[Page 3] ROmane Catholiques affirme that Protestants cannot bee saued. It matters not much what Romane Catho­liques affirme. They can affirme much more then they can proue, many dreames and fancies are at this day affirmed to be Catholique verities; and affirmed with great confidence. For want of truth is vsually attended with want of modesty. None so forward to affirme as they that haue least reason for their affirmations. But strong affirmati­ons are but weake proofes. In the meane while, the boldnesse of these Dogma­tists in affirming so many things in Reli­gion vpon so feeble grounds, hath mise­rably distracted Christendome, and lost vs the peace of the Church.

But doe all Romane Catholiques af­firme this? So the Mistaker seemes to im­plie by his indefinite assertion. But sure the man is much mistaken. It is indeed an old tradition in the Popes Court, & one of the [...] or Maximes of the Ie­suiticall Cabale, subesse Romano Pontifici est de necessitate salutis, that none but [Page 4] perfect Papalins can be saued. But all Pa­pists are not Courtiers, nor as yet, I hope, fully Iesuited; without doubt, many learned and moderate men liuing in the outward Communion of that Church (among the French, Venetians, and elsewhere) doe beleeue, that it is possible enough for Protestants to be sa­ued, since they beleeue in Iesus Christ, though they beleeue not in the Pope. Many of thē haue said so much in effect, & many more would happily say more, if they might speake freely. But though their thoughts are free, their tongues are not. Yet the Mistaker beleeues his ma­sters the Iesuits, who haue told him, that God will exclude out of heauen all sorts and sects of men, that are not (as them­selues) fully and furiously Romanized.

No Protestant can be saued! Here is a quicke purging Index for the Booke of Life. Woe were it with mankinde, if the Fathers of the Society had the kee­ping of that Booke. Their sponge would quickely make it a blotted Cata­logue. Out, into hell, must all, but them­selues, and their disciples: so many as will not worship the I doll at Rome. But [Page 5] our comfort is, these men shall not be our Iudges at the last day. Thankes be to God and our Lord Iesus Christ, we shall stand or fall to our owne Master, in whom we beleeue, whom we desire to obey, and whose we are: who will blesse vs the rather for their vniust maledicti­ons and censures. These Fathers may doe well (and so may their children and clients) who are so fierce in passing such capitall sentences against vs, to looke well to their owne finall great accounts. What will become of them God onely knowes, [...]: and to his judgement we leaue them. Onely this we know that hee shall haue judgement Iam. 2. 13. without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy. And sure, it will goe hard with them if that be true which the prudent Cardinall d'Ossat (lieger for K. Henry IV. in the Epist. 8. [...] Villeroy. Court of Rome) collected from their wicked doctrines and practises, that (not­withstanding their great pretensions of zeale, yet indeed) they beleeue neither in Iesus Christ nor the Pope. For whatso­euer he be, Tros Tyriusue, Catholique or Heretique, if their Generall haue him in a jealousie, hee must bee cut of from [Page 6] Earth and Heauen. Witnesse Henry the Great of France, who, after his conversi­on to the Pope, was strucke first in the mouth by one of their Disciples, and at last in the heart by another. And in that See Anti­coton. black Powder plot (the eternall shame of Popery) for the advancement of the Catholique cause, Papists and Prote­stants both together, (since they could not be seuered,) pell mell must all bee blowne vp. And that by the warrant and advise of these conscientious Casuists, the Fathers. But happily, though they meant to kill their friends in that massa­cre, yet they meant afterwards to put them in the Kalender; intending first to martyr, then to worship them, which had beene honour and recompence suffi­cient for their slaughter. But for all Pro­testants, dying there or elsewhere, they are sent packing to Hell: for their doome is, no Protestant can be saued.

But why may not a Protestant be sa­ved? There is no good Protestant, but (for matter of practice) hee Nehem. 1 11. desires to feare Gods name, Hab. 6. 1. repents for sinnes past, and for the time to come hath a sincere Act. 11. 23. purpose of heart to cleau vnto the Lord, [Page 7] Heb. 1 [...] 18. willing in all things to keep a good con­science and to liue honestly, obeying God in all his Commandements, so far as hu­mane frailtie will permit: and (for mat­ter of faith) he beleeues entirely the Scriptures, the Catholique Creeds, and whatsoever the Catholique Church in all ages hath beleeued as necessary to salvation. All Papists in the world shall never be able to proue the contrary: Ey­ther that we walke not according to these rules, or that so walking mercy and peace shall not be upon vs, as upon the Israel of God. Nay, since we are no further depar­ted from the present Romane Church (as our late most learned Soueraigne K. Iames professed) then shee her selfe is departed from Scripture, from Antiqui­tie, and from her selfe in her best times: shee is most vncharitable in condemning vs to Hell, because we refuse to yeeld a blind obedience to her new dictates. And the same damnatorie sentence which shee darts against vs, involues e­qually and alike all truely Catholique Christians in the world, with whom in substance we fully consent. Surely in this furious rashnesse and rigor, there is [Page 8] nothing of that sweet vertue of Charity, which 1. Cor. 13, 4. 5. 6. S. Paul describes by other pro­perties, quite contrary to these. But this is the wont of factious Zelotes, to hate and damne all that approue not their fantasies: and this angry vnmercifull passion they call Zeale to the holy cause, and that which is meere malice must passe for pure Charity.

So it fares with the Mistaker and his fellowes the Iesuiters. They take it ill that we charge them with want of Cha­rity; when in their hopes and desires (for, blessed be God, they can doe it no otherwise) they barre vs out of Heauen. It seemes, they would haue vs patiently to receiue their bloudy sentence of dam­nation, and though they pronounce it a­gainst vs without authority and without reason, yet wee must beleeue it is not without Charitie. But he much mistakes Charity and the Iesuites, who can be­leeue thē to be Charitable. Nay he must be a stranger in Europe & in the world, who can beleeue it. Their owne Catho­liques in France beleeue it not, where the Voiez [...]e Mercure Ie­suite. 1. part. Vniversitie of Paris (in the name of all the others in that kingdome) hath [Page 9] not long since challenged aboue 30 Ie­suites, to haue published execrable do­ctrines, (touching the killing of Kings, and absoluing subjects from their alle­giance) tending to the ruine of mankind and confusion of all gouernment: and many of their bookes of this argument, by publique arrest of the Parliament of Paris, haue beene condemned to the fire. And for this reason the whole Hist. In­terd. lib. 3. Senate of Venice, (not one man of that great Body dissenting) did by decree chase these men out of their Dominions into perpetuall banishment, because, the Iesu­ites haue beene the Authors and Instru­ments of all tumults, seditions, confusions, and miseries hapning in these times, in all Kingdomes and States of the world. And for vs Protestants, the innumerable massacres of our Brethren in France, the Netherlands, and elsewhere, the barba­rous treasons plotted against our late Soveraignes and this state of England, are demonstrations sufficient of their burning Charity towards vs. But all their other cruelties are but milde in comparison of this doctrine, which pur­sues our soules after death into the nea­thermost pit.

[Page 10] Yet the Mistaker thinkes this may bee affirmed with Charitie. For it is impro­bable the Catholique Church should want Charity: Most true; not improbable only but meerely impossible, the Catholique Church should bee without Charity. Far be it from vs to lay this vnjust and vnworthy charge vpon our deere Mo­ther, the Catholique Church. Charity is the ligament which connects both that whole mysticall Body vnto Christ her glorious Head, and each seuerall member one to another. The good spi­rit of truth and loue ever assists and ani­mates that great Body. This Mother of all Christians we honour as her dutifull Children, and are well assured of her blessing. We accuse not Her for want of Charity (shee giues no cause:) but that proud and curst Dame of Rome, who takes vpon her to revell in the House of God, to let in and cast out at her plea­sure, pretending that shee alone is the Mother and Mistris in that House, vsur­ping and confining all the priviledges of the Catholique Church to her selfe alone. A pretension void of colour, and against the principles of reason, which [Page 11] forbids to confound a part with the [...]hole. Though shee haue many waies [...]aid the Harlot, and in that regard de­ [...]erved a bill of divorce from Christ, & [...]he detestation of Christians; yet for [...]hose Catholique verities which she re­ [...]aines, wee yeeld her a member of the Catholique, though one of the most vn­sound and corrupt members. In this sense the Romanists may bee called Ca­tholiques. But that the Roman Church [...]nd the Catholique are all one, is a very vaine and absurd imagination, vnknowne That the Roman Church was anciently e­steemed a To­picall or par­ticular Church distinct from others, and in and vnder the Vniversall, may appeare by Ignatius in tit. epist. ad Rom. Eccles. [...]. Ambros. Epist. 83. ad med. Post Aegyptorum supputationes & Alexandrinae Ecclesiae definitionem, E­piscopi quo (que) Romanae Ecclesiae meam adhuc expectant sententiam, quid existimem de die Paschae. Innoc. ad Victricium Epis. Rothomag. [...]initio. Quia Romanae Ecclesiae normam magnoperè postulâsti, adver­tant Ecclesiarum regionis vestrae populi, qualis servetur in vrbis Romae Ecclesijs disciplina. Caelestinus Episc. Rom. Epist ad Ioan. Antioc. ap. Binn. in Concil. Ephes. Gr. lat▪ par. 1. § 20 pag. 143. Asserat se (Nesto­rius) fidem tenere, quam secundum Apostolicam doctrinam Romana▪ & Alexandrina, & Catholica Vniversalis Ecclesia tenet. Nicolaus PP. 1. Epist. 8. ad Michael. August. ad fin. Imperatores (Nero, Diocletia­ [...]us) persequuti sunt Ecclesiam Dei & maximè Ecclesiam Romanam. Idem. Epist, 70 ad Hincmarum, & caeteros Galliae Episcopos. Conan­tur Graeci tam nostram specialiter (Romanam,) quam omnem, quae linguâ latinâ vtitur, Ecclesiam reprehendere, quòd jejunamus in Sab­batis, &c. Et paulo post. Opprobria haec vniversali Ecclesiae, in eâ dun­taxat parte, quae latinâ vti dignoscitur linguâ ingeruntur. Innocent. 3. lib. 2. Epist. 200. ad Ioan. Patriarch. Constantinopol. Dicitur Vniversalis Ecclesia, quae de vniversis constat Ecclesiis, quae Graeco vocabulo Ca­tholica nominatur,—Ecclesia Romana sic non est Vniversalis Eccles [...] sed par [...] Vniversalis Ecclesiae. to Antiquity, still loosly & miserably [Page 12] begged by the Mistaker & his fellowes, without offer of proofe. Catholique-Ro­man is in true interpretation vniversall­particular: which are tearmes repugnant, that cannot be equalled. The latter re­straines & cuts off from the former: and therefore to conclude the Catholique Church within that of Rome, is to al­ter the name and nature of it, & hee that will be only a Roman must cease to be a Catholique.

It is not then the Catholique Church that we charge, or that charges vs, but the Roman. And therefore all the dis­course of our Mistaker touching the great charities of the Catholique Church to her children, is very roving and impertinent, winde and words with­out substance. All confesse, that she dif­fuses her selfe in all acts of charity after all imaginable sorts. So doe her severall members, the particular Churches. They of the Reformation, and especial­ly this of England, as amply and boun­tifully as any in the World; and much more effectually and to better purpose then that of Rome. It hath beene pub­likely avowed by some, and cannot bee [Page 13] deni'd by a modest Adversary, that hard­ [...]y any age in former times may com­pare with this of ours, (since this Church was happily purged from Popery,) for publique expressions of charity. In so few yeares, hardly ever so many Chur­ches or Chappells built and beautified for Gods service, so many Colledges, Schooles, Libraries, Hospitals, erected and endowed for the honour of learn­ing, and reliefe of the necessitous. And for the other part of charity, which is spirituall, regarding the worship of God and the conduct of soules to their eter­nall happinesse; never did any Church afford more plentifully the meanes of grace, nor more abound with all helpes and advantages of piety, then this of ours. The word of God is diligently preached amongst vs, the Sacraments of Christ reverently administred, abuses in both are remoued, the two extreames of Religion, Superstition and Prophane­nesse are avoided. The ignorant are in­structed, the disorderly admonished, comforts are applied to the afflicted, terrours to the impenitent, censures and punishments to the obstinate. In our Lei­turgy, [Page 14] policy & ceremonies, in the go­vernment of our Prelates, in the dil [...] ­gence of inferiour Pastors, in the who [...] face of our doctrine and discipline, we [...] haue a most neere and faire resemblan [...] of reverend Antiquity: all tending to th [...] gaining of soules to Christ, and to guid [...] them in the way of peace.

In the Church of Rome appeares bu [...] little of this true Charity, even toward her owne Children. Indeed, shee bring [...] forth children vnto God by her bap­tisme, but then poisons them in thei [...] breeding. When they aske for bread she giues them a stone, and serpents in stead o [...] fishes. To the word of God shee adde [...] and equalls her owne traditions, shee reads vnto them that word, but in an vn­knowne tongue: teaches them to pray, but in latine, which they vnder­stand not: directs them to call vpon God, but withall vpon Saints and An­gells: to worship God, but also dumbe blockes and Images. She sends them to Legends and pictures for much of their instruction: and for direction of their conscience to such Casuists, as their [Page 15] Aurel. Sor­bonicus in vin­dicijs contra Loemelij Spong. nuper editis pag. 516. 517. Omnium maximèin­tolerandi suntilli Theo­logiae moralis, Institutionum moralium, mo­ralium Prae­ceptorum,—.—compilatores, penè omnes Iesuitae inter quos Th. S. edidit densum opus de Ma­trimonio, o­pus non glo­riandum sed pudendum; tam immani curiositate, tam invisa in rebus spuris­simis, & in­fandis, & monstrosis, & diabo [...]icis perscrutandis sagacitate horrendum, vt mirum sit pudoris alicujus hominem ea sine rubore scripsisse, quae quivis mode stioris ingenij vix sine rubore legat. Portenta ista sunt, non Scripta [...] ani­morum insidiae, non mentium subsidia; incentiva libidinum, schola fla­gitiorum, non honestae disciplinae, non scientiae Christianae instrumenta. insoelix scientia quae omnes perdere, paucos juvare nata est. Quae circ [...] sordes & sterquilinia volvenda & revolvenda volutatur. owne men say to haue dishonoured Christian Religion with their abomina­ble lessons. She feeds them with a dry communion, and bids them obey Iesus Christ & the Pope if they will be saued. Shee hath also her Bishops, Priests, Mas­ses, Monkes, Monasteries, &c. but such as haue nothing almost common with those of the Primitiue times, saue only their names. In briefe, with all possible artifices, shee labours to keepe her poore Laity hoodwink't in ignorance: for blind men are more tractable and obedi­ent vnto their leaders. She tells them, it is Creed enough for them to beleeue on­ly in the Catholique Church, that is, to resigne vp to her selfe their vnderstand­ing. But if any of them be farther curi­ous to know more, especially if they will be prying into that dangerous booke, the Bible; shee sends them into the In­quisition to be there better catechized. [Page 16] Thus she deales with her owne. But for all vs that are (in her opinion) Here­tiques, if her power were answerable to the malignity of her desires, no remedy, wee should all passe through the Inquisi­tion into Hell.

Here is the image of the Romane cha­rity so much magnified by the Mistaker. Though we deny not, Romanists may be really charitable in some kinde: But doth not that Charity (such as it is) both begin and end at home? Contrary to the nature of true Charity which be­ginneth at home, and then enlargeth it selfe to others even to enimies. The Mi­staker talkes highly of their redeeming of Captiues, endowing of Hospitalls.—But in conscience, what thinkes hee? would not a needy Iew be sooner relie­ved in any Roman Hospitall (as they are in the City of Rome) then a poore Pro­testant? And a captiue Turke as soone ransomed as a Calvinist? Nay, we are so little beholding to them for any chari­table affection towards vs, that the ci­vility of faire language is thought too good for vs. Our writers are denyed the honour of their Ind. Hispa­nicus Bern. de Sandoual. edit. Genev. p. 167 à Conrado Gesnero. adde Auctore dam­nato ib. per Iacobum Fri­sium. adde Auctorem damnatum p. 168. vnum integerrimum simistri judicij, dele, virum integerrimum ib. doctissimus Simlerus do­ctissimè expo­suit. dele, do­ctissimus & doctissime. ib. doctissimi diligentissimi (que) viri. dele. do­ctissimi dili­gentissimi (que) ib. clarissimus medicus. dele, olarissimus. learning or morall [Page 17] parts; and if any modest man among them doe but Poss. Bibl. select. pag. 130. de Bodi­no. vniversa hâc tractatio­ne haeresin sa­pit, quod Lu­therum, Cal­vinum, Me­lancthonem, caeteros (que) ho­norificè no­minet. fairely mention any of our names, he is said to savour of here­sy. Briefly, their people are taught by their principall Staplet. Orat. de Hae­resi & Magiâ. ad fin. sicut cum Magis ac Maleficis commerci a habere, pacem inire, matri­monia facere, omnia, Chri­stianus ab­horret; non secùs cum Haereticis ea­dem commer­cia repudian­da sunt. Sicut Magos publi­cá authoritate arcemus, civitate pellimus, poenis atroeibus afficimus, eodem studio ac vigore in Haereticos vti oportet. Sicut Magici libri a­pud Christianos nusquàm tolerantur, ferro & flammâ excinduntur: i­dem de Haereticis statuendum est. Doctors to esteeme vs no better then Doggs, Infidells, & Ma­gitians that haue professedly to doe with the Divell: to abhorre all commerce, truce, and treaties with vs, to burne our Bookes, and pursue our persons with fire & sword, and farre and wide to chase vs out of their coasts. Thus are we hated, reviled, per­secuted, cursed, euen into eternall fire by the Roman Charity. If this be Chari­ty, there is no such thing, as malice, in the world. The mercies of the wicked are cruell. Prov. 12. 10.

But, it seemes, the Mistaker thinkes it favour and Charity enough to vs, to grant that though our Protestancy bee a damnable sinne, yet it is not the sinne a­gainst the Holy Ghost. For that sinne ex­cludes repentance; but Protestants may re­pent, and be converted and reconciled to [Page 18] the Roman Church, and so may bee saued. And therefore we are not vtterly con­clamati, past all hope of life or recoue­ry. This yet is more favour then wee could expect from that Pope Caus. 25. qu. I. can. Violatores. who makes every wilfull offender against the Canons, a blasphemer against the Holy Ghost. And yet the Mistaker herein is no more favourable to vs, then hee is to Iewes or Mahumetans. I presume hee thinkes no Infidells to sinne against the Holy Ghost: vpon their repentance and conversion hee will grant they may bee faued. Iust so he thinkes and speakes of vs. We haue a great obligation to him for his charity.

Well, if we will be saued, wee must renounce our errours, be converted to the faith & reconciled to the Roman Church. Our faith is the same which the Apostles (or the Apostolique Church) deliuered in their Creed; the same which the Ca­tholique Church, in the Creed of Atha­nasius, calls the Catholique faith: into this faith wee haue beene baptized, in this wee liue and hope to dye. To renounce this faith were to abiure our Christen­dome. I hope the Mistaker would not [Page 19] wish vs converted from our Creed. Though some of his Ghostly Fathers seeme very meanly to esteeme it. As ap­peares by that Censura Symboli Apo­stolici—ad in­star Censurae Pari siensis. Censure which lately they published vpon it, or rather against it: wherein they say many Articles of it seeme to be ambiguous, dangerous, false, scandalous, hereticall, &c. They say, it is in jeast, to shew the Sorbonists the iniqui­ty of their censures. As if Iesuiticall Li­bells and Pamphlets were to bee paral­lel'd with the Apostles Creed: or this as justly censurablea as the other. God in justice may giue ouer these men to A­theisme in earnest, who dare so pro­phanely dally with the Capitall Princi­ples of our faith.

By the profession of this faith and by the bond of loue, wee are linked in communion with the Catholike Church and all her true members in the world; and doubt not of Gods mercy in Christ, if to our holy faith, we adde an holy con­versation. For the Church of Rome, in those Catholique truths which shee maintaines, we are not at oddes with her, nor need any reconciling: for that masse of errours and abuses, in iudgement and [Page 20] practise which is proper to her and wherein she differs from vs, wee iudge a reconciliation impossible, and to vs (who are convicted in conscience of her corruptions) damnable.

Hitherto the Mistaker hath declamed for the Charity of his party: Hee will now declare the truth of his assertion, that no Protestant can be saved. Vpon ex­amination, wee shall finde as little truth in the substance of his discourse, as there is in the designe of it, little judgement, or conscience, or modesty.

[Page 22] TO the first ground. No Protestant denyes the Ca­tholique Church to bee one; They all deny the present Romane to be that one Catholique. If the Mistaker could proue this, his paines were to some purpose. But his labour is lost in prouing the vnity of the Catho­lique Church; where of there is no doubt or Countrouersie. Wherefore we might passe ouer this impertinent discourse; but that some things are here and there intermingled, which merit our conside­ration.

That place of Deut. 17. 8, 9. Deut. 17. alleaged by the Mistaker, makes little for the vnity of the Church, and much lesse for the Popes pretence of soueraigne power. All Controuersies ciuill or ceremoniall are there referred, (not to the high Priest a­lone, as the Mistaker thinkes, but) to the great Tribunall, called the Sanhedrim, mixt of Priests and Iudges; in which all harder causes Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill should be determined, without further appeale. And therefore in respect of the [Page 23] two kindes of causes, there were or­dained two sorts of men to heare them, Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill; the Ciuill meant by the Iudge, and the Ecclesiasti­call by the Priest. And though some­times amongst the Iewes, both the of­fices did meet in one person, as in Eli; yet this was very rare and extraordina­ry. Ordinarily they were distinct; and in the place which we haue in hand, ma­ny learned Oleaster, Lyra. Cajeta. apud Bonfrer. in loc. Sigon. de Rep. Heb. libr. 6. cap. 7. The Dow­ists in their Marginall note on 2 Chron. 19. vers. 11. [...] Romanists affirme, that by the Iudge is meant the ciuill Magistrate; who is directly distinguished and seuered from the Priest, both in the [...] originall Hebrew, and in the [...]. Septuagint. And by the Priest, not the high Priest alone, but (as may appeare by this Deut. 17. 9. Text, and another Deut. 2. 1. 5. parallell to it) the Priests the sonnes of Leui. It is true, amongst those Priests there was one Chiefe, in this mat­ter of highest judgement, in doubtfull causes: So also was there one principall among the Iudges, in 2 Chron. 19. 11. matters of the King, that is in ciuill causes. And there­fore if the Mistaker imagine, that Chri­stians must haue one soueraigne Bishop ouer all, because the Iewes had one chiefe Priest; it may bee inferred by as good [Page 24] consequence, that Christians must haue one Soueraigne Prince ouer all, because the Iewes had one chiefe Iudge. And as all harder causes of religion must be re­ferred to the Pope, so all ciuill matters must be referred to the Emperour. And as amongst the Iewes, the Priest and Iudge were resident in the place which the Lord had chosen; so the Pope and the Emperour must both abide in Rome. These Inferences are all of equall vali­ditie, that is, of no validitie at all.

The Mistaker will here haue it further well considered, that the whole people was to submit to the determination of the high Priest, (or of the Iudge as the Vers. 12. Text hath it) vpon no lesse then the paine of death. True: and there was reason for it. For 1. the sentences of them that are in authority, and iudge soue­raignely without appeale, should bee obeyed or submitted vnto, though they be vniust. A lawfull power, though vn­lawfully abused, must be obeyed. A man fined or censured in the Star-chamber, high Commission, or other Courts of Iustice, may not pretend for his con­tempt the error or misinformation of the [Page 25] Iudges. But though Inferiours be alwaies bound to obey the sentences of their Gouernours; yet they are not bound to beleeue them alwayes to be just. Those Priests and Iudges had a rule to gouerne their judgements by: they were to giue sentence Vers. 11. & Eze. 44. 24. according to the Lawe. If they erred frō this rule, (as sometimes Es. 28. 7. Ier. 2. 26. 27 Ezek. 22. 26. Mal. 2. 7, 8. Act. 23. 3. Vide Tirin. in loc. Deut. 17. they did) the errour might bee obserued, though the authority might not be dis­obeyed. 2. The high Priest in cases of moment had a certaine Priuiledge from errour, if he cōsulted the Exod. 28. 30. Numb. 27. 21. diuine oracle by the judgement of Vrim, (or by the brest-plate of judgement, wherein were Vrim and Thummim) whereby he had an absolutely infallible direction. If any such promise frō God to assist the Pope could be produced, his decisions might then justly passe for oracles, without examination; till then, his words with vs weigh so much as his reasons, no more.

The sinne of Numb. 16. Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, was a rebellion, yea treason a­gainst Moses the civill Magistrate, as well as a schisme from Aaron the Priest. That they with all their company descended aliue into the pit of hell, is rashly and [Page 26] vncharitably said. God is mercifull; and who knowes, whether some of them did not repent in the last moment? All that this example teacheth is, that men ought not to rend themselues from the Church of God, or joyne in the de­spising of gouernment, with them that seeke their owne glory, and not the glory of God.

It is a certaine truth, that Matth. 28. 20. all things ought to be obserued which Christ hath commanded: and that Mark. 16. whosoeuer belee­ueth not in Christ, shall be condemned. But here is no warrant for the Church of Rome, to force vpon the world her owne commandements and Creeds, in stead of Christs.

That in S. Matthew, Matt. 18. 17. If thy Brother offend thee tell the Church, is nothing to the point in hand. Our Lord speakes of a brother wronging his brother, and af­ter priuate admonition refusing to obey the Church: which may be vnderstood of an assembly as well Ciuill as Ecclesi­asticall. Howsoeuer, it cannot be meant of the Church Catholique, (which can­not bee told of priuate injuries,) but of particular Congregations; or as [Page 27] Chrys. hom. 61. in Matth. vide etiam Tiri­num in lo­cum. S. Chrysostome expounds it, of their Pastors. And if any disorderly or obsti­nato persons wil not be reformed by their good counsels, they are to be esteemed as prophane Publicanes and sinners, or to be punished with spirituall censures. Yet in these censures any Church may erre, through misinformation or igno­rance, and may sometimes strike the in­nocent; as is confessed by Pope Decretal. lib. 5. tit. 39. c. 28. A nobis. Inno­cent the third, and Mag. lib. 4. dist. 18. lit. F. Lombard. Whether in points of discipline or doctrine, so long as any Church holds to the rule of truth, & gouernes her selfe by the word of God, shee erres not. We are to heare the Church our mother; true, that is, not rashly to oppose her; especially if shee be carefull to heare God our Father, and Christ her Spouse, of whom it was said, Matt. 17. 5. Heare him. The Mistaker therefore vainly inferres from this place, that the iudgement of the Church in all Contro­uersies is Soueraigne and Infallible, and that absolute obedience is due vnto Her, no appeale being allowed, no not to Scripture, though expounded in a Ca­tholique sense, and consonantly to the [Page 28] judgement of the most ancient and fa­mous members of the Church. The Text euidently speakes of particular Churches, to which I suppose he will not easily yeeld these goodly priuiledges. After his wont, still when he talkes of the Church, he meanes his owne; and euer mistakes the Romane for the Ca­tholique. The Church Catholique or vniuersall is confessed in some sense to be vnerring, (as shall appeare hereafter) and he is little better then a Pagan that despiseth her judgement. For shee fol­lowes her guides the Prophets and A­postles, and is not very free and forward in her definitions. All this is as false of the Romane Church, as it is true of the Catholique.

The Treatise of S. Cyprian, of the vni­ty of the Catholique Church, (for that title Epist. 51. himselfe giues it) is directed a­gainst the schisme & error of the Noua­tians; who peeuishly seuered themselues from the Communion of Catholiques, because they gaue the peace of the Church to such as repented after their fall, in times of persecution. There is nothing in that Treatise which the Pro­testants [Page 29] dislike, saue onely the corrupting of S. Cyprians text by some Romish ze­lote: Cap. 3. se­cund. Pam. these words added to the Text. [Pri­matus Petro datur—] & [super Ca­thedram Pe­tri fundata est Ecclesia-) & super [il­lum] vnum aedificat Ec­clesiam Chri­stus— who hath added and fourred in two or three false glosses of his owne, in fauor of S. Peters Primacy: Contrary to the faith of written copies, and of the elder editions, which were before Ma­nutius and Pamelius; contrary to the constant doctrine of that holy Martyr, in other parts of his workes, and even in that very place which is corrupted; and contrary to the reading of their owne Gratian, Caus. 24. q. 1. can. Lo­quitur Domi­nus ad Pe­trum. corrected by Pope Gregory 13. And in this vnworthy fashion they haue handled many other records and Vide Rog Withring. Apol. Bell. num. 450. monumēts of Antiquity; adding, alte­ring, razing them at their pleasure. Six­tus Senensis highly commends Pope Pi­us the fift, for the care which he had Epist. de­dic. ad Pium 5. P. M. Expurgari & emaculari cu­râsti omnia Catholico­rum scripto­rum, ac prae­cipuè vete­rum Patrum scripta— to extinguish all dangerous bookes; and to purge the writings of all Catholique Au­thors, especially of the ancient Fathers from the filth and poyson of heresie. At Rome they call it heresie, not to speake the language of the Court; or to say any thing in behalfe of Protestants. A few yeares since, when the learned Iesuite Andreas Schottus of Antuerpe, published [Page 30] 600 Greeke Epistles of Isidorus Ielusio­tes, out of the Vatican Library, never be­fore printed; Beyerlinck the Censor of Bookes there, was content to passe them to the presse, In appro­batione libri editi Antu­erp. Graecè 1623. because they contained no­thing contrary to the Catholique Roman religion. It seemes they had not passed, but vpon that condition. Though since on better consideration, that vnwary clause is left out in the Approbation of the last edition of those Epistles in Greeke and Latine, at Francfort. This by the way. Anno 1629.

S. Augustine, in his Epistle of the vni­tie of the Church, largely debates that maine controversie betweene the Ca­tholiques and the Donatists, concerning the Church. Those Schismatiques pre­tended, that the Catholique Church was perished in all other parts of the world; and that it remained only in their factious Conventicles, in some corners of Rome and Africa, or (as they loued to speake) in the part of Donatus. A­gainst this fancy, (which is the opinion in effect of our Romane Catholiques at this day,) the learned Father proues, that the Catholique Church may not bee [Page 31] confined to any corners, or Coun­tries: but that it is vniversally dif­fused thorough all the world. And hee constantly fetches all his proofes from the holy Scriptures: often prote­sting that he will not fight with any o­ther weapons. Aug. de vnit. Eccl. cap. 6. Dicitis in nullis terris heredem per­manere Chri­stum, nisi vbi cohaeredem habere potu­erit Dona­tum. Legite nobis hoc de Lege, de P [...]o­pheus, de Psalmis, de ipso Evange­lio, de Apo­stolicis Lite­ris. Legite & credimus. You say ô Donatists that Christ hath no inheritance, but in the part of Donatus, (as now 'tis said of the Popes party;) Read and proue this to vs, out of the law, the Prophets, or the Psalms, out of the Gospell, or the Apostles Letters; Read it thence, and wee will beleeue you. Ibid. cap. 3. Non audi­amus, haec d [...] ­co, haec dicis, sed audiamus, haec dicit Do­minus. Aufe­rantur illa de medio, quae adversus no [...] invicem, non ex divinis Canonicis libris sed aliundè recitamus. Let vs heare no more, Thus I say, or Thus thou saist; but let vs heare, Thus saith the Lord. Away with those argu­ments on both sides, which are not taken out of the Divine and Canonicall Scrip­tures. Ibid. cap. 2. Inter nos quaestio eist, vbi sit Corpus Christi, id est, vbi sit Ecclesia; Quid ergo facturi sumus? in verbis nostris eam quaesituri, an in ver­bis Capitis sui Domini nostri Iesu Christi? Puto quòd in illius verbis potius eam quaerere debemus, qui veritas est, & optimè novit Corpus suum. It is questioned between vs, where the body of Christ is, that is, where his Church is: what then must be done? shall we seeke it in our owne words, or in the words of Christ the head of the Church? [Page 32] I trow rather in his word, who is Truth, and best knowes his one body. Ibid. cap. 4. Ipsum Ca­put de quo consentimus, ostendat no­bis corpus su­um de quo dissentimus; vt per ejus verba jam dissentire de­sinamus. Let this head, of which we agree, shew vs his Body, of which we disagree; that our dissentions may by his word be ended. Cap. 19. vid. etiam cap. 7. & 18. & passim. That wee are in the true Church of Christ, and that this Church is universally scattered over the earth, we proue not by our Doctors, or Councells, or Miracles, but by the divine Scriptures. The Scriptures are the only do­cuments, and foundations of our cause. Hi­ther is his refuge and appeale from all other sentences. The Mistaker was ill advised to send vs to this Treatise; which both in the generall ayme, & in the qua­lity of the arguments and proofes, is so contrary to his pretensions. If the pre­sent Roman Church could with S. Au­stine (and all Antiquity) submit to this Iudge (or rather Rule) of controversies; both this, in hand, of the Church, and all the rest of our contestations might bee quickly ended. Before I leaue this piece of S. Austine, I will leaue this passage out of it, to the Mistaker to ruminate vpon. Ibid. cap. 4. Whosoever beleeue aright in Christ the Head, but yet doe so dissent from his Body the Church, that their communion is not [Page 33] with the whole wheresoeuer diffused, but with themselues seuerally in some part; it is manifest that such are not in the Ca­tholique Church. The Protestants com­municate with the Catholique Church, in what part or place of the world soe­ver. They of Rome say, the Church is no where to be found but in their facti­on, none can bee saued but Romanists. What will follow from hence, He hath so much Logick that he cannot mistake.

The Herefies recounted by Epiphani­us, Philastrius, and S. Austin in their Ca­talogues, were many of them wild wan­dring conceits of heads crazed in the Principles of vnderstanding; rather fren­zies and dotages against reason, then false opinions in faith, tending to breake the vnity of the Church. And iustly said S. Austine, No Christian Catholique (hee might haue said, no rationall creature) beleeues them. It is true, divers of those Heretiques (as the Arrians, Photinians, Macedonians, Nestorians, Eutychians, &c,) did disturbe that vnity, by main­taining obstinately their errours against the common rule of faith. But they were convicted, not by their disobedi­ence [Page 34] to the Church, as the Mistaker be­leeues; but principally by the evidence and authority of Scripture: and then af­ter that, by the attestation of the Catho­lique Church (which is the faithfull keeper of all Scripture and divine veri­ties:) as appeares clearely in those Coun­cells, and Fathers, which haue opposed those Heretiques. Epiphanius alone (of the three aboue named) disputes the matter with the Heretiques; and profes­fes to fetch his arguments from Scrip­ture. Haeresi 65. Pauli Sa­mosateni. num. 6. edit Petau. [...]. Vide cund. Haer. 76. pag. 989. & Haer. 78. pag. 1047. The divine goodnesse (saith hee) hath fore-warned, and fore-armed vs a­gainst Heresies by his Truth. For God fore-seeing the madnesse, impietie, and fraud of the Samosatenians, Arrians, Ma­nichees, and the other Heretiques, hath se­cured vs by his divine word, against all their subtleties. And elsewhere to the same purpose. Where by the way, the Mistaker must needs obserue, (as hee saies) that the Protestants hold divers ancient heresies, and particularly that of denying Prayers for the dead: He is very much mistaken in his obser­vation. The commemoration of the decea­sed in the ancient Church, which [Page 35] Ap. Epi­phan. Haer. 75. Aerius without reason disallowed; was a thing much differing from those Prayers for the dead, which are now in vse in the Church of Rome. Our Roman Catholiques beleeue, (at least they say so,) that some soules of the faithfull, af­ter their departure hence, are detained in a certaine fire bordering vpon Hell, till they bee throughly purged: and their prayers for them are, that they may bee released or eased of those torments. On the contrary, the generall opinion of the ancient Doctors, Greeke and La­tine downe almost till these last ages was, (and is the opinion of the Graeci in Concil. Flor. ante Sess. 1. in Quaest. de Igne purgat. apud Bin. Tom. 4. part. 1. pag. 421. edit. vlt. Greek Churches at this day,) that all the spirits of the righteous deceased are in Abra­hams bosome, or some outer Courts of heauen; where though they liue in a blessed condition of peace, and ioy, and refreshing, being secured of glory and the beatificall vision; yet they expect the full perfection, and consummation of their happinesse, till the last day. Some of their Testimonies to this purpose, are collected by Spalat. de Rep. Eccl. lib. 5. cap. 8. num. 98. Sixtus Se­nens. Bibl. S. lib. 6. annot. 345. Antonius de Dominis, and Sixtus of Siena, wherevnto many more might easily be added. This opi­nion [Page 36] seemes directly to overthrowe two new doctrines of Popery; Purgatory, and invocation of Saints: (Such Invoca­tion I meane as is intended to the Saints as a worship due vnto them, and when they are invocated as Commissioners vnder God, to whom he hath delegated the power of conferring sundry bene­fits deposited in their hands, and to bee bestowed at their pleasure: which is properly new and Popish Invocation.) Which De Bea­titud. Sanct. lib. 1. cap. 4. & 5. Bellarmine well perceiuing, passionately labours to overthrowe it, and to proue that the Ancients were not of this minde. But his proofes are fee­ble, and fall short of the thing in questi­on; and, being a man of so great reading, it may be thought hee spake against his knowledge, and conscience. Now con­formably to this opinion, the Ancient [...]. Liturg. Basil. & Chrysost. vide Clem. Const. lib. 8. cap. 12. Chrysost. Li­turg. Gr. Epi­phan. Her. 75. Cyril. Hier. Catech. 5. Mystag. Miss. Muzarab. in Bibl. P P. Co­lon. Tom. 15. p. 787. Di [...] ­nys. Eccl. Hi­er. cap. 7. Church in her Liturgies, remem­bred all those that slept in hope of the Re­surrection of everlasting life; and parti­cularly the Patriarchs, Prophets, Apostles. Martyrs, Confessors, Bishops, Fathers, such as led a solitary life, and all Saints: beseeching God to giue vnto them rest, and to bring them (at the Resurrection) to the [Page 37] place where the light of his countenance should shine vpon them for evermore. Signifying by this Memorial their faith (as Vbi supra. St Epiphanius hath it,) that the departed are aliue and subsisting with the Lord; and their hope of them, as of those that bee from home in another country; and that at length they shall attaine the state which is more perfect. Some particular Doctors had in these matters particular opinions, which must be severed from the generall sen­timent and customes of the Church; which to this day are conserved in the Greeke Vide Marci Ephe­sii Episc. E­pist. encycli­cam. Churches, notwithstanding the pretended Vnion (in this and other points) at the late Councell of Florence. This ancient observation of the Church we condemne not. Wee say prayers are to be made for all that are departed in the true faith of Christ; that is, first Thanksgiuing, that they are deliuered from the body of death, and miseries of this sinfull world: Secondly Requests of Gods mercy, that they may haue their perfect consummation in body and soule, in the kingdome of God at the last iudgement. The Roman writers vtterly [Page 38] condemne the former doctrine, and practise of Antiquity. Azor. In­stit. moral. tom. 1. c. 20. lib. 8. See of this matter, the learned Pri­mate of Ar­magh in his defence a­gainst the Ie­spite. One of them feares not to censure it, as absurd and im­pious. By this the Mistaker may feele his errour, and see that it is not the Pro­testants but his owne Doctors that a­gree with the old Heretique Aerius.

The vnity of the Church is nothing hin­dred by diversity of opinions in doubt­full matters. It is a great vanity to hope or expect, that all learned men, in this life, should absolutely consent in all the pieces and particles of divine truth. The light, whereby wee see in this state of mortality, is very feeble, and very diffe­rent; in regard of the good spirits illumi­nation, the capacities of men, and their diligences in study, prayer, and other meanes of knowledge. So long as the Iud. 3. faith once deliuered to the Saints is earnestly contended for, and kept entire; that is, the Tit. 1. 4. common faith of Christi­ans, containing all Catholique and ne­cessary verities; so long as men Phil. 3. 15. 16. walke according to this rule charitably, though in other things they be otherwise min­ded; the Church is but one, her vnity no way violated. For this vnity consists in [Page 39] the vnity of faith, not of opinions; and in an vnion of mens hearts and affections, by true Charity; which will easily com­pound or tolerate all vnnecessary diffe­rences. Factious and fiery Spirits kindle and fly asunder on small occasions; but among wise men each discord in Religi­on dissolues not the vnity of faith or Charity. Points of Religion are well di­stinguished by Aqu. 22. q. 2. art. 56 & q. 29. art. 3. ad 2. Thomas, and Staplet. dupl. lib. 1. c. 12. n. 3. & Rel. c. 1. qu. 3. art. 6. notab. 1. & 2. Licet & vtile est de rebus difficilibus in Ecclesia aliter at (que) aliter disputare; nec hoc vnitatem violat, sed ve­ritatem illu­strat. Sta­pleton. Some, say they, are primitiue Arti­cles, of the substance of Religion, essenti­all in the obiect of faith; dissention in these is pernicious, and destroyes vnity. Others are secondary, probable, accidentall or obscure points, wherein the oppositi­ons and disputations of learned men proceeding modestly are tolerable, and sometime profitable for finding out the truth. Vnity in these matters is very contingent and variable in the Church; now greater, now lesser, never absolute in all particles of truth. And therefore those ancient Worthies, the Fathers of the Church, as they were most zealous to defend, even with their blood, to the least iot or title, the rule of faith, (as they called it) or the Creed of Christians; or [Page 40] (as the Scripture calls it) the 2. Tim. 1, 13. forme of wholesome words, the Heb. 6. 1. & 5. 12. Principles of the oracles of God, or of the doctrine of Christ: so againe, they were most cha­ritable to allow in other things (beside or without the faith,) a great latitude and liberty. As in a musicall consort, a dis­cord now and then (so it bee in the des­cant, and depart no tfrom the ground,) sweetens the harmony: So the variety of opinions, or of Firmilia­nus ap Cypr. epist 7 5. num. 5. August ep. 86, Socrat. Hist. lib. 5. cap. 21. rites in partes of the Church, doth rather commend then prejudice the vnity of the whole. Indeed in the multitude of opinions, there is but one truth: but among sundry truths, there is but one necessary to salvation; that wherein the holy Scriptures (as the Apostle saith) are able to make vs wise by 2 Tim. 3. 15. the faith in Christ Iesus. The keeper of this truth, and of the Scriptures in which it is treasured is the Church; not of one City, but the Catholique Church; that is, the fellowship of Saints dispersed through the whole World. And it is not in deepe or difficult questions, but in this necessary faith or truth, wherein the Fa­thers (alleadged by the Mistaker) justly require an exact and perfect vnity a­mong [Page 41] Catholique Christians. To be ig­norant of this faith, or to erre in it, though vnwarily, is dangerous: but to corrupt or contradict any part of it, though but in a word or syllable of mo­ment, is damnable. The difference be­tweene the Arrians and the Catholiques was but in one letter, the least in the Al­phabet; yet never was the Church trou­bled with a more pernicious heresy. And many times the addition or alteration of one word or two in the confession of faith, had reconciled the Eunomians, Photinians, Sabellians, Macedonians, &c. with the Catholiques. But in this case, for the Catholiques to yeeld in a word or syllable, had beene to yeeld their cause, and to betray the truth. Therefore worthily and truly said Basil. [...]. apud Theo­doret. Hist. l. 4. c. 17. S. Basil to the officer of Valens the Ar­rian Emperour, not a syllable of divine do­ctrine must be betrayed. For though Faith be sound in other respects, yet one word (saith Naz. Tract. de fide. S. Greg. Nazianzen as truly) like a drop of poison, may taint and cor­rupt it: and (as Hier. A­pol. 3. adv. Ruff. cap. 7. S. Hierome) for such a word contrary to this faith are Here­tiques justly cast out of the Church. But [Page 42] though faith be kept entire, yet if Chari­ty be wanting, the vnity of the Church is disturbed, her vnion dissolued. Schisme is no lesse damnable then Heresy. The old Vide Op­tat. & August. passim. Donatists did not only vniustly separate from the Catholike Church dif­fused through the World, but most vn reasonably & arrogantly esteemed their owne faction to be the only Christians; hated and censured all of the Catholique Communion, as no better then Pagans; and appropriated to themselues alone all the benefits of Christ, and all the privi­ledges of his Church. And accordingly in effect they renounced the society of all other Christians, vanting that life and salvation was no where to be had but in their assemblies. And are not the Iesui­ters of our times formally guilty of this Donatisme? Doe not the Zelotes of Rome thus speake and thinke, of them­selues and of all other Christians? Wit­nes our Mistaker, and his Pamphlet; wherein his designe is to shew that Rome compasseth and containeth all Christendome, and that Christ hath no servants, the Church no members, but only those that liue vnder the Popes o­bedience.

[Page 43] Briefly the Vnity of the Church Ca­tholique is not hindred by any diversity of opinions, or observations in her seve­rall members; so long as the substance of faith, and the bond of Charity is con­serued among them.

The Mistaker goes on.

Every terme is ambiguous; and therefore the whole proposition true or false, as it may be limited. Salvation may be had either by the ordinary meanes, or extraordinarily. The Church notes ei­ther the Catholique, or Particulars. Hee may be in the one, who is outed by the others: and an interiour Communion may be without the externall. A Church may teach many truths, and so farre bee true: yet by the addition of many er­rours and abuses become in regard of them a false Church. And it may be one in the faith, which is not at one (either with it selfe or other particulars) in opi­nions. Lastly a man may be out of a par­ticular Church, either actiuely, by a vo­luntary [Page 44] separation (which is iust or vn­just according to the grounds;) or pas­siuely, by exclusion or ejection being cas [...] out by the Church: And that may bee done either vniustly, by ignorance, ma­lice, faction &c. or justly; and this ei­ther by suspension for a time from the society of the faithfull, or by vtter and finall abdication from the body of Christ. This may better appeare in par­ticular instances.

Infidels are without the Church. They haue no distinct knowledge of Christ, or explicite faith in him. Yet some Iustin M. in Apol. v­tra (que) Clem. A­lex. Strom. lib. 5. 6. 7. Chry­sost hom. 37. in Matth. &c. aun­cient Doctors, and many late Ludov. Vives in Aug. de C. D. l. 18. c. 47. Andrad. Orthod. Ex­plic. lib. 3. ad axiom. 6. Genes. à Se­pulveda. lib. 7. Epist. 1. ad Petr. 1. ad Petr. Serra­mum. Franc. à victoria Re­lect. 13. Aquinas, Lyra, Abulensis, Bruno, Dionysius Carth. Arboreus, Durandus, &c. apud Casal. de quadr. iustit. lib. 1. cap. 12. Cornelius Mus, Claudius Seysellus, Ambrosius Catharinus, Ioan. Viguerius. Bened. Pererius, Dom. Soto. Alph. Salmeron. aoud Franc. Collium de Animabus Paganoium lib. 1. cap. 24. vide eum lib. 5. cap. 7. 8. 22. Sotus, Canus, Ve­ga, Thom. Richardus apud Greg. Val. T. 3. disp. 1. qu. 2. punct. 4. § se­cunda vero. Ro­mane writers are of opinion, (concerning Pagans before and since Christ;) that if their life be morally honest, by Gods extraordinary mercy, and the merit of Christ, they may be saued. For (say they) though God in his wisdome hath tied vs to the ordinary meanes, he hath not tied [Page 45] himselfe. Let the Mistaker here compare [...]heir Charity with his. They hope well of honest Pagans: He rashly damnes the [...]est part of Christians.

Againe, a beleeuer may be in no visi­ble Church, and yet in a state of saluati­on. For first, the ancient Church, whilest shee wanted the assistance of the Civill word, vsed a very severe discipline, to containe her children in obedience, and to prevent scandals. Lapsed sinners were not restored to her peace, nor admitted into the communion of the faithfull, but with great difficulty, and after the sharpe penance of many yeares. But if any were guilty of crimes, such as Tertullian calls non delicta sed monstra, monstrous im­pieties, as Apostasy, Idolatry, Fornica­tion, Murther and the like; Vide Ca­nones Concilis Eliberitani & Arelatensis. 1. & Albaspin. Obser. lib. 2. shee vtter­ly refused to absolue such persons, euen at the last houre of their life, notwith­standing their repentance. Yet for their comfort, though they might not haue her mercy, she doubted not but that they were capable of Concil. Valent. 1. Canone 3. Gods; and vpon their true contrition might by him bee pardoned and saued. Secondly, the Concil. Nicen. Can. 5. Churches of those happy times so [Page 46] fairely corresponded in their amitie and justice, that whosoeuer was excommu­nicated by one, was not receiued or ab­solued by any other. And hence it fol­loweth that Potest quis esse in Ecclesia ani­mo & deside­rio, quod suf­ficit illi ad sa­lutem; non tamen esse corpore siue externá com­municatione, quae propriè facit homi­nem esse de Ecclesiâ visi­bili que est in terris. Bell. lib. 3. de Eccl. milit. cap. 6. § Respondeo. & cap. 3. § Denique. externall communion euen with the truest & noblest Churches is not of absolute necessity to saluation When one (and so all) visible Churches denied their peace in that age to some Sinners, yet they denied them not Gods pardon.

Besides that a man may bee Saepe sinit diuina proui­dentia per ni­miū turbulen­tas carnalium hominum seditiones, expelli de congregatione Christianá etiam bono [...] viros. August. de ver. relig. cap. 6. In foro contentioso & exterion multi sunt Excommunicati quoad Deum, qui non sunt quoad Ecclesi­am: & è contrà multi Excommunicats quoad Ecclesiam, qui non sunt quoad Deum, quia Ecclesia non judicat de occultis. Cosm. Philiarch. de offic. Sacerd. Tom. 1. lib. 3. c. 4. p. 89. Frequenter fit n qui per Ecclesiam militantem foras emittitur, intus habetur in Eccle­fiâ triumphante; & contrà. Gloss. in Extra. Ioan. 22. Tit. 14. cap. 5. solutum in [...]li [...]. a true visible member of the holy Catholique Church, who is not actually (otherwise then in vow,) a member of any true vi­sible Church, appeareth by these in­stances. The poore man in the Gospell adhered the more closely to Christ, when he was cast out of the Synagogue; which was then the onely true Church, the Heathens being excluded, and the Chri­stian [Page 47] Church being not yet founded. And with whom (of his owne ranke) could A­thanasius communicate in that generall Apostacy of Christendome? when that noble Champion stood single in defence of diuine truth, Vid [...] Ba­ron. An. 357. Num. 44. all his Brethren the other Patriarches (not He of Rome exce­pted) hauing subscribed to Arrianisme, and cast him out of their communion.

Voluntary and vngrounded separa­tion from the Catholique communion is without doubt a damnable Schisme, yet may it bee much mollified or maligni­fied by circumstances. Tertullian was a man passionately zealous, euen to super­stition. It appeares in part by his Treatise de Coronâ militis: where he justifies the vanity and peeuishnesse of a common souldier, who made scruple to weare on his head a Crowne of Lawrell, as if the Christian religion had forbidden it. And accordingly when the Church thought fit to remit a little of her ancient rigor in the manner and time of her fasts, in the receiuing of penitents after publique sa­tisfaction, in allowing second marriages, and the like: Tertullian ill expounding this just relaxation to be a meere dissolu­tion [Page 48] of good discipline, hence tooke oc­casion, (being also prouoked by some claumnies and contumelies of the Ro­mane Clergy) to fall off from the Catho­liques, to the party of Montanus, great pretenders to mortification; and in that separation (as it is likely) he died. Yet why may wee not hope that God par­doned the errours of his honest zeale, Nicol. Ri­galtius in pre­fat. Obseruat. ad 9. libros Tertulliani. Quae Tertul­liani dicuntur haereses, eae vix aliud prae­cipiebát quàm martyria for­tiora, jejunia sicciora, ca­stimoniam sanctiorem, nuptias scili­cet vnas aut nullas. In qui­bus quicquid peccauit, id omne virtutis amore vehe­mentiore pec­câsse videatur. Id. mox ibid. Verosimile est Montani dogma quale extitit primordio quidem sui Christianis austerioribus probabili, Ter­tullianum tenuisse: non quale posteà, quum sequacium quorundam im­posturis & fraudibus acu Phrygiâ interpolatum, ab Ecclesiis passim Catholicis despui caepit. his greatest fault being an excesse of indiscreet piety? And if separatiō, such as hath been said, from all visible Churches, doe not exclude from heauen: much lesse doth a separation from the Church of Rome worke such an exclusion. Whilest the Church of Rome stood in her puritie, her amity and communion was very much esteemed (& deseruedly) by other Churches: yet neuer esteemed by any to be of absolute necessity for sal­uation. Nor did Antiquity beleeue that a separation from the Romane commu­nion in some regards, (whether actiue or passiue,) did induce or implie a disunion [Page 49] with the Catholique Church, or a reje­ction from Gods fauor and Kingdome. Many proofes here of might be alleaged: but these few which follow may suffice.

When Pope Victor withdrew his com­munion from the Churches of Asia for their Easter day, and Pope Stephen from those of Africa, Cappadocia, &c. for re­baptizing; their censures were much slighted, and their pride and Schisme, in troubling the peace of the Church, much condemned, by Euseb. lib. 5. cap. 23. z. p. Sec. Lation. Cyprian. E­pist. 74. 75. men of the greatest note for learning and piety in those ages. S. Austin himselfe, and with him 217. Bishops of Africa, and their Successors for a hundred yeares together, (if their owne Bonif. 2. Epist. ad Eu­lal. Alexandi. Lindan. Pa­nopl. Eu. lib. 4. cap. 89. in fine. Salmeron. Tom. 12. Tract. 68. § Ad Canon. Sander. de vi­sib. Mon. lib. 7. num. 411. records be true) were all seuered from the Romane communion, for main­taining the liberties of their Churches, against the pretensions and forgeries of the Sea of Rome, in the matter of ap­peales. Yet during that separation, many holy Soules were sent vp vnto God by Martyrdome, vnder the persecution of the Vandales.

The fifth generall Councell condem­ned three Chapters, casually omitted in the Councell of Chalcedon: the Bishop [Page 50] of Rome at length consenting. Many Bishops of Liguria and Istria mistaking the Councels meaning, imagined the Councell of Chalcedon to be thereby dishonoured. Sigon. de Occid. Imper. lib. 20. Therefore in a full Sy­nod of their owne, they renounce the communion of their owne Patriarch of Rome, and erect a new Patriarch at A­quileia; which was; after translated to Venice, and there (in name at least) con­tinues till this day. And the Bishops of Ireland on the same occasion (as Baron. Tom. 7. an. 566. num. 21. Ba­ronius reports,) when they perceiued that the Church of Rome did both re­ceiue the condemnation of the three Chapters, & strengthen the fifth Synod with her consent, they did all joyntly de­part from that Church, and cleaue to the Bishops of Italie & Africk in that cause. Whereby it appeares that they did not take all the resolutions of the Church of Rome for vndoubted oracles; but when they thought that they had better reason on their sides, they preferred the judge­ment & communion of other Churches before it. The most ancient Brittish & Irish Bishops did so stiffly adhere to the Churches of Asia in their celebration of [Page 51] Easter, that the Baron. ad an. 604. num. 65. D. Vsher. Treat. of the Relig. of the ancient Irish. Ch. 9. & 10. Pope did therefore cut them off from his communion: yet they persisted and neglected his anger, as vaine and without danger.

Like Instances might be numberlesse. By all which it is cleare, that, of old, a totall Communion with the Church of Rome (euen in her good dayes) was not accounted so precious and necessary, as is now pretended. On the contrary, men generally beleeued, that Christians might liue and dye in the peace of God, though they were at warre with the Pope; and keepe the vnity of the Church Catholique, though they fell off or were cut off from that of Rome.

The degrees of communion with par­ticular Churches may be many and dif­ferent. The ancient Catechumeni and Pe­nitents by degrees attained the spirituall fauours of the Church, being in some respects within her communion, with­out it in others. So in the punishment of sinners, the Church was wont to tem­per her censures according to the quali­ty of offences. Her censure for the most part was onely medicinall, for the sinners benefit to reclaime him from euill; by [Page 52] suspending him from her society, the comfort of her publique prayers and Sacrament; not denying him her inwar [...] communion and Charity. Sometime was a mortall censure, by Anathema, a­gainst malicious & incorrigible wicked nesse. In the former shee intended to purge the sinner, by depriuing him [...] while of her society; in the latter to purge her selfe, by cutting him off from the body of Christ. And this Tertullia [...] truly calls Apologet. cap. 39. maximum futuri judic [...] praeiudicium, a Sentence which will bee verified in the last judgement, according to that of our Lord: Matt. 18. 18. Whatsoeuer yo [...] shall binde on earth, shall be bound in hea­uen. Whosoeuer is thus cursed justly by the Church, shall neuer haue the be­nediction of God; vnlesse hee make his peace by true and timely repentance.

Particular Churches owe each to other the mutuall offices of loue and commu­nion (so farre as may be:) but they owe onely to the Catholique Mother of all Christians the duty of obedience. If then any Particular will deny to her Equals, the acts and vnion of Charity, because they deny (what they owe not to her) [Page 53] their subiection and seruice: this is an vnsufferable and schismaticall arrogance, whereof the Church of Rome hath now for many ages beene deepely guilty. Many other things are said against vs: but surely the most capitall Valent. in Th. 2. 2. Tom. 3. disp. 1. qu. 1. punct. 7. in explic. quaest. § Qui­bus amnibus Omninò verè & Orthodoxè docetur ad Summum Pontificem pertinere ex­plicationem & editionem Symboli fidei, id est, eorum quae à fid eli­bus credi de­bent. Quae veritas vsque adeo continet summam & caput totius Christianae Religionis, vt nemo Ca­tholicus esse possit, qui il­lam non am­plectatur; ne­que vllus sit Haereticus, qui illam non neget. Id. ibid. punct. 7. §. 40. Postremo idipsum. Ab exordio Ecclesiae constat, controuersias omnes de religione motas, ex D. Petri Cathedrâ fuisse judicatas: eosquo tan­dem & solos communi Ecclesiae judicio, Haereticos esse habitos, qui re­pugnârint definitioni ejus Cathedrae. Heresy & Schisme of Greekes, Protestants &c. is, that they refuse to bee commanded and gouerned by him who will needs be per­petuall Dictator at Rome, and from thence giue lawes to all the world.

Communion with the Catholique Church may bee distinguished and mea­sured according to those different de­grees of vnion which men may haue with Christ; for vpon this vnion that communion is founded. Christ may bee considered either as a King or Ruler in regard of the whole visible militant Church: or as a Sauiour and Head in re­gard of his mysticall body or his true spirituall members. Among the Kings liege people, that liue in outward obe­dience to his Lawes; some carry in se­cret, [Page 54] euill and disloyall affections to him others loue and obey him with th [...] heart. So it is with our Lord. All tha [...] liue within the pale of the Church, pro­fesse to honour him as their Prince and Gouernour, euen though they deny th [...] power of godlinesse, by hypocrisy o [...] dissolution; others constantly and vn­fainedly serue him in all the duties of ho­linesse. He rules them all as King, & they are his Subiects: but he is a Sauiour one­ly to these latter, who liue and dye in hi [...] true faith and feare; who are therefore liuing members of his mysticall body, to whom he communicates, by his Spirit effectuall graces, spirituall motion, and eternall life. This blessed Company is said in Scripture Col. 2. 19. to hold the head, and is called Heb. 12. 23. the Church of the first born who are written in heauen, and Gal. 4. 20. the Mo­ther of vs all. When some of the An­cients speake of the Catholique Church, Clem. Alexandr. Strom. lib. 7. pag. 514. edit. Heinsianae. [...]. & iterum in fin. libr. [...]. Origen. contr. Cels. lib. 6. p. 318. Geaec. Haeschel. [...]. Isidor. Pelus. lib. 2. Epist. 246. [...]. Aug. de Bapt. cont. Donat. lib. 5. cap. 27. Ecclesiam ve­ram intelligere non audeo nisi in sanctis & justis. Et sic passim. many times they vnderstand it in a [Page 55] strict notion; onely for this fellowship of the Saints, as it containes all and one­ly them that haue spirituall vnion and communion with Christ as their Saui­our. When Saint Cyprian compares the Church to Noahs Arke, the paraleil runnes most fully and properly on the Church in this sence. For of the Arke and this Church it is true, whosoeuer is without is saued, whosoeuer is without perisheth; neither of which perhaps is truly said of any visible Church. And thus 1 Pet. 3. 21. S. Peter seemes to apply that similitude, and sayes the Arke was a type or representation of the inward Baptisme or the Lauer of regeneration, wherein the sprinkling of Christs blood purges the conscience and saues the soule. Com­munion then with this Church is no lesse necessary to Saluation, then vnion with Christ: nor can he haue God for his Fa­ther, who hath not this Church for his Mo­ther. Which Sentence S. Cyprian the Au­thor Epist. ad Pompeium. vses, not of the Church of Rome (as the Mistaker seemes to beleeue,) but where he vehemently disputes against it. Whosoeuer either wilfully opposes any Catholique veritie maintained by this [Page 56] Church, (or the Catholique visible Church) as doe Heretiques; or peruersly diuides himselfe from the Catholique communion, as doe Schismatiques: the condition of both these is damnable. The Scriptures and Fathers cited here by the Mistaker, proue this and no more: and therefore proue nothing against Pro­testants, who neuer denied it.

We deny, that What this importeth, see the next §. pag. 58. Popery is any part of the Catholique Church, or maintaines any one Catholique verity. We deny also, that Protestants are in any degree dislinked from the Catholique Church, or from the Church of Rome it selfe, or from any Church or Christian on earth; so farre as they communicate with the Catholique. The contrary is easily and vsually affirmed, but not so easily proved by firme and conuincing Arguments.

THe See D. Ab­bot. True an­cient Ro­mane Ca­tholique. Ch. 2. p. 81. & Ch. 3. §. 3. p. 111. & p. 113. 114. Protestants never in­tended to erect a new Church, but to purge the old; the Reformation did not change the substance of Religion, but onely cleansed it from corrupt & impure qualities. We preach no new faith, but the same Catholique faith that ever hath beene preached. Whatsoever is good and true in the Ro­man profession, we approue. Wee haue abandoned nothing but Popery; which is no branch of Religion, but the shame and staine of it; nor any part of the Church, but a contagion or plague in it; which dangerously affected the whole body, though by Gods great mercy, the vitall parts kept out the poison. Naaman was still the same man, before and after he was cured of his ieprosie: but a man before distempered, after sound and healthy. In the prime grounds or prin­ciples [Page 59] of Christian Religion wee haue not forsaken the Church of Rome: wee leaue her onely in her intolerable errors and abuses. Shee hath mingled with Gods Bread her owne sowre leauen, and with good milke some drammes of poi­son. We haue cast out onely this poison and leauen; and feed Gods people with the true bread of life, and the sincere milk of his word. Where the late Popes wan­der in by-paths, we leaue them; that wee may more safely walke with the old good Bishops of Rome, in the old and good way. And in the issue, that which distinguishes a true Papist from a true Protestant, is no more but this: the for­mer will needs be a Romane & the latter only a Catholique. The difference at this day betweene the Reformed part of the Westerne Church and the Ro­mane, consists in certaine points which they of Rome hold for important and necessary articles of the Christian faith; which the Protestants cannot beleeue or receiue for such. Whereas contrarily, the things which the Protestants be­leeue on their part, and wherein they [Page 60] Voiez Vray vsage des Peres, par Iean Daillé Ch. 1. iudge the life and substance of Reli­gion to be comprized, are most, if not all of them so evidently and indisputably true, that their Adversaries themselues doe avow and receiue them as well as they. For they are verities cleerely foun­ded vpon Scripture, expressely acknow­ledged by all Ancient Councells, and Doctors of the Catholique Church, summarily deliuered in their Symboles or Creeds, & vnanimously receaued by the most part of Christians that haue e­ver beene in the world. Such are the ve­rities which make vp the faith of Pro­testants: and which are Semper, vbique, ab omnibus cre­dita. Lirin. properly Catholique, hauing carried the consent of all ages and Parts of the Church vni­versall. And if all other Christians could be content to keepe within these generall bounds, Erasm. Epist. ded. ad Arch. Warhamum. Praefat. 2. Tomo Epift. S. Hie­ron. speaking of the Apo­stles Creed, faith, Nun­quam suit sincer or ca­stiorque Chri­stiana fides; quàm cùm vnoillo eo­que breuissi­ino Symbolo contentus es­set Orbis. Vide eundem in Praefat. ad Hilar. & in Paracles: ad Lector. ante Edit. N. T. an. 1519. Bafil. the wofull Schismes and ruptures of Christendome (worthy to be lamented with teares of bloud,) might the more easily bee healed: and all the Disciples of the Prince of peace, blessed­ly vnited in an holy linke of Faith and Charity, of Loue and Communion.

The piety and wisdome of Antiqui­ty [Page 61] did thinke fittest to walke in this lati­tude, and cleerely rested satisfied with the simplicity of such a Catholique con­fession. But no bounds of reason could ever limit the vnbounded extravagan­cies and excesses of the Court of Rome. That body of faith, which the Ancients thought complete enough, to them seemes defectiue. Therefore they haue adjoyned to that old Body many new Articles. And to those twelue, which the Apostles in their Creed esteemed a sufficient summary of wholsome do­ctrine, they haue added many more in their new Romane Creed. Such are, for instance, their Apocryphall Scriptures and vnwritten dogmaticall Traditions, their Transubstantiation and dry Com­munion, their Purgatory, Invocation of Saints, Worship of Images, Latine Ser­vice, traffique of Indulgences; and short­ly all the other new Doctrines and De­crees canonized in their late Synod of Trent. These (and the like) very vaine imaginations our Mistaker calls the prime and maine points of Christian Reli­gion. Let him but change Christian Re­ligion (as his faction hath done) into the [Page 62] Romane faith; and he saies true, hee is not mistaken. Vpon these and the like new Articles is all the contestation be­tweene the Romanists and Protestants: while they are obtruded on the one side as vndoubted verities; and on the other side reiected as humane inventions, cun­ningly devised to advance ambition and avarice, without any solid ground or countenance of Scripture, Reason, or Antiquitie.

The most necessary and fundamen­tall truths, which constitute a Church are on both sides vnquestioned: and for that reason Iunius lib. de Eccl. cap. 17. Falluntur qui Ecclesiam negant, quia Papatus in eâ est. D. Rain. Thes. 5. ne­gat tantùm esse. Catholi­cam, vel sa­num ejus membrum. See the iudg­ment of ma­ny other of our writers, in the Adver­tisement an­nexed to the Old Religion, by the Reve­rend Bishop of Exeter. The very A­nabaptists grant it. Fr. Johnson in his Christian plea pag. 123. learned Protestants yeeld them the name and substance of a Chri­stian Church, though extreamely August. de Donatistis. Nonideo se putent sanos, quia dicimus eos habere aliquid sanum. De Bapt. contra Donat. lib. 1. cap. 8. de­filed with horrible errors and corrupti­ons. And if they had fairely propoun­ded their new opinions to bee discussed by the learned, with reservation of liber­ty in iudgement & conscience, to them­selues and others; they had erred much more tolerably, and much lesse disturbed the peace of the Church. But they are farre from this modesty and moderati­on. [Page 63] With vnsufferable tyranny the pre­vailing faction amongst them presses them vpon all Christians; as matters of faith, not only of opinion; not as dispu­table problemes, but as necessary truths: hauing both canonized them in their Councell of Trent, with a curse against all gaine-sayers; and put them in their Creed by Pope Pius the fourth, who hath obliged the whole Clergy of Rome to affirme that Creed by their subscription and solemne oath; obliging also all Christians to beleeue it vnder paine of damnation.

In the latter ages before the Reforma­tion, though the Court of Rome by cun­ning and violence had subdued many noble parts of Christendome vnder her yoake: yet the servitude of the Church and her misery was somewhat more supportable; because these base and per­nicious adjections were not yet the pub­lique decisions or tenets of any Church, but only the private conceits of the do­mineering faction. Yet still the best lear­ned and Notissi­mae sunt que­relae Bernar­di, Occhami, Marsilis, Cle­mangis, Alva­ri, Gersonis, &c. de corrup­to Ecclesiae statu. vide E­spenc. in Tit. 1. Digress. [...]. conscientious of Europe cal­led (as loud as they could or durst) for a Reformation. Rome heard their com­plaints, [Page 64] and Adrian. 6. PP. In­struct. pro Franc Chere­gato, in Fascic. ror. exper. pag. 173. Sci [...]nus in hac sanctá sede, aliquot jam annis, multa abomi­nanda fuisse, abusus in spi­ritualibus, excessus in mandatis, & omnia deni (que) in perversum mutata. Nec mi [...]um si ae­gritudo à ca­pite in mem­bra, à summis Pontificibus in alios iuferiores Praelatos descenderit. Omnes nos, id est, Praelati Ecclesiastici declinavimus vnusquis (que) in vias suns, nec fuit iam diu qui faceret-bonum, non fuit vs (que) ad vnum—Subiecimus colla sum­mae dignitati ad deformatam eius sponsam Ecclesiam Catholicam re­formandam, &c. Staplet. Relect. Contr. 1. q. 5. Art. 3. Vix vllum pec­catum cogitati potest (solà Haeresi exceptâ) quo illa Sedes (Romana) turp [...]ter maculata non fuerit, maximè ab anno 800. He need not ex­cept Haeresy, into which Biel (In Can. Mass. Lect. 23.) grants it pos­sible the Bishops of that Sea may fall. And Stella (in Luc. cap. 22.) & Almain (L. 3. D. 24. q. 1.) and Gabr. a Porta, a Iesuite now professor at Burdeaux (in 2. 2. q. 1. a. 10. dub. 1.) cited by Aurelius the Sorho­nist, (In octo causas Spongiae praeambulas—pag. 560,) grants if free­ly that some of them did fall. confessed them to be just, but resolved to neglect thē. This forced Luther and his associats to cry out more vehemently; not against the Church but her corruptions. Yet calmely, and with­out any thought or designe of separati­on at the first. When loe the Leo. 10. Pope an­sweres all their iust complaints with vn­just and violent censures. Because Lu­ther and his favourers tell him modestly of his faults, wishing him to correct foule disorders; Hee therefore in a rage beates them out of doores, excommuni­cates and chases them all out of his Ro­manc communion. And his Successors take care to continue the Schisme. For yeerly each Maundy Thursday in the Bull called Caenoe Domini, all Heretiques [Page 65] are with great solemnity cursed into hell. By Heretiques, they meane all them that are not of the Romane obedi­ence; and such as cannot beleeue the vi­ces of Rome to be good manners; or her new inventions to be Catholique, and (as our Mistaker will say) fundamentall do­ctrines. Cum car­puntur vitia, & inde scan­dalum oritur; ipse sibi scan­dali causa est; qui fecit quod argui debet, non ille qui arguit. Bern. ad Hugon. de S. Vict. Ep. 78. Heere is the true cause of this miserable Schisme in Christendome, & the just grievance of all Christians in the world besides their owne zelotes.

Rome cast vs out before we left her, Non. fu­gimus sed fu­gamur. Rex. Iac. in Epist. Is. Casaubon. ad Perrhon. Cardin. Ana­thematibus & diris nos ex­pulerunt; Quod satis super (que) nos absolvit. Calv. Inst. l. 4. c. 2. § 6. as our late most learned Soveraigne truly obserued. It is true when the first Reformers were driven out, they were not vnwilling to be gone. And when they saw the Church of Rome in loue with her diseases, so as shee would not bee cured: Though Israel transgresse, yet let not Iudah sinne. Hos. 4. 15. vide in cum loc. S. Hieron. other Churches (who owed her amity but not obedience) vsed their just power and liberty, and reformed themselues: Gerson de Concil. generali vnius obedien­tiae part. 1. pag. 222. vlt. edit. Paris. Nolo dicere quin in multis parti­bus possit Ecclesia per suas partes reformari, imo hoc necesse esset; & ad hoc agendum sufficerent concilia provincialia—But the good man com­plaines: this was neglected. Heu desolatione desolata est omnis terra! quia nemo est qui recogitet corde, & omnes quaerunt quae sua sunt. Concil. Tolet. 4. can. 3. Si causa fidei est, aut quaelibet alia Ecclesiae communis, generalis totius Hispaniae & Galliciae Synodus convocetur, Alb. M. in 1. D. 11. A. 9. vnicui (que) etiam particulari Ecclesiae licet id quod Catholicum est promulgare. Rome her selfe added Filio (que) to the Creed of a Generall Councell, not only without the consent of the Greeke Church but they vehemently opposing it. in provinciall or Natio­nall [Page 66] Synods, confirmed by publique Authority. Yet with such a tempera­ment of wisdome and Charity, (especi­ally in the Church of England, whereof I especially speake) that they left the Church of Rome in nothing which makes her a Church; in nothing which she holds of Christ, or of Apostolique tradition; Not in any part of the Catho­lique faith, or Gods service such as is acceptable to him; not in a charitable af­fection to their erring and seduced bre­thren of that Church. For whilest they hate and curse vs, we loue and pitty and pray for them. We returne not curses a­gaine: our Luc. 6. 28. Lord hath taught vs o­therwise. All damnatory and capitall Censures wee leaue to him, Iam. 4. 12 who a­lone is able to saue and destroy.

Only wee cannot, wee dare not com­municate with Rome; either in her pub­lique Leiturgy, which is manifestly pol­luted with grosse superstition; as them­selues [Page 67] in effect confesse by their severall pretended reformations of it: or in those corrupt & vngrounded opinions which shee hath added to the faith of Catho­liques. These abuses and errors deface the beauty, and taint the purity of di­vine truth: they make vp the Popery of Rome, not the Church. In them our Communion is dissolued: but wee haue still a true and reall Vnion with that and all other members of the Church Vni­versall, in Faith and Charity.

The state of the Church vnder the Roman obedience, and that part which is Reformed, is very fitly Mr Bedel▪ ag. Wadsw. cap. 4. resembled to a field overgrowne all with weeds, thistles, tares, cockle: Some part where­of is weeded and cleansed, some part re­maines as it was before; which makes such a difference to the eye, as if it were not the same corne. But being better considered it will be found all the diffe­rence is from the weeds, which remaine there, and here are taken away. Yet nei­ther here perfectly, nor euery where a­like; but according to the industry of our weeders, or conveniency of the worke, with care of the safety of the good [Page 68] corne. Those worthy Husbandmen that in these last 600 yeares haue takē paines in plucking vp those pernicious weeds out of the Lords field, and severing the chaffe from his graine, cannot be rightly said in doing this, either to haue brought in another field, or to haue changed the auncient graine. The field is the same, but weeded now, vnweeded then: the graine the same, but winnowed now, vn­winnowed then. Such tares are all those Romane additions, which wee haue re­jected: which the best learned of their owne confesse in effect, to bee 1. doubt­full and perplexed opinions, 2 doctrines vnnecessary and forraigne to the faith, and 3. novelties vnknowne to Anti­quity.

1 Doubtfull. The Romane Doctors doe not fully and absolutely agree in a­ny one point among themselues, but on­ly in such points wherein they agree with vs: In the other disputed betweene vs, they differ one frō another as much almost as they differ from vs. In each Controversy there is not only variety but contrariety of judgements amongst them; and in conclusion nothing but per­plexity [Page 69] and vncertainty. I appeale for proofe of this to the famous Tomes of Card. Bellarmine; where in the front and stateing of every question, he hath with great diligence noted the contentions & contradictions of his Fellowes.

2. They are confessedly Vnnecessary and Superfluous. For they confesse, that setting aside all matters controverted, the maine positiue truths wherein all a­gree, are abundantly sufficient to salvati­on; and giue direction sufficient to every good Christian both for his knowledge and for his practise; teaching him what to beleeue, and how to liue so as he may be saued. For Knowledge first, it is con­fessed a very small measure of explicite knowledge is of absolute necessity. Some Apud Greg. de Val. Tom. 3. in Aqu. disp. 1. qu. 2. punct. 4. v. 10. Bergo­mens. Con­cordant. Con­trad. dub. 419 Schoolemen thinke it needfull to be­leeue only so much of the Creed con­cerning Christ, as the Church solemni­zeth in her Holidaies, his Incarnation, Passion, Resurrection, &c. Some require an explicite beliefe of the whole Apo­stles Creed. And some (which goe high­est) adde to that the Nicen, and Athana­sian, to make a compleat belieuer. The Iesuite Vbi supr [...]. Valentia mislikes this last im­position [Page 70] as too rigorous, and seemes most to encline to the first most moderate o­pinion. And De verb. Dei. lib. 4. cap. 11. initio. Bellarmine is confident, that the Apostles never vsed to preach o­penly to the people other things then the Articles of the Apostles Creed, the ten com­mandements and some of the Sacraments: because (saith he) these are simply necessa­ry and profitable for all men: the rest be­sides, such as that a man may bee saved without them. Thus for matter of beliefe. Now secondly for matter of practise, they cannot except against any part of the publique service of God in our Lei­turgy. They will grant, I suppose, that God may be worshipped without an i­mage, nay that the interior and spiritu­all worship is most acceptable to him: that a Christian may comfortably and with successe call vpon God alone, by the only mediation of Christ, seeing the Sancti cae­perunt coli in Ecclesià Vni­versali, non tam lege ali­quâ quam consuetudine. Bellarm. de SS. Beat. lib. 1. cap. 8. §. vlt. worship and invocation of Saints was brought into the Church rather by custome then any precept: that inward repentance and confession of sinnes to God is of absolute necessity, not so their auricular Secret con­fession, abstra­cting from the abuses of it, our Church allowes and inioynes, in some cases, as very convenient for the comfort of afflicted consciences. confession, and penall workes of satis­faction: [Page 71] that it is necessary to bee really vnited to Christ by his spirit and our faith, and very comfortable to receiue both parts of the Eucharist; but no way necessary to eat the flesh of Christ car­nally in the Sacrament, or to want the Sacrament of his bloud: that those prai­ers must needs be most fruitfull and ef­fectuall which are done with vnder­standing and in a knowne language: that when a man hath constantly endeavou­red with all his forces to obey God in all the duties of Piety and Charity, yet it is not amisse for him after all this to confesse himselfe Gods vnprofitable servant; and his Bellar. de Iustif. lib. 5. c. 7. §. sit 3. Propositio-Tutissimum est fiduciam totam in sold Dei miseri­cordia & be­nignitate re­ponere. safest course not to trust to his owne merits, but wholly and solely to cast himselfe on the mercy of God in Iesus Christ. So then by the precepts and conduct of our Religion, a Christian is fully instructed in all necessary points of faith and manners, and directed how to liue religiously, how to dy comfor­tably: and all this, without any addition of Popery; and all this by the confession of Papists. Hence it followes, that by their owne Confession the doctrines de­bated are vnnecessary.

[Page 72] 3. They are also confessed Nouelties. Themselues yeeld, that for aboue a thou­sand yeares after Christ, Bellar. de Rom. Pont. lib. 4. cap 2. §. Secunda opinio. the Popes judgement was not esteemed infallible: nor his authority Bellarm. de Conc. lib. 2. cap. 13. aboue that of a generall Councell; the contrary being decreed in the late Councels of Constance and Basil, constantly defended by the ancient Sor­bon, and at this day by the Reuision du Concile de Trent. liur. 4. best learned in the Gailicane Church. Bellar. de Indulg. lib. 2. cap. 17. That Euge­nius the 3. (who began his Papacy 1145.) was the first that granted Indulgences: & Bellar. de Sanctorum Beat. lib. 1. cap. 8. §. Di­ces plur. Leo the 3. (who liued 800. yeares af­ter Christ) the first that euer canonized any Saint: That not any Greg. de Valent. in Thom. Tom. 4. disp. 6. p 2. §. Tertio prob. one ancient writer reckons precisely seuen Sacra­ments; the first Bellar. de Sacarm. lib. 2. cap. 25. Author that mentions that number being Peter Lombard, and the first Councell that of Florence. That transubstantiation Scotus a­pud Bellarm. lib. 3. de Eu­char. cap. 23. was neither named, nor made an Article of faith before the Councell of Laterane. That Antiquity, euen till these Lombard. Sent. lib. 4. c. 12. & Aqu. 3. p. qu 83. art. 1. in corp. latter times beleeued the sacrifice in the Eucharist to bee no other, but the image or commemoration of our Sauiours sacrifice on the Crosse. That in Lindan, Panopl. lib. 4. cap. 25. Albaspin. Obseru. lib 1. cap. 4. former ages for 1300. yeares, the holy [Page 73] Cup was administred to the Lairy. And diuine seruice celebrated Nic. de Lyra. in 1. ad Cor. cap. 14. & Cassand. in Liturgicis cap. 28. for many ages, in a knowne and vulgar Language, vnder­stood by the people. That Polyd. Virgil. de In­uent. lib. 6. cap. 13. the Fa­thers generally condemned the worship of Images, for feare of Idolatrie; and Azor. Moral. lib. 8. cap. 26. part. 1. §. Respon­deo. al­lowed, yea exhorted the People with dili­gence to read the Scriptures. Many more confessions of this kinde might be pro­duced.

If now the Mistaker will suppose his Romane Church and Religion purged from these and the like confessed exces­ses and nouelties: hee shall finde in that which remaines little difference of im­portance, betweene vs.

But by this discourse the Mistaker happily may beleeue his cause to be ad­uantaged, and may reply. If Rome want nothing essentiall to Religion or to a Church, how then can the Reformers justifie their separation from that Church, or free themselues from dam­nable Schisme? For surely to separate from the communion of the Church, without just and necessary cause, is a Schisme very damnable.

All this in effect is formerly an­swered. [Page 74] Yet to satisfie our Mistaker, (if it may be) we will here further say some­what to the point, more plainly and di­stinctly.

There neither was, nor can be any just cause to depart from the Church of Christ; no more then from Christ him­selfe. But to depart from a Particular Church, and namely from the Church of Rome, in some doctrines and pra­ctises, there might be just and necessary cause; though the Church of Rome wanted nothing necessary to saluation. I said signantèr, in some doctrines and practises. For there is great difference betweene a Schisme from them, and a Reformation of our selues: And it is one thing to leaue the communion of the Church of Rome, another to leaue com­municating with her in her errors.

Whosoeuer professes himselfe to for­sake the communion of any one member of the body of Christ, must confesse himselfe consequently to forsake the whole. And therefore her communion we forsake not, no more then the Body of Christ, whereof we acknowledge the Church of Rome a member, though [Page 75] corrupted. And this cleares vs from the imputation of Schisme, whose property it is, (witnesse the August. de Vnit. Ecc les. cap. 13. Periisse dicunt de caetero mundo Eccle­siam, & in parte Donati in solâ Aphri­cā remansisse. See more of them below. Donatists and Hieron. aduers. Luci­ferian. initio Dialogi. Affe­rebant Luci­feriani vni­uersum mun­dum esse dia­boli, & vt jam familiare est eis dicere, fa­ctum de Ec­clesiá lupanar. Et mox. Ve­stra Ecclesia (Catholicos alloquens) Anti-Christi magis Syna­goga quàm Christi Ecclesia debet nuncupari. Lu­ciferians,) to cut off from the Body of Christ, and the hope of Saluation, the Church from which it separates. And if any zelotes amongst vs haue pro­ceeded to heauier censures, their zeale may be excused, but their Charity and wisedome cannot be justified. Vnlesse happily they intended not the Church but the Court of Rome: which two if any Romane Catholique cannot well distinguish, let him read the French Do­ctor Peter Charron, in his third Veritie, Charr. Verit. troisiesme. Ch. 14. §. Mais les Schismatiques. Il faut prudemment distinguer entre l' Eglise Romaine & la Court Romaine—Ceste Court demeure, se couure, & se nourrit dedans ceste Eglise, ainsi que le ver dedans la pomme, comme aussi est elle née de sa gresse & de son abondance. C'est contrè la Court Romaine, què Sainct Bernard en tant de lieux, & autres Anciens ont crié & escrit. where he likens the Court of Rome in that Church to a worme in an apple, and confesses all the maladies and miseries in the one to flow from the other.

But to forsake the errours of that Church, and not to joyne with her in those practises which we account erro­neous, we are enforced by necessity. [Page 76] Aug. de [...]apt. contr. Donat. lib. 1. cap. 4. & 5. Alia causa est corum qui in istos Haereti­cos impru­dentèr incur­runt, ipsam es­se Christi Ec­clesiam existi­mantes; alia corum qui nouerunt non esse Catholi­cam. For though in themselues they be not damnable, to them w^ch beleeue as they professe: yet for vs to professe (& to auow by oath, as the Church of Rome in­joynes) what we beleeue not, were with­out question damnable. And they with their errours by the grace of God might go to heauen; when we for our hypocrisy and dissimulation, without repentance, should certainly be condemned to hell. It is the doctrine of the Romane Schoole, that veniall sinnes to him that commits them, not of subreption or a suddain mo­tion, but of presumption that the matter is not of moment, change their kinde & become mortall. The like may be said of their errours. To him who in simplicity of heart beleeues and practiseth them, & withall feareth God & worketh righteous­nes, to him they shall proue veniall. Such an one shall, by the mercy of God, either be deliuered from them, or saued with them. But he that against faith and con­science, shall goe along with the streame to professe and practise them, because they are but little ones; his case is dange­rous and without repentance desperate.

We hope and thinke very well of all those holy and deuout soules, which in [Page 77] former ages liued & died in the Church of Rome. For though they died in many sinfull errours; yet because they did it ignorantly through unbeleefe, Cypr. E­pist. 63. Pam. num. 13. Si quis de ante­cessoribus no­stris, vel igno­rantèr vel simpliciter non hoc ob­seruauit & te­nuit, quod nos Dominus facere exem­plo & magi­sterio suo do­cuit, potest simplicitau ejus de indul­gentiâ Domi­ni venia con­cedi: nobis verò non po­terit ignosci, qui nunc à Domino ad­moniti & in­structi sumus. not knowing them to be either errors or sins; and repenting in generall for all their vnknowne trespasses; we doubt not but they obtained pardon of all their igno­rances. For it were an vnreasonable in­congruity to imagine, that the God of mercy should not be as ready to pardon errours of vnderstanding, as wilfull im­pieties. Nay our Charity reaches fur­ther, to all those at this day, who in sim­plicity of heart beleeue the Romane Re­ligion and professe it. But we vnderstand onely those, who either haue not suffi­cient meanes to finde the truth; or else such as after the vse of the best meanes they can haue, all things considered, finde not sufficient motiues to conuince their conscience that they are in errour, But they that haue vnderstanding and meanes to discouer their errour, and ne­glect to vse them; wee dare not flatter them with so easie a censure. And much lesse them, that dare professe the Re­ligion of the Church of Rome, when they doe not beleeue it, or onely beleeue [Page 78] it, because some carnall or worldly re­spect doth blinde or misleade their vn­derstanding.

Wherefore, to that demand of our Romanists, If we beleeue their Religion to be a safe way to heauen, why doe we not follow it? We answer, we beleeue it safe, that is, by Gods great mercy not dam­nable to some, such as beleeue what they professe: but we beleeue it not safe, but very dangerous if not certainly dam­nable to such as professe it when they beleeue, (or, if their hearts were vpright and not peruersly obstinate might be­leeue) the contrary. The Iesuires and Dominicans hold different opinions touching predetermination, and the im­maculate conception of the blessed Vir­gin: Yet so, that the Iesuite holds the Dominicans way safe, that is his error not damnable, and the Dominicans hold the same of the Iesuites. Yet neither of them with good consequence can presse the other to beleeue his opinion, because by his owne confession it is no dam­nable errour. For as the Dominicans might vrge the Iesuites after this man­ner, so the Iesuites might returne it vpon [Page 79] the Dominicans: and so the Argument being common to both, either it must conclude for both, (and so both parts of a contradiction must be true;) or else, (which is most certaine and euident,) it concludes for neither. And if for neither of them against the other, then by the like reason it is vaine for Papists to vse it against Protestants. All false opinions are not damnable errours, to them that beleeue them: yet may they be so mani­festly false, that there can be no wise­dome in beleeuing them. If one should beleeue, that twice two were not foure, all would confesse he held no damnable errour: But if the same man should thinke all men bound in conscience to be of his opinion, and vrge them (as the Romanists doe vs) that, by their owne confession there were no danger in his way, and therefore in wisedome they were to follow it; who would not laugh at his ridiculous folly? So if they haue no better ground of their beleefe, then their Aduersaries charitable judgement of their errours, they will be so farre from conuincing their Aduersaries of lacke of wisedome, that themselues can­not [Page 80] escape the imputation of folly.

By all this it is euident, that although we confesse the Church of Rome to be (in some sence) a true Church, and her errours to some men not damnable: yet for vs who are conuinced in conscience, that she erres in many things; a necessity lyes vpon vs, euen vnder paine of dam­nation, to forsake her in those errours. Which is not so much a forsaking of her, as a purging of our selues. To cleanse some part of the Church from vile abuses, is not to goe out of the Church. If a Monastery should reforme it selfe, and reduce into practise ancient good discipline, when others would not; in this case, could it with reason bee charged with Schisme from others, or with Apostacy from its rule and order. Or as in a Society of men vniuersally in­fected with some disease, they that should free themselues from the com­mon disease, could not be therefore said to separate from the Society: So neither can the Reformed Churches (especially ours of England) be truly accused for making a Schisme from the Church, seeing all they did, was to reforme them­selues; [Page 81] yet with resolution, to continue in communion (as much as in them lay,) euen with those parts of the Church, that would not doe so. In­deed if they of Rome could first make it appeare by any sound proofe, ei­ther that the Church was pure and nee­ded no Reformation; or that it is all one to leaue the communion of the Church, and to cease communicating with some Churches in their errours; or lastly, that it is all one to forsake the Church of Rome and to forsake the obedience to that Church as it is now required; then the crime of Schisme might with some colour be laid to our charge. But all these are groundlesse assumptions, talk'd of very freely and commonly, but such as neuer will be proued by any one Argument of validity.

In summe, wee can neuer be joyned with Rome, in such corruptions as make her Popish: But wee were neuer dis­joyned from her in those maine essentiall truthes, which giue her the name and ef­fence of a Church. Whereof if the Mistaker doubt, he may be better in­formed by some late Roman Catho­lique [Page 82] writers, of milder judgement and temper: One of Examen pacifique de la doctrine des Hugue­nots. à Caen. 1590. France, who hath purposely in a large Treatise proued (as He beleeues,) the Hugonots & Catholiques of that Kingdome to be all of the same Church and Religion, because of the truths agreed vpon by both. And ano­ther of our owne Syllabus aliquot Syno­dorum, Col­loquiorum, Doctorum pro pace Ec­clesie. Aure­liae. 1628. Countrey, (as it is said,) who hath lately published a large Catalogue of learned Authors, both Pa­pists and Protestants, who are all of the same minde.

But he is perswaded, it seemes, that Protestants among themselues are not of the same Church and Religion. For he sayes, their differences are many and materiall: & Luther with his followers, Schlusselburgius, Grawerus, Hunnius, and their like, doe rigorously curse and con­demne the Zuinglians & Caluinists. And some of their harsh censures to this pur­pose he transcribes out of Brierly; who, with a curious, and (I doubt) a malicious diligence, hath raked vp their intempe­rate speeches.

For answer: first, the Protestants, espe­cially we of the Church of England, ac­knowledge not any factious names of [Page 83] Lutherans, Zuinglians, or Caluinists; with which we are injuriously nick­named by our Aduersaries, as of old good Orthodox Christians were called Phot. cod. 280. in Ex­cerptis Eulogi [...] ad fin. libri. Cornelians, and Act. Con­ciliab. Ephes. in Epist. legat. Schismat. ad suos in Ephe­so. pag. 287. edit. Bin. 1618. Cyrillians, by the seditious followers of Nouatus, and Ne­storius. With Pacianus wee professe, Christian is our name, and Catholique our Surname. We esteeme of Luther, Zuing­lius, and Caluin, as worthy men: but we esteeme them not worthy to bee Lords or Authors of our Faith, or to lead our vnderstandings captiue. Both themselues were farre from affecting such diuine honour; and we farre from bestowing it. We remember who said of Christ, Heare Him, not heare them: and therefore though these mens rea­sons may gaine our assent, their Testimo­ny is at the best but probable. Wee be­leeue not what they say, but what they proue. Much lesse can we endure, being once baptized into the name of Christ, to be marked with the name of any man, as with a note of our seruitude. Gregory Nyssen▪ contr. Apol­linar. [...]. Nyssen makes a sore complaint of his times; The great and venerable name of CHRISTIAN (saith he) is neglected; men [Page 84] profanely diuide themselues into humane appellations. And hee laments the mi­serable ambition of many Sectaries, who surname themselues from their grand Seducers. His Brother Basil. in Ps. 48. S. Basil giues instance in the Marcionites and Valenti­nians, Optar. lib. 3. Optatus in the Donatists. So might wee in them that call themselues Franciscanes, Dominicanes, Thomists, Scotists, Iesuites, &c. To all these we say with Epiphan. haer. 70. in fin. [...]. Epiphanius, The holy Spouse of Christ beares onely her Hus­bands name. And for vs, as the same Idem. haer. 42. Epiphanius and Nazianz. orat. 31. in fin. Nazianzene speake, Though we reuerence S. Peter and S. Paul, yet we are neither Petrians nor Paulians, but Christians. Our reason is that which we read in Lact. lib. 4. cap. 30. Christiani es­se desierunt, qui Christi nomine omis­so, humana & externa voca­bula indue­runt. Lactantius; They are no Christians, who seeke after forraine titles. And therefore we dis­claime the name of Caluinists: we owe no seruice, we haue no dependance vpon Caluin or any other man, as Doctor or Master of our Faith. We owe him, and the rest of the first Reformers many thankes for their painfull labours, which shall remaine of honourable account in all posterity. We cannot blesse God suf­ficiently [Page 85] for such Instruments of his glo­ry. Yet we doe not idolize their Per­sons, or adore their dictates and opini­ons, as if they were diuine Oracles, as the Romish zelotes doe with their Pope. This were not to shake of our old serui­tude, but to exchange it; and for one in­fallible Pope to set vp many. Thankes be to God, among the many Idols which we haue cast off, this Idoll of humane authority is one; which hath robbed God of much glory. That Doctor, who hath the command of our conscience, hath his chaire in heauen. We take vp no opinions vpon the credit of any of our Teachers, whom we censure as well as follow, and freely dissent from their judgement or approue it, when we haue weighed it with reason. Wee loue and honour them as our Friends; yet so, that we honour Truth, and loue it aboue all Arist. Eth. 1. [...]. Friendship.

Wherefore the jarres and diuisions betweene the Lutherans and Caluinists doe little concerne the Church of Eng­land, which followeth none but Christ. Yet to speake somewhat in fauour of them and of the truth: See D. Field of the Ch. l. 3. cap. 42. the Append. pag. 819. & seqq. vlt. edit. their dissen­sions [Page 86] are neither many nor so materiall, as to shake or touch the foundation; easi­ly reconcileable, if men of any modera­tion had them in handling. The bitter speeches of Luther none can excuse: and much lesse the virulent Pamphlets and Proscriptions of some of his Disciples, who in a preposterous imitation of his zeale are little lesse then furious. But the consequence of opinions must not bee measured by the passions or outrages of opinionate men. Two Brothers in their choler may renounce each other, and disclaime their amitie; yet that heat can­not dissolue their inward and essentiall relation. There are some doubts and que­stions (saith August. de pecc. Orig. contr. Pelag. & Caelest. cap. 23. Sunt quaestio­nes, in quibus saluâ fide quâ Christiani su­mus &c. Vide eum contr. Iulian. Pelag. lib. 1. cap. 2. & Enchirid. cap. 59. S. Austine) wherein, with­out any damage to that Faith whereby we are Christians, a man may be ignorant, or suspend his opinion, or coniecture amisse, through humane frailty. In such, what wonder if learned men varie in their judgements; especially seeing the best of men are here below but men at the best, obnoxious to numberlesse passions and infirmities; and (as the same Aug. de Ciu. D. lib. 15. cap. 5. Proficientes, nondumque Perfecti inter se pugnare possent. S. Au­stine sayes) Not perfect, but proficient If Charity might still moderate in dispu­tations [Page 87] of this nature, if truth were ever aimed at more then victory, if men con­tended for their opinions in a faire and manly fashion, that is, (as Orat. 3. de Pace. p. 220. edit. Paris [...] S. Gregory Nazianzen advises) with reasons without revilings; then might they bee an exer­cise of great vse and fruit for the disco­very of truth. But this temper of wis­dome and charity is rarely to bee found: it hath beene the miserable calamity of the Church in all ages, that the pride and confidence of Some, either too to lear­ned in their owne opinion, or too to ig­norant in other mens, hath caused these debates to degenerate into vnworthy & scandalous contentions.

The contentions of Catholiques in the ancient Church, vpon very trifling occasions, were so very bitter and intem­perate; that they were with scorne obie­cted by Cels. apud. Orig. lib. 3. Euseb. de vit. Const. lib. 2. cap. 60. Chrysost. in 1. ad Gal. Pagans, and derided in their open Theaters; much Cypr. Epist. 8. Basil. Ascet. lib. de Iudic. Dei. Nazi­anz. Orat. 1. 14. Pelus. l. 4. ep. 55. Vide Baron. an. 400. n. 51. lamented by men of modesty; though excused Pelus. ib. & Themist. apud Socr. l. 4. c. 27. by some as well as they could. Many times the ground of a violent quarrell was not reall but imaginary, vpon a meere mi­stake of one anothers meaning. Chry­sostome and Epiphanius agreed against [Page 88] the errours of Origen: but so passionate­ly contended about the condemnation of his writings, Sozom. Lib. 8. c. 15. Phot. cod. 96. that they proceeded to mutuall imprecations one against the other: and God heard the rash desires of them both, the former dying out of his Bishopricke, and the other out of his Country. In like manner, Cyrill of A­lexandria anathematized Theodoret, as favouring the Nestorian Heresy: yet quickly after Concil. Caleed. act. [...]. in the Councell of Cbalcedon, vpon examination of the cause, Theodoret was absolued and decla­red Orthodox. Nazianz. orat. 21. in laud. Athan. Hieron. epist. ad Damas. numero 57. Tom. 3. The Churches of the East and West on a vaine suspition char­ged each other with Heresy; and had beene schismatically divided, if Athana­sius had not cleared the seeming difficul­ty. The Orientalls professing to beleeue three Hypostases in the glorious Trinity, would not admit three Persons, and were therefore thought to be Arrians: On the contrary the Westerne beleeuing three Persons, could not bee induced to con­fesse three Hypostases, & therevpō were taken to be Sabellians. Here was a great jealousy, grounded vpon a great errour; which Athanasius easily discovered, and [Page 89] restored againe their good amity, & in­telligence: shewing, that they differed not in judgement, all meaning the same thing, and that Hypostasis on the one side, was the very same in effect with Person on the other.

This last example much resembles the divisions of the Lutherans and Calvi­nists, as they are called: who (especially, the moderate of either side,) differ rather informes and phrases of speech, See D. Field Append. to the 5. book pag 819. & 869. then in substance of doctrine. The first and maine Controversy betweene them is that about Consubstantiation, which af­ter occasioned that other of Vbiquity. (I omit the questions of Predestination, being no lesse debated in the Romane Schooles then in the Reformed.) In both these Controversies, the maine truth on both sides is out of Controversy; that Christ is really and truly exhibited to each faithfull communicant, and that in his whole Person, he is every where. The doubt is only in the manner, how he is in the Symboles and how in heaven & earth. Which being no part of faith, but a curious nicity inscrutable to the witt of man; wee should all here beleeue, [Page 90] where wee cannot vnderstand, and not fall a quarrelling about that which wee cannot conceiue. Just. M. in Expos. Fid. [...]. How or why are saw­ey questions in divine mysteries.

Their other differences in ceremony or discipline, are diversities without dis­cord. Vide Ter­tul. de Virg. vel. cap. 1. Firmil. apud Cypr. epist. 75. August. Epist. 86. So­crat. hist. lib. 5. cap. 21. &c. All wise men in the world haue ever thought, that in such things each severall Church is left to her own judg­ment and liberty; so as shee keepe her selfe to the generall Apostolique rules of Order and Edification, and to the ge­nerall judgement and practise of the Church vniversall. Though the body of Religion in diverse Churches & Coun­tries be cloathed in diuerse suits and fa­shions, yet for substance it may bee one in all.

In all these Contestations, (as it com­monly falls out, blessed be God!) they that are for truth, haue ever beene for Charity and mutuall toleration: as ap­peares by their Vide Iu­nij & Parei scripta Irenica. published writings, all tending to pacification. Luther himselfe, though of a rough and vehement spirit, yet before his death, being tempered by milde Melancthon, (that honour of Germany) did Admon. Neustad. de libro Con­cord. cap. 6. pag. 236. much relent & remit [Page 91] of his rigor against Zuinglius, and be­gan to approue the good counsells of peace. And among the Lutherans, all are not of the same intractable dispositi­on. As they in Polonia for instance; Vide Cor­pus Confess. & ibi Poloniae Consensum. where the followers of Luther & Cal­vin haue long liued together, in a faire and brotherly concord & communion; notwithstanding their severall opinions, which they still retaine.

Since then our discords are of no higher degree, wee say as Prudent. [...]. § vlt.—concordia laesa est, Sed defensa fide: quin & con­cordia sospes Germanam comitata Fi­dem, sua vul­nera ridet. Pruden­tius, a Christian Poet, of the vnity of his times. It hath beene a little violated, but is defended by Faith her sister: in whose company being safely come off, shee laugheth at her wounds, as being easily cu­rable.

BVt though wee doe agree in the substance of Religi­on with all true Christian Catholiques in the world; yet all this cannot winne vs the Charitable opinion of our Mistaker. For notwithstanding all this, he beleeues vs to be not only Heretiques, but no better in effect then Infidells. And hee giues his reason, which he saies, strikes at the roote and vnanswerably convinces. His custome is to giue vs only words: it is well that he offers vs reason, which we shall be ever willing to heare and consi­der of. His reason then. First wee are Heretiques, because in many opinions wee disobey the Church; and Heresy properly consists not in the matter or quality of the false doctrine beleeued, but in the pride of [Page 94] him that maintaines it in contempt of the Church. Our faith then is defectiue, be­cause wee beleeue not all that is com­maunded by the Church. But 2. which is worse, we haue no true faith at all; no, not of those things which we truly be­leeue. For though we firmely assent to ma­ny truths, yet we doe not beleeue them vp­on the only true and infallible motiue, or vpon the right ground, which is the reve­lation of God, and the proposition of his Catholique Church. The faith which re­lies not on this ground is not any true faith, but only an humane opinion or per­swasion.

Answ. If wee did not dissent in some opinions from the present Romane Church, wee could not agree with the Church truly Catholique. But the Mi­staker after his fashion, is ever begging what will never bee granted or proved, that his Roman Church is all one with the Catholique. What Optatus said of the Do­natists (who arrogated to themselues a­lone Optat. lib. 3. the name and priviledges of the Church, exclusiuely to all others,) the same say wee of the Popes part; Vestra pars quasi Ecclesia est, sed Catholica non [Page 95] est; Their Church is truly so called in some sort, being a corrupt member of the Catholique, but the Catholique Church it is not.

The Catholique Church is carefull to ground all her declarations in matters of faith vpon the divine authority of Gods written word. And therefore whosoeuer wilfully opposeth a iudge­ment so well grounded, is iustly esteem'd an Heretique: not properly, because he disobeyes the Church; but because hee yeelds not to Scripture sufficiently 'pro­pounded or cleared vnto him. So saith August. de Gen. ad. lit. lib. 7. cap. 9. Omnes. Hae­retici Scriptu­ras Catholi­cas legunt, nec ob aliud sunt Haeretioi, nisi quòd eas non rectè in­telligentes, suas falsas o­piniones con­tra earum ve­ritatem per­vicaciter asse­runt. Idē ha­bet Epist. 222. St Austin, and Hier. in Galat. cap. 5. Haereticus est quicun (que) ali­ter Scripturam intelligit, quā sensus Spiritûs S flagitat, licèt de Ecclesiâ non recesserit. St Hierome expres­ly. The best Divinae Scripturae in­tegra & firma regula verita tis. Dist. 37. c. Relatum. Bellarm. de verb. Dei lib. 1. c. 2. Sacra Scriptura regula credendi certissima tutissim [...] (que) est. Gers. de exam. doctrin. par. 2. consid. 1. Oper. part. 1. pag. 541. Scriptura nobis tradita est tanquàm regula sufficiens & infallibilis pro regimine totius Ecclesiastici corporis—vs (que) in finem.—cui se non conformans alia doctrina vel abjicienda est vt haereticalis, vel vt suspecta & imperti­nens ad religionem prorsus est habenda. learned in the Church of Rome confesse, that the Scripture was giuen as a sufficient and infallible rule for the government of the whole Church, so as any doctrine not conformable there­vnto must either bee rejected as hereti­call, or suspected as impertinent to reli­gion. [Page 96] It is confessed also that the Church Almain. in 3. D. 25. q. 1. Resolutio Occham est, quòd nec tota Ecclesia, nec concilium ge­nerale, nec summus Pon­tifex potest facere Articu­lum quod non fuit Articulus. Sed in dubijs propositioni­bus potest Ec­clesia deter­minare an sint Catholicae-—Tamen sic determinan­do, non facit quod sint Catholicae quùm prius essent antè Ecclesiae determinatio­nem. Sic etiam Turrecremata, Adrianus apud Can. lib. 12. cap. 8. S [...] ­tus in 1. D. 11. q. 1. in fine. In nova Haeresi veritas prius erat de side, etsi non ita declarata. Bonavent. in 1. D. 11. A. r. q. 1. ad fin. Haere [...] multa, quae erant implicita fidej nostrae, compulerunt explicare. hath no power to make any Article of faith, or to adde any thing to the do­ctrine of faith. Her duty is only to B [...] ­larm. lib. 2. de Concil. cap. 12. Concilia quùm definiunt, non faciunti liquid esse in fallibilis veritatis, sed declarant. Gers. de err. circ. praec [...] Non occides. part. oper. 1. pag. 406. vlt. edit. Papa vel generale Com­lium determinando de fide, nihil faciunt aliud nisi declarare talia esse fide. Canus lib. 2. cap. 7. Ingenuè fatemur non esse nunc novas rev [...] ­tiones expectandas, five à summo Pontifice, five à Concilio, five a Ecclesiâ totâ. Vide Th. 2. 2. q. 1. A. 10. ad 1. ex­plaine and declare the truth according to Scripture, and from thence to draw all her conclusions. Aquin. 2. 2. q. 1. A. [...]. in corp. For the Articles of the faith cannot encrease in substance, b [...] onely in explication. Hence it followes, that all necessary or fundamentall truth is contained in Scripture, which is the rule according to which the Church is to judge of [...]. Arist. lib. 1 de Anim. truth and errour. Her decla­ration is only to fetch out that truth which is in the Scripture: her exposition of the Text must not be an addition to it. It is a faulty and erronious declaration, [Page 97] which in stead of declaring giues ano­ther See the lear­ned Answere to Fishers Re­lation of his 3. Confer. pag. 9. and a contrary sense. Neither is any doctrine necessary or true, because the Church declares it such, but because it is such in it selfe by warrant of Scripture. If the Church walke not by this rule, Mag. 1. D. 11. lit. C. Qui pretergreditur fidei regulam, non incedit in via, sed rece­dit à viâ. Quod volu­mus Sanctum est. Ticonius Donatista a­pud S. Aug. cont. Epist. Parmen. lib. 2. c. 13. she is out of her way. And in this by­way never any Church hath wandred so farre, as the Church of Rome, which hath defined or declared very many things to be fundamentall Truths or He­resies, which are nothing lesse: follow­ing herein no other rule but her owne fantasy.

As in Truth, so in Heresy, the Church may declare what is Heresy, shee may convince and censure it: but still accord­ing to her Rule, the Scripture. Neither is any doctrine Hereticall, because it op­poseth the definition of the Alph. à Castro. lib. 1. adv. Haeres, cap. 8. Ecclesia s [...] definitione non facit ta­lem assertio­nem esse Hae­resim, cùm e­ [...]amsi ipsa non definivisset, esset Haeresis: Sed id efficit Ecclesia, vt no­bis per suam Censuram pate at illud esse Haeresim—ibid. Ideò dicitur veritas aliqua Catholica, quia à Deo in Scripturis revelata est, & è contra. Church, but because it opposes that Scripture, on which the Church grounds her definiti­on. The doctrines of Arrius, Macedo­ [...]ius, Nestorius, Eutyches were in them­selues Hereticall even before they were [Page 98] solemnely condemned in the 4 generall Councells.

But, saith the Mistaker, the Heresier mentioned by Philastrius, Epiphanius and S. Austin in their Catalogues, were many of them errours in themselues of no grea [...] moment or importance: yet they were al [...] esteemed Heresies, because they were hel [...] in disobedience to the Church. So likewise the errour of rebaptization was for the matter of it the very same in S. Cyprian, and in the Donatists: yet the Donatists were accounted Heretiques for despising the iudgement of the Catholique Church, and S. Cyprian not so, because hee conser­ved himselfe within the amity and com­munion of the Church. Therefore properly and formally he is an Heretique that con­tradicts the definitions of the Church.

Answ. In all ages, almost, the impu­tation of Heresy hath beene too too fre­quent and familiar among Christians; and in this age aboue all, wherein Chri­stendome is so miserably broken into numberlesse fragments and pieces. It is a thing purely impossible for the lear­nedst man in the World, exactly to re­count all the severall Sects and subdivi­sions [Page 99] of Christians, or such as pretend to Christianity. And every Sect hath some Zelotes, so passionately in loue with their owne Opinions, that they condemne all others, differing from them, to be Hereticall. So there liues not a Christian on earth, who in the judgement of many others is not an He­retique. I speake not this in favour of a­ny Heretique or Heresy justly so called, ancient or new. But surely as this impu­tation is a grievous crime where it is true: so it is no lesse grievous a calumny if it bee vngrounded. And it is good counsell, which Cont. Haeres. lib. 3. & lib. 1. cap. 7. Qui tàm levi­ter de Haeresi pronunciant, saepè fit vt suâ ipsorum feri­antur sagittâ, incidant (que) in eam foveam, quam alijs pa­rabant. Alphonsus à Castro giues, let them consider who pronounce so easily of Heresy, how easy it is for them­selues to erre. Very good advise, though Alphensus himselfe makes very little vse of it, and forgets it too often.

As all Truth is not of equall moment or necessity, so al errors are not, of the same malignity and danger. Every Heresy is an error; but Aug. de Haeres. in praef. Non omnis error Haeresis est, quamvis om­nis Haeresis errore aliquo, &c. Jd. alibi Errare postium Haereticus es­se nolo. Bellar. lib. 3. de Euchar. cap 8. §. Ac primum. Haeresis est, cuius con­traria est veritas fidei à Deo revelata. each error is not Heresy. What Heresy is properly, or what it is that makes an Heretique, is a thing ei­ther [Page 100] meerely impossible, or extreamely dif­ficult to define, in the opinion of Quid fa­ciat Haereti­cum, regulari quadam defi­nitione com­prehendi, si­cut ego existi­mo, aut om­nino non po­test, aut diffi­cilimè potest. Id. vbi suprà. S [...] Austine: who promised and In fine libri ad Quodvult­deum. intended a treatise purposely of this matter, bu [...] his death or other thoughts prevented him. But it is most evident, that those Bellar. de Script, in Phi­lastrio. Ob­servandum est multa a Phi­lastrio inter Haereses nu­merari, quae verè Haereses non sunt. Dion. Pctau. Animad. in Epiphan. ini­tio, de In­script. operis. Haeresis no­men latissimè ab Epiphanio vsurpatur, nec ad Theologorum normam vocabuli istius vsus exigend [...] est. ancient writers in their Catalogues (and elsewhere) doe not vse the words Heresy or Heretique, in their exact o [...] proper notion, but in a very large an [...] generall signification, not distinguishing betweene Heresy and errour. Whatsoe­ver opinion they conceived to bee con­trary to the common or approved opi­nion of Christians, that they called as Heresy; because it differed from the re­ceived opinion, not because it opposed any formall definition of the Church. This may appeare by many circumstan­ces.

1 S^t Austin was desired by his Frien [...] Quodvultdeus, to set downe all Praefat. lib. de Haer. ad Quodv. Petis exponi, omnia omnin [...] quibus à veritate dissentiunt. opi­nions of Heretiques differing from truth. Every false opinion is not properly a [...] [Page 101] Heresy, or condemned by a definition of the Church.

2 The same Author saith of Haer. 80. Alias ipse commemo­rat, quae mihi appelland ae Haereses non videntur. Phi­lastrius, that hee ranked many things in his Catalogue of Heresies, which in his judgement were not truly so named. Therefore either Philastrius set downe many Heresies, not defined to bee such by the Church, or else S. Austin should be an Heretique, who denied them to be Heresies after the Church had defi­ned them.

Lastly, he notes that Philastrius and Epiphanius differ in the number of their Heretiques, because they differed in their judgement of Heresy; August. ibid. proculdu­bio in ea quaestione v­bi disputatur, quid sit Haere­sis, non idem videbatur am­bobus, &c. that seeming an Heresy to the One, which seemed not so to the Other. Himselfe differs from them both; professing the reason to bee, because it is hard to agree vpon the true nature and definition of Heresy. He was not then of our Mistakers opinion, that the definition of the Church is that which makes an Heresy.

The like difference may bee observed in the Writers of the Romane Church. Alph. in Praefat. & lib. 1. cap. 9. Pater. miserè errâs­se Bern. de Lucemburgo Hereticorum, Catalogum describentem. Alphonsus à Castro often taxes the miserable errours, as he calls them, of [Page 102] Guido Perpinianus, Bernardus de Lucem­burgo and others in their Catalogues of Heretiques, and in their judgement of Heresy, wherein he thinkes them many times mistaken. And will the Mistaker say, that all the Heresies recounted by Alphonsus himselfe, Prateolus, and the like were errours publiquely condem­ned by the definition of the Church?

It is true, when the Church hath de­clared her selfe in any matter of Opini­ons or of Rites, her Declaration obliges all her Children to peace and externall obedience. Nor is it fit or lawfull for a­ny private man to oppose his judge­ment to the publique. He may offer his contrary opinion to bee considered of, so he doe it with evidence (or great pro­bability) of Scripture or reason, and ve­ry modestly, still containing himselfe within the dutifull respect which hee owes. But if he will factiously advance his owne conceits, and despise the Church so farre as to cast off her com­munion: hee may be justly branded and condemned for a Schismatique, yea and an Heretique also in some degree, and in foro exteriori; though his opinion [Page 103] were true, and much more if it bee false. And this was it that made one great dif­ference betweene Saint Cyprian and the Donatists, though they agreed in the er­ [...]or of Rebaptization. For the Donatists had other errours more grosse and dan­gerous, and even amounting to Heresy in the matter of them, where of S^r Cypri­an was no way guilty as shall appeare.

St Cyprian was of opinion that all Heretiques returning to the Catholique Church ought to be rebaptized. Steven at the same time Bishop of Rome held the direct contrary, that no Heretiques should be rebaptized. Both of them er­red, and both said true, in some sense. The ambiguity of the word Heretique deceived them. For the Catholique Church, afterwards in the Councell of Nice declaring her selfe in that Contro­versy, distinguished of Heretiques, and decreed that Concil. Nic. Can. 8. Cathari. Some should not bee re­baptized, but receiued with a simple be­nediction; and that Pauliani­stae s [...]u Samo­sateniani ibid. Can. 19. & Concil. 6. in Trull. Can. 95. Others should be. But the disposition and carriage of Ste­ven and Cyprian in this businesse was very different, and very remarkable.

Steuen in a violent heat Eusch. Hist. lib. 7. cap. 4. excommu­nicates [Page 104] all the Bishops of Cilicia, Cappa­docia, Galatia, &c. because they were not of his minde. When they sent some Bishops of their Company to him faire­ly to treate of the matter, He Vide Fir­miliani Epist. inter Epist. Cypriani 75. ad fin. forbids them to be receiued into any house or harbor. He vses Cyprian with termes of reproach, calls him Ibid. false Christ, false Apostle, deceitfull Worker. With Steuen agreed his Italian Bishops.

On the other side, notwithstanding this Declaration of the Bishop and Church of Rome in this Controuersie, S. Cyprian Bellar. lib. 2. de Concil. cap. 5. Con­stat Corneli­um Papam cum nationali Concilio om­nium Episco­porum Italiae statuisse non debere Hae­reticos rebap­tizari, & ean­dem senten­tiam posteà approbâsse [...]am Stepha­num Papam, & jussisse vt Haeretici non rebaptizarentur. Et simu constat Cyprianum contrarium sensisse & mordicus defendisse; id quod etiam ipse fatetur in Epist. ad Pompeium, vbi arguit Stephanum Pa­ [...]am erroris. Et tamen Cyprianus semper est habitus in numero Ca­tholicorum. persisted in his opinion; and with him 80. Bishops of Africa, Sy­nodically assembled at Carthage, besides those other of the East. For in that age men did not beleeue, that the Romane Church was infallible, or that it was Heresie to dissent from her judgement, or not to submit to her authoritie. But the behauiour of Cyprian was full of sweetnesse and modesty. He deliuers his owne firme opinion; but withall [Page 105] Cypr. E­pist. 72. ad Stephan. Quâ in re, nos vim nemini faci­mus, nec le­gom damus; cùm habeat in Ecclesiae administratio­ne voluntatis suae arbitrium liberum vnus­quisque Prae­positus. Id. Epist. 73. ad Iubaianum in fine. Haec breuitèr pro nostra mediocritate rescripsimus, nemini prae­scribentes aut praeiudican­tes, quo minùs quisque Episcoporum, quod putet, faciat, habens arbi­trij sui liberam potestatem. Nos, quantum in nobis est, cum Collegis & Coepiscopis nostris non contendimus, cum quibus diuinam concor­diam & Dominicam pacem tenemus. Et mox. Seruatur à nobis patien­tèr ac firmitèr Charitas animi, Collegii honor, vinculum fidei, & con­cordia Sacerdotij. Id. in Praefat. Concil. Carthag. Superest vt de hâc re Singuli, quid sentiamus, proferamus: Neminem judicantes aut à jure communio nis aliquem, si diuersum senserit, amouentes. Neque enim quisquam nostrûm tyrannico terrore ad obsequendi necessitatem Collegas suos adigit. professes, that he meant not to pre­scribe or giue lawes to any, that euery Bishop might freely follow his owne judge­ment, that he would not contend with any of his Colleagues about this matter, so farre as to breake diuine concord and the peace of our Lord; that he was farre from judging or censuring any of his Brethren, or cutting off from his communion any that were of a different minde: that in such cases none ought to constraine his Col­legues by tyrannicall terrour (therein glancing at the procedures of Steuen,) to a necessity of beleeuing or following what he thinkes meet. This modestie and Charitie is very often and very deser­vedly commended by Aug. de Bapt. cont. Donat. lib. 1. cap. 18. & lib. 2. cap. 1. & 2. & 3. & 4. & 10. lib. 3. cap. 1. & 3. lib. 4. cap. 10. lib. 5. cap. 17. lib. 6. cap. 6. & Epist. 48. & passim. S. Austin: who vpon this ground frees that holy Martyr [Page 106] from Schisme, (and much more from that Heresie) whereof the Donatists af­ter him were deeply guilty.

For the Donatists pursued and main­tained their errour with extreame pride, faction, and fury. They dissented with­out reason not onely from the Roman or African Particular Churches, but from the great and graue Councell of Nice, representing the whole Catholique Church. They separated from the Com­munion of all other Christians, Aug. E­pist. 172. So­ [...]etis nobis objicere, non solùm in no­stris crimina non probata, sed potiùs in vestris proba­ta. Id. lib. 2. de Bapt. cont. Donatist. c. 6. vestros fuisse Traditores monifestissi­ma rerū gesta testantur. Op­tatus l. 1. Om­nia quae in Traditores & Schisinaticos dici potue­runt, Parme­niane, [...]stra sunt. Vide Gesta purga­tionis Faelicis. char­ging them with false crimes whereof themselues were guilty. They vanted that Optat. lib. 2. Ecclesia vna est. Eam tu, frater Parme­niane, apud vos solos esse dixisti. Et post. Nitimini suadere hominibus apud vos solos esse Ecclesiam. Vide Aug. Epist. 50. & 161. Christ had no Church on earth but in the part of Donatus, and that Sal­uation could not be found but in their As­semblies. They esteemed Catholiques to bee no better then Optat. lib. 3. Verbaseductionis vestrae sunt, Attendite post vos, Redimite ani­mas vestras. Vestrum est dicere hominibus Fidelibus & Clericis, Estote Christiani. Et vnicui (que) dicere, Cai Sei, aut Caia Seia, adhuc Paganus es aut Pagana. Idem lib. 4. Vester sermo est, quem ad pacis filios ha­betis, dum dicitis, per [...]istis; attendite pos [...]vos, periit anima vestra. Aug. Enarr. in Ps. 32. conc. 2. ad fin. Isti qui dicunt, non estis Fratres no­stri, Paganos nos dicunt. Id. de Bapt. cont. Donat. l. 2. c. 7. Consule ani­mae tuae, [...]iunt, esto Christianus. O improbam rabiem, quùm Christiano dicitur, esto Christianus! Pagans, [Page 107] Optat. lib. 4. Vos odio nos habetis, Fratres vtique vestros. Audi­torum animis infunditis o­dia, inimici­tias docendo suadetis do­centes ne Aue dicant cuiquam no­strûm; tol­lunt commu­ne inter ho­mines salu­tationis offi­cium. hated them, disdained to salute them, Optat. lib. 6. Rasistis Altaria, fre­gistis Calices, lauistis Pallas, parietes & inclusa spatia salsà aquâ spargi prae­cepistis. Ad Aggae­um Prophe­tam video vos velle con­fugere, vbi scriptum est, Quae tetigerit pollutus, polluta sunt. washed their Church-wals and their vestiments, broke their Chalices, scraped their Altars, pretending that all were pol­luted by the very touch of Catholiques. (Is not much of this Donatisme to be found at this day, in some that pretend themselues to be the onely Catholiques? They may doe well to looke to it.)

For this vnworthy contempt of the Catholique Church, those wretches were worthily accounted Schismatiques in the highest degree: And Heretiques also for denying the Church to be Ca­tholique, by their restraining of it to a corner of Africa. But because the most of them erred out of a well meant zeale, being seduced by their Guides, and so Haeretic is credentes rather then Haeretici, (according to S. Austins distinction. De vtilitat. Cred. cap. 1.) and rather Optat. lib. 7. Vos jamdudum in communionem nostram voluimus recipere, quia vos illo tempore non peccâstis, sed Principes vestri. con­tinuing in the Schisme, then Authors of it; and because the worst of them in the mid'st of their Schisme and Heresie re­tained [Page 108] the Optat. l. 5. Et apud vos & apud nos vna est Ecclesiasti­ca conuersa­tio, communes lectiones, ea­dem fides, ipsa fidei Sa­cramenta, ea­dem mysteria. Et lib. 1. Ideò post vos non emendamus, quia & apud nos & apud vos, vnum est Sacramentum Aug. Epist. 164. Sacramenta, quae non mutantur, approbantur à nobis. Et Id. Epist. 48. In multis estis nobiscum, in Baptismo, in Symbolo, in caeteris Do­minicis Sacramentis. Id. contr. Epist. Parmen. lib. 2. cap. 13. Sicut Bap­tismus in eis, sic ordinatio mansit integra, quia in praecisione fuit vi­tium, non in Sacramentis, quae, vbicunque sunt, sancta sunt. substance (for the most im­portant parts,) and Sacraments of our Religion: Therefore the Catholiques much more mildly judged of them then of the followers of Arrius, Eunomius, or the like, expresly Optat. lib. 1. Benè clausisti hortum Haereticis frater Parmeniane, benè subduxisti anulum ijs; vobis verò Schismaticis, quamuis in Catho­licâ non sitis, haec negari non possunt, quia nobiscum vera & commu­nia Sacramenta traxisits. Et mox. Quid tibi visum est haec & vobis voluisse negare, quos Schismaticos esse manife stum est. Et statim. Vo­lebam vt soli damnarentur Haeretici: quantum in te est & jam vos ipsos cùm eis vnâ sententia ferire voluisti. August. Epist. 164. Non objicimus vobis nisi Schismatis crimen, quod etiam haeresin malè perseuerando fecistis. seuering them from such capitall Heretiques as erred in the prime and most fundamentall Ve­rities, concerning the Deitie, the Incar­nation of Christ, &c. They requited all their hatred with good will, acknow­ledged them to be their Aug. in Psal. 32. Conc. 2. ad fin. Velint, nolint, fratres nostn sunt. Vide eum etiam contr. Donatist. post Collat. cap. vlt. Optat. lib. 1. Quamuis Donatist. nos odio habent & execrentur, & nolint se fratres nostros dici; tamen nos recedere à timore Domini non possumus. Sun sine dubio Fratres nostri, quamuis non boni. Quare nemo miretur, eo­nos appellare fratres, qui non possunt non esse fratres. Et mox. Non sint Collegae si nolint; tamen, vt suprà diximus, fratres sunt. Frater igitur meus Parmenianus, & sic passim. Id. lib. 4. initio. Si tu non vis esse frater, ego esse incipio impius, si de nomine isto tacuero. Estis enim fratres nostri, & nos vestri. Et statim. Vos nobiscum, id est, cum fratribus vestris, pacem habere non vultis. Non enim potestis non esse fratres, quos ijsdem Sacramentorum visceribus vna mater Ecclesia ge­nuit, quos eodem modo adoptiuos filios Deus pater excepit. Brethren, [Page 109] Aug. E­pist. 166. Concordate nobiscum fra­tres, diligimus vos; hoc vo­bis volumus quod & no­bis. Id. Epist. 68. Nos cum magnâ dile­ctione serua­mus vestros illaesos: legimus illis loca, quibus ipse error conuincitur, qui fratres à fra­tribus separat. Optat. lib. 4. Oramus pro vobis quia volumus: & vos pro nobis & cùm non vultis. Vides, frater Parmeniane, sancta germa­nitatis vincula inter nos & vos in totum rumpi non posse. loued and pittied and prayed for them. Though the peeuish Schisma­tiques did much abuse this Charitie of good Catholiques towards them. For hence they tooke occasion to argue in fauour of their Schisme and Heresie: as if their Aduersaries by their owne confession did justifie it and them: reaso­ning thus. Aug. Cont. lit. Petil. lib. 2. cap. 108. Petilianus dixit: Venite ad Ecclesiam populi, & aufugite Traditores, si perire non vultis. Nam vt facilè cognoscatis, quòd cùm ipsi sint rei, de fide nostrâ optimè judicant; Egoillorum in­fectos baptizo, illi meos recipiunt baptizatos. Quod omninò non fa­cerent, si in Baptismo nostro culpas aliquas agnouissent. Videte ergo, quod damus, quam sit sanctum, quòd destruere metuit sacrilegus inimi­cus. Id. contr. Crescon. Gram. lib. 1. cap. 21. Intentio tua est, in parte Donati hominem potius baptizari oportere: hanc intentionem hins probare conatus es, quòd etiam Nos esse illic Baptismum non nega­mus. Id. ibid. lib. 4. cap. 4. Quaeris a me, à quo to baptizari conueniat, vtrùm ab eo potius quem & ego Baptismum habere confirmo, an ab co quem tuus hoc non habere contendit. Vide eundem, de Bapt. contr. Donatist. lib. 1. cap. 10. & 11. Your selues (said they to [Page 110] the Catholiques) confesse our Baptisme and Sacraments and Faith (for the most part) to be good and auaileable; We deny yours to be so, and say there is no Church, no Saluation amongst you. Therefore it is safest for all to joyne with vs. Doe not the Romanists at this day in the very same manner abuse the Charity of Pro­testants? And is not this directly that Charme, wherewith they worke so powerfully vpon the Spirits of simple people? Our answer is the same which S. Austin opposed to the Ancient Dona­tists in the places cited.

By the way: from that fauourable judgement and opinion which good Ca­tholiques in that age had of the Dona­tists, esteeming them to be their Bre­thren, notwithstanding their Schisme and Heresie, these Corollaries may be probably deduced.

1. It seemeth that an Hereticall Church (where in some Heresy is pub­liquely maintained by the Guides and Pastors of it,) is in some kinde the Spouse of Christ, and bringeth forth August. [...]le Bapt. con. Don. l. 1. c. 10. Ecclesia Ca­tholica etiam in communio­nibus diuerso­rum ab vnita­te separatis, per hoc quod suum in cis habet ipsa vti­que generat Filios Christo per Baptis­mum. Children to God, and Brethren to [Page 111] the Orthodox beleeuers. Especially, if She baptize her Children in the name of the Trinity; as did the Donatists.

2. It seemeth, that euen in an Here­ticall Church Saluation may be had; as a child may be borne in a plaguy house, and may liue, though he hath a running botch on his body. In such Churches the very ignorance and simplicity of the Vulgar is a preseruatiue to them against the poyson; more hopes of them then of the Learned.

3. It seemeth to some Mr. Hoo­ker lib. 3. §. 1. The Morton of the Church. cap. 1. §. 4. & cap. 7. §. 10. men of great learning and judgement (but herein I had rather leaue the Reader to his judge­ment, then interpose mine owne,) that all who professe to loue and honour Ie­sus Christ, (though it be in much weake­nesse and with many errours, yet) are in the visible Christian Church, and by Catholiques to bee reputed Brethren. Or to the same purpose; wheresoeuer (say they) a company of men do joynt­ly and publiquely professe the substance of Christian Religion, which is, Faith in Iesus Christ, the Sonne of God and Sa­uiour of the world, with submission to his [Page 112] doctrine, and obedience to his Commande­ments: there is a Church wherein Sal­uation may bee had, notwithstanding any corruption of judgement or pra­ctice; yea although it be of that nature that it may seeme to fight with the very foundation, and so hainous as that in re­spect thereof the people stained with this corruption are worthy to be abhorred of all men, and vnworthy to bee called the Church of God.

For further illustration and proofe of this opinion, these things are said.

That to beleeue in Iesus Christ the Sonne of God and Sauiour of the world with submission to him, is sufficient to constitute a Church, wherein Saluation may bee had, is warranted, as they thinke:

1. By Scriptures. 1 Ioh. 4. 15. Whosoeuer shall confesse that Iesus is the Sonne of God, dwelleth in him, and he in God. Againe, ibid. v. 2. Vide in h. loc. Tirinum. Euery Spirit that confesseth that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God. The like passages are 1 Ioh. 5. 1. &. 5. elsewhere, S. Peters Faith was the same Matt. 16. 16, 17. with this; and the Faith of Ioh. 11. 27. Martha, and of the Act. 8. 37. Eu­nuch. [Page 113] And the Faith of all these is ap­proued in Scripture.

2. Heretiques themselues must bee acknowledged, though a maimed part, yet a part of the visible Church. Hooker vbi supr. Ma­galtanus idem probat contra Bellar. in Tit. 3. vers. 11. Ann. 2. For if an Infidell should pursue to death an Heretique professing Christianitie, one­ly for Christian prosessions sake, could we deny vnto him the honour of Mar­tyrdome? Yet this honour all men know to be proper vnto the Church. Here­tiques therefore are not vtterly cut off from the visible Church of Christ. If the Fathers doe any where, as oftentimes they doe, make the true visible Church of Christ, and Hereticall Companies opposite, they are to be construed as se­parating Heretiques, not altogether from the Companie of Beleeuers, but from the fellowship of sound Beleeuers. For where profest vnbeleefe is, there there can be no visible Church of Christ: there may be, where sound beleefe wan­teth. Infidels, being cleane without the Church, denie directly and vtterly re­ject the very Principles of Christianity: which Heretiques embrace, and erre [Page 114] onely by misconstruction. Whereupon their opinions, although repugnant in­deed to the Principles of Christian Faith, are notwithstanding held other­wise, and maintained as most consonan [...] thereunto. To which purpose the words of Salu. de Gubern. l. 5. Eis traditio Magistrorum suorum & do­ctrina inuete­rata quasi Lex est, qui hoc sciunt quod docen­tur. Haeretici ergo sunt, sed non scientes. Denique a­pud nos sint Haeretici, a­pud se non sunt. Nam in tantùm se Catholicos judicant, vt nos ipsos titulo Haereticae appellatio­nis infament. Quod ergo illi nobis sunt, & hoc nos illis. Nos eos in­juriam diuinae generationi facere certi sumus, quod minorem Patre [...] ­lium dicunt: Illi nos injuriosos Patri existimant, quia aequales [...] credamus. Veritas apud nos est, sed illi apud se esse praesumunt. Ho [...] Dei apud nos est, sed illi hoc arbitrantur honorem diuinitatis esse quod credunt. Inofficiosi sunt, sed illis hoc est summum Religionis officum Impij sunt, sed hoc putant veram esse pretatem. Errant ergo, sed bo [...] animo errant, non odio sed affectu Dei, honorare se Dominum atq [...] a [...]are credentes. Quanmuis non habeant rectam fidem, illi tamen [...] perfectam aestimant Dei Charitatem. Qualiter pro hoc ipso falsae op­nionis errore in die judicij puniendi sunt; nullus potest scire nisi Index Saluian an ancient Bishop of Mar­seilles are very remarkeable, concerning some Arrian Heretiques, of whom he speakes thus: The tradition of their Teachers, and the doctrine which they haue learned, is to them as it were a Law▪ they beleeue as they haue beene instructed. They are Heretiques then, but not witting­ly. Briefly, they are Heretiques in our judgement, but not in their owne. For they esteeme themselues so good Catholiques▪ [Page 115] that they defame vs with the title of Here­sie. Such therefore as They are to vs, such are Wee to them. We know assuredly that they are iniurious to the Diuine Genera­tion of the Sonne of God, because they say He is inferiour to his Father: They contra­rily thinke vs iniurious to the Father, be­cause we beleeue the Sonne to be equall to Him. The truth is on our side, but they pre­sume it is on theirs. Our opinion truly honours God, but they suppose their opi­nion to be more honourable to Him. They are indeed vndutifull to God, but this they esteeme a great dutie of Religion. They are impious, but this they thinke to be true piety. They erre then, but they erre with a good minde: not out of any ha­tred to God, but with affection to him, thinking to honour hereby and loue the Lord. Although they haue not the right Faith, yet they imagine their opinion to be perfect Charitie towards God. How they shall bee punished in the last day of judgement for this error of their false opi­nion; the Iudge alone knowes.

3. In the Society of such Professors there is (at least there may be) true Bap­tisme [Page 116] administred, and rightly for the substance of it. And where true Bap­tisme may be rightly administred, there is the Couenant of Saluation in Christ setled and established, because the Seale of the Couenant is there allowed. And euery Society, in which is the Couenant of Grace, is a Church of Christ. A­gaine, where true Baptisme is, there, by the Confession of the Romanists, euery one by Vertue of that Baptisme, if him­selfe doe not ponere obieem, is made a member of the Church and of Christ, & an Heyre of heauen. And hence it fol­loweth, that Children baptized in that Church are regenerated, because they doe not ponere obicem. And hence a­gaine, that that Societie is a Church of Christ, and his Spouse, which bringeth forth Children vnto God.

4. The people of the ten Tribes, af­ter their defection, notwithstanding their grosse corruptions and Idolatrie, yet because they professed (by Circum­cision and otherwise,) to honour the true Iehouah, they remained still a true Church, (though a very imperfect and [Page 117] impure Church:) and were therefore called the Rom. 9. 25, 26. 1 King. 16. 2. people of God, the beloued of God, the Children of the liuing God, and God was called the 1 Kin. 18. 36. &c. 20. 28. God of Israel, and said to be among them, being also euer readie to direct and counsell them by his true 2 Kin. 5. 8. 1. 16. 1 Kin. 22. 5, 7. Prophets: and lastly, the Kings of Israel are often said to doe euill in the eyes of God, that is, (as it may bee pro­bably expounded) in that place, where­upon God did as yet looke with the eyes of his mercy, as vpon his Church. Though in regard of their halting be­tweene God and Baal, they were said to be without 2 Chron▪ 15. 3. the true God, without Priests and Law, that is, without that pure and comfortable worship of God, which his Priests according to his Law ought to haue performed. And it seemes by S. Paul, that a Christian seruing the true God after a false and deuised man­ner, may be at once both 1 Cor. 5. 11. a Brother and an Idolater.

And forignorances (yea or errours) of the vnderstanding, though very grosse, and (perhaps, by some thought to be) fundamentall, it seemes true Faith [Page 118] may be lodged in the same minde toge­ther with them. The Faith of Rahab in Heb. 11. 31. commended, who surely had no great knowledge of the Messiah to com­mend her. After our Lord had long conuersed with his Disciples and instru­cted them, yet did they not beleeue Matth. 20. 21. Act. 1. 6. his Kingdome to be spirituall, nor Matth. 16. 22. S. Peter the necessitie of his Passion, though immediately before he had made that goodly Confession, on which the Church is founded. The Christians of Ephesus knew not Act. 19. 2. whether then were an Holy Ghost or no: and many thousand Christian Iewes, Act. 21. 20. did both beleeue the Gospell, & yet were zealous for the old legall Ceremonies, which were by Christ fulfilled and abolished. A learned Synesius apud Phot. Myriobibl. cod. 26. man anciently was made a Bishop of the Catholique Church though he did professedly doubt of the last Resurrection of our Bodies.

The Authors of this opinion are o [...] age and abilitie enough to speake for it and themselues. The Reader may be pleased to approue or reiect it, as he shall finde cause.

[Page 119] No doubt, the errors of Poperie, and those other of Vbiquitie, Consubstantia­tion and the like, are errours grosse and palpable: yet not such as presently and absolutely cut off all, that professe and beleeue them, from the Catholique Church and all hope of Saluation; espe­cially if withall they professe resolutely and heartily to beleeue in Iesus Christ, and to obey him according to his word so farre as they can vnderstand it, or can be taught it. For howsoeuer some skil­full Disputant by Logicall deduction may from those opinions inferre some consequences damnable and destructiue to the Faith: yet the erring persons many times doe not see or beleeue that any such consequences follow clearly from their opinions; nay they doe (hap­pily) so farre abhorre them and are so well disposed towards truth, that rather then admit any such dangerous conse­quents, they would readily renounce and rectifie their opinions.

But I finde my selfe digressing; I re­turne and proceed.

By all this it is manifest that S. Cy­prian [Page 120] agreed with the Donatists onely in a part of their errour: but not whol­ly, nor in their chiefest errours, nor in their faction and obstinacy, which made them guiltie of Schisme and Heresie.

S. Cyprian was a peaceable and mo­dest man; dissented from others in his judgement but without any breach of Charity; condemned no man (much lesse any Church) for the contrary Opi­nion. He beleeued his owne Opinion to be true, but beleeued not that it was necessarie, and therefore did not proceed rashly and peremptorily to censure o­thers, but left them to their libertie: and finally, he had a teachable and tractable minde, willing to alter his Opinion if hee had seene reason, and to yeeld to Truth if it had beene cleared vnto him, or if hee had liued to heare the judge­ment of the Nicene Fathers. And this good disposition kept him from fal­ling further into such errours, as the pride and obstinacy of the Donatists plunged them.

For contrarily the Donatists, whilest they suriously contended for one false [Page 121] Opiniō, fell by degrees into many more and worse. Such as were these doctrines of theirs, That Aug. Ep. 167. De Bap. tismo dicere solent, tunc esse verum Baptismum Christi cum ab homine justo datur—vide evnd. de vnit. Ecclesiae cap. 21. the efficacy of Sacra­ments depends on the dignity of the Mini­ster, that being no true Baptisme which is not giuen by a just man: That Aug. cont. Epist. Parmen. lib. 3. & Passim. the Church ought not to tolerate evill persons in her communion; That communion with such persons pollutes and prophanes the Church, and makes it no Church: That therefore Aug. de Haer. ad Quodvultd. cap. 69. Do­natistae—per­tinaci dissensi­one in Haere­sin Schisma verterunt: tanquam Ecclesia Christi propter crimina Caeciliani, seu ve­ra, seu, quod magis judicibus apparuit, falsa, de toto terrarum orbe pe­nerit, vbi futura promissa est, at (que) in Africa Donati parte remanserit, in aliis rerrarum partibus quasi contagione communionis extincta. all the Churches of the World were perished, because they communicated with Caecilianus Bishop of Carthage, whom they accused (Vide Gesta purgationis Faelicis, & Opt. lib. 1. falsely too) to haue beene ordained by such as were Tra­ditors, or had giuen vp the Bible to bee burn't in times of persecution: Conse­quently, Aug. de vnit. Eccl. cap. 13. perijsse dicunt de caetero mundo Ecclesiam, & in parte Donati in sola Africâ remansisse. & ibi mox, totus mundus, inquiunt, apostatavit, nos autem—in Ecclesia remansimus. & iterum—suam paucitatem commendare conantur, & in sanctis Ecclesiae multitudinem toto orbe diffusam blasphemare non cessant. that the Church remained only with them in the part of Donatus, [Page 122] and that themselues were the only Chri­stians.

Now to omit the rest, this last er­rour was in the matter and nature of it properly Hereticall, against that Arti­cle of the Creed, wherein we professe to beleeue the holy Catholique Church. For by limiting the Church only to such as were of their owne communion (in Afri­ca, Rome, or elsewhere) excluding all others, they denied the Church to be Catholique. And when they were pres­sed with this absurdity by the Catho­liques; for a shift they divised a new and vaine interpretation of the Word Catho­lique, saying, that the Church was cal­led Catholique, Aug. Ep. 48. ad Vincen­tium. Acutum aliquid videris dicere, cùm Catholicae nomen, non ex totius orbis communione interpretaris, sed ex obser­vatione om­nium praecep­torum divinorum & omnium Sacramentorum. Brevic. Collat. cum Do­natistis die. 3. cap. 2. Donatistae responderunt, non Catholicum nomen ex Vniversitate gentium sed ex plenitudine Sacramentorum institutum. Et Gaudentius Donatista Coll. 3. cap. 102. Hoc est Catholicum nomen quod Sacramentis plenum est, quod perfectum, quod immaculatum. not because it is spred over the whole World or to import the V­niversality of Nations, but because their Church retained all the Sacraments and observed all Gods Commandements, and was perfect and unspotted.

This perverse confining of the Ca­tholique [Page 123] Church was the principall He­resy of the Donatists, which the Catho­lique Writers, Optatus, St Austin, and o­thers did most of all detest and oppose in them. And in their disputations of this point, they convince their Adversa­ries, not by any authority or definitions of the Church (as our Mistaker pre­tends,) but by testimonies of Scripture as hath beene obserued before, Aug. Col­lat. Carth 3. cap. 187. Sola divina testi­monia ad Ec­clesiam de­monstrandam sufficient, & mox. Sola di­vina loquatue authoritas, sola Dei Scrip­tura, cui vtri (que) subdimur, in medium pro­feratur. Et ib. cap. 155. vo­lumus & op­tamus, nego­tium Ecclesiae, non nisi divi­nis eloquijs terminare. Id. de vnit. Eccl. cap. 3. Non audiamus, haec dico, haec, dicis, sed audiamus, Haec dicit Dominus—sunt libri Dominici—ibi quaeramus Ecclesiam, ibi discutiamus causam nostram. Auferantur illa de medio, quae adversus nos invicem, non ex divinis Canonicis Libris sed aliunde recitamus.—& fic passim. and every where summon them to the judgement of Scripture alone. St Austin purposely debates this matter with them in his Treatise de unitate Ecclesiae: and therein professes almost in each page, that he will waue all other reasons or arguments, and confute them only by Scriptures. And that not by Scriptures Aug. de vnit. Eccl. cap. 5. Illa interim sunt seponen­da, quae (in Scripturis) obscurè sunt posita, & figurarum velaminibus in­voluta & secundum nos & secundum illos possunt interpretari—& an­ted iam praedico & propono vt quaecun (que) aperta & manifesta eligamus. & mox. Prorsus quae alicuius interpretationis indigent—seponamus. vide c. 24. darke or doubtfull, but so Aug. ib. c. 19. Aliquid proferte, quod non contra vos veriùs in­terpretetur, quod interprete omninò non egeat. Sicut non eget interpre­te, in semine tuo benedicentur omnes. Sicut non eget interprete, terra tua orbis terrarum. Sicut non eget—& cap. 20. Nullo interprete indi­gent Canonicarum Scripturarum testimonia, quae commendant Ecclesi­am in totius orbis communione. Et cap. 25. Ostendant Donatistae ali­qua manifesta de Canonicis libris testimonia. & cap. 4. notissimis & apertissimis testimonijs contradicunt, & cap. 15. Manifestissimis testi­monijs asservimus Ecclesiam toto orbe diffusam. cleare that [Page 124] they need not to be expounded, so full and expresse that they cannot be avoided or eluded. Briefly such as the Donatists could not resist without wilfull Aug. vbi supra cap. 1. De Scripturis sanctisita sunt omnia prolata & probata, vt ea negare non possit, nisi qui illarum Scrip­turarum ini­micum se esse profitetur. ib cap. 7. Quis tam surdus, tàm demens, tàm mente caecus, vt his tam evidenti­bus testimo­nijs obloqua­tur? Sed ad manifestiora veniamus. ib. cap. 11. Istae divinae voces de vniversa Eccle­sia ita manifestae sunt, vt contra eas nisi Haereticè animosa perversitate, & caeco furore latrare non possint. malice and blindnesse. Now the point which hee proues by so many cleare and full Scriptures, is this; that the Catholique Church is spread and diffused over the Earth among all Nations, and may not be inclosed within any one or other society or communion of men whatsoever. (Where­in he doth as clearely oppose our Ro­manists, who inclose all Catholiques and Christians within the Popes communi­on, as he did the ancient Donatists.)

It is not then resisting the voice or de­finitue sentence of the Church which makes an Heretique; but an obstinate [Page 125] standing out against evident Scripture sufficiently cleared vnto him. And the Scripture may then be said to be suffici­ently cleared, when it is so opened that a good and teachable minde (louing and seeking truth) cannot gainsay it: For some froward and obstinate persons will not bee convicted by any evidence of truth whatsoever. And if the authority of a Councell, or of some Church doe in­terpose in this conviction, the obstinacy of Gainsayers is the greater, because there is the greater reason to perswade them. And if any Church doe vpon such conviction excommunicate or con­demne any refractary Gainsayer, hee standeth guilty of obstinacy (and so of Heresy) in foro exteriori, and for such is to be reputed by the members of the same Church. But it is possible such a sentence may bee erronious, either be­cause the opinion condemned is no He­resy, or error against the Faith, in it selfe considered; or because the party so con­demned is not sufficiently convinced in his vnderstanding (not clouded with prejudice, ambition, vaineglory or the [Page 126] like passion) that it is an errour.

As these Donatists, so the Novatians also were Schismatiques, for disobey­ing the publique determination of the Catholique Church, in the same Gene­rall Councell of Nice. In the first Ages, before that Councell, the Church was very rigorous in her Discipline. Shee vt­terly refused (as wee haue before obser­ved) to admit vnto her Peace and com­munion Vide Ca­nones Concil. Eliberini. Tertull. de pudic. Cypr. Epist. ad An­tonian. & passim. some kindes of sinnners, (as Idolaters, Apostates, Murtherers, Adul­rers and the like,) though they had done many yeares penance, and though they were in their last extremity: thinking fit to leaue them to the mercy of God a­lone, and to make their peace with him by inward repentance. Afterwards Shee saw it convenient to bee more mild and mercifull in her censures: and accor­dingly declared her selfe in the Great Nic. Con­cil. Can. 11. 12. 13. 14. Councell, allowing to all sinners the hope and comfort of her absolution, when they had made her satisfaction by their humility and penance according to her Canons. The Albaspin. Sacr. Observ. lib. 2. cap. 21. Novatians stub­bornely opposed this publike resoluti­on, [Page 127] pretending that the judgement and practise of former Agesought not to be altered, that this releasing of severe Dis­cipline would open a gap to vice and li­centiousnesse, that the Church had no power to reconcile or receiue into her society such enormious Sinners though penitent, that if she did, she was polluted by their communion. And vpon these pretences, they breake out into a formall Schisme and separation.

Before the Nicene Councell, many good Catholique Bishops were of the same opinion with the Donatists, that the Baptisme of Heretiques was ineffe­ctuall; and with the Novatians, that the Church ought not to absolue some grie­vous Sinners. These errours therefore (if they had gone no farther) were not in themselues Hereticall, especially in the proper and most heavy or bitter sense of that word; neither was it in the Chur­ches intention (or in her power) to make them such by her Declaration. Her in­tention was to silence all disputes and to settle peace and vnity in her governe­ment: to which all wise and peaceable [Page 128] men submitted, whatsoever their opini­on was. And those factious people, for their vnreasonable and vncharitable op­position, were very justly branded for Schismatiques.

Now for vs, the Mistaker (nor his Masters) will never proue, that wee op­pose either any Declaration of the Ca­tholique Church, or any fundamentall, or other, truth of Scripture; and there­fore he doth vniustly charge vs either with Schisme or Heresy.

Answer.

FAith is said to be divine, and supernaturall, I in re­gard of the author or effi­cient cause of the habit and act of divine infused faith, which is the speciall grace of God preparing, inabling and assisting the soule to beleive; For 1 Cor. 12. 3. 4. faith is the gift of God alone. 2. In regard of the object or things beleeved, which are Phil. 1. 29. &c. aboue the reach and comprehension of meere na­ture or reason. 3. In regard of the for­mall [Page 3] reason, or principall ground on which faith chiefly relies, & into which it is finally resolved; which is divine revelation, or the authority of God, who is the first truth. If it faile in any of these, it is no divine or supernaturall faith.

Of the two first respects there is no controversie. For the 3^d that the formall object or reason of faith, the chiefe mo­tiue, the first and farthest principle into which it resolues is onely divine revela­tion, is a truth (denied by some of the Scotus, Du­rand. Gabriel apud Can. loc. lib. 2. cap. 8. Schoole indeed, & some other Vide passim apud Eckium, Pighium; Ho­sium, Turria­num, Coste­rum nequiter & contumelio­sè dicta in S. Scripturas. un­wise and unwary writers against Luther, but yet) confessed by the most and best learned of the Th. 1. p. q. 1. art. 8. ad. 2. Innititur fides nostra revela­tioni Prophetis & Apostolis fa­ctae. Can. loc. Theol. lib. 2. c. 8. Nec si nobis aditum praebet Ecclesia—pro­tinus ibi acqui­escendum est; sed ultrà oportet progredi & solidâ Dei veritate niti. Staplet. princs doctr. lib. 8. cap. 20. Apostolorum & prophetarum immediatè revelata sides in solum revelatorem Deum ultimò resolvebatur; eum solum pro formali objecto habuit; in eum solum tanquam supremam atque ulti­mam credendi causam desinebat & sistebat. Ergò & reliquae totius Ec­desiae fides idem formale objectum habet. Becanus Sum. 3. p. cap. 8. quaest. 8. Conclus. 3. Assensus fidei formaliter resolvitur in primam veritatem revelantem.—Atque hîc sistitur. Aegid. de Coninck. de Actib. supernat. disp. 9. dub. 5. concl. 4. Id in quod nostra fides tanquam ob­jectum formale ultimò resolvitur, five objectum formale propter quod credimus non solùm articulos fidei esse veros, sed etiam eos esse à Deo revelatos, est testimonium primae veritatis. Roman Doctors. And that this revelation, for all necessarie [Page 4] points, is Basil. M. de judicio Det, five proaem. in E­thic. [...]. A­thanas. Orat. contr. Gentes, initio. [...]. Cyrill. Hierosol. Cate­ch. 4. [...]. Theodoret. Dial. 1. [...]. Hilar. lib. 2. ad Constant. August. laudat Imp. fidem tan­tùm secundùm ea quae scripta sunt desiderantem. Vinc. Lirin. cap. 2. per­fectus Scripturarum canon ad omnia satis supérque sufficit. Et iterum Commonit. 2. cap. 1. Th. 2. 2. qu. 1. A. 10. ad 1. In doctrina Christi & Apostolorum veritas fidei est sufficienter explicata. Idem disp. de fide art. 10. ad 11. Successoribus Apostolorum non credimus, nisi in quan­tum nobis annuntiant ea, quae illi in Scripturis reliquerunt. Durand. Praefat. in Sent. S. Scriptura mensuram fidei exprimit. Scot. in Prol. Sent. qu. 3. Theologia nostra non est nisi de his quae continentur in Scriptu­ra, & de his quae possunt elici ex ipsis. Gers. de examin. doctr. p. 2. con. 1. nihil audendum diecre de divinis, nisi quae nobis à Scriptura Sacra tradita sunt. sufficiently and Basil. Regul. brevior. cap. 267. [...]. Aug. de doctr. Chr. lib. 2. cap. 9. In his quae apertè posita sunt in Scriptura, inveniuntur illa omnia quae continent fidem mor ésque vivendi. Bellar. lib. 4. de verb. non Script. cap. 11. §. His notatis, Dico illa omnia scripta esse ab Apo­stolis, quae sunt omnibus necessaria. Et Iterum. §. vltimò. Loquitur Au­gustinus (loco praedicto) de illis dogmatibus quae sunt necessaria omni­bus simpliciter. clearely made in the Scriptures, either in ex­presse termes, or by manifest deduction, is the constant Doctrine of Antiquity, even till the latter times. If the whole object of faith be thus contained in Scripture, then surely no new doctrines or revelations without, or beside Scrip­ture may be admitted: neither is the proposition of any Church, or any per­son, in matters of faith, to be beleeved, further then it may be maintained or warranted by Scripture. Our faith then [Page 5] is safe enough, which builds on this firme ground, and relyes on this solid Iren. lib. 3. cap. 1. Scriptu­ra fundamen­tum est, & co­lumna fidei no­strae. Eph. 2. 20. foundation.

Now for the Church, she that is the mother of all Christians hath two dugs, saith Aug. in Ep. Johan. tract. 3 init. Est ma­ter Ecclesia, & ubera ejus duo Testamenta Scripturarum divinarum. S. Austine, which are the Old and New Testament; out of these she feeds and giues milke to all her children. That Church (or any particular) which deli­vers onely what she hath received, and propounds not her owne traditions in stead of Gods Commandements, we are ready in all things to heare, and re­verently to submit our selues to Gods truth delivered by it.

We doe not depriue the Church of that prerogatiue & office which Christ hath given it; Rom. 10. 17. Faith comes by hearing the word of God: and the ministery of the Church is necessary (in ordinary course) for the begetting of faith. But the force and validitie of that ministery is different; according as the Church may be taken, either for the Prime Church, or for the Present.

The Prime Church I call that which included Christ and his Apostles, who had immediate revelation from heaven. [Page 6] The voyce & testimony of this Church is simply divine and infallible, and the word of God from them is of like vali­dity, written or delivered.

The testimony of the present Church, though it be not the last resolution of our faith, yet it is the first externall mo­tiue to it. It is the Hooker. lib. 2. §. 7. key, or Gretser. Defens. de verb. lib. 4. c. 4. col. 1581. prima ja­nua. See the learned Answ. to Fi­shers Relat. of his 3. Confer. pag. 24. doore which lets men in to the knowledge of divine mysteries. It workes very po­werfully and probably (as the high­est humane testimony) 1. Upon infidels, to winne them unto a reverent opinion of that faith, and those Scriptures, which they see so many wise, learned and de­vout men in the Church constantly to esteeme as the very truth and word of God. 2. Upon Novices, weaklings, and doubters in the faith, to instruct and con­firme them, till they may acquaint themselues with, and understand the Scriptures, which the Church delivers as the word of God. 3. Upon all within the Church to prepare, induce, and per­swade the minde, as an outward means, to imbrace the faith, to read and beleeue the Scriptures. But the faith of a Chri­stian findes not in all this any sure [Page 7] ground whereon finally to rest or settle it selfe; till it arise to greater assurance then the present Church alone can giue. Humane authority, consent and proofe may produce an humane or acquired faith, and infallibly (in some sort) as­sure the minde of the truth of that which is so witnessed: but the assent of divine faith is absolutely divine, which requires an object and motiue so infal­libly true, as that it neither hath, nor Cui non po­test subesse fal­sum. can possibly admit of any mixture of errour or falshood. And infallible in this sence is onely that testimony which is absolutely divine.

Now our Adversaries yeeld that the testimony of the present Church is not absolutely divine. It is not simply but in a manner divine, saith Staplet Re­lect. contr. 4. qu. 3. A. 1. Vox Ecclesiae est suo modo divina. one: not meerly di­vine, nor meerly humane, but as it were in the middle, saith Becan. 3. p. Summ. cap. 8. qu. 8. §. 8. nec purè divina, nec purè humana, sed quasi media. another: In truth and to speake properly an humane testimony, saith a Aegid. de Conick. disp. 9. dub. 5 Conc. 2. Quantumvis Ecclesia diriga­tur infallibili Sp. S. assisten­tiâ, atque ita e­jus testimoniū nitatur, suo mo­do, authoritate divinâ, atque ab ea firmitatem accipiat: tamen non est verè & propriè testimonium sive verbum & revelatio Dei, sed propriè est testimonium humanum. Ergò illud nequit esse objectum for­male fidei Theologieae, & consequenter haec nequit in illud, tanquam in suum objectum, ultimò resolvi. third: who thereupon well in­ferres that therefore the voyce of the [Page 8] Church cannot be the formall object of divine faith, or that where-into it is last­ly resolved.

The Church then is onely the first inducer to beleeue; and the watchman, that holdeth out the light in open view, and presenteth the shining beams there­of to all that haue eyes to discerne it: but the principall motiue and last object of beliefe is the divine authority of Scripture it selfe. And, that Scripture is of divine authority, the beleever sees by that glorious beame of divine light which shines in Bellarmin. de verbo Dei. li. 1. c. 2. Cer­tissimas & divi­nas esse Scrip­turas, quae Pro­pheticis & A­postolicis lite­ris continentur, nec humana inventa, sed divina oracula continere, te­stis est ipsa Scriptura—O. rig. de Princip. l. 4. c. 1. Quòd ipsae divinae Scripturae sint divinitùs inspi­ratae, ex ipsis divinis Scriptuis is ostendemus. Salv. Massil. l. 3. de Gubern. mox a [...] initio. Alia omnia, id est, humana dicta, argumentis ac testibus egent: Dei autem sermo ipse sibi testis est; quia necesse est quicquió incorrupta veritas loquitur, incorruptum sit testimonium veritatis. Scripture; & by ma­ny internall arguments found in the let­ter it selfe; though found by the helpe and direction of the Church without, and of grace within. Herein the Church leades, but the Scripture resolues. The Ministery of the Church, as a Candle­stick, presents and holds out the light: but, this supposed, there is in the Scrip­ture it selfe 2 Pet. 1. 19. light sufficient, which [Page 9] (though blinde & 1 Cor. 2. 14 sensuall mindes see not, yet) the eye of reason cleared by grace, and assisted by the many motiues, which the Church useth for enfor­cing of her instructions; may discover to be divine, descended from the father & fountaine of light. To this light the Church addes nothing at all; but onely points at it, directs us to it, disposes and prepares us for it, introduces it as the dawning of the morning doth the cleare Sunshine. So farre as any Church walks in this light, and carries it with her, we may safely follow her: if she bring a di­vine word for her warrant, she must be beleeved. But if her propositions, or doctrines be meerely voluntary, her owne, and not according to that word, there Es. 8. 20. is no light in them; neither can her autho­rity make such doctrines proper objects of divine faith.

An Object, how sensible soever it be in it selfe, yet it doth not actually moue the Sense, unlesse it be conveyed & ap­plyed to it by some Meane. So here: God hath appointed an ordinary out­ward meanes to present and propound divine verities to our faith, and this or­dinary [Page 10] means wee grant is the Church: to which wee willingly attribute these two excellent uses in that imployment, 1. of a witnesse, testifying the authority and sence of the Scriptures unto us: 2. of Gods instrument, by whose ministery in preaching and expounding the Scrip­tures, the Holy Ghost begets a divine faith in us. But in that assent which wee yeeld unto the mysteries propounded and delivered by the Church, though the Church be one cause, to wit, induc­tiue or preparatiue, Gretser. Append. 2. ad lib. 3. Bellar. de verb. D. Col. 1514. principa­liter Scripturis fidem habemus propter divinā revelationem: at ob Ecclesiae authoritatem non aliter quā ut ob conditio­nem sine qua non. Et infra. Sacris litetis as­sensum prae be­mus primariò ob divinam re­velationem, se­cundariò ob Ecclesiae testi­monium. without which men ordinarily do not beleeue; yet it is not the principall or finall, upon which wee lastly depend. The chiefe principle or ground on which faith rests, and for which it firmly assents unto those truths which the Church propounds, is divine revelation made in the Scripture. No­thing lesse then this, nothing but this can erect or qualifie an act of Becan. Sum. tract de fide ca. 1. q. 2. §. 9. As­sensus qui niti­tur authoritate Ecclesiae non est assensus fi­dei Theologicae sen divinae, sed alterius inferi­oris ordinis. super naturall faith which must be absolutely undoubted and certaine; and without this, faith is but opinion or persuasion, or at the most, an acquired humane be­liefe.

This power in the Church, to in­struct [Page 11] her children in the faith accor­ding to Scripture, (which is her ground and rule, from which she may not de­part) we willingly admit. But we cannot yeeld that the present Church hath an absolute or unlimited authority to pro­pound what she pleases, or an infallible assistance in all her propositions; which is our Mistakers meaning, and the new doctrine of some of his Masters.

Who teach, 1. that the authority of the Church is absolute, not depending on Scripture, but on which the Scripture it selfe (and so our whole faith) depends. The words of Bellar. de effect. Sacram. lib. 2. cap. 25. §. tertium te­stimonium. Bellarmine are remark­able: If (saith he) we take away the autho­rity of the present Church of Rome and of the Trent Councell; the decrees of all other anci­ent Councels, & the whole Christian faith may be questioned as doubtfull. For the strength of all doctrines and of all Councels depends upon the authority of the present Church. And elsewhere againe, to the same purpose: (lest the former words might seeme to haue fallen from his pen unawares) Bellar. de Eccl. mil. lib. 3. cap. 10. §. Ad­haec necesse est. The Scriptures, Traditions, and all doctrines whatsoever depend on the testimony of the Church, (he means that of [Page 12] Rome) without which all are wholly uncer­taine. Here's a plaine principle of A­theisme. For if this be true, all the faith we haue of God, of our Redeemer, of the Scripture, of any thing in Religion, is all but an ungrounded and uncertaine opinion, unlesse the Church confirme it. And as the Idols of old Rome could not be consecrated or deified but by consent of the Senate, who tooke upon thē [...] (as S. Chrys. in 2. ad Cor. hom. 26 in Moral. Et Tertul. Apo­log. cap. 5. Nisi homini Deus placuerit, Deus non erit. Chrysostome me­rily speakes) to make gods by most voy­ces: So here, it seemes, our true God, and Scriptures, and Religion, must all stand at the courtesie and suffrage of the Roman Conclaue.

2 They teach that much of the object or matter of faith is not contained in Scripture any way; that the Church hath an unlimited power to supply the defects of Scripture; and that she may propound any doctrines as necessary to salvation, which haue no other ground but her owne authority, which is equall to that of Scripture. There are many things, saith Mel. Canus Loc. lib. 3. c. 3. fund. 3. Canus, belonging to the faith of Christians, which are neither manifestly nor obscurely contained in the sacred Scrip­tures. [Page 13] And Doctor Princip. Do­ctrin. li. 12 c. 5. initio. Stapleton: Very many things necessary to salvation, and necessarily to be beleeved are not comprehended in the Scriptures, but are commended to us onely by the authority of the Church. And againe: Id. Relect. Contr. 4. qu. 1. art. 3. ad arg. 12. Etiamsi nullo Scripturarū aut evidenti, aut probabili testi­monio confir­metur. The Church may propound & define mat­ters of faith, without any evident, nay with­out any probable testimony of Scripture. Do not these words of Stapleton imply, that the Church of Rome propounds many things to the beliefe of Christians, with­out any probability from Scripture? With what ingenuity then, or consci­ence do they pretend Scripture in each Controversie against us, since by their owne confession many of their asserti­ons are meere unwritten Traditions, leaning onely on the authoritie of their Church? On the contrary, for the full­nesse and sufficiency of Scripture in all necessary points, we have the full con­sent of Antiquity, and of many learned Writers of their owne; even of Bellar­mine himselfe, whose plaine words to this purpose have been already noted. And the same Cardinall (though here­in, as not seldome, contradicting both [Page 14] himselfe and his fellowes) Bellar. lib. 3. de verb. D. in­terpret. cap. 10. ad arg. 15. Sci­endum est pro­positionem fi­dei concludita li Syllogismo: Quicquid Deus revelavit in Scripturis est verum, hoc De­us revelavit in Scripturis, ergò hoc est verum. Ex propositio­nibus hujus Syllogismi pri­ma certa est a­pud omnes, se­cunda apud Ca­tholicos est eti­am firmissimas nititur enim te­stimonio Eccle­siae, Concilii, vel Pontificis. grants that a proposition is not de fide, unlesse it be con­cluded in this Syllogisme: whatsoever G [...] hath revealed in Scripture is true, but th [...] or that God hath revealed in Scripture, erg [...] it is true. If matters of faith must be re­vealed in Scripture, as this reason sup­poses: then the proposall of the Church cannot make any unwritten veritie to become matter of faith. Yet to salve the soveraigne power of His Church, he makes all the strength and truth of the minor in this Syllogisme to depend on the testimony of the Church; and by consequence the truth of the conclusi­on, which ever resembles the weake: Premisse. So as, if this be true, there is no truth in the Scriptures, or in our Re­ligion, without the attestation of the Church.

3. They teach that the Church is in­fallibly assisted in her proposalls and do­ctrines, so as she cannot erre. And this dreame hath made Rome sencelesse of her errours and careles to seek any re­medie, nay utterly incapable of reme­die. For, to mindes really possessed with this fond persuasion and prejudice, [Page 15] the most convincing reasons, the most plaine Scriptures, the most pregnant authorities of Fathers, which proue the Church of Rome may erre, or hath erred, are all lost and made ineffectuall: and seeme not strong arguments of the truth, but strong temptations against it. And this imagination of their Churches infallibility, is to them at once both a sufficient reason of what is most unrea­sonable, and a sufficient answer for what is most unanswerable.

That the Church is infallible we do not absolutely deny: wee only deny the Church to be absolutely infallible. Some of the most able Writers of the Roman partie do so fairly limit this priviledge, that in their sence we do without difficul­ty admit it. Their limitation is double, regarding 1. the subject of this infallibi­lity, 2. the object of it. First, for the sub­ject, they plant this infallibility only in the Church Universall, or the Catho­lique body of Christ on earth, compre­hending all his members; not in any particular Church, or any representati­on of the Church in Coūcels, (Generall or particular) much lesse in any one [Page 16] member of the Church; no not in him who pretends to be the Head. So Walden. lib. 2. Doct. fid. art. 2. cap. 19. §. 1. Eccle­sia Universalis fidē habet inde­fectibilem, non quidem in Ge­nerali Synodo congregata, quam aliquo­ties errâsse per­cepimus—Sylv. Sum. verb. Ec­clesia cap. 1. §. 4. Ecclesia, quae non potest er­rare, dicitur, nō Papa sed con­gregatio fideliū. Et vide gloss. in cap. 24. qu. 1. call. A recta. Wal­densis, Sylvester and others.

2. For the object or extent of this infal­libility, they grant it reaches not to all points or questions in Religion that may arise, but only to such Articles as belong to the substance of faith, such as are matters essentiall & fundamentall, sim­ply necessary for the Church to know & belleue. To omit Maldon. in Iohan. 14. 26. Dubium est, an illud docebit omnia, referen­dum sit ad illud—quaecunque dixi vobis—quasi non aliud docturum Spiritum sanctum dicat, quàm quod ipse anteà docuiffer. Non repugnabo si quis ita velit interpretari. Charron. vetité 3. chap. 5. §. lc second poinct. L in­fallibilité de l'Eglise, ne s'entend que des choses qui concernent la substance de la foy, laquelle ne reçoit point de contrarieté, divet sité, changement, & pource nulle correction, reformation, ou amendement, estant vne tousiours immuable & non reformable, dit Tertullien de virg. Veland. Et ibid. saepe. others, D^r Staplet. Princip. Doctrin. lib. 8. controv. 4. cap. 15. Sta­pleton is full and punctuall to this pur­pose. He distinguishes controversies of Religion into two sorts. Some (saith he) are about those doctrines of faith, which ne­cessarily pertaine to the publique faith of the Church. Others, about such matters as doe not necessarily belong to the faith, but may be variously held and disputed without hurt or prejudice to faith. To the first sort he restrains the infallibility of the Church. [Page 17] But in the second he yeelds, that the Church may sometimes erre, either in her discourses, or in her conclusions; & that without any violation of Christs promise made to the Church for infal­libilitie. And of this assertion He giues diverse good reasons. The first and chiefest taken from the end, for which infallibility was given to the Church: It was given (saith He) for the common salvation of the faithfull, and not for the sa­tisfaction of unprofitable curiosities, or for the search of unnecessary subtleties. For as nature, so God is neither defectiue in necessaries, nor lavish in superfluities. A second reason He addes, taken from the office of the Church after the Apo­stles, which is not to make new Articles of faith, but onely to consigne and deliver those which she hath received. Thus D^r Sta­pleton.

Briefly, their meaning is, (& ours is the same) that the whole Militant Church (that is, all the members of it,) cannot possibly erre, either in the whole faith, or any necessary article of it. For such an errour must needs dis-unite all the members from Christ the Head; and so [Page 18] dissolue the Body, and leaue him no Church, which is impossible. Christ ever hath had, and ever shall haue a true Church on earth: now a true Church is all one with a Church not erring in the foundation.

By these reasonable restrictions of this infallibility, they giue us a faire and certaine interpretation of all those pro­mises, which our Lord hath made unto his Church, for his assistance: Such pro­mises are intended, not to any particular Persons or Churches, but onely, to the Church Catholique: and they are to be extended not to every parcell or par­ticularity of truth, but onely to points of faith or fundamentall. Thus we are to understand those passages;

Joh. 16. 13. John 14. 16. See the judici­ous Author of the Answ. to Fishers Relati­on of his 3. Confer. p. 49. The spirit shall lead you into all truth and shall abide with you for ever. Though that promise was directly and primarily made to the Apostles, (who had the Spirits guidance in a more high and ab­solute manner, then any since them, yet it was made to them for the be hoofe of the Church, and is verified i [...] the Church Universall. But all truth [...] not simply all, but all of some kinde. T [...] [Page 19] be led into all truths, is to know and be­leeve them. And who is so simple as to be ignorant, that there are many milli­ons of truthes (in Nature, History, Di­vinitie,—) whereof the Church is simply ignorant? How many truthes lie unre­vealed in the infinite treasurie of Gods wisdome, where with the Deut. 29. 29. 1 Cor. 13. 12. Church is not acquainted? How many obscure texts of Scripture which she understands not? How many Schoole questions which she hath not, and happily cannot deter­mine? And for matters of fact, it is ap­parant and Bellar. l. 2. de Conc. cap 8. §. Respondeo. Quidam. granted that the Church may erre. So then, the truth it selfe en­forceth us to understand by all truthes not simply all, not all which God can possibly reveale; but all appertaining to the substance of faith, all truth absolute­ly necessary to salvation.

That other promise of Christs being with his Mat. 28 20. unto the end of the world, is pro­perly meant (as some Auth. de vocat. Gent. lib. 2. cap. 2. Ecce ego vobis­cum. i. e. nolite de vestra infir­mitate trepida­re, sed de mea potestate con­fidere, qui vos usque ad con­summationem saeculi in om­ni hoc opere non derelin­quam:—praesti­turus ut nullâ sevientium cru­delitate supere­mini. In mea enim potestate praedicabitis, & per me fiet, ut inter contradi­centes, interfu­rentes. Abrahae filii de lapidi­bus suscitentur. Ancients truly giue the sence) of his comfortable aide and assistance, supporting the weakenes of his Apostles and their Successors in their ministery, or in their preaching of Christ. But it may well be also applyed [Page 20] (as it is by Leo Serm. 10. de Nativ. cap. 5. Idem Salvator noster est super coelo­rum altitudines victor mortis ascendens, & usque ad con­summationem soeculi univer sam Ecclesiam nō relinquens. others) to the Church U­niversall: which is ever in such manner assisted by the good Spirit, that it never totally failes or falls off from Christ.

For it is so firmely Math. 16. 18. founded on the Rock (that is on Christ 1 Cor. 3. 11. the onely founda­tion) that the gates of hell (whether by temptation or persecution) shall not pre­vaile against it. Not prevaile so far as to sever it from the foundation, or cleer­ly to undermine, or Bernard. Serm. 79. in Cant. Non deficit genus Christianum, nec fides de ter­ra, nec charitas de Eccles.-que fundata est su­per petram. Pe­tra a. est Chri­stus. Bellarmin, de Eccles. lib. 3. cap. 13. Quòd Ecclesia non possit deficere ostenditur pri­mùm ex Scripturis, Math. 16. Super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam. overthrow it. The Church may erre, and dangerously too; but every errour destroyes not the Church. The whole Church cannot so erre as to be destroyed. For then our Lords promise here of her stable edifi­cation should be of no value.

Lastly, that prayer of our Saviour for S. Peter, Luke 22. 32. that his faith might not faile, in the native sence of the place, regarded onely S. Peters person, for whom our Lord prayed, and obtained perseve­rance in the grace of God, against the strong temptation which was to win­now him above the rest: Yet is it very [Page 21] well referred by Aqu. 2. 2. q. 2. A. 6. ad 3. Ecclesiae U­niversalis sides non potest de­ficere, Domino dicente Luc. 22. Ego pro te ro­gavi, Petre, ut non deficiat fi­des tua. Aquinas to the whole Church; which is never so far forsaken by Christ that it should utterly forsake and fall off from him. But the faith of the Church cannot be totally corrupt­ed in the Essentialls of it, or abolished; yet may it be foulely infected with ma­ny vile and unworthy additions, though not with direct repugnancies.

In these promises then there is no foundation to support that very vaine and vaste pretension of the Church of Rome: who challenges to her selfe an absolute and universall infallibility in all her proposalls. For neither do these promises principally respect the Church of Rome, and more then the Church of Corinth, Ephesus, or the like, any further or longer then such parts do cleaue and consent to the whole bodie and Spouse of Christ: nor hath the Church Universall the like assurance from Christ that she shall not erre in un­necessary additions, as she hath for her not erring in taking away from the faith what is fundamentall and necessarie. Its comfort enough for the Church, that the Lord in mercy will secure her [Page 22] from all capitall dangers, and conserve her on earth against all enemies: but she may not hope to triumph over all sinne and error, till she be in heaven. Hay and stubble and such unprofitable stuffe, laid on the roofe, destroyes not the house, whilst the maine pillars are standing on the foundation. The Giant in Gath, 2. Sam. 21. 20. was a true man, though much deformed with superfluous fin­gers and toes; but if one loose any vitall part, he is a man no longer. There is not so much danger in adding superflu­ities, as in detracting what is essentiall and necessarie. That the Church shall never be rob'd of any truth, necessarie to the being of the Church, the promises of Christ assure us: But that to necessa­rie truths, she shall adde no unnecessarie opinions; for that we have no warrant, either from the Scripture, or any pro­mise of God. And were it otherwise, the Doctors above mentioned had be­trayed the Churches cause, in stead of maintaining it. For if in all her doctrines and definitions she be infallible, why should they restraine her infallibilitie in defining unto matters necessary? They [Page 23] should have profess'd her roundly and plainly infallible in all her determina­tions. For to limit her infallibility in defining, onely to things necessary; and then to say that all defin'd by her, is eo ipso necessarie because defin'd, is to de­lude the world, and seemingly to yeild something when nothing is yeilded.

The Romane cause at this day (as it appeares by the vulgar Writers of the Popes quarter, and, among others, by our Mistaker,) wholly depends on this pretended absolute infallibility. All Controversies in the issue are reduced to this, and decided by it. And with great reason, if there were any reason in it, or for it. For if Rome cannot erre or be deceived, then without doubt all they erre and are deceived, who dissent from her. And therefore, me thinkes, learned men of that partie, might do very well to ease themselves and the world of much trouble and paines, in the scanning of other questions; if with all their strength and witt they can but settle on the Pope or his adherents such an infal­libility, by any one convicting argu­ment; this will instantly and evidently [Page 24] conclude all our other differences. No wise man will any way contradict them, who cannot any way erre.

But surely this doctrine, that the Church is infallible in all her definiti­ons, is so far from being certaine and divine, that it is at the best but doubt­full and problematicall; and that even by, and from their owne principles.

The Roman D^rs deliver us these Maximes concerning the Churches au­thority. 1. Staplet. lib. 9. Princip. doctr. & passim contr. Whitak. That the truth of Scripture it selfe and of all contained in it relyes, in re­spect of us, upon the testimony of the Church; so as nothing is credible to us, but by the Churches attestation. 2. Valent. Tom. 3. disp 1. qu. 1. pun. 1. §. 6. col. 29. That the proposition of the Church is so necessary to the act of divine faith, that nothing can be beleeved without it. 3. That Bellarm. lib. 4. de Pont. R. cap. 14. §. Respondeo. In­primis. untill a do­ctrine be declared or defined by the Church, so long it may be either doubted of, or denyed without danger. These propositions are their owne. Hence wee assume: But this doctrine [that the Church is infallible in all her decrees and definitions] was never yet declared, decreed or defined by the Church, no not by any Councell, or by any Pope. And hence we inferre; [Page 25] Therefore it is a doctrine which may be doubted of, or denyed without danger; a doctrine which no man can beleeue by divine faith; a doctrine (whatsoever it be in it selfe) to Christians not credi­ble. If any man will deny the assump­tion, he will oblige himselfe to disproue it by a contrary instance: Let it be shewed where, and when, and in what termes the Church hath published any such declaration. And suppose (which will not be granted) that such a decla­ration had beene made, it may be de­manded with reason, upon what war­rant the Church can assume to her selfe a power so divine and boundlesse, as to authorize all her decrees in so high a forme, that they must be accounted di­vine and infallible? If the promise of God in Scripture be pleaded for this power, we haue already shewed how the learned among themselues haue voyded this plea, and so restrained those promises that they are by much too narrow to support so wide a privi­ledge. If it bee said that this authority of the Church is a principle admitted by all Christians without any doubt or [Page 26] proofe, this is a saying voluntary and and groundlesse. For 1. they will con­fesse every principle in Religion to be founded either in nature, or in Scrip­ture, or in tradition, or in Church defi­nition; and in none of these will they find any footing for this. 2. All Chri­stians in the world confesse the authori­ty of Scripture, to be a principle inde­monstrable; yet are we by them perpe­tually urged to proue that authority, and that by Scripture. 3. D^r Princ. Do­ctrin. l. [...]. c. 21. Stapleton thinkes it not onely fitting, but necessary, in respect of us, that the Church should give testimony to her self: especially thē, in this point of so great importance & conse­quence, cōcerning her infallible autho­rity, wherein all Religiō is so much con­cerned. 4. Lastly, it is a great errour and vanitie to beleeue, that this absolute in­fallibility of the Church is beleeved by all Christians: especially in the sence of our Adversaries, who ever by the Church intend that unsound piece, which they call the Roman Catholique. The Protestants and Greekes, expresly accuse this Church (and haue convicted her too, as they thinke,) of many grosse [Page 27] and dangerous errors. The See Mr. Brierwoods Enquiries. Armeni­ans, Syrians, Indians, Iacobites, Maronites, Abassines, with other innumerable as­semblies of Christians, haue many do­ctrines and customes directly repugnant to those of Rome: which were an un­reasonable presumption and absurditie, if they esteemed the Church of Rome so wholly infallible. Nay, within the Roman Church it selfe, many Authors of great learning and judgement, by name Horum om­nium testimo­nia legere est a­pud Rob. Baro­nium de obje­cto fidei. Tract. 5. cap. 19. Occam, Cameracensis, Waldensis, Panormitanus, Antoninus Archbishop of Florence, Cardinal Cusan, Nicholas Cle­mangis—haue declared their opinion, that any particular Churches, and par­ticularly the Roman, any Councels though Generall, any Popes may erre, even to heresie: and I doubt not but the best learned Romanists at this day are of the same opinion.

Before wee proceed, it will not be from our purpose, to note one thing more in passing. The Church of Rome pretends, that it is an office belonging onely to Her, to deliver the entire rule of faith to all Christian people. And she pretends further that this divine and [Page 28] infalliable rule is made up of three inte­grall parts; to wit, Scriptures, Traditions, and Church definitions. If this be true, she doth but loosely discharge her office, & very ill satisfie the obligation which she hath unto the Christian world. For 1. Why hath she not yet defined that her definitions are of divine authority? The late Fathers of Trent haue canonized unwritten traditions, and equall'd them to Scriptures; but why did they omit to canonize the decrees of all Popes, & Councells? Why did they not adde to Traditions, their Church definitions, and command them both, and them all to be received with no lesse devotion then the holy Scriptures. 2. The same Fathers have given us an exact catalogue of all the bookes of Scripture: but why did they not give us the like list of divine and infallible Traditions? Is it because they are numberles and cannot be re­counted? Or because it may be a thing full of danger to confine them to any certaine number, least some be omitted? Or because they are not yet agreed which are divine Traditions? Or is it (as Dr. Defens. au­thor. Eccles. l. 1 cap. 2. §. 5. Stapleton excuses his Church [Page 29] on the like occasion) because that Church hath not yet throughly weighed all her Tra­ditions, either for want of opportunity, or by reason of other thoughts & distractions which have not permitted her seriously to consider of this busines? But there cannot be a busines of greater moment in Religion, or more worthy of the Churches care, then to deliver the rule of truth clearely and precisely, by which all doctrines in the Church are to be squared and examined. And there­fore the Church of Rome herein so carelesse, cannot be excused from supine negligence.

Now to returne from this short digres­sion. So far as truth and reason will per­mitt, we have yeelded an infallibility to the Church: That is, infallibility in the Essentialls of faith, to the Church Vni­versall. And this confession satisfies the best of our Adversaries, who demand no more.

But when our Mistaker talkes so often of the infallibility and supreme judg­ment of the Church, He meanes som­what els by the Church. Though, surely, he knowes not well what he meanes; [Page 30] or at least will not be forward to let us know his meaning; whether he meanes the Church representative, which is a Ge­nerall Councell, or the Church virtuall, which is the Pope; in whether of the two he plants this infallibility, as in the Proper Subject, it will perplex him to say; and whatsoever he say he shall touch a sore, and find strong opposition within his owne partie.

First, for Generall Councells, we give them all the respect which is due unto them, and much more then do the most of our Adversaries. We say, that such Generall Councells, as are lawfully cal­led and proceed orderly, are great and awfull representations of the Church Catholique; that they are the highest externall Tribunall which the Church hath on earth; that their authority is im­mediately derived and delegated from Christ; that no Christian is exempted from their censures or jurisdiction; that their decrees bind all persons to exter­nall obedience, & may not be questioned but upon evident reason, nor reversed but by an equall authority; that if they be carefull and diligent in the use of all [Page 31] good meanes for finding out the truth, it is very probable the good Spirit will so direct them, that they shall not erre, at least not fundamentally. But they are not absolutely freed from all error. Such a Councell is but an assembly of men, and those sometimes not of the most able and sufficient. The Church Univer­sall may have many more able members, out of the Councell, then she hath in it. For though that represēting body, have all the legall power or binding strength of the whole, yet it hath not all the natu­rall power or wisedome which is in the whole. The Catholique Church cannot possibly communicate her strength or power in that kind to any Councell. Yet suppose the best of men to be in that meeting; even they are but men when all is done, neither all of them equall in the endowments of nature or grace, nor any of them perfect, being every one subject to all the infirmities and passions which attend our nature. Their meeting then cannot make them infallible in all things; though the act that is hammer­ed out by so many heads, must needs in reason be perfecter, then that which is [Page 32] the issue of one mans sufficiencie.

But happily they are infallibly assisted! No doubt, the holy infallible Spirit as­sists at all such holy meetings; but how Math. 18. 20. far, or in what manner, is all the doubt. The good Spirit ever assists the endea­vours of the devout and diligent, so far as is necessarie: and is ready to guide them that are desirous to be guided by him. But his guidance is not a violent rapture, or a wild Enthusiasme; but in searches of truth He ever directs us to the infallible rule of truth, the Scrip­ture. And it is possible that a Generall Councell may misapply, or misunder­stand, or neglect that rule, weakly or wilfully; and so erre, notwithstanding the Spirits assistance. A lawfull Coun­cell may in some things proceed not lawful­lie, and so erre, saith Bellar. lib. 2. de Concil. cap. 7. §. Re­spondeo. Con­cilium. Bellarmine; nay saith he, Id. ibid. c. 8. § Alii di­cunt. it may chance to be most ma­nifestly convicted of an intolerable error. His meaning is, they may be deceived where they follow not the instructions of the Pope: as Id. ibid. c. 11. in titulo. elswhere he expresses himselfe. We say, and with more rea­son, no Councell is further priviledged then it follows the instructions of Jesus [Page 33] Christ, and of his Scriptures, whose warrant all unerring Councells have had for their decrees, and all Councells must have that will not erre.

Besides, Bellar. de Concil l. 2. c. 12. § Dicun­tur igitur. Cō ­cilia per ratio­cinationem de­ducunt conclu­siones. & ite­rum ibidem §. Alterū discri­men. Patres in Concil [...]is de­bent rem ipsam quaerere, id est; conclusiones investigate dis­putando, legen­do, cogitando. the Fathers in a Coun­cell are discursive in their deliberati­ons: they use the weights and moments of reason for the drawing out of con­clusions from their principles. Where­in Staplet Re­lect. Cont. 4. qu. 2. notab. 2. Ecclesia in sin­gulis mediis non habet in­fallibilem Sp. S. directionem, sed potest in il­lis adhibendis probabili inter­dum, non sem­per necessariâ collectione uti▪ it is confessed they may mistake by ig­norance or negligence; being not herein infallibly directed, and making collecti­ons sometime but probable. Now fal­ [...]ible principles can never produce an infallible conclusion.

Yet Relect. contr. 4. qu. 2. Notab. 4. Stapleton here hath a new pret­ [...]y device, that the Church though she be fallible and discursive in the Meanes, is yet propheticall, and depends upon immedi­ate revelation (and so infallible) in de­livering the conclusion. Which is a fancy [...]epugnant to reason and and to it selfe. for to inferre a conclusion by argument or discourse, and yet to expect the same conclusion from immediate revelation, his is to argue and not to argue; to in­ [...]er it, yet not by inference. A conclusi­ [...]n follows the disposition of the Means [Page 34] and results from them. A proposition immediatly inspired without discourse may be a divine prophecy, or an oracle, but it is not a conclusion. And what use can there be of diligence or dis­course in Councells, if all their conclu­sions come by divine inspiration? Pro­pheticke infallibility is a meere 1. Cor. 12. 10. gift of God, which cannot be acquired or in­creased by studie: neither can a Prophet be discursive in that which he delivers from God as an infallible truth. And if the Canons of Councells be divinely in­spired, then they must be admitted into the Code of holy Scriptures, as of equall authoritie with them; which though Vide Can. loco. lib. 5. c. 5. qu. 3. some grosser Papists admit, yet the Bell. de Con­cil. lib. 2. c. 12. wisest dislike and deny. Upon these or the like grounds, Bellarmin leaves his companion Stapleton to walke alone in this dangerous path; and avowes to the contrarie, Ibid. §. Di­cuntur igitur. that Councells neither have, nor write immediate revelations.

Yet may some decrees of Councells, in regard of their matter and consonan­cy to Scripture, be of divine and infal­lible truth; as those of the first Coun­cells against Arrius, Macedonius and the [Page 35] rest. If in other things of lesser moment, or in any thing they erre or mistake, the Universall Church hath meanes of re­medie; either by antiquating those er­rors with a generall and tacite consent, or by representing her selfe againe in an other Generall Councell, which may re­view and correct the defects of the for­mer; as the great Councell of Chalcedon, did with the second of Ephesus. So sayes De Baptis. contr. Donat. lib. 2. cap. 3. S. Augustine, Provinciall Councells may be corrected by plenarie; and plenarie Coun­cells the former by the latter; But still all examined by Scripture and submitted to it, as the same Father Aug. ad Do­nat. post Collat. ca. 15. Item. l. 3. contr. Maxim. & de unit. Eccl. cap. 18. & 19. constantly teaches.

But if our Mistaker will be ingenuous and speake out, he will confesse that he meanes by his infallible Church onely the Church virtuall, that is, onely the Pope. In whom alone all the vertue and power of the Church is eminently conteined; by whom all Councells must be judged and all Controversies determined; on whom the whole frame of the Romane Catholique faith depends, and into whom it is lastly resolved. For this is the new Catholique doctrine of his new [Page 36] Masters, especially of the Fathers of hi [...] society: who teach with great consent▪ that Bell. lib. 4. de Rom. P. c. 3. §. Secundò, probatur. Qui­libet Successor Petri est petra & fundamen­tum Ecclesiae. every Successor of S. Peter is th [...] rocke and foundation of the Church; tha [...] Skulkenius Apol. pro Bell. cap. 6 pag. 255. Pontificia pote­stas est velut cardo, funda­mentum, & (ut uno verbo om­nia complectar) summa fidei Christianae. Vide Bell. Praef. in lib. de R. P. the Popes authority is the hinge, founda­tion, and (in briefe) the summe of Chri­stian faith: that Gretser. Defens. cap. 10. lib. 3. [...] verb. Dei. pag. 1450, & 1451. per Ecclesiam intelligimus Pont. Romanu [...] Et, per Ecclesiam Papam interpretantur, Non abnuo. Franc. Albe [...] Corollar. Theolog. Tom 1. Corol. 4. punc. 7. num. 35. 36. Dico primo quòd praeter veritatem primam revelantem, est in universo aliqu [...] regula infallibilis, animata, rationalis, qualis est Ecclesia. Quò [...] autem haec regula animata, rationalis, sit summus Pont. Romanus, n [...] est hîc locus proprius probandi, sed inter recentiores videndus Valent. 22. q. 1. & Card. Bell. & Medina-Dico secundo, stante hâc regulâ ration [...] infallibili, omnes Articuli fidei ultimatè resolvuntur in ipsam, tanqu [...] in rationem formalem, quâ, in proponendo— by the Church is un­derstood the Pope, in Greg. de Valenti [...] Anal. fid. lib. 8. cap. 7. §. Porrò. Authoritas quae in uno Pontifice re [...] det, authoritas dicitur Ecclesiae & Conciliorum. whom alone re­sides all the authority of the Church and o [...] Councells: that Bell. l. 4 de Ro [...] P. cap. 3. §. At contra. Apparet totam firmitatem Conciliorum esse [...] Pontifice, non partim à Pontifice, partim à Concilio. vide Long. à Cori [...] in Sum. Concil. praelud. 6. the strength of all Coun­cells depends upon him alone: that Gretser. defens. cap. 1. lib. 1. de ver [...] Dei p. 16. Id solum pro verbo Dei veneramur ac suscipimus, quod no [...] Pontifex ex Cathedra Petri, tanquam supremus Christianorum Mag [...] ster, ac omnium Controversiarum Judex definiendo proponit. he i [...] the supreme Master of Christians, and judge of all Controversies; and whatsoever [Page 37] [...]e propounds out of his chaire (and that [...]nely,) must be received as the word of God: that his judgment is so absolutely infal­ [...]ible, Valent. Anal. fid. lib. 8. cap. 3. ad 6. object. sive Pontifex in de­finiendo studi­um adhibeat si­ve non adhibe­at, modò tamen controversiam definiat, infal­libiliter certè definiet. that whether he be carefull or ne­gligent in his definitions it matters not, let him but define, and without doubt he defines infallibly: that Jesuitae in Regulis Pata­vii inter sche­das relictis An. 1606. quum il­linc ob interdi­ctum discede­rent: reg. 13. Apud. Paulum Soarpium The­ologum Vene­rum in Histor. Interd. lib. 2. if he (who is the Hier­ [...]rchicall Church) define that to be white which the eye judges to be blacke, it must be so admitted: that Bell. de R. P. lib. 4. cap. 5. §. Quod autem. Si Papa erraret precipiendo vi­tia vel prohibé­do virtutes, te­neretur Ecclesia credere vitia es­se bona & vir­tutes malas, ni­si vellet contra conscientiam peccare. if he should erre, and command the practise of vice, or forbid the exercise of vertue, the Church were bound in conscience, to beleive vices to be good and vertues to be bad. This is plaine dealing. Scriptures are obscure, unlesse the Pope interpret them. All Fathers and Coun­cells may erre, unlesse the Pope confirme them. The Church without him, is a bodie without an head, an house with­out a foundation. Controversies cannot be decided, but onely by his definition; and in that there can be no error, nor any appeale from it. But this being so, these men deale not plainly with us, when they pretend often in their dispu­ [...]ations against us, Scriptures, and Fathers, and Councells, and the Church: since in the issue their finall and infallible argu­ment [Page 38] for their faith is onely the Popes au­thority.

But infallibly there is nothing in Scri­pture which favours this infallibility: un­lesse the Pope may be admitted to ex­pound it, which he will do infallibly for his owne advantage. And as little in reason, or in Antiquity. The Ancient Church was very carefull to conserve the puritie of the faith against heresies. Some Tertullian. Vinc Lirin. Fathers have written purpose­ly of the plea's or prescriptions which the Church hath against them, and how Catholique doctrine may be discerned and maintained; to wit, by authority of Scripture, and tradition of the Catho­lique Church. If they had beleived the Bishop of Rome to be the infallible Judge, surely (without more a doe) they had appealed all Heretiques to his Tri­bunall. And what needed the Christian Emperours anciently (and sometime at the request of the Bishops of Rome them­selves,) to have gathered together so many Bishops, from so distant parts of the world, to celebrate Generall Coun­cells; if this had bene then knowne or imagined, that Councells can conclude [Page 39] nothing to purpose without the Pope; and that his sentence alone must cleare all controversies, and silence all Here­sies? Nay, his judgement hath bene for­mally opposed and rejected anciently, by particular Doctors, (men of emi­nency and esteeme in the Catholique Church,) by Councells Provinciall and Generall; by the Churches of the East for above 800 yeares now past; and the onely cause of that Schisme is by the Greekes cast upon the vast ambition, and pretensions of the Bishop of Rome; Nilus Thes­salon. de causes dissidii inter Graecos & La­tinos. [...]. Who refuses to have the grounds of that dissenti­on fairly heard and discussed in a Generall Councell; but, in a Masterly fashion, will needs be judge himselfe in his owne cause, and have all men besides stand by, and obey him as his Schollers. And here in the West, it is not long since the Councells of Con­stance and Basil, deposed some Popes, and decreed against all, that as inferiors they may be sentenced by Councells. And their judgement herein hath been ever constantly avowed, and maintained by the best learned Vide Vigor. in Comment. ad Resp. Synod. Basil. Em. Richer. de Ecclesia­stica & Polit. potestate. Iac. Leschass. de libertate Eccl. Gallicanae ap. Laur. Bochell. Decret. Eccles. Gall. l. 4. tit. 21. Revision du Concile de Trente liu. 4. &c. Romane Catholiques of France, as a branch of the liberties of the Gallican Church; and by the [Page 40] Sorbon it selfe, till of late Du Val & Similes. some of that bodie have been corrupted, by the practises of the Iesuites, to flatter the Pope contrarie to their owne ancient Maximes, and (as I verily thinke) con­trarie to their owne judgement. For however the Authors of this imaginati­on can be content to abuse simple peo­ple, persuading them that the Pope is in­fallible; yet I am persuaded Franc. à Victor. Relect. 4 de Potest. Pa. & Concil. prop. 12. ad fin. Da mihi Clemen­tes, Linos, Sylvestros, & omnia permit­tam arbitrio eo­rum. Sed, ut ni­hil gravius di­catur in recen­tiores Pontifi­ces, certè mul­tis partibus sunt priscis illis infe­riores. they are so far from beleiving it themselves, that they secretly deride all those that be­leive it, well knowing it to be but one of their holy frauds devised for the ad­vancement of their Catholique cause.

If this then be the infallible ground and motive of our Mistakers faith, with­out doubt all his faith (in this point, and so in all the rest which depend on this) is but a fancy, and comes far short of a probable opinion. Especially consider­ing that in all this conceit of the Popes authority and infallibility, there is no certaine ground for a divine faith to build upon: nay, there is nothing but uncertainties and probabilities. Divine faith must have a firme and divine foun­dation that cannot faile or deceive: it [Page 41] cannot relie on conjectures, on which onely this pretended infallibility relies. As may shortly appeare by this that fol­lowes.

S. Peter sate many yeares Bishop of Rome, and there he died. Well, grant this; though it seemes it can hardly be proved. For Bellarmines first reason for it is so weake, that himselfe sayes onely Bell. lib. 2. de Rom. Pont. cap. 4. §. Re­stant. suadere vi­detur, it seemes to persuade; it doth not convince but persuade, and but seeme to do so. There God commanded him to fix his Chaire, and to leave his full power to his heyres and Successors, the Popes. But what certainty of this? Indeed saith Bell. lib. 2. de Rom. P. cap. 12. §. Obser­vandum est ter­tiò. Bellar­mine, it is no where expressed in Scripture that the Pope succeeds S. Peter, and therefore happily it is not of divine right that he suc­ceeds him; Bell. ibid. §. Et quoniam. & lib. 4. de R. P. cap. 4. §. Acce­dit. yet it is not improbable that God commanded him to fasten his seate at Rome, and it may be devoutly so beleeved. Happily it is thus, and happily other­wise. This is not improbable, nor that. This may be beleived, and may not be. Heres some little feeble ground for opinion, none at all for faith: a conjectu­rall certainty here may be, no certainty of faith at all.

[Page 42] Yet further: if S. Peter left this privi­ledge of infallibility to his Chaire, sure­ly he left it onely to his lawfull Succes­sors; such as were lawfully elected and ordained Bishops of Rome, not to in­truders. But here againe we have no­thing but meere uncertainties.

For first, Onuphrius, and other Ro­mane Writers have noted six & twenty severall Schismes in the Sea of Rome; wherein two Antipopes, and sometime three, have each one pretended to the Chaire, and pretended also their claime to be just and reasonable, disabling their concurrents as unjust and unreasonable. The last of these Schismes continued above 40 yeares; from Vrban. 6. untill the Councell of Constance: during which time all these Westerne parts were dis­tracted, & perplexed, Plat. in Vrb. 6. Adeò perple­xum fuit Schis­ma ut etiam doctissimi viri & conscientiosi non valerent discutere, cui esset magis ad­haerendum. as Platina saies, the most learned and devout men being not able to judge which of the pretenders was the true Pope. If the faith of Christians did then depend on the infallible Pope, then infallibly all that while Christians had no meanes to setle their faith in any thing that should be questioned.

[Page 43] Againe, by the Popes owne Leo PP. apud Gratian. Cons. 1. qu. 1. Can. Gratia. Gratia si non gratis datur vel accipitur, gratia non est. Simo­niaci autem non gratis acci­piunt; igitur gratiam, quae maximè in Ec­clesiasticis ordi­nibus operatur, non accipiunt. Si autē non ac­cipiunt, non ha­bent, nec gratis, nec non gratis, cuiquā dare possunt. Quid ergò dant? pro­fectò quod habent. Quid autem habent? Spiritum utique mendacii. Bull. Iul. 2. Si contingat Simoniacè quenquam ad Pontificatum pro­moveri, electio ipsius, seu assumptio ad Pontificatum, co ipso nulla exi­stat; nec ullam electo seu assumpto administrandi facultatem vel in spiri­tualibus, vel in temporalibus tribuat, & à nemine pro Pontifice Roma­no habeatur.—Imo liceat omnibus Electum talem, ut Magum, Ethni­cum, Publicanum & Haeresiarcham evitare. Ca­nons, all ordinations of men promoted symo­niacally, or for money, are meere nullities, of no validity. Now it is cleare, out of their owne Baronius ad an. Chr. 912. §. 8. Romae tunc dominabantu [...] potentissimae ae què ac sordidissi­mae meretrices, quarum arbitrio mutabantur sedes, dabantur Episcopi, & (quod auditu horrendum atque infandum est) in Sedem Petri earum ama­sii Pseudo-Pontifices intrudebantur. Nusquam cleri eligentis, vel con­sentientis poste à populi aliqua mentio: Canones omnes pressi silentio, decreta Pontificum suffocata, proscriptae antiquae traditiones, veterésque in eligendo summo Pontifice consuetudines, sacrique ritus ac pristini usus prorsus extincti. Genebrard. Chronol. ad an. 901. Per annos ferè cen­tum quinquaginta, à Johanne scilicet. 8. ad Leonem 9. usque, Pontifi­ces circiter quinquaginta à virtute majorum prorsus defecerunt: Apo­tactici, Apostaticivè potiùs quàm Apostolici; quando non per ostium sed per posticum ingrediebantur. Historians, that very many Popes have beene simonically advan­ced to the chaire. And who can be in­fallibly assured that Leo 10^th, or Paul 5^th, or Vrban 8^th, or any Pope whoso­ever hath beene fairely and freely ele­cted without any corruption of rewards or promises? A Roman Catholique [Page 44] may wish or hope well, that his Holines hath entred Canonically: (though, if the Mant. lib. 3. de Calam. Tem.—Romae Templa, Sacer­dotes, altaria, sacra, coronae Ignis, thura, Preces, Coelum est venale Deúsque. Monke Mantuan said true, his hope must needs be mixed with very much feare;) but he cannot be Puteanus in 2. 2. qu. 1. A. 6. Dub. ult. Pa­pam existētem (verbi gratià Paulum. 5.) esse verum vicari­um Christi & successorem Pe­tri, non est ab­solutè de fide Catholica. 1. Quia supponit haec duas istas alias propositi­ones, Paulus 5. est baptizatus, & Paulus 5. est canonicè electus in Ro. Pontificem; at neutra ex istis duabus est de fide Catholica absolutè.— sure. And if he be not sure that any of them is Pope, he is not sure of his infallibilitie.

But besides all this, it is a thing most certaine that no Roman Catholique in the world can be certaine of any Pope, that he is either a Bishop, or a Priest, or even a Christian. For this is one point of their Catholique doctrine Decret. Eugenii post Concil. Florent. that the force and vertue of all Sacraments de­pends on the intention of all the Minister, who, if he have not an intention to doe as the Church doth, all he doth is nothing, he confers no Sacrament. And according­ly Andr Veg. lib. 9. de Iu­stific. cap. 17. Nemini potest per fidem constare se recepisse vel mini­mum Sacramentum. Estque hoc ita certum ex fide, ac clarum est nos vi­vere. Nulla siquidem est via, quâ citra revelationem, nôsse possumus in­tentionem ministrantis, vel evidenter, vel certò ex fide. Bellarm. lib. 3. de Iustif. cap. 8. §. Dicent. Non potest quis esse certus certitudine fidei, se percipere verum Sacramentum; cùm Sacramentum sine intentione Mi­nistri non conficiatur, & intentionem alterius nemo videre potest. they grant, that no man can possibly [Page 45] know (otherwise then by bare conje­cture) whether himselfe, or any other, have received either Baptisme, or Orders, or any Sacrament: being impossible for him to know the intention of the Minister. None is capable of holy orders, unlesse he be baptized. Pope Vrban 8. then cannot be either Bishop or Priest, unlesse he were made a true member of the Church by true baptisme. And he was not truly baptized, or ordained, if the Bishop ordaining him, or the Priest baptizing him, (or any other who for­merly baptized or ordained them) fai­led in their intention. And whether they did so faile, neither Vrban himselfe nor any man else can be assured, no not by an humane certainty, much lesse by a divine faith. How then, is our Mista­ker sure that his Pope is the infallible Head of the Church, when he cannot be sure that he is a member of it?

Lastly, admit the Pope infallible in his definitions, yet how can any Papist in Europe (excepting onely those few that stand by and heare his Holines when he gives out his Oracles,) be in­fallibly sure what it is which he hath [Page 46] defined? Their assurance hereof is one­ly so much faith as they can give to the reports of their Priests and Jesuites: which at the best can produce in them but a strong opinion, unlesse they can beleeve their Priests and Jesuites also to be infallible in their relations.

It much concernes our Mistaker, and all Roman Catholiques to consider, how feeble and wavering that faith must be which is concluded from these slippery principles. Every lawfull Bi­shop of Rome is infallible, but Vrban the 8^th is lawfull Bishop of Rome, ther­fore he is infallible. And then againe. Whatsoever Vrban the 8^th. defines is infallibly true, but this or that Vrban hath defined, therfore it is infallibly true. In these Syllogisines imagine the Pro­positions to be certain & true, (as they are most certainly false,) yet the assump­tions to a very Roman Catholique, at the most can be but probable, he cannot be certaine of either. Not certaine that Vrban was lawfully ordained, and ele­cted into the chaire; nor certaine that out of his chaire he hath published this or that definition. An opinion or a con­jecture [Page 47] of these things he may haue; but he cannot haue certainty, and much lesse divine faith. Wherefore, since the con­clusion cannot be stronger then the weaker of the Premisses, his faith is not divine nor certaine, but onely a conje­cture, or an opinion. Unlesse happily he can comfort himselfe with that witty invention of Cardinall Bell. l. 1. de Purg. cap. 4. §. Respondeo, non. Bellarmine, who thinkes a firme conclusion may follow out of feeble premisses by the rules of pru­dence, though not by the rules of Logicke.

We may now conclude this point, and returne our Mistakers words upon himselfe. If his faith be grounded on so fallible a motive as the Popes infalli­bilitie, it is cleare that he hath no true divine or supernaturall faith at all, but onely opinion, or persuasion, or hu­mane beleife.

THe Mistaker hath formerly upbraided us with our dis­cords in Religion: Now, he pretends there is great Unitie in doctrine among his Roman Catholiques. With little reason, and with as little ingenuitie. For certainly if in this point we be not in­nocent, they are much more guilty. The truth is, that old complaint of Optatus fits our times better then his, Lib. 5. Omnes contentiosi homines sumus, there is but too much quarrelling on all sides, which ex­poses our holy faith to the scorne of In­fidells, and ill beseemes them that pre­tend (as we doe all,) to serve and follow the Prince of peace. But sure the Ro­manists are not in case to fasten this re­proach on us, since it will reflect more strongly on themselues, who have many more, and more weighty Controversies among their owne Doctors, then those of ours.

For our dissensions I have already said enough (if not to justifie, yet) to [Page 54] excuse them. To which I now adde, by way of just recrimination, that they are both for their number, and in their na­ture, of farre lesse importance, then the dissensions in his Romane Church.

But our Mistaker answers in the be­halfe of his jarring Doctors, two things. 1. that they differ onely in some schoole-questions of opinion, not in matters of faith. 2. that they dissent in iudgement onely, without breach of charitie. But in both the parts of this answer, I shall briefly let him see that he is Mistaken.

His first plea is a very true and rea­sonable Apologie for our Reformed Churches, but not so for his Romane. Our controversies are none of them, in the substance of faith, but onely in dis­putable opinions, not cleerly defined in Scripture; wherein learned and charita­ble men do each one abound in his ow [...] sence, still keeping the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. The summe of our faith is the same which we have re­ceived from the Apostles. We have no [...] added any new Articles to the Creed nor do we differ about any of the old ones. But they of Bulla Pii. 4. post Concil. Trident. Rome have inlarg­ed [Page 55] the Creed of Christians one moity; and will needs have the world to be­leive many things as points of faith, which at the best are but doubtfull opi­nions; among all which there is hardly one wherein themselves do fully agree. The The new title of Cardi­nalls by the de­cre of Pope Ur­ban. Jun. 10. 1630. See it in the French Merc. Tome 16. pag. 592. most eminent Cardinall Bellarmine, in his Controversies against us, hath fair­ly confessed (as hath been formerly no­ted,) that each opinion almost is contro­verted amongst themselves. A Contradi­ctiones DD. Rom. Eccl. ex Rob. Bellarmi­no. Autore Jo­an. Pappo Ar­gentorati. Ann. 1597. Vide eti­am Matthiam [...] [...] Se­ctis & contro­versiis religio­nis Papisticae Basil. 1565. Ger­man Doctor hath collected out of Him their contradictions, and set them down in his owne words, to the number of 237. and withall a Catalogue of such Romane Writers as Bellarmine himselfe hath contradicted and confuted, which contains the most part of Writers in his owne Church, famous for learning in later ages.

Ioannes de Radae hath filled two grosse volumes with the contentions of the Thomists and Scotists. And the Domi­nicans and Iesuites have filled libraries with their quarrells in the matter of Grace and Freewill: wherein either side pretends the definition of the Trent Councell for their contrarie opinions. [Page 52] It seemes that Councell (like the Devill in the old Oracles,) hath deluded them both with ambiguous sentences: Or, if the definition be cleare, one of the Facti­ons doth obstinately contradict it. Why doth not his Holinesse all this while in­terpose, and give out his infallible judg­ment in the questions? If he will not, he wants charity towards his owne chil­dren; if he cannot, how is he the infal­lible Iudge? Or is it rather his wary wisedome, not hastily to decide Contro­versies, wherein witty and learned men on both sides are engaged: As Wid­drington and his followers have done. See Widdringtons Purgation a­gainst the Popes Decree, where­in he was con­demned for an Heretique and no child of the Church. lest in stead of changing their opinions, they should fall to challenge not onely the infallibi­lity (but which were more dangerous) the authority of their Iudge; and in stead of reforming their owne judgement, de­spise his.

The most capitall point of all others in their new Creed is that of the Popes authority, and that obedience which he challenges in spirituall and temporall matters: yet of all others they are most at discord among themselves about this point, The old doubts are not yet re­solved, whether he be under or above a Ge­nerall [Page 53] Councell, and whether he may erre in his definitive sentence, some advance him with priviledges above the condition of men. Others thinke more soberly of his power, and are bold to resist him, when they see him abuse it. In the Trent Coun­cel the Spanish Bishops stood stoutly for the independency of Episcopall autho­rity, and strongly maintained residence to be de jure divino; being overborne onely with most voices by the Italian faction. The Divines of Venice in the late quarrells of pope Paule the 5. against that State, neglected the Popes Interdict; so that he was fain, with shame enough, to revoke his Censures. Voiez la De­claration de l' Assemblee Ge­nerale du Cler­gé de France. An. 1625. Very late­ly the Bishops of France have brought the Regulars of that Kingdome under their jurisdiction, notwithstanding their exemptions by the Pope. And where­as his Flatterers tell him, that he hath ei­ther directly, (as Carerius, Bosius &c. some say) or indirectly, (as Bell. &c. others, to the same purpose) a Tempor all Monarchy over all the earth; that all Princes are his vassals, and may be deposed when he thinkes fitt; that he may dispense with subjects for their oath of Allegeance, and license them to [Page 50] take armes against their Soveraignes: Many good Catholiques detest these damnable doctrines, and have Barclay. Withrington. The Divines of Venice. confu­ted them, as tending to bring ruine and confusion on all states; and in France the seditious bookes of Mariana, Bellar­mine, Becanus, Suarez, Santarellus, and such like, containing these horrible Maximes of the Society, have been cast into the fire by the hand of the publique Hangman.

But among their discords there is none more memorable, or of greater consequence, then that of the two Popes Sixtus 5. and Clement 8. about their vul­gar See Dr James his Bellum Pa­pale, and Cor­tuptions of the Fathers part. 3. Latin Bibles. When the Councell of Trent declared that Translation only to be authenticall, there were abroad in the World above 60. severall Editions of it, each differing from other. Which Sixtus taking into consideration with great diligence and advise of many Car­dinals, he compared the Copies, and out of them all published one, which he straitly commanded to be received as the onely true Vulgar; by a solemne Bull abolishing all others which did not exactly, ad verbum, and ad literam agree [Page 51] with that; and was so curious as with his owne hand to correct many errors escaped in the Presse, because he would have it more compleat. This Bible was published with the Popes Declaration before it, the yeare 1590. a Copy wher­of is extant (though they have consum­ed as many as they could) in the pu­blique Library of Oxford. Clement 8. shortly after, observing many defects and corruptions in that Edition, publish­ed another, with the very like Declara­tion, wherein he authorises onely his owne Bible, revoking all others. These two Bibles infinitely differ, not onely in words, phrases, and entire verses, but in very many absolute and direct contra­dictions: yet are they both equally ju­stified, and equally injoyned, under the penalty of a curse to them that obey not. So as hereby all Roman Catholiques are involved in a miserable necessity, ei­ther to use no Bible at all, or to undergoe the curse of Pope Sixtus if they use that of Clement, or of Pope Clement if they use the other of Sixtus. Nothing can be said with truth or reason to salve this contradiction. Now I suppose our [Page 56] Mistaker will yeeld, that the authenti­call Edition of the Bible, and the Popes Authority are not matters of opinion onely. Their differences therefore are not onely in matters of opinion.

The second part of his Answer for his Doctors is, that their differences are all fairely and peaceably carried without any breach of charity. Happy were the poore Church of Christ, if all Controversies in Religion might be so handled: but it hath beene and is her misery, that it is far otherwise. And here againe the Ro­man Part is as guilty (at least,) as the Re­formed. I love not to be raking in dung­hills: Yet to shew the Mistaker, that Lutherans alone are not troubled with passions of the Spleene, I will give him some few examples of Papists railing as unmercifully at their owne Brethren, as they are wont to doe at us.

Alex. Carerius is so zealous for the Popes direct temporall Monarchie, that all who deny it are, in his language, Carerius in tit. libri sui, & lib. 2. cap. 12. § Quorum. impious polititians, and heretiques, and their reasons all false hereticall dotages. Now it is denyed by the Cardinalls Bell. lib. 5. de R. Pont. cap. 1. §. Tertia. Bellar­min, Turrecremata, Cajetan, and a great [Page 57] number of other learned Romanists.

In that bitter contention betweene the Seculars & Iesuites of this Kingdome in the yeare 1600, and after, about the authority of Blackwell the Archpriest; the two Factions are notably deciphe­red each by other. The Seculars by the Parsons his Apol. for Sub­ord. ch. 4. 8. &c. and the Table prefixed. Iesuites to be mad heads, seditious libel­lers, notorious calumniators, factious, tur­bulent, obstinate brawlers, tumultuous, of scandalous life, writing evident egregi­ous malitious untruths, impudent fictions, and wicked slanders; rebels, betrayers of the Catholique cause, &c. On the other side the Iesuites by the Watsons Quodlibet. pag. 61. 151. & passim. Seculars to be Schismatiques, Donatists, Anabaptists, Ar­rians, Vipers, men that runne such a despe­rate course, as if Religion were but a meere politicall and Atheall devise; living by the principles of Machiavell, taught by their Arch-rabbies how to maintaine (with equi­vocations,) dissimulation, detraction, ambi­tion, sedition; surfeiting sorer then ever did Heliogabalus; busied in setting division, breeding of jealousie, and making of hostile strife, by opposition of King against King, State against State, Priest against Priest, Peere against Peere, Parents against Chil­dren, [Page 62] raising of rebellions, murthering of Princes, making uprores every where. Men unworthy to be called Religious, or Catho­liques, or Christians: For howsoever they boast of their perfections, holines, meditati­ons, and exercises, yet their plots are heathe­nish, tyrannicall, satanicall, and able to set Aretine, Lucian, Machiavell, yea and Don Lucifer, to schoole. Wicked Iesuites, who would have all Catholiques to depend on the Archpriest, when as the Archpriest depended upon father Garnet, Garnet on Parsons, and Parsons upon the Devill, &c. These are our Mistakers friends whom he commends so much for unitie and charity. But sure, if this be charity, it is, such as he calls in the title of his booke, Charity mistaken.

This very contention is now againe of late revived amongst them, on the like occasion, and pursued with the like intemperate bitternes, both in See the Trea­tise of Paul Harris Priest against the Ex­communicati­on published a­gainst him and D. Caddell, by the Archbishop of Dublin. Th. Flemming ali­as Barnewell, a Franciscane Frier. Printed Anno 1632. Ireland, and especially in this Kingdome. The present Pope Vrban hath given to one Richard Smith the title of Bishop of Chal­cedon, and hath sent him (not to reside upon his See, for that had beene to pu­nish him and send him a begging, but) [Page 63] hither into England, appointing unto him for his Diocesse the two King­domes of England and Scotland; and investing him with the power and juris­diction of Ordinary over all his Catho­liques in these Kingdomes, with­out any exception of Laitie or Clergie, Secular or Regular. The Jesuites can­not brook any subordination, but where some of their owne command in chiefe. Therefore being questioned by this Bi­shop for their Faculties, they straight­way question him for his Authority; and publish to the world in divers Discussio assertionum D. Kellisoni. Au­tore Nichol. Smithaeo. Apologia pro processione se­dis Apostolicae. Autore Danie­le à Jesu. Declatatio Ca­tholicorū Lai­corum Angliae. Declarations that his power is meerly usur­ped and pretended; that there is no neces­sity either of particular Bishops for the go­vernment of particular Churches, or of the Sacrament of Confirmation, especially in times and places of persecution, (for so these men speake of the most milde go­verment of our most religious Sove­raigne:) that the Regulars, as such, are proper and principall members of the Ecclesi­asticall Hierachie; that their state is a state of greater perfection then that of Bishops or Presbyters; that their exemption from the power of Bishops is essentially annexed to [Page 60] their condition; that their priviledges can­not be revoked, no not by the Pope, &c.

These Maximes, and the like passe for Catholique doctrine among the Je­suited partie. But on the other side they are condemned and censured (not only by their owne secular Clergy here, but) in France, by the Archbishop of Paris; by 34 of their other Bishops in a full as­sembly; and by the Sorbon to be Censura quarundam propositionum per Facult. Pa­risiensem. Pa­risiis. 1631. pro­positions rash, presumptuous, false, absurd, scandalous, profane, injurious to Episcopall dignity, destructive to the Church, and he­reticall.

This Censure was quickly well wash­ed with the bitter Sponge of Iohn Floyd a Jesuite, Aurelius in vindiciis pag. 385. lurking under the name of Hermannus Loemelius, who charges the Sorbonists with malice, ignorance, stupi­dity, schisme and heresie; and with great scorne insults upon them. But against him, the Censure and Censors are de­fended by two Doctors of that Societie, Hallier, and Aurelius, in two severall Volumes. By them the Author of the Sponge is accused of Idem Aure­lius in libri sui titulo. Hallier in Ad­mon. ad Lect. p 8. 9. 16. 24. lying, ignorance, and heresie, of prophane scurrilitie; of blas­phemy and impiety; of furious, filthy and [Page 61] devillish rayling; of unsufferable arro­gance, &c.

It were easy to note The like may be seene in Bzo­vius, and Ca­vellus, & their Abbetters, a­bout Scotus and Thomas. See also Har­wartus Chance­ler of Bavaria his booke a­gainst Bzovius, in defence of Lewis of Bava­ria, against the base lying slan­ders & aspersi­ons cast upon that Emp. by Bzovius. more such examples of this Roman Charity, if it were worth the while to looke after them. The Protestants may well com­fort themselves when they suffer under these sharpe tongues, which so cruelly lash one another.

Now further that the Unity of Faith is not impeached, nor any discord in Re­ligion induced betweene learned men & the ignorant vulgar people, although they differ much in the measure of their knowledge, and in the manner of their assent to divine verities, it will be easily yeelded to the Mistaker. And I do not thinke, any learned Protestant will de­nie the great use of that distinction, (which hath ground in reason and na­ture,) betweene explicite and implicite faith, for which he contends; if it be rightly interpreted, and all faith, of what kind soever, directed upon the proper Object, which is holy Scripture, and not the Church. The best advised of his owne Catholique Bannes in 2. 2. q. 2. art. 8. §. Ultima sen­tentia. Tolet. In­struct. Sacerd. lib. 4. c. 2. n. 9. & ibi Victorel­lus annot. ult. Aquin. 2. 2. q. 2. Art. 5. in Corp. Divines yeeld that there are some points necessary to be knowne [Page 58] of all sorts, necessitate medii, in which points implicite faith doth not suffice; but expresse particular knowledge is to be joyned to the assent of faith in all them that will be saved. This granted, we will yeeld that in other espencaeus in 2. Tim. c. 3. dig. 17. p. 119. edit. Paris. 1564. Alia certè cre­dibilia implici­tè, & in animi praeparatione credant popula­res, quatenus parati sunt cre­dere quicquid Scriptura conti­net, explicitè credituri, quum quid eis consti­terit in fidei do­ctrina tradi & contineri: in secundariis in­quam creden­dis, sive in iis quae fidei obje­cta per accidens vocantur.—In subtilibus item considerationi­bus. In istis fi­des simplicium velata at (que) im­plicita valeat sufficiátque. In iis autem quae fidei per se sunt objecta, per quae nimirum homines justi beatí (que) fiunt, quales sunt super­benedictae Trinitatis, incarnation isque Dominicae articuli, definitâ opus est adultis & explicitâ fide: nec sufficeret decantata hodie per Catholicos carbonarii fides.— matters of great difficulty, and not of such absolute necessity, a ge­nerall, infolded, or virtuall beleife may suffice to some persons, who either want capacity or meanes of better instructi­on: so as they diligently and conscio­naby endevour to encrease their know­ledge, not affecting ignorance; and with­all carry an humble preparation of mind to beleive distinctly and particularly any truth when it is cleered unto them out of the word of God. In this case, that of S. Augustin Contra Epist. Fundam. cap. 4. is most true: not the vivacity or quicknesse of understanding, but the simplicity of beleiving doth make the common sort of people most safe.

In some sence, the faith of the best learned Clerkes in the world, may truly be said to be an implicite faith. For though the assent of faith be more cer­taine [Page 59] (if it be possible) then that of sence, or science, or demonstration, be­cause it rests on divine Authority, which cannot possibly deceive: yet is it also an assent inevident and obscure, both in regard of the object, which are things Heb. 11. 1. that do not appeare; and in respect of the subject, the eye of faith in this state of mortality being dimme, and appre­hending heavenly things as through 1. Cor. 13. 12. a glasse, darkly. Our faith is not yet 2. Cor. 5. 7. 1. Pet. 1. 8. sight, or vision, till we be in our heavenly Coun­try. And therefore though any faith­full man may apprehend the [...] or the revelation of God in Scripture, that the Mysteries of our Religion (the Trinity, the Hypostaticall union, and the like) are divine and true: yet no faithfull man can fully comprehend the [...], the reason or manner how these Mysteries are true. Here Orig. [...]. lib. 1. pro­aem. Sancti Aposto­li fidem Christi praedicantes—quae cunque ne­cessaria omni­bus credentibus crediderunt, manifestissimè tradiderunt, ra­tionem asserti­onum relin­quentes inqui­tendam. De ali­is dixerunt qui­dem, quia sint, quomodo autem aut undè sint siluerunt. Cyrill. Hieros. Catech. 11. [...]. Theodoret. de provid. lib. 10. sub. fin. [...]. faith for beares all curious and bold inquisitions, and requires not any distinct knowledge, but sits downe in­volved in an humble and devout igno­rance, leaving these secrets only to God.

[Page 64] The things which we dislike in the doctrine of implicite faith, as it is deli­vered by some Roman D D^rs, are speci­ally two.

1. They teach that implicite faith alone, and of it selfe may suffice to sal­vation without any distinct knowledge, or explicite faith, of any Article in the Creed. This is the doctrine of many Parisiensis, Altisiodorensis. Summa Rosella: fi fides adhiben­da fit Bannī in 2. 2. qu. 2. A. 8. §. Secundâ sen­tentiâ. Richar­dus Mediavill. Soto, Vega, apud Lorin. in Act. 10. 2. learned Writers in the Church of Rome (if others do them no wrong,) who hold, that it is not necessary to beleive any Article of the faith expressely, no not in this time of grace after the cleere publication of the Gospell, but that it is enough to beleive all which the Church beleeves. So as if a man be demanded whether Christ were borne of a virgine, or whether God be one, and three in Persons, he may answere, I cannot tell, but I beleive all that the Church beleives: and this faith may justifie and save him. The mo­dell of this faith is that confession of the Catholique Collier, so much memorated and applauded by Hofius, Pig­hius, Staphylus. and his Tran­slator Staple­ton. them, as a very good faith, and the safest way of beleive­ing, yea more safe then the meditation and exercise of the Scripture.

2. They make this implicite faith to [Page 65] rest it selfe, not on the Scripture, the onely foundation and rule of faith, but on the Church: still meaning by the Church (not the Church Catholique, or any sound member of it, but) onely the Church of Rome, that is, the Pope assisted with some few of his Cardinalls and Prelats. Wherein, the Church of Rome manifestly aimes to erect her own absolute soveraignty over the consci­ences and faith of Christian people. Whatsoever these Masterly Doctors shall define or prescribe in matters of faith, that, they say, must be received without Greg. de Va­lentia. Anal. fid. lib. 8. cap. 6. §. Quòd verò. Si­ne contradicti­one ulla obedi­re iussi homi­nes sunt Sacer­ctoti judicanti-Quod ipsum persuadere no­bis de summo Ecclesiae Pasto­re & nunc ju­bemur. contradiction, yea without Bellarm. de verbi Dei inter­pret. lib. 3. c. 10. §. Septimū arg. Christiani te­nentur doctri­nam Ecclesiae recipere, & non dubitare an h [...]c ita se habeant. Et ib. §. Addo. Debet Christia­nus sine exami­ne recipere do­ctrinam Eccles. Et ib. ad arg. 16. Doctor non proponit sententiam suam ut necessariò sequendam, sed solùm quatenus ratio suadet: at Judex proponit ut sequendam neces­sariò. Patres sunt Doctores, Concilia verò & Pontifices sunt Judices. examination, yea though it be Tannerus in Colloq. Ratisbon. Sess. 9. Si Praepositi Eccles. in aliquo dubio definiendo errarent, populus Christianus vi talis regiminis errare posset, imò deberet, false and erroneous. This indeed is a sure meanes to keep the Court of Rome in quiet possession of her tyranny and er­rors, if men may be persuaded to resigne unto her their judgement and reason, and yeeld her a blind and brutish obe­dience in all things. The colour is, that [Page 66] in all doctrines she is assisted with an in­fallible Spirit, and therefore being all divine truths and inspirations they may not be inquired into. The ordinarie pre­tence of Deceivers; of Dictum A­pellis apud Eu­seb. Hist. Eccles­lib. 5. cap. 13. [...]. Apelles the old heretick in Eusebius, of Mahomet the great impostor, and of some Others (be­sides the Romanists) in this age. But, as a learned man hath well observed, Ludov. Vi­ves de verit. fi­dei Christ. li. 4. pag. 478. con­tra errores Ma­humetis. Tu­tissimum men­tiendi genus est, nolle ratio­nem eorum quae dicas red­dere, & verita­tem dictorum ad Deum refer­re authorem, quem nemo de veritate possit interrogare. The safest way of lying, is for men to entitle God to their owne dreames, and for all reason to say they are heavenly verities which may not be examined.

It is very meet, that the ignorant peo­ple should obey Heb. 13. 17 their overseers in the Lord, and submit themselves to the Mi­nistry and direction of the Church, in many profound doctrines above their reach: But it behoves them to have a di­stinct & comfortable knowledge of the essentiall points of faith: and not secure­ly to rest in a babish simplicity, but (so far as God hath enabled them) to Heb. 6. 1. be led on to profection. To which purpose they are commanded to Joh. 5. 39 search the Scriptures, that they may 2 Pet. 3. 18. grow, and Col. 1. 10. encrease in knowledge, that the Col. 3. 16. word of Christ may dwell richly in them, and that [Page 67] they may be able both to beleive Rom. 10. 10. with the heart, and confesse with their mouth, and render 1. Pet. 3. 15. a reason of that hope, that is in them. The words of Lactantius lib. 2. cap. 8. Oportet in ea re maximè, in qua vitae ratio versatur, sibi quemque con­fidere, suóque judicio ac pro­ptiis sensibus niti ad investi­gandam & per­pendendam ve­ritatem, quàm credentem alie­nis erroribus decipi, tanquā ipsum rationis expertem. Qua­re cùm sapere, id est, veritatem quaerere, omni­bus sit innatú, sanientiamsibi adimunt, qui sine ullo judicio inventa majorum probant, & ab aliis pecudum more ducuntur. Lactantius to this purpose are observable: In those things which concerne our welfare and life, (especially that of our soules) it is fit for every man to make use of his owne discretion in the search and triall of truth, rather then without reason to relie upon the credit of o­thers that may abuse him. Every man by nature desires to be wise, and to know the truth: And therefore they befoole them­selues, who without judgement follow the judgement of their leaders; which is the pro­pertie of sheepe rather then of reasonable men. And by that of Theodoret Graec. Affect. Curat. Serm. 5. sub. fin. [...]. Theodoret we learne, what kind of knowledge the ancient Church required in Christians. Every where, saith he, you may see the points of [Page 68] our faith to be knowen, not onely by them who are Masters in the Church, and Teachers of the people, but even of Coblers, Smiths, and Weavers, and all kind of Artificers, and of women also, which get their living with their hands, yea Maid-servants and Waiting­women: Husband-men also do very well know them, and Ditchers, and Neate-herds, and Woodsetters. All these may ye find discour­sing of the Trinitie, and the creation of things, and as skilfull in the nature of man, as Plato or Aristotle.

IN humane Sciences, the great Philosopher hath taught us Analyt. Po­ster. lib. 1. c. 2. to distinguish betweene [...] and [...], principles and con­clusions. The first principles are [...] and [...], Maximes so cleare by their owne light, that they can not be proved, [Page 71] nor denyed, or doubted of, by any man that understands the Termes wherein they are propounded. In the bosome (as it were) of these principles lurke in­numerable conclusions, which must be deduced, and drawne out by the helpe of Discourse; some of them issuing out immediately, and evidently, others ob­scurely and by a long circuit of conse­quences; and are either certaine, or one­ly probable, according as they ap­proach nearer to the principle, or are further off removed.

In like manner, that there be diverse degrees of truthes and errors in Religi­on, which necessarily must be distin­guished, is a thing acknowledged by all learned men, even in the Church of Rome, (expect our Mistaker will have himselfe excepted.) 2. 2. qu. 2. art. 5. in Corp. Dicendum, quòd fidei ob­jectum perse, est id per quod homo beatus efficitur: Per accidens aut se­cundariò se ha­bent ad obje­ctum fidei om­nia quae in sa­cra Scriptura continentur; si­cut quòd Abra­ham habuit.— Aquinas, ha­ving divided the object of faith, into that which is so by it selfe, & that which is by accident and secundarily, defines the First to be that whereby a man is made blessed and saved; the Latter that which is revealed, whatsoever it be; as that Abraham had two sonnes, and David was the sonne of Iesse, &c. Dialog. part. 1. lib. 2. cap. 2. Occham [Page 72] sets downe three differences of verities to be beleeved. Some touching God and Christ, whereon principally depends our Sal­vation; Non direct è sed indirect è quodammodo ad salutem hu­mani generis pertinere nos­cuntur. as the doctrines of the Trinity, Incarnation, &c. Some whereon our sal­vation depends not so principally or directly; as the Histories of Scripture: Of the third sort, such as are not revealed; but ei­ther agree with that which is revealed, or follow manifestly of it. Melchior Canus Lo­cor. lib. 12. cap. 11. init. Quaedam sunt Catholicae ve­ritates, quae ita ad fidem perti­nent, ut his sub­latis fides quo­que ipsa tolla­tur. Quas nos, usu frequenti, non solum Ca­tholicas sed fi­dei veritates appellavimus. Aliae veritates sunt etiam ipsae Catholicae & universales, nempe quas universa Ecclesia tenet; quibus licet eversis fides quatitur, sed non evertitur tamen. Atque in hujusmodi veritatum contrariis erroribus, dixi fidem obscurari non extingui, in­firmari non perite. Has ego nunquam sidei veritates censui vocandas, quamvis doctrinae Christianae veritates sint. Canus iterum lib. 12. cap. 3. ad fin. Praeter articulos fidei, omnia quae in sacris literis assumun­tur—tametsi non sunt fidei nec Theologiae praecipua capita, sed his ex ac­cidenti conjuncta, & quasi principia secundaria; accipit tamen ea Theolo­gus, non aliter ac Philosophus principia per se nota, sine medio aut rati­one—Haec enim quasi naturalis arque insira est in animis fidelium no­tio, ut quicquid ab Apostolis scriptum traditúmque est verum esse senti­ant. Vide Staplet. Espenc. alios suprácitatos. Ca­nus to the same purpose. There be some Catholique verities which doe so pertaine to faith, that these being taken away, the faith it selfe must be taken away also. And these, by common use, we call not onely Catholique, but Verities of Faith also. There are other verities, which be Catholique also and uni­versal, namely such as the whole Church hol­deth, which yet being over throwne, the faith [Page 73] is shaken indeed but not overturned. And in the errours which are contrary to such truths as these, the faith is obscured, not extingui­shed, weakened, not perished. These may be cal­led verities of Christian doctrine, but not of faith. Briefly, it is the common and constant doctrine of Mag. 3. d. 25. Aquin. 2. 2. qu. 2. art. 5. & ibi DD. Schoolemen and Tolet. Na­varr. Sayr. Fi­liucius. Regi­naldus—caeteri. Casuists, that have written of the nature of heresie, and the measure of Catholique faith; that there is a certain measure and quantity of faith, without which none can be saved, but every thing revealed belongs not to this mea­sure. It is enough to beleeve some things by a Virtuall faith, or by a Generall, & as it were a Negatiue faith, whereby they are not denyed or contradicted: and in some things men may be igno­rant or erre in them, without danger of their salvation.

All this evidently confirmes that most necessary and most usefull distin­ction betweene fundamentall and not fundamentall doctrines: which our Mi­staker here with so great noyse and so little reason cryes downe. By Funda­mentall doctrines we meane such Ca­tholique verities, as principally and es­sentially [Page 74] pertaine to the faith; such as properly constitute a Church; and are necessary (in ordinary course) to be di­stinctly beleeved by every Christian that will be saved. Other points of truth are called not-fundamentall, because they are not of such absolute necessity, and doe not primarily belong to the Vnity of faith, or to the Essence of a Church, or to the Salvation of a Chri­stian: Such as, for their subtilty and profoundnesse, are disputable in them­selves, and happily by plaine Scripture indeterminable: Such finally as may admit an [...], or a non liquet; both igno­rance (if it be not affected,) and errour, if it proceed not from negligence or wil­fullnes, without perill. It is true, what­soever is revealed in Scripture, or pro­pounded by the Church out of Scrip­ture, is in some sence fundamentall, in regard of the divine authority of God and his word, by which it is recommen­ded: that is, such as may not be denyed or contradicted without infidelity; such as every Christian is bound with humi­lity and reverence to beleeve, whenso­ever the knowledge thereof is offered to [Page 75] him. But in regard of the matter and moment of things revealed, and of their use to us; though all be revealed alike, yet not all under the like penalty. We are told by Cardinall De Eccles. lib. 3. cap. 14. §. Quinto. Multa sunt de fide, quae non sunt absolutè necessaria ad salutem. Sane credere histori­as U. T.— Bellarmine, that many things are de fide, to be beleeved, which are not absolutely necessary to salvation. The knowledge or faith of Christs pas­sion is necessary, not so that of his Gene­alogy. Fundamentall therefore proper­ly is, that which Christians are obliged to beleeve by an expresse and actuall faith. In other points, that faith, which the Cardinall Replique. liur. 1. chap. 10. Perron calls the faith of adherence or non-repugnance, may suffice: to wit, an humble preparation of minde to beleeve all or any thing revealed in Scripture, when it is sufficiently cleared. By which virtuall faith, an erring person may beleeve the truth contrary to his owne error: inasmuch as he yeelds his assent implicitely to that Scripture, which containes the truth, and over­throwes his errour, though yet he un­derstand it not.

This maine distinction of doctrines, whereof we speak, hath expresse ground in the Scriptures of the N. Testament. [Page 76] Therein the Church of Christ is often called 1. Tim. 3. 15. 1. Pet. 2. 5. Heb. 3. 5. 6. the Spirituall house of God. The foundation of this house is either reall & personall, or dogmaticall and doctri­nall. The Reall foundation is 1. Cor. 3. 11. Eph. 2. 20. Christ; the Dogmaticall, are Matt. 16. 16. 18. Heb. 6. 1. those grand and capitall doctrines which make up our faith in Christ; that is, that Tit. 1. 4. common faith which is 2 Pet. 1. 1. alike precious in all, beeing one and the same in the highest Apostle and the meanest beleever; which the Apostle Heb. 5. 12. elsewhere calls the first principles of the oracles of God, and the 2. Tim. [...]. 13. forme of sound words. These hold the place of the common foundation, in which all Christians must be grounded. The materialls laid upon this foundati­on, whether they be sound or unsound, are named by S. Paul 1. Cor. 3. 12. super structions; which are conclusions, either in truth or in appearance, deducible from those principles. Concerning all which su­perstructures the generall rule is, that the more neere they are to the founda­tion, of so much greater importance be the truthes, and so much more perilous be the errors: as againe the further they are removed off, the lesse necessary doth [Page 77] the knowledge of such verities prove to be, and the swarving from the truth lesse dangerous.

It is cleere then, that some points are fundamentall, others not so.

But here all Protestants are defied by the Mistaker, not onely particulars, but in corps, their Colledges, Universities, all, or any of them, dared to give him in a list or Catalogue of fundamentall points. So high a Challenge, in a sub­ject of this nature, might better have be­seemed his betters; some Cardinall rather then a See Char. Mist. pag. 1. Cavallier. It seems, the man thinks excellently of his owne learning and judgement; and that conceit fills him with this courage. But his strength is not answerable, They that have tried it, say, [...]. The prudent Vlysses in Iliad. ss. [...]. Et ad Thers. [...]. Homer gave good counsell to some busie persons, that were forward to meddle in matters beyond their Spheere: the Mistaker stands in neede of it, and may do well to follow it.

By fundamentall points of faith (for of them alone the Mistaker expres­ly speakes in this discourse,) we un­derstand (as hath been noted) not the [Page 78] necessarie duties of Charity which are comprehended in the Decalogue, nor the necessarie acts of hope contained in the Lords prayer, there beeing the same object both of our prayers and of our hope, though both these vertues of Cha­rity and Hope are fundamentally ne­cessary to the salvation of Christians; but we meane those Prime and Capitall doctrines of our Religion, which make up the holy Catholique and Aposto­lique faith, once (for all) delivered to the Saints: which faith is the same which Jude. 3. the Church received from the Apostles, the Apostles from Christ, Christ from God, as Tertullian speakes: that faith which essentially constitutes a true Church and a true Christian. These fundamentalls are all contained in the rule of faith: which rule being cleerely, but diffusedly, set downe in the Scri­ptures, hath been afterwards summed up and contracted into the Apostles Creed; either by the Apostles them­selves, or by the Church of their times from them. This Creed taken in a Ca­tholique sence, that is, as it was further opened and explaned in some parts, (by [Page 79] occasion of emergent Heresies,) in the other Catholique Creeds of Nice, Con­stantinople, Ephesus, Chalcedon, and Atha­nasius, is said generally by the Schoole­men and Fathers to comprehend a perfect Catalogue of fundamentall truths, and to imply a full rejection of funda­mentall heresies: and hath beene re­ceived by Orthodox Christians, of all ages and places, as an absolute summary of the Christian faith. For proof wher­of, we will first argue ad hominem, and teach the Mistaker how to esteeme of his Creed out of his own Masters, whom he will not distrust or gainsay. Begin with the Concil. Tri­dent. Sess. 3. Symbolum A­postolorum est principium il­lud, in quo om­nes, qui fidem Christi profi­tentur, necessa­riò conveniunt, ac fundamen­tum Ecclesiae firmum ac uni­cum. Councell of Trent. The Apostles Creed is that principle, wherein all that professe the faith of Christ do necessa­rily agree, that being the firme and onely foundation of the Church. The Catec. Tri­dent. pag. 13. ac 14. Apostoli hanc Christia­nae fidei ac spei formulam com­posuerunt,—veritatis sum­ma ac funda­mentum, pri­mò ac necessa­riò omnibus credendum. Cate­chisme of Trent to the same pupose. The Apostles composed this profession of Christian faith and hope, as a summary and foundati­on of that truth which is necessarily to be be­leived of all. Azor. par. 1. lib. 8. cap. 5. Symbolum A­posto [...]orum est brevis fidei complexio, ac summa omniū credendorum; & veluti nota quaedam & signum, quo Christiani homi­nes ab impiis & infidelibus, qui vel nullam vel non rectam Christi fi­dem profitentur, discernendi ac internoscendi sunt. Huic Symbolo ad­d [...]ta sunt alia duo Nicaenum & Athanasianum, ad uberiorem explica­tionem fidei. Azorius. This Creed brief­ly [Page 80] comprehends the faith, and all things to be beleived; & is as it were a signe or cognisance, whereby Christian men are differenced from the ungodly and misbeleivers, who have ei­ther no faith at all, or hold not the right faith. To this, the other Creeds of Nice, and Athana­sius were added onely for further explanati­on. Jacob. Gor­don. Hunt. Con­trov. 2. cap. 10. num. 10. Re­gula fidei con­tinetur expressè in Symbolo A­postolorum, in quo continen­tur omnia pri­ma fundamen­ta fidei. Neque enim adeò ob­liviosi fuerunt Apostoli post acceptum Spiri­tum S. ut in Symbolo fidei quod omnibus credendum tra­diderunt, prae­termitterēt pri­mum & praeci­puum fidei fun­damentum. Huntley a Scottish Iesuite: The rule of faith is expressely contained in the Apo­stles Creed, wherein are contained all the prime foundations of faith. For the Apo­stles were not so forgetfull, as to omit any fundamentall point in that Creed which they delivered to be beleived by all Christians. Greg. de Val. in 2. 2. disp. 1. qu. 2. punct. 4. in fin. Articuli fidei in Symbolo contenti sunt veluti pri­ma principia fidei Christianae—in quibus continetur summa Euangeli­cae doctrinae, quam omnes tenenrur explicitè credere.—Ita judicant San­cti Patres, quum affirmant ab Apostolis compositum esse illud Symbolum fidei, ur omnes haberent brevem summam corum quae sunt credenda & sparsim continentur in Scripturis. Gregory of Valence. The Articles of the Creed are the first principles of Christian do­ctrine, wherein the summe of the Gospell is comprized, which all are bound expressely to beleive. So say the Ancient Fathers, that this Creed was framed by the Apostles, to the end that all Christians might have a short abridgement of those things that must be be­leeved. [Page 81] Vinc. Fili­ucius Moral. Quaest. Tract. 22. c. 2. num. 34. Nulla brevior & accommo­datior assigna­ri potest regula in Ecclesia, un­de scire possunt fideles quae­nam credenda sint populo Christiano ex­plicitè, eâ quae continetur in Symbolo—cu­jus Articuli sunt prima rudi­menta fidei. Vincentius Filiucius. There cannot be assigned a shorter and fitter rule of faith in the Church, by which Christian peo­ple may be instructed in matters to be expli­citely beleived, then that which is contained in the Apostles Creed; the Articles where­of are the first rudiments of our faith. Puteanus. in 2. 2. Qu. 2. Art. 3. Dub. ult. Concl. ult. Ideo Symbolum hoc fuit ab Apostolis compositum, ut Christiani formam aliquam haberent, quâ possent se Catholicos profi­teri. Ita D. Th. art. 5. qu. hujus. Pu­teanus late professor at Tholouse. This Creed was made by the Apostles purposely, that Christians might by this forme of faith professe themselves to be truly Catholiques, as Aquinas here saith. The great Cardinall of France Instruction du Chrestien Leçon premiere. Le Symbole des Apostres, est le sommaire & l'abbregé qu' ils ont faict de la foy necessaire au Chrestien. Ces saincts personnages ayant receu commandement de Jesus Christ de s' espandre par tout le monde, pour y prescher l'Evangile, & y planterla foy de toutes parts, esti­merent qu'il estoit du tout necessaire de reduire en abbregé, ce que tout Chrestien doit sçavoir, à fin que separiez en diverses parties du monde i [...] preschassent vne mesme chose, & ce d'autant plus aisé à retenir, qu' elle seroit reduitte à peu. Pour cét effect ils appellerent cét abbregé Symbole, qui signifie marque & signe, parce qu' il leur servoit de marque, pour distinguer les vrays Chrestiens qui l'embrassoient, des infidelles quila rejettoient. Richelieu, in his Homelies published for the instruction of his Dio­cesse. The Apostles Creed is the abridgement of that faith which is necessary for a Chri­stian. [Page 82] For those holy persons being by the commandement of Iesus Christ to disperse themselves over the world, and in all parts by preaching the Gospell to plant the faith; esteemed it very necessary to reduce into a short summe, all that which Christians ought to know and believe; to the end that being se­parated in diverse quarters of the earth, they might all jointly preach one and the same faith, in a forme short and briefe, that it might be the better remembred. Therefore they called this abridgemēt the Symbole, that is, a marke or signe, which might serve to distinguish true Christians which embraced it from Infidels and misbeleevers. It were easie to multiply testimonies to this ef­fect out of their late & ancient Schoole-Doctors, if it were not tedious. All a­gree that the Creed briefly compre­hends all fundamentall principles or rudiments of faith; that it is a distinctive note or Character severing Orthodox beleevers from Infidels and Heretiques; that it is a full, perfect and sufficient sum­mary of the Catholique faith.

And their judgement herein seemes full of reason. For how can it be neces­sary for any Christian to haue more [Page 83] in his Creed, then the Apostles had, and the Church of their times? May the Church of after ages, make the narrow way to heaven narrower then our Savi­our left it? Shall it be a fault to streiten and encomber the Kings high way with publique nuisances; and is it lawfull, by adding new Articles to the faith, to retrench any thing from the latitude of the King of Heavens high way to eter­nall happinesse? The yoke of Christ, which he said was easie, may it justly be made heavier, by the Governours of the Church in after ages? The Apostles pro­fesse they revealed to the Church the Act. 20. 27. whole Counsell of God, keeping backe nothing needfull for our salvation: what tyran­ny then to impose any new unnecessary matters on the faith of Christians, espe­cially (as the late Popes have done) un­der that high commanding forme, Qui non crediderit, damnabitur? If this may be done, why then did our Saviour re­prehend the Pharisees so sharpely, for Mat. 23. 4. binding heavy burdens, and laying them upon mens shoulders? And why did he teach them, that in Mat. 15. 30. vaine they worship­ped God, teaching for doctrines mens tradi­tions? [Page 84] And why did the Apostles call it a Act. 15. 10. tempting of God, to lay those things upon the neckes of Christians, that were not necessary? It is true, to guard the deposi­tum committed to her charge, and to defend it and every part of it from the incursion of heretiques, and to maintain the ancient sence of it against their new and adulterate glosses, the Church hath authority, and hereto shall not faile of assistance. But to adde to it is high pre­sumption, almost as great as to detract from it.

All that can be replyed to this dis­course is this; that the whole faith of those times is not contain'd in the Apo­stles Creed; which is all one, as if a man should say, This is not the Apostles Creed, but a part of it. For the Apostles and the Church of their times in giving it this name, doe they not plainly tell us, that the summe and substance of their Credenda is comprized in it? For to call it Creed, and to leave out of it any ne­cessary Article of faith, what had it been but to deceive the world? The Anci­ent Church appointing her Infants to be instructed (for matter of beleefe) [Page 85] De consecr­dist. 4. can. An­te viginti. & Symbolum & Baptizandos, & Nonliceat. onely in the Creed; & admitting her Catechumens, upō their professiō of the Creed, to baptisme, & into the nūber of the faithfull; & exacting of strangers the same profession, before they could be received into the Cōmunion of Catho­liques: did she not by all this evidently declare her judgement, that the profes­sion of this Creed and these Articles a­lone was an absolute profession of the Catholique faith? Nay, whereas the laudable custome of the Catholique Church required, that each new Marcus E­phesius in Con­cil. Florent. Sess. 12. pag. 480. ex edit. Binn. ann. 1618. Co­lon. Gr. & Lat. Olim quilibet Arcl [...]episcopus & Patriarcha literas, quae Sy­nodicae appel­lantur, inter se dabant, nihil aliud continen­tes quàm rect­fidei sui (que) sen­sus confessio­nem; quod in Orientalibus Ecclesiis hodié­que fit usque ad hoc tempus. Pa­triarch, immediately after his assumpti­on to a place of so great trust and au­thority in the Church, should render an account of his faith by his Synodicall or Circular letters, (called otherwise Optat. Mi­levit. lib. 2. Si­ricius hodiè (E­piscopus Rom.) noster est Soci­us, cum quo nobis totus orbis, commetcio Formatarum, in una commu­nionis societate concordat. literae formatae, and Aug. Epist. 162. Communicatorias literas jam olim propter suam perversitatem, ab unitate Catholica quae toto orbe diffusa est, non accipiunt Donatistae. Et saepe de illis in ea E­pistola. communicatoria) directed to his Peeres and Companions in that dignity; that by the sight of his profession his faith might be judged, whether he were a sound Catholique, or tainted with heresie; and so whether he [Page 86] were fit or unworthy to be admitted in­to their Communion: If in those Letters he did professe entirely to adhere to the Catholique Creeds, his profession & per­son was accepted as sound & Orthodox. The Circular Epistles yet extant, of Extant Concil. 6. Ge­ner. Act. 11. Sophronius Patriarch of Hierusalem, of Conc. 7. (si­ve Syn. 2. Nic.) Act. 3. Tarasius Patriarch of Constantino­ple, of Apud Baron. ad ann. 556. num. 33.— Pelagius Patriarch of Rome, of Extat inter Epistolas Pho­tii MSS. Grae­cè, in Bibl. Bod­leiana. Photius of Constantinople, and many others testifie this. So truly said S. Austin, Aug. Epist. 57. Regula fidei pusillis magnis­que communis. that the Creed is a rule of faith common to great and small. The mea­nest Catechumen must beleeve so much, and the greatest Patriarch can beleeve no more. In those old and golden times those Articles were thought abundant­ly sufficient, and it was thought a great sacriledge to adde any thing to them, or diminish them. No Catholique in the world was then required to beleeve the Popes Supermacie, or his Indulgences, or Purgatory, or Transubstantiation, or any doctrine now debated betweene us and Rome. No such matter. These things were brought in long after the beginning: the Church of Christ was long without them, and was well with­out [Page 87] them; and happy had she been, whe­ther we regard truth or peace, if she had still so continued. Nor can it be reason­ably said, that all (or any of) these things, though not expressed in the Creed, are yet contained eminently in the beliefe of the Catholique Church. For (to o­mit, that these are no traditions or do­ctrines of the Catholique Church, but onely the partiall and particular fancies of the Romane; unlesse happily the opi­nion of Transsubstantiation may be ex­cepted, wherein the later Vide Nice­tae Thesau. Or­thod. Gr. Ms in Bib. Bodleiana. Euthym. in pa­noplia. tit. 21. & Hierem. Patr. CP. in Resp. 1. ad Lutheranos. cap. 10. & Resp. 2. cap. 4. § 3. Nichol. Episc. Methon. & Sa­monam Arch. Gaz. [...]: inter Liturgica Grae­cè edita Parisi­is, 1560. Greeks seeme to agree with the Romanists:) 1. what reason can be imagined, why amongst many things of equall necessity to be believed, the Apostles should so pun­ctually and distinctly set downe some, and be altogether silent in others? As well, nay better, they might have given us no Article but that, and sent us to the Church for all the rest. For in setting downe others besides that, and not all, they make us beleive we have all, when we have not all. 2. I suppose no learned Romanist will say, that in the beleife of the cōmunion of Saints all the new doctri­nes of the Romane Church are virtually [Page 88] contained. Yet the learned Replique ch. 1. Card. du Perron thinks it probable, that the Ar­ticle of the Catholique Church and the Communion of Saints is all one, this lat­ter clause being onely an explication of the other. 3. Many of the Ancient Do­ctors have left us their expositions on the Creed, Ruffinus, S. Augustin, Cyrill of Hierusalem, Chrysologus, Maxim. Tau­rinensis, others. Where they speake of the Catholique Church, all say we must beleive the unity, universality, perpetui­ty, sanctity of the Church; none at all say any thing of any soveraigne & infal­lible power in the Church, to prescribe or define what she pleases. 4. Lastly Azo­rius the Iesuite gives a faire meaning to this Article of the Catholique Church, and such as little favours the conceit of our Mistaker. Azor. pa [...]. 1. lib. 8 cap. 6. §. Sed mibi proba­bilius. Substantia arti­culi, quo credi­mus unam, San­ctam & Catho­licam Ecclesi­am, est, neminem posse salvum esse extrà congregationem hominum qui Christi fidem & religionem profitentur susceptam; & posse salutem obtineri intrà hanc ipsam congregationem hominum piorum & fi­delium. I beleive the holy Catho­lique Church, that is, (saith he) I beleive that none can be saved out of the Congrega­tion of those men, who professe the faith and religion of Christ; and that within that com­pany [Page 89] of holy and faithfull people salvation may be obtained.

Now to the reasons alleaged for the full and formall sufficiency of this rule of faith, to which nothing essentiall can be added or may be detracted; we may adjoine the full consent of the Ancient Doctors, Greeke and Latin; who come in with one voice (each one almost con­tributing his suffrage,) to testifie for this perfection of the Creed, & that in their dayes it was so acknowledged. Iren. lib. 1. cap. 2. & 3. Ec­clesia per uni­versum orbem seminata ab A­postolis & co­rum discipulis, accepit eam fi­dem, quae est in Deum omnipo­tentem—Hanc fidem diligen­ter custodit Ec­clesia, in Celtis, in Oriente, Ae­gypto—Cùm enim una & ea­dem fides sit; neque is, qui multùm potest de ea dicere su­perfluit; neque is qui parùm, imminuit. Irenae­us, having repeated the most important Articles of it, saith, It is the faith which the Church throughout the world hath received from the Apostles; being every where one and the same, admitting neither addition nor di­minution. Therfore it is called by Tertul. de vel. virg. cap. 1. Regula fidei u­na omninò est, sola immobilis, irreformabilis. Hâc lege fidei manente caetera admittunt novitatem correctionis. Ter­tullian, one onely immoveable, and unrefor­mable rule, which remaining safe, other matters (of discipline) may be altered or corrected, as occasion requires. And the same Author againe, Id. de Praescript. cap. 13. & 14. Haec regula—null as habet apud nos quaestiones, nisi quas herefes inferunt, & quae haereticos faciunt.—manente form âejus in suo ordine quantumlibet quaeras & tractes—Fides in regula posita est, cedat turiositas fidei. Nihil ultrà scire est omnia scire. This rule ordain­ed by Christ, is not questioned by any among [Page 90] us but by heretiques, (Valentinus, Marcion and the like:) All beyond, and beside this rule is but curiosity and exercise of wit. The faith which saves, consists in this rule. Let curiosity yeeld to faith—to know no more is to know all. And a little Ibid. cap. 8. Hoc primùm credimus, nihil esse ultrà quod credere debea­mus. before. This first of all we beleive, that no more ought to be beleived, as necessary to all. In Symb. initio & fine. [...]. Athana­sius of his Creed (received by the Ca­tholique Church;) This is the sound Ca­tholique faith. If this be the Catholique faith, then it is not onely a peece or par­cell of it; then there is no part of the Catholique faith, besides or beyond this, more or lesse then this. The Fathers of the Patres Con­cilii Chalced. Act. 5. in fine. post recitata Symbola. [...]. Chalcedon Councell; The Sym­bole is sufficient to the perfect knowledge and confirmation of piety. Gregory the Nazianz. Orat. 52. init. [...]. Di­vine; It is a short breviary, or boundary, or rule of the faith and sence of Christians. Cyril Hierosol. [...]. Catech. 4. Symbolum est [...]. Iterum Cat. 5. [...]. Cyrill of Hierusalem; It is the summe [Page 91] of all necessary doctrines. Againe. That no soule might be lost through ignorance, we have all the doctrine of faith comprized within the little compasse of the Creed: which we must carefully conserve as the onely pro­vision for our journey towards heaven, re­garding no other (for point of beleife.) For herein are collected out of all the Scriptures, the most usefull maine articles of our Religi­on: and as a small graine of mustard seed con­taines within it selfe many branches; so doth the Creed in a few sentences all the substance of godly knowledge, revealed in the old and new Testament. Cyril. Ale­xandr. in Ep. ad Joan. Antioch. cítatus à Marco Ephesio in Cō ­cil. Florent. Sess. 5. statuit. [...]. The other Cyrill of Alexandria: It is utterly unlawfull any way to alter (by adding, detracting—) one word or Syllable in the holy Creed. Epiphan. in Exp. fide [...] Cath. num. 19. exe­dit. Petau. [...]. Epipha­nus: This confession is the pillar or founda­tion of truth; our life, our hope, and the assu­rance of our immortall happinesse. Hil. ad Con­stan. Aug. post confessam & juratam in bap­tismo fidem, nō oportet quicquā aliud vel ambi­gere vel inno­vare. Et mox. Tutissimum est primam ac so­lam Euangelicā fidem, co [...]fessā in baptismate intellectám (que) retinere. Hilary of Poictiers: After that faith which we all confessed and avowed in our Baptisme, it is not fit to adde or innovate or doubt of any thing. It is the safest course for all Christians, to retaine constantly that first and sole con­fession of Evangelicall doctrine. Hier. ad Pam. Ep. 61. c. 9. In Symbolo fidei & spei nostrae, omue Christiani dogmatis Sacramentum concluditur. & in Prov. c. 2. lit. 1. Fides dominica in Symbolo continetur, quam se die bap­tismatis servaturum quis (que) promittit. Hie­rome: [Page 92] All the holy doctrine of Christianity is concluded within the Creed, which is the profession of our faith & hope, which we all promised to keepe at our Baptisme. August. de Symb. ad Ca­tech. lib. 3. c. 1. Noveritis hoc Symbolum esse fidei Catholicae fundamentum, super quod aedificium surrexit Ecclesiae, constructum ma­nibus Apostolorum & Prophetarum. Idem August. de Tem. Serm 115. Symbolum comprehensio est fidei nostrae atque perfectio, simplex, breve, plenum ut simplicitas consulat audientium rusticicati, brevitas memoriae, plenitudo doctrinae—totius Catholicae legis fides, Symboli colligitur bre­vitate. Serm. 119. Symbolum est breviter complex a regula fide: ut men­tem instruat, nec oneret memoriam. Serm. 131. Doctrina Symbols vir­tus est Sacramenti, illuminatio animae, plenitudo credentium; breve est verbis, sed magnum est Sacramentis: parvum ostendens imminutione latitudinis, sed totum continens compendio brevitatis; exiguum est ut memoriam non obruat, sed diffusum ut intelligentiam supercedat; con­firmans omnes perfectione credendi, desiderio confitendi, fiduciâ resur­gendi. Quicquid praefiguratum est in Patriarchis, quicquid nunciatum est in Scripturis, quicquid praedictum est in Prophetis—totum hoc breviter Symbolum in se continet. Eadem verba repetit. Serm. 181. Serm. 181. Sancti Apostoli certam regulam fidei tradiderunt quam Symbolum vo­caverunt, per quam credentes Catholicam tenerent unitatem, & per quam haereticam convincerent pravitatem. Illi enim in diversa ituri, normam priùs sibi futurae praedication is in commune statuerunt, ne diversum vel dissonum praedicarent his qui ad fidem Christi invitabantur—ar (que) hanc it a credentibus dandam esse regulam instituerunt. Ambros. Serm 38. de Iejun. & quadrag. ad fin. Duodecim Apostolorum Symbolo fides sancta concepta est, qui velut periti artifices in unum convenientes, clavem coelorum suo consilio conflaverunt. Clavem enim quandam ipsum Sym­bolum [...]ixerim; per quod reserantur diaboli tenebrae, ut lux Christi ad­veniat. Ruffinus in praefat▪ ad expos. In his verbis Symboli, Sp. S. nihil ambiguum, nihil obscurum, nihil à reliquis dissonans providit poni. Apostoli enim discessuri breve istud futurae praedicationis, unanimitatis, & fidei suae indicium, fidei normam, munimentum, turrim in commu­ne constituunt—atque hanc credentibus dandam esse regulam statuunt. Hoc indicium est seu tessera, per quam agnoscitur is qui Christum vere secundùm Apostolicas regulas praedicat. In Ecclesia urbis Romae, mos servatur antiquus, eos qui gratiam baptismi suscepturi sunt, publicè, i. e. fidelium populo audiente, Symbolum reddere: & utique adiectionem unius saltem sermonis eorú qui precesserunt in fide, non ad mittit auditus. [...]. Rom. Epist. 1. ex versione Ruffini ad med. Apostoli disceden­tes ab invicem Symbolum condiderunt, ut hance regulam per omnes gen­tes praedicarent, summam totius fidei Catholicae recensentes, in qua in­tegritas credulitatis ostenditur. Cunctis credentibus quae continentur in praefato Symbolo salus animarum & vita perpetua bonis actibus prae­paratur Leo. Ep. 13. ad fin. Symbolum brevis est & perfecta confessio in­struct a munitione coelesti, ut omnes haereticorú opiniones solo ipsius pos­sint gladio detruncari. Cujus Symboli plenitudinē si Eutyches puro & sim­plicivoluisset corde concipere, in nullo deviaret ib. Singulare est Sacramen­tum salutis humanae. & anted non portiuncula aliqua fidei nostrae, sed quòd Dominus noster in Ecclesia neminem voluit sexus utriusque igno­rare. Novatianus de Trin. cap. 1. & 9. Symbolum regula est veritatis. & cap. 29. fidei auctoritas. Maximus Taurin. Homil. de tradit. Symboli. Signaculum Symboli inter fideles perfidósque secernit. Petr. Chrysol. Sermon. 59. Est placitum fidei, pactum gratiae, salutis Symbolum. Cae­lestin. Episc. Rom. in Epist. ad Nestorium, citante Ioanne Foroliviensi Episcopo in Concil. Florent. sess. 10. Quis unquam non dignus est a­nathemate judicatus, vel adiiciens vel detrahens fidei in Symbolis con­tentae? Plenè enim ac manifestè tradita nobis ab Apostolis, nec augmentum nec imminutionem requirunt. Bessarion Nicaenus Concil. Flor. sess. 8. pag. 464. edit. Bin. ult. Sacro Symbolo nihil est addendum, quia in Ecclesia locum obtinet principii ac fundamenti fidei nostrae. Marcus Ephesius ibid. sess. 3. pag. 431. Arbitramur nihil omissum esse a Patribus in Symbolo fidei, neque omnino positum esse quicquam man­o [...]m, quod correctione aut additamento indigeat. Et haec est potissim [...] schismatis (inter Graecos Latinósque) causa: praecipientibus Patribus, aullum aliud Symbolum esse unquam recipiendum, nec esse quicquam addendum vel detrahendum, quòdilli omnia satis complexi sunt. An­draeas Rhodi Archiepi scopus Latinus, ibid. sess. 7. pag. 451. Ad illud quod aiebat Dominus Ephesius, Symbolum esse perfectum, & perfecto nihil posse addi, respondemus, perfection, sumi dupliciter, vel quoad fi­dem vel quoad explanationem. Et quidem quoad fidem Symbolum esse perfectissimum, nec indigere additamento; quoad explanationem verò non suisse satis, propter haereses quae erant emersurae. Au­gustine [Page 93] to young novices: You must know that the Creed is the foundation of the Catholique faith, and of the Church, laid by [Page 94] the hands of the Apostles and Prophets. My margine will adde some more to this cloud of Witnesses, and fully make good my word; that the Fathers here come in with full consent.

And now our Mistaker hath his Ca­talogue of fundamentalls, recommen­ded to him by such reason and au­thorities, as I presume will satisfie his longing, and content him. If so, then he is satisfied both for the question, which be fundamentalls! and for the state of our Church, that we agree in fundamentalls. If this please him not, then it will be in his choice whether he will reject the constant opinion of his owne DDrs and the old Fathers, or show us some way how they and he (dissenting herein from them) may be reconciled. If he reject them and their opinion, we shall be content to be condemned by him to­gether with the Fathers and his owne Brethren. If he approve the perfection of the Creed (with them,) he may be pleased to make answer to his owne ob­jections: which if he will calmely con­sider, he may happily finde to be but weake and of small moment.

[Page 95] His Objections are. In the Creed there is no mention. 1. of the Canon of Scripture. 2. or of the number and na­ture of the Sacraments. 3. or of Iustifica­tion, whether it be by faith or by works. 4. That Doctrine of devills, 1. Tim. 4. 1. forbidding marriage and meates is not there condemned. 5. Lastly, the sence of diverse Articles is questioned, as that of the Descent into hell, and the other of the Catholique Church. Therefore the Creed is no perfect rule of faith.

Answer.

To the first. The Creed is an abstract or abridgement of such necessary do­ctrines as are delivered in Scripture, or collected out of it; and therefore needs not expresse the authority of that which it supposes. These Articles are princi­ples which are proved by Scripture; the Scripture it self a principle, which needs no proofe amongst Christians. The Creed containes onely the materiall ob­ject of faith, or the things which must be beleived expressely according to Scri­pture: The Scripture is further the formall object of faith, or the motive and [Page 96] ground whereupon faith is founded; being (as Philosophers say of light in regard of the sight,) both the objectum quod, in respect of the things therein re­vealed; and objectum quo, in respect of that divine verity and authority which reveales them. Although the Nicene Fathers in their Creed confessing that the holy Ghost spake by the Prophets, do thereby sufficiently avow the divine Authority of all Canonicall Scripture.

To the 2. we say 1. That the Sacra­ments are to be reckoned rather among the Agenda of the Church, then the Cre­denda: they are rather divine rites and ceremonies, then doctrines. 2. For their numbers, the Mistaker, who hath so little moderation as to thinke his Seaven fit matter for the Creed, shall be answered in the words of a Examen pacifique Ch. 1. pag. 22. Pre­nantce mot de Sacrement pro­premēt, S. Aug. dit (de Doctr. Chr. li. 3. ca. 9.) qu'il ny en a que deux, a sçauoir, le Ba­ptesme & l'Eu­charistie. Da­uantage c'est vne phrase cō ­mune parmy nous Catholi­ques, de dire, que tous les Sa­cremens sont coulez du coste de nostre Sei­gneur. Or ne coula de son costé que sang & eau. Ce que representoit (selon l'inter­pretation de Chrysostome, Cyrill, & autres anciens) les deux Sacrements de l'Eglise. a sçauoir le Baptesme parl'eau, & le calice de l'Eucharistie par le sang, Et nos Docteurs Catholiques ne font autre responce a ceci si non, que ces deux sacremens ont quelque dignité par dessus les autres: qui n'est autre chose, si non dire qu'ily a deux Sacremens principaux & plusieur sinfe­rieurs. Ce qui est demesme que les Huguenots disent, mais en diuers termes; eux disans qu'il ny en a que deux proprement, nous qu'il ny en a que deux principalement: nous disons aussi qu'il y en a plusieurs infe­rieurs; eux qu'il y en a aussi plusieurs, si nous parlons des Sacremens [...] la signification generale. Car Calvin dit, que l'ordre est vn Sacrement, & Melancthon ditle mesme, & y adjouste la penitence. Bref, ils diron [...] qu'il y en a sept, mais non pas seulement sept, & de fait, il ny a aucun des Anciens Peres qui aye iamais trouue ce nombre de sept. moderate Roman [Page 97] Catholique. Takeing the word Sacrament properly, S. Augustin saith there are but two, to wit Baptisme and the Lords Supper. And it is a common saying among us Catho­liques, that all the Sacraments flowed from the side of our Lord. Now there came from his side onely bloud and water; which repre­sented (according to the interpretation of Chrysostome, Cyrill and others of the An­cients,) the two Sacraments of the Church; Baptisme by water, and the Chalice in the Eucharist by bloud. To which our Catho­lique Doctors give no other answer; but that these two Sacraments, by reason of their dig­nity, are specially so called: which is all one to say, that there are onely two principall Sacra­ments, and many inferiours, which is the very thing which is said by the Huguenots in other termes. They say there are but two pro­perly, and we say there are but two princi­pally: Againe we say there are many infe­riour Sacraments, and they yeeld it if the name Sacrament be taken in a generall signifi­cation. For Calvin saith that Order is a Sa­crament; and Melancthon sayes the same, and moreover addes Penance. Briefly they grant there are seven, but not onely seven: and in truth, none of the ancient Fathers [Page 98] have ever found this number of seven 3. For the two principall Sacraments, Azor. par 1. l 10. 8. cap. 5. §. Praetereà di­ces. Cur inter Articulos fidei non recenserur venerabile Eu­charistiae Sa­cramentum, & Baptismi? Re­spondeo cum S. Thomâ, 2. 2. q. 1. a. 8. a [...] 6. & Richardo 3. d. 25. a. 1. qu. 1 ad 4. eos articu­los contineri & includi in ar­ticulo fidei quo credimus unam sanctam Eccle­siam, sancto­rum Commu­nionem, remis­sionem pecca­ [...]orum: nam per Sacramenta peccata remit­tuntur à Deo. Azo­rius propounds his objection: Why is not the Sacrament of the Eucharist and of Baptisme reckoned among the Arti­cles of our faith? and thus answers it, out of Aquinas and others: The two Sa­craments are implied in the articles, where we professe to beleive the holy Catholique Church, the communion of Saints, and the remission of sinnes. The Creed of Nice expresses Baptisme by name; I confesse one Baptisme for the remission of sinnes. And the Eucharist, being a seale of that holy Union which we have with Christ our Head, by his Spirit and faith, and with the Saints his members by Charity; is evidently included in the Communion of Saints.

To the 3. we grant good works to be necessary (in ordinary course) to salva­tion; and that a reward is due unto them, not for any dignity in them or us, but by divine dignation, and by Gods free and gracious promise. The faith which justifies is ever fruitfull of such good works; a living & a working faith. But no wise man will put any confidence in the [Page 99] goodnesse of any works; he will rather wholly cast himselfe on the mercies of God, who for Christs sake accepts of our weake obedience, pardons our sins, Manes. [...]. and crownes us with happinesse. This is properly the justifying of a sinner, and this we beleive when we professe to be­leeve the remission of sinnes; wherein with the Scripture and all Antiquity we place our Iustification.

To the 4. The Creed is a rule of po­sitive truths, not a rejection of errors but onely by consequent or implicati­on. He that beleives aright in the Lord Almighty, beleives all his creatures in themselves to be good, and all his insti­tutions to be holy: and therefore cannot beleive either any meates to be in their nature polluted, or marriage in any per­sons to be profane. Many of the old he­retiques who beleived so, were men marveilously abused by the Father of lies: especially the Manichees, who had in them much more of the Infidell then of the Christian; if they were not rather madmen, (according to the name of their Founder) then Infidels. Yet to do them, no wrong, it seemes by Aug. de Mc­rib. Eccl. & Ma­nich. lib. 2. c. 18. Hic non dubi­to vos esse cla­maturos invi­diám (que) factu­ros, castitatem perfectam vos vehe menter cō ­mendare atque laudare non ta­men nuptias prohibere quā ­doquidem Au­ditores vestri, quorum apud vos secundus est gradus, ducere atque habere non prohiben­tur uxores. Id. Epist. 74. Au­ditores qui ap­pellantur apud eos, & carnibus vescuntur, & a­gros colunt, & fi voluerint, uxores habent; quorum nihil faciunt qui vo­cantut Electi. S. August. [Page 100] they did not forbid meates or marriage, as absolutely impure, or to all: onely their choice Elect ones must abstaine: the other vulgar, their Auditors, were left at their liberty. The Mistaker desires passionately to free his Church from this Manicheisme, and if he can do it we desire not to finde her guilty. But if She be not, why is single life called Cha­stity, and commended as an eminent de­gree of sanctimony? why is marriage said to be in compatible with Innocentius Papa dist. 82. can. Proposui­sti. Neque eos fas sit ad officia Sacra admitti, qui exercent vel cum uxore carnale consor­tium: quia scrip­tum est, Sancti estote quoniam sanctus sum, dixit Dominus. holinesse, or with Id. ibid. Qui in carne sunt Deo placere non possunt. Gods favour? nay counted a Pelagius Papa dist. 61. can. Catinensis. Hominem qui necuxorem ha­beat, nec libe­ros, nec aliquod crimen canoni­bus inimicum­eligi suadeas. crime? nay a Bell. de Cle­ricis cap. 19. §. Jam vero. Non [...]olum conjugi­um sacerdotum, quod sacrilegium est non conjugium, sed etiam Sanctorum matrimonium sine pollutione quâdam & turpitudine non exercetur. sacriledge? worse then Coster. Enchirid. cap. de Coelib. Sacerdos si for [...]itetur, aut domi concubinam alat, tamet si gravi sacrilegio se obstringat, graviùs tamen peccat si contrahat matri­monium. whoredome? And for meates, why is abstinence from flesh counted a perfect Christian fast, yea holy and me­ritorious? and why is he that eates flesh in Lent punished with a more grievous penance, then he that commonly bla­sphemes the name of God, or defiles his neighbours bed, or abuses himselfe by drunkenesse, or others by railing, slan­dering &c.

To the 5. The Church of England [Page 101] questions not the sence of those Articles: Shee takes them in the old Catholique sence, and the words are so plaine they beare their meaning before them. Men abounding with wit and idlenesse may seeke knotts in a bull rush, and cast a mist over the most cleare truths. It is by the Romā Doctors that they are questioned, who can neither agree with us nor with themselves. Contr. 5. q. 5. A. 1. Stapleton affirmes the Scripture is silent that Christ descended into hell, and that there is a Catholique and an Apostolique Church. 4. de Chri­sto. c. 6. & 12. Scripturae pas­sim hoc docent. Bellarmine on the contrary is resolute, that the Article of the descent is every where in Scripture; and 2. 2. q. 1. A. 9. ad 1. Thomas grants as much for the whole Creed. Then for the sence of that Article, Thom. p. 3. q. 52. A. 2. in Corp. Some hold Christ descended really into hell; Durand. in 3. d. 22. q. 3. Others virtually onely and by effects. And by Hell, some understand the lowest pilt, or the place of the damned, as 4. de Chri­sto cap. 16. Bel­larmine at first: others the Limbus Patrum as Recogn. p. 11. Bellarmine at last, following the common opinion of the In Th. p. 3. qu. 52. A [...]z. Schooles. These jarres concerne not the Church of En­gland, which takes the words as they are in the Creed, and beleives them without further dispute, and in the sence [Page 102] of Aug. Epist. 99. Ancients. As also She doth in that other Article of the Catholique Church.

It remaines then (notwithstanding all this feeble opposition) very proba­ble, according to the judgement of An­tiquity and even of the Roman D D^rs, that the Creed is the perfect Summary of those fundamentall truths, wherein consists the Unity of Faith, and of the Catholique Church: the Articles wher­of all Christians ordinarily are bound expresly to beleeve, and distinctly to know, for their salvation.

I say such explicite faith and actuall knowledge is necessary to Christians ordinarily; for I meedle not with the extraordinary dispensation of Gods mercies, which is a secret reserved to the Lord himselfe. And I say men are bound to it by necessity; that is, necessi­tate praecepti, but happily not so, necessi­tate medij vel finis. For as the De explicitè & necessario credendis; vide quae scripserunt Sylv. in Sum. ver. Fides. Azor. Instit. moral. par. 1. l. 8. c. 6. Tolet. Instruct. Sa­cerd. lib 4. c. 2. Greg. de Val. in 2. 2. disp. 1. q. 2. punc. 3. 4. 5. B [...]nnes in 2. 2. q. 2. a. 8 Beca [...]. in sum. pur. 3. c. 12. Filiuo. de casib. tract. 2. 2. cap. 1. & 2. Pu­tean. in 2. 2. q. 2. [...]. [...]. 3. dub. 4. Aegyd. Connick. disp. 14. dub. 9. & 10. & DD. communiter in 3. d. 25. & in 2. 2. q. 1. a. 7. Casi [...] ­ists and Schoolemen doe well and truly observe, in this dispute of necessary and fundamentall truths, both Truths & Per­sons must be wisely distinguished: That truth may be necessary in one sense, [Page 103] which is not so in another; and funda­mentall in some persons, in certaine re­spects, which is not so to some others.

1. Every thing fundamentall is not alike neare to the foundation, nor of e­quall primenes in the faith. Among the fundamentalls of the Creed, some are ra­dicall and primary, others like branches is­suing or descending from them, as Paris Tract. de fide cap. 2. Communiter credendorum, quae usualiter Articuli fidei vocantur, alia sunt ut radices primitivae & fundamenta primaria; alia sunt ut rami descendentes &. Pari­siensis: or as Th. 2. 2. q. 1. a. 7. in Corp. Omnes Articu­li implicitè cō ­tinentur in ali­quibus primis credibilibus; sc. ut credatur De­us esse & providentiam habere circa hominum salutem: Aquinas, there are cer­taine prime principles of faith, in the bosome whereof all other Articles lie wrapped or folded up. Such is that of S. Paul. Heb. 11. 6. He that comes to God must beleeve that God is, and that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him: but especially that most important and most Joh. 17. 3. & 20. 31. Matth. 16. 16. 17. Act. 4. 12. & 8. 37. & 16. 31. Rom. 10. 9. 10. 1. Cor. 3. 11. & 12. 3. 1. Joh. 2. 22. & 4. 2. 15. & 5. 1. 5. 2. Pet. 2. 1. fundamentall of all Arti­cles in the Church; that Iesus Christ the sonne of God and the sonne of Mary is the onely Saviour of the world. These are so absolutely necessary to all Christians, for attaining the end of our faith, that is, the salvation of our soules; that a Chri­stian may loose himselfe, not onely by a [Page 104] positive erring in them, or denying of them; but by a pure ignorance, or nesci­ence, or not knowing of them, Dom. Ban­nes in 2. 2. q. 2. arr. 8. Illa quae sunt necessaria necessitate fi­nis, si desint no­bis etiam sine culpa nostra, non excusabūt nos ab aeterna morte, quamvis non fuerit in potestate nostra illa assequi: quemadmodū etiam si non sit nisi unicum re­medium, ut ali quis fugiat mortem corpo­ralem, & tale re­remediū igno­retur & ab in­firmo et medi­co; sine dubio peribit homo ille. The Roman DDrs themselves say, that In­vincible ignorance cannot here excuse from ever lasting death: even as if there were one onely remedy whereby a sicke man could be recovered from corporall death; suppose the Patient and the Physitian both were ignorant of it, the man must perish, as well not know­ing it, as if being brought unto him he had refused it.

2. Againe of Persons, some are invin­cibly disabled from faith and know­ledge, through want of capacity, Pet. de Al­linco in quaest. vesperiarum. Si­cut ad legis Christi habitu­alē fidē omnis viator obligatur sine ulla exceptione; fic ab ejus actuali fide nullus excusatur nisi solâ in­capacitate. Parvulos autem et furiosos, caeteris (que) passionibus mente cap­tos seu aliâ naturali impossibilitate prohibitos incapaces voco, et si non simpliciter, tamē secundū quid, [...]. dum his defectibus laborant. as Infants, Naturalls, and distracted Per­sons; or through want of meanes of in­struction: which may be saved, but God only knows how. Others have capacity & meanes but in very different degrees, and accordingly they differ in that mea­sure of faith and knowledge, that is ne­cessarily required in them. More know­ledge is necessary in Aegid. de Conninck. disp. 14. dub 10. Hominum sunt tres classes, majores, medii, infimi, qui hic distinguendi, Similiter Puteanus in 2. 2, q. 2. art. 3. d. ult. & [...]lii. Bishops and [Page 105] Priests, to whom is committed the go­verment of the Church and the cure of soules, then in vulgar Laickes: amongst whom in them of the rudest and mea­nest sort, (if there be a studious care of holines and obedience in their life, which is ever supposed as most necessa­ry) the knowledge of those maine Arti­les concerning our Saviours Incarnati­on, Passion, Resurrection, &c. (which are purposely to that end celebrated by the Church, in her Festivities) as many Almain in 3. d. 26. Mino­res tenentur explicitè crede­re Articulis por festivitates so­lennes celebra­tis, ut Ecclesia celebrat Festū de Nativitatc-sic Durand: Bo­navent. Alii, in eum loc. Sylv. ver. Fides. §. 6. Azor. lib. 8. ca. 6. §. 2^o quae­ritur Filiucius de Casib. tract. 22. c. 1. §. Di­ces. Alii (que) piu­rimi. Le Card. de Richelieu▪ Instruct. du Chrestien. Leçon premiere. Gen'est pas chose necessaire que celuy qui ignorera quelques vns des Articles de foy, ne puisse aucu­nes fois faire son salut; mais il est besoin qu'il ait vne cognoissance de ces Articles, suffisante pour le diriger à sa derniere fin. Si quelque vn igno­roit la Communion des Saincts, la descente de nostre Seigneur aux Lim­bes, que sa passion ait esté soubs Pilate, qu'il ait este au Sepulchre, le temps auquel il est resuscité, sçauoir est le troisiesme iour, le sens de ces mots, il est assis à la dextre de son Pere, il ne scroit damné pour cela. Le simple se peut sauuer auec moindre cognoissance que celuy qui ne peut estre tenu pour tel. C'est assez au simple de voir, comme nous anons dit, vne cognoissance du Symbole suffisante pour la diriger [...] sa derniere fin: Au lieu que le Curé & le Prelat, qui ont charge d'instruite les autres, sontobligez, & desçauoir distinctement tous les Articles du Symbole, & qui plus est de le pouuoir expliquer au peuple. Learned judge, may suffice.

For conclusion of this discourse con­cerning Fundamentalls, I will propound to the consideration and censure of the judicious, these thoughts following.

It seemes fundamentall to the faith, [Page 106] and for the salvation of every member of the Church, that he acknowledge & beleeue all such points of faith, as wher­of he may be sufficiently convinced that they belong to the doctrine of Jesus Christ. For he that being sufficiently convinced doth oppose, is obstinate, an Heretique, and finally such a one as ex­cludes himselfe out of heaven, wherein­to no wilfull sinner can enter.

Now that a man may be sufficiently convinced, there are three things requi­red. 1. Cleare revelation, 2. Sufficient proposition, 3. Capacity and understan­ding to apprehend what is reveiled and propounded.

1 Revelation from God is required: for we are not bound to beleeue any thing as Gods word, which God hath not de­clared to be his word, and that in such cleare manner, as may convince a rea­sonable man that it is from God. For want of this, not onely the Church be­fore Christ, but even Christs owne Dis­ciples are excused from being guilty of any damnable errour, though they be­leeved not the death, resurrection, or ascension of our Lord: as it is plaine [Page 107] they did not. Marc. 16. 11. 13. Luk. 24. 11. Ioh. 20. 9. Marc. 9. 10. But now that these things are so clearely re­veiled in Scripture, he were no Christi­an that should deny them.

2. Sufficient proposition of reveiled truths is required, before a man can be convinced. For if they be not pro­pounded to me, in respect of me it is all one as if they were not reveiled. This proposition includeth 2 things. 1. that the points be perspicuously laid open in themselves, for want of this Apollos be­leeved not some points of the faith, till he was further informed. Acts 18. 25. 2. that the said points be so fully and forcibly laid open, as may serve to re­move reasonable doubts to the contra­ry, and to satisfie a teachable minde a­gainst the principles, in which he hath beene bred to the contrary. For want of this, the Apostles believed not the re­surrection, when yet they were plainely told of it. See Luke 9. 44. 45. and Mar. 9. 10. compared with Marc. 8. 31. 32.

Note here (1). This proposition of reveiled truths is not, as the Mista­ker saith, by the infallible determi­nation [Page 108] of Pope or Church, but by whatsoever meanes a man may be convinced in conscience of divine revelation. If a Preacher doe cleare any point of faith to his Hearers, if a private Christian doe make it ap­peare to his neighbour, that any con­clusion or point of faith is delivered by divine revelation of Gods word; if a man himselfe (without any other teacher,) by reading the Scriptures, or hearing them read, be convin­ced of the truth of any such con­clusion: this is a sufficient propositi­on, to prove him that gain sayeth any such truth to be an Heretique, and obstinate opposer of the faith. Such a one may be truly said to be [...], condemned by his owne con­science. v. g. He that should read in Scriptures, Now is Christ risen from the dead—1. Cor. 15. 20. or, The word was made flesh. Ioh. 1.—and yet should de­ny Christs Resurrection or Incarnati­on, he were an Heretique, without a­ny determination or sentence of the Church. And such Heretiques there were many in the Primitiue Church [Page 109] fore any Councell was celebrated, and long before any Pope preten­ded to Infallibility.

(2) Note. A man may be truly thought thus convicted, not onely when his Conscience doth expressely beare witnesse to the truth, but when virtually it doth so, and would ex­pressely doe it, if it were not choked or blinded by some unruly and un­mortified lust in the will. For if a man make himselfe a slave to ambiti­on, covetousnesse, vaineglory, preju­dice, &c. these untamed passions will not onely draw the man to professe what he thinketh not, but to thinke what he would dis-avow, if in synce­ritie he sought the truth. And in this case the difference is not great be­tweene him that is wilfully blinde, 24. qu. 3. §. 28. Haereticus est. and him that knowingly gainsayeth the truth.

(3) Note. A man may be suffici­ently convinced either in foro exterio­ri, or in foro interiori. In the former he is convinced, who by an orderly proceeding of the Church is censu­red and condemned: and such a one [Page 110] ad omnem effectum juris, and in the e­steeme of the said Church, is to be reputed an heretique, though per­haps the Censure be erroneous. He that is convicted in the later kinde, is an Heretique before God, though no authority of the Church have dete­cted or proceeded against him. And this conviction onely is necessary to prove one an Heretique excluded from Heaven.

3. There is required capacity or abili­ty of wit and reason to apprehend that which is cleerly revealed and suffici­ently proposed. For want of this, not onely fooles and mad men are excused, but those who are of weaker capacity or lesse knowledge may be excused from beleiving of those things which they cannot apprehend: as the Apostles are by Christ Ioh. 16. 12.

But where there is no such impedi­ment, as hath been said, & the revealed will or word of God is sufficiently propounded; there he that opposeth is cōvinced of error, & he who is thus con­vinced is an Heretique, and Heresie is a worke of the flesh which excludeth from [Page 111] heaven. Gal. 5. 20. 21. And hence it followeth, that it is fundamentall to a Christians faith, and necessary for his salvation, that he beleive all reveiled truths of God, whereof he may be con­vinced that they are from God.

The cavills of the Mistaker against the Church of England and her Articles (in this matter) are easily answered.

When the Church of England had or­derly reformed her selfe: she was loudly accused (by the Romane faction) of He­resie and Schisme; (as it hath been, in later ages, the cunning custome of Rome to blast and disgrace all them that dared to oppose any of her corrupt opinions or usages.) Wherefore, to cleare her innocency, Shee published to the world a Declaration of her judgement in mat­ters of Religion, which we call her Con­fession. Wherin her aime was not, in any curious method, to deliver a Systeme of Divinity: but plainly, without fraud or artifice, to set downe, first the positive principles of her faith, or the fundamen­talls of it, wherein she hath sufficiently declared her selfe, both in Aro. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.—8.— most par­ticulars, and in summe by Art. 8. avowing [Page 112] the Catholique Creeds,) and then a rejection of such errors (especially Po­pish) as She judged to be without ground of Scripture, reason or Antiquity. Now Popery is not any univocall part or member in the body of Divinity: it is onely an Aposteme gathered of corrupt and heterogeneous matter. All the Lo­gick in the world cannot possibly range such a confused lumpe of falsities into any certaine or distinct method. And therefore if the Declaration of our Church against these errors be extremely confused, as our Mistaker pretends; the cause is in the errors thēselves, wherein there is nothing but extreme confusion. By the other part of his charge, that our Church in divers points speaks obscurely, and not home to the question, it is evident that he doth not well understand himselfe or those points, wherein he gives instance.

That particular Churches (and particu­larly his) have erred, our Church beleives and Art. 19. professes; and we beleive fur­ther, that if any particular Church pre­sume She cannot fall by error, She is fal­len already by pride. That the Catho­lique Church can erre in the foundati­on, [Page 113] our Church beleives not and there­fore 1. Cor. 1. 2. professes not. But by the infallible Church, I doubt not, the man meanes that which they call the Romane Catholique; for it is the perpetuall and palpable pa­ralogisme of the Faction to confound the Romane and the Catholique, and to argue from this to that; as if all the pri­viledges of the Catholique Church be­longed onely to the Roman quarter.

Likewise, it is not denyed that the true Catholique Church is alwaies visi­ble and cannot be hid. And whereso­ever there is a Congregation of men, that professe and desire to honour the true God, Calling upon the name of Iesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours, and beleiving the Scriptures of the old and new Testament; there (as very Vide supra pag. 111. Learned men are of opinion) is a true Christian Church, wherein salvation may be had, and a visible member of the holy Ca­tholique Church. Innumerable such there ever have been since Christ, and ever shall be scattered over the face of earth. For Joh. Serra­nus Appar. ad fid. Cathol. Pa­ris. 1607. pag. 172. Quicquid vel molitus est, vei moliturus mendacii Pa­ter, non tamen vel effecit ha­ctenus vel effe­ctures est post­hac, ut doctri­na Catholica, omnium Chri­stianorum con­sensu, semper & ubique ra­ta, aboleatur: Quin potius, 'il­la in densissimâ maximè invo­lutarum pertur­bationum cali­gine victrix ex­titit, & in ani­mis & in aper­tâ confessione Christianorum omnium, in suis fundamentis nullo modo la­befactata. In il­la quoque ve­ritate una illa Ecclesia fuit conservata, in mediis saevissimae hyemis tem­peftatibus, vel densissimis tenebris suorum interluniorum. Hanc succes­sionis perpetuae vim esse & illius usum omnes sobrii animadvertunt. whatsoever the Father of [Page 114] lies either hath attempted, or shall attempt, yet neither hath he hither to effected, nor shall ever bring it to passe hereafter, that the true Catholique doctrine ratified by the Common consent of Christians alwaies & every where should be abolished, but that in the thickest mist rather of the most perplexed troubles it still obtained Victorie, both in the minds and in the open confession of all Christians, no waies overturned in the Foundations thereof. And in this verity that One Church of Christ was preserved in the midst of the tempests of the most cruell winter, or in the thickest dark­nes of her waynings. Which true succession of the Faith & Church all sober men observe & acknowledg. And as a most learned Bp. Vsher Serm. of the unity of faith. Pre­late hath observed further, if at this day we should take a survey of the severall professions of Christianity that have any large spread in any part of the world, & should put by the points wherein they differ one from another, and gather into one body the rest of the Articles where­in they do all generally agree; we should finde, that in those Propositions which without all Controversie are universally received in the whole Christian world, so much Truth is contained, as, being [Page 115] joyned with holy obedience, may be suf­ficient to bring a man unto everlasting salvation. Neither have we cause to doubt, but that as many as walke according Gal 6. 16. to this rule, (neither overthrowing that which they have builded by superindu­cing any damnable heresies thereupon, nor otherwise vitiating their holy Faith with a leud and wicked conversation,) peace shall be upon them, and mercie, and upon the Israel of God.

In the point of Freewill, our Church professes (withall Catholique Antiqui­ty, Greeke and Latine, before and after Pelagius,) that though the Will be natu­rally and essentially free from all con­straint and necessiity, yet it is not spiri­tually free from sinne, or to any good, untill it be freed by inward supernatu­rall and undeserved Grace; which both prevets, prepares & excites the Will to every good act that it may be helped, & then helpes it when it is prepared. That the Will of it selfe hath no power to any good act, till it be thus quickned, ina­bled and assisted by Grace, which in all good workes and desires is the princi­pall agent, to which the Will is subor­dinate. [Page 116] But that this grace corrects and perfects nature, doth not abolish it. Wherefore the Will being mooved by grace as aforesaid, is not idle but freely moves it selfe to consent, having still a naturall and corrupt liberty to sinne. So as all the good we doe (or have or hope for) must be ascribed to God and his free grace, and all the sinne we doe, one­ly and wholly to our own will and free­dome. And by this doctrine, we fully avoide and contradict the two contrary errors, of the Manichees on the one side, who deny the naturall liberty of the Will, and of the Pelagians and their Re­liques on the other side, who give the will a spirituall liberty of it selfe, and so deny the necessity of preventing grace. If some Protestant Writers goe farther Piscator, &c. in this point, so farre as to affirme that God determines and necessitates the Wills of men to every act, good or bad, naturall, morall or spirituall, so as the motion of Providence or grace leaves no power or possibility in the Will actu­ally to dissent (in sensu composito:) Answ. 1. this is nothing to the Church of En­gland, which approves not this dange­rous [Page 117] doctrine. 2. The Mistaker cannot with reason or modesty upbraid them (much lesse others) with this opinion or the ill consequents of it; since no Calvi­nist (as he calls them) herein speaks more harshly or rigorously then his own Do­minicans, Bannes, Alvarez, Zumel, Ledes­ma, Herrera, Nugnus, Navarrete, & many others; for proofe whereof I referre him to a late Apell. pro Dom. Banne per Ariviere Doct. Paris. Lugd. An. 1630. Vide e­tiam Andr. Ri­vet. sum. Con­trov. Tract. 4. quaest. 6. Sorbonist who hath publi­shed, by way of parallel, the exact argie­ment of Dominicus Bannes, (and Others) with Calvin in this matter, quoting and comparing their very words.

For the Canon of Scripture, it is true, our Church admits of no other Bookes in the Old Testament, as divine and Canonicall, but onely those which Rom. 3. 2. were commended by God himselfe, to his owne people the Church of the Jewes. Wherein we have the consent of the most ancient Clem. Rom. Const. lib. 2. ca. 57. Melito Sard. ap. Euseb. Hist. lib. 4. cap. 27. Grae. Origen. ap. Eund. lib. 6. cap. 25 Sec. Graec. Athanas. in Synopsi. Nazianz. in Carm. Cyrill Hieros. Catech. 4. [...]. Epiphan. de Mensu: & Ponderibus num. 4. edit. Pa­ris. Concil. Laodic. Can. ult. Ruffin. in Expos. Symb. Hieron. in Praefat. ad lib. Regum. & ad libros Salom. & in Prol. Galeato. Damasc. de fid Orth. lib. 4. cap. 18. Glossa. in dist. 16. Canones. Lyra. Prolog. primo Rich. à S. victore. Exceptionum lib. 2. c. 9. Caietan. in com. hist. v. Test. fine. Vide Canum. l. 2. c. 10. &c. Christian Churches & Writers for the most part; [Page 118] who expressely exclude the Apocry­phall, and by name the Hicr. Prae­fat. in lib. Sa­lom. Iudith & Tobiae & Ma­chabaeorum li­bros legit qui­dem Ecclesia, sed cos inter Canonicas Scripturas non recipit. August. lib. 2. Contr. Epist. Gaudent. cap. 23. Scriptu­ra Machabae o­rum recepta est ab Ecclesia non inutiliter, si so­briè legatur & audiatur. Greg M. moral. li. 19. cap 17. Macch. vocat Libros non Canonicos. Machabees, whereof the Mistaker makes so great e­steema. The Bookes of the New Testa­ment are fitly severed by Eusebius into three rankes. 1. Some were [...], whose authority or Authors were never debated. 2. Others were [...], doubted of (not by the Church so much, as) by Some in the Church, & rather for their Authors then their authority, as the Epistles to the Hebrewes, of S. James, the latter of S. Peter, &c. 3. Others were [...], rejected by consent of all, as the Pastor of Hermes, the pretended Gospells of S. Thomas. S. Bartholomew and the like. The doubts of the Second ranke are now long since cleared, and all Euseb. Hist. lib. 3. cap. 3. those Scriptures generally received by all Christians (in their Westerne parts at least,) and particularly by the Luthe­rans (at least, by the best learned among them,) who admit the Epistle of S. Iames (and the rest) as Canonicall; which the Mistaker may learne (for it seemes He knowes it not) from their owne Wri­ters, and by name from their learned Dr Exeges. Plen. Locor. Loc. 1. de Scrip. S. §. 279. 280. 281. Gerhard.

[Page 119] The Mistaker ends his Discourse as He began it, with Rhetorique and Pas­sion. But this weapon wounds not, be­ing commonly— [...], the reasoning of them that want better reasons.

I shall conclude with a part of my daily prayers; humbly beseeching the Father of mercies, (who is the lover of soules, and hath said that he delights in mercy, and sworne that he takes no plea­sure in the death of them that die, being not willing that any should perish, but willing that all men should be saved and come to the knowledge of his truth;) that he would be pleased to looke with the eyes of his compassion, upon all those miserable Nations that sit in ignorance and infi­delitie, in darkenesse and in the shadow of death, calling them out of darkenesse into his marveilous light, out of the power of Sa­into the Kingdome of his deare Sonne; that it would also please Him to take away out of his Church all dissention and dis­cord, all Heresies and Schismes, all abu­ses and false doctrines, all idolatrie, su­perstition and tyranny; and to unite all [Page 120] Christians in one holy bond of truth and peace, faith and charity; that so with one minde and one mouth, we may all joyne in his service, and for ever glorify the holy name of the most glorious and holy Trinity.