CHAP. 1.

THis A.D. hauing taken my booke into his correction, intitles what he hath written a­gainst it, A REPLY made vnto M. Anthonie Wootton, and M. Iohn White, MINISTERS: wherein it is shewed, that they haue not suffici­ently answered the TREATISE OF FAITH; and wherein also the truth of the chiefe points of the said TREA­TISE is more clearely declared, and more strongly confirmed by A.D. student in Diuinitie. Wherein I mislike diuers things. First that he stiles it A REPLY, which is nothing lesse: when he replies neither to all, nor in forme to any thing; but onely repeating the conclusions and arguments of some part of the Treatise mentioned; and without any order, ma­king choise of what he lists, in my booke, to confute, he sets downe my answers imperfectly: and skipping from one thing to another, and dissembling or quite omitting the strength and substance of that I writ, he replies to few things [Page 2] in comparison: and most an end occupies himselfe in re­hearsing things that he should haue defended. This is a sorie kind of Replying, and We hold it VNWORTHY the title of an Answer where­in all the au­thors best rea­sons are dissembled, and quite omitted. B [...]arl. protest apol. p 61 vnworthy the Title, especially in these dayes, when our Seminaries haue challenged to themselues such an opinion of substantiall dealing, and go­ing through-stitch with euery thing they take in hand, and the poore Booke hauing bene so terribly threatned. They haue had it now foure yeares to blow vpon, and many hea­uie imputations haue bene layed vpon it, by no meane per­sons of their sect, that would seeme to haue skill and cou­rage; and is all now resolued into this poore REPLY? If they thought it vnworthy the answering, why would they med­dle with it? If they would needs be medling, why haue they not done it sincerely and in forme? I haue Onus eccl. p. 30. n. 13. read; how not farre from Rome, there hath bene heard in the aire as it were the noise of an armie, and blowing of trumpets, and going off of gunnes; as if there had bene some great businesse towards: and yet when men haue come neare to view, they haue seene nothing but a heard of swine, and the footings of certaine strange beasts vpon the ground: this, be like, was to warne the Pope, that the noise of his champions, and clamou [...]s of his people, was but a meteore, that would end in a little gruntling and tram­pling.

2 Next, I mislike the concealing of his name, and shrou­ding of himselfe vnder a couple of letters: yet because the ordinary practise thereof seemes to haue legitimated it, I will forbeare all other kinde of censuring, and onely in the words of three of his owne side, let him see what I might say of it. The first is Search p. 16. Walsingham: When I came to view and peruse the booke—, and finding it to be without name of author, hauing onely a most bitter intitulation; I began first to maruell at that, because I did see no reason why any Protestant writer should conceale his name in so worthy a matter as is the defence of his re­ligion—: for which his labour and learned trauell, he might assu­redly hope for so great praise and commendation, not onely from men, but reward from God also; whose truth and Gospell he should acquit from such and so great blemishes of falshood and vntruth, as [Page 3] were by the aduersaries thereof obiected against it. So he. The se­cond is Cardinall Bellarmine: Tract. de po­test. sum. Pont. adu. Ba [...]cl. prae­fat. Hee that set foorth Barklies booke, neither put to his name, nor the name of the Printer, or place where it was printed—: he was afraid belike, and not with­out cause, either that he should be punished or discommended for it —. These are no signes of a good worke. For he that euill doth, hateth the light, lest his workes be reproued; whereas he that doth the truth, comes to the light, that his workes may be knowne to be of God. Ioh. 3. The third is Iesuite Becane: Quaest. Batav opusc. tom. 3. p. 140. Yea, but you haue another name, which you dissemble. What's the reason? Your Hol­landers will thinke one thing; but I thinke another. MY OPINI­ON IS YOV DO IT, THAT YOV MAY THE MORE SECVRELY LIE AND PLAY THE IMPOSTOR. It is not said for nothing in the Gospell, He that euill doth, hateth the light: and in the Epistle to the Thessalonians, They that are drunke, are drunke in the night. And certainly, IF YOV WERE A GOOD MAN, YOV WOVLD NOT BE ASHAMED OF YOVR NAME, to confesse who you are: now when you do otherwise, how can any man chuse but suspect you? When you flie the light, WHO WILL NOT TAKE YOV FOR A NIGHT-BIRD? But Papists may do that which is not per­mitted vs. For Poggh. face [...]. the Pope was wont to haue his iester, when he told him tales to make him sport, to do it standing be­hind a cloth, in a corner, for being outfaced. And it should seeme our Seminary-priests haue obtained the same fauour; that standing out of fight, behind the shreene, they may be the bolder to vtter that, which, being bashfull, they would be loath to speake bare faced. If this be so, I am satisfied: good reason euery Order enioy his priuiledge.

3 In the Title also hee calls vs Ministers, Such is the ordinarie and common igno­minie and dis­honor, to be reputed a MI­NISTER in the English Church, that I suppose very few or no Catholike Priests of that nation would change their HONOVR, euen in England, with so base and infamous a generation. R. B. resolut. relig. p 54. Of which HONOVR of Popish Priests in the times past, one writes: Nam homines Ecclesiastics sua cul [...]a ita pro­fanarunt, & s [...], & ordinem suum, quod iam planè, & à magnis & à paru [...]s, in toto mundo, habeantur despectui. Ioh. Mar. Belg. de schism. & concil. pag. 467. ex Alan. Chartier. in con­tempt. But we haue the vantage of him: for whereas he cannot shew one place in all the new Testament, where the Preachers of the Gospell, and Pastors of the Church, [Page 4] are intitled Priests, as he is: albeit the name may be v­sed well enough in his due sense, by those that are the Ministers of Iesus Christ, and not the vassals of Anti­christ; we can shew where they Act. 13.2. & 20 24. 1. Cor. 4 1. 2. Cor. 3 6. & 5.18. Eph. 3.7. & 4.12. & 6.21. Col. 1.7.23.27. & 4.7 1. Thess. 3 2.1. Tim. 4.6. 2. Tim 4.5.11. are called Ministers, and their worke Ministerie: and our contentment is, that be­ing called to the worke of this Ministerie, we carie a Name that imports no more. Whereas Masse-priests, and Soule­priests, Friars, Iesuites and Seminaries, not onely are the ti­tles of those that weare Christs liuerie, and do seruice to Antichrist, but are become the names of the vnnatural­lest monsters and wickedst persons that liue in the world; as all the Churches and States thereof, this day, feele by ex­perience, and this kingdome can well testifie.

4 Vnder the Title he writes this sentence of Scrip­ture: Ecclesia est columna & firmamentum veritatis: The Church is the pillar and firmament of truth. 1. Tim. 3. He had read belike in Rat. 3. Campian, that the name of the Church would terrifie the Protestants, and make them pale for feare: and therefore he would affixe it: though I, for my part, will thinke he doe it not so much to terrifie vs, as to gull his owne with the name of the Church. If he had, in any good fashion, defended the exposition and application he made of it, THE WAY, § 15. Reply, pag. 223 in his Treatise, he might haue vsed it the better, and it would haue made vs the more afraid: but hauing left it in the lash, where I answered it, he is not worthy so faire a text should come vnder his title. Neuerthelesse, there is good vse to be made of it against himselfe. For if the Church be the pillar of truth; and the Papacie, which he striues for, in his Reply, be the pillar of lies: then it will follow, the Papacie is not the Church. The first proposition is his text. The second, neither his Reply nor Treatise can put by. The conclusion therefore is the truth. And so the Text may keep his place to good purpose.

5 On the backside of the same page, hee hath pla­ced in Latin and English this sentence of Saint Austin, de vtil. cred. c. 8. If thou seeme to thy selfe to be sufficiently tossed, (to wit, in doubts, questions, or controuersies of faith) [Page 5] and wouldest make an end of these labours, follow the way of the Catholicke discipline which did proceed from Christ himselfe by the Apostles, euen vnto vs; and from hence shall be deriued to posteritie. I guesse his minde was to allude to the title of my booke, which I called THE WAY: and because therein I defend the way of the Scripture, followed by the vniuersall Church, which he likes not; therefore he brings S. Austin reuoking vs to the way of Catholicke discipline. This man, sure, hath a strange apprehension, Denique addi­mus Ecclesiam, quae nunc Pon­tifici Romano obtemperat — ture ac merito Catholicae nomen sibi vendicare; eadem (que) ratio ne fidem eius Ca­tholicam esse censendam & appellandam. Suar. de fens. si [...] Cathol. aduers. Anglic. sect. err. l. 1. c. 12. nu. 9. to thinke, that wheresoeuer the Fathers vse the word Catholicke, they vnderstand there­by this New-Roman-Catholicke: and when they speake of Catholicke discipline, they vnderstand his Church proposition determined by the Pope: when they affirme nothing else, but the doctrine contained, and written in the Scriptures to be Ca­tholicke, and the discipline whereby men are directed, both in faith and manners. So S. Austin expounds himselfe Cap. 6. in the same place: Beleeue me, whatsoeuer is in those SCRIP­TVRES, is loftie and diuine; THERE is altogether IN THEM, the truth and discipline most accommodate for the renewing and repairing of our mindes, and so qualified, that there is NO MAN BVT FROM THENCE HE MAY DRAW THAT WHICH IS SVFFICIENT for him, if to the drawing he come deuoutly and godly, as true religion requires. So also Theophilus Alex­andrinus Epist. 1. Pas. chal. pag. 377. cals the medicines taken out of the holy Scrip­tures, for the curing of heresies, the ecclesiasticall discipline. The WAY to the Church therefore, and S. Austins WAY of Catholicke discipline, are both one, because they both are the way of the Scripture, and that sufficient and easie way, which the simplest that is may finde, though the Pope with his authoritie and traditions intermeddle not; and he that will seeke the Ca­tholicke discipline by Saint Austins consent, must do it in the SCRIPTVRE, which I doubt will not greatly please this Iesuite, who hath spent all his time in groping for it about the Popes stoole, he being the man, when all is done, that must determine this discipline, and Cum Pontisex definit, Ecclesia per caput suum loquitur. Suar. vbi sup. c. 2 [...]. nu. 7. the mouth whereby their Catholicke Church must vtter and expound it.

[Page 6]6 In the next page followes a Table of the contents of his booke: and after that, a short Preface to the Reader, wherein first he commends his booke that I confuted, and his Method vsed therein, to bring men to resolution, and then shewes how he was vrged, by our writing against it, to this Reply: excusing himselfe for the plainesse of his stile, and con­cluding with a grieuous complaint of our vnsincere dealing; which he proceeds to shew in that which followes. The Commendation that he giues his Method, may not be deni­ed: for we allow Apes to hugge their yong ones, and here­tickes to conceit their owne deuices; and I must con­fesse, it is good round Method indeed for the purpose, and profitable, for them, to be followed. For if you will see it, this it is: Good Eue for your soules health, I were readie to shed my best bloud: and therefore haue ventured my life, as you see, (vpon the entertainment you know of, such as I find in the hiding roomes) to bring you home to the Catholicke Church, your Method is this: Close vp your eies, and examine nothing, but obstinately renoun­cing the Protestants, and stopping your eares against the Scrip­tures, in all things beleeue vs, who on my owne word are the Church of God; and submitting your selfe to the direction of your ghostly father, without more adoe be resolute, and you shall easily be perswaded of our Roman faith. This is a good sure Method to resolution, and makes many resolute, indeed: and the Iesuite hauing found by experience how kindly it works with good natures, had reason to commend it; though in any indifferent iudgement, it be a poore one, as will appeare. The rest of his Preface is trash: come we to that which is materiall.

7 After the Preface, to shew my vnsincere dealing, where­of he complaines, he makes a title of examples of grosse vn­truths, gathered out of M Woottons, and M. Whites bookes; by which the discreete reader may see how little sinceritie or care of truth they haue had: and consequently, how little credit is to be gi­uen to their writings: and hauing dispatched M. Wootton, he comes to me with these words: Now to come to M. White, whose booke is said to do much more harme among the simple, then M. Woottons doth; I hope I shall lay open such foule want of since­ritie, [Page 7] and care of truth in him, as it will plainly appeare, that those which shall hereafter take harme by giuing credence to his words or writings, shall shew themseluis to be very simple indeed. So that, in all probabilie, he should haue some great matter to shew, that makes so large an offer; and yet euery one of these ex­amples will proue in the scanning, so many testimonies of his owne weaknesse and immodesty: when hauing had the book foure yeares in his hands, and so many of his consorts to ioyne with him in replying, (all which time their rage against it, and desire to discredit it, and vowes to confute it, appeared well enough) yet now at the last can obiect no other exam­ples of vntruth, then these. And that we may know he comes furnished, he cals for a railing roome to brawle in. Jtaque ne in posterū quidem, Lipsi rosas: ogi­ta sesamam aut papauer, sed spi­nas si as a [...]yn­thium & acetū. Lips. const 1.10. I must craue the readers patience, if contrarie to my vsuall course, he finde me in this passage something sharpe; because M. Whites outrages are such, as require more then an ordinarie sharp reprehension. Let him therefore take the Gun roome, or if he will the Lucian Iupit Tragoe 1. [...]. cart where in old time they vsed to raile freeliest. I am indifferent what he say, hauing propounded to my selfe to answer not his scurrilitie, but his Diuinitie: though he keepe so good pro­mise, in this he threatens, and his insolencies both in railing and bragging be such, that it were able to dissolue into some passion or other, the best patience that an aduersary can haue. And had he as well performed the grosse vntruths he vnder­takes to shew, as he hath his sharpnesse which he promises, he might haue gone for a good pay-master: but to raile, and run away, is womens fight. If he would haue men to thinke my outrages are such, as he sayes; he should haue expressed some of them, and quoted the pages of my booke, where the reader might see them; which when he doth not, nor cannot do, the reader may suspect he sayes this to make way for his owne railing. For the Booke it selfe will testifie what I haue done, better then any thing I can say here; wherein there are, I denie not, many sharp and bitter speeches against the abu­ses of the Church of Rome, but they are not mine, but the Papists, whom, being vrged thereunto, I alledge: it is one of the things that hath alwaies made me haue a base opinion [Page 8] of our aduersaries; that these foule tales of their Church, being blabbed out by themselues, yet they would neuer giue vs leaue to report them againe, or mention them. Other outrage or railing then this, I haue vsed none, nor neuer did in all my conflicts with thē, neither is it my maner to practise or defend it: but by this my last will & testament, I bequeath it in legacie to himselfe, and Namely to D. Harding, Stapletō, Sanders, Parsons, Euans, Surius, Feuar­dentius, Gret. ferus, I'acenius. his Cleargie, and other his con­sorts, whose spirit I haue reasonably tasted these many yeares together. Iude v 9. The Angell disputing with the Diuell, about the bodie of Moses, durst not blame him with reuiling speeches, but bad the Lord rebuke him. According to which example I wish there were lesse bitternesse, and more going to the argument in their writings. For mine owne part, [...]. Isid. Pelus. pag. 453. I thinke it not so meete to speake euery thing that my aduersarie deserues to heare, as to let nothing passe me, that becomes not my selfe.

CHAP. II.

1 THe first example of my outrages and insinceritie, is in those words of the epistle Dedicatorie: All their speech is of the Church, no mention of the Scriptures, or God our Father, but of our mother the Church, &c. Wherein if there be any trespasse, yet he shewes it but meanly, by saying it is a lewd and lowd vntruth; and referring the matter to such as are acquainted with Catholickes, and their writings. For this, and the railing that followes, and his emptie mar­uelling at the BB. that would permit me to say so, purges not Papists from the imputations, but charges them deeper. For S. Chrysostome sayes, that [...]. hom. 22. Rom. when a mans aduersarie fals to scolding, it is a signe he is guiltie. And if the truth must be tried by the words and writings of his Catholickes, then the matter will go well enough on M. Whites side. For how should the cōmō people, of whō I properly spake, talk of the Scripture, which they know not, THE WAY, § 2. n. 3. See Staplet. relect. pag. 535. which they are forbidden to reade, THE WAY § 1. n. 3. which they must beleeue containes the least part of that which belongs to their faith? The Rhemists Annot. Luc. 12 11. teach lay Catholickes, when any of them are called before the commis­sion to answer, that he is a Catholicke man, and that he will liue and die in that faith which the Catholicke Church teaches: [Page 10] and this Church can giue them a reason of all the things which they demand of him: and he that answers thus, they say, saith e­nough, and defends himselfe sufficiently. Here we see, all their speech is of the Church, no mention of the Scriptures. And he that dwels among them, or hath occasion to discourse with them of religion, shall finde the truth of that I say. And this is agreeing with the publicke profession, and doctrine of their Church. For it is holden, Quod ad nos pertinet, certior & fi [...]mior est Ecclesiae authoritas quam Srip­turae Az [...]. Inst. tom. 2 l 5 c. 24. See Abulens. q. 13 prooem in Matth. Caiet. apol de author Pap. par. 2. c. 13. ad 5. Dried, de eccl dogm. l. 2. c. 3. ad 4. that the authoritie of the Church is greater then of the Scriptures. Stapl relect. controu. 4. q 5 pag. 494. 495. That the Churches authoritie is it that makes vs receiue the Scripture, and euery thing that is to be beleeued: yea, the Church is to be heard MORE CERTAINLY then the Scripture, because her doctrine is MORE MANIFEST AND EVIDENT THEN the doctrine of the Scripture—. And Medin. de rect. in Deum fid. l 5. c. 11 refert Azor. to. 2 p. 602. our faith, whereby we beleeue the matters of faith, is reduced to the authoritie of the Church; because we giue NO CREDIT TO THE SCRIPTVRES, but for that the Church propounde the canon thereof to be beleeued. And finally Stapl relect. pag 548. the Church hath the power to expound the Scripture, from whom we must receiue the sense thereof: Pag. 550. which authoritie of the Church, is the tower and bulwarke of our faith, whereto euery faithfull man must retire when any question ariseth. Pope Gregorie the 13 D. 40. Si Papa annot. sayes, Men do with such reuerence respect the Apostolicall seate of Rome, that they rather desire to know the ancient institution of Christian re­ligion from the Popes mouth, then from the holy Scriptures: and they onely enquire what is his pleasure, and according to it they order their life and conuersation. By which words of theirs it is cleare, that I said the truth. For to what purpose should they alledge or mention Scripture for themselues, that thus place all the power, vertue and efficacie of it in their Church; that in euery issue, flie, for the exposition of it, to their Church? that finde such wants and defects in it, that all things must be supplied out of their Church? If there were any error in my speech, it lay in another point, because I did not say, all their speech is of the Pope, no mention of the Scripture, but of the Pope. I should in stead of the Church, haue said, the Pope of Rome. For See below c. 35 n. 1 THE WAY. digr. 16. n. 4. howsoeuer they vse the name of the Church, yet thereby they meane nothing but the Popes will: he is the [Page 11] Churches mouth, and head, and from him the Church re­ceiues her prerogatiues: neither do we know or beleeue a­ny thing to be the doctrine of the Church, or sence of the Scripture, vnlesse he deliuer it. This is their doctrine.

2 So that I might with good discretion compare our aduersaries to such as follow their mother onely, and their mo­ther her selfe to one of the Ethiopian kind, without any im­putation of scurrilitie. And the Iesuite should not haue set vp his combe at the BB. about the matter; for they will answer, that a great Archbishop, Thomas Becket of Canterburie, long afore them, did more then they haue done, for they one­ly heard me vtter the speech, but he vttered it himselfe, Iewel. def. apol. pag 762. Our mother Rome is turned whore for money: which being so, I could not imagine, when I writ, how our aduersaries should call vpon any, but their mother, whose children they were of the surer side. But if he thinke I haue slandered his mothers honestie, the Court is open, let him take his action against me, and he shall heare my answer. Francis Petrach a most learned man Ioh Mar. Belg pag. 441. called Rome, The whore of Babylon. Budaeus: De Asse. pag. 590. & 601. If we consider the face and habit of our Cleargie (speaking of the Church of Rome) we shall be constrained to say, the spouse hath renounced her husband, and bidden him deale in his matters himselfe —. Now the spouse of Christ forgetting the band of ma­riage, not onely lies from her husband, but without all respect of shame, goes vp and dowe the streetes and high waies, and playes the whore, from Prouince to Prouince. Matthew Paris: Hist. pag. 535. The vnsa­tiable greedinesse of the Romane Church so preuailed, that all blushing set apart, like a common and shamelesse whore, she prosti­tuted her selfe for money to all commers. Ioannes Saris burien­sis: Policrat. pag. 402. An incestuous wooer is descended into the bosome of the Church. Mantuan: Silu. l. 1. Mars is become father to our Romanes, and a whore their mother. Onus Ecclesiae: Cap. 43. n. 7. God by the Prophet E­zekiel speakes to the Church of our dayes, in these words: Thou hast committed fornication exceedingly, and art not satisfied, but hast multiplied thy fornication vpon earth, and doest all the workes of a whore, and of an impudent woman. All these that thus speake, were of the Church of Romes bed-chamber, and attended [Page 12] on her, and saw who came in and out, and therefore their testimonie proues that I said of her. Besides, Nun-Bridget Meretrix solet esse Procax in verbis, Leui [...] in moribus, Pulcra facie, Ornata vestibus. Re­uel. l. 1. c 15. sayes, the markes of a whore are foure, Shamelesnesse in words, Leuitie in manners, A faire face, And gay clothes. All these agree to the Church of Rome, as euery bodie knowes: therefore I demand iudgement, and my charges against the Iesuite.

CHAP. III.

1 THe Iesuite, it should seeme, was the sonne of some passionate woman, that can neither giue ouer afore he be tedious, nor go forward quietly: but in stead of [Page 13] giuing his reader a taste of my insinceritie, will giue him a taste of his owne immodestie and intemperance. I said, the Iesuites were the Popes Ianizaries, that guard his person, brought in to support the maine battell, when the Papacie was at a dead lift: whose writings farced with lies and noueltie, fill the land, and as followeth: but marke his answer, The discreete reader, if he be acquainted with the Iesuites, will easily discerne, how false this is: and so leaues it to his discretion to think as he shall see cause. This is a simple reply, when after a boisterous fit of railing, if the reader fauour him not with his discretion and old ac­quaintance, he hath nothing to say, and to beg credit against that we see with our eyes, and palpably feele vnder our fin­gers. For Maff. vbi infra this order was first confirmed by the Pope in O­ctob. 1540. the reason that moued him thereto, was that the Papacie being at a dead lift, they might helpe to support. The words of Maffaeus a Iesuite himselfe, are, Lib. 2 c. 12. vit. Ignat. Loiol that when Igna­tius, by the meanes of Cardinall Contarenus, offered the Pope the forme of their Order, (wherein among other things it was contained, that to the other three solemne vowes which are common to other Orders, they would adde a fourth special vow; that whithersoeuer it should please the Pope to send them, about the affaires of religion, into the countries of Christians or infidels, thither without grudging, stay or reward, they would readily go) as soone as he had viewed it, he said, This is the Spirit of God, and he hoped God himselfe had stirred vp the courage of this band, AT SVCH A TIME, to be no small helpe to THE AFFLICTED STATE of the Church. Ribadineira, another Iesuite, Vit Ignat. l. 2. c. 18. sayes, God by a singular kinde of prouidence, sent Ignatius to helpe his Church NOW WHEN IT WAS READY TO FALL, that he might set both himselfe and his sonnes the Iesuites to be a wall for the house of God—. Let vs set before our eyes the end why the societie of the Iesuites was instituted, which verily was the same which the present time of the Catholicke Church required: The societie therefore of Iesus, was chiefly erected for the defence and propagation of the faith, as is contained in the apostolicke let­ters of their confirmation—. Since the birth of Ignatius THE LIGHT OF OVR RELIGION WAS IN GREAT PART [Page 14] OBSCVRED —: and therefore it was by the incredible proui­dence of God, that this new Societie should be ordained principally for the defence of faith. This plainly shewes, how and to what purpose that Order was erected; since which time it is easie to see, that See Byzar. rer. Persic. lib. 9. pag. 213. & P. Iou. hist. l. 14. sub sin. what the Turkes Ianizaries are to him, the same haue these bene to the Pope, being also drawne by trickes and deuices out of euery countrey, to furnish the Papacie, and execute the Popes ambition and lust, vnder the pretence of Religion; no otherwise, nor honestlier, then the Turke Jn queis, ob confirmatam bellicae laudis opinionem, in omni Turcarum expeditione, & summa virium, & vincendi cer­tissima ratio semper fuit. Iou. l. 13. p. 138. See Byzar. vbi sup. takes the children of Christians, and by education makes them his best souldiers, and vse them to fight against their owne parents and countrey: by which deuice the Pope supplied the want of learning and discipline, that began to faile in his Church, which otherwise by this had bene at a low ebbe. They say, God raised them vp; we, that Satan. They crie out, that Luther was raised out of hell by the Diuell, (who yet was the seruant of Christ, and worthy of eternall honour) they must giue vs leaue to say the same of Ignatius and his companions: which of vs say true, must be tried by the do­ctrine that Luther and the Iesuites teach; and Christ Iesus, the Iudge of all controuersies, one day will determine.

2 If I complained (to them that should mend it) of their filling all things with their presumptuous and hereticall wri­tings, vntill it comes to fannes and feathers, that also is truth; for to omit our owne knowledge, and the Legends of col­lapsed Ladies, they obiect it one against another, how Quod lib. p. 39 the women dote, and runne riot after them—, and Pag. 65. to huffe and ruffe it out, a councell of women must be called to cocke a hoope, and that Pag. 39. a Iesuite is a pearle for a Lady. And touching their inno­uating all things, their belying our doctrine, their coyning of new opinions, their turning Popery into Iesuitisme, their re­ducing all things into their owne course, and Machauillian managing of the Papacie, I referre the reader to the decla­rations made against them by their owne fellowes the Semi­naries, if he list not himselfe to see these things, euery day in the yeare, with his owne eyes.

CHAP. IIII.

1 THis is the third example of my insinceritie, wherein he gets it missed in the first word, hoping, that when I begin to speake of the Harpies and Moloch, I passe from the Iesuites to the Secular priests, as if this imputation (which indeed is a foule one) were layd only on the Semina­ry; but he is deceiued: for I passe not from the Iesuite, but stick vpon him still, and auouch indifferently of them both, that since the Harpies were chased away, and Bel was ouerthrowne, and Moloch polluted, there was neuer such a greedie and raue­nous Idoll. For proofe whereof, I referred my selfe to the Quodlibets, written by one that liued and died a Seminarie Priest himselfe, and therefore could best tell the conditions [Page 16] of a Iesuite. He sayes, pag. 112. they collect and hoard vp great summes of money; pag. 85. they haue cosening and conicatching trickes to picke a man or a womans purse, and to get all their lands by it. And he shewes diuers instances, p. 89. & inde. of Gilbert and Drury, that got from di­uers gentlemen all they had, whereof the prouerbe arose, when one was cosened of that he had, Such a one is Gilberted, Such a one is Druryed. They tell of Gerard the Priest, that co­sened Drury of Suffolke of his mannor of Lozell, and other land to the valew of 3500 pounds: of M. Anthony Rowse co­sened of a 1000 pounds: of M. Edward Walpoole, of whom the said Gerard got 1000 marks. Of M. Linacre being priso­ner in the Clinke, they got 400 pounds. Of 1000 pounds drawne from yong Huddleston. Of M. Wiseman cosened of all his land. Of M. Nic. King, M. Roger Lee, the Ladie Lonell, Mistris Haywood, Mistris Wiseman, Mistris Fortiscus, all of them not Gilberted or Druried, but Gerarted. And he tels of diuers gentlewomen, whom they perswaded to become Nunnes, and to giue them their portions: one of which portions sometime amounted to aboue 200 pound. And many such like reports he makes touching their molochisme in other things. Wal­densis the Friar Sacramental part 2. pag. 217 makes much adoe with a follower of Wic­kliffe, and a maried priest, for spending a yong mans inheritance of 40 pound a yeare: and sayes, he was detected thereof before the Bishop of Norwich: but how true or false soeuer that were, it was nothing to the cheating of our Iesuites, whom the most that entertaine them, finde to be the ruine of their houses. What my selfe knew in Lancashire, and many wor­thy gentlemen of that countrey will testifie touching this matter; the sinking and drowning of many a house that hath en­tertained them, this reply must not thinke to outface with a little boldnesse: but giue me leaue, for my owne part, to ab­horre them the more, that so desperately denie what our whole State knowes to be true. And I pitie the Recusant that sels the Seminarie, his ghostly father, the foxe case for halfe a crowne, and buyes of him againe the taile in hobby-horses for ten groates.

2 But whereas the Iesuite sayes, the comparison of Mo­loch [Page 17] would sort better with married Ministers, and their hungrie proud brats, that loue little to fast, and desire much to go fine; I can easily quit him: for his Priests fruitfull-single life will not abide the ripping into, whatsoeuer his stomacke be against Ministers marriage. And if I had bene of his counsell when he writ this, he should haue mentioned it with lesse passion, vnlesse he could haue disputed better a­gainst it, Reply pag. 281, & 282. See below c. 53. where it fell in question. But if our brats be that which stickes in his stomacke, let him haue patience but a little, and I will ease him. The Pope that now is, hath The former Popes, to cast some cloake ouer their in­famie, were wont to call their children their nephews. Guicciard hist. pag. 8. Engl. a Nephew that is a Cardinall, called Burghesi, dea­rer to him then any of our children are to vs: Nouus homo suppl. ad imp. pag. 22. & inde. it is repor­ted of him, that his father Paul hath giuen him, in Eccle­siasticall reuenues, 250000 scutes by the yeare; all Benefices without cure are giuen him. The Pope creates such Cardi­nals, as in the next election may sticke to his Nephew: yong men, ignorant and base, that will be content with small reuenues, and hang vpon his Nephew, Lantes, Capponus, Barberinus, Spi­nola, Tontus, Lanfranke, de Lenis, and Philonardus. Ton­tus was a poore Atturney, and an Organist of a Church. Lan­franke a Surgeon in a hospitall for the poxe. De Lenis and Philonardus, vicars of hell. Such poore, ignorant, and base Cardinals he makes, that his Nephew may buy their voi­ces the next election to be Pope. This is written from Rome, by one that it seemes hath not bene farre from his elbow, and is a Romane Catholicke, but yet would haue a generall Councell to reforme these things, and create a lawfull Pope, which Ecclesiae vero Pastore caret; intrusi Papatū depraedantur. p. 1. he sayes, they haue wan­ted, euer since Sixtus Quintus. Now the Iesuite may the better digest Ministers brats, when he sees his holy father hath one of his owne, that thus deuoures more then all the Ministers children in England doe; and no bodies chil­dren besides, can be entertained for him. This Burghesi is a fit logge to hew a Moloch out of, and his vncle a priest that faithfully ministers to his Idoll. And to purge his hu­mour of rayling, yet a little better, let the Iesuite be ad­uised, [Page 18] that how hungrie soeuer our Ministers brattes be, yet I am certaine, and readers will confesse, they are nei­ther prouder nor finer then disguised Seminaries, whose ap­parell, entertainment and furniture, is well knowne to be both rich and costly, at the least: yea such, that were they of God, and not the Harpies▪ I speake of, as things stand with them, they would not vse, but shrowd themselves at a lower rate, and with lesse charge to their friends; and were I a Iesuite lurking in the land, as they do, I would disguise my selfe in motley, rather then my maintenance and lust should thus ouerthrow such as gaue me entertainment. What I haue seene with my eyes on the backe of a Semi­narie, I may not speake; but it is the report of our Dialog. be­tween a Secul. priest and a lay Gentl. pag. 90 ad­uersaries▪ themselues, that a Iesuite hath worne a girdle, han­gers, and rapier, worth ten pounds; a ierkin worth as much; and made himselfe three suites of apparell in a yeare; his horse, furni­ture and apparell valued at a hundred pounds; he spent by the yeare foure hundred pounds without inheritance. That which main­taines this, and all the furniture of our swaggering gallants, the Iesuite may not call poore pittances from hand to mouth: for I am sure he scornes it, and will leaue it to hungrie Mi­nisters for them to liue vpon, who would be glad, many a one of them, of one moitie of an ordinary Seminaries main­tenance, and yet chearefully and effectually labour in the Church, and are contented with that they haue, and possi­ble keepe more true hospitalitie, then The Iesuites hauing gotten Iudas his office &c. Quod lib. pag. 37 70 they that haue got­ten Iudas his office to carrie the bag; and my assurance is, that there be few that shall come to reade this, but will witnesse with me, and can call to mind, many such Ministers; and te­stifie the generall experience that our State hath of our Se­minaries couetousnesse and single life, that Non est quod fraudem obducas ô amice; ex insu lu enim in curia Romanam cōmi. grasse Harpyas comperium est, ibi (que) tam domicilium c [...]nslitu [...]sse Alph Aragon. quem refert Panormit de dict. Alph. p. 3. I might well compare them, as I did, to rauening Harpies, and wide gor­ged Idols, that vnder pretence of religion and persecution, seeke nothing but their backes and bellies, and the satisfy­ing of their lust and ambition. For we cannot but speake the things we heare▪ and see; and we speake it not in hope [Page 19] to make them ashamed. For words will not chase Har­pies from the prey; but in commiseration of our people, that suffer themselues thus to be abused, and in detestati­on of that hypocrisie, that vnder pretence of long prayers deuoure widowes houses.

CHAP. V.

1 LEt not the Iesuites, with talking of their single life, and poore pittances from hand to mouth giuen them of charitie, go about to hide that which cannot be: for (to supply what was wanting in my former speeches) the young wolues will take after their damme. The Church of Rome their mother, of whom they are come, hath beene noted for a rauening wolfe in all ages, that would neuer be glutted with spoyle. So long as Gau­de mater nostra Roma standeth in Vrspergensis, her in­satiable rauening will not be forgotten. Thus hee Chron. p. 321. writes, that was well acquainted with her gorman­dize: Reioyce, O Rome our mother, to whom the catarackes of the treasures of the earth are opened, that to thee may flow riuers, and heapes of moneys in aboundance. Reioyce in the iniquities of the sonnes of men, the price of whose wickednesse is giuen thee for thy recompence. Bee merrie with Discord, thy helper, which is broken out of the infer­nall pitte, to heape vp to thee manifold rewards of money. Thou hast gotten that thou thirstedst after; sing a song mer­rily, for by the wickednesse of men, and not through thine owne religion, thou hast conquered the worlde; [Page 20] not mens deuotion, or conscience, but their wickednesse and contentions bought with a price, haue drawne them to thee. Matthew Paris Hist maior. pag. 56. saith, that the most gracious Sea of Rome, neuer vsed to refuse anie that vsed Dummodo albi aliquid, vel rubei interce­dat the in­tercession of gold and siluer. And that Pag. 335. the Romane Church was so inflamed with greedinesse, and open couetousnesse, that Ecclesiasticall goods not being sufficient, it shamed not to dis­inherite, and make tributarie, Emperours, Kings and Princes: — and Church-men, whose words were sweete as honie, and supple as oile, yet were vnsatiable horse-leaches, saying the court of Rome is her mother, and our nurse, and it was the roote of all euils, doing the deeds not of a mother, but of a step-dame: and Pag. 747. he saith, it was like a gulfe, deuouring vp all mens reuenues, and the possessions almost of all Bishops and Abbots. And Pag. 890. he tels the answer, that a B. elect made to King Henrie the third, moouing an accord betweene him and certaine Monkes, with whom he was at variance: Knowes not your innocencie yet, the dropsie-thirst of the Romanes, which hath bene felt so often? I know (saith the King) it will neuer be stanched; to whom the Elect, Nor shall the spring of my treasure euer be dried vp, till enough be powred into their wide chappes, and spongie mawes, that I may haue my will of the Monkes. Theodoric. of Niem, Nem vnio. pag. 379. La­beri. th c. 37. The Popes exchequer is likened to the sea, whereinto all riuers fall, and yet it ouerflowes not; so into it are dayly carried from all parts of the world many pounds of gold, and yet it is not filled; wherein there is a generation, whose teeth are swords to eate the poore vpon the earth, and many horse leaches, crying, Bring, Bring—. O iustissimae g [...]ntes nostrae, vel quasi rectè cum infernali bus furijs, seu Harpyis, & Tan talo, sortem siti bundi posituri, qui nunquam satiamur. p. 380. O most iust nation of ours; like infernall furies, or Harpies, and Tantalus, that are neuer satisfied. Alanus Chartier: Refert Ioh Mar. Belg. de schism. pag. 467 Couetousnesse hath so blinded the vnderstanding of Cleargie men, that thereby their damnation is euident; and it hath brought such calamitie vpon the temporall goods of all men, that it threatens ruine to the whole Church. Onus Ecclesiae: Cap. 23. nu. 1. Our Priests now adayes fish not for men, but for honour:— plying temporalties, and louing them­selues, but neglecting the loue of God, and their neighbour; [Page 21] worse then the laitie, sucking the bloud and milke of the Church. Picus Mirandulanus in an oration to Pope Leo, In Fascic ren. expet. & fugi [...] pag. 209. calls vpon him to restraine the greedinesse of priests, and set them bounds to their mischieuous couetousnesse; and to reuenge the patrimonies of godly men, which they haue eaten and deuoured. This made Paulus Langius crie P. 875. in his history, Peter, Peter, Christ had thee not milke and sheare, but feed, feed. All histories and monuments of times complaine of this more then I can say.

2 The States of the Empire in Germanie, about the yeare 1523, exhibited Grauamin [...] Germaniae. a hundred grieuances touching this matter: wherein they shewed, that Nu. 1. all things in the Church of Rome, tended to the drawing of money. To get mony they dis­penced with Nu 1. fasting, with Nu. 2 the times of marriage, with Nu. 3. & 6. a­dulteries, incest, periurie, murder, theft, vsurie. Jam aut nu­merandum, aut absolut. one sibi carendum est: nempe quod in hoc reseruati sunt, vt vel indo nummorum al [...] ­quid eis accres­cat. nu 5. The Pope and his Bishops reserued cases to themselues: Sed & in fu­turum im [...]une, vt eas transgre­d [...] l [...]ceat, indulto promittitur. n. 6. gaue licences afore­hand to sinne. Sent pardoners abroad, Processit (que) eo­us (que) eius mali serpigo, vt pau­perum ac simpli­cium illorum, sanguinē vorent & medullā. n. 7. that for monie and yearely rents, promised the country people, such or such a Saint should receiue them into their tuition, that they should not be subiect to the disease whereof the Saint was patron. Nu. 8. The Friars so pilled the countrie, and lay vpon honest housholders, that they eate them out of doores. Nu 10. When suites a­rose, the parties were drawne to Rome, and could not haue their cause determined in their owne courts at home: Nu. 11 & 12. or had Iudges deputed them by the Pope. Nu. 13. Immunities and exemptions were granted. Nu. 14. The Presentation of Benefices voyde was giuen to curtizans, and vnable persons: Nu. 18. who also had deuices, by the rules of the Popes Chancerie, to disturbe the possession of the honestest beneficed men that were. Nu. 19. Such as were officers or familiars to the Pope or Cardinals, defrauded m [...] of their right of patronage, that they could not get the Benefices and dig­nities, whereof they were lawfull patrons. Nu. 20. & ind [...]. The Popes Chancery ouer-ruled all things. Nu. 34. 35. Men were excommunica­ted for trifles, and many times for nothing. Nu. 40. 41. Cleargie men got other mens inheritances. Nu. 47. Bishoppes admitted vile and vnable persons to be priests. And for the Nu. 48. consecration of Nu. 49. Churches, Nu. 50. altars, Church-yards, Nu. 52. baptizing bels, Nu. 52. making [Page 22] new Holydayes, Nu. 53. 54 confirming and consecrating Abbots and Abbas­ses: drew great summes of money. Quae ipsi im­mani vendunt pretio. nu. 54. The Pope dayly made new offices, which he sold for much mony. Nu. 56. Bishops and their officers, for money drew men out of the temporall courts into their owne courts, and there most vnreasonably molested and pilled them. Nu. 67. They punished sinne by the pursed Nu 68. released none, that was neuer so vniustly called into their court, vntill they had receiued money. Nu. 75 76. Officials for mony suffered and dispensed with vsurie, concubi­nage, adulterie. Nu. 78. They put the poorest tradesmen that were, to pay them a weekly fee. Ostlers, Bakers, Butchers, Millers, Badgers. Nu. 82.86. Priests would minister no Sacrament to such as were not able to giue them money. Nu. 91. Bishops not onely tolerated the concubinage of Priests for money, but made such as were continent and liued chastly, to pay rent for a concubine; which being payd, they might liue continently or keepe concubines as they would. Nu 93. The Monkes and Priests visiting the sicke, drew them to giue in le­gacie what they had to themselues. These are some of the Roman Churches Harpismes, whereby it may appeare what maner of persons the Cleargie men of Rome are, where they rule. There is Pro libert. eccl. Gallic. adu. Rom. aul. dosens. Paris. Curiae. a booke that the Parliament of Paris offered to Lewis the 11, King of France, touching this matter. It is said Nu. 67. & inde there, that if Decrees of the Pragmaticall sanction were not maintained, there would yearely be transported to Rome out of the kingdome, aboue a thousand thousand crownes. And that the Pope had had in the three yeares lust past, for Archbishoprickes and Bishoprickes a hundred thousand crownes. For Abbies a hun­dred and twentie thousand crownes: for other dignities a hundred thousand crownes. For Benefices fiue and twentie hundred thousand crownes: for diuers things there mentioned, aboue two hundred thousand crow [...]es. Nunc verò, arte Romana, sic exhaustum est aurum ex popu­larium loculis, vt aerea tantùm, minuta (que) nobis moneta relicta sit: & nummula­rijs pontem dica tum iam pu [...]ri­lium pupparum & icuncularum fictores incolant. nu. 71. By which meanes the shoppes of Goldsmiths were drawne so drie, that none but such as made puppets and chil­drens gawdes, dwelt in them. In England what was raked toge­ther, See B. Iewell def. apol. p. 757 is as monstrous; that an Englishman might well say to the Pope, as Ioan. Sarisb. Polycrat. p. 329. he did: All things are had for money, and with­out money nothing will be had—. The Bishop of Rome himselfe, is growne heauie and intollerable to all men—. They ransacke countries for their spoile, as if they would rake the riches of Croesus [Page 23] together. There is a God, that not onely hath left this abho­minable extortion to be a marke of Antichrist, but will also in his appointed time be reuenged of it. Saint Austin De verb. Dōi. ser. 19. in fin. sayes, We cannot say, no man conuinceth vs of extortion, no man chargeth vs with violence: for now and then flatterie extorts greater booties from widows, then can be extorted by torments. All is one with God, whether à man possesses other folkes goods by violence or circum­uention, as long as any waies he holds that which is none of his owne.

3 There is as much to be said to his girding at our ma­riage and children; which he would neuer haue done, if he had remembred either how weake they are in disputing a­gainst it, or how vile and brutish their owne Priests single life is knowne to be. Let him that refuses the Protestants Clear­gie for their mariage, first enquire whether he can mend himselfe by following the Popes single Priests. Theodoricus of Niem Nemo. vnio. pa 5. 377. writes, that in the parts of Ireland and Norwey, ac­cording to the custome of the countrie, It is lawfull for the Bishops and Priests openly to keepe their concubines; and when twice a yeare they visited the parish priests that were vnder them, they vsed to bring their concubines with them to the house of the said priests; neither would their concubines suffer the Bishops to visite without them. And the same fashion was obserued by the Priests of Gasco­nie, Spaine, and Portugall, and the countries adioyning; WHEREBY there were, in a maner, more children borne in those parts, then in lawfull mariage. Vdalricus the Bishop of Auspurg Epist. ad Nic. de Coelib. cleric pag. 1255. or­thodonograph. writes, that when a certaine Pope sent to draw a poole for fishes, there were taken vp and brought him aboue sixe thousand infants heads; whereupon he thought it was better to marrie. Aluarus Pelagius: Planct eccl. p 64. col. 4. The Priests liue most incontinently, and would to God they had neuer vowed continencie, especially in Spaine and Regricolae; in which prouinces the childrē of lay men are not many more then the children of cleargie men: — for many yeares together they rise vp euerie day from the side of their concubine. Alanus Chartier: Refert Ioh. Mar. Belg. de schism & con­cil. pag. 464, & 467. Our Church-men haue made their Order most vile and contemptible for their viciousnesse; they are despised of all, both small and great: for the Ministers of the Church leauing the vse of marriage, [Page 24] follow wandering, dissolute and vnlawfull lusts, that I say no worse. Nunne Bridget: Reuelat. p. 64 The Canons marrie no wiues, be­cause of their canonicall name, but impudently they haue concu­bines, day and night. Priests also and Deacons keepe whores, that with their great bellies walke among other women. Picus of Mirandula: Orat. de mo­rib. reform ad Leon. pag. 209. The priests in that time slept with the women at the doore of the Tabernacle, but in our time they breake into the sacred houses, and fie for shame, women are brought in to satis­fie their lusts; and boyes that Sodomitically are abused against na­ture, are lent and giuen them by their parents, and these boyes af­terward are promoted to be priests. The Princes of Germanie at a Diet at Norimberge, Grauam. German. n. 31. & 91 affirmed, that their priests being forbidden by the Canon lawes their lawfull wiues, did nothing but attempt the chastitie of matrons and virgins, the wiues, daugh­ters, and sisters of lay men: and in most places the Bishops and their officials, not onely tolerated priests concubines for a summe of monie, but made continent priests also that liued without concu­bines, to pay taxation of concubinage, and so they might keepe if they would. Cuyckins a Bishop of Ruraemond, hath late­ly written a Spec. concub. booke against concubinary priests, wherein he reports a hundred of these things, and Paraenet. epi. pag. 19. be saith of the Canons of a certaine Church, that they liued in whoredome, scarce two in a Colledge were free. There is no historie or mo­nument, but testifieth these things; and all trauellers and countrimen know the same to be true. The Roman Catho­licke may now, if he please, make a stand, and well bethinke himselfe what such vertue there is in his priests single life, that the lawfull mariage of Ministers should so presumptu­ously be entertained, See c. 53. which in the best ages was allowed, and neuer misliked by the vniuersall Church, till the Ro­mish faction for the more libertie of their vnbrideled lust, quarreld and refused it.

CHAP. VI.

1 I Charged the Priests and Iesuites with two things: their doctrine against the peace and securitie of kings and ma­gistrates; and their barbarous practises against their liues and kingdomes. Wherein because they haue exceeded the crueltie of beasts, and the nature of the vntamablest monsters that are, according to the maner of describing such creatures, [Page 26] I compared them to Tigars and Lions, &c. This the Iesuite, as if he were one of them himselfe, stormes and rages at, as you see, as if he would burst the chaine. But to no purpose: for I alledged the words of Posseuine, Zamorensis, and Ca­rerius, with some particular examples, to confirme my say­ing; the which either he should haue satisfied, or haue con­fested the accusation, or haue holden his tongue. Now when he doth none of these, but cals that railing and lying, which all the world sees to be true, there is little hope he will euer be tamed. My discharge is, that I haue written nothing but what Reuera impe­rialis felicitas Papali semper impugnatur in uidia Pet. de Vin. ep. 31. l. 1. [...]. Anna Porphyro. Alc. xiad. p. 32. the Kings of the earth haue heretofore complained of themselues, and found by grieuous experience, to be true; and what Praef. monito. omnibus Christianis monarc. &c. his sacred Maiestie that now is, (the mildest Prince that euer ruled) is constrained to complaine of o­penly to all the world. Nouit ille qui nihil ignorat, quod Praesiden­tes Romanae ecclesia suae astuta & sagaci pru­dentia, secundā temporum vari etatem, sua va­riarunt statuta: modo imperium sublimando, mo­do paulatim de­primendo; sed si quilibet esset contentus fuis limitibus & v­nus alium coad inuaret, sicut facere teneatur, puto quod pax esset in vniuerso orbe. Alberic. de Rosat. quem refert Iacobat. de concil. pag. 779. A. And had I read nothing in the sto­ries of former times, nor knowne their doings in a­ges past, yet I haue seene enough within these twen­tie yeares, to teach me what to thinke of Masse-priests, and all that follow their doctrine. And if I said, that no forbea­rance could mollifie them, no gentle vsage can tame their nature, no clemencie reconcile them; I did it because the forbearance that Queene Elizabeth vsed toward them, many wayes, and all her time, was admirable; yet while she liued, most wret­chedly they sought her bloud, and most barbarously handled her fame; and now she is gone, with no lesse furie and rage they prosecute her memorie, that was the incomparable Princesse of the world. And when his gracious Maiestie that now is, euer since his reigne hath vsed them with all respect, releasing many of their fines, granting pardon to diuers Ie­suites and Masse priests, granting them diuers suites, for­bearing to execute his most iust proclamations against Ie­suites and Semi [...]ies; vsing finally most gracions and fauo­rable speeches of Papists, better then they deserue, in Parlia­ment, and otherwise; yet this cursed generation of Amalek could neuer be reconciled, but still conspired his death ma­ny times ouer; and then the ruinating of all by POWDER: and at this day, by bookes openly published against him, [Page 27] traduce his Name, Religion, and Gouernment; that the meanest subiect in his kingdome could not be baselier en­tertained, with railing and presumption: Seminaries and Ie­suites leading the ring in all this; and applying thereto the holiest things of their religion; so farre forth, that hardly an instance can be giuen of any iniury or vnloyall part against him, since his blessed raigne among vs, but these Romane priests haue bin the authors: [...]. Simoc. hist Maurit. p. 200. as if the sacred maiestie of a kingdome were no lesse to be played with then childrens trifles. You that are thus without humanitie, vnnaturall, [...]pious, cruell, murderers, how can you be called Christians? Pro Athan. lib. 1. pag. 65. sayes Luci­fer Calaritanus to the Arrians; and I to the Iesuites.

2 But forsomuch as these Assasines so desperately deny their profession, and pleade their innocencie, denying that which their religion teaches so manifestly; I will take a little paines to confirme what I haue said, something more fully; the rather because they beare the world in hand we belie and slander them; and such as know no more then the Iesuites tell them, imagine it is so indeed: and therefore I say still, and here write it in capitall letters, that THE CHVRCH OF ROME TEACHES DISLOYALTIE AND REBELLION AGAINST KINGS, AND LEADES HER PEOPLE INTO ALL CONSPIRACIES AND TREASONS AGAINST STATES AND KINGDOMES: this I shew by the doctrine and assertions of the chiefest Di­uines therein. Augustinus Triumphus: Sum de eccl. potest. q 40. art. 1. The Emperor of hea­uen may depose the Emperor of the earth, in as much as there is no power but of him. But the Pope is inuested with the authoritie of the Emperor of heauen: he may therefore depose the Emperor of the earth. Art. 3. The Emperor is subiect to the Pope two waies: first by a filiall subiection in spirituall things, in as much as spirituall gifts from him, as from the fountaine, are deriued to the Emperor, and to all the children of the Church. Secondly by a ministeriall sub­iection in his administration of temporall things. For the Emperor is the Popes minister, by whom he administers temporall things. Aluarus Pelagius: De Planct. eccl. l 2. c. 13. p. 3. The Pope hath vniuersall iurisdiction ouer the whole world, not onely in spirituall, but in temporall things: [Page 28] albeit he exercise the execution of the temporall sword, and iuris­diction, by his sonne the Emperour, as by his aduocate, and by other Kings and princes of the world. The Pope may depriue Kings of their kingdomes, and the Emperor of his empire. Cap. 21. The Pope may depriue him of the empire that is disobedient, and persecutes the Church. Such shall euery Prince be expounded to be, that receiues not the Popes religion. Capistranus: De Pap. & concil. author. pag. 65. The Empe­ror, if he be incorrigible, for any mortall sinne, may be deposed and depriued. The sentence of the Pope alone, without a councell, is suf­ficient [...]gainst the Emperor, or any other. It is manifest therefore how much the Popes authoritie is aboue the imperiall c [...]lsitude: which it translates, examines, confirmes, or infringes; approues or reiects. If he offend, he punishes, deposes, and depriues him: and when he iudges his sentence to be vniust, he reuokes and abrogates it. Thomas of Aquine: 22. q. 12. art. 2 Any man sinning by infidelitie, may be adiudged to lose the right of dominion: as also, sometime, for other faults. The infidelitie of those that haue receiued the faith, may sententially be punished in this, that they shall not beare rule ouer beleeuing subiects: for that would tend to the great corruption of the faith —: and therefore so soone as any one, for apostacie from the faith, by iudgement is denounced excommunicate, IPSO FA­CTO, HIS SVBIECTS ARE ABSOLVED FROM HIS GOVERNMENT, AND FROM THE OATH OF AL­LEGIANCE, whereby they were bound vnto him. And least it might be thought, that the meaning is onely of such Kings as are vnbeleeuers and apostates; marke how Cardinall Tolet expounds it: Refert Allen answer to the book of Engl. Iust. p. 68. Note, that albeit S. Thomas named onely an A­postata, yet the reason is all one in the Princes case that is excom­municated. For so soone as one is denounced or declared an excom­municate, all his subiects be discharged of their obedience. For though the crime of a Prince be notorious, yet before declaration be made thereof by the Church, the vassals are not assoiled from obedience, as Caietan well holdeth: which declaration being made by the Church, they are not onely discharged of their loyaltie, but are bound not to obey him any more, except it be for feare of their liues, or losse of their temporall goods. As it was in England, in the time of Henrie the 8: whom though the subiects [Page 29] were bound not to obey, after he was denounced excommunicate; yet for that he was a cruell man, and would either haue killed or spoiled them, they were excused in obeying him. So he. Which words being reported by D. Allen, he addes of his owne: Thus doth this notable Schoole-man write; neither do we know any Catholicke Diuine, of any age, to say the contrarie. But he de­ceiues the reader touching the point of excommunication. For the doctrine is, that subiects are discharged from obedi­ence, before the Prince be denounced or declared. Domini­cus Bannes: 22. pag. 590. idem Greg. à Valen. vbi infra. Where there is euident knowledge of the crime, the subiects may lawfully, if they haue strength, exempt themselues from the power of the Prince, before the sentence declaratorie of the Iudge—. This conclusion is followed by Caietan, and it is the more common opinion with Thomas his disciples, and they approue it. Excommunicating therefore, or not excommunicating; de­nouncing his disobedience by the Pope, or not denouncing it, is all one to the discharging of his subiects from their alleagiance, if the King giue not the Pope contentment. Nam in casu posito, adest sem­per voluntas in­terpretatiua Pontificis ratiha bitio ipsius. Sed haec voluntas obtinet vim sen­tentiae. Bann. vbi sup. For the Popes will hath the force of a sentence; and where the King will none of his religion, or will not subiect him­selfe to his lust, his will is alway expounded to be against him; and the euidence of his deed obtaines the force of a sentence. And so to proceed. Franciscus Victoria: Relect. pa. 83 I say the Pope hath most ample power, because, when it is necessarie to a spirituall end, he not onely may do all things that secular Princes may, but he may create new Princes, and remoue others, and de­uide their kingdomes, and diuers other things. — Nu. 14. p. 26. If the Pope say that such a gouernment tends to the detriment of spirituall health, or that such a law cannot be obserued without mortall sinne, or that it is contrary to the law of God, or that it maintaines sinne; then we must stand to the Popes iudgement, forsomuch as the King hath nothing to do to iudge of spirituall things. Simancha Pacensis: De Cath. inst. tit. 23. n. 11. p. 98. If Kings or other Christian Princes become heretickes, forthwith their subiects and vassals are freed from their gouernment. Tit. 45. nu. 25. pag. 209. If any Prince be vnprofitable, or make vniust lawes against religion, or a­gainst good manners, or do any such like thing to the detriment of spirituall things; the Pope, obseruing due circumstances, may apply [Page 30] a fit remedie; euen by depriuing such a King of his gouernment and iurisdiction, if the cause require it. D. Nicolas Sanders: Visib. monar. pag. 70. It is moreouer to be supplied, that albeit the King, when he was first made, were a Christian Catholicke, yet if afterward he become an Apostata or hereticke, true reason requires that he be remoued from his gouernment—. Pag. 71. The matter is now brought to this passe, that it is fit an hereticall King be remoued from his kingdome—. De clau. Dau pag. 25. If any be so rauenous, that of a lambe he become a wolfe, deuou­ring the flocke, stealing, slaying, and scattering the sheepe, (which the Pope will say euery Protestant Prince doth) if any thing betide this man otherwise then well, let him thanke himselfe, that voluntarily runnes vpon the sword of the Church. Gregorie of Valence: Tom. 3. pag. 444 c. If the crime of heresie or apostacie from the faith, be notorious that it cannot be couered, then, euen before the sentence of the Iudge, the aforesaid punishment (of being depriued from his dominion and authoritie ouer his subiects) is in part in­curred; that is to say, so farre that the subiects may lawfully denie obedience to such a hereticall Lord. Mariana a Iesuite: Instit. reg. pag. 61. It is a wholesome meditation for Princes to perswade themselues, that if they oppresse the common-wealth, and grow intollerable through their vices, they liue vpon those termes that they may be killed, not onely lawfully, but with glorie and commendations—. Pag. 64. All this pe­stilent and deadly broode (thus he speakes of such Kings as he calls tyrants; which are all Protestant Princes) it is a glorious thing to roote out of the societie of men—: it is therefore con­fessed, that a tyrant may be slaine either by open force and armes, or by making assault vpon his pallace—: and if they that haue kil­led him escape, they are honored all their life after as great perso­nages; but if it fall out otherwise, they die a sacrifice gratefull to God and men. Pag. 65. No difference whether ye kill him with sword or poison. When Tyrone rebelled in Ireland, in the yeare 1602, the schoole Doctors of Salamanca sent the Papists there this determination, Refert quaest. bipart. in M.G. Blackw. p. 156. That the Bishop of Rome might by armes restraine such as opposed the Catholike religion. Tyrones warre a­gainst the Queene was iust, and by authoritie from the Pope; and all Catholickes were bound to further him in the same; and so doing, their merit and hope of eternall reward, should be no lesse [Page 31] then if they had warred against the Turke. But all Catholickes had sinned mortally that had serued the English against Tyrone, neither should they obtaine saluation, or be absolued by any priest, from their sinnes, vnlesse they repented and forsooke the campe of the English. The same thing was also to be deemed of such as in that warre had holpen the English with armes and munition, or payed them the accustomed subsidies. But such as were in Tyrones campe, in no case were traitors; nor had denied any due obedience, or vniustly occupied the Queenes lands, but rather had endeuou­red themselues to set at libertie themselues and their countrey, be­ing oppressed with vniust and impious tyrannie, and to their power defended the orthodoxe faith: as Christians and Catholickes ought to do. This was the resolution of the Popes Vniuersitie in Portugall, for the confirmation of as vile and detestable a rebellion, as euer any was. The like was done in Desmonds rebellion, D. Sanders being sent into Ireland to resolue and encourage the traitors, Quem virum, magno l [...]terarū incommodo, dole­nius defu [...]ctum, non multo post, in Hibernia, dū in eam insulam veram religionē restituere con­tendit. Ioh Ma­rian. tract. pro edit. vulg. c. 7. sub fin. pag. 56. among whom, by the iust iudge­ment of God, he died in extremitie and misery. In the yeare 1588, Meteran. Belgic. hist. l. 15. p. 473. when the Spanish fleete should inuade our nation, for the promoting of that desseigne, D. Allen was made a Cardi­nall, and sent into Flanders with the whole administration of the English affaires committed to him by the Pope: who, among other his practises, had the Popes declaration printed in English, that should be published vpon the arriuall of the Fleete: in which decla­ration, the sentence of excommunication against the Queene, was confirmed, and she depriued of her kingdome, honour and dignities, and all men commanded to receiue the Prince of Parma. The wri­tings of this Allen, Parsons, Sanders, and Creswell: their Doleman, Philopater and Rossaeus (a booke canonized by the Pope in consistorie) are so scandalous this way, that I abhor to report the things they write. Bellarmine hath taken vpō him to be the principal patron of this doctrine; &, in maint [...]nance thereof, hath published diuers treatises. There was neuer any And there was a wicked man, named Sheba, the son of Bicri, a man of Iemini, and he blew the trumpet and said, We haue no part in Dauid, nor inheritance in the son of Ishai; euery man to his tents, ô Israel. 2. Sam. 20.1. Sheba blew the trūpet of rebelliō, as he hath done. His asser­tions are these. De Pont. l. 5. c. 6. The Pope, as chiefe spirituall Prince, may change [Page 32] kingdomes, and take them away from one, to giue to another, if it be necessary for the sauing of soules, as we wil proue—. It is a good rule that the Glosse giues, when the Imperiall and Pontificiall lawes, touching the same thing, are found to be contrary, if the matter of the law be a thing belonging to the danger of soules; then the Im­periall law is abrogated by the Pontificiall. Cap. 7. If the Christians, in times past, deposed not Nero, Dioclesian, and Iulian, and Ʋalens the Arrian, and such like; that was because they wanted temporall strength. For that they might lawfully haue done it, appeares by the Apostle—. Besides, to tolerate a King that is an hereticke or an vnbeleeuer, labouring to draw men to his sect, is to expose religion to euident danger—: but Christians are not bound, nor may, with the euident danger of religion, tolerate an vnbeleeuing King.— When Kings and Princes become heretickes, or hinder religion, they may be iudged by the Church, and be deposed from the go­uernement: neither is there any wrong done them, if they be depo­sed—. If any Prince of a sheepe become a wolfe, that is to say, of a Christian become an hereticke; the pastor of the Church, by ex­communication, may driue him away, and withall commaund the people that they follow him not, and so depriue him of his domini­on ouer his subiects. Cap. 8. § Prae­terea cogere. Any Bishop whatsoeuer, much more the Prince of Bishops, may exercise temporall power ouer them that haue receiued temporall power ouer other. Tract. de po­test. sum. Pont. adv. Gul. Barcl. pag. 97. When the Pope sees a Christian Prince infected with heresie, by the sentence of excommu­nication he separates him from the companie of the godly: and least he infect others, he absolues his subiects from the oath of their allea­giance: and, if need so require, he commaunds them, vnder the paine of the same excommunication, that they neither reckon of him, nor obey him as their King. An. [...]089. n. 11. Caesar Baronius alledges, and commends, out of Ivo, a Breue of Pope Vrbane the second, wherein it is pronounced, that they are no homicides who kill such as are excommunicate. For we do not iudge them to be murderers, who burning with the zeale of their Catholicke Mo­ther, against such as are excommunicate, happen to haue killed any of them. Gregorie 7 commonly called Pope Hildebrand, Baro. an. 1076 n. 32. Gregor. 7. epist. l. 2. ep. 55. set downe these among the Popes priuiledges; that the Pope may vse the armes of the Empire: that Princes must kisse [Page 33] his feete: that it is lawfull for him to depose Emperors: that he is no Catholicke man, nor so to be accounted, that agrees not with the Church of Rome: that he may absolue subiects from their fideli­tie to the wicked. Suarez the Iesuite, in his Def sid. Cath. adu. Angl. sect. erro. l. 6. c. 4. nu. 18. late booke against the King, writes thus: It is to be said, that after the sentence condemnatorie is giuen against the King, by lawfull authoritie, touching the depriuing him of his kingdome; or, which is all one, when by sentence his crime is declared to be such, as by the law hath such a penaltie imposed; then he that hath pronounced the sen­tence, or he to whom it is committed may depriue the King of his kingdome, euen by killing him, if either he cannot otherwise do it, or if the sentence be iustly extended to this punishment. — If the Pope depose the King, yet he may not be killed or expelled, but by those onely to whom he shall commit the doing thereof: but if he commit the execution to no bodie, then it belongs to him that is lawfull successor of the kingdome; or, if there be no successor, it shall appertaine to the kingdome it selfe—: and therefore, as I said, one­ly his lawfull successor, if he be a Catholicke, hath that authoritie; (to kill or depose him) or if he neglect it, or there be no successor, then the communitie of the kingdome, so that it be Catholicke suc­ceeds in that right thus to kill or expell him. Let the Reader here note, not onely that the Pope and his Church teach and command the murder of Gods annointed Kings, (which any heart, not stupified with Atheisme and reprobate sence, would tremble at) but appropriate the doing thereof to Papists alone, challenging the right of committing so exe­crable wickednesse to appertaine to none but Romish Catho­lickes; and disdaining that any should haue a hand in doing this execrable mischiefe against the King, but onely a follow­er of the Popes religion. This is the doctrine that I mentioned, and meant when I said, their religion was full of doctrine teaching conspiracie against the State: stirring subiects vp to treason and rebellion. For when Rex autem Jacobus (vt in libro primo pro­bauimus) a cri­mine infidelita­tis, s [...]u haeresis, & apostasiae, ex­cusari non po­test. Suar. ibid. c 6. nu. 10. the King, by reason of his religion, is made an heretick, and reputed a persecutor of the Church, and disobedient to the Pope: and the Pope not onely hath power, but is also bound by his place to excommunicate, de­priue and depose such; and to absolue the subiects from [Page 34] their obedience to them; yea, howsoeuer, to rid the world of them, as of tyrants; it being the dutie of all, and that vnder paine of damnation, and as they will be counted good Catholickes, to obey the Pope in all things against the King. Now may any Papist warrant his religion from the imputation? and what securitie can he giue to the State? what pawne to his Soueraigne for his loyaltie? that the King and his State may be certen he will neuer practise or stirre against them. For if the Pope, by right, may do all this; and he beleeue, as his religion teaches, that he is bound in all things to obey the Pope, as the supreme Pastor of his soule, and monarch of the world; he must, whensoeuer oc­casion shall be offered, do his vttermost to fubuert the pre­sent State, and to plant the Popes religion and iurisdiction. I will suffer my selfe per possibile to be perswaded, that many Recusants and some Masse-priests loue the King, and are true hearted to the State, and wil neuer consent to trechery: but this is that I say; they cannot do this out of the princi­ples of their owne religion, which teaches them to obey the Pope against all the world: or if they say, the Pope erres, and his Diuines speake vntruly in these points; what infalli­ble assurance can they haue that they erre not, and misleade them not in the rest of their religion? Let it be well and se­riously considered, if it be not possible that they which vn­iustly and erroniously condemne the oath of alleagiance, do as erroniously condemne the faith which by that oath they say is ratified? They shall giue me leaue to thinke, for my part, that as his Maiestie, by the confession of so many Pa­pists, holds the truth against the Pope, in the matter of the oath; so he holds the same truth against him in the matter of his faith: and they that deceiue the Papists in forbidding them to take the oath, deceiue them no lesse in forbidding them to come to Church, and communicate with our reli­gion.

3 The Popes practise hath bene answerable to his do­ctrine, in regard whereof I said as I did, that he and his cler­gie, were no better then so many Beares and Tygars, the fatall [Page 35] enemies of Princes and their people, to sucke their bloud. The which because the Reply outfaces with passion, I will de­monstrate by examples, and then let the Reader iudge if euer any sauage Beare or Tygar filled his den with the bones of men and beasts, as this wolfe of Rome hath his church with the spoiles of Princes; there being no age, since his teeth were growne, wherein he hath not to the vttermost of his power, made hauocke of their liues and kingdomes. LEO ISAVRVS the Emperour of Constantinople, about the matter of Images, was excommunicated by Gregorie the second: [...] Cedren. p. 373. P. Diac. miscell. pag 617. Sigon. de reg. Ital. pag. 103. he forbad the payment of his tribute, and gaue away his country to the Lombards, whereby he and his successors lost all the Westerne empire, which the Pope and the French King afterward shared betweene them. Ba­ronius An. 730. n 5. sayes, the Pope, in this act, left a worthy example to po­steritie, that hereticke Princes should not be suffered to raigne in the Church of Christ. LVDOVICVS PIVS that was King of France and Emperour, 800 yeares after Christ, was thrust out of his kingdome Sollicitato in patrem Gregorio Pontifice Rom. Papir. Masson. annal. pag. 104. by the French Cleargie and the Pope. The story is this: Io. Mar. Belg de schis. & con. p. 426. A detestable and pestilent councell assembled at Compendium, where the Cleargie men of that time most impi­ously conspired against Lewis their soueraigne Lord and Empe­rour. For they, as it is likely, taking it grieuously that Lewis would reforme the superfluitie of their apparell, conspired against him, arming the sonnes (Pipin, Lewis and Lotharius) against their father; so that they put him him in hold, the Bishop of Rome con­senting and helping them. Then, in the said Councell, the same Bishops and Prelates condemned him, deposed him, and made him betake himselfe to a Monkes cowle. CHILDERICKE that was King of France a little before him, Aimoin. gest. Franc. p 403. P. A [...]mil. p 71. Papir. Masson. annal. in Child. p 83. was deposed, and thrust into a Monastery by the Popes aduice, who for that purpose discharged the French of their alleagiance to him. A Bishop was sent vnto him, to demaund whe­ther were fitter to raigne, Childericke that was of no authoritie, or Pipin that swayed the State: and he an­swered, it was better he were king that swayed the State; and so Childericke was depriued, and Pipin crowned. [Page 36] OTHO the GREAT, that was Emperour in the yeare 963, was in danger to haue bene cast out of Italy by Pope Iohn the 12. Jnde eijcien­dum existima­uit. [...]igo. reg. Ital. p. 271. The stories say, he did his vttermost thereunto: and that Luitpr. l. 6. c. 6. the reason why the Pope hated the most holy Emperor, was not so much vnlike the reason why the Diuell hated his Creator. The Emperour, as we see, thinkes and workes the things of God, maintaines the secular and ecclesiasticall affaires with his power, adornes them with his manners, repaires them with his lawes: Pope Iohn is an enemie to all these things. HENRIE the first, the Emperour, had Pope Bennet against him. Benn. Card. vit. Hildebr. pag. 42. The storie sayes, he endeuoured to cast him from the succession of the Em­pire: for which purpose he sent a crowne to Peter the King of Hun­garie, with this verse, The Rocke hath giuen Rome to Peter, and the Pope hath giuen this crowne to thee. HENRIE the fourth, the Emperour, was so shamefully vexed by three Popes, one after another, Hildebrand, Ʋrbane, and Paschalis, that it is more then tragicall. The quarrell that Hilderand pickt a­gainst him, was about Naucler. pag. 777. inuestitures, and Sigon. de re­gn. Ital. pag. 342. symonie, and Confictis, con­scriptis (que) super eo criminibus quae pessima & immundissima potuit odium & li [...]or exco­gitare Vita Henric. 4. pag. 46. in Fascic. rerum expet. o­ther crimes most vntruly layed to his charge. But Sigon. pag. 360. Hilde­brand excommunicated him, and absolued the subiects from their obedience; and first set vp against him Avent pag. 458. Baron. an. 1080. n. 16. Geneb. chron. 595. Ro­dulfe the Duke of Sueden and Burgundie, sending him a Crowne, with this verse ingrauen, Petra dedit Petro, Petrus diadema Rodolfo. Avent. The Rocke gaue the Crowne to Peter, and Peter giues it to Rodulfe. But he miscar­ried, and perished miserably in his treason. Then Ipsius Vrbani authoritate regnum aduersus patrem, in Lombardia suscepit. Sigon. reg. Ital. p. 384. Vrban, the successor of Hildebrand, set vp Conradus his sonne, who made warre against him; and dying Neque à Mathildú vnquam Pontificis (que) concilij, discessisset. Sigon. pag. 387. in that rebellion, Naueler. pag. 801. a­nother of his sonnes, who afterward succeeded him, was armed against him, Vita Hen. pag. 49. who tooke him prisoner, and forced him to resigne vp the empire. The extremities and in­dignities whereunto the Pope brought this noble Em­perour, haue filled the bookes of writers: among ma­ny other, this was one, Benn. vit. Hildebr. pag. 41. Fr. de Ros [...]ers Stem. Loth. pag. 219. that Pope Hildebrand [Page 37] would not release him from his excommunication, till on a time in the middest of winter, he came bare footed to Ca­nusium, where the Pope lay, and so waited three dayes be­fore the gates of his pallace for his absolution, which he hardly obtained by the intercession of Duchesse Matilda, and not long enioyed, being still vndermined with the Popes treasons to his dying day. HENRIE the fifth, his sonne, for maintaining Naucl p. 812. the priuiledges of the empire, and the custome of his predecessors, touching the inuestiture of Bishops, Vrsper. p. 272 & inde. Naucl. generat 38. Si­go. pag 409. & inde. was excommunicate by Paschalis the second, and by him and his successors miserably vexed till his death. Vrspe. p. 281. The Bishop of Traiectum conspiring against him, and ma­king an assault, was apprehended and put in prison, and af­terward deliuered. LOTHARIVS, his successor, Otho Frising. l 7. c. 18. about the same matter of inuestitures, Otho. c. 20. Naucl. p. 826. and about the right to the Duchie of Apulia, was molested and crossed by Innocent the second, who made Rex venitante fores, iurās prius vrbis honores: Post homo fit Papae, sumi [...] quo dante coronam. Radevic. p. 266. Sigo. p. 433. the verses, touching the Emperors being the Popes vassall, to be written in his pallace at Late­ran; whereupon afterward Rade. vbi sup. there grew so great contention in the time of Frederick. Naucl. p. 827. The same Pope ioyned also with the enemies of the Emperour CONRADVS, his successor, and hindered him that he should not recouer the Empire. FRE­DERICKE the first, called Barbarossa, was at the time of his empire, intangled with the Pope and his cleargies trea­sons. The stories mentioning a dangerous conspiracie a­gainst him, Vrsp. p 301. Naucl. p. 843. say, the greater part of the Cardinals and the Popes hands were in it; who tooke a great summe of money to ex­communicate him. The despites and presumptions of the Pope against him are monstrous: Papir. Masson de ep. vtb. pag. 205. Naucl. pag. 856. at last, to purchase his peace, he was faine to cast himselfe groueling vpon the floore, while the Pope set his foote vpon his necke, and insulted ouer him, with those words of the Psalme, Thou shalt walke vpon the Lion and the Aspe: the young Lion and the Dragon shalt thou treade vnder thy feete. HEN­RIE the sixth, that was sonne to this Fredericke, and his wife the Empresse, Rog. Houed, annal. p 689. were crowned by the Pope, holding the Crowne betweene his feete, and so setting it on their heads: [Page 38] and hauing thus crowned the Emperor, he strooke it off againe with his foote, to shew that he had power to depose him. The next Em­peror was PHILIP, his brother, against whom the Pope so set himselfe, that he said, Vrsperg. p. 319 Naucl. pag. 898 either he would haue Philips crowne, or Philip should haue his miter; and thereupon continually op­posed himself, and stirred vp Count Otho against him, Vrsp. p. 324. Naucl. p. 906. who miserably slue him in his priuie chamber. After him succee­ded OTHO the fourth; Walsi [...]. ypod Ne [...]s [...]. p. 46 [...]. Naucl. p. 910. him Innocent, who then was Pope, excommunicated, absoluing his subiects from his obedi­ence, and forbidding them to call him Emperor. The next Emperor was FREDERICK the seuenth; who first was ve­xed by Honorius; Vrsp. pag. 3 [...]7 Pan [...]f Collē. hist. Ne [...]pol p. 245. then excommunicate by Gregorie, for false and friuolous causes, without all order of iudgement, and o­thers made Emperors against him. The treasons, warres and businesses that were stirred vp against this Emperor, by the Pope, are innumerable. His complaints hereof are in euery storie: P [...]e Vin. lib. [...]. ep 31. that the happinesse of Emperors was alway opposed by the Popes enuie. See Pand. Collenut. hist. Neap. l. 4. pag. 157. & inde. Many things are laid against him by the Popes fauourites; but yet they all mention the Popes vnreasonable proceeding against him. K [...]an [...]z. ano. pag 225. When ALBERT the first, sent to Pope Boniface to confirme his election, he refused to do it, and said that himselfe was both Emperor and Pope: in signe whereof, the time of Iubilee then being, he shewed himself the first day in his Pontificall robes, and the next day in the h [...]b [...]t of an Emperor, with a naked sword borne before him; saying with a lowd voice, Behold here are two swords. This Boniface is he of whom [...]atin. in Bo­nif. 8. they write, that he studied with ter­ror rather then religion, to subdue Emperors, Kings, Princes, and nations: and endeuoured according to the lust of his owne minde to giue and take away kingdomes, thirsting after gold more then can be expressed. HENRIE the seuenth, commonly called of Lu­cenborow, after Naucl p 999. the Pope and his Cardinals opposing his coronation, and Avent p 597. stirring vp enemies against him, Av nt. p 598. Naucler. p 991. was at last poisoned by a Monke, in the Sacrament. LVDOVICVS BA­VARVS Auinionenses [...]llae vn [...]que [...] gescebant vari [...]. ad con tu [...]band [...]m Ger­mantam, d [...]s [...]or d [...]e m [...]a serere [...]extabant: n [...]hil immotum nihil denique in e [...]dë statu relinquere connitebantur. Auent. pag. 630. Naucl. pag. 996. was excommunicated by Iohn the 22, and misera­by vexed all his life time. In his cause it was that Occham, [Page 39] and so many other learned men writ in defence of the Em­peror, against the Pope. CHARLES the fourth Naucl. p. 101. could not obtaine his coronation, but on condition that he would not stay in Rome or Italy; which yet were part of his kingdom. WENCESLAVS Auent. p 645. Theodor Niem pag. 68. was deposed, and another put into the Empire against him, by Boniface the 9. SIGISMVND, who tooke so much paines in the Councell of Constance against Husse and Ierome, Venerat in eandem senten­tiam Eugenius. Naucl. p. 1055. was yet withstood and resisted in his voyage into Italy, by Eugenius. IONE the Queene of Na­ples, Pand. Collen p. 221. was depriued of her kingdome by Pope Vrban; Naucl. p. 1024 Pand. Collen. p. 227. who consented to her murder. MANFRED the King of Naples and Sicily, Naucl. p. 946. had the Duke of Anjou armed against him by Vrban the fourth, by whom he was slaine. CONRADINVS the King of Naples and Sicily, being taken prisoner by Charles, brother to the French King, Pand. Collen. p. 186. Paral. Vr­sperg. p. 11. was miserably put to death by the Popes counsell: who being demanded what was to be done, answered, The life of Conradine is the death of Charles; and the death of Conradine is the life of Charles. PHI­LIP AVGVSTVS the French King, Mart. Polon. append. p. 237. Naucl p 982. Paralip. Vrsper. p 27. was depriued by Bo­niface the 8, and his kingdome giuen to the Emperour Al­bert, because he would not acknowledge it to be holden of him. King IOHN of England Matth. Paris. p 223. Walsing. ypodig. Neustr p. 461. was pitifully vexed, and de­priued of his kingdome, by the Pope and his Bishops, and the French King set vp against him; and at last was See Act. and Monum. poiso­ned by a Monke. HENRIE the second, about the death of Becket, who had wrought many vprores in the State, Gul. Neubridg pag. 169. Math. Paris. p. 125. by the Popes appointment was whipt by Monkes. IVLIAN and LAVRENCE, the Dukes of Florence, Conscio & ad­nuente pontifice. Volater. pag. 51 by the Popes practise were assaulted in the Church at the time of the ele­uation of the hoast, and the one grieuously wounded, the other murdred outright. GEMIN OTTO the brother of the great Turke, being prisoner, was poisoned Guicciar. hist. pag 66. by the Pope, hired thereunto by P. Io [...]i. hist. pag. 25. l. 1. a promise of two hundred thousand crownes, and the seamlesse coate of Christ. The PRINCE of O­RANGE was grieuously murdred by Dinoth. de bell. ciuil. Belg. p 398 & inde. a Papist: who, for the same, is highly commended by Cōment. rerū in [...]b. gest. p. 1122. & inde. Surius the Friar. HENRIE the third, late King of France, after Meter. Belg. hist. pag 494. infinite treasons and [Page 40] conspiracies of the Sorbonists against him, was at last Ibid. p. 496. mur­dred by a Dominican Friar: which murder, the Pope by Orat. Sixt 5. in consist. an. 1589. a solemne oration in the Consistory, commended to the skies. His successor, HENRIE the fourth, was wounded by Rod. [...]otter. commen. p. 106 a dis­ciple of the Iesuites, suborned thereunto by the Iesuites; in memo­ry whereof a pillar was erected in Paris against the Iesuites, and they banished the Realme. There is Fran. de Verō apolog. pro Ioh. Castell. a booke written by a Papist in defence of him that did this, wherein his deed is not onely iustified, but extolled Pag 40. as a most noble deed, ioy­ned with vertue, and heroicall, to be compared with the greatest and commendablest deeds that euer were done, or are mentioned in any storie. Afterward, as we all know, this noble Prince was miserably slaine by a popish miscreant. HENRIE the 8. of England, was Sand. de scis. Anglic. [...]. [...]8. excommunicate by Pope Clement, about the matter of his diuorce; See Gu [...]cciar l. 19. pag. 891. which in his owne iudgement he thought to be lawfull. GEORGE the King of Bohemia, Bonfin. deca. 4. l. 2. sab init. Mart. Crom. rerum Polo. pag. 776 was excommunicate by Pius the second; and Matthias the King of Hungary armed against him. IOHN the King of Nauarre, Plat. in Iul. 2. was bereft of halfe his kingdome, by the practise of Iulius the second, Bin. vit. Iul. 2. who was wont to say; It was not fit the Leuites should serue others, who ought to beare rule ouer others. The VENETIANS lastly, See Botter. comment. l. 12. p. 267. & inde. Gallo Belgie. an. 16 [...]6. about the maintenance of their State against the Cleargie, were excommunicate by the Pope that now is; saue that he shrunke in the wetting, and durst not go forward. For Papit. Masson annal. Franc. pag. 289. since the time that Popes haue bene so prodigall of their curses, they haue lost their sting: and no mar­uell; for rare things are admired, when that which is daily done is contemned. QVEENE ELIZABETH of most happie me­mory, since the tenth yeare of her raigne, See Sand. schism. Angl. pag. 182. about which time Pius Quintus excommunicated her, till her dying day was neuer free from their malice See the an­swers that the priests in the Tower made in their exami­natiōs, an. 1582. Maij 13. as they are set downe in Concert. ecc Cathol. in Angl adu Caluinop. pag. 241. & ind. : the Popes and their Clear­gie, by treasons, inuasions, rebellions, conspiracies, infamous writings, and all the furie that the diuell could suggest, as­sailing her: the whole declaration whereof would fill large volumes. And now finally, HIS MAIESTIE that is, suc­ceeds her in the tasting of the same, and worse, practises: wherein the Iesuites and Masse-priests haue bene the Popes [Page 41] principall executioners Breuia Pont. & the defence thereof by Bellarm. Less. Coquae. Capel. Sticiop. Suar. Becan. Eudaem. and others. : his alleagiance refused, the Popes omnipotencie maintained: his Person disgraced, reuiled, conspired against, the Powder-treason plotted, by these men. Yet there is an old prophesie in Telesphor. de tribulat. pag. 31. Antichristus non poterit sub­iugare Venetias, nec Parisios, nec Ciuitatem rega­lem Angliae. Telesphorus, that An­tichrist shall neuer preuaile against these cities, Ʋenice, Paris, and London.

4 Here are vpon 40 instances giuen, in iustification of that I said: now the Reader may iudge as he please. In an­swer whereof, my aduersaries will pleade a right the Pope and his Cleargie had, to do all this; but the fact it selfe they will not denie. And as all States in the world know his right to be none, so Parisienses de eccl. & po­lit. potest. Blackw. Wid­dringt. Barkly: the Diuines of Venice: yea many large bookes written against it, by great Diuines old and new in the Church of Rome. Many whereof may be seene printed together by Goldastus in the three tomes of his Monarchia. not a few disdaine it in the Church of Rome it selfe.

CHAP. VII.

1 IN the fifth place he accuses me for charging the Church of Rome with that which one Michael Baius a popish Doctor, and the Kings professor at Louane, writ touch­ing merits. But I answer three things. First, that I know no reason why their Church may not be charged with that which Baius writ, as well as ours is charged with this and that which any Protestant writes. For This made the Protestants Apologie, so of­ten quoted in A. D his Reply, swell so big. a few priuate and doubtfull places are culled out of the writings of our men, and obiected to the whole body of our Church, by our ad­uersaries, as our doctrine. But the Iesuite writing in his THE WAY §. 6. Treatise, that all Catholicke learned men acknowledge the Popes definitiue sentence, and submit their iudgement thereunto; who would thinke that Baius, so learned a man, should maintaine any thing against that which the Pope allowes? specially being one of those that were at the Councell of Trent, and knew the mind thereof, and printed his booke three yeares [Page 43] after. Secondly, when I writ, I had Baius De merit op. printed at Lo­uan by John Bogard. an. 1565. in 8. his booke by me, and knew nothing but I might alledge it: he was a popish Doctor, and the Kings publicke Reader, and Deane of the V­niuersitie of [...]ouan: one that was a principall Diuine of the Trent Councell, but three yeares before: his booke priuiled­ged by the King of Spaine: and no where in all the Indices that I haue seene, either forbidden to be read, or comman­ded to be purged, as those bookes are, which the Church of Rome mislikes in good earnest. I answer thirdly, that what I alledged out of Baius, is the doctrine of the Church of Rome, and the Iesuites: this I will proue, and then answer the Iesuites arguments to the contrary.

2 First I say, that the Church of Rome holds, whatsoeuer I alledged out of Baius. For I gathered no more out of his words, but that the saluation of our soules is expected for the me­rit of workes, and not to be ascribed to the merit of Christ onely. This is the current doctrine of Rome, contained in the words of the Trent Councell, alledged by the Reply to go no fur­ther. Next, Michael Baius words, considered in themselues, as they sound containe the doctrine of the Church of Rome, for any thing that the Iesuite can shew to the contrary. And if it be obiected, that other Papists write otherwise, and con­fute him, I care not for that: for they write at this day one against another, in euery point of their faith, and agree in nothing: in the questions of Predestination: the concourse of Gods helpe with inferiour causes: Praedeterminations: the Popes primacie: taking the oath of allegiance: worship of Images: Free­will: Transubstantiation: Antichrist: Latin seruice: and yet all the Iesuites liuing cannot proue this to be their Churches doctrine rather then that. And therefore as touching his ad­uersaries that deale against him, Baius his opinion may be the Trent opinion, as well as theirs: nay better: for he was there present, when the doctrine of merits was concluded and agreed vpon, and his booke alledges the Councell on his side.

3 But I will shew, that the words of Baius affirme no more, then other Papists maintaine. They containe onely [Page 44] three propositions. First that our works merit. This propositiō they all hold, as the Iesuite will confesse: and it is enough to euacuate the merit of Christ, and translate it to our selues, and so consequently to damne him that holds it, because by merit is meant such a worthinesse in the worke, as of it owne na­ture, by the way of Dico Deum reddendo vitam aeternam seruare iustitiam com­mutatiuam. Pe­zant. 1.2. q. 114. pag. 468. Dicen­dum est in Deo esse proprium at­tributum iusti­tiae, habens quan­dam conuenien­tiam formalem, [...]isi analogam, cum iustitia commutatiua crea­ta: raetione cuius, propria & for malis iustitia commutatius dici potest, licet à rigore huius iustitiae, prout est in creaturis, aliquando dis­crepat & diffe­rat, in obiecto formali suo. At­que hanc iusti­tiam maximo Deus exercet in retribuendis praemijs me [...] rum, vel con­dignis satisfacti­onibus acceptan­dis. Suar. opusc. disp. de iustit. Dei. sect. 2. n 27. COMMVTATIVE IVSTICE, deserues e­ternall life. And it is no matter though they will answer, that the Grace of God makes vs able to do these workes: for so much Baius also sayes for himselfe: but the point is, that if eternall life be giuen properly, by an act of commutatiue iu­stice, to my worke, done by what Grace soeuer, then saluati­on is neither the sole nor proper effect of Christs death. The second proposition contained in Baius words, is, that Christ onely made vs able to do good workes, but such workes being done, then the reward is giuen, not for the merit of Christ, but for the condignitie of the worke. This is holden by others. Vasquez 12. q. 114 disp 222. n. 30 pag. 917. sayes: When the workes of a iust man condignely merit eternall life, as the wages and reward that is equall to them, there is no need that the condigne merit of another such as the merit of Christ is, come betweene, that vnto them should be rendred eternall life: for the merit of euery iust man, in respect of the man himselfe, hath some thing peculiar, which the merit of Christ hath not; namely to make the man himselfe iust, and worthy eternall life, that he may worthily obtaine the same: but the merit of Christ, albeit most worthy to obtaine eternall life for vs of God, yet hath not this effi­cacie and vertue, to make vs formally iust, and worthy eternall life; but men, by vertue deriued from him, attaine this effect in them­selues. This doctrine allowes saluation and blessednes to vs, in the same maner that God, in the couenant of works, ren­dred it to Adam, or to the Angels; for Ipsa igitur (Gratia) etiam homini reparan­do fuit necessaria: quia non alia stantem Angelum à ruina potuit custodire, nisi illa qua lapsum hominem, post ruinam, potuit reparare. Vna est, in vtroque Gratia operata: in hoc vt surgeret, in illo ne caderet: in illo ne vul­neretur, in: flo vt s [...]naretur: ab hoc infirmitatem repulit, illum infirmari non sinit; illius esca, istius medicina. Fulgent ad Trasim l 2. pag. 269. Adam ante lapsum non fuit per vtres suas naturales, praecisè etiam cum Dei generali influentia, sufficiens ad igendum aliquem actum moraliter bonum, seu vere virtuosunt, quinimo, vl­tra praedicta, fuit sibi necessarium aliud Dei auxilium speciale. Gregor. Arim. 2. d. 29. q. 1 concl. 2. pag. 107. See Mag. 2. d. 29. Ibi Tho. Argent. art. 3. Dur. qu. 1. Capreol. qu. 1. concl. 3. & 4. Suar. tom. 1. disp. 42. sect. 1. §. Dico tamen. they also had the grace of God to enable them to worke, as we haue the me­rits [Page 45] of Christ, but that grace went no further. The third proposition contained in Baius words is, that good workes haue the reward of eternall life due vnto them, not of grace, but of their owne nature, because God in the beginning by the law of na­ture, appointed the reward to be rendred to him that well did. The same is taught generally in the Church of Rome, by all them that hold, Vasq. 1.2. tom 2. pag. 803. c. 4. in these words deliuers his opi­nion of merit. when a man being in the state of righteousnesse, through the grace of God doth good workes, then the said workes merit eternall life, and are equally worthy of the re­ward, though God make no couenant in Christ to accept them: and that they haue no increase of dignitie coming to them by the merits or person of Christ, but before God make any promise to vs in him, they are in iustice worthy the reward: and though God haue made a couenant to ac­cept such workes, done by grace, yet the merit and worthi­nes thereof arises not, nor is founded on that couenant, but the promise is founded on the merit of the worke, because it were iniustice if God should not reward a good worke. And thus the greatest Diuines in the Church of Rome teach. Panopl. p [...]g. 110. Lindan: I thinke they do not worthily enough set forth the grace of Christ in our good workes, who thinke God rewards the good workes of iust men with eternall life of free grace, and the vouch­safing of his owne clemencie; because the reason of true merit, which is ingendred in good works, through the dignitie of Christs Spirit, their author, seemes to deserue GREATER praise, then that God should only VOVCHSAFE it the reward FREELY. Anard: Artic. 9. pag. 126. Far be it from vs that we should waite for eternall life, AS A POORE MAN DOTH FOR ALMES; for it is MORE GLORIOVS for vs, like conquerers and triumphers, to possesse it as the garland and crowne that is DVE to our labours. Suarez: Tom. 1. pag. 645. B. It must not be denied, but our merits are true merits, in such sort, that the workes of the godly, proceeding from grace, haue in themselues an inward dignitie, and the same proportion to the reward which they should haue, vnderstanding a man to be iust, and to worke well, without the merits of Christ: as many thinke of the Angels, and of man in the state of innocencie. 12. disp. 214. c. 4. n. 17. Vasquez: Although God haue made a promise to the workes of iust men, yet neither that promise, nor [Page 46] any couenant or fauour of God, belongs any wayes to the reason of the merit. Bellarmine: De iustif. l. 5. c. 17. pag. 993. A The workes of the iust merit eternall life condignely, by reason of Gods couenant and the worke together: NOT BECAVSE THE GOOD WORKE HATH NO PROPORTION TO ETERNALL LIFE WITHOVT GODS COVENANT TO ACCEPT IT; but because God is not tied to accept it to the reward, though it be equall thereto, vnlesse his couenant come betweene. D. Stapleton: De iustificat. pag. 237. We are said to please God, and to be acceptable to him in and for Christ: and our iustice is said to leane vpon Christs iustice, because the beginning and progresse thereof is of Christ, and depends thereon as on the ef­ficient cause—: and, Christs iustice supplies our defects, NOT BY SVPPLYING ANY VNPERFECT ACT THAT IS IN OVR RIGHTEOVSNES, and so making it perfect, that it might stand before Gods iudgement seate—; but if such imperfe­ction of our righteousnesse be without sinne, it is admitted for true righteousnesse, and admitted in the iust iudgement of God. Alph. Virvés. Andrad Horát. Caiet. Bonauē. Mart Distor. Thom. Ricard. Romae. Conrad. Capraeol. Dried Clictouae. Tilet. Vincent. Soto. all cited for this opinion by Vasq. 12. disp. 214. n. 9. & 18. The most of our aduersaries hold this; and teach a condignitie in our workes, arising out of THEMSELVES, abstracting from the merits of Christ, and promise of God: which promise is founded on the worke; and which merits of Christ adde nothing to the value of the worke, but onely eleuates the person of him that workes. Whence it followes, that the re­ward must needs be giuen by the first couenant, made with Adam: which is as much of Baius his opinion, as I alledged.

4 Thus I haue shewed that Baius in his words by me quoted, teaches no other doctrine then is ordinarily taught by other Diuines in the Church; and the Iesuites arguments to the contrary, are easily answered. To the first; there can be no more shewed out of their writings, but that life eternall is obtained by grace, and the merit of Christ, inasmuch as they are the roote of merit, which Quicquid ad humani generis reparationem pertinet, id non nostris moritu propriis, neque iusto Dei iudicio tribuendum est, quia alioqui sal­tem ex parte, essemus nostri redemptores; sed tantum proposito gratiae Dei, per redemptionem quae facta est in sanguine Christi. Pag. 12. Baius denies not; but yet for all that, holding that workes so done, haue in them an intrin­secall righteousnesse, and worthinesse of their owne; they must needs hold consequently, that God in iustice is bound to reward them, in the same maner that he rewards Angels, or would haue rewarded Adam if he had neuer fallen, which [Page 47] was by the couenant of workes. And it should seeme the Iesuite by his manner of citing them, saw not the bookes thēselues, but borowed the quotations of his friends. For first touching Alexander, he quotes 3. part. 9.69. (which I pre­sume is mis-printed in stead of qu. 69.) memb. 5. art. 3. 5: whereas in the 5. m. there are only 4 articles, and in the 3^d art. Pag. 249. he speakes expresly against him, that if a man do that which is in himselfe to doe, God necessarily giues him grace. In which words he plainly ascribes merit to workes done by nature; which is Pelagianisme. The best that he sayes against nature for grace, is in Concedendum est ergo necessariam esse gratiā, indistincte ad merendum & consequendum beatitudinem. m. 1. art. 1. another place; but that Grace, whereby he sayes we merit, he expounds to be our owne worke, wrought by the power of Gods grace, which is the very point that Baius holds. Bellarmines opinion is vncertaine, he doth nothing but chop and change; a man of no resolution, but a very weather-cocke, yet he hath one good saying on the Iesu­ites side: De iustif. l. 5. c 7. By reason of the vncertaintie of a mans owne righteous­nesse, and for feare of vaine-glorie, it is the safest way to repose our whole confidence in the sole mercie and goodnesse of God. But See Vasqu. 1.2. tom. 2. pag. 794. c. 7. his fellowes whip him for it. The other three, Tapper, Fisher, and Thomas say no more, but that our workes merit by grace; in which point they crosse not Baius, for he also allowes grace, and sayes not that they merit by nature, but that being done by grace, the reward is giuen, not by a new couenant in Christ, but by the same that God made with Adam in pure nature; from which opinion they also cannot be freed, inasmuch as they hold the merit of workes, not to be founded on Gods couenant in Christ, but Gods couenant to be founded on the merit, as I haue touched before. To the Councell of Trent, I answer, that Baius was there present, and in all probabilitie knew the meaning of it, either to be with him, or not against him; else he would not haue published his booke The Counce [...] ended an. 1563. he printed his booke 1565. two yeares after the Councel was ended: and these very words of the Coun­cell (eternall life is the grace of God) Cap. 6. he answers, and ex­pounds to his owne sence, that it is the grace of God, because it is due to the merits that proceed of grace; which grace he de­nies not to be the roote of merit, but he denies it to haue [Page 48] any influence into the reason of meriting: as I haue expounded in the third proposition. And if the Reader will see the true meaning of these words of the Councell, whereby so many are beguiled, here it is: Vasqu. p. 819. n. 84. Where life eternall is called a grace, mercifully promised to the sonnes of God: I answer, that life eternall is not called a grace mercifully promised, because the workes whereto it is giuen are not equall of themselues to it, or condignely worthy of it —; but because the merits, whereto it is rendred, are of Gods mercie; and so life eternall, in respect of the roote thereof, is called grace. Pag. 820. n. 88 Againe: The Councell of Trent affirming life eternall to be a reward, which is to be rendred faithfully by promise: if it be well marked, nothing fauours their opinion (who hold our workes not to merit of themselues, but because God hath made a promise to reward them) for that word BY PRO­MISE, must not be ioyned with THE REWARD, as if the mea­ning were, that life eternall is giuen as a reward, because it is gi­uen by promise; which it should not, if the promise were not: but it must be ioyned with that (TO BE FAITHFVLLY rendred to their good workes and merits) for this to be FAITHFVLLY rendred, it hath by promise. Wherefore WITHOVT THE PROMISE of God, eternall life should be rendred CONDIGNLY to the works of the iust, as the wages, stipend, and crowne of righteousnesse; ta­king righteousnesse for that equalitie which is to be obserued be­tweene the dignitie of workes and eternall life: but yet it should not be giuen FAITHFVLLY, or of fidelitie; because where there is no promise, there is no fidelitie: for fidelitie is that truth which is in keeping promises. Whereby we see, that it was not the mind of the Councell, to ascribe eternall life to the grace of God, o­therwise then so farre forth as that grace makes vs able to me­rit it our selues; which is the very opinion of Baius, that I al­ledged.

5 To the Bull, whereby he sayes, this opinion of Baius is expresly condemned; I answer, that when I alledged Baius, I knew not of the Bull, but since In Posseuin. appar. verbo Mich. Baius. and at the end of Vasqu. para. in epist. Pauli. I haue seene it, and bene admonisht thereof; neuerthelesse Baius his proposition is not thereby condemned: the words of the Bull, are these, after it hath set downe some 80 propositions, extracted out [Page 49] of Baius. Many of these propositions might in some fashion be de­fended, yet as they are intended by such as defend them in the rigor and proper sence of the words, we condemne them As Paule, the now Pope, in his late cen­sure of [...]eca­nus his booke, sayes, Many things therein are false and temerarious, RESPECTIVE­LY: because this censure being extorted from him, to auoide a worse inconuenience, should not simply condemne Becanus his opinion, (which Bellarmine himselfe, whose hand is to the Censure, hath broached as well as he, in his writings) but only made a shew of con­demning them, to serue the present turne, and to delude the Princes of the worlde, with hope of that which he will neuer do, till he see his occasions fit­ter then now they are. respectiuely, as hereticall, erronious, suspected, rash, and scandalous. By which condemnation, 1. 2. disp. 190. n 176. pag 516. sayes Vasquez a Iesuite, maintaining some things mentioned in the same Bull, it doth not appeare, what censure doth agree seuerally to each proposition; but by the words it is manifest, that all those notes and censures together (temera­rious and hereticall) do not belong to the said propositions, but e­uery one by it selfe, that is to say, euery one hath his proper cen­sure; and thus some propositions are onely condemned, as lying open to scandall. Thus Vasquez their great Schoole-man and a Ie­suite, answered the Bull, when it was obiected against him, for holding certaine propositions therein; in the prosecu­tion whereof he shewes, that many things contained in it are condemned onely because of his manner of defending them, with some violence and intemperance. And he sayes, See the Iesuites admonition to the Reader, prefixed to the Bull, at the end of Vasquez paraphrase; wherein he shewes that Baius is mistaken, and not truly vnderstood by such as haue dealt against him; and that the Popes Bull censures his doctrine no otherwise then Vasquez affirmes. he learned this to be the intent of the Bull from Cardinall Tolet, who was a commissioner sent by the Pope to Louan, for the composing of these contentions, and therefore best knew the mea­ning of the Bull. Belike Baius was somewhat passionate in the maintenance of his opinions, much like this Iesuite, and so the Pope by a Bull censured him: which being so, how will the Iesuite make it appeare to me, that this singular proposition, which is the twelfth in number, is condemned as Note what propositions they be that our aduersaries account to be hereticall, temerarious, scandalous, &c. as it is noted by Lud. Carbo. in his summes. Duo genera propositionum haereticarum — primum continet errores manifestos contra verita­tes in verbo Dei expressa [...], aut per Ecclesiam iam determinatas. Alterum in quo continentur errores contra veritates euidenter ex primo genere collectas —. And then a little before: Jdeo aliqua propositio dici­tur haeretica, quia haresim designat; sed hoc non facit nisi adsit pertinacia —. Propositio erronea est illa qua aduersatur veritati ex propositione de fide euidenter collectae —. Propositio quae dicitur sapere haeresim est illa quae licet non appareat haerisis manifesta, quin potius potest habere bonum sensum, tamen ex circumstantijs potest praebere saporem vel suspicionem haeresis. Vt ista propositio: Iustus ex fide viuit. — Propositio temeraria quando asseritur aliquid contra communem Ecclesia & Doctorum sententiam, sine ratione firmissima.— Propositio scandalosa est illa quae apta est gignere scandalum circa doctrinam & veritatem fidei. Ludo. Carb. sum. tom. 3. l. 1. c. 56. hereticall and temerarious, or further then [Page 50] as he held it with violence and passion▪ Let him reade the Bull, and he shall finde therein many propositions, that him­selfe will not condemne. The second is, that as an euill worke of his nature merits eternall death, so a good worke of it owne nature merits eternall life; yet Sicut se habet culpa ad poenam, ita opus virtutis ad gloriam. Sed culpa ex con­digno meretur poenam; ergo & actus virtutis, ex condigno meretur vitaem aeternam. Tho. 2. d. 27. art. 3. Quae quidem satis indicant non minus sem­piternam foelici­tatem iustorum esse praeclaris operibus debitam, quàm aeternos cruciatus eorum sceleribus qui nō nouerunt Deum. Andrad. orthod expl. pag. 517. God giues as wel euerlasting life and glory to men for and according to their good workes; as he giues damna­tion for the con­trary workes. Rhem annot. Rom. 2. n. 6. this is generally holden a­mong all their Diuines. The eight proposition is, that in such as are redeemed by the grace of Christ, there can be found no good merit, which is not freely giuen to him that is vnworthy; yet the Iesuite sayes here, that all our workes merit by the grace of Christ; which is false, if the Bull censure truly: for to haue no merit, but such as is freely giuen to him that is vnworthy, and to haue merits that are not freely giuen, but the partie is worthy, are contrary. The 14 is, that our workes at the last iudgement shall receiue no ampler reward, then by the iust iudgement of God they deserue: yet Vega De Iustificat. q. 5. holds this opinion. The 30 is, that no tentation can be resisted without the grace of Christ: yet Abulens. in Matth 19. q. 178. Gregor. Arimin. 2. d. 28. Cassal. quadrip. instit par. 1. l 1 c. 25. Bellarm. grat. & lib. arb. l. 5. c. 7. many Schoole men hold it. The like may be shewed in other propositions there censured, and yet commonly holden by the learned in the Church of Rome; whereupon I conclude, that the Bull is no sufficient argument to proue the place I cited out of Baius, not to be the doctrine of the Church of Rome: but the Iesuite would vse the name thereof, to serue the present turne, when he had no true vnderstanding of the drift and purpose of it.

CHAP. VIII.

CHAP. IX.

CHAP. X.

CHAP. XI.

1 IN all this you see not a word that disprooues my ob­iection, but onely a little passion, and wrinkling of his face, ioyned with some charitable speeches, concerning himselfe, all which is easily done by a man of his practise, but I contemne it, and therefore to the matter. I named in my Booke for a taste some speciall points wherein I thought the lying, and malice, wherewith I charged them might ap­peare: [Page 86] their giuing it out that we hold God to be the author of sin deny good workes to be necessary: put women recusants into the stewes: pull downe Churches: make hauock of their Car­dinals, Archbishops, Doctors, Nobles, Queenes. What not? as if there had neuer bene any persecuted, as Papists be. That they hold vs Protestants to be possessed; that they haue an order in their Church to exorcize, and coniure a reconciled Protestant, that all the Queenes time most vnnaturally and barbarously they threat­ned the land, and by execrable treasons conspired against it: and that they haue reported, and practised these things, I shewed out of their booke, naming the place, and leafe of euery booke, as the reader may see; and thereupon charged them with in­temperate, and vnchristian proceeding against vs, and said that if they were of the truth, they would not thus defend themselues with lying, rayling, and malice. Wherein how truely I speake, the reader must iudge by this, that the Iesuit excepts not a­gainst my quotations, wherein I shewed this, which are true, and full; but answers me with bare denials, and idle passion, alleadging the bookes of Walsingham, and Briarly, wherein he sayes they haue shewed Protestants to be more guilty of these things (as if he should haue replied, Aske my fellow, if I be a theefe) which of themselues are enough to iustifie my speech, if there were no other matter extant to charge our adversa­ries withall, this waies, that Papists deale against vs with the weapons of darkenesse, for there cannot lightly be more falshood and compiled fraud together in so small a compasse, then is in these bookes; but whereas he sayes in the margent that Wal­singham was once an earnest Protestant, and is now become a good Catholike, I aduise him not to be too confident, for he knowes that some hauing, upon Walsinghams groundes, fal­len to Papistry, yet haue not long continued so, but upon a new search haue with comfort, and peace, returned backe againe, whence they went, and therefore the surest way were to follow the order of the Pontificall, and coniure him, the which way of coniuring such as are reconciled to the Church of Rome, I say againe, is prescribed in a Pontifical. Roman. part. tit. ordo ad re­conciliand. pag. [...]06. of the old. print. solemne Booke con­taining the forme of many ceremonies vsed therein, that it is [Page 87] the desperatest, and basest shift that can be, thus to deny such an order: specially the booke containing, and prescribing it, being lately printed againe at Rome. And if the said Wal­singham turned Papist, as the Iesuit reports, by obseruing the sinceritie of Catholikes, and the grosse lying, that he found in Protestant writers, I pittie his case, that would refuse his reli­gion upon supposall of that which is not so: for, to speake of that which I have searched into my selfe, the places obiected to Bishop Iewell, a man of incomparable learning, and pietie, whose name is sufficient to beare downe all that speake a­gainst him, I finde, that as the things taxed in him, will be iustified, so himselfe in his life time, in the second edition of his defence, cleared the most of them, against Stapleton, Harding, and the rest: whose obiections they are that Wal­singham hath set downe, dissembling the answer that the Bi­shop himselfe made vnto them; and if I be not deceived, the pretended Walsingham writ not that booke, who being, as he saith himselfe, but a Deacon, and vnskilfull at those times in the controuersies, could not obiect, answer, meditate, and con­ceiue the things contained in that Booke: the stile, and mat­ter thereof bewrayes another author, and our aduersaries were neuer yet so curious, but they could be content, with any forgerie, and fopperie, to aduance their cause, and with policie to promote their religion, which Gods blessed truth, that needes no mans lie, would abhorre to do.

2 And whereas the Iesuit sayes, there is ordinarily among them the spirit of meekenesse, and forbearance more then can be ex­pected among Protestants, and if any Papist haue threatned, and attempted vnfit things, our Church doctrine doth disallow it: would this were true. For I haue shewed, that their Church, and doctrine, haue allowed, taught, and defended the murder of kings, and the absoluing of their subjects from obedience; their bookes also are full of vile, and inhumane speeches a­gainst our state, the Iesuits themselues ioyned with the rest in the treason of Gunpowder: their bookes are written not with Inke, but vineger. In Queene Maries time they shew­ed such meekenesse, as the Turke vses to do at the sacking [Page 88] of a towne; the barbarous rage of the Cleargie, in those daies, against the poore seruants of Iesus Christ, was such, that it cannot be forgotten; the common sort of Recusants I haue seene so inflamed with furie, that all the water in Trent would not quench it, if occasion wanted not. I saw Hunt, a Seminarie Priest, behaue himselfe so outragiously at the barre at Lancaster, where he was arraigned, for an as­sault made vpon the way, upon certaine officers, that were carrying a prisoner, whereof he shot G. Trauis. one into the thigh with a pistoll, that Sir Thomas Hesckith, the Queenes attorney, at that time, giuing euidence against him, called to haue him set farther off him, and some companie stand betweene, for doing him mischiefe, his outrage, in countenance, and words were such. The Bull of Pius against good Queene Elizabeth, the writings of Cardinall Pool against the state in king Hen­ries time, the diuelish behauiour of the Popes clawbackes, and vassals in their writings, this day toward his Maiestie: remember Pruritanus with his Quaere quare: remember M. Wrightintons cattell at one time, and M. Bretters at another, a litle before the Queenes death the poore dumb beasts pitifullie butchered in Lancashire, and the Spanish inuasion, with the Zeale and fury wherewith the chiefest of your side aduanced it: remember finally the In­quisition, and the order of the execution, and talke no more of meekenesse, and forbearance; all which is not obiected in malice either to incense them, or make them odious, but onely, by laying open their sinne, to draw them to repen­tance, and their followers to obedience; when this their ca­riage hath so shaken the land, & disinabled the state, that we cannot thinke of it, but many a time, and often, for feare of the euent, and iealousie of his Maiestie and his children, with weeping teares; nor speake of them, but as Iacob did of his children, Gen. 49.5. Simeon, and Leui brethren in evill, the instruments of crueltie are in their habitation, let not my soule come into their Councell; if we could preuaile that way, we would intreate them, that are their acquaintance; the band of nature, and humanitie should coniure them, religion by her sacred ma­iestie should beseech them, our common Baptisme, the Seale of our Christian profession, should importune them, their [Page 89] dearest countrey, like Coriolanus mother, should be sent out vnto them with breasts displaied, and weeping teares, and her haire hanging about her shoulders to reconcile them: but nothing can do it: no intreaty, no forbearance, no bene­fits. Rome hath alienated, and imbruted them, and how to shew them loue we know not, but must say as the Romane Lady did to her sonne in armes against his countrey: [...]. Plu­tarch Coriol. We cannot pray both for our owne safety, and thy health, but as our enemies would pray against vs, for either the countrey must perish, or else you must be taken out of it.

CHAP. XII.

1 LEt the contumelies, and intemperance be swept out, and the matter be considered: our Seminaries haue their disease, that voide their excrements at their mouth, and Rome that breeds them is a Apoc. 17.1. & 19.2. Pro. 30.20. whore, that neither can blush, nor abide with any patience to heare of her qua­lities. That which I writ touching this prodigious ignorance of the people, that liue in Papistry, and the manner of their prayers, is true, when all the Iesuites in England haue railed at it, what they can, and all the faces that they can set vpon it, shall neuer outface that which for 17. yeares together, I had daily experience of, and saw with my eies. I protest in the words of Bernard Epist. 42. pag. 804. of naked things, I haue spoken nakedly, nether do I vncouer secrets, but reprooue shameles filthines. Would God these things were done privately, and in chambers, would wee [Page 92] alone saw, and heard them; would we might not be credited, when we vtter them; would the Noes of our time, had left vs any thing, wherewith we might couer them. Now when the word round about sees these things, must we alone hold our peace? my head is broken on euery side, and when the blood gushes out round about, shall I thinke to hide it? Whatsoever I put about it will be bloodied; and my shame will be the greater, thus to go about to hide, that which will not be hidden. This is it that I say for my selfe against the Iesuites reproches: come we now to his Reply. First he an­swers, that in all his acquaintance, here, & there, he may protest, that he neuer heard any one of these his examples, and absurd forms of Prayer to be vsed by any: and divers Catholikes of far better credite then M. White, being demaunded their knowledge about this point, haue not knowen any Catholike man, or woman to vse them. Wherein he mocks the reader to his face three times ouer. First in producing himselfe, and his Catholikes for wit­nesses, whom no man knowes, against M. White, that stands openly in the face of the world, and is knowne to all; where he dwels, and what he is: and lies subject, in his person, and name, to the open, and secret, censure of the world, if he speake vntruly: whereas this masked Iesuite, and his Ca­tholikes of so good credit, and his person of good esteeme, whose words he alledges, are all shadowes, and Idols; that no man knowes to whom any thing that they say, can be im­puted, because they are inuisible: we heare the sound of an A, and a D. and the Ghost possibly of a Gentlewoman, but what they are, and where, and how I may let my countrey see their face, that thus walke in the darke, I know not: but these are the waies of Iesuites, a maske, a darke roome, a blinde lanterne, a vault, and two, or three, blanke letters: and thence they fight with all this noise. Next he mocks vs againe, in that he sayes he neuer heard any of these formes: for no doubt he hath heard, as bad as these in other words, if he haue not heard these: and I make no question but some of those Ca­tholikes, that haue bene demanded their knowledge about this point; if they were ouerheard, when they say their prayers, would speake no better. For I haue heard many repeat their [Page 93] praiers, yet neuer did I heare one speake in any tollerable forme. And any man may easily perceiue it is scarce possible, that they, which vnderstand no Latine, should pronounce it otherwise, then as I haue set downe. Thirdly where he saies, he, and his Catholikes neuer heard any of these things: as though Seminaries ordinarily vsed to examine, or heare how their people say their praiers, who are well knowne to haue many things else they minde more: and, when their peo­ple haue learned to refuse the Church, that they once pos­sesse them, they greatly passe not, either what they be, or how they pray, so they pray not with vnderstanding: But he saies, M. White, met at an Alehouse some drunken old man, or some d [...]ing wife, and of them he might receiue this rotten stuffe. Indeed the Legend tels of Iohn the Almoner, that seeing his people in the time of diuine seruice, going out of the Church to the Alehouse, tooke his booke, and followed them, saying that where the sheepe were, there the Shepheard must be also: yet M. White neuer vsed that course, when his people went to the Ale­house, but left it to Seminaries, who were as good Alebeaters, in their disguised habit, as either the drunken old mā, or the doting old wife here mentioned And to let the Iesuit plainly vnder­stand, where I receiued this ridiculous rotten stuffe, I observed, and learned it of the people, where I dwelt, diuers whereof I haue heard thus to say their praiers, when I haue examined them, or otherwise intreated them, sometime at their owne houses where they dwelt, and somtime at mine; and I know the guise of popish people so well, that schollers excepted, the laity of them generally, as well yong, as old, sober, as drunken, gentle, as simple, pronounce their Latine praiers no better; which is the barbarous ignorance that I reported. We reade in De consecrat. d. 4. Retulerunt, Gratian, how Priests baptised in Nomine Patria, & Filia, & Spiritua sancta; and no man I thinke will deny, but in king Henry, and Queene Maries times, many Masse priests in all parts of the land went ordinarily to the Grammar schoole to learne to reade their Portuisse: that no man won­der at this brutishnesse in the laity, which was little lesse in a great part of the Cleargy: and what I said of their Ceremo­nies [Page 94] also, those that liue in the countrey know to be true. And what they sauour of, whether the purity and simplicitie of Christianity, or the fashion of the Gentiles; Tertull. de coron. militis. so much detested by antiquitie, let who so will iudge. For my own part though I iudge not such as vse them in their simplicity, and igno­rance, yet I abhorre, and detest those wreches, that taking vpon them to be their ghostly fathers, yet suffer them to liue in that brutish superstition.

2 But that which the Reply takes most vnkindly, is a speech that I added, after I had set downe those formes of praier: It cannot be answered that these are the customes of a few simple people: for this is generall throughout the Countrey, the most men and women deuoted to Papistry, though well borne, and of good place, yet lye plunged in this ignorance; which last wordes were, it should seeme, a Prophecy. For you see how the touching of this sore puts him into passion, and my Booke was scarce come out, when many of this Better sort, had it by the ende; and quarrelled it: yet if we had meanes to make the triall, it would fall out to be true: for I know not what faculty, or priuiledge a gentleman, or his wife, for example, that vnder­stands no Latine, hath to pronounce it any better, then their tenants; & here I auouch againe in his presence that knowes all things, that the same ignorance, and rudenesse wherewith I charge the vulgar people, I haue obserued in diuers of the better sort: and the Iesuit is but vnwise to deny it. For if white Pater noster, and little Creed be good Physicke for the vulgar, I know not but Catholiks of greater note may vse them too. Phil. Camerar. meditat. hist. When an Emperour lay in the pangue of the gout, he cried out, that now he differed nothing from a cloune, he felt the same disease, and the same paine, and pangs without any difference. So I suppose this rude ignorance in such as are well borne, and of good place, is of no other nature, then that which is in the common sort: yet the Iesuit you see is earnester for them, then the rest, and possibly he hath reason. Ladies, and Gentlewomen, and men of worth can see better, then a poore client: its not a drunken old man, or a doting wife, that can merit a Seminaries zeale; leaue them in an Alehouse with [Page 95] M. White, saying their white Pater noster. But is Sir Mini­ster so bold as to charge any that are well borne? would to God Sir Minister had not seene Dianaes nakednes: it would haue staied a great deale of barking, that hath bene after him. YET WHAT HE WRIT, IS STIL TRVE, IF ALL THE SEMI­NARIES IN ENGLAND HAD IT IN CHASE. I wil seeke the disgrace of no mans person of any degree; I know the countrey to haue many good Gentlefolke in it; I onely re­port the barbarisme that Popery hath bred in such as follow it: and though I haue no acquaintance, or knowledge with all; yet [...]. Eustath. Iliad. the experience of some allowes me to speake as I do: that this ignorance is general, and the most, yea of the better sort, addicted to Popery, are plunged in it.

3 And that which the Iesuit reports, my Country-man, a mā of good esteeme, & place said of my booke, is not greatly materiall, supposing some Popish Gentleman, or woman said so. For besides himselfe, whosoeuer he be, that countrey hath many noble, & godly Gentlemen, as good as he: wher­of some haue seene my Booke, and reported otherwise both of it, and me: and it may be the Gentleman alleadged, if he were well examined, would prooue as learned as the Knight that Claudius Espencaeus In 2. Tim. pag. 118. telles of, who being demāded his be­leefe touching the holy Ghost, answered, he knew not whether there were an holy Ghost or no. And my comfort is, that when this present place that I now write, shall come into their hand, they will call to minde the trauell I tooke among them with all instance, and lenity to do good; and the scandalous, and lying reports, wherewith Seminaries vse to defend them­selues: they know me, and Seminaries, and Popish Gentle­men, and haue ability to compare vs one with another: in the meane time, I esteeme the man and his deposition alike: he a man of no great esteeme, that hath not so much, as a name: and will be commanded by a poore student to stand vpon the stage like a ridle for all readers to guesse at: and his deposition is sutable, when he taxeth a man with shamelesnesse, and impu­dencie, for noting that which, a thousand to one, will be prooued by his wife; and possible by himselfe, if they vse to [Page 96] say any praiers at all.

4 Whereas I said also this generall barbarousnesse did abound in the people, vntil it pleased God by the Ministrie of his Gospell to conuert them: he replies, that this seldome happens to sound Catholiks to be conuerted, or rather peruerted by the Protestant Ministery: I answer (for let the truth be knowne in euery thing, that I haue affirmed) that the Protestant Mi­nistery hath not bene fruitlesse among the people, but hath most happily conuerted thousands; and that countrey, some part of it especially, where the word hath bene more fre­quent, yeelds at this day, and long hath done, as many, and as sound professors of the truth, as any part of our kingdome. And in the backwardest part thereof, many people haue ioyfully receiued the truth, and acknowledged the errors, wherein the guile of Seminaries haue holden them; and ma­ny that appeared to be soūd Catholiks, haue done this. I heard an aged yeoman, after a Sermon effectually preached, At Gooznar, neare to Pr [...] ­ston. in a parish where Seminaries most haunt, when the preacher had done, stand up in his seate, and desiring his neighbours to make meanes to obtaine a competent Preacher into the place, professe, It was true the Preacher said, and that his old religion (as he termed it) had allowed them to liue in all naughti­nesse. This sheweth, that Popish superstition would soone be rooted out there, and those locusts soone be blowne away, if the word were effectually preached among them.

CHAP. XIII.

CHAP. XIIII.

CHAP. XV.

CHAP. XVI.

1 IN this Chapter where these words lye, he discourses of the obiect of faith, and inquires what the things are which belong to it, and must be beleeued; to no purpose intruding himselfe vpon an impertinent question touching the beleefe of a mans owne saluation: and in this period he affirmes, that it [Page 134] is against the Protestants owne Principles to beleeue it: Be­cause by their Principles, nothing may be beleeued, but what is set downe in Scripture; either expressely, or by good con­sequence; which the saluation, or remission of sinnes to Lu­ther, Caluine, White, or any particular man, is not. And to shew this to be our Principle, he saies in the margent, that M. White in such a place, insinuats, that nothing may be recei­ued, as a point of faith, vnlesse it can be proued by necessary conse­quence of Scripture without all authoritie of the Church: mea­ning, as I suppose, that I require no Church authoritie to as­sure a man any thing, but intend such things, onely to be be­leeued, as may be proued, at least by consequence of Scripture, without the authoritie of the Church. I answer 2. things. First, that in the place alleadged, I deny no authority of the Church, that is d [...]e vnto it, but onely (against them that charge the Scripture with insufficiency, as if they wanted ma­ny things needfull to be beleeued, which must be supplied by the Tradition, and Authority of the Church) I affirme that whatsoeuer is needfull to be knowne, beleeued, or done, is con­tained in Scripture, and by the same ALONE may absolutely be determined. The meaning whereof is, that what Ministrie, and power soeuer the Church hath to teach, and rule vs in the vse of the Scripture, and points of faith, (which authority no Protestant will deny to belong to the true Church, or to be needfull) yet all things, whatsoeuer belong to faith, and the Church by any authoritie, may propose vnto vs, are con­tained in the Scripture, and may be proued thereby alone: the said Church authoritie being onely a requisite condition, subordinate for the readier attaining to the sence, and vse of the Scripture: but no rule, or principle, either aboue, or with the Scripture, whereinto any mans faith, in any point is resol­ued, so that it may be said, This I must, or I may, beleeue, vpon the tradition and authority of the Church, though it be not any way reuealed in the Scripture. The which assertion of ours, hath 2. parts: the one affirmatiue, that the Scripture alone, and abso­lutely considered in it owne Latitude, and extent, contain­eth all things belonging to faith, without defect. This is [Page 135] proued Digr. 3. & 1 2. in the way. The other Negatiue; that the Churches authoritie is neither needfull, nor able to supply any necessa­ry, or new point of faith, that is not contained in the Scrip­ture. I deny it not to be ordinarily, a necessary condition, for the knowing, and beleeuing, that which the Scripture re­ueales; for Ro. 10.14. How shall they heare, that they may beleeue without a Preacher? Act. 8.31. How can we vnderstand except we haue a guide? Mal 3.7. for the Priests lips should preserue knowledge, and at his mouth they should seeke the Law; for he is the Messenger of the Lord of hoasts. I onely deny it to be the rule, and foundation of faith: or so much as the last infallible, and cleare ground, whereupon the beleeuer, in any point that he beleeues, restes himselfe. The which (to hold proportion with the Iesuit) in this place. I onely proue by the Papists owne principles, to wit, that the proposition of the Church is Grego. Val. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. punct. 1. pag. 32. §. sit nunc Sexta. neither the last and clearest mo­tiue, whereupon our faith staies, but there are higher, and clea­rer, then it; which can be nothing, but the immediate super­naturall light of the verities beleeued themselues, shining vpon our hearts from the Scripture: whereunto the light of Church authority, when it hath reuealed the doctrine con­tained in Scripture to vs, giues place; as all lesser lights do, when a greater begins to shine.

2 Secondly I answer, that from this Principle of ours: Nothing may be beleeued, but what is set downe in Scripture ex­pressely, or may be gathered from thence by good consequence: it doth not follow, that a particular man, as Luther, or White cannot beleeue the promises of Gods speciall mercie, touching his owne saluation: because though Luther, or Whites name be not expressely set downe in the promise, yet that which is set downe is so offered to vs, that being penitent beleeuers, and iustified, and standing in grace, (whereof there is an infal­lible assurance, THE WAI [...] Digr. 43. by our aduersaries owne confession) we may conclude our owne particular Saluation from thence, and must indeuour to beleeue it. This part of my answer af­firmes 2. things. First, that a penitent sinner iustified, and eleua­ted into the state of grace, may infallibly proue, or gather the assu­rance of his Saluation, by good consequence from the Scripture. [Page 136] Secondly, that this assurance, thus to be gathered, appertaines to those verities, which are beleeued by the habite of faith. I do not say any man can at all times, so firmely, and without feare of the contrary, beleeue his owne reconciliation with God; as he can the first articles of faith, that are expressely, and im­mediately reuealed: I onely affirme, that he beleeues it by the habite of supernaturall faith, and is bound to endeuour, and vse the meanes, that he may beleeue it.

3 The first point I haue purposely shewed Digr. 40. n. 39. & 4 [...]. n. 10. in the THE WAIE, and confirmed by the confession of diuers of our Aduersaries, whither I referre the Iesuit, that he may see how, and in what manner this assurance is gathered. Onely I will here admonish the reader, that if the penitent belee­uer, could not, by necessary consequence of Scripture, and true application of the generall promises of the Gospell to his owne particular person, conclude his saluation, he were in no wise bound to beleeue it: but now when he hath receiued the Testimony of Gods Spirit within him, crying Abba Father: the power of the same Spirit in his body and soule, renuing him, and producing the effectes of sauing grace: the Faith of Christ whereby he giues consent to the Gospell: the life of Christ whereby he liues, not himselfe, but Christ liues in him: the power of his death, whereby he dies to the world, and sinne: when finally in truth, and conscience he performes all the conditions, that the Scripture requires, and feeles with­in him those very signes, whereby the Gospell describes the elect: it may not be doubted, but by good consequence, both in matter, and forme, he may conclude his owne salua­tion It is no where written in the Bible, that Luther, or Cal­uine shall rise at the last day, yet the Reply will allow them to beleeue it, by consequence from that which is written: All men shall rise. It is no where written, that this Iesuite, shall come into Iudgement, and giue an account of this his faith, and the waies wherein he walkes: yet I presume he beleeues it by faith, in that by consequence it necessarily followes of that Article, He shall come to iudge, the quicke, and the dead. In the same manner a penitent sinner, examining himselfe, con­cludes [Page 137] his owne saluation from the Scripture, that sayes, Marc. 16.16. Rom. 10.9. Euery one, that repents, and beleeues shall be saued. Therefore, if there be any certainty of a mans owne repentance, of his be­ing in Grace, of the testimony of Gods Spirit (and Paret — Lom­bar [...]um nec v [...] ­lu [...]sse, nec do [...] ­isse, vt do [...]eren­tur Christian de peccatorum remissione, & gra­tia Dei, & vita aeterna perpetuo dubitare aut dif­fidere; quemad modum re vera nec vllus Ortho­doxus, & sani iudicij Ecclesi­astes, inter Pon­tificios, quod e­quidem sciam, vnquam illud docuit. Mart. Eisengren. de­fens. Concil. Trid. de cert. grat. p. 216. fie vpon that mouth, that will say there is none, when the Scripture 2. Co. 13.5. biddes vs, Try our selues touching them) it must needes be yeelded, that there is a certainty likewise of his saluation.

4 The second point, that the remission of our sinnes, and eternall life is beleeued by Faith, is cleare vpon 4. points. 1. because in the Creed, those 2. Articles are made the obiect of Faith; therefore the penitent sinner applies them to himselfe by the same habit. 2. Aliqui Catho­lici existima­runt, posse v­numquemque credete fide diuina, sine pe­culiari reuela­tione, dimissa sibi esse pecca­ta. Vasqu. 12. disp. 200. n. 5. Many learned Papists confesse so much. Fisher of Rochester. Roffenf. o­pusc. de fid. & miserecord. dei. axiom. 10. If we will enter into heauen, we must not come with a double heart, or wauering Faith, but with that, which is ALTOGETHER VNDOVBTING, and MOST CERTAINE. For to doubting minds, there is no way open. Gropper, and the Diuines of Collen, Antididag. c. de iustif. §. pro­ditum est. p. 29. We are iustified by Faith, whereby WITHOVT DOVBTING, we firmely be­leeue, that our sinnes, who are truely penitent, are forgiuen vs, for Christ: whereof notwithstanding it behooues vs, INWARDLY THROVGH FAITH, TO BE CERTIFIED, BY THE TES­TIMONY OF THE HOLY GHOST. Enchirid. Co­lon. c. de iustifi­cat. §. Non ha­beo. p. 139. For we confesse it to be the truth, that it is also required for a mans iustification, that a man CERTAINELY BELEEVE, not onely generally, that such as are truly penitent, haue their sinnes forgiuen by Christ, but also that they are forgiuen, THE MAN HIMSELFE, THAT BE­LEEVES for Christ, by Faith. And Ibid. §. sed hic. againe: No mans sinnes are pardoned, vnlesse he beleeue, that he hath obtained pardon, by Christ. Ruard the Dean of Louan, is Vasqu. 12. disp. 200. n. 35. reported to hold that without reuelation, a man may haue that assurance of his iustifica­tion which shall be without feare, or doubting: but he holds more, Ruard explic. artic. Louan. art. 9. p 119. that if any simple man, being persuaded, BELEEVE, out of this will of God (towards vs, for his Sonne, in whom he hath giuen vs all things) that his sinnes are forgiuen him by Christ, and this CERTAINELY, and as it were OVT OF THE WORD OF GOD; and thereupon is touched with true loue to God, wholly sub­mitting himse [...] to him, who thus hath preuented him with his [Page 138] loue, and repenting him of his sinnes: it is very likely, that he that is thus affected, doth truely obtaine the pardon of his sinnes, and is made the sonne of God. The same speciall faith is taught vs by Ioh. Bacon. & Catharin. quos refert Pe­rer. select. disp. tom. 2. in Ro­man. 8. d. 7. nu. 27. 30. others: and it is the highest assurance that can be. For Fidei cognitio sola visione beata inferior est cla­ritate, aequalis certitudine: reli­quis omnibus a­lijs scientijs longe superior atque certior. Pined. in Iob 19.25. n. 1. p. 96. the knowledge of faith is inferiour to the blessed vision (which the Saints in heauen haue) onely in clearenes; but it is equall in cer­tainety, and far aboue, and more certaine, then all other knowled­ges. 3. It is Certa est ex fi­de conclusio illa­ta ex vna credita & altera eui­denti — neque dubitare, si max­ime cup [...]rem, va­lerem; quin mihi certum esset, ex side, me esse in gratia; si quidem hoc colligere pos­sem, ex vna cre­dita, & altera mihi euidenti, & hoc ita esse sic suadeo. Primo, multae sunt pro­positiones de fide, quae non aliter possunt probari essè de fide, nisi quia sequuntur euidenter ex cre­ditis, saltem cum aliqua propositi­one euidenti se­cundum lumen naturale. An­drae. Vega. pro Concil. l. 9. c. 39. p. 289. This is the doctrine of others also. Scot. 3 d. 35. qu. vnit. Cano. Loc. l. 12. c 2. pag. 258. Medina 12. q. 112. art. 5. Albertin. Coroll. p. 261. nu. 11. a principle, common among our Aduersaries, that euery conclusion issuing from one promise reuealed expresly in the Scripture, and another clearely, and certainely knowne other­wise, and by euident, or good consequence added to it, belongs to faith, and is beleeued by no other habit then of faith. As for ex­ample, all the dead shall rise. Luther is dead: therefore Lu­ther shall rise. Euery one that begets, really differs from him that is begotten: the Father begets the Sonne: therefore the Father really differs from the Sonne. Here both the conclu­sions are such verities as belongs to faith. For Luther belee­ued, he should rise; and all we beleeue the Father really dif­fers from the Sonne: yet neither of them are expresly reuea­led, or written in the Scripture (as it is not, that Luther, or White shall be saued, or haue their sinnes pardoned) but the Minor proposition in the first discourse, and the Maior in the second, are knowne otherwise, and by good connexion ad­ded to that which is written; and therefore the conclusion is beleeued by faith. So it is in this discourse: euery theologicall cō ­clusion belongs to faith: but the assurance of the remission of a mans owne sinnes, is a theologicall conclusion: therefore it belongs to faith. The first proposition is manifest. The second is prooued thus. All that are penitent, and beleeue, haue the remission of sinnes as­sured them: the which proposition is of faith: because it is im­mediatly reuealed, Esay the 1.16.17.18. Act. 3.19. Rom. 10.9. Ezek. 18.21. But I repent, and beleeue; this proposition is euident, and certaine to him that doth so. For Repentance, and Faith are infallibly knowne to the iustified that haue them. Mark. 9.24. Es. 38.3. 1 Ioh. 3.21. The conclusion [Page 139] therefore, I haue the remission of sin assured me, is a theologicall conclusion belonging to faith. Vega saies, A conclusion infer­red of one thing beleeued, and another that is euident, is certaine by faith — I cannot doubt, if I would neuer so faine, but it should be certaine vnto me by faith, that I were in grace, if I could col­lect it from one thing beleeued, and another thing euident vnto me, and that this is so, I thus perswade. For there are many propositi­ons of faith, which cannot otherwise be prooued to be of faith, but because they do euidently follow of those things that are beleeued, at least with some proposition euident according to naturall light. And indeede how many propositions of faith are there, that cannot be shewed so to be, Alberti [...]. Co­roll. p. 226. n. 8. & Vega vbi supr. but because they follow eui­dently of that, which is beleeued? Thus our aduersaries hold the decrees of a Councell, and the Popes determinations, to be matters of faith, and yet suppose one proposition, whence they issue, to be but humane. Thus they beleeue by diuine faith, that Paul the 5 is right Pope, and that the Trent Coun­cell was a lawfull Councell: and yet that the election of Paul was Canonicall, or the manner of the assembly of Trident lawfull, they confesse is had onely by humane faith, that may be deceiued. They must therefore grant the Protestants, as much: that the remission of a mans own sinnes (which in all in different iudgement, a penitent sinner, iustified by Christ, may as well conclude from the Scripture, as our aduersaries can the Canonicall election of the Pope, or the lawfull māner of as­sembling the Trent Councell) is a truth Haec mihi sen­tentia firma in­sedit. Pontifi­cem Romanum ab eis desectū, quibus ius est eligendi, & quē est Christiana complexa Ec­clesia, verissi­mum Christi esse Vicarium: idque ea side, cui nullum po­test subesse sal­sum, ab vno­quoque credi oportere. Paul. Comitol. resp. moral. l. 1. q. 99. n. 2. p. 212. to be beleeued by faith. Fourthly this must be granted vpon two other points, that Soto apolog. c. 2. Ruard. ar [...]. 9. p. 119. Cassal. de quadriparr. instit. l. 2 c. 8. Staplet. [...]e iu­stific. l. 9. c 11. Peter. select. q. in Ioh. 14. disp. 18. Maturè ta­men omnibus, hinc inde, pe [...]sa­tis, probabilius profecto, esse crediderim, posse aliquos viros spirituales tanto­pere in exerci­tus spiritualibus, & in familiari­tate diuina, pro­ficere, vt, absque vlla temeritate, possint, rectè & absque vlla haesi­tatione, credere se inuenisse gratiam, & remissionem peccatorum, apud Deum: Andr. Vega. pro Concil. p. 313. our aduersaries (some few Iesuites excepted, who are but one, and an vpstart faction against the maior part in the Ro­mane Church) freely yeeld unto. First, that a iustified man may haue such certainty of the remission of his sinnes, as is void of all feare, and doubting, in the same manner as any man may certainely know, there is such a place as Rome, Con­stantinople, London. Do. Bannes In Tho. 22. q. 18. art 4. concl. 3. The same sayes Tolet. in Rom. 5. v. 5. p. 225. sayes, Our hope, (where­by we looke for Saluation) is, and is called, simplie such, as can­not [Page 140] deceiue vs, and firme, and safe, both in the Scripture, and in the doctrine of the Church: because through the diuine promise, and power of Gods mercy, whereupon it leanes, it can no more deceiue vs, then faith, in whose testimony it is founded. Martin Isengren hath written a whole booke of purpose to shew this point: in it he hath these words. Eisengren. pro conc Trid. de certit. grat. p. 228. I haue many a time, and often visited the sicke, and bene with them that haue died, and no man can re­port of me, but that as soone, as they had declared their repen­tance, I exhorted them with all diligence, to haue an VNDOVB­TED, AND CERTAINE CONFIDENCE, that our most mercifull God would, for the merit of his Sonne, WITHOVT ALL DOVBT, forgiue them their sinnes, and after this life giue them his heauenly kingdome: yea he sayes: Pag. 217. All the chiefest Di­uines of the Church of Rome, whose writings for that purpose, he had read, and searched, though they did not allow a man to be alto­gether secure, and free from all care, and heedfulnesse, yet Vniuersi, vno ore. all of them, with one voice teach, that we must NOT TREMBLE, OR MISTRVST, BVT HAVE A FIRME HOPE, AND CER­TAINE CONFIDENCE: Omnes ortho­doxi, receptique theologi, quot­quot tam inde ab Apostolorum temporibus, ad hunc vsque an­num vixerint. p. 254. and he adds that this is the doctrine of all the Schoolemen, and Fathers that haue bene since the Apo­stles, whose testimonies, and words he alledges at large Dionys. Areo pagit. Cypr. Ambr. Augusti. Chrysost. Cyril. Basil. Theodor. Leo. Gregor. Roman Pius 5. Sixt. Senensis. Mich. Medina. Anselm. Ber­nard. Magist. Thom. Scot. Altisiodor. Rey­ner. Alexand. Lyra. Bonauent Dionys. Car­thus. Gabr. Pel­bart. Biga. Got­shal. Thesaur. Hos. Ruard. Lo­uaniens. Caie­tan. Roffens. Ecch. Nausca. Cassal. Soto. Canis. Vega. Castro. Torrēs. Theses Cathol. disput. adu. Wittemberg. to the number of more then 40. Whereby the reader may iudge of my Aduersaries learning, and religion: that hauing deri­ded such testimonies, and signes of our being in Gods fa­uour, as Isengren auerres to be infallible, Reply. p. 58. concludes that the perswasion, which any Protestant hath, that their sinnes are for­giuen, is a fond presumptuous fiction, of their owne heart: but I­sengren Vbi sup. p. 217. answers, that such fantasticall companions, not vnder­standing the truth of things, babble of that, whereof they can giue no sufficient reason. Secondly, when it is demanded whence this certainty, so free from doubting and feare, arises? they grant it arises from the light of the Scripture, that is to say, the promises of mercy, and forgiuenes, reuealed in the Scrip­ture, beget, and produce it in the heart of man. Ruard Ruard. att. 9. pag. 121. sayes, Though it be inferiour to the certainty of faith, yet it DE­PENDS VPON THE SENTENCES OF THE SCRIP­TVRE, and therefore faith infused mediatly, inclines vnto it. [Page 141] Casalius saies, Cassal. qua­drip. inst. p. 221. l. 2. c. 8. This confidence arises, by hauing respect to the diuine conditionall promises, and to the conditions that they require. Vega, following the doctrine of Bacon the Carmelite, Vega pro Cō ­cil. l. 9 c. 47. pag. 321. Is credit, cui aliquid sine vlla haesitatione, certum & per­suasum est. Ca­tech. Roman. pag. 17. saies, This assurāce is not the assurāce of faith, but an assurance following faith, yet, saith he, if that will serue the turne to call it the assurance of faith, I WILL NOT GREATLY STRIVE: but, that there may be peace, and we may all agree in one, I will grant that you require, and willingly yeeld my selfe. These men as learned, as euer liued in the Church of Rome, you see, deny not this certainty of faith, or knowledge following faith, howsoeuer the said faith be not so intent, and strong in apprehending that obiect, as it is in beleeuing, that which is immediatly reuea­led, and expressely written. For what habite, or facultie is there, in the soule, whereby to receiue, and apply the promi­ses of the Gospell, touching the benefits of Christ for our re­demption, but onely faith? For although the holy Ghost, not tying himselfe to termes, do 1. Ioh. 4.13. & 3.14. sometime call it knowledge, yet calling it Rom 6.8. 1. Ioh. 4.16. againe beleeuing alone, or beleeuing and knowing, it is manifest that he intends such a knowledge as not onely flowes from the principles of faith but also is re­duced to the same habite: and this onely, which the holy Ghost teaches in termes so expresse and formall, might serue to stop the mouthes of all our aduersaries, if they had not set themselues to resist euen Gods owne Spirit, when it speakes against their corruptions. For with what other eies can the soule behold the heauenly light of the Gospell? How shall that confidence, assurance, certaintie which is created by the mixture of the light of the Scripture, with light of a good conscience renued by the holy Ghost, belong to any hu­mane knowledge, when the Scripture sayes expresly, Gal. 3.14. The promise of the Spirit is receiued by faith; and wheresoeuer, in all the Bible, the Gospell is reuealed, men are called vpon to beleeue? I will not deny, but faith hath his degrees, and can beleeue some things more resolutely, then other, and one time is stronger, then at another; but this is it, I vrge, that if there be granted a certainety of a mans owne speciall stan­ding in grace, which certainty arises by the Scriptures: it must [Page 142] needes also be granted, that it is a worke, or effect of faith: & this is confirmed by the courage, and constancy of Mar­tyrs, and by the admirable resolution, that we see in good men, when they die. Saint Ambrose In Psal. 118. serm. 7. pag. 641. saies, we see in­nocent persons in this world, ioyfully to runne towards iudgement, to hate delaies, to hasten their triall, whereas the guilty flie from it: and he giues the reason: Because the iust man knowes eternall life, the fellowship of Angels, the crowne of his good merits, is laied vp for him. The Heb. 11.36. Scripture reports how many of the chil­dren of God were tried by mocking, and scourging, by bonds, and prisonment, they were stoned, hewen apeeces, tempted, they wan­dered vp and downe, destitute, and afflicted: All which the Apo­stle saies, they did by faith, and confidence of the Promises; and yet their assurance was no other, nor otherwise begotten, then the ordinary assurance of all Gods children, which is concluded by ioyning the light of their conscience, kindled by the holy Ghost, to the immediate light of the conditions reuealed in the Scriptures.

5 That which our Aduersaries assigne to be the cause why a man cannot be sure of his saluation, because no man is sure of his Perseuerance, is easily answered, by affirming like­wise, that the grace of perseuerance, with other gifts, is gi­uen all the elect in their iustification. For S. Paule Rom. 8.38. sayes, he was certaine of it; and what he, in that place, auouches of himselfe, belongs to others, as well as himselfe, by the confession of Staplet. de iustif l. 9. c. 13. Tolet. in Rom. 8. v. vlt. our strongest aduersaries; and he auouches not onely that Gods loue to him, but more properly, that his loue to God, shall neuer faile. Perer. in Ro. 5. d 12. n. 59. The Iesuit also confesses it to be the doctrine of De Bono perseuerant. Saint Austine, that grace is giuen by Christ, whereby not onely man may perseuere, but [...]lso that he shall perseuere. [...]. Chrysost. hom. 9. in Rom. The fauorits of Princes are aduanced to ho­nour, and riches, but their preseuerance therein is vncertaine. But it is not so with the grace of God bestowed in Iustifica­tion: and therefore we may beleeue, as well our Perseue­rance, as our Grace. And if the iustified be certaine of the grace of Iustification that he hath, then may he be certaine, and well assured of his Perseuerance, because it is a grace pur­chased [Page 143] vs by Christ, and included in that Peace, which the iustified by faith haue with God, through him; or else let him shew that can, where any firme and setled peace of minde is, where there is vncertainty, and doubtfulnesse touching Perseuerance. Concil. Trid. sess. 6. can. 22. Vega pro Con­cil. l. 12. cap. 23. Barth. Medi [...]. 12. qu. 109. art. 10. ad 3. Greg. de Valent. tom. 2. pag. 849. c. And that it is in the power of a iustified man, with Gods helpe, to perseuere in grace, to the end; is defined by the Trent Councell, and holden to be the doctrine of all Catholikes: which power 1. Pet. 5.1. Saint Peter also testifies to be re­duced into act by the almightie power of God, keeping him [...]. as with a garrison through faith to saluation: according to that of Ier. 32.40. the Prophet, I will put my feare into their hearts that they shall not depart from me. Which ouerthrowes all them, that make the vncertaintie of Perseuerance a reason against the certainty of saluation.

CHAP. XVII.

1 OVr doctrine is, that in the things reuealed in the Scripture, and belonging to the obiect of faith, there is a difference; whereby some are more ne­cessary to be knowne, and without error to be vnderstood, then othersome. For though it be lawfull for no man either to misbeleeue, or obstinately not to beleeue any thing that is writ­tē, yet the simple ignorance, or error, in many things, hinders not saluation, nor the substance of Faith: but either a priuate man, or a whole particular Church thus ignorant, or erring (either inuincibly, or not affectedly, and obstinately) in such things, and yet holding others aright, hath sauing faith, and is in the state of grace. This difference of things arises from 3. respects. First, of the commandement enioyning, and vr­ging the knowledge of one thing, more then the knowledge of another: as for example, the knowledge of Christ cruci­fied, more then the knowledge of his Genealogy: for though both be reuealed alike, yet not both vnder the like penalty. Secondly, of the nature, and condition of the things; when this doth more properly, and necessarilie belong to saluation, then that: for without the knowledge of story of Gedeon, I may be saued: but without the knowledge of Christs nature, and office I cannot. Thirdly, of their vse. Whē one thing is the foundatiō, and ground, that giues light, and subsistence, to another; as the knowledge of Christs office, & merits brings light to the vnderstanding of the doctrine, touching our owne vnworthinesse: &c. Out of these respects, and degrees of things, that are beleeued, as they stand in order one to another, and in vse to vs, we call some FVN­DAMENTALL, and some NOT FVNDAMENTALL; not with relation to our faith so much as to our knowledge; in [Page 145] as much, as it is dāgerous to misdoubt the truth of any thing, that is reuealed to us, if it were but: 2. Sam. 24.9. 1. Chro. 21.5. Whether the number of the children of Israell, able to beare armes, when Dauid numbred them, were 1500000, though no man will say an error, or ignorance in this matter were against sauing faith. A Fundamentall point therefore is that which belongs to the substance of faith, and is so reuealed, and so necessary, that there can be no saluation without the knowledge, and ex­plicit faith thereof: of which nature are the things contai­ned in the articles of our faith: a point not Fundamentall, is that which directly belongs not to the way of Saluation, neither doth error, or ignorance therein make void, or de­stoy, that which is Fundamentall. Forsomuch as such a point is reuealed, but for the manifestation of the other, and is be­leeued but in order to the other: as, that Abraham had so many children, Paul had a cloke: The dead pray for the li­uing, &c: wherein it may fall out, that we may erre or be ig­norant, and yet the faith not preiudiced.

2 I know none of our Aduersaries that deny this distin­ction, but vse, and explicate it, as well, as we, though none such as this Iesuite is, be growne so peruerse, and malepart, that they will endure nothing, that we say, be it neuer so true. 22. q. 2. art. 5. Dicendū quod fidei obiectum, per se est id per quod homo be­atus efficitur. Per accidens autē, aut secun­dario, se habe [...]t ad obiectum virtutis omnia quae in sacra Scriptura con­tinentur; sicut quod Abrahā habuit duos fi­lios, &c. Thomas, hauing deuided the obiect of faith into that, which is so by it selfe, and that, which is by accident, and secondarily; defines the first to be that whereby a man is made blessed, and saued: the latter that which is reuealed, whatsoeuer it be, as that Abraham had two sonnes; and Dauid was the sonne of Iesse. Dialog. 1. part. l. 2. c. 2. pag. 6. Occham sets downe three differences of verities to be beleeued: Some touching God, and Christ, whereon principally depends our Saluation, as that there is one God, and three persons: that Christ is God, and man: that he suffered, and died, and rose againe, &c. Some whereon our Saluation depends not so princi­pally, which though we beleeue, yet do they not Non directè sed indirecte, quod ammodo, ad salutem hu­mani generis pertinere nos­cuntur. so directly belong to our Saluation; as many things written of Pharaoh, &c: Of the third sort, such as are not reuealed, but either agree with that which is reuealed, or follow manifestly of it. And Vbi sup. c. 11. pag. 9. Sunt qui­dam Moderni dicentes quod multae assertio­nes sunt, quae in rei veritate ad­uersantur diui­nae Scripturae, quae tamen ab Ecclesia mini­mè sunt dam­nandae, nec sint inter haereses numerandae. he reports it to haue bene an opinion in the Church, in his time, that [Page 146] many assertions, which in truth of the matter were against the Scripture, yet were not condemned by the Church, nor counted heresie. Espencaeus Espencae in 2 Tim digress. 17. p 119. discoursing of things to be knowne, and beleeued, sayes, The infolded faith of simple people, will serue well enough in such things as are the obiect of faith onely BY ACCIDENT — and in subtile considerations that arise about the Scripture — but in those things, which OF THEMSELVES are the obiect of faith, whereby men are led to happines, they need an vnfolded faith: the Colliars faith will do no good. Mag 3. d. 23. & ibi Scholast cō ­muniter, Tho. Bonau. Durād. Ricard. Dionys. Gabr. Occh. q. 8. Bann. 22. q. 2. art 8 dub. 2. O­uand. 4. d. 13. prop. 12. Eyme­ [...]ic. director. part. 1. q. 2. ad. 8. & ibi Scoliast. Pezant. 22 p. 504. a. Syluest. sum. v. fides. nu. 6. Simanch. ca­chol. instit. tit 28. nu. 20. Pic. Mirand. de fid. & ord. credend. theor. 12. p. 286. All the Casenists, and Schoolemen that haue written touching the nature of heresie, and the measure of Catholicke faith, agree that there is a certaine measure, and quantity of faith, without which none can be saued, but euery thing reuealed belongs not to this measure; and it is enough to beleeue somethings onely by the Colliars faith. The which doctrine doth euidently al­low our distinction, that some things are Fundamentall, and some not: for no Protestant thinks any point to be so not Fundamentall, but that euery man is bound with humility, and reuerence to accept it, whensoeuer the knowledge, and necessity thereof shall be offered him by the Church: which is all our aduersaries require in their infolded faith.

3 This distinction, by THE WAY pag. 110. me onely touched, and that by the way, briefly, vpon another occasion, the Iesuite in this chapter frowardly cauils at: and in this place wrangles with the definition that I gaue of points Fundamentall, be­cause it is not found in the words of the Scripture, that I cited, for it, in the margent. Whereto I answer three things. First, Act. 4.12. 1. Cor. 3.11. Eph. 2.19. the Scriptures cited shew the knowledge, & expresse faith of Christs death, to be absolutely necessary for all men▪ and two of the places call the matter of this knowledge a foun­dation. Therefore such a point as is absolutely to be knowne, and rightly holden of all (which euery point reuealed is not) may be called a Foundation, or Fundamentall point: Ther­fore againe, such as, by the like confession of our aduersaries, some men, and all men of some times, may erre in, or be ig­norant of, without preiudice of Saluation, may be called a point not Fundamentall: whence it followes againe, that [Page 147] my distinction is grounded well enough vpon the places ci­ted in the margent. Secondly, I answer, that how scorne­fully soeuer Iesuites thinke of the Scripture, yet we Prote­stants had as lieffe borrow our conclusions, distinctions, and words, wherein we expresse them, from it; as from the stinking puddles of rotten Schoolemen, or new found mint of vpstart Iesuites. Thirdly, my aduersary himselfe, in this very chapter, acknowledges the distinction, if it bee not applyed to a wrong end, to be good. For first touching the termes thereof, Fundamentall, not Fundamentall: He finds thē in S. Austin. True it is, S. Austin insinuates a distinction of some points Fundamentall, and some not Fundamentall. Therefore the words are according to Saint Austin, and that is well. Next in the matters themselues, also, he sayes, Catholicke Di­uines make some distinction, and hold some to be more necessary to be actually, and expresly knowne of all sorts; then other: there­fore he quarrels at that, which himselfe confesses to be the truth. There be some humours loue to be doing, if it be but to keepe their hand in vre. Maiol dies Canic. I haue read of one that had so vsed himselfe to pilfring, that he would pick his owne purse, and steale things out of his owne closet. The Iesuite seems to be of that kindred; that will quarrell, and keepe a wrang­ling with the doctrine of his owne Church, rather then he will cease from his contentious spirit.

4 Yet the saddle, somewhere pinches him, and it may be the easing of him, may do him good. He complains this distinction, when it is granted, will not helpe the matter nei­ther: for the question may still be, how many, and which truthes those be that are necessary: the which question if we leaue to be determinated by euery priuate spirit, either we shall haue no point to be counted Fundamentall, in regard the ignorance of some may be such, that they may thinke a man may be saued by morall good life, although through ignorance he beleeue nothing at all; or else so many as shall please euery brainsicke fellow. The determination therefore of this necessary question, is to be left to the iudgement of the Catholicke Church, that all such points that are confirmed by full authority of the said Church he [Page 148] receiued for such as must necessarily be beleeued by all men. Wherein first I blame his discretion: for where I mentioned the distinction, I had no cause to inquire, whose the autho­rity is to iudge, what is Fundamentall, and what otherwise; but assuming it, as a thing iudged already, I onely mentio­ned it; affirming some points to be Fundamentall, and some otherwise. How it helps the matter therefore, I had nothing to do, in that my words were not vsed in this question. Next I pittie his wretched state, that in no controuersie run­ning betweene vs, no not so much as in this, a poore distin­ction can preuaile, vnlesse his owne Church, and the Pope therein (for Shewed plainely below, cap 35. & 36. that he meanes by the authority of the Catholicke Church) be made the iudge. This is a very meane shift, when a question depends betweene vs, and them, to put the Scrip­ture, and the consent of the Ancient Church by; and re­quire themselues to be iudges. Thirdly this question, as all other matters belonging to faith, must be iudged by no mans priuate spirit, but by the Catholicke Church of Christ, as the Iudge, and by the Scripture onely as the Rule: and if they be no competent Iudges, who through ignorance may thinke a man may be saued by morall good life, though he be­leeue nothing at all; then away with the Church of Rome, and let it be acknowledged as erroneous, as any priuate spi­rit: See cap. 22. n. 1. wherein it is frequently holden, that the Gentiles were iustified, and might be saued, onely by their morall life, with­out beleeueing any thing at all. Fourthly supposing the Pro­test, left the determining of this question to priuate spirit, (which they do not, but to the true Church of God, fol­lowing the Scripture) yet let my Iesuite answer, if the pra­ctise of his owne Church be not as bad, where the Pope hath power See cap. 36. n. 3. to make a new article of faith, and that to be a Fundamentall point, belonging to faith at one time, which is not so at another; so that all men, shall then be bound to beleeue it, which before were free to beleeue it? Scot. 4. d. 11. q. 3 §. ad argu. Tonstall. de ve­rit. corp. p 46. as it hath already bene practised in the point of transubstantiation, and may when the Pope will in the points of Dico primò, veritatem hanc sc. virginem esse conceptam si­ne peccato o­riginali, posse definiti ab Ec­clesia, quando id expedire in­dicauerit. pro­batur. Nam im­primis Ecclesiā posse contro­uersiam hanc, in alterutram partem decide­re, apertè sup­ponunt Sixtus 4. & Pius 5. — Suar. tom. 2. disp 3. sect. 6. the concep­tion of the B. Virgin, and Paul. Benc. Eugub. l. de effic. auxil. c. 1. the concourse of Gods grace with [Page 149] mans wil: and the Staplet. Prin­cip. doctr. l. 9. c. 4. Relect. cō ­tro. 5. q. 2. art. 4. Canonizing of Hermes, or Clement into the sacred Scripture. In which case his Holinesse might pos­sible, if not be brain-sicke, which betides yonger men (which Popes commonly are not, vnlesse it be sometime, when the yong Cardin [...] are in an humor to elect a Bennet, or Iohn, or When Leo the tenth, a yong man, was elected in the Conclaue, Alphonsus Pe­trucius, a yong Cardinall, pro­claimed his ele­ction at the window: Pon­tificem habemus Leonem deci­mum; ac viuant vigeantque iu­niores. Pap. Mas­so. in Leō. 10. he should haue cried, by the order, Annuti [...] vobis gaudium magnum, Papam habemus, Marcell, sacr. cerem. pag. 19 Leo) yet do [...]e at least by vertue of his age; or for his re­creation play the vice of a Play, as Alex. ab Alexand. genial. di­cr. l. 3. c. 21. Amasis the King of E­gipt would sometime do among his Courtiers; and as Aelian. var. hist. l. 12. c. 15. A­gesilaus, ride vpon a sticke among his children, to make them sport: the which comparisons howsoeuer his crea­tures will take vnkindly, yet all the world knowes his Con­sistorie hath bene a stage whereon he hath many a time, and often plaied these parts ere now, as formally, as the priuat­est spirit, or braine-sickest companion aliue can do: and so I leaue him.

CHAP. XVIII.

1 HEre my name is cited in the Margent, and the page of my Booke; as if I had written, or some way insi­nuated, that these 3. points were matters of faith, and yet not contained in the Scripture. But I writ nothing that sounds that way, neither in the place cited, nor any where [Page 150] else; yet because I will misse no place, where he cites me, I answer: he affirmes 3. things. First, that we hold the perpe­tuall virginity of the blessed Virgine, the Celebration of Easter vpon the Sunday: and the Baptisme of Infants, to be For that is the question expressed by himselfe a litle before, pag. 67. of his Repl. points of faith, necessary to be beleeued. [...]condly, that these 3. are not contained in Scripture, Thirdly that we beleeue all this with the Papists. Wherein there is neuer a true word. For to the first; the perpetuall virginity of the Virgine Ma­rie, after the birth of our Sauiour, as well as before, we be­leeue, as a probable, and likely truth; but not as a matter of faith; the which if my aduersarie mislike, I require him to forbeare me, and answer Saint Basil, with whom we consent: [...]. Basil pa. 233. graec. Froben. an. 1551. That she denyed not the workes of mariage to her husband (after the birth of her Sonne) though it nothing hinder godly doctrine, yet what was done after without medling with it, let vs leaue to the doctrine of this Mystery. But whatsoeuer my aduersarie will haue to be thought of is, August. de temp. serm. 6. Theodor. in E­zech. pag. 486. Anibr. in Luc. l. 2. c. 1. §. in men sc. & l. 10. c. 23. §. stabant au tem. & Epist. l. 1. ep. 5. & 7. Basil. vbi sup. Hiero. in Ezec. 44. §. & conuertit. & adu. Heluid. Epi­phan. l. 3 haer. 78. & sermo. de laud. S. Mar. in Bibl. S. Patrū tom. 7. pag. 26. edit. 1. Hesych. & Chrysip. ser. de Maria ibi p. 33 & inde. An­drae. Ierosolym. serm. de salutat. Angel. ibid. pag. 241. Proclus Cyzecen. homil. in Concil. Ephes pag. 251. graec. Commel in. See Zuingl. tom. 3. pag. 233. the ancient Fathers brought the Scripture to proue it; that if it were a matter of faith, it should, in their opinion, be beleeued, because it were con­tained in the Scripture.

2 The celebration of Easter vpon the Sonday likewise, is no point of faith, but only a seemely, and ancient ceremony of the Church, [...]: Socrat. l 5. c. 22. pag 249. Steph. at the first not thought so necessary, as the Iesuits now affirme it to be: specially the holding of it on that day: for Euseb. hist. l. 5. c. 23. the Churches of Asia held it on the 14. day of the moneth, whether it were Sonday, or not, [...]. by an old tradi­tion. See Euseb. ibid. & inde. & l. 7 c. vlt. Socr. vbi sup. Cassiod. l. 9. c. 38 Niceph. l 12 c. 33. 34. Beda aequinoct. vernal. tom. 2. Gab. Prateol. Elench. haer. & verb. quatuordecimani. The which many Catholike Bishops, as Polycarp, Thraseas, Irenaeus, Sagaris, Melito, Polycrates, Anatolius, and diuers others, many yeares together maintained: which they would not haue done, being all godly Bishops of the Catholike Church, if the custome of the Westerne Church, to keepe it on the Sonday, had bene an article of faith. Alphons. [...]du. haer. v. Pascha. Our [Page 151] aduersaries also confesse their custome were, at this day law­full, but for the determination of the Church. Refert Beda rat. temp. c. 45. & ibi Ramesi­ens. gloss. pag. 15. edit. Basil. per Heruag. an. 1563. Theophilus Caesariensis, an ancient Father, tels how the French Church in those daies, alwaie kept it on the 8. of the Calends of Aprill, which is the 25. of March, what day of the weeke soeuer it fell: because Christ arose on that day. And with vs Bed hist. Angl. l. 2. c. 2 & 19. l. 3. c. 25 l. 5. c 22. The like disa­greement a­mong the Spa­niards and French, and o­thers testified by Sigeb. pag. 83. Cron. Caluis Cronolog. an. 546. the old Britons, and Scots celebrated it not on that day, that is now vsed: whereby it is cleare that the holding of Easter, on such a day, is not Catholike. And whereas the Iesuit sayes the ce­lebrating it on a Sonday, is not contained in the Scripture; he saies truly: yet the Church of Rome maintaining that order, in old time, thought otherwise, as he may see in To be seene in Bede de ve [...]n aequinoct. sub. fin. pag. 346. a Councell holden, about that matter, in Pope Victors time, where the Scripture is roundly alleadged for it, against the Asian B.B.

3 The Baptisme of Infants, which is his third example, we confesse to be an article of faith; but we do not confes, that it is not contained in the Scripture: we say the contrary, as ap­peares by our Caluin. instit. l. 4. c. 16. & in­struct. adu. Ana­bapt. art 1. writings against the Anabaptists: yea, the Pa­pists thēselues ordinarily vse to groūd it on the scripture. This truth, De bapt. c. 8. saies Bellar. is proued by three kindes of arguments. The first is taken from the Scripture. This is proued by the Scripture: Tom. 4. pag. 597. b. saies Gregory of Valentia: the like is done by Tho. 3. part. q. 68. art. 9. lan­sen. concord. c. 20. & 100 Sua­rez. tom. 3. disp. 25. sect. 1 Hen­riquez sum. mo­ral. de bapt. c. 21. Vasquez in 3. part. Tho. disp. 149. nu. 6. Tolet. in Ioh. 3. ann. 10. Maldon in Ioh. 3. n. 20. & In Math. 19. v. 14. he hath these wordes. illud fortissi­mum & aper­tissimum te­stimonium, quo semper Ecclesia, vt Infantes baptizarit, adducta est: Nisi quis renatus est. &c. many o­thers: which is woorth the readers obseruation, because at other times, when they deale against vs, they will cry out, it is a tradition vnwritten. Let them go for egregious impo­stors, by my consent, that against the Anabaptists, can proue by Scripture, that which they make vs beleeue is but by tra­dition. Beggars for halting at the townes end, and going vpright, when they are in the Alehouse, are set in the stocks, and nailed to the Pillorie: but Iesuits, counterfeiting after the same fashion, in a higher matter: one while with Scrip­ture: 3. arguments at once out of Scripture: a most powerfull, and plaine testimony of Scripture, for the baptizing of children: a­nother while with their leg in a string, no crosse, but tradi­tion, and Church authority, are made the guides of many mens [Page 152] faith: Nec pedibus ad insistendum idoneis Pet. M [...]ff vit. Loiol. l. 1. c. 2 [...]biae contractae breuitas rectè il­lum incedere prohibuit. Ri­bad. vit Ignat. l. 1. c. 1. The halting of Ignatio, that created them, was a type of the halting religion of his creatures.

4 That which Gretser Defens. Bel­larm. tom 1. l. 4. c. 4. sub sin. pag. 1598. Ingolst. answers hereunto, will not cleare them: he saies these things may be proued by Scripture, but not sufficiently, not effectually by Scripture alone, without tradition, but onely probably. This is against the authority, and nature of the Scripture, for it is the word of God: therefore what­soeuer is proued trulie thereby, is proued effectually, and sufficiently, and not onely probably, and this in respect of vs; which is confirmed: for 1. Ioh. 5.9. the witnesse of God is greater then the testimony of man: therefore if these things be to be proued at al, out of the Scripture, they are proued to vs, and that effe­ctually, because whatsoeuer God saith, he saith to vs▪ and that not only probably, but necessarily, and euidently; which if we see not, then it is by reason of some indisposition in vs: & al­lowing tradition or Church authority to take away this in­disposition, and to expound, and declare these Scriptures to these purposes, yet is it not true that the Iesuite saies: for then the said tradition, and authoritie puts, and driues some further meaning and sense into them, then was in them be­fore: or it onely declares, and expounds it. The former Occh, dial 1. part. l. 2 c. 14. Alphon [...]. adu. haer l. 1. c. 8. Dicimus enim quod, quantum ad ea quae ad fidem perti­nent, Romanum Pontificem nec totam Ecclesiam Dei posse de assertione non vera face­re veram, aut de non, non fal­sam. Turrec [...]em sum de Eccl. l 4. part 2. c. 3. ad, 6. our aduersaries denie: the latter is not sufficient to make the Scripture onely probable, in that howsoeuer for want of Church authoritie, a man may not see such texts, to proue the virginitie of Marie, or the Baptisme of children, yet the proofe is in them, within their owne latitude; and if there be any such matter in them at all, then is it in them more then probably, because no diuine testimonie is probable, but necessarie: but Gretser, and the Church of Rome vse their traditions, as Alchymists do the Philosophers stone; with the touch of it they turne any mettall into gold: or as Painters do Allum, to giue tincture to their colours.

CHAP. XIX.

1 MY Aduersary in In THE WAY §. 9. but, in his printed booke, cap. 7. his treatise that I answered, to shew that the Scripture is not the Rule, whereby to find, and iudge of true faith; obiected the insuffi­ciencie, and imperfection thereof: because there be diuers que­stions, and points of faith, not contained, and determined therein. Which he endeuours to proue, by this argument here set downe. Whereto I answered directly, and in forme, as THE WAY §. 9. n. 3. & inde. the booke will shew. The which my answer in this place, he re­plies to, as you see, after his ordinary manner, with brag­ging, and saying nothing; and casting out a few insolent speeches; The Protestants struggle with this argument. One may easily see, how they sticke in the mire. Onely two things to the pur­pose. It seems M. White saw the weakenes of his answer, &c: wher­to I answer.

2 First he sayes we struggle with this argument, and sticke in the mire; which in some sense I may not deny: for when I vndertooke this Iesuit, I struggled with a dunghill, and therefore Hoc scio pro certo, quod si cū sterc [...]re, &c. no maruell, if for my penance, I sticke in the mire, both here, and in many other places of this reply: his [Page 155] bragging, and railing, and facing it out with nothing, when yet all this with many shall be accepted for sound diuinity, being such as will bemire, and weary any man in the world, that desires nothing but the truth. Otherwise my answer, was direct, and plaine: for the point he is to proue, is, that the Scripture alone containes not, nor determines the whole obiect of our faith: but diuers points needfull to be beleeued are wanting in it, and must be supplied by the authority, and tra­dition of the Church: his reason to proue this is the Syllo­gisme here set downe. Whereto I answered. First granting the maior, and acknowledging it to be a point of faith, ne­cessary to be beleeued, that the Canonicall bookes, which the Church vses, are true diuine Scripture: but I denied the second proposition, that they cannot be proued so to be, by themselues, secluding Church authority and tradition. And I distinguish: for the Authority, and direction of the Church, is Gods outward ordinance to teach vs, as a condition, how to see the Scripture to be diuine; but not the thing whereby they are prooued so to be, and whereon our faith leaneth: but this diuinity, the Church as a bare Minister, out of the Scripture it selfe, prooues to be in the Scripture, not by her owne authority, that vpon her word, and testimony, either onely, or particularly it should be taken for Scripture, ra­ther then the books of other men. In the same manner that a man shewes a star giuing light to it selfe, which yet ano­ther cannot see till the man point to it. Or as a dead mans will kept in the Register, of necessity must be sought there, and thence receiued: yet all the authority of that court, which is great, and ample (specially in preseruing records) neither makes, nor prooues the will to be legitimate, but is onely a requisite condition to bring it forth, and vs to the sight and knowledge of it, the will proouing it selfe by the hand and seale of him that made it, affixed to it. So it is with the word of God, which we do not ordinarily see to be the word of God, vntill the Church teach, and traine vs vp there­in. But when it hath done, the arguments whereby it is pro­ued so to be, and the authority whereupon I beleeue it, are [Page 156] contained in the word it selfe, which I expound, and con­firme by this, that euermore, and perpetually the Church, by the Scripture it selfe, and by no other argument, prooues it to be diuine, to those she teaches, and vpon that ground, at the first receiued them for such her selfe: and many times it fals out, as with some Atheists, and Pagans, that where no Church authority, ministry, or perswasion is vsed, by onely reading of the Scripture it selfe, in respect of the outward meanes, a man coms to faith; which could not be if the Scrip­ture it selfe had not conuinced him: forsomuch as an Atheist, or vnbeleeuer will not be perswaded by any thing, but that which he euidently sees to be Gods owne word: and this perswasion arises in him, from the very booke it selfe with­out Church authority.

3 And this is yet confirmed by that which the Iesuites teach against the Anabaptists & Swinkfieldians, holding the motions of their inward spirit to be Gods word: for Bellar­mine De verb. Dei. l. 1. c. 1. & 2. sayes, that to the faithfull, acknowledging the Scrip­ture to be Gods word, it may be prooued, out of the Scrip­ture it selfe, that the Scripture is the word of God. Molhu­sine and Gretsers Gretser. def. Bellar. l. 1. c. 2. pag. 34. D. words are these. It is manifest that Bellar­mine — onely affirmes that it may be prooued, OVT OF THE SCRIPTVRES THEMSELVES, and the Canonicall books thereof, onely TO THE FAITHFVLL who receiue and reue­rence them for such, that the word of God is, not the inward spi­rit whereof fantasticall men boast, but the word of God is truly it which is contriued in those books which the faithfull hold for Ca­nonicall. In which words they say three things. First, that the faithfull, who acknowledge the Scripture to be Gods word, are they persons of whom they speake: & not such as receiue it not. Secondly, that to such it may be prooued, that not the inward spirit of fantasticall men, but the Canonicall Scrip­ture, is the word of God. Wherein they affirme two things may be prooued: A Negatiue: that the inward spirit is not Gods word: and an Affirmatiue: that Gods word is truely it which is contained in the Canonicall books of the Scripture. Thirdly, that both this Negatiue and this Affirmatiue may [Page 157] be proued out of the Scriptures themselues. Hence I reasō thus: To the godly that receiue and acknowledge the Scripture, this affirmatiue, that Gods word is it which is contained in the Canoni­call Bookes of the Scripture, may be proued out of the Scrip­tures themselues: therefore the Scripture it selfe can proue it selfe to be the word of God. Therefore, that the Scripture it the very word of God, is contained in the Scripture because otherwise it could not be proued so to be out of the Scrip­ture it selfe. Therefore all things needfull are contained in this Scripture. No wrangling can auoid this. If, to such as re­ceiue them, it may be proued, out of themselues, that these Bookes are the word of God; then this point, that these bookes are diuine Scripture, is contained in Scripture: and the cause why some see it not, is their owne indisposition and vnbe­leefe, wherewith the Scripture must not be charged: but to such as receiue these Bookes, the Iesuits affirme it may be proued, out of themselues, that they are the word of God: that is, without all Church authoritie, which is externall and not in the Scripture.

4 Secondlie, this being admitted, that it is a a point of faith necessary to be beleeued, that the Canonical Books are diuine; and then againe, that they could not be shewed so to be out of themselues; yet doth it not follow ineuitably, that all points of faith are not contained in them: for the question is not whether the Scripture be Gods word, or no, which is granted of all hands; but whether being confessed so to be, it containe all such verities, as a Christian man is bound to know: in such measure, that there is no point to be beleeued, that is not contained therein. The rea­son is, because the Scriptures are the principles of diuine knowledge: and the faith thereof, Not in na­ture, but in pro­portion. like the credite we yeed to the rules of humane sciences, which are knowne, and be­leeued of themselues without any further demonstration. And as the kings lawes containe all things, whatsoeuer the subiect is bound to do, and yet the said lawes, not prouing themselues to be of authoritie; but supposing it to be known before, and otherwise; are not thereby proued to be vnperfect, or defectiue, but being receiued, then there is nothing wan­ting [Page 158] in them, that is necessary for the common-wealth: and as in all arts, and sciences, that we learne, the rules, and pre­cepts thereof need not proue themselues, (for that which is the generall rule of other things is not ruled it selfe, in the same kinde) and yet it were folly to say, they were therefore imperfect: So may it be said to be in the Scripture (supposing it had no more light, thereby to authorize it selfe, then Prin­ces lawes, and humane principles haue) that it containes all points of faith, though it were not expressed, that it selfe is the word of God. For the readier vnderstanding whereof, let the Reader againe cast his eie vpon the occasion whereof all this question rises.

‘5 Our Aduersaries holding many points of religion, which we refuse, we require them to shew vs the said points in the Scriptures, if they will either haue vs to beleeue them, or free themselues from heresie: their Tradition, their Pur­gatory, their Masse, their Latine seruice, their Transubstantia­tion, their Images, their seuen Sacraments, their Inuocation of Saints, and all the rest, wherein we differ. This is shew­ed c. 28. n. 3. Their answer is, that many diuine truthes, and articles of faith are not contained in the Scriptures, but reuealed by Tradition, and Church authoritie, which are to be receiued, and beleeued, as well as that which is writ­ten. The original cause why the Papists set a foot the que­stion touching the insufficiency of the Scripture.’ This is the originall reason why they stand thus, against the sufficiency of the written word, for their Church authori­tie: and to proue this, they vse the Argument here propoun­ded by the Reply: and descant with it as you see. Which is an impertinent kinde of proceeding; when this point, whe­ther the Bookes contained in holy writ, be Gods word, is no que­stion betweene vs, but agreed vpon of all hands: but the que­stion is touching other speciall articles, Images, adoration, halfe communion, and such like, a number more; whether, not being contained in the Scripture, men are bound to beleeue them. For touching these things it is properly that we say, Nothing is necessary to be beleeued, as a point of faith, which can­not be prooued euidently by Scripture. And therefore this argu­ment is impertinent. For where we affirme all points of faith to be comprised, within the body of the Scripture, we distin­guish, [Page 159] first, of the things which we say are comprised: for albeit we firmely hold, the diuine truth, and authoritie of these Bookes to be euident in themselues; yet the points, that we meane in this question are touching other matters: for neither they nor we deny the Scripture, but both they, and we deny many things to be contained in it. Secondly, then againe of the manner how things are comprised: for all o­ther things are comprised in Scripture, as the duty, & obedi­ence of subiects is in the kings lawes; and as true speak­ing is contained in Grammar, or the right forme of resoluing in Logicke: but this one point is so contained as light is in the Sunne, or sweete in hony, and according to the same no­tion, whereby the authoritie of the Law, and truth of Prin­ciples, is contained in themselues. This is it, which very briefly, I answered in THE WAIE § 9. 3. & digr. 11. n. 17. two seuerall places of my Booke: Now let us see, what the Iesuite replies to it. To this, saith he, I re­ply, that principles insciences are either euident to vs, and knowne by the onely light of nature, and so neede no proofe, but onely decla­ration of termes, or words, in which they be vttered; or if they be not euident to vs, they must be demonstrated, either in the same science, or in some superiour science, by some other principle, more euident to vs. But that these Bookes, which are in the Bible are diuine Scripture, is not euident; therefore (if M. Whites similitude be good) it must be demonstrated by some other principle more eui­dent to vs, that these Bookes which are in the Bible, be diuine Scripture. The substance of his Reply is, that all principles are either euident of themselues: or not euident: such prin­ciples as are euident, he grants, need no prouing, but the Scriptures are principles of religiō, not euident of themselues, but such as need to be demonstrated, to be Gods word, by some other principle in a higher science, more euident to vs: both denying them to be euident, and also to be made so, by onely declaring the words, wherein they are vttered. And to proue this, he saies, in the margent, if it were euident (that these Bookes in the Bible are diuine Scripture) how is it onely beleeued by faith, for Saint Paule cals faith Argumentū non apparentium? Heb. 11.1. 1. My answer is, that the Scriptures are principles euident of [Page 160] themselues, to those that haue the Spirit of God, and such as need not to be proued by Church authoritie, but onely to be reuealed, and expounded, according to that which is in themselues. This my answer to helpe the reader out of the Iesuits perplexed discourse, I will lay downe, and explicate in 3. propositions. First, the Scripture in diuinitie hath the same office, that principles haue in sciences: that as the rules, and prin­ciples of Grammar teach all true speaking, and as the ele­ments of Arithmeticke teach all right numbring: so the do­ctrine contained in the Scriptures teaches all true faith. Se­condly, as they are the principles of religion, and rule of faith, so they enioy the same priuiledge, that principles do in forren Pro­fessions; that is, to be receiued, and assented to, for themselues with­out discourse. For Atist. Poster. c. 1. no humane science proues it owne prin­ciples, or disputes against him, that denies them: and al­though the principles of an inferiour science may be demon­strated in a superiour, yet this befalles not that which is the highest, as the Metaphysicks; which hauing no superiour sci­ence, neither stands to demonstrate it selfe, nor to receiue demonstration from another, but our vnderstanding assents immediatly to the principles thereof, and so goes forward by them, to discerne of other things. In the same manner the Scripture, hauing no superiour science, or rule aboue it, is, like these principles, receiued for it selfe, and is not occu­pied in prouing it selfe, and the principles therin contained; but shewing other things by them, it selfe must be assented to without discourse, by faith, before we can argue out of it. Thirdly, all demonstration, and proofe of principles is onely volun­tary, not necessarie, against him that denies them: as in Musicke, the Musitian demonstrates his precepts, not thereby to teach his arte, but to conuince him that denies it. Hence ap­peares the insufficiency of my aduersaries reply. First in that he saies, principles are not euident, but need demonstration, that so the Scriptures being yeelded to be the principles of religion, yet they should not be receiued, vnlesse they proue themselues, vntill the authoritie of the Church come. There is no man acquainted with Principia per seipsa nata sunt cognosci: reli­qua verò per principia. Arist. prio. l. 2 c. 18. idem Procl. in Euclid. l. 2. c. 2. humane art will say so. [Page 161] His owne Thomas Tho. 1. part. q. 1. art. 8. sayes, that like as other sciences do not ar­gue to proue their owne principles, but out of the principles ar­gue to shew other things: so the sacred doctrine doth not argue to proue the owne principles, but from them proceeds to shew some­thing—. The same is said by Capreol. prol in 1. part. q. 1. pag. 24. Greg. Valent. tom. 1. pag. 50. a. others. Next it is false, that the Scripture is like those principles which need demonstra­tion by some other principle in a higher art, more euident to vs. Here are two vntruths. For first there is no higher art then themselues. Thomas Vbi supra. sayes, The sacred Scripture hath no higher science. The setting vp of the Pope, and his Church a­boue it, to giue it authoritie, as a higher science giues to a lo­wer, is a blasphemous practise of Antichrist. Bozius Boz. de sign. eccl. tom. 2. pag. 439. wri­teth, that the Scripture is not to be reckoned among such prin­ciples, as before all things are to be credited; but it is proued and confirmed by the Church, as by a certaine principle, which hath authoritie to reiect and allow Scripture. Let the Reader, by these words of Bozius, a famous Papist, conster my aduer­saries meaning in this place: if he chance to say, he meanes not, as I charge him. Againe it is false, that the Church is more euident to vs then the Scripture, in that sense that be­longs to this question: I see indeed the Church that tea­ches me, before I beleeue the Scripture to be diuine (sup­posing I were a Pagan, that as yet had not receiued the Scripture) but I beleeue the Scripture to be diuine, and am conuinced in my conscience that it is the word of God, be­fore I can beleeue the Church sayes true. For I cannot be­leeue it sayes true, but vpon the grounds of Scripture, which it offers me; and therefore consequently the truth of the Scripture is more euident then the truth of the Church. In which case it is, as when a man stands in the doore with a torch in his hand, to giue light to such as need; where he holds out the torch indeed, yet he puts no light into it, nor does any thing, but onely hold it before them. The Church-authoritie, in ministring to vs, doth no more to the Scrip­ture then this man doth to his torch. I wil yet vse a more fa­miliar conparison, whereby the Reader shall see, how ab­surdly my aduersary holds the Church to be more euident [Page 162] then the Scriptures, and to giue them authoritie, which they haue not of themselues, because it propounds, and perswades them vnto vs. Seius owes Caius mony vpon a bond; that vp­on trust, and for the better keeping thereof, is put into the hands of Titius. For the proofe of this debt, it is necessary that Titius bring forth the bond; but when he hath done, I demand, whence hath the bond his credit? How is it proued to be Seius his true deed, rather then a counterfet? Not by Titius his authoritie, because he brings it forth, but by it self; in that the hand and seale thereof manifest themselues to be Seius his: Titius that keeps it, is but a means to bring it forth. But what if Seius denie the debt, that Caius be enforced to sue him, and by law to cast him; who giue, Caius the right, and makes Seius his debtor? and who makes the bond of force? doth the Iudge; before whom the cause is tried? The simplest man in the countrey will not say so: for the bond both proues it self, and giues Caius his right, and make, Seius a debtor; when the Iudge onely giues it execution, and de­clares no more, but that which was in the bond before. Let the Scripture be compared to this bond; and let my aduersary put me to proue that it is the word of God, as Caius is put to proue his bond; and it wil manifestly appeare, that though the Church haue some ministery in propounding it, yet that ministery or authoritie, call it what you will, doth no more then the Iudge in this case doth. It is not a principle aboue the Scripture, or more euident, whereby the truth thereof is proued: as the Iudges authoritie proues not the bond.

6 Our aduersaries, when they haue wrangled what they can, are inforced to confesse thus much, in that they grant the last and highest resolution of our faith to be into the authoritie of the Scripture. And let the Reader diligently obserue, how it comes about. In euery controuersie, and article of faith, they say, they are moued by the authoritie of the Church, they beleeue the Trinitie, the Incarnation, the Scripture to be Gods true word, because God hath so reuealed by the infal­lible authoritie of the Church. But how come they to know this authority to be infallible? by what motiue doth the spirit [Page 163] of God induce them to beleeue it? Can loc. p 48. Stapl princip doctr. pag. 318. & Tripl. aduer. Whica pag. 184 188. Greg. Val. tom. 3. pag 31. Rode [...]. Delgad de auth Script. pag. 51. Pezant comm. in Tho. pag. 479. They confesse expresly, it is the reuelation of the Scripture, giuing testimonie to the Church, which reuelation is beleeued for it selfe, and for no other: therfore the highest and last reason, light, & authoritie, mouing a man to beleeue the things of faith, the sence of the Scripture, the authority of the Church, and al, is contained in the Scripture it selfe. For thus I reason: The reuelation of the Scripture is beleeued for it selfe, therefore the Scripture is a principle in­demonstrable by any other, and euident in it selfe: therefore it is not beleeued by Tradition, vpon the authoritie of the Church, but for it selfe: therfore this point, that the Scripture is Gods word, is contained in the scripture: therfore the Scripture is al-sufficiēt, & wants nothing that is needful to be beleeued.

7 Hitherto I haue expounded the maner, how the Scrip­tures are said to be Principles, that are to be admitted imme­diatly without discourse of other arguments: and how this their authoritie is not founded vpon, nor demonstrated by the authoritie of the Church: and how Church-authoritie is onely a condition and ministery to offer them vnto vs. Now I come to answer his argument, wherby he would proue them not to be euident to vs: the which is but a poore one. For S. Paul doth not say, Faith is the argument of things not euident, as the vulgar Latin, cited in the margent, translates; but of things that are not seene. Now things may be euident and appeare manifestly to the vnderstanding, though they be not seene, when they are euident otherwise, by any light, or discourse to the vnderstanding. The which kind of euidence, and that also which is by sence, may stand with faith: for the declaration whereof, note first, that a thing is euident, Jn assensis principiorum scientiae huma­nitus inuentae, est coactio, propter euidentiam spe­culationis quia in eu intellectus euidenter con­clusionem intue­tur & specula­tur. August An­conit. q. [...]9. ar [...] 4. ad 1. when it moues the vnderstanding so sufficiently, that it cannot chuse but assent vnto it: note secondly, that a thing may be euident three wayes; first when it is sensible, as that which we ap­prehend by our outward sense: secondly when by the light of nature it is manifest by it selfe; as two equall numbers put together, make an equall. Thus the first principles and notions of nature are euident. Thirdly, when it is manifestly gathered from that which of it selfe is [Page 164] manifest: as that a stone cannot moue vpward of it selfe na­turally, because all heauie things naturally moue downe­ward. Hence it is plaine, that Albeit faith rest not vpon that eu dence, but vpon d­uine reuelatiō. Fides non elicit actus suos, mediante discursu; sed sicut visus immediate fer­tur in obiectum, sub ratione luci­d [...]ta etiam fulei habitus in suum obiectum, sub ratione diuinae reuelationis. The contrary whereof is Manichisme. Putaru [...]t nihil amplius esse [...]re dendum quàm quod possit eui­denti ratione demonstrari. August. de vtil. credend. c. 1. tom. 6. many obiects of faith may also be euident, because that which is beleeued, may also in some respect be seene, as Peter that beleeued Christ, yet also saw him. Or otherwise be knowne by the light of nature, or gathe­red from that which is knowne: as that there is a God. And before I read this in my aduersaries margent, I neuer knew but there was a compossibilitie of faith, and euidence, in di­uers respects: whereby they might both stand together in the same man, about the same obiect. Eymericus Eymeric. Di­recto. part. 1. q. 2 n. 2. sayes, We may know the vnitie of the Deitie by naturall reason: yet we be­leeue one God. Delgado: De Author. Script pag. 51. Many diuine things touching God, which are receiued by faith, may also be found out by naturall rea­son. Caietan Caiet. 22. qu. 175. art. 3. sayes, though Paul were rapt into the third heauens, where he saw things which before hee beleeued, yet the habit of faith touching those things, remained in him still, &c. Faith and knowledge, Mayro. 3. d. 23. art. 6. pag. 13 sayes Francis Mayronis, are ha­bits that may stand together. Faith by authoritie reuealed; know­ledge by euident demonstration. Thus it is no contradiction, that the same obiect be beleeued by authoritie, and euidently knowne by demonstration. Altisiodorensis: Altisiod. sum. l. 3. pag. 273. According to diuers apprehen­sions, the same thing is knowne and beleeued, beleeued and doubted. Mag. 3. d. 24. Alexand. 3. part qu. 79. m. 3. Tho. 22. qu. 2. art. 4. cont. Gent l. 1. c. 4 Occh. 3. q. 8. art. 4. c. Duran. prol. sent. pag. 4 c. Ricard. 3. d. 24. q. 5. pag. 85. Gabr. 3. d 24. qu. vnic. art. 2. concl. 2. Henric. Albert. Bonau. Tarantas. quos refert, & sequitur Dionys. 3. d. 24. Simanch. cath instit tit. 28 n. 18. Rectè porro Caiet. ex hoc loco Pauli, argumentatur esse nonnulla quae de Deo euidenter cognosci, & demonstratiue probari queant. Perer. select. disp. in Roma. pag. 83. The principallest Schoole-men that are, do all hold thus: which I would not haue noted so curiously, but to beate the confidence of my aduersary, thus peremptorily auouch­ing against me, that he knowes not. For albeit faith exceeds the dimension of reason, yet reason is subordinate to it, as sense is to vnderstanding. And therefore as it is no in­conuenience to say, we vnderstand the same things we see; no more is it to say, we beleeue that which is euident, in diuers respects. How many things are we commanded in the Scripture to beleeue, which yet we can demonstrate by reason? as that there is a God, and the immortalitie [Page 165] of the soule? For as one may reueale a thing to another two wayes together: first by shewing him a light to see it; and then by proposing some externall signe or marke where­by to finde it; or some image or description whereby to con­ceiue it: so God hath shewed vs the Scripture to be di­uine, not onely by the light that shines in it, whereby we be­leeue it, but also by the outward contexture of it, containing the image of the diuine wisedome and puritie, as the princi­ples of sciences shew their owne authoritie. The place cited out of the Hebrewes, is answered by that I haue said.

CHAP. XX.

CHAP. XXI.

1 MY Aduersary being in a deepe discourse about the persons, and societies of men, to whom alone God vouch­safes the assistance of his Spirit, for the vnderstanding, and beleeuing the things of faith: thinks himselfe interrupted by a speech of mine, in the place quoted, touching the Church Militant, and Triumphant: the which if he had misli­ked, he should haue confuted in it owne place, where I vsed it, to shew the true state of the question concerning the vi­siblenes of the Church; saying, the question is of the Militant Church; though we say also, that the Church mentioned in the Creed, euery member whereof is saued, be in some sort in­uisible too, in that the Church Triumphant in heauen, which is one part of the Church mentioned in the Creed, is to vs, that liue here, inuisible, and onely beleeued. This speech my Aduersary, according to his disordered, and cowardly Method, vsed in all his booke, durst not confute in it owne place, where it lay, but drawes in, backwards by the taile in­to the den of his discourse, as Apollodo. de orig. deorum. they say Cacus did the oxen, [Page 180] he stole from Hercules, that he might the better descant vp­pon it, when his Reader, by this his glancing at it, cannot know the purpose whereto I intended it, nor the ground whereupon I affirmed it.

2 That which he sayes is foure things: First, that I call that which consists of Professours, the Church Militant; the which you see he mentions, so that one would thinke he meant to condemne it; yet he dares not, but onely craftily repeats it, to expose it to censure, with the rest that fol­lowes: for Catech. Roman. pag. 112. edit. Colo. an. 1507. Bellar. Eccl. mil. c. 1. his owne side speakes in the same manner. D. Bannes 22. pag 94. edit. Venet. a­pud D [...]mian. Z [...]nar. 1602. sayes: The Church which VPON THE EARTH, LIVES IN WARFARE, is called Militant. — One way as it is a congregation of such as professe the faith of God — ano­ther way, as it is congregated not onely by faith, but also by Bap­tisme. In this therefore there is no fault; but all is well: for this part of the Church on earth that liues in the Camp, war­faring with the Diuell, the world, and the flesh, in that re­spect, by the Papists owne confession, is rightly called the Church Militant.

3 Next he sayes, the Church, which consisteth onely of the Elect, I call the Catholicke Church. Which he dares not de­nie neither, when he bethinks himselfe a little better, how the Catholicke Church mentioned in the Creed, Catech. Rom. in symb. § San­ctorum com­munionem. is no o­ther, then that whereto belongs the Communion of Saints, the forgiuenesse of sinnes, the life euerlasting: and though the reprobate, and vnbeleeuers mingled among these, are cal­led also by the name; Shewed cap. 39. n 6. yet are they no true, or vniuocall members thereof, in as much, as Eph. 5.23. Christ is the Sauiour of his body: but the Church, wherein they liue, as mice, and vermine liue in a mans house, is called Catholicke in respect of the Elect.

4. The third thing he sayes, is, that this Church Militant, and Catholicke, to keepe the Antithesis, I should either haue called the Church Triumphant, not as Catholickes meane Triumphant; but because being visible, it may triumph indeed, in that no persecutors can find, know, or hurt them. But this foo­lish conceite auoids not that I said, but idlely, and rudely [Page 181] flies from it: for the Church, which in that place, I affirmed to be inuisible, is not the militant, but the Church of the Elect alone: which considered apart, by it selfe, and abstracting from all other respects; our aduersaries themselues con­fesse to be inuisible, in that they hold Possunt homi­nes, aliquibus coniectutis opi­nari quinam sint qui ad hunc piorum hominū nun erum per­tineant: certò autem scire mi­nime possunt — Haec Eccle­siae pars est in­cognita. Cate. Rom. p 113. no man can iudge, who are elected, nor see the glorified triumphing in heauen: and so they lie open to the Iesuites raw conceite, as much as we.

5 Fourthly, he giues a reason, why I should rather haue called the Church, Triumphant, then Militant, or Catholicke; because being, as Protestants hold, inuisible, it neede feare no per­secution, but may triumph indeed, when no man can hurt, or finde them. And then spinning out the conceite, he sayes. It may also be called a Lamentant, or a lamentable Church, in that being inuisible members thereof can haue no fellowship one with another: nor performe those offices, which should be done, or tell where to seeke for instruction, Sacraments or Pastors, nor finally haue so much, as a Historiographer to write their actes, &c. In this re­spect, the Protestants inuisible Church, may be called a Church Lamentant, or a Lamentable Church. This is the Iesuites cru­dity: and yet a well digested answer, to that I said touching these matters, would haue more preuailed with all that loue the truth. For how, and in what manner, we hold the Church to be inuisible; and how all this that is obiected may be an­swered, I haue shewed at large §. 17. ad 24. in the WAY. And here I one­ly admonish my aduersary, that he had a Lamentable cause in hand, and as Lamentable a faculty to mannage it, when with a flegmaticke iest, he mentions that, which yet in the place where he was put to it, thought it his best course to say nothing to it.

CHAP. XXII.

CHAP. XXIII.

1 FOr the reducing of this wilde discourse into some or­der, and the better discerning of the controuersie, you are to note that the Iesuite, in the beginning of his Treatise, laied downe 4. propositions touching faith; out of the which he would spin his motiues to Papistry: the first is, that Faith is necessary to saluation. The second, that this faith is but only one. The third, that it must be infallible. The fourth, that it must be entire, extending it selfe to all points vniuersally. This conclusion I graunted in one sense, and denied in another: That our beleefe must be entire, whole, and sound in all points by obtaining a particular distinct knowledge of the same in our selues: that so our faith might include an apprehension, and knowledge of that we beleeue, as well as an assent in the will; I granted: but if his meaning were, that which then I [Page 188] suspected, and now he bewraies; that the implicite faith, taught by the Iesuites and schoolemen, destitute of know­ledge, and onely beleeuing, as the Church beleeues, were this entire faith so necessary, and infallible; then I denied it, and gaue my reasons: and Dig. 2. in a speciall Digress. shewed and confuted it. All which he passes by, and onely mentions as you see, my bare assertion against his implicite faith: but what I said in describing it, confuting it, and shewing the drift, and purpose of it; he touches not, though it concerned his cause, more then that, which he replies to. This is his me­thod whereto he cleaues in all his booke, to reply entirely, to nothing.

2 That which he sayes, is two things. First, he repeates, and expounds his conclusion: Next he touches some small portion of that I said concerning it. In repeating his con­clusion, first he sayes, he meant it against such, as thinke it suf­ficient to beleeue some few articles onely, though they deny, or doubt of others, which yet the Church beleeues: yea rashly, and obsti­nately denies them: who these men are, he names not, but he meanes the Protestants. Because they deny such points, as the Church of Rome (which he meanes by his Catholicke Church) vntruly propounds vnto them. For they must be the persons intended, that deny any thing, which the Roman Church holds for an article of faith: as the Popes primacy, Purgatory, Images, and the rest: which in Commonly printed with the Trent Councell. inser­ted in the WAY praef. n. 15. the new Creed of the Trent Councell are made articles of faith. But the Pro­testants answer readily, that they confesse no point at all may be denied, or doubted of either obstinately, or rashly, or at all, that is a point of faith reuealed in the word of God; but the things holden and propounded by the Church of Rome against them, are the false doctrines, and heresies of Antichrist, ridi­culously called the faith of the Catholicke Church. Then ex­pounding his conclusion, he shewes in what manner faith must beleeue all things, that it may be entire: and he sayes either expresly, or implicitely: wherein he bewrayes, that which I suspected, and signified in my answer for his conclu­sion, being, that faith must be entire and sound, stedfastly beleeuing [Page 189] all things reuealed: I The WAY. pag. 5. answered, that this might be granted in a true sense; But peraduenture his mind ran vpon a further matter, which his Church teaches about infolded faith: meaning there­by, that howsoeuer he affirmed that we are bound to be­leeue all points of faith, as well one, as other, yet that might be done sufficiently by beleeuing as the Church beleeues, with­out knowledge of any thing, that is beleeued: the which my suspition he grants, in this place, to be true; and so his con­clusion, which at the first carried so good a semblance of binding men to the knowledge of particular verities, and made so honest a proffer against ignorance; is now resolued into this sense: that by an intire faith you are bound to be­leeue all things; the which is done, by knowing nothing, but onely beleeuing implicitely, as the Church of Rome beleeues. Let a man neuer trouble himselfe with inquiring into the mysteries of Christian religion, or controuersies of faith; but onely say, Rhem. annot. Luc. 12.11. he will liue, and die in that faith which the Catho­licke Church teaches; and this Church can giue a reason of the things beleeued. This is the equiuocating tongue of the Church of Rome, that can ambush it selfe in words, and vn­der faire speeches conceale no small wickednes.

3 His arguments in maintenance of this implicite faith, are fiue. First the authority of M. Wootton, who seemes to speake against me; next because to get expresse knowledge of all points contained in Scripture, (which are points ne­cessary to be beleeued) is impossible; at least for vnlearned men. Thirdly faith, and knowledge are two distinct things; faith being of things not knowne, captiuating the vnder­standing: therefore this distinct knowledge is not presup­posed before: Fourthly, reason, and experience teach, that be­leefe and knowledge are distinct: beleefe not presupposing knowledge, but going before it. Fiftly the Fathers, Irenaeus, Hilary, & Austin, affirme faith to be sufficient without know­ledge. Afore I answer his arguments, note fiue things. First, what our aduersaries meane hy implicite, or infolded faith; and it is nothing else, but a blind assent of the mind to whatsoeuer the Church of Rome beleeues, without any [Page 190] knowledge at all of the things themselues. Occh. dialog. part. 1. l. 3. c. 1. p. 18. Dur. 3. d. 25. q. 1. [...]abr. ibi. Notab. 2. Do. Bann. 22. pag. 349. The Schoole­men deliuer it in finer termes, that it is the assent of the minde to some generall, or vniuersall thing, wherein many particulars are included, with will to beleeue nothing, that is contrary there­unto: but the meaning is, that to the essence, and nature of this entire faith, the distinct knowledge, or apprehension of a­ny particular truth, or article, is not required; but onely re­solution, and profession, to be of the Churches beleefe, what­soeuer it be; in the same manner that I reported the Colliars faith. Thus any man by an implicite faith beleeues the ar­ticles of Religion, and particular mysteries of our faith, touching the Ʋnity, and Trinity, of the Godhead, the Incar­nation, and Office, of Christ, the nature of Faith, the practise of Repentance, the Resurrection, the Sacraments, Redemption of mankinde, state of sinne, and the last Iudgement: when he will beleeue, and hold touching these things, as the Church of Rome doth; and yet in the meane time his vnderstan­ding, in no measure, penetrates into these articles, nor can distinctly explicate, or conceiue them. Altisiodorensis, Sum. l. 3. tract. 3. c. 1. qu. 5. saies, To beleeue implicitely, is to beleeue in this generall, that whatsoeuer the Church beleeues is true. Dionysius. 3. de 25. qu. vnic. p. 215. This is in­folded faith, to beleeue in generall, all that our Holy mother the Church beleeues. Summa Rosella, V. Fides, n. 1. quem refert. Bann. vbi sup. To beleue all that which our mother the Church beleeues, and holds: as when a Christian man is asked, whether Christ were borne of the virgine Marie, or whe­ther there be one God, and three Persons, and he answers that he cannot tell, but beleeues, touching these matters, as the Church holdeth. This is the definition of entire faith, which the Iesu­ite saies extends it selfe vniuersally to all points, at least, impli­citely. Note Secondly what the things are, and which be the points, that our aduersaries teach to be sufficiently beleeued by this infolded faith. The Reply seemes to affirme, that it is allowed onely in some points, which a man, for want of suffici­ent meanes, cannot know: I grant, saith he, and neuer did de­ny, but that there are some points necessary to be particularly knowne, of all sorts, Necessitate medij, and some necessary to be knowne Necessitate praecepti. In which points implicite beleefe doth [Page 191] not suffice, but expresse particular knowledge is required, by Ca­tholicke Diuines, to be ioyned to the assent of our faith—in other points; so farre as we neither know, nor haue sufficient meanes to know them, we may well commend the Colliars faith, in beleeuing in generall, as the Church beleeueth. In which wordes my ad­uersarie seemes to allow implicite faith only in some few cases; and charges me with two grosse vntruthes, because I say, the Papists vtterly refuse knowledge, and Canonize the Colliars im­plicite faith, for their Creed. But he should haue obserued that which was vnder his eyes, and affixed to my words alledged, whereby I proued what I said. I alledged Iacobus Graffius, a Friar lately writing from Capua, Decis. aurear. l. 2. c. 8. nu. 16. that euery Christian is not bound to know the articles of faith explicitely, but only Cleargy mē. I cited Antonine an Archbish. and a Saint in the Church of Rome, Sum. mor. part 1. tit. 5. c, 2. §. 1. who reporting the tale of the Colliar, first saies, that a great Doctor being demanded what he beleeued, answered as the Church, and being further demanded what the Church be­leeued, answered that it beleeued the articles contained in the Creed. And then falles to commending that faith: which shewes that he thought it was the entirest beleeuing, euē of the Creed, to do it by implicite faith. I alledged Pighius, and Hosius the Cardinall, who Pigh. hier. l. 1. c. 5. Hos. cont. Brent l. 3 p. 146 in the places cited affirme, that it is the safest way to hold a mans selfe to the faith of the Church, though it should erre in the faith. And that this Colliars faith is more safe then any meditation, or exercise in the Scripture. And whosoeuer shall view the places, Hosius especially, shall well perceiue, that I speake the truth: which I will yet iustifie fur­ther, by shewing Catholicke Diuines (as my aduersaries stiles a packe of heretikes) to teach, that it is sufficient by this im­plicite faith to beleeue, euen the principall articles of faith contained in the Creed. Tract. de fid. William the B. of Paris, L. 3. tract. 3. c. 1. qu. 5. Altisio­dorensis, V. Fides. nu. 1. Summa Rosella, and others, refe [...]t. D. Ban. 22. qu. 2. art. 8. § Dubitatur se­cundo. hold that it is not necessary to beleeue any article of faith expressely, but it is enough to beleeue, all that our mother the Church beleeues, and holds. So that if a man were demanded whether Christ were borne of the Ʋirgine, and whether there were one God, and 3. Persons, he might sufficiently answer; I cannot tell; but I beleeue as the Church [Page 192] holds: and this faith would iustifie, and saue him. The Iesuits Lorin. in Act. Apost p. 438. 1. b. Grego de Valent. tom. 3. disp. 1. qu. 2. punct. 4. pag. 311. A. re­port, that it is the opinion of many Authors, in the Church of Rome, that the explicite faith of Christ (as he is true God, and man, and the Redeemer of mankinde) euen after the sufficient publishing of the Gospell is not necessary necessitate medij, either for Iustifica­tion, or saluation: and he cites Richardus Mediauillanus, Ʋega, and Soto. Which is true; for these are Vegaes expresse words: Pro. Concil. Tridēt. l. 6. c. 15. p. 92. edit. Co­lon. 1572. It is to be affirmed, that men are so iustified by the faith of the Me­diator, that yet the vnfolded faith neither of this article, nor of any other must be thought requisite vnto iustice: because the explicite faith of other articles belonging either to Speculation, or morall life, suffices thereunto:—and this is it, which our Diuines commonly teach, when they say, the Faith of one mediator either vnfolded, or infolded, is enough for iustificatiō: neither can they hold other­wise that thinke, as Reported be­fore c. 22. n. 1. many in the Romane Church do, the Gentiles without any knowledge of Christ: or supernaturall faith at all, may be saued.

5 I know well enough some of our aduersaries speake o­therwise and seeme to require a more vnfolded faith, whose doctrine I will not conceale. Eymeric. part. 1. q. 7. n. 8 The Directorie of the Inquisi­tors, out of 22. qu. 2. art. 5. Aquinas, saies, A man is bound explicitely to be­leeue the articles of faith, but other points of faith onely implicitely. That which D. Bann. vbi sup. Alexand Pezant. 22. q. 2. art. 8. disp. 1. Greg. Val. tom. 3. disp. 1. qu. 2. punct. 3. 4. 5. Vasqu. 12. disp. 121. others speake more at large. First, These are the Propositions of Pezantius a Iesuite School­man. that in the state both afore, and after sinne, it was necessary, for all of yeares of discretion, both by the command, and necessity of the meanes, to beleeue some supernaturall thing by explicite faith. Secondly, The things thus to be beleeued are all points needfull for the orde­ring of their life; as to beleeue there is a God, and his diuine pro­uidence, and the immortality of the soule; that he is the Creator, Rewarder, and Gouernor of all. Thirdly, that now in the state of the Gospell, it is also necessary to beleeue in Christ, as the Redeemer of mankinde, by faith explicite. Fourthly, by the Commandement, all are bound to beleeue, explicately the Mysterie of the Incarna­tion, and the Trinitie; the principall articles of faith, contained in the Creed, which by themselues pertaine to the substance of faith; and some other things which tend to direct them in working a­right: But, what those articles of the Creed are, which thus [Page 193] belong to the substance of faith, Pezant. saies, the Doctors are not agreed: but he laies downe his owne iudgement; that they are the articles touching the Vnitie, Essence and Trinitie of the Persons in the Godhead: touching the Creation, the Remission of sinnes, Eternall life, the Natiuitie, Passion, Resurrection, and Second comming of Christ, the Sacraments of Baptisme, Eucha­rist, and Confession; the precepts also of Faith, Hope, and Charity, the ten Commandements, and Praiers deliuered in the Catechisme: It is also probable, he saies, that all good Catholickes, should be­leeue explicitely the virginity of Mary, that they may worship her: but it is certain, that the article touching the Church, that there is but one congregation thereof, which is of the faithfull, Were you there Sir? that obey the Pope, Christs Vicar, must be beleeued explicitely: and some say also certaine traditions touching the signe of the Crosse, and the adoration of Saints, and Images. This is the largest, and most particular explication, that I finde in any of them, touching the things that all men, vnlearned, as well as lear­ned, are bound, either by Commandement, or absolute ne­cessity to beleeue by faith explicite: Yea the Scholiast vpon the Directory of the Inquisition Pag. 60. requires the articles of faith to be gotten perfectly without Booke, which the Iesuits Grego. Val. p. 320. c Pezant. pag. 505. d. deny. But how shall I know this is the doctrine of their Church? how will my aduersary assure me that other Diuines in his Church, as Catholicke as these, are of the same minde; that I might truely say, I mistooke them, when I said, they vtterly refuse knowledge, and canonize the Colliar? If they would hold them euery where, and constantly to this, it were a good step to an end in this controuersie, and our doctrine were iusti­fied, that particular knowledge is to be ioyned with the assent of faith, and we must not so beleeue the Church, but that we be able also, in some measure, to conceiue, and penetrate the things themselues. If my aduersarie will vrge me with this, and stand vpon it, that it is the doctrine of his Church, I will not striue with him: onely I will commend 2. things to his consideration. First, how he will pleade the saluation of innumerable lay people, I will not say in Lancashire, but in France, Spaine, and Italy, euery where, that haue no know­ledge [Page 194] of these things, but onely beleeue as the Church be­leeues; whom the Church of Rome hath hitherto trained vp in this implicite faith of the Colliar? how will he excuse the Colliar, whom Staphylus commends so, that knew not these things? and what if it should fall out, that the Gentle­man his friend, whom he mentions A person of good esteeme and place, in that your coun­try p. 39. Repl. before in this Reply, being catechized by his ghostly father, should be able to say no more, then the Colliar? Next, that euen the Iesuites, and these Diuines, who make shew to maintaine this explicite faith, yet vtter that besides, that vnanswerably makes for the implicite, in all articles. Henriquex De sin. hom. c. 17. n. 1. lit. x. sayes, A man may be iustified by the implicite faith of Christ, Si planè con­tritus, cum ple­na satisfactione, vel cum marty­rio, aut indul­gentia plena­ria, decedat. and if he die, be saued also, with a pardon. Relect. de Sacram. part. 2. q. 2. concl. 3. Canus, and In Tho. 22. q. 2. art. 8. dub. vlt. concl. 1. Bannes affirme, that the explicite faith, or distinct knowledge of Christ is not necessary as a meanes to iustifie vs. And Bannes Concl. 4. addes, that it were neither heresie, nor error, nor rashnes, nor scandall, to auouch that a man may also, in the same manner, be saued, because iustification being the last disposition to glory, it is very probable that he which is iu­stified by an implicite faith, may also by the same faith without al­teration be saued: Vasquez In Tho. 12. q. 2. disp. 121. c. 2. sayes, He doubts not, but many countrie people, without fault, are ignorant of some necessary mysteries. Vega Pro concil. pag. 92. sayes, as I alledged before: It is to be affirmed, that men are so iustified by the faith of the Mediator, that yet the vnfolded faith neither of this article, nor of any other must be thought requisite vnto iustice, because the explicite faith of other articles belonging either to speculation, or morall life, suffices thereunto. I could alledge many other such doctrines; but these are enough to shew my aduersary, that his Diuines deale but doubly in our point of implicite faith, and such as make faire offer against it, yet are fast friends to the Colliar.

6 Note thirdly concerning the persons, who they be, that our aduersaries allow to beleeue implicitly, & who are bound to expresse knowledge. Mediauillanus 3. d. 25 p. 89. edit. Venet. per Laz. Soard. 1508. sayes, that such as are superiors in the Church must haue a fuller knowledge concerning faith, then inferiours. So that I beleeue such superiours are bound to beleeue all the articles of faith expresly, though euery one of thē be not bound to beleeue their number, or artificiall distin­ction. [Page 195] Syluester Sum Syluest. v. fides. n. 6. sayes, Euery one that hath cure of soules, as Pre­lates, Priests, Prophets, Doctors, and Preachers, are bound expresly to beleeue the whole distinction of the articles of faith, according to their substance: but others are not so bound. Direct. Inqui­sit. part. 1. q. 4. n. 3. Eymericus, out of 22. q. 2. art. 6. Thomas: Prelats, and Curats are bound to haue the expresse faith, and knowledge of all the articles of faith: wherefore the explication of things to be beleeued, is not alike, in respect of all sorts of men, necessary to saluation; because Superiors, which haue the charge of instructing others, are bound to beleeue expresly more things, then others are. 22. q. 2. art. 8. disp. vnic. sub sin. Pezantius thinks thus of the matter, that Bishops are bound, A hard taske for the Boy — Bi­shops mentioned by Gerson and o­thers (see Vers. sign. ruin. Eccl. sign. 3. & 8. Pic. Mirand. orat. ad Leo.) and for some men Bi­shops too, mentio­ned by Theod. Niem. nemor. Semita. & de scism. p. 66. & Cathar. n. spe­cul. haeret. p. 71. Clemang. de stat. Eccl. p. 15. & 30. & concil. delect. card. & Alliac. reform. Eccl. consid. 3. and for some Popes also. See specul. Pontif. p. 110. and possible for our yong Iesuites and Seminaries, to say nothing of the old Mas Priests in times past. expresly to know the articles of Faith contained in the Creed, and Scripture, and in the definitions of the Church: so that they can both expound, teach, and perswade them: Simple Priests must know those things that belong to the making of the Sacrament, and other things contained in the Creed: Prea­chers such things as are necessary to teach the people how to be­leeue, and liue: parish Priests are not bound to be so perfit in the knowledge of the articles of faith that they can assoile hard questi­ons; but it is sufficient, if they can instruct their charge in such things, as they are tied to beleeue, and do; and if they haue suf­ficient knowledge of the Cases of Conscience. And so the impli­cite knowledge, and faith is admitted onely in the vnlearned Laity, and not in Clergie men of any sort, if our aduersa­ries will hold them to their doctrine; but they dubble, and perseuere not in it, as will appeare by viewing the places of the Archbishop, and the Cardinal, whom The WAY §. 2. n. 6. I alledged in my booke.

7 Note fourthly that the things which we mislike, and speake against in this matter of implicite faith, are these. First, that in teaching of it, the Church of Rome seemes manifestly to seeke her owne soueraignty, euen aboue the Scripture in the consciences of men, rather then the true knowledge of God, and his will. To what purpose they do this 2. Th. 2.4. apoc 18.7. I sit a Queene. we are not ignorant; but we see it tends to the stu­pifying of the word by blind, and brutish obedience, that there need be no trauell in religion it selfe, but onely a reli­gious care, that the Church of Rome be not offended. [Page 196] Whereunto whosoeuer will cleaue resolutely, to obey all her drudgery, and tyrannie; that man, by some fine distin­ction or other, and that by the Iesuites themselues, and such as talke most of explicite knowledge, shall be iustified to be of an entire faith extending it selfe vniuersally to all points, one as wel as another, though he were as ignorāt as a sheepe; or as mad as Suid. v. [...]. Amphistides in Suidas, that could not tell fiue, nor whether his father or his mother bare him. Secondly, we mislike that ignorance so much condemned by the word of God, should thus be bolstered out, whereby true faith is quenched, the light, and zeale, and comfortable assurance thereof is taken away, and all sorts of people are imboldened to security, & negligence in seeking that quantity of know­ledge whereto God hath enabled them to attaine. So that hereby the people of God, in whom Col. 3.16. his word ought to dwell plentifully with all manner of knowledge; Ro. 10.10. that should be able both to beleeue with the heart, and confesse with their mouth to saluati­on, Heb. 5. vlt. that through long custome, should haue their wits exercised to discerne both good, and euill: 1 Pet. 3.15. that should be alway ready to giue an answer, to euery one that asketh a reason of the hope that is in them: are turned into sencelesse Idols, that can neither heare, nor see, nor vnderstand: the which kind of ignorance the ancient Church neuer allowed. Thirdly, we cōdemne the defining of faith, yea entire, & Catholicke faith, by this kind of beleeuing: for albeit the faith, & knowledge of the best of Gods children be intangled (as Caluin hath freely confessed) with the relickes of much ignorance, when many things be­leeued, & necessary to saluation, are not yet distinctly vnder­stood, yet there is a progres, & increase in knowledge, wher­by the dullest, & ignorantest of Gods children, are inlightned more, and more, vntill they reach that quantity of appre­hension that the commandement of faith requires. In which sense we allow the faith of any man liuing, specially the vn­learned, to be implicite: First, when he knowes, and appre­hends in generall, the substantiall articles belonging to faith, which are contained in the Scriptures, and rule of faith: Se­condly, when the ignorance is only in the particulars, whereby [Page 197] the said generall articles are demonstrated; as a lay man be­leeuing the Vnity, and Trinity of Persons in God, yet is not able to expresse, or conceaue the difference betweene the essence, and the Persons, nor the different manner of per­sons proceeding. 3. When withall he vses the meanes to increase in knowledge, by searching the Scriptures, and hearing the word preached: and in the meane time obedi­ently submits himselfe to the ministry, and direction of the Church herein. The implicite faith of such persons, as haue this threefold disposition concurring in them, we condemne not: but this is not it, which our aduersaries pleade for; who defēd that it is enough to assent to the Church, though all this be wanting; that is to say, to professe himselfe a Romane Catholicke, beleeuing as the present Church holds, without any knowledge of the things in themselues.

8 Note lastly that the distinct knowledge of things be­leeued, which against this implicitie of faith, we require, is the knowledge of that which God hath reuealed, not of the essence, and reason, of the things. For the vnderstanding whereof, we must consider, that the Scriptures, and Church, by their proposition, reueale the points of faith vnto vs; and bid vs learne, & beleeue thē: as that there is one God the maker of all things; and one mediator Iesus Christ, that was conceaued by the Holy Ghost, borne of the virgine Marie; and as followes in the Rule of Faith. Which things thus mentioned vnto vs, are profound mysteries, and haue many abstruse, and secret notions belonging to them, as for example the deepe rea­sons of the Trinitie in the Godhead, and the Ʋnion of the two natures in Christ. Now when we require knowledge to be ioyned with the faith of these things, we meane the know­ledge of the Reuelation, not of the reason, and whole nature of the things reuealed: for is any man so presumptuous, as to imagine that a supernaturall obiect, beleeued by faith, re­uealed by God, can by discourse of reason, be reduced to na­turall vnderstanding; the Apostle 1. Cor. 2.14. saying, The naturall man perceaues not the things of God, neither can he know them? Or do our aduersaries imagine the knowledge we require to be [Page 198] such as is in humane sciences, where conclusions are demon­strated by their principles, and things are comprehended in their causes, and properties? Haue they that power ouer their people to make them beleeue, that we require, for exam­ple, men to be able to vnderstand, and vtter, the manner, and reasons how God is one? How 3. in Person? How the dead shall be raised againe? How our nature subsists in the word? How the redemption of mankinde could be wrought by the sufferings, and death of the Sonne of God? How the Sacra­ments confer Grace? How man could be predestinate, be­fore the world was made? We do not require the world to know these things, [...], &c. Theodor. de prouid. l. 10 sub fin. which are reserued to the beatificall vi­sion in the life to come: but onely in such sort, and measure, as is reuealed; which is by conceauing that God is one: that the Persons are 3. that the dead shall be raised againe, &c. and such things concerning them, as may, without error, be vnderstood; Deut. 29 29. For secret things belong to the Lord our God: but things reuealed belong to vs, and to our children for euer. The state of the question. The true state of the question therefore, touching implicite faith is, whether the beleeuer, besides his generall assenting to the Church, and Scripture, be also bound to haue in himselfe a distinct knowledge of things propounded him to beleeue; so that he can, according to any true notion of conceauing, apprehend, and conceaue, that which is reuealed to him? in which question the distinction of Necessary, as the meanes, and Necessary by the command, is friuolous: because whatsoeuer is omitted against Gods commandement is sinne; and con­sequently damnable without repentance, and therefore if knowledge be commanded, it is also the meanes of Saluation, so farre foorth, as the obseruation of the commandements is the meanes. But our aduersaries apply this distinction (which in some question is of good vse) in this place to lay their people a sleepe on their pillow, when they shall heare knowledge to be commanded, but yet not as a Necessary meanes. Now there be twenty wayes to escape from a com­mandement.

9 These things thus premised, now I answer my aduer­saries [Page 199] arguments made for implicite faith against distinct knowledge. The first, that I dispute so whotly against that which M. Wootton admits: is false. For M. Wootton admits no more, then he insinuates in his conclusion, that a generall beleefe of some points may suffice some persons, without danger of damnation: and this pleases me well enough: for I haue shewed this not to be the question; but let my aduersary deale sincerely, and hold him to that which is taught in his Church: and it will please himselfe neuer a whit. When that doctrine allowes ignorance in all points; and the other, which is somewhat honester, allowes it in more points, and defines the ignorance otherwise, then M. Wootton will do. My aduersary therefor hath not M. Wootton on his side; nor against me; but directly with me against himselfe. To the second, that my opinion for the knowledge of all points of faith, one as well as another, is intollerable, because it is impos­sible for vnlearned men, to get expresse knowledge of all points con­tained in Scripture: I answer, that my words alleadged do not affirme the necessity of knowing all things reuealed (as that Iacob had a lame leg, or Abraham two wiues) but all points of our faith; expounding faith, not as he doth, for euery thing that is reuealed, but of the substantiall articles of faith, which the vnlearnedst that are may learne, and vnderstand, if they will vse the Ministry of the Church, and exercise their wits therin, as the word requires. The story may be seene in [...] Acts and Mo­num. of the Ch. The Church of Rome had experience of this at the sacking of Mirandula, & Chabriers; where not the elder sort alone, but the very children of lay men, whom vnmercifully they assassinated, and butchered, were found in knowledge to parallel the Doctors, that ex­amined them. And Iustine against Trypho, Dial. cum Tryph. sayes of his time, that such as could no letter on the booke, vnderstood all the mysteries of faith, And this is manifest by the places of Chry­sostome, Theodorit, and Eusebius following. My aduersary therefore must hold him to that obiect of faith, that I speake of, and then shew it is impossible to be apprehended, which he cannot do. And whereas he sayes, He graunts, and neuer did deny, but there are some points necessary to be particularly [Page 200] knowne of all sorts, wherein implicite beleefe doth not suffice, but expresse particular knowledge is required by Catholicke Diuines: I answer, that when I spake against implicite faith, demanding, To what purpose should God propound all the points of our faith, one as well as another, vnlesse his will were that we should learne them all? I knew not what my aduersary would grant or de­ny, but hauing shewed that the Colliars faith was canoni­zed by no small fooles, in his Church, and commended for sufficient in all points I vsed this reason against it, which I confirmed by a text of Scripture, and a speech of Saint Au­stine. And if my aduersary conuinced thereby, relinquish that rude opinion, requiring expresse particular knowledge, at least in some points, if not Necessitate medij, yet Necessitate praecepti, this, to requite his kindnesse to M. Wootton, I gratefully ac­cept: and wish him, that when he writes againe, he will in­genuously expresse what those his some points are; and how far foorth the commandement of faith ties vs to know them. For these things may be so expounded, that what in words is granted, in effect shall be denied: and then the Pope may commend his towardlinesse, Nub. as the woman doth her daugh­ter in Aristophanes. [...] A goodly sparke with a tongue that will strike on both sides.

10 And whether he meane this, or that, yet my report, that the Church of Rome vtterly refuses knowledge: and that the Colliars faith is canonized for the Papists Creed, should not haue bene called a grosse vntruth, vntill my reasons whereup­pon I grounded it, had bene answered, or at least mentio­ned; but that it is a priuiledge, and speciall indulgence that my aduersary hath obtained, to reply without making any answer. For is not the Colliars faith so reported, and com­mended by the Authors, whom I cited, that any may fee they allowed it in all points whatsoeuer, whether there were means to know them, or no means? doth not Staphylus By this faith of the Colliar euery vnlearned man may try the spi­rits of men, whe­ther they be of God or no: By this faith he may resist the Diuell, and iudge the true interpretation from the false; & [...]iscerne the Catholicke from the hereti­call Minister; & the true doctrine from the forged. Fred. Staphyl. apol. pag. 53. make it the best kind of faith, that is: and the rest whom I quoted in the margent, propose it as the best forme of beleeuing any thing whatsoeuer? and yet the Iesuite replies, as if they allo­wed it onely in some few points, so far as we nether know, nor [Page 201] haue sufficient meanes to know them. But his owne words im­mediately following, in defence of this faith, touching such things, that in this generall action is infolded a particular, or implicite beleefe of all points, in asmuch as a generall includeth all particulars, and beleeuing the Church disposes the minde, &c. bewraies that he holds the same thing that I obiected. For this is the very reason, that the grossest maintainers of im­plicite faith vse to defend it against them that require the knowledge questioned.

11 To his third argument That faith and knowledge are 2. distinct things, therefore there may be true faith, without any distinct knowledge of the things beleeued: I answer, that the know­ledge which I require is not of the essence, and reason of the things beleeued, but of their proposition, and that concerning them, which is reuealed; as I haue distinguished: and there­fore I deny the consequence. For though such knowledge be not faith, but a habit distinct from it, yet it concurres to the habit of faith, in as much as no man can assent to that where­of he neuer heard: for Ro. 10.14. how shall they beleeue in him of whom they haue not heard? The knowledge that hath no ingredience into faith, is the knowledge of that which is not reuealed; for faith not onely goes before such knowledge, but also vtter­ly repels it, neuer admitting any penetration into Gods se­cret mysteries: for 1. Cor. 2.9. the things which the eye hath not seene, nor the eare heard, nor can enter into the heart of man, hath God pre­pared for them that loue him. And in this sence all the texts of Scripture, and places of the Fathers, quoted by my aduer­sary against knowledge, are vnderstood; and so I answer his last argument. For it was the constant, and vniforme doctrine of the ancient Church, that how soeuer faith apprehends my­steries not to be inquired into; yet the proposition, and do­ctrine of all the articles of faith must distinctly be conceaued, that a man be able to vnderstand what they are, Saint Chry­sostome Hom. 16. in Ioh. rebuking this ignorance, proceedes into this dis­course, which plainely shewes, that he was of this minde: We beleeue, saith he, In the Father, and the Sonne, and the holy Ghost: The resurrection of our bodies, and euerlasting life. If a [Page 202] Gentile aske you; who is this Father? who is this Sonne? this ho­ly Ghost? are there 3. Gods? what would you say to this? what an­swer would you make? how would you dissolue his obiections? And when you should stand dumbe to these things, suppose he should bring in another question touching the resurrection, whether you should rise againe in this, or in another bodie? if he should demaund, why Christ came in the flesh rather at this time, then in the former a­ges? what if he should pose vs in such and the like things? how great punishment is laid vp for vs that (by being able to answer nothing, nor to dissolue these questions) should be the authors of error to them that walke in darkenesse—for if they so trauell day, and night to be able to speake against our religion, how shall we escape, vnlesse we haue skill to beate backe such assaults? Thus 1. Pet. 3. Peter com­mands, Be alwaie ready to satisfie euery one that demands a reason of your faith, and hope: and Col. 3. Paule, Let the word of Christ dwell plentifully in you. But what will these foolish drones answer? for­sooth, that euery simple soule is blessed, and Pro 10. This is one of the Pa­pists reasons for the Colliars faith: note Chrysostomes answer. he that walkes sim­ply, walkes surely. But this is the cause of all euill, that not many know how to bring in the testimonies of the Scripture opportunely. For in that place alleadged, simple is not to be vnderstood for a foole, that knowes nothing, but for one, that is not euill, or crafty, &c. These wordes of Chrysostome shew against all exception, that Gods words vpon paine of punishment, re­quires a distinct knowledge of the points of our faith; in such measure, that if an ignorant man, or a cauiller, should question with vs about them, we might be able to expound, & manifest them; which by the Colliars, and my aduersaries impicite faith we could not do. Theodorit hath a narration, which may fully satisfie any man what kinde of knowledge the Christian Church then practised. Euery where, De curand. affect. l. 5. sub. fin. saith he, you may see these points of our faith to be knowne not onely by them, who are masters in the Church, and teachers of the people; but e­uen of Coblers, Smithes, and Weauers, and all kinde of artificers; and of women also which get their liuing with their hands, yea maid seruants, and waiting women: husbandmen also do very well know them, and Ditchers, and Neat-heards, and woodsetters. All these may ye finde discoursing of the Trinitie, and the Creation of things, [Page 203] and as skilfull in the nature of man, as Plato, or Aristotle. Iustin Martyr requires the same distinct knowledge in all. [...]. Dial. cum Tryph. p. 249. This Relation of Theodorit makes it cleare, that in those dayes the doctrine of beleeuing as the Church beleeues, by impli­cite faith was not receaued; but the Christians generally, euen the most vnlearned, obtained, and practised the same distinct knowledge, that here my aduersary disputes against, and im­pugnes with the names of the Fathers, that onely speake a­gainst the curious, and arrogant inquiring into mysteries.

CHAP. XXIIII.

1 MY aduersaries fift conclusion was, that as one entire faith is necessary to saluation, so God, who willes the sal­uation of all men, hath prouided, and left an ordinary rule, and meanes, whereby they may be informed, which, and what this faith is. This conclusion he visites, in this place, to see how his aduersaries haue vsed it, and first he repeates it, then he telles his purpose in laying it downe: next he reports what I said to it, though scarse truly. Fourthly he telles what followes of that, which he findes I haue granted him; and so lastly leaues the onely difficulty that I obiected against it vnassoiled, and leaps into a wilde-goose chase, nothing to the point, about Praedestination, whither M. White meanes not to follow him. His purpose in propounding it, he saies was, first to admonish such as presume to attaine faith with­out vsing the meanes: Secondly to helpe such as despaire, when they either know not that there is such a meanes, or vnderstand not what in particular it is. To take away pre­sumption, [Page 205] and desperation, he layes downe this conclusion, touching the rule of faith: the which when he afterward defines to be his Romane Church, speaking by the mouth of the Pope, you may perceaue what a ready way he takes to keepe men from Presumption, and Desperation.

2 But whatsoeuer his intent were, he sayes I grant him 4. things, which is in a manner, as much as he desires. First, that there is such a rule left. Secondly, that by this rule we may be infallibly instructed what is to be holden for true faith. Thirdly, that the cause why men misse the truth, is because they either finde it not, or obey it not. Fourthly, this rule is of such nature that it is able to direct al men, yea the simplest, and vnlearnedst aliue. The which I granted him then, and by these presents do grant againe, vpon condition he will not be proud of that I giue him, without any vantage to his pur­pose; as if he had obtained some great boone: but hold him to my grant mannerly, and incroach no further. For I gaue him warning that if he meant such a rule, as all men at all times may haue accesse vnto, as being concealed from none, but visible, and reuealed, or manifest to all places, ages, and persons: I would not grant it him, for the reasons there expressed: the which my exception in this place he calles vnorderly running before the Hare: and in his next Section, answers by expounding him­selfe, that he did not meane it should be actually manifest, but onely such, as Doth he meane I ma [...] ­uell, in his Po­tentia remota, whereof pag. 165. & below c. 26. might be knowne: but I ranne not before the Hare, for I hunted a Foxe, that was closely stealing to the wood, in which game, good Fox-hunters say, it is not against the law to crosse the way, and marke his headding. For his head is to the wood in euery conclusion, aiming at nothing but to traine by degrees, such as follow him, into his visible Church, and the Popes authority ruling therein: and there­fore I distinguisht the diuers sences of his words, being ac­quainted before with old Reinard, Gregory of Valence, in whose steppes I saw the Reply to tread; and shewed which was true, and which false, that there might be no ambigui­ty. And although he answer, that I mistake him, when I thought his meaning was, this rule should be manifest, and actu­ally [Page 206] knowne to all: yet I am not satisfied; for though I giue him leaue to expound himselfe, and accept his exposition: yet what I suspected necessarily followes, still of that he saies afterward, as I then obserued: for Treat. c. 10. in the WAIE, §. 13. he defines the teaching of the Church to be the rule: and this Church he maintaines to be such, as not onely is of it nature visible, and such as may be seene; but Treat. c. 12. in the WAIE, §. 18. & inde. manifest, and actually knowne to all places, ages, and persons in the world. And it followes manifestly of that; if you say that sometime the Church could not be knowne, nor be a meanes whereby the true faith might be knowne: then men liuing at such time should want the meanes: and so it were not vniuersally true, that God would haue all men saued, and come to the knowledge of his truth: He that saies the Church is the Rule, and such a rule, as all men vniuersally may at all times know, meanes that the rule is manifest, and actually knowne to all: this meaning he disclaimes, and I am satisfied with it, yet it followes vio­lently vpon his owne wordes.

3 Thirdly from the 4. things I graunt, he gathers 3. things more. First, that No man must presume, or once hope to attaine to true faith, without finding, and following the rule there­of ordained by God. Secondly, that No man neede to despaire, though he be neuer so vnlearned or simple, but by seeking, finding, and follwing this rule, he may be sufficiently instructed in faith. Thirdly, that it concernes euery one careful of his saluation, to seek, & follow this rule, for his instruction in the faith, which is necessary to saluation. These three, I likewise yeeld him, though they be not that, which he principally almes at, to encourage him: because it will be some little honesty for him, when his friends reade his booke, to shew them what materiall points he hath extorted from M. White: but the gift is not great: my aduersary will returne the whole 7. backe againe in exchange for one single one that I can name him.

CHAP. XXV.

CHAP. XXVI.

1 MY Aduersaries last conclusion was, that the rule of faith must haue three properties. 1 To be infallible, that shall not deceiue vs. 2 Easie to be vnderstood of all sorts of men, learned, and vnlearned. 3 Ʋniuersall, to shew what is the truth in all points. Touching my answer hereto, he sayes foure thing. FIRST, that I grant these three properties to be re­quired in the Rule in some sence. The first, that it must be infallible; and the last that it must be vniuersall, I grant sim­ply without any limitation, and this is true. SECOND­LY, touching the second condition, of being easie, he ex­pounds himselfe, that he meanes so easie, that without mi­raculous illumination, or extraordinary, and excessiue difficulty, any sort of men may vnderstand the meaning of it, and sayes M. White seemes also to yeeld him this. The which I did in these words: The rule is easie, and plaine to all sorts of men, learned, and vnlearned, that vse the meanes, and are diligent in attending it, and be inlightned by the Spirit of God, to such it is plaine, be they neuer so vnlearned: to the rest it is not: nether is it a necessary con­dition [Page 244] of the rule so to be: not because it selfe is obscure at any time, but for that sometimes men haue not eyes (for want of diligence, or Gods illumination) to see into it; for all meanes, and rules are vaine vnles God giue eyes to see. This exposition wherby I decla­red in what sence the rule must be vnderstood to be easie, he distinguishes: and sayes, If I meane no more but that the Spirit of God must helpe our vnderstanding, in a speciall manner, to en­able it to apprehend, and yeeld to that, which the rule propounds: he will not contend with me. But if my meaning be, that a man must first haue faith, and in that sence be inlightned, before he can vnderstand the meaning of the rule; then he sayes my say­ing is false; and sets downe a proposition against it; that to be endued with faith, is not required as a necessary condition to the easines of the rule: which is a needlesse limitation. For first, I mentioned not faith, but the illumination of Gods Spirit, whereof faith is an effect. 2. Himselfe in those words, the Spi­rit of God must assist, and concur with mans vnderstanding, not onely in generall to preserue the faculty thereof, but in a spe­ciall manner to enable it to apprehend, and yeeld: confesses as much, as I said, or could meane, taking my words in all their latitude. 3. If faith be taken in one particular sence, as sometimes it is for the receiuing of diuine illumination into the heart, as a darke roome, when the window is opened, or a candle is brought in, receiues light: then it is true, [...]rgo ante fidem & absque fide, intelligi Scrip­turas posse affirmas. Hoc si tibi absurdum non videtur, plus quam Pelagia nus es. D. Stapl. de author. script. c. 8. §. 16. that the heart must be endued with faith before any man can vnder­stand the rule, and yeeld his assent to it, vnlesse he will hold Pelagianisme: neither doth my Aduersaries argument con­clude any thing against this; for the vsing of the rule, and this faith go together, as the opening of the eye, and light con­cur to seeing. Therefore as he that seekes a thing in a blind roome, first opens the window, and lets in light, and then ap­plies his eye, with the helpe of that meanes to the obiect: so though it be supposed, that faith cannot be had before the rule instruct vs, yet this light of Gods Spirit, which is the begin­ning of faith, as the medium whereby the rule is vnderstood, goes in order before it. As in all our sences Nihil agit in distans, nisi pri­mo agat in me­dium. Allias. [...]ct. de anim. c. 8. part. 3. the way from the sence to the obiect is disposed by the medium: But if [Page 245] faith be taken in the whole extent for the knowledge, and assent of all that which is reuealed; then I grant the rule must go before.

2 Thirdly touching illumination of the Spirit, which we both agree is necessary for the vsing, and vnderstanding of the Rule, he will haue 2. things noted. First, that this is not the Protestants spirit. Whereunto I answer, it is neither the Protestant, nor Romish, nor any priuate spirit, much lesse the Popes spirit; Shewed Ch. 35. whereby alone they breathe, that thus charge others with priuate spirits; but the Spirit of God, that is 1 Cor. 12.6. giuen to euery man to profit withal. Secondly that this Spirit of God is ready to assist all men, at least sufficiently to the attaining of the truth and that no mā whō grace hath excited to vse the rule, need feare any want thereof: but all men rather had need feare least them­selues be wanting to concurre with this Spirit; and least in stead of following the Spirit of God, they suffer themselues (as all they do, that follow the Church of Rome) to be misled by the spirit of Satan, transfiguring himselfe into an Angell of light, &c. The which I am also well pleased to note: and commend backe againe to himselfe, and all of his sect, who refusing the light of the Scripture, that so euidently detects their errors, haue suffered themselues to be seduced by the spirit of Antichrist Apoc. 13.13. , who hath transfigured himselfe into an Angell of light: and broaching his owne priuate conceits, yet colours all with the stile of S. Peters successour, and seeming authority, and spirit of the Church: when the Primum mobile of all Papistry is now become the Iesuited Popes sole instinct.

3 Fourthly he mislikes, that besides these 3. properties of the Rule, I would haue other two: Vnpartiality, that it be addicted to no side: and Authority to conuince, that there might be no appeale from it. But these conditions I added for the better explication of the rest, and to exclude the Church of Rome, which is so partiall, that it begges to be it owne iudge; and so vnable to support the cause, since that the clea­rest definitions thereof are still called in question by them­selues: as Digr. 36. I made demonstration. The which being the true reasons of his mislike, he dissembles, and onely replies that [Page 246] these conditions are either not necessary, or else included in the other 3. the former of which is not true: the latter, that they be in­cluded in the condition of infalliblenesse, I will not contend about: onely I noted them for the more distinct, and particu­lar explication of that which must belong to the Rule. And so in this point there shall be no variance.

CHAP. XXVII.

1 HEre I must repeate my old complaint that I am for­ced to renew in euery question that falles out be­tweene vs, that my aduersary omits and dissembles the whole substance of my writing, and onely descants vpon some few remnants that he rends out, here and there; wisely foreseeing either that his cause would abide no triall, or him­selfe was not the man that was able to make the triall For though he could, well enough, translate and transcribe, ano­ther man writing, and patch it together, when he had done, to make a pamphlet; yet the defence he must leaue to his Author, being belike some student, A.D. Student in diuinitie. as he professes himselfe, that is proceeded no higher then translations; and yet will serue the turne to beare the name of a Catholicke writer. This abiect course, which, now adayes, that side cleaues to as deuoutly as to their faith, bewrayes the misery of their side, to say no more: and so I follow him whither the winde and the tide carrie me. For he that rides a iade must take his owne pace or go afoote.

2 First he sayes his Aduersaries either ignorantly or wilful­ly peruert the state of the question, else they could haue had no co­lour to make so long discourse. The which is no vnprofitable way, when he cannot defend his question, to picke a quarrel to the state. And possible he hath learned it by po [...]ching in D. Stapletons bookes, who, in his time made good vse of this tricke. But how was the question mistaken? He saies, his question was not whether Scripture be the rule of faith, but, whether Scripture alone be the rule, and meanes, to breed faith. For the trial of this I must intreate the Reader to take know­ledge how things stand betweene vs, though I haue once, or twise, already, vpon like occasions, repeated it. The Iesu­ite, in his Treatise that I answered, beginnes with certaine [Page 249] propositions which he sayes are to be supposed and set downe for certaine and assured grounds: First, that no man can be saued without the true faith. Secondly, that this faith is but one, nei­ther can men be saued in any other. Thirdly, that this faith must be infallible and certaine, so that the beleeuer be fully perswaded of the truth thereof. Fourthly, that it must be whole and entire, beleeuing rightly all points, one as well as another. Fifthly, that God hath ordained a certaine rule or meane, whereby all men, learned and vnlearned, may be instructed in this faith, and infalli­bly taught, WHAT is to be holden for the true faith, and WHAT not. Sixtly, that this rule must haue three conditions. First, infalli­bility, to be certaine, without deceiuing vs. Secondly, easines, that it may be plainely knowne of all sorts of men. Thirdly, latitude, that, by it, we may know absolutely all points need­full to be learned. Then In THE WAY §. 5. and in his printed treatise p. 17. concl. 1. he proceeds to inquire what, in particular, is the thing which may be assigned to be this rule? whereto he answers in foure conclusions, the first whereof is this, whereabout he now contends, The Scripture alone, es­pecially as it is translated In his printed copie it is: Spe­cially as it is, by Protestants translated into the English tongue. into the English tongue, cannot he this rule. This I denied in another conclusion opposite to it, vsing the words of the publike articles of our Church: The Scripture, comprehended in the Canonicall bookes of the old and new Testament, is the rule of faith, so far that whatsoeuer is not read therein, or cannot be proued thereby, is not to be accepted as a­ny point of faith, or needfull to be followed. And so, from that place to pag. 57, I disputed that the Scripture ALONE is the rule of faith: that is to say, That rule which my Ad­uersary, in his fourth ground, had said, God had prouided, whereby euery man, learned and vnlearned, may sufficiently be in­structed WHAT is to be holden for the true faith. Now he com­plaines that the State is peruerted, the question not being whether Scripture be the rule of faith: but whether Scripture alone be the rule and meane, ordained of God to breed all faith. And he notes two points wherein it is peruerted. First, in that I so affirme and defend the Scripture to be the rule, as if he, and his sectaries, excluded it from being the rule in any sort: which he sayes they do not. For they hold the Scrip­ture, [Page 250] as propounded by the Church, to be part of it. I answer, that I knew well enough they confessed the Scripture to be part of the rule, and the Diuine doctrine, which is the whole rule, to be, some of it, written. But I knew also that they denied it to be the whole rule: ioyning therewith vn­written traditions and the Popes Decretals, which they call Church authority: I knew also they allowed it to be no part of the rule but as, and in such sence, as the Church of Rome should please to propound it: and I saw his conclusion, in termes, denying the Scripture alone to be the rule whereby men may sufficiently be instructed WHAT the faith is: there­fore I disputed directly opposite to all this, that the Scrip­ture alone, without traditions, is the whole rule to shew vs WHAT is to be holden for faith; and nothing but the Scrip­ture, this is close to the question. For albeit he yeelds it to be the rule in a sort, because as his Church propounds it, it con­taines part of the rule; yet he denies it to be that whole and entire rule, that his conclusion inquires of: and so is to be dis­puted against as well as if he denied it to be any part of the rule at all. Againe, he holds two things. First affirmatiuely; that the Scripture is one part of the rule: then negatiuely: that the Scripture alone is not all the rule. Both these are contradi­ctory to my assertion: The Scripture alone is the rule. My as­sertion therefore affirming what he denies, and denying what he affirmes, containes the true state of the question: and his inuoluing the matter with all this cauilling, tends onely to the couering of his doctrine, the loathsome visage whereof he is ashamed should be seene.

3 The second point wherein he sayes the question is per­uerted, is in that I take the rule of faith otherwise then he doth. For whereas he, by that word rule, meanes such a rule as not onely is sufficient to REVEALE, all diuine truths that are to be beleeued, but also to BREED, or produce in vs, the faith whereby we beleeue them: I, he sayes, vnderstand such a rule onely as is sufficient to reueale the diuine verities, though it be not sufficient to breed in vs faith and assent thereunto. And it is true that I vnderstand such a rule indeed; the Church, where­in [Page 251] I liue, onely beleeuing the sufficiency of the Scripture to containe all the obiect of faith, but not to enable vs to be­leeue it, or vnderstand it, ordinarily, without the ministry of the Church and other meanes. But this peruerts not the question: The state of the question touching Scrip­ture ALON [...]. for about the meanes there is no question; but the question is, whether Scripture alone, excluding all Church traditions, and authority, comprehend the whole obiect, or matter, of faith: that is to say, All that we are bound to know, beleeue, and doe, for our saluation; though it be granted that, to breed, or produce, faith and knowledge, of that which is in the Scripture, the Ministry of the Church and the helpe of Gods Spi­rit, and our owne industry, must concurre. For our Aduersaries deny this: and hold their runagate traditions and Church au­thority to be necessary, not onely for the expounding and confirming to vs that which is in the Scripture, if any one chance to deny it, or not to see it: but for the supplying of in­finite articles of faith, which are no waies at all comprised in the Scripture, but vpon the said authority are to be receiued as well as that which is reuealed in the Scripture. The Iesuite speakes as if he thought his Church authority to con­sist more in breeding faith and leading men to beleeue what is written, then in adding any thing to the measure of the diuine verities contained in the Scripture: and indeed some­time there be of his side that will plainely say so. He that writ the defence of the Censure Def. of the Cens. pag. 141. NOTE THIS and inquire whether all Pa­pists will stand to it. sayes, it is to be noted that the question betweene vs and the Protestants is of EXPRESSE SCRIPTVRE ONELY, and not of any far fet place, which by interpretation may be applied to a controuersie. For this conten­tion began betweene vs vpon this occasion, that when we alledged diuers weighty places and reasons, out of the Scripture, for proofe of inuocation of Saints, praier for the dead, Purgatory, and some other controuersies: our aduersaries reiected them, for that they did not plainely and expresly decide the matter. Whereupon came this question, whether all matters of beleefe are plainely and ex­presly in Scripture, or not; which they affirme, and we deny. And this, he sayes, is is the true state of the question. Gretser Defens. Bellar tom. 1. l. 4. c. 4. p. 1598. sayes: These things may be proued by Scripture, but not sufficiently, not [Page 252] effectually by Scripture alone without tradition, but onely proba­bly. The which if my aduersary and his Church did hold con­stantly, and in good earnest, I would confesse I had peruerted the state of the question. But they do not: but hold many things belonging to faith to be wanting, and no way at all, neither openly, nor expresly, nor consequently, contained in the Scripture. Dominicus Bannes: D. Dann. 22. Tho. p. 302. All things which pertaine to Catholicke faith are not contained in the Canonicall books, ei­ther manifestly, or obscurely; nor all those things which Christ, and his Apostles taught, and ordained for the instructing of his Church, and confirming of the faith, were committed to the holy Scriptures, and the contrary is open heresie. Melchior Canus Can. loc. p. 151 There are many things, belonging to the doctrine, and faith of Christians, which are contained in the sacred Scriptures, neither manifestly, nor obscurely. Cardinall Hosius Hos. confess. Polon. p. 383. The greater part of the Gospell, by a great deale, is come to vs by tradition, very little of it being written in the Scripture. Peresius Peres. de tra­dit. p. 4. Tradition is ta­ken so, that it is distinguisht against the doctrine, which is found in the Canonicall bookes of the Scripture. Bellarmine Bell. de verb. Dei, lib. 4. c. 1. The name of tradition is applied by Diuines to signifie onely vnwritten do­ctrine. Alphonsus Alphons. à Castr. adu. haer. lib 1. c. 5. This is to be laid for a most sound foundation —that the traditions of the vniuersall Church, and the deter­minations thereof, in things concerning faith, are of no lesse autho­rity, then the sacred Scripture it selfe, though there be no Scrip­ture to proue them. Hessels of Louan Hessel. expli. symb. c. 69. p. 38. The Apostles neuer in­tended by their writing to commit to writing the whole doctrine of faith, but as necessity vrged them, what in their absence they could not teach, that they committed to writing. Costerus the Iesuite Coster. enchi­rid. p. 43. It was neuer the mind of Christ, either to commit his mysteries to parchment, or that his Church should depend on paper writings. Lindane Lind. panopl. pag. 4. We Catholickes teach, that Christians are to beleeue many things, which are to be acknowledged for Gods word, that are not contained in the Scripture, and many things finally to be re­ceiued with the same authoritie, wherewith those doctrines of faith are receiued, which are contained in holy writ. Rodericus Del­gado Roderic. dosm. de autor. Script. l. vlt. p. 63 Albeit these things are not found written in the Bible, yet they must, no lesse be obserued by the godly, that they may fulfill [Page 253] the precepts, and firmely beleeue the mysteries of the heauenly faith. Doctor Stapleton: Staplet. prin­cip. doctr. l. 12. cap. 5. There both were among the Iewes, and are among vs, very many things religiously performed in the worship of God, and also necessary to saluation, and necessarily to be beleeued, which yet are not comprehended in the Scriptures, but are appro­ued, or commended to vs, ONELY by the authority of the Church. Gregory of Valentia, Valent. tom. 3. p. 258. D. All the controuersie is, whether the Apo­stles, by word of mouth, WITHOVT WRITING, deliuered, any such doctrines, as now affoord an infallible argument for the determining of the controuersies of faith in the Church. These wordes of our aduersaries make it more then plaine, that the Church of Rome holds the Scriptures vnsufficient, not one­ly in respect of breeding faith, or bringing men to know, and beleeue it ordinarily, which we grant, but also in respect of containing it in themselues, which we deny. And that my ad­uersary holds the same thing, I will prone directly. For ha-laid downe 4. grounds: First, that true faith is necessary: Se­condly, that this faith is onely one: Thirdly, that this faith must be certaine: Fourthly, and entire in all points: he addes the fift, that it must not be doubted, but God hath prouided, and left some certaine rule, and meanes, whereby euery man may, in all points, and questions, be sufficiently, and infallibly instructed, WHAT is to be holden for true faith: and then immediately, he puts the question, what in particular may be assigned to be this rule? wher­to he answers, in his first conclusion: The Scripture alone, especially as translated into English, cannot be this rule. Which I denied. Therefore his question was touching the sufficien­cy of the Scripture, as the said sufficiency is opposed to vn­writtē traditiō, & not as it is distinguished against the requisite condition of the meanes to be vsed for the vnderstanding of the Scripture. And this I confirme: for my aduersary saies, they hold the Scripture to be part of the rule, because it is part of the doctrine of the Church immediatly reuealed by God: but yet there are many substantiall points of faith not contai­ned in them. Yea Pag. 67. Reply. his expresse words are, The question is be­twixt vs, and Protestants, whether God did reueale any thing, to the Prophets, and Apostles, necessary to be beleeued, which is not [Page 254] now expressed, or so contained in the Scripture, that by euident, and necessary consequence (excluding all tradition, and Church au­thority) it may be gathered out of some sentence, expresly set downe in the Scripture. I did not therefore peruert the state of the question, but my Aduersary hauing nothing else to say, thought good, by this shift, to rid himselfe from that, which he saw could not be answered.

4 Neuerthelesse, pleasing himselfe with his owne con­ceite, he concludes, that conuicted with the euidence of truth, I haue yeelded to his conclusion, in that sence wherein he meant it, That Scripture alone is not the rule of faith. And therefore all my discourse is idle and impertinent. I answer two things, first, if his conclusion, The Scripture alone is not this rule, which almighty God hath prouided whereby euery man may suffici­ently be instructed WHAT is to be holden for true faith; meane no more but onely to adde the Ministry of the Church, and mens owne industry, to the Scripture, as the meanes, for the ordinary vnderstanding and beleeuing that which is written in it: in this sence, the Scripture alone is the rule whereby to iudge whatsoeuer matter belongs to faith; but Scripture alone is not the ordinary rule and meanes, by it selfe, to kindle in vs the true knowledge and faith of that which it containes, without the Ministrie of the Church, and o­ther things, be ioyned with it, for the learning of it: then I grant it: and require the Iesuite againe in lieu thereof, ei­ther to renounce his traditions, or else confesse they haue no other vse but onely to helpe to expoūd and teach that which is wholly contained in the Scripture, without any power to supply any defect of doctrine that may be supposed to be therein. And when he hath done, the next treatise of faith he writes, to distinguish a little better betweene the Rule, and the Meanes of applying it: and not say, that is no suffici­ent rule whereby to be instructed WHAT is faith and WHAT not, which onely is not a sufficient meanes to bring men to faith without the subordinate condition of such meanes as is required in the application of any rule. Secondly I answer, that his conclusion meanes more: viz. That Scripture alone [Page 255] is vnperfect and defectiue 2. waies. The first, in that, without other meanes, it doth not ordinarily breed, or draw foorth, in vs, assent to that it reueales, nor so much as make vs see the reuelation to be. And therefore there needes the Church, by her Pastor, to teach and perswade vs: and there needes the Spirit of God, and industrie, in our selues. This way no Protestant euer denied. The se­cond is, in that it alone containes not all Gods word, or all such truth as he hath reuealed necessarily to be belee­ued; but onely one small and obscure part thereof: the best part, or, at least, some part, being by Traditi­on onely, vnwritten. This way we deny with open mouth: and the Iesuite holds it, and in the place now contro­uerted, hugges it in his armes: and therefore I discoursed against him as I did, and in no other sense: and so conse­quently it is apparant I yeelded not his conclusion, in the whole sence, but onely in a part. For view my words: The Ministerie of the Church is the ordinary meanes whereby we may learne the faith of Christ. And, no man can of himselfe attaine to the knowledge thereof, but as the Church teaches him, except it be in some extraordinary cases. How will my Iesuite conclude frō hence that therefore I yeeld his conclusion as it is vnderstood the second way, which way I haue shewed immediately be­fore both his Church and himselfe vnderstand it? Doth he that saies the kings Iustices are t [...] ordinary meanes whereby to learne the matter of ciuill obedience; and that no subiect can, ordinarily, attaine to the knowledge of the law, vnlesse some body publish it, yeeld therfore that the law alone is not the rule of the said obedience and subiection, prescribing the measure and qualitie thereof, but the Iustices also, and such as acquaint vs with the law, are part of the rule? yea the greater, and more certaine part? No man will say so: when all men see the Magistrate to be but the executioner, and mini­ster of the law, to teach, publish, and execute that which is in the law it selfe: and the Booke of the law to containe the whole and entire obiect of obedience; that no subiect is bound to any obedience, or to the doing of any thing [Page 256] whatsoeuer the Magistrate might happen to impose vpon him, but that onely which is contained in the law; either expressely, or thence to be gathered by true consequence. And so my Iesuits vaunt of our yeelding and impertinent discourses relishes but of the Souldier that created him and his vaunting Order; though his putting vs ouer to his other Catholicke Authors be scarse souldier-like, but tastes more of the Creeple. He vses this often, and I confesse it is a good short cutte home-wardes, if a man be empty: but it sinkes him that vses it into the lowest bottome of contempt; to giue the onset with conclusions and princi­ples, and then to maintaine them with boasting and ig­norance. If we were not well acquainted with this transparent cowardlinesse in our busiest Aduersaries, it would leauen the most setled patience that is a­mong vs.

CHAP. XXVIII.

1 HIs reason why the Scriptures trāslated into English, cānot be the rule of faith is, because our translations are full of errors. Wherby, he says, his mind is not to deny the true Scripture in the originall or in the translation, to be infallible, but only the ordinary English translations. My THE WAY, §. 5. nu. 2 §. 6. nu. 2. 4. 8. answer was the same that D. Stapleton Relect. pag. 525. makes for the vulgar Latin, that in respect of the words onely there might be some error; but in respect of the sence there is none. For if the words of the trā ­slation be not so perfect as they might, yet that hinders not the truth of the matter, nor the integritie of the sence. For the vulgar Latin canonized by Sess. 4. the Trent Councell, and In those words: J do not denie the true Scripture, either in the Originall, or in the Trans­lation to be in­fallible. granted by the Iesuite himselfe to be infallible, is not free from error and corruption in words. Mariana Tract. pro edit. vulg. Mul­ta superius in Hebraicis & Graecis codicibus vtti esse osten­dimus; multae mendacia in re­bus minutis: eo­rum pars aliquae non exigua, in nostra editione vulgata extat. c. 21. pag. 103. says, There be many corruptions in the Hebrew and Greeke bookes, which are the originall, and many lies in small matters; no small part whereof is also in the vul­gar. It may safely therfore be yeelded, that our English tran­slations, as all other translations in the world whatsoeuer, are not infallible, nor free from all errors in words: and yet the sence and matter of the Scripture translated, which is the rule, be stil maintained to, be infallible. This my answer, yeel­ding such a kind of erroniousnes in words, my aduersary ob­iects to M. Wotton; who, belike in his answer to this argu­ment, demanding what English Protestant euer affirmed that our translations were infallible, or tooke them for the rule? He replies secondly, what means M. White then to say the Scripture tran­slated into English, is infallibly true, in respect of the matter? M. White answers, that his meaning in so saying, was to accord with M. Wotton, by distinguishing betweene the words and the contents of the translations: M. Wotton denying the words to be the rule; and I affirming the matter contained in the words so to be. What contradiction is this; when he grants our translatiōs, as al humane means are, to be subiect [Page 260] to error in one sence; and I deny them to be subiect in another?

2 This my assertion, that our English translations, as touching the matter contained in them, are infallible: howsoeuer there be varietie among them in words & stile, he entertaines, after his accustomed maner, with some passiō For expoūding my self, that I wold not maintain this or that mans editiō, but the Scrip­tures wel and faithfully translated, in such maner as our Church allows them: he cals this a starting hole: neuer remēbring how himself wil not defend this or that edition in his own Church, but wil retire to those editions that are approued: as also the primitiue Church permitted varietie of translations, and yet followed the purest, as neare as it could iudge of thē, for the time being. I wil therfore say it again, that OVR ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS, AS TOVCHING THE MATTER CONTAINED THEREIN, ARE INFALLIBLE, AND THE DIVINE IN­SPIRED WORD OF GOD, THAT IS THE RVLE OF FAITH. And my aduersary is but a meane disputer, if he thinke to disproue this by obiecting some verball errors. For either they wil proue no errors at all; or if they do, D. Stapleton shall tell him, they hinder nothing the truth of the matter, nor the integritie of the text: and I will giue him a whole legion of his owne writers, that shall impute as foule errors to his Trent vulgar, which yet he thinkes infallible. Neuerthelesse his arguments in disproofe of that I say, are three. First, the testimonies of Martin, Reynolds, and the Grounds of the new religion. Secondly, the testimonie of M. Broughton and Carlile. Thirdly the diuersitie of translations in our Church. Wherto I answer first in general, that I satisfied these reasons sufficiently in my booke; and gaue direct answer to them: whereto he hath replied nothing, but onely repeates his ob­iections. He was therefore too hastie, to call that bold, blinde, and false, which he could not reply to; & me brazen faced that said no more but what himself giues experience of For I said Martin could not giue one instāce of any sence corrupted in our trās­lations; & himself, in stead of producing somwhat out of Mar­tin, breaks out into railing: which is folly. For cocks of y^e game are not allowed to crow til they haue beatē their mate: for he [Page 261] that crowes, and yet runnes away, is a crauin, and shall haue his necke wrung off, or be turned to the dunghill to crow among hens. Secondly I answer in particular: to the first, ad 1. it is but a foolish brag, to be contemned. To the second, ad 2. it is reported Protest. apol. tract. 1. sect. 10. subdiuis. 4. on Briarlies credit, who is an aduersary. But al­lowing they said as much as is alledged, the truth must be tried, not by the hastie speeches of a discontented man, but by the thing it selfe: and I shewed in the 7. Digress. how di­uers Papists haue said worse of the Latin vulgar, which yet is holden infallible by the Iesuite. Mariana Tract. de vulg edit. pag. 103. sayes, Diuers learned men of France, Italy and Germanie, in their writings ac­cuse the corruption of the vulgar edition, and the negligence of the interpreter: and that it containes many lies in things of smaller moment. His third reason is, ad 3. if our Translations were not erronious, what need were there, after so many varieties of tran­slations, to coine a new translation of the Bible, different from all that haue bene before? the which also when it comes, will be of in­fallible authoritie no more then the former, &c. Praef. before the new trans­lated Bible. The Transla­tors haue answered this themselues, so religiously and lear­nedly, that it will content any godly minde: onely our Ie­suites, of Momus race, will carpe at any thing. Lucian. Her­motim. pag. 113 Graec. Aldi. & de vera hist. l. 2. sub init. Natal. Com. They write of Momus, that none of the gods could do any thing, but he had a quarrell at it. When Neptune had made a bull, Ʋulcan a man, and Minerua a house; he quarrelled at the bull, because the hornes stood on his head; the man, because he had not a window in his breast; the house, because it stood not on wheeles, to remoue it when it stood not well. And Philocran ep. ad vxor. when Ʋenus walked by, smiling at his conceit, he told her she was not well made neither: [...]. pag. 384. and her shooe made too much creaking as she went. My aduersary hath a spice of Momus in him. His humour affirmes foure things: first, that the translation is coined. This we denie: for coining signifies translating otherwise then the originall languages intend; which they haue not done, for any thing the Ie­suite knowes: for he had not seene it when he wrote this; and whensoeuer he sees it, he hath not so much learning as to compare it with Greeke and Hebrew: and the Reader may iudge the better of it by this, that it agrees, through­out, [Page 262] with the translations of the learned in the Church of Rome, Pagnine, Vatablus, Munster, Erasmus, Arias, bet­ter then the vulgar doth; of which translation, many Ro­mish Catholicke Doctors report, Refert Azor. part. 1. sum. mor l. 8. c. 3. pag. 639 §. Quarto. that there be some corrup­tions in it, and that things might haue bene translated more clear­ly, significantly, properly, truly, and better: and things naugh­tily translated, yea in a contrary sence, and nothing to the pur­pose. He that is bound to such a translation, with an ill grace, tels vs of coining. Secondly, he affirmes our new tran­slation to be different from all that haue bene before: this is stale, and I vouchsafe it onely this answer: How can he tell that saw it not before he writ this, it not being then come forth? Thirdly he sayes, that with much cost, care and scandall to our cause, it is set forth. For the care and cost, he hath no­thing to do: his Highnesse, and the State, and learned of our Church, he now begins to see, will spare neither care nor cost to aduance Gods truth, and impart the sacred Scripture to his people; which the Pope and his Cleargie, with so much care and cost haue laboured to destroy. The scandall con­cernes him nearer: but that he is a Pharisee, and so can re­ceiue no formall scandall from vs. Or if he will assume to himselfe so tender a conscience, as to be afraid of scandall; let him speake out, and trifle not: what scandall is it now, when learning and meanes increase, to make a new tran­slation; ouer it was in the primitiue Church, when Lucian, Ierom, and others made their new translations, the Church hauing many translations in it before? What scandall is it, more then was See Cassand. praef. ord. Rom. Gregories altering of the Liturgies, when euen with generall contradiction, increasing to mutinie, he abolished the old, to make roome for his new? or more then is the infinite varietie of Liturgies, Breuiaries, and Missals in the Church of Rome at this day? the varietie whereof, is almost reached in the different editions of their translations: in so much that THE TRENT COVNCEL HAVING AVTHORISED AND PREFERRED THE LATIN-VVLGAR, YET NO PAPIST LIVING CAN TELL WHICH IS CERTAINLY IT: whe­ther [Page 263] the edition of the Goths, or Complute, or Louane, or Clement, or Sixtus, or any other. For as there be these and diuers other editions of the vulgar, set for [...]h and allowed in the Church of Rome by the Pope, so do they neuer a one of them agree with other: which fully returnes the scandall into my aduersaries owne bosome, and for euer de­barres his sectaries from obiecting to vs the varietie of our translations; wherein if there be any force, it will pinch them as much as vs.

3 Fourthly he affirmes our new translation to be of in­fallible authoritie no more then the former were, that our Church vsed. This shall be granted him in respect of the matter and doctrine contained; which in all translations, that varie but in character of speech, is alike certaine. But how shall the vnlearned, which can neither vnderstand the originall, nor com­pare translations, nor so much as reade, nor will admit infal­lible authoritie in the Church to assure them, be infallibly cer­taine the translation containes no substantiall error euen in the matter? this he would faine know. My answer My answer was not tou­ing the vnlear­ned alone, but of the vnlear­ned and lear­ned together, per commodam distributionem. was, that we know this by the same meanes whereby we know other truths, and discerne other articles of Christian faith, namely, by the light of the doctrine translated, the testimonie of the Spirit, the mini­sterie of the word, the rules of art, and such like. My aduersarie replies, this is but a flourish of words; and bids me answer di­rectly to the point: and thus he reasons; If these be the meanes whereby we are assured our translations containe no substantiall error, the light of the doctrine translated, the testimonie of the Spi­rit, the ministerie of the word, the rules of art, the knowledge of tongues, and such like; then they are so either ioyntly altogether, or euery one seuerally by it selfe, or onely some of them: But nei­ther are all of them ioyntly, nor euery one seuerally, nor onely some of them: Ergo these be not the meanes: ergo some other meanes must be assigned, and that is the authoritie of the Church. I will answer directly to the point, granting the first proposition, and distinguishing the second, which hath three members: first, that all of them ioyntly together are not necessarie; which he proues, because so the vnlearned that want tongues and art, [Page 264] could not haue this assurance: I answer, they are all of them ioyntly together necessary, by concurring all of them in the Church, some in the learned, some in the vnlearned, to the working of this assurance in the learned and vnlearned: for they are not ioyntly the means, so that they need all of them immediatly touch euery one that shal be assured; but it is suf­ficient, that art and tongues, ioyned with Gods Spirit, be in the learned; and the ministerie of the Spirit, and the Church, and the light of the doctrine translated, be in the vnlearned, all concurring to produce Viz. this clear assurance that the translation cōtains at least nothing con­trary to the a­nalogie and rule of faith. one effect in both, though not all alike existing in them both. The second member is, that euery one of these seuerally is not sufficient: and this I grant: for no o­ther meanes is sufficient, if Gods Spirit be wanting to giue effect to it. The third member is, that onely some of these are not a sufficient meanes to breed this assurance: this is false: for the light of the doctrine translated, & the testimony of Gods Spirit, are sufficient to assure the vnlearned, that what is tran­slated to them is true, at least touching the doctrine, in the same maner that Gods Spirit and the light of the truth assure vs, that the things taught by word of mouth in preaching, are the truth; which light, and testimony of the Spirit, neuer go with translations or preaching which contain false doctrine. His D. Stapleton Triplic. in ad­monit. says it ouer, that by the internall perswasion of the Spirit of God alone, any matter of faith may be beleeued though the Church say nothing at all: but the Iesuits reason to the contrary, is, then it would follow, that an vnlearned man hauing that Spirit of God, by the onely light of the doctrine shining in it, without any other help, should vnderstand Greeke and Hebrew, because the Scriptures are written in them: but this followes ne­uer a whit: for though I grant the doctrine shines in the Scripture, and God by his Spirit giues a full assurance, yet he doth not this to the vnlearned but by translations: which assurance I vnderstand according to the state and condition of him that is to be assured; the learned seeing the heauenly doctrine in the learned tongues, and translated both; the vn­learned vulgar people in the translation onely, and not in the originall, as a man sees light by the opening of a window, [Page 265] because that is the meanes to let it in. I do not say, the light of the doctrine and the testimonie of Gods Spirit giue the vnlearned assurance in the Scripture it selfe euery way, but in the Scripture truly translated into the language they vnder­stand: neither doth the contrary follow of my words, We know the diuine doctrine to be one and the same in all translations immediatly in the originall, and more obscurely in the translations; and God directeth the children of light by the holy Ghost, who ope­neth their hearts that they know his voice from all others, and that the light of his truth may shine vnto them: for this light shi­neth, and this testimonie of the holy Ghost worketh, first, not immediatly, but by meanes: secondly, not by the same meanes in all, but diuersly, whiles to such as haue the light of the ho­ly Ghost, being learned, it shines in the originall tongues, but being vnlearned, onely in translations: as the words that are printed in a booke, are plaine and legible of themselues without any other meanes to him that hath light and a per­fect eye; but if a man be dim sighted, then to him they are onely legible through his spectacles: and as it is necessary, though the light be cleare of it selfe, yet to open the win­dow, in case a man be shut vp in a house; so my saying, the doctrine is one and the same in all translations, and God directs the children of the light to discerne it, and makes the light of it shine vnto them, hinders not, but I may well say also, the win­dow or translation must be opened to let in this light, when men are shut vp in ignorance of the tongues; and so still some of the meanes I named alone, are sufficient, where all cannot concurre.

4 My aduersary in the knitting vp, replies against this, that if the holy Ghost doth not sufficiently assure vs without other meanes, then the light of the doctrine, and the testimonie of the Spirit, are not the onely necessary, nor alone sufficient meanes to assure vs, that the translation we vse, is not corrupted. By which reason he may say also, that when the opening of a window is a necessary meanes to shew the light, this light is not the onely necessary, nor alone sufficient meanes to en­lighten me: for there is sufficient in the Scripture to assure [Page 266] me, but still the helpe of Church-ministery and industry are necessary to worke it in me, or else my aduersarie must proue that the subordination of the meanes where by causes are ap­plied to their effects, take away the sufficiencie and perfection of the said causes, that is to say, the Grammar containes not all things necessary and sufficient for the vnderstanding of Latin, because it is not sufficient vnlesse the learner go to schoole, and heare his master teach him. And though it be granted, that the ministery of men, and rules of art, and knowledge of tongues, be all subiect to error, yet doth it not follow, that by them we cannot attaine infallible assurance of our translations, as I haue shewed in THE WAY, §. 6. n. 3. my answer to this argu­ment, where it was first propounded: whither I referre my aduersary, that, if he would haue dealt really, should not haue here repeated his old argument, but haue ingenuously replied what he had to say to it, but that had bene labour.

CHAP. XXIX.

1 HIs second reason against the Scriptures being the rule of faith, was their obscuritie: because they faile in the second condition of the rule, being of them­selues alone so obscure and vnknowne, both to the vnlearned and learned, that no man can thereby alone be sufficiently directed. This reason was handled § 7, and 8. where I answered the argu­ment whereby he prosecuted it: and euery word also that he replies here, which makes me to wonder with what consci­ence he followes his cause, when, that he sayes here being an­swered, he shrinks from replying, and onely repeates his old argument againe, and yet intitles his booke a Reply, when he replies nothing, but conceales all from his Reader that I an­swered: neuerthelesse, that he sayes, I will answer againe.

2 First he tels in what sence he holds the Scripture to be obscure, and how farre forth. Not that it cannot by any meanes be vnderstood; or that it is any imperfection in the Scripture to be obscure, but the perfection rather: the onely thing he goes about to proue, being, that de facto it is obscure, or at the least not so easie as the ordinary rule of faith ought to be: which is denied, and confuted: not denying some parts to be obscure, as many prophecies and mysteries therein; nor affirming any of it to be so effectuall to our vnderstanding, that without the mo­tion of Gods Spirit, and vse of the meanes, euery man can effectually vse it to his saluation: for I neuer denied the re­quisite [Page 270] condition of Gods grace, and the Churches teaching, and our owne endeuour, to open our vnderstanding, euen in the plainest Scripture that is, but I onely affirme, all things concerning faith and good life, needfull to be knowne, to be so plainly set downe therein, that the vnlearnedst man aliue, vsing the meanes (which is not the Church-authoritie intended by my aduer­sary) and being enlightned with Gods Spirit, may sufficiently vn­derstand them to his saluation; which is enough to make it a rule perfect, entire, and as easie as is possible for a rule to be, for the finding out and deciding whatsoeuer matter be­longs to faith. For howsoeuer some things in the Scripture, the knowledge whereof is not simply necessary to saluati­on, be very obscure and doubtfull; yet the whole rule of our faith, needfull to all men, is set downe so plainly, that it may be vnderstood of all men, allowing them some eleuation, and onely supposing them to haue the light of grace, and to take that paines in searching, that is ordinarily required in the vse of any rule, and in the execution of any meanes whatsoeuer. It seemes my aduersarie would conclude from hence, that therefore I grant Scripture alone not to be so easie as the rule of faith ought to be: because I require so many, euen out­ward meanes and helpes for the vnderstanding thereof, beside the helpe of Gods Spirit within vs. But he is deceiued, and deceiues his Reader: for I expounded my selfe, that it is not necessarie the rule be so easie and effectuall, that no helpe shall be needfull for the applying it to our conscience: but the perfection and easinesse of it stands in this, that a man vsing diligence, and eleuated by grace from his naturall ig­norance, shall finde therein absolutely and plainly, all things whatsoeuer he is bound to know and beleeue, and needs not that the Church by her authoritie and traditions should adde any thing to it, that is not contained in it. And that this con­dition of vsing meanes and outward helpes, takes not away the reason of a rule, he must confesse by his owne principles: for let his Church-teaching and authoritie, his owne Helena, be the rule; yet afore any man can determinately know it, or vnderstand and yeeld to it, he must, I hope, haue the grace [Page 271] of the Spirit, and seeke it out, and diligently attend what it tea­ches him: which is as much as we require for the vnderstan­ding of the Scriptures. This therefore is a vaste partialitie in my Iesuite, that he will conclude a thing cannot be a suffici­ent rule or meanes, that requires the helpe of grace and a mans owne industrie in the applying it, when themselues holding their Church to be the rule, yet confesse, that no man can heare the voice thereof, not vnderstand nor yeeld assent to it, without the very same meanes that we require for the vnderstanding of the Scriptures. What voice, what complaint, what querimonie shall we vtter against this per­uersnesse, against this spirit of contradiction? But my aduer­sarie sayes, that among these outward meanes and helpes, which M. White requires to the vnderstanding of the Scripture, besides the Spirit of God, there must be one (an outward meanes) which is There is no such outward infalible means in this life. HOC NOBIS SIT SATIS INDVBIVM APVD LITE­RATOS HABE­RI, NVLLVM ESSE IN TER­RIS IVDICIVM QVOD ERRARE LABI, DECIPI, NON POSSIT. Pic. Mirand. a­polog. pro Sa­uanarol. l. 1. c. 1. infallible, and sufficient to breed infallible assurance, and so easie to be knowne and vnderstood of all sorts, that all may ordinarily direct themselues thereby onely by diligent attending and assenting to it, and this is the rule of faith that in this place he meanes: wherein if he meane good earnest, this question is at an end, and the Scripture is granted to be the rule: for he will allow that to be the rule, which by the helpe of grace supposed, is sufficient to direct all sorts, onely by diligent attending and yeelding assent to it: now such is the Scripture alone, that the grace of God sup­posed, onely by diligent attendance and assent vnto it, it is sufficient; and therefore also you see the necessitie and requisite condition of vsing diligence, by my aduersaries owne words, hinders not the Scriptures from being the rule of faith, euen in his owne sence, & as himself vnderstands the rule of faith: for such as is both infallible and sufficient to breed infallible assu­rance in vs, and so easie to be knowne and vnderstood, that all sorts of men may direct themselues in all points of faith, onely by diligent attending and assenting to it: because onely diligent atten­tion and assenting being added on our behalfe to the helpe of Gods grace, it may thereby be determinately vnderstood of all sorts, in all things needfull to be knowne.

3 But he sayes, that as in a common wealth, besides [Page 272] the written lawes, there are vnwritten customes, which inter­prete the written law, and liuing magistrates that haue au­thoritie to interprete both written and vnwritten lawes, and to compell men to his sence, without which the written lawes were not a sufficient rule and meanes to preserue good order in the state, because through the peruersnesse of men, they would be misvnderstood; so in the Church, beside the written Scriptures, there must be admitted some vnwritten traditions to interprete the Scriptures, and some liuing magistrate (the Pope) to propound and expound the Scriptures, and to compell men to take the sence that he giues, because the Scriptures are not so plaine, but they may be misvnderstood, &c. This comparison, and the conclusion of it, I denie: for albeit meanes must be ioyned with the Scrip­ture, yet this Church-authoritie, and these vnwritten traditions, are none of the meanes, but onely that which I haue named: for there needs no meanes to supply any matter of faith that is wanting in the Scripture, but onely to open our eyes that we may see what is therein; whereas these traditions, and this Church-magistracie, are supposed to be necessarie for the ad­ding of innumerable things to be beleeued, that are not contained in the Scripture, as I haue Ch. 27. n. 3. shewed. My aduersarie therefore plainly shewes the difference that is betweene vs, and dis­couers what he meanes, when he pretends the Church and her authoritie; for this rule of faith, he expounds transpa­rently to be the Pope with his traditions, and to him giues that which is denied in the Scriptures, plenarie power, partly out of the Scripture, partly out of his Decretals, to propound to all men the matter of their faith, and compell them to take his sence, be it true or false. This is the Antichristian bondage, whereinto the man of Rome will bring all the world; and the hellish pride, wherin he aduanceth himself, to sit as God in the Church, exalting his owne will & lawes aboue the wil and lawes of the eternall God; and subiecting Gods blessed word to his cursed will, which his base Co [...]ceruau [...] ­runt sibi magi­stros ad deside­ria sua, non v [...] ab eu discerent quod facere deberent, sed vt eorum studio & calliditate i [...]niret [...]r ratio qua licere [...] id quod liberes. Spoken of the Popes clawbacks by Concil. delect. Card. sub init. Parasites for their [Page 273] backes and bellies, so much striue for; which we execrate as hell, and leaue to the Diuell, from whence it first appeared vnto the world; ciuill states, and the commonwealths of this world, may haue such vnwritten customes, and allow this au­thority to magistrates; but God hath left no such traditions to his Church, nor set any such head ouer it, thus to expound the Scriptures, or to determinate the sense thereof, but all his whole will is written, and out of the Scripture it selfe, is to be reuealed, & imparted to particular men, when any doubt arises, by the ministry of the Church, either in ordinary prea­ching, or in the Councels of godly, & orthodoxall Bishops; That a Councel is the highest tri­bunall vpon earth, and aboue the Pope affir­med by Iustinian in praetermiss. per Anto. Cont. p. 11. Phot. No­mocan. tit. 9 c 1 & 6. The Coun­cels of Pisa. Const. & Basil. and the Vniuer­sity of Paris to this day. See to this purpose Card Florent. tract. de Scism. Anto. de Rosell. monarch. tract. de concil & Mich. Cezen. lit. ad imperat. part. 12. sub sin. Ioh. Fran. Pic. Mirand. apol. pro Sauanaro. l. 1. c. 1. to the which the Pope, and his rabble, if they will know the truth, and be saued, ought to subiect themselues, as well as the poorest Christian that liues: and the written word is so absolute, and sufficient, to direct them herein, and his spi­rit so infallibly ready to guide them, if they will vse the meanes, that there is no more to be required, for the full manifestation of any thing needfull, for any man whatsoeuer: and Certū est quod possit errare, eti­am in ijs quae tangum fidem, haeresim per suam determinationem aut decretalem asserendo. Ha­drian 4. de sacra. consit. p. 26. see below. this authority of the Pope it selfe, when all is done, is faine to be reiected.

4 Thirdly, whereas I said out of Chrysostome, that how­soeuer some part of the Scripture be obscure, yet some places are so plaine, and easie to vnderstand, that euery man by reading may know the meaning, which speech I extend to so many places, as are sufficient to teach vs all things needfull to saluation, in this sense, that the whole rule of faith is set downe, in plaine places of Scripture, which any man of himselfe by reading, may vnderstand, (requiring still the grace of God, and diligence in searching) he replies three things. The which afore I answer, the Reader must note that the words he opposes are Chrysostomes, and what I said, I proued by many arguments, the last whereof, was the testimonie of the ancient Fathers, who say in ex­presse words, as much as I. The which arguments he an­swers not a word to, and therefore replying vpon my con­clusion, he opposes, through me, the plaine Scripture, the ancient Church, and his owne writers, by all which I confir­med that I said.

[Page 274]5 First, he sayes that albeit some places are plaine, yet it doth not follow, that the Scripture ALONE, (euen in those plaine places) is the rule, because no man without some other meanes, besides the plainenesse of the words, can be infallibly assured, that he vnder­stands them right: the which he proues, first, because some pla­ces seeming plaine, are vnderstood otherwise then they seeme. Secondly, because the plainest places that are, may be wrested to a wrong sense, as that plaine place, This is my bo­dy, is wrested by the Caluinists, to a figuratiue sense. I an­swer, his reason why Scripture alone could not be the rule of faith, was because it is not plaine; the which obscurity I de­nied to be in that which is necessary to be knowne, affirming the Scripture, in such places, to be plaine; now he replies, that though such places be plaine, yet still it cannot be the rule. Thus first he denies the Scripture to be the rule, because it is not plaine; and then allowing it againe, to be plaine, yet still he denies it to be the rule. What will this man stand to I maruell? But they be not plaine enough, because without some other infallible meanes, besides the seeming plainenes of the words, no man can be infallibly assured, that he vnderstands aright, euen those plaine places This absurd cauill, I haue answered twenty times: first, that the meanes whereby this is done, are the helpe of Gods Spirit, our owne diligence, the Church-teaching, the light of nature: and these meanes are infallible; And these meanes I admit, either coniunctim, or diuisim, to be necessary, as a condition and medium for the full assurance of vnderstanding these places: but this condition takes not a­way the true motion, and reasons of plainenesse from them; for, as I answered in my booke to this argument, that is not ob­scure, which by ordinary, and easie meanes may be vnderstood, but which, either hath no meanes at all to open it, or onely such as are not ordinary: to his confirmation, THE WAY p. 36. n. 2. I answered likewise. But to his instances, of the Caluinists, wresting a plaine place, This is my body, to a figuratiue sense, I reply, first it is plaine, and euident, that it is a figure, by the circumstances of the place, when he that said the words, This is my body, that is giuen for you, at the same instant, held nothing but bread in his hand, [Page 275] and liued, and was neither yet glorified, nor crucified, and spake of a sacrament, wherein it is ordinary to speake figuratiuely. Secondly, the Papists do the same in the next words, This cup is the new Testament, and yet they hold them to be plaine words; if my aduersary will be smattering, about the expo­sition of these words, let him giue a reall answer to the place of my booke, Digr. 49. n. 8. where they are handled of purpose for him.

6 Next he sayes, though the letter of the Scripture, be neuer so plaine, yet to haue infallible assurāce of the sence, there is required some other rule, and meanes, the which rule is not in the bare letter of the Scripture, but is to be learned of the Church, as Ʋincenti­us saith. The which being the same he said before, without difference, or augmentation, let it briefly receiue the same answer, That the requisite cōdition of vsing ordinary, & easie meanes, wherof the ministry of the Church, truly expounded, is one, I neuer denied, but this proues not the Scriptures to be obscure, nor remoues infallible assurance frō the Scripture to the Church, but onely shewes, that the Scripture infallibly, out of it selfe giues vs this assurance by this meanes; and Vin­cētius his words affirme no more: for by the rule of Ecclesiasti­call, and Catholicke sence, according to the which he requires the line of propheticall, and apostolicall interpretation to be directed, he meanes no vnwritten Church-tradition, or doctrine that is wanting in the Scripture, (for he holds the Scripture it selfe to be sufficient for euery thing) but onely that that which is in the Scripture be so vnderstood, as agrees with the rule of faith, which the true Church hath alwaies holden: now that which the Church hath alwaies holden, is contained in the Scripture alone; that the Reader may see the Iesuites treache­ry in alledging Vincentius against the sufficiency of the Scripture, who in that very place, (which belike he neuer saw with his owne eyes) begins thus: Here possible one may de­mand, when the rule of the Scripture is perfect, and in it selfe more then enough sufficient vnto all things; (Note here whether he thinks, as the Iesuite doth, that many substantiall points of doctrine, needfull to saluation, are not contained in them, and that it is but a part of the rule) what need is there to ioyne [Page 276] vnto it, the authority of the Churches sence? and he answers as the Iesuite hath alledged, that this is because all men do not take it in one sence, therefore it is necessary that the line of interpretati­on, be directed according to the rule of Ecclesiasticall, and Catho­licke sence. In which manner he speakes also in Diximus in superioribus, hanc suisse semper & esse hodie Catho­licorum consue­tudinem, vt fidem veram duo [...]us his modis approbent: Primum diuini canonis authori­tate: Deinde [...]c­clesiae catholicae traditione. Non quia canon solus non sibi ad vni­uersa sufficiat, sed quia verba diuina, pro suo plerique arbura­tis, interpetan­tur. cap. 41. another place, not supposing any thing to be wanting in the Scripture, so much as to giue infallible assurance of it owne sence, much lesse any articles of faith needfull to saluation, but onely sup­posing that some heretikes would not yeeld to that it gaue, or possible through their owne default, did not see it; and thereupon aduises to oppose against them, the rule, and pra­ctise of the Church, as a man by witnesses would conuince him, that denies the truth: the which practise, as it hinders not the Scriptures to containe the perfect rule of faith, so we will allow it, and require no sence, or exposition of the Scrip­ture, nor no point of religion, to be receiued, vnles it be thus directed.

7 It is therefore vntrue, that he concludes with; one can­not infallibly be assured, when the words of the Scripture are to be vnderstood properly, and when not, without the authority of the Church, vnlesse it be by reuelation: I say this is false vpon two points, first, because this assurance may be had, as from the ex­ternall meanes, by the Scripture it selfe, though the Church say nothing; Next because this Church authority, he vnder­stands to be the externall testimony of the Church reuealing, if not making the said sence out of tradition, which is not writ­ten, and not out of the Scripture it selfe: so that the vnder­standing which I haue of the sence, and my perswasion, that it is the true sence, shall not be founded on the Scripture, but on the authority of the Church of Rome, that sayes it; which THE WAY. §. 8. n. 7. & digr. 11. I confuted, affirming that this assurance, and the assurance of all other things beleeued, is wrought and bred, in the heart, by the Spirit of God principally, and then by the a­lone words of the Scripture ioyned therewith, as by the for­mal beginning of that my assurance, and by the ministry of the Church onely as Gods ordinance appointed to helpe me, to attaine, and recouet that sence, and assurance, that, by [Page 277] meanes of this helpe, arises in me, from the Scripture it selfe, though many times, and very ordinarily this is done with­out all motion of the Church whatsoeuer, by onely reading, as I haue often said, in case when men are either conuerted from Athisme, or confirmed in the truth, without hearing or knowing of the Church, by onely reading.

CHAP. XXX.

1 THe third thing obiected against the Scripture, was Imperfection; that it containes not the whole matter of faith, but many things else, are needfull to be knowne, and beleeued, that are not written therein. For though he spake somwhat reseruedly, There be diuers que­stions of faith, which are not EXPRESSLY set downe: yet his mea­ning is, There be diuers particular points to be beleeued, which are contained therein, neither expressely, nor anyway at all, but re­ceiued vpon sole Tradition, and Church authoritie, as I haue [Page 279] Ch. 27. n. 2. shewed; and his Introduction here mentioned, affirmes: which being a grosse, and blasphemous assertion, therefore: to couer the odiousnesse of it: here in the first place, he saies, that by affirming the Scripture, not to containe all points of faith, he doth not attribute any imperfection to it. And how I maruell, will he perswade vs this, when it is impossible it should be perfect, that leaues vs vnperfect in the faith, and re­ueals but a portiō of that, which yet of necessitie, must be known to saluation? his reason is: because his aduersaries, will neuer be able to shew that, to containe all points of faith, doth belong to the nature, and perfection of Scripture. But I answer, it pertaines to the perfection of the Scripture, and is due to the nature thereof, to containe all things: because it selfe sayes so, and there can be no other infallible, or conuenient reuelation. And Propounded in the WAY Digr. 3. &. 13. many testimonies, and arguments euince it: which my aduersary not being able to answer, hath well, and wisely passed by with silence. And therefore denying this, they at­tribute imperfection to it. For to deny that, which the Scrip­ture is, is to make it imperfect. Athanasius Orat. cont. Gent. sub. init. saies, The holy Scriptures are [...]. sufficient by themselues to shew the truth. Isiodore Pelusiota, L. 2. Epist. 369. The sacred volumes hauing the testimony of the di­uine Scriptures, are the stayres whereby we ascend to God. All there­fore brought out of them in the Church of God receiue, as proued gold, tried in the fire of the Spirit of Gods truth: [...]: and whatsoeuer things, without these volumes, are carried about, though they haue shew of probability, leaue to those, that plot the fables of heresies. S. Basil: [...] de fid. pag. 394. edit. Basil. an. 1551. It is manifest presumption, and apostasie from the faith, either to abrogate any of the things, that are written, or bring in any thing that is not written. And Vincent. Lirin. Monito. c. 2. &. 41. The rule of the Scripture is perfect, and in it selfe sufficient, and more then sufficient vnto all things. And 3. d. 25. qu. vnic. a. Gab. Biell, his owne School­man, All things necessary to be beleeued are contained in the Ca­nonicall Scripture: it belonges therefore to the perfection of the Scripture to containe all things.

2. Against this he obiected, the stale, and threadbare ar­gument: it is not contained in the Scripture, that it selfe is the word of God. My answer was, that the vertue, and power that [Page 280] shewes it selfe in euery line, and leafe of the Bible, proclaimes it to be the word of God, and the sheepe of Christ discerne the voice, and light of it, as men discerne sweete from sowre, light from darkenesse: Now he demandes in this Reply, How then it chances, that our illuminated Luther could not see the Epistle of S. Iames to be diuine Scripture? I answer readily to the point: if the Scripture be so easily, and infallibly knowne to be Gods word by the authority of the Church: how chances it, that his illuminated Caietan Catharin. cont. Nov. dog. Caiet. S xt. Senens. Biblio. l. 6. annot. 337. denied the same Epistle of S. Iames to be diuine Scripture? how chances Noted afore so many Papists deny, the Apocrypha to be Canonicall, as well as we? how comes it about that Genebrard Genebrard. chronol. p. 181. Posseuin. appar. verb. Gilb. Ge­nebrard. affirmes the third & fourth Bookes of Esdras to be Canonicall Scripture, which the Chuch denies? Thus my Iesuit is fallen vnawares, into the same pit, he made for me. Secondly, my aduersarie Verum est, doctorem qui­dem Lutherū, & quosdam a­lios, exemplum veteris Eccle­siae imitatos, de libris modo dictis non ita prae­clare sensisse: sed tamen jidē, postea re dili­gentius perpen­sa, priorem sen­tentiam muta­re non dubita­runt. Eckhard. fascic pag. 21. cannot proue that. M. Luther perseuered to the end in the deniall of this Epistle. The iudgement of Nonnul. i an­tiquitus de epi­stolae huius au­thoritate dubi­tarunt. Passeuin. appar. v. Iacob. Apost. see Euseb. hist. Eccle l. 3 c. 25. & Ieron. & Doroth de viris illust v. Iacobus. so many in the Primitiue Church, refusing it, dazeled Luthers eyes, and made him to doubt for a time: but that he neuer saw and beleeued it to be Scripture to the end, my aduersary will scarse be able to shew. Thirdly, Luthers not seeing this light, proues not that there is no such light, or voice in the Scripture; for all faith thereof is not in an instant, but successiuely, and by degrees: and all men, at all times, haue not eyes, and disposition alike to see it: as the Apostles, at the first, saw not Christ to be that he was, though he were the light, that came into the world. Saint Austine Tract. 35. Ioh. sayes, The Scriptures are lighted vp to be our Candle in this world, that we walke not in darknesse. Therefore they are seene by their owne light. For the same Saint Au­stine ⁿ saies, will you light a Candle to see a burning Candle? for a burning Candle is able both to make manifest other things, that are hidden in darkenesse, and to shew it selfe to thy eyes. The Scripture therefore by it owne light shewes it selfe, as I said, to be the word of God, and if any see not this light, the de­fect is in themselues, and is remoued by no other light added, but by the same light, at such time, as pleases God to open the eyes. Theophilus Antiochenus Orat. 1. ad Antolych. sayes, we must not say [Page 281] there is no light because the blind see it not, but let them, that see it not accuse their owne eyes. For as in all other matters of faith, it falls out among the children of God, that 1. Cor. 13.9. [...]. Chry­sost. ibi. hom. 34. [...] Scol. graec. ibi. some see, and know more, and some vnderstand, and beleeue lesse, then othersome: yet the matters of faith themselues are one, and the same; and the beleeuers are inlightened with Gods Spi­rit, though not all in the same measure: so may it fall out about this obiect: that some particular men may not at the first, or alway perfitly see the light of euery part of Scrip­ture, or perfitly heare the voice of Christ founding there­in: for here in this life we know, but in part, and prophecy but in part, though the light of the Scripture shine fully forth vnto all.

3 This light of the Scripture my aduersary grants, but yet, to bring in his traditions, and Church-authority, marke how he replyes. What light soeuer there be in the Scripture yet it shines not to our vnderstanding till it be illuminated with faith, which the elect themselues, at all times, are not: the which I grant, and thereupon inferre, that this light was neuerthelesse in the Scripture, though Luther saw it not, in one place there­of: and the reason why he saw it not, was, because euery one of the elect is not at all times indued with all faith: but my Iesuite addes, that this light, whereby the Scriptures shew them­selues to be the word of God, shines not to the vnderstanding illuminated with faith, neither, vnlesse it be propounded by the authority of the Church: vpon which as vpon a Candlesticke the light of the Scripture must be set, or else it will not sufficiently shine vnto vs, to giue vs, of it selfe, infallible assurance that it is the word of God. Concedimus i­gitur sacras lite­teras, quae diuinae doctrinae con­tinent lumen, tanquam lucer­nam esse, per se­ipsam splendidis­simam atque ful­gentissimam: sed nobis tamen non in se lucidam — sed quatenus est diuinitus in Ec­clesiae Catholicae authoritate, tan­quam in cande­labro, positum, vt luceat omnibus qui in domo sunt — Errant igi­tur aduersarij cum scripturam esse lucernam, ac illuminare nos, idem esse existi­mant, quod, eam non egere Eccle­siae infallibili au­thoritate, vt nos certos faciat. Grego. de Va­lent. tom 3. pag. 117. c. Verus Scripturae sensus inest Scripturae sicut signatum signo; sed media certa, explorata, infallibilia, quibus sensus iste eruitur, non est ipsa Scriptura; sed traditio Ecclesiastica, vox & definitio Ec­clesiae, seu eius qui Ecclesiae, vice Christi, praesidet. Grets. defens. Bellar. tom. 1. p. 1970. c. This is the finall euasion that the Iesu­ites vse against this argument in defence of their traditions, and Popes authority, against the sufficiency of the Scripture: that the Scriptures haue in them a shining light, and are, as the Protestants say, able to proue themselues to be the word of God, and containe their true sense in themselues: but this light we see not, and this true sense we know not; and this assurance, that they [Page 282] are Gods word, or that this is the true sense, we cannot haue in the Scripture it selfe: but by the meanes of Traditions, and the Popes authoritie shewing, and propounding these things to vs. As a candle though hauing light in it selfe, yet shewes light to none, when it is hid vnder a bushell, but when it is set vpon a Candlesticke. I answer 2. things. First, as I haue often said, this authority, and teaching of the Church, is not alway, nor simply, necessary to shew all men the light of the Scripture, or so much as to point to it: for either by the immediate light of Gods Spirit, or by the light of nature, it may be knowne to be Gods word, as by the light of nature it is knowne that God is: whereupon it followes plainely, that the Scripture alone, as the Rule, hath this light in it selfe, and from it selfe shewes it, else it could not, in this manner, without Church proposition, shine to a­ny. Secondly I grant, that ordinarily, for the seeing, and discer­ning of the euidēce, perfection, purity, power, sence, & all this light that is in the Scripture; the proposition of the Church is necessary, as a candlesticke to hold it forth, but then this proposition may be expounded two waies: one way to signi­fie such authority, as by, and from it selfe, induces me to be­leeue afore I see any authority in the Scripture, and together with the authority of the Scripture: the twofold authority of the Church, and Scripture concurring to the moouing of my vnderstanding, as when two men concurre, as one for­mall beginning; to the carrying, and moouing of a blocke. This Church proposition thus expounded, I vtterly deny to be either needfull, or possible. Secondly it may be expounded for the Ministry of the Church, by her Pastors, and people, reuealing the Scriptures to them that know them not, and teaching the nature, sense, and meaning thereof. But this ministry is but a bare condition adding no light, sense, autho­rity, or matter to the Scripture, but onely leading vs to see it. Of which Ministery there is no question betweene vs: for all Protestants grant, The authority, or ministery of the Church, supposes no want of light in the Scripture. and vse it: but the question is, whether all the articles, and whole nature of faith, be contained in Scripture alone, excluding vnwritten traditions, though the Ministery of the Church be needfull, as an instrument to shew, teach, and ex­pound [Page 283] the Scripture, as a candlesticke is needfull to shew the can­dle? For the vse of this Ministry, and requisite condition of all other meanes, that are to be vsed, supposes no want, or defect in the obiect, whereabout they are applied, but one­ly produces it to his operation: as the setting of a candle vpon the socket, addes no light to it that was wanting in it selfe, but onely remoues some impediments that hinder the standers by from seeing, and the opening of a window to let in light makes not the Sunne imperfect, or but a parti­all light. And if our aduersaries intended no more but this, there were an end of the controuersie, for no Protestant euer denied the necessity of Church ministry in this sense, but freely confesse it, although the authority See it expoun­ded Chap. 35. n. 1. & inde. and here immedi­atly after, in nu. 4. mentioned we renounce.

4 For the better explication of this my answer, and that the Reader may see how impertinent it is, that my Aduer­sary sayes: Note FIRST, that The quest. betweene vs & the Papists a­bout the Chur­ches authority. the question is not whether some meanes be ordinarily required to the vnderstanding of the Scripture, and the producing of faith in such, as reade, and vse it: nor whether the Scripture worke infallible assurance immediatly, in all men (for in some it doth) without the o­peration, and coming betweene of the Church ministery. For we hold it doth not. But the point is, whether this au­thority of the Church, supply any article of faith, or mat­ter needfull to saluation, that is wanting in the Scripture, so that it may be said, as my Aduersary alway speaketh, the Scripture alone, is but a part of the rule of faith, which God hath left to instruct men, what is to be holden for faith: and there be many substantiall points, belonging to faith, which are contained in Scripture alone, nether expresly, nor thence to be deduced by consequence, but to be supplied by tradi­tion, and Church authority: and so the question is not about the expediency, or condition of the meanes, but about the perfection, and sufficiency of the thing it selfe. Note SE­CONDLY, that my aduersary from the necessity of the means, concludes the insufficiency of the thing, thus: The light of the Scripture, shines not to vs: the true sense of the Scripture is [Page 284] not infallibly assured vnto vs without the meanes of the Church: The Scripture therefore is vnsufficient, not containing all things needfull: not instructing vs, WHAT is to be holden for matter of faith: as if a man should say, the light of the candle appeares not to vs, but when it is set on a candlesticke: therefore there is much light that is wanting in the candle, and is sup­plied by the candlesticke. Note THIRDLY what the things properly are, which our aduersaries attribute to the Church, in comparing it with the Scripture. They are there: first, to be a meanes to reueale and expound the Scripture to vs; and to breed the faith thereof in our consciences. Secondly, to be the Foundation of our faith, in this sense; that we do beleeue this to be Scripture; and this to be the true sense of the Scripture, and this to be the matter of faith, onely be­cause the Church expounds the Scripture so. Thirdly, to supply vnto vs many articles of faith, absolutely needfull to saluation, that are wanting in the Scripture, out of tradi­tion, and by the said tradition to expound the Scripture. These two latter points they infer on of the first, which is the incroching consequence that I except against, in that the au­thority, wherein God hath placed his Church, is not in re­spect of the Scripture, but in respect of vs, being a bare Mi­nister to the Scripture. D. Stapleton Relect. p. 462. sayes, The Church is the ground, and pillar of truth in a higher kind, then the Scrip­ture, namely in the kind of the efficient cause. And Pag. 494. in explicat. qu. the authori­ty of the Church may be vnderstood to be greater then the autho­rity of the Scripture, because it is not simply subiect, or bound to it, but may by it authority teach, & decerne, something which the Scripture hath neither determined, nor taught. — The things which the Church teaches do as much binde the faithfull, as those things which the Scripture teacheth, — we Catholickes affirme that the Church is to be heard more certainely then the Scriptures, because the doctrine thereof, is more manifest, and euident, then the doctrine of the Scriptures, or at the least, equally with the Scrip­tures, because the authority thereof is no lesse irrefragable, and infallible. — The Scripture is the booke of the Church, the testi­monie of truth, which the Church testifies, the law of God, which [Page 285] the Church hath publisht, the rule of faith which the Church hath deliuered. We had wont to maruell at the blasphemies Illyric. clau. script. p. 541. Hos de express. verb. Dei. of Cusanus, Verratus, Hosius: That the Church hath authoritie a­boue the Scripture. The Scripture as it is produced by heretikes, is the word of the Diuell. A Councell is the highest tribunall, and hath the same power to determine any thing, that the Councell of the Apostles, and Disciples had.—The things written in the Go­spell, haue no soundnesse, but through the determination of the Church: &c. But now you see, the same renewed in that Church to this day, and the Iesuits, in the midst of their lear­ned subtilties, to be as grosse, as the grossest Friars, preferring their Church authority farre aboue the Scriptures, or any vse that a Candlesticke can haue in shewing the candle. Note FOVRTHLY what it is that the Protestants say, touching the authority of the Scripture, and the Church, so much as belongs to the present occasion. First, that the Scriptures haue in them a light, and an authoritie of their owne, suffici­ent to prooue themselues to be the word of God, and to giue infallible assurance, to all men of the true sense: and this light, and authority is not added, increased, or multiplied, by the Mi­nistry of the Church, or any thing that it doth about the Scripture. Secondly, this light, and authoritie of the Scripture, shines in vs, and takes effect in vs, then onely, when the Spirit of God opens our hearts to see it. The defect of which heauenly illumination is the reason, why some neuer, and the elect themselues, at all times do not see it, but it ar­gues no defect of light in the Scriptures. Thirdly, the means whereby God opens our eies, and hearts to see this light, and authoritie in the Scripture, is the Ministry of the Church; I expound my selfe, it is the ordinary, and publike meanes wher­to he referres men. And this Ministry is by preaching, and ex­pounding the Scripture, out of it selfe, and perswading, and con­uincing the consciences of men: yet priuately, and extraor­dinarily, when, and wheresoeuer this Ministry failes, or ceas­ses; the light, and sense of the Scripture is obtained by the Scripture alone, without this Church Ministry: and the Scrip­ture alone in this sort immediately, at sundry times, by it [Page 286] selfe, giues full assurance, and workes all other effects in our consciences, that it doth when the Church propounds it. Fourthly, the Scripture is so sufficient of it selfe, both to re­ueale whatsoeuer is needfull to be knowne, and to establish and assure our heart in the infallible faith of that it reueales, that the Church hath nether authority to adde, so much as one article, more then is contained therein; nor power to giue this assurance from any thing, but from the Scripture it selfe. So farre forth, that THE WHOLE TEACHING, AND DOCTRINE, AND AVTHORITIE OF THE CHVRCH IS TO BE ADMITTED, AND YEELDED TO, OR REFV­SED, ACCORDING AS IT CONSENTS, OR DISAGREES WITH THE SCRIPTVRE, the fountaine of truth, the rule of faith. Note FIFTLY, what our aduersaries meane by the Church, and the meanes, whereby the Church executes her authority; what the things are, which by her authority she may do: and what the proper effect is, that this authority workes in vs. First, by this Church This is shew­ed c. 35. nu. 1. &c. 36. nu. 1. they vnderstand the Church of Rome, for the present time being: and therein the Pope, in whom they say, the whole power, and vertue of the Church abideth. Secondly, the meanes, whereby it exe­cuteth her authority, is vnwritten Tradition; out of the which it supplies all things pretended to be needfull for the exposition of the Scripture, or the defining of matters, that must be beleeued. Thirdly, the things, that she may do, by her authoritie, are all things, that appertaine to the que­stions of religion. Cus. epi. 2. 3. 7. to expound the Scripture after her owne iudgement: Conc. Trid. sess. 24. can. 3. to dispense against the Scripture: Stapl. princip. l. 9. c. 14. & re­lect. pag. 514. to cano­nize new Scripture, that before was none: Stapl. ibi. & relect. p. 494. & inde. to giue authority to the Scripture. August. de Ancon. qu. 59. art. 1. &. 2. to make new articles of faith. Gl. de transl. episc. Quanto. §. veri. to make that to be the sence of the Scripture, that is not: Lastly, the effect of this power is the same, that the Scripture breeds, and more: Grets. defens. Bel. tom. 1. pag. 1218. c. obedience in all that will be saued, so that the world is bound, as much to the Popes definitiue sen­tence, as to the Scripture, or the voice of God himselfe. The speech of all the cano­nists. for Christ, and the Pope make but one tribunal: Capistran. de author. Pap. pag 130. . He is aboue al, like him, that came downe from heauē. Capist. ibi. For with God, and [Page 287] the Pope his will is sufficient reason, and that which pleases him, hath the vigor of a law. Palaeot. de consist. part. 5. q 9. after his sentence pronoun­ced no man must doubt or delay to yeeld: Petrisedes in Romano sol [...]o collocata, liberta­te plena, in suis a­gendis per omnia poteri debet, nec vlli subesse ho­mini. Gl. ibid. v­bi sup. yea all the Coūcels, and Doctors, and Churches in the world must stoop to his determination.

5 These fiue things thus obserued, it is easie to se, that our aduersaries attribute more to the Church, then to be onely a meanes for the communicating of that, which is in the Scripture to vs; expounding the authority thereof, that it ex­ceedes the latitude of a Candlesticke, and is turned into the Candle it selfe. And so to returne to my aduersaries answer, and to conclude, I thus reason: The Ministery, and authority of the Church is required either onely as a condition to in­struct vs, and leade vs to the knowledge, and assurance of that which is contained in the Scripture it selfe; or else as a meanes to reueale vnto vs some thing, that is not conceiued in the Scripture; But not of the latter: for all articles of faith are in the Scripture. Therefore the former; Therefore the Scripture alone is the rule of faith.

6 My aduersarie saies it troubles vs, that he sayes, there be diues questions of faith, which are not expressely set downe, nor determined in the Scripture. Whereto I answered, that this was not the question, for if by expressely he meant, written word for word, in so many syllables, then the rule is not bound to containe all things thus expressely; it being sufficient, if all things needefull were contained therein in respect of the sense, so that it might be gathered from thence by conse­quence: the question not being, in what manner, but whe­ther any way at all, the whole, and entire obiect of our faith be reuealed in the Scripture, though some part there­of be gathered but by Consequence from that which is written expressely in so many syllables. To this my ad­uersary replyes, that it troubles vs sore to be thus conuinced with the euidence of the matter, that we cannot deny it: but are driuen to confesse diuers sustantiall points not to be expressely set downe. But he is deceaued; it troubles vs not a whit: would this hatefull guise of bragging, and talking of Conuincing, [Page 288] when nothing is graunted, but that which belongs not to the question, troubled vs no more. For no Protestant affirms all things to be written expressely, but onely that All things be­longing to faith are written: in such sort, that we haue, in the Ca­nonicall bookes, either expresse wordes, as plaine, as any man can speake, or infallible sense, which any man, by vsing the meanes may vnderstand, for euery article of faith whatso­euer. Neither did D. M. Luther, or any of the learned Diuines of our Church, whom my aduersary in his canting language, calles his new Masters, euer hold otherwise. He sayes, by our leaues this was the question, first, when our Grandfather Luther was so hoate to haue expresse Scripture, that he would haue all ex­pressed, euen in words, &c. And biddes me see Gretser in his defence of Bellarmine. But by his leaue, Gretser and he both, speake vntruly, and he absurdly. For he so quotes Gretser, that a man would thinke Gretser had shewed out of Luthers wri­tings some places, wherein Luther required expresse Scrip­ture, euen in wordes: which he doth not, nor Bellarmine, whō he defends, could do: but be reports in English, what Gret­ser lied in Latine, and then biddes see Gretser, when there is as little in Gretser to this purpose, as in himselfe. If M. Lu­ther, and the Diuines of our Church, confesse many things not to be written verbatim in expresse syllables: as it is not thus written, that infants must be baptized: or that Christ is con­substantiall with his Father: do they therefore confesse, they are not written at all? or will himselfe conclude the Scripture wants that, which is not written in so many words? Is the true sense, and meaning of the words nothing? are they not as well conclusions of Scripture, which are deduced by true discourse, as which are expressed, verbatim? doth not Picus Theorem 5. sub sin. say, such are most properly conclusions of faith, which are drawne out of the old, and new Testament, or by good connexion depend on those, that are drawne? doth not the Cardinall of Cambrey 1. q. 1. art 3. p. 50 h. say, They are conclusions of diuinity not onely which formally are contained in Scripture, but also which necessarily follow of that, which is so contained? And before him Prolog. sent. qu. 1. art. 2 pag. 10. f. Rom. edit. Aureolus, another Cardinall: In the second manner of proceeding, when we goe for­ward [Page 289] from one proposition beleeued, and another necessary: or from both beleeued to inquire of any one, that is doubtfull: no other ha­bite is obtained, but the habite of faith: the contrary whereof are heresies? in which wordes we see, he affirmes a going forward from that, which is certainely beleeued (because it is expres­ly written) to that which is gathered by discourse, and makes this latter also to belong to faith. I know few of the schoole­men deny this: whereupon it followeth manifestly, that it is reputed to be within the contents of the Scripture, not onely which is expressed in words, but also which is so in sense, and good consequence: In which manner, I haue prooued vnanswerably, that all the whole obiect of faith is expressed.

CHAP. XXXI.

1 The Apostle 2. Tim. 3.15. hath these words. The holy Scriptures are ABLE to make thee wise TO SALVATION through THE FAITH, WHICH IS IN CHRIST IESVS. For the whole Scripture is inspired of God, and is profitable to TEACH, to IMPROVE, to CORRECT, to INSTRVCT IN ALL RIGHTE­OVSNESSE: That the man of God may be ABSOLVTE, and made PERFECT, VNTO ALL GOOD WORKES. This text we alledge to proue the sufficiency of the Scripture, whereto my Aduersary in his discourse In the WAY. §. 11. answered two things. First, that the Apostle doth not say in these words, that the Scrip­ture is sufficient to instruct a man to perfection, but that it is profi­table, but I shewed that he affirmes it to be SVFFICIENT by three reasons: the first, because the Apostle sayes, They are able to make vs PERFECT, and that to EVERY good worke: now that which doth this, is sufficient, inasmuch as God requires no more at any mans hand, but perfection to euery good worke. My Aduersary in this his cōfused Reply (wherin he durst not deale openly, and distinctly, that I might perfectly discerne, which part of my argument, his words properly concerne) seemes to deny the consequence, because S. Paul sayes also, that Piety is profitable to euery thing; and yet it is not sufficient in such sort, that there needs no other helpe, or meanes to be ioyned with it, to attaine whatsoeuer thing. Whereto I reply againe. First, that euen this Piety, being the totall, and whole effect, that the study of the Scripture works in mē, is sufficiēt, with­out the ioyning of any thing else to it, that is not Piety; for it followes in the next words; that this Piety hath the promi­ses of this life, and of the life to come: that is to say, whatsoeuer is promised vs in this world or in the next, is obtained by Piety. Therefore Piety is sufficient. Therefore any thing in this example notwithstanding, the Scriptures being affirmed to be profitable to euery thing, are affirmed also to be sufficient. Secondly, we do not maintaine the Scripture to be sufficient [Page 292] in that sense, that without all helpe, and meanes to learne them, they will suffice; for who euer denied the ministery of the Church, the illumination of Gods Spirit, and a mans owne syncere indeuour to be also requisite? But when we say they are sufficient, we do it against the assertion, that sayes, they containe not the substāce of al things needful to be knowne; but besides the meanes to vnderstand, and learne them, we need Church authority, and vnwritten tradition, to supply diuers articles of faith, that they reueale not. Thirdly, my Aduersary may possibly finde some formes of speech, where a thing is called profitable to all things; yet other things are as necessary as it; for the profitablenes of one thing, excludes not the necessity of another thing. But wheresoeuer it is said, that any thing is profitable (not simply to this, or that pur­pose) but to make persect to euery thing in the same kind, there the sufficiency thereof is absolutely concluded: and thus the Apostle speakes of the Scripture, that it is profitable to make PERFECT to EVERY good worke. The said perfection be­ing an effect of their profitablenesse: for that profitable thing is sufficient of it selfe, that makes, and produces the effect perfect.

2 My second reason, whereby I shewed the sufficiency of the Scripture was this: All that we need to saluation is either to be taught, or reproued, or instructed, or corrected: but the Scrip­ture alone doth all this. Ergo they are sufficient: to this he answers nothing.

3 Thirdly I reasoned thus, That is sufficient, and containes all things needfull to be knowne, which is able to make a man wise to saluation; but the Scripture is able to doe this: Ergo it is sufficient: this argument he hath tumultuously repeated, as he hath all the rest, and answered I know not how. First, he sayes, if the word alone had bene put in, it would more plainely appeare, how it proues nothing, let the world therefore be put in: That which alone is able to make a man wise to saluation is sufficient, but such is the Scripture, that alone it is able to make a man wise to saluation, Therefore it is sufficient. How doth it now appeare so plainely that it proues nothing? the first proposition is manifest of it [Page 293] selfe, the second is as manifest; for all that the Apostle af­firmes, is of the Scripture alone, and of nothing else; for of Scripture alone, he saies, it is able to make wise to saluation, it is profitable to teach, to reproue, to instruct, to correct, that the man of God may be perfect, the conclusion therfore must needs be true. Secondly he saies, the Apostle speakes of the old Testament yea of euery parcell of Scripture, yet M. White will not say, that, now specially, the old Testament, without the New, or euery parcell of the old it selfe, is alone sufficient for all the said pur­poses, whereto M. White answers, that he neither speakes of the old Testament alone, nor of any one parcell, either of old, or new separated from the rest, but of the whole, in this sense all the whole Scripture taken together is able, &c. And if the Iesu­its, and D. Stapleton, whom this man traces, had not renoun­ced all truth, they would not say it, when that which the A­postle auouches of the Scripture, cannot agree to euery parcel alone, but to all together, for what one parcell performes all these effects, to make wise to saluation, to teach, to reproue to instruct, to correct, to make perfect? the Scripture is so vnder­stood, as that all these things may truly be affirmed of it, but these things cannot truely be affirmed of the parcels alone: Ergo.

4 Thirdly he saies the word PROFITABLE must not ex­pound the word ABLE, or if it be, the word ABLE doth not sig­nifie, that the Scripture is so able, as to worke that effect without any other meanes, or helpes, concurring with it, but at the most it imports a great degree of profitablenesse. This is no answer to this argument. But to another that he hath not expressed. I said therefore thirdly, though very briefly, By the word able, the other word profitable must be expounded. Which I thus put in­to forme: that which is PROFITABLE, by being ABLE, is suf­ficient: the Scripture is so PROFITABLE, that it is ABLE to make vs wise to saluation: Ergo it is sufficient. He first denies the Minor, and saies, the word profitable, is not to be ex­pounded by the word Able: but he seemes to be dazeled. For: that which is able to make wise to saluation, must needes be a­ble to make absolute, and perfect, because perfection consists in be­ing [Page 294] wife to saluation: but the Scripture alone is able to make wise to saluation: Ergo. Next he saies, that supposing the word PROFITABLE be expounded by the word ABLE: thus, Scripture is able to make one absolute, and perfect: yet the meaning is not that it is able without other helpes, and meanes con­curring with it, but at the most, that it is very profitable: and if it be sufficient, yet this sufficiency is not that whereof our question is, but in a certaine limited kinde, to wit, of written Scripture. That is to say: if by able to make vs wise to saluation, be meant that the Scriptures are sufficient, yet it is not meant, that, alone they are sufficient, as the Protestants hold; but with a limitation, so far as Scripture can be sufficient. In which his answer he plainely discouers himselfe to be foundred, and spent. For our que­stion is not, whether the Scripture alone, without vsing the Ministery of the Church, or our owne industry, or such meanes, as God hath appointed for the finding our, and vnderstanding of that which is contained in it, be sufficient: for Bread, and Drinke, and all manner of food, is not sufficient to sustaine mans life, if he take no paines to get it, or if he be not able to swallow, and digest it: and my aduersaries owne Church, and traditions, with all their royalties, are not sufficient, vnlesse men take paines to finde them, and be so mad as to beleeue them, and so blinde as to let them downe: but the question is of their latitude, and extent, viz. whether the written Scrip­ture containe, in expresse words, or sense, the whole, and entire do­ctrine of faith, and good life, so that the Church by her authoritie, and traditions, may adde no point of faith, that is wanting in the Scripture. This appeares to be the question by my aduersa­ries own words: and the words of the Diuines in his Church. Now the Apostle saying, the Scripture is able to make one wise to saluation, affirmes the sufficiency of it alone, without a­ny other helpe, or meanes, to supply any doctrine or matter of faith, not contained therein, because there is no more needfull but to be wise to saluation, and that wisdome the Scripture is able to instruct vs in. Which ability is not limited to certaine points, but extended to all the whole obiect of faith, by the word. For thus I reason: He speakes of the Scripture alone, and [Page 295] nothing else, therefore the Scripture alone is able to make wise to saluation: therefore it is so profitable, and in such sort, to make abso­lute, and perfect to euery good worke that it can do it. For it is able. Therefore it alone is sufficient. Therefore this sufficiency is so limi­ted to written Scripture, that it is perfectly, and wholy contained in it.

5 The second part of my aduersaries answer, in his dis­course, to the text alleadged, was, that the Scripture is said to be profitable, because it commendes to vs the authority of the Church. This his answer I opposed with 7. arguments. But when I repeated it, I put in the word sufficient, thus: He saies they be profitable, and SVFFICIENT because they commend vnto vs the Churches authority, the addition of which word, you see, he distasts, and makes a vantage of, thereby to put off the answer to sixe of my arguments. That the Prouerbe might be true, its an ill winde, but blowes some men profite: for vnder that pretence, he takes occasion to cauill, and put off that he could not answer. For first, the word might well be put in without any preiudice to his sense. For if their profi­tablenesse lie in commending to vs the Church authoritie, then their sufficiency lyes there too: and so I might well make him say, they be profitable, and sufficient, because they cōmend vnto vs the Churches authority. Secondly, it is idle that he saies my obiections are ouerthrown, Only by reading his words aright, leauing out the word sufficient. For let him looke vpon them againe, and he shall finde, they ourthrow his ex­position of profitable, as well as if he had expounded, sufficient, in the same manner. But my aduersary will take a small occa­sion to shun an argument.

6 Onely to the sixth he replies: for whereas I said the meaning cannot be, that they are profitable, because they com­mend vnto vs the Churches authority, because the Apostle saies, they are able to make the man of God perfect, that is, the Pastor himselfe, the Pope, the Councell, and all: and it were absurd to say, that the Scriptures make the Church perfect by cōmending it to it self; for thē the Apostles should speak thus by my aduersaries exposition, the Scriptures are profitable to make the Church per­fect, [Page 296] by commending to it the authority of the Church: and yet he defendes it. First, because it sendes them, Pastors, Pope, Councell, and all, to the interpretations of Councels, and Fathers, of the ancient Church. But then I demand, how did they make perfect the ancient Church it selfe, the first Councels, and Fa­thers, of whom the Apostle speakes, as well as of the latter? for they had none to retire to, but the Scripture onely. Se­condly because the Pastors of the Church sustaine two persons, one as publike Pastors authorized to teach: another as priuate men, needing instruction themselues, and so the Apostle saies, the Scripture sends them, as priuate men to themselues, conside­red as publike men, inabled as need shall require to define the truth in any point; the which is an irkesome answer, to a­ny that shall consider it; for although a Pastor be considered these 2. waies, yet it is false that is assumed, that he which as a priuate man erres, and is ignorant, yet as a publike person, is able to direct himselfe, and others, and define the truth, this I say is a trick to mocke an ape with, though it be all the shift they haue to defend the Pope, from being a formall hereticke; and yet ad­mitting it to be true, that the Pastors of the Church, conside­red as priuate men, are sent to themselues considered as publike men, yet it cannot be true, that the Scripture makes thē per­fect this way by sending and commending them to them­selues, because the perfection auouched is the effect of that teaching, that reprouing, that correcting, that instructing which is contained in the Scripture it selfe, and not in the authoritie of man, whither the Scripture is imagined to send vs. For all that the Apostle, in this text, affirmes, is of the Scripture alone, as appeares,

7 Besides my argument, I alleadged some testimonies of Chrysostome, and certaine Papists, to iustifie my exposi­tion, wherein they affirme as much out of the text, as I doe; whereto he replies, that the said testimonies must either be ex­plicated to mean that the Scriptures are able to instruct vs with the meanes of Church authority, or else be taken without limitation; if they be thus explicated, they proue nothing against him, if they be taken without limitation, they proue as much against vs, as against [Page 297] him. I answer to the first, the testimonies are to be seene, and the words thereof are so full, that they cannot be thus expli­cated: as for example, Chrysostome in his words, expounds S. Paul to distinguish the Scripture against his owne ministry. Thou hast the Scripture to teach thee in steed of me, if thou desire to know anything, there thou maiest learne it, that which can teach vs in steed of the Church Pastours, can teach vs without their authority, & if God as Antonin says, hath spokē but once, & that in the Scriptures, & that so fully, that he speakes no more, how can the meaning be, that other authority should be ioyned with them? for so God should speake twice: once in the Scriptures, another time in the Church, and in the Scripture so far from fully, that he needs speake againe in the Church. The like may be said to the other testimonies, but I refer the iudgement to the conscience of the Reader. To the second, if these words be taken without limitation, that alone without any means ioyned to thē they are able to instruct vs, they proue as much against me, as against him, that its maruell, I should haue so little iudgement, I demand, and why so I pray? because then they will make as much against our Church ministery, as against his Church au­thority: which had bene spoken to the point, if we by Church ministry, had meant either the same, or as much, as he doth by Church authority; but when his Church authority intends a supply of that which is wanting, in the Scripture by traditions, & our Church ministry no more but a simple cōdition of vsing the meanes, to make vs see, that which is contained in thē: which ministry also we do not hold to be alway, & vnto all persons, necessary, he may let our iudgements alone, and take a new reckoning of his owne, that is so simple, as to make alike things that are so far vnlike, his Church authority, and our Church ministry.

CHAP. XXXII.

CHAP. XXXIII.