Will he reprehend the seeking of the kingdom of God for this or the forsaking temporall estates to follow Christ in a higher way of perfection because the gaine and returne is a hundred fold in this life and therefore makes for the temporall ends of such men And are these our beaux Esprits Are these the learned new Academy that cannot make this distinction between making and being made or are they rather indeed en bon François in plaine English dull and earthly Spirits and which least they would heare not Wit 's but silly Fellows Who if they could once resolue vpon a God or any such not only omnipotent but free agent who could do and giue what he pleased should rather betake themselues with Salomon who had I thinke as good a naturall wit as the best of the new Academy and shew'd a much better in making such a choyce and in the acknowledgment of his owne weakenes and want betake themselues I say to their prayers that they might receaue the spirit of Wisedom from heauen without which spirit no meruaile if they haue no palate of heauen nor as being indeed meerely Animals any rellish of spirituall things But neither indeed do they belieue there is any such thing as holy spirit Et quem non inuenit vsquam Esse putat nusquam Concerning different opinions among Catholiques the Aduocates Fallacy and Calumny SECT X. AFter all these Rhetoricall pretermissions of temptations into so he writes and principles of Irreligion and Atheisme in Catholique doctrine as considerations which he wil seeme to esteeme of lesse moment thereby to prepare your expectation to some more weighty Only I should desire you sayth he to consider attentiuely when you conclude so often from the differences of Protestants Pref. that they haue no certainty of any part of their religion c. Whether you do not that which so magisteri ally you direct me not to do that is proceed a destructiue way c. Ans Now this Pretermissiō is no figure but a fraud Fallacy for his aduersary directs him not to proceed a meere destructiue way Now this restrictiue particle meere fraudulently left out is no figure but a fallacie of pretermission and makes indeed a kind of Non-sense in his Aduersary where there is a good and plaine sense For whosoeuer will throw downe the doctrine of another must proceed a destructiue way but he who doth nothing else but throw downe and builds nothing as he who doth nothing but ouerthrow doctrines of religion holdeth nothing prositiue in religion at least in coherence of his doctrine he proceeds a meere destructiue way and a meere Antimachus he is an Ismael sonne of Agar secundum carnem genitus a child of the flesh and therefore as euery Socinian doth persequutes the free-borne child the yssue of the Spirit but what sayth the Scripture Eijce ancillam filium eius non enim erit haeres filius ancillaecum filio liberae cast forth the handmaid and her sonne for the sonne of the hand-maid shall not coherit which the sonne of the free-woman Indeed one house could not hold them Why because Ismael was terrae homo a fierce condition'd man manus eius contra omnes manus omniam contra eum his hands against all men and all mens hands against him which is in effect to say he proceeded a meere destructiue way And I pray you is not a Socinian such an Ismael whose hands are vp against all Professors of Christianity since his reasons principles tend as his Aduersary chargeth him to the ouerthrow of all Christian Profession no lesse then of Catholique religion And doth he not deserue that all Christian hands should be employed about his eares with vnanimous consent to extinguish such a Giant But doth the sonne of Sarai proceed a meere destructiue way he dares not say it as bold as he is therefore he onely sayes he proceeds a destructiue way wherein he doth well and as euery confutant must do otherwise he doth nothing Pref. But his aduersaries Arguments so he retorts obiected against the Protestant tend to the ouerthrow of all religion because sayth he as you argue Protestants differ in many things therefore they haue no certainty of religion so an Atheist or a Sceptique may conclude as well Christians and the Professors of all religions differ in many things therefore they haue no certainty of any thing Ans I know well these are the ordinary Socinian Topickes which this man hath by hart whence they are wont to argue themselues out of all religion And it is a very Socinian and Atheisticall argument indeed that is a foolish one as foolish as this Euery man is a man therefore no man is a Christian For though euery man be a man and therefore subrect to errour some more some lesse some in one thing some in another whence difference of opinions ariseth and vncertainty is concluded yet some men are Christians and as such in matters defined to be of faith not differing nor vncertaine They should deduce thus if they would conclude to the purpose they intend Christians in points of fayth defined by their Church to be such the definition of which Church they hold as their rule of fayth disagree among themselues therfore they haue no certainty in points of religion then the solution is ready I deny that such Christians who rely on that autority of the Church defining as all Catholique Christians do disagree in any poynt of religion so defined therefore this inference of vncertainty from the differences of doctrines in poynts of fayth fals heauy vpon the backs of all Sectaries nor can be shaken off but toucheth not the Catholique Whence they should conclude if they were indeed wise and gallant either the Catholique or none Not as they are wont there is difference of opinions and doctrines among Professors of Christianity betweene Lutherans and Caluinists c. and the Catholique from them all therefore there is no certainty therefore no religion at all and therefore lastly I will be an Atheist or Socinian Whereas if these Sceptiques would be feriously sceptique indeed that is serious inquisitors of truth and not make it their whole life and busines euer to seeke neuer to find like those sylly and sinfull women of whome S. Paul semper discentes numquam ad scientiam veritatis peruenientes always learning and neuer arriuing to the knowledge of truth nay if they did not set downe for their last arrest despaire of euer knowing with those foolists Sceptiques and Pyrhonians lastly if they could be persuaded that they heare what they heare or see what they see certainely they might see discerne a vast disparity betweene these two kinds of differences the differences of Sectaries among themselues in most substantiall points of faith and those of Catholiques discepting and discussing difficulties occurring as yet vndecreed and vndetermined by authority as children of truth neuer ceasing to inquire after it
were supposed the spirit of truth they could not haue beene iudged false Prophets for going out of the Church no nor for opposing the doctrine of the Church Moreouer that by which another thing is tried as by a rule must needs be supposed more perfect in regard of Iudicature then the thing tried but it is absurd to thinke that the spirit of a priuate man is more perfect in nature of Iudicature then the spirit of the Church therefore S. Iohn neuer aduised priuate men to try the spirit of the Church Lastly this very command or aduise Try euery spirit is the aduise of the Church it selfe in the person of S. Iohn a principall pillar of the Church but no man can be so silly as to thinke that the Church aduiseth priuate men to try her spirit and least of all can Heretiques challenge any such authority Heretiques also are subiects of the Church euen in that they are at the least characterically Christians which character of subiection they can neuer wipe out whersoeuer they run they are euer subiects though rebells therfore their calling the Church to question and triall is mere presumption and an act of rebellion No Catholique presumeth to trie the spirit or doctrine of the Church nay euery Catholique trieth his owne spirit and doctrine by that of the Church therefore a Catholique as such hath no priuate opinion of fayth but all Catholique that is the same with the whole Catholique Church The Catholique makes no choyce of doctrines of fayth but taketh such as are giuen him he is Gods beggar and therefore no chooser Ego autem mendicus sum pauper I am a beggar and poore Thus euery Catholique is taught both to say and belieue The Heretique makes choyce of what he will hold with the Church takes what he list's and refuseth what he list's not take And this is to be euen Etimologically an Heretique and an Heretique formally no lesse in what he takes then in what he refuses For what he takes he chooseth to take vpon his owne discretion not vpon the credit of the Church nor formally from the Church therefore he is an Heretique in all euen in the points of diuine fayth which he holdeth with the Church not of the Church and therfore holdeth nothing with diuine fayth because he is still a chooser of what he holds and so an Heretique Another Text of S. Iohn by this Aduocate corrupted and misinterpreted SECT XXI WHat this all-trying spirit can do of himselfe without the spirit of the Church will appeare by his singular talent in interpreting Scriptures nor shall I swarue from my subiect in this way for I shall demonstrate that all his interpretations are Sophismes wily and fallacious detorsions of Scripture from their true sense to his owne crooked ends Pref. S. Iohn sayth he giues a rule to all Christians to make this triall by to consider whether they confesse Iesus to be the Christ that is the guide of their fayth and Lord of their actions So he Answ The words of S. Iohn are these In hoc cognoscitur spiritus Dei c. In this the spirit of God is knowne Euery spirit that confesseth Iesus Christ to haue come in fleth is of God and euery spirit that dissolueth Iesus is not of God and this is Antichrist The affirmatiue part of which copulate sentence as some other the like occurring in the Epistles of S. Iohn is to be vnderstood in sensu formali as thus Euery spirit which coufesseth Iesus Christ to haue taken flesh as confessing this truth is of God who is the author and warrant of this truth therefore of him who confesseth this supernaturall truth it may be truly said Caro sanguis non reuelauit hoc tibi flesh and blood hath not reuealed this vnto thee being a truth aboue the conceipt of flesh and blood which restriction to a formall sense is both sufficient and often tymes necessary for the verifying of many the like sentences of â—oly Scripture Wherefore although the negatiue to deny Iesus Christ to haue taken flesh be a sufficient note whereby to discerne a false spirit yet the affirmatiue to confesse Iesus Christ to haue come in flesh is but a part of the rule The other part is the character of Christian Charity as the same Apostle teacheth in the same Chapter Omnis qui diligit ex Deo natus est Euery one that loueth is borne of God therefore these two rules we find conioyned in the precedent Chapter hoc est mandatum â—ius vt credanius in nomine silij eius Iesu Christi diligamus alterutrum This is his commaundment that we belieue in the name of his sonne Iesus Christ and that we loue one another for in these two vertues indeed a Christian is consummate For fayth in Iesus Christ the sonne of God incarnate includeth all points of fayth because it implyeth the beliefe of all that Iesus Christ hath taught or teacheth either by himselfe or by his Church according to that saying of of his Qui vos audit me audit in which sense also the affirmatiue proposition of the Apostle Euery one who confesseth that Iesus Christ came in flesh c. hath a true construction euen without restriction but then it is nothing to the purpose of this Aduocate who by this rule would exclude the necessity of beliefe of other points of fayth proposed by the Church to make this confession of Christ to haue come in flesh the rule whereby to try spirits As therefore that other cognoisance of a Christian mutuall Charity according to that of our Sauiour In hoc cognoscent omnes c. all men shall know you to be my disciples by this ensigne or character of mutuall loue excludeth not that of fayth or the confession of the sonne of God Incarnate from being a rule whereby to discerne spirits and to know who are true Christians So this rule of Fayth in Christ excludeth not that of Charity and neither of them nor both exclude a third giuen by the same Apostle Qui nouit Deum audit nos Cap. 4. qui non est ex Deo non audit nos in hoc cognoscimus spiritum veritatis spiritum erroris See heere an expresse rule to try spirits by He who know's God heares vs he who is not of God heareth not vs in this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error Now it is most absurd to think the force of that rule to be limited and confined with the age of the Apostles therefore by that vs is vnderstood the Church or if they were to be heard of posterity in their writings we caÌ„not heare them so without an interpreter which interpreter as before hath beene proued can be no other of infallible authority but the Church Now that the Apostles were to continue in their posterity of Apostles Euangelists c. that is Preachers and Teachers of Christs Ghospell Doctors and Pastors c. ad consummationem Sanctorum
fortuna duos So an Heretique when he makes two with the Catholique they cannot stand together vnder one roofe of the Church expulsi sunt nec potueruntstare the Spirit of God as being the predominant spirit in the Church and in right of possession expels the other incompatible spirit of Pride But yet Good Sir Remouer is it possible so grosse a folly should escape your reflection as you manifest in the close of this your answere for thus you write That if this Church wherin nothing necessary to Saluation is wanting will not allow you her Communion but vpon condition c. in this case the Church for requiring such a condition is schismaticall not you for separating Now for my part I truly should haue had a very great Scruple to haue imprinted vpon your reputation such a character of a prodigious pride as you haue heere displayed with your owne hand and pen. For as I haue intimated before it is certaine yea and to surmise the contrary or draw it within suspitioÌ„ or iealousy is mere litigious cauilling that the Church will neuer require the beliefe of so small and innocent an error as includeth no preiudice or falshood against Catholique faith or manners and if it include any such it cannot be small or innocent Yet put the case that the Church should require of any single or priuate Christian that he would for peace sake condescend with the whole Catholique Church to the profession of some point of doctrine which euen in his iudgment were but a small and innocent error but in her iudgment an Orthodoxe truth though not yet defined and would aduise him to depose his single conscience in this point wherein he could not possibly be supposed to haue any conuincing euidence especially against the torrent and vnanimous consent of the whole Church and that finally in case he would not submit he should be excommunicate held an alien from the Church were it not a strange pride in such a man to say No he could not and so would not depose his conscience that he know's he is in the right and the whole Church in an errour for thus we must suppose according to the sense of this Motiue that Luther stood out single against the whole Church and that therfore vnlesse the Church will allow him her Communion vpon his owne termes and conditions that is without obligation on his part to any such profession of doctrine or practise of the whole Church he would disclaime her communion and proclaime her schismaticall for requiring from him any such concurrence with her in any such practise or exterior conformity Although by the way Luther for whome he apologizeth opposed the whole Church in points of fayth then already defined when those errors if errors were neither small nor innocent being now imposed vpon Christians to be belieued euen as they would belieue God himself I say no error so imposed or so authorized could be small or innocent but if an error at all a most grieuous and damnable imposture Or if they were true doctrines and then also defined by the Church then Luther and his sectaries by not belieuing them and for separating according to your former discourse from that Church all the Churches of the world and so from the true if there were any true were damnable Schismatiqueâ— Therefore this part concerning Luthers Apostasy as vrged in your Motiue remaines yet vnanswered And yet further let vs consider your Apology for this Apostata personated in your selfe In this case the Church not allowing me her coÌ„munion is schismaticall not I for separating Reflect seriously vpon this discourse whether it be not only vnchristian but incongruous and illiterate nor worthy to haue dropt from a Grammarians Pen much lesse from a maister of Art's or of a Chaire For if Luther or any such whom you act in this defence were euer in the Church from which he separates he was in it as a limbe or member in the whole body for example as an arme or legge or thigh c. Now in case of separation or diuision betweene the body and any member do we say the body is deuided from the legge or arme or the legge or arme from the body Schisme is diuision or separation the Church say you is Schismaticall for requiring the aforesaid condition From whome or what schismaticall from whom or what deuided Is the Church deuided or separated from you What the body from the legge as if you suppose it incurably gangrain'd and then Immedicabile vuluns Eâ—se reâ—idendum est ne pars syncera trahatur But shall the body in this case be cut from the legge quis ita lâ—quitur is not this very language schismaticall separate from all Catholique vse of common sense speach Doth the Church separate from you in not condescending to your single opinion or you from her in not submitting to her Catholique doctrine The Church held the same doctrine for which you separate from her before you came to her you found her possest of this doctrine you leaue her so possest ' and standing where you found her Who separates in this case You stood for a while ioyned to a pillar you flye from the pillar what is the Pillar gone from you or you from the Pillar Nay I say more were it indeed an error which the Church should vrge you to professe and which because you refuse to professe you forsake the Church yet not the Church if we speake properly but you are the Schismatique or Separant Schismatique or Separate alway's denominates the inferior or subiected part for who are now the Separatist's in England They who exact conformity that is the Gouernours of the English Church or they who refuse to conforme Do you not see that by the very like discourse the Non-conformant's may conclude the Conformant's to be Schismaticks Nay might not the Heretiques of all ages euen those who opposed the doctrine of the primitiue Church haue returned the Schismaticall vpon that Church Yea vpon the Colledge of the Apostles themselues for requiring the beliefe of some doctrine which those Heretiques belieued not and which in their deluded conscience was errour For could not euery Nicholait say as much You require of me to professe against my conscience that I belieue some error which I belieue not otherwise you allow me not your communion you for requiring this are Schismaticall not I for separating from you rather then to condescend to this your condition Nor truly do I see why a priuate subiect might not aswell stand out against the King and Parlament refusing to subscribe or obey some decree or order establish't by full consent and authority of both Houses pleading in defence of such his recusancy that the order or decree is an errour in the State and alleadging perhap's to that purpose some old Charter or record misapplyed by his owne priuate interpretation disagreeing from the common intendment and declaration of the Lawyer 's and Iudges of
lit c. 21. Austin was that Scripture or Scriptures written in their harts Quid sunt leges Dei seriptae in cordibus nisi ipsa prasentia spiritus sancti qui est digitus Dei What are law's of God written in harts of men but the presence of the holy Ghost who is the fingar of God And this Scripture of hart 's was foretold by the Prophet Hieremy Cap. 31. Post dies illos after those days that is in the tyme of the Ghospell dabolegem meam in visceribus eorum in corde eorum scibam eam I will giue my law in their bowels and write it in their hart There was then the Scripture the Word of God the Ghospell There I say as in the Autographon the authentique the originall instrument out of that authentique and originall transcribed and copied out in parchment's or papers If then euery transcript or copy retain's the credit of a true copy or transcript so far forth as it is found agreeing with the originall it followeth that whatsoeuer we receaue vpon the authority of Scripture we receaue it first from and vpon the credit of the Church And what we read or vnderstand as Scripture is to be compared with that authentique least it may proue a false copy which we presume to be Scripture or the word of God Since then the holy Ghost euen to the consummation of the world resideth in the Church of Christ according to his promise it followeth euidently that the word of God is in the Church as in the Authentique and Originall but in writings of inke and paper only as in Copies and Transcripts What madnes then what grosse absurdity is this to belieue the Copy rather then the Originall Or with what sense can any man pretend to vnderstaÌ„d this Copy or Transcript as written with inke and paper better then by the liuing voyce of the Author himselfe of that anthentique originall the Church Since in the Church of Christ and only there resides the Author of holy Scriptures perpetually and successinely writing them and the verities contained in them in the hart 's and soules of Christians members of that Church as they are vnited by vnity of one fayth and charity with their head Christ Iesus Whence it followes furthermore that to say we receaue the Scriptures from the Church but not the sense and meaning of them is to speake contradictories For both the meaning and vnderstanding of Scriptures is in the Church and only there with certainty and infallibility of interpretation where that spirit dwel's which alone can interprete infallibly his owne authentique And besides not the letter written but the sense and meaning of the writing or the Verities therein contained are the Scripture or word of God Therefore if they receaue not these from the Church they receaue not the holy Scriptures thence but a mute and dead writing a riddle to be read according to ech man's fancy and coniecture For as no man knoweth what is hidden in the hart and soule of man but the spirit which is in man so no man can probably presume to vnderstand those hidden Verities that wisedom of God occultat am in mysterio hidden in mistery howsoeuer appearing in words but the spirit of God First therefore Christians are to inquire where that spirit is the Author of Scripture and the doore by which we must enter into the Scripture for he that presumeth to enter another way as by the way of human reason and discourse Philosophy or the like as by a posterne is worthily suspected to be a theefe in Religion it is he who openeth the sense and vnderstanding of men extending it to a more large spheare of capacity which naturall reason shuâ—'s vp and confines within the narrow bounds of naturall principles and discourse vpon them We are to enquire I say if we are yet to seeke where this spirit residesâ— and since we treat this busines with such as pretend to be vmpir'd by Scriptures to them we say as Christ to the Iewes Joh. 5. scrutamini scripturas quia vos putatis in ipsis vitam aeternaÌ„ habere Search the Scripture for there you thinke to haue life eternall Where that spirit of truth was promis'd to continue by our Sauiour there certainly it is to be sought and found and only there There I say where Christ would be nobiscum omnibus diebus vsque ad consummationem saculi to continue with vs to the worlds end from that time omnibus diebus all the day 's of posterity not by tymes or inter-spaces or intermission of his presence nor with them alone to whom he then personally directed his speach who were not to continue all the day 's of future ages vnto the worlds end and which could not be vnderstood of them as after their death inuested with immortality and in possession of eternity wherein there is neither plurality of dayes nor consummation of tyme but with their progeny and the ofspring of their Fayth who were to belieue in Christ by them and whom he ioyned with his Apostles in his prayer for them Joh. 17. and sure his prayer was heard vt ipsi vnumsint c. That they also may be one by vnity of fayth and charity vt credat mundus that the world may belieue not this age of men alone but in that sense wherein he commaunded that the Ghospell should be preach't to euery creature and belieue What quiae tu me misisti that Iesus Christ is the Sonne of God Enquire then what Society of men that is who in succession to the Apostles and from their tymes in all ages haue taught and still do teach that Christ is the sonne of God who euen in this last age of vs and our Fathers haue taught this to the East and West of Indians c. and when you haue found that Society of Christian professor's when you haue found out the sunne in the clearest midday know that you haue found the Church of Christ and with that the word of God the Scriptures the Gospell together with the true and infallible interpretation of these For this Society of men is indeed Epistola Christi the Epistle yea and Ghospell of Christ 2. Cor. 3â— written non atramento sed spiritu Dei viui not with inke but with the spirit of the liuing God and this Scripture is that qua legitur ab omnibus hominibus which all men read not only such who can read the Scripture written in Hebrew Grecke or Latin c. but euen such as cannot read at all For as this Scripture is written not with inke but with the spirit in the hartes of Christians so it appeareth not in the exterior traict's of Characters but in the exterior profession and liues and Christian vertues of Christians There I say it is read euen by such who know no letters For as in the creation of Nature that creating and conseruing power of God omnipotent his wisedom also
the words of Scripture falsely interpreted I deny it For it is only an apparent and fallacious discourse therefore not discourse truly so called Now to his Confirmation The principles whence we draw these conclusions that is the holy Scriptures are agreed on by all to be infallibly true what is that to the purpose if it be not agreed in what sense they are true Therefore I say the premises may be true the consequence lawfull and good and so the conclusion true according to some sense of the premises but because that sense may be a false sense though the premises of themselues be true therefore the discourse or whole Syllogifme may deceaue and lead into error yea euen so much the more because the consequence is good But his Aduersary hath told him in the 4. Chap. of this Pamphlet so he still like to himselfe nibling and detracting from his Directors credit That from truth no man can by good consequence inferre falshood He tels him what S. Iohn hath told long since Omne mendacium ex veritate non est no lye is consequent from truth which is most true as vnderstood formally no lye is consequent of truth as it is truth but from a materiall truth a lye may follow The Scriptures are always materially true that is true in themselues and from them as true no falshood can be consequent but they may be and are commonly falsely sensed and interpreted and that purposely by Heretiques therefore from them as falsely interpreted falshood may and doth follow euen by good consequence Well then to open the Fallacy Vlceris os and so to let out the corruption Scriptures falsely interpreted are not the Word of God but the word of man the false Interpreter therefore they who are guided by Scriptures so interpreted and now the word of man may be misguided and are so euen by those Scriptures now not holy but prophaned by man His fallacious Answere or Euasion to his Aduersaries Arguments conuincing the necessity of an infallible Church SECT XXVI Pref. YOu say thirdly with sufficient confidence If the true Church may erre in defining what Scriptures be canonicall or in deliuering the sense thereof we must follow either priuat spirit or naturall wit iudgement and by them examine what Scriptures containe true or false doctrine Thus the Aduocate and what sayth he to this All this fayth he is apparently vntrue neither can any proofe of it be pretended Answ Iust so Bellarmine thou lyest Behold an Alexander loosing the Gordian knot What can no proofe be pretended Surely a sufficient diuision or enumeration of parts hath been esteemed a sufficient proofe as excluding out of the thing deuided whatsoeuer is not contained in some part or member of the diuision as if Bachelour Maister Doctour be a sufficient diuision or enumeration of the Degrees giuen in the Vniuersity he who is proued to haue taken no one of these degrees is sufficiently proued to haue taken no degree in the Vniuersity His Aduersary argues thus The authority which must determine what Scripture is Canonicall or what is the true sense of such Scripture is either the Church of God or priuate spirit or naturall wit and iudgment Not the Church according to Protestants therefore either the priuate spirit or natural wit c. If this diuision be good then the inference is apparently true if it be not good let him shew the insufficiency of the enumeration Yes Pref. Other direction we haue sayth he besides either of these three and that is the testimony of primitiue Christians Answ Ridiculus mus But do you marke the subtility of the Logician how sliely he euades and shifts the necessity of being directed by a true Church or by the spirit or by naturall wit We haue befides these the testimony of primitiue Christians And do those primitiue Christians make a fourth member in this diuision of direction distinct from the other three What difference betweene primitiue Christians and primitiue Church and then what difference to our purpose betweene the primitiue Church and the true Church which is the Church to which his Aduersary challengeth this right of direction So himselfe apparently granteth what he so desperately auoucheth to be apparently vntrue and whereof no proofe can be pretended Wherein I also note a Fallacy of fact Fallacy and fraudulent dealing his endeauouring to make his Aduersaries doctrine odicus to the ignorant Reader by his confident or impudent reiection of his reason and branding it with this Censure all is apparently vntrue c. when afterwards he granteth in effect all Surely he hopes his Aduersary will be so blind as neuer to perceaue this grant while he sayth not the same his Aduersary doth in the same words For insteed of his aduersaries true Church he hath Primitiue Christians and why not Primitiue Church as wel might you aske the Diuell why not holy-water The very word Church is Exorcisme to all Heresy as the name of IESVS to infernal fiends Another pelting fallacy you may obserue Fallacy euen in the same period We haue other direction sayth he besides the priuate spirit and the examination of the contents of Scripture As though his Aduersarie had plac't examination of the contents in the number of directions wherby to examine what is contained in Scripture as though he had proposed the very same examination the guide or director to it selfe And why this Because he had somthing which he could except against this examination of contents by shewing how it may faile in direction But what then Who giues this examination the office of Director Not his aduersary Nay rather because it may faile and may meete with many difficulties hence his Aduersary inferreth the necessity of a Director by whose assistance Christians may make this examination of Scriptures and be assuâ—â—d what Scriptures are to be receaued or reiected c. Who or what then is this true guide or director The true Church sayth his Aduersarie What sayth the Aduocate Not the true Church no by no meanes nor can any proofe of this be pretended The Church mera Chymera he will take heed of saying so Well then what other thing if not the true Church No other thing forsooth but another Word What the Primitiue Christians Do you marke how neere he came to the Church and yet escap't it Not the Church not the true Church not the Primitiue Church but primitiue Christians O Scotus O subtility of distinction most true the very name of Church ouerthroweth Protestancy But why not againe primitiue Church as well as Primitiue Christians He knew a primitiue Church will infer a deriuatiue Church it carrieth in the very common notion and obuious signification of the word the nature of a Body a Society a Society of Christians the kingdom of Christ in that Church and kingdom order and subordination commaund and subiection will by necessary sequele force a necessity of perpetuity and visibility in which propriety it must differ from
the Synagogue This is therefore a terrible hearing to Protestancy a Church Terribilis vt castrorum acies ordinata terrible as an army in battaile-array Now for Primitiue Christians they imply no such order no such coordination or subordination as of a body and therefore as so many scattered sheep they might wholy dye in their owne ashes not Phenix-like suruiue in their posterity which to affirme of a Church of Christ his establish't Common-wealth or kingdom purchas 't by right of Conquest with the inestimable price of his blood is not only Hereticall but most impious and prophane since neither the Synagogue and Law of Moyses became euacuate or abrogate viâ corruptiuâ by a corruptiue desition but past into a Church Euangelicall Law via perfectiuâ as Christ was the perficient not the corruptiue end of the Law Non veni legem soluere sed adimplere c. I came not to dissolue but to fulfill the Law c. Some other fallacious Euasions in answere to the same position of his Aduersary SECT XXVII IN the very next Paragraph I meete with another Fallacy which I haue also touch't before Pref. You say with conuenient boldnes that this infallible authority of your Church being denyed no man can be assured that any parcell of Scripture was written by diuine inspiration which is an Vntruth for which no proofe is pretended and besides voyd of modesty full of impiety Answ And I pray you obserue his notorious method his Censure is for the most part the preface to his Answere when he hath first struck his Aduersary on the head or wounded his reputation with some calumny or contumely then he wil dispute the matter not only cooly but very coldly as you shall see In the meane tyme since he is so liberall of contumelious and reproachfull language if we spare him it is mere gratuite grace no merit of his not so much as of congruity nay it may seeme much more congruous to shew the man his error where he may see it better then in himselfe For I belieue it will appeare to any vnderstanding man euen by the Genius of his stile that he hath drunke more liberally of Narcissus Well then of Aristotles as neere as it springs Whence I do not see but his President way be my Apology and very Charity will require that some sprinkling of salt be employed vpon his so great insulsity Now marke the Fallacy His aduersary sayth Take away the authority of Gods Church no man can be assured c. For Gods Church this Atturney changeth your Church as though his aduersary preassumed what is in question with Protestants Which he purposely doth not but only sheweth the necessity of a Visible Church and infallible authority shereof The fallacy of this change hath this intent to make his aduersary more odious for his preassuming antedating as also that he may impugne him more easily where he contends not which he doth almost euery where neuer strikes where his Aduersary wards So he seldome or neuer argues or answeres to the matter in hand But why now is this an vntruth void of modesty Because sayth he the experience of innumerable Christians is against it who are sufficiently assured that the Scripture is diuinely inspired and yet deny the infallibility of your Church or any other Answ What Euen of Gods Church For this is the authority this the Church which his aduersary namely and only asserteth And where is the immodesty Is it immodesty in a Catholique to proue the infallibility of the Church of God his Prime principle of Religion and that by an argument which this no Church can no otherwise answere but by rayling at it as with his Lucians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O execrable For who are those innumerable Christians Are they not the aduersaries of the Roman Church and only they And is it immodesty in a Roman Catholique to defend and proue the contrary to that which the Aduersaries of that Church would proue and do teach whereby to ouerthrow that Church and with that all Christianity But to shew him the weaknes of his argument I forme the like Innumerable Christians are sufficiently assured that no man can be assured of any parcell of holy Scripture otherwise then by the authority of the Church of God Ergo M. Ch. who denies them this assurance is voyd of all modesty And now againe why full of impiety Pref. Because sayth he if I cannot haue ground to be assured of the diuine authority of Scripture vnlesse I first belieue your Church infallible then I can haue no ground at all to belieue it Answ I expected he would say then I will be a Socinian But still you see him in his Fallacy Your Church for Gods Church And why then hath he no ground at all vpon that supposall Pref. Because there is no ground nor can any be pretended why I should belieue your Church infallible vnlesse I first belieue the Scripture diuine Answ Still Your Church Sure we shall neuer bring him back to Gods Church againe Now quite contrary I say there is no sufficient ground to omit pretences and permit them to his Hyperbolicall style why men should belieue the Scriptures diuine vnles first they belieue an infallible Church of God For to reuolue to the first birth and parentage of holy Scriptures whence haue we them who told vs they were diuine haue we not the new Testament to instance in this part from the Euangelists and Apostles And were not they the Church of God and hath any other told vs they are diuine and of diuine authority but they primarily and their posterity after them Can any man expect a more certaine testimony concerning his owne or any other mans birth then from the mother who brought him forth into the world Was not the holy Scripture cōceaued of the holy Ghost as it were in the wombe of the Church Yea those soules and spirits of Prophets Euangelists Apostles in which those Scriptures were conceaued euen formally as diuine together with the truth contained in them were they not before those Scriptures were brought to light And could any but they or vpon their credit belieue those Scriptures were of diuine yssue conceaued I say in those spirits diuinely inspired and illuminated yea and from them flowing as from a vitall principle actually and actiuely inflowing into those conceptions togeather with the holy spirit of truth Whence also it followeth euidently that those diuine truth's cannot be the formall conceptions of any soule or vnderstanding not endued and eleuated by this spirit of truth with which spirit since no man can assure himselfe to be endued yet euery Christian ought to belieue as certaine that the Church of God is indued therefore euery Christian ought to receaue those diuine truths contained in Scriptures togeather with the Scriptures themselues from the Church of God whose lawfull issue and ofspring they are Neither can this in reason seeme to a Christian any whit
derogatory from the maiesty of the diuine word to be conceaued in the spirit of man no more then it was from the Maiesty of the Sonne of God to be conceaued in the wombe of the B. Virgin Mary and that as there the Eternall Word was inuested with humane flesh so heere in these spirits of men as in the wombe of the Church the Word of God sowne by the holy Ghost should be inuested with humane notion and brought forth to light of the world in the guise of humane speach and voyce In which sense we may interprete that testimony of the holy Baptist Ego vox clamantis I am the voyce of the cryer as his voyce was the inuesture of that Word of the holy Ghost crying in the desert by which it was conueyed to the eares of mortall men so is the voyce and declaration of the Church the meanes by which the Word of God and all Truth contained in it is conueyed to our soules and vnderstandings And as that cry of the Holy Ghost was first conceaued in the spirit of the Baptist then vttered by his voyce to the world so these Scriptures were first conceaued in the Church those Apostolicall spirits in which they were first imprinted and inuested if I may so speak by the operation and Energy of that fire which appeared in tongues afterwards vttered vpon due occasions in words and writings As therefore those of that tyme heard the voyce of that cryer in the desart from the mouth of the Baptist so all Christians heare and must heare the word of God and diuine truth by the mouth of the Church Well then what this man so confidently auerreth that there is no ground yea that no ground can be pretended why we should hold Gods Church for so he must say if he say any thing against what his Aduersary sayes infallible vnles we first belieue the Scripture diuine I as confidently deny And for as much as respects priority or antecedency of beliefe since the Scripture as I haue said is no other word but what the Church hath and daily doth vtter vnto vs whether historicall or dogmaticall or howsoeuer first conceaued in the vnderstanding and spirit of the Church it followeth that as we haue receaued it vpon her credit telling and teaching vs that it is diuine so we must à Priori belieue the Church as infallible witnes or reporter before we can belieue the infallibility of Scripture which she reporteth it followeth also that we must belieue the Church interpreting the Scripture for it is incredible that any other man should better vnderstand what I speake according as I haue conceaued or what I meane by the words I speake then I my selfe the speaker who only intend to vtter my conceipt It followeth yet further that although there were no Scripture and these Christian Verities had descended to vs only by Tradition and by the testimony of former ages transmitting them successiuely from Christ to this present age we should be bound to belieue the Church that is that continued succession of men belieuing those Christian Verities vnles we will say there was no obligation vpon men to belieue in God and to worship him according to that beliefe before the tyme of Moyses before the Scriptures were For was not Circumcision obligatory before Moyses and was not the posterity of Abraham obliged to belieue and practise that tradition as of diuine authority of which our Sauiour sayth Moyses dedit rebis Circumcisionem non quia ex Moyse est sed ex Patribus He will say You proue the Church infallible by Scriptures your Scriptures must be first belieued infallible I answer we proue this out of Scriptures against such as professe to belieue Scriptures not the Church as out of their owne principles it followeth not thence that we first belieue the Scripturs diuine or infallible For though in methode of confuting such Aduersaries we begin with the Scriptures yet in the methode of belieuing we begin from the Church vpon whose credit we belieue the Scriptures to be diuine and according to this method commencing from the Church Christian fayth was first propagated among nations and imbraced by Heathens Nor will it be to the purpose to reply that Heathens were induced to belieue by reason of miracles This I say is not to the purpose how the Church gained this credit but hence it is inferred that in regard of Christian Beliefe the Church had the Precedency before Scriptures that is the Church was belieued before the Scriptures were belieued Wherefore to conclude this point if it be impiety not to belieue Scriptures as no doubt it is yet it is an impiety no way deducible from this doctrine that the beliefe of an infallible Church is precedent to the beliefe of Scriptures But it is not hard to conceaue by the very carriage of the busines as he handles it what he driues at in all this discourse which is indeed to euacuate all authority both of Church and Scriptures and vpon the ruines of both to build the Godles Socinianisme Therefore all inferences which may seeme any way to perplexe Christian doctrine or force it into straits are his aduantages It was the prudent industry of the Roman Consull to prouoke Catiline whose secret practises and designes vpon the Common-Wealth he had vnderstood into open warre and rebeilion for he supposed no Cittizen would then appeare in his defence or make the oppression of a Tyrant his quarrell As no man would approue the fyering of the house wherein himselfe were or wracking the shippe wherein he sayled himselfe I suppose likewise if this pretended Champion for Protestancy were once discouered and strip't to the naked truth of what he is indeed that is as I haue said a very Socinian Mole vnderworking euen Protestancy it selfe and all Religion no Protestant who hath any zeale of the Religion he professeth would euer be seene in his patronage nor willingly I thinke in his company nor would he vouchsafe the ordinary greeting or salutation as good-morrow Ep. 2. Joan. to him who acknowledgeth neither day nor morning of Christian religion or God saue you to him who doubts whether there be any such thing as God Saluation nor would they thinke him fit to conuerse among Christians who hath disputed himselfe out of all termes of Christian commerce and conuersation His Calumny concerning Protestants reputed Atheists c. by Catholiques SECT XXVIII Pref. YOu say fifthly and lastly sayth this Aduocate with confidence in abundance that none can deny the infallible authority of your Church but he must abandone all infused fayth and true religion if he de but vnderstand himselfe Answ This Aduocate himselfe is no small part of proof of the truth of this Hypothetique who since he hath relaps't from this doctrine of infallible authority of the Church hath withall disclaimed all infused fayth as his Aduersary hath charged him vpon information more then credible wherin that is in abandoning both I confesse
then other Churches are no then the Church of Rome Yet let them haue made of him what they can or what they list a Vessell of Honour or Contumely since by their all-sufficient Canon of Scripture they are vnquestionable for what they do or make of such matter yet I assure my selfe he will neuer be able to make good this comparison or parity vntill he make it euident when and how that notorious change entred into the Roman Church whence the Church of England receaued Christian Religion how and when I say the Roman Church Apostated from her selfe For vntill then we shall neuer cease to extoll in comparison her first birth and entrance first sowne and planted by Apostolicall euangelizing then watred with the blood of two principall Apostles as is extant vpon record of irrefragable testimony then the entrance of the same Religion from thence propagated into other nations togeather with the entrers and founders of the same all men of knowne and eminent sanctity to extoll I say these entrances of the Roman Religion in comparison with the infamous ingredientes of defection from that Church into some of the same Nations achieued by men or monsters rather of most celebrated infamy and stigmatized Worders Had the Church of Rome needed reformation were these likely or probable instruments a Friar with his dis-nun'd and de-uirginated Concubine Or a second branded and inusted Institutor Or that third Poet of his owne bi-sexe and heterogenious Loues Felicia tempora quae ves Moribus opponunt habeat iam Roma pudorem Happy tymes that haue such reformers now Rome hath cause to blush Most certainly the wisedom of God neuer made choyce of such Apostles who sayth Qui mihiministrat me sequatur he that doth my seruice let him follow me All morall and Christian Vertues especially contempt of the world and of all interest respect of flesh and blood vsher'd and accompanied the entrance of the Roman Catholique Religion wheresoeuer it entred Many well knowne and notorious vices paued the way to nouell Heresies and entred with them yea grew from the very root 's and principles of them Which very Paralell and one point of comparison whosoeuer shall haue duely considered and seriously waighed let him in gods Name dispute parities of the Church of England with the Roman Church The rest which followeth in this 16. Paragraph concerning the Popes infallibility is nothing else but rauing language the ouerflowing exuberance of his pregnant passion To which it is full inough to answer in this place That the Pope neuer hath nor euer shall define vice to be Vertue or the contrary nor oblige men to belieue Antichristianity Christianisme or Christianity Antichristian nor lead men by any such doctrine into Socinianisme into Turcisme yea these are the mans word 's vnto the diuell himselfe if he haue a mind to it Yet I confesse giue him his due this was no ill order'd consecution from Socinianisme to Turcisme from Turcisme to the Diuell though perhaps the progresse might haue beene better gisted thus From Turcisme to Socinianisme from Socinianisme to the Diuell at the very middle doore of which three I heare this Aduocate dwell's if any chance to enquire of him Domui paries communis vtrinque deuided from either with a common wall so that his mutuall intelligence with both is both facile and credible His concealed Arguments for Socinianisme SECT XXX ALthough this Atturney of Protestants would seeme to deserue of them his fee yet he will not faile to aduance his owne cause or his most owne Socinianisme which is I doubt his finis cui his most intended affaire Wherefore as he laboureth in behalf of Protestants to weaken yea to abolish all infallibility of the Church of Christ so he endeauours out of the doctrines of some Catholiques to vnnerue the testimony of Scriptures vpon the authority of which the whole fabrick of Protestancy is pretended to rely For who seeth not what aduantage he with his Socinian Academy will draw from hence As thus Doctrines of Christian fayth according to Protestants cannot be proued by the Authority of the Church for that authority with them is errant Againe some of them in the opinion of Papists cannot be sufficiently proued by Scriptures as that maine point of their fayth and hope the mistery of the Trinity therfore if we harken to both or belieue both since whether rather to belieue we know not it can no way be proued Whence with a Diagorus the surnamed Atheos or a Protagorus concerning any such thing as Trinity and soone after as Deity they will returne a Non liquet it is not certaine For me who haue enterprized the discouery of his Fallacies together with some hidden driftes and mines alone it shall not be necessary or requisite to pursue his seuerall testimonies of Catholique Writers they will do it no doubt at the least so far forth as they shall deeme it needfull who vndertake the answere of this great Pamphlet though I verily thinke it will proue magis operosum quà m operae pretium the haruest will neuer render the seed in so barren a field And I do not know but a man may suspect he had a mind to entertaine his Aduersary hastning after him in examining his witnesses were it but to slow his pursuite like as Medea scattered her brothers bones in her flight from her Father to retard their speed who eagerly pursued her while they stayd to gather them vp Yet was she neuer sure so peeuish a shrew as to quarrell with them for not gathering them vp cleane as this Aduocate doth in behalfe of his Clients scattered bones which notwithstanding I certainly thinke his aduersary either hath done or would haue gathered to a bone if he had thought them indeed his bones and not rather some other watry or aery substance Only after a more short and generall way I answere as concerning those Scriptures out of which as he sayth some of our Writers deny that the Trinity can be conuinc't ad hominem thus M. Ch. himselfe hath denyed in the hearing of sufficient witnesses that this point of Christian beliefe can be proued out of Scripture and said that it can lesse be so proued then the Catholique doctrine of Transubstantiation which he with his Agonotheâ—'s the Protestants constantly deny possible to be proued by Scriptures Whence thus I argue M. Ch. sayth the B. Trinity cannot be proued by Scripture he the same denieth that any point can be held as of diuine fayth but what is proued out of Scripture therefore he denieth that the Trinity is to be belieued as of diuine fayth Ergo he belieues not the B. Trinity as a Christian therefore he is none So by his owne doctrine he leades himselfe to Turcisme or Socinianisme or to the diuell himselfe if he haue a mynd to it Moreouer I answere those Catholique Writers no doubt from those lesse expresse and conuincing authorities of holy Scriptures lesse I say conuincing of themselues abstracting from
deafe eare to all exotique interpretation yea and to all naturall reason and discourse when it impugnes this authority as you Socinians are deafe to supernaturall truth when it sounds a note aboue the reach of your reason Wherefore since this your answere is in effect no otherwise a confutation of your first Motiue but by a flat deniall I do not see but it may moue still with as much force as euer yea and liue againe to fight against the Father and that with more equity then he fights against his Mother And all this I haue said supposing he meanes by his de facto as I vnderstand him and as I haue some reason more then euery man knows to thinke he mean's If he meane otherwise when he shall vouchsafe to come out of the Clouds and appeare in his true meaning he shall be answered otherwise II. Motiue Because Luther his followers separating from the Church of Rome separated also from all Churches pure or impure true or false then being in the world vpon which ground I conclude that either Gods promises did faile of performance if there were then no Church in the world which held all things necessary and nothing repugnant to Saluation or else that Luther and his Sectaries separating from all Churches then in the world and so from the true if there were any true were damnable Schismaticks II. Remotiue To the second God hath neither decreed nor foretold that there shall be alwayes a company of men free from all errour in it selfe damnable Neither is it alwayes of necessity Schismaticall to separate from the externall communion of a Church though wanting nothing necessary For if this Church supposed to want nothing necessary require me to professe against my conscience that I belieue some errour though neuer so small and innocent which I do not belieue and will not allow me her communion but vpon this condition In this case the Church for requiring this condition is Schismaâ—icall and not I for separating from the Church III. Promotiue Gods decree concerning the perpetuity of a Visible and infallible Church on earth to the end of the world hath bene foretold many wayes as hath beene declared in part in the former Promotiue and more fully and plainly by many Catholique writers and the contrary is heere assumed with too to great boldnes but without all proofe or possibility of proof That such separation from the Church is schismaticall is euident for schisme being the breach of vnion in Charity as Heresy violates the vnity of faith to separate from the externall communion of this Church is to shew you are fallen out with the Church with which you refuse to conuerse in Ecclesiasticall conuersation as he who flyeth the company of a man with whome he hath beene formerly familiar in way of ciuill conuersation is supposed to be fallen out with him Then againe this separation is very scaÌ„dalous as yeilding a iust presumption that such a Separant is in his iudgment an Heretique Now to scandalize wittingly and knowingly as such a Separate cannot be ignorant that this is a true cause of scandall or if he be he is wilfully ignorant is to violate the law of Charity and this especially when you separate from a Church wherein nothing necessary to Saluation is wanting as you make the supposition But if this Church wanting nothing necessary as you suppose require you to professe against your conscience that you belieue some error then say you your Separation is lawfull But either this error required by the Church to be belieued is in your conscience an error of doctrine concerning fayth or manners or no If yea then in your conscience somewhat necessary is wanting to that Church that is the contrary doctrine of truth If it be no error of doctrine concerning either of these but only some opinion held or practized as indifferent then certainly the Church will neuer vrge you to belieue it then againe you may choose whether you will belieue it or no and then lastly you should haue no cause for this to breake with the Church or deuide your selfe from her Communion If you say in the iudgment of the Church it may perhaps be held indifferent yea perhaps a necessary point of doctrine but to my conscience it is an error in faith or manners Now this I expected and this I knew you said in your hart so then I say againe in your iudgement and conscience the Church is wanting in some necessary point of true doctrine And heere now I appeale to the sentence of any sober and indifferent Christian what greater pride can be imagined then that any priuate or single man should haue a conscience repugnant and refragatory to the conference of the Church of God What sober Christian I say reflecting duely vpon such a conscience will not doome it mere insolency and arrogance True it is no pride of man can be a Paragon with the pride of formall Heresy this is indeed that Pes superbiae that foot of pride by the length and bulk whereof you may coniecture how Gigantique a monster an Heretique is For which cause all Orthodoxe Spirits haue learned to pray with the Church Psal 35. Non â—eniat miâ—ipes superbiae manus peccatoris non moucat me this foot of pride this suggestion of Sathan may it haue no accesse vnto my soule and the hand or pen of such a sinner let it haue no power to moue or drawe me from an humble beliefe Ibi ceciderunt qui operantur iniquitatem expulsi sunt nec potuerunt flare there and in that pride Apostat-Angels fell with them Apostat-Christians fall from the Church expulst and eiected thence or by reason of their pride they could stay no longer there For after this pride growing daily more in an Hereticall conscience hath at length extinguished the spirit of God stifled all his Inspirations and Motiues then the same spirit of God expulseth that Satanicall and mutinous spirit out of his family which is the Church of Christ bandites throw's him forth into the open field of professed Heresy 1. Iohn 2. vt manifesti fiant that they may be knowne for Heretiques and warred against as open rebels that their conuersation may be eschewed by weaker Christians their Herefies lay'd open and beaten downe by the more learned to be buried at last in the ignominy and obliuion of their infamous Ancestry 2. Thess 2. whom our Lord Iesus from age to age hath and will kill with the spirit of his mouth And now after their eiectmens and expulsion they pretend the equity of their separation when it is indeed their Iniquity which hath separated and expelled them qui operantur iniquitatem expulsi sunt c. As when God and the Apostate Angels by reason of their pride became two factions if I may so say the immensity of heauen was too strait to containe both Quaemare quae terras quae totum possidet Orbem Non caepit
is no body else that can or will do it c. Prom. When Martin Luther ran out of his Monastery and ran into a Nunry made a strumpet of a Nun and forthwith turned rebell vnder the colour of reforming abuses in the Roman Church there was not indeed another to be found so very a miscreant who could and would do the like worke of vnchristian Charity although the breach now made he was seconded by others true and most effectiuely by that burn't Sacrifice of Geneua who for his merit might haue been an holocaust Hem Correctores Behold the Reformers of the Roman Church with the true mark 's and brand's of their extraordinary Mission Habeat iam Roma pudarem blush Catholique Rome for your abuses laid open to the world by these innoceÌ„t Hieremies these extraordinary Committies or Missioners For in extraordinary cases extraordinary courses are not to be disallowed Remot If some Christian Layman should come into a Country of Infidels and had ability to perswade them to Christianity who would say be might not vse it for want of commission Prom. No man would say it that I know and as you M. Aduocate put the case you speake Law for in this exigent interpretatiue Commission from the Church to any Layman your self for example hath place for the Church giues leaue to any man to persuade Christianity especially in such circumstances of necessity yea and to make Christians too by baptizing But now the application What aduantage hath your plea from this Who can interpret that any man hath a Commission from the Church to preach against the same Church This can be no ordinary commission as I haue proued nor extraordinary of any effect or authority vntill it be manifested by extraordinary testimony which can be no other but true miracles VIII Motiue Because Luther to preach against the Masse which containes the most materiall points now in controuersy was perswaded by reasons suggested to him by the Diuell himselfe disputing with him so himselfe professeth in his Booke de Missâ priuata that all men might take heed of sollowing him who professeth himselfe to follow the Diuell VIII Remotiue â—â—thers conference with the Diuell might be for ought I know nothing but a melanchely dreame c. VIII Promotiue An qui amant ipsisibi somma fingunt Surely t' is you who dreame that Luther dreamed because you would haue it so otherwise you cannot choose but know by him that he dreamed not if you will belieue him who sutely knew whether he were waking or sleeping when the Diuell cour'st him otherwise you make the Diuell a very dull and Phlegmatique courser I haue seen much coursing in my dayes but neuer knew any man who slept while he was cours't yet I cannot but admire your iudgment and discretion that you rather belieue Luther in what he teacheth against the Church then what he testifieth of his owne certaine knowledge but this was properly and prouidently added by you for ought I know for I thinke you were not present at the disputation no you were then but an Embrie of Protestantisme no nor so much but only existeÌ„t in virtute causarum so for ought you know it was nothing but a melancholy dreame Yea and perhaps for ought you know he wal'kt too in his sleepe when as he confesseth of himselfe he oftentymes walk't with the Diuell in his bed-chamber that some of his Diuels with whome he conuersed so familiarly were braue Diuels Doctours of diuinity Doctours of the Chaire among the Diuels this he dream'd too Now I verily suspect these were the disputant Diuels who disputed him out of the Masse and being such great Doctors of Diuinity sure they would scorn to take hold of such an aduantage to dispute with him while he slep't For they no doubt intended a victory which had beene none if he had beene a sleepe while they disputed therefore I verily thinke he was broad-waking as he himselfe teaches But did he indeed trow you M. Aduocate eat so much salt with the Diuell as he saith he did It little appear's by this or did he but dreame he eat salt too For surely he was a very freshman in diuinity who would be driuen out of his saith by a dreame or because he could not defend it againnst the Diuell waking he sleeping But since you reserue so many euasions to escape this Diuellish disputation with Luther as not denying that he had such a Conference euen waking with the waking Diuell but that it might be otherwise then againe for ought you know we will presse you no further with this yet when you made this Conference of Luther with the Diuell your Motiue not to belieue Luthers doctrine authorized or suggested by the Diuell you then knew no more then now you know that is for ought you knew it might be but a melancholy dreame so this part of your Motiue stand's in the same force which then it had Remot But if it were reall the Diuell might persuade Luther from the masse hoping by doing so to keep him constant to it Prom. Certainly you haue taught the Diuell a lesson of Policy for which he will thinke himselfe obliged to teach you many In the mean tyme this is a very transcendent answere and applyable to many a solid blasphemy If the Diuell had persuaded Luther to preach against the Blessed Trinity as whosoeuer preacheth or teacheth against it may be presumed I thinke to do it by his perswasion and somewhat to this purpose I haue heard whisper'd of a certaine Socinian who stickles for Protestancy why might not a Socinian or Antitrinitarian answere to this likewise that the Diuell perswaded him this to keepe him more constant to the beliefe of the Trinity So likewise if Arius were said to haue beene perswaded by the Diuels arguments to preach or write against the Equality or Consubstantiality of the Sonne of God with God the Father why might not the Arian to whom this should be obiected answere the Diuell did it to keepe him more constant to the beliefe of Consubstantiality Syr I am sory you are become so priuate and inward with the Diuell that you can diue into his intentions and acquaint your selfe with them better then he who had eat so much salt with him who had his company at bed and board as daily and as nightly as his owne reueyled Catharine But do you not see what a gappe you lay open to a most outragious blasphemy when you teach Heretiques to make the Diuell a Gateghist and an Apostle of Christian doctrine and what he doth himselfe he might do by others his instruments So then the of-spring and posterity of those Heretiques who denyed that the sonne of God suffered death vpon the crosse might be said to haue beene perswaded by the Diuell to preach that deniall to the end to keep them closer to the beliefe of Christs Passion Now I see you so wholy taken vp in your extraordinary missions and extraordinary Courses