Doctor Featly his Reply.

The Heathen accounted it an ominous thing, offendere in limine, to stumble as a man is going out a-doores, in lifting his legge ouer the threshold. You do so, M. Fisher: you stumble at the first setting your foote out a-doore, and (which is farre worse) you stumble at three strawes.

The first is, that (forsooth) any man reading this parcell, would beleeue, that D. White and my selfe were on the sudden summoned to this Con­ference. And what if he should beleeue so? What doth this aduātage our cause, or preiudice yours? It matters not much, how wee came to this en­counter, but how we came off. Yet are there no words in the Relation, which imply any such thing, that wee came sudden or vnprouided; nay, whosoeuer reades the first Chapter, touch­ing the occasion of the Conference, cannot but perceiue that wee had notice of it before, and came prouided. The truth is, for mine owne part, I knew of it two daies, and no more, before the meeting; and I excepted against the day ap­pointed, as beeing too neere, and sudden, for a man to prepare, either to oppose or answer in so [Page 48] spacious and [...]ast a Question, [...] from Christ to L [...]ther: yet beeing ouer-intrea­ted to be there as an Assistan [...] onely, in the [...] yeelded.

The second straw you stumbled at, is, That the Relator would make the Reader beleeue, that M. Fisher put a figure of 2. at the second part of his Question. And what if the Reader did so be­leeue? It is certaine, that there is a second [...] in your Question. And what [...] then had it beene, to set before the second Vtrum, the figure 2 ? Howsoeuer, there was no fault in the Protestant Rela [...]our, but in the Printer, who mistooke the interrogatiue point in the copy (?) for the figure 2. In the originall written Relation, there was no such figure infarced. The Printers tripping is not to be taken for a stumble of the Relators: nay, it is rather maruelled, that he tripped no more, beeing so hastie to [...] without his err [...]nd. And to thrust out a Relation without direction & authority of the like stamp, is that error of the Printer, Page 20. line 6. where the originall copie went thus, [...] a­gaine, those of M. Fisher's side calling for [...], Where are your names? D. White said, This is nothing but apparant tergiuersation, &c. The shallow Printer, not vnderstanding this passage, inuerted the sentence thus: D. White said, Where are your names? and thereby wholly peruerted the sence, D. White called not for names, but [...] the Popish Auditors for vnseasonably and vnciuilly [Page 49] calling for names, when M. Fisher was at a stand.

The third straw you stumble at, is, That the Protestant Relator seemeth to say, that the Priests and Iesuites cast out papers, &c. You say this is not true, and yet you your selfe here men­tion three such papers scattered by you; and I haue receiued a fourth, written by your man; and Sir Hamfrey Lynde hath seene a fift; and M. Wal­ker & M. Rogers, a sixt and seuenth. Whereunto al­so they haue returned Answers; the one in print, the other in written hand. Let the Reader then iudge, whether the Protestant Relator any way ouerlashed, in charging you with the dis-sprea­ding of such papers.

Doctor Featlie's Reply.

You talke of prescribing methods and pro­portions to be obserued on both sides, as if wee fought vnder your banner, or were to receiue the law from you. Who made you dictator; and M. Sweet your Magister equitum, that you take vp­on you to enact Martiall Law, for sacred [...] in the truthes quarrell? Verily, if you prescribe no better lawes in this kind then those that are set downe in the Conference, and auowed in your defence, viz.

In a good Syllogisme, to answer to the conclusion; To distinguish on a proposition, and apply it to no learn; To prooue an effect alwaies by an effect, because a [...] effect is posterius, &c. you are fitter to bee a Law-giuer among the Alogi, a sort of Hereticks. Alogi, then the Logicians; inter Alogos, then Logicos.

Doctor FEATLY.

This second condition was not propounded by M. Sweet at the Conference, as is prooued in the Attestation, page 40. but is since deuised by M. Fisher, to set a faire Glosse, and colour on his and M. Sweet's miserable shifts and euasi­ons: responsum nullum dant praeter vnicum, quod sem­per dant nihil ad propositum: whatsoeuer they are not able to answer to, that is with them nothing to the purpose. To the instance in fifteene nouel­ties of the Romish faith, M. Sweet answered, as you report, page 16. that Those things were then impertinent, and nothing to the purpose. To Sir Humfrey Lynde's motion to M. Sweet, to dis­pute of Transubstantiation out of Saint Austen, M. Sweet answered, That is not now to the Que­stion. To my proofe a priori, of the Visibility [Page 54] of the Protestant Church. M. Sweet answe­reth, page 19. That is not to the Question: you ought to prooue the truth of your Church, à posteriori. That is to the Question. To giue some relish and taste to these vnsauory Answers of M. Sweet's, You faine a Prouiso of his, which indeede is a Pro­cudo of your owne; That M. Sweet answered this according to law, for there was a Law (forsooth) made, That nothing should be spoken or heard, but to the purpose How those things aboue-al-leadged, were to the purpose, and touched the very▪ Apple of the eye of the Question, shall bee shewed in due place. In the meane time, let the Reader note, that M. Fisher taketh more liberty, then the fained supposititious decree of Geneu [...], gi­ueth him: for, that alloweth a man, onely to lie for Gods honour; but heere M. Fisher coy­neth a lie, onely for M. Sweet's credit.

Doctor FEATLY'S Reply.

First, the parts of your question are distingui­shed really: for a Protestant Church may haue beene visible in many Ages, and yet not the names of visible Protestants liuing in those Ages now to bee produced, as your selfe confesseth in effect, page 33. line 23. Wee doe not require, that all [Page 61] visible mens names should bee vpon record, nor all re­cords produced.

Secondly, they are distinguished formally in words, whether the protestant Church, &c. And whether the Names, &c.

Thirdly, they are distinguished by points: for in the middle of your question, before the se­cond part of it, you your selfe put a colon thus(:).

Fourthly, you distinguish them your selfe in your answer, in the written copie which I haue: for to the first part you answer in the margent, It was not: which answer was not, nor can bee applied to the latter part.

Either the parts of your question are distinct in sense, or out of question you propound them senslesly, whether and whether, two whethers, meaning but one. Admit the construction you giue of the first part, viz. Whether a Protestant Church were visible in all Ages, that is, so visible, as the Names of visible Protestants may bee shewed: what construction then will you make of the latter clause, & whether the Names may be shewed?

Is not this iust like Battus his spell in the Latin Poet;

Or the like of the French:

It is as if I should propound such a question: Whether Iesuites be so honest men, that they [Page 62] will not equiuocate, and whether they will not equiuocate?

Or whether the letters in a small print are so visible that they may bee read, and whether they may bee read?

Or whether the parts of this question are so distinguished that they are not altogether confounded, and whether they are not alto­gether confounded?

But you say, I am bound to dispute in your sense. What sense mean you? The sense that is to be made of your words, or the sense which you make by your mental reseruation? It seemeth you are so vsed to your Iesuitical Cabala, that you can­not in your disputing but smacke of it. I am bound to dispute with you, you say, in your sense. I grant you: am I therfore to dispute with you in your non-sence? But you say, that it is for Gram­mar Scholars to argue about the Aduerb Vtrum, and the copulatiue et and. Tell your great Clark, Cardinall Bellarmine, so, who wier-drawes your Sacrifice of the Masse out of the Copulatiue (et) and: And he was a Priest of the most high God, &c. and your Transubstantiation, out of the Pro­noune, hoc: Hoc est Corpus, &c. & your Popes supre­macie, out of the Pronoune, tibi: Dico tibi Petre, &c. Doth not Saint Austen presse Grammaticall Arguments against Cresconius the Grammarian? Nay, doth not Saint Paul himselfe presse a Gram­maticall argument Against the Iewes?Gal. 3. 16. &c. Non ex seminibus, sed ex semine; Not of seedes, as of many, but of thy seed, as of one.

[Page 63] How many ancient and later Diuines (whose bookes you are not worthy to carry after them) haue substātially proued the Trinity, by a Gram­matical Argument drawne frō the Plural Num­ber, Faciamus, Let vs make man; yea & the Trinitie in vnity, by an Argument founded vpon the con­struction of a Verbe Singular with a Nowne Plurall, Elohim, that is, Dij crea [...]it. It is no dispa­ragement, Master Fisher, for the greatest Clarke to remember his Grammar: But he, who so farre forgets his Grammar as you doe, deserueth to be turned back to the Grammar Schoole, and to haue his Garmmar-Rules better imprinted in­to him with a Schoole-Masters Ferula, or some­what else. Yea, but Aquila non capit Muse a [...]: you are a high flyer, and therefore scorne to strike at a Flie: Yet take heed of such Flies, lest you bee choked with one of them, as your Pope Adrian was. Such dead Flies as you heere swallow, are able to corrupt and spill a whole boxe of the sweetest Oyntment.

Doctor FEATLY'S Reply.

In the Answer to this Paragraph, first, you shake hands with the Acephali: afterwards, you salute the Donatists: in the end, you take vp your lodging with the Spright of the buttery; in whose company, it seemes, you take most de­light. About the yeere 480.To beginne with your Acephali. These Acephali were a shole of Hereticks, bred (as it should seeme) of the spawne of Eutyches & Diosco­rus: for they held, that there was but one nature in Christ, viz. the diuine, which they affirmed to haue beene crucified. These differed from other Here­ticks, in this especially; That whereas other Hereticks for the most part took their names from the Author and Head of their Sect, (as the Arians from Arius, the Nestorians from Nestorius, &c); these Hereticks, because their first Author could not bee certainly knowne, were termed Acephali from [...] priuatiuo, and [...], signifying a Head; as if you would say, Head-lesse Hereticks. So that, as Pliny writes of the herb Anonymos, no­men non inueniendo inuenit, that it took it's name [Page 68] Anonymos, from the want of a name; so it may be truly said of these Hereticks, that they took their name from the want, or at least, ignorance of the name of their parent and first Author. Thus your Alfonso deduceth, and expoundeth their name: Haeretici Acephali dicti,Alfonsus a Castro aduer­sus Haereses. l. 4.sic nominati sunt, [...] simul insurgentes, nullus repertus est, quiillarum esse [...] princeps atque magister. The Hereticks tearmed Acephali, were so named, because multitudes of them rising together, there was found none, who might be their Head and Master. Neither doe you in your Answer contradict, but rather con­firme this Etymology, by rehearsing diuers and sundry opinions touching their Head and Au­thor. Which variety of opinions, and difference of Authors about him, plainely argueth, that no certainty was, or can be had of him, who he was, and much lesse what was his proper name. Wherefore, distrusting your former Answer, you adde a second, saying, Howsoeuer this particular were, it doth not conclude, that there could be in all Ages visible professors of the Protestant faith, whereof no Sto­ry nor other antient Monument maketh [...] of names, or opinions, or places of aboad of any of them, [...] of those who opposed them. I grant, it doth not con­clude so much, neither was it brought to con­clude so much: it prooueth sufficiently what intended, viz. That your Question is grounded vpon a false Supposal: it cutteth M. Sweet's reason in the hams, If there were visible Protestants in [...] Ages; then certainly they may bee now named. The [Page 69] Head and Author of the Heresie of the Acephali was, I suppose, a visible man: yet can he not now, nor, for ought appeares, could he then, when hee broched his Heresie, be named. In like manner, the 7000. that neuer bowed their knees to Baal, and all your Ancestors descending from Noah, were certainly visible men: yet can they not now be all named; and therefore M. Sweet's Ar­gument, ab authoritate negatiue, and à negatione vocis ad negationem rei, is a poore fallacie, fit to bee ranked with that which they wrongfully fa­sten on my Argument à priori, viz. petitio princi­pij, or the begging the Question.

I wil not say, that in disputing about the Acephali, you shew your selfe [...]: but certainly in that which followeth, you shew your self [...], else you would not so ignorantly apply Saint Au­stens proofes in his Book against Donatists, to dis­prooue our Church. For it is well knowne, that we teach with Saint Austen, that Christs visible Catholique Church is dispersed farre and wide ouer the face of the whole earth. But you are the Donatists of our Age: for, as the Donatists confined the Catholique Church of Christ, to Africa, and therein, to the Sect of Donatus: so you also restraine the Church of Christ to Rome, and the Popes adherents.Aug. Epist. 80. ad Hesychium. We teach with Saint Austen, Non Romanos, sed omnes gentes Dominus se­mini Abrahae media quoque iuratione promisit: That God promised with an oath to Abraham, not the Romans, but all Nations for his seed. We [Page 70] beleeue, that wheresoeuer the Scriptures are re­ceiued, and Christs Sacraments administred, God calles some by ordinary meanes; and con­sequently there is a Christian Church (though ne­uer hearing of Rome, or Papall Iurisdiction) who are ordained to saluation. Wee account all that professe the name of Christ, & Doctrine of the Gospell, to be members of the visible Catholick Church; yet with this difference, some are sound members and parts, others vnsound, and these more or lesse. Wee doubt not, but Christ hath his flock vnder the Turk and Tartarian, and Mogol, in Asia, Africa, Europe, yea Italy, and Rome it selfe, euen in the denne of Antichrist. And therefore we are the true Catholicks, who maintaine verè Catholicam Ecclesiam, a Church truly Catholicke: and you are the Donatists and Masters of the separation of these times, who damne all sorts of Christians, saue those who are content to receiue the mark of the Romish Beast in their fore-heads. What then speake you of three Protestants to be na­med in euery Age? Although our Sauiours words are most true,Mat. 18. Where there are two or three gathered in my name, there am I. And although Tertullians inferences from those words,Exhort. ad virg. are most true, Vbi tres sunt, Ecclesia est, licèt Laici sint: Where there are three,de poe [...]it. there is the Church, yea though those three bee Lay-men: and, In [...] Ec­clesia est, the Church is in one or two men: yea Alensis, and diuers among you, remembred by Tostatus, Prolog. in Euangel. affirme, that from the time of Christs [Page 71] suffering, vntil his resurrection, sides in sol [...] reman­sit beata Virgine, that onely the blessed Virgin perseuered in the faith; and consequently, that the Church subsisted for that time onely in her. Yet God be blessed for it, wee need not to fly to any such defence. We shall bring into the field, pares aquilas, nay, plures aquilas, more ensignes and banners then you, yea incomparably more, for the first and best Ages: and if you exceed vs in the latter, I wish you to remember, that in time, in liquors, the lees and mother gathers towards the bottome: and a spoonefull of pure wine is better then a Hogs-head of dregs.

Yea, but we are so farre from beeing able to produce three Protestants in all Ages, as we cannot name one in euery age. How proue you this? Forsooth M. Brierly hath prooued it to your hand. A beggerly Rapsodist, whose patched cloak is already all to-be-tome by one of our noble Mastiues, and the ragges that remaine, as I am informed, will be shortly by another puld away. Were M. Brierly a man of better iudgement, and more integrity then our worthy Morton, now Lord Bishop of Couentry and Litchfield, hath prooued him to be: yet beeing a knowne Papist, to alleage meerely his work and words, to mee is but a dry kinde of proofe; and therefore you did well in this place, to knock at the Buttery-dore.

And heere I intreat the Reader to note, how the very name of the Buttery reuiues the Iesuite. In all the other passages of his Book, there is no­thing [Page 72] that pretends to wit or mirth: but heer he is very pleasant, now his dull wit is whetted: he was not able in all the Conference, nor since in his Answer, to send out such a flash. Will you know the reason? The Spright of the Butterie pos­sesseth him, and thus he diuines; The Protestants cannot abide with any patience, when they bee much pressed in this poynt, as appeareth by diuers that haue been vrged, and in particular by Doctor Featly in this Conference, who hauing been called vpon to produce Names, burst forth, &c.

It is true, I burst forth, not into a passion, as you would make the Reader beleeue, but into a laughter, as did the rest of the company: neither did I by any gesture or speech, discouer my im­patience, but your folly, who, when I alledged you reasons and testimonies, were not content with them, but called for emptie names, &c. And what was this, but to call for a Colledge Buttery-book; which is nothing but a Register of the names of such as are in that societie? If the sprite of the Butterie had not obfuscated your braine, & surprized your iudgement, you might haue vnderstood, & plainly perceiued, that I cō ­pared not a Catalogue of noble Confessors and Martyrs of the Catholique Protestant faith, to a Buttery-book; but such a Catalogue as you then required, and you vsually bring, to proue the vi­siblity of your church, viz. a companie of names, and nothing else; testes sine testimonijs, witnesses deposing nothing for you. And, may not such [Page 73] emptie Catalogues be fitly compared to But­terie-books? Note, Reader, say you, what a fit Title hee giueth to a Catalogue of Names of Protestants; who, indeed, are more like to bee found in a Butterie-booke, then any good Record of Antiquitie, as hauing had their beginning of late in one Martin Luther; who, after his apostasie, more respected the Butterie, then any ecclesiasticall storie.

I maruell not, that you, Yeomen of the Popes Butterie and Pantry, and the Blacke-gard of Rome, haue a sharpe tooth against Luther; who, by burning the Popes haruest of Indulgences, hath made the Catalogue farre lesse of those that brued for the Friers Buttery, and baked for the Popes Kitchin. Certainly, if Martin Luther had so fat a belly as you paint him with, hee did but hold that which hee got among you: for, after hee for sooke Sodom (which you Apostataes call apostasie) hee so hated and detested the glut­tony and drunkennesse of Monks and Friers, and so sharpely inueighed against them, that Erasmus sometimes spake as truly as wittily of him; That though hee otherwise highly esteemed of him, yet hee could not but confesse, that hee was much too blame in two things; that hee presumed to touch theBoth being No [...]me ta [...] ­gere.Popes Crowne, and the Monkes bellie. Wherefore seeing Luther deserueth no better of your fraternities, strike him out of your Butterie-booke, and put Father Parsons in his place, the grand Master of your new equiuocating Religion, or religious equiuocation, because, good man, his name was [Page 74] strucke out of the Buttery-booke of Bailliol-Col­ledge in Oxford; and hee expeld, for falsifying the Butterie-booke, and thereby cozening, and purloining the Students of that Colledge.

Doctor FEATLY'S Reply.

I maruel not, M. Fisher, that you leaue M. Sweet in the suds: for, you haue much adoo, with all your strength and skil, to get yourself out of the mire. M. Sweet, since he left our Vniuersities, and was metriculated into your Society, seemes (to speak in our Academicall Phrase) to haue resu­med gradum Simeonis, and to haue proceeded backward: for, whatsoeuer truth, in Logick or Philosophy, hee had learned in our Schools, he hath learned to vnlearn in yours. It seemeth, he hath met with some such Master as Timotheus the Musician was; who took double pay of his scho­lars, for vnteaching them what they had learnd of others. Hee was taught in our Schools, that an effect cannot be scientifically proued or demon­strated, Arist. analy [...]. poster. l. 1. c. 2but by the cause: for, Scire, est causam sci­re propter quam, &c. and Demonstratio is Syllogismus scientificus, [...], a scientificall Syllogism, procee­ding of those things that are former in nature, and more knowne, and causes of the conclusion. All this he hath vnlearned, and will needs go a­bout to perswade vs, that An effect, because it is posterius, must needs be proued by an effect; and by the same reason, that effect, by another effect; and [...] [...] [Page 82] Thirdly, the Romane or Westerne Church ought to bee distinguished from the Papacie, or mystery of iniquity in it; which is not the Church, but a preualent and predominant facti­on in it. The Romane Church we acknowledge to bee a member (though a sick and weak one) of the Catholique visible Church; and conse­quently, to haue some part in the gracious pro­mises made to the Church, in the Gospell: but the Papacy, or that predominant faction, is no member, but a botch or an aposteme in the Church; to which none of those promises be­long, yet many prophesies are cleerly fulfilled in it.

First, 1. Tim. 1. 4. Now, the Spirit speaketh ex­presly, that In the later times some shall depart from the faith, giuing heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of diuels, forbidding to marry, and commanding to ab­stain from meats, which God hath appointed to be recei­ued with thanksgiuing. This Prophesie hath been fulfild in the Papacy euer since Pope Hildebrand's time;Auent. annal. Boior. l. 5. edit Basil. ad Pern. p 448. in which, as Auentin [...] reports, the peo­ple in some places trod vnder foot the Hoasts that were consecrated by married Priests: Tales enim non esse sacerdotes, neque sacrificare, Hildebran­dus docebat: for, Hildebrand taught, that such were no Priests. And again, Maritos ab vxoribus separat, scorta, pudicis coniugibus: stuprà, incestus, adulteri [...], casto praefert matrimonio: Hee seuered men from their wiues: he preferred harlots before married wiues; fornication, adultery, and incest, before [Page 83] chaste marriage. And likewise in the Papacy that part of the Prophesie is fulfilled, touching the forbidding of certain meats; as for example, flesh, and egges, and white meats, and the like, and that for conscience sake, and vnder paine of deadly sin, and accounting such abstinence me­ritorious.

Secondly, that Prophesie in 2. Thes. 2. 9. Com­ming, after the power of Satan, in all power of signes and lying wonders, is daily fulfilled in the Papacy, and no where else. See their Legends, old and new.

Thirdly, that Prophesie, 2. Pet. 2. 18. They allure by the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonnesse, &c. is fulfilled in the Papacy, which permitteth pub­lick Stews, I might say, alloweth, because who keep those houses, do therefore pay a pension to the Pope.

Fourthly, that Prophesie, Iude 16. speaking great swelling words of vanity, is fulfilled in the Papacy; which teacheth, that the Church of Rome is the Mother and Queen of all Churches; that the Pope cannot erre; that hee is aboue the Law of God; that those who adhere to him, can more than merit heauen: they can supererrogate.

Fiftly, that Prophesie, 2 Pet. 2. 3. and Apoc. 18. 3. The Merchants of the earth are waxed rich, through the abundance of her delicacies. Through couetousnesse, shall they with feigned words make Merchandize of you, and the like in the Apoc. is ful­filled in the Papacie, which draweth an infinite [Page 84] treasure, by the Merchandize of pardons and indulgences for releasing soules out of Purgato­ry.

Sixtly, that Prophesie, 2. Thes. 2. 4. Hee as God sitteth in the Temple of God, shewing himselfe that hee is God, is verified in the Papacie, which giueth the Pope the stile of Lord God, Head of the Church, Lyon of the Tribe of Iuda, &c. and power to dis­pence with breach of oathes, and incestuous mar­riages, &c.

Seuenthly, that Prophesie, 2. Thes. 2. 7. The my­stery of iniquity doth already worke: onely hee who [...] letteth, will let, vntill he be taken out of the way, and [...] shall that wicked man be reuealed. This I say, accor­ding to the interpretation of the Fathers, Ter [...]l and Chrysostome, De Resurrectio­ne. is fulfilled in the Papacie. Tertullian saith Romani imperij absessi [...], in de­cem Reges diuisa, Antichristum superinducit: The de­cay of the Romane Empire, diuided into [...] Kings,Homil. in 2. Thes. shall bee the bringing in of Antichrist. Chrysostome giueth some more light, saying, When the Romane Empire shall be taken away, [...]. then hee shall come. Now all the world seeth, that the Papacie is built vpon the ruines of the Romane Empire, and at this day possesseth the seat thereof.

Eightthly, that Prophesie, Reuel. 9. 3. & 7▪ There came out of the smoke Locusts vpon the earth, &c. and on their heads, were (as it were) Crownes, &c. agreeth to your swarmes of Monks and Friers: and one of your own Exposi­tors [Page 85] interpreteth their Crownes, the round cir­cle vpon your shauelings head, like vnto a Crowne.

Ninthly, That Prophesie, Reuel. 13. 11. And I beheld another Beast comming vp out of the earth, and he had two hornes like a Lamb, and he spake as a Dra­gon, and hee exerciseth all the power of the first Beast, &c. agreeth to the Papacie and Pope, who re­sembleth Christ, whose Vicar hee calleth him­selfe, and yet carrieth himselfe like a Dragon in the Church, and he exerciseth also the power of the first Beast, to weet, the Romane Empire, de­scribed in the first verse, by seuen heads and ten hornes, because, as the first Beast, the Romane Empire, by power and temporal authority, so the Pope, by policie and spirituall iurisdiction, ruleth ouer a great part of the world.

Tenthly, that Prophesie, Reuel. 13. 18. Let him that hath vnderstanding, count the number of the Beast, for it is the number of a man, and his num­ber is 666. agreeth to the Pope, as I shewed be­fore out of Irenaeus. L. 5. aduersu [...] Haeres. c. 30. [...] nomen habet 666. et valdè verisimile est, et nouissimum regnum hoc habet vocabulum: Latini enim sunt qui nunc regnant: that is, that name Latinus hath in it these numerall let­ters, which make vp 666. and this is very like to be the name of the Beast: the last Kingdome hath this name, for they are Latines who now rule. Arethas agreeth with Irenaeus in iudgement, as Feuer dentius himselfe noteth.

Eleuenthly, that Prophesie, Reuel. 17. 3. I saw [Page 86] a woman sit vpon a scarlet-coloured Beast, full of names of blasphemie, hauing seuen heads and ten horns, and verse 9, The seuen heads are seuen hils, on which the woman sitteth. and verse 18, The woman is the City which reig [...]eth ouer the Kings of the earth, agreeth with the Papacy, as Saint Ierom teacheth vs.

Twelfthly,Epist. 17. ad Eustochium, c. 7. et l. 2. aduer. Iouinianum.that Prophesie, Reuel. 17. 4. The woman was araied in purple and scarlet color, and dec­ked with gold, and precious stones, and pearles, hauing a golden cup in her hand, full of abominations and sil­thinesse of her fornication: & supra, verse 2. With whom the Kings of the earth haue committed fornicati­on, and the inhabiters of the earth haue been made drunk with the wine of her fornication, agreeth to the Pa­pacy, which is set forth in most pompous man­ner, and enticeth the Kings and people of the earth to idolatry, which is spirituall fornication.

Thirteenthly, that Prophesie, Reuel. 17. 6. And I saw the woman drunken with the bloud of the Saints; and with the bloud of the Martyrs of Iesus, agreeth to the Papacy or Romish Synagogue, which hath spilt the bloud of many thousand protestant Martyrs, since the 1000 yeer; in w^th, Satan was let loose, vnder the name of Waldensian and Al­bigēsian hereticks, & the like names of reproach.

Fourteenthly, that Prophesie, Reuel. 17. 16. 17. And the tenne horns shall hate the Whore, &c. for, God put in their hearts, to giue their Kingdome to the Beast, till the Word of God be fulfilled, agreeth to the Pope and Papacy; to which, the greater part of the Kings of the earth, after a sort, gaue their [Page 87] Kingdomes, by submitting themselues, and sub­iecting their Kingdomes to the Antichristian Yoke. But now (God bee blessed) diuers Kings and States, whose eies God hath anointed with the eye­salue of the Spirit, haue discouered the abominati­on and filthinesse of the Whore of Babylon, and begin to hate her, and make her desolate: and wee doubt not, but in time other Princes and States will ioyne with them, and perfectly ac­complish this Prophesie, by stripping her naked, and eating her flesh, and burning her with fire.

Now to sharpen my weapons a little vpon M. Fisher's Whetstone, Confingant tale quid Haeretici: confingant tale quid Papistae: Let the Papists feine some such like thing: let them deuise, if they can, any Protestant Church, or any other society or person in the world, in which the marks of Anti­christ aboue-described, are so conspicuously to bee seen, as in the Romish Synagogue, and the Head thereof, and then I will confesse, I haue spilt all my paines in deciphering these charac­ters: but, till they haue brought some man, State, Society or Church in the world, in whom the former marks are more visible, than they are at this day in the Romish Church and her Head, I shall bee euer of the opinion of that learned Iudge and States-man, who said pleasantly, that, If the Pope of Rome were not Antichrist, he had very ill luck: for, if there should be a proclama­tion or warrant, to send for a man described by such marks as Antichrist is in the Apocalypse, [Page 88] without all question, the Pursuiuant would at­tache and bring the Pope of Rome.

Doctor FEATLY's Reply.

I know, diuers learned men haue beene of the opinion, that Aristotles Demonstrator doth dwell vnder the same roofe, with Tullies Orator, and Xenophons Prince, & Castilians Courtier, name­ly, Sir Thomas Moores Vtopia, extra anni solisque vias. To vndertake to make a demonstration, consisting ex veris, primis, immediatis, prioribus, notio­ribus causis conclusionis, is all one, saith Ludouicus Viues, as if to cure a most dangerous disease, a Quacksaluer should promise a strange receipt made of foure simples; the first whereof is found in India; the second, amongst the Ceres; the third, in the Riphean Hilles; and the fourth, in the nest of a Phenix. If that demonstration which they call potissima, the soueraigne demonstration, and non par [...]iell, containing the quintessence of al ne­cessarie proofe (consisting of all tearmes recipro­call, and all propositions inabled, and qualified with those three degrees of necessitie, so called, [...], & [...], de omni, per se, et quatenus ipsum) were any where in vse, it should seeme to bee in the Mathematicks, the most certaine Science, and fullest of euident demonstrations: but Pererius the Iesuite, and others with him, vn­dertake to prooue, that the Mathematicians vse [Page 93] no such demonstrations: and therfore many Lo­gicians and Philosophers conclude, that such ab­solute demonstrations, exalted to the highest de­gree of necessity, presently conuincing and captiuating the vnderstanding, are meere imaginary speculati­ons. Let the Philosophers and Logicians, among themselues, end this controuersie. I will pro­nounce sentence peremptorily on neither side. But setting aside that Idea of demonstration, and speaking of such demonstrations à priori, or à causâ, as are vsually found in Scholastick Diuini­ty, I will maintaine this Syllogisme to be a good demonstration (as demonstrations go), current against all M. Fisher's and M. Sweet's Logick.

The Church holding the perpetuall faith, grounded on the eternall Gospell, hath perpetuall visible Professors of that faith.

The true Church of Christ holdeth the per­petuall faith, grounded on the eternall Gos­pell:

Therefore the true Church hath perpetuall visible Professors of that faith, &c.

For the Maior or first proposition, it is partly grounded vpon Christs promises rehearsed be­fore, in the setting downe of the state of the Question, touching the Visibility of the Church, assertion the fourth; and partly vpon that Text of theRom. 10. 10. Apostle, With the hart man be­leeueth vnto righteousnesse: and with the tongue, con­fession is made vnto saluation.

The Minor or assumption is most necessarily [Page 94] true, because this eternall faith is the formall cause, constituting and making the true Church; for,Gasp. Lauren. De public, dis­putat. as Laurentius rightly argueth, Homines non con­stituunt Ecclesiam, quat [...]nus simpliciter sunt homines Europei, Romani &c. sedquatenus sunt fideles: ergo fides & doctrina fidei, est causa formalis & interna Ecclesiae, et per eam Ecclesia constituitur, et per eandem dignosci­tur: Men make not the Church, simply as they are Europeans, or Romanes, or Africans, or Bri­tans, or the like, but as they are of the faithfull, or holding the faith: therefore, faith and the Doctrine thereof, is the formall and internall cause of the Church, and by it the Church is made a Church, and distinguished from all other societies. Heere then you haue the confession of visible men to saluation, or the Visibility of pro­fessors of the sauing faith: a proper attribute, or [...], demonstrated of the proper subiect, the true Church, by the proper and neerest cause, the eternity of faith: and what more is to be re­quired in a true demonstration, à priori? You will say, this demonstrateth, that the true Church shall bee alwaies visible, but not that the Prote­stant Church. I reply, either the Protestant Church is to be supposed to be the true church, or not: if it be supposed to bee the true Church, then, hauing demonstrated the perpetuall Visibi­lity of the true Church, I haue consequently demonstrated the perpetuall Visibility of the Protestant Church; if this bee not to bee suppo­sed nor granted, then you should haue primarily [Page 95] denied this, and put vs to the proofe of it; which beeing prooued, would inferre the Visibility: but this you did not, and (I think) durst not in the Conference, for feare you should haue beene presently conuinced; yet now, since the Con­ference, you are growne so hardy as to deny it, and therefore thus I proue it.

A Church, holding & professing entirely the perpetuall faith, needfull to saluation, is a true Church.

The Protestant Church holdeth and profes­seth entirely the perpetuall faith, &c.

Therfore the Protestant Church is a true Chur.

The Maior is confessed of all sides, and must be so, because there is no saluation without the Church: where therfore the sauing faith is held and professed, there must needs bee the Church.

The Minor or second proposition is thus con­firmed:

The Primitiue Catholique faith,Iud. 3. Reu. 14. 6.once giuen to the Saints, is the perpetuall faith grounded on the euerlasting Gospel.

But the faith which the Protestant Church holdeth, is the Primitiue Catholick faith, once giuen to the Saints:

Therefore, the faith which the Protestant Church holdeth, is the perpetuall faith, &c.

The Maior in this last Syllogisme is of vndoub­ted truth.

The Assumption is thus confirmed:

The faith deriued from the holy Scriptures, [Page 96] contained in the three Creeds; The Apostles Creed, the Nicen Creed, and the Creed of Atha­nasius and the foure first generall Councels, is the Primitiue and Catholique faith once giuen to the Saints.

The Protestants faith is deriued from the Scriptures, and contained in the three Creeds, and foure Councels aboue-named:

Therefore the Protestant faith is the Primi­tiue Catholique faith, once giuen to the Saints.

In this last Syllogisme, the Maior cannot be denied by any who receyue these Creeds and Councels.

The Minor may bee confirmed three manner of waies.

First, by the publique profession, and practice of the Church of England, and other Protestant Churches.

Secondly, by deduction of each particular head of the Protestant faith, out of the princi­ples aboue-named.

Thirdly, by the Confession of the Romish Church it selfe.

And first, it is well knowne to all who are conuersant in the harmonie of Protestant confessions, or haue obserued the practice of the Protestant Churches, that the Protestant Doc­trine is, that No article of faith ought to bee beleeued, vnder paine of eternall damnation, which is not either expresly contained in Scriptures, or may be necessarily and euidently deduced from them. All the Protestant [Page 97] Churches reade or sing the Creeds aboue-na­med: and for the foure first generall Councels, there is no Protestant, who will not seale the true faith deliuered in them with his blood, if hee be cald thereunto.

Secondly, there is no particular positiue Ar­ticle of the Protestant faith, which we will not vndertake to proue by Scriptures. Let Master Sweet or Master Fisher instance, where and when they will; we will neuer refuse to meet them in this field. On the contrarie, besides those fifteen poynts set downe in the conference, there are many other Tenets of the Roman Church, which no Papist dare vndertake to proue by Scripture: & therefore, according to the maner of the ancient Heretiques,Irenaeus ad­uers. Haeres. l. 3 c. 2. Cùm ex Scripturis arguuntur, in accu­sationem conuertuntur ipsarum Scripturarum, quasi non rectè habeant, neque sint ex authoritate, & quia variè sunt dictae et quia nō possit ex his inueniri veritas ab his qui nesciunt traditionē, nō enim per literas traditā illam, sed per viuam vocē: When they are conuin­ced by Scripture, they fall on accusing the Scrip­tures thēselues, as if they were not as they ought to be, or were not of authoritie, and that they are variously or ambiguously vttered, and that out of them the truth cānot be found, by those who are ignorant of tradition; for that it (viz. the truth) was not deliuered by letters, but by word of mouth. Is not this in part your plea at this day, that the scriptures are ful of ambiguities; that they re­ceyue countenance & whole authority quoad nos, [Page 98] from the Church; that the written Word, without vn­written traditions, is not sufficient.

Thirdly, there is no positiue Article of our faith, which you your selues, or the learnedst a­mong you doe not hold and beleeue as Catho­lique: therefore wee are on a sure ground, euen by your owne confession.

To instance in most of the principall Articles.

First, wee beleeue the Canonicall Scripture to be the Word of God: you beleeue them also to bee so, but adde vnto them the Apocrypha.

Secondly, wee beleeue the Originals of the two Testaments, in Hebrew and Greek, to bee authenticall, and of vndoubted authoritie: you (I hope) beleeue so too; but you adde, that the vulgar Latin Translation is authenticall also.

Thirdly, wee beleeue the written Word of God to bee the ground of faith: you beleeue so, but adde thereunto the vnwritten word.

Fourthly, we beleeue, that Christ is the Head of his Church: you beleeue so likewise, but adde vnto him a visible Head, the Pope.

Fiftly, we beleeue, that there are two places; Heauen for them that shall bee saued, and Hell for them that shall bee damned: you beleeue so too, but adde thereunto other places more, Pur­gatorie, Limbus patrum, and Limbus infantum.

Sixtly, wee beleeue, that the true God is to be worshipped in Spirit and truth: you beleeue so too; but, you adde, that hee may bee analogi­cally and relatiuely worshipped by Images.

[Page 99] Seuenthly, we beleeue▪ that we ought to call vpon God: you beleeue so too; but adde heere­unto, that you may call vpon Saints.

Eightthly, we beleeue, that Christ is our Me­diator, both of redemption and intercession: you beleeue so too, but you adde to him Angels and Saints, vpon whose intercession and merits you in part relie.

Ninthly, we beleeue; that the Saints departed beare most ardent affection to the Saints liuing vpon earth, and pray in generall for the Church militant: you beleeue so too; but adde, that they haue knowledge of our particular necessities, and pray to God in speciall for vs.

Tenthly, we beleeue, that Christ hath institu­ted two Sacraments in his Church; Baptisme, and the Eucharist: you beleeue so too, but adde to them fiue other; Matrimonie, Penance, Or­dination, Confirmation, and Extreme Vnction.

Eleuenthly, we beleeue, that grace is annexed to the Sacraments in such sort, that all those who worthily receiue them, participate also of sancti­fying grace: you beleeue so too; but adde, that the Sacraments conferre this grace ex opere opera­to (a worse Solecism in Diuinity, than in Gram­mar), and that God is tied vnto them; so that all children, dying without Baptism, are necessarily damned.

Twelfthly, wee beleeue, that the intention of the Minister is requisite to the right administra­tion of the Sacrament: you beleeue so too; but [Page 100] you adde, that the effect of the Sacrament depen­deth vpon the intention of the Minister.

Thirteenthly, we beleeue, that in the Eucha­rist the worthy Communicant really partaketh of Christ's Body: you beleeue so too; but adde, that Christ is receiued orally and carnally vnder certain Accidents, the elements beeing transub­stantiated.

Foureteenthly, we beleeue, that we are iusti­fied and saued by the merits & Passion of Christ: you beleeue so too, but adde thereunto your owne merits and satisfaction.

Fifteenthly, we beleeue, that we ought to pray for all the members of Christs militant Church vpon earth: you beleeue so too; but adde ther­unto, that wee may and ought to pray for the Dead also.

Sixteenthly, we beleeue and receiue the three Creeds; the Apostles, the Nicene, and that of A­thanasius, and the foure generall Councels: you beleeue them also, but adde a fourth Creed, viz. the twelue new Articles coined by the Pope, and annexed to the Councell of Trent.

Thus you see how the Articles of our beleefe are drawne out of your owne confessions. That which wee hold for matter of faith necessary to saluation, you (and, in a manner, all the Christi­ans in the world) hold as we. And therefore our doctrine is Catholique, according to Vincentius Rule, quòd ab omnibus, quòd vbique, quòd semper: whereas your additions to the Catholique faith, [Page 101] were neuer maintained, neither by all Christians in any Age, nor by any Christians in all Ages. Neither you, nor all the Papists in the world, are able to proue any one point of your Trent-faith, wherein you differ from vs, to be Catholique.

And now let vs hear your Paralogisms against my demonstration.

Obiect. 1. First, you say, it conuinceth not the vnderstanding, and therefore is no demonstra­tion.

Answer. This obiection of yours sheweth, that you need to be informed in your vnderstan­ding, how a demonstration conuinceth the vn­derstanding. It is not the property of a demon­stration, actually to conuince the vnderstanding, but potentially or vertually. The meaning of this Proposition, A demonstration conuinceth the vnder­standing, is this; that A demonstration hath in it power and strength to inforce the vnderstanding of any intelligent man, to assent to the conclusi­on, the premises beeing before apprehended by him: and euery demonstration is a Syllogisme: and euery Syllogisme proceedeth ex quibusdam positis. To illustrate this by that vsuall example of the eclipse of the Moon; which the Astrono­mers demonstrate by the cause, to weet, the in­terposition of the earth between the Sun and the Moon. Before this demonstration will conuince the vnderstanding of any man, he must first haue the tearms expounded vnto him: afterwards he must be taught, that the Moon hath not light of [Page 102] her self, but receiueth it from the Sunne; third­ly, that the Sunne casteth his light by right lines. Fourthly, it must be shewed how, in such points, called by Astronomers, Caput & cauda Draconis, the Sunne and Moone are diametrally opposed: whereby it comes to passe, that, by the interposi­tion of the earth, the Moon is debarred from re­ceiuing light by the Sunne-beames. And thus in the end, the vnderstanding is conuinced by this demonstration.

That which is hindred from receiuing light from the Sunne, by the interposition of the earth, is eclipsed.

But the Moon, in the points aboue-named, viz. the head and taile of the Dragon, is alwaies hindred from receiuing light from the Sunne, by the interposition of the earth:

Ergo the Moon alwaies in those points is e­clipsed.

Aquinas sheweth, that the vnderstanding of a Ploughman is not conuinced by this demonstra­tion, but onely the vnderstanding of him who is sufficiently fore-instructed in the tearms and sup­positions heerunto belonging. Therefore as this demonstration conuinceth not the vnderstan­ding, by the bare proposall of the Syllogisme; but, the assent hauing been before wrought to the premises, it enforceth and compelleth a rec­tified vnderstanding to assent to the conclusion: In like manner, I grant, that the bare proposall of my former Syllogisme will not presently con­uince [Page 103] a man either vtterly ignorant, or in error, as I feare you are, to assent to the perpetuall Visibi­lity of the Protestant Church. But if, as I enfor­ced you to assent to the Maior, so you would haue but staied, and suffred mee to inforce the Minor, will you, nill you, you should haue beene com­pelled to yeeld to the conclusion.

But say you, in your worthy witty instance, This Argument doth no more perswade a man, that the Protestants are the true visible Church, then a man, in case of doubt, can bee perswaded by the like Argu­ment which a man may make, to prooue himselfe and his brethren to bee as well spoken of as any in the pa­rish thus:

Those who are in heart honest men, are as well spoken of as any in all the parish, &c.

Good Sir, let mee aduise you to obtaine a writ of remoue for the Windmill: for the whirling about of the sailes, wrought very much vpon your braine, as you were a-printing this Answer in the Cell. Had not you had a whimpsy in your head, you would neuer haue set this your Paralo­gisme, as a Parallel to my demonstration. In my demonstration, the Maior, rightly vnderstood, is vndoubtedly true, and de fide, as your selfe con­fesse, page 23. The Scripture doth shew, the ho­ly, Catholique and Apostolique Church, both to haue perpetuall vnchanged faith, and also to bee perpe [...]tually visible. But in your Syllogisme, the Maior is apparantly false. If honest men were alwaies wel spoken of, how can the Apostles words stand, Sine [Page 104] per famam,2. Cor. 6. 8.siue per infamiam, either by good re­port, or by euill report, &c? Nay, how can the words of truth it selfe be verified,Mat. 5. 11. Blessed are yee when men speake all manner of euill against you for my sake? Againe, perpetuity of faith is the adequate or selfe-sufficient cause of the perpetuall profes­sion thereof: but honesty in heart is not the cause of fame, but honest and vertuous actions. It is not the inward burning, but the outward shining of our light before men, which maketh men to see our good works, and thereby glorifie God in vs for them. Yet by this your very instance and Syllogisme, wee haue the better: and therfore, this your Syl­logisme may be fitly tearmed as you will haue it, A demonstration, but with this addition of Fishers folly. To be an honest man in heart, is both prius naturâ, and morally eligibilius, in nature before, and more desireable, then to be well spoken of. Mal­lem de me dicas, Vir bonus est, ergo bonae famae, quàmè contra. By this very argument, the Visibility of the Church is but secundarium quid, and [...], a secundary proofe, and a common accident to the truth of faith. And as wee therefore enquire of fame, that we may know a mans vertue: so wee therefore enquire of the true Church, as your selfe confesse, Page 23. that by it wee may learne the true faith. We seeke a guide, that we may finde the way; and not the way, that wee may finde a guide. If I can otherwise infallibly know a mans vertue without fame, (put case he liued in a De­sart) I will not then set it vpon the triall of fame: [Page 105] but in case I should faile of other proofe for a probable Argument, I would produce fame. In like manner, if wee had no other infallible proofe of the true faith, then by the perpetuall Visibility of the professors thereof, I would hold it as you doe, a point of principall moment, to enquire of the Visibility of professors: but sith we haue another more easie, direct, and infallible meanes to prooue it, viz. by comparing the doctrine with the Canonicall Scriptures; you shall giue me leaue, M. Fisher, rather to follow this Method generally prescribed, and vsed by the Antient Fathers, as I haue shewed before, Assertion 7. then the other Method prescribed by you.Touching the Visibility of the Church. Assertion 7.

Obiect. 2. Secondly, you charge my demon­stration with falshood in both the premises. The Maior you say is false, for that there may bee a Church or company, who may haue inward faith, eternall and vnchanged; as for example, a Church of Angels, &c. An instance as wide from the mark, as the heauen is distant from the earth. Our question is of a visible Church of which all sorts of men may learne infallible faith necessary to saluation. Are Angels visible? Are all [...]orts of men to learne infallible faith of a Church of Angels? Doe you hold it for a good interpretation, If thy brother of­fend thee, tell the Church; that is, tell the Angels, or a Church of Angels? Although Christ bee the Head of Angels, and they make a part of the tri­umphant Church in a large sense; yet I neuer [Page 106] read of a Church of Angels. Bellarmine saith in ex­presse tearmes, Lib. 3. de Eccles. Milit. cap. 12. Eccle­sia est Societas quaeda [...]m, non Angelorum, sed homi­num. The Church is a Society or company, not of Angels, but of men. If I should haue brought such an Argument, to proue the militant Church vpon earth (of which we disputed) to bee inuisi­ble, because the Angels are inuisible; I should haue suspected my selfe, to haue beene as wise as hee that adored, for a Relique, one of the fea­thers of the Angell Gabriels wings.

Erubuit, salua res est, you seeme your selfe to be ashamed of this Answer: and therfore you in­sist not vpon it, but passe to the Minor, burdening it with falshood; saying, The Protestants faith is not vnchanged, but so often changed, and so much subiect to change, as one may say, as a great person in Germa­ny once said of some Protestants, What they hold this yeere, I doe in some sort know, but what they will hold next yeere▪ I doe not know. I can requite you with a like Apophthegme:

The Popish faith is so subiect to change, that wee may say of it, as a learned person in France once said, That if a man would finde the Popish Te­nets, he must looke into an Almanack for them. At one time, the murther of Kings is Catholique doc­trine, viz. in the time of the League against the King of Nauarre. At another time, they pull in that horne: and then for a season, such murder is disauowed. That the Councell is aboue a Pope, was Catholique Doctrine with you in Martin the [Page 107] fifts time: it was not Catholique doctrine in Leo the tenths.

About the breaking vp of the Councell of Trent, the edition of the vulgar byAnno Dom. 1590. Sixtus Quin­tus, was authenticall, and not to bee reiected vp­on any pretence. Not long after, it was not au­thenticall: ForAnno. Dom. 1592. Clemens the eighth corrected it in many hundred places. Now goe and vp­brayd vs with our late reuised translation: but see withall, that you dispence with the Pope, that he may dispence with you. One yeere the im­maculate conception of the blessed Virgin is maintained in bookes allowed by your Church; another yeere it is impugned. Lastly, in one yeere it is determined in bookes set out by authoritie, among you, that the oath of alleageance may lawfully bee taken by Roman Catholiques: in the next yeere wee reade, that hee is no good Catholique that will take that oath. The title of vniuersall Bishop was held insolent, arrogant, profane, Antichristian, Luciferian, in SaintGreg. Epist. l. 4. Epist. 78. & 82. & alibi. Gre­gories time: but now you hold it to be the holy title of Christs Vicar. Yea, but say you, The Pro­testants haue no certaine and infallible rule, sufficient to preserue them from change. Belike then, the Scripture is no certaine and infallible rule; but vnwritten traditions are: the Word of God is no sure ground, the Popes Decree is. The A­postle then hath much deceyued vs, who saith, Let God bee true,Rom. 3 4.and euerie man a lyer. If euerie man a lyer, euerie Pope too. [...], homo, not [Page 108] vir onely, to exclude Pope Ioane from priuiledge of inerrability. You adde, to piece out your for­mer argument, that in my demonstration I proue magis notum perignotius, viz. the visibilitie, which is easily knowne, by the truth of Doctrine, which is more hardly knowne, especially by onely Scripture; of the sense whereof, according to the Protestants, who say, The whole Church may erre, no particular man can bee infallibly sure. The edge of this argument hath beene turned alreadie in the Remonstrance; whereunto I adde: First, that visibilitie is more knowne to sense, then the truth of doctrine, but not to the vnderstanding of a Christian. Second­ly, the visiblenesse of a particular present Church is the obiect of sense; but not the per­petuall, former, and future visibility of any one Church, much lesse of the vniuersall. And there­fore it is much easier, out of plaine and euident Texts of Scripture, together with the three Creeds, knowne to the simplest among vs (where the Liturgie is in a knowne Tongue) to deduce the truth of doctrine necessarie to saluation, then hee can produce a successiue Catalogue of visi­ble professours out of good Authors in all Ages. Yea but no man, say you, can hee infallibly sure of the sense of Scripture, because Protestants hold, The whole Church may erre. In thus arguing, you bewray either ignorance, or an ill conscience. Ignorance, if you knowe not, that wee distinguish betweene the essentiall or formal Church, and the Church representatiue; of poynts necessarie to saluation, [Page 109] and not necessarie; of euident Texts of Scripture, & of obscure. But if you knew these distinctions, as indeed you cannot but knowe them (hauing read D. Field and other Protestant Writers) you dispute against your conscience. Because, in obscure and difficult Texts of Scripture, the Church may erre; will it therefore follow, that no man can bee sure of the sense of plaine and e­uident Texts? In which, if wee may beleeue Aug. de doct. Christ. l. 2. c. 9. In iis enim quae aperte in Scrip­tura posita sunt, inueniuntur illa omnia, quae fide continent mo­res (que) viuendi.Saint Austin, all those things are found, which concerne faith and manners. Will it follow, be­cause wee hold, that your Church representa­tiue, that is, the Pope and his Consistorie, or the Pope and his Councell may erre, that therefore the essentiall and formal Church of Christ, con­sisting of all the visible Christians in the world, in propounding doctrine necessarie to saluation out of Scripture, may erre? The Church follow­ing her guide, the Word of God, is sure not to erre, whether vniuersall or particular. For which preseruation from errour, we doubt not, but that there is a farre higher degree of spiritual assistāce to the generall Councels, then nationall: yet in both it sometimes falleth out, that, as Austen ob­serueth, Priora à posterioribus emendentur: the former are corrected by the later.

Thirdly, you beg an Argument from your selfe, drawne from a beggerly fallacy, called Petitio principij, or begging your maine question. You say, that my former Syllogisme was a petitio principij, and therefore no demonstration: but I [Page 110] prooued it then, and since confirmed it, that it was a Demonstration, and therefore no petitio principij. Let the Reader heere obserue, how your Answers and Obiections interfere, and sup­plant one the other. Master Sweet will haue my Argument to bee a transitio à genere in genus; but you, a petitio principij. Againe, elsewhere you call this Argument, A digression from the que­stion, & a diuersiue proofe, and yet here you will haue it to bee identicall. Wherefore as Xenopha­nes▪ opposed a motion made by Eleates, Arist. Rhet. l. 2. [...]. in behalfe of Leucothea, to celebrate her funerals with teares and lamentations, and withall to sacrifice to her as a Goddesse: this motion, sayth hee, ouerthroweth it selfe. If wee sacrifice to Leu­cothea as an immortall Goddesse, we must not bewaile her death: and if we bewaile her death, as being a mortal woman, wee must not sacrifice to her, as to a Goddesse priuiledged from death In like manner, whosoeuer readeth your said seuerall Answers, may obiect a­gainst them; If the Argument aboue-named, was a petitio principij, it could not be a transitio à genere in genus: and if it were a transitio à genere in genus, it could not be a petitio principij. If it were a diuer­siue proofe, it could not bee identicall: if it bee identicall, as you here affirme, it cannot be diuer­siue: for, it implyes an apparant contradiction, to say,In prouing the same thing by the same thing, digres­seth from the same thing. that a man, in proouing idem per idem, doth digredi ab eodem. But you yeeld a reason why this Argument beggeth or supposeth that which is in question: For (say you) in asking [Page 111] which is the true visible Church, or Congregation of the true faithfull, wee aske, at least vertually, which is the true faith. By the like reason, you might proue euery Demonstration à priori, to bee a petitio prin­cipij: For, in propounding any question touching the effect, wee enquire vertually and implicitly of the cause. And therefore Aristotle, in lib. 2. Poster. Analyt. acutely prooueth, omnem quae­stionem esse quaestionem medij; that euerie scienti­ficall question is, in effect, a question of the me­dium or the cause. By the like Argument you might prooue, that all Arguments drawne à definitione ad definitum, are petitiones principij: be­cause, in propounding any question touching the definitum, wee, at least vertually, inquire of the definition. If the tearmes in my Syllogisme were but formally distinct, the Syllogisme could bee no petitio principij: how much lesse then can it bee termed petitio principij: when, as it is certaine, they are distinct really, as your selfe confesse in your fourth Argument: to which now I ad­dresse my selfe.

Fourthly, you impeach my Demonstration, by pushing againe at the Maior; saying, Although faith be prerequired to be in some or other members of the true Church; yet inward faith alone, without some outward profession, by which it is made visible, or sen­sible, doth not sufficiently make a man to be a member of the visible Church.

It is a true rule in Philosophy: Vehemens sensi­bile corrumpit sensum; the bright light of a De­monstration [Page 112] so buzzardeth you, that you see not where you are, nor knowe what you are about. I am so farre from affirming, that inward faith, without outward profession, maketh a visible member of Christs Church; that from inward faith, I inferre necessarily ex consequenti; outward pro­fession, which (as I sayd in the Conference) makes a member of the visible Church. Doo you grant the consequence, or deny it? If you grant it, my Argument proceedeth: if you deny it, confirmabit pro me vester Aristoteles, your great Clerke,Lib. 3. de Eccles. Milit. cap. 13. Cardinall Bellarmine, makes good the consequence in this manner: Qui non confitentur fidem, sed, eâ in corde retentâ, exteriùs profitentur per­fidiam et idololatriam, non sunt boni, nec saluantur; cùm ad Roman. 10. dicat Apostolus, Corde creditur ad iusti­tiam, ore autem fit confessio ad salutem: et Mat. 10. Om­nis qui negauerit me coram hominibus, &c. They are not good men, nor shall bee saued, who do not confesse the faith; but, keeping it in their hearts, outwardly professe perfidiousnesse and idolatry: For, the Apostle, Rom. 10. saith, With the heart man beleeueth to righteousnes; but with the tongue man confesseth to saluation: And Mathew 10. Whosoeuer denieth me before men, him wil I deny before my Father which is in heauen.

Let Master Fisher therefore looke back vpon my Argument, and demonstrate to me, though à posteriori, what Academicall learning taught him to deny it to bee a demonstration à priori.

Doctor FEATLY'S Reply.

This parcell of your Answer containeth in it an allegation out of D. Field, and an alleuiation or mitigation of a speech of yours sauouring of Pe­lagianisme. To your allegation out of D. Field, I answer, Mitte quod scio, Die quod rogo. D. Fields speech I acknowledge, which is very pertinent to his end, but nothing to yours; that it is requi­site [Page 116] for all Christians, especially the weaker, to fly to the Church, and hide themselues vnder her wings, to preserue them from the danger of Romish Kites, as D. Field prudently obserueth: so no Protestant, to my knowledge, denieth. Our Nouices and Catechumeni are taught, as to honor God their Father, so also the Church their Mother. Now, because the Whore of Babylon beareth her selfe, as if shee were the Spouse of Christ, and true Mother of all Christians; it is most be­hoouefull to all those that haue care of the health of their soules, to distinguish their true Mother from a false harlot; the sincere milke, and whol­some brests of the one, from the poysoned dugs of the other: to which end, D. Fields Treatise of the Church, is a singular help: which when I reade, mee thinks I see that strong wrestler Iri­tarius, Plin. nat. histo. l. 1. cap. 20.so much innobled by Pliny, qui rectos [...]t transuersos celatim toto còrpore habuit neruos, who had double sinnewes running acrosse ouer all his bo­dy: so able, so sinewie a Writer is D. Field; who hauing well traced true antiquity, doth in that whole Treatise take vp your owne weapons, and conquereth you with them: hee takes away your strongest harnesse, in which you trust, I meane, the Catholique Church; proouing it to bee ours, not yours. To the authority of Scriptures (which I here beginne at) hee addeth the consent of the Church of the liuing God, the pillar of truth, in whose determination and Communion, both wee and you are to rest. But doe you, M. Fisher, in earnest [Page 117] or with mentall reseruation, appeale to D. Fields iudgement? Me thinks you draw the latch, as if you meant to enter into the penetralia & Clozet of that work of the Church. If you bee willing so to doe, I will leade you into the Entrie. Turne me but the page ouer, you shall finde, before the circuit of the sentence alleaged by you, be en­ded, a Writ of Error sued against that Church, which wil needs be the Mistresse and Mother of the rest, nay, the whole Church. There hath she her paterne from the Donatists, of appropria­ting to her self the title & priuiledges of the Church, ex­cluding all other from the hope of saluation. So the Ro­manists cast into hel all the Christians of Greece, Russia, Armenia, Syria, Aethiopia, because they refuse to be sub­iect to the tyranny of the pope; as also the States & king­doms of Europe, which haue freed themselues from their Aegyptiacall bondage; That the Romanists abuse vs with pretences of antiquity, vnitie, vniuersalitie, ma­king the simple beleeue, that al is antient which they pro­fesse, and that the consent of all Ages is for them: whereas it is easie to prooue, that all the things wherein they differ from vs, are nothing but nouelties and vn­certainties; that the greatest part of the Christian world hath been diuided from them for certaine hun­dreds of yeeres; and more to that purpose: which in that preface he promiseth, and in the tractate prooueth. To which booke, me thinkes, M. Fi­sher, or some other of his pew-fellowes, should vn­dertake in order, proutiacet, to make answer, or else neuer to haue beene so hardie, to cite that [Page 118] Author, whose lines vpbraid them with i [...]abili­tie or negligence, so long as they suffer so lear­ned and laborious a treatisely bent point blank against the walles of Rome to remain vnbatte­red.

Now to your alleuiation: you say in that speech of yours, concerning men not able, by their owne abi­lities, to finde out the infallible faith: you meant not to imply, that any were able of themselues, without helpe of Gods grace, to attaine the true faith: I hope, you meant not, because I trust that you are not sunke so deepe into Pelagianisme. Yet you should haue circumcised your lips and tongue, and kept bet­ter the Apostles rule,1. Tim. 1. 13. to hold fast the for me of sound words: for, what Christian eare can endure to heare of men able, by their owne ability of wit or lear­ning, to find out faith? Wit and learning, I grant, are Gods good gifts, [...], not to bee vnder-valued, much lesse contem­ned; yet let me tell you, that wit and learning without grace (such is the corruption of our nature) rather hinder, then further our conuer­sion, as Saint Austen writes in his confessions, not with inke, but with teares: and on the con­trary, grace without eminent wit or learning, out­strips naked wit & learning, in our race to heauen. Indocticoelum rapiunt, et nos cum doctrinis nostris, &c.

As for that which you adde, that Visibility though alone it prooue not the true Church, yet that it much helpeth to the proof thereof, I much desire you to help me heere, in shewing me how [Page 119] it much helpeth: for Visibility is but a common accident, and I finde no topick place in Aristotle, ab vno accidente communi ad subiectum. Suppose a meere naturall man were to choose his religion, and his Church, what will Visibility helpe him? Besides, all sorts of Christian Churches, Iewish Synagogues, Mahumetane and Gentile Congre­gations are visible: will you say That is the truer Church which is more visible? If you carrie it away from vs by that marke, the Greek Church will carrie it away from you; the Mahumetanes, from the Greeke Christians; and the Idolatrous Gentiles, from all. But this poynt hath bin hand­led before in my sixt & eight Assertion, touching the Visibility of the true Church: therfore omit­ting all farther prosecution of this point, and my proofe by Syllogisme, I come now to iustifie my induction.

Doctor FEATLY's Reply.

This last passage hath been so duely pondered by those honourable, reuerend, and worshipfull Personages, who haue set their hands to the At­testation, that, to adde any more to that which is there most exactly discussed, were to offer post Protogenem lineam ducere, to draw a line after the most curious painter. The matter of fact then beeing cleered by witnesses beyond all excepti­on, I owe nothing to M. Fisher for his Counter-relation, [Page 123] saue onely satisfaction to a similitude of debt, wherewith hee thinkes hee payes mee home, pag 61.

Doctor FEATLY'S Reply.

Wee haue had triall before of your Gram­mar, Logicke, and Philosophie, and heer now you giue vs a cast of your Rhetoricke. The parts of a good similitude, called Protasis and Antapo­dosis, ought to be like two eyes looking one way, and not asquint: else they make not a similitude, but a dissimilitude. Let vs then view the aspect and cast of these your eyes. As a man, who being to pay a debt of twentie pieces or pounds to another his creditour,Protasis. in stead of actuall paying, offers to proue by a Syllogisme, that hee can pay him: and afterwards being pressed, not hauing [Page 125] one piece of gold of his owne, taketh out one or two pieces out of his creditours purse, and layeth them downe, and will lay no more downe, vntill his creditour first dispute with him whether the pieces laid downe be his owne or no. And the creditour refusing so to doe, till the whole summe were laid downe, hee the debtor taketh vp his cloke, and runneth away: Euen so Doctor Featly, Antapodosis. being to proue the visi­bilitie of the Protestant Church, first proued it by a demonstration à priori, and afterwards, at the importunitie of his aduersarie, vndertooke also to proue it à posteriori, by producing a catalogue of Names from Christ to Luther; and hee began, recto et naturali ordine, with the first age, instan­cing in Christ and his Apostles, very earnestly pressing and vrging, yea and adiuring also Master Fisher to answer this instance: And vpon Master Fishers finall and peremptorie refusall thereof, he was pulled away by the companie, and not suf­fered to argue any longer with such a one, that refused to answer Christ and his Apostles. Hold hooke and line, and the Fisher shall catch a Gudgeon. I grant, a Similitude needeth not cur­rere quatuor pedibus, runne vpon foure feet; yet certainly it is a very bad Similitude that is lame of all foure, as this is; and therefore cannot draw Dunne out of the mire. First, to produce a Cata­logue of Names, was no debt, but rather a merit or worke of supererrogation: for the visibilitie of the Protestant Church may bee, and hath beene [Page 126] sufficiently defended, and demonstratiuely pro­ued, without producing any catalogue of names: and therefore your similie limpeth on the first foot.

Secondly, to proue the visibilitie of the Church by a demonstration à priori, is not to pay a debt, by offering to proue, that a man can pay it; but actually to pay it in the purest gold, whereas it had been sufficient to pay it in ordina­rie siluer or coorser gold. For, a demonstration à priori, as farre exceeds a demonstration à poste­riori, as gold doth siluer, or the finest Angel gold baser coine of the same metall; and therefore your similie halteth on the second foot.

Thirdly, to instance in Christ and his Apostles, was not to lay downe two pieces for twentie, but to lay downe a Diamond worth manie mil­lions, in stead of twentie peeces: for if the Poet could say,Cic. Orator. Plato mihi instar millium: Plato is to mee in stead of a thousand; how much more may a Christian, especially a Protestant Christian say, Christ and his Apostles are to me in stead of mil­lions of witness [...]s? Neither is it an idle ma [...]ter, as in your ridiculous similie you would imply, but a matter of the greatest importance of all, to en­quire whether Christ and his Apostles bee ours or yours: and therefore your similitude halts downe-right on this third foot.

Fourthly, it is not all one, after a man hath laid downe two pieces, to stay till they bee weighed, before hee lay downe any more, and [Page 127] simply to refuse to lay downe any more. It is one thing, voluntarily to goe away; and another thing, to bee puld away by those of his friends whom hee hath cause most to respect; and there­fore your similie is lame also on the fourth foot: and how then can it stand vpright, much lesse goe for currant? Nay, the most beggerly crip­plenesse of this long-robed comparison, is in the begging as granted that which is the moment and ground of the whole question. Hee putteth the case, that the debter tooke the two pieces out of the creditours purse. Surely, a blind or verie credulous creditor, that would stand still till the debter picked his pocket. O patience! Good Sir Creditor, if you can, vpon your cre­dit, make good, that those whom you intend by the two tendered pieces of coyne, namely, Christ and his Apostles, are the proper legacy and riches of the Romane treasurie, take vs your bondmen in stead of payment of the rest. But if this field, wherein this precious pearle lyeth, bee by good title ours (as I then would, and at any time hereafter can proue) I think, vpon such con­uiction, you will haue small courage to clamour for the rest of your twentie. Doe but looke on this coyne, though loth, and see whose image and superscription it carryeth: is it not the liuely indeleble Character of our Sauiours Charter, the Scriptures? They are ours by Christ; Christ ours by them.

The Roman pouch is so stuffed with Traditi­ons, [Page 128] so choaked with counterfait ouergilt Cop­per of new-minted Articles, that Christ, and his Apostles, and Euangelists, cannot bee admitted; nay, will not bee embased, to bee mingled with such drosse. But I wonder that you dwell so long vpon a money-Similie. I thought you had vowed pouerty, and might not touch siluer. I haue heard of some of your orders, that if they touch coyne, it blisters their hands: as it is reported of a certaine Lady, that if a Rose-leafe bee put vpon her hand as shee is asleep, it will make it blister. But it seemeth to mee, that you are Theocritus his Fisher; you fish for gold; and, if you are not wronged, haue caught no small number of gol­den gudgeons in your net, and transported them beyond the seas, carrying, Rem ad non res, no smal stock to English Nunneries, I had almost sayd Ie­suitisses or Loyolasses. And if you will needes haue a Similie from paying monie, to illustrate this passage in the conference, thus you may frame it: Suppose a Catalogue for sixteene-hundred yeeres which haue runne since Christ, to bee sixteen-hundred pound: suppose the hundred yeeres to bee a hundred pound: I, by producing a Catalogue of visible Protestants in the first age, lay downe a hundred pound of the summe, and bid you tell it after me, and then demand of you, whether the summe bee right? You answer, that you will tell mee, after you haue told the whole summe of 1600. pounds. I presse you again & againe, to answer concerning [Page 129] this first summe, whether it be right or no: if it be right, I promise to lay down al the rest in the like manner. You answer as before, Lay downe the rest, or you shall not begin with the first & next heap, but with the last in cōclusion. I charge you, as you wil answer it at your peril to your Master, whose factor you pretend to bee, to giue-ouer all cauil­ling, & plainly & directly to answer me, whether this first sum be right or not: and when, notwith­standing this deep charge, you trifle & cauill, the witnesses, who were to set their hands to my ac­quittāce, pul me away, saying, You shal deale no more with such a cauilling factor. This is a true & perfect embled of the breaking vp of the Conference: wherewith I will breake vp my defence thereof.

Doctor FEATLIE'S Reply.

What you repeat in this passage, touching my proceedings in the Conference, hath beene before vpon diuers occasions answered; and I endeuour, as much as may bee, to auoyd your familiar figure of battologie or repetition. For, that which concerneth M. Bugges, that hee receiued satisfaction by the Conference, and gaue many thankes to Sir Humfrey Lynd for procuring it, and not as you imagine, when the trouble was about the Conference, but the selfesame night, in the very roome wherein we conferd, is not onely proued by Sir Humfrey Lynde his testimonie, but also by M. Bugges owne subscription, both to the Pro­testant Relation in generall, and to this passage in particular, and that of late, since all pretended trouble was blowne ouer. Now M. Fisher, you [Page 133] are a very merry man, that will goe about to face a man out of his beliefe, and dispute him out of that peace and comfort which hee feeleth in his consciecne. M. Bugges may well answer you in the words of Saint Austen, spoken to another purpose, Tu ratiocinare: ego credam, &c. Doe you syllogize: I will beleeue. Demand you a reason, if you list: I will giue thankes. Argue as long as you please, How I could bee resolued by the Conference? I am sure, I was resolued, and so still continue. When the Philosopher in A. Gellius, sophistically disputed against motion in this manner:

‘Whatsoeuer is mooued locally, is either moo­ued in the place wherein it is, or wherein it is not. It cannot be mooued in the place wherein it is not, because that is not to mooue locally, or in place: where the body hath no existence, it can haue no motion. Neither can a body be said to mooue in the place wherein it is, be­cause while a body remaines in its place, it can­not mooue from it:’ One of his Auditors there present, whose arme a little before had beene put out of ioynt; though hee could not verbally answer that his sophisme, yet hee really refeld it thus, At ego sensi motum luxato brachio, I am sure I felt a motion when I hurt my arme, and put the bone out of ioynt. In like manner, when you ar­gue, that M. Bugges could not be mooued by any thing that was spoken in the Conference, be­cause his Question was not answered; or the [Page 134] Catalog [...]e of names not produced; or because D. Featlyes proofs were diuersiue; or because the Po­pish. Audience still called for names; or because you and M. Sweet are not yet satisfied: or because I know not what: M. Bugges, in a word refutes all your reasoning, At ego sensi motum, I am sure I felt my selfe mooued by it: and the doubt which sometimes shook my faith, remooued: So that I wa [...] thereby, not (as the other) put out of ioynt, but in ioynt; and of lame, made whole. Neither will it hence follow, that M. Bugges must needs bee a man of meane capacity, if hee were satisfi­ed by so short a Conference; but rather that God oftentimes vseth weake meanes to ouerthrow Satans strong holds. Firmus the Maniche was reclaimed from that heresie, by a digression of Saint Austens, in a certaine Homily. Alipius was drawn from heathenish sports and pastimes, by an example, in a discourse of Saint Austens on the By. That noble Venetian Marquesse, who left both his Marquisate, and all that hee had, for the loue of the Gospell, and comforta­bly ended his daies at Geneuae, was at the first re­formed, both in his faith and life, by an elegant Simile in a Sermon of Peter Martyrs. Sometimes an exquisite Sermon taketh not the Auditory; and sometimes a farre meaner taketh: now and then a stronger Argument worketh not vpon the vnderstanding and will; and yet a weaker proofe doth at the same time. You cannot bee ignorant of the Story in Ruffinus, of an Arrian Philoso­pher, [Page 135] of whom the learned Bishops in the Coun­cell could get no ground at all: yet a simple vnlearned man, by two or three blunt Interroga­tories, conquered and quite confounded him. Wil you from this, and the like instances, inferre, that the men so conuerted, were men of meane capacity? The contrary euidently appeares in Story: you should rather from hence gather with religious Austen (who may truly be said to [...] written, rather ex gratia, then degratia, so gratiously doth hee write of grace) totum Deo dare, qui vo­luntatem hominis bonam et praeparat adiuuandam,Enchirid. ad Laurent.et adiuuat praeparatam; in our first conuersion, and euery good work after, to ascribe all to God, who both prepares the will to be aided by grace, and aideth it beeing prepared.

Yea, but say you, M. Bugges much desired a se­cond meeting: therefore it seemes, he was not so resolute a Protestant as wee make him. If this were a good Argument, you might prooue all of our side to be vnsettled in our Religion; yea, M. Deane of Carlile, and my selfe also, who much desired, and yet doe, a second meeting, to perfect the work then begun. Though a man be neuer so well resolued in poynt of Religion, yet hee may desire to heare Diuinity-Disputations, and make good vse of them. Yea, but M. Bugges de­sired M. Fisher and M. Sweet to giue him a Cata­logue of names of professors in the Romane Church; saying, that if after this, the Doctors would not giue him a Catalogue of Protestants, [Page 136] hee would dislike their cause. If M. Bugges spake so (which I haue reason to doubt) hee spake it, as hauing certaine knowledge, that we had a Ca­talogue, which hee did or might haue seene in the Conference. Nor indeed doth the desiring or requiring of a Catalogue, inferre any doubt of the conclusion. Though a plaine vnlearned Christian beleeue most firmely, that Christ was borne of the seed of Abraham and Dauid, yet may he desire more particular information, by hearing the beginning of Saint Mathews, or Saint Lukes Gospell read and expounded to him. More­ouer, when I vndertooke to name those who taught Protestant Doctrine in all Ages, if I should faile therein, he should haue had iust cause to dislike my proceedings. Yea but, say you, there was no cause giuen in the Conference at all, of any effectuall resolution to be made by the old Gentleman: therefore he could not bee so resolued by it, as is pretended. For answer heereunto, though I am loth, yet you constraine mee to recapitulate the chiefe points touched in the Conference. Before the Conference, M. Bugges was somewhat staggered in the poynt touching the Visibility of the Church, by your brauadoes, and Rhodomontadoes, that all the world were Papists before Luther; That there was neither vola nor vestigium of a Protestant Church before that time;A briefe reca­pitulation of the Confe­rence.That no Protestant Minister durst encounter you in this point: if any should be so hardy, as to enter into these lists with you; you would presently blank, silence, [Page 137] and nouplus them. Thus possessed, and in some sort perplexed by your bold and confident asserti­ons and false suggestions; hee with much adoe, by Sir Humfrey Lyndes meanes, procures a Con­ference: wherein hee findes all things otherwise then hee might expect. Hee and all the Audito­ry obserued D. White, and my selfe, to bee very ready and earnest to proceed in the Questions; both to prooue the Visibility of our Church, and disprooue theirs. On the contrary, he could not but see you to cast all manner of Remoraes and rubs, to hinder speedie and direct proceedings: and for the Questions touching the Visibility of the Church,

First, hee heard, that the perpetuall Visibility of the Church, beeing a point of faith, was not to bee built vpon deduction from humane Stories and good Authors, as the Iesuite requi­red; but vpon diuine reuelation in Gods Word, as is confessed byBellarmine loc. sup. cit. Canus loc. l. 11. c. 4. praeter aucto­res sacros nul­lum historicum certum esse posse et [...]doneum, ad faciendum cer­tam in theologia fidem. learned Papists.

Secondly, that a Protestant Church might haue beene visible in all Ages, and yet not the names of visible Protestants now to bee produ­ced, and prooued out of good Authors, because neither all mens names euer were vpon re­cord, nor are all antient Records preserued to this day, neither can wee come by all those Re­cords that are yet extant.

Thirdly, that notwithstanding the Popish brag, that All the Christian world were Papists before Lu­ther; yet you were not able to name any Coun­trey, [Page 138] City, Village or Hamlet, nay not any man, who for 500. yeeres and more after Christ, either professed your Trent-faith in generall, or those fifteene points recited in the Conference in par­ticular.

Fourthly, that the surest and strongest meanes to prooue the perpetuall Visibility of a Church, was á priori, by the conformity of it's faith to the Scriptures: of which faith, God promiseth in his Word, that it shall haue visible Professors to the worlds end.

Fiftly, that a visible Church inferrs not neces­sarily a right faith. Iews, Mahumetanes, Gentiles, and diuers sorts of blasphemous Hereticks, haue visible professors of their impieties: yet are they all of a wrong beliefe; if of any on the con­trary, the right faith inferreth necessarily a visi­ble Church, because the true faith cannot bee in a Church, which professeth it not openly, or priuately: therefore the prime and maine que­stion of all is, of the right beliefe, of the primi­tiue and Catholique faith, whether wee or the Church of Rome haue it; and not of a Catalogue of names.

Sixtly, that an offer was made, to name some eminent persons, which in al Ages taught Prote­stant Doctrine, and opposed the Romish errors, either when they came in, or not long after; and that this Catalogue had beene a good way pro­ceeded in, if you had not beene the cause by your delayes and tergiuersations.

[Page 139] Lastly, that when I instanced in Christ and his Apostles, and vrged you againe and againe, yea and adiured you also to answer directly, whe­ther they taught our faith or yours; yet you per­emptorily and finally refused so to doe: which hee might well interpret, to proceed from your apparant distrust in your cause.

And now let the discreet Reader iudge, whe­ther M. Bugges had not reason to alter his opini­on concerning you and your cause, at least in that particular, of which only he seemed to doubt of.