one thing and you proued another The question was of the visibilitie of Church but your arguments were of the eternity of faith Is not this thiug ad ChouÌ„ Ego respondeo de allijs tu disputas de cepis M. Fisher answered of Garlike you spake of Onions For this vnsauory exception M. Sweet was sauced in the conference where it was proued against him that to proue an effect by the cause is a direct naturall and not a diuersiue proofe My argument standeth thus The true Primitiue faith once giuen to the Saints hath had must and shall haue alwaies visible Professors thereof But the faith of the Protestant Church is the true Primitiue faith once giuen to the Saints Therefore the Protestant faith hath had and shall haue alwaies visible Professors thereof The Maior is euident in Scripture and confessed on all hands The Minor I offered to proue but the Iesuites durst not stand to their deniall The Maior and Minor passing without controll none but Master Fisher would haue denied or distinguished vpon the conclusion This argument I affirme not onely direct to proue the conclusion denied but also most pertinent to the maine scope of the question which is to finde out the true Church whereof there can be no sound and infallible proofe but out of Scripture And for the visibility of the true Church either it is a matter of faith or not If not what need wee so much trouble our selues with it If it bee matter of faith Aliunde scilicet possunt suadere de rebus fidei nisi ex literis fidei can they otherwise perswade in matter of faith then out of the Writ of faith that is the holy Scripture For humane Stories and Records in al ages they are not easily found and when we haue found them we find them so defectiue so corrupted and defaced and oftentimes so contrary one to another that they scarce beget humane faith subiect to errour And were they neuer so perfect as Bellar. confesseth they could not beget diuine and infallible faith If no man can bee saued without knowledge that he is in the true Church and no man can knowe that he is in the true Church vnless hee can proue out of good Authours the perpetuall succession and visibility of the Church to which hee adhereth as Iesuites make their breake-neck climax or gradation what shall become of many millions of Christians in their owne Church who neither haue time nor meanes nor learning to search all Records of Antiquitie Could all Lay Papists produce Writers in all Ages who maintained the present Tridentine faith which none yet of the their learned Clerks euer did or could yet they are little neerer For Iewes and Paynims and it may bee diuers sorts of Hereticks can proue too many visible professors of their Heresies and impieties in all ages since Christ and his Apostles times and some before From visibility of Professors no man can certainely conclude truth of sauing Doctrine conformable to Scriptures but from conformity of Doctrine to the scriptures a man may by infallible consequence grounded vpon Gods promises to his Church conclude perpetuall visibility of professors more or lesse And therefore the course I tooke is not onely the streight but the easiest and onely certaine way to bring vs to the true Church which is the house of the liuing God the pillar and ground of truth Thus much for proofe of my proofe by syllogism I wil now giue you an account of my Catalogue and shew my inducements to my induction Against which I heare by you it is excepted that in vndertaking it I leaue the beaten way and take a way by my self where I shall surely lose my selfe neuer come to an end To this obiection the ciuil Law furnisheth me with an Answer Nemo tenetur diuinare No man is bound to prophecie before-hand especially of the successe of anothers labours If leaue be procured for a second Meeting the golden thread of succession which I tooke hold of from Christs blessed hand and his Apostles shall be drawne downe God willing to later Ages euen to Luthers time But what they meane by holding the beaten way I cannot easily diuine If they mean that I ought to proue the visibility of the Protestant Church by hauing recourse meerely to the corrupt Popish Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I say that way perhaps beaten by some yet seems to me a slipperie dirty way and I hope I shall bee able to shew that we need not aurum in stercore quaerere to seek the golden purity of faith amids the dung and drosse of Romish superstitions and deprauations in later ages Many of our Worthies haue shewne mee a more excellent way quos sequor à longe et vestigia pronus adoro These are Doctor Abbot now my Lord of Canterbury in his Answer to Hill Humfrey to Campion his third reason Doctor Vsher now Lord of Meth de successione Ecclesiae The History of the Waldenses Fox Acts and Monuments Crispin of the state of the church Morneys mystery of iniquity with Riuets defense thereof Simon Voious Catalogue of doctors Illiricus witnesses of the truth Wolsius his select readings Lydius his Waldensia and Mouster à Vortleys noble discourse As those that trauell by night through the Hercynian Forest when they are at a stand obserue certaine birds fleeing before them and by the brightnes of their white feathers shining in the dark guide their steppes and finde out a way so in vshering the Witnesses of Truth throughout all Ages when in the darker times mine owne obseruations shall faile mee I doubt not but by the bright wings of those auspicate birds that haue flowne before me I mean the light of their siluer quils who haue wrote of this Subject to finde out my way I haue omitted nothing that hath been materially excepted against the Conference except an omission of the sâ—ate of the question which they say is not so perspicuously and dilucidly deliuered as they could wish That which is set down to this purpose in the entry into the Conference they say is so brief that instar fulguris terret magis quà m illustrat it is like lightning which rather scares than lights the Passenger in his way If this were a iust exception yet it lyeth not against me who had the Opponents part put vpon me but against M. Fisher who be-spoke himselfe to be Respondent For by the orders of all Schools it is the Answerers and not the Opponents task to state the Question He that keeps a Fort in battel is to make his ramparts and guard the walls with redouts and out-works the assailants part is to lay well his batteries and make breaches where he can At the next desired meeting when D. White or my selfe should haue supplyed the Respondents place the Question should haue been explicated to the full by the distinctions conclusions heerin inclosed But as that Meeting by iniurious
Prince Castilians Courtier namely Sir Thomas Moores Vtopia extra anni solisque vias To vndertake to make a demonstration consisting ex veris primis immediatis prioribus notioribus causis conclusionis is all one saith Ludouicus Viues as if to cure a most dangerous disease a Quacksaluer should promise a strange receipt made of foure simples the first whereof is found in India the second amongst the Ceres the third in the Riphean Hilles and the fourth in the nest of a Phenix If that demonstration which they call potissima the soueraigne demonstration and non parâ—iell containing the quintessence of al necessarie proofe consisting of all tearmes reciprocall and all propositions inabled and qualified with those three degrees of necessitie so called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de omni per se et quatenus ipsum were any where in vse it should seeme to bee in the Mathematicks the most certaine Science and fullest of euident demonstrations but Pererius the Iesuite and others with him vndertake to prooue that the Mathematicians vse no such demonstrations and therfore many Logicians and Philosophers conclude that such absolute demonstrations exalted to the highest degree of necessity presently conuincing and captiuating the vnderstanding are meere imaginary speculations Let the Philosophers and Logicians among themselues end this controuersie I will pronounce sentence peremptorily on neither side But setting aside that Idea of demonstration and speaking of such demonstrations à priori or à causâ as are vsually found in Scholastick Diuinity I will maintaine this Syllogisme to be a good demonstration as demonstrations go current against all M. Fisher's and M. Sweet's Logick The Church holding the perpetuall faith grounded on the eternall Gospell hath perpetuall visible Professors of that faith The true Church of Christ holdeth the perpetuall faith grounded on the eternall Gospell Therefore the true Church hath perpetuall visible Professors of that faith c. For the Maior or first proposition it is partly grounded vpon Christs promises rehearsed before in the setting downe of the state of the Question touching the Visibility of the Church assertion the fourth and partly vpon that Text of the Apostle With the hart man beleeueth vnto righteousnesse and with the tongue confession is made vnto saluation The Minor or assumption is most necessarily true because this eternall faith is the formall cause constituting and making the true Church for as Laurentius rightly argueth Homines non constituunt Ecclesiam quatâ—nus simpliciter sunt homines Europei Romani c. sedquatenus sunt fideles ergo fides doctrina fidei est causa formalis interna Ecclesiae et per eam Ecclesia constituitur et per eandem dignoscitur Men make not the Church simply as they are Europeans or Romanes or Africans or Britans or the like but as they are of the faithfull or holding the faith therefore faith and the Doctrine thereof is the formall and internall cause of the Church and by it the Church is made a Church and distinguished from all other societies Heere then you haue the confession of visible men to saluation or the Visibility of professors of the sauing faith a proper attribute or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 demonstrated of the proper subiect the true Church by the proper and neerest cause the eternity of faith and what more is to be required in a true demonstration à priori You will say this demonstrateth that the true Church shall bee alwaies visible but not that the Protestant Church I reply either the Protestant Church is to be supposed to be the true church or not if it be supposed to bee the true Church then hauing demonstrated the perpetuall Visibility of the true Church I haue consequently demonstrated the perpetuall Visibility of the Protestant Church if this bee not to bee supposed nor granted then you should haue primarily denied this and put vs to the proofe of it which beeing prooued would inferre the Visibility but this you did not and I think durst not in the Conference for feare you should haue beene presently conuinced yet now since the Conference you are growne so hardy as to deny it and therefore thus I proue it A Church holding professing entirely the perpetuall faith needfull to saluation is a true Church The Protestant Church holdeth and professeth entirely the perpetuall faith c. Therfore the Protestant Church is a true Chur. The Maior is confessed of all sides and must be so because there is no saluation without the Church where therfore the sauing faith is held and professed there must needs bee the Church The Minor or second proposition is thus confirmed The Primitiue Catholique faith once giuen to the Saints is the perpetuall faith grounded on the euerlasting Gospel But the faith which the Protestant Church holdeth is the Primitiue Catholick faith once giuen to the Saints Therefore the faith which the Protestant Church holdeth is the perpetuall faith c. The Maior in this last Syllogisme is of vndoubted truth The Assumption is thus confirmed The faith deriued from the holy Scriptures contained in the three Creeds The Apostles Creed the Nicen Creed and the Creed of Athanasius and the foure first generall Councels is the Primitiue and Catholique faith once giuen to the Saints The Protestants faith is deriued from the Scriptures and contained in the three Creeds and foure Councels aboue-named Therefore the Protestant faith is the Primitiue Catholique faith once giuen to the Saints In this last Syllogisme the Maior cannot be denied by any who receyue these Creeds and Councels The Minor may bee confirmed three manner of waies First by the publique profession and practice of the Church of England and other Protestant Churches Secondly by deduction of each particular head of the Protestant faith out of the principles aboue-named Thirdly by the Confession of the Romish Church it selfe And first it is well knowne to all who are conuersant in the harmonie of Protestant confessions or haue obserued the practice of the Protestant Churches that the Protestant Doctrine is that No article of faith ought to bee beleeued vnder paine of eternall damnation which is not either expresly contained in Scriptures or may be necessarily and euidently deduced from them All the Protestant Churches reade or sing the Creeds aboue-named and for the foure first generall Councels there is no Protestant who will not seale the true faith deliuered in them with his blood if hee be cald thereunto Secondly there is no particular positiue Article of the Protestant faith which we will not vndertake to proue by Scriptures Let Master Sweet or Master Fisher instance where and when they will we will neuer refuse to meet them in this field On the contrarie besides those fifteen poynts set downe in the conference there are many other Tenets of the Roman Church which no Papist dare vndertake to proue by Scripture therefore according to the maner of the ancient Heretiques Cùm
to bee reiected vpon any pretence Not long after it was not authenticall For Clemens the eighth corrected it in many hundred places Now goe and vpbrayd vs with our late reuised translation but see withall that you dispence with the Pope that he may dispence with you One yeere the immaculate conception of the blessed Virgin is maintained in bookes allowed by your Church another yeere it is impugned Lastly in one yeere it is determined in bookes set out by authoritie among you that the oath of alleageance may lawfully bee taken by Roman Catholiques in the next yeere wee reade that hee is no good Catholique that will take that oath The title of vniuersall Bishop was held insolent arrogant profane Antichristian Luciferian in Saint Gregories time but now you hold it to be the holy title of Christs Vicar Yea but say you The Protestants haue no certaine and infallible rule sufficient to preserue them from change Belike then the Scripture is no certaine and infallible rule but vnwritten traditions are the Word of God is no sure ground the Popes Decree is The Apostle then hath much deceyued vs who saith Let God bee true and euerie man a lyer If euerie man a lyer euerie Pope too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 homo not vir onely to exclude Pope Ioane from priuiledge of inerrability You adde to piece out your former argument that in my demonstration I proue magis notum perignotius viz. the visibilitie which is easily knowne by the truth of Doctrine which is more hardly knowne especially by onely Scripture of the sense whereof according to the Protestants who say The whole Church may erre no particular man can bee infallibly sure The edge of this argument hath beene turned alreadie in the Remonstrance whereunto I adde First that visibilitie is more knowne to sense then the truth of doctrine but not to the vnderstanding of a Christian. Secondly the visiblenesse of a particular present Church is the obiect of sense but not the perpetuall former and future visibility of any one Church much lesse of the vniuersall And therefore it is much easier out of plaine and euident Texts of Scripture together with the three Creeds knowne to the simplest among vs where the Liturgie is in a knowne Tongue to deduce the truth of doctrine necessarie to saluation then hee can produce a successiue Catalogue of visible professours out of good Authors in all Ages Yea but no man say you can hee infallibly sure of the sense of Scripture because Protestants hold The whole Church may erre In thus arguing you bewray either ignorance or an ill conscience Ignorance if you knowe not that wee distinguish betweene the essentiall or formal Church and the Church representatiue of poynts necessarie to saluation and not necessarie of euident Texts of Scripture of obscure But if you knew these distinctions as indeed you cannot but knowe them hauing read D. Field and other Protestant Writers you dispute against your conscience Because in obscure and difficult Texts of Scripture the Church may erre will it therefore follow that no man can bee sure of the sense of plaine and euident Texts In which if wee may beleeue Saint Austin all those things are found which concerne faith and manners Will it follow because wee hold that your Church representatiue that is the Pope and his Consistorie or the Pope and his Councell may erre that therefore the essentiall and formal Church of Christ consisting of all the visible Christians in the world in propounding doctrine necessarie to saluation out of Scripture may erre The Church following her guide the Word of God is sure not to erre whether vniuersall or particular For which preseruation from errour we doubt not but that there is a farre higher degree of spiritual assistāce to the generall Councels then nationall yet in both it sometimes falleth out that as Austen obserueth Priora à posterioribus emendentur the former are corrected by the later Thirdly you beg an Argument from your selfe drawne from a beggerly fallacy called Petitio principij or begging your maine question You say that my former Syllogisme was a petitio principij and therefore no demonstration but I prooued it then and since confirmed it that it was a Demonstration and therefore no petitio principij Let the Reader heere obserue how your Answers and Obiections interfere and supplant one the other Master Sweet will haue my Argument to bee a transitio à genere in genus but you a petitio principij Againe elsewhere you call this Argument A digression from the question a diuersiue proofe and yet here you will haue it to bee identicall Wherefore as Xenophanes opposed a motion made by Eleates in behalfe of Leucothea to celebrate her funerals with teares and lamentations and withall to sacrifice to her as a Goddesse this motion sayth hee ouerthroweth it selfe If wee sacrifice to Leucothea as an immortall Goddesse we must not bewaile her death and if we bewaile her death as being a mortal woman wee must not sacrifice to her as to a Goddesse priuiledged from death In like manner whosoeuer readeth your said seuerall Answers may obiect against them If the Argument aboue-named was a petitio principij it could not be a transitio à genere in genus and if it were a transitio à genere in genus it could not be a petitio principij If it were a diuersiue proofe it could not bee identicall if it bee identicall as you here affirme it cannot be diuersiue for it implyes an apparant contradiction to say that a man in proouing idem per idem doth digredi ab eodem But you yeeld a reason why this Argument beggeth or supposeth that which is in question For say you in asking which is the true visible Church or Congregation of the true faithfull wee aske at least vertually which is the true faith By the like reason you might proue euery Demonstration à priori to bee a petitio principij For in propounding any question touching the effect wee enquire vertually and implicitly of the cause And therefore Aristotle in lib. 2. Poster Analyt acutely prooueth omnem quaestionem esse quaestionem medij that euerie scientificall question is in effect a question of the medium or the cause By the like Argument you might prooue that all Arguments drawne à definitione ad definitum are petitiones principij because in propounding any question touching the definitum wee at least vertually inquire of the definition If the tearmes in my Syllogisme were but formally distinct the Syllogisme could bee no petitio principij how much lesse then can it bee termed petitio principij when as it is certaine they are distinct really as your selfe confesse in your fourth Argument to which now I addresse my selfe Fourthly you impeach my Demonstration by pushing againe at the Maior saying Although faith be prerequired to be in some or other members of the true Church yet inward faith alone without
faith of the Protestant Church is eternall perpetuall and vnchanged Therefore the Protestant Church is so visible as the Catholique Church ought to be and the Popish Church is pretended by M. Fisher to bee M. Fisher. I distinguish the Maior That Church whose faith is perpetuall and vnchanged so as the Names can bee shewed is so visible as the Catholique Church ought to be and as M. Fisher pretends the Roman Church to be I grant it That Church whose faith is perpetuall and vnchanged yet so as the Names cannot be shewed in all Ages is so visible as the Catholique Church ought to bee and as M. Fisher pretends the Roman Church to be I deny it To the Minor I apply the like distinction and consequently to the Conclusion in the same manner D. Featly What Answer you to the Conclusion also This is a Strain of new Logick M. Fisher. Tolle distinctionem D. Featly A strange distinction of the etemity of faith by Professers to be named and not to bee named What are Professers nominable or innominable to the eternity of faith M. Fisher. Conclude that which I deny that the Protestant Church is so eternall as the Names of visible Protestants in all Ages may be shewed D. Featly That Church whose faith is the Catholique and Primitiue faith once giuen to the Saints without which no man can be saued is so perpetuall visible as the Names of some of that Church may be shewed in all Ages But the faith of the Protestant Church is the Primitiue and Catholique faith once giuen to the Saints without which none can be saued Therefore the faith of the Protestant Church is so perpetuall and visible as the Names of some of that Church may be shewed in all Ages M. Fisher. I answer the Minor If this Proposition bee taken simply in it selfe I absolutely deny it but if this Proposition bee considered as it must bee as related to the first question and the end thereof I further adde that it is not pertinent to that end for which the whole Dispute was intended to weet to shew to those who are not able by their owne ability to finde out the infallible faith necessary to saluation without learning it of the true visible Church of Christ and consequently the Visibility of the Church is first to be shewed before the truth of doctrine in particular shall be shewed D. Featly First what speak you of those who are not able by their owne abilities to finde out faith Is any man able by his owne ability without the help of diuine grace Secondly what helpeth the Visibility to confirm the truth of the Church Visibility indeed prooues a Church but not the true Church Heer M. Fisher alleaged some words out of D. Field of the Church supposing thereby to iustifie his former Answer Whereunto D. Featly promised Answer should be made when it came to their turn to answer now hee was by order to oppose M. Fisher. D. Featly The Summe of your former Answer was that the Minor of my former Syllogisme was both false and impertinent It is neither false nor impertinent Therefore your Answer is false and impertinent And first my Minor is not false M. Fisher. I answer to the Antecedent that it is both false and impertinent but I adde that for the present it must first be prooued to be pertinent or else it diuerteth vs from the chief end of our Dispute which was as I said before that infallible truth may bee learned of the true visible Church and not the true visible Church by first finding euery particular infallible truth and by that to conclude which is the true visible Church D. Featly I proue that the Minor is pertinent That Minor Proposition which together with the Maior doth necessarily and directly inferre the Conclusion of the Minor last denied is pertinent to the probation of that Minor denied But the Minor Proposition of the third Syllogisme doth necessarily and directly inferre the conclusion of the Minor last denied Therefore the Minor of that Syllogism is pertinent Note that M. Fishers Answers to euery one of these Syllogismes were penned by him verbatim with the aduice of M. Sweet and one other suggesting priuately and amending what they thought fit Which breeding much delay irkesom to the hearers and the Opponent then saying You are very long M. Fisher M. Chamberlane standing by said Let him alone for he and his learned Councell are not yet agreed M Fisher. I distinguish the Maior That Minor proposition which together with the Maior doth necessarily and directly inferre the conclusion of the Minor in such manner as it may serue for the purpose to which the whole Dispute is ordained I grant it to be pertinent But if it doe inferre the conclusion yet not in such manner as it may serue for that purpose for which the whole Dispute was ordained I deny the Maior Heere the Disputants iarred and so the Writer ceased yet that which followeth was then deliuered by them D. Featly That Minor which together with the Maior inferres the proposition last denied the whole processe hauing beene per direct a media is pertinent to that purpose to which the Dispute is ordained But this Minor together with the Maior directly and necessarily inferres the proposition last denied the whole processe hauing beene per directa media Therefore it is pertinent to that purpose to which the Dispute is ordained M. Fisher. Your Media in your Syllogismes were directa but they tended not ad directum finem D. Featly This is a Bull. M. Fisher. Media directa yet not addirectum finem that is direct and not direct for Media are said to be directa only ratione finis in regard of the end M. Sweet Is there not a fault in arguing called transitio à genere in genus When a man by arguing quite leaues the maine question and subiect D. Featly I acknowledge that transitio à genere in genus is a fault in disputing but I neuer heard that the inference of the effect by the cause was transitio a genere in genus such was my argument For faith in a right beleeuer produceth profession and confession thereof which makes a visible member and the like profession of many members a visible Church Where the cause is perpetuall the effect must needs bee perpetuall Therefore where the faith is perpetuall the profession thereof must needs be and consequently the Visibility of the professors thereof Is this transitio à genere in genus D. Good M. Sweet you once learned better Logick in Cambridge then you shew now Heere againe those of M. Fishers side calling for names Where are your names D. White sayd D. White This is nothing but an apparant tergiuersation you will not answer any argument directly nor suffer vs to proceed in our argument and therefore I require you M. Fisher according to the order mentioned in the beginning for each party to haue an houre and a
Oracles of the Prophets the countenance of the Church is figured when at the first rising againe shee is renued into the ages of the moneth shee is hidden by the darknesse of the night and by little and little filling her hornes or right ouer against the Sunne rounding them doth shine with the light of cleere brightnesse The sixt assertion The false and malignant Church is oft time 〈◊〉 visible conspicuous and ample then the true Church and consequently eminent Visibility amplitude and splendor is no certaine note of the true Church The glorious face and outside of a Church which dazleth our aduersaries eyes was rather against Michea then for him all the Prophets prophecied c. It was rather against Eliah then for him for there were 450 Priests of Baal besides Câ—â—marims and hee took no notice in a manner of any seruant of God but himselfe It was rather against Ieremy then for him when all the Priests took counsell against him saying The law shall not depart from the Priest c. Nay the glorious outside and face of a Church was rather against Christ himselfe then for him All the chiefe Priests and Elders took counsell against Iesus Since Christs death to instance onely in one sort of Hereticks the Arrians vndoubtedly would haue carried the truth away by voyces and outward pomp for some hundreds of yeres if that were a safe triall for Saint Ierome complaineth Tunc vsiae nomen abolitum est tunc 〈◊〉 fidei damnatio conclamata est 〈…〉 Arrianum se esse miratus est Then the name of substance was abolished then the condemnation of the â—â—cene Creed was proclaimed the whole world sighed and maruelled that it became Arrian Vincentius putâ— theâ— case what was to be done Quando saith he Arrianorum venenuÌ„ non ià m portiunculam quandam sed pene orbem totum contaminauerat adeo vt prope cunctis Latini Sermonis Episcopis partim vi partim fraude deceptis caligo quaedam mentibus offunderetur When as the poyson of the Arrians did not infect a little portion but in a manner the whole world insomuch that almost all the Latine Bishops partly by force and partly by cunning were intrapped and had a kinde of mist cast before their eyes These things beeing so may we not iustly vpbraid the Papists as Gregory Nazianzen doth the Arrians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c Where are they now who vpbraid pouerty vnto vs and boast of their wealth who define the Church by multitude and despise the little flock of Christ who honour the sand and reproach the greater lights of heauen who treasure vp Check-stones and passe by Margarites The seauenth Assertion When there is a difference betweene the visible professors of Christianity and each party pretendeth it selfe to bee the true Church in opposition to the other the onely sure and infallible meanes to know which of the dissident parties are of the true Church is by trying their doctrine by Scripture To this touch-stone of truth the Prophet Esay directeth vs To the Law and to the Testimony if they speak not according to this Word it is because there is no light in them And our blessed Sauiour Search the Scriptures for in them you think yee haue eternall life And S. Peter We haue also a more sure word of Prophesie vnto which you doe well if yee giue heed as to a light that shineth in a darke place By this rule the Bereans examined the doctrine of the Apostle searching the Scriptures daily whether those things were so Saint Austen best approoueth of this course to come to the knowledge of the true Church In Scripturis Canonicis requiramus Ecclesiam in the Canonicall Scriptures let vs search the Church And Non audiamus Haec dico Haec dicis sed audiamus 〈◊〉 dicit Dominus Sunt certi libri Dominici quorum authoritati vtrique consentimus ibi quaeramus Ecclesiam Let vs not heare I say this or Thou saist this but let vs heare This saith the Lord. There are certaine bookes of God to whose authority wee both consent there let vs seeke the Church And after much debating the matter hee concludeth the Chapter with these words Ergo in Scriptur is Canonic is eam requiramus therefore let vs seeke her the Church in the Canonicall Scriptures And Quisque nostrum non in iustitia sua sed in Scripturis quaerat Ecclesiam Aug. ep 48. Saint Basil directeth vs to the same course 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 With whomsoeuer doctrine agreeable to Scripture shall bee found the truth is alwaies to be adiudged to bee on their side To forbeare more allegations the learned Author of the imperfect work on Mathew hearing the name of S. Chrysostome deliuereth a firmer conclusion in formall and expresse tearmes and that seuerall times shewing that his iudgement was settled and resolued vpon it 〈…〉 modis â—stendebatur quae esset Ecclesia Christi et quae Gentilitas nunc autem nullo modo cognoscitur quae vera Ecclesia Christi nisi tantummodò per Scripturas quare quia omnia haec quae sunt proprie Christi in veritate habent et haereses illae in schemate similiter Ecclesiam similiter scripturas similiter baptismum similiter eucharistiam et caetera omnia demâ—m ipsum Christum Volens ergo quis cognoscere quae sit vera Christi Ecclesia vnde cognoscat in tanta confusione multitudinis nisi tantummodo per Scripturas Et pòst Qui ergò vult cognoscere quae sit vera Christi Ecclesia vnde cognoscat nisi tantummodò per Scripturaâ— Formerly it was shewed many waies what was the true Church of Christ and what was Gentilism but now it is knowne no other way which is the true Church of Christ but onely by the Scriptures Wherefore because all these things which properly belong vnto Christ in truth euen those heresies haue in shadow in like manner the Church in like manner the Scriptures in like manner Baptisme in like manner the Lords Supper and all other things finally Christ himselfe Hee therfore who is desirous to know which is the true Church of Christ whence should hee know it in such a great confusion of multitude but onely by the Scriptures And a little after Hee that will therefore know which is the true Church of Christ whence should hee know it but onely by the Scriptures It is obserued by those who follow the Law that when a Defendant excepts against the iudgement iurisdiction of the Court he certainely despaires of his cause in that Court. And what can wee interpret it in our aduersaries but distrust and despaire of their cause to detract as they doe from the perfection and except against the authority and sufficiency of Scripture for deciding all controuersies And heer I will be bold to turne the Iesuite Campions roring Canon against him and his fellowes Cùm multa sint quae aduersariorum in caâ—sa diffidentiam
I in my Argument nor you in your Answer vse those words 〈◊〉 aeterno Page 22. To that Syllogisme in the Conference viz. That Church whose faith is eternall and pâ—â—petuall and vnchanged is so visible as the Catholique Church ought to be and as the Popiâ—â— Church by M. Fisher is pretended to be But the faith of the Protestant Church is eternall perpetuall and vnchanged Ergo The Protestant Church is so visible as the Catholique Church ought to bee and the Popish Church is pretended by M. Fisher to bee You answer That the Maior is not vniuersally true for that there may be a Church or company who may haue inward faith eternall and vnchanged As for example A Church of Angels who for want of visible professors are not so visible as the Catholique Church ought to be Quid ad Rombum What is this instance to the purpose I dispute of the Church on earth you answer of the Church in heauen I dispute of faith you answer of vision I dispute of a Church succeeding in all Ages you answer of a Church in which there is no succeeding nor Ages I dispute of a Church visible in all Ages you answer of a Church visible in no Age. I dispute of noble Confessors Martyrs who haue sealed the profession of the Christian faith with their bloud you answer of immortall Spirits In a word I dispute of men named in good Authors and Histories you answer of Angels whose names are written in heauen and were neuer vpon visible Record except two or three named in the Scriptures Page 31. To those words of mine I neuer heard that the inference of the effect by the cause was transitio à genere in genus such was my Argument for faith in a beleeuer produceth profession and confession thereof You reply That M. Sweet 's Logick is not lesse to bee esteemed if hee had tearmed that 〈◊〉 to weet proouing the effect by the cause transitio à genere in genus for a cause as a cause an effect as an effect doe not onely differ specie but also genere and besides a proofe à priori and à posteriori are diuers kindes of proofes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I dispute of a transition à genere in genus in rebus you answer of a transition in notionibus I speake of a straying from the subject of the Question you answer of passing through diuers heads of Logick in proouing I speake of genus in Scientijs you answer of 〈◊〉 in the predicables or predicants so well in defence of M. Sweet you obserue M Sweets pretended Law of speaking nothing but to the purpose But certainely you saw not the But and somissed the mark reading M. Sweets Law without it thus Item 2. That nothing should be spoken to the purpose Euery Puney in Logick can tell you that the meaning of transitio à genere in genus is the proouing of a conclusion in one science by the principles of another distinct from it and no way subalternall to it As for example To demonstrate a conclusion in Physick by principles in Geometrie or to demonstrate a conclusion in naturall Philosophy out of a principle or principles in Morall Philosophy But if your interpretation of transitio à genere in genus should stand euery demonstration of the effect by the cause à priori or of the cause by the effect 〈◊〉 posteriori in the same Science should bee a transitio à genere in genus because as you say the cause as a cause and the effect as an effect differ genere for which ignorant Arguing as M. Sweet was prickt by D. Goad in the Conference so you M. Fisher for your more ignorant and grosse defence of it deserue to be sent to fustitudinas ferricrepinas Insulas vbi viuos homines mortui incursant boues Page 65. You alledge this for a reason why you refused to answer Christ his Apostles for that say you All disputation about particulars before the true Church were by her perpetuall Visibility or some such euident marke found out and knowne would haue beene fruitlesse and endlesse which was the reason why M. Fisher in another former conference had with a certaine Minister would not enter into any particulars vntill he had asked these generall Questions First what ground the Minister would stand vpon c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heer you bring-in by the head and eares a Conference of yours with a worthy Minister and an acute Disputant touching the merit of works What is this to the Visibility of the Protestant Church or a Catalogue of Names If this bee not transitio à genere in genus I am sure it is transitio à Quaestione in Quaestionem a vagring from one Question to another sufficiently distant neither was there any cause at all giuen you of this digression for I drew you not to dispute about any particulars but proceeded to prooue the generall Question proposed by your self to weet that The Protestant Church was so visible in the first Age that the Names of those that taught the Protestant faith might be produced viz. Christ his twelue Apostles Saint Paul and Ignatius to whom after you had giuen your Answer Whether they taught our faith or yours I would haue gone on in like manner in naming the Professors of the Protestant faith in all Ages Now then let the Reader iudge whether this your digression into a long tale of a conference of yours with a Minister touching merits were any way necessary or pertinent Page 68. 69 70. You alleage many Sayings out of Tertullian's golden Book of Prescriptions to prooue that Hereticks who reiected the authority of the Apostolicall and Mother Churches and refused also some Scriptures or peruerted the Text by additions and detractions should not be admitted to dispute with Orthodoxall Christians out of Scriptures 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The sentences indeed you cite are golden but you apply them most leadenly for what Protestant whom by a ridiculous 〈◊〉 principij or begging the Question you stile Hereticks what Protestant I say euer reiected the authority of the Apostolicall or Mother Churches as they were in the Primitiue Times much lesse either refused or peruerted any part of parcell of the Canonicall Scriptures by addition or detraction Wee attribute much more to the holy Scriptures and the ancient mother-Mother-church of which Tertullian speaks who receiued the Originall of Scriptures from the Authors themselues then you do we willingly put our whole cause in their hands wee renounce any Article of faith which cannot be prooued to haue been held by the Apostles and their heires Tertullian speaks of Prooue that the Apostles or the Primitiue Churches immediatly founded by them held your Trent-faith or those twelue new Articles added by Pope Piuâ— in the end of that Councell and imposed vpon all Professors to sweare vnto and then I will acknowledge that the Romane Church hath a good title to the Scriptures And if we prooue not that we
former acknowledge that the Hussites and Waldenses walked with a right foot in that way of Truth which since Luther blessed bee God hath beene much more cleerely discouered and trodden then in former times If Protestant Writers sway little with you who yet could better tell then you or M. Sweet and such other new vpstart Iesuites who were Luthers forerunners learne of your owne Rainerius and Claudius de Seissel and Cocleus and Lyndanus and Claudius Rubis and Aeneas Syluius and Iohn Dubranius and Alfonsus à Castro and the Author of the Fasciculus rerum exet and many other that the Waldenses bore a Torch before Luther and shewed him his way Yea but Schlusenburg saith It is impudencie to say that many learned men in Germany did hold the doctrine of the Lutheran Gospell Schlusenburgs words are Impudenter scribit Vtenboyus seex Conrado Pellicano audiuisse multos viros eruditos in Germaniâ priusquam prodiret Lutherus euangelij doctrinam tenüisse adeoque ipsum Pellicanum priusquam auditum esset nomen Lutheri Purgatorium Papisticum reiecisse Vtenboius writes impudently that he heard Conradus Pellicanus affirme that many learned men in Germany held the doctrine of the Gospell before Luther appeared and that Pellicanus himselfe impugned the Popish Purgatory before the name of Luther was heard For ought I know Vtenboius is as honest a man as Schlusenburgius and if Schlusenburgius deny it Vtenboius affirmeth it yea and for ought is prooued to the contrary Conradus Pellicanus also yet that which Schlusenburg maintaineth for the honor of his Master no way helpeth your cause for admit there were not in Germany yet there might bee elsewhere many thousands as in Bohemia France England c. who before Luther embraced the doctrine of the Gospell Secondly in Germany it selfe there were not multi eruditi viri many learned men yet there might be some for ought Schlusenburg saith to the contrary therefore Schlusenburges testimony falls very short neither doth George Myllius his come much neerer to the marke His words are Si antecessores Lutherus in officio habuisset Orthodoxos Si Apostasia commissa ab Episcopis Pontificijs non fuisset Lutherana reformatione opus non fuisset Non ergo possumus veros monstrare Episcopos qui ante Lutherum sub Papatu fuerint praedecessores Lutheri Si enim tales fuissent in Romana Ecclesia discedendi ab ista causa non fuisset If Luther had had orthodoxall Predecessors in his Office If the Popish Bishop had not made an Apostasie there should haue beene no need of a Lutheran Reformation Therefore we cannot shew true Bishops vnder the Papacie to whom Luther succeeded for if there had beene such in the Romane Church there had beene no cause to depart from it What makes this testimony for you Is it for the honor of your Church to bee truly branded with Apostasie to haue no orthodoxal Bishops bearing rule in it What though there were no right-beleeuing Bishops vnder or in the Papacy will it follow that there were no right-beleeuing Christians elsewhere It is true Reformation presupposeth a Deformation as a remedy presupposeth a disease a purgation precedent matter fit to bee purged Though the Romane Church or rather the predominant faction in the Romane Church was vnsound in the faith and very corrupt and rotten yet were there other sound members of Christs Church in whose steps it is well knowne that Luther trod What a paralyticall Paralogisme is this Myllius a Lutheran affirmeth that There were 〈◊〉 orthodoxall or right-beleeuing Bishops in the Romane Sea therfore there were no visible Protestants in all the world before Luther Now for Benedictus Morgenst Non est inuentus in Baliua nostra Hee who found him for you makes him runne the same way with Ioachimus Camerarius but not whither you would haue him They both stand for the honor of Luther and maintaine that he alone laid the first stone in the Fabrick of reformation that none ought to share with him in that dignity in beeing the first Apostle of the reformed Churches They will not endure that Luther should be thought to draw water out of any other Cisterne but out of the Fountaine of liuing water the Scriptures Wicklef indeed saith Ioachimus was instructed by the Waldenses and Hus by Wicklef but Luther receiued his doctrine neither from Hus nor Wicklef but was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taught of himselfe out of Scriptures This preeminency all Protestants doe not willingly grant to Luther Zuinglius and Pellicanus and Vtenboius and your owne Alfonsus à Castro seeme to make others as ready forward at that time as Luther And indeed whether Luther set Zuinglius or Zuinglius Luther first a-work or whether the Spirit of God stird vp both their spirits at the same instant to set to that noble work of repairing and reforming Gods Temple I hold it needlesse to define Let Luther and Zuinglius and many other their contemporaries and fellow-workmen in that great work shine as so many precious stones in the foundation of the reformed Churches Ne sit primus nec vel imus quispiam Will it follow that because Luther was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and did not tind his candle at another mans light therefore there was no visible Protestant at that time but hee It will follow say you because Morgenst addeth that It is manifest to the whole world that before Luther's time all Churches were ouerwhelmed with more then Cymerian darknesse And you adde also to Morgenst fiue other corroboratory testimonies of Caluin Bucer Beza Iewell and Perkins whereunto after I haue giuen a direct and particular answer I will dismisse you Master FISHER And lest this may bee thought to haue beene onely the conceit of Luther and Lutherans who yet could better tell then D. Featly D. White and such other new Masters I will adde heereunto what is said first by Caluin who doth acknowledge that in this Lutheran reformation there was made a discession or departure from all the world Secondly by Bucer who calleth Luther the first Apostle of the reformed doctrine Thirdly by Beza a principall Caluinist who teacheth that at this time ordinary vocation of the Church-men was no where extant and consequently teacheth that there was at that time no visible Church and so if any Church at all it was onely inuisible as is affirmed euen by our owne English Protestant Diuines namely Master Iewel who saith The truth was vnknowne and vnheard of when Martin Luther and Viderick Zuinglius first came to the knowledge and preaching of the Gospell and M. Perkins who saith Wee say that before the daies of Luther for the space of many hundred yeeres an vniuersall Apostasie ouer-spred the whole face of the earth and that our Protestant Church was not visible to the world Doctor FEATLY When Caluin saith There was a departure made from all the world and Morgenst That
half that you now oppose and suffer me to answer Prooue by Christ and his Apostles or by any of the Fathers for the first 600 yeeres these present Tenets of the Romane Church viz. 1. That all power of order and Iurisdiction in respect of the Churches is to be deriued from the Church of Rome 2. That no Scripture sense or translation thereof is authenticall vnlesse the same were receiued from the Church of Rome 3. That the Romane Church onely was and is the authenticall Custos of vnwritten traditions 4. That all generall Councels were called by the sole authority of the Pope and that hee might ratify and disannuall whatsoeuer pleased him in them 5. That the Pope onely had power to canonize Saints 6. That the Pope had or hath power to depose Princes Prooue all or any of these and we will neither carp nor cauill about names but answer directly without all delayes euasions or tergiuersations M. Fisher. When you Doctor White or Doctor Featly haue prooued your Church to bee visible in all Ages and named visible Protestants then I promise you to prooue the Visibility of the Catholique Romane Church but that is not done by you yet D. Featly It had bin done but for your delayes and tergiuersations Answer briefly and directly to my former argument and I will descend to my Induction and produce the names of such eminent persons as in all Ages haue maintained the substantiall points of faith in which wee differ from your Romane Church That Church whose faith is the Catholique and Primitiue faith once giuen to the Saints without which none can bee saued is so visible that the names of the professors thereof in all Ages may bee shewed and prooued out of good Authors But the Protestant Church is that Church whose faith is the Catholique and Primitiue faith once giuen to the Saints without which none can be saued Therfore the Protestants Church is so visible that the names of the professors thereof may be shewed in all Ages c. The Maior is ex concessis What say you to the Minor M. Fisher. I distinguish the Minor D. Featly Vpon what tearme doe you distinguish M. Fisher. I distinguish of the proposition not of any tearme D. Featly Heere is againe another straine of new Logick to distinguish of a proposition and apply the distinction to no tearme howsoeuer I am glad to heare you distinguish and not simply to deny that the Protestant faith is the Catholique Primitiue faith Mark I beseech you you that are present that M. Fisher demurres vpon the proposition his conscience will not suffer him simply to deny that the Protestant faith is the Catholique Primitiue faith we simply and slatly and in down-right tearmes deny that your present Tridentine faith is the Catholique Primitiue faith M. Fisher. I answered you before that your Minor is false and impertinent D. Featly I have prooued already that it is pertinent what say you to the truth of it M. Fisher. This is to diuert from the question The question is not now Whether our faith or yours bee the Catholique Primitiue faith but the question now is of the effect to wit the Visibility of your Church which you ought to prooue out of good Authors D. Featly May not a man prooue the effect by the cause Is there no other meanes to proue the effect but by naming men and producing Authors for it M. Sweet An effect is posterius the question is about an effect therefore you ought to proue it à posteriori D. Featly What a reason is this May not an effect be proued by his cause Must an effect bee needs proued by an effect or à posteriori because an effect is posterius M. Sweet Leaue these Logick Disputes Bring the names of your Protestants that is it we expect D. Featly If I should relinquish my former argument to which yet you haue giuen no manner of answer you M. Fisher would report that I was non-plussed as you slandered D. White in a former conference who I tell you M. Fisher is able to teach vs both Whereto M. Fisher replied nothing To preuent all such mis-reports to the wrong of either it was mooued by the hearers that it should be written downe by the common Writer of the Conference that both the Disputants beeing willing to proceed D. Featly was desired by the company because it was late to produce the names of such Protestants as were extant before Luther in all Ages This beeing written and subscribed by them both D. Featly proceeded to his Induction D. Featly An induction is a forme of argument in which wee proceed from enumeration of particulars to conclude a generall after this manner It is so in this and this et sic de eaeteris and so in the rest Therefore it is so in all According to this forme of arguing thus I dispute The Protestant Church was so visible that the names of those who taught and beleeued the doctrine thereof may bee produced in the first hundred yeeres and second and third and fourth et sic de caeteris and so in the rest Therefore it was so in all Ages First I name those of the first Age and I begin with Him who is the beginning of all our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ blessed for euer at whose name all knees must bow both in heauen earth and vnder the earth at which words all the company on both sides expressed an holy reuerence After Christ I name the twelue Apostles and Saint Paul and because there were few Writers in the first Age at least whose vndoubted works haue comne to our hands I name onely Ignatius after the twelue Apostles and Saint Paul yet not denying but that many others may be named M. Fisher. These are enow for the first Age Christ the twelue Apostles Saint Paul and Ignatitius Heere at the name of Ignatius some of M. Fishers side seemed very glad and confident saying We are sure enough Saint Ignatius is on our side D. Featly I meane not the new Ignatius Loyola but Ignatius the Martyr betweene whom there is more difference in quality then distance in time M. Fisher. Name of all the Ages or else you do nothing D. Featly I cannot name all at once will you haue mee name men of so many Ages with one breath Will you haue mee eat my whole dinner at a bit Can I name twelue seuerally but I must name first one then two then three and so forward I name as I said before in the first Age for our Religion our blessed Lord and Sauiour the Founder of all Religion the twelue Apostles and after them Saint Paul and Ignatius the Martyr For the second Age I name Iustin Martyr Clemens Alexandrinus and Saint Irenaeus and I beginne first with Christ and his Apostles M. Fisher. You shall not beginne with Christ and his Apostles D. Featly You are not to make my Induction I will begin with Christ and his Apostles where I should
et fideli profana et perfidâ— facta est Ita quae Apostolis Ecclesiam docentibus erant inandita ea pòst à patribus caepere queri ambigi Quae priscis 〈◊〉 scrupulum mâ—hebaâ—â— ea probabilia visa sunt 〈◊〉 à receâ—ioribus Scholasticis et Canonistis habebanturâ—â—ra Quae illi opinati sunt et tennerunt â—odie 〈◊〉 defendunt pertinaciter et dissentientes 〈◊〉 First Heathenish and then Iewish rites and opinions stole in these were the seedes of ill examples and orders or customes these at the first beeing small were not obserued sometimes they were spied and checked Afterwards by degrees they more and more increased then were they confirmed and spred further till in the end the whole face of Religion was eaten out as it were with a Canker and the Church of Rome 〈◊〉 and faithfull spouse became a profane and disloyall strumpet So those things which in the Apostles time were vnheard of after beganne to bee questioned and doubted by the Fathers Those things which the anâ—ient Doctors made scruple of seemed probable to some and were held true by the later School-men Canonists Those things which they held but as opinions the Papists at this day defend obstinately and condemne all that dissent from them Iust as Velleius Paterculus reports of the Romane State that degenerating from the antient vertue and glory it fell maturè à rectis in vitia à vitijs in prana prâ—uis in praecipitia from good to bad from bad to worse from worse to worst of all so the Roman Church in tract of time fell from certain truths to doubtfull Tenets from doubtfull Tenets 〈◊〉 manifest errors from manifest errors at last to heresies where we now finde them and there leaue them because they are resolued there to stick The generall Conclusion The Protestant Church according to the distinctions and Assertions premised hath beene in all Ages in some degree visible Thus much of the first Question propounded by the Iesuite touching the Visibility of the Protestant Church in all Ages The second Question touching the Catalogue of names follows Touching the Names of visible Protestants in all Ages The second Question WHether visible Protestants are to bee named in all Ages out of good Authors To this Question I answer as to the former by Distinctions Assertions The first Distinction Visible Protestants are either Such as subscribe to the harmony of Protestant Confessions in each point of faith and Theologicall Conclusion Or such as haue deliuered either implicitly or explicitly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 positiuely or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by way of opposition some point or points of Protestant Doctrine especially if it cannot be proued that they held any doctrine de fide repugnant to the Protestants faith or different from them in any point of moment or very materiall much lesse fundamentall In this Question neither is it reasonable neither indeed doth the Iesuite demand that wee should prooue visible Protestants in all Ages in the first sense but in the later onely His words are For auoiding of all mis-taking and consequently needlesse and fruitlesse Disputes M. Fisher in his Question requireth first that names of men in all Ages be set down whom Sir Humphrey Linde and his friends conceiue to haue been Protestants Secondly that those men whose names they set downe bee shewed out of good Authors to agree in houlding some points of faith in which Protestants differ from Roman Catholiques Thirdly that Sir Humphrey Linde or his friends will defend against M. Fisher that the same men held no other points of faith different one from another and from the present Protestant Doctrine The second Distinction The Names of Protestants are of two sorts Proper as Bertram Lollard Dulcinus Caluin Beza Iewell c. Appellatiue as Protestants Gospellers Reformers Albingenses Waldenses Lionists Piccards Turlepins and generally all such names as haue either been assumed by any society of Protestants to distinguish themselues from others or cast vpon them by way of reproach by their Aduersaries whose reproaches they and wee accounted their glory In this Question although the Iesuite seemeth to take Names in the first sense yet he cannot be so grossely ignorant as not to knowe that it is aboundantly sufficient for the proof of a visible Church euen à posteriori to proue out of good Authors the appellatiue Names of Protestants in all Ages No man doubteth that it is a sufficient Argument to prooue the Visibility of the true Church in Israel in Elias time to produce that sacred Record of seuen thousand that neuer bowed their knees to Baal albeit neither doth the Spirit of God there set down neither can any man liuing now tell what was the proper name of any one of them No Geographer will euer make question but that there are now many visible Churches of Christians in Africa and diuerse parts of Asia vnder the Turk and Tartar knowne by the names of Abyssens Maronits Cophti Armenians Georgians or the like and yet neither can the Geographers themselues peraduenture nor you nor I presently giue the proper name of any one of them For my part I know but one Greek Christian sometime Student in Oxford Metrophanes Critopulus The third Distinction These words Protestants are to be named may admit of a double construction Either that names ought to be produced and that we are bound to produce them to proue the Visibility of our Church as if without such producing the protestant cause shold any way suffer or receiue any prejudice Or that such names may bee produced and that there are such Records yet extant out of which wee are able to makes a Catalogue of Protestant professors In this question the Iesuite holdeth that the names of Protestants in the first sense are to bee produced that is ought to bee produced and must of necessitie to proue the visibility of our Church but hee denieth it in the second sense that is that such names can bee produced On the contrary my Tenets are that Visible Protestants are to bee named in the second sense that is are â—minable but not in the first sense Though wee need not make any such Catalogue yet ex superabundanti I refuse not to doe it our cause is so richly furnished that wee can do it though wee are not bound to do it for the reasons partly alledged in the conference partly confirmed and enlarged in the defence thereof The fourth Distnction Good Authors are of two sorts Of the first rank and such are Classicke Theological or Historical Authors against which neither Papists nor Protestants much except but both account them of great worth and credit Of the second ranke and such are those Authors who though they are not of any singular or eminent note yet they may bee tearmed good according to the ages in which they liued which afforded no better In this question I restrain not good Authors to those of the first rank only but admit also of those
excuse the matter saying Fâ—gisse Haereticos atque in praelatos ac monachos se abdidisse that the Hereticks which seemed to bee flowne away in this Age were not indeed vanished out of the world but lay close and hid themselues vnder Bishops Rochets and Monkes Coules where neither Prateolus nor Norice durst to search for them As this ninth Age so the tenth and some others after were very barren of learned Writers And therefore no maruaile if the haruest wee gather in these Ages of the professors of the truth and defenders thereof by writing bee very thinne for to leaue an Armie of bastard apocryphall Authors as the Papists do to maintain the Popes title or in so weighty a cause to rely on the ragged regiment of Authors mustred vp in Orthodoxographia bibliotheca veterum et Epistolae obscurorum virorum c. I hold it rather a dishonor and disaduantage then any credit or aduantage to the truth The fift Assertion Since Boniface the Third's time in the seauenth Age and much more since Hildebrand in the tenth such was the greatnesse of the Pope and transcendent power of the See of Rome that few durst or might write freely against the errors and vsurpations thereof And therefore it is not to be maruailed that we haue not many but it is rather to bee maruailed that wee haue any who haue displayed the abominations of the Whore of Babylon The Answer of a Poet in Augustus time is very famous who beeing demanded why he replied not vpon Augustus who had writ against him a bitter Satyr cleanly wiped his lips and said Periculosum est 〈◊〉 â—um scribere qui potest proscribere It is a dangerous thing to giue him a dash with a pen who is like to requite it with a slash of a sword to obiect against him in inke who can returne an answer in blood Pone Tigelinum teda lucebis in illa Qua stantes ardent fixo gutture fumant Set the Pope or Church of Rome out in her colours and shee will make you a light of the Church by burning you at a stake Platina and Occham long ago vpon iust cause and lamentable experience cast this bloodie aspersion on the Pope and his Adherents Occham frameth his inditement in these words Vt intentum 〈◊〉 horrendum ad finem possint perducere defendentes vâ—ritatem prosequuntur interimunt innoxium sangâ—â—nem fundunt That they may bring their horrible purpose to passe they prosecute such as maintaine the truth murther them and shead their innocent bloud Platinaâ— in these words 〈◊〉 mandataâ— Christi quise Vicarium eius dicit credâ—â—â— in verba Dei exurit Hee condemneth the commands of Christ who professeth and calleth himselfe his Vicar and burneth such as beleeue in the words of God Laurentius Valla for writing freely against the forged donation of Constantine lost his libertie and Countrie too Occham was so bold to strike at the Popes triple Crowne and to oppose some doctrines of the Church of Rome that hee was therefore excommunicated by the Pope and so grieuously persecuted that he was constrained to flie to the Emperor for succour to whom hee made this reasonable motion Tu defende me gladio ego defendam te calamo Defend thou mee by thy sword or power I will defend thee by my word or pen. Were the Waldenses and Albingenses murthered by thousands for Heresie No Rainerius cleareth them of that Omnia rectè de Deo credunt They beleeue all things rightly concerning God Why then Solummodo Romanam Ecclesians blasphemant Clerum They speake euill of the Church of Rome and the Clergie The opinions of the Albingenses saith Hallian did not so much stir vp the hate of the Pope and great Princes against them as the libertie of speech did wherewith they vsed to blame the vices and disolutenes of the said Princes and Clergie yea to tax the vices and actions of the Popes themselues This was the principall point that brought them into vniuersall hatred What was it so inflamed the Pope against the Hussites that hee proclaimed two Croisadoes and imploied great armies against them Their administring the Sacrament in both kindes maugre the sacrilegious decree of the Councell of Constance No. That he could and did dispence with all It was that article of the Hussites gathered out of their writings by Alanus Papaest â—estia de qua habetur in Apocalypsi 12. Datum est ei bellum facere cum sanctis The Pope is the beast whereof it is said in the 12. of the Reuelation It is granted to him the beast to warre with the Saints Hincillae lachrymae Nay rather Hinc ille crâ—or This kindled such a fire against the deare seruants of Christ that nothing could or did quench it but their bloud shed in great abundance For some hundreds of yeeres the chiefe Records and Monuments of the Westerne Church haue been in the hands of our Romish aduersaries who haue partly burned them partly corrupted them and partly kept them from vs. And herein they deale with vs as Theramenes his Colleagues dealt with him who hauing a purpose to question him for his life first strooke his name out of the Catalogue of the gouernours of the Citty and then articled against him And when he pleaded the priuiledge of all those whose names were written in the Catalogue they barred him from this defence saying That he could not plead that priuiledge because his name was not in the Catalogue In like manner our aduersaries take away from vs or make away from vs our records and then they non-sute vs for want of euidence Gregorie the great wrote manie things preiudiciall to the Popes pretensions and vsurpations and therefore Sabinianus his successor burnt diuers of his bookes as Platina intimates and Sixtus Senensâ—s expresly affirmeth That his most wicked emulators did burne the greater part of Gregories works presently after his death Auentine brandeth Pope Hildebrand with the marke of a corrupter of Chronicles and a razer out of them the things that were done Cocleus writeth of Hus Dum duceretur ad locum poenae videns in coemiterio libros suos comburi subrisit proper eam stultitiam While hee was led to the place of execution seeing in the Church-yard his bookes to bee burned hee smiled at that follie And his smiling may seeme propheticall for notwithstanding all the meanes that they could possibly vse to root him and his writings out of the memory of men yet both through Gods mercy are preserued and some few works also of Wicklef But the great bulk of them not much inferior to the quantity of Saint Austens works could not escape the fire beeing so narrowly searched after by the command of diuers Popes yea and Kings too If we might haue accesse to the Popes Library we doubt not but that wee should finde many more bookes written both in Latine and Greek against the Pope
This Cope acknowledgeth in his Dialogues As for corrupting antient Authors and circumcising later I referre all that desire to be satisfied in this point to T. I. his Treatise of the corruptions c. as also to the Indices expurgatorij Quiroga and Sanctouall The flourishing Fencer Campian in his first reason termeth Protestants difficiles Aristarchâ—s 〈◊〉 arrepta virgula censoria si quae ad stomachum 〈◊〉 faciunt obliterant But doe not Papists more truly deserue to bee censured censorious Aristarchi For as Aristarchus vsed to raze out the verses of Homer which hee liked not so hee that hath but halfe an eie may see that the Romanists in their Indices expurgatorij blot out of all sorts of Authors whatsoeuer liketh them noâ— or any way makes against them But wee hope wee shall shortly haue a Vindex for their Index And therefore leauing the further prosecution of this point I will now set downe my last Assertion and generall conclusion Notwithstanding all the difficulties aboue-mentioned yet God hath not left his truth though too much opposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to bee without witness in all Ages as may appeare by the learned labors of diuers Protestants aboue mentioned out of whose large fields as also mine owne particular obseruations I haue gleaned a brief Catalogue which may suffice to poynt out a Protestant successiue Church from Age to Age. The beginning of the Catalogue For witnesses to the truth of the Doctrine wee now professe and maintaine in the Church of England I alledge IN the first Age from Christs birth to 100 yeeeres CHRIST IESVS The twelue Apostles Saint Iohn Baptist. Saint Mark Saint Luke Saint Paul with his schollers Titus Timothy and the Churches planted or watered by them Romanes Corinthians c. Clemens about the yeere 90. Ignatius about the yeere 100. with the Churches to whom he wrote The Tralians Magnesians Tarsians Philadelphians c. In the second Age from 100. to 200. Polycarpus 140. Iustin Martyr 150. Methodius 155. Dionysius Corinthiacus 158. Hegesippus 160. Melito Sardensis 170. Polycrates cum Synodo Asiaâ—â—ca 180 Saint Irenaeus 190. Clemens Alexandrinus 200. These Professors of the truth 〈◊〉 denying others I alledge for the two 〈◊〉 centuries further we proceeded not in 〈◊〉 Conference and therefore heere I 〈◊〉 a stop for a time and withall a challenâ—â— to M. Fisher to set downe the names 〈◊〉 his supposed Papists for these two 〈◊〉 Ages together with such poynts of 〈◊〉 Romish Religion as he will prooue 〈◊〉 they maintained which after hee haâ—â— done I will make good my witnesses anâ— disprooue his and then proceed to 〈◊〉 succeeding Ages euen vnto Luther if 〈◊〉 permit Hic rhodus hic saltus Hic modus haec nostro signabitur area currâ— A defence of Doctor FEATLY his proceedings in the Conference together with a refutation of Master FISHERS Answer vnder the name of A. C. to a Treatise intituled The Fisher caught in his owne Net AS Velleius Paterculus obserues that In the battell at Philippi in which Brutus should haue taken Anthony to task and Cassius Augustus it fell out cleane contrary so that Brutus met with Augustus and Anthony marched against Cassius So it came to passe in this present combate D. White prepared and prouided to encounter M. Fisher his former Antagonist and D. Featly was intreated as in Assistant to deale in a second place with M. Sweet if occasion were offered Yet vpon a cunning trick of the Iesuite discouered immediately before the Conference it was then on the place of the meeting resolued otherwise by some that were principally interessed in the businesse that D. Featly should beginne with M. Fisher and oppose him in the Iesuites question touching the visibility of the Protestants Church and D. White as there should bee cause should take off M. Sweet if he interposed as also answer in the contrary question propounded to the Iesuites touching the Visibility of the Romish Church in all Ages Thus D. Featly who intended to be but an Assistant contrary to his expectation was made the principall Opponent in this Disputation Wherin that hee might the better manage the truthes quarrell and satisfie his Auditory hee set before his eies certaine rules partly taken out of Scripture partly out of the antient Fathers to direct his proceedings by them The first rule is Saint Paul's Let nothing bee done through strife or vaine-glory God is not in the fire of contention nor in the whirle-winde of passion but in the still voice of them who in meeknesse of spirit seeke the truth out of loue of truth it selfe not of desire of victory Nolunt Scripturâ— ae docere nisi eos qui doceri quaerunt The Scriptures will not instruct those who seek not to bee instructed by them in this manner Democritus fitly compared truth to a iewell in the bottome of a Well if the water bee cleere we may easily discerne it but if troubled it is impossible to see the bottome of the Well much lesse discerne the most precious Iewel of truth lying in it For this cause D. Featly in the beginning of the disputation as is confessed by A. C. earnestly besought M. Fisher to deale sincerely as in the sight of God setting aside all passion and by-respects and when M. Sweet propounded that condition that all bitter speeches should be auoided D. Featly with the rest most willingly accepted of it and commended M. Sweet for proposing of it The second rule is Nazianzens 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is the best order in all speech and actions to begin and end with God According to which prescription D. Featly beganne with a short Prayer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and ended partly with a doxologie adding to his instance in Christ our Lord and Sauiour blessed for euer at whose Name all knees must bow both in heauen and earth and vnder the earth partly by an holy adjuration M. Fisher I charge you as you will answer before Christ at the day of Iudgement The third rule is Epiphanius his who obserueth in a Disputation against the Photinians quòd adhibiti sunt qui vtrinque exciperent ea quae dicebantur quae postea ab vtraque parte obsignabantur there were appointed Notaries who did take that which was said on both sides and their notes afterward were signed by both parties According to which obseruation M. Ailsbury was chosen and accepted of as Notary on both sides and D. Featly did set his hand to each Syllogisme as likewise did M. Fisher to his Answers and this schedule containing the substance of the arguments and Answers in the end of the Conference was sealed with three seales the Earle of Warwicks Master Boultons and Master Bugges The fourth rule is Tâ—rtâ—llians first to 〈◊〉 the ground and set vp as it were the goales by determining the state of the question Summam quaestionis saith he certis line is determinemus aduersus Marcionem L. 17. His
may be knowne by some periphrasis D. Featly What say you then to the Hereticks called Acephali who are so called because their Head Author cannot be named nor particularly described yet the Author was a visible man Are all visible mens names vpon Record are al the Records that were in former times now to be produced Heere diuers of M. Fishers company called Names Names Names D. Featly What will nothing content you but a Buttery-book You shall haue a Buttery book of names if you will stay a while Master FISHER'S Answer To this obiection touching the Acephali M. Boulton answered that those Acephali held some particular Doctrine which did amount to the nature of a name sufficient to distinguish them from others insinuating heereby that these Acephali were not Anonymi Further it may be answered that it is not certaine whether they had any particular Author for some say that they were a company who in the controuersie betwixt Iohn the Bishop of Antioch Cyril of Alexandria behaued themselues like Neutrals submitting themselues to neither as to their Head Others think that they were certaine men who beeing the Fauourers of Petrus Mogus the Heretick did afterwards renounce him from beeing their Head because he would not accurse the Councell of Chalcedon Others say that one Seueius Bishop of Antioch was their Author But howsoeuer this particular were it doth not conclude that there could be in all Ages visible professors of the Protestants faith whereof no story nor other antient Monument maketh mention of names or opinions or places of aboad of any of them or of those who opposed them as Stories make mention of some of these circumstances both of the Acephali and whatsoeuer other eminent professors of euery true or false Religion Wee doe not require that all visible mens names should bee vpon Record nor all Records produced For although to prooue such a visible Church as that of our Sauiour Christ described in Scripture to bee spred ouer the world a small number of visible Professors bee not sufficient as Saint Austen prooueth against the Donatists yet to shew how confident wee are of our cause wee for the present onely require that Three eminent Protestants names in all Ages be produced out of good Authors But they are so farre from beeing able to produce three as they cannot name one in euery Age as is cleerely proued in the Protestants Apology neither indeed can they abide with any patience when they bee much pressed in this point as appeareth by diuers who haue beene vrged and in particular by D. Featly in this Conference who hauing beene called vpon seuerall times to produce Names as hee had vndertaken at one time he burst foorth into these words set down by the Protestant Relator What will nothing content you but a buttery-book you shall haue a buttery-book if you will stay a while Note Reader this Doctors want of grauity and patience and what a fit title he giues to a Catalogue of names of Protestants who indeed are more like to be◠found in a Buttery-book then in any good Record of antiquity as hauing had their beginning of late in one Martin Luther who after his Apostasie more respected the Buttery then any Ecclesiasticall Story Doctor FEATLY'S Reply In the Answer to this Paragraph first you shake hands with the Acephali afterwards you salute the Donatists in the end you take vp your lodging with the Spright of the buttery in whose company it seemes you take most delight To beginne with your Acephali These Acephali were a shole of Hereticks bred as it should seeme of the spawne of Eutyches Dioscorus for they held that there was but one nature in Christ viz. the diuine which they affirmed to haue beene crucified These differed from other Hereticks in this especially That whereas other Hereticks for the most part took their names from the Author and Head of their Sect as the Arians from Arius the Nestorians from Nestorius c these Hereticks because their first Author could not bee certainly knowne were termed Acephali from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 priuatiuo and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying a Head as if you would say Head-lesse Hereticks So that as Pliny writes of the herb Anonymos nomen non inueniendo inuenit that it took it's name Anonymos from the want of a name so it may be truly said of these Hereticks that they took their name from the want or at least ignorance of the name of their parent and first Author Thus your Alfonso deduceth and expoundeth their name Haeretici Acephali dicti sic nominati sunt 〈◊〉 simul insurgentes nullus repertus est quiillarum esse◠princeps atque magister The Hereticks tearmed Acephali were so named because multitudes of them rising together there was found none who might be their Head and Master Neither doe you in your Answer contradict but rather confirme this Etymology by rehearsing diuers and sundry opinions touching their Head and Author Which variety of opinions and difference of Authors about him plainely argueth that no certainty was or can be had of him who he was and much lesse what was his proper name Wherefore distrusting your former Answer you adde a second saying Howsoeuer this particular were it doth not conclude that there could be in all Ages visible professors of the Protestant faith whereof no Story nor other antient Monument maketh 〈◊〉 of names or opinions or places of aboad of any of them 〈◊〉 of those who opposed them I grant it doth not conclude so much neither was it brought to conclude so much it prooueth sufficiently what intended viz. That your Question is grounded vpon a false Supposal it cutteth M. Sweet's reason in the hams If there were visible Protestants in 〈◊〉 Ages then certainly they may bee now named The Head and Author of the Heresie of the Acephali was I suppose a visible man yet can he not now nor for ought appeares could he then when hee broched his Heresie be named In like manner the 7000. that neuer bowed their knees to Baal and all your Ancestors descending from Noah were certainly visible men yet can they not now be all named and therefore M. Sweet's Argument ab authoritate negatiue and à negatione vocis ad negationem rei is a poore fallacie fit to bee ranked with that which they wrongfully fasten on my Argument à priori viz. petitio principij or the begging the Question I wil not say that in disputing about the Acephali you shew your selfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but certainly in that which followeth you shew your self 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 else you would not so ignorantly apply Saint Austens proofes in his Book against Donatists to disprooue our Church For it is well knowne that we teach with Saint Austen that Christs visible Catholique Church is dispersed farre and wide ouer the face of the whole earth But you are the Donatists of our Age for as the Donatists confined
ceaseth Doctor Featly You haue a purpose Master Fisher to cauill you know my meaning well enough by the terme perpetuall to wit that Christian faith which hath continued from Christs first publishing it till this present and shall continue till his second Comming The Church which houldeth this faith you beleeue shal be so visible that the Names of the professors thereof may bee shewed in all Ages But the Protestant Church holdeth this perpetuall faith Ergo. Master Fisher. Your Argument is a fallacie called Petitio principii Doctor Featly A demonstration à causa or à priori is not Petitio principij But such is my Argument Ergo. Is it not a sounder Argument to proue the visibility of the professors from the truth of their faith then as you do the truth of your faith from the visibilitie of professors Visible professors argue not a right faith Heretikes Mahumetanes and Gentiles haue visible professors of their impieties yet will it not hence follow that they haue a right beliefe On the contrary we knowe by the promises of God in the Scripture that the Church which maintaineth the true faith shall haue alwaies professors more or lesse visible Master Sweet You ought to proue the truth of your Church à posteriori for that is to the question and not à priori Doctor Featly Shall you prescribe me my weapons Is not an Argument à priori better then an Argument à posteriori This is as if in battell you should enioyne your enemie to stab you with a knife and not with a sword or dagger I will vse what weapous I list take you what buckler you can Master Fisher. A proofe à posteriori is more demonstratiue than à priori Heere Master Fisher sheweth his Academicall learning in preferring a demonstration à posteriori before that which proceedeth à priori Is not a demonstration of the effect from the cause better then of the cause by the effect In this place or vpon the like occasion againe offered neerer the end of the disputation Master Sweet replied M. Sweet This is to diuert the question The question is not now Whether our faith or yours bee the Catholicke primitiue faith but the question now is of the effect to wit the visibilitie of your Church which you ought to proue out of good Authors Doctor Featly May not a man proue the effect by the cause Is there no other meanes to proue the effect but by naming men and producing authors for it Master Sweet An effect is posterius the question is about an effect therefore you ought to proue it à posteriori Doctor Featly What a reason is this May not an effect bee prooued by his cause Must an effect bee needs proued by an effect or à posteriori because an effect is posterius Master FISHER'S Answer Thus farre the Relator who hath heere added much more then was said and in particular those formall words which he reporteth Master Fisher to haue said viz. A proofe à posteriori is more demonstratiue then à priori Master Fisher did not speake perhaps hee might say That a proofe à posteriori doth better demonstrate to vs then à priori not meaning in generall to preferre a Logicall demonstration à posteriori before that which is à priori but that such a proofe à posteriori as hee in this present question required and as the question it selfe exacted would better demonstrate or shew to all sorts of men which is the true Church then any proofe which Doctor Featly or D. White can make à priori to proue the Protestant Church to bee the true Church as shall be shewed when need is heereafter At this present it may suffieâ—â—â— say to that which Doctor Featly now obiecteth against the proofe taken from visibility that Although all kind of visible professors doe not argue right faith yet want of visibile professors argueth want of Christs true Church For supposing it to bee true which euen D. Featly himselfe heere saith according to the Protestants Relator viz. wee knowe by the promises of God in the Scripture that the Church which maintaineth the true faith shall haue alwaies professors more or lesse visible and as Master Fisher further proued in one of the foresaid papers giuen to the old gentleman before this meeting so visible as their Names in all Ages may bee shewed out of good Authors supposing also out of Doctor Whitaker contr Dur. l. 7. p. 472. that Whatsoeuer is foretold by the antient Prophets of the propagation amplitude and glorie of the Church is most cleerly witnessed by Histories and supposing lastly out of Doctor Iohn White in his way p. 338. That things past cannot bee shewed to vs but by Histories Supposing all this I say it is most apparant that if there cannot bee produced as there cannot Names of Protestants or of any other professors of Christian faith in all Ages out of Histories to whom Gods promises agree besides those which are knowne Roman Catholiques not Protestants nor any other but onely the Roman Catholiques are the true church of Christ which teacheth the true faith and of which al sorts are to learn infallible faith necessary to saluation Doctor FEATLY'S Reply I maruel not M. Fisher that you leaue M. Sweet in the suds for you haue much adoo with all your strength and skil to get yourself out of the mire M. Sweet since he left our Vniuersities and was metriculated into your Society seemes to speak in our Academicall Phrase to haue resumed gradum Simeonis and to haue proceeded backward for whatsoeuer truth in Logick or Philosophy hee had learned in our Schools he hath learned to vnlearn in yours It seemeth he hath met with some such Master as Timotheus the Musician was who took double pay of his scholars for vnteaching them what they had learnd of others Hee was taught in our Schools that an effect cannot be scientifically proued or demonstrated but by the cause for Scire est causam scire propter quam c. and Demonstratio is Syllogismus scientificus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a scientificall Syllogism proceeding of those things that are former in nature and more knowne and causes of the conclusion All this he hath vnlearned and will needs go about to perswade vs that An effect because it is posterius must needs be proued by an effect and by the same reason that effect by another effect and Thirdly the Romane or Westerne Church ought to bee distinguished from the Papacie or mystery of iniquity in it which is not the Church but a preualent and predominant faction in it The Romane Church we acknowledge to bee a member though a sick and weak one of the Catholique visible Church and consequently to haue some part in the gracious promises made to the Church in the Gospell but the Papacy or that predominant faction is no member but a botch or an aposteme in the Church to which none of those promises belong yet many
moment and ground of the whole question Hee putteth the case that the debter tooke the two pieces out of the creditours purse Surely a blind or verie credulous creditor that would stand still till the debter picked his pocket O patience Good Sir Creditor if you can vpon your credit make good that those whom you intend by the two tendered pieces of coyne namely Christ and his Apostles are the proper legacy and riches of the Romane treasurie take vs your bondmen in stead of payment of the rest But if this field wherein this precious pearle lyeth bee by good title ours as I then would and at any time hereafter can proue I think vpon such conuiction you will haue small courage to clamour for the rest of your twentie Doe but looke on this coyne though loth and see whose image and superscription it carryeth is it not the liuely indeleble Character of our Sauiours Charter the Scriptures They are ours by Christ Christ ours by them The Roman pouch is so stuffed with Traditions so choaked with counterfait ouergilt Copper of new-minted Articles that Christ and his Apostles and Euangelists cannot bee admitted nay will not bee embased to bee mingled with such drosse But I wonder that you dwell so long vpon a money Similie I thought you had vowed pouerty and might not touch siluer I haue heard of some of your orders that if they touch coyne it blisters their hands as it is reported of a certaine Lady that if a Rose-leafe bee put vpon her hand as shee is asleep it will make it blister But it seemeth to mee that you are Theocritus his Fisher you fish for gold and if you are not wronged haue caught no small number of golden gudgeons in your net and transported them beyond the seas carrying Rem ad non res no smal stock to English Nunneries I had almost sayd Iesuitisses or Loyolasses And if you will needes haue a Similie from paying monie to illustrate this passage in the conference thus you may frame it Suppose a Catalogue for sixteene-hundred yeeres which haue runne since Christ to bee sixteen-hundred pound suppose the hundred yeeres to bee a hundred pound I by producing a Catalogue of visible Protestants in the first age lay downe a hundred pound of the summe and bid you tell it after me and then demand of you whether the summe bee right You answer that you will tell mee after you haue told the whole summe of 1600. pounds I presse you again againe to answer concerning this first summe whether it be right or no if it be right I promise to lay down al the rest in the like manner You answer as before Lay downe the rest or you shall not begin with the first next heap but with the last in coÌ„clusion I charge you as you wil answer it at your peril to your Master whose factor you pretend to bee to giue-ouer all cauilling plainly directly to answer me whether this first sum be right or not and when notwithstanding this deep charge you trifle cauill the witnesses who were to set their hands to my acquittaÌ„ce pul me away saying You shal deale no more with such a cauilling factor This is a true perfect embled of the breaking vp of the Conference wherewith I will breake vp my defence thereof The Protestant Relation Paragraph the eleuenth touching the issue of the Conference This Conference though it took not that progresse which was desired by reason of the Iesuites tergiuersation not permitting D. Featly to come to the ripenesse of any Argument yet it hath not beene fruitlesse for since that time the aforesaid M. Bugges came to Sir Humfrey Lynde and gaue him many thankes for the said meeting and assured him that hee was well resolued now of his Religion that hee saw plainely it was but the Iesuites bragging without proofes and whereas formerly by their sophisticall perswasions hee was in some doubt of the Church hee is now so fully satisfied of the truth of our Religion that hee doth vtterly disclaime the Popish Priests company and their doctrine also Master FISHER'S Answer I haue cause to doubt that this which the Relator saith is not true for thereby hee maketh the old Gentleman to bee but of a weake capacity or of a very mutable nature for first I am sure there was no cause giuen in the Conference of any such effectuall resolution to bee made by the old Gentleman Secondly I cannot see when this speech should bee made by the Gentleman to Sir Humfrey If immediately after the Conference it would argue too much want of capacitie for if hee did but rightly conceiue the true state of the Question in which himselfe had especially desired to bee satisfied as I verily hope hee did hee might easily haue marked the insufficiencie of D. Featly his diuerting proofes which also were so answered as the audience for want of satisfaction in them vrged him to leaue off and 〈◊〉 produce names of Protestants in all Ages the which producing of names beeing so oft and earnestly required to bee done in all Ages and yet beeing onely pretended and that most falsely to be done for one Age and the Conference beeing so abruptly left off by D. Featly before he would goe forward to name men in other Ages especially in Ages before Luther at the question required any meane capacitie might see that the Question in which the old Gentleman desired to bee satisfied was not fully answered nor consequently hee satisfied Moreouer the same Gentleman beeing present when the Earle of Warwick told M. Fisher that D. Featly should at another time come againe to giue names of Protestants in other Ages hee might easily and doubtlesse did vnderstand that as yet 〈◊〉 in all Ages were not giuen nor consequently the Question satisfied in which hee expected Answer Furthermore presently after hee went away from the Conference hee told M. Fisher himselfe that hee was glad that at the next meeting his Question should bee answered which shewed that as yet he did not conceiue it to be answered Lastly diuers dates after all the trouble and stirre was past which was made about the Conference the old Gentleman was not â—ore solute a Protestant as the Relator pretendeth for meeting M. Fisher and M Sweet hee desired them to giue him a Catalogue of names of Professors of the 〈…〉 that if after this the Doctors should not giue him a Catalogue of Protestants hee should dislike their cause Which Catalogue M. Fisher and M. Sweet haue ready for him but will not deliuer till he get the Doctors to make theirs ready that hee bring to them the Doctors Catâ—logue with one hand and receiue theirs with the others to deliuer to the Doctors All that can bee suspected is that in the very time of the said stir when the old Gentleman either was or feared to bee called in question it may perhaps bee that he might say those words which the Relator mentioneth But this if
it were was onely vpon fraâ—ltie or humane feare of trouble and not any firme and settled resolution grounded vpon the Conference sith both before and after he shewed a contrary minde as hath beene said Doctor FEATLIE'S Reply What you repeat in this passage touching my proceedings in the Conference hath beene before vpon diuers occasions answered and I endeuour as much as may bee to auoyd your familiar figure of battologie or repetition For that which concerneth M. Bugges that hee receiued satisfaction by the Conference and gaue many thankes to Sir Humfrey Lynd for procuring it and not as you imagine when the trouble was about the Conference but the selfesame night in the very roome wherein we conferd is not onely proued by Sir Humfrey Lynde his testimonie but also by M. Bugges owne subscription both to the Protestant Relation in generall and to this passage in particular and that of late since all pretended trouble was blowne ouer Now M. Fisher you are a very merry man that will goe about to face a man out of his beliefe and dispute him out of that peace and comfort which hee feeleth in his consciecne M. Bugges may well answer you in the words of Saint Austen spoken to another purpose Tu ratiocinare ego credam c. Doe you syllogize I will beleeue Demand you a reason if you list I will giue thankes Argue as long as you please How I could bee resolued by the Conference I am sure I was resolued and so still continue When the Philosopher in A. Gellius sophistically disputed against motion in this manner Whatsoeuer is mooued locally is either mooued in the place wherein it is or wherein it is not It cannot be mooued in the place wherein it is not because that is not to mooue locally or in place where the body hath no existence it can haue no motion Neither can a body be said to mooue in the place wherein it is because while a body remaines in its place it cannot mooue from it One of his Auditors there present whose arme a little before had beene put out of ioynt though hee could not verbally answer that his sophisme yet hee really refeld it thus At ego sensi motum luxato brachio I am sure I felt a motion when I hurt my arme and put the bone out of ioynt In like manner when you argue that M. Bugges could not be mooued by any thing that was spoken in the Conference because his Question was not answered or the Catalogâ—e of names not produced or because D. Featlyes proofs were diuersiue or because the Popish Audience still called for names or because you and M. Sweet are not yet satisfied or because I know not what M. Bugges in a word refutes all your reasoning At ego sensi motum I am sure I felt my selfe mooued by it and the doubt which sometimes shook my faith remooued So that I waâ— thereby not as the other put out of ioynt but in ioynt and of lame made whole Neither will it hence follow that M. Bugges must needs bee a man of meane capacity if hee were satisfied by so short a Conference but rather that God oftentimes vseth weake meanes to ouerthrow Satans strong holds Firmus the Maniche was reclaimed from that heresie by a digression of Saint Austens in a certaine Homily Alipius was drawn from heathenish sports and pastimes by an example in a discourse of Saint Austens on the By. That noble Venetian Marquesse who left both his Marquisate and all that hee had for the loue of the Gospell and comfortably ended his daies at Geneuae was at the first reformed both in his faith and life by an elegant Simile in a Sermon of Peter Martyrs Sometimes an exquisite Sermon taketh not the Auditory and sometimes a farre meaner taketh now and then a stronger Argument worketh not vpon the vnderstanding and will and yet a weaker proofe doth at the same time You cannot bee ignorant of the Story in Ruffinus of an Arrian Philosopher of whom the learned Bishops in the Councell could get no ground at all yet a simple vnlearned man by two or three blunt Interrogatories conquered and quite confounded him Wil you from this and the like instances inferre that the men so conuerted were men of meane capacity The contrary euidently appeares in Story you should rather from hence gather with religious Austen who may truly be said to 〈◊〉 written rather ex gratia then degratia so gratiously doth hee write of grace totum Deo dare qui voluntatem hominis bonam et praeparat adiuuandam et adiuuat praeparatam in our first conuersion and euery good work after to ascribe all to God who both prepares the will to be aided by grace and aideth it beeing prepared Yea but say you M. Bugges much desired a second meeting therefore it seemes he was not so resolute a Protestant as wee make him If this were a good Argument you might prooue all of our side to be vnsettled in our Religion yea M. Deane of Carlile and my selfe also who much desired and yet doe a second meeting to perfect the work then begun Though a man be neuer so well resolued in poynt of Religion yet hee may desire to heare Diuinity-Disputations and make good vse of them Yea but M. Bugges desired M. Fisher and M. Sweet to giue him a Catalogue of names of professors in the Romane Church saying that if after this the Doctors would not giue him a Catalogue of Protestants hee would dislike their cause If M. Bugges spake so which I haue reason to doubt hee spake it as hauing certaine knowledge that we had a Catalogue which hee did or might haue seene in the Conference Nor indeed doth the desiring or requiring of a Catalogue inferre any doubt of the conclusion Though a plaine vnlearned Christian beleeue most firmely that Christ was borne of the seed of Abraham and Dauid yet may he desire more particular information by hearing the beginning of Saint Mathews or Saint Lukes Gospell read and expounded to him Moreouer when I vndertooke to name those who taught Protestant Doctrine in all Ages if I should faile therein he should haue had iust cause to dislike my proceedings Yea but say you there was no cause giuen in the Conference at all of any effectuall resolution to be made by the old Gentleman therefore he could not bee so resolued by it as is pretended For answer heereunto though I am loth yet you constraine mee to recapitulate the chiefe points touched in the Conference Before the Conference M. Bugges was somewhat staggered in the poynt touching the Visibility of the Church by your brauadoes and Rhodomontadoes that all the world were Papists before Luther That there was neither vola nor vestigium of a Protestant Church before that time That no Protestant Minister durst encounter you in this point if any should be so hardy as to enter into these lists with you you would presently blank silence and nouplus them
non videns lapidem non lapidem c. A man no man that is an Eunuch seeing not seeing that is seeing dimly being â—urblind a stone no stone that is a pumice for heere is a priuate Letter no Letter relating not relating the substance of my Argument not my Argument First it may bee call'd a priuate Letter because it was seald vp like a priuate Letter and indorsed to an Honorable Personage yet it was no priuate Letter for diuers copies of it were dispersed and read before the Earle receiued it who heard of it before hee read it His Lord-ships name was set vpon it onely to make it more passable and to giue vent for such cheating wares as Master Fisher thought would passe more currant by a Letter addressed to so Noble a Personage Secondly it relateth and not relateth because it omitteth much more then it relateth for the Introduction in the beginning and the Induction in the end of the Conference and all my Replies in the middle they are all not circumcised only as the Argument here relateth but quite cut out Thirdly it relateth my Argument not my Argument my Argument because propounded in most of my words yet not my Argument because not according to my meaning when I disputed thus in the Conference The Church whose faith is perpetuall and vnchanged is so visible or ought to bee so visible that the names of the Professors thereof may be shewed in all Ages I argued not so according to my owne opinion but as it is expresly set downe in the Conference ex concessis vpon your owne ground vpon which to supplant you I held it a great disparagement to your cause and therefore in repeating the Argument againe I expresly added as you your selfe confesse That Church which holdeth this faith you beleeue I said not wee to bee so visible as that the names of the Professors may be shewed c. In the very entrance to the Conference you acknowledge these to haue beene my words although this Question be grounded on vncertain and false supposals for a Church may haue beene visible yet not the names of all Professors thereof now to bee shewed And againe Are all visible mens names vpon record are all Records in former times now to bee produced And againe in the same page M. Sweet calling for names of Protestants well might say If Protestants had beene in all Ages their names in euery Age might bee produced Vnto which as the Protestant Relâ—tor â—aith and the Counter-Relator denieth it not D. Featly replyed saying This is a non sequitur Out of all which passages it euidently appeares that both you in this your Letter and L. D. otherwise M. Sweet in the defence of the Appendix bely your owne consciences in saying that I professed out of mine owne iudgement opinion that the true Church must be able to name Professors in all Ages It is true as Brasidas the Lacedemonian ran thorow his Aduersary with his owne Speare so I took that proposition tanquam hastam amentatam from you to wound you with your owne weapon And although I needed not at all to haue descended to an Induction or produced any Catalogue of such as maintained Protestant Doctrine by name yet the more to conuince you and to satisfie some of the Auditory I beganne a Catalogue and had proceeded farther in it if I had not beene called away by those whose Authority and Loue might command mee who would not suffer mee to deale any longer with an aduersary so atheologicall and alogicall so irreligious and vnreasonable so irreligious to refuse finally and peremptorily to answer an instance in Christ and his Apostles beeing vehemently pressed and not without adiuration Secondly so vnreasonable to require an Opponent to prooue at once eminent professors for 1500 yeeres to haue taught Protestant Doctrine Was there euer any that vndertook to make good a catalogue of Professors in all Ages who did not first prooue that there were such in the first Age and then in the second et sic de caeteris and so in the rest Was there euer a Respondent who vndertook to answer an Argument by Induction of particulars consisting of 15 or rather 15 hundred particulars and al in his iudgement questionable who did not answer them piece-meale in order first applying his Answer to the first particular and secondly to the second c I cannot patterne you better then by that malefactor who hauing stolne my Oxen and beeing indited for them seuerally would not answer directly to the first enditement Guilty or not guilty but said still that hee had that Oxe with his fellowes heereby hoping vpon tryall of the whole in one lump to escape by his book or benefit of Clergie as wee call it In like manner when you were put to it to answer directly Whether the Protestant Professors were not visible in the first Age and so in the second and so in the third c you answer It was not visible in the first Age with the rest nor in the second with the rest and further you will not goe The difference betweene you is onely this He answered so shufflingly and confusedly to saue his neck and you to saue the rack of an Argument he to slip out by his Clergy you by your vnclerkly Sophistry You may bee sure such kinde of foggie and misty answering could no way satisfie a man of so cleere a iudgement and apprehension in controuersies of this nature as the Earle of Warwick is Which that you may the better know from his own pen I will acquaint you with a Letter wrote by occasion of this businesse by his Lordship and addressed to Sir Humfrey Lynde To my louing friend Sir Humfrey Lynde SIR since my beeing at your house at the Disputation of M. Doctor Featly and Fisher diuers haue come vnto mee to know whether it was a Disputation appointed by me or no and whether I was not satisfied with it Whereby I perceiue those that learne the doctrine of equiuocation will not spare to tell a plaine lye to doe any man wrong that is not of their opinion And I am the more confirmed in this opinion for since last night M. Plume came to mee and deliuered this enclosed letter which I much maruell at I would not answer it but thus that I would speake with you and that M. Fisher should not need feare that D. Featly would flee from him but meet him at any time to make good his Tenet I had thought to haue spoken with you my selfe but my earnest occasions pressed mee to go this day into the countrey Wherefore if you meet I pray let the company know for the meeting that I knew of it but halfe an howre before it was and I came at the request of another Gentleman and for no desire of mine to be satisfied for I thank God my conscience makes no doubt of the truth of our Religion This I say because I heare that