Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
book_n deny_v election_n great_a 14 3 2.1254 3 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A10908 The Protestant Church existent, and their faith professed in all ages, and by whom with a catalogue of councels in all ages, who professed the same. Written, by Henry Rogers D.D. prebendary of Hereford. Rogers, Henry, ca. 1585-1658. 1638 (1638) STC 21178; ESTC S116092 131,830 215

There are 11 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Ferrara made by Marcus Bishop of Ephesus Sess 5. in a grave and learned speech recorded by your owne Surius in the fourth Tome of Councels imprinted at Colonia Agrippina Anno 1567. Definitiones Decreta aliarum omnium Synodorum recitanda nobis videntur ut haec nostra Synodus non solum ab illis non discrepare verumetiam ipsas in omnibus imitari velle videatur quoniam nos firmiter credimus majores nostros nil prorsus silentio praeterjiffe quod ad nostrum fidei Symbolum spectet Marcus Ephesinus in Generali 8. Synodo Sess 3. apud Surium Tom. 3. Pag. 375. Porro autem quoniam de Divinis primi ac alterius Concilii dogmatibus nil aliud reperitur nisi duae tantem fidei nostrae expositiones hoc est duo Symbola quae tamen pro uno a caeteris Conciliis suscepta fuerant idcirco à recitandis tertii Concilii gestis auspicandum nobis censemus vobis probare promittimus Christianorum omnium unam esse Catholicam fidem ad quam accessionem aliquem fieri aut quicquam ab ea non liceat auferri In primis ergo Nicenum Symbolum à trecentis decem octo Patribus Niceae celebratum recitetur Legatur etiam ejusdem Concilii definitio ut idem Nicenum Symbolum immutabile ac immobile permaneret neminique fas esset aliam fidem proferre Sess 5. Quartum Concilium viz. Ephesinum definit atque determinat ut aliam fidem conscribere aut componere aut sentire aut docere liceat nemini Concilium 5. viz. Constantinopol idem definit qui aliud Symbolum docuissent anathemati subjiciunt Sic etiam 6. Concilium seu Trullanum priora Concilia dictum Symbolum amplectitur obsignat Sic etiam 7. ac ultimum generale Concilium Hactenus Marcus Ephes ibidem Ab anno 800. ad 900. 1. Theodotus Melissenus 2. Iohannes Sixtus 3. Photius All these three were Patriarchs of Constantinople as is acknowledged by Baronius an 835. n. 25. All zealous adversaries to your worshipping of Images for which Baronius there calleth the first Haereticum Iconoclastam an haereticall Image-breaker The second Haeresis promulgatorem acerrimum The third namely Photius held a Councell at Constantinople planè numerosum admodum Concilium it was a very full Councell in so much as Michael the Emperour gloried that it equalled the number of the Fathers of the great Nicen Councell teste Baron an 861. n. 1. This was accounted a Generall Councell by Photius and by Theodorus Balsamon Comenting upon it Sic ait Baron ibid. n. eodem In this Councell was condemned the worshipping of Images Ab anno 900. ad 1000. Nilus Calaber Habuit hoc saeculo Graeca Ecclesia duos doctrina sanctitate illustres Nilum Calabrum Niconem Lacedemon Baron an 900. n. 8. Nico. Lacedemon Hic non à Graecis solum sed etiam à Latinis inter Sanctos est relatus Baron an 961. Ab anno 1000. ad 1100. Simeon Armenus Vir Sanctus verae fidei Professor Baro. an 1016. n. 7. 8. Theophilactus Episcopus Bulgarorum He in his writings imitateth Saint Chrysostome but he is a Schismaticke saith Bellar. de scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis Ab anno 1100. ad an 1200. Euthimius Zigabenus who wrote against all Haeresies and upon the 4. Evangel Bellarm. de Scriptoribus Ecclesiae Theodorus Balsamon Who commented upon Photius his Nicene Canon and divers Councels He was an enemie to the Church of Rome saith Bellarm. Ab Anno 1200. ad 1300. Arsenius Patriarcha Constantin A man for vertue and the service of God not farre short of the highest perfection ut Nicephorus Gregor lib. 3. p. 31. edit Basiliensis an 1562. cum Caesarea Majest privilegiis Gregorius Patriarcha Idem Gregor l. 6 pag. 80. Ioannes Glices Patriarch also of Constantin a most learned grave wise man above all men Nicephorus Gregoras lib. 8. pag. 123. 132. Ab Anno 1300. ad 1400. Catechuzenus Pachimaerus Nicephorus Gregoras These three were Fathers of the 14 age saith Bzonius in the end of that age Tom. 13. in his Supplement of Baron his Ecclesiasticall History an 1299. They did teach contrary to the doctrine of the Haereticks so Baronius calleth us but I may truly say that the first and last of the three teach contrary to their faith and so the other professed or he could not be of the Greeke Church who deny the Popes primacie of power deny Purgatory Communicate in both kinds For Catechuzenus in the election of Iohn Bishop of Constantinople doth say that all Bishops of greater or lesser Cities receive equall grace Baronius addeth his owne Glosse saying True equall grace of Order not of Iurisdiction Nicephorus in his 10 booke disputeth at large against the Latine Church à pag. 230 ad finem ejusdem libri To. 6. Bibl. Sanct. pag. 99. Ep. ad lect To these I may adde Cabasilas whom together with Balsamon Genebrard calleth two famous Greeke Fathers for which words he is blamed by M. De la Bigne who calleth the same men Schismaticks and enemies to the Church of Rome Tom. 6. Bibl. Sanct. pag. 101. 102. Gentianus Hervetus another of your side doth write in defence of Cabasilas in his Preface to the Reader before Cabasilas his booke intituled A Compendious Interpretation upon the Divine Sacrifice extant dicto 6 Tom. Bibl. Sanctae pag. 159. But he is thus blamed by your De la Bigne Dealbat Aethiopem Gentianus labouring to excuse Cabasilas doth but wash a Blackamoore for it is manifest he was a Schismaticke that he burned with hatred against the Church of Rome and wrote an Haereticall Booke against Tho. Aquinas Yet he is placed by Bellarmine amongst his Ecclesiasticall Writers in a distinct Columne also of his Chronologie from Haereticks Ab Anno 1400 ad 1500. Marcus Ephesinus Insignis Theologus as hee is stiled in the Acts of the Councell of Florence Sessione 2. apud Surium Tom. 4. Laonicus Chalcondilas who being of the Greeke Church testifieth that the agreement made at Florence was not received in Greece lib. 1. de rebus Turcicis non longè à principio Thus have I finished my Catalogue of Greeke Writers having many more to insert if any just exception can be given against these I will conclude concerning them with these two Arguments the one to prove that they were of our Faith and Church the other to prove that they were not of the Roman Faith or Church thus All they that doe professe the Apostles Creed as it was explicated in the Nicene Councell that receive the Scriptures received by the Protestants that receive the foure first Generall Councels and the two Sacraments of Baptisme and the Eucharist under lawfull Pastors are of the Protestants Faith and Church But those Authors as all others of the Greeke Church did professe and receive the said Creed Scriptures Councels and Sacraments under lawfull Pastors Ergo They are of the Protestants Faith and Church The Proposition is A definitione ad
their society their own testimony not the testimony of God Vnlesse thou know thy selfe not in the word of cavelling people but in the testimonies of my Books In the Scriptures have wee learned to know Christ in the Scriptures have we learned to know his Church Wee have these Scriptures common to us both and why out of these doe not we hold Christ and his Church common to us both And againe Behold the Scripture common to both loe where wee have known Christ loe where we have known his Church Reflecting now upon what wee have cited out of this incomparable Father wee may observe how plainly how frequently how perseveringly he maintaineth that this Question concerning the Church may be proved plainly manifestly clearly out of Scripture That hee would not have men use Humane testimonie in this question and they which doe use Humane testimonies herein and not Divine stand upon uncertainties Aquin. 1. q. 1. art 8. Carbo to the same purpose the Schoolmen say That Humane reasons in hac doctrina non valent ad probandum are not of force to prove yet it useth Humane reason not to prove Faith and what it believeth but to declare other things as a forreine Argument and probable but it useth Divine Authorities as a proper and necessary Argument Secondly let us observe that this Father writing upon this Question so many Books as make more then halfe a great Tome yet never used any other Argument in those Bookes but Scripture hee never called upon his Adversaries to shew names of their Professors in all Ages nor did hee attempt that for himselfe but chose rather to cite the same Scriptures twenty times at least in severall Bookes of that subject out of which places I will collect two Arguments first desiring the Reader to observe That things expresly contained in Scriptures and things thence deduced are of a different nature these later inferior to those those are Principles these are but Conclusions those depend upon supernaturall light of Divine Revelation these Conclusions are grounded upon those Divine Principles which men apprehend by Faith and then doe search and find the illation and consequence of these Conclusions by the light of naturall reason improved by Industry and refined by Art I doe not say that I can shew in Scripture that the Protestants are the true Church which were to make it a point of Faith but out of Scriptures I can prove that the Protestants are a Church and so make it a Theologicall conclusion and the Arguments demonstrations because drawne out of the proper Principles of Theologie or Divinitie thus 1. Argument They who professe that Faith which was preached through the World are a true Christian Church But the Protestants holding the Apostles Creed and the doctrine of the Apostles doe professe that Faith which was preached through the World Ergo The Protestants are a true Christian Church 2. Argument They who hold Communion and acknowledge themselves to be a part of that Church which is dispersed through the World are a true Church But the Protestants doe hold Communion and acknowledge themselves to bee a part of that Church which is dispersed through the World Ergo The Protestants are a true Church Secondly out of the same Principles I will prove that the Church of Rome is not the Church as excluding all other Churches thus 1. Argument The Church doth professe that Faith which was preached and received through the World The Roman Church holding a new Creed of unwritten Traditions Transubstantiation worshipping of Images c. doe therein not professe that Faith which was preached and received through the World Ergo The Church of Rome is not the Church 2. Argument The Christian Church hath many more Children then the Church of the Iewes But the Romane Church hath not more Children then the Church of the Iewes Ergo The Roman Church is not the Christian Church The Major Saint Austine doth bring out of Scripture in those words The barren hath many more children then shee that hath an husband The Minor will appeare if we say unto these Romanist● as Saint Austine did to the Donatists Let them compare their multitude with the multitude of the Iewes dispersed over the world and they shall see how few they are in comparison of them the Iewes being by the calculation of the a Brirewood in his Enquiries most learned in Historie and Geographie as many as will people all Europe The Roman Church when it was entire being not much more then halfe Europe if so much and now having lost halfe that it was is farre lesse This I shall enlarge morefully hereafter when I shall come to maintaine my former Arguments Now I addresse my selfe to Master Fishers Replie CHAP. VI. Fisher Concerning M. Rogers his Answer to M. Fishers five Propositions BY this which hath been said against Master Bernard his Looke beyond Luther it may be easily seene that M. Rogers hath not sufficiently answered M. Fishers question aforesaid for with a bold audacitie he nameth for Protestants famously knowne Romane Catholikes to wit these Writers of the first seven hundred yeeres and amongst others even Saint Bede whose Writings and profession of life being a professed Romane Catholike Monke shew him to bee no Protestant Rogers I can see no such thing in what you have said against Mr. Bernard neither have you said any thing there which may touch me but you have the same in this your Treatise against me you have written not halfe a sheet in Reply to Mr. Bernards Booke of eight or nine sheets and yet you would have men see in your short Reply to him a Confutation also of what I have written I have read that Alexander the Great seeing a companie of Indian Apes marching along a Hils side tooke them to be an armie of Enemies but when he came neere he found them to be as they were poore silly fearfull Apes that ran into the woods to hide themselves Hee that thinkes hee seeth in your Reply to Mr. Bernard a confutation of him or me is as much mistaken as Alexander was in the Apes the reason is hee looketh a farre off as Alexander did when hee tooke them for armed men but hee that commeth neere unto your Writings vieweth and examineth them diligently shall find that there is no armie there are no armed men no sword no weapon no Scripture no reason to wound us You strout and stalke a farre off but when wee draw neere you flye into the thickets of some darke speeches ambiguous phrases aequivocating termes like those Liguranes quos major aliquantò labor erat invenire quam vincere It is more labour to find you out then to conquer you Mr. Bernard I doubt not is able to answer any thing that you have objected unto him if he think such poore objections of yours to be worthy of any Reply I wil addresse my selfe unto what you object unto mee you say that I have not sufficiently answered Mr. Fishers
Romane Church may give testimonie against you and for me Caiphas even then when he persecuted Christ might prophesie truly of Christ Pilate who did crucifie Christ did write that of Christ which was true viz. that hee was King of the Iewes Matthew Paris was a member of the Romane Church who said that your Church did never reject any that came unto her if they brought white or red with them Silver or Gold This member of the Roman Church said that a principall member viz. That Pope Gregorie the seventh did confesse on his death-bed that by the instigation of the devill hee had troubled the world yet this was such a member as that Innocentius the fourth Matthew Paris the then Pope vvrote of him that hee vvas vir probatae vitae Religioris expertae Such a Writer as that Baronius giveth this testimony of him Take away from his Booke his calumnies Anno 996. n. 63 64. invectives taunts and blasphemies against the Apostolick See often repeated and you vvill say it is a golden Commentarie taken vvord by vvord out of the publike Records and very vvell compiled together Thus farre Baronius As if a man should except against a vvitnesse and say you must not believe him in this vvhich he sayes against me but in all things else you may believe him hee speakes nothing but vvhat is upon publike Record Cajetane was a learned member of your Church and yet he held the Canon of Scripture as vvee doe contrarie to that vvhich the Councell of Trent hath defined Sixtus Senensis vvas a member of the Roman Church and yet hee did denie some part of the Scripture to be Canonicall which the Councell of Trent defined for Canonicall and that after the Councell Bellarm. de Verbo Dei l. 1. c. 7. I will fit you with many such members in my Catalogue Fisher Neither can I see any reason why hee did not with like audacitie goe on in naming other famous Romane Catholickes in every Age but that as it seemeth hee was not resolved whether hee were better to put in his Catalogue the names of damned Haeretickes which disagree in divers points of Faith from all ancient and present Pastors and Doctors of the Church even from the Protestants themselves Rogers Who you meane by these Haeretickes I know not and therfore I need not reply unto you herein if you had laid that imputation upon us I would have enlarged my selfe in the defence but you say they differ in points of Faith from the Protestants Fisher Or else to put in names of Popes Cardinals Bishops Priests Monkes and other religious men whose Writings and profession of life palpably shew that they held the present Roman Doctrine and communicated with the Roman Church Rogers I have answered you already that I will name Popes Cardinals Bishops Priests Monkes and others of your Church and why but such as neither their Writings nor profession of life doe palpably shew that they held the present Roman Faith If their Writings expresse what you say I will yeeld but that their Roman profession of life should include the now present Roman Faith I deny and besides what I formerly spake concerning your Writers I will adde some few instances now Gratian. Can Comp. de consecr dist 2. Gelasius was a Pope and yet hee held your present halfe Communion to be Sacriledge and decreed thus Aut integra suscipiant aut ab integris arceantur Let them receive the Communion in both formes or in neithe● Nich Lyranus was a Catholick and yet hee held the Canon of Scripture contrary to that of the Councell of Trent as Bellarmine confesseth So did Hugo and Thomas de Vio two Cardinals Irenaeus Basil Chrysostome Augustine and others whom I cited before cap. 4. were Bishops and yet they held the fulnesse and perfection of Scripture without the supply of unwritten Traditions contrary to the Councell of Trent Ierome was a Priest and a Monke yet denied those Books to be Canonicall which we deny contrary to that the Councell of Trent hath taught and decreed As the hand of a man may smite himselfe and yet continue a member of his body so these might be members of the Roman Church and yet give testimonie in something against your Church The Embassador De Ferrias of France was a member of the Roman Church and a French man Histor Concil Trid when in the Councell of Trent speaking of the miseries of France hee said If they should demand why France is not in peace hee could answer nothing but that which Iehu said to Ioram How can there be peace there remaining and concealed the words following but added You know the Text. The Cardinall of Loraine was a principall member of the Roman Church and the second Clergie man in the Latine Church yet hee speaking of the miseries of France said in the Councell of Trent If you would demand who hath caused this tempest and fortune I can say nothing but this That this fortune is come by our meanes cast us into the Sea By Vs hee must understand the Roman Clergie Iudas that betrayed Christ gave a true testimonie against himselfe when hee said J have sinned in betraying innocent blood And the limbs of Antichrist may give a true testimonie against Antichrist Now whereas you say that they communicated with the Roman Church I grant they did in some things or else they had not beene members of that Church but not in all for not in those things they did disavow reprove condemn and that this may the better be understood I will enlarge my discourse herein CHAP. VIII What it is to communicate with others How farre wee yet communicate with the Roman Church and wherein wee refuse to communicate COmmunio est multorum unio Communio quid Communion is the union of many They that agree in one opinion are so farre united they are one They that enjoy any thing in common are so farre united Rom. 12. The Church is one body 1 Cor. 12. Christians are severall members of this one body as therefore the members being many are united in one body and doe communicate in divers of the selfe same things from that one body and communicate one unto another the service of those things that are proper unto them as they are severall members So in the Church all Christians make but one body collective which are united together by many things some outward some inward some both outward and inward because it is corpus vivum a living body wherein there is saith Saint Augustine a soule Augustin Breviculo Collat. 3. Collat. 9. and a body The soule are the inward gifts of the holy Ghost faith hope and charity c. The body are the outward profession of faith and receiving of Sacraments Whence it comes to passe that some are of the soule and of the body of the Church and therefore united to Christ their Head both inwardly and outwardly these are most
by me I needed not to have set downe names of Protestant Pastors in all ages or in any age My two first Arguments the one a causis the other a signis might have served the turne without the third ab exemplis and I might have contented my selfe with going lesse then halfe that way which is your way and not mine I never tooke it for other then an uncertaine darke slippery cumbersome way it was your only way and yet you would not goe one step Did ever any Iudge citing a man by writ to appeare before him at Westminster limit him which way he should come would you thinke it reason that a Iudge should command a Herefordshire man to come to London not through Worcester or Glocester but through Shropshire Darbyshire Yorke c. The two Evangelists Saint Matthew and Saint Luke deriving the pedigree of our Saviour from David yet did it by different wayes De Doct. Christiana and divers lines Saint Augustine saith That two men differing in the exposition of some place of Scripture he that erreth yet if his exposition leade to charity hee is like unto a man which missing his way yet commeth to the end of his journey My journey is to Christ my scope to bring my faith and my Church thither you might leave me to chuse my owne way which was the way of Saint Augustine by Scriptures who doth disclaime and dislike your way by humane testimonies Yet even in this your owne way I doubt not but I shall goe as farre as you in a day and shall come sooner to my journeyes end then you shall for the reasons which now I will alleadge in the succeeding Chapter CHAP. XIII Humane Histories no proofe of any Church YOu would bring this great triall concerning the visible Church to Histories only which I might refuse briefly for these reasons First Histories humane in Divinity are weak improper and uncertaine proofes Secondly your Index expurgatorius blotting out of Authors that which maketh against you Thirdly You forge Authors Records and Councells to further your cause Fourthly You slight and deny the best Authors Yet to give others satisfaction I will enlarge these foure reasons in this Chapter not that your objections require any such full answer in this point that I have performed already First of the uncertainty of humane Histories Bodin in that learned discourse of his entitled The Method of Histories a man of your owne who also dedicated that booke unto the chiefe President of your Court of Inquisition doth make foure kindes of Histories First Humane Secondly Naturall Thirdly Mathematicall Fourthly Divine The first he saies is uncertaine and confused the second for the most part certaine the third more certaine the fourth most certaine and unchangeable Yet you Master Fisher in this divine question refuse the fourth which is divine most certaine and immutable and will have no other proofe then the first which is humane uncertaine and confused When Ticonius in the same question did alleadge Divini Testamenti tonitrua those thundering testimonies of the word of God against Parmenianus the Donatist Aug. cont ep Par l. 1. c. 1. which we doe produce against the Romanists making the same claime to the Church which they did and tying the Church to Rome as the Donatists did to Africk Parmenianus on the other side opposeth the relation of the Priests of his owne side say then saies Saint Augustine that we ought rather to beleeve your Colleagues then the Testament of God shall the smoake of earthly lyes prevaile against this light which came from Heaven If Parmenianus were not in love with his Episcopall Chaire he would rather choose to beleeve the written word of God then his fellow Bishops Thus much and much more to this purpose in that Booke and divers other Bookes of the seventh Tome but I will conclude this of the uncertainty of humane testimony with the words of that Father in his second Tome in his 48. Epistle Necesse est incerti sint qui pro sua societate testimonio utuntur non Divino sed suo It is of necessity that they must be uncertaine who defend their society not by the testimony of God but by their owne Thus much of the uncertainty in it selfe but much more uncertaine is all that you shall alleadge since you have by your Index Expurgatorius altered Authors to your purpose at your pleasure The Pope himselfe and the Ordinaries in their severall jurisdictions as also the Officers of Inquisition against Haeretickes are carefull to prevent the publishing of any Bookes which may seeme any way to derogate from the power of the Pope Widring in Apol. pro jure princ pag. 343. and if any such Bookes be published they endeavour wholly to suppresse the same or at the least forbid any man to reade them without speciall licence untill they be purged Thus a Priest of your owne hath written These your purging Tables are of two sorts some doe forbid whole Authors some doe blot out sentences or words so that if any Author speake against you you will either deny the whole Booke or produce some Edition licenced by your Inquisitors wherein those words are not to be found as having passed under the Purgatory of your penne Your severall bookes called Indices expurgatorij purging Tables printed in divers places as at b An. 1584. Madrid in Spaine at c An. 1607. Rome at d An. 1586. Lions are witnesses that you have left no witnesse in the world without exception If Saint Augustine say Tom. 4 ed Parisi apud Catol Guil. viduam etc. Anno 1555. Mortuorum animae non sentiunt res viventi●m The soules of the dead know not the estate or affaires of the living Your Belgian Index doth purge out this with a deleatur let it bee blotted out fol. 115. litera l. If Saint Gregorie Nissene say We have learned to worship and adore that nature alone which is uncreated you can purge out this with a deleatur dictio solummodò blot out this word alone saith your Spanish Index pa. 20. If Saint Chrysostome speake for the perspicuity of Scripture as hee doth in many places as namely in his third Sermon upon Lazarus deleantur let those words be blotted out saith your Index of Spaine reprinted at Samiur If the same Father speake for the sufficiency of Scripture as he doth in his Commentary on the 95. Psalme the same Index hath a deleatur for it If hee say the Church is founded upon the Rock of Faith and not upon Saint Peter the same Index hath a deleatur for it let it be blotted out Much could I cite to this purpose but as the rule is Qui semel pejerat c. He that is once convicted of bearing false witnesse is never after to be admitted for a witnesse so hee that is once found to falsifie and blot out Records looseth for ever his credit in any thing he shall produce out of his owne
cast a dart or shoot an Arrow This is Pugna levis bellumque fugax turmaeque vagantes Lucan de Parthis Et melior cessisse loco quam pellere miles Illica tela dolis nec Martem comminus unquam Ausa pati virtus sed longe tendere nervos Et quò ferre velint permittere vulnera ventis Light armed men who flying fight and never firmly stand Better in skipping up and downe then fighting hand to hand Their poisned darts they send and shoot but will not closely fight Wounds which they dare not bring themselves they send by winged flight Had the Argument been so easily answered you would not have answered it by a manifest untruth as you have done by saying That the Protestants Faith is not contained in Scriptures whereas it is one of the greatest Controversies betweene you and us whether the Scriptures be the onely rule of Faith which wee affirme and you denie it is the sixth Article in the Doctrine of our Church of England the Title is thus Of the sufficiencie of holy Scripture for salvation The Article it selfe is this Holy Scripture containeth all things necessarie for salvation so that whatsoever is not read therein nor may be proved thereby is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an Article of the Faith or to be thought requisite and necessarie to salvation c. To this Article of ours agreeth the Helvetian Bohemian French Belgian Saxonian Suevian confessions Reade the Bookes of Luther Brentius Melancthon Chemnitius Calvin Zanchie Whittaker and you shall find that they all doe professe this and write at large in defence thereof We proclaime it in our Pulpits we maintaine it in our Schooles wee will shed our blood rather then admit any Articles of Faith which are not contained in the Scriptures Is it not strange you should have the face to denie that wee professe that which is printed in the Doctrine of our Church preached in our Pulpits every day maintained in our Schooles defended by all proclaimed to the world What doth Chemnitius maintaine in the first part of his Examen Concilii Tridentini but this This the first Controversie which hee there handleth against you What doth Calvin labour in his first Booke of Institutions cap. 6 7 8 9. in his third Booke and second Chapter where hee speaketh of the nature of Faith but this And it is not a little that he writeth to this purpose in his fourth Booke and tenth Chapter Hath not Zanchie written a whole Booke to this purpose Against whom doth Bellarmine write his third and fourth Booke de verbo Dei which tend onely to this purpose to denie the fulnesse of Scripture and to extend matters of Faith to unwritten Traditions but against the Protestants There hee putteth Luther and Brentius in the forefront of his Adversaries Doth not Valenza in his third Tome upon Thomas disputatione 1a. quaest 3ª 4ª 5ª 6ª 7ª octava maintaine the same Tenet against the same men This is the maine Question betweene your Jesuited Schoolmen and us when they write de objecto fidei what those things are which are to be believed with a religious assent of divine Faith Whether onely those things which are contained in Scriptures as the Protestants doe professe or also unwritten Traditions as the Church of Rome doth professe let us then view the Argument and see how you answer it 1. Arg. First a Causis thus The Faith contained in the Scriptures hath had visible Professors in all Ages But the Protestant Faith is contained in the Scriptures Ergo The Protestant Faith had visible Professors in all Ages M. Fisher denieth the Minor or second Proposition which I have proved in the last Page before out of the publike Doctrine of our Church and chiefest Writers of our side and theirs neither can hee be ignorant of the same but the Argument troubles him and something hee must say Neither is hee ignorant that in this Controversie of the visible Church betweene them and us It is not the inward habit but the outward profession of Faith which maketh a visible Church Ecclesia constat professione ejusdē fidei Bellarm. Tom 2. l. 3. c. 2 3 4. etc. cōmunicatione eorundem Sacramentorum The Church doth consist in professing the same Faith and cōmunicating the same Sacraments Cap. 9. And againe the same Author cap. 10. writeth thus I answer Formam Ecclesiae non esse fidem internam nisi Ecclesiam invisibilem habere velimus sed externam id est fidei confessionem c. The forme or essence of the Church is not the inward Faith but the outward profession of Faith L. 19 c. 11. which Saint Augustine declareth most plainly against Faustus the Manichee and experience doth testifie the same for they are admitted into the Church who professe the Faith Thus farre Bellarmine So then by Faith in this Argument of the visible Church is alwayes understood the outward profession of Faith whereas the Protestants doe professe that they believe nothing but what is contained in the Scriptures this Respondent hath the face to say wee doe not professe it If but one man should come into the face of a congregation and say I doe professe and believe onely those things which are contained in Scriptures were not hee very impudent and had a face harder then brasse who would say to this man Thou dost not professe that Faith which is contained in Scriptures That Argument is not easily answered which driveth the Respondent to such miserable shifts Wee professe no Articles of Faith but those which are contained in the Apostles Creed which of these Articles are not contained in Scriptures Ad Partes Master Fisher this is the law of answering to a Proposition that hath many members wee professe that with a religious divine Faith wee receive nothing but what is contained in the five books of Moses or Ioshua Iudges Ruth the two books of Samuel the two books of Kings the two books of Chronicles the two books of Esdras Esther the booke of Iob or the Psalmes or Proverbs or Ecclesiastes or the Canticles or the foure greater or twelve lesser Prophets Or in the foure Evangelists or in the Acts of the Apostles or the Revelation and Epistles of Saint Iohn or the Epistles of Saint Paul Saint Iames Saint Peter Saint Iude which of these bookes is not Scripture Thus wee professe our Faith doe not wee every where professe with Saint Augustine De Doct. Christiana l. 2. c. 9. and against you That all things concerning Faith and life necessarily to be knowne and believed are plainly set downe in Scripture With Saint Basil Serm. de fidei confess Lib. cont Hermogen and against you That it is pride and infidelity to adde unto the Scriptures With Tertullian against you and Hermogenes Scriptum esse doceat Hermogenis officina Si non Scriptum timeat vae illud c. Shew where it is written or else feare that woe
which is denounced against those who adde unto the Word of God And will you say that wee professe any Faith besides that which is contained in Scriptures This is your easie answering Master Fisher to denie that wee professe that which we doe professe in all our Bookes in all our Schooles in all our Pulpits in all our Discourses of this subject viz. What wee ought to believe You will as easily answer the other Argument let us see the Argument and your answer 2. Arg. A Signis thus The Faith which hath testimonies of Antiquitie Universalitie and consent of Fathers and other Writers in all ages had visible Professors in all ages But the Faith of Protestants hath these testimonies Ergo The Faith of Protestants had visible Professors in all Ages To this you answer by denying the Minor or second Proposition thus The Protestant Faith hath not testimonies of Antiquitie Universalitie and consent Ad partes Master Fisher which Article of the Apostles Creed doth want the testimonie of Antiquitie Universalitie and consent which of those Bookes received for Canonical of the Church of England and named of mee a little before want these testimonies of Antiquitie Universalitie and consent Is it Genesis or Exodus or any other Booke of Moses Is it the Psalmes or Proverbs or Histories that want this testimony Or is it Esay or Ieremie or Ezekiel or Daniel or any other of the Prophets Is it Matthew or any other of the Evangelists or Apostles name the man name the Church name the time if you cannot then say your easie answering is no answer 3. Arg. Ab Exemplis thus Names of such as professed the Protestants faith in all ages Christ and his Apostles St. Iohn Ignatius Polycarpus Iustinus Martyr Irenaeus Tertullian Clemens Alex Origen Cyprian Lactantius Athanasius Cyrill Hierosol Ambrozius Nyssenus Hieronimus Ruffinus Chrysostomus Augustinus Cyrillus Alex Theodoretus Socrates Sozomenus Fulgentius Evagrius Gregorius primus Beda Damascenus Alcuinus Thus having gone halfe way I conclude with this Argument The Protestant faith being that which is contained in Scriptures was received and taught by all the Orthodox Fathers But the Fathers above named be all Orthodox Ergo Now what answer doe you Master Fisher give to this Argument of mine not a word unlesse to denie the conclusion be to answer an Argument I hope you will not acknowledge your selfe to be so ignorant in Logicke you know the Rule Ex veris possit nil nisi vera sequi If my Premises be true my Argument in forme as you neither deny my Premises nor except against the forme of my Argument the conclusion must follow must be true for out of true Premises can follow no conclusion but what is true Arist De Sophist Elench c. 17 18 c. this is not easie answering but not answering Looke into Aristotle concerning the duty of a Respondent and the divers kinds of answering You not being able to answer this Argument say I must bring out some or other good Authors who doe clearly shew these before named to hold all or some principall points of Protestant Faith differing from the Catholicke Roman Faith I have proved what I undertooke and what is sufficient by such Arguments as you cannot answer you dare not examine but flye from them knowing their strength and your weaknesse But you will have me prove them by Authors is any humane authoritie of a private man better then reason And what Authors would you have will not their owne profession and their owne workes together with the esteeme and reputation of Orthodox Writers which they have had in all Ages serve the turne to shew what their Faith was doe any men know what they did believe or what they did professe better then themselves As for your Roman Catholicke Faith I have alreadie shewed how fond how vaine how simple a conjunction you make of them that no child ordinarily of seven yeares of age understanding the termes but will wonder with what face you can say That a part of a Church is a whole Church that a part of a Kingdome is a whole Kingdome that a part of mans Body is the whole Body You say also that I must prove out of good Authors that they doe not condemne any of the 39 Protestant Articles Here you not being able to answer as I thinke doe dissemble conceale and passe by what I did put downe in answer to this demand of yours viz. 1. It is no prejudice to our Faith if the same Authors doe differ from us in other opinions not concerning Faith as long as they maintaine our Faith 2. The Church of Rome cannot produce Fathers in all Ages who doe not contradict the Councell of Trent in some Doctrines established in the said Councell This you can conceale and passe over knowing that you are not able to performe it for your Councell of Trent I undertooke for matters of Faith not for secondarie Doctrines to produce Authors in all Ages professing our Faith though they might dissent from us in other Doctrines of an inferior nature not revealed in Scripture nor belonging to the foundation and Principles of Christian Religion As for the sufficiencie of my Arguments I have already made it good for any thing that you have yet spoken against them Let us now see what you say further against them CHAP. XVI Fisher WHo doth not also see that the same Arguments may be more strongly retorted against Protestants by onely altering the word Protestant into Catholick in regard our Catholick Doctrine may be and is ordinarily proved by plaine testimonies of Scriptures and Fathers A most bold falshood even by the confession of divers learned Protestants themselves Rogers All the proofe that this man will bring is for ought I can see or thus Who doth not see I doe not see If it be granted c. as I have observed before for if these Arguments might be retorted against the Protestants by changing of one word why did hee not performe the same I must doe it for him Major The Faith contained in the Scriptures had visible Professors in all Ages Minor But the Catholicke Faith is contained in the Scriptures Conclusion Ergo The Catholicke Faith had visible Professors in all Ages Here I have onely changed the word Protestant into Catholicke and what one word is here against Protestants who doe hold and professe no other Faith then what is contained in Scriptures as I have already shewed out of our sixt Article wee grant this whole Argument Major Minor and Conclusion which if you doe grant I will take the Minor and inferre a dangerous Conclusion against the Church of Rome thus The Catholicke Faith is contained in the Scriptures The Roman Faith is not contained in the Scriptures Ergo The Roman Faith is not the Catholicke Faith If you denie this Minor as it seemes by those words of yours before alleadged you will denie viz. Our Catholick Doctrine may be and is ordinarily proved by plaine testimonies
he hath already seemed to say that none of their negative Doctrines pertaine to their faith and that all which is affirmed by Protestants is affirmed by Roman Catholikes and that this affirmative Doctrine onely doth pertaine to faith it will follow that Protestants have no faith different from Roman Catholikes out of which it will follow that those English Protestants who shall hold some of the 39 Articles and deny the rest may be said to have no faith different from those which subscribe to all the 39 Articles which last Consequence if Master Rogers grant I aske why the booke of the Canons doth excommunicate ipso facto such halfe Protestants Why doe their Bishops imprison them as Hereticks and not account them members of their Church And why may not Roman Catholikes by as good or better right accouunt Protestants who deny so many points defined in both ancient and recent Generall Councels to be Hereticks excommunicaeed and no members of the ancient and present Catholike Church Rogers That which you require heere I performed in my first Answer in my definition of a Protestant or else it had been no good definition had it not contained all that is essentiall this you know well enough but because you have nothing to answer you will demaund the same question againe Looke into my definition there you shall finde it and I made the same request unto you for a definition of the visible Church and what points you hold to be fundamentall to which you make no answer at all I there also undertooke to prove all our Affirmations which you deny so you doe the like by your Affirmations which we deny my words were these in my former answer Rogers in his first answer In all these I defend the Negative and so it doth belong to you to prove the Affirmative which when you shall doe by testimonies of Writers in all ages I will yeeld unto you for you proving the Affirmative the Negative will fall of it selfe as for example The first instance of Negation in our Articles is part of the sixt Article concerning those bookes of Esdras Tobit Iudith c. which we receive not for Canonicall you doe the proofe is on your side What I require of you I will performe on our side whatsoever is affirmative in our Articles I will maintaine to be affirmed and taught in all Ages as the 1 2 3 4 5 Articles the Affirmative part of the 6 the 7 8 and so in the rest or I will yeeld unto you Give me instance what Affirmation of our Articles you deny and I will prove it in all Ages And I desire you to set downe withall which of your affirmative Articles you receive and whether we agree in the Articles of the Creed or not I will doe the like by you and give you an instance in our Affirmatives Shew me who in every Age did receive the bookes of Esdras Machabees Tobit Iudith c. for Canonicall in the 1 2 3 4 Centurie of yeares This is one of the first points of your Tridentine faith Master Fisher I desire you also for the avoiding of confusion to deliver your opinion whether all the Affirmative Doctrines of the Councell of Trent are matters of faith per se fundamentall and necessary to be held for salvation fide explicita I speake de adultis quibus facultas discendidatur Thus farre in my former Answer to which you have made reply you have neither shewed which of our Affirmative Articles you deny nor which you receive nor have you proved one Instance I gave of your Affirmatives nor as much as expressed what you hold for matters of faith but dissembling all this passe it over with silence unlesse you had thought as the Boy did by his bodged verses that what you wrote would never be read but that men would reade the Titles and number the Pages and there finde written over head Master Rogers weake Grounds Master Rogers weake Arguments would take the rest upon trust would you ever have put Pen to Paper and yet in matters of Controuersies never expresse what your selfe held nor tell us being requested what your owne faith is or to give a reason of your owne faith nor to define your owne Church And answer formally and punctually to no one Argument and frame no one Argument of your owne Hominis est vehementèr abutentis otio literis That a man should offer to write a Tract and that in so sacred a profession as Divinitie and that in a question of so high a nature as these are what is the Christian faith what is the visible Church and herein not answer one question not to bring one Distinction or Definition or frame one Argument in forme or like a Scholler is a mispending of time wasting of Paper and abusing the very name of Learning Divinity as all other Sciences consisteth of Principles and Conclusions the Principles received on both sides are the Scriptures to which you would adde unwritten Traditions you bring not one place of Scripture to maintaine those Affirmative Tenents of yours which we deny you account Articles of faith And as for Theologicall conclusions you inferre none you frame no Argument you make no Syllogisme you give no reason of your faith though Saint Peter require it whom I thought of all the Apostles you did most respect what shall we thinke then but that you have neither Scripture nor reason for your faith I meane in your new Creed in which you dissent from us Fisher I require withall that he give me a substantiall ground well proved out of Scripture why those perticular points which he shall assigne are points of Protestant faith rather then others contained in the 39. Articles if he say as he hath already seemed to say that none of their Negative Doctrines pertaine to their faith and that all that is affirmed by Protestants is affirmed by Roman Catholikes and that this Affirmative Doctrine onely doth pertaine to faith it will follow that Protestants have no faith different from Roman Catholikes Rogers He calleth unto me to distinguish between points of Protestant faith and other points contained in the 39 Articles and yet in the next word he is faine to confesse that I distinguished if he say as he hath already seemed to say that none of their Negative Doctrines pertaine unto their faith This I had delivered in my first Answer and yet he still calleth for it yet he must mince it a little and say I seemed to say so great a friend he is to seeming that he will never leave it knowing it to be essentiall to the definition of Sophistry and a Sophister You might have left out your seeming and written plainly that I said so seeing in my Answer to your first Paper I spent nere a page in explicating and exemplifying this Distinction and in my Answer to your second Paper which was delivered me as the worke of five Jesuites then conversant about Gondamors house
I wrote thus As I did admonish Master Fisher to distinguish betweene Affirmation and Negation so I doe these men and that faith is Affirmation not Negation for no man beleeveth what he denieth Secondly In points of faith I like Master Fishers Rule They that are in the Affirmative must prove Now all that we affirme they affirme as one God three persons all the Creed So that we need not prove what our Adversaries do confesse But in those points in variance between us they are to prove because they are Affirmative we Negative as unwritten Traditions Latine Service Invocation of Saints c. Thus farre in my former Answer This is saying plainly this is not seeming Whereas you inferre that seeing all which is affirmed by Protestants is affirmed by Roman Catholikes and this Affirmative Doctrine onely doth pertaine to faith it will follow that Protestants have no faith different from Roman Catholikes I grant the Consequence what is this to the question whether we are of the visible Church or no this which you would inferre doth rather prove us to be a part of the visible Church then any way gaine-say it Thus They which have no other faith then that of the Church of Rome are parts of the visible Church But the Protestants have no other faith then that of the Church of Rome Ergo The Protestants are a part of the visible Church The minor Master Fisher would inferre out of my Grounds as if I would deny it no I grant it and so I hope will he the major then the conclusion must follow We differ from you in Ecclesiasticall Doctrines and Discipline which you terme to be points of faith but we deny They are corruptions of faith Innovations Idolatrous Antichristian Doctrines You would force them upon us as points of faith we refuse them because the Scripture doth not expresse them the Primitve Church did not know them and the greatest part of the Christian Church to this day doth not approve them And your owne writers are distracted into many and divers opinions concerning them Paulus venet l. 1. 2 What Antiquity have you for your halfe Communion Worshipping of Images c. What Universality seeing the Church of Greece of Syria the Georgians Circassians Mengiellians Breitenbachius Purgr c. de Iacobitis Vitrivius Histor orientalis c. 76. the Moscovits and Russians the Christians of Babylon of Assyria Mesopotamia Parthia Media of Cassar Samarcham Charcham Chinchtalis Tanguth Suchir Ergimal Tenduck Caracam Mangi the Iacobits whose Sect is extended and spred abroad in some fourty Kingdomes which I assure my selfe is more large then all the Roman Church do communicate in both kindes worship not Images deny Purgatory and which with you is more then all the rest deny the Popes Supremacy So you have neither Antiquity nor Universality to which I might adde nor Consent among your selves in those additions of yours contained in your new Creed As for one Instance the Councell of Trent hath made the bookes of Machabees Canonicall Melitus Sav. Origenes Athanasius Hilarius Epiphanius Cyrillus Nazianzen Amphiloch Hieronymus Ruffinus which is left out of the Canon by ten Fathers that is I take it by all the Fathers that dyed within 400 yeares after the Incarnation and wrot of that subject Your Nicholaus Lyranus Dionysius Carthusianus Hugo and Thomas de Vio Cardinals whereof this last was one of the most learned that ever the Church of Rome had insomuch that in the Councel of Trent it was said I thinke no man heere doth thinke himselfe so great a Divine but that he might learne of Cajetan All these I say of your side exclude those Bookes from the Canon as we doe yet will you not say they were of another faith then the Church of Rome which you must say if your new Creed and Decrees of Councels be points of faith as you here say And lest you should escape with your wandring discourses and your flying from the question I will presse my argument in forme Whosoever denyeth the new Creed or any Articles thereof the Councell of Trent or any Doctrine thereof is an Hereticke and denyeth the faith But Carthusianus and Thomas de Vio Cajetan both Cardinals deny some Articles of the new Creed and some Doctrines of the Councell of Trent Ergo Lyra Carthusianus and Thomas de Vio are Hereticks and deny the faith I am sure you will hold this Conclusion to be false if so then one of the premisses must be false not the minor ergo the major which is your Tenet whereby you would proue us to be Hereticks and to deny the faith Fisher Out of which it will further follow that those English Protestants who shall hold some of the 39 Articles and deny the rest may be said to have no faith different from those which subscribe to all the 39 Articles Rogers I grant it doth follow so that those same Articles which they deny be not those Articles which concerne the Unity of the Godhead the Trinitie of persons and all those things which are contained in the Creed I say therefore they differ in Ecclesiasticall Doctrines or Discipline not in faith so they receive the Scriptures and Apostles Creed Fisher Which last consquence if Master Rogers grant I aske why the bookes of Canons doth excommunicate ipso facto such halfe Protestants Rogers They may be excomunicated for gaine saying Ecclesiasticall Doctrines or the established Discipline of the Church they may be excommunicated as erroneous Shismaticks Fisher Why doe their Bishops imprison them as Hereticks and not account them members of their Church Rogers Andrewes in his Defence of the Apologie for the other Bilson in his perpetuall government of the Church Carleton against the Appeal They must be imprisoned as Schismaticks Our Bishops doe all professe that there are no Puritane Doctrines that the difference is onely in matter of Discipline they count them neither Hereticks nor wholly excluded out of the Church here you have supposed two falshoods in two lines those learned Protestants from beyond the Seas whose Discipline doth somewhat vary from ours doe testifie that the purity of Doctrine doth flourish in England purely and sincerely So Beza from Geneva that by Queeene Elizabeths comming to the Crowne God againe had restored his Doctrine and true worship So Zanchius that the whole compasse of the world hath never seene any thing more to be wished then is her Government So Daneus Fisher And why not Roman Catholicks by as good or better right account Protestants who deny so many points defined in both ancient and recent Generall Councels to be Hereticks Excommunicated and no members of the Ancient and present Catholick Church Rogers If we did the one you may doe the other but I have shewed the falshood of your supposition that we count them Hereticks who discent from us in any of our Articles they may be erroneous in a lesser nature then Heresie turbulent in those errours they may be Schismaticks
disobedient unto Government and so excommunicated and imprisoned for either of those without Heresie If all Decrees of Councels be Doctrines of faith as you affirme your Cardinall Bellarmine is deceived who saith that in Councels the greatest part of those things which are done doe not belong to faith neither the Disputations concerning faith nor the reasons which are added nor those things which are brought for explication and illustration but onely the very naked Decrees and not all those but they alone who are proposed as matters of faith To this subscribed Widrington in the Preface above alleadged and he voucheth Canus for the same opinion CHAP. XXIIII Fisher I Aske what Scripture or reason assureth that no Negative Doctrine pertaines to faith for Scripture having in it so many Negative sentences which are to be beleeved assureth the contrary neither is there any reason which can assure a man that he is freed from beleeving for example this Negative Deus non mentitur God doth not lie rather then from beleeving this Affirmative Est Deus Verax God is a true speaker for both being said by one and the same God our Lord Trueth it selfe and both being propounded by one and the same Catholicke Church his Spouse assisted by his Spirit the Spirit of truth as spoken by God in holy Scripture both are equally to be beleeved neither can any without danger of eternall damnation deny or doubt of either those or any other even the least point of Catholike faith as we may learn out of Saint Athanasius Creed saying that Whosoever will be saved it is needfull that he hold the Catholike faith which unlesse each one hold entire that is in all points and inviolate that is in the true uncorrupted sense of the Catholike Church without doubt he shall perish everlastingly So as whether the Doctrine be Negative or Affirmative whether fundamentall or accessory supposing it to be a Doctrine propounded by the Catholike Church as revealed by God it must be beleeved explicite or implicite and may not rashly or which is worse advisedly be denyed or doubted of and much lesse may the contrary be obstinately maintained against the knowne judgement of a lawfull Generall Councell or the unanime consent of the Pastors of the Church in regard our Saviour hath expresly averred That he who despiseth them despiseth himselfe and him that sent him to wit God his Father And againe he that will not heare the Church let him be to thee as an heathen and Publicane All which sheweth that such as do obstinately deny or doubtingly dispute against any the least point knowne by Church proposition to be a point of Catholike faith is worthily accounted an Heretike a despiser of God an excommunicated person and no member of the true Catholike Church and one who if he so live and die without repentance cannot be saved But as Athansius without any want of charity pronounceth he shall without doubt perish everlastingly Rogers I have answered you more then once and given you reasons more then one or two why Negations are not matters of faith per se fundamentall and necessary for I brought this distinction of Affirmation and Negation after those distinctions of Doctrine 1. Accessorie of res fidei per se res fidei per accidens 2. Doctrine fundamentall of res fidei per se res fidei per accidens Then I added this distinction of Affirmation and Negation so that my meaning appeared by the connexion it had with that which went before that Negations are not points or Articles of faith are not fundamentall doctrines are not res fidei per se I did not say but they might be res fidei per accidens as all propositions revealed in Scriptures whether affirmative or negative are besides those Articles of faith Here then you doe not dispute ad idem non facis elenchum you prove what I doe not deny you prove that Negatives contained in Scripture pertaine to faith which I do not deny but you do not prove that they are points of faith fundamentall Doctrines res fidei per se things proper and essentiall unto faith as your great Schooleman Aquinas your Bellarmine and Valenza have written cited by me afore where I have also shewed the difference betweene being a matter of faith and pertaining to faith neither doe I say that any man is freed from beleeving this Negative God doth not lie or any other Negative revealed in Scripture but that an implicite faith may serve in all Negatives as well as those Affirmatives which are not Articles of the Creed I say againe that Negatives in Scripture are res fidei per accidens non per se They are accidentall unto faith not essentiall There is no generall necessity to beleeve them fide explicita so to beleeve them as actually to know them but it is sufficient to beleeve them fide implicita with a minde prepared actually to beleeve them when they doe appeare unto us actually to be revealed in Scripture All things revealed in Scripture have aequalem veritatem non aequalem utilitatem They are equally true but not equally profitable For these propositions God is not a lyer God is not as man the heathen hath no knowledge of his Law Pharaoh was not obedient And all that are Negatives in Scripture being put together cannot informe a man in that saving truth which is sufficient for his soules health to beleeve but a few Affirmatives twelve Propositions contained in the Creed can doe it Againe I say that All things revealed in Scripture have aequalem necessitatem credendi non aequalem necessitatem cognoscendi It is not a like necessary for us to know all things revealed in Scripture but it is a like necessary for us to beleeve them when we know them As you have falsified the predicate of my Proposition by changing points of faith unto that which pertaineth unto faith fundamentall into accessory proper and essentiall into that which is accidentall so have you falsified the subject of the same Proposition for immediately after that distinction of Affirmation and Negation my words were these In those Articles of our English Church our Negation is partly a traversing partly a condemning of your novelties and additions and therfore no part of our faith for no man would deny his owne faith Thus farre in my former Answer as also in a few lines after my words were these The first instance of Negation in our Articles is part of the sixth Article concerning those Bookes of Esdras Tobit Iudith c. whereby it appeareth manifestly that I spake not of Negatives revealed in Scripture but of Negatives in Doctrines Ecclesiasticall Now that you should argue from Negatives in Scripture to Negatives out of Scripture is à baculo ad angulum from the staffe to the corner my Tenet therefore is that Negatives revealed in Scripture are res fidei per accidens non per se Negatives not revealed in Scripture are not res fidei
undoubted as that the sacrilegious hereticks themselves will not rebaptize those whom I have baptized Saint Augustine doth answer thus He doth not commit sacriledge who dares not rebaptize after that baptisme which is not thine but the baptisme of Christ The baptisme is Christs the rebaptizing is thine I correct in thee that which is thine and acknowledge that which is Christs for this is just that when wee reproove the evils of men we should approve whatsoever good things we find in them because they are Gods I say this is just that even in a sacrilegious person I should not violate that true Sacrament which I find in him neither that I should so correct a sacrilegious person as thereby to commit a sacrilegious sinne For they are evill though the baptisme amongst them bee good as the Iewes were evill though the law was good And even as the Iewes shall bee judged by that law which they though defiled could not defile So the Donatists they shall be judged by that baptisme which they could not deprave though them●elves be depraved Wee therefore thus deale with a Iew when he commeth unto us to bee made Christian wee doe not destroy in him the good that he hath from God but the evill that he hath of himselfe for we amend and destroy in him his infidelity whereby hee doth not beleeve that Christ is come already was borne hath suffered is risen againe and we instruct him in the faith of these things Wee also disswade him from those errors whereby he still sticketh to the shadow of the old Sacraments and we shew unto him that the time is come already wherein the Prophets foretold that these things were to bee taken away and changed But in that hee beleeveth one God is to bee worshipped which made Heaven and Earth that he doth abhorre all the Idolls and sacriledges of the Gentiles that hee doth expect the day of Iudgement that hee doth hope for eternall life we commend him approve him acknowledge him wishing him to beleeve as he had beleeved to hold as he had held So also when a Schismatick or an heretick doth come unto us to bee made a Catholick we disswade destroy and take from him his schisme and his heresie but as for the Sacraments of Christ if wee finde them in him and whatsoever other truth he holdeth farre be it from us that we should violate or minister againe that baptisme which was once received least while wee cure the vices of men wee condemne the saving graces of God and seeking to heale that which is not wounded we should wound a man there where he was whole Thus farre Saint Augustine These words of this Father make so plaine for our reformed Churches as that they need no application let the Reader understand Papist where he readeth Donatist and he shall find the Argument to follow We so left you as that we retained whatsoever you had from God and reject that which was from man we retained that which made you a Christian Church we rejected that which made you Popish and Antichristian In the former we communicate with you in the latter we disclaime So those whom I have and shall cite did communicate with you in some things but not in all for if they had communicated with you in all things they would not have reproved Aug. l. 2. cor op Par. c. 21. and disliked so many things Qui communicat consentit qui consentit corrumpitur If hee communicate hee doth consent if hee consent hee is corrupted To consent to evill is nothing else but to approve and commend that which is evill neither is there any man joyned in evill but he that doth commit evill or favour it act it or approve it In those good men which are displeased with those evills the Church doth continue hath continued and will continue for ever And as the graine unwinnowed is hid in the chaffe So the godly doe not easily appeare amongst a multitude of the wicked The people may be good where the Bishops are bad as the people were bad though Moses a good man was their Prince where Moses and Aaron were there also were sacrilegious murtherers Where Caiphas was and many like unto him there were also Zacharias and Simeon and others like unto them Saul and David were in the same Synagogue c. So that I doubt not but some may be found in all ages who did not communicate with your new doctrines superstitious worship tyrannicall discipline although they did communicate with you in the Scriptures and Apostles Creed as wee and all the famous Christian Churches in the world doe Know then that whereas you say that the Fathers and others alleadged by some of your men did communicate with the Roman Church unlesse you can say in all things you conclude nothing Syllogizari non est ex particulari for otherwise I might argue thus Some living creature is an Anabaptist Master Fisher is a living creature Ergo Master Fisher is an Anabaptist Because they communicate with you in some things thence to inferre you are the same in all things is fallacia à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter CHAP. IX Fisher AND as ancient Fathers have done before them condemned some or other Protestants Doctrine even of those 39 Articles of the English Protestant Church although they be more craftily composed then the Articles of other Protestant Churches Rogers I told you in my first Answer that it is no prejudice to our Faith if the same Authors doe differ from us in other opinions not concerning Faith as long as they maintaine our Faith and that the Church of Rome cannot produce Fathers in all Ages who doe not contradict the Councell of Trent in some Doctrines established in the said Councell These were my words in my first Answer to which you reply not at all to this purpose I also used that distinction of Discipline and Doctrine and distinguished between Doctrine Accessary and Fundamentall Adding also that matter of Faith consisteth not in Discipline but Doctrine and that Doctrine not Accessary but Fundamentall By which distinction I meane as I then expressed the same which Aquinas doth by res fidei Per Se Per accidens To this purpose I then distinguished Dogmata 1 Schola 2 Ecclesiae 3 Fidei Between 1 Opinions of Schoole 2 Doctrines of the Church 3 Articles of Faith To all which grounds of mine and more which I th●n layed you make no reply at all saving that some other grounds of mine you cavill at viz my Definition of a Protestant and my Distinction of Affirmation and Negation which I will justifie in their places Why would you say nothing to these grounds Master Fisher If they were true why would you not grant them If false why not deny them If ambiguous why not distinguish them I know no other Answer but one of these three wayes Concedendo negando vel distinguendo You will doe none of these to
my grounds and yet write in the top of your Booke for divers pages these words Master Rogers his most weake grounds viz. pag. 26 27. and in both these pages not one word spoken of my grounds Thus would you perswade your silly Proselytes who must reade no more then the Title of your Bookes That you have answered all when you have answered nothing Likewise pag. 22. you write over head Master Rogers his most weake Arguments whereas there is not in that page any one Argument of mine You can passe all those grounds of mine with a tricke of Rhetorick to take notice of that which you cannot answer unto and in stead of that must strike at a stander by namely our Booke of Articles saying That they be more craftily composed then the Articles of other Protestant Churches which I deny as most false neither need it any further Reply being an indefinite exception and as it seemeth spoken of purpose to draw mee from that matter proposed to goe a roving as your selfe have done with impertinent discourses Fisher I might therefore without more adoe conclude that Master Rogers hath not sufficiently answered Master Fishers Question Rogers With as little adoe as you can inferre abrogating a Law from that word which is the most proper for enacting the same Decret 1. part dist 4. c. 4. Lugduni Edit anno 1584. jussu Greg. 13. Statuimus id est abrogamus Wee doe enact it that is wee doe cancell it or as you say the Roman Church that is the Catholicke Church a part that is a whole a piece of man that is a whole man this is quidlibet ex quolibet from the staffe to the corner Fisher In regard hee hath neither named Protestants in all Ages neither hath hee sufficiently proved them hee named to be Protestants but by such false suppositions and bad definitions and such other shifts as any Arrian or Anabaptist or whatsoever other absurd Sectary may by the like defend the same persons to have beene of their Religion or Sect. Rogers The Question was whether the Protestant Church was visible in all ages This I prooved by divers Arguments to which you have made such answer as wee shall see anon To this I have not sufficiently answered say you in regard 1. I have not named Protestants in all ages As if there were no other means to decide the question but this no other proofe then induction or that my adversary proposing the question should limit me what kind of proofe I must use As if the King of France denouncing war against the King of England should send him word If you will warre against mee you must doe it by land not by sea and you must land in Picardie not in Normandie or Britaine or Poitou and you must chuse your place of battell in large Plaines and fight with horse not with foot and bring no Archers into the field or else confesse that you are no Warrier your Englishmen Scots and Britaines no Souldiers your proceedings not justifiable by the law of Nations Would Charles of France the Frentick have sent such a message such a challenge to our Henry the fift Yet Master Fisher saith If any Protestant will answer the Premises let him set downe names of Protestant Preachers in all Ages who taught the people Protestant Doctrine in everie severall Age or else confesse that there were no such before Luther or at least not in Ages to be found in History As if I should say If any Iesuit will answer mee let him shew mee the names of Iesuit Preachers in all Ages who taught the people Iesuiticall Doctrine in every severall Age or else confesse that there were no such before Ignatius Laiola We will deale with you as Edward the third with Phillip who presented himselfe before Paris saying Hee did call upon him to open fight in the view of France and before his great Theater of Paris He did not limit him to any one kind of fight or weapon hee left him to his choise so doe wee with you prove your selves to be the only Church and that all are excluded from salvation unlesse they hold Communion with and subjection to your Pope prove it by any testimonie of Scripture or demonstration from the Principles of Scripture or Reason frame your Argument as you thinke best for your owne advantage there are many places for Arguments viz. 24. wee exclude none but will admit them in their degrees some as necessary some as probable These are places of Art or Learning yet you will exclude us from all these and bring us ad loca inartificiata to testimonie And whereas those are Divina of God or Man vel Humana of God or Man You will have none but the later which can be but weak there being no Historian or Father but might be deceived and very few against whom you have not taken some exceptions Of all the formes of arguing a Syllogisme is that principall forme which alone hath constringencie and necessary illation and to which all other formes as being imperfect are reduced this we must not meddle with but bring exemplum or inductio or at the most an Enthymeme which is curtatus imperfectus Syllogismus all of them unsufficient parere scientiam to worke and produce true knowledge and yet we must use onely these This is as if the King of France should have sent to our King that when hee fought hee should not put on his best Armour nor use his best Sword Saint Augustine in this question excluded humane testimony yet you will have nothing else Non audiamus Haec dicit Ambrosius Augustinus c. Sed haec dicit Dominus Your Schoole also granteth that Scriptures are the principles in Theologie and all demonstrations must bee ex proprijs principijs out of proper principles Yet you will none of them onely names out of Histories you call for This was a kind of proofe which I did not approve at first but denyed the consequence of your 5th Proposition thus The summe of your fift Proposition is briefly this If the names of Protestant Pastors in all ages cannot be shewed then the Protestants are not the true Church This I deny to be of undoubted consequence for that argument negatively from authority is of no force In your demand you require the names of such as taught the Protestant doctrines whereas all your Propositions before were of faith as if all doctrines were points of faith I undertooke to shew a Church professing the same faith which the Protestants now doe in all ages and in all your Propositions you speake of faith here you speake of doctrines You know all doctrines are not articles of faith I have named Authors for 800. yeeres and in this my second Reply I will for the rest Was not my request more reasonable to call upon you to goe on so farre it being your owne way it being a course proposed by your selfe yet he that hath not gone one mile findeth fault