may appeare to them that will take the paines to reade it yea I dare bee bold to say the Church of Rome had not for many hundred yeares before the Councell of Trent so good a forme of doctrine as that Catechisme containeth which I speake not to justifie the Councell or the Catechisme in any errour comprehended therein but only to shew the beggery of the aduersarie of which this shall be sufficient His disorder shewes it selfe in three things First in not setting the state of the question Secondly in misplacing his owne arguments Thirdly in idle repetitions For the first There cannot be a greater fault in a Disputant then either to leave the question altogether vnstated or else to state it amisse for by this meanes it ordinarily fals out that the contention is nothing else but Andabatarum pugna the fight at blind man buffe as we say so as a man may misse ten times before hee hit once But of the two the former is the worse wherein this our aduersary offendeth If he say he tooke it as hee found it it will not excuse For I dare say his pretended aduersaries intended not a combat if they had they would haue depriued him of the occasion of much babbling And yet had he not listed to be contentious hee might haue picked such a state of the question out of the defenders writings as might haue dâ—â—led the edge of his quarrelsome humor for the state being set aright and with perspicuity it will easily appeare to which side the truth inclineth wherefore that I offend not in that wherein I finde him to be faulty I will doe that which he hath left vnperformed First then wee are to know that the words whereof the question consisteth are full of ambiguity For both the Church of Rome and a true Church and a Church truly visible haue many senses and significations The Church of Rome hath at least eight seuerall acceptions For sometimes it noteth the particular Diocesse of the Romane territory commonly called the particular Romane Church Sometimes and most vsually it comprehendeth all the national Churches which communicate with Rome in the same faith and vnder the same head the Pope commonly called the Catholique Romane Church Sometimes the Clergy of that Church is onely vnderstood by that title commonly called the Church representatiue Sometimes the people onely commonly called the Laity and of some the popular Church of Rome Sometimes the whole body of Clergy and Laity Sometimes the Papacy or Apostacy in that Church which is S. Iohns Babylon Sometimes the Elect in that Church still communicating with the Papacy which S. Iohn calls Gods people And sometimes the hidden Church which is in the Romane Church and yet communicateth not with her abominations which some call the Church in the wildernesse Againe A Church is said to bee true diuers wayes As first materially in that it consisteth of a people comprehended within the compasse of Gods Couenant of life and saluation Secondly formally in regard of frame and constitution Thirdly accidentally in regard of soundnes and outward communion Thirdly a Church is said to be truly visible for the true markes of a Church which it hath either in regard of it selfe within it selfe in which respect the Churches in persecution are truly visible though their enemies and others which are not of their number see them not Or in regard of the world abroad whether Christians or Infidels which know her assemblies And in this latter sense againe it is said to be visible either strictly and properly when the whole Church is visible at once and all together which is onely true of particular Congregations or largely and Synechdochically when the whole cannot bee visible together and at once but by peâ—cemeale and succession and so the Catholique Church here on earth may truly be said to bee visible Thus you see how great ambiguity there is in the sense of these few words The Church of Rome is a true and truly visible Church Now in the second place to apply all this to our present purpose Although diuerse men doe set the state of this question diuersly as may best serue for their owne priuate ends and purposes yet I will take it in the largest extent and as it may bee most fauourable for the Church of Rome Thus Whether the Catholike Church of Rome as it is called in opposition to the Dioces in regard of the whole body thereof compounded of Clergy and Laity bee still within the couenant of Gods sauing grace and haue such markes of that couenant still abiding in it that though properly at once and all together it cannot bee visible yet by peece-meale and successiuely it may truly be said so to be And so much for the state of the question and his first disorder His second point of disorder is in misplacing his owne arguments which I take not as if it were done ignorantly as not knowing what hee should haue done for hee excuseth himselfe for it supposing it superfluous to doe it but artificially for his best aduantage It seemes hee trusted more to the gentlenesse of his aduersaries and to his owne abilitie in opposing them then to the strength of his owne and his power to maintaine them and so brings them in as it were by way of ambuâ—â— But howsoeuer it hath pleased him to proceed I may not passe them ouer in this place without tryall vnless I would incurre the same suspition Let vs see therefore how hee proueth the negatiue His first argument wherein he placeth his greatest confidence is briefly propounded pag. 24. but more at large pag. 90. of his Aduertisement and it lyeth thus That Church which denieth yea accurseth the sauing faith of Iesus Christ vnto Iustification allowing only such a faith which can neuer saue a man but is a gracelesse faith separable from grace and which a man may carie with him into Hell that is an Apostatized Church vtterly falne away from Christ wherein no saluation is to be found or hoped for But the Church of Rome doth all this Ergo. To which I answer by denying all I deny the proposition because it is sophisticall The assumption because it is false and I need not then doubt to deny the conclusion The proposition is sick of that Sophisme which the Logicians call secundum plures interrogationes or propositiones that is when many Propositions are ioyned together in one whereof some are true some false as here are at least three One that the Church so bablingly described is an apostatised Church another that it is vtterly fallen away from Christ a third that no saluation is to be found or hoped for therein Of which the first onely is true and the rest notoriously false and against the Scripture for first to denie yea to accurse sauing Faith to allow the contrary is not a point of totall finall Apostasie vnles it be ioyned with malice and obstinacie and be the sinne against the holy Ghost
vseful to ioyne vs together again in one communion The former whereof is false as hath beene shewed in the former answers The latter dependeth vpon the scandals of the Author for the better vnderstanding whereof wee are to know That the reformed Churches neuer made a full and totall separation from the Church of Rome but onely partiall from her corruptions Non tam ab ea quam ab eius erroribus discessimus saith Iewel in his Apologie which is the common voice of all euen of Perkins himselfe in his Reformed Catholike who shâ—wes in euery head of doctrine how farre wee may and must hold communion with that Church and to this and no more hath the Reuerend Author respect in this assertion Now this Calumniator would make the world beleeue that his intent is to vse a meanes by help of this distinction to ioyne vs together againe in one communion in those things wherein we are already separated which as it was far from his heart and meaning for his whole Treatise tends to the contrary so indeed it were a vaine thing for him to endeuour it by this distinction For it would be all one as if hee should say As she is a visible Church wee may communicate with her in her corruptions But as she is Babylon we may not Which is indeede the folly which hee illustrateth by his two similitudes of societie with a strumpet and the deuill Thus you see the honesty and wisedome of the man and by this you may iudge of his zeale for the glory of God Author They haue not well heeded the charitable profession of zealous Luther Nos fatemur c. We professe saith hee that vnder the Papacie there is much Christian good yea all c. I say moreouer that vnder the Papacie is true Christianitie â—â—a the very kernell of Christianity c. BVRTON Luthers speech then was true But euer distingue tempora Luther wrote that before the Councell of Trent till which the Church of Rome had not altered the rule of Faith But now wee that liue after that Councell cannot say so for in that Councell the nut was crackt the kernell reiected yea anathematized and now they haue retained no more but the broken shell of a Church Answer It is a strange thing to see how men are enamoured of their owne conceits Qui amant ipsi sibi somnia singunt saith the Poet I warrant you if M. Burton were braied in a morter yet would not these toyes depart from him Huartus in his Tryall of wits reporteth of a Noble-mans Page in Spaine that being distracted of his wits imagined himselfe to be a King in which conceit he so pleased himselfe that when hee was cured hee was displeased with the Physitian that restored him to his right minde and so I doubt M. Burton will be with those that shew him the vanities of these his imaginations Well howsoeuer it be wee must be content and suffer him to abound in his owne sense till Time the Mother of Truth reueale his grosse mistakings and in the meane while lâ—t it bee sufficient answer to this long discourse that here is nothing but idle repetition of those things which haue beene already answered And hâ—â—herto we haue answered what hee hath obiected to what was said in the Booke of The old Religion concerning this argument Author Nothing can be so well said or done but may be ill taken BVRTON Now God forbid But is it well said or done to affirme that the Church of Rome is yet a true or a true visible Church Now let the Reuerend Author iudge indifferently hauing well weighed the former reasons whether we doe ill or no in taking his saying ill or whether wee had not reason to haue expected an ingenuous Palinodie or Augustine-like Retractation rather then such an Apologie which whether it be rather to be pitied then any vncharitablenesse in the Reader in taking such a saying ill let indicious charitie it selfe iudge Nor need we stretch the saying to imply that the Church of Rome is a true beleeuing Church Suffice it we except against any being yea or visibility of a true Church in the Synagogue of Rome Answer Some men are like Nettles which if a man handle softly they sting him but if hardly and roughly they are not felt Our Reuerend Antistes hauing but glanced at the zeale of some transported to such a detestation of the Romane church as if it were all error no church is deeply censured as if preferment had changed his note and taught him to speake more plausible language of the Church of Rome then eyther hee did or ought Hereupon he frames an Apologeticall milde and Christian Aduertisement to rectifie their iudgement lest their preiudice may turne more to their sinne then to his wrong What 's the issue Nothing but scorne for sooth they expected that the Reuerend Author well weighing the former reasons would haue made a pittifull Retractation and not such an Augustine-like Apologie Nay they will not acknowledge any the least mistaking in the matter yea those words Nothing can be so well said or done but may be ill taken which are the ordinary preamble to reconciliation are taken amisse and so proue themselues to be true through their frowardnesse What then is to be done Haec non succedit alia ineunda est via The Reuerend Author must vse them like hounds which the more a man beateth the better they loue him or like the wilde Irish which are most seruiceable when they are most slauishly vsed And so they shall haue their desire a Palinodie or Retractation which is That is repenteth him that hee hath dealt so fauourably with them For as for their reasons if they were not as bold and blinde as Bayard himselfe they would be ashamed to commend them to the iudgement of iudicious Charity Author Who sees not that visible referres to outward profession true to some essential principles of Christianitie neyther of them to soundnesse of beleefe BVRTON Is outward profession a sufficient marke of visibilitie for a Church This is none of those markes which the Church of England takes notice of a Church by Answer No Are not they the preaching of the word administration of sacraments and Ecclesiasticall discipline And what outward profession of Christianitie can any visible church make without these Outward profession therefore comprehendeth them all and so is a sufficient marke of visibilitie for a Church BVRTON Againe the Scripture calls them the Synagogue of Satan which call themselues Iewes and are not Answer True yet were they true Iewes in the flesh and outwardly Rom. 2. â—8 29. and so may a true visible Church of Christians be also BVRTON The Samaritanes sometimes professed themselues to bee of the Iewes religion and professed the worship of the Lord were they therefore a visible Church Answer The reason is not like because they neuer were in the Couenant of Gods grace but were aliens from the Common wealth of Israel
where as he allowes it to haue beene so till the Councell of Trent as appeareth in all this Discourse Now for Bellarmine I am sory such a superficiall Reader should meddle with him to the shame of our whole Nation Marke how hee reasoneth Bellarmine disclaimeth these three as proper markes of the Church Ergo the Church of Rome hath them not I pray what consequence is here First may not a man disclaime that which he hath for some siâ—ister respects best knowne to himselfe as pride and presumption in medling in causes and with persons too high for him and the like Secondly doth Bellarmine disclaime them simply and not onely in comparison of meere proper markes Thirdly may not the Church of Rome haue them as markes common to all Churches true and false though not as proper to the true Church Fourthly doth not Bellarmine De Eccles. lib. 3. cap. 2. § Nostra autem sententia contradicting himselfe put these three into the definition of the Church and doth hee not by them distinguish the Church from all other sorts of men whatsoeuer Professione verae fidei Sacramentorum communione subiectione ad proprium Rastorem Fiftly is it not a Maxime of Bellarmines lib. 1. de Sacrament in genere cap. 26. § Respondeo Sacramenta that the Sacraments and the word of God and the rest semper solius esse Ecclesie etiamsi interdum extra Ecclesia in inueniantur what dealing then is this to play the Sophister so palpably à dicto secundum quid ad 〈…〉 This is his third Argument The fourth you shall finde pag. 35. to this purpose If the Church of Rome cannot demonstrate it selfe to bee a true Church then it is no true Church But it cannot Ergo 〈…〉 To this many things are to be answered because both propositions are to be denyed The former because it is inconsequent First because want of demonstration takes not away the truth and true being of any thing if it did there are infinite things in the world which should haue no being or not be that which they are euen the Scripture it selfe should not be the word of God because it cannot be demonstrated so to be to a naturall man Secondly because want of ability to make demonstration especially of the parties owne being is much lesse able to doe it for how many millions of men and women are there in the world which should cease to be that they are if that were true being vtterly vnable to demonstrate themselues so to be The latter proposition is to be denyed because it is vntrue for if by demonstration you meane the proofe of those three marks mentioned in the Homily the church of Rome can by them demonstrate her selfe to be a true Church according to the kinde and proportion of truth as well as any other Church And all that will acknowledge her to bee a true Church will and must acknowledge her to haue the true markes of the true Church in the same degree of truth wherein she is acknowledged to bee a true Church But you can proue by two arguments that she cannot doe it First because Bellarmine is constrained to confesse that all his 15. markes cannot make it euidently true but onely euidently credible that it is a true Church I answer First this is not true Bellarmine saith no such thing hee hath not the word Onely but thus he speaketh Though they make it not euidently true yet doe they make it euidently credible yea hee distinguisheth betweene Heathens which admit not the Scriptures and Christians which doe and saith that to them it makes them euidently credible but to these euidently true as well as euidently credible Lib. 4. de not is Eccles. cap. 3. § Dicimus ergo This therefore is not good dealing Secondly this is the same fallacy of arguing à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter wherein you offended afore He cannot doe it by these his fifteene markes say you Ergo he cannot doe it at all Is this a good kinde of reasoning Indeed it argueth his folly or rather madnesse in forsaking those markes which can demonstrate it and cleaning to those which cannot doe it but it doth not proue that he cannot doe it by any other meanes In the second place therefore you indeauour to proue it by Romes owne doctrine and confession about her baptisme the onely relique say you which some suppose is sufficient to proue her a true Church which is this That the efficacy of baptisme depends vpon the Priests intention whereof because no man can be certaine therefore no man can bee certaine whether hee were rightly baptised and so cannot bee certaine that he is a true member of the Church From which confession you reason thus That which no one Papist can demonstrate all of them put together cannot demonstrate But no one of them can demonstrate himselfe to be a true member of the Church Ergo not all together And what the That Church whose members either seuerally or together cannot demonstrate themselues to bee members of the true Church cannot demonstrate her selfe to be a true Church But the members of the Church of Rome neither seuerally nor together can doe it Ergo She her selfe cannot doe it That I may giue a full and sufficient answer to this large argument which is taken from Romes owne doctrine and confession I must signifie vnto him that it seemes to me that he knowes not what Romes doctrine and confession in this point is First therefore hee must know that the Church of Rome hath not yet determined fully what the intention of the Priest in baptising or of the Bishop in ordaining is They say indeed that a virtuall intention is sufficient without the actuall or habituall But what is that virtuall intention Some say that the very pronouneing of the words I baptise thee c. are sufficient thereto Nec aliud requiri ex parte ministri and that there is no more required on the behalfe of the Minister So Thomas Part. 3. de Sacr. qu. 64. art 8. ad 2. and so Catharine the Bishop of Minori in the Councell of Trent held and affirmed And Bellarmine himselfe though of the contrary opinion viz. that the inward intention of the Priest is required yet is constrained to distinguish de perfectione Sacramenti simpliciter absolutè de perfectione eiusdem coram hominibus and so agreeth that if wee respect the perfection of the Sacrament before men the outward prolation of the words is sufficient Lib. 1. de Sacr. in genere cap. 28. § Ad locum obiectum Secondly hee must know what certainty it is which the Church of Rome meaneth when she confesseth that no man can be certaine of the intention of the Priest for shee distinguisheth of certainty in this case One is certainty of faith which is infallible another humane and morall the former shee confesseth cannot ordinarily bee had but the latter may which she accounteth to be sufficient and this comes
BVRTON And for the essentiall principles of Christianity the Iewes at this day hold the Old Testament and if it bee said They deny Christ expressely the Papists doe so too implicitely and by their owne expresse doctrines of Trent haue no more communion with Christ then the Iewes haue Nay Papists doe expresly abiure the doctrine of Christ as wee shewed before in the Popes owne Bull. Answer The tongue that lyeth slayeth the soule Such comparisons are not onely odious but damnable If this zeale do not transport you to sinne I doubt not but euill-speakers raylers and slanderers may finde an easie passage into the kingdome of heauen Author Grant the Romanists to be but Christians how corrupt soeuer and wee cannot deny them the name of a Church BVRTON But why should we grant them that which neuer a Papist is able to demonstrate to vs or yet vndoubtedly to perswade himselfe of Answer This fond conceit is sufficiently answered already BVRTON Although for the bare name of Christians and of a Church wee will not much stand with them so they do not hereupon or any for them incroach and challenge the beeing and realitie yea or the very visibility of a true Church Answer You are very liberall of that which is none of your owne Can you bee content to afford the precious name of a Christian and of a Church of Christ to them which in mans iudgement not partially affected are not so The Iews would neuer doe it neither will the Papists doe it neither will the Reformed Churches doe it neither will any well informed Christian doe it But you will not much stand vpon it Author We are all the same Church by vertue of our outward vocation whosoeuer all the world ouer worship Iesus Christ the onely Sonne of God the Sauiour of the world and professe the same common Creed BVRTON Doth the Church of Rome worship Iesus Christ who for Christ worship the Beast and his Image bearing his mark Answer Doe all in the Church of Rome doe so what they whose names are written in the Lambs booke of life Reu. 13. 8. or are you sure that none of the Church of Rome liuing and dying professed members thereof are written therein BVRTON Doc they hold the same Creed that deny the faith without which they cannot say the first words of the Creed I beleeue in God Answer And dare you say that all and euery one in the Church of Rome doth so Author Rome doth both hold the foundation and destroy it she holds it directly destroyes it by consequent BVRTON What foundation doe they hold directly with vs wee shewed before that they haue nothing of Christ but the shell the shadow the Pope is the kernell if any Answer You said so indeed but you shewed it not yet if they haue the shell that is the outward profession of the foundation directly it is enough to make them be said to hold the foundation directly BVRTON Nay doe they hâ—ld more of Christ directly then the very society of Deuils doe yea or so much as they Answer They doe if your selfe say true for you say that To hold the foundation directly is to hold Iesus Christ so to be come in the slesh as therein to suffer and satisfie for our saluation becomming our Christ our Iesus redeeming vs from our sinnes by imputing his merits to vs that our sins might not be imputed to vs which were imputed to him by whose stripes wee are healed by whose righteousnesse imputed wee are perfectly iustified in the sight of God And all and euery point of this the Church of Rome directly holdeth BVRTON Nothing lesse yea she directly not by consequence onely directly I say shee denieth and destroyeth this foundation How and where in the Councell of Trent Sess. 6. Can. 10. Siquis dixerit homines per ipsam Christi iustitiam formaliter iustos esse Anathema sit Is not this a direct and flat expresse denyall of the foundation Answer Is this an expresse flat and direct denial of the foundatioÌ„ then Melancthon Caluin Illyricus and all sound and good Protestants doe expresly flatly and directly deny the Foundation for all of them doe and must hold this doctrine for accursed and all the Ministers of the Church of England haue cause to be ashamed of your ignorance boldnesse Mr. Burton who dare challenge the Church of Rome to denie the foundation directly in that wherein she holdeth and confirmeth the truth of the Gospel you must know therefore that in these words is condemned the damnable doctrine of Andrew Osiander and his followers who taught and held that a man is formally iustified by the very Righteousnesse by which Christ himselfe is essentially iust and righteous being partakers thereof by inhabitation This allegation therefore is a notable abuse not only of the Councel but of your selfe and the Reader See Bellarmine de Iustif. lib. 2. cap. 2. Sect. 2. His verbis though himselfe offend therein also afterwards BVRTON And in the 11th Canon If any shall say that men are iustified by the sole imputation of Christs righteousness or by sole remission of sins otherwise then by inherent righteousnesse by vs obtained thereby or also that the grace of God whereby wee are iustified is onely the fauour of God let him bee accursed What more direct deniall of the foundation Answer I might here challenge you for altering and changing the words of the Councell but I will not take all aduantages I answer therefore that it seems you know not the true meaning of the Councell for taking the word Iustification in the Councels owne sense this Canon containes very sound and Christian doctrine What then doth it mean by Iustification A compound of Protestant Iustification and Sanctification for so it defines Iustification cap. 7. of this Session in the first words Iustificatia est non sola peccatorum remissio sed sanctificatio renouatio interioris hominis per voluntariam susceptionem gratiae donorum and so the true sense and meaning of the Canon is this If any man shall say that men are so iustified by the sole imputation of Christs righteousnesse or by sole remission of sinnes that they are also sanctified thereby without inherent grace and charity or also that the grace whereby wee are so iustified is onely the fauour of God Let him bee accursed and let him be so indeed for me You will say this is nothing but meere iugling I grant it but it is not direct denyall of the foundation for here as Chemnitius acknowledgeth is both remission of sinnes and imputation of Christs righteousnesse included which though it be sufficient to iustification in the Protestant sense yet in the popish sense wherein sanctification is also required it is not sufficient BVRTON Is not this the foundation That Iesus Christ came into the world to saue sinners and how who his owne selfe bare our sinnes in his owne bodie on the tree that we being dead to sins should liue