Qvi non credit condemnabitvr Marc. 16. Or A discourse prouing, that a man who beleeueth in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion &c. & yet beleeueth not all other inferiour articles of Christian fayth, cannot be saued And consequently, that both the Catholike, and the Protestant (seeing the one necessarily wanteth true fayth) cannot be saued. Written by William Smith, Priest. Smith, William, Priest. 1625 Approx. 261 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 90 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2012-10 (EEBO-TCP Phase 2). A73183 STC 22872.5 ESTC S124609 99899073 99899073 150754

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.

Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 2, no. A73183) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 150754) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1475-1640 ; 1978:7) Qvi non credit condemnabitvr Marc. 16. Or A discourse prouing, that a man who beleeueth in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion &c. & yet beleeueth not all other inferiour articles of Christian fayth, cannot be saued And consequently, that both the Catholike, and the Protestant (seeing the one necessarily wanteth true fayth) cannot be saued. Written by William Smith, Priest. Smith, William, Priest. [172] p. [by the English College Press] for Iohn Heigham, with permission, At S. Omers : anno 1625. Printer's name from STC. Signatures: A-X⁴ Y² . Reproduction of original in the Peterhouse College Library, Cambridge, England.

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.

eng Faith -- Early works to 1800. Salvation -- Early works to 1800. 2020-09-21 Content of 'availability' element changed when EEBO Phase 2 texts came into the public domain 2011-07 Assigned for keying and markup 2011-07 Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2011-08 Sampled and proofread 2011-08 Text and markup reviewed and edited 2012-05 Batch review (QC) and XML conversion

QVI NON CREDIT CONDEMNABITVR MARC. 16.

OR A diſcourſe prouing, that a man who beleeueth in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Paſſion &c. & yet beleeueth not all other inferiour articles of Chriſtian fayth, cannot be ſaued.

AND Conſequently, that both the Catholike, and the Proteſtant (ſeeing the one neceſſarily wanteth true fayth) cannot be ſaued.

Written by WILLIAM SMITH, Prieſt.

He that beleeueth not, ſhalbe condemned. Marc. 16.

Without fayth it is impoſſible to pleaſe God. Heb. 11.

AT S. OMERS For Iohn Heigham, with permiſſion, Anno 1625.

THE EPISTLE DEDICATORY TO THE READER.

GOod Reader, ſuch are the lamentable times, wherin we liue, as that they not only bring forth men, who with great contention, and heat of dispute, do vndertake to maintaine particuler Errour, directly repugnant to the Scripture, and the iudgement of Chriſt his Church; but alſo, they affoard ſome others who (as if wickednes would ſtriue to raiſe it ſelfe to its higheſt pitch) are not afraid to entertaine all Religions with ſuch a cold indifferency, as that they would, that ſaluation may be obtayned in any Religiō; ſo that the profeſſours therof do belieue in the Trinity, the Incarnation, & other ſuch fundamental points of Chriſtianity, whether they be Papiſts, Proteſtants, Anabaptiſts, Browniſts, or any other of theſe later Sects: They heereupon further do teach, that we are not obliged (vnder the paine of any ſpirituall loſſe) to embrace any one of theſe Religions before another, ſcornefully traducing in their conceipts all others, who exact a more ſtrict and articulate beliefe of our Chriſtian myſteries: which later kind of men is far more daungerous and hurtfull, then the former; ſince thoſe our of a prepoſterous zeale (their vnderſtanding being blinded and miſinformed) do only defende falſhoods for verityes, ſo running themſelues vpon that rocke of Tertullian: Haereſis eſt, probata non credere, non probata praeſumere. It is the propriety of Hereſy, not to beleeue points proued, and to preſume or take for graunted, things not proued. Whereas theſe Adiaphorists (whoſe ſecret pulſe doth indeed beate vpon Atheiſme) diſclaime from all neceſſity of truth, iuſtifyinge the defence of errours euen vnder the title of errours, and houlding only this one maine controuerſy in Chriſtian Religion, to wit, that in Chriſtian Religion there are no maine controuerſies. Againſt theſe ambidexter Proteſtants (ſo to call them) who draw their ſoules perdition in the ropes of a ſupine and careles ſecurity, I haue thought good to vndergo the wryting of this ſhort enſuing Treatiſe. The ſubiect of which diſcourſe I find moſt neceſſary euen from my owne experience, who for the ſpace of thirty yeares and aboue (with infinite thankes to God) haue beene a Prieſt of the Catholike Roman Church, during which longe compaſſe of tyme, I haue dealt with many ſoules here in Englād; and haue found infinite of them openly profeſſing Proteſtancy, yet inwardly perſwaded (as is aboue touched) that men of moſt contrary fayths (ſo that in groſſe they beleeue in Chriſt) may be ſaued; as if ſaluation were a Center, indifferently extending its lines, to the circumference of all Religions: yea diuers of theſe men were not aſhamed to conteſt with me in the open defence of this wicked opinion; and fortifying themſelues principally with this following reaſon.

2. God (ſay they) is moſt mercifull, and therfore it would be much repugnant to his infinite mercy, to damme for all eternity, any man that beleiueth in him, and in Ieſus Chriſt, as his Redeemer; ſo that withall he forbeare dooing of all wronge, but leade a vertuous (or at leaſt, a morall) lyfe, though in other articles of leſſe importance he may erre. To this I anſweare, with the Apoſtle.Rom. cap. 11. O altitudo diuitiarum ſapientiae & ſcientiae Dei! Gods iudgments are inſcrutable, and to be admired, not to be ouercuriouſly pried into. If it was his diuine pleaſure, for many ages to make choyce only of the Iewiſhe Nation (a very handful to the whole earth) for his elected people, and to ſuffer all the reſt of the world (generaly ſpeaking) to ly drowned in Idolatry, and therefore to be damned. And if alſo after our Sauiours Incarnation, he vouchafed not, for the ſpace of many ages, to enlighten whole Countreys with the Ghoſpel of Chriſt, but permitted them to continue (to their ſoules eternall perditiō) in their former Idolatry & Heatheniſme; yea ſuffering euen to this very day (and how long yet after, his diuine Maieſty only knoweth) diuers vaſt Countreyes to perſeuere in their foreſaid Infidelity, if (I ſay) this proceeding in God is beſt liking to himſelfe, and that for the ſame he cannot be truly chardged with Iniuſtice or cruelty, ſeeing he gaue them ſufficient meanes of ſaluatiō by the law of Nature, and did not withdraw from them grace ſufficient leauing them thereby without excuſe. Then much leſſe can any man expoſtulate God of iniuſtice or want of mercy (for his diuine goodnes is nothing but iuſtice and mercy it ſelfe) if he ſuffer men to periſhe eternally, and damne them for want of an entire, compleate, and perfit faithe in all the articles of Chriſtianity; eſpecially in theſe times, when no Chriſtian can pretend for excuſe any inuincible ignorance in matters of faithe by reaſon that the true articles of Chriſtian Religion, are ſufficiently propounded and diuulged by Gods Church, to all Chriſtians whatſoeuer; therfore touching Gods ſecret iudgements and diſpoſales heerein, we will conclude with Cap. 30 Eſay: Deus iudicij Dominus.

3. This then being thus, from hence it appeareth, how much the Proteſtants wronge the Catholikes in charging them with want of charity, for houlding that Proteſtants dying Proteſtants, cannot be ſaued, wheras on the contrary part, diuers learned Proteſtants do (ſay they) graunt the hope of ſaluation to Catholikes or Papiſts, dying Papiſts. To this we reply, that here is no want of Charity, but rather a Seraphicall and burning Charity; for what greater charity can there be, then (ſeeing it is an indiſputable verity, that men dying in a falſe & hereticall faith cannot be ſaued) to premoniſhe and forwarne withall conuenient ſedulity & endeauour, opportunè, importunè, their Chriſtian Brethren of ſo great a daunger, as the perdition of their ſoules commeth vnto? Noe, the ſoules interminable and endles weale or woe, is not a matter of complement, that ſo for ceremony ſake it is to be forborne to be inculcated and often ſpoaken of, eſpecially where the moſt certanie truth of the matter inſiſted vpon, & the charitable conſcience of the ſpeaker, do warrant the diſcourſe. And if Catholikes muſt be accompted vncharitable for theſe their admonitions, then by the ſame reaſon they muſt inſimulate the Apoſtle of the ſaid fault of want of Charity, who Tit. c. 3. 2. Theſsal 3. ſeuerely chargeth vs to fly the company and ſociety of an Heretike; and who rangeth Gall. cap. 5. & Rom. 16. ſchiſmes and hereſies among thoſe ſinnes, the workers wherof shall not obtaine the kingdom of God. But to returne more particulerly to the ſubiect of this Treatiſe: I haue thought good to entitle it with the words of our Sauiour: Qui non credit, condemnabitur. Marc. 16. He that beleiueth not, shalbe condemned; as being a ſentence, which beſt ſorteth to the matter here handled, and which indeede really (though breifly) inuolueth in it ſelfe the truth here diſcuſſed. The ſourſe, from whence this Libertiniſme beleife did take its firſt emanation and flowing, is the contempt of the authority of the Catholike Church: for thus reaſoneth our Newtraliſt in Doctrine.

4. Both Papists and Proteſtants doe agree in beleiuing the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Paesſion &c. but they mainly diſſent touching Purgatory, Praying to Saints, Freewill, the ſacrifice of the Maſſe, Iuſtification &c. therfore I will embrace and follow that doctrine (meaning the doctrin of the Trinity, the Incarnation, Paſsion &c. and hould it neceſſary to ſaluation, in which all ſides doe agree. But ſince the diſſentions and diſagreements in Religion, are of theſe ſecondary & leſſe principall points, to wit, Purgatory, Praying to Saints &c. and ſince it is impoſsible, that both the Papist and Proteſtant, should teach truly in the ſaid articles, (for they teach meere contrary doctrines therin.) And further ſeeing I haue no more reaſon to belieue the one ſide then the other (and it is impoſsible for me to belieue both) therfore my reſolution is (contemning the authority of Gods Church in its definitions of theſe articles) peremptorily to ſtand to neither, but will hold the doctrine of Purgatory, Praying to Saints, and all other controuerted points of fayth at this day, betwene Papists and Proteſtants, matters meerly of indifferency, and of that nature, as that neyther the true nor falſe beleife of them, can eyther further or hinder a mans ſaluation. Thus diſputeth our Newtraliſt. And thus whileſt he wilbe of all Religions, he wilbe of no Religion. Then which (as if Religion were only, but an intentionall, and no reall name or word) what can be inuented more impious and Atheiſtical in it ſelfe, more repugnant to ſacred ſcriptures, more croſſe to the practice of all antiquity, and (as herafter ſhalbe proued) more adueiſe to all naturall reaſon? ſo dangerous it is for a Chriſtian once to diſmember himſelfe by pertinacy of iudgmēt from the Church of Chriſt; and ſo truly is verified of ſuch a man, that ſentence of Optatus: Deſerta Lib. contra Parmentan. matre Catholica impij filij, dum foras excurrunt & ſe ſeparant & errando rebelles abſcedunt. Our mother the Catholike Church being once forſaken, her wicked children do goe out and depart from her, and thus being become Rebells through erring, do hyde themſelues. Thus we ſee, how theſe all reconciling Omnifidians, doe carry themſelues, who through the pretended immenſity of their pretended charity (forſooth) can promiſe ſaluations to al Religions, and who ſeeke to introduce a peace into Gods Church (by compounding al controuerſies of faith) farre more dangerous, then are the warres & contentions of Heretikes.

5. Now ſeeing all ſuch men make no more accompt of diuerſity of Religions, then others doe of wearing ſuits of apparrel of different coulours; and ſeeing by ſuch their lukewamenes in matters of faithe, they ſeeme to be all Laodiceans, therfore wee may aſure our ſelues, that the commination and threat denounced againſt the Church of Laodicea regiſtred by theApoc. cap. 3. Euangeliſt ſhall (without finall repentance) fall vpon them: Becauſe thou art lukewarme, and neither colde, nor hot, I will vomit thee out of my mouth. But (good Reader) as vnwilling to tranſgreſſe the accuſtomed limits of a preface, I will detaine thee noe longer; only I haue thought good to put thee in mind (and ſo to end) with the ſentence and iudgment of Saint Auguſtine paſſed vpon the Pelagians (as for ſome delibation and taſt of the ſubiect herafter handled) who beleeued in the Trinity, in Chriſt, and his Paſſion, were men of moral and honeſt conuerſation; yet for houlding that only by the force of nature, without the aſſiſtaunce of Gods grace, a man was able to exerciſe vertue and flye vice, (a point no more fundamentall thē moſt of the controuerſies betweene the Catholikes and the Proteſtants) they are regiſtred for Heretikes by the ſaide S. Auguſtine, & conſequently not to be in ſtate of Saluation: his words Epist. 129. 37. are theſe: Nec tales ſunt Pelagiani, quos facile contemnas, ſed continenter viuentes, at que in bonis operibus laudabiles; nec falſum Chriſtum, ſed vnum verum equalem que patri & coeter num, veraciter que hominem factum, & veniſſe credentes, & venturum expectantes: ſed tamen ignorantes Dei iustitiam, ſuam cōſtituere volentes, Heretici ſunt. In English thus: Neither are the Pelagians ſuch men, as are eaſily to be contemned for they doe liue continently, and are laudable 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 for their good workes. They further doe belieue, not in a falſe Chriſt, but in one true Chriſt who is equall & coeternall with his father, and who was truly made man, They beleeue, that he is allready come, and they expect him hereafter to come; yet becauſe they are ignorant of the iuſtice of God, and would make it their owne iustice, (meaning, becauſe they taught it might be obtained by their owne naturall force) therfore they are Heretikes. Thus farre Sainct Auguſtine, with whome I end; leauing thee (Good Reader) to the deliberate and ſtudious peruſall of theſe enſuing leaues, and intreating moſt earneſtly the praiers of all good Catholikes for the remiſſion of my manifould and infinite ſinnes, and for an happy houre of the diſſolution of my ould and decaied body.

Your ſoules well-wishing friend William Smith.
QVI NON CREDIT CONDEMNABITVR MARC. 16.
That a man, who belieueth in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Paſsion &c. and yet beleeueth not all other articles of Chriſtian Faith, cannot be ſaued. And firſt of the definition of Hereſy and an Heretike. CHAP. I.

BEFORE we come (Good Reader) to diſpute particulerly of the ſubiect of this diſcourſe, I hould it moſt conuenient, in place of a ſhort Prologomenon, or Preface, to prefixe and ſet downe, the true definition of Hereſy, or an Heretike; ſince this method wil giue light to the whole enſuing Treatiſe, and wil beſt manifeſt, what opinions be Hereſies, and what men Heretikes; and conſequently (ſeeing hereſy is incompatible with ſaluation, & cannot ſtand with the purchaſe of heauen) will demonſtrate, that not any one Religion profeſſinge the name of Chriſtians, though it maintaineth but one hereſy, can iuſtly promiſe to it ſelfe, the hope of ſaluation or eternall life. Well then Hereſy, or Hereſis (as we tearme it in latine) is a greek word, ſignifying as much as Electio, Election or choyce, comming of the greeke Verb aireo, in latin Eligo, to chooſe or make choice of. So as this word Haereſis, originally and primatiuely, ſignifyeth election or choice (as is ſayd) in generall; yet becauſe they, who deuide themſelues by maintayning falſe opinions from the Church of Chriſt, doe make choyce of theſe their new opinions, and ſo therby do ſeparate themſelues from the Church; therefore this word Haereſis (looſing its former generall ſignification) is reſtrained by the Apoſtles, and the ancient Fathers, through an Eccleſiaſticall vſe and acceptance (which courſe we finde houlden in diuers other wordes, as the wordes Apoſtolus, Chriſtus, Baptiſma, and many other now taken by the Church in a ſecondary acceptiō) to ſignify any falſe and new opinion, or Religion, of which a man maketh choyce, and pertinaciouſly defendeth it againſt the Church of God; & the maintainours thereof, are commonly ſtilled Heretikes. Thus Hereſy (in its true and Eccleſiaſticall definition) is any falſe opinion touchinge fayth and Religion, contumaciouſly defended againſt God, and his Church. This definition (I meane in taking the word Haereſis and Haereticus, in this reſtrained ſenſe) is warranted by the Apoſtle, by the ancient Fathers. And laſtly (to omit the like acknowledgement of the Catholikes) by the learned Proteſtants. By the Apoſtle; for thus we find him to ſay: There must be Hereſies among you, that they which are approued among you, may be knowne 1. Cor. 11. As alſo: A man that is an Heretike, after the firſt and ſecond admonition, auoide. Tit. 3. And finally: Thoſe which were of the hereſy of the Sadduces, laid hands vpon the Apoſtles. Act. 5.

2. By the ancient Fathers. For S. Hierome in cap. 3. ad Tit. ſhewing the difference between hereſy and ſchiſme, thus defineth hereſy: Haereſis est, quae peruerſum dogma habet. Hereſy is that which containeth a peruerſe and froward opinion. And S. Auguſtine in like manner lib. de fide & ſimbolo cap. 10. defineth hereſy in theſe wordes: Haeretici ſunt, qui de Deo falſa ſentiendo fidem violant: Heretikes are thoſe, who do violate their fayth by houlding falſe opinions touching God. By the Proteſtants: for to name one or two among many, M. Ormerod (a moſt forward Proteſtant) thus defineth an Heretike: He is an Heretike, who ſo ſwarueth from the wholeſome doctrine, as contemning the iudgment of God and the Church, perſisteth in his opinion, Dialog. 2. with whome conſpireth D. Couell, ſaying: Heretikes are they, who directly gaine-ſay ſome article of our fayth. Exam. p. 199.

3. Now out of this former definition of hereſy, I am to premoniſh thee good Reader of two points. firſt, that euery hereſy is maintained with obſtinacy againſt the Church of God, and therfore the maintainours thereof are ſayd by the Apoſtle, that they went out of vs, 1. Ioan. 2. that is, out of Gods Church; and for the ſame reaſon the Apoſtle pronounceth an Heretike to be condemned by his owne iudgment. Tit. 3. becauſe he preferreth his iudgment before the iudgment of the whole Church; from which conſideration it followeth, that what man ſoeuer houldeth any erroneous opinion touching fayth, and being aduertiſed thereof by Gods Church, and not yealding his iudgment in all humility therto, is thereby become an Heretike. And ſuch is the ſtate of Catholikes and Proteſtants, ſince the one doth euer reciprocally charge and condemne the other with falſe doctrine, & therfore ſeeing the church of Chriſt muſt be with one of them, it followeth, that the other not ſubmitting their iudgments to it, are proclaimed thereby Heretikes. And thus it may ſometimes fall out, that the firſt inuentor of a falſe opinion may be no Heretike, as maintaining it before it be condemned by the church; whereas the Profeſſors of it, after its condemnation, are become Heretikes, according to that of Vincentius Lyrinenſis, in his worthy booke againſt the prophane innouation of the hereſyes of his tyme. O admirable change of thinges, the authors of one and the ſame opinion are esteemed Catholikes; and their followers Heretikes! Thus we ſee that pertinacity of iudgment, doth conſumate an Hereſie.

4. The ſecond is, that the aforeſayd definition of hereſy (being the only true definition, and acknowledged for ſuch by all ſides) is not reſtrayned, eyther in it ſelfe, or by the meaning of the Apoſtle (as by his wordes ſet downe in the next chapter following, may more eaſily appeare) only to the moſt principall and (as they are called) fundamentall points of chriſtian fayth, as of the Trinity, the Incarnacion of Chriſt, his Paſſion, the Decalogue and the articles of the creed, but it is extended in its owne Nature (conſidering to Logicke the definition, and the thing defined, ought to be of an equall latitude or lardgnes) to any erroneous opinion whatſoeuer, frowardly defended by a man, and gainſayed by the Church of God: So as, it is as perfit an Hereſy (and the beleeuers therof are as true Heretiks) to deny, that there is a Purgatory, or to deny Freewill, Prayer to Saints, the doctrine of Indulgences, the neceſſity of Baptiſme, or any other article approued by the Catholike Church (granting the doctrine of the Catholikes in theſe articles to be true) as to deny the Trinity, the Incarnation of Chriſt, his Death or Paſſion &c. And a man ſhalbe aſwell damned in hell for denying theſe former, as for theſe other; though the denyall of theſe later, do exceed the other in mallice; ſince the Hereſies of them are more wicked & blaſphemous. And thus much touching the definition of Hereſie, or an Heretike, which being iuſtly premiſed, we will now come to the maine controuerſie handled in this Treatiſe.

That euery Chriſtian, though beleeuing in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Paſsion &c. cannot be ſaued in his owne Religion, proued from holy ſcripture. CHAP. II.

NOw then to begin to fortify & warrant this vndoubted truth, that euery Chriſtian, though beleiuing in the Trinity &c. cannot be ſaued in his owne Religion, I will drawe my firſt kinde of proofes, from the ſacred wordes of holy ſcripture. And theſe teſtimonies ſhalbe of three ſorts. One concerning Heretikes, which texts are not reſtrained to any particuler Hereſies, but deliuered of Hereſie in generall. The ſecond branche of authorityes shall touch Heretikes euen for certaine particuler Hereſies, different from denying the Trinity, the Incarnation of our Sauiour, the Paſſion, and other like principall and fundamentall points & articles of Chriſtian Religion. The third ſhall containe the neceſſity of faith, without any reſtriction, to the points or articles, which are to be beleiued.

2. And firſt to begin with the firſt, we reade theEpiſt. ad Tit. c. 3. Apoſtle thus to ſpeake of an Heretik in generall: A man, that is an Heretike, after the firſt or ſecond admonition auoyd, knowing that he, that is ſuch, is ſubuerted, and ſinneth, being condemned by his owne iudgment. Where the Apoſtle commaundeth vs to auoid an Heretik, which he would not haue done, if the ſayd Heretike had beene in ſtate of ſaluation: the Apoſtle further adding this reaſon, in that (ſaith he) ſuch a man (as being a pertinatious & willfull Heretike) is condemned by his owne proper iudgment: that is, becauſe he aduanceth his owne iudgement, aboue the iudgment of Gods Church, and becauſe he needeth not that publike condemnation of the Church, which vpon other offenders by way of excōmunication is inflicted. The Apoſtle in 2. Theſſ. cap. 3. coniureth (as it were) in the name of Chriſt, that all ſhould auoid all falſe belieuers, in theſe words: We denounce vnto you, Brethren, in the name of our Lord Ieſus Chirſt, that you withdraw your ſelues from euery Brother walking inordinately, and not according to the tradition, which they haue receaued of vs. This place concerneth faith and doctrine (as the whole chapter ſheweth) but if theſe men here to be eſchewed were in ſtate of ſaluation, they ought not then to be eſchewed: Againe this text cannot haue reference to thoſe, who deny the Trinity, the Incarnation, and Paſſion, ſeeing the deniers of theſe high articles, are not Brethren in Chriſt; and yet the Apoſtle ſtyleth them Brethren, whome he here reprehendeth.

3. Againe, the Apoſtle in another place thus forewarneth: The Epist. ad Gall. cap. 5. workes of the flesh be manifeſt, which are fornication, vncleanes, impurity or diſſentions, ſects &c. They which doe theſe things, shall not obtaine the kingdome of God: Where wee ſee is expreſſe mention made of Sects, and that maintainours of any ſects in opinion of faith (much more of any Hereſie, which is euer auerred with greater contumacy and frowardnes, and with neglect of the Churches authority ſhall not enter into the kingdome of heauen: from which Teſtimonies we may further conclude, that as one only act of fornication, barreth a man from the kingdome of God, ſo alſo one Hereſie excludeth him from the ſame.

4. A fourth place is this: I deſire Epiſt. ad Rom. cap. 16. you Brethren to marke them, that make diſſentions and ſcandalls contrary to the doctrine which you haue learned, and auoid them, for ſuch do not ſerue Chriſt our Lord: But if ſuch men be to be auoided, and doe not ſerue Chriſt, then no doubt they continuing in that ſtate, cannot be ſaued. Againe 1. Tim. 1. the Apoſtle ſpeaketh of certaine men, and ſaith of them, that Quidam circa 1. Timoth. 2. fidem naufragauerunt: Certaine men made shipwracke about the faith. Where the Apoſtle vſeth the metaphor of shipwracke, therby to expreſſe more fully, that Heretikes once falling out of the ſhippe of Chriſts churche, are caſt into the ſea of eternall damnation. To conclude, the Euangeliſt Saint Iohn ſpeaketh of all Heretikes in generall, not embracing the doctrine of Chriſt (within which all ſecondary queſtions of chriſtian Religion are contained) in this ſort: If any man come 2. Ioan. vnto you, and bring not the doctrine of Chriſt, receaue him not into your houſe, nor ſay, God ſaue you vnto him. But a man is bound in charity to ſuffer any one, who is in ſtate of ſaluation, to come into his houſe, and to ſalute him, or ſay: God ſaue him.

5. Now what can be replyed againſt theſe former Texts? It cannot be ſayd, that they are meant only of ſuch Heretikes, as deny the myſteryes of the Trinity, the Incarnation of Chriſt, his Paſſion, and ſuch like ſupreme and cardinall points of Chriſtian Religion: this (I ſay) cannot be auerred for theſe reaſons following. Firſt, becauſe thoſe, who in the Apoſtles tymes, denyed theſe principall points of Chriſtianity, could not be truely tearmed Heretikes (ſeeing he is truely an Heretike, who was once a member of Chriſts church by fayth, but after ceaſeth to be thereof) no more then all the Iewes or Gentils could not be accounted or ſtyled Heretikes, becauſe they neuer beleeued the foreſayd myſteryes of chriſtianity. Secondly by reaſon, that according to the former definition of Hereſy or Heretikes aboue ſet downe, the former Texts haue a neceſſary reference, to all Hereſy and heretikes whatſoeuer, whether the ſubiect of the ſayd falſe opinion be ſmall or great. Thirdly, becauſe that in the former Texts of Scripture, there is no reſtriction of the word Haereticus or Haereſis, to the chiefe or higheſt points of Chriſtian Religion, but it is extended to all kind of Heretikes or Hereſies whatſoeuer, euen by the Apoſtle without exception, who (no doubt) if he had vnderſtood Hereſyes, or Heretiks only in the greateſt points (at leaſt in ſome one Text or other, among ſo many) would accordingly haue reſtrayned his wordes, only to thoſe kind of Heretikes; and the rather ſeeing the denyall of thoſe great points only (not of others) do in our Libertines opinion, make the denyers thereof Heretikes. But not to leaue the leaſt ſhow of refuge or euaſion, heerin I will produce ſome paſſages of holy Scripture, in which the maintenours of particuler errours, euen in leſſer points, then the higheſt articles of Chriſtianity, are cenſured by Chriſts Apoſtles, to be depriued of eternall ſaluation.

6. And firſt we find S. Paul thus to propheſy. In 1 Tim. c. 4. the later times certaine shal depart from the fayth, attending to ſpirits of errour, and doctrine of Diuells, forbidding to mary, and to abſtaine from meates. Heere the Apoſtle propheſieth (according to the iudgment ofHom. 12. in Timot. Saint Chryſoſtome,In hunc locū Ambroſe,Lib. contra Iouin. c. 7. Hierome, and S. Her. 25. & 40. Auguſtine) of the Heretikes, Eucratites, Marcioniſts, Ebioniſts, & ſuch like, who denyed Matrimony, as a thing altogether vnlawfull, and prohibited abſolutly at al tymes, and the eating of certaine meates, as creatures impure: Now theſe Heretikes belieued in the Trinity, and might in the Incarnation, &c. and yet euen for theſe two former Hereſies touching mariage, and eating of meates, and not for the Trinity, or Incarnation, they are ſayd by the Apoſtle to departe from the fayth of Chriſt, and to attend to the doctrine of Diuels. But ſuch, as leaue the fayth of Chriſt, and attend to the doctrine of Diuels, are not in ſtate of ſaluation. In my iudgement this one authority alone is ſufficient to ouerthrow this phantaſy of our Newtraliſts; ſince the wordes are diuine ſcripture, the hereſies reprehended no fundamentall points of Religion; but of as little or leſſer conſequence, then the Controuerſies betweene the Catholikes and the Proteſtants; and yet the maintainers of them are accounted to depart from the faith of Chriſt, and to attend to the doctrine of Diuels.

7. A ſecond place shalbe that of the former Apoſtle, who writing of certaine Heretiks erring touching the Reſurrectiō of the body, ſayth thus: Their 2. Timoth. 2. ſpeach ſpreadeth like a Canker, of whome is Hymenaeus and Philetus, who haue erred from the truth, ſaying that the Reſurrection is already paſt, and haue ſubuerted the fayth of ſome. Theſe men beleeued all the myſteryes of the Trinity, Incarnation &c. (ſeeing otherwiſe the Apoſtle would haue reprehended them for want or beliefe therein, as for the article of the Reſurrection) yet for erring only touching the reſurrection of the body, they are ſayd to erre from the truth, to ſubuert the fayth of ſome: and that, as a Canker neuer leaueth the body, till by little and little it waſteth it away; ſo their ſpeaches by degrees, poyſon and kill the ſoules of the hearers. From which it euidently followeth, that theſe Heretikes continuing and dying in the foreſayd hereſy, could not be ſaued; ſince that fayth, which erreth from the truth, and which ſubuerteth the true fayth of others, and which in killing and deſtroying the ſoule, reſembleth a Canker, cannot afford ſaluation to its Profeſſors.

8. Another paſſage, which heere I will vrge, is that of S. Iohn, who calleth certaine Heretiks, Anti-Chriſts, ſaying: Now 1. Ioan. c. 2. there ate become many Anti-Chriſts, who went out of vs, but were not of vs; for if they had beene of vs, they had remayned with vs. Theſe Heretikes belieued in the Trinity, in the Incarnation of Chriſt, that he dyed for the ſaluation of the whole world, only they erred touching the perſon and natures of Chriſt, and yet they are figuratiuely ſtyled Anti-Chriſts, and are ſayd to departe out of the church of Chriſt. But no ſaluation is reſerued for Anti-chriſts, & ſuch as departe from the Church of God. And thus much out of Gods holy writ expreſly touchinge Heretikes in general, and in particuler.

9. To theſe Texts I will adioyne (though not immediatly and directly ranged vnder the former head) a place in S. Peter in my iudgment moſt vnanſwerable, and by neceſſary inference euicting the point heere vndertaken. The place is thoſe wordes in the 2. epiſtle. of S. Peter, cap. 3. where he ſayth thus: In the Epistles of Paul there are certaine thinges hard to be vnderstood, which the vnlearned and vnstable do peruert vnto their owne destruction. Now here I thus argue. But theſe things hard to be vnderſtood in S. Pauls epiſtle, do not concerne the doctrine of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Paſſion &c. and yet the miſvnderſtanding of them doth cauſe (as the Text ſayth) the deſtruction, that is, the damnation of theſe, who miſunderſtand them; therefore farre leſſer points, then the denyall of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Paſſion &c. doe iuſtly threaten to the falſe belieuers of them, damnation; and conſequently that a bare beliefe of thoſe ſupreme points, are not only neceſſary to ſaluation.

10. That thoſe difficulties in S. Pauls epiſtles, intimated by Sainct Peter, doe not concerne the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Paſſion, &c. I proue ſeuerall wayes: firſt becauſe S. Peter maketh no ſuch mention, which no doubt he would haue done, if the ſubiect of them had touched only thoſe ſupreme myſteries, and were not to be extended to other inferiour points.

11. Secondly it is acknowledged by the commentaries and writings of all the fathers (beſides that the epiſtles themſelues ſhowe no leſſe) that Saint Paul is moſt euident and cleare in all his epiſtles touching the Trinity, the Incarnatiō, the Paſſion &c. and therfore there is no reaſon, why the difficultyes in them ſhould be applied to thoſe articles, muchleſſe reſtrained to them alone.

12. Thirdly, the Fathers do vnderſtand thoſe difficultyes in Saint Pauls epiſtles inſinuated by Saint Peter, cheifly touching Iuſtification; as appeareth by the teſtimony euen of S. Auguſtine himſelfe in his booke: de fide & operibus lib. 12. who particulerly inſtanceth in that place 1. Cor. 3. If any man builde vpon this foundation, golde, ſiluer &c. Which Text treateth of Iuſtification, and works, and expreſſely ſaithLib. de fide & operibus, cap. 15, & 16. that this is one of the difficult paſſages intended and meant by Saint Peter. With whome Saint Hierome may ſeeme wel to agree, who in thoſe worden, Epistola ad Romanos: Nimijs Epist. ad Algaſiain quest. 8. & in epiſt. ad Rom. obſcuritatibus inuoluta eſt. Intimateth no leſſe; for it is found, that the epiſtle to the Romans moſt intreateth of Iuſtification and of faith and workes. Fourthly and laſtly, the Proteſtants themſelues doe vnderſtand the ſaid obſcurities of Saint Pauls epiſtles touching Iuſtification, as appeareth (to omit the teſtimonies of all others herin) from the wordes and comment of M. Doctor Fulke againſt the Rhemiſts Teſtament vpon the foreſaid place of S. Peter: and thus far of this text; where we find by an ineuitable deduction, that a falſe faith touching Iuſtification only cānot ſtand with ſaluation.

13. The ſame is proued from the definition and propriety of faith. In this place we will take into our conſideration, the definition of fayth ſet down by S. Paul; ſecondly the dignity & worth of faith much celebrated by diuers of the Apoſtles; thirdly, the inſeparable propriety of fayth, which is vnity; for ſo doth the Scripture delineate and deſcribe fayth: from all which it will ineuitably follow, that the fayth, which ſaueth man, is not to be reſtrayned only to the Trinity, the Incarnation, and other ſuch ſublime points of Chriſtian Religion (though in other points it be erroneous) but is extended to all other pointes whatſoeuer, which the Church of God propoundeth to be belieued.

14. And to beginne with the definition of fayth giuen by the Apoſtle, he thē defineth fayth thus: Fayth Heb. cap. 11. is the ſubſtance of thinges to be hoped for, the argument of thinges not appearing: The ſenſe whereof is this: firſt that fayth through an infallible certainty cauſeth thoſe thinges to ſubſiſt, and haue a being in the mind of man, which thinges are yet to come, being but hoped and looked for: ſecondly, that fayth cauſeth the vnderſtanding to giue aſſent to thoſe points, which it vnderſtandeth not, acknowledging them to be more certaine, then any thinges whatſoeuer, according to thoſe wordes of S. Thomas: Multo magis 2. q. 4. a. 8. homo certior eſt de eo, quod audiuit a Deo, qui falli non potest, quam de eo, quod videt propria ratione, quae falli poteſt. Now heere (I truſt) no man will deny, but the Apoſtle defineth that fayth of a Chriſtian, which ſaueth him. This being graunted (for to deny it, were both impious in the denyer, and moſt iniurious to the Apoſtle) we are to remember, the nature of euery true definition ſet downe by the Logitians, to wit (as is aboue mentioned) that the thing defined, and the definition, be of one and the ſame extent and latitude; ſo as whatſoeuer is comprehended vnder the definition, the ſame is alſo contayned vnder the thing defined. This then being preſuppoſed by force of all reaſon (for Logicke is but an artificiall and ſeruiceable handmayd vnto reaſon) we find that this definition of fayth compriſeth in it ſelfe, not only the doctrine of the Incarnation, the Trinity, and the like, and this not articulately, but only by way of deduction; but alſo it contayneth al ſecondary points of Religiō, ſeeing the former definition doth predicate, or may be ſayd, of all the ſayd ſecondary & leſſe principall points of Religion, controuerted betweene Chriſtians at any tyme.

15. Therfore the thing heere defined, which is the ſauing fayth of a Chriſtian, is in like ſort to extend it ſelfe to all the ſayd ſecondary pointes of Religion, how indifferent ſoeuer they ſeeme in mans iudgment. This inference is ſo demonſtratiue (being taken from the former definition of fayth) as that the Apoſtle himſelfe preſently after the former wordes, beginning to inſtance in the ſeuerall obiects of fayth (among diuers other examples) ſetteth downe, that to belieue Noas flood or the deluge of the world by water for ſinne, is an article of fayth: for thus he ſayth: By fayth Noah hauing receaued an anſwere concerning thoſe thinges, which as yet were not ſeene, fearing, framed the Arke for the ſauing of his houſe.

16. But to proceed further; if the articles of the Trinity, the Incarnation and the like, be the only eſſentiall points of a true Chriſtian fayth, it is more then wounderfull, that the Apoſtle vndertaking to ſet downe the true definition of an auaileable fayth, and exemplifying it, in ſeuerall obiects, ſhould wholely and ſilently omit the ſayd articles of the Trinity, Incarnation, Paſſion, &c. he in that chapter not expreſſely ſpeaking one word of them. And thus much touching the definition of fayth giuen by the Apoſtle: from which definition we conclude, that who ſeeketh to haue a true fayth neceſſary to ſaluation, (beſides the myſteryes of the Trinity, the Incarnation &c.) muſt belieue diuers other dogmaticall articles of Chriſtian Religion. And therefore anſwearably heerto, we aſſure our ſelues, that when our Sauiour ſayd: He Marc 16. that beleeueth not, shalbe condemned. He did ſpeak of the belieuing (at leaſt implicitly) of the whole corps of Chriſtian fayth and doctrine, and not only of any one part thereof; for ſo in this latter manner it would be both falſe & abſurd. In like ſort where our Bleſſed Sauiour in the ſame chapter ſayth to his Apoſtles: Preache the Ghoſpell to all Creatures. He did vnderſtand the whole Ghoſpell; which contayneth many other points beſides the Trinity, Incarnation, Paſſion, &c.

17. In this next place we will deſcend to thoſe paſſages of holy Scripture, which do much magnify the efficacy and vertue of fayth. And accordingly hereunto we find it is ſayd: He Mare vltimo. that beleeueth and is baptized, shalbe ſaued, but he that beleeueth not shalbe condemned. Againe our Sauiour ſayd to the blind men, praying to receaue their ſight: According Mat. 9. to your fayth, be it vnto you. And further: Without Heb. 11. fayth it is impoſsible to pleaſe God. And more: Our fayth is the victory, which ouercō meth the world. 1. Ioan. 1.5. Now in theſe & many other ſuch texts, for breuity omitted, I demaund what fayth is vnderſtood or meant? If it be anſwered a true, entyre, and perfect fayth, belieuing al points of Chriſtian Religion propoſed by Gods Church, it is true, and that which I ſeeke heere to proue: if an vnperfect and mungrill fayth, beleeuing ſome point of Chriſtian Religion, and reiecting others; and ſo an erroneous fayth, being partly falſe and partly true, I ſay, it can neuer deſerue theſe prayſes giuen by the Euangeliſts, and Apoſtles, neither can it produce ſuch ſupernatural effects aboue ſpecifyed, no more then darkenes can produce light; ſince Truth himſelfe hath taught vs, that Luc. 6 we cannot gather figges of thornes, nor grapes of bushes.

18. Now in this third place, we will touch that inſeparable attribute of true Chriſtian fayth, which is vnity in fayth and doctrine. This marke is ſo indiſſolubly annexed to the true fayth of Chriſt, as that we find his Apoſtles euer ready moſt ſeriouſly, to inculcate the ſame to their diſciples. Thus accordingly the Apoſtle exhorteth the Epheſians, ſaying: Be you Ephe 4. careful to keep the vnity of the ſpirit, in the bond of peace. And immediately againe: There (z) is one Lord, one fayth, one Baptiſme. Where we ſee that vnity in fayth is expreſſely ſet downe. As alſo in another place: I beſeech 1. Cor. . you, that you all ſpeake one thing: bee you knit togeather in one mind, and one iudgment: and as this was the exhortatiō of the Apoſtle, ſo we read that the firſt belieuers followed the ſame, of whō S. Luke. Acts c. 4. thus ſayth: The multitude, that beleued, were of one hart & one ſoule. And hēce it proceedeth, that the Church of Chriſt (which comprehendeth the profeſſours of this vnanimous fayth) is ſtyled by Gods holy writ to be, one Rom. 12. Cant. 6. Ioan. 10. body, one ſpouſe, and one flocke of sheep, a truth ſo euident, as that (beſides the frequent teſtimonyes ofAtha. orat. 1. con. Aria. Chryſ. op. imperf. in Mat. ho. 20. Tert. de praeſcript. Irenaeus d. 1. c. 5. confirming the ſame) euen the Proteſtants do ſubſcribe in iudgment hereunto. For thus Luther himſelfe (to omit others) writteth. A Tom. 3. Wittē. in pſal. 5. fol. 166. kingdome deuided in it ſelfe, shall not ſtand, neyther haue any Heretikes at any tyme beene ouercome by force or ſubtilty, but by mutuall diſſention; neyther doth Chriſt fight with them otherwayes, then with a ſpirit of giddines and diſagreement.

19. Now then this vnity of fayth is ſo to be vnderſtood, as that it is not repugnant therto, that one and the ſame point ſhould at one tyme not be houlden, as neceſſarily to be beleeued, the which, after it hath vndergone a definitiue and ſententionall decree of Gods Church, is neceſſarily to be belieued: As for example, it was not neceſſary in the beginning of Chriſtianity to beleeue, that the booke of the Machabees, the Epiſtle of S. Iames, S. Iude, the ſecond epiſtle of S. Peter, the 2. and 3. of S. Iohn, to be Canonicall Scripture, till they were defined ſo to be by the third Councell of Carthage, Can. 47. at which S. Auguſtine was preſent. But after this Councell had by the aſſiſtance of the holy Ghoſt, defined them to be Canonicall, then it was, and is hereſy to deny them to be Cononical. And the reaſon of this diſparity is, becauſe it is Gods good pleaſure and wiſedome, not to reueale to his Church al articles of fayth in the beginning and at one tyme, but at ſeuerall tymes, and vpon ſeuerall occaſions, as to his diuine maieſty beſt ſeemeth expedient. Thus the fayth of a Chriſtian is capable of dilatation, and of a more lardge vnfoulding or expoſition, but not of any contrariety in beliefe, change, or alteration. And thus (to inſiſt in the former example) it may well ſtand with Chriſtian fayth in the beginning, not to accept the former bookes for canonicall, till the authority of the Churche had pronounced them for ſuch; but it ſtandeth not with true fayth, that one man ſhould poſitiuely beleeue as an articie of fayth, that the Machabees and the reſt of the bookes aboue ſpecifyed are not canonical Scripture, but the prophane writtinges of man. And another man ſhould at the ſame tyme beleeue, as an article of fayth, that they are canonicall Scripture; ſince the one of theſe contrary beliefes, muſt be Heretical.

20. This verity then of the vnity of fayth, being warranted by the word, both of God, and man, as is aboue ſayd, we will take into our conſideration, the Catholike, and Proteſtants Religions, all who ioyntly do profeſſe to beleeue in generall, in the Trinity, in Chriſt his Incarnation, his Paſſion, and the creed of the Apoſtles; and ſo we ſhall diſcerne, whether the fayth of all theſe ſeuerall profeſſors, doth inioy the foreſayd marke of vnity in doctrine or no. But ſeeing this ſubiect is moſt ample and lardge, I will therefore ſepoſe this enſuing Chapter, for the more full and exact diſcouery of the many and great diſagreements betweene Catholikes and the Proteſtants in their fayth and Religion.

The ſame proued from want of vnity in Fayth between Catholikes and Proteſtants, touching the Articles of the Creed: and from that, that the Catholike & Proteſtant do agree in the beliefe of diuers articles neceſſarily to be beleeued, and yet not expreſſed in the Creede. CHAP. IIII.

VNdertaking in this place to ſet downe, the multiplicity of doctrines betweene Catholikes and Proteſtants, though they all ioyntly beleeue in the Trinity, the Incarnation of Chriſt, his Paſſion, and the like; & conſequently to ſhow, that this their generall beliefe, wanteth that true vnity of fayth, which out of the holy Scriptures, Fathers, & the Proteſtants I haue aboue ſhowed, to be moſt neceſſary to ſaluation. I will firſt examine, how the Catholikes and the Proteſtants, do differ touching their beliefe of the creed, made by the Apoſtles. Next I will demonſtrate, that ſuppoſing all Profeſſors of both Religions, ſhould agree in the true ſence and meaning of the creed; yet there are diuers other dogmaticall points, neceſſarily to be beleeued, (& are at this inſtant beleeued both by Proteſtants and Catholiks) which are not expreſſed or mentioned in the Creed at al; or by any immediate inference to be drawne from thence. Laſtly I will ſet downe the great difference betweene Catholikes and Proteſtants in other points of fayth, of which the Creed maketh no intimation or mention at all, and yet the beliefe of them is houlden neceſſary to ſaluation, both by Catholike and Proteſtant: from all which it ſhall appeare, how far diſtant the Catholike and Proteſtant Religion are from that vnity in doctrine, ſo neceſſarily required to that fayth, whereby a Chriſtian is to be ſaued.

2. I do heere begin with the Apoſtles creed, firſt becauſe the articles of the Trinity, the Incartion, the Paſſion &c. are included in the creede; Secondly, by reaſon there are many Adiaphorists in Religion (as I may tearme them) who ſeeme to deale more lardgly and liberally heerein, ſeeinge they are content to extend the neceſſary obiect of fayth, not only to the articles of the Trinity, the Incarnation, and Paſſion, but to all pointes ſet downe in the creed, who aſſure themſelues, that God exacteth not at our hands the beliefe of any other articles, then what are contained in the creed. Now heere aforehand we are to conceaue, that true fayth reſteth in that true ſenſe and meaning of the wordes of the Creed, which was intended by the Apoſtles, and not in the wordes themſelues, ſeeing both in the iudgment of all learned Catholikes and Proteſtants, to beleeue the words of the creed, in a ſenſe different from the intended ſenſe of the Apoſtles (and conſequently in a falſe ſenſe) is no better, then not to beleeue at all: And the reaſon heereof is, becauſe a falſe conſtruction drawne from the creede (no leſſe then from the Scripture) is not the word of God, but the word of man, and conſequently the ſayd letter of the creed, ſo interpreted, is ſubiect to the ſame cenſure, whereunto the word of man is lyable; from whence it followeth, that whoſoeuer belieueth the wordes of the creed in another ſenſe, then was intended by the holy Ghoſt, and the Apoſtles, doth not beleeue the creed at all, but only beleeueth the worde of man, which euer ſtandeth ſubiect to errour and miſtaking. So as the ſentence of Saint Hierome deliuered only of the Scripture, may iuſtly be applyed of the creed: Scripturae In ep. ad Paulinum. non in legendo, ſed in intelligendo conſistunt. The Scripture (or Creed) doth not conſiſt in the letter, but in the ſenſe, and true vnderſtanding of the letter.

3. This then being truly preſuppoſed, let vs begin to examine the articles of the creed, and ſee how we Catholiks and Proteſtants do differ in the conſtruction and vnderſtanding thereof. And firſt touching the firſt article of our Beliefe in God, obſerue how different it is. The Catholiks do beleeue, that their God no way cooperateth or willeth ſinne in man; that he hath but one ſimple & expreſſed will touching ſinne, & this in deteſting and hating of it; that he will not puniſh vs for not keeping of ſuch precepts, the which is not in our power to keepe; that he imputeth ſinnes to euery man, that committeth ſinne; briefly that he giueth to all men, ordinary and ſufficient grace to ſaue their ſoules, and deſireth, that all men may be ſaued; whereas the Proteſtants beleeue the meere cōtrary to al theſe points: for they beleeue that their GodBeza in his diſplay of popish practiſe pag. 202. ſaith: God exciteth the wicked will of one thiefe to kill another. See Zuinglius tom. 2 de proui. c. 6. fol. 365. Caluin inſtit. l. 2. c. 18. ſect. 1. cooperateth, forceth, and willeth a man to ſinne; that he hath a doubleLuther tom. 2. Wittemburg. de cap. Babil. fol. 74. D. VVhitakerus de Eccleſ. cont. Bell. controuerſia 2. queſt. 5. pag. 301. wil, (and therefore a diſſembling will) the one expreſſed in Scripture, according to which he forbideth man to ſinne; the other concealed to himſelfe, by the which he impelleth man to ſinne; that he will puniſhReynolds in his 2. concluſion annexed to his conference. pag. 697. vs tranſgreſſing the ten commandmēts, it not being in our power to keepe the ſayd commandements; that to theLuth. tomo 2. Wittemb de capt. Babyl. fol 74. & Whitak. vt ſupra. faythfull ſinning neuer ſo wickedly no ſinne shalbe imputed. Finally, that to certaineCal. inſtit. l. 3. c. 23. ſaith, God doth ordaine cō ſilio nutuque, by his Councell & pleaſure, that among mē ſome be borne to certaine damnatiō from their mothers wombe. See D. Willets ſynopſi p. 554. affirming the ſame. men, he giueth not ſufficient meanes of ſaluation, but purpoſeth and decreeth from all eternity, that ſome men (lyuing in the eye of the world, and in their owne conſcience neuer ſo vertuouſly) shalbe damned and caſt into ſempiternall perdition. Thus we ſee how great a difference there is betweene the Catholikes and Proteſtants, in beleeuing the firſt article of the creede, and how ineuitably it followeth, that eyther the Catholiks or proteſtants, do ſtand ſubiect and obnoxious to that ſaying of S. Auguſtine quest. 29. ſup. Ioſue. who imagineth God ſuch, as God is not, he carryeth euery where another God, to wit a falſe God in his mind.

4. Touching the 2. article, which is, And in Ieſus Chriſt his only Sonne: weeCon. Trident. Catholikes belieue in Chriſt, who is God of God, and equall with his Father; a Sauiour, who ſuffred death (quoad ſufficentiam) for all mankind, and who accompliſhed the functiō of his Sauiourſhip, only according to his humanity; a Sauiour who dyed only in body, and not in ſoule; finally a Sauiour, who from his firſt conception was endued with all knowledge, wiſedome, & prouidence, and exempt from all ignorance, paſſion and perturbation: wheras the Proteſtants doe belieue in Chriſt, as their Sauiour, who according to their fayth, is God ofD. Whitak. approueth this opinion, alleadging Caluin in proofe thereof, cont. Cāp p. 121. himſelfe andMelā. in loc. com. edit. 1561. p. 41. inferiour to the Father, who dyed only for theD. Willet in his ſynops printed 1600. p. 780. as alſo Caluin and Beza in whole treatiſes. elect; who performed his mediation not only according to his humanity, but alſo according to hisMelā. ſupra & D Fulk. diuinity (though in the iudgment of all learned men, true diuinity is impaſſible) who in the time of his Paſſion, beſides the death of the body (as inſufficient for our ſaluation) ſuffred in ſoule theCal. inſtit. l. 2. c. 16 ſect 10. & D. Whitak. cont. Duraeum l. 8. p. 556. Beza in reſpon. ad acta Colloquij Montisb. part. 1. pag. 147. D. Willet in his ſynopſis p. 599. & 600. D. Sutliffe in his reueu of D. Kelliſons ſuruay printed 1606. p. 55. torments of hel: briefly, who laboured with (n) ignorance, paſſion, and euen deſperation it ſelfe.

5. Touching the article of Chriſts deſcending into hell, the Catholikes doe belieue hereby, that Chriſt deſcended in ſoule after his paſſion, into that part of hell, which is called lymbus Patrum, to deliuer from thence the ſoules of the iuſt there detayned, till his comming: of which iudgement are alſo ſome learnedD. Bilſon in his ſuruay of Christs ſufferings and deſcent to hell p. 650. 651. 652. and the Lutherans are generally of the ſame opinion. Proteſtāts; but the greateſt part of Proteſtants doe interpret this article, of Chriſt deſcending into hisD. Willet in lymbomaſtix. D. Fulke ſo alleadged by VVillet in ſynopſi pag. 605. 606. graue, ſoe by the worde hell: vnderſtanding the graue: but Lib. 2. inſtit. cap. 16. §. 20. Caluin teacheth, that by Chriſts deſcending into hell is vnderſtoode, that Chriſt apprehended God to be moſt angry and offended with him for our ſakes, and that thervpon Chriſt ſuffred great anxiety and griefe of ſoule; and which is more, moſt blaſphemouſly Caluin teacheth, that Chriſt vttered words of deſperation in ſaying: my God, why haſt thou forſakē me? Touching the article of Chriſts aſcending into heauen, we Catholikes and the Caluiniſts doe belieue hereby, that Chriſt truly in body aſcended vp into heauen; wherasLuth: l. de ſacr. Coenae Domini tom. 2. f. 112. ſaying: credimus quod Christus iuxta humanitatē eſt vbi que preſens. Brentius in Apolog. pro conſ. VVittem. Illyricus l. de aſcē. Domini. and finally by all Lutherās Lutherans doe teach, that Chriſts body is in all places, with the diuinity; and that therefore it did not really after his paſſion, aſcend vp into heauen, it being there both before & after his paſſion; thus the Lutherans both in ours and the Proteſtants iudgments doe deſtroy by this their conſtruction, the whole creede, and particulerly Chriſts incarnation, natiuity, paſſion, death, aſcending into heauen, and his comming to iudgment; ſeeing, ſuppoſing Chriſts body to be in all places, all theſe articles were but apparantly or phantaſtically, and not truly or really performed.

6. Touching the article of Chriſts iudging the quicke and dead: wee Catholikes doe beleeue, that Chriſt at his comming to iudgment, will ſo iudge man, as that his good workes, receauing all their force from our Sauiours paſſion, ſhalbe rewarded; whereas the Proteſtants, denying allCal. l. 3. instit; c. 5. §. 2. Bucer. in actis collo quij Ratisb. Beza Zuingli. and moſt other Protestants. merit of workes (as iniurious and derogatory to his death and paſſion) do hould, that Chriſt ſhall then reward only a bare andCalu. in Antid. Concil. Trident. Kemnitius in exam. Con. Trid. and most other Proteſtants. ſpeciall fayth.

7. Concerning the Article: I belieue in the Holy Ghost. Whereas all Catholikes and many Proteſtants do beleeue, that the Holy Ghoſt is the third perſon in the moſt Bleſſed Trinity. Caluin (howſoeuer he was perſuaded of the truth or falshood therof) much lamenteth notwithſtanding, to auoyd the force of arguments drawne from the chiefeſt places of Scripture, and vſually alleadged by all Antiquity in proofe of the holy Ghoſt, being the third perſon in the Trinity. Thus we find that Iuſt. l. 1. c. 13. §. 15. Caluin will not haue (contrary to all Antiquity) that paſſage of Scripture Pſalm. 33. By the word of the Lord, the heauens were made, and all the hoſt of them by the ſpirit of his mouth, to be vnderſtood of the diuinity of the holy Ghoſt. In like ſort he reiecteth the argumentSee of this ſubiect againſt the Trinity, Iluumus a Proteſtant in l. Caluin. Iudaizās drawne from that other moſt remarkable Text, 1. Ioan. 5. There be three, that giue teſtimony in Heauen, the Father, the VVord, and the holy Ghoſt, and theſe three be one. Caluin vpon this place thus ſaying (therby to take away from thence the proofe of the Holy Ghoſt) Quod dicit tres eſſe vnum, ad eſſentiam non refertur, Luth. in l. contra Iacobum Latomū omo 2. Wittem, 〈…〉 di •• anno 1552. ſed ad conſenſum potius. Finally, Luther was ſo farre from acknowledging the Holy Ghoſt, to be the third perſon in the Trinity, or to acknowledge the Trinity it ſelfe, that thus he writteth: Anima mea odit hoc verbum, homouſion, vel conſubſtantialis. My very ſoule doth hate the worde, homouſion, or conſubstantial.

8. Concerning the article: I beleeue the holy Catholike Church. The Catholikes do beleeue this to be a viſible company of mē profeſſing the preſent Roman Catholike fayth, of which ſome are predeſtinated, others reprobated. The Proteſtāts do belieue this Church to conſiſt only of the elect andConfeſſ. Aug. act. 5. Luther l. de Concilijs & eccleſ. Cal. l. 4. inſt. c. 1. §. 2. predeſtinated.

9. Touching the article: The Communion of Saints. The Catholikes do heereby beleeue, ſuch a communion to be betweene the Saints in Heauen, the ſoules in Purgatory, & men vpon earth, that the one part doth helpe the other with their moſt auaileable prayers, and interceſſions. The Proteſtants deny all ſuch intercourſe of benefites betweene theſe ſeuerall partes of the Church of Chriſt, accountingCaluin l. 3. inst. c. 5. § 6. Conturiatore Ce •• . 1. lib. 2. c. 4. col. 460. Brentius in conſeſ. Wittenberg. c. de Purgatorio. the Catholike doctrine heerein ſuperſtitious and ſacrilegious.

10. Laſtly touching the article of, Forgiuenes of ſinnes, we Catholikes do beleeue, that this remiſſion of ſinnes is performed, when the ſoule by a true and inherent iuſtice, and by infuſed guifts of God, enioyeth a renouation of her ſelfe, and therby becommeth truly iuſt in the ſight of God: the Proteſtants diſallowing all inherent iuſtice, doe only acknowledge an imputatiueKemnitius in exam. Concil. trid. Caluin l. 3. inſtit. c. 11. iuſtice or righteouſnes, which conſiſteth in that the iuſtice of Chriſt is (as they teach) only imputed vnto ſinners; ſo as wee remaine ſtill ſinners, though ſinnes be not imputed vnto vs through the iuſtice of Chriſt: a doctrine moſt iniurious to the moſt meritorious paſſion and death of Chriſt. Thus haue wee runne ouer the articles of the creede, from whence wee collect, that ſeeing (as is aboue intimated) he only belieueth auaileably & truly the creede, who belieueth it in that ſence, in which the Apoſtles did wryte it, & ſeeing there are meere different or rather contrary conſtructions of each article giuen by the Catholikes and Proteſtants, ſo that if that conſtruction of the Catholiks be true, it followeth neceſſarily that the other of the Proteſtants befalſe, or contrarywiſe; We may therefore ineuitably conclude, that it is not ſufficient to ſaluation for any one to ſay, that he belieueth the creede, who belieueth the words of it in generall, without reſtrayning them to any peculier conſtruction giuen eyther by the Catholikes or Proteſtants, except he belieue it in that one particuler ſence (and none other) which was intended by the holy Ghoſt, when it was firſt framed by the Apoſtles.

11. Now in this next place, we are to demonſtrate, that graunting for a tyme, by an Hypoteſis or ſuppoſall, that a man did beleeue the articles of the creed in their true ſenſe or conſtruction, yet followeth it not, that this beliefe (though it be neceſſary) were ſufficient alone for a man to obtaine his ſaluation thereby; and the reaſon heerof is, becauſe it is moſt certaine, that there are diuers points of Chriſtian Religion, houlden neceſſarily to be beleeued in the iudgment both of Catholikes and Proteſtants (& accordingly are beleeued ioyntly both by Catholikes and Proteſtants) and yet the ſayd points are not contayned or expreſſed in the Creed. Among others, I will inſiſt in theſe following.

12. Firſt, That there are certaine diuine wrytinges of infallible authority, penned by the holy Ghoſt, which we commonly call, the Scriptures of the oulde & new Testament, of which Testament we find no mentiō in the Creed, and yet all men are bound vnder payne of damnation to beleeue, that ſuch wrytinges there are: ſince otherwayes (abstracting from the authority of the Church) there were not ſufficient meanes left to beleeue, that it were a ſinne to breake any of the ten Commandements, or (which is more) that Christ Ieſus was the true Sauiour of the world.

13. Secondly, That there are ſpirituall ſubſtances, which we call, Angels, which now enioy the moſt happy ſight of God, and that many thouſands of them, did fall preſently after their creation, and are become thoſe malignant ſpirits, which vſually are tearmed Diuells.

14. Thirdly, That there is any materiall place of Hell, where the wicked are tormented, of which wee find nothing in the Creed in the iudgment of Proteſtants; for although the word, Hell, be mentioned in that article: He deſcended into Hell: yet by the worde Hell, the Graue is vnderſtood by most of the Protestants.

15. Fourthly, That the paines of the damned, shalbe for all eternity, and not for a certaine tyme only.

16. Fifthly, That Adam did preſently vpon his creation fall from the grace of God, and thereby tranſferred Originall ſinne vpon all mankind: So as by reaſon of his fall, all men are borne in Originall ſinne.

17. Sixthly, That the world was once drowned for ſinne, which innundation is commonly called, Noës floode.

18. Seueanthly, That our Sauiour whileſt he conuerſed heere vpon earth, did many miracles.

19. Eightly, That S. Iohn Baptiſt was our Sauiours Precurſor or forerunner, and that our Sauiour did choſe to him certaine men for his Apostles, which did firſt preach and plante the Christian fayth, through out the whole world.

20. Ninthly, That Circomciſion is now forbidden, as a thing moſt vnlawfull and vngodly.

21. Tenthly, That there are any ſacraments of the new Teſtament inſtituted by Chriſt, for the ſpirituall good of mans ſoule.

22. Eleuenthly, That before the ending of the world, Antichriſt shall come, who shallbe a deſigned ennemy of Chriſt, ſo as he shall labour to ſubuert, and ouerthrow all Chriſtian Religion.

23. Theſe points (beſides ſome others) all Chriſtians (aſwell Proteſtants as Catholikes) do beleeue, and doe hould that the beliefe of theſe points is neceſſary to ſaluation, and yet not any one of all theſe articles, is expreſſed or ſet downe in the Apoſtles Creed; whence I conclude, that the Apoſtles Creed, cannot be a ſufficient boundary to containe and limit an auaileable fayth. For what hope can that man haue of his ſaluatiō, who beleeueth, that there are neither any diuine Scripture, nor any Decalogue commonly called the ten Commandements, nor that Chriſt did worke any miracles, nor that he inſtituted any Sacraments, nor that there is any place of hell for the damned, nor finally (to omit the reſt) that there is any eternity of puniſhment?

24. And heere I am to premonish the Reader, that it is no ſufficient anſwere to reply, that moſt of al the foreſayd points are expreſſed in the Scripture, and therefore are to be beleeued; this I ſay, auaileth not, ſeeing heere I diſpute againſt thoſe, who maintaine with wounderfull pertinacity of iudgment, that it is ſufficient to ſaluation, to beleeue only the articles (& nothing els) which are contayned in the Creed; but not any of the former articles are contayned therein. Againe, ſeeing to beleeue, that there are any diuine Scriptures, is not expreſſed in the Creed, it conduceth nothing to the anſwering of this our argument, to ſay that the forementioned articles are proued out of Scripture, and therfore are to be beleeued.

25. Neither ſecondly, can the force of our ſayd argument be auoyded, in replying that al the former articles are implicitly comprehended in that article: I beleeue the holy Church: becauſe the Church teacheth, that all theſe articles are to be beleeued: this is no warrantable anſwere, by reaſon, that as theſe may be reduced to this article of the Creed, ſo alſo may al other points controuerted betweene the Catholikes and the Proteſtants, be in like manner reduced to the ſayd article, ſeeing the Church of God ſetteth downe, what is the truth, & what is to be beleeued in the ſayd Controuerſyes, binding her children vnder payne of damnation, aſwell to beleeue the truth in the Cō trouerſyes of our dayes, as to beleeue the former articles mentioned, which are not expreſſed in the Creed. And yet theſe our Newtraliſts in Religiō, who make the creed, the ſole ſquare of their faith, do not thinke, that thoſe queſtions of Religion inſiſted vpon betweene Catholikes and the Proteſtants, are in beleeuing or not beleeuing of them, any way hurtefull to their ſaluation.

CHAP. V. The ſame proued from the want of vnity in fayth betweene Catholikes and Protestants, in articles neceſſary to be beleeued, and yet not expreſſed in the Creede.

IN this third and laſt place we will inſiſt in certaine controuerſyes of Religion, ſo differently maintayned by Catholikes and Proteſtants, as that graunting the maintaynours of the one ſide, to hould the truth, it followeth, that the other party vphouldeth falſehood and hereſy. Now for the more dangerous wounding of our Newtralizing Proteſtants heerein, I will omit here to ſpeak of the Controuerſies, touching Purgatory, Praying to Saints, Free-will, Monachiſme, and diuers others ſuch like; and will reſtraine my ſelfe, only to theſe Controuerſies, the ſubiect of which Cō trouerſyes, are taught by the one ſide, to be (vnder Chriſt) the immediate meanes, of our grace & ſaluation; and denyed by the other party, to be of any ſuch force and efficacy, for the ſoules euerlaſting good: and conſequently in regard of their ſubiect, are one way neceſſarily to be beleeued. So as if it be ſhowed, that the Proteſtants and the Catholiks do mainly diſſent in the meanes of obtayning grace, & purchaſing of ſaluation; it muſt of neceſſity be inferred, that both the Proteſtants and the Catholikes continuing in ſuch their ſtate, cannot obtaine grace and ſaluation: ſince not only Philoſophy, but euen naturall reaſon teacheth vs, that he neuer shall attaine the end, who vſeth eyther not the ſame meanes, which are only and neceſſarily inſtituted to the gayning of the ſayd end.

1. But to procced to theſe points Firſt, Concerning the ſacraments in generall; the Catholikes doe beleeue, that all of them (where no iuſt impediment is) do conferre grace into the ſoule of man, by the helpe and continuance of which grace, the ſoule in the end, obtayneth its ſaluation. The Proteſtants do not aſcribe any ſuch ſupernaturall effect or operation of grace to them.

2. And to come more particulerly to the Sacraments. Touching Baptiſme: the Catholikes beleeue, That children being borne in Originall ſinne, cannot be ſaued, except they be baptized with water, according to thoſe wordes of S. Iohn. 3. Vnleſſe a man be borne againe of water, and the ſpirit, he cannot enter into the kingdome of God. The ProteſtantsWillet in his meditat, in Pſal. 122. & Calu. & Beza frequently. beleeue, that infāts dying vnbaptiſed, may be ſaued.

〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉

3. Touching the Sacrament of Pennance or Confeſsion, the Catholikes beleeue, That after a Chriſtian hath committed any one mortall ſinne, that ſinne cannot be forgiuen him, but (at leaſt in voto) by meanes of confeſsing the ſayd ſinne to a Priest, of the new Testament, and receauing abſolution thereof from him: anſwerably to that of S. Iohn. 20. Whoſe ſinnes you shall forgiue, they are forgiuen them: and whoſe ſinnes you shall retayne, they are retayned. The Proteſtants beleeue, that neyther the confeſſion of ſinnes to man, nor the abſolution of man, is neceſſary for the remitting of them; but that it is ſufficient to confeſſe them only to God. And thus according to the diuerſity of doctrine, either the Proteſtant for want of this ſacrament (after he hath mortally ſinned) cannot be ſaued, or Catholiks for wrongfully impoſing this yoak vpon Chriſtiās, do looſe their ſaluation.

4. Touching the moſt Bleſsed Eucharist, the Catholikes beleeue, That the very body and bloode doth lye ineffably and latently, vnder the formes of bread and wine, according to that: This is my body, This is my blood. Math. 26. That vnleſſe we eate his body, and drinke his blood, we shall not haue life euerlaſting. Iohn. 6. Laſtly, That we are to adore Christ his body, being accompanyed with his diuinity in the ſayd Sacraments. The Proteſtants do beleeue, that Chriſts true body, as neuer leauing heauen, cannot poſſibly be truly and really vnder the forme of Bread and Wine; and conſequently they beleeue, that the eating of his body, and drinkinge of his blood, is not neceſſary to ſaluation. Finally they hould our adoration of the Sacrament to be open Idolatry; and tearme Catholikes Idolaters, for adoring of it. And thus eyther the Proteſtāts, as not feeding vpon this celeſtiall food, shall not haue life euerlaſting, if the Catholikes doctrine heerein be true; or els Catholikes (ſuppoſe (which God forbid) they should erre) for teaching and practiſing idolatry heerein, should incurre damnation.

5. Touching the meanes of our Iuſtification. The Catholikes beleeue, That not only fayth, but workes alſo do iuſtify. The Proteſtants reiect al workes from Iuſtification; teachinge that only fayth doth iuſtify man: yea they further proceed, affirming that who once hath true fayth, is moſt aſſured and certaineCalu. in inſtit. paſsim. Kemnit. in exam: Conc. Tri of his ſaluation, whereas the Catholikes reputing this as a meere preſumption, are willing according to the Apoſtle, Phil. 2. To worke their ſaluation with feare and tremblinge. To be short the Proteſtants do teach, that a man by thinking himſelfe to be iust, is by this meanes become iuſt; whereas the Catholikes do hould this doctrine not only to be phantaſticall, but alſo Bella. l. 3. de Iustificatione. in reaſon moſt abſurd.

6. Touching Grace, without which a man cannot be ſaued, the catholiks beleeue, That God out of the Abyſſe and deapth of his infinite mercy, offereth to euery Chriſtian ſufficient grace, whereby he may be ſaued, and therefore they do encourage euery one to endeauour to ſeeke their ſaluation. TheCalu. & Beza in whole treatiſes. D. Willet ſinopſi 1600. p. 789. Proteſtāts teach, that God giueth not this ſufficiency of grace, to euery one, but to certaine men only; & that diuers there are, who notwithſtanding al their endeauour to beleeue truly, and liue vertuouſly, yet they cannot, nor shall not be ſaued.

7. Touching the Decalogue, or ten Commandements, the Catholiks beleeue, That except a Chriſtian do keepe them, he cannot be ſaued, according to our Sauiour: If thou wilt enter into lyfe, keepe the Commandements. Math. 19. TheThe impoſsibility of the commandements is taught by D. Reynolds 2. concluſ. annexed to his conference p. 697. D. Willet in ſynopſi p. 564. Proteſtants do abſolutly teach an impoſſibility of keeping them. And thereupon Luther thus affirmeth: The ten Commandements Ser. de Moyſe. appertaine not vnto vs.

8. Laſtly, touching the Pope or Bishop of Rome, the Catholikes do beleeue, That he is vnder Chriſt, the ſupreme Pastour vpon earth; that who doth not communicate with him, in ſacraments and doctrine, not yeelding him all true obedience, in ſubiecting their iudgments in matters of fayth to his iudgment and ſentential definitions, cannot be ſaued. The Proteſtants doe teach, that the Bishop of Rome is that Antichriſt which is deciphred by the2 Theſſ. 2. Apoc. 13 & 17. Apoſtle, and which is the deſigned ennemy of Chriſt, and that whoſoeuer embraceth his doctrine, or enthralleth (as they write) their aſſents to his cathedrall decrees, in points of Religion, cannot obtayne ſaluation.

9. Thus farre of theſe pointes, of which I haue made particuler choiſe to inſiſt vpon (omitting ſome others of like nature) becauſe wee ſee, that moſt or all of them, do immediatly and principally (as is aboue ſayd) touch the meanes of purchaſing of grace, of remiſſion of our ſinnes, and obtayning of ſaluatiō, being maintayned for ſuch by the Catholikes, but vtterly denyed & reiected by Proteſtants. And here I now vrge two things. Firſt, if theſe former doctrines, as they are beleeued by the Catholikes, do immediatly concerne ſaluation, and become neceſſary meanes thereof, then cannot the Proteſtants (as reiecting all ſuch doctrines, and ſuch meanes both in beliefe & practiſe) be ſaued. But if (by a ſuppoſall) they be not of that nature, but falſe in themſelues, and the contrary doctrines true, then cannot the Catholikes (as beleeuing falſe doctrines immediatly touching mans ſaluation, and accordingly practiſing them) be ſaued. From which forked argument, it may moſt demonſtratiuely be inferred, that it is impoſſible, that both the Catholiks and the Proteſtants (the one part beleeuing, the other part not beleeuing the foreſayd doctrines) should both be ſaued; for who neglecteth neceſſary meanes, shall neuer attayne to the deſigned end of the ſayd meanes. Secondly, I vrge, that a falſe beliefe, not only in theſe articles, but alſo in any other Controuerſyes, betweene the Catholikes and the Proteſtants, is plaine Hereſy. And this, becauſe euery falſe beliefe, is comprehended within the definition of hereſy, as being in it ſelfe an electiō & choiſe of a new or falſe doctrine, wilfully maintayned againſt the Church of God; and therefore it followeth, that eyther the Catholikes or Proteſtants for their perſiſting in this falſe beliefe, or hereſy, shalbe damned.

10. But heere I will ſtay my ſelfe; wading no further in the diſquiſition and ſearch of the great diſſentions betweene Catholikes and Proteſtants, touching Fayth and beliefe; only I will reflect a little vpon the premiſes of the two laſt Chapters. And heere, ſince it is made moſt euident, firſt, that the Proteſtants and Catholikes, do mainly differ in the ſenſe and conſtruction of the articles of the Creed, and conſequently (ſeeing the ſenſe and not the wordes make the creed) that they both do not beleeue one and the ſame Creed, but haue to themſelues ſeuerall Creedes. From whence ſufficiently is diſcouered, that want of vnity in fayth, among them both; which vnity is ſo neceſſarily required to mans ſaluation, as in the precedent Chapter is demonſtrated. Secondly, that though by ſuppoſition, they did beleeue the Creed, & the ſenſe therof with an vnanimous conſent, yet it is proued, that there are diuers other articles not contayned in the Creed, which are indifferently beleeued (as neceſſary to ſaluation) both by Catholike and Proteſtant. Thirdly, ſeeing alſo there are ſundry Controuerſies in Religion (as is aboue exemplifyed) which immediatly concerne ſaluation, being houlden as neceſſary meanes thereof, by the catholikes, but diſclaymed from and abandoned by Proteſtants, as mayne errours and falſe doctrines, that therefore it is a manifeſt errour to make the Creed, the ſole rule of fayth.

11. Therefore from all the former premiſes, I do auerre, that he, who maintayneth, that both Catholikes & Proteſtants, and conſequently men of any Religion (notwithſtāding that the one ſide doth neceſſarily beleeue and maintaine Hereſy, can be ſaued, or that euery Chriſtian can obtaine heauen, is wholy depriued of all true iudgement, reaſon and diſcourſe, and for want thereof, may deſeruedly be ranged among them, of whome the Pſalmiſt ſpeaketh: Nolite fieri ſicut equus & mulus, quibus non est intellectus. Do not become as Horſe and Mule, which haue no vnderſtanding.

CHAP. VI. The ſame proued from the authority and priuiledges of the Church, in not erring in her definitions, and condemnation of Hereſies; and first by Councells.

FROM the inuiolable vnity of Fayth, we wil next deſcend to the priuiledges of Gods true church, of which priuiledges, I will at this tyme take only one into my conſideration; which, is that the church of God is indued with a ſupreme prerogatiue, in not erring in her definitiō of faith or condemnation of hereſy. This point is warranted by innumerable texts of holy Scripture, as where it is ſayd: Vpon thy wales, O Hieruſalem, I haue ſet watchmen, all the day, and all the night they shal not be ſilēt. Iſai. 72. But God did not ſet watchmen ouer his Church to teach errours. And againe, the1. Tim. 3. Church of God, is the pillar and foū dation of truth; what more perſpicuous? And further, whereas each man is commaunded to repaire in difficulties, euen of leſſer conſequences, to the Church, it is threatned by Chriſt himſelfe, that who will not heare the Church, ſhalbe accounted, as an heathen or publican, according to that his condemnation: Si Eccleſiam non audierit, Matt. 18. ſit tibi ſicut Ethnicus & Publicanus: where we find no reſtriction, but that in all things wee are to heare the Church. Againe Chriſt himſelfe ſpeaketh to his Apoſtles, and in them to the whole Church: Luc. 10. He that heareth you, heareth me. But if the Church, could erre, neyther would Chriſt referre vs to the Church (eſpecially vnder ſo great a penalty) neyther by hearing the Church, could we be iuſtly ſayd to heare Chriſt. Finally, the Church is ſo gouerned by Chriſt, as its head, or ſpouſe, and by the holy Ghoſt as its ſoule, as therfore we find the Apoſtle thus to write Epheſ. . therof. God hath made him head. (ſpeaking of Chriſt) ouer all the Church, which is his body: And againe one Epheſ. 4. body, and one ſpirit, and yet more: The Epheſ. 5. man is the head of the Church. From which Texts it followeth, that if the Church ſhould erre in its definition, or reſolution of Fayth, and condemnation of Hereſy, this erring muſt iuſtly be aſcribed to Chriſt and to the holy Ghoſt: and conſequently it followeth, that the Apoſtles in making the Creede, would haue omitted that Article. I belieue the holy Catholike Church. For why ſhould we be bound to belieue the Church, if the Church could erre?

2. This truth, (I meane that the Church of Chriſt cannot erre in her ſententionall decrees) is ſo illuſtrious and euident, that Tertullian ſpeaking of certaine Heretikes of his time, obiecting the erring of the whole church, thus figuratiuely or Ironically writeth: Age Lib. de preſer. omnes errauerunt, nullam reſpexit Spiritus ſanctus: that is, goe to, belike, all the Churches haue erred; & the holy Ghoſt hath reſpected or looked vpon no one Church. And S. Auguſtine. Diſputare Epiſt. 118. contra id quod Eccleſia vniuerſa ſentit, inſolentiſsimae inſaniae eſt: To diſpute againſt any point, maintained by the whole Church, is extreme madnes. To whoſe iudgement herein moſt of the more ſober and learned Proteſtants doe indiſputably ſubſcribe; ſince diuers ofD. Bā croft in ſer. 1588 Fox. act. Mon. 464 h. art. 4. the deuines of Geneua in their propoſitions and principles, diſputed pag. 141. & diuers others. them doe with all ſeruour and earneſtnes maintaine, that the church of Chriſt cannot erre, and that, what ſhe defineth, for truth, is moſt true, or what for Hereſy or falſehood, is hereticall, and to be condemned.

3. This baſis or foundation of the Churches not erring, being thus firmely layd, we are herevpon to conclude, that what points of Religion, the Catholike Church of Chriſt hath condemned for hereſies, the ſame are by vs to be reputed for hereſies (ſince the Churches cōdemnation or approbation is moſt infallible) & the maintainours of the ſayd hereſies, for heretikes; and conſequētly that ſuch heretikes, as departing out of the Church of God, by their houlding of the ſayd hereticall opinions, cannot be ſaued. Now becauſe the iudgmēt of the Church in matters of fayth is (by the aknowledgment of all ſides) diſcouered two wayes; firſt by the ſentence of generall Councells; ſecondly by the frequent atteſtations of the chiefe doctors of the Church in euery age, in their particuler writings, they not being contradicted therein, by any other orthodoxall Fathers, or doctors of the ſame age; I will therefore diſtributiuely handle both theſe wayes, ſhewing that both by generall Councels, and alſo by the particuler iudgment of the learned Fathers, many opinions, though not touching the Trinity, the Incarnatiō, the Paſſion, or the expreſſe articles of the Apoſtles Creed, haue bine condemned for plaine hereſies, and the belieuers of them anathematized for Heretikes.

4. And firſt, to begin with Councells, the infallible authority of which, euen Chriſt himſelf, hath by his own words often ratifyed: as where he ſayth: VVhere Math. 18. two or three (much more when many hūdred venerable Biſhops) are gathered together in my name, I am in the midst of thē. And againe, ſpeaking to his Church, and in it to the aſſembled Doctours and Paſtours thereof: I am Math. 28. with you all dayes, euen to the conſumation of the world. Which councels are euer directed, and gouerned by the holy Ghoſt: according to thoſe wordes in the Acts: Viſum est c. 15 Spiritui ſancto & nobis. It hath ſeemed good to the holy Ghoſt and vs. And therefore are worthily receaued & admitted, for the ſupremeſt ſentence of Gods Church, not only by the ancientAtha. epiſt ad Epictetū. Aug. epi. 162. Nazianz oratione in Athanaſium. Cyrill l. de Trinitate &c. Fathers, but euen by the more learned Proteſtants; ſince to omit others, one of the moſt remarkable of them thus writeth: Synods D. Bilſon in his perpetual gouermēt pag. 370. are an externall iudiciall meanes to diſcerne errour; & the ſupremeſt meanes to decyde doubts. But to proceede. The Councell of Nice was celebrated (though principally for the repreſſing of the hereſy of Arrius, denying the diuinity of Chriſt) yet withall touching the Controuerſy of keeping the feaſt of Eaſter, as is apparent out ofD. Bilſon ſupra pag. 374. Euſebius, Lib. 3. de vita Constantini. Athanaſius, andDe ſynodis Ariminis & Seleuciae. Epiphanius. Now this Councel pronounceth Anathema, to al thoſe, who (beſides their denying of the diuinity of Chriſt) ſhall deny that the feaſt of Eaſter, was not to be kept according to the cuſtome of the church, but according to the cuſtome of the Iewes. And theſe heretikes were called Quartodecimani, Hereſ. 70. Andianorū. of whom ſee Tertul. l. de preſcrip. Augustine hereſis 29. And here we are to vnderſtand, that the worde: Anathema, vſed and pronounced by this Councell (which word is alſo almoſt euery where vſed in all their general Coū cells) ſignifyeth aſmuch, as accurſed, and in this ſenſe we find this word, Anathema, to be vſed by the Apoſtle, in ſeueralEpiſt. ad Rom. 9.1. Cor. 12. &c. places, ſo as when a Councel pronounceth Anathema, to any for belieuing ſuch and ſuch hereſies, or not belieuing ſuch and ſuch true doctrines, it intendeth to ſay, that thoſe men ſo doing, are to be accurſed and abandoned from God, But no man is to be accurſed or abandoned from God, for belieuing, or not belieuing points of indifferency, but for belieuing of ſuch errours, as cannot ſtand with his ſoules ſaluation.

5. Alſo you ſhall reade Act. 15. of the Councell aſſembled in the Apoſtles time, the occaſion and reaſon thereof was, for that certaine contentious men, maintaining that the Gentiles, cōuerted to the Chriſtian fayth, might eate meats offered vp to Idols, & blood and ſtrangled beaſts, contrary to the cuſtome of the Iewes; the Apoſtles being aſſembled, & bearing with the weaknes of the Iewes, in the infancy of the Church, decreed the prohibition of eating blood and ſtrangled meates. After, which decree once eſtabliſhed, it is certaine, that it had bine a mortall ſinne immediatly to haue eaten of blood, and ſtrangled meates; ſo as before it being a point of indifferency, is now made neceſſary. This appeareth from the text: firſt from thoſe wordes; Certaine going forth from vs, haue troubled you with wordes, ſubuerting your ſoules. But men do neyther depart out of the Church, by maintaintng certaine opinions, nor by their example therein can they ſubuert other mens ſoules, if their doctrine and practiſe thereof, do ſtil remaine, about things indifferent; Secondly from that other paſſage. It hath ſeemed good to the holy Ghoſt and vs, to lay, no further burthen vpon you, then theſe neceſſary thinges: where we find, that the prohibition of ſuch meates, is ranged by the Apoſtles, in regard of thoſe tymes, amoung thoſe things, which are neceſſary; Againe neyther would the Apoſtles haue gathered themſelues ſo ſolemly, neither would they haue aſcribed, the decreeing of it to the worke of the holy Ghoſt, if the ſubiect of the queſtion, and difficulty then diſcuſſed of by them, had concerned matters only of indifferency.

6. Now from the example of this Councell, I do gather, that if a Councell by its owne authority may decree, that the eating of certaine meates (being otherwayes of their owne nature indifferently to be eaten without ſinne) ſhalbe vnlawful, and ſhall repute and hould the impugners thereof for men departed from out of the Church of Chriſt; then a fortiori, what doctrine ſoeuer a Councell ſhall condemne of its owne nature for hereſy, the ſame is to be reputed, by all good Chriſtians for hereſy, and the defendours thereof for Heretikes.

7. The third Councell of Cau. 47. Carthage (wherat S. Auguſtine was preſent) decreed, that the booke of the Maccabees with ſome other bookes, ſhould be acknowledged as canonicall; and pronounceth an Anathema, and condemnation to all thoſe, who ſhould not belieue them, as canonicall ſcripture: from whence it may be concluded, that ſeeing the booke of the Machabees, teacheth prayer for the dead, that therefore this Councell alloweth this doctrine, and condemneth the contrary doctrine for hereſy.

8. The doctrine of the Nouatians (who taught, that there was not power in the Church, to reconcile men to God, but only by Baptiſme; excluding and denying thereby the ſacrament of Pennance) was condemned with the thunderbolt of Anathema. In the Councell of Rome houlden vnder Pope Cornelius, aslib. 6. hist. c. 33. Euſebius reporteth, was condemned for hereſy, the errour of Anabaptiſme, as the ſame l. 7. hiſt. c. 2. 1. Euſebius relateth.

9. The Councell of Chalcedon condemned the hereſy of Eutiches, who taught, that there was but onevt patet in act. 1. Conc. Nature in Chriſt, after the Incarnation. In like ſort the firſt Councell of Epheſus, condemned the hereſy of Neſtorius, teaching two perſons to be in Chriſt, as appeareth out ofIn Chronico. Proſper, and Lib. 7. c. 3 . Socrates. Now touching both theſe laſt hereſyes, we are to vnderſtand, that both Neſtorius, and Eutiches, did beleeue in Chriſt Ieſus our Sauiour, as the Redeemer of the world, yet they were regiſtred & brāded for heretiks only for their pertinacious erring, touching the Perſon & Natures of Chriſt; as now the Proteſtants may be reputed Heretikes, for their aſcribing of ignorance, Paſſion, and deſperation to Chriſt.

10. The Councel of Chalcedon alſo decreed, that vowed virgins and monks could not marry, condemning thoſe with an Anathema, & for heretiks, that ſhould hould & maintaine the contrary, as is to be ſeene out of the Councell it ſelfe. The fourth Councell of Carthage (whereat S. Auguſtine was preſent) pronounced, that the Can. 79. doctrine of prayer and Sacrifice for the dead, was according to the true fayth of Chriſts Church; and condemned the contrary opinion for hereſy and the maintainers of them for Heretikes. The Councell of Conſtantinople, vnder Pope Vigilius, condemned Origen for his hereſy, in which he taught that the deuils ſhould in the ende be ſaued; asIn rita Iuſtiniani. Zonaras and Lib. 17. c. 27. Nichephorus relate. Finally the ſeuenth ſynod or 2. councell of Nice, condemned all them for Heretikes, who taught, that the Images of Chriſt, & of his Saints, were to be depriued of all due reſpect and reuerence, and to be condemned and broaken: of this point, ſee PaulusLib. 23. reri •• Roman. Diaconus andIn compēdiu hiſtorius. Cedrenus.

11. Thus farre concerning Councells, condemning for hereſy falſe opinions touching fayth and Religion, where I haue reſtrayned my ſelfe, only to thoſe Councels (this laſt only excepted) which were within the firſt fiue hundred yeares, or little more, becauſe thoſe tymes are more prized, & eſteemed, then the now later tymes. The like courſe was continued by Councells, for condemning and reſiſting of Innouations, and falſe doctrines (though not concerning the Trinity, the Incarnatiō, or the Apoſtles Creed) in the ſucceeding Ages; which I purpoſely omit.

12. But now I heere demand, firſt how can it ſtand with the infallible authority of Gods Churche, in not erring in matters of fayth (of which priuiledge I haue intreated in the beginning of this Chapter) if ſo she shall define the former errours, for condemned hereſyes, and Anathematize, and curſe the maintaynors of them, for branded Heretikes, if the doctrines are but ō ly, matters of indifferency; & ſuch as may ſtand with ſaluation? Secondly, I aske, how both the deffendours & impugners of the ſayd doctrines, can be freed from the brand of Hereſy? Seeinge the true definition of Hereſy, neceſſarily agreeth to the doctrines, maintayned by the one ſide; for it is certaine, that eyther the Catholikes, or the Proteſtants, do make choiſe of new opinions herin, & do ſtubbornely maintayne theſe their Innouations againſt the Church of God.

The ſame proued from the authority of the Church, condemning hereſies, manifeſted by the writinges of particuler Fathers. CHAP. VII.

NOW to come to the ſecond way, of diſcouering the Churches ſentence, in the foreſayd point, which is by the particuler iudgment, of the ancient learned Fathers, which were in their ſeueral ages, the ſhyning lamps of Gods Church, whoſe authorityes that all ſucceeding ages, are to reuerence, is eaſily euicted from Gods holy writ; for anſwearably heerto we read in Deutronom. 32. Remember the ould dayes, thinke vpon euery generation, aske thy father, and he will declare vnto thee, thy elders, and they will tell thee. And the Proteſtant confeſſion of Bohemia conſpireth therunto, ſaying: The Harmonia confeſſ. p. 400. ancient Church, is the true and best miſtreſſe of poſterity, and going before leadeth vs the way. Comming then to the Fathers, I will firſt inſiſt in the particuler errours (not touching eyther the Trinity, the Incarnation, & Paſſion of our Sauiour, or the articles of the Creed, but points ſeeming of more indifferency) condemned by them, for open and damnable hereſyes. And heere I haue purpoſely made particuler choice of diuers Controuerſies of this tyme, handled betweene the Catholikes & the Proteſtants, to the end that our Adiaphorists (who maintayne, that both Proteſtants & Catholikes may be ſaued) may ſee, that the denyall of thoſe very articles of fayth, were reputed by the Fathers of the primitiue Church, for hereſies, & the denyers of them for Heretikes, and conſequently in the Fathers iudgment, not capable of ſaluation. Next I will ſet downe, diuers of the Fathers ſayinges, & ſentences, pronounced of hereſy, and Heretikes in generall.

2. But before we come to the condemnatiō of particuler hereſyes, we muſt conceaue, that reaſon it ſelfe, & reuerence due to the chiefe Doctors & Fathers of the primatiue Church, muſt preſuppoſe, that in thoſe tymes, all thoſe opinions, were generally acknowledged for damnable hereſyes, which are placed in the Catalogue of hereſyes, by Irenaeus, Hierome, Epiphanius, Philaſtrius, Augustine, Theodoret, and other approued Authors, of thoſe dayes. This by drift of reaſon is to be acknowledged, for two reſpects: Firſt, becauſe we cannot find any Doctor, or Writer of the ſame ages, who contradicted the foreſayd Fathers, for planting in their Catalogues, any opinion as hereſy, which was not hereſy. Secondly, in that the forenamed Fathers, and Authours of the Catalogues of hereſies, were godly and learned men, and therefore neyther would, nor durſt, brand any opinion with the note and marke of hereſy, which the whole Church of God did not then take as hereſy. All this then iuſtly & truely preſuppoſed; let vs proceed to the particuler hereſyes, ſo regiſtred for ſuch, by ſome of the foreſayd Fathers, where (for the fuller conuincing of our Newtraliſts in Religion) my greateſt choiſe (ſome few only excepted) ſhalbe of the Controuerſies, remayning ſtill at this day, betweene the Catholikes and Proteſtants.

3. Firſt then, That God was the author of ſinne, was maintayned by Florinus, and condemned for hereſy, or rather blaſphemy byEuſeb l. 5. hist. cap. 20. Irenieus, andIn cō monitorio Vincentius Lyrinenſis.

4. The opinion touching the impoſſibility of the Commandments, was maintayned by certaine Noueliſts of thoſe tymes, & condemned for hereſy byIn explan. ſimbol. ad Damaſ. S. Hierome in theſe words: Execramus &c. VVe doe execrate, and abhorre the blaſphemy of thoſe, who ſay that any impoſsible thing is commanded by God, to be kept and obſerued by man. See alſo the like condemnation heereof giuen bySerm. de temp. cap. 101 S. Auguſtine.

5. That man had not Free-will, is auerred by the Manichees, and condemned for a manifeſt hereſy byIn praeſat. dial. cont. Pelagia. Hierome in theſe wordes: Manichaeorū est hominis damnare Naturam, & liberum auferre arbitrium. The Manichees do condemne mans nature, & do take away Free-will. As alſo by S. Auguſtine Lib. de haereſ. c. 46. ſaying: Peccatorum originem non tribuunt Manichaei libero arbitrio. The Manichees doth not aſcribe the beginning of ſinne to Freewill.

6. That fayth doth only iuſtify, was condemned for an hereſy in the Eunomians byLib. de haereſ. c. 54. S. Augustine, who furtherLib. de fide & operib. c. 14. ſayth, that it firſt proceeded from the falſe vnderſtanding of S. Paul in his epiſtles.

7. That prayer or ſacrifice, could not be offered vp for the dead, is maintained by Aerius, & his followers, who alſo taught, that ſet faſting-dayes are not to be appointed by the Church: yet were theſe two opinions condemned for hereſyes by Hareſ. 75. Epiphanius, andLib. de hereſ. cap 33. S. Auſtine, who thus writteth: Aeriani haeretici docent, non oportere orare, aut offerre ſacrificium pro mortuis, nec statuta ſolemniter celebranda eſse ieiunia, ſed cum quiſque voluerit ieiunā dum, ne videatis eſse ſub lege. The Heretike Aerians do teach, that we ought not to pray or offer ſacrifice for the dead: that ſolemne faſting dayes are not to be celebrated, but that every one is to faſt, when it pleaſeth himſelfe, leaſt otherwiſe he might ſeeme to liue vnder the law. Thus farre S. Augustine.

8. That Virgins might marry, was condemned in Vigilantius for hereſy by S. Hierome, who againſt the ſame Vigilantius, thus writeth: Quid faciunt Orientis Eccleſiae? &c. VVhat do the Churches of the Eaſt in this point? VVhat the Church of Egipt? And the Apoſtolicall Sea? They admit for Prieſts, men, who are eyther Virgins, or continent, or if they haue wiues, do ceaſe to become husbands.

9. That marriage and virginity was of equal dignity, was defended by Iouinian, who alſo abſolutly denyed, all diuerſity of merits, yet was this his errour cōdemned for hereſy byLib. 1. aduer. Iouin. c. 2 S. Hierome, andDe tē pore ſer. 191. S. Auguſtine thus writing thereof: Iouiniani damnamus errorem, qui dicit nullam in futuro meritorum distantiam. VVe condemne the errour of Iouiniā, who teacheth, that there is no diſparity, or difference of merits in tyme to come.

10. That the Church was not euer viſible, was taught by the Donatists, but condemned for a moſt wicked hereſy, by S. Augustine, who thus diſcourſeth therof: Donatistae Lib. de vnit. Ecc. c. 12. & epiſt. 170 ad Seuerum. detorquent ſcripturas, in Eccleſiam Dei, vt tanquam defeciſse, & perijſse de toto orbe videatis. The Donatiſts do detort the Scripture, and apply it againſt the Church of God, that the Church thereby may ſeeme to haue ſuffered defect, or perished out of the whole world.

11. That Baptiſme of children was not neceſſary, was taught by the Pelagians, but condē ned for a manifeſt hereſy byIn reſcripto ad Mileuitanum Concil. Innocentius, by Haereſ. 88. S. Auguſtine, andIn ep. 86. ad Epiſcopum Aquetletenſem. S. Leo.

12. The Religious vſe of the images of Chriſt & his Saints, was ſacrilegiouſly denyed be Zenaias Perſa, as Nicephorus (s) witneſſeth, thus writing: Zenaias iſte primus (o audacem animam & os impudens) vocē illam euomuit, Christi, & eorum qui illi placuerūt, imagines venerandas non eſse, that is. This Zenayas was the first, that vomited forth this word (to bould ſoule, and impudent mouth) that the Images of Christ, and his Saints, were not to be worshipped.

12. That we ought not to pray to Saints, or to worshippe their Relikes, was maintained by Vigilantius, but condemned for hereſy byLib. cont. Vigilant. c. . & 3. Saint Hierome, and byLib. de Eccleſ. og. c. 3 S. Augustine, who of this later branche thus writeth. Sanctorum corporum, & praecipue Beatorum veliquias, a ſi Christi membra, ſinceriſſime honoranda credimus; ſi quis contra ſententiam venerit, non Christianus, ſed Eunomianus aut Vigilātianus creditur. VVe beleeue that the Reliques of holy bodyes (but eſpecially of Martyrs) as the members of Chriſt, are to be honoured most ſincerely: and who shall come to impugne this doctrine, is to be accounted no Christian, but eyther an Eunomian or a Vigilantian.

13. The ouerthrowing of Altars, & caſting away of holy Chriſme, was taught & practiſed by the Donatiſts, yet was this their ſacrilegious proceedings condemned, & themſelues branded for Heretikes byLib. 2. contra Petilianū c. 52. & l. 3. c. 40 & epiſt. 163. S. Auguſtine, and by Optatus, who ſpeaking to the Donatiſts, diſcourſeth therof in this manner: Quid Lib. 6. contra Donatist. eſt tam ſacrilegum, quam altaria Dei, in quibus & vos aliquando obtuliſtis, frangere, radere, remouere? Quid enim eſt altare, niſi ſedes corporis & ſanguinis Christi? Quid vos offenderit Chriſtus, cuius illic per certa momenta, corpus & ſanguis habitabant? VVhat is ſo ſacrilegious (O you Donatists) as to breake, deface, caſt downe the altars of God, whervpon your ſelues haue ſometymes offered vp ſacrifice? VVhat other thing is an Altar, then the ſeat of the body and blood of Chriſt? In what hath Chriſt ſo offended you, whoſe body and blood, for certaine moments or short tymes, did dwell and remayne vpon the Altars?

14. To be short, I paſſe ouer (as leſſe pertinent to the Controuerſies of theſe tymes) how the errour of Origen touching the ſaluation of Diuells was condemned for hereſy, byHaer. 43. & de ciuit. Dei l. 21. cap. 17. S. Auguſtine; the error of Tertullian denying ſecond marriages, was in like ſort mightily reprehended & condemned by Haer. 86. S. Augustine, though both theſe Doctors (I meane Tertullian, and Origen) had otherwiſe by their learned writinges, deſerued well of the Church of God.

15. Thus farre touchnig the foreſaid controuerſies condemned for hereſies, by the Fathers of the primatiue Church; though the ſubiect of the ſaid hereſies, was neither touching the Trinity, the Incarnation, the paſſion of our Sauiour, or the articles of the Creede; a-point ſo euident, & confeſſed euen by the Proteſtants, as that many of the foreſayd examples, are collected out of the Fathers, and confeſſed ſo to be condemned, by learned Proteſtants, as by the Centuriſts in their firſt chapter of euery ſeuerall Century, by Oſiander, in his ſeuerall centuries, as alſo by Pantaleon in his Chronology. Beſides which condemnation of the Church, eyther theſe doctrines, or the contrary to them, are neceſſarily proued to be hereſyes, euen from the very definition of hereſy aboue ſet downe; and therefore it followeth, that both the Catholikes and Proteſtants (the one beleiuing them, the other not) cannot be ſaued, ſeeing Heretikes, dying Heretikes, cannot be ſaued.

16. Now to come to the ſentences of the Fathers powred out in great heate, and feruour of zeale againſt Heretikes & Hereſies in generall. And to beginne with S. Ihon the Euangeliſt. S. Irenaeus Lib. c. 3. & apud Euſeb. l. 4. c. 13. relateth (to ſet downe Irenaeus own wordes) that Policarpus the martyr (who was ſcholler to the Apoſtles) was wont to tell, how that Saint Iohn the Apoſtle of our Sauiour, being at a certaine tyme in Epheſus, and going into a publicke bath, & finding Cerinthus the Heretike to be within the bath, ranne preſently out of the bath, ſaying to them who were with him: Let vs flee from hence, for feare least the bath fal vpon vs, and kil vs, in which the ennemy of God Cerinthus abideth.

17. The ſayd authourVbi ſupra. Irenaeus, in like ſort relateth in theſe wordes following, how that the foreſayd Policarpus meeting at Rome by chance, Marcion the Heretike, and being demanded of Policarpus, whether he knew him or not? anſwered: Yea, I know thee for the chiefe child of Sathan. To conclude with the teſtimony of this Father, the ſayd Irenaeus, writing to Florinus an heretike, who once was ſcholler to S. Policarpe with him, thus ſayth: Theſe opinions Iren. in epiſt. ad Flori. of thyne (O Florinus) to ſpeake friendly, are not true nor holſome. Theſe opinions are repugnāt to the Church &c. I may trulie proteſt, that if the holy & Apoſtolicall Prieſt Policarpus, had heard of ſuch opinions, as thou defendest, be would haue stopped his eares, & cryed out (according to his fashiō) O good God, vnto what miſerable tymes, haſt thou reſerued me, to heare theſe thinges? And preſently would haue runne out of the place, where he had beene ſtanding or ſitting, where ſuch doctrine had beene vttered. But now to reflect a little vpon the premiſes: Cerinthus, Marcion, and Florinus, did all belieue in the Trinity, the Incarnation of our Sauiour, and receaued the Apoſtles Creede; and erred only in leſſer points, and yet wee ſee what ſharpe reprehenſions, were vſed towards them, by S. Iohn, & S. Policarpe his ſcholler, As to fly out of their company, to acknowledge one of them to be the child of the Diuell, to stoppe their owne eares, for not hearing of their errours &c. All which ſpeaches had beene ouer much, aggrauated, and tranſcended the boundes of Charity, if their errours had reſted vpon matters only of indifferency, and had beene compatible with mans ſaluation.

18. But to proceed to the ſentences of other Fathers in this point. Athanaſius ſayth in his creed (to vſe his wordes) VVhoſoeuer doth not hould the Catholike faith, whole and inuiolable, he shall perishe for euer. And S. Hierome expreſſely thus writteth. For Lib. 3 Apol. cōt. Ruffinū. one worde or two, contrary to the fayth, many haue beene cast out of the Church. Yea he proceedeth further thus writting: Haeretici Dial. contra Lucif. c. 1 quicumque, Christiani non ſunt. VVhoſoeuer are Heretikes, theſe men are not Christians. S. Baſil was wount to ſay, as Theodoret recordeth: Thoſe Lib. 4. hiſt. c. 17. who are truly inſtructed in the diuine doctrine, will not ſuffer any ſyllable of the diuine decrees to be corrupted, but for the defence therof (if neceſsity forceth them) will vndergoe any kind of death. TertullianLib. de preſer- that ancient Father hath a ſentēce, not much different from that of the former Father. S. Auguſtine ſayth: Imagine a Lib. 4. contra Donatiſt. c. 8. man to be chast, continent, not couetous, not ſeruing Idols, ministring hoſpitality to the poore, ennemy to none, malicing no body, ſober, frugall &c. but yet if he be an Heretike, certainly no man doubteth, but for this alone, that he is an heretike, he shall not poſſeſse the kingdome of God. A dreadfull ſaying of ſo learned and godly a Father. The Donatists for diſagreeing from S. Augustine in ſome traditions, not ſpecifyed in the Scripture (much leſſe in the creed) are thus reprehended by him. In In explicat. Pſal. 54. theſe points thoſe Heretikes were with me, and yet not altogeather with me, in ſchiſme not with me, in hereſy not with me, in many thinges with me, in few not with me. Theſe few in which they were not with me, the many could not help them, in which they were with me. And yet theſe Donatiſts beleeued with S. Auguſtine, the Trinity, the Incarnation, & recyted with him the Apoſtles Creed. Briefly S. Auguſtine in quest. 11. in Matth. thus defineth an Heretike: Haereticus est, qui de aliqua parte doctrinae falſum credit. He is an heretike, who beleeueth any falſe thing touching any point of Christian fayth. Within which definition, it neceſſarily followeth, that eyther the Proteſtants for not beleeuing Purgatory, Prayers to Saints, Freewill, Merit of workes, or the Catholike for beleeuing of them are to be included. S. Gregory Nazianzen in Oratione 37. Vnum vni cohoeret &c. One point of fayth agreeth with another, ſo as of them altogether there is made a certaine golden and wholeſome chaine; therefore if but one opinion or article be taken away, or made doubtfull, the whole chaine of fayth will be come broken. And S. Cyprian: Cum Lib. 1 epi. 6. ad Magnū. Dominus noſter Ieſus Chriſtus &c. VVhen our Lord Ieſus Christ, did teſtify in the Ghoſpell, that thoſe were his ennemyes, who were not with him, he noted not any one hereſy, but manifeſtly showeth, that all Heretikes whoſoeuer, are his ennemyes; ſaying: He that is not with me, is against me, and he that doth not gather with me, diſperſeth. Luc. 11. And S. Chryſoſtom: Quemadmodū In ep ad Gal. c. 10. in mone a regia &c. Euen as who pareth away a little of the Kings ſiluer, maketh the whole peece therof, to be adulterate; Euen ſo, who ouerthroweth, the leaſt part or brā che of true fayth, may be ſayd, to corrupt the whole; he proceeding from this ſmall beginning to worſer courſes.

19. To come to an end of the Fathers iudgment in this point, S. Ambroſe Lib. 6 in Luc. c. 9. ſhall conclude all, who thus plainely writeth thereof: Si vnum horum retraxeris &c. If thou shalt recall or deny any of theſe points, thou haſt retracted thy owne ſaluation; for euen Heretiks ſeeme to challenge Chriſt to them, for no man will deny the name of Chriſt; neuertheles, he indeed denyeth Christ, who doth not confeſse all pointes of fayth, instituted by Christ. Thus farre of the Fathers iudgment in this matter, where I am to aduertiſe the Reader. Firſt (as aboue I haue touched in the Councels) that if all falſe doctrines whatſoeuer pertinaciouſly defended againſt the Church of God, be hereſyes, as the definition of hereſy aboue explicated, proueth them to be, and as the Fathers of the Primitiue Church, and in them the whole Church of God, haue maintained, then either the Proteſtants or Catholikes for their diſentions & houlding of cōtrary doctrines, touching freewill, Purgatory, Prayer to Saints, ſacrifice &c. are to be accounted heretiks; and conſequētly both cānot be ſaued in their Religon. For that Heretikes, continuing Heretiks, cannot be ſaued, is demonſtrated; firſt, from thoſe fearefull threats & comminations of the Apoſtles thundred out againſt Heretikes (of which point I haue diſcourſed aboue) Secondly, from the authority of Chriſts church, which excludeth all Heretiks (as I haue ſhowed) from all hope of ſaluation: And laſtly (to omit many other reaſons) from that principle, That Heretikes are no members of Chriſts church, of which point we are to diſpute in the next place. Now if the ſayd falſe doctrines, be not hereſyes, then haue the Fathers of the primitiue church, generally erred in defyning them for hereſyes, and conſequently the whole Church of God repreſented in the Fathers, as in her Paſtors and Doctors, hath alſo therein erred, which is repugnant to the holy Math 18. Ioan. 16. 3. Epheſ. 1. Scripture, and our Sauiours promiſe.

20. The ſecond thing to be aduertiſed is, that of the former authorityes of the Fathers againſt hereſy, not any of them are reſtrayned by them to be hereſies, touching the Trinity, the Incarnation of Chriſt, his Paſſion, the Articles of the creede (for of theſe heere is made no mention or intimation in their authorityes) within which compaſſe our Formaliſts in Religion, ſeeke to cō taine their fayth; but they are implicitly by the Fathers extended, to all hereſies whatſoeuer, whether they concerne the ſupreme and fundamental points of Chriſtian Religion, or any other ſecondary, and leſſe principall point of the ſame Religion.

The ſame proued from that principle, that neither Heretikes nor Schiſmatikes, are members of Chriſts Church. CHAP. VIII.

IN this laſt place concerning the Church, we will ſet downe, another principle of Chriſtian fayth, and after will deduce from thence by way of moſt neceſſary inference, our concluſion heere handled. The principle is this: That Heretikes houlding any hereſyes whatſoeuer, are no members of the church of Chriſt. The deduction is, that Heretikes therefore cannot be ſaued; ſince none can be ſaued, but ſuch as are members of Chriſtes church. This principle is proued (as aboue is intimated) out of Gods holy word, as where it it1. Tim. 1. ſayd: Certaine men made shipwracke touching fayth, that is, they fell out of the ſhip of the Church by forging of Hereſies. And againe: They 1. Io. 2. went out of vs, that is, as S. Augustine expoundeth, out of the Church, of which we are. The expoſitions of which texts are warranted, euen by force of reaſon: for ſeeing the Church is an vnited multitude (for it is one Spouſe, Cant. 6. one Kingdome, and one Body) & this vnion chiefly conſiſteth in the profeſſion of one fayth; it is repugnant to reaſon, that they should be reputed as members of the body of the Church, who haue no coniunction at all, in the chiefeſt matters with the ſayd body.

2. If we proceed to the teſtimonyes of the ancient Fathers, we shall find them of an vnanimous iudgment herein, to wit, That Heretikes are no members of the Church, and therfore cannot be ſaued. And firſt, occurreth S. Irenaeus Lib. 3 Cap. 3. who ſayth, that Policarpe did conuert many Heretikes vnto the Church; therefore it may be concluded, that thoſe Heretikes before their conuerſion, were out of the Church. S. Cyprian Epiſt. ad Iubainum. ſayth: Heretikes, though they be out of the Church, do challenge to themſelues the authority of the Church, after the manner of Apes, who not being men, yet would be accounted to be men. The ſame Father thus plainly writeth in another place. Cum lib. de vnitate Eccleſ. Deo manere non poſſunt, qui in Eccleſia Dei vnanimes eſse noluerunt. They cannot remaine with God, who diſſent in iudgment from the church of God. And yet more fully in the ſame place: Non peruenit ad Chriſti praemia &c. He arriueth not to the rewards of Christ, who leaueth the church of Chriſt, he is an alien, he is prophane, he is an ennemy; for he cannot haue God to his Father, who hath not the Church for his Mother. And S. Hierome ſayth: Quê non In dialog. con. Lucifer. à Domino Ieſu Chriſto, ſed ab alio &c. VVho take their denomination or name not from our Lord Ieſus Chriſt, but from ſome other (as the Marcioniſts, Valentinians, Montenſes, &c.) are not the Church of God, but the ſynagogue of Antichriſt. Finally S. Auguſtine (for I haue already dwelled ouerlong, in the authority of the Fathers) pronounceth that: Nihil ſic Trae. 27. in Ioann. formidare debet &c. A Christian ought to feare nothing ſo much, as to be ſeparated, from the body of Christ, which is his Church, and which is one and Catholike; for if he be ſeparated from the body of Chriſt, he is not a member of Chriſt; if no member of Christ, then is he not ſtrengthned with his ſpirit. But who hath not this ſpirit of God, the ſame mā is not of God. Thus farre S. Auguſtin; with whome euen the Proteſtants do ioyne heere in iudgment; for D. Doue in his booke of perſuaſions thus ſayth: This propoſition, that Heretikes are not to be communicated withal, is vndoubtedly true. And D. Sutcliffe in his Examen of petitions, pag. 9. alleadgeth the Laodicean Councell can 31. 32. 33. in proofe thereof, thus concluding: The Laodicean Councell doth directly condemne, communion with Heretiks, eyther in marriage or prayer.

3. This already alleadged may ſerue to proue that Heretikes, are no members of the Church of Chriſt, & conſequently cannot attaine ſaluation; ſince it is agreed among all learned men, that only the members of the church of Chriſt can find ſaluation in Chriſt, we will in this place deſcend to Schiſmatikes, who if they be neyther of the Church of God, nor can iuſtly expect any ſaluation (during ſuch their ſtate) then à fortiori, no Heretike, can expect any ſaluation; ſince a Schiſmatike beleeuing all articles of Chriſtian fayth, doth only diuide himſelfe by diſobediēce, in not communicating with the Church in prayer & Sacraments. Whereas an Heretike (as is aboue ſayd) willfully & contumaciouſly maintayneth errours, & falſe opinions cōdemned by the Church. Now that a Schiſmatike is not a member of Chriſts Church, is firſt proued from the Texts of Scripture (aboue in part touched) where the Church is called one fould of sheep Ioan. 10. One body. Rome 12. One ſpouſe, and one Doue Cant. 6. But now Schiſme according to its Etimology, deuideth that, which was one, into parts; for Schiſma, being a greeke word, commeth of the verbe Schizo, which is ſcindere, therefore as a member being cut off from the body, is no longer a part of the body; ſo a Schiſmatike diuiding himſelfe by his owne diſobedience, from the communion of the Church, is no longer a member of the ſayd Church.

4. This verity, to wit, That Schiſmaticks are not members of the Church of Christ, is (beſides the former proofes) warranted with the authorityes; & ſentences of the ancient Fathers. And firſt S. Cyprian thus purpoſely writeth of Schiſmatikes: Qui Lib. 4. ep 9. ad Florē. cum Epiſcopo non ſunt, in Eccleſia non ſunt. Thoſe, who agree not with the Bishop (meaning the ſupreme Bishop of Gods Church) are not in the Church. And againe, the ſaydLib. de vnitate Eccleſiae. Father moſt elegantly cō pareth Schiſmatikes, to Beames diuided from the ſunne, to Boughs cut off from the tree, & to Riuers wholy ſeparated from their ſpringes. Saint Chryſoſtome diſcourſing of Schiſmatikes thus ſayth: Schiſmatis Hom 3. in ep. 1 ad Cor. ſignificantia ſatis eos arguit &c. The very ſignification of this word ſchiſme, is a ſufficient and vehement condemnatiō of them &c. Which Father in anotherHom. 13. in ep. ad Epheſ. place, compareth a ſchiſmatike, to the hand cut off from the body, which thereupon ceaſeth to be a member; and expreſſely affirmeth, that Schiſmatiks, though they conſent with the Church of Chriſt, in doctrine, yet are not in the Church of Chriſt, but in altera Eccleſia, meaning in a Church different from the Church of Chriſt. S. Hierome diſtinguishing ſchiſme from hereſy thus diſcourſeth: Inter In c. 3. ad Tit. hereſim & ſchiſma hoc intereſse arbitramur &c. VVe take this to be the difference betweene hereſy & ſchiſme; that hereſy maintayneth a peruerſe and falſe doctrine, whereas ſchiſme ab Eccleſia pariter ſeparat, in like manner ſeparateth a man from the Church in regard of diſsention and diſobedience towardes our Bishop. S. Augustine thus woū deth a Schiſmatike: Haeretici lib. de ſide & ſimbol. c. 0. & Schiſmatici congregationes ſuas Eccleſias vocant &c. Heretiks and Schiſmatikes, do call their congregations the churches. But Heretikes doe violate their fayth, in beleeuing falſely touching God, whereas Schiſmatikes, though they beleeue the ſame points, which we beleeue, yet through their diſſentions, they do not keep fraternall charity, wherefore we conclude, that neyther an Heretike, belongeth to the Catholike church, becauſe he loueth not God, nor a Schiſmatike, becauſe he loueth not his Neighbour. To conclude, Fulgentius lib. de fide ad Petrum cap. 38. & 39. agreeth with the former Reuer. Father in this point, ſaying: Firmiſsime tene &c. Beleeue for certaine, and doubt not that only Pagans, but alſo Iewes, Heretikes, and Schiſmatikes, who dye out of the Catholike church, are to go to euerlaſting fire.

5. And thus farre touching Schiſmatikes, who becauſe they be not of the Church of Chriſt, cannot obtaine ſaluatiō; which point being made euident, by ſo many authorityes both diuine and human, then much more ſtrongely may we conclude, that Heretikes (as exceeding the Schiſmatikes in prauity and malice, and being excluded in like ſort with thē out of the Church of Chriſt) cannot he ſaued. But before I end this Chapter, giue me leaue, good Reader, to expatiate a little, beyonde my deſigned limits: O then you Schiſmatikes heere in our owne country, whoſe ſoules are ſo wholy abſorpt in earthy & muddy conſiderations, caſt your eyes vpon your owne ſtates, & vſe ſome ſmall introuerſies vpon your ſelues. You ſee what a dangerous cenſure the ancient Church of Chriſt, by the mouthes of its chiefe Paſtors & Doctors, hath thundred againſt you. It ſayth: You are not of Chriſts church, you are aliens and strangers therto. It further pronounceth, That dying in ſuch your ſtate, you are all depriued of all hope of ſaluation. Good God, what ſtupor & dulnes of yours is this? Are you Chriſtians? Preferre then Chriſt before the world. Feare your God more then man. Giue then to God, what is Gods, & to Caeſar, what is Caeſars. Reflect vpon theſe enſuing principles of the Catholike, & therefore your owne Religion.

6. The one that God ordinarily deriueth his grace vnto mans ſoule, by the conduicts of his ſacraments, and giueth abſolution of ones ſinnes, particulerly by the ſacrament of Pennance, and confeſſion: you wilfully depriue your ſelues, of the participation of the Sacraments, and therby of grace & of the remiſſion of your ſinnes, & are you not then as dryed branches, void of that heauenly grace, which giueth life to the ſoule? You wāt the grace & forgiuenes of your ſinne, s where then is your hope of eternall life? Remember the Apoſtles wordes, & be afraid: Gratia Dei vita aeeterna, & do not diſioyne thoſe aſunder, which S. Paul hath ſo inſeparably vnited.

7. The ſecond, the vncertainty of any particuler mans ſaluation, which point is able to ſtrike you dead through feare; & the rather, ſince it is noe ſmall ſigne of mans future damnation, deliberatly and willfully, yeare after yeare, to diuide himſelfe from the Church of Chriſt, and from al the ſpirituall influences ſtreaming from thence.

8. The third, that there is a Purgatory, the paines wherof, though terminable, yet are inſupportable. Suppoſe then the beſt, that is, that you finally dye with true repentance, and reconciled to Gods Church (which yet is not in your power, but out of the maine Ocean of Gods mercy) neuertheles your owne fayth aſſureth you, that you muſt ſuffer in that place euen inſufferable tormēts for your former diſſimulation, & that your continuance, in thus diſſembling with God, ſerue but as bellowes the more to blowe that dreadfull fire. Oh how great intereſt then, are you to pay in the end, for the enioying of this your miſpēt time? If you be Catholikes (though but in hart) you beleiue all here ſaid, and therfore may the more aſſuredly preſage of your owne future miſery. If you doe not beleiue theſe three former points of Catholik Religion, then are you leſſe damned for want of true faith, then otherwayes by your vnchaungeable ſchiſmatical liues, for want of due conformity to the Church of Chriſt; therefore I wishe you to awake, out of that ſchiſmaticall letargy of the ſoule, and dayly meditate of that of the Apoſtle Rom. 10. Corde creditur ad iuſtitiam, ore fit confeſsio ad ſalutem. With the hart we beleeue vnto iuſtice: but with the mouth confeſſion is made to ſaluation. But I will ſtay heere my penne, remembring my vndertaken ſubiect, and will proceed to the next head.

The ſame proued by arguments drawne from reaſon. CHAP. VIIII.

TO paſſe from the authority of Gods ſacred word, his holy Church, & the ancient Fathers the pillars therof, touching the nature of hereſy, and of Heretikes, as alſo touching the vnity and infalibility of the ſame Church, and the perſons diſincorporated and ſeparated from it; from all which heades it hath beene euidently euicted, that a man obſtinatly defending, any one errour in fayth and Religion, cannot expect ſaluation. It now remayneth, that the ſame be made euident by force of reaſon, that therby all men, enioying the faculty of reaſon, may the more eaſily ſubſcribe to ſo vndeniable a verity, & ſay with the Pſalmiſt heerein: Pſal. 92. Testimonia tua credebilia ſunt nimis. Well then, the firſt and chiefeſt reaſon, is taken from the cauſes of true fayth, where for the better conceauing thereof, we are to vnderſtand, that fayth is a ſupernaturall habite, not obtayned by the force of Nature; and that who reſteth doubtfull or ſtaggering of any one article, is charged by the Canon-law, with flat infidelity, according to that: Dubius Iure Canon. c. 10. de Haeretic. in fide, infidelis est. Therfore to the beliefe of any one article of fayth, two things doe concurre: the one, is the firſt reuealing verity (as the ſchoolemen ſpeake) which is God himſelfe: the ſecond is the Church, propounding the article to be beleeued. Now when we beleeue any point of fayth, God, who is the first reuealing verity (as is ſayd) reuealeth it to the Church, and the Church propoundeth it ſo reuealed, to vs to beleeue; and thus we beleeue a point of fayth, thorough the authority of God reuealing, and the Churche propounding. And this is moſt conſonant, and agreeing, with that moſt admirable and infallible rule of fayth, ſet downe by the moſt ancient Vincentius Lyrinenſis, in the beginning of his Commonitorium, deſeruing to be ſtamped in characters of gold: I Initio commonitorij. haue demanded (ſayth this Authour) very many thinges, of many men, excelling & renowned for learning, and ſanctity of life, how, and by what way, I might fortify my fayth, in tyme of hereſyes aryſing: and I euer receaued this anſwere of all, or in manner of all, that whether I, or any other, deſirous to auoyd the ſnares of Heretikes, and to continue ſound in the Catholike fayth, he muſt by Gods aſsiſtance, Fidem munire duplici ratione: fenſe his fayth with a double reaſon; Sacroſancti Canonis authoritate; deinde Eccleſiae Catholicae traditione. Firſt by authority of Gods word: ſecondly, by tradition of the Catholike Church. Thus farre Vincentius. Thus we ſee, where we beleeue any thing, though it be materially true, and not through this former authority, this is not ſupernaturall beliefe in vs, but only an opinion grounded vpon other reaſons & inducements. Euen as the Turke beleeueth, that there is one God, Creatour of the world, yet this his beleefe is no true fayth, but only an opinion of a thing, which is true; ſince this his beliefe, is grounded only vpon his Alcoran, being otherwiſe a fabulous booke, though of the being of one God, it ſpeaketh truly.

2. Now to apply this to my purpoſe. This first reuealing verity, which is God (through whoſe authority wee ought to beleeue euery article of fayth) doth with one and the like authority, reueale all articles of Chriſtian Religion; ſo as it is as forcibly to be beleeued, that there is (for example) a Purgatory, or that we may pray to to Saints (ſuppoſe theſe articles to be true) as that there is a Trinity, or that Chriſt was incarnated. From whēce it ineuitably followeth, that who beleeueth in the Trinity, and yet doth not beleeue that there is a Purgatory, or that we may pray to Saints, hath no true and ſupernaturall beliefe of the Trinity; but only beleeueth that there is a Trinity, becauſe he is perſuaded thereto, only by his owne reaſon, or through ſome other humane authority. For if he did beleeue, that there is a Trinity, or that Chriſt was incarnate through the authority of God ſo reuealing this truth, ſo to be beleeued, by the ſame authority he would haue beleeued, that there is a Purgatory, and that we ought to pray to Saints, ſeeing both the articles of the Trinity, and of Purgatory, or praying to Saints, are equally, and indifferently alike propounded by God, and by his Church to be beleeued.

3. And ſeeing to the ſame authority, euer the ſame reuerence, affiance, and credit is to be giuen, thus we may demonſtratiuely conclude, that what Proteſtant doth beleeue in the Trinity, and yet doth not beleeue, that there is Purgatory, Praying to Saints, Freewill, the Reall preſence (admitting them once to be true) or any other points controuerted, betweene the Catholikes and the Proteſtants, the ſame man hath no true fayth of the Trinity, of the Incarnation, and conſequently for want of a true, and ſupernaturall fayth cannot be ſaued, ſince we reade: Qui non Marc 16. credit, condemnabitur. VVho beleeueth not, shalbe condemned. And from this former ground it it proceedeth, that S. Thomas, 2. 2. q 5. art. 3. and all learned ſchoolemen teach, that who beleiueth not only for Gods authority, ſo reuealing any point whatſoeuer, great, or ſmall, fundamental or not fundamental, the ſame man belieueth not any other article at all, with a true and ſupernaturall faithe: And hereto accordeth thoſe words ofLib. de preſcr. Tertulliā, againſt Valentinus an Heretike: Some thinges of the law and Prophets Valentinus approueth, ſome thinge he diſaloweth, that is, he diſallowech all, whileſt he diſproueth ſome. Which ſentence of Tertullian, muſt of neceſſity be true, ſince who reiecteth the authority of God, in not beleeuing any one article, propounded by God to be beleeued, the ſame man begetteth a ſuſpition or doubt of Gods authority, for the beleeuing of any other article how fundamentall ſoeuer.

4. Another reaſon may be taken from a diſtinction of fayth vſed by the learned, which faith is of two ſorts: the one they call Explicite fayth, the other Implicite. Explicite fayth is that, which all men vnder paine of damnation, are bound expreſſely to beleeue, as the Trinity, the Incarnation of our Sauiour, his paſſion, the Decalogue, or ten Commandements &c. Implicite fayth is that which comprehendeth all thoſe pointes, which a man is not bound expreſſely and diſtinctly to beleeue in particuler (though he be expreſſely boūd not to beleeue any thing contrary therto) but is to reſt in the iudgment of the Church, cōcerning all ſuch points, and what the Church of Chriſt houldeth therein, implicitly to beleeue. This diſtinction is warranted, not only in the iudgment of all Catholike ſchoole men, but alſo in the iudgement of the moſt learnedD. Baro. l. de fide & eius ortu p. 40. Hooker in Eccleſ. politia. in praefat. p. 28. by Maelanct. l. 1. epiſt. epiſt. ad Regem Angliae. Proteſtāts (though they forbeare the phraſes, of Explicite and Implicite fayth) and particulerly of D. Field, who in theſe wordes following giueth the reaſon therof, ſaying: For ſeeing In his Treatiſe of the Church in his epiſt. dedicatory to the Archbishoppe. the Controuerſies of Religion in our tyme, are growne in number ſo many, and in nature ſo intricate, that few haue tyme, and leaſure, fewer strength of vnderſtanding to examine them, what remayneth for men deſirous of ſatisfaction in things of ſuch conſequēce, but diligently to ſearch out, which among all the ſocietyes of men in the world, is that bleſſed company of holy ones, that houſehould of fayth, that ſpouſe of Chriſt, & Church of the liuing God, which is the pillar and ground of truth, that ſo they may imbrace her communion, follow her directions, and reſt in her iudgments. Thus Doctor Field.

5. Now this diſtinction being preſuppoſed, I thus argue, both theſe kinds of faith, are neceſſary to ſaluation. Explicite faith, becauſe it comprehendeth, all thoſe fundamental and ſupreme points of Chriſtian Religiō, without the expreſſe and articulate knowledge of which a man cannot be ſaued. And theſe be thoſe only, which Newtraliſts in Religion hould neceſſary to be belieued: Implicite faith, of other points alſo is neceſſary to ſaluation, becauſe otherwyſe then beleiuing implicitely & inuoluedly what the Church teacheth therin, we cannot (according to the former Doctours wordes) find out that bleſſed company of holy ones, the houſehould of fayth, the ſpouſe of Chriſt, & Church of the liuing God. And ſeeing Implicite fayth, is neceſſary to ſaluation, we muſt graunt, that this Implicite fayth hath ſome obiect; the obiect is not the article of the Trinity, the Incarnatiō, the Decalogue &c. ſince theſe are the obiects of Explicite fayth (as is aboue intimated) therfore articles ſeeming of leſſer importance, are the obiect of implicite fayth; the which as a man is bound implicitly to beleeue in the fayth of the Church, ſo is he bound not to beleeue any thing contrary to the ſayd articles. Seeing then diuers controuerſies betweene the Catholikes and the Proteſtants, are included vnder this implicite faith, and that the Church of God, houldeth but one way of them: it followeth that one ſide of the cōtrary beleiuers of thoſe points doth erre in their beliefe, and conſequently through want of this true & neceſſary implicite fayth, cannot be ſaued.

6. A third reaſon, may be this. It is proper, & peculier to vertues infuſed (& ſuch be Fayth, Hope, & Charity) that euery ſuch vertue is wholely extinguiſhed by any one act contrary to the ſayd vertue. Thus for exāple, one mortal ſinne, taketh away al charity & grace, according that: He Iacob. cap. 2. that offendeth in one, is made guilty of all. One act of deſpaire, deſtroyeth the whole vertue of Hope; then by the ſame reaſon, one hereſy wholely corrupteth & extinguisheth all true fayth. Therefore ſeeing Fayth is a Theologicall, and infuſed vertue, this fayth is deſtroyed with one act of hereſy, whether it be about Purgatory, Prayer to Saints, Freewil, or any other cōtrouerſy between the Catholiks & the Proteſtants; therfore whoſeuer denyeth Purgatory, or any of the reſt (granting their doctrins to be true) is depriued of all infuſed fayth touching any article of Chriſtian Religion, whether they concerne the Trinity, or the Incarnation, or any other fundamentall point, which he may ſeeme to beleeue: but without fayth (that is, without true, infuſed, and Theological faith) it is impoſsible to pleaſe God, as the Heb. 11. Apoſtle aſſureth vs.

4. Another reaſon may be this; Theſe Newtraliſts in Religion, doe not agree euen in the general grounds of Chriſtian faith, to wit, in the Articles of one God, of the Trinity, of Chriſt &c. with any other Chriſtiās. This is proued, becauſe as all other Chriſtians, do beleeue in theſe general heads; ſo doth each of them particulerly agree, that theſe generall principles are to be limited & bounded to euery ones particuler ſecte, as the Proteſtant (for example) beleeueth otherwayes in God, the Trinity, and Chriſt, then the Catholikes doe (as is els where demonſtrated) But now theſe our Newtraliſts, doe not limit the foreſayde principles, to any particuler ſect, or in any particuler manner; therefore it euidently followeth, that they haue no true beliefe, euen of thoſe generall and fundamentall articles.

5. A fift reaſon shalbe this. It is moſt certaine, that what generall propenſion, Nature (or rather God himſelfe, by nature as his inſtrument) hath ingrafted in all men, the ſame is in it ſelfe, moſt true, certaine, and warrantable. As for example, Nature hath implanted in ech mans ſoule, a ſecret remorſe of Conſcience for ſinnes and tranſgreſſions committed, as alſo a feare of future punishement, to be inflicted for the ſayd ſinnes perpetrated: therefore from hence it may infallibly be cō cluded, that ſinne it ſelfe is to be auoyded, & that after this life there is a retribution of punishment, for our offenſes done in this world; ſince otherwayes it would follow, that God should inſert in the ſoule of man (idly, vainly and as directed to no end) certaine naturall impreſſions & inſtincts, which to affirme were moſt derogatory to his diuine maieſty and wiſedome, & repugnant to that anciently receaued Axiome: God, & Nature worketh nothing in vaine. Now to apply this, we find both by hiſtory, and by experience, that diuers zealous and feruent Profeſſours of all Religions whatſoeuer (both true and falſe) haue beene moſt ready to expoſe their liues in defence of any impugned part, or branch of their Religion, from which vndaunted reſolution of theirs, we certainly collect, that this their conſtant determination of defending the leaſt point of their Religiō, proceedeth partly from a generall inſtinct of God, impreſſed in mans ſoule, teaching each man, that death it ſelfe is rather to be ſuffered, then we are to deny any part of fayth and Religion in generall. And thus according hereto, we find that the Athenians, who were Heathens (though they did erre touching the particuler obiect herein, as worshipping falſe Gods) were moſt cautelous, that no one point should be infringed or violated touching the worshiping of their Gods. The like religious ſeuerity was practiſed by the Iewes, as Ioſephus Cont. Apion. witneſſeth. And God himſelfe euen in his owne writtē word threatneth, that, VVho Apo. 22. shall eyther adde or diminish to the booke of the Apocalips, written by the Euangeliſt, from him he will take away his part out of the booke of life. Now if ſuch dāger be threatned for adding to, or taking frō more or leſſe, thē was ſet downe by the Euangelist in this one booke, how can then both the Catholiks and Proteſtants haue their names writtē in the booke of life? Since it is certaine and granted on all ſides, that eyther the Catholike addeth more to the fayth of Chriſt, then was by him inſtituted, or the Proteſtant taketh from the ſayd fayth diuers articles, which Chriſt & his Apoſtles did teach. But to returne to our former reaſon: From al this, we deduce, that no points of true Religion, are of ſuch cold indifferēcy, as that they are not much to be regarded, or that they may be maintayned cōtrarywayes by contrary ſpirits, without any danger to mans ſaluation; but that they are of that nature, worth, & dignity, as a man is to vndergo all torments, yea death it ſelfe, before he yeald, or ſuffer the leaſt relapſe in denying any of the ſayd verityes.

6. The ſixt and laſt reaſon, to proue that the maintayning of falſe doctrins now queſtioned betwene the Chriſtians of theſe tymes, are moſt preiudicial & hurtful to the obtaining of our heauēly bliſſe, wherin at this tyme I wil inſiſt, may be takē frō the conſideration of the differēt effects, which the contrary doctrines betweene the Catholiks & the Proteſtants produce in mans ſoule, touching the exerciſing of vertue or vice: ſince moſt vndoubted it is, that the beleeuing of ſuch opinions which of their owne nature do impel, & as it were violētly draw the ſoule to vice, looſenes, & impurity of manners & conuerſation, cānot ſtand with the hope of eternal happines. And the chief reaſō hereof (beſids others) is this, in that the wil, which is the ſeate of vertue or vice, doth neceſſarily and irreſiſtably worke, as the vnderſtanding (in which reſide fayth & all falſe doctrines) doth dictate to the wil: now then the vnderſtāding being infected with hereſies, tēding directly to the plāting of vice eradicating of all vertue in the ſoule, it of neceſſity follweth, that the will muſt worke and exerciſe it ſelfe according to thoſe falſe principles, which the vnderſtanding ſuggeſteth to the will for true, and that with the greater facility, in regard of the prones of mans nature (through our firſt Parents fall) inclined to liberty, pleaſure, and ſenſuality. But becauſe the ſubiect of this reaſon is a lardge field wherin to walke, & the truth therof is to appeare by ſeuerall inſtances, drawne from diuers particuler doctrines, maintained at this preſent by the Proteſtants, and all breathing nothing, but vice, diſſolution, and all turpitude in manners; therfore I will reſerue the next enſuing chapter, for the fuller manifeſtation of the truth in this point.

The ſame proued from the different effects of vertue, and vice, which Catholike and Proteſtant Religion do cauſe in their Profeſſors. CHAP. X.

THE firſt doctrine of this nature, wherein we will inſiſt, maintayned by the Proteſtants, and denyed by the Catholikes, is the impoſsibility of keeping Gods commandments. According heereto Luther ſayth: The Ser. de Moiſe. ten commandements appertaine not to Chriſtians. With whome Fox conſpireth in theſe wordes: The Act. mon. pag. 1335. ten Commandements were giuen not to do them, but to know our damnation, and to call for mercy to God. As alſo D. Willet, ſaying: The In ſinopſ. Papiſm. pag 564. law remayneth ſtill impoſsible to be kept by vs, through the weaknes of our flesh; neyther doth God giue vs ability to keep it, but Chriſt hath fullfilled it for vs. And finally D. VVhitaker in that ſentence of his: Qui Cont. Camp. cat. 8. p. 153. credunt, ij non ſunt ſub lege, ſed ſub gratia; Quid plura? Chriſtiani execratione legis liberantur. They, who beleeue, are not vnder the law, but vnder grace. VVhat more in this point is to be ſayd? Chriſtians are freed from the curſe of the law. Now then if Chriſtians be freed from the curſe of keeping the law (wherin the ten commandements are contained) how can the breach of them be any way hurtefull to the violatours of them? And if the comandments were neither giuen vs to keep, nor we haue power to keepe them, why should the theife forbeare to ſteale, or the homicide to commit murther? Who ſeeth not how this doctrine diſcourageth a mā from liuing vertuouſly, by brideling his vnruly and ſenſuall deſires?

2. Secondly touching Chaſtity, the Proteſtants teach that Chaſtity is not in our power. And hence 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 it is, that Luther thus writeth: It is Tom. 5. Wittē. ſerm. de matrim. not in our power to be without a woman &c. It is not in our power, that it should be ſtayed or omitted, but it is as neceſſary, as to eate, drinke, purge, make cleane the noſe &c. To whome (omitting all others for greater breuity) M. Perkins ſubſcribeth ſaying: The vow In his reformed Catholik pag. 161. of continency, is not in the power of him, that voweth. Now this doctrine being imbraced for true, how forcibly doth it inuite (or rather impell) all people vnmaried (either men or women) to ſatisfy their luſt by their owne incontinent liues? In like ſort, what great encouragement doth it giue to maried perſons to violate the band of matrimony, when either of the perſons through abſence, or longe ſicknes, or ſome other ſuddaine and accidentall impotency, cannot render the debt of matrimony? And the parties thus ſinning, either maried or vnmaried being expoſtulated & chardged with their offence therin, may they not iuſtly reply in excuſe of them ſelues, that they are not to be blamed or rebuked for their incontinency, ſeeing by their owne doctrine & Religion they are expreſely taught that they haue not the guift of Chaſtity, and that it is not in their power, to liue chaſtly & continently.

3. Thirdly, the Proteſtants doctrine of veniall and mortall ſinne doth wounderfully extenuate and leſſen the atrocity and malice of ſinne in the beleeuers of that doctrine. For the Proteſtants do teach, that there is no ſuch difference of ſinnes in themſelues, but that the moſt grieuous ſinnes whatſoeuer, being committed by any one, that hath true fayth, are but veniall; and their reaſon therfore is, becauſe in their doctrine, no ſinnes are imputed to ſuch, who haue true fayth.De eccl. cōtra Bellarm. contro. 2. q. 5. pag. 301. Thus accordingly D. VVhitakers teacheth: Si quis actum fidei habet, ei peccata non nocent. Sinne is not hurtefull to him, who actually beleeueth: who did learne this of his graund Maiſter Luther, who wryting of this point, ſayth: No Luth. in his ſer. englished & printed anno 1578. p. 176. worke is diſallowed of God, vnles the author thereof be diſallowed before. All which being grāted as true doctrine, it muſt needs follow, that who ſo shall take himſelfe to be one of theſe faythfull (as euery Proteſtant is bound by his owne Religion to beleeue of himſelfe) ſhall make ſmall accompt of omitting any ſinne; conſidering he is taught by the former doctrine to beleeue, that (to vſe the wordes of one of their owne Maiſters:) Sinne VVotton in his anſwere to the late popish articles pag. 92. is pardoned him, as ſoone as it is committed.

4. The Proteſtants doctrine of Reprobation, and deniall of Freewill, mightily diſanimateth and diſcourageth the beleeuers thereof, from embracing of vertue, and eſchewing of ſinne; for if it be true (as this their doctrine ſuggeſteth) that ſome men are borne, euen from their mothers wombe, without any reference to their workes, reprobates, or thrall to eternall damnation, and cannot be ſaued, to what end ſhould they ſeeke their owne ſaluation, by a true fayth, auoyding of ſinne, and the practiſing of a penitentiall, and vertuous life? Or if we haue not Freewill, with the concurrency of Gods grace to doe well (as the former doctrine inſtructeth vs) why ſhould we bend our beſt endeauours, to embrace vertue and to flye all vice; ſince it is not in our power (accordinge to the Proteſtants fayth) to exerciſe the one, and to fly the other?

5. To this may be adioyned the Proteſtants like doctrine of Predeſtination, and their ſuppoſed certainty of ſaluation: for admit, that men be predeſtinated to heauen without any reſpect or reference to their workes, or liues, and that doe what wickednes they can imagine, yet certaine it is, that they shalbe ſaued; is not this doctrine moſt potent and forcible, to diſſuade all the beleeuers therof, from exerciſing an auſtere pious, and Religious life, and to engulfe themſelues in all kindes of enormityes and ſinnes; and the rather, conſidering how precipitious and headlong mans nature is to ſinne, and to decline all rigorous and exemplar courſes of vertue; eſpecially if ſo the caſe ſtands, that man can neyther aduantage or hurt himſelfe by any ſuch different manners of life. Now that by the Proteſtants doctrine, no ſinne can endanger the predeſtinate, in regard of their certainty of ſaluation, appeareth. Anſwearably heereto wee finde Doctour Fulke to ſay of Dauids Adultery: Dauid In his tower diſpute with Edmund Cāp. the 2. dayes conferēce. when he committed adultery, was, and remayned the childe of God. And Beza himſelfe to the like purpoſe, thus writteth thereof: Dauid In reſponſ. ad colloq. Mon ••• . parte a tera pag. 73. by his Adultery and murther, did not looſe the Holy Ghoſt. So powerfully doe theſe their poſitions incline men, to ſatisfy their deſires, in all vice, impiety, and ſenſuality.

6. Touching the Proteſtants doctrine of Iuſtification by Fayth only, which potentially includes diuers of the other pointes heere ſet downe, and which poſition of its owne nature, excludeth from Iuſtification all workes, how vertuous, meritorious and pious ſoeuer, we find the Proteſtants thus to ſay; Luther ſpeaking heereof, burſteth forth with wounderfull rashnes, ſaying: Fides Concione 4. in ca. 21. Luc. niſi ſit ſine &c. Vnleſſe fayth be without the leaſt good workes, it doth not iuſtify; nay it is no fayth. That iuſtification by fayth only extinguiſheth al exerciſe of vertue, is iuſtifyed not only by experience of theſe dayes, but alſo by the acknowledgement euen of ſome learnedſt Proteſtants; for thus Iacobus Andreas (a famous Proteſtant) complayning and diſliking of this doctrine, writeth: A ſerious and Chriſtian diſcipline is cenſured with vs as a new Papacy, and a new Monachiſme: they ſay we haue now learned to be ſaued, by only fayth in Chriſt &c. VVe cannot ſatisfy by our faſting, prayer, &c. therefore permit, that we may giue ouer theſe, ſeeing we may be ſaued otherwiſe, by the only grace of God. And to the end (ſayth this Author further) that all the world may know they be no Papiſts, nor truſt in good workes, they take a courſe to put none in practice. With whoſe true iudgment heerein M. Stubbs an english Proteſtant ſeemeth to conſpire, ſaying: The In his motiue to good workes printed 1566 pag. 42. Proteſtant truſteth to be ſaued by a bare & naked fayth (deceauing himſelfe) without good workes, and therefore eyther careth not for them, or at leaſt ſetteth little by them. And thus farre touching good works, wholely exiled and baniſhed by the doctrine of Iuſtification by fayth only. Now that this doctrine of Iuſtification by fayth only doth incorporate (as it were) within it ſelfe, and admit all kind of ſinnes, appeareth no leſſe from the frequent acknowledgement of the learned Proteſtants. And firſt Luther thus writeth heereof: A Tom. 2. Wittē. de capt. babil. fol. 74. Chriſtian baptiſed is ſo rich, that Vbi ſupra. although he would, he cannot looſe his ſaluation, by any ſinne, how great ſoeuer, vnles he will not beleeue. And further in another place: As nothing Luth. in loc. comm. claſſ. 5. c. 27. iustifyeth, but beleefe; ſo nothing ſinneth but vnbeliefe. To which doctrine D. VVhitaker (as aboue is showed) accordeth ſaying. Sinnes Vbi ſupra. are not hurtfull to him, that beleeueth. And thus much now touching the doctrine of Iuſtficatiō by faith, wher we ſee euen by the confeſſion of the Proteſtants, that this doctrine preuayleth in the Profeſſours of it, no leſſe for committing of all ſinne and iniquity; then for the expelling and banishing away of all good workes, vertue and deuotion.

7. Touching the Proteſtants particuler doctrines of Fasting, Voluntary pouerty, and Chaſtity or Virginity. And firſt of Faſting. M. Perkins teacheth thus: Faſting In his reformed Catholik pag. 220 in it ſelfe, is but a thing indifferent, as is eating or drinking. With whome conſpireth D. VVillet in more full tearmes, ſaying: Neyther In ſynopſ. p. 243. is God better worshipped by eating, or not eating.

8. Voluntary pouerty is ſo debaſed by the Proteſtantes doctrine, as that the foreſayd Doctour VVillet thus teacheth heereof: He In ſynopſ. pag. 245. is an ennemy to the glory of God, who chaungeth his riche eſtate, wherein he may ſerue God, for a poore: ſo contrary is he to the iudgement of our Sauiour, Matth, 10. ſaying: If (x) thou wilt be perfect, go ſell thy ſubstance, and giue to the poore, and thou shalt haue treaſure in heauen.

9. Laſtly, touching ſingle life in compariſon with marriage, Maiſter Luther thus ſayth: VVe Tom. 5. Wittē. in exeg. ad cap. 7. 1. Cor. f. 107. conclude, that mariage is as gould, and ſpirituall, or ſingle life as dunge. And Doctour VVhitaker likewiſe teacheth thereof in this manner, ſaying: Virginity is not ſimply good, but after a certaine manner; it is neuer better then Cōt. Campia. rat. 8. marriage, but in regard of the circumſtance, that is, of the troubles accompanying mariadge. Now I heere demand with what encouragment can any man goe about to practiſe theſe foreſayd vertues of faſting, voluntary pouerty, and perpetuall virginity, if he be firmely and inwardely perſwaded, that the Proteſtantes former poſitions, and doctrines touching the ſayd vertues, be true, and agreeable to Chriſtes ſacred inſtitutions? But to haſten to an end in this matter, I will conclude with the Proteſtants doctrine touchinge Purgatory, and Confeſſion of ſinnes.

10. Concerning Confeſſion of ſinnes, it is found by experience, that (beſides the firſt inſtitution therof by Chriſt, Matth. 18. Ioan. 20.) a man is much deterred from ſinning, through the shame that he is to endure, by confeſſing his moſt ſecret ſinnes to a Prieſt; as on the contrary, it much enboldeneth one to ſinne, if he be fully perſwaded by his owne Religion, that confeſſion of them vnto God alone, is ſufficient.

11. Touching the doctrine of Purgatory, how doth the denyal of this doctrine open the ſluce to all libertye? And concerninge Iuſtice, it taketh away all reſtitution of things wrongfully detayned; ſince by the Proteſtants doctrine teaching, that no temporall punishement remayneth for ſinne once remitted, all ſatisfaction for wrongs, and for committing of former ſinnes, and al mortification of body and ſoule, are needles; and finally, this doctrine freeth a man from all feare of ſuffering any punishment after this life; and this vnder couler, that Chriſt hath ſatisfyed for the ſins of the whole world: by which reaſon, we may as well ſay, that we neede not to pray at all, ſince Chriſt in the tyme of his paſſiō, prayed for al. But now to caſt our eyes backe vpon the foreſayd doctrines, if all the different opinions of fayth in Controuerſies, betweene the Catholikes & the Proteſtants, were meerely ſpeculatiue, without any reference to the vertuous or vicious working & operation of the will, deriued from them, then with ſome ſhow of reaſon, in a vulgar iudgement, it might be auerred, that (ſuppoſing they touch not the Chriſtian fayth) they might eyther affirmatiuely or negatiuely be houlden without all dā ger of ſaluation: ſuch were the hereſyes ofSee heerafter S. Auſtin hereſ. 43. Origen, teaching that the Diuells in the end of the world ſhould be ſaued, of S. Cyprian touching rebaptization, and diuers ſuch like; for the maintaining of which points eyther way, the wil (in reſpect of any externall working or operation drawn from thence) can ſucke no poyſon. But the caſe is farre different in the former doctrines ſet downe, for we find, that the ſaid doctrines, which breath nothing but diſſolution and all turpitude of manners euen in ſpeculation, muſt forcibly and immediately touch the pulſe of the wil; the will neceſſarily beating and indeede breaking out into outward actions of vice & liberty, according as it remaynes infected with the contagion and poyſon of the former doctrinall ſpeculations; Well then, this vpon neceſſary inference being granted, ſo as forcible working, effect, force, and operation of the ſaid doctrines are in the wil, nothing but liberty, diſolution of manners, improbity, ſenſuality, and ſinne, I referre to the iudgment of any man, whether the ſaid doctrines be but pointes of indiferency, or no, and may be defended and beleiued either way, without preiudice to the beleiuers true faith, and danger to his Saluation, as our formaliſts doe auerre. For can it poſſibly be conceaued, that theſe doctrines should be reputed indifferēt to mans ſaluation, or in themſelues true, which (as is proued) forcibly impell the will to all kind of vice, againſt which, God hath thundered out ſuch dreadfull threats, as where it is ſaid: Pſal. 91. All they that worke iniquity shalbe confounded. And againe Eccleſiaſt. 40 Death, bloude, contention, edge of ſworde, oppreſsion, hunger, contrition, which, are created for ſinners. And further Pſal. 9.10. God shall raigne ſnares of fire vpon ſinners, brimſtone, with tempeſtuous windes, shalbe the portion of their cuppe. And heereto I adioyne euen the acknowledgemēt of Proteſtants themſelues, who confeſſe that the liues of the Catholikes, are commonly of a more vertuous and better edification, then the liues of Proteſtants, who by their owne confeſſions lye groueling in all ſenſuality; for euen Luther thus ſayth heerof: When Dominica 26. post Trinitatem. we were ſeduced by the Pope, euery man did willingly follow good workes, and now euery man neyther ſayth, nor knoweth any thinge, but how to get all to himſelfe, by exaction, pillage, theft, lying, vſury &c. To which Confeſſion (to omit diuers others) Muſculus a forward Proteſtant ſubſcribeth ſaying: Vt In loc. com. cap. de Decal. in expla. e tij precepti. verum est fateor &c. That I may confeſſe the truth herein, they are become ſo vnlike vnto themſelues, that whereas in the Papacy they were Religious in their errours and ſuperſtition, now in the light of the knowne truth, they are more prophane &c. then the very ſonnes of the world. Which diſparity of liues and conuerſation, cannot be iuſtly aſcribed to any other cauſe, then in that the Proteſtāts were ready to put in practiſe, what afore they haue learned by ſpeculation of their owne doctrines: Which point then being thus, I meane that the doctrines of the Proteſtants doe depreſſe vertue, and blandish, countenance, & elate vice, & that therupon the liues of the Proteſtants (by confeſſion of themſelues) and to the diſedifying of their followers, are become actually farre worſe and leſſe vertuous, then the liues of the Catholikes, I heere demand, how it can be warranted with any show of reaſon, that theſe doctrines of the Proteſtants begetting ſo great a change from vertue to vice in their profeſſours, can be reputed, but as points of indifferency? Or that men belieuing them, practiſing them in their conuerſation, and finally dying in them, can be ſaued? ſo contrary it is to our Sauiours precept: Mat. 1 . If thou wilt enter into life, keepe the Commandements.

The ſame proued from the fearefull deaths of the firſt preachers of Proteſtancy. CHAP. XI.

IN this next place we wil briefly take a ſuruay of the particuler deathes of ſome few of the chiefeſt Proteſtants, who haue beene the firſt ſtā pers & broachers of the Controuerſyes betweene the Catholikes and the Proteſtants; and then we will leaue to the iudgmēt of others, whether thoſe kindes of deaths do befall (in Gods accuſtomed proceeding) to men, who firſt did ſet on foot, and maintayned ſuch points & poſitions of Religion, as that eyther the beleeuing, or not beleeuing of them, may well comport & ſtand togeather with mans ſaluation.

2. To beginne then with Luther, omitting to ſpeake eyther of his vitious life, or of the liues of others hereafter ſet downe, though confeſſed, & diſplayed for ſuch by many of their owne brethren.Cochlaeus in vita Lutheri. It is certaine, that Luther Gualterus in Apologia pro Zuinglio. dyed very ſodainly; for when at ſupper being in good health, he had daintily fed vpon great variety of meates, and entertained his gueſts then with him, with witty (but diſſolute) diſcourſes, the very ſame night he dyed. Zuinglius was ſlaine in the warres in Germany vndertaken for Religion only againſt the Catholikes, in which Carres he dyed not as a preacher, but as a warriour, & dyed in the field; and yet in ſuch ſort, that Gualterus an earneſt Proteſtant ſayth thus of him: Noſtri Gualterus in Apologia pro Zuinglio. illi &c. Diuers of vs are not ashamed to pronounce Zuinglius to haue dyed in ſinne, and therefore to haue dyed the ſonne of hell. Oecolampadius Cochlaeus in actis Lutheri. (reputed Bishop of Baſill, where he lyeth buryed) and a man moſt forward in ſpreading the points of Proteſtancy, wēt helthfull to bedde, but was found by his wife in the morning dead in his bedde. Andreas Corolstadius, anIn ep. de morte Carolstadij. eminent Proteſtant, and a great aduancer of the ſuppoſed Ghoſpel, was killed by the Diuel, as certaine Miniſters euen of Baſill do iuſtify: Iacobus Andreas a famous Lutherā, & in other points an earneſt Proteſtant, liued and dyed (as Hoſpinian Hoſp. in hiſtor. ſacram. part. 2. fol. 389. the Proteſtant writeth) As if he had had no God, but Mammon, and Bacchus; he neuer praying, neyther going to bedde, nor ryſing from thence. And further ſayth, that in the reſidue of his life, he ſhewed no godlines. To conclude Caluin (the refyner of all Proteſtancy, and chiefe ſupporter of all controuerted points againſt Catholikes) dyed being conſumed with lice & wormes, extremely blaſpheming againſt God, of whoſe death, Conradus Schluſſenburge (a famous Proteſtant) thus writteth. Deus In Theolog. Caluiniſ. l. 1. f. 72. manu ſua potenti &c. God with his mighty hand, did viſit Caluin, for he deſpaired of his ſaluation, called vpon the Diuels, and gaue vp his ſoule ſwearing and blaſpheming: Caluin dyed being eaten away with lice; for they ſo bred about his priuy members, that none about him could endure the ſtench, and ſmell. Thus farre the foreſayd Proteſtant.

3. Now then, ſeeing all theſe men beleeued all the fundamentall points of Chriſtian Religion as the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Paſſion &c. ſeeing alſo they were the moſt principal men, that firſt introduced and after diſſeminated Proteſtancy throughout the world, ſpending their whole liues in ſpreading & defending the ſame by their writings. Finally ſeeing God did cut them off by ſuch moſt miſerable, calamitous, and prodigious deaths (which is to be feared were but preſages of the eternall deaths of their ſoules) who can otherwaies be perſuaded, but that all this was wrought by the iuſt hand of God? Not ſo much for their perſonall ſinnes proceeding of humane frailty, (for there were, many others, as great ſinners as they, who haue eſcaped ſuch dreadfull ends) but for their firſt inuēting maintaining, & preaching of the Proteſtant faith and Religion; & infecting all countreyes with ſuch their falſe and ſenſuall doctrines: which being granted, how then can it with any touche of reaſon be ſuppoſed, that the poſitions of Proteſtancy, impugned by the Catholikes, ſhould containe nothing but matters of indifferency? Or that a man, whether he beleeue them, or not beleeue them, may alike and indifferently be ſaued?

The ſame proued from the doctrine of Recuſancy, taught by Catholikes and Protestants. CHAP. XII.

I Haue thought good to draw another argumēt from the common taught and approued doctrine of Recuſancy in euery Religion, though this head may ſeeme to haue a ſpeciall reference, to the reaſon aboue touched, & in part be therin implicitely included, wherein is shewed, that nature her ſelfe hath imprinted, in the profeſſours of all Religions, a religious care punctually to keep & preſerue euery article of their Religion both in beliefe & practiſe. Now here we are to premoniſh, that if in the iudgment of all learned men (both Catholikes and Proteſtants) it is thought an action moſt wicked and vnlawfull, and not to be performed, but (without finall repentance) vnder paine of eternall damnation, that a man should communicate only in going to the Church & to heare but a ſermon, contrary to that Religion, which himſelfe beleiueth to be true; though this may ſeeme to be coloured vnder pretence of obſeruing the Princes commandements, and for feare of looſing our temporall eſtates; I ſay, if this action be thought vnlawfull, wherein neuertheleſſe the performers therof doe punctually vndertake, not to maintaine or to beleeue any one hereticall or erroneous poſition; how then can it be reputed, as conſonant to reaſon, that men beleiuing different opinions of faith and promiſcuouſly communicating in prayer, with a contrary Religion to their owne, should neuertheſſe all be ſaued? ſince the firſt fault conſiſteth (as ſome would interpret though falſely) only in an externall and materiall (as the ſchoolemen ſpeake) going to the Church of a different Religion, wheras the others do directly and openly ſinne in defending articles of Religion, contrary to the truth of Chriſtian Religion; for ſuch is the caſe herein, either of Catholiks or proteſtants.

2. Now that this kind of going to Church of a different Religion is wholely condemned, as moſt vnlawfull and wicked, I firſt proue from the iudgments of the Proteſtants; ſecondly from the reſolutions of the Catholikes. And to begin with the Proteſtants, we find this kind of Recuſancy (I meane to be preſent at the ſermons or prayers of a different Religion) is taught byDe vitandis ſuperſtitio. extant in tract. Theolog. p. 584. Caluin, by theAlleaged by Sleydan in com. englished l. 7. f. 87. Deuines of Germany, byIn cō cil. Theol. p. 628. Melancthon, byIn his diſcourſe hereof recited in Melanct. treatiſe de concil. Theolog. pa. 934. & 635. Peter Martyr, and finally (to omit others) by D. Willet, In ſynopſ. printed 1600. p. 612. & 613. &c. who for the better fortifying and warranting of the ſayd opinion, produceth his teſtimonyes from the authorityes of Latimer, Bradford, Philpot, Ridley, and others, diuers, of which according to this their doctrine, ſuffered death in Queene Maries tyme, as appeareth out of Foxes acts and Monuments. And thus much for the Proteſtants. That the Catholikes do with the like or greater feruour, teach, & practiſe this recuſancy, is cleare by the example in our owne Countrey, where ſince Proteſtancy was firſt planted, many ſtores of venerable and learned Prieſts haue choſen rather to ſuffer death, then they would change their Religion, or goe once to the Proteſtants Church; their liues being commonly proferred them, if ſo they would conforme themſelues, and leaue their recuſancy. In like ſorte, many hundred of the laity pay yearely great ſommes of money for their recuſancy; diuers of them enduring further oppreſſions, diſgraces, and impriſonement only for the ſame cauſe, through the rigour, malice, and couetouſnes of ſubordinat Magiſtrates; his maieſty (whoſe clemency is moſt remarkeable, & whome God long preſerue in his gouernement ouer vs) being herein mightily wronged, through the falſe and moſt iniurious informations of their aduerſaryes.

3. Now that the doctrine of learned Catholikes is anſwearable to the practiſe heerein, appeareth from the frequent teſtimonies of diuers learned men of the Catholike Church of this tyme: yet for greater breuity I will inſiſt in the authorityes only of three, to wit, Cardinall Baronius, Cardinall Bellarmine (the two late lampes of Gods Church) and of Mutius Vitelleſcus, then but Prouinciall, now Generall and head of the order of the Ieſuits diſperſed throughout all Chriſtendome. For ſome yeares paſt their iudgments being demanded, whether the Catholiks of Englād, for the ſauing of their goods, liuings, and liberty, might goe to the Proteſtant Church, or not to heare a ſermon, though otherwayes they did not communicate in prayers and ſacraments with the Proteſtants, theſe three learned & holy men (beſides diuers others moſt eminent Doctours and writers, whome I heere omit) did giue their negatiue ſentence therein, whoſe particuler wordes in latine, I haue thought good heere to ſet downe.

The iudgment of Cardinall Baronius.

Viſis & conſideratis, quae ſuperius diligenti perueſtigatione in vtram que partem diſputata, reiectis omnino & exſufflatis, quae pro parte affirmatiua fuere propoſita, quod ſcilicet liceret Catholicis adire Eccleſias Haereticorum, vt ſuperius ſunt propoſita, inhaeremus ſaniori ſententiae posteriori, ab Eccleſia Catholica antiquitus receptae, & vſu probatae; quod ſcilicet ita facere pijs non liceat, quam rogo noſtros Catholicos Anglos amplecti ex animo.

Caeſar Card. Baronius tituli SS. Nerei & Achillei Presb.

I hauing ſeene and conſidered (meaning in the queſtion of English Catholiks going to the Church) al theſe points which haue beene diſputed of on both ſides, but reiecting and wholely abandoning al the reaſons alleadged for the affirmatiue part (to wit, to proue, that it was lawfull for Catholikes, to go to the Church of Heretikes) I doe adhere to the more ſound and later opinion, which anciently was receaued of the Catholike Church, and allowed by vſe and cuſtome. That is, that it is not lawfull for pious and godly men ſo to do, and I intreate & deſire all our English Catholikes, to embrace this my opinion and iudgment.

Caeſar Cardinall Baronius Priest of the title of the Church of S. Nereus and Achilleus.
The iudgement of Cardinall Bellarmine.

Conſideratis rationibus pro vtraque parte allatis, exiſtimo non licere viris Catholicis in Anglia Haereticorum adire Eccleſias, multo minus concionibus ipſorum intereſſe; minime autem omnium cum ipſis in praecibus vel pſalmodia, alijſ que ipſorum Eccleſiaſticis ritibus cōuenire. Ideo propria manu ſubſcripſi.

Robertus Bellarminus Sanctae Romanae Eccleſiae Presbiter, Cardinal. tit. Sanctae Mariae in via.

Thus in Engliſh: The reaſons brought vpon both ſides conſidered (to wit, touching the lawfullnes or vnlawfullnes of the English Catholikes going to the Protestants church) I am perſuaded, that it is not lawfull for English Catholikes to go to the Church of Heretiks; much leſſe to be preſent at their ſermons, but least of al to communicate with them in prayers or ſinging of pſalmes, and other their Eccleſiasticall rites and customes. And therefore this my iudgment heerin, I haue ſubſcribed with my owne hand.

Robert Bellarmine Prieſt & Cardinall of the holy Romā Church of the title of Sanctae Mariae in via.
The ſentence of Mutius Vitelleſcus, then Prouinciall, now generall and head of the order of the Ieſuits.

Vidi rationes, quae in hoc ſcripto pro vtra que parte afferunt, & exiſtimo non licere viris Catholicis in Anglia, Eccleſias Haereticorum adire &c. & puto hoc debere eſſe extra conuerſiam.

Mutius Vitelleſcus Prouincialis Rom. Societatis Ieſu.

In English: I haue ſeene the reaſons, which are alledged in this booke or writing on both parts (touching the going, or not going to the Proteſtants church) and I am of opinion, that it is not lawfull for Catholikes in England to goe to the churches of Heretiks. And I am perſwaded, that this point ought to be out of all controuerſie.

Mutius Vitelleſcus Prouinciall of the Society of Ieſus in Rome.

4. And thus farre touching the ſentences of theſe three learned men, deliuered in warranting the doctrine of recuſancy in Catholikes. Now to turne our eye vpon the premiſes; if the going to the Church of another Religion, only for auoyding of temporall loſſes, & but to heare a ſermon of the ſaid Religion, be to be accounted a ſinne, not to be done vnder paine of damnation, as being preſumed to be an externall conformity to a falſe Religion (as by all the former teſtimonyes aboue alleadged is plentifully proued) though the party ſo offending, may perhaps beleeue al points truly of Chriſtian Religion; with what reaſon thē can it be warranted, that both Catholikes & Proteſtants conſpiring only in the fundamētal points of the Trinity, Incarnation, Paſſion &c. but differing mainly in all other points of Religion, yet neuertheleſſe promiſcuouſly communicating one with another in prayers and the Sacraments, can all ioyntly be ſaued? And the rather, ſeeing that both ſides teaching contrary and irreconciliable doctrines, touching Freewil, Purgatory, Praying to Saints &c. It muſt needes follow, that the one part defendeth not matters of indifferency (as is commonly ſuppoſed) but iniuſtifiable errours, or rather (to ſpeake as the truth is) manifeſt and groſſe hereſie.

The ſame proued from the writings of Catholikes and Proteſtants, wherin they reciprocally charge one another with hereſy. As alſo from the Inſurrections, warres, and Rebellions originally vndertaken only for Religion. CHAP. XIII.

IF there were no other reaſon to be alleadged in diſprouffe and confutation of this plurality of Religions (ſo to tearme it) then this following, it might ſeeme fully preuayling in all cleare iudgments, not wholely darkened with the miſt of earthly and temporal reſpects: Firſt the wonderfull and ireconcileable booke-warrs betwene Catholikes and Proteſtants, wholely vndertaken in defence of their ſeuerall Religions: Secondly the preſſures and calamities, with which diuers ſtats & Countreys do afflict other ſtates, as alſo the Inſurrection of ſubiects againſt their naturall Princes, only for difference of Religion, not contayning themſelues, till they burſt out into open hoſtility and armes, for defending their owne Religion, and ſubuerting of the others.

2. Touching the firſt (good God) how many learned men on all ſides, ſince the firſt Apoſtaſy of Luther, haue ſpent their whole time and al their ſeruiceable yeares in wryting, diſputing, & preaching in defence of their owne Religion, & impugning of the aduerſaries; accounting the maintainers and beleiuers therof as heretikes, and pronouncing eternal damnation againſt their Religion? Witneſſes hereof are the libraries of al the famous Vniuerſities of Chriſtendome, the Stationers shoppes in all great Citties, and laſtly the yearely Mart of books returned theſe many years from Franckefort. And is it poſſible, that ſo much paines, trauaile, and labour of writing, & otherwayes accompanied with ſo great charges of printing, should be vndertaken for queſtions only of indifferency, and ſuch as it importeth nothing at all, touching the gayning of Heauen & auoiding of Hell, what a man beleiueth therin, or of what ſide he relyeth.

3. Concermig that ſecond point, which is the afflictiōs, & warrs with which one ſtate, Coūtrey, or kingdome do perſecute their neighbours, and al originally and primatiuely for matters of Religion, as alſo touching the open Rebellion of the ſubiects againſt their lawful Soueraignes, only for the ſaid occaſion. The laſt threeſcore years, as alſo theſe very times, do giue ouer lamentable examples heerof. Witneſſes of this matter (purpoſely to forbeare the preſidents of our owne Country) is Scotland, into which Countrey Knox, Goodman, and Bocanan with other their Agents and confederats, firſt introduced Proteſtancy by force and armes; a point ſo acknowledged, that Doctor Bancroft, the late pretended Archbishop of Canterbury, as wholely inueighing againſt ſuch violent courſes, made a booke entituling it: Of the proceeding of the Scottishe Miniſtres according to the Geneuian rules of reformation.

4. Touching France, who knoweth not, that for this laſt fifty yeares, there haue beene alwayes almoſt open warres betweene the Kinges of France & the Huguenots (till the laſt King of France became Catholike) vndertaken by the Huguenots only for Religion? And do not the Cittyes of Rochell, Mont-albons, Montpelliers with diuers others at this very day, ſtand out againſt their King vnder pretext of the defence of their Religion and Ghoſpell? The occurences of this nature of the low Countreyes, and the Hollanders are no leſſe remarkable; of whoſe firſt taking of armes againſt their lawfull King only for Religion, Oſiander an earneſt Proteſtant thus confeſſeth: They Oſian. n Epito. cent. 16. pag. 94. of the low Countreys by publick writings, renounced all ſubiection and obedience to Philippe their Lord and King. And againe: VVhen Oſian. vhi ſupra pag. 81. foure hundred of them of good reſpect haue ſued for liberty of Religion, and could not preuaile, the impatient people stirred vp with fury at Antwerpe, and other places of Holland, Zeland, and Flandres, did throw & breake downe Images. But of the proceedings and rebellions of the low Countrey men againſt their King, only for cauſe of Religion, it is needles to ſpeake further, ſeeing it is to well knowne to all men of vnderſtanding, & that moſt worthy ſouldier, Spinola (another Iudas Machabaeus of theſe tymes) by his heroicall exploits & endeauours euen at this very day, ſeeking to reduce the lowe Countreyes to their former allegiance, doth ſufficiently proclayme to the world the truth heerof.

5. I paſſe ouer Geneua, which citty (as the whole world knoweth) did firſt withdraw it ſelfe from the allegeance of their Leideg Lord the Duke of Sauoy, only by reaſon that againſt his will and pleaſure, they would profeſſe the Proteſtant Religion, and ſo accordingly to this daye, they haue made themſelues a ſtate or commonwealth, wholely independent of Sauoy, of which citty Doctor Sutcliffe confeſſedly writeth:in his anſwere to a certaine libe ſupplicatory p. 194. They of Geneua did depoſe their catholike leidge Lord, and Prince from his temporall right; albeit he was by right of ſucceſsion, the temporall Lord and owner of that citty and Territory. In like ſort, I pretermit the many like examples of the commons aryſing againſt their lawfull Princes and Magiſtrats inChitraeus in chron. 1593. & 1594. Sueueland,See heerof Fulke his acknowledgment in his anſwere to Farnius declamatiō p. 35. Denmarke,Oſian. in epito. centur. 16. p. 115 Poland,Touching Heluetia or Switherland, changing their Religion by warre, ſee D. Bancroft in his ſuruay of the holy pretended diſcipline p. 13. and Chriſpinus of the ſtate of the Church p. 509. Germany, andSee the acknowledgement of D. Bilſon in his true difference part. 3. p. 270. & 273. Bohemia, & of this laſt Country, the late and fresh reuolt of the ſubiects from the Emperours obedience. All which riſings, Inſurrections, and Rebellions were originally vndertaken only for Religion, and haue no doubt ſince the firſt breach of Luther, coſt the liues in all places of a million of men, at leaſt, and haue actually depoſed and diſthroned diuers Kings & Princes of their eſtates and territoryes.

6. Theſe thinges then for their euidency being acknowledged for true and vndeniable, many of which remaine as yet fresh in our owne memory, of the nature of which Actions, I will not heere diſpute. Only I heere vrge, that it is more then incredible, that ſuch rebellious deuaſtation of Countreyes, beſeiging of cittyes, depoſing of Princes, ſlaughter of many hundred thouſandes of men, ſhould be practiſed almoſt throughout al chriſtendom within this laſt three ſcore yeares, only for admitting, or not admitting the differences betweene the Proteſtant and Catholike religion, if both the contrary partyes were not perſuaded, that vpon the true or falſe beleefe of theſe controuerſies in Religion, their ſoules ſaluation or damnation for all eternity did depend. For it is certaine, that theſe contrary partyes did agree and conſpire, in the generall beliefe of the Trinity, Incarnation, Paſſion, death of our Sauiour, and verbally reciting of the Apoſtles Creed.

The ſame proued from the Proteſtants mutually condemning one another of hereſy & for Heretikes. CHAP. XIIII.

IF Proteſtants doe maintaine, that their different opinions ſeuerally houlden among themſelues be hereſyes, and that the beleeuers of them are for ſuch their falſe beliefe (if ſo they dy therein) not capable of ſaluation; then à fortiori may we be bould to pronounce, that the Controuerſies of fayth, betweene the Catholiks & the Proteſtants, are not of that middle nature; but that the opinions and ſentences of the one ſide, are to be reputed for manifeſt hereſyes, & ſuch as cannot ſtand with mans ſaluation. This inference is moſt neceſſary, ſince on all ſides it is acknowledged, that there is a farre greater diſparity in Religion betweene the Catholiks and the Proteſtāts, then there is betweene the Proteſtants among themſelues.

2. Now that the Proteſtants do hould one another for Heretikes, it cannot be denyed. For to inſiſt firſt in the Controuerſies touching the reall preſence, maintayned in their ſenſe by the Lutherans, but denyed by the Sacramentaries, we find that Luther thus writeth of the Sacramentaries: VVe Luth. contr. articulos Louanieſes theſ. 27. tom. 2. cenſure in earneſt the Zuinglians, and all the Sacramentaryes for Heretikes, and alienated from the Church of God. And againe the ſame Luther thus writteth: I doe Tom. 7. VVitē. fol. 381. protest before God and the world, that I do not agree with the Zuinglians, nor euer will whileſt tht world ſtandeth, but will haue my handes cleane from the blood of thoſe sheep, which theſe Heretikes (marke his wordes) do driue from Chriſt, deceaue and kill. And againe in the former place: Curſed Vbi ſupra. be the charity and concord of the Sacramentaryes, for euer and euer to all eternity. But Heretikes, and men alienated from the Church of God, and which doe kill the ſheepe of Chriſt (during ſuch their condition) are not in ſtate of ſaluation.

3. Now of Luthers doctrine we find this bitter recriminatiō vſed by the Tigurine Diuines, who were Zuinglians or Caluiniſts: Nos Tigurini tract. 3. contra ſupremā Lutheri confeſsionem. condemnatam & execrabilem vocat ſectam &c. Luther calleth vs a damnable and execrable ſect, but let him looke, that he doth not declare himſelfe an Archeretike, ſeeing he will not, nor cannot haue ſociety with thoſe, that confeſſe Christ. And Zuinglius thus writteth: Behould Tom. 2. ad reſponſ. Lutheri. how Satan endeauoureth to poſſeſſe this mā, meaning Luther. But to proceed to other points. Nicolaus Gallus (an eminent Proteſtant and ſuperintendent at Ratisbone) thus writeth of the contentions betweene the Proteſtants themſelues: Non In theſibus & Hypotheſibus. ſunt leues &c. The diſſentions, that are among vs, are not light, nor of light matters, but of the greatest articles of Chriſtian doctrine, of the law and the ghoſpell, of Iustification and good workes, of the Sacrament and vſe of Ceremonyes. Conradus Sluſſenburg (another famous Proteſtant) alleadgeth Pappus a Proteſtant, thus complaining againſt the Caluiniſts: Etſi initio In theologia Caluinist l. 1. art. 28. de vno tantum articulo &c. Although in the beginning one only article was called into doubt, notwithſtanding the Caluiniſts are now ſo farre gone, as they call in doubt, neither few, neither the leaſt articles of Chriſtian doctrine: for now we diſſent from them, touching the omnipotency of God, the perſonal vnion of two natures in Chriſts &c.

4. But to come nearer home; theIn their mild defence of the ſilenced ministers ſupplication to the court of parlamēt. Puritans here of England thus complaine of the Proteſtants: Do we vary from the ſincere doctrine of the Scriptures? Nay rather many of them do much more ſwarue from the ſame &c And thus anſwerably we find, that the Puritans hould the Bishops of England for Antichriſtian, whereas the Proteſtants do teach, that of neceſſity Bishops ought to be in the Church of God. Doctor VVillet ſpeaking of diuers opinions taught by the more moderate Proteſtant, as M. Hooker, D. Couell and others, thus writeth: From In medit. in pſal. 122 this fountaine hath ſpronge forth theſe and other ſuch whirle pooles and bubbles of new doctrine, as that Christ is not originally God &c. And then after he thus cōcludeth: Thus haue ſome byn bould to teach and write, who as ſome Schiſmatiks (mening herby the Puritās) haue diſturbed the peace of the Church, one way in externall matters, concerning diſcipline, they haue troubled the Church, another way in oppoſing themſelues by new quirkes and deuiſes, to the ſoundnes of doctrine among Protestants. M. Parkes in his booke dedicated to the then pretended Archbishop D. Bancroft, thus writeth of the proceedings of ſome Puritans heere in England: They Epiſt dedic. are headstronge and hardened in errour, they ſtricke at the maine points of Faith, shaking the very foundation it ſelfe, Heauen and Hell, the diuinity and humanity, yea the very ſoule and ſaluation of our Sauiour himſelfe. And againe more plainly in the former place he ſayth thus: They haue peſtilent hereſies. And yet more: They are hereticall and ſacrilegious.

5. To conclude this point of their particuler ſayings and redargutions heerin, D. Couell repeating and regiſtring the poſitions of the Puritans here in England,In his defenſe of Hooker 65. & 74. & 75 among other of their poſitions ſetteth downe theſe following: The ſtatute Congregations of England, are no true Church, And againe: The Protestant church of England hath no forme of a Church. Now that all theſe diſſentions among English Proteſtants, cannot be interpreted only about ceremonies, or about gouernement, as ſome Proteſtants doe anſweare,Vbi ſupra. when they are chardged herewith by the Catholikes) the foreſaid M. Parkes plainly and truly confeſſeth the cōtrary, ſaying: The Protestants deceaue the world, and make men beleeue, there is agreement in all ſubſtantiall points; They affirme that there is no queſtions among them of the truth. Now the former point is furthermore made euident by the reciprocall deportment and demeanour of Proteſtants among themſelues. For firſt (beſides the chardging one another with flatt hereſy, as is aboue shewed) they doe not only prohibite the readingSo Hoſpiniā a Proteſtant witneſſeth in hiſtor. ſacrament. parte altera fol. 693. of ech others books; but they alſo ſet downe articles of viſitation for the inquiryHoſpiniā vbi ſupra. & apprehending of ſuch their aduerſaries, and being apprehended do impriſonHoſp. vbi ſupra them; yea further they proceede, not allowing the trauailersſo relateth Oſiander in Epitom. of either party, common entertainement, due in al Nations to ſtrangers. Finally their diſſentions are ſo implacable among them (though all be Proteſtants) as that in defence of their ſeuerall doctrine, they haue with great hoſtility takenThis is showed & exemplifyed by Hoſpiniā vbi ſupra fol 395. & 397. In like ſort by Oſiander in epitom. cent. 16. pag. 735. armes, one againſt another, as appeareth by the late memorable example in Holland of the Arminians and Gomariſts, who only for ſome difference touching Freewill and Predeſtination betweene them, did riſe in hoſtile manner againſt their aduerſaryes, and ceaſed not that courſe till Barnauille the chiefe of one ſide & faction, was beheaded. All which violences and extremityes, would neuer haue beene vndertaken, if their diuerſity of doctrine (which is the cauſe of ſuch and ſo great exhorbitancies) did conſiſt only in articles indifferent of themſelues, and ſuch as did not concerne the neceſſity of ſaluation.

6. The foreſayd point touching the Proteſtāts diſſentions in eſſentiall points of fayth, is moſt clearely manifeſted, by taking a view of their bookes, written one againſt another (though this method is partly inuolued in the diſplaying of their particuler ſentences and writings aboue alleadged). The number heerof, amounteth to diuers hundreds; yet as deſirous to be short and compendious, I will ſet downe the titles only of twenty of them, euen from which titles the indifferent Reader may iudge, whether the authours of them (being al eminent Proteſtants) did maintaine the ſubiects of the ſayd books to be matters of indifferency, and ſuch as may be either way houlden without breach of that true fayth, which is neceſſary to mans ſaluation. And heere I will forbeare to reckon within this number, any book written only eyther for, or againſt the reall preſence, maintained by the Lutherans, becauſe heerein they conſpire partly with vs Catholikes, and conſequently the controuerſy heerin reſteth, not only betweene the Proteſtants themſelues, but alſo betweene them and vs.

7. Firſt then may be reckoned that booke intituled: Oratio de incarnatione filij Dei, contra impios & blaſphemos errores Zuinglianorum & Caluiniſtarum: printed Tubingae, Anno Domini 1586.

Secondly, Alberti Graueri bellum Ioannis Caluini & Ieſu Christi, Brapiae 1598.

Thirdly, Antipeus, hoc eſt, refutatio venenati ſcripti a Dauide Pareo editi, in defenſionem Stropharum & corruptelarum, quibus Ioannes Caluinus illustriſsima ſcripturae teſtimonia de myſterio Trinitatis, nec non oracula Prophetarum de Chriſto detestandum in modum corrupit. Francofurti 1598.

Fourth. Aegidij Hunnij, Caluinus Iudaizans, hoc eſt, Iudaicae gloſſae & corruptelae, quibus Ioannes Caluinus illuſtriſsima ſcripturae ſacrae loca & testimonia de glorioſa Trinitate, deitate Chriſti, & Spiritus Sancti, cum primis autem vaticinia Prophetarum de aduentu Meſsiae, & natiuitate eius, Paſsione, Reſurrectione, Aſcenſione ad caelos, & ſeſsione ad dexteram Dei, detestandum in modum corrumpere non abhorruerit. VVittenbergae. 1593

Fift, Conradi Schluſſenburgij Theologiae Caluiniſticae libri tres, in quibus, ſeu in tabula quadam, quaſi ad oculum, pluſquam ex ducentis viginti tribus ſacramentariorum publicis ſcriptis, pagellis, verbis proprijs, & authorum nominibus indicatis demonstratur, eos de nullo fere Chriſtianae fidei articulo recte ſentire &c. Francofurtae 1594.

Sixt, Pia defenſio aduerſus Ioannis Caluini, Petri Boquini, Theodori Bezae, VVillelmi Clebitij &c. & ſimilium calumnias; Item Refutatio Pelagiani ſeu, Anabaptiſtici, Caluiniſtarum erroris de baptiſmo & peccato originali. Adduntur collectanea plurimorum Caluini contra Deum, eiuſ que prouidentiam & praedestinationem. Effordiae 1583.

Seauenth, Demonstratio imposturarum ac fraudū, quibus Aegidius Hunnius Eccleſiae orthodoxae doctrinam petulanter corrumpere pergit. Bremae 1592.

Eight, Argumentorum & obiectorum, de precipuis articulis doctrinae christianae cum reſponſionibus, quae ſunt collectae ex ſcriptis Philippi Melancthonis, additis ſcholijs illustrantibus vſum ſingularum reſponſionum, partes ſeptem. Neapoli 1578.

Ninth, Gulielmi Zepperi Dillenbergenſis Eccleſia Pastoris institutio, de tribus Religionis ſummis capitibus, quae inter Euangelicos in Controuerſiam vocantur. Hannoniae. 1596.

Tenth, Reſponſio triplex ad fratres Tubingenſes, & triplex eorum ſcriptum, de tribus grauiſsimis queſtionibus, de coena Domini, de maiestate hominis Christi, & de non damnandis Eccleſijs Dei, nec auditis nec vocatis: Geneuae. 1582.

Eleuenth, Ad Ioannis Brentij argumenta, & Iacobi Andreae theſes, quibus carnis Chriſti omnipreſentiam nituntur confirmare; id eſt aduerſum renouatos Nestorij & Eutichetis errores reſponſum. Geneuae. 1570.

Twelueth, Apologia ad omnes Germaniae Eccleſias reformatas quae ſub Zuingliani & Caluiniani nominis inuidiae vim & iniuriam patiuntur, Tiguri 1578

Thirteene, Christophori Pezelij Apologia verae doctrinae de definitione Euangelij, appoſita thraſonicis praestigijs Ioannis VVigandi, VVittenbergae. 1572.

Fourteene, Colloquij Montisbelgartenſis inter Iacobum Andreae & Theodorum Bezam, Acta Tubingae 1584.

Fifteene, Veritatis victoria, & ruina papatus Saxonici. Loſannae 1563.

Sixteene, Hamelmannia, ſiue Aries Theologizans dialogus oppoſitus duabus narrationibus hiſtoricis. Hermani Hamelmanni, Neoſtadij 1582,

Seauenteene, Christiani Kittelmani decem graues & pernicioſi errores Zuinglianorum in doctrina de peccatis, & Baptiſmo, ex proprijs ipſorum libris collecti & refutati, Madelburg. 1592.

Eighteene, Ioannis Moſellani praeſeruatiua contra venenum Zuinglianorum, Tubingae 1586.

Ninteene, Reſponſio ad ſcriptum, quod Theologi Bremenſes aduerſus collectores Apologiae formulae concordiae publicarunt. Lipſiae 1585.

Twenty, Hieremiae Victoris vera & dilucida demonstratio, quod Zuingliani & Caluinistae, numquā ſe ſubiecerunt confeſsioni Auguſtanae, exhibitae Carolo quinto, anno 1530. Germ. Francofurti 1591. And thus much of the titles of Proteſtants bookes, written one againſt another.

8. Now from al the former premiſes aboue ſet downe, I heere conclude, that if the ſeuerall opinions and doctrines among the Proteſtants themſelues be not in their owne iudgmēts, matters of Indifferency; but are by themſelues truely reputed for Hereſies, and the maintayners of them not houlden to be in ſtate of Saluation, but accounted branded Heretikes; then with much more reaſon may the ſame ſentence be pronounced, touching the maine irreconcitiable Controuerſies, differently beleiued and houlden by the Catholikes & Proteſtants; & the rather ſince (as it is aboue ſaid) there is a farre greater difference of doctrine betweene the Catholike & the Proteſtant, then betweene the Proteſtant & the Proteſtant.

The truth of the former doctrine proued from the many abſurdityes, neceſſarily accompanying the contrary doctrine. CHAP. XV.

SVCH is the ſweet prouidence of the diuine maieſty in the diſpoſall of things, as that he euer cauſeth truth to be warranted with many irrefragable reaſons, & falſehood to be attended on with diuers groſſe abſurdities; that ſo the iudgement of men may the better be ſecured, for the imbracing of truth, and remaine the leſſe excuſable, if in place of truth it entertaineth falſehood and errour. Of the reaſons conuincing the infallible truth of our doctrine maintained in this treatiſe, I haue already diſcuſſed aboue in the ninth chapter: now heere I will a little inſiſt, in diſplaying the many and palpable abſurdities accompanying the contrary doctrine, which point will chiefely reſt (beſides ſome other short inſertions) in a recapitulation of moſt of the former heades or branches, aboue handled. For if this doctrine were true, that euery one might be ſaued in his owne Religion, or that the beleife only of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Paſſion, and the Creede, were ſufficient therto, notwithſtanding the beleife of other erroneous opinions and hereſies; then would it follow: firſt, that the holy ſcriptures of Chriſt & his Apoſtles, were moſt falſe, which haue inueighed ſo much againſt hereſies, and hath denounced the heauy iudgment of damnation againſt the profeſſors of them, as aboue is showed, which comminations and threats the ſcripture in ſome places, not only extendeth to all hereſie and Heretikes in generall without anyEpiſt. ad Titū. cap 3. Galat . 5. Rom. c. 16.1. ad Tim. 1. limitation; but alſo in ſome other texts, they are particulerly reſtrayned, euen to certaine hereſies of farre ſmaller importance, then the denyal of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the paſſion, the Creed are, as is euident, touching the denying of 1. Tim c. 4. 2. ad Tim. c. 2. 1. Ioan. cap. 2 mariadge, of eating certaine meats, and touching the nature of Chriſt. Now that the denyall of other inferiour articls of faith then of the Trinity, Incarnation, &c. is plaine Hereſie, is demonſtrated aboue, both from the definition of Hereſie, and from the iudgment of the primitiue Church.

2. Secondly, the foreſaide doctrine of our Newtraliſts, impugnethvt ſupra. the definition of faith giuen by the Apoſtle, which definition of faith, comprehendeth a general beleife of all articles of Chriſtian Religion,Heb. cap. 11. and is not therefore to be reſtrained to any one kind of them.

3. In like ſort it deſtroyeth the priuiledges, and dignityes of fayth, ſet downe by the foreſayd Apoſtles, whoMatt. vltim. & Hebr. 11. promiſeth ſaluation to him, who hath faith, as alſo affirmeth, That without fayth, we cannot pleaſe Eph. 4. Act. 4. Rom. 12. God; but ſuch excellencyes cā not be aſcribed to a mungrill fayth, which beleeueth ſomethings true, other falſe: they are therfore to be giuen, to a true, intire, & perfect faith in all points, or els the Apoſtle groſſely erred in aſſigning to faith the foreſayd priuiledges; ſeeing a falſe fayth is no better then no faith at all.

4. Againe it depriueth Chriſtian faith of its true marke or Character of Vnity, ſo much celebrated by the Apoſtle. Now then if vnity of faith be neceſſary to Saluation, how can both Catholikes and Proteſtants, expect ſaluation? Seeing there is no greater diſtance betweene the oppoſite parts of a Diameter, then there is repugnancy betweene both their beleifes. And thus if both them (though wanting this vnity) can be ſaued, then hath the Apoſtle falſely and erroneouſly deſcribed and delineated the fayth of a Chriſtian. But to reflect vpon the former paſſages; is any man ſo ſtupid, as to dreame, that that doctrine ſhould be true, which giueth ſo open a lye to ſo many vnanſwerable texts of Gods holy writ, touching the condemning of Heretiks in generall, as alſo touching the definition, excellency, and propriety of true faith? It is impoſſible, it is not to be imagined; Gods word is like himſelfe, moſt true, ſacred, and inuiolable, and therefore it iuſtly witneſſeth of it ſelfe, that Sriptura Matt. 24. non poteſt ſolui. And againe: Coelum & terra tranſibunt, verba autem mea non tranſibunt. Math. 24 Heauē and earth shall paſſe away, but my wordes shall not paſſe.

5. But to proceede further touching the foreſaid want of vnity & diſagreements; if euery Chriſtian might be ſaued in his owne Religion, then might thoſe be ſaued, which beleiue the articles of the Creed in a moſt differēt ſence & manner, then which, what can be more rashly & exorbitātly ſpoken? For ſeeing there is but one true intended ſence by the Apoſtles of the Creede, which if we attaine not, then doe we beleiue, that which is falſe; but to beleeue the Creede in a falſe ſence is no better, then not to beleiue it at all, as is aboue ſaid, and therefore it would followe by way of inference, that he might be ſaued, who beleiued not any one article of the Creede at all. Now that the Catholikes & Proteſtants do beleiue the articles of the Creede in different (or rather contrary) ſenſes, (and conſequently that the one ſide beleiueth it in a falſe and erroneous ſenſe) is aboue proued in the fourth chapter.

6. If it be here replyed, that the maintainers of this doctrine do ſo farre yeald, that they only are to be ſaued, which in a true ſence beleeue the Creed; yet by this their reſtrainct they condemne all thoſe others, which beleeue it in any other ſenſe different from that, intended by the Holy Ghoſt and the Apoſtles; and conſequently, they condemne in their iudgment and depriue of ſaluation, either the Catholikes or the Proteſtants; ſince of neceſſity, the one of theſe do beleeue the Creed, not in its true ſenſe, but in a falſe and hereticall ſence and conſtruction, different from that of the Apoſtles.

7. But granting that the Catholikes and Proteſtants beleeue the Creed, in one true ſence intended by the holy Ghoſt; yet if our Newtraliſts would haue the Creed the ſquare or rule, thereby to meaſure our fayth, then marke the abſurdityes following: For by this doctrine one might be ſaued, who beleeued 1. Not that there were any Scriptures at all written by the Prophets & Apostles (ſince the Creed maketh no mention of any ſuch diuine writinges.) 2. In like ſort he might be ſaued, who did not beleeue, there were any Angells or Diuels. 3. Or that there is a materiall place of Hell. 4. Or that the paynes thereof are eternall. 5. Or that Adam did preſently vpon his creation fall from grace, and therby tranſported original ſinne vpon all his posterity. 6. Or that our Sauiour whileſt he conuerſed heere vpon earth, wrought any miracles. 7. Or made choice of certaine men to be his Apostles, to preach the Chriſtian fayth throughout the whole worlde. 8. Or that Circumſicion is now forbidden and antiquated. 9. Or that there are any Sacraments of the new testament, as Baptiſme, the Euchariſt &c. 10. Or that finally before the diſſolution of the world, a deſigned ennemy of Christ shall come, who is tearmed Antichriſt. I ſay by our Newtraliſts Religion, he ſhould be ſaued, who beleeued none of the foreſayd articles, ſeeing not any one of them is expreſſed or ſet downe in the Apoſtles creed; and yet the beliefe of the ſayd articles, is neceſſarily exacted & required to ſaluation both in the iudgments of the Catholikes & the Proteſtants, both which partyes do with an vnanimous conſent, teach the neceſſity of beleeuing the ſayd articles.

8. But to proceed further, & to come to the different articles of fayth, differently beleeued by the Catholikes & Proteſtants; and yet not expreſſed in the Creed, & articles of ſuch nature, as that they are houlden by the Catholikes to be inſtituted by our Sauiour, as ſubordinate (yet neceſſary) meanes of the grace of God, and of ſaluation; whereas the Proteſtants, as not beleeuing at all the ſayd articles, do wholely diſclayme from acknowledging all ſuch meanes. Theſe articles I haue recited aboue, to wit, 1. That Sacraments in generall do conferre grace. 2. That a childe dying without baptiſme, cannot be ſaued. 3. That mortall ſinne is not remitted without the ſacrament of Pennance and confeſsion. 4. That we are to adore with ſupreme honour the Bleſſed Sacrament. 5. That not only fayth, but alſo workes do iustify man. 6. That a Christian, by thinking himſelfe to be iust, is not thereby become iust. 7. That euery Chriſtian hath ſufficient grace offered by God to ſaue his ſoule, & that therefore God on his part would haue all men ſaued. 8. That without keeping the tenne commandements a man cannot be ſaued. 9. Finally, that all Christians, ought vpon payne of eternall damnation to communicate in ſacraments and doctrine with the church of Rome, and to ſubmit themſelues in al due obedience to the ſupreme paſtour of Gods church. In al which points the Proteſtants do beleeue directly the contrary, condemning vs of hereſy, ſuperſtition, yea idolatry, for our belieuing the foreſayd points. Now I ſay, ſeeing the former articles do immediatly touch & concerne either remiſſion of our ſinnes, or grace of our ſoule, or our iuſtification, or our due honour adoration to our Sauiours body being accompanied with his diuinity, or laſtly our communion with Chriſt his church, and the head therof, in any of which (as concerning ſo nearely our eternall happines) who erreth, cannot poſſibly be ſaued.

9. And ſeeing the Proteſtants (as is ſayd) do in all the ſayd points maintaine the iuſt contrary to the Catholikes, and thereby do abandone the Catholikes acknowledged meanes of their ſaluation; I heare aske in all ſobernes of iudgment, what can be reputed for a greater abſurdity, then to affirme with our Newtraliſts, that the Catholikes and Proteſtants (notwithſtanding their ſo different and contrary beliefe, and anſwearble practiſe in the former articles, ſo neerely touching mans ſaluation) may both be ſaued? Seeing it muſt needs be, that either the Catholikes shalbe damned for ſetting downe certaine means of our ſaluation, contrary to Chriſts mind and inſtitution (ſuppoſing the ſayd means to be falſe) or that the Proteſtants shalbe damned for reiecting the former meanes of Saluation inſtituted by Chriſt, admitting them to be true.

10. But to paſſe forward: If euery Chriſtian might be ſaued in his Religion, in beleuing only the fundamentall points of the Trinity, the Incarnation, &c. then hath the Church of Chriſt euen in her primitiue dayes (at what time the Proteſtants themſeluesSee of this acknowledgement the defence of the Apology of Englād written by Doctor Iewel, Kemnit. in exam. Concil. Trid. par. 1. p. 74. the cōfeſſ. of Bohemia in the harmony of confeſs. pag. 400. beſides diuers others. doe exempt her from errour) moſt fondly & intollerably erred in condemning certaine opinions (which are not fundamentall) for Hereſies, and the maintayners for Heretikes; and conſequently the ſcripture, and Chriſt himſelfe haue deceaued vs, by aſcribing vnto the Church, an infallibility Math. 18. Luc. 10.2. Tim. 3. of erring in her definitions of Faith, and cōdemnation of hereſies, and by commanding vs to obey the churches authority and ſentence, in all thinges, as ſtiling her the pillar, and foundation of truth. And further it should follow, that the Church should thus inſufferably erre, both in generall Councells, as alſo in the priuate authorities and ſentences of all the learned Fathers in the firſte times.

11. And thus for example, the Councell of the Apoſtles should haue erred, Act. 15. in decreeing it vnlawfull to eate in thoſe times blood and ſtrangled meates. In like ſort the firſt Councell of NiceEuſeb. l. 6 hiſt. c. 33. should haue erred, in condemning the Quartodecimani for heretikes, becauſe they would not keepe Eaſter day, according to the cuſtome of the church. The councell of Rome vnder Cornelius for condemning the hereſie of the Nouatians; who reiected the Sacrament of Pennance, as alſo for condemning the errour of Anabaptiſme. The councellVt patet in act. 2. of Calchedon, for condemning the Hereſie of Eutiches, and for prohibiting the mariages of Monkes, and Virgins; and the firſt Councell of Epheſus Socra. l. 7. c. 34. for condemning the hereſy of Neſtorius; both which Heretikes beleiued in the moſt holy Trinity, and acknowledged Chriſt for their Redeemer. The fourth councell of Carthage Can. 79. for ſententionally decreeing, that prayer and ſacrifice for the dead, was according to the true faith of Chirſt, and for pronouncing the denyers therof for Heretikes. And finally (to omitt other Coū cels) the councell of Constantinople Zonaras in vita Conſtantini & Nicephorus l. 17. c. 27 should haue erred, for condemning the Hereſie of Origen, who taught that the Diuels in the end should be ſaued. And thus farre of councels condemning points of ſeeming indifferency, for open & wicked hereſyes.

12. But now graunting that the ſayd points as they were houlden by the maintainers of thē) were not Hereſies, & that the beleiuers of them might be ſaued, then two maine abſurdityes doe ineuitably follow. The firſt is, the erring of the whole Church of God in condemning them for hereſies, they being not Hereſies, but true doctrines, as is ſaid. The ſecond, the inconſiderate carriadge of the church in theſe matters: For to what purpoſe or end, were all theſe councells (conſiſting of many hundreds of the moſt graue and Reuerend men of all chriſtendome) celebrated with ſuch labour and trauaile out of all countries, and infinite chardges, if the doctrines (for the impugning, reſiſting, & condemning wherof they were gathered) might be indifferently maintayned and defended on all ſides, without breach of true faith, or danger of ſaluation? The erring of the Church is no leſſe manifeſted in the ſentences and condemnation giuen by many of the moſt ancient, famous, & learned Fathers in the primitiue Church (not any one orthodoxall Father contradicting them therein) againſt diuers, maintayning opinions, that ſeeme, in (regard or the Trinity, the Incarnation &c) of ſmall importance; if ſo theſe opinions be not hereſies, nor the beleiuers of them Heretikes, but men in ſtate of ſaluation.

13. And thus according hereto Florinus, though he taught God to be the authour of ſinne, might be ſaued. In like ſort the Heretikes, who in S. Hieromes dayes, denyed the poſſibility of the Cō mandements, the Manichees, who denyed Freewill, the Eunomians, who taught that only faith did iuſtify. The Aerians, who denyed prayer and ſacrifice for the dead, and tooke away all faſting-dayes. Vigilantius, who taught that Prieſts might marry, & that we ought not pray to Saints. Iouinian, who helde mariadge to be better then virginity; The Donatiſts, who taught the inuiſibility of the Church. And finally (to omit many others for breuity ſake). The Pelagians, who denyed the neceſſity of Baptiſme in Children. All theſe men (I ſay) might be ſaued, notwithſtanding the former doctrines, if ſo euery one might expect ſaluation in their Religion. And yet we finde, that the foreſaid men, were branded for wicked Heretikes, & their doctrines for damnable Hereſies (as in the ſeauenth chapter aboue is showed) by S. Irenaeus, S. Hierome, S. Epiphanius, Philaſtrius, S. Augustine, Theodoret, and others; diuers of theſe holy Fathers wryting Catalogues of Hereſies, did place the foreſaid doctrines and their authours within the ſaid Catalogues, and this they did without any reluctation or gaineſaying of any other ancient and learned Father of their tymes.

14. From which conſideration I do gather, that if thoſe opinions were not iuſtly condemned for hereſies, and their authours for Heretikes; then not only the Church did fondly erre in ſo great a matter, but alſo the aforeſayd alleadged Fathers (to wit) S. Irenaeus, S. Hierome, Epiphanius, S. Augustine with many ſuch others, should deſeruedly be reputed for Heretikes, for their condemning of true doctrines for hereſies, and the beleeuers of them for heretikes; and on the contrary ſide Florinus, the Maniches, the Eunomians, Vigilantius, Iouinian, the Donatiſts, Pelagius, and many other ſuch, should be accounted for their teaching of true doctrins, orthodoxall Fathers and authours, and might haue iuſtly complayned of their inſupportable wronges, and indignityes proceeding from the pennes of the foreſayd Fathers: an abſurdity, which I thinke no man, enioying the benefit of his fiue ſenſes, will allow: And yet the admittance of our Newtraliſts paradox, inauoydably draweth on this inference.

15. Another abſurdity accompanying the former doctrine, is, that Heretikes should be true members of Chriſts church. This I deduce. For ſeeing by the conſent of all learned men, none can be ſaued, but ſuch as be members of Chriſts Church (for otherwayes Turks and Iewes dying in that ſtate might be ſaued) and ſeeing the foreſayd regiſtred doctrines, and the authours are condemned for hereſies and Heretikes, both by the authority of Gods Church, and according to the true definitiō of hereſy aboue ſet downe (for the foreſayd Heretikes made choyce of thoſe their hereſies, and did maintaine them moſt frowardly againſt the whole Church of God, not ſubmitting their iudgments to it) it muſt of neceſſity follow, that if thoſe men could be ſaued, then Heretikes continuing Heretikes, are members of Chriſt his Church; then which, what paradox in it ſelfe can be accounted more abſurde, or in the iudgment of learned men more incredible? Conſidering with what acerbity of comportement, the Apoſtles & all the orthodoxall, learned, & pious Fathers, both in their writings & otherwiſe, haue in all ages entertained Heretikes, as aboue I haue manifeſted in the ſixth Chapter.

16. Againe, ſuppoſing the truth of the doctrine of the Omnifidians (as I may tearme thē) yet obſerue how repugnant it is to all reaſon, & otherwiſe abſurd euen in its owne nature. I will heere paſſe ouer diuers reaſons alleadged in the precedent chapter, and inſiſt a little in ſome few of them. The firſt: It is certaine, that that faith which belieueth ſome articls, & yet belieueth not others, which are no leſſe true (& ſuch is the faith of our Newtraliſts) is no true ſupernatural fayth; ſeeing it beleeueth nothing thorough the authority of God & his Church, both which reueale and propound all articles alike & indifferently to al men to be beleeued. Now what more croſſe to reaſon, then that a bare opinion (not relying vpon any ſupernaturall grounds, as hauing neither God for its Reuealer, nor the Church for its propounder) conceaued only through moral inducements (& therefore euer ſtanding obnoxious to errour and miſtaking) ſhould be able to purchaſe eternall ſaluation to mans ſoule?

17. Againe how aduerſe is it to all true iudgment, to auerre, that it is no preiudice or hinderance to mans ſaluation, to beleeue thoſe principle of Religion, which teach & aduance all liberty & ſenſuality in conuerſation and manners, & do depreſſe and diſparadge all chaſtity, faſting voluntary pouerty, keeping of the commandements, all rigorous and painefull workes, and labours of vertue, piety, and mortification? For it is moſt contradictory in the very tearmes, and no leſſe repugnāt to Gods ſacred word, that that doctrine, which transferreth Iud verſ. 4. the grace of God into wantonnes, should be accounted the Mat. 7. Luc. 13. strict way, which leadeth vnto life.

18. Furthermore, can it be conceaued, as ſorting to Gods moſt mercifull proceeding with man, that he should cut off the liues of thoſe mē with moſt feareful, ſodaine, & prodigious deaths, who firſt broached the doctrines of Proteſtancy, if the ſayd doctrines had eyther bene true in thē ſelues, or at leaſt of that coldnes or indifferency, as that they might ſtand with the ſoules ſaluation? No, God is iuſt, and withall mercifull; & therefore neuer extraordinarily punisheth, but for extraordinary ſinnes; poore men that theſe were, who compare (as it should ſeeme) both in the diuulging of their mendacious and lyinge doctrines, as alſo in their vnexpected and ſodaine death, with the falſe Prophets of3. Regum. Achab.

9. But to haſten to an end in the ennumeration of the Abſurdities, following the foreſaid paradox of ſaluation in euery Religion, and to come to that which within its owne lardgnes inuolueth many improbabilities. For if Catholikes and Proteſtants (notwithſtanding the diſparity of their fayth) can both attaine to Heauen, in vaine then is the doctrine of recuſancy taught ioyntly on both ſides, and in vaine haue ſo many ſortes of Reuerend and learned Preiſts & others of the laity in our owne Country (whoſe bleſſed ſoules, I beſeech to pray to God dayly for the remiſſion of my many ſinnes) ſuffred cruell deaths in the late Queenes raigne, only becauſe they refuſed to preſent themſelues to the ſermons of the Proteſtants; but they are gone, & moſt happely gone, ſince: Clauis Tert. de preſcr. Paradiſi, ſanguis Martyrum. In vaine likewyſe, theſe later yeares haue diuers lay perſons endured (contrary to his Maieſties naturall inclination, moſt prone to mercy and commiſeration) great loſſes, diſgraces, and impriſonements, only for the ſame cauſe. But who can thinke, that learned men should be ſo prodigall of their liues, and blood; and English Catholikes, ſo inſenſible of their temporall ſtates, children, and poſterity, as that they would willfully precipitate, and caſt themſelues into thoſe miſeries, only for not beleeuing and exerciſing points of indifferency, & ſuch as may ſtand with their ſoules eternall happines? In vaine alſo then haue the learned men on both ſides, ſpent out their whole liues, in defending (each man his owne Religion) in their moſt paineful and voluminous bookes & writtings, if ſo they diſſented one from another in matters of ſuch ſuppoſed ſmall importance. Finally in vaine and without iuſt cauſe (& therefore moſt cruelly) haue many forren ſtates in Chriſtendome, impoſed proſcriptions, bannishments, and other inſupportable diſgraces, to ſuch of their owne ſubiects, as will not imbrace their owne doctrine and Religion, though both ſides did conſpire and agree in the fundamentall points of faith. In vaine alſo both in former times, and at this preſent haue there beene & are ſuch Inſurrection of ſubiects againſt their Princes; ſuch bloody & implacable warres betweene abſolute Princes themſelues; ſuch deuaſtation & depopulation of whole Countries, ſuch mayne battells & feilds fought with loſſe of diuers hundred thouſands liues; and laſtly ſuch inceſſant & vninterrupted beſeiging & takinge of great Citties and townes with effuſion (for the moſt part) of much innocent blood of weomen and children; and all this originally and principally for matter of Religion; I ſay in vaine & moſt iniuriouſly haue all theſe attempts and actions beene vndertaken, if the diſagreement in Religiō (for which they are vndertaken between Catholikes & Proteſtants) were of that reconcileable nature, as that the profeſſours on both ſides (notwithſtanding their diuerſity of faith) might ioyntly be ſaued.

20. What can we now reply hereto in behalfe of our Newtraliſts? Shall we ſay, that the moſt learned men of all Religions, the Kings, Princes, States, and all their ſubiects of all Chriſtendome, were and ſtill are actually madd, and out of their ſenſes, in managing theſe their deplorable attemptes for Religion; and that our all reconciling and peaceable Newtraliſts (who through his pliable ſterne of diſpoſition in theſe ſpirituall matters, is become in kindred, as aboue is touched, of the halfe blood with the Atheiſt, and who is commonly deprehended to want learning grace, and vertue) is peculiarly enlightened by God in ſetting downe what articles of fayth are only neceſſary to mans ſaluation, and what are to be reputed, but as acceſſary, and of ſmaller importance? To ſuch ſtraites (we ſee) is the defence of the former doctrine driuen vnto. Seeing therefore this doctrine of our Omnifidians, or Nullifidians (for indeed while they ſeeme to allow all Religions, they take away all Religion) is encompaſſed on all ſides with ſo many notorious abſurdityes (as are diſplayed in this Chapter) & ſeeing it cannot be true, except there be a retrogradation of all matters heere on earth, and a turning of the world (as they ſay) vpſide downe, that is, except the moſt learned become moſt madd, and the moſt ignorant, moſt wiſe. And except truth in doctrine be neceſſarily to be accompanyed with infinite groſſe abſurdityes, and errour and falſehood fortifyed and countenaunced with ſtore of proofes both diuine & humane, as if God did purpoſely lay trappes to enſnare mans iudgment. Therefore, ſince ſuch comportement and carriage of things, is not ſutable and correſpondent to Gods prouidence and charity towardes mankind, let euery man (who thinketh he hath a ſoule to ſaue or looſe) vndoubtedly aſſure himſelfe, that there is but one true fayth or religion, wherein he may auayleably expect ſaluation, and that this fayth of Chriſt, (wherewith the ſoule is clothed) is like to the inconſutible garment of Chriſt, both being incapable of diuiſion, renting, or partition.

21. Now for the greater illuſtration of this point, by way of ſimilitude, and as tending towards the cloſure of this treatiſe. Imagine that a man pretendeth right and title to certaine lands, and taketh aduiſe of all the learned Lawyers and Counſailours of the whole Realme, to whome he showeth all his euidences, of which ſome do cary a title only in groſſe and in general; others proue a more particuler and more reſtrayned right to the ſayd lands; Imagine further, that vpon the diligent peruſall of the euidences, the ioynt conſent & iudgments of all the ſayd Lawyers, ſhould after their longe and ſerious demurs, conſpire in this one point, to wit, that for the recouering and obtayning of the ſayd lands, the foreshewed euidences in generall are not only ſufficient; ſeeing diuers other mē not hauing any true intereſt in the lands, may neuertheleſſe inſiſt and vrge their like general clayme; but that with the help of the ſayd common euidences, he muſt more punctually rely (for the gayning of his preſumed inheritance) vpon other more particuler and perſonall euidences, and aſſignements. Now all theſe learned Counſailours agreeing in this ſentence, and fortifying their iudgments heerein with their owne experience in the like caſe; with the new Reports warranting the ſame; with the authorityes of all the ancient, learned, and reuerend Iudges before them; and laſtly with the cō formity of reaſon confirming no leſſe. If here now ſome one Emperick Atturney, or other (skilfull only by a little experience, in making a Nouerint vniuerſi &c. should ſteppe forth (armed ō ly with impudency and ignorance) and should pronounce the foreſayd ſentence of all theſe learned ſages to be falſe, and that the party pretending right to the ſayd landes, were ſure by his generall title and euidences only to obtaine the ſame; all other his more particuler euidences, being but vnneceſſary & needleſſe therto, who might not iuſtly contemne, & reiect the cenſure of ſuch a fellow? Or could not the party clayming the foreſayd inheritance, be worthily reprehended, if by abandoning the graue counſaile of the learned Lawyers, & following the aduiſe of this ignorant man, he should finally looſe all clayme, title, and poſſibility to his ſayd inheritance?

22. Our caſe is heere the ſame. We all pretend right to the inheritance of the Kingdome of heauen (for we read: Coronam vitae preparauit Dominus diligentibus ſe) Our title in generall therto, is our beliefe in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Paſſion &c. (the beliefe wherof is neceſſary, but not ſufficient) All eminent men for learning (both Catholiks and Proteſtants) do proue from the Scriptures; from the authority of Godes Church; from the nature of hereſy; from the definition of true fayth, and from diuers other reaſons and principles aboue expreſſed, that no man can attaine to this heauenly inheritance, by belieuing only the former fundamentall pointes of Chriſtianity, if ſo he haue not (at leaſt implicitly) a true and particuler fayth of all other leſſe principall points of Chriſtian Religion. Now commeth heere a diſſolute, gamneleſſe, and left-handed fellow, not practiſed in any kind of good literature (for it is obſerued, that al our moſt forward Newtraliſts are men for the moſt part voyd of learning, vertue, & conſcience) who peremptorily out of his Pithagorian chayre (that is, without proofe) teacheth, that a beliefe in generall of the articles of the Trinity, Incarnation, Paſſion, &c. doth only neceſſarily conduce to mans ſaluation, and that the doctrines of Purgatory, Freewill, Reall preſence, and other contouerſies betweene the Catholikes and Proteſtants, are not in any ſort neceſſary to the purchaſing of our eternall inheritance and wel fare; but are to be reputed (with reference to that end) points indifferent, vnauayleable, needeleſſe, and as the greek phraſe is: Pareria, or by-matters. Who would not heere commiſerate the folly & ignorance of ſuch a man, but eſpecially pitty the poore ſoules ſeduced by ſoe blind a guide?

THE CONCLVSION. CHAP. XVI.

HITHERTO, good Reader it is ſufficiently, I hope, demonſtrated, that euery Religion, though profeſſing the name of Chriſt, and beleeuing in the Trinity, the Incarnation, & the like fundamentall points of Chriſtian Fayth, if their beliefe in other ſecondary and leſſe principall pointes be erroneous, cannot promiſe to it ſelfe any ſecurity of ſaluation; and conſequently that the controuerted articles at this day between Catholikes and Proteſtants touching Purgatory, Freewill, Praying to Saints, Sacrifice &c. are of that great importance, as that the profeſſours of both ſides (to vſe the phraſe of a Bleſſed Martyr in the ſame caſe) Vnum caelum capere non poteſt. One heauen cannot containe. It now remayneth to show, that ſeeing at this day there are originally, but two different religions among Chriſtians, to wit, the Catholike Religion and the Proteſtant, (within which is included all its branches & deſcendents) whether the Catholike or Proteſtant Religion is that wherin a man may be ſaued: But ſeeing this ſubiect is moſt learnedly and painefully entreated of by many Catholike wryters, who from all authorityes both diuine and humane, haue irrefragably euicted the truth of their owne religion, and falſehood of the Proteſtants profeſſion; and conſequently that in the Catholike, not in the Proteſtant faith, the ſoules eternall ſaluation is to be purchaſed: therfore I do remit the Reader for his greater ſatisfactiō therin, to the peruſall of the ſaid books, and particulerly to the ſtudying (rather then to the reading) of that moſt elaborate, learned, vnanſwereable, and gauling worke of the proteſtants Apologie of the Roman Churche.

2. Only before I heere end, I muſt make bould to put him in remembrance, with what the Proteſtant Religion in this treatiſe (though but caſually and incidently) is moſt truly chardged; to wit, firſt with particuler condemnations paſſed vpon diuers of its cheifeſt articles, euen by the ſeuerall ſentences and iudgments of the primitiue Church, and that therfore thoſe doctrines ſo condemned, and yet after defended with all froward pertinacity againſt the Church of God, are not only therby diſcouered for plaine, and manifeſt hereſies, but furthermore both implicitely by the teſtimony of holy ſcripture, as alſo by the definition of Hereſy aboue expreſſed. Secondly, that the doctrinall ſpeculations & poſitions of the Proteſtants faith doe forceibly impell the willes of ſuch as beleiue them, to all vice, liberty and ſenſuality. Thirdly, that God out of the infinite abyſſe of his Iuſtice, hath punished euen in this worlde, (as earneſt giuen of far greater punishmēt in the world to come) with moſt fearefull, vnnaturall and prodigions deathes, the firſt inuentours in our age and promulgatours of the ſaid doctrines; and ſuch deaths, as his diuine maieſty is accuſtomed to ſend to his profeſſed ennemies. Fourthly, that Proteſtancy is torne a ſunder with inteſtine diuiſiōs, diuers profeſſors of it, chardging their brethren profeſſours with Hereſie, and diſpayring of their future ſaluation.

25. From all which we may infalliby conclude, that except Hereſy, diſſolution of manners, moſt infamous & miſerable deaths and diſagreements in doctrine between one & the ſame ſect, be good diſpſitions and meanes to purchaſe heauen, the Proteſtant Religion can neuer bring her beleiuers therto. What then remaineth, but that, who will expect ſaluation, should ſeeke it only in the Catholike Church? It being that Arke, erected by our ſecond Noe within which who vertuouſly liue, are exempted from that vniuerſall deluge of eternall damnation. For only in this Church is profeſſed and taught that faith, to which by longe preſcription & a continued hand of time, is peculierly aſcribed the name Catholike: Catholicum Pacianus epiſ. ad Sympronianū, quae eſt de nomine catholico. istud nec Marcionem, nec Apellem, nec Montanum ſumit anthores. That fayth is, which was prophecyed to be of that dilating and ſpreading nature, as that, to it all Iſa. 2. & expoū ded in the English bibles āno 1576 of the vniuerſality of the Church, or fayth of Chriſt. Nations shall flow, and which shall haue the Pſal. 2. & expounded of the Churches vniuerſality by the foreſayd English Bibles. 1576. end of the earth for its poſſeſsion from ſea Pſal. 72. to ſea; beginning Luc. 24. at Hieruſalem among al Nations. That fayth, the Profeſſors wherof shalbe aDan. 2. in which is included the continuance of the churche without interruption. Kingdome, that shall neuer be deſtroyed, but shall ſtand for euer, contrary to the short currents of all hereſies. Of which S. Auguſtine thus writteth: Many hereſies are allready dead, they haue continued their ſtreame, as longe as they were able; Now they are runne out, and their riuers are dryed vp; The memory of them, that euer they were, is ſcarce extant: That faith, the members whereof in regard of their euer viſible eminency, are ſtiled by the holy Ghoſt, A Pſal. 57. mountaine prepared in the top of mountaines, and exalted aboue all Hilles; with reference wherto (to wit, in reſpect of the Churches continuallIſa. 2. whereby is proued the churches euer viſibility. viſibility) the aforeſaide S. Auguſtine cōpareth it to a tabernacle placed in the ſunne. Tom. 9. in ep. Ioan. tra. 2. That faith, whoſe vnion in doctrine both among the members therof, and with their head, is euen celebrated by Gods holy writte; ſince the Church of God is therefore called, One Rom. 17. Cant 6. Ioan. 10. which places o proue the Churches vnity. body, one ſpouſe, and one sheepe-fould: which preuiledge S. Hierome acknowledgeth by his owne ſubmiſſion in theſe wordes: I Epiſt. ad Damae ſum. do conſotiate or vnite my ſelfe in communion with the chayre of Peter; I know the Church to be builded vpon that Rocke; whoſoeuer doth eate the lambe out of this houſe, is become prophane: That faith for the greater confirmation wherof, God hath vouchſafed to diſioint the ſetled courſe of nature, by working of diuers ſtupendious and aſtonishing miracles; according to thoſe wordes of our Sauiour: Goe Mat. 10. in which words our Sauiour maketh miracls a marke of true faith or the Churche. preach you, cure the ſicke, raiſe the dead, cleanſe the leapers, caſt out Diuels. A prerogatiue ſo powerfull & efficacious with S. Augustine, that he expreſſely thus confeſſeth of himſelfe: Miracles Tom. 6. contra epist. Manich c. 4. are amongst thoſe other things, which most iustly haue houlden me in the Churches boſome. To conclude (omitting diuers other characters (as I may tearme them) or ſignes of the true fayth) that fayth, which is of that force, as to extort teſtimony and warrant for it ſelfe, euen from its capitall and deſigned ennemyes, anſwerably to that: Our Deut. 32. which words include the confeſsion of the aduerſary to be a note of truth. God is not as their Gods are, our ennemyes an euen witneſſes. Whereunto the Proteſtants heerein ſeeme to yeald, ſince no leſſe from their owneThis is proued in that Proteſtants do not rebaptize infants or children of Catholike Parents afore baptized. Now theſe Infants are baptized, in the fayth of their parents (as all children are by the doctrine of all learned Proteſtants) But if this fayth of Catholike parents be ſufficient, for the ſaluation of their children dying baptized therein; then much more is it ſufficient for the ſaluation of the Parents themſelues, ſince it is moſt abſurd to ſay, that the Catholike fayth of parents, should be auaileable for their children or infants dying baptized therein, and yet not auayleable for the Parents. practiſe, then from their acknowledgementSee thereof D. Some in his defence againſt Penry pag. 182. and D. Couell in his defence of M. Hookers fiue bookes of Eccleſiaſticall pollicy pag. 77. in wordes, they aſcribe to our Roman fayth, the hope of ſaluation. To this faith then, good Reader, with an indubious aſſent, adhere thou both liuing and dying. Flye Newtraliſme in doctrine, as the bane of all Religion; Flye Proteſtancy, as the bane of Chriſts true Religion, and ſay withEpiſt. ad Symphronianum. Pacianus: Christianus mihi nomen est, Catholicus vero cognomen: Illud me nuncupat, istud me oſtendit. A Christian is my name, a Catholike my ſurname: that doth denominate me, this doth demonſtrate me.

The contents of the Chapters. THat a man, who beleiueth in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the paſsion &c. and yet beleiueth not al other articles of Chriſtian faith, cannot be ſaued: And firſt of the definition of Hereſie, and of an Heretike. Pag. 9. 2 The foreſayd verity proued from the holy Scripture. p. 15 3 The ſame proued from the definition, nature and proprietie or vnity of faith. pag. 29. 4. The ſame proued from the want of vnitie in faithe, betweene the Catholikes and the Protestants, touching the Articles of the Creede. And from that, that the Catholike & Protestant, do agree in the beliefe of diuers articles neceſſarily to be beleeued, and yet not expreſſed in the creed. pag. 33. 5. The ſame made euident frō the like want of vnity in faith betweene the Catholike and the Proteſtant, in articles neceſſary to be beleiued, and yet not expreſſed in the creed. pag. 48. 6. The ſame proued from the authority or priuiledge of Gods church in not erring, either in her definitions of faith, or condemnation of Hereſies, and firſt by councells. pag. 56. .7 The ſame proued from the like infallible authority of the church in not erring, mainfeſted from the teſtimonies of particuler Fathers. pag. 67. 8. The foreſaid truth euicted from that principle, that neither Heretikes, nor Schiſmatikes, are members of the church of God. pag. 81. 9. The ſame proued from arguments drawne from reaſon. pag. 90. 10. The ſame proued from the different effects of catholike Religion and protestancy touching vertue and vice. pag. 102. 11. The ſame verity proued from the fearefull deaths of the firſt broachers of protestancy. pag. 115. 12. The ſame confirmed from the doctrine of recuſancy, taught by catholikes and Protestants. pag. 118. 13. The ſame manifeſted from the writings of the Catholiks and Protestants, reciprocally chardging one another with hereſy. And from the inſurrections, warres, and rebellions begunne only for Religion. pag. 126. 14. The ſame proued from the Proteſtants, mutually condē ning one another of hereſy. pag. 13. 15. Laſtly the ſame demonstrated from the many abſurditye neceſsarily accompanying the contrary doctrine. pag. 142. 16. The concluſion. pag. 165. FINIS.