Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	believe_v	catholic_a	creed_n	7,176	5	10.6146	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A00791	An answer to a pamphlet, intituled: The Fisher catched in his owne net In vvhich, by the vvay, is shevved, that the Protestant Church was not so visible, in al ages, as the true Church ought to be: and consequently, is not the true Church. Of which, men may learne infallible faith, necessarie to saluation. By A.C.	A. C.; Champney, Anthony, 1569?-1643?, attributed name.; Sweet, John, 1570-1632, attributed name.; Floyd, John, 1572-1649, attributed name.; Fisher, John, 1569-1641, attributed name.	1623 (1623)	STC 10910.4; ESTC S107710	44,806	106

AN ANSWER TO A PAMPHLET INTITVLED THE FISHER CATCHED IN HIS OWNE NET IN VVHICH BY THE VVAY IS SHEVVED That the Protestant Church was not so visible in al Ages as the true Church ought to be and consequently is not the true Church Of which men may learne infallible Faith necessarie to Saluation By A. C. MATTH 28. vers 19 20. Going teach al Nations baptizing them c. Behold I am with you AL DAYES euen to the consummation of the World EPHES. 4. vers 11 14. Christ gaue some Apostles and some Prophets othersome Euangelists and othersome PASTORS and DOCTORS c. that we be not Children WAVERING and CARRIED ABOVT with euerie winde of Doctrine c. M. D. C. XXIII THE PREFACE GEntle Reader although I doubt not but al that be wise and iudicious especially if they duly consider the occasion and state of the question lately treated in a Conference betwixt D. White and D. Featly Ministers and M. Fisher and M. Sweet Iesuits wil easily discerne euen by that false Relation which is set out in print by a Protestant that the Protestants Cause hath not gained any thing Neuerthelesse because those who be partially affected or of meane capacitte may as it is to be doubted diuers doe conceiue and speake amisse of this matter to the disgrace of the Catholike Cause and the preiudice of their owne and other mens soules I haue thought it needful to set out a true Relation of the occasion progresse and issue of that Conference and this in such sort as diuers falsehoods of the Protestant Relator may be easily perceiued and the weakenesse of the Protestants Cause may be euidently discouered which is also so bad as it seemeth it cannot be supported but by setting out such lying Relations the sight and consideration whereof maketh me more easily beleeue that to be true which I haue read viz. That a decree was made by Diuines in Geneua defyning it lawful to lye for the honor or credit of the Gospel and that conformably to this decree an English Minister being told that one of his Powfellowes had made lyes in stead of proofes of his Protestant Religion did answer saying He cannot lye too much in this cause It must needes be a weake and bad cause that needeth to be supported by such weake and bad shifts I for my part wil not promise to haue perfectly remembred and set downe euery word that passed in this Conference especially spoken by by-standers nor to haue strictly obserued the precise order of euerie passage but for the substance and truth of the matter that I doe relate I assure that there shal not be found any falsehood vnlesse it be in some of those Parcels which I doe not relate of my selfe but out of the Protestant Relator whose Relation ordinarily as I doe not contradict vnlesse it be vpon necessarie occasion so I doe not intend to approue but simply relating what it saith I wil leaue it to others to iudge what they thinke fit of it Onely this I wil say That euerie one may beleeue it so farre as it relateth any thing which may aduantage the Catholique Defendants and their Cause or disaduantage the Protestant Disputants and their Cause For it is certaine that no man wil lye for the aduantage of his Aduersarie or his Cause nor for his owne disaduantage But in such things as it hath set downe aduantagiously for the Protestant Disputant or his Cause there is iust reason to suspect it in regard I am told that D. Featly himselfe who is said to be the Author hath confessed That more is said in the Relation then was said in the Conference it selfe and I am sure something is left out which was said and something mis-reported This being premised by way of Preface I wil begin to discourse of the matter it selfe CHAP. I. About the first occasion of the Conference in which is shewed that Master Fisher did not seeke it or prouoke his Aduersaries by any challenge vnto it nor did intend to haue it so publike as by his Aduersaries fault it proued The Protestant Relator of this Conference setteth downe the occasion in these words EDWARD BVGGS Esquire about the age of 70. yeeres being lately sicke was solicited by some Papists then about him to forsake the Protestant Faith telling him There was no hope of saluation without the Church there was no Catholike Church but theirs and to beleeue the Catholike Church was the Article of his Creede and by it could no other Church be meant but the Church of Rome because it could not be proued by al the Protestants in the Kingdome that they had any Church before Luther This Gentleman being much troubled in his mind with these and the like suggestions who al his life time had beene and prosessed himselfe a Religious Protestant became now more sicke in mind then body After his recouerie being much troubled in mind with these former suggestions of the Popish Priests he repayred to Sir Humfrey Lynd Knight who by reason of his alliance and long acquaintance with him gaue the best satisfaction that he could to his said Cousin Master Buggs who seemed to take content in such his Conference and to be wel satisfyed by him in al points But the Popish Priests and Iesuits not desisting to creepe in further where they had once made a breach perseuering stil in questioning him where his Church was before Luther Whereupon hee repayred againe to Sir Humfrey Lynd and required some further satisfaction of him concerning that demand And thereupon Sir Humfrey Lynd told him it was first in Christ and the Apostles consequently also conspicuous in the Primitiue Church for 600. yeeres after Christ after which time some errors crept into the Church as diseases into a mans body so that the Church which Luther we acknowledge was in general the same Christian Church as his body was the same substantial body being now wel and lately sicke though different in the qualities c. How farre this parcel of the Relation is true or false I wil not stand to discusse as not yet knowing how or by whom the aforesaid Gentleman came first to doubt of his Church and consequently of his Religion yet I haue some cause to doubt that it is not altogether true especially in that he saith The Popish Priests and Iesuits not desisting to creepe in further where they had ●●ce made a breach perseuering stil in questioning him where his Church was before Luther For I doe not thinke that many if any at al Priests or Iesuits did first put this doubt into the old Gentleman his head nor perseuered in questioning him about it And for Master Fisher in particular I know certainly that hee neuer saw this old Gentleman much lesse did he speake to him in any matter of Religion til that time when Sir Humfrey Lynd first met Master Fisher. The which meeting is mentioned in the Protestant Relation saying thus And after his

answered nor consequently he satisfied Moreouer the same Gentleman being present whē the Earle of Warwick told M. Fisher that D. Featly should at another tyme come againe to giue Names of Protestants in other Ages he might easily and doubtles did vnderstand that as yet Names in all Ages were not giuen nor consequently the Question satisfied in which he expected answere Furthermore presently after he went away from the Conference he told M. Fisher himselfe that he was glad that at the next meeting his Question should be answered which shewed that as yet he did not conceiue it to be answered Lastly diuers dayes after all the trouble and styrre was past which was made about the Conference the old Gentleman was not so resolute a Protestant as the Relator pretendeth for meeting M. Fisher and M. Sweete he desired them to giue him a Catalogue of Names of Professors of the Romā Church saying that if after this the Doctors should not giue him a Catalogue of Protestants he should dislike their cause Which Catalogue M. Fisher and M. Sweete haue ready for him but will not deliuer till he get the Doctours to make theirs ready that he may bring to them the Doctours Catalogue with one hand and receiue theirs with the other to deliuer to the Doctours All that can be suspected is that in the very tyme of the sayd styrre when the old Gentleman eyther was or feared to be called in question it may perhaps be that he might say those words which the Relator mētioneth but this if it were was only vpon frailty or humane feare of trouble and not any firme and settled resolution grounded vpon the Conference sith both before and after he shewed a contrary mynd as hath byn sayd As for other idle and false reports of a great Lady or any other Catholiks sayd to haue ben turned Protestants vpon this Conference I neglect them as being notoriously false It may be that some Weaklings who not being present at the Conference nor hauing commodity to heare what passed but from the lying lyps of some Protestants Who reported that Fisher was ouercome and had yielded Christ and his Apostles to be Protestants some Weaklings I say might perhaps be staggered vntill they heard the true report that this was only an impudent slaunder vttered by D. Featly but in words and deeds contradicted by M. Fisher. But I make no question so soone as these shall see or heare what is heere related they will be well satisfied and confirmed in the Catholike truth and that euen Protestants themselues will be moued to harken more after the matter And in case their Doctours doe not giue them a better Catalogue of Names of Protestants in all Ages then they did in this Conference they will doubt as they haue cause that the Protestant Church hath not byn so visible in all Ages as euen by D. Featly his argument is proued the true Catholike Church ought to be and consequently that it is not the true Catholike Church which in their Creede they professe to belieue and out of which as euen Caluin confesseth they cannot hope for remission of their sinnes nor saluation of their soules CHAP. IIII. Contayning a Reuiew and Reflection vpon the Premisses NOw hauing made an end of this Relation I am to intreate the Gentle Reader to reuiew it or reflect vpon it and to call to mind and marke 1. The occasion and consequently the end of the disputation 2. The Question and true meaning of it 3. What Methode was most fit to haue been obserued in treating of this question 4. What course was taken by the Protestant Disputant what by the Catholike Respondent All which being duely considered thou wilt better see what is to be iudged of the whole Conference and wilt make to thy selfe more benefit of the matter treated in it then perhaps hitherto thou hast done §. 1. About the Occasion and end of the Conference 1. The occasion of this Dispute was as thou hast heard in the Relation that a certaine old Protestant Gentleman was told as the truth is that there is no saluation out of the true Catholike Church and that to belieue the Catholike Church is one of the Articles of the Creed which euery Christian is bound to belieue and know and that this Church was no other besides the most auncient and vniuersally spread ouer the world the knowne Catholike Roman Church which hath had and can yet shew visible Pastours other Professors in all Ages and that the Protestant Church wherof for the present he was a member sprung vp of late and could not be the true Church of Christ as not hauing had as Christs true Church ought to haue Pastours and Doctours and lawfully sent Preachers so visible as the Names of them may be shewed in all Ages out of good Authors And this was the occasion of the dispute for heerupon the old Gentleman was so much moued in conscience to doubt of the Protestants Religion that he could not be quiet till he had made meanes to get this matter discussed in a Conference betwixt Catholike and Protestant Deuines in such sort as in the Relation hath byn told And therfore the end of this Conference was to giue this old Gentleman and others that should heare it satisfaction in this most important necessary point I call this point most important and necessary in regard the certainty of euery other point belieued by infallible diuine Fayth necessary to saluation dependeth vpon it For although euery point belieued by diuine Faith be in it selfe most true and by reason of the Diuine reuelation made knowne to the world by Christ his Apostles most certaine and infallible yet this truth infallible certainty therof is not made knowne to vs according to the ordinary course of Gods prouidence but only by the meanes which God hath appointed to wit by Pastors Doctors and Preachers of the true visible Church of Christ. §. 2. About the Question and meaning of it The Question propounded to be treated in the Conference vpon the occasion and for the end aforesayd was Whether the Protestant Church was visible in all Ages especially in the Ages before Luther and whether the Names of such visible Protestants may be shewed in all Ages out of good Authors The reason why this question was proposed rather then any other was for that the old Gentleman was already perswaded that there must be in all Ages a visible Church of Christ hauing in it visible Pastors Doctors and lawfully sent Preachers who are by Almighty God appointed and authorized to teach and of whom all sorts of people are commaunded warranted to learne infallible Fayth necessary to saluatiō And further that this Church and these her Pastors Preachers haue byn in all Ages past not only visible but so visible as the Names at least of some Pastours teaching and some people learning the true Fayth in all Ages might be produced

be ridiculous impudency By this may appeare how notoriously the old Gentleman and the rest of the Protestant Audience were abused by D. Featly vndertaking so boldly to proue both by syllogisme and Induction the affirmatiue part of the aforesayd question which was proposed to be treated in the conference the Negatiue whereof is so plainely confessed by so many Prime Protestants as now we haue heard §. 3. About the Method Concerning the Method which had beene fittest to haue beene obserued in treating the aforesayd Question it is to be noted that there be two severall methodes of finding out infallible diuine truth in all points necessary to saluation the finding wherof was the chiefe end for which the aforesayd Question about the perpetual visibility of the Church was proposed to be treated of The first methode or way is that euery man eyther by his owne wit or by hearing another discourse do examine throughly ech particuler point of diuine Fayth about which Controuersy or Question is or may be made what is and what is not to be beleeued vnder payne of damnation the which requireth 1. Ability and strength of naturall wit and skill in Latin Greeke Hebrew and other languages and some art by which he may vnderstand the tearmes and state of the Question and all that is writen of it 2. That he reade or heare and vnderstand all that is written of that Question in holy Scriptures Councells Fathers and moderne Writers and in the originall Languages and Copyes and what els may be sayd of it pro and contra by learned Disputants 3. That he doe maturely weigh and ponder al that is sayd both for the affirmatiue and negatiue part of the Question 4. That by prayer and good life he obtaine the assistance of Gods spirit to illuminate his vnderstanding in matters which exceed the capacity of his naturall wit 5. That all this premised he of himselfe without relying vpon the Iudgement of any Church frame a firme and infallible Iudgement what is and what is not to be held for truth necessary to saluation and this being knowne by it as by a rule to iudge which company of men are or are not the true visible Church of Christ in al Ages Now who seeth not that this methode or way of attayning sound resolution in all particuler points of Fayth by that to iudge what company of men are or are not the true visible Church in all ages cannot be fit and conuenient to be prescribed to all or indeed to any sort of men and especially to such as neither haue extraordinary ability of naturall wit or skill in languages nor art requisite to vnderstand the tearmes and state of all Questions nor leasure to read or heare nor strength of iudgment to weigh and ponder all that is or may be sayd of them nor such extraordinary guiftes of prayer and other vertues as they may presume to haue gotten particuler assistance of Gods spirit more then other men whereby they may assure themselues that they in particuler without relying vpon any Churches iudgement can firmely and infallibly iudge in euery Question about points of Fayth what is and what is not to beleeued as a truth necessary to saluation The 2. methode or way which indeed is both most easy and may giue full satisfaction to all sortes consisteth in these 3. points 1. To beleeue and acknowledge as euery Christian is bound by the articles of his Creed that there is and hath beene in all Ages a visible Catholique Church of Christ which is the Pillar of truth and in it a visible company of Pastours and Doctours and lawfully sent Preachers assisted by the spirit of God who haue learned of their predecessours and they of theyrs still vpwardes vntill Christ his Apostles who learned of Christ and Christ of God his Father the infallible Truth in all pointes of fayth of whome by Gods appointment all sorts haue in all Ages past as appeareth by Historyes learned and must in tymes present and to come learne the infallible truth in all matters of Christian fayth necessary to saluation The 2. is to discerne which company of Christians are this visible Church of Christ and who be these Pastours Doctours and lawfully sent Preachers of whome all sorts of men may securely learne what is and what is not to be held for infallible truth in all matters of fayth necessary to saluation The 3. is to heare and belieue and obey whatsoeuer this Company of Christians haue in all Ages taught and what the present ordinary Pastours Doctours and Preachers thereof do teach to be diuine and infallible truth necessary to saluation which to do will not be hard to those who do truely feare and loue God and be meeke and humble in hart and who can and will for the loue and seruice of Christ captiuate their vnderstanding and submit it to the obedience of faith which must be done by mortifying and denying their owne priuate opinion that they may follow the sense and iudgment of Christ speaking in and by his Catholike Church VVhich whosoeuer heareth beleeueth obeyeth doth heare beleeue and obey Christ. And VVhosoeuer contemneth or will not heare beleeue and obey the Church he contemneth Christ and by Christs owne censure is to be accounted as an Heathen or Publican Now concerning the first and third of these points as no doubt or difficulty was moued either by the old Gentleman or Syr Humfrey Lynde or the Doctours or any other of the Company presēt at the Conference so there is no reason why any difficulty should be made therof at all And as for the 2. point it seemeth to me there should be no great difficulty in regard it is already agreed of all sides that there must be one or other such Company of Christians and among them Pastors preachers so visible as is said and none besides the Catholique Romaine hitherto hath shewed a sufficient Catalogue of names of men in al Ages who can with any colour be proued or defended to haue beene professors of the true diuine infallible Catholike primitiue vnchanged faith first deliuered by Christ and his Apostles after continued in an orderly succession of visible Pastors Doctours appoynted by God to be allwayes in the Church of purpose to preserue people of all ages from wauering in doubt of any point of faith or being carried about with the wind of any vpstart Errour Neither indeed can any such Catalogue be giuen but it may be manifestly shewed to be insufficiēt as either wanting names of men in some ages or containing names of such as may certainly be proued to be no Protestants but to differ in doctrine of fayth one from another and to condemne one or other of the 39. Articles vnto which English Protestant Ministers are sworne Neuertheles if any one be not yet satisfyed in this point but will haue the Question made whether the Protestant Church hath beene so visible in all Ages as

true bookes of Scripture and Fathers which be true translations and which be right interpretations for both about Scriptures Fathers such Questions may arise and cannot be well decided whout the Iudgement of the true present visible Church in regard Scriptures and Fathers do not alwaies sufficiently expresse what is to be held in the aforesaid Questions neither will one priuate man in such cases follow anothers opinion when ech man will be easily inclined to thinke that he hath as good Scriptures or Fathers or Reasons or all these togeather to plead for the truth of his opinion as another hath for his This reason may be confirmed out of Tertullian who in his golden booke of Prescriptions giueth diuers reasons why Heretikes who reiect the authority of the Church should not be admitted to dispute out of Scriptures First for that by their disputations they weary those that be fame they ouercome those which be weake and those which be in a middle disposition they dism●sse with scruple or doubt Another reason Tertullian giueth because this Heresy doth not receaue some Scriptures or if a receaue it peruerteth them to their owne purpose with additions and detractions and if it receaue some yet not whole or if whole in some sort yet by false expositions it turneth them from the right to a peruerse sense And a peruerse or corrupt sense sayth he is as contrary to truth as is a peruerted or corrupted Text. Tertullian therefore for these reasons iudged best not to make the combat in Scriptures but that this gappe should be stopt and that Heretikes should not be admitted to any disputation of Scriptures and he telleth how this may be done saying It must be examined to whome the possession of Scripture doth belong to the intent that he who hath no right vnto them may not be admitted vnto them And further he sheweth That the right order of thinges requireth that first it only be disputed to whom the Fayth belongeth As if he should say which is the true visible Church VVhose are the Scriptures From whome by whome when and to whome was deliuered that discipliae by which they are made Christians for where there shall appeare the truth of Christian sayth and discipline to be as doubtles it is in the true visible Church of Christ there shal be truth of Scriptures and expositions and al Christian Traditions And hauing shewed how Christ did promulgate his doctrine by the Apostles he further prescribeth That what Christ and his Apostles did preach must be learned no otherwise then by the Churches which they founded so as euery doctrine agreeing with those Apostolicall Mother-Churches that is to be deemed true and what doth not agree to be iudged false And therefore to make it apparent that the Heretikes opinions although pretended by themselues to be cc̄formable to Scriptures and such as may be proued out of Scriptures are not Apostolicall nor true he vrgeth them as M. Fisher vrged D. Featly to shew the beginning of their Churches and to vnfould the order of their Bishops so from the beginning running downe by succession as that their first Bishop had some of the Apostles or some Apostolicall man who perseuered with the Apostles for his Author and Predecessour and hauing giuen examples of the Catholike Churches who can thus vnfould the order of their Pastours and namely Rome for one he sayth afterwardes Confingant tale quid Haeretici Let Heretiques euen feigne some such like thing Thus we see what Tertullian did say to Heretikes of his tyme by which we may learne what we may say to the Nouellists of our tyme whome offering to dispute with vs about Scriptures we may altogeather debarre from Scripture and may examine them as Tertullian did those of his tyme saying VVho are you VVhen and whence came you VVhat haue you to do in my ground you that are not myne By what right dost thou O Marcion we may say O Martin Luther cut down my woods By what licence dost thou O Valentine O Caluin diuert or turne aside my fountaynes By what power dost thou O Apelles O Anabaptist remoue my limits VVhy do you O the rest of Heretikes sow and feed according to your owne will vpon my Land and pasture It is my possession I am the ancient possessour I haue the firme Originalls from the Authors themselues to whome the propriety did first belong I am the heyre of the Apostles as they did ordaine in their Testament and last will as they did commit it to my faythfull Trust as they did adiure me so I hold it But you they haue disinherited and cast out as strangers and enemyes c. So as by this prescription of Tertullian vntill D. Featly or some other can by other markes then by alleadging wordes of Scripture as by perpetuall visibility and interrupted succession of Bishops c. proue Protestants not to be Heretikes but the true Church of Christ and the right heyre of the Apostles to whome cōsequently belongeth the most ancient first possession of Scriptures M. Fisher had good reason and right to deferre disputing with him out of Scripture of Christ and his Apostles vntill he had made his full Induction of Names of Protestant Church-men and vnfoulded the orders of their Prostant Bishops so running downe from the beginning by succession as that their first Protestant Bishop had some of the Apostles or some Apostolicall man who perseuered with the Apostles for his Author Predecessour The which I accompt to be so impossible for him to doe as I dare and do challenge him saying with Tertullian Confingant tale quid Haeretici Let D. Featly or any of his fellow Protestants at least feigne because I am sure they cannot find Names of Protestant Bishops and Pastors whome they do imagine for proue they cannot out of good Authors to haue beene in all ages Which whiles they do not al sorts of people haue iust cause to thinke that neither D. Featly nor D. VVhite can performe that taske which they did tooto boldly vndertake of naming prouing and defending visible Ptotestants in al ages therupon al men may as I do conclude That the Protestant Church hath not beene so visible in all ages as the Cathelike Church ought to be and consequently the Protestant Church is not the true Catholique Church which we prosesse to beleeue in our Creed Neither consequently are their I'astours and Doctours and Preachers lawfully sent or sufficiently authorized to teach and expound Gods word nor consequently are people securely warranted to learne of them what is and what is not to be belieued by infallible diuine fa●th necessary to saluation nor indeed ought they to beleeue or heare them at all but ought to vnite themselues to that One Holy Catholike Apostolike perpetually visible Roman Church hearing beleeuing obeying the Pastors thereof whereby they may haue infallible iustruction in all matters of fayth secure direction for all matters concerning good life in such sort as they may attaine remission of their sinnes and saluation of their soules the grace of God in this life and endles heauenly happines in the next Vnto which I beseech sweet Iesus to bring vs all Amen FINIS Eudaimon Iohannes in defens p. H. Garn. D. Bishop against Rob. Abbots A very weake and Insufficient satisfaction as is showed hereafter Eph. 4. Heb. 11. Rom. 10. v. 14 15. Eph. 4. 11. Ose. 2. v. 19 20. Isa. 59. 20. Matth. 18. 20. Eph. 4. v. 11. 〈…〉 M. Fisher. D. Field in his Epistle Dedicatone Aug. lib. de vnitate Ecclesiae a This great Lady did expresly say that the conferēce did make against Protestants euen as it was related by you Protestant relator And another Lady who was present at the conferēce did protest to one that asked her how it moued her that she was by it confirmed in Catholique religion Lib. 1. Inst. c. 1. Sect. 4. Eph. 4. v. 11. c. Rom. 10. v. 14. c. 1 Luth. ep ad Argentin anno 1525. 2 Conradus Schushelb in Theol. Calu. lib. 2. fol. 130. B. versus finé 3 Geo. Mylli in Augustanae Confessionis explie art 7. de Eccl. pag. 137. 4 Benedict Morgést trac de Eccl pag. 145. 5 Calu. in I. epist. ep 141. 6 Bucer ep ad Epis. Hereford 7 Beza in Theol. ep epi. 5. 8 Iewell in his Apolog. of the Church 4 c. diuis 2. in his defence 42. 9 Perkins in exposit of the Creed † See the booke intituled The Author and substance of Protestant religiō Isa. 59. v. 21. Isa. 61 9 Isa. 60 11 Matth. 5 14 Matth. 18 17 Matth. 28 19 20 Coccius in thesauro Cōtrouersiarum tomo 1. lib. 8. art 1. Aug. in psal 47. lib. de vnit Eccles. cap. 16. 25. Isa. 59. v. 21. 60. v. 11. 61. v. 9. 1. Tim. 3. v. 15. Ephes. 4. v. 4. 11. 12. 13. 14. Tertul. lib. de praescript Luc. 10. v. 16. Matth. 18. v. 17 Tertull. de praescrip c. 15. Cap. 19. Cap. 20. 21. 22 sequent Cap. 32.

About this time M. Sweet propounded these Conditions to be obserued 1. That al bitter speeches should be forborne 2. That nothing should be spoken or heard but to the purpose Which second he did propound to preuent impertinent digressions Neuerthelesse after this D. Featly made a long digression altogether impertinent to the Question which he was to dispute of for in stead of prouing a Protestant visible Church and naming visible Protestant in al ages he made a vaine and vnseasonable bragging offer to disp●oue the Roman Church in diuers particular points as are rehearsed by the Protestant Relator which he read out of a Paper Whereunto as he was speaking M. Sweet according to the second Condition before propounded answered That th●se things were then impertinent and nothing to the purpose But M. Sweet did not say as the Relator reporteth They are Scholastical points not Fundamental Neyther was there any such Syllogisme then made as the Relator annexeth D. Featly hauing ended his long digression M. Fisher said as the Protestant Relator telleth After you haue proued your Church visible in al ages and named the Professors thereof I wil satisfie you in your particulars D. Featly In the meane while name but one Father but one Writer of note who held the particulars aboue named for fiue hundred yeeres after Christ. To which instant demand of D. Featly saith the Relator nothing was answered But neyther was this said neyther was it needful to answer First for that M. Fisher formerly answered That he would satisfie al particulars after the visibilitie of the Protestant Church in al ages was shewed as the present Question required Secondly because to dispute of these particulars was vnseasonable and not to the present purpose as likewise was that other motion made by Sir Humfrey Lynd to M. Sweet to dispute of Transubstantiation out of S. Augustine To which motion being as I said vnseasonable M. Sweet answered wel according to his second Prouiso saying That is not now to the Question Then D. Featly said saith the Protestant Relator there are two meanes onely to proue any thing by necessarie inference to wit a Syllogisme and an Induction other formes of Argument haue no force but as they are reducible to these I proue the visibilitie of our Church by both and first by a Syllogisme No saith M. Fisher you must not onely proue it to be visible but so visible as the names of Protestant Professors in al ages may be shewed out of good Authors To this D. Featly said There are two Qu●res in your Question First Whether the Protestants Church were in al ages visible And secondly Whether the names of such visible Protestants can be shewed No said M. Fisher my Question is meant to be but one entire Question and so to cut off al needlesse wrangling made by D. White and D. Featly about the Aduerbe Vtrum Whether and the Copulatiue Et And as if Grammar Schollers had beene disputing rather then graue Diuines who were not to stand vpon rigor of Grammar especially in this case where the sence of the Speaker is plaine and may wel stand with Grammar M. Fisher said The Question being mine it pertaineth to me to tel the meaning and my meaning was onely to make it one Question viz. Whether the Protestants Church were so visible as the names of visible Protestants in al ages may be shewed out of good Authors Wherefore if you wil dispute you must dispute in my sense and must conclude the Affirmatiue viz. The Protestant Church was so visible as the names of the Professors in al ages may be shewed out of good Authors Proue this or proue nothing D. Featly That Church which is so visible as the Catholique Church ought to be and as the Popish Church is pretended by M. Fisher to be is so visible that the names of the Professors thereof may be produced and shewed in al ages out of good Authors But the Protestant Church is so visible as the Catholique Church ought to be and as the Popish Church is pretended to be Ergo M. Fisher. I denie the Minor Minorem probate D. Featly That Church whose Faith is eternal and perpetual and vnchanged is so visible as the Catholique Church ought to be and the Popish Church is pretended by M. Fisher to be But the Faith of the Protestant Church is eternal perpetual and vnchanged Ergo To this M. Fisher answered first excepting against the Word Eternal saying Faith is not eternal or ab aeterno It is true said a Minister who sate by Faith is not eternal but euiternal Neyther so said M. Fisher for it is not to be for euer in Heauen It is eternal said D. White in Predestination So said M. Sweet D. White himselfe may be said to be eternal and he might haue added this present Disputation may be said to be Eternal D. Featly You haue a purpose M. Fisher to cauil you know my meaning wel enough by the terme Perpetual to wit that Christian Faith which hath continued from Christs first publishing it til this present and shal continue vntil his second comming c. If this were said by D. Featly which is doubted he should haue considered how he and D. White cauilled vpon the word Whether and And when they knew M. Fishers meaning wel enough yea after they had heard him plainely explicate his meaning Whereas M. Fisher onely put them in minde to speake properly like Scholers and did not cauil or reply after D. Featly did explicate his meaning But to returne to the argument D. Featly That Church which holdeth this Faith you beleeue shal be so visible that the names of the Professors thereof may be shewed in al ages But the Protestant Church holdeth this perpetual Faith Ergo M. Fisher. Your argument is a fallacie called Petitio principij D. Featly A demonstration a causa or a priori is not Petitio principij But such is my argument Ergo Is it not a sounder argument to proue the visibilitie of the Professors from the truth of their Faith then as you the truth of your Faith from the visibilitie of Professors Visible Pastors argue not a right Faith Heretikes Mahumetans and Gentiles haue visible Professors of their Impieties yet will it not hence sollow that they haue a right beleese On the contrarie we know by the Promises of God in the Scripture That the Church which maintayneth the true Faith shal haue alwayes Professors more or lesse visible M. Sweet You ought to prooue the truth of your Church a posteriori for that is to the Question and not a priori D. Fealty Shal you prescribe me my Weapons Is not an argument a priori better then an argument a posteriori c. To this M. Fisher said A proofe a posteriori is more demonstratiue then a priori Thus farre the Relator who hath here added much more then was said and in particular those formal words which he reporteth M. Fisher to haue said viz. A proofe a

posteriori is more demonstratiue then a priori M. Fisher did not speake perhaps he might say That a proofe a posteriori doth better demonstrate to vs then a priori not meaning in general to preferre a Logical demonstration a posteriori before that which is a priori but that such a proofe a posteriori as he in this present Question required and as the Question it selfe exacted would better demonstrate or shew to al sorts of men which is the true Church then any proofe which D. Featly or D. White can make a priori to proue the Protestant Church to be the true Church as shal be shewed when need is hereafter at this present it may suffice to say to that which D. Featly now obiecteth against the proofe taken from visibilitie That although al kind of visible Professors doe not argue right Faith yet want of visible Professors argueth want of Christs true Church For supposing it to be true which euen D. Featly himselfe here saith according to the Protestants Relator viz. We know by the Promises of God in the Scripture that the Church which maintaines the true Faith shal haue alwayes Professors more or lesse visible and as M. Fisher further proued in one of the foresaid Papers giuen to the old Gentleman before this meeting so visible as their names in al ages may be shewed out of good Authors Supposing also out of D. Whitaker contra Dur. l. 7. p. 472. That whatsoeuer is fore-told by the ancient Prophets of the propagation amplitude and glory of the Church is most clearely witnessed by Histories and supposing lastly out of D. Iohn White in his Way p. 338. That things past cannot be shewed to vs but by Histories Supposing al this I say it is most apparant That if there cannot be produced as there cannot names of Protestants or of any other Professors of Christian Faith in al ages out of Histories to whom Gods Promises agree beside those which are knowne Roman Catholikes not Protestants nor any other but onely the Roman Catholikes are the true Church of Christ which teacheth the true Faith and of which al sorts are to learne infallible Faith necessarie to Saluation But as for the argument which D. Featly wil needes perswade vs not to be Petitio principy but Demonstratio a priori viz. That Church whose Faith is eternal and perpetual and vnchanged is so visible as the Catholike Church ought to be and as the Popish Church by M. Fisher is pretended to be But the Faith of Protestants Church is eternal perpetual and vnchanged Ergo The Protestants Church is so visible as the Catholike Church ought to be and the Popish Church is pretended by M. Fisher to be This argument as it is set downe is so farre from being a Demonstration whose propertie is to conuince the Vnderstanding as it is not a probable or Moral perswasion For I am verily perswaded that no wise man not alreadie possessed with Protestant opinions wil or can be so much as morally conuinced or in any sort probably perswaded by it That Protestants be the true visible Church more then a man in case of doubt can be by the like argument which a man may make to proue himselfe and his Brethren to be as wel spoken of as any in al the Parish Thus Those who are in heart true honest men are as wel spoken of as any in al the Parish But I and my Brethren are in heart true honest men Ergo As this proofe is not able to make any man not partially affected to beleeue these men to be wel spoken of or to be honest men so neyther can D. Featlyes proofe make any wise man beleeue Protestants to be the true visible Church or to haue the true Faith Secondly If the terme That Church be vnderstood onely of a particular Church as for example the Church of England it is so farre from a Logical Demonstration as it hath not in it any Logical forme according to any of the vsual Moods Barbara Caelarent c. But if it be vnderstood vniuersally of euery Church that is or may be then both Maior and Minor are false and so it cannot be a Demonstration whose propertie is to consist of most certainely true propositions The Maior in this latter sense is false for that there may be a Church or Companie who may haue inward Faith eternal and vnchanged as for example a Church of Angels who for want of visible Profession are not so visible as the Catholike Church ought to be The Minor is false also for the Protestant Church hath not the true Primitiue Faith neyther is that Faith they haue vnchanged but so often changed and so much subiect to change as one may say as a great Person in Germanie once said of some Protestants What they hold this yeare I doe in some sort know but what they wil hold next yeere I doe not know Which is true in regard they haue no certaine and infallible Rule sufficient to preserue them from change But if D. Featly shal say That he neyther meant the tearme That Church in eyther of the aforesaid senses but meant to signifie by it that one holy Catholike and Apostolike Church which the holy Scriptures doe shew both to haue perpetual vnchanged Faith and also to be perpetually visible Then indeed the Maior is true But the Minor is most false and so the argument is farre from being a Demonstration especially when it endeuoreth to proue Magis no●um per ignotius viz. the Visibilitie which is easily knowne by the truth of Doctrine which is more hard to be knowne especially by onely Scripture of the sense Whereof according to Protestants who say The whole Church may erre no particulat man can be infallibly sure For if the whole Church or Companie to whom Christ promised the Spirit of Truth to teach them al truth may erre Then much more may euery particul●r man erre and consequently no particular man can be infallibly sure of the sense of Scripture Thirdly This argument beggeth or supposeth that which is in question For in asking which is the true visible Church or Congregation of the true faithful we aske at least virtually which is the true Faith in regard the true Church cannot be without this true Faith Yea therefore doe we aske which is the true Church that of it being first knowne by other Markes we may learne what is the true Faith in al points in which we yet know not what is to be held for true Druine Faith Fourthly Although Faith be pre-required to be in some or other members of the true Church yet inward Faith alone without some outward profession by which it is made visible or sensible doth not sufficiently make a man to be a member of the visible Church Let D. Featly therefore looke backe vpon his argument and tel vs what Academical Learning taught him to cal it a Demonstration a priori But let vs heare how M. Fisher did answer this