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
erroneous opinions touching Fayth against the then present Church of God But to returne more particulerly to the Subiect of this Treatise The source from whence this Libertinisme in beliefe impugned heere by me did take it origen and beginning is the contempt of the authority of Christs Church and the assumed authority of ech mans priuate Spirit For thus reasoneth the Neutrallist in Religion Both the Papists and Protestants do agree in belieuing the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. But they maynly dissent touching Purgatory praying to Saints Freewill Sacrifice of the Masse c. Therefore I will imbrace and follow the acknowledged doctrine of them both meaning the Doctrine of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion and hould it necessary only to Saluation since in it all sides do conspire But seeing the dissentions in religion amonge the Papists and the Protestants are of these secondary and lesse principall points only to wit Purgatory prayer to Saints c. and seeing it is impossible that both the Protestant and the Papist should teach truly in the sayd Articles for they teach meere contrary doctrines therein so as if the one side teach true it necessarily followeth that the other side teacheth false And further seeing I haue no more reason once reiecting the authority of Gods visible Church to belieue the one partie more then the other and it is impossible for me to belieue them both Therfore my priuat Spirit biddeth me to belieue neyther but to hould the doctrines of Purgatory prayer to Saints Freewill c. and all other controuerted points of Fayth at this day betweene the Papist and the Protestant to be matters meerely accessory and of such indifferency as that neyther the true or false beliefe of them can further nor hinder my Saluation Thus farre argueth our Newtrallist who whyles he wil be of all Religions is indeed of no Religion Then which as if Religion were but a meere abstracted Notion in the mynd what can be excogitated to be more impious and Athiestical in it selfe more repugnaÌ„t to the sacred Scriptures more crosse to the practise of all Antiquity and as heerafter shall be proued more aduerse to all naturall Reason But good Reader as vnwilling to traÌ„sgresse the accustomed limits of a Preface I will detayne thee no longer only for some delibation and tast of the Subiect heerafter handled I will conclude with the sentence and iudgment of S. Augustin passed vpon the Pelagians who belieued in the Trinity in Christ and his PassioÌ„ were men of honest and morall conuersation yet for houlding That only by the force of Nature without the assistance of Gods grace a Man was able to exercise vertue flie vice a point no more fundamental then most of the CoÌ„trouersies betweene the Catholikes the Prostants they are registred for Heretikes by S. Augustin and consequently not to be in his iudgment in state of Saluation His words are these (9) Epist. 120. c. 37. Nec tales sunt Pelagiani quos facilè conteÌ„nas sed continenter viuentes atque in omnibus operibus laudabiles Nec falsum Christum sed vnum verum aequalemque Patri coaeternum veraciterque hominem factum venisse credentes venturum expectantes sed tamen ignorantes Dei iustitiaÌ„ suam constituere volentes Haeretici sunt Thus S. Augustin with whom I end leauing thee Curteous Reader to the deliberate and studious perusall of these ensuing Leaues and intreating most earnestly the prayer of all good Catholikes for the remission of my infinite sins for a happy hourâ— of the dissolution of my old and decayed Body Thy Soules wellwishing friend VV. B. P. The Contents of the ensuing Treatise THAT a man who belieueth in the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. And yet belieueth not all other Articles of ChristiaÌ„ Fayth cannot be saued And first of the definition of Heresy and of an Heretike Chap. 1. The foresayd Verity proued from the Holy Scripture Cap 2. The same proued from the definition nature and propriety of Vnity in Fayth Cap. 3. The same proued from the want of Vnity in Fayth between the Catholike and the Protestant touching the Articles of the Creed Cap. 4. The same euident from the like want of vnity of Fayth betweene the Catholike and Protestant in Articles necessarily to be belieued and yet not expressed in the Creed Cap. 5. The same proued from the authority or priuiledge of Gods Church in not erring eyther in her definitions of Fayth or condemnation of Heresies and first by Councells Chap. 6. The same proued from the like infallillible authority of the Church in not erring manifested from the testimonies of particuler Fathers Cap. 7. The foresaid Truth euicted from that Principle that neither Heretikes nor Schismatikes are members of the Church of God Chap. 8. The same proued from the punishment ancieÌ„tly inflicted vpon Heretikes by the Church Chap. 9. The same proued by arguments drawne from Reason Chap. 10. The same proued from the different effects of Catholike Religion and Protestancy touching Vertue and Vice Chap. 11. The same Veritie proued from the feareful deaths of the first broachers of Protestancy Ch. 12 The same confirmed from the doctrine of Recusancy taught by Catholikes ProtestaÌ„ts Ch. 13 The same manifested from the writings of the Catholikes and Protestants reciprocally charging one another with Heresy and from the Insurrections Warrs and Rebellions begun only for Religion Chap. 14. The same proued from the Protestants mutually condemning one another of Heresy Chap. 15. The same demonstrated from the many absurdities necessarily accompanying the contrary doctrine Chap. 16. The Conclusion of the whole Chap. 17. THAT A MAN WHO BELIEVETH IN the Trinity Incarnation Passion c. And yet belieueth not all other Articles of Christian fayth cannot be saued And first of the definition of Heresy and an Heretike CHAP. I. BEFORE we come good Reader to dispute particulerly of the Subiect of this Discourse I hould it most conuenient in place of a short Prolegomenon or Preface to prefixe and set downe the true definition of Heresy or an Heretike since this method will giue light to this whole ensuing Treatise diuers passages therof being principally founded vpon the definition and nature of Heresy and will best manifest what opinions be Heresyes and what men Heretikes and consequently seing Heresy is incompatible with saluation and cannot stand with the purchase of Heauen will demonstrate that not any one Religion professing the name of Christians which doth maintaine but one Heresy can iustly promiâ—â— to it selfe the hope of Eternall life Well then Heresy or Haeresis as wâ— tearme it in Latin is a Greeke word â—â—gnifying as much as Electio Election 〈◊〉 Choyce comming of the Greeke verâ—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Latine Eligo to Choose or maâ—â— Choyce of as (a) lib. de praescript c. â— Tertullian and S. Iâ—rome (b) in c. 5. Epist. ad Galat. do well note so that this woâ—â— Haeresis
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
commauÌ„ded by the church not to performe the publike lyturgy of the church if he did contrary therto he was adiudged by the church to sinne mortally In like sort a Bishop leauing his Fayth and maintayning any one Heresy did thereby loose all his authority of Iurisdiction and thereupon during such his state all his AbsolutioÌ„s censures punishments and sentences practiced by him towardes any Person were adiudged by the church of God to be of no force or validity To which practice of the church (a) In 3. p. q. 39. ar 3. Saint Thomas subscribeth in these words Haeretici non possunt absoluere nec excommunicare nec Indulgentias facere aut aliquid huiuscemodi quod si fecerint nihil actum est Heretikes speaking of Cleargy men cannot absolue any one nor excommunicate nor giue Indulgences nor exercise any such like point of spirituall Iurisdiction and if they attempt contrary heereto they do but practice in vayne Touching Politicall or ciuill censures or punishments anciently inflicted vpon Heretikes The first may be that such men were forbidden to contract any marriage with other Religious and faythfull Christians and such of the faythfull christians as did marry with them did sinne mortally This is proued out of the (b) Can. 31.32.33 Laodicean councell aboue touched prohibiting all such mariages also all praying and communicating in Sacraments with Heretiks of which point I will heerafter intreate more fully Another punishment was that Heretiks were wholy restrained by the church from all practice of their Religion This appeareth from the actions of Constantine the Great who was so farre from graunting liberty of Religion to the Arians as that he threatned banishment to all who would not subscribe to the Nicene councell The same is proued from the like iudgement of Iouinianus who being elected Emperour by the souldiers admitted the acceptance thereof with this condition and not otherwayes to wit that all the subiectes of the Empire would promise to keep an entire vnity of christian beliefe practice The like iudgment herein is of the Auncient Fathers And first S. (c) Epist. 33. ad Mar. cell soror Ambrose though sollicited therunto by the Emperor Valentinianus would not suffer the Arians to haue within his Iurisdiction any one Church for the practice of their Religion to be allotted for them (d) As appeareth out of Theodor. l. 5. c. 32. S. Chrysostome being mooued by the Emperor of his tyme to graunt a Church to one Gayn as a Duke for the practice of his Heresy with great Christian courage openly withstood the same (e) Ep. 76. S. Leo did much reprehend Anatholius Bishop of Constantinople for permitting Heretikes to liue promiscuously with Catholikes Finally (f) Ep. 29. S. Augustine did vehemently persuade one Olympius an Earle that he would diuulge and put in practice the lawes of the Emperour made against the Heretikes Donatists who taught the Inuisibility of the Church that so throgh force of the lawes they might not be suffered to make any profession of their Religion A third punishment concerneth thâ— books of Heretikes which the Church 〈◊〉 God euer prohibited to be read indiffereÌ„tlâ— of all but only by such learned men 〈◊〉 were able to refute the Errours and Heresie contained in the sayde books And hence 〈◊〉 is that we finde that the fourth Counceâ—â— of (g) Ca. 18. Carthage admonished the Bishop that they would reade the bookes of Heretikes 〈◊〉 only for necessity In like sort the seauenth Câ—uncell prohibited the books of the I conoch Heretiks who did write virulent Treatises against the Religious vse of Images To proceed further there were diuers other chasticements appointed for Heretiks in the auncient Church (h) Wherof see L. Ariani ca. de Haereticis and by the auncient Christian Emperours in their lawes as Bannishment a pecuniary (i) L. Cuncti Haeretici mulct or fine the losse (k) L. Manichaeri of all their goods And lastly when the insolencie of Heretiks did grow insufferable euen death it selfe which punishment of death Valentinian and Marcian the Emperours did first decree of which point see the iudgment of the Councell (l) Act. 1. of Chalcedon of (m) In c. 5. ad Galat. Ierome and lastly of (n) Li. 2. contra literas Petiliaeni c. 83. Augustine who ex professo proueth that Magistrates haue power to punishe Heretikes euen which the sword Thus far touching the punishments auncieÌ„tly appointed by the church of God against Heretiks Now to apply this to our purpose I do heere wish the reader to take into his consideration two things first that here is no mention made in the former authorities what the Heresies were against which such seuere proceedings were put in execution neither is there any intimation in them of the deniall of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. but the sayd punishments were extended to all Heretiks indifferently and without any limitation of peculiar Heresies Now that these punishments were not ordayned for the denyers of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. is euident for two reasons first because as is often aboue sayd the denyers of these supreme poynts are not Heretykes but Infidels or Iewes secondly because the punishment of death only and no inferiour punishment aboue mentioned was appoynted by the church for those who once were Christians but after did fall into Infidelity by denying those supreme poynts of Christian fayth Secondly the Reader is to obserue that seing Heretikes though not denying the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion the Decalogue c. did vndergoe the foresayd punishments the whole Church oâ— God with is gouerned with the spirit of the holy Ghost would neuer haue inflicted vpon them erring only in lesser matter then about the Trinitie IncarnatioÌ„ Passioâ— c. such seuere and rigorous punishments aâ— are aboue meÌ„tioned if she had thought thaâ— the defence of those errours how small soâ—uer they seemed could haue stood with thâ— saluatioÌ„ of mans soule since otherwaies thâ— church should haue discouered her selfe 〈◊〉 be a most cruell Tyrant and not an Induâ—gent mother to her Children members THE SAME PROVED FROM Arguments drawne from Reason CHAP. X. TO passe froÌ„ the authority of Gods sacred word his holy church the Auncient Fathers the pillars thereof touching the nature of Heresy and Heretiks as also touching the vnity and Infallibility of the same church and the persons disincorporated separated from it from all which heads it hath been euidently euicted that a man obstinatly defending any one Errour in faith and Religion cannot expect saluation It now remaynes that the same be made euident euen by force of reason that therby all men enioying the faculty of reason may the more easily subscribe to so vndeniable a veritie say with the Psalmist heerin (i) Psa 91. Testimonia tua credibilia facta sunt nimis Well then the first and cheifest reason is taken from the causes of true fayth
where for the better conceauing thereof we are to vnderstand that fayth is a supernaturall habit not obtayned by the force of nature Therfore to the beliefe of any one Article or point of fayth two things concurre the one is the first reuealing Verity as Scholemen speake which is God Himselfe the secoÌ„d is the Church propounding the article to be belieued Now when we belieue any point of fayth God who is the first reuealing Veritie as is sayd reuealeth it to the church and the church propounds it so reuealed to vs to be belieued And thus we belieue a point of fayth through the authority of God reuealing the church propounding and where we belieue any thing though it be true not through this authority this is not supernaturall beliefe in vs but only an opinion grounded vpon other reasons inducements Euen as the Turke belieueth that there is a God Creator of the worlde yet this his beliefe is no true fayth but only a meere opinion of a thing which is true since this his beliefe is grounded not vpon Gods authority reuealing this but only vpon his Alcaron being otherwayes a fabulous booke though of the being of one God it speaketh truly Now to apply this This first reuealing Verity which is God through whose authority we ought to belieue euery article doth with one the like authoritie reueale all Articles of Christian Religion to the church so as it is as forcibly reuealed to be belieued that there is for example a Purgatory or that we ought to pray to Saints graunting these articles to be true as that there is a Trinity or that Christ was Incarnate from whence it vnauoydably followeth that who belieueth in the Trinity and yet doth not belieue that there is a Purgatory or that we may pray to Saints hath no true and supernatural beliefe of the Trinity but only belieueth that there is a Trinity because he so vnderstandeth or is persuaded thereto only by his owne reason or through some other humane motiues according to that sentence of S. Augustine lib. de vtilitate credendi cap. 11. Quod intelligimus aliquid rationi debemus quod autem credimus authoritati For if he did belieue that there is a Trinity or that Christ was Incarnate through Gods authority so reuealing this truth to be belieued by the same authority he would haue belieued that there is a Purgatory or that we ought to pray to Saints seing both the Articles of the Trinity and Purgatory or praying to Saints are equally indifferently a like propounded by God and his Church to be belieued Thus we may demonstratiuely conclude that what ProtestaÌ„t doth belieue in the Trinity and yet doth not belieue that there is a Purgatory praying to Saints Freewill the Reall presence admitting them once to be true or any other point controuerted betweene Catholikes and Protestants the samâ— man hath no true fayth at all of the Trinity or Incarnation and consequently for wanâ— of a true and supernaturall fayth cannot bâ— saued since we read (a) Marc. 16. Qui non credit condemnabitur Who belieueth not shal be condemned And from this former ground it proceedeth thaâ— (b) 2. 2. q. 5. ar 3. S. Thomas all other learned Schoolemen teach that who belieueth not only for Gods authority so reuealing any poinâ— whatsoeuer great or small fundamentall or not fundamentall the same man belieueth not any other Article at all with a true and supernaturall fayth and heereto accord those wordes of (c) Lib. de praescript Tertullian against Valentinus the Heretike Some thinges of the law and Prophets Valentinus approueth some thinges he disalloweth That is he disalloweth all whilest he disproueth some Which sentence of Tertullian must of necessity be true since who reiecteth the authority of God in not belieuing any one article propounded by God to be belieued the same man begetteth a suspition or doubt of Gods authority for the belieuing of any other article how fundamentall soeuer Another reason may be taken from a distinction of fayth which according to the learned is of two sortes The one they call explicite fayth the other implicite Explicite fayth is that which all men vnder payne of damnation are bound to belieue As according to most of the Schoolemen the Trinity the Incarnation of our Sauiour his Passion the Decalogue or ten Commaundements the articles of the Creed Implicite fayth comprehendeth all those points which euery vnlearned man is not bound expressely distinctly to belieue and knowe in particuler though he be expressely bound not to beâ—ieue any thing contrary thereto but is to â—est in the iudgment of the church concerning all such points and what the church of Christ houldeth therein he is bounde â—mplicitely to belieue This distinction is warranted not only in the iudgment of all Catholike Schoolemen but also of the most â—earned (d) D. Bar. l. defide eius ortis p 40. Hooker in his Ecclesiast policy in the preface p. 28. by Melancton l. 1. Epist Epist ad RegeÌ„ Angliae Protestants though they commonly forbeare the phrase of explicite imâ—licite fayth particulerly of D. Feild who â—n these words following giueth the reason â—hereof saying For (e) In his Treatise of the Church in his Epist Dedicat to the L. Arch-Bishop seeing the Controuersies of Religion in our time are growne in number so many â—nd in nature so intricate that few haue time and â—â—asure fewer strength of vnderstanding to exaâ—ine them what remayneth for men desirous of saâ—isfaction in things of such consequeÌ„ce but diligently â— search out which amongst all the Societies of men â—s the worlde is that blessed Company of holy ones 〈◊〉 at househould of fayth that spouse of Christ and Church of the lyuing God which is the Pillar and ground of truth that so they may imbrace her communion follow her directions rest in her iudgments Thus D. Feild Now this distinction being presupposed I thus argue Both these kinds of fayth are necessary to saluation Explicite fayth because it comprehendeth all those fundameÌ„tall and supreme points of Christian Religion without which and the expresse and articulate beliefe of which a man cannot be saued And these be those only which our Newtrallists in Religion hold necessary to be belieued Implicite fayth of other points also is necessary to saluation because otherwyse then belieuing implicitely inuoluedly what the church teacheth therein we cannot according to the former Doctours words range our selues to the blessed company of holy ones the househould of fayth the spouse of Christ and Church of the lyuing God Againe seing Implicite fayth is necessary to saluation we must graunt that this Implicite fayth hath some Obiect This Obiect is not the Articles of the Trinity the Incarnation the Decalogue c. according to the foresaid iudgment of the Schoolemen since these are thâ— obiects of explicite fayth as is aboue mentioned therfore Articles of seeming lesser importance are the
such is the fayth of our Newtrallists is no true supernaturall fayth seing it beleiueth nothing through the authority of God and his church both which reueale propound all articles alike and indifferently to all men to be belieued Now what more crosse to reason then that a bare opinion not relying vpō any supernaturall grounds as neither hauing God for its Reuealer nor the Church for its Propounder conceaued only through morall inducements and therfore euer standing obnoxious to errour and mistaking should be able to purchase eternall Saluation to mans soule Againe how aduerse is it to all true iudgment to auerre that it is no preiudice or hinderance to mans saluation to belieue those principles of Religion which teach aduaunce all libertie sensualitie in cōuersatiō manners do depresse disparage all Chastity Fasting voluntary Pouertie keeping of the Commaundements and finally all serious and painfull labours and works of vertue piety and mortification for it is most contradictory in the very tearmes and no lesse repugnant to Gods sacred word that that doctrine which (u) 2. Pet. 3. promiseth lybertie and (x) Iudae vers 4. transferreth the grace of God into wantonnesse should be accounted the (y) Mat. 7. Luc. 13. straite way which leadeth vnto lyfe Furthermore can it be conceaued as sorting to Gods most mercifull proceeding with man that he should cut off the liues of those men with most fearefull sodaine and prodigious deaths and particulerly of Caluin who was eaten away with lyce a death peculiar to diuers of Gods most capitall Enemyes as to Antiochus Herod Maximinus others who first broached the Doctrines of Protestancy if the sayd Doctrines had either bene true in themselues or at least of that coldnes and indifferency as that they might comport and stand with the soules saluation No. God is iust withall mercifull therfore neuer extraordinarily punisheth but for extraordinary sinns Poore men that they were who comparted as it should seeme both in the diuulging of their mendacious and lying Doctrines as also in their vnexpected and sudden deaths with the false Prophets (z) 3. Reg. of Achab But to hasten to an end in the enumeration of the Absurdities following the foresaid Paradox of saluation in euery Religion and to come to that which within its owne largenes inuolueth many improbabilities If Catholikes Protestants notwithstanding the disparity of their fayth can both attayne to Heauen in vayne then is the doctrine of Recusancy ioyntly taught on both sides in vayne haue so many scores of Reuerend and Learned Priests and others of the Laytie in our owne Countrey whose blessed soules I beseech to pray to God daylie for the remission of my many sinnes suffered cruell deaths in the late Queenes raigne only because they refused to present themselues at the seruice of the Protestants But they are gone and most happily gone for (a) Tertul. de Praeser Clauis Paradisi sanguis Martyrum In vayne likewyse these later yeares haue diuers lay Persons endured cōtrary to his Maiesties naturall inclination most prone to mercy and commiseration great losses disgraces and imprisonments only for the said cause But who can thinke that vertuous and learned men are so prodigall of their lyues and bloud and English Lay Catholikes so insensible of their temporall states children and posterity as that they would wilfully precipitate and cast themselues into those miseries only for not belieuing and exercising points of Indifferencie and such as may stand with their soules eternall Happines In vayne also then haue the Learned men on both sydes spent out their whole liues in defending ech man his owne Religion in their most painfull and voluminous bookes and wrytings if so they dissented one from another in matters of such supposed small importance In vayne and without iust cause and therfore most cruelly haue many States in Christendome in our age imposed proscription banishments and other insupportable disgraces to such of their owne subiects as will not imbrace their owne doctrine though both sydes did conspire and agree in the fundamentall points of fayth In vayne also both euer since Luthers reuolt as also at this present haue there byn and still are such Insurrections of Subiects against their Princes such bloudy and implacable warres betweene absolute Princes themselues such deuastation and depopulation of whole Countreys such maine battayles and fieldes fought with losse of diuers hundred thousand lyues and lastly such incessant and interrupted besieging and taking of great Citties townes with effusion for the most part of much innocent bloud of Women and Children and all this originally and principally for matter of Religion I say in vayne and most iniuriously haue all these attempts actions byn vndertaken if the disagreements in Religiō for which they were vndertaken betweene Catholikes and Protestants were of that reconcileable nature as that the professours on both sydes notwithstāding their diuersity of fayth might ioyntly be saued What can we now reply heereto in the behalfe of our Newtrallists Shall we say that the most learned men of all Religions that Kings Princes States and many hundred thousand subiects of Christendome were and still are actually mad and out of their senses in menaging these their deplorable attempts for Religion that the all-reconciling peaceable Newtrallist who throgh his pliable sterne of disposition in these spirituall matters is become of the halfe-bloud with the Atheist and who wanteth as is commonly noted both learning grace vertue is particulerly enlightened by God in setting downe what articles of fayth are only necessary to mans Saluation and what are to be reputed but as accessory and of smaller importance To such straites we see is the defence of the former doctrine driuen vnto Seeing therefore this doctrine of our Omnifidians or rather Nullifidians for indeed while they seeme to allow all Religions they take away all Religion is encompassed on all sides with so many notorious absurdityes as are displayed in this Chapter and seing it cannot be true except there be a retrogradation of all matters heere on earth and a turning of the world as they say vpside downe that is except the most learned become most madde and the most ignorant most wise Therfore since such comportment and carriage of thinges is not sorting to Gods Prouidence and Charity towards manking let euery man who thinketh he hath a soule to saue or loose vndoubtedly assure himselfe that there is but one true Fayth or Religiō wherin he may auaileably expect saluation and that the sauing fayth of Christ wherewith the soule is cloathed is like vnto the inconsutible garment of Christ both being incapable of diuision renting or partition Now for the greater illustration of this point by way of similitude and as tending towards the closure of this treatise Imagine that a man pretendeth right and title to certaine Lands taketh aduice of all the learned Lawyers Coūsellours of the whole Realme to
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
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
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
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
CHAP. VIII IN this last place concerning the church we will set downe another Principle of Christian fayth and after will deduce from thence by way of most necessary infereÌ„ce our conclusion here handled The Principle is this That Heretikes houlding any Heresies whatsoeuer are no members of the Church of Christ the deduction is that Heretikes therfore cannot be saued since none can be saued but such as are members of Christs church This principle is proued as aboue is intimated out of Gods holy worde as where it is (a) 1. Tim. 1. sayd Certaine men made shippewracke touching fayth that is they fell out of the shippe of the church by forging of Heresies And againe (b) 1. Ioan. 2. They went out of vs that is as S. Augustine expounds it out of the church whereof we are The exposition of which texts are warranted euen by force of Reason for seing the church is an vnited multitude for it is one kingdome one people and one bodye and this vnion cheifly resteth in the profession of one fayth it is repugnant to reason that they should be reputed as members of the body of the church who haue no coniunction at all in the cheifest matters with the body If we proceed to the testimonie of the Auncient Fathers we shall finde them of an vnanimous iudgment heerein to wit that Heretikes are no members of Christs church therfore cannot be saued And first occurreth (c) Lib. 3. c. 3. S. Irenaeus who sayth that Policarpe did conuerte many Heretikes to the Church therfore it may be concluded that those Heretikes before their conuersion were not of the church S. (d) Epist ad Iubaianum Cyprian saith Heretikes though they be out of the Church do challenge to themselues the authoritie of the Church after the manner of Apes who not being men would be accounted to be men The same father thus in another place wryteth Cum (e) Lib. de vnitate Ecclesiae Deo manere non possunt qui in Ecclesia Dei vnanimes esse noluerunt They cannot remayne with God who dissent in iudgment from the Church of God And yet more fully in the same place Non peruenit ad Christi praemia c. He arriueth not to the rewards of Christ who leaueth the Church of Christ he is an alien he is profane he is an enemie he shall not haue God for his father who hath not the Church for his mother S. Ierome Qui non à Domino Iesu Christo sed ab alio (f) In dialogo coÌ„tra LuciferiaÌ„ c. Who take their denomination or name not from our Lord Iesus Christ but from some other as the Marcionists Valentinians Montanists c. are not the Church of God but the Synagoge of Antichrist Finally S. Augustine for I haue allready dwelled ouer longe in the authoritie of the fathers pronounceth that Nihil sic formidare debet c. (g) tract 27. in Ioannem A Christian ought to feare nothing so much as to be separated from the body of Christ which is his Church and which is one and Catholike for if he be separated from the body of Christ he is not a member of Christ then is he not strengthened with his spirit But who hath not the spirit of God the same man is not of God Thus far S. Augustine with whom euen the Protestants do ioyne heerein in iudgment for D. Doue thus saith This proposition that Heretikes are not to be communicated withall is vndoubtedly true And D. Sutcliffe in his examen p. 9. alleadgeth the Laodicean councell Can. 31.32.33 in proofe therof thus concluding The Laodicean Councell doth directly coÌ„demne Communion with Heretikes either in Marriage or Prayer This allready alleadged may serue to proue that Heretiques are no members of the Church of Christ and consequently cannot attaine saluation since it is agreed amongst all learned men that only the members of the church of Christ can fynd Saluation in Christ Now heere by Heretikes we cannot vnderstand those who deny the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. seeing the denvers of these Articles are not Heretikes as is aboue shewed in the definition of Heresy but they are either Iewes Pagans or Infidels froÌ„ which it followeth that the fathers authorityes aboue set downe against Heretykes cannot be applyed to the denvers of the Trinity the Incarnation c. but they are to be limited to such Heretyks who maintayne lesser errours touching Christian fayth We will in this place descend to Schismatiks who if they be neyther of the church of God nor can iustlie expect any saluatioÌ„ during such their state then a fortiori no Heretike can expect anie saluation since a schismatike belieuing all articles of Christian fayth doth only in will diuide himselfe by disobedience in not communicating with the church in Prayers and Sacraments wheras an Heretike with greater malice as is aboue sayd willfully and contumaciously maintaineth in his iudgmeÌ„t Errours and false opinions condemned by the church Now that a Schismatike is not a member of Christs church is first proued from those texts of scripture aboue in part touched where the church is called one sould of sheepe Iohn 10. one Body Rom. 12. one spouse and one Doue Cant. 6. But now Schisme according to its Etymologie diuideth that which was one into parts for Schisma being a greeke word commeth of the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is scindere therfore as a member being cut from the body is no longer a part of the body so a schismatike diuiding himselfe by his owne disobedience from the communion of the church is no longer a member of the sayd church This verity to wit that Schismatiks are not members of Christs church is besides the former proofs warranted with the authoritie sentences of the Auncient fathers And first S. Cyprian thus purposely writeth of Schismatikes (h) Lib. 41 Epist â— ad Florinum Qui cum Episcopo non sunt in Ecclesia non sunt Those who agree not with the Bishop meaning the supreme Bishop of Gods church are 〈◊〉 in the Church The sayd (i) Lib. de vnitate Ecclesiae Father most elegantly compareth Schismatikes to beames diuided froâ— the sunne to boughes cut from the tree and to Ryuers wholly separated from theiâ— springs S. Chrysostome discoursing of Schismatikes thus (k) Hom. 1. in Epist 1. ad Cor. sayth Schismatis significatio satiâ— eos arguit c. The very signification of the woâ—â— Schisme doth sufficiently reprehend them or rathâ—â— the verie name of Schisme is a vehement condemnation of them c. which Father in anotheâ— (l) Homil. 13. in Epist ad Ephes place coÌ„pareth a Schismatike to the hanâ— cut from the body which therupon ceasetâ— to be a member and expressely affirmeth that Schismatikes though they consent with the Church of Christ in Doctrine yet anâ— not in Christs church but in altera Ecclesia meaning in a Church differing from Christs
Church S. Ierome distinguishing Schisme from Heresy thus discourseth Inter (m) In c. 3. ad Titum Haeresim Schisma hoc interesse arbitramur c. We take this to be the difference betweene Heresy and Schisme That Heresy maintayneth a peruerse and false Doctrine wheras Schisme ab Ecclesia pariter separat in like manner separateth a man from the Church in regard of dissention and disobedience iâ— our Bishops S. Augustine thus woundeth a Schismaâ—â—ke (n) Lib. de fide sym c. ro Haeretici Schismatici congregationes â—as Ecclesias vocant c. Heretikes and Schismaâ—â—kes do call their congregations the Churches But â—eretikes do violate their fayth in belieuing falsely â—â—uching God whereas Schismatikes though they â—â—lieue the same points which we belieue yet throgh â—â—eir dissentions they do not keep fraternall Charity â—herfore we conclude that neyther an Heretike beâ—ogeth to the Catholike Church because he loueth 〈◊〉 God nor a Schismatike because he loueth not â—s neighbour To conclude (o) Lib de fide ad Pet. c. â— S. 3â— Fulgentius agreeth â—ith the former reuerend Fathers thus sayâ—â—g Firmissimè tene c. Belieue for certayne and â—â—ubt not that not only Pagans but also Iewes Heâ—â—tikes Schismatikes who dye out of the Church â—e to goe into euerlasting fire And thus far concerning Schismatikes â—ho because they be not of the Church caÌ„â—ot obtayne saluation which point being â—ade euident by so many authorityes both â—â—uine humane then much more strongâ—â— may we conclude that Heretikes as exâ—â—eding the Schismatiks in prauity and maâ—e and being excluded with them in like â—â—rt out of Christs Church cannot be saâ—ed But before I end this Chapter giue me â—aue good Reader to expatiate a little beyoÌ„d my designed limits O then you Schismatikâ— heere in our owne Countrey whose souleâ— are wholly absorpt in earthy and muddâ— considerations cast your eyes vpon you owne states and vse some small introuersion vpon your selues You see heere whaâ— a daungerous censure the Auncient church of Christ by the mouths of its chiefe Pastorâ— and Doctours hath thundred agaynst you It sayth you are not of Christs Church you aâ— aliens straungers thereunto It further pronounceth that dying in such your state yoâ— are depriued of all hope of saluation Gooâ— God! what stupor and dulnes of yours â— this Are you Christians preferre then Chriâ—â— before the world Feare you God more theâ— man Giue then to God what is Gods and to Casaer what is Caesars Reflect vpon three principles of the Catholike and therefore you owne Religion The first that God ordinarily deriueâ— his grace into mans soule by the conduits oâ— the Sacraments and giueth absolution oâ— ones sinns particulerly by the Sacrament 〈◊〉 Pennance and confession not otherwise you wilfully depriue your selues of the participation of the Sacraments and thereby 〈◊〉 grace and of the remission of your sinnes are you not then as dryed branches void that heauenly iuyce which giueth lyfe the soule you want this grace and forgiuenes of your sinnes where then is your hope of eternall life remeÌ„ber the Apostles words â—nd be afrayd gratia Dei vitae aeterna and do not disioyne those asunder which S. Paul â—ath so inseparably vnited The second is The vncertainty of any parâ—icular mans saluation which point is able â—o stryke you dead through feare and the â—ather since it is no small signe of a mans fuâ—ure damnation deliberately and wilfully yeare after yeare to deuide himselfe from Christs church and from all the spirituall â—nfluences streaming from thence The third That there is a Purgatory the â—aynes whereof though terminable yet are â—nsupportable Suppose then the best that 〈◊〉 that you finally dye with true RepentaÌ„ce â—nd reconciled to Christs church which â—et is not in your owne power but out of â—he maine Ocean of Gods mercy neuertheâ—esse your owne fayth assureth you that you must suffer in that place euen insufferable â—orments for your former disunction that â—our continuance in dissembling thus with God serues but as bellowes the more to â—low that dreadfull fire O how great inteâ—est then are you to pay in the end for the â—nioying of this your mispent tyme If you â—â—e Catholikes though but in hart you belieue all heere sayd and therefore may the more assuredly presage of your owne future misery Yf you doe not belieue these three points of Catholike Religion then are youâ— damned no lesse for want of true Fayth in Christ then otherwise by your vnchaungeable Schismaticall liues for want of due coÌ„formity to the church of Christ Therefore I wish you to awake out of that spirituall letargy of the soule daily meditate on thaâ— of the Apostle Corde creditur ad iustitiam orâ— fit confessio ad salutem (q) Rom. 10. With the hart we belieuâ— vnto iustice but with the mouth Confession is maâ—â— vnto saluation And lest that dreadfull commination and threate of our Lord and Sauiour preuayle with you heerein (r) Luke 12. 〈◊〉 that denyeth me before men shal be denyed before the Angells of God But I will stay my selfe remembring my vndertaken Subiect and will proceed to the next Head THE FORMER TRVTH PROVED from the consideration of the punishments anciently inflicted vpon Heretikes by the Churcâ— of Christ CHAP. IX HAVING in the precedent Chapters shewed the Iudgement of tâ—â— church of Christ by way of doctrine speculation agaynst Heresy and Heretikes in generall we will in â—his place insist in relating the practice of the â—ayd church agaynst Heretikes consisting in â—he punishments aunciently inflicted vpon Heretikes by the authority of Gods church from the consideration wherof we may easily gather that the church of Christ in those â—ymes infallibly taught that Heretikes so liuing and dying could not be saued seeing â—t would neuer impose such multiplicity of â—euere punishments vpoÌ„ men for their houlling of those doctrines which might stand with the saluation of the belieuers of them And first we are heere to obserue that the punishments inflicted vpon offendours by the church were eyther Ecclesiasticall or Politicall Ciuill The first of Ecclesiasticall punishments â—or Heretikes was Excommunication by the which Heretikes were driuen away from â—he Sacraments were depriued of the common suffrages and prayers of the whole church and finally banished from the community comfort of the godly and faythfull This censure of Excommunication of Heretiks is most auncient seeing that it had 〈◊〉 beginning from the first times that counâ—ells began to be celebrated for the extirpaâ—ion and rooting out of Heresies is founded vpon all those places of Scripture in the foregoing chapters alleadged agaynst Heresy and Heretikes Another Ecclesiasticall censure agaynst Heretikes is the depriuing them of all the vse of spirituall power and authority whether it be of order or Iurisdiction This kind of power belongeth only to Ecclesiasticall Persons or the Cleargy according heereto if a Priest became an open Heretike he was
throghout the world spending their whole liues in spreading and defending the same by their wrytings Finally seeing God did cut them off by such calamitous miserable and prodigious deaths which is to be feared were but presages of the eternall deaths of their soules who can otherwise be perswaded but that all this was wrought by the iust hand of God not so much for their personall sinnes proceeding of humane frailty for there were and are many others as great sinners as they and yet escaped such dreadfull ends but for their first inuenting maintayning and preaching of the Protestant fayth and Religion and empoysoning almost all Countreyes with such their false sensuall doctrines which being graunted how then can it with any truth of reason be supposed that the positions of Protestancy impugned by the Catholikes should contayne nothing but matters of Indifferency or that a man whether he belieue them or not belieue them may alike and indifferently be saued THE SAME PROVED FROM the doctrine of Recusancy taught both by Catholikes and Protestants CHAP. XIII I Haue thought good to draw another argument from the common taught and approued doctrine of Recusancy in euery ReligioÌ„ though this head may seeme to haue a speciall reference to the reason afore touched in part be therein implicity included wherein is shewed that nature herselfe hath imprinted in the professours of all Religions a Religious care punctually to keep and preserue euery article of their Religion Now heere we are to premonish that if in the iudgement of all learned men both Catholike and Protestant it is thought an action most wicked vnlawfull and not to be performed but without finall repentance vnder payne of eternall damnation that a man should communicate only in going to the Church and in hearing but a sermen contrary to that Religion which himselfe belieueth for true though this may seeme to be coloured vnder pretense of obseruing the Princes commaundement for feare of loosing our temporall estates I say if this action be thought vnlawfull wherin neuerthelesse the performers thereof doe not punctually vndertake to maintayne or belieue any one Hereticall or erroneous position how then can it be reputed as consonant to reason or Religion that men belieuing different opinions of fayth and promiscuously communicating in prayer with a contrary Religion to their owne should neuerthelesse all be saued since the first fault coÌ„sisteth as some would interprete though falsely only in an externall and materiall as the SchoolemeÌ„ speake going to the Church of a different Religion whereas this other doth directly and openly rest in defending articles at least in its owne iudgment of a Religion contrary to the truth of Christian Religion for such is the case herein eyther of Catholikes or Protestants But before we particulerly enter into this discourse we will heere insist as most pertinent to our purpose in relating the two most religious Examples of Eleazar and the Widow with her seauen Sonnes recorded in the Bookes of the Machabees Touching the first we reade (1) 2. Machab c. 6. that Eleazar being a most auncient graue and learned Man was so far from eating of the meates sacrifized to Idolls according to the prohibition of the Iewish lawe that when certaine men as tendring his old age and moued thereto as the Text sayth iniqua miseratione through vnlawfull pitty proffered him other flesh to eate vnder colour whereof they would tell the Tyrant King thereby to saue his lyfe that he had eaten of the sacrifized meates that he did choose rather to vndergoe a most cruell death then to feigne that he had eaten of the sayd sacrifized flesh And so accordingly he suffered â— most glorious Martyrdome thus speakinâ— to God in the middest of his torments (2) Vbi supra For thy feare ô Lord I do suffer these things As concerning the (3) 2. Machab c. 7. Widdow with bâ— seauen Sonnes O what spirituall resolutioâ— appeared in them all Indeed able to vpbrayd vs ChristiaÌ„s with our luk-warmnest in professing our fayth They all suffered most exquisit torments and in the end most bloudy deaths only because they would not at the Kings command eate of Swynes flesh which was contrary to the Lawe of Moyses And this both the Mother still exhorting her sonnes to constancy heerein all her seauen Sonns performed with such an admirable resolution both in their answeres to the Tyrant during their torments and in their patience of suffering death as that considering her sex and the tendernes of their yeares it might be truly sayd that weaknes was heere able to instruct strength and youth old age Now from these two most remarkable Examples I thus argue The tyme of the old Testament was much inferior in worth dignity and many priuiledges to the new testament seing to them in the Old things as the (4) 1. Cor. 10. Apostle witnesseth did happen as in a figure whereas the new Testament (5) Hebr. 8. as the sayd Apostle affirmeth is established in better promisses But now if in the old Testament men did choose to endure most cruel deaths rather then they would contrary to the Law eate forbiden Meates which in themselues were lawfully to be eaten were it not for the prohibition annexed vnto them And seeing though they had consented to the eating of them yet this being but anâ— externall Act or Ceremony they might neuerthelesse inwardly haue retayned and kept their true beliefe touching the Law yet since the performaÌ„ce of so small a matteâ— as it appeared in outward show could noâ— be without greate sinne and damnation oâ— the party so offending Shall any Christian thinke that now in the tyme of Grace anâ— of the New Testament which tyme exacteth more perfection at our hauds for 〈◊〉 (6) Luc. 12. whome much is giuen of him much shal be râ—quyred that men professing to belieuâ— with contempt of the Churches authoritâ— interposed therein contrary articles touching Christian Religion and dying sucâ— their different fayths in which the one sydâ— must of necessity mantayne a false fayth that men I say of both these sides can bâ— saued it is against all force of ReasoÌ„ againâ—â— the iudgment of the Primitiue Church â— finally against Gods Iustice And thus far concerning the two fore sayd exaÌ„ples in the Machabees Which Booke admitting them for the tyme not to be diuine Scripture yet it is acknowledged oâ— all sydes that the Histories recorded in the are true and that Eleazar and the Widâ— with her seauen Sonns performed most worth examples of piety and Religion and that they had yielded to the Kings Command in eating of forbidden meates they had as violating the law giuen to them by God without repentance incurred damnation And this is the iudgment of the auncient Fathers Catholike Doctours and the learned Protestants But let vs descend more particulerly to the doctryne of Recusancy and examine whether it be lawfull to exhibite our selues present at that Church in tyme of diuine seruice
or of preaching the doctrine of which Church we hould in our Conscience to be erroneous and false Now that this kind of going to the Church of a different Religion is wholly condemned as most vnlawfull and wicked I first proue from the iudgment of the Protestants secondly from the resolutions of the Catholiks And to beginne with the Protestants we find this kinde of Recusancy I meane to be present at the Sermons or prayers of a different Religion is taught by (a) De vitandis superstition extant in Caluini Tract Theolog. p. 584. Caluin the (b) Alledged by Sleydan Com. Englished l. 7. fol. 87. Deuines of Germany by (c) In Concil Theolog. p. 628. Melancton by Peter (*) In his discourse hereof recited by Melancton in his Treatise of Concil Theolog. p. 634. 635. Martyr finally to omit others by Doctour Willet (d) In his Synops printed 1600. p. 612. 613. c. who for the better fortifying and warranting of the sayd opinion produceth his Testimonies from the authorities of Latimer Bradford Philpot Ridley others diuers of which according to this their doctrine suffered death in Queene Maries tyme as appeareth out of the Acts and monuments of Iohn fox And thus much for the Protestants That the Catholikes doe with the like or greater feruour teach practise this Recusancie is cleare by the example of our owne Countrey where since Protestancy was first planted many scores of venerable learned Priests haue chosen rather to suffer death then that they would change their Religion or goe once to the Protestants Church their liues being commonly profered them if so they would coÌ„forme themselues and leaue their recusancy In like sort many hundreds of the Laity pay yearely great summes of money for their recusancy diuers of them enduring further oppressions disgraces and imprisonments only for the same cause through the malice rigour and couetuousnes of certaine subordinate Magistrates vnder his Maiesty whose clemency is most remarkable and whome God long preserue in a holy gouernement ouer vs being heerein mightily wronged through the false and most iniurious informations of their Aduersaries Now that the doctrine of learned Catholikes is answeareable to the practice â—eerein appeareth from the frequent testimonies of diuers learned men of the Catholike Church of this tyme yet for greater breâ—ity I will insist in the Authorities only of three to wit of Cardinall Baronius Cardinall Bellarmine the two late lampes of Gods Church and of Mutius Vitellescus then but Prouinciall now Generall and Head of the â—esuites dispersed throughout Christendome For some yeares past their iudgment being demaunded whether the Catholikes of England for the sauing of their goods lyuings and liberty might goe to the Protestants Church or no to heare a sermoÌ„ only though otherwayes they did not communicate in Prayer Sacraments with the Protestants for the warranting or disallowing whereof there were seuerall reasons brought on either side all which reasons were proposed and expressed to these three worthy men These three learned holy men then besides diuers others eminent Doctors and wryters whom I heare omit did giue their negatiue sentence therein whose particuler words in Latin I haue thought good heere to set downe The Iudgment of Cardinall Baronius VISIS consideratis quae superiùs diligenâ— peruestigatione in vtramque partem sunt disputata reiectis omnino exsufflatis quae pro parâ— affirmatiua fuêre proposita quod scilicet liceret Catholicis adire Ecclesias Haereticorum vt superiùs suâ—â— proposita inhaeremus saniori sententiae posteriori 〈◊〉 Ecclesia Catholica antiquitùs receptae vsu probâ—tae quod scilicet id facere pijs non liceat Quam rogâ— nostros Catholicos Anglos amplecti ex animo C. Card. Baronius tit S. Nerei Achillei Presb. That is I hauing seene and considered meaning in the Question of English Catholike going to church all those points which haue byâ— disputed of on both sides but reiecting and wholly abandoning all the reasons alleadged for the affirmatiue part to wit to prooue that it was lawfull fâ— Catholikes to goe to the Heretikes Church I do 〈◊〉 hereto the more sound and later opinion which â—â—ciently was receaued of the Catholike Church aâ— allowed by vse and custome That is that it is 〈◊〉 lawfull for pious and godly men so to doe And I 〈◊〉 treate all our English Catholiks to imbrace this 〈◊〉 opinion and iudgement Caesar Cardinall Baronius Priest of the tiâ— of the Church of SS Nereus Achilleâ— The Iudgement of Cardinall Bellarmine CONSIDERATIS rationibus pro vtraque parte allatis existimo non licere viris Caâ—icis in Anglia Haereticorum Ecclesias adire mulminùs concionibus illorum interesse minimè auâ— omnium cum ipsis in precibus psalmodia â—sque ipsorum Ecclesiasticis ritibus conuenire Iâ— me propria manu subscripsi R. Bellarminus S. R. L. Prew Card. Tit. S. Ma. in via Thus in English The reasons brought vpon â—h sides considered meaning touching the lawfulâ— or vnlawfulnes of English Catholiks going to the â—â—otestants Church I am persuaded that it is not â—full for English Catholikes to go to the Churches Heretikes much lesse to be present at their Serâ—â—ns but least of all to communicate with them in â—yers and singing of psalmes and other their Ecâ—siasticall rites and customes And therfore this my â—gment herein I haue subscribed with my owne â—nd Robert Bellarmyne Priest Cardinall of the holy Roman Church of the Title of the Church of S. Maria in via The Sentence of Mutius Vitelleseus then Prouinciall but now Generall Head of the Order 〈◊〉 the Iesuites VIDI rationes quae in hoc scripto pro vtraqâ— parte afferuntur existimo non licere viâ— Catholicis in Anglia Ecclesias Haereticorum adireâ— puto hoc debere esse extra Controuersiam Mutius Vitellescus Prou. Râ—â— Soc. IESV In English I haue seene the reasons whiâ—â— are alleadged in this booke or wryting for both parâ— meaning for going or not going to the Protestaâ—â— Church I am of opinion that it is not lawfull fâ—â— Catholikes in England to goe to the Churches of Heretikes and I am persuaded that this point oughâ— to be out of all Controuersy Mutius Vitellescus Prouinciall 〈◊〉 the Society of Iesus in Româ— And thus far touching the sentences 〈◊〉 these three learned men deliuered in warranting the doctrine of Recusancy in Catholikes Now to reflect backe vpon the promiseâ— If the going to the Church of another Religion for auoyding of temporall losses and only to heare a sermon of the said Religion be to be accounted a Sinne not be done vnder payne of damnation as being presumed to beare an externall conformity to a false Religion as by all the former testimonies aboue alleaged is plentifully proued though the party so offending may perhapps truly belieue all points of ChristiaÌ„ Religion with what reason then can it be warranted that both Catholiks and Protestants conspiring only in the
whom he sheweth all his Euidences some of which Euidences do cary a title only in grosse and in generall others proue a more particuler more restrayned right to the sayd Lands Imagine further that vpon the diligent perusall of these Euidences the ioynt consent and iudgment of all the sayd Lawyers should after their longe and serious Demurrs conspyre in this one point to wit that for the recouering obtayning of the said Lands the foreshewed Euidences in generall are not sufficient alone seeing diuers other men not hauing any true interest in the sayd Lands may neuerthelesse insist and vrge their like generall clayme but that with the help of the sayd Common Euidences he must more punctually relye for the gayning of his presumed inheritance vpon other more particuler and personall Conueyances and Assigments Now all these learned Counsellours agreeing in this sentence fortyfying their iudgments herein with their owne experience in the like case with the new Reports warranting the same with the authority of all the auncient learned ReuereÌ„d Iudges before them lastly with the force of reason confirming no lesse If some one Empericke Atturney or other skilfull only by a litle experience in making a Nouerint vniuersi should steppe forth armed only with impudency and ignorance pronounce the foresayd sentence of all those learned Sages to be false and that the party pretending right to the sayd lands were sure by his generall Title and Euidences only to obtayne the same all other his more particuler Euidences being but vnnecessary needelesse theerunto who might not heere iustly contemne and reiect the rash censure of such a fellow Or could not the party clayming the former inheritance be worthily reprehended if by reiecting the graue Counsell of the learned Lawyers and following the aduyce of this ignorant man should finally loose all clayme title and possibility to his sayd Inheritance Our case is not much vnlike heerto Wee all pretend a right to the Inheritance of the kingdome of Heauen for we reade (*) lac 1. Coronam vitae praeparauit Dominus diligentibus se Our title in generall therto is our beliefe in the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. the beliefe whereof is most necessary but not sufficient All emineÌ„t men for learning both Catholikes and Protestants do proue from the Scriptures from the authority of Gods Church from the nature of Heresy from the definition of true fayth from diuers other principles and reasons aboue expressed that no man can attayne to his heauenly Inheritance by belieuing only the former fundamentall points of Christianitie if so he haue not a true and particuler fayth of many other lesse principall Articles of Christian Religion Nowe commeth heere a dissolute gamnelesse ignorant fellowe not practised in any kind of good literature for it is obserued as aboue is sayd that all our most forward Neutrallists are meÌ„ for the most part voyde of Learning Vertue and Conscience who pereÌ„ptorily out of his Pythagorean chayre that is without any proofe affirmeth that a beliefe in generall of the Articles of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion is only sufficient to mans saluation that the doctrines of Purgatory Freewil Reall Presence and other Controuersies betweene the Catholiks Protestants are not in any sort necessary to the purchasing of our eternall welfare what way soeuer we hould but are to be reputed in respect of that end points indiffereÌ„t vnauayleable and as the Greeke is meerely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Bye-matters Who would heere not commiserate the folly and ignorance of such a man but especially pittie the soules seduced by so blind a Guyde THE CONCLVSION of the whole Treatise CHAP. XVII HITHERTO Good Reader it is sufficiently I hope demonstrated that euery Religion though professing the name of Christ and belieuing in the Trinity the Incarnation and the like fundamentall points of christian Fayth if their beliefe in other secondary lesse principall points be erroneous cannot promise to it selfe any security of Saluation and consequently that the controuerted articles at this day betweene Catholikes and Protestants touching Purgatory Freewill Praying to Saints Sacrifice c. are of that great importance as that the professours on both sides to vse the phrase of a blessed martyr (*) Camp in decem rationib rat 10. in the same case vnuÌ„ caeluÌ„ capere non potest It now remayneth to shew that seeing at this day there are originally but two different Religions among christians to wit the catholike Religion and the Protestant within which are included all its branches and descendents whether the catholike or the Protestant Religion is that wherein a man may be saued But seeing this Subiect is most learnedly and painefully intreated â—f by many Catholike wryters who from 〈◊〉 authorities both Diuine humane haue â—efragably euicted the truth of their owne â—eligion and falshood of the Protestants â—ofession and consequently that in the â—atholike not in the Protestant fayth the â—ules eternall happynes is to be purchased â—erefore I doe remit the reader for his greaâ—er satisfactioÌ„ therin to the perusal of the said â—ookes particulerly to the studying raâ—er theÌ„ to the reading only of that most elaâ—orate learned and vnanswerable Worke â—f the Protestants Apology of the Roman Church Only before I heere end I must make â—ould to put the Reader in remeÌ„brance with that the Protestant Religion in this former Treatise though but casually and incidentâ—y is most truly charged to wit First with â—articuler coÌ„demnations passed vpon diuers â—f its chiefest articles euen by seuerall senteÌ„â—es iudgements of the Primitime church â—nd that therefore those doctrines so condeÌ„â—ed yet after defended with all froward â—ertinacy agaynst the church of God are hereby discouered for playne and manifest Heresies this point being further euicted â—mplicitely both from the testimonies of hoâ—y Scripture as also from the definition of Heresy aboue expressed Secondly that the doctrinall speculations and positions in thâ— Protestants fayth most strongly mooue tâ— Wills of such as beliefe them to all vice â—â—berty and sensuality Thirdly that God oâ— of the infinite abisme of his Iustice hath pâ—nished euen in this world as earnest giuen 〈◊〉 far greater punishment reserued in the lyâ— to come with most fearefull vnnaturall 〈◊〉 prodigious deaths the first InueÌ„tours in oâ— age Promulgatours of the sayd doctrineâ— and such deathes as his diuine Maiesty is accustomed to send to his professed enemyes Fourthly that Protestancy is torne asundeâ— with intestine diuisions diuers Professourâ— of it charging their Brethren-Professourâ— with Heresy despayring of their future saluatioÌ„ From all which we may conclude that except Heresy dissolution of manners most infamous and calamitous deathes anâ— disagreements in doctrine betweene one the same sect be good dispositions meanâ— to purchase Heauen the Protestant Religioâ— can neuer bring her Belieuers thereto What then remayneth but who will expect saluatioÌ„ should seeke it only in the Catholike