because the verities therein contained are necessary to be belieued for this very necessity you cannot belieue but by belieuing aforehand the Scripture but contrarily you may reiect the verities themselues if you be not preobliged to belieue the diuine authority of the bookes wherein they are contained 5. Againe you say that Scripture is the only Rule of Christian Fayth (e) Cap. 2 per totum yet it is not necessary to Saluation to belieue it to be a rule of Fayth no nor to be the Word of God The first part of this doctrine is the scope of your whole second Chapter The second is taught purposely and at large in the same Chapter (f) Pag. 116. pag. 116. n. 159. Ioyne these two assertions and the Conclusion will be That we are not obliged to receiue that which is the only ordinary meanes of attayning Christian Fayth namely the Scriptures And therefore in the ordinary way we cannot be bound to imbrace Christian Fayth seeing it cannot be compassed without the meanes to attaine to it For how can one be obliged to attayne an end and yet be left free to reiect the only meanes of atchieuing that end I am the freer to make this question because you concurre with me in the answere when you say (g) Pag. 16. It was necessary that God by his prouidence should preserue the Scripture from any vndiscernable corruption in those things which he would haue knowne otherwise it is apparent it had not been his will that these things should be knowne the only meanes of continuing the Knowledge of them being perished Now is it not in effect all one whether the Scripture haue perished or whether it be preserued if in the meane time we be not bound to belieue that it is the Rule of Fayth and word of God Nay seeing as things now stand we may find the verityes contayned in Scripture sufficiently expressed in innumerable other bookes we may at this present in conformity to your doctrine reiect all the holy Scripture contenting our selues with the contents thereof taken from other Authors and not from the writers of the Bible 6. The Doctrine which he carryeth through his whole Booke but particularly insisteth vpon in his third Chapter that we cannot learne from Scripture it selfe that it is Canonicall but only from Tradition of men deliuering it from hand to hand is no lesse iniurious and derogatiue to holy Scripture then the former speaking of men in his sense that is not as endued with any infallible assistance of the holy Ghost which Catholicks belieue of the Church but only as wise or many men or for the like human qualifications for to this effect he sayth (h) Pag. 72. n. 51. Tradition is a principle not in Christianity but in Reason not praper to Christians but common to all men This is certainly the right course to blast the Authority of holy Scripture not to maintaine it For besides that which I haue touched already that by this meanes we are not so certaine of Scripture as of profane bookes he must come at length to resolue the beliefe of Scripture into the Tradition or Authority of Pagans Iewes Turkes or condemned Hereticks as well as of true Christiās For seeing errours against fayth or Heresies cannot in his principles be discerned but by Scriptures before they be receaued the testimony of one man concerning the admittance of them must weigh as much as of another and be considered only as prooceeding from a number of men be they faythfull or Infidels true Christians or condemned Hereticks 7. And further according to the same principles he must acknowledge that he belieueth some parts of Canonicall Scripture with a more firme assent then others to wit as they haue been deliuered with more or lesse generall consent or haue been more or lesse once questioned which is to depriue Canonical Scripture of all Authority For if once we giue way to more or lesse in the behalfe of Gods word we shall end in nothing And this hath the more force in this mans doctrine who professeth that the greatest certainty which he hath of any part of Scripture is within the compasse of probability What certainty then shall those Scriptures haue which participate of that probability in a lesse and lesse degree according as they haue been deliuered with different tradition and consent How this doctrine will sound in the eares of all true Christians I leaue to be considered contenting my selfe to oppose your Assertion with the discourse of D. King afterward Bishop of London in the beginning of his first Lecture vpon Ionas where amongst other things he sayes Comparisons betwixt Scripture and Scripture are both odious and daungerous The Apostles names are euenly placed in the writings of the holy foundation With an vnpartiall respect haue the children of Christs family from time to time receiued reuerenced imbraced the whole volume of Scriptures You on the other side speake in a different strayne and say thus (i) Pag. 67. n. 36. I may belieue euen those questioned Bookes to haue been written by the Apostles and to be Canonicall but I cannot in reason belieue this of them so vndoubtedly as of those bookes which were neuer questioned And elswhere The Canon of Scripture (k) Pag. 69. n. 45. as we receiue it is built vpon vniuersall Tradition For we do not professe our selues so absolutly and vndoubtedly certaine neither do we vrge others to be so of those Bookes which haue byn doubted as of those which neuer haue By this meanes what will become of the Epistle of S. Iames the second Epistle of S. Peter the second and third of S. Iohn the Epistle to the Hebrewes and the Apocalyps of S. Iohn And what part of Scripture hath not been questioned by some and those some so many as would haue made vs doubt of the works of Tully or Liuy c. if they had affirmed them not to haue been written by such Authours And the only doubting of Erasmus or some such other about the workes of some Fathers hath caused them to be questioned by diuers vpon much weaker grounds as difference of stiles or the like 8. In another place you tell vs (l) Pag. 68. n. 43. that to receiue a Booke for Canonicall it is inough to haue had attestation though not vniuersall yet at least sufficient to make considering men receiue them for Canonicall which were sometimes doubted of by some yet whose number and authority was not so great as to preuaile against the contrary suffrages Obserue vpon what inextricable passages and lesse degrees of probability this man doth put vs in our beliefe of holy Scripture First we must settle our Fayth on men then on considering men though the consent be not vniuersall thirdly vpon the greater and more preualent number and authority of suffrages as if the greater number alone without infallible assistance of the holy Ghost were a sufficient ground for Christian Fayth You deny pag.
knew to be such so in this place his owne Iudgment touching some things which God had not particularly reuealed vnto him This doctrine is subiect to the same iust exceptions which were alleadged against the former For if once we deny vniuersall infallibility to the Apostles we cannot belieue them with infallibility in any one thing but still we may be doubting whether they speake out of their owne spirit and not by diuine Reuelation though they should euen declare in what sort they intend to speake because we may feare they are deceiued in those very declarations And as you will perhaps say they write Diuine Reuelations except in things which they professe to deliuer as the Dictates of human human reason and prudence another will say that they must or may be vnderstood to deliuer the dictats of human reason and prudence whensoeuer they do not in expresse rearmes professe to deliuer diuine Reuelations which is very seldome the ordinary custome of holy Scripture being to deliuer verityes without any such qualifying of them And if S. Paul when in the Epistle and Chapter by you cited v. 40. sayes of himselfe I thinke that I also haue the spirit of God might be deceiued in that thought of his we may also say he might be deceiued euen when he affirmes that he writes by the spirit of God and much more may we doubt when he expresses no such thing as commonly neither he nor any other Canonicall writers doe 6. In the words which you cite To the rest speake I not the Lord S. Paul treates of a very important matter that is of the wiues departing from her husband or the husbands from his wife Wherein if S. Paul were subiect to errour he might chance to haue taught a point of great Iniustice against the commaund of our Sauiour declaring the very Law of nature What God hath ioyned togeather let not man separate (s) Mat. 19.6 And as for the words you alleadge in the second place Concerning virgins I haue no commandment of our Lord but I deliuer my Iudgment the Apostle afterwards within the compasse of the selfe same discourse sayes that a man sinnes not if he marry wherin if S. Paul may be deceiued as speaking out of his owne spirit as you say he doth in some precedent words you will not only want this text to prooue with certainty that marriage is lawfull but whensoeuer marriage is allowed in any other place of Scripture as Hebr. 13. v. 4. Marriage is honourable in all you haue put into the mouthes of the old and moderne heretiques who impugned the lawfullnes of marriage a ready answere that those texts of Scripture were but the Dictats of human reason and prudence wherein the writers of Canonicall Scripture might be deceiued 7. The other words Speake I not the Lord shew only that our Sauiour left power for the Apostles and his Church to aduise counsaile ordaine or commaund some things as occasion might require which himselfe had not commaunded or determined in particular which truth if you hold to be only a Dictate of human reason you open a way for refractary spirits to oppose the ordinances of their Superiours and Prelats in things not expressely commaunded by our Lord. 8. The last Words v. 25. Concerniug virgins I haue no commandment of the Lord but I deliuer my Iudgment which we translate but I giue counsaile prooue indeed our Catholicke Doctrine concerning workes of supererogation or Counsayles in regard that the Apostle in this place persuades virginity as the better but commaunds it not as necessary Yet they do in no wise imply any doubtfulnesse or fallibility in the Apostles neuer any hitherto besides your selfe offering to answere our argumeÌ„t by saying the Apostle wrote only the dictate of human reason or prudence and so might be deceiued Which answere had been very obuious if they had presumed to be so bold as you are with the Apostles and therefore it is a signe that no man besides your selfe durst deliuer this doctrine 9. Certainly if the Apostles did sometimes write by the motion of the holy Ghost and at other times out of their owne priuate Iudgment or spirit though it were granted that themselues could discerne the diuersity of those motions or spirits which one may easily deny if their vniuersall infallibility be once impeached yet it is cleere that others to whom they spake or wrote could not discerne the diuersity of those spirits in the Apostles For which cause learned Protestants acknowledge that although ech mans priuate spirit were admitted for direction of himselfe yet it were not vsefull for teaching others Thus you say pag. 141. A supernaturall assurance of the incorruption of Scripture may be an assurance to ones selfe but no argument to another And as you affirme (t) Pag. 62. that bookes that are not Canonicall may say they are and those that are so may say nothing of it so we cannot be assured that the Apostles deliuer diuine Reuelations though they should say they doe nor that they deliuer not such Reuelations though they say nothing thereof if once we deny their vniuersall infallibility 10. Now I beseech the good Reader to reflect vpon this mans endeauours to ouerthrow the holy Scriptures and Christianity and to what at last he tends by these degrees First he sayth our beliefe that Scripture is the word of God exceedes not probability 2. Amongst those Bookes which we belieue to be the word of God we belieue some with lesse probability then others Thirdly we may be saued though we neither belieue that Scripture is the Rule of Fayth nor that it is the word of God Fourthly our assurance that Scripture or any other Booke is corrupted is of the same kind and condition both only morall assurances Fifthly the writers of holy Scripture might erre in things which they deliuered not constantly or not as diuine Reuelations but dictates of human reason or if they deliuered any doctrine not confirmed by miracles Sixtly vpon the same ground he might say that the Apostles were infallible only when they deliuered things belonging to Fayth Piety or Religion not when they wrote things meerely indifferent or of no great moment in themselues as some Socinians (u) Volkel l. 5. c. 5. Dom. Lopez de Authorit sac Script eyther grant or care not much to deny And then further it will be left to euery mans iudgement what is to be accounted a matter of moment And soone after it will be said that to search whether the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity for example be contained in Scripture or no is not much necessary since a man without knowledge of that speculatiue doctrine may belieue and loue God as a chiefe Socinian teaches (w) Iren. Philâ—leth dissertatione de Pace Ecclesiae and your selfe affirme (x) Pag. 37. that any Fayth if it worke by loue shall certainly auaile with God and be accepted of him And then will some say Why may not a
I cannot perceiue some fallacy in my reasons against it or neuer hereafter open your mouth in defence of it I answere it seemes to me that your reasons are already sufficiently prooued to be fallacyes since from them either nothing can be deduced for your purpose or else you must acknowledge your selfe to haue no certainty that there is a God that vertue is to be imbraced or that Christian Fayth is euen probable 7. And yet I adde that you must in another respect also solue your owne obiections Remember these your words (zz) Pag. 36.37 Yet all This I say not as if I doubted that the spirit of God being implored by deuout and humble prayer and sincere obedience may and will by degrees aduance his seruants higher and giue them a certainty of adherence beyond their certainty of euidence And elswhere (a) Pag. 112. Gods spirit if he please may work more a certainty of adherence beyond certainty of euidence Now you caÌ„not deny but that these men may be tempted against their Fayth by inuoluntary doubting that they may increase in it that they may commit some deliberat sinne and may make daily progresse in Charity and good workes euen by the greater increase of their Fayth and yet you graunt them a certainty of adherence beyond their certainty of euidence And so in this case your selfe must answere your owne arguments and confesse them to be but fallacies Euen your maine reason that Christian Fayth can be endued with no stronger certainty then the probable motiues on which it relyes by this selfe same instance is proued a Sopbisme For now you grant a certainty of Fayth not without probable arguments of credibility yet not for them it being more certaine then they are and therefore you are still put vpon a necessity of answering your owne arguments And whereas pag. 330. you make a shew of answering this particuler obiection really you do not answere but plainly contradict your self labouring to prooue that it is impossible that there should be a certainty of adherence beyond the certainty of euidence as the Reader may cleerly see and shall be demonstrated in due time 8. One thing more I must not let passe and it is That whereas you say We would fayne haue Christian Fayth belieued to be infallible that there might be some necessity of our Churches infallibility it seemes you are apt inough to yield infallibility to Gods Church if once it be granted that Christian Fayth is infallible And with good reason For seeing you teach that vniuersall Tradition and other arguments of credibility cannot produce an infallible beliefe of holy Scripture and of the mysteries belieued by Christians it must follow that some other infallible meanes must be found out for the propounding to vs the holy Scriptures which other infallible meanes euen according to your persuasion being not Scripture it selfe nor euery mans priuate spirit there remaynes only the authority of the Catholicke Church which as an instrument of the holy Ghost may be an infallible propounder both of Scripture and all diuine verities Wherein there is a large difference betweene the Church and other Iudges These in their sentences or determinations intend not to deliuer points of infallible Fayth as the Church must intend and do it if once it be granted that from her we must receiue holy Scriptures and belieue them with a certaine and infallible assent of Christian Fayth The second Doctrine Chap. 3. That the assurance which we haue of Scriptures is but morall CHAP. III. 1. THis man magnifies holy Scriptures in many places as the only thing on which he relyes his Saluation but whosoeuer shall walke along with him from place to place marke well his wayes will find that they lead to the quite contrary and shew that he neither doth value them to their right worth nor doth lay any other grounds but such as are more apt to breed disesteeme then esteeme of them This may be seene in that he teacheth (b) Pag. 141. 62. That our assurance that the Scripture hath been preserued from any materiall alteration and that any other booke of any profance writer is incorrupted is of the same kind and condition both morall assurances 2. If this may be allowed it must necessarily follow that the assurance which we haue of Scripture must in degree be much inferiour to the assurance which we haue of such bookes of prophane Authors as haue a more full testimony and tradition of all sorts of men to wit Atheists Pagans Iewes Turkes Christians wheras the bookes holy Scripture are either vnknowne or impugned by all except ChristiaÌ„s by some also who would beare of Christians and consequently the morall assurance of them and of the incorruptednesse of them is the much the lesse and of lesse morall credit And by so same reason whosoeuer builds vpoÌ„ this mans grouÌ„ds cannot haue so great assurance that there was a Iesus Christ that he had disciples and much lesse that he wrought wonderous things and lesse then this that those wonders were true miracles as that there was a Coesar Alexander Pompey c. or that they fought such battailes and the like For these things descend to vs by a more vniuersall tradition then the former (c) Pag. 116. Do not your selfe speake thus We haue as great reason to belieue there was such a man as Henry the Eight King of England as that Iesus Christ suffered vnder Pontius Pilate You should haue said we haue greater reason to belieue it if we consult humane inducements only and consequently if Christian Fayth be not absolutely infallible euen aboue the motiues of credibility we are more certaine that there was a King Henry then a Iesus Christ A thing which no true Christian can heare without detestation 3. That which followes out of the same 116. page is of the like nature laying a ground for vn wary people to reiect Scripture For hauing spoken of some barbarous Nations that belieued the doctrine of Christ and yet belieued not the Scripture to be the word of God (d) Pag. 116. for they neuer heard of it and Fayth comes by hearing you adde these words Neither doubt I but if the bookes of Scripture had byn proposed to them by the other parts of the Church where they had been before receiued and had been doubted of or euen reiected by thâ—se barbarous nations but still by the bare beliefe and practise of Christianity they might be saued God requiring of vs vnder paine of damnation only to belieue the verities therein contained and not the diuine authority of the bookes wherein they are contained 4. If this be granted why might not any Church haue reiected the Scriptures being proposed by other parts of the Church And why may not we do so at this day Nay seeing de facto we know the verities of Christian Fayth by Scripture only according to your doctrine we cannot be obliged to belieue the Scriptures
Catholique then from Catholique to Protestant then about againe to Catholique till at last he be come to that passe that it is hard to say What he is neyther Precisian nor Subscriber to the 39. Articles nor confessed Socinian nor right Christian according to the grounds which he hath layd If you will belieue himselfe for matters of Religion he is constant in nothing but in following that way to heauen which for the present seemes to him the most probable He followes that which at the present seemes most probable A poore comfort in matters of Fayth wherin errour is of so great consequence And yet this cold comfort is vpon the point of being lost for the probability is limited to the present 2. Would any man thinke that in matters of this nature and after so much profession that he is now satisfied he should (i) Pref. n. 2. professe himselfe still to haue a Trauellers indifferency most willing to be led by reason to any way or from it And accordingly to tell vs (k) Pref. n. 1. That had there been represented to his vnderstanding such Reasons for our Doctrine as would haue made our Religion more credible then the contrary certainly he should haue despised the shame of one more alteration with both armes and all his hart most readily haue imbraced it Such was the preparation which he brought to the reading of that Booke comming with such a mind to the reading of it as S. Austin before he was a setled Catholique brought to his conference with Faustus the Manichee Did S. Austin after he was a setled Catholicke come with the like disposition to conference with any Heretique or mis belieuer To what purpose then doth this man bring S. Austin here but to shew the difference betwixt the Fayth of one that is a Catholicke and of one that is not the difference I say in point of adhesion to his Fayth the Catholicke belieuing so assuredly that he may say with the Apostle If we or an Angell from heauen euangelize (l) Gal. 1. ◠to you besides that which we haue euangelized to you be he Anathema Others not being able euer to be certaine of what they belieue because they build vpon grounds which by their owne confession are not certaine and infallible 3. In which respect also it may be iustly wondred with what sense this man taking vpon him to be a guide to others and to leade them a sofe way to heauen professeth himselfe not to be setled in his way and stil to haue not only a (m) Prof. n. 2. Trauellers but an Ignorant Trauellers Indifferency willing to be led to any way or from it because he knowes not whether he be right or wrong otherwise if he know himselfe to be right certainly it were not his part to be so willing to be led to any way or from it which giues me hope that no man of iudgment and timorous conscience will aduenture the eternall saluation of his soule vpon the writings or Doctrine of one who is so vnsetled whom he either knowes not where to find or how long to keep in any one opinion or profession to whom the words of S. Bernard (n) Ep. 193. concerning Petrus Abailardus who taught that Fayth was but opinion may be applyed Homo sibi dissimilis est totus ambiguus He is a man who disagrees euen from himselfe wholely composed of doubtings I leaue out his middle words intus Herodes foris Ioannes 4. One thing certainly people would be very glad to know that whereas he maintaines that his Alterations were the most satisfactory actions to himselfe (o) Pag. 303. that euer he did and the greatest victories that euer he obtained ouer himselfe Men I say would be glad to know vpon what new and great Motiues these most satisfactory actions greatest victoryes were ouer throwne againe and frequent changes grounded For his first being Catholicke we haue Motiues in writing vnder his owne hand and now in print But what new reasons mooued him to forsake vs this would people willingly know If he had no better reasons then be the answers to his owne Motiues I scarcely belieue that any iudicious Protestant will allow the alteration to haue been good diuers of them being against Protestants themselues and some repugnant to all Christianity as may be well seene by the effects which they haue wrought in him to wit so much vnsetlednesse in beliefe and Religion that he knowes not to this day what he would be at But we may well suppose that as he willingly leaues all men to their liberty prouided that they improue it not to a Tyranny ouer others so he reserues the like liberty to himselfe and is in fine resolued to belieue whatsoeuer for the present doth seeme most probable to him and so liuing in perpetuall Indifferency be an example to others to be constant in no profession which is as good as to be of no Religion The tenth Doctrine Prouides for the impunity preseruation of whatsoeuer damnable errour against Christian Fayth CHAP. XI 1. HE is no lesse prouidēt to conserue then industrious to beget Vnchristian errours Atheismes Suppose an Orthodoxe Belieuer fall first into damnable Heresies then to Turcisme or Iudaisme afterward to Paganisme and finally to Atheisme Let him freely speake his mind to the learned and vnlearned to high and low to the Laity and Clergy to all sorts of persons Let him haue swarmes of followers let Circumcision be reduced the Saturday obserued for Sunday with Iewes or Friday with the Turkes and in confirmation of these sacrileges let Bookes be written What remedy Must these things be tolerated in a Christian Common wealth or Kingdome with resentment of a Christian Prince in despite of Christian Prelates vnder the eyes of Christian Deuines in the midst of Christian people They must be suffered if we belieue this mans doctrine (p) Pag. 297. that no man ought to be punished for his opinions in Religion We are willing sayth he to leaue all men to their liberty prouided they will not improue it to a Tyrāny ouer others (q) Pag. 179. n. 81. a good meanes to preserue euery one in his liberty without feare of punishment And the contrary persuasion and practise what is it It well becomes them who haue their portions in this life who serue no higher state then that of England or Spayne or France who thinke of no other happinesse but the preseruation of their owne fortunes and tranquillity in this world who thinke of no other meanes to preserue States but human power Machiauillian Policy How daungerous to Church euen to State this pernicious errour is and what encouragement it giues for vnquiet persons to oppose Authority and how deepely it taxes England other Protestant Churches of Machiauillian Policy and to be men who haue their portions in this life who serue no higher State then that of England or Spayne or France who thinke
sometimes appeare true and other times false which diuersity of iudgments you must according to this your doctrine follow euen against any point confirmed by miracles if it chance to seeme not true to your vnderstanding which is the part and proper disposition of a Socinian The fifth Doctrine Chap. 6. By resoluing Fayth into Reason he destroyes the nature of Fayth and beliefe of all Christian verityes CHAP. VI. 1. THe source whence all the aforesaid and innumerable other pernicious sequels do follow Gentle Reader is that according to this mans doctrine Christian Fayth must be resolued into the euidence of naturall reason not as preparing or inducing vs to belieue but as the maine ground strongest pillar of our Fayth and in a word as the conclusion depends on the premises And to this purpose he builds much vpon this axiome (h) Pag. 36. n. 8. We cannot possibly be more certaine of the conclusion then of the weaker of the premises as a riuer will not rise higher then the fountaine from which it flowes Hence in the same place he deduceth that the certainty of Christian Fayth can be but morall and not absolutely infallible With this principle is connexed another vnlesse you will call it the same more expressely declared and applyed And it is this If vpon reasons seeming to my vnderstanding very good I haue made choyce of a Guide or Rule for my direction in matters of Fayth when afterward I discouer that this Guide or Rule leades me to belieue one or more points which in the best iudgment that I can frame I haue stronger reasons to reiect then I had to accept my former Rule I may and ought to forsake that Rule as false erroneous otherwise I should be conuinced not to follow reason but some setled resolution to hold fast whatsoeuer I had once apprehended What followes from this vast principle but that if holy Scripture for example propound things seeming more euidently cōtrary to reason or my opinion more plainly contradicting one another then the inducements which first mooued me to belieue Scripture were strong conuincing I must reiect the Scripture as an erroneous Rule and adhere to my owne Reason and discourse as my last and safest guide This certainly doth follow Especially if we remember another principle that the motiues for which we belieue holy Scripture are only probable for so they must in all equity giue place to reasons seeming demonstratiue conuincing as there will not want many such against the high misteries of Christian Fayth if once we professe that our assent to them must be resolued into naturall discourse How farre dissonant this is from the receiued persuasion and tenet of all Christians that their Fayth is not resolued into Reason but Authority it is easy to see by the effects For why do Socinians and such like deny the misteryes of the Blessed Trinity the Deity of our Blessed Sauiour and diuers other verityes of Christian Fayth but because they seeme manifestly repugnant to reason 2. It cannot be doubted but that any one to whom the saluation of his owne soule is deare will be wary in admitting doctrines deliuered in a Booke if with Truth it may be affirmed that the Author in point of beliefe is certainly no good Christian as one who denyes the Diuinity of Christ our Lord and the most Blessed Trinity which are misteryes most proper to Christian Fayth and most hatefull to Iewes and Turkes For what authority can he challenge with any iudicious Christian in matters concerning Fayth who confessedly erres in the prime articles of Christian Fayth as we feare euen a sound man if we thinke he come from the pest-house and none will trust the Diuell though transfigured into an Angell of light For which cause spirituall men bid vs examine not only what motions we find in our soule but also from what roote they proceed 3. I wil not take vpō me to say what you are or what you are not but in matters cōcerning articles of fayth we ought to speak plainly You tell vs (i) Praefat n. 5. that you belieue the Doctrine of the Trinity the Deity of our Sauiour and all other supernaturall verityes reuealed in Scripture The question is not whether you belieue some kind of Trinity nor whether our Sauiour be God in some sense by participation as Dauid sayes I haue said you are Gods Psal 81.6 and in that sense that they are contayned in Scripture But the question is whether you belieue those misteryes as they are generally belieued by Christians and expressed euen in the 39. Articles of the English Church or whether you belieue that in this sense they are reuealed in Scripture Be pleased then to declare your selfe whether you belieue that in the Godhead there be three Persons of one substance Power and Eternity the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost as is taught in the first article And then whether you belieue the second Article wherein is said The Sonne which is the word of the Father the very and eternall God of one substance with the Father tooke mans nature in the wombe of the Blessed Virgin of her substance So that two whole and perfect natures that is to say the Godhead and Manhood were ioyned togeather in one Person neuer to be deuided whereof is one Christ very God and very Man Thirdly whether you firmely belieue the contents of the fifth Article The holy Ghost proceeding from the Father and the sonne is of one substance Maiesty and Glory with the Father and the sonne very eternall God If these demaunds seeme harsh blame your selfe who were forewarned euen before that which they call the Direction was published when it was in your power to haue freed your selfe from this trouble and secured others from the scandall which your Booke may giue Neither are these questions from the matter but consequent to principles deliuered in your Booke 4. And let no man wonder that I desire plaine dealing For I haue seene a Socinian Catechisme in print which at first grants that Christ is God but then to the question whether he haue the diuine Nature it answers No because forsooth that is a thing repugnant both to Scripture and Reason It is apparent that the Socinians agree with the Manicheans that Fayth is resolued into Reason and that the Manicheans maintained a most strict brotherhood with the Priscillianists who taught that it is lawfull to dissemble a mans Fayth euen by oath For their saying was Iura periura secretum prodere noli And Arius who denied the Diuinity of our Sauiour Christ made no bones to forsweare himselfe by a profession of Fayth contrary to his internall beliefe And whether any one who is esteemed a Socinian do not hold it lawfull to deny or speake ambiguously against what he belieues that so in a very peruerse sense he may with the Apostle become all to all it is likely you know better then another can tell you 5. Howsoeuer
euery one doth now expect that both for these and other manifest errours mentioned in that litle Booke of Direction you openly declare your selfe it being not sufficient to say as you do in a generall confused manner (k) Pref. n. 28. Whosoeuer teaches or holdes them let him be Anathema For this vniuersality or collection of errours in a confused sort leaues an euasion to make good your speach if you reiect but any one of those errours through withall you imbrace the rest And therefore to acquit your credit and to take away scandal it were your part to renounce ech one in particular For if in any occasion certainly in this silence ought to be interpreted a confession of the said errours S. Hierome is of this mind when he sayes (l) Ep. 75. adu Vigilantium Nolo in suspicione Haereseos quemquam esse patientem ne apud eos qui ignorant innocentiam eius disâ—imulatio conscientia iudicetur si taceat It you be not guilty I do you a singular fauour in giuing you this fayre and sit occasion to wipe of that publicke staine which report hath cast on you and wherof you haue not only giuen too great occasion by your owne words in frequent Conferences but now by your writings which being published after the Direction demonstrates how deeply Socinian errours are rooted both in your iudgment affection which could not be abated either by priuate aduise or publicke admonition 6. But to returne from this necessary digression This your resoluing Fayth into naturall Reason giues occasion for others at least if your selfe be guiltlesse to deny the Diuinity of our Sauiour Christ and consequently to deny that he redeemed mankind by his Death which if he be not true God had beene O blasphemy not a price for our Redemption but a punishment rather of his either vsurping the name of the true Sonne of God or at least for giuing men cause to belieue he did so These I grant are harsh inferences and yet you cannot auoyd them so long as you limit Christian Fayth to probabilities and resolue solue these into naturall discourse as the conclusion into the premises And giue me leaue to say you do but dissemble to circumuent an vnwary Reader when you say (m) Pref. n. 12. that you submit all other reasons to this one God hath sai so Therefore it is true For you conceale the maine point which is that you cannot know that God hath said so except by motiues of credibility which can produce only a probable assent and this must yield to the contrary if it seeme euident by conuincing arguments as Socinians conceiue their reasons against the Blessed Trinity and the Deity of our Sauiour Christ to be The like I say of other high misteryes of Christian Fayth and still must conclude that vnder colour of vphoulding your cause you ouerthrow Christianity The sixth Doctrine Chap. 7. Destructiue of the Theologicall Vertues of Christian Hope and Charity CHAP. VII 1. THe grounds which he hath layd for the ouerthrow of Christian Fayth doe by consequence ouerthrowe also Christian Hope and Charity and bring them downe to the ranke of ordinary Morall vertues But not content with this he hath other passages in which he strikes more neere the roote and deliuers doctrines which tend immediatly to the destruction of them It is sayth he (n) Pag. 368. against reason and experience that by the commission of any deadly sinne the Habit of Charity is quite extirpated Reason and experience are his Guides you see in all the most supernaturall businesses of our soules Reason and experience as it seemes do tell him that euen when he is committing a mortal sinne that is infringing the commaundment of God in a matter of weight and moment and in effect saying I will not serue him he is not withstanding in Christian Charity with him and his humble seruant Christian Charity as all Christians are taught is a supernaturall infused Habit whereby we doe loue and preferre God before all things and are habitually inclined to it When we do not preferre him before all things but turne our selues to Creatures by some ouerweeing affection to them that act of commission or omission if it be as I said Mortall is not only to be considered as an Act but as an Act killing the soule and bereauing it of the life thereof that is of Charity whereby only we liue in God and consequently the Infused Habit of Charity ceaseth in vs howsoeuer we may find by experience some inclination still to loue God either by some repetition of former acts of our owne or raysed by some consideration represented to vs. 2. This is the doctrine receiued amoÌ„gst Christians which I do not now vndertake to dispute and declare at large but reserue it for a larger worke my intent in this being only to point out the heades from whence very ill consequences must needes follow that people may take heed of them and not be too greedy of such nouelties least togeather with them they sucke their euerlasting bane For to goe no further to what passe would this one doctrine bring a Commonwealth or Kingdome if it were receaued Certainly to all licentiousnesse and liberty For if deadly sinne may consist with the Habit of Charity much more with the Habit of Fayth and Hope And it being certain amoÌ„g Christians that God will damne no man in whose soule he beholds the precious gemmes of these three Theologicall vertues Fayth Hope and Charity it will be concluded that deadly sinne vnrepented cannot exclude a man from Heauen An errour most pernicious and to be banished the thoughts of euery Christian Man 3. For the vertue of Hope if I vnderstand him right he sometimes destroyes it by Presumption with ouermuch largenesse and sometimes turnes it to Desperation by denying sinners a possibility to be saued euen with the best repentaÌ„ce that they can haue In proofe of too much largenesse it will be sufficient to alleadge words wherin he speakes thus to Catholicks (o) Pag. 32. This pretense of yours that Contrition will serue without actuall Confession but Attrition will not is a nicety or phansy or rather to giue it the true name a deuise of your owne to serue ends and purposes God hauing no where declared himselfe but that wheresoeuer he will accept of that repentance which you are pleased to call Contrition he will accept of that which you call Attrition For though he like best the bright-flaming Holocaust of Loue yet he reiects not the smoaking flame of that repentance if it be true and effectuall which proceeds from Hope and Feare Heere he is very large and against all good Diuinity will needes haue an Act proceeding from Hope or Feare to be a sufficient and proportionable disposition to the noblest of the three Theologicall vertues Charity Among Protestant Deuines there want not some who are so farre from belieuing that sorrow arising from Feare of Hell is sufficient