine, Baronius. And yet D. Covell highly speaketh in the 
Covell def. of Hook pag. 24.  praise of such men in this manner: Alexander Hales, who made his sum that excellent work, by commandment of Pope Innocentius the fourth, was called the fowntayne of life, because of that lively knowledge, that flowed from him: he was scholar to Bonaventure, a Scholar not inferior to himself, of whom he was wont to say, that in Bonaventure he thought Adam sinned not: meaning of that Illumination which was in him (and doubtless there was much in him) as though he had not been darkened by the fall of Adam: And therefore the Church called him the Seraphical Doctor: To these Aquinas was not inferior who came so near unto S. Augustine, (whom in his book 
(Covell against Burg.)  against Burges he esteemeth the chiefest Doctor that ever was, or shall be, excepting the Apostles) that some thought he had all his works by heart, and by a common proverb it was spoken, that the soul of S. Augustine duelt in Aquinas: in whom above all the rest, four contraryeties were said to excel: abundance, brevity, facility, security: in respect whereof he gained the Title to be called Angelical. And to speak somewhat of our Popes themselves, so odious with this people, The Protestant Relator findeth much virtue, devotion, and piety in them, which have been even in these days: among which, to particular in the last Pope Clement 
Relation of Relig. cap. 42. 43.  8. he writeth of him in this manner. He did often weep upon piety and godly compassion, at his Masses, Processions etc. his eyes were still watreinge, sometimes streameing with tears, in so much that for weepeing he seemed another Heraclitus: 
Relation cap. 29. sup.  he was a good Pope, a good Prince, a good prelate. And to exclude Ignorance, he writeth thus: the Papists cry mainly in all places for trial by disputation. Then if our Popes be so holy, so good Popes, good men, good Princes, good Prelates, our Kings and Queens and best Learned, Saints, our Pastors, Doctors and Teachers that be the Pope's Agents, and foretops of popery, most excellent for learning and piety, their writings renowned, their doctrine secure, we may securely follow them, and as securely conclude, by these Protestants, that only this Church of Rome is the true Church of Christ. lastly in this question I argue thus: That which by the confession of Protestants is our mother Churches, and from which no Church ought further to separate itself, than it is separated from itself, when it was in her best estate, for true doctrine, and in which she still continueth in all things necessary to salvation, so undoubtedly that they confess it in plain words, to be the family, of jesus Christ, part of the house of God, and visible Church, that they which live and die in it may be saved, must needs be acknowledged by them for the true Church of Christ: But the present Roman Church by these Protestants is such: And therefore by them the true Church of God. The Mayor proposition is evidently true: for all children (to which all other Churches in respect of Rome, or compared) are bound to obey their Mother, especially teaching all necessary truth, as is here supposed. And that which is the Mother Church, which is the highest, if it be a part of the house of God, and visible Church, and the family of jesus Christ, it must needs be the most excellent part thereof, the head, and chief, and so absolutely the true Church, such societies being named by the most worthy and ruling authority in them. And if salvation is to be had in it, it must likewise by that title, be the true Church of Christ. For D. Feild with D. 
Field pag. 69. Covell def. of Hook. pag. 76.  Covell and others before have given their sentence, in these words: There is no salvation, remission of sins, or hope of eternal life out of the Church. Then of necessity that Church wherein there is not only hope, but by the adversaries themselves, an assured ceretainty of salvation, and eternal life, which cannot be had without remission of sins, must needs be only the true Church of Christ. The Minor, proposition is thus proved by these Protestants: first his majesties 
King's speech in parlam.  words be these: I acknowledged the Roman Church to be our Mother Church, this in public Parliament, and in the conference at Hampton court, in this order: No Church 
Confer. at Hampt. pag. 75.  ought further to separate itself from the Church of Rome, either in doctrine or ceremony, than she hath departed from herself when ●hee was in her florisheinge and best estate. Which before is proved by these Protestants she hath not done in any essential, and fundamental thing, which is all they require. And this will more then abundantly appear, through out this treatise hereafter. And D. Conell writeth thus of this present Roman 
Covell def. of Hook pag. 68  Church: toucheing the main points of Christian truth, they constantly persist in them: Protestants do gladly acknowledge them to be the family of jesus Christ. They of Rome were, and are still in the Church, a part of the house of God, a limb of the visible Church. Which he addeth also to have been Mr. hooker's sentence, telling us, that 
Hook. l. 5. pag. 188.  what he writeth of the Church of Rome, is but to give her her due, and we acknowledge them to be of the family of jesus Christ. And he concludeth thus: It is strange, for any man to deny 
Covell sup. pag. 73. & pag. 76.  them of Rome, to be of the Church. And again: We affirm them of the Roman Church, to be parts of the Church of Christ, and that those that live, and die in that Church, may be saved. And all kinds of Protestants when they combat among themselves, rather prefer the Church of Rome, than their fellow Protestants. The Relator writeth thus: The 
Relation cap. 45.  Lutherans in Germany, both the Clergy, and laity, openly protest, they will rather return to the Church of Rome, then join with the Sacramentary Protestants, such as be in England. And of these Mr. jacob writeth thus: The Bishops of England when they deal with Puritans, must join 
jacob. pag. 73.  plainly with the Catholics in their Answers, if they will maintain themselves. lastly the Puritans have written against these Protestants, 
Offer of conf. pag. 16.  as is cited before, in these words: If the Ministers be in error, they protest to all the world, that the Pope and the Church of Rome, and in them God an Christ jesus himself, have had great wrong, and Indignity offered unto them, in that they are rejected, and that all the Protestant Churches are schismatical in forsakeinge unity and communion with them. Then if the Lutherans, or parliamentary Protestants, or Puritans, all, or any of them, are to be believed against others, none of their congregations, but only the Church of Rome at this present is the true Church of Christ, whose communion of all men is to be embraced, directions followed, and judgement to be rested in. Now after all these Protestant witnesses I come to D. Morton: he agreeth with his former Brethren, concerning things necessarily required to a true Church, and in these words: The belief of some Articles are so absolutely necessary 
Morton App. lib. 4. cap. 2. sect. 3. pag. 443.  for the constitution of a true Church, as a reasonable soul is for the essential being of a man: such as concern the knowledge of the unity of the godhead, and of the trinity of the parsons, together with the true and faithful apprehension of the natures of Christ the Messiah, God and Man: the power of his death, and resurrection, by whom we have remissions of sins, and after death life everlasting. Wherefore we presume, that in a Church, although corrupted with error, and superstition, yet if it doth not ruinated the foundation, the erroneous and superstitious professors may be saved: even by virtue of that tenor which is in capite videlicet. Christ jesus, the Lord and Author of life, which notwithstanding, we must so understand, as that the error and superstition do proceed not from knowledge, but from ignorance. Now that the present Roman Church inviolably holdeth all these necessary things, to a true Church, is granted by many Protestants before; and his Majesty whom this doctor should allow, entreateing of such (as they term them) necessary points, writeth thus: We hope that 
K. james ag D. Conrade. Vorstuis pag. 60.  no Papists shall ever be found to err in any of those main points. And concerning our schoolmen Masters in divinity with us, he useth these words: In the main grounds of Christian Religion, they are worthy of all commendation. And 
Pag. 63. sup.  toucheinge those doctrines which D. Morton will name our errors and superstitions, he addeth thus: If the subject of Vorstius 
Pag. 46. 47. supr.  his heresies had not been grounded upon questions of a higher quality than such matters, as are in controversy at this day, between the Papists, and us; we do freely profess, that in that case we should never have troubled ourselves with the business in such fashion. By which words it is manifest, that he did not think, that any opinion which Catholics hold, doth either exclude us from the true Church, or from salvation: otherwise the maintainers of such things though as near friends as the Netherlanders to England were fervently to be admonished. But D. Morton himself will 
Morton App. lib. 5. cap. 25. pag. 663.  clear us in this matter, and in this manner: and in these words: If we should not acknowledge Gods holy providence (as in the Greek, so in the Roman Church, by whom have been preserved the laws of the commandments containing the same of moral obedience, the Symbol and Creed Apostolical, which hold the same of the fundamental Articles of faith, the two Sacraments Baptism and the Eucharist: and the Scriptures of the old and new Testament in their first originals: of Hebrew and Greek, being the evidences of our heavenly Father's will, and containing in them all truth necessary unto salvation: we might be worthily judged both impiously unthankful unto God, and malicious against that Church. Therefore if D. Morton requireth only, as before such necessary points and Articles of faith to a true Church, and here acknowledgeth them in the Roman Church, and protesteth they might be worthily judged malicious against that Church, if they should deny it: It is evident that they are malicious against it, they shall deny it, to be the true Church of Christ: because in his judgement the true and essential definition of the true Church, ever was, and still is unseperably annexed unto it. Concerning D. Mortons' exception and limitation: That the error and superstition do proceed not from knowledge but from Ignorance, is fully answered by his own fellows in Religion before, graunteinge, that the Pope's greatest Doctors, and Princes of our Religion, are Saints and saved souls. And to avoid ignorance, or wilful erring they have written: The Papists cry mamely in all 
Relation of Relig. cap. 29.  places for trial by disputation. And that English Protestants, persecutions against us, are thought to equal those of Nero, and Dioclesian. Which we would not suffer, if we knew ourselves in error, wilful both to be afflicted in this, and the world to come. Besides D. Mortons' limitation is ridiculous, for error and superstition do not proceed from knowledge, as his fond distinction surmiseth: neither doth the state of knowledge, or ignorance, ●arye the essential, necessary, and fundamental definition, nature, or essence of the Church, being one and the same in that, as in all other things, in all estates and times. The particular exceptions which he taketh against the Innovation of some doctrines which he contendeth to have been in the Roman Church, first are frivolous in this dispute, none of them as he confesseth being of any thing essential, and necessary either to the true Church, or salvation, of which we contend in this place. Secondly they shall be all confuted in their proper places, by these his own brethren, and present friends and countrymen in Religion. Thirdly not to suspend my Readers judgement so long, Doctor Morton shall answer and by a general 
Morton Appeal. lib. 4. cap. 30. pag. 573. 574.  reason, so much as this place, will permit, confute himself in his own objection. His words be these: Protestant's in oppugninge doctrines which they call new and not Catholic, are so far from suffering the limitation of the first 4●0. years, that they give the Romanists, the scope of the first 600. years. S. Gregory lived within the first 600. years. He addeth for himself, and other Protestants, as the Centuriarists, and many more, of our conversion then, in this 
Morton lib. 1. cap. ●. pag. 60. supr.  manner: Pagan and Heathenish people by the light of the gospel through the ministery of Austen, the legate of S. Gregory were brought unto the fold of Christ. And therefore our Authors called i● a gracious conversion. And yet that this light, Gospel, fold of Christ and gratiu● conversion, to which they were converted, was (as they now scoffingly term our Catholic Roman Religion) Romanisme, Papisme, Papistry, superstitions Ceremonies, and the like by which they express the full state of our Religion is thus testified by D. Mortons' Protestant Authors, and witnesses. The words of his Centuriarists be these: Augustinus Romanus ordinis 
Centuriator. Ceatur. 6. An. 1●82. pag. 747. 748.  Benedicti Monachu● à Gregorio Papa Anno Domini 582. Augustine a Roman, a Monk of the order of Benedict was sent from Gregory the Pope in the year of our Lord 582. into England to win it to the Pope of Rome, and to make it subject to his superstitious jurisdiction. Enterin into the Kentish Isle named Tenet in the year of our Lord 596. he endued King Edelbert and his superstitious Wife in the Roman Religion. Yet with that condition, that this Popish worship should be free and not compelled. After calling a council he obtruded the Romish Rites and customs to those Churches that it to say Altars, Vestments, Images, Masses, Chalices, Crosses, Candlesticks, Censors, Banners, sacred vessels, holy water, thou books of the Roman Ceremonies, Oblations, Processions, pomps, Tithes and the like. When he had subjecteth the britain Churches to the Antichrist of Rome Romano Antichristo subiecisset, he died. Thus we see by D. Morton his greatly reverenced, 
Col. 749.  and esteemed friends, and fellows in Religion, that the state of the Roman Church in that his allowed time, was the same, that it is at this present. And not only his Centuriarists, but other Protestants by his own Relation are witnesses 
Morton App. lib. 1. cap. 3. Willet de August. mon. Morton supr. pag. 67. l. 1. cap. 6. Centuriat. centur. 7. col. 559.  in this cause. Doctor Humphrey as he acknowledgeth, saith that Gregory brought in on us ceremoniarum, a burden of Ceremonies. D. Willet saith, he brought in Popery, Luke Osiander and his before cited friends call that Religion, ceremonias papisticas, papistical ceremonies. And to use their words: Ceremonias papisticas instituturi, & propagaturi: quod Beda vocat aliquos Christo praedicando acquirere, to teach and publish papistical ceremonies, which Bede, that glory of our nation, calleth to get some to Christ by preaching. Mr. Bale an other of his friends, 
joan. Bal. l. de script. Brit. centur. 1. in August. pag. 34. fol. 3 5.  and Authors hath these words: Augustine was sent Apostle from Gregory to instruct the English Saxons, in the papistical faith, papistica fide initiandos. And again King Ethelbert being converted received Romanisme with the superstitions adjoined. Romanismum cum adiunctis superstitionibus suscepit. Augustine brought in Al●●rs, Vestments, sacred Vessels, Relics and books of Ceremonies, all which Gregory had sent unto him, with the blessing of Peter. And that these with the rest of our sacred ceremonies which they call the body of popery, were not then newly Invented, but used in the Church of Rome, when his majesty saith, it was a Rule to all 
K. Speech.  both in faith, and ceremonies, shall be testified and proved hereafter, in the proper question of such things, by D. Morton himself▪ and too many others of his now English Protestant confederates in Religion, to be without manifest impudency to be denied. Therefore, by these Protestants, The present Roman Church must be allowed to be the true Church of Christ; And all their former invectives against it, and their departeing from it, by their own judgements, must be recanted.   

CHAPTER III. WHEREIN IS PROVED BY these Protestants, that the Pope of Rome ever was, and now lawfully is, and aught so to be esteemed the supreme pastor, and head on earth, of the whole Church of Christ: of his sentence and Authority.  
FROM hence it is evidently proved, That the Pope of Rome is supreme head of the true Church of Christ: for seeing these Protestants have told us, that true Regiment and discipline is a note of the true Church of Christ, and thus it appeareth, that the Church of Rome is this true Churehe, and hath this note of true Regiment, the supreme binding, and commanding Authority, of the Pope, being the chiefest of that government, is therein concluded Likewise it so followeth by their note of true doctrine, wherein they have granted the Church of Rome constantly persisteth in all things, necessary and essential: such as this Question of the Pope's prerogative and highest juridical power is: for as it followeth in these men's judgements, if the Pope is not supreme head, and Ruler of the true Church of Christ, than that society that so accepteth him, is not the true Church: So if it be proved, that he is the highest supreme pastor, and vicar of Christ in earth. That Church which so receiveth him, and no other is the true Church of Christ. For to be supreme governor of the true Church, and the true Church so to be governed, are mutual and unseparable Correlatyves, as a King and Kingdom, Lord and Servant and the like. And this with that which is entreated in the former chapter might suffice in this controversy. But to give all contentment. I will prove it more in particular, and first argue thus.  
That Church which is the Mother, and consequently, commanding Church over all Churches, her children▪ hath supreme authority over them, otherwise no Mother nor commander over all: But the Church of Rome is this Mother and commanding Church: Therefore it hath supreme authority over all. Therefore the Pope highest Pastor in it, is this supreme Ruler, and Commander. Both propositions be proved by Protestants before: and so nothing remaineth doubtful.  
Further I argue in this order: No society or company wanteing one supreme, and chief Pastor over the rest, to suppress Schisms, and avoid factions, can be the true Church of God, whose communion all men are bound to embrace, follow her directions, and rest in her judgement: But all Protestant companies, societies, and Congregations, want this chief Rule●, and commander, and the Church of Rome only enjoyeth it: Therefore no Assembly or society of Protestants, but only the Church of Rome is the true Church of Christ. The Mayor though it be evident before, yet thus it also is proved and confirmed again by these Protestants, teaching that from the beginning this supremacy was in one. D. Feild writeth thus: Tertullian saith rightly 
Feild. l. 4. c. 2. pag. 196.  and ap●ly, what was hidden and concealed from Peter on whom Christ promised to build his Church? D. Sutcliffe speaketh more plainly in these 
Sutcliffe sub. pag. 40.  words: Tertullian giveth the keys only to Peter, saying: that the Church is built upon him. And to prove that this prerogative founded in thi● chief Apostle, first Bishop of Rome, was to continue to his successors: D. Downame saith that in the primitive Church: 
Downame l. 1. Antich. p. 36.  Titles of honour, and pre-eminence were given to the Church of Rome, as the chief, or head of the Churches. Further D. Feild citeth and approveth, this saying of S. Hierome: Eccl●si●sal●● 
Hieron. contra Lucifer.  in summi sac●rdotis dignita●● pe●de● cui si non exors quaedam & ab omnibu● 〈◊〉 de●●● po●es●a●, tot in ecclesia efficientur scismata, quot sacerdotes. The health of the Church dependeth on the dignity of the highest Priest, to whom except an extraordinary and eminent power be given by all men, there will be so many schisms, where the words Church, highest Priest, and, of all, demonstrate, that he speaketh of the whole Church universal; for those words cannot be applied to any particular Church. Again D. Covell hath these words: The twelve were not like to agree, except there had been one chief amongst them: for saith S. Hierome, amongst the twelve one was therefore chosen, that a chief being appointed, occasion of dissension might be prevented. Which neither S. Hierosme, D. Covell, or any other, 
Covell ag:: the plea of the Innoc. pag. 107.  Catholic, or Protestant, could suspect among the Apostles, confirmed in grace, that any mortal or damnable dissension could fall among them: Therefore this appointing of one, to be chief among the Apostles, and him that was to be our first Bishop of Rome, S. Peter, it must needs be for a continual Rule, and law, for the Universal Church for ever. And yet, if we would be maliciously envious to the Apostles privilege in grace; if in that special time of the grace, and favour of God. The supremacy of one above all was so necessary, that otherwise schisms, (which be more properly against the whole Church and head thereof then against any particular Church wanting such supreme authority to be disobeyed) could not then he otherwise prevented; it must needs be much more necessary in the continuance and later ages of the Church, as shall be proved from these Protestants in the next Argument, in the mean time, for this point D. Covell writeth in this order? we easily see, 
Covell against the plea of the Innocent. pag. 106.  that equalitte doth breed factions, and therefore wisemen to suppress the seeds of dissensions have made one above the rest. And better to clear this doubt by these Protestants I will hear repeat again, what their Protestant Relator hath written in this matter utterly disabling the Protestants Religion, and commending 
Relation of Religion c. 47.  the Church of Rome: his words be these: The Protestants are severed bands, or rather scattered troops, each drawing divers way, without any means to pacify their quarrels, to take up their controversies. No Prince with any pre-eminence of jurisdiction above the rest: no Patriarch, one or more to have a Common superintendance or care of their Churches, for respondency and unity: no ordinary way to assemble a general Council of their part, the only hope remaining to asswadge their contentions. The other have the Pope, as a Common Father, Adviser and conductor to them all, to reconcile their ●ar●●, to appease their displeasures, to decide their difference, above all things to draw their Religion by consent of councils to unity. Hitherto this Protestant writer: where D. Feild may plainly see, that those three things, wherein he teacheath the unity of the Church consisteth, cannot in the judgement of his fellow Protestants, be maintained without this one supreme, and commanding pastor, and authority, in the Church of Christ.  
My next Argument is thus: whatsoever Regiment, Supremacy, and Government of the Church, was ordained by Christ in his time, and was as much, or more necessary to remain, and continue in it, for future and succeedeing ages, is still to be allowed, and continued: But the Supreme Regiment, and commanding jurisdiction, of one highest spiritual Pastor, and Governor is such: Therefore still to be allowed, and continued. The Mayor proposition is evidently true, for Christ's ordinance above all things, is to be observed, and notheing so necessary to his Church, may be without damnation omitted. The Minor proposition is thus proved, by these words of D. Covell, that follow: Because in the execution of holy things, where the parsons 
Covell against the plea of the Innocent. pag. 106.  put in trust are but men, discord, and disorder usually do break in: the wisdom of God thought it necessary, that amongst them, who for their Ministry were equal, an Inequality for Order, and Superiority to command, should be granted: that by this means, Order, and union should both be preserved in Christ's Church. Which of it concern all persons, and ages in the Church of Christ, (as surely it doth,) the government must not cease with the Apostles. where it is evident, that Christ among his Apostles instituted in one, an Authority and Superiority, to command, and without this one commanding superiority, union, and order could not be preserved, that it concerneth all parsons, and ages, and so must never cease, but endure for ever, which is all I contend to prove, for all Protestants want it, and only the Roman Church enjoyeth it. And further, the same Protestants Doctor proveth this spiritual supremacy of one Pastor, to be perpetual, because now in these times of schism, & dissensions, there is more need of that commanding superiority: And yet (saith he) it was the principal means to prevent schisms, and dissensions in the 
Covell sup. pag. 207.  primitive Church, when the graces of God were far more abundant, and eminent, then now they ar: nay if the twelve were not like to agree, except there had b●●ne one chief amongst them: for saith S. Hierome, amongst the twelve one was therefore chosen that a chief being appointed, occasion of dissension might be pr●u●●●ed. And as in the same place he thus argueth, against the puritans Presbytery: how can they think that equality would keep all the Pastor's of the world in unity? So I say to all Protestants, they cannot with reason think, that so many equal Regiments, and Rulers in Religion, as they make in their distinct Provinces, and Churches, if the world were of their Religion, could over agree: to which the lamentable experience of their miserable dissensions, and errors already, for want of one supreme Commander, and not otherwise to be redressed as the Protestant Relator hath 
Relat. sup.  written before, doth testify. Which absurdity and most unsufferable inconvenience, for want of such commanding power, D. Covell setteth down in these words: seeing 
Covell sup. pag. 107.  that all men may easily err, and that no errors are so dangerous, as those which concern Religion: the Church should be in a far worse case, than the meanest Common wealth, nay all most then a den of thieves, if it were destitute of means, either to convince Heresies, or suppress them. Which cannot be done as they plainly confess, by any power, in their Church, not by any authority, as they writ, but by a General 
Feild.  council, and a supreme Commander to call it, which they want, and as their Relator telleth us, can never have it. Further 
Relation.  I argue thus: That Church which as the Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury wittnesseth, 
Abbot ag. Hill pag. 189.  by tradition of the ancient, was the seat of S. Peter, the highest and supreme pastor in the Church as D. Feild and D. Covell before have allowed, from S. Hierome, and Tertullian, and D. Sutcliffe 
Sutcliff. subt. pag. 40.  thus citeth, and writeth, Tertullian giveth the keys only to Peter, saying: that the Church is built on him. And thus he testifieth for himself: Peter preached in no place, but he there ordained 
Sup. pag. 3.  Bishops, and teachers, and founded Churches: Which in his book against D. Kellison, he 
Sutel. against Kell. pag. 105.  maketh an Argument of supremacy. And which as the same Protestant Archbishopp citeth from S. Leo and Prosper great Doctors and Saints, was by Religion supreme head of the world: This Church I say must needs be 
Abb. sup. pag. 189. 190.  chief and supreme: But the Church of Rome is that Church, as is evident, and appeareth by these Protestants in those their places cited: Therefore it is, and so ought by Protestants to be honoured and obeyed. Both propositions be affirmed by Protestants before, and so notheinge in this Argument remaineth to be further proved.  
Next I suppose what D. Feild writeth of the great and patriarchal Churches of Gracia, Armenia Aethiopia, Russia never subject or inferior unto any except to the Church of Rome as Catholics hold, teaching that to be supreme: his words of those Churches be these: We conclude therefore, 
Feild. l. 3. c. 5. pag. 7●.  that their schisms and separations are sinful, wicked and dangerous, and their errors inexcusable. And concerning schism he thus defineth it: Schism is a breach of the unity of the Church. That supposed, and that schism which is 
Feild sup. pag 70.  contempt of authority, is a kind of disobedience, which always is against a Superior, and one higher in dignity, and command, I argue thus. Whatsoever Church is that, to which, and against which, all patriarchal Churches, excepting one claiming to be highest, are in schism, and disobedience, is supreme, and of highest authority: But this is the Church of Rome: Therefore that is supreme. The Mayor proposition is evident, otherwise those Churches against D. Fields words before, could not be schismatical: nor possibly could be in schism which he saith is a breach of the unity of the Church, and must needs be a contempt of superiority. The Minor is manifestly true: for by D. Feild before, the other patriarchal sees besides Rome are in schism, and no other Church but the Roman Church was extant in the world, besides them, at the time of their schism, and long after neither any other than did, or now doth claim superiority over them: Therefore that alone is supreme: otherwise those Churches not resisting superiority, cannot be in schism, against D. Feild his grant before related. 
Feild sup. l. 3. c. 5. pag. 70.   
Further for my next Argument, the same D. fields hath these words: Schism is a breach of the unity of the Church. The unity of the Church consisteth in three things: first the subjection of people to their lawful Pastors: secondly the connexion, and communion, which many particular Churches, and the Pastors of them, have among themselves: thirdly in holding the same rule of faith. This supposed, which as it confirmeth the former argument, for all these things required to the unity of the Church so necessary to be preserved, must needs imply a supreme authority: So it giveth matter of an other Argument, in this manner.  
Whatsoever doctrine, and power, in the Church, is so necessary, that without it, neither all, nor any of these unities absolutely needful, can be preserved, is to be granted: But one supreme spiritual commanding Ruler, and the doctrine thereof is such: Therefore one supreme governor, and doctrine according is to be allowed. The Mayor proposition is evidently 
Relation of Relig supr. cap. 47.  true, by D. Feild and other Protestants, otherwise nothing can be schism, nothing can be heresy. The Minor proposition is directly proved before, by the Protestant Relator, twice already cited, where he expressly teacheth that without one such supreme pre-eminence of juridiction above the rest, which he saith all Protestants want and Catholics have, quarrels cannot be pacified, unity kept, controversies decided, and consequently neither Schism, nor Heresy condemned.  
Again thus I argue: whatsoever the Church of Rome claimed, or exercised, when by Protestants confession, is was in her Florisheing, and best estate, a Rule to all, Anchor of piety, chief and only Church, that it still ought to enjoy, and we to grant unto it: But in that time, it claimed, and exercised supremacy over all: Therefore it ought now to enjoy it, and we to grant it. The Mayor is evident, for that which is a Rule to all, may, not be crooked, neither that which is confessed chief, be made Inferior, And that the Church of Rome had those eminent privileges, is thus proved by these Protestants: our King saith of this Roman 
King's speech in Parlam.  Church: it is our mother Church it was a Rule to all, both in doctrine and ceremonies, when it was in her florisheinge and best estate. D. Covell writeth thus: The Church of Rome was the chief and 
Covell def. of Hook.  only Church. M ● Ormerod calleth it, the eye of the west (in which diussion England is) and 
Ormerod pict. pap. pag. 184. Down. l. 2. Antichr. pag. 105.  the Anchor of piety. D. Downame granteth, it was a note of a Good Christian, to clean unto the Roman Apostolical Church.  
The second proposition, that the Church of Rome claimed and had supremacy, in that unspotted, and primitive time of Christianity, is also proved in the former: for that which is Mother, Rule to all both in doctrine and ceremonies, chief Church etc. must needs be granted supreme. Yet to prove it further: D. Sutcliffe, citeing S. 
Sutcliffe subu. pag. 57  Irenaeus, living near the Apostles time, and long before any general council, or Christian Emperor, to give supremacy to the See of Rome, writeth thus: Irenaeus saith, that every Church ought to have respect to the Church of Rome, for her eminent principality. Mr. Ormerod ascendeth to Pope, S. Anacletus, living withein one hundred years of Christ: his words be these: To prove that the Church of Rome hath the pre-eminence over all Churches, 
Ormerod. pict. pap. pag. 78.  Anacletus allegeth Matth. 16. vers. 18. upon this rock will I build my Church: and he expoundeth it thus: super hanc Petram (id est) super Ecclesiam Romanam, upon this Rock: that is, upon the Church of Rome, will I build my Church. And who shall we think was better acquainted with the privilege, of that highest Apostle S. Peter, Bishop of Rome, than this so glorious a Pope, Martyr, and Saint so near succeedeing unto him? when especially these Protestant's before have assured us, that this supreme power was not to die with S. Peter, but to continue in the Church for ever. And this was not a singular opinion of that Holy Pope, and Saint, but of others also: the words of D. Downame be 
Down. l. 1. Antichrist. cap. 3. pag. 35.  these: divers Bishops of Rome before the time of Socrates the historiam (in her that best and flourishing estate) contended to have the primacy, over all other Churches: and that is the chief scope of many of their Epistles decret all. And yet in that time the Protestants confess those Popes for Saints: and if their Epistles be decretals, and laws to the Church, as this Doctor calleth them how had not these Masters of decrees, and lawemakers unto the Church, also supreme and highest power in the Church? for laws and decrees are made by Sovereigns, and not by subjects. And not only Popes, but other Saints, and Doctors before, and to be cited hereafter by Protestants, were of the same myndc: for this time it shall suffice that M ●. Middleton 
Middleton Papistom. pag. 200.  writeth thus; Papias (lyveinge in the Apostles time) taught Peter's primacy, and Romish Episcopalitye.  
My next Argument, or further confirmation of the former, is thus: That Church, or governor, that in the best and flourishing estate of the Church, by Protestants, did claim, exercise, and execute, supreme, & highest spiritual jurisdiction, in all known parts, of the world, Asia, Africa, and Europe was truly supreme, and so still to be accounted: But the Pope and Church of Rome was such: Therefore supreme in authorine. The Mayor is evidently true, for in this life no supremacy can extend further, then into the whole known world, and all parts thereof. The second proposition is thus proved by these Protestants: and first of Asia, among the Greek Churches, and privileges which they claim: D. Covell telleth us, that Pope 
Covell ag:: thea plea of the Inn. pag. 65.  Victor a glorious Saint, and Martyr, did in that best time, authoritatively take upon him supremacy over all Asia, excommunicating the Churches of it: his words be: inseperateing all Asia from the unity of the faithful, for being disobedient in the point and question of Easter. And what greater supremacy can be named in the Church, then to excommunicate, and purt forth of the Church, so great a part of the world? Therefore seeing such jurisdiction is not, but in superiority, this supremacy must needs be granted to the Church of Rome; for of all Churches of the world even by the grant of Protestants, the Greek Church next to the Church of Rome hath ever most contended for superiotie, and in the ancient cowncells, next to the Church of Rome, is most privileged: yet here they are by a Saint Bishop of Rome, justly excommunicated, as by their superior: for as these Protestants argue in an other place: par in parem non habet authoritatem. An equal against an equal hath not authority. And Doctor Covell before hath told us, that they were thus censured by the Pope of Rome, to use his words again, for being disobedient in the point and question of Easter: Which makes it plain in his opinion, that the Pope of Rome was supreme, and had highest power not only to censure, but to decree in matters of Religion, and bind others unto it, otherwise not to have conformed themselves unto him, had not been in these Greek Churches, disobedience, which is only against authority, and superiority. And although S. Iraeneus disliked this proceedeing, with the Asiaticall Churches, Ob. as these Protestants use to object: yet it Answ. was only, because he thought there was not such severity then to be used, not that he denied the power, and authority of the Pope to do it: for of his opinion of the justice of his supremacy D. Sutcliffe 
Sucl. subu. pag. 57  hath wittnessed before that he saith: Every Church ought to have respect to the Church of Rome, for her eminent principality. Therefore he thought it had supremacy. For principality eminent over every Church here mentioned, must needs be supremacy over all: for every Church being subjecteth unto it, none is privileged, from subjection and obedience unto it.  
Next let us come to Africa: for which M. Perkins writeth thus: Appeals were often made out of Africa, to the Popes of Rome, in those 
Perk. problem, pag. 237. 238.  days, of her best estate. And yet appeals be all ways to superiors, and never out of foreign kingdoms, but to the highest, for which cause, D. D●wname granteth in this 
Downam. l. 2. Antichrist, pag. 105. 106.  manner, that S. Augustine and Victor Vticensis in Asrike were of opinion, that to adhere to the Church of Rome, was a Mark of a true Catholic in those times. Which could not be, except it were the commanding Church, and enfranchised from error. Neither doth this Doctor 
Down. su●. pag. 106. 107.  Deny, but the Bishops than did swear obedience to the Pope. And entreateing of a Bishop recanteinge his Heresies, he writeth thus. He sweareth, to renounce his former Heresies, and to profess, and maintain that Faith. And Religion, which the Bishop and Church of Rome did profess. Which is a thing in itself so absurd for Bishops in that best time to do, except they did hold, the Pope's Authority to be supreme, and judgement in religeons controversies Infallible, that no man of understanding can believe it: Therefore Mr. Ormerod wittnesseth; that S. Leo taught, that 
Ormerod pict. pap. pag. 44. Sutcl su●● pag. 19  God did assist, and direct that See in decrees.  
Concerning Europe: D. Sutcliffe giveth particular examples, how S. Gregory (to use his words) commanded the Bishops of france. And commandeth also in England, the constituting of our Archbishop S. Augustine, and the very See of that pre-eminence, at Canterbury. D. Covell writeth the like of Pope Gregory his 
Covell against Burg. pag. 49.  commanding authority, in all Spain: who provoked by the Heresy of the Arians, commanded that through all Spain there should be but once dipping in baptism. And if either a general council, in the primitive Church, to which Protestants will seem to give highest authority, or the Emperor, to 
Bilson Suru. pag. 83. Mort. Apol. part. 2. pag 340. Relat. c. 47. Su●cl. subu. pag. 119. Field pag. 228. etc. Do●n, l. 1. Antich. c. 3. pag. 36.  whom by their proceed they would highest power, if they could procure any of their Religion could either give, or confirm this highest authority, to the Pope of Rome, Then D. Downame denieth not, but that both the Emperor justinian, and the general council of Chalcedon in the primitive Church, attributed to the Pope of Rome, to be head of the Church: which he saith is the greatest style. And addeth of that Church, in that best estate: Titles of honour, and pre-eminence were given to the Church of Rome, as the chief, or Head of the Churches.  
Again I argue thus: whatsoever power doth rightly ordain in the Church generally ceremonies by all to be used in it, appointeth metropolitans, Archbishops, Bishops, assigneth precincts, to every parish, and a certain compass to every presbyter, in the primitive Church, and best estate thereof, musts needs be supreme: But the power of the Pope of Rome is such: Therefore it is supreme. The Mayor is evidently true, for it containeth authority over all in the Churches. The Minor is proved by D. Morton, Mr. Ormerod, Mr. Ormerod, Mr. Hull, 
Mort. apol. part. 2. Orm. pict. pur. Covell exam. Hull Rom. pol pag. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86.  and Doctor Covell, telling us, that Lent, Imbringe days, Friday Altars, Albes, Corporals, Priests Robes, Saints, Fast evens, Saints Shrines, Hymns, Pax, Paschal Taper, Mass for the dead, Canonical hours, Processione, Holy water, Introite of Mass, anointing Bishops, crosseing with Chrism in Baptism, were ordained in the Church by these primitive, and holy Popes, Telesphorus, Calixtus, Stephanus, Sylvester, Sixtus, Vigilius, Honorius, Bo●ifacius, Sergius, Leo, Innocentius, Zozimus, Vitellian, Celestine, Pelagius, Vrbanus, Agapitus, Damasus, Higimus, Pius, Alexander: all which ruled the Church long before the exceptions of Protestants against it. D. Covell doth not only tell us, that metropolitans, Archbishops etc. came from thence, and who to whom should be obedient, or superior: and were so used before the Nicene Council: 
Covell mod. exam. pag. 111.  But further (to use his words) either Evaristus Bishop in the See of Rome (in the year of Christ 112.) or as some say Dionysius first assigned the precincts to every parish, and appointed to each Presbyter, a certain compass, whereof himself should take charged alone. Therefore that authority of the Pope, which thus from 
Covell exam. pag. 162. sup.  the beginning, and before councils were holden, assigned, limited, and appointed to all spiritual parsons, and callings, their Titles, honours, precincts, jurisdiction, and power, must needs be supreme.  
I argue again: That Church, whose Bishop was before the first general Council, Chief Patriarch in the Church of Christ, and in that and other general councils, so allowed, and confirmed, by the confession of Protestants, and whose Rulers when that Church was in her florisheing, and best estate, a Rule to all our mother Church etc. Did make and publish decrees, and laws to the whole Church, and in the greatest affairs of general, and other councils, that they should not do against the directions of that commaundeinge Ruler, else to be accounted no councils: and that it were not lawful for Bishops to do any thing against his decrees, must needs be the supreme and commanding Church, over all others: But the Church of Rome by the testimony of Protestant's, is in this pre-eminent and privileged estate: Therefore by them it is the supreme and commanding Church, of the whole Christian world: The Mayor proposition is evidently true: for, first he that is the first, and chief among all others, cannot be dependent, therefore he must needs be supreme, otherwise D. Fields unities of the Church could not possibly be kept, as is proved before, nor the grant of his fellows, that there ever was since Christ one supreme in his Church, cannot be justified. For if the first, chief, and most worthy, is not he; the second, less chief or less worthy carnot be he. And if by Protestants, a general Council is highest, and supreme judge, as D. Morton 
Morton. Apol. part. 2. pag. 340. Sutcl. subu. pag. 119. Field pag. 228.  saith: a general Council is highest judge: by D. Surcliffe: general councils have sovereign authority in external government: by D. Feild: Bishops assembled in a general Council have (and only have) authority to interprett scriptures and by their authority to suppress all them that gainsay such Interpretation, and subject every man, that shall disobey such determinations, as they consent upon, to excommunication, and censure of like nature: Then that Pope or prelate which in that true Church (where such usurpation unjustly could not be) that had authority to confirm, ratify, or to frustrate and invalidate such, and all other councils, must of necessity be supreme, and of the highest commanding power, over all. The Minor proposition is proved by these Protestants: first D. Feild writeth in these words: The main 
Field l. 3. c. 1. pag. 61. 62.  division of the christian Church is presently, and was formerly for certain hundreds of years, into the Latin and Greek Church, as most principal. In the time of the Nicene Council, and before, as appeareth 
Nicen. Concil. can. 6.  by the Acts of the Council limiteinge there bounds, there were three principal Bishops, or patriarchs of the Christian Church: namely the Bishop of Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch. After which time, Constantinople before named Byzantium made great by Constantine, and being the seat of the Emperors, the Bishops of this See not only obtained to have the dignity of a patriarch among the rest, but in the second general Council, holden at Constantinople was preferred before both the other of Alexandria, and Antioch, and set in degree of honour next unto the Bishop of Rome. Hitherto 
See D. Feild l. 4. c. 5. pag. 202. clearly allowt●e Pope's sentence to be greatest next to a general Council. It is cited in the next chapter.  D. Feild; by which discourse of his, there is evident demonstration made, that the privilege of the Bishop of Rome, was not given him by general councils, but he had it before the first Nicene Council, the first general. Secondly that it was the most principal, that was in the Christian Church, for of the two most principal Churches ●atine and Greek (to use his words) the Latin the most principal was under him: thirdly he was from the beginning preferred before the patriarchs of Alexandria, and Antioch, and Constantinople: in so much, that for Constantinople claymeing after to be chief, he calleth it a pretended Title, 
Feild sup. pag 62.  and false: and further his words of the Bishops of Constantinople be these: The mognificence and glory of his city daily encreaseinge, he challenged to be superior, and would be named universal B. not challengeing to himself to be B. alone, but enchroacheinge upon the Right of all other, and thereby declareinge. Himself greater, and more honourable than any of the rest, and the chief Bishop of the whole world. Hitherto his words of the encreacheing, and usurpation of that Bishop: Then by his sentence, the Pope of Rome still was chief, and obtained by right the primacy, in the whole Christian: Church: And this cheefnes and primacy, as D. Covell hath told before, must needs be supremacy, for no other could have it: and D. Downame also hath acknowledged 
Down. l. 1. Ant. pag. 36.  that both the Emperor and general Council attributed to the Pope of Rome in the primitive Church, to be head of the Church: the greatest style, in his judgement: and it must needs be, if (as it is) among all members of the body the head is chief, supreme, and most excellent. Let us add to this two sentences of D. Feild: the one concerning the authority of Traditions in these words: There is no reason why traditions or unwritten verities should not be made equal 
Field pag. 238.  with the words, precepts and doctrines of Christ, the Apostles and Pastors of the Church left unto us in writeinge if they could prove any such unwritten verities for it is not the writeinge, that giveth things their authority. But the worth and credit of him that delivereth them, though by word, and lively voice only. And after delivering three Rules, 
Feild. pag. 242.  how to know certainly these so authorized traditions, and unwritten verities, he speaketh in this manner. The third Rule is the constant testimony, of the Pastors of an Apostolical Church, succeedeingly delivered: To which some add the present Testimony of any Apostolical Church, whose declynings when they began, we cannot precisely tell. Hitherto the words of this Protestant Doctor, of the authority of traditions, equal to scriptures being proved by this his Rule. Then if the opinion of these some his Protestants by his manner of argueinge, teaching that the present testimony of an Apostolic Church, is sufficient Rule, to prove true traditions, of so high authority, not only this Catholic doctrine of the Pope's supremacy, and commanding power, but all other doctrines, taught against these Protestants, of necessity must needs be true by this Rule, for they all being the doctrines of the present Church of Rome, the first and principal Apostolic Church, must needs be justified by the Testimony of an Apostolic Church, at this present when they are taught by it. And this is sufficient for my purpose: for so that some Protestants be of this opinion, it is as much as I request, and do not desire or expect D. fields voice, or an harmony of Protestants, never yet agreeing well, in any thing, to be all of one mind in this matter. But to urdge this particular question in hand, of the Pope's supremacy by that Rule of traditions, which he alloweth, which is: The constant testimony of the Pastors of an Apostolic Church, succeedingly delivered: It is proved by these Protestants before, that the Pastors of that greatest Apostolic Church, even from the Apostle S. Peter, have succeedingly claimed, taught, decreed, exercised, and executed that highest power of supremacy, in all parts of the known world. And yet for further proof of my Minor proposition, Mr. powel writeth of these holy primitive 
powel l. 1. Antichrist. pag. 230. 231.  Pope's following, in this manner: Calixtus Pope defined, that all Bishops though gathered in a general Council shall fulfil the will of the Church of Rome: They which do not this, are pronounced of Pope Pelagius, to keep a Conciliable and not a Council. And again in these words: 
powel sap. pag. 240.  Pope Damasus wrote, that it is not lawful for the bishops to do any thing, against the decrees of the Bishops of Rome. Therefore by these Protestants. The Pope of Rome of right is, and of all aught to be acknowledged, and admitted, for the supreme head, and Ruler of the Church of Christ. And this being thus unuincibly proved by these English Protestants themselves, our mortal enemies, and persecutors, I conclude with their own words, granted before, upon such trial, and conviction. That the Pope, and the 
Offer of Conference pag. 16.  Church of Rome, and in them, God and Christ jesus himself, have had great wrong, and Indignity offered unto them, in that they are rejected, and that all the Protestant Churches are scismaticastin forsakeinge unity and communion with them. Which D. Feild must also justify, affirming (as 
Feild. l. 4. c. 5. pag. 202.  shall be cited at large in the next chapter) that the judgement of the Pope of Rome, or Church of Rome is one of the greatest in this world, and as great disobedience to resist, or deny it: which is evident also before, but more of it hereafter.  
Now let us come to the New Protestants history itself maliciously by their Bishops published against the Church of Rome. First entreateing of the conversion of this kingdom to the faith of Christ: they set down this marginal supposition in these 
Theatre of the Empire of great Brittany pag. 203. cap. 9 n. 5.  words: Saint Peter the Apostle supposed to have preached in Britain. And further write, as followeth. To which uncontrollable testimony some others have added, that Saint Peter the Apostle preached the word of life, in this Island, as to other gentiles he did, for whom God had chosen him, that 
Act. 15. 7.  from his mouth they might hear the Gospel, (as himself allegeth) and that he here founded Churches, and ordained priests and deacons, which is reported by Simon Metaphrastes out of the Greek 
Metaphrast. Centur. 1. part. 7. dist. 8.  Antiquities, and Guilielmus Eisingrenius in the first of his century, who saith that Peter was here in Nero's time. Therefore if the Antiquities of the grecians, and Adversaries to the Romave See, give this testimone unto it, we need not be scrupulous to receive it, especially when these Protestant Bishops with their Pantaleon give credit to this authority of S. Peter over this kingdom in these words: Much about these times (as Beatus Rhenanus 
Theat sup. pag. 204. n. 9 cap. 9  in his History of Germany, Pantaleon and others do report) one Suetonius a noble man's son in Britain converted to the faith by the first planters of the Gospel in this Island, and after his baptism called Beatus, was sent by the brethren from hence unto Rome, to be better iustructed, and further directed by Saint Peter himself. Therefore a dependence of this kingdom from S. Peter, and the Church of Rome in spiritual things from the beginning of Christianity is to be allowed. Which they further confirm in their history of King Lu●ius, sendeinge to Pope Eleutherius, at Rome about the Conversion of this Kingdom, and his sendeing hither, Faganus and Damianus, two famous 
Thea of G. Br. pag. 206. n. 18. l. 6. cap. 9  Clerks, to that purpose, of whom they writ in this manner. These together both preached, and baptised, amongst the Britain's, whereby many daily were drawn to the faith: And as a worthy▪ 
Dicetus Deane of London: a manuscript in the King's library ad An. 178.  and ancient historian saith: the Temples which had been founded to the honour of their many Gods, were then dedicated to the one, and only true God: for there were in Britain eight and twenty Flamens, and three Archflamins, in stead of which, so many Bishops and Archbishops were appointed: under the Archbishop of London were the provinces of Loegria, and Cornubia: under York, Deira, and 
Saint David's in Wales.  Albania: under urbs begionum, Cambria: by which means, this happy Kingdom under that godly King, was nobly beatified with so many cathedral Churches, and Christian Bishops Sees, before any other Kingdom of the world. Now because these Protestants have told us before, that to ordain Bishops and teachers, and to found Churches is an Argument of supremacy, seeing all Bishops of this Kingdom were ordained, 
Sutcliff. ag. K●ll. pag, 105.  their Sees designed, and Churches founded, by Eleutherius Pope of Rome, and his authority, in those which he sent hither, with that power, Faganus and Damianus; all spiritual and ecclesiastical Jurisdiction of that primitive Church in this Kingdom of necessity was derived from the Church of Rome. For although Mr Francis Mason in his new defence of the English Ministry, 
Mason of the consecration etc. pag. 52.  would attribute great privilege to Eluanu● and Meduinus, whom as he, with his Bishops say, King Lucius sent to Pope Eleutherius at Rome, about the conversion of this nation, standeinge upon a Report in these words: john Capgrave reporteth that Eleutherius made Eluanus Bishop of Britain, and Meduinus a Doctor to preach the faith of Christ through the whole Island: Yet he must needs grant, that both Order, and jurisdiction Episcopal, came into, and was preserved in this Kingdom from the Pope of Rome. For first he writeth of King Lucius in this manner: The King wrote to Eleutherius, desiring that by his commandment, he might be made a 
Mason sup. cap. 3. §. 2.  Christian. Secondly he proveth, King Lucius had but a part of this Kingdom but the Pagan Emperors Marcus Antonius Verus, and Aurelius Commodus his brother, were chief unto 
Beda l. 1. histor. cap. 4.  the wall of separation, and Lucius was tributary unto them. Thus he writeth of King Lucius: He had seen Christians reproached by the Pagans, as infamous parsons, and despitefully 
Mason l. 2. pag. 52. cap. 3. §. 1.  handled by the Romans that were in authority. Therefore the Pagan Romans then were in authority. Thirdly his own words before. That Eleutherius made Eluanus: Bishop of Britain, and Meduinus a Doctor to preach the faith of Christ through the whole Island, are clear for Eleutherius the Pope, his authority, universally over all, for King Lucius was but a tributary King, for one parcel of this Island, and the Romans themselves had but part. Yet the jurisdiction was given (as before, through the whole Island. Mr. Mason's words be these: The Romans had spread their golden Eagle over a great part of the Island. The Emperor Hadrian had made a wall fourscore miles long: Antonius Pius had made an other, to divide the Romans from the Britain's: and all that lived within this wall were tributary to the Romans: of which number King Lucius is said to be. Therefore Lucius being but one of that number, of tributaries, for a part, of the Romans part, had neither spiritual, nor temporal jurisdiction, any further, much less over all. His words of this whole Island are these: York, London. Caerlegion, in these three noble cities 
Mason sup. l. 2. cap. 3. pag. 54.  were the seats of the Archflamynes, so there were 28. Flamynes, and three Archflamynes in stead of which so many Bishops and Archbishops were appointed. Therefore seeing the Romans themselves had but a part of Britain, and Lucius but a tributary part, of that part, and these men assuer us, that so many were assigned Bishops and archbishops with their several Sees, and jurisdictions, over all this Island. comprehendeing both. England contained in the names Loegria, 
Stowe Annal. 12. cap. 1. and others.  and Cornubia, unto Humber; the North and Scotland in Deira and Albania; and Wales in Cambria, as our Historians tell us it followeth by undeniable consequence, that all spiritual jurisdiction, and authority in all this land, now termed great Britain, was deduced, brought in, and continued, from, and under the Pope of Rome. And that neither King Lucius, or any his successor did, or in justice could claim any supremacy in such causes: For none of them until our King james was quietly possessed of them all; and yet one and the same spiritual jurisdiction ruled in all these kingdoms, of England, Scotland, and Ireland; Ireland subject to Canterbury, and Scotland to York, and all to the Pope, as these Protestants acknowledge, until late yares. Therefore ridiculous it is, for the Theatre Protestants, to give such supremacy to Kings, because as they say, Pope Eleutherius in his epistle to King Lucius calleth him, the vicar of God, in his Kingdom, for by that Kind of reasoning, every vicar in his parish, being so called, might claim such supremacy. And the Presbytery must needs be obeyed of all. But if we may believe these men that the laws of S. Edward, do warrant S. Eleutherius proceed here in Britannye, they will find in those laws set out by themselves that they warrant his supremacy, further than I mean to 
S. Edward's laws published by Mr. Lambert a Protestant pag. 2. fol. 1●0.  urdge it: The words are these: The whole land, and all the islands to Norway, and Denmark belong to the Crown of his Kingdom, and are of the Appendancies and dignities of the King. And it is one Monarchy, and one Kingdom, and was sometime called the Kingdom of Britannye, and now called the Kingdom of English men. For Lord Eleutherius Pope, who first sent an hallowed crown to Britannye, and Christianity by God's inspiration, to Lucius King of the Britan's, appointed and allowed to the Crown of the Kingdom, such meats, and bounds, as are said before. Therefore English Protestant's are very ingrateful to that Holy Pope, and Saint, our so great Benefactor. And their own Theatre is a witness of that his love, and well deserueing of this land, and their ungratitude, their words be these: Pope Eleutherius thus wrote to Lucius, King 
Theat. pag. 222. n. 8. lib. 6. cap. 19  of Britanny, for the reformation of the King, and the nobility of the Kingdom of Britanny: you desired us, to send unto you, the Roman and Imperial laws, which you would use in your Kingdom of Britanny. The Roman laws and the Emperors we may at all times mislike, but the law of God by no means. By the divine clemency you have of late received in your Kingdom of Britanny, the law and faith of Christ: you have with you in your Kingdom both the old and new testament: out of them (in God's name) by the ●ownsaile of your state, take 
Corn. Tacit. in annal. in Hadr. Pi. Anton. M. Ant. Stowe hist. Holinsh. ib. David. in Bric. Polyd. verg. l. 2. h. angl pag. 42. 42, etc.  you alawe, and therewith by God's permission, govern your Kingdom of Britanny. About which times, Lolius, Calphurnius, Agricola, Pertinax, Cl. Albinus junius, Severus etc. were Propretors, Lieutenants, and commanding Rulers here, for the Roman Emperors, as both their own, and our Historians witness. And not only this, but after entreateinge of the saxons laws in this Kingdom, and the two much severity of trial in suspicion of Incontinency (as they think) they writ in this manner: This punishment beginning 
Theatre pag. 287 l. 7. cap. 3. n. 6.  in these Pagans, and continueing unto the year 750. Stephen the second, and most pontifical Pope of Rome, did utterly abolish, as two severe and overrigorous for Christians to undergo. They allege authority also, that the Kingdom of Norway was given to King Arthur by the Pope. 
Pag. 317 l. 7. cap 12.  Which is plainly testified in the laws of S. Edward, as they are published by the Puritan Protestant, Mr. Lambard, and out of the 
Guliel. Lambard. in legib. S. Edward. fol. 137. 138. print. at London Anno D. 1569. cum privileg. Reg. Mayest. per decem.  library of Matthew Parker himself, whom they name their Archbishop of Canterbury. The words be these: Impetravit enim temporibus illis Arthurus Rex à Domino Papa, & curia Romana, quod confirmata sit Norweia in perpetuum coronae Brytanniae, in augmentum Regni huius, vocavitque illam dictus Artherus Cameram Brytanniae. In those time's King Arthur obtained from our Lord the Pope, and the Court of Rome, that Norway might be confirmed for ever to the Crown of Britain, for increase of this Kingdom, and the said Arthur called it the chamber of Britain. And for this cause the Norwegians say, they may dwell in this Kingdom, and be of the body of this Kingdom, to wit, of the crown of britain. Of his claim and practise in later times in such affairs their examples are two many to be cited. But to insist in his absolute spiritual supremacy, of which I entreat, as they told us before, how all spiritual jurisdiction was derived to the Brittannes, from the Pope of Rome, in prescribeing and limiteing their Episcopal Sees, and privileges, so they testify the same in the Regiment of the Saxons, for although England itself, besides Scotland and Wales, was divided 
Theat. pag. 278. lib. 6. cap. 54. n. 2. pag. 292 l. 7. cap. 4. n. 19  into an Heptarchy, and contained seven kingdoms, Kent, Southsaxons, Westsaxons, East-Saxons, Northumberland, Maria, and East-Angels, and none of those Kings (if they had been Protestants could) claim to exercise any spiritual power by their doctrine, further than their own temporal command; yet they teach us, that the spiritual jurisdiction in the supreme and highest degree was wholly in the Pope, over all those kingdoms. And for proof of this, to use their own words: Honorius 
Theat. pag. 5. lib. 1. cap. 3. n. 4.  (appointed by the Pope) the fift Archbishop of Canterbury first divided England into parishes: And then they set down all the Bishoprics in England, under their two metropolitans, Canterbury and York, which by no possibility can be reconciled with an heptarchical, 
Pag. 6. l. 1.  or seven fold government, besides that in Walls. And yet not only the welsh dioceses of Landaffe S. David, Bangor and S. Asaph but Ireland also in those times of divisions in temporal Regiments; and Kings, were subject not only to the Pope, but to the Archbishop of Canterbury, which was ever subject to the Pope of Rome, and by him instituted. Their words 
Pag. 145. lib. 4. cap. 4. n. 8.  be these: matters memorable within this province are these: First, that the Bishops of Ireland were wont to be consecrated by the Archbishop of Canterbury, in regard of the primacy, which they had in this country: until such time, as ●hou Papirio, a Cardinal, was sent thither from Pope Eugenius, the fourth, to reform ecclesiastical discipline in this Island. And that this Kingdom of great Britain hath even from the primitive Church of the first converted Brittannes, submitted themselves, and their posterities, to the Pope of Rome, in the highest and most commaundeinge power, and Authority in this world, in their judgement, a general Council (as hereafter) 
Cap. general Counsels infr. Theatre l. 6. cap. 9 pag. 206. ●. 19  I thus demonstrate from this their Theatre; wherein they writ in this order: After these times the Brittannes continued constant in Christianity, and the censures of their Bishops (for the great estimation of their constancy, piety, and learning) required and approved in great points of doctrine, among the Assemblies, of some general councils: as that of Sardys and nice, in the time of great Constantine, had we our Bishop's present. Whose forwardness against the Arrian Heresy, afterwards Athanasius advanceth in his Apology unto jovinian the Emperor, amongst three hundred Bishops assembled at the Council of Sardys, in Anno 350. Then seeing as these men teach us, general 
Infra cap. gen. Counsels.  councils are the highest judge, and bind all men to their decrees, and our bishops that were there, to consent unto, and embrace doctrine, for this whole Kingdom, were so renowned for constancy, piety, and learning, and all this in their confessed puer time of Christianity, I will recite what doctrine in this point of Pope's supreamacye, they approved, and received there, for this and all nations to follow, and observe. In the third Canon of this 
Concil. Sardic. can. 3.  their great Council it is thus decreed: Bishop Osius said: if any Bishop shall be judged in an other cause, and he thinketh he hath a Good cause, that a Council should be called again, if it please you let us honour the memory of S. Peter the Apostle, that they which have examined the cause, may write to julius Bishop of Rome, and if he shall adjudge, that judgement is to be renewed, let it be renewed, and let him appoint judges; but if he shall allow the cause to be such, that the things that are done shall not be examined again, such things as he shall decree, shall be confirmed. Doth this please you all? The Council answereth, it pleaseth us. Therefore all now in England ought to be pleased with the supremacy of that highest See, and appeals unto it. The 4. and next Canon, 
Can. 4. sup.  immediately beginneth thus: Bishop Gandentius said: let it be added, if you please, to this sentence full of sanctity, that when any Bishop shall be deposed by the judgement of those Bishops, that be in the places near. And he shall demand to have his business handled in the city of Rome, that after his appeal, no Bishop be ordained in his chair, that was thought to be deposed, except his cause shall be determined in the judgement of the Bishop of Rome. The 7. Canon declareth it to be in the 
Can. 7. sup.  Pope's power to send, a latere judges in such causes, into any country, notwitstandeing any sentence of other Bishops. And as these primitive Bishops of this Kingdom, with that learned and Holy assemble of that general Council, received, and approved that supreme power in the Pope of Rome, so he by these protestants testimony ever practised it in this nation. For besides that which is written before, they use these words: Celestine Pope of Rome sent his Archdeacon Palladius into Britain to withstand 
Theatre. lib. 4. cap. 1. pag. 138. n. 22.  the Pelagian Heresy, who at one time did drive out these enemies of grace, and ordained a Bishop among the Scots, whereby that Barbarous nation ●mbr●ced Christianitic. This they cite, and approve from Prosper Aquitan. And again in this manner: Pelagius by birth a britain, by profession a Mouke, by lewd doctrine an Heretic, brought up in the fame us 
Lib. 6. cap. 53. pag. 277. n. 10.  monastery of Bangor, in Wales, his Heretical assertions were afterwards condemned by Innocentius the first Bishop of Rome. Whose doctrines were, 1. that man without the grace of God, was able to fulfil all the commandments. 2 that man in himself had free will. That the grace of God was given unto us according to out merits. 4. That the Just have no sin. 5. That children are free from original sin. 6. That Adam should have died though he had not sinned. Concerning the Town of Stanford 
Lib. 1. cap. 31. pag. 59 n. 8.  they make this relation from John harding; it continued an university unto the coming of Augustine, at which time the Bishops of Rome interdicted it, for certain Heresies sprang up among the Britons, and Saxons. They writ further thus: York hath challenged to have been sometime 
Pag. 6. n. 7.  Metropolitan over all the Bishops in Scotland. It was made equal in honour and power with Canterbury, by Pope Gregory, as Beda relateth, and had twelve suffragan Bishoprics, that owed obedience. And again: York was made a Metropolitan 
Pag. 78. n. 9  city by a pall sent unto it from Honorius. And to show, that the disposeing of these things, was in the power of that highest See, thus they testify again: That Lichfeild was made an 
Lib. 1. cap. 3. pag. 6. n. 8.  archiepiscopal See, by Pope Hadrian the first, at the suit of Offa the great King of Mercia, is manifested by Matthew of Westminister, unto whose jurisdiction were assigned the Bishoprics of Winchester, Hereford, Leicester, Siduacester, Helinham, and Dunwich. Like were the condition of S. David's, 
n. 6. 8.  Dorchester by Oxford, and others. And to show, that these primitive bishops were only subject to the Pope, and no Prince, in their spiritual proceedeings; when the wicked King Vortigern had put away his first lawful Christian wife, and married. Rowena, the daughter of Hengist, a Pagan, 
Theat. l. 7. cap. 12. pag. 313.  about the year of Christ 470; for declareing the remedy thereof they writ in these words: Which Pagan marriage proved not only the bane of the land, but so ruinated the Church of Christianity, that a provincial Council of the Britons was assembled in Ann. 470. to repair those things, that this marriage had decayed. Then Popes, and not Princes, by these 
Parker. lib. antiq. Britan nic. pag. 329:  Protestants ever had spiritual supremacy in this Kingdom. For their first Archbishop Parker An. 1536. writeth thus: Potentia populis nongentis amplius Annu in Anglia duravit. The power of the Pope continued in England above nine hundred years. And there ought to continue still, as I have made demonstration, by these Protestants before▪ to which I add this sentence of Isaac Casanbon, ex o●e 
Isaac Casanb. respon ad ep. Cardinal. p●r. pag. 8.  ipso. ser. Regis: taken from the mouth itself of our most sincere King, commanding him to commit it te writeinge; and is as followeth: Rebus ipsis probet Romanus pontifex: let the Pope of Rome prove by things themselves, that he doth not seek his own, 
Pag. 67. supr.  but the glory of God immortal, and the peace of people, concord, and salvation, to be a care unto him: then our most se●ene King, as he hath long since protested in his Admonitory epistle, without delay primas illi deferet, ipsumque 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, cum Gregorio Nazianzen●, dicet non invitus, will give primacy unto him, and not unwillingely say with Gregory Nazienzen, that he hath charge over the whole Church. To which I answer, that I wish, (and I trust, with more devotion, and Religion than he) That not only Popes, but other Princes, spiritual, and temporal, Bishops, Priests and all men in authority, and others, did more seek the glory of God, than their own, and were more careful of the people's peace, concord, and salvation, than they now are, or many were even from the time of Christ; Then so many disorders and Impieties should not have so full dominion, where protestancy Ruleth; and the scripture had never said, omnes quae sua sunt quaerunt, non qu● jesu Christi: all men, or all sorts of men seek the things that be their own, and not of jesus Christ. And it chargeth us again to obey Magistrates, and men in authority, though wicked, sed etiam discolis. And to say as you must do, (otherwise you demonstrate against your English Protestant Church whose mouth you so often undertake to be and for the Pope of Rome, that Magistrates falling into deadly sin cease to be Magistrates, one of your brother Witkliffe his Heresies, condemned by highest authority. For otherwise, if the present Pope, Paulus the fift a Saint in all Indifferent judgements, as all his predecessors, from Leo the tenth, and the revolt of Luther, in respect of any Protestant succession, might be thought worthy to be esteemed such, or as your words prescribe, in your Protestant Censure; Yet except it were his due, without that your adjudged sanctity, neither our King of England, nor all the Protestant Princes, and Regiments in the world, could by your Religion make the Pope, or any other, to be primate, and have the charge, or oversight of the whole Church. For by your own doctrine of Princes, or Presbyteries supremacy, none extendeth further, than their own temporal dominions, much less over the whole Church, or any great part thereof: And by 
Lord Cook● prot. assert. jacob Reas.  your own Rule of authority, justified both by the Lord Chief justice of England, and your Ministers, Nemo potest plus juris in alium transfer, quam ipse habet: No man can transfer or bestow more Right upon an other, than he himself hath. Therefore by our sentence from our King's Mouth (as you assuer us, all Popes ever were, and this is, supreme Head and Ruler of Christ's whole Church, in England, and all other parts of the worlds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, of the whole Church, as your Greek grant with S. Gregory Nazianzen, is. And all that desire to be accounted the chosen, and true sheep, and members of this great flock, fold, and Church of Christ, aught to submit themselves, to this high shepherd, primate, and Overseer of the whole Christian world, and to be judged by him, and not to be judges over him. And to this also D. Morton himself 
Morton App. lib. 4. cap. 7.  must subscribe though he will be singular above his fellows, as often times he is. For first he alloweth this sentence, of their, so named, Archbishop Whiteguist, against Cartwright: Victor in the year of Christ 198 was a godly Bishop and Martyr, and the Church at that time was in great purity, as not being long after the Apostles. And his Majesty telleth him that this Church of Rome was then a Rule to all. Yet D. Morton assureth us, that this godly Bishop, and Martyr, and Ruler of that Church, which was a Rule to all, did exercise the highest Act of jurisdiction, and power over all Churches, in the world, that did not yield unto him, in the Easter observation, inflicting excommunication the greatest act of jurisdiction by Protestants, against them: his words be these: 
Morton App. l. 1. cap. 9  Pope Victor excommunicated all Churches, both Greek, and Latin, which differed from his Church, in the observation of Easter. This claim, and exercise of this supreme jurisdiction, was when the Church, of Rome, was a Rule to all, in the judgement of these Protestants: and a matter of so great moment, that the doing of it if unjustly, had been most damnable: and yet he lived, and died an holy Saint. Therefore I urge D. Morton with these his 
Morton app. pag. 298.  own words in the case of S. Cyprian: This we think might work in our Adversaries, at least, blush: except they would intend to prove concerning Saint Victor, that the same man of God and holy Martyr of Christ, was neither Saint, nor Martyr. But undoubtedly a damnable schismatic. When D. Morton wittnesseth the quite contrary, saying, they were condemned for Heretics, who after the Council of Nice, conformed not themselves herein to the Roman Order. But D. Morton insisteth 
Mort. supr. pag 76.  further in these words: S. Cyprian directly ordained in a Council, that every man's cause should be hard there, where it was committed: and 
Mort. sup. pag. 296.  therefore commanded those men to return home again unto Carthadge, who had adventured to appeal unto Rome. And yet, Bellarmine urgeth appealeinge unto the Bishop of Rome from all the coasts of the world, as a special Argument of the Pope's absolute primacy D. Morton is answered by himself before, proveinge that the Bishop of Rome exercised this supreme power, over all Churches, both Greek, and Latin. Then over Africa, and Carthadge. And in this very objection again confoundeth himself; for he telleth us, that in S. Cyprian his time, they appealed to 
Mort. supr.  Rome and proveth by S. Cyprian, whom he would have an enemy to such Appeals, and supremacy of the Church of Rome, that such appeals were then used, long before any general Council, or Christian Emperor, to grant such privileges to that Church. And that the Popes, and Bishops of Rome, that claimed, received, and admitted such appeals, namely S. Cornelius and others ware Holy Saints, and Martyrs. Therefore if that had been true, which D. Morton writeth in these words: 
Morton pag, 296.  Saint Cyprian directly ordained in a Council, that every man's cause should behard there where it wa● committed, and therefore commanded those men to return home again unto Carthadge, who had adventured to appeal unto Rome, not alloweinge that any other Bishops should retract things, done by them in Africa, unless (saith Cyprian) a few lewd and desperate parsons think the Bishops of Africa to have less authority, by whom they have been already judged and condemned. If this allegation of D. Morton were true, and certain: Yet it nothing preiudicateth the Authority and supremacy of the Pope of Rome, not to be censured and judged by Inferior Bishops, such as those of Africa were unto Rome by Protestants doctrine. And D. Morton himself besides all that is said before is witness sufficient in this Matter: for writing of Pope julius in those allowed times, he hath these words: Two points 
Morton pag. 286.  would be observed in this claim of Pope julius. The first is, what it was that he challenged: the second is, by what right. Both these are recorded by Socrates. His challenge was, that he ought to be called unto the Council, and that, without his sentence, no decrees should be concluded. The right hereof he pretendeth to stand upon the authority of an Ecclesiastical canon. The words of Socrates his Author, 
Socrat. histor. ccclesiast. circa An. 346. & histor. tripart. lib. 4. cap. 9  because D. Morton is a known myncer of authorities, are these: Regula Ecclesiastica iubeat, non oportere praeter sententiam Romani Pontificis concilia celebrari. The Ecclesiastical Rule commandeth, that councils he not celebrated, without the s●●tence of the Bishop of Rome. And again: Canonibus iubentibus praeter Romanum nibil decerni 
Socrat. sup. & histor. trip. lib. 4. cap. 19  Pontificem. The canons commaundeinge, that nothing be decreed, without the Pope of Rome. And yet D. Morton will not have any such canon, or constitution, his frivolous distinction, in the Nicene Council, then lately ended, than they must needs be of more ancient, and uncontroleable antiquity, and authority by his own censure; and S. Cyprian's Council and decree against this highest power, of no validity; if he could bring forth any such decree, or Council, which he doth not, but only allegeth these words of S. Cyprian, to Pope Cornelius, statutum est omnibus nobis: Which he thus translated: S. Cyprian directly ordained in a Council: Which 
Cyprian. ep. 55. ad Cornel. Morton App. lib. 2. pag. 296.  S. Cyprian neither had done, nor could do, to bind S. Cornelius, and the Church of Rome with all others. For by D. Mortons' own Argument, if Pope and S. Cornelius' Pope and Saint Stephen, with others, Bishops of the Mother and commanding Church of Rome, then by his Majesty, a Rule unto all, might not be a Rule and commander over the African Church, much less could the Church of Africa subject, Ruled, and depending make statutes and decrees, to rule, and command, this Rule and commander of all. And Mr▪ Morton might have concluded the contrary, of his translation, for the Church of Rome, if he had considered that S. Cyprian's words, be not, Statutum sit ab omnibus nobis, it is decreed of or by us all, ●●t statutum sit omnibus nobis, a decree is made for us all: Because S. Fabian Pope of Rome and predicessor to S. Cornelius had made such a 
●abian. ●●ist 3. ●●m. 1. conc.  decree to bind all, as S. Cyprian spoke of, Ibi causa agatur ubi crimen admittitur: let the cause be hard there, where the fault is committed. Yet in the same place Appeals to Rome are excepted in these words: We forbidden foreign judgements by a general decree, reserved always the Apostolic authority. And again: It pleaseth also, that if a Bishop accused, hath appealed to the See Apostolic, that shall be decreed, which the high Bishop of that See giveth sentence of. All which, as also that whole epistle of S. Cyprian to S. Cornelius, than Pope of Rome, never denyeing appeals thither, but excuseinge, and defendeing, and purgeing himself, and other Bishops of Africa, accused by Appellants at Rome, as they had likewise done, priori anno, the year before, sufficiently 
Cyprian ep. 55. supr.  confirm the undeniable supreme authority of that Church. Which S. Cyprian there proveth to be of Infallible judgement, and undeceaveable by any Appellants, or others in matters of Religion, and so to be appealed unto, and supreme. His words in the same epistle, and concerning the same Appellants, are these: Navigare audent, & ad Petri cathedram; They dare to sail even to the chair of Peter, and to the principal Church, from whence priestly unity is risen, and carry thither letters from schismatics, and wicked men, nor to think, that they be Romans, (whose faith by the Apostle preaching is praised, to whom false belief cannot have access. Hitherto the very words of S. Cyprian, in that place, and epistle, which D. Morton allegeth against the Roman supremacy: by which is evident that S. Cyprian, neither did, nor could by his doctrine deny appeals to that Church, which as he writeth could not be deceived with Heretics, nor false belief could have access unto it: which could be for no other cause, but for the Infallible judgement thereof, and that God did assist it in truth, as other Protestants are witnesses before. And D. Morton having first written 
Morton app. pag. 296.  in this order: The Title of universal Bishop of the Church, hath been long used of the Pope of Rome: is as much to blame, to speak thus: S. Cyprian saith, none of us is called the Bishop of Bishops: which not S. Cyprian only, but the whole Council of Carthadge, under Cyprian, did profess: furthermore calling it a terror tyrannical, for any one Bishop to impose upon his fellow Bishops, a necessity of obedience. For first D. Morton cannot but know, that this Council of Africa defendeinge Rebaptization, was justly condemned by the then Popes of Rome, and recanted by the African Bishops, present at it, as is proved before. Secondly D. Morton will be a Presbyterian if he maketh equality in the clergy, and denieth Archbishops, primates, and patriarchs, as his citation without better gloss implieth. Thirdly he doth abuse his Readers, to wish them to believe, that S. Cyprian, and the African Bishops, decreed any thing against the claim of S. Stephen, than Bishop of Rome, his predecessors, and successors to be Bishop of Bishops 
Mort. sup. pag. 296.  in a right sense, as he there citeth from Binias; for so against his own words, and citation, they had called their own decree, a terror tyrannical, for any one Bishop to impose upon his fellow Bishops, a necessity of obedience: For D. Morton, dareth not to deny but S. Stephen, and other Popes of Rome, were at the least fellow Bishops, with those of Africa. But S. Cyprian, and those Bishops decreed no such thing: for D. Morton may so in that Council, that the sentence of S. Cyprian is the last of all, and after all the other Bishops, and only to condemn Baptism by Heretics, after recanted and condemned. And the words which he cited against Bishop of Bishops, are in S. Cyprian's 
Carthagin. council. sub Cyprian. to. 1. council. init.  exhortation (not decree) to the Bishops of Africa, beginning Audistis, Collegae Dilectissimi: you have hard o most beloved fellows, nothing concerning, except affirming, or confirming that claim, and Title in Pope Stephen, an holy Saint, and Martyr, but altogether about rebaptisation, and are these: Superest, ut de hacre quid singuli sentiamus, proferamus: It remaineth, that every of us speaketh of this matter what he thinketh, judging no man, or removeing any man from the Right of communion, if he shall think otherwise, for none of us (there assembled) constituted himself, Bishop of Bishops. Which seeing S. Stephen an holy Pope, and Martyr, with others of that sacred See, (than a Rule to all, by Protestants, and D. Morton) did; by them also it must be yielded to be just and lawful. Neither must D. Morton be so hyperpapall, as to deny the Council of Sardyce where appeals to Rome are warranted, to be general, for his Masters the makers of their great Theatre, have so allowed, and received it before. Nor slander S. Cyprian, by perswadeing the world, that he died out of the unity of the Church of Rome; for recalling of which his great rashness, I refer him to better Authorities, of S. Augustine, S. Jerome, 
Augustin. ep. 48. Hieron. dialog. count Luciferian.  and the like. And this sufficeth of this question: By which the university of Cambridg may easily resolve themselves, by their own Doctors, of the second proposition, offered unto them, by the Priests of Wisbich: There is an external judge in matters of faith; who it is, and of what authority his definitive sentence is in such things.   

CHAPTER FOUR WHEREIN BY THESE Protestants is proved, that all Books of scripture, received for such by the Church of Rome, are canonical: That the Protestants also have either no scriptures at all, or uncertain and doubtful: and no true Canon of them.  
Thus having demonstratively proved by these our English Protestants, that the true Church of Christ, is of that byndeinge and commanding authority, power, and privilege: That, There is no salvation, remission of sins or Hope of eternal life out of the Church: it is the blessed company of holy ones, household of faith, spouse of Christ, pillar and grawnd of truth, her communion is to be embraced, directions followed, judgement rested in, to overrule all Inferior judgement. whatsoever, etc. And that both the present Church, of Rome is this so excellent and enfraunchised society, and the Pope and Bishop thereof supreme head, and spiritual governor, over the whole Christian world: all other Questions against these Protestant's are all ready determined by them, for the Church and Pope of Rome. So that nothing is further needful to be disputed in this business, either of scriptures, or any other matter in controversy: yet for particular satisfaction to all, in all particulars, I will proceed, and first for the Books of holy scriptures: and argue these first in general.  
Whatsoever Books are proposed unto us by the true Church of Christ, and the supreme Governor thereof, to be canonical scripture, are for such to be embraced, and reverenced: But all Books allowed for canonical by the Church of Rome, at this present, be such: Therefore so to be embraced and reverenced. The Mayor proposition is evident before, by the privileges of the true Church recited in general: and not only so, but in particular also concerning the authority of the true Church in approveinge and proposeinge holy scriptures: for Mr. Wotton hath thus testified for 
Wotton ●ef. of Perk: pag. 442.  Protestants: The judgement of the Church we are so far from discreditinge; that we Hold it for a very special ground in this matter of scriptures. And D. Covell hath these convinceing 
Covell against Burg. pag. 60.  words: The Church of Christ accordeing to her authority, received from him, hath warrant to approve the scriptures, to acknowledge, to receive, to publish, and command unto her children. And to make it evident, that this privilege by these Protestants, cannot be attributed, or ascribed to any other Church, than the Church of Rome, they have before confessed, that never any other Church, but that only, excepting the Church of Constantinople pretended Title (much less enjoyed it, to this supremacy, to propownde scriptures, or make decrees, and laws to the whole Church, and the children thereof, and the claim thereof in that behalf was but pretended and usurped: and now is by their desolation left desolate. And to make this, the next argument and others more clear, I will in this place recite the words of D. Feild: wherein to omit the Holy scriptures, because they in no place tell us, which be, or be not canonical scriptures: But we are as these Protestants before have told us, and shall more particularly testify Hereafter in this chapter, to receive them from the Church of Christ, That we may know whom most to trust, and obey in this, and such matters of controversy, he writeth thus, having spoken of the Church before: Hither 
Field pag. 202. l. 4. c. 5.  we may refer, those different degrees of obedience which we must yield to them, that command and teach us, in the Church of God, excellently described and set down, by Waldensis. We 
Waldens'. doct. Fidei l. 2. art. 2. 3. p. 27.  must saith he, reverence, and respect the authority of all Catholic Doctors, whose doctrines, and writings the Church alloweth; we must more regard the authority of Catholic Bishops; more than these the authority of the Apostolic Churches: amongst them more especially the Church of Rome: of a general Council more than all these. Hitherto D. Fields allowance that this sentence is excellent. Therefore soeinge Protestant's never had, nor can have, as they have testified before, any general Council, and deny all councils to be general, which Catholics allege for this Question of the Books of scriptures, and others also, They are bound to be obedient to that sentence next unto them, which D. Feild here hath told us, to be the judgement of the Church of Rome, or Pope of Rome, which hath defined, and allowed, the catholic doctrine for the Books of canonical scripture, as also other questions, as all Protestants acknowledge. Otherwise they are in one of highest degrees of disobedience, that is in this world, as his words before are witness. For he alloweth it for an excellent direction, for this present time, and state of controversies: And yet if he would contend (which he neither doth, nor can being allowed for this present time) to draw it to the days of Thomas Waldensis, disputing against Witcliffe, their Brother in Religion, as they writ, and resisting the Pope's authority, it maketh nothing for his excuse: for if Witcliffe, as they say, was of their Religion, the case between Waldensis, and him, was the same which now is with myself and other Catholics writing against these Protestants Brethren, and Associates in Religion unto Wickliff, and his Adherents. This supposed, I make the like Argument again, in this manner.  
Whatsoever books are proposed for canonical scripture, by the true Church, are the highest Rule, that can be had, or found, in time of controversy, are to be received for holy scriptures: But all those Books which the present Roman Church alloweth, are so proposed: Therefore to be received for holy scriptures. The Mayor proposition is evidently true, otherwise all Christians in such times must needs be perplexed in the chiefest matter of Religion, by Protestants, the scriptures themselves: which cannot be: for so contradictories might both be true: The highest Rule aught to be followed: the highest Rule ought not to be followed, Which be contradictory. It ought to be followed, because it is our Rule, and the best that can be assigned: it ought not to be followed, because it is false and deceitful. And no man can be so bound under damnation to follow a false Rule. And concerning the authority of the Church in this case, it is further confirmed by these Protestant sentences. D. Covells words be 
Covell def. of Hook pag. 31.  these: The Church of Rome teacheth no bad opinion, to affirm, that the scriptures are holy, and divine in themselves, but so esteemed by us, for the authority of the Church. And again: That the scriptures are true, we have it from the Church. And further thus: The Church hath four 
Covell sup. pag. 32. 33.  singular offices, towards, the scripture. First to be of them (as it were) a faithful Register. Secondly, to discern and judge between false and adulterate, and that which is true and perfect. The third to publish, and divulge, to proclaim as a crier, the true edict of our Lord himself. The last is, to be an Interpreter: and in that, following the safest Rule (to make an undivided unity of the truth, uncapable of contradiction) to be a most faithful 
Covell sup. pag. 34.  expositor of his own meaning. And he concludeth thus: W●e say, that we are taught to receive the word of God, from the authority of the Church: we see her judgement, we hear her voice: and in humility subscribe unto all this. Therefore being so proved before, by these Protestants, that the Church of Rome is the Church of Christ, endowed with these privileges, concerning scriptures, that the sentence of it by D. Feild before, is more 
Feild. l▪ 4. c. 5. pag. 202.  to be regarded then any they have, or can pretend, and hath proposed all books for scripture, which Catholics receive, we must obey it, and the rather agreeing with the Greek Church of which D. Feild writeth 
Feild. pag. 71. l. 3. c. 5.  thus: we account them in the number of the Churches of God. Which that Church cannot be which proposeth adulterate and false scriptures, for true and the undoubted word of God: The Minor proposition is also evidently true: That all books which the Church of Rome receiveth for Holy scriptures as so proposed, published, and proved unto us, by the true Church, and that sentence, which in this time is highest and to be obeyed, as these Protestants have written. And so all things in this Argument are evidently confessed for true, by our Adversaries.  
Before my next argument I will cite the opinion of D. Dove Protestant Bishop of Peterboroughe, in this matter, that we may plainly see, where upon Protestants denyeing so many books for canonical scriptures, which Catholics receive, is ground: his words be these: Catholics 
Dove persuas. pag. 15.  prove them to be canonical out of S. Augustine: we, that they be Apochryphas out of S. Hierome, both which Doctors are of no small authority with the Church of Rome: And therefore in this we differ no more from them, than S. Hierome did from S. Augustine. This supposed, I argue thus, from these Protestants.  
Whatsoever doctrine, was taught in the time of the primitive Church by a Bishop, Saint, and Doctor of the Church in the judgement of Protestants far the most Learned Doctor that ever was, or shall be in all likelihood, excepting the Apostles, and this so constantly, that this so worthy a man taught it to be the Common doctrine of the Church of Christ, in all probability is more like to be true, then that which doubtfully taught by an other Doctor of the same time, who both (as the same Protestants writ) dealt unchristianely, and his authority in some other questions was not much worth, and in this also recalled his opinion, or renounced it to be his meanening: But the doctrine which Catholics hold, concerning canonical scriptures, is by the testimony of protestants, thus much more likely to be true, and worthy to be believed, than the contrary opinion of Protestants: Therefore by Protestants it is more probable, credible, and worthy to be believed.  
The Mayor proposition in the proceed of these Protestants, (by whom I dispute in this place) is evidently true. For among men learned in professions, the Common maxim and reason is, we must believe every one most cunning in his art, and among men learned he that is most, or more learned, is to be credited before him, that is supposed to be his inferior in learning: And doctrine constantly taught not only to be the doctrine of such a more or most learned Father, and Doctor and Saint, but further to be doctrine generally of Christ's true Church, is of more credit, and more worthy to be believed, then that which by a man supposed not so learned, is either doubtfully or singularly taught, or uncertain, whether it was so taught, or if it were, yet was recanted, disclaimed, or retracted by himself.  
The second proposition, concerning these two great Doctors, and their opinions in this point, is thus proved by these Protestants. D. Cou●ll writeth of S. Augustine in 
Covell against Burges pag. 3.  these terms. He was far the most learned Doctor, that ever was, or shall be in all likelihood, except the Apostles. And giving the highest commendation he could to S. Thomas Aquin●s our holy and learned schole-man he 
Covell ag. Burg.  writeth thus: By a Common proverb it was spoken, that the soul of S. Augustine dwelled in Aquinas. Concerning S. Hi●●ome, upon whose Imagined opinion in this point, they would hazard their whole Religion in their judgements, alloweing only the scriptures to be judges, and grounds: in other points they use him in these terms: Mr. Wottons' 
Wotton def of perk.. 495. 500 519. 520.  words be: Hieromes authority in the case of single life is not much worth. Hierome condemning jovinian dealt unchristianely with him. The authority of Hierome, concludeinge a work of perfection from those words of Christ: go and sell all etc. is not to be admitted. Now let us hear from these Protestants, in what manner these two Doctors taught as this Protestants tell us, these two divers doctrines, one for Catholics, and the other for Protestants. D. Feild writeinge of books, which Catholics admit for canonical, and the Protestants refuse, telleth us that S. Augustine, and the third Council 
Field pag. 248. l. 4. c. 23. & pag. 246.  of Carthage, (confirmed in the sixth general Council) wherein Augustine was present, and Innocentius Pope living in that time seem to add them to the Canon. Then it seemeth by this Protestant testimony, that S. Augustine's opinion, approved in so great a provincial Council, confirmed in a general Council, the highest commaundeinge judgement by them before, and by the Pope, of the greatest Apostolic See, the second judge in the Christian world, before in D. fields allowance: especially in that best time, when his Majesty saith it was a Rule to all, and constantly taught as the doctrine of the Church, by this the greatest doctor, that ever was or is like to be by these men, is worthy to be credited and believed: and by their doctrine before, All men that will not be disobedient both in the second, and first degree also, are bound to embrace, and follow it.  
Now let us hear what these Protestants will testify of S. Hierome for their opinion, in this Question, of these books: The Protestant Conference at Hampton court before 
Conference pag. 60.  the King, entreateing of Protestants exceptions against these scriptures, useth these words: Most of the objections made against those books, were the old Cavils of the jews, renewed by S. Hi●rome in his time, who was the first that gave them that name of Apochryphas: which opinion upon Ruffinus his challenged, he after a sort disclaimed: the rather because a general offence was taken at his speeches in that Kind. Hitherto the censure at that public Protestant Conference, by which the Protestants ground for denial of those books of scripture, and terming them Apochyphas, is utterly overthowne. For an opinion founded upon old jewish Cavils against Christians, singularly held, or renewed, reclaimed by the Author, and generally gi●●ing offence (as these Protestants affirm this was) is not probable to be true. D. Covell against Burges the Puritan, answereth the objections against these 
Covell ag. Burges pag. 8●. 86. 87. 88 89 90. 91.  books, as Catholics do. And showeth, that these books have without cause been accused of faults, by Protestants, only to deny them to be canonical, as Catholics esteem them. And further he addeth thus: They are most true, and might have the reconcilement 
Covell sup. pag. 87.  of other scriptures. And again in these words: If Russinus be not deceived they were approved as parts of the old testament, by the Apostles. For when S. Hierome writ so scornfully of the history of Susanna, and the song of the three children, he chargeth him therein, to have rob the treasure of the holy ghost, and divine Instrument, which the Apostles delivered to the Churches. And S. Hierome (who is not usually slow to defend himself) leaveth that point unansweared, pretending that what he had spoken, was not his own opinion, but what the jews objected. And for his pains in translateing the book of judith, (which Protestants deny) he giveth this reason: because we read that the Council of nice did reckon it in the number of holy scriptures. Hitherto D. Covells words: and much like unto this of Russinus, he citeth from S. Augustine, S. Cyprian, and others, Temporibus Apostolorum proximis, in the next ages to the time of the Apostles. And thus we see how weak that Protestant Religion is, that by their own testimony, is founded upon so singular new revived, jewish Cavils, disclaimed, and generally offensive, and disliked opinion.  
From hence I argue further: All Books which were approved by the Apostles for parts of the old testament, were the treasure of the holy ghost and divine Instrument which the Apostles delivered to the Churches, which are most true, and might have reconcilement of other scriptures, are to be allowed for such: But all these things are verified of books which these Protestants deny, and by themselves, as is cited from them before: Therefore are to be allowed for canonical scriptures, both propositions be granted by these Protestants before, and so in this argument nothing remaineth to be proved.  
And again thus I argue: whatsoever a general Council in the primitive Church (the highest Rule by Protestants before to approve scriptures, and bind all men unto the definitions of it; received for scripture, aught to be received for such: But more books than Protestants allow were so received as these Protestants tell us: Therefore more are to be admitted. Both propositions are here also granted before by Protestants, and so the Argument concludeth truly against them.  
Further I argue thus: Those Books which the jews before, and at the coming of Christ, for their greatest, or great part dwelleing out of jury, used as parts of the old testament, and delivered as a canon to the Christian Churches, and were joined in one volume, read by them of the Latin Church, than the acknowledged true Church of Christ, and were received in the third Carthaginian Council, which was confirmed in the sixth general Council, are now to be received and allowed for canonical scriptures: But those books which Protestants deny and Catholics allow, be such: Therefore they are to be now allowed for canonical. The Mayor proposition is evidently true: for if the jews before, and at the commeing of Christ, the primitive Christians of that time, and their practice, the authority of the true Church of Christ, the most principal Church before by D. Feild, and other Protestants, a fomous provincial Council, and the confirmation of a general Council, are not to be admitted, to direct and instruct us, there is no means left for instruction in this case, these being by these Protestants before, the greatest warrants, and Rules we can have in such causes. The second proposition is proved in this manen D. Feild having spoken, how the Hebrew jews had made their Hebrew canon, accordeing to their jewish reckoning of the number of their letters, (how probably I leave to Hebritians, and may not now entreat) he concludeth thus: These only did 
Field l. 4. c. 23. pag. 245.  the ancient Church of the jews receive, as divine, and canonical. Neither much marvel, all the others being the last that were written, and in the time of their decayeing state, and afflictions. Of these he writeth thus in the next words: That other books were added unto 
Feild. sup.  these, whose authority not being certain, and known are called Apocryphal, fell out on this sortè. The jews in their later times, before, and at the 
Act. 6. c. gloss. ordinar. & lyr. in eandem locum.  coming of Christ were of two sorts: some properly and for distinction sake named Hebr●es, commorant at Jerusalem, and in the holy land: others named Hellenists, that is jews of dispersion, mingled with the Grecians. These had written sundry books in Greek, which they made use of together with other parts of the old testament, which they had of the translation of the Septuagint: But the Hebrues received only the two and twenty books before mentioned. Hence it came, that the jews delivered a double Canon of the scripture, to the Christian Churches. Thus we see that the greatest part of the jews, Proselytes, and all our of jury, did add these books with the other for scripture, used them as part of the old testament, delivered them to the Christian Churches, as part of the canon of scripture, and the primitive Church consequently so received them, otherwise they were not thus delivered. Therefore thus far the Minor proposition is proved, for I do not expect D. Feild to say, or not say expressly, that these be, or be not canonical, but what in true consequence he must say, by his own grant before, and hereafter. Then he telleth us, they in S. Augustine's time were received 
Field pag. 246.  by him, the fathers of third Council of Carthage, and Innocentius then Pope of Rome, in the best estate of that Church when it was (as before by Protestants) 
King's speech sup.  a Rule unto all, in the catalogue of canonical scriptures. Now that the Canons of this Carthaginian Council were confirmed in the sixth general Council holden at Trallo: (to use his words) and which Protestants acknowledge 
Field l. 4. cap. 23. pag. 258.  for a general Council, their highest Rule, he testifieth after in the same chapter. Neither is his exception, because the Laodicean Council which nameth not all Ob. them, is there also confirmed, of any purpose: Answ. for that general Council, by Protestants, approveing and confirming both, that which named them for canonical, and that doth not name them all, must needs confirm them for canonical, otherwise against supposition, this Council of Carthage had not been confirmed, as they teach it was.  
Further I argue thus: all those Books, which Protestants in their authorized communion book, and books of Honolyes, allowed, by their convocation, and parliament, and our King, do prescribe to be used as canonical scriptures, as well as others, and are so cited and practised, aught to be received, and allowed for canonical: But those Books which they deny, and Catholics receive for canonical, are such: Therefore they ought to admit them into the Canon of Holy scriptures. The Mayor proposition is evident, for books, Rules, laws, and directions proposed by true authority, as those be supposed of Protestants, are to be obeyed, and followed. The Minor proposition is likewise 
l. 1. homel. l. 2. homel. Artic. 25. Communion B. Tabl. direct. of service. Survey of the Book of comm. prayer pag. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. Petit. of 22. Preach. exc. ag. hom. and except. 4. ag. comm. Book. Articl. of Relig. Articul 6.  most certain: for their books of Homelyes' received in the 25. Article of their Religion do ordinarily so cite them: and their Communion book so termeth and useth them too often to be alleged in this place. Whereupon, to be brief, the Protestant Author of the Survey of the book of Common prayer, affirmeth plainly, and often urdgeth it, That the Protestants of England must approve with the Roman Church, these books for canonical. So likewise do the 22. preachers of London in their petition. If any man shall Answer, that the Articles of their Religion exclude them from the canon of the scripture, and so they cannot be said to receive them: I answer him again, that this is so far, from freeing them in this point, that it both excludeth them, defineing and embracing so contradictory doctrines in so important business, from all hope of truth, and further proveth, that these men buildeing all upon scriptures, have either no scriptures at all, or else such doubtful, uncertain, and unresolved scriptures, that true Religion which must be most assured, and infallible, cannot be ground, or maintained by them. For proof whereof, I will first recite their subscribed Article in this question, and then frame my Argument. Their Article is set down in these 
Articl. of Rel. articul. 6.  definitive words: Holy scripture containeth all things, necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby; is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed, as an Article of the faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation. In the name of holy scripture, we do understand those canonical Books of the old and new testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church. Of the first part of this Article I am to entreat in my chapter of Traditions, hereafter. Of the later part, I will speak in this place, only first admonisheing my Readers, in what ample manner D. Feild, and others of that Religion 
Feild. l. 3. c. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. pag. 60. 62. 63. 64. etc. Feild. l. 3. Titul. c. 1. & 2.  take this word, the Church: for breviate whereof, the Titles of the first and second chapters of his third book be these: Of the division of the Christian world into the Greek, Latin, Armenian, Aethiopian, and Nestorian Churches. c. 1. of the harsh and unadvised Censure of the Romanists, condemning all these Churches, as schismatical, and Heretical. cap. 2. Now this supposed, I argue thus:  
No books, whose authority have at any time been doubted of, in the Church, are by this Protestant Article to be allowed for Canonical scriptures: But all books that either Protestants, or Catholics receive for canonical, have in the judgement of these Protestants been doubted of in the Church: Therefore by these Protestants, there be no canonical scriptures at all. The Mayor proposition is evidently proved, by their recited article defineing those books canonical of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church. The Minor proposition is directly proved by D. Willet who writeth 
Willet Synop. quaest. 1. of scripture. pag. 2. 3. edit. An. 1594. and after published again.  directly, and at large, how every book both of the old, and new testament, have not only been doubted of, but also denied in this their Church. I suppose the last edition of his book was since the commeing in of his Majesty my prescribed time: otherwise it is so directly there proved by him that no Protestant can deny it. And to show the pitiful case of this their Protestant Article and Religion their Protestant Bishop of Wincester D. 
Bilson suru. pag. 664.  Bilson within my limitation writeth thus: The scriptures themselves were not fully received in all places, no not in Eusebius time. He saith, the Epistle of james, of Jude, the second of Peter, the second and third of john, are contradicted. The Epistle to the Hebrues was contradicted: the Churches of Syria did not receive the second epistle of Peter, nor the second and third of john, nor the Epistle of Jude, nor the Apocalypse: the like might be said for the Churches of Arabia. Will you hence conclude, that these parts of scripture were not Apostolic, or that we need not receive them now, because they were formely doubted of? Therefore the Protestants of England have no certain, and undoubted scripture, if they will stand to their suscribed Articles, and their own subscription. Which this Protestant Bishop before, seeing the absurdity thereof, hath refused to do. Therefore they may not (as they do) deny those other books which Catholics admit, upon so great, and highest warrants, before in Protestants judgement, because in former times they have been doubted of, as those last recited by the testimony of their Bishop, and all the rest, as D. Willet hath wittnessed have been. To these I might add more Arguments from these Protestants true Greek Church, and the general Council of Florence, both allowed by some of these writers, and yet alloweing, and warranting for canonical, all books received by Catholics. And other Arguments by them: but these are sufficient for this matter, at this time. And as demonstration is made, that these Protestants either have no true scriptures at all, or not the true Canon of holy scriptures: So it is as evident, that their Religion cannot be proved true, and infallible (as true Religion is) by evidences, that in their proceed are doubtful, fallible, or no holy canonical scriptures, but by them excluded from that number, and sacred Canon.   

CHAPTER V OF THE INTEGRITY, AND excellency, of the Latin vulgar translation of scriptures, used in the Roman Church: and Protestants false, corrupt, and erroneous Translations in their own judgement and Censure.  
NOW let us entreat of the vulgar Latin translation, of holy scriptures, handled in the next Chapter, for whose allowance by these Protestants, I argue by them, in this manner.  
That Latin Translation of scriptures which is to be used in schools and pulpits, and for antiquity, to be preferred before all others, was used in the Church, thirteen hundred years ago, by S. Augustine preferred before all others, and both by the judgement of S. Isidore, and these Protestants themselves, is thought the best translation, and to be preferred before all others, is accordingly to be allowed, esteemed, and preferred: But the vulgar Latin translation, by these Protestants is such: Therefore even by them so to be allowed, and preferred. The Mayor proposition is manifestly true: for that which is so ancient in the true Latin Church, and to be preferred before all others, must needs be allowed and preferred. The Minor proposition is proved, as followeth: first their Bishop D Dove, writeth in these words, of this vulgar Latin translation: We (Protestants) grant it 
Dove persuas. pag. 16.  fit, that for uniformity in quotations of places, in schools and pulpits, one Latin text should be used, and we can be contented for the antiquity thereof, to prefer the old vulgar translation, before all other Latin books: so much we do yield to the Council of Trent. D. Covell entreateinge of translations of scripture, against Burges the Puritan, 
Covell against Burges pag. 94.  answereth in these words: We are ready to confess, whether you understand the Italian, or that which goeth under the name of S. Hierome, that they were used anciently in the Church, a thousand and three hundred years ago, one of them by S. Augustine preferred before all the rest, the other highly commended by Beza, and that of the vulgar (though with Pagnin and Driedo) we think it not S. Hieromes, but mixed: yet we can be content, to say as Isodore doth of it. Interpretatio eius this translation is to be preferred before others. Hitherto this Protestant Doctor, who with their Bishop Dove before have granted, as much as the Council of Trent, a Rule to Catholics decreed in this matter, if we may give credit 
Field pag. 258.  to D. Feild, citeing and alloweing Andradius, writing in this manner: The Church doth approve translations, not pronownceing that there is no thing amiss in them, but that the divine mysteries are therein truly delivered, and nothing that concerneth faith, Religion, or good manners, ignorantly or fraudulently suppressed. The Council of Trent defined, that the vulgar Latin translation shall be holden authentical: but he saith, Andreas Vega, who was present at the Council, reported that the Fathers of the Council, meant not to determine, that it is not defective or faulty, but that it is not erroneous, and faulty in such sort, as that any hurtful or pernicious opinion in matters of faith, or manners, may necessarily be deduced from it. And that this was the meaneninge of the council, he saith, Andreas Vega alleged the authority of the Cardinal of Saint Cross, afterwards Pope, who delivered so much unto him. Hitherto D. Fields allowance, which alloweth that his Protestants before have testified as much for the vulgar Latin translation, as the Council of Trent defined, and consequently, as much as Catholics do hold in this question.  
Further I argue thus: That Translation of scripture which was used 1300 years age, when the Church was in her best and flourishing estate, and from which no hurtful or pernicious opinion can be deduced, is to be allowed, and preferred: But the vulgar Latin is such: Therefore to be thus allowed, and preferred. The Mayor proposition is evidently true, and before granted: and 
Covell def. of Hook. pag. 29.  D. Covell saith: God hath so linked his word, and his Church, that neither can stand, where both are not. The Minor is also before proved by these Doctors, their Bishop Dove, D. Covell, and Field: so nothing remaineth to be proved in this argument: And so it is proved and allowed by these Protestants, that of all translations it is to be preferred; that it containeth nothing against Faith, Religion, or good manners, nothing that is erroneous which sufficeth for my purpose.  
Now let us see how these Protestants can justify their Translations from such defects; for they have granted before that this vulgar Latin used, and allowed in the Roman Church, is to be preferred before all their Protestant Translations, Latin, English, Welsh, Dutch, French or whatsoever named translations. I argue thus▪  
No translation whatsoever is authentical: But every English and other Protestant translation is a translation: Therefore none of them is authentical. The Mayor proposition consisteth of the very words of D. Covell, 
Covell ag. Burg. pag. 94. Dove persuas. pag. 16.  which be these: No translation whatsoever is authentical scripture. D. Dove writeth thus: all Translations have many faults. The Minor is manifestly true: for a translation cannot truly be said to be no translation: for so contradictories might be true, which is unpossible.  
Further thus I argue: No translation, which is not well translated, but requireth new translations, is to be allowed: But all English translations are such: Therefore not to be allowed. The Mayor is evidently true, for things not well done, are ill done: because Non datur actus indifferens in individuo. No act singularized is indifferent. Therefore being ill, is not to be allowed. The Minor is proved by the King's speech in the Conference, at 
Confer. pag. 46.  Hampton, where he saith, that he could never yet see a Bible well translated into English: but the worst of all he thought the Geneva to be. And therefore a new translation should be made for our English nation. And so D. Covell also 
Covell ag. Burg.  wisheth. Again thus I argue: No translation, that is perverred in many hundreds of places, is inferior to the Turks Koran, and denieth Christianity, is to be allowed: But the English Protestant Common translation it such: Therefore not to be allowed. The Mayor proposition is more than evidently true: The Minor is thus proved by the Protestant Author of the book, called Advertisement: 
Aduertism. in an. 1604.  his words be these: The Bible is perverted in eight hundred, and eight and forty places in the old testament. The English Protestant Bible, is inferior to the ●urkes Koran And so Christianity is denied in England by public authority.  
My next Argument is this: No translation that hath many omissions, many additions, which sometimes perverteth the sense, is senseless, and sometimes contrary; is a true translation, or to be allowed: But the English received Protestant translation is such: therefore not true, nor to be allowed. The Mayor is palpably true. The Minor is proved by Mr. Burges in these words 
Burg. apol. pag. 93. in D. Covells Answ.  of the approved English translation: it is a Translation, which hath many omissions, many additions, which sometimes obscureth, sometimes perverteth the sense: being sometimes senseless, sometimes contrary.  
Thus I argue again: No translation, that is corrupt, hath gross corruptions, by leaveing out of words, by putting to of words, and which perverteth the meaning of the holy Ghost, is a true, or sufferable translation: But the usual English translation, by Protestants, is such: therefore not true, nor sufferable. The Mayor proposition is apparently true. And the Minor is thus proved by these Protestants: The 22 
Petit. of 22. preachers except. 21. ag. comm. Book.  preachers writ of the translation in the communion book, in this manner: It containeth in it divers corrupt translations of scriptures, by leaveing out of words, putting to of words, perverting the meaneing of the holy ghost. The Protestant Survey of the book of Common prayer, 
Survey pag. 160.  addeth: There be many gross corruptions, as may partly appear by the Abrigment of the Ministers of Lincoln diocese. Then how sound a Religion these Protestants have, that must be founded, and proved by such translations, I leave to others consideration.  
My next Argument is this: No translations that be corrupt; not answeareable to the truth of the original; are not to be allowed: cannot be defended etc. even in Protestants judgements, are to be rejected and condemned as false, and profane: But all English Protestant Translations of the Bible, even from the revolt of Henry 8. from the Church of Rome, are such, by these Protestants: Therefore by them to be rejected, and condemned as false, and profane. The Mayor proposition is evidently true, even in Protestants Censure, and the Minor is proved by them in this manner. Their sentence in their public Conference is this: The 
Conference at Hampt. pag. 45.  translations of the Bible allowed in the time of Henry 8. and Edward 6. were corrupt, and not answeareable to the truth of the original. And of the translations used in the time of Q Elizabeth, 
Conference pag. 46. sup.  and his Majesty since, they testify in these words: The English Bible as it is translated, is corrupt, and not answeareable to the truth of the original. His Majesty professed he could never yet see a Bible well translated into English. Therefore order is there taken, in these words: A new 
Pag. 46. sup.  translation is to be made, and none of the former to be allowed. The 22 Protestant preachers of london of their petition write in this manner: 
Petit. of 22 preachers except. 11. 12.  The English Protestants in their public proceedeings translate scriptures corruptely, by leaveing out of words, putting to of words: perverting the meaning of the holy ghost. Misapply places of holy scriptures to the countenance of errors. Others of them write thus: We have divers translations of holy scriptures: 
Def. of the Minist. reasons pag. 10.  That which by our service book (this is the practical Rule of their Religion) is appointed to be read, is the worst of all, and to be charged, with sundry gross, and palpable errors. And speakeing of Mr. Hutton, taking upon him to excuse their translation, their words be these: 
Def. supr. pag. 38.  Mr Hutton taking upon him the defence of Protestants corruptions, is no more able to make his part good, against the truth of the exceptions, with all his flourishes: then Goliath was against David with all his blasphemies. Therefore the Religion of English Protestants by themselves, to their own pleaseing, deduced either from such false, corrupt, and erroneous translations, or from Greek, or Hebrew, or any other ancient, or received text, so corruptely, and profanely translated, and expounded, by no possibility can be justified, for true and holy.  
If any man answereth, that these Protestant testimonies of their corrupt translations, and my former Arguments, against the validity of deductions, and conclusions from so false, corrupted, doubtful, or uncertain texts, and sentences of scriptures, proceed only against their former translations, and Religion then used, and so deduced among them: But now they have a new, and better translation, by his majesties order, and commandment, and thus entitled: The holy Bible containing the old 
Title of the Protest. new translation of the Bible. An. 1614  testament, and the new, newly translated out of the original tongues: and with the former translations diligently compared, and revised, by his majesties commandment. Imprinted by Robert Barker, Printer to the Kings most excellent Majesty. To this I answer; that if this new translation be true, and all the others, as they acknowledge false, corrupt, and worthy to be condemned, (otherwise they have unworthily condemned them.) Then as all their Religion in their doctrine was deduced from such false translations, They must needs come to a new correction, and as they have forsaken their translations for corrupt, and adulterate, from which their Religion was deduced; So they must now alter, change and correct their Religion, or some Articles thereof, because it was deduced, and founded from corrupt translations, and deceaveinge principles. For their Religion wholly consisting upon their conclusions, which always follow the worse part, conclusio semper sequitur deteriorem partem; Their Religion must needs be worse, and more requireing correction, than their translations. Again, I only dispute against their Religion, which hitherto they have practised, not against any new Religion, which they will make from their new translations, not knowing yet, neither they temselues (so often changing) what it will please them, to be. Thirdly I must deal plainly with them, to think they had done far more excusably for themselves, and their Religion, still to have faced out their old for tolerable, rather than to have given such a downfall to their Religion, and scriptures, so much troubled their four and forty translators (as Mr. Hugh Broughton, their most admired 
H. Brough. oratiuncul. ad jacob. Reg. 1609.  linguist telleth us) and yet still abuse us (themselves shall be witness) with new and more false translations of holy scriptures. For the same greatest Protestant rabbin thus entituleth his book of exceptions against these Protestants sufficiency, and sincerity in this cause: Oratiuncula de molitione versionis è sacrorum codicum fontibus in Riwlos 
Orat. supr. in Imit.  Britannicos. Ad jacobum Regem magnae Britaniae. A little oration of the enterprise of translation from the fowntaines of the holy books into the british gunnells. To james King of great Britanny. And to tell us, what indirect dealeinge was used by the Protestant Bishops, in this matter, how false both their former translations were, and this can prove no other by any probable judgement, thus he beginneth his oratiuncula, as he calleth it: O great King the British nation hath now long desired to obtain a better translation of the Bible. And I have meditated these thirtre continual years well to perform it. And your highness pleasure was that I most exercised of all should take in hand this hard work. Vestraque Serenitas me voluit, exercitatissimum omnium opus hoc arduum moliri. But the Bishops as we call, two ways wrestled against it. First that their usual translation might continue. But your highness, the errors being thoroughly known, thought that to be wickedness. Then they themselves would do it, by chuseing of their fellows, or rather four and forty vicar's of their labour. As though our nation were able to yield so many fit men: when there scarcely are, or ever were, two in all the world, which could handle the Hebrew prophets, as good Thalmudists, and the Hebrew Greek Apostles also as Athenians. But now six years trial hath taught, that it is one thing to dream of tongues, an other to know them. And now they are said to be at a stand. And would willingly give over, but that the King's authority requireth an end. But that your most learned Majesty may see what is to be hoped for, from them, lest the Churches be forced to buy babbles for the word of God: I will in few words delever, that it may appease that such poor students are not to be suffered to lest with the King, and the flock. Hitherto this great linguists oration, his exceptions are to tedious to be recited. Only because these men have so magnified the Hebrew text of the old testament, in respect of the septuaginta, and vulgar Latin, now this great searcher of Hebrew monuments can hear only (for he never see either of them, of two perfect Hebrew copies of the old testament, in all the world, and both they be in the jews custody, one in Jerusalem, and the other at Nehardegh in Mosopotamia. Veteris testamenti duo exemplaria tam accurata atque mens humana providere potuit, seruantur à judaeis. Hierosolymis alterum: alterum Nehardeghae in Mesopotamia. Then if we have no better comfort, from these Hebritians, for a true Hebrew text, then that England neither hath, had, or can procure any, and none is to be had, but from our Enemies the jews; and yet if they could procure a true copy, which they have not done, there is not any one in England by their own judgements able truly to translate it, and these last translators were weary of their enterprise, and would have given it over, after six years experience of their disability, but that the King's majesties pleasure was, to have one end or other, we may not easily admit such translations for holy scriptures, nor Religion deduced from them, for a true Religion. And ●his the rather, because since the birth of this new translation, it is condemned by their own approved writings, I will omit others, and only cite one place out of their late commended history of the world, in these 
Histor. of the world l. 1. cap. ●. §. 14. Chron 2. cap. 21. v. 16. The Protest. new transl. sup.  words: The ill translation of Ethiopia for Chus, is among other places, made most apparent in the second of Chronicles in these words: So the Lord stirred up against jehoram, the spirit of the Philistines, and the Arabians which confine the Ethiopians: The Geneva translation hath it, which were beside the Ethiopians. (the new English readeth thus:) more over the lord stirred up against johoram the spirit of the Philistines, and of the Arabians, that were near the Ethiopians. Now how far it is between the Philistines, and the Negroes, or Ethiopians, every man that looketh in a map, may judge. For he Philistines and Arabians do mixed, and join with the land of the Chusites, and are distant from Ethiopia, about two and thirty, or three and thirty degrees, and therefore not their next neighbours: but all Egypt and the deserts of Sur, and Pharan, are between them. And to aggravate this matter the more, these new Protestant translators taking upon them, to translate the old testament out of the Hebrew, and new out of the Greek, and only alloweing those texts in words, are so far from performing it in deeds; that in the old testament they have forsaken the Hebrew text divers thousands of times, as may be proved by their own merginall observations of that matter; my leisure was not to recount them all, but in Genesis the first book they have thus behaved themselves above two hundred times, and after the same rate in all the rest. As in the 5. 20. and 25. chapter of the book of judges forty times. fifteen times in Sam. l. 1. cap. 18. in the 2. Book of Samuel in cap. 22. thirteen times. in cap. 1. 7. 18 20. in four chapters above thirty times in the third book of Kings. And so they deal with the Greek in the new testament, and in the old testament, where the scripture is written in the Chaldy, and Hebrew mixed, as in the time of captivity so they use the Chaldy tongue, as in Esra cap. 4. they forsake the Hebrew thrice, and the Chaldye eleven, or twelve times, in the second chapter of Daniel, they leave it thirteen times, in the third chapter twelve times, in the 5. chapter neyne times etc. and in these and other places where they refuse the original tongue, as for example, the Hebrew, they do it not, many times to prefer either the vulgar Latin, Septuagin●a, or Syriac, but their own conceit, and Imagination. Yet in places where they forsake the original, to prefer, any of the other, it is evidently against their own profession, and Religion, and in places of their former translations, censured by Mr. Gregory Martyne, or other English Catholics, they often times neither regard their own, or ours, but give us new scriptures, and revelations of their own (though not many times in great matters) and so in this multiplication, and change of scriptures they have also multiplied, and changed Religion, deduced from them, and for that one Article of their ancient creed, I believe in the holy ghost, may now say by such proceed: we believe in the four and forty English Protestant holy Ghosts. For whosoever reject all texts of scripture, as their own marginal observations tell us, they do, though (as before) often not in great things, yet sometimes otherwise, and deny unwritten traditions of this kind, must needs be in such estate.   

CHAPTER VI PROVETH BY THESE Protestant's, that the true and juridical exposition of scriptures is against them, and for the doctrine of the Roman Church.  
AFTER these, I am to entreat of the true, lawful, and juridical Exposition of holy scriptures; And that it belongeth to the Church of Rome, having both the true scriptures▪ the true translation of them, and itself having power, and authority, being the true Church of Christ, to propose it to all Christians: and not to these Protestants: for no company or congregation of men, wanting and denying divers books of scriptures, in which divers Articles of Religion, as prayer to Angels, their patronadge, prayer and sacrifice for the Dead, merit of good works, etc. are directly proved, not so apparently taught in other scriptures, besides following, and alloweing erroneous, and corrupt translations, can have the true and juridical exposition of scriptures, especially having no jurisdiction over others, by their own grant: But the English Protestants are in this state: Therefore they have not this true, lawful, and juridical exposition of scriptures. Both propositions are granted before, and so nothing remaineth to be proved in this argument.  
Further I argue thus: No private Interpretation of scriptures, by conference of places, and such Rules as Protestants assign for Interpreteinge scripture, is binding, or juridical: But all Protestant Expositions, in respect of true byndeing authority, in such cases, is private: Therefore no Protestant Interpretation is binding, or juridical. The Mayor proposition is thus proved by D. Feild 
Field l. 4. c. 19 pag. 235.  in these words: We confess that neither conference of places, nor consideration of the antecedentia, and consequentia, nor looking into the originals, are of any force, unless we find the things which we conceive to be understood and meant in the places interpreted, to be consonant to the Rule of faith. And he writeth thus again: private Interpretation 
Field pag. 226.  is not so proposed and urged, as if they would bind all others, to receive it. The Minor proposition▪ That all Protestant expositions in respect of a binding and juridical power are private, is thus proved by this Protestant Argument: No Interpretation or Interpreters wanteing jurisdiction, and authority, to command their Interpretations, and expositions in matters of faith, to be believed as such, is to be accounted byndeing, and juridical: But all English Protestant Interpretations, expositions, and definitions, by their own judgement, want this binding, and commanding authority in matters of faith: Therefore they are not juridical, and byndeinge to be believed. The Mayor is evidently true, for, where there is not power and authority in things, those things cannot be rightly and iuridically commanded, or binding men to do, or believe them. The Minor proposition is proved by D. Feild in these words: As before we made 
Field pag. 228.  three kinds of judgement, the one of discretion Common to all, the other of direction Common to the Pastors of the Church, and a third of jurisdiction, proper to them that have supreme power in the Church: So likewise we make three kinds of Interpretation: the first private: the second of public direction: and so the Pastors of the Church may publicly propose, what they conceive of it: And the third of jurisdiction, and so they that have supreme power, that is in the Bishops assembled in a general Council, may interpret the scripture, and by their authority suppress all them, that shall gainsay such Interpretations: and subject every man that shall disobey such determinations, as they consent upon, to excommunication, and Censures of the like nature. Hitherto D. Fields words, plainly declareing, that in his judgement, the Protestants neither have, nor can have this juridical, and commanding judgement, or Interpretation: because, as is proved by themselves before, they neither have had, nor can have any general Council, in which alone he placeth this jurisdiction, and binding power. For, proposeing without authority, which he giveth there to Bishops, is not juridical, and coactive. If he shall answer, that in the first three hundred years there was no general Council, and yet matters of Religion were decided and embraced: he condemneth himself, and all Protestants, in this business; for either he must leave that primitive Church absolutely without jurisdiction, and power, which is most absurd, or leave it to them that both truly claimed, and used it, the Popes of Rome, as these Protestants have before acknowledged: And above all men D. Feild must be of that opinion: for he 
Feild. pag. 202.  hath written and allowed in this manner: We must reverence the authority of all Catholic Doctors, whose doctrine and writings the Church alloweth: we must more regard the authority of Catholic Bishops; more than these the authority of the Apostolic Churches: amongst them, more especially the Church of Rome of a general Council more than all these. Therefore by this Protestant Doctor, in time when general councils cannot be, the highest deciding, and juridical sentence, and power is in the Church and Pope of Rome. And by this he is also prevented, from saying that Protestants may command such Interpretations, and definitions within their own temporal Territories: for so they should not most reverence, and respect, next to a general Council, the Church of Rome the next judge, as he hath written, but quite the contrary their own stubborn, and disobedient wills, which in such causes is Heretical, or Sc●maticall usurpation, and yet D. Feild in his division of Interpretations before, assigneth no jurisdiction at all to inferior Bishops, to command either in the whole Church, or in Provincial, in such cases. Further I argue thus: No opinions or Articles, not ground upon the word of God, are to be believed or commanded as matters of faith: But all Protestants deductions, and Interpretations in these controversies, are such, not ground upon the word of God: therefore not to be believed, or commanded, as Articles of faith. The Mayor is the Common doctrine of Protestants: The Minor is proved both before, when Protestants have deprived themselves of councils, Popes, and all true proposers of the word of God, tying themselves to their own doctrines, and deductions, and is thus further confirmed, by D. Covell, in these words: 
Covell def. of Hook. pag. 85.  Doctrines derived, exhortations deducted, Interpretations agreeable, are not the word of God. Therefore the whole Religion of Protestants against Catholics, being thus founded, upon so deceitful a ground as humanee deduction is, cannot truly and juridically be commander. Yet it is so manifest to all, that their Religion consisteth wholly on their Imagined Interpretations, and deductions, that Mr. Wotton and 
Wotto● def. of Perk. pag. 467. etc.  others are enforced absurdly to say, that deduction from scripture maketh a matter of Faith: otherwise he cannot make any article of faith to be in their doctrine against us. And D. Feild himself so resolute before against these private Interpretations, and expositions, seemeth to be of the same mind, to defend their Religion in making such deductions to be matters of faith, by every private deduction, his words be these: We 
Feild pag: 226.  say that men not neglecting that light of direction, which the Church yieldeth, no● other helps and means, may be assured out of the nature of the things themselves, the Conference of places, the knowledge of tongues, and the suitable correspondence, that one part of divine truth hath with an other, that they have sound out the true meaning of it. And by this assuredness he seemeth to understand assuredness of faith, making their private deductions, and Interpretations, the word of God, as M. Wotton before cited, doth in 
Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 467.  these words: We acknowledge both and hold, all matters concludeth Logically out of the scriptures to be the word of God, as well as if they were expressly set down in it, word for word. Therefore I may lawfully take it is a Common Protestant doctrine, both Doctor Feild and M. Wotton speaking for their Protestants in the plural number: we say: we acknowledge etc. so that by their Religion, M. Fields or M. Wottons' Logic, vain and uncertain deduction, is of higher authority, and more to be believed, than any general Council or 
Articl of Relig. art. 21.  other external Rule of Religion; for all these by them, as is presently to be proved may err, even in things appertaining unto God: but their private Interpretations, and deductions, suteing with their humour, is the word of God aswell as if it were set down in scripture word for word, as M. Wotton hath told us before.  
My next Argument is this: No people, or professors of Religion, freely acknowledging, that all Rules in their Religion, though their best approved, and most public to be most reverenced, and respected, be subject to error, may err and have erred in things belongeing to God, are erroneous, unconstant, variable, often recant, and correct their public proceedeings in such things, can be said to have the true, and juridical exposition of scriptures: otherwise there is a lawful and true jurisdiction and power to bind them of their Religion, both to errors in things, against God, and misbelief in this life, and to eternal damnation, the peneltie thereof in the next: But the Protestants of England are in this Condition, by their own judgement: Therefore, they have not the true, and juridical exposition, and Interpretation of scriptures: The Mayor is proved before, and directly by M. Wottons' 
Wotton sup.  words: all matters concluded logically out of the scriptures, are the word of God, as well as if they were expressly set down in it word for word: But the word of God neither is, nor can be erroneous, to be recanted, amended corrected &c. therefore the Mayor is most certainly true, by these men: And the Minor also is proved by them in this order: They have granted before, that a general Council is the highest judge: And yet in public and subscribed Articles, have these 
Articl. of Relig. art. ●1.  words: General councils may err, and sometime have erred, even in things pertaining unto God. Wherefore things ordained by them as necessary to salvation, have neither strength nor authority, unless it may be declared that they be taken out of holy scripture. Therefore no certain Interpretation with them for they have assured us, 
Field pag. 228.  that a general Council may expound scripture, and by authority suppress all them that gainsay such Interpretations, to excommunication, and Censures of like nature, and is by them the highest judge hath no more privilege but to err, and be examined, and controlled by inferior (for none is higher as before) Reprovers, and particular Interpreters among them, whom (as they have also taught before) we are not bound to believe, but be so vile, corrupt, and erroneous, as they have confessed, there is none among them, to decide, things in controversy, or define a truth. And lest any man should absurdly say, that their Convocation, Parliament or any other pretendeing superiotie among them, in these matters should be better able to judge and interprett scriptures, than Bishops assembled in a general Council: 
Willet Antilog.  first D. Willet writeth thus: In England the temporal prince is governor, Ruler, chief overseer, 
praef. Engl. & pag. 71. 120. 150. 43. Pref. 19 the Reader in Antill.  and steward of the Church, to whose judgement and redress the reformation of Religion belongeth. Yet he addeth: Neither he, nor their Church hath any privilege from error: but plainly protesteth: they must take out a new lesson, and learn to reform their erroneous conceits. Which their Bishop D. Dove alloweth to have been their state from the first original of their 
Dove persuas. pag. 31.  protestancy, in England, his words and grant are these: When the Mass● was first put down, King Henry had his English liturgy, and that was judged absolute without exception: but when King Edward came to the Crown, that was condemned, and an other in the place which Peter Martyr, and Bucer did approve, as very consonant to God's word. When Q. Eliz●●eth began he● Reign, the former was judged to be full of Imperfections, and a new was devised, and allowed by the consent of the Clergy: but about the middle of her Reign we were weary of that book, and great means have been wrought to abandon that, and establish an other: we do at the least, at every change of prince, change our book of Common prayers, we be so wanton, that we know not what we would have: Hitherto this Protestant Bishop of the public proceed in their Religion; And he freely confesseth errors in all these their states and changes. And this their flitting from error to error, findeinge no Centre, or hope of settleing in truth, hath so perplexed even their best learned, that a late Protestant writer among them, hath these words: The late Archbishop of Canterbury (D. Whiteguist) as is credibly reported 
Survey of the B. of come. prayer pag. 159. 160.  took such a grief, (when their communion book was to be amended) discovered by these or like words: good Lord; when shall we know● what to trust unto? that he presently fell into his palssy, was curried from the Court, and died shortly after. And D. Morton (D. Covell M. Wotton, 
Morton Apol. part. 2. pag. 315. Covell ag. Burg. pag. 75. 43. Wotton def. pag. 42. etc.  M. Middleton and now the university of Cambridge teacheth, it is a general position, there is none in their Church whose judgement is Infallible. Then I conclude their Interpretations be false, and their Religion erroneous, uncertain, and false; for they have granted before, that the word of God which is Infallible, most certain, and undoubted, is the ground of true Religion, and every article in it, so founded: But these their highest and best sentences in Religion, being so erroneous to be corrected, fallible, deceitful etc. must needs be the word of lying and deceitful men, or the wicked spirit, and in no ways the holy Infallible, and most certain word of God, who can neither be deceived in himself, or deceive others.  
Further thus I argue: whosoever teach not only, that the whole Christian world may err in things pertaining to God, but are bound to receive such errors, under pain of excommunication, and like Censures, and yet teach this from scriptures, cannot be said to have their true Interpretation: But the Protestants of England by their own testimony, are in this state: Therefore have not this true juridical Interpretation, of scriptures. The Mayor proposition is evidently true, for so God that is just, should ordain jurisdiction; and power, to bind men to things unjust, such as errors in Religion be, and these Protestants, though to excuse, or alleviate their own Heresies, they affirm, that any particular Church, or a general Council, may err in this manner, yet they deny it of the whole Church, in which cause D. 
Field pag. 203. l. 4. c. 5.  Feild writeth in these words: we think that particular men and Churches may err damnably, because notwithstanding, others may worship God aright: but that the whole Church, at one time, cannot so err: for that the Church should cease utterly for a time, and so not be Catholic, being not at all times: and Christ should sometimes be without a Church. Thus it is evident by these Protestants, (for the words: we think: be plural) That whosoever by their Interpretations should allow such absurdities, cannot have the true interpretation of scriptures. Now the Minor is easily proved by him also: for all men are bound to obey lawful superiority, and authority such as he saith a general Council hath over all Christians, in these cases: his words before cited be these: They that have supreme 
Field l. 4. ●. 16. pag. 228.  power, that is the Bishops assembled in a general Council, may interpret the scripture, and by their authority suppress all them that shall gainsay such Interpretations, and subject every man that shall disobey such determination, as they consent upon, to excommunication, and Censures of like nature. Wherefore seeing general councils have this binding, and commanding power, over all men, by these Protestants, and yet by their Article before, may err, and have 
Art. 21. sup.  erred even in things pertaining unto God, the whole Christian world with so many absurdities, may be in this damnable error, the Church might cease, not be Catholic, Christ 
Field pag. 203.  should be without a Church: which D. Feild before esteemeth great absurdities. Again thus I argue: They which strangely pervert belly, deprave, abuse, and falsify holy scriptures, cannot be thought to be true interpreters of them: But M. parks so testifieth of our 
Parks ag. lymbom. def. of the 1. 2. 3. testim.  English Protestants: Therefore they cannot be thought to be true Interpreters of them. Notheing remaineth in this Argument to be proved.  
Further I argue thus: No Interpreters, or expositors of scripture, whose Interpretations be partial, untrue, seditious, savoureing of Treason, poison the Gospel etc. are to be judged true, and juridical: But the English Protestants by their own testimonies, be such: Therefore not to be judged true, and juridical interpreters: The Mayor is true and evident: And the Minor thus proved, first by the Protestant 
Confer. at Hampt. pag. 47.  conference in these words: The notes annexed to the Geneva translation, some are very partial, untrue, seditious, and savoureing to● much of dangerous, and traitorous conceits. Yet these were allowed, and published, as public and approved interpretations. An other Protestant writeth in this manner: The Bishop's 
Aduerment. An. 1604.  notes betray our Lord, and Redeemer, and befool the rock of salvation, they are the very poison to all the Gospel. M. Ormerod writeth thus of his fellow 
Ormer. pict. purit. q. 4.  Protestant's: They fill the margins of their books, full of places of scripture, in a wrong sense, that by this means they might more easily deceive the simple people. They neither care for Mayor, Minor, nor Conclusion, so they may say some thing. They point their margins with shameful abuseing of scripture. To these I might add more arguments, as that by their own testimonies they are Heretics, schismatics, have no ttue Church, no true Religion, and the like, as among other reasons from themselves, why catholics may not communicate with them, in spiritual, and religeous affairs, is proved in a late treatise against them: I will therefore pass them over, as already proved.   

CHAPTER VII. WHEREIN BY THESE Protestant's  proved, that unwritten traditions lawfully proved, are the word of God, equally as the holy scriptures: That many such are: and all confirm the doctrine of the Church of Rome: and condemn Protestant's Religion.  
AFTER this entreateinge of holy scriptures, the written word of God, let us come to that part of his sacred word, delivered by traditions and unwritten verities, preserved and proposed to faithful Christians by the holy spouse, and Church of Christ, whose judgement, Rule, and direction is so dignified above all Inferior judgements, by these Protestants before. Concerning the validity and authority of truly proved traditions, I argue thus.  
All Rules, Grounds and Authorities in matters of Religion, that are equal with holy scriptures, in the judgement of Protestants, the highest Rule in such causes, are ●eghely to be reverenced, and obeyed of all Christians: But the holy traditions and unwritten verities delivered by Christ, and Apostles being lawfully proved, are of this nature: Therefore to be reverenced, embraced, and received. The Mayor proposition is evidently true, for where there is absolute equality, there is not inferiority, but parity, as is manifest in all equalities. The Minor is thus proved in this manner: first M. Wotton speakeing of such, hath these 
Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 405. pag. 436. supr.  words: out of all question we are bound to keep them; and telleth us that M. Perkins was of the same opinion. D. Feild speaketh thus concerning traditions. In this question, by tradition, we understand such parts of Christian doctrine or 
Field pag. 238. l. 4. cap. 20.  discipline, as were not written by them, by whom they were first delivered. For thus our Adversaries understand traditions which they divide into divers kinds. First in respect of the authors, so making them of three sorts, Divine, Apostolical, and Ecclesiastical. Secondly, in respect of the matter, they concern, in which respect they make them to be of two sorts: for either they concern matters of faith, or matters of manners: and these later again either temporal, or perpetual, universal or particular. All these in their several kinds they make equal with the words, precepts, and doctrines of Christ, the Apostles, and pastors of the Church, left unto us in writeinge. Neither is there any reason, why they should not so do, if they could prove any such unwritten verities. For it is not the writing that giveth things their authority, but the worth and credit of him that delivereth them, though by word and lively voice only. Thus the authority of Traditions is justified by Protestants to be equal with the scriptures, if they can be proved. Now because Protestants mayntayneinge the sufficiency of scripture for matters of faith, deny traditions of that nature I argue in this manner. All Articles and matters of faith are in Protestants judgement proved and delivered to us by tradition: Therefore some articles, and matters of faith, are in their judgement, or so must be granted, to be delivered by tradition: The consequence is evident, for every general proposition includeth the particular. The Antecedent is thus proved by them. Whosoever do grant those things, which, by them contain all matters and Articles of faith to be delivered by tradition, must needs allow traditions in matters of faith: But these Protestants do so: Therefore they must allow such traditions. The Mayor is evident, for whatsoever containeth all, excludeth none, and so comprehending all, comprehendeth also some and the parts of that all. The Minor is likewise proved in this manner, supposeing the Common opinion of these Protestants, set down in the sixth Article of their Religion 
Articl. of Relig. art. 6.  in these words: Holy scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever i● not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an Article of the faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation. Now to prove my second proposition, D. Feild will testify, that both these scriptures, and the right order of deductions from them, in matters of faith, are delivered unto us by tradition only, his ●ordes be these: Much contention there hath 
Field l. 4. pag. 238. cap. 20.  been, about traditions, some urgeing the necessity of them, and other rejecting them. For the cleareing whereof, we must observe, that we reject not all: for first we receive the number, and names, of the Authors of books divine, and canonical, as delivered by tradition. This tradition we admit. The number, Authors, and integrity of the parts, of these b●oke●, we receive as delivered by tradition. Thus much for the scriptures, that their number, Authors, parts, and every chapter, verse, and sentence is by tradition; Then their pretended deductions from thence must needs be such, for in every theological Syllogism they must needs take either the one or both propositions from this granted tradition, and their conclusion must much rather be tradition, as also the manner of deduceing, for they grant they are not expressly in scripture, and to decide this, D. Feild wittnesseth again in this order. The 
Feild sup. pag. 238. 239.  second kind of tradition, which we admit, is that summary comprehension, of the chief heads of Christian doctrine, contained in the Creed of the Apostles, which was delivered to the Church, as a Rule of her faith. The orderly connexion, and distinct explication, as these principal Articles gathered into an Epitome, i● rightly named a tradition. And howsoever he will contend that the Articles are in scripture, or may thence be deduced: in which his fellows in Religion, hereafter will give him denial for Christ's discendeing into Hell, communion of Saints, and others: yet he must needs grant, that the Creed of the Apostles being composed by them, and delivered to the Church, as a Rule of her faith, before the scriptures of the new testament, wherein he will say it is contained, were written, is absolutely a Tradition. And yet he maketh it so absolute a thing, that to use his words, in it are implied, and whence are inferred, all conclusions Theological. But that the 
Feild supr. cap. 20.  true explication also of scripture is a tradition, he wittnesseth in these words: The third is that form of Christian doctrine, and explication 
Field pag. 239.  of the several parts thereof, which the first Christians receiving of the same Apostles, that delivered to them the scriptures, commended to posterities. This may right be named a tradition, for that we need a plain, and distinct explication, of many things, which are somewhat obscurely contained in the scripture. Therefore seeing these deductions from scripture, are not without tradition, and things obscurely contained, may not be received as articles of Religion, by them without a plain and distinct explication, by tradition, and the plain things of scripture, by them before, as also that epitome of our faith, the Apostles Creed, are traditions; it is manifestly proved, that all Articles, and matters of faith, are by tradition, by these their writings.  
Further I argue thus: whatsoever doctrine is of that necessity, that the denial Feild: 
〈…〉  obstinately, is Heresy, must needs be a matter of faith, and necessary to salvation: But by these Protestants, there is such doctrine only by tradition: Therefore some matters of faith, and necessary to salvation, are believed only by tradition. The Mayor proposition is evidently true, yet further confirmed by these Protestants: D. Covells 
Covell exam pag? 202. Ormer. dial. 2.  words be these: Heretics are neither simple Infidels, nor Idolaters, but obstinately erring in some fundamental point. M. Ormerod writeth thus: he is an Heretic: which so swerveth from the wholesome doctrine, as contemning the judgement both of God, and the Church, persisteth in his opinion. Thus we see that Heresy is not without denial of a matter of faith, wherein both the judgement of God, and the Church is contemned.  
The Minor is proved by D. Feild in this manner where first (to use his words) he alloweth for a clear Instance not to be proved by 
Field pag. 240.  scripture, the perpetual virginity of Mary, and after confesseth that Hiluedius for pertinatiousely denial thereof was condemned of Heresy. In that he saith: this is no point of Christian faith, but a 
Feild sup. cap. 20.  seemly truth delivered unto us by the Church of God, fitting the sanctity of the blessed Virgin, and the honour due to so sanctified a vessel of Christ's Incarnation, as her body was: he speaketh truly in allowing it for a Tradition, but denying it to be any point of Christian faith, and yet telling us that helvidius for denial of 〈◊〉 was condemned of Heresy, he both contradicteth himself, the truth, and his fellow Protestant's before, assureing, that Heretics be they that obstinately err in fundamental points, as D. Covell writeth: or as M. Ormerod noteth: serve from the wholesome doctrine as contenininge the judgement both of God and the Church. Where it is evident, that a matter of faith is denied in every Heresy, and also that things delivered only by tradition, (as D. Feild acknowledgeth the perpetual virginity of our blessed Lady to be) are the word, and judgement of God. Further these Protestants seem to condemn the Anabaptists, and deniers of the necessity to baptize Infants: yet D. Feild writeth thus: 
Field pag. 239.  The foarth kind of Tradition, is the continued practice of such things, as neither are contained in the scripture expressly, nor the example of such practice expressly there delivered. Of this sort is the baptism of Infants, which is therefore named a tradition, because it is not expressly delivered in the scripture, that the Apostles did baptise Infants, nor any express precept there found, that they should do it. And his words, of the plural signification: The fourth kind of traditions: such things: of this sor●e● etc. are sufficient argument, that he alloweth divers other Traditions of this nature. That which he addeth, we find the scripture to deliver the grounds of it, is expressly 
Field pag. 228. Covell def. of Hook. pag. 85.  against himself before, and D. Covell, thus assureing us in these words: doctrines derived, exhortations deducted, Interpretation● agreeable, are not the word of God, and D. Feild: 
Feild supr. pag. 226.  private Interpretation is not so proposed and urged, as if they would bind all others to receive it. Yet all men are bound to receive, and firmly believe articles, and matters of faith. Further D. Willet telleth us, that Vigilantius 
Willet Antilog. pag. 13.  was condemned of Heresy, for denying reverence to Relics, and yet Protestants generally teach, that doctrine is not contained in holy scriptures. D. Feild writeth 
Field pag. 138. l. 3. cap. 29.  in these words: Aerius condemned the custom of the Church, in naming the dead at the altar, and offering the sacrifice of the Eucharist for them. For this his rash and inconsiderate holdenes, and presumption, in condemning the universal Church of Christ, he was justly condemned. For the practice of the Church, at that time was not evil in any of these things, neither do we concur with Aerius in the reprehension of that primitive and ancient Church. What was this practice of the primitive Church concerning the dead, for denial whereof Aerius was condemned as D. Feild hath told us, I will recite from other Protestants. M. Middleton assureth us thus: 
Middleton papistom. pag. 64. 45. 46. 51. 47. 48. 49.  S. Chrisostome taught it to be the Apostles ordinance to pray for the dead, it was a tradition in the primitive Church received from the fathers, to pray for the dead, and beg mercy of God for them. The dead were prayed for in the public liturgies of 
Hull Rom. pole pag. 86 Morton Apol. part. 1. pag. 273.  Basile, Chrisostome, and Epiphanius. The Church in Epipbanius time used to crave mercy, for the dead. M. Hull saith: Leo 15 Leo the pope, appointed Masses for the dead. D. Morton citeth from Caluine this: ipsi veteres preces fundebant pro defunctis. The ancient father's prayer for the dead. And to give final content to D Feild, the sentence of his true Greek Church is 
Gennad. Scholar def. 5. cap. 3.  this: The doctrine of purgatory, prayer, and sacrifice for the dead, was a Tradition of the Apostles. That which the Latins call Purgatory, they of the Greek Church name Catharte●ion. They were only Scismaticorum sectatores, followers of schismatics which denied it. The seeing Protestants do ordinarily teach, that prayer for the dead is not contained, either expressly, or deducebly in scriptures, it must needs be by tradition; for denial of which tradition Aerius was condemned of Heresy, and the universal Church at that time by D. Feild taught prayer for the dead, for he telleth us, that Aerius in his opinion contemned the universal Church of Christ: and so must D. Feild confess of himself, and his fellow Protestants, if they deny this to be a Tradition, as they have denied the Books of Maccabees, where this verity is taught, to be caconical scriptures, to gainsay this primitive and Catholic doctrine.  
And from hence, thus I argue again by the Rule of S. Augustine allowed by D. Feild: whatsoever the whole Church holdeth, not 
Field l. 4. c. 21. pag. 242.  being decreed by the authority of councils, but having been ever holden, may rightly be thought to have proceeded from Apostolic authority: But the Catholic doctrine; of prayer, and sacrifice for the dead, is such, by the testimony of these Protestants: Therefore a tradition from the Apostles by these Protestants. The Mayor consisteth of the very words of S. Augustine, as they be translated and allowed by D. Feild in this manner. 
Field pag. 241.  Having set down the kinds and sorts of traditions it remaineth to examine by what means we may come to discern, and by what rules we may judge which are true, and Indubitate traditions. The first rule is delivered by S. Augustine: Quod universa 
Aug. l. 4. cont. Donatist. cap. 23.  tenet ecclesia, nec concilijs institutum, sed semper retentum est, non nisi authoritate apostolica traditum, rectissimè creditur. Englished by D. Feild as in the Mayor proposition: where, rectissimè creditur, is most rightly believed: he hath translated, may rightly be thought. The Minor proposition is proved before by these Protestants, in teaching, this doctrine to have been the doctrine of the universal Church, resisted by Aerius, and also that it was an Apostolic tradition: which all Protestants of England must needs grant unto, by S. Augustine's, and D. fields▪ first Rule before; for by their proceed, they are so far from graunteing, that this doctrine is defined by councils, and by that title to be embraced: That they plainly teach in the Articles of their Religion the definition of a general Council in matters of faith not taken out of scriptures (as they teach this is not) is nothing worth. The 
Articl. of Relig. art. 21.  words of their Article be these. Things ordained by general councils as necessary to salvation, have neither strength, nor authority, unless it may be declared that they be taken out of holy scripture. Hitherto their subscribed article: And that this is a thing necessary to salvation, must needs also be yielded unto, by these Protestants, telling us before, both that Aerius was condemned of Heresy for denying it, as also that Heresy is arror in some fundamental point, 
Cou●ll sup.  which must needs be necessary to salvation. My next Argument shall be taken from the next Rule of D. Feild, to know true traditions: and my Mayor proposition shall be his very words thus next following. The second Rule is, whatsoever all, or the 
Feild supr. pag. 242.  most famous, and renowned in all ages, or at the least in divers ages, have constantly delivered, as received from them, that went before them, no man contradicting or doubting of it, may be thought to be an Apostolical Tradition: But the Catholic doctrine of prayer for the dead, praying to Saints, single life of the clergy, especially in the Latin Church, and others in their proper place to be proved such by these Protestants, are in this state: Therefore by Protestants they be Apostolic traditions. The Mayor is the very saying and sentence of D. Feild before: and the Minor concerning prayer for the dead, also before allowed by these Protestants: the others are to be proved in their order this now sufficeth.  
The first proposition for my next Argument shall be D. fields third, and last Rule, to know true, and indubitate traditions; and is delivered by him in these words: The third Rule, is the constant testimony, 
Feild supr. l. 4. c. 21. pag. 242.  of the pastors of an Apostolic Church, successively delivered: But prayer for the dead etc. is so proved by such testimony: therefore an Apostolic tradition. The mayor is D. Feild sentence. And the Minor is before proved by these Protestants: for if the universal Church (as before by them consented) is this verity, not only one Apostolic Church (sufficient for his Rule) but all did consent unto it, otherwise it could not be said the doctrine of the universal Church. And of all Churches Apostolic, there can be no question with Protestants burr the Church of Rome ever taught thus; and D. Field hath told us before, that 
Field l. 4. c. 5. pag. 202.  amongst Apostolic Churches, the Church of Rome is more specially to be obeyed, reverenced and respected. Further thus I argue: whatsoever things are either approved by these Protestants themselves, for true, and indubitate traditions, or allowed by them, that the primitive Church, and fathers received for such, are to have that allowance: But the sign of the cross, mixture of water with wine, in the Eucharist, reverence of holy Imadges, and Relics, sacrifice and prayer for the dead, vows of chastity, and single life of priests, parsonal absolution from sin after confession, Baptism by private parsons, in time of necessity, Confirmation, profession of our faith to believe in the Father the Son holy Ghost, ordination of Archbishops in their provinces, and Bishops in their diocese, the Article of Christ descent to Hell the Apostles creed, Baptism of Infants, the perpetual virginity of our blessed Lady, the celebrateing of our Lord's day, called Sunday, for the sabbath in the old law, the feasts of Pentecoste, and Easter, and their time when to be celebrated, not answeareing to the jews, and for denial of which the quartadeciman Heresy was condemned, and others are thus allowed by these Protestants to be true traditions, or so esteemed in the primitive Church by their testimony: Therefore they ought to have allowance for true and indubitate Traditions. The Mayor is evident, for against Protestants no better testimony can be, then from themselves, and they have granted before, that the primitive Church is a true Rule in Religion, and to be followed of us.  
Now to prove the Minor I must ci●e these Protestants, and if any of them in the judgement of some others in their Religion speak not always to their likeinge, or unproperly as they think, let them try this combat with themselves, it belongeth not to me in this treatise, First D. Covell and others teach, That the sign of the cross is 
Covell ag. Burg. pag. 139. 124. 125. confer.  an apostolickall constitution and tradition. And the Protestants against Puritan do not defend it by scripture. The same D. Covell from the 
Covell ag. Burg. pag. 122.  ancient Fathers tell us: That the mixture of water with wine, is an apostolical tradition. And as a general Council is of highest judgement, by these men before, so D. Willet writeth 
Willet Antilog. pag. 169.  thus: the Greeks' in a general Council held at nice, confirmed and allowed the adoration of Imadges, and it taught that Reverence of Imadges is an Apostolical tradition. M. Middleton hath 
Concil. Nyc. 2. Middleton pap. pag. 64. 45. 46. 51.  thus testified: S. Chrisostome taught it to be the Apostles ordinance to pray for the dead, and confesseth it was a tradition in the primitive Church, received from the Fathers, to pray for the dead, and beg mercy of God for them. The dead were prayed for in the public liturgies (or Masses) of Basile, Chrisostome and ●piphanius. The Greek 
Gennad. Scholar def. 5. c. 3.  Church so allowed by Protestants as before testifieth thus: The doctrine of Purgatory, prayer and sacrifice for the dead was a Tradition of the Apostles. M. Perkins, Ormerod, and others assure us, 
Perk. probl. pag. 93. Ormer. pict. pag. ●7 Morton Apol. part. 1. pag. 227. 228. Middleton pap. pag. 134. Willet Antilog. pag. 13.  the ancient Fathers taught prayer to Saints: and D. Morton allegeth: how all antiquity taught Invocation of Saints. Then seeing Protestant's will not allow it by scripture, they must grant it by Tradition. M. Middleton telleth us: that the ancient Fathers so receaveinge it, from them that went before them, taught; that vows of chastity, and single life in Priests, is to be observed by tradition. D. Willet granteth, that Vigiluntius was condemned for an Heretic, for denial of reverence to Relics: Then by tradition in the judgement of Protestants, for they teach, that it is not contained in scripture. His Majesty and the Protestant conference tell us with 
Confer. pag. 13.  the Fathers, and Apostolic Churches, that the particular and personal absolution from sin, after confession, is apostolical and a very godly ordinance. And yet other Protestants there affirm, that neither that nor others following are contained in scriptures. D. Bilson Protestant Bishop of Winchester with consent 
Confer. pag. 18.  of Antiquity teacheth: That baptism to be ministered by private persons, in time of necessity is an holy tradition. His Majesty, and the said: Conference teach, that Bishops be divine ordinations: 
Confer. pag 35. 36.  and confirmation is an apostolical tradition. How it ought by these men to be received 
Pag. 10. 11.  for a sacrament, shall be proved among other Sacraments hereafter. M. Wotton writeth, 
Wotton def. of Perk. pag 465. 4●6.  that S. Basile did hold: that the very profession of our faith, by which we believe in the Father, the Son and the holy Ghost, is a tradition. D. Covell wittnesseth thus: that it was an 
Covell ag. the plea. of the Innoc. pag. 104. Barlowe Ser. Sept. 21. An. 1607. part. 3. cap. 2.  apostolical tradition, or ordination, to ordain Archibishop● in their provinces: as Bishops also in their diocese to rule the Church. And yet many English Protestants to be cited hereafter deny such things either directly or consequently to be contained in scriptures, and yet (as before) do make true discipline, and Regiment, so essential a thing in Religion, that in their doctrine it is a note of the true Church. The Protestant Puritan utterly deny also, that Christ's▪ descent into Hell can be proved out of scripture: yet their Protestant Bishop of Winchester D. Bilson 
Bilson suru. pag. 664.  affirmeth: That the Article of Christ● descent to hell, and the Creed wherein it is contained is an Apostolical tradition, delivered to the Church, by the direction and agreement of the Apostles. To which D. Feild hath also given testimony before: 
Field pag. 238. 239.  And affirmeth the same of other particulars, remembered in the Minor proposition; among which, that doctrine of baptizing infants is denied by many of his English Protestant Church, either to be contained, or to be proved by scripture: yet D. Feild 
Field pag. 239.  writeth thus: Baptism of Infants is named a tradition, because it is not expressly delivered in scripture, that the Apostles did Baptize Infants, nor any express precept there found, that they should so do. Then if we should grant more authority, and give greater credit to this Doctor, that in his judgement against his fellow Protestant's before, he could probably deduce this doctrine from scripture, which they deny, yet it is but his private deduction and Interpretation, and perhaps some few others, which as before by his grant bindeth us not to receive it, as the doctrine of baptizing infants doth. Of the perpetual virginity of our blessed Lady, to be a tradition, I have entreated before. And Doctor Feild addeth thus: The fift kind of traditions 
Feild supr. 239.  comprehendeth such observations, as in particular are not commanded in scripture, nor the necessity of them from thence concludeth. Of this fort many think the observation of the Lent fast to be, the fast of the fourth and the sixth days of the week, and some other. The custom of standeing at prayer on the Lord's day, and between Easter and Whitsuntide, was generally received as delivered by Apostolic tradition, and when some began to break it, it was confirmed by the Council of nice. And if 
Council Nic. can. 20.  to stand at prayers, at such times of the Lords day, Easter, and Whitsuntide was generally received as a Tradition delivered by the Apostles, than the times themselves, not being either commanded, or directly exemplified in scripture, must also be allowed by tradition. And yet the Sabbath day in the old law, which was abrogated by this tradition of the Sunday, the Lords day (as he nameth it) was so expressly commanded by scripture, that in order it is the third of the ten chief commandments, and one of the first table belongeing to the worship of God. Therefore a Tradition so powerable, as to give a ceaseinge, to the express written word, law, and commandment, of God, must needs be of equal power. And the Christians feast of Easter, likewise crosseing with, and evacuateing the Pascha, of the law written, and without scripture, only by the prerogative of Tradition, cannot be inferior, especially seeing (as before) the Quartadec●mans, deniers thereof were condemned as Heretics by the primitive Church for that cause. And the like reason is of the feast of Whitesontide, in the Church of Christ received by the same Rule of Easter, only by unwritten tradition, yet clearly abolisheinge and takeinge away the written law, and word of God in that behalf.  
Further I argue thus: whatsoever is not a perfect, and complete Rule, and Square in matters, and questions of Religion, without the help, and direction of unwritten traditions, cannot be termed an absolute Rule in this kind: But the scripture, and written word of God, by these Protestants is such: Therefore by them no absolute and perfect Rule in matters of faith. The Mayor is evidently true, in the light of nature: otherwise, one and the same thing, in the same respect might be absolute, and not absolute, perfect and not perfect, and two Contradictories might be true, which is unpossible. The Minor proposition is thus proved by D. Field, who speakeing of traditions 
Field l. 4. cap. 20. pag. 239.  unwritten, and yet allowed by him, hath these words: The third kind of tradition is that form of Christian doctrine, and explication of the several parts thereof, which the first Christians receiving of the same Apostles, that delivered to them the scriptures, commended to posterities. This may rightly be named a tradition, for that we need a plain and distinct explication of many things, which are somewhat obscurely contained in the scripture: Which is sufficient proof, that tradition unwritten is the cause, why many things are believed by faith ground upon tradition not written, which the scriptures could never warrant us to believe. For things obscurely handled, and not plainly and distinctly explicated, which (as he saith) is by tradition, cannot be the formal object of faith, by any possibility; for seeing true, certain, and undoubted Revelation from God, even by Protestants, is the formal cause of beleeveinge, things obscurely contained, or taught, cannot have this privilege: And yet by D. Fields words, many things be in this state, without the assistance of tradition, and yet firmly to be believed: Therefore not the obscurity in scripture, but (to use his words) a plain and distinet explication of many things by tradition, received by the first Christians, from the Apostles, commended to posterities, is the formal cause, and reason of beleeveinge such verities.  
Now to draw to an end in this question of traditions, D. Feild to his four before acknowledged kinds of traditions, The holy scriptures, the Creed of the Apostles, the form 
Field pag. 238. l. 4.  of Christian doctrine. and explication of the several parts thereof which the first Christians receaveinge of the same Apostles, that delivered to them the scriptures, commended to posterities, and the continued 
Field pag. 239.  practice of such things as neither are contained in the scripture expressly, nor the example of such practice expressly there delivered, though the grounds, reasons and causes of the necessity of such practice, be there contained, and the benefit, or good that followeth of it: he addeth the fift kind in these words: The fift kind of traditions comprehendeth 
Feild supr. pag. 239.  such observations, as in particular are not commanded in scripture, nor the necessity of them from thence concluded, though in general, without limitation of times, and other circumstances, such things be there commanded. Of this sort many think the observation of the lent fast to be, the fast of the fourth and the sixth days of the week, and some other. This supposed as also the 
Field pag. 242.  same Protestant Doctors Rules before, to know true traditions, the consent and doctrine of the Church, the most renowned for learning, the constant Testimony of the pastors of an Apostolic Church, among which next to general 
Field pag. 202.  councils binding and commanding all, the Church of Rome is especially to be obeyed, reverenced and respected, as most privileged from error: it must needs be evident by these Protestants, that Traditions whether delivered in scripture, to be deduced from them, or to be received without scripture, are to be adjudged for the Roman Church: for that before is proved by them to be the true Church of Christ, the Pope of Rome to be the supreme, commanding Ruler in it, that the scriptures received by it, are Canonical, and the undowbted word of God, and all true, and juridical expositions, and deductions from them are only for the doctrine of the same Church of Rome: And so their other grounted Rules of general councils, and Learned Fathers, to be handled in the next chapters, do also teach unto us, the same doctrines, by these Protestants; for by their judgement they may not, nor can proceed in such business, but by the holy scriptures, and true expositions, and deductions from them, already proved by these Protestants for the present Roman Church: Therefore I conclude this question with this Arguments following.  
Whatsoever doctrines in Religion, general councils, the highest binding and commanding Rule and authority over all Christians, in the judgement of Protestants, have defined by the Bishops, and Fathers assembled in them, in matters of Religion, by traditions, written or unwritten, are to be received and embraced of all: But all, or the chiefest Articles in question, between Catholics, and Protestants are directly concluded by the grounte of these Protestants, by the councils, and Bishops, in them assembled, at nice the second, the great Laterane, Florence and Constance, Basile, cited and allowed for general councils by the Protestant Bishop of Winchester, D. Bilson, D. Willet, D. Covell▪ M. 
Bills. Middlet. papist. ●9. 119. 120. 124. 125. Willet synop. count 1. q. 7. Liniban. ap.  parks and others, in such manner as the present Church of Rome now teacheth: Therefore they ought so to be received, and embraced of all Christians, both propositions are granted before, by these Protestants, or in these citations. Therefore nothing remaineth to be proved in this Argument. And because these Protestants 
parks pag. 137. 180. Covell def. of Hook. pag. 21. Parks ag. lymb. pag. 176. Willet Antil. pag. 178. etc. Abbot ag. Hill pag 38. 48. 49. 51.  teach that those doctrines are not contained in, or to be proved by scriptures, consequently they defined them by unwritten traditions, of equal authority with scripture by D. Feild before, being so adjudged, allowed, and approved by that highest commanding sentence in the Church of Christ. But of general councils I am to entreat in the next chapter. In the mean time I urdge only this one particular of the highest authority, and government in the Church by tradition, as these Protestants assure us and I argue thus.  
Whosoever defend, and teach that which they think to be the highest authority and function spiritual in the Church, without which the word of God cannot be truel● preached, nor Sacraments duly ministered, the essential things of the true Church, by the Protestants Religion, to be an unwritten Tradition: needs must allow of unwritten traditions, necessary to salvation: But these English Protestant's case is such: Therefore they must allow unwritten traditions, necessary to salvation. The Mayor proposition is evidently true: and the Minor thus proved by them. The Protestant Author of the offer of conference 
Offer of confer. pag. 12.  writeth thus: The Bishop of Rochester with the consent and by the direction (no doubt) of some of the chiefest Prelates hath published his sermon preached before the King at Hampton Court, the main drift whereof is to prove, that the office and c●lling of Bishops is a divine, and Apostolical ordinance. And again in these words: unwritten ordinances, 
Pag. 34. sup.  aswell as written or divine and Apostolic, in the constitution of the chiefest office, and ministry of the Church. D. Covell hath testified the same for himself before: and their Bishop Barlowe 
Barlowe Ser. Sept. 21. 1606. before the King.  his words before the King, and with public applause are these of this matter: First posuit actu he acted it by the hands of the Apostles, and so the Episcopal function is an ordinance Apostolical he hath enacted it for succeeding posterity, and so it is a canon, or constitution of the whole Trinity. It is Geographia agraphos, unwritten husbandry▪ whereof there is no written precept or Rule from Christ. Irenaeus calleth it an Apostolical tradition, manifest to all the world.  
To these let us add some Protestant testimonies, how from the first creation of the world, all Articles of Religion, for many hundreds of years, and afterward many chief and necessary points thereof, were taught, and delivered by tradition without scripture. And I will only cite their late work, History of the world, much commended 
Histor. of the world lib. 1. pag. 180.  and approved among them. Of the practice and delivery of Religion thus they writ: That the Rule in general was paternal, it is most evident: for Adam being Lord. Over his own children, instructed them in the service of God, his Creator: as we read, Cain and Abel brought oblations before God, as they had been taught by their parent, the Father of mankind. Their sixth treatise or Paragrah in that first book is 
Lib. 1 §. 6. pag. 78.  thus entitled: of the patriarchs delivering their knowledge by tradition. And writ in these words: if we consider the curiosity and policy of elder ages, we shall find, that knowledge was the greatest treasure, that men sought for, and which they also covered, and hid from the vulgar sort, as jewels of inestimable price, feareing the irreverent construction of the Ignorant, and irreligious: so as whatsoever was attained unto, concerning God, and his workeinge in nature, the same was not left to public dispute, but delivered over by heart, and tradition, from wise men, to posterity, equally zealous, ex animo in animum sine literis medio intercedente 
Dion. Areop.  verbo, from mind to mind without letters by way of Tradition or word of mouth. And it was thought by Esdras, Origen, and Hilarius (as Mirandula conceiveth) that Moses did not only upon the mount receive the law from God, but withal secretiorem & veram legis enarrationem, a more secret and true explanation of the law, which saith he, out of the same Authors, he delivered by mouth to josuah, and josuah to the Elders: for to teach these mysteries, which he called, secretiora, to the rude multitude, were no other, quam dare sanctum canibus, to cast pearls before swine. In succeeding times this understanding, and wisdom, began to be written in Ciphers, and Characters, and letters, bearing the form of beasts, birds, and other creatures: and to be taught only to such, as served in their temples, and to their Kings, and priests. Of the first the Cabala of the jews was 
Pag. 79.  an imitation: This Cabala importeth a law received by Tradition, and unwritten. Cabala in Hebrew is Receptio in Latin, and a receiving in English. If then such as would seem wisest in the use of reason, will not acknowledge, that the story of the creation, or beginning of all things, was written by Inspiration, the holy Ghost guiding the hand of Moses: yet it is manifest, that th● knowledge thereof might by tradition (then used) be delivered unto him, by a more certain presumption, than any or all the testimonies which profane antiquity had preserved, and left to their successors. For leaving to remember, that Adam instructed Seth, and Seth his children, and Successors, which cannot be doubted of, it is manifest that Mathusalem lived together with Adam himself, 243 years, and Noah with Mathusalem no less than 500 years; and before Noah died, Abraham was 58. years old: from whence this knowledge by an easy and ordinary way might come to Israel, and so to Moses. And to clear all doubts, and objections these Protestants prove unto us. That the very binding, and obligatory precepts of God themselves, were thus delivered, and observed, only by unwritten traditions. They entitle the 8. §. of their second book 
Histor. sup. libr. 2. cap. 4. §. 4.  in this manner: Of the unwritten law of God, given to the patriarchs by tradition. And thus they add: The patriarchs of the first age received many precepts from God himself and whatsoever was first imposed by Adam, the same was observed by Seth, who instructed Enos: from whom it succeeded to Noah Sem, Abraham, Isaac, jacob, joseph, and Moses. Yea many particular commandments afterward written, were formerly imposed and delivered over by tradition, which kind of teacheinge the jews afterward called Cabala precept received from the mouth of their priests and Elders: to which the jews after the law written, added the Interpretation of secret mysteries, reserved in the bosoms of their priests, and unlawful to be uttered to the people. But the true Cabala was not to be concealed from any: as being in deed the divine law revealed to the patriarchs, and from them delivered to posterity, when as yet it was unwritten.  
And entreating how after letters and writing was invented, and many revealed mysteries so recorded, yet men must still maintain traditions unwritten, and instruction from them, they exemplify in this order out of S. Jude his Epistle, josephus, 
Pag. 79. 80.  Origen, Tertullian, S. Augustine, Beda, Procopius, Gazaeus and others, that Enoch did write di●ine things. And thus they add: it is probable that Noah had seen, and might preserve this book. For it is not likely that so exquisite knowledge as these men had was suddenly invented, and found out. And entreating how the book of the battles 
Pag. 306. cap. 5. §. 7.  with others of holy scriptures had been lost thus they writ: it seemeth probable, that such a book as this there was: and that the same should now be wanting, it is not strange, seeing so many other volumes, filled with divine discourse, have perished in the long race of time, or have been destroyed by the ignorant and malicious heathen Magistrate. For the books of Henoch, howsoever they have been in later ages corrupted, and therefore now suspected, are remembered in an Epistle of Thaddaeus, and cited by Origen, and by Tertullian. That work also of the Patriarch Abraham, of formation, which others bestow on Rabbi Achiba, is no where found. The books remembered by josua c. 10. v. 13. and in the second of Samuel c. 1. v. 18. called the book of jasher, or justorum, is also lost. The book of Chozai concerning Manasse, remembered in the second of Chron. 33. v. 18. and 19 of this book also lost Hierome conceives that the Prophet Isay was the author. The same mischance came aswell to the story of Solomon, written by Ahia Silonites; as to the books of Nathan the Prophet, and to those of jeedo the Seer, remembered in the second of Chron. c. 9 v. 29. with these have the books of Shemaiah, and of Iddo remembered in the second of Chron. c. 12. v. 15. perished: and that of john the son of Hanain, cited in the second of Chron. c. 20. v. 34. also that of salomon's, which the Hebrues writ Hiscirim, of 5000 verses, of which that part called Canticum Canticorum, only remaineth 1. Kings 4. 32. and with this divers other of salomon's works have perished, as his book of the natures of trees, plants, beasts, fishes etc. 1. Kings 4. 33. with the rest, remembered by Origen, josephus, Hierome, Cedrenus, Ciccus Aesculanus, Picus Mirandula, and others. Of 
Pag. 307.  these and other books many were consumed with the same fire, wherewith Nebuchadnessar burned the temple of Jerusalem. Hitherto this Protestant discourse, of the necessity of unwritten traditions, not only before the scriptures were written, but after, so many books of holy scriptures dictated by the holy Ghost, having utterly perished. Except we will say (which God forbidden) that God revealed, and published in holy scriptures, so many needles, and fruitless things: or else so many necessary and divine Revelations have altogether been lost, and concealed from those that should believe, and keep them.   

CHAPTER VIII. WHERE THE HIGHEST, supreme, judicial, definitive authority, of general councils, is both proved to be such, by these Protestants: To bind all Christians in matters of Religion, to approve the doctrine of the Church of Rome, and condemn protestancy.  
THE next Question is concerning general councils: of what authority, and command they are, in controversies of Religion; and whether the Doctrine of the present Church of Rome, or that of English Protestants, is proved, and confirmed by them, in the sentence of these Protestants themselves. Toucheinge their power, and commanding authority, in these causes, I argue thus.  
Whatsoever in controversies of Religion, is the highest judge, the only remedy, to redress errors, hath sovereign authority, is above others, to be appealed unto, hath authority to interpret scriptures, and to suppress all them, that gainsay such interpretation, and subject every man disobeyeing such determinations, to excommunication, and Censures of like Nature, and above all other judgements is most to be reverenced, and respected, in the opinion of Protestants, must also by them, be allowed for the supreme, highest, and last, not to be appealed from, judgement in this world, in such questions: But by the testimony of these English Protestants, a general Council is of these pre-eminences, in these matters: Therefore by them, the supreme, most binding, uncontroleable, and judgement not to be appealed from, or denied by any. The Mayor proposition is evidently true: for that which is supreme, and highest, cannot be Inferior unto any: neither that which hath command, and authority over all, can possibly be under the controlment, and correction of any, none being left to be superior unto it. The Minor is proved by these 
Bilson Suru. pag. 82. Morton part. 2. Apol. pag. 340. l. 4. cap. 18. Relat. cap. 47.  Protestants following. The Protestant Bishop of Winchester D. Bilson hath these words: The authority of general councils, is most wholesome in the Church, and he citeth S. Augustine to that purpose. D. Morton writeth thus: Concilium publicum est summus judex: a general Council is highest judge. The Protestant Relator of Religion nameth it the only remedy in such times of controversies. D. Sutcliffe hath 
Sutcliffe subu. pag. 119. Sutcl. ag. D. Kell. pag. 41. 42. 102.  these words: general councils have sovereign authority in external government. And thus again: False it is that we will admit no judge, but scriptures, for we appeal still to a lawful general Council. We hold all the Christian faith explained in the six general councils. D. Feild hath written thus: Bishops assembled in a general 
Field pag. 228.  Council have authority to Interpret scriptures, and by their authority, to suppress all them, that gainsay such Interpretation, and subject every man that shall disobey such determinations, as they consent upon, to excommunication, and censures of like nature. And 
Field l. 4. cap. 5. pag. 202.  (as before is cited) alloweth this sentence: We must reverence and respect, the authority of all Catholic Doctors, whose doctrine and writings the Church alloweth: we must more regard the authority of Catholic Bishops: more than these, the authority of the Apostolic Churches: amongst them more especially the Church of Rome: of a general Council, more than all these.  
Now, to prove that general councils thus allowed by these Protestants, for the highest, and irrevocable judgement, cannot by their own doctrine, prove their Religion to be true, and so consequently no Inferior authority justify their cause, I argue in this manner: whosoever by public decree, and constitution, do condemn general Councelle, of error, and to be a fallible, and deceitful Rule, in Matters of Religion, and have no other means to find the truth, cannot pretend their Religion to be infallibly true, as matters of faith and revealed of God are, by such testimonies: But the English Protestants are in this condition, concerning general councils: Therefore their Religion neither is, nor can by their own proceed, be warranted and proved by them to be true. The Mayor proposition is evident: for no judgement erroneous, and fallible, can possibly make any matter, or question free from error, and infallible: otherwise a thing might be effected and caused without a cause. The Minor proposition is manifestly proved by these Protestants, in this order: for they have before condemned all other Rules, which they have, of error, as their parliament, King's Censure, and all private Interpretations, and made them subject, and controleable by general councils, as having authority over all parsons: D. Fields words of allowance after he had with others granted general councils to be supreme, binding, and commanding all be these: We must obey without scrupulous questioning, with all modesty of 
Field pag. 202.  mind, and reverence of body, with all good allowance, acceptation and repose in the words of them that teach us, unless they teach us any thing, which the authority of the higher and superior controlleth. Immediately before he had allowed the supreme and highest judgement to general councils, and the next to the Pope, and Church of Rome. Than Protestants teacheing contrary to superior, and higher authority in the Pope, are to be condemned by him. But notwithstanding all this to make their cause desolate, and demonstrate, that their Religion hath no warrant of truth, and Infallibility, at all, Thus they writ of this highest Rule of general councils, even in their public Articles of Religion: 
Articles of Relig. art. 21.  general councils may err, and sometime have erred even in things pertaining unto God. Wherefore things ordained by them, as necessary to salvation, have neither strength, nor authority, unless it may be declared, that they be taken out of holy scripture. Therefore how truly, or certainly soever general councils make decrees, and definitions in matters of faith, they give no validity to Protestant Religion, if in themselves they should approve it, for by their cited Article, their ordination hath neither strength, nor authority, as it is the decree of the general councils, but as it may be declared, by a private Protestant writer, Prince, Parliament, or Convocation, in their conceit to be taken out of scripture, and yet before they have told us, a general Council commandeth all, all must submit themselves unto it, and all other their Rules be erroneous, and deceitful. Therefore by these Protestants neither general Council, nor any other Rule, assigned by them, can by any possibility, prove their Religion true.  
Further I argue thus: No society, people, or professors of Religion, which by their own confession, neither have, nor by their proceed can hereafter have, or have heretofore had, any general Council, or means to assemble, and call it, can in reason pretend it for their cause: But the state of Protestants by their own confession is such: Therefore general councils cannot be pretended for them. The Mayor proposition is evidently true: for esse and being must needs in all things, go before operari, and workeinge by them For as by nature nothing can be made of nothing, so that which wanteth being, and is not, can produce nothing. The Minor proposition is likewise manifestly true, for never any Protestant, nor altogether, so much as claim authority, or jurisdiction, in this matter, none among them pretending it further, than their own particular temporal dominions, which all united together (never like to be) are far to short, and unequal, to make a Council general, which they say excludeth none, especially of the great patriarchs of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria and Antioch, not one of them being for them, but all with their whole precincts, limits, subjects, and ditions against them, by their own confession. To this I add the Censure of their own Protestant Relator, in these words: The Protestants 
Relation of Religion cap. 47.  are severed bands, or rather scattered troops, each drawing divers way, without any means to pacific their quarrels, to take up their controversies. No Prince with any pre-eminence of jurisdiction, above the rest: no Patriarch one or more, to have a Common superintendance of care of their Churches, for correspondency and unity: no ordinary way to assemble a general Council of their part, the only hope remaining ever to assuage their contentions. And yet if they could have means for such a meeteing of Protestants, so few in number, and weak in jurisdiction, by their own grant, in regard of Catholics, and other Christian Kingdoms, and provinces, different to them in Religion, this would be far from the least show, and name of an universal, and general Council, such as they allow, to judge, and sentence in this business. Neither can these men now deny the necessity of general councils, having so much allowed them for supreme sentencer before, and appealed to a general Council to be assembled. Neither may they compare their so desolate estate with the primitive Church of the first three hundred years: for themselves have granted before, that a supreme, and commanding binding power over all, was not only claimed, but lawfully and iuridically exercised, and executed by the Popes of Rome in those times, in all parts of the Christian world: and both power, and authority to approve, and reprove councils, was belongeing unto them by publicly received Canon in those days. And hereupon I argue in this manner, that general councils are for the doctrine of the Church of Rome. Whatsoever Church in the primitive time of Christianity, was endowed with such privileges, that every thing was void, that was done without the consent of the Bishop, and Ruler of it, and no Council could be called, without his allowance, and at this present, hath by the grant of Protestants, a common Father, adviser, and conductor, to end jars, displeasures, differences, to keep Religion in unity by councils, when no other Church enjoyeth these immunities, must needs in all reason be said to be warranted and defended by general councils: But the Church of Rome is by the grant of Protestants in this Condition: Therefore warranted, and defended by general councils▪ The first proposition is evidently true: for he that from the beginning, had these prerogatives, to approve, or disprove, Confirm, or invalidate councils, cannot be conceived to have ratified, or confirmed any thing, against the immunities, and Common received doctrine of that Church, so exalted, dignified, and privileged above all others of the whole Christian world, and against his own supreme, and eminent Authority.  
The Minor proposition is thus proved: first D. Covell showeth, that an hundred years before the Nycene Council in the year of our Lord 2●5 when there was no Emperor Christian, to call councils, as Protestants would persuade the world, they did, and should; the Pope of Rome had this prerogative to call councils: Therefore from the beginning by pre-eminence of his See, seeing there had not been either general Council or Emperor to give it unto him. His words be these: The synod of Rome called 
Covell ag. the plea of the Innoc. pag. 110.  by Cornelius (Pope of Rome) against Nonatus, consisted of threescore Bishops and many others of the clergy. Where we see Heresy condemned, and ●● that scarcity of Bishops in those first days of Christianity, so great in Council assembled by the Pope's authority. Wherefore the Protestant Bishop of Winchester D. Bilson D. ●orton his late appeal, with others of his Protestants, grant these propositions: 
Bilson true diff. pag. 66. 67. Morton Appeal pag. 286.  The Canon of the primatife Church made every thing void, that was done without the Bishop of Rome. And again: The Canon of the primitive Church forbade any Council to be called, without his consent. Which being only peculiar to him, and his See Apostolic, and from the beginning, must prove a singular pre-eminence in him; and a power supreme in deciding Matters, and doubts of faith. Therefore M. Ormerod wittnesseth, that S. ●eo, 
Ormer. pict pa. pag. 44. Orm. sup. pag. 78.  that glorious Saint, and Doctor, taught that God did assist, and direct that See, in decrees. And further he wittnesseth, in these words: To prove that the Church of Rome hath the pre-eminence over all Churches, Anacle●us (living in the Apostles time, and Pope of Rome) allegeth Matth. 16. vers. 18. upon this rock will I build my Church: and he expoundeth it thus super hanc Petram (id est) super Ecolesiam Romanam, upon this rock: that is upon the Church of Rome, will I build my Church. This of the testimony of that Apostolic Pope, Saint, and Martyr And D. Downame granted, that 
Downame lib. ●. An●●chr. pag. 105.  S. Augustine that renowned Doctor, and Victor Vticensis were of opinion, that to adhere to the Church of Rome, was a Mark of a true Catholic, in those times. And telleth us further, of a 
Pag. 107. sup.  Bishop fallen into Heresy, and after recanting it, in this order: He sweareth to renounce his former Heresies, and to profess, and maintain that faith and Religion, which the Bishop, and Church of Rome did profess. All which proceed of so great consequence, and pre-eminency, testified by enemies themselves, could never have been exercised by that Apostolic See, with so great approbation of Saints, and Doctors, in the primitive Church, and best estate thereof, except supreme authority even in councils themselves, as those Canons testify, and peculiar assistance as S. Leo taught to be freed from error in decrees, and consequently not to be condemned by general councils, whom it was to confirm or reprove, had been granted by Christ unto it. Then this privilege and prerogative of that Church Apostolic, being thus both supreme, and perpetual, it may not now without Irreligious Injustice, be denied unto it. And therefore the Protestant Relator of Religion, having, as before, excluded his fellow Protestant's from all hope of comfort, and relief by general Council, addeth immediately of Catholics in 
Relation cap. 47. sup.  these words: The other have the Pope as a Commom Father, Adviser, and Conductor to all, to reconcile their jars, to appease their displeasures, to decide their difference, above all things to draw their Religion by Consent of councils, unity. And that this jurisdiction of the See of Rome, is not only over the Catholic and truly believing members of the Roman Church, but of right belongeth unto it, over all Christians in the world is proved before by these Protestants themselves. 
Cap. 3. sup.   
Further I argue thus: whatsoever councils define, or confirm the doctrine of the Roman Church, and condemn Protestant opinions, defended against it, are to be said to prove the Religion of Catholics: But divers councils both allowed by Protestants for general, and others in the primitive Church and confirmed even in the judgement of Protestants, are such: Therefore the Religion of the Roman Church is proved by them. The Mayor proposition is evidently true. And the Minor thus is proved first concerning the first general Council of Nice, D. Covell 
Covell ag. Burg. pag. 87.  hath told us before from S. Hierome, that it received more books for scripture then Protestants allow. M. Middleton saith, it 
Middlet. papistan. pag. 39  taught the dignity of Rome over the West provinces, (at the least) and this by old custom. How much more ample this custom was, is proved before: and himself sufficiently insinuateth, speaking in this manner. Papias 
Pag. 200. sup.  (living in the Apostles time) taught Peter's primacy, and Romish episcopalitie. And D. Downame denieth not, but the great general 
Down. l. 1. Antich. pag. 36.  Council of Chalcedon attributed to the Pope of Rome to be head of the Church. Which he saith is the greatest style. D. Field before hath wittnessed, that the third Council of Carthage confirmed 
Feild sup.  in the sixth general Council, and wherein S. Augustine was present, receiveth canonical scriptures, as the Church of Rome now doth. D. Willet perceiving 
Will●t Antil pag. 88 89.  the primitive councils to be so clear for the Church of Rome, that he could not gloss them, with any resemblance or colour of truth, calleth the ancient confirmed councils of Neocesarea, and Toletane the first, and the sixth general Council before expressly allowed by D. Sutcliffe, the papal Church, popery, doctrine in popery. And of the seventh general Council he writeth thus: The Greeks' in a 
Willet sup. pag. 178. Middlet. papist. pag. 193.  general Council held at Nice, confirmed and allowed the adoration of Images. M. Middleton speaketh in this manner: peruseing councils, Fathers, and stories from the Apostles, forward we find the print of the Pope's feet. So that it is evident by them, that from the very beginning, the doctrine of the Church of Rome as occasion was, is allowed both by councils, Fathers, and Histories. And this is the reason why in their Article of Religion 
Artic. 21.  before they have thus defined: general councils may err, and some times have erred, even in things pertaining unto God. Because from time, to time, as cause was given, they have defined the truth of the doctrine of the Roman Church, against them. And because, I may not in this breviate repeat many particulars, briefly I argue thus.  
divers councils, allowed by these Protestants for general councils, have confirmed, and allowed all, or the chiefest doctrines, which the Roman Church now teacheath against Protestants, and condemned the contrary held by them, even by their own testimony: Therefore by their own judgement they are for the Roman Church, and not for them. The consequence is evident, and the Antecedent is thus proved by them. The Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury writeth thus: The Council of Constance was a general Council. 
D. Abbot ag. D. Kill. pag. 38. 48. 49. 51. Bilson Willet apud parks pag. 137. 180.  So their Protestant Bishop D. Bilson, and affirmeth the same of the Council of Basile. So doth Doctor Willet, and granteth the same of the Council of Florence. And yet it is evident to all the world, that in these councils the complete body of their Protestant Religion, was condemned, in their predecessors, john Wickliff, john Husse, and Hierome of prague; and the quite contrary in all things, decreed, and concluded for the Church of Rome. For further confirmation whereof, the Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury hath these words: the Council of 
D. G●orge Abbot sup. pag. 48. & 52.  Constance (before by him and others general) did define Wickliff to be an Heretic. Also Pope john the 23 in a general Council at Rome did condemn him for an Heretic. Then by this grant, The protestancy of England, being the same (as these Protestants tell us) which was taught be john Wickliff, and by these councils (general by their own assertions) condemned for Heresy, must needs be Heresy: And the contrary doctrine of the Church of Rome, orthodoxal, and Catholic; otherwise no doctrine ever at any time was or can be hereafter lawfully condemned for Heresy, or iuridically approved, and allowed for true and Catholic. For by their own Censure, the highest judgement in the Church, general councils have thus defined, and by their doctrine before of the power of general councils bound all Christians, under penalty of eternal damnation, so to believe in these questions. And although the general councils of the primitive Church were assembled about other Heresies, The Catholic doctrine of these points now impugned by Protestants, then generally received, and not doubted of, as will manifestly appear in the Chapter of Holy Fathers and Doctors of the primitive Church: yet because the first four general councils are by name received and authorized by Parliament, both by Queen Elizabeth, and our 
Statut. 1. Eliz. & 1. jacob. etc. Sutcliffe ag. D. Kell. pag. 102.  present Sovereign: And D. Sutcliffe for Protestants hath answered thus before: we hold all the Christian faith explained in the six general councils. Then seeing the first six have got this great papal approbation: first concerning the first general Council of Nice, all though Vitus and Vincentius were precedents there for the Pope of Rome, yet it was further confirmed by that Apostolic 
Conc. Rom. tom. 1. council.  See in these words: Whatsoever is constituted in nice of Bithynia to the strength of our holy Mother the Catholic Church by 318 Priests we confirm with our mouth. We anathematize all them that shall dare to dissolve the definition of the holy, and great Council, gathered together at nice. The third Canon of that holy Council 
Conc. 1. Nicen. can. 3.  defineth thus: Omnibus modis Interdixit sancta Synodus etc. The holy Council hath wholly forbidden, that it shall be lawful neither for Bishop, Priest, nor 
Protest. Book of making and Order. Bish. Priests etc. An 3. Edw. 6. 1. El. & 1. jacob. & can▪ jacob. can. 7. can. 8. Socr. 1. c. 8. Sozom.  Deacon, nor any other of the Clergy, to have with him any strange woman, except perhaps mother, or Sister or Grandmother, etc. Where there be more Orders of the Clergy, than Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, only allowed with them, and none of these to have any other woman, or wife, but to live in chastity. Their Answer that Paphnutius persuaded the Council, that wives married before orders might be kept, out of Socrates and Sozomen is directly against the words of the Council 
l. 1. c. 22. Epip. in Compend. Basil. epist. 17. in addit. Hier. in vigilant. epist. 50. ad Pammach. cone. Carthag. 2. can. 2. council 6. generca. 2. in Trull.  before cited, against S. Epiphanius that glorious Saint, and Father of the Greek Church, S. Basile also S. Hierome etc. the second Carthaginian Council confirmed in the sixth general Council allowed by D. Sutcliffe defineing thus: Apostoli docuerunt & ipsa seruavit antiquitas etc. The Apostles taught and antiquity itself observed: that Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, and those that handle Sacraments, should be keepers of Chastity, and abstain from wives. And yet these Protestants utterly deny the opinion of Paphnutius himself, as they themselves cite him, for they Mary after Orders, which they confess both Paphnutius, and the first Nicen Council denied to be lawful, together with Socrates Sozomenus, and all Greek authority, and practice. In the fourteenth Canon of that first general Council, the sacrifice of Mass, and Christ's real presence in the blessed Sacrament, of the altar are taught in these 
Concil. Nicen. 1. can. 14.  words: This neither the Rule nor custom hath delivered, that they which have not power to offer sacrifice, should give the body of Christ to them that offer it up. The sixth canon delivereth by their 
Concil. 1. Nicen. can. 6.  own Interpretation, that the Pope of Rome is supreme head of the Church of England, and all others in this part of the world: And in truth of the whole 
john Speed in Theatr. pag. ●06. council. Sardicen. can. 3. 4. 7. etc. Theodoret. l 2. hist. c. 8▪ hist. trip. l. 4. c. 24. 2●. 15. 16. Conc. Constantinopol 2. gener. can. 2. Can. 5.  Christian world, as is declared in the great Sardican Council general, and otherwise binding this Kingdom, by our Bishop's presence, and assent there, by our Protestant Theatre, where Appeals be granted to the Pope from any Bishops, or councils themselves. And the second general Council held at Constantinople maketh manifest that the Nicen Council prescribed no limits, to the Pope of Rome, but to other patriarchs: and plainly deciareth, Episcopuin Romanum habere primatum. That the Bishop of Rome is supreme. And by denying this, to have been the decree of the Nicen Council, they prove the Pope's supremacy from the beginning. For Socrates 
Socrates in histor. tripart lib. 4. cap. 9  writing how the Antiochian Council kept within twenty years of that of nice. Was rejected, because not approved by the See of Rome, writeth thus: Cum utique Regula e●clesiastica iubeat, non oportere praeter sententiam Romani pontifi●is Con ilia celebrare. The ecclesiastical Rule commandeth, that councils be not called, without the consent of the Pope of Rome. Therefore their Bishop Bilson writeth thus: The Canon 
Bilson true diff pag. 67 pag. 66. sup.  of the primitive Church forbade any Council to be called without the Bishop of Rome his consent. The canon of the primitive Church made every thing void, that was done without the Bishop of Rome. Then what may we think of the Protestants doings in England, where his Authority 
Nicephor. Calix. histecel in council. Ephes. Prosper in Chron. An. 431.  is so despised? In the third general Council at Ephesus the then Pope of Rome Celestical, constituted Cyrillus Patriarch of Alexandria, to be precedent for him. In the fourth general Council at Caleedon the cause of the Pope's supremacy, is so clear, that D. Downame denieth not, but it attributed 
Downam l. 1. Antichrist. c. 3. pag. 36. council. Chalcedon. sess. 8.  to the Pope of Rome to be head of the Church. In that Council in the 8. session is thus registered: Omnes Episcopi clamaverunt etc. All the Bishops cried out, next unto God, Leo (than Pope of Rome) hath judged. And the Pope himself not being present in that Council, his legates gave sentence against Dioscorus. The words of the Council be these: Et cum 
Concil. Calced. Act. 1. 2. 3.  adhuc in sua permaneret pertinacia etc. And when Dioscorus continued in his obstinacy, Paschasinus Bishop, and with him Lucentius Bishop and Bonifacius Priest holding the place of the most holy and most blessed Archbishopp of the Apostolic See, the elder Rome, Pope Leo pronounced sentence. A Bill 
Conc. Calcod. Act. 3.  was preferred to the Council with this Title: Sanctissimo & beatissimo universali Archiepiscopo etc. To the most holy, and the most blessed universal Archbishop, and Patriarch of great Rome, Leo, and to the venerable Synod of Chalcedon. The 
Concil. calced. Act. 1. ex nou. trans.  Church of Rome is there called, Caput omnium ecclesiarum: The head of all Churches. And granted, if any Council was called without Authority of that See: Nunquam ritè factum est, nec fieri licuit; It was never rightly done, nor lawful to be done. The Council writeth to S. Leo then Pope, to confirm their decrees. 
Concil. Cacled. epistol. ad S. Leon Leo epistol. 53. 54. 55. 59 60. 61.  And he confirmeth them, excepting the precedency of Constaminople before Alexandria, and Antioch. Further in this great general Council of 630. Fathers more Ecclesiastical Orders then Protestants allow are assigned, their marriage disallowed, 
Can. 6. Can. 11. Can. 15. Can. 23.  except lectors. For Monks or sacred virgins to marry is excommunication. Likewise for temporal men to live in, and possess Monasteries, and Religeous houses.  
The fist general Council, held at Constantinople, wholly proceedeth against errors of that time, and handleth nothing now in Controversy, yet both that, the sixth general following, and all others before, are confirmed by Pope Leo the second, in these 
Lee 2. epist. ad Constantin. 4. Imperat. seff. 18. concil. 6.  words. Because, this sixth Council, hath most fully taught the definition of true faith, which the Apostolic See of blessed Peter doth reverently receive, Therefore we also, and by our office this venerable see Apostolic agreeably and with one mind, consenteth unto, the things which by it are defined, and by the authority of S. Peter confirmeth them, as upon a firm Rock etc. And receiving all these six councils by name, and approving them, decreeth, that the Fathers in them assembled, are to be numbered, Inter fanctos Ecclesiae Pairs, atque Doctores, among the holy Fathers, and Doctors of the Church. The same general Council writeth 
Epist. 6. synod. ad Agathon 1. ppam.  to Pope Agatho, in this: We refer unto thee, standing upon a firm rock, as to the Ruler of the chief See, of the universal Church, what is to be done, yielding to the letters of true confession, sent from your fatherly blessedness, which we acknowledge, 
Epist. Agasess. 4. synod 6.  as sent from the highest head, of the Apostles, written by divine instinct, by which we have driven away the lately risen heretical sect of manifold errors etc. In which so much applauded Epistle these words are contained, concerning the See Apostolic of Rome: This is the Rule of true faith, which both in prospiritie, and adversity, the Apostolic Church of Christ hath lively held, which by the grace of God, shall be proved never to have erred, from the path of Apostolic Tradition, neither hath shrouke depraved with Heretical novelties, because it was said to Peter, I have asked for thee, that thy faith sail not, and thou sometime converted, confirm the brothers. Here our Lord hath promised, that the faith of Peter should not fail, and he admonished him to confirm his brethren, which all men know the Apostolic Popes, predecessors of my meanness have always confidently done. And because these Protestants do so freely acknowledge, the Trullan Canons, to be the decrees and Canons of this sixth general Council, allowed by them: first in the second Canon are approved 
Can. 2.  so many provincial councils, and writings of the ancient Fathers, utterly condemning Protestant Religion. In the third Canon is taught, how the custom of the Church of Rome for an unmatryed 
Can. 3.  Clergy is the true observation of the Ecclesiastical Canon therein. And for the Church of Greece itself deposeth Priests, Deacons, and Subdeacons' marrying after Orders. And to show both the Ecclesiastical Orders which Protestants condemn, and disable matrimonies of votaries against these men, thus they decree. If any Bishop, or 
Can. 4.  Priest, or Deacon, or Subdeacon, or Reader, or Cant●r, or Ostiarius shall have company with a womam dedicated to God, let him be deposed, as he that hath violated the spouse of Christ. But if a lay man do it, let him be excommunicate. The manner of the consecrating and receiving 
Concil. Carth. 4. can. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9 10. 11. 12 Concil. 6. gener. supr. can. 2. can. 6.  Bishops, Priests, Deacons, Subdeacons', Acolythite●, Exorcists, Lectors, Ostiariers, Psalmists, nuns, Widows etc. Is contained in the 4. Carthagenean Council, confirmed in this sixth general Council. Their 6. Canon defineth thus: Because it is said in the Canons of the Apostles, of those that be not married, are promoted to the Clergy, only Readers and Singers may marry: we● also observing this decree, that from henceforth is he lawful for no Subdeacon, Deacon or Priest to contract marriage: and if he shall dare to do it, ●et● him be deposed. And concerning Bishops, thus beginneth the 12. Canon. It altogether commandeth, that Bishops after they are Ordered, depart 
Can. 12.  from their wives. They receive, and allow those forms of Masses, that be attributed to S. james the Apostle, and S. Bas●le, 
Can. 32.  and affirm them to be the true Authors of them. The monastical single life, with the 
Can. 39 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. Can. 48.  Rules of Monasteries, are set down in divers Canons. And when a Bishop is chosen that was married, he is separated from his wife, and she put into a Monastery, far from him: Vxor eius monasterium ingrediatur, proculab Episcopi habitatione extructum. They define thus for lent: Visum est 
Can. 56.  etc. It seemeth good that the whole Church of God, which is in all the world, should keep fast following one order and obstayne from eggs and cheese, as from the flesh Creatures etc. Honour to the sign of the cross is thus concluded:  ei p●r quam ab antiquo lapsu saluati sum etc. Seeing the vivificant 
Can. 73.  Cross hath showed unto us, that salvation, we ought to use all diligence to give due honour to that, by which we are saved from our old fale. Whereupon giving adoration unto it, both in mind, in word, and sense, we command that the figures of the Cross, made by some on the ground, and pavement be blotted out, lest that which is the Trophy of Victory unto us, be injured, by the treading of them that go upon it. The use and Reverence of holy Imadges is sufficiently approved, when they call them, Venerabilium Imaginum picturas, 
Can. 82.  The pictures of venerable Imadges, commanding the making, and use of them. In the last Canon they give diligent, and long directions, 
Can. 102.  unto priests, how to behave themselves, in advising and absolving penitents, in the Sacrament of penance. Therefore I may conclude, that Protestants Religion is utterly condemned by general councils both of the primitive Church and latter ages: And consequently by all other judgements, in the Church of Christ: Because these men have told us, that all Bishops, Doctors, and Professors of Religion, are bound to follow the definitions, of general councils.   

CHAPTER IX. WHEREIN IS PROVED BY these Protestants, That the authority of the primitive Fathers, is to be received, and followed in matters of Religion: And how it wholly proveth, the present doctrine of the Church of Rome: utterly condemning all Protestant Religion.  
THE authority, and value of the Testimony, of the ancient Fathers, and that they taught and approved the doctrine of the present Church of Rome, even by the grant of these Protestants is evident in the last Chapter: for being of that opinion in general councils, and public assemblies, and sentences, to which by their own consent, and subscription they submitted, and bound themselves, as to their lawful and commanding Rule, they could not, and might not, teach and write otherwise in private, then in public themselves and others had authoritatively concluded. Yet for a full satisfaction to Protestants in all things, I will briefly entreat of these also, as they wer● private writers: And first of their authority, I argue thus.  
Whoso ever allow in show, and words, among the Ignorant Readers, or hearers of their writings, and sermons, the authority of the ancient, and primitive Fathers, to procure people to believe that their Religion, and doctrine agreeth with them, as men teaching and writing the truth, and to that purpose do yield unto them great respect, and reverence, ought truly and sincerely to believe and embrace their Religion: But these English Protestant writers be such: Therefore they ought and are bound to follow, and embrace their doctrine. The Mayor proposition is evidently true: for as dissimulation, crafty, and double dealeinges, to delude and deceive others, in all things is a vile and abominable sin, against truth, charity, and justice, so in matters of Religion, wherein not the least equivocation of to save a man's life, may be used, it must needs be an offence, most damnable, and devilish. The Minor proposition is thus proved, by these Protestants: Their Protestant Bishop D. Bilson writeth thus: The 
Bilson suru. pag. 85.  ancient consent of godly Fathers, is with great care to be searched, and fallowed of us, chiefly in the Rule of faith. And again: We rest upon the 
Pag. 82. sup.  scriptures of God, upon the authority of the ancient Doctors, and councils. And maketh the same reason, with Vincentius Lirinensis, in these 
Pag. 83. sup.  words: least every man should wrest the scriptures, to his fancy, and suck thence, not the truth, but the patronage of his error. And he addeth, that S. Augustine gave this respect, not only to general councils, but to the testimonies of particular Fathers, Irenaeus, Cyprian, Hilarius, Ambrose, Gregory etc. Chrisestome, Basil and others. D. Sutcliffe writeth thus: We 
Sutcl. subvers. pag. 87.  acknowledge the faith of the Fathers of the fourth, fift, and sixth ages, and adjoin ourselves to that Church. And to credit his cause, and make his readers believe, he consenteth with those Fathers, he speaketh in this manner: The Fathers in all points of faith, are for us (Protestants) 
Sutel. ag. D. Kell. pag. 17.  and not for the Pope. D. Willer knowing of what little credit his bare word is, even by his Protestants, as appeareth hereafter, would procure credit to his protestancy by damnable perjury, in these words: I take God to witness, before 
Willet Antilog. pag. 263.  whom I must render account, etc. That the same faith and Religion, which I defend, is taught and confirmed in the more substantial points, by these Historians, councils, Fathers that lived within sign or six hundred years after Christ. And further 
Pag. 264. sup.  thus: It is most notoriously evident, that for the grossest points of Popery, as Transsabstantiation, sacrifice of Mass, worshipping of Imadges, justification by works, the supremacy of the Pope, prohibition of Marriage, and such other, they (of the Roman Church, have no show at all, of any evidence from the Fathers, within syve hundred years of Christ. In all which questions, among others, I am to prove the contrary be these Protestants themselves hereafter, in their place. And in an other page of the same treatise he writeth thus: The ancient Fathers that lived within six hundred years of Christ, are 
Willet Antil. pag. 271. K. speech in parl. An. 1603: conference at Hampt. pag. 73.  against them. His majesties speech in parliament it this: I will ever yield all reverence to antiquity: And in their conference: For my part, I know not, how to answer the objection of papists, when they charge us, with novelties, but to tell them their abuses are new. And he approveth the days of Constantine for a Rule, in Religion: saying: Constantine is not to be appeached of superstition, but things then used may still be continued. 
Confer. pag. 69.  But now it shall appear, that these Protestant Doctors, and Ministers, are so far from justifying these their oaths, protestations; and assertions, they be enforced to acknowledge, those primitive Fathers do allow, teach, and approve the doctrine of the present Roman Church, which these men impugn and persecute: and for that cause do not only deny the authorities of those primitive, learned, and holy Fathers, but call, and censure them, with uncivil, barbarous, contemptuous, and Irreligious names, and phrases. For proof whereof I argue thus.  
Whatsoever Sect, Religion, or People, being urged by such testimonies, as Protestants have given for allowance of the Father's authorities before, to follow them, accept of their doctrine, and stand to their judgement in these controversies of Religion, do utterly refuse, and disallow it, though his Majesty should approve it, but say they are unfit judges, in controversies of divinity, that their judgement is little to be respected, their testimony is not worth answering, there is no probability in their opinions, they are not to be believed, deserve not credit, are not credible, to be admitted, are not fit judges, were to partial, are to be forsaken, contemned, and despised; such men cannot with any appearance of truth, affirm those primitive Fathers, and Doctors, to allow, their Religion, and proceed, or defend their cause, by their Authorities: But these Protestants Doctors, and Ministers of England be such: Therefore, those Fathers are not for their Religion. The Mayor proposition is to manifestly true, and the Minor is proved also by these Protestants themselves in this manner. M. Wotton expressly controlleth the King's sentence before, concerning 
Wotton def of Perk. pag. 15. 16.  the time of Constantine, and antiquity: his words be these: the trial of Doctrine, is not to be fetched from the opinions and examples of men. And again. It may not seem strange, if superstition were crept into the Church before Constantine's time. M. Ormerod scoffeth 
Ormerod pict. pag. 78.  at the authority and testimony of S. Anacletus, Pope of Rome, that lived in the Apostles time and was a glorious Martyr, for Christ, because he proveth the supremacy 
Middleton papistem. pag. 200.  of the See of Rome from the grant of our Saviour. M. Middleton doth the like, by Papias, living with the Apostles, for the same doctrine. M. Hull condemneth for like causes, almost all the blessed Popes, 
Hull Rom. pol.  and Martyrs, Bishops of Rome from S. Peter the Apostle, with in the first four hundred years, as shall be cited hereafter. D. Covell before hath styled S. Augustine with 
Part. 2. cap. Ceremonies. Wotton def. of perk. pag. 8. pag. 17. 9 88  the greatest commendation of learning: yet M. Wotton writeth: We need not fear S. Augustine, though against us. Eusebius is to be reprehended. There was want of modesty, and truth also in the treatise of Hierome against Vigilantius. The ancient Fathers spoke more like philosophers, than divines. It is more than I know, that Gregory is a Saint. The Author of the Epistle to the Philippians, (attributed to S. Ignatius) is an unfit judge in 
Wotton sup. pag. 118. 224. 422. 440. 462.  controversies of divinity. Tertullians' witness is of small authority. Damascen is not greatly to be respected Origin is generally condemned. Ignatius epistle to the Romans (approved by S. Hierome and Protestants also) is a counterfeit Ignatius, for 
Pag. 340: Pag. 387. Pag. 467. Pag. 494. Pag. 495.  teaching merit of good works. Cyprian is toe far carried away, since he ascribeth to alms daes the purging of sin. Irenaus judgement is little to be respected. Tertullians' testimony is not worth answeareinge. Tertullian and Origen may be joined together. Chrisostoms' Rhetoric is better than his 
Pag. 499.  Logic, Hieroms authority in case of single life is not murch worth. Those Christian Fathers which condemned 
Pag. 500  jovinian (as S. Augustine, Ambrose, Hierome &c.) dealt unchristianly with him. The 
Pag. 519. Pag. 520.  authority of the ancient writers (Athanasius, Augustine, Hierome) concludeinge a work of perfection from those words of Christ go sell all etc. is 
Pag. 543.  not to be admitted. The authority of Clement of Alexandria and Augustine, with the school Doctors is inferior to the jews. Origen and Theodoret (whom before he preferreth before S. 
Pag. 545. 546. 584. 594.  Augustine) overthrow their own distinction. Lactantius though he were an ancient Christian, yet in his verses (of worshipping the Cross) he showeth himself liker a light Poet, than a grave writer. And as he hath used all the learned Fathers of the primitive Church, for teaching the doctrine of the present Church of Rome, so he exclaimeth as barbarously, and undutifully, against all Christian Kings, of this, and other nations, for the same cause, his words be these. The 
Wotton def. of perk. pag. 53. Ormer. pict. pag. 44.  Kings of England, and Scottland etc. were Sathanes Soldiers, when they were of the Pope's Religion M. Ormerod disalloweth S. Leo, because he taught that God assisted the See of Rome in decres. For the like reason D. Downame rejected the authority of many holy Popes, and Martyrs of that Church, in her best days, when it was a Rule to all, according to his majesties Censure, 
Down. lib. 1. Antichr. cap. 3. pag. 35. 36.  because (to use his words) divers Bishops of Rome before the time of Socrates the Historian, contented to have the primacy, over all other Churches; and that is the chief scope of many of their epistles decretal. Yet this was as our King 
Conference at Hampt. pag. 75. Perk. problem. pag. 4.  hath told us, when it was a Rule to all, and when no man might separate himself from the doctrine of that Church. M. Perkins hath written thus: The Fathers have spoken many things incommodiously of holy things. The ancient Fathers did 
Pag. 93. 94. Pag. 105. Pag. 184.  sin in the Invocation of Saints: yea, were guilty of sacrilege, such were Paulinus, Fortunatus, S. Leo, S. Ephrem, S. Fulgentius, Petrus Damianus, Prosper. The ancient Fathers sometimes speak inconveniently, of the Article of justification. Some of the ancient Fathers (as Tertullian and Cyprian) are Montanists▪ or at the least do err filthly, for making Confirmation a Sacrament. D. Sutcliffe 
Sutel. subu. pag. 5. Pag. 8. Pag. 9  Who before made so much show of reverence to the Fathers, writeth thus: Metaphrastes is a lying pedant, writeinge more lies than leaves: Bede reporteth to many things by heareasy. Ado is a fabulous writer. The History of King Lucius his conversion (testified by so many authorities) 
Pag. 19  May well be parogoned, with the tales of King Arthure, Sir Tristram, and Lancelot Du●acke. The britains have cause to detest the memory of Augustine: That holy Saint surnamed the Apostle of our nation for converting i●. M. Ormerod is not only at defiance with 
Ormer. paganop. pag. 44.  all Fathers, for teaching that Christ descended to comfort the patriarchs, and Father's dead before him, but compareth, the Article and belief of Christ's descending into Hell, for such purpose, to the fable of Hercules, feigned to go thither, and fetch from thence Theseus, Pe●ithous and Cerberus, the great dog of Hell, with three heads, as the poets Imagine. M. Middleton 
Middleton papistom. pag. 40.  writeth thus: The credit of men is but a sandy foundation to build upon: Meaning the holy primitive Fathers of the Church: and scoffingly telling, that great Saint and 
Pag. 27.  Doctor, S. Epiphanius, that he lost the book of 
Pag. 45.  the Apostles Constitutions out of his bosom, which he cited Haeres. 45. he addeth of him thus: I must crave leave to say of Epiphanius: many assertions he counted for Heresies, which were not Heresies: many assertions he counted not Heresies, which are Heresies: And all this, because he condemneth divers Protestant opinions of Heresy, and justifieth the doctrine of the Church of Rome, against them. Against S. 
Middleton sup. pag. 49.  Dionysius the Areopagite, for teaching prayer for the dead, he scoffeth in this manner: Denys his answer is shortheeld, ready to fall back. When S. Ambrose approveth Christ's real presence in the blessed Sacrament, and Transubstantiation: he writeth of him thus: 
Pag. 61. Pag. 64.  he is guilty of presumptuous, and desperate blasphemy. At S. Chrisostome he scoffeth, and teacheth him, how he should speak, because he teacheth the doctrine of prayer for the dead. And useth this mock against him, calling 
Pag. 66. sup.  it an apostolical Tradition: well might Chrysostome say, the Apostles knew what profit redownded to the dead, by prayer for them: for himself knew not. And thus in general: The Fathers sometime went beyond the bounds of sobriety, in the doctrine 
Middlet. sup. Pag. 133. Pag. 134.  of chastity: The Fathers are not fit judges to determine either of Priests marriage, or vawes of chastity. And for this doctrine, thus he writeth of S. Ambrose: That man hath the Apostatical dragon, the devil dwelling in him. And, so he will send 
Midd. pag. 135.  Ambrose away with his Quietus est. Chrisostome is so hot in his amplifications, that he forgetts himself. 
Pag. 137.  Chrisostome in his vehemency, goeth beyond 
Pag. 138.  measure in reprehending: and the Christians of his time in their lightness went beyond measure in vowing. The Canons which Epiphanius citeth against Priest's marriage, or married men to be made Priests, 
Middleton sup. Pag. 141. Pag. 143. Pag. 144. Pag. 156. Pag. 161.  are apocryphal. He was two partial affected in this matter. The ancient Fathers did err. Augustine was a most subtle disputer: y●t a quick wi●● soon falleth into contradiction. Neither is Hilary (howsoever the Romish Church hath made him a Saint) over hastily to be received. Irenaeus, Hilary, and Epiphanius, (for teaching free will) are Pelagian 
Pag. 179. Pag. 180.  Heretics. We have hard before, what great respect in words the Protestant Bishop of Winchester, giveth to the ancient Fathers, yet by his own confession, his own Protestant Brethren charge him, with the contrary in these words: all this 
Bilsons' sur●●. pag. 84.  great shew● of cleaving to the Father's judgement, is but coloured in you. For in other points again we see, when they speak not to your liking, the case is altered. You forsake the ancient, and learned Fathers. You contemn and despise them. You affirm 
Pag. 85.  against all the Fathers. You little regard the sound doctrine of the Fathers. And the same Protestant 
Pag. 98.  Bishop D. Bilson telleth us, that these Protestants which have thus written of him, do for themselves less (if it may be) regard those ancient learned Fathers: for writing 
Bilson sup. pag. 98. pag. 274. 275. prefa. to the King's sup.  against them, in this kind, he entituleth one Treatise thus: The defenders disdain of the Father, Others: wrested, and lewdly falsyfied. And again. They condemn all the Fathers, Greek, and Latin, as conspiring against the truth, and perverting the scriptures. Therefore I conclude this Argument, by these Protestants, that the primitive Fathers be not for their Religion, but wholly for the doctrine of the Church of Rome. And hereupon, (though needless) I make a new argument against them, by themselves, in this manner: whosoever to make their Readers believe, that the Fathers be for their cause, do falsify them, corrupt, indignly and injuriously handle them, clip, shamefully corrupt them, greatly abuse, untruly allege, misquote, maim, mistranslate, notably corrupt, Father falsehoods upon them, pervert their true Arguments, disdain, wrist, and lewdly falsify them, cannot justly pretend, that they be for their Religion: But these English Protestants are by their own testimony, in this case: Therefore they cannot justly pretend, that the Fathers be for their cause. The Mayor proposition is evidently true. And the Minor is sufficiently proved before, by D. Bilson and other Protestant writers. To which I add affirmed, and publicly with privilege published, against D. Willet, who before hath so damnably sworn, that the Fathers be for the Religion of Protestants. 
Park●● against Lymbomastix p. 170. pag. 151. def. of 3. test. sect. k. k. k. def. of 1. and 2. test. p. 2. 5. sect. 18. 21. pag. 181. 166. 101. 100 def. of 2. place sect. 10. 11. 20. def. of 3. test. sect. 7. 12. 15. 16. etc. pag. 7. 10. 19 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. def. of 3. test sect. 16 pag. 28. def of 1. 2. 3. test.  M. Parks in his book dedicated to the than Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury writeth of him in these words: He condemneth all the ancient Fathers, for dreamers. Condemneth all the ancient Fathers, for dreamers. Condemneth all the Fathers. He condemneth all learned and godly divines, for enemies of Christ's Cross, and blasphemers of his passion. He instifieth most wicked Heretics, and condemneth most holy Fathers. He falsely translateth, corrupteth, indignly handleth, greatly abuseth, untruly allegeth, misquoteth, mayneth, mistranslateth, much abuseth, notably corrupteth, etc. S. Augustine, Origen, S. Ambrose, S. Chrisostome, S. Leo, S. Hierome, Tertullian, S. Bernard, etc. Fathereth falsehoods upon them, perverteth their true Arguments, corrupteth their words. He teacheath us further, that he belieth Bellarmine, and Catholic writers, deceiveth the world. He strangely perverteth, belieth, depraveth, abuseth, much abuseth, falsifieth holy scriptures. And the same D. Willet hath written, and published with privilege also, as fowl dealings, or more vile in his judgement, and the Censure of the Protestant Approvers of his book, of the same English Protestant Author. The particulars are toe many, gross, and tedious, therefore I will only set down the Title of his book, to give some conjecture of the contents in this kind. It is styled in these words. Loidoromastix, that is a scourge for a 
Willet in Lo●doromastix in the Title of it.  Railer: containing a full, and sufficient Answer, unto the uncristian railings, slanders, untruths, and other injurious imputations, vented of late by one Richard Parks, Master of Arts, against the Author of Lymbomastix, wherein three hundred railings, errors, Contradictions, falsifications of Fathers, corruptions of scripture, with other gross oversights, are observed out of the said uncharitable discourse by Andrew Willet Professor of divinity. Hither to the only Title of that Book, published by a Professor of divinity, as he termeth himself, and privileged by public allowance, of English Protestants. Therefore there is no show, either of probability, or possibility, that the authority, and testimonies, of the holy, learned, and ancient Fathers, of the primitive Church, should be for the Religion of these Protestants: when by their own writings, it is directly condemned by them, whether we examine their works and authorities in particular, or when they were assembled in general, or others generally confirmed councils as demonstration is made by their own Assertions. And by this it is evident, by these Protestants themselves, that their so termed Religion, is Heretical, impious and damnable, and for such condemned in their own judgements, by all general and approved Rules, and grounds in divinity, The holy scriptures, sacred traditions, The Church of God, decrees, and sentence of the highest, and all Apostolic Sees, general, and other approved holy councils, learned Fathers, and whatsoever can be pretended, to be a judge in these causes. So that not any one true Christian Consistory, or Censure can be truly claimed, or cited for justifying of their proceed. Which is as much as can, and more than needeth to be alleged, for condemning of Heresy, or any error in Religion. Yet to leave nothing omitted, to satiffy these Protestants, in these questions, and recall them to the unity of the true Church of Christ, or from their savage cruelty of persecution. I will in the next, and second part of this work immediately following, make like demonstration by their own writings, and authorities, published, allowed, or received among them, since the beginning of the Reign of our Sovereign, King james, in England. That in all the chiefest Controversies, of this time, in particular, The doctrine of the present Church of Rome, is only orthodox, Catholic, and true: And the Contrary of these Protestants, erroneous, Heretical, and damnable.  
Here endeth the first part of the general grounds in Religion: and ensueth the second, of the particular Questions, between Catholics, and Protestant, of England.    

THE SECOND PART OF ENGLISH PROTESTANT'S RECANTATION IN MATTERS OF RELIGION.  

CHAPTER I. WHEREIN BY THE PRESENT English Protestant writers, is proved against Protestants, and their doctrine, That the predestination of particular men, cannot without particular Revelation, be certainly known: much less as a matter of faith.  
AS among all Questions of Religion, the eternal predestination of men to be saved, being from eternity, in God, can have none before it in duration; So in order let us first entreat, and begin from thence: how fare and certainly it may be known of particular men's pre-ordination to glory, in this world.  
The holy Council of Trent, advertising all men with S. Paul, to work their salvation with fear and trembling, hath thus defined of 
Philipp. 2. v. 12. Conc. Trid. sess. 6. can. 12.  this secret. So long as we live in this mortality, no man ought so much to presume, of the hidden mystery of God's Predestination, that he certainly determine himself to be in the number of the predestinate, as though it were true, that he which is justified, could either sin no more, or if he shall sin, aught to promise to himself a certain Amendment: for except by special revelation it cannot be known, whom God hath chosen. The like doctrine it concludeth against the predestinaries of 
Can. 15. 16. sup.  this time, in the 15. and 16. canons, of the same session.  
The contradictory of which Catholic position, hath been so fare and generally defended by Protestants: That it is as the 
See cap. 2. infra.  principal and chiefest ground of their Religion: That as a man is justified by faith, so this faith is that, which assureth him, that he is just, in grace and favour with God, that he cannot (at the least finally or totally) fall from grace: And so consequently that he knoweth as a matter of faith, that he is both just, and predestinate: as will sufficiently appear in the next chapter by English Protestants since his majesties entrance into England, the short time which I have limited to dispute against them by themselves; what inconveniences, abuses, and iniquities, this invention hath brought into the world, will in some sort appear in this chapter, by their own writings: and is so much known to all men, by lamentable experience, that I need not to repeat it in this place. Wherefore I will only confute this Protestant opinion by the present English Protestant writers, and thereby demonstrate the Catholic doctrine of the cited sacred Council, to be most true, and religious, in this point, even by their sentence.  
Then first, concerning this proposition, I argue thus No doctrine or opinion, which is a desperate doctrine, contrary to divinity, and to the true doctrine of predestination, is or can be the true doctrine in this question: But the predestinarie Protestant doctrine, with assuredness of faith (without particular revelation) that a man shall be saved, is thus desperate, contrary to divinity and to the true doctrine of predestination: Therefore it neither is, nor can be the true doctrine.  
To deny the Mayor or first proposition, is blasphemy: because God, infinite, and immutable wisdom, cannot possibly command, or reveal for truth, any such error, Therefore the first proposition being evidently true, The Minor or second proposition is authoritatyvely with English Protestants, concluded against this predestinarie opinion in the public Protestant Conference at Hampton Court, before his 
Conference at Hampton court pag. 29.  Majesty and with his allowance, in these words. Very many in these days, neglecting holiness of life, presume too much of persisting in grace, layeing all their Religion upon predestination, If I shall be saved, I shall be saved, which is a desperate doctrine, contrary to good divinity, and the true doctrine of predestination, wherein we should reason rather ascendendo, then discendendo, thus: I live in obedience to God, in love my neighbour; I follow my vocation etc. Therefore I trust that God hath elected, and predestinated me to salvation. Hitherto the consent of this English Protestant Conference: from whence it is manifest, that no certanitie, much less by faith, but only a moral trust, or hope, according to the good life of man, can be had without revelation, that we are predestinate.  
secondly supposing, which with the scriptures all Protestants grant, that without grace by Christ, and persisting in it, no man can be saved: I Argue thus. No man that is uncertain, whether he shall fall from grace, can be certain with certanitie of faith, that he is predestinate, or shall be saved: But without particular Revelation all men, Protestants, and others, be uncertain, whether they shall fall from grace: Therefore no man without particular revelation, is or can be certain, he is predestinate.  
The Mayor proposition is certainly true. And his Majesty in the same cited Protestant Assembly, citeing the place of S. Paul before related, against the certainerie of predestination, concludeth the Minor or second proposition thus. We may full from grace: 
Conference at Hampton sup. pag. 30.  and addeth: the doctrine of predestination should be handled with great discretion: which he insinuateth the Protestants have not done, and speaketh plainly of them in these words: The Inferring of the necessity of standing and persisting in grace is a desperate presumption. The like is taught more at large in other places of that conference: where it is also 
Confer. sup. pag. 41. 42. 43.  acknowledged, that present justification, or justice is lost, by any mortal or grievous sin: which to be frequently committed by Protestants will appear hereafter by their own testimonies.  
My third Argument is this: No doctrine that is pestilent, and scandalous, to all Churches, is, or can be true doctrine: But this predestinarie doctrine is such: Therefore neither is, nor can be true. The Mayor 
Relation of Religion cap. 45.  is evident. The Minor is proved by the Protestant Relator of Religion, who telleth us, that Protestant's in Germany will rather return to the Church of Rome, then admit this Protestant point of doctrine, which they call predestinarie pestilence: and addeth, that this with some others 
Cap. 48.  of their opinions, hath exceedingly scandalised all other Churches.  
My fourth Argument is this. Nothing that is not revealed of God, can be believed with certainty of faith, or with faith: But particular men's predestination is not revealed of God: Therefore it cannot be by faith believed.  
The first proposition is evidently true: because God's revelation, or to be revealed of him is the formal object, or cause of belief, and true faith. The second proposition is thus proved, by D. Covell; who entreating 
Covell def. of Hooker pag▪ 59  of this great question, hath these words. A curious searcheing into that will, which is not revealed, serveth but to breed a contempt, of that, which is revealed unto us. Man desireth rather to know, then to do; nay to know, even those things, which do not concern him, rather than to do that, for the neglect whereof, he must give an account. From hence cometh it to pass, that what the schools have curiously sought out, concerning the nature of God's will: the pulpits, nay the stalls of Artificers, have undertaken to decide them all. And 
Pag. 62. sup.  prosecuteing this question, having cited and approved the Catholic distinctions of the will of God, into antecedent, consequent, of God's good pleasure, and the sign of it: into a will absolute, conditional etc. he concludeth thus: God willeth all men to be saved. Who therefore that they are not it is not his decree, but their own fault. Certainly saith S. Ambrose, he willeth all men to be saved, if they will themselves: for he that hath given a law to all, doubtless hath excluded none. If any Protestant will answer, (as 
Wotton def. of Perkins pag. 467. etc.  many of them unlearnedly hold.) That deduction from scripture, as they suppose maketh a matter of faith. I tell him with all learned divines, and in true divinity, that nothing uncertain, doubtful, or fallible, can possibly make a matter of faith, which must of all assents in this world be most certain. But every deduction from such supposed scripture, especially where neither the matter, man, his name, parson, or any thing of him in particular is revealed, must needs be uncertain, doubtful, and fallible: Therefore it cannot make a matter and conclusion unfallible and of faith. For the conclusion, in no syllogism can be more certain, than the premises, and fallible human deduction, from, and by which it is concluded: But according to the Rule of Logic, semper sequitur debilioreni partem; always followeth the weaker part. And the Mayor is evident in itself before. The Minor is proved thus by Doctor Feild: private Interpretation (or 
Field pag. 226. Covell def. of Hooker pag. 8.  deduction) bindeth not. But true faith bindeth all men. And D. Covell expressly writeth the same, which I have answered, and in these words. Doctrines derived are not the word of God. But nothing, but the word of God, written or nor written, as is evident, maketh a matter of faith even by Protestants.  
The first Argument is framed thus: whatsoever is only known of God, cannot be known, much less with certainty of faith by particular men: But particular men's predestination is only known to God: Therefore not to particular men, much less with certanitie of faith. The Mayor proposition is evidently true, the word only, being exclusive, and denying all others. The Minor proposition is thus testified, by D. Covell in express words. 
Covell def. of Hooker pag. 63. and pag. 108.  God only knoweth who are predestinate. And in an other place, thus: men's predestination unto life none can know, but God only.  
The sixth Argument is: No doctrine that draweth from consideration, what concerneth man's salvation, and bringeth contempt of good works, is true: But this predestinarie opinion is such: Therefore not true.  
The Mayor is evidently true, even in the doctrine of English Protestants, making in 
Artic. 12.  their square itself of their Religion▪ good works to be necessary to salvation, and the consideration of it also. The Minor is thus proved by D. Covell. If all men rightly considered 
Covell def. of Hooker pag. 107. 108.  in those actions, that concern man's salvation, how far we are tied, not only in obedience, but for use, to those things that are means to effect the s●me: few would have been so carlessely resolute, to contemn good works, through an opinion of eternal election. By which sentence he doth not only deny the Protestant certanitie, and security of predestination, but plainly teacheth, that good works are the means to effect salvation. Then as the end cannot be obtayed, without the means, that bringeth unto it: so it cannot be predestinate without such means, except God could, or should predestinate things to be, otherwise than they be, or can be, which is unpossible.  
The seventh and last Argument in this question, may be this. No man Ignorant of that whereupon predestination, or the certain knowledge thereof dependeth, can certainly know himself to be predestinate: But all Protestants are ignorant of that; which is, whether they shall live and die in good works: Therefore no Protestant is certain of salvation.  
The Mayor is evident: And the Minor proved 
Covell. sup. pag. 108,  by the same Protestant Doctor in these words: Eternal election includeth a subordination of means; without which we are not actually brought to enjoy what God secretly did intend: and therefore to build upon God's election, if we keep not ourselves to the ways, which he hath appointed for me to walk in, is but a false deceiving vanity: for all men notwithstanding their pre-ordination unto life (which none can know but God only) are in the Apostles opinion, till they have embraced the truth, but the children of wrath, as well as others. And to manifest that this was the doctrine of the primitive church, by which these Protestants say they will be judged; D. Morton writeth 
Morton Apol. part. 2. pag. 223.  in these words. Veteres Patres fere omnes arbitratisunt, praedestinationis causam fuisse praevisa hominum opera. All most all the ancient fathers did think that the good deeds of men foreseen, were the cause of predestination. And Mr. Wotton writeth thus: we acknowledge that the fault is wholly 
Wotton def. of Perkins pag. 86.  in every man, that is not saved. Therefore I conclude this question, that even by English Protestant Doctors, the doctrine of the Roman Church in this is true: and that of the predestinarie Protestants is false, erroneous, and damnable.   

CHAPTER II. PROVETH BY THE SAME Protestants of England: That only faith (much less the assureing faith of Protestants, neither doth, nor can justify.  
NEXT unto this Question of predestination, let us entreat of that, which hath moste and nearest connexion unto it, man's jusification in this life: whether it be by the supposed assureing faith of Protestants, that a man is justified and righteous as thy commonly call it, or otherwise, by these writers. Of which matter the Council of Trent first for Catholics defineth thus: It is necessary 
Codcil. tried. ses. 4. can. 9  to believe sins neither are forgiven, neither were at any time forgiven, but freely by the mercy of God for Christ. And then addeth concerning the presumptuous faith of Protestants (which it had before confuted) in this manner. If any 
Can. 12. sup  man shall say, that justifying faith is nothing else, but a confidence of God's mercy, remitting sins for Christ, or that by that only confidence, we are justified: let him be Anathema.  
Now that the ordinary Protestant opinion hath been and still is, a man to be justified by this only kind, of their supposed assureing faith, or confidence: as also that a man justified cannot totally or finally fall from grace, is manifestly known unto all acquointed with their doctrine, and this is often repeated and allowed in their recited conference at Hampton court. And these present Protestant 
Confer. pag. 41, 24. 30. Wotton def. of perk. pag. 129. 134. 279. 280.  writers with others. Mr. Wotton writeth thus: it is out of doubt, that assurance of salvation by saith may and must be had. And again. Falling from faith is unpossible, And further thus. We hold it as unpossible to lose charity, as to lose faith. He which hath not both faith and charity to the end, never had them. Mr. powel speaketh 
powel. l. Antichrist. pag. 508. 712. & 476. Pag. 712. & 518. sup.  thus: Every one that is elect, is and aught to be assured of a full remission of his sins. The faithful aught to be assured, they shall have eternal life, and he which denieth it, doth not believe his Creed. To affirm that a man which is justified, may fall from grace and be damned is not to believe the Creed. It is blasphemy to say, a man truly justified and sanctified, may totally and finally fall from grace. The Protestant Catechism printed in the year of Christ 1609. 
Catechis. An. D. 1609. pag. 35. Maxey Serm. 8. januar. 1604.  thus defineth faith: Faith is a full assurance of my salvation in JESUS CHRIST alone.  
This supposed, first I argue against these Protestants (and it is granted by Mr. Anthony Maxey the Kings chaplain in his sermon before his majesty) in this manner. If a man is, or may be sure, that he is just or justified, and certainly in grace, and cannot totally or finally fall away, he is also and may be sure that he is predestinate: Because no man persevering and dying in grace, is or possibly can be damned: But no man (as is proved by Protestants in the former chapter) without particular revelation, is or can be certain, that he is predestinate: Therefore neither is, or can be so certain of his justification, and perseverance, if he were Just, and could be so assured of it.  
Secondly the same doctrine of the not certainty of justification is confirmed and proved by Protestants, in their recited Conference, 
Confer. sup. pag. 29. 30. Articul. 17.  alleging from their book of Articles, that the promises of God in scripture touching these things are general. From which I argue thus: no promise of God in general doth make a revelation particular to any private parson: But all promises of him, of these things, are only general: Therefore they can make no revelation in particular, or cause such faith of any private parson. Both propositions are proved before, and are evidently true: For no private man by his human deduction uncertain. And subject to error, can possibly apply general things unto himself, with such assuredness, and unfallible certainty, as is, and of necessity must be in faith, founded upon the immediate Revelation and word of God, which by no power can be uncertain or doubtful. For as these Protestant writers have assured us before: Private Interpretation or 
Part. 1. cap. Interpret. of scriptures.  deduction, as it is not the word of God, so it bindeth no man unto it. Therefore it is not true faith, but a most certain folly, for D. Raynolds, D. Sutcliffe, D. Feild, D. Morton, or any Protestant to believe, that he in particular is just, shall so persevere, or is predestinate. When not so much as the least memory, or mention of their particular predestination, justice, or preseverance, or name itself, is once remembered in any Revelation or word of God, the only Rule and ground of faith.  
Again these Protestants that ascribe justisication to their supposed assureing faith, do also teach, that such faith and good works 
Articl. An. Dom. 1562. confirmed in Can. Reg. can. 5. Conference sup. pag. 41.  cannot be separated. So they have agreed in their reconfirmed canons. And also that every grievous sin depriveth of grace, and justification. Then that this opinion of Protestants is not true in this point, I further argue in this manner. All Protestants, or others whatsoever, that be assured by faith, that they are Just, must likewise be as certainly assured, that they have good works, live in obedience to 
Conference pag. 29.  God, love towards their neighbour, follow their vocation, and are, void of all grievous sin, as they have tanght us before: But no Protestants will or can truly affirm so of themselves: Therefore they neither are, nor can be certain in such manner, that they are Just. The Mayor is evident; And for the Minor all men know they are in the contrary condition and state, that is in great and generally grievous sins. And themselves freely and truly acknowledge their most wicked and sinful lives. First D. Covell telleth us plainly, that charity 
Covell modest examination pag. 144.  faileth in the Protestant Clergy. Then that Protestant Clergy cannot by their own doctrine be just or justified by faith, for iustifieing faith, as they teach, is not, where charity faileth, or is not. And yet it is the Protestant clergy which chiefly and principally patronizeth and defendeth that doctrine of only faith assureing to justify, and the others but as taught and instructed by them. Further, those Protestants that writ against the puritans, as D. Bilson Protestant Bishop of Winchester, D. Covell, D. Sutcliffe, M. Ormerode, M. powel, M. parks with others commonly and undoubtedly esteem them, either as Heretics, Schismatics, or such as cannot be in state of grace: and the Puritans condemn as generally and absolutely the Protestants of the like, and other great damnable sins, as I have in other places entreated, and is known unto all that have perused their writings. Therefore I will only at this time city the testimony of M. Hull, who speaketh generally of all Protestants, Puritans or not Puritan: his words be these: These are the days 
Hull Rome's polocies, in prefat.  whereof our Saviour Christ and his Apostles so long ago fore prophesied, wherein charity should wax cold, and faith should scarce appear, wherein man should be slidebacks from Christ, and Apostals from his true Religion, wherein they should be lovers of themselves, coue●ous, cursed speakers, disobedient, unthankful, unholy, truce breakers, false accusers, despisers of them that are good, Traitors, heady, high minded, lovers of pleasure, more than laver of God, having a show of godliness, but have denied the power thereof; yea wherein men are become users, neuter, Temporisers, Atheists, the earth, the stable earth (he there alludeth to an earth quake lately chaunceing as he citeth) gins now to quaver, and to shake, as being over burdened with our sins, and to weak to bear the weight of our Iniquities. Hitherto this Protestant preacher, in his more than uncharitable book against Catholics, witnesseth of 
Prot. proof-part. 1. c. 9 cap. 8. etc.  his own brethren in Religion, the English Protestants. Of the more than irreligious and profane behaviour of their clergy of English Protestants, in abuseing, falsefieing, & perverting the holy Scriptures, Fathers, Counsels, and all Authorities for Religion, I have for this point sufficiently entreated before, to prove that they are not just, or righteous, but most unjust and impious by their own testimony. What other sins they are defiled with, let their own lives and the world censure: But sure I am they are not void of all grievous sins, which they must be, if they be justified and in grace: and such they must be in deed, before they know themselves to be such, except they can know that to be, which is not, as their sharp wits would seem to do in this and other questions of Religion.  
Then seeing it is to apparent, that Protestants are not just, either by their Imagined assureinge faith, or howsoever: let us further examine by these writers, and Protestant professors, whether it is in itself possible, that this supposed faith should justify. The contrary whereof thus I demonstrate from their own writings. All men that pretend to be justified by this Imagined faith, must needs be justified by some act or acts thereof: But no man is justified by any act or acts thereof: Therefore no man is justified by it. The Mayor is manifest. The Minor is thus proved by Protestants. First D. Field with 
Field pag. 177.  others doth, and of necessity must affirm, that in this business of their fantasied justification, their devised faith hath two, and only two acts: One going before justification, teaching us to pray, entreat God, and humble ourselves, when we are not just: and this act as he acknowledgeth it to go before justification, so he thus freely confesseth, that it doth not justify. The second Act, as he telleth us, doth follow justification, and so by no possibility (because the cause cannot be after the effect caused by it) that is able to justify: wherefore his own words of this Act of their invented faith, be these: She doth not actively justify, but findeth the thing done. Therefore seeing they teach, there be but two acts in their new faith, the first, and second te last which admit no more, and neither the one nor other, nor both together, (because they grant there is no partial influence or cooperation from them, to that purpose) doth, do, or can justify, there is no possibility of justification by such idle faith, for so two contradictoryes should be true: man is justified by some act of faith: man is not justified by any act of faith. Which in Logic and nature is known to be unpossible, and a stupid absurdity to affirm it. This matter is further proved by D. Covell: who rejecting Luther's 
Covell def. of Hooker pag. 42.  opinion, in this question, granteth a seperabilitie, of faith and works, and that faith, as they commonly grant, doth not justify. Then justification cannot possibly be by only faith, which in an other treatise he declareth by example in these words: Faith is the fowndation of spiritual building of God's house, charity the Roof, without which the best are, 
Covell against Burges pag. 148.  but as houses uncovered, that cannot long continue. Then justification which is the Roof of our spiritual building in this world, is and musts needs be the work and building of charity, and not of faith alone. Which demonstratively is true by his grant, that faith, and the works of charity may be separated: for they consent that without such works man is not justified, therefore not possibly by this their Poetical faith.  
Further, both the present Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury D. George Abbot against D. Hill, and D. Feild also, doth often tell us, that the Greek Church is the true Church of Christ. Then supposing from my first chapter in the first part of this work, by the grant of the same D. Feild, 
Protest. proaf. part. 1. cap. 1.  D, Covell, D. Sutcliffe, M. Wotton, and M. Ormerod, that the direction thereof is to be followed, her judgement to be rested in, that it hath authority to command her children, the judgement of it, is a very special ground of faith, supporting the truth, as a pillar doth underpropp a building, is a diligent and true keepr of doctrines committed to her, changeth nothing, diminisheth nothing at any time, addeth nothing superfluous, looseth not her own, usurpeth not things belonging to others: and that there is no salvation, remission of sins, or hope of eternal life out of the Church. All which be the very words of those last cited Protestants related in that place. From which grants thus I argue. No doctrine or opinion, that is a thing most horrible, unworthy any Christian, against the law of God, and light of nature, is, or can possibly be true: But the paradox of Protestants, that this their supposed only faith doth justify is such: Therefore it neither is, or can be true. The Mayor is evidently true, and to affirm the contrary is to deny all true Religion, and the Authority of God: for if he should, or could teach, or reveal to men to follow doctrine that is horrible, unworthy a Christian, against his own law, and natural light, such doctrine could not be true, nor he honoured as God, but to be accounted a deceiver and seducer. The Minor or second proposition be the express words of the Greek Church, so true, to be obeyed and followed in doctrine by these Protestants as before is cited. For Hieremias Patriarch of Constantinople chief in 
Hieremias Patriarcha constant in censura cap. 5.  that Church in his censure against Protestants useth these words in this article. The doctrine that only faith doth justify, is a thing most horrible, unto or thy any Christian, against the law of God, and the light of nature. Therefore these men maintaining so horrible doctrine by the censure of the true Church, as they teach, and out of which, as they affirm before, there is no salvation, remission of sins, or hope of eternal life, are so far from being just, justified, or to be saved by faith or any other means in their proceed, that by their own confession, they have left unto themselves, no hope of eternal life, or salvation at all.  
Moreover I argue thus: Nothing which cannot be defended without granting and maintaining, more new and strange absurdities, and impossibilities, is or can be true doctrine: But this Protestant assertion, of their only assuring faith justifying is such: therefore it neither is, nor can be true. The first proposition is evidently true, for every truth may, and is defended without any absurdity, or inconvenience: The second proposition is also manifestly proved from D. Feild and others before: To whom I add M. Wotton, who laboureing what he can to defend this his forged faiths justification, and answer that place of S. Paul: How shall they call on him, in whom they do not believe: being urged to 
Rom. 10.  prove that faith goeth before prayer and other good works, without which they teach a man is not justified: and which themselves urge in a sense like to that, as they (though untruly) suppose, against prayer to Angels and Saints, in whom we do believe: (yet the believing, although not in them, that it is lawful to pray to them, sufficeth in that case) he maketh his supposed faith a very chimerical fiction, and no true real thing of that nature: but is forced to this absurdity, to say: assuring faith, and prayer proceeding after 
Wotton def. of Perkins pag. 209.  faith, be simul tempore, both together in the same instant of time. Which is unpossible, being divers distinct acts, specified from divers objects, produced by divers powers and operations of the soul, one precedent going before, the other following and (to use his own words, proceeding after. Therefore by himself, except before and after Prius & Posterius, be simul and simul tempore, together, and together in time, which every young logician in Cambridge will tell him is most childish and absurd, both this his Answer is a new gross absurdity, and that his former doctrine, that cannot be otherwise defended is of like quality: which will more appear in the next argument by this man's divinity also.  
Therefore I argue further thus: Nothing that wanteth assuredness, but hath doubteinge, and is not without doubt, can be a matter of faith: But this Protestant position, even by their own confession wanteth assuredness, hath doubting, and is not without doubt: Therefore it is no matter of faith, or true faith. The Mayor or first proposition is so certainly true, that Protestant's generally acknowledge (as the truth is) that nothing can be more certain and undoubted than faith: for being ground upon the unfallible word and Revelation of God which it most undoubtedly certain, true, assured, and without all doubt unpossible to be otherwise, ●f God be God and truth itself. How can there be any place of doubt of any thing of that nature? and therefore that common saying, Dubius in fide est infidelis, he that doubteth in faith is an Infidel: so much as in him lieth making God unworthe to be believed, is ordinarily allowed with Protestants. The Minor proposition is also proved by Protestants, and M. Wotton himself wittnesseth of this their Imagined faith in these words: Without doubt it is not. And again in this 
Wotton def. of Perkins pag. 135. 152. pag. 161.  manner: I may grant the faithful ordinarily are not assured of their salvation by such a faith, as hath no doubteing in it. And further thus; our faith is not without some doubteing, and our feeleing not so strong, as it should, and may be. And they have spoken so long in defence of this their fantastical faith, that they proved themselves not to have a sound and certain faith of those things that of all others are moste generally believed of all (excepting Atheists) that there is a God: for among Protestants the same Protestant faith, there be such doubts: Whether there be a God, or no. Wherefore M. parks a Protestant writer among them might justly speak of his English fellows in Religion, in this manner: Heresy and Infidelity join and labour to subvert 
parks Apol. pref.  and overthrow all grounds of Christian Religion. Thus he of these Protestants.  
Again I argue in this manner from the 16. article of their Religion. Where it is thus 
Artic. 16.  defined: After we have received the holy Ghost we may departed from grace, and fall into sin. And after, it teacheth that true repentance procureth forgiveness of sin. Now this true repentance either goeth before, or followeth this their Imagined iustifieing faith. If it goeth before this their faith, than that faith justifieth not, because man is made just before any Act of that applying faith is exercised. If this Repentance followeth, than again that their supposed faith doth not justify, for by their own doctrine a sinner Impenitent is not just. For their applying faith is to apply (as they say) the promises of Christ unto us, but Christ in scriptures is so far from promising salvation to man impenitent, that he promiseth and denownceth damnation. That both these Acts should be together, is unpossible, as I have demonstrated against M. Wotton, in the like case before. This is also proved by the Arguments concerning predestination, in the former chapter; for those Protestants which hold this justification by faith, defend also assuredness of predestination, teaching that every one that is at any time just, is predestinate, and so the one is as well known unto them, as the other, and either of them a matter of faith with these men, Again faith and hope be distinguished; faith is the grounds of things to be hoped. Faith, Hope, Charity, these three. But where there is assured faith to obtain a thing, or having a thing, Hope is there evacuated. Again: These Protestants with the scriptures grant, that the just, and justified are in heaven. But faith is not in heaven, being evacuated by beatifical vision, therefore justice is not by faith. Again: faith is not discursyve; D. Feild 
Feild. pag. 226. Covell def. of Hooker pag. 85.  writeth as truth is, that private Interpretations bind not; and D. Covell saith, doctrines derived are not the word of God: then they are not matter of faith. But all these pretenced faiths of these Protestants are only their own private interpretations, applications, and derived doctrines: for no scripture saith, that any one Protestant in particular, D. Willet, D. powel, or other, is justified, or shall be saved: Therefore no faith, much less justifying faith.   

CHAPTER III. WHEREIN BY THESE PREsent English Protestant writers, the Catholic doctrine of justification by inherent grace, and justice, is proved against the same Protestants, and their opinion.  
NOW it will be no difficulty, for a Christian man to believe doctrine of inherent grace, ●ustice, & justification by good works: if he will, as all Christians do, are aught, grant and believe any justification at all. For the contrary opinion of Protestants, being even by Protestants our Adversaries themselves confuted, that of the Catholic Church must needs be true. In which question the Council of Trent for Catholics 
Concil. Trid. sess. 6. can. 11.  defineth thus. If any shall say, a man is justified either by only Imputation of the justice of Christ, or the only remission of sins, excluding grace, and charity, which is diffused in their hearts by the holy Ghost, and is inherent, or that the grace whereby we are justified, is only the favour of God, let him be Anathema. For proof of which doctrine even by my country Protestants, and to procure their conformity (as they ought) first I argue thus.  
Wheresoever there be degrees of Inherent justice, and man more or less accordingly so justified, there must needs be inherent justice, and justification by it: But when a man is justified, there be such degrees of inherent justice, and more or less justification by it: Therefore there is justification by inherent grace, and justice. The Mayor and first proposition is manifestly true: The second is proved by D. Feild: who 
Field pag. 118.  acknowledgeth the denial of inherent grace, to be untruth, and is so far ashamed of the Protestant opinion in this point, that he writeth thus. Luther never denieth inherent Righteousness to be more in one, then in an other, and more in Mary the Mother of Christ, then in any other. Then of necessity there is inherent justice and grace in men justified, and men be justified by it, otherwise it is not justice or righteousness, if it doth not make men just and righteous: for being inherent as he confesseth, it must needs denominate the subject wherein it is, as all inherent and intrinsical forms and qualities do. Heat, cold, beauty etc. make men and bodies wherein they be inherent, to be, and be called truly, hot, cold, beautiful etc. And seeing in just men there be degrees of this inherent grace, and justice, increase and access of it, there must needs be inherent grace, and justice, for new degrees of increase are not, where the thing increased is not. Neither the comparative degree, (more) but where the positive is: No man or thing can be said to be better, fairer, colder, hotter &c. than it was before, except before it was good, fair, cold, hot etc.  
Again I argue in this manner: whatsoever is the cause of glory and increase thereof in heaven, is the cause of justice and justification, from which such glory cometh: But inherent grace is the cause of glory in heaven, and the differences thereof: Therefore it is the cause of justification in earth. The Mayor is evidently true: And the Minor is proved by D. Feild in these words: From this Imparity of Inherent righteousness, it is, that there 
Field pag. 116.  are so different degrees of joy and glory, found among the Saints of God, that are in heaven. Then seeing the difference and excess of glory, and joy, in heaven proceed from the imparity of inherent righteousness, or justice, and righteousness or justice is the cause of glory, inherent Righteousness or justice must needs be that, by and for which we are justified in earth, and glorified in heaven.  
Thirdly from the same Protestant Doctor I argue thus: All justice and glory of man cometh either from inherent grace, or imputed: But not from imputed: Therefore from that which is inherent. The Mayor is evident: for all grace must needs be inherent, or not inherent: and if not inherent it is by imputation, if any way at all. The second proposition is proved by D. Feild: who doth not only renounce the error of equality of joys, and rewards in heaven, taught by jovinian, and seemeing to follow upon the Protestant doctrine of justification and glory by imputation of righteousness: but clearly also confesseth with Catholics, & the recited Council of Trent, joys and reward in heaven for inherent justice, and not imputed righteousness: his words be these: That there is an equality 
Field pag. 140.  of joys, and reward in heaven, imputed to jovinian, we do not hold. Where his word (we) and plural number proveth he speaketh generally for Protestants. And concerning the second he writeth thus: from imputed righteousness no imparity of joy can flow. Then seeing the first sentence granteth an imparity of joy and reward: and the second affirmeth, it cometh not from imputed righteousness: The third and conclusion must needs be this: That both joy and reward in heaven, and their degrees, imparity or inequality, proceed from inherent justice.  
My next Argument is this: All grace wherewith men's souls in Sacraments, or otherwise be filled, and is infused into them, must needs be inherent: But grace of justification and sanctification is such: Therefore man is justified by inherent grace. The Mayor is evident, for filling and infusion, is by putting in of things, and not by imputation: for no such thing can fill any thing. The Minor is thus proved by D. Feild speakeing of children baptised: and the like reason is of others. His words be these: Children when they are adopted and made 
Feild. pag. 179.  the sons of God, when they are justified and sanctified, are filled with habits or potential abilities, of these virtues faith, hope, and love. The same 
Field l. 1. c. 4. pag. 10.  doctrine he teacheth in an other place to be cited hereafter, when I shall entreat of the grace and efficacy of Sacraments: where this Article will be more declared. For this time it is further confirmed by D. Covell who also in plain terms approveth 
Covell def. of Hooker pag. 114.  habitual, and real infusion of grace, and concerning justification avoncheth thus: The doctrine of Luther in this point was not unjustly called 
Pag. 40. sup.  into question, by those of the Roman Church. And seemeth to labour to reconcile that, which he esteemeth the best opinion of Protestants in this matter, to that of the Church of Rome.  
Further I argue thus: All that is a gift of God a quality in the soul, an internal habit, and infused from God, is inherent: But the grace of justification is such: Therefore it is inherent. The first proposition is manifestly true▪ the second is proved by M. 
Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 81. 82.  Wotton in these words: Grace is some gift of God, which is a quality in the soul. And a little after. The habits of grace be infused from God.  
lastly in this matter I reason thus: whatsoever maketh every true Christian to be righteous in the sight of God, is true justice: But Inherent grace maketh every true Christian righteous in the sight of God: Therefore inherent grace is true justice. The Mayor is manifestly true: And the Minor thus plainly proved by M. Wotton, in 
Wotton def of Perk. pag. 12. pag. 186.  these words: We acknowledge every true Christian to be righteous in the sight of God, by inherent Righteousness. And answering for Protestants and writing this for their acknowledgement in the plural number would have us take it for their common opinion. And thus Catholic doctrine of inherent grace is directly and demonstratively proved to be true even by Protestants. And their denial thereof together with their conceit of imputative righteous, also by themselves convinced for false and erroneous. Which is further confirmed by M. higgon's in his Sermon at Paul's Cross, wherein speaking of the just, he calleth them. Parson's having 
Theoph. Higg. Ser. 3. mart. 1610. pag. 24.  grace dwelling in them. And again: We have inherent righteousness in ourselves. Then seeing forms inherent, do, and must needs denominate the subject, in which they inhere, and be subjecteth, as heat, cold, whiteness, blackness, and the like, are the true cause, why those things in which they are subjecteth, be named, and truly are things hot, cold, white and black: so justice, inherent and subjecteth (as these men tell us) in the souls of men, must needs make them, both truly named, and truly and really to be just. And this is evident through all the theological virtues faith, hope, and charity or love of God (all one) as in other virtues. For as by prudence or wisdom a man is named, and truly is prudent, and wise: by temperance temperate, and so of the rest: So by theological virtues resideing and inherent in us, we are named, and truly be, as their denomination, acts, and effects are. Of faith and belief, we are only named, and are faithful, and beleeinge; by hope, hopeful or hopeinge; by charity or love of God, loveing of him, and keeping his commandments, which is man's justification, as M. Wotton shall be witness, in 
Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 175.  these his words: Righteousness saith Austin is nothing else, but not to sin: not to sin, is to keep the commandments of the law: that is as himself presently expownds it. To do none of those things, that are forbidden, and to do all those things, that are commanded. Therefore faith (though it be necessarily required) is not as Cambridg saith, the whole cause of justification. Yet there is more hereafter of this matter.   

CHAPTER FOUR WHEREIN THE CATHOLIC doctrine of the efficacy and validity of good works, done in grace, their merit and reward is proved by these English Protestants.  
CONCERNING the validity, and efficacy of good works, done in grace, sufficient to justify: the Doctrine of the Church of Rome to be holy and sincere in this matter, hath been sufficiently proved by our country Protestants, in the former chapters. But to take away all pretence of exception, I will a little more particularly speak of this Question: Wherein the Council of Trent hath thus defined. Eternal life is to be proposed to those, that work well 
Concil. Trid. sess. 6.  to the end, and trusting in God, both as a grace mercifully promised to the children of God by jesus Christ, and as a Reward by the promise of the same God, faithfully to be rendered to their good deeds, and merits. And a little after, yielding a reason, for the dignity and worthiness of such good works, addeth thus: Christ jesus himself as the head to the members and vine to the branches, doth continually inflowe virtue, anticipateth, accompanieth, and followeth always their good works, and without which they could by no means, be grateful, and meritorious to God. Hitherto the words of the Council, for Catholics. Now to prove how Protestants do accommodate themselves to this doctrine, first I argue in this manner.  
Good works should have justified in the state of innocency if Adam had not fallen: Therefore they can justify being done in the state of grace, by Christ: The parity and consequence is proved by the dignity and value of Christ's passion, and merits, restoring for this purpose, that which we lost in Adam. The Antecedent is justified by D. Covell, who comparing the good works of Christians by grace in Christ, repairing the fall of Adam, with works in the state of innocency, writeth thus: Had Adam continued in his first estate, man's absolute Righteousness, and integrity in all his actions, 
Covell def. of Hooker pag. 40.  had been the way of life to him, and to all his posterity. And seeing this integrity in man's Actions, had tended but either to the keeping of the precepts, or doing works of perfection, both which by Protestants here after be possible, this reason concludeth. Secondly I argue thus: whatsoever procureth pardon for sins doth justify: But good works done in grace, procure pardon for sins: Therefore they justify. The first proposition is evidently true: for as nothing but sin maketh man unjust; so that which taketh it away, must needs leave him just. The second proposition is thus proved first by D. Covell writing in these words: 
Covell def. of Hooker pag. 42. Field pag. 116.  Good works, Humiliation, Fasteinge, and Weepeing are means to blot out sin. And by D. Feild also in this manner: Good works done in grace procure pardon for sin. Again thus I argue: That which is able to justify perfectly, in the sight of God, and did justify Abraham, the Father of the true believers, and justified, doth also justify us: But good works are of that efficacy, and did justify Abraham, our Father: Therefore they justify us his children. The Mayor is manifestly true. For first both that power and ability is in vain which never is acted, as that common ground in learning teacheth: and the Protestants make the manner of the iustifyeing of Abraham, a form of our justification. The second proposition is proved by M. Wotton, who 
Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 241. see Wotton pag. 174. 175. and infrac. 5.  speaketh thus in the name of Protestants: We teach, that those that are in deed adjudged good works, are able to justify a man perfectly in the presence of God, and to deserve everlasting life. Whereby he doth not only teach justification by works of grace, but that they deserve everlasteing life; but of this their worthiness and merit I will dispute hereafter. And the same M. Wotton in the same 
Wotton sup. pag. 240. Wotton sup. pag. 203.  his defence of M. Perkins, writeth thus: M. Perkins professeth that Abraham was justified by works, even before God: not only before men. This a little before the same place. And for himself concerning the iustifieing of Abraham, his words be these: Abraham was justified long before God made him the promise, and before he came out of the land of Chanaan. Which was before his faith so much urged by Protestants in this question, was so commended.  
Further I argue thus: Nothing that is error, is true doctrine: But the denial of justification by good works, is error: Therefore not true doctrine. The Mayor is evidently true: for truth and error are opposites. The Minor is thus proved by D. Covell, whose words be these: To say we claim nothing by any duty we do, or any virtue we find 
Covell def. of Hooker pag. 42.  in ourselves, in the best construction, maketh but an harsh sound, and discovereth the error, which they of the Church of Rome have thought us to hold. Where he directly calleth that error, which the Roman Church hath charged Protestants with, in this question; and expresseth it to be, in extenuating good works so far, that they and virtue in us were not sufficient Title to claim reward for them of God: which could not be, except they were of a iustifieing and deserving nature and power.  
Moreover thus I reason: That which is the observation of the law, is righteousness, and justice: But good works done in grace at the observation of the law: Therefore they are righteousness and justice. The Mayor is evident. The Minor is proved by the 
Covell def. of Hooker pag. 42.  same Protestant Doctor in the same place, and in these words: Amongst creatures in this world, only man's observation of the law, of his nature is righteousness: only man's transgression sin. Which might also be sufficient for an other Argument: for if only transgression of the law, is sin, and unjustice; then good works the keeping of the law, must needs be justice. And in an other place thus the same Author speaketh of prayer, a part of good works: Prayer is the best means both to 
Covell modest. examinat. pag. 176.  testify our dutiful affection, and most effectual to obtain, whatsoever we wanting can desire at God's hands. D. Sutcliffe thus commendeth this good work. By prayers we obtain remission of 
Sutcliff ag. D. Kellison pag. 72. 73.  sins. By prayers we obtain God's grace. And yet it is evident even in Protestants doctrine, that they which have remission of sins, and God's grace, are just, and righteous, in their phrase of speaking. 
Good deeds done in grace, meretoreous, by English Protestant's   
Now that good deeds done in grace are also meritorious, thus I argue: Whatsoever is rewarded, rewardable, bindeth an other to give for it, was by antiquity, and now also properly called merit, is meritorious: But good works done in grace, are such: Therefore they are meritorious. The Mayor is evident: And the Minor thus proved first by D. Covell which speaketh thus: That 
Covell def. of Hooker pag. 51. 52.  works of perfection to which we are not bound, have greater reward, then keeping of the precepts. Then both the one and other must needs have their reward, the one great, and the other greater: and consequently be so meretorious, and deserueing; for even in our vulgar language, and propriety of speech, reward is not but where deserving is; signifyeing a Retribution or paying again for a thing. Again the same Protestant Doctor writeth thus in 
Coveli sup. pag. 40. 44.  plain terms: Rewards do always presuppose such duties performed as are rewardable. It was the phrase of Antiquity to call our virtuous attainment by the way of merit. The phrase of the Latin doth properly make one to merit of an other, and as it were to bind him to him, who doth any thing which pleaseth, and delighteth him, for whom it is done. Which sufficiently proveth that second proposition. And from this grant, this matter is thus, further demonstrated by their Articles to which they have, all subscribed, 
Articl. of Relig. Articl. 12.  where it is thus defined: good works which are the fruits of faith, are pleaseing and acceptable to God in Christ. Upon which words, good works do please God, their public gloss is in these 
Roger's in art. 12. pr●pos 1. pag. 53.  words: God hath commanded them to be done, and requireth righteousness, not only outward of the body, but also inward of the mind, and hath appointed for the virtuous, and godly, rewards both in this life, and in the world to came, and to the wicked punishments, spiritual, corporal, and of body and soul, eternal in the pit of Hell: And for this doctrine cite these scriptures: Matth. 5. 16. joh. 15. 12. Phil. 2. 14. etc. 1. Thess. 4. 3. etc. 2. Tim. 2. 19 james 2. Matth. 5. 22. 26. etc. And all these Protestant Confessions, Helvetia. Basile, Boheme, France Belgia, Ausburge, Saxony, Wittemb. Sueve. Therefore we need not be doubtful of it, by Protestant proceed.  
But to make it further, and without all exception, most apparently true: I further argue in this manner. That which was taught by the true primitive Church in this point, is true doctrine: But merit of good works was then taught by it: Therefore it is true doctrine. The Mayor is evident before. And the Minor is proved thus, by these Protestants. D. Morton from Caluyn acknowledgeth, 
Morton apolog part 1. pag 275. 276. Covell modest. exam. pag. 120. Sutcliff subvers. pag. 50.  that the word merit was used of the Ancient Fathers, in obtaining reward. D. Covell assureth us thus: divers both of the Greek, and Latin Church, taught free-will, merits, and invocation of Saints, as Catholics do. D. Sutcliff telleth us, that within the first 600. years (time of truth with him and other Protestants) the doctrine of merits and good deeds was taught. And M. Wotton acknowledging that the ancient Fathers used the name of merit, in this question concludeth thus: The doctrine of merits, as it was held and taught by the ancient Christians, we acknowledge, and embrace. Therefore seeing Protestant's (as M. Wotton generally 
Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 339.  undertaketh in their name) acknowledge for true the doctrine of the Father's concerning merits, and (as before by Protestants) the Fathers and the present Roman Church agree in this point, Protestants also must subscribe unto them. And not to make these Protestants singular in this consent, I will add M. Bell to their number: he 
Bell trial of the new Religion cap. 9  writeth thus: True it is, I freely grant, that the holy Fathers do often use the word, merit, and do often call the works of the faithful, meretorious. And doth not only yield; that, to be worthy, and meretorious, is all one, but that such works of the faithful, are rewarded with heaven. I Argue again in this order: works that are rewarded in heaven, may or aught to be done in respect of reward, and bring a special worthiness unto the workers of them, are meretorious: But the good deeds of Christians done in grace, be such: Therefore they are meretorious: The Mayor is evident before, both by the description of reward, by the grant of Protestants, and in respect that M. Bell last cited, hath assured us, that, to be worthy, and to be meretorious, is all one. The Minor is thus proved: first M. Ormerode writeth thus: You (meaning Catholics) 
Ormerod paganopapis. pag. 53.  do notoriously slander us (Protestants) beareing the world in hand, we teach that none ought to do good in respect of reward, be it known unto you, we are far from teaching, that a man ought not to do good in respect of reward. M. Wotton hath these words: God will reward the 
Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 302. pag. 334.  least good work of any of his children. And again: They that are justified, shall have a special worthiness in themselves, when they shall come to receive their inheritance, because they shall be truly, and fully sanctified. Where not only a reward is granted to good works, but that they make the doers of them meriting, and worthy of their eternal inheritance, and that this worthiness is caused by grace, and justice whereby they are justified, and bring forth works, of such worth, value, and deserueinge.  
And to clear further this name of reward, which some of them would violently wrest from the true and proper meaneing thereof in this question: Thus I argue again: whatsoever is so effectual, that reward, or stipend cannot be denied unto it, without injustice, is meretorious: But good works done in grace, are such: Therefore they are meretorious. The Mayor is manifest, for that which is due by justice, is due by Title and worthiness: for the proper act and office of justice is, to render to every one his own, and due. The Minor is thus proved by M. Wotton, who entreateing of the crown 
Wotton def. of Perkins pag. 337. 338. 2. Timoth. 4. v. 8.  of justice, which according unto S. Paul's doctrine, God as a just judge is to render, writeth thus: S. Paul reckons up his good services: and good reason: for the reward is not due to any by promise, but to them that do good works. For else what should be rewarded? But why should it be called a crown of justice? because it is given to the just, according to their just works. And in that respect God is called a just judge, in giving this crown: because he gives good for good. And again: we wholly subscribe to S. 
Wotton sup. pag. 339.  Augustine, that God cannot but reward our good works, because of his promise, and because they are such, for the substance of them, as he hath enjoined: and so (as I have said often) in general justice, they that do well, must have well.  
lastly in this Question I argue thus: That which deserveth condign, or worthy reward, is meretorious But good deeds done in grace, be such: Therefore they are meritorious. The Mayor is evident: because Meritum ex condigno, merit by condignietie, is the greatest, and that which hath been most impugned by Protestants. The Minor is concluded by his majesty, in his approbation of the Accidence, before the Grammar, usually taught in England: where speakeing of schoolmasters deservings, for the teaching, and instruction of children, his regal and resolute sentence, for this matter, is uttered in these words: you shall 
Approbat. of th● Accidence init.  deserve of almighty God condign reward. Where both deserving, which is merit, and the reward to be condign, is testified. And thus much, for this question, out of their private Authors and Doctors, Now let us cite somewhat, out of their public Theatre. 
Theatre of great Britan pag. 342.   
In which they deliver unto us first the common opinion of that primitive age of Christianity in this point, generally in these terms: It is not to be wondered at in that these times, the holy Acts of men, which no doubt were many, and the habit of monks, the accounted holy garments of humility, were so meritoriously respected and reputed in the devout hearts of the Religeous. Where we see, that this doctrine of the merit of good works, was so general, and universal, that no man might wonder at it: Their reason shall, be answered in his proper place; Therefore seeing this universal doctrine of merits, was in that unspotted time of the Church, as these men have often granted, it may be wondered at, with what colour, or pretence of truth, these men against their own Rule, and judgement should now deny it, or bring it into question. Especially seeing they assign through all their work, this cause of merit and satisfaction to have given the chief ground, and original, to so many holy, and Religious fowndations, in England, to merit and procure pardon of God, to satisfy for the sins of themselves, the founders, their friends, Ancestors, and posterities. As we may understand by these few Examples, which they propose unto us in this order: Oswy King of Northumberland 
Theat. pag. 338. n. 2.  having cruelly slain King Oswyne of Deirans, in that place afterward for satisfaction of so heinous an offence, a monastery was built, as upon like occasions, many the like fowndations were laid. And of him again (partly cited in an other place:) This King Oswy having reigned 28. 
Pag. 338. n. 8.  years falling sick, stroke with remorse for the death of good King Oswyne, and the blood which he had spilled, vowed a pilgrimadge to Rome. So they describe 
Pag. 339. n. 3.  unto us, K. Wlfhere his works of satisfaction, in building Churches, and monasteries, for his Murdering, or Martyringe his sons Wlfald and Ruffin. And again: Ethelbert of Kent in fowndinge 
Pag. 302. n. 4.  S. Paul's Church in London, in his charter hath these words: Ethelbert Rex Deo inspirant pro animae suae Remedio, dedit Episcopo Mileto terram etc. Ethelbert King by God's Inspiration, for remedy of his soul hath given to Bishop Miletus the land called Tu●lingham for the Monastery of 
Pag. 343. n. 4.  S. Paul. And again: King Ethelbald living a wicked life being reprehended by the epistle of Boniface an English man, and Archbishop of Mentz, in repentance released and privileged the Church from all tributes to himself▪ and built the Abbey of Crowland in Lincolnshire, for the pacifyeing of God's wrath towards his sins. And again: King Offa in testimony of his Repentance, for the blood he had 
Pag. 345.  spilled, he gave the tenth part of all his goods unto the Church men, and unto the poor. At  he also built an other Monastery, and in Warwickshire a Church, where the adjoining town, from it and him beareth the name Offa Church. In great devotion he went to Rome, where he made his Kingdom subject to a Tribute then called Peter peace, afterwards Romescot. In honour of S. Alban, and in repentance of his sins over against Verolamium in the place then called Holmehurst where that Proto-martyr of Britain for the constant profession of Christ, lost his head, Offa built a magnificent Monastery, endoweinge it with lands and rich revenues for the maintenance of an hundred monks. And thus again: King Ethelstan having consented 
Pag. 363.  to his brother edwins death, repent the same; for besides his seven years penance voluntarily undergone, to pacify the ghost of his betrayed brother, he built the two monasteries of Middleton, and Michelnesse, going into the North against the 
Pag. 364.  Danes, as he was a man much devoted to godward, turned a side to visit the Tomb of S. john of Beverley, where earnestly praying for his prosperous success, for want of richer jewels, there offered his knife, voweing that if he returned, he would redeem it with a worthy price. Which as they tell us, he truly performed, though they mention not, what it was. But to put us out of doubt, that both this doctrine of merit, and satisfaction, and the execution of it, by such meritorious good deeds, was both grateful, and pleaseing to God, and honourable with all good men, first they testify of this last recited King in these words: relating of a strange miracle wrought by 
Pag. 364. sup. n 8. 10 & pag. 365.  him, thus they add: The enemies by craft and subtlety coming to his camp, he awakeing boldly rushing upon his enemies, put them back with the death of five petty Kings, twelve Dukes, and well near of the whole Army. He joined Northumberland to the rest of his Monarchye, and returning to Beverly redeemed his own knife. His dominion was the largest that any Saxon before him had enjoyed, and his fame the greatest with all foreign princes, who sought his friendship both with love and alliance by matching with his scisters, and presenting him with rich and rare presents: for Hugh King of France besides other inestimable juells, sent him the sword of Constantine the great, in the hilt whereof, all covered with gold, was one of the nails that fastened Christ to the cross, and of the spear, and crown of thorns. Before him they make King Elfred the most worthy, and after him, King Edward a Saint, and yet make them both in doctrine and practice of merit, and meritorious works to be renowned. Of the first they 
Pag. 351.  writ in this manner: Elfred the fourth son of King Ethelwolfe and lady Osburge his wife, a child of five years old, was sent very honourably attended to the city of Rome, where Leo then Bishop confirmed him, was his godfather at confirmation, and anointed him to the expectation of a Kingdom: grown in years he grew so in discretion, magnanimity, and favour of all men, that in the successive Reigns of his three elder brethren, he ruled as a viceroy, or secondary King under every of them, and 
Pag. 357.  after them at the last succeeded in the English monarchy: He was a most worthy prince. Gurmund or Gurthurne the danish King with thirty of his chief nobility came to conditions with King Elfred, and are christened. His buildings were many, both to God's service, and other public use, as at 
Pag. 359.  Edelingsey a Monastery, at Winchester a new Minster, and at Shastesbury a house of Nuns, wherein he made his daughter Ethelgeda the Abbess. His other holy works and meritorious deeds are to many to be remembered in this place; but they conclude of him in these words: The 
Pag. 359. sup. n. 25. 28.  virtues of this prince are matchable to any, that ever reigned before him, and exceed the most, that ever reigned after him, both in service of God etc. Concerning K▪ Edward surnamed the Confessor, it would be to tedious to make recital, but of part of his holy virtues, and meritorious works, in this place I only add from these men: The 40000. pounds yearly of Dane guilt was remitted by him, paid for 40. years continuance, 
Pag. 397. 398. 399. 400. 401. 402.  out of the lands of all, except only the clergy, because (say our ancient laws the Kings reposed more confidence in the prayers of holy Church, then in the power of Arms. His words of Q. Editha his wife openly upon his death bed were: ●hee was his wife, but in secret embracings as his scister. K. Edward (and his successors after) miraculously cureth the disease called struma, now the King's evil, with other prophetical and heavenly jousts he was endowed. He vowed a pilgrimadge to Jerusalem, for dischardg whereof he built the Church of Westminister etc. These Protestants conclusion of him is this: Kiuge Edward a prince of much virtue and integrity of life, reigned with such justice and piety, that he obtained the venerable name of Saint, and unto posterities is distinguished from other Edward's, by the adjunct, Confessor. o how happy were it, if either Catholics, or Protestants could truly write so much of Protestant princes, neither friends to the doctrine or favours of exercise, of merits, and meritorious deeds. Therefore the university of Cambridge, by their own Doctors were overseen, to say: We hold charity to be no concurring cause of justification with faith. Yet somewhat more of this matter, is, contained in the next chapter.   

CHAPTER V WHEREIN IS PROVED BY these English Protestants, that the commandments of God are possible to be kept by grace: may, and aught so to be kept.  
CONCERNING the keeping of 
Concil. Tried sess. 6. can. 11.  God's commandments, The Council of Trent hath thus defined. No man ought to use that temerarious saying, and condemned by the Fathers, under Anathema, that the precepts of God are unpossible to be kept of a man justified, for God doth not command unpossible things, but commanding doth admonish, both to do what thou canst, and to ask, what thou canst not do, and doth help that thou mayest be able to do, whose commandments are not heavy, whose yoke is sweet, and burden light, for they which are the children of God, do love, and they which love him, as himself wittnesseth, keep his sayeings. Hitherto the Council of Trent, for the doctrine of the Roman Church: now that the English Protestants by their own writings, are, or aught to be of the same opinion, in this question, thus I argue.  
Whatsoever all Christians justly vow to keep and perform, that in all true doctrine they are able to keep, and perform: But by the opinion of English Protestants, all Christians vow to keep the commandments: Therefore they may, and must keep them. The Mayor is manifest by Protestants, graunteing with the holy scriptures, and Fathers, that just vows be both of things possible, and must be kept: for if the just promise of man to man bindeth, how much more a just promise to God, which is a vow obligatory and byndeing? The Minor is proved by the public Protestant English communion book, reconfirmed by his majesties authority: which both teacheth, that we are bound to 
Communion Book tit. chatechisme, and tit public Baptism. §. well beloved friends.  keep the commandments, and all that are baptised vow to do it. Then seeing all English Protestants, do either swear, or subscribe unto, and daily follow and execute the doctrine, and prescription of that their authentical Ritual, and Directory, as they cannot by their oath or subscription deny it without perjury or denial of their faith: so by the rule itself, they commit sacrilege in rejecting that doctrine.  
Secondly I argue thus: All things that are of necessity to be observed, or kept of men, in Religion, are possible: But the commandments are of necessity to be observed, and kept: Therefore they are possible. The Mayor is so evidently true, that if it were false, all Christians of necessity must be damned, and none saved, not being able to do that which of necessity they must do, or else not be saved, but damned. The Minor is proved by the present Protestant Archbishops of Canterbury, and D. Fields allowed Greek Church: which censureth thus: The commandments of God of necessity are 
Hieremias patriarch. constant. censur. cap. 5.  to be observed. Therefore if they would deny their communion Book itself, which before hath proved the same, for vows justly made are of necessity to be kept: yet if D. Feild and such will be members of their allowed true Church, they must be of this opinion: & I the rather hope so, because, D. Feild with others say: out of the Church there is no salvation. Thirdly that doctrine which is 
Feild sup. paert. 1. cap. 1.  so absurd, that by Protestants opinion, no man teacheth it, is not true: But this of the unpossibilitie to keep the commandments is such: Therefore it is not true. The Mayor is manifest: The Minor is made as manifest by these words of D. Sutcliff: 
Sutcliff ag. D. Kellison pag. 74. 91.  No man doth teach, that the commandments are absolutely, and simply unpossible. Therefore they may be kept.  
Further I argue thus: All that grant the doctrine of the Church of Rome (expressed before out of the Council of Trent) to be true in this point, and that God exacteth of us to keep the commandments, must needs grant the possibility, to do it, and consent herein with Catholics: But English Protestant's do, or must do so: Therefore they must grant this possibility, and consent to Catholics. The Mayor is evidently true: The Minor is proved by D. Covell thus: 
Covell def. of Hooker pag. 55. 58.  The Church of Rome's opinion is true concerning committing or avoydeing sin. And again: God exacteth we should keep all the commandments. 
Pag. 57  And further in these words: If we be not ourselves wanteinge, though we cannot avoid all sins: yet we may, and shall avoid all great and presumptuous sins. And to make this matter more clear, if it needed, he addeth: Because S. 
Pag. 58. sup.  james saith, he that keepeth the whole law, and offendeth in one, is guilty of all: some thought, all sins to be imputed to him, that committed any one: But S. james only telleth to us, that God exacteth a keeping of them all. This then is the Conclusion, that though no man be without all sin, yet many are without many presumptuous sins, which through prayers, and good means they avoid. What these men teach of venial sins, and the distinction of them from mortal, and grievous sins, agreeable to Catholic doctrine, I shall entreat hereafter: In the mean time further I argue thus. If true charity such as keepeth the commandments, may be had in this life, them they may be kept: But such charity may be had in this life: Therefore the commandments, may be kept. The first proposition is evidently true: for the sufficient cause being put, the effect must needs be possible, otherwise the cause were not sufficient, contrary to our supposition: 
Wotton d●f. of Perkins pag▪ 15.  The Minor is thus proved by M. Wotton writing in this manner: True charity, though not perfect, may be had in this life, and by it the commandments of God may be, and are kept, though not perfectly. Therefore (which he granteth in express words) the commandments both may, and be kept. Therefore may be kept, for things unpossible neither are, nor can be done. Ad impossibilia non est potentia: There is no power to things unpossible. And the same Protestant writer, speakeing of inherent justice writeth thus: Neither do we (Protestants) deny, that this inherent Righteousness 
Wotton sup. pag. 174. 175.  is such, as might enable us to keep the law, and shall when it is perfect. Righteousness saith Austin is nothing else but not to sin: not to sin, is to keep the commandments of the law: That is as himself presently expownds it, to do none of those things that are forbidden, and to do all those things that are commanded. To him I may add D. Barlow Protestant late Bishop of Lincoln, who 
Barlowe Answ. to a name less Cath. pag. 304.  relateth two things which may serve this purpose: The first is how princes have the greatest Temptations & are most unlikely by that means to keep the commandments, and keep themselves from great sins: his words be these: Kings have many occasions, which may allure them to sin, especially having that privilege in scripture, whether exgratia or de facto: whether by exemption from God, or fear of men: that no man may say unto them, why do you thus. And the second thing concerning keeping the commandments, and living without great sin, he writeth of Queen Elizabeth (no more confirmed in grace then other princes for any thing he writeth, or any man can conjecture) in these words: Queen Elizabeth never in her life committed hellish crime. Therefore if she a princess, and 
Barlow● sup. pag. 73.  Queen, by this man's testimony (though I take it not as a revelation) living in that dawngerous n1 of those of her rank, by his judgement before, never committed any sin deserueing Hell, I hope he will, or must grant, that by his judgement, others not in such case of danger, and some of them also that be of that place, may live without syns' hellish, or if they commit any in their life, may do penance for them, keep the commandments, and be saved. And thus much of this matter: And I hope a full discharged of the scruple of the University of Cambridge, in their last question, by their own learned Doctors and professors.   

CHAPTER VI. WHEREIN THE CATHOLIC doctrine of free will in man, is proved by these English Protestant writers.  
THE Council of Trent for Catholics, entreateing of the fall of 
Concil. Trid. sess. 6. can. 1.  man, by the sin of Adam, hath thus declared in this Question. Men were so much the Servants of sin, and under the power of the devil, and death, that not only the gentiles by the strength of nature, but neither the jews by the letter of the law of Moses, could be delivered, or rise from thence, although free will was not extinguished, but weakened in power, and declined in them. And thus again: The beginning of 
Can. 5. sup.  justification in them, that be of discretion, is to be taken from God, by jesus Christ, by grace preventing, that is from his calling, by the which when they had no merits, they are called: That they which were averted from God by sins, by his excitatinge and helpeing grace, to convert them, are disposed to their justification, freely assenting to the same grace, and cooperating: So that God touching the heart of man, by the illumination of the holy Ghost, neither man himself doth nothing at all, receiving that inspiration, when he may abject it, neither not withstanding without the grace of God, can move himself to justice, before him, by his free will: Whereupon in holy scripture it is said, be you converted to me, and I will be converted 
Zachar. 1.  to you, was ●●e admonished of our freedom: when we answer, o Lord convert us to thee, and 
Psal. 84.  we● shall be converted, we confess we are prevented by the grace of God. Hither to that holy Council, which I have related more at large, in regard that many Protestants have (and I fear sometimes voluntarily) mistaken and reported the doctrine of the Roman Church in this Question. And after this, the same sacred Council defineth against the 
Concil. Trid. sup. sess. 6. can. 6.  enemies of free will, in this manner: If any m●n shall say, that the free will of man, after the sin of Adam, is lost and extinct, let him be Anathema. Now let us hear, how these English Protestant writers will agree with this Catholic sentence. In which matter thus I argue.  
Where there is freedom in will, from coaction, and necessity, there is free will: But in man's will after the fall of Adam, is this freedom: Therefore in him there is free will The Mayor is evident by Protestants graunteing such freedom to make free will: The Minor is proved by D. Covell 
Covell def. of Hooker pag. 35.  writing thus: Notwithstanding all the wownds given to human nature, by the fall of Adam, Ignorance, Malice, Concupiscence, and Infirmity: ●et the will is free from necessity, and coaction, though not from misery and infirmity▪ where he doth most plainly teach a freedom of the will from sin: for where no necessity and coaction is, there must needs be liberty and freedom: and in the will, freedom in it, and free will. And to make Protestants agree with the recited Council of Trent in this matter, thus he speaketh again in their name: In supernatural things we say, the 
Covell sup. pag. 37.  will of man hath not obtained grace by freedom, but freedom by grace. Meaneing that by the grace of Christ man is made free to do all duties, in supernatural and religeous affairs, of themselves above the natural power, before it is assisted by spiritual, and supernatural help and grace. And concerning the natural power itself, before the coming of grace, he speaketh in this manner: There is in the will of man, naturally that freedom, whereby it is apt, to take or refuse, any particular 
Covell sup.  object whatsoever, being presented unto it. And from hence I argue further in this order.  
That without which man's actions are neither good nor evil, must needs be granted: But free will in man, is such: Therefore it must needs be granted. The Mayor is evident: for if men's actions were neither good nor evil, there could be no reward for virtue, because nothing should be virtue, where nothing is good: nor punishment for sin, because nothing could be sin, where nothing could be evil. The Minor is proved by D. Covell, who ascribeth to this freedom of man's will, the goodness and malice of human actions, as if he would say, if man had not freedom, and liberty of will, his Actions could not be praised for good: nor condemned for evil: his words be these: All the unforced Actions of 
Covell sup. def. of Hooker pag 49. 50.  men, are voluntary▪ and all voluntary actions, tending to their end, have choice: and all choice presupposeth the knowledge of some cause, wherefore we make it: And therefore it is no absurdity, to think, that all Actions of men, endued with the use of reason, are generally either good, or evil. Where we may see, what a creature man is made by them that deny free will unto him, that even in Protestants judgements, by that denial, not only his actions (as before) be neither vice, or virtue: and himself thereby deprived of the power of choice and election, is denied to be a reasonable creature, and proved by their own deductions, to be a beast and wholly mortal.  
Again I argue thus: All that grant, and acknowledge the truth, of the doctrine of the schoolmen, and of the Church of Rome in this point, and further, that man hath liberty to virtue, and vice, must needs grant free will in man: But these English Protestant writers following, grant these things: Therefore they must grant free will in man. The Mayor is both too manifest, and copious: The Minor is proved by these Protestant citations, D. Covell writing of 
Covell def. of Hooker pag. 34.  the fall of man in Adam, setteth down his opinion in this o●der: We must needs confess, that by sin he hath lost much: who is now able to comprehend all that he should? But we dare not affirm, that he hath lost all, who even in this blindness, is able to see some thing, and in this weakness, strong enough, without the light of supernatural iustifyeing grace, to tread out those paths of moral virtues, which have not only great use, in human society, but are also not altogether of a nature oppositely different from man's salvation. And further thus he writeth: Though sin hath given (as the 
Covell sup. pag. 35.  schoolmen observe) four wownds unto our nature; Ignorance, Malice, Concupiscence, and Infirmity: the first in the understanding, the second in the will, the third in our desiring appetite, the last in the Irascible: yet the will is free from necessity, and coaction, though not from misery, and Infirmity. For (as S. Bernard saith) there is a threefold freedom, from necessity, from sin, from misery; the first of nature, the second of grace, the third of glory. In the first from the bondadge of coaction, the will is free in it own nature, and hath power over itself. In the second, the will is not free, but freed from the bondadge of sin. And in the third it is freed from the servitude of corruption. Now that freedom, by which the will of man is named free, is the first only: And therefore we dare say, that the wick●d, who have not the two last, (being captives to sin in this life, and to misery in the life to come) yet for all this, want not the freedom of will. And to make plain demonstration, that in this question he joineth with the Church of Rome: as he hath before followed the schoolmen in 
Part. 1. cap. 2. Covell sup. def. pag. 35. 36. 37.  general, chiefest Agents and foretops of popery (as they are called by Protestants before, so in particular he appealeth to the Authority of Petrus Lombardus, Master of the Sentences. To Albertus, Bonaventara, Scotus, S. Thomas etc. For decision hereof. Whose opinion to be the same with the present Catholic Church no man can make question. To this man I add the forenamed approvers of the Greek Church to be the true Church, D. Abbots the present Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury D. Feild etc. For this Greek Church censureth in these words: Man hath 
Hieremias Patriarch. constant. Censur. cap. 18, ●. 19  free will to eternal salvation. And again: Virtue and vice be in the power and choice of man. We may avoid all sins. It is against the nature of things, that to be esteemed virtue, which a man doth by necessity. For every virtuous action must proceed from the liberty of the will.  
I argue further thus: That which was the doctrine of the primitive Church in this point, is true: But to grant free will was the doctrine thereof: Therefore it is true. Both the Mayor and Minor be proved before. 
Part. 1. cap. 9 part 2. c. 4. Covell mod. examinat. pag. 120. Sutcliff. subu. pag. 50.  The Mayor in the first part and this also. The minor in the 4. chapter before out of D. Covell and D. Sutcliff. And so nothing in this argument requireth proof any further. Therefore I make this new argument. All men granting unto man, liberty to sin, or, not to sin, to be saved, or not to be saved, must needs grant free will in man, as Catholics do: But the Protestants following grant such liberty, and freedom to man: Therefore they grant unto him free will, as Catholics do. The Mayor is manifest: and the Minor thus proved by M. Wotton, who defendeinge M. Perkins, 
Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 67. pag. 68  compareing a sinner out of grace, to a prisoner, addeth thus for himself: He that is chained by sin, may choose whether he will do such an Action, or no. And again thus: Liberty in the state of grace, to will spiritual good, we thank fully acknowledge. And 
Wotton sup. pag. 85.  further in these words: A man may with hold himself from breaking into gross sins. We deny not, that it is in the power of men, to make choice of life. We acknowledge that the fault is in every man, that 
Pag. 86. Pag. 88  is not saved.  
I Argue further: That which true Religion doth not deny, and was consented unto, by the primitive Church, is not to be denied for true: But the doctrine of free will in man is such: therefore not to be denied for true. The Mayor is manifest. And the Minor both confirmed by D. Covell and D. Sutcliff: and now proved by M. Wotton, 
Wotton def of Perk. pag. 88  who both confesseth, that the ancient Fathers in the primative time consented with Catholics, in this question: And concludeth thus: We say with Austin both in words and meaneing, 
Sup. pag. 90.  that true Religion neither denies free will, either to a good, or bad life.  
My last Argument against all English Protestants is from their own public decree, and framed thus. Whosoever by their own public decree, and subscription in Religion, agree with the Council of Trent, in this question, do grant free will: But all English Protestants be, or aught to be such: Therefore they grant free will. The mayor is manifest by the recited degree of the Council. The Minor is thus demonstratively proved: for the Book of the Articles of their Religion (as before) confirmed by his Majesty, to which all Ministers have subscribed, or so ought to do, by their own proceed, doth teach them thus: The condition of man after the 
Artic. 10. of Religion.  fall of Adam is such, that he cannot turn, and prepare himself by his own natural strength, and good works, to faith, and calling upon God: Wherefore we have no power to do good works, pleasant, and acceptable to God, without the grace of God preventing us, that we may have a good will, and working with us, when we have that good will. Then with the Council of Trent it supposeth, that by grace man is made free even to supernatural things: and before grace is by nature free. And this is sufficient for this Question.   

CHAPTER VII. WHEREIN THE CATHOLIC doctrine, of the distinction between precepts, and cownsayls, and how they bind, is proved by these English Protestant writers.  
THE common doctrine as well of the Church of Rome, teaching a distinction between precepts, and counsels, the necessity of the one, & not the other, as also the contrary generally taught by Protestants, are sufficiently known to all, acquainted with the controversies of this time; wherefore without needle's repetition further, to prove that these English Protestant writers, do or by their own writings ought to agree, and consent to Catholics in this question, Thus I argue, and but briefly, because it is so plainly yielded unto, by these men.  
All that consent with the Roman Church, in this question, grant this distinction of precepts and counsels, as it doth: But these English Protestants accounted learned writers, among which are cited hereafter, do so consent with the Roman Church: Therefore they grant, or aught by their doctrine to grant this distinction of precepts, and counsels. The Mayor is manifest: The Minor is proved by these Protestant Doctors. First D. Feild confesseth it 
Feild. pag. 241.  thus: Besides precepts many things were delivered by the way of counsel, and advise only to the Churches. Secondly I may add all those which before have granted unto us, that the commandments of God may be kept, the denial of this distinction and doctrine, being but an accidentary, and subordinate error, defended, to uphold that falsehood, that the commandments are not possible to be observed: wherefore, I will thirdly cite D. Covell a man plainly delivering his own consent, and of his fellow Protestants also, so far as he can allow their Religion, in this matter: his words be these. Precepts and Counsels have this difference, that the 
Covell def. of Hooker pag. 51. pag. 52.  one is of absolute necessity, The other left unto our free election. To cast away wholly the things of the world, is no precept of necessity, but an advise of greater perfection. He that obeyeth not a precept, is guilty of deserved punishment: but he that faileth of these counsels, only wanteth without sin, that measure of perfection. For it is not a fault, not to vow, but to vow, and perform is praise. He that performeth the one, shall have greater glory, but he that faileth of the other, (without repentance) shall have certain punishment. Neither is it said, saith S. Augustine, as thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not kill: So thou shalt not marry, for those are exacted, this is offered. This if it be done, is praised: Those unless they be done, are punished. For saith S. Hierome, where it is, but advise, there is left a freedom: But where there is a precept, there is a necessity. Precepts are common to all: counsels to the perfections of some few. The precept being observed hath a Reward, being not observed a punishment: But a counsel or advise, not observed hath no punishment: and being observed hath a greater reward. And yielding, as it were a reason, why, according to my former assertion, some Protestants and others, have denied this doctrine, he addeth thus: In these points 
Covell sup.  all have not holden the same opinions; some thought these cownsailes to be of the same necessity with precepts: as those Heretics called Apostolici, others esteemed them as things indifferent. Others as things forbidden, which error is accused by some of our Adversaries, to be an opinion of our Church. There is none of any second judgement in our Church, which doth not think, that willing poverty, humble obedience, and true chastity, are things very commendable, and do bring with them great advantadge, to the true perfection of a Christian life. By these we do more, then without these we should. And before he maketh a long discourse, how the 
Covell sup. pag. 50. 51.  states of poverty, chastity, and obedience, belong to these perfections: Which is also evident in his words recited.  
Wherefore out of this grants thus I argue again: what soever Catholic doctrine is so certain, and allowed, that it is warranted by the word of God, the law of reason, by S. Augustine, S. Hierome, the primitive Church, and denied by no Protestant of judgement, by Protestant testimony, that without all doubt is true: But this Catholic doctrine is such, so allowed and warranted: Therefore it is true. The Mayor is without all question true: for those Rules of true doctrine, the word of God, primitive Church etc. Neither in Catholic or Protestant proceed can deceive us: The Minor is proved by the very words of the Protestant Doctors before cited. Therefore I will conclude with this Argument following.  
Whatsoever Church, or congregation, granteth, so many works, and estates of perfection, as before they have recompted, Poverty, Chastity, and Obedience, and yet in life and execution do not practise any one of them in any condition, company, fraternity, or congregation, in any, one place or country in so long time, as protestancy hath Reigned, but spoiled, abandoned, persecuted, or overthrown all monasteries, houses and communities living in such perfection, neither is, nor can be the true, and perfect Church and spouse of Christ; but that which proceedeth in the contrary course: But the Church or congregations of Protestants are in this case, as all men know, and the Roman Catholic Church in the contrary disposition and state: Therefore the Protestant Religion is not true, but only the Catholic. How holy and Religeous this our Kingdom hath been in this high degree of sanctity, in times of Catholic Religion, how many hundreds of Monasteries were founded to such purpose, how many glorious Kings, Queens, and Princes, forsakeinge their kingdoms, Diadems, and Honours, have embraced this state of perfection, in chastity, poverty, and obedience, and became Monks and Nuns, may in sort be gathered out of the Protestant late Theatre, where you shall find the number to great to be cited. I will only allege their words in one place to give some trial of it, which are these: Not only priests 
T●●at. of gr. Britan. pag. 305. n. 16. 17.  and lay men vowed and performed pilgrimadges, to Rome. But Kings, Queens, and Bishops also did the like. So great a devotion was in their hearts, and so holy a Reverence held they of the place. King Egbert succeeded his uncle Ceolnuph in the Kingdom ruling with peace and pity twenty years foresooke the wo●ld, and shore himself a monk, as divers other Kings in those days had done, as Inab, Ethelred, Kenred, Sigebert, Sebbi, Offa, Cronulph etc. Some 
Pag. 17. 25. 37. 47. 298. 301. 308. 338. 351. 360.  of the Queens were these: Q. Aelfrith, Cuthburga, Elemner, Andrye, Quinburge, Eadburge, Eve, Segburge, Ethelburge, Cuthburga, Oswith, Kinswith Ethelwith, E●fride, Eanifled, Erminhild, Ethelswith, Edgiva, Elfgine, with others. The examples of the sons and daughters of Kings, with such great princes, would require a volume to give them due remembrance. I will only recite two or three relations, from these Protestants, how honourably these works of perfection with their vows were then esteemed, and how barbarous a thing it was then, to violate them. They writ of King Etheldred in these words: The remorse of conscience for the 
Pag. 341. n. 4  blood he had spilled, and the places of Oratoryes by him destroyed (besides his Intrusions into an other man's Right) struck so deep a wound into King Ethelreds' breast, that e●er he bethought him what recompense to make. First then building a goodly Monastery at Bradney, and that most fruitful seated in the county of Lincoln, thought that not sufficient to wa● aw●●●he scars of his fowl offence, but determined in himself to forsake the world, for that was the term attributed to the monastical life. But such was the Religion then taught, and the goldy zeal of the good princes then raigneinge, whose works have manifested their virtues, to posterities, and faith in Christ, the salvation of their souls, in whose paradise we leave them, and Etheldred to his devent intent: who to reconcile himself first unto Kenred, bequeathed the Crown solely to him, although he had a son capable thereof: then putting on the habit of Religion, became himself a monk in his own monastery of Bradney where he lived in a regular life the term of twelve years, and therein lastly died Abbot of the place, when he had reigned 30. years. Chelred the son and heir apparent of this King Ethelred, entered into Religion, when he 
Pag. 341. n. 6.  was of sufficient years to have succeeded his Father in the Kingdom. Of the miraculous victory of King Osway by his vow to dedicate his daughter to Christ in perpetual virginity, they writ in this manner. Penda the merciless Pagan King invading King Oswy refuseing all 
Pag. 338. n. 4. 5.  juells and offers of peace, King Oswy seeketh help of God by prayer. And with such zeal as was then embraced, vowed his young daughter Elfled to be consecrated in perpetual virginity to him, with 12 farms and their lands, to the erection, and maintenance of a monastery; And his enemies army being thirty times his and of well appointed and old tried soldiers, Penda lost his life, with discomfiture of all his mercian power. Of Ethelwald son of Ethelbert 
Pag. 360. n. 3  thus they writ: He entereth now rebellion, and besides the alleadgeance due to his prince, in sacriledgeius manner broke the hests of holy Church, in deflowering, and taking a votarist to wife. But fearing the Army of K. Edward bad in the night winborne (which he had taken) and his Nun adieu, flyeinge to the Danes in Northumberland. Where we see that this point of Protestant doctrine is by their own sentence, sacrilege, a breaking of the hests of holy Church, joining itself against God and country, with Rebellion and infidelity. And a thing though used by Infidels, yet a monster and seldom hard of among Christians: for of those Infidel Danes they add in these words: Hunger and 
Pag. 354. cap. 35. n. 5.  Hubba began with fire and sword to lay all waste before them spareing neither parson, sex, nor age. The places respected for public good, and sacred temples consecrated only to God, which all other Tyrants have forborn, the savage men as the earths destroyers cast down, and trampled under their profane feet: among which for note were the goodly monasteries of Bradney, Crowland, Peterborough. Ely, and Huntingdon, all laid in level with the ground, and their votaries aswell the Nuns as the Monks, murdered with their inhuman and merciless swords: to avoid whose barbarous pollutions, the chaste Nuns of Coldingham deformed themselves to their lascivious eyes, by cutting of their upper lips and noses: but to everlasting remembrance they remain most fair and well beseeming faces of puer virgins. Then if the glory, and honour of such vows, works of perfection, their vowers, votarists, and professors are so great, and estimable with God, and good men even in the judgement of these Protestants. And those that have (though but in small things in respect of these Protestants) afflicted and persecuted them, are worse than tyrants, savage men, earth destroyers and profane; what is become of those Protestants that destroyed so many hundreds of holy Temples, monasteries, and places consecrated to God, which all other tyrants have forborn? And what hope can be to these, that live, persisting in those steps of their forerunners, and daily adding new, and more afflictions to the sacred Priests, and holy professors of that Religion, and perfection therein? God of his infinite mercy grant them true penance, and turn away his so much deserved vengeance, from this nation: And that as these men have much exexceeded the Infidel Danes in offending, so they may in some kind imitate them in satisfaction and repenting: for they themselves in this Theatre are witness, that their 
Theat of gr. Britt. pag. 391. 392.  greatest King Canutus (whom I choose to exemplify in) for satisfaction of such his sins. Went on pilgrimadge to Rome to visit the sepulchre of S. Peter and Paul. Built many Churches and Abbeys, greatly reverenced S. Benett (whose monasteries were so persecuted) he offered up his crown upon the Martyr's S. Edmund's Tomb. Most rich and royal jewels he gave to the Church of Winchester, whereof one is recorded to be a cross worth as much as the whole revenue of England amounted to in one year. He set his crown, on the head of the picture of our Saviour on the cross, at Winchester, never weareinge it more. Unto Coventry he gave the Arm of Saint Augustine the Doctor: which he bought at Papia, in his return from Rome, and for which he paid an hundred Talents of silver, and one of gold. With his own hands he did help to remove the body of Saint Alphegus at the translation of it from London to Canterbury, whom the Danes (not withstanding his archiepiscopal and sacred calleing) before had martyred at Greenwich. Gunhilda daughter of this King, and Emma his wife, was the first wife of 
Pag. 393. n. 24.  Henry 3. Roman Emperor, her surpassing beauty bred in the Emperor jealousy of her incontinency, the matter to be tried by combat, her champion was her page, but a youth brought out of England, against agyantlike man, but the page cut of his head. The Empress refuseth the Emperor's bed, and took the holy veil of a Nun in Flaunders where she spent the rest of her life. O how happy had it been, for K. Henry 8. and his daughter Q. Elizabeth, themselves, for us, and all posterities in England, if as in sinning they imitated and exceeded the unbeleeveing Danes, so in repenting and satisfaction they had been Imitators of their piety.   

CHAPTER VIII. WHEREIN THE CATHOLIC doctrine, of the distinction between mortal and venial sins is proved by these Protestant writers.  
IN this Question thus I briefly make demonstration, for the Catholic doctrine, by these Protestants: All men that grant, and do not deny this difference of sins, some to be mortal, depriveing of grace, others venial, not depryveing of it, but consisting with it, do grant this distinction, and do, or aught to agree with Catholics therein: But these English Protestant Doctors, and writers do thus: Therefore they do, or aught to agree with Catholics therein. The Mayor is evident: For as matters of faith may never (without that great horrible offence, of denial of a man's faith) be denied, so they ought according to the obligation, and duty of some times professing our faith, be also some times confessed: But the rest of the Mayor which is sufficient in this argument is expressly affirmed, and the Minor thus proved. First the public Protestant Conference at 
Conference pag. 41.  Hampton Court, assureth us thus: Among sins some be grievous, or mortal, which deprive of grace, others venial, or which do consist with grace. Which is the same which the Church of Rome teacheth, in this Question. And D. Feild entreateinge of this matter, writeth 
Field pag. 116.  thus in the name generally of Protestants: We do not deny the distinction of venial and mortal sins, but do think, that some sins are rightly said to be mortal, and some venial: some do exclude grace, out of that man in which they are found, and so leave him in a state, wherein he hath nothing in himself, that can or will procure him pardon; others do not so far prevail, as to banish grace. 
Covell def. of Hooker pag. 56.  D. Covell disputing against the Heresies, of English Puritan Protestants, useth these words: Your three false conclusions, seem to establish a threefold error, contrary to the doctrine of all Churches, that are accounted Christian. First, that all sin, is but one sin. Secondly that all sins are equal. Thirdly that all sins are united. The first making no division of the kinds of sin; the second no distinction, of the qualities of sin; and the third no difference in committing sin. Against these we say, (and we hope warranted by truth) that sins are of divers kinds: of divers degrees: of divers natures. From which, thus I argue again.  
Whatsoever doctrine, is contrary to the doctrine of all Churches accounted Christian, is erroneous, and in the contrary to that, which is warranted by truth, is not true: But that Protestant doctrine, which denieth the divers kinds, degrees, and natures of sins, is such: Therefore it is not true. The Mayor is manifest: for true doctrine cannot be contrary to all Christian Churches, to truth, nor can be erroneous, opposite to truth. The Minor is expressly in plain words, proved by D. Covell before, who maketh it so odious, that in his opinion, none accounted, or to be accounted a Christian will defend it. And the same doctrine of distinction of sins thus he confirmeth in these words: It is not all one, to be ● foot, 
Covell def. of Hooker pag. 57 58.  and a rod wide. And therefore the law that forbade but one thing (thou shalt not kill) forbade three things, as Christ expoundeth it; Anger to thy Brother: to call him fool: to offer him violence: these having every one as their several degrees, so their several punishment. This Heresy than we leave to his first Authors jovinian, and the rest.  
From which sentence thus I argue again: Nothing that is Heresy, and was for such condemned in the Heretic jovinian, and others for such, can be true doctrine: But this Protestant puritan doctrine here confuted by D. Covell in his Judgement is such: Therefore it cannot be true. The Mayor is evident: for true doctrine, and Heresy, be contrary. The Minor is proved in the last Protestant citation. lastly I argue thus.  
That doctrine which hath scandalised all Churches, and leaveth many followers of that Religion, wherein it is taught, ill satisfied, cannot be true; But the doctrine of divers Protestants in this question, is such: Therefore it cannot be true. The Mayor is evident, for truth cannot scandalise all Churches, nor leave the Professors ill satisfied. The Minor is proved by the Protestant Relator of Religion, who entreating of this, 
Relation of Religion cap. 48.  and other such Protestant paradoxes, writeth thus: Touching the eternal decrees of God, the quality of man's nature, the use of works, some of their chief Authors have scandalised all other Churches withal, yea and many of their own to rest very ill satisfied. Therefore the former Catholic doctrine in this point is true, and Orthodox, even by these Protestants. Which shall suffice in this question, perhaps not so generally received by English Protestants, especially in the Articles of their Religion: to which they have subscribed.   

CHAPTER IX. WHERE THE DOCTRINE OF the Roman Church concerning the use and reverence of holy Imadges, is proved by these English Protestant writers.  
NEXT unto these Questions, so nearly concerning the Internal sanctity, justice, and sanctification of man: I would willingly give contentment to my country Protestants, from their own Doctors, and Professors in Religion, in those Articles which they most dislike in the Roman Church. Wherefore as is it sufficiently known, that the Protestant Relator of Religion, is by his profession in his writing both a professed Enemy unto Catholics, and among Protestants a man of reputed worthiness, and taking upon him an experimental knowledge of Religeous causes: so I hope no exception will be taken unto me, if I first make Answer, and give satisfaction unto his demand: which to make an union between Catholics and 
Part. 1. cap. 2. Relation of Religion cap. 48.  Protestants, in only on the behalf of Catholics (as I have also before remembered) is thus set down in his own words: To give over worshipping of Imadges, offering supplication to Saints, offensive Ceremonies, Indulgences, and useinge of strange languadge, not understand in our devotions. These be all which he willeth Catholics to relinquish in their Religion, among so many controversies in essential things, as their styled Professor D. Willet and other of their writers have registered: And consequently willeth Protestant's to conform themselves to the Roman Church in all the rest. To whom I will Answer in every particular, even by his English fellow Protestant writers, and himself also: And first in general, upon his own grant and desire I argue thus.  
When two Churches are at difference in Religion, and by grant of both, one is the true Church of Christ, and differ in many great questions, and many of essential points by the grant of Protestants being one of the Churches, and the other Church by their judgement only to have an union needeth to relinquish five things, and none of them essential, but dispensable all, and the other Church to submit in all others, then by thas doctrine which Protestants have taught us in the first chapter of the first part of this work about the Infallibility of the true Church, and generally that it cannot err in any essential thing, that Church which is by the adversaries confession in this state of truth in all things essential, is the true Church, and the other false: But by the Protestant Relator before, the Roman Church is in this state of truth, and the Protestants Church in the contrary: Therefore the Roman Church is true, and that of Protestants false. Both the propositions be evidently true, and proved before. Therefore lamentable is the condition of that Protestant Religion, defective, and to be reform by their own sentence in so many and essential Questions. And this Protestant Relator, and all Protestants with him, may certainly know, (considering what they have written of the true Church's privileges 
Part. 1. ●. 1.  from error before) that their so deformed congregation is a false Church, and the Church of Rome which so long time hath been accused by Protestants of a general Revolt, and Apostasy, and now by her enemies judgement needeth to amend only five dispensable things, so small a blemish and spot to be washed away, doth also want those deformities, and Protestants eyes are dazzled as well in those few now, as in so many before now recanted. But to give him and all other Protestants of England particular satisfaction by their own writings both in those five, and all other chief questions between us, I will now first begin with that, which he nameth first, worshipping of Imadges, as he termeth it.  
The Council of Trent entreating how holy Imadges, are to be used and kept in Churches, expresseth the reverent respect to be observed towards them, in this manner: Not because it may be believed, there is any divinity 
Concil. trident. sess. 9  or virtue in them, for which they are to be worshipped: or that any thing is to be asked of them: or any trust to be placed in the Imadges: as of old it was done of the gentiles: which placed their hope in their Idols: But because the honour which is given unto them, is referred to the Prototypa which they represent: So that by the Imadges which we kiss, and before which we put of our hats, and kneel down, we adore Christ: and reverence the Saints whose similitude they bear. Which is that which is established against oppugners of Imadges, by the decrees of councils, especially the second Synod of nice. Hither to the opinion of Catholics in this question, being the same, and no other, but that, which the second Nicene Council had decreed 900. years ago. Wherein a relative worship, or Reverence of holy Imadges, was defined. Then supposeing what I have cited before from D. Feild, D. Morton, D. Sutcliffe D. Willet and others that a general Council hath the highest binding 
Part. 1. c. 6.  judgement, and that neither the Protestant Church in England, or all places of Europe where it is, ever had, or can have any such Council, by their own confession, but every Rule they have, or can have, Prince, Parliament, or Convocation, is fallible, and hath erred, as is proved in the first part of this work; This, I say, supposed thus I argue.  
That which is confirmed and allowed by a general Council, the highest commanding Rule in the Church, is to be observed, and received before any Protestant article, or position, allowed by no such, but by a deceitful Rule: But this Catholic doctrine was so confirmed and allowed, and the contrary of Protestants only by a fallible and deceiving Rule: Therefore the doctrine of Catholics, and not of Protestants in this Question is to be observed. The Mayor is evidently concluded forth of these Protestants before, and so much of the second proposition that the Protestant doctrine of these men neither in this or any one Article hath been allowed by any such highest or binding Rule. That which remaineth to be proved is only this, that by Protestant testimony this Catholic position hath been allowed and confirmed by general Council: which is performed by D. Willet, writing thus: The Greeks in a general 
Willet Antilog. pag. 169.  Council held at Ny●e confirmed and allowed the Adoration of Imadges, about the Time of Adrian the first. And their Theatre hath like words:  
Again thus I argue That doctrine which the true Church (by Protestants judgement) embraceth, is by them to be received, and believed: But the doctrine of the Roman Church is the same in this point, with that of their true Church, the Greek Church: Therefore it is to be received, and believed of them. The Mayor is proved before: And the Minor by the Relator of Religion 
Relation of Religion cap. 54.  himself who seeketh this Attinement: for speaking of the Christian Grecians, he writeth thus: They hold the worshipping of picture. And their own Patriarch in his Censure of Protestants, delivereth his sentence in this order: We do honour and are prostrate, to 
Hieremius in censur. cap. 21.  their Imadges, not with that worship which is proper to God, but relatively, and with a certain respect to the Exemplars. Therefore by these Protestants the doctrine of the Roman Church is true in this Question. Thirdly I argue thus.  
All men allowing honour or reverence to be due, and done to things less significative of God, Saints, or holy things, must needs allow it to things more significative and representing: But these English Protestants allow such honour or Reverence to things less representative, and only under that formality of representing; Therefore they ought to allow to things more representing, holy Images etc. The Mayor is evident being an Argument affirmative from the less to the greater; The Minor is thus proved by these Protestants, by citeinge from them how they allow honour and reverence to things less representing, than Images, that is to books, to the name of a thing to be honoured, To sacraments which they say are only signs, D. Feild entreating of the reverence done to Imadges writeth thus: it is 
Field pag. 152.  like to the honour we do to the Books of holy scripture. To this I add their commanded reverence in their service and Churches to the name of jesus when it is read in the gospel. 
Comm. Book confirmed.  Which custom of reverence the university of Oxford in their Answer to the Puritans Millinarie petition confirmeth and defendeth in these words: Reverence done at 
Answer to the Millinarie petition pag. 14.  the name of jesus, to be our Inward subjection to his divine Majesty, and an apparent token of our devotion. Then needs must the reverence done at a picture and Imadge be such. Concerning the signs in Sacraments with them, M. 
Perkins probl. pag. 163.  Perkins the famous Sacramentary writeth thus. Honour, veneratio, reverentia exhibetur Sacramento, quatenus signum est. Honour, worship, reverence is given to the Sacrament, as it is a sign. Where honour, worship, and reverence is allowed not only to a sign, but under that formality, quatenus signum est, as it is a sign; and when we come to examine this Protestant, it is no immediate sign of Christ, but of grace by him, only a quality spiritual, as their definition of their Sacraments: signs of grace, doth witness. Therefore 
Articul. Relig. 25.  an Imadge the Immediate sign, representation, and expression of Christ (and so of other holy Imadges) and more perfectly representing, is rather to be honoured, worshipped, reverenced, as his words be.  
Fourthly I argue thus: All men allowing Honour, Reverence, or worship to the sign or Imadge of the Cross of Christ, must allow it to his immediate and perfectly reprenting Imadge: But these English Protestants allow it to the sign or picture of the cross of Christ: Therefore they ought to allow it to his Imadge; And so of others by like proportion. The Mayor is sufficiently proved before, as also that the sign of the cross is less figuring and presenting Christ, than his own Imadge: The Minor is proved thus by their own writings. First in the King's Canons the sign of the cross is named, an honourable badge: therefore 
Can. 140.  it may be honoured: for whatsoever is honourable, worthy of, and deserving honour, may be honoured. D. Covell writing against Burges the puritan, denying the use of the sign of the cross writeth thus: There was a 
Covell against Burges pag. 115.  reverent use, and estimation of the sign of the cross in the Apostles time. Therefore it is still to be as then, used and esteemed with reverence. And thus again he writeth of the sign of the cross: It is a lawful outward ceremony, and 
Covell sup. pag. 116.  honourable badge: and the very name of the cross hath and shall be honourable amongst all true Christians to the world's end. And again: It was so far honoured 
Pag. 126. sup.  by the holy Ghost, that it often expresseth, the whole merit of Christ's passion. It seemeth to be an Apostolical tradition. It had then honour, was an ancient and reverend sign. M. Perkins writeth 
Pag. 139.  in these words: The wood of the cross in the Church of Constantin: in the feast of the exaltation 
Perkins probl. pag. 79. Pag. 83. sup.  of it, was kissed and worshipped, adoratur. The cross was reverenced, and worshipped within the first 400. years. And to that purpose he citeth Prudentius, Paulinus, S. Hierome, Euagrius, alleging divers public examples, in that sense.  
Further I argue thus out of M. Burges the puritan: what soever honour was given to the sign of the cross by the primitive Fathers, may now be given by Catholics to the Imadge of Christ: This is proved before: But as much reverence as Catholics use was used to the sign of the cross by the primitive Fathers: Therefore Catholics may lawfully use their reverence to holy Imadges. The Mayor being before proved: The Minor is justified by M. Burges in his 
Burges apol. apud Covell pag. 146.  Apology, writing, that the Ancient Fathers, Origen, Tertullian, S. Cyprian, S. Hierome, S. Athanasius, and S. Augustine did allow as much reverence and virtue to the sign of the cross, as Catholics 
Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 594.  do. And M. Wotton confesseth thta Lactantius approved the worship of the Cross.  
fifthly in this Question I argue thus: whatsoever doctrine about Imadges was practised by S. Basile and the primitive Church, is true, and may still be practised: But such use of Imadges as is with Catholics now was then practised: Therefore it may still be practised. The first proposition is often proved and granted before: And the Minor thus proved by these Protestants: 
Wotton def. sup. pag. 594.  first. M. Wotton granteth from S. Basile, these words: I honour the history of Imadges, and do properly worship them. Therefore they 
Perlins' probl. pag. 78.  may be so still used. M. Perkins writeth thus: The use of Imadges was public in Churches within the first 400. years. And again: The Imadge of Mary the virgin was wont to be carried in solemn pomp, solemni in pompa efferri. And so no doubt reverenced, as whatsoever is so solemnly carried and borne in pomp and honour, must needs be used: The very bearing itself in such order being a reverence.  
lastly I make this Argument: such use of Imadges as was practised by the jews in the time of the law, is still lawful for Christians: But the jews in that time did practise without reprehension the worship or reverence of Imadges: therefore it is now lawful. The Mayor is evident, for all divines grant, that the prohibition to the jews (prone to Idolatry) was as severe or more to them, then to Christians. The Minor is thus granted by M. Wotton: The jews in the Temple before Christ, 
Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 581. 582.  did worship the pictures of the Cherubyns. Then if the pictures of Cherubins, being mere Creatures, were publicly in the temple worshipped, how much more is the picture, and Imadge of their and our Lord, jesus Christ to be had in reverence, and so to be used: And so of Imadges of his servants, and Saints in their due proportion: Because the Saints themselves may be honoured, and prayed unto, as I am to prove by these Protestants in the next chapter. And this is further proved by these Protestant 
Theat of gr. Britt. pag. 342. n. 2.  Bishop in their Theatre, where they testify in these words: By the clergy that are accounted the light of the world, in a Council at Rome held under Pope Constantyne the first, it was decreed and commanded, that carved Imadges should be made to the memorial of Saints, and should be set up in Churches, with respective adoration. Which is, to be referred unto, and terminated in the prototypa, Saints, represented by such Imadges, and by such Images yielded unto them, and in them ended. And in an other place they call such Imadges Monuments of Christian Religion, and sufficiently prove, they were even from the time of Christ both used for the memory, and reverence of Christ, or his Saints, whom they represented. Their words of the miraculous Imadge erected in honour of Christ, by the woman in the Gospel cured by the hemm of his garment touched, and reverenced by her, testified by Eusebius, and others are these: julian (the Apostata) destroyeth all monuments of 
Theat. pag. 266.  Christian Religion, among others the Imadge of Christ made of brass at Caesarea Philippi, where the miraculously curing herb grew. And they condemn him for this wickedness, in overthrowing that Imadge, erected to the honour of Christ, and miraculously confirmed, both to be religeously erected to his honour, and so continued. But let us come into our own nation, where they will give us some light, (though by them misted what they can) in what reverence these have been used in this Island, even from the first conversion of the britains, and ever after, both with Kings, and subjects. Of Subjects thus they writ: In Diocletian his time a thousand Saints suffered Martyrdom at Lichfeild, in 
Theat. pag. 206. n. 19  memory whereof the city beareth arms to this day, in an Eschacheon of Landscape, sundry parsons diversly martyred. Of our Christian primitive King's 
Pag. 207. n. 22.  first they writ thus: Our Kings ranked for sanctity before all other potentates of the earth, as Vincentius 
Pag. 206. n. 20.  recordeth. Then thus: The virgin Mary with her son in her Arms, in the ensign of Arthur, so often desplayed for Christ doth show the badge of that age's Christianity. And again: In 
Pag. 207. n. 21.  the ancient Charters of the fowndation of Glastenbury it is called Origo Religionis in Anglia: in an other: Tumulum Sanctorum, ab ipsis discipulis Domini aedificatum fuisse vener abilem. The beginning of Religion in England, that it was a grave of Saints builded by the disciples of our Lord, and venerable King Arthur benefactor unto it, his Arms there an Escutcheon, whereon a cross with the virgin Mary in the first quarter is set, and held to be the Arms of that Abbey. And further of our English Kings in this order from the year of Christ 643. they testify, how they honoured these holy Imadges, in their most honourable Ensigns, and badges of honour. King Oswy giveth 
Pag. 385. n. etc.  a plain cross in every part a Lion Rampant. The next King Wlfhere a S. Andrew's cross. So these Kings following King Ethelred, Kenred, Chelred, Ethelbald, Offa, Egfride, Kenwolfe to the year 800. And so they recount after, of King Egbert, Ethelwolfe, Ethelbald, Ethelbert, Ethelred, Elfred, Edward surnamed the elder, Ethelstan, Edmund, Edred, Edwy, Edgar, Edward surnamed the Martyr Ethelred, Edmund surnamed Ironsyde, and Edward the Confessor. And of these English Kings, in an other place they writ in this manner: The Saxons before King William his time used only 
Pag. 424. n. 60.  to sign their Charters, with guilt crosses, and such marks. So great and respective regard our blessed Kings of that happy age bore unto such Imadges, signs, and remembrances of our Saviour, and his holy Saints, that even in their temporal actions they ever had them in presence, and memory. Much more in Churches and places of holy worship, where they used them in as religeous respects, as the Roman Church doth at this time; as we may gather by the very words of these Protestants in this book, where they writ of King Inas esteemed a Saint by these men themselves, in these 
Theat. pag. 298. 299.  words: King Ine buildeth the renowned Abbey of Glastenbury most stately to the honour of Christ, Peter, and Paul, where formerly stood the old cell of joseph of Aremathea, which this King Ina after a most sumptuous manner new built, the chapel whereof he garnished with gold, and silver, and gave rich ornaments thereto: as Altar, Chalice, Censor, Candlesticks, Basin, and holy water buckett Imadges, and pale for the Altar of an incredible value. And how these Imadges were used, so placed in chiefest place of adoration, and with such other Instruments of Catholic worship we cannot make a question; If we should, they will direct us, and make it evident, that such reverence as Catholics now use, was then used unto them. Their words of King Canutus are these: Canutus the Danes 
Theat. pag. 205. n. 17.  greatest King, so soon as he became a Christian in England, held it his chiefest majesty, to be the vassal of Christ. And with such devotion as then was taught, crowned the Crucifix at Winchester, with the crown he wore: and never after, through all his Reign, by any means would wear the same.   

CHAPTER X. WHEREIN THE CATHOLIC doctrine of prayer, and honour to Saints and Angels, is proved true: by these English Protestants writers.  
NEXT I must by the Protestant Relator his order, entreat of Supplication to Saints: and to Angels consequently. Of this matter thus we read in the Council of Trent. The holy Council doth command 
Concil. trident. sess. 9  all Bishops and others, which have the office and charged of teaching; That according to the use of the Catholic and Apostolic Church, received from the primitive times of Christian Religion, and the consent of holy Fathers, and decrees of holy councils chiefly, that they diligently instruct the faithful of the Intercession of Saint's Invocation, honour of Relics, and lawful use of Imadges: teaching them, that it is good that the Saints which reign with Christ offer their prayers to God, for men: and that it is profitable, humbly to call upon them: and to fly to their prayers, aid, and help, to obtain benefits of God, by his son jesus Christ, our Lord, who alone is our Redeemer and Saviour. Hitherto the doctrine of Catholics in this Question. Now let us argue from these English Protestants to the same purpuse.  
First I argue thus: All that be in blessedness in heaven, and instate of excellency with God and worthy of honour, and both hear or know our prayers, and doings, and pray for us, are to be honoured, and may be prayed unto: But the Saints and Angels in heaven be such, and in this condition: Therefore they are to be honoured, and may be prayed unto. The Mayor is apparently true, and with those conditions granted by these best Protestant writers: The Minor that the Saints and Angels in heaven are in that state, is thus proved by these English Protestants. D. Feild writeth thus: The 
Feild. l. 3. c. 31. pag. 143.  Saints in heaven do pray for all in general. And thus again of Vigilantius the Heretic: If he absolutely denied, that the Saints departed do pray for us, we think he erred: for we (Protestants) hold they pray in genere. Then it is proved, the Saints be in heaven and glory a state worthy honour, and that they pray for us: now I will prove they hear our prayers by these Protestant writers, because they teach us that they know our Protestations, Professions, and expect our services. D. Field to make us know, that he thinketh they know these things, (for 
Field pag. 192.  a Doctor may not make things that understand not, to understand, and be made witnesses of things they know not hath these words: We protest and profess before God, men, and Angels: his friend D. Willet writeth thus: 
Willet Antil. in epist. dedic. anglic.  That the Angels expect his majesties faithful service. Then they know his service: And if they know the deeds and services of princes, and Kings are to do their service faithfully. No doubt but they know the deeds of Subjects also, and in doing faithful service the subject is not to be freed, where the Sovereign is not exempted. And concerning Prince Henry his son, thus their Theatre prayeth. upon whose parson I pray that the 
Theat of gr. Britt. pag. 37. n. ●.  Angels of jacobs' God may ever attend, to his great glory, and great britains happiness. And as these for the King and his son. So the Protestant Bishop of Lincoln D. Barlowe enueying against his Catholic Adversary not writing of Q. Elizabeth, as himself did, 
Barlowe Answer to a nameless Oath pag. 69.  freeing her from all mortal sin in her whole life, hath these words: o blessed Trinity, and all you glorious Angels can you endure this hellish blasphemy, and brook these slawnderous us impieties, in silence and unrevenged? Then I hope if a Protestant bishop may invocate, and pray to the Angels, to take revendge, to hurt and hinder me: it will be as agreeable to the laws of Charity, and true Religion, to desire their help, assistance, and pray unto them to releyve our wants, in our time of necessity, or at any time to honour them. The like unto this, is written by D. Wilkes, and other 
Wilkes obedience pag. §. 3. Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 12.  Protestants: And M. Wotton proveth the same of the Saints in heaven in this manner. The Saints departed we love and honour; of their credit with God we doubt not: their care of men we deny not. And to assure us, that they have not a care of us only in general, but in particular also and so know our actions, first M. George Close parson of black Torrington in devonshire, 
M. George Close ser. before the judges at Exeter.  in his sermon before the judges, at Exeter, moving wicked lawyers, to Repentance, urgeth it in these words: So shall the Angels rejoice in your contrition, almighty God accept your Confession, and the whole world keep an holy day for your satisfaction. Therefore if the Angels know our particular internal Actions, such as Contrition, and sorrow of mind is, how much more those that be external, and in no ways shrouded from their understandings. And to this verity his Majesty himself giveth testimony speaking 
King's speech die 21. Martij An. 1609. at Whitehall  thus: It is a Christian duty in every man, reddere rationem fidei, and not to be ashamed to give an account of his profession, before men, and Angels as oft, as occasion shall require. Therefore seeing Auditors in taking Audite must needs know the Reckon, and Accounts, of their accountants, the Angels and Saints cannot be Ignorant of our Actions, done before them, as his Majesty expresseth. And D. Covell in Examination of Puritan, writeth thus: 
Covell examinat. pag. 195.  Doth any man think, the Angels do not help us, being ministering spirits? and seeing God hath given his angels charged over us, may we not pray to have their assistance. From whence thus I argue again.  
They that be in glory, can help us, and have charge over us to minister, and men may pray to have their assistance, and they attend to further our requests, may be requested and prayed unto: But the Angels (and consequently) the Saints in heaven be in these conditions towards us: Therefore they may be requested, and prayed unto. The Mayor is evident: and the Minor also sufficiently proved by this last citation from D. Covell, and thus confirmed again 
Covell exam. sup. pag. 178.  by him. The Angels attend to further our Requests. Therefore we may request their help.  
Further I argue thus: That which is the doctrine of the L. Protestant Archbishops, and D. Fields true Greek Church, may not be rejected. But this doctrine of prayer and honour to Saints, and Angels is such: Therefore not to be rejected. The Mayor being before granted; The Minor is thus proved by the Greeks in their censure of Protestants; where speaking of the one only true God, they have these words: 
Hieremias in censur. cap. 21.  We do not acknowledge other for God besides thee: But we make all Saint's Mediators, and chiefly and excellently above all others, the Mother of God himself, Marry the Mother of God. And we constitute all Saint's Mediators, and Advocates for us. And they pray not only for us, but also for those which be dead, so that they died not in mortal sin. For in such a case, no job, or Daniel, though they should stand up to pray, should deliver their children. We call upon our Lady, Angels, archangels, that Precursor and Prophet of our Lord, the Baptist, also the glorious Apostles, Prophets, Martyrs, and holy Pastors, and Doctors, also the Company of holy women, and all Saints, to make intercession for us sinners. Hitherto the Censure of the Greek Church, both teaching the same doctrine, with the Church of Rome, and preventing the frivolous objections of Protestants in this point.  
Again thus I argue: That which was the doctrine of the primitive Church, free from superstition (as his Majesty wittnesseth) 
Confer. pag. 69.  is true doctrine and to be embraced: But the practise and doctrine of the Roman Church to pray to Saints was the doctrine of that time: Therefore it is true, and to be embraced. The Mayor is granted, and proved by Protestants before: And the Minor now thus proved by them. M. Perkins speaching of the doctrine of that time in the Church, in this matter, speaketh thus. There was in the Church Intercessio singularium, 
Perlins' probl. pag. 89.  prosingularibus, Intercession to Saints in particular, for men or things in particular. This he testifieth for invocation to Saints, and their prayers for men in particular, (for he had with other Protestants granted before a general Intercession of the Saints for those that live.) 
Pag. 88, sup.  And citeth for particular invocation, the histories of Eusebius, and Palladius. And addeth further thus: The ancient Fathers were wont in their Masses, (In liturgijs) to recite the names of 
Pag. 89. sup.  Martyrs and Saints, requiring further, and ask our Lord, that he would grant this, or that, by their prayers, or intercessions. He might have 
Pag. 93. sup.  added more with truth, if it had pleased him, that those Ancient Masses or liturgies had divers particular prayers unto Saints. And this doctrine of particular prayer, and invocation of Saints, was so generally used, both in the public Masses, and by the Fathers of that time, That this Protestant writer both freely acknowledgeth it, and calleth it sin, and sacrilege in them: his words be these: The ancient Fathers especially 
Perkins sup. pag. 93.  after 400. years of Christ did sin in the invocation of Saints: yea were guilty of sacrilege. And for this doctrine so chargeth among others, these holy and learned Fathers: S. 
Pag. 94. sup.  Paulinus, Fortunatus, S. Leo, S. Ephrem, S. Fulgentius, P. Damianus, Prosper etc. And this is the strange Idolatry, wherewith some of these men have so fond accused Catholics: and therefore notwithstanding all their show of desire to be tried by the Fathers, M. Ormerod seeing how they 
Ormerod pict. pap. pag. 26.  condemn Protestants, for denial of this prayer, and invocation: speaketh thus of those holy, and learned Fathers: They did not ponderously consider of this question. Is not this a ponderous consideration of so worthy a Protestant writer, to condemn all antiquity of want of consideration, when the let not with his humour? and yet he writeth further thus: Although the Ancient Fathers 
Pag. 27. sup.  had all jointly embraced this opinion: yet are not we therefore bound to receive it. Where he dealeth as old Protestants were used to do, not to regard any Authority, but what pleaseth them. But to prove by the confession of Protestants, that this was the doctrine of the primitive Church, this is sufficient. Yet I add M. Middleton, who writeth 
Middleton papistom. pag. 129.  thus: Austin teacheth us: That Christians celebrated the memories of Martyrs, for these two intents: That we may be associate to their merits, and helped with their prayers. And D. Morton allegeth: 
Morton Apol. part. 1. pag. 227. 228.  how all Antiquity taught invocation of Saints.  
lastly in this Question I argue thus: No doctrine which denieth any Article of our Creed, is true, or to be received: But the denial of Angels (and more strongly of Saints whose Communion is in the Creed) to offer up our prayers which we in earth make, is to deny an Article of our Creed: Therefore, it is not true, nor to be received. The Mayor is evident by Protestants: The Minor is thus proved by D. Covell, 
Covell against Burges pag. 89.  who disputing against Burges the puritan, who called this an usurping untruth, and taxed the Book of Tobias, because there the Angel said, he was one of the seven holy Angels, that offer up the prayers of the Saints of God: Answereth 
Covell sup. pag. 90.  in these words: If it be an an usurped untruth, for the Angels to offer up the prayers of the Church, unto God, in the mediation of his son, we shall (peradventure) deprive ourselves of a great part of their Ministry, and dissolve that communion of Saints, which we profess to believe as an Article of God's truth. Therefore I will by these Protestants conclude in this matter, that the doctrine of the Roman Church herein is Orthodox and true: and the contrary heretofore taught by Protestants, false and impious. And the rather because it seemeth by the King's Canons, to be excommunication 
King's Canons. An. 1604. can. 8.  to deny this Catholic doctrine: for in these Canons it is excommunication, Ipso facto, to affirm, or teach, that the form and manner of making and consecrating Bishops, Priests, and deacens, containeth any thing in it, that is repugnant to the word of God. And yet the Protestant Author of the book called Abridgement thus 
Abridgement An. 1605. pag. 30.  testifieth of the oath in that Book of ordination: The oath of supremacy is thus concluded, so help me God, and all Saints, and the holy Evangelists. Which the late edition by Barker 
Book of Mak. Bish: etc. deacons Oath sup.  hath left out. The Churches that were dedicated to Saints in this Kingdom even in the time of the Christian britains, and Saxons after, the honour, and worship, that was done, and due unto them, how they are named even by Protestants the Tutelar patrons of our nation, there be to many 
Theat of gr. Britan.  Examples in the late Theatre to be recited.   

CHAPTER XI. WHEREIN IS PROVED BY these English Protestant writers, that the Ceremonies of the Roman Church, so much heretofore impugned by them, are now contrariwise in their judgement, adjudged holy, ancient, reverent, decent etc.  
THE third thing which the Protestant Relator in this his desired Atonement, requireth the Church of Rome to give over, is to leave their offensive Ceremonies, as he termeth them, what they be in particular he doth not express, but by the writings of others, his Associates in Religion, we may justly suppose, he most aimeth at the ceremonies used in the holy sacrifice of Mass, cross, candles, and such as I will justify by themselves in this Chapter, particularly reciting them, or the chiefest, which I now omit in this place to avoid Repetitions, to which I am often forced. And first concerning Ceremonies, by what Authority, they may be ordained, and being so duly ordained, of what authority, and reverent estimation, they ought to be, ensueth thus by these Protestants: Their public Articles have thus 
Articul. Relig. 20.  sentenced: The Church hath power to decree Rites, or ceremonies, and authority in controversies of faith. Then much more must that her authority needs extend to accidental things in Religion, such as these ceremonies are: D. Covell 
Covell modest. examinat. pag. 64. 65.  telleth us, they be to be had in such Respect, that (to use his words:) The primitive councils have condemned them as Heretics, only for being stiffly opposite in this kind. And entreateth 
Covell sup. pag. 56.  of them in these words following. We call them, Ceremonies, properly all such things, as are the external Act of Religion, which have their commendation, and allowance from no other cause, but only, that in God's worship they are virtuous furtherances of his honour. And after he had thus defined, 
Pag. 58. 59  or described them, he doth also divide them, in this order, and in these words:  
All Ceremonies may be divided thus: some were for justifications, such as the law commanded, whereby the observer was made more purified, and more holy. In place whereof afterward succeeded those, that were for ornament, and to signify such virtues, as were requisite in those parties, that rightly use them. Secondly in Respect of the Author, some were ordinances of nature, as to look up to heaven, to life up the hands, to how the knees, to knock the breast, and such like, when we pray, things used in their devotion by the Heathens themselves: others were appointed by God himself, some by the Apostles, and Bishops, that succeeded in their place: thirdly some in the parts of the immediate worship, as sacrifice, prayer, adoration, and suchlike: some only dispose, as fasting, austere living: some are only instruments, as Churches, Altars, chalices, and all those, which religeously being separated. serve only to make the devotion more solemn, and that solemnity to be more holy. Fourthly of these some, respect parsons, some times, some other concern places, all which concurring in a divine worship, are with Ceremonies by separation made sacred, and so fit to serve unto holy uses. lastly some are particular, some more general, and universal. And having thus entreated 
Covell supr. pag. 65.  of the original, description, and division of Ceremonies, he writeth further of their necessity, in this manner.  
There is nothing, can be a surer preserver of Religion, then to keep it from contempt: a thing not easily done, where it is left destitute and deprived of holy Ceremonies. For the principal excellency of our Religion being spiritual, is not easily observed, of the greater number, which are carnal: and therefore we propownde not naked mysteries, but clothe them: that these offering to the senses a certain Majesty, may be received of the mind, with a greater Reverence. And therefore some of the Fathers, accounting them as the shell to the kernel, have said, that no Religion, either true or false, was able to consist without them. Hitherto the words of this Protestant Doctor. From which I first argue in this manner.  
Whatsoever Religion omitteth, and neglecteth those things, which are so necessary, for the preservation of true Religion, that it cannot consist without them, cannot be the true Religion: But the English Protestant Religion is such: therefore it cannot be true. The first proposition is evidently true in the light of nature: for any thing that is necessary for the preservation of an other, cannot be separated from it. The second proposition is likewise Manifest, for the Protestants of England neither esteem so of Ceremonies, as this Doctor telleth us, they ought to be accounted of, neither retain such Ceremonies, as his divisions comprehend, as is evident. Therefore the Roman Church is true, and the Ceremonies thereof holy, otherwise there should be no true Church, or Ceremonies practised: and consequently no true Religion, by this Doctor before.  
Again, supposing, as before is granted by these Protestants, that either their Church, Religion, and Ceremonies, or the Roman Church, Religion and Ceremonies be true, I argue thus: No Church, or Religion, which omitteth, and denieth those holy Ceremonies which are parts of the immediate worship, and the Instruments thereof, can be the true Church, and Religion: But contrariwise that which embraceth and alloweth them: But the Protestant English Church omitteth, and denieth ceremonies, parts of the immediate worship, and the instruments thereof, that is, sacrifice, altars, etc. which D. Covell telleth us before to be such, and the Roman Church embraceth and alloweth them: Therefore the Roman Church and Ceremonies, and not the Protestants are true. Both the propositions are manifest: Therefore the Ceremonies of the Roman Church be holy, reverent, etc. otherwise no true Church and Religion could have them, or be such.  
Thirdly I argue thus: The true Church hath power to decree Rites, or Ceremonies, and consequently to bind others to receive them, and not reject them: But by 
Part. 1. cap. 2.  the grant of Protestants in the first part, the Roman Church was the true Church when it ordained all ceremonies now used in it: Therefore they ought to be used and bind all men to receive them, and so are consequently holy, decent, reverent etc. The Mayor proposition consisteth of the 
Articul. Relig. 20.  words of their allowed article before cited. And the second proposition largely proved by these Protestants, as I have cited. And by D. Covells' citation it would have been accounted 
Covell modest. examinat pag. 64. 65.  Heresy in the primitive Church to have been stiffly opposite in this kind. Therefore Protestant's may not deny them, under such peril in his judgement.  
Further thus I argue: Those which be the Ceremonies of that Church, which the English Protestants acknowledge for the true Church, are to be received for holy, decent, reverent &c: But the Ceremonies of the Roman Church that now is, be the Ceremonies of the Lord Protestant Archbishops and D. Fields and others true Church, the present Greek Church: Therefore they are to be received as holy, decent etc. The Mayor is manifestly true, out of their Article before, and their writers 
Articul. 20. sup.  against the puritans. The Minor is proved out of the Protestant Relator of Religion, who speaking of them of the present Greek 
Relation cap. 53. or cap. 54.  Church, writeth thus: With Rome they concur in the opinion of Transubstantiation, and generally in the service, and whole body of the Mass, in praying to Saints, in auricular confession, in offering of sacrifice, and prayer for the dead, and in these without any, or with no material difference. They hold purgatory also, and worshipping of pictures, for the form and ceremonies of the Mass, they much 
Cap. 55. sup.  resemble the Latins. In crosseings they are very plentiful. Their liturgies be the same that in the old time, namely S. Basils', S. Chrisostomes' and S. Gregoryes 
Cap. 53. or 54.  translated, without any bending of them to that change of languadge, which their tongue hath suffered. In sum all those opinions which grew into the Church, before that separation, between the Greeks' and Latins, and all those ceremonies which were common unto both, they still retain, as their Crosseings and Tapers with others. Thus they have proved, not only that the Ceremonies of the Roman Church agree with, or be the same with those of that Church, which they teach to be the true Church, but to have been used in the primative Church, in the Masses of S. Basile, S. Chrisostome and S. Gregory the great, Pope of Rome the last that added any thing to that Mass, which the Roman Church now useth, and is also used among the Grecians themselves, being translated into Greek, as this Relator wittnesseth: And this will most plainly further appear in that he saith, the Greeks' agree with the Latins and Roman Church in all opinions, and ceremonies used before their separation. For to make manifest the Antiquity of these holy ceremonies by that his prescribed time of separation: first D. Willet 
Willet Antil. pag. 169.  telleth us, it was before the writing of the tripartite history, which he citeth to that end, and was twelve hundreds of years since. D. Downame is of the like opinion, 
Downame Book of Antichrist.  denowncing it to have been in the days of the primitive Church, before they take any exception to the Church of Rome D. Feild is of the same mind, all of them assigning 
Feild. l. 3. c. 1. pag. 62. Sutcliff subvor. pag. 89 & epist, dedicat. Willet Antilog. pag. 263. 271.  it long before the 600. year: which D. Sutcliffe, D. Willet and others allow for an unspotted time in Religion, and ceremonies thereof. And thus we see, that those things which to their ignorant Readers, and Auditors, they will seem to reprehend, themselves in their own judgement, and Rule in such causes, have most highly and undenieably confirmed and justified.  
Again I argue thus, from the Relator himself: Those Ceremonies which breed order in the Church, avoid scandal, give propagation unto Religion, breed unity, and do engender, quicken, increase, and nourish the inward Reverence, respect, and devotion, which is due unto sovereign Majesty, and power: and of themselves, are decent, reverent, and significant, are to be allowed, retained, and adjudged such as become true Religion: But the present Ceremonies of the Roman Church, at this day are such: Therefore to be allowed, retained, and adjudged for decent, holy, reverent etc. The Mayor proposition is without all question true, and more than the Protestants require in this case. The Minor is 
Relation of Religion cap. 47.  proved by this Relator, speaking of the Church of Rome, and the ceremonies thereof in these words. For order in the world, for quiet in the Church, for avoiding of scandal, for propagating and increase, of what great power that unity is, which proceeds from authority, the papacy may teach. And again. The outward state and glory of their service, doth engender, 
Relation sup. cap. 6.  quicken, increase, and nourish the inward reverence, respect and devotion, which is due unto sovereign Majesty, and power. Their outward gestures are decent, 
Cap. 5.  reverent and significant. Then these holy Ceremonies having so great allowance, from our Enemies themselves, for their decency, reverence, signification, virtue, and antiquity, must needs be so embraced, preserved, and exercised, and may not be termed offensive ceremonies by that or any Protestant. And to exemplify particularly, in those ceremonies of the present Church of Rome, which be most disallowed of our English Protestants: I argue thus: Those ceremonies which were used in the primitive Church of Rome when it was in her best and flourishing state a Rule to all &c. aught, or may still be practised and observed: But those ceremonies which the present Roman Church now observeth, and are so much disliked by many English Protestants, are such: Therefore they ought, or may still to be used, and with reverence practised. The Mayor proposition is often granted before, 
Articul. of Relig. 20. An. 1562.  by these Protestants, and thus defined in the 20. Article of their Religion. The Church hath power to decree, Rites or ceremonies, and authority in controversies of faith. So that whether these ceremonies belong to faith, or manners, being practised, or ordained by our Mother Church of Rome, and the governors thereof, when by all confessions, it was holy, and the true Church of Christ, they are religeously to be embraced, and received.  
The Minor proposition is thus proved by these men: M. Hull in his work entitled 
Hull Rome's polecies pag 82. 13. 83. 84. 85. 86.  Rome's polecies: thus recompteth them. Lent, embringe days, friday, altars, linen, Albes, corporals, priests Robes, the feast of S. Peter's chains, the feast of Candlemas. The exaltation of the cross, the Saint's fasting evens, anointing the sick, anointing Bishops, crossing with Chrism in Baptism, Saint's Shrines, Hymns. pax to be carried about to be kissed, the paschal Tapar on Easter Even, to be hallowed, organs and Church instruments, singeing of psalms in order with Antiphones, Mass for the dead, canonical hours, processions, processions to go round about the Church every sunday. Hitherto the words of this Protestant writer. Others of them, as D. Morton, D. Covell, M. Ormerod, 
Morton Apol. part. 2. pag. 141. Covell examinat. Ormerod pict. parit. G. 2. 1. 3. 4. Theat of gr. Britan. pag. 298. 299. 351. etc.  do add holy water, holy fonts, interrogatories in Baptism, dedication of Churches, introyte of Mass, wafer cakes to be consecrated in the holy Mysteries, Gloria in excelsis, the Ring in Marriage. And others are added by their Theatre before, and other Protestants. And they tell us further, the names of those sacred Popes and Pastors of the Church that used, approved, constituted or confirmed unto us these sacred Ceremonies to have been in the primitive Church, when it truly was by his majesties grant in her best estate and Mother Church, to prescribe unto other provincial 
kings speech in parlam.  Churches, her daughters, and (as they then were and now should be) her obedient children. And they name them as followeth: Telesphorus, Calixtus, Stephanus, Silvester, Sixtus, 
Hull. sup. pag. 82. 13. 83. 84. 85. 86. Morton Covell Ormer. sup.  Vigilius, Honorius, Bonifacius, Sergius, Leo, Innocentius, Zozimus, Vitellian, Celestine, Pelagius, Vrbanus, Agapitus, Damasus, Higinius, Pius, Celestinus, Alexander. All which ruled the Church, and lived, long before Protestants exception to the Church of Rome, 
K. in parlam. King in Confer at Hampton pag. 75.  and when it was in her flourishing and best estate, such as we may not departed from it by his regal sentence. Of what higthest and commanding authority, over others the Popes of Rome were, in those unspotted days of Christianity, hath been proved before.  
To which I add, that D. Covell doth not only tell us, that metropolitans, Archbishops 
Covell modest. exam. pag. 111.  etc. came from thence, and who to whom should be obedient, and Superior, and were so used before the first general Council, to testify that this supremacy was from Christ immediately, and not from councils: But he further speaketh thus: Either Evaristus Bishop in the See of Rome (in the 
Covell supr. pag. 162,  year 112) or as some say, Dyonisius first assigned the precincts, to every parish, and appointed to each Presbyter, a certain compass, whereof himself should take charge alone. Hitherto his words.  
Then if this supreme and binding authority, was in that chaste and flourishing time of true Religion, in the Bishop of Rome, over all Priests, Bishops, Archbishops, metropolitans &c. to appoint, constitute, and decree, not only what ceremonies, and solemnities should be used in all Churches: but to rate, and proportion out, what power, privilege, and jurisdiction, all Pastors, prelate's, and spiritual Rulers should enjoy, how far the compass, precincts, and bounds of their Regiments should extend, whom to whom should be obedient, and subject, who Governor and Superior: I trust no man will be so obstinately wilful, as to resist the holy Ordinance of God, his holy spouse our Mother Church, the sacred primitive Pastors thereof, renowned Saints, and Martyrs, and the sentence of our King himself, before cited, as to call these Religeous Ceremonies now after so many hundreds of years into question. Especially to use and conclude with D. Covell his words in this 
Covell ex●m pag. 65.  point: The primative councils have condemned them as Heretics, only for being stiffly opposite in this kind. And again of such English Protestants: They have done nothing else, but untile the 
Pag. 61.  house, that the Rafters, beams, and the main timber might with the violence of tempests more speedily perish. And thus much of this Question.   

CHAPTER XII. Of Indulgences.  
AFTER these, by the Relators direction I am to entreat of indulgences, and last of strange languadge in devotions: both which being by his estimation of those things, which in Religion are dispensable, and not essential to be believed, I might pass over as entreated of and allowed before by these Protestants, in the last chapter, among so many other holy Ceremonies, and accidental practises, and customs in the Church of Christ. Yet to satisfy all desires I will speak in particular also of these Questions: And first of Indulgences, in which I argue thus.  
Whosoever grant that the Church hath authority and power both to forgive sins, and to remit the severity or punishment due for sin, must needs grant the Catholic doctrine of Indulgence: being nothing else but such Relaxation: But the English Protestants do, or by their writing must grant this forgiveness of sin, and release of pain due for sin: Therefore they do, or aught to allow the Catholic doctrine of Indulgence. The first proposition is evidently 
Cai●●an. tract. 15. c. 5. Sot. dist. 21. q. 1. ar. 3. Abul q. 90. in 16. Matth. Ledes. p. Sot. & alij. Field l. 1. c. 17.  true, by the common acceptance and definition of Indulgence, both with Catholics and Protestants, which is a Release of pain, for sin enjoined or to be enjoined. The Minor proposition is proved from D. Feild in these words: The true Church admitteth and receiveth all that with sorrowful repentance return, and seek reconciliation, how great soever their offences have been: not forgetting to use due severity, which yet she sometime remitteth. And reciting the causes of such remission, he addeth thus: The due and just consideration, moving the Church to remit some thing of her wont severity is, either private or public peril. And for proof of this doctrine, he citeth 
1. Corinth. 2. v. 8. 9 10.  that place of S. Paul, to the Corinthians, of granting Indulgence or relaxation of pain to the incestuous parson. Whereby manifestly appeareth that in this Protestant Doctor's judgement, authority and power ought to be allowed to the Church, to release and remit severity, and punishment due for sin; which is the same which is termed Indulgence. Neither can he find any evasion by distinguisheing between penances enjoined, and not enjoined. For that power, faculty, and authority, which can enjoin penance, and after it is enjoined, rebeace it again, cannot be interpreted, but (at least, in that supreme Pastor, to whom the highest prerogative of binding, losing, and releacinge, is committed) to have ability, to pardon, remit, or release it, before it be enjoined. Secondly thus I argue: That doctrine and practise, which the ancient primitive Bishops of Christ's Church held and used, is true, and to be continued: But the doctrine and practice of Indulgences is such: Therefore true, and to be continued. The Mayor proposition is evidently true, often granted before, by these Protestants: and the Minor thus proved by D. Feild, in these words: The ancient Bishops 
Feild. sup. l. 1 c. 17. pag. 33.  were wont to cut of great parts of enjoined penance: which remission and relaxation was called an Indulgence. And that is to no purpose, which he addeth immediately in these terms: Out of the not understanding whereof, grew the popish pardons and Indulgences. For first how more probable it is, that the Bishops of the Roman Church, immediately and successively succeeding these ancient Bishops, practizeing the true doctrine, and use of Indulgences, should continually preserve it, and understand it, than those, which by interposition of a thousand and more years, come after them, and without any order episcopal, or priestly, but by usurpation and intrusion (as is proved by these Protestants themselves in this treatise) teach, and of their own heads propose the contrary? secondly his exceptive addition destroyeth his intent for which it is alleged, and Protestants opinion in this point: for the substance of Catholic doctrine concerning Indulgences, to make it a release of pain due for sin, is the same with the practice of those ancient Bishops, by him allowed, as is proved before, and in all congruity he that both can inflict and take away punishment, can much rather take it away without infliction: for he that can do two things, can much more and with greater facility do one of them: because this one is contained in those two, and power of doing the one of necessity must needs be granted to him, that hath power to do both: especially the highest Ruler and Governor in such things.  
Thirdly thus I argue: Whatsoever doctrine, or practise, these English Protestants teach, or exercise, in their public and judicial courts, and Consistories, that they may not deny to be lawful: But in such authoritative places, and judgements, they allow, and approve the Catholic doctrine concerning Indulgences: Therefore they may not deny it. The Mayor proposition is manifestly true, otherwise two contradictories might be true, and in Religion which is unpossible. The Minor also is as evidently certain, by their ordinary and usual release, and relaxation of pain, and severity due for sin, against the ancient primative Canons, allowed by them, and by no pretext justifiable, but by way of Indulgence, as appeareth plainly in their proceed. And this even in cases and causes scandalous moste requiring satisfaction and penance in their own doctrine. If they think their Relaxation or Indulgence therein to be frustrate, their dealings therein be impious, and they deceivers: if they allow them for just, they also allow Indulgences, being nothing else but a release of such penance and severity, as before. If they will not blush to say that the money or bribes given by the penitents to them, their wives, or Servants doth satisfy, this is frivolous, and in the grounds of Protestants denying good deeds) if these were such) to be satisfactory and meretoreous, more than foolish, and ridiculous to be affirmed. And against D. Feild his two 
Feild sup. l. 1. cap. 17.  considerations moving the Church to such Indulgence, or release, which he telleth us be private or public peril; insinuating, that in his judgement the Indulgence or release as the nature thereof requireth, must be free and liberal, and not a commutation or change for gifts or money, which in Protestants denying the enjoininge of penance, must needs be wicked and simoniacal.  
Fourthly thus I argue: Whosoever grant, and allow Authority, to absolute penitents in confession, both a paena, & culpa: from the punishment and guilt of sin, must maintain the doctrine of Indulgences: But these English Protestants grant authority to absolve both from the guilt, and punishment of sin, therefore they must maintain the doctrine of Indulgences. The Mayor proposition is often proved and allowed before. The Minor is thus demonstratively confirmed, out of the communion Book, received in the King's Canons: where in the 
Com. Book Tit. visitat. of the sick.  treatise of the visitation of the sick, their Rule and direction is set down in these words: Here shall the sick parson make a special confession, if he feel his conscience troubled with any weighty Matter. After which confession the priest shall absolve him after this sort.  
Our Lord JESUS CHRIST, who hath left power in this Church to absolve all sinners, which truly repent, and believe in him, of his great mercy forgive thee thine offences: and by his authority committed to me, I absolve thee from all thy sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghost. Amen.  
Where we see not only a juridical, and authoritative absolution, from all sins, given by Protestants divinity, by the Priests, as there they call their Ministers, expressed in these judicial and juridical words: the Priest shall absolve him. Christ hath left power in his Church to absolve all sinners. by his authority committed to me, I absolve thee from all thy sins, etc. But also as full and powerable authority, arrogated, and usurped of them, to give plenatie pardons, and Indulgences of the severity, due for sin before by their own confession, and that in more large, illimited, and ample order, than the Pope himself teacheth or practiseth. For first they generally hold, that notwithstanding any punishment or severity that such a parson had deserved for his sins, yet after their such absolution and authoritative Indulgence, without any penance to be performed, either in this life, or in Purgatory, (which they deny) presently after the separation of his soul from the body, he is in heaven, and ever during happiness. Secondly their Rubric and Religion is, to give these plenary pardons to all, requesting them. Thirdly every private minister is allowed to give these plenaries, which neither Priests nor Bishops themselves with us, can ordinarily do. Fourthly they give these there plenary Indulgences, without any just cause, or any cause of piety at all: which the Pope himself never doth, concerning 
Bull. Martini. Extrau. unigenitus  such punishments for sins, as are paid in purgatory, or the like, as is evident not only by the writings of all modern Catholics of this time, but by these laws, 
Clement●● 6. Bonau. d. 20. 1. p. q. vlt. Ric. ibidem q. 1. ma. q. 2. Gabr. lect. 57 in can. Missa. Gerson q. de hacre. Aug. de Ancon. in summa q. 30. ar. 4. & 5. Adr. Ca Sot. Cord. Ledesm. q. 20. etc.  Canons and former Catholic Doctors here cited, and others.  
lastly thus I argue: whosoever teach the distinction of mortal and venial sins, depriving, & not depriving of grace, allow severity, & punishment for sin, both committed and remitted, & denying purgatory, say all the elect presently after death are in heaven, must needs teach the doctrine of Indulgences, and in more ample manner, then catholics do: But the English Protestant's before and commonely so teach: Therefore they must so allow of Indulgences. Both propositions are evidently true, and confessed by Protestants: and need no probation. Therefore the catholic doctrine of Indulgences may not be denied by English Protestant's: They themselves though in words denying, yet in practice exercising it, in an higher measure, then is used by the Pope himself, as I have proved before. And may further add, from their communion book, where it is registered in these words: In the 
Com. Book tit. commination § Brethren.  primitive Church there was a godly discipline, that at the beginning of Lent, such parsons as were notorious sinners, were put to open penance, and punished in this world, that their souls might be saved in the day of the Lord, and that other admonished by their example might be the more afraid to offend. That the said discipline may be restored is a thing much to be wished. Where they grant not only a punishment for example of others to take heed to offend, and to satisfy their congregation, but to satisfy God for their sins committed against him, by their words, to be put to penance, and punished in this world that their souls might be saved in the day of the Lord. For as their friend M. higgon's publicly preached, and with privilege printed: As 
Theoph. Higg. ser. 3. Mart. An. 1610.  there is a death in sin, and a death to sin, so there is a double resurrection: the first à culpa from sin; the second à paena, from the punishment, which followeth thereupon. Therefore these men granting such temporal punishments due for sin, even when and where the culpa, sin or guilt is forgiven, and yet not exercising any such discipline, or punishment for sin, must needs in their own proceed allow of Indulgences, in a far more large, ample, or rather prodigal, and presumptuous manner, then is, or at any time was used in the Church of Rome.   

CHAPTER XIII. Of the public Service of the church in Latin, or greek: and not in the vulgar tongues.  
NOW let us speak of the Relators last scruple: a strange tongue in devotions, as he termeth our latin church service. which although it be both in itself, and his judgement a matter ceremonial, in Religion, and so entreated of, and proved before, yet I will briefly justify it by these Protestants themselves, in particular, and argue thus.  
That which was the practice of the church of Christ, from the first conversion of nations unto him, until this age, of Protestants, is still to be observed or lawfully may: But the public church service to be in the latin tongue in this part of the world, wherein we live, was ever so used and practised: Therefore still it ought or may be so lawfully continued. The first proposition is evidently true, and before often granted by these Protestants. The second is thus proved by D. Dove Protestant Bishop of 
Dove persuasion Pag. 23. 24. cap. of prayer.  Peterboroughe: his words be these, Until of late (sc. these days of protestancy) throughout the west part of the world public prayers were in Latin: in the east part in Greek even among those nations, to whom these languages were no mother tongues. And this the confesseth, to have been the custom from the first conversion of nations. For these two languages, Latin, and Greek, with the Hebrew, being the learned tongues of the world, (and the Hebrues and jews especially in jury, for the most part remaining in incredulity) The learned and religeous Converters of countries to Christ, often not understanding their barbarous languages, but preaching and persuading by Interpreters, yet useing a public Liturgy, Mass or church service, could neither practise it for themselves, or frame it for others, in their tongues unknown. Of which D. Sutcliffe giveth us a fit domestical example, of this nation English: his words of S. Augustine coming hither from S. Gregory Pope of Rome to convert us, are these: coming also into Kent, he was not 
Sutcliff Feb. Pag. 19  able to speak one word of English, nor to preach, unless it were by his Interpreter. And yet he doth, and must needs acknowledge, that S. Augustine used a public Liturgy, and service, which could be none in any equal judgement, but that which was used in Rome, & he brought from thence. And in no wise English for this he must either find among the Infidels, which could not be: or else to be composed by him or his associates, or by them translated, which cannot be Imagined, they neither (as before understanding our languadge to compose it, for the Inhabitants, or use it for themselves. But this they have confessed before.  
Again thus I argue: Such church service, mass, or liturgy, and in such tongue, as was sung in the city of Constantinople itself the chief city of Greece, and in the time of a general Council, and yet not in Greek, may with as good reason, or more be now used in England, or any such nation: But the latin Mass was then and there sung. Therefore it may be still used in England and other nations. The Mayor is evident: for by no probability the commanding city of Greece and of the christian world at that time, and a general Council there and then assembled, would have allowed a public absurdity in Religion: having so much more show of authority to reprehend and correct, even by Protestants sentence then they have. The Minor is proved by M▪ Hull in these words: Latin Mass was sung at the sixth Synod 
Hull Rome's polecies Pag. 83.  at Constantinople in the year. 666.  
Thirdly thus I argue: all that allow of the public church service in a strange and barbarous tongue to people not understanding, aught in all reason rather to allow it in the latin, a learned and common tongue to all learned, in this part of the world: But the English Protestants allow of the church service in such a barbarous tongue unknown: Therefore by much more reason they must approve of the public service in the Latin tongue, which always the Priest and chiefest Auditors do understand. The Mayor cannot be denied: And the Minor is thus proved from D. Dove a Protestant 
Dove persuas. pag. 24.  Bishop in these words: In Wales their mother tongue is welche, in Cornwall cornish, in Ireland Irish, yet in all these places the public service is read in English. And yet he will never prove, nor with all his Protestants take such pains in catechizing, that the Ignorant people in those Provinces (those that most need instruction) will ever be able to understand the English service, used among them, or other more short and familiar things in our languadge so strange unto the.  
Fourthly supposing, as often is proved before, the primitive Church, and practise thereof to be a warrant unto us, as also that (which no Protestant can deny) the privileges of the Latin Church to be at the least equal with the Greek: and that which all experience and observation by living among Greeks, and Romans proveth that the present vulgar Greek languadge common in Greece is altogether different from that learned tongue of Greece used in the primitive Church with the holy Fathers, of that Church in those times, as S. Basile, S. Chrisostome and such others, thus I argue.  
The present Greek Church (allowed for the true Church before by Protestants) publicly useth the Masses of S. Basile, S. Chrisostome, etc. Which the common Grecians do not understand: Therefore the countries under the Latin Church may use their ancient Latin Masses, and Liturgies. The consequence is not to be denied: And the Antecedent is proved from the Protestant Relator, who speaking of the custom of the Greek Church, hath these words: Their Liturgies be 
Relation cap. 53. or 54.  the same that in the old time, namely S. Basils', S. Chrisostomes', and S. Gregory's translated, without any bending of them to that change of languadge, which their tongue hath suffered.  
lastly in this point, supposing the main grand of Protestants against Latin service to be, because so the vulgar and ignorant not understanding it remain without due Instruction, as they pretend, I argue thus. That Church (whether it is the Catholic, or the Protestant) which by confession and grant of the opposites and Adversaries, doth much more duly, truly, and diligently, instruct, and catechize young people, and the ignorant both by word, and writing in their known and common languadge, than the other doth, is not to be condemned either of negligence or unskillfulnes in this business: But the present Church of Rome, by Protestants testimony is in this case: Therefore not to be condemned. The Mayor is evident, and the Minor proved from the same Relator of Religion, who speaking of Catholic Priests useth these words: They be of excellency for piety, and reverence 
Relation cap. 27. sup.  towards God, zeal towards the truth, of love towards this people, which even with tears they can often testify, they match their adversaries, (Protestants) in the best, and in the rest far exceed them. And further to the same of Protestants, and honour of our Religion, thus he writeth: For books of prayer and piety, all Country's are 
Cap. 27. sup.  full of them at this day in their own languadge, Their opposites, Protestants, by their weakness and coldness are enforced to take their books to supply theirs. And again in this manner. Such is their diligence, and 
Cap. 28. sup.  dexterity in instructing, that even the Protestants themselves (in some places) send their sons to their schools, upon desire to have them prove excellent in those arts they teach. This order hath also their solemn catechizinge, in their churches, on sundays, and holidays, for all youth that will come, or can be drawn unto it. But this point of their schools in instructing youth, is thought of such moment by men of wisdom and judgement, being taught so by very experience and trial thereof, that the planting of a good College of jesuits in any place, is esteemed the only sure way, to replant that Religion, and in time to eat out the contrary. Hitherto this Protestant Relator, to his own and his Associates shame, and confusion in this cause. And so I end his Questions: hoping that himself with others of his so confounded Religion, will upon this so great satisfaction conform themselves to the Church of Rome, and doctrine thereof, as he hath before advised.   

CHAPTER XIIII. CONCERNING REVERENCE of holy Relics.  
WHEN I entreated before of the religeous use of holy Imadges, I would also have spoken of this question, the reverence of holy Relics, being so near and symbolizing doctrines, had not the Relator of Religion before referred me to an other course. Therefore I will now speak thereof, in which case the Catholic doctrine expressed in the Council of Trent, is this: 
Concil. Trid. Sesi. 9  Veneranda esse àfidelibus etc. The bodies of Martyrs etc. Are to be reverenced of the faithful. According to which thus I argue, in this Article by these Protestants.  
That which was the doctrine of the primitive Church in this question, is true, and what it condemned for Heresy, is false: But the primitive Church taught reverence of Relics, as the present Roman Church now doth, and condemned the contrary of Protestants for Heresy: Therefore the Catholic doctrine is true in this controversy, and the contrary of Protestants, false and Heretical. The Mayor proposition is evidently true, by often grant before. And the Minor is thus proved. First D. Willet citeth and approveth S. Ambrose thus speaking 
Willet Antill. pag. 201. Sutcliff Subu. pag. 27. Pag. 50.  of Valentinian deceased. I will honour his Relics, and commend his gracious memory. D. Sutcliffe wittnesseth that S. Gregory and S. Augustine, (that converted this nation) esteemed much the relics of Saints. And in their time, Churches were built in the honour of Saints, and their relics worshipped. And D. Willet with others 
Willet Antil. pag. 13.  acknowledge (as they needs must) that Vigilantius was condemned of heresy for denial thereof, in the primitive Church, and by the authority thereof.  
Secondly I argue thus again: That which was the custom and doctrine of the primitive Church, may, or is still to be kept and defended: But to pray at the monuments of Saints, and reverence their Relics was the custom and doctrine then: Therefore still to be kept, and defended. The Mayor is evident: and the Minor thus proved. First M. Wotton 
Wotten def. of Perk. pag. 9  hath these words: It was the manner of the primitive Church to pray at the Tombs of Martyrs: and the Christians assembled ordinarily, where the Martyrs were buried. And to show what they did there (which he would willingly have concealed, for he loveth not prayers to Saints, nor reverence of their Relics, for which causes the primitive Christians so there assembled he citeth S. Hierome writing 
Wotten sup. pag. 544.  in this manner of holy Paula: she went into the Sepulchre, and kissed the stone of his Resurrection, which the Angel had removed from the door of the Tomb: the place of his body, where the Lord had lain, as if she had thrusted for the desired waters, she li●k●d with her faithful tongue. D. Downame writeth the like, of the holy pilgrimadge of that blessed woman. And to give most convincing instance, and proof in this matter, M. Perkins in his Problema writeth thus: Primitiva 
Perkins problem. pag. 81.  Ecclesia honoravit & veneratione prosecuta est reliquias mortuorum. The primitive Church did honour, and prosecute with reverence the Relics of the dead.  
Thirdly thus I argue: That usadge and behaviour which was lawful to the jews, and practised of them towards their Reliks, is now in the time of grace, given by Christ, as lawful for Christians, towards their holy Relics, and things: But the true faithful jews lawfully used reverence and honour to their Relics: Therefore it is lawful to Christians to do the like. The Mayor is evident, this being no ceremonial or legal thing, abrogated by Christ, but rather confirmed, by making the things of his law and Gospel more reverential, than the figurative was: The Minor is thus proved by M. Wotton in these words: You bring divers 
Wotton def. of Perk. pag. 581.  proofs, that the Ark was had in great reverence: all needless for who denies it? and again: The jews, saith Hierome, in foretimes worshipped the holy of holies, because there were the Cherubins, and the propitiatory, and the ark of the testament, Manna, Aaron's rod, and the golden altar, and further in this manner: He speaks not of worshipping the 
Pag. 581. 582.  Ark, but the holy of holies, because of the things, that were in it. He makes the Propitiatory, Manna, Aaron's Rod, and the golden Altar, causes of that worship, as well as the Cherubins. In the words following he counts the Sepulchre of our Lord more worthy of worship. Then seeing those Relics under the law, and before Christ (the meritorious cause of all grace, and such excellency) were so worthy of worship, and reverence, that they were not only reverenced in themselves, but other things were worshipped and reverenced because of them: and yet by this judgement the Relics in Christianity (as the Sepulchre, no part of Christ, but the place of his sacred bodies some few hours lying there) are more worthy of worship, as this Protestant writer confesseth: we may not deny this Reverence, and the Catholic doctrine thereof, to be holy, even by English Protestant's sentence.  
lastly thus I argue, from the general practice of English Protestants: if it is lawful to give civil reverence to the body of a noble man, or woman deceased, because they were noble, and honoured when they lived, much more reason there is, to give religeous and spiritual Reverence to the body of a Saint, holy and honoured by God, and man, when he lived, and now in joys, in heaven, truly and for ever honourable: But the Antecedent is true, by English Protetestants, who by their Heralds of arms allow, and practice, that all Inferiors shall give and yield the same honour to the body of the honourable parson deceased, that was due unto him, living his soul and body being united; and this though in all moral judgement the soul of such an one is damned. And this is the custom and ceremony, not only with Heralds, but used in Court, ratified by their Bishops, Doctors, and Universities, as many and late examples teach, which I will urge no further, but desire all may live and die well, that they may leave behind them sufficient, or some motive, either to be honoured, or helped by the prayers and devotions of the living. The consequence is evidently true, and thus demonstrated▪ for as excellency is the cause of honour, and civil excellency of civil and terrene honour: so spiritual or religeous excellency of spiritual, and such honour. And much more: for the civil honour and motive thereof is only ens rationis, an invention, worthiness, and attribute of men, and nothing at all Inherent in the body, or soul of the party so honoured: when the other excellency and cause of honour, is both permanent, and an Inherent dignity, as is proved before of inherent justice, and for ever remaineth in the soul glorified, in the presence of God, his Saints, and Angels in heaven, and there by them esteemed truly worthy of honour.  
And how honourable such holy Relics have ever been, especially in this nation, from the first conversion thereof to Christ, these Protestants themselves in their Theatre (though so much as they can suppressing all honour, and memory of such things) will sufficiently testify. Concerning the often and frequent pilgrimadges to Rome, to visit and reverence the holy monuments, and relics there, they have told us before in these words: Not only Priests and lay men, vowed and 
Theat. pag. 305.  performed pilgrimadges to Rome, but Kings, Queens and Bishops also did the like. And in particular in these words: King Kenred abandoned both crown 
Pag. 307.  and country, and went to Rome, where of Pope Constantine he received the tonsure and habit of a monk, at the Apostles tombs. Kings Cadwallader and 
Pag. 164.  Chodwald (if not both one) abandoned their kingedoms about the year 682. touke habit of Religion in Rome, so King juor a Britain and King Ive a Saxon. Ceadwalla King of the west Saxons goeth on 
Pag. 298.  pilgrimadge to Rome. King Inas after he had reigned 
Pag. 298.  in great prosperity 37. years and odd months, professing voluntary poverty, went to Rome, where in the habit of a Religeous man he ended his life in poor estate. King Osroy vowed a pilgrimadge to Rome. 
Pag. 338. 345. Pag. 391.  King Offa in great devotion went to Rome. I have spoken before how King Canatus went on pilgrimadge to Rome, to visit the sepulchres of S. Peter and S. Paul. And so of others. And 
Pag. 285.  for Jerusalem so far, and dangerously distant, thus they writ: It was an ancient custom to go to Jerusalem on pilgrimadge with a red cross worn on their back, whence the name crosse-backe, or in old English crouche-backe was to them attributed. Whence Edmund Earl of Lancaster second son to Henry 3. got that name. So the crouched or 
Pag. 92.  crossed friars. And of Princes in particular thus they writ: Lagman King of man gave over his kingdom, took the cross wento to Jerusalem. They tell us also of Q. Helena a most virtuous religeous 
Pag. 205. etc. 258.  british Lady, Mother to Emperor Constantine the great her pilgrimadge to Jerusalem. And again: Offa heir to the crown of Eastangles upon 
Pag. 311.  a Religeous devotion took his pilgrimadge to the sepulchre of Christ. And again: Swain eldest son 
Pag. 400.  of Earl Goodwin (so potent against K. Edward the Confessor) upon a remorse of Conscience undertook a pilgrimadge to Jerusalem, and in his return died in Lycia. Of Robert Father to King William the 
Pag. 413.  first, they writ in this manner: Seeing at the city phalesia in Normandy a most beautiful damsel called Arlett, took her to his bed, he begatt on her William his only son, and after upon a remorse of Conscience undertook a pilgrimadge unto Jerusalem from whence he never again returned. Duke Robert intending his pious pilgrimadge unto the holy Land, assembled all his nobility, caused them to swear fealty unto his son William, being then but seven years old. Entering jury, not able to travail, was borne in a litter upon the Saracens shoulders, and near unto the city meeting a returning pilgrim, desired him to report in his country what he there saw, which is (said he) I am carried to heaven upon the devils back. And to leave foreign countries with their holy places and relics thus reverenced, this our own nation as it visited other countries in this respect, so in the same also it was visited and frequented of them. Thus they writ: Charles King of France congratulated 
Pag. 345.  King Offa, with letters of Gladness, both for his victories and Christian piecie in his land embraced: desiring of Offa safe conduct for such his subjects as come to his country in devotion to God. In which among other places Glastenbury was renowned, for, ●hat Rectory (to use their words) was in the 
Pag. 207.  charters of Edgar, Edmund, Elfred, Edward, Bringwalthius, Kentwin, Baldred, Ina, Kenwall, the Conqueror Rufus and others continually termed THE GRAVE OF SAINTS; THE MOTHER CHURCH: THE DISCIPLES FOUNDATION. Of the hand of King Oswald, thus they writ: After his death 
Pag. 337.  it never consumed, but was shrined in silver in S. Peter's Church at Bedda, now Bambrough, with worthy honour was worshipped for the miracles, and covers that 
Pag 364.  it did, as likewise the earth wherein his blood was spilled. They tell us also of the pilgrimadge, and reverence to the Relics of S. John of Beverly, 
Pag. 391.  both by Kings, and subjects. King Canutus before offered up his crown upon the Martyr's Saint Edmund's tomb. And honoured the body of S. Elphegus at the translation 
392. Pag. 83.  of it from London to Canterbury. The Relics of S. Cuthbert, at Durham were visited in pilgrimadge, and reverenced by our Kings and others. They tell us, how the bodies of 
Pag. 294.  the two young Princes Nephews to K. Egbert, were miraculously revealed, (their names Ethelred and Etherbert) and greatly reverenced. Of K. Kenelm thus they writ: 
Pag 307. 308.  Murdered, obscurely buried, but miraculously known, and afterwards with great honour and ceremony translated to the Monastery of Winchcomb, which his father founded. And so of that glorious and noble Saint Neote, supposed to be the son of 
Pag. 351. 352.  King Ethelwolfe, brought up at Glastenbury. He planted a Monastery in Cornwall, whereunto he used for devotion and studious meditation (being one of the first divinity Readers in Oxford) often to withdraw himself, which of his abode there, was afterwards called NEOTESTOKE, and when he was dead, his body was with great honour interred in the country of Huntingdon, at a place then called ANULFESBURIE, and afterward in regard of his Interment, Saint Neotes, and now Saint Needs. And in the same shire of Huntingdon at S. jews, 
Pag. 57  they tell us, that S. Ive a Persian, an Eremite being buried, his body was uncorrupted in Robes Episcopal. Had in great honour, and the town took denomination of him. And so of others to many to be recited.   

CHAPTER XV. Of the real presence of Christ, and transubstantiation, in the blessed Sacrament, of the Altar.  
BECAUSE I would be loath to omit any one question, especially of moment, wherein these Protestants take exception against the doctrine of the Church of Rome: I will next make recital what their two great writers D. Sutcliff and D. Willet most dislike therein, and Answer it unto them, and all others, in whatsoever not before allowed, and justified, by their own writers.  
D. Sutcliff making mention of those Articles, 
Sutcliff Subu. pag. 44.  which he supposeth we cannot justify, only reciteth these, that follow: Real presence, Transubstantiation, the sacrifice of Christ's body for the quick and dead, half communion, Pope's supremacy, Indulgences, worshipping of Imadges, and Purgatory.  
D. Willet (as before) assigneth these that 
Willet Antil. pag. 264.  ensue: Transubstantiation, the Sacrifice of Mass, worshipping of Imadges, justification by works, the supremacy of the Pope, prohibition of Marriage, (in the clergy) which he calleth the grossest points of popery. He addeth also, an equality of Bishops, onoly approveth the Hebrew scripture:, justification by faith, and disliketh free will. These be all their Exceptions: neither doth the Book of Articles of their Religion make mention of any other much material (except Sacraments whereof hereafter) then either such as I have already handled, or be comprised in these Cataloges: Although all in these remembered are not the doctrine of the Parliament Protestant Church of England. But Additions, and new Inventions of particular Puritans, as D. willet's Hebrew scriptures, equality of Bishops, etc. In which (excepting that which I have spoken of the scriptures before consonant to the Council of Trent) I must leave him to be censured as a perjured man (having sworn to their Articles) by their own Religion, laws and proceed. For the rest, most of them be proved by themselves before, as Pope's supremacy, Indulgences, Imadges, justification by works, or inherent justice (not only by faith) and free will. All the others I am now to examine. And first of Transubstantiation, and Christ's real presence in the blessed Eucharist, Because it comprehendeth as well this manner of Christ's presence, and a true Sacrifice, as they all grant, upon proof of that verity: as the question also of D. Sutcliffs termed half communion; For if Christ be substantially, truly, and wholly present in both kinds: Then it is not an half, but whole communion, and receiving of Christ: for he must needs be equally received and participated under the one, as under bo●h kinds and forms: according 
D. Thom. 3. p q. 80. ar. 3. Gabr. lect.. 84. Ric. d. 11. Caiet. 3. p. q 3. ar. 3. Sot d 12. q. 1. ar. 12. pet. Sot. lect.. 20. Euchar. L●des Claud. de Saint's Ruard. & alij.  to the common opinion of schools, aswell long before the Council of Constance as after, teaching that no more fruit is communicated and given to the Receivers and Communicants, by both, then by one kind. this supposed. I Argue thus in this Question. Whatsoever doctrine the highest binding, authoritative, and commanding judgement which (by these Protestants before) is a general Council, hath determined, defined & concluded, is to be embraced and maintained: But the doctrine of Christ's real presence, and Transubstantiation, is such: Therefore to be embraced, and maintained. The Mayor is evident, and often granted by many of these Protestants. among whom D. Feild writeth thus: The Bishops assembled in a general Council, may interpret 
Field l. 4. c. 16.  the scripture, and by their authority suppress all them that shall gain say such Interpretations, and subject every man, that shall disobey such determinations, as they consent upon, to excommunication, and censures of like nature. The Minor is also proved 
Covell defof Hook. pag. 21 Parks against Limbom. pag. 176. Tom. ●. Concil. in Concil. Later. Bergam. hist. an. 1213. Genebr. hist. an. 1215. Palmer. Floren. chron. an. 1215. Concil. Lateran. cap. 1.  by them, directly in this manner: for first both D. Covell and M. parks cite and allow the Council of Laterane, as a Rule of faith. And having present in it the patriarchs of Greece, Constantinople and Jerusalem, 70. metropolitans, 400. Bishops and other Fathers above 800. together with the Legates both of the Greek and Roman Empire, with the Orators of the Kings of Jerusalem, France, Spain, England (so especially binding us) and Cyprus: I trust the rest of them cannot deny it to be general, if ever any was so termed, this being far the greatest that ever was in the world: now that it defined Christ's real presence in the blessed Sacrament, is evidently demonstrated by these express words of the Council granted by Protestants: Verum Christi Corpus & Sanguis in Sacramento altaris sub speciebus panis & vini veraciter continetur, transsubstantiatis pane in Corpus, & vino in Sanguinem, potestate divina. The true body and blood of Christ is truly contained in the Sacrament of the altar under the forms of bread and wine, the bread being transsubstantiated into his body, and the wine into his blood, by the divine power. Therefore all English Protestants are 
Field l. 4. c. 16.  suppressed by D. Fields sentence before, from gain saying it. And to show further that this was no new and strange doctrine, than first held, and defined, but of the ancient primitive Fathers, thus I argue again in this question.  
Whosoever held that there is in this Sacrament a conversion, mutation of one thing into an other, and not in shape; but in nature, that bread is made Christ's body, that the visible creatures are changed into the substance of Christ's body, & blood, etc. Do and must needs grant transubstantiation, and Christ's real presence in the B. Sacrament: But the ancient Fathers do this: Therefore they teach and grant Transubstantiation. The Mayor is evident, those terms being equivalent with transubstantiation, and seem the very same both in effect and name. The Minor is proved by M. Perkins in these 
Perkins probl. pag. 153. 154.  words: The Ancients when they speak of the supper, have many forms of speech, which show a conversion: Ambrose useth the name of conversion, and the name of mutation. Cyprian saith, it is changed not in shape but in nature. Origen saith, that bread is made the body by prayer. Gaudentius saith, Christ's body is made of bread, and his blood of wine. Eusebius Emissenus saith, that the Priest by secret power doth change the visible creatures into the substance of Christ's body, and blood. And that the bread doth pass into the nature of our Lord's body. Anselmes' saith, that the breads doth flit into Christ's body. Fulbertus saith, it is transfused, Algerus saith, it is transiected and transferred into Christ's body. Hitherto this Protestants words of those ancient Father's doctrine in this point, to which he might have added many more, and more convincing: But he knew these too many, and manifest against them, as appeareth by this his frivolous gloss upon their express sentences, confounding and confuting himself in his own words, which be these: But the Ancient Doctors where they speak of the conversion and change of the bread, they understand the change of the use, and condition, not of the substance. What man but impudent, and void of all shame, and grace, would Father upon so many holy, and renowned Learned Fathers, so gross equivocation, or rather flat lying, to speak one thing, and mean an other, as he speaketh, and this in so chief and material article of Faith, and Religion, wherein not the least equivocation may be used, if it could save the life of thousands or millions of men. And to confound this sacramentary by his own fellows: First D. Feild 
Field pag. 150.  writeth thus: The body of Christ is present in, and with the sanctified Elements. The primitive Church thought the sanctified and consecrated Elements to be the body of Christ. Where he plainly confesseth that those primitive Fathers meant as they spoke, and both spoke and meant, as Catholics now do, that Christ is really present there. And that there was a substantial change, or transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. Secondly D. Downame tolleth us, 
Downame l. 2. Antich. pag. 110.  that S. Ambrose, one of his cited Authors speaketh thus: We adore in the mysteries that flesh of Christ, which the Apostles adored in the Lord JESUS. Then if the same flesh of Christ, which was adored of the Apostles, is both present in this Sacrament, and to be adored, that Doctor did speak of a true and substantial conversion and mutation. Thirdly he is so clear in this point for Catholics, that M. Middleton not knowing how to gloss him, yet more then inconsiderately angry with that holy and Learned Saint, and Doctor, for that his doctrine, speaketh of him in these profane terms: He is guilty of presumptuous 
Middleton papistom. pag. 61.  and desperate blasphemy. Fourthly M. Perkins before citeth and numbereth with the other ancient Fathers, Algerus, who 
Alger. l. contra Bereng.  wrote expressly against Berengarius, in the question of transubstantiation, and in his book extant in that matter handleth and confuteth the objections of carnal reason against it, in the some order as the present schoolmen do. And it is so manifest that he taught this doctrine of transubstantiation, which the other as then an Heretic denied, that M. Middleton confesseth, that Berengarius 
Middleton papistom. pag. 94. 95.  in his Recantation beginning Ego Berengarius, etc. did so far aknowledg the real presence, & Transubstantiation, that he thinketh the Catholics of this time rather suppose he confessed to much, then to little in that Matter. And the present Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury speaketh of him in these words: Berengarius in deed was only called 
Abbots against D. Hil pag. 60  in question for denying of Transubstantiation, in the Sacrament, and h●e yielded once or twice, to recant, and abjure the doctrine, which he held. Then they which writ against him, and all those Learned Fathers cited by M. Perkins before, consenting with them, as he confesseth, must needs maintain the real presence of Christ and Transubstantiation. And those Protestants of England, which defend the contrary, must needs be Heretics, for that cause, as is thus by a new argument proved from their own Protestant Archbishop. Whosoever maintain a doctrine publicly, and juridically recanted, & abjured be Heretics: But all English Sacramentaries be such: Therefore they be Heretics: and the contrary is true Catholic doctrine. The Mayor is evidently true: And the Minor proved before by their cited Archbishop, teaching (which they all confess) that the recanted and abjured heresy of Berengarius▪ is the same which they defend. Again thus I argue: whatsoever thing, being Christ's body, when it is received of us: and is with devotion to be received, because it is his body: and is after an ineffable manner his body: and by grace made Christ's body: and is his body present in the sanctified elements, is the true body of Christ: But the B. Sacrament of the Eucharist, is so: Therefore it is the true body of Christ. The Mayor is manifestly true: And the Minor thus proved by these Protestants. First D. Dove Protestant Bishop of Peterborough 
Dove persuas. pag. 28.  writeth thus: As often as we be made partakers of the Lords Table, we recreave the Lords body because he hath said it his owneself. We receive it with reverence and devotion, because it is his body. And approveth the Catholic doctrine of Bishop Gardiner and others, saying with allowance thus! Stephen Gardiner and the learned of their Church were wont to say, it was his body ineffabili modo, after an unspeakable manner, after such a manner as men's tongues could not utter. And so say all Catholics at this day, numbering this among the great mysteries of Christian Religion, as the ancient fathers did. Whereby the sacramentaries are confounded: For to say, or think that bread and wine may be figures of Christ's body, and blood, as many other things are, and divers things be figures of others, is neither unspeakable, or not able to be uttered, but a thing so easy to be conceived, and spoken, that every ignorant man can both without difficulty conceive, and utter it. Again the same Protestant Bishop thus writeth of Catholics in 
Dove supr.  England: If they will receive at our hands, we will not be over hasty with them to examine them, how they do expound the words, Hoc est Corpus meum, this is my body. Which no man of conscience, and learning can write, much less a pretender to be a Bishop and Pastor, except he doth inwardly think the Catholic doctrine of Transubstantiation, and the real presence to be true: otherwise he should admit both men that be unworthy, & in some of their judgements, Idolaters to the greatest Sacrament, which cannot be excused from most heinous sin. To him I add M. Middleton speaking 
Middleton papistom. pag. 106.  in this manner: Though bread by nature be but a profane common Element, appointed of God to feed our bodies: yet by grace it pleaseth the Lord to make it his body. D. Field as before writeth thus: ●he 
Field pag. 100L.  body of Christ is present in and with the sanctified Elements. Therefore there is a real presence and Transubstantiation.  
Further thus I reason: That which by the omnipotency of God, is made Christ's body, and is that in which Christ is really present, and in which there is probably taught transubstantiation of bread into Christ's body, that which by antiquity was said to be made Christ's body, and is the flesh, which was given for the life of the world, is verily and truly the body of Christ: But the Eucharist is thus: Therefore it is the true body of Christ. The Mayor proposition is evident. And the second thus proved by D. Covell whose words of this sacred mystery be these. The omnipotency of Christ maketh 
Covell def. of Hooker pag. 276.  it his body. We all agree in a real presence. And speaking of the manner how Christ is miraculously made present there, he writeth thus: We must truly believe, that Christ is there 
Covell def. pag. 116. 117. sup.  present. Which because some irreligious men, at the first doubted: men have been driven to find out, these reasonable satisfactions, or rather satisfactions to human reason, from his omnipotency, transubstantiation, or such like: whereas in deed we know that in many mysteries of our faith, it is sufficient to believe the thing, though we cannot comprehend the manner how. And citeth there the high mystery of the Trinity, the Resurrection and this blessed Sacrament to be of that kind. Then seeing by this allowance, it is so certain, that Christ is really present there, that it is Irreligion to doubt it, and it is a reasonable satisfaction, even to human reason (from whence Protestant arguments against it be deduced) that the manner is by Transubstantiation, as we Catholics teach, no man but Irreligious, and unreasonable, can call it into question. And he writeth further of this matter in these words: it is on all sides plainly 
Covell sup. pag. 119.  confessed, that this Sacrament is a true and real participation of Christ, who thereby imparteth himself, even his whole entire parson. Therefore if the whole entire parson of Christ which cannot be without his body and blood, is there, and there imparted and received, damnable is that diminisheing doctrine, wherein sacramentaries would have it but a sign & figure: And he expressly teacheth, that they do not, or should not differ from the Roman Church, concerning the true, real, and substantial presence of Christ, in this Sacrament. Which he as plainly expresseth, where entreating of the dignity of Priests, he writeth thus: To these parsons, God 
Covell sup. pag. 87.  imparted power over his mystical body, which is the society of souls, and over that natural, which is himself, for the knitting of both in one, a work which Antiquity doth call the making of Christ's body. And in an other treatise he speaketh, of the same matter, in this manner: The power of the 
Covell modest examinat. pag. 105.  Ministry by blessing visible Elements, it maketh them invisible grace. It giveth daily the holy Ghost. It hath to dispose of that flesh which was given for the life of the world: and that blood which was powered out to redeem souls. Hitherto this Learned Protestant: whose words be so plain in this point, that no conclusion, but themselves, needeth to be inferred from them. And not only in this, but other Questions, as before, these Protestants of England are so clear, for catholics doctrine, and against that, which their parliamentary Religion doth, or would seem to teach, that D. Willet 
Willet apud parks against Limbom. pag. 20. 21. def first testim.  writeth of them in this sort. They maintain traditions, free will, freedom from sin, justification by works, works of super erogation, of transubstantiation with divers others. Therefore even by Protestants, this sacred doctrine of the Roman Church is to be embraced, and defended: as well taught by Catholics, Protestants, and D. Fields true Greek Church also: from which lastly thus I argue.  
That doctrine which is taught by the true Church in Protestants judgement, which by them cannot ere in any essential thing, is true: But the doctrine of the Roman Church concerning the real presence and transubstantiation is such: Therefore it is true. The first proposition is proved and granted before: And the second is manifest in these the express words of the Greek Churches censure, upon Protestant doctrine: It is the judgement of the Church, that in the holy 
Hierem. in censur cap. 10.  supper after consecration, and benediction, the bread doth pass, and is changed into the very body itself of Christ, and the wine into that blood of his, by the power of the holy Ghost. For our Lord in the same night wherein he was betrayed, taking bread and giving thanks, broke it and said, take and eat, this is not bread, or a figure of my body, but this is my very body, and my blood. So that, both then and now the bread is transformed and changed into his body, and the wine into his blood, as our Lord promised, and affirmed in many places of scriptures. And this is more than sufficient of this matter: especially seeing not only Queen Elizabeth, in her 
Parliam An. 1. Elizab. parl.. 1. jacob parl.. 1. Edw. 6 c. both kinds.  first Parliament received this doctrine of Transubstantiation, by allowing and reviving the statute of King Edward, the sixth in that behalf, and this their statute was never yet repealed: But also in the first parliament of his majesty confirmed with the rest of Q. Elizabeth. The Protestant publishers of 
Praefat. in Petr. Gallatin. Franc. An. 1602. Morton App. pag. 396. & pag. 395  Petrus Gallatinus, tell us, that the testimonies which he bringeth from the rabbins before Christ, are undeniable, which allowed, D. Morton writeth thus: They are more plain and pregnant for transubstantiation, then are these sayings of transsubstantiators themselves. They make so directly for transubstantiation, that the most Romish Doctors for the space of almost a thousand years, after Christ, did not in so express terms publish this mystery to the world. Again D. Androwes Protestant Bishop 
Casaubon resp. ad Card. Per. pag. 50. 51.  of Ely cited by Casaubon and Casaubon himself, from our King himself, (as he saith) affirm: It is Christ's body, the same object, and thing, which the Roman Church believeth. Therefore acknowledging there is a change in this Sacrament, as commonly they do, that before the words of consecration it was bread, and wine, and after, is the same object and thing which the Roman Church believeth, the body and blood of Christ. This change being from bread into the body of Christ, and from wine into his blood, which is a change. Substantiae in Substantiam, of one substance into an ohter, must needs be (as we Catholics teach) Transubstantiation.   

CHAPTER XVI. Of the holy Sacrifice, of Christ's blessed body, & blood; commonly called the Mass, daily offered in the Church.  
AND hereby is not only proved the Catholic doctrine of this particular question, of Christ's real presence in the B. Sacrament, and the manner how by transubstantiation of the elements bread and wine by power of his omnipotent word into his most sacred body and blood: but those also which depend from thence, as is before remembered, the sufficiency of communicating of such as do not offer the holy sacrifice (first instituted and ever to be continued in both kinds) in the one kind only: as also the true external and public sacrifice of Christ's true Church, consisting of the oblation and offering of his most B. body and blood, in these holy Mysteries; for which, because it hath been so profanely and blasphemously contradicted by divers of our English Protestants, I mean to speak a little more particularly therein: and from themselves first argue thus.  
Whatsoever is the real and true body, and blood, of Christ, now unseparable from his most blessed soul and is publicly offered unto God by the lawfully called and authorized priests of his Church, is a true, public, and holy sacrifice: But that which is commonly called the Eucharist, or blessed Sacrament of the altar, offered by Catholic priests, of the Roman Church in Mass, is such: Therefore it is a true public and holy sacrifice. The Mayor proposition is evidently true and confessed of all men of learning in Christianity, neither can be doubted of any, that is ignorant if he knoweth the terms themselves expressly signifying and showing the verity thereof even by the light of nature. The second proposition is also more than abundantly proved and verified by these Protestants in the last chapter: yet to give it a further (though needles) confirmation, I prove it again in this order to be a sacrifice external and public.  
That doctrine which that Church, which is esteemed by Protestants to be the true Church teacheth, is to be allowed: But this doctrine of Christ's blessed body, and blood, to be over public sacrifice, in the Church, is such: Therefore it is so to be allowed. The first proposition is often granted before; and the second of the Greek Churches opinion, and practice, both at this present, and from the time of the primitive days of christianity, to be agreeable with the present Roman Church, is justified by the Protestant Relator of Religion in the chapter of holy ceremonies His words (to make 
Relation cap. 53. or c. 54.  a new repetition) of that Church's doctrine are these: With Rome they concur in the opinion of transubstantiation, and generally in the service, and whole body of the Mass, in praying to Saints, in auricular confession, in offering of sacrifice, and prayer for the dead, and in these without any, or with no material difference. They hold purgatory also, and worshipping of pictures. For the form and 
Cap. 55.  ceremonies of the Mass they much resemble the Latins. In crosseings they are very plentiful. In sum 
Relat. of Relig c. 53. or 54 sup.  all those opinions which grew into the Church, before that separation, between the Greeks' and Latins, and all those ceremonies which were common unto both, they still retain. Then this doctrine and practice of this public sacrifice, being not only the use of these two Churches now, but before their separation, which these Protestants in that place have told us 
Cap. 11. sup.  to have beerie 1200. years ago, must still with reverence be observed. Which this Protestant Relator shall here confirm again, 
Relat. sup. cap. 53. or 54.  speaking of the present Greek Church in these words: Their liturgies be the same that in the old time, namely S. Basils', S. Chrisostomes', and S. Gregory's (which is the same that the Roman Church now useth) translated, without any bending them to that change of language, which their tongue hath suffered. M. Middleton also 
Middleton papistomast. pag. 51. Morton Apol. part. 2. pag. 81.  telleth us of the Masses of Basile, Chrisostome, and Epiphanius, and that in them the dead were prayed for. D. Morton goeth higher, to the days of the Apostles, citing and allowing not only the Masses of S. Basile and S. Chrisostome, but S. james the Apostle himself. Wherefore I hope he and others will be the better pleased to accept the Censure of Hieremias the Constantinopolitan Patriarch taking upon him to be supreme in that Church, uttered in these words: The holy Mass is a sacrifice 
Hierem. in censur.  instituted of Christ in memory and commendation of all his mercy and humility sustained for our sakes. Saint james the Apostle, called our Lord's Brother, first reduced into order that liturgy and Sacrifice, being so instructed of Christ to do it. In all parts of that holy sacrifice, nothing else is handled, but an universal order of things, which our Saviour undertook for our Redemption. How these primitive Masses, liturgies or forms of the B. sacrifice of Christ's body and blood, in all questions and articles of Religion agree with that which the Roman Church now practiseth from S. Gregory, as these men before allow, and others writ from S. Peter the Apostle, is apparent in those liturgies and Masses, and too long to be cited in this place. And from hence thus I argue again.  
That doctrine, and public practice of Sacrifice, or other, which was instituted by Christ, practised by his Apostles, and such holy Saints and Doctors of the Church, as Saint Basile, S. Chrisostome, S. Epiphanius. and S. Gregory were, may and ought still to be observed, kept, and used: But the doctrine, and practice of our public Church Sacrifice, or Mass, is such. Therefore it may, and aught still to be kept and used. The first proposition is most evidently true, and cannot be denied by any true Christian: and the Minor is before proved in these last Protestant's allowed citations: and may further be confirmed by these Protestant writers: D. Sutcl●ffe writeth thus: We read in Ignatius this phrase, offer and, sacrificium 
Sutcliff subu. pag. 32.  immolare, to offer and immolate sacrifice, and like phrases in Irenaeus, Cyprian, Tertullian, and Martialis, who mentioneth also Altars. And these words, and the things, truly signified by them, Altar and Sacrifice, are in the Greek and other tongues so unseperably joined, and knit together, that D. Morton doth thus acknowledge: We cannot dislike the sentence 
Morton App. pag. 162. l. 2. cap. 6. Sect. 1.  concerning the mutual relation and dependence between an Altar and sacrifice: but grant that altar doth as naturally and necessarily infer a Sacrifice, as a shrine doth a Saint, a father a son. And again: it is truly said Sacrifice and priesthood are Relatives. Then, for altars he hath hard before, that they were in the Apostles time: and consequently Mass, the Christian sacrifice was then: for he hath told us they cannot be separated. And his Protestant Bishops in their late Theatre, will put him out of all doubt, that from the beginning of Christianity, even in England, such altars for sacrifice were used of the Christians. Their words be these: It is reported that 
Theatre of great Brit. pag. 205. n. 12. pag. 204.  Patrick the Irish Apostle, and canonised Saint long before the Reign of King Lucius preached the Gospel in many places of Wales: And also that Ninianus Bernicius of the race of the British princes converted the Picts to the Religion of Christ. To which effect also the sayings of S. john Chrisostome Bishop of Constantinople enforce. And among islands expressly nameth this our Britain: Whose Inhabitants (saith he) have also consented to the word, which is planted in every heart, in honour whereof they have erected their temples, and Altars. Thus in the Britain's time; that S. Augustine brought in Altars, Mass, and the ceremonies thereof is proved by these Protestants in other places. And the Theatre itself setteth this for one of the Questions of S. Augustine to S. Gregory: Gifts 
Theat pag. 330.  offerred on the Altar how to be distributed asked by Augustine of Pope Gregory. And thus they writ of King Redwald. After baptism returning to Idolatry, 
Pag. 333.  in one and the same temple after the manner of the old Samaritans, he erected an Altar for the service of Christ, and an other little Altar for  sacrifices, which stood unto the days of Beda himself. And long before again in the Britain's time they tell us of Priests stain standing at the Altars. And again in 
Pag. 291. Pag. 317.  Gildas time 1200. years since, oaths taken upon the Altars made of stome. And to secure D. Morton what the sacrifice offered upon those Altars was, they tell us, that in this primitive time in this Island, among the britains: The Altar was called the seat of the 
Theatre pag. 317. sup. n. 6.  celestial sacrifice. And again, whereas D. Morton hath granted before, That Sacrifice and priesthood are Relatives, which be of an unseparable nature, Both he, and all others that now so earnestly contend to have themselves accounted Priests, must as much labour for this external sacrifice, which as he affirmeth, is unseparable from priesthood. Otherwise if they shall again fly up and down, to their fantasied spiritual priesthood, and sacrifice, Queen Elizabeth (if her prayers and devotions had been as great) was as good a Priest. As S. Peter was, and D. Mortons' Mother, grandmother, beldame, and all women of his kiudred, or in the world, (if their virtue were equal, were as good Priests as he: if he were a true Priest, which I deny: And yet they all agree, that all woman sex, and kind is uncapable of holy priesthood. Again D. Morton with his friend Theodore Bibliander 
Morton App. pag. in sacrif.  assuer us, that the Rabbins before Christ did teach, that those which received the Messiah, should in place of the sacrifices of Moses law, have an external sacrifice in bread and wine, and called it Thoda. Which is sufficient for this place, & purponse, where I only prove, that there is in Christian Religion an external sacrifice to succeed the sacrifices of the Law; for that this sacrifice though begun in bread and wine, is the blessed body and blood of Christ, I have proved by these Protestants in the former chapter. And this which I contend in this place, is plainly granted unto me by Casaubon, wrighting in 
Casaub. resp. ad Card. Per. pag. 51. 52. etc.  our King's name, and by his command as he protesteth, and in these words: neither is the King Ignorant, nor denieth, that the fathers of the primitive Church, did acknowledge one sacrifice, in Christian Religion, that succeeded in the place of the sacrifices of Moses Law. And according to this it is confessed by other Protestants, allowing also, the doctrine of the primitive fathers for a Rule to us: The words of M. Middleton are these: The sacrifice of the Altar, 
Middlet. Papist. pag. 92. 113.  and unbloody sacrifice were used in the primitive Church; and the ancient fathers called the sacrifice of the body, and blood of Christ, a sacrifice. And again: The primitive Church did offer sacrifice at the 
Pag. 49. sup. Pag. 137. 138. 47. 45.  Altar, for the dead. Sacrifice for the dead was a tradition of the Apostles, and the ancient fathers. Then if this was from the beginning, true and Catholic doctrine, to offer sacrifice, and say Mass for the dead, much rather for ●he living, and so both for the living and the dead, in Protestants judgement. And so both the form of our holy priesthood. Receive power to offer sacrifice in the Church for the living and dead: And also holy sacrifice of Mass, offered for such purpose, by a duly consecrated Priest, is holy and acceptable before God. And all English Protestants that shall deny it, are not only within the Anathema of the Council of Trent in these words: If any man shall say, that in the Mass a true and 
Concil. Trid. Sess. 6. cap. 1. de Sacrif. Miss.  proper sacrifice is not offered, let him be Anathema: But subject to the curse and condemnation of the primitive Church against Aë●ius, the Heretic, and his complices, as their own Doctor's Field and Covell are witnesses in this manner: Aërius condemned the custom of the Church, 
Field pag. 138. l. 3. cap. 29. Covel. Exam. pag. 114.  in naming the dead at the Altar, and offering the sacrifice of Eucharist for them: and for this his rash and Inconsiderate boldness, and presumption, in condemning the universal Church of Christ, he was justly condemned. How much more than are these present Protestants worthy condemnation, who do not only contemn the doctrine, and custom of the present Roman, Greek, and universal Church of Christ, in this so greatly concerning question, but against their own judgements, with rash inconsiderate boldness, and presumption condemn the universal primitive Church, an● confederate themselves with Heretics (i● their own judgement) justly condemned, against it. And contrariwise this holy Catholic doctrine of Mass, or Sacrifice fo● the living and dead, by our Enemy's allowance, a Tradition of the Apostles, use and custom of the universal Church of Christ, in the primitive, and best flourishing estate thereof, and ever since continued, is inviolably to be maintained.   

CHAPTER XVII. OF THE SINGLE, AND CHASTE life, of Priests, and vows of chastity.  
NOw let us come to that doleful and heavy Question to these married Protestant Church men; To prove by them also the ancient and true Catholic doctrine, and practice of the single, and chaste life of Priests, and vows of chastity: The contrary wanton, licentious and sacriledgeous liberty unto this and other works of perfection, whillfull poverty, and obedience as it first made way for Protestant here●es into the world, as appeareth by their Apostle Luther, and the rest presently upon ●heir revolt, for chastity, poverty, and obedience, which they had vowed: for the most ●art giving themselves over to their contra●es, Lust, Riches & Rule: so it is to this day ● unpleasing a thing in this Epicurean ●ct, that they cannot endure to follow the anons either of the Latin Church, under whose obedience they should be, if thy will show any at all, or to the Gre●ke Church either as will appear in this chapter, howsoever they will seem to allow thereof, especially in this Article, of later days using more liberty therein, than other Churches But to omit all things of discontentment to this people I argue thus. That doctrine and practice which is a work of perfection, profitable unto, or making perfect the members of Christ's mystical body, his Church, aught to be allowed and practised of them: that call themselves the perfect, and reformed Church, especially in that sort of people, or some great part of them, that are, or would be esteemed the most perfect, reformed guides and directors to others, as their ministers pronounce themselves to be: But the doctrine and practice of single and chaste life, and vows of chastity. Be such: Therefore to be embraced and allowed of these Protestants, otherwise they have not the perfect and reform but unperfect and deformed Church.  
The first proposition is evidently true, and in the light of nature too gross absurdities do follow in denying it. The second proposition is at large proved by these Protestants in the chapter of precepts and 
Cap. 7. sup.  counsels before from whence at this time I will only show by D. Covells' testimony, that it is so absurd to deny it, that he would free all Protestants from it. His words of the works of perfection be these. In these points all have not holden the same opinions: 
Covell def. of Hooker pag. 52.  some thought the counsels to be of the some necessity, with precepts: as those Heretics called Apostolici. Others esteemed them as things indifferent. Others as things forbidden, which error is accused by some of our Adversaries, to be an opinion of our Church. There is none of any sound judgement in our Church, which doth not think, that willing poverty, humble obedience, and true chastity, are things very commendable, and do bring with them great advantadge to the true perfection of a Christian life. By these we do more than without these we should. Then these men granting the doctrine, and never practising the use of it, from whence this advantadge to true perfection is brought, are in a practical error, in this point and aught to reform themselves. If any man will excuse their omitting of it: he must needs answer, that it is, either because they will not, or are not able to perform it. If it only proceedeth of wilfulness, they are generally to be reproved of wilful obstinacy, and sin against the holy ghost, universally refusing or resisting such holy motions, Inspirations, and graces. If they say, it proceedeth from want of grace, spiritual power, and assistance to effect it, they plainly prove, and thereby acknowledge themselves, and their Religion, to be graceless, and not of God; not having that ability, and strength in any one company, or society of men, or women, among them in so long time, to embrace and practice that which so profiteth to perfection. And as strongly grant, the Church of Rome, and the doctrine thereof for true, wherein that grace hath been given to thousands of societies, to profess, to live, and die in perpetual vowed chastity; which hath not been bestowed one any one fraternity in their Religion. And thereby demonstrate to the world, that those Catholic Priests of our nation, whom they persecute as enemies to God, are in this great favour, and grace with him, in performing that perfect estate, of continency which our Adversaries openly confess they cannot do. Which we are so fart from acknowledging in us, that in great multitudes, we will solemnly swear, we truly perform it.  
And no man understanding the severe canons of Catholic Religion, for such offenders, the great reverence we give to that most blessed sacrifice, which we daily offer, and what innocency of life at the least to be free from all carnal and other mortal sin, we require unto it, and the ministering of all other Sacraments continually practised by us, can condemn our Order in this matter further in this question I argue thus: That which was decreed by the Church, within the first 400. years of Christ, is now to be observed: But the vow of continency was then decreed to be annexed to holy orders: Therefore still so to be observed. The Mayor is allowed before: And the Minor proved by M. Perkins in these words: Continentiae votum, necessarium, & 
Perk problem. pag. 192.  perpetuum, etc. The vow of continency, necessary, and perpetual, seemeth first to have been decreed in the west Church, about 380. years after Christ. Traely it was received before, but by the private devotion of some, not by the public judgement of the Church. If any man saith, he acknowledgeth, then only to be decreed though used before, and this in the west Church; it sufficeth for this purpose, and is obligatory to Protestants, both confessing that a time of truth, the Roman Church then to have been the true Church, and Mother unto others, and themselves under the jurisdiction of that western & Roman Church. And customs are not usually decreed, but upon Transgression of them. But M. Middleton will tell us, That S. ●piphanius an holy Saint and blessed Bishop of Greece, writeth of such decrees, and Canons to the whole Church, both to have been extant, and practised long before that time and from the beginning of Christianity, as his words (traditions) without limitation argue. 
Epiphan. l. 1. to 2. contra her. Cathari apud Middleton papistom pag. 139. 140.  Thus he is cited by him writing of the Cathari Heretics. Those Traditions which were delivered peculiarly for the Clergy by reason of their supereminency in celebration of the divine mystery, These Heretics would have all men tied unto, when they did hear that a Bishop ought to be unreprovable, the husband of one wife, and continent, and likewise of Deacons and Priests. For in truth since the coming of Christ, the doctrine of the Gospel doth not admit into these offices any, that have married a second wife, by reason of the excellent dignity of priesthood. And this holy Church doth sincerely observe, yet doth not the Church admit any into those offices that is the husband but of one wife, whose wife is yet living with him in the fellowship of marriage, sed eum qui se ab una continuit, aut in vidui●●te vixit. But him only that either was never married, or that after the death of his wife liveth unmarried, the Church receiveth into the office of a Deacon, Priest, Bishop, or Subdeacon, which is especially observed, where the Ecclesiastical Canons are sincerely kept. But thou wilt say unto we, that in many places, Priests and Deacons do live in wedlock: But this is not according to the sincerity of the canons. Hitherto, and further, be the convincing words, of this holy, and learned Father, of the Greek Church, whose evidence is so plain for the Catholic doctrine, and practice in this Question, and against Protestants, that M. Middleton flatly saith: Epiphanius was too partially 
Middleton sup. pag. 143.  affected in this point. And hereupon thus I argue again: That doctrine, which is so plainly, and directly held, and maintained, by the learned holy fathers, of the primitive Church, that the present Protestant Adversaries, (otherwise seeming to allow these fathers) confess it to be their opinion, and of the Church in their time is to be embraced and observed: But this Catholic doctrine of Priests continency, and vows of chastity is such: Therefore to be embraced, and observed. The Mayor is manifestly true, both Catholics and Protestants in show at the least, allowing the primitive Church and Fathers thereof for judges in questions of Religion. The Minor is thus proved. First M. Middleton acknowledgeth S. Epiphanius, S. Hierome, S. Chrisostome, and S. Ambrose, to be so plain against their Marriage in the Clergy and their doctrine against vows of chastity: that having written of S. Epiphanius as before. he addeth of S. Hierome thus: He made unciwill entroades against Gods holy ordinance, 
Middleton supra pag. 134. Pag. 138.  in this point. Of S. Chrisostome thus: Chrisostome in his vehemency goeth beyond measure in reprehending, and the Christians of his time in their lightness went beyond measure in voweing. Of S. Ambrose thus: Ambrose had the Apostolical 
Pag. 134.  dragon, the devil dwelling in him. And of the holy ancient Fathers in general in this matter. He speaketh in these terms: Neither 
Middleton sup. pag. 133.  is it any thing to the purpose, that the ancient Fathers allowed vows of chastity, and single life of Priests. And again: The Ancient Fathers are not 
Pag. 334.  fit judges to determine either of Priests Marriage, or vows of chastity. M. Wotton well perceiving, the doctrine and practice of the holy primitive Church, in those unspotted days, dealeth as freely with us in these words: Such was the opinion of holiness in single life, 
Wotton, def. of Perk. pag. 491.  in the primitive Church: that it is not to be looked for, that antiquity should afford us any testimony, against the practice and judgement of those days. Then how graceless, and impudent are these men, to cite both fathers, and councils, to prove that, which in their conscience, and knowledge, they both understand in themselves, and publish thus unto the world, they utterly denied, and disallowed; wholly and clearly teaching the present doctrine of the Roman Church, and the contradictory to Protestants assertions? Whether they were Greeks' or Latins: and this in so serious manner, that such breach of chastity vowed (which M. Perkins confesseth to be above 1200. years old) was called Incest and punished with excommunication. From whence I argue thus further.  
That which by holy fathers is called Incest, and by allowed general Council in the primitive Church, censured with excommunication, is not to be adjudged lawful: but the contrary. But breach of the vow of chastity, now above 1200. years annexed to priesthood is such. Therefore it is not to be adjudged lawful: But the contrary. The Mayor proposition is evidently true: And the Minor thus proved, by M. Perkins, in these words. Epiphanius in his 
Perk probl. pag. 201.  61. heresy saith, they that marry after they vow do sin, and enjoineth them penance. So Augustine and Hierome. viduit c. 9 After these Marriadges began to be accounted of some for a more grievous sin, after the year 380. Basile calleth these Marriadges, Incest, the offence of whoredom and adultery, in his hook of virginity; by the Council of Chalcedon in the 15. canon they are punished with excommunication. But they will say the later Greek Church useth more liberty in suffering the use of Marriage in holy orders: Though this is nothing to us, that be under the western and Roman Church, by their own confessions, yet thus I demonstrate, that they neither agree with the ancient, nor present Greeks' in this question, but make lust, licentiousness, and liberty to be their law. For proof whereof I argue thus.  
That which is the chiefest law to the Greeks' (being as D. Feild writeth, the 13. 
Field l. 3. c. 18. pag. 101.  Canon of the 6. general Council, otherwise the 13. canon made in Trullo) doth only licence Subdeacons', Deacons, and Priests, married before Orders, not to be separated from their wives, but to abstain from them in the time of their turn, that is in the time when they sacrifice, as the second Council of Carthadge in the 2. Canon defineth. But the Fathers say that they know it delivered for a canon to the Roman Church, that Deacons, or Priests in their ordination profess, that they will not any more company with their wives. But both the doctrine, and practice of Protestants, are contrary marrying both before, and after orders, not regarding any time of sacrifice, but denying it, and being under the Roman Church, yet profess open disobedience to the Canons of it. And not only to the Latin but to the Greek Church also. For in the Greek Church neither their Bishops, Religious men, or women, or votaries of chastity are permitted to marry: but for such to marry is adjudged sacrilege in that Church, the words of their Patriarch Hieremias are these: Whosoever 
Hierem. in cens in epilog.  shall not perform the vow of chastity, doth incur the most filthy sin of sacrilege: and to perform such vows, is the most angelical and excellent life that can be led on earth: therefore we must greatly extol monastical life, and conversation. Therefore these Protestants, not only permitting and tolerating, but inciting, provoking, and procuring Bishops, Monks, Friars, Nuns, and all votaties to marriage, are by this censure guilty of the filthy sin of Sacrilege, and agree with no Church, Greek, or Latin, in this point, and question.  
But these men in their Theatre and else Object. where tell us that there were married Priests in Ireland, in the time of S. Malachy, and in 
Speed in Theatr. pag. 145. etc.  England in the time of S. Dunstan, our Archbishop of Canterbury. But they have been told before, even from primitive Saints, Answ. and Doctors, that wheresoever, and whensoever such were, it was an error, and intruded abuse, and not according to the sincerity of the Canons. And answell by this kind of Argument, that such, and such things have been, or now be, without proof that they are good, and aught to be, they might prove murder, treason, Adultery, incest, sacrilege, blasphemy, and whatsoever villainies, and Impieties to be holy or justifiable things: for these things were, not only in one, or two kingdoms, in one or two times, but be, and have been with such wicked men, in all times, and kingdoms. And to let them know by their own authorities, that it was so in this their objection, wicked men that were thus married, or allowed it; and holy, and Saints, that forbade, and condemned it, They themselves in this their Theatre witness, in these words: S. Malachy 
Theatr. sup. n. 9 pag. 145.  (whose life S. Bernard writeth) prohibited Priests Marriadges in Ireland. And to assure us further, that they were holy men, that forbade these Marriadges, and the highest authority by their own judgement before by which they were forbidden, thus they testify in these words: Pope Gregory sendeth hither (into England) 
Theat. pag. 421. n. 47.  his Bulls, with damning curses, against the married Clergy: commanding that none should hear their Masses. And thus again: Pope Gregory in a general Synod excluded the married Priests from execution of their holy offices, and forbade the lay men to hear their Masses. And our Archbishop of Canterbury, 
Pag. 373.  then by their own sentence a Saint, condemned them miraculously as they testify; so were they condemned by other councils and authorities. The sanctity of S. Dunstan, 
Pag. 371. 372.  his miracles, gifts of prophety, and verified Propheties of the calamities, and punishments which God inflicted upon the Princes and favourers maintaining those wicked marriages, are in some part testified in their own Theatre. The Princes that 
Theat. pag. 377. etc. cap. 43. l. 7.  disallowed them were holy and Saints; among which was King, and S. Edward the Martyr murdered and martyred by the favourites of married Priests Among which was his Mother in Law Queen Elfrida, and her son his half brother Ethelred after King by this Martyrdom. Where upon these men themselves have thus registered: The hearts of the Subjects drawn from their Sovereign. 
Theat. sup.  Dunstan's prophesy against their wickedness. A cloud of blood and fire, and many extreme miseries of that tyme. Dunstan further prophesieth of other calamities to the Land after his death, Queen Elfrida, this great patroness of those wicked Marriadges, and Murderess of that blessed King, & Martyr, acknowledged her error, and did perpetual penance for those Impieties: their own words thereof be these: Elfrida the second wise of King Edgar, procured the 
Theat. pag. 372. n. 17.  murder of King Edward, her son in law, that her own son Ethelred might come to the crown: and afterwards to purify his, and her husbands, ghost and to stop the people's speeches, of so wicked a fact, she founded the Abbeys of Amsbury, and Whorwell, in the 
Pag. 374. n. 10.  counties of Wiltshire, and Southampton: in which later she lived with great repentance, and penance until the day of her death. But both the life and death of them that repent not, was by these men's relation, odious and execrable. I will only exemplify in two Kings, Ethelred before related, and King Edwyne before him, both maintainers of Priests marriage. of King Edwyne they writ in these words: 
Theat. pag. 366. n. 7. 8. Pag. 369. n. 2. 3.  King Edwyne the day of his coronation before his nobles sitting in counsel at that age, not above thirteen years old, with shameless and unprincely lust abused a lady of great estate, and his near kinswoman. He was a great enemy unto the Monkish orders, whom from the monastery of Malmesbury, Glastenbury and others, he expelled, placing married Priests in their Rome's. Dunstan likewise the Abbot Saint of Glostenbury he banished the Realm, for his overbold reprehensions, etc. His subjects deny him obedience, And set up Prince Edgar his brother in Mercia, and Northumberland, not fully fourteen years old. Edwyne then reigning in a still decaying state, was held of such is subjects, in no better esteem, than was jehoram of judah, who is said to have lived without being desired: for very grief whereof after four years of his Reign, he ended his life. His wife thought to be to Near in the blood royal, to be matched with him in spousal bed, the subjects disliking of the unlawful marriage (the cause of Dunstan's banishment) failed by degrees to perform their duties to their King, and her, they likewise forced to a separation in the third year of his regardless government.  
The miseries and punishments of King Ethelred, and this Kingdom for his sins, they recount in this manner: Ethelred not able 
Theat. pag. 376. 377.  to resist the Danes, his subjects not loveing him, payeth unto them 10000 pounds to departed. An other peace he purchaseth with 16000 pounds. The next composition 20000. pounds. Then 24000. pounds. Then 30000. pounds, and lastly 40000. pounds, until the land was emptied of all the coin, the Kingdom of her glory, the nobles of courage, commons of content, and the Sovereign of his wont respect and observance. The miseries of this land, for the sins of the patrons of such marriadges, as now be defended, and honoured in England, which then it felt, are to many, and lamentable to be remembered at this time. And a man may justly call it a strange Example, that among other strange punishments of King Henry the eight that great patron of Cranmer, that married bishop (that mared Religion) and supreme head of such a Church, that in his life time so jumbled, tumbled, and tumbled the world together, should have no better commendation of these Protestants now, but to be ranked by them, as the chiefest among wicked, and justly punished English Kings, in their late published history of the world, in these words: Now for King Henry the eight▪ if 
History of the world in pref.  all the pictures and patterns of a merciless prince were lost, in the world, they might all again be painted to the life, out of the story of this King. And because Protestants memories serve them not, to call to mind, the holiness, sanctity, and Saints, that have been in our English Catholic Clergy, but like filthy swine desire to tumble, moil, and root in dirt, let them cast over their accounts, through out the histories of this kingdom, beginning with their own Marriadges, and time, and so ascending to the first conversion of this land to Christ, and it will be no difficult Auditt to make, that they themselves▪ and those which were married, as these be, were the most disordered, profane, and irreligious that were in our English Clergy; let them make the calculation, I may not now intent it, my method will not allow it. Being fittest for such as be partakers of such impieties. Only to begin their reckoning, I must put them in mind, out of their Theatre and other their own histories, penned by Protestants. That as this Kingdom, of our English, or saxon Christians, hath been but twice conquered, and overrun, once by the Danes, then by the Normans, the greatest miseries and punishments it hath endured; So the same their Theatre, other histories, and Protestant writings, never object unto us, more Married, and disordered Priests, and clergy men, then at those times. God of his mercy grant, that their third state of married ministers, presage us better bydeings, and bring us greater comforts. Of vows and profession of perpetual chastity, and other works of perfection it is further entreated in the proper question of such holy and religious life and conversation.   

CHAPTER XVIII. OF PURGATORY, AND PRAYER for the dead.  
AFTER this, let us entreat of prayer for the dead, and Purgatory: And because, these Protestant's before have given so great allowance, to the Greek Church, especially D. Feild Intituling the 5. chapter of his third 
Field l. 3. c. 5. in titul.  book: Of the nature of schism, and kinds of it, and that it no way appeareth that the Churches of Greece, etc. Are heretical or in damnable schism. And it is their common assertion, that the doctrine of purgatory is only taught by the Roman, and not Greek Church, I will first thus argue from the authority thereof. That doctrine which is taught by that Church, which is neither heretical, nor damnably schismatical cannot be heretical, nor damnable, but orthodox, and Catholic: But the doctrine of Purgatory is taught by this so justified Church, the Greek Church. Therefore not heretical, nor damnable. But orthodox and Catholic. The first proposition is evidently true: for it is the doctrine, and practice of any company, or private parson, that giveth unto it, the denomination, Heretical, Schismatical, Orthodox, etc. The second proposition is proved by these Protestant Testimonies following. First the Protestant Relator, writing of this Greek Church, speaketh thus: With Rome 
Relation of Relig. c. 53. or c. 54.  they concur in the opinion of transubstantiation, and generally in the service, and whole body of the Mass, in praying to Saints, in auricular confession, in offering of sacrifice, and prayer for the dead, and these without any, or with no material difference. They hold Purgatory also, and worshipping of pictures. Therefore these doctrines of purgatory & the rest must needs by their judgement be orthodox and Catholic, and neither heretical nor damnably schismatical, otherwise against D. fields supposition, and Title, his fellow Relator had proved it to be such. Again M. Middleton telleth us, that in the 
Middleton papistom. pag. 51.  Masses of Basile, Chrisostome, and Epiphanius (all Greek Fathers) the dead were prayed for. But because they will perhaps look for the very name of Purgatory, I deduce it from the time of the Apostles to have been taught, and the doctrine thereof in the Greek Church: For M. Perkins telleth us, that Dionysius 
Perk. problem. pag. 178. The Protestant book of Homel. Bell. motiu. fol. 133. etc.  (commonly called, and by Protestants, The Areopagite, S. Paul's Scholar) did teach: In Purgatorio expiari peccata. That sins are purged in Purgatory. Therefore he thought there was a purgatory, as Catholics do, and in that satisfaction was made for sins. And there he setteth down the prayer used for the dead, recorded by the same S. Dionysius in these words. Dionysius Hierar. Ecclesiast. p. 3. 
Perk. sup.  c. 7. Oratio illa precatur divinam clementiam, ut cuncta dimittat per infirmitatem humanam admissa peccata, defuncto. That prayer doth beseech the divine Clemency, to forgive to the par●ie deceased, all sins committed by human Infirmity. To like purpose (as hereafter D. Bilson the Protestant Bishop 
Bilson Survey of Christ's sufferings.  of Winchester citeth, S. justine, Ir●naeus, Cyrill, Chrisostome, Theodoret, Ignatius, Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius, Athanasius, Epiphanius, Basile, Gr●gorie Nazianzene, Damascen, Theophilact, etc. The glories of the Greek Church. And therefore Gennadius Scholar the Learned Patriarch of that Church, in his defence pf the Councils of Florence, writeth thus of that matter. The 
Cennad, Scholar defence 5 cap. 3.  doctrine of Purgatory, prayer, and sacrifice for the dead was a Tradition of the Apostles. That which the Latins call Purgatorium (purgatory) they of the Greek Church name Catharterion. signifying a purging, cleansing or satisfying place, of the Greek verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to purge, cleanse, expiate, etc. And proving this at large, by the ancient Greek fathers, he addeth thus: They were only Schismaticorum s●ctat●res, followers 
Gennad. sup.  of S●ismati●ks, whi●h denied it. For such Masters in Religion will our Protestants find out to follow, if any time, age, Church, or society had them. lastly in this Argument, the Censure of the Greek Church upon this error of Protestants, is delivered in these words: That the souls departed are to be 
Hierem. Patr. constant in censur. c. 15.  relieved by prayers, sacrifices, and good deeds, of those which live, and that it was decreed by the holy Apostles, that in the celebration of the holy mysteries, a memorit should be made of them, that were departed this life.  
Again I argue thus: That which was the doctrine and Tradition of the Apostles, and holy Fathers, of the primitive Church, is to be embraced: But the doctrine of Purgatory, praying, and satisfying for the dead, was such: Therefore to be embraced, and observed The first proposition is often graunred before. And the second also proved in this chapter, yet thus I add unto it. M. Middleton 
Middleton Papistom. pag. 64.  saith, that S. Chrisostome taught it to be the Apostles ordinance, to pray for the dead. And confesseth: It was a Tradition in the primitive Church; 
Pag. 45. 46. sup.  received from the fathers to pray for the dead, and beg mercy of God for them. And again: The 
Pag. 51. sup.  dead were prayed for in the public Liturgies (or Masses) of Basile, Chrisostome, and Epiphanius. And further thus: The Church in Epiphanius time used 
Pag. 47. 48. 49.  to crave mercy for the dead. M. Hull telleth us that in the primitive Church, Leo appointed 
Hull Rom. pol pag. 86 Morton apol. part. 1. pag. 329. Morton sup. pag. 273.  Masses for the dead. D. Morton saith of S. Augustine, that he prayed for his Mother Monicha deceased. And from Caluine he wittnesseth generally thus: Ipsi veteres preces fundebant pro defunctis. The ancient fathers prayed for the dead.  
Further I argue thus: whatsoever doctrine being denied overthroweth an Article of our Creed, & being granted confirmeth it, is true, by Protestants: if they deny not the Articles of the Creed, as they will not seem to do: But the doctrine of Purgatory being denied, destroyeth an Article of our Creed, and being granted, confirmeth it: Therefore it is, or aught to be esteemed true, by Protestants. The Mayor is evidently true, for the Articles of our Creed be most true, and cannot by true doctrine and positions be proved otherwise. I prove the Minor in this manner. Those places both of scriptures and fathers, which the Protestants themselves against the Puritans namely D. Bi●son (Protestant Bishop of Winchester with others) use to prove the Article of Christ descent to hell, do prove purgatory, which is made evident by citing some few. As that of the Prophet David. He led them 
Psal. 106. v. 14. 16.  forth of darkness, and the shadow of death: and broke their bonds. He shattered in pe●ces, the brazen gates, and broke the Iron bars. And that of the Prophet Zacharie speaking of Christ's descending thither: Thou also in the blood of thy Testament, 
Zachar. 9 v. 11.  hast let out the prisoners from the lake. And David and S. Paul of his ascending with these captives into heaven. Thou didst ascend 
Psal. 67. v. 19 Ephes. 4. v. 8. 9  on high: thou tookest captivity. And in S. Paul: Ascending on high, he led captivity captive, he gave gifts to men. And that he ascended, what is it but because he descended also first into the Inferior parts of the earth. Which sayings of holy scripture (that cannot be untrue) cannot be justified of the hell of the damned, from whence none were delivered: because in hell there is no Redemption. Therefore the same Protestant Bishop Bilson assigneth a third 
Bilson Survey pag. 552. 656.  place, besides heaven and hell, his words be: Abraham's Bosom was upward far above hell. Neither did I make Abraham's bosom to be paradise or heaven. And citing the fathers to prove Christ descent to hell, he bringeth them ordinarily proving Putgatorie, or if not by that name, yet in effect, teaching that Christ descended to a place of punishment, were many deceased were punished, and detained captives, and delivered them from thence which (as before) could not 
Bilson sup. from pag. 582. to pag. 665.  be hell. The very names of those Fathers proveing this doctrine, are toe many and tedious to be related, their sentences may be seen in that his collection.  
lastly I argue thus: whatsoever doctrine is defined, or proposed to Protestants by their highest commanding Rule of their Religion, as Communion Book, Book of Articles etc. to which they all subscribe, they may not deny: But this doctrine of Purgatory or praying for the dead is such: Therefore they may not deny it. The Mayor is evident, and the Minor proved out of their publicly allowed and reconfirmed Communion Book. Where in the Burial of the dead their Ministers are appointed to pray for the party deceased in these words: That we with this our Brother, and all other departed 
Comm. Book Tit. Burial of the dead● near the end: §. almighty God.  in the true faith of thy holy name, may have our perfect consummation and bliss, both in body and soul, in the eternal and everlasting glory: Amen If this prayer, that people deceased may come to heaven body and soul (man hath no other part to be prayed for) is not to pray for the dead nothing can be called praying for the dead, and for their salvation. And so I end this Question, with this sentence of M. higgon's, in his public sermon, 
Theophil. Higg. serm. 3. Mart. 1610.  at S. Paul's Cross, giving a reason of this doctrine, in these words: As there is a death in sin, and a death to sin, so there is a double resurrection: The first a culpa, from sin: the second a paena, from the punishment which followeth thereupon. Which must needs be the temporal punishment of sin, the ground of Purgatory, and satisfaction, after death being oftentimes not satisfied, answered, or (to use his own phrase) not risen from, in this life. For the eternal punishment of hell, due for great sins, is ever remitted, and risen from, in his resurrection a culpa, from sin. Otherwise a man now entitled heir of the kingdom of heaven, and salvation, should also be guilty of hell, and damnation, saved and damned, in heaven and hell together. And upon this and other such holy grounds, these Protestants in their late Theatre recount unto us so many hundreds 
Theat. of great Brit. etc.  of Religeous houses founded by holy Kings, princes, and others in England to pray for the souls of themselves, their Ancestors, posterity, and other Friends.   

CHAPTER XIX. teaching HOW THERE be 7. Sacraments in number, by these Protestants, according to the doctrine of the Roman Church.  
HAVING ended all other Questions to the full satisfaction, and according to the requests, and demands, of Protestants, desiring to be satisfied therein, and performing this from themselves, and own writings: I will proceed in the same manner in the Articles of the holy Sacraments, and first of their number, thus set down in the Council of Trent: There be seven Sacraments 
Concil. Trid. decret. de Sacrament.  of the new law, instituted by JESUS CHRIST our Lord, neither more nor fewer: Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Orders, Matrimony. For defence and proof of which doctrine, by these Protestants themselves, thus I argue.  
Whatsoever doctrine a confessed true general Council, having authority to bind all by these Protestants before, hath determined in this question is to be received and followed: But the Catholic doctrine of the Roman Church concerning seven Sacraments, is thus determined by such general Council, and binding authority: Therefore to be received, and followed. The first proposition is granted before, and must needs be thought so equal to all Protestants, that how soever they think of the infallible sentence of such assemblies in matters of faith, yet none of them may be so partial, but to prefer a general Council to any Protestant assembly, censure, sentence, or decree. The second is evidently proved, supposeing what is written before even by Protestants of the general Council of Florence, and for such with the doctrine thereof not only acknowledged, by D. Willet and M. parks but 
Willet Limbom. parks pag. 137. 180. Gennadius in defence. council. Flor. Concil. Florent. de Sacramentis novae legis.  by the Patriarch of Greece himself in his defence thereof. Where it is thus decreed, both with assent of Grecians, & Armenians: Novae legis septem sunt Sacramenta, scilicet Baptismus, Confirmatio, Eucharistia, Poenitentia, Extrema unctio, Ordo & Matrimonium &c. There are seven Sacraments of the new law, that is, Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Orders, and Matrimony. Which do much differ from the Sacraments of the old law, for they did not cause grace, but did only figure that it was to be given by the passion of Christ. But these of ours both contain grace, and give it unto them that worthily receive them. Hitherto the decree of that holy general Council, received by all Christendom, Latins, Armenians, jacobynes, Grecians. From whence I further argue in this manner.  
Whatsoever doctrine essential in Religion, (such as Sacraments be) is taught by the true Church, that is neither heretical, nor schismatical, is to be embraced: But the doctrine of seven Sacraments, as the Roman Church teacheth, is such, being likewise taught by the Protestants true Greek Church: therefore to be embraced. The Mayor is also proved in the last Argument, and further confirmed in the Censure of the Greek Church, upon Protestants in these words: There is an holy 
Hierém. in censur. cap. 7.  Catholic and Apostolic Church, of all true Christian men. In this Catholic and true believing Church there be seven divine Sacraments, Baptism, the Unction of holy Ointment, holy Communion, Orders, Matrimony, Penance, and the oil of Extreme Unction. And they further prosecute (as also the cited general Council of Florence doth) the institution, form, matter, effect, and other things, belonging to these seven holy Sacraments, according to the present doctrine, of the Roman Church.  
Again, I suppose, that Catholics in their definition of the Sacraments of the new law, requiring a containing and giving of grace, by these holy Sacraments, besides their signification thereof: (being only signs, Seals etc. as the common Protestant opinion is) to be far more restricted, and limited, then that of Protestants, because many more things be, and may be signs of any thing, than both signs, and causes: as appeareth to be true in all generical and specifical differences. For example under animal a living creature are contained more, then under animal rational●, a living creature with reason, only limited to man, who otherwise abstracting from his rationality, is with all other living creatures comprehended, Under the Genus Animal a living Creature. So a Sign of grace as well agreeth to the Sacraments of the old law, as to those of the Gospel: but not to contain and give grace. Only proper to those of the new Testament, as is recited before from the general Council of Florence, and is at 
Concil. Trident. decret. d● Sacramentis ecclesiae etc.  large set down against Protestants in the Council of Trent. This supposed which no man can deny, I argue thus.  
All things that agree with the definition of a Sacrament, be Sacraments: But according to Protestants all those seven before remembered, Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreame-Vnction, Orders, and Matrimony agree with, and have the definition of a Sacrament: Therefore they are Sacraments. The Mayor is evident, because in Logic the thing defined, and definition, are convertibles: as this: man and a reasonable creature. Whoesoever is the one is also the other, being one and the same. The second proposition 
Dove persuas. pag. 27. 28.  is thus proved by D. Dove Protestant Bishop of Peterboroug in these words: Concerning the number of Sacraments, we will not dispute, for according to their (Catholics) definition of a Sacrament, there be seven. Then much more as I have demonstrated, there must be so many by Protestants definition of Sacraments. As for his overplus number, more than seven, which he addeth, if he can prove it, he shall deserve better, then in writing that book, in finding forth more holy instruments of grace, and sanctification then hitherto have been known; in the mean time God grant him more and better knowledge with grace. But in that he granteth our number of seven Sacraments, according to our definition, it is as much as we contend, and all which hitherto they have denied: for when Catholics entreat of Sacraments, their number, grace, form, matter, Character etc. they speak of them, according as they are defined, and taken in the Catholic Church, and schools: and come not to Protestants, either to define, or determine them, or any other question in Religion. Yet, as before, except I am to old to remember my Logic, or this Bishop never did, or now will not understand it, if the definition of Catholics more particular and limited extendeth to seven Sacraments: That of Protestants more large or general, will stretch as far, and further: except the less is greater than that which is greater than it, two more than three, the Species more ample in Logic then Genus, and in grammar our degrees of comparison be altered, the positive turned into the comparative, superlative and contrary.  
I argue again in this manner: wheresoever in controversy of any question in Religion, between two societies, whereof one is in the truth, the adverse part itself doth grant that their opinion is not true by their own proceed. There the contrary is to be adjudged true, otherwise against the supposition neither should have the truth but both be in error: But in this question this is the case between Catholics and Protestants, the Protestants acknowledging more Sacraments by their proceedeings then two: Therefore the Catholic doctrine of seven Sacraments is true. The Mayor is infallibly true, and so proved by Protestants, graunteing generally, either their Religion and doctrine, or that of Catholics 
Petition of 22. preachers excep. 3. against comm. Book. Survey of the Book of comm. prayer pag. 117. quaest. 26. & pag. 134 135. 132. 133. 120.  to be true. The Minor is proved by the 22. preachers of london, in their petition, who resolutely affirm, that Protestants must needs yield to more than two, by their proceed; Therefore to the Catholic doctrine of seven Sacraments, else their supposition should be false, and all Religions in error, in so great a Question. Which is further confirmed by the Protestant Surveyors of their communion book, teaching the same doctrine, and expressly justifying it in Confirmation, Penance, and Matrimony. And to show their opinion and censure in this thing to be just, I demonstrate both them and the rest to be Sacraments, by English Protestant proceed in this manner, by the things they require to a Sacrament.  
Whatsoever is a visible Sign, or ceremony, ordained of God, or a visible sign with grace, is a Sacrament: But all those seven, taught by Catholics, are such: therefore they are Sacraments. The Mayor is the Protestants definition of a Sacrament, as the same 22. 
22. Preachers in petition sup. excep. 2.  Protestant preachers testify, even from their approved books of Articles, and Communion, and the Book of Articles itself to which all Ministers subscribe testifieth in these words: Sacraments ordained by 
Articles of Religion artic. 25.  Christ be certain sure witnesses, and effectual signs of grace, and Gods good will towards us, by the which he doth work invisibly in us etc. All which being not only granted by Catholics, but further expressly that to the worthy receivers they contain and give grace ex opere operato, of themselves, where due preparation and disposition is, as the Council of Trent hath declared: 
Concil. Trident decret. de Sacram. sup.  which is all and more than Protestants ordinarily require to Sacraments, it must needs follow by D. Dove his grant before, that all those seven, esteemed by Catholics for Sacraments, contain all those things, which these Protestants require unto Sacraments, because they agree (as he hath confessed) with the Catholic 
Dove supr. persuas. pag. 27. 28.  definition of Sacraments, which as before, containeth all, and more than Protestants demand.  
Further thus I argue: All of those other seven accounted among Catholics, for Sacraments, which have a visible sign or ceremony ordained of God, as Baptism, and Eucharist have, be Sacraments, as they are. But all those other five, rejected by Protestants, have such visible sign, or ceremony, ordained by God: Therefore they be Sacraments. The Mayor is the grant of their own subscribed Article: wherein 
Articl. of. Relig. sup. art. 25.  admitting Baptism and the Eucharist for Sacraments, in these words: (There are two Sacraments ordained of Christ our Lord in the Gospel, that is to say, Baptism and the supper of the Lord.) They refuse the others for this only cause, as followeth: Those five commonly called Sacraments, that is to say, Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony, and Extreme Unction, are not to be counted Sacraments, of the Gospel: for that they have not any visible sign, or ceremony ordained of God. So that all I have to prove by this highest Protestant sentence, to prove them Sacraments, is: that they have a visible sign, or ceremony ordained of God. For which I produce D. Dove again granting our definition to agree with these: for our schools put a Sacrament in genere signi: and so far hold, that they are all instituted by Christ, that the Council of Trent defineth thus: Si quis dixerit Sacramenta 
Concil. Trid. decret. d● Sacram.  novae legis non fuisse omnia a jesu Christo domino nostro instituta, aut esse plura, vel pauciora quam septem, videlicet Baptismum, Confirmationem etc. Anathema sit. If any man shall say that all the Sacraments of the new law were not instituted of jesus Christ our Lord, or that there be more or fewer than seven, that is Baptism Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Extreme Unction, Orders, and Matrimony: or else that any of these seven is not truly and properly a Sacrament, let him be Anathema. Again these Protestants will further tell us, in particular, how every of those five hath a ceremony visible, or external, ordained of God: and so to be Sacraments: and first for Confirmation, thus I argue.  
Whatsoever hath an external ceremony 
Confirmation proved a Sacrament by Protestant's.  instituted by Christ, signifyeing or giucing grace, is a Sacrament: But by these Protestants, Confirmation is such: Therefore a Sacrament. The Mayor is at large proved and granted before. The Minor is proved in this manner. The communion Book reconfirmed in the title of Confirmation giveth this direction to the Bishop in these words: The Bishop shall lay his hand upon every child severally: therefore there is an external Ceremony or sign: and that it was ordained by Christ may both appear by their Conference at Hampton Court, in these 
Conference at Hampton pag. 10. 11.  words: Confirmation is an Apostolical tradition. And that they mean it to be sign, such as the sign of a Sacrament is, the Bishop is appointed to use these words: We make our 
Communion Book tit. conf. sup. §. Almighty.  humble supplications unto thee for these children, upon whom after the example of the holy Apostles, we have laid our hands, to certify them by this sign of thy favour, and gracious goodness, towards them. Therefore this external sign, both delivered by the Apostles, used by their example, and so far signifying God's grace, and favour, and certifyeing the parties thereof, must needs be ordained by Christ, and a Sacrament no other external sign by Protestants, being able to make such certificate: whis is further confirmed, with this Protestant Argument, that followeth.  
Whatsoever sign external giveth spiritual strength, to the receivers thereof, and force to serve God is a Sacrament: But Confirmation doth this: Therefore a Sacrament. The Mayor is evident by Protestants, graunteing that such spiritual force, and strength is not given by any sign, but such as is a Sacrament: neither do all of them grant, that it is given by Sacraments. The Minor is proved by D. Covell in these words: 
Covel Mod. Examination pag. 192  remembering the conflict we have undertaken (in Baptism) we come (to Confirmation) for an addition of new forces: in Baptism we are regenerate to life, but in Confirmation we are strengthened to battle. So that being an external sign, and giving grace as Baptism doth, it must needs be a Sacrament as that is, and the sign must needs be ordained by Christ, for none other but God can ordain 
Penance a Sacrament by protest. Chapter of Indulgences.  a sign to be a means of grace.  
Concerning Penance, to be a Sacrament, I have made demonstration before in the chapter of Indulgences, and it is evidently true in this order. Wheresoever in any ceremony, and external sign, grace is so amply given, that not only all guilt of sins by Protestants, but their punishments are forgiven, and by authority from Christ, there must needs be both an external ceremony or sign instituted by him, and a Sacrament: But thus it is in these Protestants judgements in Confession, and Absolution: Therefore a Sacrament. Both the Mayor and Minor are abundantly proved in the recited chapter before. And to prove, that such confession may be auricular, (as they term our Catholic confession to a priest) though that kind of confession is not so needful to make it a Sacrament: M. Hull writeth thus: Auricular confession was 
Hull Rome's polec. pag. 89. 90.  used in the primitive Church, before the time of Zozomenus the ancient historian. And his Majesty in the Conference at Hampton 
Conference pag. 13.  witnesseth: That the particular and parsonal absolution from sin, after confession, is apostolical and a very godly ordinance. Therefore I thus argue again.  
That which was used in the primitive Church, is an external ceremony, forgiveing sin, an Apostolical, and godly ordinance, is a sign ordained by Christ, and a Sacrament: But Penance is such: Therefore it is a Sacrament. Both propositions are granted, and proved before.  
And hence also is proved, that Orders is a 
Orders a Sacrament by Protestants of England.  Sacrament. For: whosoever have power to give grace, and forgive sins, (except in Baptism) by an external ceremony, must needs have, and receive that power in a Sacrament: (for such extraordinary gifts be not given as Protestants confess, by miracle: But priests as before, have this power: Therefore Order and consecration is a Sacrament. Both propositions are manifestly true.  
Further I argue thus: whosoever acknowledge, that in consecrateing priests, by imposition of hands, by the Bishop, the holy ghost, grace, and power is given, to give grace, and forgive sins, must needs acknowledge Orders or ordination to be a Sacrament: But the Protestants of England do this: Therefore they must acknowledge Orders to be a Sacrament in their proceed. The Mayor is evident. And the 
Book of cons. in Priests.  Minor expressly is contained in their authorized, and confirmed public Book, of Consecrateing priests etc.  
Again thus I argue: That external visible ceremony, by Imposition of hands upon ordinary men, whereby power is given them, above others from Christ, to translate from darkness into glory, to make invisible grace of visible Elements, daily to give the holy Ghost, to dispose of the flesh, and blood of Christ▪ and giveth power which no potentate on earth, can give, and the like prerogatives, above all human power, is to be esteemed a Sacrament: But (by these Protestants) Orders hath these, and such more prerogatives by Imposing of hands, etc. Therefore to be esteemed a Sacrament. The Mayor proposition is evidently true: for an external ceremony, giving, and signifying such power, grace, and privileges, that no terrene power, and authority can give, must needs be instituted by Christ himself, and so by that, which is proved before, be allowed for a Sacrament. The Minor is proved by D. Covell, where entreating of the power, and eminency of Priests, by their 
Covell def. of Hooker pag. 87.  function, and Order, in the external ceremony, of imposition of hands he hath these words: To these parson's God imparted power over his mystical body, which is the society of souls, and over that natural, which is himself, for the knitting of both in one a work which antiquity doth call the making of Christ's body. And in an other 
Covel mod. Examinat. pag. 105. Pag. 115. See D. Covell def. of Hooker pag. 87. 88 91. and cited cap. seq. of Character, etc.  Treatise thus: The power of the Ministry by blessing visible Elements, it maketh them invisible grace, it giveth daily the holy Ghost. It hath to dispose of that flesh, which was given for the life of the world: and that blood which was powered out, to redeem souls. And again: It is a power, which neither Prince, nor Potentate, King, nor Caesar on earth can give: The Apostles leave, and impart the fame power, to ordain, which was given to them. From whence I argue further in this order.  
That external and visible Ceremony, whereby the Apostles received supernatural grace, power, and pre-eminency, and left it to the Church, to continue, being first instituted of Christ, is a Sacrament: But Orders is such: Therefore a Sacrament. The Mayor is granted and proved before: and the Minor also: to which I add the sentence, of their public Conference, at Hampton Court, 
Conference at Hampton  where it is concluded by authority, among them, that this power of Orders given (as they pretend) by imposition of hand, is, Divinae ordinationis, and de iure divino. The ordinance of God, and by his divine law. From which doctrine granted by them, in so public assembly one of their own fellows in Religion inferreth this conclusion in these terms. If the English Protestant's opinion be maintained, 
Certain cons. pag. 46.  that Bishop's jurisdiction is de iure divino, his Majesty and all the Nobility ought to be subject to excommunication.  
Neither do I urdge these Protestants Authorities, 
The Author's intent. and meaning by proving seven Sacraments by Protestants how to be understood.  either for this, or the other Sacraments, that I seem to grant unto Protestants, that number of seven Sacraments, to be among them, to whom (as to other Heretics of any other now want a true and lawful succession in orders as they do) I can only allow two Sacraments, Baptism, and Marriage, whereof the first for the necessity thereof may be in such cases of extremity, (as this Inundation of heresy is) not only be administered by Heretics, but Infidels themselves, retaining the true matter, form, and Intention due in that holy Sacrament. And the other of Matrimony, not requiring as of the essence thereof, the operation of the Priest: Yet do I not grant the grace of this Sacrament to any Protestant, or other out of unity of the Catholic Church, out of which as there is no salvation, so no grace to be hoped for, bringing men to eternal beatitude. But seeing this number of seven Sacraments, hath been so much Impugned, by Protestants, and denied by them to be in the true Catholic Church, which before I have proved the present Church of Rome to be, I have now made demostration, by themselves, that by their own proceed, they ought to allow this number unto the Church of Rome. And now I proceed in like manner to Matrimony, and Extreme unction: and in the first I argue thus.  
That which hath an external, or visible 
Matrimony a Sacrament by English Protestant's.  sign, or Ceremony, instituted of God, signifying, or giving grace, and sanctification, is an holy estate, & honourable representing the grace of union, between Christ and his Church, is a Sacrament: But Matrimony is such: therefore a Sacrament. The Mayor consisteth of the Protestant definition of a Sacrament, wholly containing it and more them Protestants require unto it, and so cannot by them be denied. The Minor is proved by their own public directory, where, in the treatise entitled The form of solemnisation of 
Comm. Book tit. Matrim. §. dearly. etc.  Matrimony, it is called in these terms: Holy Matrimony, an honourable estate, instituted of God, signifying unto us the mystical union, which is between Christ and his Church: which holy estate Christ adorned and beautified with his presence, and first miracle. And in an other place it is named, holy wedlock. 
§. For as much, etc.  To which purpose tendeth, also that their prayer over those that be married, in these words: God the father, God the son, God the 
Sup. §. God, etc.  holy Ghost, bless, preserve, and keep you: the Lord mercifully with his favour look upon you, and so fill you with all spiritual benediction, and grace. Again thus I argue.  
That external visible ceremony, or sign, that is consecrated of God, to such an excellent mystery, as to signify the spiritual Marriage betwixt Christ, and his Church: and by the grace, and bond whereof, men are bound to love their wives, as their own bodies, to leave Father, and Mother, (to whom by nature we are so much bound) and to be but one fleesh with his wife etc. must needs be a Sacrament: But Matrimony is such by Protestants of England: Therefore by them, to be esteemed a Sacrament. The Mayor is manifestly true, in itself. And the Minor in those 
§. o God. §. all ye which.  words, and more expressly (to prove it a Sacrament) set down in that their public directory in the places here cited. And had not the licentious wantonness of these men so much for their ownc lasciviousness maintaining Marriage, and accounting it an holy state in those of the clergy, in whom the holy Fathers before name it incest, sacrilege and matter of excommunication, disliked of the inseperabilitie between man and wife, which being granted for a Sacrament it bringeth with it, they would never have denied unto it that dignity and denomination. To which, so often and many pluralities of wives in their ministry itself and some Protestant Bishops among them (until a little restraint was ordained by his Majesty in parliament) are more than 
The Sacrament of Extreme unction. jacob. 5. v. 14. 15.  sufficient testimony in this case. That Extreame-Vnction, is a Sacrament, by their Articles, and S. james, his doctrine in his epistle, ●eceaued by them, for canonical, is more than manifest. And so manifest, that (except credible Protestant Testimonies deceive me) greater Protestant Authority hath so granted, than these their Doctors may contradict. In which I will be silent; and only add in this place, that their Communion Book itself, and their common doctrine contained in their Catechism there, set down to be believed of all, sufficiently insinuate, that either there be seven Sacraments, as Catholics believe, or at the least, more than two, according to their Article doctrine before. For in proceeding dialoguewise, by question, and answer, their words be these. Question. How 
Communion Book Tit. Catechism.  many Sacraments hath Christ ordained in his Church? Answer. two only, as generally necessary to salvation, that is to say, Baptism and the supper of the Lord. Where the words, generally, and necessary to salvation, do imply, that there be others, not generally to be received of all, as Matrimony is peculiar to the married, Orders to clergy men; etc. neither are these absolute necessary to salvation, otherwise the unmarried, and virgins could not be saved; all women which are uncapable of priesthood, should be damned, and none but clergy men saved etc. And these Protestants do not hold, that those words, generally, necessary to salvation, are essential to the definition of a Sacrament, which they define in the next words followeinge in this manner. By this word Sacrament I mean an 
Catechis. supr.  outward and visible sign, of an Inward and spiritual grace, given unto us ordained by Christ himself, as a means whereby we receive the same, and a pledge to assure us thereof. Which aswell, proveth the Catholic doctrine, that Sacraments give grace, of which hereafter, as also that, which I have urged, in this place.   

CHAPTER XX. PROVING BY THESE Protestant's, the Catholic doctrine, of an Indelible Character, in the Sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation, and Orders.  
CONCERNING the Catholic doctrine, of the Church of Rome, teaching a spiritual Character, to be impressed in some of these Sacraments, and hitherto denied by Protestants: The Council of Trent hath thus defined: In three Sacraments, Baptism, Confirmation, 
Concil. Trident. Sess. 7. cap. 4.  and Orders, a Character is impressed in the soul, that is, a certain spiritual and indelible sign, that they may not be iterated. For proof of which doctrine, by English Protestants, I argue in this Manner.  
That doctrine, which is taught by the Greek Church, neither heretical, nor Scismatical, but orthodox by these Protestants, ot by a general Council, whose decree, and sentence bindeth all, is to be allowed by them, much more, if both those their Rules so confirm it: But the doctrine of this Indelible character, in the Sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation, and Orders, is taught and approved both by the Greek Church, and a general Council, that of Florence, for such allowed by them before: Therefore it ought to be embraced by them. The Mayor is evidently true, by their grant before. And the Minor thus proved. First the Greek Church, by Hieremias their Patriarch, in their Censure 
Hierem. in censur. cap. 11.  upon Protestants, in the eleventh chapter, hath so censured. And the general Council of Florence, with the assert of the same Greek Church, Armenians, jacobines and all Christendom hath defined it in these words: Inter haec Sacramenta, tria sunt, Baptismus, 
Concil. Flor. in union. Arm.  Confirmatio, & Ordo, quae Characterem. i. spirituale quoddam signum à caeteris distinctum, imprimunt in anima indelebile, etc. Among these Sacraments, there are three, Baptism, Confirmation, and Order, which impress in the soul a Character, that is, a certain spiritual sign, distinct from others indelible: whereupon they are not Iterated in the same parson, but the other four do not Impress a Character, and admit Iteration.  
To be brief, I argue thus once for all. That doctrine, which is generally maintained, not only by all professors of it, but also acknowledged, and defended by them, that be esteemed learned among the enemies thereof, and profess the same Religion with them, is true: But this doctrine of a Character is such: Therefore it is true. The Mayor is evidently apparent, for no more than friends, and adversaries learned, can consent to any truth. The Minor is thus proved, by these Protestant Doctors, following, joining in Religion with them, that impugn and persecute the Church of Rome. First D. Feild 
Feild. l. 1. cap. 15.  acknowledgeth a Character in Baptism, and to remain even in the excommunicate: And so indelible. D. Covell affirmeth the same of Baptism, and Orders, and seemeth to insinuate it, of Confirmation. He writeth of it in these words: It is not amiss both termed a kind of Mark, 
Covell def. of Hook. pa. 87. 88 91.  or character. And confesseth it to be Indelible. And for Orders he addeth thus: For ministerial power is a work of separation, because it severeth them, that have it, from other men, & maketh them a special order, consecrated unto the service of the most high, in things wherewith others may not meddle. I call it indelible, because they which have once received this power, may not think to put it of and on, like a cloak, as the wether serveth. And again in this manner. Where there is a change of estate, with an 
Sup. pag. 91  Impossibility to return, there we have reason to account an Indelible Character, to be imprinted. This saith the Church of Rome, is in Baptism, Confirmation, and Order, This form, figure, or Character is called Indelible, because that is not to be reiterated (as Protestants confess of Baptism, Confirmation and Orders) from whence it cometh. The Character of Order is an active power, as the schoolmen speak, which giveth an Ability, publicly to administer the Sacraments, unto those, whom the Church hath esteemed fit. The Character of Baptism, is a passive power, which maketh men fit, to receive the rest. And from hence, not only is proved in as plain words, as any schoolman, or other Catholic can speak, the Catholic opinion of a Character, but also that Orders, and others besides them allowed for Sacraments, are to be so esteemed as his last words (the rest) insinuate. And this sufficeth of this Question.   

CHAPTER XXI. PROVING BY THESE Protestant's, that the Sacraments of the Gospel give grace, and, as the schools speak, ex opere operato: by the work wrought.  
CONCERNING the validity, and grace of Sacraments, The Council of Trent defineth thus: If any 
Concil. Trid. Sess. 7.  man shall say, that the Sacraments of the new law, do not give grace, by the work wrought, (opere operato) but that only faith of the promise of God sufficeth to obtain grace: let him be Anathema. And to demonstrate, that the present Protestants of England are, or by their own writings, aught to be of the same opinion, thus I argue.  
Whatsoever Catholic doctrine of the Roman Church, is confirmed both by the public proceed and private writings of the Protestants of England, aught to be allowed, and embraced by them: But the doctrine of the Roman Church, concerning the efficacy of Sacraments, that they cause grace in the worthy, and duly disposed Receivers of them, and that ex opere operato, as the Council before, and our schools speak, is such: Therefore it ought to be allowed, and embraced by them, for true. The Mayor is evidently true, and cannot be denied, for no man may or can hold against his own opinion, or that public Rule, and Authority, to which he hath subscribed, and submitted himself in Religion. The second proposition is thus proved: and first by that chief Rule their book of Articles, 
Book of Articl. of Relig. art. 25.  to which they have all subscribed: where it is thus defined in their Religion: Sacraments ordained of Christ are effectual signs of grace, and Gods good will towards us, by the which he doth work invisibly in us. And again, in their newly reformed communion book in these words. By this words Sacrament I mean an 
Comm. Book refor. titul. Catechis.  outward, and visible sign, of an inward, and spiritual grace, given unto us, ordained by Christ himself, as a means, whereby we receive the same. Therefore being granted by the greatest Rules of Religion, which English Protestant's have, that Sacraments be effectual of grace, and God's favour, giving grace, and means whereby we receive grace; And all English Protestants Ministers have subscribed to these doctrines in those books, They must needs grant, that Sacraments be causes of grace: for among causes the efficient, and effectual is not only a cause, but of extrinsical causes, by many degrees the chiefest. And being allowed for such Instruments, and means, by which God worketh invisibly in us, and giveth grace, and we so receive grace, as their words be: They must needs be true instrumental causes of grace, and such work in us. And their same practical Rule of their Religion the Communion book hath the same doctrine concerning Baptism, and consequently of all others, proved by them to be Sacraments, one and the same reason being of all: for in the Treatise of Baptism thus it prescribeth the Minister to speak unto God: By the Baptism of 
Comm. Book Titul. public Baptism. §. Almighty and everlasting §. almighty and immortal God, etc. sup.  thy well beloved Son IHESUS CHRIST, didst sanctify the flood jordan, and other waters, to the mystical washing away of sin. And in the next prayer, they pray in these words: We call upon thee, for these Infants, that they coming to thy holy Baptism, may receive remission of their sins, by spiritual Regeneration. Then seeing the Sacrament and water of Baptism washeth away sins, and remitteth sins, which cannot be done without grace, it must needs have an Influence, causality, and efficacy in this sanctification; for to wash, and to remit, are not without operation, and causing. Neither can those Protestant Bishops, and Doctors, that were assembled at the conference at Hampton Court, be of other mind, for 
Conference at Hampton pag. 16.  granting (as there they do) a necessity of Baptism to salvation. They must also of necessity teach, that it giveth grace, which is so necessary to salvation, that no man can be saved without it, for so he might be saved without Christ. And this (as before) they must grant, except they would say (which none of them to my remembrance doth) that it is only conditio sine qua non, a necessary condition, but no cause, which if any man should affirm it is directly against his subscribed Rule befote.  
Now let us come to their particular writers, of which, the first to be cited, the Author of the Survey of the communion Book, confirmeth that which I have concluded, by their public Rules in this case, telling us plainly, that by the public Protestant 
The Protestant Survey of the Book of common prayer pag. 104. 118. 89. 141. 103. 104. Field pag. 10. 179 Middleton pap●stom. pag. 108. Pag 106.  Religion of England, Sacraments or means of grace, and do work, ex opere operato, by the work done. As the Catholic Council of Trent hath before defined. D. Feild acknowledgeth no less: and affirmeth plainly, that the water of Baptism is filled with sanctifying force and power. Therefore it is a cause of grace, and such sanctification. M. Middleton speaketh of communion in these terms: It doth exhibit, and convey the graces, and merits, of Christ's passion unto us. And he nameth it, an effectual Instrument of grace. And of Sacraments thus he writeth: They are effectual Instruments, of our regeneration. 
Pag. 100 Sutcliff Ans. to th● lay pet. pag. 22. Sutcliff ag. D. Kell. pag. 69.  D. Sutcliffe, besides the matter, and form of a Sacrament, instituted by Christ, requireth unto it, grace and justification. And writeth further in these words: We confess, that God worketh sanctification, by the Sacraments of the new testament. D. Covell commending the opinion of the Catholic schoolmen, in this Question, 
Covell def. of Hook. pag 96. 97 98. 99 100 101. 102. etc. Against Burges pag. 101. 102. 103. and def. sup pag. 96  teacheth: Sacraments be Instruments of grace: causes of sanctification: give grace instrumentally. His words be these: The Sacraments are not only signs, but causes of our justification. And reciting the opinion of our Catholic schools, approveth, and expoundeth it, in this manner: Agent causes we know are of two sorts: principal, which worketh by virtue, and power of his form: as fire maketh hot: and thus nothing can cause grace, but God himself: grace being a participation of the divine nature. Instrumental, which worketh not as the other, by the virtue of his own proper form, but only by that Motion, which it hath from the principal, and first Agent. Thus do Sacraments work. And further allowing, and expounding the school phrase, and doctrine, that Sacraments work by the work done (ex opere operato) he justifieth the same, and showeth, how the Church of Rome hath been slandered by Protestants in this point: his words be these: The Sacraments be 
Covell sup. pag. 97.  effectual means and vessels of grace, as glasses containing potions to cure the sick. Neither doth any man say, no not the Church of Rome (although they be so accused by some of us) That the Sacraments work of themselves, by a virtue resigned unto them without God. God worketh by them as by Instruments powerful, and thought in his wisdom fittest. The Sacraments are powerful means of Regeneration, having by a divine ordination, a force, and virtue, to beget faith. And therefore justly amongst all the Treasures, that God hath left unto his Church, we honour, and admire most the holy Sacraments. And again: Sacraments 
Covell sup. pag. 98. Pag. 99  are the powerful Instruments of God, unto eternal life. And further thus: It is a strong growing fancy, to be afraid to say, that the Sacraments beget faith. Sacraments give grace by the work done, ex opere operato. And reciting what things are required to the due receiving of Sacraments, concludeth thus: Now that, which in all 
Pag. 99 sup.  this, actively, and instrumentally bringeth grace, is the external Action, which is commonly called the Sacrament: this having virtue from his Institution. And he doth not only join with the Church of Rome (as before) in this Article, But for it approveth the decrees of our Popes, and councils, even of Trent itself in this manner: We say with the Ancient fathers, Stepbanus, Siricius, 
Covell sup. pag. 102.  Innocentius the first, Leo, Anastasius the second, (all Popes of Rome) in his Epistle to Anastasius the Emperor; with the councils, first the general Council of nice, the first Council of Carthage, the last assembly at Trent, with the testimonies of the Fathers, and Doctors, that the Sacraments for the Institution of Christ, and his promise, are effectual, etc. And thus much from these Protestants themselves, against themselves, for those sacred, and Catholic doctrines, of the Roman Church; for the most Just, and worthy defence, and profession whereof, they have so long time, so rigorously, and Injuriously against their own sentence, persecuted their natural friends, and Catholic Countrymen. Hereafter God of his mercy grant unto them, and all Enemies of his holy Church, grace to know the truth, and to profess, and follow it, when they know it.   
FINIS.   

The faults escaped in printing, are thus to be corrected.  
PAge 15 line 2. for are, read as. p. 23. l. 19 heaps, heads. p. 32. l. 15. poort, part. p. 41. l. 10. same, son, p. 97. l. 2. so, see. p. 127. l. 11. appease, appear. p. 140. l. 7. curried, carried. p. 144. l. vlt. and, and his, p. 152. l. 2. prayer, prayed, p. 190. l. 8. shrouke, shrunk. p. 198. l. 23. daes, deeds. p. 211. l. 5 full, fall p. 221. l. 2. man, many. Ibid. l. 10. users, usurers, p. 257. l. 7. stafe, state, p. 268. l 19 second, sound, p. 271. l. 22. devent, devout, p. 272. l. 10. times his, times greater than his, p. 280. l. 2. understand, understood, p. 299. l. 2. when the let, when they fit, p. 314. l. 9 rebeace, repeal, p. 324. l. 15. the, them, p. 326. l. 4. same, shame, p. 363 l. 14. entroades, oaths, p. 401. l. 20. words, word. p. 403. l. 7. or, ar.   

APPROBATIO.  
Iste Liber qui Inscribitur English Protestant's Recantation à quodam viro docto & pio mihique familiariter noto compositus, & à me perlectus, nihil continet quod fidei Catholicae vel bonis moribus adversetur, sed doctissimè haereticos huius temporis, Angliae praesertim, per ipsorummet confessionem refutat. In cuius rei testimonium nomen meum subscripsi.  
Die 19 julij. 1617. MATTHAEUS KELLISONUS. Huius judicio subscripsit die 27. julij, Georgius Coluenerius S. Theol. Doctor & Professor, ac Librorum Censor.