thing in order to Christian Peace in things of Ecclesiastical constitution as v. c. The latin service the Sacrament vnder one kind the celibate of Preists thô not in things of Faith such as is the Church's Jnfallibility 3. D. Morley Replyed If by the Church he meant all Christians in all places it could not erre If any particular Church v. c. That of Rome it could erre had erred which he proved thus That Church which formerly held as matter of Faith an errour hath erred can erre But this is the case of the Church of Rome Therefore it hath erred and can erre To proue the minor he inslanced in the Communion of Infants beleived to be necessary to salvation For which he quoted Innocent 1. S. Austin Binius Maldonate This last says for six hundred yeares it was Dogma de Fide vniversalts Ecclesiae 1. Revisor you approved here what J haue at larg proved aboue little good from Conserences in matters of Religion can be expected But you haue a sting in the end when you reject all the fault all the opposition of so great a good as the Peace of the Ch. on vs. Who are resolved to remit nothing A very vncharitable rash judgment And vntru to boote as appeares by F. Darcys reply by that story which Protestants with great confidence relate in Q. Elisabeths time viz that the Pope offred to confirm all she had don in Church affayres vpon condition she would acknowledg him How can you say We will remit nothing when your Brethren assure the Pope was ready to remit all But it is your fashion to say vnsay as you think for your present purpose Then it served your turn that the Pope did not dislike your Reformation to moue Catholicks to embrace it so you spread that report Now it is to your purpose to throw the odium of the division on the Popes inflexibility so you report that The tru only reason that the schismatical Party is resolved never to rest satisfyed with what is remitted So the rebellious Part of the Parliament resolved never to be satisfyed with what soever answer the King gaue to their Addresses for that Reason we might say all Treatys for peace betwixt the King Parliament would proue ineffectual 2. F. Darcys answer shews how desirous the Church is to restore Peace to Christendome being ready for so great a good to remit of her Ryght in imposing ceremonys making Canons In Faith she can change nothing that belongs to a higher Tribunal she receiues it from her spouse in the nature of a Depositum 1. Tim 6.20 which must not be altred But Ecclesiastical Discipline being lef to her determination of her own appointement she may change as the Father sayd will change if by that meanes she could restore to the sheep-fold of Christ all his strayed sheep This is more than the Ch. of Engl. will do seing to reclaime her vndutiful children she will not omit the signe of the Crosse in Baptism kneeling at the Sacrament bowing to the Altar all ceremonys of humane jnstitution her own injunction Nay she would not alter some words in her Lyturgy to purchase Peace 3. If the Church diffusivè that is all Christians in all places cannot erre wo be to the first Protestants whose sentiments in matters of Faith were as contrary to those of all Christians in all places as to those of the Roman Church except that one point of Papal Power So if all Christians did not cannot erre the first Protestants did erre all their followers doe erre will erre as long as they retain those sentiments for what is an errour to day will be such to morrow to the end of the world As to the Communion of Infants J acknowledg that for a long time when Baptism was administred solemnly by Bishops to men grown vp Adultis two other Sacraments were administred with it Confirmation the Eucharist That when it was administred by Preists they were ordred to anoint the baptised person not on the forehead but on the crowne That when Infants were baptised because the Sacrament could not without danger be administred to them vnder the species of Bread alone it was giuen vnder the other species the Preist dipping his finger into the Holy Chalice gaue it them to suck or a litle particle of the species of Bread soaked in the consecrated wine was layd on their tongue That the Communion was giuen to Infants out of an opinion that it was necessary to salvation grounded on those words of Christ Ioan. 6. Vnlesse ye eate the Body .... you haue no life in you I grant also that some haply many in some private Churchs beleived that to be the litteral meaning of those words thought consequently that sense was De fide a point of Faith Yet I deny that the vniversal Church did erre in declarations or definitions of Faith for indeed she never made any definition in this matter That Text was exposed with the rest of Holy writ to the view of all Christians left to the interpretation of ordinary Pastors as the rest was Many vnderstood it litterally for that reason extended to Infants the Communion in Baptism ordained to men enjoying the vse of Reason The Church seing no pressing inconvenience in this custome consequently no necessity to make a severe examen of the meaning of those words a censure of an jnnocent errour permits them to go on without interposing her Authority or by any legal definition obliging her children to beleiue either the one or the other part And I doubt not but there are several other texts of scripture commonly vnderstood one way that thought to be the litteral meaning tru sense followed as such some nay many may beleiue that sense to be De fide the Church permits them to beleiue practice so not seing any necessity to call a General Council to decide it the errour being nether destructiue to necessary Faith nor good manners yet this sense may be different from that the Holy Ghost cherfly intended by those texts all this without any prejudice to the Church of Rome's infallibility which never declared any thing in it Such I think is the common way of explicating Anti Christ to be one single man the three yeares a halfe to be litterally vnderstood for forty two months vulgar From alike occasion the error of the Chiliasts or Millenarians had its rise progresse which was not condemned till its Abettars grew troublesome to those who differed from them in the exposition of those words Apoc. 20.4 on which they grounded their error Hence it so lows that what Maldonate says makes nothing against the Churchs infallibility in defining things of Faith for he nether says nor could say with truth that she ever defined any thing in this matter And the practice it self of communicating Infants cannot
of reason all considerations of Eternity And if they should be judged weyght by men will God judge so too At the greate day will it be a sufficient excuse for Schisme Heresy to say I was affrayd of loosing my estate of hindring my fortune of offending my freinds of giving advantage to my Enemys Will not Christ answer Seing You haue disowned me my Church before men I will disowne you before my father I will not deny but you haue given satisfaction as to what concernes your self that you are a Protestant Yet J must professe you giue little satisfaction as to your Church Nay I do declare that I would never desire other nor better grounds to vindicate the Truth of Catholick Religion the necessity of living in the Communion of the Catholick Church than what this letter affords For by it we may gather the condition of the Protestant Church to be like that of Laodicea Apoc. 3.17 Wretched miserable poore blind naked I hartily wish you those of your ranke were truly sensible of this Truth that you made a ryght vse of it by seeking ways to returne to the Communion of the Catholick Roman Church so put an end to this horrid Schisme Though the difficultyes to be overcome were greate yet greate difficultyes ought not to fryght vs from so greate so necessary a good as that of the Peace of the Church But in reality they are lesse then apprehended which you must say if you beleiue what you report after Bishop Andrews that the Pope was willing to confirme all that Q. Elizabeth had done in matter of Religion provided she would acknowledge his Supremacy This is then the grand nay the only obstacle Now all who haue been conversant in Catholick countryes see their customes even where that Supremacy is acknowledged see cleerly that this is no such formidable thing as to excuse justify a separation by consequence can be no just hindrance of Peace which the God of Peace grant vs giue all Schismaticks a tru desire of Amen SECTION XX. A Revision of his Letter to a Preist WHo this Regular Preist is you do not tell vs yet what you say of him he of himself describe him by infallible notes You endeavour to proue in this letter to him three things 1. That being so perswaded as he was he was bound in Conscience to leaue the Communion of the Roman Church 2. That he was bound to joine Communion with the Protestant Church of England 3. That he was bound to do it out of hand Which Propositions are built one vpon another the third on the second this on the first Which being Conditional not Absolute supposing his Present perswasion we must see what that is according to this Meridian we must calculate his Duty What this poore man's Perswasion is if he haue any setled is hard to judge of He hath vowed Obedience to his Regular Superiour will not keepe it He hath vowed Poverty breakes that vow He professe the Catholick Faith beleiues it full of Errors nay Heresyes He says he will remaine in the Communion of the Roman Catholick Church yet beleiues her to be Heretick Schismatick He hath beene ordred backe to his Convent he refuses to returne he hath been Canonically admonisht of his extravagances he slights it he hath been Excommunicated he Laughs at it In fine in him Hereticks find a constant freind Schismaticks a sure Advocate Apostates a certaine Patrone Catholicks an implacable Enemy yet he pretends he is nether Heretick nor Schismatick nor Apostata but a Catholick member of the Roman Church Who can square these circles reconcile these Contradictions betwixt his Declarations Actions that so a judgment may be framed of his Tru Persuasion Whither shall we giue credit to his declarations Or his Actions Those speake his being a Catholick he is nothing lesse These declare his hatred to Catholicks their Religion which yet he professeth So we must conclude him a Chimera one composed of contradictions his Religion is made vp of parts mutually destroying one another Or else that he hath no Religion for as a Chimera cannot haue a being In rerum naturâ so there can nether be an Entity composed of Contradictions nor a Religion for the same reason At least at the greate Audit he can never fayle to heare Discede a me c. Begon from me whither so ever Religion he be of his owne words will condemne him Ex ore tuo te judico serve nequam What can hence be gathered but that his Perswasion being so vncertain his Religion so dubious or certainly none at all nothing can be thence gathered as to the Communion which he should enter into If you think him well disposed for your Church you discover what kind of men it is composed of Ours that is the Catholick Church doth not desire such nor tolerate them further than there is hopes of their amendment little or none at all being left of this man she hath cast him out by Excommunication As I learne from your owne letter So by what I see I conclude that You haue spoyled a Catholick not made a Protestant Yet to moue him to come quite over you very learnedly distinguish three ages of the Church The first whilest she continued in that Faith which was once delivered to Saints p. 31. The second p. 32. from the time the Pope tooke vpon him the title of vniversal Bishop Yet you are not resolved what time to allow to this Second age whither one thousand or eleven or twelue hundred yeares The third p. 42. from the two Councils of Lateran vnder LEO X. Trent jmplying that all were bound to communicate with the Church of Rome in its first age myght communicate with it in the second must not in the third Jn the first Communion with it was a necessary duty in the second it was lawfull but not necessary in the third vnlawfull a sin And these dreames take vp aboue 30. pages Rev. All this is a dreame for the second age which you speake of is yet to come the Pope never having taken the title of Vniversal Bishop Besides this Christ promist his assistance to the Church not for any determinate time but for all times assured her of his presence till the end of the world now when you shall proue that Christ hath broken or can or will breake his word we will think your second age possible not till then so the first age in which all are obliged to joine in Communion with the Church of Rome is not expired nor will nor can ever expire D. M. p. 62. Having quitted the Communion of the Roman Church he is bound to joine with that of England in Conscience it being the most perfectly reformed Church in the world in Prudence in order to the protection of his Person provision
A REVISION OF DOCTOR GEORGE MORLEI'S IVDGMENT IN MATTERS OF RELIGION OR AN ANSWER TO SEVERAL TREATISES WRITTEN BY HIM VPON SEVERAL OCCASIONS CONCERNING THE CHVRCH OF ROME AND MOST OF THE DOCTRINES CONTROVERTED BETWIXT HER AND THE CHVRCH OF ENGLAND TO WHICH IS ANNEXT A TREATISE OF PAGAN IDOLATRY BY. L. W. Permissu Superiorum 1683. THE PREFACE SEing my Lord of Winton is pleased to wipe off that odious aspersion of his being a Papist which myght in the late conjuncture haue cost him his civil endangered his natural life by declaring not only his judgment in matters of Religion but also the grounds on which it relyes contained in severall treatises long since compounded but never till now made publick I presume he will not be offended that with the respect due to his quality of Peere of the Realme these be reviewed Reviewed I say for althô Appellations lye only to hygher Revisions are committed to equal or even inferiour courts He protests he is no Papist I think so too I wish it were as easy to cleere him of Calvinisme of which he ownes pag. XII that he hath beene suspected to it he seemes enclined when he says that God by Miracles promoted the Jdelatrous worship of the Pictures Relickes of Saints This I think in reality is to make God the Authour of sin Which Blasphemy I do not beleiue the Church of England will owne thô it be a choice flower in Calvin's garden He declares his loyalty to the government establisht the Royal Family c. And J beleiue him in this also nay I judge as favourably of the greatest part of his rank moreover that they are loyal not only for their Interest but for conscience out of a sense of their duty to God their soveraigne their country that he they will oppose to their Power Schisme in the Church Faction in the State Yet I think all their endeavours will be ineffectual to prevent ether considering the constitution of the Protestant Church qualifications of its Clergy For as in some natural Bodyes there is a defect which maugre all care of Physitians cuts the thred of life before it be spun to its ordinary length so in some Bodyes Politick that of the English Protestant Church in particular Here are some reasons to proue this 2. The first Protestancy is a Schisme those who liue in it liue in a Schisme It is a Schisme because it is a party separated from the whole Catholick Church Luther was a Schismatick so was Calvin so was Zuinglius so was each Patriark of your Reformation for each of these at their first breaking forth left the Whole Catholick Church or Congregation of Christians of what denomination soever not any one single Person in the whole world to whome he or they did joine himself So that if ever any man was truly Schismatick each one of these was such Wherefore all who joined to them as all Protestants did were Schismaticks Now it is not probable that God will giue that greate Blessing of Ecclesiasticall Peace to Schismaticks who hate it oppose it My 2. is Protestants are Hereticks that is Choosers of the points which they beleiue For the Catholick Church delivered to her children not only what they beleiue but also many articles which they reject Each Protestant takes this complex examins it finding some Articles not to please him he casts them out of his creede Hence one rejects the Real presence another Free will A third Merits a fourth the Possibility of keeping God's Commandments c. Each one culling out what Articles he pleases composing of them not a Catholick but a Protestant Faith not a Faith of the Ghospels but of this time their Phancyes What more evident signes of Hereticks Now if they be such can we think them fit instruments to oppose Heresy who did introduce do still defend it This shall be further confirmed by my fifth Reason My 3. Protestants are a Cadmean broode they sprung out of the Earth armed no sooner did their soveraigne Lords see their faces but they felt their Jron hands Witnesse Germany France Hungary Bohemia Scotland swethland Denmark the Low countryes Geneva Our English Protestants say they are not concerned in these Rebellions but that is not tru for by approving applauding them they make them their owne encourage the Practice by commending the precedent With what force can they teach Obedience to his Majesty who praise Rebellion against other Or divert men from Treason who transforme Traitors into Heroes canonize Regicides My 4. There nether is nor ever was any Authority vnder the Heavens better grounded than that of the Catholick Clergy consisting of the Pope Bishops was before the Reformation It was establisht by Christ setled by the Apostles ratifyed by general particular Councils confirmed by an vninterrupted Possession of almost fifteene hundred yeares backt by all Laws Ecclesiastical Civil acknowledged by all Christians then aliue What gentleman can say so much for his estate What officer for his Authority What King for his crowne What Parson for his Tith What Protestant Bishop for his miter When a Calvin a Luther c. to say no more private men starte vp declame against that Clergy as a humane invention an Antichristian establishment you applaude them with them trample vnder feete the whole sacred Order teach your followers no submission no obedience is due to it When you haue taught them to breake such cables can you expect to bind them to their duty with single threds The English Protestant pretence to Bishops doth no satisfy 1. Because in reality they had no canonical ordination as we say proue 2. Althô they had imposition of hands were real Bishops which we deny See Anti-Haman Chapt. xxxv yet They entred not by the doore but climed vp some other way Iohn X. 1. Were not promoted according to any canonical forme ether ancient or moderne Wherefore what can we judge of them but according to Christ's words Loco citato 3. Your first Protestants promoted their Religion Spreade their noveltyes contrary to all even English Bishops in contempt of them first in Henry VIII his time Tindale others Secondly in Q. Elizabeths time when all the Bishops aliue detested your Reformation were for that stript of their jurisdiction deposed from their seates confined What wonder then your followers doe not regard that Crosier which you haue broken nor honour the Miter which they haue seene you trample vnder your feate Lastly suppose your Bishops wereas validly canonically consecrated as any ever were can you say that their Authority is better grounded than that of all the Catholick Clergy Sure you cannot pretend to better grounds for your Authority than our Clergy had As it was than lawfull laudable to three or four private men to contradict our whole Clergy then in being why may not
some private men amongst you withstand yours What reason can you alleadge against a Tub preacher Some texts of scripture Canons of Councils Tradition of the Church Laws of the Realme All these stood in favour of our Clergy against the first Reformers as more evidtntly than for you against your dissenters So your Schisme Reformation hath deprived you of all meanes to preserue the Peace of the Church My 5. Is taken from the manner of your Reformation From Rome our Ancesters had received by the same hands a systeme of Faith a body of Ceremonys some Ecclesiastical Laws The whole Faith as necessary to be beleived the Ceremonys as decent to entertaine devotion The laws as convenient to government order And your first Reformers changed all Jn Faith they first rejected the whole vnwritten word Tradition a greate part of the written scripture They secondly perverted many places of this by new interpretations retaining the word without its sense The Ceremonys laws were treated as licentiously throwing out of dores whatsoever they pleased Now why may not another imitate these your Patriarks Cur non licebit Valentiniano quod licuit Valentino de arbitrio suo fidem innovare What was lawfull to Luther is sure lawfull to a Lutheran what was laudable in the sixteenth is not a sin in the seventeenth age to giue new interpretations to scripture abolish other ceremonys repeale more Canons Especially the motiues of reforming being common Which is My 6. Your first reformers rejected some Articles of Faith as being delivered by fallible men some Ceremonys as men's inventions some laws as contrary to Evangelical liberty Now all this holds as strongly against what they Keepe in as what they leaue out for all Canons were imposed by men all Ceremonys prescribed by men scripture it self brought to you continued amongst you by fallible men as much as the real presence Now as you blot this out of your creede why may not another strike out Baptisme a third the Trinity a fourth the Incarnation afifth the vnity of God a sixth the Deity it self so farewell all Faith What reason is there to say that our Roman Missioners sent by S. Gregory were infallible in delivering the mysterys of the Trinity or Incarnation fallible in speaking of Purgatory or the Real presence They say they pared away these Articles because they were not from the beginning were abuses But will not a Monothelit alleadge the same against the distinction of wills in Christ an Eutychian against the distinction of natures a Nestorian against the vnity of Person in him a Macedonian against the Divinity of the Holy ghost an Arrian against that of the son a Manichean against the vnity of the Divine nature a Iew against the new Testament a Libertin and Atheist against both old new God himself These are not wyre drawne conclusions by obscure mediums far fetched illations but natural obvious sequels of the fundamental principles of your Reformation which are inconsistent with any constancy in Faith and settlement in Church government So I must conclude that your Church building is such as no principles can beare your principles are such as can beare no building By which we may guesse from whome your reformers had their vocation from Abaddon Apollion the Destroyer seing their principles are good only to Destroy Churchs not at all to Build them In fine a prudent man without casting a figure might haue seene the fate of the late troubles in their principles which were inconsistent with any setled forme of civil gouvernment would ruin them all successively as they did without any hopes of rest vnlesse these were layd aside the just ancient government restored The like conjecture may be made of Protestantisme its principles being inconsistent with any setled forme of Faith Church government will destroy them all by Schisme Heresyes no probability of a settlement vnlesse these be renounced the Ancient Catholick Apostolical Faith Government restored For a further proofe of this I appeale to experience which is a demonstration A posteriori as the former is A priori which is My 7. Experience shews that t is much easier to destroy than to settle a government ether in Church or State Nothing of Art or Power was wanting to the establishment of the Prelatical Church in England She appeared first with the plausible colours of an Apostolical Reformation was cherisht by Royal favour armed the severest laws imaginable Yet one age had not past over her head when the peccant humours bread within her layd her in the dust the crowne it self with her which it was hoped she would vp hold Both were againe restored yet how soone was the joy of that over both brought againe into a like danger Seeke no where abroade the spring of these mischeifes they rise from the Reformation are inseparable from the Protestant Church My 8. And last reason is drawne from the Protestant Clergy it self which as it is modelled principled can never sufficiently influence the Nation to preserue its vnion in the Worship of God its duty to the King to prevent Schisme in the Church Faction in the State This appeares by experience The reasons I reserue till some further occasion be given 3. D. M. so we shall hereafter call my Lord of Winton says in his Preface pag. 11. A french Iesuit called Mainbourg publisht something as writen by her late R. H. he repeates afterwards four times in the Preface once in his post script Mainbourg the Iusuit when it was Mainbourg the secular Preist who printed it Which that booke of his tells all the world so did the publike Gazets containing his dismission out of the society His superiors did never permit him to print it whilest he was a Iesuit knowing how sacred the secrets of Princes ought to be So that paper crept about only in written copyes seene by few of these not many beleiving it to be hers whose name it beares Now D. M. hath spreade it the rumor of her Change in Religion for his owne vindication so prejudiced his mother the Church of England for I doubt not but her R. H. example will moue more Powerfully to leaue that Church than D. M. S. judgment to retaine men in it He questions the Conference betwixt her R. H. the Bishop which being a matter of Fact must rely on the deposition of witnesses their credit interest She is positiue he conjectural she had no motiue but Truth he concerned for the honour of his Church his owne His topick is if the Bishop answered so he was nether so Learned nor Conscientious nor Prudent as he ought to be Which many will easier grant then that her R. H. in a matter of fact would wittingly tell an vntruth He relates many things in his Preface to little purpose v. c. His coming out of
or which is all one confounded the Hierarchy of the Church cast away fiue Sacraments deprived the other two of their efficacy reduced them to the condition of Iewish rites to be Beggerly elements denyed the vniversal redemption banisht Free will introduced stoick Fate changed Hope into Presumption a sin against the Holy Ghost so commended Faith as to destroy charity made good bad workes indifferent by depriving those of merit these of offending God in his elect c. Besides many points of discipline which thô lesse considerable than those of Faith yet are not to be neglected which no Church of England man will deny seing he defends those retained in it against the Presbiterians If these be Small points what are Great And if these be not Many what Herēsy ever had many It will not be enough to say the Church of England doth not oblige her Children to beleiue all these for shee ownes Communion with those who do abetteth her children when they reproach vs with the contrary Truths But suppose there were but Few but One difference that inconsiderable in it self yet if it causes a Schism it destroys all hope of Salvation Now what comfort is it to a wounded man to tell him he hath but one wound that not great if that touch the hart is mortal The Novatians the Miletians the Quarted ci mans the Donatists c. were tru Schismaticks could not be saved altho each of them differred from Catholicks but in one point that not of Faith but of Ecclesiastical Discipline And they were as obstinate in the defense of that one as others in that of many great ones The fewer lesse considerable the points are betwixt vs the Protestants the greater is their guilt in dividing Communion on that score All spiritual temporal jurisdiction the Authority of Prelate Prince is derived from the same fountain God There is no power but of God the Powers that be are ordained of God Rom. 13.1 The same persons are subject to both Let every soul be subject to hygher Powers And this out of the same principle of conscience Who soever therefore resists the Power resists the ordinance of God .... Wherefore ye must needes be subject not only for wrath but also for conscience sake The same motiues are alleaeged to excuse the Disobedience to both Abuses in government heavy vnnecessary Impositions greivances c. The same pretexts serue to make the Rebellious Actions against both plausible Evangelical Liberty Reformation Reestablishment of ancient forme of Government c. Stubbor nesse in the Rebellious is covered with the same fig-leaues Complaints of greivances not harkned to petitions for Redresses vnregarded humble Addresses not effectual Alike Art vsed to conceal a resolution never to be satisfyed what ever Answer be returned for if one request be granted they will demand more if denyed than they perswade their followers they are slyghted that no good can be hoped from such persons that things must be redrest without them Then they teach that all Power is derived not from God as the Apostle says but from the People that their superiours are only their Commissioners accountable to them these having abused their Power may nay ought to be devested of it And so they proceed to change the establisht Government in Church state alleadging the Bible as the Rule of their Actions against the Head of the Church ancient Statutes those against the Prince yet wresting both to their capricios not framing these to those In reality making all Government in Church state subservient to their Interests All which are written with a sun beame in the Hystorys of our civil wars in England those of the first Reformation in Germany France Scotland England too So chang in Church state are begun with lamentations bemoanings of the People greived overcharged carryed on with Humble Addresses Petitions end in confusion destruction Hence it appeares how dangerous it is for a Prince to countenance those Pretences to Liberty against the Prelate with in his dominions What is sawce for à goos is sawce for a gander Both hold their Authority on the same renure what strikes at one wounds the other That Principle which shakes the miter endangers the Crown who breakes the Crozier would crack the scepter for both are made sacred by the same divine Ryght Soe who dares oppose the one is disposed to shake hands with his duty to the other The differences betwixt them being no other but only as of more lesse in the same kind 2. Your care of not exposing your dear self to danger is laudable if that were so great as to exceed that of Preists in England But are Preists so safe in England Ministers in such danger at Brussels Did you blush or smile when you sayd printed this at this time of day Had you sayd it was vnsafe at Brussels it myght haue past your Prudence commended but J doubt whether that comparison was Prudent Look towards Tyburne or Tower-Hill westminister Hall or old Bayly then tell me whether it is so safe in England for Preists c. Then cast your eye back on Brussels see whether in any corner of the town you discover such Tragical scenes J grant that some nay many of the Ch. of Eng. Are so moderate as not to prosecute a Preist though known to be such J beleiue you to be of the number Yet this is no security for a Preist when knowen when any one more Zealous or malicious may cause him to be apprehended brought to the Barr where he shall vnavoydably be condemned And what greater danger can hang over a minister in Madrid or Rome it self before the face of an Inquisitor God will in due time discover the Authours of such crueltys as at certain Periods of time are exercised vpon Preists guilty of no crime vnlesse Preisthood be one I know the cheife Actors in the late Tragedy were as little freinds to the Hierarchy of the Ch. of Eng. to Monarchy too as to that of Rome that those Cricumcellions or Cannibals intended to breakfast on vs dine on the Protestant Clergy sup on the Royal Family Yet those who loue the cause do not hate the effect those who concurred to the making oppose the repealing of the penal sanguinary laws will not break their harts with greife to se them at least some times executed But you cheered vp having F. Darcy's hand word for your security And now begins the dispute SECTION III. 1. Little good from Conference 2. Catholicks ready to comply in what they can 3. Communion of Infants how beleived anciently 1. D Morley sayd There could little fruit be expected from a Conference when one side is resolved to remit nothing 2. F. Darcy Answered they would not be so stiffe in all points for the Church myght alter some
be proved to be vniversal or in vse in the Roman Church Some think the Pelagians introduced that custome that S. Austin proues thence the necessity of Baptism argumento ad hominem By a reason drawn from their own sentiments The same I say of Binius S. Austin for both speake of the practice which they found without citing any publick decree for indeed there was none ever made even by Innocent I. whom you cite For the place you mean is in his answer to a letter written to him by the Fathers of the Council of Milevis in Africa which had condemned Pelagius Celestius who taught there was no need of the grace of God to keep the commandments that children myght be saved without Baptism Innocent approves their decrees proves none can be saved without Baptism because none can be saved Without eating the Body drinking the Bloud of Christ And he addes Qui vitam ijs sine regeneratione defendunt videntur mihi ipsum baptismum velle cassare cùm praedicant hos habere quod in eos creditur nonnisi baptismate conferendum Those who hold they the children may be saved without being regenerated seeme to me to take away Baptism it self teaching that they haue without it what we beleiue is not giuen but by Baptism Thus he which words are cited by S. Austin l. 2. cont duas Ep. Pelag. c. 4. so what explicates one will serue the other both saying the same thing Where it is certain that he thinks a Participation of the Body Bloud of Christ necessary to salvation Now whether he meanes a real sacramental Participation by receiving the Sacrament or only a mystical or spiritual Participation which both you we beleiue is attained by the Sacrament of Baptism is the constant doctrine of the Church to this day seemes not so evident You say he meanes the first I say the second this is my reason He doth not speake of the participation by Communion or the Eucharist but of that by Baptism for he doth not say Cum Baptismate conferendum as if some thing different from Baptism administred with it were the medium of that Participation but Baptismate conferendum as if Baptism were the sole cause or meanes of that Participation Now the participation of Christ's body by Baptism is mystical not sacramental Therefore he speakes of the mystical Participation of Christ's Body averres that to be necessary to salvation Which both you I both Protestants Papists do admit for tru Catholick doctrine How can you then hence inferre that the Church hath erred may erre This is my first answer A second is that he S. Austin speake of participation of the Body Bloud of Christ In voto in desire which all haue are bound to haue when they are baptized .... A third is that in decrees of Faith or doctrinal we make a great difference betwixt what is Ex professo directly treated discussed defined such other things as are only accidentally mentioned Infallibility in the later points is by vs esteemed a Priviledge reserved to the writers of Holy scripture not pretended to even by general councils we make likewise a great difference betwixt a decree a reason for making the decree on which it is grounded For example in the 7. general Council it is said that Angels may be painted because they haue bodys We think our selves oblidged to beleiue Angels may be painted but not that they haue Bodys for our Divines commonly teach the contrary Now to your objection J answer that Innocent mentions only accidentally that point of Infants Communion intends by it only to proue that Baptism is necessary to salvation So the real Communion is not held by vs a decree of Faith Thus I haue once again broken that weapon which you brandish a new althô you know it had been broken in Viscount Falkland's hand whence you took it SECTION IV. 1. No possibility of salvation in schisme 2. Protestants truly Schismaticks 3. Catholicks hold their salvation desperate 4. A paralel betwixt Protestants Donatists D. Morley The Iesuit sayd that doubless it was more prudent safe to venture a man's self in that Church where in all agree he may besaved than in one where in all Catholicks say a man cannot be saved The Doctor replyed it was rather the vsual saying than the setled jugdment of all Catholicks for F. knot says the case may be such that a Protestant dying such may be saved which is as much as Protestants grant to Papists And then it would out of this reason follow it were more safe to be of the Donatists perswasion than a Catholick for S. Austin granted that a Donatist could be saved where as the Donatists did affirm that who soever was not a Donatist could not besaved Revisor all the substance of what J will here say is contained in this syllongisme None out of the true Church of Christ a schismatick can be saved The Protestants are out of the tru Church of Christ or schismaticks Therefore they cannot be saved The first Proposition or Major that none can be saved out of the tru Church of Christ is so cleere in scripture in Fathers even in Hereticks themselues that all must see it who do not wilfully shut their eyes My first Proofe the Church is the Body of Christ. Colos. 1.24 For his Christ's Body which is the Church Vpon which words S. Austin discourses thus 1. lib. Cont. Epistolam Petiliani Donat. c. 2. Vnde manifestum est eum qui non est in membris Christi Christianam salutem habere non posse Membra vero Christi per vnitatis charitatem sibi copulantur per candem capiti suo cohaerent quod est Christus Iesus Hence it is evident that who is not part of Christ's body cannot attain to Christian salvation And those are in Christs body who are linked together to their head with the loue of vnion And in his 19. Chapter Ad salutem vitam aeternam nemo pervenit nisi qui habet caput Christum Habere autem caput Christum nemo poterit nisi qui in eius corpore fuerit quod est Ecclesia No man can be saved vnlesse Christ be his Head But Christ can be head to no man who is out of his Body which is the Church My 2. proofe Rom. 8.9 If any man haue not the spirit of Christ he is none of his S. Austin alluding to these words tract 27. in Ioan says Christi spiritus neminem animat qui non sit de corpore eius Christs spirit doth quicken none but such as are in his Body that is in the Church 3. Proofe It seemes the express words of Christ Ioan. 15.6 If a man abide not in me he is cast forth as a branch is withered men gather them cast them into the fire they are burnt This is the doom of such
are his lowest facultyes Just as if what the Apostle says is over my head you should say is vnder my feet But why doth not the Natural man receiue Faith Because It is foolishnesse vnto him And just such is Transubstantiation to you therefore is laught at by you the other reason is convincing He cannot receiue Faith Becaus it is spiritually discerned Are Senses spiritual facultyes can they Spiritually discern If not as certainly they cannot pull them off the throne on which you placed them of which they are vnworthy as being vncapable of discerning the thing in question which is of The spirit of God spiritual discerned only spiritually No lesse but rather more evident are the words of the same Apostle 2. Cor. 10.4 The weapons of our warfare says he are not carnal but myghty through God to the pulling down of strong holds casting down imaginations every hygh thing that exalteth it selfe against the knowledge of God bringing into captivity every Thought to the obedience of Christ .... do ye look on things after the outward appearance Thus your own Translation Which words decide the thing in question For first it is evident he speakes of the Doctrine he preacht which is Faith And in the first place he cleerely discards outward Senses from any share in this judgment The weapons of our warfare are not carnal now Senses are Carnal as is cleere 2. He rejects inward Senses Casting down all jmaginations 3. He teaches that our vnderstanding must also be subject Bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ Thus according to the Apostle all facultys of soul body spiritual carnal interiour exteriour must vayle bonnet to Faith which is termed Myghty through God The last question Do ye look on things according to their out ward appearance Is a conclusion of the foregoing discourse cuts all the nerves of the Doctors argument Which is totally grounded Vpon out ward appearance to carnal sense Let vs apply the Apostles meaning to our present purpose by some few questions What will you say that is on the Holy Altar Mr. Dr Answer Bread wine But why do you think it to be bread wine Answer wee looke on the out ward appearance judge of the thing after that You know sir that the Catholick Church all over the wor'd even Luther himself beleived it to be the Body Bloud of Christ with what weapons do you combat their opinion Answer The weapons we fyght with are Carnel they are the senses Now let vs propose such questions to a Catholick What do you beleiue that to be which is on the Altar Answer the tru Body Bloud of Christ But why do you beleiue it to be the Body Bloud of Christ Answer Because Christ says it is so the Church teaches me his words are so to be vnderstood Doth it appear to be the Body Bloud of Christ Answer no. But We look not on things after the out ward appearance when that is not conformable to the word of God delivered to vs by the Church With what weapons do you combat the contrary errour Answer The weapons we vse Are not carnal sense But myghty through God to destroy all jmaginations beate downe all thoughts which are raysed in vs in opposition to the divine revealed truth 3. If we consult Reason in this debate we shall see that Senses ought not to be admitted as judges it being absolutely impossible they should vnderstand the matter in question therefore cannot possibly pronounce sentence on ether side For what is the question What is the meaning of those words of our Blessed saviour This is my Body this is my Bloud for I suppose your jmpiety is not arrived to that heygth as to deny his words to be tru or say you would not beleiue any thing to be what he plainly vndeniably says it is That is you do not beleiue that God doth or can tell a Lye Otherwise farewell all Faith we must make vse of other Mediums to deale with you Our dispute then being about the sense of those words of Christ J proue that our senses cannot judg in it with this argument Senses cannot judg of things which are not their proper objects But such are the things in debate in this controversy Therefore senses cannot judg of these things The major or first Proposition is cleere For the eye cannot judg of a found because it is not its proper object Nor the eare of a colour for the same reason The same of all other senses Wherefore no sense can judg of any thing that is not its proper object The minor or second proposition viz things in debate here are not the proper object of Senses is also selfe evident For the proper meaning or signification of words is the proper object of no sense But the matter here in debate is the proper meaning or signification of the words of Christ Therefore it is the proper object of no sense These Premisses are so evidently tru that J think it enough only to proue the first Proposition this I doe by induction for nether eye nor nose nor palate nor hand nor eare can see tast smel feale or heare the signification of words wherefore no sense can perceiue it The only doubt can be about Hearing by reason of the convexion betwixt the sound of an Articulate word which is the object of the eare the signification of it yet even here my Proposition is tru for the same articulate sound is insignificant to one who vnderstands it not sometimes signifyes different things to persons of different langages v. c. Lego to a Latinist signifyes I reade to a Grecian I speake to an English man nothing Yet the sound in the eare is the same to all these three Jndeed if it were not so by learning anew language our eares should be changed framed in a different manner to represent the new signification Which I suppose no body will say As to the other Proposition the minor that our dispute is about the signification of those words is as evident For our sentiment is grounded on the words being taken litterally yours vpon their being taken figuratively Both which are the severall significations One thing only occurres in answer to this viz that the litteral signification is so absurd that it cannot be admitted Answer this is sayd but not proved in du place these absurditys will be confidered J hope found to be no bsurditys Answer 2. this doth not satisfy my reason for no Absurdity can make any faculty judg of what it cannot know As no Absurdity can make me a competent judg of a composition in the Chinese language of which J am entirely ignorant Here I myght lay down my pen it already appearing that all you can alleadg from Senses can signify nothing seing they cannot depose of a thing they are totally strangers to you say nothing but
evident 1. Because the Apostles proposition Faith comes by Hearing is vniversal vnlimited to any time or place 2. God sent his Apostles Disciples to Preach the Ghospel without any expresse command to vse other signes or write bookes indeed most of those written were casual 3. The Apostles sent their successours on alike errant with alike Commission we find in S. Irenaeus that Faith was long preserved in some countryes without any written word 4. Faith by the Apostle called milke is still by Parents Nurses such persons instilled into the Tender minds of Infants even before they are able to reade And if they conceiue it ryghtly beleiue it strongly they haue tru divine Faith 5. The same of several Persons at men's estate who for Poverty or other employments cannot reade the scriptures 4. Scripture may seeme an exception from that general rule Faith by Hearing but it is not so Scripture it selfe being only an jmage of what is spoken therefore belongs to the same Sense that words do Hence S. Austiu l. 2. de Doct. Christ c. 4. Quia verberato aere statim transeunt verba nec diutius manent quam sonant instituta sunt per litteras signa verborum ita voces ostenduntur non per seipsas sed per signa quaedam sua By reason that after a little motion of ayre the voice presently vanishs is assoone lost as the sound is past Letters were invented as signes of words by which meanes words are shewed not by themselues but by their signes Thus S. Austin Which was elegautly exprest by a French Poet Brebeuf en sa Pharsale C'est de là que nous vient cet art ingenieux De peindre la parole de parler aux yeux Et par les traits divers des figures tracées Donner de la couleur du corps aux pensées Hence that ingenious art did first arise Of painting words speaking to our eyes Where with the pen doth by mysterious draught Both colour giue Body to a thought J doe not cite this as building my assertion vpon it but as a neate expression of what I meane The ground on which J rely is scripture whereof a greate part is evidently a description of speeches For 1. a greate part of the Ghospel is a Relation of our saviours Admonitions Sermons Reprehensions Justructions c. 2. The Acts of the Apostles containe their speeches 3. the Apocalypse is a representation of visions Prophecyes revealed to S Iohn 4. S. Luke in his preface declares that he writes what he had Heard 5. S. Mark writ what S. Peter preacht Marcus Discipulus Interpres Petri says S. Hierome juxta quod Petrum referentem audierat rogatus Romae a Fratribus breve scripsit Evangelium Mark the Disciple Interpreter of Peter at the request of the Brethren in Rome writ in a short Ghospel what he had heard Peter preach My last cheifest proofe is from the words of Abraham to the glutton Luck 16.29 They thy Brothers haue moyses the Prophets let them heare them Et verse 31. If they heare not Moyses the Prophets nether will they be perswaded though one rise from the dead Here those are sayd to haue Moses the Prophets who haue their writings 2. Moses the Prophets are sayd to Speake in their writings seing others are sayd to Heare them Hence I conclude that the jnstruction we receiue from Scripture it selfe is reduced to Hearing SECTION IX 1. All Senses never contrary to Faith 2. Hearing is to correct the other senses 3. A conclusion of this digression THe two first points are cheifely aimed at in all this Preface will serue to cleere the mist which Humane Reason casts before our eyes that we may not discerne Truth from falshood but may embrace a Cloud for Iuno leaue the substance for a shaddow Thô some Senses may yet all can never be contrary to Faith this is my first conclusion The reason is Faith must be conveyghed into our mind by some Sense wherefore that Sense at least is not contrary to Faith Which is evident by the ordinary course of Providence teaching vs by Hearing Preachers Missions c. Of which S. Paul Rom. 10. Now if God doth at any time by particular inspiration instruct some that is nothing against this Truth seing those thoughes so inspired are conformable to what others Heare by consequence not contrary to all Senses 2. My second Conclusion is in matter of Faith Hearing is preferred before all other Senses The 1. reason is because Hearing is more capable of conveyghing revealed Truths than any other Sense nay than all the rest together it having more significant signes then all the rest together as is evident by the multitude of significant words The second reason is because God doth actually vse Hearing no other Sense to communicate to vs his Faith For our whole Duty to God our neyghbour what we are bound to beleiue practice is all delivered ether by living words in Catechisms Sermons or in Bookes by dead representations of those living words Wherefore when senses interfere in their depositions concerning any object of Faith we must recurre to Hearing adhere to that For example Other Senses represent Christ to vs as an ordinary man Hearing says he is The only begotten son of God full of grace Truth we must beleiue this silence the rest The rest say water only washes from dirt the surface of the Body this says it purges the soul from the staine of sin we must beleiue this Why then should not this rule acknowledged by the Zuinglians in other things to be good hold in the Blessed Eucharist So that althô the tast tell vs it is bread wine we may subscribe to our Hearing with S. Cyril nay with the whole Church say It is the Body Bloud of Christ But what if Reason takes the part of the other Senses Answer I will say still we must stick however to Hearing For example Reason says the same substance cannot be One three Hearing says the same Divine substance is one in nature three in Persons Our duty is to beleiue God to be so to silence all reasons to the contrary This is what S. Paul vnderstood by Pulling downe imaginations every thought contrary to his Doctrine bringing vnderstandings vnder the subjection of Christ I haue here delivered as by a digression such grounds as if well vsed will be sufficient to resist all the Attacks of God his spousés enemys Yet they are soe cleere that J think few can deny them without rejecting Christianity in some very material points Yet I haue not wandred in this digression out of the syght of my learned freind D. Morley if he retaines his treatise in his company in passing over these few sections he will easily obserue there is nothing but which relates to it J now returne to him
say you But the Church it selfe also must needes be vselesse because the Ch. as well the scripture teaches vs by no other medium But that of our senses Here is matter indeed for lamentation tho you shew no greate signe of real greife But God be praysed the Church is not brought so low as to want your helpe Her Authority is not prejudiced by such as with Humility receiue her Doctrine but by such as with Pride reject it by Protestants who impugne the sense she received with the words from her spouse his faithfull interpreters the Apostles D. M. p. 5. If I be not certaine that what I see feele tast smell to be bread wine is bread wine but something else by the same reason I cannot be certain that these words this is my body whither I see them written or heare them spoken be indeed those words not some other words of a different or contrary signification Revisor You still go on in a false supposition that we Cartesian like deny all credit to Senses This is absolutely false for we giue credit to our Senses thô not so greate as to Eternal Truth Nether do we doubt of that thing being bread wine which to Senses seemes such except only when God himself tells vs It is his Body Here then is our case A thing is placed on an Altar that Lookes feeles tasts smells like Breade What is that thing God tells me in the Eare It is his Body our Senses tell me It is Bread Whither of these depositions shall I beleiue That of Senses say you that of God says the Church seing it is not impossible our Senses should be mistaken but it is absolntely impossible that God should tell Alye But say you If we doubt of those sensations of bread we may doubt of those of the words whither we reade or heare them Answer Till you shall shew me by an Authority greater then that of God himself those words are something else J will beleiue them to be those words As I beleiue that to be Bread which seemes such vnlesse where God tells me the contrary Do J passe thorough a market by a Bakers shop come into adining toome we giue as full credit to our Senses as you judg that to be Bread which seemes Bread only on the Altar after Consecration we say it is the Body of Christ because Christ says it is such the Church always vnderstood those words as we doe Then you learnedly discourse of Outward signes inward invisible grace Of the Trumpet its sounding of men preparing to battle God blesse vs of Dreames visions jnspirations what not From which if you can conclude any thing against vs J will beare your chaines These rambling phancys are extraordinary in one of your age I wish you to take heede your pen goe not faster than your head as it seemes to doe when you cite those words as of S. Austin Quod non lego non credo what I read not I beleiue not which make against you for We read what we beleiue that it is Christ's Body but we do not read It is not Christ's Body nor It is Bread which is what you beleiue D. M. p. 7. If there be a certainty in the sense of Hearing there must be in that of seing Revisor I admit an equal certainty in both taken by themselues yet Hearing when announcing what God says surpasses Syght all the rest for we are to strike to Faith God's Truth not to any else D. M. p. 8. 9. If there be no certainty of Senses in one thing there is none in any thing vnlesse I know certainly what that one thing is nothing can secure me vnlesse Christ in expresse words tell vs Beleiue your Senses in all things else but only in the Sacrament Revisor Whence so greate a concerne for the Authority of Senses so little for that of the Church All is vndone if the Senses be corrected by the expresse words of Christ whome they contradict no hurt done thô the Church be charged with errour even when she follows the words of Christ yet by the Church we receiue the word of God its meaning too Now why is an errour charged on Senses of so pernicious a nature as to destroy all their credit vnlesse Christ's expresse words are produced to vouch it in all other things one nay many errours charged on the Church by which we receiue Faith no hurt done Js not Faith handed to vs by the Church of as greate consequence as that little scantling of Knowledge which we receiue from our Senses But why is an errour of Senses so fatal to their credit Haue they never deceived you or at least some others of your acquaintance do you therefore renounce them Haue not some men their eyes only representing a greene medow fallen into a quack-mire do you for that reason either pull out your eyes as vselesse or shut them as deceivable when you walke Are these Arguments of such strength as to beate downe the expresse words of Christ Doctrine of the whole Church what times do we liue in to what passe is Christianity brought when a Doctor of Divinity a pretended Bishop fyghts with such straws against Christ's words Faith I Yet because old age is apprehensiue J will giue you a remedy against this groundlesse Feare You require an exception in expresse words J will giue you one at least Aequivalentèr It is a general Rule Exceptio in non exceptis firmat regulam When an exception is made from a Rule all things not exprest in the exception remaine vnder the Rule Wherefore Christ having excepted only the Blessed Sacrament from the Deposition of Senses he left all other things subject to them So sir althô you hold with vs Transubstantiation when you see a floore you may walke on it without fearing a precipice when you see a Chaire you may confidently sit downe without Fearing it should proue a Cobweb Wherefore Cheere vp deare sir you may be secure thô Christ be beleived SECTION XI OF MIRACLES 1. Whither all Miracles visible 2. What Miracles are 3. The final cause of Miraçles 4. Accidents Changeable the substance remaining 5. Dr. M.'s Paradoxes 1. D. M. p. 9. T is to little purpose to tell vs that this conversion of Bread into Flesh wine into Bloud is miraculous therefore so monstrous as to be a contradiction to Sense Miracles are Appellations to Sense the end of them is by the evidence of our Sense to convince our Vnderstanding of some thing which otherwise we would not or could not haue beleived Revisor You seeme resolved to prevent our retreate by stopping all ways imaginable to it yet your main industry is to misse not to hit that which is most obvious which I haue already taken expect you or any who takes vp the Cudgelles for you in it Yet I will in short review what
an Ismael in Abraham's family an Esau in Isaacs a Ruben in Iacob's an Absalom in David's an Adam in the terrestrial Paradice a Lucifer in the Celestial All which bad men did nether excuse a separation from the Church in which they lived nor prejudice the rest who did not approue or abette the sins as the Church hath long since declared against the Donatists We professe we beleiue the Sanctity of the Catholick Church which consists in her Doctrine her Laws her Rites many of her children not all And it is the goodnesse of God to make vs partakers of all the good workes which any one doth but not of the bad For we beleiue a Communion of Saints not of sinners of merits not of offenses So the guilt of sin is confined to the person sinning but the merits of vertuous actions spreades to all the faithfull who are in the state of grace Wherefore we ought not to think the worse of the Church for any fault committed by any of her children seing she nether teaches nor commands nor approues it But the Protestant Church cannot so easily cleare her selfe from such spots as the sins of her children leaue her Doctrine of the impossibility of God's Commandments that we are nether the better for good nor the worse for bad actions which are nether meritorious nor demeritorious in the praedestinate of Evangelical liberty the roote of all Sedition Rebellion in Church State c. These I say the like having beene taught by same of her children never condemned by her make her answearable for all sorts of sins which are but the natural sequels of those Premisses effects of those causes fruits of that tree which the first Protestants planted their followers water cherish In Catholicks a bad life is contrary to Catholick Doctrine laws in Protestants it is a natural sequel of both J do not say this to excuse any fault with reason charged vpon the persons mentioned except the gun powder plotters or to forestall my Readers judgment in favour of the Church if those accused should be really found guilty There is no cause for such an Apology The faults alleadged against Mr. Cressey are at the worst indiscreete expressions of edjous things which he thought tru D. M. thinks not so And her R. H. did shew in effect that no Wordly consideration should moue her to professe a Religion of which in her conscience she was not Of which more hereafter Who but Atheists Libertins can blame this Which is only a preferring Heaven to Earth Eternity to time the soul to the body God to man the Peace of a good conscience before the reproach of some bad men Those who think all Religions indifferent that the King is to determine which we are to follow the Hobbians may blame this but not a Disciple of Christ his Apostles SECTION XVII Mr. Cressey excused 1. Whither the Kingdome may be sayd to haue taken the Covenant 2. Whither the K. was the only sufferer for his Religion 3. Many of the Protestant Clergy renounc't their Dignityes 4. Whither the Clergy suffred for their Loyalty or their Religion 5. Of the Actings of the English Protestant Clergy in the troubles 1. D. M. p. 7. It is false injurious to say that the Presbiterians did constrain the whole kingdome to forswear their Religion for it must be the whole Kingdomes taking not the Presbiterians imposing generally of the Covenant that must proue this assertion Revisor You take Mr. Cressey's words in a very strict sense that you may accuse them condemne him Yet I think in good Phylosophy divinity too Propositions In materiâ contingenti althô they seeme Vniversal are not such but only Indefinite For example Philip. 2.21 All seeke their owne not the things which are of Iesus-Christ T it 1.12 The Cretans are always lyars evil Beasts slow bellyes These Propositions are as to their forme Vniversal the first with a distributiue particle to Persons All the second with alike particle of time Always Yet nether are truly Vniversal not the first for nether S. Paul nor several of the Apostles then aliue Sought their owne In alike manner amongst the Cretans some were very good sincere vertuous men Such Propositions are frequent in common discourse v. c. All Spainards are Graue All French men civil All Italians cautious All young men rash All women talkatiue All old men morose c. Which are taken as tru because commonly they are so taken Indefinitè But taken as Vniversals they are false seing several instances can be brought in which they are not tru greate warinesse is necessary in applying any one of them to particulars This is my first Answer Another is that the Kingdome by an ordinary figure is taken for the governing part of it so what is decreed by that may be sayd to be decreed by the Kingdome Which is tru thô some of this part oppose it Thus a Peace or Truce is sayd to be made by the Republick Of Venice v. c. when the Senate decrees it or when the major part of Senators resolue it althô some Senators oppose it are for war Livy Vbi semel decretum erit omnibus id etiam quibus ante displicuerat pro bono atque vtili foedere erit defendendum Plinius l. 6. Epist 13. Quod pluribus placuit omnibus tenendum Dionisius Halicarnassaeus Parendum his quae pars maior censuerit Even those who dislike a decree before it be made are bound to approue it after it is made Provided it containe nothing against Conscience Indeed we see in all Assemblyes where things are carryed by plurality of votes all even the NOES are bound to approue the order vnlesse in some cases when they are admitted to a Protestation Now the major part of the then Gouvernours of the Nation or Kingdome decreed the taking of the Covenant the major more conspicuous part of the subjects may be sayd to haue admitted that decree althô very many considerable both for number quality by some industry shifted off the taking of it so the Kingdome may in some sort be sayd To impose the Covenant also To take it Thus we say that England changed its Religion such a yeare thô a very greate number at that time did not admit of any change And we may say that the Oaths are imposed vpon taken by the Kingdome thô several refuse them Were not Mr. Cressey a Papist I beleiue either of these answers would suffice 2. D. M. p. 8. His second crime is his saying The King was almost the only man who remained so constant to his Religion as to hazard for it the losse of his estate life too This is false say you for many thousands did the same Revisor In the ruin of others there was a complicancy of causes which procured it loyalty to their King hatred to their persons for fyghting against them their
destructiue to Salvation It is vndeniable that Schismaticks remaming such cannot besaved They shall not haue God for their father who haue not the Church for their mother S. Cyprian And you are in a Schisme I myght alleadge several other things destructiue to Salvation but this one is enough D. M. p. 17. 18. The Papists say there is no salvation out of their Church The Donatists sayd so too And was it not for that saying so that they were pronounced Hereticks Revisor Here are three grosse mistakes of which I haue spoken sec 4. The 1. that the donatists sayd there was no salvation out of their Church Their grande errour was that the Church was lost by communicating with a sinner All their other errours were but sequels of this viz that there was no Church but theirs the rest of the Christians communicating with Cecilianus who had delivered vp the holy bookes 2. That there was no valid Baptisme but in their Communion 3. That the son was lesser than the father the Holy ghost than the son See S. Austin l. de Hereticis ad Quod vult Deum § 69. Epi. Baronij ad annu Dom. 321. n. 4. For these errours the donatists were tru Herticks But for saying that Heresy destroys salvation they could not be Hereticks vnlesse you will make S. Athanasius one who says in his creede Quam fidem nisi quisque integram inviolatamque servaverit absque dubio in aeternum peribit No hopes of salvation where any point of Faith is denyed The 2. That they were pronounced Hereticks for saying so They were pronounced Hereticks for saying other things as J haue shewne The 3. that they were held for Hereticks The Catholick Church held them at first for Scismaticks such they were but not for Hereticks The Catholicks exacted nothing of them but that they should joine Communion with them they offred to that intent that in those cittyes which had two Bishops one of each Communion the surviver which soever it was should governe alone the Diocese that by that meanes the Schisme myght be extinguisht A condition never offred to any Heretick or Hereticks what soever At last indeed they turned tru Hereticks as I sayd on another score D. M. p. 19. For you to conclude in favour of Popery without hearing Protestants is that which cannot be done either in Equity or Conscience Rev. She did not conclude for one side without hearing the other She had heard Protestants from her jnfancy had weyghed maturely what they could say for themselues or against Popery It is wonderfull that a short Conference with some Papist it could be no more if there were so much should be of force sufficient to roote vp all those prejudices against God's Church which you so carefull instill to those vnder your conduct althô they had bin confirmed by long practice reiterated Acts contrary to the Catholick Faith all these backed with almost the greatest temporal interest in the world for on the one side she saw honour Riches the probable expectation of our Imperial crowne on the other Reproaches Calumnyes disgrace probably a tragical End for such had been the fate of her Father-in-law indeed what misery or vnjustice is so evident so greate as a Papist may not feare from a Tru Protestant But Magna veritas praevalet Truth seconded by God's interiour grace assisted by her generous resolution never to admit the whole world into consideration when her soul was concerned overcame all those difficultyes With this Truly Heroical resolution you acquaint vs. For you say to her D. M. p. 21. You your selfe haue told me more then once even since this false report hath beene raysed of you that you would not do any thing whereby you myght seeme to be of a Church or Religion which you are not of indeed no not for any wordly consideration whatsoever And p. 22. you are wont to say that no wordly either Advantage or Prejudice is to be considered when the gaining of the One or the avoyding of the Other comes into competition with the hazarding or securing of our spiritual everlasting jnterest of our souls consequently that if you were convinced there were no Salvation to be had but in the Church of Rome no consideration either of Losse or of Danger here in this world you myght incur by it should keepe you from it Rev. Out of these truly Christian Resolutions often declared to you I gather many material points either vnknowne before or not sufficiently knowne 1. That her R. H. was really enclined to be a Catholick So that Report was grounded 2. That you knew this inclination 3. That you endeavoured to divert her from it alleadging cheifly temporal interest to divert her from becoming a Papist This J gather out of those declarations which she so often made out of this very letter which containes little if any thing at all else 4. That either you which I do not beleiue or some other Protestant advised her to dissemble in matter of Religion professe her self a Protestant thô she were not so What other occasion could she haue to make that declaration that She would not do any thing to seeme to be of a Church of which she was not for all the world Lastly that she was too generous to be fryghted with such Bug beares When her soul lay at stake knowing full well it Would availe her nothing to gaine the whole world if she lost that Mar. 8.36 5. Thus this letter confirmes what was sayd but not commonly beleived of the Religion in which her R. H. dyed that she truly was a Catholick or as you call vs a Papist for you owne her inclination that way you had little to alleadge to divert her from it but temporal interest which was as little able to retaine her as a cobweb to hold a Lion so it is impossible to misse in the conjecture of the event But what judgment will the world make of your Church out of this letter The concerne you writ for was as greate almost as could occurre the retaining within your Communion a person as considerable almost as any whatsoever a person worthily esteemed as greate for her qualifications of mind as to vertu vnderstanding as for her dignity in the Kingdome a person who was a greate ornament to your Church nay a Piller of it So no doubt but all industry was vsed to prevent her leaving you that whatsoever your Art your wit learning could doe was employed to that intent we may guesse that as the cause was common so the concurrence was therefore we may conjecture that all the nerues of the Protestant Church joined to giue this Blow Yet how weake how inconsiderable is it And is then your Glorious Apostolical reformed Church come to this Haue you no motiues to commend her Communion retaine pious souls in it but Temporal will these weygh downe in the scales