solution may pass for current who can be certainly assured that there is any true Church of Christ visible or invisible existent now in the world for all the promises concerning the continuance of it to the worlds end may be as well said to be as well conditionall and frustrate by the malice of men as this Eph. 4 c. and who knowes that the said malice is not already grown to that height that it hath deserved that God should take his true Church quite out of the world and so that there is now no true Church existent in all the world Sir in this long passage Answ 22 you have fought onely with your own wind instead of a Question you have supposed an Answer and then given your own Answer to your own Questioning Answer or Answering Question both which being full enough of I leave it as I find it unless you will have a Syllogisme without a Syllogisme Answer a Question without a Question and then you shall have it thus That which was never Questioned or Answered ought not now to be Questioned or Answered but the frustrating of Gods predictions conditionall or absolute by mans malice or merits was never Questioned or Answeted therefore now ought not to be Questioned or Answered Such as these may well come out of a Jesuiticall Court but never yet came from the Catholick Church Sir I must and do tell you there is little less then Blasphemy in your supposition and somewhat more then little less in your position this is beyond Nihil dictum quod non dictum fuit prius Whether it be not evident Quest 23 that unlearned Protestants who cannot determine differences in Religion either by force of Argument or places of Scripture but must wholly depend in the choice of their Faith upon Authority and Credit of Christian Teachers are not obliged in Conscience to prefer that Authority and credibility of Doctors which all circumstances considered is absolutely and unquestionably the greater Authority No Answ 23 it is not yet evident for unlearned Protestants can determine differences in Religion if not by force of Argument yet by places of Scripture which they of Rome cannot do and the reason is ready they deny their Laity we allow ours to read the Scripture and therefore need not depend upon their Teachers but upon the Teacher of us all nor have you yet proved your Authority unquestionably the greater but unquestionably the least of all Authorities unless you take it Sensu Romano non Catholico what the next produces we shall see Whether that Authority of Doctors Quest 24 where those of one side are equall at least if not exceeding them of the contrary party in Learning Wisdome Zeal Sanctity Vertue Sincerity and all other Qualities and Perfections which confer to the accomplishment of complete Authority in Christian Teacher and with this equality incomparably exceed the Doctors of the other party in number is not in all prudence to be judged absolutely and unquestionably the greatest Authority To pass your impertinences of Idem upon Idem Answ 24 and your over-weening opinion of exceeding the Protestants party in Learning Wisdome Zeal Sincerity Virtue Sanctity to which adde but the Scripture and we will acknowledge a complete Authority and submit to the exposition of that Authority in the sense of the four first Generall Councils and the Fathers of the first 800. years or a present lawfully called Generall Council to which if you will do the like we shall then praise God for the fruition of what we yet pray for the Peace and Unity of Christendom Whether this equality at least in all the said perfections Quest 25 is not to be found in the Roman Doctors compared with those of the Protestants Let the equality at least Answ 25 be granted in all the said perfections Quoad hominem though the Comparison savers not well what you gaine by it we may see anon Whether this forementioned equalizing the Protestant Doctors those of the Roman Church Quest 26 the many yeares of their continuance and universall extent of their Religion considered exceed not incomparably in number those of the Protestants profession No it doth not Answ 26 neither incomparably nor yet comparably for the many years of continuance will exceed on our part so that you divide the years equally from 800. to 800. and then judge your selves which 800. years comes nearest to the primitive purity in matter of Religion your 800. or our 800. Name but one general Council or any number of Fathers for the first 800. exceeding our number actum est the field is yours Whether this equality in perfections Quest 27 and incomparable excess in number considered all unlearned Protestants are not obliged both in Prudence and Conscience to prefer the Authority of the Roman Doctors before that of Protestants and consequently to follow the Roman and desert the Protestant Doctrine No Answ 27 not yet for all this is but Idâ—m per idem still onely you have now added Conscience to Prudence adde but Scripture to your Roman Doctors and that Scripture expounded by the first 800. years either representatively or successively or by a present lawfully called general Council and we shall have conscience yours and ours ruled by prudence and prudence following conscience and by both Unity restored Whether upon the foresaid considerations the Authority of the Protestant Doctors Quest 28 in all things wherein they contradict the Romans is not contemptible and unable to sway the judgement of any prudent Christian to frame any moral esteem of it for though in matters wherein they are seconded or not contradicted by an Authority incomparably greater than their own they may deservedly be esteemed for their Naturall Abilities and Morall Qualities worthy of Credit yet in all things wherein they stand in opposition and contradiction against an Authority incomparably exceeding theirs they deserve nothing but to be sleighted and contemned by all those who are to be led by the sole force of Authority Thus when Protestant Doctors affirm that either the Scriptures or Fathers are for them and against the Roman Church what they say in this is not to be regarded seeing the Authority of the Roman Doctors absolutely greater then theirs unanimously affirm the quite contrary thus when they affirm that the Roman Church is full of Errors and Superstitions crept in they know neither when nor how their accusation is to be sleighted being clearly and constantly contradicted by a far greater Authority Thus when they say that Protestants may be saved living and dying wilfully in their Religion they deserve no Credit at all for the quite contrary is most constantly defended by the incomparably stronger Authority of the Roman Doctors the like is to be affirmed in all points of difference betwixt the two Religions so that a Protestant is not to consider the Abilities and Authority of his Doctors absolutely or in matters out of Controversie but as contradicting an Authority incomparably excelling theirs
in which contradiction they deserve neither Credit nor Esteem It was once twice trice before but an equalizing Answ 28 but it is now once twice thrice four times an incomparably greater Authority and all this is Gratis dictum prove your Authority greater and but greater without incomparably then ours and we yield in the mean time you shall give me leave to send you this Syllogisme for answer to your Question Protestants alleadging Scripture expounded by the Fathers for the first 800. yeares are at least of an equall Authority with the Church and Doctors of Rome alleadging Scripture without the exposition of those Fathers but Protestants so alleadge Scripture and so the Roman Doctors alleadge Scripture Therefore the Protestants are of an equal Authority at least with the Roman Doctors You will be forced to confesse more than my modesty challenges in the mean time I suspect you for an incomparably cholerick proud man contending more for Triumph than Truth and till you have incomparably proved your Authority seek not to Proselitize an unlearned Protestant to captivate his Faith and Religion to Roman Doctors without Faith or Religion I demand farther Quest 29 That if the Authority of all the Doctors of the whole Body of Protestants be so inconsiderable in comparison with those of the Roman Doctors how much less will be the Authority of any one Sect or Party of them and then how minute and scarce perceptible will be the Authority of a Laud a Hammond a Chilling-worth a Ferne a Bramhall a Taylor c. who now obtain so powerful an ascendant upon the hearts of our modern Lay protestants seeing they are in a manner nothing in respect of the Authority of the Roman Doctors Authoritatively supoken of your Roman Doctors Answ 29 and minutely spoken of Protestants but I pray whom do you intend by Laud so you stile him I knew him Mr. William Land Dr. William Laud Lord Bishop William Laud Lord Archbishop William Laud and know not you his Conference with Fisher Mr. Fisher or Dr. Fisher if he attained so high be answered Sir I can tell you of a Gentleman yet living who in Constantinople at one bout heard ten of your Doctors rejoyce much at the Archbishops death because he was the great if not the greatest enemy your Roman Church ever had and this because he laboured for an Unity and Reconciliation of Christendom answer him when you please or can and till then let him enjoy peace in his Grave without your detracting him as not living to give you his own answer By Chillingworth so you Mr. Chillingworth so I is dead too I pray you when will you answer his Letter to Mr. Lewiger a brother of your own and which I have now sent you till you do let him be in peace too Good Master Lewiger THough I am resolved not to be much afflicted for the loss of that which is not in my power to keep yet I cannot deny but the loss of a friend goes very near to my heart and by this name of friend I did presume till of late I might have called you because that perhaps for want of power and opportunity I have done you no good office yet I have been alwaies willing and ready to do you the best service I could And therefore I cannot but admire at the affected strangenesse which in your last letter to me you seemed to take upon you renouncing in a manner all relation to me and tacitly excommunicating me from all interest in you The superscription of your letter to me is to Mr. W. C. and your subscription is John L. as if you either disdained or made conscience of styling me your friend or your self mine If this proceed from reason I pray shew it If it proceed from passion or weakness I pray mend it If you think me one of those to whom St. John forbids you to say God save you then you are to think prove me one of those deceivers which denyed Jesus Christ to be come in the flesh If you think me an Heretick and therefore to be avoided you must prove me 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by my own judgement which I know I cannot and therefore you cannot If you say I do not hear the Church and therefore am to be esteemed an Heathen or Publican you are to prove then that by the Church is meant the Church of Rome And yet when you have done so I hope Christians are not forbidden to shew Humanity and Civility even to Pagans For Gods sake Mr. L. free your self from this blind zeal at least for a little space and consider with reason and moderation what strange crime you can charge me with that I should deserve this strange usage especially from you Is it a crime with all my understanding to endeavour to find your Religion true and to make my self a believer of it and not to be able to do so Is it a crime to employ all my reason upon the justification of the infallibility of the Roman Church and to find it impossible to be justified I will call God to witness who knowes my heart better then you do that I have evened the scale of my judgement as much as possibly I could and have not willingly allowed any one graine of worldly motives on either side but have weighed the reasons for your Religion and against it with such indifferencie as if there were nothing in the world but God and my self and is it my fault that the scale goes down which hath the most weight in it that the building falls which hath a false Foundation Have you such power over your understanding that you can believe what you please though you see no reason or that you can suspend your belief when you do see reason If you have I pray for our old friendship sake teach me that trick and until I have learnt it I pray blame me not for going the ordinary way I mean for believing or not believing as I see reason If you can convince me of wilfull opposition against the known truth of negligence in seeking it of unwillingness to find it of preferring temporall respect before it or of any other fault that is in my power to amend It is indeed a fault if I amend it not be as angry with me as you please But to impute unto me unvoluntary Errors or that I do not see what I would see but cannot or that I will not profess what I do not believe certainly this is a far more reasonable Error then any you can justly charge me withall for let me tell you that imputing Socinianisme to me whosoever was the Author of it was a wicked and groundless slander Perhaps you will say for this is the usuall song of your side that Pride is a voluntary fault and with this I am justly chargeable for forsaking the Guide which God hath appointed me to follow but what if I forsook it because I thought I had reason to fear it
this and all other points of Doctrine Nay that the Popes themselves should be so ignorant of the true ground of this their Authority as to pretend to it not upon Scripture or universall Tradition but upon an imaginary no-such Canon of the Council of Nice That Vincentius Lyrinensis seeking for a Guide of his Faith and a preservation from Heresie should be ignorant of this so ready a one The infallibility of the Church of Rome All these things and many more are very strange to me If the infallibility of the Roman Church be in deed and was alwaies by Christians acknowledged the Foundation of our Faith And therefore I beseech you pardon me if I choose to build mine upon one that is much firmer and safer and lies open to none of those Objections which is Scripture and universall Tradition and if one that is of this Faith may have leave to do so I will subscribe with hand and heart Your very loving and true friend W. C. By Bramhall so you my Lord Bishop Bramhall so I when will you answer him or rather reply to his Answer to Mounseir Millitere he is alive and while he lives you dare not I suppose do it since he Commands as much Learning and Reason as any of you all put you altogether By Hammond Ferne Tayler so you Doctor Hammond Doctor Ferne Doctor Tayler so I nor should I have said less of any of your Roman Doctors so far have I read my Ethicks are all living and can answer for themselves with whom if you and yours hap to Cope I am confident you will fall in the Combate if you Conquer I will be your Proselite not for the strength of your Questions or pinning my Faith upon their Learning Religion Zeal Sincerity Vertue and Wisdom in all which they exceed but for the strictness of my own Conscience so that the Combate be decided before equitable and equall Judges Quest 30 All this is demanded supposing that the Roman Doctors were onely equall to those of Protestants in all the aforenamed Qualities conducing to the perfect Authority of a Master in Christianity But now I demand whether those that have Authority of Teaching in the Roman Church generally speaking in so much as can be prudently deduced by experience from them are not much excelling the Protestant Ministry in all the said Qualities What Councils have they worth the mentioning in comparison of the Generall Councils consenting with the present Roman Church even according to their own Confession as the second of Nice the Great Council of Lateran the Councill of Constance Florence and Trent wherein such multitudes of Learned men and holy Patriarchs Metropolitans Archbishops Bishops Doctors Prelates both of the Eastern and Western Churches unanimously confirmed the Roman and condemned the Protestant Doctrine What proofes of Learning have the Protestant Ministry comparable to those of the Roman Doctors whereof many have written one no small number two others three and foure others six eight ten twelve and some twenty and four and twenty great Tomes in folio and those replenished in the generall repute of Christendom even amongst Protestants also with profound and high Learning Who amongst their Ministry have they who have obtained the universall esteem of Sanctity as hath our Gregory Beda Thomas Bonaventure Antonine Dominick and diverse others Where find they amongst theirs that zeal to pass into the heart of so many barbarous and Heathen Nations to plant the Cospel even with the undergoing of unheard-of Torments and suffering most cruel Martyrdoms as many of the Roman Clergy have done within these late years Let them name but any sole Minister who hath suffered Martyrdom for preaching Christian Faith to Pagans What means have the Protestant Ministery with their Wives Goods and Families to apply themselves to study and devotion comparable to our single Clergy and retired Religions Where is that unanimous consent in all Points of Faith seeing they are perpetually jarring not onely one with another but the same Minister dissenting notoriously now from what they taught twenty years ago amongst them compared to the constancy and agreement of our Doctors What Miracles have any of their Ministery done in confirmation either of their Doctrine against the Roman Church or of the Christian Faith against Heathens as unless all human Faith be infringed many of ours have done both against them and Heathens I could instance in many more particulars but these may suffice for these short demands whence appears evidently That whosoever professes to be led by the sole Authority of Christian Doctors and Pastors must either deserve the esteem I say not onely of an unchristian but even of an imprudent man if he adhere to so undeserving and contemptible an Authoâ—ity as is that of the Protestant Ministry in comparison of the Roman Doctors who so incomparably outstrip them not onely in multitude but in all the motives and perfections which give credit to the Authority of a Christian Teacher Again Answ 30 at your incomparable comparison and with your addition of an undeserving and contemptible Authority in the Protestant Ministery outstript in multitude motives and in all perfections If this be your way to get credit to your cause much good may it do you but on an ordinary wise man I conceive it will not work Had you continued your supposition of Equality betwixt the Roman and Protestant Doctors it would more become you and might have proved a better way to overcome us how much you excell us will presently be seen in your demands The first whereof is What Councils have the Protestants worth the mentioning in comparison with the general Councils consenting with the present Roman Church and then you name five the Second of Nice the great Council of Lateran the Council of Constance Florence and Trent now I must marke a juggle here you name not what you name these Councils for but in the general the particulars must be guest at and I shall guess at them The second of Nice I conceive you name for Images or worshiping of God by Images for untill this Council which was not called untill the Year 787. Images or Worshiping of God by Images was never decreed and what value this Council is of I tell you truely from my Books There were more unlearned and evil-disposed men in it than ever were in any before or almost since it was called by Irene the Empress an Heathen borne converted Christian by Constantinus his Father to whom she was married and suffered her son Constantine to lofe his eyes for withstanding the determinations of this Council so much natural affection she had Called by her and managed by one Tharisius a Lay-man a Courtier and Bishop of one years standing and John Legate of the East Church of whom it is said he was a devout man but of no great Learning and the other two that ruled the rost in this Council were Theodosius and Constantinus of all whom together it hath been said There were
a meer Ceremony should not be fundamental Or lastly what reason there is to say that Laying on of hands hath a neerer connexion to the radical and prime mysteries of our Faith then many other points controverted betwixt Protestants and those of the Roman Church Whether by Laying on of hands here is intended Confirmation which to be a Sacrament properly so taken Answ 17 will be hard for you to prove but not hard for me to grant that it is Sacramentale quoddam and yet not Sacramentum for want of visibile signum invisibilis gratiae and yet hard again for you to make it a foundation the use whereof is not disbelieved or rejected by us No the disuse of it is lamented and let them answer it who have caused it Yes and Laying on of hands in the Administration of Holy Orders is used by all those who are ordained Episcopally and yet no Sacrament for all that though we confess it a foundation quoad Ecclesiastices not quoad Ecclesiam Why Annointing with Oyle mentioned by St. James should not be a fundamental point you might have told your self without demand from others because the Epistle of St. James and some other Books were not received into the Canon of the Scripture untill some time after the Foundation was laid Nor is Laying on of hands esteemed by Protestants a Ceremony not Sacramentall nor is it by St. Paul termed the Foundation and substance of the Eucharist We all you and we hold the Eucharist to be a Sacrament and not onely Sacramentall but Fundamentall that is Inadultis Nor do I remember that I ever read that Laying on of hands hath a nearer connexion to the radicall and prime Mysteries of our Faith unless onely in Ecclesiasticis then many other points controverted betwixt Protestants and those of the Roman Church It is yet further demanded Quest 18 seeing Protestants affirm that the whole Catholick visible Church may erre in the definition of points of Faith not fundamentall and seeing that they affirm that the points in difference betwixt us are not fundamentall and so not necessary to Salvation and lastly seeing they affirm also that the Scriptures may be obscure in points not necessary to Salvation by what means can they ever think to convince the Roman Church of Error in these points of difference betwixt them and her Sir Answ 18 with your favour Protestants do not affirm that the whole Catholick Church can erre in Doctrines absolutely fundamentall and necessary to all mens Salvation for so we should destroy an Article of our Creed I believe the Holy Catholick Church which consists of Triumphant souls as well as Militant men but that this or that visible Church or the whole visible Church and Catholick as limitted to visible may erre in the definition of points not fundamentall yes and fundamentall too Protestants do affirm and the reason is because the whole visible Church consists of men and men when they are at best are subject to Error Nor do Protestants affirm the points in difference betwixt you and them to be not fundamentall or unnecessary to Salvation for some of them are so fundamentall and necessary to Salvation to you and such learned men as you are that unless you leave them you will hardly finde the way to Heaven take one for all and let the Merit of your own works be it and see if your sharing with Christ in earning a part of your Salvation will not lose you the whole and so by this the rest of this Question is answered and the Roman Church convinced of Error in points of difference betwixt them and her Seeing also that every point of Faith is a Divine Truth Quest 19 proceeding from the Revelation of God and to be believed as I suppose for the present with the common consent of Protestants with an infallible assent of Faith if the universall visible Church may erre and the Scripture may be obscure as is generally affirmed by our Adversaries in points of Faith not fundamentall how shall such points as are in Controversie betwixt us and are accounted by Protestants not fundamentall or not necessary to Salvation be discerned to be points of Faith or how agreed this Modern Protestant Doctrine of no difference betwixt us in points necessary to Salvation which that of their beginners and more antient Predecessors who taught that the Scriptures were clear onely in all points necessary to Salvation and upon that pretext both affirmed that our Doctrines against them were clearly convinced of falsehood by the Authority of sole Scripture and allowed all Lay-people promiscuously to read them as being clear to them in all the points controverted betwixt us for this manifestly supposes that they were held by those beginners to be points of Faith necessary to Salvation or fundamentals Or what means is there to believe them as points of Faith seeing they can never be believed infallibly upon the Churches Authority by reason of her pretended fallibility in them nor expresly for the Authority of Scripture by reason of its obscurity in the delivery of them according to the principles of Protestants That every point of Faith as divine Truth Answ 19 proceeding from the Revelation of God if you are not equivocall in that expression is to be believed is granted but whether as you suppose with a common consent of Protestants with an infallible assent of Faith I cannot say for if by infallible assent you mean a full assurance or great confidence I can tell you Protestants are not so bold we confess assurance to be the effect of a strong Faith we affirm it not to be the Essence of all Faith If the universall visible Church may erre and the Scriptures may be obscure as is generally affirmed by out Adversaries in points of Faith not fundamentall how shall such points as are in Controversie betwixt us and are accounted by Protestants not fundamentall or not necessary to Salvation be discerned to be points of Faith How the universall visible Church may erre I told you in the former and how the Scriptures may be obscure and to whom I tell you in this Protestants do not generally affirm them obscure in points not fundamentall though if they did it were nothing to the purpose in points controverted betwixt us That Scriptures are the Rule of Faith which is fundamental is by Protestants affirmed That the Scriptures are easie and plain to all sorts of men learned and unlearned which use the means and are diligent in reading them is likewise affirmed when they are obscure to any they are obscure to them onely who have not eyes enlightned to see into them they who have humble and diligent souls will soon discern which be and which be not points of Faith How our predecessor and modern Protestants agree need no further demonstration then what is already given that the Scriptures are cleer onely in all points necessary to Salvation is for you to prove Pretext we know none your Doctrines against
us are clearly convinced by Authority of Scripture not alone but of expositors also Lay-people allowed by Protestants to read the Scriptures and so they were by the Primitive Fathers and so they would by you if you would follow Primitive and Catholick example we hold them clear in points of Faith necessary to Salvation which though not believed infallibly upon the Churches Authority by reason of her not pretended fallibility yet are believed expresly for and by the Authority of Scripture without any obscurity in the delivery of them not according to the principall of Protestants onely but of the Primitive Fathers also I demand further Quest 20 if the whole visible Church may erre in the definition of any points whatsoever that Error must either proceed from ignorance and want of light or from malice and want of vertue and goodness not the second for then the whole visible Church of Christ should not be sancta Holy as it is believed to be in our Creed and described in the Scriptures but should become a Harlot and abominable deceiver of the world and a seducer of Nations in teaching contrary to the known truth not the first for if she could erre out of ignorance to what purpose do Protestants appear to her Determination in a lawful and general Council in any of the points of difference betwixt them and those of the Roman Church seeing she may through ignorance erre in the determination of them as being not fundamental according to them neither can it be said notwithstanding the whole visible Churches fallibility in points not fundamental nay though it should actually erre and that Error should be evidently discovered yet even those who had thus evidently discovered the said Errors were to conforme themselves to those erroneous definitions of a general Council for if this conformity be understood of an internal conformity in Judgment as it is wholly impossible seeing that were to judge the same thing to be true and not true at the same time and to judge against an evident knowledge and if it be understood of an external conformity and profession onely it were manifestly impious and high Hypocrisie in resisting the known Truth revealed by Almighty God which they evidently know to be a most false Error in Faith Secondly if one were to subscribe and externally to conform himself to the definitions of lawful general Councils which one perswades himself he evidently knows to be erroneous till another be assembled to correct them why did not Protestants afford this external conformity to the definition of the general Councils of Florence of Lateran and to the second Council of Nice to omit others till some other lawful general Council came to correct their pretended Errors they having no other reason to reject the authority of the said Councils then that they define many things against the Protestant Doctrine Thirdly seeing it was never yet seen nor can be ever made manifest that any lawful general Council revoked any definition in matter of Faith of any former lawful general Council what hope is there that they should now begin to do what was never done before them Fourthly if it were supposed that any such revocatory definition should issue from them that party whose Doctrine should be condemned by such revocations would accuse the Council of Error as much as the contrary party accused the former Council of error in defining against them and so the controversie would remain as indetermined as it was before neither would it be possible to determine it fully by a general Council for the party condemned would still expect another Council to revoke that definition which seems to him evidently erroneous and so there would be no end of new determinations and revocations in infinitum Yet farther seeing lawfull Generall Councils do not onely oblige even under pain of Anathema or being accursed and excommunicated all Christians to believe and profess the Doctrine which they teach them not onely to be true and free from Error but to be divine Truth revealed by God himself if they should erre in any such definition they must make God the Father of Error and untruth which quite destroys the veracity of God and consequently overthrowes the main and primary foundation of Christian Faith and therefore must necessarily be held to include a fundamentall Error So impossible and implicatory a thing it is for them to erre in matter of Faith and not to erre fundamentally For either that erring Council must define some positive Error or that which God never revealed to be revealed from God or that some true Revelation from God is an Error Both which conâ—â—ine no lesse malice then this To make God a Lyer How the whole visible Church may erre Answ 20 you have heard now whether from Ignorance or Malice you would know from malice I think not because then it would not be Sancta Holy as you say most rightly but why not from Ignorance For they are but men and men at best know not all things they know but in part and yet we appeale to the determination of her in a lawfull Generall Council because what she knowes in part and what you know in part and what we know in part may amount to more then half the whole and therein we shall acquiesce untill we know perfectly So then the malicious erroneous definition of a Generall Council if lawfully called being declined we shall study conformity both internall in judgement and externall in profession without sinning either against evident knowledge within or by high Hypocrisie without And yet why we conformed not to the definitions of the Generall Councils as you call them of Florence of Lateran and the second of Nice you know if you would express it as well as we not so much for defining many things against our as against the Catholick Doctrine Nor thirdly is all hope taken away from doing what was never done as you say but most untruly because some Generall Councils have revoked what former Generall Councils lawfully called have determined And fourthly upon supposition that any such revocatory definition should issue that either you or our selves either of our Doctrines being condemned should still expect another Council to revoke that definition For certainly the Catholick Christian will be so modest as to stand to the definition of that spirituall power which he acknowledgeth the highest upon Earth though the Catholick Roman would not unless the Bishop of Rome both called and commanded the Council and so the In infinitum would be yours not ours And farther let it be granted that lawfull Generall Councils do oblige under pain of Anathema to believe and profess that Doctrine which they teach to be free from Error and a divine Truth revealed by God himself so it be not a new Revelation against the old we would not believe they make God the Author of Error or a Lyer you may do it if you please or dare Seeing St. Quest 21 Paul Eph. 4.14 affirmes
particulars considered the Protestant Religion in any Sect of it whatsoever can be esteemed the true Christian Religion Sir Answ 32 I have not yet known the Protestant Religion divided into any Sects we all believe the same Creeds we all hold the same foundation and Articles of Faith we all hold the Scriptures the onely judge of controversies which because you deny and decline we think that man imprudent who deserts the Protestant to turn Roman and him prudent that deserts the Roman to turn Protestant since there is but a possibility of salvation for an unlearned man in the Roman because it depends upon human Authority in the Protestant there is a certainty of salvation for unlearned and learned because it depends upon divine Authority and therefore a true christian Church and Religion Hence I press further Quest 32 Whether the proving that Protestant Religion cannot be prudently chosen or retained by any unlearned persons who are sufficiently informed of the eminent Authority propounding the Roman Religion is not a sufficient Argument to them that no Sect amongst them in any point wherein it differs from the Roman hath either any solid ground in the Holy Scriptuâ—es or true relation to Gods Holy Spirit or coherence with true Religion seeing a Religion which cannot by them be prudently chosen cannot possibly proceed from any of these three whatsoever fair shew Protestants each respectively to his several Sect make vainly of them Sir all these are but words Answ 33 and you do still supponere not supponenda For that Religion may be prudently chosen whose rule of Faith is certain but such is the rule of Faith in the Protestant Religion as being ultimated and determined in and by the Scripture therefore the Protestant Religion may be prudently chosen Again that Religion cannot be prudently chosen whose Authority proposing it is not sufficient but such is the Authority propounding the present Roman Religion as being human whether Pope or Council therefore the Roman present Religion cannot prudently be chosen Again that Religion may prudently be chosen which hath true relation to Gods Holy Spirit but the Protestant Religion hath such relation therefore the Protestant Religion may prudently be chosen for there is a true relation betwixt Gods Holy Spirit and Gods Holy Word because Gods Holy Spirit is the Author of Gods Holy Word I need not speak of the third because coherence with true reason follows either of the former And upon this I demand yet further Quest 34 Whether the Roman Doctors have any obligation to urge any other Argument then this either from Scripture Fathers or reason against Protestants till they have cleared their Religion from the impeachment of imprudence committed by their followers in the election of it or persisting in it as is afore declared Sir Answ 34 your afore Declaration hath proved little and your present proves less though I confess your Roman Doctors have no farther obligation to urge any other Argument then Scripture Fathers or Reason against Protestants Urge either of them to purpose and we shall be so far from clearing our Religion from the impeachment of imprudence that we will confess it is the onely prudence in the choyce of Religion to embrace the Roman Till then I say That Religion which hath not hitherto been convinced from Scriptures Fathers or Reason ought by the rule of prudence to be embraced but such is the Protestant Religion therefore by the rule of prudence the Protestant Religion ought to be embraced or if you will have it per contraria take it thus It is a part of imprudence to embrace that Religion which hath been convinced from Scriptures Fathers and Reason but such is the Roman Religion therefore it is the part of imprudence to embrace the Roman Religion Now Sir to avoid reply give me leave to tell you Baptizing as Christ hath Commanded Praying as Christ hath taught Believing the Scriptures Serving and Worshipping God without Images Receiving the Sacrament as Christ Instituted it have not been convinced by Scriptures Fathers or Reason Equalling Tradition to Scripture Worshiping of Images or God by Images Praying to Saints Receiving the Sacrament in one kind believing the Popes infallibility c. have been convinced by Scriptures Fathers and Reason On the contrary side I demand Quest 35 whether the Roman Doctors have any obligation in rigour of dispute to use any other Argument for perswading unlearned persons to desert the Protestant and embrace the Roman Religion then this imprudence in adhering to the Protestant and of prudence in uniting themselves to the Roman Church so long as the said unlearned Protestants perswade themselves that they proceed prudently in preferring their own before the Roman seeing this erroneous perswasion is the first step which must be redressed in relinquishing the one and the contrary perswasion the first step which must be fixed in approaching to the other Now when unlearned Protestants once confesse that they are convinced in this and thereupon recede from Protestancy but object that the prudentiall Motives to prefer the Roman Religion before the Protestant as they conceive that the Protestant is wholly improbable and so to be deserted so they convince no more then that the Roman is probable and so it is great Likelyhood to be the true Religion but convince not that it is so much as morally certaine To Protestants brought thus farre there is an obligation put upon the Roman Doctors to prove at least the morall certainty of it to such as acknowledge that it is morally certaine that the Roman Re-Religion is the sole true saving Religion but deny notwithstanding that it thereby followes that it is infallibly certain rises an Obligation to prove that it is Infallibly certain and when one is once convinced of this also but yet doubts whether this Infallibility be Divine and so the highest of all Infallibilities there will be also an Obligation to shew to such as are brought on so far the most high divine infallibility of the Roman Religion hence therefore I demand whether our late Protestants and Socinians proceed not preposterously and unreasonably in pressing Roman Doctors to demonstrate the Divine Infallibility of the truth of the Roman Religion before they themselves grant that it is infallible in any degree or morally certain or probable or prudential for though it be necessary to prove all these particulars in their due circumstances yet there is no necessity to prove them all at once to every Adversary but by degrees the one in order after the other with correspondence to what of them is denyed or called in question by those with whom we treat for thus we proceed orderly and logically à notioribus ad ignotiora and hold a correspondence with Nature by proceeding ab imperfectioribus ad perfectiora still observing the step or progress of our Adversary and still stepping and going along with him and if this method had been strictly held by our late controvertists the Adversaries mouths had