SAINT AUSTIN'S RELIGION.  
COLLECTED FROM HIS own writings, & from the confessions of the learned Protestants:  
Whereby is sufficiently proved and made known, the like answerable doctrine of the other more ancient Fathers of the Primitive Church.  
Written by JOHN BRERELEY.  Quod (Patres) credunt credo, quod tenent ten●o, quod d●cent doceo, quod praedicant praedico etc. Aquiesce istis, et quiescis à me. Aug. Tom. 7. contra julian. Pelag. l. 1. c. 5. prope finem. 
Printed. 1620.   

D. Augustinus Monachus.  
Perrexit (Petilianus) ore maledico in vituperationem Monasteriorum, et Monachorum, arguens etiam me, quod hoc genus vitae a me fuerit institutum. Aug. Tom. 7. contra literas Petil. l. 3. c. 40. post med.  
Disponebam esse in Monasterio cum fratribus etc. capi bom propositi fratres celligere, compatres meos, nihil habentes, sicut nihil habebam, et imitantes me: ut, quando ego tenuem paupertatulam meam vendidi, et pauperibus erogaut, sic facerent et illi qui mecum esse voluissent, ut de communi viveremus etc. nulli licet in societate nostra habere aliquid proprium. Aug. Tom. 10. de diversis. serm. 49. de communi vita Clericorum. post init.  
Quantum in hac perfectionis via profecerim, magis quidem novi ego, quam quis quam alius homo etc. Et ad hoc propositum quantis possum viribus alios exhortor, et in nomine Domini habeo consortes quibus hoc per meum ministerium persuasum est. Ang. Tom. 2. epist. 89. versus finem.  
S. Austin's being a Monk is confessed by the Century writers. cen. 5. c. 6. col. 701.   

TO THE MOS HIGH AND MIGHTY PRINCE, JAMES by the grace of God, King of great Britain, France, & Ireland, defender of the faith; my most gracious & dread Sovereign.  
THe much observed and no less commended care, wherewith your highness endeavoureth to enrich your Princely understanding, not forbearing so much as at the time of your bodily repast, to have for the then like feeding of your intellectual part your highness' table surrounded with the attendance & conference of your grave and learned divines (in which respect you may not unaptly be termed in the very words of Eunapius, a living liberary, & walking study) addeth a more than ordinary lustre of ornament to your royal estate, and encourageth my otherwise fearful & humble thoughts, more boldly to approach and salute your highness with this saying of S. 
(a) Lib. 8. indict. 3. ep. 37. Innocentio. prope sin.  Gregory, Si delicioso copitis pabulo saginari beati Augustini opuscula legite: And although the viands hereby thus prepared may, in regard of the Cook's plain or rather unskilful workmanship in confection, seem unworthy of your royal presence; for so much yet as they be of themselves sovereign Antidotes whereby to repel the dispersed contagion of dangerous infection, and are now placed on the table before your highness by the attendance and service of men to your Majesty not ungrateful or suspected, even the learnedst Protestants themselves, from whose frequent abounding confession the many hereafter ensuing particulars of S. Austin's professed religion are collected; I am not without hope that your highness will in such respect vouchsaife to esteem them as not unworthy either of your own taste, or the view and further trial of your attending learned divines.  
And pardon great Saveraigne your meanest (yet well meaning) subject, but to put your Majesty in remembrance, that seeing our knowledge in this life is but in 
(b) 1. Cor. 13.9.  part, even by a 
(c) 1. Cor. 13.12.  glass in a dark sort, and that the Scriptures a lone are prescribed by your learnedst divines for the satisfying & quieting of our knowledge in all doubts of religion whatsoever; that your Majesty would please to take notice that the said sacred Scriptures are not able to afford us so much as certain & infallible proof & knowledge of themselves; for as the titles of the said books can be no certain proof of their divine authority, considering that many writings of like title were forged under the 
(d) See Eusebius hist. l. 3. c. 19 et lib. 6. c. 10. S. Aug. contra adverse. leg. et Proph. l. 1. c. 20. Zozom. hist. l. 7. c. 19 Hmmelmannus de tradit. Apost. part. 1. l. 1. col. 251. et part. 3. l. 3. col. 841. A●d see 2. Thes. 2.2.  Apostles names, and never received by the Church for Canonical: So likewise Protestant writers expressly teach, & 
(e) Hooker in Eccles. pol. l. 1. sec. 14. p. 86.  conclude resolutly, that of things necessary the very chiefest is to know what books we are to esteem holy, which point is confessed impossible for the Scripture itself to teach: And 
(f) Ibid. l. 2. see. 4. p. 102. 146. Covel in his defence of Hooker, art. 4. p. 31.  it is not the word of God which doth, or possibly can assure us that we do well to think it is his word. From whence it is that yet to this present, Protestants so importantly differ in the very Canon of the Scriptures, for it is well known that the 
(g) Adamus Francisci in Margarita Theol. p. 448. Chemnit. in exam. part. 1. p. 55. 56. 57 and in Enchirid. p. 63. Hafenref. in loc. Theol. loc. 7. p. 292. Osiand. Cent. 4. l. 3. c. 38. p. 399. The Centurists, cent. 1. l. 2. c. 4. col. 54.  Lutheran Churches do still reject as Apocryphal the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistle of S. james, the second and third of S. john, the latter of S. Peter, the Epistle of S. judas, and the Apocalypses of S. john: with whom agreeth 
(h) Loc. come. c. de iustific. parrag. 5. p. 250.  Wolphangus Musculus a Caluinist, in rejecting the Epistle of S. james as erroneous in justification by works. Now if the Scriptures be confessedly thus unable to afford us but so much as certain proof of themselves, then in all true consequence of reason much less are they able to direct & exempt us in case of all doubt or question infallibly from error.  
And the rather considering that in such case (as D. 
(i) Conference c. 2. diuis. 2. p. 68  Raynoldes confesseth) It is not the show but the sense of the words (of Scripture) that must decide controversies; and that touching this questionable sense, the Scripture howsoever infaliible and sufficient in itself which none denyeth, yet it is not (which is the only point now pertinent and questionable) infallibly sufficient as to us in her instruction thereof, as not resolving and instructing us therein infallibly, because not immediately of itself but only by certain means 
(k) Whitaker de Scriptura, controuer. 1. q. 5. c. 9 p. 251.  on our behalf required, as 
(l) Whitaker, ib. p. 521. 522. 523. Reynoldes in his confer. c. 2. p. 83. 84. 92.  namely, Our skill in the tongues, our weighing the circumstances of the text, our conferring of places, our prayer, diligence etc. All which though endeavoured by us with all possible care, are yet (as being actions on our part) most clearly not infallible but humane, and subject to 
(m) Lubbe●tus de princip. Christian. dog. l. 6. c. 13. p. 442. Whitaker. de Eccles. controuer. 2. q. 4. p. 221.  error: And such as the same notwithstanding, Luther, and many other his followers have (even according to our adversary's censures) no less confessedly then grievously 
(n) Whitguift in defence. p. penult. Bridges in def. of the government. p. 559. Hospin. hist. sacram. part. 2. fol. 14. 44. 55. 49. 57  erred, and therein persisted, 
(o) Luther de caen a Domini. tom. 2. Germ. fol. 174.  evenconcerning such points of doctrine as they from their own careful observation of these foresaid means held for most certain, undoubted, & clear. And the like might be exemplifyed in the 
(p) In their Apol. p. 103.  Broumstes, 
(q) Hooker, Eccles. pol. in pref. sec. 8. p. 38.  Anabaptistes, 
(r) Carrh▪ wright in his second reply. part. 1. p. 18. 509.  Puritans, 
(s) Caluin, Tract. theol. p. 533. etc.  Libertines, and 
(t) Colloq. Ratisbone.  Lutherans, whoal of them in like manner have no less carefully conferred, and seriously pretended the Scriptures in defence of their so many different errors, which each of them severally apprehended for undoubted & true, and yet the same notwithstanding all of them confessedly erred.  
Upon due consideration therefore had of these premises so necessarily inferring our own incertanty, all foresaid pretence of Scripture to the contrary notwithstanding, and like further observation that the chief question of the Canonical Scriptures them selues, is determined to us not by Scripture itself, as hath 
(*) See here before at e. f.  been showed, nor 
(u) Whitaker. adversus Stap. l. 2. c. 6. p. 370. l. 2. c. 6. p. 357.  by private testimony of the spirit, but according to the learnedst 
(x) The author of the treatise of the Scriptures and the Church. c. 16. fol. 75. Whitaker. count. Staplet. l. 2. c. 4. p. 298. 300. Chemnit. in examen. part. 1. p. 69. Lubbertus de princip. Christian. dog. l. 1. c. 4. p. 18.  Protestants by judgement of the Church, which confessedly 
(y) Fulke his answer to a count. Cath. p. 5. jewel in def. of the apol. part. 2. p. 242. Witaker contra Stap. l. 1. c. 5. p. 69.  had the assistance of the holy Ghost, in her infallible discerning to us which books of Scripture were sacred and which not; whereby also is further argued or rather convinced her no less needful assistance of the same spirit in her like discerning to us the sense 
(z) Chemnit. in ex am. part. 1. p. 74. Sar●●ia in defen. tract. count. Bezam. p. 8.  of the said Scripture, for what availeth it us to be made certain of the books, and left incertain of the sense. What reason can our adversaries allegde whereby to acknowledge the Church's privilege in the one & deny it (where it is no less needful) in the other?  
It cannot therefore I hope (in these times of so great doubt & question) seem either unfitting or unsafe, that for our own more certain instruction in the doctrine of the Primitive Church, (which both parties acknowledge for the true Church) we should make humble recourse unto the received and renowned writings of S. Austin (a principal member of the said church) who living so long before these our times, and being in such respect indifferent to our late since uprisen controversies, is by our learned adversary's professedly reverenced, as the undoubted 
(a) See hereafter c. 1. h. etc.  best witness since the Apostles times of Apostolic doctrine.  
Neither can the persuasion which is oftentimes settled and grown strong in us by education, afford any infallible certanty to your greatest Majesty, or your learned divines, whereby to secure yourselves from error, as might be made plain (without all further needful discourse) by example, not only of sundry ancient Kings and 
(b) See the Protest. Apol. tract. 2. c. 3. sec. 6. parag. 2. p. 513. at's.  Emperors, who brought up in Arianism, did thereupon embrace and by their laws establish the error thereof as a truth most consonant to the Scriptures; but also of divers modern Lutheran Princes, as of Denmark. Saxony, Brunswick etc. who upon their like education in Lutheranism, do profess as not to be questioned their monster of 
(c) See Whitguif● in his defence of the answer, p. penult. Bridges, in his def. of the government. l. 7. p. 559. Hospin. in hist. Sacram. fol. 14. 44. 55. 49. 57 And part. 2. fol. 245. 282. 286. 287.  ubiquity, and other now dissenting opinions, condemning thereupon the adverse doctrines of Caluin, and Suinglius, for 
(d) Luther, Tom. 2. Wittenberg. fol. 503. and tom. 7. fol. 382. Fulke against the defence of the censure, p. 101. 155. Hospin. hist. saciam. part. 2. fol. 183.  errors most execrable. In like sort the reformed Churches (so are they 
(e) By Hooker in Eccles. pol. l. 4. sec. 8. p. 101. 183.  styled) of Transiluania, Poland, and hungary, (who being Antitrinitaries, and yet otherwise 
(f) See Gratianus Prosper in his instrumen tum doctrinarum etc.  only differing from the Caluinistes in the doctrine of the Trinity, & the Baptism of infants, have together with their milk, sucked the poison of Arianism) are upon this like ground even to this present so carried away against our received doctrine of the blessed Trinity, that they forbear not to compare it to the 
(g) See Osiander, cent. 16. l. 2. c. 22. p. 209.  three headed Cerberus, condemning the same in their sundry 
(h) Gratianus, Prosper, Socinus, Gentilis, Seruetus, Blandrata, and other new Arians.  published writings, (stored with plentiful alleged testimonies of Scripture) for the chiefest brand of all Popish and Antichristian 
(i) See Osiander, cent. 16. l. 2. c. 22. p. 209.  corruption: And as we can not assure ourselves, but that in case of our like supposed education in those opinions, so once in like manner established with the current and countenance of the state, our judgements (no less than theirs) in like sort might have been preoccupated and transported with the same errors; so their example affordeth us just forwarning, not to rest secure upon the appearing probability of any such like settled persuasion whatsoever.  
And so much the less, if we not only observe in general, the great revolt of late made by so many of the learnedst Caluinistes from Caluins former received, & so much applauded 
(k) See Willet in Rom. c. 9 p. 442. Melancth. in Con. Theol. part. 2. p. 111. Hemingius de universali gratia. Snecanus in method. de script. p. 124. 430. 441. Castalio in his book hereof de praedest. Fox in Apoc. p. 473. & sundry others.  doctrines, concerning Reprobation, induration, universality of grace 
(l) So did Caluin, Beza, and the French Protestants and our now Puritans, who are now contradicted by Bancroft in the confer. at. Hampton, p. 36. Whitguift in his def. p. 384. Downham in his def. l. 2. c. 6. & l. 4. c. 2. 3.  condemning of Bishops for Antichristian, the 
(m) See Willet upon the Psalms 122. and the Puritans in their answer to downham's sermon, p. 51.  denying of Christ's descending into hell, the lawfulness to marry again in case of divorce upon adultery etc. And the yet further defection of many other learned Protestants who wholly 
(n) See Fulke de successione Ecclesiast. p. 281. Cook in his Pope joane, in ep. dedic.  abandoning their Protestant religion, have withal submitted themselves to our Catholic faith; but do also yet further call to mind in particular, how that the●e is almost no man so unexperienced, who knoweth not that in some things he hath altered his own former judgement, and varied from himself, condemning upon a second consideration for false, what he once held for undoubted and most clear. Remarkable examples whereof I might give in 
(o) See Hospinian hist. sacram. part. 2. in his Alphabetical table under the title, Lutheri in constantia in doctrina.  Luther, 
(p) See Hospin. hist. sacram. part. 2. fol. 68 115. 140. and Colloq. Altemberg. fol. 377.  Melancthon and others, but I will only content myself with Martin Bucer, (a man in the opinion of 
(q) In his Scripta Anglicana. under the title of indicia doctis. virorum de Bucero. & p. 944. and vlt.  Protestants most learned and holy, who after his defection from our 
(r) Osiand. Cent. 16. l. 1. ●. 33. p. 88  Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, & sacrifice, made his first change into Luther's 
(s) Osiand. ubi supra. and Peter Martyr in his treatise of the Lords supper annexed to his common places in english. p. 138.  adverse doctrine of consubstantiation, from which he made a second change 
(t) In his ep. ad Norimb. et Essengenses. Lavatherus, hist. sacram. fol. 31.  into Suinglianisme, most vehemently impugning Luther's foresaid opinion of Consubstantiation, in which respect Luther termed him 
(u) Fabricius in Lutheri, Loc. come. clas. 5. c. 15. p. 50.  perfidious: but from this yet he made a third change, whereby professing again 
(x) See Schluffel. burge in theol. Caluin. fol. 17. 129.  Luther's doctrine he asked 
(y) In his firster edition of his comment. in joan. 6. & Math. 26. and in qutavor Euangelia in joan. 6. p. 686.  pardon of God and the Church for his former Suinglian opinion, 
(z) Lauather in hist. sacram. fol. 31.  estranging himself thereupon from the Tigurin Suinglians, whom he before so much honoured; after all which he lastly made a fourth change, which was his return again to Suinglianisme, the which he finally professed and 
(a) Schlusselburge in theol. Caluin. fol. 70. 17.  defended at Cambridge, and all this at each time of such his alteration or change, with most earnest pretence and protestation in his so often published variable doctrine, of undoubted certanty conceived from the Scriptures.  
All which (or any part thereof) I would not be mistaken to apply or intent in any sense or sort further, then only as thereby in all humble manner to move your Majesty unto a second and more serious consideration, upon occasion of the now thus propounded and confessed ensuing particulars of S. Austin's professed religion: wherein if according to that liberty of sincere and plain speaking, which (as in this case) is no less than appertaining (or rather prescribed) to a man of my function, I have forborn as unworthy, that adulterate placency or Sophistication of insinuating or temporising speech, which is not the least infelicity that usually attendeth upon greatness, and in steed thereof (according to the 
(b) Psal. 119. 4●.  Prophets directing me for to speak of God's testimonies even before kings, & not be ashamed) have with more candour of mind ingenuously (and yet I hope not offensively) signified to your highness, that not undoubtful possibility of erring, from which not Kingly majesty exempteth humane condition, I am not unconfident, that in the equity of your Princely judgement, you will as in my excuse vouchsafe to approve this worthy saying of S. Amhrose to the noble Emperor Theodosius, 
(c) Ambros. ep. 17. ad Theodos. prope initium.  neque Imperiale est libertatem dicendi negare, neque sacerdotale quod sentit non dicere etc. nihil in sacerdote tam periculosum apud Deum, tam turpe apud homines, quam quod sentit non liberé denunciare. The zeal of God's truth, and my devoted best affections to your highness, as to my gracious and dread soveraige liege Lord, (whose ever honoured memory with me remaineth in such respect as almost charyly enfoulded within the purest find on of my loyal heart) have required at my hands the performance of this duty. The which with most humble and suppliant desire of your majesty's pardon, (which hath enlarged itself to become sanctuary to a greater offender) I do all prostrate, presume hereby to offer up as sacred to your highness' name, with my daily continued prayer unto God, the author of all truth, to direct & preserve your royal heart and understanding in the ways of his truth.  
Your humble servant. JOHN BRERELEY.   

The author's preface to his learned adversaries.  
THough not from any great hope to persuade, where the whole frame of our religion appeareth as all declining, or rather prostrate under the burden of disgrace, nor as confident in my own particular, whereby to oppose myself against so great a multitude of doctors, yet if for no other occasion, but that posterity may know we have (according to the measure of our knowledge) not been wanting in our better offices towards our dearest country, from which not perils, at home, or exile abroad can ever estrange our Christian affections; as also to make full supply in lieu of my own confessed unablnes in that behalf, I have (as no less than zealous of the one, and all conscious to myself of the other) undertaken to offer unto your grave considerations, a brief survey of the many collected particulars of S. Austin's professed religion, a father whose never dying memory is by your 
(a) See hereafter, c. 1. h.  selves yet hitherto not unworthily celebrated.  
In which course howsoever I have not made strange to communicate with the commendable labours of our other learned writers, with whom I am joined in one communion of faith, I have yet nevertheless performed it with such addition and further alteration of manner & method, as I may perhaps be thought to have written, though not nova, yet noué, as having accomplished the same (to use S. Austin's 
(b) Tom. 3. de Trinitate. l. r. c. 3. ante med.  words) diverso stilo non diversa fide: for besides the novelty of this argument in our language, and my particular citing (not from others collections, but from mine own eyes perusing the originals at large) of the certain tome of 
(c) The edition of S. Austin's works usually followed in this treatise, is that which is in folio. printed Lugduni. An. 1586.  S. Austin's works, the book, the chapter, and very part of the chapter (where it is capable of partition) in which S. Austin's alleged sayings are extant, to be found; I have yet further added a general 
(d) See hereafter c. 19  prevention to such other his more obscure sayings as are by our adversaries vulgarly objected; and have also in more full and evident explication of his religion yet further explained the same from the like answerable consenting doctrine of the other ancient Fathers that lived next 
(e) See hereafter, c. 20. sect. 13.  before his age, in 
(f) See hereafter, c. 20.  his age, and 
(g) See hereafter. c. 2. sec. 13.  after his age, from all whom it is incredible that he should descent, himself saying of the Fathers, 
(h) Tom. 7. l. 1. contra julian. Pelag. c. 5. prope fin. and see c. 7. ante med. & l. 2. versus finem.  what they believe I believe, what they hold I hold, what they teach I teach what they preach I preach etc. And lastly I have made most of all this (concerning both S. Austin and the foresaid other Fathers) evident, not from my own private enforcing or applying of their produced sayings, but from the frequent abounding confession of our learned and understanding adversaries themselves, of whom I must yet say (as did 
(i) Tom. 7. add Donatistas' post. collationem. c. 34. fin.  S. Austin in like case of the Donatists) we must rather for this thank God then them, for that in our behalf they should publish and lay open all those things either by word or reading, it was the truth that enforced them, not charity that invited them.  
Now as concerning your alleged writers whom I thus produce, as confessing for us and against both you and themselves, they are not unlearned, vulgar, or of mean esteem, but men eminent and of chief rank in your Churches, as namely and chiefly for foreign authors, the Century writers of Magdeburge, Luther, Suinglius, Caluin, Beza, Bucer, Bullinger, Melancthon, Musculus, Zanchius, Peter Martyr etc. And for domestic writers, jewel, Humphrey, Whitguift, Bilson, Whitaker, Willet, Fulke, Perkins, Brightman, Carthwright, etc. Now of what account hath ever been the argument thus taken from the learned adversaries confessing against themselves, is in itself most clear, and hath been by 
(k) See Protest. Apol. p. 671. And D. Morton in his Appeal, ep. dedic.  others largely confirmed from Protestant writers; wherefore against the hereafter ensuing further force thereof, you can have no other remedy then (as did 
(l) Theodoret. hist. Tripart. l. 6. c. 17.  julian the Apostata in the like case) to forbid & bar us Catholics for the time to come from the reading of your Protestant authors; for me to have alleged the particular sayings of S. Austin, and the other ancient fathers without improbable urging the advantage resulting from the words and circumstance of the place, would have been, though perhaps not over difficult, yet to some tedious, & still subject to question and reply; whereas to allege them in the very same confessed sense, wherein they are by your own learned brethren understood, and for such thereupon by themselves rejected, as making directly against both you and them, is that which as to the point of S. Austin's now controverted religion giveth end to all question or further doubt thereof, & enableth me your humble adversary boldly to provoke your graver judgements unto the consideration of this treatise following.  
Now as touching S. Austin's writings alleged in this ensuing treatise most of them are undoubted, known, and confessed, as being specially named & cited by S. Austin himself in his confessed books of Retractations: And as for those other few alleged books, that are by some affirmed not to be S. Austin's, as namely the books entitled, Hipognosticon, de Ecclesiasticis dogmatibus, de visitatione infirmorum, Quaestiones veteris et novi Testamenti, de verbis Apostoli, de vera et falsa paenitensia etc. Besides that these are by 
(m) In iustitut. printed, 1602. in the alphabetical table under the word Augustinus, most of these books are ranked and alleged as in the Catalogue of S. Austin's own books.  Caluin, and the 
(n) Cent. 5. c. 10. col. 1127. 1128. 1129.  Centurists, acknowledged to be S. Austin's proper works, and are the undoubted writings, if not of S. Austin, at the least yet of some other ancient Fathers that lived in, or near his time, they be also in this treatise purposely forbonre as being but very seldom or sparingly alleged or if at all alleged, yet commonly not without some other saying annexed thereto, taken from S. Austin's own undoubted writings, or from some other ancient Father of his age.  
But yet to speak somewhat in proof of these books, and first concerning Hipognosticon, the same being professedly written contra Pelagianos, et Celestianos', against whom likewise S. Austin wrote, argueth the book to be written by him, or some other father of those times: In which respect M. 
(o) In Problem. p. 29.  Perkins severeth it from the spuria scripta Augustini, and placeth it under the other title of Dubij tractatus. And it is yet further alleged almost 500 years since by Peter 
(p) Lib. 4. dist. 21.  Lambard, under S. Austin's name; and is by D. 
(q) Defence of the reformed Catholic, p. 91.  Abbot, for such acknowledged and urged.  
Concerning the book de Ecclesiasticis dogmatibus, it is cited 800. years since, under the name of Genadius (who lived in S. Austin's age) by Walfridus 
(r) De rebus Eccles. c. 20.  Strabo, by 
(s) Lib. 1. de corp. et sang. Dom. c. 22.  Algerus, and by 
(t) In Symacho. fin.  Platina.  
Concerning the book, de visitatione infirmorum, it is likewise by M. 
(u) In Problem. p. 30.  Perkins severed from the spuria scripta Augustini, and by him placed under the title of Tractatus dubij, being so reputed the work of some ancient Father.  
As touching Quaestiones veteris et novi Testamenti, it is alleged under Austin's name, almost 500 years since, by 
(x) Caus. 32. quaest. 2. parag. Moses' tradidit.  Gratian and Peter 
(y) Lib. 4. dist. 31. 32.  Lombard; In so much as M. 
(z) 2. part of his answer, p. 19 4.  Hutton professeth to think the author of this book somewhat auncienter than Austin.  
And as for the book de vera et falsa paenitentia, it is alleged under S. Austin's name almost 500 years since frequently by 
(a) Lib. 4. dist. 15. 17. 19 20.  Peter Lombard, and for such acknowledged and urged by D. 
(b) 2. part. of his defence. p. 289.  Abbot.  
Lastly as concerning the book de verbis apostles, it is alleged under S. Austin's name by Peter 
(c) Lib. 2. dist. 30. l. 4. dist. 21.  Lombard, & about 900. years since by S. Bed●, (as appeareth next before the beginning of every several sermon of that book, according to the edition of S. Austin's works printed Lugduni. 1586.) and is for such alleged and acknowledged by 
(d) Vbi supra. p. 192. 252. 296. 399.  M. Abbot: whom I the rather here allege, for that of all the Protestant writers yet come to my hands, he showeth himself most conversant and frequent in the reading and alleging of S. Austin. As likewise I do the rather here allege Gratian, and Peter Lombard, for that the Protestant writer 
(e) In Method. aliquot locorum etc. fol. 12.  Simon Pauli, making a Catalogue of the Doctors and restorers of the heavenly doctrine, therein ranketh Gratian, and Peter Lombard, together with hus, Luther, and Melancthon, and so also doth 
(f) Method. theol. in pref. p. 1. 2.  Hiperius.  
But to return to the learned adversaries; this careful preparation being by me thus made, I can but here request leave to admonish you with the Apostle, 
(g) lac. 2. 1,  not ●o hold the faith of Christ in the acceptation of persons, regard not I pray you who it is that writeth, but what is written, and howsoever you think of me as perhaps (& not injustly) but weak and despicable in the presence of your own very learned judgements, for bear not yet I pray you, your due respect unto S. Austin himself, and to so great a troop of your own learned writers, who in regard of their so many alleged sayings digested into this brief treatise, are the primary authors, and myself but as it were the collector or reporter thereof.  
And let me also request further leave without offence to premonish, that in answer hereto you would not (as some of you whom I spare to name have heretofore done in answer to other treatises) seek to evade, or to obscure the matter thus evidently proved, either by prolixity of discourse (as thereby to seduce or divert the unwary reader from the point properly issuable, which in case of supposed truth might with shorter terms receive direct and full answer upon your confessing, denying, or distinguishing) or by passing over with silence without all answer thereto such proofs as are of greatest importance, for howsoever this kind of omission may be holden excusable by the precepts of Rhetoric, yet is it in divinity gross and unworthy; or otherwise by usual tergiversation of objecting (in steed of answering) certain old objected and often answered obscurer sayings of S. Austin, 
(h) See hereafter. c. 19  (hereafter purposely in part prevented) or other of the Fathers, wherein their contrary meaning is evident and for such by learned Protestants themselves 
(i) See hereafter. c. 20.  confessed: or else by digressing into allegation of certain schoolmen dissenting sometimes from the more common received doctrine concerning not the conclusions of faith, but the manner of some such conclusion, or some other like point not then by the Church determined. Which how little it forceth, is by S. Austin himself in sundry 
(k) Tom. 7. contra julian. Pelag. l. 1. c. 6. post init. And de Baptismo, contra Donat. l. 1. c. 18. init. And l. 2. c. 4. prope init.  places declared and taught: Or otherwise in alleging certain Novalistes', as 
(l) See the advertisement set before the Protest. Apol.  Erasmus, Valla, Wicelius, Cassander Agrippa, Polidore, Virgil, jacobus Faber, and some few more such like, who not confessed against them selves, but as parties affirmed directly for themselves in behalf of some one or other of your novel opinions by them for the time defended; which yet they all or most of them afterwards 
(m) Ibidem.  retracted by their final submission to our Catholic Church. For all this whatsoever, howsoever countinanced with variety of reading, or other probability and ornament of discourse, (as heretofore it hath been, and in such elaborate sort as I have seldom known, so i'll a tale so well told) yet what was it then as to the Fathers by us objected, and by our adversaries confessed judgements in the conclusions of faith? Or what can it be now as to the point of S. Austin's controverted religion, and so many of your learned brethren confessing thereof against both you and themselves? If any shall undertake to publish such further answer of this kind, as I nothing doubt but that the studious Reader thus premonished will of himself be able easily to discern the same to be no other than wast of time and paper, so I for my part in steed of reply thereto (which in case of more direct & full desired answer would not be wanting) shall rather choose to spend part of my good hours in earnest prayer for the party which shall so abuse his better leisure, that not depending too much upon humane 
(n) 1. Cor. 8.1.  knowledge which but puffeth up, and which at this present distracteth the 
(o) Besides common knowledge thereof, see the Protest. Apol. tract. 2. c. 3. sec. 5. sub. 3. 4. 5. 6.  Lutherans, Caluinistes, Puritans, Anabaptistes, Brounistes, and Ant●trinitaries, into no less great diversity of opinions, then singular contempt each of other, he may from example of these, learn to become so humble wife, and wisely humble, as forbearing to be his own judge) according to the direction and advice of sundry Protestant 
(p) Acontius in stratagem. Satan. l. 4. p. 203. Hooker in Eccles. pol. in praef. sec. 6. p. 28. Melancthon, l. 1. epist. ep. ad Regem Angliae. p. 49. The harmony of confessions in English. p. 319. Field of the Church. epist. dedic. Bancroft in his sermon preached the 8. of Feb. pag. 42.  writers, to rest in others judgement, and thereupon to 
(q) Deut. 32.7. job. 8.8. Eccles. 8.9.  remember the ancient days of the Primitive Church, to consider the years of so many generations, and 
(r) Hierem. 18.15.  avoiding as dangerous the ways not trodden, to 
(s) jerem. 6.16.  inquire for the old way which is the good way, and to walk therein, that so keeping the Churches 
(t) Isay. 35.8.  beaten path wherein (even very) fools cannot err, & resigning up himself (according to S. 
(u) Tom. 7. cont. Crescon. l. 1. c. 33. init.  Austin's advice in case of doubt or question) to the judgement of her who 
(x) 1. Tim. 3.15.  is the pillar & ground of truth, and whom 
(y) Math. 18.18.  not to hear, is to be as a Hathen or Publican, he may so at last yielded, not verbally but really to 
(z) 2. Cor. 10.5.  captinate his understanding to the obedience of Christ.  
JOHN BRERELEY.   

THE AUTHOR BEGINNETH HIS BOOK TO HIS Catholic ‛ friend. CHAPTER. 1.  
GOod Sir, whereas at the time of our last conference had (during our small abode together at the spa for both our healths) concerning the misbegotten controversies of this age; you signified to me how grateful to all men (in this so great crowd and throng of writing) were little portable treatises, & how much the dilicacy of our times was in dislike with greater volumes, as all wearied or rather offended with prolixity of discourse; In which respect you moved me to undertake (as my health would permit) some such short labour as might become grateful, thereupon propounding for matter fitting to be hanled the doctrine of S. Austin concerning the many now controverted points of religion, whereof you willed me to collect & set down for every one some little: And albeit that your thus directing me to such enjoined brevity (which in case of the adversary's answers thereto, lieth commonly open to the inconvenience of great disadvantage) be contrary to that form of larger discourse which 
(a) Tom. 2. ep. 23. Bonifacio. post. med.  S. Austin observed from Nebriclius for necessary, who affirmed that in a great question he hated a short answer; the more yet that I have sithence considered of your motion, the more with all did I (as condescending to the necessity of the times) incline (so briefly as the matter will permit, and without all affected curiosity of words) to undertake in satisfaction thereof, this ensuing labour, as receiving (I must confess) no small encouragement thereto both from ancient writers and Doctors, and our modern Protestant adversaries themselves, all of them approving & much commending S. Austin and his 
(b) Ep. to S. Aug. extant in Austin's works Tom. 2. ep. 25. prope initium.  doctrine.  
S. Hierome saith to S. Austin, I have always reverenced thy sainctity with that honour which is fitting, and I have loved our Lord and Saviour dwelling in thee etc. increase in virtue, thou art famous in the world, Catholics do worship thee as the builder again of the ancient faith etc. S. 
(c) Extant in S. Austin. Tom. 2. ep. 31. paulo post initium.  Paulinus Bishop of Nola, in his like Epistle to S. Austin termeth him, the salt of the earth, and the light worthily placed upon the candlestick of the Church. 
(d) Ep. ad quosdam Galliarum Epis. extant, Tom. 1. Con. cil.  Caelestinus saith, we have always accounted Austin a man of holy memory, for his life and merits of our Communion etc. whom we have long since remembered to have been of so great knowledge, that by our predecessors he was always esteemed amongst the best Masters. Prosper 
(e) Lib. 3. de vita contempt. cap. 31.  describeth S. Austin to be sharp of wit etc. painful in Ecclesiastical labours, clear in daily diputations etc. Catholic in his exposition of our faith etc. yea he slyleth him 
(f) Ep. de gratia et de lib. arb. ad Ruffinum.  The chief portion of the priests of our Lord of that time. And the like deserved prases are largely given to S. Austin, by 
(g) In his epistle extant, Aug. tom. 2. ep. 37. Possid. in vita Aug. Hil. ep. ad Aratum. Vic. l. 1. de persec. Vand. Cas. in prologo super Psalterium.  Severus Sulpitius, Possidonius, Hillarius, Victor, Cassiodorus, and sundry others.  
But the splendour of his deserts is so shining, as that even the learnedst Protestants rest in greatest admiration thereof: So D. 
(h) Tom. 7. Wittenberg. fol. 405.  Luther affirmeth that, since the Apostles times the Church never had a better Dactor then S. Austin. And, 
(i) Loc. come. clas. 4. pag. 45.  after the sacred Scriptures there is no doctor in the Church who is to be compared to Austin. Doctor 
(k) Answer to john Burges. pag. 3.  Covel affirmeth, that he was A man far beyond all that eu●● were before him, or shall in likelihood follow after him, both for divine and humane learning, those being excepted that were inspired. With whom agreeth Doctor 
(l) Of the Church l. 3. fol. 170.  Field terming Austin the greatest of all the Fathers, and worthiest divine the Church of God ever had since the Apostles times. which so high commendation made of him, is not the only private judgement of these few, for an other 
(m) Gomarus' his speculum verae Ecclesiae. pag. 96.  Protestant writer acknowledgeth that Austin of all the Fathers is holden most pure in the opinion of al. And M. 
(n) Monas Tessagraphica etc. in proem. p. 3.  Forrester styleth him. That monarch of the Fathers S. Austin.  
But not only S. Austin personally, but even the age wherein he lived for sainctity and learning ha●th been ever and very specially holden for most renowned. So D. 
(o) In his letter to Sir Fraucis Knowles extant in the treatise entitled, informations from Scotland, p. 80.  Raynoldes affirmeth that The time of S. Austin was the most storishing time that ever happened since the Apostles days, either for learning or zeal. Yea saith M. 
(p) His trial of the Romish Clergy. p. 293.  Wootton, The Church in S. Austin's time by the blessing of God was so enlarged, that it had the possession of many parts of the world: And that, in comparison of it the Arian heresy was but in corners. Caluin 
(q) Institut. l. 3. c. 3. sec. 10.  himself hereupon yet further acknowledging, that Austin only is sufficient to show, the judgement of the ancient Church. In so much as M. 
(r) His Retentive, p. 85.  Fulke forbeareth not to bear the world in hand, that (to use his words) the Popish Church is but an heretical assembly departed from the universal Church long since Augustine's departure out of this life. whereto D. 
(s) Answer to F. Campion in English, in the contents, fol. a. 2. parag. 28.  Whitaker addeth that, Austin was wholly on the Protestants side.  
Now as it cannot upon these premises be denied concerning S. Austin's religion in general, but that (even in our adversary's judgement) it undoubtedly was the same religion which the Apostles pubiished and delivered to posterity, so can I not but join with you in resting hopeful, that if I can be able though but briefly yet truly to make it appear, that the particulars of S. Austin's doctrine touching the several points at this day in controversy were consonant and agreeable with our now professed Catholic religion, this than will fall out to be a matter unto our adversaries very persuading, and to all indifferent readers no less than convincing, that our said religion is the very same for truth & substance with that undoubted Primitive faith, which the Apostles themselves first taught, and delivered afterwards by their successors to S. Austin. And for so much as S. Austin living so many ages before our times, and as then ignorant of our late since uprising and daily increasing controversies, could not foresee to leave behind him direct and pnuctual resolution to every of our now occurring particular doubts, or further to entreat of them, then as was casually ministered to him by the accidental occasions of those times; the due observation hereof doth premonish the indifferent reader, (as discerning the sun's great brightness though shining to him but through a slender crevice) how to esteem of that little (in comparison) which shall so appear unto him upon examination taken in this kind from S. Austin's dispersed writings; which animadversion thereof, but once for all hereby thus remembered, I will now (briefly according to your desire) proceed to the several here next ensuing points of controversy not in such exact order of method (I must confess) as a curious reader may perhaps expect, but so as the condition of my present estate (wanting both health and leisure to renew and set in better frame this my cursory and indigested labour) can permit.   

Concerning God, the humanity Christ, the Blessed Virgin Mary, and the holy Angels. CHAPTER. 2.  

S. Austin teacheth that the Son of God, is God of God, and not of himself. SECTION. 1.  
Protestant's 
(a) Whitaker contra Camp. rat. ●. p. 121.  teach that Howsoever the Fathers of the Nicene Council affirmed Christ to be God of God, Caluin nevertheless affirmeth, that we are firmly to believe, that Christ is God of himself. And Caluin 
(b) Ep. 2. ad polonos, extant in tract. theol. p. 706.  affirmeth this prayer, holy Trinity one God have mercy on us, to displease him, and to savour of barbarism; so 
(c) Contra Bellar. part. 1. c. 19 p. 121.  Daneus affirmeth that, Caluin truly thought and writ this phrase, God of God, to be improper, and to savour of barbarism. In like sort avocheth M. 
(d) Synopsis. p. 610.  Willet of Christ that, As the son of God, he is of himself, neither taketh he his essence but person only of his Father. The same doctrine is also taught by sundry other 
(e) Snecanus in method. de script. p. 107.  Protestant writers.  
But contrary to all this S. Austin agreeably with the Nicene Council, and our now Catholic Church teacheth that 
(f) Tom. 9 in john. Tract. 48. paul. ant med.  the son is God of God etc. And that, the Father by generation gave to the son that he should be God. And again 
(g) Ibidem. tract. 106. paulo post med.  of whom (to wit the father) he hath to be (son) from him he hath power. Also, 
(h) Tom. 6. contra serm. Arianorum. c. 34. See this book mentioned Tom. 1. l. 2. Retract. c. 52.  so God the Father and the son, God of God, at once are etc. for so he received life from the Father.  
Now this faith of S. Austin is so undoubtedly true, that with him there in agree sundry Protestant doctors. Zanchius 
(i) De tribus Elohim. part. 1. l. 5. p. 322. and in epistolis. l. 1. p. 206.  saith, The very essence of God is in Christ etc. But from whence hath he it? from himself or from another? If thou sayest simply from himself, than he is not begotten of the Father, for what is the son begotten of the Father, but God of God, light of light, true God of true God, as the Fathers in the Nicene Council have defined out of the word of God? etc. Therefore from the Father he hath his essence, and what he is etc. He is begotten of the Father's substance. And with Zanchius do agree herein 
(k) Loc. come. p. 25. Tig. diu. in consensus Orthodoxus in praef. fol. 3. Pezel in his argumentorum et object. part. 1. pag. 90. 89. 113. Ab. in his 3. part. of the defence of the reformed Catholic, pag. 38. Tilenus, in Syntagma. pag. 164. Covel, in defence of Hooker. p. 16. 17. 18.  Melancthon, the Tigurin divines Pezelius D. Abbot, and sundry other Protestant writers.   

S. Austin teacheth, that God doth not reprobate any to sin or damnation, or command any thing impossible. SECTION. 2.  
CAluin 
(a) Institut. l. 3. c. 23. parag. 6.  teacheth that God by his council and appointment doth so ordain, that amongst men some be borne destined to certain death from their mother's womb, who by their perdition may glorify his name. Beza 
(b) Display etc. p. 17. 31. 76. 116. 202.  affirmeth that, God decreeth to destruction, createth to perdition, and predestinateth to his hatred and destruction: God exciteth the wicked will of one thief to kill an other etc. This slaughter springeth from God justly enforcing the will of the thief. Suinglius 
(c) Tom. 1. de providentia Dei. fol. 365. 366.  expressly termeth God, The author, mover, & causer of man's sin, and he exemplifieth in adultery, and murder: and the like is taught by sundry other 
(d) Luther in Assert. art. 36. Bucer, in Enar rat. in ep. ad Rom. in c. 1. pag. 94. Brentius m Amos. in c. 3.  Protestant writers.  
But the contrary to this with our Roman Church teacheth S. 
(f) Tom. 7. de pec. mer. et remis. c. 18. post initium▪  Austin that it is wickedness to say, that the evil will of man is to be referred to God as the author thereof. And again, 
(g) Tom. 3. de spir. et lit. c. 31. post med.  otherwise is the author of sin, which God forbidden. And according to this he further avoucheth 
(h) Tom. 7. l. 6. hypognost. c. 2. ante med.  that God only forseeth and not pred●stinateth evil (or sin) but he forseeth and predestinateth good things; & he denounceth of the damned that 
(i) Ibidem. fine.  God doth therefore punish them, because he foresaw what they would be, but he made them not, or predestinated to be punished, but only, as I have said, he foresaw them in Massa damnabili, in a state of damnation; of this he giveth instance in judas saying, 
(k) Ibidem. c. 5. post. med.  God foresaw but caused not the sins of judas, as I have said before etc. he was only foreseen not predestinated. And he concludeth that 
(l) Ibidem. c. 6. paulo post initium.  the rule of this disputation is to be holden most firm etc. That sinners in their sins are only foreseen, not predestinated. This doctrine is so clearly S. Austin's, that the Prot. Polanus confesseth that 
(m) Symphonia. p. 185.  Austin, Tom. 7. ad decimum artic. sibi falso imposit. saith, It is an abominable opinion which believeth God to be the author of any evil will, or evil action: the same Austin ad 13. Artic. saith, If any man fall from justice and godliness, it is through his own will etc. Nothing there the Father, nothing the son, nothing the holy Ghost, neither in such business doth any thing of Gods will happen, by whose help we know many to have been stayed from falling, but none forced to fall. And our adversaries in their translation of his book. de civet. Dei. l. 5. c. 9 p. 209. do allege S. Austin to say, God is not the giver of all wills, for wicked wills are not of him etc. And the like is acknowledged of S. Austin by 
(n) Decades in english, dec. 3. serm. 10. p. 494.  Bullinger, 
(o) Loc. come. part. 1. fol. 161. 162. 167. 169. 172. 182.  Chemnitius, and 
(p) Compend. theolog. l. 2. p. 303. 496. 497. 498. 499. 500  Echartus.  
And whereas several Protestant 
(q) Calu. instit. l. 3. c. 23. sect. 6. beza in respons. ad acta colloq. Montisbel. part. altera. p. 152. and in his display of Popish practices. p. 237. Knox in his answer against the adversaries of God's predestination. p. 116. 123.  doctors do teach that God's foreknowledge is the cause of things, so as we cannot leave undone the sins which God forseeth, S. Austin teacheth directly to the contrary that 
(r) Tom. 5. de ciu. Dei. l. 5. c. 10. post med.  we are no ways compelled, holding God's foreknowledge to take away the freedom of will etc. for neither doth man therefore sin because God foresaw him to be a sinner etc. If he will not, he sinneth not, & if he will sinne, God hath also foreseen this. This is 
(s) Pag. 211. 212.  confessed, & accordingly translated in our adversaries own english translation de civet. Dei. where they further relate S. Austin to say, It 
(t) Ibid. p. 209.  doth not follow that nothing should be left free to our will, because God knoweth the certain and set order of all events. But S. Austin is so full herein, that the Protestant 
(u) Symphonia. c. 2. pag. 114.  Polanus allegeth several sayings from him and S. Hierome, to this purpose.  
In like sort whereas Caluin and his followers, as M. Willet relateth, 
(W) Comment. upon the Romans, in c. 9 p. 443.  affirm that, God by his absolute will hath reprobate and rejected some without respect unto their sins: The same M. Willet confesseth to the contrary that, 
(x) Ibid. p. 438.  Austin referreth reprobation unto the foresight of original sin, and considereth man in massa corrupta. A point so plain in S. Austin against Caluin, Beza, and the rest, that Beza 
(y) In respons. ad acta. colloq. Montisbel. part. 2. p. 164.  confesseth it, and therefore reprehendeth S. Austin. Again where Caluin and others do refer the induration or hardening of 
(z) Instit. l. 1. c. 18. parag. 2. Bucet. in ep. ad Rom. in c. 9 p. 394. 397.  Pharos heart, to the actual working of God, S. Austin is so direct therein against Caluin, that 
(a) Instit. l. 2. c. 4. sect. 3.  Caluin confesseth saying the ancient Fathers were sometimes over religiously fearful to confess the truth in this matter etc. Not Austin (him self) was free sometimes from that superstition, as where he saith, that induration and excaecation pertain not to the working of God, but to his foreknowledge.  
Lastly where M. 
(b) His meditation upon the 122. Psal. p. 91.  Willet and other Caluinistes do generally teach that God's commandments are to us impossible, S. Austin avoucheth to the contrary that, 
(c) Tom. 10. de temp. ser. 61. ante med.  God who is just can not command any thing impossible, nor he that is holy will damn man for that which he cannot eschew. Yea, we accurse (saith 
(d) Tom. 10. de temp. serm. 191. prope fin.  he) the blasphemy of them who affirm any thing impossible to be commanded by God. And the very same saying of S. 
(e) In explanat, Simbol. ad Damasum.  Hierome is confessed and reprehended by 
(f) Tom. 2. Wittenberg. fol. 216. Hamel. de tradit. Apost. col. 96. Hof. his comment. de paenitentia. fol. 55. cent. 4. c. 10. col. 1248. Cal. instit. l. 2. c. 7. sec. 5.  Luther, by Hamelmannus, Hoffman, the Centurists, and Caluin. And S. Austin is very express herein in sundry other 
(g) Tom. 7. de great. et lib. arb. c. 16. init. et de pec. mer. ●t remis. l. 2. c. 6. fine. et de natura et gratia. c. 43. et 69.  places. In so much as Melancthon forbeareth not to confess and reprehend, 
(h) l. 1. ep. p. 290.  imaginationem Augustini de impletione legis, Austin's opinion of fulfilling the law.   


(h) l. 1. ep. p. 290.  S. Austin teacheth that Christ suffered not according to his divine nature; nor according to the same was Priest, or offered sacrifice, or was mediator: and that from his nativity he was free from ignorance, and; after his death descended into hell: and that his body by God's omnipotency may be without circumscription. SECTION. 3.  
SVinglius, 
(a) Tom. 2. in resp. ad confess. Lutheri. fol. 458. Hosp. hist. sacram. part. 2. fol. 57 et 76.  and Hospinian, do confess of Luther, & 
(b) In epist. theol. ep. 60. p. 185.  Beza, of Musculus, and Islebius, that they all of them teach that, Christ suffered according to his divine nature: But S. Austin condemneth this blasphemous opinion for heresy saying, 
(c) Tom. 6. de Haeresi. ad quod vult Deum. Haer. 73. initio. And see Tom. 3. deagone Christiano. c. 23. et tom. 2. ep. 102. ad Euoditum et tom. ●0. de tempo. ●●. serm. 191.  there is an heresy that saith Christ's divinty to have suffered when his flesh was fastened upon the Cross.  
M. jewel, and M. Fulke, with others holding that, 
(d) Fulks retentive p. 89. and his confut. of the Papists quarrels, p. 64. 65. And against the Rhem. Test. in Heb. 5. v. 6. sec. 4. fol. 399.  Christ according to his divinity, was his Father's Priest, and offered sacrifice. S. Austin opposeth himself to the contrary teaching that 
(e) Tom. 8. in Psal. 109. v. 4. multo post med.  according to that he is God, he is not a Priest, but a Priest for his flesh assumpted; In so much as he withal further teacheth against our adversaries, as the Centurists say of him, 
(f) Cent. 5. col. 496. et Aug. Tom. 1. l. 10. confess. c. 43. prope initium.  Austin seemeth to attribute to Christ the office of mediator only according to his humane nature, for so he saith, in as much as he is man he is mediator, but in as much as he is the word, he is not mediator, because he is equal to God▪ & the like 
(g) Tom. 2. ep. 59 ad Paulinum. circa med. Tom 3. l. 1. de Trinit. c. 7. ante med. Tom. 6. l. 16. cont. Faust. c. 15. et tom. 9 in john. tract. 82. prope fin.  sayings are frequent in him in sundry other places.  
In like manner whereas Protestants 
(h) Willet in Synopfis. p. 599. et 600.  teach that Christ was not from his nativity free from ignorance, but received daily increase of knowledge by education. D. Sutliue hereupon urging that 
(i) Examination of kellison's Survey. p. 55.  If Christ as man by the union (with the Godhead) be omniscient, why is he not also omnipotent and present in all places? S. Austin to the contrary saith 
(k) Tom. 7. l. 2. de pec. mer. et remis. c. 29.  which ignorance I can by no means believe to have been in that Infant in which the word is made flesh etc. neither can I imagine that infirmity of the mind to have been in Christ a child which we see to be in Children etc. A saying so pregnat that 
(l) Resp. ad Bellar. ad 2. controuers. c. 1. p. 145. & sec. p. 249.  Danaeus answering thereto confesseth that, Austin. l. 2. c. 29. de pec. mer. et remis. denyeth Christ to have taken children's infirmities and ignorance: which to be false (with leave of so great a man) I have showed before, saith he. But yet with S. Austin agreeth S. 
(m) Lib. 8. ep. 42.  Gregory, who condemneth this opinion as novel in the Heretics who were thereupon termed Agnoitae. And with both S. Austin, and S. Gregory, agree also 
(n) Lib. 10. demonst. Euang. c. vlt.  Eusebius, S. 
(o) Lib. 5. de fide, c, 8.  Ambrose, and S. (p) Hierome.  
Concerning Christ's descending into hell after his death, 
(p) In c. 11. Isaiae.  denied by D. 
(q) In his limb●. mastix. & Fulke in willet's sinopsis p. 605. 606.  Willet, D. Fulke, M. 
(r) In his book, that Christ descended not into hell.  Car●il, and many others. S. Austin to the contrary expressly teacheth that Christ was 
(s) Tom. 2. ep. 57 ad Dardanum. solut. 1. quaest. post. init.  in hell according to his soul, but in the grave according to his flesh. And further demandeth 
(t) Tom. 2. epist. 99 ad Euodium. post init. & tom. 10. serm. 137. de tempore.  who but an infidel will deny Christ to have been in hell. To which purpose and sense he is so understood and alleged by D. 
(u) Survey of Christ's sufferings. p. 626. 598. 599. Aretius, loc. come. p. 53.  Bilson and other Protestant writers.  
Concerning the possibility of our Saviour's body to be without circumscription, Protestants in their translations of his books 
(x) l. 22. c. 8. p. 888.  de civitate Dei, (directly against the Caluinistes 
(y) Fulke against the Rhemish Test. in joan. 20. 19 sec. 2.  opinion) do allege S. Austin as reproving those that will not believe that jesus Christ was borne without interruption of the virginal parts, nor passed into his Apostles when the doors were shut. Of which last point himself affirmeth that 
(z) Tom. 2. ep. 3. ad volus. paulo ante med.  Christ brought his body through the doors that were shut: Saying further also hereof, If reason here be expected, it were not miraculous, if example, it were not singular. In so much that whereas jovinian then objected this scruple of our B. Lady's virginity (as our adversaries do now object the scruple of like incircumscription in the sacrament) to be against the truth of his humane and natural body, S. Austin for himself and us, answereth and confuteth jovinian herein, saying, 
(a) Tom. 7. contra jul. Pelag. l. 1. c. 2. post med.  This also did jovinian in the name and sin of the Manichees, denying the virginity of holy Mary, which was while she conceived, to have remained when she brought forth, as though we believed with the Manichees Christ to be a fantasy, if we affirmed him to be borne, his mother's virginity not corrupted, but etc. The Catholics have despised this sharpest argument which jovinian produced, and they neither believe holy Mary by bringing forth to have been corrupted, nor our Lord to have been a fantasy, but that she remained a virgin after the birth, and of her notwithstanding the true body of Christ to have been borne. And that Iouinians denial of our Lady's virginity consisted in this very point, it is confessed by 
(b) De Haeresibus. c. 82. fol. 233. and see the Centurists. cent. 4. c. 5. col. 381.  Danaeus. yea this doctrine is so clearly S. Austin's, that the Protestant Rungius acknowledgeth the same in these words, 
(c) In disput. 11. ex ep. ad Cor. 2. fol. 83. & Thes. 30.  as Austin concerning the entrance of Christ through the doors shut, with reverence said, let us grant that God can do some thing, which we confess we cannot find out; Let weight and manner cease for a time etc.   

S. Austin teacheth that the blessed Virgin Mary was freed from original sin; that her body was assumpted into heaven: And that she vowed chastity. He also teacheth the different degrees of Angels and Archangels. SECTION. 4.  
COncernong our B. Lady the mother of Christ, the 
(d) ●ent. 5. c. 4. col. 499.  Centurists, under their title of the Doctor's errors, do confess and allege of S. Austin 
(e) Ibidem. col. 4●9.  thus, as touching original sin for as much as concerneth Mary, Austin writeth, excepting the holy Virgin Mary, of whom in honour of our Lord when we treat of sins, I will have no question at all etc. This therefore Virgin Mary excepted etc.  
The same 
(f) Cent. 5. c. 10. col. 1122.  Centurists professing to set dowen a Catalogue of the books written by S. Austin under the title 
(g) Col. 1124.  de libris quos Episcopus scripsit, do number and place among his other books saying 
(h) Col. 1127.  de assumptione Virgins Maria. lib. 1. And this her assumption was so anciently & generally received, that the Emperor Mauritius (above 1000 years since) celebrated a festival day thereof, as 
(i) Lib. 17. c. 28.  Nicephorus relateth, and 
(k) Cent. 6. c. 6. col. 342. Danaeus in prim. part. alt. parte. p. 1528.  Protestants acknowledge. Yea there is extant in S. Hieromes works a notable sermon, De festo assumptionis Mariae, written by him, or as others think, by Sophronius his equal. Further mention also hereof is to be seen in S. Gregory, in Antiphonario et Sacramentario, and in Andrea's Cretensis (ancient to S. Gregory) in his special oration of this feast, extant in Surius: In so much as the Protestant Dresserus reproveth even S. Damasus saying, 
(l) De festis diebus. p. 148.  Damasus ordained the feast of the Ascension of Mary in the year of Christ 364. for an  use, that therein honour might be given unto her, & prayers offered etc. Therefore this feast is deservedly rejected, saith this Protestant▪ with whom agreeth M. Perkins in like sort rejecting Missale Ambrosij, only because, 
(m) In problem. p. 21.  mentionem facit festi Assumptionis, it mentioneth the feast of the Assumption. And 
(n) De tradit. Apost. part. 1. l. 5. col. 434.  Hamelmannus allegeth further testimonies hereof from Nicephorus, Dionysius, and junenalis, an ancient Bishop of Jerusalem. The Centurists affirm that 
(o) Cent. 7. c. 6. col. 163.  Isidore mentioneth the Assumption of Mary. And according to 
(p) Examen, part. 4. p. 159.  Chemnitius, the Council of Moguntia, c. 36. about the year of our Lord 800. numbereth these feasts etc. The Assumption of Mary etc. And that S. Dionysius his writings, which confessedly record her Assumption, were ancient to S. Austin, it is confessed by many Protestant 
(q) Fulke against Rhem. Test. in 2. Thes. 2. sec. 19 & in 1. Cor. 11. sec. 22. Bridges in his defence, p. 917. Ormerod, in his picture of a Puritan. fol. G. 3. The Centurists. cent. 4. c. 10. col. 1129.  writers.  
S. Austin likewise taught that the B. Virgin vowed perpetual chastity, for thus he writeth 
(r) Tom. 6. de sancta virginitate. c. 4. prope initium.  How saith she shall this be done, hecause I know not man, which truly she would not have said, if she had not before vowed herself a virgin to God etc. Verily she would not have asked how a woman should hring forth a son promised unto her, if she had married to have lain with a man. This is so clearly S. Austin's religion, that D. Fulke confessing the same, chargeth S. Austin with a non sequitur, saying, 
(s) Against Rhem. Test. in Luke. c. 1. v. 34. sec. 13.  although S. Austin gather she vowed virginity, yet it followeth not &c. And Chemnitius (to use his own words) attributeth 
(t) Examen. part. 3. p. 39 And sec. p. 56.  to Austin this feigned vow of Mary, which directly (saith he) impugneth the Scriptures. Yea saith Peter 
(u) De Eucharist. et votis. col. 1609.  Martyr, Austin in his book of holy virginity believeth that B. Marry vowed virginity etc. which (saith this heretic) all easily know how absurd it is.  
Lastly whereas 
(w) Instit. l. 1. c. 14. parag. 5. & 6. Hiperius in method. Theol. p. 387. 288. and the ministers of Lincoln Diocese in their abridgement, p. 74.  Caluin & other Protestants do utterly deny the diverse orders of Angels, other Prot. themselves translate S. Austin to say, 
(x) In their English translation of the books, de civitate Dei, l. 22. c. 30. p. 919. ante med.  No inferior shall (in heaven) envy his superior, even as now the other Angels do not envy the Archangels. Yea Che●●iti●● allegeth S. Austin as affirming the diverse degrees of 
(y) Loc. come. part. 1. fol. 2.  Thrones, Dominations, Principalities etc. Saying further, how they differ amongst themselves etc. In the next life we shall see face to face.    

Concerning the sacred Scriptures. CHAPTER. 3.  

S. Austin teacheth the sacred Scriptures to be discerned for such by the authority of the Church. SECTION. 1.  
WHereas Protestants ordinarily teach that the sacred Scriptures are infallibly discerned by us from all Apocryphal writings either by the Scriptures themselves, or the private spirit, S. Austin agreeably with the now Roman Church, referreth our certain knowledge thereof to the authority and determination of the Church of Christ, saying, 
(b) Tom. 6. contra ep. fundamenti. c. 5. ante med.  I would not believe the Gospel, unless the authority of the Catholic Church moved me thereto etc. If thou houldest me to the Gospel, I may hold myself to them by whose commandment I believed the Gospel, and these commanding I will not credit thee etc. The Authority of Catholics weakened, I can not then believe the Gospel etc. It is necessary that I believe the Acts of the Apostles, if I believe the Gospel, because Catholic authority doth commend a like both Scriptures unto me. And though sundry 
(c) In whitakers duplicatio adversus Stapletonum. l. 2. c. 8. p. 387.  Protestants labour to evade this, by affirming that S. Austin spoke of the time past when he was a Manichee, and not as then being Catholic: all the words cited do clearly contest the contrary, and accordingly are understood by the Protestant 
(d) Centuriae tres. cent. 2. q. 3. p. 267.  Bachmannus in this very sense which we now urge. And Suinglius having recited this former saying of S. Austin, in steed of better answer, is not ashamed to give this undeserved censure, saying, 
(e) Tom. 1. fol. 135.  here I entreat your indifferent iudgement● that you freely speak, whether this saying of Austin may not be thought more audacious than meet, or to have been uttered imprudently.   

S. Austin teacheth the books of Toby, judith, Hester, Maccabees etc. to be divine and canonical Scriptures. SECTION. 2.  
Saint Austin professedly dissented from the Canon of the Hebrews saying, 
(f) Tom. 5. de civet. Dei. l. 18. c. 36. fine.  not the jews but the Church holdeth the books of Maccabees for Canonical; which saying is so plain, that the Protest. 
(g) In his defence englished, art. 5. p. 151.  Pierre du Moulin, affirmeth these words of the Church holding them for Canonical to be an added falsification, alleging yet not any proof or testimony thereof, whereas all copies are consenting against him: In so much as our 
(h) P. 725.  adversary's english translation of this book not daring to deny these words, doth of fraudulent purpose, and to make them less apparent, only omit this other parcel, (quos non Iudaei sed) because that this but appearing, it argueth the said books to be Canonical in the same sense wherein they were by the jews rejected, and therefore properly Canonical. But concerning all the books now in question S. Austin comprehendeth them at once with the other undoubted Scriptures under one and the same word Canonical, saying, 
(i) Tom. 3. de doctrina Christiana. l. 2. c. 8. ante med.  The whole Canon of the Scriptures is contained in these books following, and then next immediately numbering them up, he placeth in rank with Genesis, Exodus etc. the other now controverted of Toby, judith, Hester etc. which Protestants generally reject for Apocryphal. And whereas S. Austin was present and 
(k) Council. Carthag. 3. fine  subscribed to the Carthage Council, in the same it was universally decreed. 
(l) Concil. Carthag. 3. can. 47.  That besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing should be read in the Church under the name of divine Scriptures, now the Canonical Scriptures are Genesis Exodus etc. wherewith it in order reckoneth the other books now in question, most evidently so placing and ranking them under the foresaid title of Canonicas Scripturas, and of such as are to be read in the Church, sub nomine divinarum Scripturarum.  
And though M. Moulins objecteth that S. Austin saith, 
(m) His defence, p. 152. and see Aug. tom. 7. contra Epist. Gaudentii. l. 1. c. 31. circa med.  The book of Maccabees is received not unprofitably of the Church, if men read it soberly, yet M. Moulin in the same place giveth the answer himself, which in substance is, that S. Austin said this as in respect of Razes killing himself: whose example the Donatists of indifferent zeal followed, in regard whereof S. Austin requireth this sobriety. And he further explaineth this (which M. Moulin omitteth) saying, 
(n) Ibidem. & tom. 2. ep. 61. post med.  The Scripture of the Maccabees touching Raze his death hath told how it was done, but not commended it as though it were to be done: Even as the book of 
(o) Cap. 16.30.  judges reporteth the like of Samson, whom yet the 
(p) Hebr. c. 11.32. And see Aug. de civet. Dei l. 1. c. 21.  Apostle commendeth.  
Again to that other often answered cavil of our adversaries, that the foresaid Council of Carthage here mentioneth, five books of Solomon, whereas we have but three; I do once more in answer thereto explain, that the Council under those five books of Solomon, comprehendeth also the other two books of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, both which as S. Austin further explaineth, 
(q) De doctrina Christiana. l. 2. c. 8. circa med.  were said to be Salomon's, in regard of a certain resemblance of stile.  
But the truth hereof is so clearly defended by the Carthage Council, and S. Austin, that our adversary Mathaeus 
(r) Tract. tripart. theol. p. 46.  Ho, confesseth and reproveth the Carthage Council in these words, The Council of Carthage hath decreed for Canonical all the books of the old Testament, excepting the third and fourth of Esdras, & the third of Maccabees etc. I add that the Council of Carthage ought not to have Canonised more books, because it had not authority etc. To which the French Prot. Poliander, addeth saying, 
(s) In his refutation. p. 44.  To come now to the error of some Counsels, the Counsels of Carthage, and Florence, have enrouled for Canonical books, and as divinely inspired etc. The books of Toby, judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, and the Maccabees etc. And the Pope's Innocentius, and Gelasius have reckoned these books among the Canonical etc. And to be brief, S. Austin is so clearly ours in this weightiest point concerning the number of the sacred scriptures, that he with the foresaid Council is therefore sharply reprehended by 
(t) Hist. sacram. part. 1. p. 160. Lub. de principiis Christ. dog. l. 1. c. 4. p. 8. Hip. in method. theol. l. 1. p. 46. Bucer. in his scrirpta Anglicana, p. 713. Zanch. de sacra Script. p 32, 33. Field. of the Church. l. 4. c. 23. p. 246. 247. Reynoldes in his conclusions annexed to his conference. conclus. 2. p. 699. 700.  Hospinian, Lubbertus, Hiperius, Bucer, Zanchius, D. Field, and D. Raynoldes.   

S. Austin teacheth that one text of Scripture may have divers true senses. SECTION. 3.  
DIrectly contrary to 
(a) Confut. of Purgat. p. 151. Willet in his sinopsis. p. 26.  D. Fulke, and D. Willet, S, Austin teacheth with us, that one text of Scripture may have divers true senses, saying, 
(b) Tom. 1. l. 12. confess. c. 31. initio.  when one saith this meant the Scripture which I do, another saith, yea that which I do, I think I speak more religiously in saying, why not both, if both, be true, and if a third and fourth etc. why not all? which in divers other places he so often repeateth and confirmeth that sundry 
(c) The divines of Geneva in their propositions and principles etc. c. 52. p. 149. Zanchius de Scriptura. p. 422. 424. 425. Aretius. loc. come. loc. 59 p 187. 177. The author of Catholic Traditions p. 86. 112. Bilson in his survey p. 418.  Prot. authors do assent to his judgement therein.  
Now this truth supposed, it fully preventeth our adversary's usual evasion in many points of controversy, as for example, where we allege the Fathers; expounding some texts of Scripture in behalf of Purgatory, Prot. do commonly object the same or some other Father, upon occasion of other application, understanding thereby the tribulation of this life, so opposing this against the other, which exposition the said Fathers never intended, but admitted both the said senses. And the like instance might be given of our adversaries like evasion in other points of doctrine, as namely in the further exposition of Tu es Petrus et super hanc Petram etc. Hoc est corpus meum etc. and sundry such like. Now this is so certainly S. Austin's doctrine, that the Prot. 
(d) In the ministers defene for refusal of subscription part. 1. p. 61.  Hutton accordingly allegeth and confesseth the forecited saying of S. Austin to this purpose.   

S. Austin teacheth that besides the sacred Scriptures, the Traditions of the Church are to be received and believed: as also that all heretics do insist only upon the Scriptures. SECTION. 4.  
COncerning the question, whether the Scriptures do contain all needful points of faith and salvation, not only by general direction to 
(e) Hebrews. 13.17.  Obey our Prelates; 
(f) Math. 18.17.  Hear the Church; hold 
(g) 2. Thes. 2.15.  the Traditions etc. which we grant, and in which sense the Fathers do often commend the Scriptures perfection; but also so particularly, as that there should be no need of any unwritten Traditions, which we deny, & Protestants affirm: S. Austin disputing against Cyprian's error of rebaptising, 
(h) Tom. 7. de Baptismo, contra Don. l. 5. c. 23. ante med.  saith, The Apostles commanded nothing herein, but the custom which was opposed against Cyprian is to be believed to have proceeded from their tradition as many things be, which the universal Church holdeth, and are therefore well believed to have been commanded by the Apostles, although they be not found written. And speaking of the Baptism of Infants he 
(i) Tom. 3. de Gen. & lit. l. 10. c. 23. prope finem.  avoucheth that it were Not at all to be believed, if it were not an Apostolical Tradition. Again 
(k) Tom. 2. ep. 118. ad januar. c. 1.  Those things which we observe not written but delivered which are kept all over the world are to be understood to be observed as decreed either by the Apostles the selves, or general Counsels. And so likewise 
(l) Tom. 3. de doctrina Cristiana. l. 4. c. 21. prope initium. And in council. Carthag. 3. can. 24.  The mixture of water with wine in the Chalice, he confirmeth from Tradition▪ which his sayings are so evident for Apostolic Traditions, that M. 
(m) In Whirguiftes defence. p. 103.  Carthwright answering thereto saith, To allow S. Austin's saying is to bring in Popery again. Adding 
(n) Ibidem, & in Carthwrightes his 2. ●eply. part. 1. p, 84. 85. 86.  further that If S. Austin's judgement be a good judgement, than there be some things commanded of God which are not in the Scriptures, and thereupon no sufficient doctrine contained in the Scriptures.  
Lastly whereas M. Carthwright, and others, do usually 
(o) In hooker's Eccles. pol. l. 3. sec. 7. p. 118.  object against unwritten Traditions certain obscure, and by us often answered sayings of S. Austin, and other Fathers, our learned adversary M. 
(p) Ibipem. p. 119.  Hooker forbeareth not (in our so clear a cause) by his special explication and answer, to explain and clear them to our hands, so that all further answer I deem over tedious and unworthy. I will now conclude this point with but remembering how peculiar S. Austin maketh it unto heretics to insist upon only Scripture: To which end he induceth the Arian heretic saying then to Catholics, as Protestants, Puritans, Brounistes, Anabaptiistes etc. do now say to us, If 
(q) Tom. 6. contra Maximinum. l. 1. prope init. & prope finem.  you bring any thing from the Scriptures etc. it is necessary that we hear it, but these words which be besides Scripture are in no case received of us, seeing our Lord doth admonish us saying; In vain they worship me teaching the commandments of men. And elsewhere he affirmeth as common unto all 
(r) Tom. 3. de Trinitate. l. 1. c. 3. prope n.  Heretics, to endeavour to defend their false & deceiptufl opinions out of the Script. (As it is in part confessed and observed of him and others by the Protestant 
(s) Symphonia. c. 1. p. 96.  Polanus.) Yea he further avoucheth that, 
(t) Tom. 3. de Gen. ad lit. l. 7. c. 9 propc fin.  Not for any other cause they become heretics, but for not understanding the Scriptures aright, they obstinately defend their false opinions against the truth of the Scriptures. And that 
(u) Tom. 9 in joan. tract. 18. prope init.  Heresies do not rise etc. but when good Scriptures are not well understood. In which respect he saith truly of heretics, 
(w) Tom. 7. de Bap. contra Don. l. 3. c. 19 post med.  Scripturas tenent ad speciem, non ad salutem, they have the Scriptures for a show, but not to their salvation. And agreeably with S. Austin, saith S. 
(x) Orat. 2. contra Constantium. & l. ad Constantium. cited by Polanus in Symphonia. p. 95.  Hillary, remember that there is no heretic which doth not feign the blasphemies which he teacheth to be according to Scriptures. Yea saith S. 
(y) Disput. contra Arianos.  Athanasius, (cited by 
(z) In Symphonia. p. 95.  Polanus) every heresy is masked with the doctrines of Scriptures: whereupon 
(a) Lib. de prescript. & see S. Hierome ep. ad Paulinum.  Tertulian premonisheth against the uncertain encounter with the heretics by Scripture.    

Concerning the Church of Christ. CHAPTER. 4.  

S. Austin teacheth that the Church of Christ is freed from error. SECTION. 1.  
DIrectly contrary to the general doctrine of Protestants impugning that special privilege of the Church of Christ, being freed from error, S. Austin agreeably with us Catholics, is so plain and full herein to the opposite, as that he doubteth not to refer us to her final determination in all questions of doubt and difficulty: for speaking of the Rebaptising of heretics he saith, 
(c) Tom. 7. contra Crescon. l. 1. c. 33. init.  Although example of this be not brought out of the Canonical Scriptures, ●ot the truth of the same Scriptures is holden of us in this matter, when we do that which now pleaseth the universal Church which the authority of those Scriptures commendeth, that so because the holy Scripture cannot deceive whosoever feareth to be deceived with the obscurity of this question, let him take council therein of the same Church, which without all ambiguity the holy Scripture demonstrateth. Yea he fur-avoucheth that 
(d) Tom. 2. ep. 118. c. 5. circa med.  It is a point of most insolent madness to dispute against that which the universal Church thinketh. In so much as he faith, 
(e) Tom. 7. de Bapt. cont. Don. l. 7. c. 53. cir. med.  Of the Churches universal consent (in any point of doctrine) Id autem sit securae vo●is asserere, it is secure to affirm it. And lastly he affirmeth the decree of a general Council to be, 
(f) Tom. 7. cont. duas ep. Pelag. l. 4. c. 12. prope fin.  competens sufficiensque judicium, a competent and sufficient judgment.   

S. Austin teacheth that the Church of Christ is Catholic or universal. SECTION. 2.  
THough the very name of Catholic be so ungratful and odious to the auncienter heretics, that the 
(g) Aug. tom. 7. l. 1. cont, Gaudent. c. 33. prope init. et post med.  Donatists termed the same an humane fiction, which yet saith (S. Austin) are words of blasphemy; as also to the more novel sectaries, D. 
(h) Against Rhem. Test. in Act. 11.26. sec. 4.  Fulke confessing that, some Lutherans have altered the word of the Creed, and for Catholic, put Christian. And 
(i) Praefat. Novi Testamenti. Anno. 1605. And see the Lutherans in colloq. Altemberg. in Respons. ad accus. corrupt. fol. 154. 353.  Beza styling it, The most vain term Catholic: yet S. Austin so highly esteemed thereof, that he said, 
(k) Tom. 1. de vera religione. c. 7. paul. ant med.  We must hold the communion of that Church which is named Catholic, not only of her own, but also of her enemies, for will they, nile they, Heretics, and schismatics, when they speak not with their own fellows but with strangers, call the Catholic Church, nothing else but the Catholic Church, for they could not be understood unless they discern it by this name, wherewith she is called by the whole world. And though it be common to Protestants with former heretics in words to style themselves Catholics, yet saith S. 
(l) Tom. 6. l. cont. epist. fundam. c. 4. circ. med.  Austin; whereas all heretics would be called Catholics, yet if a stranger ask the way to the Catholic Church, no heretic dare show his own Church or house. And the like saying is to be seen in S. 
(m) Catech. 18.  Ciril. And even so at this day the name Catholic, is ordinarily appropriated to us Roman Catholics by M. 
(n) Act. mon. p. 613. Sleid. in the english history. l. 7. fol. 96. et l. 10. fol. 127. jac. in his reasons taken out of God's word. p. 23. 73. 74. 24. Wilkes. in his obedience, pag. 39 Dres. in Millenar. 6. p. 214. Humf. in vita juelli. p. 102. 100  Fox, Sleiden, jacob, Wilkes, Dresserus, Humphrey, and all other writers.  
Yea this name Catholic was so powerful with S. Austin, as that he made it one special motive (as now the like it should be to us) for to preserve and keep him in the Church's bosom, saying hereof, 
(o) Tom. 6. cont. epist. fundam. c. 4. circa med.  Lastly the very name Catholic holdeth me etc. which words are so undeniable, that D. 
(p) Against Rhem. test. in Act. Apost. c. 11. v. 26. see, 4.  Fulke granteth that, Among many other things which kept S. Austin in the Church, the name of Catholic was one.  
But to pass from the name to the thing itself, or reason of the name, that the true Church should be called Catholic, not (as D. 
(q) Ibidem.  Fulke with old heretics pretendeth) only in regard of it observing all the commandments of God, which very assertion S. 
(r) Tom. 2. ep. 48. ad Vincentium paulo ante med.  Austin confuteth, saying to the heretic, thou seemest to have said somewhat wittily, when thou expoundest the name Catholic, not by the communion of the whole world, but by the keeping of all the commandments etc. But in regard of it becoming and continuing after it first increase Catholic & dispersed over the world: In proof whereof S. Austin as the very 
(s) Cent. 5. c. 4. col. 410. & col. 414.  Centurists do observe) alledgedgeth many testimonies from the sacred Scriptures saying, 
(4) Tom. 7. de unit. Eccles. c. 8. initio.  Therefore let us hear some few from the Psalms song so long ago, and let us see with great joy that they are accmoplished. And then immediately after both there, and cap. 9 he allegeth testimonies from the Psalms, over many to recite, and right worthy of the reader's perusal and observation. And speaking of the 
(u) Ibidem. c. 7. initio.  Prophets, How many and how manifest are the testimonies (saith he) of the Church dispersed through all nations over all the world, from whence I will recite some few, leaving more to the leisure of the readers fearing God. And then reckoning up a number of Esaies' prophecies to this purpose, he affirmeth many more, which (saith he) are so many that from Esay alone, if I should gather all, I should exceed the measure of fitting speech. And in regard of his so many and plain predictions, S. 
(w) Tom. 5. de civet. Dei. l. 18. c. 29. post. init.  Austin affirmeth that, Esay prophesied so, that by some he was termed rather an Evangelist than a Prophet: concluding also directly to the point, that as heretical conventicles cannot be called Catholic in regard they do but preavile for certain times & incertain provinces so again the true Church is called Cath. in regard of i● foretold large & lasting extent; for thus S. 
(x) Tom. 9 de Symbolo. l. 4. c. vlt. circa med. and see To●. 10. de tempo●e. ser. 131. post med.  Austin writeth, the Church possesseth the whole which she received of her hu●band in dowry etc. Eu●ry congregation of what heresy so ever lurketh in corners, she is a concubine not a matron. O Arian heresy why dost thou insult? why dost thou puf? why dost thou also for a time usurp many things? etc. And he urgeth the Donatists saying, 
(y) Tom. 7. cont. Gaudent. l. 2. c. 2. circa med.  If yours be the Catholic Church, show it to stretch out in beams over the whole world, show it to extend it bows with plenty of fruit over the whole earth, for hence by the Greek word also it is named Catholic. And again it is called in Greek 
(z) Tom. 2. epist. 170. ad Severinum. ant med.  Catholic, because it is spread over the whole world, it is lawful for none to be ignorant of her. And whereas D. 
(a) Answer to a counterfeare Catholic. p. 95. & against Purgatory. p. 14.  Fulke objecteth to the contrary that, the Church is not called Catholic, because it should be every where etc. The Popish Church is not in every part of the world, for Mahomet sect is the greater part, many countries are Idolaters, and most of them that profess are not in the fellowship of the Popish Church. This very objection S. Austin answereth against Cresconius the Donatist in these words, 
(b) Tom. 7. cont. Crescon. l. 3. c. 63. fine.  Thou disputest foolishly against the most manifest truth, that therefore the world doth not communicate with us, because as yet there are many of barbarous nations who have not believed in Christ, because under the name of Christ there are many heresies different from the communion of our society etc.   

S. Austin teacheth that the miliant Church must ever continue, and that visibly. SECTION. 3.  
THough the militant Churches perpetual continuance, and visibility, be already sufficiently employed in S. Austin's foresaid assertions of it remaning Catholic, yet because the contrary is very dangerously taught by sundry Prorestants, I will yet further proceed therein. And first concerning her continuance, whereas our adversaries teach that, before Luther's time 
(c) Perkins upon the Creed. p. 400.  an universal Apostasy over spread the whole face of the earth, and that (their) Church was not visible to the world: Also that 
(d) Chamierus in ep. jesuit. part 2. p. 49.  error possessed not one or other little portion (of the Church) but the Apostasy averted the whole body from Christ. That likewise 
(e) Whitak. in resp. ad rat. Camp. rat 3. p. 48.  the mystery of iniquity went through all the parts of the Church, and so at last possessed the whole Church. In defence of which so miserable a refuge (whereto our adversaries are enforced to betake themselves upon our provoking them to show forth their Church for former times.) D. Fulke, and D. Willet are not abashed to conclude that 
(f) Answer to a counterfeit. Catholic. pag 79.  the visible Church may become an Adultres, and be divorced from Christ: and that the 
(g) Synopsis. p. 52. 54.  visible Church may fail upon earth. Now S. Austin (directly against all this) reproveth these Protestants in their forefathers the Donatists, as being erroneous (saith he) 
(h) Tom. 7. de unit. Eccles. cap. 13. prope fin.  in that they wrested the Scriptures against the Church of God, as though it might have been thought to have fallen away and perished from the whole world. Reprehending them also yet further in their saying (as Prot. now did) 
(i) Tom. 8. in Psal. 101. con. 2. ante med.  Apostatavit et perijt Ecclesia de omnibus gentibus, the Church hath fallen away and perished out of all countries. And again 
(k) Ibidem. paulo ante.  That Church which was of all countries, now is not, but hath perished. whereto he there answereth saying, This they say (or object) who are not in the Church, O impudent speech? etc. why dost thou say that the Church hath perished out of all countries? and concludeth thus, Let not heretics brag as though the days of the Church were few, for they are even unto the very end etc.  
Now touching the Churches ever visibility, S. Austin affirmeth that 
(l) Tom. 8. in Psal. 47. prope init.  she is the city placed upon a hill which cannot be hid, the candle which is not hid under the bubel (but) known to al. And that 
(m) Tom. 7. cont. lit. Petil. l. 2. c. 32. circa med.  Hence it is that the true Church is hidden to none, whereupon that is, which Christ sayeth in the Gospel, a city placed upon a hill cannot be hid, and therefore in the Psalm it is added, he hath placed his tabernacle in the sun, id est, in manifestation, that is clearly to be seen. This inference thus made by S. Austin from the Scriptures argueth, that S. Austin spoke not only as of the Church of his own time, but also as of the Church in the ensuing times, which the said alleged Scriptures respected both a like: Yea S. Austin is so confident in this doctrine of the Churches ever visibility, as that he doubteth not to set dowen this as a special mark, or as he saith, 
(n) Tom. 6. cont. Faustum. l. 13. c. 13. initio.  A manifest sign whereby evermore to direct the ignorant, which among so many pretended congregations is the true Church.   

S. Austin teacheth that the Church was built upon S. Peter: and that S. Peter was the head of the whole Church. SCTION. 4.  
COncerning the Churches being builded upon the Rock, as S. Austin acknowledgeth the building thereof upon Christ (as being the primary Rock or foundation) so likewise doth he affirm (as from the then common received doctrine) our Saviour's building of his Church upon Peter, as being a secondary or ministerial Rock or foundation, holding both these expositions for good and probable, saying hereof expressly, 
(a) Tom. 1. l. 1. retract. c. 21. post init.  Let the reader choose whether of these two opinions be more probable. To this purpose than he writeth, 
(b) Ibidem.  in his book (contra epistolam Donati) I have said in a certain place concerning Peter the Apostle, that upon him as upon a Rock the Church is builded, which sense is also song by the mouths of many in the verses of most blessed Ambrose etc. but I know that since I have often expounded that which is said by our Lord; thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church, that it might be understood upon this which Peter confessed, saying, thou art Christ the son of God. And then presently afterwards (as before he concludeth) but of these two opinions let the reader choose which is the more probable. And he allegeth and approveth S. 
(c) Tom. 7. de Bapt. cont. Don. l. 3. c. 1. ante med.  Cyprian saying, for neither Peter whom our Lord chose first (or chiefest) and upon whom he built his Church etc. And himself saith elsewhere, 
(d) Tom. 8. in Psal. 30. con. 2. ante med.  O Church, that is, o Peter, because upon this Rock I will build my Church, kill and eat. And of Peter's sea, he denounceth that, 
(m) Tom. 7. in Psal. count. partem Donat. versus finem.  It is the Rock which, the proud gates of hell do not overcome: In so much that the Protestant Hammelmannus confesseth this of S. Austin saying, 
(e) De Traditionibus Apostolicis. part. 2. l. 3. col. 622. and see the like sayings of the other Father's alleged & rejected f●r the same. col. 621. 623. 624. 625.  Austin in his book against the epistle of Donatus, teacheth that the Church was founded upon Peter as upon the Rock, and he proveth this his opinion by the verses of Ambrose etc. concerning the Cook etc.  
But S. Austin proceedeth yet more particularly saying, 
(f) Tom. 4. quaestion. ex Novo Test. quaest. 75. post med.  Our Saviour when he commanded that there should be given for him and Peter, than he seemeth to have paid for all, because as in our Saviour there were all causes of pre-eminence, so also after our Saviour all are contained in Peter, for he ordained him the head of them, that he might be the Pastor of our Lords flock etc. It is manifest that all are contained in Peter, for ask for Peter, he is known to have asked for all, for ever in the superior, the people are either reproved or commended. And again 
(g) Tom. 8. in Psal. 108. enarrat. 1. prope initium.  certain things are said (in the Gospel) which properly seem to belong to Peter the Apostle, yet they have not a clear sense, but when they are referred to the Church, whose person figuratively he is known to have borne, by reason of the primacy which he had over the Disciples etc.   

S. Austin teacheth the primacy of the Roman Church. SECTION. 5.  
COncerning S. Peter's successors, the Bishops of Rome, S. Austin acknowledgeth that in the Roman Church 
(a) Tom. 2. ep. 162. multo ante med.  the principality of the Apostolical chair ever flourished. And 
(b) Tom. 6. de vtil. credendi. c. 17.  shall we doubt (saith he) to hide ourselves in the bosom of that Church, which &c. from the Apostolical sea by successions of Bishop's hath obtained the height of authority? To which not to give the Primacy, is truly either the greatest impiety, or headlong arrogancy. And writing to Pope Bonifacius himself he saith, 
(c) Tom. 7. cont. duas epist. Pelag. ad Bonifac. l. 1. c. 1. circa med.  It is common to us all who are Bishops, although thou therein dost excel by reason of the greater height of thy pastoral watchtower. In like sort he writeth to Pope Innocentius saying, 
(d) Tom. 2. epist. 92. ad Innocent. prope finem.  we think etc. that by the authority of thy holiness derived from the authority of the holy Scriptures, that they will more easily yield who believe such perverse and pernicious things: so attributing the Pope's authority to the Scriptures themselves. And as for Innocentius himself, the Centurists confess, 
(e) Cent. 5. col. 1230. 662. and see Osiander. cent. 5. p. 59  that he laboured much for the primacy of the Roman Church, which is evident by all his epistles etc. whereupon they allege from his epistles, sundry of his sayings, which importing so much, are therefore by them 
(f) Cent. 5. col. 775. 779.  reprehended. And whereas Innocentius writ one epistle to the Fathers of the Carthage Council, wherein he affirmeth the Primacy of the Roman Church to be 
(g) In Aug. tom. 2. ep. 91. prope init. and see cent. 5. col. 825. & 780.  decreed, non humana sed divina sententia, not by humane but divine sentence. And an 
(h) In Aug. tom. 2. ep. 93. multo ante med. and see cent. 5. col. 843. 780.  other to the Millevitane Concel, wherein he challengeth that matters of faith are to be referred to the Apostolical Sea. Though the Centurists do dislike and reprove these said epistles for the foresaid doctrines tauhgt therein by Innocencentius; yet S. 
(i) Tom. 2. epist. 106. post init.  Austin writing to Paulinus of the Pelagian heresy, which was condemned in those two foresaid Counsels, & mencioning two several letters of those two Counsels sent to the Apostolic sea: To which two letters Innocentius made several answer in his two former recited epistles from whence are alleged the testimonies of his claimed Primacy. S. Austin (I say) of these very answers or epistles writeth thus worthily, 
(k) Ibidem.  Innocentius of blessed memory writ back unto us concerning all things in that manner which was fit and convenient for the Bishop of the Apostolic sea: and elsewhere he further saith of the same epistles, 
(l) Tom. 7. cont. julian. Pelag. l. 1. c. 4. post med.  what could that holy man (blessed Innocentius) answer to the African Counsels, but that which anciently the Apostolic Sea, and the Roman Church continually held with the rest? Most evidently so hereby geuing his allowance of that very Primacy which Innocentius claimed in or by these two foresaid epistles.  
But indeed S. Austin was always so duly respective to the Roman Sea, as that he greavosly reprehended the heretics of his time for their then 
(m) Tom. 7. cont. lit. Petil. l. 2. c. 51.  terming the Roman Church (as our adversaries now do) the chair of pestilence; & teaching with all (against the Protestants often objection) our due reverence thereto, not withstanding the wicked lives of any Popes, 
(n) Tom. 2. ep. 165. ante med.  although (saith he) any traitor in those times had crept into that rank of Bishops, which is continued from Peter himself to Anastasius, who now sitteth in the same chair, it would nothing hurt the Church and innocent Christians, for whom our Lord providing, saith of evil Pastors, what they say, do ye, but what they do, do ye not. Lastly this wholesome council he giveth unto all heretics, 
(o) Tom. 7. in Psal. contra partem Donati versus finem.  come ye brethren if you will be engrafted in the vine, it is a grief when we see you cut of so to lie, number the priests even from the Sea of Peter, and see in that rank of Fathers who succeedeth another, that is the Rock which the proud gates of hell do not overcome.   

S. Austin denyeth Ecclesiastical Primacy to Emperors, and Kings. SECTION. 6.  
THe Millevitan Council (whereat S. Austin was present & 
(a) In the last Canon of the Milevitan Council.  prescribed) decreed in the case of clergy men that 
(b) Can. 19  whosoever should ask of the Emperor the knowledge (or hearing) of public judgements, should be deprived of his honour: Of which Canon 
(c) Cent. 5. c. 33. p. 152.  Osiander saith, It is not worthy of commendation. And whereas M. jewel 
(d) Reply. art. 4. p. 272.  objecteth the testimony of S. Austin concerning Constantine the great undertaking the judgements of Bishops and their causes upon appeal made to him in that behalf; S. Austin himself shall give him his answer in these words, 
(e) Tom. 2. ep. 162. multo post med.  The Emperor granted them another judgement at Arles, to wit, of other Bishops, not because it was needful, but yielding to their importunities etc. for neither durst the Christian Emperor so receive their tumultuous and deceitful complaints, that himself would judge of the sentence of Bishops, which sat at Rome, but as I have said, he granted other Bishops, from whom they also chose to appeal again to the Emperor, wherein you have heard how he detested them etc. And as he had yielded to them to judge of their cause after the Bishops, afterwards he asked pardon of the holy Prelates: Yea S. Austin saith further that, 
(f) Ep. 166. ante med.  because Constantine durst not judge of the cause of a Bishop, he committed the same to be discussed and ended by Bishops. Optatus also (who lived with S. Austin alleging Constantine's answer to the Bishops that appealed to him saith 
(g) Lib. 1. versus finem.  Constantine with great anger answered etc. you ask of me judgement in the world, when I except the judgement of Christ. And a little after, Donatus thinketh that he may appeal from Bishops to which appeal Constantine thus answered, O outrageous boldness of fury, as in the causes of Gentiles etc. Yea this is so clear in S. Austin, that M Carthwright answereth to M. Whitguifts like objecting hereof saying, 
(h) 2. Reply part. 2. p. 163.  Austin saith that the Emperor was driven by the Donatistes' importunity who made no end of appealing unto him, to give sentence in that matter, for the which also he was to crave pardon of the Bishops etc. Lastly S. Athanasius reporteth that the Bishop Hosius, said to Constantine, 
(i) In ep. ad solitariam vitam agentes.  I beseech thee to cease, and remember thou art mortal etc. do not entermedle in Ecclesiastical matters, nor do thou command us in this kind, God hath committed to thee the Empire; to us those things which concern the Church etc. Take heed lest that drawing to thee those things which concern the Church, thou be guilty of great crime etc. And again, who seeing him in decreeing to make himself the prince of Bishops, & to be precedent in Ecclesiastical judgements, may not deservedly say, that he is that abomination of desolation which was foretold by Daniel?    

Concerning the Sacraments. CHAPTER. 5.  

S. Austin teacheth that the Sacraments do not only signify, but truly confer grace to the worthy receiver. SECTION. 1.  
THough 
(k) Fulke against Purgat. p. 35. Willet in his Sinopsis p. 415. Perkins in his reformed Catholic. p. 294. 298. jewel in his defence. p. 201.  Protestants usually teach, that Sacraments do signify grace, but not confer it: yet S. Austin with us Catholics teacheth the contrary saying, 
(l) Tom. 9 in john tract. 80. versus finem.  from whence is that so great virtue of the water, that touching the body it washeth the heart, but the word working it? etc. Cleansing therefore would not be attributed to the liquid and slippery element, if it were not added in the word. And he proveth by example of Circumcision, the force of Baptism to children though they want faith, saying, 
(m) Tom. 7. l. 4. de Bapt. cont. Don. c. 24. post init.  The Sacrament of itself was of great force. But this doctrine is so clearly S. Austin's, that Luther answereth to Cochlaeus his objecting of S. Austin in this manner, 
(n) Lib. cont. Cochlaeum.  But if there be any of the Fathers who have thought the Sacraments to justify by their own virtue, though it be Austin as Cochlaeus contendeth, I nothing care, they are the sayings of men. Agreeably to which also writeth Caluin, 
(o) Lib. 4. Instit. c. 14. sec. vlt.  peradventure those immoderate commendations of the Sacraments which are read in the ancient writers, as that of Austin etc. hath deceived those miserable Sophisters.  
And whearas 
(p) Willet in his sinopsis. p. 418.  Protestants do further teach that the Sacraments of the old law are equal in force to ours, S. Austin with us to the contrary avoucheth that 
(q) Tom. 8. in Psal. 73. multo ante med.  There are some sacraments geuing salvation, others promising the Saviour; the Sacraments of the new Testament give salvation, the Sacraments of the old Testament promise the Saviour. A saying so pregnant against Protestants that if we believe 
(r) Loc. come. p. 299. and see Caluin. l. 4. institut. c. 14. sec. vlt.  Musculus it was spoken inconsiderately by Austin. Yea saith Caluin, 
(s) Lib. 4. instit. c. 15. sec. 7. And see Chemnitius examen. part. 2. p. 38.  Let it trouble no man, that the ancient Fathers strive to make a difference between the one and the other, their authority ought not to be such as to shake the infallibility of Scripture etc. Neither is that quircke of Austin to be approved, that by the Baptism of john sins are forgiven in hope, but by the Baptism of Christ sins are forgiven indeed.   

S. Austin teacheth that certain of the Sacraments do imprint a Character or mark in the soul of the receiver. SECTION. 2.  
THough D. 
(t) Sinopsis. p. 419. and upon the 112. Psal. p. 91.  Willet with other Protestants utterly deny all such Character, yet S. Austin avoucheth the same, comparing the Character imprinted in the soul by certain Sacraments with the external mark or Character used in warfare, saying, 
(u) Tom. 7. l. 2. cont. epist. Parmen. c. 13. post med. tom. 7. l. 6. de Bapt. cont. Don. c. 1. tom. 9 in joan. tract. 5. & 6. tom. 7●. count. lit. Petil. l. 2. c. vlt. tom. 7. cont. Crescon. l. 1. c. 30. tom. 9 tract. 5. in ep. joan. tom. 2. ep. 23. post med. et ep. 50. 204.  when a man is set at liberty and punished, is that Character renewed, or rather being known, is it not allowed? Do Christian Sacraments less inhere then this corporal mark seeing we see that the very Apostates do not want Baptism. But S. Austin is so clear in this point that D. Covel approveth the same in S. Austin against the Puritans saying, 
(w) Defence of Hooker. art. 13. p. 91.  you scof at the word Character, as if there were no stamp at all which made a difference between the Clergy, and Laity etc. S. Austin was the first that used that word in this sense, and no doubt of it, there is in Baptism that mark stamped upon us etc. This form, figure, impression, or Character, is called indelible, because that is not to be reiterated, from whence it cometh, that the Character of order is an active power etc. And the answerable doctrine of the thing though not of the word, is so certainly taught by M. 
(x) Eccles. pol. l 5. sec. 77. p. 228.  Hooker, that M. Willet doth therefore charge him with teaching that, 
(y) Meditation on the Psal. 122. p. 91.  There is in orders given an indelible Character.   

S. Austin teacheth that there are seven Sacraments. SECTION. 3.  
COncerning the number of the Sacraments, which Protestants 
(a) Willet in his sinopsis p. 423.  generally teach to be but two, although S. Austin had no special occasion given him to write purposely of their certain number, yet by that which he writeth casually and but obiter, as by way of other discourse, he signifieth his opinion to be far different from Protestants. Behold (saith 
(b) Tom. 8. in Psal. 103. Concione. 1. ante med.  he) the gifts of the Church, the gift of the Sacraments, in Baptism, in the Eucharist, in the other holy Sacraments, what a gift is it? The 
(c) Tom. 7. cont. lit. Petil. l. 2. c. 104. circa med.  Sacrament of Chrism in the kind of visible signs is sacred, even as Baptism itself. In like sort comparing Baptism, with order, and proving that orders once received cannot be lost, no more than Baptism, he saith, for both are 
(d) Tom. 7. cont. epist. Parmen. l. 2. c. 13. ante med.  Sacraments and with certain consecration both are given to man, that when he is Baptised, this when he is ordered etc. And again, If both be Sacraments, which none doubteth of, why is that lost, and this not? Neither Sacrament must be injured. Yet further, 
(e) Tom. 7. de Baptis. count. Don. l. 5. c. 20. post med.  If &c. by a sinner Sacraments are not celebrated, how doth God hear the murderer praying, either over the water of Baptism, or over the oil, or over the Eucharist, or over the heads of them upon whom hands are imposed. And that S. Austin thought the same concerning Matrimony, Penance, and Extreme unction, shall be showed hereafter in their proper places.  
Ad only hereunto, that S. Dionysius the Arcaopagite, in his writings confessedly ancient to S. Austin, doth no less confessedly according to Luther 
(h) Tom. 2. Wittenberg. de captiu. Babil. fol. 84. Humf. in jesuit. part. 2. p. 519.  and D. Humfrey's acknowledgements, mention six Sacraments, and S. Cyprian also casually mentioneth fine, as 
(i) Examen. part, 2. p. 7.  Chemnitius is forced to confess: Having no other answer thereto, but only pretending without all proof that this sermon is forged and none of Cyprian's; whereas the book, de operibus Cardinalibus Christi, (whereof this sermon de ablutione pedum, and the other de caena Domini, are parcels) is dedicated to Cornelius Bishop of Rome in Cyprian's time and to whom Cyprian himself wrote, l. 1. ep. 1. & 3. in so much as Erasmus in his Annotations annexed to Cyprian's works, affirmeth it to be, 
(k) Upon the folio. 287.  the work of some learned man of that age. And M. Fulke acknowledgeth that, 
(l) Against Rhem. Test. in 1. Cor. c. 11. v. 20. sec. 6.  The author (thereof) was not in time much inferior to Cyprian.   

S. Austin teacheth that the Sacraments are to be administered with the sign of the Cross. SECTION. 4.  
DIrectly contrary to all Puritans, and the more usual practice of Protestants S. 
(m) Tom. 9 in evang joan. tract. 118. prope fin.  Austin teacheth that, unless the sign of the Cross be applied, whether to the foreheads of the believers, or to the water wherewith they are regenerated, or to the oil wherewith they are anointed, or to the sacrifice wherewith they are nourished, none of these are rightly administered. And the like he teacheth in sundry 
(n) Tom. 10. de tempore. ser. 181. c. 3. fine. tom. 10. serm. 19 de Sanctis. fine.  other places. In so much that the Centurists reciting and reproving this fore-alleged sentence, affirm thereof that, 
(o) Cent. 5. c. 6. col. 657.  superstisiosé loquitur, he speaketh superstitiously. And D. Fulke acknowledgeth that, 
(p) Against Rhem. Test. in 1. Cor. 11. v. 34. p. 532.  Indeed S. Austin in john. Tract. 118. saith, that the sign of the Cross was a ceremony used in all the Sacraments which if it were not used, nihil eorum rite perficitur, 
(q) Burges in Couels answer to him. p. 136. Puritans in their treatise of the sign of the Cross. p. 21.  nothing is performed or done according to the rite or custom. with whom agree other Protestants, reproving S, Austin for this Catholic doctrine of the sign of the Cross. And yet S. Chrisostome (living together with S. Austin) giveth like testimoney for the Greek Church saying, 
(r) In Mathaeum. Hom. 55. post med.  all things which help to our salvation are perfected by the Cross, for when we are regenerated the Cross of our Lord is present, when we are nourished with the most sacred meat, when we take Orders, every where and always that ensign of victory is at hand.    

Concerning Baptism. CHAPTER. 6.  

S. Austin teacheth that Baptism taketh away all sins, both original and actual. SECTION. 1.  
FOr the obtaining of the grace given by Baptism, S. Austin agreeably with our Catholic school men requireth fit disposition: In so much that 
(s) Hagoges Christiana, part. 4. c. 28. p. 519.  Danaeus having recited the effects of Baptism, affirmeth that, the schoolmen say, these are to be understood of those, who put no bar (or hindrance) to the effects of Baptism, but it is (saith he) an obscure speech, though Austin. c. 23. ad Bonifacium, saith, obicem ponere. Now this bar supposed to be removed S. Austin teacheth, that, 
(t) Tom. 7 cont. duas epistolas Pelag. l. 3. c. 3. circa med.  Baptism washeth away all sins, all altogether, of deeds, words, thoughts, or original. And the like he hath in 
(u) Tom. 9 de Symbolo ad Catechum. l. 3. c. 10. initio. Tom. 7. de pec. orig. c. 40. tom. 8. in Psal. 50. ante med. Tom. 7. contra julian. Pelag. l. 6. c. 5. tom. 8. in Psal. 118.  sundry other places so expressly, that the 
(w) Cent. 5. c. 4. col. 368. & 516. & 1133.  Centurists, and 
(x) Examen. part. 2. p. 38.  Chemnitius, do allege his sayings, and confess his judgement in our behalf.   

S. Austin teacheth that concupiscence remaning after Baptism is not sin. SECTION. 2.  
IN regard of this plenary remission of sin, S. Austin consequently further teacheth that 
(a) Tom. 7. de nuptiis et concupis. l. 1. c. 23. prope initium.  concupiscence is not now sin in the regenerate. And again 
(b) Tom. 7. de pec. mer. et remis. l. 2. c. 4. initio. et cont. julian. Pelag. l. 6. c. 5. prope fin. count. duas ep. Pelag. l. 1. c. 13. tom. 5. de civet. Dei l. 1. c. 24. fin.  concupiscence in children Baptised is free from guilt, it is left for the combat. But this doctrine is so confessedly S. Augustine's and the other Fathers, that Caluin saith thereof 
(c) Institut. l. 3. c. 3. parag. 10,  it is not needful to search much, what here the ancient Father's thought, when Austin alone may suffice thereto, who hath gathered with fidelity and great diligence all their opinions, therefore let the readers take from him, if they will have any certanty of the sense (or meaning) of antiquity, but between him and us this difference may seem to be, that he etc. dareth not call that disease (of concupiscence) sin, but &c. teacheth it then at length to be sin, when to the (first) conceiving or apprehension either deed or consent followeth. with whom agreeth Chemnitius, who speaking of our concupiscence saith, 
(d) Loc. come. part. 3. in his Theses thereto annexed. fol. 18. b. parag. 10.  Austin began to dispute, that it was not properly sinne but so called by a figure etc. which (if we will believe Chemnitius) was spoken incommodiously.   

S. Austin teacheth that children dying unbaptized are not saved. SECTION. 3.  
THough it be now an ordinary opinion among 
(e) Carthwright in Whitguiftes defence. p. 516. Dillingham in his disput brevis de Symbo. p. 4. 5.  Protestants that children borne of faithful parents dying without Beptisme may be saved, whose cruel and unchariritable practice herein is over frequent and answerable: yet S. Austin jointly with our now Roman Church teacheth the very contrary saying, 
(f) Tom. 7. de anima et eius origine. l. 3. c. 9 initio. tom. 10. de verb. Apost. ser. 14.  If thou wilt be a Catholic, do not believe, do not say, do not teach, that children dying before they be Baptised, can come to forgiveness of original sins. And 
(g) Tom. 2. ep. 28. ad Hieron. multo post med.  whosoever saith that children shall be revived in Christ who die without participation of this Sacrament, this man truly contradicteth the Apostolical preaching, and condemneth the whole Church etc. So generally received was the doctrine hereof in his time. Lastly he teacheth, that though 
(h) Tom. 7. de pec. mer. et remis. l. 1. c. 16. initio.  it may truly be said, that children dying without Baptism are to be in damnatione omnium mitissima, in the easiest state of damnation, yet he deceiveth and is deceived, who teacheth that they are not to be damned. Now these sayings are so unanswearable in S. Austin that M. Carthwright confesseth that 
(i) In Whitguifts defence. p. 521.  Austin was of mind that children could not be saved without Baptism: for which he over boldly chargeth him with 
(k) Ibidem. p. 516.  absurdity. Sundry other 
(l) Bullinger his Decades in english. dec. 5. ser. 8. p. 1049. Musculus, loc. come. c. de Baptis. p. 308. Dillinham de Symbo. p. 4. 5. The Centurists. cent. 5. c. 4. col. 379.  Protestants acknowledging and reproving likewise in him the same doctrine.  
Now in regard of this so absolute necessity of Baptism unto children, S. Austin is confessed to teach, that in case of necessity it is lawful for the Laity to Baptism, for thus writeth 
(m) In resp. ad act. colloq. Mon. tisbel. part. 2. p. 143. and see Whitguifes defence, tract. 9 p. 522. 523.  Beza, whereas Austin writeth to Parmen. l. 2. c. 13. that he knoweth not whether the Baptism which a Lay person etc. enforced upon necessity (of the child) perishing doth administer, is piously to be reiterated, is a blemish (or error in S. Austin saith Beza.   

S. Austin teacheth sundry ceremonies of Baptism now used in the Roman Church. SECTION. 4.  
FIrst than he teacheth that, 
(n) Tom. 10. in l. 50. homil. hom. 27. multo ante med.  the water being consecrated in the name of Christ is signed with his Cross, and that, 
(o) Tom. 10. de tempore serm. 181. c. 3. prope fin. & ser. 19 de sanctis. prope finem.  with this sign the font of Baptism is sanctified: which consecration of the water is taught by S. 
(p) Lib. 1. c. vlt. ant med.  Cyprian saying, the water ought to be cleansed and sanctified first by the Priest. And by S. 
(q) De mister. init. c. 3. post med. and Aug. tom. 9 in joan. Tract. 118. prope fin.  Ambrose in these words, when the water of salvation shall be consecrated with the mystery of the Cross etc. S. 
(r) Tom. 2. ep. 105. ad Sixtus. versus fin.  Austin also teacheth, the exorcism of Infants from the Churches ancient rite, or custom; as also their Exuflation: of both which, speaking of julianus he saith, 
(s) Tom. 7 de nup. et concup. l. 2. c. 29. fin.  He hath accused of grievous crime the most ancient tradition of the Church, whereby, as I have said, children are exorcised and breathed upon. And speaking to julianus himself saith 
(t) Tom. 7. cont. jul. Pelag. l. 6. c. 5. post init.  Thou wert to be blown but of the whole world, if thou wouldst contradict this exufflation, wherewith the prince of the world is cast out of children.  
In like sort concerning Annoyling before Baptism he further saith, 
(u) Tom. 9 in evang joan. tract. 44. post init.  He is annealed but not yet washed etc. It is not sufficient for the Catechumen) that they are annealed, let them hasten to washing (or Baptism.) Of this Carthwright confesseth that, 
(x) 2. Reply, part. 2. c. 4. p. 226.  Anointing in Baptism was as general & of as long continuance as the Cross, for b●ing in Africa in Tertulians time, it spread itself into the east and west Churches.  
Concerning Abrenunciation, and Godfathers to Infants. S. Austin affirmeth that, 
(y) Tom. 10. de tempore. ser. 116. prope fin. And tom. 9 de Symbol. l. 2. c. 1. & l. 3. c. 1.  The Godfathers answer for them that they renounce the Devil, his pomps, and works: And that 
(z) Tom 2. ep. 23. ad Bonif. post med.  They answer in the child's behalf to several interrogatories; mentioning 
(a) Tom. 9 in evang joan. tract. 44. post init.  withal the use of spistle.  
In like manner as touching trinall immersion, S. Austin saith, 
(b) Tom. 10. de tempore. ser. 201. post med.  The mystery of the Trinity is also showed in the Sacrament of Baptism, whiles the old man is thrice drowned. This ceremony is further mentioned by 
(c) De co●ona militis. Basil. de Spir. Sanct. c. 27 Cir. Catech, 2. Chrisost. hom. 24. in joan.  Tertulian, S. Basil, S. Ciril, and S. Chrisostome, which being afterwards misapplyed by the Arians to the signifying of three several natures in the three persons (as S. 
(d) Lib. 1. ep. 41. ad Leandrum.  Gregory recordeth) one immersion was thereupon in some Churches 
(e) Concil. 4. Toletan. c. 5.  established.  
To conclude, all these ceremonies of Baptism are so clearly set down and taught by S. Austin, that the (f) Centurie writers do particularly and at large record and dislike the same: 
(o) Cent. 4. c. 6. col. 415. 417. 418. 419. & Cent. 5. c. 6. col. 652. 657.  of which also saith 
(g) Resp. ad Tom. 2. Bellar. p. 281.  Daneus, so Austin and some Father's thought, that they were Apostolical traditions, which they believed to be most ancient, but without ground, saith Daneus.    

Concerning the Sacrament of Confirmation. CHAPTER. 7.  
COncerning Confirmation S. Austin writeth that the water thereof is oil or Chrism. 
(h) Tom. 9 in ep. joan. tract. 3. ante med.  Spiritual unction (saith he) is the holy Ghost himself, whose Sacrament is in the visible unction. 
(i) Tom. 8. in Psal. 26. in praefat. enarrat. 2. prope fin.  we are now anointed in the Sacrament. And, 
(k) In Psal. 44. circ. med.  The visible oil is in the sign, the invisible oil is in the Sacrament. Again, 
(l) Tom. 3. de Trinit. l. 15. c. 26. post init.  God hath anointed him with the holy Ghost, not with the visible oil, but with the gift of grace, which is signified by the visible oil wherewith the Church doth annoyle those that are baptised. This doctrine is so clearly S. Austin's, S. Hieromes, and S. Ambroses, that Danaeus reproveth them in his answer to Bellarmine, objecting the same Fathers saying 
(m) Resp. ad tom. ●. c. 6. p. 452.  Ambrose favoureth over much his Siricius and the Roman bishops, who brought forth that Confirmation. Therefore what &c. Ambrose writ, it is to be attributed to his error or favour towards the Pope of Rome, not to the truth; Hieromes sentence against the Luciferians, corrupteth the place of the 8. chapter of the Acts; Austin was overwhelmed with the error or shipwreck of his age. So general was the doctrine hereof in S. Austin's time, for which also S. Cyprian is reproved by 
(n) De tradit. Apost. col. 773. 774. 775.  Hammelmannus.  
This Chrism according to S. Austin was only to be consecrated by a Bishop; In so much that the 3. Carthage Council (whereat S. Austin was present and subscribed) decreed that, 
(o) Can. 36. and see council. 2. Carthag. c. 3.  A Priest should not consecrat virgins without acquamting the Bishop & should never hollow Chrism. A Canon so plain in our behalf that Osiander censureth it to be 
(p) Cent. 4. l. 4. c. 24. p. 529.  superstitious ambition, and ambitius superstition, and yet the answerable doctrine of the other Fathers herein is reported by the 
(q) Cent. 4. col. 865. 869. 503. 1274.  Century writers.  
Yea S. Austin expressly calleth it a Sacrament, saying, 
(r) Tom. 7. cont. lit. Petil. l. 2. c. 104.  The Sacrament of Chrism is in the kind of visible signs sacred, even as Baptism itself. These words are over plain for our adversaries to evade by saying that S. Austin here used the word Sacrament improperly or but in a general sense, except they will say the like of Baptism, which would be over gross. And we have seen before, that S. Austin required the sign of the Cross for the duly administering of this Sacrament. For which doctrine also the 
(s) Ministers of Lincoln diocese in their abridge. p. 41.  Puritans reprove Tertulian, Cyprian, & Ambrose.  
This Confirmation S. Austin affirmeth to have been given with imposition of hands: The holy Ghost (saith 
(t) Tom. 7. de Baptismo. count. Don. l. 3. c. 16. ante med.  he) is said to be given by imposition of hands etc. but the holy Ghost by the imposition of hands is not now given as heretofore it was with temporal and sensible miracles confirming the same to the commendation of the faith now taught, and to enlarge the beginnings of the Church, for who now may expect that those upon whom hands are imposed for the obtaining of the holy Ghost, should suddanly begin to speak with tongues? And again 
(u) Tom. 3 de Eccles. dog. c. 52. ante med.  those who are strengthened with the imposition of hands and Chrism, let them be admitted to the Eucharist. And whereas our 
(x) Caluin institut. l. 4. c. 19 sec. 6. Carthwright. 2. Reply, part. 2. p. 233.  adversaries would escape by affirming that by this geuing of the holy Ghost was only meant the miraculous gifts of the holy Ghost, mentioned in the 
(a) Cap. 8. 17.  Acts of the Apostles, peculiar (say they) to those beginning times, S. Austin hath already here sufficiently answered the same, and yet in further surplusage he writeth thus hereof, 
(y) Tom. 9 in ep. joan. tract. 6. post med.  Is it expected that those upon whom hands are imposed for the obtaining of the holy Ghost, that they speak with tongues, or when we impose hands upon these Infants, doth every one of you observe whether they speak with tongues? when you see that they do not, is any of you so perverse (as Caluin now is) for to say that they have not received the holy Ghost?  
Now as concerning the effect of this Sacrament which is the geuing of the grace of the holy Ghost, S. Austin and the other Fathers do so generally teach the same, that according to M. 
(z) Eccles. pol. l. 5. sec. 66. p. 170.  Hooker, The Fathers every where do impute unto confirmation the gift or grace of the holy Ghost, not which maketh us first Christian men, but when we are made such, assisteth us in all virtue, armeth us against temptation and sin. And in this truth the Fathers are approved by D. 
(a) Modest examination. p. 192.  Covel, and by the Communion book turned into latin, and printed at London by Thomas Vautrolerius, Anno. 1574. In so much that the Protestants are herein reprehended by the 
(b) Nichols. in his plea of the innocent. p. 25. Ministers of Lincoln diocese in their abridgement. p. 76. Carthwright, in Whitg. defence. p. 726.  Puritans.   

Concerning the real presence, or Sacrament of the Eucharist. CHAPTER. 8.  

S. Austin teacheth the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Sacrament of the Eucharist. SECTION. 1.  
TOugh the opinions of Protestants in this weightiest point of religion are known to be many, and those very diverse and distracted amongst themselves, yet S. Austin most conformably to the Roman Church teacheth and believeth the true and real presence of Christ's sacred body and blood in the Sacrament: for writing upon those words of the Psalm, he was carried in his own hands, he demandeth, saying, 
(c) Tom. 8. in Psal. 33. concione. 1. versus fin. & see concione. 2. et ante expositionem Psalmi.  Brethren how can this b● done? In man who understandeth it? for who is carried in his own hands? A man may be carried in the hands of others, in his own hands no man is carried: How this may be understood in David according to the letter I find not, but in Christ I find it, for Christ was carried in his own hands, when commending his own body he said; This is my body, for than that his body was carried in his hands. Here note that these words, were carried in his hands (according to S. Austin) are literally understood of Christ carrying his body in his hands at the last supper, when he gave the Sacrament to his Disciples. Yea this saying is so unanswearable that the Protestant 
(d) Hist. Sacram. part. 1. l. 4. p. 292. 293.  Hospinian undertaking to set dowen the hyperbolical phrases of the Fathers, doth among others for such place this now saying of S. Austin.  
In like sort doth he affirm that the Communicants do receive blood contained in the Cup, no less truly than it was contained in the cup of the old Testament; for whereas Vrbicus held, that the old Testament was so changed, as that the beast gave place to bread, and blood to the Cup, S, Austin reciteth and reproveth his opinion saying, 
(e) Tom. 2 in ep. 86. ad Casul. post med.  this urbicus affirmeth old things so to be changed, that in Christ a beast should give place to bread etc. blood to the Cup etc. he affirmeth a beast to have given place to the bread, as not knowing, that then even the bread of proposition was accustomed to be placed upon the table of our Lord, and that now himself doth receive part of the body of the immaculate Lamb, he affirmeth the blood to give place to the Cup, not remembering that now himself receiveth blood in the Cup, therefore how much better and more fitly might he affirm old things to have passed, and new things so to be made in Christ that the Altar should give place to the Altar, sword to the sword, fire to fire, bread to bread, a beast to a beast, blood to blood: Affirming so that for the bread of proposition in the old law, we now have the bread of life, for their then sheep, the now Lamb of God, and for their then blood of brute beasts, the now blood of Christ. To which purpose he further saith, The people 
(f) Tom. 4. quaest. in Leuit. quaest. 57 prope sin.  (of the old law) were prohibited from the blood of the sacrifices which were offered for sins, but now by those sacrifices this one sacrifice is signified, by which is made true remission of sins, and yet not any is prohibited, not only for taking for nourishment (of the soul) the blood of this sacrifice, but rather those which will have life are exhorted to drink it. According to which also saith S. 
(g) Serm. de caena Domini. multo ante med.  Cyprian, The doctrine of this Sacrament is new etc. Christ being the teacher, this doctrine was first made known to the world, that Christians should drink blood, the drinking whereof the authority of the old law did most strictly forbid, for the law prohibiteth drinking of blood, the Gospel commandeth that it be drunk.   

S. Austin teacheth that the very wicked do truly receive the body of Christ. SECTION. 2.  
Saint Austin affirmeth that, 
(h) Tom. 7. de Baptismo. count. Don. l. 5. c. 8. post med.  It was the body and blood of our Lord even unto them to whom the Apostle said, he that eateth unworthily eateth judgement to himself. Again, 
(i) Tom. 9 in evang joan. tract. 27. versus fin.  Let us not eat the flesh of Christ and the blood of Christ only in the Sacrament, which many evil men do, but let us eat it to the participation of the spirit: And elsewhere he mentioneth the whicked, 
(k) Tom. 7. cont. lit. Petil. l. 2. c. 55. fine.  who eat and drink his body in the Sacrament: Now in these two last places, by his thus adding these words, in sacramento, in the Sacrament, he doth in prevention of our adversary's usual answer, that by the body is meant the Sacrament of his body, most directly to the contrary distinguish the body from the outward Sacrament. In which doctrine he is so full that he affirmeth that, 
(l) Tom. 7. cont. Fulgent. Donat. c. 6. circa med.  The traitor judas received the good body, and Simon Magus the good baptism of Christ. And he doubteth not to say further that, 
(m) Tom. 2. ep. 162. versus finem.  Our Lord suffered judas to receive amongst the innocent Disciples (quod fideles norunt) pretium nostrum, our price (or ransom) which the faithful know. This doctrine is so undeniable in S. Austin, that the Protest. 
(n) Compend. theol. l. 1. c. 8. p. 237. 238.  Echartus, allegeth divers of these sayings to this very purpose of wicked men's real receiving of Christ's body. And Bucer saith, 
(o) Scripta Anglicana. p. 679.  How often doth Austin write that even judas received the very body and blood of our Lord.   

S. Austin teacheth that great care is to be used lest any part of the Sacrament do fall upon the ground: And that it is to be received fasting; Besides which, he also teacheth and alloweth the use of holy bread now used by Catholics. SECTION. 3.  
WIth what great care do we observe (saith S. 
(p) Tom. 10. l. 50. homil. hom. 26. post init. And see serm. ad Infants.  Austin) when the body of Christ is ministered unto us, that nothing thereof do fall out of our hands upon the ground: In which he is so clear that this doctrine is acknowleged in him by the Prot. 
(q) Praxis de Ceremoniis. sec. 13. p. 10.  Crastovius. And yet with him agreeth herein 
(r) Catech. 5. prope. fin.  S. Ciril, saying, Take heed lest any thing of it fall from thee etc. As also 
(s) Lib. de Cor. mil.  Tertulian writing, we take it greavosly that any thing of our Chalice or bread do fall upon the earth. And the same is likewise taught by 
(t) Hom. 13. in Exod.  Origen. For which their doctrine and reverence towards this most holy Sacrament, they are confessed and reproved by the Protestant writers 
(u) Against Symbolising. part. 1. p. 148.  Parker, 
(x) Aphorism. de Eucharist. fol. 230.  Vadian, 
(y) Lib. ep. Suing. et Oecol. p. 690.  Oecolumpadius, and 
(z) Rejoinder to Bristol, and answer to Sanders p. 687.  Fulke.  
In like sort concerning the receiving of this Sacrament fasting, it is so evidently taught by S. 
(a) Tom. 2. ep. 118. c. 6. ante med.  Austin, that 
(b) Hist. sacram. part. 1. p. 48.  Hospinian confesseth that Austin clearly signifieth this fast to be an Apostolical tradition, and therefore necessary to be observed, for he saith, It pleaseth the holy Ghost, that in honour of so great a Sacrament, our Lord's body should enter into the mouth of a Christian before other meats. which practice was so general also in the greek Church, that Hammelmannus affirmeth that 
(c) De Apost. tradit. part. 3. l. 3. col. 814.  Theophilus accused Chrisostome under this title, that he debarred not from the Sacrament of the Eucharist, those that were not fasting etc. but Chrisost. taking this for a grievous crime doth greatly excuse himself in his Epistle etc. in these words, If this be true let my name be blotted out of the book of life. And the same Hammelmannus concerning this very point saith unto S. 
(d) Ibidem. col. 815.  Austin, Although thou Austin affirmest that the Church all over the world observeth this etc. yet I will bring the contrary against thee.  
The same also is acknowledged by 
(e) De Sacramentis. p. 803. 804.  Zepperus of S. Austin, who further there 
(f) Ibidem. p. 805.  reciteth sundry Fathers requiring like enjoined Chastity of married persons before their communicating.  
Lastly concerning holy bread S. Austin writeth that, 
(g) Tom. 7. de pec. mer. et remis. l. 2. c. 26. prope init.  Though that which the Catechumen receive be not the body of Christ, yet it is more holy than the meats wherewith we are nourished: And that the Catechumen might not receive the Sacrament (which S. Austin here calleth corpus Christi) appeareth by S. Austin in several 
(h) Ibidem. c. 2. ad tom. 9 in joan. tract. 11. & 96.  places. A truth so clear that D. 
(i) Against Heskins etc. l. 3. c. 23. p. 377.  Fulke answering thereto, termeth it, A superstitious bread given in S. Austin's time to those that were Catechumen, in steed of the Sacrament.   

S. Austin teacheth that the Sacrament of the Eucharist is to be adored: and other Fathers teach that it is to be invocated; and that Angels are present in time of the sacrifice. SECTION. 4.  
THough all Protestants, Caluinistes, or Suinglians, do generally disclaim in the Sacraments adoration, yet S. Austin writing upon that part of the Psalm, Adore ye the footstool of his feet, doth by this footstool understand earth, and by earth the flesh of Christ, saying, 
(a) Tom. 8. in Psal. 98. circa med.  Expounding what is the footstool of his feet, he saith, the earth is the footstool of his feet: I become doubtful, I fear to adoare the earth, lest he condemn me which made the heaven and the earth. Agine I fear not to adore the footstool of the feet of my Lord, because the Psalm saith unto me, adore ye the footstool of his feet. wavering I turn myself to Christ, because here I seek him and I find how the earth may be adored without sin, how without sin the footstool of his feet may be adored. for he took of earth, earth, because flesh is of earth, and of the flesh of Mary he took flesh. And because he walked here in that flesh, and gave us that flesh to eat for our salvation, now none eateth that flesh but first adoreth it. It is found how such a footstool of the feet of our Lord may be adored, and not only we may not sin by adoring, but sin by not adoring etc. Therefore when thou dost bow down & prostrate thyself to every earth, do not behold it as earth, but as that holy one whose footstool it is which thou adorest, for, for him thou dost adore. Now whereas D. Bilson answereth hereunto that 
(b) His true difference. part. 4. p. 536.  It is eaten with the spirit, adored with the spirit, yea the very eating of it is the adoring of it, S. Austin directly to the contrary distinguisheth eating from adoring, & maketh (as we do) adoring in priority to eating, saying, no man doth eat that flesh before that he adore it. Teaching withal there yet further, our adoring thereof not only in spirit, but also by external bowing down & prosternation: And all this not as to his body or flesh present to us always after one and the same manner in heaven, but as in regard of the diversity of time and place upon often celebration) ad terram quamlibet, even to every earth, or consecrated host which we behold. And in further discovery of this shift, S. Austin maketh further frequent mention of adoration even in the unworthy: for speaking of the rich proud men who do unworthily receive, acknowledgeth yet their external adoring, saying thereof, 
(c) Tom. 8. in Psal. 21. concione. 1. prope fin.  All the rich men of the earth have eaten and adored, the rich men of the earth have eaten the body of their Lord's humility, yet they are not filled to imitation as the poor, but yet they have adored. And again, 
(d) Tom. 2. ep. 120. ad Honoratum.  They are brought to the table of Christ and receive his body and blood, but they only adore. they are not filled, because they do not imitate etc. They come to the table, they eat and adore, but they are not filled, because they do not hunger & thirst justice. This doctrine of Adoration is so plainly S. Austin's that 
(e) Scripta Anglicana. p. 678.  Bucer confesseth that Austin writeth in many places that the body and blood of our Lord is to be honoured and received in the visible signs.  
In further explication of S. Austin's belief in this so material a point of faith, the answerable sayings of the other Fathers are very pertinent, as namely of S. Ambrose, S. Chrisostome, S. Nazianzen, and S. Basil, all of them living in S. Austin's age, and by him highly 
(f) Tom. 7. cont. julian. Pelag. l. 2. c. 2. 3. 4. 10.  commended. S. Ambrose then (as heretofore did S. Austin) 
(g) De spiritu sancto. l. 3. c. 12.  saith, by the footstool is understood the earth, and by earth the flesh of Christ, which we also at this day do adore, not mystically or in a mystery, but in mysterijs etc.) in the mysteries of the external elements of the Sacrament. Even as S. Austin in like manner is confessed by Hospinian to say, 
(h) Hist. sacram. part. 1. l. 5. p. 533. & see Gratian distinct. 2. Nos autem.  we do truly honour in the form of bread and wine which we see, things invisible, that is to say, flesh and blood. S. Chrisostome accordingly writeth, 
(i) In 1. Cor. hom. 24.  I will show thee upon earth (and therefore not in heaven only) that which is worthy of greatest honour etc. the kingly body in heaven is now set before thee on earth to be seen etc. And that which is the chiefest and principal of all, thou dost not only see it upon earth, but thou touchest it, and not only touchest it, but thou eatest it etc. And again, 
(k) Ibidem.  This body did the wise men worship in the manger etc. And with fear and much trembling adored it: Let us therefore imitate those strangers etc. Thou seest it not in the manger, but upon the Altar, not a woman holding it in her arms, but the Priest present. Yea S. Chrisostome admonisheth us to pray unto it, saying, 
(l) In 1. Cor. hom. 41.  We do not in vain celebrate the memory of the dead as the holy mysteries, or come beseeching the Lamb lying there. Agreeable to which saith also S. Basil, writing in behalf of unwritten 
(m) De spir. sanct. c. 27.  Traditions; who hath left in writing the words of invocation whiles the bread of the Eucharist and the Cup of benediction is showed?  
And in regard of the body thus honoured on the Altar, S. Chrisostome further teacheth that 
(n) De Sacerdotio. l. 6. c. 4. & hom. 1. de verbis Isaiae.  The Angels are present with the Priest, and that the place round about the Altar is filled for the honour of him that lieth thereon, the Angels compassing it about with reverence. And to prevent all usual answer of figurative or excessive speech, he further 
(o) De sacerdotio. l. 6. c. 4.  confirmeth the same by a vision thereof told to him as from an old man to whom many revelations were showed. And 
(p) In c. 1. Lucae.  S. Ambrose saith, doubt not but that the Angel is present when Christ is present, Christ is sacrificed etc. S. Gregory Nazianzen, reporteth that his sister Gorgonia being diseased 
(q) Orat. 11. de Gorgonia sorore.  prostrated herself before the Altar, and calling upon him who is worshipped on it etc. O miracle (saith he) she presently received health. This place is so evident that D. Fulke (though evading what he may) is yet enforced to affirm thereof that, 
(r) De successione Eccles. p. 230.  Gorgonia had the Eucharist on the Altar in great reverence, and peradventure not without superstition. And Hospinian termeth 
(s) Hist. sacram. part. 1. p. 477.  gorgonia's fact superstitious and wicked, as though the miracle here showed, or Nazianzens commending of her herein, would have been for superstition. But this truth is so confessed in the Father's o● that age, that 
(t) Examen. part. 2. p. 92.  Chemnitius allegeth at large the foresaid sayings of S. Austin, S. Nazianzen, and S. Ambrose, himself thereupon concluding with Luther, that the Eucharist is Sacramentum venerabile & adorabile, A venerable Sacrament & to be adored. In so much that Chemnitius saith of himself and other 
(u) Ibidem. & p. 94.  Lutherans, by such external confession (of the Sacraments adoration) we separate ourselves from the sacramentaries. And the very some is taught and confessed from the foresaid Fathers by 
(x) De Bapt. et Euchar. p. 472.  Chitraeus an other Lutheran.  
From this known adoration of Christ under the Sacramental forms of bread and wine, proceeded the mistaking of the Heathen, who (saith S. 
(y) Tom. 6. l. 20. contra Faust. Manich. c. 13. post med.  Austin) do believe that we do honour, instead of bread and the Chalice, Ceres, and Bacchus. And why were Christians thus charged to worship Ceres, and Bacchus, for the sacrmental bread and Cup, rather than Neptune, or some other like for the water in Baptism, were it not in respect of the honour peculiarly exhibited to the Eucharist, and not to Baptism.  
In like sort whereas in regard of the height of the mystery, & the foresaid honour so exhibited the fathers of that age were unwilling to expose the celebration thereof to the unworthy eyes of the Catechumen, whereof 
(z) In ep. 8. p. 80.  Beza saith, Most of the most ancient (writers) thought that Christinorum sacra, the sacred mysteries or sacrifices of christians were to be hid, not unlike to certain mysteries of Ceres, in so much that they would not admit the Catechumen to behold them. As also they were unwilling to expose the same to the profane scorn or misconceiving of the Heathen, in so much as they therefore, and especially 
(a) Tom. 8. in Psal. 33. & in Psal. 39 Tom. 10. in l. 50. homil. hom. 42. tom. 5. de civet. Dei. l. 10. c. 6. fine. Tom. de verbis Domini. in ser. 46. tom. 9 in joan. tract. 26. tom. 2. ep. 162.  S. Austin profess to speak thereof, not without special reservation, as Norunt fideles, the faithful know, norunt qui initiati sunt, they who are admitted (or professed) know, and such like. Whereupon Maximus a heathen writer (though acknowledging 
(b) Tom. 2. ep. 43. prope init.  one chief God without beginning doth, in regard of this private celebration of the Eucharist, wherein (as he conceived) Christians saw and worshipped Christ their God, present to them in secret places, demand to know from S. Austin, 
(c) Ibidem. ep. 43. post med.  what God that is which you Christians challenge as proper to yourselves, and dispose yourselves to see him present in secret places?  
Now whereas Protestants do generally object that Pope Honorius, who lived, Anno Domini. 1220. was the first that commanded or decreed the adoration of the Sacrament; the decree of 
(*) See cap. sanc. de celebratione Missatum.  Honorius only being that, The Priest should often teach his people that when at Mass the Host is elevated, they should reverently bow dowen, this then rather most evidently proveth the than before general received doctrine and practise thereof among the Clergy and only argueth the lay peoples then late beginning negligence in some places, and so far is this decree from all suspicion of innovation, that whereas the Roman Church had many then open adversaries, no one of them yet chargeth this Honorius with innovation.  
But to clear Honorius, of the least suspicion herein, before him lived Odo 
(d) In Synodicis constit. c. 5. de secram. Altaris.  Parisiensis. Anno. 1175. who adviseth that, The Say people be often admonished, that wheresoever they sbal see the body of our Lord to be carried, forthwith they bow their knees as to their Lord and Creator. Before Odo lived Algerus, Anno. Domini. 1060. who saith, 
(e) De sacram. Euchar. c. 3.  with this faith we adore the Sacrament as a divine thing, we speak unto it as a lively and reasonable thing, and pray; Lamb of God which taketh away sins have mercy upon us, because we believe not that which is seen, but that which truly is, Christ to be there. About these times lived the heathen Philosopher Aueroes, Anno. 1142. as witnesseth M. 
(f) Chronicle. fol. 208.  Couper, who testifieth so abundantly the general practice of this adoration in his time, for which he derided Christians, that the same is confessed & reported by M. 
(g) Against Heskins. p. 235.  Fulke, and by 
(h) De religione Chrstiana. l. 4. c. 18. p. 340.  Ramus. In so much that M. Sutliue relateth that, 
(i) Abridgement or, survey of Popery. c. 47. p. 295.  Aueroes of all religions accounted Popery to be most absurd, for that the Papists worship a piece of a Mass cake for their God, & yet presently devour him into their bellies. Before all these lived S. Damascene, whom 
(k) Cronic. p. 451.  Carrion chargeth, not only with Transubstantiation, but withal placeth, the adoration of the reserved and elevated bread within the second 500 years after Christ. Pratorius 
(l) De sacramentis. p. 288.  also not only telling how Damascene taught transubstantiation, but withal affirming that Anno. 735. Adoration of the bread followed it, as if Christ were there, saith he; whereto M. 
(m) Act. mon. p. 896.  Fox addeth, that if Honorius did not (as we have seen he did not) first begin the same them we cannot (saith he) find it out to come in by any other.  
And do but now lastly obsetue that whereas D. 
(n) Appeal. l. 4. c. 29. p. 566.  Morton doth praticularly recite all or most of these alleged premises, he doth yet in lieu of direct answer thereto, shuffle them of with other extravagant discourse, and deceipful comparing of phrases, answering nothing at all to the aknowledged testimonies of Odo, Algerus, Aueroes, Carion, and Praetorius, all which do evidently prove the observed practice of adoration, before the time of Honorius the 3. He also answereth nothing to that which is there inferred from the words of Honorius his decree proving adoration to have been then before general. He likewise answereth nothing to the foresaid and there cited testimonies of S. Austin, Ambrose, Chrisostome, and Nazianzen, nor to Chemnitius, so alleging them. He trifleth about Vrban the 4. who lived after Honorius the 3. He objecteth for authentical against us, Cassander, a condemned novelist, his alleged words yet being not against the adoration, but circumgestation of the Sacrament: and he finally endeavoureth to deceive and sophiticate his reader from external adoration, to adoration improperly taken, by deceitful comparing of phrases, which course but admitted, no point of religion can be so plainly delivered, but may thereby be evaded, seeing no word almost can be alleged which hath not sometimes by some of the Fathers, in some one or other matter and upon other occasion been improperly used.  
Wherefore I boldly provoke to the reader's judgement that none so stupid as hence discerneth not, that the known & unanswearable practice of this Adoration, perpetuated thus from before the objected time to the contrary of Honorius the 3. to the foresaid confessed much more ancient times, without any novel contradicted beginning thereof in the mean time known, is a most sure and saife interpreter of the other foresaid sayings alleged formerly in proof thereof from S. Austin, Chrisostome, and other the ancient Fathers of that age, and that as those Fathers did agree with the times following in semblable terms of Adoration, so likewise in one and the same intended truth and meaning thereof: Then which what can be produced more convincing and demonstrative in proof of the real presence, which the said adoration doth necessarily suppose.   

S. Austin teacheth that the Eucharist is a true and proper sacrifice, and that it is propitiatory even for the dead; And that it was offered upon Altars consecrated with oil, and the sign of the Cross. SETION. 5.  
IN further proof of S. Austin's professed doctrine concerning both real presence, and adoration, he affirmeth with us the Eucharist to be a sacrifice according to the order of Melchisadech, exhibited of Christ's body and blood offered. To which purpose he writeth, 
(o) Tom. 6. cont. adverse. leg. et Prophet. l. 1. c. 20. post init.  Those who read know what Melchisadech brought forth, when he blessed Abraham, they are also partakers of it, they see the like sacrifice now to be offered to God all over the world. Again, 
(p) Tom. 2. ep. 95. ad Innocent. post med.  Melchisadech bringing forth the Sacrament of our Lord's table knew to prefigure his eternal Preisthood. As also, 
(q) Tom. 5. de civet Dei. l. 18. c. 35. circa med.  we see this sacrifice by the Preisthood o● Christ according to the order of Melchisedech to be now offered to God in every place from the East to the west. This point of Melchisedec's sacrificing is so clear in S. Austin that D. 
(r) Appeal. p. 166.  Morton in his very objecting of him, yet acknowledgeth that S. Austin held that Melchisedeches offering was a sacrifice.  
Now this sacrifice of the new Testament according to the order of Melchisedech, S. Austin teacheth to be the sacrifice of the body & blood of christ saying most pregnantly of christ that, 
(s) Tom. 8. in Psal. 33. Con. 2. ante exposit. Psal. post med.  Of his body & blood he or dained a sacrifice according to the order of Melchisedech. As also 
(t) Tom. 5. de civet. Dei. l. 17. c. 20. post. med.  what more credible to speak, then that which pertaineth to the participation of this table, which the Priest himself th● mediator of the new Testament exhibiteh according to the order of Melchisedech of his own body and blood; for this sacrifice hath succeeded to all the sacrifices of the 〈◊〉 Testament. Again reporting, how 
(u) Ibidem. l. 22 c. 8. ante med.  one whose house had suffered hurt by wicked spirits, requested a Priest to go thither, whereupon (saith S. Austin) one went and offered there the sacrifice of the body of Christ, praying earnestly that that trouble might cease, (and) God forthwith taking pity, it ceased. And as here he calleth it the sacrifice of Christ's body, so elsewhere he calleth it, the sacrifice of the mediator, saying, 
(x) Tom. 3. Enchirid. c. 110. initio.  It is not to be denied, that the souls of the dead are relieved by the piety of their living friends, when the sacrifice of the mediator is offered for them. A saying also so plain for Purgatory, that for such it is confessed and rejected by 
(y) In his Treatise upon S. Aust. Enchirid. in c. 110. fol. 310.  Danaeus. It is also called The sacrifice of our price or redemption, for S. Austin speaking of his mother Monica then dead, he saith, 
(a) Tom. 1. l. 9 confess. c. 12. circa med.  when the sacrifice of our price was offered for her etc. And again, 
(b) Ibidem. c. 13. circa med.  she desired that she might be remembered at thy Altar etc. where she knew the holy oblation to be given wherewith the band it canceled which was against us. He calleth it also, 
(c) Tom. 5. de civet. Dei. l. 8. c. 27. ante med.  The sacrifice of Christians, 
(d) See before here at t.  which succeeded all the sacrifices of the old Testament: whereof he also further writeth, that, 
(e) Tom. 7. de bapt. count. Don. l. 3. c. vlt. prope fin.  Those whom our Lord cleansed from the leper he sent back to the same Sacraments, that with the priests they might offer for themselves sacrifice, because the sacrifice which he would have to be celebrated in the Church for them all, had not yet succeeded.  
S. Austin also avoucheth, that this sacrifice of Christ's body and blood is propitious or available for the souls in Purgatory, his words are, 
(f) Tom. 3. in Enchirid. c. 110. post med.  when therefore the sacrifices whether of the Altar, or of the Alms, are offered for all the dead that are Baptised, they are thankes-gevinges for those that are very good, and they are propitiations (or sacrifices to appease God's displeasure) for those that are not very evil: These words are so convincing that 
(g) De sacrificio M●ssatico. l. 2. c. 7. p. 525. And see the Centurists. cent. 5. c. 6. col. 674.  Hutterus excusing Cyprian's objected words of sacrifice for the dead, as to be but meant of the sacrifice of prayer; yet coming next after to answer this place of S. Austin, in steed of all evasion it is so direct and plain for external sacrifice for the dead, that as enforced he saith thereof, In aeternum defendi non potest, it can never be de●ended; And therefore immediately after he provoketh to the law and testimony of Esay. 8.20. having affirmed before that, In this present question (of sacrifice) Austin doth not agree with himself. But S. Austin proceedeth yet further teaching this to be a tradition of the universal Church, saying, 
(h) Tom. 10. de verbis Apost. serm. 32. c. 2. initio.  It is not to be doubted but that the dead are helped by the prayers of the holy Church, and by the wholesome sacrifice, and Alms, which are given for their souls, that our Lord may deal more mercifully with them than their sins have deserved. for the universal Church observeth this as delivered from their forefathers, that those should be prayed for, and the sacrifice remembered to be offered for them who die in the communion of the body and blood of Christ, when they are remembered in their place at the time of the sacrifice etc. It is not to be doubted, but that these things do profit the dead, but such, who have so lived before their death, that these things might be profitable to them after their death. for su●h as d●e without faith, which worketh by charity, and the Sacraments, in vain are these works of piety bestowed upon them by their friends etc. Therefore no new merit's are obtained for the dead, when their friends do any good for them, but their own merits going before, these are made to follow. Lastly his advice is that, as for such things which help the souls of the dead, as sacrifices, prayers, Alms, they bestow for them more diligently, instantly, abundantly which being dead in flesh not in spirit, they love not only carnally but spiritually: This place is so pregnant for our purpose that it is recited, confessed, and rejected by 
(i) De origine erroris. c. 9 fol. 223.  Bullinger. Lastly S. Austin teacheth that this sacrifice is offered upon Altars saying, 
(k) Tom. 10. de sanctis ser. 11. prope init.  The body of our Lord is offered upon the Altar. And 
(l) Tom. 5. de civet Dei. l. 22. c. 10. circa med.  we erect Altars in which we sacrifice to one God. Affirming further that, 
(m) Tom. 10. de sanctis, ser. 19 prope. fin.  Altars are consecrated with the sign of the Cross: And that 
(n) Tom. 10. ser. de tempore. 255. initio.  The stone is hallowed or anointed, upon which the divine sacrifices are consecrated unto us. Yea such reverence he bore to Altars, that saith he, 
(o) Ibidem.  We celebrate this day the consecration of the Altar. And the use of 
(p) Concil. Agathens. can. 14.  Altars was such in this age of S. Austin's, that the Centurists say, 
(q) Cent. 5. col. 744. Osiander. cent. 5. l. 4. c. 18. p. 482. & l. 1. c. 30. p. 123.  they begun in this age etc. to consecreate Altars of stone, pouring upon them Chrism as is decreed in the 26. Canon of the Council Eupaunense.    

Concerning the Sacrament of penance: wherein auricular confession to priests, imposed penance, and days of pardon are taught by S. Austin, and other Fathers. CHAPTER. 9  
AS concerning Penance, S. Austin teacheth, that it importeth a further penalty then only repentance or grief of mind for sin committed, and that therefore it extendeth itself also to external accomplishments, consisting in Alms, fasting, and other like works of penance: In which respect he describeth 
(a) Tom. 4. de vera et falsa paenit. c. 8. post med.  Penance to be a certain revenge of him that sorroweth, punishing in himself that which he is sorry for having committed.  
This penance according to S. Austin is diversely imposed, 
(b) Tom. 3. in Enchirid. c. 65. initio.  according to the measure (or diversity) of every one's sin: And, 
(c) Ibidem. And see council. Carthag. 3. can. 31.  times of penance (saith he) are rightly appointed by them who govern the Church. And whereas M. 
(d Synopsis. p. 504. Cal●in. Institut. l. 4. c. 15. sec. 4. etc. 19 sec. 17.  Wil thinketh that the remission given us in Baptism doth suffice for all the sins committed after Baptism, and therefore that the Penance, now entreated of, should be unnecessary. S. Austin to the contrary writeth that 
(e) Tom. 2. ep. 23. ad Bonif. multo ante med.  If the child with the increase of age become evil, then beginneth he to have his own sins, which are not taken away by regeneration (or baptism) but are cured by another medicine: which in an other place he explaineth to be Penance, saying, 
(f) Tom. 6. l 2. de adulterinis coniug. c. 16. prope intium.  If murder be committed by a Catechumen. it is washed away by baptism, but if it be committed by one that is baptised, it is healed by penance and reconciliation.  
In like sort those words 
(g) joan. 20.23.  of Ch●ist, whose sins you forgeue, th●y are forgiven, whose sins you retain, they are retained, in S. Austin's judgement do extend further than to our private repentance for saith he, 
(h) Tom. 10. l. 50: homil. hom. 49. c. 3. post med;  do ye such penance as is done in the Church etc. Let no man say to himself, I do it secretly, I do it with God, God who pardoneth me knoweth that I do it with my heart, for then without cause it had been said, what ye shall louse in earth, shall be loused in heaven, then without cause are the keys given to the Church of God, we make voide the Gospel of God the words of Christ, we promise to ourselves that which he denyeth.  
Hence also it is that S. Austin maketh the Priest the delinquents judge, saying, 
(i) Tom. 4. de vera & falsa paenit. c. 20. ante med.  Let the spiritual judge take heed etc. for he ought to know what he is to judge, the power of a judge requireth this. And again, 
(k) Tom. 5. de civet. Dei. l. 20. c. 9 ante med.  No judgement given seemeth better to be taken, then that which is said, whatsoever ye sbal bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven. yea he ennableth the spiritual judge, the Priest, as truly to louse or forgeue the sinner upon his repentance, as in type thereof Lazarus was upon his restoring to life, loused and let go, for thus he writeth, 
(l) Tom. 9 in joan. tract. 49. in c. joan. 11. versus fin. Tom. 8. in Psal. 101. con. 2. post init.  when thou confessest, thou goest forth, for what is it to go forth, but as it were by going forth to be cleared from hidden sins? But that thou mayest confess, God causeth crying with a loud voice, that is calling with great grace. Therefore when the dead man came forth yet bound, confessing and yet guilty, that his sins might be loused, ou● Lord said to the ministers, louse him and let him go. what is this, louse him and let him go? Whatsoever you shall louse upon earth, shall also be loused in heaven. As also, 
(m) Tom. 9 in joan. tract. 22. circa med. And see Tom. 4. de vera & falsa paenit. c. 10.  before he confessed he was hidden, but when he confesseth, he cometh forth out of darkness to light, and when he hath confessed, what is said to the ministers? That which was said at the grave of Lazarus, louse him and let him go, how? It is said to the Apostles the ministers, whatsoever ye shall louse upon earth, shall be loused also in heaven.  
In further explanation yet of S. Austin's judgement in this so weighty a point, we may see also the agreeable sayings of Pacianus, and S. Ambrose, from whom S. Austin may not be thought for to descent: whereas then the novatians erroneously taught concerning such as fell in persecution that, 
(n) Hist. t●●partit. l. 2. c. 13.  They were to be invited to penance, but the hope of forgiveness they were to expect not from the priests, but from God alone who hath power to forgeue sin; Against this Protestant like error of the novatians, Pacianus saith, 
(o) In ep. 1. ad Symphronianum.  Thou affirmest that God only can do this, it is true, but that also which he doth by his Priests, is his power, for what is that which he saith to the Apostles, whatsoever ye shall bind upon earth etc. Answearably to which writeth S. Ambrose of the same novatians thus, 
(p) Lib. 1. de paenit. c. 2.  But they say they give reverence to our Lord to whom only they reserve the power of forgiving sins, but to none do they greater injury etc. for seeing our Lord said in his Gospel etc. whose sins you forgeue they are forgiven etc. who doth more honour, he who obeyeth the commandments, or he that resisteth? And 
(q) Ibidem. c. 7.  why do ye baptise, if by man sins may not be forgiven? This error was so certianly the novatians, that for such it is reported and confessed by 
(*) Examen. part. 2. p. 193.  Chemnitius.  
Hence also it is, that S. Austin so often persuadeth, not only to Confession, but also against all shamefastness in hindrance thereof, which argueth a further Confession then only private to God, premonishing withal to provide in time, and setting forth the great danger, if so by the deferring they should dye before the priests absolution received: Of these points than he writeth thus, 
(r) Tom. 8. in Psal. 66. Post med.  Thou fearest to confess, who not confessing yet cannot be hidden: Thou shalt be condemned holding thy peace, who confessing might have been freed. And a little after, be sorrowful before thou confessest, being confessed rejoice, now thou shalt be healed. The conscience of of him that doth not confess had gathered corruption, the imposthume swollen, it vexed thee, it did not suffer thee to be at rest. The Physician applieth the plastars of words, and sometime cutteth etc. Acknowledge thou the hand of the Physician, confess, let it go out in confession, and let all the corruption run out. Again, 
(s) Tom. 10. l. 50. homil. hom. 12. init.  We ought to confess our sins daily and humbly, not only to God, but also to holy men and those that fear God etc. For God will not therefore that we confess our sins, as though he could not know them, but because the devil desireth this, that he may find what to object against us before the tribunal of the eternal judge etc. Therefore against his enchantments and decepts, wherwit he doth now hinder our return let us take most wholesome precepts against him, who now will hinder in us the confession of sin. Yea he adviseth us to be mindful hereof in time of health, 
(t) Ibidem. hom. 41. post. med.  because (if a man) shall prolong it to the end of his life, he knoweth not whether he can receive penance, and confess his sins to God & the Priest. To which purpose his council further is, that man 
(u) Tom. 4. de vera et falsa paenit. c. 10. initio.  make known his life to God by the Priest, let him prevent the judgement of God by confession. And again, 
(x) Tom. 9 l. 2. de visit. infirmorum. c. 4. paulo ante med.  There are some who think it sufficient for their salvation, if to God alone, to whom nothing is hid etc. they confess their sins, for they will not, or they are a shamed, or they disdain to show themselves to the priests etc. but I would not have thee deceived with that opinion etc. for his judgement is to be undergone whom our Lord doth not disdain to be his Vicar. As also, 
(a) Ibidem. c. 5. ante med.  If thou dost remember the places and times in which thou hast sinned, and with whom thou hast sinned they are to be told.  
Concerning shamefastness, a great tentation against confession of sins, S. Austin writeth that, 
(b) Tom. 8. in Psal. 50. multo ante med.  there are man's who are not ashamed to sin, (but) are ashamed to do penance; O incredible madness, thou art not ashamed of the wound itself, yet thou art ashamed of the binding thereof etc. Therefore fly to the Physician, do penance. For blushing (saith he 
(c) Tom. 4. de vera & fall. paenit. c. 10. prope initium.  elsewhere) obtaineth part of remission etc. for in this that himself telleth to the Priest, and overcometh shame with the fear of offence, the sin is pardoned. And speaking of Cities besieged, who joined Baptism and penance together for their relief, he telleth how that in such common danger there is 
(d) Tom. 2. ep. 180. ad Honoratum. circa med. and see tom. 6. de adult. coniug. l. 1. c. 28. fine. & tom. 10. 50. homil. hom. 41.  concourse of people of all ages, some desiring Baptism, others reconciliation, others also the doing of penance itself &c. where if the ministers be wanting what destruction followeth them who die, either not baptised, or bound, etc. but if the ministers be present etc. some are baptised, others reconciled etc.  
This absolution or reconciliation was given by the Priest with imposition of hands, and enjoined penance, for thus the 4. Council of Carthage (whereat S. Austin was present and subscribed) decreed that, 
(e) Cap. 76.  he who in his sickness desired penance etc. should be reconciled by imposition of hands etc. If he recovered etc. he should be subject to the appointed laws of penance, as long as the Priest who gave him penance shall think good. This Canon is confessed and approved by 
(f) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 15. & see the Council, can. 78.  Osiander. And the Centurists do acknowledge for the practice of this age that, 
(g) Cent. 5. c. 6. col. 665.  Penitents were absolved with imposition of hands. To which purpose also S. Austin adviseth the sinner that He 
(h) Tom. 4. de vera & falsa paenit. c. 15. prope initium.  put himself wholly in the power of the judge, in the judgement of the Priest, reserving nothing to himself, that he may be ready to do all things for the recovering the life of his soul, which he shall command. And his further advice is that, 
(i) Tom. 10. de sanctis. serm. 39 post med.  we seek confession with pure heart, and perform our penance given by the priests. Of which penance the third Council of Carthage decreed, that 
(k) Can. 31.  by the sentence of the Bishop times of penance should be appointed to penitents according to the difference of their sins.  
This Penance or temporary punishment was so enjoined, as that sometimes also it was remitted by indulgence or pardon, for so the 4. Carthage 
(l) Can. 82.  Council (whereto S. Austin subscribed) decreed, that penitents should kneel down even upon the days of pardon. And Innocentius who (in regard of the known corresspondents between him and S. Austin) is no obscure interpriter of his doctrine, affirmeth likewise 
(m) Ep. 1. ad Decentium. c. 7.  of penitents etc. who do penance etc. that the custom of the Roman Church showeth, that the Thursday before Eeaster pardon was to be given them. In which belief S. Chrisostome was so full as that the Centurists confess that, 
(n) Cent. 5. c. 6. col. 692.  Chrisostome affirmeth that there are days of pardon and Indulgence. And to omit S. 
(o) Lib. 3. ep. 15. 16. 18. & Concil. Ancyran. Can. 5 & Concil. 1. Nicen. can. 11.  Cyprian, teaching pardon of penance enjoined. M. Bel acknowledgeth that 
(p) Survey of Popery, part. 3. c. 11. p. 492.  Pardons sealed with lead, called the Pope's Bulls were granted by Pope Adrian. Anno Domini. 772. S. Gregory also is most expressly reprehended and charged 
(q) Symonds upon the revelations. p. 84. Bale in acts pontiff. Roman. p. 46.  for granting pardons to such as frequented Churches on set days. Pantaleon 
(r) Cronic. p. 48.  to this end alleging S. Gregory's own writings.  
But to conclude, our doctrine of penance and confession is so clearly taught by the fathers of those Primitive times, that M. Simondes' chargeth 
(s) Upon the revel. p. 57  Leo the 1. with auricular confession: The 
(t) Cent. 3. c. 6. col. 127.  centurists confessing the same of other more ancient Fathers. A doctrine also in itself so true, that 
(u) In Apol. confess. Augustan. art. 13. de numero. sacram. fol. 161.  Melancton thinketh it easy to judge, which are properly Sacraments etc. Therefore (saith he) Baptism, the Lords supper, Absolution, are truly Sacraments etc. with whom agreeth Luther saying, At the first I denied 7. Sacraments and only placed 3. for the time, Baptism, Penance, bread etc. And the like doctrine is taught by 
(x) Loc. come. Tom. 1 fol. 305. Altham. in Conciliat. loc. script. pugn. loc. 191. fol. 211. & loc. 195. fol. 219. Spang. in marga●ita theol. p. 116. 117.  Sarcerius, Althamerus, Spangburgius, all of them Protestant writers.   

Concerning the Sacrament of Extreme unction; wherein is proved the same to be a Sacrament: And used in the Primitive Church. CHAPTER. 10.  
THough the Sacrament of Extreme unction be generally impugned by Protestants, yet S. Austin with us teacheth the same saying of the sick. 
(a) Tom. 9 de rectitudine Cathol. conuersationis. post init.  Let him ask of the Church holy Oil wherewith his body may be anointed according to the Apostle. James. 5. And again 
(b) Tom. 10. ser. de temp. 215. circa med. & see tom. 9 de visit. Infirm. l. 2. c. 4. initio. Origen, hom. 2. in Leuit. Prosper. de praedict. l. 2. c. 29. Chrisost. de Sacerd. l. 3. c. 6.  Let him anoint his body, that it may be fulfilled in him which is written, is any man sick? Let him bring in the priests, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil. But in further explication of S. Austin's judgement, Innocentius Bishop of Rome then living with S. Astine, upon more casual occasion of a demand propounded to him, answereth concerning the fore mentioned saying of 
(c) Ep. ad Eugubinum.  S. james, c. 5.14. without doubt (saith he) it is to be understood of the faithful being sick, who may be anointed whth the holy oil of Chrism. Affirming yet further concerning, not the ministering but the receiving thereof, that Not only priests in their sickness, but also Laye-people in theirs may have the benefit and use thereof. This is so clear in Innocentius that Bale saith, 
(d) Acta Romanorum Pontif. p. 31. & in his pageant of Popes. fol. 26.  Of the annoyling of the sick Innocentius hath made a Sacrament. Agreeably to whom 
(e) Speculum. pontiff. p. 33.  Szegedin also writeth that, Innocentius the 1. and Faelix the 4. have made a Sacrament of the annoyling of the sick.  
And for this very cause the epistle of S. james which the Fathers and we allege in behalf of Extreme unction, is rejected by Luther in these words, 
(f) Tom. 2. Witteberg. de captivit. Babylon. fol. 86.  But I say, if in any place it be foolishly written in this especially &c. but if it were the epistle of james the Apostle, I would say that it were not lawful for an Apostle by his own authority to institute a Sacrament etc. for this belongeth to Christ alone. And the self same is defended by 
(g) De Sacramentis. c. 7. p. 95.  Hunnius. Lastly the ancient practice of this Extreme unction was so undoubted in the Primitive Church, that M. Whitaker confesseth respectively thereof saying, 
(h) Contra Duraeum. l. 8, p. 650.  I acknowledge the superstitious custom of this annoyling to have remained longer in the Church then was meet.   

Concerning the Sacrament of Orders: wherein S. Austin teacheth that they are properly a Sacrament, given only by a Bishop, who hath authority to excommunicate even the dead: and that priests may not marry, or be one that was Bigamus. CHAPTER. 11.  
Saint Austin comparing Baptism with Order, and proving that Orders once received cannot be lost no more than Baptism, giveth for the reason hereof that, 
(i) Tom. 7. cent. epist. Parmen. l. 2. c. 13. ante med.  both are Sacraments, and both are given to man with certain consecrition, that, when he is baptised, this, when he is ordained. And again, 
(k) Ibidem. post med. and see Tom. 7. de bapt. contra Don. l. 1. c. 1. circa med. And Tom. 6. de bono coniugali. c. 24. ante med.  for if both be Sacraments, which no man doubteth, why is not that lost and this is? neither Sacrament is to be injured.  
But S. Austin not only thus plainly acknowledgeth Orders to be a Sacrament, but withal reprehendeth (and as it were pointeth at) the promiscuous tumultuary parety and ordination now affected by the Puritan Clergy, saying of certain heretics that 
(l) Tom. 5. ex quaest. vet. et novi Testam. q. 110. ante med.  They trouble the Order begun by Peter the Apostle, and observed even until this time by the continuance of Bishop's succeeding one another, challenging to themselves Order without beginning, that is, professing a body without a head, whereupon it is meet to call their Seathe chair of pestilence.  
S. Austin likewise affirmeth 
(m) Tom. 6. de haeresibus. haer. 53. de Arianis circa med.  the equaling of Presbyters with Bishops to be the condemned error of the Arians, in so much as Danaeus confesseth that, 
(n) De haeresibus. c. 53. fol. 175.  Epiphanius, Austin, and Isidore, have enrouled the Arians within the Catalogue of heretics, in that they made the dignity of a Priest & a Bishop alike. And the same is yet further confessed of Austin, and Epiphanius, by M. 
(o) In his 2. reply. part. 1. p. 619.  Carthwright.  
And whereas M. Whitaker affirmeth that 
(p) Contra Duraeum. l. 9 p. 813.  Presbyters are named priests, not properly but improperly; S. Austin expounding certain words of the Apocalypse affirmeth to the contrary that, 
(q) Tom. 5. de civet. Dei. l. 20. c. 10. post med.  They are not only understood of Bishops and Presbyters, who now in the Church are properly called priests.  
He further likewise teacheth against the Puritans, the civil jurisdiction of Bishops, whereof M. Whitguift concludeth from sundry his sayings by him alleged that, 
(r) In his defence. tract. 23. p. 771. 772.  Austin heareth civil cases, Austin a judge in worldly matters, Austin thinketh that the holy Ghost hath bound Bishops unto civil cases, to which purpose he also produceth other Fathers, who with S. Austin are further reprehended for this very cause by 
(s) In omnes Pauli epistolas, in 1. Cor. 6.4. p. 254.  Caluin.  
S. Austin likewise mentioneth the Bishop's blessing in these words, 
(t) Tom. 5. de civet. Dei. lib. 22. c. 8. ante med.  we rise and receiving the Bishop's blessing departed. yea he reprehendeth the Pelagians for impugning the same, saying, 
(u) Tom. 2. ep. 90. ad Innocent. post med. see Sozomen. hist. l. 8. c. 18. Chrisost. orat. 4. cont. judaeos. Conc. 3. Aurelian. Can. 22. et Regiense. can. 4. et Agathen. c. 30. & Bode, hist. l. 5. c. 4. & 6.  by the contention of these Pelagians, our bl●ssing is contradicted, that so we may be thought to speak in vain over the people.  
He reserveth as peculiar to Bishops the Consecration of virgins, and Chrism, for in the third Council of Carthage (whereat S. Austin was present and subscribed) it was decreed, 
(x) Can. 36.  that a Priest should not consecrate Virgins without the advice of the Bishop, and that he should never make (or hollow) Chrism. And the like reservation of Orders to be given only by a Bishop is defined in the fourth 
(y) Can. 3. & 4.  Carthage Council, and so confessed by D. 
(z) Sermon at Lambeth. p. 40.  Downham.  
S. Austin attributeth the power of excommunication as appertaining (not as 
(a) Carthwright in his 2. reply. part. 2. p. 77. 78. etc.  Puritan think unto the Presbytery or Congregation but) to the Bishop, himself to such purpose excommunicating 
(b) Tom. 2. ep. 187. ad Bonif. fine.  Bonifacius, and thereupon affirmeth 
(c) Tom. 7. de corrept. et gratia. c. 15.  the Episcopal judgement to be the greatest penalty in the Church: teaching likewise that, 
(d) Tom. 2. ep. 118. ad januar. prope initium.  by the authority of the Bishop every one (offending) ought to be removed from the Altar to do penance, and by the same authority reconciled again. A point so clear that D. Whitwhiguift proveth from S. Austin the Carthage Counsels & others, that 
(e) Defence. tract. 18. p. 676. 677.  the Bishop alone did excommunicate.  
Yea S. Austin was so full herein, that he threatened excommunication in case of desert, even to those that were dead, in these words, 
(f) Tom. 2. ep. 50 ad Bonif. post init.  If those things should be true which are objected by them against Caecilianus, and could at any time be showed unto us, we would excommunicate him even being dead: whereof also report the Centurists that, 
(g) Cent. 5. c. 6. col. 666.  The severity of this discipline went so far, that it spared not the dead. So Arsacius successor to Chrisostome was Excommunicated after his death etc. after the same manner Austin saith of Caecilianus, that he would excommunicate him though he were dead, if those things could be proved which were objected against him by the authorities, in ep. ad Bonifacium. 50. And according to this Innocentius (living in the same age with S. Austin) saith, 
(h) In ep. ad Archadium.  We do excomunicate Arsacius even after his death whom you in steed of great john brought into the Episcopal throne; And this is so certain that it is recorded and acknowledged by the 
(i) Cent. 5. c. 6. col. 663.  Centurists. Now answearably to this practice of S. Austin in the Primitive Church, the Catholic Church of latter times hath proceeded to take up & burn the dead bodies of some condemned heretics, as of Wicclife, Bucer, and others; which though by our adversaries it be tragically objected and amplified, yet is it by themselves upon the like ground & occasion accordingly put in practice, for Osiander reporteth that 
(k) Cent. 16. l. 2. c. 4. p. 120. & l. 3. c. 32. p. 673.  David George dying at Basil, some years after his death his heresy was laid open, wherefore the senate of Basil commanded that his dead carcase should be taken out of the grave, and should be burned by the executioner or hangman.  
S. Austin likewise acknowledgeth the several orders or degrees of Deacons, Subdeacons, Acolites, Exorcists, etc. for these are not only all 
(l) Can. 4.5.6.7.  named in the fourth Carthage Council, but also the very ceremonies yet questionable and appertaining to these times are there appointed, as namely to the 
(m) Can. 5.  Subdeacon, the Patten, Chalice, Cruet full of water & towel for the priests hands: to the 
(n) Can. 6.  Acolite a waxed candle, that he may know himself appointed to lighten the Church lights, and 
(o) Can. 7. & see Aug. Tom. 5. de civet. Dei. l. 10. c. 22. initio. englished. p. 389.  for the Exorcist a book of Exorcisms. In so much as Osiander reciting the several Canons hereof, condemneth them for 
(p) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 4. & 5.  trifling and superstitious. And whereas Protestants pretend Exorcism to be a miraculous gift peculiar to the Church's beginning times, S. Austin to the contrary placeth it among the other foresaid Ecclesiastical Orders; decreeing yet further also to the contrary that 
(q) Concil. 4. Carth. can. 90.  The Exorcists do daily impose hands upon those who are possessed; for which he with that Canon is reproved by Osiander, saying, 
(r) Cent. 4. l. 1. c. 1. p. 17.  It hath neither command nor promise in the Scripture.  
S. Austin also teacheth (to the dislik of our adversaries) that who so married a widow, or had himself been twice married, should not be afterwards made Priest, for thus he writeth, 
(s) Tom. 6. de bono coniug. c. 18. prope init. And see Tom. 3. de Eccles. dog. c. 92. & Concil●. 4. Carthag. can. 69.  Dispensatorem Ecclesia non licet ordinari etc. It is not lawful for a minister of the Church to be ordained, unless he be the husband of one wife, which they understood more subtly, who think that neither is he to be ordained, who being a Catechumen, or a Pagan, hath had an other wife, for here is treated of the Sacrament, not of sin, seeing in Baptism all sins are forgiven etc. And As the woman, though a Catechumen, if she be deflowered, cannot after Baptism be consecrated amongst the virgins of God, so it seemeth not absurd that he who hath had more wines than one hath not committed any sin, but hath lost a certain rule of the Sacrament, not necessary for the merit of good life, but for the seal of Ecclesiastical ordination. This saying is so recited, confessed, and reprehended by 
(t) De Poligamia. 213. 214.  Beza. And where the like is decreed of Bigamy being a let to Preisthood by the 4. Carthage Council, Osiander condemneth the said Council for 
(u) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 14.  superstitious herein.  
Lastly he teacheth that priests may not marry; and so in the 2. Council of Carthage it was thus decreed, 
(x) Can. 2.  It hath pleased us to decree, that the sacred Bishops, & priests of God etc. should be continent in all etc. that so what the Apostles have taught, and antiquity itself hath observed, we keep; by all the Bishops it was said, it pleased us all, that Bishops, priests, and Deacons, or such as handle the Sacraments, kepers of chastity shall contain themselves even from their wives. And the same is decreed in the third 
(y) Can. 17. & 25.  Carthage Council, and for such acknowledged by 
(z) Cent. 4. l. 4. c. 24. p. 526.  Osiander. As also by the 5. Carthage Council, where the African Fathers renew the decree thereof, 
(a) Can. 3.  secundum propria statuta, according to their own former decrees: In so much as 
(b) In ep. ad Romanos. p. 365.  Melancthon specially reprehendeth this first Council, and Osiander avoucheth that, 
(c) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 33. p. 156. And see Aug. Tom. 6. de adulterinis coniug. l. 2. c. 20. circa med. & Tom. 10. ad frattes in Eremo. ser. 37. & Possidonius in vita August. c. 26.  It plainly fighteth with the doctrine of Paul.   

Concerning the Sacrament of Matrimony taught by S. Austin: And that the innocent party upon Adultery may not marry another; and of the priests blessing after marriage. CHAPTER. 12.  
THat marriage should be a sign of the conjunction of Christ with his Church, is so inducing to prove it a Sacrament, that therefore such signification thereof is devyed by the Puritans, as M. 
(a) In his 2. part of the answer c. 17. p. 112. & p. 147. & see the survey of the book of common prayer p. 132.  Hutton relateth who yet, allegeth against them Chemnitius and the cenfession of Wittenberg assenting to have marriage called a Sacrament.  
Now S. Austin in this respect writeth, 
(b) Tom. 7. de nupt & concupis. l. 1. c. 10. initio.  A certain Sacrament of marriage is commended to the faithful that are married, whereupon the Apostle saith, husband's love your wives as Christ loved the Church. This doctrine is so clear in S. Austin & the other Fathers, that M. Fulke granteth that 
(c) In Rhem. test. in Ephes. 5. 32. sec. 5.  Austin and some other of the ancient Fathers take it, that Matrimony is a great mystery of the conjunction of Christ and his Church. yea S. Austin expressly termeth the marriage of Christians a Sacrament, saying, 
(d) Tom. 7. de nupt. & concupis. l. 1. c. 17. initio.  In marriage let the good things thereof be loved, Children, Faith, Sacrament etc. A Sacrament which the husbands, separated and commiting adultery do not lose. And, 
(e) Tom. 6. de bono coniug. c. 24. init.  The good of marriage etc. for as much as concerneth the people of God, is in the sanctity of the Sacrament. As also, 
(f) Ibidem. c. 18. post med.  In our marriages the sanctity of the Sacrament is of greater worth than the fruictfulnes of the womb. And again, 
(g) Tom. 4. de fide & oper. c. 7. prope initium.  not only the bond of marriage, but also the Sacrament is so commended, that it is not lawful for a husband to give his wife to another. In these & sundry other such sayings S. Austin distinguishing the marriage of Christians, from the marriage of the Gentiles, he maketh our marriage a Sacrament not otherwise then in respect of Christ and his Church, & their other marriage no Sacrament, which argueth that he used the word Sacrament properly.  
It is likewise the doctrine of S. Austin, that in case of divorce upon adultery, the innocent party may not marry again, for thus he writeth 
(h) Tom. 10. in l. 50. hom●l. hom. 49. post init.  By reason of only fornication it is lawful to dismiss a wife committing adultery, but it is not lawful to marry another whiles she liveth. And again, 
(i) Tom. 6. de adult. coniug. l. 1. c. 21. fin. & de bono coniug. c. 7. and de adult. coniug. l. 1. c. 8. l. 2. c. 4. & 9 l. 11. c. 21. 22. 24.  He that dismisseth his wife except for fornication, causeth her to commit adultery, but if for this cause he dismiss her, let him so remain himself. And agreeably to this, the 
(k) Can. 17.  Millevitan Council (whereat S. Austin was present) is so plain herein that it is therefore reproved by 
(l) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 33. p. 151. Pelarg. in his disput and ●●●●d to his schola ●●dei. fol. 5 〈◊〉  Osiander, and Pelargus. Melancthon also acknowledging that, 
(m) In ep. ad Rom. in c. 14. p. 367.  The Millevitan Council, at which Austin was present &c. decreed concerning divorce, that the innocent person should not marry again; whereof also say the 
(n) Cent. 5. c. 4. col. 519. etc. 10. col. 1133.  Centurists, The opinion of Austin is, that it is not lawful for the innocent party to marry another: for which also he is reprehended by 
(o) Examen. part. 2. p. 263.  Chemnitius.  
S. Austin further teacheth & commendeth the vowed perpetual chastity by mutual assent of married persons, for speaking of man and wife he saith, 
(p) Tom. 6. de bono coniug. c. 25. circa med. etc. 3. & Tom. 4. l. 1. de serm. Domini in monte. c. 14. Tom. 3. de fide ad Petrum. c. 3.  Let both know who with like consent hath vowed to God Chastity, that a greater reward is truly due unto them. In which place and sundry other he is so plain herein that the Century writers do object to him his opinion hereof, terming it, 
(q) Cent. 5. c. 4. col. 518.  An opinion not agreeable to the word of God. But yet S. Austin is so full in this point, that he persuadeth Armentarius and his wife to the accomplishment of their vow in that behalf, writing unto them both, a special epistle 
(r) Tom. 2. ep. 45. init.  to that purpose; of which and such other like examples out of S. Austin, Peter Martyr saith, 
(s) De Euchar. et vot. col. 1608. 1609.  These things brought out of Austin do not agree with the sacred Scriptures: And, the man of God writeth these things being deceived as man. And the like reprehension is given to S. Austin, by 
(t) De origine Monach. fol. 102. 105.  Hospinian.  
Lastly, the blessing of the bridegroom and bride, by the Priest after marriage made, is decreed by the 4. Carthage Council in these words, 
(u) Can. 13.  The husband, and the wife, when they are to be blessed by the Priest, and when they have received the benediction, in reverence thereof let them remain the same night in virginity. This Canon is reproved by 
(x) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 6.  Osiander, and confessed by the 
(y) Cent. 4. c. 6. col. 453.  Centurists.   

Concerning free will, justification, merit of works, works of supererogation, & the difference of mortal and venial sins. CHAPTER. 13.  

S. Austin teacheth that man hath free wil SECTION. 1.  
THe Sacraments being thus ended, I will now proceed to other doctrines, and first concerning freewill enhabled now in us, not by nature, but by grace; wherein I find, as in the former points of faith, so likewise in this, S. Austin most agreeable with our now Catholic Roman Church, for thus he teacheth, that 
(a) Tom. 6. in acts cum Faelice Manich. l. 2. c. 4. circa med.  every man hath in his will, either to choose those things which are good, and be a good tree, or to choose those those things which are evil, and be an evil tree etc. This therefore our Lord saying, either do ye this, or do ye that, sheweth that it is in their power what they should do. Again, 
(b) Tom. 8. in Psal. 7. prope fin.  He that made us would have it in our power not to consent to the devil: yea he affirmeth that, 
(c) Tom. 3. de spir. & lit. c. 34. post med.  It is in our will to consent to God's calling, or to descent from it: As also, 
(d) Tom. 2. ep. 47. Valentino. ant med.  I have dealt with yours and our brethren what I could, that they would persever in the sound Catholic faith, which neither denyeth freewill whether to bad life or to good, neither attributeth so much unto it as that without grace it availeth any thing. And for our performance of good he teacheth that 
(e) Tom. 7. Hypog. l. 3. circa med.  God doth (by his assisting grace) work and man (by his freewill) cooperate; Saying also of the faithful person that, 
(f) Tom. 9 in evang joan. tract. 72. versus finem.  Christ working in him he also worketh his own eternal salvation and justification.  
But in this point S. Austin is so confident, as that he doubteth not to condemn the Manichees of heresy for their denial of freewill: 
(g) Tom. 6. de fide, cont. Manich. c. 9 fin.  Against these things (saith he) the Manichees bark with accustomed blindness, & when th●y are convinced that nature is not evil, but (most pregnantly for freewill in us) that it is in the power of man either to do well or evil, they say that the soul hath no freewill, and do not see their own blindness. with him agreeth S. Hierome affirming that 
(h) In proaemio librorum adversus Pelagianos. fine.  It is proper to the Manichees to condemn the nature of men and to take away freewill and God's assistance; for which error also they are condemned by S. 
(i) In joan. hom. 45. prope initium.  Chrisostome: In all which places of these Fathers it is evident by the context of them, that the said Fathers condemned the Manichees as erroneous, not only for their denial of freewill in Adam, (as Protestants pretend) but also for their further denial thereof in us, as is likewise confessed by the Protestant 
(k) De universali gratia. p. 109.  Hemingius: And in this S. Austin laboured so far as that he alleged a whole composed 
(l) Tom. 7. de great. et lib. arb. c. 2. troughout.  Tract of collected Scriptures (not peculiar to Adam, but such as concern us, in further proof thereof. For which and sundry other his plain sayings in proof of freewill he is acknowledged and disliked by the 
(m) Cent. 5. c. 4. col. 500 501.  Century writers.  
Hence also it is, that S. Austin so utterly disclameth from the Protestants supposed impossibility of keeping the commandments, as that he forbeareth not to affirm, 
(n) Tom. 7. de great. & lib. arb. c. 2. init.  that the commandments of God would not profit man unless he had freewill, wherewith doing them &c. And again, 
(o) Tom 6. de fide. count. Manich. c. 10. initio.  who will not cry out that it is a foolish thing to give commandments to him who h●ith not freedom to do what is commanded, and that it is injury to condemn him, who had not powwer to fulfil the commandments. This is so clear in S. Austin, that Melancthon saith thereof, 
(p) Lib. 1. epist. p. 290.  Austin hath not sufficiently explicated the justification of faith etc. which thou shalt rightly understand, if thou dost cast away thine eye wholly from the law, and from Austin's imagination of fulfilling the law.  
Yea S. Austin doubteth not to give direct sentence against our adversaries concerning Genesis. c. 4. v. 7. referring Cain's dominion there expressed, not as intended to Abel, (as Protestants do of late translate) but to sin, saying thereof, 
(q) Tom. 5. de civet. Dei. l. 15. c. 7. circa med.  Thou shalt have dominion over it, what, of thy brother? God forbidden, of what then but sin? whereto assenteth his familiar S. Hierome, saying likewise thereof, 
(r) In quaest. in Genes.  because thou hast freewill, I do admonish thee, that sin have not dominion over thee, but thou over sin. And the very same reading is affirmed and made good by divers learned Protestants, as namely 
(s) In his great Bible in Gen. 4.7. Mercerus upon Genesis. in Gen. 4 7. Pezel. in Genes. c. 4. p. 94. Gesnerus, in Gen. p. 114.  Castalio, Mercerus, Pezelius, and Gesnerus, who special●y reciteth and answereth our adversary's usual objections to the contrary. Yea the agreeable translation hereto is accordingly observed by the great English Bible of Anno. 1577. and by the english Bible in 4. of Anno. 1584.  
And whereas Protestant's usually object S. Chrisostome to expound this place according to their mind; the truth is, he giveth both expositions saying thereupon, 
(t) In Genes. hom. 18.  I have delivered both senses, leaving to your wisdom that to be chosen which seemeth more agreeable to that which hath been said: yea he inferreth and collecteth from this very place the freedom of will saying, 
(u) In Genes. hom. 19 c. 4. prope initium.  The Lord of all things hath made our nature to have freewill etc. he suffereth all to lie in the will of him that is sick, this therefore is now also done in Cain.  
To all which (in more clear explication of S. Austin's judgement) I will add the further answerable consenting doctrine delivered by S. Hierome and the Fathers of the Arausican Council, which was celebrated in the age of S. Austin. and against the Pelagians who too much inhabled freewill as of itself sufficient without grace: wherefore S. Hierome saith to the Pelagian 
(x) Dial. 3. adverse. Pelag.  This is that which I told thee in the beginning, that it is in our power to sin or not to sin, that freewill may be kept. The foresaid Council also saith, y This also we believe according to the Catholic faith, that grace being received by Baptism, all who are baptised through Christ's help and cooperation may and aught to fulfil such things as belong to salvation, if they will labour faithfully.   

S. Austin teacheth that our justification consisteth not only in remission of sins, or not imputation thereof, but likewise in good wo●kes: and that the same once had may be lost. SECTION. 2.  
HOfman, with other protestāns, teacheth that, 
(a) Comment. de paenit. l. 2. fol. 114.  The justice wherewith we are saved etc. consisteth wholly in remission of our sins, or as Viril saith, 
(b) Compendium Christian. relig. l. 1. c. 4. fol. 17.  in imputation, both which 
(c) Volumen Thes. theol. vol. 1. loc. 15. p. 256.  Piscator maketh all one. But S. Austin teacheth to the contrary that, 
(d) Tom. 2. ep. 106. Bonif. post init.  The grace of God etc. bringeth to the life of the second man, not only by blotting out sins, but also by helping not to sin. As also 
(e) Tom. 2. ep. 105. ad Sixtum. post med.  neither etc. is any man freed and justified but by the grace of God etc. not only by remission of sins, but first by the inspiration of faith it defy, and the fear of God etc. Again, 
(f) Tom. 7. de natura & great. c. 26. post init.  Our heavenly Physician doth to this end only cure our diseases that now they be not, but that hereafter we may walk rightly. And the Millevitan Council (whereat S. Austin was present and subscribed) decreed that, 
(g) Can. 3.  whosoever shall say, that the grace of God wherewith we are justified etc. doth avail only to the remissio of sins etc. let him be accursed. Yea S. Austin is so plain herein, as that Caluin maintaining imputative justice by only faith, and as secluding works therein, reproveth S. Augustine's contrary doctrine saying thereof, 
(h) In omnes Pauli epist. ep. ad Rom. c. 3.21. p. 35.  I am not ignorant that Austin expoundeth otherwise etc. I know over well, that certain new spyers do produce very proudly this doctrine of Austin.  
And whereas Protestants usually object S. Paul as contrary to S. james concerning justification by works. D. Whitaker confesseth that S. Austin agreeably with us Catholics doth reconcile them together saying, 
(i) Resp. ad rat. Camp. rat. 1. p. 12. and see the Centurists. Cent. 5. c. 10. col. 1133. and see Aug. quaest. 83. quaest. 76.  Austin reconcileth james to Paul, wherefore (saith Austin) the sentences of the two Apostles Paul, and james are not contrary in themselves &c. because Paul speaketh of works which go before faith (unto which never Catholic attributed justification) and james of those works that follow faith, (which is the very point that Catholics now teach concerning justification by works.  
Now that this justification by faith and works once had may be lost, it is likewise taught by S. Austin saying, 
(k) Tom. 7. de praedestinatione Sanctorum. c. 14. post init.  why is it granted to some that they be taken out of the dangers of this life while they are just, & others that are just do live longer in the same dangers until they fall from justice? who knoweth the sense of our Lord? And again, 
(l) Tom. 7. de correp. et. great. c. 13. post init.  Let all fear who run well, it being unknown who shall come (to the mark:) Therefore by reason of the profit of this secrecy, it is to be believed that some of the sons of perdition, not receiving the gift of perseverance unto the end, do begin to live in faith which worketh by charity, and for a time do live faithfully and justly, and afterwards do fall, neither do they dye before this happen unto them.  
And from this uncertanty of perseverance S. Austin likewise adviseth that, 
(m) Ibidem.  none of the multitude of the faithful, as long as they live in this mortality, presume themselves to be in the number of the predestinate, because it is needful that that be hid in this place (or life;) which truth is further confirmed & depending of this his other doctrine that, No man can be certain of his own final perseverance. And so speaking of the just he affirmeth (even according to our adversary's english translation) that 
(n) Tom. 5. de civet. Dei. l. 11. c. 12. circa med. And according to the english translation. p. 419.  these though they be assured of their reward for their perseverance, yet are they not sure to persever (or rather according to the Latin they are uncertain of their perseverance) for what man knoweth that he shall continue to the end in action and increase of justice, unless he have it by revelation? And the good of this uncertanty he avoucheth saying, 
(o) Tom. 2. ep. 107. ad Vitalem circa med.  it is profitable to all or most for their sound humility, that they may not know what hereafter they are to be, to this end it is said, he that seemeth to stand, let him take heed lest he fall.   

S. Austin teacheth that good works do merit; and that there are works of supererrogation. SECTION. 3.  
THat good works do merit remission of sins and life eternal, it is clearly taught by S. Austin saying. 
(p) Tom. 3. Enchirid. c. 70. circa med.  By alms God is to be pacified for sins past. And 
(q) Tom. 8. in Psal. 37. fin.  Let alms be given, sins redeemed. As also, 
(r) Tom. 5. de civet. Deind. 21. c. 27. multo ante med.  Our Lord showeth how much alms avail for the blotting out of sins past. And he demandeth saying, 
(s) Tom. 2. ep. 105. ad Sixtus. multo ante med. And see Tom. 2. ep. 52. 46. 47. & Tom. 3. Enchirid. c. 106. 107. et tom. 7. de nat. et great. c. 2.  Are there no merits of the just? there are truly, because they are just etc. yea he further avoucheth that, As to the demerit of sin death is given as wage, so to the merit of justice as wage life eternal.  
He proceedeth also further teaching the divers degrees of merits in these words, 
(t) Tom. 9 in evang joan. tract. 67. circa med.  Many mansions do signify the different (degrees or) dignities of merits in one life eternal. And 
(u) Tom. 6. de sancta virgin. c. 26. circa med. & tom. 5. de civet. dei. l. 22. c. 30.  One star differeth from another in glory etc. these are the divers merits of saints. But in this he is so full that the contrary error he condemneth in jovinian: We condemn (saith 
(x) Tom. 10. de tempore, ser. 191. prope fin. & tom. 6. haer. 82. tom. 1. l. 2. retract. c. ●2.  he) the error of jovinian, who affirmeth no difference of merits in the world to come: hereof also say the 
(y) Cent. 5. c. 4. col. 518. & see Chemnit. exam. part. 4. p. 110. 142. And see Wotton in defence of Parkins. p. 500  Centurists, It appeareth that Austin was of that opinion, that virgins dedicated to holiness have more merit with God than the faithful that are married, for because jovinian thought the contrary, that they had no more merits, this in him reprehendeth Austin. l. 3. de pec. mer.  
He likewise further teacheth by the example of Moses prevailing for the Israelites, 
(z) Tom. 4. super Exodum. quaest. 149. post med.  that we should be admonished, that when our own merits do hold us down that we be not loved of God, that we may be helped with him by the merits of them whom God loveth. In so much that he further avocheth that, 
(a) Tom. 6. cont. Faustum. l. 20. c. 21. post init. & tom. 5. de civet. Dei. l. 21. c. 27. post med.  Christian people do celebrate with religious solemnity the memories of martyrs etc. that they may be partakers of their merits, and helped with their prayers. yea be encourageth us to do good in hope or expectation of reward, for thus he writeth, 
(b) Tom. 8. in Psal. 120. post med.  when thou dost a good work, do it for life eternal etc. do it not but for life eternal, if therefore thou dost it, thou dost it securely, for this God hath commanded.  
And as for works of supererrogation or Christian perfection, that is, that a man may do more than he is commanded to do, S. Austin speaking of Commandments and Counsels, and alluding to Luke, 10.35. saith, 
(c) Tom 6. de sancta virgin. c. 30. circa med.  Those things are exacted these are offered, if these be done, they are commended, if those be not done they are condemned, in those our Lord commandeth what is debt, but in these if ye shall any thing supererrogate, at his return he will repay you. And again 
(d) Tom. 10. de temp. serm. 61. circa med.  One thing is counsel, another command, &c, he that willingly heareth counsel and doth it shall have greater glory, he that fulfilleth not the cammaundement, unless he repent, cannot escape punishment. To this purpose he also citeth those words of S. Paul to the 
(e) Tom. 7. Hypognost. l. 3. c. 8. multo post med.  Corinthians, Of virgins I have no commandment of our Lord, but I give counsel. And in further example hereof the Protestant writer M. 
(f) Upon jude. p. 226. and see Aug. tom. 2. ep. 89. versus finem.  Trig saith, S. Austin counting it a degree of perfection in Christianity not to seek after the riches of the world, thus writes of himself: I who writ these things have loved that perfection, whereof our Lord spoke to the young man, go and sell all thou hast, how far I have gone forward in this way of perfection I know more than any other etc. and to this purpose with all my might I exhort others, and etc. have companions to whom this is persuaded by my ministry. But to conclude this doctrine of works of supererrogation is so true & clear, that it is therefore assented unto by M. 
(g) Eccles. pol. l. 3. sec. 8. p. 140. & l. 2. p. 103. 122.  Hooker, and D. 
(h) Defence of Hooker. art. 8. p. 49. 50. 51. 52.  Covel.  
Lastly S. Austin is so plainly agreeing with us and dissenting from Protestants in these questions of justification and merits of works, as that he is therefore reproved by sundry Protestant writers. Austin sometime (saith 
(i) Cent. 4. l. 4. c. 23. p. 520.  Osiander) in the article of justification seemeth to attribute over much to the merits of good works which are done after a man's conversion. The Centurists likewise say, 
(k) Cent. 5. c. 4. col. 507.  Austin sometimes giveth over much to good works. Brentius 
(l) In confess. Wittenberg. & see Melancthon. l. 1. epist. p. 290. and in Concil. theol. p. 240. Caluin institut. l. 3. c. 11. sec. 15.  affirmeth that, S. Austin taught affiance in man's merits towards remission of sin. The divines of Wittenberg charge S. Austin for his teaching (say 
(m) English harmony of confessions. sec. 16. c. 25. p. 509.  they) that we obtain remission of our sins and life, not only for Christ his sake through faith, but also for the merit of our works. Melancthon writeth that, 
(n) In colloquio Altembe●g. fol. 307.  we are just not only by faith, but by all gifts and virtues, and this truly is Austin's mind: yea he preventeth the objection of S. Austin sometimes mentioning only faith, saying, 
(o) Ibidem. fol. 308.  with Austin only faith only excludeth works going before (faith.)   

S. Austin teacheth that mortal and venial sins do differ of their own natures. SECTION. 4.  
COncerning the distinction of mortal and venial sin; the difference whereof ariseth, according to the Protestants opinion, not from the diversity of the sins in themselves, but of the parties committing them, so as to their faithful professors (if we will believe 
(o) Institut. l. 3. c. 4. sec. 28. Fulke against Rhem. Test. in ep. jean. sec. 5. fol. 447.  Caluin, Fulke, and others) all sins are venial, and unto others as 
(p) Willet sinopsis. p. 560.  Papists, all sins are mortal. yet S. Austin teacheth the contrary, sometimes (saith 
(q) Tom. 3. Enchirid. c. 22. post med.  he) we lie for the good of others, a sin therefore it is, but venial. And, 
(r) Tom. 7. cont. duas ep. Pelag. l. 3. c. 3. post init.  All sins do not make us the sons of the devil. yea he reciteth, 
(s) Tom. 10. de sanctis. serm. 41. post init. And Tom. 3. Enchirid. c. 78. 79.  quae sunt minuta peccata, which are little sins as for example, as often as a man eateth and drinketh more than is necessary, or speaketh more than is meet, or is more silent than is expedient, with a number more such like. In so much that Peter Martyr writeth that 
(t) Common places. part. 3. c. 4. sec. 81. p. 153.  S. Austin in his books de spir. et lit. c. 28. saith, even as there are certain venial sins without which every just man cannot live, and yet they hinder us not from salvation, so are there etc. And as for these venial sins, S. Austin thinketh that the saying of our Lord's prayer is expiatory for them, for thus he writeth, There 
(u) Tom. 9 de symbolo ad Catechum. l. 1. c. 7. circa med.  are venial sins without which this life is not &c. for little sins, without which we cannot be, prayer is invented, what hath prayer? forgeue us our debts etc. if their sins were small ones, this daily prayer would suffice to blot them out. In like sort 
(x) Tom. 4. de vera et fall. paenit. c. 4. propefin.  There are certain venial sins which are daily loosed by our Lord's prayer etc. but others which are to death, are not so loosed, but by the fruits of penance. Again, 
(y) Tom. 3. Enchirid. c. 71  for daily, short, and light sins without which this life is not spent, the daily prayer of the faithful satisfyeth. And he expressly maketh difference between 
(z) Tom. 5. de civet. Dei. l. 21. c. 27. & in the Eng. trans. p. 871. 872.  sin, and crime, between great sins and small sins; affirming withal that this which he speaketh of our Lord's prayer concerneth small sins only. To which purpose he is further alleged by the 4. Tolletane 
(a) Can. 9  Council. As lastly that S. Austin doubteth not to affirm that, 
(b) Tom. 4. de vera et fall. paenit. c. 20. et ult. post init.  venial sins were always forgiven by ceremonies. Now this doctrine of the difference of mortal and venial sins is so clear a truth that with S. Austin and us it is likewise taught and defended by 
(c) Loc. come. part. 3. in his Thesis thereto annexed. fol. 24. Melancth. in council. Euang. p. 546. Musculus. loc. come. p. 29. The harmony of confessions. p. 81.  Chemnitius, Melancthon, and other Protestant writers.    

Concerning prayer for the dead, Purgatory, material fire in hell, Lymbus Patrum, invocation of Saints, their worship, and Images. CHAPTER. 14.  

S. Austin teacheth that it is lawful and godly to pray for the dead; & that there is a place of Purgatory after this life. SECTION. I.  
COncerning prayer for the dead, S. Austin was so wholly Catholic, as that without altergiversation or staggering he spareth not to write that, 
(a) Tom. 10. de verbis Apostoli. serm. 32. c. 2. initio.  It is not to be doubted but that the dead are holpen by the prayers of the holy Church, and by the wholesome sacrifice and alms which are given for their souls, that our Lord may deal more mercifully with them than their sins have deserved; for the universal Church observeth this as delivered from their forefathers, that those should be prayed for, and the sacrifice remembered to be offered for them, who die in the communion of the body and blood of Christ, when they are remembered in their place at the time of the sacrifice etc. It is not to be doubted, but that these things do profit the dead, but such, who have so lived before their death, that these things may be profitable to them after their death: for such as dye without faith, which worketh by charity, and the Sacraments, in vain are these works of pity bestowed upon them by their friends &c, Therefore no new merits are obtained for the dead, when their friends do any good for them, but their own merits going before, these are made to follow. Yea his advice is that, as for such things which help the souls of the dead, as sacrifices, prayers, alms, they bestow upon those more diligently, instantly, abundantly, who being dead in flesh not in spirit, they love not only carnally but spiritually. Again, 
(b) Tom. 3. Enchirid. c. 110. initio.  there is one so good that these things he needeth not, and again, another so evil that neither can he be helped with these when he dyeth etc. therefore they profit not all men etc. when then the sacrifice of the Altar, or of any Alms are offered for all the dead that are baptised, for those that are very good they are thanksgevinges, for those that are not very evil they are propitiations, or sacrifices satisfying God's justice. Also, 
(m) Tom. 4. de cura pro mortuis. c. 18. init.  they profit not all for whom they are done, but those only who while they lived deserved that they profit them, but because we know not who those are, we ought to do them for all the regenerate. Now whereas D. Morton and other Protestants do vulgarly object that S. Austin prayed for his mother Monica, whom yet he thought to be in heaven, and that the like was done by other Fathers for those who undoubtedly were also in heaven; this S. Austin for himself and the other Father's hath answered and explained in the precedent words, affirming that for such as were very good, or in heaven, prayers were thankesgevinges, and for those who were not very evil, or in hell, they were propitiations, or satisfactions. Yea S. Austin is so Roman Catholic, as that M. Fulke avoucheth that, 
(c) Confut. of Purg. p. 349.  Austin defended prayer for the dead, and that, 
(d) Ibidem. p. 326.  it was the common error of his time: for which also he is acknowledged and reproved by 
(e) Tract. theol. p. 394. Bulling. de origigine erroris. c. 9 fol. 223.  Caluin, and Bullinger.  
In like sort concerning Purgatory or temporal punishment after this life, S. Austin affirmeth expressly that, 
(f) Tom. 5. de civet. Dei. l. 21. c. 13. ●ane. & after the eng. translation. l. 21. c. 16. p. 857. & l. 21. c. 21. p. 860. & l. 21. c. 24. p. 863.  some suffer temporal punishments only in this life, others after death, some in both; and that there are 
(g) Tom. 5. de ciu. Dei. l. 20. c. 25. ante med.  certain Purgatory pains for certain persons hereafter: In so much that D. Fulke acknowledgeth that 
(h) Confut. of Purgat. p. 110.  Austin de civet. Dei. l. 21. c. 13. concludeth very clearly that some suffer temporal pains after this life, this may not be denied. And that, 
(i) Ibidem. p. 78.  Austin speaketh indeed of the amending fire, but had no ground of that fire, but in the common error of his time.   

S. Austin teacheth local hell, and material fire therein: As also Limbus Patrum, or Christ's descending into hell. SECTION. 2.  
COncerning local hell, and that the material fire thereof punisheth the wicked spirits and souls of men; whereas M. jacob saith, 
(k) In bilson's survey of Christ's sufferings p. 43.  You set yourself to prove that in hell there is material fire etc. you call it true fire which we utterly deny. And 
(l) Ibidem. p. 46.  The Scripture show no more any corporal or material, or true fire in hell, than a corporal worm, material brimstone etc. which are only so termed metaphorically. yet S. Austin to the contrary affirmeth that, 
(m) De ciu. Dei. l. 21. c. 10.  incorporeal spirits may be strange yet true means be tormented with the punishment of corporal fire: In so much as D. Bilson confesseth that 
(n) In his survey. p. 44.  S. Austin long since hath plainly resolved, that the fire of hell is not only a true fire, but a corporal fire, that shall punish both men and devils; avoching yet further this to be a doctrine received by the Fathers of all ages in Christ's Church. Amongst whom S. Hierome condemneth Origen for teaching this error that, 
(o) Ad Auitum. And see bilson's survey. p. 51.  The fire of hell etc. doth not torment, but the conscience of sinners. And yet Danaeus is content to be condemned for an heretic with Origen in defending that, 
(p) Resp. ad Bellar. disput. part. altera. ad. 6. controu. p. 1227.  The word fire is taken in the holy Scripture Metaphorically and tropically, not properly. As also D. Reynoldes maintaining that, 
(q) Censura librorum Apocriphorum, in his title of lecture. 51. 52. 53. 54. 56. 57  the fire of hell is not material, nor burneth souls corporally; with whom also agreeth 
(r) Institut. l. 3. c. 25. parag. 1●.  Caluin. Lastly S. Austin is so clear herein, that Danaeus being to answer his testimony objected by Bellarmine, hath no other refuge left him, but barely to say that, 
(s) In re●pons. ubi supra. p. 1327.  the authority of Austin here is none, or of no worth.  
So likewise concerning Limbus Patrum, or Christ's descending into hell, S. Austin teacheth that, 
(t) Tom. 10. de tempore. ser. 137. prope init.  Christ laid his flesh in the monument, and his soul accompanying him he descended to hell, whereby the elect, who though they were in the bosom of tranquillity, yet being detained within the gates of hell, are brought again to the pleasures of Paradise: neither was this the private opinion of S. Austin, for he further avocheth that, 
(u) Tom. 2. ep. 99 ad Euodium. multo ante med.  almost the whole Church agreeth concerning the first man (Adam) that Christ loosed him (from hell.) To which purpose D. Bilson 
(x) Survey. p. 598.  particularly allegeth S. Austin.   

S. Austin teacheth that Saints are to be invocated, and worshipped: As also their relics to be reverenced. SECTION. 3.  
COncerning invocation of Saints, S. Austin is so fully agreeing with us, that himself doubteth not to pray unto S. Cyprian, being long before martyred, saying, 
(a) Tom. 7. de Baptismo. contra Don. l. 7. c. 1. & see l. 5. c. 17.  Let him help us with his prayers etc. that our Lord granting, we may imitate his goodness, as much as we are able▪ yea he reporteth in proof hereof this strange miracle, 
(b) Tom. 5. de civet. Dei. l. 12. c. 8. circ. med. & in the english translation. p. 886.  One Florentius (saith he) here of Hippo, a poor old man lost his upper garment, and being unable to buy an other, he came to the shrine of the 20. Martyrs, and prayed aloud unto them to help him to raiments etc. at his departure he espied a great fish newly cast up by the sea etc. and cutting the fish he found in the belly thereof a ring of gold. And in this doctrine S. Austin is so clear, that Chemnitius relating his former prayer to S. Cyprian affirmeth that, 
(c) Examen. part. 3. p. 211.  Austin did this without Scripture, yielding to the time and custom: So general was the custom of praying to the Saints in the time of S. Austin; for which he is also further reprehended by other 
(d) The Centurists. Cent. 5. c. 6. col. 674. Lectius. in prescript. theol. l. 2. p. 174. 277. 280.  Protestants; M. Fulke not forbearing also to acknowledge and say, 
(e) Rejoinder to Bristol. p. 5.  I confess that Ambrose, Austin, and Hierome, held invocation of Saints to be lawful.  
In like sort, in proof that Saints may be worshipped, he writeth thus of martyrs, 
(f) Tom. 5. de ciu. Dei. l. 8. c. 27. init.  we honour their memories as of holy men of God. And, 
(g) Ibidem. l. 20. c. 21. ante med.  we worship Martyrs with that worship of love etc. but with that worship which in grenke is called Latria (or which is proper only to God) we neither worship them nor teach them to be worshipped. Yea S. Austin is reproved for using our now usual distinction of Dulia, and Latria, by Hospinian saying, 
(h) De Templis. p. 207.  Blessed Austin first invented this distinction of Dulia and Latria, and amongst religious worshipes he thus distinguished, that, that which is due only to God, he calleth Latria, and that he nameth Dulia which is lawful to give unto creatures. And to this purpose he allegeth sundry sayings of S. Austin.  
But S. Aust. also approveth the feasts celebrated in honour of Saints saying, 
(i) Tom. 8. in Psalm. 63. initio.  Having this day the feast of the passion (or death) of holy Martyrs etc. As also, 
(k) In Psal. 88 con. 2. and see Concil. 3. Carthag. can. 47.  The martyrs, whose birth d●yes we celebrate, said etc. yea Chemnitius allegeth S. Austin to say, 
(l) Examen. part. 2. p. 176. & see Aug. tom. 6. contra Faustum. l. 20. c. 21. post init.  Christian people do celebrate together the memories, of martyrs with religious solemnity. Furthermore concerning the honouring of the Relics of Saints, the 5. Carthage Council (whereat S. Austin was present) decreed thus, 
(m) Can. 14.  It pleaseth us that Altars which are errected in the fields & high ways, as the memories of martyrs, in which no body or relics of martyrs placed, are approved by the Bishops etc. be cast dowen. This Canon Osiander termeth 
(n) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 33. p. 158.  a foolish and grossly superstitious constitution, Austin being either present or approving it. And the like dislike of this Canon is to be seen in the 
(o) Cent. 5. col. 697.  Century writers. But S. Austin himself further saith, 
(p) Tom. 2. ep. 103. ad Quintianum fine.  They carry the relics etc. of Stephen the martyr, which your holiness knoweth how fitly you ought to honour as we have done. And, 
(q) Tom. 3. de Eccles. dog. c. 73. initio▪  we believe that the relics of martyrs are most sincerely to be honoured as the members of Christ etc. if any impugn this opinion, he is not to be thought a Christian, but an Eunomian, and Vigilantian. This point of doctrine was so received in that age of S. Austin as that Osiander faith of S. Hierome (who was familiar with S. Austin) that, 
(r) Cent. 4. l. 4. c. 19 p. 506.  He foolishly contended, that the relics of Saints were to be worshipped. And the centurists recite the very words 
(s) Cent. 4. c. 10. col. 1250. and col. 602.  of S. Hierome concerning the worship of Relics as also of Vigilantius objecting to Catholics their then usual honouring of relics: The doctrine whereof S. Hierome reporteth to have been the received doctrine in his time (to use his own 
(t) Lib. contra Vigil. c. 3.  words Non unius urbis, sed totius orbis, not of one City, but of the whole world. yea they were as then so religiously esteemed, as that, 
(u) Tom. 2. ep. 137. multo ante med. And see tom. 3. de Eccles. dog. c. 73.  Pilgrimages were made unto the places of their abode.  
Lastly whereas Faustus the Manithee charged Christians in their honouring of martyrs to have made them Idols, even as 
(x) White in his way to the true Church. p. 220.  Protestants do now charge us Catholics for worshipping of Saints, S. Austin thinketh so unworthily & so basely of this objection, as that he saith thereof, 
(y) Tom. 6. cont. Faust. Manich. l. 20. c. 21. initio. And see c. 4. & tom. 2. ep. 43.  It doth not move me so much as to answer this calumnis etc.   

S. Austin teacheth that it is lawful to use and worship the Images of Christ and his Saints. SECTION. 4.  
ALthough occasion to entreat of Images was not so ministered to S. Austin as of other things, yet he leaveth us not without all testimony thereof, but indeed affirmeth that it was usual & frequent in his time to have the pictures of Christ and his Saints: for upon occasion of certain Pagans devised forgeries against Christ, and Peter, and Paul, S. Austin conjecturing why they named therein those two Apostles rather than the other, saith, 
(a) Tom. 4. de consensu Evangelist. l. 1. c. 10. circa med.  I think it was because they had seen in many places them pictured together with him, to wit, Christ: And which argueth him to speak of Christian countries, he addeth immediately next after (as in reason of being so painted together with Christ) because Rome doth more famously & solemnly celebrarte the merits of Peter, and Paul, even for the same day of their sufferings.  
And as concerning the division of the ten Commandments into the first and second table, S. Austin (directly to the contrary of our adversary's pretended argument against Images) differeth from them, therein 
(b) Tom. 4. quaestionum in Exod. l. 2. q. 21. post init.  affirming this part of the commandment. Thou shalt not make to thyself any graved thing, not to be a several distinct precept of itself, but parcel of (and therefore explained by) this former, Thou shalt not have strange Gods. Herein he writeth so largely, and his judgement is so confessed, that Musculus speaking of Catholics saith, 
(c) Loc. come. de Decalogo. p. 39  They divide the precepts of the first table into three, and of the second into seven, & so they leave out the commandment concerning Images and graved things &c. following Austin who l. 2. quaest. super Exodum. c. 71, etc. appointeth three precepts to the first table, and the other seven to the second. And then as pretending most unworthily, S. Austin to be herein contrary to himself, he further saith, But the same Austin plainly differeth from himself &c. again if the authority please, why doth it not please in that which he writeth agreeably with the rest of the more ancient (Fathers) rather then in that which he writ differently from others and himself; but it agreed better to the time wherein graved things & Images were brought into the Church of Christ. Willet likewise for this very cause reproveth S. Austin saying, 
(d) Comment. upon Exodus in c. 20. p. 515.  As for the reasons of the contrary opinion, they are of no value, Austin would have but three precepts in the first table. And again, 
(e) Ibidem. p. 314.  The Romanistes opinion is, that there are but three commandments in the first table, putting the two first into one &c, of this opinion is Austin quaest. 71. in Exod.  
And as by the premises S. Austin includeth the lawfulness of sacred Images, so withal he confessedly teacheth (which in direct terms extendeth itself to the 
(f) Numeri. 21. 8.  brazen serpent, and the Images of 
(g) Exod. 25.18.  Cherubins, appointed by God himself) this our Catholic principle, that, 
(h) Tom. 3. de doctrina Christ. l. 3. c. 9 initio.  The honour given unto profitable signs appointed by God (as being in itself lawful) passeth from them to the thing signified. To which purpose Hospinian affirming that Sacraments may as signs be honoured, saith (even as we say of 
(i) Hist. sacram. part. 1. l 5. c. 8. p. 477.  Images) that honour stayeth not in them, but passeth from them to the things which are signified. In proof of which opinion, he also allegeth S. Austin saying, Those things which Austin writ, de doctrina Christiana. l. 3. c. 9 do agree with these, who adoreth (saith he) a profitable sign appointed by God, whose power and signification he understandeth, doth not honour that which is seen and passeth, but rather that whereunto all such things are to be referred. This place is so pregnant, as that it is therefore alleged to the same purpose by 
(k) Defence. de Euchar. loc. 1. col. 382.  Peter Martyr.  
Ad lastly thereunto that the Lutherans have still Images in their Churches, as witnesseth 
(l) Defence of the English translat. of the Bible. c. 3. p. 119.  M. Fulke, and are therein defended by divers Caluinistes, as namely D. 
(m) Answer to certain object. p. 83. & 53. Tuch. Antidote. p. 92. Bucer, in Centuria. ep. theol. p. 270. Pet Mart. & Melanc. in Polmerus. de Imaginibus. sec. 374. 476. 471.  Fotherbie, M, Tuchborne, Bucer, Peter Martyr, and Melancthon.    

Concerning Christian fasts, as abstinence from certain meats upon certain days: As also concerning vowed chastity and monastical life. CHAPTER. 15.  

S, Austin teacheth that prescribed days of fasting, and abstinence ● from certain meats are lawful. SETION, 1.  
FIrst as concerning the fast of Lent, S. Austin teacheth that, 
(n) Tom. 10. de tempore. ser. 77. init. & ser. 62.  not to keep it at all is sacrilege, & in part to break it is sin: This doctrine is confessed and disliked in S. Austin by the 
(o) Cent. 5. c. 6. col. 686. 687.  Centurists, and 
(p) De tradit. Apost. part. 3. l. 3. col. 824.  Hamelmannus; and it is further explained by S. Ambrose, whose disciple S. Aust. was, as the same 
(q) Ibidem. col. 786.  Hamelmannus testifieth: and of whom Oecolampadius saith, How 
(r) Epist. Oecol. & Suing. p. 608.  should Austin teach contrary to Ambrose by whom he was ordered! Now it is evident that S. Ambrose expressly affirmeth that 
(s) Ser. 25. 34. 36.  It is sin not to fast in Lent; wherein he is confessed and reproved by M. 
(t) In Whitguiftes def. p. 100  Carthwright, who also saith of them both 
(u) 2. Reply part. 1. p. 83.  Ambrose and Austin were both of them corrupt in Lent fast: for which also S. Ambrose is at large reprehended by 
(x) De tradit. Apost. col. 788.  Hamelmannus.  
In like sort concerning the then usual fast of Wednesday, friday, and Saturday, S, Austin saith, 
(y) Tom. 1. ep. 86. ad Casulanum. mult. ant med.  The Christian who accustometh to fast Wednesday, friday, and Saturday, etc. This saying also is acknowledged by the 
(z) Cent. 5. c. 6. col. 730. 686.  Centurists.  
But S. Austin proceedeth yet further condemning the contrary opinion of Protestants in the heretic Aerius, saying of him, 
(a) Tom. 6. haer. 53. init.  It is reported that he hath added some opinions of his own, saying that we ought not to pray or offer sacrifice for the dead, and that appointed fasts are not solemnly to be kept. In which his censure he is acknowledged and disliked by 
(b) De haeres. c. 53. fol. 177. Fulke in his answ. to a counter. Cath. p. 44. 45. Osiand. cent. 4. l. 3. c. 47. p. 434.  Danaeus, Fulke, and Osiander: And yet the same censure is given against Aerius for the greek Church by S. 
(c) Haeres. 75.  Epiphanius.  
And whereas the Puritans, as M. Welsh, one of them confesseth, 
(d) Reply against Browne. p. 196.  say, we think it no heresy to fast on the Lord's day, more than other days. yet S. Austin avoucheth that, 
(e) Tom. 2. ep. 86. ad Casulanum.  To fast on the Lord's day is a great scandal, yea a scandal of the whole Church. In which he is confessed and alleged by M. 
(f) Defence. p. 102.  Whitguift and the 
(g) Cent. 4. col. 445. 401.  Centurists, and both he and S. Ambrose by 
(h) De tradit. Apost. part. 3. l. 3. col. 786. 787.  Hamelmannus, and the 4. 
(i) Can. 64.  Carthage Council for decreeing the same doctrine is reproved by 
(k) Cent. 5. p. 13.  Osiander.  
In like manner concerning abstinence from certain meats, S. Austin reporteth of his time that 
(l) Tom. 6. cont. Faust. Manich. l. 30. c. 5. post init. see Tom. 1. de moribus Eccles. c. 31.  Catholics &c. do abstain, not only from flesh, but also from certain fruits of the earth, not that they think them unclean etc. And, almost all in Lent observe this abstinence; which also may yet more appear by Faustus the heretic Manichee, who in defence of his own wicked perpetual abstinence from certain meats, as of their own nature unclean, signifieth the Churches than Catholic custom, in his objecting thereof & saying to S. Austin, 
(m) Aug. Tom. 6. cont. Faust. Manich. l. 30. c. 4. post init.  If Lent be observed by you without wine and flesh not superstitiously but by God's law etc. yea in this S. Austin was so full that he censured and condemned jovinian for his contrary doctrine: whereof saith 
(n) Exam. part. 4. p. 142. and see Aug. tom. 6. haer. 82. circa med.  Chemnitius, Austin affirmeth jovinian to have taught, fasts or abstinence from certain meats to profit nothing. Of which also S. Austin saith himself, 
(o) Tom. 3. de Eccles. dog. c. 68 init. & see the Centur. cent. 4. c. 5. col. 381.  to believe that no merit increaseth to those that abstain from wine or flesh, is not the part of a Christian, but of a jovinian, or novel Protestant; amongst whom 
(p) 3. part of his defence of the reform. Cath. p. 60. Wil in Antilogie. p. 13. Dan. in 1. part. alt. part. p. 938.  D. Abbot, Willet, and Danaeus, are not ashamed to defend jovinian in his foresaid error.   

S. Austin teacheth that the vow of chastity is lawful. SECTION. 2.  
TO omit that S. Austin affirmeth it to be 
(q) Tom. 1. l. 2. Retract. c. 22. initio.  the heresy of jovinian to equal the merit of wives with virgins; he taught (as before) the lawfulness of vowed chastity amongst those who are married, affirming that to such 
(r) See before chap. 12.  as with mutual consent have vowed to God chastity, that a greater reward is truly due unto them; and that 
(s) Tom. 2. ep. 45. prope fin.  such things are not to be vowed by married persons but by mutual consent etc. which once had he addeth further, give both to God what you have both vowed; yea he censureth the breach of the vow of chastity for damnable adultery, saying. 
(t) Tom. 8. in Psal. 83. post init.  If he shall marry after the vow which he hath promised to God, he shall be condemned etc. If a Nun shall marry, she shall be reputed to have committed adultery against Christ. To this purpose also the fourth Carthage Council (whereat S. Austin was present and subscribed) decreed concerning vowed widows, that 
(u) Can. 104.  If any widows though young in years etc. shall vow themselues to God, and casting of their lay habit, shall appear in religious habit under the testimony of the Bishop & the Church, and shall afterwards turn to secular marriages, according to the Apostle, they shall have damnation. This decree is so disliking to Danaeus, that he chargeth the Council and S. Austin with 
(x) 1. partis. alt. parte. p. 1011.  abusing manifestly the word of God; and as Osiander thinketh 
(y) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 20.  this Canon hath great errors in it.  
And whereas the ancient Novelistes did usually object (as Protestants still do) that of 1. Tim. 4.3. thence to infer, that the Churches forbidding of marriage in vowed persons, is the doctrine of devils. S. Austin answereth thereto in these words, 
(z) Tom. 6. cent. Faust. Manich. l. 30. c. 6. prope init.  He forbiddeth to marry, who saith that it is evil, not he who preferreth before this good an other thing better. And the same answer is made by Protestants in the case of fasting from certain meats as namely by M. 
(a) Eccles. pol. l. 5. sec. 72. p. 209. jacob in his defence of the Church. p. 59 quaerimonia Ecclesiae. p. 106. 107.  Hooker, M. jacob, & others. Ad lastly herunto that this vowing of chastity by priests, Virgins, or Widows, was not (as Protestants seek to evade) in S. Austin's judgement 
(b) Aug. Tom. 6. de virginit. c. 13. 22. 23. And see Fulke against Rhem. Test. in 1. Cor. c. 7. ad 28.  in regard of this present life, neither that they should pass the time without greater troubles, nor for the avoiding of greater vexations, but expressly for the life to come, which is promised in the kingdom of heaven. And according to this he reporteth Iouinians condemned error, saying, 
(c) Tom. 6. haer. 82. prope fin.  He would not marry, not for any greater merit with God in the kingdom of life everlasting, but for the present necessity lest he should suffer the troublet of marriage.   

S. Austin teacheth that it is lawful to vow the state of monastical or religious life. SECTION. 3.  
COncerning the professed poverty of Monks, S. Austin reprehendeth one januarius for that 
(c) Tom. 10. de diversis. serm. 49. de come. vita Cleric. c. 2. ante med.  professing a life in common, he made a will and appointed heirs &c, whereof he further saith, Proh dolor illius societatis, O grief of that community. The beginning of this very sermon is above 900. years since alleged verbatim under S. Austin's name by S. Bede in 2. Cor. c. 8. And this sermon and these very words now cited, are at large recited under S. Austin's name above 100 years since in the Council of 
(d) Cap. 112.  Aquisgrane, under Lewis the first. The Centurists also say hereof, 
(e) Cent. 5. col. 710.  Austin by the way rehearseth certain things of Monks etc. as that, None of them possessed any thing proper to them selves: And the same is confessed by 
(f) Polit. Eccles. l. 2. c. 13. p. 474. Hosp. de orig. Monach. fol. 74.  Zepperus, and Hospinian, as also of S. Hierome, by 
(g) Estate of the Church. p. 132.  Chrispinus.  
And that this profession of Monathisme was under vow, S. Austin further saith, 
(h) Tom. 8. in Psal. 75. mult. post med.  what is it, they made void their first faith? they have vowed & not performed; therefore let no brother placed in the Monastery say, I will leave the Monastery etc. it is answered to him they have not vowed, thou hast vowed, thou hast looked back etc. remember Lot's wife. And yet in more full explication of S. Austin's judgement and the doctrine of his time; the Protestant Mollitor affirmeth even of the Chalcedon Council, 
(i) De Eccles. milit. p. 80. and see Concil. Calced. can. 15.  that it, against the Oracles of the holy Ghost, forbade the use of marriage to Monks, and Nuns.  
But S. Austin yet further impugneth the heretic Petilianus for inveighing against this profession, he spoke (saith S. 
(k) Tom. 7. cont. lit. Petil. l. 3. c. 40. post med.  Austin) with contumelious mouth in disprase of Monks and Monasteries. And he chargeth the Circumcelians, for that 
(l) Tom. 8. in Psal. 132. post init.  they were accustomed to say what meaneth this name of Monks. And again, 
(m) Ibidem. ant med.  what do they say who insult against us concerning the name of Monks etc. who say unto us, show ye where the name of Monks is written?  
Now as concerning the religious habit of professed Virgins, Widows, and Monks, the 4. Carthage Council (whereto S. Austin subscribed) speaking of professed Widows, saith, 
(n) Can. 104.  Those who leaving their laical habit have vowed themselves to God under the testimony of the Bishop & the Church in a religious habit etc. The Centurists also confess 
(o) Cent. 5. c. 7. col. 744. and see also Osiand. cent. 5. p. 155.  veiled virgins (to be mentioned) in the 26. Canon of the Millevitan Council, whereto also S. Austin subscribed; as also to the 4. Carthage Council wherein it was decreed that 
(p) Can. 11.  when a Nun is presented to the Bishop for her consecration, that she be clothed with such garments as shall be fit for her profession & sanctimony ever after to use. This Canon is also acknowledge by Osiander, charging it 
(q) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 6.  with superstitious and hipocritical habits. And the like is to be seen in the 3. 
(r) Can. 4.  Carthage Council, reported also by the same 
(s) Cent. 4. p. 523.  Osiander. The Centurists also speaking of the Monks of the 4. age, confess that they used 
(t) Cent. 4. c. 6. col. 472. and see cent. 5. c. 6 col. 704. & Sozom. hist. l. 3. c. 13.  a certain clothing (or covering) upon their heads, which they called their hood, a girdle also about their loins, and a garment upon their shoulders; and they mention also the 
(u) Cent. 5. c. 6. col 733.  habit of Nuns. In like manner as touching the abstinence of Monks the centurists report from 
(x) Cent. 5. c. 6. col. 688. and col. 711. 732.  S. Austin their almost incredible fasts, affirming also from him that, some spent very often three whole days and more without meat or drink, and that they abstained also from flesh and wine: and that Aust. in ep. 86. telleth that many in the Monasteries fasted five days in the week during their whole life.  
S. Austin also testifieth himself to have been a Monk, for speaking of monachism he saith, 
(y) Tom. ●. ep. 89. ad Hilarium. versus fin.  I who writ these things etc. do exhort others to this purpose with all my power, and in the name of our Lord I have partakers. And speaking against Petilianus he affirmeth that, 
(z) Tom. 7. cont. lit. Petil. l. 3. c. 40. post med.  he spoke with contumelious mouth in disprase of Monasteries and Monks, reprehending also me, that this kind of life was instituted by me. To which purpose also saith Passidonius of S. Aust. that, 
(a) In vita August. c. 5. init.  being made Priest, presently he erected a Monastery within the Church, and began to live with the servants of God according to the manner and rule. yea S. Austin further saith of himself, 
(b) Tom. 10. de diversis serm. 49. de come. vita Cleric.  I disposed myself to be in the Monastery with the brethren etc. I sold my slender means, & gave to the poor etc. behold how we live, it is not lawful for any in our company to have any thing proper to themselves. And the Centurists likewise report that 
(c) Gent. 5. c. 6. col. 701.  Aust. in Psal. 103. exhorteth rich men, that they will sell their gods, fields, villages, gardens, to give to the servants of God, and to build Churches and Monasteries, yea 〈◊〉 the 11. epistle is troubleth him not to number himself with the Monks, when he saith, I in my little cottage with my Monks etc. The Centurists also say concerning eremites. 
(d) Cent. 5. c. 6. col. 714.  It is evident that there were eremites etc. but they are called Anchoretes etc. Austin Tom. 1, de moribus Cathol. Eccl●s. l. 1. c. 31. expressly saith, that kind of men to be dispersed chiefly through the East and Egypt, who living most private, altogether from the sight of men, do inhabit most desert places, and do enjoy the speech of God: Of whom also S. Austin there affirmeth for their diet that they were content only with bread and water; mentioning also particularly one 
(e) Tom. 5. de civet. Dei. l. 5. c. 26. post. init. And after the english translation. p. 232.  john an Eremite and Prophet.  
Lastly though Protestants would delude all this, by barely affirming that the Monks of those Primitive times were much different in their profession and manner of life from ours of these, yet, besides the premises which do over clearly convince the contrary, it is evident that, that very monachism which S. Austin hath thus described and commended, is much disliked by our libertine Novelistes, & so accordingly 
(f) Institut. l. 4. c. 13. sec. 16.  Caluin saith, In the mean time I do not dissemble, but that in that very ancient form (of monachism) there is some thing which little pleaseth me. for which also both S. Austin and S. Hierome are further confessed and reprehended herein by 
(g) De origine Monach. fol. 100 106.  Hospinian, who termeth also 
(h) Ibidem. fol. 33.  Austin a great lover of monastical profession according to the custom of that age etc. but this Father (let it be spoken otherwise with leave of so great a man) wresteth the words of the Prophet, saith this Protestant: So little pleasing is S. Austin and the ancient Monks with their perfection and austerity of life to modern Protestants.    

Concerning Antichrist, usury, and permission of stews. CHAPTER. 16.  

Concerning Antichrist his coming at the end of the world: And of Enoch, and Elias, their coming as then to resist him. SECTION. 1  
WEreas our adversaries do think, the word Antichrist to signify, not an open professed adversary, but Christ's pretended 
(i) centurists cent. 1. l. 2. col. 435. Musulus, loc. come. p. 184.  Vicar; the Centurists do to the contrary confess, that S. Austin is of opinion that Antichrist shall be one, who will directly oppose himself to Christ, for thus they writ, 
(k) Cent. 5. c. 4. col. 416.  Austin teacheth the Etymology of Antichrist, in epist. joannis. Tract. 3. Antichrist in latin he is said who is contrary to Christ etc. some understand Antichrist to be so called, because he is to come before Christ etc. it is not so said, it is not so written, but Antichrist, that is, contrary to Christ etc. likewise in Tract. de Antichristo, desiring to know of Antichrist; first you shall mark why he is so called, to wit, for that he will be contrary to Christ in all things etc. he will dissolve the Euangelical law, and will recall into the world the worshipping of devils.  
S. Austin likewise affirmeth that he shall spring from the jews saying, 
(l) Tom. 9 tract. de Antichristo. post. init And see cent. 5. c. 4. col. 416. And see tom. 3. de benedict. jacob. prope fin.  As our authors say, Antichrist shall ●e borne of the people of the jews, of the tribe of Dan, according to the Prophet saying etc.  
The Centurists also confess that in S. Austin's judgement Antichrist should not come till all the subjected kingdoms were revolted from the Roman Empire which yet is unaccomplished, for thus they writ, 
(m) Cent. 5. c. 4. col. 420.  Austin in his treatise of Antichrist declareth in few words the time of Antichrist's coming, therefore the Apostle Paul from hence affirmeth Antichrist not to come before into the world, unless first a departure shall come, that is, unless all kingdoms shall departed from the Roman Empire, which were before subject unto it: And then next afterwards they add, but this time is not yet come because though we see the Roman Empire for the greatest part to be overthrown, yet as long as the kings of France shall continue who must possess the Roman Empire, it shall not wholly perish, because it shall stand in it kings. And the same continuance yet of the Roman Empire, is collected by other 
(n) Dresserus in Millenario 5. in his oration added to the end thereof. de Monarchia 4. fol. Nn. 2. & fol. Nn. 3. Sonhius, tom. 1. continen. scripta. etc. p. 173. Springerus de pace religionis. p. 18. 20.  Protestants even from the Scriptures themselves.  
Now concerning the short reign of Antichrist, S. Austin (according to our english translation) 
(o) Tom. 5. de civet. Dei. l. 20. c. 23. circa med. And according to the engl. transl. p. 823.  writeth Antichrist's kingdom shall be most cruel against the Church, though it last but a while etc. The times, time, and half a time, is three years and a half: a year, two years, and half a year, and this is declared by a number of days afterwards, and by the number of months in other places of Scripture. As also, 
(p) Ibidem. c. 8. p. 801.  bond he is, and in the last and smallest remainder of time shall he be loosed, for we read that he shall range in his greatest malice only three years & six months. And again, 
(q) Tom. 9 tract. de Antichristo. prope fin.  Antichrist when for three years and a half etc. he shall vex the world etc. afterwards he shall kill Enoch and Elias.  
But as touching Enoch, and Elias, S. Austin saith, 
(r) Tom. 7. de pec. orig. c. 23. post med. & tom. 3. de Gen. ad lit. l. 9 c. 6 post med. and tom. 3. de mirabilibus sacrae Scripturae. l. 1. c. 3. post med.  We doubt not Enoch, and Elias, to live in the bodies wherewith they were borne: which he confirmeth in sundry other places, and of the same opinion are also sundry Protestants. 
(s) Pet. Mart. in his common places in english. part. 3. c. 16. sec. 17. p. 380. Caluin. in Haebr. in c. 11. 5. and see Luther Tom. 6. Wittemb. fol. 79. Willet upon Gen. in. 5. p. 69.  But S. Austin yet teacheth further saying, 
(t) Tom. 5. de civet Dei l 20. c. 29 post init. & after the eng. transl. p. 830.  that Elias shall convert the jews to Christ, (ultimo tempore) before the end of the world etc. is most commonly believed and taught of us Christians, and is held as a point of infallible truth, for we may well hope of the coming of him before the judgement of Christ, whom we do truly believe to live in the body at this hover, without ever having tasted of death. Again (even according to our english 
(u) Ibidem. p. 834.  translation) somewhat before the day of judgement, Elias shall come, the jews shall believe, Antichrist shall persecute, Christ shall judge, and the dead shall arise.  
Lastly S. Austin teacheth that at the day of judgement Christ shall come 
(x) Tom. 10. de tempore. ser. 130. post med.  with the sign of the Cross before him: And the same is taught by Origen, Chrisostome, Hierome, Hillary, Theophilact, Euthemius, and Bede, in their several commentaries upon Math. 28.30. And the same is defended by the Protestant M. Trig, saying, 
(y) True Catholic. p. 295.  Gualther of famous memory so expounds Math. 24.30. And by the sign of the son of man, he understandeth the Cross, these be his words, most of the ancient Fathers expound the Cross to be this sign etc. Also Thomas Couper Bishop of Lincoln said, my brethren can you not endure that sign to be made here upon earth, which before the coming of the judge shall be conspicuous in heaven? And yet all this is so Popish to M. Nappeir, that he blusheth nor to write, 
(z) Upon the Reuelat. p. 89. 90. 214. 215. 219. and Proposition. 31. p. 72. 73. 74. 75.  The sign or Cross which appeared in vision to Constantine with these words in hoc signo vinces, in this sign thou shalt overcome, was the first public & visible mark of Antichrist. O times, o times, what a monster have ye bred?   

S. Austin teacheth usury to be unlawful. SECTION. 2.  
THough many 
(a) Molinaeus in Fenton of usury. l. 2. c. 2. sec. 3. p. 44. Bucer. in his scripta Anglican. p. 789. 790. 791 Virel, in his prin. grounds of religion englished. p. 148. Bullinger in his Decades in english. Dec. 3. sirrah. 1. p. ●7●. Osiander. cent. 16. l. 4. c. 34. p. 1047.  Protestants do defend usury for lawful, yet the contrary with all Catholics is mantained by S. Austin, of whom thus writeth M Fenton, 
(b) Treatise of usury, l. 2. c. 3. p. 52.  If we desire S. Austin's judgement (who is in steed of many) he is so confident, that he appealeth to the usurers themselves, who practised in his days, saying in Psal 36. quam detestabile sic, quam odiosum, quam execrandum, pute et ipsi Faeneratores norunt, (how detestable, how odious, how execrable, it is, the very usurers know themselves:) but he might happily speak of some excessive usury or extortion, observe therefore how presently he explaineth himself in the very same place saying, Si aliquid plus quam dedisti expectes accipere, Faenerator es, et in hoc improbandus, (If thou expect to receive any more than thou delivered, thou art a Usurer, and in this thou art to be condemned:) the common objection which is made for usury etc. is answered by the same Father saying. the usurers also dare say, they have not else whereon to live, so may the robber say etc. so may the burgler say etc. so may the bawd say etc. his final sentence is, that usurers belong not to the Church of God. Thus far M. Fenton from S. Austin against usury.   

S. Austin teacheth that stews may be permitted for the avoiding of greater evil. SECTION. 3.  
AS concerning Stews which are permitted in some Catholic countries in prevention of greater inconvenience, as of unnatural or violent accomplished lusts, and the general over spreading of that particular evil, which otherwise; like the plague, would disperse itself into all or most parts of the city were it not restrained (as is the other to the pesthouse) to the sink or channel or some one like reserved several precinct: In this respect Catholic divines hold, that for the preventing of greater mischief, it may be so permitted, though not allowed; as in like respect the 
(c) Math. 19.8.  libel of divorce was by Moses not allowed, but permitted for the hardness of the jews hearts; or as is usury by the Church 
(d) Fenton in his treatise of usury. l. 2. c. 9 p. 71. 73.  of England, and some 
(e) Of Geneva, see Hutton in his preface to the 2. part of the answer.  other Protestant Churches not allowed, but like wise permitted, in respect of trade, commerce & other important necessity. To which purpose writeth, 
(f) In nou. Test. in Anot. in Math. 19.8.  Beza, The civil laws if they be well enacted, do command nothing which God prohibiteth, nor prohibit any thing which God commandeth, but through the iniquity of men they are compelled only to moderate many things, which they cannot quite take away, and these are they which are said to be permitted by the laws, for example, Christian charity forbiddeth to commit usury, yet by reason of the trading of men, many Magistrates see they cannot absolutely forbid it, therefore they prescribe a certain quantity of gain. But is it therefore lawful with a good conscience to commit usury? No truly: neither do the civil laws approve, but rather condemn what they only tolerate, the wickedness of men compelling them thereto. Luther also writeth that, 
(g) In Deutero. in c. 24. fol. 160.  Christ Math. 19 proveth sufficiently the law of divorce to be merely civil and permitted for the hardness of the people etc. Many things in a common wealth are to be suffered by reason of those that are hard and untractable, lest greater evils be done. And hereof also saith 
(h) In Mat. c. 19 8.  Pelican, he pardoned the lesser evil, lest the greater should be committed.  
Now upon this one and the same like ground is established our not allowance, but like permitting of stews, yet not without condign answerable punishment inflicted upon 
(i) Fenton ubi supra. l. 2. c. 9 p. 70. 57  usurers and 
(k) See F. Persons in his answer to Nichols. fol. 1. & 3.  stews.  
But to come to the point of stews, S. Austin writeth, 
(l) Tom. 1. l. 2. de ordine. c. 4. circ. med.  what can be said more unclean, more void of comeliness, more full of turpitude, than harlots, bawds, and such other like pestilences? take harlots from among men, and you shall disturb all things with lecherous lusts etc. A saying so direct and pertinent, that it is therefore confessed and rejected by Peter 
(m) Common places in english. part. 2. c. 11. sec. 6 p. 471. jewel in his defence of the Apology. p. 409.  Martyr and M. jewel. And whereas M. jewel would evade, that S. Austin wrote those words, himself yet keeping a concubine, and living in whoredom: It is evident to the contrary and confessed by the 
(n) Cent. 5. c. 10. col. 1120. under the titie, scripta ab August. cum adhuc esset Catechumenus.  Centurists, that S. Austin after his conversion and before his Preisthood, wrote many excellent treatises, among which this book de Ordine, was specially one, and for such mentioned by the Centurists, and written by S. Austin as himself testifieth, 
(o) Tom. 1. l. 1. Retract. c. 3. initio.  when he wrote contra Academicos, which was as himself yet further testifieth, 
(p) Lib. 1. retract. c. 1. initio.  even when he had given over the world: And which is most, S. Austin ranketh this book among his many other excellent treatises by him specially mentioned and revewed in his book of Retractations, and explaining or retracting from each of them what he thought needful, he doth the like to this, 
(q) Lib. 1. retract. c. 3.  but yet without all explanation or exception to the saying now alleged.    

Concerning Ceremonies. CHAPTER. 17.  

S. Austin teacheth sundry holy ceremonies now used in the Catholic Church in the administration of the Sacraments. SECTION. 1.  
Having thus gone through the many particular points of doctrine, we will now lastly end with Ceremonies, which how forcible they be to stir up in us devotion, S. Austin very pertinently affirmeth saying. 
(r) Tom. 2. ep. 119. ad januarium. c. 11. fine. and see c. 7.  I think that the very motion of the mind, as long as it is yet entangled in earthly things, is more slowly inflamed, but if it be directed to corporal similitudes, & from thence to things spiritual, which are represented by those similitudes, by the very passage as it were it is strengthened, and as fire stirred up, it is inflamed, and with more ardent love is drawn to rest and quiet. As also 
(s) Tom. 2. ep. 5. ad Marcel. post init.  There are certain signs, by the celebration and use whereof, not to God, but to us, profitable offices of piety are exercised. And 
(t) Tom. 9 de visit. Infirm. l. 2. c. 3. init.  there are certain exterior signs which sometimes stir up sluggish faith. In example whereof he further saith, 
(u) Tom. 4. de cura pro mort. c. 5. post init.  when they kneel dowen, when they stretch out their hands, when they lie prostrate upon the ground etc. A man by these doth better stir up himself to pray etc. And, the same external things visibly done, that internal invisible (motion) which caused them is increased, and hereby the affection of the heart, which went before, that these things might be, increaseth, because they are done.  
But to descend to Ceremonies in particular, and first concerning Ceremonies usual in administration the of Sacraments, we have 
(x) See before, c. 5. sect. 4.  already alleged from S. Austin the confessed general usage of the sign of the Cross in the administration of the Sacraments: we have also alleged from 
(y) See before c. 6. sect. 4.  him the other usual Cerem●●● used in Baptism, as namely, the Consecration of the water of Baptism, Exercisme, Exuflation, Annoyling, Abrenunciation, the usage of spittle, Godfathers, and trinal imersion. As concerning Confirmation, we have alleged the 
(z) See before. c. 7.  consecration of Chrism or Oil, the signing of the party confirmed with the sign of the Cross and, imposition of hands.  
As touching the Eucharist, S. Austin with the third Carthage council decreed concerning the mixture of water with wine in the Chalice, that 
(a) Can. 24. and Aug. tom. 3. de doc. Christ. l. 4. c. 21. and Tom. 3. de Eccles. dog. c. 75.  in the Sacrament of the body and blood of our Lord, nothing more be offered then our Lord himself delivered, that is, bread and wine, mingled with water; This is confessed by Osiander, who saith thereof, 
(b) Cent. 4. l. 4. c. 24. p. 527.  mingling of water is not without superstition. In like sort concerning the consecration of the Sacrament with the sign of the Cross, S. Austin writeth, 
(c) Tom. 9 in joan. tract. 118. prope fin.  which sign unless it be applied to the foreheads of the believers or to the water wher●●● they are regenerated, or to the oil wherewith they are anointed, or to the sacrifice, wherewith they are nourished, none of them are duly performed. As also, 
(d) Tom. 10. ser. 19 de Sanctis. prope fin.  with the sign of the Cross etc. the Sacraments of the Altar with addition of our Lords words are made. And most plainly, 
(e) Tom. 10 ser. 181. de temp. c. 3. fine.  with this sign of the Cros the body of our Lord is cos●crated. This point is so plain in S Austin that for such it is confessed by M. 
(f) In Couels answer to Burges. p. 130.  Burges, and the 
(g) Treatise of the sign of the Cross. p. 27.  Puritans.  
S. Austin also taught before the receiving of the Sacrament 
(h) See before. c. 8. sect. 3.  fasting; and the use of holy bread. He also teacheth that, 
(i) Tom. 8. in Psal. 113. con. 2. post med.  vessels consecrated by their very ministry are called holy: whereof also saith S. 
(k) Ep. ad Theoph. Alex. ante libros paschales  Hierome, the sacred Chalices and holy coverings, by reason of touching the body and blood of our Lord, are to be worshipped (eadem maiestate) in like sort as the body and blood. And S. Austin with the 4. Carthage Council decreed that, 
(l) Can. 5.  the Subdeacon when he taketh Orders &c. shall take from the hand of the Bishop the empty Paten, and the empty Chalice, and from the hand of the Archdeacon, the Cruet with water and Towel. All which is confessed by the 
(m) Cent. 4. c. 9 col. 873. Osiand. cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 4.  Centurists and Osiander. And as for Deacons and their office, S. Austin saith, 
(n) Tom. 4. in quaest. Vet. et nou. Test. q. 101.  they power water upon the hands of the Priest, as we see in all Churches: so general was the usage hereof in this ancient age. And we have seen 
(o) See before. c. 8. sect. 5.  before that S. Austin taught that, the body of our Lord is offered upon the Altar: And that Altars were consecrated with the sign of the Cross and Chrism.  
We have seen likewise 
(p) See before. c. 9  concerning the Sacrament of Penance, that S. Austin mentioneth confession of our sins, and the priests absolution with imposition of hands, and enjoined penance: for the mitigating whereof pardons were sometimes granted.  
And as for the Sacrament of Orders we have likewise seen 
(q) See before. c. 11.  before the several rites used in ordaining Bishops, priests, Deacons, Subdeacons, Acolites, Exorcists, Readers, and Doorekeepers: In some whereof are mentioned, Chalice, Paten, Cruet, Towel, Waxed candles for Church lights, books of Exorcism etc. All which is confessed and reproved by Osiander for 
(r) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 4. 5.  superstitious. It was likewise decreed in the 4. Carthage 
(s) Can. 41.  Council that, the Deacon should only wear the Albe in time of the sacrifice or reading. Of which Canon Osiander also saith, 
(t) Cent. 5. p. 10.  these things smell of the idle Roman pontificial Ceremonies; S. Austin likewise 
(u) Tom. 4. quaest. vet. et nou. Test. q. 46. post med.  mentioneth as is also confessed by M. 
(x) 2. part. of the answ. p. 194.  Hutton the vestiment called Dalmatica, worn by Deacons. But to conclude many in one. M. Parker affirmeth that, 
(y) Against symbolising. part. 1. c. 1. p. 52.  The Fathers will have the garments to be religious which are used in the Church.  
Lastly concerning Matrimony, S. Austin 
(z) See before. c. 12.  before mentioned the priests blessing of the Bride and Bridegroom.   

S. Austin teacheth sundry Ceremonies concerning prayer now used in the Roman Church. SECTION. 2.  
TO forbear the many other Ceremonies, which would require a larger discourse, and to recite but some few of those which are concerning prayer. And first concerning even the Rogation week, D. Boys avoucheth that, 
(a) Exposition of the dominical epistles, the spring part. p. 219. 220.  It is more than probable that rogations were in the Church before the days of S. Austin; in proof whereof he allegeth divers of S. Augustine's wrytinges.  
Concerning Canonical hours, S. Austin adviseth thus, 
(b) Tom. 10. de temp. serm. 55. post init.  upon the vigils rise more early & above all things assemble together at the third, the sixth, and the ninth (hours.) And concerning prayer towards the East, the Centurists confess and say of Austin that he, 
(c) Cent. 5. c. 6. col. 677.  l 2 de sermone Domini in monte. testifieth that they did pray standing, and with their faces towards the East. And the like is confessed of S. Basil, and the other Fathers by the same 
(d) Cent. 4. col. 432.  Centuristes. In like sort S. Austin mentioneth 
(e) Tom. 4. de cura pro mort. c. 5. post init.  our kneeling dowen, our stretching out our hands, our lying prostrate upon the ground, our 
(f) Tom. 10. de verbis Domini. ser. 8. post init. and de temp. ser 48. and tom. 8. in Psal. 31. enar. 2. ante med.  knocking of our breasts, as Ceremonies helping to better devotion in prayer.  
He commendeth also the signing of our foreheads with the sign of the Cross: The people (saith 
(g) Tom. 6. cont. Faust. Manich. l. 12. c. 30. circa med.  he) are marked in their foreheads with the sign of our Lord's passion, in preservation of their saifty; and, 
(h) Tom. 9 in evang joan. tract. 3. post init.  he would not have a star to be his sign in the foreheads of the faithful, but a Cross. Yea speaking of himself and his own practice, he glorieth of the Cross in these words, 
(i) Tom. 8. in Psal. 141. circa med. and tom. 9 in Io. tract. 36. and tom. 8. in Psal. 46.  I am so far from being ashamed of the Cross, that I do not keep the Cross of Christ in a hidden place, but I carry it in my forehead. yea further speaking against the Pagan contemning the Cross he saith, 
(k) Tom. 8. in Psal. 141. circa med.  Let him insult against Christ crucified let me see the Cross of Christ in the foreheads of Kings.  
He likewise affirmeth that, 
(l) Tom. 2. ep. 178. mult. post med. and tom. 7. cont. lit. Petil. l. 2. c. 78. and see Willet upon the Romans in c. 16. p. 737. confessing this.  All nations do sing Amen, and Alleluia, in the Hebrew words, which (saith he) neither the Latin nor the barbarous may translate: And that 
(m) Tom. 3. de doc. Christ. l. 2. c. 11. prope init. And see this confessed by Fulke against. Rhem. Test. in reuel. 19 4. sect. 2.  for the more sacred authority of the words so remaining.  
The Centurists also report from him concerning the practice of the Christians in those times that, 
(n) Cent. 5. c. 6. col. 692.  as before Easter they spent the Lent with affliction of the body, as hath been said before, so after Easter they spent the Quinquagesima (or days between Easter and Whitsuntide) with much joy, so that etc. they used Alleluia in their Hymns and Canticles, as Austin relateth. Tract. 17. in Icanet Ep. 86. & 119. Of this also saith S. Austin himself, 
(o) Tom. 8. in Psal. 106. prope init. & tom. 10. de temp. ser. 151. circa med.  there is Alleluia, and twice Alleluia, which at certain times we are accustomed solemnly to sing, according to the ancient tradition of the Church. Again, speaking of Easter time he saith, that then 
(p) Tom. 2. ep. 119. ad januar. c. 15. prope fin.  fastings are released, and we pray standing etc. and Alleluia is sung. And according to this M. Hooker 
(q) Eccles. pol. l. 5. sec. 71. p. 199. 205. 215. And see Aug. Tom. 8. in Psal. 110. post init.  approveth the Churches appointing of several times, some in signification of our joy, and others of our sorrow.  
S. Austin with the fift Carthage Council decreeth that, 
(r) Can. 6.  as often as any doubt is had of Churches whether they be consecrated, without all fear let them be consecrated. Of this Canon Osiander saith, 
(s) Cen. 5. l. 1. c. 33. p. 157. and see the Centurists. cent. 5. col. 644.  the other part of this chapter concerning the cosecration of Churches is superstitious.  
The Church thus consecrated S. Austin affirmeth it to be a sanctuary for persons fleeing thereunto, whereof he writeth thus to Bonifacius, 
(t) Tom. 2. ep. 187. prope init. And see tom. 5. de ciu. Dei. l. 1. c. 4. and the Centurists. cent. 5. col. 720. 721.  thou hast taken violently a man out of the Church etc. therefore restore him again saife to the Church whom thou most irreligious haste taken away etc. and I do excommunicate thee until etc. And Osiander reciteth and reproveth as 
(u) Cent. 5. l. 2. c. 28. p. 294. and see Socrat. hist. l. 6. c. 5. & Concil. Agath. can. 29. & Tolet. 12. can. 10. and Ilerdense. can. 8. and Matisconense. 2. can. 8.  wholly superstitious the 5. Canon of the Arausecau Council, in which it was decreed that, such as fled to the Church ought not to be delivered up, but defended for the reverence and intercession of the holy place.  
Concerning also several parcels of the Mass, S. Austin speaking of Kyrie leison, affirmeth that, 
(x) Tom. 2. ep. 178. versus fin.  All Christian greeks, Latins, & barbarous, do pray for mercy in the greek tongue. And the like usage thereof, at Matins, Mass, and Evensong, is expressly affirmed 
(y) Can. 5.  (about S. Augustine's time) in the Council Vasense, and afterwards by S. 
(z) Lib. 7. ep. 63.  Gregory.  
He mentioneth also 
(a) Tom. 7. de bono persever. c. 13. and tom. 20. de temp. ser. 44. versus fin. and tom. 8. in Psal. 85. and Cyprian de orat. Dom. versus fin. and D. Boys in his exposition of the Lyturgy. p. 118. & Aug. tom. 2. ep. 57 ad Dardan. ant med. and tom 3. de spir. et lit. c. 11.  Sursum eorda, habemus ad Dominum, gratias agamus Domino Deo nostro, dignum et iustum est etc. which argueth the then public Lyturgy of the west Church, to have been for substance the same in form and language with ours now of this age.  
And yet in further proof of the Latin language of public service in those ancient times of S. Austin it is made yet more certain, in that no novel contradicted beginning thereof since S. Austin's time can be named, whereas to the contrary, Mass in Latin is confessed by the 
(b) Cent. 7. c. 6. col. 154.  Centurists to have been, Anno Domini. 681. And the usage thereof before this in England is acknowledged by the 
(c) Cent. 7. c. 7. col. 233. & 143. Osiand. Cent. 7. p. 189. Spark against john de Albinis. c. 17. p. 161.  Centurists, Osiander, and M. Spark: In so much that Willet himself writeth that, 
(d) Sinopsis contr. 4. q. 10. p. 160. 164.  about the year of our Lord 666. the Latin service was commanded to be used in all countries. And the no less antiquity thereof is granted by 
(e) Hist. sacram. part. 1. l. 3. p. 192.  Hospinian. But M White ariseth yet higher confessing that, 
(f) Way to the true Church. p. 378.  Mass in Latin, where the people understood it not (to have been) in the time of Gregory 600. years after Christ.  
And whereas all that our adversaries do hence infer is, that they do not expressly find Mass in Latin before these times; D. Spark very pertinently confesseth and answereth unto the like objection in another matter saying to the Puritans, 
(g) Persuasion to uniformity. p. 25.  The most diligent searcher of ancient writers cannot show the first beginning & original thereof, he may show when first he reads it was used, but that will not prove that it was not used before, but rather shows the contrary. Hereunto only yet add the example of all ancient Liturgies of the western Church whereof none be found in England, French, Spanish, Dutch, or Italian: And also that the public Lyturgy in Latin, though confessedly it was ancient, is not yet known to have been contradicted upon any first known novel beginning thereof sinnce S. Austin's time, and thereupon then let the reader judge but indifferently of the whole.  
Lastly S. Austin mentioneth the very word Mass itself, saying, 
(h) Tom. 10. de temp. serm. 91. init. And see ser. 237.  In the lesson which is to be read to us at Mass, we are to hear &c And whereas M. 
(i) Against Rhem. test. in 1. Cor. 20. sec. 9 fol. 279.  Fulke doth in evasion hereof over boldly without all proof answer, those sermons of S. Austin, wherein Mass is so named to be couterfeated, he is refelled therein by his own Protestant brethren Peter 
(k) In Crispinus of the estate of the Church. p. 141. And see himself in his common places in English. part. 4. c. 12. p. 216.  Martyr, and 
(l) De opificio Missae. l. 1. sec. 12. p. 5.  Crastovius, of whom thus writeth Crispinus, Many doubt whether these sermons be Austin's, but Peter Martyr saith, the style and sentences seem to be Austin's. I am of opinion that in the time of Austin the word Missa began to be usurped. And Crastovius confesseth that, S. Austin, and S. Ambrose, used the word Mass, and thereby understood that sacred action of the Christian Lyturgy. M. 
(m) Problem. p. 31.  Perkins also among his other exceptions against some of S. Augustine's sermons, forbeareth yet to except against these sermons now alleged.  
But not only S. Austin, but all the Fathers of the 2. 
(n) Can. 3.  Carthage Council, as also of the 4. 
(o) Can. 84.  & the Millevitan 
(p) Can. 12. and see Osiander confessing this cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 17. & l. 1. c. 33. p. 149.  Council do mention the word Missa: In so much that M. Fulke confesseth that; 
(q) Against Rhem. Test. in 1. Cor. 10.21. sect. 8.  about S. Austin's time the name of Missae began to be in use, as it seemeth by Council Millevitan. can. 12. Hereto I will only add, that where the Apostle promiseth concerning the public celebration of the Eucharist saying, 
(r) 1. Cor. 11. vers. vlt.  the rest I will dispose when I come; & yet wrote nothing more afterwards of that point, whereby are insinuated those many things concerning the same which are observed by tradition, S. Austin frameth 
(s) Tom. 2. ep. 118. ad januar. c. 6. post med.  thereupon his like answerable collection, and so plainly, that 
(t) De tradit. Apost. part. 3. l. ●. col. 815.  Hammelmannus rejecting him therein, betaketh himself to the unworthy, and yet common refuge of Protestants, of pretending S. Austin to be contrary to himself: And thus much of Ceremonies    

Concerning miracles reported by S. Austin, and making in further proof and confirmation of our Catholic religion by him formerly taught. CHAPTER. 18.  

S. Austin reporteth several miracles in proof of invocation of Saints. SECTION. 1.  
NOw for the further, and yet more clear understanding, & no less confirming of S. Augustine's now examined religion, we will next briefly recite or rather but abridge, certain of those miracles done in testimony thereof and reported by S. Austin himself in his undoubted book de civitate Dei. l. 22. c. 8. which (in regard of the known worthiness of the said book) is by a Protestant (termed by one of his own brethren 
(a) Preface of the translation to the Earl of Pembroke.  a famous Father) now lately translated into English. first then in proof of invocation of Saints, S. Austin relateth (as before that one 
(b) De civet. Dei. l 22. c. 8. & in the Engl. transl. p. 886.  Florentius of Hippo a poor old man, lost his upper garment, and being unable to buy another, he came to the shrine of the 20. martyrs, and prayed aloud unto them to help him to raiments etc. at his departure he spied a great fish upon the shore etc. which cutting in pieces he found in the belly thereof a ring of gold.  
He reporteth also of 
(c) Ibidem. and in the engl. trans. p. 887.  one Bassus a Syrian that dwelled at Hippo, who praying for his sick daughter at S. Stephen's shrine, and having her garment with him, word came by a boy that she was dead etc. he coming home finding all in tears, laid her garment upon her and she presently revived.  
He likewise relateth, 
(d) Ibidem. and p. 889.  a miracle wrought (saith he) amnngst us so famous, that I think none of Hippo but saw it, or knew it. The substance of this his report concerneth partly Paladia a devout woman and greatly diseased, who repaired for her health to the monument of S. Stephen, and descending 
(e) Ibidem. and p. 890.  from the steps whereupon she stood, she went to pray to the holy martyr (these last words are purposely left out in the English translation) and having touched the grate, she thereupon fel-downe as it were a sleep, and rose up again sound etc. then rose such an exultation both of men and women etc. their joy was so loudly expressed, that it was able to strike the strongest ear with stupour. This he reporteth as of a thing done in his own presence.  
He besides reporteth 
(f) Aug. tom. 4. de cura pro mort. c. 16. prope init.  the aparition made to the Citizens of Nola by (holy) Faelix when it was oppugned by the Barbarians: And though the 
(g) Cent. 5. c. 13. col. 1482.  Centurists reject such apparitions of the disceased, they do yet report 
(h) Cent. 5. c. 13. col. 1482. 1486. 1487. 1489.  other like from the other Fathers of S. Austin's age.   

S. Austin reporteth several miracles in proof of the honouring of Saictes relics. SECTION. 2.  
TO this purpose he saith, 
(h) Ibidem. and p. 883.  The miracle that was done at Milan when I was there, when a blind man obtained his sight, might come to the notice of many etc. the thing was done many people being witness that ran to the bodies of the martyrs Protasius, and Geruasius, who lying hid and altogether unknown, were found by Ambrose the Bishop by revelation in his sleep. This miracle S. Austin also recordeth in his book 
(i) Lib. 1. c. 13. post med.  of Retractations: And 
(k) Lib. 9 confess. c. 7.  elsewhere relateth that the bodies of Protasius, and Geruasius, were miraculously preserved after many years uncorrupted, and at last revealed to S. Ambrose.  
He reporteth also that, 
(l) Ibidem. and p. 886.  when Bishop Proiectus brought the relics of Stephen the martyr to his tomb, many people flocked together, amongst whom a blind woman prayed them to lead her to the Bishop that carried the holy relics: the Bishop gave her certain flowers which he had in his hand, she took them, put them to her eyes, and forthwith had her sight restored, she went before them rejoicing, those who were present being astonished.  
He testifieth also of 
(m) Ibidem. and p. 887.  Eucherius a Spanish Priest, that dwelled at Calam, who was cured of the stone by the same relics which Possidius brought thither: and being afterwards of another disease laid out so for dead (ut ei iam pollices ligarentur) that his hands were bound, by the help of the said martyr, when the garment of the said Priest was carried back from the shrine and laid upon his body as he lay, he was raised to life.  
The like he mentioneth of a certain 
(n) Ibidem. and p 887.  Votaress, who being sick and past recovery, sent her garment to the same shrine, but before it came back she was dead, yet her Parents covered her dead carcase with it, which done she presently revived. Elusinus (also saith 
(o) Ibidem. and p. 888.  he) a captain, seeing his son dead, took him and laid him upon the shrine etc. where after he had prayed a while, he found him revived.   

S. Austin reporteth some miracles in proof of the sign of the Cross: And of pilgrimage to the holy land. SECTION. 3.  
HE recordeth that, In Carthage 
(p) Ibidem. and p. 884.  Innocentia a most religious woman etc. had a canker in her breast, a disease, as the Physicians say, incurable, etc. she turned herself only to God in prayer, and was admonished in her sleep, that &c, what woman who being baptised did first meet her, should mark that place with the sign of the Cross, she did so, and forthwith was cured. This miracle is also reported by the 
(q) Gent. 5. c. 6. col. 661.  Centurists.  
And as concerning the holy Land, or Pilgrimage thereto, S. Austin affirmeth of a certain man that 
(r) Ibidem. and p 885.  had bestowed on him by a friend a little of the holy earth, brought from jerusalem, where Christ being buried rose the third day: he hanged it in his Chamber for the better avoidance of evil (or wicked illusions) from his person, now when the house was cleared of that infestation he began to think what to do with that earth, which for reverence thereto he would not keep longer in his chamber: It happened that I and my fellow Bishop Maximus being near etc. he desired us that it might be buried some where, and there a place to be made for public prayer etc. and it was done accordingly. There was there a young man troubled with the palsy, who hearing hereof desired his parents, that without delay they would bring him to that holy place, whether being brought, he prayed and forthwith he went away upon his own feet sound.   

S. Austin reporteth certain miracles in proof of the sacrifice of Christ's body; of Altars, and of penetration of bodies. SECTION. 4.  
HE recordeth that, 
(s) Ibidem. and p. 885.  one Hesperius who liveth at this day (saith he) by us, hath a farm● called Zubedie, in the territory of Fussali, which he having observed by the harm done to his servants, and , that his house was haunted with evil spirits, he desired our priests in my absence, that some one of them would go thither, by whose prayers they might departed, one went, and offered there the sacrifice of Christ's body (for which the English translation most corruptly saith, one went, prayed, and minstred the Communion) praying very earnestly that the vexation might cease, and by God's mercy it forthwith ceased. This miracle is confessed by the 
(t) Cent. 5. c. 6. col. 684. Hospinian. hist. sacram. part. 1. p. 389. 591. Lavath. de spectris. part. 3. c. 10. p. 254.  Centurists, and Hospinian, as also by Lavatherus, who reciting this story verbatim, inferreth thereupon, that it is clear that superstition presently, began etc. As also, to pray and sacrifice for souls.  
In proof of Altars he reporteth how that 
(u) Ibidem. and p. 886.  A young man possessed with a devil being brought to the memorial of the two martyrs Geruasius and Protasius etc. with a terrible noise catched fast hold upon the Altar, whence he durst not once move or could not, but held it as if he had been bound to it etc. than the devil within him with great howling asked that he might be spared etc. and departed out of the man.  
Concerning penetration of bodies, S. Austin reporteth how that 
(x) Ibidem. and p. 888.  Petronia a most excellent woman was miraculously cured of a great and continual sickness, in which all the helps of the Physicians failed etc. she affirmed that she was persuaded by a certain jew that she should sow a ring within a girdle of hair, which she should wear about her next her naked body: and the ring should have a stone in it which is found in the raines of an ox. Being tied as it were with this remedy (of the Magician) she came to the shrine of the holy martyr. But going from Carthage etc. rising to go on her journey, she saw the ring lying before her feet, and wondering she felt the girdle of hair wherewith she was girded: which when she perceived to be fast tied, as it was at first, she suspected that the ring was broken and so fell of; but when that was found to be whole she presumed she had received as it were a pledge of her future health by so great a miracle, and so losing the girdle, she cast it with the ring into the river. They do not believe this (saith S. Austin) that will not believe that Christ was borne without interruption of the virginal parts, nor passed into his Apostles, when the doors were shut. But let them inquire of this, and if they find it true, let them believe the other. The woman is famous, nobly borne, nobly married, she dwelleth at Carthage, a great City, a great person, those that are inquisitive after it, they will not suffer to be ignorant of it. The martyr himself, by whose prayers she was cured, believed in the son of the perpetual virgin, believed in him, who went into his Disciples the door being shut.   

S. Austin reporteth some miracles to be wrought by holy Oil. SECTION. 5.  
I Knew (saith S. 
(y) Ibidem. and p. 886.  Austin) a virgin in Hippo, who was freed from the devil by anointing herself with oil, into which the Priest that prayed for her had mingled his tears. As also, 
(z) Ibidem. and p. 888.  Irenaeus his son being dead, and ready to be buried, one of his friends advised him etc. that the body should be annealed with the oil of the same Martyr (S. Stephen.) It was done and he revived.   

A further confirmation of these foresaid miracles reported by S. Austin in proof of our Catholic religion. SECTION. 6.  
Whereas it is objected against these miracles, and against this chapter of S. Austin, that Viues in his annotations upon this chapter affirmeth that he suspected many things to have been 
(a) Viues in comment. in l. 22. de ciu. Dei. c. 8. And see his preface in comment. ad libros de civet. Dei.  added thereto: This his suspicion is not concerning any the miracles therein mentioned, but only concerning some few words (which he saith were in his opinion) added, velut declarands gratia, for more clear explication, of which he further saith, some I will leave out, others according to my custom I will be content only to point unto; whereas he neither omitteth nor excepteth against any of these miracles, but to the contrary there iustifyeth his addition of them from the answerable correspondence of divers ancient 
(b) In Aug. de ciu. Dei. l. 22. c. 8. at k. q. s. z. and in praefat. in comment. ad libros de ciu. Dei.  manuscriptes; and from divers old 
(c) In his other praef. there de veteribus interpretibus huius operis  expositors of this book, who never took exception against this chapter now in question. The divines also of Louvain in the fift Tome, after the end of 
(d) Pag. 313.  the books de civitate Dei. do mention 8. old manuscriptes, or copies there in particular named, according to which they had conferred and published the books de civitate Dei. Hereto I but annex, the 9 and 10. chapters of the same 22. book de ciu. Dei. most evidently relating to the many great miracles, there next before mentioned, which can not be true, if the forementioned miracles reported there c. 8. unto which they so relate, be but added or forged.  
In like manner whereas M. Maulin objecteth saying, 
(e) Defence of the Cath. faith, englished. art. 17. p. 323.  S. Austin Tom. 5. de ciu. Dei. c. 8. is to be suspected, for he speaketh there of miracles done in Africa etc. whereas himself, Tom. 2. ep. 137. saith that &c. in Africa there were not any miracles wrought in any place. In solution hereof, to forbere all distinguishment of times according to which the said 137. epistle might be written long before the other book de ciu. Dei. as in deed S. Austin in his 
(f) Lib. 2. and see Danaeus his like answer concerning another book. in prologom. ad Ang. Enchirid.  Retractions, placeth this book de ciu. Dei. among his other latest books (which only observation in other matters sufficeth to reconcile no less great seeming repugnances:) And to forbear likewise, that if repugnancy were admitted, greater proof is yet 
(g) See hereafter in this section at r. s.  alleged of this book de civitate Dei, then can be for that foresaid Epistle: for a Protestant writer in his preface usually set before S. Austin's Epistles printed in 8. censureth thus of them, that certain were mingled which at the first were found not to be Austin's &c. some absolutely to be forged etc. In so much as he setteth dowen in the 
(h) Pag. 757.  margin upon S. Augustine's foresaid words of trial by compulsory confession, wherupon M. Moulins now objected words are depending and immediately next following thereto, nowm iudicium, as thinking the same but novel and forged. But besides all this it is otherwise answered that as S. Austin ep. 137. most evidently 
(i) Tom. 2. ep. 137. ante med.  speaketh of certain suspected delinquents, who denying the offence, were for their trial sent, not indifferently to all places of the martyrs relics, where miracles were showed, but only unto certain such, as the offending party repairing thereto, was there miraculously compelled to confess his fault, (of which kind of compulsion S. 
(k) Ibidem. & Hierome in Apol. adversus jovin.  Austin, and S. Hierome, do make particular mention) so likewise his thereupon ensuing there denial of miracles in Africa is not concerning the miracles of health, formerly alleged from this book de ciu. Dei. much less than not indefinitely of all miracles (as Moulin pretendeth) but respectively as to the premises, and with limitation, as but denying only talia hic fieri, such other kind of miraculous compulsory confession of the offence to be done in Africa, as is last before mentioned: whereupon S. Austin there entereth into special consideration concerning the great diversity of miraculous gifts, diversely attributed both to persons and places. A thing to evident that Moulin himself doth in his very foresaid book acknowledge the foremencioned miracle 
(l) Defence etc. art. 9 p. 208.  of the house haunted with spirits, and cleared by the Priest saying Mass in it.  
To conclude therefore this passage concerning the miracles (most of them done in Africa at the memorial of S. Steph●n) reported by S. Austin in his foresaid book de ciu. Dei, it is yet further to be observed, that the same are also acknowledged and recorded by Euodius of whom thus writeth S. Austin, at 
(m) Lib. 22 de ciu. Dei. c. 8. and after the engl. trans. p. 888.  Vzaly near Utica, have many miracles b●ne wrought by power of the said martyr, (Stephen) where Bishop Euodius erected his memorial long before this of ours. The same Euodius did accordingly publish a special treatise in 2. books de miraculis Protomartyris Stephani, extant in S. Augustine's works Tom. 10. Also Sigebert G●mblacensis (500 years since) in l. de illust. 
(n) Cap. 15.  Eccles. script. maketh mention of this Euodius, and of his treatise of S. stephan's miracles, and the Century writers say from 
(o) Cent. 5. c. 10. col. 1137.  Trithemius, there is a book of Euodius extant, of the miracles done in Africa by the relics of S. Stephen: of which miracles mention is also made by S. 
(p) Tom. 10. de diverse. ser. 51.  Austin elsewhere, by 
(q) In script. Eccles. in Luciano. c. 46. in. Auito. c. 47. in Orosio. c. 39 Bede. l. Rerract. in act. Apost. c. 5. 8. et in l. de tempor. ratione. Nicep. hist. l. 14. c. 9  Genadius, Bede, and Nicephorus. A truth so clear that Hospinian confesseth that 
(r) De Templis. p. 301.  Austin telleth many true miracles done by the sign of the Cross & the devil put to flight, de ciu. Dei. l. 22. c. 8. Yea he further saith, 
(s) Pag. 138.  hither b long those other true miracles which other Father's mention, as also Austin de ciu. Dei. l. 22. c. 8. And whereas Duraeus objecteth these foresaid miracles. D. Whitaker denyeth not but confesseth saying, 
(t) Reply to Duraeus. p. 886.  I do not think these miracles vain (and therefore not forged) which are affirmed to have been done at the monuments of the martyrs. Moreover our adversaries themselves have in such like respect not forborn to translate and publish in english S. Austin's foresaid book of miracles.  
In further confirmation of all which, I might yet add sundry other miracles mentioned by S. Austin in sundry 
(u) Tom. 1. l. 1. Retract. c. 13. post med. tom. 7. de unit. Eccles. c. 19 ante med. Tom. 1. l. 9 confess. c. 7. Tom. 9 in joan. tract. 120. circ. med.  other of his writings, as also by 
(x) Orat. in mamant. Naz. orat. in Cipri. Chrisost. l. contra Gentiles. Amb. ser. de S. Geruas. et Protas. Hier. cont. Vigilan. & ep. ad Eustochium. and in vita Hilarion. Sulpt. in vita Martini. and see Cent. 5. c. 13. from col. 1478. till 1493. & cent. 4. c. 13. from col. 1433. till col. 1456.  S. Basil. S. Gregory Nazianzen, S. Chrisostome, S. Ambrose, S. Hierome, Sulpitius, and the Century writers; against all which if any yet unsatisfied, shall oppose his own bare unwarranted denial, we leave that man as much more worthy of contempt then further reply: And thus much briefly concerning such miracles collected from S. Austin, as do clearly convince what religion it was, whether Catholic or Protestant, which was by him professed, and by miracles thus confirmed.    

Concerning such sayings of S. Austin as are usually objected by our adversaries against his former Catholic doctrines, confessed for such by Protestants, and confirmed by miracles. CHAPTER. 19  

Such places are answered, as are urged against the Canonical Scriptures: against Traditions, and the authority of Counsels. SECTION. 1.  
AGainst the book of Maccabees, M. Moulin objecteth that S. Austin saith, 
(a) Defence. p. 152.  The book of Maccabees is received not unprofitably of the Church, if men read it soberly: M. Moulin in the same place giveth the answer himself, which in substance is, that S. Austin said this as in respect of Razes killing himself, whose example the Donatists of indiscreet zeal followed, in regard whereof S. Austin required this sobriety; explaining further there, and elsewhere 
(b) Tom. 2. ep. 61. post med.  (which Moulin omitteth) that, The Scripture of the Maccabees hath, touching Razes death, told how it was done, but not commended it as though it were to be done. And in the book of judges 
(c) Cap. 16.30.  is reported the like of Samson, whom yet the Apostle 
(d) Hebrews. 11.32. and Aug. de ciu. Dei. l. 1. c. 21.  commendeth.  
Whereas M. Carthwright 
(e) In hooker's Eccles. pol. l. 2. sec. 7. p. 118. 119.  objecteth against unwritten traditions, certain obscure sayings of S. Austin, and other Fathers: M. Hooker forbeareth not (in our so clear a case) by his special explication and answer, to explain, and clear them to our hands.  
D. Fulke 
(e) In hooker's Eccles. pol. l. 2. sec. 7. p. 118. 119.  objecteth against the authority of Counsels, that S. Austin teacheth that, 
(f) Answer to a counterf. Cath. p. 89. And Aug. tom. 7. de Bapt. cont. Don. l. 2. c. 3. post med.  general Counsels themselves may be often amended, the former by the later, when by some experience of things, that is opened which before was shut, and that known which before was unknown: But his meaning here is only concerning matters of fact, or at most but concerning such points of faith, as were by former Counsels, not erroneously determined, but only left undefyned, and afterwards resolved upon by later Counsels; for S. Augustine's words of Amendment argue him not to speak of faith (seeing faith or heresy is not properly said to be amended) but of matters of fact, which are subject to amendment. A truth yet more evident in that this amendment is here said to come to pass by the experience of things, unto which experience not doctrine of faith, but matters of fact be properly subject.  
M. jewel objecteth 
(g) Reply. art. 4. p. 272.  the testimony of S. Austin concerning Constantine the great, undertaking the judgement of Bishops, and their cause upon appeal made to him in that behalf, but M. 
(h) 2. Reply. part. 2. p. 163.  Carthwright answereth hereto in our behalf, that, Austin saith, that the Emperor was driven by the Donatistes' importunity, who made no end of appealing unto him, to give sentence in that matter, for the which also he was to crave pardon of the Bishops. To which purpose also S. Austin, and Optatus have 
(i) See before c. chapter. 4. sec. 6.  formerly made their several, answers.   

Such places are answered, as are objected from S. Austin against Baptism by women in case of necessity: And against the real presence. SECTION. 2.  
Master Carthwright objecteth against Baptism by women, the 4. 
(k) Can. 100  Carthage Council saying, 
(l) In Whitguiftes def. tract. 9 c. 5. p. 523.  Let not a woman presume to Baptism: But his answer is given him by his Protestant adversary M. Whitguift in these words, 
(m) Ibidem.  that Canon inhibiteth women to Baptism in the open Church, and this (saith he) is a sufficient answer. with whom agreeth Osiander, affirming that this objected Canon is, 
(n) Cent. 4. l. 1. c. 1. p. 19  rightly understood, de Baptismate publico, of public Baptism.  
Against the blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist, some object S. Austin to call it sometimes a sign or figure; but this we also acknowledge it to be, and the same yet no more against our real presence, then confessedly it is against the other not only Sacramental, but also real presence affirmed by 
(o) Instit. l. 4. c. 17. parag. 7. & 10. & 32. jewel. reply. p. 341. Pol. In Syllog. p. 307. Beza in ep. theol. ep. 5. p. 59  Caluin, jewel, Polanus, and Beza, by some of whom and others this seeming difficulty is avoided & answered: for Caluin writeth that. 
(p) In omnes Pauli ep. in 1. Cor. 11. p. 323.  whereas some gather from hence that Christ is absent from the supper, because a memory (or remembrance) is not but of a thing absent, the answer is ready etc. saying also of the Sacrament, 
(q) Instit. de caena Dom. c. 12. p. 331.  It doth not only figure (or represent) but also truly exhibit etc. And again, 
(r) Institut. l. 4. c. 17. sec. 10.  There is no cause that any should object that it is a figurative speech, whereby the name of the thing signed is given to the sign. whereof other Caluinistes also say 
(s) Collatio Cath. orthod. etc. p. 548.  there is not any found amongst the Orthodoxal, who affirm the body of Christ to be only figured or signified in the supper of the Lord: which also M. Bruce explaineth yet more fully saying, 
(t) Sermon upon the Sacrament pag. 10.  I call them signs, because they have the body and blood of Christ conjoined with them, yea truly is the body and blood of Christ conjoined with the bread etc. and not in respect only of their representation are they called signs. But Beza writing to Alemannus, who objected against beza's foresaid real presence (as the Caluinistes usually do against ours) an obscure sentence of S. Austin, answereth saying, 
(u) Ep. theol. ep. 5. p. 59  therefore that place of Austin in Psalm. 98. you are not to eat this body which you see etc. thou art not so to take, as though it favoured thy opinion, for Austin doth not so exclude all eating of the true body. In like manner also answereth Bucer saying, 
(x) Scripta Anglicana. p. 678.  Here it is objected, that the holy Fathers, especial Austin, do call the bread the sign of the Lords body. which he explaineth further saying. where do the holy Fathers make the Sacramental signs, the signs of Christ absent; etc. The Fathers call them signs, but they understand signs that do exhibit. And the like answer is 
(y) Tom. 7. Wittemberge. fol. 405.  given by Luther.  
Hereby and otherwise is also answered that common objection taken from S. Austin saying, 
(z) Tom. 2. ep. 23. ad Bonifac. versus fin.  As in a certain manner the Sacrament of Christ's body, is the body of Christ, the Sacrament of Christ's blood, is the blood of Christ, so the Sacrament of faith, is faith: for 
(a) Ep. ad Frudegardum.  Paschasius and 
(b) Lib. cont. Berengarium.  Lanfranfrancus do answer this to be spoken of Christ's body and blood, as in respect of the Cross, and that the external Sacrament of both kinds, though being but (as in respect of his passion upon the Cross) a representation of his body there crucified, and of his blood there shed might nevertheless in respect of such representation, be termed the thing itself in such manner suffering upon the Cross (for of that Immolation so once made in the words there next before he speaketh.) Algerus resteth in the other answer before mentioned, affirming the Sacrament to be called Christ's body both 
(c) Lib. 10. de sacram. Euchar.  properly and improperly, improperly, (saith he) for as much as concerneth the species and form of the elements, properly, for as much as concerneth the sumbstance which it containeth. And if S. Austin otherwise with Suinglius had intended an only Sacramental representation, without real presence of the thing itself thereto annexed, why then should he in the now objected words, term Baptism a Sacrament of faith, and not a Sacrament of Christ's blood? This point Carthwright observed, & therein disliked S. Austin, saying therefore as to this now very objected sentence, 
(d) In Whitguiftes def. tract. 16. p. 619.  I can not allow S. Augustine's reason which he maketh, nor the proportion that is between the Sacrament of the body and blood, and his body and blood itself on the one side, & between the Sacrament of Baptism and faith on the other side etc. whereas he should have said, that as the supper being the Sacrament of the body of Christ, is after a sort the body of Christ, so baptism being a Sacrament of the blood of Christ, is after a sort the blood of Christ: so many ways are these common objections answered, and that by Protestants themselves. Caluin 
(e) Institut. l. 4. c. 17. parag. 34.  also objecteth S. Austin as seeming to 
(f) Tom 5. l. 21. de ciu. Dei. c. 25. vers. fin.  deny that the wicked do receive the body of Christ in the Sacrament; in explication hereof it is observable, that S. Austin mentioneth a double receiving of Christ's body, the one only Sacramental, whereby is received Christ's body present under the Sacramental forms of bread and wine, common with the wicked & the good; the other spiritual, of which S. Austin to the full clearing of this point saith, 
(g) Tom. 10. de verbis Domini. serm. 2.  There is a certain manner of eating that flesh etc. according to which whosoever eateth remaineth in Christ etc. but after a certain manner. Now by this spiritual together with the Sacramental receiving, is likewise received the grace and spiritual effects of that body peculiar only to the good; and this kind of receiving Christ's body it is which he denyeth to the wicked: In which respect be commendeth those, 
(h) Tom. 5. de ciu. Dei. l. 21. c. 25. ante med. & prope fin.  who eat the body of Christ, not only in the Sacrament, but in very deed; admonishing therefore that, 
(i) Tom. 9 in joan. tract. 27. versus fin.  we eat the flesh & blood of Christ not only in the Sacrament, which also many wicked do, but that we eat it to the participation of the spirit. And again, 
(k) Ibidem. tract. 26. post med.  See brethren that you eat the heavenly bread spiritually; And yet most pregnantly, 
(l) Tom. 10. de verbis Apost. ser. 2. This sermon is cited for S. Aust. by Bede. in 1. Cor. 10. and ad Philip. c. 2.  The blood and body of Christ will be life to every one, if that which is taken in the Sacrament visibly, be eaten spiritually (in ipsa veritate) in very truth; explaining yet further of the wicked that 
(m) Tom. 9 in joan. tract. 26. versus fin.  he doth not eat his flesh spiritually etc. although he cut with his teeth the Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ carnally and visibly. And lastly he concludeth as 
(n) See before. c. 8. sec. 2.  before, that the wicked do according to the firster foresaid sense truly receive Christ's body; And this so plainly that Bucer reciting the common objection from S. Austin concerning panem Dominum, and panem Domini, concludeth nevertheless of the wicked saying, 
(o) Scripta Anglicana. p. 679.  In how many places doth Austin affirm, that they also receive the body and blood of our Lord? how often doth he write, that judas himself received the body and blood of the Lord?  
In proof also against Incircumscription, it is urged that S. Austin saith, 
(q) Ep. 57 ad Dardan.  Take space of places from bodies and they will be no where: And against the being of a body in many places at once; It is likewise objected, that S. Austin affirmeth of Christ, 
(r) Lib. 20. cont. Faust. c. 11. post. med.  that he could not be at one time in the Sun, and in the Moon, and upon the Cross: But Chemnitius answereth for himself and us that 
(s) Loc. come. part. 3. fol. 195.  Austin when he disputeth of the common law and order of nature, he saith, If spaces of places be taken away, bodies have not where to be, nor can be: But yet he doth not therefore deny, when the Scripture delivereth that the body of Christ entered through the doors being shut, where penetration of dimensions being made, two bodies were in one place or place was wanting to a body, but he affirmeth that by the power of the law of God, the law of nature doth cease. Avouching yet further hereof that, All antiquity with one consent etc. doth so take it and understand it. But hereof we have spoken more largely 
(t) See before. c. ●2 sec. 3.  heretofore.   

Such places are answered, as are urged from S. Austin against invocation of Saints, Images, and relics. SECTION. 3.  
AGainst invocation of Saints, M. Moulin 
(a) Defence. etc. englished. art. 8. p. 199.  objecteth these words of S. Austin, 
(b) Tom. 5. de ciu. Dei. l. 22. c. 10. circ. med.  At which sacrifice etc. martyrs are named in their place and order, but they are not invocated by the Priest who sacrificeth. S. Austin hereby only meaneth, that in the act of sacrificing due only to God, not martyrs but only God himself is invocated or sacrificed unto: accordingly as he most evidently explaineth himself in the same treatise saying, 
(c) Ibidem. l. 8. c. 27. prope init. And tom. 6. cont. Fast. Manich. l. 20. c. 21.  who of the faithful ever heard the Priest standing at the Altar etc. to pray, I offer sacrifice to thee o Peter, o Paul, or o Cyprian; This therefore is the only invocation, to wit, by way of sacrifice, which he impugneth.  
M. Mouling also 
(d) Vbi supra. art. 8. p. 198.  urgeth these other words of S. 
(e) Tom. 7. l. 2. cont. Parmen. c. 8. ante et post med.  Austin Permenianus in a certain place maketh the Bishop mediator between God and the people etc. If therefore Paul should be a mediator etc. the reason of Paul should not be good, wherein he said one God, one mediator etc. whereupon Moulin inferreth that S. Austin said thus as against mediatorship or intercession: But D. 
(f) Orthodoxus jacobus. p. 48.  Gordan, though objecting this saying, yet explaineth there from S. Austin's other words in the same place, that this doth not take away our mutual intercession one for another, showing further also that, 
(g) Ibidem. p. 45.  Christ is the mediator of God and men (not because he is the only mediator of intercession but) because in him being one, God and man are joined. As for Parmenian the Donatist, his error being, that the grace of the Sacrament did so depend upon the goodness of the Priest, that a good Priest Baptising did sanctify, and that the evil Priest Baptising did defile; this tying so of grace to the priests personal goodness, did (as S. Austin argueth against it) consequently infer, that the Priest should be the mediator of grace and redemption, which is the point that S. Austin confuteth in the place objected.  
Against pictures and relics this place of S. Austin is ordinarily objected, 
(h) Tom. 1. de moribus Eccles. c. 34. post med.  do not follow the troops of ignorant men, who in their very religion are superstitious etc. I know that there are many worshippers of sepulchers and pictures. I know that there are many who drink most riotously over the dead, and bringing banquets to the dead bodies, they bury themselves over those that are buried, and ascribe their gluttony and drunkenness to religion. This he spoke not as against all religious reverence done before the pictures, or at the monuments of the dead Saints or martyrs, but only as against those who put the same in practice promiscuously to or before the picture or sepulchre of any dead person, whether martyr or other, and the same also not without luxurious excess of drinking: This superstitious and ignorant abuse he there taxeth, as also elsewhere saying, 
(i) Tom. 2. ep. 63. Aurelio. circa med.  drunkenness an ryetous banquets in Churchyards, were thought by the carnal and ignorant people, not only to be the honours of Martyrs, but also the comforts of the dead. Besides this we have seen 
(k) See before. c. 14. sec. 3. 4.  before S. Augustine's acknowledgement of the reverence due to profitable signs, and relics: As also the orderly usage 
(l) Tom. 1. l. 6. confess. c. 2. and tom. 5. de ciu. Dei. l. 8. c. 27. ante med.  of bread and wine etc. at the sepulchers of Saints, which himself reporteth his own mother Monica to have practised, until the contrary upon just occasion was prohibited by S. Ambrose. And he yet further saith, 
(m) Tom. 2. ep. 42. ad Madaurenses. circa med.  you have seen etc. the highest top of the most noble Empire (or the Emperor) bowing dowen his crown to pray at the sepulchre of Peter the fisher: But of S. Austin's allowance of pictures, and relics, we have seen more largely 
(n) See before. c. 14. sect. 3. 4.  before.   

Such places are answered as are urged from S. Austin against Purgatory. SECTION. 4.  
DOctor Fulke 
(o) Against Rhem. test. in 1. Cor. 3. sec. 6. fol. 267.  objecteth these words of S. Austin 
(p) Tom. 7. Hypognost. count. Pelag. l. 5.  The third place we are utterly ignorant of: But S. Austin said this as only against the Pelagians who (as M. 
(q) Of the Church l. 5. c. 19 p. 71. And see the same in Danaeus in Isagog. Christ. part. 4. p. 557.  Field confesseth) taught that there was besides heaven, and hell, another third place of everlasting continuance for such children as died unbaptized. Now in respective confutation of this said imaginary third place of everlasting rest, S. Austin said as is objected: otherwise how full and resolute S. Austin was concerning Purgatory, and prayer for the dead we have clearly seen 
(r) See before. c. 14. sec. 1.  before, and for such confessed by Protestants.  
But D. 
(s) Against Rhem. test. in 1. Cor. 3. sec. 6. fol. 267.  Fulke further objecteth, that S. Austin saith, 
(t) Tom. 3. Enchirid. c. 69. init. et 68 post. init.  It is not incredible that some such thing is done after this life, and it may be inquired of, whether it be so and either be found or hid: S. Austin uttered these words not as being doubtful of Purgatory, but only whether that some of the faithful after this life be saved so much later or sooner by a certain Purgatory fire, as they more or less loved their transitory goods. So that his doubt there is not, whether there be any Purgatory, which by the very words objected is rather supposed, & in this very same book is confessedly affirmed, but, only (as he yet further in this place objected, explaineth him 
(u) Ibidem. c. 68, post init.  self) whether that such affection to worldly things lawfully enjoined (as to wife, children &) that without grief of mind he cannot part with them, be punished in Purgatory or not. This only is his doubt, and may by us yet be doubted of, but without all scruple or doubt of Purgatory in him or us.   

Such places are answered, as are v●ged from S. Austin against justification by works, freewill, and merit of works. SECTION. 5.  
Wereas' some object in behalf of justification by faith, and against works, that S. Austin in some places affirmeth only faith to justify. This is explained and answered 〈◊〉 
(x) See before. c. 13. s●c. 2. & 3.  by D. Whitaker, and Melancthon, both of them affirming that S. Austin in those places only intendeth to seclude such works from justification as go before faith, not such as follow; which is the same which we all teach.  
Others likewise object certain places which seem to make against freewill; but in those places S. Austin writ against the Pelagians, who to much enhabled freewill, and natural works, as of themselves sufficient 
(y) Tom. 2. ep. 200. ad Asellicum .. multo ante med. an ep. 89. ad Hillarium. quaest. 2. init.  without grace, which doth nothing prejudice us, disclaiming in the sufficiency either of freewill or works without God's grace. But Hemingius doth answer this objection very directly saying, 
(z) Lib. de universali gratia. p. 105.  As often as Austin weakeneth freewill, he speaketh against the opinion of Pelagius, for otherwise he often attributeth freewill to man, and confesseth that man without freewill can neither live well nor sin etc. nor that there is any place for rewards or punishments: wherefore it is diligently to be observed, in wh●● respect freewill is some times affirmed and sometimes denied by S. Austin.   

Such places are answered as are objected from S. Austin concerning vows, miracles, and Ceremonies. SECTION. 6.  
SOme object certain places 
(a) De sancta virginitate. c. 34. de bono viduitatis. c. 9 & 10. & ep 72. ad Bonifacium.  of S. Austin to make for the marriage of votaries, as that such marriage should be in force and not void: In answer hereto, and to other like objected sayings from S. 
(b) Lib. 1. ep. 11. Epiph. haer. 61.  Cyprian, Epiphanius, and others, it is to be observed, that there is a double vow, the one private or simple, wherein is nothing but the parties bare promise, the other termed a solemn vow, wherein is not only a promise, but a delivery also made of the thing promised, whereof the Church taketh solemn acceptance, and the party is thereupon by the Church specially consecrated to Christ: In the firster case, the marriage though sinful by breach of the simple vow, is yet in force, and of this vow are the Fathers objected sayings understood; but in the other foresaid case where the thing promised is solemnly delivered over the special consecration of the party, all pretended marriage is a mere nullety, and so by S. Austin and other Fathers adjudged; for in this case any pretended marriage is termed by the fourth 
(c) Can●. 104.  Carthage Council, crimen adulterij, the sin of adultery, and therefore nothing less than marriage; in so much as Osiander reprehendeth this Canon, as affirming 
(d) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 20.  spiritual marriage betwixt consecrated widows and Christ. And it is further termed Adultery by S. 
(e) Ep. 6. ad Theodor. Basil. de vera virginit. Ambros. ad virg. laps. c. 5. Aug. Tom 8. in Psal. 83. multo ante med. Innocent. ep. ad Victoricum. c. 12. 13. Concil. 2. Turon. can. 21. whereof see the Centurists. cent. 6. c. 9 col. 575. Osiander. Cent. 6. l. 3. c. 2. p. 209. Hamelman. de tradit. Apost. part. 3. l. 3. col. 814.  Chrisostome, S. Basil, S. Ambrose, S. Austin, S. Innocentius, and by S. Hierome, not only adultery but incest. And S. Innocentius mentioneth the former distinction of simple and solemn vow, affirming of the first, that the breach thereof is sinful, but the marriage true, but of the latter, that it is adultery and not marriage.  
D. Fulke 
(f) Confut. of Purgat. p. 333.  objecteth S. 
(g) Tom. 7. de unit. Eccles. c. 19 prope init.  Austin as disclaiming from miracles; it is answered that S. Austin writing against the Donatists, who bragged of their secret apparitions (common likewise to the Protestants Hacket, Carolastadius, Suinglius, and Luther) which he termed the false reports of lying men, or else the wonders of deceiving spirits, doth not reject, but in that special disputation only forbear the argument of miracles, especially seeing that the miracles whereof the Donatists so bragged, were (though granted for true) but such as the Devil might bring to pass, as not exceeding the power of nature. But as concerning such true miracles as exceed all power of nature and secundary causes, as curing the diseased without means of physic, raising of the dead etc. these are urged by 
(h) Tom. 5. de ciu. Dei. l. ●2. c. ●.  S. Austin himself as a strong argument against the Pagans: In so much that he numbering up 
(i) Tom. 6. cont. ep. fundam. c. 4. ante med.  the many things that held him in the Church's bosom, nameth expressly miracles for one.  
Against Ceremonies sundry 
(k) Fulke against Rhem. test. in Gal. 4.3. sec. 3. Morton in his appeal. p. 53 Caluin, institut. l. 4. c. 10. sec. 13.  Protestants do object S. 
(l) Tom. 2. ep. 119. c. 19  Austin; but he in the very place objected explaineth himself to speak only against such, which neither are contained in the authorities of Scriptures, nor found to be decreed in the Counsels of Bishops nor strengthened with the custom of the universal Church etc. so that scarce, or not at all, can reasons be found which people followed in the making of them. To which purpose also M. Wh●●guif● directly answereth to this place objected saying, 
(m) Defence. tra●●. 10. c. 2. p. 545.  Austin. ep. 119. speaketh but of unprofitable ceremonies etc. neither grounded upon the Scriptures, determined by Counsels, nor confirmed by custom.   

A further answer in general to all such objections as are urged from S. Austin, or others of the Fathers. SECTION. 7.  
AS concerning all these & such other like trivial and unworthy objections so often from S. Austin and the other Fathers by our adversaries reinforced and urged, and by our writers more than often explained and answered, we do hereby once for all premonish and commend to the reader's remembrance these few further general observations next ensuing, in more full explanation of these & other like occurring obscure sayings of S. Austin & other Fathers wherein (as our adversaries acknowledge 
(n) Beza ep. theol. ●p. 82. p. 382. Snecanus method. descript. p. 429. Chemnitius examen. part. 1. fol. 80. White in his way to the true Church. pref. to the reader, sec. 17.  and answer) they could not possibly foresee to write of all things so distinctly & clearly, as is now to be wished.  
The first than is, that (according to the direction even given by Protestants) we do understand the obscure saying of any Father, agreeably to his many more plainer sayings delivered in other places of the same matter: and much more than that we do not insist upon any seeming doubtful saying against those many more which are plain, and for such confessed. Of this observation 
(o) Snecanus method. descript. p. 414.  Snecanus allegeth Tertulian saying, It is fit that the fewer be understood by the more. And again, lest one speech should overthrew many others, it is to be expounded according to all, rather than against al. Hereof also saith Pezelius, 
(p) In argument. ●t object. p. 254.  A profitable rule in teaching is delivered, that it is fit that the few be understood by the more. M. Carthwright yet saith further, 
(q) 2. Reply. part. 1. p. 627.  If it be a simple answer to set one author against another, it is much more simple to set one authority at variance with itself, without showing any way of reconciliation.  
And yet what more frequent with Protestants then this simple kind of answer for doth not D. Whitaker, in steed of better answer say, 
(r) De sacra Scriptura. p. 690.  though (Austin) in this place seemeth to favour Traditions, yet in other places he defend●th earnestly the perfection of the Scripture. And of S. Basil he likewise saith concerning the same traditions, 
(s) Ibidem. p. 670.  he fighteth with himself. And 
(t) De principiis Christ. dog. l. 2. c. 10. p. 675.  Lubertus saith, I oppose Basil against Basil. As also, 
(u) Whitaker. ubi supra p. 678.  Chrisostome fighteth with himself. And, 
(x) Lubertus. ubi supra. p. 676.  I oppose Chrisostome to Chrisostome. Neither 
(y) Ibidem. p. 678.  doth Damascen agree with himself. The like simple answer is given by Hospinian against S. Austin saying, 
(z) Hist. sacram. part. 1. in indice 3. Patrun. at the word Augustinus. col. 3.  He wanteth the testimony of Scripture▪ neither agreeth he with himself, yea, he contradicteth himself. Of whom also saith 
(a) Synopsis de Patribus. p. 34.  Tossanus, Austin is often wavering, and not agreeing with himself in all things. with these also answereth no less simply Malancthon saying, 
(b) In ep. ad Rom. in c. 14. p. 418.  I know many things may be gathered out of the ancient (writers) which are contrary to our opinions etc. I provoke not to all the writers, ●ut to the better sort, Ambrose, Austin, and as far forth as the rest agree with these, who seeing they sometimes speak contrary things, they shall give us leave if we reprehend some things. But Beza extendeth this simple kind of answer yet further, for speaking of the ancient Fathers in Theodosius his time, he saith, 
(c) In nou. Test. in praefat. ad principem Condensem. p. 4.  I confess that as then there were many most learned Bishops, but withal I affirm etc. that scarce any of them can be found, who differeth not, both from himself, and from many others in matters of greatest moment. Caluin also having mecioned the ancient Fathers and better writers of this age, saith of them, 
(d) Instit. in praefat. ad Regem. Gal. p. 7.  Those holy men were ignorant of many things, they do often fight amongst themselves, and sometimes with themselves. And the like saith Peter Mart●r, 
(e) De votis. p. 463.  that chiefly is to be observed that the Fathers do not always agree amongst themselves, and sometimes not one with himself.  
Wherefore to omit this kind of simple answer, as in itself base, to the Father's injurious, and used only by such as find themselves galled, or rather condemned by the same Fathers, seeing the forementioned objections of our adversaries taken from S. Austin, being at the least but places obscure and questionable, and those other by us alleged being plain, and for such by the learnedst Protestants acknowledged, it were absurd and against all sequel of reason, either to urge these places as one contrary to another, or to expound and determine the sense of those that be so confessedly plain and out of question, by these other whose sense is obscure, doubtful, and yet depending in question; which only observation being in itself so clear and manifest, sufficeth of itself to dissolve all the foresaid, and other objections framed from S. Austin or other Fathers by so many Protestant writers.  
The second observation is, that we also understand the Father's doubtful sayings according to the then common received opinion of the other Fathers, as is by S. Austin himself in this case confessedly observed: for whereas julianus the heretic, to prove that children are without original sin, objected this sentence of S. Chrisostome, we baptise Infants though they have no sins: S. Austin teacheth how to understand this obscure sentence saying, 
(f) Tom. 7. contra julian. Pelag. l. 1. c. 6. multo ante med.  intellige propri●, understand it of sins of their own, (or actual) and there is no contention; but thou wilt say, why did not (Chrisostome) ad propria, their own? why do we think but because disputing in a Catholic Church, he thought he should not be otherwise understood, nobody was troubled with such a question, you not as then wrangling, he spoke securely. This point and very example is observed by Peter 
(g) Common places in english. part. 2. p. 228.  Martyr, as also by Chemnitius, who thereupon observeth & inferreth 
(h) Examen. part. 1. fol. 80. And see Snecanus in method. descript. p. 429. 430. 432.  that, In this sort Austin, de natura et gratia, applieth the sentences of Hillary, Ambrose, Chrisostome, Hierome, which Pelagius had alleged in confirmation of his error, according to the Analogy of faith, adding a fit interpretation.  
Now according to this observation and practice of S. Austin al. our adversaries mistaken objections from him are again at once determined by the confessed contrary doctrine in the next Chapters alleged from the other Fathers, that severally lived in the same age with S. Austin, and in the other ages next before and after him. As also according to both these foresaid rules may easily be avoided that pretended necessity of children's receiving the Eucharist under pain of damnation, wherewith S. Austin is by D. 
(i) Answer to a counterf. Catholic. p. 87.  Fulke and many others so often and so seriously mischarged. For hereto it may be answered, that in S. Austin's opinion▪ children in Baptism received the effect of the other Sacrament, without which virtual communicating he thought them not saved: otherwise that he did not think their Sacramental receiving of the Eucharist necessary appeareth, first, in that he taught before, that in Baptism was a plenary remission of all sins. Secondly in that our adversaries cannot allege any his saying affirming directly to to the point, that a Baptised child dying before his communicating is damned. Thirdly in that S. Austin teacheth that 
(k) Serm. ad Infantes apud Bedam. in 1. Cor. 10. And see Tom. 7. l. 1 de pec. mer. et rem. c. 19 and tom. 5. de civet. Dei. l. 21. c. 16. and after the english transl. p. 856.  none ought any ways to doubt, but that every one of the faithful is made partaker of the body & blood of our Lord, when he is made in Baptism a member of Christ, and that he is not estranged from the fellowship of that bread and Chalice, although before he eat that bread, and drink the Chalice, he depart out of this world being in the unity of the body of Christ, This point is so clear in S. Austin as that the 
(l) Cent. 5. c. ●. col. 604.  Centurists do in particular free him from this impution.  
As for S. Austin's communicating to Infants (but without all opinion of the necessity before supposed) we grant his doctrine thereof: A doctrine likewise holden good not only by S. Cyprian, who reciteth a 
(m) Serm. de lapsis. circ. med.  memorable miracle concurring therewith, and one in his own presence; But also Musculus, who maketh true and 
(n) Loc. come. e. de caena Dom. p. 34●.  direct answer to those words of S. Paul, Let a man prove himself, and allegeth 
(o) Ibid. p. 341.  the ancient Church's judgement and practice in proof thereof. A doctrine also still defended 
(p) Lib. ep. Oecolam. et Suing. p 305. 329.  by the Bohemians.  
The third observation is, that according to our adversaries own 
(q) Chemnitius examen. part. 1. fol. 80. Snecanus method. de script. p. 290. Bancroftes survey. p. 336. Humphrey in jesuit. part. 2. rat. 5. p. 501. & rat. 2. p. 129. and see S. Basil. ep. 64.  rule, we do discern the Father's sayings by them uttered in heat or fervour of disputation, from those other which they writ dogmatically; for that in the first kind, the Father's being more attended and busied how to convince and overcome, than always precisely observant or circumspect of their manner of speaking (which they never doubted would be understood otherwise then according to the Catholic received sense, even as next here before S. Austin expounded and excused S. Chrisostome) their meaning may the more colourably be mistaken: In which respect such their objected sayings (as namely those commonly urged against freewill, and merit of works, taken from S. Augustine's disputation with the Pelagians who enhabled these as available without grace) are not holden so convincing or fit for argument; which few observations thus propounded being but duly observed, by the studious and indifferent reader, will suffice to deliver him from the doubtful labyrinth of all uprising objected difficulties. And thus much briefly in answer to all the objections pretended from S. Austin, wherein our adversary's most colourable endeavour is, but to make him no further contrary to us, then confessedly therein he should be contrary to himself, which is nothing; he being in very deed so plain in our behalf, and so far from Luther's new erected doctrine, that one of Luther's scholars blushed not to say, 
(r) Alberus contra Carolastadianos. l. 7. And see the like in Musculus in praefat. in libel. Ger. de diaboli tyrannide. And Hospin. hist. sacram. part. 1. fol. 346.  I doubt not but if that Austin were none living, he would not be 〈◊〉 to profecie himself Luther's scholar.    

Concerning the doctrine and religi●a of the other Fathers in general, and also of those who lived in the age of S. Austin: And that it was the same with the doctrine▪ & religion here formerly taught by S. Austin, and at this day taught by the Catholic Roman Church. CHAPTER. 20.  

The Fathers in general & who lived in the age of S. Austin confessedly taught the same doctrine with him concerning Christ being our mediator only according to his humanity; concerning the sacred Scriptures. & traditions. SECTION. 1.  
Having thus hitherto entreated of the religion professed by S. Austin to whom above all the Fathers Protestants do usually make their boldest claim, a● pretending him to make most for them, and against us: Hereby I hope sufficiently appeareth, what is to be expected in this kind from the other Fathers; for if D. Boys doth acknowledge that, 
(a) Exposition of the dominic. epist. the winter part. p. 253. and see before. c. 1.  the most indifferent for both parties among the Fathers is Austin, who yet standeth so adverse against them, as we have formerly seen by all the premises, much more adverse then in all probability are the other Fathers. And for so much as the further explanation of the other Father's judgements yieldeth a yet further strong proof of S. Austires 
(b) See before in the pref. to the learned adversary.  professed like consenting religion, and that in regard of my enjoined and affected brevity, I have not opportunity to demonstrate the same from the other Fathers own alledgedged sayings at large, I will now therefore only add (as in full satisfaction of all reasonable readers) a brief recital of our learned adversaries themselves, charging and reproving the Fathers indefinitely, or else sundry of them at once, & charging also divers of those who lived in S. Augustine's age with their known confessed judgements & practise in particular of our Catholic faith.  
First then in proof of our Saviour's office of mediatorship only according to his haman nature, Caluin himself denying it, yet saith of the Fathers 
(c) Instit. l. 2. c. 14. sec. 3. & Beza in ep. theol. ep. 28. p. 174.  herein the error of the ancient Fathers cannot be excused.  
In like sort concerning the canonical Scriptures the Protestant Poliander saith. 
(d) See before. c. 3. sec. 2.  to come now to the error of some Counsels, the Counsels of Carthage, and Florence, having rolled for Canonical books, and as divinely inspired etc. the books of Toby, judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, and the Maccabees &c. and the Pope's Innocentius, and Gelasius, have reckoned these books among the canonical. And the like is formerly confessed by sundry other Protestants.  
Traditions are so fully taught by the Fathers, as that for teaching the same D. Raynoldes 
(e) Conclusions annexed to hi● confer. conclus. 1. p. 689.  reproveth S. Basil, and S. Epiphanius: Chemnitius reprehendeth 
(f) Examen. part. 1. p. 87. 89. 90.  Clemens Alexandrinus. Origen, Epiphanius, Ambrose, Hierome. Maximus, Theophilus, Basil, Damascen. D. Fulke acknowledgeth as much of 
(g) Confut. of Purg. p. 362. 303. 397. and against Martial. p 170. 178. & against bristol motives. p. 35. 36.  Chrisostome, Tertulan, Cyprian, Austin, Hierom. & D. Whitaker confesseth the like of 
(h) De sacra Script. p. 678. 681. 683. 685. 690. 695. 696. 668. 670. and see Schrod●●us in opusc. theol. p. 72.  Chrisostome, Epiphanius, Tertulian▪ Cyprian, Austin, Innocentius, Leo, Basil, Eusebius Damascen.   

The Fathers in general are confessed to teach the Primacy Ecclesiastical of of Peter, and the Bishops of Rome: As also to deny supreme Ecclesiastical government to temporal Princes; and that the Pope is not Antichrist. SECTION. 2.  
COncerning S. Peter, and his then successors, Bishops of Rome in the foresaid ancient times; sundry of the Fathers are by Protestants reprehended for their affirming the Church to be builded upon Peter, whereof Caluin saith, 
(i) Instit l. 4. e. 6. parag. 6.  Some of the Fathers have so expounded (those words super hanc Petram) but all the Scripture cryeth the contrary. Danaeus also saith of the Fathers, 
(k) Resp. ad Bellar. part. 1. p. ●77.  the saying of Christ, thou art Peter etc. they have noughtily expounded of the person of Peter. And the 
(l) Cent. 3. col. 84. 85. & cent. 4 col. 1250. & col. 1141. & col. 555. 557. 558.  Centurists do expressly reprehend and charge many of the ancient Fathers with this opinion. D. Fulke affirmeth that (not some few 
(m) Confut of the Papists quarrels. p. 4.  but) many of the ancient Fathers etc. were deceived to think something more of Peter's prerogative, and the Bishops of Rome's dignity, then by the word of God was given to either of them: In so much as in regard of the Roman Bishops then claimed and enjoyed Primacy, Protestants fear not to affirm, that the Roman Bishops in the time of Constantine the great, were very Antichrist's▪ whereof writeth M. 
(n) In Apocalip. p. 539.  Brightman, Antichrist hath reigned from the time of Constantine the great to this very day: And speaking of the Pope of Rome he saith, 
(o) Ibidem. p. 477. and see p. 471.  for these thousand three hundred years he is that Antichrist; whom M. Nappier nameth 
(p) Upon the revel. p. 362. 85 88 75. 68 And see Gawius in Palma Christiana. p. 34.  to be Silvester the first.  
But Protestants forbear not to reprove and charge with affected & usurped Primacy, even S. Peter himself, and the other next to him succeeding bishops of Rome, for of this certain Caluinistes write thus, 
(q) Catalogus testium veritatis tom. 1. p. 27.  It may not be denied but that Peter was sometimes faulty in ambition and desire of power etc. by which infirmity of Peter, doubtless it was signified, that those Bishops which bragged of Peter's succession, were to be faulty of the like, yea with greater ambition by infinite degrees etc. wherefore this so perverse abition of Peter and ignorance of heavenly things, and negligence withal etc. did without doubt signify that the Roman Bishop, because he would be chief and heir of Peter's privileges, was to be ignorant and a contemner of heavenly things, and one desirous of human riches, power, and pleasures. To which purpose also avoucheth another Protestant writer that, 
(r) Philippus Nicholai, in comment. de regno Christi. p. 221.  The affectation of Primacy was a common infirmity of the Apostles, as also of the first Bishops of the City of Rome.  
Hence also it is that the ancient Fathers did confessedly reprove some Emperors of their times for usurping of Ecclesiastical government, of which thus writ the Centurists, 
(s) Cent. 4. c. 7. col. 54●.  The Emperors also did sometimes assume to themselves unseasonably the judgement of matters of faith, which Athanasius reprehendeth in Constantius, and Ambrose in Valentinian: of which latter also saith 
(t) Cent. 4. l. 4. c. 9 p. 477. And D. Downham in his defence. l. 1. c. 8. p. 162. 163.  Osiander, Ambrose answered, o Emperor, do not trouble thyself to think that thou hast any imperial right over heavenly things, do not extol thyself &c. with whom agreeth M. 
(u) 2. Reply. part. 2. p. 161. 162. 155. 156.  Carthwright adding further, Ambrose saith, it was not read nor h●ard of before, that any Emperor was judge over a Bishop in a cause of faith; which was not the judgement of Ambrose only but of other Bishops round about. Of which point also Polanus allegeth 
(x) Symphonica. e. 22. Thes. 2. p. 836. 837. 838. 839. 841. 842. 843. 844. 849.  sundry testimonies of the ancient Fathers.  
Concerning Antichrist whose coming, person, and continuance were no doubt plainly and faithfuly delivered by the Apostles to their followers, and from them successively continued in the Church of God, in better forewarning and discovery of the monster when he should appear: And first as touching the time of his coming, foretold not to be before the end of the Roman Empire, M. Fulke confesseth saying, 
(y) Against Rhem. test. in 2. Thes. 2.3. sec. 4.  Indeed most of the ancient Fathers did judge that the Roman Empire should first be decayed before Antichrist were reveled: whereof also saith Caluin, 
(z) In 2. Thes. 2.3.  for as much as they have expounded this place of the defection of the Roman Empire, it is more frivolous than that it needeth any long confutation, and I do marvel that so many writers otherwise learned and witty, have been deceived in so easy a thing, but that when one had erred, the rest without judgement followed in troops: which their pretended error was for sooth, because they did not agree in the said exposition with the 
(a) Fulke in his answer to a counterf. Cath. p. 27. 36. Downham of Antichrist. l. 1. p. 4. Willet in synops. p. 160. Perkins upon the Creed. p. 307. Danaeus. resp. ad Bel. part. 1. p. 371. Whitak. de Eccles. controu. 2. quaest. 4. p. 144. Powel, de Antichristo in praefat. p. 1.  protestants late novel opinion concerning the revelation of Antichrist in Boniface the third Anno. 607. At what time, as also yet to this present, the Roman Empire than was, and yet is not dissolved, but 
(b) See before c. 16. sec. 1.  preserved and in being.  
As concerning the person of Antichrist, M. Whitaker saith, 
(c) Lib. de Antichristo. p. 21  The Fathers for the most part thought that Antichrist should be but one man, but in that, as in many other things they erred: whereof also saith 
(d) 2. Repl. part. 1. p. 508  Carthwright, divers of the ancient and chiefest of them imagined fond of Antichrist, as of one singular person: for which doctrine also the Fathers are charged with error by 
(e) Hist. Antichristi. p. 11.  Gracerus.  
Now as for the short time of the height of his persecution, M. Fox confesseth that 
(f) In Apoc. c. 12. p. 345.  Almost all the holy and learned interpreters do by a time. times, and half a time, understand only three years and a half. Affirming further this to be, 
(g) Ibid. p. 362.  the consent and opinion of almost all the ancient Fathers: In further proof thereof also saith Bullinger, 
(h) Upon the revel. englished in c. 11. ser. 46. fol. 142.  doubtless all expositors in a manner, grounding themselves upon this text, have attributed to the kingdom of Antichrist, and to his most cruel persecutions, no more them three years and a half.   

The Fathers in general are confessed to teach our Catholic doctrines concerning the Sacrament of Baptism. SECTION. 3.  
IN proof of the efficacy of Sacraments, and of the grace given thereby Suinglius writeth, 
(i) Tom. 2. de bapt. fol. 70.  Here most of the doctor's understanding by the name of water, that material and external water of Baptism, have attributed unto it much more than was fit, whereupon it afterwards came to pass, that they ascribed the cleansing of souls to the element of water. Of which also saith Luther, 
(k) Tom. 2. Wit●emberg. fol. 229.  I excuse the Fathers, who driven either by temptation, or necessity, stoutly denied sin to remain after Baptism: In so much as Caluin acknowledgeth, 
(l) See before. c. 6. sec. 1.  the ancient Church's judgement coneerning concupiscence remaining after Baptism not to be sin, without our consent thereto; And he and others also do reprehend 
(m) See before. c. 5. sec. 1.  the Fathers for preferring the efficacy of our Sacraments before the other Sacraments of the old Testament.  
In like manner concerning the necessity of Baptism, Musculus granteth that, 
(n) Loc. come. p. 308.  some Fathers, amongst whom is Austin, have subjected Infants dying without Baptism, to damnation; Of the generality of which opinion we have spoken 
(o) See before. c. 6. sec. 3.  before. And whereas M. 
(p) In his appeal. p. 244.  Morton instead of answer hereto, objecteth as from the Fathers their like supposed erroneous necessity of children's receiving the Eucharist, that this necessity was not as in respect of salvation, but by him mistaken, I have showed 
(q) See before. c. 19 sec. 7.  already. Yea the Fathers were so resolute herein that as Caluin testifieth 
(r) Instit. l. 4. c. 15. sec. 20.  of them, it was usual many ages since, even almost from the beginning of the Church, that in danger of death Say people might baptise, if the minister was not present in due time: And 
(s) Conference at Hampton court. p. 18.  the denying of private persons in case of necessity to baptise, were to cross all antiquity, saith D. Bilson. And as for the Ceremonies of Baptism, and the Eucharist, Beza saith, 
(t) Ep. theol. ep. 8. p. 79.  I cannot sufficiently admire all that decking, wherewith the most ancient thought to adorn Baptism and the Lords supper: And having recited sundry of these ceremonies he calleth them 
(u) Ibid. p. 80.  stagelike fooleries, affirming further that, those who make the Apostles authors of these fooleries, are not worthy of confutation, how ancient writers so ever they be. Zepperus also having mentioned holy water, salt, Oil, Exorcism, Spittle, etc. saith hereof, 
(x) Politia Eccles. l. 1. c. 12. p. 123.  I confess these superstitious ceremonies are very ancient in the Church, being not many ages after the Apostles times; whereof also see Echartus 
(y) Compend. theol. l. 1. c. 8. p. 204.  alleging these ceremonies from the Fathers.   

The Father's in general are confessed for our Catholic doctrines concerning the Sacraments of Confirmation, Orders, and Extreme unction. SECTION. 4.  
COncerning Confirmation, it is reported how that M. 
(a) The conference at Hampton court. p. 10. And downham's defence. l. 4. p. 23.  Whitguift showed at large the antiquity of confirmation, as being used in the Church ever since the Apostles times. And the ministers of Lincoln diocese charge 
(b) Abripgment. p. 41.  Tertulian, Cyprian, Ambrose, with error of using the Cross in confirming those that were baptised: whereto the Century writers add the Father's further confessed usage of 
(c) Cent. 4. c. 6. col. 478  Chrism in Confirmation; wherein Bucer yet further acknowledgeth that in the Primitive Church it was done with 
(d) Scripta Anglicana. p. 570.  hand-imposing only of a Bishop.  
As touching Orders, D. Field avoucheth that 
(e) Of the Church l. 5. c. 25. p. 121. and the Centurists. cent. 3. c. 7. col. 149. 150.  there is no question but that the minor Orders of Subdeacons, Acolites, Exorcists Lectors and Ostiaries, are very ancient; alleging further in proof thereof S. Cyprian and many other Fathers.  
And as for Extreme unction, M. Whitaker answering to the ancient Fathers objected testimonies in behalf thereof, confesseth saying, 
(f) Contra Duraeum. l. 8. p. 650.  I acknowledge the superstitious custom of this unction to have continued longer in the Church then was meet.   

The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholic doctrines concerning Confession, satisfaction & pardons. SECTION. 5.  
THe Century writers speaking of those ancientest times of Cyprian, and Tertulian, affirm that, 
(g) Cent. 3. c. 6. col. 127. and cent. 4. c. 6. col. 425.  they gave absolution from sins thus, if any did penance they should first confess their sin, for so doth Tertulian in his book de paenitentia, greatly urge confession, and it appeareth by certain places of Cyprian, that private confession was usual, wherein they confessed their sins and wicked thoughts, as in serm. 5. de lapsis. et l. 3. epist. ep. 14. & 16. where he expressly saith, of lesser sins also, which are not committed against God, it is needful that confession be made, and this also he often commandeth to be. l. 1. ep. 3. etc. that satisfaction also was accustomed to be imposed according to the offence, it appeareth serm. 5. de lapsis. And whereas M. Morton affirmeth against this confession of the Centurists that, 
(h) Appeal. l. 2. c. 14. parag. 2. p. 254.  Cyprian mentioneth not sins of thought: May it please him to read Cyprian. serm. 5. de 
(i) Multo post med.  lapsis, where he thus writeth, but because they have but thought hereof, let them confess this sorrowfully and simply to the priests of God etc. they disburden their minds, they seek for wholesome cure, though but for little and small wounds etc. I beseech you brethren that every one confess his sin etc. whiles satisfaction and remission made by the priests is grateful with our Lord. And the same necessity of private confession is 
(k) Ep. 91. ad Theodor. et ep. 80. ad Episc. Campaniae. Basil in quaest. breu. interrogat. 288. And see further Cyprian. l. 3. epist. 16. 17.  taught by S. Leo, and S. Basil.  
As for the common objection to the contrary of Confession abrogated by Nectarius (urged by M. 
(l) Appeal. p. ●56.  Morton:) admmitting the story for true, it is answered thereto first, that the confession abrogated by Nectarius, was not private, but public confession, sometimes by penitents upon devotion voluntarily used. This he abrogated upon occasion of scandal in a particular cause thence ensuing, as appeareth by Cassidorus 
(m) Hist. tripart. l. 9 c. 35.  his more ancient translation, and whereof see Bellarmine 
(n) De penit. l. 3. c. 14.  more at large. Secondly I answer that the fact of Nectarius is reprehended by 
(o) Lib. 7. c. 16. finc.  Sozomen the reporter thereof, as geuing occasion unto desolute life. Thirdly I say that thereby was only abrogated at the most, not all confession, but a than late precedent, and there mentioned particular order for Confession to be made unto the penitentiary parish Priest, leaving the penitents at liberty to resort for confession elsweare. Fourtly, whereas the Novatian heretics were condemned for that they denied priests power to remit sin (and consequently thereby confession) that these also were the men, who then first impugned this appointed penitentiary Priest, appeareth by the reporters of this objection 
(p) Lib. 5. c. 19 and Soz. l. 7. c. 16.  Socrates, and Sozomen, who likewise do further 
(q) Soc. l. 5. c. 10. Soz. l. 7. c. 12.  report how much Nectarius depended upon the advice and counsel (in other matters) of the same novatians; which is also acknowledged 
(r) Cent 4. col. 862. ct 1129.  by the Centurists, and for which he is by Osiander 
(s) Cent. 4. l. 4. c. 13. p. 486.  termed Nectarius Bishop of small judgement and counsel in matters of divinity. In regard of all which several premises, what can this suspected and perplexed fact of Nectarius, who is therein also reprehended 
(t) Cent. 4. c. 7 col. 501.  by the Centurists, prevail against the confessed clear stream and current of all antiquity?  
Furthermore concerning Penance and satisfaction, the Century writers speaking of the 4. age, do therein hold 
(u) Cent. 4. col. 294. and see col. 231.  reprovable the Fathers of that age, and the other age's precedent: Caluin also holding herein, 
(x) Instit. l. 4. c. 12. parag. 8. & l. 3. c. 4. parag. 38.  inexcusable the immoderate austerity of the ancient Fathers, as wholly different (saith he) from the Lord's commandment. And, I am not Ignorant (saith 
(y) Examen. part. 4. p. 68  Chemnitius) that the ancient do sometimes commend that canonical discipline over largely, and with over great words. whereof also saith 
(z) Libelli aliquot. fol. 11.  Melancthon, All the Nicene Council being overcome with the consent of the multitude and time, approved the Canons of Penance. M. Whitaker addeth yet more expressly that, 
(a) Contra Camp. rat. 5. p. 78.  the Father's thought by their external discipline to pay the pains due for sin, and to satisfy God's justice: And that, 
(b) Ibidem.  not Cyprian only write some things concerning penance very incommodiously, and foolishly, but almost all the most holy Fathers at that time were in that error etc. and depraved penance. Lastly concerning Pardons. D. Field confesseth that, 
(c) Of the church. l. ●. c. 17. p. 33.  the ancient Bishops were wont to cut of great parts of enjoined penance, which remission was called an Indulgence. And whereas he would evade, that the enjoined penance thus remited, was not then imposed as in satisfaction of God's justice, it is so evidently against the Father's judgements confessed here by M. Whitaker and others, as needeth no further confutation.   

The Fathers in general are confessed for our Cathlicke doctrines concerning real presence, the reservation of the Sacrament and receiving fasting, and chaste. SECTION. 6.  
NOw as concerning the confessed judgement of the ancient Fathers in proof of the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Sacrament, Caluin affirmeth that 
(d) Lib. epist. & resp. ep. 208. p. 392.  The ancient Fathers & chiefly Hillary, and Ciril, went further herein then was fitting, and that therefore he will not subscribe to them: Of which also saith Peter 
(e) In ep. annexed to his common places in english. ep. to Beza. p. 106.  Martyr, I will not easily subscribe to Ciril, who affirmed such a communion, as thereby even the substance of the flesh and blood of Christ, first is joined to the blessing, for so he calleth the holy bread: In so much as he is not ashamed to term 
(f) 2. Alphabet. table at the word heresy.  it the heresy of Ciril, touching our communion with Christ. And Bucer (though falsely pretending the Fathers) professeth yet 
(g) Scripta erudita &c p. 37.  to avoid the sayings of the holy Fathers etc. as being different (saith he) from the word of God, and serviceable to Antichrist.  
Now in regard of the known antiquity of real presence 
(h) See Protest. Apol. tract. 1. sec. 3. p. 82. Praetorius de sacram. p. 221. 288. Zepperus de sacram. p. 48. Vrsinus in commonefact. etc. p. 211. Centuristes. Cent 8. c. 4. col. 312.  confessed in Gregory, Ambrose, Chrisostome Eusebius Emissen, S, Cyprian, & others, a learned adversary acknowledgeth that 
(i) Adamus Francisci in margarita. p. 256.  even Transubstantiation entered early into the Church. And another also confesseth saying, 
(k) Antony de Adamo in Anatomy of the Mass. fol. 246.  I have not yet hitherto been able to know when this opinion of the real and bodily being of Christ in the Sacrament did begin.  
In like sort concerning the used chastity even of married persons before their receiving of the Sacrament Hospinianus confesseth that, 
(l) Hist. sacra. part. 1. l. 2. p. 46.  in the Primitive Church the Eucharist was received chaste. for which he allegeth sundry Father's testimonies. And the same doctrine is reprehended by Zepperus, 
(m) De sacram c. 36. p. 805.  in Tertulian, Hierome, and the Fathers of the Council of Eliberis.  
So also as touching receiving fasting, Hospinian affirmeth that, 
(n) Hist. sacram. part. 1. l. 2. p. 47.  In the Primitive Church they fasted before the receiving of the supper: whereof I have spoken more at large 
(o) See before. c. 8. sec. 3.  heretofore.  
But now to speak of the Reservation of the Sacrament, used in all Catholic countries for the more present help and comforth to the sick and which is neglected generally by all Protestants; M. Fulke confesseth and reprehendeth the Father's saying▪ 
(p) Against Heskins etc. p▪ 77.  that the Sacrament of some was reserved in the elder days of the Church, is not so great a controversy, as whether it ought to be reserved. Caluin speaking of Catholics reserving the Sacrament for the sick saith, 
(q) Instit. l. 4. c. 17. parag. 39  I confess that those who do so, have the example of the ancient Church, but in so great a matter, and wherein the error is not without great danger, nothing is more secure then to follow the truth. And whereas S. Ciril, speaking of the heretics Anthropomorphits saith of them, 
(r) Ad Calosyrium.  I hear they say, that the mystical blessing, if any remnant thereof remain till the next day following, is unprofitable to sanctification, but they are mad in so saying, for Christ is not another, neither shall his body be changed, but the virtue of blessing and lively grace do always remain in it; Hereto Peter Martyr answereth 
(s) Aduersus Garden. ob. 213. col. 838.  whereas it is added that the remnants of the Eucharist kept till the day following, do not cease from sanctification, I think this belongeth to a certain received custom etc. which custom though it tasted of some superstition, yet Ciril and others subscribed unto it: for forthwith from the times of the Apostles by little and little they began to degenerate from that ancient simplicity of God's worship etc. the Anthropomorphits heretics believed, that those remnants had such a conjunction with the body of Christ, that what corruption happened to them, they thought did also happen to the body of Christ. Now how could the heretics have imagined thus; had not the real presence been the received doctrine of those ancient times? And as for M. morton's answer 
(t) Appeal. p. 602. 603.  thereto, it is so impertinent and extravagant as I deem it unworthy of all further reply.  
Wherefore to proceed, according to Chemnitius, 
(u) Exam. part. 2. p. 102.  witnesses of this custom of private reservation of the Eucharist, are Tertulian, Cyprian, Ambrose, Hierome, Basil etc. it is known how much certain of the ancient (writers) have commended this private reservation, as Nazianzen, Ambrose, etc. and truly if the antiquity of a custom universally dispersed or long continued might impose either necessity, or prescribed to the truth, by no means ought that private reservation either be changed or abrogated. Now whereas D. 
(x) Appeal. l. 2●. c. 3. p. 136.  Morton would divert his reader from the point urged, under pretext that, the carrying of the Sacrament unto private men's houses, used in the time of persecution in the Primitive Church, hath been since abrogated, the persecution being ceased, what is this against the reservation of the Sacrament in the Church for such as are sick? or in answer to the inference made upon the other, as namely that the Fathers therefore thought it a sacrament, and Christ present before our receiving thereof: to the contrary whereof Protestants teach that 
(y) Willet in his synops. p. 460,  It is no Sacrament, unless it be received. In like sort where M. Morton objecteth the Father's delivering sometimes the remains left of the Sacrament, unto 
(z) App●●le. p. 136.  Innocent children to be by them eaten, or else to the pure element of the fire to be there consumed, to what purpose was all this, had the Fathers but thought of the remanies of the Sacrament, as Protestants now do, to wit that they were but particles of bread only representing the body of Christ? And lastly whereas the same M. Morton yet urgeth, that S. Cyprian saith, 
(a) Ibidem. p. 135.  that that bread is received not shut up; what availeth this but to prove that the Sacrament should be not only reserved, but also received? Otherwise how plain S. Cyprian was for reservation appeareth by his own 
(b) Serm. 5. de lapsis.  writings, and is formerly confessed by Chemnitius.  
But Oecolampadius yet further hence acknowledgeth, 
(c) Lib. epist. Oecolam. and Suing. p. 690▪  the religion of the ancient Fathers, who took it grievously that the Eucharist should fall upon the ground: for which the said Fathers are reproved by M. Parker, who termeth 
(d) Against symbolising. part. 1. c. 3. 10. 11. p. 148.  it in them hypocrisy; and the like is acknowledged by 
(e) Aphorism. de Euchar. l. 6. fol. 230.  Vadian.   

The Fathers in general are confessed concerning our Catholic doctrines of the sacrifice of Christ's body & blood in the Eucharist: As also that the same was propitiatory even for the souls departed; & of mingling water with wine in the Chalice; and of Altars. SECTION. 7.  
DOctor 
(f) Conference. p. 552.  Reynoldes affirmeth concerning Altars, & sacrifices, that they are linked together by nature in relation and mutual dependence one of another: So as proof of the one is also proof of the other. Now M. Carthwright says, 
(g) 2. Reply. part. 2. c. 9 p. 264.  the abuse of the ancient writers herein may easily appear, in that in this so great liberty of speech, they used to call the supper a sacrifice, and the communion table an Altar; whereof also Peter Martyr saith, 
(h) Common places. part. 4. c. 12. p. 225.  the Fathers should not with so much liberty have seemed here and there to have abused the name Altar: In so much as in respect of this antiquity of Altars, divers 
(i) See Milius in volumen 1. disput. 15. fol. 254. 257.  learned Protestants do retain and defend them against their other brethren. But as touching sacrifice itself, Caluin writeth, 
(k) In Haebr. c. 7. 9 p. 924.  when so many ancient doctors of the Church had forged without commandment a sacrifice in the supper of Christ, and so by adding sacrifice had adulterated the supper, afterwards they endeavoured on every side how to get colours wherewith to shodow their error. And again, 
(l) De vera Eccles. reform. in tract. theol. p. 389. and i●st. l. 4. c. 18. parag. 11.  The ancient (Fathers) are not to be excused, for so much as it appeareth that they have varied from the pure and proper institution of Christ, for seeing the supper is to be celebrated to this end, that we communicate with the sacrifice of Christ, they not content herewith have also added an oblation, this addition I affirm to be faulty. Crastovius a learned Caluinist confesseth that, 
(m) Lib. 1. de opificio Missae. p. 28. 58. 102. 171. And in Caluin in ep. ad Haebr. c. 7. 9 p. 924.  The Father's thought the Eucharist to be a sacrifice according to the order of Melchisadech. Fulke also saith hereof, 
(n) Against Heskins. p. 99  I confess that divers of the old Fathers were of opinion, that the bread and wine which Melchisadech brought forth was sacrificed by him, and that it was a figure of the Sacrament, which they improperly called a sacrifice etc. Cyprian also thought that herein Melchisadech resembled the Preisthood of Christ.  
And that the Fathers taught, that this sacrifice of the Eucharist was also propitiatory or satisfactory for sin, the same Crastovius acknowledgeth saying, 
(o) Lib. 1. de opificio Missae. p. 167.  But the sayings of the Fathers do not only import impetration, but also a certain  force of appeasing, Origen. hom. 13. in levit. saith, This is the only commemoration which maketh God propitious to men. Athanasius serm. de defunctis, cited by Damascen saith, the oblation of the unbloody host is a propitiation. And he allegeth yet further to the same purpose the like sayings of S. Chrisostome, Ambrose, Austin, Gregory, Bede, etc.  
The Fathers also confessedly taught that this sacrifice of the Eucharist was to be offered also for the dead; hereof also writeth 
(p) In tract. theol. p. 394.  Caluin, There remaineth another sort of the dead whom (the Fathers) would have remembered at the supper, that place of rest might be given them etc. I do not deny that this was a most ancient custom. which also was so general, that M. Gifford confesseth that, 
(q) Demonstration against Brounistes. p. 38.  in the (Churches) public worship to pray for the souls of the dead, and to offer oblation for the dead, was general in the Church long before the day s of Austin, as appeareth in Cyprian, and Tertulian. Zepperus 
(r) De sacram. p. 47.  allegeth S. Austin and divers other Fathers, by whom (saith he) sacrifice for the quick and the dead was made of the holy supper. And according to Bullinger, 
(s) De orig. erroris. fol. 223. And see Decades in english. dec. 5. serm. 9 p. 1082.  Austin maketh mention of oblation for the dead etc. in Enchirid. c. 109. etc. which I therefore speak of more largely, that you may understand this custom of offering for the dead, not to be ordained by the Apostles, but by the holy Fathers. M. Fulke doth not deny but plainly acknowledgeth that, 
(t) Confut. of Purgat. p. 362. 303. 393. and Osiander in his refutatio adversus Costerum. p. 73.  Tertulian, Cyprian, Austin, Hierome, and a great many more, do witness, that sacrifice for the dead is the tradition of the Apostles. And whereas S. Ciril 
(u) Catech. Mistag. 5. ante med.  termeth the Sacrament the host of propitiation, and the greatest help for souls (departed) for which it is offered; Hospinian hereupon saith, 
(x) Hist. sacram. part. 1. l. 2. c. 7. p. 167.  Ciril affirmeth according to the received custom of his time that the sacrifice of the Altar is the greatest help of souls. To conclude, not only the generality of Mass for the 1000 year's last passed is granted by many Protestant 
(y) Bacon in his relics of Rome. fol. 344. Danaeus de Antichristo. c. 20. p. 101. the Cet●ristes. cent. 6. c. 6. col. 336. Hospin. concord. discord. in prologom. fol. 3. Hutterus de sacrif. Missat. l. 1. c. 23. p. 377.  writers, but they likewise further admit that, 
(z) Ascam. in Apol. pro caena Dom. p. 31.  It cannot be known at what time and by what men the supper of the Lord was cast out of possession by the Mass.  
Lastly as concerning the mingling of water with wine in the Chalice for the sacrifice (by us holden necessary, not to make the Eucharist a Sacrament, wherein M. 
(a) Appeal. l. 2. c. 4. p. 138. 139.  Morton deludeth his unwary reader, but as to the bene esse of it, or representation, so as to omit the same were sin whereunto D. Morton answereth nothing) M. Whitguift avoucheth that, 
(b) Defenc. tract. 8. p. 473.  Cyprian was greatly overseen in making it a matter so necessary in celebration of the Lords supper to have water mingled with wine, which was at that time no doubt common to more than to him; whereto agreeth M. 
(c) Ibidem. p. 525.  Carthwright: In so much as M. jewel confesseth of this mixture that, 
(d) Reply to Harding. p. 34. and Parker against symbolysing. part. 1. c. 2. p. 103.  Indeed S. Cyprian and certain old Fathers speak of it and force it much.   

The Father's in general are confessed for our Catholic doctrines concerning prayer for the dead, Purgatory and Limbus Patrum. SECTION. 8.  
DOctor Fulke confesseth that, 
(e) Confut. of Purgat. p. 313. and see cent. 4. c. 6. col. 454.  In the burial of Constantine (our first christian Emperor) is mention of prayer for his soul according to the error of the time. And again, 
(f) Confut. of Purgat. p. 320. 326.  Ambrose indeed alloweth prayer for the dead, it was a common error of his time. with him agreeth M. Gifford saying, 
(g) Demonstration against Brounistes. p. 38.  this corruption (of prayer for the dead) was general in the Chuurch long before the days of Austin etc. It was the practice of the Church in general, & the corruption so ancient, that Tertulian saith, it was observed by tradition from the Apostles etc. the doctrine of Purgatory was crept in also. whereto might be added sundry 
(h) Willet in Tetrast. part. 3. p. 97. Chemnit. exam. part. 3. p. 107. Fulke in his retentive against Brist. p. 106. Hospin. hist. sacra. part. 1. p. 155. Caluin. instit. l. 3. c. 5. parag. 10.  other testimonies of our adversaries, so likewise reprehending and charging the Fathers with prayer for the dead. But M. Carthwright forbeareth not to contesse that, 
(i) 2. Reply. part. 1. p. 619.  Epiphanius (a greek Father) esteemed Aerius to be an heretic for his judgement, that we ought not to pray or make any oblation for the dead; and Austin (a Father of the Latin Church) reporteth this as one of his heresies. Of this also saith D. Fulke in the like words, 
(k) Answer to a counterf. Cathol. p. 44. 45.  Aerius taught that prayer for the dead was unprofitable, as witness both Epiphanius and Austin, which they count for an error. But D. Fulke saith yet further of 
(l) Confut. of● Purgat. p. 161.  Purgatory, The error of Purgatory was somewhat rifly budded in Austin's time. And again, 
(m) Ibidem. p. 78. 194.  Austin speaketh of the amending fire in the place by M. Allen alleged, he doth so indeed but had no ground of that fire, but in the common error of his time.  
In like sort as touching Limbus Patrum, M. jacob for the Puritans confesseth that, 
(n) In bilson's full redemption. p. 188.  All the Fathers with one consent do affirm, that Christ delivered the souls of the patriarchs and Prophets, out of hell and his coming thither, and sospoyled Satan of those that were then in his present possession. And D. Barlow confesseth likewise for the Bishops that, 
(o) Defence of the articles. of the Prot. relig. p. 173.  This passeth most rife among the Fathers, who taking inferi. for Abraham's bosom, expound it, that Christ went thither add liberandum liberandos, to convey the Father's deceased before his resurrection into the place where now they are: whereto might be added like further confession and testimony of D. 
(p) Contra Duraeun l. 8. p. 567. Dan. ad Bellar. disput. part. 1. p. 176. Bil●on in his full redemption. p. 189. and in his survey of Christ's sufferings. p. 656. jacob in his defence of the treatise of Christ's sufferings. p. 199. 200.  Whitaker, Danaeus and sundry others.   

The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholic doctrines of invocation of Saints, of our reverend use of Images, relics, and the Cross. SECTION. 9  
OF the Father's belief concerning invocation of Saints and Angels, D. Fulke saith, 
(q) Rejoinder to Brist. p. 5.  I confess that Ambrose, Austin, and Hierome, held invocation of Saints to be lawful. And Chemnitius having alleged S. Austin, praying to S. Cyprian being martyred before, concludeth thus thereof, 
(r) Examen. part. 3. p. 211.  Austin did this without the Scripture, yielding to the times and custom. And again, 
(s) Ibidem. part. 3. p. 200.  Invocation of Saints began to be brought into the public assemblies of the Church about the year of our Lord 370. by Basil, Nyssen, and Nazianzen. The 
(t) Cent. 3. c. 4. col. 83.  Century writers also speaking of the more ancient times of Cyprian, and Origen, do confess that they also contain manifest tokens of the invocation of Saints. So little do these confessions of our learned adversaries agree with or rather so far do they exceed D. 
(u) Appeal. p●. 227.  morton's evasion of Rhetorical Apostraphes.  
In more full confirmation whereof add only that Chemnitius in this respect doth not excuse with rhetorical Apostraphes, but flatly accuse and reject 
(x) Examen. part. 3. p. 211.  most of the Fathers, as Nazianzen, Nyssen, Theodoret, Ambrose, Hierome. etc. who (saith he) did not dispute but avouch the souls of martyrs and Saints, etc. to hear the petitions of those that prayed, and to carry them to God etc. they went to the monuments of martyrs, and often invocated the martyrs by name. Of which also saith M. 
(y) Volum. 2. p. 592.  Parkins, The Fathers, especially those after the 400. years, have erred in the invocation of Saints.  
As touching the public placing of Images in the Church (which M. Fulke thinketh to be 
(z) Defence of the engl. translat. c. 3. p. 119.  against the commandment) sundry examples or testimonies of the ancient Fathers are in proof thereof alleged by M. 
(a) Against sybolising. part. 1. p 32. Chem. exam. part. 4. p. 26. 29. 30. Cent. 4. col. 409.  Parker Chemnitius, and the Century writers: In so much that in respect of such ancient public allowance of images, the Protestant Functius affirmeth that 
(b) Lib. 7. comment. in praecedent. Chronolog. at Anno. Christi. 494. fol. m. c●  Anno. 494. Xenaias was the first in the Church that stirred up war against Images.  
And as for relics of Saints and pilgrimage thereto, the Century 
(c) Cent. 4. c. 6. col. 456.  writers do charge the Fathers of the 4. age, with public translation of Saints relics. And Chemnitius affirmeth that, 
(d) Examen. part. 4. p. 10.  from translations presently were made cicumgestations of relics, as is to be seen in Hierome, and Austin etc. yea saith he, 
(e) Ibidem. and see cent. 4. c. 6. col. 457.  they made pilgrimages to the places where they heard there were relics famous by miracles, so they went in pilgrimage to the holy land, and to Rome, to the Churches of Peter, and Paul: and the like hereof is testified by the Century writers.  
Now in more semblable proof yet of Images, M. Parkins reporteth concerning the reverence in ancient times given to the Cross, that 
(f) Volum. 2. p. 596 and Fulke against Heskins. p. 657.  Paulinus. ep. 11. saith, the Bishop of Jerusalem yearly at Eaester set forth the Cross for the people to worship, himself being the chief of the worshippers. So general and received was the usage thereof in the time of Paulinus, who according to 
(g) Cent. 5. l. 3. c. 2. p. 387.  Osiander, was familiar with Hierome, Austin, and Ambrose. Neither was this reverence exhibited to the Cross by the clergy or vulgar people only for Prudentius reporteth the like practice thereof in the old Emperors saying, 
(h) In Apothegm.  Vexillum Crucis summus dominator adorat, the greatest commander (the Emperor) adoreth the standard of the Cross. Danaeus 
(i) Primae partis. alt. part. ad Bellar. 5. controu. resp. p. 1415 And Parker against symbolising. part. 2. c. 7. p. 61.  also affirmeth that S. Ciril, and sundry other learned Fathers were plainly superstitious and blinded with this enchantment of the Crosses adoration. Furthermore M. Burges saith concerning the Father's opinion of the Cross (with exception only to the point of adoration, which is next heretofore already sufficiently confessed) that, 
(k) In Couels answer to Burges. p. 130. 136.  there is nothing ascribed to the Cross in or out of Baptism by the rankest Papists, but the Fathers are as deeply engaged in the same, so as if we will use it as the Fathers did etc. we take the soul to be fenced with crossing of the body, and the Cross to have virtue of consecrating the Sacrament, driving away devils, witchcraft etc. In proof whereof he allegeth sundry ancient Fathers, and the like is affirmed by several 
(l) Treatise of the sign of the Cross. p. 21. and see cent. 4. col. 3●2. & 1493.  Puritans and the Centurists: In so much that as to the many miracles by us objected in this behalf from the Fathers, D. Covel avoucheth that, 
(m) Answer to Burges. p. 138.  No man can deny but that God manifested his power to the amazement of the world in this contemptible sign, as being the instrument of many miracles.   

The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholic doctrines concerning freewill, and merit of works. SECTION. 10.  
COncerning the Father's doctrine of freewill, Protestants affirm that 
(n) Discovery of untruths in D. bancroft's sermon. p. 23.  the error of freewill derived from justin martyr, and Irenaeus, was at the time of the Nicene Council in some ripeness etc. we know that ever since the Apostles times in a manner it flourished every where, till Martin Luther took the sword in hand against it. The Centurists, speaking of the times next after the Apostles, do think, 
(o) Cent. 2. c. 4. col. 58.  that scarcely there is any point of doctrine which began so soon to be darkened as this of freewill. As also 
(p) Ibidem. col. 59 and cent. 4. col. 291. Calu. instit. l. 2. c. 2. parag. 4. Hamelman. de tradit. Apost. l. 2. c. 7. col. 93.  after the same manner Clemens every where affirmeth freewill, that it may appear, that not only all the Doctors of that age were in such darkness, but also that the same increased afterwards in the later ages. In like manner concerning induration, Caluin affirmeth that, 
(q) See before. c. 2. sec. 2.  The ancient Father's wer● superstitious, and afraid to confess the truth thereof.  
And as for the Father's doctrine of works, D. Humphrey is fully of opinion that, 
(r) In jesuit. part. 2. p. 530.  It may not be denied, but that Ireneus, Clemens, and others, whom they call Apostolical (in respect of the time in which they live) have little Apostolically inserted into their writings the opinion of freewill, and merit of works. Melancthon also thinketh that, 
(s) In ep. ad Romanos. p. 391.  Origen; and many others following him, feigned men to be just for their works. And M. Whitaker holdeth chargeable 
(t) Resp. ad rat. Camp. p. 78. and in Fulkes defence of the engl. transl. p. 368.  with error herein (to use his own words) not only Cyprian, but almost all the most holy Fathers of that time. The Centurists speaking of the Fathers of those ancient times say, 
(u) ●ent. 3. c. 4. col. 79.  It seemeth that for the most part this chiefest article of justification to have been obscured, for they attributed to works justice even before God. Again, 
(x) Ibidem. col. 78. and see cent. 4. col. 292. 293.  The doctors of this (third) age have declined from the true doctrine of Christ and the Apostles concerning good works: yea they conclude upon recital of sundry of the ancient Father's sayings thus, 
(y) Ibidem. col. 293.  Now let the godly reader think how far this age hath declined in this article from the doctrine of the Apostles▪ Lastly Caluin writeth. 
(z) Instit. l. 3. c. ●5. parag. 2.  I confess that the writers of the ancient Church have every where used (the name of merit) and I would to God that by the abuse of this word they had not given to posterity occasion of error; yea the Fathers were so full herein, that we have seen before 
(a) See before. c. ●3. sec. 3.  their confessed condemning of jovinianus for his denial of merit●●.   

The Father's in general are confessed for our Catholic doctrines concerning vows, the single life of priests, monachism, prescribed fasts, and Ceremonies. SECTION. 11.  
WE are not ignorant (saith 
(b) Exam. part. 3. p. 41.  Chemnitius) that the Fathers allowed the vows of perpetual single life, and that they also brought them to be obligatory, or to bind in conscience. Peter Martyr thinketh 
(c) De votis. p. 524.  Epiphanius with many other of the Fathers to err, in that they said it was sin to breaks such a vow when need required, and that they badly ascribed it to Apostolical tradittion. M. Wootton censureth 
(d) Defence of Parkins. p. 491.  this to be one of the blemishes of the ancient writers: whereof also saith 
(e) Instit. l. 4. c. 13. parag. 17.  Caluin, they say this was observed from longest memory, that those who would dedicate themselves wholly to our Lord, should bind themselves with the vow of chastity, truly I confess that this custom was anciently received, But I do not grant that this age was free from all vice. 
(g) Retentive against Bristol p. 64. Carthw. 2. Reply. part. 1. p. 509. cent. 4. col. 847. 303. 877. and Cent. 3. col. 85. 86. Beza de Poligamia. p. 211. 212. 213. 214.  But Hospinian affirmeth yet further that, 
(f) De orig. monach. fol. 102.  not only Austin, but other Fathers also erred in the vowed chastity by mutual consent (even) of married persons. And as for the forbidding of Bigams, and marriage unto priests, the first is so general and ancient that M. Fulke confesseth that he which hath had two wives, could not be a Priest in Hieromes time. And as for the other, of the unmarried life of priests, M. jewel saith, 
(h) Defence of the Apology. p. 195. and cent. 3. c. 6. col. 148. and cent. 4. col. 616. 486. 303. 704 1293. Osiand. cent. 5. l. 1. c. 33. p. 156. Szeged. loc. come. p. 327. Osiand. cent. 4. l. 2. c. 27. p. 195. cent. 5. l. 1. c. 39 p. 176. & p. 45. 30. 298. 395. 406. cent. 4. p. 46. 167. Chem. exam. part. 3. p. 50. 52. 62.  Here I grant M. Harding is like to find some good advantage, as having undoubtedly a great number of holy Fathers on his side. Bucer likewise acknowledgeth that, 
(i) Gratulatio ad Eccles. Anglic. p. 35.  The Church of the East Egypt, and the sea Apostolic were accustomed in S Hierom s time, not to take for priests, but either such as were not married. or ceased to be, by abstaining from their wives. Hereto ad, that the defending of priests marriage was condemned in 
(k) Contra Vigilant. c. 1. & Fulke against Rhem. test. in 1. Tim. 3. sec. 5 p. 683. 684. and cent. 4. c. 8 col. 603.  Vigilantius, and 
(l) Contra jovin. l. 1. c. 19 14. et ad Pannach, Apol. c. 8.  jovinian, by S. Hierome: whereof also saith 
(m) Tom. 6. haer. 82. fine. and Danaeus de haeresibus. haer. 82. fol. 230.  S. Austin, This heresy was quickly trodden dowen and extinguished, neither could it ever prevail so much as to the deceiving of any priests.  
But now to speak of the professed religious life of Monks, and Nuns, M. Carthwright acknowledgeth that 
(n) In Whiteg. def. p. 344.  Ruffian, Theodoret, Sozomen, Socrates, do mention monks a most in every page. And the Centurists do begin a whole special tract, the title whereof is, 
(o) Cent. 4. c. 10. col. 294.  Of the Monks through Syria, Palistine, Bithynia, and the other places of Asia under Constantine the great: They do also make another like special tract, the title thereof being 
(p) Ibidem. col. 1306  The African Monks through Egypt, under Constantine the great; and yet another bearing this title, 
(q) Ibid. col. 1331  Monk's through Europe. They also heretofore mentioned their 
(r) See before. c. 15. sec. 3.  religious habit; and further affirm that many of them 
(s) Cent. 4. col. 471.  neither had houses, nor did eat bread, nor supping meats, nor drunk wine, but dwelled in mountains; As also abstained 
(t) Ibid col. 474.  from all flesh, fish, eggs, and cheese. Osiander and the Centurists do also report 
(u) Osiand. cent. 4. p. 100 440. the Centurists. cent. 4. col. 1323.  their enclosing or muring up of themselves in little straight Celies. They affirm also, 
(x) Ibid. col. 474.  that many of them slept upon the ground, others went barefooted, and others weared haircloth privately. And as for their professed voluntary poverty they further say, 
(y) Ibid. col. 464. 300. 301. and Osiand. cent. 5. l. 3. c. 13. p. 356.  It is evident that those who were to profess monastical life, did distribute their goods before they entered into the Monastery. In like sort concerning the vowed chastity of Monks, the Council of Chalcedon is therefore reprehended by 
(z) Cent. 5. l. 3. p. 359.  Osiander. And as for Nuns, the Century writers report that there were 
(a) Cent. 4. c 6. col. 467.  Monasteries of women professing chastity: And that there were virgins before Constantine's time professing perpetual chastity. justus Molitor 
(b) De Eccles. milit. 8.  also saith, The Council of C●lcedon contrary to the oracles of the holy Ghost, forbade the use of marriage to Monks, and Nuns. And of the very name of Nuns, the Centurists say, 
(c) Cent. 4. c. 6. col. 470.  Hieronimus ad Eustochium Nonnae etiam vocabulo usus est, Hierome used the word Nun: And they report that 
(d) Ibid. col. 468.  They were clothed in the Church before the Altar etc. candles burning. And of the consecration of their Monasteries, 
(e) Cent. 5. l. 3●. c. 13. p. 362.  Osiander citeth the 
(f) Can. ●4.  Chalcedon Council decreeing in these words, we have decreed that such Monasteries as are once consecrated etc. shall ever so continue etc. and that afterwards they shall not be turned into secular habitations. The Centurists also testify, 
(g) Cent. 5. c. 6. col. 709.  the obedience of Monks to be such, as that they went not out of their Celestina upon any occasion without licence of their superior, whom they called 
(h) Ibid. col. 708.  the abbot.  
By all this I hope is sufficiently discovered the extreme boldness or ignorance of many 
(i) Pet. Mart. in come. places in engl. part. 4. c. 1. p. 7. White in his way to the true Church. sec. 42. parag. 11. p. 307. Humfred. in jesuit. part. 2. rat. 5. p. 587. Zepperus. in polit. Eccles. l. 1. c. 8. p. 90.  Protestant writers, who bear their readers in hand, that these ancient Monasteries and Monks of the Primitive Church, were nothing less than Popish, as being (say they) in very deed no other than Colleges of students, such as are yet in use in Cambridge, Oxford, and other universities: But this evasion is further plainly confuted by the like confessed 
(k) Cent. 4. c. 6. col 467. 476. 1335. 1337. Osiand. cent. 4. l. 4 c. 19 p. 503. 507.  Monasteries of virgins (which I hope our adversaries will not pretend to have been Colleges of women students. As also by M. Carthwright, who in regard of so evident premises, concludeth to the flat contrary, that 
(l) 2. Reply. part. 1. p. 502.  Monks are Antichristian, notwithstanding their ancienty, and that, 
(m) Ibid. p. 500  the Monks, Eremites, and Anchorites, in Hieromes time were very gross.  
To speak now of the prescribed fasts approved and used in the Primitive Church, whereof Caluin writing saith 
(n) Instit. l. 4. c. 12. parag. 19 20.  I cannot altogether excuse the ancient (Fathers) in this respect, but that they laid some seeds of superstition etc. the observation of superstitious Lent was then every where in force. Chemnitius also acknowledgeth that, 
(o) Exam. part. 1. p. 89.  Ambrose, Maximus, Theophilus Hierome, and others, do affirm the fast of Lent, to be an Apostolical tradition: whereof also saith Scroderus 
(p) Opusculum theologic. p. 71.  almost in the same words, Ambrose, Theophilus, Hierome, and others, do decree Lent to have descended from Apostolical tradition. The 
(q) Cent. 4. c. 6. col. 440.  Centurists also do charge the Fathers of the fourth age with superstitious fasting upon Wednesday, and Friday. In so much as M. 
(r) In his true Catholic. p. 601.  Trig, in regard of such their confessed antiquity, professeth to defend & urge against his other Protestant brethren, The fast of Lent and solemn weekly fast of Wednesday, and Friday: whereto might be added the ancient Churches 
(s) Heretofore. c. 15. sec. 1.  confessed condemning of Aerius, and jovinian, for their contrary doctrine, though they be 
(t) Danaeus de haeres haer. 53. p. 177. Fulke in his answer to a counter. Cath. p. 44. Whitak. de Eccles. p. 305.  defended in their errors by sundry Protestants.  
And as for the common objection of Montanus his condemned fasts, and of Socrates reporting the indifferency and liberty of fasting. The firster is explained and answered by M. 
(u) Eccles. pol. l. 5. sec. 72. p. 209. 210. and Quaerimonia Eccles. p. 110.  Hooker, and others his brethren, and the second touching Socrates, and his confessed evident untruth in this kind it hath been formerly 
(x) See Whitguift in his defence. Tract. 8. c. 2. p. 350. Frigivelleus Gavius in Palma Christiana. p. 103. and Protest. Apol. p. 181. etc.  discovered both by Catholics and Protestants.  
Lastly as concerning Ceremonies, M. Calfhil (to omit others) affirmeth that, 
(y) In Fulkes Rejoinder to Marshal's reply. p. 131. 132.  The Fathers declined all from the simplicity of the Gospel in Ceremonies. As for D. 
(z) Appeal. p. 53. 324.  morton's objecting of S. Austin against Ceremonies, it is evident that S. 
(*) Tom. 2. ep. 119.  Austin spoke not of the Church's ceremonies, but only of such particular 
(†) Ibid. paul● ant med.  customs as were taken up of the common people as not instituted by the Church: An answer so clear that M. Whitguift answereth 
(¶) Defence. tract. 10. c. 2. p. 545.  Carthwright agreeably in these words, Austin ep. 119. speaketh but of unprofitable ceremonies etc. neither grounded of the Scriptures, determined by Counsels, nor confirmed by custom.   

The Father's in general are confessed by Protestants not only for particular points of faith, but jointly at once for many or most of them together. SECTION. 12.  
TO forbear as now all such like particular further allegation, and to comprehend at once many or the most of the points in controversy; D. Whitguift discoursing of 
(a) Defence pag. 472. 473.  doctrine taught in any age since the Apostles times, affirmeth without any other exception either of age or father, that almost all the Bishops and learned writers of the Greek Church and Latin also for the most part, were spotted with doctrines of freewill, of merit, of invocation of Saints, and such like etc. Meaning thereby such other like points of our now Catholic doctrine: which his assertion is now sithence specially renewed and made good almost in the same words by D. Covel, saying, 
(b) Against the plea of the Innocent. c. 9 p. 120.  divers both of the Greek and Latin Church were spotted with the errors about freewill, merits, invocation of Saints, many things might be alleged in this kind if it were any virtue to rip up their faults, whom we ought to honour.  
In like manner concerning the like liberal acknowledgement of the Century writers, Caluin, and whitakers; whereas Cardinal Bellarmine allegeth the particular sayings of Caluin and the Centurists, as charging the ancient Fathers with 
(c) De notis Ecclesiae. l. 4. c. 9 nota. 6.  error in freewill, Limbus Patrum, denial of our concupiscence without consent to be sin, satisfaction. prayer for the dead, merit, penance, the fast of Lent, the unmarried life of priests, Baptism of lay persons in case of necessity, the manner of sacrificing etc. Whitaker answering thereto iustifyeth the same saying, 
(d) De Eccles. controu. 2. 9 5. p. 299.  whereas Bellarmine allegeth certain testimonies from Caluin, and the Century writers, as noting certain errors of the ancient Fathers, which were common to them with the Papists, as namely freewill, merit, Limbus, Invocation of Saints, the unmarried life of priests, satisfaction, and certain other such like etc. (before mentioned by Bellarmine) I answer thereto, that it is true which Caluin and the Century writers have written, that in many things the ancient Church erred, as in Limbus, freewill, merit of works, and in the residue of those other before recited.  
Agreeably hereunto also acknowledgeth 
(e) Nowm. testam. praefat. ad Principem Condensem.  Beza of the times of Cyprian, Austin, and Chrisostome, that even then Satan did say the first foundation in Greece of invocation of the dead, whereto some Bishops of chiefest note were so far from opposing themselves &c. that they did not only not express the open superstitions arising, but also nourished them etc. Hence those opinions of freewill etc. affirming presently after that the knowledge of providence, freewill, faith, and free justification, was as then almost oppressed with the commentaries of the Grecian Bishops etc. At the same time invocation of the dead prevailed, and the foolish opinion of single life; which shameful errors being openly defended, the multitude also of Ceremonies increased &c. and the Monks in Egypt and Syria etc. almost all admired as Angels, prayers also for the dead, begun then to be used more freely, and the Platonical question concerning Purgatory fire etc. This acknowledgement of Beza is so certain that the Protestant 
(f) Asinus Auis. sec. 43. p. 60.  Holderus purposely preventeth all extenuation or excuse thereof.  
M. 
(g) In Apoc. in c. 14. p. 382.  Brightman having named S. Athanasius, Basil Chrisostome, Ambrose, Hi●rome Augustine etc. avoucheth further, that they were in words condemning Idolatry, but indeed establishing it, by invocation of Saints, worshipping of Relics, & such other like wicked superstitions; affirming yet further that no more pure doctrine can be drawn out of their writings, than any profitable notion be gathered by the beating of the waves▪  
In like sort M. Napier recordeth that, 
(h) Upon the revelation p. 361.  The Bishops staff, the Archbishos cloak or pale etc. Item, their holy water, their Chrismes in Baptism, the shaving of their heads, their golden and silver vessels in the Church, their Albes, and Corporals, of linen for the Altar, their consecration of the Altar, the observation of days etc. the fasting in Lent from flesh, the choice of meats, the pretended chastity of the Clergy, the celebration of Masses in memory of Martyrs, the adoration of the Cross, were all instituted and devised, and arose about the 313. year of Christ, together with the style of Primacy, usurped by the Roman Bishop: The 
(i) Ib. p. 362.  supper of the Lord (was then) degenerate and turned over to the Mass, to be celebrated for dead men etc. and mixed with water. In the 
(k) Ib. p. 363.  20. Articles of the first Council of Nice are superstitious rites, even the observation of days, to wit, of peace (or indulgence) and superstitious penances etc. Th●se and divers other abuses and superstitious rites creeped in, in the outward visible face of the Church in Silvester the first his days.  
The Century writers in their fift Century being that age wherein S. Austin flourished, affirm that as then 
(l) 〈◊〉. dedic.  every where Monasteries and Cells of Eremites were builded, and that they had for their praisers Austin, Chrisostome, and others most excellent men: Hence also the chief articles of faith, of free remission of sins by faith in Christ, began to be obscured and defiled etc. The doctrine also of good works was diversely corrupted etc. They attributed salvation to them with reproach and injury to the merit of Christ etc. The light also of true invocation began to be obscure etc. Afterwards also because overmuch should be challenged to the merits and worship of dead men, in this age also rise up the worship of Relics &c. running to pieces of Saints, as they were commonly thought: Therefore these chief heads being adulterated, it is easy to conceive that in the other parts also of heavenly doctrine sincerity was many ways corrupted etc. The Roman Bishops not only greedily, but also impudently sowed the seeds of their Primacy or eminency above other Churches of the world, etc. Rome formerly the head & mistress of the world is become the seat of Antichrist etc. & more particularly they charge the Fathers of this age as erring in our Catholic doctrines of 
(m) Cap. 4. col. 500  freewill, of 
(n) Col. 504.  justification, of good 
(o) Col. 506.  works, of 
(p) Col. 510.  prayer, of human 
(q) Col. 513.  Traditions, of 
(r) Col. 513.  virginity, of 
(s) Col. 513.  Penance, of 
(t) Col. 515.  Baptism, of the Lords 
(u) Col. 517.  supper, of 
(x) Col. 518.  marriage, of the 
(y) Col. 520.  Church, of the place of 
(z) Col. 520.  souls, and of the 
(a) Col. 523.  Canonical books: In all which they recite and reject their particular sayings. And the like also might be seen under the titles of 
(b) Cap. 7. col. 774.  Primacy, of 
(c) c. 6. col. 684.  Lent, of 
(d) Col. 697.  Relics, and their translation of 
(e) Col. 700.  Monks, of 
(f) Col. 714.  Heremites, and the Ceremonies 
(g) Col. 727.  of Baptism. In so much that Osiander avoucheth that, 
(h) Cent. 5. l. 1. c. 1. p. 1.  Most divines of this Century did no little divert from the purity of Apostolical doctrine unto human opinions and Traditions etc. In this Century Antichristianisme was conceived in the brain of Ambitious Bishops etc. So confessedly ancient are both the foresaid rites and doctrines of our Catholic religion from the abounding testimonies of the Centurists, Osiander, Caluin, Beza, Whitaker, Brightman, and Napier.  
And here it may be well observed that the foresaid Protestants rejecting the Fathers thus in general for agreeing with Catholics in all the foresaid points of faith, that this preventeth and confuteth D. morton's usual evasion throughout his Appeal, in pretending that the Fathers held these points, but in other manner than we Catholics now do, as though the Fathers agreed with us in words & terms and differed from us in meaning.  
Ad now last hereunto, that in regard of our foresaid sympathy with the Fathers in matters of faith and religion, that D. Whitaker further avoucheth, 
(i) ●ontra Duraeum. l. 6. p. 4●3.  The Popish religion to be a patched coverlet of the Father's errors sowed together. And 
(k) Stratagem. Satanae. l. 6. p. 296.  jacobus Acontius informed Queen Elizabeth that this kind of trial by the Fathers, was a most pernicious course and altogether to be avoided. D. 
(l) De vita juelli. p. 212.  Humphrey did grievously reprehend M. jewel for his so bold appealing to the Fathers, saying therefore to us of him, He granted overmuch, and yielded more than of right unto you, and injured himself overmuch etc. and in a manner spoiled himself & the Church etc. what have we to do with the Fathers, with flesh or blood? Lastly Peter Martyr concludeth for certain, 
(m) De votis. p. 476.  that so long as we do insist upon Counsels, and Fathers, we shall be always conversant in the same errors.  
And do but now remember that which is heretofore 
(n) Heretofore in the preface to the learned adversary  alleged, as acknowledged concerning the unanswearable argument thus taken and prosecuted from the frequent abounding confession of the learned adversaries testifying against themselves; and then let the indifferent reader in God's name but consider whether that the foresaid doctrine of our now professed Catholic religion taught thus by S. Austin and the other ancient Fathers, be not sufficiently in this kind explained & made manifest, both particularly, and in general, even to the full preventing of all colourable reply to the contrary.   

That the Fathers who lived next before and after the times of S. Austin agreed with him in the Catholic Roman faith. SECTION. 13.  
HItherto hath been discuorsed concerning S. Austin's religion, as well from his own confessed sayings and reported miracles, as also from the like confessed answerable judgement of such Fathers (amongst other) as were conversant and living with him: Only now in more evident & concluding proof of his religion, we will lastly add a brief touch of the religion in general, confessedly professed in the several ages which were next after and before the time in which S. Austin lived. First as concerning the age after, nothing is more memorable in illustration thereof, then is the very conversion of us English men by the other S. Austin sent thereto by S. Gregory, Anno Dom. 
(a) Cooper in Chron. fol. 156. Fox. act, mon. p. 117.  599. whose doctrine was so agreeable with our professed religion, that our learned adversaries themselves do not only confess all the 
(b) Humphrey in jesuit. part. 2. rat. 5. p. 626. Carion. in Chron. l. 4. p. 567. and see the Protest. Apol. tract. 1. sec. 1.  Particulars thereof, but terming it in such respect 
(c) Fulke in confut. of Purg. p. 333.  our perversion, do yet further affirm in general that, 
(d) Harison in descript. of Britanny set before Hollinshead Chron. vol. 1. p. 29. 27.  Austin came and brought in Popery; and that, 
(e) Bale in cattle. script. illust. cent. 14. p. 117.  Austin by his interpreters taught our people the Papistical faith: And according to Bale, Austin was sent from 
(f) Cent. 1. fol. 3.  Gregory to season the English with the Popish faith, and that King Ethelbert died one and twenty years after he had received Popery. And being thus (in the opinion of Protestants) the 
(g) Ascham in Apolog. pro caena Dom. p. 33.  overthrower of true religion, and establisher (not of some part but) of all Popish doctrine, he heretofore 
(h) Osiander cent. 6. p. 290.  after his death undoubtedly went to hell there to receive his reward.  
In like sort concerning our country man S, Bede (who was living 
(i) In his hist. Anglorum. l. 5. c. vlt.  in the age next after our said conversion, and till whose time according to 
(k) In Lombardun in Proleg. fol. * four  Danaeus, S. Austin's doctrine was defended, Osiander 
(l) Cent. 8. l. 2. c. 3. p. 58.  avoucheth that He was enwrapped with all the Popish errors in the articles in which (saith he) we differ this day from the Pope.  
And for so much as our Catholic religion, whereto we were so converted, was not then private only to us english men, but (as is known and confessed by many Protestants) was 
(m) Parkins in his exposition of the Creed. p. 307. 400. Hospin. hist sacram. l. 2. p. 157. Fulke in his answer to a counter. Cath. p. 36. And see the Protest. Apol. in divers places.  universally then dispersed and professed over the Christian world, it thence evidently followeth, that it was not as then begun with innovation, b●t was the same with that former religion which the elder S. Austin i● the time so ne'er precedent professed & taught.  
This point is made as yet more clearly evident by the undoubted great miracles showed by God, at the time of our said conversion, and the same so credibly and certainly reported from S. 
(n) Lib. 7. ep. 30. Indict. 1. Bede. hist. l. 1. c. 26. lib. 2. c. 3. Fox. act. mon. p. 117. 121. 122. Goodwin in his Catal. of Bishops of England. p. 4. Holins Chron. vol. 1. lib. 5. c. 21. p. 10●. 100 108. 109. Stow, his Annuals. p. 66.  Gregory, S. Bede, Fox, Goodwin, and our own Protestant historiographers Stow, Hollinshead, that D. Morton in his special answer thereto, as not daring to deny so evident a truth, hath no refuge at all but to confess saying. 
(o) Appeal. lib. 3. c. 18. p. 424.  Among them who profess the faith of Christ, albeit not with equal truth and sincerity, the less sincere parties may work miracles whereto God concurreth, but not for proof of the errors, which are proper unto themselves, but for confirmation of the truth, which with them is common to the Church; therefore etc. we may grant that God doth cooperate by them to the conversion of Infidels. In like sort answereth D. 
(p) Comment. de regno Christi. l. 1. p. 91. 289. 312. 313. 314. 318.  Philip. Nicola● speaking of those known and confessed miracles, which impudence itself may not deny to have been showed by God in the late Conversions in this age of sundry nations in the oriental India and elsewhere, The Jesuits (saith he) and Popish priests etc. do like the Bileamites build the Church of Christ, and do in the name of God among the Indians, and Americans, successfully expel the Idols and devils of the Gentiles, and do work great miracles, especially when they undertake the conversion of Idolatrical nations, and now cometh his answer, Huc usque enim 
(q) Ibid. p. 91. 53.  Lutheranizant etc. that they do all this as in confirmation of the Lutheran religion 
(r) Ibid. p. 5●.  Converting the Gentiles in that way of religion to Christ which themselves do not so much as enter into. Thus both Lutherans and Caluinistes being unable to deny the evident truth of so many great miracles undoubtedly wrought by our Church upon her converting so many heathen nations to the faith of Christ, are nevertheless not abashed to pretend that the foresaid miracles were yet by God so showed, as in confirmation not of our Catholic faith but of their Protestant religion: Speak now here ingeniously, can you believe them?  
Neither doth D. Morton his evasion any thing help him, alleging the example of the water miraculously vanishing away from the font, at such time as a dissembling jew came hypocritically unto a Novatian Bishop for to be Baptised: for here was no miracle wrought at the instance of the nocatian, or by his agency, or ministry, or in any sort colourable to confirm Novationisme, but rather to the contrary; for this perfidious jew (as 
(s) Hist. lib. 7. c. 17.  Socrates reporteth and the 
(t) Cent. 5. c. 13. col. 1483.  Ceturistes confess) having been before baptised after the Catholic manner by Atticus a Catholic Bishop of Constantinople, and coming now again (under pretence thereby of begging money) to be a new baptised of Paulus the novatian Bishop, God himself as unwilling to have his Catholic baptism formerly received to be so scornfully and sacrilegiously profaned, did immediately of himself, & without all agency therein of the Novatian, miraculously hinder the said jew from being again baptised by the heretical Bishop: A thing so far from confirming Novationisme, as it argueth rather directly the contrary.  
And no less if not more disparity, or rather impertinency is observable in D. morton's like further objecting of Balaam, and Cayphas, (not working miracles but) prophesying of Christ against their own wickedness: whereto but further ad concerning all these examples, aswel that no one of them came to pass (as did our foresaid other miracles) upon occasion or in behalf of commending or publishing to the heathen people or others, any doctrine then before there unknown or not received; as also that caiphass his objected 
(u) joan. 11.49.50.  Prophesying was but for once, the Apostles then doing many 
(x) Math. 10.1.  great miracles: As likewise was 
(y) Numer. 24.17.  Balaams Prophesying for once, even in the time of Moses, whose many stupendious miracles need no recital; And so in like manner that which is objected to concern the Novatian, was but for once and the fift Century when as the Church of God was most 
(z) Cent. 5. c. 13. from col. 1478. till 1494.  glorious in miracles: whereas in the other foresaid examples of undoubted miracles confessedly wrought by S. Austin in our conversion, and by our Catholic priests in their late conversions in this age of sundry heathen nations, the Protestant Church was confessedly destitute of all like answerable example in that kind, as is confessed by D. Fulke, saying, 
(a) Against Rhem. test. in Apoc. 13. sect. 3. fol. 478  It is known that C●luin and the rest, whom the Papists call Arch-heretickes, do work no miracles; with whom agreeth D. Sutliue in these words, 
(b) Examination of kellison's survey. p. 8.  neither do we practise miracles, nor do we teach that the doctrine of truth is to be confirmed with miracles. And of Luther inparticular, his own Prot. neighbours say, 
(c) Divines of the Count Palatine in their Admonitio Christiana de libro concordiae. c. 6. p. 203.  we have not heard of any miracle that he did. And thus much in proof that the ages next succeeding S. Austin agreed with him in our Catholic Roman faith.  
But now to come to the age precedent to S. Austin, that the same Catholic faith was then also universally professed, and Protestancy not so much as known to have been then in being, to omit much other proof (whereof this short intended treatise is not capable) that learned and so excellent a man 
(d) Deut. upon the revelat. p. 262.  M. Napier (in his treatise dedicated to the King's majesty, and for the supposed worth thereof reprinted in London, Anno. 1594. and now again sithence reprinted in London by M. Norton, Anno. 1611. cum privilegio Regiae maiestatis. Besides the further 
(e) In the Preface to the Christian Reader.  imprinting thereof divers times in the French, and Ducth tongues: and yet further promised, 
(f) Ibidem.  publishing the same shrotly in Latin to the public utility of the whole Church; this so learned and esteemed Protestant writer avocheth that, between the year of Christ 300. 
(g) Upon the revelat. printed. Anno. 1594. p. 68 and after the later edition. p. 90. 85.  and 316. the Antichristian and Papistical reign began, reigning universally and without any debatable contradiction 1260. years, next ensuing the first 300. years after Christ: And the same not (as D. Morton would 
(h) Appeal. p. 72.  evade) in regard of some one or other only point of Popery, (so to use their phrase) but so generally in regard of the whole, that saith M. 
(i) Upon revelat. p. 161.  Napier, from the year of Christ 316. God hath withdrawn his visible Church from the outward assemblies to the hearts of particular godly men, during the space of 1260. year's 
(k) Ibid. p. 191.  Gods true Church most certainly abiding so long latent & invisible, 
(l) Ibid. p. 161. 156. 237. 23. 188.  the Pope 
(m) Ib. p. 145.  & his Clergy duringal tbat time possessing the outward visible Church of Christians; & 
(n) Ibid. p. 239.  never suffering for the space of 1000 years after Silvester the first, any to be seen vouchable or visible of the true Church etc. Thus far M. Napier. To whom assenteth M. Brochard, affirming that 
(o) Upon the revelat. fol. 110.  The Pope fell from Christ in the time of Silvester, and that, 
(p) Ibidem.  the Church was trodden dowen and oppressed by the Papacy even from Siluesters time to these times, during 
(q) Ib. fo. 123.  the said 1260. years. with these agreeth M. 
(r) In Apoc. in his Synopsis before the book. fol. a. 1. parag. 11.  Brightman teaching that, The Church was latent from the time of Constantine for 1260. years, and that 
(s) In Apoc. in c. 17. p. 462.  ever since the time of Constantine the great. Rome hath been the whore of Babylon, and the Roman Bishop hath been the beast and Antichrist foretold in the Apocalypses: whereto M. Leigh addeth that 
(t) Britannies' great delivery. fol. B. 2.  The Popes ever since the first 300. years have been Devils.  
We may yet further ad hereto in behalf of the like yet further acknowledged antiquity of our Catholic religion, that M. Napier further avoucheth 
(u) Upon the revel. in c. 16. p. 191.  that, during even the second and third ages (next after Christ) the true temple of God and light of the Gospel was obscured by the Roman Antichrist himself. That also in the book so 
(x) In ep. theol. ep. 46 p. 232.  grateful to Beza, and penned by Caelius secundius Curio (a Caluinist) is affirmed and holden for good, 
(y) De amplitudine regni. Dei. lib. 1. p. 43. 45. 47.  that, The world continued in great darkness, blindness, & ignorance, almost from the Apostles age to these very times, in which above all expectation the Lord began to manifest himself etc. Lastly Sebastianus Francus concludeth for certain that, 
(z) Ep. de abrogandis. stat. Eccles.  Presently after the Apostles times all things were turned upside down etc. And that for certain through the work of Antichrist, the external Church together with the faith and Sacraments vanished away presently after the Apostles departure, & that for these 1400. years the Church hath been no where external and visible etc. So peremptorily do they charge the ancient and holy Fathers of the Primitive Church with Antichristian Apostasy from the faith of Christ. Yea they do not forbear to publish to the world their special book of that argument entitled, 
(a) His Majesty in his declaration concerning his proceedings with the states in case of Vo●stius. p. 15. 19 35.  De Apostasia Sanctorum, and to send the same to the Archbishop of Canterbury, and to maintain further by letter unto the said Archbishop, that the doctrine contained in that book, de Apostasia Sanctorum, was agreeable to the doctrine of the Church of England. The miserable deceived author thereof, and other his complices, Napier, Brightman, Brocard, Leigh, and sundry other Protestant writers not discerning, that by such their pretended Apostasy, themselves do in very deed, as precursors, prepare and make way to that fearful Apostasy, which is in their opinion foretold by the 
(b) 2. Thes. 2.3. and see Caluin upon the same place, as also Piscator.  Apostle to happen before the end of the world: for what else is this pretended Apostasy of the Primitive Church, other than a plain preparation and earnest persuasion to make Apostasy or departure from the doctrine of the Primitive church, and so consequently from the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles? So clear it is that not only the ages subsequent, but also precedent to S. Austin up to the Apostles are all of them disliked and condemned by Protestants, as wholly papistical, and Antichristian.    

The conclusion of the whole book.  
HItherto (gentle Reader) have I entertained thy pains and patience, in making proof to thee of S. Austin's professed religion, from his own alleged sayings & reported miracles, with solution also to the contrary objections usually pretended from S. Austin: only now in conclusion of all, I offer to thy consideration, how unlike it is, that I should be able to allege to thee so many plain and pregnant sayings of S. Austin, in behalf of so many several points of religion, and all or most of them for such by the learned adversary confessed, and yet further confirmed with like confessed consenting doctrine of the other ancient Fathers that lived next before, in, and after his age, and (all this notwithstanding) no such matter (as some adversaries pretend) to be by S. Austin therein intended or meant. Can he not in some only one or other, but in all the chief points of controversy speak so plainly with us and against Protestancy, and so likewise acknowledged by Protestants themselves, and yet himself in those very points join in religion with Protestants and against us? All which being so abundantly heretofore in this treatise examined and proved even from the sparing and wary confession of the learned adversaries, who acknowledge no more than the rack of truth enforceth them unto, may suffice to satisfy thee, studious Reader, that hereby is delivered to thee, but (as it were) the bare out side or naked appearance of things, in comparison of that far greater proof and evidence, which is in very deed at large abounding in the writings of S. Austin & the other ancient Fathers: If therefore any shall without all forehead seek to abuse thee with denial of so evident premises, I do therein boldly appeal to the equity of thine own indifferent judgement. And as for those other who with more plain dealing, but no less offence in do ingeniously confess and acknowledge S. Austin's foresaid doctrine to make with us, yet withal contemn and reject the same for Popish, if any (I say) supercilious forehead of that rank, who 
(c) Math. 13.13.14.  having ears to hear and will not hear, eyes to see and will not see, shall oppose against us his own late adverse novel doctrine, as pretended from the Scriptures, in the understanding whereof he doubteth not to prefer his own private interpretation before S. Austin and the other Fathers, I can but (yet not without commiseration) pronounce of such a one, 
(d) Apoc. 22.11.  Qui sordidus est sordescat adhuc: And I must needs apply unto him those words of our King's most excellent Majesty which he worthily delivered against Vorstius, a principal pretender of this Christian liberty: As for 
(e) In his foresaid declaration. p. 63. 64.  this Christian liberty (saith he) which Vorstius doth urge so much, certainly he doth it with no other intention but only under this fair pretext etc. to abuse the world etc. To abuse Christian liberty in presuming to propound a new doctrine to the world in point of the highest and holiest mysteries of God, is a most audacious rashness, and impudent arrogancy. And again, 
(f) Ibid. p. 61. 62.  If one particular man may take upon him such singularity as this, how shall he be subject to general, national, and synodical Counsels etc. Wherefore he is plainly discovered to be resolved, not to be subject in any sort to the judgement of the Church etc. for he knows to well that the ancient Church &c. (is against him) And this is the reason why he will not in these points submit himself to the judgement of any mortal man, but upon this occasion mantaines his Christian liberty: Thus far his Majesty against Vorstius, and indeed against all Protestants, who being pressed with the authority of S. Austin, & the other Fathers of the Primitive Church, either for the interpretation of the Scriptures or for our knowledge of the practice of those purest times in matters of faith and religion, do finally betake themselves to this desperate refuge of contemning S. Austin, and all Fathers upon pretence of this Christian liberty, that all controversies are to be decided only by the private spirit interpreting the Scriptures.  
Now lastly as to all Catholic Readers I conclude, that seeing the faith which at this day we believe and profess, is confessedly the same with that of S. Austin's, and the other holy Bishops and Doctors of the Primitive Church, that therefore amongst the other greatest blessings of God bestowed upon us, we ever esteem this with highest respect of our happy vocation: In due requital and gratitude whereto, let us with all exultation of mind accept and embrace what pressures, punishments, and torments so ever inflicted upon us, for our defence thereof; yea if death itself be urged, let us rather make choice to dye in our Lord, with S. Austin, S. Ambrose, S. Hierome, S. Gregory, and the other holy Prelates, Martyrs, Confessors, & Virgins, of those purest times, then to dye the death of the wicked, with Aerius, jovinian, Vigilantius, Waldo, Wiclive, hus, Luther, Caluin, and other damned Heretics; whose very inconstancy and civil dissensions amongst themselves, may serve us for a strongest argument, that their singular doctrines first proceeding from the spirit of error and ignorance, were after mantained by the spirit of pride and obstinacy, & shortly will be ended by the spirit of discord and contradiction.  
God save the KING.   


THE CONTENTS of the preface to the king's Majesty.  
THat the sacred Scriptures alone are not sufficient to determine controversies. p. 5.  
That controversies in Religion are to be decided by the Church. p. 9  
That long education in any profession or Religion, is not sufficient security for the truth thereof. p. 10.  
That Protestants have revolted from their former professed doctrines: And of their great inconstancy and incertanty therein. p. 12.   

The contents of the Preface to the learned adversaries.  
Certain writings of S. Austin charged by Protestants for counterfeit, are defended; and other their evasions prevented. p. 25.   

Chapter. 1.  
The Author beginneth his book to his Catholic friend. p. 1.   

Chapter. 2.  
Concerning God, the humanity of Christ, the B. Virgin Mary, and the holy Angels. 

Section. 1.  
S. Austin teacheth that the son of God, is God of God, and not of himself. p. 8.   

Section. 2.  
S. Austin teacheth, that God doth not reprobate any to sin or damnation, or command any thing impossible. p. 10.   

Section. 3.  
S. Austin teacheth that Christ suffered not according to his divine nature, nor according to the same was Priest, or offered sacrifice, or was mediator; and that from his nativity he was free from ignorance; and after his death descended into hell, and that his body by God's omnipotency may be without circumscription. p. 16.   

Section. 4.  
S. Austin teacheth, that the B. Virgin Mary, was freed from original sin: That her body was assumpted into heaven; and that she vowed chastity. He also teacheth the different degrees of Angels and Archangels. p. 22.     

Chapter. 3.  
Concerning the sacred Scriptures. 

Section. 1.  
S. Austin teacheth the sacred Scriptures to be discerned for such by the authority of the Church. p. ●26.   

Section. 2.  
S. Austin teacheth the books of Toby, judith, Hester, Maccabees etc. to be divine and Canonical Scriptures. p. 28.   

Section. 3.  
S. Austin teacheth that one text of Scripture may have divers true senses. p. 33.   

Section. 4.  
S. Austin teacheth that besides the sacred Scriptures, the Traditions of the Church are to be received & believed. As also that all heretics do insist only upon the Scriptures. p. 35.     

Chapter. 4.  
Concerning the Church of Christ. 

Section. 1.  
S. Austin teacheth that the Church of Christ is freed from error. p. 39   

Section. 2.  
S. Austin teacheth that the Church of Christ is Catholic or universal. p. 41.   

Section. 3.  
S. Austin teacheth that the militant Church must ever continue, and that visibly. p. 46.   

Section. 4.  
S. Austin teacheth that the Church was built upon Peter: And that Peter was the head of the whole Church. p. 50.   

Section. 5.  
S. Austin teacheth the Primacy of the Roman Church. p. 53.   

Section. 6.  
S. Austin denyeth Ecclesiastical Primacy to Emperors, & Kings. p. 57     

Chapter. 5.  
Concerning the Sacraments. 

Section. 1.  
S. Austin teacheth that the Sacraments do not only signify, but truly confer grace to the worthy receiver. p. 60.   

Section. 2.  
S. Austin teacheth that certain of the Sacraments do imprint a Character or mark in the soul of the receiver. p. 62.   

Section. 3.  
S. Austin teacheth that there are seven Sacraments. p. 64.   

Section. 4.  
S. Austin teacheth that the Sacraments are to be administered with the sign of the Cross. p. 66.     

Chapter. 6.  
Concerning Baptism. 

Section. 1.  
S. Austin teacheth that Baptism taketh away all sins, both original and actual. p. 68   

Section. 2.  
S. Austin teacheth that concupiscence remaning after Baptism is not sin. p. 69.   

Section. 3.  
S. Austin teacheth that children dying unbaptized are not saved. p. 71.   

Section. 4.  
S. Austin teacheth sundry Ceremonies of Baptism now used in the Roman Church. p. 73.     

Chapter. 7.  
Concerning the Sacrament of Confirmation. p. 76.   

Chapter. 8.  
Concerning the real presence, or Sacrament of the Eucharist. 

Section. 1.  
S. Austin teacheth the real Presence of Christ's body and blood in the Sacrament of the Eucharist. p. 81.   

Section. 2.  
S. Austin teacheth that the very wicked do truly receive the body of Christ. p. 85.   

Section. 3.  
S. Austin teacheth that great care is to be used lest any part of the Sacrament do fall upon the ground; and that it is to be received fasting: Besides which, he also teacheth and alloweth the use of holy bread, now used by Catholics. p. 87.   

Section. 4.  
S. Austin teacheth that the sacrament of the Eucharist is to be adored. And other Fathers teach that it is to be invocated; and that Angels are present in time of the sacrifice. p. 90.   

Section. 5.  
S. Austin teacheth that the Eucharist is a true and proper sacrifice, and that it is propitiatory even for the dead; and that it was offered upon Altars consecrated with oil and the sign of the Cross. p. 104.     

Chapter. 9  
Concerning the Sacrament of penance, wherein auricular confession to priests, imposed Penance, and days of pardon, are taught by S. Austin and other Fathers. p. 111.   

Chapter. 10.  
Concerning the Sacrament of Extreme unction, wherein is proved the same to be a Sacrament, and used in the Primitive Church. p. 122.   

Chapter. 11.  
Concerning the Sacrament of Orders, wherein S. Austin teacheth that they are properly a Sacrament, given only by a Bishop; who hath authority to excommunicate even the dead: And that priests may not marry, or be one that was Bigamus. p. 125.   

Chapter. 12.  
Concerning the Sacrament of Matrimony taught by S. Austin; and that the innocent party upon Adultery may not marry an other: And of the priests blessing after marriage. p. 134.   

Chapter. 13.  
Concerning free will, justification, merit of works, works of supererogation, and the difference of mortal and venial sins. 

Section. 1.  
S. Austin teacheth that man hath free wil p. 139.   

Section. 2.  
S. Austin teacheth that our justification consisteth not only in remission of sins or not imputation thereof, but likewise in good works, and that the same once had may be lost. p. 145.   

Section. 3.  
S. Austin teacheth that good works do merit, and that there are works of supererogation. p. 149.   

Section. 4.  
S. Austin teacheth that mortal and venial sins do differ of their own natures. pag. 154.     

Chapter. 14.  
Concerning prayer for the dead, Purgatory, material fire in hell, Limbus Patrum invocation of Saints, their worship, and Images. 

Section. 1.  
S. Austin teacheth that it is lawful and godly to pray for the dead; and that there is a place of Purgatory after this life. p. 157.   

Section. 2.  
S. Austin teacheth local hell, and material fire therein; as also Limbus Patrum, or Christ's descending into hell. p. 163.   

Section. 3.  
S. Austin teacheth that Saints are to be invocated and worshipped, as also their relics to be reverenced. p. 163.   

Section. 4.  
S. Austin teacheth that is is lawful to use and worship the Images of Christ and his Saints. p. 168.     

Chapter. 15.  
Concerning Christian fasts, as abstinence from certain meats upon certain days: as also concerning vowed chastity and monastical life. 

Section. 1.  
S. Austin teacheth that prescribed days of fasting, and abstinence from certain meats are lawful. p. 173.   

Section. 2.  
S. Austin teacheth that the vow of chastity is lawful. p. 177.   

Section. 3.  
S. Austin teacheth that it is lawful to vow the state of monastical or religious life. p. 180.     

Chapter. 16.  
Concerning Antichrist, usury, and permission of stews. 

Section. 1.  
Concerning Antichrist his coming at the end of the world: And of Enoch, and Elias, their coming as then to resist him. p. 187.   

Section. 2.  
S. Austin teacheth usury to be unlawful. p. 192.   

Section. 3.  
S. Austin teacheth that stews may be permitted for the avoiding of greater evil p. 194.     

Chapter. 17.  
Concerning Ceremonies. 

Section 1.  
S. Austin teacheth sundry holy ceremonies now used in the Catholic Church in the administration of the Sacraments. p. 198.   

Section. 2.  
S. Austin teacheth sundry ceremonies concerning prayer now used in the Roman Church. p. 204.     

Chapter. 18.  
Concerning miracles reported by S. Austin, and making in further proof and confirmation of our Catholic religion by him formerly tauhgt. 

Section. 1.  
S. Austin reporteth several miracles in proof of invocation of Saints. p. 213.   

Section. 2.  
S. Austin reporteth several miracles in proof of the honouring of Saints relics. p. 216.   

Section. 3.  
S. Austin reporteth some miracles in proof of the sign of the Cross: and of pilgrimage to the holy land. p. 218.   

Section. 4.  
S. Austin reporteth certain miracles in proof of the sacrifice of Christ's body: of Altars, and of penetration of bodies. p. 220.   

Section. 5.  
S. Austin reporteth some miracles to be wrought by holy oil. p. 223.   

Section. 6.  
A further confirmation of these foresaid miracles reported by S. Austin in proof of our Catholic Church. p. 224.     

Chapter. 19  
Concerning such sayings of S. Austin as are usually objected by our adversaries against his former Catholic doctrines, confessed for such by Protestants, and confirmed by miracles. 

Section. 1.  
Such places are answered as are urged against the Canonical Scriptures; against Traditions, and the authority of Counsels. p. 231.   

Section. 2.  
Such places are answered as are objected from S. Austin against Baptism by women in case of necessity: and against the real presence. p. 234.   

Section. 3.  
Such places are answered as are urged from S. Austin against invocation of Saints, Images, and relics. p. 242   

Section. 4.  
Such places are answered as are urged from S. Austin against Purgatory. p. 246.   

Section. 5.  
Such places are answered as are urged from S. Austin against justification by works, freewill, and merit of works. p. 248.   

Section. 6.  
Such places are answered as are objected from S. Austin concerning vows, miracles, and Ceremonies. p. 250.   

Section. 7.  
A further answer in general to all such objections as are urged from S. Austin or other of the Fathers. p. 254.     

Chapter. 20.  
Concerning the doctrine & religion of the o●her Fathers in general & also of those who lived in the age of S. Austin: And that it was the same with the doctrine and religion here formerly taught by S. Austin, and at this day taught by the Catholic Roman Church. 

Section. 1.  
The Fathers in general and who lived in the age of S. Austin, confessedly taught the same doctrine with him concerning Christ being our mediator only according to his humanity: concerning the sacred Scriptures, and Traditions. p. 264.   

Section. 2.  
The Fathers in general are confessed to teach the Primacy Ecclesiastical of S. Peter, and the Bishops of Rome: As also to deny supreme Ecclesiastical government to temporal Princes; and that the Pope is not Antichrist. p. 267.   

Section. 3.  
The Fathers in general are confessed to teach our Catholic doctrines concerning the Sacrament of Baptism. p. 273.   

Section. 4.  
The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholic doctrines concerning the Sacraments of confirmation, Orders, and Extreme unction. p. 276.   

Section. 5.  
The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholic doctrines concerning Confession, Satisfaction, and Pardons. p. 278.   

Section. 6.  
The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholic doctrines concerning real presence, the preservation of the Sacrament, and receiving fasting and Christ. p. 283.   

Section. 7.  
The Fathers in general are confessed concerning our Catholic doctrines of the sacrifice of Christ's body and blood in the Eucharist. As also that the same was propitiatory even for the souls departed: and of mingling water with wine in the Chalice; and of Altars. p. 289.   

Section. 8.  
The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholic doctrines concerning Prayer for the dead, Purgatory, and Lymbus Patrum, p. 295.   

Section. 9  
The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholic doctrines of invocation of Saints, of our reverend use of Images, Relics, & the Cross. p. 297.   

Section. 10.  
The Farhers in general are confessed for our Catholic doctrines concerning free will, and merit of works. p. 302.   

Section. 11.  
The Fathers in general are confessed for our Catholic doctrines concerning vows, the single life of priests, monachism, prescribed fasts, and Ceremonies. p. 305.   

Section. 12.  
The Fathers in general are confessed by Protestants, not only for particular points of faith, but jointly at once for many or most of them together. p. 313.   

Section. 13.  
That the Fathers who lived next before and after the times of S. Austin agreed with him in the Catholic Roman faith. p. 322.  
The conclusion of the whole book. 335.      

A TABLE OF THE PRINCIPAL POINTS contained in this book.  

A  
ABsolution given by imposition of hands & enjoined penance. 119.  
Abstinence from certain meats prescribed. 175.  
Amen, and Alleluia, anciently used. 206.  
Ancient way to be followed. Pref. p. 31.  
Angels, and Archangels, are different Orders. 25. They are present at the sacrifice of the Mass. 95.  
Answer in general to such objections as are urged from Fathers. 254.  
Antichrist one man. 187. 272. He shall come from the jews. 188. Not before the utter ruin of the Roman Empire. 188. 271. He is to continue but 3. years and a half. 272. 189.  
Altars anciently used for sacrifice. 290.  
Altars consecrated with the sign of the Cross and oil. 110. Miracles wrought thereat. 221.  
S. Austin himself a Monk, before the Pref. to the King. and 183. Sundry his writings rejected by Prot. are defended. Pref. p. 23. Himself commended by Fathers, and Prot. 3. The age wherein he lived likewise commended. 5. Prot. challenge S. Austin to be of their religion. 5.   

B  
Baptism taketh away all sins. 68 273. Children dying without it, are not saved. 71. 274. Say persons in case of necessity may baptise. 72. 275. Objections against it answered. 234. Ceremonies of Baptism anciently used. 73. 275.  
Bigami hindered from holy Orders. 135.  
Bishops have civil jurisdiction. 123. their blessing. 125. The Pelagians impugning it, reproved. 127. They are in degrees above priests. 126. They only consecrate Virgins and Chrism. 128. they have authority to Excommunicate. 128. even such as are dead. 129.   

C  
CAluinistes revolt from Caluin. Pref. p. 12.  
Ceremonies move to devotion. 198. used in administration of the Sacraments. 199. Objections against them answered. 253. 312.  
Character imprinted by some Sacraments. 62.  
Chrism hallowed only by a Bishop. 77. Miracles wrought thereby. 223.  
Christ is God of God. 9 denied by some Prot. 8. but believed by others. 10. he suffered not according to his divine nature. 16. Neither as God was Priest, or mediator. 17. 266. He was freed from ignorance. 18. He descended into hell. 19 His body may be without circumscription. 19 Objections against this answered. 241.  
Christian liberty taught by Prot. disliked by the King's Majesty. 387.  
Church of Christ freed from error. 39 she is Catholic or universal. 41. and ever visible. 46. Built upon S. Peter. 50.  
Churches were consecrated. 207. They were sanctuary. 207.  
Commandments of God not impossible. 15. 142.  
Commandments of the first table divided by S. Austin as Catholics now do. 169.  
Concupiscence is not sin without consent. 69.  
Confession of sins. 113. 278. etc. Shamefastness is not to hinder the same. 118. Sins in particular are to be told. 118. 278. Objections against confession answered. 279.  
Confirmation a Sacrament. 76. 276. Given by impsition of hands. 78. 277.  
Counsels of good authority. 40. Objections against them answered. 232.  
Cross used in administration of the Sacraments. 66. 200. 276. worshipped. 300. It shall be carried before Christ at the day of judgement. 191. It was used in prayer. 205. Miracles wrought thereby. 218.  
Cyprian's sermon de ab●●lutione pedum proved to be ancient. 66.   

D  
Divorce in case of Adultery doth not warrant the Innocent party to marry again. 136.   

E  
EDucation no warrant for the truth of religion. Pref. p. 10.  
England converted by Austin to Popery. 323.  
Enoch, and Elias, yet alive, and to come at the time of Antichrist. 190.  
Eremites and their austere life. 185.  
Eucharist, Real presence proved. 81. 283. The wicked receive the body of Christ. 85. Great care is used that no particle fall upon the ground. 87. 289. It is to be received fasting. 88 285. It is adored. 90. 97. Invocated. 94. 95. Adoration was not first brought in by Honorius. 99 Objections against Real presence answered. 225. How it was received by Infants. 260. Transubstantiation anciently taught. 106. 284. It was received chaste. 284. 89. It was anciently reserved for the sick. 285.  
Extreme unction a Sacrament. 123. Anciently used. 122. 277. S. james his epistle rejected for the same by Prot. 124.   

F  
Fasts prescribed. 175. 310. Objections against fasting answered. 311.  
Fathers by Protestants made contrary to themselves. 256.  
Father's obscure sayings are to be expounded by the common received opinion of other Fathers. 259. Their speeches uttered in heat of disputation are to be discerned from sayings dogmatical. 262. They are confessed in general for our Catholic faith. 313. They are disclaimed from by Prot. 320.  
Freewill taught. 139. 302. The denial thereof condemned in the Manichees. 140. Objections against it answered. 248.   

G  
GOd doth not reprobate any to sin or damnation. 11. Yet Prot. teach the contrary. 10.  
God's foreknowledge doth not hinder freewill. 13.   

H  
Hell hath in it material fire. 161. The contrary reproved in Origen. 162. And yet taught by some Prot. 162.  
Holy bread anciently used. 89.  
Hours Canonical anciently used. 204.   

I  
IMages of Saints anciently used. 168. Their placing in Churches approved by Lutherans, & Caluinistes. 172. 299. Objections against them answered. 244.  
Incertainty of our predestination. 148.  
Inconstancy of divers Prot. in matters of faith. Pref. p. 12. 13. 14.  
justification consisteth not only in remission of sins. 145. Once had it may be lost. 147. Works do justify. 147.   

K  
KIng james his deserved commendation. Ep. to his Majesty.  
Kyrieleison anciently used in Mass. 208.   

L  
LEnt fast obligatory. 173. 310. Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday anciently fasted. 174. 311. The denial of prescribed fasts reproved in Aerius. 174. Saboth fasts impugned. 175.  
L●mbus Patrum, or Christ's descending into hell. 163. 296.   

M  
MArriage a Sacrament. 134. Married persons by mutual assent may vow perpetual chastity. 137. 177. 306. The priests benediction after marriage. 138.  
Marriage after the vow of chastity unlawful. 177. 305.  
Marry the mother of God freed from original sin. 22. Assumpted into heaven. 23. Vowed perpetual chastity. 24.  
Mass a proper sacrifice. 104. 290. according to the order of M●lchisedech. 104. 291. It is the sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ. 105. Of our mediator. 106. Of our price or redemption. 106. Of Christians. 107. It is propitiatory. 107. 291. for the dead. 108. 292. It is offered upon Altars. 109. Anciently said in Latin. 208. The word Mass ancient. 210.  
Miracles wrought by oblation thereof. 220. Water mingled with wine in the Chalice. 294.  
Merits of works. 149. Divers degrees of merits. 150. The denial thereof reproved in jovinian. 150. Merits of one may help another. 151.  
Miracles in proof of Catholic Religion. 213. 325. Objections against them answered. 224. etc. 251. 327. Prot. work no miracles. 329.  
Monastical life approved 180. 307. It requireth all things in common. 180. It is under vow. 181. The impugning thereof is reproved in Petilianus. 181. the particular habit of Monks, and Nuns. 182. 307. Their great abstinence. 183. 308. S. Austin himself was a Monk. 183. Monks obedience to their superior. 309.   

N  
NVnnes in ancient time. 182. 308. their consecration in the Church, and their habit. 309. Their Monasteries. 309. 310.   

O  
OBedience of religious persons. 309.  
Obscure places of Scriptures, and Fathers are to be explained by plainer. 254.  
Orders a Sacrament. 125. Inferior orders. 131. 277. Their proper offices. 131.   

P  
PEnetration of bodies proved by miracles. 221.  
Penance importeth more than repentance of the mind. 111. It is imposed by the Church according to our sins. 111. 120. 281. It is sometimes remitted by Indulgence. 120. 282.  
Penance is a Sacrament. 122.  
S. Peter head of the Church. 50. 268.  
Popes of Rome S. Peter's successors. 53. 268.  
Prayer for the dead. 157. 295.  
Prayer to Saints. 164. 297. Miracles in proof of prayer to Saints. 213. Apparitions made by Saints. 215. Objections against praying to Saints answered. 242.  
Prayer toward the East. 104.  
Princes, Kings, or Emperors, not supreme heads of the Church. 57 270. Objections for them answered. 233.  
priests properly so called. 127.  
Priest the spiritual judge. 113. He hath power from G●d to remit sin. 115. The denial thereof condemned in the novatians. 115.  
Preist●s are inferior to bishops. 126. The denial thereof condemned in the Acrians 1●6. They may not marry. 133. 306. The contrary condemned in jovinian, & Vigilantius. 307.  
Purgatory and temporal punishment after this life. 160. Objections against it answered. 246.   

R  
Relics of Saints to be honoured. 166. 246. 299. Miracles wrought by Relics. 216. 219.  
Rogation days anciently used. ●04.  
Roman faith hath continued and been known in all ages. 330.   

S  
SAcraments confer grace. 60. Some of them imprint a character in the souls of the receivers. 62. There are seven Sacraments. 64.  
Saints are to be worshipped. 165.  
Scriptures not able to give us certain knowledge of themselves. Pref. p. 5. All conference thereof by private men subject to error. Ibidem. p. 7. The Canon thereof not agreed upon by Prot. Pref. p. 6. They and their sense are known by the Church. Ib. p. 9 & 26. The books of Toby, judith. etc. Canonical. 28. 266. Objections against them answered. 30. 231. One text of Scripture may have divers true senses. 33. Heretics insist only upon Scripture. 37.  
Sin's mortal and venial of their own natures. 155. Venial sins forgiven by our Lord's prayer, and Ceremonies. 155.  
Stews permitted. 194.   

T  
TRaditions are to be believed. 35. 267. Objections against them answered. 232.   

V  
VEssels consecrated. 201.  
Vestments consecrated. 203.  
Virgins preferred before married persons. 150. 177.  
Vows of chastity anciently used. 305.  
Vows made by Monks, & Nuns. 181. 305. Objections against vows answered. 250.  
Usury unlawful. 192.   

W  
Works do justify. 147. Objections answered. 248. do merit. 149. 303.  
Works of supererogation. 152.   
FINIS.