the Apostles creed haue byn condemned for playne Heresies and the belieuers of them anathematized for Heretikes And first to begin with councells the infallible authority of which euen Christ himselfe hath by his owne wordes often ratifyed as where he sayth Where (k) Mat. 18. two or three much more where many hundreds of venerable Bishops are gathered togeather in my name I am in the midst of them And againe speaking to the Church and in it to the assembled Doctours and Pastours thereof I am (l) Mat. 28. with you all dayes euen to the consummation of the world which councells are euer directed and gouerned by the holy Ghost according to those wordes in the Acts (*) c. 15. Visum est Spiritui Sancto nobis and therefore are worthily receaued and admitted for the supremest sentence of Gods church not only by the auncient (n) Atha Ep. ad Epictetum August in Epist 162. Greg. Nazian orat in Athan. Cyril l. de Trinit c. Fathers but euen by the more learned Protestants since to omit others one of the most remarkable of them thus writeth (o) D. Bilson in his perpetual gouernement p. 370. Synods are an externall Iudiciall meanes to discerne errour and (p) D. Bils vbi supra p. 374. the surest meanes to decide doubts But to proceed forward and to beginne with these And first with the councell of the Apostles This councell was assembled as we read in S. (1) Act. 15. Luke by reason of certayne contentious men maintayning that the Gentils conuerted to the christian Faith might eate meate offered vp to Idols bloud and strangled beasts coÌ„trary to the custome of the Iewes The Apostles being assembled and bearing with the weakenes of the Iewes in the infancy of the church decreed all prohibition of eating bloud strangled meates After which decree once established it is certayne that it had byn a mortall sinne immediatly to haue eaten of bloud straÌ„gled meates so as before it being a point of indifferency is now made necessary This appeareth from the text First from those words Certayne going forth from vs haue troubled you with words subuerting your soules But men do neyther depart out of the Church by maintayning certaine opinions nor by their example therin can they subuert other mens soules if their doctrine and practice thereof doe still remayne about thinges 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 among those thinges which are necessary Againe neither would the Apostles haue gathered themselues togeather so solemnely neither would they haue ascribed the decreeing of it to the work of the holy Ghost if the Subiect of the question and difficulty then discussed by theÌ„ had concerned matters only of Indifferency after such their decree made Now from the example of this councell I doe gather That if a councell by it owne authority may decree that the eating of certayne meates being otherwayes of their owne nature indifferently to be eaten without sinne shal be vnlawfull and shall repute and hould the impugners thereof for men departed out of the Church of Christ then à fortiori what doctrine soeuer a councell shall condemne of it owne nature for Heresy the same is to be reputed by all good christians for Heresy and the defendours thereof for Heretikes Secondly the councell of Nice was ceâ—ebrated though principally for the represâ—ing of Arius his Heresy denying the Diuinity of Christ yet withall touching the controuersy of keeping the feast of Easter as â—t is apparent out of (q) l. 3. de vit Const. Eusebius (r) in lib. de Synod Arim Seleuciae Athanasius (Å¿) Haeres 70. vz. Audianorum Epiphanius Now this councell pronounceth Anathema to al those who besides the denying of the Diuinity of Christ should 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 Quartadecimani of whom see Tertullian libro de praescript Augustine Haeresi 29. And heere we are to vnderstand that the word Anathema vsed and pronunced by this councell which word is also almost euery where vsed in all generall councells signifyeth as much as accursed and in this sense we find this word Anathema to be vsed by the Apostle in seuerall (t) Rom. 1. Cor. 12 places so as when a councell pronounceth Anathema to any for belieuing such or 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 The third Councell of Carthage wherat S. Augustine was present decreed that the booke of the Machabees with some other bookes should be acknowledged as canonicall and pronounceth 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 (*) 2. Macab c. 1. for the dead that therfore this councell alloweth that doctrine condemning the contrary doctrine for Heresy 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 therby the Sacrament of Pennance was condemned with the brand of Anathema in the councell of Rome houlden vnder Pope Cornelius as (x) lib. 6. hist c. 33. Eusebius reporteth At which tyme also was condemned for Heresy the errour of Anabaptisme as the same (y) l. 7. hist cap. 2. Eusebius relateth The councell of Calcedon condemned the Heresy of Eutiches who taught that there was but only one (z) vt patet in act 1. Conc. Nature in Christ after his Incarnation In like sort the first councell of Ephesus condemned the heresy of Nestorius teaching two Persons to be in Christ as appeareth out of (a) in Chronico Prosper and (b) l. 7. c. 34. Socrates Now touching both these last Heresies we are to vnderstaÌ„d that both Nestorius Eutiches did belieue in Christ Iesus our Sauiour as the Redeemer of the world yet they were registred and branded for Heretikes only for their pertinacious erring touching the Person and Natures of Christ as now the Protestants may be reputed Heretikes for their ascribing of Ignorance Passion and Desperation to Christ The councell of Chalcedon also decreed that vowed Virgins and Monkes could not marry condemning those with an Anathema and for Heretikes that should hould and maintayne the Contrary as is to be seene out of the Councell it selfe The fourth (c) Can. 79. councell
more then darkeâ— an produce light since Truth himselfe 〈◊〉 taught vs (i) Luc. 6. That we cannot gather figges â—ornes nor grapes of bushes And hence by premises we are to vnderstand that we â—n entyre perfect fayth that by the â—h we belieue all supreme articles of the Trinitie Incarnation Passion c. anâ— all the articles of the Creed expressely articulately in their true sense and do belieue all other inferiour articles at least implicitely that is that we haue a readie preparation of mind to belieue all other articles which the Church of Christ dotâ— propound to be belieued so as that thougâ— we do not belieue euery article of Chrâ—stian Religion with an explicite and expresse faith yet we are bound vnder painâ— of damnation nor to belieue any doctrinâ— contrary or repugnant to the said articleâ— which the Church of Christ doth prâ—pound to be belieued from which it vnauoydably followeth that once grauntinâ— that the Church of Christ propoundeth 〈◊〉 be belieued that there is a Purgatory â— that we may pray to the Saints he incureth damnation who belieueth that theâ— is no Purgatory or that we ought not 〈◊〉 pray to Saints Now in this third place we will toucâ— that inseparable Attribute of true Chrâ—stian fayth which is Vnity in fayth 〈◊〉 doctrine This marke is so indissolubâ—â— annexed to the true fayth of Christ as thâ— we find his Apostles euer readie most â—â—riously to inculcate the same to their dâ—ciples Thus accordingly the Aposâ—â— exhorteth the Ephesians saying (k) Ephes 4. Be you carefull to keepe the vnity of the spirit in the bond of peace And immediately againe (l) Ephes vbi supra There is one Lord one fayth one Baptisme Where we see that Vnity in fayth is expressely set downe As also in another place (m) Ephes loc cit I beseech you that you speake all one thing be you kâ—it together in one mind and one iudgment And as this was the exhortation of the Apostle To we read that the first belieuers followed â—he same of whom S. Luke thus saith The (n) Act. 4. multitude that belieued were of one hart and â—ne soule And hence it proceedeth that the Church of Christ which comprehendeth the Professours of this vnanimous faith is â—tyled by Gods holy writ (o) Rom. 12. One Bodie one (p) Cant. 6. Spouse (q) Ioan. 10. one flocke of sheepe A truth â—o euident as that besides the frequent teâ—timonies of the Faâ—hers (r) Athanasius orat 1. con Ani. Chrysost opere imperfecto in Mat. Hom. 20. Tertullian de praescript Irenaeus l r. c. 5. confirming the â—ame euer the Protestants subscribe in iudgâ—ent heerto For thus (Å¿) Luther tom 3. Wittenberg in psal 5. fol. 166. Luther himselfe to omit (t) see herâ—â—â—f the Deuines of Mansfeild against the Sacramentaries And the Deuines of Heidelberg against the Anabaptists others writeth A kingdome deuiâ—ed in it selfe shall not stand neither haue any â—eretikes at any tyme bine ouercome by force or â—btility but by mutuall dissention neither doth â—hrist fight with them otherwise then with a spiâ—â—t of giddines and disagreement Now then this Vnitie of faith is so to be â—nderstood as that it is not repugnant therto that one and the same point should at one time not be houlden as necessary to be belieued the which after it hath vndergone a definitiue sententionall decree of Gods Church is necessarily to be belieued As for example it was not necessary in the beginning of Christianity to belieue that the booke of the Machabees the Epistle of S. Iames S. Iude the second Epistle of S. Peter the second and third of S. Iohn to be Canonicall Scripture till they were defined so to be by the third Councell (u) Can. 47. of Carthage at which S. Augustine was present But after this Councell had by the assistance of the holy Ghost defined them to be Canonicall and this after confirmed by the consent of the whole Church then it was and is Heresy to deny them to be Canonicall And the reason of this disparity is because it is Gods good pleasure wisdome not to reueale to his Church all articles of faith in the beginning and at one time but at seuerall times 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 large vnfoulding or exposition but not of any contrariety in beliefe chaunge or alteration Anâ— thus to insist in the former example yâ— may well stand with Christian faith in the â—eginning not to accept the former bookes or Canonicall till the authority of the Church had pronounced them for such But it standeth not with sound faith that one man should positiuely belieue now after the Churches definition therof giuen as an article of fayth that the Machabees and the rest of the bookes aboue specified are not Canonicall Scripture but the prophane writings of man and another man should belieue as an article of Faith that they are Canonicall Scripture since the one of these contrary beleifes must be Hereticall This verity of the Vnity of faith being warranted by the word both of God and man as is aboue said we will take into our consideration the Catholike and Protestant Religions both which ioyntly do professe to belieue in generall in the Trinity in Christs Incarnation his Passion and the Creed of the Apostles and so we shall discerne whether the faith of all these seuerall Professours doth inioy the foresaid marke of vnity in doctrine or noe But seing this Subiect is most ample and large I will therfore sepose this ensuing chapter for the more full and exact discouery of the many and great disagreements betweene the Catholikes and the Protestants in their fayth and Religion THE SAME PROVED FROâ— want of vnity in fayth betweene Catholikes anâ— Protestants touching the Articles of the Creed CHAP. IIII. VNDERTAKING in this place tâ— set downe the multiplicity of opinions betweene Catholikes anâ— Protestants though they all iointly belieue in the Trinity the Incarnation oâ— Christ his Passion and the like and consequently that this their general beliefe wanteth that true Vnity of fayth which out of thâ— holy Scriptures Fathers the Protestants I haue aboue shewed to be most necessary to Saluation I will first examine how the Protestants and Catholikes doe differ touching the beliefe of the Creed made by the Apostles Next I will demonstrate that supposing all Professours of both Religions should agree in the true sense and meaning of the Creed yet there are diuers other dogmaticall points necessarily to be belieued and are at this instant belieued both by Protestants and Catholikes which are not expressed or mentioned in the Creed nor by any immediate inference can be drawne from thence Lastly I wil set down the great difference betweene Catholiks ProtestaÌ„ts in other points of fayth of which the Creed makes no intimation or
commauÌ„ded by the church not to performe the publike lyturgy of the church if he did contrary therto he was adiudged by the church to sinne mortally In like sort a Bishop leauing his Fayth and maintayning any one Heresy did thereby loose all his authority of Iurisdiction and thereupon during such his state all his AbsolutioÌ„s censures punishments and sentences practiced by him towardes any Person were adiudged by the church of God to be of no force or validity To which practice of the church (a) In 3. p. q. 39. ar 3. Saint Thomas subscribeth in these words Haeretici non possunt absoluere nec excommunicare nec Indulgentias facere aut aliquid huiuscemodi quod si fecerint nihil actum est Heretikes speaking of Cleargy men cannot absolue any one nor excommunicate nor giue Indulgences nor exercise any such like point of spirituall Iurisdiction and if they attempt contrary heereto they do but practice in vayne Touching Politicall or ciuill censures or punishments anciently inflicted vpon Heretikes The first may be that such men were forbidden to contract any marriage with other Religious and faythfull Christians and such of the faythfull christians as did marry with them did sinne mortally This is proued out of the (b) Can. 31.32.33 Laodicean councell aboue touched prohibiting all such mariages also all praying and communicating in Sacraments with Heretiks of which point I will heerafter intreate more fully Another punishment was that Heretiks were wholy restrained by the church from all practice of their Religion This appeareth from the actions of Constantine the Great who was so farre from graunting liberty of Religion to the Arians as that he threatned banishment to all who would not subscribe to the Nicene councell The same is proued from the like iudgement of Iouinianus who being elected Emperour by the souldiers admitted the acceptance thereof with this condition and not otherwayes to wit that all the subiectes of the Empire would promise to keep an entire vnity of christian beliefe practice The like iudgment herein is of the Auncient Fathers And first S. (c) Epist. 33. ad Mar. cell soror Ambrose though sollicited therunto by the Emperor Valentinianus would not suffer the Arians to haue within his Iurisdiction any one Church for the practice of their Religion to be allotted for them (d) As appeareth out of Theodor. l. 5. c. 32. S. Chrysostome being mooued by the Emperor of his tyme to graunt a Church to one Gayn as a Duke for the practice of his Heresy with great Christian courage openly withstood the same (e) Ep. 76. S. Leo did much reprehend Anatholius Bishop of Constantinople for permitting Heretikes to liue promiscuously with Catholikes Finally (f) Ep. 29. S. Augustine did vehemently persuade one Olympius an Earle that he would diuulge and put in practice the lawes of the Emperour made against the Heretikes Donatists who taught the Inuisibility of the Church that so throgh force of the lawes they might not be suffered to make any profession of their Religion A third punishment concerneth thâ— books of Heretikes which the Church 〈◊〉 God euer prohibited to be read indiffereÌ„tlâ— of all but only by such learned men 〈◊〉 were able to refute the Errours and Heresie contained in the sayde books And hence 〈◊〉 is that we finde that the fourth Counceâ—â— of (g) Ca. 18. Carthage admonished the Bishop that they would reade the bookes of Heretikes 〈◊〉 only for necessity In like sort the seauenth Câ—uncell prohibited the books of the I conoch Heretiks who did write virulent Treatises against the Religious vse of Images To proceed further there were diuers other chasticements appointed for Heretiks in the auncient Church (h) Wherof see L. Ariani ca. de Haereticis and by the auncient Christian Emperours in their lawes as Bannishment a pecuniary (i) L. Cuncti Haeretici mulct or fine the losse (k) L. Manichaeri of all their goods And lastly when the insolencie of Heretiks did grow insufferable euen death it selfe which punishment of death Valentinian and Marcian the Emperours did first decree of which point see the iudgment of the Councell (l) Act. 1. of Chalcedon of (m) In c. 5. ad Galat. Ierome and lastly of (n) Li. 2. contra literas Petiliaeni c. 83. Augustine who ex professo proueth that Magistrates haue power to punishe Heretikes euen which the sword Thus far touching the punishments auncieÌ„tly appointed by the church of God against Heretiks Now to apply this to our purpose I do heere wish the reader to take into his consideration two things first that here is no mention made in the former authorities what the Heresies were against which such seuere proceedings were put in execution neither is there any intimation in them of the deniall of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. but the sayd punishments were extended to all Heretiks indifferently and without any limitation of peculiar Heresies Now that these punishments were not ordayned for the denyers of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. is euident for two reasons first because as is often aboue sayd the denyers of these supreme poynts are not Heretykes but Infidels or Iewes secondly because the punishment of death only and no inferiour punishment aboue mentioned was appoynted by the church for those who once were Christians but after did fall into Infidelity by denying those supreme poynts of Christian fayth Secondly the Reader is to obserue that seing Heretikes though not denying the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion the Decalogue c. did vndergoe the foresayd punishments the whole Church oâ— God with is gouerned with the spirit of the holy Ghost would neuer haue inflicted vpon them erring only in lesser matter then about the Trinitie IncarnatioÌ„ Passioâ— c. such seuere and rigorous punishments aâ— are aboue meÌ„tioned if she had thought thaâ— the defence of those errours how small soâ—uer they seemed could haue stood with thâ— saluatioÌ„ of mans soule since otherwaies thâ— church should haue discouered her selfe 〈◊〉 be a most cruell Tyrant and not an Induâ—gent mother to her Children members THE SAME PROVED FROM Arguments drawne from Reason CHAP. X. TO passe froÌ„ the authority of Gods sacred word his holy church the Auncient Fathers the pillars thereof touching the nature of Heresy and Heretiks as also touching the vnity and Infallibility of the same church and the persons disincorporated separated from it from all which heads it hath been euidently euicted that a man obstinatly defending any one Errour in faith and Religion cannot expect saluation It now remaynes that the same be made euident euen by force of reason that therby all men enioying the faculty of reason may the more easily subscribe to so vndeniable a veritie say with the Psalmist heerin (i) Psa 91. Testimonia tua credibilia facta sunt nimis Well then the first and cheifest reason is taken from the causes of true fayth