A treatise of three conversions of England from paganism to Christian religion. The first two parts I. Under the Apostles, in the first age after Christ, II. Under Pope Eleutherius and King Lucius, in the second age, III. Under Pope Gregory the Great and King Ethelbert, in the sixth age : with divers other matters thereunto appertaining : dedicated to the Catholics of England, with a new addition ... upon the news of the late Queens death, and the succession of His Majesty of Scotland to the crown of England / by N.D., author of the Ward-word.

The First PART of this Present TREATISE CONCERNING Three Conversions OF ENGLAND TO THE Christian, Catholic, Roman Religion. (Book 1)

The ARGUMENT.

THe purpose of this first Part (gentle Reader) is, to declare by evident demonstration, both of Histories, Reasons, Antiquities, and Succession of Times, and by confession and other testimonies of the Adversaries themselves, That this our Isle of England, and People thereof, the Britans, Saxons, and English, have at three several times received Christian Faith from Rome, and by Romish Preachers. First, under the Apostles, in the first Age after Christ; And then under Pope Eleutherius, in the second Age; And thirdly, under Pope Gregory, in the begin∣ning of the sixth Age: And that this Faith and Religion was no other than the Roman Catholic Faith, generally received over all Christendom in those days; And that it was One, and the Self-same Faith, at all these three times; and that the same was continued and professed after∣ward in England publicly for almost 1400 years together, to wit, from the Apostles days, unto the Reign of King Henry VIII. under divers Nations, States, Governments, and variety of Times, by Britans, Saxons, Danes, Normans, and English; and that the self-same Faith continueth at this day in the Church of Rome, and Christian Catholic World abroad, without change or altera∣tion of any one substantial Article, or Point of Belief; and that all Cavils and Calumniations of Heretics and Sectaries in this behalf are vain and foolish, and most manifestly here confuted. And finally, a most clear; easie, evident, and infallible deduction, visible to the Eye and Ʋnderstanding of every mean intelligent Reader, is set down, and brought from hand to hand, without interruption, from the first Conversions of our Realm unto this day; and this so perspicuously, as no man, that will not wilfully shut his eyes, but can see and behold the same, as by the Chapters following (God willing) more particularly shall appear.

CHAP. I.

Whether England and English-men have particular Obligations to the See of Rome, above other Nations? And of the first Conversion of Britans to Christian Religion in the time of the Apostles.

AFTER a certain Narration made by me in my Answer to Sir Francis Hastings,* 1.1 about the seventh Encounter between him and N. D. wherein I declared what Reverend Re∣spect other Nations and Kingdoms of the Christian World have ever born to the See Apostolic, and Bishop thereof, until this miserable Age of Heretical Spirits, who ridiculously do hold the same to be Antichrist: I do infer the conclusion and comparison following, about the particular Obligation of English-men towards the same See and Bishop, above many other Kingdoms, saying in my Ward-word thus:

* 1.22. And if all Christian Nations have, and ought to bear, such Reverence and Respect to the See of Rome;* 1.3 then much more out little Island of England, (as this man calleth it) for that it hath received more singular benefits from thence, than any one Nation in the World besides, having been twice con∣verted from Paganism to Christian Religion, by the especial Diligence, Labor, and Industry of the same See.

Once, in the time of the Britans, about 180 years after Christ, at what time Eleutherius, that holy Pope and Martyr, converted King Lucius and his Subjects, by the Preaching of St. Damianus and his Fellows,* 1.4 sent from Rome to that effect; And the second time, 400 years after that again, when our Predecessors the English Saxons were con∣verted by St. Augustin and his Fellow-Preachers, sent by St. Gregory the Great, then Bishop of Rome, to the same end. And if it be most certain, and cannot be denied, that these two so great and universal benefits rightly con∣sidered are the highest under Heaven that our Land could receive from any mortal then, and that the Obligation of this double Spiritual Birth of ours is so much greater than the Bond we owe to our carnal Parents, by how much more weighty and important is our Eternal Salvation than our Temporal Life and Generation: let all men consider the barbarous ingratitude of this man, that barketh with such spite against the See of Rome, the Mother of our Christianity, and against her Bishops, the Workers of so high a Blessing to us. And with this consideration I leave the modest and discreet Readers to judge of the matter, as Reason and Religion shall induce them, and not as the rage of this and other such raving people would incite them.

3. Thus I wrote then, and to this declaration and conclusion of mine, our Knight taketh upon him now to answer in these words: Whereas this Roman Advocate saith,* 1.5 That this Land ought to bear more reverence to the See of Rome than other Nations, for that it hath received more singular benefits from thence, namely, that it was converted from Paganism to Christian Religion by the special Diligence, Labor, and Industry of the same See; I answer, First, That it is apparent by sundry Testimonies, that this Land was converted to the Faith long before that time by you specified, and not by the Bishop of Rome. Gildas testifieth that Britanny received the Gospel in the time of Tiberius the Emperor, and that Joseph of Arimathea was sent by Philip the Apostle from France hither, where he remained till his death. And Bede (our Country man likewise) doth testifie, That in his time this Land kept Easter after the manner of the East Church; by which my be gathered, that the first Preachers came hither from the East parts of the World, and not from Rome. More proofs might be set down, but I spare them.

4. Mark (good Reader) what manner of Answer this is to my former Speech. and how directly these people do go to the matter. I said before, That the Isle of England, wherein so many at this day do rail against Rome, hath more obli∣gation of Love towards the same for benefits received, than divers other Coun∣tries; for that the people of this Island have been twice converted by men sent from thence; once, under Pope Eleutherius, almost 200 years after Christ, and again under Pope Gregory the Great, about the year of our Lord 600. Now to this the Kt. thinketh to have answered well, by affirming two or three things; First out of Gildas, That Britanny received the Gospel in the time of Tiberius the Emperor, before any or these two Conversions named by me: Which how like∣ly it is, (Tiberius living but five years after Christ's Ascension) shall after be ex∣amined. Secondly, That Joseph of Arimathea was sent by Philip the Apostle out of France into Britanny, which yet the true Gildas hath not: But by these two Examples the Knight would shew, That in Britanny the Faith of Christ was not first of all planted from Rome, nor by the Popes thereof, or by their industry. And to the same effect he allegeth out of Bede, the used of observing Easter after the manner of the East Church remaining amongst the Britans in his

time; whereof he inferreth, as you see, That it is most like that our first Preach∣ers were from the East, and not from the West Church.

5. But suppose all these things were true; do they overthrow that which I said before in my Ward-word, that the Britans were converted under Pope Eleutherius, or the Saxons under Pope Gregory, and by several Preachers sent from Rome by them?* 1.6 They prove only that before these two public Conversi∣ons, which we owe to the Church and Popes of Rome, there might be some sparkles of Christian Faith also in Britanny by other means; which I never de∣ny'd, but only said that I would have English-men grateful to Rome for these two; which Conversions no man can deny, without apparent impudence, as after more amply shall be shewed, where also these Examples alleged out of Gildas and St. Bede shall be examined, how far they are true, or do make for the purpose here in hand.

6. So that this first part of Sir Francis's Answer being nothing to the purpose, as you see, tho' all were granted, which he allegeth; Let us hear his second part. Secondly, (saith he) tho' it be granted that Eleutherius sending hither Preachers from Rome in King Lucius his time, did frist convert this Land to the Christian Faith,* 1.7 I say that there is not now the same Faith in Rome that was then: There were then no Masses said, no setting up of Images in Churches, &c. Here now, if we will take Sir Francis's word, we have a sure warrant by his [I say] that the Faith in Rome is not the same now, that it was in Pope Eleutherius his time; and that in particular, there were neither Masses then, nor Images. Where∣in you may note, first, that cunningly he holdeth his peace of the Conversion of English-men under St. Gregory, (which most concerneth us that be of this Nation) for that he dareth not deny that both Mass and Images were in use in his time in the Roman Church and Faith; and so brought into England by St. Augustin that converted us:* 1.8 which is evident in St. Bede in every place of his Story, and particularly where he relateth the first entrance of St. Augustin and his Fellows into Canterbury, in Procession, with a Cross and Image of our Savior in a Banner, and that they said their first Masses there in an old Church of St. Martin, builded, as he saith, by the old Christian Romans before their departure out of Britanny.

7. And for the time of Eleutherius, under whom the Britans were converted, tho' it were not hard also to prove the same particulars; yet will I not take that disputation now in hand, but shall leave it to a better occasion afterward in this Treatise; where, without standing upon these particular two Doctrins of Mass and Images, here mentioned by the Knight, I shall shew more general and firm Arguments that the Faith of the Church of Rome under Eleutherius,* 1.9 200 years after Christ, was the very same, and no other, than was that under St. Gregory, 400 years after; that again, nor this under Gregory different from that which now is in Rome under Clement VIII. a thousand years after Gregory, and shall endure to the worlds end.

8. This, I say, we shall demonstrate afterward most clearly: but yet, to the end the Reader may see in the mean space how much credit is to be given to this Knight's [I say], let him but read the fourth Chapter of his good Masters,* 1.10 and chief historical Doctors, the Magdeburgians, touching the second Age of Christ, wherein Eleutherius lived, towards the end, as also the beginning of the third Age immediately ensuing, and he shall find that in the second Age,* 1.11 under their ordinary Title of Inclinatio Doctrinae complectens stipulas & errores Doctorum; that is to say, The falling away of Christian Doctrin, containing the stubble and errors of Doctors, they reprehend Ignatius, who was St. John Evan∣gelist's Scholar, for using the phrase, Offerre & Sacrificium immolare, to offer and make Sacrifice; as also the holy Martyr Irenaeus, for saying,* 1.12 That Christ had taught a New Oblation in the New Testament, which the Church receiving from the

Apostles, doth offer up throughout all the world, &c. And in the third Age they accuse that blessed Bishop and Martyr St. Cyprian of Superstition for saying,* 1.13 Sa∣cerdotem vice Christi fungi, & Deo Patri sacrificium offerre; that the Priest sup∣plying the place of Christ,* 1.14 doth offer Sacrifice to God the Father. They re∣prehend also Tertullian for using the phrase, Sacrificium offerre; to offer Sacri∣fice. They condemn also St. Martial, Scholar of the Apostles themselves, for saying, Sacrificium Deo creatori offertur in ara; Sacrifice is offered to God our Creator upon the Altar among Christians.

9. So that, if by our Mass Catholics understand no other thing but the pub∣lic external Sacrifice appointed by Christ in his Church, as we do not; then may we see that (by confession of the Magdeburgians themselves) this Mass was as well in use in Eleutherius his time, as in time of Gregory I. after him. And the like might we shew about the use of Images, but that it were over long for this place; our intention being only to treat of the Conversion of our Countrey to Christian Religion; and to note by the way, Which is most to be credited by a discreet man,* 1.15 either the I say of a Courtly Knight, affirming that Mass was not in the time of Eleutherius; or the Testimonies of so many grave and Learned Fathers to the contrary, that lived in the same Age, to wit, Igna∣tius, Martial, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian, and others.

10. And this being sufficient for refutation of both parts of Sir Francis's idle re∣ply, I shall go forwards to discuss a little the first entrance of Christian Faith into England; how, and in what time, and by whom it is likely that it might be done before the days of Eleutherius; and whether this first Conversion or sow∣ing the Faith in our Island may be ascribed also to Rome, as well as the other more public Conversions afterward? Which if it fall out to be so, then hath the Knight, instead of diminishing our Obligation to Rome, not a little increa∣sed the same, by mentioning also a third Conversion from that See, which I for brevities sake, and for that it was less notoriously known than the other two, thought good to pretermit in my Ward-word; but now, being moved thereunto by Sir Francis, who fighteth mightily (for the most part) against himself, alleging matters that make for us, I shall now briefly discuss more in particular this affair.

* 1.1611. First then, no man can deny but that the Death, Resurrection, and Ascension of our Savior, the coming of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles, and their beginning of Preaching presently upon the same, was in the eighteenth year of Tiberius, the third Emperor of Rome; who living five years after, and Caius Caligula other four, there entred Claudius, who reigned fourteen years, and Nero after him as many, who in the last year of his Reign put to death St. Peter and St. Paul, St. Peter having come to Rome, according to Eusebius, in the second year of Claudius, which was eleven years after the Resurrection of Christ,* 1.17 tho' some Authors differ in that account. Eusebius his words, transla∣ted out of Greek by St. Jerome, are these: Petrus Apostolus, Natione Galilaeus, Christianorum Pontifex primus, &c.

Peter the Apostle of the Country of Galile, the first chief Bishop of Christians, after he had founded the Church of Antioch, went to Rome; and having there preached the Gospel, remained Bishop of the same City for twenty five years together, &c.

St. Paul was sent thither Prisoner by Festus, Governor of Judaea, in the second year of Nero's Reign,* 1.18 that is, fourteen years after St. Peter, according to the same Eusebius.

12. The next year after St. Peter came to Rome, which was the third year of Claudius his Reign, there began to be such War in Britanny, as the Em∣peror himself resolved to go in person thither; and so he did, with admiration of the whole world.* 1.19 And if there were any Christians in Rome at that time, as it is likely there were, (the Christian Faith having been now preached in the world some dozen years after Christ's Ascension) it is very probable that some

went with him into Britanny; and that this was the first sparkle of planting Christian Faith and Religion in those Countries; but much more afterward, as their number increased, seeing that this War continued for forty years to∣gether; that is to say, to the fourth year of Domitian, when as well extern Hi∣stories, as our William of Malmsbury,* 1.20 (to omit other Heathen Writers) doth teach, That Britanny was wholly subdu'd, and brought into a perfect form of Pro∣vince. And in this time there being continual going and coming from Rome to Britanny, and Christian Religion every day increasing in Rome, the same could not choose but be kindled also in Britanny, especially for two or three Conside∣rations. First,* 1.21 for that there were many Britans inhabiting in Rome at that day; some for Hostages, some for their own Pleasures, thereby to fly the Wars and unquiet state of their own Country, others taken and carried by force, as * 1.22 Caractacus Sylurum Rex, Caractacus King of the Sylures, who inhabi∣ted that part of Britanny which at this day we call South-Wales, who being taken, was sent to Rome by Ostorius Governor of that Country for Claudius the Emperor, in the 11th. year of his Empire, and much Nobility with him, as Tacitus in his Story doth relate.

13. Some also, both Romans and of other Nations, being Christened, and flying the Persecution which was in Rome against such Men, especially under Nero, got themselves into Britanny, as a place of more liberty, and less subject to Examinations in such matters, by reason of the Wars and Tumults there. And this is conform to that which Gildas the ancient Britan writeth in his Com∣plaint of the Overthrow of Britanny;* 1.23 where having declared the extreme Cala∣mity come upon his Country-men by that War and Victory of the Romans against them under Claudius, addeth presently these words: Interea glaciali frigore rigenti Insulae, &c.

In the mean space, while these Wars lasted, there appeared, and imparted it self to this cold Island, (removed further off from the visible Sun, than other Countries) that true and invisible Sun, which in the time of Tiberius Caesar had shewed it self to the whole World, I mean Christ, vouchsafed to impart his Precepts, &c.

14. This is the sum and true sense of his Sentence, tho' the words be some∣what intricate, and his stile obscure; which Sir Francis understanding not, citeth this place of Gildas (as before you have heard) to prove that Britanny re∣ceived the Gospel under Tiberius Caesar: which he saith not, nor is not likely,* 1.24 (as before hath been declared) both in respect of the small time which Tiberius lived after the Apostles began to preach, as also for that in those days there was no War in Britanny, whereof Gildas speaketh immediately before.

15. And thus much of the Time and Occasion whereby Christian Religion began first in Britany, within the first fifty years after Christ's Ascension; whereto also we may add the Testimony of Nicephorus,* 1.25 and before him of Theo∣doretus and Sophronius, ancient Writers, who do testifie, That Brittaniae Insu∣lae, &c. The Britan Islands fell in division among the Apostles, in their first par∣tition which they made of the World. And it is most like that St. Peter being come to Rome to teach and convert the Western-parts of the World, as Italy, Spain, and France, by name; these Islands also received the same benefit from him. And so say our Authors, whom afterwards I shall allege for his being in Britanny.

16. And this is another point of Obligation betwixt England and Rome, (if Sir Francis can be content to hear it) to wit, that the first Bishop of Rome went in person to convert our Country, as afterward we shall hear grave Authors affirm, to whom I remit me. Tho' who indeed were the very first Teachers in Britanny, and Preachers in particular, or Helpers thereunto, is not so certain; our ancient Historiographers, by reason of the variety of Times, and our Countries Calamities, having left no clear Testimony thereof. True it is,

that our later Writers of the English Nation,* 1.26 namely Holinshed and Cambden, do affirm, That one Claudia Ruffina a Noble British Lady, living then in Rome, and being the Wife (as they say) of one Pudens a Roman Senator, and Mother of the two famous Christian Virgins Praxedes and Pudentiana, did send divers Books and Messages unto her Friends in Britanny, and thereby helped much to their Conversion. And this may appear (say they) as well by the Salutation sent from her by St. Paul's Pen to Timothy,* 1.27 when he said, Eubulus, Pudens, Li∣nus, Claudia, and all the Brethren, do salute you; as also for that she was the first Hostess or Harbourer of St. Peter and St. Paul at their coming to Rome,* 1.28 it may be conjectur'd that she was one of the first Christians of the City. Where∣of it may be inferred, that if it be true that she sent those first Messages, Books or Messengers of Christian Knowledge into her Country, she was also the first, or one of the first Helpers to that Conversion.

17. But now the proofs of this mater are not so strong as I could wish or de∣sire, for the Honor of our Country; but let us hear them as they be. First, the proof that she was a Britain, is by certain Verses of Martial the Poet, written unto her in his Epigrams, thus:

* 1.29Claudia caeruleis cùm sit Ruffina Britannis Edita, cur Latiae pectora plebis habet?

Whereas Claudia Ruffina is born of the Britans (that paint themselves) how cometh it to pass that she hath gained so much the good wills of the Italian People? And then he goeth forward to praise her also for her Beauty, exceed∣ing the Beauty either of Italians or Grecians. He commendeth her besides for three Children which she had born to her Husband, and these Children our men would interpret to be the foresaid two Virgins Praxedes and Pudentiana, together with Novatus their Brother, all Children of Pudens the Senator above-named.

18. But altho' I could wish much (as I said) for the Honor of our Nation, that this thing were true, especially her being the Wife to Pudens, and Mother of the foresaid Children, that were all Saints; yet have I great Arguments to the contrary:* 1.30 Whereof the first is the silence of all Antiquity in this behalf. Martial also being a Heathen, and Enemy to Christians, would hardly have commended her so much, and written Epigrams to her of her rare Beauty, if she had been a Christian, which was the most odious thing that might be in those days; nor could she be so Beautiful in his time, living under Vespasian and Titus, and dying under Trajan, during whose Reign it appeareth in Martial that these Verses were written; for so much as she must needs be very old in those days,* 1.31 seeing that Pudens his House, placed in declivo Montis Scauri, in the side of the Hill called Scaurus, was the first (by Tradition of all Antiquity) that re∣ceived St. Peter, and afterward St. Paul in Rome, and is at this day a Church dedicated to his Daughter St. Pudentiana; and from the arrival of St. Peter to Rome, until the time of Trajan, were almost sixty years. So as if she were Wife of Pudens, and Mother of those Children, when St. Peter came to Rome, she must needs be very aged, when Martial wrote those Verses of her Beauty. Besides this,* 1.32 our own Bede, Ado Archbishop of Trevers, Usuardus, and other ancient Authors in their Martyrologies, do assign another Wife unto Pudens the Senator, as Mother to the foresaid three Children, whose Name was Sabi∣nella; so that, tho' it be true that there was such a British Lady named Claudia Ruffina in Rome commended by Martial under Trajan, and that St. Paul did commend another Claudia and Pudens for Christian Religion in his second Epi∣stle to Timothy, (all which is sufficiently proved;) yet that this Claudia Ruffina was the Claudia mentioned by St. Paul, or that the same Ruffina was a Chri∣stian, or Wife to Pudens, or Mother of Praxedes and Pudentiana, (which are

the principal Points whereof the matter dependeth;) This, I say,* 1.33 is not pro∣ved, nor any part thereof, but only huddl'd up by our later Heretical Writers, under a shew of other Proofs, to wit, that there was such a Claudia that was of Britanny, and another by St. Paul named; which are impertinent. Points to the Principal that should have been proved. And hereby we see that Here∣tics are but slight Provers, and very deceitful in all matters, as well Historical as Doctrinal.

19. Wherefore, to let this pass, and to speak of the first Ecclesiastical Teachers of Christian Religion in England, who through the great perturba∣tion of Wars (as hath been said) were not so well known,* 1.34 nor distinctly ob∣served, nor deliver'd to Writing in those days, as otherwise they might have been; yet find I some mention (tho' dispersed) of three several Apostles of Christ to have Preached there, to wit, St. Peter, St. Paul, and St. Simon of Chananee, sirnamed the Zealous; two Apostolical Men also in these first troubled Times to have been sent thither, Aristobulus a Roman, whom St. Paul named in his Epistle to the Romans, and Joseph of Arimathea, a Nobleman of Jury, that buried Christ: Of all which Five we shall speak somewhat in order.

20. And first of St. Peter himself to have been in England (or Britanny) and Preached, Founded Churches, and Ordained Priests and Dencons therein,* 1.35 is recorded out of Greek Antiquities by Simeon Metaphrastes a Grecian. And it seemeth to be somewhat confirmed by that which Innocentius I. Bishop of Rome hath left written above 1200 years agone, saying, That the first Churches of Italy,* 1.36 France, Spain, Africa, Sicilia? and the Islands that lie betwixt them, were found∣ed by St. Peter, or his Scholars, or Successors. For which cause Gulielmus Eysen∣grenius, in his first Centuria, or hundred years, doth write also,* 1.37 That the first Christian Churches of England were sounded by St. Peter under Nero. Whereunto it may be thought that the foresaid Gildas had relation, when expostulating with the Britain Priests of his time for their Wickedness, (for which the Wrath of God had brought in the English Saxons upon them) he objecteth among other things, Quod sedem Petri Apostoli inverecundis pedibus usurpassent;* 1.38 That they had usurped the Seat St. Peter with unshamefac'd feet: meaning thereby either the whole Church of Britanny first founded by him, or some particular place of Devotion or Church which he had erected. And finally, Alredus Rienuallus,* 1.39 an English Abbot of the Order of Cisterce, left written about 500 years agone a certain Revelation or Apparition of St. Peter to an holy man in the time of King Edward the Confessor, shewing him how he had Preached himself in England, and consequently the particular care he had of that Church and Na∣tion, &c.

21. If any man ask, What time it might be that St. Peter left Rome,* 1.40 and went into Britanny, and other Countries round about? Cardinal Baronius, a famous Learned Historiographer of our time, thinketh that it was then when Claudius the Emperor banish'd all the Jews out of Rome, (as in the Acts of the Apostles it is recorded) among whom it is like that St. Peter also, being by Nation a Jew, retired himself, and took that occasion to go into divers Pagan Countries to preach the Faith of Christ, that thing belonging especially to his Charge as Head of the Apostles, according to his own words of himself,* 1.41 Ele∣git Deus per os meum, audire gentes verbum Evangelii & credere.

God hath chosen and appointed that Gentiles shall hear and believe the Word of the Gospel by my mouth.

This then was the cause why he was so diligent and careful to go and preach every-where Christian Religion, to the end he might fulfil and accomplish this Will and Ordination of his Master. And this was one cause also (to wit, his absence from Rome) why, according to Baronius and other Learned Men, St. Paul writing to the Romans did not name or salute him in his Epistle, whereof our Heretics do brabble much. And thus much of St. Peter.

* 1.4222. Of St. Paul's being in Britanny, there are not so many particular Testi∣monies; yet the foresaid Theodoretus doth affirm, That from Rome he made certain Exoursions, in Hispanias, & in Insulas, quae in Mari jacent; into Spain, and the Islands lying in the Sea near about. And in another place (as the Mag∣deburgians do cite him) he writeth expresly, That St. Paul Preached to the Bri∣tains. And the like hath Sophronius Bishop of Jerusalem in his Sermon of the Nativity of the Apostles. Venantius also Fortunatus, a most Learned and Holy. Man, writing above a thousand years agone of St. Paul's Peregrination, saith thus:

Transit & Oceanum, vel qua facit Insula portum, Quas{que} Britannus habet terras, at{que} ultima Thyle.

He pass'd over the Ocean-Sea to the Island that maketh a Haven on the other side,* 1.43 even to the Lands which the Britains do possess, &c. For which respect Arnoldus Mirmannus, in his Theatre of the Conversion of all Nations, affirmeth St. Paul to have pass'd to Britanny in the fourth year of Nero, Anno Domini 59; and there to have Preached, and afterward to have returned again into Italy. And so much of St. Paul; who having twelve or thirteen years permitted him by Christ after his coming to Rome before his death, for helping St. Peter, and for assisting the West-parts of the World, and St. Peter himself almost twice as much: it is not unlike (their Zeal being considered, and the state of times weighed) but that they made many Excursions, as the former Authors do write. And thus much of them.

* 1.4423. For the Preaching of the third Apostle, Symon Chananaeus, sirnamed the Zealous, we have the Testimony of Nicephorus out of Greek Monuments, to whom agreeth Dorotheus a very ancient Writer; as also the Greek Martyrology, as testifieth Baronius in his Annotations upon the Roman Martyrology. And by this also we see, that albeit St. Peter had undertaken to preach to the West-part of the World, yet did other Apostles also help him therein; as St. Paul in Italy and Spain, and this Symon in Britanny and other places, and St. Philip in France, &c.

* 1.4524. Of Aristobulus also, St. Peter's Scholar, do testifie in like manner the foresaid Authors, Mirmannus, Dorotheus, Baronius out of the Greek Martyro∣logy, that he was sent by St. Peter into Britanny, and there made a Bishop. And that Aristobulus was a principal known Christian in Rome before St. Paul's arrival there, it appeareth by the Epistle of the said Apostle to the Romans, where he saluteth him in these words; Salute those that be of the house of Aristo∣bulus: Nor is it read that ever this Aristobulus came back from Britanny to Italy again. And this of him.

* 1.4625. Of Joseph of Arimathea his coming into France, and his sending thence into Great Britanny, either by St. Philip (as some say) who preached then in Gaul, or (as Others hold) by St. Peter himself, as he passed that way to and from Britanny; and how he obtained a place to exercise an Eremitical Life for him and his ten Companions in the Island called Avallonia, where Glastonbury after was builded: albeit I find no very certain or ancient Writer to affirm it, yet because our later Historiographers, for two hundred years past or more, do hold it have come down by Tradition,* 1.47 (and namely Johannes Capgravius, a Learned Man of the Order of St. Dominick, and others after him.) I do not mean to dispute the matter here, but rather to admire and praise the Heavenly Providence and Goodness of Almighty God, who in these very first days of his Gospel procured for so remote an Island so excellent Spiritual Fathers, Founders, and Patrons, both of contemplative and active Life in Christian Religion; the first Four which I have named being all Preachers, and this Fifth having come out of Jury unto Marsilia in France with St. Mary Magdalen and

her Company, and seen her extraordinary Austerity of Contemplative Life, and Zeal of Solitude, and doing Penance therein; he began that kind of Life also in Britanny, as our Writers do testifie, and namely Cambden among others doth observe. Solitariam vitam amplexi sunt,* 1.48 &c. ut severo vitae genere ad Cru∣cem preferendam se exercerent.

Joseph and his Company did take upon them a solitary life, that with more tranquility they might attend to holy Learn∣ing, and with a severe kind of conversation exercise themselves to the bearing of Christ's Cross.

26. And albeit John Fox (out of whom Sir Francis hath stoln all that he saith in this matter, and most of the rest that be Historical, tho' suppressing his Name) doth cavil upon this man's going into England; making him first a Preacher, and not an Eremite; and then saying, That he came not from Rome, but out of Jury and France,* 1.49 and consequently that the Church of Bri∣tanny is not the Daughter of the Church of Rome, nor had not her first Birth or Institution from thence; (and yet St. Cyprian glorieth in that his Church of Carthage in Africa, and all the other Churches under her in Mauritania and Numidia, had received their first Institution of Christian Faith from Rome, as from their Mother:) All the World may see that this is but a foolish and ab∣surd Cavil of Fox; for that albeit St. Joseph came not immediately from Rome, nor was a Roman by Birth, (as none of the Apostles were;) yet he taught in England the Roman Faith, that is to say, the same Faith that St. Peter, and St. Paul, and Aristobulus, that came immediately from Rome, had taught be∣fore him, or did teach jointly with him in Britanny. Of which Roman Faith St. Paul had written to the Romans themselves before the going of St Joseph into Britanny: Fides vestra annuntiatur in universo mundo;* 1.50 Your Faith is preach∣ed and divulged throughout the whole World; signifying, That the Christian Faith planted in Rome by St. Peter, was derived already for a Platform into all other parts of the World round about. For which cause Tertullian writing in Africa, said, That the Authority of his Church came from Rome.* 1.51 Ʋnde nobis quoque authorit as praesto est, saith he. And St. Cyprian (as before hath been noted) called the Roman Church, Matricem caeterarum omnium, the Mother and Origi∣nal Church of all other Churches. And St. Innocentius also,* 1.52 whose Holiness St. Augustin so much admired, doth affirm, That all Churches generally of the West-parts of the World were founded by St. Peter and his Disciples. And St. Angustin himself had no better way to defend his Church of Hippo, and other of those Countries, to be truly Catholic against the Donatists,* 1.53 than to say, that they were Daughters and Children of the Church of Rome, though some of them were very near as far off in distance of place, as England at this day.

27. Well then, by this we see that the shift invented to deliver us from all Obligation to the See of Rome for our two Conversions, under Eleutherius,* 1.54 and Gregory I. by saying that some had preached Christian Religion first in Britanny, before these two public Conversions fell out, is a foolish shift, and diminisheth not our said Obligation, but increaseth rather the same. For if this first Preach∣ing and first Faith taught in England by our first Preachers, was the Roman Faith, and deriv'd principally from the City and Church of Rome, by the Preaching of St. Peter and St. Paul, Aristobulus and others, as hath been decla∣red; and if the very first Beams or Sparkles thereof, before any Preachers per∣haps were sent, came by the access of some Roman Christians upon the Wars and other occasions, which before hath been declared; then all this rather multiplieth our Bonds to Rome, than diminisheth the same. And so instead of two Conversions from Rome, (whereof I spake in my Ward-word) now we find three. And consequently a triple Obligation is come upon us for a double.

28. And this shall suffice to the first Answer of Sir Francis, or rather simple shift, by which he would avoid our Obligation to Rome, persuading us that our first Preachers came not from thence, but from Asia, and the East Church. Of which Argument, though I have said more here than I meant to have done; yet for that Sir Francis, and all other Heretics of our time, for hatred to Rome, do seek certain Reasons, or rather foolish Conjectures, to prove the same, I shall be forced to say somewhat more thereof in the Chapter following.

CHAP. II.

An Answer to certain Cavillations, Lies, and Falsifications of Sir Francis, and his Masters, Fox and the Magdeburgians, about the first Preaching of Christian Religion in Britanny.

ALbeit the fond heretical wrangling before rehearsed against Rome, deser∣veth not so large a Confutation as I have already bestowed thereon, es∣pecially in so clear a matter as are the manifold benefits which our Island hath received from the See of Rome; yet for that it seems to be a general Conspira∣cy of all Heretics of our time, as well Lutherans as Zwinglians, Calvinists and Puritans, to take from Rome (if they could) all the merit of bringing Christian Faith into our Country, I am forced in this place to stand longer upon the matter than otherwise I would, for that there followeth also another Conse∣quence hereof,* 1.55 of no small moment, which St. Irenaeus, Tertullian, St. Cyprian, St. Augustin, and others, are wont to urge greatly against Heretics, to wit, That if our Church be the Daughter and Disciple of the Church of Rome, then ought it to run unto her in all doubts and difficulties of matters of Faith. Wherefore we shall briefly discuss the truth of this Affair.

2. Besides the Proofs set down in the former Chapter how the chief of our first Preachers came from Rome immediately, as St. Peter, St. Paul, and St. Ari∣stobulus; and that the other, as St. Symon of Chananae, and St. Joseph of Arima∣thea, if they did not come from Rome, yet preached the Roman Faith conform to the Preachings of St. Peter and St. Paul: there remain two other Conje∣ctures also very probable to the same effect, to prove that St. Joseph was spe∣cially directed into Britanny by the same Apostles. The first is, for that King Inas above 900 years past, when he laid the Foundation of Glastonbury-Abby in memory of St. Joseph and his Fellows that had lived a solitary Life there, he caused these Verses to be written in the Church, as Cambden and others testifie,

* 1.56Anglia plande lubens, mittit tibi Roma salutem: Fulgor Apostolicus Glasconiam irradiat.

Be glad, England, for that Rome sendeth Health to thee, and Apostolical Bright∣ness doth lighten Glastonbury. Which could not well be spoken, if the coming of these Saints and first Inhabiters there, had not some relation to Rome, and to the Apostles that sent them.

* 1.573. Moreover I find in the ancient Chronicles of the Helvetians, and sundry Authors (as B. Rhenanus in his Story of Germany, yea and Pantaleon an Here∣tic, and others) do testifie, That one Suetonius, a Nobleman's Son of Britanny, being converted in Britanny by such Christians as first planted the Faith there, and called (after his Baptism) Beatus, was sent by them to Rome to St. Peter

Apostolorum Corypheo (as the Story saith) that is,* 1.58 to the chief Head of the Apo∣stles, to be better instructed and confirmed; who returning backward again from Rome towards Britanny through Switzerland, found such flocking of People unto him, and such propension to Christian Religion, as he stay'd continually among them, and built himself an Oratory to exercise a Monasti∣cal Life there, near unto a Town called in their Language Ʋndersewen, not far from the Lake of Than, where he dy'd about the year of Christ 110.* 1.59 And for that this man apply'd himself to a Monastical Life, and brought the same purpose with him out of Britanny, (as it seemeth,) the conjecture is not im∣probable, but that he was converted and sent to Rome to St. Peter by St. Joseph and his Fellows that followed the same Life in Britanny, and that they had par∣ticular correspondence with the said Apostle in that behalf.

4. And thus much being added for confirmation of that which was said and discussed in rhe former Chapter about the first Preaching and Receiving of the Faith in Britanny; there remaineth now,* 1.60 that we see the Objections which Sir Francis and his Men and Masters do bring against this, to prove that the first Teachers of Christian Faith in Britanny were rather Grecians, and of the East Church in Asia, than of the West Roman Church: For which Assertion having no Author at all that ever wrote thereof, nor any man living or dead that hitherto ever affirmed it, beside themselves, or before Luther's days; they are forced to build their whole imagination (I mean Sir Francis, and his Master Sir John Fox, and Fox his Masters again Illyricus Vigandus Judex, and Faber, that make the Quadrillio, or Round-Table of the Magdeburgtans in Saxony) upon this bare Conjecture, and fond Inference, That for so much as in Bede's time some in Britanny observed the day of Easter after the fashion of some East Churches, (for all did not so use it,) therefore it was like that the first Preach∣ers of that Island came not from Rome,* 1.61 (which these men cannot abide to hear) but from the East; as though (forsooth) this abuse might not have entred after those first Preachers, though they had come from Rome. But let us hear their words about this matter.

5. First, Sir Francis writeth thus: Bede our Country-man doth testifie,* 1.62 that in his time this Land kept Easter after the manner of the East Church, by which may be gathered, that the first Preachers came hither from the East-parts of the World, and not from Rome. Mark, I pray you, the Knight's good gathering: Might not a man as well argue thus; That divers Reliques of the Pelagian, or other anci∣ent Heresies, were found in some parts of Britanny in Bede's time; Ergo, The first Preachers in Britanny were Pelagians, or other Heretics? But let us hear John Fox, who taught Sir Francis this Argument, though the other were not so grateful a Scholar as to name him. I take (saith he) the Testimony of Bede,* 1.63 where he affirmeth, that in his time, and almost a thousand years after Christ here in Britanny Easter was kept after the manner of the East Church, in the Full of the Moon, what day of the Week soever it fell on, and not on the Sunday, as we do now; whereby it is to be collected, that the first Preachers in this Land have come out from the East-part of the World, where it was so used, rather than from Rome.

6. Here you see the Argument more fully set down, and the same foolish Collection made that was before. For except it could be proved that this Er∣ror of keeping Easter-day with the Jews had begun and endured in Britanny from the Apostles time downward, (which cannot be shewed, but rather the contrary is certain, as after you shall hear) this Collection is not worth a rush. And it is to be noted by the way, that as Fox cannot tell any Tale lightly with∣out some notorious Lye, so here be two very manifest: The first,* 1.64 that St. Bede affirmeth this Custom of keeping Easter with the Jews to have been here in Britanny in his time, as though all Britanny had used it; whereas in divers places he doth attribute the same to the Scots, that dwelt in the Island of Ireland

principally, as also to some of them that dwelt in Britanny, and to some Bri∣tans themselves,* 1.65 but all the English Church was free from it: So as John Fox his Speech of Britanny in general is both false and fraudulent. But the other clause, That St. Bede testifieth this, for almost 1000 years after Christ, is foolish and impudent, seeing it is notorious that St. Bede dy'd in the year 735, which is almost 300 years short of Fox his Account, and consequently could not testifie a thing so long after his death. But this the Reynard juggleth, to make St. Bede seem to be a late Writer; whom they cannot abide, for that he setteth down the Beginning and Progress of our Church far different from theirs.

7. But I think good to put down also the words of the Magdeburgians about this matter,* 1.66 (out of whom Fox took his Argument, and the Knight of the Fox) to the end it may appear how one Heretic teacheth another (though of different Sects) to cavil, lye, and cogg, and do agree all in one Spirit of Malig∣nity, though they differ in Opinions. Thus then these Captain-Lutherans do write of this matter in their famous lying and deceitful Centurial Story: Quis fuerit, qui primùm in Britannia Evangelium docuer it, &c. Who was the first that taught the Gospel in Britanny, is not clear; the thing that seemeth nearest to the Truth is, that the British Church was planted at the beginning by Grecian Teachers, and such as came from the East, and not by Romans, or other of the West-Church. And to this we are moved by two Conjectures: First, That Peter Abbot of Cluniack writing to St. Bernard, saith, That the * 1.67 Scots in his time were wont in old time to celebrate Easter-day after the manner of the Grecians, and not of the Romans: And secondly, for that Geffry the Cardinal, who lived about the year of Christ 700, doth testifie in his Story of Britanny, lib. 8. cap. 4. That the Britans would in no wise admit the younger Augustin, Legat of Gregory the Great, neither acknow∣ledge any Primacy of the Bishop of Rome over them; which is another clear sign that Religion was not planted there by Romans. And albeit Pope Innocentius I. in his Epistle distinctione 12. doth affirm on the contrary side, that all the Occidental Churches, and those of Africa, were founded by Peter, or by his Disciples or Succes∣sors; yet we judge that to have been spoken by him rather of desire of a little Vain-glory, or of Temporal Power, than for that the Truth is so, or may be proved out of Stories.

8. Thus our Magdeburgenses, whose words I have caused to be noted more at length, by that they require some consideration; and that by these sew, the Reader may judge of the quality of that whole huge lying story of theirs, which our Fox hath followed in his Acts and Monuments, with above 10000 false Additions of his own; and I speak far within number, when I say 10000. But let us return to our present Story.

* 1.689. First whereas they say, That to them it seemeth nearest to the Truth, That Grecians and other of the East-Church, and not of the West-Church, were the first Preachers in Britanny; it must either be very imprudently spoken against their own Conscience, if they have read that which I before have set down out of divers Authors, (they having no one Author in the World of their own side that ever wrote so, or signified so, before themselves;) or if they have not read these Authors alledged, then it is great Presumption in them to take upon them to write so Universal an History of all Matters, Times, and Nations, as they profess, without procuring first to read the ancient Authors and Writers thereof, about common and vulgar things at least. But hatred and malice to Rome doth make them blind, and so rather to run into all kind of Absurdities, than to yield any Praise or commendable thing to Rome, or to the Bishops there∣of. But let us go forward to examin more particulars, for there are store in this little Story or Relation about Britanny.

10. Their first Conjecture or Argument why Britanny was converted by Grecians and not by Romans, is, as you have heard, for that Petrus Cluniacensis writeth, Scotos Graeco more suo tempore, solitos olim Pascha celebrare; That the Scots in his time were accustomed in old time to celebrate Easter day after the manner of the Grecians. What sense hath this? The Scots in His Time did celebrate in Old Time. What sense, I say, or construction can this have? I confess that some Scots of old time, (especially in Ireland and Orcades, as divers Britans also) did hold the Asian Custom of celebrating the Easter together with the Jews.* 1.69 And this needed not to be prov'd by so late an Author as Cluniacen∣sis, for that St. Bede 300 years before Petrus Cluniacensis doth testifie the same in divers places of his Works. Albeit how the Scots in Cluniacensis his time did (as these men say) celebrate in old time Easter with the Grecians, (the Greek Church at that time being not different in this point from the Roman, though some in Asia minor were) this cannot be understood by any reasonable man. And it may be it was written after Dinner by these good Germans, when they had drunk hard, and so I leave it to their own Explication; though in what sense soever they speak it, or it may be understood, a most fond Conje∣cture it is for that which they pretend, (as we have shewed) to wit, that the first Preachers of Britanny came from the East.

11. About the second Conjecture upon the words of Geffry of Monmouth,* 1.70 whom they call Geffry the Cardinal, there are as many more unlearned and ma∣licious Escapes to be noted. For first, he was never Cardinal in his life, as all our Histories do make it plain; but first a Monk, then Archdeacon of Monmouth, then preferred by King Stephen to the Bishoprick of St. Asaph in North-Wales in the year of Christ 1152, as both Matthew Paris and Matthew of Westminster do affirm in their several Histories handling that year. Neither did any man to our knowledge ever call him Cardinal, but only a certain Venetian School-master named Ponticus Virunnius, who living almost a hundred years agone,* 1.71 translated some part of this Geffry's British History, or rather contracted the same into an Epitome, for the pleasure of a certain Noble Family in Venice, who in old time had come out of Britanny. And this man, either of Error, or Flattery to that Family, or both, calleth him Cardinal forsooth, against the clear Testimony of all others that lived with him; as soon after his Death did the foresaid Matthew Paris and Guil. Neobrigensis, long before this other late Venetian Schoolmaster.

12. And of this our Magdeburgians could not be ignorant, though they would needs make Geffry of Monmouth a Cardinal also; for that in some things he sheweth himself to favor the old Britans against St. Augustin that came from Rome. Neither could they be ignorant also of the time wherein Geffry lived, (except they will confess themselves to be very unskilful and gross Compani∣ons indeed) seeing so many Authors do testifie the same, to wit, in the year of Christ 1152, in which year he was made Bishop of St. Asaph, and lived divers years after. So as our German Heretics appointing him, for his more credit, to have lived in the year of Christ 700, do add of their own benevolence to his Antiquity 450 years, which is somewhat more than Fox took from St. Bede a little before, to discredit him, and make him seem a young Author.* 1.72 And these Confederates do proceed so ridiculously in this kind of Cozenage, as the one affirming St. Bede to have lived 1000 years after Christ, and the other that Geffry of Monmouth lived 700, they come between them both to make the said Geffry to be 300 years elder than St. Bede, whereas he was indeed 450 years younger, the difference is in all 750 years. And this is not of Error, as hath been shewed, and is most plain, but of Envy, desiring to prefer Geffry, that seemeth to favour them sometimes in his Narrations about St. Augustin, and to put back St. Bede, that is every where and wholly against them. And if

you find this juggling in so small and short a matter as this is; imagin what passeth in their whole Volumes: I mean both of Fox and the Magdeburgians, as before I have noted. And thus much of the Title and Time of Geffry of Mon∣mouth: Now let us come to his Words and Assertions.

13. First, in his sixth Book and fourth Chapter quoted by our Magdeburgi∣ans, there is no such matter handled at all as they mention, concerning the Strife between the Britans and St. Augustin; nor in the next two Books following, nor in all the four Chapters of any of the rest. But in the eleventh Book and seventh Chapter, talking of the coming of the foresaid Augustin into England, he writeth thus:

* 1.73Intereà missus est Augustinus à beato Gregorio, &c.

In the mean space was sent into Britanny Augustin by Blessed Gregory, to preach to English-men the Word of God, who were yet blind in Pagan Superstition, &c. Though among the Britans that Christianity was yet in force, which being received from the time of Eleutherius the Pope, had never failed until that day, &c. Among whom there was an Abbot of Bangor named Dinoot, that had above 2000 Monks under his charge, who answered to Augustin, when he requir'd Subjection of the British Bishops, and that they would joyn with him to convert the English Nation, That the Britans owed no Subjection unto him, nor would bestow the labour of Preaching upon their Enemies, seeing the Britans had an Archbishop of their own, and that the Saxons took from them their Country; for which cause they hated them extremely, nor did not esteem their Religion, nor would communicate with them, more than with Dogs.

14. Lo here all that is to be found in Geffry of Monmouth to this purpose; which is nothing else, as you see, but a passionate and choleric Answer of the Britans, as of men afflicted and exasperated. Here is no one word of their not acknowledging the Popes Supremacy, (as the Magdeburgians write) but only that they acknowledged not the Superiority of Augustin over the Britans, seeing he was only sent to the English; and that the Authority of their own Archbi∣shop was not taken away by his coming, for any thing they yet knew, but remained as before. Which question of Jurisdiction between two Archbishops falleth out daily, even where the Pope's Authority is acknowledged; and so we see that it is a manifest Lie,* 1.74 which the Magdeburgians affirm so resolutely, That the Britans would not acknowledge any Primacy of the Bishop of Rome over them: For they speak (as you see) of Augustin's Authority, and not of the Bi∣shop of Rome, from whom we read not that he had yet shewed to them any Authority to place him over their Archbishop; and consequently it is a vain and malicious Inference which the Magdeburgians here do make out of this Answer of the Britans, (if it had been true) that forasmuch as they admitted not St. Augustin's Authority, they acknowledged not the Primacy of Rome, and that this again was a clear sign that Religion was not planted in Britanny by the Romans.

15. For how clear is this, I pray you? or how hangeth this together? might not this Error of not acknowledging the Power of the Roman See, (if it had been among them) have crept in after the first planting of Christian Faith? Will these Germans, or Sir Francis or Fox their Scholars, deny that Ravennae in Italy (for Example) was converted by St. Apollinaris sent thither from St. Pe∣ter,* 1.75 for that afterwards the Bishops of that place for many years waxing proud and presumptuous upon the presence and Court of the Exarchs and Vice-Roys of the Emperours residing amongst them, did refuse to yield to the Bishops of Rome? Or for that England at this day, by Error of Protestant Religion, refu∣seth to acknowledge any Subjection in Spiritual Affairs to Rome, will our men deny that the English Nation was ever converted to Christian Faith from Rome?

Who seeth not the impertinency of this kind of Argument? And yet with such-like kind of Arguments and Inferences, these absurd People do deceive the World.

16. But the last point of these Germans Assertion about Pope Innocentius I. is a most egregious Impudency to say of so holy a Father, so highly commended by St. Augustin, and other Fathers that lived with him and after him,* 1.76 That he spake of Vain-glory, and desire of Temporal Power, when he wrote above 1200 years agone, That all the West-Churches (and the British amongst the rest) were founded by St. Peter, or his Disciples and Successors. And let any indifferent or prudent Reader in the World consider of what weight these words of the Germans may be, when having said That albeit Innocentius I. wrote so, yet we judge that to have been spoken of Vain-glory, &c. A proud Censure of so great a man by three or four poor Companions, that wrote Books for their Bread, and begg'd the same commonly of every Prince to whom they dedicated their several Cen∣turies! That so contemptible People (I say) should presume to touch the Ho∣nor and Truth of so great and worthy a Saint and Father as was holy Innocentius, so called commonly by St.Augustin, St Hierom, St. Basil, Orosius, and others;* 1.77 and whom all the rest of the World together with these men admired and respected in his Life for such. Sancti Innocentii (saith St. Hierom to the Virgin Demetriades) qui Apostolicae Cathedrae, & beat ae memoriae Anastasii successor & filius est tene as fidem, nec pergrinam, quamvis prudens callidá{que} videaris, doctrinam recipias. Hold the Faith of holy Innocentius, which is the Successor and Son (in the Seat of St. Pe∣ter's Chair) of Anastasius of blessed Memory, that went before him; and do not admit any new or foreign Doctrin, though thou maist seem perhaps wise and subtle to thy self.

17. Thus wrote St. Hierom, which is another manner of Judgment of Inno∣centius, both for his Holiness of Life, and Authority of Place to direct men in Religion, than the Magdeburgians give, who would make him Vain-glorious. But thus they use all ancient Fathers that are against them. And so much for this Chapter.

CHAP. III.

The former Controversie is more particularly handled, how the Grecian Cu∣stom of celebrating Easter-day after the Fashion of the Jews came first into the British and Scottish Church; and how untruly and wickedly John Fox and John Bale do behave themselves about this matter.

BUT now let us return (if you please) to speak a word or two more of the entrance of the foresaid Custom of celebrating Easter with the Jews into Britanny; to wit, how, and about what time, or upon what occasion,* 1.78 it is probable that it entred. Wherein first it seemeth most certain, that it could not be brought in by the first Preachers of Christian Religion, to John Fox and Sir Francis and the Magdeburgians would have men believe. And this is pro∣ved as well by the Reasons and Authorities alleged * 1.79 before, to shew that the first Preachers in Britanny either came from Rome, or preached Roman Doctrin; as also by the Reasons following.

First, for that if Damianus, and other Preachers sent into Britanny by Pope [Reason I] Eleutherius, to instruct King Lucius and the rest in Christian Faith, about the year 180, had found any such Custom there, contrary to the Roman Use from whence they were sent, they would have removed the same, or at least wise

have made some mention thereof; forsomuch as at that time the contrary Custom of celebrating Easter upon the Sunday was public in the Use of the Roman Church; and Pope Pius I. had made a Decree for confirming the same against the Asian Use about 40 years before their going into Britanny, to wit, in the year 144, as * 1.80 Eusebius testifieth.

[Reason II] 3. Secondly, St. Bede declaring in many places of his Works the Contention that was in Britanny about this Point, as well between St. Augustin and the British Bishops, as between St. Laurentius and others his Successors with the Irish and Scottish Nation; he sheweth in his second Book what Letters Honorius the Pope, about the year of Christ 635, as also Pope John IV. some few years after,* 1.81 wrote to the said Nations about this Error, Pro eodem errore corrigendo (satth St. Bede) literas eis magna Auctoritate atque Eruditione plenas direxit. The Pope wrote them Letters full of Authority and Learning for the correcting this Error. And then Beda addeth further, That Pope John in the beginning of his Epistle declared manifestly, that this Heresie was sprung up among them very lately, nuperrimè temporibus istis exortam esse haeresim hanc, that this Heresie was sprung up very lately in those days. And that not the whole Irish and Scottish Nations, but some of them only, were infected therewith, so as this was never universally received among them, nor begun by An∣tiquity.

[Reason III] 4. The third Reason is, for that St. German and his Fellows going twice into Britanny almost 200 years before this time mentioned, to resist the Pelagian Here∣sie, never made mention of this other Heresie of Quartadecimani, or of Paschatitae, (for so they were called, as after shall be shewed;) which yet was condemned for an Heresie more than 200 years before that again, to wit, under Pope Vi∣ctor, as hath been said, and so held in all Ages after, especially after the Coun∣cil of Nice had reproved the same, and allowed of the Roman Catholic Use; as not only St. Beda,* 1.82 in the place before alledged out of the words of St. Wilfrid, doth testifie,* 1.83 but the same also appeareth by the Emperor Constantine's own Letters registred by Eusebius in his Life. All which being so, it is more than probable that St. German would have said or written somewhat of so great a Controversie, if he had found the contrary Use in practise among the Britans in his days.

[Reason IV] 5. A fourth Reason may be the Testimony of Florentinus Vigorniensis, who writeth in the year 628 of his Chronicle,* 1.84 Eo tempore errorem Quartadecimano∣rum in observatione Paschatis apud Scotos exortum, Honorius Papa redarguit, &c. At that time, Honorius the Pope did reprove the Error of the Quartadecimans in celebrating Easter, sprung up among the Scottish-men. Thus wrote he upon the point of 500 years past, whereby it is evident that he held not this Custom to have come into Britanny with the first Preachers of Chri∣stianity.

[Reason V] * 1.856. Finally, it appeareth by St. Bede, That a Synod or Council was gathered of purpose in Northumberland about this matter, in time of our English Primi∣tive Church, in the year of Christ 664, and the 22d of the Reign of King Os∣wyn, who was there present, with King Egfride his Son. The chief Disputers in this Council on the Scots behalf, for the Eastern Custom, was one Colman, an Abbot first, and after Bishop of Lindisferne, together with Bishop Cedda, and some others. But in defence of the Roman Use were Agilbertus Bishop of the West-Saxons, and Wilfride an Abbot of Northumberland, afterward Arch∣bishop of all the Kingdom of Northumbers, Vir doctissimus, &c. a most Learn∣ed Man (as St. Bede calleth him) who had studied both in Italy and France, &c.

7. The Question was handled about the Antiquity (as hath been said) of both Uses and Customs,* 1.86 but especially of that of the East among the Scots and British. And albeit that B. Colman did allege the Tradition of Asia. from St. John the Evangelist downward, as also the Writing of one Anatolius a Learned Asian Bishop, that had written thereof almost 200 years before; yet for the Antiquity thereof among the Scots and British Nation, he alleged no greater Continuance than from the Abbot Columba, who lived not full 70 years before that day; for that he died (as John Bale testifieth) in the year of Christ 598.* 1.87 Nunquid Reverendissimum Patrem nostrum Columbam (saith B. Col∣man) & Successores ejus viros Deo dilectos, qui eodem modo Pascha fecerunt, divi∣nis Paginis contraria sapuisse vel egisse credendum est? Shall we think that our most Reverend Father Columba and his Successors, being men so beloved of God as they were, did understand or do contrary to holy Scriptures in celebrating Easter as we do now? &c.

8. Whereunto St. Wilfrid answered both learnedly and piously, That this Error might be tollerable in them that lived so distant from the See-Apostolic,* 1.88 in a Corner of the World, so long as it was held without Obstinacy; they be∣ing perhaps pious men, that at the beginning brought it in from the East-parts, and continued the same upon simplicity, delighted with the facility thereof, and not understanding so easily the Catholic Roman Calculation, which had many great difficulties, as after shall appear. Simplicitate rustica, saith he, sed intentione pia, &c. ad quos Catholicus Calculator non advenerat: By a rude kind of simplicity, but Godly intention, they erred, &c. no learned Catholic Cal∣culator of Times and Days having yet come to them. Of which point of Cal∣culation we shall speak somewhat more presently after.

9. But yet here now we see by this Disputation and Conference of that Sy∣nod, That B. Colman himself did not ascribe the beginning of this Custom unto the first Preachers of Ireland and Scotland,* 1.89 nor yet unto St. Palladius nor Patri∣tius their known Apostles, that 200 years before that time were sent by Pope Celestinus to convert both Nations in the year 430 and 432, as all Authors do agree. And consequently it is most probable to be true, that which Pope John IV. before-named writeth unto Thomianus, Chromanus, and other Scottish Bishops, and to their whole Clergy, That this Custom of celebrating Easter upon the Full Moon of March, was begun but of late among them, (I mean among the Scots dwelling in Ireland, and in the Islands near about, for that of them prin∣cipally St. Bede professeth himself to speak.) And thereby insinuateth, that by them also the same was imparted with the Picts and Britans and other Scots that lived in the Isle of Britanny. And by this the Reader may see, how good an Argument it is which the Magdeburgians and John Fox do use and urge so much; to wit, That forsomuch as this Greek or Asian Custom of celebrating Easter with the Jews was found among the Scots and some Britans, in St. Bede's time and afterward: Ergo, It is likely that the first Preachers of Britanny came not from Rome, neither were of the Roman Religion, but rather of the East-parts; of which Sequel I have shewed the Absurdity before in the prece∣dent Chapter.

10. But now perhaps you will ask me, How and when it is probable that this Custom came in among the Britans? Whereunto I answer, First,* 1.90 for the Britans, that some are of opinion it was brought into Britanny it self by Pela∣gius the Heretic, or some of his Followers, about the year of Christ 420, who being a Britan born, and a Monk (as some think) of the famous Monastery of Bangor, travelled into Italy first, and then into Sicilia, Aegypt, and other East-parts of the World, to learn and study, as he professed; and by that professi∣on of Hypocrisie he crept into many Learned and Godly mens special Love and Friendship: and above others he entred with St. Paulinus Bishop of Nola, and

by him with St. Augustin.* 1.91 But afterward being discovered by St. Hierom to have taught Heresies in secret, together with his Fellow and Disciple Celestius, (who by the description made of him by St. Hierom may seem to have been a Scottish-man,* 1.92 for he saith, Habet enim progeniem Scoticae gentis de Britannorum vicinia, for he hath his Off-spring from the Scottish Nation near to the Britans;) where∣fore these two men being now discovered to be Heretics, and condemned by Innocentius I. and by divers Synods, are said for very shame to have retired in∣to Britanny, and being deadly Enemies to the Pope and Church of Rome, that had condemned them, and considering that the Eastern Custom of celebrating Easter was opposite to the same Church, and yet defended by many; it is thought probable enough that they might bring in the same.* 1.93 Wherewith doth seem to concur somewhat the words of Hermannus Contractus a Chronicler, that wrote above 500 years ago; who writing of the year of Christ 630, saith, His temporibus Haeresis de Paschate, & Pelagiana, Britanniam turbat; In these days the Heresie about the celebrating of Easter, and the Pelagian, did much trouble Britanny. By which words it seemeth that he would signifie that these two Heresies grew to be all one in England, and consequently like to be brought in by the selt-same men.

11. But yet, all this notwithstanding, it seemeth much more probable, ac∣cording to St. Bede's History, and the Reasons before-alleged, that this Use of Easter came not in with Pelagius, but long after; for that St. German, and St. Lupus, and others, made no mention thereof; but especially for that the Writings of the Popes Honorius and John IV. to the Scottish Nation and Bishops before-mentioned, say, That this Custom of Easter was newly sprung up in their days: It seemeth more probable (I say) that this Custom was imparted to the Britans by the said Scottish Nation, and namely by those that dwelt (as hath been said) in Ireland, or in the Islands of Hebrides. But how they them∣selves gat it, is not so certain; yet the most probable seemeth, that either some of them travelling into the East-Countries, or others of those East-Countries co∣ming to them, brought the Observation thereof: For albeit ever after that the same was condemned by Pope Victor, and the Truth established by the Council of Nice,* 1.94 the whole Western Church, yea also (as Constantine saith) the far great∣er part of all East, held the Roman Use; yet was not the contrary so extin∣guished, but that divers Churches of Asia minor, did hold and practise the same for a long time; especially certain Heretics, as the Novatians, Montanists, Priscillianists, Sabbatians, and others that seemed of the Devouter sort, and therewith deceived many simple people, pretending that this Use was more pious than the other,* 1.95 as being founded in the express words of Scriptures of the Old Testament, and confirmed by the Example of Christ himself, who made his Easter together with the Jews upon the fourteenth day of the Moon of March, as appeareth by the Evangelists.

12. For these (I say) and other like reason, it seemeth (according to St. Bede) that the simple and rude Irish and Scottish Christians (as there he called them) falling upon the Use of this Custom, did like better of it than of the Roman, which required more exact Calculation and Observation of Times and Days, as before hath been touched,* 1.96 and as appeareth by that which Nicephorus wri∣teth, that the old Calculation of Easter according to the Roman Use (to wit, that it should be upon the first Sunday after the Full Moon of March) was so hard to be observed oftentimes, as some learned men of Aegypt were appointed in Alex∣andria to calculate every year the same before-hand, & that the Patriarch of that Church had care to send it abroad to other parts of the World for their Instru∣ction and direction therein; which Office of calculating Easter-day was exerci∣sed for divers years in Alexandria by one Theophilus a Priest of that Church; who afterward coming to be Patriach, wrote divers Paschal Epistles in Greek

for direction of finding out the true day of Easter; which Epistles were transla∣ted by St. Hierom in the year of Christ 404.* 1.97 And after the said Theophilus made a Cyclus, or Calculation to serve for 100 years together, as appeareth by St. Leo the Pope in his Epistle to the Emperor Martian. All which Observations and Directions being hard for men so far distant (as Ireland and Scotland was from Alexandria) to know and keep, it is like that they followed rather the other, which was more plain and easie.

13. And this is insinuated before by St. Bede, when he saith that St. Wilfrid objected to B. Colman, that his Ancestors observed this Rustica simplicitate,* 1.98 by a kind of rude simplicity; and added further, that no learned Calculator of Times had ever arrived unto them.* 1.99 And if any man will know the Reasons of the diffi∣culties that were in this Ecclesiastical Roman Account or Computation for ce∣lebrating Easter upon the first Sunday after the fourteenth day of the Moon of March, let him read the foresaid Paschal Epistles of Theophilus, as also the learn∣ed Discourse of Anatolius Bishop of Laodicea written about forty years before the Council of Nice,* 1.100 part whereof is set down by Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History. St. Augustin also, in his Answers to the Questions of Januarius, shewing the reasons why the Church of Christ would not have the Feast of Easter to be stable and firm, as that of his Nativity, Circumcision, and some other Feasts are, but rather to follow the motion of the Sun and Moon, for divers Mysteries there∣in contained; doth touch divers points of the foresaid difficulties. But the prin∣cipal grounds that make the matter hard to the common sort, are, first, the ine∣quality between Annus Solaris, and Annus Lunaris, that is to say, the Year ac∣cording to the course of the Sun, and according to the course of the Moon; the Church using the second, and not the first. And the difference between them standing in the odds of eleven days, for equalling whereof serveth the Rule of the Epact answerable to the Cycle of the Golden Number,* 1.101 consisting of 19 years Revolution, for observing the beginnings and Full Moons that fall out in every year, seeing that Easter-day must be kept upon the first Sunday af∣ter the first Full Moon in March, as hath been said. And furthermore, for∣asmuch as this fourteenth day of the Moon must be that which falleth upon the very day of the Spring Equinoctial, or immediately followeth the same, (which Equinoctium was observed by the Council of Nice to be in those days upon the 21st of March, though since that time it fell back by little and little to the 11th day, for correction whereof Pope Gregory XIII. was forced to make his Refor∣mation from the year 1582, by detracting ten days, as all men know: For this (I say) and for that if the fourteenth day of the Moon of March should happen to be Sunday, the celebration of Easter must, by the same ancient * 1.102 Fa∣thers Prescription, be transferred to the next Sunday. For observing of these Points, the Cycle also of the Sun, or Circle of Dominical Letters, containing the Revolution of 28 years, was invented, as necessary for this Observation. I might add much more to this effect; but this is sufficient to shew the grounds of many difficulties, as also (returning home to our Affair in hand) to shew the beginning of the Eastern Custom among the Scots, Picts, and Britans, not to be of that Antiquity which John Fox and his Fellows would pretend.

14. But now, besides this,* 1.103 we may not omit another point of more consi∣deration for the Reader's Utility, which is the small Piety or Religion of these Sectaries of our days; who care not what they grant, deny, or say, so they say somewhat against Rome, her Bishops, or Religion, even in the first Ages, or Primitive Church: For to this end, and with this good mine, you shall see them here prefer in effect the foresaid Eastern Custom of celebrating Easter us'd by the Britans and Scots, before the Catholic Custom of Rome; albeit they well know how many Ages agone it hath been condemned not only for Error,

but also for Heresie;* 1.104 yea tho' themselves do practise the contrary Custom at this day in England and Germany. For that this is also a knack of these good men, to speak one thing for advantage, and practise another. As for Exam∣ple when the Question is about all those Books of the Old and New Testa∣ment which by Luther and Lutherans are rejected from the Canon of Canoni∣cal Scriptures, as Ecclesiasticus, Judith, Hester, Macchabees, St. James Epistle, the Apocalypse, and other like: When we reprehend the Lutherans for this point, our Protestants of England take their parts, and defend them stoutly, as we see by the Writings of Fulk,* 1.105 Chark, Whitaker, and others, against F. Campian, that objected the same to Luther and his Followers; and yet on the other side they set the same Books forth in their English Bibles, as Books of the Scriptures. What dealing, I pray you, is this? For either they be Scriptures, and conse∣quently of Infallible Truth, or no. If the first, then why do you defend the Lutherans, that call them in doubt? If the second, why do you set them forth to the people among Scriptures?

* 1.10615. The like Example may be taken from Martin Luther, who in his Book de Conciliis doth persuade the German Princes to observe Easter-day as an immo∣vable Feast, whensoever it falleth out, without expecting Sunday, as the Roman Church doth;* 1.107 which point he saith is contrary to the Apostle, forbidding us to observe Days, Months, and Years. And yet I do not hear but that He, and other Lutherans to this day, do observe the Roman Use in practice of their Church concerning this point.

And the very same may be noted here of our English Calvinists; who tho' in Practice of the English Church do observe the same Roman Custom, as all men do know, yet in their Writings they are content to impugn the same, as a matter coming from Rome; which you may see notoriously performed by John Bale,* 1.108 a chief Gospeller in King Henry VIII. and King Edward's days, who treating of the former Disputation between Colman the Scottish Bishop and St. Wilfrid the English Abbot, in the foresaid Council of Northumberland re∣lated by St. Bede, praiseth highly the first, to wit Colman, together with his Learning and Piety in defending the Jewish Custom; but scoffeth very contem∣ptously and spitefully at the second, that propugned the Catholic Roman Use, notwithstanding that St. Bede (as before you have heard) calleth St. Wilfrid Virum doctissimum, a most learned man, and other ways also for his Holiness ex∣tolleth him exceedingly, affirming among other points, That for his rare Learning and great Vertue he was made Archbishop of all the Kingdom of Northumberland, divided after him into two Bishoprics, York and Lindisferne; and when afterward (as to the best men happeneth) he was persecuted and driven out by violence of King Egfrid from his said Archbishopric,* 1.109 he went and preached to the South-Saxons, and converted all that Kingdom, together with the Isle of Wight, working many Miracles in like manner among them; whereby he is truly called, the Apostle of Sussex.

16. Thus writeth Bede of St. Wilfrid Apostle of the South-Saxons, who vanquished also in the former Disputations B. Colman, and converted thereby King Oswyn from his former Rite of observing Easter with the Jews, (which he had learned during his Education in Scotland) to follow the Roman Use. But what (think you) saith John Bale thereof? You shall hear in his own words: Stulté respondit Wilfridus,* 1.110 (saith he) &c. Wilfrid answer'd like a Fool, saying, that the Apostle St. John did play the Jew in many things, &c. So saith Bale; which words, besides the Contumely, contain a most false Lye, and Slander also;* 1.111 for that Wilfrid said not so, as in St. Bede may be seen, but only that St. John might tolerate, perhaps, for a time certain Rites of the Old Law, as some of the other Apostles also had done (and namely St. Paul in circumcising Timothy) to bury the Synagogue with Honour,* 1.112 &c.

17. But hearken yet further how this new Gospeller, and old Apostate-Fryer, goeth forward against this holy Man:* 1.113 Temporum (saith he) calculatores Evangelistis opponit; Wilfrid did oppose the Roman Computists, or Calculators of times, against the Authority of the Evangelists. This is an open Lye, as the place in Bede will testifie; for he saith only, that perhaps one cause why the rude simplicity of the ancienter sort of Scottish Christians embraced the Jewish Custom at the beginning, amongst other things might be,* 1.114 for that no learned Calculator of the Roman Use had in those days arrived unto them. He saith not one word of opposing this to the Evangelists; and yet by the way do you note, that this false Apostata would have his Reader think that this Jewish Heretical Custom is conform to the Evangelists, than which nothing can be spoken more wickedly.* 1.115

18. But let us go forward, and see what ensueth: In fine (saith he) suis praevaluit Imposturis, dementatis qui aderant Regibus, &c. In the end Wilfrid in his Disputation prevailed by his Impostures, having bewitched the two Kings that were present, King Oswyn and King Egfrid. Did you ever hear a more shameless tongue? But this he wrote of St. Wilfrid, (Obiter, and by the way) in the Narration he maketh of B. Colman. But when he cometh to talk of him in particular and severally, he is far more bitter and impudent against him; telling us first, how that after Wilfrid had been in France, Italy and Rome, to study,* 1.116 and there learned the Mathematical Calculations of times out of the Gospels: Reversus in Patriam, Romanas Consuetudines, contra Quartadecima∣nos, (sic enim pios homines tunc derisorié vocabant) disceptationibus in Synodo pub∣licis defendebat, gerebatque circa collum reliquiarum, quas Roma tulerat, capsulam quandam, &c. Et Archiepiscopus denique ob haec & his similia constitutus, bis infra spatium 45 annorum, non ob Regum insolentiam, ut Polidorus immodesté scribit, sed ob suam temeritatem, imò malitiam atque neguitias plures,* 1.117 Archiepiscopatu pulsus est, & longo tandem confectus senio, periit Anno Christi 710. He returning from Rome to his Country, did defend by public Disputations in a Synod the Roman Customs against these men, (who being Pious and Godly, were called scof∣fingly

in those days Quartadecimans) he carried about his Neck a certain Box of Saints Reliques, which he brought with him from Rome: And being for these and other like things made Archbishop, he was driven out twice with∣in 45 years from his Archbishopric; and this not by the Insolency of the Kings that drave him out (as Polidor doth immodestly write) but rather for his own Rashness, yea Malice, and many Wickednesses, &c. And so at length being consumed with Old Age, he perished in the year of Christ 710.

19. Behold here a Narration worthy the Spirit of a new Gospeller and old Apostata, against so Venerable and Worthy a Pillar of our Primitive English Church as was St. Wilfrid!* 1.118 Mark how he is tax'd for travelling and studying at Rome, for defending by public Disputations the Roman Custom of celebra∣ting Easter, which yet was defended and decreed openly by the General Council of Nice, as before you have heard, and after shall be proved; for bearing a Box of Reliques about his Neck brought from Rome, which no doubt is one of the things that most troubleth the Spirit of John Bale, as it did the Devils and wick∣ed Spirits in England, who cry'd, and were cast out by the same, as you may read in them that write his Life.

20. Moreover he saith, That for his own Wickedness he was driven out of his Archbishopric, and so finally perished in the year 710. As for his perish∣ing, if he perished that lived so austere a Religious Life, converted so many thousand English Heathens to Christian Faith, wrought so many Miracles as are recorded of him; then woe to Us, that cannot imitate so great Holiness, and woe to John Bale, that ran out of Religion, and being a Fryer took a Wench named Faithful Dorothy; and that, as himself braggeth, * 1.119 Neque ab homine,

neque per hominem, sed ex speciali Christi dono; Neither from man, nor by man, but by the special Gift of Christ, as tho' Christ did use to divide such Gifts to Fryers that had vowed Chastity. And how good a Fellow he became after∣ward, and how pleasant a Companion, you may understand by his own words, when writing of his Works he saith,* 1.120 Facetias & jocos sine certo numero feci; I have written Jests and Pastimes without any certain number; (a fit Argument for a new Gospelling Fryer!) But yet how far this exercise of Jesting was from the Gravity and Holiness of St. Wilfrid, no man can doubt. And so himself (miserable man!) may be thought to have perished, while the other reigneth eternally in Heaven.

21. And as for Refutation of the horrible Slander, That for his Wickedness St. Wilfrid was driven out of his Archbishopric; I have no better means present, than to oppose against this lying Apostata the Universal Consent of all Anti∣quity, especially those that wrote his Life; as St. Bede, and after him Hedius, Odo, Fridegenus, Petrus Blesensis, and others, who have written both his Life and Death, as of a great Saint; and his Memory and Festival Celebration is held throughout the Universal Church upon the 12th day of October,* 1.121 as all Martyro∣logies do testifie. And thus much of the Insolency of John Bale against the per∣son of St. Wilfrid.

22. But now, whereas further he is not ashamed to defend the Jewish Custom, and the Quartadecimans condemned for it, saying, That they were pious men, and were called by the nickname of Quartadecimans for a scoff only; I am for∣ced to deal further therein, and to shew him first to be an Heretical and most shameless Calumniator, for that the name of Quartadecimani, or Quatuordecima∣ni, (signifying those that observe the fourteenth day of the Moon of March to celebrate Easter) is an old name appointed to those that held that Heretical Use for ma∣ny Ages agone, as may appear by St. Epiphanius, that wrote 1200 years agone, whose words are these:* 1.122 Emersit rursus mundo alia Haeresis Tesseradecatitarum appellata, quos Quartadecimanos quidam appellant; There is another Heresie sprung up in the World of some that are called in Greek Tesseradecatites, which others in Latin do call Quartadecimans, &c. The Explication of which words St. Augustin after him, in his Book of Heresies written to Quod-vult-Deus, doth set down thus:* 1.123 Hinc appellati sunt, quòd non nisi quartadecima Luna mense Martio Pascha celebrant; These People are called by the Greek words Tesseradecatites, and by the Latin Quartadecimans, for that they do celebrate Easter upon the fourteenth day of the Moon of March. Unde etiam Quartadecimani cognomi∣nati sunt, saith Nicephorus, lib. 4. Histor. cap. 36. for which cause they are cal∣led also Quartadecimans.

23. And yet further the same men were called also by a third name of Pascha∣tites, as appeareth both by St. Philastrius Bishop of Brixia, somewhat before St. Epiphanius; who in his Catalogue of Heresies numbring up these Pascha∣tites,* 1.124 yieldeth the reason of their name in these words: Qui asserunt quartadeci∣ma Luna celebrandum esse Pascha, non autem sicuti Ecclesia Catholica celebrat; Who affirm that Easter-day is to be celebrated upon the fourteenth of the Month of March, (upon whatsoever day it shall fall out, and not as the Catholic Church doth accustom to expect the Sunday.

24. Well then, we see that St. Wilfrid, and other Roman Catholics of his time, did not invent the name of Quartadecimani for a scoff to disgrace godly men thereby, as ungodly John Bale blusheth not to avouch; but that it is an old name, invented and appointed by the Universal Primitive Church, to them that defended obstinatly the Jewish Custom of celebrating Easter-day strictly upon the fourteenth day of the Moon of March, according to the Prescript of the Mosaical Law; which Custom hath been accounted naught, Jewish, and Heretical, for the space of 1400 years, to wit, ever since the Decree of

St. Victor, Pope of Rome, against the same, since which time all Authors that have written of Heresies, have held for Heretics those that defended this Cu∣stom; as may appear first by Tertullian,* 1.125 that liv'd in that very time of Pope Victor, or presently after; as also by the first Council of Nice, which was held some hundred years after Victor again, and Victor's Decree therein confirmed; as after again in the Council of Antioch,* 1.126 gather'd together almost 50 years after that of Nice; and somewhat after that again, by the Council of Laodicea; and then by Philastrius and Epiphanius before cited; and finally by St. Augustin, Theodoretus, Nicephorus, Damascenus, and others that ensued. And the De∣fenders of this Heresie, (howsoever John Bale and his Fellows will sanctifie them now again for pious men, for that they hold against the Roman Church) were so odious to the Catholic Fathers, even of the Greek and Eastern Church, especially after the Determination of the Council of Nice, (which Determina∣tion, tho' it be not extant now in the said Councils Decrees, yet is it testified sufficiently, both by Theodoretus, and the Letters of Constantine himself,* 1.127 record∣ed by Eusebius, that Socrates in his Story writeth of St. John Chrysostom, Arch∣bishop of Constantinople, these words: Eis, qui in Asia Festum Paschatis quarto∣decimo die mensis primi celebrabrant, Ecclesias, non secùs quam Novatianis, ademit. St. Chrysostom did take away Churches throughout his Jurisdiction from those that in Asia did celebrate the Feast of Easter upon the fourteenth of March, no less than from the Novatian Heretics themselves: And no less doth the same Author report of Leontius Bishop of Ancyra in Asia, and other Eastern Bi∣shops.

25. And the reason hereof was not only for that by this different Custom of celebrating Easter there grew great Schisms amongst Christians, but for that indeed the true Formality of this Heresie (consisting in that they would make it of necessity to keep the Old Law in this behalf) was begun first by an Here∣tic called Blastus, as appeareth by Tertullian, who (to use his own words) saith thus: Latenter Judaismum introducere voluit, dicens,* 1.128 Pascha non aliter custodien∣dum esse, nisi secundum Legem Moysis quartodecimo mensis. He meant covertly to bring in Judaism, affirming that Easter was not to be kept, but according to the Law of Moyses, upon the fourteenth day of the first Month.* 1.129 For refutation of which Heresie, Tertullian saith, Quis autem nesciat, quoniam Evangelica gratia evacuatur, si ad Legem Christus redigitur? Who doth not know but that the grace of Christ's Gospel is made void, if Christ be reduced again to the Observation of the Mosaical Law?

26. This then was the very essential point of this Heresie, and of them that defended the same; to wit, That they would bind Christians to the observa∣tion of this point according to the Mosaical Law. Against which point of Ob∣ligation St. Paul is so earnest in many places of his Epistles, as he resisted St. Pe∣ter openly, for that by his Conversation only he did seem to force or bind men to Judaical Observations: Gentes cogis Judaizare:* 1.130 you do force Gentiles to follow the Jews. And for this cause he wrote so earnestly to the Galatians: Ecce, ego Paulus dico vobis, si circumcidamini, Christus nihil vobis proderit;* 1.131 Be∣hold, I Paul do testifie unto you, That if you do circumcise your selves, (or use this Mosaical Ceremony) Christ shall profit you nothing.

27. And again, he telleth them in the same place, That whosoever useth but this one Ceremony of Circumcision,* 1.132 bindeth himself thereby to the obser∣vation of all the Old Law, and consequently doth deprive himself of the whole Grace of Christ; which yet is to be understood (as ancient Fathers do expound) after the Gospel of Christ was fully divulged, and in them that did use any of these Ceremonies as of necessity; for that otherwise we read of the Apostles themselves, gathered together in Council, that they gave leave to Christians for a time at the beginning, abstinere à sanguine & suffocato,* 1.133 to abstain from

Blood, and that which is strangled, or rather did ordain the same: which yet afterwards was taken away again by Authority of the Church; so as it is evident that the toleration was for a time only, and as a thing indifferent without obligation. And for like respect we read of St. Paul himself, that albeit afterward he did forbid to the Galatians the use of Circumcision with such severity as you have heard, yet at the beginning he circumcised Timothy for respect of the Jews, as St. Luke testifieth, for that the Gospel was not yet so far preached,* 1.134 as it made the Observations of the Mosaical Law to be wholly unlaw∣ful; especially if they were used as things indifferent, and not of necessity; as it is probable that both St. John Evangelist, Polycarp, and others of the East-Church did,* 1.135 when for a time they used the Festival Day of celebrating Easter, as an indifferent thing, obliging no man to follow the one or the other Use; to wit, either this of the fourteenth day commanded by the Old Law, or the other of the Sunday brought in by Tradition from St. Peter and St. Paul in the Roman Church;* 1.136 as, among others, St. Protherius Patriarch of Alexandria (by the Testimony of St. Bede) doth write to Pope Leo: And long before them both, St. Ignatius Bishop of Antioch (which Church was founded by St. Peter) doth testifie in divers Epistles, that Easter-day was to be celebrated upon a Sunday. Yea, St. John himself, making mention of dies Dominicus, the Lord's day, in the beginning of his Apocalypse, as of a solemn Day above the rest, (which no man will deny to be Sunday) there is no other reason why this day should be called our Lord's Day with so special Title of Festivity, but only for that it was dedicated in the Apostles time to the Resurrection of Christ. And if in every Week it be kept Festival for that respect, and that the whole Sabboth be turned into it; then much more just is it that the great Sabboth of Christ's Resurrecti∣on should be once a year celebrated upon this day. Yet was the matter, as you have heard, left for arbitrary and indifferent for divers years in Asia, without constraint on either side.

28. But when in process of time the Bishops of Rome, especially Pope Pius I. and Victor, had perceiv'd that by this Toleration and Difference of Observa∣tion, not only Schisms and Dissention grew, but Heresie also and Judaism was meant to be brought in; then the said Pius I. in the year of Christ 148. (as Eusebius testifieth) made a Decree against the Asian Jewish Observation;* 1.137 and after him again, in the next Age following, Pope Victor seeing the same in∣conveniences greatly to increase, wrote a Letter to Polycrates Bishop of Ephe∣sus to gather a Synod against it about the year of Christ 249, as Eusebius testi∣fieth. And when he perceived, that both He and divers Asian Bishops did stand more stifly in defence thereof than he expected; yea, that they began not only to shew obstinacy therein against the former Decree of Pope Pius and the See of Rome, but to draw near also to the very formality of Heresie before mentioned, to wit, that it was necessary to observe the Fourteenth Day; nay further, that it was ex Evangelii praescripto, & secundum Regulam & Normam Fidei, by the Prescription of the Gospel, and according to the Rule and Norm of Faith,* 1.138 as the said Polycrates in his Epistle to Pope Victor writeth: When Victor (I say) saw this, he resolved, after Counsel taken by Conference with divers Synods both of the West and East Churches,* 1.139 to Excommunicate those Asian Bishops that resisted, if they would not agree. Which Determination albeit Irenaeus and some others at that time did mislike, and dehort Pope Victor from it, as a thing perillous and scandalous, and subject to many troubles, (as Eusebius reporteth,) yet did never any of them say that he could not do it; but rather, when he had done it indeed, they did accommodate themselves thereun∣to both in West and East, ratifying and confirming the same by divers parti∣cular Synods,* 1.140 as Nicephorus recounteth; to wit, in Jerusalem, Caesarea, Tyrus, Ptolomais, Corinth, Lions of France, where St. Irenaeus himself was Bishop, and other places, &c.

29. And finally the Council of Nice confirmed the same, as the Fathers thereof do testifie by their particular Letters to the Clergy of Alexandria, whose words are these, as Theodoretus relateth them;* 1.141 Scitote controversiam de Paschate susceptam, prudenter sedatam esse: Ita ut omnes fratres, qui Orientem incolunt, jam Romanos, nos, & omnes vos, sint consentientibus animis in eodem celebrando deinceps sequuturi.

You must understand, that the Controversie about celebrating Easter taken in hand by us, is prudently pacified: so as all our Brethren that inhabit the East-parts will follow for the time to come the Romans, (or the Roman Church) Us, (and the Authority of the Council) and all You (of the Aegyptian Church) with full consent of mind in cele∣brating the same Feast.

Note here, That the Council doth put the Autho∣rity of the Church of Rome in the first place, even before Themselves, and then Themselves and the Authority of the Council in the second place, and those of Alexandria in the third; which is another reckoning than our Heretics are wont to make of the Roman Church.

30. Constantine also the Emperour,* 1.142 writing his Letters to all Bishops of the Christian World, that had not been present at the Council of Nice, nor could come, yieldeth account unto them, with great Christian Modesty and Zeal, of the chief Matters handled in that Council: Where coming to speak of the Decree of celebrating Easter, he saith thus:* 1.143 Cùm de sanctissimo Festo Paschatis disceptaretur, communi omnium sententia videbatur rectum esse, ut omnes ubique uno, eodemque die illud celebrarent: When the Question was proposed about ce∣lebrating the holy Feast of Easter, it seemed good, by the common consent of all that were present in this Council, that all Christians should celebrate the same in one and the self-same day; which day he sheweth to be Sunday, and refuteth at large the Custom of celebrating the same with the Jews upon the fourteenth day of the Moon, tho' it were a Feria concluding thus:* 1.144 Quae cum ita se habent, &c.

Which things being so, do you willingly embrace this Decree of the Council as a great Gift of God, and a Commandment sent from Heaven; forasmuch as whatsoever is decreed by holy Council of Bi∣shops, that must be ascribed to God's holy Will. Wherefore do you de∣clare and denounce unto all our dear Brethren living among you, the Decrees of this Council, and namely the Decree of celebrating this holy Feast, &c.

31. Thus wrote our good British Emperour Constantine, with a far dif∣ferent Spirit from those Christian Inhabitants of Britanny who afterwards defended the contrary Custom, without respect of holy Decree of the Nicene Council;* 1.145 but far more opposite and contrary is the wicked Spirit of John Bale, John Fox, and other such latter Brutish rather than British Sectaries, that even in our days, after that the Roman Catholic Use hath been received for thirteen hundred years since the said Council, they are content, for hatred of the Name of Rome, to bring it into Controversie again, and to allow rather the Jewish Use, and to praise them that defend it in our Countrey, (as you have heard) rejecting and defacing others that stood for the Catholic Party, tho' never otherwise so famous and il∣lustrious for their Learning and Vertue, as Beda, Agilbert, Wilfrid, and others the chiefest Pillars of our Primitive English Church were. But this is their shameless Spirit, to dishonor (wherein possibly they can) their Forefathers.

32. And thus much of this matter, about the first Conversion, or Preach∣ing of Christian Faith in Britanny under the Apostles. Now will we pass to the more public Conversion of our Land under King Lucius, which (as in my Ward-word) I called the First in respect of our two public Conversions from Paganism, so do I here name it the Second in regard of the former

Preaching in the Apostles Time. About which Conversion, tho' in effect our Modern Heretics dare not deny the same, yet shall you hear no less wrang∣ling of them about this than the former, for the great grief they receive in that it should be said or thought to come from Rome.

CHAP. IV.

Of the Second Conversion of Britanny under King Lucius, by Pope Eleu∣therius, and Teachers sent from him, about the year of Christ 180; and of the notorious absurd Cavillations of Heretics about the same also.

ALL that hitherto hath been spoken is about the first Preaching of Chri∣stian Religion in Britanny by particular men within the first Age, or hundred years after Christ; which our Roman Enemies, only upon Envy and Animosity, without any one Testimony of Antiquity, will needs take from Rome and the Roman Church, and give it to the Grecians of Asia, and to the East parts, as you have heard. Now do follow two other more famous and public Conversions of the said Island under the two renowned Popes of Rome, and by their special Industry; which are acknowledged and registred by the whole Christian World, and do so much press the Spleen and move the Gall of our Rome-biters, as they leave no corner of their Wits unsifted to discredit or reject the same.

* 1.1462. The first Conversion was (as the Warder saith) under Pope Eleutherius towards the end of the second Age after Christ; when King Lucius of Britanny hearing of the great and horrible Persecutions of Christians in Rome, and of their often Martyrings, and that they remained constant notwitstanding in their Christian Faith, to all mens admiration, and that their number did in∣crease daily, even of the chiefest Nobility, and that two worthy Senators in particular, Pertinax and Tretellius, had been lately converted from Paganism to profess Christ; yea, that the Emperour himself, Marcus Aurelius, then living, began to be a Friend to Christians in respect of a famous Victory ob∣tained by their Prayers,* 1.147 (all which things Baronius sheweth the Emperour's Legat in England to have told Lucius:) For these causes (I say) and for that he hated the Romans and their Old Religion, to whom he understood the Christians to be contrary, he resolved to be instructed in that Religion. And understand∣ing the chief Fountain thereof to be at Rome, contented not himself either with Instructions he might have at home by Christians there, nor yet from the Christian Bishops flourishing then in France, as St. Irenaeus, Photinus, and others, but sent men to Rome to demand Preachers of Eleutherius the Pope; who directed to him two Romans,* 1.148 named Fugatius and Damianus, by whom the said King and his Countrey were converted about the year of Christ 180, as John Fox holdeth) but as Baronius thinketh 183; from whom Pamelius; Genebrard, Nauclerus, and other Chronographers do little dissent; tho' Mari∣anus Scotus doth put it in the year 177. And this Conversion of Britanny un∣der King Lucius, is testified both by the ancient Books of the Lives of the Ro∣man Bishops, attributed by some to Damasus, as also by the ancient Ecclesiasti∣cal Tables and Martyrologies yet extant, as Baronius proveth; and by * 1.149 St. Bede in his History of England, and after him by Ado Archbishop of Tre∣vers, and Marianus Scotus anno 177, and all Authors since.

3. This then being so, and John Fox the Father of Lies not ••••••ing openly to impugn the same, yet granteth he the thing with such difficulty and strain∣ings, and telleth the story with so many hems and haws, ifs and ands, Interpre∣tations and Restrictions, as a man may see how greatly it grieveth him to con∣fess the substance thereof; I mean of this second Conversion by Pope Eleuthe∣rius: and therefore he turneth himself hither and thither; now granting, now denying; now doubting, now equivocating, as is both ridiculous and shame∣ful to behold. For as on the one side he would gladly deny the Truth of this Story, so on the other side, being press'd with the Authorities before alledged, and general consent of all Writers, he dareth not to utter himself plainly, but endeavoureth to leave the Reader in suspence, and doubtful whether it were true or no; which is the effect most desired commonly of Heretical Writers, to bring all things in doubt and question, and there to leave the Reader.* 1.150 And to this purpose doth the Fox tell us first, That divers Authors of later Times do not agree about the certain year wherein this Conversion of King Lucius did happen; some saying more, and some saying less. But what is this to the overthrow of the thing it self? For that about the particular times wherein things were done, there is often found no small variety among principal Writers, and about principal Points and Mysteries of our Faith; as, about the coming of the Magi, and Martyrdom of the Infants; about the time of Christ's Bap∣tism, yea also of his Passion, what Year and Day each of these things happened; which yet doth not derogate from the certainty of the things themselves.

4. And this is his first Cavil, or rather light Skirmish,* 1.151 whereby he would somewhat batter or weaken the credit of the Story, before he cometh to lay the full Assault, which ensueth immediately, with seven double Cannons planted by him, which he calleth seven good conjectural Reasons, against the Tradition of Antiquity about this Conversion of Britanny from Pope Eleuthe∣rius. Wherein notwithstanding you must note, That he proposeth the Con∣troversie as tho' his purpose were only to prove that Pope Eleutherius was not the first that converted England; which thing,* 1.152 as it might be granted in the sense before often touched, if he spake or meant plainly, so finding him to deal guilefully, and to go about to prove in the end (as appeareth by his Con∣clusion) that Eleutherius converted not King Lucius at all, but only helpt per∣haps to convert him, or to instruct him better in Religion (being a Christian before) I am constrained to examin briefly the Force (or rather Fraud and Folly) of these his seven Arguments, to the end you may judge thereby, how he behaveth himself in so main a Volume as his Acts and Monuments do con∣tain, seeing that in this one matter he beareth himself so fondly and mali∣ciously, And for brevities sake I will reduce the said seven Arguments to three general Heads or Kinds; shewing first, that all are Impertinent; se∣condly, that some, besides Impertinency have also gross Ignorance; thirdly, that others, besides these two commendations, have Fraud and plain Imposture in them.

5. To the first kind of Impertinent do appertain his fourth, fifth, and sixth Arguments handled by me before against the Magdeburgians, to wit, that St. Bede said in his time, That the Britans celebrated Easter after the fashion of the East-Church; that Petrus Cluniacensis testifieth the same in his days of some Scots;* 1.153 and that Nicephorus saith that Simon Zelotes preached the Gospel in England. All which three Arguments, as they do serve to no purpose here, but to shew that Fox stealeth all out of the Magdeburgians, so no other Answer is needful to be made unto them, than that which before hath been written; seeing that, all being granted that here is said, yet proveth it nothing that the Faith of Bri∣tanny came not from Rome; and consequently all is impertinent.

* 1.1546. Of the second sort both Impertinent and Ignorant Arguments, are his se∣cond and third probations: My second reason is (saith he) out of Tertullian, who living near-about, or rather somewhat before this Eleutherius, testifieth in his Book contra Judaeos, that the Gospel was dispersed abroad by the sound of Apostles in divers Countreys; and then among other Kingdoms he reciteth also the parts of Britanny, &c. Thus you see how impertinent it is to the purpose we have in hand; for that it concludeth not but that Pope Eleutherius after the Apostles time might convert King Lucius and his People publicly by Fugatius and Damia∣nus, as we affirm. And then secondly, it includeth notorious Error and Ig∣norance,* 1.155 in that he saith Tertullian lived before Eleutherius; for that it is prov'd out of Tertullian's own Works and Words, especially in his Book de Pallio, (wherein he yieldeth the reason wherefore he changed his Habit from a Gown to a Cloak, as Christians were wont to do in those days) that he was con∣verted to the Christian Faith in the tenth year of Pope Victor, that was Suc∣cessor to Eleutherius, which was Anno Domini 196. And moreover, he wrote his Book contra Judaeos, cited by Fox, divers years after that again, as Pame∣lius and others do demonstrate in his Life.* 1.156 So as Eleutherius reigning fifteen years before Victor (as all Authors do agree) it followeth that he was Pope twenty five years before Tertullian was a Christian: And forsomuch as the Conversion of England is assigned to have been in the fifth year of Eleutherius, it followeth that Tertullian was not a Christian in twenty years after that time. And thus much for his second Reason; now let us hear his third.

* 1.1577. My third probation (saith he) I deduct out of Origen, whose words are these; Britanniam in Christianam consentire Religionem: That Britanny did consent in Christian Religion; whereby it appeareth the Faith of Christ was sparsed here in England before Eleutherius. Mark his own Contradiction; mark his Inference, and note his Imposture. He affirmeth out of Origen, That Britanny did consent in Christian Religion; and yet he saith in his Inference, Whereby it appeareth it was sparsed in England; Sparsing importeth, that particular men here and there were converted; Consent importeth a general Conversion: So that by Origen's words of consent it may seem, that he meant the public Con∣version made by Eleutherius; and by Fox's own false Interpretation and foolish Inference he is made to say, that there were only certain sparkles of Christian Religion in his days in Britanny.* 1.158 But the true words of Origen corrupted by Fox do make the matter more clear; who disputing against the Jews, urgeth them with this Question, Quando enim terra Britanniae ante adventum Christi in unius Dei consensit Religionem? For when did the Land of Britanny agree in the Religion of one God Before the coming of Christ?

8. Here you see the words of Origen, first not truly but corruptly alledged before by John Fox; and secondly, that Origen doth speak them of a consent in Religion throughout all the Land of Britanny, and thereby seemeth to signi∣fie, not the particular Conversion of several men before Eleutherius his Time, (as Fox would enforce it,) but rather the public Conversion (as I have said) un∣der King Lucius and Eleutherius; which Conversion, according to the former Account of Fox himself,* 1.159 (who saith it was in the year of Christ 180) was about 76 years before the Death of Origen, for that (as Eusebius testifieth) Origen died in the year of Christ 256, and was of age 69 when he died, so as he was born seven years after our said Conversion under Lucius, and conse∣quently he might mean of this Conversion in his former Homily. And it is not only Ignorance, but wilful Malice and Imposture also, in John Fox, to make his Reader believe (as before in Tertullian, so in this Man) that he was either Equal or Elder than Pope Eleutherius. And for this cause, that Origen in his foresaid Homily must needs mean of a former Conversion of Britanny,

that came not from Rome. Consider the Man's Honesty and Wit in these shifts.

9. And albeit this may be sufficient, and more than enough, to shew his false Dealing and lack of Fidelity in every thing he handleth, yet will I add his two last Arguments, which he calleth his first and seventh; and in which (as I said before) that not only the former two qualities of Impertinency and Error are to be found, but manifest Fraud also, and wilful Deceit. Let us hear his words. But first I must both pray and prevent the Reader to take in pati∣ence the hearing of one and the self-same thing many times repeated,* 1.160 for that we having to deal with three several Parties, that do tell us Tales by retail one to another of them, (to wit, Sir Francis, Sir Fox, and Messieurs the Magdebur∣gians) we cannot well see or set down what each of them saith, and borroweth one of another, but by repeating the same things; yet shall it be very briefly. Thus then writeth Fox, in that which he calleth his first probation against the first Conversion of England by Eleutherius.

10. My first probation (saith he) I take out of the Testimony of Gildas,* 1.161 who in his History affirmeth plainly, That Britanny received the Gospel in the time of Tiberius the Emperour, and that Joseph of Arimathea was sent by Philip the Apostle from France to Britanny. Gild. lib. de Victoria Aurel. Ambrosii. Here you see first not only crambe recocta, according to the Proverb; that is to say, Cole∣worts and other Trash twice sodden; but many times also both sodden and set before us: for all this you heard before more than once, both out of Sir Francis and the Magdeburgians. And when all is granted, yet is the whole Argument but a vain and childish Cavil; for it proveth only that Damianus and Fugatius, sent by Eleutherius, were not the very first of all that preached Christian Faith in Britanny; which we never affirmed, but only that Britanny was converted publicly under Eleutherius, which this impugneth not. And se∣condly, for the receiving of Christ's Faith under Tiberius the Emperour, I have shewed before that it is unlikely, seeing Tiberius lived but five years after the Ascension of our Savior, and that the place alledged for it out of Gildas (if he mean the true Gildas now extant) proveth it not, but only that Christ him∣self appeared to the World in the time of Tiberius, and that the Faith of Christ entred Britanny afterward under Claudius, as may appear evidently to him that will read and examin the place with attention. Which the Fox percei∣ving, thought it not best to alledge us the said true Gildas published by Polydor Virgil, and allowed by all Learned Men of Christendom, whose Title is,* 1.162 De excidio Britanniae, but runneth to a forged Gildas, De Victoria Aurelii Am∣brosii, to confirm his Allegation withal; of which Gildas the said Polydor, after due Examination of the matter, writeth as followeth:

11. Extat item alter libellus (ut tempestive lectorem nefariae fraudis admonea∣mus) qui falsissimè inscribitur Gildae commentarium,* 1.163 haud dubie à quodam pessimo impostore compositum, &c. Sanè is nebulo longè post homines natos impudentissimus, &c.

There is extant besides, another Book also (that I may by this occasion advertise the Reader in time of a wicked Imposture) which is most falsly entituled, The Commentary of Gildas, devised, no doubt, by some naughty Deceiver, &c.

Truly he was the most impudent Knave that ever lived, &c. Thus said Polydor of the Inventer of this Book; and as much would he have said of Sir John Fox, that obtrudeth the same for a true Author, if he had lived in our days. And seeing that the Calvinists themselves of Heidelberg in Germany, taking upon them to set forth all the British Writers, Anno 1587, (as Gildas, Geffrey of Monmouth, Ponticus Virunnius, and others) durst not set forth this feigned Gildas alledged by Fox, but only the former true Gildas printed before by Polydor; it is a token that Fox is more impudent and more

greedy to deceive, than they; as you shall much more perceive by his last Ar∣gument ensuing.

* 1.16412. For my seventh Argument (saith he) I may make my probation by the plain words of Eleutherius, by whose Epistle written to King Lucius we may understand that Lucius had received the Faith of Christ in this Land before he sent to Eleutheri∣us for the Roman Laws; for so the express words of the Letter do manifestly purport, as hereafter followeth to be seen.

Thus saith he, and citeth for his proof in the Margin, Ex Epistola Eleutherii ad Lucium; and by this last and strongest Argument of his, the silly Fellow thinketh to strike the Nail dead, and to prove that King Lucius was a Chri∣stian before he received Preachers from Pope Eleutherius; and consequently, that all is false which Antiquity hath held, attributing the Conversion of that Kingdom, and of the King himself, to the Bishop of Rome. For which cause Fox addeth presently, Peradventure Eleutherius might help something either to convert the King, or else to increase the Faith newly sprung up then among the People.

13. So defineth he the matter; and consider, I pray you, what he attri∣buteth to Eleutherius in this Conversion: Peradventure (saith he) he might help something to King Lucius his Conversion. And is not this a great matter, especially being qualified (as it is) with the restriction Peradventure? If a man should say of Aesop's Fables, that peradventure some of them in some points might be true; were it not as much as John Fox doth attribute to all this Con∣sent of Authors for this Conversion under Pope Eleutherius; seeing he saith not absolutely, Eleutherius did convert King Lucius, or help indeed thereunto, but that peradventure he might help something, &c.? You may mark the diminutives used by Fox to lessen the benefit, to wit, peradventure, might, something, &c. and thereby consider what a holy stomach he hath to Rome,* 1.165 and what little ac∣count he maketh of the Authority or Consent of all Antiquity, when they make against him.

14. But now let us weigh further his Proofs, and by them also his Frauds and Impostures. First of all for Proofs, that King Lucius was a Christian be∣fore he dealt with Eleutherius, he alledgeth the Epistle it self of Eleutherius; which he setteth down as authentical, citing only in the Margin, Ex vetusto codice Regum antiquorum, taken out of an old Book of old Kings, but telleth not where we shall find this old Book; and it may be (perhaps) of as good credit (if it were found) as the Book of Gildas before alledged, De Victoria Aurelii Am∣brosii, or as many other fabulous things be in the Story of Geffrey of Monmouth, and John Fox after him.

* 1.16615. And indeed if we consider the beginning of the first words of the Epistle it self, we shall find certain doubts, which neither Fox nor his Fellows will ever be able to solve; as first of all, that it was written after Eleutherius was dead; for so it appeareth by the Account of Time noted in the Title, which is this in Latin, as Fox relateth: Anno Domini 169 à Passione Christi scripsit D. Eleutherius Papa, Lucio Regi Britanniae ad correctionem Regis & Procetum Regni, &c. Which words Fox omitteth to translate into English, for that they make against him, and therefore would not have his unlearned Reader to un∣derstand the absurdity thereof; for they say, That Pope Eleutherius wrote this Epistle to Lucius King of Britanny, to correct both Him and the Nobility of his Kingdom, in the year 169 after the Passion of Christ: To which 169 years if we add other 33, which Christ lived before his Passion, they make 202; which is 19 years after Eleutherius's Death, who dy'd in the year of Christ 184, as all Authors agree. For which cause Fox himself, in this very place, and elsewhere often, doth appoint the Conversion of King Lucius to have been in

the year of Christ 180, and the 10th of Eleutherius his Reign; but this Epistle appointeth it 22 years after, to wit, Anno Domini 102. So wise a man is Fox in bringing it in!

16. Secondly, this Epistle was written in Latin, and so should Fox have delivered the same unto us wholly, if he had dealt plainly:* 1.167 But he hath not so done, but only giveth us the Title in Latin, without any Interpretation, as now hath been said; and the remnant (or at leastwise so much as he thought convenient) in English only, and this of his own Translation, without letting us see the Original; and so he playeth the Fox in every thing. But, to return again to this Latin Title of the Epistle, there is another cause why John Fox would not translate it into English; and this is, for that it is said therein that it was written by the Pope ad correctionem Regis, & Procerum Regni, &c. to correct the King, and Nobility of the Realm: which proveth that the Pope took himself to be their Superior also in those days, and they to be subject to his correction. For which causes Fox's Scholars, Holinshead, Hooker, and Harrison, do leave out this Title altogether in their Chronicles; for that the word Corre∣ction upon the King and Nobility, is an odious thing in these days, especially from Popes.

17. And thus much of the Title, and Fraud used therein. Now let us pass to the Body of the Epistle. Thus it beginneth in John Fox's Translation;* 1.168 Ye require of us the Roman Laws and the Emperours to be sent over unto you, which you may practise and put in are within your Realm. The Roman Laws and the Empe∣rours we may ever reprove, but the Law of God we may not. You have received of late, through God's Mercy, in the Realm of Britanny the Law of Christ, &c. Thus saith the Epistle, and out of these last words John Fox doth frame his former seventh Argument, That King Lucius had received the Faith of Christ before he sent to Eleutherius for the Roman Laws. Well, suppose it was so, and that this sending was a second Embassage some years after his Conversion; how doth this infer that King Lucius was a Christian before he dealt with Eleutherius, or before he sent the first time unto him; and so that he was rather converted by Grecians than by Romans, as the next immediate words of Fox are? And that hence it may be inferred that Eleutherius did rather help perhaps to his Conversion, or to increase the Faith newly sprung up, than convert him. Are not these notorious shifts, and shameless windings of our Fox, to delude his Reader.

18. But you will ask me perhaps, how I do prove that this was a second Embassage sent by King Lucius to Eleutherius, and the Pope's Answer to the same? Whereto I say, that this is confessed and proved by Fox himself; who writing of King Lucius saith, That some years after his Conversion, when he had put his Realm in Order for matters of Religion, he wrote again to have the Civil and Imperial Laws sent over to him, whereby to govern his Kingdom accord∣ing to Christian Religion.

19. All this, I say, doth Fox set down afterward very particularly,* 1.169 shew∣ing that after King Lucius and his Realm had received the Baptism of Christ, were made Christians, and had turned twenty-eight Heathen Flamens, and three Archflamens, that were before of Gentiles, into so many Christian Bishops and Archbishops: All this being done and well settled,* 1.170 the foresaid King Lucius (saith he) sent again to the said Eleutherius for the Roman Laws, thereby likewise to be governed, as in Religion now they were framed accordingly: Ʋnto whom Eleu∣therius again writeth after the tenor of these words following; Ye require of us the Roman Laws, &c.

20. Whereby it is evident, that this Letter of Eleutherius (if it be true, and not feigned by Fox) was written to King Lucius some number of years after his Conversion, seeing he could not setttle his Realm, as here Fox de∣scribeth,

but in some good space of time. Holinshead, Hooker, and Harrison (Disciples also of this Fox) in this do take upon them to determine the Time, (tho' I know not by what Authority) saying, That it was three years after King Lucius his Conversion and Baptism.* 1.171 The Faith of Christ (say they) be∣ing thus planted in the Island, Anno 177, it came to pass the third year of the Gospel received, that Lucius did send again to Eleutherius the Bishop, requi∣ring that he might have some brief Epitome of the Order of Discipline then used in the Church, &c.

* 1.17221. Thus hold they, and that upon this second Embassage followed the foresaid Letter of Eleutherius to King Lucius. Which if it be true, then let them give Sentence of their good Father, what an egregious Hypocrit and Deceiver he was, to argue out of this Letter, That, forasmuch as it ap∣peareth by the same, that King Lucius was a Christian when this Letter was written: Ergo, King Lucius was not converted by Eleutherius, but by some other before him, tho' perhaps he might help somewhat to his Confirmation in Religion, &c.

* 1.17322. But now to the substance of the Letter it self, or rather of the piece or parcel that it hath pleased Fox and these his Scholars to impart with us. You must note first, That these good Scholars seeing their Master to have left us this English Epistle of Eleutherius so imperfect and curtail'd, as it seemeth to have neither end or just beginning, do say that the rest was lost, which yet Fox telleth us not. Secondly, they seeing the Title to make much against them, left it out, as before hath been said. Thirdly, touching the very Corps it self of the Epistle set down by him, they put it down so different both in Words, Sen∣tences, Authorities, and Texts of Scripture, from that which Fox hath; as it sheweth either the thing to be wholly feigned by Them, or their Master; or that they have a great Liberty and Priviledge to alter the same at their plea∣sures.

23. And this would be sufficient for this matter; but further perchance you might demand, Why this Epistle of Eleutherius is alledged and urged so earnestly by them, seeing it seemeth to make so little for them? Whereunto I answer,* 1.174 That the chiefest Causes seem to be two or three. The first, That Fox might frame thereupon his former foolish Argument, That forasmuch as by this Epistle it appeareth that King Lucius was a Christian when this Epi∣stle was written by Eleutherius, it may seem that Eleutherius converted him not, nor any other sent from Rome; the falshood and childishness of which Argument hath been sufficiently laid open before.

* 1.17524. The second Cause is, to found two points of Doctrin thereon. The one, That Scriptures only are sufficient to govern any Kingdom without other Ecclesiastical, Civil, or Temporal Laws; which yet themselves do not pra∣ctise, where they have Dominion, as experience teacheth us. The other point is, That every King is God's Vicar, that is to say, absolute and supreme Head in all Causes as well Spiritual as Temporal within his Realm; and to this end is brought in the Testimony of this Letter of Eleutherius, not only by Fox, Holinshead, Hooker, Harrison, Hastings, and other of that Crew, taking one from another that Argument; but even their great Champion Jewell, as Holinshead relateth in the first Volume of his Stories.

* 1.17625. The Reverend Father John Jewell (saith he) sometime Bishop of Salisbury, writeth in his Reply unto Harding's Answer, That the said Eleutherius, for general Order to be taken in the Realm and Churches here, wrote his advice to Lucius in manner and form following:* 1.177 Ye have received in the Kingdom of Britanny, by God's Mercy, both the Law and Faith of Christ; ye have both the New and the Old Testament; out of the same, through God's Grace, by the advice of your Realm make a Law, and by the same, through God's sufferance, rule your Kingdom of Britanny; for in that Kingdom you are God's Vicar, &c.

26. These are the words alledged by Master Jewel out of this Epistle; which differ not much from that which is in Fox and Holinshead: But both of them do add a third Clause out of the said Epistle, which is this;* 1.178 A King hath his name of Ruling, and not of having a Realm. You shall be a King while you rule well; but if you do otherwise, the name of a King shall not remain with you, but you shall utterly lose and forgo it, which God forbid. And then maketh Holinshead this Annotation in these words; Hitherto out of the Epistle that Eleutherius sent unto Lucius; wherein many pretty Observations are to be collected, if time and place would serve to stand upon them.

27. So he saith; but what Annotations these are he declareth not, tho' it be easie to guess by others which he maketh in other places: For that in the very next page before he maketh us a very grave Discourse,* 1.179 How that Lucius sent to Rome the second time for a Copy of such politic Orders as were then used in the Regiment of the Church; but that Eleutherius, for divers reasons, thought it best not to lay any more upon the Necks of the New Converts of Britanny, than Christ and his Apostles had already set down to all men in the Scriptures. And is not this a wise Discourse? as tho' no Temporal Laws were to be made in a Christian Commonwealth, but only those that are set down in Scriptures. Who seeth not the madness of these Conclusions or Illations? Nay, who doth not consi∣der how greatly this matter is against themselves? That King Lucius dwelling so far off from Rome as he did; yea, being otherwise an Enemy to the Roman Nation, as these men confess that he was, did notwithstanding so highly re∣spect, even in those ancient days, the See and Bishop of Rome, that he submitted himself thereto, and demanded from thence direction, not only in matters of Re∣ligion, and Ecclesiastical Laws, but in Temporal and Civil also; and Eleutherius knowing his own Authority over him and his, doubted not to appoint them what was to be done. And albeit Mr. Jewell doth call it an Advice, as you have heard, yet the Title of the Epistle implieth more, saying, that it was ad corre∣ctionem Regis & Procerum Regni, as above we have declared. And this for the first point contained in this Epistle.

28. And for the second,* 1.180 wherein Eleutherius saith that King Lucius was God's Vicar or Vicegerent (as Holinshead translateth it) within his own Realm; what Catholic ever deny'd this, or that any lawful Temporal Prince is not God's Vicar and Substitute in governing his People under him? Sure we are, St. Paul speaking even of a Heathen Prince or Magistrate, saith,* 1.181 Dei enim mi∣nister tibi est in bonum; for he is God's Substitute to thee for thy good. And in another place, teaching Servants how they should obey their Heathen Lords and Masters, he saith, Servi obedite Dominis carnalibus, cum timore & tremore,* 1.182 sicut Christo; Servants obey your Carnal or Temporal Lords, as to Christ him∣self. And again in the same place, Sicut Domino, & non Hominibus; As unto our Lord Jesus, and not as unto Men. And doth not here the Apostle confess expresly, that Temporal Lords and Princes, yea tho' they were Pagans, are Christ's Vicars and Substitutes in their Government of Temporal Affairs? But yet I do not think that either Fox or Holinshead will say that they were Christ's Vicars also in Spiritual Affairs, or Heads of the Church within their Realms, as by this Epistle of Eleutherius they would make King Lucius seem to be.

29. And so finally, Whether this Epistle of Eleutherius be true or feigned,* 1.183 it maketh little for them, but much rather against them. And there be divers things in it which do make it probable that it is a feigned matter. First, for the time set down in the Title, shewing it to be written after Eleutherius was dead. Secondly, for that neither Fox nor Holinshead would deliver it unto us in Latin as it was written. Thirdly, for that the Copy set down by Ho∣linshead hath many Texts of Scriptures full little to the purpose, and fondly

apply'd,* 1.184 and unworthy the great Learning of Pope Eleutherius; which John Fox perceiving, like a wily Fox indeed, left them quite out of his Copy; professing notwithstanding to put down the Epistle wholly, as he found it.

30. Fourthly, the last point of Doctrin therein taught, That Kings are no longer Kings than they rule well; and do lose and utterly forgo the same, when they do otherwise; is a Doctrin not fit for Eleutherius, but agreeing rather with that of Husse and Wickliff mentioned before in the Second Encounter, as con∣demned by the General Council of Constance.* 1.185 And this shall be enough about this first Heretical Cavillation concerning the Conversion of Britanny under Pope Eleutherius, which our English Sectaries, for hate to Rome, will needs call in doubt. But not being able to stand in this quarrel, they flie to another of more moment, which shall be handled in the ensuing Chapter.

CHAP. V.

Of another Heretical Shift about the former Conversion of Britanny under Pope Eleutherius and King Lucius, as tho' the Faith of Rome that was then, did not remain now; which is reproved by two evident Demonstra∣tions, the first Negative, the other Affirmative.

WHen all the former Foxly Shifts and Devices will not serve to shake off the praise of our Britans Conversion from Rome by means of Eleutherius, our Fox diggeth to himself another starting-hole, where∣unto, when he is pressed, to run; and his good Cub Sir Francis fol∣loweth him diligently at the heels. The Fox his words are these: But grant we here,* 1.186 that it be as they would have it, (and indeed the most part of our English Stories do confess it) neither will I greatly stick with them therein: yet what have they got thereby, when they have cast all their gain? In few words, to conclude this matter, if so be that the Christian Faith and Religion was first derived from Rome by Eleutherius, let them but grant to us the same Faith and Religion that was taught in Rome, and from thence derived hither by Eleutherius, and we will desire no more: For then was there not any Ʋniversal Pope,* 1.187 neither any Name or Ʋse of the Mass, nor any Sacrifice Propitiatory, nor any Transubstantiation, neither any Images of Saints departed set up in the Churches, &c.

* 1.1882. Thus saith the Fox, granting by Testimony of most Writers that which before he laboured so much to impugn. Now let us hear the Cub, how well he hath learned to bark after his Sire: Tho' it be granted (saith he) that Eleu∣therius sending hither Preachers from Rome in King Lucius his time, did first convert this Land to the Christian Faith; I say, there is not now the same Faith in Rome that was then: There were then no Masses said, no Transubstantiation known, no setting up of Images in Churches, no Ʋniversal Pope, &c.

3. Here you see the self-same Speech, with the self-same Spirit, betwixt the Cub and the Fox, the Scholar and the Master; but that the Scholar altereth somewhat the order, to cover thereby his borrowing from the other: Nay, we may note another thing also, which is usual in such people; the Scholar is more earnest and eager than his Master of whom he took it, and more over-lashing; so as what the one speaketh but doubtfully, the other affirmeth most resolutely; what the one saith, the other sweareth. Let them grant us (saith Fox) the same Faith which was then at Rome, and we desire no more. This was somewhat modest, tho' False and Hypocritical; for he meaneth it not, what∣soever you grant him, or prove against him. But what saith his Scholar? I

I say (quoth he) there is not now the same Faith in Rome that was then. This is more resolute and peremptory as you see: For who saith it I pray you? I say it (quoth he) as tho he would challenge the field of him that will dare to de∣ny it, or prove the contrary. But who are you (Sir) that we should yield unto you this Pythagorical Authority of ipse dixit? granting all things upon your own Assertion without further proofs? if you be the Man that so often be∣fore have been made a mouse, and your Credit so many times shaken by shew∣ing your false dealing, then may it be now an Argument rather to the con∣trary: to wit, Sir Francis saith this or that without alledging any Proof, Er∣go it is probable that the matter is either feigned or falsified, and this con∣sequence you shall see much confirmed both in him and his Father Fox, by this that here we are to examin.

4. For first, both of them do affirm (as you have heard) and that with great Asseveration, that in the Time of Eleutherius the Pope, that is to say, in the second Age after Christ, there was not the Faith in Rome that now is: For that there was no mention or knowledge then, either of any universal Authority of the Church or Bishop of Rome, or of the name or use of Masses, or Sa∣crifice propitiatory, or of Transubstantiation, or of Images used in Churches, and the like.

5. To which vain Arguments of both these poor Men, I might answer sufficiently, by telling them (if they will learn) that albeit it were true in some sence, that these Doctrins, which here they alledge and some other in Con∣troversie between us, were not found in the Second Age, when Pope Eleuthe∣rius lived, so expresly set forth, as in other Ages afterward, when better Occasion was offered, and the Times did more permit the same: yet is this no good Argument to prove, that they were not believed then also in the Ca∣tholic Church. For if this Consequence should be admitted, then as well might it be admitted also against many other principal Points and Articles of our Faith, which are acknowledged and believed by Protestants also at this day, tho not expresly handled, discussed or determined in those first two hun∣dred Years after Christ: as for Example, the Name and Doctrin of the Bles∣sed Trinity, the two distinct Natures, and one Person in Christ,* 1.189 his two distinct wills, the Virginity of our Blessed Lady both before and after her Child-birth, the Proceeding of the Holy Ghost, as well from the Son, as from the Father, &c.

6. All which Points and some others are not found to be handled so clear∣ly and distinctly by Authors of the first two hundred Years, as afterward, partly for that they were occupied in other matters against Gentiles and Here∣ticks that touched not these Points and partly for that General Councils could not yet be gathered together, to discuss and declare them distinctly; tho no good Christians will or may doubt, but that they were believed in the Church before, from Christ downward, and that the General Councils that determi∣ned them afterward for Articles of true Belief against Heretics, that had cal∣led them in question, did not so determine them, as if they had made them Articles which were not before (for this the Church could not do, as is held by all Catholics) but only that they being Articles of True and Catholic Belief before, the Church did now declare them to be such.

Wherefore this being so, I might answer (and I see not how they could reply) that John Fox and his Scholar may as well deny and call in question all or any of these foresaid Articles, as the other, which they recite. For that they were as little, or perhaps less specified in the first two hundred Years, than these which they object.

7. But I will deal more liberally with our Minister and Knight,* 1.190 and will seek to satisfie them with Reason, who do brabble and argue against us with∣out Reason. I shall endeavour to do the same by two ways, hoping to

make their Folly appear to every indifferent Man by them both. The first shall be via negativa, the negative way, by putting them to some proof. And the second shall be affirmative, shewing them what Proofs may be brought for our side. Nothing doubting but that each shall be sufficient to satisfie the equal Reader: Let the first kind of Argument then, by the way of negative, be this.

8. We deny that the Faith now held in Rome, and namely the Articles here mentioned of the Pope, Mass, Transubstantiation, and use of Images, were not believed in Pope Eleutherius's days, as now for the substance of the Do∣ctrin. And let them prove it if they can, and if they say, that it is hard to prove a negative, we are content that they prove only an affirmative, where∣by the said negative may be inferred, to wit, that any one of these Doctrins did begin to enter into the Church after Eleutherius. And to this Proof they are bound in all equity and reason, as we shall shew by our sequent Discourse. For if it be true, that the Articles and Points of Doctrin here mentioned by Fox and Sir Francis wherein they differ from us,* 1.191 be indeed not things heard of, or believed at Rome in the time of Pope Eleutherius (which yet they denie not, but that in other Ages after they were generally received) then followeth it, that Fox and his Fellows must shew the Time, Place, Men, and Occasion of their beginning, to wit, when, where, and by what Men, and upon what Causes, and with what Authority, or Induction or Violence, or by what Deceit, or with what Contradiction of others, these Doctrins entred first, and were continued in the Church. All which Points we can shew of every other Error or Heresie, that hath risen and was held for such, from Christ's Time to ours.

9. And if either Fox or his Cub, or any of that Kennel can or will shew this, and joyn issue with us upon this one Point, we do accept thereof, and the matter may be quickly dispatch'd. But if this cannot be done, then must we follow the Rule of St. Augustin held by him for infallible in such Affairs:* 1.192 to wit,

That when any Doctrin is found generally received in the known visible Churh, at any Time, or in any Age, whereof there is no certain Author, Time, or Beginning found: then is it sure, that all such Doctrin hath come down from Christ and his Apostles.

10. This doth that holy Doctor and great Pillar of Gods Church Saint Augustin affirm and reiterate in every place of his Works against Heretics of his Time, which argued, as our Men do, by denying only, and putting Catholics to Proof. As for Example, against the Donatists, denying the custom of baptizing Infants, for that it was not in Scripture, nor recorded by Fathers of the first Ages,* 1.193 Saint Augustin answereth thus, Illa consuetudo, quam & tunc homines sursum versum aspicientes non videbant à posterioribus in∣stitutam, rectè ab Apostolis tradita creditur.

That Custom of Baptizing In∣fants, which Men before us in the Church looking upward to Antiquity, did not find to have been ordained by them that came after the first Ages, is rightly believed to have been delivered by the Apostles.

11. And again in another place speaking of Ecclesiastical Customs, he saith, Quod universa tenet Ecclesia,* 1.194 nec Conciliis institutum sed semper retentum est, non nisi anthoritate Apostolica traditum rectissimè creditur.

That, which the universal Church doth hold, and was not instituted by any Council, but hath been still retained in the Church, this we may most justly believe to have come from no other Authority, than from the Apostles.

And the like Speeches unto this hath St. Augustin in divers other places both of this Book against the Donatists, as l. 2. c. 7. and l. 5. c. 23. as also lib. de Ʋnitat. Ecclesiae. c. 19. & Epistola 118, &c. And as for that he speaketh of Institution by Councils, he meaneth of Customs and Ceremonies, and

not of Articles of Belief. Which no Council can appoint, but only declare and expound, as before we have shewed.

12. This Position then of St. Augustin is most true and consonant to the Doctrin of all other Fathers in that behalf, that when any thing is found ge∣nerally received in the Church, and no Author, Institutor, or Beginning can be found thereof, this without all doubt cometh down from the Apostles. And of this position may be alledged two infallible grounds.* 1.195 The one of Faith, the other of evident Reasons. For in Faith who can think so basely of Christs Power or Will in performing his Promises made unto his Church, to conserve her in all Truth unto the Worlds end, as that he should permit her notwithstanding to admit or teach generally any one false Article of Do∣ctrin, and much less, so many as these men object against us? For whereas he promised his Holy Spirit to be with her unto the Worlds end, and that she should be the Pillar and Firmament of Truth to direct others, and final∣ly that hell gates should never prevail against her: How should all this be per∣formed, if she fell into those Errors, of which Protestants accuse her? or what greater Victory could the gates of Hell have against her, than that from an Apostolical Church, of whom Christ spake, she should become an Apostatical Church, as these Men do call her? which is the greatest Blas∣phemy against Christ and his Divinity, that possibly can be imagined, see∣ing it doth evacuate his whole Incarnation, Life, Death, Doctrin, Resurre∣ction, and other Benefits of his coming, which were all imployed to this end, to make unto himself a Church and Kingdom in this world, that should direct Men in all Truth to their Salvation. And this being taken away, and the other granted, that the Church her self may fall into Error and false Doctrin; then is there no certainty in any thing. And consequently it cannot be that any erroneous Doctrin should be taught or received general∣ly by the Church. And this is the first ground of St Augustin's Assertion.

13. But besides this, there is another founded in Reason and Experience,* 1.196 which cannot be denied. And for that it is a consideration of great Importance and may serve the Reader to many purposes of moment, for discerning of Doubts and Controversies; I shall desire him to be attent in perusing the same. We do find by Experience, and that not only in Ecclesiastical, but Temporal Affairs also: That when Orders, Laws and Customs are once settled in any Common-wealth, it is hard to alter or take them away, or to bring in things opposite or different to them, without some Resistance, Dis∣pute, Contradiction, or at least some Memory thereof, how, why, and by whom it was done. As for Example, if a Man would go about to bring in any Innovation in the particular Laws of London, and much more in the gene∣ral Laws of all the Land: no doubt, but he should find some Resistance therein, some that would dispute about the matter, alledging Reasons to the con∣trary: others would resist and oppose themselves; and when all did fail, at leastwise some Record, Story or Memory would be left of this Change.

14. But much more if this matter did concern Religion, which is most esteemed above other Points. As for Example, if a Man would begin to teach any Points of Doctrin at this Day in England contrary or different from that which is there received, and established by public Authority; he would pre∣sently be noted and contradicted by some no doubt: as we see the Puritans, Brownists, Family of Love, and other such newer Teachers have been, and the History thereof is notorious, and will remain to Posterity.

15. And this is the very reason also, why all Heretics and Heresies from the beginning did no sooner peep up in the visible Catholic Church, but that they were noted, impugned confuted, and finally cast out from that body, to the Devils dung-hill. And the Records thereof do remain, who were the

Authors and Beginners, who the Favourers and setters forward, at what time, upon what occasion, under what Popes and Kings, and other such-like Cir∣cumstances. And this will endure to the end of the World.

* 1.19716. This then being so, we now come to the state of our Question, and to joyn with the Protestants upon this Issue, That seeing the Doctrins before mentioned, of the Popes Authority, Sacrifice of the Mass, Transubstantiation, Ʋse of Images, and the like, were found to be generally received and believed in the Visible and Universal Catholic Church of Christendom, when Martin Lu∣ther first began to break from the same; yea, and many Ages before, by their own confession, they must shew us when the said Doctrins were brought in afterwards to the Church, not being there, nor believed therein before; to wit, by what Man or Men, with what Authority, Constraint, or Persuasion, with what repugnance of them that misliked the same, and other like Circum∣stances before mentioned; which if they be not able to do, most certain it is, that whatsoever they prattle against these Doctrins, saying they were not in Eleutherius's time, it is nothing but Cavils and Heretical Shifts.

17. And now that they cannot shew any such particularities for the entrance or admittance of these Doctrins into the Church, is most evident: For what∣soever time they assign for their beginning, we can still shew, that before that time they were in use, if they mean of the Things themselves, and not only of Words or Phrases.* 1.198 As for example, when they object, That in the Coun∣cil of Lateran under Pope Innocentius III. in the year of Christ 1215. the word Transubstantiation was first used; we answer, That albeit that word was then added for better explication of the matter, as these words Homousion, Consub∣stantial, Trinity, and the like, were by the first General Council of Nice; yet the substance of the Article was held before, from the beginning, under other equi∣valent words of Change and Immutation of Natures, Transformation of Elements, and the like. As for Example, that of St. Ambrose speaking of the words of Christ in the Consecration,* 1.199 Non valebit sermo Christi, ut species mutet elemento∣rum?

Shall not the words of Christ be of power to change the Natures of Elements?— And again, Sermo Christi, qui potuit de nihilo facere, quod non erat, non potest ea quae sunt in id mutare, quod non erant? "The Speech of Christ that was able to create of nothing that which was not before; shall it not be able to change things that are already into that which they were not before?

He meaneth the Bread and Wine into the Body and Blood of Christ, as himself doth expound.

18. So as here we see the change of the Natures of Elements, and of the Substance of one Body into another, averred by St. Ambrose long time before the Council of Lateran; which is the same that we mean by Transubstantiation. And conform to this do speak also other ancient Fathers, as well Greek as Latin; and one thing is specially to be noted, That both the Greek and Latin Church did agree therein in the said Council; there being present two Patriarchs of the Greek Church,* 1.200 to wit, those of Constantinople and Hierusalem, and others both Archbishops, Bishops, and Prelates: So as of both Churches the Arch∣bishops were 70, the Bishops 412, Abbots and Priors 800, and Prelates in all 1215, together with the Legats, Doctors and Embassadors of both Empires, West and East, as also of the Kings of France, Spain, England, Hierusalem, and others. So as this point of Doctrin about Transubstantiation was not han∣led in corners, but publicly: and the Council doth not deliver the same as any New Doctrin, but only as an Explication of That which ever had been held before.

19. And the same is answered to the other-like Heretical Cavils about other points here objected by Fox and Sir Francis of an Ʋniversal Pope, the use of the Mass, and Propitiatory Sacrifice, the setting up of dead Mens Images, and the like. For

if they understand by the first the Primacy and Supreme Authority Ecclesia∣stical of the See of Rome, and her Bishops; and by the second, the Christian external Sacrifice of the Body and Blood of our Savior, instituted by himself as the Complement of all other Sacrifices that went before; and by the third, Sacred Memories and Images of Christ and his Saints, that are not dead, but living and reigning everlastingly in Heaven: then are all these Doctrins (howsoever disguised by Heretics with different words, to make them more odious) most true and Catholic Doctrins, and received in the Church from the beginning, and continued from the Apostles downward.

20. And albeit these People, to continue cavilling, do alledge divers times,* 1.201 that the first of these Articles, about the Popes Supremacy, did begin first under Pope Gregory the Great and Phocas the Emperor, about the year of Christ 600; and that the last, about the Ʋse of Images, was decreed in the second General Council of Nice, about the year 700; and that the other of the Use of Mass be∣gan by little and little they cannot tell when: yet is this all most ridiculous, and themselves dare not stand to any certain time by them assigned; for that pre∣sently we appoint another time before that wherein these things were also acknowledged; which they cannot do in the Heresies by us objected to them, for that we shew indeed the very true time wherein they began, and had their off-spring, together with the proper Authors, Places, Occasions, and other-like particularities, recorded not by our selves, but by other authentical Wri∣ters before us, so as reasonably there can be no doubt thereof. And herein stands the true difference between us: We really and substantially shew the Beginning and Authors of their Heresies, for that they are Heresies indeed; but They cannot shew the Beginning or Author of any of our Articles of Be∣lief since Christ and his Apostles, for that they are no Heresies, but Catholic Doctrins, and have ever endured from Christ downward; tho' in some Ages more than other, they have been expounded or declared by Fathers and Coun∣cils, according to the necessities of the time; and this is one proper Office of the Holy Ghost, appointed for Guider of the Church to explain matters, as doubts do arise.

21. Wherefore this is the first way of trial whether the foresaid Articles of the Roman Religion, taught at this day, about Transubstantiation, Mass,* 1.202 and the like, be the same that Pope Eleutherius held, and sent into Britanny, or not. And I do call all this kind of Argument Negative, both in respect of our Adver∣saries, that deny them to have been then in use, and of Us, that deny them to have been brought in afterward: And they ought to prove the second, seeing they cannot deny but that they were once generally in use, and received over Christendom. Whereof we do make the former most infallible Inference with St. Augustin, That forasmuch as they were once in use, and generally received, and no particular beginning can be shewed of them or of their entrance: Ergo, They came from the Apostles themselves.

22. To this Inference the Sectaries and Heretics of our time have one only shift more; which is, That albeit these Doctrins have for many Ages been re∣ceived generally in the Church of Christendom; yet that they crept into the same by little and little, and finding no resistance, began at last to be univer∣sally believed. But this creeping Instance can have no place here by any pro∣bability: For, to say nothing of the Providence of God in protecting his Church from such creeping Errors, nor yet of the Promises of Christ before-mentioned to the same effect,* 1.203 Reason it self doth demonstrate also that this possibly could not be; For if the Doctors and Fathers of the Church did note and discover from time to time every least Heresie or Error that did peep up in their days, and this not only in Heretics, but in divers principal Fathers also that held any particular Opinions, as is manifest in St. Cyprian, Lactantius, Ar∣nobius,

Cassianus, and others; If this diligence (I say) were used by them in all other occasions, how could it happen that so many, so manifest, and so important Doctrins, as are in controversie between Us and Protestants, should be let pass without Note or Contradiction, if they had been either New or Er∣roneous? How should it come to pass (I say) that no one of these ancient Fa∣thers should ever impugn any of these Doctrins, if they were New Opinions, and brought into the Church contrary to the Doctrin that was before, as these men do say? Yea, how should it fall out that no one Record in the World should be left by our Ancestors, that at such a time, by such or such occasions, began the Doctrin of Purgatory, of Praying to Saints, of the Real Presence, of the Ʋse of Images, of Mass and Sacrifice, of seven Sacraments, and the like, that were not held in the Church before?

* 1.204 23. And that this is impossible, may be shewed by this experimental Dedu∣ction, which now I will set down. Let us imagin that none of these Doctrins were in the first Age under the Apostles; and namely, that then there were but two Sacraments, no Purgatory at all, or any External Sacrifice held. We ask them concerning the second Age, wherein Justinus, Polycarpus, Irenaeus, Clemens Alexandrinus, and Tertullian, were chief Teachers, whether these Doctrins were in this Age, or no? If they deny it, tho' we might prove the contrary out of their Works; yet, not to pass from this first kind of Argument, we ask the like of the third Age, under Origen, Cyprian, Dionysius Alexan∣drinus, Pamphilus, Arnobius, and the rest? And if they deny of this Age also, that these Doctrins were not held by them, we go to the fourth Age, under Athanasius, Hilarius, Optatus, Basil, Nazianzen, Ambrose, Hierom, Chrysostom, Epiphanius, Cyrillus: In whose Writings every where there is men∣tion of all these Doctrins, as afterward in our second Argument we shall shew out of the Protestants themselves; and namely the Magdeburgians, that profess to note all.

24. Now then, I ask our Adversaries touching this creeping Instance, how could these Doctrins so creep into the Catholic Visible Church in this fourth Age for example, and be received so generally over all Nations, Countreys, and Kingdoms, by these principal Lights, Captains, Watchmen, and Guiders of the same, as no Note, Detection, Resistance or Memory should be left of any Doubt, Dispute, or Opposition made against them? Is this likely? Is this pos∣sible? Read all the Fathers Works over, and find, if you can, but one place wherein one Father did ever hitherto note another for holding Purgatory, Praying to Saints, believing the Real Presence, or the like, as they did Cyprian (tho' otherwise a most Learned and Holy Man) for teaching Re-baptization of Heretics, and some other Fathers for other particular Opinions different from the Catholic Doctrin of that Age. Whereof we may infer, That they would have done the like also in these other points, if they had been held for new or erroneous in those days.* 1.205 And hereof also may be inferred another Sequel or Observation of very great moment against our Heretics, That when soever any Doctrin is found in any of the ancient Fathers, which is not contradicted nor noted by any of the rest as singular, that Doctrin is to be presumed to be no particular Opinion of his, but rather the general of all the Church in his days; for that otherwise it would most certainly have been noted and impugned by others. Whereby it followeth, that one Doctor's Opini∣on or Saying in matters of Controversie not contradicted or noted by others, may sometimes give a sufficient Testimony of the whole Churches Sentence and Doctrin in those days; which is a point very greatly to be considered.

25. But yet further, to all this may be added another Consideration of no small weight, which is the difficulty of bringing in certain Doctrins,* 1.206 if any man would have attempted it; as for Example, the Doctrin of Seven Sacra∣ments: If there had been but Two only before in the Apostles time, it had been an extreme great Novelty to have added Five more, which never would have been admitted without much strife and resistance, seeing all Catholics do hold, that Christ only could institute Sacraments, for that He only could assure the Promise of Grace made thereunto, as excellently doth declare the Council of * 1.207 Trent, and long before that again the Master of Sentences; and * 1.208 St. Thomas, in the name of all Catholics, did leave that Doctrin registred, and there can be no doubt thereof.

26. Wherefore this Truth being admitted, That the whole Church hath no Authority to institute any Sacrament, or to alter any thing about the sub∣stantial parts thereof; to wit, the Matter, Form, or Number, (as the same Council of Trent in another place declareth;* 1.209) how was it possible that five whole Sacraments should be added or brought into Catholic Doctrin, and re∣ceived and believed throughout Christendom without any resistance or oppositi∣on at all, if there had been but two only instituted by Christ, and exercised by the Apostles in the first Age? How, I say, could five more be brought in af∣terward? By whom? at what time? in what Countrey? &c.* 1.210 For if any one had begun to do it, others would have resisted; it being a matter of so high moment. And if one Countrey, Province or Church had admitted them, another would have refused; or at leastwise there would have been some Doubt or Disputation, and some general Meeting and Synod, or Council ga∣thered about that matter; and some parts would have admitted one Number, and some another, as we see that the Sectaries of our time have done since the matter hath been called in question by them; some allowing five, some four, some three, some two. But no memory of any of these differences being to be found among Catholics, most certain it is that this Number came down from Christ and his Apostles themselves.

27. The like, or greater difficulty,* 1.211 would also have been about the use of Sacramental Confession, if it had not been appointed by Christ, and put in ure presently, and so continued from time to time: For that it being a thing in it self most repugnant to man's sensual Nature, to be bound to open his particu∣lar sins to another, with that Humility and Subjection which Catholic Do∣ctrin doth prescribe in the use of that Sacrament; clear it is, that if it had not been in ure even from the Apostles time, and that as a matter of absolute necessity, it could never have been received afterward, nor yet brought in by any Human Power, Art, or Device. For who (I pray you) should or could bring in such a thing of so great repugnance and difficulty upon the whole Christian Church? Will they say any Pope? Let them name either Him or Them, together with the Time, and other Particularities; which they never will be able to do.

28. Besides this, I ask them further, What Pope would ever have attem∣pted this, if it had not been by Obligation before him; seeing that Popes themselves, the more Great and Eminent they be above others, the more na∣tural repugnance must they needs find in themselves, to go and kneel down at the feet of an inferior Priest, and confess unto him their most secret sins? And the like may be said of Temporal Princes and Emperours; who if any Pope or Power Ecclesiastical would have laid such a burthen upon them, not used nor of obligation before, how would they have yielded unto it? which of them would not have answered, that seeing their Fathers and Ancestors were saved without this subjection, and irksom obligation of revealing their particular sins, they would hope to be so also? And finally, some great Difficulty, Doubt,

or Contention would have been about this matter, before it could have been so brought in, and established all over the Christian World, as we see by experi∣ence it was; and at leastwise some memory would have remained thereof in Histories, which we find not, and consequently we may conclude that there was never any such thing. And this is sufficient for our first Argument. Now let us pass to the second.

CHAP. VI.

It is proved by the second kind of Affirmative or Positive Arguments, That the Points of Catholic Doctrin, before denied by Fox and Sir Francis, were in use in Pope Eleutherius his Time, and in other Ages im∣mediately following; and this by Testimony of Protestant Writers themselves.

ALbeit the Reasons and Considerations before alledged, whereby our Ad∣versaries are willed to shew the beginning of such Articles and Points of our Catholic Doctrin as they deny to have come down from the Apostles Time, were sufficient to put them to silence, being not able to perform any part thereof, and consequently also may open the eyes of any studious Reader to see the Infirmity of Their Cause, and the Strength and Truth of Ours; yet will we, for greater satisfaction of all sorts, pass over to the other part also of Positive and Affirmative Proofs, which are so abundant in this behalf, as if I would set them down all, this only point would require a parti∣cular Treatise; wherefore I mean to abreviate the matter, as much as I may.

* 1.2122. For which respect, whereas there are two means to set down these Proofs; one out of the Authors themselves that lived in the same Age with Eleutherius, and the next after; and the other to cite the same out of Prote∣stant Writers: I have made choice of the second way in this place, both for that it is shorter, and seemeth also more sure and effectual. For if I should cite the places, as for Example in the second Age, St. Irenaeus lib. 5. advers. haeres. for the Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome, and the same, lib. 4. cap. 77. and with him Justinus Martyr, q. 103. together with Theophilus, Athenagoras, Clemens Alexandrinus, for Freewill, and the same Clemens, lib. 5. stromatum, and divers others of that Age, for the Merit of Good Works, for the manner of doing Penance, and the like; and if I should alledge the said Irenaeus, lib. 4. cap. 32. for the Sacrifice of the Mass, and Justinus Martyr Apolog. 2. and Clemens Alexandrinus, lib. 7. Stromatum, about the Rites and Ceremonies of the said Mass, and the same Justinus, q. 136. and the same Irenaeus, lib. 1. c. 18. for the Ceremonies of Baptism and Chrism used in those days: If (I say) I should alledge these, and other Authors of that time, for positive Proofs of Catholic Articles against Protestants in Eleutherius's days, the matter would first grow to be very long; for that I must alledge the places at length, seeing that otherwise the quarrelling Adversary would say that I left out the Antecedents and Con∣sequents,* 1.213 as themselves are wont to do, when they mean not to have any Text rightly understood; Secondly, they would quarrel with us (when they see themselves prest) about the Authors Books, whether they be truly theirs or no; and thirdly, about the Translation, Words, and Sense. All which would bring a long Dispute.

3. But now finding that certain Authors of their own Religion, (if they be of their Religion) I mean the Magdeburgians, called otherwise Centuriatores, have taken upon them to set down the whole Story of the Church, and have herewithal treated as well of the Doctrin, as also the Doctors of every Age; I have thought best to take my Proofs out of them, being Confessions, as it were, against themselves and their Mates the Calvinists (tho' not very friendly Mates in many matters of Doctrin, as you shall hear) and their Story being the very Ground and Fountain of all John Fox his Volume of Acts and Monu∣ments, except only those things which concern England in particular; wherein whether he or they behave themselves with less Honesty or Conscience, is hard to say: but in this Treatise you shall have divers tasts of them both. And this being spoken as it were by the way of Preface, we shall now take in hand the matter proposed.

4. These men being four Saxons, whom before we have named, gathered together in the City of Magdeburg, to wit, Flaccus Illyricus, Joannes Vigandus,* 1.214 Matthaeus Judex, and Basilius Faber, and in Religion strict or rigid Lutherans, took upon them (as hath been said) to write the whole Ecclesiastical History from Christ to their Time by Centuries or Ages, allowing 100 years to every Age, whereof they are called Centuriatores. And in every Age they handle these and like Chapters, Of the Church, and increase thereof, or Doctrin therein taught; Of Heresies and Heretics; Of Doctors, and Writers, and the like. But amongst other points especially to be noted to our purpose, that presently after the Apostles in the second Century, they make this Chapter, repeating the same in every Age after: Inclinatio Doctrinae,* 1.215 complectens peculiares & incommo∣das opiniones, stipulas, & errores Doctorum quae palam quidem, hoc est, scriptis tra∣dita sunt: That is,

The declining of true Christian Doctrin, containing the peculiar and incommodious Opinions of Doctors, their Errors, Straw, or Stubble, which were left publicly by them, that is to say, in their Writings.

5. This is the Title of this Chapter in every Age, and those last words seem to be added, thereby to insinuate to the Reader that the said Doctors inwardly did hold perhaps many more Errors, and Straw-opinions, in these mens judg∣ments, than they left openly in writing. And by this arrogant Title you may see these four good Fellows mean to judge and censure all from the beginning of Christian Religion unto their days; and among others they will censure John Fox also, and his Fellows, as you may see in the Preface of one of their Centuries, dedicated unto the Queen of England the third year of her Reign, 1560, where having told her Majesty a long Tale of the Gospel and pure Word of God, naming the same above half a hundred times (if I have counted right) in this one Epistle, and shewing how Princes must have no other Rule of Go∣vernment than the said Word (but yet understood as these men will interpret it) they tell her also, that they now do bring her Antiquity to look upon, yet complaining that few in ancient Times did write luculenter, & cum judicio,* 1.216 perspicuously and with judgment. And then again, Sacrosanctae antiquitatis titulo plurimos quasi fascinari, ut citra omnem attentionem, rectum{que} judicium, quantumvis tetris erroribus applaudant: That very many are as it were so be witch∣ed with the holy Title of Antiquity, that without all attention and upright judgment, they do give willingly consent to never so foul Errors, if they be set down by Antiquity.

6. Lo here what an entrance this is of them that profess Antiquity, to dis∣credit by their Preface all Antiquity of Christian Religion, and of the eldest and primitive Church, whose Acts and Gests they promise to set down; but the very point indeed is, that they themselves will be Judges of all (as the fa∣shion of proud Heretics is) and admit only so much as maketh for their parti∣cular

Sect,* 1.217 and discredit, or reject the rest. And in this point our English Calvinists are like to find as little favour at their hands, as we that are Catho∣licks, and less too; for that by the whole course of Antiquity they do shew these men to be clearly Heretics, and their Opinions about the Sacraments, In∣visibility of the Church, and other like, to be Heretical: whereas our Doctrins which they find in ancient Fathers differing from them, they call either incom∣modious Opinions, Blots, Stubble, or Errors of Doctors, as before you have heard, and not lightly Heresies. As in this their Preface to the Queen they ad∣monish her Majesty more carefully to beware of Their Doctrin than of Ours, in these words;* 1.218 Cùm jam varia grassentur quasi factiones opinionum, &c. Whereas every where now-adays divers factions of Opinions grow up among them, that profess the Gospel; there are some among others, who by certain Philosophical Reasons go about to evacuate, or make void the Testament of our Lord, so as they would remove the Presence of the true Body and Blood of Christ from the Communion, and would by a certain strange perplexity of words deceive the people against the most clear, the most evident, the most true, and the most potent words of our Savior himself: Where∣fore your Majesty must principally look to this point, and provide that the Articles of our Faith be kept without such Pharisaical Leaven, and that the Sacraments insti∣tuted by Christ be restored without all corruption and adulteration. Thus far the Mag∣deburgians to her Majesty, by which you may perceive why I call them Fox his Masters in lying, but not his Mates in believing.

7. To come therefore now to our purpose; I might, as before hath been said, if it were not over long, use two ways for this positive Proof, That these Articles deny'd by Fox and his Scholar were heard of and acknowledged in Eleutherius's time: The first by citing the places themselves out of the princi∣pal Doctors that then lived; but this (as I have said) would be over-long. Yet one place I cannot omit of Irenaeus in the very Age we speak of,* 1.219 and written while Eleutherius yet lived. The words are these: Maximae & antiquissimae Ecclesiae, &c. We shewing the Tradition of the greatest and most ancient Church of Rome, known to all the World, as founded by the two most glorious Apostles Peter and Paul (which Tradition and Faith she receiving from the Apostles, hath preached and delivered unto us by Succession of her Bishops from time to time unto our days) do confound thereby all those [Heretics] which by any ways, either through delight in themselves, or vain-glory, or blindness of understanding, do gather otherwise than they should: For that unto this Church, in respect of her more Mighty Principality, it is necessary that all Churches must agree, and have access; that is to say, all faithful people wheresoever they live. In which Church the Tradition that hath descend∣ed from the Apostles, hath ever been kept by those that live in any place of the World.

8. And again, a little after, having for proof of his Faith, and confirmation of Apostolical Tradition, recounted all the Bishops of Rome from St. Peter to his days, he saith, Nunc duodecimo loco, &c. Now in the twelfth place from the Apostles hath Eleutherius that Bishopric, and by this Succession (of the foresaid Roman Bishops) is the Tradition of the Apostles conserved in the Church, and the Preaching of the Truth hath come down unto us; and this is a most full Demonstration, that one and the same lively Faith hath been conserved in the Church from the Apostles time, and delivered unto us in Truth &c.

* 1.2209. Lo here Tradition of the Apostles delivered and conserved by the Suc∣cession of the Bishops of Rome! Lo here the Church of Rome called so long ago the Greatest and most Ancient of all other Churches, her Principality both named and confirmed! Behold the Obligation of all other Churches of the World, yea and of all faithful Christians, to agree and have access to Her! See here all vainglorious and self-will'd Heretics confounded by Irenaeus, with the

only Tradition and Succession of this Church of Rome and her Bishops, even from St. Peter's time to Eleutherius, that lived with Irenaeus! What Catholic man could say more at this day? And will any jangling Fox or Sir Francis avouch yet without shame, that none of these points were ever known or heard of in Eleutherius's time?

10. Well then, this is one way to confound them, if I would follow it. But being over tedious, I mean to take another, and shew out of their own Historiographers the Magdeburgenses, that all these Doctrins deny'd by Fox, and his Follower here, were known and in ure among the chiefest Writers in the primitive Church, and first Ages after Christ.

And first of all, to begin with this very matter first named by them,* 1.221 Of the Primacy of the Pope and Church of Rome: The Magdeburgians have an especial Paragraph thereof, De primatu Ecclesiae Romanae, under the foresaid Title of the incommodious Opinions, Stubble, Straw, and Errors of the Doctors that lived within the first 200 years after Christ. And in that Paragraph they not only do alledge for Stubble this last Authority of Irenaeus by me cited, (tho' they alledge it so miserably maimed, as of six parts they leave out more than five) but also ano∣ther place of St. Ignatius, that lived in the first Age with the Apostles them∣selves, to the same purpose, which they cite in like manner under the same Title of Straw, and Stubble, and incommodious Opinions.* 1.222 And then passing to the third Century, or second Age after that of Christ, they cite Tertullian for the same incommodious Opinion,* 1.223 about the Primacy of the Roman Church and Bi∣shop, saying of him, Non sine errore sentire videtur Tertullianus claves soli Petro commissas, & Ecclesiam super ipsum structam, &c. Tertullian doth seem not without Error to think that the Keys of the Church were given only to St. Peter, and that the Church was built but on him.

11. They cite also four or five places out of St. Cyprian, where he holdeth the same with Tertullian, and so they are both confuted for Stubble-Doctors together. Yet go they further with St. Cyprian, citing divers other places out of him to the same effect for the Bishop and Church of Rome, all which they take for Stubble; as where he saith, One God, one Christ, one Church,* 1.224 one Chair builded upon the Ark by the Word of our Savior; and three or four like places more, which for brevity I omit; and finally they say of him, and three other Fathers of his time, Cyprianus, Maximus, Ʋrbanus, and Salonius,* 1.225 do think that one [Chief] Bishop must be in the Catholic Church, &c. Lo, four old Fathers that lived almost 1400 years agone, and were the Lights of that Primitive Church, rejected here by four drinking Germans gathered together in some warm Stow of Magdeburg, tippling strongly (as a man may presume) and judging all the World for Stubble besides themselves; for which cause the third person in this Quaternity is called perhaps Mattheus Judex. But let us go forward.

12. They are not content with this rejection of St. Cyprian, but they fall up∣on him again in these words; Cyprian affirmeth expresly,* 1.226 without all foundation of holy Scripture, that the Roman Church must be acknowledged by all Christians for the Mother and Root of the Catholic Church, And further yet in another Treatise, That this Church is the Chair of Peter, from which all the Ʋnity of Priesthood pro∣ceedeth. And finally, Cyprian, say they,* 1.227 hath divers other perillous Opi∣nions about this matter; as for Example, That he tyeth the Office of true Pastorship to ordinary Succession, and that he denieth that Bishops can be judg∣ed, &c. And Origen also in this Age hath no mean blots about the Power and Office of the Church, &c.

13. Hitherto are the words of the Magdeburgians against the chief Writers of these two first Ages after the Apostles, concerning the point of Principality and Supremacy of the Church and Bishop of Rome, so clearly confessed by

the said Fathers (as the Magdeburgians do grant) and on the other side so bold∣ly denied by the Fox, and the Knight his Follower and Proselyte, as a thing not so much as heard or dreamed of in these first Ages: whereof you have heard their several and resolute asseverations before; Let them but grant me, saith Fox; and then I say, quoth the Knight, there is no such matter, &c. And by this one point only of the five Articles before objected by them, and denied flatly to have been known or believed in Eleutherius's time, you may see how they behave themselves, and what may be said on our part, and how great a Volume this Book would grow unto, if I should prosecute all the other four Ar∣ticles also by them mentioned before, and should pass through the first three or four or five hundred years after Christ (for so much our Adversaries sometimes, upon a good mood of bragging, will seem to allow us) to shew, not out of the Books and Writings of the ancient Fathers themselves, for that this were over long, but what these Magdeburgians do note and gather against themselves, out of their Works, for the Antiquity of that Doctrin which they impugn, reje∣cting afterward all again with this only frivolous and fond Cavil, That these Opinions of the Fathers were but naevi, stipulae, & palia Doctorum; stains, stub∣ble, and straw of Doctors; opiniones incommodae, &c. and incommodious Opi∣nions.

* 1.22814. Wherein it is well noted by a Learned Man of our time, That these Fel∣lows do proceed, as if one being suspected or accused of Theft, Heresie, or any other grievous Crime, should willingly present himself before the Magistrate or Senate of the City; and there first of all, for his clearing, should bring in for Witnesses against him∣self the best learned, most grave, ancient, and best reputed honest men of all that City, to testifie that he is indeed such a one, to wit, a false Thief, an Heretic, or the like; but yet, having so done, would endeavor to refute all these again by one bare rejection, saying, that they spake rashly and incommodiously, and that they were overseen, and knew not what they testified, or were in a dream when they spake or testified against him; and finally, that all were deceived, and he alone to be believed against them all. And would this shift (think you) countervail so grave Witnesses against him? or would any indifferent Judge leave to condemn him for this evasion? or would any man think him much better than mad that would take such a course of De∣fence? And yet this is the very course of these Magdeburgians, who citing first the gravest and most ancient Fathers of Christendom against themselves, do re∣ject the same again with this only jest and contumely, that they spake incommodi∣ously, ignorantly, and were Stubble-Doctors.

15. Well then, for so much as concerneth the first Article mentioned by Fox and Sir Francis, as a thing not heard of in Eleutherius's time, (to wit, the Ʋniver∣sality and Primacy of the Church and Bishop of Rome) you see, that with going to the Authors themselves of that Age, the Magdeburgians do make it clear against themselves.* 1.229 And for the second point concerning the use of Mass, and Propitiatory Sacrifice, we have cited sufficiently before in the first Chapter of this Treatise out of the same Magdeburgians, who condemn divers of the most ancient Fathers for testifying this matter; and we may do the like in all the other Articles spe∣cified by Fox and his Knight, but that it would be over tedious. And therefore I do remit the curious Reader to the Volumes of the Magdeburgians themselves, if he have so much time to lose as the reading thereof doth require: Only in this place I am to note unto him, for his better Instruction, three or four kinds of shifts and frauds used ordinarily by these Protestant Germans, in setting down these and other like matters out of the Fathers, which I shall do in the next ensuing Chapter.

CHAP. VII.

The same Argument is continued, and it is shewed out of the Magdeburgi∣ans, how they accuse and abuse the Fathers of the Second and Third Age, for holding with Us against Them.

DIvers are the shifts and frauds, and manifold the abuses, which Protestant Writers, and namely the Magdeburgians, do offer to the ancient Fathers,* 1.230 in examining their Sentences about Controversies in Religion: Whereof one principal may be accounted, that of four or five places, or more, that may be alledged out of them for Us and our Doctrin, in the question proposed, they will not cite two, left the multitude of Authorities (if they alledge all that [ I] in the Fathers are found) should give our Cause too much credit. Secondly, [ II] of four or five parts of the Fathers words, contained in the places by them al∣ledged, these good Fellows do cut off ordinarily three, lest if they did set them down at length, with their Antecedents, and Consequents, their Opinions might appear more probable and plausible than these men would have them: And of this you have had an Example in the first Authority alledged by me even now out of Irenaeus about the Principality of the Church of Rome; which being set down somewhat at length, as it is in the Author, maketh the matter clear; but shuffled up in four or five words, after a most cur∣tail'd manner (as the Magdeburgians do alledge them) do scarce make any sense at all: which is the thing the Alledgers do desire, thereby to discredit the Author.

2. Their third fraud is, that having alledged the first Authorities for Us, [ III] and against themselves, they devise divers pretty and witty slights to discredit them again; as sometimes saying, that in other places the said Father expound∣eth or contradicteth himself; sometimes, that he speaketh rashly, or incom∣modiously, or without Scripture, and other such contemptuous rejections. As for Example, talking of St. Cyprian that famous Bishop, Doctor, and Martyr, and the Christian Phoenix of his Age (as St. Augustin judgeth of him) these men do handle him in this sort.

3. Cyprianus sine Scriptura loquitur, Cyprian speaketh without Scripture;* 1.231 Cyprianus superstitiosè fingit, Cyprian doth feign superstitiously; Cyprianus malè judicat, Cyprian judgeth naughtily, and the like. Nay, they endeavor to discredit the whole multitude of Doctors and Fathers in every Age: As for Example, in the beginning of the first Age next after the Apostles, they write thus: Tamesit haec aetas Apostolis admodum vicina fuit, &c.* 1.232 Albeit this Age wus nearest to the Apostles, yet the Doctrin of Christ and his Apostles began to be not a little darkened therein, and many monstrous and incommodious Opinions are every-where found to be spread by the Doctors thereof. Perhaps some cause hereof might be, for that the Gift of the Holy Ghost in these Doctors, did begin to decay, for the ingratitude of the World towards the Truth.

4. Lo here what a Preface this is, to make contemptible to the Reader all the Fathers of the very first Age after the Apostles! But what then do you think they will say of the next following? You shall hear by their own words in the Preface of that Age, which are these:* 1.233 Quò longiùs ab Apostolorum aetate recessum est, eò plus stipularum Doctrinae puritati accessit; The farther that we go off from the Apostles Age, the more Stubble we shall find to have been added to the Purity of the Christian Doctrin. Thus they say of these two Ages, and by this last Sentence you may imagin what they will say of all the Ages following.

5. And this is now spoken by them by way of prevention, to discredit ge∣nerally the Fathers of these first Ages, when they say any thing against them: But when they come to particulars,* 1.234 they have notable Quips for them; where∣of, for Example-sake, we shall let you hear some few, whereby you may as well learn their sharp Wits, as heretical Spirits. About the matter of Man's Free-will,* 1.235 whether it were wholly lost by Original Sin, (as Protestants say) or wounded only, as Catholics hold, and strengthened again by God's Grace, to do good in him that will; they write thus of the Doctors of the second Age: Nullus ferè Doctrinae locus est,* 1.236 qui tam citò obscurari coepit, atque hic de libero ar∣bitrio; No one place or part of Christian Doctrin began so soon to be darkened, as this of Free-will. And then they go on thus with the chiefest Doctors of that Age:* 1.237 Irenaeus disputes not distinctly, and wresteth the Speeches of Christ and of St. Paul in favour of Free-will, saying, That there is Free-will also in Faith and Belief: Sed haec satis crasse dicuntur, & aliena sunt à scripturis; But these things are spoken grosly by Irenaeus, and are far from the sense of Scriptures. But whether these Good-fellow-Saxons may be accounted less gross in Wit or Grace than Irenaeus, is easie to guess.

* 1.2386. From St. Irenaeus they pass to Clemens Alexandrinus, another Pillar of that Age, saying, Eodem modo Clemens Alexandrinus liberum arbitrium ubique asserit, ut appareat in ejusmodi tenebris non tantum fuisse omnes ejus saeculi Authores; verum etiam in posterioribus eas subinde crevisse & auctas esse: Clemens Alexandrinus doth in like manner every-where affirm Free-will;* 1.239 whereby it appeareth, that not only all the Doctors of this second Age were in the same darkness, but that the same did grow, and was encreased in the Ages following. Behold here their general Sentence, both of this Age, and the other ensuing! To what end then should we alledge more particulars in this matter, seeing their re∣solution to discredit all? In the third Age they do shamefully slander Tertullian, Origen,* 1.240 Cyprian and Methodius for the same Doctrin of Free-will, saying, They do abuse the Scriptures intolerably for maintenance thereof.

* 1.2417. For the fourth Age having given this general Sentence, Patres omnes ferè hujus aetatis de libero arbitrio confusè loquuntur; All the Fathers almost of this Age do speak confusedly of Free-will, &c. They add also, contra manifesta Scripturae sanctae Testimonia; contrary to the manifest Testimonies of Holy Scripture. And then they take in hand to course seven chief Fathers and Doctors; in par∣ticular, Lactantius, Athanasias, Basilius, Nazianzenus, Epiphanius, and Hie∣ronymus, saying, That they were all deceived, all in darkness, all misled about this Doctrin of mans Free-will. So as it is no marvel if Sir Francis's sharp sight disco∣ver so many thick Clouds and Darkness in the Catholic Church of our days, seeing his Masters the Magdeburgians discover so many in the Primitive Church, as by this you may see.

* 1.2428. About the point of Justification they begin the next Age after the Apo∣stles thus: Doctrina de Justificatione negligentiùs & obscuriùs ab his Doctoribus tradita est. The Doctrin of Justification was delivered by the Doctors of this second Age after Christ more negligently and obscurely than it ought to have been.* 1.243 And the same they say of the third Age also: Hunc summum Articulum de Justificatione obscuratum esse, justitiam enim coram Deo operibus tribuerunt; that this chief Article of Justification hath been obscured in this Age, for that the Doctors thereof did attribute Justice before God unto Works, and not to only Faith, &c. And then again in the fourth Age they reprehend greatly Lactantius,* 1.244 Nilus, Chromatus, Ephrem, and St. Hierom, for the same Doctrin. The other lower Centuries I have not lying by me, but it is easie to guess what these men will say of later Ages Authors, seeing they do exagitate so greatly the more ancient.

9. About the Sacrament of Penance,* 1.245 which is another Controversie betwixt us, they write in the beginning of the second Age thus: Quòd jam tum coeperit haec pars Doctrinae de poenitentia labefactari, ex Tertulliano, Cypriano, & Haeresi Novatiana infra patebit; That this part of Christian Doctrin about Penance, even then (in the first Age after the Apostles) began to be weakened, shall appear afterward by Tertullian, Cyprian, and the Novatian Heresie. Thus they write boldly and confidently as you see. And then in the Age following,* 1.246 Plerique hujus saeculi Doctores, Doctrinam de poenitentia mirè depravant; The most of the Doctors of this Age do wonderfully deprave the Doctrin of Penance.* 1.247 And what is the reason think you? They tell us presently; Ad ipsum tantum opus poe∣nitentis, seu contritionem, eam deducunt, de fide in Christum nihil dicunt; They re∣duce Penance only to the works of the Penitent, that is to say, unto Contrition, and do speak nothing at all of Faith in Christ. But who doth not see this to be a notorious slander? For how is it possible to have Contrition without Faith? Consider then how little it is to be wonder'd at, if these Companions and others of their Crew do slander and calumniate Us that live in these days, when they shame not to do it against so many Holy and Learned ancient Fathers of the Pri∣mitive Church. But let us go forward.

10. About the Perfection and Merit of Good Works,* 1.248 these Censurers affirm also, That the true Doctrin of Christ in this behalf was obscur'd in the second Age, immediatly after the Apostles: And they do wonderfully by name fall out with Clemens Alexandrinus, for that he saith, Gratia salvamur,* 1.249 sed non absque bonis ope∣ribus; We are saved by Christ's Grace, but yet not without Good Works; which is the very Exposition that Sir Francis himself holdeth before in the second En∣counter, but his Masters here do deny it. And then in the next Age they say,* 1.250 Magis, quàm superioris saeculi, Doctores hujus aetatis,* 1.251 à vera Doctrina Christi & Apo∣stolorum de bonis operibus declinarunt; The Doctors of this Age are fallen away from the Doctrin of Christ and of his Apostles about Good Works, more than the Doctors of the former Ages. And then in particular they cry out of Origen, that he writeth, That God giveth Glory to every one in the Life to come,* 1.252 pro mensu∣ra meritorum, according to the measure of his merits. Et simili errore (say they) Cyprianus meritorum praecedentium defensione obvelari peccata subsequentia. And that Cyprian by like Error (to Origen) doth say, that by the defence of precedent Me∣rits, Sins that follow may be covered. Which they cannot abide to hear.

11. Well, I might run over many other things, as about Laws of Fasting,* 1.253 Ob∣servation of Holydays, Virginity, Continence, and the like, wherein the ancient Fa∣thers no less disagreed from our new Gospellers, than We do at this day: And they complain thereof even at the first entrance of the second Age, saying, Do∣ctrina de libertate Christiana nonnihil coepit obscurari, &c. The Doctrin of Christi∣an Liberty began greatly to be obscur'd in these days. Note, I pray you, that still their complaint is of obscurity and darkness no less in those ancient first Ages, than now they complain of Ours, and with the self-same reason. For what is the reason, think you,* 1.254 why they complain so greatly here of Christian Liberty abridged 1500 years agone? You shall hear the particulars which they alledge, complaining first of these words of S. Ignatius, Scholar to the Apostles:* 1.255 Do not dis∣honor (saith he) the Holydays; do not neglect the Fast of Lent, for that it containeth the imitation of God while he liv'd upon Earth; despise not the Passion-week, but do you fast Wednesdays and Fridays, and give the rest of your meat to the Poor, &c.

12. Thus said he,* 1.256 and it misliked greatly the Magdeburgians to hear so much talk of Fasting. And from this complaint they pass to another against all the Fa∣thers of that Age, saying, De Martyrio nimis magnificè sentire caeperunt; The Do∣ctors of this Age did begin to have too magnificent an Opinion of Martyrdom.* 1.257 And about the Consecrating of Virgins to Christ, they mislike greatly certain speeches of St. Ignatius; as for example, Ep. ad Antiochen. Virgines videant, cui se

consecrarint; Let Virgins consider well, to whom they have consecrated them∣selves. And again, Epist. ad Thrasen. Eas, quae in Virginitate sunt, honorate, sicut sacras Christo; Do you honor them that live in Virginity, as consecrated unto Christ. And yet further, in his Epist. ad Hieronem. Virgines custodi, tan∣quam Sacramenta Christi; Have care to keep Virgins as Sacraments of Christ. Which kind of Speeches misliking our Magdeburgians, they say, That they were an occasion,* 1.258 and opened the way to those things, which afterwards were thereupon foun∣ded, concerning Cloisters and Vows.

13. In the next Age after, to wit, the third, they also complain greatly of the same things, and many other the like As namely about Chastity and Virgi∣nity,* 1.259 Nimium praedicari & extolli Continentiam; That Continency and Chastity was too much commended and extolled. And they are so earnest against Ter∣tullian,* 1.260 Origen, and Cyprian, for this matter, (especially the latter) as they do accuse the Holy Man for hatred to Womankind, saying, Ex professo quasi ubique detestatur multebrem sexum; He doth every-where almost even of purpose detest Womankind. But in what sense, I pray you? In no other point (without doubt) but that he had no desire to have a Sister for himself, as each of our German-Ministers may be presumed to have. But why is this false slander of detesting Womankind laid upon holy St. Cyprian by these good Fellows? For∣sooth,* 1.261 for that he praised so much Virginity, affirming, as they alledge him, That Virginity doth equal it self to Angels; yea, if we do examin well the matter, we shall find it to exceed Angels; for that, contrary to Nature, it getteth a Victory in Flesh,* 1.262 against Flesh, which Angels do not. And again, in another place, Albeit Marriage be good, and instituted by God, yet Continency is better, and Virginity ex∣ceedeth all. Behold the cause why these Protestants affirm St. Cyprian to have hated the Feminine Sex.

* 1.26314. They say also of Martyrdom, that the Fathers of this Age spoke immode∣rately thereof: Martyrium immodicè extulerunt omnes hujus aetatis Doctores; All the Doctors of this Age did praise immoderately Martyrdom. And then a∣gain,* 1.264 of Invocation of Saints, Videas in Doctorum hujus saeculi scriptis non obscura vestigia invocationis Sanctorum; You may see in the Writings of the Doctors of this second Age clear steps of Invocation or Prayer to Saints. And then of Pur∣gatory, Semina I urgatorii in aliquot locis apud Originem subinde sparsa videas; You may see the Seeds of Purgatory dispersed in this Age in the Writings of Origen. And you must note, that these good Fellows do speak by diminutives of purpose, calling it signs or footsteps of Prayer to Saints, and Seeds of Purgatory, and the like. But presently in the next Age they accuse openly, and by name, St. Athanasius,* 1.265 St. Basil, St. Gregory Nazianzen, St. Ambrose, Prudentius, Epipha∣nius and Ephrem, eight great Doctors, and principal Guides of the Christian Church,* 1.266 for this Error of Praying to Saints. They accuse also, for express holding of Purgatory, Lactantius, Prudentius, and St. Hierom, in the same Age.

* 1.26715. They accuse all the Doctors of this Age for attributing too much to Tra∣ditions and Observations of the Church, especially about Monastical Life, Vir∣ginity, honoring the Memory and Reliques of Martyrs. And they are so earnest and impudent in these fancies of theirs, as having cited the Fathers Sentences against themselves, they cannot let them pass without intollerable reproachful words: So do they accuse holy Athanasius of Superstition for commending Vir∣ginity.* 1.268 And having alledged a long place of St. Basil in praise of Monastical Life, they add this Censure, Quae quidem omnia & praeter, & contra Scripturam sunt;* 1.269 All which words (of St. Basil) are both besides and contrary to holy Scripture. Then take they in hand St. Ambrose, saying, Nimis insolenter pro∣nunciat de Virginum meritis Ambrosius: Ambrose doth pronounce too too inso∣lently of the merits of Virgins.* 1.270 And for that holy Ephrem had said, That all pious people shall come merrily in the Day of Judgment before the face of Christ, but

especially Monks, and other such as have lived in Desarts in Chastity, Labors, Watch∣ings, Fastings, and the like. These good Fellows, whose greatest Labors of Penance have been to drink and be merry in warm Stows, saying,* 1.271 Quid potest monstrosius dici contra meritum Christi? What can be spoken more monstrously against the merit of Christ? And then to a Godly Speech of St. Ambrose,* 1.272 about the pious honoring of Martyrs Tombs, they give this Censure, Cogitet pius Le∣ctor, quàm tetra sint ista; Let the Godly Reader consider how horrible these things are, uttered by Ambrose.

16. And in another place, upon certain words of St. Ambrose about the holy Cross found out by St. Helena, they have in their injurious Speeches, Multa commemor at superstitiosa, quae vehementer contumeliosa sunt in meritum Christi, & repugnantia Fidei; Ambrose doth reckon up many superstitious things, which are greatly contumelious against the merit of Christ, and are contrary to Faith. And thus they go forward against the rest of the Doctors and Fathers that a∣gree not with them in their Fancies and Heresies; and generally having sought to discredit, about the Article of Justification and Good Works, this fourth Age after Christ, and the chief Doctors thereof by name, as Lactantius, Gregory Nyssen, Hilarius, Nazianzen, Ambrose, and Ephrem; they conclude with this contumely against them all: Jam cogitet pius Lector,* 1.273 quàm procul haec aetas in hoc Articulo, de Apostolorum Doctrina desciverit; Let the Godly Reader now consi∣der how far this fourth Age departed from the Doctrin of the Apostles in this Article of Good Works and Justification.

17. Well then,* 1.274 in all these points of Controversie between Us and the Prote∣stants, to wit, the Primacy and Principality of the Church and Bishop of Rome, the Sacrament and Sacrifice of the Altar, otherwise called the Mass, Freewill, Justification, Penance, Merit of Good Works, Traditions, observing of Fasts, Holydays, Sacred Virginity, Continency, Monastical Life, Prayer to Saints, Purgatory, Memory and Reliques of Martyrs, and other like, (which in effect are the principal points wherein the Protestants do disagree from us) we see by the testimony and witness of their own men that the ancient Fathers of Eleuthe∣rius's days, and the next two Ages after him (for I go no lower) did wholly agree with us against them; and this so far forth, as the Magdeburgians do say more than once of all the Doctors of the second Age after Christ, (wherein Eleutherius lived) That they erred, and lived in darkness, for that they held with us, as now you have heard.* 1.275 And with what face then doth John Fox say a lit∣tle before, Let them but leave us the Religion that was in Eleutherius's time, and we will ask no more? With what forehead also doth Sir Francis, his Scholar, add,* 1.276 I say there is not now the same Faith in Rome that was then; there were then no Masses, no Ʋniversal Pope, &c.? But with such men do we deal, that care not what they say or deny, so they may bear out the matter for the present, and seem always to have somewhat to say.

18. But now will we leave this, and pass to another Conversion under St. Gregory the Great, which concerneth us English-men more particularly than the former; whereabout you shall see no less Heretical Fraud and Malignity used than in the other before-mentioned, if not more; for that these people finding all Antiquity against them, and having no other Authorities for proof of their Religion, but only their own Inventions, with some light shew of Scripture expounded by themselves, are forced to use most shameful and de∣sperate shifts, when their Cause is examined by the Histories of former Ages. And so much of this point.

CHAP. VIII.

Of the third Conversion of our Island and English Nation by St. Augu∣stin and his fellows sent from Pope Gregory the first, Anno 596. And of divers Heretical Shifts and Impudences to deface the said two excel∣lent Men, and the Religion brought into England with them.

YOu have heard the two Shifts before used about the first public Conversion of Britanny by Pope Eleutherius, to wit, first of all to discredit this Sto∣ry so much as in them lay, and then being forced to grant it, their last Re∣fuge was to say, that the same Faith was not then in Rome that is now, nor that the Points of Doctrin now believed and taught, were known and ac∣knowledged then. Both which Shifts have been most evidently refuted, and the same Religion shewed to have been in Rome under Pope Eleutherius, which at this day is there taught.

2. But now there remaineth the other public Conversion of the English Nation from Pope Gregory under King Ethelbert of Kent some four hundred years or more after the other, in which neither of the two former Shifts can be used by our Adversaries. For neither can they deny or bring in doubt the History it self, recorded by all Writers of that time, and since, (and namely and most abundantly by our Countrymen St. Bede,* 1.277 and his Continuator William of Malmesbury, and others) nor can they say that the Faith of Rome then derived into England, was any other than that, which is now in Rome. Which latter Point, he that will see proved substantially, and examined Article by Article, and Point by Point, by conferring the Doctrin, Rites and Ceremonies brought into England by our said Apostle Augustin, with that which at this day is taught and practised in the Roman Churh; let him read the Translation of the said Story of Bede, put into English by our famous learned Countryman M. Do∣ctor Stapleton, with his notes to the same, and the learned Treatise, which thereon, and by that Occasion he made, Intituled, The Fortress of Faith, which sheweth the same to be conform likewise to all Antiquity.

3. Wherefore our wily Knight Sir Francis seeing this, hath answered not one Sentence or Syllable in this his Reply or Wast-word, to this Conversion of Englishmen under Pope Gregory, tho I urged the same somewhat earnestly in my Ward-word. And yet for that upon other Occasions, he saith once or twice in his Book, That Augustin brought in the Romish Religion: as tho the Romish Religion had been different at that day from that of the Christian Bri∣tans; and for that his Master John Fox (out of whom he hath stolen all this Story) runneth also to this Shift upon divers Occasions: I am forced to say somewhat thereunto in this place.

* 1.2784. You must then understand, that Fox and his Fellows being excluded from the former two Shifts (as I have said) and yet forced to use somewhat against this evident Deduction of our English Faith from the See of Rome, they betake themselves to other Refuges, as absurd, or rather more, than the former. The first whereof is, to discredit by all means, they can devise, the Authors of this Conversion, to wit, St. Gregory the Pope, and St. Augustin our Apostle. About this time,* 1.279 (saith Fox) departed Gregory Bishop of Rome, of whom it is said; that of the number of all the first Bishops before him in the Primitive Church, he was the basest, and of all them that came after him he was the best.

* 1.2805. Lo here Envy and Malice how blind they are; for as for Baseness, if he means in Blood or Worldly Honor, it might perhaps with more probability have been attributed to all, or any of the Popes that were before him, than to

Gregory, who was (as is known) the Son of a most Noble and Rich Senator Gordianus, as all Authors do testifie.* 1.281 Whose Palace on the Hill Scaurus near to that of the Emperours, is at this day a fair Church and Monastery; and this Man being his Fathers Heir, built with his own Substance seven Monasteries, and endued them with rents before he entred into any religious Order himself. Wherefore touching Birth and wordly Wealth, this was so far off from the Baseness, wherewith Fox would disgrace him, as he might perhaps with more probability have subscribed this note (as before I said) to any other Pope from St. Peter downward, then to St. Gregory. And as for rare and singular Learn∣ing; (which impugneth also Baseness) or for Holiness of Life, (that increas∣eth much Nobility) I think John Fox dareth not to make St. Gregory inferi∣our to many Popes that went before him, tho he were no Martyr, as many of them were. So that hard it were to determine wherein this Baseness doth consist, but that the simple fellow would needs say somewhat to so great a Mans Disgrace. And for terming him the best of all that followed, this is not so much to praise him, as to dispraise the rest; or to make base and best to fall out in Tune, and so we must pass it over as an impertinent Speech.

6. But if we should stand upon the Testimonies of Antiquity in this behalf, to oppose them against John Fox, as namely Joannes Diaconus that wrote his Life, and many other after him; we should oppress the poor Fellow with Multitude of Witnesses; yet cannot we let pass two that lived in Spain at the same time, the one and the other soon after. The first is Isidorus Archbishop of Sevil, who writeth thus presently upon his Death: Gregorius Papa,* 1.282 Roma∣nae Sedis & Apostolicae Praesul, compunctione timoris Dei plenus & humilitate sum∣mus, tantoque per gratiam Spiritus Sancti scientiae lumine praeditus, ut non modo illi praesentium temporum quisquam, sed nec in praeteritis quidem par fuit unquam. Pope Gregory Bishop of the Roman and Apostolic See, being full of Compun∣ction of the Fear of God, and most high in Humility, was indued by the Holy Ghost with so great light of Knowledge, as not only any Man of the present time is equal unto him, but neither of the Ages past.

7. This is his judgment, which holy St. Hildefonsus Archbishop of Tollet, having cited in a Book of his of the same Title not long after, yieldeth as it were the Reason of this Asseveration of St. Isidore in these words:* 1.283 Ita enim cunctorum meritorum claruit perfectione sublimis, ut (exclusis omnium illustrium virorum comparationibus) nihil illi simile demonstret antiquitas. Vicit enim san∣ctitate Antonium, eloquentia Cyprianum, sapientia Augustinum, &c. For St. Gre∣gory

did shine with so high a perfection of all kind of merits, as (the com∣parisons of all other worthy Men being excluded) Antiquity hath nothing to shew like unto him, seeing that in Holiness he surpassed St. Anthony, in Eloquence St. Cyprian, in Wisdom St. Augustin, &c.

Thus wrote these Men in those days, and albeit it may seem some kind of ex∣aggerations; yet we may hereby behold the judgment of those Ages, and the sense of these two learned and holy Prelates, how different they were from John Fox and his Mates in our days, that seek so fondly to discredit so rare a Man; and this shall be sufficient for St. Gregory.

8. Now as for our Apostle St. Augustin, tho' the malice of our Heretics be ex∣ceeding great, both against his person and actions; yet is Fox oftentimes for∣ced to speak well of him and his company, as in these words:* 1.284 At length when the King (Ethelbert) had well considered the honest Conversation of their Life, and moved with the Miracles wrought through Gods hand by them, he heard them more gladly; and lastly by their wholsom Exhortations and Example of godly Life, he was by them converted and Christened in the year abovesaid 596. and the 36 of his Reign.

9. Thus writeth he there; and moreover talking of a great and special Mi∣racle wrought by St. Augustin in sight of the Britans, then his Adversaries, for confirmation of the Roman Doctrin in observing the Easter-feast, as now it is used, (which Miracle was the restoring of a blind Man to his sight, by only kneeling down and praying to God for him in the presence of the multitude whose Prelates had attempted the like before, but could not atchieve it) he saith,* 1.285 that the stories both of Bede and Polychronicon, Huntington Iornalen∣sis, Fabian, and other more do agree in this matter; And yet in the very next Page following, he goeth about to discredit him by all means possibl••, and to diminish the Opinion of Sanctity in him: For talking of a certain meeting of seven Britan Bishops with him, where they say St. Austin being now made Archbishop and Primate of England, would not raise nor move his Body at their coming in, Fox writeth thus, Much less would his Pharisaical Solemnity have girded himself as Christ did, and wash his Brethrens feet after their journey, but how knoweth John Fox this?* 1.286 Hear his Reason; Seeing his Lordship was so high, or rather so heavy, or rather so proud, that he could not find in his heart to give them a little moving of his Body, &c.

By this is his Affection seen to the Man, and also by that he would gladly bring him in some manner of suspition, to have been some part of the cause of the slaughter of the Britan Monks of Bangor, slain by Ethelfred a Heathen King of Northumberland, for that they come to Chester to pray against him. Whereas Fox himself notwithstanding doth confess, that both Huntington and other Authors (and he might have said also Bede himself) do say,* 1.287 that St. Au∣gustin was dead when this slaughter happened, nor could any way this matter appertain unto him, or to any occasion given by him; yet doth another Com∣panion of John Fox go further, and more maliciously against this holy Man our.* 1.288 Apostle, to wit, John Bale the Apostate Frier, who writeth thus: Augu∣stinus Romanus à Gregorio primo ad Anglosaxones papistica fide initiandos Aposto∣lus mittebatur. "Augustin the Roman was sent as an Apostle from Gregory the first, to convert the English-Saxons to a Popish Faith. Behold here, how an∣cient Papists, the Catholics of England, are by this Mans Opinion.

* 1.28911. I pass over the rest of Bales false and contumelious Speech concerning St. Augustin, as that he being ignorant of the Scriptures, taught false Doctrin, and that he made himself Archbishop by violence; that he attended more to get tythes and oblations for Masses, than to preach the Gospel, and that he was cause of the slaughter of 1200 Monks, and other such like reproachful lies; against whom I could propose the whole stream of the best Authors ever since his time, both domesti∣cal and extern, if it were worth the striving with so contemptible an Adver∣sary: and if nothing would restrain the Liberty of so reproachful a Tongue; yet at leastways the respect of our Nation converted by him, and so many great miracles wrought by him to that effect, as both St. Bede and others do recount, and Fox dareth not deny, ought to have some bridle to this shameless Apostata. For that not only St. Bede, Malmesbury, Marianus, Scotus, Sigebert, and others do recount them;* 1.290 but even St. Gregory himself wrote the same by his own pen to Eulogius Archbishop of Alexandria, who had written unto him of some like miracles wrought in Egypt also about that time, in the Conversion of new Christians. St. Gregory's words are these,

* 1.29112. Sed quoniam &c.

But for that truly the good, which they do there, is much encreased by the joy you take in other mens good also: I will requite you with the like good News, as you have written to me. Know then, that whereas the English Nation placed in the corner of the World, have remained hitherto in their Infidelity, worshipping stones and blocks, I did by the help of your Prayers these days past (God as I hope, moving me thereunto) send unto that Nation a Monk of my Monastery to preach unto them; who upon

my License afterward being made Bishop in the Countreys near unto them,* 1.292 arrived at last unto that end of the world. And now Letters are come unto us both of his Health, and his Work that he hath in Hand; and surely either he, or they that were sent over with him, do work so many miracles in that Nation, as they may seem therein to imitate the Power and Miracles of the Apostles themselves; and in this very last Solemnity of Christ's Nativity past, there were above ten thousand Englishmen baptized by the hands of this our Brother and fellow Bishop, &c.

13. Thus far St. Gregory, who is another manner of Witness than Fox or Bale, tho Fox doth confess (as you have heard before) both the vertuous Life and Miracles of St. Augustin and his fellows. And if he do so indeed, and do think them to have been wrought by Gods Power, and not by the operation of Satan; then it is great Blasphemy both in him and his fellows, to think that God would concurr by Miracles to the planting of false Doctrin and Error, which scornfully they call the Papistical Faith. Whereof now we shall treat more in particular, having disputed these things about Saint Augustin's Person.

14. About which Doctrin these good Fellows seem to quarrel much more,* 1.293 giving simple People to believe, that he brought from Rome a different Chri∣stian Religion from that, which was in Britanny before, as out of Sir Francis own words alledged may appear: And albeit John Fox in his History treating of this matter, doth not dare to affirm it plainly, but rather seeketh here and there to pick out some differences between the Roman Religion, that St. Augu∣stin brought in, and that which is now, as for example where he saith:* 1.294 Note by the way (Christian Reader) that whereas it is said that Augustin * 1.295 baptized ten thousand English Saxons upon a Christmas day in a River, it followeth (saith he) that then there was no use of Fonts, &c. Yet in a certain Preface of his, which he calleth his Protestation to the whole Church-of-England, he hath these words, All this while about the space of 400 years (after the Conversion of King Lucius) Re∣ligion remained in Britanny uncorrupt, and the Word of Christ truly preached; till about the coming of Augustin and his Companions from Rome, many of the said Bri∣tan Preachers were slain by the Saxons. And after that began the Christian Faith to enter and spring amongst the Saxons after a certain Romish sort; yet notwithstanding somewhat more tollerable than in other times, which after fol∣lowed, &c.

15. Thus writeth Fox maliciously enough (as you see) to bring in doubt and discredit our first Christian Religion, planted by St. Augustin;* 1.296 but yet hereby it is evident, that if Englishmen were ever true Christians either at their first Conversion, or for more than 900 years after, they were Roman Chri∣stians. But whether they were ever true Christians indeed or not, that Point Fox dareth not plainly to determine in this place; but only as the fashion of Hereticks is, to call matters in question and leave them in doubt, so doth he, and (as one said well) To lay the Eggs for another to hatch the Serpents. For that Fox his Scholars, Holinshed, Hooker, and Harrison, and other like, have presumed upon this foundation, to determine resolutely the matter, that Eng∣lishmen were never true Christians indeed before Luther began his Doctrin, which appeareth in these their words following,* 1.297 speaking of the Inhabitants of Britanny. When the sheep of Gods pasture (say they) would receive no wholsom fod∣der, it pleased his Majesty to let them run on headlong from one iniquity to another. Insomuch that after the Doctrin of Pelagius, they received that of Rome also, brought in by Austin and his Monks; whereby it was to be seen, how they fell from the Truth into Heresie, and from one Heresie still into another, until at last they were drowned in the pits of Error, digged up by Antichrist, &c.

* 1.29816. Thus do write these Companions, of the first Conversion of Englishmen by St. Augustin, but whether they mean of the Britans, or of Englishmen, or of both, that fell into these pits, it is not so easie to judge: For they name both to determin or distinguish neither People; and which way soever you take it, it hath not only falshood and impiety; but open contradictions also in it self. For it they mean the Britans, then it is evidently false, that they were convert∣ed by St. Augustin and his Monks. And if they mean of the English, it is much more false, that they ever received the Doctrin of Pelagius, or fell from Truth to Heresie, as these phantastical Men both ignorantly and maliciously do affirm. But let us hear yet further their blasphemous and desperate Speeches of our first Apostle St. Augustin.

* 1.299This Augustin (say they) after his arrival converted the Saxons indeed from Paganism, but as the Proverb saith, bringing them out of Gods Blessing into the warm Sun, he imbued them with no less hurtful Superstition, than they did know be∣fore.* 1.300 For beside the only Name of Christ, and external contempt of their pristin Ido∣latry, he taught them nothing at all, but rather an exchange from gross to subtil Treachery, from open to secret Idolatry, and from the name of Pagans to the bare Title of Christians, &c.

17. Lo here these Mens censures of the first Conversion of our English Nation to Christianity. They compare Paganism to Gods blessing and our new Christi∣an Religion to the warm Sun, and all our Forefathers Faith and Religion, more than 900 years together, they define to be nothing but Superstition, Trea∣chery and Idolatry, no less hurtful than the Paganism it self, which they pro∣fessed before, and that they lived and died only with the bare name of Chri∣stians without the Substance, &c. And consequently are most certainly damned all eternally. Now if the worst Devil that is found in hell had a mouth, and should be let forth to preach, curse, or scold against us, as these men do; could he speak worse or more blasphemously (think you) against the first Chri∣stianity of our Nation, or against God himself, that testified the Truth and Sanctity thereof by so many rare miracles, as before hath been shewed? Could this Divel (I say) in his own shape or language speak more opprobriously of our primitive English Christian Church, then these new Gospellers do? espe∣cially if we add that which Friar Bale hath in these words,* 1.301 Carnalis illa Anglo∣rum Synagoga, quae Roma venerat, illam persequebatur Ecclesiam, quae secundum Christi Spiritum apud Britannos erat.

That Carnal Synagogue of English Christians, that came from Rome, did persecute the Church that was in Eng∣land, according to the Spirit of Christ bfore Augustin came.

18. Behold our first Christian English Church not only call'd a Synagogue, but a carnal Synagogue: and the British Church which a little before Holin∣shed condemned (as you heard) of Heresie, is now called the true Church, ac∣cording to the Spirit of Christ. But what spiritual Man (think you) was this, that so speaketh of Spirit and condemneth our primitive English Church of Car∣nality? You shall hear him described by his own pen, and first of his Vocati∣on,* 1.302 how he became a Frier. Duodecim annorum puer (saith he) in Carmelitani Monachatus Barathrum, Nordovici detrudebar.

When I was a Boy of twelve years old at Norich, I was thrust into the pit of being a white Friar.

So he saith, and out of these words two things may be noted of his spirit, which is no doubt of lying, for that both of them are slanderous fictions of his own; first that he was made a Friar at the Age of twelve years, for that no Religious Or∣der can admit Men to the same,* 1.303 according to the Ecclesiastical Canons, but of convenient years, and fit to make their choise for so great an attempt, as is to renounce the World, and lead a Religious Life, according to the vows they make, which before the Council of Trent was at Fourteen years, whereunto the said Council added two years more. It might be then perhaps, that this

Boy was put into the White Friars Monastery at Norwich at twelve years old, to sweep the Church, or cleanse Candlesticks, or other such Offi∣ces fit for that Age, and his Person; but not to be a Friar, or to be admit∣ted into the Order it self, and much less (which is the second lie) can it be probable, that he was forced thereunto, as here he telleth his Readers; for that it is well known, that such Profession were not available, for which cause every Order of Religion hath their Noviceships, or times of Probations appoint∣ed, wherein Men are to be proved, and to prove also themselves, and to have free liberty to make their Elections, without force or constraint at all. And so do all true Religious Men know and profess, albeit this miserable Apostate having lost all spirit and sense of Religion, and become wholly carnal indeed, would have it thought that he was put into Religion against his will.

19. But how did he get himself out again, (trow you) from this Servitude into Liberty of the Flesh, World, and Devil, and of his new Gospel, you shall hear it also from himself, Apparente Dei verbo (saith he) deformitatem meam vidi,* 1.304 &c. "The Word of the Lord appearing, I saw mine own deformity of being (to wit) a Priest, and a Friar. Well, and what followed? Horribilis bestiae ma∣ledictum charecterem deinceps erasi:

I did presently then scrape out the cursed mark or character of the horrible Beast:

So he calleth his old Character of Priesthood, his Vows of Poverty, Chastity, and Obedience, and other Ob∣ligations of Religion.

20. But what was the means to scrape out these Characters? you shall have it from himself in like manner. Non enim (saith he) ab homine,* 1.305 neque per hominem, sed speciali Christi & verbo, & dono, uxorem fidelissimam accepi Dorothe∣am:

For that I took unto me (and you must mark the word enim that yield∣eth the cause) a most faithful wife. Dorothy (some Nun you may imagin, as faithful in keeping her Vow of Chastity as himself) and this not from any Man, nor by any Mans help, but by the special gift and word of Christ, &c.

Lo here Christ made a wooer for this Friar to marry a Nun against both their Vows and Promises made to him before; and is not this a fit Spi∣ritual Father to call the whole Primitive Church of England a Carnal Sy∣nagogue, &c.

21. But yet hear him out further, what he writeth of our first Christian King Ethelbert, and of the Religion receiv'd by him from St. Augustin, and thereby consider what manner of Men this new Gospel bringeth forth. Ethel∣bertus Rex (saith he) Romanismum, cum adjunctis superstitionibus tandem suscepit; hac nimirum adjectâ conditione, ut omnino liber, & non coactitius esset novus ille Deorum cultus: King Ethelbert at length having heard the Preaching,* 1.306 and

considered (as Fox saith) the Miracles and vertuous Life of St. Augustin and his Fellows, admitted the Roman Religion with all the Superstitions adjoyned thereunto; but yet with this condition, that this new worship of Gods (which he now admitted) should be altogether free, and no way sub∣ject to Coaction, &c.

In which words the Apostate (if you mark him) doth not only speak blasphemously of our whole first Christianity, calling it a new Worship of many Gods; but seemeth also to insinuate, that it was so admitted by King Ethelbert at the beginning, as it might be free for Men to leave it again, when they would. Than which contumelious slander (if he mean it so) nothing can be spoken or imagined more absurd or wicked. Let any Man read St. Gregories letters to King Ethelbert after his Conversion,* 1.307 and he shall see an other Lesson there taught him: to wit, his great and perpetual Obligation to God for so singular a Benefit, confirmed from Heaven with so ma∣ny Miracles, and such other points.

* 1.30822. But by this we may see, whither these Mens drifts do tend: which is to discredit all Antiquity and Religion, and to bring in question whether Eng∣lishmen were ever true Christians hitherto or no. And as for the space of 900 years together after St. Augustin's time unto Luther, these Men deny it flatly, for so much as they say, that our first Faith received from Rome, was not the true Faith of Christ, nor of Christendom; but a particular Romish Faith, full of Error, Superstition, and Idolatry, as you have heard; yea worse (if we will believe Holinshed, Hooker, and Harrison) than was the Paganism, which Englishmen professed before their Conversion: And then followeth, that for so much as they hold also, that the longer Religion endured in Eng∣land, the worse it waxed: needs must they conclude, that when Luther began his Gospel, our Fathers and Grandfathers were no Christians at all, and much less true Christians. And this for them.

* 1.30923. But if we will talk of our selves, that now live in England, we must needs also conclude the same: to wit, that after all Mutations made in Eng∣land about Religion, since Luther began, the Protestants cannot be sure with any Reason, that they are true Christians, or have yet received the right Faith or Gospel unto this day. Which I prove thus, First for that the Gospel preach∣ed by Luther, was never yet admitted wholly into England: For at the very beginning thereof under King Henry, it was contradicted by him and the State,* 1.310 during his whole Reign, yea condemned for Heretical, as by many De∣crees as well of Parliaments as otherwise by particular Ordinances is mani∣fest: his Majesty always holding Luther's Opinions for Heresies, and according thereunto, burned the Professors thereof for Heretics unto his dying day, as is notorious: Tho' in one Article about the Popes Supremacy he concurred with them; but not as taking the same from Luther or his Doctrin: So as Luthers Gospel (if it were a Gospel, as John Fox calleth it every where in his Acts and Monuments) was never yet received in England. For that in King Edwards days the Doctrin of Zuinglius and not of Luther was admitted. Which Do∣ctrin Luther always held for opposite to his, and for plain Heresie, as before at large hath been declared.

24. And as for her Majesties time that now is, clear it is that neither of both the former Doctrins or Gospels have formally, or fully been admitted: I mean neither the Lutherans or Zwinglians,* 1.311 but rather the Doctrin of a third, oppo∣site in many Points to them both; to wit, of John Calvin. And yet neither hath this Gospel been so frankly or generally received or practised, as the chief Professors thereof, and such as take themselves to follow the same most exactly (I mean the Puritans) do remain content, but rather complain, that their true Doctrin indeed and Gospel, was never hitherto truly established in our Country,* 1.312 as in the first Encounter against Sir Francis we have shewed abun∣dandtly.

25. So as if the first Gospel of St. Augustin, brought into England from Rome, wherewith our Ancestors lived and professed Christianity for 900 years toge∣ther, were not the true Gospel of Christ indeed, nor the other Gospel of Martin Luther, that appeared to the World in the year 1517 was ever admitted into Eng∣land in King Henry's time, that died in the year 1547. And if from thence for∣ward under King Edward, Zwinglius's Doctrin and not Luthers, was established, for the English Gospel of that time: And if under her Majesty that now is, nei∣ther of these two, but Calvins Doctrin and Gospel hath been admitted (tho' yet with such Restrictions, and Alterations, as the purest Patrons thereof say it is not their Gospel, but a patched thing, as * 1.313 before at large we have decla∣red) what followeth then (I say) but that we Englishmen have yet no true Gos∣pel at all, nor ever had, and consequently we were never yet true Christians, nor are at this day: For that the Christianity of the antient English from King

Ethelbert to King Henry VIII. was no true Christianity, as these men say; and much less will they grant of the Religion established by King Henry, as opposite as well to Protestants as to Catholics. That also of King Edward's days was different from all; and that which now is in Eng∣land, is contradicted as well by Lutherans, Zuinglians, and Puritans, as by Catholics. Where then, and among whom, shall we find the true Gospel?

26. One only shift these people do pretend, which is to run to the Britans Religion at that time, when St. Augustin came into England; for this both Fox and Bale do acknowledge to have been the right Religion, and (to use their words) the naked unspotted Gospel, and far different from the Romish Religion that Augustin brought in from Gregory: wherefore that point rest∣eth now to be examined. And albeit you have heard a little before how Ho∣linshead accuseth the Britans Religion of Pelagianism and other Heresies,* 1.314 yet Bale writeth thus: Priùs illic fuerit Christianismus, &c.

Christian Religion was in Bri∣tanny before the coming of Augustin and his Fellows: But it was not to their commodity, for that it was without Masses, and without distinction of Meats or Days; and the Britans observed the bare naked Gospel, without Jewish Ceremonies, &c.

27. So writeth he. And Fox (as before you have heard) said,* 1.315 That for 400 years after Pope Eleutherius and King Lucius, Religion remained in Bri∣tanny uncorrupt, and the Word of Christ truly preached, till about the co∣ming of Augustin and his Fellows from Rome, &c. And yet he cannot deny but that in this space both the Pelagian and other Heresies had entred also among them, and that some Reliques thereof remained even when Augustin arrived. And whereas they say, that the British Religion before the coming of Augustin was uncorrupt, and free from all Jewish Ceremonies, it is ridiculous; forasmuch as we have shewed * 1.316 before, that the chiefest difference between these two Religions at that day was about a Jewish Ceremony observ'd by the Britans, against the Order and Faith of the Church of Rome, to wit, the su∣perstitious keeping Easter day upon the fourteenth of the first Moon of March, together with the Jews.

28. But as for other substantial points of Faith, (especially such as be at this day in controversie between Us and Protestants, as Mass, Sacrifice, Fast∣ing, observing of Holydays, and the like here named) the old Britans Re∣ligion did agree with that of Rome, brought in by St. Augustin, and so hath continued until this day; and this shall we shew in the Chap∣ter following. So as if the old British Faith was the true Faith, We have it among Catholics at this day, and not Protestants, as shall be de∣clared.

CHAP. IX.

That the Roman Religion, brought into England by St. Augustin under Pope Gregory, was the very same that was brought in before under Pope Eleutherius by Fugatius and Damianus, and continued after∣ward among the Britans until the coming of St. Augustin to the English Nation.

WE have shewed before how that the Christian Faith, preached in Eng∣land in the Apostles time, was the Roman Faith; and that the in∣crease, or public Establishment thereof again under King Lucius, was also from Rome;* 1.317 and finally, that the third propagation was in like manner from the same City, under Pope Gregory by St. Augustin. Now remaineth it that we shew and declare how the Britans, from King Lucius's time until the coming of St. Augustin (which was 400 years, and more) downward, did not alter their Faith, nor yet the See of Rome Hers; and con∣sequently, that the Faith remaining among the Britans when St. Augustin en∣tred, and that which was brought in by Him from Rome, and taught unto the English, was all one.

* 1.3182. And first for the Church of Rome, if we count the Bishops thereof that held that Seat from Eleutherius, the fourteenth Pope after St. Peter, who died Anno Domini 196, until the beginning of Pope Gregory I. the sixty-sixth Pope, who was chosen Anno Domini 590: In this space (I say) of 400 years, there passed fifty Popes all of one Faith; nor shall it be found that any one of them changed his Religion, or was different in belief the one from the other; which is a sufficient proof that the Roman Faith in Gregory's time was the same that it was in Eleutherius's time.

3. And as for the Britans, we read not but that from the time of King Lu∣cius they continu'd the Faith receiv'd under him from Pope Eleutherius, until the rising up of the Heretic Pelagius, which was somewhat more than 200 years after; and for other 200 years again after that, to wit, from the time of Pela∣gius until the coming of St. Augustin, we find not in any History that the Bri∣tans (being once deliver'd from the Heresie of Pelagius by the help of St. German and Lupus,* 1.319 Bishops of the Roman Faith) ever changed their Religion in any one substantial point; nor that they swerv'd from the general Faith of the rest of Christendom, except only some few of them infected with the fore∣said Heresie whiles it lasted, and the Custom of keeping Easter-day with the Jews: Which before we have shewed to have been perhaps some remainder of Pelagianism, or otherwise brought in after. But howsoever it got in, cer∣tain it is, that in other substantial points of Doctrin and Religion, there was no difference between the Britans and Romans at that day, to wit, un∣der Pope Gregory that sent hither Augustin; which I shew by the Reasons fol∣lowing.

[Reason I] 4. First, That if St. Augustin at his coming had found any other substan∣tial difference of Belief in the British Faith, from that which he brought from Rome, he would have reprehended the same, as well as he did their different Custom in celebrating Easter after the Jewish manner, and some few other Rites of less moment; or at leastwise, being afterward made Archbishop and Primate of all the Land, and conferring with the British Bishops in Council, (as Fox saith he did) he would have communed with them about the same, or objected it unto them,* 1.320 or at leastwise have made some mention thereof,

either in his Letters to Pope Gregory (as he did of far lesser matters) or to some other man. But any such thing we do not read; and consequently it may be concluded certainly, that there was no such difference in matter of Faith and Doctrin.

5. Another Reason may be taken on the other side, from the Britans towards [Reason II] St. Augustin; who being in Controversie with him about his preaching to the Saxons, whose Conversion for the present they seemed not to desire (in respect of many injuries receiv'd from them, as St. Bede affirmeth) they did observe all Occasions, Causes, and Reasons, which they might alledge by any proba∣bility, why they would not joyn with him in that Work; and if they could have alledged this Cause, That the Doctrin which he preached had been diffe∣rent in any one point from that which they had received and observed before, it had been a very sufficient excuse and reason for them. But we do find no such exception alledged by them, and consequently we may conclude (as before) that there was none.

6. Our third Argument or Reason may be deduced from the consideration of [Reason III] the Universal State of Christian Faith in those days, to wit, under Gregory I. who was chosen Pope about the year of Christ 590, at what time there was Unity and Conformity of one Religion throughout all Christendom, except only in some places of the World certain Reliques of a 1.321 Pelagians, b 1.322 Origenists, c 1.323 Dona∣tists, and d 1.324 Eutychians, out of whom sprung also in those days the e 1.325 Arminian Errors, as appeareth by the History of those times, especially out of St. Gre¦gory's own Works. Neither do we read that the Britans were noted with any of these Heresies, but only with Pelagianism some years before; from which they had been deliver'd by the Preaching of the French Bishops St. German and St. Lupus, and by the diligence of their own Metropolitans St. Dubritius and St. David afterward. Seeing then St. Augustin came from Rome by Italy and France, and was directed to the Bishop of Arles,* 1.326 from whom he passed through France into Britanny; it is certain he brought no other Faith than the Univer∣sal Faith of Christendom receiv'd and believ'd in those days: From which seeing that Britanny was not held nor noted to be different, nor yet Excommunicated, (as certain Bishop of Ireland appear to have been by divers Letters of St. Gre∣gory himself,* 1.327 written to them in their reprehension for participation with cer∣tain Schismatics;) it followeth, that the Faith which St. Augustin brought, and that which the Britans had before, must needs be one and the self-same in all material and substantial points.

7. To which effect also may be added, That in the very next Age among [Reason IV] the Britans, before the English entred,* 1.328 there were British Bishops in divers General and National Councils; as in the time of Constantine and Pope Syl∣vester we read, That one Restitutus, a famous Bishop of London, was present at the Synod of Arles in France, in the year of Christ 325, and subscribed to the same, as by the Acts of the said Council appeareth;* 1.329 wherein among other points was ordained, That no man having a Wife should be made a Priest without his Wifes consent, promising to forbear her Company for the time to come. It appeareth also by the Apology of St. Athanasius,* 1.330 that divers Bishops of Britanny were present at the Council of Sardica, held for St. Athanasius against the Arians, about the year of Christ 350; as also the Council of Ariminum, wherein tho' the greater part of that Council were beguil'd by the Arians, yet St. Hilary doth praise divers good Bishops for their Constancy, and among other, Provinciarum Britannicarum Episcopos, certain Bishops of the Britan Provinces. By all which is shewed, that the Christian Religion of Britanny was Catholic and Universal, and concurring in all points with the Roman in those days, as Athanasius and St. Hilary, who praised these Bishops,* 1.331 are known to have done; and consequently it cannot be presumed that either the British

Religion should be different from the Roman in the next Ages after, when St. Gregory sent St. Augustin to convert the English, or that the Roman Re∣ligion brought in by St. Augustin should be different from the British, except only in certain Rites or Reliques of Pelagianism, which yet were not gene∣rally received of all, as before hath been declared.

[Reason V] * 1.3328. The fifth Argument standeth upon some Observations taken out of Hi∣stories, and other Monuments of Antiquity; whereby it may be gathered more or less what points of Religion, among such as are now called in Contro∣versie by Protestants, were believed in those days by the ancient Britans. For albeit the Story of that Church before the coming of St. Augustin be not so left written by any authentical Writer, as were to be wished, and as other Coun∣treys have (and namely ours by St. Bede) and this in respect of the manifold Wars, great Miseries, and continual Calamities fallen upon the British Nation for 200 years together before the Conversion of the English, (whereby neither the orderly Succession of their Bishops, neither their meeting in Synods and Councils, neither the observation of Ecclesiastical Discipline, neither their Communication with the Churches of other Countreys, and especially the See of Rome, could be so well performed or recorded) yet of the small Spar∣kles and Reliques that do remain, it is not hard to guess (besides the Reasons and Considerations before-alledged) what Religion the Britans were of, and whether their Faith agreed more with the Protestants of our days, than with the Religion of St. Augustin brought in from Rome, and continu'd by Catholics unto this present.

* 1.3339. For first, if we will hear external Authors, St. Chrysostom testifieth against the Gentiles in his days, that in Britanny there were Altari a Christi dedicata, Altars dedicated to Christ; which Altars do infer Sacrifice, and Sacrifice Priest∣hood, as in his Books de Sacerdotio he proveth. So as in St. Chrysostom's Age, which was the very same wherein the Saxons entred into Britanny, the Britans Religion was Catholic, according to St. Chrysostom, agreeing as well with the Western as Eastern Church, whereof himself was. For if they had been different, or had followed any other Religion than the Common, he would not so much have bragged of them, as against the Gentiles he did.

10. But let us return to British Authors themselves. If we read over with attention the little Treatise or Epistle of Gildas, which he writeth of the De∣struction and Conquest of his Countrey, (he being the only Author indeed of entire credit which we find extant of those ancient times) we shall find signs and footsteps enough what Religion the Britans were of, tho' his purpose was not to write any Ecclesiastical History. He lived a good while before the co∣ming of St. Augustin, and in the second part of his said Treatise reprehendeth grievously the most horrible sins of the Britans, for which these Calamities of the Picts, Scots, and Saxons, came upon them. And he beginneth his complaint first of their Kings and Judges, saying, Reges habet Britannia, sed Tyrannos; Judices habet,* 1.334 sed impios; crebro jurantes, sed perjurantes, voventes, sed continuò propemodum mentientes:

Britanny hath Kings, but they are become Tyrants; it hath Judges, but they are impious; swearing often, but forswearing; making Vows, but presently almost breaking the same, &c.

11. Here we see that breaking of Vows was held for no small sin in those days.* 1.335 But he goeth further, talking of the said Princes; Inter Altaria jurando demorantes, & haec eadem ac si lutulenta paulò pòst saxa despicientes, cujus tam ne∣fandi piaculi non ignarus est Constantinus:

They run to the Altar and swear, (when they are in necessity) and a little after they despise the said Altars again, as if they were but dirty Stones, of which wicked Sacrilege King Con∣stantine is not ignorant, &c.

Here you see Altars made of Stone in those

days, and Princes accustomed to swear by Altars, and to seek their Refuge in peril or necessity by running to them, and staying by them in Sanctuary, or when they would do any act with religious solemnity; and that it was count∣ed a heinous sin to break promises made upon Altars in those days; which yet Protestants make no scruple of.

12. But now what this Oath of King Constantine was, (whereof Gildas speaketh) and in what form it was made, it appeareth in the next words after, which amongst other are these:* 1.336 Hoc anno post horribile juramenti Sacra∣mentum, quo se devinxit, &c. Deo primum, Sanctorum demum Choris, & Gene∣trici comitantibus, &c. latera Regiorum tenerrima puerorum vel praecordia crude∣liter inter ipsa (ut dixi) sacrosancta Altaria nefando ense, hasta{que} prodentibus lace∣ravit; ita ut Sacrificii coelestis sedem & purpurea pallia coagulati cruoris attinge∣rent, &c.

Even this year, after a most dreadful Oath, whereby Constan∣tine bound himself, &c. first to God, and then to the whole Choir of Saints, and the Mother of Christ accompanying the same, &c. he pierced with his wick∣ed Sword and Spear the most tender sides and hearts of two young Princely Children; and this so near to the holy Altars, as their Purple Cloaks all besprinkled with Blood did touch the seat of the heavenly Sacrifice, &c.

Behold here an Oath broken, which was made to God upon the holy Altars, in the sight of his Mother, and of all the Saints of Heaven, for the preser∣vation of the said two Princely Children committed to Constantine, and most cruelly murder'd by him, even at the side of the said Altars, so near that their Purple Cloaks did touch the seat of the heavenly Sacrifice. Which is the same phrase that other ancient Fathers did use to describe holy Altars; calling them the Seat of the blessed Sacrifice, or (which is all one) the Seat of the Body and Blood of our Saviour. Quid est enim Altare,* 1.337 (saith Optatus) nisi sedes Corporis & Sanguinis Christi? What is an Altar, but the seat of the Body and Blood of Christ?

13. And now I would ask our men, whether these speeches of Gildas do agree better to Protestants Religion or to Ours? Would any Protestant speak or write thus? But let us hear how he goeth forward against another Britan Prince of that time, called Aurelius: Among many other Crimes,* 1.338 he object∣eth this: Propriâ uxore pulsâ, furciferam germanam ejus, perpetuam Deo vidui∣tatis castimoniam promittentem, suscipis;

Thou having driven away thine own Wife, takest unto thee her wicked Sister, which had promised to God per∣petual Chastity of Widowhood.

And then to another wicked Prince,* 1.339 Ma∣glocunus, he objecteth, That having made a Vow to be a Monk, he returned to the World again, saying, Coram omnipotente Deo, Angelicis vultibus, huma∣nisque, perpetuò Monachum vouisti, &c. O quàm profusus spei coelestis fomes despe∣ratorum cordibus (te in bonis permanente) inardesceret! ô qualia, quantáque animum tuum Regni Christi praemia in die Judicii manerent! &c.

Thou didst vow to be a perpetual Monk before Almighty God, in the sight both of Angels and Men. O how great a flame of heavenly-hope would burn in the hearts of them that now despair of thee, if thou hadst remained in that good state! O how great Rewards of Christ's Kingdom would remain for thee in the day of Judgment, &c.

14. Thus saith he. And would Protestants (think you) speak thus also, seeing John Fox doth so greatly condemn our ancient Kings and Princes of the English Nation,* 1.340 for that so many of them in the fervour of the Primitive Church, made themselves Monks? Yet Gildas (you see) on the contrary side, commendeth highly that Fact in the Prince Maglocunus, and greatly con∣demneth him for leaving that holy state: And hereby also is refuted that foolish refuge of Fox and his Companions, who say and affirm without shame,

that Monks had no Vows in those days; but only that Monasteries were Schooles and places of Learning without any Obligation to persevere therein, or to abstain from Marriage, &c. But let him shew, that every one of those 2000 Monks, that he saith lived in the Monastery of Bangor together, did ever marry, or pretend to have Liberty so to do after they were professed Monks, and then he saith somewhat. And as for vowing and public profession made to God in the sight of his Angels, and the whole Church: the matter is evi∣dent enough in this place, what was then in use among the Britans.

* 1.34115. But let us pass from Princes to Priests. What saith Gildas of them? You shall hear his Words: Sacerdotes habet Britannia, sed insipientes, &c. Eccle∣siae domus habentes, sed turpis lucri gratia eas adeuntes, &c. rarò sacrificantes, & nunquam puro corde inter altaria stantes, &c. Sedem Petri Apostoli immundis pe∣dibus usurpantes, &c.

Britanny hath Priests, but without Wisdom, &c. They possess the houses of the Church, but go unto them only for filthy lucre's sake, &c. They do seldom sacrifice, but never go to the Altar with a pure heart, &c. They do usurp the Seat of Peter the Apostle, with unclean feet, &c.

16. Lo here, Massing and Sacrificing Priests in those days, which are so hated and persecuted at this day in England, tho', God be thanked, free from these Vices of impure Life,* 1.342 which here is objected to the Priests of that time. But let us hear yet Gildas further: In Apostolicis sanctionibus ob inscitiam he∣betes, They are dull in observing Apostolical Sanctions, for that they are un∣learned and understand them not. Lo here Priests reprehended for lack of skill in the Ecclesiastical Canons, and Apostolical Decrees. And yet he goeth further: Desperatiùs errant, quo non ab Apostolis, vel Apostolorum successoribus, sed à Tyrannis,* 1.343 & à patre eorum diabolo emunt sacerdotia, These Men do err the more desperately,* 1.344 for that they buy unto themselves the Office of Priesthood not of the Apostles or their Successors (as Simon Magus would have done the Holy Ghost) but of Tyrant Princes, and of the Devil their Father.

17. Here you see that Priesthood in those days was not wont to be given by the Authority of Lay Princes, but by the Successors of the Apostles, to wit, Bishops. And then further he goeth forward shewing how these naughty Priests, being once possessed of that Dignity, and made proud thereby, presu∣med to say Mass unworthily:* 1.345 Manus non tam venerabilibus aris, quam flammis inferni ultricibus dignas, in tale schema positi sacrosanctis Christi sacrificiis exten∣suri,

These Priests being once put in this Dignity or Ornament, they presume to stretch out their hands to the most holy Sacrifices of Christ, tho their hands be more worthy of the burning flames of hell, than to touch the venera∣ble Altars.

* 1.34618. Thus he wrote of Altars and Sacrifice among the Britans in those days, and divers other Points like unto this, which for brevity's sake I omit; only I would ask our Men in general, whether this be spoken as of Protestants or no? And then would I demand of John Fox in particular how that can be true which he affirmeth; That the Britans had no Mass in those days, seeing Gil∣das talketh so much of Priests that did Sacrifice upon Altars? And if he will say that Gildas useth not the word Mass, it is a plain Cavil, seeing nothing is signified by the Mass, but only the external Sacrifice of Christians here men∣tioned. And that the word Mass was generally used in the Latin Church for Sacrifice long before this time of Gildas, appeareth by many Authors, but es∣pecially by St. * 1.347 Augustin the Doctor, in divers places of his works, whereof some in the Margent we shall note.

19. I would ask also of John Bale, how the Religion of the Britans was the pure and naked Gospel in those days (for so he saith) if it had in it not only that

custom of the Jews before mentioned of the Quartadecimani; but all these other Points also, which his Church counteth for Errors, to wit, of Professed Monks, and Consecrated Nuns, of Sacrificing upon Altars, and the like, how (I say) could this British Church be accounted by him and his, so pure and unspotted? But little heed is there to be given to these Mens saying or unsaying, but as the pre∣sent occasion of necessity urgeth them. And therefore we will go forward to shew some other Observations in this kind.

CHAP X. The continuation of the same matter, wherein is shewed, by divers Proofs and Examples, that the Britans before St. Gregory's time, were of the same Religion that he sent into England by St. Augustin, to wit, of the Roman.

AND first of all to begin with the first Entrance of our first English Apostles, St. Bede writing of the City of Canterbury, at the coming of St. Augu∣stin, before King Ethelbert was converted, saith thus,* 1.348 Erat autem propè ipsam civitatem ad orientem, Ecclesia in honorem St. Martini antiquitus facta, dum ad∣huc Romani Britanniam incolerent, &c. In hac ergo ipsi primò convenire, psallere, orare, Missas facere, praedicare & baptizare coeperunt,* 1.349

There was a Church near to the City on the East side, built in old time in the honor of St. Martin, while yet the Romans did hold Brittany, &c. Wherefore in this Church, Augustin and his company did first use to meet together, to sing Psalms, to Pray, to say Masses, to preach, and to baptize the People, &c.

2. Note here, that seeing the Romans left England presently upon the destru∣ction of Rome by the Goths (to wit about the year of Christ 400 which was some fifty years before the entrance of the Saxons) then was the use of build∣ing Churches in the Honor of Saints in practise among the Britans and Roman Christians of those days living in Britanny. And forasmuch as this Church of St Martins was found fit to say Mass, and Baptize in,* 1.350 according to the use of Rome, and for that the Britan Christians were never found to have reprehen∣ded, or misliked this manner of serving God, used by St. Augustin and his Fel∣lows: it is an evident Argument, that the same was and had been in use also among them from all Antiquity: neither was it a novelty brought in by St. Augustin.

3. Moreover about the same time of the Romans going out of Britanny, or soon after (to wit, about the year of Christ 440) it appeareth by Bede, that the two French Bishops, St. German and St. Lupus the first time,* 1.351 and St. German and St. Severus the second time, came into Britanny to resist the Pelagian Here∣sie and to reestablish the Catholic Faith that was among them before. And so they did as well by working many Miracles, as by their Preachings, which Bede recounteth at large throughout many Chapters.* 1.352 But now that these three holy Bishops, (the first of Antisiodore in France, the second of Troy in Campany, the third of Trevers in Germany) were all of the Roman Religion, and held in all Points of Controversie against the Protestants of our Time,* 1.353 both in Doctrin and Practise, is evident, not only by that the Roman Church doth hold them all three for Canoniz'd Saints, and celebrateth their Memories, the First upon the 31 of July, the Second upon the 29 of the same Month, the Third upon the 15 of October, which would never be permitted if they had

been different in any one Point of Faith; but also the same is clear, as well by their own Writings that are extant, and by their Lives written by others, as also by divers things recounted by St. Bede in his Story of their Doings in England: as namely where he writeth of St. German, how he cured the Tribu∣nes Daughter of Blindness by his Prayer,* 1.354 and by applying the Relics of cer∣tain Saints unto her Eyes in the sight of all the People. Deinde (saith he) Germanus plenus Spiritu sancto; &c.

Then St. German full of the Holy Ghost, did invoke the Name of the Blessed Trinity, and presently took from his side a certain Box of Saints Relics, that he was wont to carry about his neck, and with his hands did put them upon the maids eyes, which out of hand received perfect sight therewith. Whereat the Parents of the maid rejoyced exceedingly, and all the People did tremble at the sight of the miracle, &c.

4. Thus writeth St. Bede of that Act. And further that the said Bishop went to the Sepulcher of St. Alban (which even at that time appeareth to have been kept with great Devotion) prayed to the Saint largely, and there left in his Sepulcher part of the Relics of all the Apostles, and of divers other Saints, which he had brought with him out of France, and carried away with him, in exchange thereof, much of the earth that was died with the Blood of St. Alban. Which he would not have done if he had been a Protestant. And then yet further, talking of another famous Miracle and Victory achieved by the said St. German against Heretics, with sounding out the word Alleluia, St. Bede saith,* 1.355 Aderant Quadragesimae venerabiles dies, quos religisiores reddebat praesentia sacerdotum, &c. The venerable days of Lent were come, which the presence of these Priests (of God) made more religious, &c.

5. Behold here now almost 200 years before St. Augustin came into England, the use of Relics of Saints, of praying to Martyrs, and honoring their Sepulchers, the use of Alleluia, the Religious Observation of Lent, and such other Points re∣corded to be in practise among the Christian Britans. Is this Protestant-like, think you? or can these men be presumed to have been of our new Religi∣on? But let us proceed to talk of some Britan Teachers and Pastors them∣selves.

6. Geffrey of Monmouth in his British Story, much esteemed and alledged by our Adversaries, writeth, that at a certain Feast of Pentecost at Chester, about the year of Christ 522. (as Bale holdeth) King Arthur being present, there was a great meeting of Princes,* 1.356 Lords, and Bishops for his Coronation, and that of the three Archbishops of Britanny at that time (which were London, York, and Chester) Dubritius Archbishop of Chester did the Office of the Church that day, of whom he saith, Hic Britannia Primas, & Apostolicae Sedis Legatus, tantâ religione clarebat, ut quemcunque languore gravatum, orationibus sanaret. This Man being Primate of Britanny, and Legate of the See Apostolic, was so famous for his Religion and Sanctity, as he did heal any sick Man by his Prayers.

7. Lo here the Popes Legate among the Britans did also Miracles before the coming of St. Augustin. And then further talking of the Church Solemnity that day,* 1.357 he saith, Postremo (peract â processione) tot organa, tot cantus fiunt utris∣que templis, &c. Lastly the Procession being ended, there were so many Or∣gans did sound, and so great variety of Music heard in both Churches, as was wonderful &c. Behold Procession and Organs in Britanny before St. Augustin's coming. This Man afterwards left of his own will the said Archbishoprick, and became an Ermit, as both Jeffrey, and John Bale do testifie, which Protestant Bishops are not wont to do.

8. And further Bale writeth of him that he died the 18 day before the Ca∣lends of December, Anno Domini 522. and that his Body afterward in the year of our Lord, 1120 the Sixth of May was translated under Ʋrban Bishop of

Rome, to the Church of Landaff in Southwales. All which could never have been done, nor permitted by the Bishop of Rome, if there had been any Suspi∣cion, that he had held any Point of Doctrin different from the Church and Faith of Rome at that time; which maketh also the matter evident, that the Here∣tical Custom of celebrating Easter according to the Jews,) which in St. Grego∣ry's time was found in Britanny) was a latter custom not held by all, but by some few only.

9. In this Man's place was made Archbishop the famous Man David Me∣nevensis King Arthurs Unkle (as Jeffrey and Bale do testifie) who passed the said Archbishoprick from Chester to St. Davids, and so it is called at this day of his Name. This David (saith Bale) was a goodly Man of Stature,* 1.358 about four cubits high, learned and eloquent, and after ten whole years Study in the Scripture, expounded the same as a Trumpet, carrying always the Text of the Gospel with him. He extinguished the Relics of the Pelagian Heresies in Bri∣tanny, preached incessantly, cured many sick, and built twelve Monasteries and was held for a very great Saint in his days, and canonized afterward by Calix∣tus II. Bishop of Rome, &c. Per Calixtum secundum (saith he) Papisticorum deorum ascribitur in Catalogum, He was put in the Catalogue of the Papistical Gods by Calixtus the Second. Whereby appeareth, that the Britans were not only Papists in those days before the coming of St. Augustin; but had Papist Gods and Saints also there. Yet this Man might live (according to Bale) to have seen the times of St. Augustin's entrance; for that he saith he flourished in the year 440. and lived in all 146 years, tho' Gerrad Cambrensis, Polydor,* 1.359 and others do make him somewhat more ancient.

10. And for that we have talked here of John Bale, and that the testimonies taken from Enemies themselves are of greatest weight against themselves: we shall in this place touch certain Points briefly of the chief Preachers and Pa∣stors among the Britans in those days; to wit, for the next two hundred years before the coming of St. Augustin into England. Which Preachers are mentioned,* 1.360 and much praised both by Fox and Bale, as true Teachers in those days, where∣of Fox writeth thus:

In this Age (to wit after the Peace restored to the Church by Constantine) followed here in the land of Britanny; Fastidius, Ni∣nianus, Patricius, Bacchiarius, Dubritius, Congellus, Kentegernus, Helmotus, David, Daniel, Sampson, Elnodugus, Assaphus, Gildas, Henlanus, Elbodus, Dinothus, Samuel, Nivius, and a great sort more, which governed the Bri∣tan Church by Christian Doctrin a long season: albeit the civil Governours for the time were dissolute and careless, (as Gildas very sharply doth lay to their Charge) and so at length were subdued by the Saxons. And all this while about the space of 400 years (to wit from the time of King Lucius) Re∣ligion remained in Britanny uncorrupt, and the word of Christ truly preach∣ed, until about the coming of St. Augustin, and his Companions from Rome, &c.

11. Here now you see the chief Teachers of the British Church (Nineteen in number) for the space of 400 years (as Fox avoweth) set down in order, and highly praised by him; but neither his Order or Argument is worth a rush.* 1.361 For as for his Order, he beginneth with Fastidius, that lived not two hundred years before St. Augustin's coming, tho he name four hundred. And then he putteth some before, that lived long after the rest, and sometimes skippeth over 100 years together from one to another, as you shall see by the Examen. And for his Argument, how many lies and errors it containeth, shall easily ap∣pear by the Sequel of this Discourse. For first concerning two of the chief in this Catalogue contained, (to wit, Dubritius and David, Archbishops of the Britans) you have seen before, that they were Roman Catholics and canonized many Ages after their Death by Roman Bishops, which they would never have

done, if they had differed from them in any Point of Religion. But now let us see of the rest, for I see not what reason there is, why Fox should so com∣mend these two.

12. The first four are Fastidius, Ninianus, Patricius, and Bacchiarius, all which are found to have been Catholic Men, and held the common Faith of Rome in those days, nor any of them ever favoured any of these new Doctrins, brought in by our new Gospellers.* 1.362 Trithemius maketh mention of Fastidius whose Sir∣name was Priscus, Bishop of the Britans, a Man of rare Life and great Learn∣ing in the Scriptures, and a singular Preacher, and lived in the time of Ho∣norius and Theodosius the Emperors, about the year of Christ 420. The same do write of him both Honorius, Gennadius, and Bergomas. And John Bale con∣curreth with the rest, adding that he was Archbishop of London, and that amongst other his Works he wrote one De Viduitate servanda, of keeping Widowhood, without marryig again. By which only work you may know that he was not of John Bale's Religion. What we have written also of the Religion of St. German and his fellow Bishops, that came into England, may easily declare what Religion this Man was of, who being then Archbishop of London, must needs be presumed to have had a great part in their calling in, as also to have joyned with them against the Pelagians, which he would not have done, if they had not been all of one Religion. And thus much of him.

* 1.36313. Of St. Ninianus, who converted the Picts to Christian Religion, St. Bede maketh most honorable mention in the Third Book of his Ecclesiastical History, and the Roman Martyrologe doth cite him for a Saint upon the Six∣teenth day of September. Which would never have been permitted, if he had been in any one thing different from the Roman Faith. Nay John Bale writeth of him thus: Ninianus Bernitius ex Regio Britannorum sanguine procreatus, Italiam adhuc adolescens petiit, Romae apud divini verbi ministros mysteria veritatis edo∣ctus ad plenum, celer in patriam remigrabat, &c. miraculis ac sanctitate clarissimus obiit anno 432.

St. Ninian Bernitius being descended of the Blood of the King's of Britanny, went in his youth into Italy, and being fully taught the My∣steries of Gods Word in Rome, he returned swiftly to his Country again, where he flourished exceedingly in Miracles and Sanctity of Life, and after died in the year of Christ 432.

Mark here, that Princes Children became Priests in those days, and went to Rome to learn Divinity, and that this Man having done so, and brought back into Britanny the Christian Doctrin of Rome, wrought Miracles thereby. Ergo he was no Protestant, so that here Bale testifieth against himself.

* 1.36414. There followeth of Patricius in John Fox; but indeed he should have put Palladius before Patricius. For so doth Bale, and he hath Reason; for that he was a famous Teacher in Britanny, and sent from Rome by Pope Cae∣lestinus before Patricius, as Bale doth note, saying first of Palladius: Hic à Cae∣lestino Romanorum Pontifice Antistes mittebatur &c.

This Man was sent Bishop from Caelestinus Pope of Rome,* 1.365 to drive out of Britanny the Pelagian Heresie, which at that time had infected the greater part thereof, and to reduce the Scots to true Piety, &c.

He flourished about the year of Christ 431. &c.

* 1.366So saith he. And the same is confirmed by that which Prosper (a far bet∣ter Author than Bale) writeth in his Chronicle, where he saith that Palla∣dius was sent by Caelestinus Pope in the year 432 into Britanny; but especial∣ly to the Scots, as testifieth also St. Bede in his Story. So as in this time also the Popes of Rome had Supreme Care in Spiritual Affairs both among the Britans and Scots, seeing he appointed them Bishops from Rome.

15. And this is confirmed also by the other Example of Patricius,* 1.367 who (as John Bale saith) was sirnamed Mangonius, and was born in Britanny of the Fa∣mily of Senators, and thereby called Patricius, but yet of kindred by his Mo∣ther to St. Martin Bishop of Tours, study'd Divinity in Rome, and thence sent by Caelestinus the Pope to preach to the Irish-men.* 1.368 Istum (saith he) ad Scotos & Hibernos post Palladium Graecum misit, ut eos à Pelagianorum tueretur erro∣ribus: This man did Caelestinus Bishop of Rome send to the Scots and Irish-men (especially those that lived in Britanny) after Palladius the Grecian, to defend them from the Errors of the Pelagians.

16. Behold the Care and Authority of the Bishop of Rome in those days! But what followeth in Bale?* 1.369 This man (saith he) did preach the Gospel unto the Irish-men, with incredible fervour of spirit, for forty years together; and did con∣vert them to the sincere Faith of Christ. He was most excellent both in Learning and Holiness; and among other Miracles that he did, he continued in Praying and Fast∣ing forty days and forty nights, founded many Churches, healed many sick, deliver'd many possessed of Devils, and raised to life sixty that were dead, &c.

17. Behold the effects of Preachers sent forth by the Bishops of Rome, re∣counted by the Heretics themselves: Let Fox or Bale shew us any such Exam∣ple of Miracles, wrought by Preachers sent by them and their Sect. And that this man also was made Bishop by Caelestinus the Pope,* 1.370 and sent hither after Palladius, is testified by St. Prosper, that lived in that time, and after him by St. Bede, Marianus Scotus, Sigibert, and others; who say also, that he died in the year of Christ 491, being of the age of 122 years; and his Memory is held in the Roman Calendar upon the 17th day of March, &c. And now our Fox and Bale being taken in these Examples to speak against themselves, we might pass over the rest with silence, assuring the Reader that all is like unto this. Yet some points more we shall note.

18. The fourth before named Bacchiarius,* 1.371 tho' he be not mentioned by John Bale, yet other Authors do report that he was brought up in Rome, and in good credit with Pope Leo I. to whom he dedicated a Book written in defence of his Pilgrimage to Rome. He had been the Scholar of St. Patricius; and by this you may guess of what Religion he was.

19. Congellus is the sixth Preacher of true Religion cited in Fox's Catalogue, (for of Dubritius, which is the fifth, we spoke before) whom Bale saith to have flourished about the year of Christ 530, and that he was the first Abbot of the Monastery of Bangor. But what more think you? Ab isto Monachismus à Pelagio introductus, &c. From this man (saith he) the Religion of Monks brought in by Pelagius the Heretic, was not only spread over Britanny under shew of true Religion, but was dilated also into other Countreys, &c. Behold how Fox and Bale agree! Fox saith, He was a true Preacher of the Word of God;* 1.372 and Bale saith, He was a Father of Pelagian Monks. And note here by the way, that Fox professing to shew the continual Succession of the Britan Church, leapeth from Patricius to Dubritius of whom we spake before, and between whom there was above 100 years distance, if we believe Bale and other Authors. And then followeth Kentegernus and Helmotus before David Menevensis, who should have come after him in respect of time; tho' of Helmotus Bale maketh no mention;* 1.373 but of Kentegernus he saith, That he flourished in the year 560, and lived in all 185 years; which, if it be so, he must needs be alive long after the entrance of St. Augustin. He saith, He was a Monk, and had three hundred Scholars in one Col∣ledge, which he sent to preaching here and there, &c.* 1.374 And then he addeth fur∣ther, Melote utebatur, &c. He used a Garment made of Goats skins, with a streight Hood, having a white Stole about his Neck after the fashion of the Primitive Church. He converted many to the Faith of Christ, recall'd many Apostatas, drove out Pelagi∣ans, built Churches, ministred to the sick and healed their sickness, and lived in very

great Abstinence, &c. Thus he describeth him, and whether this description doth agree to a Protestant Minister, or to a Catholic Abbot, let the Reader consider.

20. There do follow in Fox's Catalogue, David, Daniel, Sampson, Elnodu∣gus Asaphus, and Gildas. But of St. David, the first of this number, we have spoken before in this Chapter. And as for Gildas, (which is the last of this Rank) Bale saith, He was a Monk of Bangor. And further it may easily appear by the speeches themselves, which before we have alledged out of him in the former Chapter, of what Religion he was.

* 1.375Of Daniel, Sampson, and Elnodugus, tho' John Bale speak little or nothing, yet Capgrave, Leland, and others, shew that they were of the same Religion with the rest, Daniel being the first Bishop of Bangor, and Sampson next after St. Da∣vid was Bishop of that place.

* 1.37621. Of Asaph, Bale saith, He was Scholar to the foresaid famous Abbot Kente∣gern, and was made Bishop of Elgoa in Wales, which of his name was called Asaph ever since. He flourished in the year 590, and saw the coming in of Augustin and his Fellows from Rome; and was the first of the Britans (saith Bale) qui à Gregorii Romani Discipulis in Angliam adventantibus Auctoritatem & Unctionem acce∣pit; that took his Authority and Ʋnction (or Consecration) from the Disciples of Gregory Bishop of Rome, that came into England. So writeth Bale, and by this sheweth that St. Asaph held nothing against the Roman Religion, seeing he ac∣cepted his Authority and Consecration from the Bishop of Rome. Besides this, this Bishop St. Asaph hath his Memory celebrated in the Roman Martyrology upon the first day of May, which he should not if he had been different in any one point from the Roman Religion.

22. And so being come down now to St. Augustin's time, it is to no purpose to go any farther, or name the rest that do ensue in Fox, to wit, those five, Herlanus, Elbodus, Dinothus, Samuel, and Nivius, for that they lived after St. Augustin's entrance: whereas Fox's promise was to cite only British Teach∣ears that were before him, and different from the Roman Religion, whereof he hath named hitherto none.* 1.377 Besides that of three of these five Bale writeth not; and as for Dinothus Abbot of Bangor, he was the chiefest of those who opposed themselves against Augustin, and set other men against him also in Synodo Wic∣cionum, and was severely punished afterward for the same by the Providence of God,* 1.378 as St. Bede noteth, to wit, by the Sword of Ethelfredus a Heathen King of Northumberland long after the Death of St. Augustin, when the said Dinothus and 1200 Monks were slain at Chester by the Souldiers of the said Ethelfride, Augustino jam multo ante tempore (saith St. Bede) ad Coelestia Regna sublato; St. Augustin being taken to Heaven long before; tho' Bale be not ashamed to say that it was done by his suggestion, praising the foresaid Di∣nothus and his Confederates, for that they would not preach Baptism and celebrate Easter-day, according to the Custom of Rome, and Universal Catho∣lic Church.

23. So as now we see that these men care not what they say or avouch, so they say somewhat against Rome, and those that any way favoured the same; wherein passion doth so greatly blind them, as they cannot discern when they alledge matters plainly against themselves, as you have seen in the for∣mer enumeration of British Teachers, Pastors, and Prelates; whom they would have us think to have been of a different Religion from that of Rome; whereas their own words, testimonies, condition, and state of life, do testi∣fie the contrary. And so I leave these men to their folly and impudency in this behalf.

CHAP. XI.

The Deduction of the aforesaid Catholic Roman Religion, planted in Eng∣land by St. Augustin, from his time to our days; And that from King Ethelbert, who first received the same unto King Henry VIII. there was never any public interruption of the said Religion in our Land.

HAving shewed before, how that the Roman Catholic Faith was first preached in our Island under the Apostles, and then again in the next Age under Pope Eleutherius, and thirdly four Ages after that again under Pope Gregory; and that all this was but one and the self-same Religion, continued, renewed, and revived in divers times, under divers States and People of the Realm; there may seem to remain only now two other points considerable in this affair: The first, Whether this Religion brought in by St. Augustin to England were held at that day for the only true Religion of Christendom, and so accepted by all the World? The other, Whether that Religion then planted hath come down, and been continued in England ever since, by continual Suc∣cession, until the first public alteration made thereof in our days? For if this be so, then is the demonstration easie to be made even from the Apostles Times to Ours.

2. And for the first, tho' we have handled the same somewhat before,* 1.379 yet briefly we will add now, That there can be no doubt at all in this matter with men of Reason and Judgment, but that St. Augustin and his Fellows brought in with them the whole Body of Religion, as well touching Articles of Belief, as Ceremonies, and Ecclesiastical Customs, which were at that time in use at Rome whence they came, and in other Catholic Countreys by which they passed, namely, Italy, France, and Flanders,* 1.380 from which Countreys Pope Gre∣gory himself exhorteth them by his Letters to take such good Ecclesiastical Uses as they should see most agreeable to Piety, Edification, and Devotion; which is a sign that all those Countreys agreed fully in Faith and Belief with Rome at that day, and were perfectly Catholic, tho' in some external Ceremonies be∣longing to Devotion there might be difference. And forasmuch as the French Bishops St. German, St. Lupus, and St. Severus,* 1.381 150 years (as hath been said) before the entrance of St. Augustin, planted in Britanny the French Catholic Faith against the Pelagians; and these men coming from Rome, found no fault therewith, most certain it is that all was one. And finally if we do consider the Works, Writings and Actions of Pope Gregory, related by us before, partly out of St. Isidore, living at that time in Spain, partly out of his own Epistles yet extant, written to the chiefest Bishops of the Christian World, and their An∣swers to him again, together with their agreement in Faith and Religion. If we do consider also the Heresies condemned in his days by Him and his Autho∣rity, as the Eutychians, Monothelites, and others, which our Protestants also do condemn for Heresies at this day. By all this (I say) and by infinite other Arguments and Demonstrations that may be made, it is most evident, that ei∣ther Christ had no Visible Church or Catholic Religion in those days,* 1.382 (which were most foolish and wicked to imagin) or that the Religion of St. Gregory and his Church of Rome, and others of others of the same Communion, was in that Age the only true Catholic Church, and consequently had in it the only true Catho∣lic Faith and Religion of Christ whereby Christians might be saved; which also is proved most evidently by infinit Miracles wrought in England, and in

divers other Countreys, upon manifold occasions, during this time of our Primitive Church, as shall appear more in particular in the deduction of our second point; which is the continuance of this same Religion from St. Augu∣stin to Thomas Cranmer, the first and last Archbishops of Canterbury, following by Succession the one the other for the space of above 900 years; the first dying a Saint, the last ending in Apostacy, as after shall be shewed.

* 1.3833. Wherefore, to come to the second point about the deduction of Catholic Religion in our Nation from St. Augustin downward; first of all, St. Bede talk∣ing of the planting thereof, and of our first Primitive Church, (whose progress and increase he describeth for the space of almost 140 years after the entrance of St. Augustin) hath these words: Gregorius Pontifex Divino admonitus instin∣ctu,* 1.384 servum Dei Augustinum, & alios plures cum eo Monachos, timentes Domi∣num misit, praedicare verbum Dei genti Anglorum, &c.

Gregory the Pope, be∣ing admonished by heavenly Instinct, did send God's Servant Augustin, and others Monks with him, that feared God, to preach his Word to the English Nation, in the 14th year of Mauritius the Emperour, which was of Christ 596, and the 4th after that St. Gregory was made Pope.

* 1.3854 These holy men landed in the Isle of Thanet belonging to the Kingdom of Kent; for that the whole Dominion. of the Saxons in those days (which was all the Land, except Scotland, and the other part now called Wales, whither the reliques of Britans were retir'd) was divided into seven several States and Dominions,* 1.386 which they called Kingdoms. The first whereof (to speak of them according as they received the Faith) was the Kingdom of Kent, whose King Ethelbert (being the fourth in number from Hengistus, that began the same about the year of Christ 450) afterward, first of all other, received the Christian Faith at the preaching of St. Augustin, about the year of Christ 600; that is to say, an hundred and fifty years after they had reigned as Pa∣gans there.

* 1.3875. The second Kingdom was of the East-Saxons, and contained the Shires now called Essex, Middlesex, and Hartfordshire. The first founder of which King∣dom was Erchenwine about the year of our Lord 527, as Stow and some others do hold, tho' Malmesbury doth write otherwise; but both do agree, that under King Seebert, or, as * 1.388 Bede calleth him, Sabered) those Provinces were convert∣ed to Christian Religion by the preaching of St. Mellitus, Fellow to St. Augustin, and first Bishop of their chief City of London, whither he was sent by St. Augu∣stin from Centerbury, in the year of Christ 604.

* 1.3896 The third Kingdom was of the East-Angles, which contained the Shires of Norfolk, Suffolk, Cambridge, and the Isle of Ely. Which Kingdom was begun about the year of Christ 492, by one Ʋffa, but converted after to Christian Religion under King Sigebert, about the year of Christ 609, and that by the preaching principally of their first Bishop Felix, born in Burgundy in France, be∣ing ordain'd Bishop of a City there; called Dunwich at that time, which now is more than half consumed with the Sea.

* 1.3907. The fourth Kingdom was of the Northumbers, which contained ma∣ny Shires towards the North; to wit, Lancashire, Yorkshire, Cumberland, Westmorland, Northumberland, Durham, and some part of Scotland. The first Monarch of this Kingdom is accounted Ida; and it received the Faith of Christian Religion under their 13th King, Edwyn, in the year of Christ 626, by the Preaching of St. Paulinus, sent thither to preach by Justus, the fourth Archbishop of Canterbury; by whom the said Paulinus was translated from the See of Rochester to be Archbishop of York.

8. The fifth Kingdom was of the West-Saxons,* 1.391 which contained the Coun∣treys of Cornwall, Devonshire, Dorsetshire, Somersetshire, Wiltshire, Barkshire, and Hampshire. The first Founder thereof was Cerdick, about the year of Christ 509; and under Kenegilsus their fifth King they received the Christian Faith, by the preaching of St. Berinus their first Bishop of Dorchester, in the year of Christ 635.

9. The sixth Kingdom was of the Mercians, or Middle-Countrey,* 1.392 being in that time the greatest of all the rest, and containing some fifteen or sixteen Shires, as Glocester, Hereford, Chester, Stafford, Worcester, Shrewsbury, Oxford, Warwick, Darby, Leicester, Buckingham, Northampton, Nottingham, Huntington, and Rutland. The first Founder of this Monarchy is said to be one Creda, about the year of Christ 586; and the Conversion thereof to Christian Faith was about the year of Christ 635, under Prince Peda, Son and Heir unto the notable persecuting Pagan Peda. Their first Apostle was B. Finan, who bap∣tized King Peda against his Father's will in the Kingdom of the Northum∣bers, at a Town by Berwick called Ad murum, and this by the instance of the good Christian King Oswyn, King of Northumberland, who gave King Peda his Daughter in Marriage on this condition, That he would become a Christian.

10. The seventh Kingdom was of the South-Saxons,* 1.393 containing the Shires of Sussex and Surrey; and began about the year of Christ 478, by one Aelus a Saxon, and was converted to Christianity under King Ethelwold, (or Ethel∣wach, as St. Bede nameth him, about the year of Christ 662, by the preaching especially of St. Wilfrid their first Bishop, who erected a Monastery for the Epis∣copal See in a place called Seolyce or Selcey.

11. Well then, thus we see that within the space of forty years, more or less, six Kingdoms of England received the Gospel, and the seventh not long after, under their first Preachers and Apostles before mentioned. And what great variety of Miracles God did work by these his Servants, and their Helpers and Assistants in this Work of the Conversion of our Coun∣trey, is evident by all Stories of that time and after; and no man but an Infi∣del or Miscreant, can with any probable reason call them in doubt.

12. And it seemeth that the promise of our Savior made to his Apostles at his last farewell, in St. Mark's Gospel,* 1.394 for Miracles to be wrought in the Con∣version of Nations, (especially of Gentiles,* 1.395 as St. Gregory observeth) was as abundantly fulfilled in the first Conversion of our English Nation, as of any other probably in the World. The Signs and Miracles (saith Christ) which shall follow them that shall believe in me, or receive my Faith (especially in the begin∣ning) are these: That they shall cast out Devils in my Name; they shall speak with new Tongues; they shall remove Serpents, and if they should drink Poyson it shall not hurt them; they shall lay their hands upon sick men, and therewith heal them, &c.

13. All these things promised Christ our Savior, and performed them most abundantly in the first Conversion of Nations, while the said Miracles were necessary to plant and confirm the Faith.* 1.396

But when (as St. Gregory in the place before alledged saith) the young Plants had no more need of such daily watering by Miracles, then ceased they.

Tho' in our Countrey and Primi∣tive Church they endured no small time, as were easie to shew, if I would stand in this place to run over the Ecclesiastical Stories of the least part of the aforesaid seven Kingdoms; whereof yet many things will be spoken of af∣terward.

14. For only in the Kingdom of Kent, for the first hundred years after the Conversion of King Ethelbert, there possessed the See of Canterbury from St. Au∣gustin unto Bertualdus, (who died in the year of Christ 730, and with whom

St. Bede endeth) eight Arch-bishops,* 1.397 all most Godly, and Holy Men, to wit; Augustin, Laurence, Melitus, Justus, Honorius, Deusdedit, Theodorus and Bertualdus. Which Bishops were held for great Saints in our Primitive Church, as appeareth by the writing both of St. Bede, that lived also himself in that Age, and by William of Malmesbury, that lived some Ages after. Who yet alledgeth a more Ancient Author than himself,* 1.398 called Gosselinus, that wrote the Lives and Miracles of all those Eight Arch-bishops of Canterbury, and of some other Saints of our Country. Horum (saith he) & non minus sancti Letardi, &c. Of these Arch-bishops as also of St. Letard, that in

Ancient time came in with Q. Berta, the Author before mentioned Gosse∣linus hath written their marvelous and admirable vertues, out of Bede and others. Adding also many things, which he saw himself with his own Eyes, shewing the great Miracles and Signs, which they did, &c. He doth recount also the Rank of Kings, with their Kindred, that lay Buried in his days in the Church of St. Augustin at Canterbury. Which he doth worthily call the lights of England, and the Senators of the English Heavenly Court of Parliament. And to this Quire of Saints and Crown or Diadem of our Eternal King Christ, he addeth other pretious Stones also of Inestimable Glory, to wit St. Adrian the Abbot, and St. Mildred the Virgin, as Con∣spicuous in Glory of Miracles as the rest, &c.

15. Thus writeth Malmesbury of these servants of God of the Church of Canterbury, for the first hundred years after Christ's Faith received: but he that would recount the like of all the other six Kingdoms and English Churches, should have great store of matter. Especially, if he would enter into the par∣ticular Lives and Actions of such eminent Holy Men, as that Age by the force and virtue of that Primitive Christian Religion brought forth. And then, if with all this he remember in like manner that most certain principle before mentioned; that God would never have concurred with such abundance of Piety, Holiness,* 1.399 and Miracles to the setting up of a false Religion; he will easily see, how plain a demonstration this is for the truth of that Religion, which was thus planted amongst us, by St. Augustin, and Maligned by these Sectaries of our time.

* 1.40016. Well then, in this manner was Religion first planted among us, accor∣ding to that which St. Mark the Evangelist saith of the first Preachers and Preachings among other Nations and Gentiles in his time: To wit, Domino cooperante & sermonem confirmante sequentibus signis, Christ working with them, and confirming their Preaching with Signs and Miracles. And this Faith being once planted, did take such deep Root by the said watering of Christ the Author thereof, as it continued and held out from time to time, through all difficulties and differences both of times, Men, and State, and by Peril, Divisions, Enmities, and cruel Wars, that fell out every day between those Seven Kingdoms, until they were united all under one Monarchy some 200 years after; to wit, under King Egbert, King of the West-Saxons. And from him again the same indured other 200 years unto King Edward the Confessor before the Conquest.

17. And that which is worthy also the noteing in this case, is, that during the time of all this Enmity, Emulation, Suspicions, Jealousie of Kingdoms and States, and Bloody Battels between these Kingdoms for the space of the foresaid 200 years, from their Conversion to Christianity until they came to be a Monarchy:* 1.401 They all lived under one Arch-bishop and Primate of Canterbury, holding their due subordination and good correspondence with him, and by him with the See of Rome, and other Catholic Countries for matters of Faith and Ecclesiastical Affairs, no otherwise than if they had been all Friends, yea Subjects and Provinces of one and the self same Kingdom, and

this is the vertue and force of Catholic Union. Whereas amongst Sectaries, every little difference of Temporal States, (yea of Towns, Cities, and Go∣vernments) doth presently cause a diversity also in Faith and Religion.* 1.402 As we see at this day, that Saxony (for example) where the name of the Prote∣stants first began, being under a different Prince hath a great difference also in Religion from other parts of Germany, that call themselves Protestants, and the Kingdoms of Denmark and Swedeland, tho' they profess all Lutheranism, yet is the manner so different in these different States, as not only the one will not depend of the other in any sort of subordination or Ecclesiastical Juris∣diction (as in England we see they did) but neither do they agree in any one Form of Religion, or substance of belief in all points, no nor in one state it self, where all profess themselves to be Lutherans, as in Saxony, where the higher Saxons allow only rigid or streight Lutherans: But the lower Saxony alloweth only the softer sort, and expelleth the rigid or severe Lutherans; as the other do them, where they get Dominion.

18. Geneva and Berne are both Cities and States of the Switzers, and both of them profess Protestancy, tho' not according to Luthers Doctrin. But yet the Temporal State of the said two Towns being different, the Magistrates have appointed a different and distinct Form. Which in England also we see by experience, how much they differ from those of Scotland, Holland, and France, who profess themselves Protestants of the same Calvinist School: But every Nation and Church after his own fashion. And finally what differences have risen in England it self, during her Majesties only Government, betwixt Puritans, Brownists, Family of Love and State Protestants (as * 1.403 Thomas Diggs calleth them) no Man can be ignorant. But to what differences and divisions they would grow in two or three hundred years (if Sects could last so long, and that the States which profess them were Enemies in Temporal Affairs as it was in England) is easie to guess.

But the reason hereof is manifest, to wit,* 1.404 that for so much as Sectaries making their own judgments and inventions the Rule of their Belief and Religion, and their Temporal Princes their absolute Guiders and immediate Heads in Ecclesiastical matters: it must needs follow, that as these Princes or States do change or alter for any respect whatsoever (as they do for many) Religion also must needs alter and change for contentment or interest of the said States or Princes.

19. But to return to our Deduction and Continuation of Catholic Religion among the English Saxons after they came to be a Monarchy, (to wit,* 1.405 from the year of Christ 800) it is first to be noted that assoon as God had delivered them from one affliction (which was the continual Civil Wars of one King∣dom with an other) he sent them a second Calamity, far greater perhaps than the first, induring for other 200 years, which was the continual incursions and devastations of the Danes. Who pursued them not only for Temporal re∣spects, to get their Country from them, but also for Religion it self (the said Danes being then Pagans;) as appeareth by the cruel Murders and Martyrdoms as well of St. Edmund King of the East-angles,* 1.406 Martyred by them about the year of Christ 885, as of Holy Elphegus Arch-bishop of Canterbury, some Ages after, about the year 1011 and of divers others overlong hear to recount. And yet notwithstanding, when the said Danes,* 1.407 with their King Canutus Son of Swanus, came once by Gods Holy grace to be Christians (which was soon after the foresaid Martydom of the Holy Arch-bishop Elphegus) they sub∣mitted themselves with Humility and fervor of Spirit to that very same Chri∣stian Faith of their Enemies the English-men, which they had persecuted in them before, taking them also for their instructors. Which is a token, that there was no other Christian Faith known in the World at that day for them

to embrace, but only that which the English professed, to the embracing whereof, there is no doubt, but the Miracles wrought continually in confir∣mation of the truth of that Faith (as well at the Tombs of the foresaid Mar∣tyrs St. Edmund and Elphegus slain by the Danes themselves, as other ways also) did greatly move and animate them.

20. But whatsoever the chief motives were to move this Nation to embrace Christian Religion, this is certain, that soon after this time of St. Elphegus his Death, God delivered the whole Kingdom of England into the Danes hands under the foresaid King Canutus,* 1.408 about the year of Christ 1020. And he Reigned and held the same peaceably for almost twenty years. In which time he being now Christian did many notable Acts of a good Religious King; Went to Rome for Devotion to visit the Holy Sepulchres of St. Peter and St. Paul, gave great Alms there and else where, made just Laws in England, loved and favored exceedingly the English Nation, used them with all confi∣dence both at home, and abroad, Married King Emma Mother to King Ed∣ward the Confessor, thereby to unite himself the more to the Nation. And finally became of a Persecutor and Conqueror, one of the best Kings, that England perhaps had in many Ages to Govern her.

21. William of Malmesbury living (as it hath been said) some 500 years agone under King Henry the first, Son to William the Conqueror, writeth many most excellent Religious Acts of this King Canutus, saying amongst other things thus:* 1.409 Monasteria per Angliam, &c. He did repair all the Monasteries in Eng∣land, that were overthrown or defaced by the Wars of his Father Swanus or himself.

He did Build Churches in all the places, where he had fought any Battels. And appointed Priests for the said Churches, who should Pray continually to the Worlds end for the Souls of them that had been slain in those places. He was present at the Consecration of a goodly Church in a place called Aschendum (where he had his chiefest victory) causing both the Nobles of the English and Danish Nation, to offer with him Rich gifts to the said Church, &c.

* 1.41022. Over the Body of Blessed St. Edmund, which the Ancient Danes had slain, he Builded a Church worthy the greatness of his Kingly Heart, appoint∣ing there both an Abbot and Monks, and giving them many Possessions. In so much as by the greatness of his gifts, that Monastery at this day is above all the rest in England. He took up with his own hands the Body of St. Elphegus Arch-bishop of Canterbury (slain not long before by his Danes) and caused

the same to be be carried unto Canterbury: Reverencing the same with wor∣thy honor. He gave such great Gifts and rare Jewels to the Church of Winchester, that the shining of pretious Stones, did dazle the Eyes of such as did behold them, &c. In the Fifteenth year of his Kingdom he went to Rome by Land, and having stayed some days there, and redeeming his sins by Alms in those Churches, he returned by Sea to England, &c.

23. Thus and much more doth William of Malmesbury write of this notable King Canatus a terrible and fierce Warrior before his Conversion, and much given to Blood and Impiety, whereby may easily be seen, what force Catho∣lic Religion is of, to make change in a Mans manners, where it truly entreth. Let Protestants shew us some such examples of Princes Converted to their Religion. But to go forward in Malmesbury: he setteth down after all this a large Epistle of King Canutus, which he wrote from Rome, or in the way homeward, unto the two Arch-bishops, Egetnothus and Alfricus, the first of Canterbury, the other of York, and by them to the whole Realm, giving them account of his Journy to Rome. Where amongst other things he writeth thus:* 1.411 Canutus Rex totius Angliae, & Denmarkiae, & Norvegiae, & partis Suecorum, &c. notifico vobis, me noviter ivisse Romam, oratum pro Redemptione

peccaminum meorum, &c.

I Canutus King of all England, Denmark and Nor∣way, and part of Swecia, &c. do give you to understand that of late I went to Rome, to pray for the Redemption of my sins, and for the health of my Kingdoms and people: having made a vow of this Journy long ago, but could never perform it until now, by reason I was hindred by the Affairs of my Kingdoms. And now I do yield most hearty thanks to Almighty God, that he hath granted me this Grace to come and visit in my Life time the Blessed Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul and all the Sanctuary that is within and without this City: and according to my desire to honor and worship the same in my own person, &c.

24. Thus he wrote. And moreover adjoyned many other pious Ordinan∣ces in the same Epistle to be observed in England, for Restitutions to be made, Alms to be given, and other good deeds to be done, exhorting all to perform them willingly, and threatning them that should do the contrary. And William of Malmesbury saith,* 1.412 that returning after to England he caused the same to be strictly observed. And gave many new priviledges to Churches. And one among other to the Church of Canterbury, which Malmesbury setteth down at length, and in the end hath these words; Si quis verò, &c.

If any Man shall perform this my Ordination with a prompt will, Almighty God by the Intercession of the most Blessed Virgin Mary and all his Saints, in∣crease his portion in the Land of the living. And this Donation of Privi∣ledge is written and Promulgated in the Presence of me King Canutus, in the Wooden Church, in the year of Christ 1032.

23. Thus far writeth William of Malmesbury of this Kings Pious disposition after his coming from Rome.* 1.413 And John Stow addeth out of Henry of Hun∣tington, as followeth. After this time, Canutus never bare Crown upon his Head, but he set the same upon the Head of the Crucifix at Winchester, &c. And thus much of his Piety and other Fruits of true Christian Faith, which he had received. And it is no small Argument of the Divine Power thereof, that it could so mollifie and change so fierce a Warriour and cruel a Persecu∣tor as this King was before his Conversion.

26. So as now we have brought down the continuance and succession of one, and the self same Christian Religion in England from St. Augustin and King Ethelbert, unto King Canutus, for the space of 400 years. And that this was no particular Religion of England alone, but the Common General Faith not only of Rome, but of all Christendom besides, at that day, and con∣sequently the only Catholic Religion of those Ages, appeareth in like man∣ner by other words of the Kings former Letter Recorded by Malmesbury, where he saith. Sit autem vobis notum, &c. Be it known unto you, that in this last solemnity of Easter, there was a great Assembly of Nobility here in Rome,* 1.414 together with Pope John and the Emperor Conrade (to wit,* 1.415 all the greatest Princes from the Hill Garganus unto this other next the Sea) all which did re∣ceive me most honorably, and did present me with Magnificent Gifts, &c. Thus wrote the King: Whereby we may easily perceive, that King Canutus was held in all Points for a perfect Catholic Prince, seeing that both Pope John the 20th. and the Emperor Conrade the 2d. did esteem and honor him so highly.

27. After Canutus succeeded in the Kingdom of England his two Sons Harold and Hardicanutus, for two or three years.* 1.416 And then King Edward the Confessor, for Twenty-three years together. After whose Death the second Harold Son of Earl Goodwin holding the Kingdom by violence, against both English and Danes, scarce one year, William Duke of Normandy came in, as all Men know, and Conquered the Land towards the end of the year 1066. and held the same all days of his Life, and so hath his posterity after him by

Male or Female unto our time,* 1.417 and have continued the same Religion, which he found or brought into England (for all was one) for the space of 500 years unto King Henry the Eighth's time, which may be proved beside other ways, by the Succession of our Arch-bishops of Canterbury. Stigand an English Man, being the Twenty-third from St. Augustin, holding the same, when William the Conqueror got the Crown, to whom succeeded Lanfranc, and to him Anselmus, and so successively one after another: none of them ever being noted to be contrary to his Predecessor in Religion, until Thomas Cranmer in King Henry the Eighth's time. Who applyed himself to the Religion, which the State and Prince liked best to allow of in that time. And after the Kings Death, agreed to break his last Will and Testament, in changing that Religi∣on into Zuinglianism,* 1.418 most detested by his Majesty. And after again Conspi∣red to put down and destroy all the Kings Children, and to set up the Duke of Suffolks Daughter. And finally, was put to Death both for Heresie and Treason in Queen Maries time, as after more particularly shall be shewed. And this was the first change of Religion in any Arch-bishop of Canterbury, from the beginning unto his days.

* 1.41928. So as from King Ethelbert, the first Christned English King, unto King Henry the Eighth being the Eighteenth from William the Conqueror, and more than Eighty from the said Ethelbert, one and the self same Faith endured in England, and the self same Church florished, under so many different both Kings and Nations, as before hath been shewed. And the like we have de∣clared to have been for the first 600 years under the Britans, to wit, that they never were known to have changed their Religion. Which being so, the deduction and demonstration is so clear, as any reasonable Man can either make or require for proof, that one and the self same Religion endured from the beginning to the ending among them.

29. Unto which kind of proof the Ancient Holy Father and Martyr St. Ire∣naeus, giveth great Authority by a like Argument. For that having made the like Enumeration of the Bishops of Rome, (as we do now of our Arch-bishops of Canterbury) against the Heretics of his days, and that from St. Peter down∣ward to Pope Eleutherius, that lived with him, he inferreth this conclusion: Est plenissima haec ostensio,* 1.420 unam & eandem vivificatricem fidem esse, quae in Eccle∣siis ab Apostolis & conservata & tradita in unitate, &c. This is a most full proof,

that one and the self same lively Faith, hath been conserved in the Church from the Apostles days unto our time, delivered from one to another in unity, &c.

And if that were a most full proof and demonstration in St. Ire∣naeus judgment against the Heretics of his time; The same is now much more to us, having seen the Succession of so many Ages since, and noted the man∣ner of like proof and Argument in all other Fathers after him. As namely of St. Augustin,* 1.421 Numerate sacerdotes velab ipsa Petri Sede, & in ordine illo Patrum, quis cui successit videte. Number the Priests that have succeeded the one to the other even from the Seat of Peter himself. And then further. In hoc ordine Successionis nullus Donatista Episcopus invenitur. No one Donatist Bishop is to be found in this rank of Succession. And yet more.

* 1.42230. Et si in illum ordinem Episcoporum quisquam traditor per illa tempora subrep∣sisset, nihil praejudicaret Ecclesiae. And if any Traytor in those days should have crept into that order and rank of Roman Bishops (for of them he speaketh) it should not have prejudicated the Church of God.

31. Which saying of St. Austin may serve us, not only to Answer whatso∣ever Heretics do, or may object true or false against the Lives of any latter Ro∣man Bishops, but for defence also of the Rank and Succession of our Arch∣bishops of Canterbury, notwithstanding the Apostasie of * 1.423 Thomas Cranmer, or any other his like, that for these latter years may have crept in (as St. Austin

saith) or been thrust in, and by violence occupied that See and Seat unworthi∣ly, either in respect of his life, or Religion, or both; seeing that the former Succession as well of Men as of Doctrin, from St. Austin to Cranmer, is mani∣fest and evident for the space of 900 years without interruption; as also that they were united all this time in Faith and Doctrin, with the Universal Church of Christendom, as Members and Branches of their Head and Body; and that the first breach and interruption made thereof in that See by Cranmer and con∣tinued after him by some, of his followers, was noted presently and contra∣dicted, yea censured and condemned also by Sentence of the whole Church, and thereupon rejected and abhorred by the principal of his own people, both Clergy and Laity at that time.

32. And the same contradiction endureth to this day, and will do ever, in those that conserve their Ancient Faith and Religion, and do adhere to the law∣ful Succession of his Predecessors against him and his partners, until it please Almighty God to put the said order and lawful Succession in joynt again, and restore that chief and head conduct of our Country to his former integrity, whereby the Water of true Catholic Religion was wont to be derived to the people of our Land, and will be again when Gods wrath for our sins shall be pacified, and his mercy induce him to permit (as often otherwise he hath done) that all return to the accustomed Ancient course of Catholic Faith, and Religion again, seeing in very deed there is none but that; for so much as Sects and new Religions are but inventions and entertainments of time, whilst God punisheth some sins in his Servants, and after all returneth where it was before.

33. And this have we spoken by the way, and by occasion of Cranmer that was the first Arch-bishop of Canterbury that ever brake from the Roman Faith, but, notwithstanding his Apostasie, Catholic Religion was not extinguished in England by that, but remained there still all King Henries time, as also during the Reigns of his three Children, King, and Queens, Edward, Mary and Elizabeth unto these our days, as in the next Chapter following more largly and particularly we are to demonstrate.

CHAP. XII.

How Catholic Religion hath continued and persevered in England during the times and Reigns of King Henry the Eighth and his three Children, King Edward, Queen Mary, and Queen Elizabeth, notwithstanding all the troubles, changes, alterations and tribulations that have fallen out, and that the same Religion is like to continue to the Worlds end, if our sins hinder not.

THE deduction which we have hitherto made of Catholic Religion from our first Conversion, under St. Gregory and King Ethelbert of Kent,* 1.424 unto the Reign of King Henry the Eighth with whom concurred in the See of Rome, Leo the Tenth and Clemens the Seventh and other Popes Successors of St. Gregory, hath been for the most part in time of Peace and without any public discontinuance at all, but now are we to prosecute the same matter from the alteration made by King Henry downward unto our days,* 1.425 and there∣in to shew, that albeit in the external Face and Form of Religion, there have been divers Mutations, as Tempestuous Winds and Storms for the present, yet hath the Catholic Religion held firm her continuance throughout all these

Tempests, yea shewed her self more clear, eminent and notorious by the Con∣fession of her most constant Members, then she did before in peace, which is the proper privilege and excellency of truth,* 1.426 and of the Catholic Church (that is the Pilar of Truth) above all Sects and Heresies (as St. Cyprian, St. Austin, and other Fathers do note) to come out of Persecution, as Gold out of Fire more bright, illustrious, and eminent than before, or as an excellent Ship well Tackled and skilfully guided, breaketh thorow the Waves with∣out hurt at all.

2. And this hath been proved now by the experience of 1600 years, where∣in this Ship of the Catholic Church hath passed thorow no fewer storms than there are years and overcome them all; whereas many hundred Sects and Sectaries in the meane space have been broken in pieces, perished and consum∣ed, either by division among themselves, or with a little externe Persecution or Discipline of the Church, whereof I shall not need to alledge many ex∣amples, for that the World is full of them, and all Histories do testifie, and our former deduction hath made it clear, and one Domestical example of our own days there is before our eyes, which may serve for all the rest, to wit, that some severity being begun by our State against two opposite Religions in England, the Catholics and Puritans, (tho' much more rigorous against the former than the second) yet hath Catholic Religion increased thereby, and Puritanism been broken and in a manner dissolved. The Reason of which different success we shall touch afterwards. Now to the purpose we have in hand.

3. For the first Twenty years of King Henries Reign unto the year of Christ 1530 no Man can deny, but that the integrity of Catholic Religion, Union and Communion with the rest of Christendom, and perfect subordination to the See Apostolic of Rome remained in England whole, as the said King had received it from the most prudent, Religious, and Victorious Prince his Fa∣ther King Henry the Seventh, and he again from his renowned Ancestors, whom yet King Henry the Eighth as he did excel in knowledge of Learning, So was he nothing inferior to them in zeal of defending the purity of Catho∣lic Faith, as may appear by the multitude of Sectaries and Heretics as well Waldensians,* 1.427 Arrians, Anabaptists, Lollards and Wickliffians, as Lutherans, Zuinglians, Calvinists, and the like, burned by him, for dissenting from the universal known Church and Roman Religion in the first said Twenty years of his Reign, which Fox setteth down with great complaint and regret, and we shall after declare more at large in the Second and Third parts of this Treatise.

4. And when Luther afterward rose up, in the Eighth year of this glorious Kings Reign, which was the year of Christ 1517 King Henry caused first the Famous Learned Bishop John Fisher of Rochester to confute the Mad fellow, and after he vouchsafed to do the same himself by a most excellent Book,* 1.428 which I have Read, and seen subscribed with his own hand, with the Dedication thereof, by his Ambassador Dr. Clark (after Bishop of Bath and Wells) unto Pope Leo the Tenth, who in gratification thereof, gave his Majesty and all his Posterity, the most Honorable Style and Title of Defender of the Faith.

* 1.4295. And thus continued King Henry and the Religion under him in England, until the foresaid year 1530. at what time there happened a most fatal and un∣fortunate contention between Clement the Seventh the Pope and him, about his Divorce from Queen Katherine. He began first to shew his grief and dis∣pleasure against Cardinal Wolsey, and secondly against the whole Clergy of England, Condemning the one and the other in the Forfeiture of Premunire, who in their submission and supplication for Pardon, either of fear or flattery, called him Supreme Head of their Church of England.* 1.430

6. The King also began to shew openly his disgust with the Pope for not yielding to his pretence and Petition: But what? Was the Kings Religion changed by this? Or did he alter his judgment in Faith for this disaffection to∣wards the Pope? No truly, as well appeareth by his other actions; For he fre∣quented the Mass no less than before, he burned Heretics more than ever, as appeareth by Fox his accompt, and so you shall see in all the residue of his Life, which were Sixteen years after this.* 1.431 And albeit at this time being much troubled with this breach with the Pope, he attended less to repress Heresie for some years, than he had done before, yet was his judgment no less against them than from the beginning, and the longer he lived, the more grew his aversion from them, as may easily appear to him, that will but look over the years that ensued after this disgust and breach with Pope Clement the Seventh. For albeit in the next year after, to wit, 1531 he proceeded to shew his aversion from that Pope, yet did not he neglect the punishment of Lu∣therans, as may appear by the burning of David Foster, Valentine Freese,* 1.432 John Tenkesbury the old Man of Buckingham, and other which Fox doth com∣plain of.

7. In the year 1532. The King proceeding in the same discontentment with the Pope, did certain things rather to terrifie him, than to make any change of Religion,* 1.433 as making Sir Thomas Audley Chancellor in the place of Sir Thomas More, which Audley was suspected, to favor Lutheranism: In using also familiarly Thomas Cromwell a Man of the same humor or worse.* 1.434 To which end also he going over into France, conferred with Francis the French King, and persuaded him to Summon the Pope to a General Council, but he would not, whereupon King Henry returning into England, not only spake open words against Pope Clement, but suffered one Dr. Cutwyn, Dean of Hert∣fort, to Preach publickly against him in a Sermon before the King himself,* 1.435 in the Church of the Franciscan Friers of Greenwich, who passed so far in that vein, as a grave Religious Father Named Elstow, reprehended him publickly out of the Quire or Roodloft, for which he was sent to Prison. And this was the first open contradiction, that King Henry had within his Realm about this Controversie with the Pope, and yet doth Fox recount unto us divers of his Martyrs most opposite to the Pope, that were burnt by the Kings Authority this year, as namely: James Baynam, Robert Debnam, Nicolas Marish, Robert King, and others.

8. There followed the year 1533 wherein his Majesty was Married to Queen Ann Bullen,* 1.436 and consequently this year passed most in Triumph about Coronation of the said Queen, as also the Birth and Baptism of her Majesty that now is: So as little was done in matters of Religion any way, but a great Gate seemed to be opened to the Protestants and to Luthers favorers by this Marriage, in so much that Fox doth assign the ground of his Gospel principally from this year in respect both of the Kings and Queens inclination, as he pre∣sumeth, and of the great Authority of Cranmer, Cromwell,* 1.437 and some other that he calleth his Gospellers, or Patrons rather of his Gospel. And yet if you behold the external Face of the English Church at this day, all these nam∣ed and others held the Catholic Faith, Use and Rites, and both King and Queen, Cranmer and Cromwell; went as Devoutly to Mass as ever before, and so remained they in outward shew (I mean the former three) even to their Deaths; And Cromwell when he was to die, protested on the Scaffold, that he was a good Catholic Man, and never doubted of any of the Church Sacra∣ments then used, and the like would Cranmer have done no doubt, if he had been brought to the Scaffold in King Henries days, as he was to the Fire after∣wards, in Queen Maries, which had been a happy case for him.

* 1.4389. There ensued the year 1534, which was the year indeed of open breach with Rome, for that an Excommunication being set forth by Pope Clement VII. against King Henry VIII. upon notice given of his Marriage, and the said Ex∣communication set up in Dunkirk and other Towns in Flanders, which did im∣port the consent also and concurrence of Charles the Emperour; and then cer∣tain Prophesies being blown about at home, as coming from Elizabeth Barton, sirnamed the holy Maid of Kent,* 1.439 about the King's Deprivation, he was much more exasperated than before; and so calling a Parliament, caused the Pope's Authority to be wholly extinguished, and transferred to himself, and made divers Bishops in order to preach at Paul's Cross against the Pope's Supremacy over the Catholic Church. But what? may we think that these Bishops did in so small a time change their belief in matters of Faith? The King also being angry with divers Friars, as namely with F. Elstow beforenamed, that contra∣dicted Cutwyne the Preacher when he inveighed against the Pope's Authority, did this year,* 1.440 upon the 11th of August, ordain, That all the observant Friars of St. Francis's Order should be thrust out of their Convents, beginning with Greenwich where the said contradiction was made, and to seem somewhat to favour the Augustin-Friars, of whose Order Luther had been, he commanded them for the present to be put in their places, yet did he at the very same time cause John Frith to be burn'd in Smithfield for denying the Blessed Sacrament, and this by his own particular order; which Frith and his Master Tyndal were the greatest Enemies that Friars had.

* 1.44110. He burned also this year Henry Poyle, William Tracy, and other Prote∣stants, as Fox testifieth in his Calendar: So as we may see that the King's Faith was as before; and tho' he were content to suffer some new-fangl'd Spirits to ruffle at this time, as namely Friar Barnes in London, where he preach'd most seditiously,* 1.442 and Hugh Latimer in Bristol, where, as Stow saith, he stirred a notorious Tumult, causing the Mayor to suffer Lay men to preach, and to pro∣hibit and imprison Priests, and other like Disorders; yet what the King thought inwardly of them, he declared afterwards by his acts, when he burn∣ed Barns, and cast Latimer into the Tower, and kept him there with evident danger of his life so long as himself lived; which disposition of King Henry, Tyndal smelling at the same season, wrote from Flanders to his Scholar John Frith,* 1.443 Prisoner in the Tower of London, in these words: And now methinketh I smell a counsel to be taken, &c. But you must understand, that it is not of a pure heart, and the love of Truth, but to avenge themselves, and to eat the Whores flesh, and to suck the marrow of her bones, &c. So wrote that honest man, signifying that King Henry was resolved to make an outward shew in favouring the Gospellers, not for love or liking he had of them, but to revenge himself of the Pope, and to enjoy the Goods of Monasteries, and other spiritual Livings, which he, in his blasphemous heretical vein, calleth the Whores flesh, and marrow of her bones.

11. Well then, this was the beginning of their Gospel in England, by their own Confession and Interpretation; and so whatsoever was done from this year forward, against Catholics or Catholic Religion, unto the 31st year of his Reign, which was of Christ 1540, to wit, for five whole years, was upon these grounds, and to the former ends of Revenge and Interest, if we believe Protestants themselves; in which point notwithstanding, for that divers God∣ly, Learned and Zealous men could not be content to follow the King's affecti∣ons as others did, and namely Bishop Fisher of Rochester, Sir Thomas More late Chancellor of England, and divers most Reverend and Venerable Abbots, Pri∣ors, and Doctors, and other their like, they were content to give their Blood in defence of Catholic Unity against this Schism, as the Abbots of Glastenbury, of Whaley, of Reading, Dr. Forest Queen Catharine's Confessor, Dr. Powel, and the like.

12. Some others, and amongst them one most near to the King himself both in Blood and Affection, namely Cardinal Pool, opposed himself by public Wri∣ting from Padua, as we may see by those three learned Books left by him in La∣tin, De Unitate Ecclesiae. Others also of the same Blood-Royal, as the Marquess of Exceter, and Countess of Salisbury (the said Cardinal's Mother) shewed their dislike, which afterwards was the cause of their ruin; and many Shires also of the Realm at this time, not being so patient as to bear these Innovations, took Arms, and fell into great Commotions, as in Lincolnshire, Yorkshire, So∣mersetshire, and some other Provinces, making all their Quarrels for matters of Religion.

13. So as by this we see that Catholic Religion remained still in England both in Prince and People, but that the Prince for a time thought good for other ends to tolerate and wink at disorders therein, until the aforesaid year of 1540; when calling all his Realm together both Spiritual and Temporal to examin well this matter of Religion, they decreed that famous Statute both in Parliament and Consistory Ecclesiastical, called the Statute of six Articles,* 1.444 or as John Fox nameth it, the whip with six strings or lashes, in which Decree are condemned for detestable Heresies all the most substantial points of Protestants Doctrin, especially of Zwinglians and Calvinists, and most severe punishment of Death appointed unto the Defenders and Maintainers thereof, whereby the Catholic Judgment and Censure of the whole Realm in that behalf was seen, and the King himself made further declaration thereof presently for his own part, by putting away his German Wife Anne of Cleve, by which the Gospel∣lers had thought to have drawn him further into League and Religion with the Protestant German Princes, and by punishing Cromwell, the Head and Fountain of most of these Innovations, by the loss of his Head.* 1.445 He burned also immedi∣ately after this Statute in Smithfield, upon the promulgation thereof, three fa∣mous Heretics, Barns, Jerom, and Gerard; the first an earnest Lutheran, the other two Zwinglians.

14. All these demonstrations I say King Henry made this year of his Catho∣lic Opinion and Judgment in all points, except in matter of Supremacy, which was his own Interest. And for the other six years which he lived afterwards, he vary'd not from this, but rather confirm'd the same, as we may see by his burning of Anne Askew for denying the Real Presence in the Sacrament, not many months before his death; and by his own hearing of Mass in his bed, and receiving the blessed Sacrament on his knees when he was not able to stand on his feet; but especially by that which Bishop Gardiner testified while he lived, and preached the same in a public Sermon at Paul's Cross, that the said King not long before his dying day, when he sent him Embassador to a Diet in Germany,* 1.446 gave him special Commission in secret to procure by the means of some Catho∣lic Princes, and of the Pope's Legat and Nuntio there, some honorable conditi∣on for his Majesty's reconciliation with the Pope and See of Rome again; which tho' God of his secret Judgment permitted him not to effectuate by the shortness of his life, yet appeareth it by this what his sense in matters of Religion was.

15. So then now we have that Catholic Church and Religion continued in England during King Henry's Reign, both in Prince and People, tho' much tur∣moil'd by Faction, Schisms, and Heresie, wherein notwithstanding she no more lost her possession and continuance, than she did in time of the raging Ari∣ans, Donatists, or other Sectaries that prevailed in power for the present time, either generally, or in some particular Provinces, as Lutherans and Zwinglians also did in King Henry's days in divers places, or do at this day, which yet was and is so, as they are easily distinguished from the other, not only by the Divi∣sions and Differences among themselves, but also for that the Union of the Ca∣tholic

Religion doth ever shew it self in some Regions adjoyning; yea com∣monly also even in those very places where these Sects do range and bear most rule, some Catholics do remain to contradict them openly, and to plead for their old possession;* 1.447 and the greater the Persecution is, the greater and more eminent is this Catholic contradicting part stirred up and increased by the very Power and Vertue of the Cross of Christ in Persecution, as before hath been noted.

16. And this was the state of Catholic Religion in King Henry's Reign; to wit, that it was held and defended publicly, except only the Article of Eccle∣siastical Supremacy denied to the Pope, whereunto notwithstanding many thousands of the Realm never agreed, and consequently were truly Catholics. Heretics also were punished, especially those three Sects that principally ranged at that time, to wit, Lutherans, Anabaptists, and Zwinglians, (all three taking their Origin from Luther) so as of all these three Sects King Henry burned ma∣ny; and albeit of the fourth sort of men that opposed themselves against him, to wit Catholics, he put divers also to death under the name of Papists, yet both this very Name, as also the different manner of their Deaths, but above all the nature of their Cause, doth evidently distinguish them from the other, and shew that their Deaths were true Martyrdoms, and the others due Punishment for their Wickedness.

* 1.44817. For first, the name of Papists, that signifieth them to hold with the Pope as Supreme Head of their Church, importeth no more hurt or offence than if any Sedition moved within any Realm, those that hold with the King should be called Kinglings; or those, for example, that hold part with the Mayor of London, when any Apprentices would raise Rebellion against him, should scornfully be called Mayorists; and generally for a man to hold with his Lawful Superiour cannot be termed a Faction, and much less an Heresie.

* 1.44918. Secondly, the very difference and manner of punishment used by King Henry towards both parts; the one by Fire, the others by Beheading and Hanging, doth evidently shew what difference he made of them; the one as of Heretics, and the other as of men offending against his State and Person after he had made the Supremacy Ecclesiastical to be a matter of his State and of his Royal Dignity; whereby also he shewed that he was no Gospeller.

19. But now for the third point, which is the most important of all the rest, to shew the difference in these mens Causes, and that the Catholics suffered innocently for their Conscience, and consequently were true Martyrs; and that the other sorts of Sectaries were punished deservedly as Malefactors, it is not hard to prove to him that is of any mean consideration or indifferency in matters. For first, who will not grant but that he that is an honest and good man when he goeth to bed (for example) cannot easily be made an evil man in his sleep, without any motive of his affection or free will at all? And again, He that is a good and true Subject towards his Prince and Countrey this day, how can he well to morrow be judged a Traytor, (the highest sin of all other) if in the mean space he change not his mind, nor do any act of word or deed contrary to that he did before: And yet this was the Cause of the Catholics put to death under King Henry for the Supremacy.

20. As for Example, Sir Thomas More was Prisoner in the Tower of Lon∣don upon some displeasure, in the year 1534; where he attending only to his Prayers (as * 1.450 himself testifieth) and to the Writing of some Spiritual Books pertaining to the contempt of this present transitory World, there passed in the mean time a Statute in the Parliament-house, appointing that whomsoever did not believe the King's Majesty to be Supreme Head of the Church of England

in causes Ecclesiastical, should be a Traitor, and suffer death for it; which seeming a new and strange thing unto him, and contrary to the belief of all his Forefathers, he could not so soon conform himself thereunto, and conse∣quently refused (when he was demanded) to subscribe to the Statute, and to make so great a change in his Faith upon the change of others; for which soon after he was put to death, not for that he had attempted, altered,* 1.451 or innovated any thing, as you see, but for that he would not alter and make innovation. And this was the proper true cause of all Catholics that suffered for the Supremacy under King Henry VIII.

20. But on the contrary side, the others that were put to death by him as Sectaries, did wickedly and presumptuously alter and innovate of their own heads many things about Belief and Doctrin different from that which they had received, and contrary to the Belief of all their Forefathers, ancient Christians for many Ages together; and that with such obstinacy, as no Reason, Au∣thority, Discipline or Order, no Witness Human or Divine, could prevail with them; and albeit for this obstinacy each Sect pretended Scriptures for them∣selves, yet the vertue and substance of Scriptures consisting in their true mean∣ing, and interpretation thereof, it was intolerable pride and insolency in them to arrogate to themselves the said true Interpretation and Exposition before the whole Church of God that went before them: And hereof ensued the justness of their punishment, which in Catholics can have no place, as before hath been shewed. Yet one Example of each sort of these men shall we here alledge, thereby better to declare the Case.

21. King Henry during his Reign caused sundry sorts of men to be put to death about matter of Religion, as is notorious; and first,* 1.452 certain Anabaptists and new Arians, namely in the 27th and 30th years of his Reign. In the for∣mer of these two Condemnations were nineteen Men and six Women, as Stow and others do relate; and in the second were three Men and one Woman con∣demned. These Anabaptists denied, amongst other points, that Children ought to be baptized before they come to years of discretion, and can actually believe; for defence of which Doctrin they stood resolutely upon many clear places of Scripture as to them then seemed; to wit, Qui crediderit & baptizatus fuerit, salvus erit, Marc. 16. He that shall believe and be baptized, shall be saved.* 1.453 Lo (say they) it is necessary to believe as well as to be baptized; which Infants being not able to do, ought not to receive Baptism in their Infancy; or if they do, they must be rebaptized again when they come to years of discretion. Thus reasoned they. And besides this Text, they and their chief Masters do alledge almost thirty pla∣ces of Scripture more, which seem most plain and evident to them, as by their Books that are extant appeareth.

22. The like places they do alledge also for that other absurd Position of theirs, That no Magistrate may punish by death: as for example, those words of God, Exod. 20. Non occides, Thou shalt not kill; and again the saying of our Savior, Omnes qui acceperint gladium, gladio peribunt, Matth. 26. All that use the sword shall perish by the sword. Thus said the Anabaptists, from which by no means could they be drawn, but went willingly to the fire for testimony of their Opinions. The Arians also denying the Equality of God the Son with the Father, alledged no less plain places, as they would have them to seem; namely that of Christ himself in St. John's Gospel, ch. 14. Pater meus major me est, My Father is greater than I; and many other, which were too long here to recite. And this of them, who burned together obstinately in one fire in England.

23. But what shall we say of the Lutherans? Do not they alledge plain places also, both against Us and Calvinists as themselves think? For against Calvinists, in defence of the Real Presence in the Sacrament, they urge the

plain words of Christ as we do: Hoc est corpus meum: This is my Body. And against us, for their gross Opinion that the substance of Bread and Wine re∣maineth together with the Body of Christ, they alledge many places of Scrip∣ture where it is called Bread, which places the Zuinglians accepting, do turn the same against the Lutherans, affirming that for so much as it is so oftentimes called Bread in the Scripture,* 1.454 it is not the true Body of Christ at all: And this passed between Fryer Barns and the two Apostata Priests Gerard and Jerom, burned with him: The first a fervent Lutheran, the other two earnest Zuinglians, all three consumed by Fire at one Stake in Smithfield by King Henries appointment, in the Thirty-second year of his Reign.

24. But now was there a third or fourth sort of Sectaries in K. Henries days, who were neither Anabaptists, Arians, nor yet perfect Lutherans or Zwing∣lians, but would have the Controversie of the Blessed Sacrament and Real Presence, to be an indifferent thing to be believed, or not believed. as every Man should think best:* 1.455 So held William Tyndall, as also his Scholar John Frith, whom John Fox doth compare to St. Paul and Timothy, Frith being Burned in Smithfield by the Kings express Commandment in the Twenty-sixth year of his Reign, and Tyndall not long after in Flanders by the said Kings procurement, as more largely we shall declare in the Third Part of this Trea∣tise, when we come to examine John Fox his Calendar of Martyrs. Now it shall be sufficient for proof of that we say to alledge Fox himself, who setting down the Articles of Frith for which he was Burned, assigneth this for the first.* 1.456 First (saith he) the matter of the Sacrament is no necessary Article of Faith under pain of Damnation, &c. But may be believed or not believed as every Man shall think best. And for proof thereof alledgeth divers Arguments out of Scripture, that the Fathers forsooth of the Old Testament, were saved by the same Faith that we are, and yet were not bound to believe the Real Pre∣sence, &c. And Fox seemeth to like well both of this Argument and of the Heresie.

25. Now then here be four or five sorts of Sectaries Condemned by King Henry, and all defended themselves by shew of Scriptures, but for that each of them doth reserve the interpretation of Scripture to themselves, and thereby teacheth new Doctrin, contrary to that which was received generally in the known Church before them, to whose judgment and interpretation they will not yield themselves: Hereof it followed, that the indictment of Heresie ly∣eth truly and justly against them, and that they were worthily Condemned and Burned for this Pride, self-will and obstinacy. But on the contrary side against the Catholics, that died for the Ecclesiastical Supremacy of the Pope, none of these Accusations can justly be laid, for that they do neither stand upon their own judgment, nor have invented any thing of new, nor do adhere to their own Interpretations, or Exposition of Scriptures, but being accused, do make their Plea and Defence far otherwise, to wit, that they found this Doctrin of the Popes Supremacy in use and practice before they were born,* 1.457 as a thing received from Age to Age by the known Catholic Church time out of mind: that they see all Christian Kingdoms and Princes to have embraced the same, and General Councils to have allowed thereof: That the Texts and Examples of Scripture alledged for the proof of this Article, and all others whereon they stand, are not inventions of their own, but so expounded by Ancient Fathers and uniform consent of the Catholic Church; that all our Christian English Kings from our first Conversion unto King Henry the Eighth acknowledged this Spiritual Authority of the Bishop of Rome; and King Henry himself defended the same most earnestly with his own Pen, not many years before, against Luther and Lutherans: That it is not a thing devised but delivered, as * 1.458 Tertullian said, of the Catholic Faith, and therefore

if any point thereof were to be altered, it must be done by the same Authority by which it was delivered to them, to wit by the whole Church, Councils, and General Pastors thereof.

26. This was the Defence and Pleading of Catholics under King Henry the Eighth to excuse themselves from Treason, objected against them, for hold∣ing the Popes Supremacy; wherein you see divers notorious differences be∣tween the Defence of the Sectaries, and them, for that amongst the Sectaries, every one held what himself thought best, of things invented by themselves, every one cited Scriptures, and interpreted them as he listed, without Au∣thority, President or Example of former Ages, and consequently they are justly called Heretics, that is to say choosers. For that they chose to them∣selves what to believe in every Sect, and reduced the last and final resolution of all things to their own Wills and Wits, which in matters of belief is the highest Crime that against God and his Church can be committed.

27. But on the other side the state and condition of the Catholics, and their cause is quite opposite to this, for that they stick to Authority, Obedience, Integrity, Example of their Ancestors; they bring nothing of their own; they invent or innovate nothing: They stand only upon that which they have found Established to them, not by this or that Man, or by this or that Author of any Sect, or by this or that particular Congregation, fellowship, or Facti∣on, or by this or that Town, City, Province, Kingdom, or Country, but generally by the whole universal Church and Pastors thereof, and therefore properly and truly are called Catholics, which is to say Ʋniversal and gene∣ral.

28. And this shall suffice to shew the difference between the Catholic Mar∣tyrs, and Heretical Malefactors put to death in King Henries time,* 1.459 whereof yet we shall Treat more largely in the third part of this Treatise, where we are to handle the particular Stories of Fox his Calendar-Martyrs, and to com∣pare and paralell them with ours, shewing that yet never Dogs and Cats, nor yet Sampsons Foxes did ever so disagree in natures and conditions, as these good Martyrs did in Faction and contrariety of opinions amongst themselves, and consequently could not be Martyrs or witnesses of any one Faith whatso∣ever.

29. And with this also will we end the Discourse of King Henries Life, ha∣ving sufficiently shewed (as to me it seemeth) that the Catholic Religion held her footing and continuance also under ther Reign of this King, no less perhaps than before, yea she shewed her self much more to the World, by the Persecution which then she suffered, than before in the time of peace; for that the Famous and Illustrious Martyrdoms of such excellent Men as were Bishop Fisher, Sir Thomas More, Dr. Forest and many other such Worthies, that suf∣fered Martyrdom in those days, did more Illustrate her, and made extern Na∣tions to talk more of the Zeal and Constancy of English Catholics, than ever they would have done if that Persecution had not fallen out; and the like success hath happened since both under King Edward the Sixth and her Ma∣jesty that now is, as briefly we shall here declare.

30. And as for King Edwards Reign, as it was but short,* 1.460 and the first pas∣sage from Catholic Religion to open Profession of Heresie: So was it not so sharp for effusion of Blood as under King Henry: For that the King being very young, and those that Governed in his Name not thorowly settled in their States and Affairs, troubled also with much Division and Emulation among themselves, could not attend to prosecute matters so exactly against Catholics, as some of their desires and Appetites were; yet began they very well, as we may see by the most unjust Persecutions and Deprivations of two principal Bishops, Gardiner of Winchester, and Bonner of London, by

such violent Calumnious manner as was proper for Heretics to use. The par∣ticulars whereof John Fox doth set down at large, whereby a Man may take a taste what they meant to have done,* 1.461 if they had had time. For that Cran∣mer and Ridley that had been Bishops in King Henries time, and followed his Religion and humor while he lived, being now also resolved to enjoy the Pre∣ferment and Sensuality of this time, so far as any way they might attain unto, getting Authority into their hands by the Protector and others that were in most Power, began to lay lustily about them, and to pull down all them both of the Clergy and others, whom they thought to be able or likely to stand in their way, or resist their inventions.

31. And hereupon divers were laid hands on and Imprisoned, divers fled over Seas, sundry most Captious and Calumnious Questions and Demands were devised to entangle Men: As Namely: Whether a King of one year old, were not as truly a King as at Forty or Fifty, which if you did grant concerning the Title and Right of his Crown (which is true) then presently they inferred, that King Edward, being but Nine years old, wanting yet discretion might also be lawful Head of the Church, and determine Controversies of Religion, yea change the Faith and Religion which his Father and all his Ancestors Kings and Princes of England, all Parliaments, Synods, and Councils before his days had left unto him for the space of a Thousand years and more. And albeit he had not sufficient judgment to understand what Religion meant, yet was he made judge thereof by vertue of his Birth and Succession to the Crown.* 1.462 And this Point was wonderfully urged by the Protector Seymor, to all Preachers, Prelats, and Bishops of that time, that they should inculcate the same to the people in their Sermons, to the end that himself taking all the said Child Kings Authority upon him, might be Head and Judge in his place: Whereunto that he might seem the more fit and able for his excellent learn∣ing, John Bale the Apostata Friar that lived under him, was not ashamed to Publish in Print, and place him for a Learned Author amongst his Illustrious British Writters,* 1.463 for that some Proclamations perhaps passed by his hands, tho' otherwise he was known to be so unlearned, as he could scarce Write or Read.

32. But yet (as I said) this Doctrin or rather Paradox, of the Child Kings supereminent ability, high Authority and Supreme Ecclesiastical Power to determin, alter, change and dispose of matters of Religion at his pleasure, tho' he were but of one year old, was sounded in Pulpits every where at this time; whereof Sir John Cheke the Kings School-master amongst others Wrote a se∣veral Treatise, besides the large Message sent in the Kings Name (but of his Writing) to the Catholic people of Devonshire, as after shall be shewed. The same also was objected grievously against Bishop Gardiner and Bishop Bonner by Name, that they had not in their Sermons appointed unto them by the Protector, so sufficiently urged this Point of the Kings Ecclesiastical Power in his Nonage, as was required. And this especially for that the people in divers parts of the Realm, and namely those of Devonshire, seeing such alterations to be made in Religion under the Minority of a Child, quite contrary to the Laws and Statutes left by King Henry the Eighth,* 1.464 and that all things went backward both at home and abroad (the Towns we had in France being lost, or upon the point of losing) they complained first, and after took Arms for defence of their Ancient Religion, in the beginning of the third year of this Kings Reign, the people of Sommersetshire and Lincolnshire be∣ginning first in the Month of May; and then in July the people of Essex, Kent, Suffolk, Norfolk, Cornwall, and Devonshire, and in August those also of Yorkshire, all crying and demanding to have the Catholic Religion remain as it was left by King Henry, at least-wise until King Edward came to law∣ful

age, thereby to be able to determin and judge of matters of Religion; which demand did wonderfully trouble and vex the Lord Seymour Protector, and other new Gospellers, who being hungry after Catholics Goods, could abide no delay in making this desired Innovation.

33. And albeit, before these Insurrections fell out,* 1.465 they did well see by di∣vers attempts that the heart of the people was wholly against those their Inno∣vations in Religion, as appeareth plainly by a Speech of the Lord Rich, then Chancellor, to the Sheriffs and Justices of Peace of all Shires, gathered toge∣ther in London in the year 1548, being the second of King Edward's Reign, as at large you may see in Fox: yet such was their importunity in this behalf,* 1.466 as they would needs go forward; which thing pleasing John Fox well,* 1.467 he wri∣teth thus: By this you may see what zealous care was in this young King, and in the Lord Protector his Uncle, concerning the Reformation of Christ's Church.

34. The same Fox also setteth down in another place what the young King answered to the Devonshire-men that desir'd that the state of matters in Reli∣gion might remain as King Henry had ordained and left them; and in parti∣cular they required that the Statute of Six Articles against Heretics might stand in force until King Edward came to full age. Whereunto let us hear his Answer, and consider thereby how matters went in those days. To the first, about the Statute of Six Articles made by his Father, and inviolably kept all days of his life, the little Child answered thus: Know you what you require?* 1.468 They were Laws made, but quickly repented; too bloody were they to be born of Our people: You know they helped Ʋs to extend rigor, and to draw Our Sword very often; yea, they were as a Whetstone unto Our Sword, and for your Causes We have left to use them; and sith Our mercy moved Ʋs to write Our Laws with Milk, how be you blinded to ask them in Blood, &c?

35. And then further he saith, But to leave this manner of reasoning with you,* 1.469 We let you wit, That the same Laws have been annulled by Our Parliament with great rejoyce of Our Subjects, and not now to be called by Our Subjects in question. Dare any of you stand against an Act of Parliament, &c? Assure you most surely, that We of no earthly thing make such account, as to have Our Laws obey'd, for herein resteth Our Honor; and shall any of you dare to breath against Our Honor, &c? Lo how little account this little King Child was taught to make of his old Father's Laws; and how thundringly to speak for the maintenance of his own! But when they came to the second point about his Nonage, he is yet more resolute; for thus he writeth:

36. In the end of your request (saith he) you would have Our Fathers Laws stand in force until Our full age. But to this We think, if ye knew what ye spake,* 1.470 you would never have uttered that motion, nor ever have given breath to such a thought. For what think you of Our Kingdom? Be We of less Authority for Our Age? You must first know, that as a King We have no difference of years nor time; but as a na∣tural Man, and Creature of God, We have Youth, and by his sufferance shall have Age. We are your rightful King, your leige Lord, your King anointed, your King crowned, the sovereign King of England, not by Our Age, but by God's Ordinance; We possess Our Crown not by Years, but by the Blood and Descent from Our Father King Henry VIII. &c.

37. All this, and much more, did they make the innocent young King to talk and write in defence of their Innovations, who had more Interest therein than He. And as for the Catholic People, albeit they deny'd not but that he was a true King in his minority of Age, yet no man was so foolish as to think (notwithstanding all these preachings to the contrary) but that it was a diffe∣rent thing for matters of Religion to be altered now in his Name, than after∣ward by Himself when he should come to Age.

38. But among all others, none urged this Argument so much, nor with such Authority, as the King's eldest Sister the Princess Lady Mary, Heir-apparent to the Crown; who being a zealous Catholic, and yet wishing well also to the Protector,* 1.471 did by sundry Letters, to be seen in Fox, admonish both Him and the rest of the Council, That they should look well what they did, during the King's minority, in altering the Will, Laws and Ordinances of his and her Father King Henry, for that afterward they were like enough to be called to account about the same when the King her Brother should come to full years. Moreover she admonished them. That they had no Authority to make such alteration in so great matters as they did, but ought rather to conserve things in the state left unto them by King Henry her Father, according as by solemn Oath they had sworn unto him before his death that they would do (but especially about matters of Religion) until the King her Brother came unto lawful Age.

* 1.47239. By all which is clearly seen how the Catholic Religion remained in Eng∣land most substantially rooted in King Edward's days, and that Heresie entred only from the teeth outward, and was maintained by violence of Temporal Authority, and according to that was the success: For after many toils and turmoils, one killing another of those that governed, when they thought they had laid a sure Platform to continue the same, by excluding the Lady Mary and Lady Elizabeth, and thrusting in Jane the Duke of Suffolk's Daughter, after King Edward's death, and had so plotted and fortified that Design, as they thought it sure; the only Zeal of the common Catholic People, for the reco∣vering the use of Catholic Religion again, overthrew all, and placed Queen Mary, as is notorious to the World. And afterward, if we consider the end of most of them, which in those days being Counsellors, for Ambition, or other respects, were promoters of Heresie, as Dudley, Pembroke, Winchester, Arundel, Shrewsbury, Paget, and others, they all died Catholicly, and most of them in this Queens days, when with much favour of the State they might have shewed themselves Heretics.

* 1.47340. And thus much for the Reign of King Edward; after whom Queen Mary succeeding, restored Catholic Religon to her seat and ancient possession again; which having endured only five years, it pleased God to give another trial and probation to his Servants, by a new alteration, in the beginning of her Majesty's Reign that now is: but yet not so forsaking them, nor their Cause, but he left sufficient testimony in our Realm at that time what Religion had born rule unto that day, and how and when the change began. For first of all the Bishops and chief Prelates of the Realm not only resisted this mutation, but most of them suffered Imprisonment or Banishment for the same, as London, Winchester, Durham, Carlisle, Worcester, Lichfield, Ely, Lincoln, Peterborough, Asaph, Chester, tho' some few other were not at first put in Prison, but detained only in Custody, and deprived, as York, Exceter, Bath and Wells. I will omit other principal men, as Deans and Archdeacons of Churches, as Dr. Cole of London,* 1.474 Dr. Steward of Winchester, Dr. Robinson of Durham, Dr. Setland of Worcester, Dr. Rambridge of Litchfield, Dr. John Harpesfield of Norwich, Dr. Jo∣liff of Bristol, Dr. Boxall of Windsor, Dr. Nicholas Harpesfield of Canterbury, Dr. Dracott of York, Dr. Peter of Buckingham, Dr. Cheasey of Middlesex, and many others, which were over-long to rehearse all. I omit also Dr. Fecknam Abbot of Westminster, and the two learned Priors of the Carthusians, Chasey and Wilson, and many other Religious Men, that left their Livings and the Realm, not to be forced to yield to this change. Which multitude of learned Witnesses, (not to speak of infinite others of less degree) being the chief throughout all Shires of England where they dwelt, did well shew by their constant profession unto their dying days what root and foundation Ca∣tholic Religion had in England at that time; and hath yet, I doubt not, as after shall be shewed.

41. And albeit in these forty years and more that have endured since the be∣ginning of this change, the Temporal State of our Realm hath for our sins been opposite and enemy to this Religion, with full intent to extirpate and extin∣guish the same, yet such is the everlasting force of Truth, and so faithful is the holy Providence of Almighty God for defence thereof in times of most need and pressure, that the Catholic Faith, and Profession thereof, hath never been more eminent and illustrious in England, than in this time of so grievous affliction;* 1.475 there having been above an hundred Priests (not to speak of others of other Degree) that have made profession thereof at the Bars and Benches of most of all the Tribunals and Judgment-seats of Eng∣land, and have sealed also their Confession with most willing offering of their Blood.

42. And indeed that which is most rare and worthy noting in this affair, is that most of them were born and bred in England during the time of her Maje∣sty's Reign, and were brought up in the Religion that now is professed within the Realm; divers of them also had study'd at the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, where they had heard the adverse Part alledge for themselves what they could, and themselves had read and examined with no small diligence what grounds the Protestants had for their Opinions; which being done, they went over the Seas to hear and see the Catholic Party, and so resolve them∣selves more substantially in such matters as nearest concerned their eternal Sal∣vation; wherein being throughly satisfied in all their doubts, they passed fur∣ther, and became Priests, and so returned into England again to impart to others the hidden Treasure of Truth which themselves had found out.* 1.476 And albeit divers of them were of that Kindred and Parentage, and so qualified also in themselves, that they might have lived both wealthily and at their ease if they would have followed the World and present course of Times, yet made they choice rather to fall into manifold Dangers, Imprisonments, and Death it self, than to forsake the truth of Catholic Religion, or forbear to communicate the same to others; which is another manner of ground and foundation for their Constancy, than John Fox recounteth in many of his Martyrs, who up∣on toys became Protestants, and of meer ignorance and obstinacy went to the Fire for the same; as namely, Joan Lashford,* 1.477 a married Maid (as he saith) of twenty years old, that took aversion from the Mass when she was but eleven years old, (upon very good grounds you must imagin in those years of her Age;) as also Agnes Potten and Joan Trunchfield, the Wives of a Beer-brewer and Shoe-maker of Ipswich, resolved to go to the Fire, upon a certain Vision that one Samuel a Minister told them that he had in the Prison with them. And upon the same ground it seemeth another Wench,* 1.478 called Rose Notting∣ham, embraced the said Minister and kissed him in the street as he went towards burning.

43. Andrew Hewit in like manner, an Apprentice of London of nineteen years old, determined to die with John Frith (then in the Tower of London) for the Opinions that he would die for, tho' yet he did not know what his Opinions were. William Hunter also, another Apprentice of London,* 1.479 and of the same age of nineteen years, running away from his Master, and finding an old English Bible lying in the Chappel of Burntwood, fell to reading thereof,* 1.480 and thereby presently became a Protestant in divers Opinions, and would needs burn for the same. Rawling White likewise is recounted by Fox to have been an old poor Fisher-man in Wales,* 1.481 and hearing of a certain new fresh Doctrin to be had out of the Scriptures in English, and grieved that himself was not able to read them, he put his little Boy to School to learn to read, who being somewhat instructed in that Art, he caused him to read Scriptures unto him,* 1.482 and profited so much therein within a little time, that the old Fisher-man

began to be a Preacher; and so leaving his Occupation, went up and down Wales with his Boy after him bearing the Bible, out of which he took upon him to preach at every Town and Tavern thereof, seeking thereby to pervert such as were no wiser than himself; nor could he be restrained from his wilful folly, until the Bishop of Cardiff apprehended him, whom afterward also he was forced to burn, for that he stood obstinate in his fantastical Opinions, which were such as scarce agreed with any Sect whatsoever. And finally, Laurence Sanders, a famous scarlet Martyr of theirs, being a married Priest, and seeing a little Bastard of his brought to him in Prison by the Woman that bare it, he was so tenderly affected thereunto, as in great vehemency of spirit he said to the standers by, What man of my Vocation would not die to make this lit∣tle Boy legitimate, and prove his Mother to be no Whore?

44. And of this I might give infinit Examples out of John Fox, what sub∣stantial grounds and motives many of his Martyrs had to run to the Fire, or ra∣ther how without all ground or probable reason in the world,* 1.483 but only wilful Pride and Obstinacy, most of them thrust themselves to death, no less than in old times did the Massilians, Montanists, Circumcellians, and Martyrians, most famous Heretics, upon the like madness, as after we are to shew more at large in the * 1.484 third Part, where I am to treat of these matters more particularly, and to give you (if I be not deceived) large matters of laughter, or rather of com∣passion, in this behalf. Now this shall be sufficient to shew both the great number and respective quality of domestical Witnesses for the Catholic Faith, and continuance thereof in our Countrey during the time of this sharp Persecu∣tion under her Majesty, and that never more than in this time hath the Ca∣tholic Church been perspicuous, honorable and eminent in our Realm; which is altogether contrary to that which John Fox ascribeth to his Church, whose Invisibility, Obscurity, and lurking from the eyes of men, he both granteth and excuseth, by the presence of Persecution against her; whereas we hold on the other side, that the true Church (and consequently Ours) is ever more visible and notoriously known in time of Affliction and Persecution, than in Peace.

45. And so we have shewed by Example of our English Church, especially in this present Age, wherein not only domestical sufferings at home have come by Fame, Books, and Writings to the knowledge of Foreign Nations, and thereby also the notice of so many worthy constant Catholics that are within the Realm; but whole Troops also both of English Men and Women in Exile for their Consciences, do represent the same daily to their eyes, as it were by a lively spectacle, to the wonder of the Christian World. But above all the rest, they must needs be greatly moved with the sight of whole Com∣panies, Families, and Communities of English of both Sexes, of tender Age, and those for the most part of very principal good Birth and Parentage, that have come forth of our Countrey for the love of Religion, and lived with great Edification in other Nations, partly in Colleges and Seminaries, partly in Re∣ligious Convents and Monasteries, yielding great admiration to strangers for their rare Vertues of Piety, Patience, Contentment and Devotion. And as for Colledges and Seminaries,* 1.485 those of St. Omers and Doway in Flanders, of Rhemes in France, of Rome in Italy, of Valliadolid, Sevill, and St. Lucars in Spain, and of Lisbon in Portugal, do sufficiently testifie. And as for Monaste∣ries both of Men and Women, they are not unknown; as that venerable Com∣pany of English Carthusians in Mechlyn, the honorable Religious Houses of English Noble and Gentlewomen in Bruxells, Lovain, and Lisbon, whose rare Vertues do singularly edifie all those that know them, and greatly illustrate the Name of our Countrey for Religious Piety with Foreign Nations. All these (I say) do bear witness at this day to the whole World, and to us also, that, God be thanked, the fire and fervor of Catholic Religion, which Christ came to plant

upon Earth, is not extinguished by so long and grievous Persecution in our Countrey, but rather increased, at least in Intention, as Philosophers do speak, tho' not in Extension.

46. And truly, when I consider the matter more seriously with my self,* 1.486 I doubt much whether England, if it had continued Catholic, had ever enjoy'd such excellent Education for their Youth at home, as by occasion of this Tribulation God hath given them abroad in Foreign Nations. Certainly the Example is rare, and never heard of in former times, and at this day the like is seen in few other Nations besides Us; but in none of those that have suffered for Catholic Religi∣on is this Blessing found so abundantly as in Ours, God make us grateful for it; for if our Ingratitude turn not the course of his Mercies hitherto used towards us, it seemeth evident that he will not suffer the Seed of Catholic Religion to be extinguished in England, having conserved the same so potently and strangely unto this day, which is from the first preaching of the Apostles and Apostolic-men to the Britans, unto the time of Pope Gregory I. under whom our English Nation was converted, as hath been declared, and from thence again downward unto Us, which is more than a thousand years; and so I doubt not but he will to the Worlds end, if our sins deserve not the contrary. And this shall serve for this first Part, containing the Deduction and Continuance of Catholic Religion in England without interruption, for more than fifteen hun∣dred years together. Now will we pass to the second Part, to examin the same Succession in Protestants Religion throughout all these Ages, if it may be found; making our Conclusion, as after you shall see, That as our Religion entred first, and hath never left England unto this hour, so the Religion of John Fox, in the form that he would have it, was never yet admitted into England publicly, by any Prince or Potentate whatsoever, until this present day, nor ever like to be. And this shall serve for the first Part of our Treatise.

The End of the First Part.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Taken out of the fourth chapter of the seventh En∣counter.
• * 1.2

  Ward. pa. 103.
• * 1.3

  The particu∣lar obligation of English-men towards the Bish. of Rome.
• * 1.4

  Bed. lib. 1. hist. Ang. cap. 17, 18. &c. Guil. Malmes∣bur. lib. 1. hist. Ang. & Pont. Ang. lib. 1. cap. 1.
• * 1.5

  Wast. pag. 192. An imperti∣nent and ca∣villing An∣swer of the Knight.
• * 1.6

  How imperti∣nent the An∣swer of the Knight is.
• * 1.7

  I say.
• * 1.8

  Bed. lib. 1. hist. Ang. c. 34.
• * 1.9

  The Faith of Rome one and the same un∣der Pope Eleutherius, Pope Gregory, and Pope Cle∣ment VIII.
• * 1.10

  Mass confessed in the second Age after Christ.
• * 1.11

  Magdeburg. cent. 2, & 3. cap. 4. de doct. Ignat. Epist. ad Smyrnens.
• * 1.12

  Iren. lib. 4. cap. 32.
• * 1.13

  Cyprian lib. 2. Ep. 3.
• * 1.14

  Tertull. lib. de coena Domini. Martial in Ep. ad Burdegal.
• * 1.15

  Sir Francis's [I say] rever∣ted.
• * 1.16

  The begin∣ning of prea∣ching the Christian Faith, and progress thereof.
• * 1.17

  Euseb. in chron. An. Christ. 44.
• * 1.18

  Euseb. in chron: Beda lib. 1 hist. Ang. cap. 3.
• * 1.19

  The first en∣trance of Christian Faith into Britanny.
• * 1.20

  Malm. in Fastis anno ab urbe condita 838. Christi 86.
• * 1.21

  Reasons of the repair of Chri∣stians to Bri∣tanny under Claudius.
• * 1.22

  Corn. Tacit. lib. 12. Ann.
• * 1.23

  Gild. de exci∣dio Britan. c. 6.
• * 1.24

  Gildas misun∣derstood by Sir Francis.
• * 1.25

  Niceph. l. 3. hist. cap. 1. Theod. lib. 9. de curandis Graec. affectib. Sophron. in Ca∣talog.
• * 1.26

  Holinsh. in de∣script. Britan. rom. 1. cap. 9. Cambd. in sua Brit. p. 162.
• * 1.27

  2 Tim. 4.
• * 1.28

  The story of Claudia Ruffina a British Lady.
• * 1.29

  Mart. lib. 11. Epig. 35.
• * 1.30

  Arguments a∣gainst the story of Claudia Ruffina.
• * 1.31

  Baron. in Mar∣tyr. ad diem 19 Maii.
• * 1.32

  Bed. Ado. Ʋsu∣ard. in Martyr. ad 14 Cal. Ju∣nii.
• * 1.33

  Points not proved in the Story of Clau∣dia Ruffina.
• * 1.34

  The first Prea∣chers of Chri∣stian Faith in England.
• * 1.35

  Metaph. apud Surium, die 23 Junii. pag. 862.
• * 1.36

  Innocent. Epist ad Decent.
• * 1.37

  Eyseng. cent 1. part 7. dist. 8.
• * 1.38

  Gild. p. 2. Ep. de excid. Brit.
• * 1.39

  Alred. apud Sur. 5. Jan. pag. 131.
• * 1.40

  About the time that St. Peter went in∣to Britanny. Acts 18. Baron. tom. 1. Annal. pa. 512. An. Christi 58.
• * 1.41

  Act. 15.
• * 1.42

  Of St. Paul's going into Britanny.

  Theod. Ep. ad Tim. & in Ps. 116. lib. 9. de curand. grac. af. Sophron. Serm. de nat. Apost.
• * 1.43

  Arnold. Mirm. in Theatro.
• * 1.44

  Of Symon the Zealous.

  Niceph. lib. 2. hist. cap. 40. Dor. in Synops. Baron. ad diem 28. Octobris. Magdeb. cent. 1. lib. 2. c. 2.
• * 1.45

  Of Aristobulus's being in Bri∣tanny.

  Mir. in theatro de conver. gen∣tium, pag. 43. Dor. in Synops. Baron. ad diem 25 Martii. Rom 6.
• * 1.46

  Of Joseph of Arimathea's coming into Britanny.
• * 1.47

  Jo. capg. in SS. Britan. Catal. Polid. Virg. in hist. Ang. li. 1. Cambd. in desc. Brit. pag. 162. Harpesf. in hist. Eccl. f. 3.
• * 1.48

  Cambd. in desc. Provin. Belg. Britann.
• * 1.49

  Fox's Cavil∣lations refu∣ted.

  Cypr. Ep. 45.
• * 1.50

  Rom. 1.
• * 1.51

  Tert. l. de pre∣scrip. cap. 36.
• * 1.52

  Cyp. in Ep. 45.
• * 1.53

  Aug. in Psal. contra part. Donat.
• * 1.54

  Heretical wrangling turning to their own confusion.
• * 1.55

  Iren. cont. hae∣reses.

  Tert. de prae∣scrip.

  Cyp. l. 4. c. 8. de unit. Eccles. A consequence of the ancient Fathers to be noted.
• * 1.56

  Guil. Cambd. in desc. Brit. de provin. Belg. An. Dom. 690.
• * 1.57

  B. Rheu. l. 3. rerum German. sub Hello. Pant. de viris Germ. part 3. Stumpf. chron. Helvet. l. 7. c. 22.
• * 1.58

  Eyseng. cent. 2. part 5. dist. 2. The story of St. Beatus a Britan, Scholar to St. Peter.
• * 1.59

  An Dom. 110.
• * 1.60

  Whether the first Preachers in Britanny were of the East Church, or West,
• * 1.61

  The foolish Inference of Heretical Ca∣villers.
• * 1.62

  Wastw. p. 192.
• * 1.63

  Fox pag. 95. Col. 2. nu. 78.
• * 1.64

  Bed. l. 2. Eccl. hist. c. 4, 19. & l. 3. c. 25.
• * 1.65

  Two Lies of Fox.
• * 1.66

  The Magde∣burgians Sen∣tence about the Conversi∣on of Britanny. Magd. cent. 2. c. 2. p. 9.
• * 1.67

  Scotos Graeco more suo tempo∣re solitos olim Pascha celebra∣re, non Romano.
• * 1.68

  The examina∣tion of the Magdeburgians false dealing about the con∣version of Bri∣tanny.
• * 1.69

  Bed. hist. Ang. l. 2. c. 4, 19. & l. 3. c. 3, 25.
• * 1.70

  About Geffry of Monmouth made Bishop•• An. 1152.
• * 1.71

  Vide Praef. in lib. rerum Brit. Gaufredi, &c. Heidelberg. impress. 1587.
• * 1.72

  Notable Falsi∣fication of Fox and Magdebur∣gians in cor∣rupting of Times.
• * 1.73

  Galfr. Monu∣metens lib. 11. cap. 7.
• * 1.74

  An absurd kind of reaso∣ning of the Magdeburgians.
• * 1.75

  Petrus Chrys. Serm. de S. A∣pollinari. Et Petrus Damian. de eodem, Mombr. tom. 2. Vide Sur. 23. Julii.
• * 1.76

  Centuriatores Magdburg. Flaccus Iuyric. Jo. Vigand. Matt. Judex. Basilius Faber.
• * 1.77

  Aug. tom. 1 p. 36. & Ep. 91. ad Conc. Carth. Hier. ep. ad De∣met. Basil. ep. ad innocent. Orosius in hist. lib. 2.
• * 1.78

  That the cu∣stom of cele∣brating Easter with the Jews came not in with the first Preachers.
• * 1.79

  Sup. c. 1.
• * 1.80

  Euseb. in chron. an. 144. Bed. l. 2. c. 2.4. & 19.

  Item l. 3. c. 25.
• * 1.81

  Bed. l. 2. hist. cap. 19.
• * 1.82

  Bed. l. 3. c. 19.
• * 1.83

  Euseb. l. 3. de vit. Constant. cap. 17, & 18.
• * 1.84

  Flor. Vigorn. in Chron. an. 628.
• * 1.85

  A Council in England about celebrating of Easter-day. Bed. l. 3. hist. c. 25.
• * 1.86

  A Synod and Disputation a∣bout the Con∣troversie of celebrating Easter in Engl.
• * 1.87

  Bed. l. 3. c. 25.
• * 1.88

  The Answer of St. Wilfrid for the Roman Use.
• * 1.89

  Marian. Scot. in Chron. an. 430, & 432. Prosp. in chron. eod. an. Bed. l. 2. c. 19.
• * 1.90

  When & how the Eastern Custom came in among the Britans.
• * 1.91

  Aug. Ep. 105. & de dono per∣sever. l. 2. c. 20.
• * 1.92

  Hierom. praef. in l. in Ezech.
• * 1.93

  Herm. Contr. an. 430. chron.
• * 1.94

  Constant. Epist. ad Episcopos a∣pud Euseb. l. 3. c. 18. de vita ejus.
• * 1.95

  Exod. 12. Levit. 23.5. Numb. 9.11, &c. 28. Deut. 16.5. Mat. 26. Marc. 14. Luc. 22.
• * 1.96

  Niceph. hist. Eccl. l. 4. c. 36. & l. 5. c. 20.
• * 1.97

  Hier. in ep. 31. ad Theoph. Epist. 64. ad Martian.
• * 1.98

  Lib. 3. c. 25.
• * 1.99

  Reasons of dif∣ficulties in the Roman Ac∣count.
• * 1.100

  Euseb. l. 7. hist. cap. 29.

  Aug. l. 2. ad quaest. Jan. c. 1, 2.
• * 1.101

  The Use of E∣pact, Golden Number, and Cycle of Do∣minical Let∣ters for obser∣ving Easter day.
• * 1.102

  Euseb. lib. 5. Ecc. hist. c. 23. S. Amb. ep. ad E∣piscopos per. Ae∣miliam consti∣tutos, and St. Bede l. de rati∣one temp. c. 57.
• * 1.103

  Where also they do yield the reasons of this Ordina∣tion.
• * 1.104

  The Sectaries of our time al∣low of the ce∣lebrating East∣er with the Jews.
• * 1.105

  Camp. in ration. reddit. cap. 1.
• * 1.106

  Luther's Opi∣nion of Easter. Lib. de Concil.
• * 1.107

  Gal. 4.
• * 1.108

  John Bale de∣fendeth the Jewish keeping of Easter. lib. 3. c. 25.
• * 1.109

  Bed. l. 3. c. 25. & l. 4. c. 3.14. An. Dom. 677, 678.
• * 1.110

  Bal. cent. 1. script. Brit.
• * 1.111

  Bed. l. 3. c. 25.
• * 1.112

  Act. 20.
• * 1.113

  Bal. cent. 1. script. Brit. in Colman.
• * 1.114

  Absurd calum∣niations of John Bale.
• * 1.115

  Bal. ibid.
• * 1.116

  Bal. cent. 1. in Wilfrid.
• * 1.117

  A most malici∣ous speech of Bale against St. Wilfrid.
• * 1.118

  Crimes ob∣jected by Bale to St. Wilfrid.
• * 1.119

  Bal. cent. 5. descript. Brit. fol. 244.
• * 1.120

  Cent. ibid.
• * 1.121

  See the Marty∣rology of Ʋsu∣ard. and the Annot. of Mo∣lan. die 12. Oct. and Baron. up∣on the Rom. Martyr. eodem die.
• * 1.122

  Epiph. haeres. 50.
• * 1.123

  Aug. har. 29.
• * 1.124

  Philast. in ca∣tal. hares.
• * 1.125

  Tert. de prae∣scrip. advers. Haeres.
• * 1.126

  Concil. Ant. cap. 1.

  Concil. Laod. cap. 7.

  Theod. l. 3. c. ult. de fab. haer. Niceph. l. 4. hist. c. 36. Damasc. haeres. 50.
• * 1.127

  Theod. l. 6. c. 9. Euseb. l. 3. de vit. Constant. c. 17, 18. Socrat. l. 6. hist. c. 10, 20.
• * 1.128

  Tert, l. de praesc. cont. haeres.
• * 1.129

  Why the Asian Custom of ce∣lebrating Ea∣ster was con∣demmed.
• * 1.130

  Gal. 2.
• * 1.131

  Gal. 5.
• * 1.132

  How the cele∣brating of some Cere∣monies or Cu∣stoms for a time might be lawful.
• * 1.133

  Acts 15.29.
• * 1.134

  Acts 16.3.
• * 1.135

  How the Ro∣man Use be∣gan of cele∣brating Easter upon a Sunday.
• * 1.136

  Bed. l. de ratio temp. c. 42. Ignat. ep. 6. ad Magnes. & 8. ad Philip. Apoc. 1.10.
• * 1.137

  Euseb. in Chron. an. 148. De consecrat. dis. 3. cap. Nosse. & ibid. dis. 4. cap. Celebritatem. Euseb. l. 5. hist. c. 23, 24.
• * 1.138

  Ibid. cap. 22.
• * 1.139

  The Decree of Pope Victor about keeping Easter.
• * 1.140

  Niceph. l. 4. c. 36.
• * 1.141

  Theod. l. 6. c. 9.
• * 1.142

  The testimony of Constantine the Emperor.
• * 1.143

  Euseb. l. 3. de vit. Constant. c. 17.
• * 1.144

  Euseb. ibid. c. 8.
• * 1.145

  The wicked Spirit of our Sectaries.
• * 1.146

  Reasons mo∣ving King Lu∣cius to enquire of Christian Religion.
• * 1.147

  Baron. in annal. Ecc. an. Christi 183. tom. 2.
• * 1.148

  When K. Luci∣us was con∣verted.
• * 1.149

  Bed de gestis Angl. l. 1. c. 4. & de sex. aetat. sub. Ant. Vero. Ado in chron. sub. Commodo Imp.

  Mar. Scot. in 6. atat.

  Pol. Virg. l. 1.
• * 1.150

  John Fox his Tergiversa∣tion.

  Fox Act. and Mon. p. 96. col. 2.
• * 1.151

  First Cavil.
• * 1.152

  The effect of 7 Cannons planted by Jo. Fox to batter the story of K. Lucius con∣version from Rome.
• * 1.153

  Fox his first kind of Argu∣ments Imperti∣nent.
• * 1.154

  The second kind of Argu∣ments, Imper∣tinent and Ig∣norant.

  Fox pag. 95.
• * 1.155

  The Age of Tertullian falsi∣fied.

  Tert. lib. de pallio c. 3. n. 42.
• * 1.156

  Jac. Pamelius in vit. Tertull. pag. 29.
• * 1.157

  Fox ibid. col. 2. n. 73.
• * 1.158

  Orig. hom. 4. in Ezechiel circa medium.
• * 1.159

  The Age of Origen perver∣ted.

  Euseb. l. 7. hist. c. 1.
• * 1.160

  A request and prevention to the Reader.
• * 1.161

  Fox. pag. 96.
• * 1.162

  A forg'd Gildas brought in by Fox.
• * 1.163

  Pol. Vir. l. 1. hist. pag. 16.
• * 1.164

  Fox pag. 96. Fox's last and falsest Argu∣ment.
• * 1.165

  Contempt of the Testimony of Antiquity.
• * 1.166

  About the Epi∣stle of P. Eleu∣therius to K. Lucius cited by Fox.

  Fox pag. 96. col. 2. n. 40.
• * 1.167

  Fox's subtilty in concealing the Original in Latin.
• * 1.168

  Fox pag. 96.
• * 1.169

  Fox Act and Monument pag. 96. col. 2. n. 30.
• * 1.170

  Act & Mon. ibid.
• * 1.171

  Holinsh. p. 24. descript. Angl. col. 2. n. 40.
• * 1.172

  The contrari∣ety between Fox and his Scholars.
• * 1.173

  About the substance of Eleutherius's Epistle to K. Lucius 183.
• * 1.174

  First Cause.
• * 1.175

  Second Cause.
• * 1.176

  Hol. l. 4. hist. Ang. c. 19. p. 52.
• * 1.177

  Jewell fo. 119.
• * 1.178

  Fox Acts and Mon. p. 96. Hol. descript. Brit. pag. 25.
• * 1.179

  The first point of Eleutherius's Epistle.
• * 1.180

  How Tempo∣ral Princes are God's Vi∣cars also.
• * 1.181

  Rom. 13.
• * 1.182

  Ephes. 6.
• * 1.183

  Reasons which make the Epi∣stle of Eleuthe∣rius suspected.
• * 1.184

  John Fox play∣eth Reynard the Fox.
• * 1.185

  Encount. 2. c. 4.
• * 1.186

  Fox's Confessi∣on, Act, & Mo∣num. pag. 96.
• * 1.187

  1, 2, 3, 4.
• * 1.188

  Comparison between the Fox and the Cub.

  Wast. p. 192.
• * 1.189

  Points of Re∣ligion not ex∣presly handled or determined by the Church within the first two hun∣dred years.
• * 1.190

  Two ways of Proof; the one negative, the other af∣firmative.
• * 1.191

  The first way of argument negative a∣gainst Prote∣stants.
• * 1.192

  The first ground of St. Augustins rule.
• * 1.193

  Ang. l. 4. de Bapt. cont. Do∣nat. c. 6.
• * 1.194

  Lib. 4. de bapt. c. 24.
• * 1.195

  Two reasons why that which is gene∣rally received in the Church and hath no known begin∣ning, may be presumed to come from the Apostles Ioan. 14.15, 16. Mat. 16.
• * 1.196

  The second ground of St. Augustin's rule.
• * 1.197

  The proper state of the Question.
• * 1.198

  Transubstantia∣tion ever in the Cath. Church.
• * 1.199

  Amb. l. 4. 5, & 9. de Sacra∣mentis.
• * 1.200

  The Council of Lateran un∣der Innocentius III. Anno 1215.
• * 1.201

  A silly shift of the Heretics.
• * 1.202

  The Inference upon all the former Nega∣tive Argu∣ment.
• * 1.203

  That Heresies could not creep into the Church with∣out being espied.
• * 1.204

  An experi∣mental dedu∣ction.
• * 1.205

  A Considera∣tion of much importance.
• * 1.206

  The difficulty of bringing in five new Sa∣craments.
• * 1.207

  Sess. 7. cap. 1.
• * 1.208

  4 dist. 5. q. 10 art. 2. & part. 3. q. 64. act. 4.
• * 1.209

  Sess. 21. c. 7.
• * 1.210

  Impossibilities
• * 1.211

  The difficulty of bringing in the use of Confession.
• * 1.212

  Two means of proofs by ci∣ting Authors.
• * 1.213

  Ordinary ca∣villation of the Adversary.
• * 1.214

  The story of the Magdebur∣gians.
• * 1.215

  A proud title against the Fathers Wri∣tings.
• * 1.216

  Magd. in praef. Ep. dedicat. ad Elizab. Angl. Reginam in cent. 4.
• * 1.217

  Magdeburgians against the Calvinists.
• * 1.218

  Cent. ib. pag. 9. Tom. 4.

  The Magdeb. speech to her Majesty a∣gainst Calvi∣nists.
• * 1.219

  Iren. l. 3. c. 3. advers. haeres. A notable speech of Ire∣naeus, that li∣ved with Eleu∣therius.
• * 1.220

  A collection upon Irenaeus's words.
• * 1.221

  About the Pri∣macy of the Pope and Ch. of Rome. Cent 2. cap. 4. pag. 63.
• * 1.222

  Ignat. epist. ad Rom.
• * 1.223

  Tert. l. de prae∣scrip.

  Cent. 3. cap. 4. pag. 84.
• * 1.224

  Cyp. l. 1. ep. 8.
• * 1.225

  Cyprian egre∣giously abused by the Magde∣burgians.
• * 1.226

  Cyp. c. 4. ep. 8.
• * 1.227

  Tract. de sim∣plic. Praelat. Cyp. l. 1. ep. 6. & l. 4. c. 4. ep. 9. Origen. tract. 1. in Mat. & hom. 15. in Levit.
• * 1.228

  Greg. de Valent. The ridiculous manner of proceeding of the Magdebur∣gians.
• * 1.229

  About Mass and Sacrifice.
• * 1.230

  Three manner of fraudulent shifts in al∣ledging & dis∣crediting the Fathers.
• * 1.231

  Cent. 3. c. 4.
• * 1.232

  Cent. 2. c. 4. p. 55.

  The judgment of the Magde∣burgians con∣cerning the second Age.
• * 1.233

  Cent. 3. c. 4. p. 17.
• * 1.234

  Magdeburgians Quips against the Fathers.
• * 1.235

  About Freewill.
• * 1.236

  Cent. 2. c. 4. p. 53.
• * 1.237

  Iren. l. 4. c. 72.
• * 1.238

  Clem. Alexan.
• * 1.239

  All Doctors in Eleutherius's time said to be in darkness a∣bout Free-will.
• * 1.240

  Cent. 3. c. 4. p. 77.
• * 1.241

  Cent. 4. c. 4. p. 291.
• * 1.242

  The Contro∣versie of Justi∣fication.

  Cent. 2. p. 59.
• * 1.243

  Cent. 3. p. 79.
• * 1.244

  Cent. 4. p. 191.
• * 1.245

  About the Sa∣crament of Penance.

  Cent. 2. p. 62.
• * 1.246

  Cent. 3. p. 81.
• * 1.247

  Cent. ib.
• * 1.248

  About Good Works.

  Ibid. p. 59.
• * 1.249

  Clem. l. 5. strom.
• * 1.250

  Enc. 2. c. 16.
• * 1.251

  Ibid. p. 80.
• * 1.252

  Orig. l 8 in Ep. ad Rom. Cyp. l. Epist. ep. 25.
• * 1.253

  About Fasting, Virginity, ob∣servation of Holydays.

  Cent. 2. p. 65.
• * 1.254

  Cent. 2. p. 65.
• * 1.255

  Ignat. Epist. ad Phil.
• * 1.256

  Against Mar∣tyrdom.
• * 1.257

  Sacred Virgi∣nity.
• * 1.258

  Page 65.
• * 1.259

  Cent. 3. p. 86.
• * 1.260

  St. Cyprian ac∣cused to hate Women.
• * 1.261

  Cyp. l. de bono Puditiae.
• * 1.262

  Cyp. Serm. de nativ. Christi.
• * 1.263

  Martyrdom.
• * 1.264

  Page 83. Invocation of Saints.
• * 1.265

  Cent 4. c. 4. p. 295.
• * 1.266

  Ibid. p. 304.
• * 1.267

  Traditions. Monastical Life. Reliques.
• * 1.268

  Page 300.
• * 1.269

  Lib. 2. ad Marcell.
• * 1.270

  Ephr. l. de lu∣ctamin. spiritus cap. 2.
• * 1.271

  Page 301.
• * 1.272

  Amb Serm. 6. de marg. tom. 3. & in orat fu∣neb. de obitu Theodosii.
• * 1.273

  Cent. 4. p. 293.
• * 1.274

  The sum of this Chapter, and shameful shifting of He∣retics.
• * 1.275

  Cap. 5. num. 2
• * 1.276

  Supra ibidem.
• * 1.277

  Bed. l. 1. hist. Ang. c. 23. & deinceps.

  Malm. de gest. Regum. Ang. l. 1. & de Pont. Angl. l. 1.

  Galf. mon. hist. Ang. l. 11. c. 22.

  Huntingt. hist. l. 3. c. 1.
• * 1.278

  Two new wicked devi∣sed shifts.
• * 1.279

  Fox Act. & Mon. p. 107. coll. 2. n. 84.
• * 1.280

  The defence of St. Gregory against Here∣tics.
• * 1.281

  Ioannes Diac. in vita Gregor. Magni.
• * 1.282

  Isid. de viris il∣lustris c. 27. The testimo∣ny of Isidorus concerning St. Gregory.
• * 1.283

  Hildef. libel. de viris illustr. The judment of St. Hilde∣fonse.
• * 1.284

  Fox Act. & Mon. col. 2. n. 5. p. 105. Fox praiseth St Agustin our Apostle against his Will.
• * 1.285

  Fox. Act. p. 107. col. 1.
• * 1.286

  Fox seeketh to discredit St. Augustin.
• * 1.287

  Bed. lib. 1. hist. c. 35.
• * 1.288

  Jo. Bale. cent. 1. scrip. Brit. fol. 35.
• * 1.289

  Bales scurruli∣ty against St. Augustin.
• * 1.290

  Of the mira∣cles wrought by St. Augu∣stin.
• * 1.291

  Greg. l. 7. Epist. 30. Ind. 1.
• * 1.292

  St. Gregories Relation of English Af∣fairs.
• * 1.293

  About the Do∣ctrin brought in by St. Au∣gustin.
• * 1.294

  Fox p. 107. col. 2.
• * 1.295

  A wise con∣sequence; for that now also Fonts would hardly suffice to baptize 10000 in a day.

  Fox in Protest. p. 9.
• * 1.296

  Whether St. Augustin taught the Saxons true Religion.
• * 1.297

  Holin. in de∣script. Britan. c. 27. col. 1.
• * 1.298

  Whether Englishmen were ever true Christi∣ans before Luther's time.
• * 1.299

  Holinsh. ibid.
• * 1.300

  Most vile blas∣phemy a∣gainst the first Christian Englishmen.
• * 1.301

  Baleus descript. Britan. cent. 1. fol. 35.
• * 1.302

  Ibid. cent. 5. fol. 245. How John Bale became a Friar.
• * 1.303

  De Reg. juris l. 6. c. Non solum. & Ca∣et. in Sum. Concil. Trid. sess. 28. cap. 15.
• * 1.304

  How Bale was unfriared and made an Apo∣state.
• * 1.305

  Bale ibid.
• * 1.306

  Fox p. 105. col. 2. nu. 5.
• * 1.307

  Bed. l. 1. hist. c. 33.
• * 1.308

  The wicked intents of our Sectaries.
• * 1.309

  That Prote∣stants cannot be sure that they are Chri∣stians accord∣ing to Fox and Holinshed.
• * 1.310

  See the Acts of Parliament Anno 31. Hen. 8. c. 14. & anno 32. c. 26. & anno 34. c. 1.
• * 1.311

  Enc. 1. c. 3, 4, 5.
• * 1.312

  Super ibid.
• * 1.313

  Enc. 1. c. 6.10 and 12.
• * 1.314

  Baleus descrip. Brit. cent. 1. fol. 35.
• * 1.315

  Fox in his pro∣testation to the Church of England, p. 9.
• * 1.316

  Sup. cap. 3.
• * 1.317

  Sup. c. 1, 3, 5, 6.
• * 1.318

  That Rome changed not her Faith from Eleutherius to St. Gregory.
• * 1.319

  That the Bri∣tish Christian Faith was the same with the Romans. Sup. c. 3.
• * 1.320

  Fox pag. 117. col. 2.
• a 1.321

  Greg. l. 5. ep. 14.
• b 1.322

  Philas. l. de haeres.
• c 1.323

  Greg. l. 3. ep. 32.
• d 1.324

  Greg. l. 10. in Job. c. 29.
• e 1.325

  Niceph. l. 18. c. 53.
• * 1.326

  Bed. l. 1. c. 25.
• * 1.327

  Greg. l. 2. ep. 36. indict. 10. & l. 9. ep. 61. indict. 4.
• * 1.328

  The presence of British Bi∣shops in Fo∣reign Coun∣cils.
• * 1.329

  See Syn. 2. A∣relatens. to. 1. Concil. and the subscripti∣ons.
• * 1.330

  Cap. 2, & 3. Athan. Apol. 2. cont. Arrian.
• * 1.331

  Hilar. de Syn. advers. Arrian.
• * 1.332

  Observations out of Histo∣ries.
• * 1.333

  Chrys. orat. cont. Gentes, quod unus est Deus.
• * 1.334

  Gild. de excidio Britan. c. 26.
• * 1.335

  The Britans use of taking Sanctuary, & swearing up∣on Altars.
• * 1.336

  Gildas ibid.
• * 1.337

  Optat. lib. 6.
• * 1.338

  Against King Aurelius. Gild. ibid. pag. 122.
• * 1.339

  Against King Maglocunus for leaving to be a Monk.
• * 1.340

  Fox Act. & Mon. p. 103.
• * 1.341

  Against Priests that said Mass sel∣dom and ill. Gil. ibid pag. 132.
• * 1.342

  Gildas ibid.
• * 1.343

  Ibid. p. 133.
• * 1.344

  Buying of priesthood. Act. 2.
• * 1.345

  Gildas ibid.
• * 1.346

  Altars and Sa∣crifice among the Britans.
• * 1.347

  Aug. to 10. ser. 237. & 251. de temp. & in concil. Milevit. c. 12. & Car∣tha. 2. c. 3. & Concil. Carthag. 4. c. 84. quibus interfuit Augu∣stinus Epiph. haeres. 50. Eu∣seb. l. 5. hist. c. 23. & in vita Constant. l. 3. c. 17.
• * 1.348

  Bed. l. 1.6. c. 27.
• * 1.349

  A Church de∣dicated to St. Martin among the ancient Christian Britans.
• * 1.350

  An evident Demonstrati∣on that the British Religi∣on agreed with that of St. Augustin.
• * 1.351

  St. German and St. Lupus.
• * 1.352

  Bed. l. 1. hist. c. 17, 18, 19, 20, 21.
• * 1.353

  That St. Ger∣man, St. Lupus, and St. Seve∣rus were Ro∣man Catholics.
• * 1.354

  Relics of Saints. Ibid. c. 18.
• * 1.355

  Ibid. c. 18. The use of Lent among the Britans.
• * 1.356

  St. Dubritius Primate of Britanny Anno 522.

  Galf. hist. Brit. l. 9. c. 12. and 13.
• * 1.357

  Ibid. p. 70. Procession and Organs.
• * 1.358

  Bal. descript. Eccles. fol. 30. St. David of Wales Anno Domini 540.
• * 1.359

  Camb. in Catal. script. Britan. Polid. l. hist. Angl. in fine.
• * 1.360

  Fox in his Protestation to the Church of England. p. 9.

  19 British Bi∣shops and Do∣ctors pretend∣ed by Fox to have been Protestants.
• * 1.361

  Neither Or∣der nor Ar∣gument good in Fox.
• * 1.362

  Fastidius Pris∣cus Trit. de script. Eccl. Bal. fol. 23.
• * 1.363

  St. Ninianus. Bed. c. 4. He∣ctor. Boet. l. 7. & 15. Ioan. Fordonius l. 3. c. 9.

  Bal. ibid.
• * 1.364

  St. Patricius. St. Palladius.
• * 1.365

  Bal. ibid. fol. 23. Marian. Scotus. in Chron. eodem. Anno 430.
• * 1.366

  Prosper in Chron. ann. 432. & 434. Bed. l. 4. hist. cap. 30.
• * 1.367

  St. Patricius.
• * 1.368

  Bal. descript. Frit. Cent. 1. fol. 25.
• * 1.369

  Ibid.
• * 1.370

  Prosp. cont. lib. Collat. in fine. Bed. hist. Ang. l. 1. c. 13. & in l. de sex aetat. Mar. Scot. l. 2. sex. aetat. an. 432.
• * 1.371

  Bacchiarius. Joan. cap. in catal. SS. Brit. Polid. Virg. 1. histor.

  Harpesf. §. 6. cap. 22. Congellus.
• * 1.372

  Bal. fol. 29.
• * 1.373

  Kentegernus.
• * 1.374

  Bal. fol. 32.
• * 1.375

  Jo. Capg. in catal. Sanct. Brit.
• * 1.376

  St. Asaph re∣ceiv'd his Con∣secration from Rome.

  Bal. ibid. f. 34.
• * 1.377

  Bal. ibid. f. 135.
• * 1.378

  Bed. l. 2 hist. c. 2.
• * 1.379

  That the Re∣ligion brought in by St. Augu∣stin was Ca∣tholic.
• * 1.380

  Greg. in epist ad Aug.
• * 1.381

  Bed. l. 1. hist. c. 18, 19, &c.
• * 1.382

  Either no true Church or Re∣ligion was in St. Gregory's time, or else it was the Roman.
• * 1.383

  The continu∣ation of Reli∣gion from St. August. down∣ward.
• * 1.384

  Bed. hist. Ang. l. 1. c. 22.
• * 1.385

  St. Aug. & his Company lan∣ded in the Isle of Thanet.
• * 1.386

  The 1 King∣dom of Kent converted to Christian Faith, anno Dom. 600. Bed. l. 1. hist. Malm. l. 2. hist.
• * 1.387

  2 Kingdom of East-Saxons converted 604.
• * 1.388

  Lib. 2. cap. 5.
• * 1.389

  3 Kingdom of the East-Angles converted an. Dom. 609. Malm. l. 1. hist. c. 6.
• * 1.390

  The 4 King∣dom of North∣umbers conver∣ted an. 626.
• * 1.391

  5 Kingdom of West-Saxons, converted 635.
• * 1.392

  6 Kingdom of Mercians, con∣verted 635.
• * 1.393

  7 Kingdom of the South-Sax∣ons, converted anno 662.
• * 1.394

  Marc. 16.
• * 1.395

  Greg. hom. 29. de festo Ascens. Domini. Marc. 16.
• * 1.396

  Why Miracles ceased after∣ward.
• * 1.397

  The Primi∣tive Church of Kent.
• * 1.398

  Malms. l. 1. de gestis Pont. Ang. pa. 112.
• * 1.399

  An infalliable principle.
• * 1.400

  Catholic Re∣ligion planted in England with great power of Mi∣racles.

  Marc. ultimo.
• * 1.401

  One Catholic Religion un∣der States that were enemies.
• * 1.402

  Diversity of States work∣eth diversity of Religion a∣mongst Secta∣ries.
• * 1.403

  In his humble motives an. Domini 1601.
• * 1.404

  Why Secta∣ries do change so often their Religion un∣der different States.
• * 1.405

  Affliction by the Danes from the year 800 down∣ward.
• * 1.406

  S. Edmund and S. Elphe∣gus Martyred by Danes.
• * 1.407

  Osbertus in vita S. Elph. apud Sur. 21. April Malm. lib. 1. Pontif. Angl. pa. 116. Matth. West. monast. an. Dom. 1011. & 1012.
• * 1.408

  The good Acts of King Canutus after his Conver∣sion.
• * 1.409

  Malmes. de gist. Regum Angl. l. 2. c. 11.
• * 1.410

  The building the Abby of Edmundbury, and rich en∣dowment thereof by King Canutus.
• * 1.411

  King Canutus his Letter from Rome. Malm. ibid. fol. 14.
• * 1.412

  How King Canutus per∣formed his good desires when he re∣turned from Rome. Ibid. fol. 42.
• * 1.413

  Stow in Chron. pag. 116.
• * 1.414

  Ibidem apud Malm. fol. 41.
• * 1.415

  King Canutus was Catholic.
• * 1.416

  1043.
• * 1.417

  The Succes∣sion of Catho∣lic Religion since the con∣quest.
• * 1.418

  Thomas Cran∣mer Arch-bishop of Can∣terbury.
• * 1.419

  The conclusi∣on of this de∣duction.
• * 1.420

  Iren. l. 3. adversus haeres. cap. 3.
• * 1.421

  Aug. in psal. contra partem Donati. Aug. ep. 165.
• * 1.422

  Aug. ibid.
• * 1.423

  Thomas Cranmer his A∣postasie doth not prejudi∣cate the See of Canterbury.
• * 1.424

  Anno Domini 600. Anno 1509.
• * 1.425

  Anno Domini 1530.
• * 1.426

  1 Tim. 3. The Catholic faith groweth by persecuti∣on and af∣fliction, and heresie is o∣verthrown.
• * 1.427

  King Henry zealous in Ca∣tholic Religi∣on.
• * 1.428

  King Henries Book against Luther, Dedi∣cated to Leo 10. An. Dom. 1523.
• * 1.429

  The begin∣ning of the Kings breach with the Pope.
• * 1.430

  Stow An. Dom. 1530.
• * 1.431

  King Henry winked for a time at some heretics.
• * 1.432

  Heretics bur∣ned An. Dom. 1531.
• * 1.433

  Thomas Aud∣ley.
• * 1.434

  Thomas Crom∣well.
• * 1.435

  Fa. Elstow contradicteth the Preacher in defence of the Pope be∣fore the King.
• * 1.436

  Anno 1533.
• * 1.437

  The begin∣ning of Fox his Gospel in England.
• * 1.438

  Anno 1534.
• * 1.439

  The first year of open breach with Rome.
• * 1.440

  Hol. pag. 964: The Franciscan Friars put out of their Con∣vents.
• * 1.441

  Heretics burn∣ed an. 1534.
• * 1.442

  Stow an. 1534.
• * 1.443

  See the Letter of Tyndal to Frith, set down by Fox. p. 987.
• * 1.444

  The Statute of six Articles, An. 1540.
• * 1.445

  The burning of Friar Barns a Lutheran, with Gerard & Jerom, Zwing∣lians.
• * 1.446

  K. Henry gave Commission for his re∣conciliation with Rome.
• * 1.447

  Catholics in∣creased by Persecution.
• * 1.448

  The name of Papist not just∣ly punishable.
• * 1.449

  The different punishments upon Catholics and Protestants doth shew what K. Henry thought of them both.
• * 1.450

  In his Epistles.
• * 1.451

  The true cause of Catholics suffering un∣der K. Henry.
• * 1.452

  The condem∣nation of Ana∣baptists and Arians by K. Henry.
• * 1.453

  Absurd posi∣tions of Ana∣baptists & Ar∣rians in K. Hen∣ry's time grounded up∣on Scriptures pretended.
• * 1.454

  The condem∣nation of Lu∣therans and Zuinglians by King Henry.
• * 1.455

  The opinion of Tyndall and Frith agree∣ing with nei∣ther Luther∣ans nor Zwin∣glians.
• * 1.456

  Fox pag. 942.
• * 1.457

  The different plea or de∣fence of Ca∣tholics from heretics,
• * 1.458

  Tertull. l. de praescript. ad∣versus haeres.
• * 1.459

  The disagree∣ment of Fox his Calendar Martyrs.
• * 1.460

  King Edward the 6th. his Reign.
• * 1.461

  The attempts of Cranmer and Ridley and others of their crew in King Edwards days.
• * 1.462

  The attempts of Seymor the Protector, and John Bale in flattery to∣wards him.
• * 1.463

  Bal. descript. Brit. cent. 5. fol. 237.
• * 1.464

  See Stow and other Chroni∣clers in the year 1549.
• * 1.465

  The general aversion of English-people against the en∣trance of He∣resie.
• * 1.466

  Fox p. 1185.
• * 1.467

  Fox ib. 1186.
• * 1.468

  Fox p. 1189.
• * 1.469

  K. Henry's Laws rejected by his Son K. Edward.
• * 1.470

  K. Edward's reply to the demand of the people of De∣vonshire.
• * 1.471

  Q. Mary's ad∣monition unto the Protector and Council.
• * 1.472

  Heresie in K. Edward's days entred by vio∣lence.
• * 1.473

  Catholic Reli∣gion restored by Q. Mary.
• * 1.474

  Bishops and Archdeacons deprived and imprisoned for Cath. Faith, An. 1560.
• * 1.475

  The constancy of English Ca∣tholics in this time of Perse∣cution.
• * 1.476

  The constant resolution of divers Catho∣lic Priests.
• * 1.477

  Joan Lashford. Fox p. 1547, 1517.

  Agnes Potten. Joan Trunch∣field.
• * 1.478

  Rose Notting∣ham.

  Fox p. 1547.
• * 1.479

  William Hunter.
• * 1.480

  Fox p. 1395. an. 1555.
• * 1.481

  Rawling White.
• * 1.482

  Fox p. 1414.
• * 1.483

  Heretical ha∣stiness to burn for their Er∣rors.
• * 1.484

  Cap. 2.
• * 1.485

  A great num∣ber of English Youths in Ex∣ile for Religi∣on.
• * 1.486

  The Conclusi∣on of the first Part of this Treatise.