against Gods Church shal be damned But here I will stay my selfe wading no further in the disquisition and search of the great dissentions betweene Catholikes and Protestants touching faith and beliefe only I will reflect a litle vpon the premises And heere it is made most euident first that the Catholikes and Protestants do mainly differ in the sense and construction of the Articles of the Creede and consequently seing the sense and not the words do make the Creed that they both do not belieue one and the same Creede but haue to themselues seuerall Creedes from which point is sufficiently discouered the want of Vnity in faith among them both which Vnitie is so necessarily required to mans saluation as in the precedent chapter is demonstrated Secondly that though by supposition they did belieue the Creede and the true sense therof with an vnanimous consent yet it is proued there are diuers other articles not contayned in the Creed which are indifferently belieued as necessary to saluation both by Catholike and Protestant Thirdly seing also there are sundry Controuersies in Religion as is aboue exemplified which immediatly concerne saluation being houlden as necessary meanes therof by Catholikes but disclaymed from and abaÌ„doned by the Protestants as mayne errours and false doctrines Therfore from all the former premises I do auerre that it is a manifest errour to make the Creed the sole rule of Fayth and that he who maintaynes that both the Catholikes and Protestants notwithstanding their great disparitie of beliefe and fayth the one side necessarily belieuing maintayning Heresie can be saued or enioy one heauen is wholy depriued of all true iudgement reason and discourse and for want thereof may deseruedly be ranged among them of whome the psalmist speaketh (h) Psal 11. nolite fieri sicut equus mulus quibus non est intellectus THE SAME PROVED FROM the authority and priuiledge of the Church in not erring in her definitions and condemnation of Heresies and first of Councels CHAP. VI. FROM the inuiolable vnitie of faith we will next descend to the priuiledges of Gods true Church Of which priuiledges I will at this time take only one into my consideration that is that the Church of God is endued with a supreme priuiledge and prerogatiue of not erring in her definitions of fayth or condemnatioÌ„ of heresie This point is warranted by innumerable texts of holy Scripture as where it is sayd (i) Esay 72. Vpon thy wall ô Hierusalem I haue set watchmen all the day and all the night they shall not be silent But God did not set watchmen ouer his Church to teach errour And agayne The (a) 2. Tim. 3. Church of God is the pillar and foundation of the truth what more perspicuous And further whereas ech man â—s commaunded to repayre in difficulties matters of small consequeÌ„ces to the Church it is threatned by Christ himselfe that who wil not heare the Church shal be accompted â—s an Heathen or Publican according to â—hat his commination Si Ecclesiam non auâ—ierit (b) Mat. 18. sit tibi sicut Ethnicus Publicanus where we find no restriction but that in all things we are to heare the Church Agayne Christ himselfe speaketh to his Apostles and in them to the whole Church He (c) Luc. 10. that heareth you heareth me But if the church could erre neither would Christ refer vs to the church especially vnder so great a penalty neither by hearing the church could we be iustly sayd to heare Christ Finally the Church is so gouerned by Christ as its head or spouse and by the holy Ghost as its soule as therefore we find the Apostle thus to write (d) Ephes 1. thereof God hath made him head speaking of Christ ouer all the Church which is his body And agayne (e) Ephes 4. One body and one spirit yet more The (f) Ephes 5. man is the head of the woman as Christ is head of the Church From which texts it followeth that if the church should erre in its definitioÌ„s or resolutions of fayth and condemnation of Heresy this erring might well be ascribed to Christ and to the holy Ghost and consequently it followeth that the Apostles in making the creed would haue omitted that Article I belieue in the Catholike Church For why should we be bound to belieue the church if the church could erre This truth I meane that the church of Christ cannot erre in her sententionall decrees is so illustrious and euident that Tertullian speaking of certaine Heretikes of his tyme obiecting the erring of the whole church thus figuratiuely or Ironically writeth Age Omnes (g) in l. de praescript c. 28. Ecclesiae errauerunt nullam respexit spiritus Sanctus vti eam in veritatem deduceret ad hoc missus à Christo ad hoc postulatus de Patre vt esset doctor veritatis c. That is Go to Belike all the Churches haue erred and the holy Ghost hath regarded no Church that be might lead it into truth being sent for this purpose by Christ and to the same end begged by Christ of the Father â—hat it might be the teacher of truth And S. Augustine Disputare (h) Epist 118. contra id quod Ecclesia vniuersae sentit insolentissimae insaniae est To dispute agaynst any point maintayned by the whole Church is extreme madnes To whose iudgment herein most of the more sober and learned Protestants do indisputably subscribe since diuers of them doe with all feruour earnestnes maintayne that (i) D. Bancrost in his Sermon printed anno 1588. Fox Act. mon. fol. 464. b. art 4. The deuines of Geneua in their propositions and principles disputed c. p. 141. and diuers others the church of Christ cannot erre and that what she defineth for truth is most true or what for Heresy or â—alshood is hereticall and to be condemned This Basis or foundatioÌ„ of the church not â—rring being thus firmely layde we are heereupon to conclude that what points of Religion the catholike church of Christ hath condemned for Heresies the same are by vs to be reputed for Heresies since the churches condemnation or approbation is most infallible and the maintayners of the sayd Heresies for Heretikes and consequently that such Heretikes as departing out of the Church of God by their houlding of the sayde Hereticall opinions cannot be saued Now because the iudgment of the Church in matters of fayth is discouered two wayes first by the sentence of generall Councells secondly by the frequent attestations of the sayd chiefe Doctours of the Church in euery age in their particuler wrytings they not being contradicted therin by any other Orthodoxall Fathers or Doctours of the same age I will therefore distributiuely handle both these wayes shewing that both in generall by Councels and also by the particuler iudgement of the learned Fathers many opinions though not touching the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion or the expresse Articles of
of Carthage wherat S. Austine was present pronounced that the doctrine of prayer and Sacrifice for the dead was according to the true fayth of Christs Church and condemned the contrary opinion for Heresie and the maintainers therof for Heretikes The Councell of Constantinople vnder Pope Vigilius condemned Origen for his Heresy in which he taught that the Diuells should in the end be saued as (d) in vita Iustiniani Zonaras and (e) lib. 17. c. 27. Nicephorus relate Finally the seauenth Synod or Councell of Nice condemned all them for Heretikes who taught that the Images of Christ his Saints were to be depriued of all due respect and reuerence and to be contemned and broken Of this point see Paulus (f) l. 23. Rerum Româ—narum Diaconus and (g) in CoÌ„pendio Historiarum Cedrenus Thus far concerning Councells condemning for Heresies falsâ— opinions touching fayth and Religion where I haue restrayned my selfe only to those Councels this last only excepted which were within the first fiue hundred yeares or little more because those times are more prized and esteemed then later tymes I haue also made choyce to exemplify some of the Controuersies of these dayes condemned in these Councels The like course was coÌ„tinued by Councels for condemning resisting of Innouations and false doctrines though not concerning the Trinitie the Incarnation or the Apostles Creede in the succeeding ages which I purposely omit But now I heare demaund First how can it stand with the infallible authoritie of Gods Church in not erring in matters of faith of which priuiledge I haue intreated in the beginning of this chapter if so she shall define the former Errours for condemned Heresies and anathematize curse the maintayners of them for wicked Heretikes though otherwyse they belieued in the Trinity Incarnation Passion c. if the Doctrines be but only matters of indifferencie and such as may stand with Saluation Secondly I aske how both the defenders impugners of the sayd Doctrines can be freed from the brand of Heresie seing the true definition of Heresy nessarily agreeth to the Doctrines maintayned by the one side for it is certaine that either the Catholikes or Protestants doe make choyce of new opinions heerin and do stubbornely maintaine these their Innouations against Gods Church THE SAME PROVED FROM the Authority of Gods Church condemning Heresies manifested by the writinges of particuler Fathers CHAP. VII NOw to come to the second way of discouering the Churches senteÌ„ce in the foresaid points which by the particuler iudgment of the Auncient and learned Fathers who were in their seuerall ages the shining lampes of Gods Church and whose authorities all succeeding ages are to reuerence is easily euicted froÌ„ Gods holy writte for answereably heereto we read in (b) Ca. 32. Deuteronomie Remember the old dayes thinke vpon euery generatioÌ„ aske thy fathers and they will tell thee thy Elders and they will declare vnto thee And the Protestant ConfessioÌ„ of Bohemia conspireth thereunto saying The Auncient (i) In the Harmony of CoÌ„fessions p. 400. Church is the true and best mistresse of Posteritie and going before leadeth the way Comming then to the Fathers I will first insist in the particuler Errours not touching either the Trinity the Incarnation or Passion of our Sauiour or the Articles of the creed but points seeming of more indifferencie condemned by them for open and damnable Heresies Next I will set downe diuers of the Fathers sayings and sentences pronounced of Heresie and Heretiks in generall But before we come to the condemnation of particuler Heresies we must conceaue that reason it selfe and reuerence due to the cheife Doctors Fathers of the Primitiue Church must presuppose that in those times all those opinions were generally acknowledged for damnable Heresies which are placed in the Catalogue of Heresies by Ireneus Hierome Epiphanius Philastrius Augustine Theodoret and other approued authours This by drift of all reason is to be acknowledged for two respects first because we cannot finde any Doctor or wyter of the same ages who contradicted the foresaid Fathers for placing in their Catalogues any opinion for Heresy which was not Heresy Secondly in that the forenamed Fathers and Authours of the Catalogues of Heresies were godly and learned men and therfore neither would nor durst brand any opinion with the note marke of Heresie which the whole church of God did not then take as Heresie All this then iustly and truly presupposed let vs proceed to the particuler Heresies so registred for such by some of the foresaid fathers where for the fuller coÌ„uincing of our Newtralists in Religion my greatest choyce some few only excepted shal be of the controuersies remayning still at this day betweene the Catholikes and Protestants 1. That God was the authour of sinne was maintayned by Florinus condemned for Heresy or rather Blasphemie by (k) as Eusebius relateth l. 5. Hist c. 20. Irenaeus and Vincentius (l) in suo Commonitorio Lyrinensis 2. The opinion touching the Impossibility of the Commaundments was maintained by certaine Nouellists of those tymes and condemned for Heresy by (m) in explanat Simbol ad Damasum Ierome in these words Execramur c. We do execrate and abhorre the blasphemy of those who say that any impossible thing is commaunded by God to be kept and obserued by man See also the like condemnation thereof giuen by (n) de tempore serm 101. Augustine 3. That man had not freewill is auerted by the Manichees and condemned for an explorate Heresy by (o) in prefat dial contra Pelag Ierome in these words Manichaeorum est hominum damnare naturam liberum auferre arbitrium The Manichees doe condemne mans nature doe take away freewill As also by S. (p) l. de haeres c. 46. Augustine saying Peccatorum originem non tribuunt Manichaei libero arbitrio The Manichees do not ascribe the beginning o sinne to Freewill 4. That Fayth doth only iustify was condemned for an Heresy in the Eunomians by Saint Augustine (q) l. de haeres c. 54. who further sayth (r) l. de fide operibus c. 14. That it first proceeded from the false vnderstanding of S. Paul in his Epistles 5. That Prayer or Sacrifice could not be offered vp for the dead is maintayned by Aërius his followers who also taught that no set fasting-dayes are to be appointed by the church yet were these two opinions condemned for Heresies by (s) haeres 75. Epiphanius and Saint (t) lib. de haeres c. 33. Augustine who thus wryteth Aëriani Haeretici docent non oportere orare aut offerre sacrificium pro mortuis nec statuta solemniter celebraÌ„da esse ieiunia sed cùm quisque voluerit ieiunandum ne videatur esse sub lege The Aërian Heretikes doe teach that we ought not to pray or offer sacrifice fo the dead that solemne fasting dayes are not to be celebrated but that euery
thine O Florinus to speake friendly are not true nor wholsome These opinions are repugnant to the Church c. I may truly protest that if the holy and Apostolicall Priest Policarpus had heard of such opinionâ— as thou defendest he would haue stopped his eares cryed out according to his fashion o good God vnto what miserable tymes hast thou reserued me tâ— heare these things and presently would haue runâ— forth of the place where he had byn standing or sâ—ting where such doctrine had byn vttered Buâ— now to reflect a little vpon the premises Cerinthus Marcion Florinus did all belieue in the Trinity the Incarnation of oâ—â— Sauiour and receaued the Apostles creed and erred only in lesser points For if the had erred in denying the Trinity Incarnation Passion c. they had not byn repute for Heretikes but rather for Iewes Pagans â—or Infidells as aboue is noted and yet we â—ee what sharp reprehensions were vsed agaynst them by S. Iohn and S. Policarpe his â—choller as to flie out of their company to acknowledge them to be the Children of the Diuell to â—toppe their owne eares for not hearing of their Erâ—ours c. all which speaches had byn ouer much aggrauated and transcended the bond of Charity if their Errours had rested only vpon matters of Indifferency and had byn â—ut such as had byn compatible with mans Saluation But to proceed to the sentences of other Fathers in this point S. Ierome expresly thus writeth (n) Lib. 3. Apolg. contr Ruffin For one word or two contrary to the â—ayth many haue byn cast out of the Church Yea â—e pronounceth and proceedeth further exâ—ressely thus wryting Haeretici quicuÌ„que Chriâ—tiani non sunt whosoeuer are Heretikes those men â—re not Christians Basill was wont to say as (o) Lib. 4. hist c. 17. Theodoret recordeth Those who are truly â—nstructed in the diuine doctrine will not suffer any â—llable of the diuine decrees to be corrupted but for â—s defence if necessity forceth them will vndergoe â—ny kind of death (p) Lib. de praescript Tertullian that Aunciâ—nt Father hath a sentence not much diffeâ—ing from that of the former Father (q) Lib. 4. contra Do. cap. 8. S. Augustine Imagine a man to be chast continent â—â—t couetuous not seruing Idolls ministring hospitality to the poore enemy to none maligning no body sober frugall c. But yet if he be an Heretike certainly no man doubteth but for this alone that he iâ— an Heretike he shall not possesse the Kingdome oâ— God A dreadfull saying of so learned godly a Father The Donatists for disagreeing from S. Augustine in some Traditions not specifyed in the Scripture much lesse in the Creed are thus repreheÌ„ded by him In (r) Aug. in explan psal 54. these points those Heretikes were with me in Heresy not witâ— me in many thinges with me in a few not witâ— me the many could not help theÌ„ in which they weâ—â— with me And yet these Donatists belieued with Saint Augustine the Trinity the Incarnation and recited with him the Apostles creed Briefly S. Augustine in q. 11. in Matt. thus describeth an Heretike Hereticus est qui de aliqua parte doctrinae Christianae falsum credit He iâ— an Heretike who belieueth any false thing touching any part of Christian fayth within which definition it necessarily followeth that eytheâ— the Protestants for not belieuing Purgatory Prayer to Saints freewill merit of worke c. or the Catholikes for belieuing of them are to be included S. Gregory Nazianzeâ— orat 37. Vnum vni coharet c. One point oâ— fayth agreeth with another so as of them altogether there is made a certayne golden and wholesome chayne therfore if but one opinion or article be taken away or made doubtfull the whole chayne of fayth will become broken S. (s) Lib. 1. ad Mag. Cyprian Dominus noster Iesus Christus c. When our Lord Iesus Christ did testify in the Ghospell that those were his enemyes who were not with him he noted not any one Heresy but he manifestly sheweth that all Heretikes whatsoeuer are his enemyes saying He that is not with me is agaynst me and he that doth not gather with me disperseth S. (t) In Epist ad Galat c. 10. Chrysostome sayth Quemadmodum moneta Regia c. Euen as who pareth away a little of the Kings siluer maketh the whole peece to be adulterate EueÌ„ so who ouerthroweth the least branch or part of true Faith may be sayd to corrupt the whole he proceeding from these small beginnings to worser courses To come to an end of the Fathers iudgments in this poynt S. Ambrose shall (u) Lib. 6. in Luc. c. 9. conclude all who thus plainly writeth heereof Si vnum horum retraxeris c. If thou shalt recall or deny any of these points thou hast retracted thy owne Saluation for euen Heretikes seeme to challenge Christ to them for no man will deny the name of Christ neuerthelesse he indeed denyeth Christ who doth not confesse al points of sayth instituted by Christ Thus far of the Fathers iudgments in this matter where I am to aduertise the Reader first as aboue I haue touched in the Councells that if all false Doctrines whatsoeuer pertinaciously defended against the church of God be heresies as the definition of Heresy aboue explicated proueth them to be and as the Fathers of the Primitiuâ— church and in them the whole church of God haue maintayned then either the Protestants or Catholikes for their different houlding of contrary Doctrines touching Freewill Purgatory Prayer to Saints Sacrifice c. are to be accoÌ„pted Heretikes coÌ„sequently both cannot be saued in their Religion For that Heretikes continuing Heretikes cannot be saued is demonstrated first from the fearfull threats and comminations of the Apostles thundred out against Heretikes of which point I haue discoursed aboue Secondly from the Authority of the church of Christ which excludeth all Heretikes as I haue shewed from all hope of saluation and lastly to omit many other reasons from that principle that Heretikes are no members of Christ his Church of which point we are to dispute in the next place The Second thinge to be aduertised is that not any of the former authorities of the fathers against Heresy are restrayned by them to Heresies touching the Trinitie the Incarnation of Christ hiâ— Passion or the Articles of the creed supposing the denyall of them to be heresies aâ— indeed they are not but rather blasphemyes Infidelity for of these there is made no mention or intimation in their authorities within which compasse our Formallists in Religion seeke to confine their fayth but they are implicitely extended by the fathers to all Heresies whatsoeuer whether they concerne the supreme and fundamentall pointes of Christian Religion or any other secondary and lesse principall points of the sayd Religion THE SAME PROVED FROM that Principle That neither Heretikes nor Schismatiks are members of Christs Church
originally primitiuely signiâ—â—eth Election or Choyce as is said in generalâ— yet because they who deuide themseluâ—â— by maintaining false opinions from tâ—â— Church of Christ do make choyce 〈◊〉 these their new opinions and so therbâ— do separate themselues from the Churcâ— therfore this word Haeresis loosing it foâ—mer generall signification is restraynâ— by the Apostles and the Ancient Fatheâ— through an Ecclesiasticall vse acceptancâ— and appropriation which course we finâ— houlden in diuers other wordes noâ— taken by the Church in a secondary aâ—ception to signifie anie false or neâ— opinion in Religion among Christian of which a man maketh choyce pertâ—naciously defendeth against the Churâ—â— of God and the maintainers therof aâ— commonly styled Heretikes Thus three things necessarily concurre to make any false opinion Heresy and the defendours â—herof Heretikes First it must be some erâ—our touching the Faith of Christ And the â—eason hereof is because he that neuer proâ—essed or imbraced the Christian Faith is not an Heretike though he erre but a Iew or a Pagan and Heathen This is the doctrine of S. (c) quast 11. art â— Thomas of all learned men The second condition necessarily â—oncurring to euery Heresy is that there â—e an erreneous iudgment in the vnderâ—tanding of him who maintayneth the Heresie from whence it followeth that â—n externall deniall of a mans Faith is not Heresy except it proceed from an interâ—all errour of the vnderstanding but is raâ—her to be accompted dissimulation or â—chisme as S. Thomas (d) quaest 10. 2. 2. teacheth The third and last condition is that this â—rrour be maintained with great obstinacie â—gainst the authority of Christs Church â—eaching the contrarie doctrine and that â—he defendour therof being admonished of â—is errour will neuerthelesse openly resist â—he authority of the Church therin seeing â—f he be admonished by the Church of his Errour and instantly therupon do forsake â—is false opinion he is to be accompted only erroneous and his false doctrine only an Errour This agreeth to that of S. Augustine (e) l. 18. de ciuit Dei c. 51. Qui in Ecclesia Christi aliquid prauum sapiunt si correpti vt sanum rectumque sapiant resistant contumaciter suaque pestifera mortisera dogmata emendare nolunt sed defensare persistant Haereticiâ— fiunt foraes exeuntes habentur in exercentibus Haereticis That is Who belieue any false or wrong opinion in the Church of Christ and being counsailed and admonished therof do contumaciously and stubbornly resist and will not recall their pestiferous and deadly opinions but do persist in defending of them they are therby become Heretikes and so departing out of the Church they are taken for such as vent forth open and willfull Heresies Thus S. Augustine This Construction both touching the foresaid definition of Heresy in taking the words Haeresis and Haereticus in an euill restrayned and appropriated sense is warranted by the Apostle by the Auncient Fathers and lastly to omit the like acknowledged iudgment of the Catholikes by the learned Protestants By the (f) 1. Cor. 21. Apostle for thus we find him to say There must be Heresies among you that they which are approoued among you may be knowne Againe (g) Galat. 5.19 vid e Testam nouum 1576. The workes of the flesh are manifest which are adulterie fornication c. seditions Heresies c. As also (h) Tit. 3. A man that is an Heretike after the first second admonition auoyde And (i) Act. 5. finally Those which were of the Heresie of the Sadduces c. laid hands vpon the Apostles By the Auncient Fathers For S. Ierome (k) in ca. 3. ad Titum shewing the difference betweene Heâ—esie and Schisme thus defineth Heresie â—aeresis est quae peruersum dogma habet Heresie is â—at which containeth a peruerse froward opiâ—on And S. Augustine (l) l. de fide simbolo ca. 10. defineth Hereâ—kes in these wordes Haeretici sunt qui de Deo â—â—sa sentiendo fidem violant Heretikes are those â—ho do violate their faith by houlding false opiâ—ons touching God By the Protestants For to name one or wo among many M. (m) Dial. 2. Ormerod a most â—orward Protestant thus defineth an Hereâ—ike He is an Heretike who so swarueth from the â—holesome doctrine as contemning the iudgment â—â—th of God and the Church persisteth in his opiâ—ion c. With whom conspireth D. Couell 〈◊〉 saying Heretikes are they who directly gainâ— some article of our faith Now out of this former definition of â—eresie I am to promonish the Reader of â—ee pointes the which in the perusing of is Treatise I would haue him often to â—ll to remembrance first that euery Heâ—y is maintained as is aboue taught â—â—th obstinacie against the authoritie of the Church of God and therfore the maintayners therof are said by the Apostle (o) Ioan. 2.29 that they went out of vs that is out of God Church and for the same reason the Apostle (p) Tit. 3. doth pronounce an Heretike to 〈◊〉 condemned by his owne iudgment because hâ— preferreth his iudgment before the iudgment of the whole Church From whicâ— consideration it followeth that what maâ— soeuer houldeth an erroneous opinion â— touching Christian Faith and being aduertized therof by Gods Church and nâ— captiuating his iudgment in all humiliâ—â— therto is therby become an Heretike Anâ— such is the state of Catholikes and Protestants since the one doth euer reciprocall charge and condemne the other with falâ— doctrine and therfore seing the Church 〈◊〉 Christ must be with the one of them it followeth that the other not submitting the iudgment to it are proclaymed therby Hâ—retikes And thus it may sometimes fall oâ—â— that the first Inuentour of a false opiniâ—â— may be no Heretike as maintayning it bâ—fore it be condemned by the Churcâ— wheras the Professours of it after its coâ—demnation are become Heretikes accâ—ding to that of (q) l. aduersus Haeres Vincentius Lyrinenâ— O admirable change of things the authours of 〈◊〉 and the same opinion are esteemed Catholikes 〈◊〉 their followers are iudged Heretikes Thus we see that pertinacity of iudgment doth euer consumate an Heresy The second that the denyall of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. are not properly called Heresies but rather blasphemies the denyers of them not to be accouned Heretikes but Infidels Iewes or Pagans From whence it proceedeth that what places of Scripture or of the Faâ—hers are spoken of Heretiks the same cannot be truly applyed to the denyers of the Trinity the Incarnation Passion c. The third is that the forsayd definition â—f Heresy being the only true definition â—nd acknowledged for such on all sides is â—ot restrayned eyther in it selfe or by the â—eaning of the Apostle only to the most â—upreme as they are called fundamental â—oints of Christian Fayth as of the Trinity â—â—e Incarnation of Christ his passion the â—ecalogue and the
Articles of the Creed â—â—t it is extended in it own nature consiâ—ering that according to al Art the definitioÌ„â—â—d the thing defined ought to be of an eâ—all latitude or extent to any erroneous â—â—inion whatsoeuer frowardly defended 〈◊〉 a man and impugned by the Church of â—od So as it is as perfit an Heresy and â—e belieuers therof are as true Heretikes to deny that there is a Purgatory or to deny Freewill praying to Saints the doctrine oâ— Indulgences the necessity of Baptisme oâ— any other Article affirmed by Catholikes granting the doctrine of Catholiks in thesâ— Articles to be true as to deny the Trinity the IncarnatioÌ„ of Christ his death Passion c. supposing the denyall of these to bâ— but Heresies And a man shal be aswell daÌ„ned in Hell for denying these former as foâ— these other though the denyall of these lâ—ter do exceed the other in malice since thâ— blasphemies of them are in themselues moâ— wicked heynous And thus much toâ—ching the definition of Heresy or an Heretikâ— which being iustly premised we will conâ— now to the mayne Controuersy handleâ— in this Treatise THAT EVERY CHRISTIAN CANNOâ— be saued in his owne Religion Proued from tâ— holy Scripture CHAP. II. NOw then to beginne to fortify anâ— warrant this vndoubted truth that euâ—ry Christian cannot be saued in his owne Religioâ— I will draw my first kind of Proofe froÌ„ tâ— sacred wordes of holy Scripture And theâ— testimonies shal be of three sorts One coÌ„ceâ—ning Heretikes textes which are not-restrâ—ned to any particular Heresies but deliuered of Heresy in generall The second branch of authorities shall touch Heretikes euen for certaine particuler Heresies different from denying the Trinity the Incarnation of our Sauiour his Passion other like principall and fundamentall articles of Christian Religion The third shall containe the necessity and dignity of Fayth without any restriction to the pointes or articles which are to be belieued And first to beginne with the first We read the Apostle thus to speake of an Heretike in generall (a) Epist ad Tit. c. 3. A man that is an Heretike after the first or second admonition auoyd knowing that he that is such is subuerted and sinneth being condemned by his owne iudgment Where we see the Apostle commaundeth vs to auoid an Heretike which he would neuer haue done if the sayd Heretike had bin in state of Saluation The Apostle further adding this reason in that he sinneth and in that such a maÌ„ as being a pertinacious willfull Heretike is condemned by his owne proper iudgment that is because he aduaunceth his own iudgment aboue the iudgment of Gods Church and because he needeth not that publike coÌ„demnation of the Church which vpon other offenders by way of Excommunication is inflicted Of which text of the Apostle Tertullian both pithily and excellently giueth his glosse saying (b) Lib. de praescript c. 6. Quia in quâ— damnatur sibi elegit Moreouer the Apostle elsewhere coniureth as it were in the name of Christ thaâ— we should auoyd all false belieuers in thesâ— words (c) 2. Thess cap. 3. We denounce vnto yow Brethren iâ— the name of our Lord Iesus Christ that you withdraw your selues from euery Brother walking in ordinatly and not according to the Tradition whicâ— they haue receiued of vs. This place concernetâ— Fayth and doctrine as the whole Chapteâ— sheweth But if those men heere to be eschewed were in state of Saluation theâ— ought not then to be eschewed Agayne this text cannot haue refereÌ„ce to those whâ— deny the Trinity Incarnation and PassioÌ„ seeing the denyers of those high Articleâ— are not Brethren in Christ and yet the Apostle styleth them Brethren whom he heeâ— reprehendeth The Apostle also in anothâ—â— place thus forewarneth (d) Epist. ad Galat. c. 5. The workes of thâ— flesh be manifest which are fornication vncleaneâ— impurity c. dissentions (*) or Heresies according to the Testament of an 1576. Sects c. They whicâ— do these things shal not obtayne the kingdom of Goâ— where we see there is expresse mentioâ— made of Sects and that the maintainers oâ— any Sects in opinion of Fayth much morâ— of any Heresy which is euer auerred witâ— greater contumacy and frowardnes anâ— with neglect to the Churches Authority shall not enter into the kingdome of Heauen From which testimony we may furâ—her conclude that as one only act of fornication barreth a man from the kingdome of God so also one Heresy excludeth him froÌ„ the same A fourth place is this (e) Epist. ad Rom. c. 16. I desire you Breâ—hren to marke them that make dissentions and scandalls contrary to the doctrine which you haue learned and auoyd them for such do not serue Christ our Lord. But if such men be to be auoyded and do not serue Christ then no doubt they continuing in that state cannot be saued Fiftly the Apostle speaketh of certaine men saying of them (f) 1. Tim. 1. Quidam circa fidem maufragauerunt Certaine men haue made shipwracke of their Fayth Where the Apostle vseth the Metaphore of shipwracke therby to expresse more fully that Heretikes once falling out of the shippe of the Church of Christ are cast into the sea of eternall damnation To conclude the EuaÌ„gelist S. Iohn speaketh of all Heretikes in generall not imbracing the Doctrine of Christ within which all secondary questions of Christian Religion are contayned in this sort If any (g) 2. Ioan. man come to you and bring not the doctrine of Christ receaue him not into your house nor sâ—â— God saue you vnto him But a man is bound â— charity to suffer any one which is in staâ— of Saluation to come into his house and â— salute him or say God saue him Now whâ— can be replyed against these former texts â— cannot be sayd that they are meant only â— such Heretikes as deny the mysteries of tâ— Trinity the Incarnation of Christ hâ— Passion and such like supreme points â— Christian Religion This I say cannot 〈◊〉 auerred for these reasons following Fiâ— because those who in the Apostles tymâ— denyed these principall points of Christiâ—nity could not be truly termed Heretikeâ— but rather Iewes or Heathens seeing he 〈◊〉 an Heretike truly as is aboue shewed whâ— was once a member of Christs Church bâ— Fayth 〈◊〉 1 but after ceaseth to be therof by erring in some secondary points touchinâ— Christian Fayth Secondly by reason thaâ— according to the true definition of Heresâ—â— or Heretikes aboue set downe the formeâ— texts haue a necessary reference to all Heresies and Heretikes whatsoeuer whetheâ— the subiect of the sayd false opinions be smaâ—â— or great Thirdly because that in the former texts of Scripture there is no restriction of the word Haereticus or Haeresis to the chiefe or highest points of Christian Religion but it is extended to all kind of Hereâ—ikes and Heresies whatsoeuer euen by the Apostle without exceptioÌ„ who no doubt â—f he had vnderstood Heretikes or
more then darkeâ— an produce light since Truth himselfe 〈◊〉 taught vs (i) Luc. 6. That we cannot gather figges â—ornes nor grapes of bushes And hence by premises we are to vnderstand that we â—n entyre perfect fayth that by the â—h we belieue all supreme articles of the Trinitie Incarnation Passion c. anâ— all the articles of the Creed expressely articulately in their true sense and do belieue all other inferiour articles at least implicitely that is that we haue a readie preparation of mind to belieue all other articles which the Church of Christ dotâ— propound to be belieued so as that thougâ— we do not belieue euery article of Chrâ—stian Religion with an explicite and expresse faith yet we are bound vnder painâ— of damnation nor to belieue any doctrinâ— contrary or repugnant to the said articleâ— which the Church of Christ doth prâ—pound to be belieued from which it vnauoydably followeth that once grauntinâ— that the Church of Christ propoundeth 〈◊〉 be belieued that there is a Purgatory â— that we may pray to the Saints he incureth damnation who belieueth that theâ— is no Purgatory or that we ought not 〈◊〉 pray to Saints Now in this third place we will toucâ— that inseparable Attribute of true Chrâ—stian fayth which is Vnity in fayth 〈◊〉 doctrine This marke is so indissolubâ—â— annexed to the true fayth of Christ as thâ— we find his Apostles euer readie most â—â—riously to inculcate the same to their dâ—ciples Thus accordingly the Aposâ—â— exhorteth the Ephesians saying (k) Ephes 4. Be you carefull to keepe the vnity of the spirit in the bond of peace And immediately againe (l) Ephes vbi supra There is one Lord one fayth one Baptisme Where we see that Vnity in fayth is expressely set downe As also in another place (m) Ephes loc cit I beseech you that you speake all one thing be you kâ—it together in one mind and one iudgment And as this was the exhortation of the Apostle To we read that the first belieuers followed â—he same of whom S. Luke thus saith The (n) Act. 4. multitude that belieued were of one hart and â—ne soule And hence it proceedeth that the Church of Christ which comprehendeth the Professours of this vnanimous faith is â—tyled by Gods holy writ (o) Rom. 12. One Bodie one (p) Cant. 6. Spouse (q) Ioan. 10. one flocke of sheepe A truth â—o euident as that besides the frequent teâ—timonies of the Faâ—hers (r) Athanasius orat 1. con Ani. Chrysost opere imperfecto in Mat. Hom. 20. Tertullian de praescript Irenaeus l r. c. 5. confirming the â—ame euer the Protestants subscribe in iudgâ—ent heerto For thus (Å¿) Luther tom 3. Wittenberg in psal 5. fol. 166. Luther himselfe to omit (t) see herâ—â—â—f the Deuines of Mansfeild against the Sacramentaries And the Deuines of Heidelberg against the Anabaptists others writeth A kingdome deuiâ—ed in it selfe shall not stand neither haue any â—eretikes at any tyme bine ouercome by force or â—btility but by mutuall dissention neither doth â—hrist fight with them otherwise then with a spiâ—â—t of giddines and disagreement Now then this Vnitie of faith is so to be â—nderstood as that it is not repugnant therto that one and the same point should at one time not be houlden as necessary to be belieued the which after it hath vndergone a definitiue sententionall decree of Gods Church is necessarily to be belieued As for example it was not necessary in the beginning of Christianity to belieue that the booke of the Machabees the Epistle of S. Iames S. Iude the second Epistle of S. Peter the second and third of S. Iohn to be Canonicall Scripture till they were defined so to be by the third Councell (u) Can. 47. of Carthage at which S. Augustine was present But after this Councell had by the assistance of the holy Ghost defined them to be Canonicall and this after confirmed by the consent of the whole Church then it was and is Heresy to deny them to be Canonicall And the reason of this disparity is because it is Gods good pleasure wisdome not to reueale to his Church all articles of faith in the beginning and at one time but at seuerall times and vpon seuerall occasions as to his diuine Maiesty best seemeth expedient Thus the fayth of a Christian is capable of dilatation and of a more large vnfoulding or exposition but not of any contrariety in beliefe chaunge or alteration Anâ— thus to insist in the former example yâ— may well stand with Christian faith in the â—eginning not to accept the former bookes or Canonicall till the authority of the Church had pronounced them for such But it standeth not with sound faith that one man should positiuely belieue now after the Churches definition therof giuen as an article of fayth that the Machabees and the rest of the bookes aboue specified are not Canonicall Scripture but the prophane writings of man and another man should belieue as an article of Faith that they are Canonicall Scripture since the one of these contrary beleifes must be Hereticall This verity of the Vnity of faith being warranted by the word both of God and man as is aboue said we will take into our consideration the Catholike and Protestant Religions both which ioyntly do professe to belieue in generall in the Trinity in Christs Incarnation his Passion and the Creed of the Apostles and so we shall discerne whether the faith of all these seuerall Professours doth inioy the foresaid marke of vnity in doctrine or noe But seing this Subiect is most ample and large I will therfore sepose this ensuing chapter for the more full and exact discouery of the many and great disagreements betweene the Catholikes and the Protestants in their fayth and Religion THE SAME PROVED FROâ— want of vnity in fayth betweene Catholikes anâ— Protestants touching the Articles of the Creed CHAP. IIII. VNDERTAKING in this place tâ— set downe the multiplicity of opinions betweene Catholikes anâ— Protestants though they all iointly belieue in the Trinity the Incarnation oâ— Christ his Passion and the like and consequently that this their general beliefe wanteth that true Vnity of fayth which out of thâ— holy Scriptures Fathers the Protestants I haue aboue shewed to be most necessary to Saluation I will first examine how the Protestants and Catholikes doe differ touching the beliefe of the Creed made by the Apostles Next I will demonstrate that supposing all Professours of both Religions should agree in the true sense and meaning of the Creed yet there are diuers other dogmaticall points necessarily to be belieued and are at this instant belieued both by Protestants and Catholikes which are not expressed or mentioned in the Creed nor by any immediate inference can be drawne from thence Lastly I wil set down the great difference betweene Catholiks ProtestaÌ„ts in other points of fayth of which the Creed makes no intimation or
iudgment both of Catholikes and Protestants and accordingly are belieued iontly both by Ptotestants and Catholikes yet the sayd pointâ— are not contained or expressed in the Creed Among others I will insist in these following First That there are certayne diuine writings oâ— infallible authority which we commonly callâ— the Scriptures of the old new TestameÌ„t of which Testaments we find no mention in the Creed and yet all men are bound vnder payne of damnation to belieue thaâ— there are such writings since other wayeâ— abstracting from the authority of thâ— Church there were not sufficient meane left to belieue that it were a sinne to breakâ— any of the ten Commaundements oâ— which is more that Christ Iesus was thâ— true Sauiour of the world for though wâ— read in the Creed that he suffered and died yet we read not expresly there that he dyed to redeeme man 2. That there are spiritual Substances which we call Angels which now enioy the most happy sight of God and that many thousands of them did fall presently after their Creation and are become those malignant Spirits which vsually are tearmed Diuells 3. That there is any materiall place of Hel where the wicked are tormented of which we find nothing in the Creed in the iudgment of the Protestants for though the word Hell be mentioned in that Article He descended into Hell yet by the word Hell the graue is vnderstood by most of the Protestants 4. That the paynes of the damned shal be for all eternity and not for a certayne tyme only 5. That Adam did presently vpon his Creation fall from the grace of God and thereby transferred Originall sinne vpon all mankind so as by reason of his fall all men are borne in Originall sinne 6. That the world was once drowned for sin which Inundation is coÌ„monly called Noës floud 7. That our Sauiour whiles he conuersed heere vpon earth did any miracles 8. That S. Iohn Baptist was our Sauiours Precursor or forerunner and that our Sauiour did choose vnto him certayne men for his Apostles which did first preach and plant the Christian fayth throughout the world 9. That Circumcision is now forbidden as a thing most vnlawfull vngodly 10. That there are any Sacraments of the new Testament as the SacrameÌ„t of Baptisme or Eucharist and instituted by Christ for the spirituall good of mans soule These points besides some others all christians aswell Protestants as catholiks do belieue and do hould that their beliefe of these points is necessary to saluation yet not any one of all these Articles is expressed or set downe in the Apostles creed From whence I would conclude that the Apostles Creed cannot be a sufficient boundary to contayne and limit an auayleable fayth For what hope can that man haue of his saluation who belieueth that there are neyther any diuine scriptures nor Angells nor Diuellâ— nor any Decalogue commonly called the Ten commaundements nor that Christ did worke any miracles nor that he dyed for man nor that he instituted any Sacrament and particulerly the Sacraments of Baptisme and the Eucharist nor finally to omit the rest that there is any place of Hell or any eternity of punishment for the damned And heere I am to premonish the Reader that it is no sufficient answere to reply that most of all the foresayd points are expressed in the Scripture and therefore are to be belieued This I say auayleth not seeing heere I dispute against those who maintayne with wonderfull pertinacity of iudgment that it is sufficient to saluation to belieue only the Articles and nothing els which are contayned in he Creed buâ— not any of the former Articles are contayned therein Agayne seing to belieue that there are any diuine scriptures is not expressed in the Creed it conduceth nothing to the answering of this our argument to say that the forementioned articles are proued out of Scripture and therefore are to be belieued Neither secondly can the force of our said argument be auoyded in replying that all the former articles are virtually and potentially comprehended in that article I belieue the holy Church because the Church teacheth that all these articles are to be belieued This is no warantable answere by reason that as these may be reduced to this Arâ—icle of the creed so also may all other points controuerted between the catholikes and the Protestants be in like maÌ„ner reduced to the said Article seeing the church of God setteth downe what is the truth and what is to be belieued in the sayd controuersies bynding her children vnder payne of damnation aswell to belieue the truth in the controuersies of our dayes as to belieue the former mentioned articles which are not expressed in the creed And yet these our Newtrallists in Religion who make the Creed the sole square of their Fayth doe not thinke that those questions of Religion insisted vpon betweene the Catholikes and the Protestants are in belieuing or not belieuing of them any way hurtfull to their Saluation THE SAME PROVED FROM the want of vnity in fayth betweene Catholikes and Protestants in Articles necessary to be belieued and yet not expressed in the Creed CHAP. V. IN this third and last place we wil â—nsist in certayne controuersies of Religion necessarily to be belieued the one way both in the iudgment of â—atholikes and Protestants and not contained in the creed and yet so differently maintayned by Catholikes and Protestants as that graunting the maintayners on the one side hould the truth it followeth that the other party vphouldeth falshood and Heresy Now for the more daungerous wounding of our Newtralizing Christians heerein I will omit heere to speake of the coÌ„trouersies touching Purgatory Praying to Saints Freewill Monachisme and diuers other such like will restrayne my selfe only to those Controuersies the subiect of which Controuersies are taught by the one side to be vnder Christ the immediate meanes of our grace and Saluation denyed by the other party to be of any such force or efficacy for the soules euerlasting good So as if it be shewed that the Protestants and the Catholikes doe maynely dissent in the meanes of obtayning grace and purchasing of saluation it must of necessity be inferred that both the Protestants and Catholikes continuing in such their contrary fayths cannot attayne grace and saluation since not only Philosophy but euen naturall reason teacheth vs that he neuer shall attayne the end who vseth eyther not the same meanes or contrary to those meanes which are only and necessarily instituted to the gayning of the sayd end But to proceed to these points first Concerning the Sacraments in generall the Catholikes do belieue that all of them where no iust impediment is doe conferre grace into the soule of man by the help and continuance of which grace the soule in the end obtayneth saluation The Protestants doe not ascribe any such supernaturall effect or operation of grace to them And to come more particulerly to the Sacraments
the Apostles creed haue byn condemned for playne Heresies and the belieuers of them anathematized for Heretikes And first to begin with councells the infallible authority of which euen Christ himselfe hath by his owne wordes often ratifyed as where he sayth Where (k) Mat. 18. two or three much more where many hundreds of venerable Bishops are gathered togeather in my name I am in the midst of them And againe speaking to the Church and in it to the assembled Doctours and Pastours thereof I am (l) Mat. 28. with you all dayes euen to the consummation of the world which councells are euer directed and gouerned by the holy Ghost according to those wordes in the Acts (*) c. 15. Visum est Spiritui Sancto nobis and therefore are worthily receaued and admitted for the supremest sentence of Gods church not only by the auncient (n) Atha Ep. ad Epictetum August in Epist 162. Greg. Nazian orat in Athan. Cyril l. de Trinit c. Fathers but euen by the more learned Protestants since to omit others one of the most remarkable of them thus writeth (o) D. Bilson in his perpetual gouernement p. 370. Synods are an externall Iudiciall meanes to discerne errour and (p) D. Bils vbi supra p. 374. the surest meanes to decide doubts But to proceed forward and to beginne with these And first with the councell of the Apostles This councell was assembled as we read in S. (1) Act. 15. Luke by reason of certayne contentious men maintayning that the Gentils conuerted to the christian Faith might eate meate offered vp to Idols bloud and strangled beasts coÌ„trary to the custome of the Iewes The Apostles being assembled and bearing with the weakenes of the Iewes in the infancy of the church decreed all prohibition of eating bloud strangled meates After which decree once established it is certayne that it had byn a mortall sinne immediatly to haue eaten of bloud straÌ„gled meates so as before it being a point of indifferency is now made necessary This appeareth from the text First from those words Certayne going forth from vs haue troubled you with words subuerting your soules But men do neyther depart out of the Church by maintayning certaine opinions nor by their example therin can they subuert other mens soules if their doctrine and practice thereof doe still remayne about thinges indifferent Secondly from that other passage It hath seemed good to the holy Ghost and vs to lay no further burthen vpon you then these necessary thinges where we find that the prohibition of such meates is ranged by the Apostles in regard of those tymes among those thinges which are necessary Againe neither would the Apostles haue gathered themselues togeather so solemnely neither would they haue ascribed the decreeing of it to the work of the holy Ghost if the Subiect of the question and difficulty then discussed by theÌ„ had concerned matters only of Indifferency after such their decree made Now from the example of this councell I doe gather That if a councell by it owne authority may decree that the eating of certayne meates being otherwayes of their owne nature indifferently to be eaten without sinne shal be vnlawfull and shall repute and hould the impugners thereof for men departed out of the Church of Christ then à fortiori what doctrine soeuer a councell shall condemne of it owne nature for Heresy the same is to be reputed by all good christians for Heresy and the defendours thereof for Heretikes Secondly the councell of Nice was ceâ—ebrated though principally for the represâ—ing of Arius his Heresy denying the Diuinity of Christ yet withall touching the controuersy of keeping the feast of Easter as â—t is apparent out of (q) l. 3. de vit Const. Eusebius (r) in lib. de Synod Arim Seleuciae Athanasius (Å¿) Haeres 70. vz. Audianorum Epiphanius Now this councell pronounceth Anathema to al those who besides the denying of the Diuinity of Christ should deny that the feast of Easter was not to be kept according to the custome of the church but according to the custome of the Iewes And these Heretikes were called Quartadecimani of whom see Tertullian libro de praescript Augustine Haeresi 29. And heere we are to vnderstand that the word Anathema vsed and pronunced by this councell which word is also almost euery where vsed in all generall councells signifyeth as much as accursed and in this sense we find this word Anathema to be vsed by the Apostle in seuerall (t) Rom. 1. Cor. 12 places so as when a councell pronounceth Anathema to any for belieuing such or such Heresies or not belieuing such and such true doctrines it intendeth to say that those men so doing are to be accursed and abandoned from God But no man is to be accursed or abandoned from God for belieuing or not belieuing points of Indifferency but for belieuing of such Errours as cannot stand with his Soules saluation The third Councell of Carthage wherat S. Augustine was present decreed that the booke of the Machabees with some other bookes should be acknowledged as canonicall and pronounceth Anathema and condemnation to all those who should not belieue them as canonicall Scripture From whence it may be concluded that seeing the booke of the Machabees teacheth Prayer (*) 2. Macab c. 1. for the dead that therfore this councell alloweth that doctrine condemning the contrary doctrine for Heresy The doctrine of the Nouatians who taught That there was not power in the church to reconcile men to God but only by Baptisme excluding and denying therby the Sacrament of Pennance was condemned with the brand of Anathema in the councell of Rome houlden vnder Pope Cornelius as (x) lib. 6. hist c. 33. Eusebius reporteth At which tyme also was condemned for Heresy the errour of Anabaptisme as the same (y) l. 7. hist cap. 2. Eusebius relateth The councell of Calcedon condemned the Heresy of Eutiches who taught that there was but only one (z) vt patet in act 1. Conc. Nature in Christ after his Incarnation In like sort the first councell of Ephesus condemned the heresy of Nestorius teaching two Persons to be in Christ as appeareth out of (a) in Chronico Prosper and (b) l. 7. c. 34. Socrates Now touching both these last Heresies we are to vnderstaÌ„d that both Nestorius Eutiches did belieue in Christ Iesus our Sauiour as the Redeemer of the world yet they were registred and branded for Heretikes only for their pertinacious erring touching the Person and Natures of Christ as now the Protestants may be reputed Heretikes for their ascribing of Ignorance Passion and Desperation to Christ The councell of Chalcedon also decreed that vowed Virgins and Monkes could not marry condemning those with an Anathema and for Heretikes that should hould and maintayne the Contrary as is to be seene out of the Councell it selfe The fourth (c) Can. 79. councell
one is to fast wheÌ„ it pleaseth him least otherwayes he might seeme to liue vnder the law Thus far S. Augustine 6. That Priests might marry was condemned in Vigilantius for Heresy by Ierome who in his booke agaynst Vigilantius thus writeth Quid faciunt OrieÌ„tis Ecclesia c. What do the Churches of the East in this point what the Church of Egypt and the Apostolicall Sea they admit for Priests men who are eyther Virgins or coÌ„tinent or if they haue wyues do cease to become husbands 7. That Marriage and Virginity were of equall dignity was defended by Iouinian who also absolutely denyed all diuersity oâ— merits yet was this his errour condemneâ— for heresy by (u) lib. 1. aduersus Iouin c. 2. S. Hierome and S. (x) de tempore serm 191. Augustine thus writing heerof Iouiniani damnamus errorem qui dicit nullam in futuro meritorum distantiam We condemne the errour of Iouinian who teacheth that there is no disparity or difference of merits in tyme to come 8. That the Church was not euer visible was taught by the Donatists but condemned for a most wicked Heresy by S. Augustine who thus discourseth thereof Donatistae detorqueâ— Scripturas in Ecclesia Dei vt tanquam defeciâ— perijsse de toto orbe videatur The (x) lib. de vnitat Eccles c. 22. Epist. 170. ad Seuer Donatisâ— do detort the Scripture and apply it to the Churcâ— of God that the Church thereby may seeme to haâ— suffered defect or perished out of the whole world 9. That Baptisme of Children was not necessary was taught by the Pelagians but condemned for a manifest heresy by (y) in Rescripto ad Mileuit Concil Innocentius by S. Augustine (z) haeres 86. and by S. (a) in Ep. 86. ad Epis Aquileiensem Leo. 10. The Religious vse of Images of Christ oâ— his Saints was sacrilegiously denyed by Zenaias Persa as (b) l. 16. c. 27. Nicephorus witnesseth writing thus Xenaias iste primus ô audaceâ— animam os impudens vocem illam euomuri Christi eorum qui illi placuere imagines venirandas non esse That is this Xenaias was the firsâ— that vomited forth this word o bould soule impâ—dent mouth that the Images of Christ and his seruants were not to be worshipped 11. That we ought not to pray to Saints or to worship their Relikes was iustifyed by Vigilantius but condemned for heresy by S. Ierome (c) Li. contra Vigil c. 1. 3. and by S. Augustine who of this latter branch thus wryteth Sanctorum (d) Lib. de Eccles Dog c. 73. corporum praecipue Beatorum Martyrum Reliquias ac si Christi membra sincerissimè honoranda credimus Si quis contra hanc sententiam venerit non Christianus sed Eunomianus aut Vigilantianus creditur We belieue that the Relikes of holy bodyes but especially of martyrs as the members of Christ are to be honoured most sincerely and who shall come to impugne this doctrine is to be accompted no Christian but an Eunomian or a Vigilantian 12 The ouerthrowing of Altars and casting away of holy Chrisme was taught practised by the Donatists yet was this their sacrilegious proceeding condemned and themselues branded for heretikes by S. (e) Lib. 2. cont Petila c. 52. l. 3. c. 40. Epist 163. Augustine and by Optatus who speaking to the Donatists discourseth thereof in this manuÌ„er Quid (f) Lib. 6. contra Donatistas est tam sacrilegum quà m altaria Dei inquibus vos aliquando obtulistis frangere radere remouere Quid enim est Altare nisi sedes sanguinis corporis Christi Quid vos offenderit Christus cuius illic per certa momeÌ„ta corpus sanguis habitabat What is so sacrilegious O you Donatists as to breake deface and cast downe the Altars of God whereupon your selues haue sometimes offered vp sacrifice What other thing is an Altar then the seate of the body and bloud of Christ In what hath Christ so offended you whose body bloud for certaine moments or short times did dwell or remayne vpon the Altar To be short I passe ouer as lesse pertinent to the Controuersies of these tymes how the Errour of Origen touching the saluation of the Diuells was condemned for Heresy by (g) Haeres 43. S. Augustine the Errour of Tertullian denying second marriages was in like sort mightily reprehended and condemned by the sayd (h) Haeres 86. S. Augustine though both these Doctours I meane Tertullian and Origen had otherwaies by their learned wrytings deserued well of the church of God and though the Heresies taught by them might seeme partly to be excused to wit the one in the defense of chastity the other of mercie Thus far touching the foresayd controuersies condeÌ„ned for Heresies by the fathers of the Primitiue church though the subiect of the sayd Heresies was neyther touching the Trinity the Incarnation Passion of our Sauiour or the Articles of the creed A poinâ— so euident and confessed euen by the Protestants as that many of the foresaid examples are collected out of the Fathers and confessed so to be condemned by diuers learned Protestants as by the Centurists in their fourth chapter of euery seuerall century by Osiander in his seuerall centuries as also by PantaleoÌ„ in his chronology Besides which condemnation of the church either these Doctrines or the contrary to them are necessarily proued to be Heresies euen from â—he definition of Heresy aboue set downe â—nd from whence it followeth that both â—he catholikes and the Protestants the one â—elieuing theÌ„ the other not belieuing them â—annot be saued seeing Heretikes continuâ—ng Heretikes cannot be saued Now to come to the sentences of the â—athers powred out in great heate and ferâ—our of zeale agaynst Heretikes and Heresy â—n generall And first to beginne with Saint â—ohn the Euangelist S. (k) Lib. 3. c. 3. apud Euseb l. 4. c. 23. Irenaeus relateth to set down Irenaeus his owne words that â—olicarpus the martyr who was scholler to â—he Apostles was wont to tell how that â— Iohn the Apostle of our Sauiour being â—t a certayne tyme in Ephesus going into 〈◊〉 publike Bath and finding Cerinthus the Heretike to be within the bath ran presentâ—y out of the bath saying to them that were with him let vs flie from hence for fearelest the â—ath fall vpoÌ„ vs kil vs in which the enemy of God Cerinthus abideth The same Authour (l) Vbi supra Irenaeus in like sort relateth in these words following how that the foresayd Policarpus meeting at Rome by chance Marcion the Heretike and he demaunding of Policarpe whether he knew him or not Policarpe answered I know thee for the first begotten child of Sathan To conclude with the testimony of this Father the sayd Irenaeus wryting to Florinus an Heretike who once was Scholler to S. Policarpe with him thus sayth (m) Iren. Epist ad Florin These opinions of
defence of the Apology KeÌ„nitius in exam Concil Trident. part 1. p. 74. diuers others Protestants themselues exempt her from errour most truly insufferably erred in condemning certayne opinions which are not fundamentall for Heresyes and their maintayners for Heretikes and consequently the Scripture and Christ himselfe haue deceaued vs by ascribing to the church an (m) Mat. 18. Luc. 10. 1. Tim. 3. c. infallibility of erring in her definitions of fayth and condemnation of Heresies and by commaunding vs to obey the churches authority and sentence in all things as styling her the pillar and foundation of truth And further it should follow that the Church should thus intollerably erre both in generall councells the highest Tribunalls heere vpon earth as also in the priuate Authorities and sentences of all the learned Fathers in those firster tymes And thus for example the councell of the (n) Act. 15. Apostles should haue erred in decreeing it vnlawfull to eate in those tymes bloud strangled meates In like sort the first councell of (o) Euseb l. 3. de vita Constant Epiphan haeres 70. Nice should haue erred in condemning the Quartadecimani for Heretiks because they would not keep Easter day according to the custome of the Church And to pretermit all the other Councells aboue alleadged the Councell (p) Euseb l. 6. Hist. cap. 33. of Rome vnder Cornelius for condemning the Heresy of the Nouatians who reiected the Sacrament of Pennance as also for condemning of Anabaptisme And thus farre of Councels condemning points of seeming Indifferency for open wicked Heresies But now heere graunting that the sayd points as they were houlden by the maintayning of them were not Heresyes that the belieuers of them be saued then two mayne absurdities doe immediatly follow the first as is sayd is the erring of the whole Church of God in coÌ„demning them for Heresies they being not Heresies but true doctrines The second the inconsiderate cariage of the Church in these matters For to what end or purpose were all these Councells consisting of many hundreds of the most graue and Reuerend men of all Christendome celebrated with such labour trauayle out of all countreys infinite charges if the doctrines for the impugning resistng and condemning whereof they were gathered might be indifferently maintayned defended on all sides without breach of true fayth or daunger of Saluation The erring of the church is no lesse manifested in the sentences and condemnations giuen by many of the most auncient famous leâ—rned Fathers in the Primitiue Church not any one Orthodoxall Father contradicting them therein agaynst diuers maintayning opinions that seemed in regard of the Trinity Incarnation c. of small importance â—f so those opinions be not Heresies nor the belieuers of them Heretikes but men in state of SaluatioÌ„ And thus according heerto Floâ—inus though he taught God to be the Auâ—hour of sinne might be saued In like sort the Heretikes who in S. Ieâ—ome his dayes denyed the possibility of the Commaundements The Manichees who â—enyed freewill The Eunomians who â—aught that only fayth doth iustify The Aeâ—ians who denyed prayer sacrifice for the â—ead and tooke away all fasting dayes Vigilantius who taught that Priests might marry and that we ought not to pray to Saints Iouinian who held marriage better then virginity The Donatists who taught the Inuisibility of the Church And finally to omit many others for breuity sake the Pelagians who denyed the necessity of Baptisme in Children All these men I say might be saued notwithstanding their former doctrines if so it be that euery man might expect Saluation in their Religion And yet we find that the foresaid men were branded for wicked Heretikes their doctrines for damnable Heresies as in the seauenth chapter aboue is shewed by Ireneus Ierome Epiphanius Philastrius Augustine Theodoret and others diuers of which holy Fathers writing catalogues oâ— Heresies did place the foresayd doctrines their Authours within the sayd catalogues this they did without any reluctation oâ— gain-saying of any other auncient and learned Father of their tymes From which consideration I doe gather if those opinions were not iustly condemned for Heresies and their Authouâ— for Heretikes Then not only the churcâ— did fouly erre in so great a matter but alâ— euen the aforesaid alleadged Fathers to wiâ— Ireneus Ierome Epiphanius Austine witâ— many such others should deseruedly be reputed for Heretikes for their condemning of true Doctrines for Heresies and the belieuers of them for Heretikes and on the contrary syde Florinus the Manichees the Eunomians Vigilantius Iouinian the Donatists Pelagius many other such should be accompted for their teaching of true Doctrines Orthodoxall Authors and might haue iustly complayned of their insupportable wronges and indignities proceeding from the pens of the foresaid fathers An absurdity which I thinke no man enioying the benefit of his fiue senses wil allow And yet the admittance of our Newtrallists Paradoxe inanoidably draweth on this infereÌ„ce Another Absurdity accompanying the former doctrine is this that Heretikes should be true members of Christs church This I thus deduce for seing by the consent of all learned men none can be saued but such as are true members of Christs church for otherwyse Turkes and Iewes dying in the state of Turcisme and Iudaisme might be saued and seing the foresaid registred Doctrines and their Authours are condemned for Heresies Heretiks both according to the Authority of Gods church according to the true definition of Heresy aboue in the beginning set downe for the said Heretikes haue made choyce of those their heresies and do maintaine them most frowardly against the whole church of God not submitting their iudgments to it must of necessity follow that if those men could be saued then Heretikes continuing Heretikes are members of Christs true church then which what Paradoxe can in it selfe be accompted more absurd or in the iudgment of learned men more incredible considering with what acerbity of comportement the Apostles and all the Orthodoxall learned pious Fathers both in their wrytings and otherwyse haue in all ages entertayned Heretikes as aboue I haue manifested Furthermore if an Heretike continuing an Heretike can be saued then hath the auncient church of Christ vsed great tyranny to diuers such Professours by vndeseruedly punishing such meÌ„ with losse of Goods Imprisonments Excommunication Banishment sometymes with death it selfe for such were the punishments appointed by the auncient church and Christian Emperours against Heretyks as I haue shewed in the nynth chapter Againe supposing the truth of the doctrine of these Omnifidians yet obserue how repugnant it is to all reason and otherwise absurde eueâ— in it owne nature I will heere passe ouer diuers reasons alleadged in the precedent Chapters insist a little in some few of them The first It is certaine that that Faith which belieueth some articles and yet belieueth not other articles which are no lesse true and