Calumnies and Sophistries of M. Ch. gathered out of his two Answers: And first out of his answere to the Direction giuen him by the Maintayner of Charity.
SECTION I.

AS among men, Soph. Elench. c. 1. sayth Aristotle, some are of a health­full complexion and constitution, some are not but seeme to be so: and of mettalls some are true gold or siluer, others may haue the likenes and lustre of either, but yet are neither: so of rational Discourses, some are indeed and really true discourses, some are only appa­rently such.

Now, sayth he, because to some men it is more gainfull and aduantagious, to seeme wise and knowing, then to be, and not to seeme; therefore such men make choyce rather to seeme to do like wise and skilfull men, then to doe it only, and not seeme to do it. The Sophister is such an one, one who trade in false coynes of Discourse or seeming knowledge, [...]. Because the returne indeed i [...] quicker then in true gold of lawfull argument's, and it is easier to de­ceaue the most part of men by fallacious inferences then to con­uince vnderstanding men by true Conclusions.

The end and scope of Sophisme, Soph. c. 3. is Victory, intimated by the Philosopher in that word [...], ambitious of Victory: and a further end of this victory is some desired purchase as of riches, honour, or the like; which are purchased thus at the chea­pest rate, as that which is bought with copper, or the like coun­terfait [Page 21]trash, comes cheaper to a man, then what he buy's with current gold. For this cause therefore the Sophist serueth him­selfe of such fallacious and adulterate formes of discoursing, which hauing only the false face of true Syllogismes, are in­deed meere Sophismes and Paralogismes.

I haue no mind to introduce in this place an odious compa­rison between these two, the Author of this answer, with his Antagonist: yet they who know them both, will be able I thinke to make some probable coniecture, to whether of the two this character of a Sophister [...], a trader or dea­ler in, or for commodities may seeme the more proper to him, who hath solemnely renounc't and diuorc't all trafficke with the world, not only by profession, but by a total and actual dispossession: or to him who hauing added to the inclination of corrupt nature, the poyse and sway of a bad repentance, is fallen back vpon the world with a greater swing; who con­uerseth daily with trade and trafficke, seeking to improue his fortunes by all the thriuing wayes he can. Therefore so often, and so lowdly to declaime against his Aduersaries Sophistry and Calumny, I cannot imagine impudence inough in him to do it; but an exigence ra [...]her & necessity, to remoue from him­selfe by his pretended dislike and detestation of these vices, all opinion of them to withdraw mens eyes from beholding them in himselfe, where they are most palpably to be seene, and to deriue the iust hatred of them vpon his Aduersarie. 1. Cal­lumny, and So­phisme. So while he most proclaimeth his aduersaries sophistry, euen then, & in that, he imployeth his maister peece of a most sophisticall Ca­lumny; which I note as his primitiue and original Sophisme & Calumny running throughout his whole Worke from the be­ginning to the end, as shall appeare by the sequele of particu­lars. But withall I am to premonish you, Syr, that you are not to expect to find all these fallacies, within the number of Ari­s [...]tle's, who were he now aliue and would vndertake to reduce them to those formes of Sophismes described and obserued by him (and he was a man of no small obseruation in this kind, & had inherited the obseruations of many others) I am verily persuaded he would haue found himselfe reduced to greater & impossible, thē euer he had medled withal. But now to pro­sequute [Page 22]our history of Fallaci [...]'s and Calumnies.

It is a Fallacy, a Non-cause for a Cause, where dissembling the true cause or causes, which he could not but know, of his Aduersaries (as he call's it) tergiuersation, 2. Falla­cy. in truth, Refusal to giue him (as he sayth) a faire, but more likely a foule meeting; he would impose vpon the world, that the cause was his Ad­uersaries diffidence and distrust in the cause of religion which he defends. But heare his Challenge, or Protestation to this purpose.

Pref. Which Protestation (sayth he) by God's helpe, I would haue made good, that if you, or any other that would vndertake your cause, would giue me afaire meeting, and choose out of your owne booke any one argument, whereof you were most confident, and by which you would be content therest should be iudged of, and make it appeare that I had not, or could not answere it, that I would desist from the worke which I had vn­dertaken, and answere none at all.

Answ. And is not this a Goliath indeed? Date mihi Virum; giue me a man; excepts no man. And obserue withall his Rheto­rique of a most Hyperbolical Confidence: Choose (1) ou [...], of your (2) owne booke, (3) any one (4) argument, wherof you (5) were most (6) confident. ‘(Soláne perpetuâ me, reus carpêre iuuentâ?)’ But first, Syr, if confidence might carry the cause, there were no dealing with this Champion. Secondly it is an vnreasona­ble postulate that the force of all the rest should be iudged by the defence of any one Argument, or (much more) by the abi­lity of any one defendant: neither is euery man best able to de­fend his owne best argument, though he may liue to see the worst sufficiently defended, though not after the māner which he prescribes. But suppose that one argument chosen out, what shall be done next? make it appeare. To whom? that he had not, or could not answere it. But when? and how answer it? For the time being vndetermined, when can it appeare that he cannot ans­were it? and the manner of answering not exprest, how shall it be made appeare that he can answere it after no manner whatsoeuer. Experto crede &c. For he who know's M. Ch. will neuer belieue that he will euer be brought to such a non plus of answering, that he will not be able to answere at least, T'is alye, or call his ad­uersarie [Page 23] Knau [...]; or sweare, t' [...]s as he sayth; challeng his aduersary to sweare the contrary &c. No doubt he hath many [...]hi [...]t's and sutes of answers, and that none will fit, who can tell?

But now at length, what if? when all this were made to ap­peare. Marry then he would desist from the worke, and answere none at all; as much as if he had said, if his mouth were stopt, he would hold his peace. O but now, en crimen, en causa, loe the crime and cause which he expostulates with his Aduersary.

Pref. That hauing by all the artes he could possibly deuise (being Maister I dare say of more then seauen) prouoked him to such a trial, accumulating threat's too, that if he refused it, the world should be infor­med of his tergiuersation; notwithstanding all this, he hath perpetually and obstinately declined it.

Ans. What challenge could be deuised more picquant and irritant then this? and then what greater testimony of Cowar­dize, then not to answere such a challenge? therfore he addeth very consequently.

Pref. Which to my vnderstanding is a very euident signe, that there is not any truth in your cause, nor strength in your arguments.

Ans. Whereupon, as hauing gotten the victory, proued what he intended, that his Aduersary conscious of a bad cause had refused the triall, he triumph's out of Scripture.

Pref. Euery one that doth euill hateth the light, neither commeth to the light, least his deeds should be reproued &c.

Ans. But doth not this Fallacy, especially set off with such confidence, make a goodly florish and shew of truth? & is it not well followed by the sophist? Now to detect this Fallacy is in­deed to shame it: and therefore falshood is wont to hide it selfe behind some curtain of apparent Truth; draw the curtaine a­side and the monster appear's. T'is a secret vicer or loathsome sore,

Now I dare presume there is no vulgarly vnderstanding man, acquainted only with the circumstances, tyme, place, persons diuersly affecting and qualifying these men, the Aduocate and his Aduersary, who cannot of himselfe imagine other most iust causes of this so guilefully traduced refusall to giue a meeting (if [Page 24]there had ben any such offer or prouocation to trial or meeting, which his aduersarie denyes) and by this discouer the fallacy. Nor could the aduocate himselfe out of his little experience of the condition of such men which he might haue gathered in the space of halfe a yeare or there about, while he was connu­meratus in nobis, one of our number (as S. Peter said of Iudas,) be ignorant of other causes.

As for his protesting and setting it vnder his hand, he hath protested so often, that no man I thinke will euer hereafter giue credit to his Protestancy. As on the other side, no man I doubt would belieue he were a Catholique, though he would set that vnder his hand againe; for which cause no man I know hath greater occasion to practise that singular vertue of selfe-content, or self-repose in the testimony of his owne conscience, and more truly to say secretum meum mihi, my secret is myne owne; for no man, sure, that know's him, will offer to take it from him: his Religion will be a mystery whatsoeuer it be; yet euen by this passage you may conceaue how little need he hath of any rule but Scripture, who hath so speciall a talent in interpreting and applying it to any purpose, as though it were wax, or clay, as soft as himselfe, in the hands of the Potter, ca­pable of any forme, or vse, ‘— Argillâ quiduis imitaberis vdâ:’ or a sword for euery sheath; an Aduocate for euery cause. For by this Scripture with his comment, he might teach the Iewes, if need were, to argue against our Sauiour, that this was an eui­dent signe there was no truth in his cause, since he hid himselfe, when their fore-Fathers made inquiry after him, surely to dis­pute with him, to pitch vpon one point (at least they might pretend so, and be angry if they were not belieued) Quousque tol­lis animam nostram, situ es Christus dic nobis palam: Loe the point which they would haue pitch't vpon. But when, I say, he would not be found, (though at other tymes he had beene) nor giue them a faire meeting, they might haue retorted, and beaten his owne sword to his head, (a tricke which this Aduo­cate could haue taught them) he who doth euill, hateth the light &c. They might likewise haue concluded the weaknes of the Chri­stian cause, by the premises of the Apostles feare and hiding [Page 25]themselues propter metum Iudeorum, for feare of the Iewes.

Well then, the Aduocate, I will not say, is deceaued, but would deceaue; for not all that fly the light hate the light; Fallacy, Light Equiuo­call. nay rather many flye the light because they hate darkenes. For I hope it is not yet out of our memory, or the memory of our Fathers, that many by committing themselues to light haue beene committed to darkenes.

But howsoeuer, is this to flye the light, or triall of light, to deny you personall meeting? I would gladly know who more offer's himselfe to light, he who appeares in presence of fourty or twenty perhaps in some priuate Chamber; or he who cometh forth vpon the stage of the world? For I would aske the man what is it he pretend's by this prouoking to personall appearance? Would he dispute with his aduersaries body, his face, his eys, his forehead? Grant that this Atturney hath the harder forehead; hath nor his aduersary reason to eschew the encounter? Or would he commit with with wit, learning with learning? &c. If so, he cānot but know that the silent language of one Pen is lowder and further hard then the clamorous dis­pute of twenty Coursers: and he who prefers a writing, before a speaking iudge, should, me think's, in good coherence choose to be iudged rather by his pen, then by his tongue. For though the Apostles tongue he grantes, were as good a rule as Scripture, yet he who is no Apostle (at least of the last twelue) nor hath receaued their spirit, though a clouen tongue, must by vertue of his Principles, and doth acknowledge Scripture a better iudge then speach.

If he loue the light indeed, he should more loue the greater light; If in confidence of his cause he desire to manifest his doctrine, he doth best in making choice of such a light, as wher­in he may appeare not onely to a few but to many; nor to the present in place alone, but to the absent too, nor onely to the present but to future ages. For though he can speake low'd for a need, yet he will scant be heard ouer the Thames disputing in Holb [...]rne, nor in Westminster though in the vacancy: but the voice of his Pen may be hard as far the Sequana, and Po [...], and Rhenus, and Tiber, and Beti [...], [Page 26] ‘Et Tagus & Ganges, forsan & Antipodes.’ And truly if he presume himselfe an equall match for so great vndertakings, what shold he do els but manifest himselfe to the world, and disabuse it. Exalta in fortitudine vocem tuam, tu qui euan­gelizas Sion; you who euangelize Reformation to the Church of God, exalt your voyce by the strength of your Pen; the voyce of your tongue will proue too weake, were it the voyce of ten Stentors. If verily he affect notice, and manifestation of a truth so presumed, why will he choose to print those his waighty disputes, rather in the aire, then in written monu­ments, if he please, of brasse, yea to out-liue the life of brasse or marble? The truth is, he wrongs his discretion by seeming to thinke otherwise, and so shall he who belieues he doth; nor his loue of light could not choose but be ambitious of this grea­ter light; yet howsoeuer he shews the folly of his fallacy in twy­ting his Aduersaries hate or feare of light, who hath chosen to encounter him in the greatest light; euen in the eye of the world.

The Application of this sentence of our Sauiour, Qui malè agit &c. to the Socinians.
SECT. II.

THE Atheist, or the Embryo of Atheist, the new Acade­my, hateth the light indeed, and therefore dixit insipient in corde suo &c. he hath said it in the silence and secrecy of his owne hart, where no body heares what he saith but they who are one heart with him. They lurke in silence and obscurity, although they walke at midday in open view, in the market place; yet still they fly the light; they whisper in corners, they will not speake plainly what they thinke, what they belieue; they sculke in Allegories and false pretences, casting euer and anon cloudes of doubtfull questions, ouer the most cleare and orthodox, and receaued Doctrines. Then they steale vpon you in the darknes, vntill by little and little they [Page 27]leaue you no light of any positiue truth, no fayth, no grace, no supernaturall blisse; no Sunne aboue the Moone; no God aboue the God of nature, and reason; confined within the ne­cessity of the one, and the short and narrow marches of the other.

Yet all this while this implicite or disguised Atheist holdes faire intelligence with our Protestant, salutes him curteously, takes him familiarly by the beard, as though he would kisse him, meane while with a flash of his sword through his side, powre's out all his entralles of fayth and charity. The poore Sonne of Abigail obserued not the sword, hanging in a false sheath of counterfaite Religion, whence it could easily slip out; no more is this poysoned dagger of Socinians obserued, hidden in the sheath of Protestancy, or pretended ioyning with them against the Roman; wherewith while he flee [...]es in the face of Protestancy, he giues it the deadly stabbe, euen through the sides of Papacy.

These are indeed those Lucifugae, those fly-lights, those ratio­nall Batts; that sana ratio; that sober mystery of iniquity, nego­tium perambulans in tenebris, the busines that walk's in darknes; in tenebris & in regione m [...]rtis, in the misty and darkesome coast of sin and heresy. These not daring to appeare vnto the world in the light of print, in their owne guise of doctrine & principles, least so vgly Monsters should affright euen heresy it selfe; in co­uert of his wing, and in his nest hatch forth those griping Har­pies, Socinian problems, that rauish religion out of the world, defile and pollute all that's pure and holy in Christian Fayth with their doctrine of Naturality, sauou [...]ing of nothing but flesh and bloud &c.

Would God would open the eyes of these our Countrymen, especially our Vniuersities the two ey's of this kingdome, who vnwittingly and vnwillingly (as I verily presume) are made the stalking-horses to this Godlesse Academy, this Progeny of viper's, this issue of Heresy; but which comming to light, will [Page 28]kill that too, and extinguish that litle remnant sparke of what­soeuer beliefe or acknowledgment of a Christ, of a Sauiour, of mankind: quaerunt extinguere scintillam meam, quae relicta est, vt non supersit viro meo nomen & reliquiae super terram; seeke to abolish and raze out of all notice and memory the very name of Christ, & Christianity. So may the holy Church complaine of this Gi­gantique race in behalfe of his spouse, who died to redeeme mankind, whom these men seeke to murder againe in his seed and ofspring.

It were againe to be wished, that euen this Antagonist wold bring forth to light those workes and workmen of darknes in their owne likenes, (he can do it) that men might fly them as they would the Diuel appearing in their shape. Meane while let him take notice that this Fallacy ioyned and conuolued with the Calumny of flying the light, is detected; Calumny, I say, as obiected to his Aduersary, but, as retorted vpon himselfe, a solid and grounded presumption; who if he be no Protestant (as I know no reason, why he should be rather belieued, when he sayth he is, then when he sayth he is not) then what he is, or where to find him, what man can tell?

For if you say, he walkes in the Ministeriall habit of a Prote­stant; so hath he lately done in the lay-garment of a supposed Catholique. If you haue seene him lately write and talke Pro­testant; so hath he not long since wrote and talk't Catholique; but so also hath he talk't Anti-trinitarian, and Anti-christian, not only Anti-protestant, and Anti-papist. When shall we see him in his likenes, that we may say, here, and this is he, while euery one that doth euil bateth the light, neither commeth to the light, least his deed's should be reproued &c.

Another Calumny of M. Ch. refuted.
SECT. III.

ANother calumny of the Aduocate is this. Preface. That his aduersary finding him proofe, forsooth, against his batte­ries (his persuasions to surcease from writing) took vp (sayth he) the resolution of the furious Goddesse in the Poet, madded with the vnsuccessefulnes of her malice, ‘Flectere si nequeo superes, Acherenta mouebo.’ For certainly those indigne Contumelyes, that masse of portentuous and execrable Calumnies wherwith in your Pamphlet to N. N. you loaded not only my person in particular, but all the learned and moderate Deuines of the Church of England &c. could not proceed from any other fountaine.

Answ. But first, and by the way, how was he found of proofe against those batteries? Certainly by his Answere to the reason of such surcease conueyed vnto him (as he sayth) by an acquaintance of both: which was this in effect, that he easi­ly contemned those motiues of his Aduersarie, which were very proper motiues of the Diuel and his instruments, Pref.to tempt poore spirited men out of the way of conscience and honesty, but very incongruous for ei­ther teachers or louers of truth. But if he were indeed desirous he should not answere Charity Maintayned, one way there was, and but one, whereby to obtaine his desire: which was, by a farre conference to be written downe on both sides, conuincing (sayth he) my Vnderstanding, that any one part thereof, nay any one argument in it, of moment and con­sequence to the cause, was indeed vnanswerable. To which demaund he receaued (as he sayth) no other reply but this, that his Aduersary would haue no Conference with him but in Print.

Ans. By which very words of the Aduocate you see cleer­ly intimated the very contradictory of what he obiects against his Aduersary, that he flyes the triall of light; whereas, by his owne confession, he appeales from a lesse to a greater light, from a priuate conference to a publique manifestation in print. For which appeale, besides the forementioned, he might haue [Page 30]other iust causes; among the rest this one consideration, how the passages of such a Conference might be written, and afterward caused to be printed by this Challenger, with how great ad­uantage to himselfe he might iustly suspect, by the aduanta­gious and vnfincere proceedings of some others of this Aduo­cates quality, in some former like Conferences yet in fresh me­mory.

Which feare and equity of Appeale to publique testimony by print, is yet further confirmed euen by this passage of his Pre­face, wherein this Complainant is not asham'd to publish to the world to his aduantage what had priuately past betweene him and his Aduersary by the intermise of a common friend to both, to whom it was with all secrecy intrusted; both for this reason wherein the Plaintife is become his aduersaries Apolo­gy, as you see, and those many others fitter to passe in silence, his refusall of Conference other then in print, was and is most reasonable, and will satisfy all discreet and vnpartiall men, whether this Aduocate will or no.

But now besides all this, the condition annexed to this so vehemently vrged Conference is most ridiculous, and indeed so manifestly cutting off all hope of any fruite to be reaped by it, that any prudent man will easily vnderstand, that all this in­stancy and importuning of a Conference, is nothing else but a faire florish, a vaine bragge, an ostentation of valiance & con­fidence in the quarrell. Forsooth the effect of this Conference should be to conuince his Vnderstanding (in which word it pleaseth him to play as with a fether) who was resolued (quoth he) not to be a Recusant, if I were conuicted. Verily like inough; he would fall off once more from Recusancy, rather then stand to the conuiction. But what if his stout Will should preuaile so much with his Vnderstanding, as neuer to yield it selfe conuin­c't, although it were? Againe the argument might be of it selfe conuincing, and yet not conuince his Vnderstanding, which might proceed from the weaknes of his Iudgment, who would then say (as he is wont) that his Aduersary walkes in clowd's, if his argument should conclude out of principles of Scholasti­que Diuinity, inuested also in termes of the Schooles, such as he would not be able to see through them the strength of the ar­gument; [Page 31]then would he glory in his ignorance, and imploy some pretty Phrase or other whereby to geere at Schoole-ter­mes; and what then? ‘Soluuntur risu tabula. —’ And yet a simple conuiction shall not suffice; but his vnder­standing must be so conuinc't. How so? Forsooth, that some argument of his Aduersaries booke were indeed vnanswerable; wher­in is implyed a condition, if you marke it, of a strange la [...]itude; for if he could not answere it to day, he might to morrow, if not to morrow, the next, or the next day, the next moneth, the next yeare &c. for all is indefinite here; or if he could not ans­were it at all, were it therefore vnanswerable? Were there an vnderstanding in the world, or could be, yea of Man or An­gel, which could answere it, then it should not be vnanswera­ble; vnles he would be so good as to grant out of his bounty, that what he could not answer in this cause, neither man nor Angel could; so that it must of necessity stand or fall with him. What then should haue been the issue of this so vehemently solicited conference? marry this: after a while should haue is­sued forth Cum gratiâ & Priuilegio, some worthy Treatise con­taining a relation of the Conference held betwixt the Iesuite M. H. and W. Ch. Maister of Arts of the Vniuersity of Oxford &c. Wherein the Iesuit had as certainly been discomfited, as Turnus was sure to be vanquish't by Aeneas, Virgil writing the History.

Now to returne to the consideration of those indigne Contumelies and execrable Calumnies &c. Calum­ny. Which I shall not doubt to note as a fallacious Calumny of this Aduo­cate, who would make the world belieue that to be Contu­mely and Calumny which is no such thing. For if the sub­stance of what is written by his Aduersary be a truth, at least in the sense of the writer, not in tended any way to traduce or disparage, but as a discourse and inference of a truth; where is then the Calumny? Besides, if there be nothing harsh, or in­solent, or vnciuil in the expression of this truth; where is the Contumely? where is the portentuosity, or execrability to be discerned? vnles perhaps out of the exuberance of his spleeny Rhetorique he will needs phraze it portentuous, execrable, indigne [Page 32]Contumely, whatsoeuer his queazy stomack cannot digest with patience?

And how then could such a stomack digest these so crude Expostulations cook't with so much bitternes and gall of a Sa­tirical Iuuectiue? I make doubt whether any other could but he who can digest his owne vomit. For I dare auouch, euen in these few lines, wherein he expostulates this wrong, there is more of the portent, and Calumny &c. to be found, then in both those Treatises (as by him supposed) of this his Aduersary. Nor was it a litle gall, and rancor which went into the seaso­ning of those words of his, proper motiues for the Diuel, and his in­struments to tempt &c. Vpon whome he plays, with these instru­ments in consort with the Diuell, is no hard ridle to read, nor worke for an Oedipus: yet it had beene faire dealing to haue pointed out some one or more particulars, out of that masse of portentuous and execrable Calumnies &c. But he was wiser then so; he knew whatsoeuer he should haue pointed at particularly, would haue appeared no such portent to any wise man; he thought it better, to hope his Reader would be either so curre­ous as to belieue him vpon his word; or so negligent, as not to examine him, or confer the places.

A Calumny obiected, retorted vpon the Obiectour.
SECT. IV.

IF that be one of those execrable Calumnies wherewith he complaines that himselfe, together with the learned and moderate Deuines of England are loaden, by his Aduersary; who sticketh not (saith he) to fasten the imputation of Atheisme and Irreligion vpon all wise, Pref.and gallant men, that are not of his owne Religion.

Ans. If his Aduersary neither say so, nor can by any truth or candor of interpretation be vnderstood to meane so, then is this obiection of a Calumny, his Calumny who obiecteth it; & su­rely he hath taken great paines to small purpose, to loade himselfe and his friends so heauily; for vnles he will needs [Page 33]pluck it from those shoulders wheron his Aduersary imposed it, he hath no cause so to groane vnder the burden. For the words of his Aduersary whence he forceth, and violently wri­teth this execrable Calumny are these: Direct. Chap. 1. They are strangers to that wise and gallant nation, who imagine they can be of any religion, if they will not be Catholique. Out of which testimony concerning the Italian nation, to make it odious, he frameth this discourse as virtually included in it; A wise & gallant nation can be of no Religion, if not Catholique: The Italian is a wise and Gallant nation, Ergo the Italian can be of no Religion, if not Catholique. To which I answere; this vniuersall proposition, a wise and gallant nation &c. is wonderfully strained, and indeed with no truth or ingenuity forced out of that particular, the Italian a wise and gallant nation, can be of no Religion if no Catholique. For he might, and should in good Logick and honesty, take this proposition specificatiuè, not reduplicatiuè, as thus, the Italian a wise and gallant nation &c. Not thus: The Italian, as it is a wise and gallant nation, or, because it is a wise and gallant nation, precisely so, that these words wise and gallant, may be taken as Epither's or adiections of pro­priety, supposed to be acknowledged in that Nation, at the least, according to some eminency in those kinds, as Homer so frequently applying that Epithete [...], neately­booted Greekes neuer surely intended by that, to make their neat bootes any cause of their sacking Troy, or any the like effect.

Yet if in our case these attributes wise and gallant be supposed in the writers intendment, to haue some influence into that negatiue (the Italian a wise and gallant nation cannot be of any other religion) yet it should not follow, that wise and gallant, were the adequate, or the necessary cause of that negatiue. Whence it will not follow that euery Nation wise and gallant, or all wise & gallant (yea as wise and gallant as the Italian, which equality not withstanding I belieue might be denyed to some other na­tion without any contumely, or disgrace, or any wrong done them) should be said to be either Catholique, or of no religion. For though wise and gallan [...], be granted a great part of the cause why the Italian cannot be of any other religion, yet this being but the partiall cause, some other wise and gallant men may be of some religion, or Sect, though not Catholique.

But yet suppose, that wise and gallant, were (which cannot be granted) the adequate cause, and of necessity inducing such an effect, and of force to draw out the conclusion to whom­soeuer applyed: as thus; That such and such are wise and gal­lant men, Ergo Catholiques, or of no religion: Or thus; And they not Catholique, Ergo of no religion; where shall this Calumny light? For first you must subsume the minor, before you can determine the Calumny, for it can be no Calumny but where it fals.

Well then, I will subsume it for him, make him some part of recompence for his paines taken in framing his Aduersaries discourse, so very often into syllogism's, such as he pleaseth. But thus I do it for him, and thus he must subsume; otherwise, for ought I see, his Execrable Calumny &c. will proue but smoke: Wise and gallant men can be of no religion, if not Catholique; But I, together with the learned and moderate Deuines of En­gland, are wise and gallant men: Ergo I, with them, can be of no reli­gion if not Catholique.

Behold heere the indigne Contumely, the Portentuous and Execrable Calumny, squeezed out of his Aduersaries words mee­rely by racking them to the worst sense, and torturing them, forsooth, that M. C. or the learned Deuines of England are not wise and Gallant men; this is now the worst he can make, yea and worse then he can truly make of those his Aduersaries words, so Tragically inflamed. Now truly I may haue beene mistaken, but I should not easily haue belieued that M. Ch. would haue taken it so very grieuously, to be ranked with those wise and Gallant men. But such is now become his zeale of Religion (great pitty, no man will belieue it) that he had rather be esteemed not wise and Gallant, then of no Religion. But why, thinke you, hath he so misalleaged his Aduersaries words? Insteed of these, This wise and Gallant nation can be of no religion if not Catholique, he hath them thus; as though his Aduersary said, wise and Gallant men can be of no religion, if not of his. O, he would not seeme to grant his Aduersaries religion, or that of the Italian nation, Ca­tholique: for he would faine retaine vnto his cause, the name of Catholique; as both he and his associates are wont now of later day's to nick-name themselues, Catholiques, and laugh at one [Page 35]another, I suppose, for so doing. For this name (Catholique) can no more stick to their profession, then were it printed in wynd or water: but either they are Catholiques, or no: if no, why do they say they are? if yea, what is it to them, that they who are not Catholique, are of no religion?

Againe, either these men conceaue of Catholique Religion as the Italian doth, or no. If no; then the Italians being of no reli­gion if not Catholique concernes them nothing; if they con­ceaue a like, then t'is no disparaging imputation to say they are of no Religion if not Catholique. The Italian is supposed by this writer and others who know them, so wise and vnder­stand [...]g, as to make this discourse; of all Societies of men who professe Christianity, this, the Roman Catholique, is most pro­bably the true Religion; he is withall supposed so Gallant that he will not professe a religion which he iudgeth none, or not true. Whence he concludeth thus: Either this is the true, or none; and then againe, Either I will imbrace this or none. Now if these men haue the like conceipt, if they make the same Ante­cedent, then the Consequent falls likewise vpon them; if I say, they be alike wise and Gallant, without any disparagement at all; where is now the indigne Contumely, or Execrable Calumny? For what other thing is this to say, but that he who will not be of that religion, which he belieueth the only true, wil be of none. Otherwise this must needes proceed from some basenes, if ha­uing reiected the religion which he iudgeth the only true, if any true; he imbrace notwithstanding, or seeme to imbrace some other Sect, or Profession which he hath in his iudgment à fortiori reiected, in reiecting the Catholique.

And let this Aduocate turne himselfe which way he list, & play his part in Tragicall Rhetorique in the Eye of the world, to stirre vp Passion in the beholders, and so to blind them; nei­ther he, nor any else who know's the Roman, and can compare it with any other, as now he can, shall euer be thought to be of any religion, if not Catholique: yea, and maugre himselfe, if he but dare enter into his soule, seriously and sincerely, all passion and affection whence partiality may arise, throwne aside, he shall not choose but acknowledge the Roman of all other, for ought he know's, the most probable.

In th [...]mea [...]e tyme he will halt betweene God and Belial; sa­crifice to neither; suspend his opinion; sustinere assensum, as the Academiques were wont to say, and consequently suspend and defer all seruice and worship of God; whome, where he is he know's not, with the Papist, or Protestant, or Greek, or Turke; no nor how he would, or should be serued, vnder what notion or name of Deity. So what he serues and worships as God for ought he knows, is an Idol: as the Arrian God, to the Roman is an Idol, so must the Catholique [...] be to the Arrian: and the God of Caluin, positiue Author of sin no lesse then of grace, is an Idol to all Orthodoxe Christians: and so of the rest.

Let the Samaritan erect as many Altars as he will, and ac­cost Hierusalem by imitation of empty Ceremonies, as much as he list; all this notwithstanding, while he adores not in Hierusa­lem, Ioan. 4. he adores he know's not what. Nos adoramus quod scimus, quia salus ex Iudais est: For the tyme is come long since when true A­dorer's adore the Father, in spirit and truth; Whence it fol­loweth that they who adore him not in spirit and truth, adore not God at all; for it is not inough to exhibit the external acts of adoration and religion, shooting them as it were at randon, as you would say, let them fall where they are due, whereso­euer that be, with the Catholiques or Protestants, or Caluinistes, or Anabaptistes, or Arrians, or Donatists &c. for this must be a ratio­nal and voluntary Sacrifice, or worship, to loue whome we adore, and know whom we loue; for we cannot loue whom we know not, and therefore our loue of God must flow from true fayth and beliefe in God, without which we cannot know him.

From all which appeareth that this very obiecting of a Ca­lumny, and Contumely is it selfe both calumnious and contu­melious, both in substance and quality. In substance, as being a false crime obiected; and then in quality of expression, amplified with great bitternes of speach, in a studied inuectiue, and Archy­lochian style. Strange intemperancy of a man, who had not so much power and commaund ouer himselfe, as to refraine from Calumny and Contumely, at the least, while he reprehen­ded it.

Seuerall Calumnies of M. Ch.
SECT. V.

HEnce now from this so bitter inuectiue against one falsely supposed Calumny of his aduersary, he floweth into a copious conglobation of true Calumnies of his owne against his Aduersary and his Cause, while he employeth, for the more enforcing of his arguments, or indeed filly fancies and surmises, his figure Pretermission: as to passe by first; to say nothing secondly; not to obiect to you thirdly; nor to trouble you fourthly. In all which, first, secondly, thirdly &c. he doth nothing else indeed but trouble, entertaining his Reader with meere impertinencies; nor answering any thing directly to what his aduersary writeth.

Pref. To passe by first (sayth he) that which Experience iustifies, that where, and when your religion hath most absolutely commaunded, three, and then Atheisme hath most abounded.

Answ. Now, this is a very Preuarication accompanied with a Calumny. For what could be said more against him­selfe in confirmation of what his Aduersary writeth, and he complaineth of; that the more wise and Gallant spirits can be of no religion if not Catholique? For euery man knoweth where Catho­lique Religion hath most absolutely commaunded, Calum. against Cath. Rel. and yet commands, and which he himselfe sufficiently intimates in these very words, which is the very thing his Aduersary auou­cheth, saying, they are strangers to that wise and Gallant Nation &c. And this confirmeth furthermore, that those Eminent spirits conceaued the Catholique of all other the most probably true; for could they haue iudged some other Sect to haue more probabi­lity of truth in it, they would rather haue imbraced that, then haue fallen flat into Atheisme: therefore their falling thence immediatly into Atheisme, is an argument of that former dis­course, which I haue supposed probably to haue passed in their secret discussions: or this, or none true.

Adde vnto this, that in that Nation, where our Religion hath and doth most absolutely commaund, those wise and Gallant spi­rits, [Page 38]were best acquainted with the doctrine taught in it. Wher­vpon blinded with pride, or passion, or wicked life, being not able to discerne the colour of truth, by the light of the sunne, they despaired to discerne it, by candle-light.

And it is, I confesse, an experience grounded vpon great rea­son, both of nature and manners. Waight's which fall from hi­gher places, force their descent through middle obstacles more strongly, and therefore fall lowest. None but a Iudas called to the eminency of Apostle-ship, could haue plunged himselfe in­to such a depth of desperate treason, as to betway to death, the Author of life: whom when I consider how soone he fell from the spirit of his vocation to be a calumniator fratrum, a Diuell, as our Sauiour himselfe call's him, I am induc'd to thinke, he be­came an Apostle for no other purpose, but to know our Sauiour and his doctrine, and then betray him.

And verily I could easily belieue, that of the number of those who professe Christianity, more turne Atheists of those who haue beene Catholiques, then of those who neuer knew Catholique religion; as those who haue been b [...]rne and bred in Lutheranisme, Caluinisme, or the like; because from so low a place, they do not easily fall so farre; ‘Qui iacet in terrâ, non habet vnde cadat.’ Who lyes on the ground, he fall's no lower, vnles perhaps they haue taken these in their way from the Catholique: for if they haue so, twenty to one, vnles they be some duller spirits, they stay not there, howsoeuer they make shew of such profession; but after some short space of entertainment, they goe on their iourney from thence, to Adiaphorisme in religion; where hauing spent some tyme in good fellowship with all professors, vntill they haue consumed that litle remnant stocke of Christian, or whatsoeuer else beliefe of a God, they steale away after a while from thence too, keeping on directly in that roade, vntill they arriue to the very next Inne, and the very last, adioyning to the Ferry vpon the bank-side of Death and Damnation, commonly called stylo veteri, Atheisme; now of later yeares, the new Academy, or Socinianisme.

By this the Aduocate may see what he hath gained to his Cause by this obiected Calumny. Forsooth, that reuolt from [Page 39]Catholique religion renders it selfe at last into Atheisme, or Soci­nianisme; where such reuolters, I make no doubt, would be glad to meete him; for there (men say) this indifferent Tra­uailer dwells; though they say again, he hath shift of habita­tions, and his iudgment often changeth lodging, but that's his ordinary, and more constant rendeuous.

Calumnies against Miracles.
SECT. VI.

THe next Calumny and second in number of the Pre­termissions strikes at Heauen, (and expect that he will haue a fling at God himselfe afore he hath done) by mouing iealousy and suspicion of all miracles, and hi­stories, and records of Saints; whiles he would make men be­lieue the Catholique Church approueth forging of Miracles, and lying Legends (so he writes) which is indeed a noto­rious Calumny: and had he not made so much hast in running back from the Catholique, as though he had come thither on­ly to fetch fire of faction; he might haue acquainted himselfe better, with the practise of the holy Church, in this very point of Miracles, and relations concerning Saints. He might haue admired their exactnes of scrutiny, and all the way's of indu­stry to find out the truth; and to reiect whatsoeuer hath the face or least shew of counterfait or vnsound; Knowing well that neither truth can be of any durable consistency with fal­shood; (they expell one another euen naturally, as light and darkenes,) but besides this,

the Catholique Church needs no such subsidies; the pillar of truth craues no support of lyes and forgeries: She hath in her Archiues, records and euidences of this kind, so authentique, so authorized, so testified, that blindnes it selfe by no other Exor­cisme but that of manifest truth, hath beene compelled to see them, and confesse them. No otherwise then those Ministers of Pharao, digitus Dei hic est. But giue them leaue to question Saints [Page 40]and miracles, who questionles had neuer yet any; no not when the tyme most required them, to countenance their extraordi­nary mission, when they ran out of the Church to reforme it, or, as to cry fire, fire, when they carried it in their bosomes.

Calumny against holy Ceremonies.
SECT. VII.

THe third passe, or figuratiue omission, in these word's Not to obiect to you thirdly, is a spurn'or kick, as he goes by, Pref. at the weake and silly Ceremonies, and ridiculous obser­uances (so he) of the Catholique Church.

Ans. Indeed if they were only Ceremonies without the substance whereunto they relate, they were surely silly Cere­monies, but if euery least Ceremony include a mystery, greater then hath euer entred into his little weake state, or vnderstan­ding; who is then ridiculous but he who laugh's at what he know's not, yea euen therefore because he knowes it not. Yet had the man but stayd to haue learned his Catechisme among vs, he might haue knowne the vse and meaning of our Cere­monies: now hauing come into the Church, as Cato came vn­to the Theater, only to go out againe; what meruaile if he re­turne a ridiculous censurer, of what he only saw and vnder­stood not? Such post-hast were hardly tolerable in a Spie, much lesse in one who comes to see and censure. Of whom, if I should aske, what in particular were sylly and ridiculous in those ceremonies, or whether the Church hath not authority to prescribe Ceremonies; if the Church of England allow of ce­remonies, no whit more substantiall then the Roman (to say no more) will he be strong inough, thinke you, to find out a disparity? Or, will he rebell against all? I belieue, by these and many other the like passages of his booke, the Chayres who haue subscribed it, litle obserued how lowd an All-arme is sounded to mutinies, and seditions, and rebellions, against all Church-gouernment.

But now, alas, euen this may seeme a thing ridiculous in­deed in vs, who reprehend his laughing and deriding the wai­ting [Page 41]Gentle-women, or maides of Honour, who geeres the Queene hir selfe. For did he allow of any such thing as Reli­gion Queene of vertues, he would not grudge hir due atten­dance and obseruance of holy Ceremonies: nor would he (I thinke) be so vnmannerly as to find fault with such, as please the Queene.

Calumny against Ecclesiasticall Persons.
SECT. VIII.

A Fourth Calumny, with which he will not trouble vs, is: Pref. A great, part of your doctrine, specially in the points conte­sted, makes apparently for the temporall ends of the teachers of it; which I feare, is a great scandall to many beaux Es­prits among you.

Answ. Surely the acknowledged doctrine of our Lord and Sauiour makes in great part for the temporall end's of the tea­chers; and will these beaux Esprits, M. Ch. with the rest of the Session of wits, make Christian doctrine their scandall for that? Qui vos audit, me audit, he who obey's you, obeys me; if it be rightly vnderstood and belieued practically, is of force to sub­due the world to the Gouernours and teachers of the Church and Christian doctrine, by a far more eminent obedience and commaund, then whatsoeuer dominion of temporall Soue­raignty, or whatsoeuer subiection of men to men. And that Pasce oues meas, vnderstood as it ought, not of feeding only but of ruling too, is a more large commission granted to S. Peter, by God himselfe (from whom all iust Empire and Commission is deriued) then Augustus Caesar euer enioyed, euen then when he styled himselfe Emperour of the world; as we may suppose by that Edict which issued forth by his order, vt describeretur Orbis, [...], all the inhabited, or knowne world; which may seeme, to haue beene the language of that age, that made him equall sharer of Empire with Iupiter, deuiding the scepter and sway of all nature betwixt them two.

[Page 42]And yet all that power and iurisdiction reaching from East to West, extended to the body only and exterior subiection, and commaunding the subiects purses &c. For it is but a flattery of the Poet,

Whereas the Empire of the Apostles extendes indeed, to the commaund of soules: yea from this East their kingdome be­gin's, from thence they raigne euen vnto the West of mortall bodies: which seruile nature being subiect to the soule, becomes his subiect who commaunds the soule. Augustus could impri­son, banish, or confine bodies; soules he could not.

He could lay bodies in fetters and chaines; but the Apostles were endued with power to fetter, and enchaine, or to enlarge soules from fetters of sin, quas Sathan alligauit, which Sathan bound. And are our beaux Esprits of the new Academy scanda­lized at this? We will giue them yet further matter of scandal, quite pluck out the ey's of Enuy, if she haue any left.

For of the Church, and of the Gouernours, and Doctors of the Church, we read the Prophesy of Esay fulfilled in the Ca­tholique Church: Qui sunt istiqui ficut nubes volant, & sicut columbae ad fenestras suas? who are these that flye as Cloud's, and as Doues to their window's? Me expectant insulae & naues in maris principio, vt adducam filios tuos de longè. For the Iland's expect me, and the ship's of the sea, that I may bring thy sonnes from farre. But that which follow's makes for the temporall end's of the tea­chers, those flying Cloud's &c. who bring to their nest's the spoiles of their Conuertites or Proselytes, togeather with them argentum eorum, & aurum eorum &c. their siluer and their gold.

Thus we read how the first Christians sold their whole esta­tes; laid downe the prices of all at the feet of the Apostles, that they might from thenceforth receaue, as from God, by the hands of their Gouernor's, the supplies of their necessities. But was not this a gainfull trading to the Apostles? And were not their for­tunes fairely improoued? Could they euer haue so enrich't themselues by fishing? Luc. 5. Praeceptor per totam noctem laborantes nihil ce­pimus; [Page 43]labouring this whole night we haue taken nothing. And were not those nets well sold? Nor were they content with part (O scandal of Socinians!) they would haue all, and punisht exemplarly some who reserued part of their money's to them­selues for their priuate vses.

But yet, let them heare further, to their greater scandall, Rum­patur, quisquis rumpitur inuidiâ: Let him burst, who swell's with enuie. Et aedificabunt filij peregrinorum muros tuos; Jsa. Ibid.& reges eorum ministrabunt tibi: and the Children of strangers shall build thy wal­l's; and their Kings shall minister to thee. Behold the fruit and haruest of their preaching; those [...], word-seeder's, Kinges become their Vassalles; yea and commaunded vnder paine of perdition, to be so. Gens & regnum quod tibi non seruierit, peribit; the nation and kingdome that shall not serue thee, shall perish. Et venient ad te curui filij eorum qui humiliauerunt te, the po­sterity of those who haue persequnted thee, shal come vnto thee vpon their knees. And yet more plainly and fully, & suges lac gentium, & mamillâ regum lactabere: and thou shalt suck the milke of the Gentiles, & thou shalt be nursed with the milk of Kings. Had these happy changes and fortunes appeared to this Aduo­cate, as probably possible to be achieued by him, if he should become one of those teacher's of such doctrines, I am verily per­suaded he would haue made one, yea and a very busy one; and would haue flow'ne as fast, as any of his fellow-pigeons, to a benefice. Howsoeuer, they who know him well, will not ea­sily belieue he disliked such points of Catholique doctrine, be­cause they carry before them a face of gaine, to accrew to the teachers of them; nor will they belieue he is so very an enemy of gainfull doctrines, who know how many Irons of thrift he hath in the fire at once, and some in the water.

A further solution of this Calumny and Fallacy.
SECT. IX.

BVt now to shew more plainly that this pretended scan­dall is but a fallacious Calumny, I deny, that points of doctrine are therefore to be disliked, much more to be reputed scandalous, because they make for the tempo­rall [Page 44]end's of the teachers, if they be not made for those ends; if those temporals be only the material not formall ends, that is, not the ends intended by the author of those doctrines, but on­ly shadow's or concomitants of the true and formall end. O­therwise these tender Socinian consciences might as well stum­ble at the choyce of Salomon, who hauing the choyce giuen him of what he would wish, made choice of wisedom: optaui, & da­tus est mihi sensus, inuocaui & venit in me spiritus sapientiae. I wisht and sense was giuen me, I inuok't and the spirit of wisedom came into me. O, but did he thriue by this guift? venerunt autem mihi omnia bona pariter cum illâ; all felicities, all good things came to me togeather with it.

Nay to seeke the kingdome of heauen makes for the tempo­rall ends of the seekers: Primum quaerite regnum Dei &c. first seeke the kingdome of heauen and all these other commodities shall be added as the ouer plus. Will he reprehend the seeking of the kingdom of God for this? or the forsaking temporall estates to follow Christ in a higher way of perfection, because the gaine and returne is a hundred fold in this life? and therefore makes for the temporall ends of such men? And are these our beaux Esprits? Are these the learned new Academy, that cannot make this distinction between making, and being made? or are they rather indeed, en bon François, in plaine English, dull and ear­thly Spirits? and (which least they would heare) not Wit's, but silly Fellows? Who if they could once resolue vpon a God, or any such, not only omnipotent, but free agent, who could do and giue what he pleased; should rather betake themselues with Salomon (who had, I thinke, as good a naturall wit, as the best of the new Academy, and shew'd a much better in making such a choyce, and in the acknowledgment of his owne weakenes and want) betake themselues, I say, to their prayers, that they might receaue the spirit of Wisedom from heauen; without which spirit, no meruaile if they haue no palate of heauen, nor (as being indeed meerely Animals) any rellish of spirituall things: But neither indeed do they belieue there is any such thing, as holy spirit;

Concerning different opinions among Catholiques, the Aduocates Fallacy and Calumny.
SECT. X.

AFter all these Rhetoricall pretermissions of temptati­ons into (so he writes) and principles of Irreligion and Atheisme in Catholique doctrine, as considerati­ons which he wil seeme to esteeme of lesse moment, thereby to prepare your expectation to some more weighty: Only I should desire you (sayth he) to consider attentiuely when you conclude so often from the differences of Protestants, Pref.that they haue no certainty of any part of their religion &c. Whether you do not that, which so magisteri ally you direct me not to do, that is, proceed a destructiue way &c.

Ans. Now this Pretermissiō is no figure, but a fraud & Fallacy; for his aduersary directs him, not to proceed a meere destructiue way. Now this restrictiue particle (meere) fraudulently left out is no figure, but a fallacie of pretermission; and makes indeed a kind of Non-sense in his Aduersary, where there is a good and plaine sense. For whosoeuer will throw downe the do­ctrine of another, must proceed a destructiue way; but he who doth nothing else but throw downe and builds nothing, as he who doth nothing but ouerthrow doctrines of religion, & holdeth nothing prositiue in religion, at least in coherence of his doctrine, he proceeds a meere destructiue way; and a meere Antimachus he is; an Ismael, sonne of Agar, secundum carnem genitus, a child of the flesh; and therefore (as euery Socinian doth) per­sequutes the free-borne child, the yssue of the Spirit; but what sayth the Scripture? Eijce ancillam, & filium eius, non enim erit haeres filius ancillaecum filio liberae; cast forth the handmaid, and her sonne, for the sonne of the hand-maid, shall not coherit which the sonne of the free-woman: Indeed, one house could not hold them. Why? because Ismael was terrae homo, a fierce condition'd man, manus eius contra omnes, & manus omniam contra eum; his hands against all men, and all mens hands against him; which [Page 46]is in effect to say, he proceeded a meere destructiue way. And I pray you, is not a Socinian such an Ismael? whose hands are vp against all Professors of Christianity, since his reasons, & prin­ciples tend (as his Aduersary chargeth him) to the ouerthrow of all Christian Profession, no lesse then of Catholique religion? And doth he not deserue that all Christian hands should be employed about his eares, with vnanimous consent to extin­guish such a Giant?

But, doth the sonne of Sarai proceed a meere destructiue way? he dares not say it, as bold as he is: therefore he onely sayes, he proceeds a destructiue way; wherein he doth well, and as euery confutant must do, otherwise he doth nothing.

Pref. But his aduersaries Arguments (so he retorts) obiected against the Protestant tend to the ouerthrow of all religion; because (sayth he) as you argue, Protestants differ in many things, therefore they haue no certainty of religion; so an Atheist, or a Sceptique may conclude as well; Christians and the Professors of all religions differ in many things, there­fore they haue no certainty of any thing.

Ans. I know well, these are the ordinary Socinian Topickes, (which this man hath by hart), whence they are wont to ar­gue themselues out of all religion. And it is a very Socinian and Atheisticall argument indeed, that is, a foolish one; as foolish as this; Euery man is a man, therefore no man is a Christian. For though euery man be a man, and therefore subrect to errour, some more, some lesse, some in one thing, some in another, whence difference of opinions ariseth, and vncertainty is con­cluded; yet some men are Christians, and as such, in matters defined to be of faith, not differing, nor vncertaine.

They should deduce thus if they would conclude to the purpose they intend: Christians in points of fayth, defined by their Church to be such (the definition of which Church they hold as their rule of fayth) disagree among themselues, therfore they haue no certainty in points of religion; then the solution is ready: I deny that such Christians, who rely on that au­tority of the Church defining, as all Catholique Christians do, disagree in any poynt of religion so defined; therefore this in­ference of vncertainty from the differences of doctrines in poynts of fayth fals heauy vpon the backs of all Sectaries, nor [Page 47]can be shaken off; but toucheth not the Catholique. Whence they should conclude if they were indeed wise and gallant, either the Catholique, or none: Not as they are wont, there is difference of opinions and doctrines among Professors of Christianity, betweene Lutherans and Caluinists &c. and the Catholique from them all; therefore there is no certainty; therefore no religion at all; and therefore lastly, I will be an Atheist, or Socinian.

Whereas if these Sceptiques would be feriously sceptique indeed, that is serious inquisitors of truth, and not make it their whole life and busines euer to seeke & neuer to find, like those sylly and sinfull women of whome S. Paul, semper discentes, & numquam ad scientiam veritatis peruenientes, always learning and neuer arriuing to the knowledge of truth; nay if they did not set downe for their last arrest, despaire of euer knowing, with those foolists Sceptiques and Pyrhonians; lastly if they could be persuaded that they heare what they heare, or see what they see; certainely they might see & discerne a vast disparity betweene these two kinds of differences; the differences of Sectaries a­mong themselues in most substantiall points of faith; and those of Catholiques discepting and discussing difficulties occurring, as yet vndecreed and vndetermined by authority; as children of truth neuer ceasing to inquire after it where soeuer it be; and ready to imbrace it when they find it, proposed vnto them, ei­ther in the obscure light of infallible Authority, or that of vision in Eternity.

Calumny concerning Transubstantiation, and the B. Trinity.
SECT. XI.

ANother maine tentation and principle of Irreligion he hath taken paines to transport out of Arabia, this sonne of Agar; where he hath met with his fellow Atheist, or Socinian.

Pref. Againe, I should desire you to tell me (saith he) ingenuously, whe­ther it be not probable, that your portentuous doctrine of Transub stantia­tion [Page 48]ioyn'ed with your forementioned persuasian of, no Papist, no Christian, hath brought a great many others as well as himselfe to Auer­röes his resolution; quandoquidem Christiani adorant quod comedunt, sit anima mea cum Philosophis: since Christians adore that which they eat, let my soule go with the Philosophers.

Answ. I thinke his Aduersary will not spare to tell him in­genuously, that he is persuaded, a very small matter may bring a Socinian to be as very an Atheist, or Infidell, as that Arabicke Leeche Auerröes: and in phrasing the doctrine of Transubstantiation portentuous, he sheweth himselfe brought as neere an Infidell, as a Iew can be, with whose spirit he seemeth so ingenuously to sympathize; quomodo potest hic nobis carnem suam dare ad mandu­candum? how can this man giue vs his body ro eate? And yet euen hence (by the way) out of this very testimony of Auer­röes, you may perceaue that this doctrine of Transubstantiation, or howsoeuer the reall and corporall Presence of Christs bo­dy in the Sacrament, so, as it was conceaued to be truly eaten, was the common doctrine of Christians of those times, not on­ly of the Roman Church.

Concerning which doctrine, and those words of Christ, Nisi manducaueritis &c. it is probably thought that Iudas was one of those, who said, durus est hic sermo &c. This is a hard or harsh language &c. Yet furthermore those words of our Sauiour at his last supper, when he instituted this Sacrament, accipite & manducate, hoc est enim corpus meum: take and eat, for this is my bo­dy, are so cleere for Transubstantiation, that this very Aduocate is knowne to haue retorted, after his manner, vpon occasion of some one pressing him to know his opinion concerning the Trinity, that there is no so cleere testimony of Scripture for the Trinity, as for Transubstantiation. Which answere of his, ioyned with that which he auoucheth so often in this Pamphlet, that the Scripture, not the Church, is the rule whereby to determine points of fayth, maketh the B. Trinity no lesse portentuous, then Transubstantiation; since it is certaine there is no mistery of fayth more seemingly repugnant, and more apparently subuer­ting the prime and most receaued axiomes of naturall Reason and Philosophy, then this of the B. Trinity.

And is not this a portentuous discourse of this Aduocate, & a [Page 49]prodigious Calumny, trenching so deepely vpon the Deity it selfe? And is not he, the author of this, a very Portent, & Pro­digy, vnder the guise of Christian profession, worthy to be shipt for some vnknowne Land, where his breath may infect none but sauage creatures? nor make the hayre of Christian Professors stand stiffe by hearing such blasphemies, from his mouth? as I haue heard some one say, his haire did, who may one day write his Character, if he haue not already done it, in his very wittily Symbolizing Sceptique.

Meane while, if this Auerreist haue made the like Arabick resolution, to trust his soule with Philosophers rather thē with such Christians; & if he make a proper choice of Philosophers, and sute himselfe fitly, he may then in very good consequence of doctrine & conformity to his principles, sing euery moneth In noua fert animus. No man will expect his Pithagorique soule in one shape of Religion long:

And then, ‘Quo teneam vultus mutantem Protea nodo?’ With what knot shall I hold fast this form-varying Proteus? Marry thus it followeth:

For you shall haue him one while Arian, another while Nesto­rian, now Pelagian, now Hussite, now Caluinian, then Arminian &c. But only hold him fast throughout all his changes, yea the more he transforms and transfigures draw the knot harder, vn­till at length after many and many a Metamorphosis, he come about to the very same shape, wherein first you tooke him slee­ping in Socinian security; onely waking in his nimble fancy, wherin he shapes as many discolour'd formes of Religion, as there are colours appearing in the Rain-bow, or the Peacock's traine; wherewith he playes according to the gaiety of his hu­mor [Page 50]and frisk's from Religion to Religion, like a squirrill from bough to bough.

His fallacious calumny concerning Pru­dentiall motiues.
SECT. XII.

HIs immediately ensuing demaund, Whether our requi­ring men vpon onely probable and prudentiall motiues to yeild a most certaine assent vnto things in human reason impossible &c.Preface.be not a likely way to make considering men scorne our Religion; is a fraudulent Calumny as he would haue it vnderstood; which is, that we exact this most certaine assent out of Motiues onely probable and prudentiall, as the principall cause, or motiue of such assent.

Nor could he be ignorant, (if he deserue the opinion I haue conceaued of him) that these motiues are proposed & vn­derstood by Catholiques, as persuasiue and inductiue only, or as preuious despositions to fayth, which is the gratuite and su­pernaturall guift of God; and therefore cannot flow from any humanely voluntary, or naturall, or sublunary Cause: yet he who made all things ex nihilo sui, of nothing, or of no preexistēt Being in themselues, and can therefore euen in reason more probably make any thing of some thing; qui fecit medium fornacis quasi ventum roris flantem; who made thefiery furnace refrigeratiue to the martyrs, howsoeuer this were done; qui fecit lutum ex sputo &c. who contriued eye-light out of a plaster of dust and spitle; who made wyne of water; and the like stupendious effect's not contained in the naturall force or efficiency of such causes; can likewise serue himselfe of inferior meanes and dis­positions towards the producing of some supernaturall effect, in the soule of man; or assume them, and ioyne with them, or them with himselfe, to such effects.

When therefore, these probable or prudentiall Motiues attentiuely considered, haue wrought in the soules of men first an opinion, that such a doctrine may be true; then perhaps a [Page 51]liking of the doctrine, out of such motiues: after this, the spirit of God inwardly concurring & mouing along with these mo­tiues, a kind of pious inclination or willingnes to imbrace such a doctrine, if they could be persuaded it were true; & this, not­withstanding all reasons and countercheck's of flesh and bloud or whatsoeuer temporall regards to the contrary, through a desire to serue God, as he would be serued; it is then the im­mediate worke of Gods grace, to endue, and as it were, to in­forme such a soule with diuine faith; by heauenly endowment the vnderstanding becomes eleuate and raised to a height, a­boue the sublunary sphere of naturall reason, to a certaine pro­portion with diuine and supernaturall obiects; by this ena­bled, as it were, with vndazeled eyes of Eagles, to looke vpon the sunne.

Now when they say, the assent to the Conclusion cannot be of greater firmity or certainty, then is the certainty, force, or firmity of the Premises, which are supposed only probable and prudentiall motiues; they seuer the Premises, and take them as considered in themselues alone, not as they are indeed, in their Eleuation and Coniunction with the supernaturall power of grace.

For when they say, the Conclusion is qualified by the Pre­mises, weake if the Premises be weake &c. nor onely so, but euen the weaker of the two, leades the way in this marke of reason and discourse, and the Conclusion followeth that, not the stronger, which it cannot follow passibus aequis, with equall stepp's, and which therefore must imploy no more strength then the weaker, that the Conclusion may follow both. This is true when the Premises haue onely an vniuocall and naturall influence into the Conclusion: that is; when they impart only that force or value to the Conclusion, which they hold of their owne, and proper in right and title of nature or naturality: but where their in [...]uence is, as I may say, supernaturall, disposi­tiue to a highter forme or Act, the tenure wherof is onely ar­bitrary, and as it were at will of the Lord of Vertues, due vpon no consideration of any naturall exigence or Couenant; and is therefore an Equiuocall influence, as of causes inflowing in­deed not onely by their owne force but in vertue of their prin­cipall [Page 52]cause and agent, which is supernaturall: then in all good reason they concnrre, by proeuring an effect proportio­nate to that principall and supernaturall cause; nor impropor­tioned to themselues, as considered in that coniunction and sublimation.

Neither ought this to seeme strange in supernaturall influ­xions of causes; for euen in the course of nature, and in good Physiologie, an accident which is a far inferiour nature, may produce a substance, as heat (yea euen then when it is separate from the substance of fire) produceth fire: the reason; because although as heat, or as an accident, it holdes an inferiour place in nature, yet as it is the naturally-ioynt instrument of fire, in virtute causae principalis, in, or by vertue of the fire, it produceth fire: so likewise those motiues only probable, though as such vnable of themselues, by reason of their improportion, yet in vertue of their principall agent, or prime moouer (which is the holy Spirit operating and mouing in the soule) & conioyn'd and sublimed by that prime mouer or agent, they may, and do dispose to the producing of an infallible assent: but of this point he will offer a more proper occasion to speake hereafter.

But now, this is some part of the Calumny, that we re­quire things contradictory and impossible to be done: Pref. and is this indeed an impossible requisite, that we require a most certaine assent to beyielded to things in human reason impossible? for with this he chargeth vs.

Answ. To which I answere, it is falsely supposed by him, that those things whereunto we require a most certaine as­sent, that is, an assent of diuine fayth, are in human reason im­possible. For if they be true, they are not in human reason im­possible, though they haue the semblance or appearance of im­possibility in humane reason. No truth is vntruth to human reason; therefore no truth is impossible in human reason; for I suppose that distinction, of Truth Philosophicall, and Truth Theologicall, many yeares since expuls't the Vniuersity. For truth, in the whole latitude, being the obiect of reason and vn­derstanding, it cannot be that any truth should imply impossi­bility, or repugnance to human reason or vnderstanding; no more then that any thing corporally visible, can inuolue con­tradiction [Page 53]or impossibility to be seene by a corporall eye-sight. Therefore if they be vntruth's, let them be conuinc't to be vn­truth's; if they hold those things to be impossible in human reason, which are aboue human reason, no meruaile if this Ad­uocate belieue not the B. Trinity. He will say, perchance, now he belieues it; but how? for I aske him; Doth he yield a most certaineassent, that is, an assent of diuine fayth, to the B. Trini­ty, as that God is one God in three really distinct persons? If he belieue it not with certainty of diuine fayth, he belieues it not as a Christian: If he do belieue with that certainty of fayth, then he yield's a most certain assent to a thing as impossible in humane reason, as any other point of fayth required to be be­lieued with a most certaine assent. But why do I aske him? It appeares euen by these words, as well as by his words of mouth; vttered vpon the forementioned occasion, that he in­deed belieues not the B. Trinity, no nor Incarnation, nor Re­surrection, nor any such thing impossible, in his style, to hu­mane reason, with any such certainty of assent, as makes a Chri­stian, and distinguishes him from an Infidell, or Socinian.

It appeares furthermore by what he writes in this place, that he would haue it sufficient, to belieue such mysteries, with a lower degree of Fayth. Now either this lower degree of fayth, is diuine fayth or no. If diuine, then the assent arising from such fayth, is a most certaine assent; or an assent with certainty exclu­ding all deliberate positiue doubt concerning the obiect of fayth. If that lower degree be not diuine fayth, then it is not only a Iower degree of fayth, as differing from some other di­uine fayth, only in degree of certainty, or secundum magis & mi­nus, according to more or lesse certainty, as heat differ's from heat, and more white from lesse white; but it is different in the very species or kind of fayth; as diuine fayth, from human fayth, which differ euen in definition and Essence of fayth: Therefore the Catholique requiring diuine fayth, and teaching, not, this Iower degree of fayth, but this indeed, no diuine fayth to be in­sufficient for the acquiring Eternall saluation; requireth no more then the Apostle doth, where he sayth, fine fide impossibile est placere Deo, without fayth it is impossible to please, or serue God; meaning that fayth, which in that very place is by him [Page 54]described to be, sperandarum subctantia rerum, argumentum non ap­parentium; the substance of things to be hoped, the argument of things not appearing, which no man can deny to be diuine fayth. Now to require such fayth, (besides the necessity of it) cannot possibly mooue any scorne to religion, Pref. but is rather most fit and congruous to beget a more honourable conceipt, & due Veneration of diuine mysteries in faythfull soules. For those other, who out of an excesse of an Hyperbolicall Pride, will seeme to scorne whatsoeuer stand's without their sphere; or, because they are not, will suppose there are no Eagles; we can expect no lesse from them. For this indeed is that verbum crucis, pereuntibus stultitia; that word of the crosse, folly and matter of scorne to those who perish; 1. Cor. 1. ijs autem qui salui fiunt, id est nobis (sayth S. Paul) virtus Dei; but to them that are saued, that is to vs, it is the Power of God. And he who tell's them (which this Aduocate takes so hainously that he makes it some part of his Apology for Atheisme) that they were as good not belieue at all, as belieue with a lower degres of fayth, Pref. meaning human fayth only; sayth no more but true, that humane fayth can neuer aspire to the purchase of supernatur all hopes; & that therefore, in regard of euerlasting Saluation, if it grow no higher, it becomes fruit­les and lost labour.

As if a generall pardon were proclaimed for all such who should make their personall appearance in such a Court or Pal­lace before the king, vpon such a day, or within such a space of tyme; a man should say, it were as good stay at home, as to goe to the Court only, and neuer enter or appeare in presence of the king; because the pardon was granted to such personall appea­rance made, not to such a iourney made: for so likewise Salua­tion and pardon of sinnes is proclaimed and promised to such a fayth as should enter those adita, those sacraries, or treasuries of diuine hopes; not to such as cannot, and will not enter, but stand without, S. Leo, Serm. 7. de Nat. in the mist of humane reasons, or in the smoke of worldly wisedom, vnable to ascend into that presence of Ma­iesty.

And yet there (forsooth) will they stand by this Aduocat's aduise, nor goe one foot further, or higher, then they can see the way in that mist; and will yet (I thinke) contest with diuine [Page 55]Wisedome, yea and quarrell too, if he vouchsafe not to come downe a degree lower, and pardon them vpon equall termes; or shew them some conuincing reason why it should be neces­sary to clymbe vp those staires of diuine fayth; or why they should not sufficiently deserue pardon by taking so much pai­nes in comming as farre as they could vpon the plaine and ea­uen ground of reason; and why his Maiesty should annexe vn­to his pardon, such impossible and contradictory conditions, as to require a voluntary, and certaine assent, to things in humane reason impossible, that many moderate and considering men, who would otherwise come readily, and sue forth their pardons, ac­cording to his Proclamation, hearing of these conditions, fly backe, and belieue that there is either no such pardon to be ex­pected, and that, this is but some forged Proclamation; or that surely it is, or should be granted, vpon reasonable termes, and such conditions, as may sute with mens abilities; that conditions of this impossible and contradictory nature are likely to make considering men scorne all pardons, and all religion. So they with their lower degree of fayth; where I leaue them disputing with God at the foot of the staires, & proceed. For thus is followeth.

The Church compared with Scripture.
SECT. XIII.

Pref. LAstly, I should desire you to consder, whether your pretence, that there is no good ground to belieue Scripture, but your Churches infallibility, ioyned with your pretending no ground for this, but some text's of Scripture, be not a faire way to make them that vnderstand them­selues, belieue neither Church nor Scripture?

Answ. This Cauill or Calumny we might retort as he is wont, almost totidem verbis, as thus; Whether their pretence that there is no good ground or rule whereby to determine what is truth in doctrine of fayth, but Scripture, ioyned with their pretending no ground for this, but some text's of Scriptures, to­geather with euery mans naturall reason interpreting it, which is as errant a guide, and diuerse, as the head's of men; be not a [Page 56]faire way to make men that vnderstand themselues, belieue neither their doctrine, nor their Scripture? But what is this to him, who cares not how his argument reflects vpon himselfe, so it wound the Catholique? who will be content like another Samson, or Eleazar to be crush't to death, vnder the ruine of his Aduersaries: Trahere cùm pereas inuat, — he is cōtent that the ship be shot through and through, wherein he sayles with the Catholique; nay, this would be his glory, ‘Solus nequis occidere, nobiscum potes.’ But what, if we be deceaued all this while? What if he be not the man, Achylles himselfe, but a Patroclus in his guise, and figh­ting in his armour? while he, with his Socinian Myrmidons, stands aloofe out of shot; or if he fight, and fall with Protestan­cy, he will reuiue and reuenge himselfe in Socinianisme? What, I say, if all this arguing for Protestancy against the Catholique, be nothing else but a cunning vndermining to blow vp both? Or what, if this Switzer in religion, fight only for pay? To day for Holland, to morrow perhaps for Spaine? but if the warre and seruice grow hoat, he willl serue neither, he wil returne home, and sleepe safe, in the new Academy, and in a whole skin. Not­withstanding because this arrow howsoeuer flying from hart, or hand only, for Religion, or for Pay, being shot against a rock, not entring there, may chance to glance, and wound some stan­der by, who is neither rock, nor rocky; it will not be amisse to fore-arme such, by fore-warning them.

It is false then, which he presumeth Gratis, that we pretend no other ground, for the infallibility of the Church, but some texts of Scriptures; nor is our doctrine so incoherent to it selfe, but as before, and without Scripture, the Church could truly say, Visum est spiritui sancto & nobis, it hath seemed good to the ho­ly Ghost and to vs: So if no Scriptures were now, the same Church guided by the same holy Ghost, might truly say, Visum est spiritui sancte & nobis: yea and this very doctrine that the same holy Ghost, Spirit of truth, speakes in the Church, we are taught not only by this and those other texts of holy Scripture, but à priori, by the Church, vpon whose credit and testimony we receaue this Scripture.

For thus I vrge: Where was this Scripture, where the whole [Page 57]Ghospell, before it was written? Was it not first in the Church, in the soules and spirits of the Apostles and disciples of Christ, wherin they were written by the fingar of the holy Ghost? nay the presence of the holy Ghost (sayth S. Austin) was that Scri­pture, or Scriptures written in their harts. De spir. & lit. c. 21. Austin) was that Scri­pture, or Scriptures written in their harts. Quid sunt leges Dei seri­ptae in cordibus, nisi ipsa prasentia spiritus sancti qui est digitus Dei? What are law's of God written in harts of men, but the presence of the holy Ghost, who is the fingar of God? And this Scripture of hart's, was foretold by the Prophet Hieremy: Cap. 31.Post dies illos (after those days, that is, in the tyme of the Ghospell,) dabolegem meam in visceribus eorum, & in corde eorum scibam eam: I will giue my law in their bowels, and write it in their hart. There was then the Scripture, the Word of God, the Ghospell: There, I say, as in the Autographon, the authentique, the originall instrument; out of that authentique and originall, transcribed and copied out in parchment's or papers. If then, euery transcript, or copy retain's the credit of a true copy or transcript, so far forth as it is found agreeing with the originall; it followeth, that whatsoe­uer we receaue vpon the authority of Scripture, we receaue it first from, and vpon the credit of the Church: And what we read, or vnderstand as Scripture, is to be compared with that au­thentique, least it may proue a false copy, which we presume to be Scripture, or the word of God.

Since then the holy Ghost, euen to the consummation of the world, resideth in the Church of Christ, according to his pro­mise; it followeth euidently, that the word of God is in the Church, as in the Authentique and Originall, but in writings of inke and paper, only as in Copies and Transcripts. What madnes then, what grosse absurdity is this, to belieue the Copy rather then the Originall? Or with what sense can any man pretend to vnderstād this Copy or Transcript, as written with inke and paper, better then by the liuing voyce of the Author himselfe of that anthentique & originall, the Church? Since in the Church of Christ, and only there, resides the Author of ho­ly Scriptures, perpetually and successinely writing them, and the verities contained in them, in the hart's and soules of Chri­stians, members of that Church, as they are vnited by vnity of one fayth, and charity with their head Christ Iesus.

Whence it followes furthermore, that to say we receaue the Scriptures from the Church, but not the sense and meaning of them, is to speake contradictories. For both the meaning and vnderstanding of Scriptures is in the Church, and only there with certainty and infallibility of interpretation, where that spirit dwel's, which alone can interprete infallibly, his owne authentique. And besides, not the letter written, but the sense and meaning of the writing, or the Verities therein contained, are the Scripture or word of God. Therefore if they receaue not these from the Church, they receaue not the holy Scriptures thence; but a mute and dead writing, a riddle, to be read accor­ding to ech man's fancy and coniecture.

For as no man knoweth what is hidden in the hart and soule of man, but the spirit which is in man: so no man can probably presume to vnderstand those hidden Verities, & that wisedom of God, occultat am in mysterio, hidden in mistery, how­soeuer appearing in words, but the spirit of God. First therefore Christians are to inquire where that spirit is the Author of Scri­pture, and the doore by which we must enter into the Scrip­ture; (for he that presumeth to enter another way, as by the way of human reason and discourse, Philosophy, or the like, as by a posterne, is worthily suspected to be a theefe in Religion;) it is he, who openeth the sense and vnderstanding of men, ex­tending it to a more large spheare of capacity, which naturall reason shu [...]'s vp and confines within the narrow bounds of na­turall principles, and discourse vpon them.

We are to enquire, I say, (if we are yet to seeke) where this spirit resides [...] and since we treat this busines with such as pre­tend to be vmpir'd by Scriptures, to them we say, as Christ to the Iewes, Joh. 5. scrutamini scripturas, quia vos putatis in ipsis vitam aeternā habere; Search the Scripture, for there you thinke to haue life eternall. Where that spirit of truth was promis'd to continue by our Sauiour, there certainly it is to be sought, and found, and only there. There I say, where Christ would be nobiscum omni­bus diebus vsque ad consummationem saculi; to continue with vs to the worlds end, from that time, omnibus diebus, all the day's of po­sterity; not by tymes, or inter-spaces, or intermission of his pre­sence, nor with them alone to whom he then personally dire­cted [Page 59]his speach, who were not to continue all the day's of fu­ture ages, vnto the worlds end; (and which could not be vn­derstood of them, as after their death inuested with immorta­lity, and in possession of eternity, wherein there is neither plu­rality of dayes, nor consummation of tyme;) but with their progeny, and the ofspring of their Fayth, who were to belieue in Christ by them: and whom he ioyned with his Apostles in his prayer for them, Joh. 17. (and sure his prayer was heard) vt & ipsi vnumsint &c. That they also may be one, by vnity of fayth and charity, vt credat mundus, that the world may belieue; not this age of men alone, but in that sense wherein he commaunded that the Ghospell should be preach't to euery creature, and be­lieue: What? quiae tu me misisti; that Iesus Christ is the Sonne of God. Enquire then, what Society of men that is, who in suc­cession to the Apostles, and from their tymes in all ages, haue taught, and still do teach, that Christ is the sonne of God; who, euen in this last age of vs and our Fathers, haue taught this, to the East and West of Indians &c. and when you haue found that Society of Christian professor's, when you haue found out the sunne, in the clearest midday, know that you haue found the Church of Christ, and with that the word of God, the Scri­ptures, the Gospell, together with the true and infallible inter­pretation of these.

For this Society of men is indeed Epistola Christi, the Epistle, yea and Ghospell of Christ, 2. Cor. 3 [...] written non atramento sed spiritu Dei viui, not with inke, but with the spirit of the liuing God; and this Scripture is that qua legitur ab omnibus hominibus, which all men read; not only such who can read the Scripture written in Hebrew, Grecke or Latin &c. but euen such as cannot read at all. For as this Scripture is written not with inke, but with the spirit, in the hartes of Christians; so it appeareth not in the exterior traict's of Characters, but in the exterior profession, and liues, and Christian vertues of Christians: There, I say, it is read euen by such, who know no letters.

For as in the creation of Nature, that creating and conser­uing power of God omnipotent, his wisedom also, and good­nes are imprinted in all the workes of nature, and all creatures from tyme to tyme, togeather with their being, receaue that [Page 60]stamp and impression, which they exhibite to be read by all intellectuall natures, in one most legible language of nature, common to all nations; according as it is said, Caeli enarrant glo­riam Dei &c. So in regeneration, and in the progeny of Grace the author of Grace Christ Iesus, is read and vnderstood in his worke, and word of Grace, his creatures of grace, which is the Church of Christ; which by that spiritually and supernatural­ly creating power, receaue the print and characters of Christ Iesus, and his truth, in their hart's and soules first, which after­ward's they manifest in their liues and professions, and much more in the death's; whereby they proclaime him, and the truth of his doctrine to all ages, to all nations, with the last and lowdest voyce, of bloud; like to that voyce of our dying Lord, who crying with a lowd voyce gaue vp the Ghost. O tooto dull and deafe eares, which the singar of God hath neuer ope­ned, which cannot heare a voyce so lowd; and those blind eyes, which read not those letters, that most legible Scripture of Ca­tholique truth, written in the bloud of all ages, since Christ re­deemed the world with his; and those inominate, and vnlucky birds of night, who flying the triall of the day shining in the Church, as in the Tabernacle of the Sunne, run into couert, and obscurity of darke Scriptures, the common rendeuous, and re­trait of all Heresies; which they do no lesse absurdely and pre­posterously, then as if in question of right and title grounded in law, they would appeale from the suruiuing law-maker, to his written lawes; as they would say, giue vs your Law's in wri­ting, and then leaue them to vs, we will not learne of you the vnderstanding of them: for so, this euer-suruiuing Law-maker is the holy Ghost, presiding in the Church in all iudgements & questions of fayth; from whom there neuer can be any iust ap­peale; the Scriptures his lawes which are written primarily & principally, in the soules and hart's and vnderstandings of this Church. In which Scriptures, no Heretique, or Alien can pre­tend any right or title of interest at all, no authority nor ability of vnderstanding them.

Therefore although we debate right and truth by testimo­ny of Scriptures, against the vniust vsurpers of them, to take from them those stoln'e weapons, and recouer them to the true [Page 61]titler's, as euen in this claime of infallibility of the Church: yet this truth we learne not immediately of the Scripture written, but receaue it à priori, from the originall of the holy Ghost, writ­ten in that one, composed of many, homogenious by fayth and charity; that one soule, I say, and vnanimous spirit of the holy Church of all ages. For as in our natural body, one & the same in diuisible soule, informeth, and enlifeneth the daily new ac­ceding and aggenerate matter of nourishment: so this spirit of truth informeth, as it were, and animateth with the spirit of Grace and truth, not only the whole mysticall body of Christ all at once, or once for all, but successiuely euery acceding and new-borne member of the Church.

As therefore in processe of naturall growth, we do not pro­perly learne that we are reasonable ereatures; but by the very hauing a reasonable soule, and the vse thereof, we know it: so Catholiques do not properly learne, that the Catholique Church is inerrant, or infallible, but by being Catholiques we belieue it. For of this truth I do not see, but in a true sense I might say; Est hac non scripta, sed natalex: quam non didicimus accepi­mus, legimus; verùm ex naturâ ipsâ arripuimus, hausimus, expressimus: ad quam non docti, sed facti; non instituti, sed imbuti sumus: A truth not written for vs, but borne in vs; which he haue not learned, nor acquired, nor read in bookes; but by a second nature of Grace we are instantly possest of, we haue suckt it, and exprest it; for which we haue beene made, not taught; indued with it, not schooled to it. Therefore I should not doubt to auouch, though the whole rable of flesh & bloud, and heresy reclaime, that it is (vnderstanding it in equality of proportion) no lesse innate and connaturall to a Catholique man, as such to belieue that the Catholique Church is indued with infallible authori­ty, then it is naturall to a reasonable man, as such, to know he is endued with a reasonable soule.

Therefore as he should be thought an absurd and senseles man, who should goe about to persuade a man by reason, that he hath not a reasonable soule: so is he worthily iudged an im­pertinent, pratling Sophist, who endeauours to argue a Ca­tholique out of his beliefe of a Catholique infallible Church: which stone notwithstanding, I know this Aduocate neuer [Page 62]ceaseth to rowle, and I could wish he would reflect, how he may haue deserued that Sisyphian pennance, howsoeuer thus I vnderstand, ‘Saxum sudat voluendo, neque proficit hilum.’ He rowles the stone, and sweats for his paines: not those texte therefore of Scripture, which this Sisyphus presumes, but the vi­sible Church, the spouse of Christ, his purchase of bloud; not a lease for terme of yeares according to the tenure of seruile Agar, and her issue, which became voyd: but an euerlasting in heri­tance, according to the tenure of Couenant made with the pro­geny of Sarai, the house of Israel, and the house of Iuda, an vn­abrogable and term'les decree, firme and durable as the consti­tutions of Nature, Hierem. 32. In quam traditi estis &c. Rom. 6.17. as the course of sunne and moone. This spouse, I say, hath deliuered vs this truth; or rather hath borne and bred vs in it, we haue suck't this milke from hir brest, [...], rationall and fraudlesse milke, conforma­ble to reason, though aboue it; and therfore consummating rea­son and extolling it; food for the Children of Obedience, vt in eo crescamus, that we may grow by that in stature of grace, and Christian perfection; from which brests and milke of Christian simplicity, no errant Sophister shall be of power to remoue vs; though he attempt it neuer so confidently or impudently, by adiuring vs, Thus he adiured a certain Catho­lique. as we will answere at the last day, (arrainged, I trow, at the Socinian Barre, to be tried by certaine select Iudges, or a grand Iury of Pyrrhonian Sceptiques, or the new Academy, who will neuer pronounce any arrest, or sentence at all:) but what? to suspect the doctrine of the Catholique Church, to question her authority; to call those so many Doctours, the starr's and light's of all Christian ages, who haue alwayes taught and supposed this truth, so many martyrs who haue ob­signed it with their bloud; to call them all to their answere, forsooth, for their holding or teaching this doctrine; and to giue this Switzer a meeting▪ and conuincing, so that he leaue prating; which done, they may returne whence they came, & he to write the Conference, and pen his owne Paan, with an i [...] triumphe; tu moraris aureos curru [...].

Calumnies against Protestants in generall, imputed to his Aduersary, proued to be the Calumnies of this Aduocate, obiecting them.
SECT. XIIII.

HEnce now he vndertakes to purge the Protestants in generall from Calumnies, by which he pretend's they are highly iniured by his Aduersary; in which purga­tiue way, I will take the paines to go along with him, with hope to lead him after a while into the illuminatiue, wherein he may see his owne Calumnies really and subiecti­uely inexistent in himselfe, while he labours to shew them in others, in whom they are imputatiuely only, or, as falsely fan­cied by him: but by this meanes, you shall haue him perpetu­ally in Calumnies and Fallacies; for where he finds them not, he makes them: which I will so note in the pursuit of his dis­course, that I will make no choice, but take them vp as they offer themselues in his owne order of prosequution; to the end it may appeare, that whensoeuer I shall cease to pursue him, I doe it not for want of further matter of the like nature, in the remnant of his Volume; but rather for want of patience in my selfe, nor without cause, fearing it in the reader. For I confesse a writer more pregnant in this kind of plenty, or lying more open to exceptions and reprehensions, I haue neuer yet found any; notwithstanding if part of these which I shall note for Fallacies or Calumnies, may seeme perchance not altogether so notorious as to deserue so black and foule a marke; yet he hath giuen me a Precedent in himselfe, to call a Calumny what­soeuer I thinke vntruely obiected.

But yet I will not range so wildly, nor indeed so far out­compasse the true notions and significations of words, as this Aduocate euery where doth; but I will call a Calumny a false crime obiected, or a false reproach, especially amplyfied and exacerbated after a reproachfull and Calumnious manner. As euen this immediately following in his Preface, where he [Page 64]notes for Calumny these words of his Aduersary; Cap. 2 [...]The very do­ctrine of Protestants, if it be followed closely, and with coherence to it selfe, must of necessity induce Socinianisme. This, if it be a true charge, is no Calumny; it should therefore haue beene proued vntrue, which this Champion neither doth, nor can do. But what he saith. Fallacy! I will briefely gather vp, if first I shall haue giuen you notice, of one peece of Fallacy, of which he serues himselfe very often; which is to conceale and passe ouer in deep silence, what most concerns him to take notice of, as though there were no such thing.

With whome therefore I would expostulate in few words, Tantumne est abs re tuâ otijtibi, aliena vt cures? do your owne occa­sions permit you so much leasure, as you can take care of other mens affaires? Vnles you will answere me, perhaps, since you are fallen back from the Catholique, ‘Haeretici nihil à me alienum puto.’ As though you held your selfe interessed, in euery quarrell with the Catholique; for otherwise, what do those Calumnies a­gainst Protestants in generall concerne you, if you be none of those Protestāts with which your Aduersary chargeth you more then once? and namely in his former Chapter, that you reiect all supernaturall infused Faith, that this you professe and en­deauour to proue: which doctrine, without doubt, is your ac­quittance and exemption from all those Calumnies against Protestants, no lesse then from all Christianity. ‘— Hoc ad te pertinet Ole.’ This concernes you; why do you not at the least deny it? But if you had a scruple to lye, I confesse your silence is so much the more pardonable. But then withall your silence will be in­terpreted Confession; for if you be a Christian, and not asha­med of the Ghospell of Christ, you are obliged to purge your selfe so far forth, as by deniall, to say you are no Infidell, no Atheist, no Socinian, when you are publisht in Print guilty of these crimes; which notwithstanding you cannot truly say, vntill you retract and recant that doctrine, of no supernaturall infused faith.

And now, men condemne you not, because you make a scruple to deny a truth, or to lye; but because you make no [Page 65]scruple to be a Socinian: not because, I say, you will not deny a truth, but because in truth you maintaine a lye. Which makes me verily thinke, that the more wise and learned heads of your famous Vniuersity, had no voyce in choosing such a Proctor for Religion, as in a warre against a Christian Nation, they would neuer approue the calling in the Turke to aide.

His pretended Calumnies cleared, and retorted.
SECT. XV.

NOw returne we to those generall Calumnies, as pre­tended against Protestants, from which he will with all the power of his zeale, assoile them, and stand in their defence (with is more then he doth for himselfe) euen then and there were he is assaulted most strongly; so faith­full and true will he shew himselfe to the seruice he hath vn­dertaken; to vindicate the credit, of his [...]. his Re­warders, and Maintainers; for his owne, he makes lesse recko­ning, I would he did; it is not so far spent, but that it is recoue­rable both to health and strength againe; but now, after he hath kis't the ground, thus he onset's.

Pref. Your Calumnies in generall are set downe in thesewords: The very doctrine of Protestants if it be followed closely &c. This I say confi­dently, and euidently proue by instancing in one error, which may well be termed the capitall and mother Heresy.

Answ. And verily what he sayth, he doth indeed euidently proue to any man who hath eyes, and opens them; for other­wise the blind-man walking in the clearest sun-shine, walk's still in darknes. But his answere to this, forsooth:

Pref. In all which discourse the only true word you speake is: This I say confidently.

Answ. Thus said, he flings forthwith from the matter, his Aduersaries proofes, quite out of the way? which I obserue as his notorious Fallacy, reducible to that of Aristotle, an affected ignorance of the Elench, the true and Logicall reproofe of his Aduersaries Argument; his perpetuall Sophisme; & as the very soule of his volume diffused throughout, [Page 66] ‘— Et magno se corpore miscet.’ which otherwise had beene as very a Pamplet in bulke, as now in substance.

For what is it to the solution of his Aduersaries Argument's to heap so many Calumnies vpon the Pope, and those so ma­ny most false and inconsequent Consequences, what import they to that purpose? But these turning's and windings are very shift's; much like to those of the fearefull Hare, but cun­ning; which pursued by the hound's, leap's in heere, and out there, with a hundred trauerses and doublings confounding the sent. Some one perhap's may be at leasure to track him, and follow him, through all his Meander's, and Labyrinth's of dis­course, vntill he find the Minotaure, ‘Semibouem (que) virum, semiuirum (que) bouem,’ that Amphibion, that riddle in Religion, and shew him to the world: he is a copious Argument indeed, a wide field wherin a man may sooner loose him, then find any right way out. But his Calumnies and Sophismes are my taske; and these yet, which way soeuer he takes, and in all his digressions and by­path's he is not vnmindfull to sow most plentifully: as euen in this barren place, where he new-molds his Aduersaries reasons into a Syllogisme, as it pleaseth himselfe, such as he can most ea­sily play vpon, and such I dare say, as neuer came into his Ad­uersaries dreame; nor is indeed any probably deduction from his discourse.

Pref. Who would not laugh at him (sayth he) that should argue thus: Neither the Church of Rome, nor any other Church is infallible: Ergo the doctrine of Arrius, Pelagius, Eutyches, Manichaeus, was true doctrine?

Answ. Thus he laugh's at his owne iest, and it is indeed ri­diculous, and ridiculously patcht' vp, out of his Aduersaries words, where he sayth, that from the formentioned capital He­resy all other heresies follow at ease. But thus indeed he might haue collected, had it pleased him to be serious in amatter of such consequence, rather then to make it his disport.

The perpetually Visible Church of Christ, according to Protestants, is not infallible: Ergo, for ought they know, or can conuince, the doctrine of Pelagius, Manichaus &c. is true doctrine: [Page 67]and this will proue indeed a solid and stronge Enthimeme; whence a manifest absurdity euen in the doctrine of Protestants is concluded out of this their maine principle, that the Church of God may [...]rre in proposing things vntrue to be belieued as diuinely reuealed; and then further, if this absurdity fall directly, and in true con­sequence from that principle, it must necessarily follow accor­ding to the very elements of Logicke, that the principle it selfe is absurd and vntrue.

For by that receaued Axiome, Nothing giueth what it hath not, though it may happen that some Premises or Principles may inflow some lesse absurdity into the Conclusion, then is contained in their proper notion and efficiency; because the ab­surdities hidden in the vertue or force of some principle, are not discerned in their whole latitude by euery vnderstanding, as being not able to penetrate and sound the Principle; yet a greater absurdity they can neuer in flow, be the vnderstanding neuer so comprehending: it followeth then, that this maine principle of Protestancy is as absurd and vntrue, as this Con­sequent is, or perhaps much more; and this inference offering it selfe most readily, and euidently inough, resulting in his Ad­uersaries discourse from that principle, this Aduocate is so far from impugning it, that he seemes to take no notice of it; but shapes his aduersaries Argumēt in his own fancy, such as he can deale with all; combats an imaginary Foe, — Pro (que) viro, nebulam; or like an Aiax in his rauing fit, wreak's his fury vpon a silly sheep insteed of an Vlysses. Now in this mood, while he hath hay in his hornes, he is an vnfortunate man who comes neere him; he lays about him like a Hercules furens; spares not his owne Mother if she come in his way: & because no body comes, he fall's most desperately vpon his owne Chimera [...]es; as Fornica­tion to be legitimated hereafter by the Church, not improba­ble; and the whole Communion to be taken away from the Laity.

Ah tender and compassionate Soule! how he zeal's for his brethren! And where was this pittifull zeale, or zealous pitty, when togeather with Transubstantiation and reall Presence, the whole Communion was taken away, not only from the Laity, but from the Clergy too: no more remayning in that Sa­crament, [Page 68]then what you may call for at home. Now truly this is a ridiculous Calumny, not worthy inough to come from a ioynd-stoole, much lesse from a diuinity Chaire; to complaine of taking the drinke away from the Laity, when themselues haue left neither meate nor drinke, neither for Priest, nor Laity.

Howsoeuer the Catholique Church giues the cuppe too, no lesse then the Protestant; for either in the Protestant cuppe there is something else then wyne, or nothing else. If nothing but wyne, this is also giuen to our Catholique Laity when they communicate; i [...] somewhat else, what else, the reall Pre­sence and Transubstantiation once denyed? Some ingredient perhaps of a strong imagination, working with this, or the like spell, crede quod habes, & habes. And how can any man tell that our Laity cannot imagine as strongly, as they can? Or if they cannot, t'is but a fancy difference; and if but a vaine and idle fancy, what haue they gotten more then the Catholique? A matter of nothing, to coole their wyne withall.

His Calumny concerning VVorship of Angells, Traditions, Latin seruice &c.
SECT. XVI.

AFter this he strikes at the worship of Angels, to be re­uenged perhaps of the striking Angell that slew the first-borne in Aegypt; then at Traditions, and tea­ching mens commaund's for doctrines, Latin-seruice, Images &c.

Verily I can hardly belieue that M. Ch. had a stomack strong inough to digest these many, and many tymes sodden Cram­bes, inough to kill fourty maisters; ‘Occidit miseros crambe repetitae magistros.’ and I could easily suspect some other had a great hand in the cookery, and ingested a great part of these ingredients. And is all our expectation come to this? after his ingenuous acknow­ledgment, when tyme was, that Charity maintayned could not be defeated by any forces of Protestancy; nor by any of those accu­stomary attempts and practises, and that notwithstanding he [Page 69]had a way, and had found where, and wherewith he could in­uade them strongly, and beat them from their former hold's; which was to say in effect,

Now, after all this to come forth in a thredbare sute, patcht' vp with old shred's of a number of stale Arguments, and Obie­ctions, ‘Vilia vendentem tunicato scruta popello;’ such as in his first Protestancy he would not haue stoopt' to take vp. Well then I see, any disgrace is credible inough in him, who hath throwne away his Target: and see, I pray you, what the famine and penury of a staru'd cause may do; Iob. Quae prius nole­bat tangere anima mea, nunc prae angustiâ cibi mei sunt; what hereto­fore my soule loathed, now for very need, is become my food.

The truth is, he was resolued vpon other prouision when he made this quarrell his enterprize; nor was he ignorant of these hard exigents, and these narrow passages whereunto the Pro­testant cause hath beene, and is daily driuen by the Catholique; therefore he had determined with himselfe to draw him forth into the wide Champian, and spacious plaines of Socinianisme. Now being cros't in his course (sic visum Superis, so the Gods would haue it) he is fallen into the ordinary beaten way of his Anti-Catholique Ancestry, and (which I assure my selfe, not long since, he hartily disdain'd) now he can vouchsafe to gleane after them. And howsoeuer, since Non-Conformity is now become out of all way of profit and preserment, to say as they say, and thinke with himselfe; Pref. therefore (to vse his words) seeing we see these things done by him, which hardly any man who knew him, could belieue he would do; what wonder, if he goe forward still like to himselfe with as little modesty and moderation, as hi­therto. For now he can call Catholique Honour, and Reuerence to­wards the Images of our Sauiour, or his Saints, Idolatry; and the legall proceeding of Catholique Countries against Heresies by them adiudged capitall crimes, Murder: and forgets in what coast of the world he writeth this; and whose hart he wounds through the sides of Catholiques: and how pretence of Heresy and pretence of Treason is laid by him to the charge of so many [Page 70]lawes and statutes lately prouided in such cases, which remaine in force of vnrepealed decrees. And may not this man write any thing, so he write against Catholiques? But can any man be­lieue that M. Ch. his first defection from Protestancy was so blind and headlong that he considered not whither he went? Or that he knew not the Catholique doctrine concerning the vse of Pictures, a Question so commonly vext and ventilated a­mong Protestants? Or is he the only Animal that in all spon­taneous commigrations foreknow's only the whence, but not the whither? Or was he so wicked and irreligious, that he would make choise of Idolatry? Or conceaued he so meanely of the Profession for which he is now become so desperate a Whiff­ler, that in his iudgement he plac't it behind Idolatry? Or is la­stly the Catholique vse of pictures become Idolatrous, since he recoil'd secondly to Protestancy? And with his reuolt from it, is the Catholique doctrine reuolted from it selfe? And may we not then iustly feare a generall Apostasy in the course of nature, if M. Ch. should chance to turne once more?

His Calumny, That Catholiques execution of Heretiques is Murder, discussed, and retorted.
SECT. XVII.

Pref. DEuises haue beene inuented (by Catholiques) how men may worship Images without Idolatry, & kill innocent men, vnder pretence of Heresy without murder.

Answ. This point was not to be sleightly passed ouer, con­tayning a notorious and fallacious Calumny; wherein also if you obserue well, you shall espy the Socinian mole working vn­derneath: Do but commaund your eyes a little patience.

If Heresy be only the pretended cause, what is the latent & true Cause which is pretexed or veiled vnder the name of He­resy? [Page 71]What is that causa precatarchica, that chiefly & prineipally, though couertly mouing cause, if this be the euident and appa­rent cause only? As when in the age of our Fathers, some lost their liues, vnder pretence of Treason, it was easy to assigne the true cause, practise, or profession of ancient Religion made trea­gon by new Lawes. Let him likewise declare vnto the world the true cause, or causes pretens't and cloak't with the crime of Heresy, in the procedures of Catholikes in those their capitall sentences and executions vpon Heretiques, other then their willfull obstinacy in maintaining hereticall opinions.

I suppose now, that Heresy is punishable by death, euen in the opinion and practise of chiefest Protestants Caluin, Beza, Bellarm. de laicis l. 3. c. 22: and others; being also the knowne and receaued doctrine of Fathers and Councels, grounded vpon expresse testimonies of holy Scriptures. And this, a man would thinke to be the opi­nion of this Aduocate; for euen in that he termes the killing of innocent men, vnder pretence of Heresy, Murder; he should seeme to intimate that death executed vpon Heresy, not the pre­tended, but the true, and primely mouing cause, is not Murder, nor killing of innocent men. As he who calleth Death for Treason only pretended, Murder, supposeth that Treason it selfe truly so named, is iustly punishable by Death; will he then say, that those opinions were not indeed Heresies, but falsely supposed such? or only made criminall vnder the name of He­resy, and as such, or insteed of such punished by death? Which being neuer yet proued, but rather the contrary conuinc't by all the Arguments and profes wherby any opinion can be con­uinc't hereticall, is in no wise now to be assumed.

And yet further, if those opinions haue beene fore-iudged or fore-damned for Heresies; Catholique posterity hauing those precedents, & according to those, sentencing alike the very same Heresies, cannot surely with any probability, be said to haue proceeded to capitall condemnation of such opinions, only vn­der pretence of Heresy. And if, notwithstanding all those pre­cedents of Antiquity, authorities of Fathers, Councels &c. defi­ning such opinions to be Hereticall, what in after ages hath beene done according to those precedent Decrees, and Defini­tions, may be yet traduc't to a coulorable proceeding against [Page 72]such doctrines vnder pretence of heresy: why may not likewise, in the ciuill Gouernment of all Christian Common-wealths throughout the world, capitall proceedings against many cri­mes in this present age, according to Precedents, & Lawes of former tymes, be brought back into dispute, and Iudges of As­sises condemned for their pronouncing capitall sentence against such delinquents, and such and such demeanors, vnder pretence of capitall Crimes, being indeed (would these men say) no crimes at all, or not iustly punish't with death?

And surely, I belieue it will be hard for any Christian, in con­sonancy to Christian doctrine, to thinke that laycke and secu­lar Precedents and Statutes, may not with as litle scruple be re­called into question, as Ecclesiastique Decrees; or to giue a rea­son. why the authority of a Nationall Synod, Senate of Par­lament, should be more inuiolable then the authority of an Oc­cumenicall Councell; especially if we consider and belieue, that this later authority, both in regard of matter & forme, the things decreed, and the manner of decreeing, is of a nearer approach and accesse to diuine Law's, and Ordinances, then the former.

If then, Sentences and Iudgments conformable to Senato­ry or Parlamentory Statutes must not be esteemed colours and pretences only; much more the sentences and executions of the Church, in conformity to Ecclesiasticall orders and Consti­tutions, cannot but absurdly be presumed to be only preten­sions, veilings and maskings of some hidden mistery of malice or pollicy. For when the true cause is both apparent, and of it selfe sufficient to authorize the proceeding of the Magistrate; what need of masking and cloaking causes, when whatsoeuer hidden or concealed cause is lesse valid, and a lesse sufficient warrant for such proceedings, then those publicke and note­rious Decrees and Lawes prouided in such cases?

His Fallacy discouered, his supposall of no Heresy, according to Socinianisme.
SECT. XVIII.

NOtwithstāding all this he hath yet an euasion, though a very secret and close one; somewhat like to the es­capes of those amorously pursued riuers which Poet's fable, vnder the ground; whence, we simple men, while we thinke to follow him in open view, and aboue ground, after the vulgar sense and acceptation of words; run far wide, and short of his meaning, when we thinke we are at his heeles. For if I be not much mistaken, he is euen now close­ly lurking in Socinianisme, while we follow him in the knowne way of Protestancy. Now in good Socinianisme, or true Atheisme, all Heresy as supposed criminall, and in the odious and ordina­ry acception of the word, is only a colour and pretence, hauing in it selfe no reality or substance of crime. For these Nullifidians, as they know no such vertue as Fayth; so they acknowledge no such Vice as Heresy. For in their Sceptique or Pyrrhonian way, all assensions are but opinions, all Visa are but [...], all Vision but Apparition.

Will you haue the Character of a Socinian? Take it in briefe, and for this tyme in part. He is a thing, that neither see's, nor hear's, nor smelles, nor feeles, nor tast's any thing, nor vnder­stands any thing; but is only so affected, as though he saw, heard, felt &c. He is therefore, a quasi animal, and a quasi man, and a quasi Christian; nothing without a quasi, or a quasi nothing, and a quasi any thing. He will giue no iudgment at all of any thing: he will not say the Crow is blacke to day, for feare he may say to morrow this a swan; nor that hony is sweet to day, least it may seeme gall to morrow. For all obiects affect their senses, not by what they are in themselues, but as the senses are formerly affected; which affection or disposition may vary daily; which variance or mutation, because they foresee not, therefore they can promise you no opinion of theirs for to mor­row, [Page 74]no more then the Wether-cock can tell you which way it shall stand when the wind blowes next.

They deny as peremptorily as they can, that there are ten Predicaments; for whatsoeuer may fall vnder sense, or vnder­standing belongs to one Predicament [...], nothing but relation: So Fayth then with such men is but a Fancy, as the obiect that beget's it but a phantome, a thing not so, but only seeming so. Aske him then what he think's of any Christian, doctrine, whether he belieue three persons one God, the Sonne of God Incarnate, or that he was borne of a Virgin &c? rather then he will seeme headlong, or a spend-thrift of his iudgment; rather then he will be thought so vnwise, he will (as a lesse dis­grace) be thought no Christian: therefore he will answere you so very readily, as you shall see, he doth it easily, [...]. Ti's no more so, then so; Or neither so, nor so. With this briefe sentence of abso­lution, they quit all Heresy; nor will it be prophane in them, to whom nothing is holy, to say to Heresy, smiling sweetly vpon her as she stand's at the barre, mulier vbi sunt qui te accusant; nemo te condemnauit? woman where, or who are thy accuser's? and her to answere, nemo Domine, none but Papists, my Lord; no Socinian, my Lord: Neque ego te condemno, nor do I condemne thee; thou art as true to me as the most Orthodoxe opinion of Christianity, Vade in pace.

Fallacy of Diuision.
SECT. XIX.

ANother Fallacy I meet with euen in this place which we may rank with Fallacies of Diuision. For where his Aduersaries discourse hath his Arguments or rea­sons of proofe in ioynt connexion, and immediate subsecution of his Position; there this Sophister seuer's and de­uides the proofe from the Position, disioynting and dismem­bring them into so many senerall and disparate propositions, without any relation or discursiue consecution of the one from the other: which Fallacy though it may seeme to fall naturally [Page 75]from the spring and spirit of Heresy, and Schisme, which in their very Notion and Etimology import diuison; yet I make no doubt, but it was voluntary heere, and of choyce, hauing in it the Authors ends, which were, I doubt not, to weaken his Aduersaries discourse; as if he would vnty the faggot, the more easily to breake the single stick's, which in the whole faggot he could not do.

His aduersaries position was this: The doctrine of Protestants followed closely and coherently to it selfe, induceth Socinianisme; and par­ticularly their doctrine denying infallibility of the Visible Church of Christ. This proposition he proueth immediatly: For if the infallibility of such a publique authority be once impeached, what remaineth but that euery man is giuen ouer to his owne wit, and discourse &c. This reason he sorth with declaring, and confirming by other reasons with close compacture, and consistency of discourse, because it was strong, ‘(— Pede pes, iunctus (que) viro vir,)’ he fraudulently dissolues and discomposeth; hoping perchance by a semblable sleight and finesse, the like fortune and successe of that one suruiuing Roman Champion, against the three Al­bane Curiaty, whome by a guilefull flight, hauing deuided by competent distances, he return's vpon them so singled, & slew them one after another, whom in ioynt combat he durst not deale withall.

Which hope notwithstanding hath frustrated this Cham­pion; nor could he indeed in reason expect the happy successe of the Roman combattant, who fight's against Rome, against whose Fayth the power of hell shall not preuaile. Do but cast your Eye, if you please, vpon these reasons, euen as they lye a­part and loosely, and of purpose scattered by this Aduocate, ‘Inuenies etiam disiecti membra Quiritis;’ you shall find in euery limbe a Catholique verity, too strong for him to breake though single. As where his Aduersary sayth; for if this infallibility be once impeach't &c. he omits the connecting particle (for) importing a reason of the immediately preceding position, thus: You say againe confidently, that if this infallibility &c. Pres.

Againe when his Aduersary adioyneth in confirmation of this reason; For if the true Church may erre &c. we are still deuolued [Page 76]either vpon the priuate spiret or else vpon naturall wit, for determining what Scriptures contatu [...], true or false doctrine &c. He hath it thus: You say thirdly with sufficient cousidence, Pref. that, i [...] the true Church may erre &c. Where his Aduersary addeth in further confirmation of this; And indeed take away the authority of Gods Church, no man can be assured, that any booke of Scripture was written by diuine inspiration &c. this man thus: Pref. You say fourthly with conuenient boldnes, that this infallible authority of your Church being de [...]yed, no man can be assu­red &c. Where you may also obserue a false trick by the way, to make his Aduersaries words carry a more odious sound to Pro­testant eares: for he sayth not, take away the authority of our Church, but, take away the authority of the Church of God; which he therfore the rather sayth (God's Church) then (our Church) because he takes not that here as granted by the Protestant, that our Church, is Gods Church; but only shew's heere the necessity of an infallible Church, which soeuer that be.

Nor will it help this Aduocate, that soone after his Aduer­sary as it were directing his speach to Catholiques, calleth that Church, our Church; for to Catholiques this needed no fur­ther proofe, who belieue it already. Whence with them he might presume it, as granted, according to that of S. Paul, sapien­tiam lequimurinter perfectos, we vtter wisedome (diuine truth) among those who belieue it; reseruing that doctrine (that our Catholique Roman Church is the true Church of God,) to the proper place, as to be proued against Protestants. But you shall take him very often faultring in this Fallacy. Fallacy: ante-dating his Aduersaries order, and therefore seldome answering to the sub­iect in hand; whereof hereafter instances will occurre very plentifully.

He wil say perhaps, he hath fore-inserted his Aduersaries discourse entire, and as it lye's in his owne Booke; but to this I say againe, he answer's is not as it lyes there, but misordreth it, to his aduantage, euen as formerly ordred by himselfe. For ac­cording to faire play and ingenuous behauiour, although he might do well, in answering the whole discourse by retaile, or by parts; yet he should haue taken notice of the relation and connexion of one part with another; and so haue answered rea­son's as reasons, positions as positions, and not haue made euery [Page 77]reason, a position. I know he hath learned to analize a Dis­course better then so, and would esteeme it poore Anatomy, only to dissect limbe from limbe, ioynt from ioynt, and neuer shew the naturall commissure and compacture of limbe with limbe, & ioynt with ioynt: nor distinguish them according to their true Nomenclature, and their seuerall, both proper, abso­lute, & relatiue functions.

But he, as though the dissected were only bellua multorum capitum, a beast with many head's; so he lectures vpon legs, thighs, belly, eyes, eares, armes &c. all vnder one appellation of Head, as though all the parts and members were heads; for iust so he hath anatomiz'd his Aduersaries context of speach, making euery part, as it were a seuerall head; and why? Because as in a naturall body, by reason of that due order and compo­sure of members, a certaine mutuall intelligence of influences and sympathies of the members betweene themselues is enter­tained; of which mutuall intelligence and influence depends the life and vigor of euery part, and ioindy of the who [...]e body: so in the body of a rationall discourse, there is the like influence of one part into another, and one part vpholds & strengthneth the other: and to take away this mutuall correspondence and relation, is to take away the very harmony of discourse; & none who know's what he doth, will do it but he who intends to marre the musicke, or loues discords and iarrings better then harmony.

For to this purpose which I haue said (what other can be imagined) he hath deuided those reasons and confirmations of his Aduersaries position, into so many heads or propositions, distinguishing them not only by numbers, as, you say first, Pref. and you say againe; you say thirdly, then fourthly, then fiftly; but also by seuerally varying the odious phrase; as you say confidently inough; then, you say with sufficient confidence; thirdly, you say with conuenient boldnes; fourthly, you say with confidence in abundance, when all is in­deed but one thing said, the Proposition with some few proo­fes adioyned. Yet the fauourers of his cause and person, would easily pardon this poore peece of Sophistry, or waue it at the least, had he achieued his intent by this; but now Cuibone? what hath he got by this? [Page 78]

With so much ado, with so great expence of honesty and inge­nuity laid out vpon a miserably Fallacy, to do nothing, is in­tollerable: had he yet ouerthrowne those scattered forces, or made something of his owne dissections, more then a dissector of an oxe can doe; now for my part, I had no other drift, but only to note his Fallacies and Calumnies; and to do more in shewing his weake attempts, vpon these disranked and disse­cted parts, as they are singly encount'erd by him, would proue an enterprise, much more easy then needfull. Yet because I haue shew'n his insufficiency against his first Prosection, which is his Aduersaries Position, whereof the ensuing members are (as I haue said) the proofes; I will only employ a dash of pen vpon what he hath against the rest, and the rather because I as­sure my selfe that euen in these too, I shall meet with Calum­nies, and Fallacies; these being indeed as the very soule, or the naturall, and proper language of his pen, without which it can­not speake.

His Answers to his Aduersaries Arguments, Fallacious, or none.
SECT. XX.

Pref. YOu say (sayth he) againe, if this infallibility be once impeach't, euery one is giuen ouer to his owne wit and discourse. To this he answer's by a distinction: Giuen ouer to his owne wit and dis­course, not guiding it selfe by Scriptures, he denyes this to be conse­quent to infallibility of the Church so impeach't; giuen ouer to discourse, that is, right reason (sanaratio say the Socinians) groun­ded on diuine reuelation, and common notions, & consequent deductions from them, he denies this consequent to be incon­nenient, though it follow of the infallibility of the Church de­nied.

Answ. Now this euasion his Aduersarie foresaw, and ther­fore [Page 79]barred the passage, which barre this nimble Aduocate slily skip's ouer, taking no notice of it. The barre of preuention was this; And talke not here (so his Aduersatie) of Scripture, for if the true Church may erre either in defining what Scripture is Canonicall, or in de­liuering the sense and meaning thereof, we are still deuolued either vpon the priuate spirit, or esse vpon naturall wit, and iudgment. What place then for discourse guided by diuine reuelation, in col [...]erence of their doctrine, who take away the meanes of knowing what reuelation is diuine? Either materially in regard of the Canoni­call Scripture; or formally in regard of the true sense and in­terpretation of such Scriptures, whereof neither the one nor the other can be afcertained without the infallible authority of the Church, the only meanes to arriue to this certainty.

Wherefore if the man be in his wits, he will find out his guide, and know him to be a sure guide, before he put himselfe into his iourney; otherwise both the guide and guided may fall into a ditch, whence neither his Logick-rules, nor all his conse­quent deductions, with twenty ropes to boot, will euer be strong inough to pluck him out. Now the only guide which guideth reason by Scripture is the holy Spirit, the only true and sure interpreter of holy Scriptures. This holy spirit is not pro­mised to any priuate man, but to the Church it is promised; therefore in this Church is infallibly to be found: whence he that followeth this company of men, not only followeth not a company of beasts, Pref. which this Aduocate would insinuate the Church may be, but he followeth the holy Ghost, guiding the Church.

But by this you may see the man miscrably tortured by vnauoidable truth, euen, maugre himselfe, forc't to confesse what his Aduersary teacheth, and euen here relaps't into his di­lemma which he may seeme to haue laid of purpose to catch him; for he is fallen vpon the Scripture as interpreted by euery man's naturall with and iudgment, or the priuate spirit; By which touch-stone, the Priuate spirit with his Logick-rules &c. he will also try euery spirit, 1. Joan. 4. and by his ignorantly applying the words of the Apostle (Belieue not euery spirit) to this purpose, shew's plainly, how sure an Interpreter he is of holy Scriptu­re, togeather with his right reason, and common notions, and Logick-rules.

For surely in good Logick the vniuersall and distributi [...]e signe omnis, all, euery, importeth number and multiplicity, ther­fore he sayth, Belieue not euery spirit but trie the spirits; as if he said, of many spirits belieue not euery spirit; because the holy spi­rit is but one spirit, from which one spirit, spirits and euery one of spirits are participations and deriued spirits. Now that one spirit (which is so one, that it cannot be a part of number, like as diuine vnity, or the vnity of diuine nature, is no part of num­ber) that one spirit I say, is not to be tried; for it cannot be but a true spirit: otherwise no spirit could be knowne to be true, if that one spirit could befalse, which is the only rule wherby to trie all spirits; but of the multitude of spirits, or partaking spirits some do, and all may, lye. Of which number of lying spirits, are the Apostate Angells fince their defection from the spirit of truth; and those false Prophets in whose mouth's those lying spirits were speakers. Such also were those Pseudoprophets, v­pon occasion of whom S. Iohn forewarneth Christians not to be­lieue euery spirit, but to try spirits. And who were those false Pro­phets or Apostles, those lying spirits? They were those of whom he had said before, that they had beene in the Church, and were gone out of the Church, and therefore became lying spirits, oftentimes actually lying, always inclined and prepa­red to lye, and so neuer to be belieued.

For as that first reuolt from God, the spirit of truth, was the originall cause why those mutinous spirits became lyar's: so Apostasy from the Church of God, in whom the same spirit of truth presides, is the generall origen, and extraction of all false Prophets and Heretiques. As therefore that one prime spirit, is none of those spirits, euery one of which is to be tryed, but by which euery numerable spirit is to be proued: so the spirit which guideth the Church, is not a spirit to be tried, but that by which euery priuat spirit must be examined, and tried. In which sense also it is most truly said, Prima Sedes, the prime sea is iudged by none: therfore it is true againe, that the Church of Christ, the Catholique Church, is the only competent iudge of it selfe, according to that receaued principle of naturall reason, rectum est iudex sui, & obliqui: what is straight of it selfe, both shew's it selfe to be straight, and what is crooked, to be so. He [Page 81]therefore who will presume to reforme the Church in doctrine of faith, wherein the spirit of truth is her guid and teacher, Dauiel 12. he shall be the starre, which would giue light to the Sunne, but none of those who shall shine in perpetuas aternitates.

For I would aske any man, only sober, and in his wits, if the Church of God may haue erred, either in determining Scriptures, or the true meaning of them, (which point concer­ning Scriptures I specifie, to preuent all refuge to trial by Scrip­tures) by what other spirit shall this spirit of the Church be tried? And I would gladly looke vpon that face of Impudence, that would assume to it selfe, what it denyeth to the Church of God: and when I shall haue found him, I shall know for certaine, that he is one of those Antichrists, of whom the same Apostle, Et nunc Antichristi multi facti sunt. Ex nobis prodierunt: Joan. 2. & 4. and euen now many are turned Antichrists; they went out from vs. Yea by this very brand, I will know them, this indeleble chara­cter of antichrist, to goe out of the Church, & then to question the spirit and doctrine of the Church.

It would be worth their labour, yet once to shew, when the Church of Rome went out of the Church of Christ, where she left it at her departure; as we shew, what Church Arrius went out of, whence Pelagius, and Nestorius &c. whence of this later age, Luth [...]r, and Peter Martyr, and Caluin, and the rest. Yet besides this character of a false Prophet, which is his terminus à quo, the whence they goe out, the Apostle hath giuen vs another, their terminus ad quem, the whither they goe, going out of the Church; Multi pseudoprophetae exierunt in mundum; many false Pro­phets are gone out into the world; and yet more plainly: Ipsi de mundo sunt, ide [...] de mundo loquntur▪ & mundus eos audit: They are of the world, they are become worldlings, the world is their talke, flesh & blood their discourse; intimating euen by this, that He­reticall doctrine; is carnall doctrine, the language of corrupt Nature, the discourse of flesh & blood, and therefore the world harken's to their doctrine, as being of a carnall spirit, symbo­lizing with these teachers.

Indeed, the Society of Christians, is not the world, nor any h [...]m [...]genious part of the world; of whom therfore our Sauiours words are truly vnderstood, V [...]s de mund [...] nonesti [...], se [...]g [...] [...]ligi vo [...] [Page 82]de mundo; you are not of the world, but I haue chosen you out of the world. Whence the whole mortall kind of man is suffi­ciently deuided by these two names, the World, and Christen­dome; therfore, that going out of the Church, signified by those words, prodierunt ex nobis, they went out from vs, could be no whither else, but into the world, there being no third place, or family of mortall men to go vnto; therefore all Heretiques are a part of that faction, the World; and therefore being indued & swayed, and guided by the spirit of the world, which is a lying spirit, they cannot be competent Iudges or Examiners of the spirit of the Church, or any doctrine of fayth, or interpretation of Scriptures. But as the Church Triumphant shall iudge the world and condemne it, and shall not be iudged by it; so the Church now Militant, is inuested with the like authority and iurisdiction towards mortall men of this world, to iudge and condemne the world, that is, all those who are seuered from her Society, and not to be iudged by them. Her doctrine there­fore is the sole Iudicature both of it selfe, and all other crooked and oblique opinions. Wherefore the counsaile of S. Iohn to try spirits, is to trie them by the spirit and doctrine of the Church; for vnles the spirit of the Church were supposed the spirit of truth, they could not haue beene iudged false Prophets for go­ing out of the Church, no nor for opposing the doctrine of the Church.

Moreouer, that by which another thing is tried, as by a rule, must needs be supposed more perfect in regard of Iudica­ture, then the thing tried: but it is absurd to thinke that the spirit of a priuate man is more perfect in nature of Iudicature, then the spirit of the Church; therefore S. Iohn neuer aduised priuate men to try the spirit of the Church.

Lastly, this very command or aduise, Try euery spirit, is the aduise of the Church it selfe, in the person of S. Iohn a principall pillar of the Church; but no man can be so silly, as to thinke that the Church aduiseth priuate men, to try her spirit (and least of all can Heretiques challenge any such authority.) Hereti­ques also are subiects of the Church, euen in that, they are, at the least, characterically Christians, which character of subie­ction they can neuer wipe out whersoeuer they run; they are [Page 83]euer subiects, though rebells; therfore their calling the Church to question and triall, is mere presumption, and an act of rebel­lion. No Catholique presumeth to trie the spirit or doctrine of the Church; nay euery Catholique trieth his owne spirit and doctrine by that of the Church; therefore a Catholique, as such, hath no priuate opinion of fayth, but all Catholique, that is, the same with the whole Catholique Church.

The Catholique makes no choyce of doctrines of fayth but taketh such as are giuen him: he is Gods beggar, and there­fore no chooser. Ego autem mendicus sum & pauper, I am a beggar and poore. Thus euery Catholique is taught both to say and belieue. The Heretique makes choyce of what he will hold with the Church, takes what he list's, and refuseth what he list's not take. And this is to be euen Etimologically an Here­tique, and an Heretique formally, no lesse in what he takes, then in what he refuses. For what he takes he chooseth to take vpon his owne discretion, not vpon the credit of the Church, nor formally from the Church: therefore he is an Heretique in all, euen in the points of diuine fayth, which he holdeth with the Church, not of the Church; and therfore holdeth nothing with diuine fayth, because he is still a chooser of what he holds, and so an Heretique.

Another Text of S. Iohn, by this Aduocate corrupted, and misinterpreted.
SECT. XXI.

WHat this all-trying spirit can do of himselfe with­out the spirit of the Church, will appeare by his singular talent in interpreting Scriptures; nor shall I swarue from my subiect in this way, for I shall demonstrate that all his interpretations, are Sophismes, wily and fallacious detorsions of Scripture, from their true sense, to his owne crooked ends.

Pref. S. Iohn (sayth he) giues a rule to all Christians to make this triall by, to consider whether they confesse Iesus to be the Christ, that is, [Page 84]the guide of their fayth, and Lord of their actions. So he.

Answ. The words of S. Iohn are these; In hoc cognoscitur spiri­tus Dei &c. In this the spirit of God is knowne; Euery spirit that confesseth Iesus Christ to haue come in fleth, is of God; and euery spirit that dissolueth Iesus is not of God; and this is Antichrist. The affirmatiue part of which copulate sentence, as some other the like occur­ring in the Epistles of S. Iohn, is to be vnderstood in sensu formali, as thus. Euery spirit which coufesseth Iesus Christ to haue taken flesh, as confessing this truth is of God, who is the author and warrant of this truth; therefore of him who confesseth this supernaturall truth, it may be truly said, Caro & sanguis non reuelauit hoc tibi, flesh and blood hath not reuealed this vnto thee, being a truth aboue the conceipt of flesh and blood; which restriction to a formall sense, is both sufficient, and often tymes necessary for the verifying of many the like sentences of [...]oly Scripture. Wherefore although the negatiue, to deny Iesus Christ to haue taken flesh, be a sufficient note whereby to discerne a false spirit; yet the affirmatiue, to confesse Iesus Christ to haue come in flesh, is but a part of the rule. The other part is the character of Christian Charity, as the same Apostle teacheth in the same Chapter; Om­nis qui diligit, ex Deo natus est: Euery one that loueth is borne of God; therefore these two rules we find conioyned in the prece­dent Chapter; hoc est mandatum [...]ius, vt credanius in nomine silij eius Iesu Christi, & diligamus alterutrum. This is his commaundment that we belieue in the name of his sonne Iesus Christ, and that we loue one another; for in these two vertues, indeed a Chri­stian is consummate. For fayth in Iesus Christ, the sonne of God incarnate, includeth all points of fayth, because it implyeth the beliefe of all that Iesus Christ hath taught, or teacheth, ei­ther by himselfe, or by his Church, according to that saying of of his, Qui vos audit, me audit: in which sense also the affirmatiue proposition of the Apostle, Euery one who confesseth that Iesus Christ came in flesh &c. hath a true construction, euen without restri­ction: but then it is nothing to the purpose of this Aduocate, who by this rule would exclude the necessity of beliefe of o­ther points of fayth proposed by the Church, to make this con­fession of Christ to haue come in flesh, the rule whereby to try spi­rits. As therefore that other cognoisance of a Christian, mutuall [Page 85]Charity, according to that of our Sauiour, In hoc cognoscent omnes &c. all men shall know you to be my disciples by this ensig­ne, or character of mutuall loue, excludeth not that of fayth, or the confession of the sonne of God Incarnate, from being a rule whereby to discerne spirits, and to know who are true Christians: So this rule of Fayth in Christ, excludeth not that of Charity, and neither of them, nor both exclude a third, gi­uen by the same Apostle, Qui nouit Deum audit nos; Cap. 4.qui non est ex Deo, non audit nos: in hoc cognoscimus spiritum veritatis, & spiritum erroris. See heere an expresse rule, to try spirits by: He who know's God, heares vs, he who is not of God, heareth not vs: in this we know the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error. Now it is most absurd to think, the force of that rule to be limited and confined with the age of the Apostles; therefore by that (vs) is vnderstood the Church: or if they were to be heard of posterity in their writings, we cānot heare them so without an interpreter; which interpreter as before hath beene proued, can be no other of infallible autho­rity, but the Church.

Now that the Apostles were to continue in their posteri­ty of Apostles, Euangelists &c. that is, Preachers and Teachers of Christs Ghospell, Doctors, and Pastors &c. ad consummatio­nem Sanctorum, vntill the number of Saints were consummate, that is, to the end of the world, appeareth playne by the words of the Apostle to the Ephesians; Ephes. 4. therefore to the hearing and be­lieuing those succeding Apostles, Doctors &c. is extended the obligation of succeding ages. For can we be so senseles, as to thinke, those succeeding Doctors haue imposed vpon them the obligation of teaching, and not other Christian subiects the o­bligation of hearing? Or was our Sauiour so imprudent an Oe­conomus, or dispenser of his gift's and talents, that he would furnish those, whom he had designed hearers and learners in his Christian schoole, with greater sufficiency for discerning spi­rits, or greater assurance of not erring, then those, quos dedit, whom he appointed to be their Maisters and Teachers? Obedite prapositis vestris & subiacete ijs; obey your Prelates, and be subiect to them. And wherein are they Praepositi, Prelates, or Gouer­nours? Certainly in those things, for which they must render account to God; which are things appertaing to their soules; [Page 86] for they are to render account for your soules, sayth the Apostle in that place. To them therfore appertaine spirituall instructions, and all spirituall directions; to them the triall and discretion of spirits. Or, shall the subiects first try their Prelates spirits, yea the highest Prelature and authority on earth, before they obey? Is this to be directed, or to direct? Or, who is heere, the Pre­late, he who is tryed, or he who tryeth? And, is not this grosse Anarchy, and Confusion? Haue these spirits any conceipt of Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy? Or do they belieue there is any such thing, as Order and Subordination in the greatest Empire and kingdom vpon earth, the Church of God?

By what hath beene said, it appeareth that S. Iohn, by gi­uing that rule of triall, the Confession of the sonne of God in flesh, neuer intended to exclude other rules. Therefore this is a miserable and fallacious consequence which this Aduocate in­sinuates, saying; S. Iohn giues this rule of triall, to consider whether men confesse Iesus to be the Christ, not whether they acknowledge the Pope to be his Vicar. Ergo, to examine whether they acknowledge, this is no part of triall. This consequence I say, is no better then this; We must try mens spirits by considering whether they confesse Iesus to be the Christ. Ergo, not whether they confesse that Christ dyed for the sinnes o [...] the world; or whether he rose from death or no &c. Now hath not this man good reason to rely so much vpon his neuer-failing rules of Logick, in matters of Fayth, who makes such goodly consequences? I can in charity belieue he hath more Logick then he makes shew of in this worke, other­wise I see no obligation he hath to rely vpon it so confidently.

You may likewise note his skill in Logick by this other con­sequence, Pref. which he likewise insinuates. S. Paul sayth, try all things, and hold fast that which is good: Ergo, we must try all things after this manner, which S. Paul teacheth not; we must try all things by our owne spirit, or the Scripture interpreted by our owne spirit, with the help of neuer-failing rules of Logick. Or thus, Try all things: Ergo, try euen that by which all things are to be tryed. Try the spirit of the Church; try the spirit of God; for without this spirit of truth, which we know not where it is but in the Church, it is most certaine that neither Scriptures can be vnderstood, nor any other certaine rule imagined by which [Page 87]we may try any spirit, or doctrine of fayth: So the aduise of the Apostle should be de impossibili, of a thing impossible, if he adui­sed vs to try all things, by any other rule. And as well might this Logician infer, out of this principle, try all things, thus; Try all things whether they be crooked or straight by that which is certainly straight: Ergo, try that which is certainly straight, by that which may be crooked. And as well he might infer thus: Season all things with salt: Ergo, season salt too; for with what other thing shall salt be seasoned? Si sal euanuerit, in quo s [...]lietur? So likewise, if that all-trying spirit may erre, by what other spi­rit shall it be tryed?

His fallacious Interpretation of a text of S. Peter, 1.3. vers. 15.
SECT. XXII.

AFter he had abused the testimony of S. Paul, it was to be expected S. Peter should not escape. He would be their second Nero, ioyne them in the execution of a morall death, much more tyrannicall then that of Nero; which though it could deuide their soules from their bo­dies, yet it could neuer seuer their soules from Christian truth, and a truth which themselues had taught; the inseparability of truth, and diuine authority from the pillar of truth.

Pref. I say no more (sayth this Aduocate) then S. Peter sayth, in commaunding all Christians to giue a reason of their Hope.

Answ. But the truth is, S. Peter sayth not so, nor is it proba­ble he had any intent to ingage Christians in a greater obliga­tion then Christ himselfe had imposed, which was only to confesse him vpon due occasions, neuer to deny him, or the truth of his doctrine. S Peters words are these, Dominum autem san­ctificate in cordibus vestris, parati &c. Sanctify our Lord in your harts, all way ready to giue satisfaction, as the Latin version hath it, [...], ready to exhibite your Apology to euery man who requireth a reason of your Hope. Now, who seeth not a large difference betweene giuing a reason, and requiring [Page 88]it; or betweene exhibiting an Apology, or other satisfaction to him who requireth a reason, and giuing him a reason: There are other way's of satisfaction and Apology, besides giuing a rea­son, at the least particular reasons for the seuerall doctrines of fayth, as this Aduocate seemes to require, who would haue no­thing belieued, but after a particular tryall and discussion of it. So he that answered only, Christianus sum. I am a Christian, was no way reprehensible by this aduise, or precept of S. Peter. Is not he ready to Apologize, to defend his religion, who is ready to die for it? which a man may do without giuing any other par­ticular reason of his beliefe, by his only confessing, or professing it vpon fit occasions.

Or if he vnderstand an obligation imposed by the Apostle vpon all Christians to giue a reason of their beliefe; what meanes he? That euery Christian is bound to giue, or be able to giue a reason of euery point of Christian beliefe? How is it credible, that such a morall impossibility should be of obliga­tion? Or doth he indeed suppose, that no Christian is bound to belieue more, then that whereof he can giue a reason? Now then, shall he say with truth, I belieue in God the Father, with the rest as followeth in the Apostles Creed? For surely he inbound not to say, he belieues what he belieues not; and as sure it is, he is not able to giue a particular reason of euery article of this Creed. The Socinian will say, he is bound to belieue no more, What sayth M [...]Ch. whome in this Treatise of his, we suppose a Christian, vntill he declare himselfe a little more expressely, & a very litle will serue the turne?

But let him forme his discourse out of this text of S. Peter; Euery man is bound to giue a reason of his beliefe, or Hope: Ergo, Euery man is bound to giue a particular reason for euery point of his beli [...]fe, or Hope when will he make good this illation by his neuer failing rules of Logick? Againe if euery Christian were charged with this obligation, to giue a reason to euery one requiring it; what kind of reason should that be? Must it need's be a conuincing reason, and satisfaction, not only in it selfe, but respectiuely in regard of the requirers vnderstanding, or disposition? What if he be a Iew, or Infidell, or Socinian? shall I belieue no more then that wherof I can giue a conuincing & satisfactory reason [Page 89]to a Iew, Infidell, or Socinian? Let him tell vs, what kind of reason he requires, that we may know the obligation he layes vpon vs. In the meane tyme, I doubt not to auerre and proue that the meanest Catholique is able to giue a more satisfactory account, of euery point of Catholique faith, then the most lear­ned Protestant can, of any one. As thus, why do you belieue three Persons one God? because, sayth the Catholique, I belieue the Catholique Church, which teacheth me so to belieue. And so of the rest.

Now because no Protestant giues, or can giue this reason, in coherence with his Protestant principles, of necessity he giues a worse, if any. For whether his reason be his owne, or any other humane discourse whatsoeuer, independant of this authority of the Church, or secluding it; or be it Scripture, yea Canoni­call Scripture, interpreted by himselfe or any priuate Spirit, he giueth no better an account, then an Arrius, Eutychius, Donatist &c. hath, or might haue giuen, in defence of their Heresies. Thus much concerning the abused authority of S. Peter.

VVords of our Sauiour fallaciously abused.
SECT. XXIII.

HEnce he proceedeth with some pretty Rhetorique & method of blasphemy (if you marke him,) as hauing first prophaned the testimony of S. Iohn, after him S. Paul, next S. Peter the Vicar and Viceroy of Christ in the Christian world,

the very next house is a fire; it was not probable he could stay himselfe in this precipice. Lastly therefore he prophaneth Christ himselfe: so truly may it be said of Heresy; Inclinata est ad mortem domus [...]ius, & ad infer [...]s semitae ei [...]s; Prou. 2. Her howse is han­ging towards death, and her path's lead to hell.

Our Sauiours words are these; Luc. 12. When you see a cloud rising from the West, you say, we shall haue raine, and so it happen's. And when the Southwind blow's you say the summer appreaches. Hypocrites, know you to [Page 90]discerne the face of heauen and earth; and do you not discerne this tyme (of my presence or comming?) But why also do you not discerne what is iust by your selues? That is, as if he had said, you who are so skilfull, as to read the prognostick signes of the heauens, and by them foretell future euents of weather or seasons; why do you not by your selues, that is, by those internall signes and tokens of your soules, remorse of conscience, secret inclinations, and other the like indicatures of what is iust or vniust, why do you not by these discerne what is iust? And what affinity hath this discourse of our Sauiour with this Aduocates application, that therefore, euery man must of himselfe examine and try by his owne dis­course, or Scriptures interpreted by himselfe, what is true do­ctrine in points of supernaturall beliefe? What tokens or prog­nosticks haue men for these? What light of naturall reason, or what indicature of inward motions, or naturall inclinations, shew the truth of supernaturall mysteries?

And not without some Fallacy hath this interpreter made choice to translate, Fallacy. iustum, [...], right, rather then iust; why of your selues iudge you not what is right? because right, hath a more apparent reference to matter of doctrine in this positure of words (of which doctrine he would haue euery man to be his owne iudge) then iust hath, which rather implyeth a relation to morall actions.

Another sentence of our Sauiour abused.
SECT. XXIIII.

TO as litle purpose, and with asmuch violence and irre­uerence, are those words of our Sauiour. If the blind lead the blind &c. applied by him. For whether in probabili­ty follow the blind, they who follow the Church of God, as their guide, to which is promis't the spirit of truth; or they, who follow either their owne priuate spirit, or naturall reason and discourse, or the Scripture interpreted by these, which is to them as blind, as the interpreters of it? But by these goodly expositions, and applications of Scriptures, you see how substantially they are furnish't, for examining and try­ing [Page 91]spirits, and doctrines of fayth by Scriptures, and naturall discourse, and neuer-failing rules of Logick. And, Good Syr, would a man euer wish, that any man should make himselfe more ri­diculous, then to take neuer-failing, or infallibility from the Church of God, and giue it to Logick-rules? This is to robbe Pe­ter indeed, but sure it is not to pay Paul.

His false Logick, or misapplication of Logick-rules.
SECT. XXV.

OBserue now forth with, in the close of misapplyed Scri­pture, his fallacious misapplication of Logick pre­cepts, and Dialectique forme of discourse. Great confi­dence, no doubt, he had in the ignorance, or negli­gence of his Reader. He hoped to lye hid in these brakes of thorny and intricate Paralogismes, to appeare only in gay flowers of soft language, Mollit sermones suos extranea; Pron. 2. so Heresy is wont to soften, and file her language. Howsoeuer he giues me a warrant by his example, to syllogize his loose Periods, & shape them into Logicall-formes. Which, for my part I professe to do, with much more fidelity then he doth; wherein I will appeale to the iudgement of other men, yea and especially of those his more learned and more sober Co-academiques.

Thus then he argueth: Discourse truly so called misguideth no man: Drawing conclusions out of Scriptures by good consequence, is dis­course truly so called. Ergo, drawing Conclusions out of Scripture &c. misguideth no man. To this I answere, that although Discourse truly so called misguideth no man, ex vi formae, by that forme of lawfull discourse; yet ex vi materiae, in regard of the matter, it often doth: But, drawing of conclusions out of Scripture by good conse­quence is discourse truly so called; this I distinguish. Drawing them out of Scriptures formally taken, that is, truly vnderstood, and this by good consequence, is discoursetruly so called, I yeild; Out of the Scriptures taken only materially, that is, out of the words of Scripture falsely interpreted, I deny it. For it is only an ap­parent and fallacious discourse; therefore not discourse truly so called.

Now, to his Confirmation: The principles whence we draw these conclusions, that is, the holy Scriptures are agreed on by all, to be infallibly true; what is that to the purpose, if it be not agreed, in what sense they are true? Therefore I say, the premises may be true, the consequence lawfull and good, and so the conclusion true, according to some sense of the premises: but because that sense may be a false sense, though the premises of themselues be true; therefore the discourse, or whole Syllo­gifme may deceaue and lead into error; yea euen so much the more, because the consequence is good.

But his Aduersary hath told him, in the 4. Chap. of this Pamphlet (so he, still like to himselfe, nibling, and detracting from his Directors credit) That from truth, no man can by good consequence inferre falshood. He tels him, what S. Iohn hath told long since, Omne mendacium ex veritate non est: no lye is conse­quent from truth; which is most true, as vnderstood formally, no lye is consequent of truth, as it is truth; but from a materiall truth, a lye may follow. The Scriptures are always materially true, that is, true in themselues, and from them as true, no fal­shood can be consequent; but they may be, and are commonly falsely sensed and interpreted, and that purposely, by Hereti­ques; therefore from them as falsely interpreted, falshood may, and doth follow, euen by good consequence.

Well then, to open the Fallacy (Vlceris os) and so to let out the corruption: Scriptures falsely interpreted are not the Word of God, but the word of man, the false Interpreter; therefore they who are guided by Scriptures so interpreted (and now the word of man) may be misguided, and are so, euen by those Scri­ptures (now not holy, but prophaned by man.)

His fallacious Answere, or Euasion to his Aduersaries Arguments, conuincing the necessity of an infallible Church.
SECT. XXVI.

Pref. YOu say thirdly with sufficient confidence. If the true Church may erre in defining what Scriptures be canonicall, or in deliuering the sense thereof, we must follow either priuat spirit, or naturall wit, & iudgement, and by them examine what Scriptures containe true or false doctrine. Thus the Aduocate: and what sayth he to this? All this (fayth he) is apparently vntrue, neither can any proofe of it be pre­tended.

Answ. Iust so, Bellarmine thou lyest. Behold an Alexander loo­sing the Gordian knot. What? can no proofe be pretended? Sure­ly a sufficient diuision or enumeration of parts, hath been estee­med a sufficient proofe, as excluding out of the thing deuided, whatsoeuer is not contained in some part or member of the di­uision; as if Bachelour. Maister Doctour, be a sufficient diuision, or enumeration of the Degrees giuen in the Vniuersity, he who is proued to haue taken no one of these degrees, is sufficiently proued, to haue taken no degree in the Vniuersity. His Aduer­sary argues thus; The authority which must determine what Scripture is Canonicall, or what is the true sense of such Scripture, is either the Church of God, or priuate spirit, or naturall wit, and iudgment. Not the Church, according to Protestants, therefore either the priuate spirit, or na­tural wit &c. If this diuision be good, then the inference is appa­rently true; if it be not good, let him shew the insufficiency of the enumeration. Yes.

Pref. Other direction we haue (sayth he) besides either of these three; and that is, the testimony of primitiue Christians.

Answ. Ridiculus mus! But do you marke the subtility of the Logician, how sliely he euades and shifts the necessity of being directed by a true Church, or by the spirit, or by naturall wit? We haue befides these, the testimony of primitiue Christians. And do [Page 94]those primitiue Christians make a fourth member in this diui­sion of direction, distinct from the other three? What difference betweene primitiue Christians, and primitiue Church? and then, what difference to our purpose, betweene the primitiue Church, and the true Church? which is the Church, to which his Aduersary challengeth this right of direction. So himselfe apparently granteth, what he so desperately auoucheth to be apparently vntrue, and whereof no proofe can be pretended. Wherein I also note a Fallacy of fact, Fallacy. and fraudulent dealing; his endeauouring to make his Aduersaries doctrine odicus to the ignorant Reader, by his confident or impudent reiection of his reason, and branding it with this Censure, all is apparently vntrue &c. when afterwards he granteth in effect all. Surely he hopes his Aduersary will be so blind as neuer to perceaue this grant, while he sayth not the same his Aduersary doth, in the same words. For insteed of his aduersaries true Church, he hath Primitiue Christians; and why not Primitiue Church? as wel might you aske the Diuell, why not holy-water? The very word (Church) is Exorcisme to all Heresy, as the name of IESVS to infernal fiends.

Another pelting fallacy you may obserue, Fallacy. euen in the same period. We haue other direction (sayth he) besides the priuate spirit, and the examination of the contents of Scripture. As though his Ad­uersarie had plac't examination of the contents, in the number of directions, wherby to examine what is contained in Scrip­ture: as though he had proposed the very same examination, the guide or director to it selfe. And why this? Because he had somthing which he could except against this examination, of contents, by shewing how it may faile in direction. But what then? Who giues this examination the office of Director? Not his aduersary. Nay rather, because it may faile, and may meete with many difficulties, hence his Aduersary inferreth the ne­cessity of a Director, by whose assistance Christians may make this examination of Scriptures, and be assu [...]d what Scriptures are to be receaued, or reiected &c. Who, or what then, is this true guide or director? The true Church, sayth his Aduersarie? What sayth the Aduocate? Not the true Church; no, by no meanes, nor can any proofe of this be pretended. The Church? [Page 95] mera Chymera; he will take heed of saying so. Well then, what other thing if not the true Church? No other thing, forsooth, but another Word. What? the Primitiue Christians? Do you marke how neere he came to the Church, and yet escap't it? Not the Church, not the true Church, not the Primitiue Church, but primitiue Christians. O Scotus! O subtility of distinction! most true; the very name of Church ouerthroweth Protestancy. But why not againe primitiue Church, as well as Primitiue Christians? He knew a primitiue Church will infer a deriuatiue Church; it carrieth in the very common notion and obuious signification of the word, the nature of a Body, a Society, a Society of Chri­stians, the kingdom of Christ; in that Church and kingdom, order and subordination, commaund and subiection will by necessary sequele, force a necessity of perpetuity and visibility; in which propriety it must differ from the Synagogue. This is therefore a terrible hearing to Protestancy, a Church; Terribilis vt castrorum acies ordinata, terrible as an army in battaile-array.

Now, for Primitiue Christians, they imply no such order, no such coordination, or subordination, as of a body, and therefore as so many scattered sheep, they might wholy dye in their owne ashes, not Phenix-like suruiue in their posterity; which to affirme of a Church of Christ, his establish't Common­wealth, or kingdom, purchas't by right of Conquest, with the inestimable price of his blood, is not only Hereticall, but most impious and prophane; since neither the Synagogue and Law of Moyses, became euacuate, or abrogate viâ corruptiuâ, by a cor­ruptiue desition; but past into a Church & Euangelicall Law via perfectiuâ, as Christ was the perficient, not the corruptiue end of the Law: Non veni legem soluere, sed adimplere &c. I came not to dissolue, but to fulfill the Law &c.

Some other fallacious Euasions, in answere to the same position of his Aduersary.
SECT. XXVII.

IN the very next Paragraph I meete with another Fallacy which I haue also touch't before.

Pref. You say with conuenient boldnes, that this infallible au­thority of your Church, being denyed, no man can be assured, that any parcell of Scripture was written by diuine inspiration; which is an Vntruth, for which no proofe is pretended, and besides voyd of modesty, & full of impiety.

Answ. And I pray you obserue his notorious method; his Censure is, for the most part, the preface to his Answere: when he hath first struck his Aduersary on the head, or wounded his reputation, with some calumny, or contumely; then he wil dis­pute the matter not only cooly, but very coldly, as you shall see. In the meane tyme, since he is so liberall of contumelious and reproachfull language, if we spare him, it is mere gratuite grace, no merit of his, not so much as of congruity; nay it may seeme much more congruous, to shew the man his error, where he may see it better then in himselfe. For I belieue it will ap­peare to any vnderstanding man, euen by the Genius of his stile, that he hath drunke more liberally of Narcissus Well, then of Aristotles, as neere as it springs. Whence I do not see, but his President way be my Apology; and very Charity will require, that some sprinkling of salt be employed vpon his so great in­sulsity. Now marke the Fallacy.

His aduersary sayth, Take away the authority of Gods Church, no man can be assured &c. For (Gods Church) this Atturney changeth (your Church) as though his aduersary preassumed, what is in question with Protestants. Which he purposely doth not, but only sheweth the necessity of a Visible Church, and infallible authority shereof. The fallacy of this change hath this intent, to make his aduersary more odious for his preassuming & anteda­ting; as also, that he may impugne him more easily, where he [Page 97]contends not; which he doth almost euery where; neuer strikes where his Aduersary wards: So he seldome or neuer argues, or answeres to the matter in hand.

But why now is this an vntruth void of modesty? Because sayth he, the experience of innumerable Christians is against it; who are sufficiently assured that the Scripture is diuinely inspired, and yet deny the infallibility of your Church, or any other.

Answ. What? Euen of Gods Church? For this is the autho­rity, this the Church which his aduersary namely and only as­serteth. And where is the immodesty? Is it immodesty in a Ca­tholique to proue the infallibility of the Church of God? his Prime principle of Religion? and that, by an argument, which this (no Church) can no otherwise answere, but by rayling at it, as with his Lucians [...]! O execrable! For who are those innumerable Christians? Are they not the aduersaries of the Roman Church, and only they? And is it immodesty in a Roman Catholique, to defend and proue the contrary to that which the Aduersaries of that Church would proue, and do teach, whereby to ouerthrow that Church, and with that all Christianity? But to shew him the weaknes of his argu­ment, I forme the like: Innumerable Christians are sufficiently assured, that no man can be assured of any parcell of holy Scri­pture otherwise, then by the authority of the Church of God; Ergo, M. Ch. who denies them this assurance, is voyd of all mo­desty.

And now againe, why full of impiety? Pref. Because, sayth he, if I cannot haue ground to be assured of the diuine authority of Scripture, vnlesse I first belieue your Church infallible, then I can haue no ground at all to belieue it.

Answ. I expected he would say, then I willbe a Socinian. But still you see him in his Fallacy (Your Church, for, Gods Church.) And why then hath he no ground at all, vpon that supposall?

Pref. Because, there is no ground, nor can any be pretended, why I should belieue your Church infallible, vnlesse I first belieue the Scripture diuine.

Answ. Still, Your Church. Sure, we shall neuer bring him back to Gods Church againe. Now, quite contrary I say there is no sufficient ground (to omit pretences, and permit them to [Page 98]his Hyperbolicall style) why men should belieue the Scrip­tures diuine, vnles first they belieue an infallible Church of God. For, to reuolue to the first birth and parentage of holy Scriptures; whence haue we them? who told vs they were di­uine? haue we not the new Testament (to instance in this part) from the Euangelists and Apostles? And were not they the Church of God? and hath any other told vs they are diuine, and of diuine authority, but they primarily, and their posterity after them? Can any man expect a more certaine testimony con­cerning his owne, or any other mans birth, then from the mo­ther who brought him forth into the world? Was not the holy Scripture cōceaued of the holy Ghost, as it were in the wombe of the Church? Yea those soules and spirits of Prophets, Euan­gelists, Apostles, in which those Scriptures were conceaued euen formally as diuine, together with the truth contained in them, were they not before those Scriptures were brought to light? And could any but they, or vpon their credit belieue those Scriptures were of diuine yssue; conceaued, I say, in those spirits diuinely inspired and illuminated? yea and from them flowing, as from a vitall principle, actually, and actiuely in­flowing into those conceptions, togeather with the holy spirit of truth?

Whence also it followeth euidently, that those diuine truth's cannot be the formall conceptions of any soule, or vn­derstanding, not endued and eleuated by this spirit of truth; with which spirit since no man can assure himselfe to be endued, & yet euery Christian ought to belieue, as certaine, that the Church of God is indued; therefore euery Christian ought to receaue those diuine truths contained in Scriptures, togeather with the Scriptures themselues, from the Church of God, whose lawfull issue, and ofspring they are.

Neither can this in reason seeme to a Christian any whit derogatory, from the maiesty of the diuine word, to be concea­ued in the spirit of man; no more then it was, from the Maie­sty of the Sonne of God to be conceaued in the wombe of the B. Virgin Mary: and that, as there the Eternall Word was in­uested with humane flesh; so heere in these spirits of men, as in the wombe of the Church, the Word of God, sowne by the holy [Page 99]Ghost, should be inuested with humane notion, and brought forth to light of the world, in the guise of humane speach and voyce. In which sense we may interprete that testimony of the holy Baptist, Ego vox clamantis, I am the voyce of the cryer; as his voyce was the inuesture of that Word of the holy Ghost crying in the desert, by which it was conueyed to the eares of mortall men: so is the voyce and declaration of the Church, the meanes by which the Word of God, and all Truth contained in it, is conueyed to our soules and vnderstandings. And as that cry of the Holy Ghost was first conceaued in the spirit of the Baptist, then vttered by his voyce to the world: so these Scriptu­res were first conceaued in the Church, those Apostolicall spi­rits in which they were first imprinted, and inuested (if I may so speak,) by the operation and Energy of that fire which ap­peared in tongues, afterwards vttered vpon due occasions in words and writings. As therefore those of that tyme heard the voyce of that cryer in the desart, from the mouth of the Baptist; so all Christians heare, and must heare the word of God, and di­uine truth, by the mouth of the Church.

Well then, what this man so confidently auerreth, that there is no ground, yea that no ground can be pretended, why we should hold Gods Church (for so he must say, if he say any thing against what his Aduersary sayes,) infallible, vnles we first belieue the Scripture diuine; I as confidently deny. And for as much as respects priority, or antecedency of beliefe, since the Scripture, as I haue said, is no other word, but what the Church hath, and daily doth vtter vnto vs, whether historicall or dogmaticall, or howsoeuer first conceaued in the vnderstan­ding and spirit of the Church; it followeth, that as we haue re­ceaued it vpon her credit, telling and teaching vs, that it is di­uine; so we must à Priori, belieue the Church, as infallible wit­nes or reporter, before we can belieue the infallibility of Scri­pture which she reporteth: it followeth also, that we must be­lieue the Church interpreting the Scripture; for it is incredible, that any other man should better vnderstand what I speake ac­cording as I haue conceaued, or what I meane by the words I speake, then I my selfe, the speaker, who only intend to vtter my conceipt.

It followeth yet further, that although there were no Scripture, and these Christian Verities had descended to vs on­ly by Tradition, and by the testimony of former ages, trans­mitting them successiuely from Christ, to this present age; we should be bound to belieue the Church: that is, that continued succession of men, belieuing those Christian Verities; vnles we will say, there was no obligation vpon men, to belieue in God, and to worship him according to that beliefe, before the tyme of Moyses, before the Scriptures were. For, was not Cir­cumcision obligatory before Moyses? and was not the posterity of Abraham obliged to belieue and practise that tradition, as of diuine authority? of which our Sauiour sayth: Moyses dedit rebis Circumcisionem non quia ex Moyse est, sed ex Patribus.

He will say, You proue the Church infallible by Scrip­tures, your Scriptures must be first belieued infallible. I answer we proue this out of Scriptures against such as professe to be­lieue Scriptures, not the Church, as out of their owne princi­ples; it followeth not thence, that we first belieue the Scripturs diuine or infallible. For though in methode of confuting such Aduersaries, we begin with the Scriptures, yet in the methode of belieuing, we begin from the Church, vpon whose credit we belieue the Scriptures to be diuine; and according to this method, commencing from the Church, Christian fayth was first propagated among nations, and imbraced by Heathens.

Nor will it be to the purpose to reply, that Heathens were induced to belieue by reason of miracles. This I say, is not to the purpose, how the Church gained this credit; but hence it is inferred that in regard of Christian Beliefe, the Church had the Precedency before Scriptures; that is, the Church was belieued before the Scriptures were belieued. Wherefore, to conclude this point, if it be impiety, not to belieue Scriptures, (as no doubt it is) yet it is an impiety no way deducible from this do­ctrine, that the beliefe of an infallible Church, is precedent to the beliefe of Scriptures. But it is not hard to conceaue, by the very carriage of the busines, as he handles it, what he driues at in all this discourse: which is indeed to euacuate all authority, both of Church and Scriptures, and vpon the ruines of both, to build the Godles Socinianisme. Therefore all inferences which [Page 101]may seeme any way to perplexe Christian doctrine, or force it into straits, are his aduantages.

It was the prudent industry of the Roman Consull, to prouoke Catiline, whose secret practises and designes vpon the Common-Wealth he had vnderstood, into open warre and re­beilion; for he supposed, no Cittizen would then appeare in his defence, or make the oppression of a Tyrant his quarrell: As no man would approue the fyering of the house wherein himselfe were, or wracking the shippe wherein he sayled him­selfe. I suppose likewise, if this pretended Champion for Pro­testancy, were once discouered, and strip't to the naked truth of what he is indeed, that is, as I haue said, a very Socinian Mole, vnderworking euen Protestancy it selfe, and all Religion; no Protestant who hath any zeale of the Religion he professeth, would euer be seene in his patronage, nor willingly, I thinke, in his company: nor would he vouchsafe, the ordinary gree­ting or salutation, as good-morrow, Ep. 2. Joan. to him who acknowledgeth neither day nor morning of Christian religion; or, God saue you, to him, who doubts whether there be any such thing as God & Saluation: nor would they thinke him fit, to conuerse among Christians, who hath disputed himselfe out of all termes of Christian commerce, and conuersation.

His Calumny, concerning Protestants reputed Atheists &c. by Catholiques.
SECT. XXVIII.

Pref. YOu say fifthly and lastly (sayth this Aduocate) with confidence in abundance, that none can deny the infallible authority of your Church, but he must abandone all infused fayth, and true religion, if he de but vnderstand himselfe.

Answ. This Aduocate himselfe, is no small part of proof of the truth of this Hypothetique, who since he hath relaps't from this doctrine of infallible authority of the Church; hath with­all disclaimed all infused fayth, as his Aduersary hath charged [Page 102]him, vpon information more then credible; wherin (that is in abandoning both) I confesse he hath proceeded, no lesse conse­quently then irreligiously. But what of this?

Pref. This is (sayth he) agreable to what you haue said before, and what out of the abundance of your hart you speak very often, that all Chri­stians besides you, are open Fooles, or concealed Atheists.

Answ. For my part, I haue neuer knowne any Catholique vse any such inciuility of language. Neither do I thinke any harboureth any such conceipt, of all other not Catholiques, that they are either open Fooles, or concealed Atheists: though I can easily belieue, the common opinion of Catholiques to be, that a Soci­nian is a concealed Atheist at the least; and so in consequence a foole: For the foole hath said in his hart, There is no God.

Now, that which followeth in this Paragraph, I will only retort, & disoblige my selfe of a duty,

All this, the Aduocate writes with notable confidence, as the manner of Sophistes is (which manner he is very well acquain­ted with) to place their confidence of preuailing, in their con­fident manner of speaking: but then for the euidence where­with he should maintaine so great a confidence, it is as inuisi­ble, as the Religion he defends, from the tyme of Luther vp­ward.

His fallacious Recriminations.
SECT. XXIX.

HItherto we haue seene, what this Aduocate had done he tell's now what he could doe; which we must suppose to be more then he hath, or will doe. ‘— O parce viribus vsque tuis.’ As if he had a mynd to recriminate and charge Papists, that they lead men into Socinianisme, he cold certainly make a much fayrer shew of euidence then his Aduersary hath done.

And truly, I belieue he hath met with an Aduersarie, that will easily yeild him the priority in making faire shew's, with­out [Page 103]any shew of repugnance at all. But now he fall's into the puerility of a most triuial Rhetorique: you shall see him fight as like a Parthian as you would wish, doing most, what he makes shew least to do; fight's, as he flyes away, and will be found I belieue, — Parthis mendacior. For thus he colours and florishe's his Sophisme.

Pref. If I had a mind to recriminate, I would not tell you, you deny the infallibility of the Church of England. Ergo, you lead to Socinianis­me. Which is altogether as good as this: Protestants deny the infalli­bility of the Roman Church. Ergo, they induce Socinianisme.

Answ. Yet because, this (I would not tell you) is no reall pretermission, or passing ouer in silence, what he would say, but a saying it, after a more aduantagious and Emphatique manner of speach, then if he had said it positiuely, and in plaine termes; as the flight of warring Parthians is no serious and in­tended flight, but a more dangerous fight, vnder shew and pre­tence of feare and flight: therefore we must vnderstand these words according to the direct and positiue sense; as though they were couch't in this forme. This argument, You deny the infallibi­lity of the Church of England, Ergo, you lead to Socinianisme, is as good as this; Protestants deny the infallibility of the Church of Rome, Ergo, they induce Socinianisme. Wherein I note first, his most familiar Fallacy of willfull ignorance and mistake of his Aduersaries Argument, and the Elench; who neuer inferred leading or indu­cing into Socinianisme, out of the deniall of infallibility of the Roman Church, but out of the deniall of some infallibility of Iudgment, and authority of a Visible Church to determine of Scriptures and their interpretation &c. For he knew well, that if there were any other such infallible authority to determine such differen­ces, it should not then follow that they who disclayme the au­thority of the Roman Church, should haue their only remai­ning refuge, to the priuate spirit, or naturall iudgment &c. Wherefore hauing not yet excluded all other infallibility, no nor disputed it, he assumeth not infallibility of the Roman Church, or the deniall of that, as inducing Socinianisme, but the deniall of all infallibility of whatsoeuer Church.

Therefore if this Logician would haue played fayre, and not more like a Sophister then like a Scholler (which very ap­pellation, [Page 104]in my iudgment, carrieth with it a face and promise of ingenuity) he should haue framed his Aduersaries Argument as it lyeth in him, or at least, so as it might appeare the same in effect, and not seeme to haue his whole attention applyed to shift's and aduantages: thus then he should haue formed it, Pro­testants deny infallibility to the Church of God, Ergo, they induce Soci­nianisme, and then haue compared it with this his owne recri­minant, Papists deny the infallibility of the Church of England, Ergo, they induce Socinianisme, and then, ‘— Macte, O cum compare compar:’ Not a nut more like an apple; He had parallel'd it faire in­deeed.

Secondly in comparing the English with the Roman Church, Fallacy. he seemes, no doubt, to take the Roman as a particular Church; fraudulently affecting not to know, that by the Roman Church, Catholiques vnderstand all Christian Churches, making one with the Roman by obedience and subordination to it. Whence (by the way) Catholique Roman Church, is no Bull, as I haue heard a Dux Gregis among them, was pleased sometyme to say it is.

And yet againe, how long hath the English Church made a part separate from the Roman? Look back into her cradle of ex­traction, or distraction rather, and blush not. What was the ori­ginall cause? and yet blush not. Well, say we what we list to all the Churches I know, there is none more Visible then the Pro­testant; some man yet aliue may haue seene her quite through from her first birth, or appearance, euen to this age; but yet, what was the cause of the distraction? ‘Causa mali tanti &c. —’ But I know this Aduocate will easily shift all this; he will grant, for a need, True; the generation was Equiuocall, yet it might be Honourable inough; Ex malis moribus bonae leges &c. of euill manners, good Laws &c. I know his common place. Howsoeuer, in my iudgment, the comparison hath something of the odious.

But what hath this Retrograde to do with the Infallibility of the Church of England? He hath profe'st the infallibility of it so farre, as to deny to subscribe the English Articles of fayth [Page 105]and doctrine; wherein the authority of this Church may seeme to appeare, of as great force as wheresoeuer. He may haue since beene wrought into some other opinion, by the skill and in­dustry of some such Artist, as know's well how to deale with so pliable a nature; ‘(Vdum & molle lutum, nunc nunc properandus, & acri Fingendus sine fine rota;) —’ Or that other, (though no Doctour, yet a maister of Art, — ingenique largitor,) Persius proem. one who can teach such towardly schollars, wit; yea thrifty wit (a precious lesson in this age of prodigality) may haue persuaded him to conforme. Howsoe­uer now he will do her this honour by way of Restitution, as to say, she is no more Fallible then other Churches are, no then the Church of Rome.

Yet let them haue made of him what they can, or what they list, a Vessell of Honour, or Contumely, (since by their all-sufficient Canon of Scripture, they are vnquestio­nable for what they do, or make, of such matter) yet I assure my selfe, he will neuer be able to make good this com­parison, or parity; vntill he make it euident, when, and how that notorious change entred into the Roman Church, whence the Church of England receaued Christian Religion: how, and when, I say, the Roman Church Apostated from her selfe. For vntill then, we shall neuer cease to extoll in comparison her first birth and entrance, first sowne and planted by Apostoli­call euangelizing; then watred with the blood of two princi­pall Apostles, as is extant vpon record of irrefragable testimo­ny: then, the entrance of the same Religion from thence propa­gated, into other nations, togeather with the entrers and foun­ders of the same; all, men of knowne and eminent sanctity: to extoll I say these entrances of the Roman Religion, in compa­rison with the infamous ingredientes of defection from that Church, into some of the same Nations, achieued by men, or monsters rather, of most celebrated infamy, and stigmatized Worders.

Had the Church of Rome needed reformation, were these likely or probable instruments? a Friar with his dis-nun'd and de-uirginated Concubine? Or a second branded, and inusted [Page 106]Institutor? Or that third Poet of his owne bi-sexe, and hetero­genious Loues?

Happy tymes that haue such reformers: now Rome hath cause to blush.

Most certainly, the wisedom of God neuer made choyce of such Apostles, who sayth, Qui mihiministrat me sequatur; he that doth my seruice, let him follow me. All, morall and Christian Vertues, especially contempt of the world, and of all interest & respect of flesh and blood, vsher'd and accompanied the en­trance of the Roman Catholique Religion, wheresoeuer it en­tred. Many well knowne, and notorious vices paued the way to nouell Heresies, and entred with them; yea, grew from the very root's and principles of them. Which very Paralell, and one point of comparison whosoeuer shall haue duely conside­red, and seriously waighed, let him, in gods Name, dispute pa­rities of the Church of England, with the Roman Church.

The rest which followeth in this 16. Paragraph concerning the Popes infallibility, is nothing else but rauing language, the ouerflowing & exuberance of his pregnant passion. To which it is full inough to answer in this place, That the Pope neuer hath, nor euer shall define vice to be Vertue, or the contrary; nor oblige men to belieue Antichristianity Christianisme, or Christianity Antichristian; nor lead men, by any such doctrine, into Socinianisme, into Turcisme, yea (these are the mans word's) vnto the diuell himselfe, if he haue a mind to it.

Yet I confesse (giue him his due) this was no ill order'd consecution, from Socinianisme to Turcisme, from Turcisme to the Diuell; though perhaps the progresse might haue beene bet­ter gisted thus: From Turcisme to Socinianisme, from Socinianisme to the Diuell; at the very middle doore of which three, I heare this Aduocate dwell's, if any chance to enquire of him, — Do­mui paries communis vtrin (que), deuided from either with a com­mon wall; so that his mutuall intelligence with both, is both facile, and credible.

His concealed Arguments for Socinianisme.
SECT. XXX.

ALthough this Atturney of Protestants would seeme to deserue of them his fee, yet he will not faile to ad­uance his owne cause, or his most, owne Socinianisme; which is, I doubt, his finis cui, his most intended af­faire. Wherefore as he laboureth in behalf of Protestants to weaken, yea to abolish all infallibility of the Church of Christ; so he endeauours out of the doctrines of some Catholiques, to vnnerue the testimony of Scriptures, vpon the authority of which the whole fabrick of Protestancy is pretended to rely.

For who seeth not what aduantage, he with his Socinian Academy will draw from hence? As thus; Doctrines of Chri­stian fayth, according to Protestants, cannot be proued by the Authority of the Church, for that authority with them is er­rant. Againe, some of them, in the opinion of Papists, cannot be sufficiently proued by Scriptures, as that maine point of their fayth and hope, the mistery of the Trinity; therfore if we harken to both, or belieue both (since whether rather to belieue we know not) it can no way be proued. Whence, with a Dia­gorus, the surnamed Atheos, or a Protagorus, concerning any such thing as Trinity, and soone after, as Deity, they will returne a Non liquet, it is not certaine.

For me, who haue enterprized the discouery of his Falla­cies, together with some hidden driftes and mines alone, it shall not be necessary or requisite to pursue his seuerall testimonies of Catholique Writers; they will do it, no doubt, at the least so far forth, as they shall deeme it needfull, who vndertake the answere of this great Pamphlet; though, I verily thinke, it will proue magis operosum quàm operae pretium, the haruest will neuer render the seed, in so barren a field. And I do not know, but a man may suspect he had a mind to entertaine his Aduersary hastning after him, in examining his witnesses, were it but to slow his pursuite; like as Medea scattered her brothers bones in her flight from her Father, to retard their speed who eagerly [Page 108]pursued her, while they stayd to gather them vp: Yet was she neuer sure so peeuish a shrew, as to quarrell with them, for not gathering them vp cleane, as this Aduocate doth in behalfe of his Clients scattered bones; which notwithstanding I certainly thinke, his aduersary either hath done or would haue gathered to a bone, if he had thought them indeed his bones, and not ra­ther some other watry, or aery substance.

Only after a more short and generall way, I answere, as concerning those Scriptures, out of which (as he sayth) some of our Writers deny, that the Trinity can be conuinc't; ad hominem, thus: M. Ch. himselfe hath denyed in the hearing of sufficient witnesses, that this point of Christian beliefe, can be proued out of Scripture, and said, that it can lesse be so proued, then the Catholique doctrine of Transubstantiation, which he with his Agonothe [...]'s the Protestants, constantly deny possible to be pro­ued by Scriptures. Whence thus I argue: M. Ch. sayth the B. Tri­nity cannot be proued by Scripture; he, the same denieth, that any point can be held as of diuine fayth, but what is proued out of Scripture; therefore he denieth that the Trinity is to be belieued as of diuine fayth: Ergo, he belieues not the B. Trinity as a Christian; therefore he is none. So by his owne doctrine, he leades himselfe to Turcisme, or Socinianisme, or, to the diuell him­selfe, if he haue a mynd to it.

Moreouer I answere: those Catholique Writers, no doubt, from those lesse expresse and conuincing authorities of holy Scriptures, lesse I say conuincing of themselues, abstracting from the authority of the Church, applying them in confirmation of this mistery, gather a necessity of acknowledging the infallible authority of the Church, without which, notwithstanding ho­ly Scriptures, we should be in doubt how to belieue some prin­cipall point of Christian beliefe. The necessity of which autho­rity, appeareth yet more euidently, euen by what he quarrells concerning the doctrines of Eusebius, Origen, and those other questioned and controuled by the like authority of the Church. Against which authority no faculty of wit, and vnderstanding, no eminency or glory of science and erudition could preuaile; no not martyrdome it self could protect any error against or­thodoxe beliefe, or escape the censure of this supreme Iudge on earth.

What he sayth of Cardinall Peron informing the world of some Errors of those Ancients; Calum­ny, a­gainst Peron. if he meane the world knew them not before, discourers great plenty of ignorance in himself: if he knew it without his information, he sayth nothing: for could not Socinians, who deuoure Christian Libraries to no o­ther end, but to digest them into scandals, read the very same in others of far more ancient authority, then this most learned Cardinall?

In that the Arrians would gladly be tryed by the Fathers before the Councell of Nice, they shew their hereticall spirit; which always flyes from the authority of a Visible, Vocall, and liuing Iudge, to the mute copy of Gods, or mans word; as here, to defunct authors who left behind them their priuate opi­nions in things at that tyme not expressely defined; which is indeed to fly to their owne interpretations, both of Fathers & Scriptures; from a publique authority, to which a neuer failing assistance is diuinely promised, to some particular or single opi­nions of priuate men, to whom no such assistance was promi­sed. But whither will not a theefe fly from the sentence of au­thority which can condemne him? And whither not, an Here­tique from the Church? And who doubts, but the Church of Christ, is most representatiuely, and iointly, and vnanimously in a generall Councell, as a kingdom in a Parlament or full se­nate; in which mysticall body then, as euer, yea then more effe­ctually and actiuely then euer, the holy Ghost, as the soule in­forming, moueth and directeth. Whither flyes he then, who flyes from this Church, but from the spirit of God? Quo ibo à spiri­tu tuo? Whether shall I fly from your spirit? True, he flyeth from Christ, but escapes him not: from him a Sauiour, to him a Iudge, from his Mercy to his Iustice; si desceudero in infeinum ades: if I go downe to hell, you are there.

And is this the Socinian scandall, or is this any way lea­ding men into Socinianisme, that the Church of God assembled together of purpose to examine or determine some question of fayth, hath defined the contrary to some doctrine or opinion of some priuate Doctor, or Doctors? who as such, whatsoe­uer they preiudged, could not say, as the Councell could; Vi­sum est spiritui sancto & nobis; it hath seemed good to the holy [Page 110]Ghost, and vs? You see then the weaknes of this Fallacious Calumny, yet strong inough to cast a mist before the eyes of the vnlearned, or vnpassioned Reader; the number of which sort, because it like to affoard him most voyces, their applause and approbation is the triumph he aymes at.

His Sophisticall Calumny, concerning differences of Catholique Doctors, in questions vndefined.
SECT. XXXI.

ANother occasion or inducement to Socinianisme pre­tended by this Aduocate, are those different opinions of Scholastique Deuines in points of doctrine as yet vndetermined by the Church: this is also one of those, a thousand tymes recoct Crambes; like some cold Seruice daily brought in, only to furnish vp the table, vntill it grow mouldy, and meat for no body.

But what is this towards the disabling or disparaging the authority of the Church in points now defined, and no longer disputed as dou [...]full? Will the Socinian hence argue thus; In some points of doctrine vndecided some Catholique Doctors disagree among themselues: Ergo, in points decided they haue no certainty? Who seeth not the inconsequence of this illation? If they differ concerning the modification of diuine Pre­science, and the different respect and habitude which it hath to future euents, necessary or contingent, ablo [...]ute or conditionall; will they out of this variance inferre the vncertainty of diuine prenotion, or conclude that God foreseeth not at all? But yet, see how he concludes for the Socinians.

Pref. The Dominicans, sayth he, maintaine on the one side, that God can foresee nothing, but what he decrees: The Iesuit's on the other­side, that he doth not decree all things.

Answ. Iungentur iam Gryphes equis: he will make these one, and other sides to meete in one syllogisme, and so be no more sides at all; and then no different doctrines at all; which is the [Page 111]quite contrary conclusion to what he assumeth: Reflect se­tiously vpon these different propositions of the Dominicans and Iesuits, and you shall find them contradictories, and so impossi­ble to inflow into one Conclusion true or false, by any law­full consequence. For, ex nihilo nihil, and contradictories annihi­late one the other.

Now this proposition God foresees nothing but what be de­crees, is in effect equiualent to this, God decrees all that he foresees. Againe, God decrees not all things, as ratione materiae, equipollent to this, God decrees not something which be foresees; for the question being stated of things future, or which shalbe, both sides grant that God foresees them; the difference betweene them is, h [...]w he foresees them.

Now let any man commit the two propositions as ioynt premises, and see whether from that complexion or commis­sion the Socinian conclusion can any way result. Nay you shall find it generally true which I haue said, That two Contradi­ctions can neuer ioyne in any such commission, to produce a third proposition, as truly consequent from them: but see them now committed, and obserue how ready and obuious the Conclusion will be, which the Socinians draw from them.

In what mood and figure, Logician? But what Socinian syllo­gizing is this, to ioyne two propositions of contrary doctrines and repugnant in themselues, in one formall complexion of premises; and out of those to inferre the conclusion? Is it won­der if of so monstrous a coniunction of premises, a prodigious conclusion be brought forth, the conclusion being the naturall issue of the premises? Might he not aswell conclude from two propositions, the one of Catholiques, the other of Arrians, in like manner, thus?

An obuious conclusion, sayth the Socinian; as though he would say, Fairely encounterd, and kisse it. For out of this absurd con­clusion, [Page 112]he will further question, whether there be any such thing, as Father & Sonne in God; and soone after deny it.

But if the Aduocate will goe back vpon euery such occa­sion of encounter, he will shew no more wit then his horse, that being in the way from the Vniuersity, would needs be so curteous, as to returne back with euery horse he met. And I verily thinke as small an occasion, and as weake a motiue, will draw this man back to Socinianisme, as the horse to his manger; although perhaps the manger may haue beene the strongest motiue to both retrogressions; and though per­chance againe, the Socinian horse knew better whither he retur­ned, and did it with a stronger resolution, then his rider; how­soeuer he might passe, for a sufficient Hieroglyphique of a Soci­nian, who is ready to turne in his way of opinion euery day, with whomesoeuer obuious, who shall giue him a reason of change stronger in apparence, then the former that guided his iourney.

Againe; if he will still float and swimme in Socinianisme, vntill all differences of schooles be attoned, he may, for ought I know, dye as he liues; and well may he deserue to swimme af­ter death too, sowed vp into a lether-sacke, and so cast into the sea, to be depriued of all the elements at once. I need not tell him for what crime that punishment was decreed: But if he will not belieue, there is any such thing as diuine Predestina­tion, vntill it be on all sides agreed, whether it be ex praeuisis me­ritis, or no: or that there are any diuinely Elct vntill he can be certified, why Iacob rather then Esau: if he will buy no pots, vn­til the Potter yield him a cōumcing reason why he made some pottes for baser seruices, other for more honorable vses: nay if it will not satisfy him to say, there was vse for both kinds, but will further vrge; but why of this clay, of this very peece of clay, a pot of base seruice? since he know's by his owne expe­rience the Potter could haue made it a pot of Honour, for so the Poët sayth, — Argillâ quiduis imitaberis vdâ; soft day will take any forme: It, I say, he will stand stiffe vpon these termes of dispute, he will neuer fasten vpon any opinion of Diuinity, nor buy any pots; nor, had that pot beene so stiffe when it was clay, could the Potter euer haue made it [Page 113]a pot of any seruice whatsoeuer.

The truth is, Christian Religion was neuer brought into the world by coursing; and such Coursers, vnlesse they change their course, are too clamorous and quarelsome to expect ad­mittance into the schoole of peace. S. Paul will tell them, in playne termes, [...] &c. if any man seeme ambitious of Victory, in contention of dispute, we haue no such custome; he may do well to matriculate him­selfe, in the new Academy, among those Pyrrhonian Scepti­ques, whose life and religion is nothing else but dispute. Of whom S. Paul may seeme to speake [...], they befor, and foole their soules away in dis­putes. [...], sayth S. Chrysostome there; in the darkenes of discourse, and naturall reasons: as they are cal­led by S. Leo, Terrenarum caligo rationum, mists of human rea­sons; which is notwithstanding light, and the only light with Socinians. Against whom the Propher Esay pronounceth a curse, Quiponunt tenebras lucem, & lucem t [...]nebras, who impose the name of darknes vpon light, and call light darknes; as they, who esteeme naturall reason, light, and the doctrine of fayth, darknes: Vaequi sapientes estis in oculis vestris: Woe to you who are wife in your owne eyes, that is, the eyes of naturall reason; who aspire to the knowledge of supernaturall [...]uth, by the light of nature; therefore euery Socinian is a foolish Icarus,

His Fallacious application of this his Aduersaries Position, From truth no falshood, in true consequence.
SECT. XXXII.

Pref. I Might lastly adioyne, sayth he, that you fettle for a rule vnquestionable, that no part of Religion can be repugnant to reason; that from truth no man can by good conse­quence inferre falshood, which is to say in effect, that reason can neuer lead any man to error.

Answ. This is in effect, and really, a false glosse; but rather indeed it is in effect to say, that reason can neuer lead any man to error from a truth by good consequence: which is all one, as to say; no false Conclusion can flow by true consequence from true premises as such; which his Aduersary said not vnawares, as this Aduocate would haue you thinke, but aduisedly and knowingly, and which the very walles of their Logique Schooles proclaime.

Pref. And after you haue done, you proclaime to all the world, that if men follow their reason and discourse, they will (if they vnderstand themselues) be led to Socinianisme.

Answ. This is indeed nodum in scirpo, to seeke a knot in a bulrush: as though what his Aduersary sayth, were any preua­rication against the former principle (from truth, no falshood, by good consequence:) But this Aduocate cannot touch a line of his Aduersaries discourse, but he must sophisticate it one way or other. His Aduersary sayth indeed, that no man can deny the in­fallible authority of the Church, but he must be left to his owne wit, and way's, & must abandon all infused fayth, if be vnderstand himselfe aright: Is this the same, as to say, that if men follow their reason and discourse they will be led into Socinianisme? or rather, that if they follow rea­son, hauing reiected the authority of the Church, which is to follow reason, where reason cannot guide, or where reason is blind, they will at length be led away from all true religion, & thenceforward to Socinianisme, or whither he list?

The ground of which discourse, may be this, or the like: Naturall reason, as such, apprehendeth not supernaturall truth, because such truth is aboue reason, though not repugnāt to rea­son; yea rather, euery truth is reasonable, and conforme to rea­son truly conceauing. For which cause Christian Doctrine is called by S. Peter [...], rationall milke: and accor­ding to true Metaphysicke, all truth hath consistence with­in the spheare of a reasonable Vnderstanding, therefore no truth can be repugnant to reason: yet as the Moone, though other­wise light by the illumination which it hath from the Sunne, by which we see by night; yet if it be opposed to the Sunne, or interposed betweene the sunne and our eyes, becomes both dark it selfe, and endarkneth the sunne to vs: so Reason standing [Page 115]in opposition to Fayth, and that diuine light of day whence it receaues that little night-light which it hath, is both it self in darknes, and depriues our soules of the light of fayth.

Whence it comes to passe, that Reason thus endarkned, ta­keth Falshood for Truth; or from a materiall Truth, diuine reuela­tion misconceaued, and so not Truth, inferreth an vntruth euen by good consequence. Hence now from misconceauing Rea­son, or Reason opposing supernaturall Truth, springeth a mu­tuall repugnance betweene true religion and false, or miscon­ceauing Reason, not submitting it self to supernaturall Fayth. Nor yet doth it cease to be Reason and discourse truly so cal­led, though misapplied; for to conclude consequently out of a false principle, is no lesse an act of discourse, then to inferre truth out of true principles.

Wherefore notwithstanding this Aduocate his tooto ear­ly and antedating Triumph, these two Propositions of his Ad­uersary may stand togeather peaceably; That no part of religion can be repugnant to Reason, as Reason vndeluded, as conteyning it self within due limits, as in due subiection to that supreme light whence it is deriued; as submitting it self where it is too weak; as suffering it selfe to be guided, where it is blind; to be enlight­ned, where it is darke; to be raised to a competent stature or pro­portion, where it creeps, vnable to raise it sel [...]: all which con­ditions are conformable euen to naturall reason. This, I say, may stand with this other, That from Truth, as truly conceaued, or formally Truth, no vntruth can be inferred by good consequence; and la­stly both these two may admit this third into society of cohe­rence; That if men sollow Reason, where Reason is darke and blind, and weake, and in a word cannot guide, they may be led into error; and from error to error, vntill at length they fall in­to vtter darknes of infidelity and Socinianisme. Of Socinianisme, I say, a most diuellish, and perhaps of all other the most dange­rous Idolatry; as being most neerely allied to the soule of man, borne as it were in his bowels; nurst and nourish't by selfe­loue; cheris't and confirmed, and growing daily in greater strength, and equall stature with Pride and Self-conceipt.

For this Supremacy, euen in spirituall commaund, being once granted to naturall Reason, with authority to direct and [Page 116]vmpire in spirituall affaires (which authority and power God hath reserued to himself, that is, to the holy Ghost, whose king­dome is the Church) what followeth, but that the holy Ghost is deposed, Reason enthroned in his Chaire, where it com­maunds absolutely, without all dependance or subordination to God, from whome it neuer receaued any such authority. Thus Reason is made the God of such men; and because so made, a very Idoll; and all Socinianisme is Idolatry, yea the last, and lowest, and basest I dolatry; and whither Hereticall Idola­try d [...]uolues at last; for euery formall Heretique is an Idolater, and euery Socintan a worse then he. A most proud Dwarfe, a Pygmalion, wholy contracted and confined within himselfe; whose Reason is all his sayth; and consequently his Hopes of no larger extent; and his Charity enspheared within the same compasse, the obiects or naturall reason: Whose will is nothing else but self-loue, referring all he doth, to his proper interest & regard, which is indeed, the highest place of pride: then which the first Precedent of pride, the creature that first shewed it to the world; he, in whom pride was first ideated; from whose Pride, as from the original source, all the pride of temporall, or spirituall Ambition, all the pride of Schisme, and Heresy, and Socinianisme, and Idolatry are shares, and dimanations; ascended no higher, when he said, ascendam & ero similis Altissimo; I will as­cend, and be like the most High.

Thus you see (to returne his owne Epiphonema thither whence it came, to his due and proper place, that is vpon him­selfe) with what probable matter he might furnish out, and iu­stify his accusation, if he should charge his Aduersary with lea­ding men to Socmianisme: yet obserue I pray you, his pittifull condescendence in the close; the clemency and temper of his victory, in the much which he sayth he could do, and the very little which he doth.

Pref. Yet (notwithstanding all this) I do not conceaue I haue ground inough for this odious imputation: much lesse should you haue charged Pro­testants with it, whom you confesse to abhorre and detest it.

Answ. Now this is the misery, and indeed the point of dif­ference betweene him and his Aduersary: that he conceaues he hath not ground inough for this odious imputation, & therefore [Page 117]imputes it not. His Aduersary conceau's he hath; nor vainely conceau's, but know's and prou's it, and therfore chargeth them with it, that deserue it; to the end they may cease to deserue it, & abhorre it, not only in it selfe, but in the necessary cause of it.

Many a one loueth the Father, who loues not the child; yet that beloued Father, is the parent of that vnlouely child. What if the Rauen abhorre her young ones; or the Beare per­haps her whelp's? yet both these are the naturall yssue of both effect's, as they are the brood and progenie: so are they images and resemblances of their causes, wherin the face of causes may be seene as in a mirrour. And for what other end are looking­glasses made, then to reflect, and shew the face wherof they present the image?

Let him first cleare his maintainers from this imputation, that Socianisme is the effect of Protestancy; or let him shew at least by solid arguments, that it is not the naturall issue of Pro­testancy, but as a monstrous birth not intended (I do not say by Protestants, but by Protestancy, according to a Phisicall & necessary, though not a morall and expressely voluntary in­tention,) or lastly that the generation is meerly casuall and oc­casionall: Then let them say, they detest and abhorre it, other­wise their detestation is like theirs who detest the shame of sinne, but loue the sinne.

Nor is it indeed worth God a mercy to any man to abhorre Socinianisme; for it hath certainly a most vggly and deformed aspect to any eye that hath euer lookt Christianity on the face; yea, I verily belieue, if we could see a damned fiend without the sinne of Socinianisme which made him one, he would seeme a much more tolerable Spectacle; yet this Chāpion is very con­fident that he can arme the Mother against the Child, & com­mit them in deadly Duell: he can do much in this kind, and so could she, of whom one said, ‘Tu potes vnanimes armare in proelia fratres:’ Thou can'st set brothers together by th'eares. And if the Sonne chance to fall in the war, we haue his epitaph at hand— Nati sepulchrum est ipsae Parens, the mothers wombe his tomb. For I am assuredly persuaded their ends are [...], confatall; he will die like a Sampson, or like an Eleazar perhaps, suo sepultus [Page 118]triumpho, buried in his triumph.

Pref. O. but Protestants will fight against Socinianisme, her proud Impe, not with broken reeds (so this Aduocate) and out of the paper foriresses of an imaginary infallibility.

Answ. So I belieue, but out of a paper fortresse of reall falli­bility; which he hath raised them in this Volume, which I dare say will proue a doughty Fortresse, while he maintains it, especially so armed, if not with broken reed's, a reed tho; and such a reed of resolution, as I trust a little wynd may shake it, if it blow in the right corner, and often hath. But well then, with what weapon's shall we expect them in this more then Ciuill Warre, betweene mother and sonne?

Pref. Mary they will fight, with the sword of Spirit, with the word of God?

Answ, With the word of God! Fight against Socinians with the word of God! O rem ridiculam, Cato! I vndertake this combat for the Socinians; — mecum erit iste labor, I will act this part for once, — Sedeant spectent (que) latini; let the Papists hold their peace and looke on.

Will you, a Protestant, proue to me a Socinian, that the sonne of God tooke flesh and became very man? very God, and very man? and this out of Scripture, the word of God? Conuince my reason first, that this is infallibly the word of God, which you call Scripture. I say conuince me this, as infallible. If you thinke to conuince it by the testimony of Tradition, which is of men; and if that may be infallible, then the Papist Churchs Tradition descending from age to age, may be infallible; which you with me deny. Therefore since the Conclusion can haue no more certainty, then is deriued into it from the Premises, it can be no more infallible, that this Scripture is the word of God, then that this testimony of Tradition is infallible.

Now truly, I would go some miles on bare foot to heare such a dispute, wherein the Protestant should vndertake to conuince the Socinian, that their Bible is infallibly the word of God, especially all testimony of Tradition of the Church seclu­ded; which if they would admit, they would deny infallibly. Yea should the Protestant conuince it morally infallible, that this Bible were the word of God; yet such a morall infallibi­lity [Page 119]should neuer be proued to the Socinian, to be greater, then that those Decades intitled of Liuy, are indeed the works of Li­ [...]y; and consequently this infallibility could neuer amount to the irrefragable certainty of diuine Fayth. He would vrge them further with differences of Translations, and those no petty differences, but very substantiall, and concerning points of fayth. How would they proue it infallible, that their Transla­tion is authentique, and the word of God?

Should I yet grant out of a Socinian supererogation, or su­perarrogance rather, or out of confidence and animosity, or an itch of dispute, or out of curiosity to try how well the Prote­stant can vse this Goliah's sword, of which he so braueth, Non est si­cut iste, None like this, Pref. (and surely, were I of the Socinian hu­mor, this very motto, non est ficut iste, would put a strange itch of glory into my fingars, to be at him, and either to spoile him of his Non est sicut iste, or to break it in peeces:) but should I grant, I say, for disputes sake, that the Protestant Bible were infallibly the word of God, yea and that infallibly rather then the Roman, how would the Protestant conuince his interpre­tation to be the true sense and soule of that word? Why this Protestant-Interpretation infallibly rather, then that of some Arrian, or other Heretique, denying that point of doctrine in question? Most certainely should I heare of any such Prote­stant who would enter into such a Duell with a nimble Soci­nian, such as I know some, I should rather transfer the motto of the sword vpon the swordman, Non est sicut iste; of all the Wise of Gotam, non est sicut iste, there is not such another, who goes a­bout to hedge in a Socinian with the leaues of his Geneua Bible.

You may please to obserue by the way; that (Goliah suppo­sed the Type of the Diuell, as Dauid of Christ; this sword, the word of God, taken from the Diuell who prophanes it) al­though this sword wherewith Dauid kill's Goliah, be a non est sicut ist [...], for good, in a Dauids hand, that is, in the hand of a true Christian, the spirituall issue of Dauid; yet in the hand of a Go­liah, a Philistin, an Heretique, it is a non est ficut iste, for bad: there­fore all Heretiques haue made this weapon their choyce, wher­with to fight against Catholiques. Wherein this champion vaunting his confidence, boasteth nothing els but the custo­mary [Page 120]glory of all H [...]etiques: yet if he [...]ight with a Socinian as very a Giant as himselfe, he will find this sword will do him little seruice.

But thus now, hauing florish' [...] a while with his Goliah's sword, and only shew'n the blade to the Socinian (who is no­thing terrified with it) then fairely sheathing it againe, as ha­uing done great fea [...]'s, he concludes with his wonted acclama­tion, and a Plaudite to himself.

[...]ref. Thus Protestants in generall (sayth he) I hope are suffi­ciently vindicated from your Calumny; I proceed now to do the same ser­nice for the Deuines of England.

Answ. But if his seruice for the Deuines of England, proue no better, then it hath done for the Protestant [...] in generall, in this his vindication; I do not see what great reward he can expect from either. But I rather belieue, that had some D [...]uines in England, more difcreet and prouident then others, had their heads in the consultation, he might haue stood in the Faire vntill night with a Nemo nos conduxit. Nor can I doubt but many of them considering, how this Champion comes ap­pointed into the field, how furnish't with circumstances requi­site for such a combattant, will often say, ‘Non tali auxtlio &c. —’ Now the choyce as it is made, in my iudgment, Plus fellis quàm mellis habet, hath more of the Waspe then of the Bee, more Pas­sion then Prouidence; yet I, for my part can excuse the indis­cretion of the Elector's (if any censure it so) by the pollicy of the choyce. I can suspect they were prudent to make vse of this Neutrall, already pres [...] for any seruice; to interpose him bet­weene them and their aduersary, to receaue the blow's; or like an out-worke to intercept the batteries; who if he fell, yet he should haue done them the seruice to haue stood the assault for a while, and kept off the enemy from the Citty wall's while they fortified within: the losse could not be great of an already Perd [...]: ‘Quod perit, peri [...]ss [...] duca [...], —’ What's lost already, giue it for lost, and thers an end. For their owne reputes, they had foreseene an eu [...]sion whereby to as­soyle them. — He knewe you best. — He came lately [Page 121]from you. — His very abandoning, and reabandoning your cause, after a neerer acquaintance may take off something from the credit of it in the opinions of many men. Howsoeuer, he was a man of seruice: — he wanted employment to set him a work. If any man wil say it was Charity Mistaken, the mista­ker will desend it, they doubt not, with more credit, then euer it was impugned.

Now the thing, wherein he professeth, or prostitutes his seruice to the Deuines of England, is, his vindicating of them from the Calumny (as he sayth) of his Aduersary. What calumny? For­sooth, his imputing vnto them insufficiency, or inability to deale with Socinians by way of argument. The reason of their insufficiency in this behalf giuen by his Aduersary, is; that their studies and learning, lye another way. But heare it rather as alleaged and glossed by this their Aduocate.

His falsely supposed Calumnies against English De­uines, reiected; and the supposall proued calumnious.
SECT. XXXIII.

Pref. THeir learning (you say) consistes only in some su­perficiall Talent of Preaching, languages, and clo­quution, and not in any deepe knowledge of Philo­sophy, especially of Metaphysicks; and much lesse of that most solid profitable, subtile, and (O remridiculam, Cato, & ioco­sam!) succinct method of Schoole-diuinity.

Answ. Thus farre the Aduocate, making himselfe merry vpon that word (succinct) calling vp the seuerity of Cato, to laugh with him at the ridiculous application. Yet he should haue done better, in my iudgment, to haue summond a Demo­critus, who would haue laught at any thing. For Cato, I dare answere for him, though he laught to see an Asse eat thistles, he would neuer haue laught at this.

But since neither of these are now at leasure to laugh, who together with godles Socinians, and other Infidell's experience [Page 122]long since in the eternity of their woe, the truth of that Pro­phetique commination, Luc. 6. Vae vobis qui ridetis nunc, woe to you who laugh now, because they laugh't when, and where they should haue wep't; I thinke it not amisse to call out some Gramma­rian from Eaton, or Winchester Schoole, to shew the Logician his little skill in Grammer, leauing it behind through his too to hasty posting to Logick; who, I belieue will make it manifest that the Iester is the veriest iest, and the most pregnant Topi­que of ridiculous, ‘— Captator (que); dabit risus Nasica Coran [...].’ Well then, this Adiunct, or Epithete (succinct) as applyed to Schoole-diuinity, largely and voluminously treated by some Deuines, is geered by this Logician, as very incongruous. Be the question therefore thus stated; Whether, notwithstanding this diffusion of treating in large Volumes, the method of Schoole-diuinity may be fitly inough phrazed succinct? The Logician denies. Against whom I exhibite my Grammarian Courser, though without his Hood, or Formalities of a Gra­duate: which ceremony (were he a Graduate) though lauda­ble, yet I suppose to be obligatory only in the Vniuersity; and who, though he hath not learn't to conclude in Dialecticall forme, in actu signato, as by rule of art; yet he shall speak reason, in Logicall, that is, reasonable consequence, in actu exercit [...], as by rote of nature. The methode of Schoole-diuinity may be fitly termed succinct, notwithstanding the foresaid diffusion, Ergo falleris.

This he proues, commencing from the Quid nominis, as he hath learn't in Tullies Offices. What is succinct? It is according to our classick authors and teachers of Latin speach, that which with vs, girt, tuk't vp, gathered vp, or the like. In this sense, a Giant may be succinct, if he be girded, as truly as the Pigmy; the widest Heauen is thus succinct, with all, or any of the fiue Zones: nor yet is either the Heauen more narrow, or the Giant of lesse bulke, because he is girded: nor had that Nymph, — ritu succincta Dianae; or that other — nodo (que); sinus collecta fluentes, their garmēt's any whit shrunke, or of Iesse, or shorter measure, because they were tuck't vp, or close girt to their body: nor was she whom the Poët describes — succinctam Pharetr [...], either she, [Page 123]or her Quiuer lesse, by reason of her so girding it about her.

Yet you must giue me leaue to call this kind of wearing, or arraying succinct, as well in English as in Latin, since the manner of wearing, is the same in either language. It is, I say, succinct in the manner, though not in the matter; as if Homer's Ilias may be so malignantly printed, that it may be shut vp into a nut-shell; in that case we may truly say it is succinct, in the manner of impression and compression, though as large in the matter. And a Nestor I hope, or a Glaucus shall be as prolixe in their Haranges, and as tedious; and as many skirmishes about the body of Patroclus, or about the fiering the Grecian shippes &c. as if it were printed in a most large and legible Character, as yours M. Atturney, in folio. Ergo, succinctnes of method may very well stand with the large treatings of Schoole-deuines, without any ridiculous incongruity at all. This much the Grammarian could say.

Now to returne to our owne doctrines of fayth, or expli­cations of those doctrines which heretofore lay dispersed and loose, in the monuments of Holy Fathers, as they wrote vpon seuerall occasions of emergent Heresies in seuerall ages, and ne­uer reduced into one body, by due order and method, could not then, and so scattered, be truly termed succinct: the same, now ga­thered togeather & ingirt (in one Pandect or Sūme) by an orderly prescript of method, may be worthily & cōgruously called suc­cinct; & the method likewise so cōprizing & summing, a succinct method: yea though those doctrines and explications thus me­thodically summed, be either in number or largenes of treating, euen more ample and diffuse, in regard of matter, then they were in those Fathers; yet still the method is succinct in regard of the manner. As, if a hundred load of Hay, or (if that be fitter for his purpose) straw, were laid vp in one rick or barne, which laid before scatter'd in the fields or meadows in a thousād cocks, though the hay, or straw be the very same in quantity or num­ber of load's, yea though it were Iayd togeather which some o­ther load's that neuer grew in those field's or meadow's; yet no man will deny, but that hay, or straw so rick't, or hows'd, lye's now in a more close manner, and a narrower roome, then as scattered in the fields or meadow's: which more narrow and [Page 124]close compression, and collection, is in effect the same with our succinctnes of method in School-diuinity. Would Cato laugh at this? No, Cato would be more wise then so. The Socinian may very properly, and in good consequence of his Philosophy, laugh at his owne iest, whose religion is nothing els but the a­doration of his owne conceipt.

You haue hard part of the Calumny against the Deuines of England, their want of Schoole-diuinity, which being by this Aduocate only laught at, and so rather confest then consuted, becomes the Calumny of the charger. Heare now his glosse, or comment vpon this supposed Calumny.

The second part of the Calumny, concerning the stu­dies, and learning of the English Vniuersities.
SECT. XXXIV.

THe Protestant Atturney pursueth his charge of Ca­lumny in these words:

Pref. Wherein you haue discouered in your selfe, the true Genius, and spirit of deiraction.

Answ. See how knowingly, and expertly he speaks of this Genius of detraction, as though it were his familiar. But his reason.

Pref. For taking aduantage from that, wherein Enuy it self cannot deny, but they are very eminent, and which requires great sufficiency of substantiall learning, you disparage them, as insufficient in all things els.

Answ. Now truly I make no doubt, but very many of ei­ther Vniuersity haue these talents in great eminency: and no meruaile, if we consider either so many and choyee wits, as in so great a multitude of Pretenders; or those excellent meanes, wherewith they are endowed for all kind of good litterature. Wherein, I dare presume to say, they are incomparable with any other Vniuersity of Europe; and only comparable between themselues, as one eye with another in the same face, without disparagement to either. Which Excellency would be in these kinds far more apparent and testified to the world, that nei­ther [Page 125]Enuy nor Truth might deny it; especially in those yearly confluences of hearers and witnesses, summond by the celebri­ty of report, as it were to the Olympique Games, and spectacles of learned Arts (so that it might be said of them, as some [...]) me it was of ancient Rome, ‘Famam Rome tuae non pudet historiae,)’ if the care and industry of the Electors, were rather to grace those publique Exercises, by the Excellency of the men, then the men by those Exercises.

As for their talent in preaching, let them before they boast, be sure whether Enuy do meddle with it, at least forraine En­uy, if domestique do; and then shew vs their commission for preaching: Quomodo pradicabunt nisi mittautur; how shall they preach vnles they be sent? Sicut scriptum est, quam spec [...]osi pedes &c. how faire are the feet of those who preach those good tydings, who preach peace; signif [...]ing by this sequele and connexion, that the speciosity, neatnes, or cleanes of feet, that is, of affections requisite in such a Preacher, must proceed from the grace and spirit of that diuine mission and commission. The quite con­trary of which effects, hath beene manifestly seene and obser­ued, and notoriously knowne to the world, in the preaching of a Luther, of a Caluin, and the like: their preaching was without mission, therefore were their feet so foule as the impressions of their foot-steps, extant vpon record, do clearely testify.

Therefore also the ayme and scope of their preaching was not peace, but mutiny and rebellion, and defection from their Mother-Church, and from spirituall obedience; from Samuel to Saul; in whose abiection, and excussion of whose anthority, they withall abiected and shook off God himself, and in Saul, and with Saul f [...]ll to Idolatry. For he who shaketh of that o­bedience, which God hath establish't in his Church, enthron­eth another God; that is, the power, or the creature, vpon which he transferreth his obedience which he oweth to God, which is Idolatry. Vpon which breach and defection, followed forth­with that deluge of all mischiefe, and inundation of Vices, ouer­flowing those nations, wherein Religion had beene in greatest florish. Loe, the effect of their mission-Iesse preaching.

Vpon these groundes the examine must goe, whether it were [Page 126]or no, detraction to say, their learning consists in a superficiall talent of preaching; or whether he might not haue denyed it to be preaching at all, according to the ordinary acceptation of the word, as by Christian vse it is consecrated and dedicated, to signify Euangelicall Annunciation, or the Embassy of God to men: vnles perhaps in attributing a superficiall talent of prea­ching, he implicitely meant to deny the substance; as indeed, that kind of preaching can haue nothing else but superficiality, being deuoid of the substance, which is diuine truth and spirit. It were therefore to be wish'd rather, then disliked by this Ad­ [...]ocate, or his Clyent's, that they were enuied, ‘( [...]) Pindar. Pyth. [...]d. 1.’ and not pittied, that so goodly a superficies, so much exteriour grace of wit, should want the body and interiour worth, and substance of diuine truth wherein to subsist.

Well Syr, after all this brauery and presumed excellency of preaching &c. if this proue a true imputation of insufficiency in those Deuines, when they are pressed by Socinian Argu­ments, who are therefore either caught themselues by their illa­queations, or giue occasion to the Socinians of their greater ob­firmation; or to others to be drawne into the same infidelity: If this, I say, be truth, yea, and a knowne and testified truth, and so neither Calumny nor detraction; how will he excuse that in­sufficiency, or at the least, deny it to be a great cause of the pro­pagating of that contagion? Or lastly (which be pretends to doe) vindicate his Maintainers from this aspersion? Heare how substantially he doth it.

Pref. As if, forsooth, because they dispute not eternally, Vtrum Chymaera bombinans in vacuo possit comedere secundas inten­tiones; or, Whether a million of Angels may not sit vpon a needles point; because they fill not their braines with notions that signify nothing, to the vtter extermination of all reason and common sense, and spend not an age in weauing, and vnweaning subtile webb's, fitter to catch flies, then soules; therefore they haue no deepe knowledge in the Acroamaticall part of learning.

Answ. This is his answere. Whence you may suspect, that Brasmus was his last Acr [...]ama, from whom he eame to write this with his pen, full of salt, and sarcasme, to cast vpon the faces of [Page 127]all Schoole-deuines: and you may note, as in passing by, how, euen heere, as euery where, what he blame's in his Aduersary, he out-doe's it himself; and by this very passage of many, you may obserue how familiar he is with the Genius of Detraction, which comes from him so easily, that I durst almost excuse him, and say he takes no notice of it, ‘(— Vsque adeo à teneris assuescere magnum est:)’ as some Orpheus play's and sing's by the rules of art which he reflect's not on. As for this question of a Chymaera, it is, no doubt, wholy Chymerique: and whether it may haue beene the sub­iect of some Quadragesimall coursing, I cannot tell. I haue knowne as mad a question canuas't there in my day's (as con­cerning a Pridian, and a Postridian) which some Diuinity-chaire may yet remember. And yet, me think's, I could propose this question to be maintained by some witty Inceptor, or Com­mencer, affirmatiuely thus: — Virum Chimaera bombi [...]ans in vacuo, debeat comedere secundas intentiones? — Affirme.

Then for the more luculent and fraudlesse processe in this graue probleme, I would first cleare the termes from ambigui­ty. I would vnderstand by Chymaera, a Socinian; and him (that you might be able to look vpon the monster, with lesse fright and horror, mask't or vizar'd in Protestantisme) then bombi­nans in vacu [...], that is, busy in disputing to no purpose; nor with hope or intent to determine any truth; or, bombinans in vacu [...], buzzing his imposture in some idle and vacant eare; or againe, bombinans in vacu [...], buzzing and disputing against all principles of Diuinity, and Philosophy, that there is vacuum in nature, that God is not euery where, or that it is not certaine whether be be any where.

And then, whether this Chymaera, ought to feed only vpon second Intentions? whether he ought in conformity to his Prin­ciples to be content with such Commons? or whether he ought to take commons in any College of the Vniuersity? The two former he should hold affirmatiue, the third negatiue. For according to all those who truly belieue there is a God, all food and nourishment of bodies hath subsistence and being from him; nay rather, it is God that feedeth and nourisheth in all sortes of viands: but in the way of Socinians God himselfe hath [Page 128]no subsistence, according to whose principles, all that concer­neth God or Deity, is doubtfull and vncertaine, or only ap­parence and imagination: But in this doubtfulnes, imagina­tion &c. there is no reality or subsistence of truth; what remai­neth then of God, and consequently what feeding remayneth but only vpon second Incentions, vnreall notions &c? And certainely, he may seeme very insatiable, whome all, that God is, with him, cannot satiate; therefore he ought to be satisfied with second Intentions; therefore he cannot in equity com­plaine if his Colledge send him to the Logick or Metaphysick Schooles, to take vp his Commons in Notions, and second In­tentions.

Adde vnto this, that it is directly against the first intention of the Founders of Colledges, that any Socinian should haue Commons there; therefore he must feed vpon second Inten­tions. The Antecedent I proue; for those Founders indowed their Colledges with meanes and maintenance only for such who belieue in God, yea and in Christ too, as themselues all be­lieued: therefore it is contrary to their intentions, which were real intentions, that Socinians should haue any Commons there at all: Ergo — ‘Chymara bombinans in vacu [...] debet comedere secundas intentiones.’

His geering of Schoole-termes, and Angells vpon the needles point.
SECT. XXXV.

COncerning the place of Angels, or the coexistency of more Angels in the same materiall place; though much m [...]ght be said in a more high way of Theory & Acroa­matique abstractions, and tenuity of Notions, and subli­mity of Speculation, whereby I could shew that the man only raues, and geeres his owne Ignorance: yet both because I seeme now to know his diet, that he feeds more grossely; and also be­cause he insinuates some weaknes of braine; least I should be [Page 129]accessory to the vtter exterminating of his reason (though it seemes to me a strange matter to exterminate, or banish that which dwels no where, as a Socinians reason hath no residence, nor can indeed be resident any where; a shrow'd property, and adangerous obstacle to be interposed betweene any such pre­tendent, and a Bishopricke, or a Chaire;) yet I will not ven­ture to perplexe him in such mazes and labyrinths of intricate subtilities. Yet here I could not choose but wonder at the in­constancy of the man, that he who professeth so much honour to Logick, who relies vpon it with such confidence, that he attributes more infallibility to Logick-rules, then to the Church of God, should so slight, and auile second Intentions, and No­tions, which either, as mentall or vocall, are the very style, and idiome, and mother-tongue of Logick. For what other thing are Predicables, and Predicaments, Syllogismes, and Enthe­memes, Categoriques, and Hypothetiques, and the like? Nay what one of all the seauen liberall Sciences, can subsist, or vp­hold it selfe in due honour, or disuulgar it self without those proper and seuerall notions and termes of art? And are the no­tions of Scholastique Diuinity, the only notions that signify nothing? What if they signify nothing to him that vnderstands them not? do they cease by that, to be significant? If the Sunne in the clearest shine, discouer no colours to the blind; is it not therefore retectiue of colours, to those that vse eyes?

I would gladly know of him those notions, or any of those in common vse of Catholique Schooles, that signify nothing. If he haue met with any such, or rather any by him supposed such, he might haue done well, before he threw his Censure head long, to aduise with the Doctour of the Chaire, who would haue instructed him in their true signification: whose patience, and modesty of condescendence to this Aduocates Ig­norance, I cannot but take notice of, who wold dissemble such adisparagement of his faculty, in Schoole-diuinity, and his vse of such termes and notions proper to such schooles. Howsoe­uer these are not the webs wherewith we pretend to eatch soules: No. We rather employ S. Peters nets to this end, to whome, and the rest of the Apostles it was said, Facia [...] ves fieri piscateres hominum, I will make you fishers of men; which nets [Page 130]are the doctrines of Christian fayth and manners, tyed to his chaire; which are the nets indeed, wherein not flyes, but birds, yea euen Eagles haue beene, and are caught, in euery Region vnder the sunne.

But the doctrines of Heretiques, and disputes of Socinians, are indeed [...] thin, and weake cobwebs: wherein only flies, 2. Pet. 2. light and weake spirits, instabiles anima, irresolute soules, are intangled; and whom so taken in the webbe, the skulking spider, that all enuenoming spirit, suddainly inuades & kill's with his poysonous doctrine. For they are Heretiques and Socinians, who hauing suck't from the most fragrant and soueraigne flowers of holy Scriptures, the hony which they conuert to poyson, spinne it out of their owne braines and bowel's, their owne naturall reason and discourse; and weaue it into nets wherwith to catch such soules. But such nets are cast in vayne before the ey's of birds, those Orthodoxe spirits who fly aboue, or euen through them; carrying away together both the webbe and webster, dissipating both into the ayre, by dis­couering them.

And truly though all Heretiques, may be called Spiders & their doctrine Cobwebbs; yet most of all Socinians, with their, not doctrines, but doubts. Vpon whom therefore were the God­desse Minerua to pronounce againe sentence of execution, she would not doome them to hang till they were dead; no, but as when she condemned her Emulatresse Arachne. ‘Viue quidem, pende tamen improba, dixit.’ Liue, but hang; for the life of a Socinian is wholy pendant in opinions, alway's hanging, and no better worth.

You haue seene his purgation, how effectually he hath vindicated his Deuines from the pretended Calumny, euen so, as I haue related; but that in his very transition from this Pa­ragraph, he hath left behind him the impression of a Socinian pride.

Pref. But I haue too much honour'd (saith he) the poorenes of this detractation to take notice of it. Answ. Whence also (as from many other the like traict's) you may conceaue in what spring he hath washt his face, who thinks he honours whersoeuer he daignes to take notice. If content be riches, he needs to purchase no [Page 131]more; rich already, and happy inough, who doth so easily please himselfe; only poore and vnhappy in this, that he hath no riuall in his Authadie.

His Calumny and Fallacy concerning the declining of Protestancy, intimated by his Aduersary.
SECT. XXXVI.

HEnce he passeth from a pretended Calumny, to not so much as a pretexible or colourable Accusation, but somthing which he fallaciously phrazeth Accusation, and is no such thing. For what foole can thinke any man accuseth, or blameth that thing, which no man can doubt, but he wisheth?

Pref. Your other part (sayth he) of your Accusation, strikes dee­per, and is more considerable; and that tells vs, that Protestancy waxeth weary of it selfe; that the Professors of it, they especially of greatest worth, loue temper and moderation &c.

Answ. Is this an Accusation? Can his Aduersary possibly be conceaued to blame this? Why then doth he so depraue the cleare sense of his Aduersaries words, but only to make him odious, euen to them, whom he commends for their better in­clination towards antiquity and truth, for their temper and moderation?

Which simple relation of his Aduersary, exhibited without all bitternes of speach, or any offensiue style, see how he exul­cerates? With what bitternes of a black Censure, as though he had dip't his pen — succo nigra loliginis, — or, in felle a­maritudinis, in the gall of bitternes, as S. Peter said to Simon Ma­gus an Apostata from the Church of God; and who after his Apostasy returning to his trade, deluded many by his enchar­med wing's of pride and imposture. Heare his owne words af­ter his Aduersaries, euen as related by himself: and (as you are a louer of truth & true iudgment) take the paines to cōpare them.

Pref. Which scurrilous libell (sayth he) voyd of all truth, discre­tion, and honesty &c.

Answ. And is not this indeed scurrilous railing? void of all truth, discretion, and honesty? For doth this man deserue to be speared? or to be treated calmely, who tempests so rudely? who rides with so loose a bridle of passion, or no bridle at all, that he out-runs euen himself, and self-knowne truth. And yet after this he enter's into his Aduersaries bosome, to rauish thence a concealed thought, contrary to what his words carry before them, and contrary to his very thought.

Pref. For did you conceaue (sayth he) such inclination of men of worth and learning to your party; can any man imagine, you would pro­claime it and bid men take heed of it?

Answ. I answere, No: he would not, nor doth he any where bid them take heed of it, but take notice of the vnsettled condition of all Heresy, which either fall's further into Tur­cisme, Socinianisme, Atheisme &c. as we see it hath in many part's of the world, which haue laps't from the Roman: or else floa­tes for euer, & turnes round as it were in an vncessant wheele of Error's, much like the wheele of Fortune, and not a litle in conformity with that; vntill they returne to the pillar of truth, and partake the firmity and weight thereof from the spirit of truth which resides there; whose speciall guift all stability and ballast of soules is; without which they are as light as that chaffe which the vnquenchable fire shall burne, or as that dust, quem proijcit ventus à facie terrae.

But, what wonder (to returne thither whence we haue a litle digrest) if he make a quite contrary construction of his Ad­uersaries words, since he cannot belieue himselfe, who hath so often belyed himselfe.

Pref. Sic notus Vlysses? do we know the Iesuit's no better?

Ans. Yes Aiax. you know them, and they you.

Pref. Are they turned preuaricator's against their owne cause?

Ans. I am sure you are; Take which cause you will: and euen heere (good Syr) marke if he turne not preuaricator euen against himselfe.

Pref. Are they likely men to betray and expose their owne Agent's & Instruments; and to awaken the eyes of Iealousy, and to raise the clamour of the people against them? Certainly your zeale to the Sea of Eome, testi­fied by your Fourth Vow of speciall Obedience to the Pope, proper to your [Page 133]Order, and your cunning carriage of all affaires for the greater aduantage and aduancement of that Sea, are cleare demonstrations, that if you had thought thus, you would neuer haue said so.

Answ. Heere, before I passe any farther, it will not be ab­surd, I thinke, to giue him a companion; to couple him with Iohn Donne, whose words in his booke which he hath entitled with his owne Name, (Pseudo-martyr) are so like these of the Aduocate, as if they had beene spit out of the same mouth. Heare some passages of the Deans, to this very purpose. Psendom. cap. 4. But all your la­bour is to vnderstand the present state of kingdoms, and where any ouer­ture is giuen for the Popes aduantage, or wherein any opposition or hinde­rance is interiected against his purposes. And againe: If they be, as they say in their Constitutions but bacula senis, the old mans staues, the old man is the Pope; they are bound to say once a weeke one masse to their Ge­uerals intention, though they know not what it is. And of this generall in­tention the center and basis is the aduancement of that Sea, about which these Planetary monkes haue their course and reuolutions. And yet more. But the Iesuit's in this latter age, haue found the vse of the com­passe, which is the Popes will &c. They are more seuere maintainers and increaser's then any other of those doctrines of the Roman Church, which we noted to beget this inclination (that is, to Martyrdom.) Thus far the Deane.

Answ. Now, would I know who exorcised these spirits? Who forc't them by any torture to proclame these so high prai­ses of their aduersaries? what haue the Iesuit's deserued of these men, that they should be so honoured by their testimonies a­boue all other Orders or Professors of the Roman Catholique Church? For at least, to those who acknowledg subiection to the Roman Sea, whose approbation without doubt they couet more, then of any other, they testify their supreme prayse and commendation. For what more highly commendable in the iudgments of all such Catholique spirits, then their so vigilant seruice and obedience to him, whom they iointly belieue to be the Vicar of Christ? What more admirably laudable, then to be the staff of Christ Iesus, in the hand of his Deputy on earth; then to make the aduancement of his Church, the Basis and Center of their intentions?

But then chiefly, by what so commemorable merit of their [Page 134]Order towards these men, mere aliens & strangers to them, can they haue deserued those diuine Elogies & Encomions, fitter to be celebrated in the honour of the Apostles themselues, to whom indeed they are most due and proper? The Iesuit's must needs blush to heare themselues so dignified, as to be called Planetary monkes, or which is all one, Apostolicall monkes; for these Planetary monkes wander no whither, but whither they are sent with the same commission of the Apostles, establish't by those words, Euntes in mundum vniuersum &c. going into the whole world, preach this Ghospell &c. And he was (sure) a Planetary monke, 1. Cor. 4. who said of himselfe and his Coapostles, & in­stabiles sumus, we haue no setled habitation. Now for these Pla­nets, to haue their courses and reuolutions about the same cen­ter with the Apostles, the aduancement of the Church and Ghospell of Christ is so high a point of glory and dignity, that the Apostles themselues aspired to no higher.

Now would I know, I say, againe, who made these pen [...] their ennemies trumpets? Or who blew them, or plaid them to what tune he listed? Are they not asham'd of such preuarica­tion? But you may pardon them, they did it against their will's; they had no such interition; in a word, digitus Dei hic est; they were exorcised. Nor haue we cause to glory, they will say: If we prays'd you with truth's; yet we pepperd you with lyes.

Thus hath this couple preuaricated, as you see, vnwittingly and vnwillingly. True; which may be their Apology for any good they do for any Catholique Profession, at any tyme: A Comicall, a Parmenian beneuolence;

I haue done more good to day vnawares, then euer I did wit­tingly in my life. As for any preuarication of his Aduersary, if his words offer a preuaricating sense, that is, disaduantagious to the writers cause, it is an ordinary lapse, a very vsuall ouersight, as not to obserue all aduantages in the speach or writing of other men; so not to foresee, or auoid all disaduantages in his owne. I assure my selfe he pretends no exemption from the common condition of mortality, [...] which is (incertae prouidentia nostra) failing of prouidence, and caution in many things, wher­in [Page 135]naturall sagacity of wit, or iudgment carries the torch, if he haue neither swaru'd from the prescript of Fayth, nor Charity. If otherwise he haue incurred some disaduantage, I verily thinke, he will be content, rather to seeme lesse prouident, then so cunning a dissembler, as this Aduersary would make him. Notwithstanding, the ground of this preuarication layd by this Aduocate, is indeed an vntruth of his owne, which is this: that.

Pref. As the Samaritan's saw in the disciples countenance, that they meant to goe to Hierusalem: so you pretend (sayth he) that it is euen legible in the forehead's of th [...]se men, that they are euen going, nay making hast to Rome.

Answ. This had beene preuarication indeed; but they are the words which this shameles Atturney infoist's, and masketh in a different Character, as continued in his Aduersaries dis­course, and as his words, who hath no such. Now for that la­tent, or pretexed meaning, or intention which this Aduocate, this Politique-would-be would seeme to haue decipher'd in his Aduersaries writing, it is altogether as improbable, as the inter­pretation is malicious: whereby while he pretends to free him from one preuarication, much lesse he endeauours to winde him into a greater.

For what greater Preuarication indeed, or what folly more disaduantagious to his cause, then to haue gone about to seeme angry, yea enraged (as this Interpreter intimates) against those, whose approaches to Catholique Religion in some exterior expressions, he describes? — Sic notus Vlysses? Was euer Aiax more mystaken in Vlys [...]es, euen then, when he raued with madnes? Was there any pollicy to endeauour to alienate such men of that temper and moderation, yea and learning too, to staue them off, to beat them from the doores, whose reentrance into the house, he couets aboue all things? O yes, forsooth.

Pref. You foresaw your tyme of preuailing, or euen subsisting, would be short, if other Aduersaries gaue you no more aduantage, then these do.

Answ. O Policy beyond the moone! We are more likely to preuaile with such, or subsist by such, who wish vs all extirpa­ted, whose daily outcries for so many yeares, haue by all meanes endeauoured to awake the Lawes; who attempt daily to raze out all monuments and memory of Catholique Religion; who [Page 136]are so far from brooking the name of sesuit, that they are ene­mies to the name of Iesus; all impressions of which they would deface both in print and picture. With these we can hope to preuaile, by these subsist, rather then with men of temper and moderation; as though all aduantages which gaue vs argument or matter to write, though we write in our owne bloud, were our greatest booty and content. O grosse Policy! but O witty discoueryl though to find it out where it lurk't vnder a preten­ded folly of preuarication, — (Sic notus Vlysses?) as very a Vlysses as he was, this slye Aduocate, this Palamedes hath dete­cted him.

Now all the wit of antique and moderne discoueries (huic herbam porrigito, palmam date) yield primacy to this. Battus into an Iudex, or Touchstone, is a stale and fabled metamorphosis.

They were there, vnder those hill's (quoth he) and so they were. Here is a Battus who hath discouered what was neuer hid; hath exposed to publique view the inuisible Eele. And hath not the man reason to glory in this discouery? Iudge you, whether he hath or no? And in further conformation of his owne perswasion, that he hath indeed found out the Nilus-head, retected his Aduersaries drift's and policy, and layd them open to the world, that no man can doubt, but it is the very meaning of the riddle which this Oedipus hath read; heare how conuin­cingly he argues it, Pref. out of the sillinesse and poorenesse of his Aduersa­ries suggestions, and partly the apparent vanity and falshood of them. So he.

Answ. But he might haue done well to haue told vs in particular what he charged with falshood. But we must be content with what he can do. He can tell vs, something is false; but what, he cannot tell: nor will he particularize, of purpose, that the Rea­der may apply this confuse and vndetermined imputation, to any particular, as he pleaseth, and withall suspect all. Heare now his solid confutation of those silly suggestions.

Pref. What if out of Deuotion towards God; out of a desire that his should be worhipped, as in spirit and truth in the first place, so also in the beauty of holynes: what if out of feare, that too much simplicity and na­kednes [Page 137]in the publique seruice of God may beget in the ordinary sort of men a dull and stupid irreuerence &c. I say, what if out of these considerati­ons, the gouernors of our Church, more of late then formerly, haue set thē ­selues to adorne and beautisy the places where Gods honour dwels, and to make them as heauenly as they can, with earthly ornaments; is this a signe they are warping towards Popery?

Answ. To all which I answere, what if his Aduersary blame none of all these either things or considerations, but rather like them well? What if he inferre out of all this, no such matter as any reall or intended approach to the Roman Church? No, it is manifest inough what he inferr's, which is that which writes, and expresseth in words plaine inough, that Protestancy is sub­iect to perpetuall changes. And in a more generall way he in­fers the powerfull working of truth, which will infallibly, in tyme become victorious. The reason; because all truth hath existence and subsistence from, and in God; it is his Word: wheras error and falshood spring originally either from the frailty and ignorance of man, or from the malice of the Diuell, whose worke all Heresy and Falshood is. To dissolue which worke of the Diuell, the consubstantiall Word of the Eternall Father became man, that man in him might become victorious ouer all falshood and Heresy, which is the doctrine of flesh & bloud, the schoole and Iesson of the world, which makes a party against Christian Religion.

Pref. Againe; What if (saith he) the names of Priests and Al­tars so frequent in ancient Fathers though not in the now Popish sense, be now resumed?

Answ. I would fayne know when he will be so good as to shew vs the different sense of these names in the vse of ancient Fathers from the now Popish sense? Neuer. But at the least by this nominall Conformity, the Church of England is put in a state, by this regard, more iustifiable against Bapists then before, being hereby enabled to say to Papists, (whensoeuer these names are obiected) we also vse the names of Priest and Altars, and yet belieue neither the corporall presence, Pref.nor any proper, or propitiatory Sacrifice.

Answ. But to omit that the ancient Fathers most frequently mention a Proper sacrifice too, yea and a reall and corporall pre­sence of Christ his body and blood in, that sacrifice of the Altar, [Page 138]wherin the Priest is sacrificant; & that all these things & names are equally frequented by the vse of ancient Fathers; it were well to consider whither this euasion will lead vs? to wit, into the very Hell of Sonanianisme. Will you proue the Fathers belie­ued the Trinity? Why? Because there is frequent mention in them of three Persons, Father, Sonne, and the Holy Ghost. We Socinians also vse these names, and yet we belieue not the Trini­ty, in the now Popish sense: nay they might apply this euasion to whatsoeuer mystery of fayth, now generally belieued by Christians, and of frequent mention in the holy Fathers.

Pref. Lastly (sayth he) what if Protestants be now put in mynd that for exposition of Scriptures they are bound by a Canon to follow the ancient Fathers, which whosoeuer doth with sincerity, it is vtterly impossible he should be a Papist.

Answ. There spake a Iewell: Behold the Phenix newly hatcht in his ashes, & already flush; now this was well flowne surely; he was resolu'd to strike home. And an Hyperbole flyes from him with as great facility as an euen Truth; but I know his shift, that the Fathers had some priuate opinions, which the Church hath antiquated, and Catholiques now hold not orthodox; therfore they, who follow them (will this Aduocate say) cannot be Papists. But this consequence is not worth a rush; for those Fathers neuer held those opinions in opposition a­gainst the Church, but were alway's ready to follow what the Church would determine in those points of doctrine, as then vndefined, like as they most readily imbraced all her doctrines already defined. By which two Catholique properties their actuall conspiring in things defined, and preparation to con­spire in things to be defined, they were truly Papists; and who­soeuer follow's those Fathers in this, it is vtterly impossible he should not be a Papist.

The rest ensuing in his vindication of English Deuines is partly nothingelse but animosity of deniall, and offering as it were, to course sense with reason; to proue by reason that the eyes of men see not what they see, or see what they see not; partly meere impertinences, nothing to disprooue that change and al­teration which his Aduersary describes, but neither censures, nor reprehends at all, as this Sophist would make men belieue. [Page 139]which done; then after his solemne manner of conclusion, he triumph's, sicut exaltant victores captâ predâ quando diuidunt spolia; as victor's are wont to exult hauing gotten some booty when they deuide the spoyles. For euen so he deuides his presumed victory amongst his friends, giuing euery man his share.

Pref. And thus, my friends, I suppose, are clearely vindicated from your scandal's and Calumnies.

Answ. No doubt as clearely, as those were truly Calum­nies and scandal's; which were either none, or they were his, and of his owne making, as I suppose I haue clearely proued.

His Answere to some personall Imputations.
SECT. XXXVII.

Pref. IT remaineth now that in the last place I bring my selfe fairely off, from your foule aspersions.

Answ. Thus the Aduocate, now his owne Clyent. But by his leaue if this method can stand with the order of Charity, which (they say) begins at home; sure it doth not with the order of good Rhetorique, according to which order he should first haue remoued his personall pre­iudices, that he might be heard more fauourably in the behalfe of his Clyents, or friends. God himselfe may seeme to haue prescribed this order: Peccatori autem dixit Deus, Psalm. 49.quare tu enarras Iustitias meas? God said to the Sinner, why dost thou preach my righteousnes? God himselfe would not be iustified by a sinner. Which very words of the holy King, when that great Origen, after his lapse, moued by some intreaty of friends to say some­thing out of the Chaire, had chanc't to fall vpon them, at the first ouerture of the booke, are reported by some, to haue drawne teares from his repentant silence insteed of speach of explicatiō. By this rule then, he should not in the last, but rather in the first place haue iustified himselfe, that so, all rubbs of exception a­gainst his owne Person, being taken away, his iustification of other men, might haue found a smoother way to the acceptāce of indifferent iudgments. But I can as easily pardon his fayling [Page 140]in the rules of Rhetorique, as of Logick, of which he makes so loud profession, and which he hath taken for his Cynosure in Religion, in place of the Church of God: yet if he affoard vs but truth, in any method or order whatsoeuer, for my part, I can be satisfied.

Let vs now behold how he wipes off those foule aspersi­ons. They are only a number of false and impious doctrines petty charges, which he saith, he will not name in particular, & in that professeth his owne discretion and prouidence, not to assist his Ad­uersary, in spreading of his owne vndeserued defamation. And yet, for all that, some man would thinke so many and mighty imputa­tions, should deserue an Apology. Now in one word (and that a word which no Socinian cares for) he answers all.

Pref. Whosoeuer teaches, or holds them, let him be Anathema: A­gaine. The summe of all those charges cast vp by your self, is this: Nothing ought, or can be certainely belieued, further then it may be proued, by eui­dence of naturall reason; whosoeuer hold's so, let him be Anathema.

Answ. You haue his Laconique Answer to all. Now, Syr, if the man be yet a Socinian (as the presumption that he is, is ve­ry graue and grounded) what hath he said, in saying, let him be Anathema? What waight hath this imprecation in the Socinian schoole? Truly as much as a feather blowne to and fro by the wynd, a fancy, an opinion, alterable with euery change of ima­gination, nay with euery alteration of affection. So, what is A­nathema to day, Cell. lib. [...]. c. 5. in the worse sense, an imprecation or execra­tion, may be to morrow Anathema in the better sense, that is, a consecration; what to day is a curse, way be a blessing to mor­row. Nor is it easy to conceaue, in whether sense he takes Ana­thema, by way of cursing, or blessing. For I vehemently sus­pect, he neuer meant to curse the fauourer's of those opinions, to whom, I doubt not, but he wishes, as to himselfe; yea and whose deferts towards himself, haue gain'd no small interest & title to his well wishings; wherfore what he sayth, He who holds so, let him be Anathema, may in the Socinian intendment, be no more but this, he who hold's so, long may he liue.

Yet for a more expesse discharging himself from all imputa­tions of this nature, namely of such as charge him with deniall of supernaturall Verities, what sayth he? marry, He belieues all [Page 141]those book's of Scripture which the Church of England account's Canoni­call,Pref.to be the infallible word of God.

Answ. You see the Resolution of his Fayth into the Autho­rity of the Church of England. Where you may note, that he sayth, not that he belieues it infallibly, or that those bookes are infallibly the word of God, but that they are the infallible word of God; where that (infallible) is a meere fallacious Pleo­nasme, a redundant and superfluous accession to the word of God. Whence it followeth only, that he belieues this with a fallible Fayth, and therefore no diuine Fayth; which he doth consequently to his principles: for holding the motiue of his beliefe, that is, the authority of the Church of England, as of all o­ther Churches, to be but fallible and capable of errour, his be­liefe can haue no greater assurance then that motiue hath. But then it followeth, that he hath no infallible assurance of these Bookes, that they are the word of God: Ergo, he hath no assu­rance that the contents of these Bookes are supernaturall Veri­ties, or Verities at all: Ergo, with this may stand his deniall of supernaturall Verities.

And that you may Vnderstand that he belieues the afore­said Verities, with a Socinian fayth only, he ioyneth in one and the same tenure of beliefe, things euidently contayned in those Canonicall Bookes, with things probably deducible from the same. Whence thus I argue. If he belieues, as his words expresse, things euidently contained in those Bookes, with no more as­surance, then he belieues things euen probably deducible thence; then he belieues neither with assurance of diuine fayth: Ergo, he belieues them not as supernaturall Verities, to the be­liefe of which, humane fayth can neuer ascend, as being out of the reach and extent of all such Fayth: therefore, as yet, and by this profession, he hath not cleared himselfe from the imputa­tion of Socinianisme, and Infidelity.

An Act of Parlament, the motiue of his beliefe. His fallacious refuge.
SECT. XXXVIII.

Pref. FVrthermore I acknowledge all that to be Heresy which by the Act of Parliament, primo Elizabethae, is de­clared to be so.

Answ. With this acknowledgment may well consist the deniall of all supernaturall verities, according to my former deduction. And this is surely a strong presum­ption that he belieues an act of Parlament, with no greater as­surance, then the decrees of a Generall Councell: yea, and that he belieues the Parlament rather then a Generall Councell, shews that such his beliefe is grounded vpon his affection, not his iudgment; for no poyse of iudiciall motiues can preponde­rate, or sway him rather towards a Parlament. Wherefore since none of these motiues, or authorities yield him assurance, that such contents of Canonicall Bookes, are supernaturall verities, it followeth no way out of his beliefe of these, that he belieues any supernaturall verity, as such: Ergo, notwithstanding this profession, he is a Socinian still.

Which, though it be so, yet I will not do him wrong, nor say he hath effected nothing by this his syncere profession and acknowledgment. But what hath he done? Forsooth, he hath cuningly put himself vnder the wing's of the State; he hath re­tired himself into the sanctuary of Protestancy; by this meanes he hath ingaged them in his quarrell, whose religion he profes­seth: so that whatsoeuer inconuenience, as irreligion, nullity of diuine fayth, lastly Socinianisme it self, shall be deduced as consequent out of his disclaiming the authority of the Cath. Church, and acknowledging a Parlamentary religion, and au­thority in determining Canonicall Scripture, & declaring He­resies, must fall first vpon the English Protestants, and must be answered by them. Thus while he endeauours to bring himself off fairely from those foule aspersiōs, he draw's them on whom [Page 143]he pretends to vindicate: and thus he brings about his owne ends, and couertly aduanceth his owne designe, which is to ruine all Religion.

His fallacious Hypocrisy.
SECT. XXXIX.

WHat he talkes of retaining liberty in points which may be diuersly held satuâ fides compage, the iun­cture or structure of fayth remaining safe, is a ri­diculous Hypocrisy in him, who endeauours by his doctrine and principles to demolish the very foundation of Christian Fayth, which is the infallibility of diuine Reuela­tion; I meane, the infallibility of that authority which declares it to be such; and consequently, that vnquestionable certainty vpon which Christian Fayth relyeth being taken away, not to leaue one stone vpon another in this earthly or militant Hie­rusalem, in the building of Fayth. And can you haue further pa­tience to heare any more of his Sophistique Hypocrisy? For he know's, that all Christiās would spit defiance in his face, should he not seeme to speak somewhat like a Christian.

Pref. Yet thus much I can say (quoth he) which I hope will sa­tisfy any man of reason that whatsoeuer hath beene held necessary to sal­uation either by the Catholique Church of all ages, or by the consent of Fa­thers, measured by Vincentius Litinensis his rules; or is held neces­sarie either by the Catholique Church of this age, or by the consent of Pro­testants &c. That, against the Socinians, and all others, I do verily be­licue and imbrace.

Answ. Can any man belieue he writes what he thinkes, if he vnderstand what he writes? For who doubts but the Catho­lique Church of all ages hath held the beliefe of an infallible Church, as a point of Christian Fayth? For how could the Ca­tholique Church gathered togeather in Generall Councels, a­nathematize and condemne whosoeuer refused to subscribe to her decrees in points of fayth, had not the same Church sup­posed her self to haue infallible authority for all such decisions and decrees? Therefore he who belieues what the Catholique [Page 144]Church holds necessary to be belieued, belieues this.

Now obserue in these very words (by the Catholique Church of this age, or, by the consent of Protestants) how he makes the Pro­testants a member of his diuision a part from the Catholiques. Wherein also he preuaricates egregiously, granting to the Ro­man Church that attribute of Catholique, which hath euer di­stinguish't the Church of God, from all Hereticall Societies & Separatist's; and giuing to his Protestant, the particular name of Separation, which hath euer bene held a speciall character of Heresy. Now it is euident, that the Catholique Church of this age as distinguish't from Protestants, holds this point as a point of fayth, and necessary to saluation, That the Church of God is endued with infallible authority for determining questions or doctrines of Fayth [...] which very point he constantly denyes. Therefore it is false, that he belieues (if he belieue as he writes) whatsoeuer the Catholique Church of all ages, or the Catholi­que Church of this age, holdeth necessary to be belieued.

His Purgation concerning temporall respects, as Motiues to his change of Religion.
SECT. XL.

Pref. ANother great and manifest iniury you haue done me, in charging me to haue for saken your Religion because it conduced not to my temporall ends &c. Whereof if you could conuince me, by iust & strong presumptions, I should then acknowledge my selfe to deserue that opinion &c. that I changed not your Religion for any other, but for none at all.

Answ. His Aduersary seemes to charge him, that hauing forsaken the Catholique, he finally plunged himselfe into So­cinianisme: now this Aduocate confesseth in these words, that Socinianisme is no religion, which notwithstanding in the very same page he ranketh in the number of Christian professions. For now he grants, that if he can be conuinced, to haue chan­ged the Catholique, for Socinianisme, he hath chāged it for no re­ligion at all. It is true, that this his chāge for Socinianisme can be [Page 145]proued no otherwise, but by his owne words and actions, which if they haue vpon seuerall occasions, before many wit­nesses proclamed his iudgment concerning points of Christian Religion, to harmonize with the doctrines and principles of knowne and profest Socinians; surely these are presumptions strong inough, at least as strong as can be expected, in question of iudgment and opinions of men.

But now, to the substance of the charge he saith nothing; onely he attemps to disproue the motiues: that is, to proue those temporall ends, to haue beene no motiues of his change; which yet is more then he doth, or can do. Therfore in behalfe of those presumed ends, and in confirmation of that presumpti­on, thus I argue; only supposing first, that he was in his wits when he made the change, that it was voluntary; and then se­condly that no man in his wits, and voluntarily maketh any change but for some end or ends; then thus: Whosoeuer may out of his owne words and demeanours be conuinced to haue changed religion, for no religion, may be conuinced to haue changed for temporall ends: But M. Ch. may be conuinced out of his owne words &c. to haue changed religion for no reli­gion: Ergo, for temporall ends. That Catholique religion is Religion, or a Religion, himselfe grantes; That Socinianisme is no Religion he often seemes to grant, and howsoeuer, it is ea­sily proued: That he changed the Catholique for Socinianisme, his owne words, and actions, and written doctrines testify e­uidently inough. Now, that no man changeth religion for no religion but for temporall ends, is, I thinke, vndeniable. For can any man be imagined to abandone all religion, for an e­uerlasting end? What? to be the talke perhaps of posterity sup­posed neuer to end? As he who is said to haue burn't Dianas Temple at Ephesus, to be diffamed throughout the world, and after ages, for his villany and irreligion? But let vs ponder his reasons, by which he refutes this presumption of temporall end's.

Pref. How is it possible, that I should haue deserted your religion for end's, and our of desire of preferment; since I refused (which also you impute vnto me) to subscribe the 39. Articles; that is, refused to enter at the Common doore, which heere in England lead's to preferment.

Answ. This is easily answerd by saying; Some there are who enter, Joh. 10. and not by the common doore; no nor by the doore. A­gaine those temporall ends might be many other, besides Ec­clesiastique preferments; from enioying which, this refusall of subscription could not exclude him. But yet againe (sayth he) bow incredible is it, that you should belieue, that I forsook your religion as not suting with my desires and designes, Pref.which yet reconciles the enioying of the pleasures and profits of sinne here, with the hope of happines hereafter?

Answ. This is manifestly false, that Catholique Religion reconcileth the enioying of sinfull pleasures, or profits of this life, with hope of eternall happines: but rather professeth and protesteth with S. Paul. Neque fornicarij &c. 1. Cor. 6. neither Fornicators, nor I dolaters, nor aduouterers, nor the effeminate &c. shall pos­sesse the kingdom of God. Yea further, the Catholique Church denounceth Anathema against all such, as Luther, Caluin, and the rest, who reconcile Iustification with deadly sinne, either by non-imputation, or soli-fayth &c. therefore of the Church it may be truly said, Non enim qui operantur iniquitatem; in vijs eius am­bulauerunt; for they who worke iniquity haue not walk' [...] in her ways (of doctrine.) Catholique doctrine denying all possibi­lity of consistency to mortall sinne with sanctifying grace, pre­cludes all such sinne from hope of enioying eternall happines: therefore he whose hopes ayme at any such reconciliation, hath made a choyce better suting with his desires, by changing the Catholique for Protestancy.

Pref. But the profession of Catholique Religion proposeth as great hopes of great temporal aduancements to the capable seruants of it, as any, nay more then any religion in the world.

Answ. But what then, if it proposed no such hopes to him? If in so great a multitude of capable seruants, and those of an­cient and tryed seruice and fidelity, who for that cause might very well expect to be preferred before him, a late Proselyte, nor sufficiently tried; what, I say, if by reason of this interposall of so many iust pretenders, aduancement from that profession stood aloofe to him, and proposed to his hopes at a vast di­stance, with litle probability of approach in any short space; which proposition so qualified, could be but a weak attractiue to a spirit ambitious that way. And then, what if he saw a shor­ter [Page 147]way to such aduancement, proposed to him at home, and extended towards him, euen ouer the seas by a full and able hand: Ʋaler. Flaccus. as when Glory appeared from the transmarine shore to that Grecian Prince Iason, with a laurell in her hand; was it then incredible, that if the motiues to his change were tempo­rall ends, he would lay hands on the most likely meanes, and most conducing to those ends? If he will giue vs leaue to be­lieue he had such ends, since we cannot choose but belieue it; sure he will giue vs leaue to thinke he was no foole. Both which supposed, the presumption of his Aduersary is iust and strong inough, that he quit the Catholique for temporall ends.

Pref. But it is incredible, that if he had such ends, or desires, he should make choyce of Socinianisme, Because (sayth he) Soci­nianisme explicates the law's of Christ, with more rigour, and lesse in­dulgence and condescendence, to the desires of flesh and blood then Catho­lique doctrine doth.

Answ. How true this is I will not heere dispute, but giue it true. So did the Manichaans, so the Donatists, so the Tertullianists, so some other Heresies explicate some points of Christian do­ctrine, and some sentences of Scripture, more rigidly, and more repugnantly to flesh and blood, then the Catholique Church did; and therfore those Explicator's were Heretiques, and their rigor of doctrine Heresy, because a man may be an Heretique vs well, for the more, as for the lesse.

But what is this to the surpose, that Sucinianisme explicates the Law's of Christ with greater rigour, if it bind no man to belieue them, or to belieue that they are the law's of Christ the Sonne of God, and therefore obligatory; but leaues euery man free to his owne reason, to belieue so much of them as he think's fit? where is then the rigour? So the doctrine of Caluin explicate's the lawes of God, the Ten Commaundments not only hard, but impossible to be kept: Loe, the rigour of explication; Loe. but therefore he bind's no man to keep them: Loe, the indulgence of application.

That Socinianisme is the readiest way to temporall Aduancements.
SECT. XLI.

ANother reason of incredibility, that if the Motiue to abandon the Catholique Church, had beene tempo­rall respects or ends, he would haue imbraced Soci­nianisme, is this as followeth.

Pref. Socintanisme is a doctrine by which no man in his right mynd, [...]an hope for any honour or preferment, either in this Church, or state, or any other.

Answ. This I deny, and auouch the quite contrary, which is this; that in any Protestant, or not Catholique State, a Soci­nian is most capable of aduancement. My reason; because Soci­nianisme bindeth no man to professe it publiquely, nay, it im­poseth no obligation to any exterior act whatsoeuer, which may yield the least sent, or suspicion of it; nay rather by the maine principle of it, (sana ratio) right reason, such as they terme right, which so appeareth to euery man in particular, they are obliged to exhibit no signe or shew at all, which may hinder or crosse their designes: therefore Socinianisme obligeth rather to all exteriour conformity.

Since therefore all Heresy is subiect to change and altera­tion, alterable by the authority by which it stands; the Socinian of all other is most ready to change with it; and to conforme himselfe to any Church, or state whatsoeuer; as the waxe as yet vnprinted is capable of any impression; and the Eye hauing in it self no colour, receaues the formes or idols of all colours. Therefore in such a Church or State, no Sect is endued with so great aduantages as Socinianisme is, which can without any dif­ficulty or demurre put on the guise and liuery of any profes­sion. The Socinian can be a Puritan to day, to morrow a Prote­stant, the third day an Arminian, and the fourth an Arrian; and af­ter, so, or so; or neither so, nor so.

Nor can I doubt but this is indeed the very principall cause [Page 149]why so many make this choyce. For the Socinian is the only He, who sayles with euery wynd, whiles other professors, some out of tendernesse or scruple, iniected by the principles of their doctrine, dare not yeild to the countermaund of secular authority; others out of animosity of opposition, or, as it were, the pride of their choyce, will not conforme; others out of the extreme hate of what they feare (the hate, I say, of that truth which they feare will preuaile) will not come in; and while all these, either by their not yielding, or by direct opposition, run hazard of their fortunes, yea liues and liberty; the smooth-faced Socinian arides euery change; derides the folly of Non-confor­mants; swims aloft like a Corke; fall's and rises with the wa­ues; whatsoeuer stormes against religion, or be the seas neuer so rough, he will neuer drowne: in briefe, he is the one Pamphylus and Eutrapelus of tymes and fortunes, the only State-humou­rer, and State-complyer. He might passe for a very wiseman in some heathen Philosophy; a very Atheist in Christianity. And tell me now, is not this man in the high rode-way of prefer­ment, if (which he must, if he be true to his principles) he can but keep his owne Counsell, or impart it only to his confi­dents?

Adde vnto all this, that wheresoeuer rules of Policy or Rea­sons of State sway the Gouernment, more then rules of Piety or Religion, the Socinian will be thought the fittest instrument for imployment in State-affaires; who wil be wrought to any circumstance of aduantage; who will vndertake, yea and make good way through all those difficulties which neither Reli­gion nor Honesty would venture vpon. For who can que­stion the aduantage which he hath ouer a Religion-bound Conscience, who himselfe hath either none, or a Socinian one, which is so flexible & changing with euery turne of fancy or affection, varying with euery variety of occasion? All which demonstrates (to vse his word's) that this foule aspersion is no false one; or at the least not so cleanly wip't out, but that not­withstanding all his purgations and compurgations, it stick's as fast and deepe as euer it did.

The Aduocates misconstructions of his Aduersaries Direction, declared to be a iust and charitable Admonition.
SECT. XLII.

AS for the fountaine whence this Aduocate supposeth these aspersions to haue proceded from a hart (sayth he) abounding with the gall and bitternes of vncharitablenes, Pref.and euen blind with malice towards him; I verily think who­soeuer knows both parties, will neuer belieue this censure, nei­ther as proceeding from the one, nor as against the other. The Censurer will neuer deserue so much credit as to be delieued; nor the Censured so much discredit as to be suspected of so much malice. Besides that (as I am informed) his Charity and cur­tesy extended to this plainant in tyme and place, haue deserued a better construction, were he not growne now so forgetfull of all that he learned among Catholikes, that he hath forgotten to construe Charity in any Christian language, either words or deeds.

He might haue construed this foule aspersion, (which he so call's) no aspersion at all, but an Admonition, and a needfull one, least others might receaue infection from his contagious pen. He might haue interpreted it as proceeding from Zeale, not a peruerse Zeale (as his words are) to his superstition, which himselfe, this Aduocate, immediatly after call's the Catholique Cause. Now to call the Catholique cause, or Religion, superstitio [...], is indeed (to vse the phraze of the Chayre) a very Bull.

And howsoeuer he construes it, out of his owne not Zeale (which were a mere Solecisme in Socinianisme) but his ouer, and ouer, and many tymes peruerted iudgment; yet other more sober and vnderstanding men, comparing this Admonition with the profession and function of the Admonisher, will in­terprete it a duety, or a necessary Charity.

They I say, who shall consider, that the prudence of Al­mighty [Page 151]God ouer his Church, hath for all tymes deputed cer­taine men to the charge and office of Gardian, of Watch, of Sen­tinell, according to that of the Prophet, Jsa. 62: Super mures tues Hierusa­lem constitui custodes &c. Vpon thy wals, Hierusalem, I haue pla­ced watchmen; will not only hold them worthy pardon but prayse too, who discharge this office faythfully: which fol­loweth in that place, Totâ die & nocte non tacebunt &c. Day nor night they shall not be silent. And if men of that charge and prefe­cture be worthily honoured with the appellation of Angels; to them most fitly may be applyed what the other Prophet sayth; Angelis suis Deus mandauit de te &c. God hath charged his angels to guard thee &c.

Yea were the Incumbent of such a Ministery neuer so meane of quality, yet the obligation fals vpon him with his function, to signify the approach of the thiefe or enemy: Ezech. 33. and they who shall heare this sound of signification, are likewise bound to take notice, and stand vpon their Guard.

And yet if there be any who shall hold, either their owne, or other the like watchments silence or conniuency in these oc­casions of impendent dangers, their greater prudence or discre­tion; yet euen this their prudhominy, or caution may be so much the more exensable, if their stilnes be supplied by the barking of others. And for this cause, they will (I thinke) at the least excuse, if not cherish such, who by discharging them, vnder­take the whole burden of Enuy and perill vpon themselues.

But to such a minister who hath apostated, and reapostated from Religion (take which you will) who hath delegated any such authority? Vnles he will take it for his warrant, which is written in the Canticles, Posuerunt me custodem in vineis, Cant. [...]Vineam meam non custodiui: they haue appointed me a keeper in the vi­neyards, my owne Vineyard I haue not kept: surely almighty God gaue him no such keeping.

And howsoeuer he think's the preiudice of his Person so of­ten false and faultring in Religion, should in equity be no dis­paragement to his doctrine, or disaduantage to his Plea; yet it is certainly so great and iust a preiudice, that it dischargeth all men from giuing eare or credit to his reasons, whatsoeuer they be; and whatsoeuer he argues to the contrary in this place, [Page 152]might as well Apologize for the Diuel; who no doubt could vrge as strong and pressing Reasons; against any profession of Religion, as this Adnocate hath either learn't, or can learne of him; and yet I suppose no man is bound with indifference to heare Reason from the Diuell; no, although he preach Ghos­pell.

Yea I dare presume to say, had Christ himself beene pre­iudged in the opinions of indifferent and vnderstanding men, by the like presumptions, so strongly and clearely made good against him, the not acceptance of the Iewes had beene at the least excusable. Which he himselfe not obscurely fignified by his appeale to themselues, Quis ex vobis arguet me de peccate? Who of you can charge me with any sinne? as supposing that a suf­ficient warrant of their recusancy, if they could iustly charge him with any sinne, much more if they could haue charged him with so grieuous a crime, as Infidelity, or Socinianisme.

For who can belioue him who is presumed not to belieue himself? For be his reasons neuer so strong, yet he will be sup­posed able to answere them, since he belieues not the doctrine built vpon those reasons.

No. Syr, it cannot, it must not be otherwise; this preiudice must in reason staue off all beliefe, vntill it be remoued. And if either Bellarmine could haue beene proued a Iew, or Peron an Atheist, as easily & as credibly, as this Minister-Aduocate (who by these base adiections, seeltes to fly-blow their worthily me­mories with suspition) can be proued a Socinian, Calum­ny. which is im­plicitely both Iew, and Atheist; their works and writings would haue as litle credit and authority, as themselues fayth and religion.

Wherefore the Christian Reader (that the streame of this Ministers discourse turned another way, may serue to good vse,

knowing that his Saluation, depends vpon his impartiall and fyncere iudgment of these things (now to harken to Ortho­doxe and seriously Christian Doctors, rather then to Renega­do's and T [...]aitor [...] to all states of Religion, and to bend a more [Page 153]inclinable eare to Vertue then to Vice, is no partiality at all) will guard himself I hope from such impostors, and will regard the person also, not only his reasons; and who it is speaks to him, not only what he speakes; knowing that if the Diuell vt­ter some truthes, euen in those truthes he conceales a false and diuellish meaning: and after that he hath gained credit by the attractiue splendor of some true doctrines, he will hope to be belieued euen when he lyes; and so howsoeuer appearing first in the inuesture of light and truth, he will proue an Angell of darknes and Imposture.

It hath beene the vsuall Practise of all hereticall writers, to embellish their discourses, with as many verities as they could possibly inculcate, without apparent contradiction or repug­nancy. Euen this deuise begot not a little esteeme, to the Ans­werer of Charity mistaken; he had employed his care to make his work popular and taking, by the intermedling of many Catho­lique truth's; this was it, which so much commended it to the vulgar Reader, whose capacity could not sound the incohe­rence and inconsistency of those truth's with the fashood's, which he principally intended to bring into credit, by consor­ting thom with those: therefore when he heard his worke so popularly applauded, he might haue said with great truth, and modesty, as she who hearing her self highly praysed for the hayre she wore, said ‘Nescis quam pro melaudat nunc iste Sicambram.’

The rest which followeth in this Prefatory Answere to the Direction, and immediatly precedeth his Conclusion, is a briefe recollection (as it seemes) of what is scattered in his en­suing Volume, trust vp together with a number of points, fast­ned all to one chiefe point, and maine head of Doctrine, which is indeed a most false Principle in the sense he pretendeth; That all things necessary to Saluation are euidently contained in Scriptures. Whence it will follow, that the beliefe of the B. Trinity is not necessary to Saluation, as which, in this Aduocates opinion (as I haue noted heretofore) is not euidently reuealed in the Scri­ptures.

And yet grant this principle true; it will follow, that the authority determining Controuersies of fayth, cannot be the [Page 154]Scripture, but the Church; for it is notorious that some Her eti­call doctrines haue beene grounded vpon some ineuident pas­sages of Scripture, and those vented as doctrines of fayth, and therefore as necessarily to be belieued, or at the least not reie­cted by an expresse misbeliefe.

Againe, some parts of Scripture may haue an euident con­struction to one, which to another may be darke and obscure; then the doctrine inferred vpon that euidence, will be of fayth to him to whom it is euidently contained in Scripture; to ano­ther who will deny the euidence, because he see's it not, it will not be so: What authority then, other then the Church shall de­termine the true sense of this part of Scripture, euident and ine­uident, especially (which may often fall out) if no other more euident Scripture, can be brought in, as a witnesse of greater authority to cleare the doubt?

Heere then the doctrine of Fundamentalls and not Fun­damentals, will be good for nothing, but to bring in more Fayths, yea contradictory Fayths; since all points of Fayth are Fundamentall, so as necessarily to be belieued by him to whom they are euidently contained in Scripture; and none funda­mentall to him, to whom they are not euidently contained in Scripture, and therefore not necessary to be belieued.

And if you say, that such points euidently contained in regard of some vnderstanding, not euidently to another, are none of those which are cōmaunded to be preached to all men (which euasion this Aduocate may seeme to haue reserued,) how will this be proued? since our Sauiours commaund is in general termes this, Praedicate Euangelium hoc omnicreaturae. Preach this Ghospell to all the world; he sayth not, these, or these points of the Ghospell, and no more. And yet againe: Quod aeu­distis in aurem praedicate super tectae, what you haue heard in secret, preach it publiquely.

But especially when any controuersy concerning do­ctrine of fayth ariseth, and some Heresy is authorized by some supposed euidence of Scripture, then the contrary truth is to be preach't and publish't to the whole Church, least that Heresy should be imbraced for a truth of Fayth, or the word of God; yea God himselfe pretended the Author of that vntruth, or He­resy, [Page 155]which pretence is a very high and low'd Blasphemy.

By which may appeare the grosse and palpable absurdity of this Ministers doctrine, legitimating as it were all Adulte­rate and suprious Doctrines, and Heresies, by saying; Nothing that is obscure can be necessary, to be vnderstood, or not mistaken. Which is indeed one of his capitall Principles, and a chiefe support of his doctrine.

For I aske, Is not the mistaking, or misinterpreting of some parts of Scripture the very source of some Hereticall doctrines? and those Scriptures the greatest strength and colour, that gi­ueth credit and countenance to such Heresies? Is not then, the not-mistaking of such Scriptures necessary, euen as necessary, as it is that such doctrines should not preuaile, or win credit by the authority of those Scriptures? For though the true vnder­standing of some obscure parts of Scripture be not necessary, yet it is necessary that such obscure parts be not so mistaken as to warrant Heresy by their authority.

If therefore out of that first principle, by this Minister pre­sumed, a thousand other absurdities follow, such as those, by him deduced howsoeuer, (for I will not examine the regularity of those deductions) what is this to the matter in hand? For this was not the Direction or Caueat giuen him by his Aduersary, that he should not answere out of this principle of Protestancy; but that he should not out of those other specified by his Dire­ctor, those Socinian principles, which euen Protestants abhorre.

The Conclusion of his Preface, with his fallacious Apology for himselfe.
SECT. XLIII.

HE concludes after his self-plauding manner, as I haue often noted before.

Pref. And thus your Venome against me, is in a manner spent.

Answ. Which words I take notice of also heere, that you may obserue with me the spirit of his style perpetuate through­out [Page 156]his whole worke; and with all, the difference betweene it and his Aduersari [...]s Pen; and then tell me whether this be not the spirit of a Spider indeed, which findeth venome euen where none is; whome therfore (that is, Aduocare and Spider) I shall not doubt to ioyne in one and the same Word; which mall be this, for the tyme.

Pref. Now only two litle impertinenties remaine: the first, that I re­fused to subscribe the Articles of the Church of England: the second, my mortues which first induced me to forsake Protestantis [...]e.

Answ. So he; and to the first he answer's in effect this.

Pref. That the doctrine of the Church of England is so pure and Orthodoxe, that whosoeuer belieues it, and liues according to it, vndoub­tedly he shall be sau [...]d. That there is no error in it which may nocesutate, or warrant a man, to disturbe the peace, or renounce the Communion of it. Which acknowledgment he is persuaded is the only thing in­tended by subscription.

Answ. By this you see he hath now leueled his way to Ec­clesiasticall preferment; so that, if hereafter you heare he hath accepted any such commodity, you many know he did it vpon better consideration. The scruple he had concerning subscri­ption is vanish't into the aire, whither the rest of his scruples will follow in their turnes. It may be that scruple was but a melancholique Dreame, such as he conceaues Luthers confe­rence with the Diuell might be. He is now Materia prima, for any benefice, Chayre, Prebendary, Chanonry, or what yee will: you may coniecture who hath had the tempering, and working of this pliable clay; he was a Maister in that feat you may assure your selfe, if not a Doctor, and this his Maister­peece.

To the second impertinency concerning his motiues he answere's: Pref. That it is more impertinent and friuolous then the former; Vnlesse (sayth he) it he a iust exception against a Physician, that him­selfe was sometymes in, and recener [...]d himself from that disease which he vndertakes to cure; or against a Guide in a way, that at first, before he had experience himselfe misto [...]ke it, and afterward [...] so and his error, and [...] it. That [...] Micha [...] de Montaigne, wassurely of [Page 157]a farre different mynd, for he will hardly allow any Physician competem, but only for such diseases, as himself had passed through; and a farre grea­ter then Montaigne.

Answ. (I pray you by the way take notice of this, as not spoken by chance, or without due reflection, least any man should question whether authority were of greater waight in the Socinian balance, Iesus Christ, or Michael de Montaigne.)

Pref. Euen he that said. Tu conuersus confirma sratres tuos, thou being conuerted confimre thy brethren, giues vs sufficiently to vnder­stand, that they which haue themselues beene in such a state, as to need conuersion, are not thereby made incapable. of, but rather engaged, and obliged vnto, and qualified for this charitable function.

Answ. He might haue added to this, that the Hollander's (men say) make speciall choyce of such men, for Pilot's, and Maisters of ships, who haue formerly wrack't many ships in the tyme of their Maister-ship.

Now truly, this might passe for a pretty Probleme or Im­perrinent to be disputed in the Qu [...]dlibets; and I do not see but like a Boole it would run either way, or be shot like an Ar­row at either But. Yet surely for the Physician he would grant him a very straite commission, and confine his practise within the compasse of a very few cures: or else if his Pattents were for both sides-Trent for example, he would make his body a very Apothecaries shop which had tryed the Poisons of most kinds of druggs. And I do not know why a Physitian so qua­lified, that is so generally infected and diseased, might not giue a man a sicknes, as soone as a cure.

Howsoeuer (to run along with him in the same way) if his owne diseases in a Physician; or mistaking the way in a Guide; or the many shipwrack's of a Pilot, may make either Guide, or Pilot, or Physician more competent in their seuerall professions; surely this Minister is the man who hath beene sick of euery Religion; and hath mistaken euery Way; and hath ship wrackt euery ship he hath sail'd in: Ergo, who can doubt but the choice of such a Guide, such a Pilot, such a Phyfician, is very proper and warrantable?

For his Conuersion, though some will perhaps deny, that face his first turne to the Catholique, he hath euer beene in any [Page 158]such state, as to need conuersion, who hath beene euer since in motion: yet if Conuersion may make a man, not incapable Of, but rather ingaged and obliged Vnto, and qualified For this cha­ritable function, of conuerting his brethren; surely this man hath beene conuerted to, and from euery Religion, and so hath brethren on euery side. For I belieue he hath had more Con­uersions in one yeare, then the Sunne hath Tropiques, yea per­haps as many more.

Since therefore the speciall aduantages of his Person for such an employment, are so paliable; he may seeme to wrong him, who would goe about to disable him from being a fit Ad­uocate of the Protestant cause, euen by that which most of all enables and qualifies him, for this charitable function.

Nay, what will you say, if these very Motiues themselues, which first drew him to Catholique Religion, now obiected against him by his Aduersary, as to disparage him, proue his ad­uantages (so wonderfully do all things concurre to aduance his designes?) For let the Papist take them in the worst sense he can; as that these Motiues were indeed diuine immissions, or as embassies from God himself; will it not then follow in very good Logick, Gen. 32. yea and Diuinity too, Si contra Deum fortis fuisti, quantò magis contra homines praeualebis? If thou hast beene strong, and inuincible against God himselfe, how much more easily shalt thou preuaile against Papists?