they being so plaine pregnant that a cheefe aduersarie was forced to confesse that ther is frequent mention in the ancient writers treaking of the Eucharist of the wordes sacrifice oblation hoaste victim to which may be added that the same Fathers in like manner vse the wordes altar Preist verie commonly all which ar so fit for the purpose of signifiing a true proper sacrifice that no writer either diuine or profane could euer inuent other more significant apte as it vndoubtedly appeares for that their writings manifest that they neuer vsed anie other wordes or phrases when they treated of the nature vse of a proper sacrifice since this I say is so apparently true I ernestly request of my reader to consider how voyde not onely of reason but also of common sense the sectaries of this our present age may iustely be iudged how shamelesly obstinate they be who denie that to be a true proper sacrifice which is as plainely affirmed to be such both by scripture it selfe the true Interpreters ther of as in wordes phrases they possible could declare to humane sense vnderstanding And with this I conclude the proofe of the maior of my sixt last argument framed directly against the English Relion hence I passe to the second parte of my treatise in which I will positiuely demonstrate by six other affirmatiue arguments the truth of the Roman faith nowe professed in the greater parte of the Christian world framing compounding my silogismes of the contradictorie propositions to those which I haue vsed before for the confutation of the English faith in this insuing manner THE SECOND PARTE OF THE CONVICTION CONtaining the defensiue arguments Adhuc excellentiorem viam vobis demonstro 1. Cor. 12.31 ALTHO ' in realitie rigor of truth especially for the more learned sorte of people ther is no necessitie of other proofe of the truth of the Roman Catholike faith then the disproofe which I haue alreadie made of the English Religion in regarde that ther being onely their Religion ours here in question theirs being false as I haue plainely demonstrated ours must by vnauoy dable consequence be true supposing two contradictories cannot be both true in one and the same matter or subiect neuerthelesse for greater satisfaction of the reader more cleare conuincement of the truth I will breefely proceed by positiue affirmatiue arguments in defence of the Roman faith Religion THE HRST PRINCIPAL ARGVMENT I Propounde my first sylogisme in this forme manner That onely Religion is true which is truely Catholike But the Roman Religion onely is truly Catholike Therefore the Roman Religion is the onely true Religion The Maior needs no proofe as being graunted by our aduersaries being once admitted with the Minor the other doth thence necessarily follow according to the rules of Logike which teaches that the premisses being true truely disposed the consequence cannot faile The Minor which our Antagonists denye I prone because the Roman Religion onely hath all the conditions required to true Cathoâ—â—â—â—â—â—e that is it hath vniuersalitie of matter or obiect of faith it hath vniuersallitie of time place persons that professe it also it hath vniuersallitie of the rule or reason which directs the professors in the confession exercise of their faith with all it hath vnitie in the same And first that the Roman Religion hath vniuersallitie in matter it is most manifest for that the aduersaries them selues can not denye but that it conprehendeth by faith beleeueth not onely all that is contained in the scriptures but also what soeuer els is proposed by their Church as matter of faith comprehended either in the written worde of God or diuine traditions which are the vnwritten worde of God which is the most large compleit vniuersallitie of faith that can be imagined to the latitude of which the obiect or matter of the English faith comes not neare as being by them limited to the bare scriptures onely As likewise because they denie points which the Roman Church maintaines for matters of faith As ar Purgatorie prayer to saincts c. Secondly That the Roman Religion hath vniuersallitie in the rule or reason which guideth the professors of it in their true beleefe it is also euident in regarde they neither beleeue nor refuse â—o beleeue anie thing as matter of faith for anie other immediate motiue or cause then for that it is proposed vnto them by the infallible authoritie of their Church to be beleeued or not to be beleeued as the worde of God which is the prime formall obiect of their faith which generallitie or vniuersalitie of rule is so great solid that it is inpossible to imagin anie more ample perfect in that nature Thirdly This most constant vnuariable vniuersallitie of the totall rule of faith as it is but one onely in it selfe so doth one onely agreeable vniforme consent of faith necessarily flowe issue out of it as frome a most cleare fountaine which is vnitie in the same faith among all euerie one of the professors of it supposing that according to true Philosophie where the formall obiect is one the actions tho' neuerso manie must of necessitie be of one the same species or nature that which in supernaturall faith is yet more certaine apparent by reason the obiect of it is exceedingly more vniforme vnuariable then anie naturall obiect is Fourthly Vniuersallitie of tyme place persons is so manifestly founde in the Roman Religion that the aduersaries them selues confesse that ther hath ben euer a visible Roman Religion in the world from the tyme of the Apostles euen to this present day which yet if they were so impudent as to denie all histories all writings all acts monuncents euen the verie stones them selues in manie places would quite conuince confounde them Onely one exception or euasion they haue to wit by alledgeing that altho' the Roman Church for the space of the fiue hundreth first yeares was a true Church yea the mother Church of all the rest of the particular Christian Churches Praesatmon as great King Iames doth ingenuously confesse yet say they hath it since fayled in faith of the Church of Christ is turned in to the seat of Antichrist viz when Phocas the Emperour gaue vnto Boniface the third Pope of that name the title of vniuersall Bishop This therefore is our aduersaries common allegation for proofe of the supposed defection of the Roman Church in matters of faith but so feeble friuolous false that both they themselues if they were not verie bleareyed all others might as it were in a miroir or perspectiue glasse clearely discouer this by the viewe of the successe of times to be but false colors painting whereby to limme their owne inexcusable defection from that faith which they founde vniuersallie established in the Christian world when their first
vniuersalitie of â—atter but also perpetuall continuation of time supposing it was vnnecessarie for Christ to haue promised his contiuual assistance to his Apostles except the Religion which he deliuered vnto them had ben necessarily to be perpetuallie preached in all times without interruption euen till the day of Iudgement in which respect it implyes that relation of vniâ—ersalitie which my former argument conâ—udes And to this I ioyne Secondlie that the other â—rte of the maintainers of the English faith â—ho enterprise the defence of the visibilitie of there Religion in all ages are yet farther out â—f square then the other In regarde by this â—â—eanes they enter in to a taske which as the â—ustration of their tryall in that particular â—ath alreadie giuen experience they will neâ—er be able to performe By all which it is euidentlie appeares that the English Religion hath no such relation or respect vnto all future times intrinsecallie included in it obiect or matter or if anie reference it had it was of such temporarie smale continuance that it quite lost it by the way in all that vaste space of time which passed betweene the Popedome of sainct Gregorie the Apostacie of Martin Luther Thirdly I yet farther adde that the defenders of the English faith assume false abuse their hearers when they so commonly affirme that their Religion is the same which was taught preached by Christ his Apostles which I proue because it doth not indeed agree in all particulars with the obiect matter of the faith doctrine which Christ his Apostles published to the world as manifestly appeares by comparing some seuerall points of them both conferring the one with the other For where can the nouelistis finde either in the scripture Fathers or authenticall historie that Christ his Apostles taught that those onely bookes of scripture ar Canonicall which the Church of England holdes for such or that Christians ar iustified by that faith onely by which they beleeue their sinnes are remitted the iustice of Christ applyed vnto them by the faith same that euerie one in particular is bounde so to beleeue that this faith onely is necessarie sufficient to saluation or wher doe they finde that Christ his Apostles preached that the onely written worde is necessarie sufficient to saluation where doe they reade in scripture or Fathers that the visible Church planted by Christ increased by the preaching of the Apostles continuated by a disinterrupted succession of Pastors can erre in faith that ther is no Purgatorie nor place of satisfaction either in this world or the next for lesser sinnes or the paine due to greater or that in the Sacrament of Eucharist the bodie bloud of Christ at not contained receiued other wise then figuratiuely by faith a lone I knowe they can shewe vs none of these seuerall propositions either in scriptures or doctors of the Church or by anie authenticall historie or relation that the same haue ben taught by Christ or his Apostles I am assured that all they can performe in this case is to produce certaine textes of scripture which to the ignorant sorte of people may seeme to haue resemblance with those their positions but none soe plaine that without detortion of either sense or wordes or both or without their owne fallatious illations consequences can possible containe anie such doctrine For example for their solifidian iustification or their iustification by faith onely they alledge diuers passages out of the epistles of S. Paule as that man is not iustified by the workes of the lawe but by faith that faith is reputed to iustice yet none of those shewe that faith onely iustifies much lesse doe they mention or insinuate that peculiar faith of remission of their sinnes by which the professors of the English Religion beleeue they ar iustified that which is euidently convinced by the tenor of the texts then selues in which neither of the partes of the former position is contained but added by the expesitions glosses of those who violently drawe the scripturs to their peruerse purpose And the like practice of the Nouellists may easily be discouered to be vsed in the rest of the seuerall propositions aboue rehearsed in Bellarmin other Catholike Controuertists who professedly confute the newe doctrine of the sectaries of this present age to whom I remit the reader for more exact discussion of the same supposing this place is vncapable of more large proceeding And hence it appeares that the professors of the English faith must needes confesse that according to the premisses here breefely declared confirmed the matter obiect of their Religion doth not agree with that doctrine which Christ his Apostles planted published which is the Minor proposition of my second silogisme aboue propunded the verie same I here intend to conuince And now to the confirmation of the instance I responde I graunt the multitude of beleeuers doth not cause formally constitute vniuersallitie in theobiect of Religion neuerthelesse if comparing one Religion wit an other it is discouered to be apparently certaine that the one hath euer had a greater multitude of professors in all tymes places since the first fondation of the true faith then the other yea that the one hath had a greater number of faithfull persons for manie ages together when as the one had none at all In this case I say it is manifest that the multitude of beleeuers doth euidently argue the Religion so beleeued professed to be no other but that same Religion which was first founded by Christ our Sauior with his promisse of perpetuall visibilitie cantinuation with multiplicitie of faithfull people consequently that it onely hath vniuersallitie in matter obiect that on the contrarie the other Religion which can shew no such multitude of professors but is notoriously defectiue in this particular hath not anie vniuersallitie at all in the seuerall points of doctrine which it teacheth them to beleeue And now this may suffice to demonstrate that ther is no vniuersallitie to be founde in the obiect or matter of the English ReligioÌ„ The second kinde of vniuersallitie of Religion is in tyme which I proue not to be had in the English Religion in the forme following That Religion wantes true vniuersallitie of tyme which hath not ben visibly extant in all tymes since the true Religion was first founded But the Religion of England hath not ben visibly extant in all tymes since the first foundation of true Religion Therfore the Religion of England wantes true vniuersallitie of time The maior is most certaine maintained by many of the professors of the English faith if not by all Yet because they are not wholely vnited in this point as farre as I can perceiue by their doctrine because of those whoe maintaine the visibilitie of the Church fewe or none of them graunt that the Church
apparent that the English Religion hath no such attribute consequentlie that it is defectiue in that nature Wherefore hence I passe to the last gender or kynde of vniuersallitie which is that of the generall rule of faith of which there be two sortes the one is nothing els but the word of God as it is contained in the scriptures or diuine Apostolicall traditions The other rule is the visible Church by whose authoritie we come to knowe certainely infallibly the true sense of the worde of God all those things which his diuine maiestie hath reuailed as matter of faith to be beleeued by all sortes of people or otherwise necessarie to saluation Tract 1. Suarez de fide disp ◠sec 2. fine And of these two rules which some diuide in to three or more thou ' in my opinion not so properlie conuenientlie the second which is the authoritie of the Church is commonlie called in the schooles regula proponens that is a rule or way by which the prime reuailing veritie or diuine authoritie which is the formall obiect foundation of supernaturall faith is immediatelie applied vnto beleeuers And altho' if indeed the worde of God were so cleare that euerie one by reading the wordes of scripture or Apostolicall traditions as they are sett downe in the Councels or other recordes of the Church could not but vnderstand them in a true vniforme sense the first of those two rules might suffice alone yet because the scriptures are obscure difficult in their vnderstanding as both themselues experience testifie also because out of the imperfection of nature mens iudgements often times disagree in matters of doctrine practice therefore besides that speachlesse rule I meane in decision of matters of controuersie there was necessarie another liuing vocall rule by which the true meaning of the first prime rule which is the worde of God might so infallibly be declared vnto thē as all doubts scruples excluded their mindes consciences might safely rest in euerie point of faith by it proposed without anie further question or tergiuersation Now to come to the purpose in that first foundation of faith which is the authoritie of God as he reuaileth matters to his Church without which true faith cannot stand the defenders of the English Religion agree with the Romanists as also they agree with them in the first of the two rules at the least so farre as concernes this controuersie that is they hould Gods worde to be a rule of faith as the Roman Catholikes hould But the difference is in that our aduersaries will needs haue the worde of God to be the scripture onelie that interpreted by the spirit of euerie priuate person who reades it consequenter they hould this onelie for their rule proponent by which the diuine authoritie is applied to euerie point of faith in the beleeuers Whereas on the contrarie we Romanists beleeue vse the authority of the most vniuersall Church as the infallible applyer of Gods reuailing veritie vnto vs in all matters of faith manners And in this rule vpon which all certaintie of faith dependes quoad nos that is for as much as toucheth the beleeuers or credents I here proue that the English Religion wanteth this vniuersallitie as well as the rest of the obiect circumstances aboue discussed the which I demonstrate in this forme of argument That onelie proponent rule of faith his vniuersall which is one the same in all or at the least in the greater parte of beleeuers But that which the professors of the English Religion hould for their proponent rule of faith is not one the same in all or the greater parte of beleeuers Ergo that which the professors of the English Religion hould for their proponent rule of faith is not vniuersall The maior of this Sylogisme is euident by the definition of vniuersall which according to the doctrine of Philosophers is one in all if it be taken in rigor of Logike or as the Metaphisitians vse the worde Or at the least it signifies the greater parte if it be accepted onely in a morall sense as here I take it From which declaration of the word vniuersall is collected no lesse cleare conuincent proofe of the minor proposition which affirmeth that the proponent rule of faith in the professors of the Church of England is not one the same in all or yet in the greater parte of beleeuers That which I she we first because the priuate spirit of euerie professor of the English Religion which is the onelie immediate rule of saith they professe to follow in matters of faith as the verie sounde of the worde doth declare is peculiar to those that haue it not common to all therefore it cannot possible be generall or vniuersall That the spirit by which the professors of the English Religion interpret the worde of God is peculiar to some onelie not common to all such as exteriorly professe the faith of Christ it is manifest in that it neither passeth into other countries with cōformitie in all points of beleefe to all the rest of the pretended reformed Churches as appeareth in the controuersie of the real presence with the lutherans the inamissibilitie of grace In his booke directed to Christian Princes the point of Predestination free will with the Arminians nay nor yet doth it agree with the spirit of all the inhabitants of England it selfe as both King Iames doth plainely suppose wher he graunteth ther ar manie Puritans in his Realme besides Papists Protestants also experinental knowledge doth manifest the same it being certainely knowne generally confessed on all sides that those three sortes of people be not gouerned by one vniforme spirit but euerie one by their owne rule of faith the rule of the Romanists being one common among them selues in all places of the world but on the contrarie the rule of the Protestants Puritans being diuided seuerall both in their owne countrie out of it both among themselues also from the Catholikes wheresoeuer they be which diuision both from themselues others is an infallible argument that they haue no vniuersallitie in their propounding rule of saith That which yet more plainely appeares is confirmed by a worke lately published by a Protestant Doctor his name I doe not remembers who describes seueral sectes of Puritans or pure Caluinists all different both among themselues from the English Protestants Which diuersitie of sectes cannot stand without a different spirit or rule of faith Secondlie I proue the spirit of the professors of the English religion is not one the same in all or the greater parte of credents because it is not that spirit by which the visible Church hath ben in all times places persons successiuely gouerned without interruption ergo it is not an vniuersall spirit but onelie particular priuate The antecedent of this argument
vnto iustice Rom. 10. but with the mouth coufesion is made to saluation And howbeit I conceiue that the defenders of the inuisibilitie may instance say that profession of faith is not required to the essence of the true Church by consequence that it may subsist with internall faith onelie neuerthelesse I reioyne to this that althou ' I should grant profession of faith in metaphisical rigor to be no essentiall parte of the true Church yet is it so necessarilie annexed to the true Church as it neither is nor euer will be founde without professors neither is there anie authority either of scriptures or Fathers whereby it can be proued that anie such true Church euer were or euer will be coÌ„sisting of internall faith onelie But all those places which I haue aboue alledged both of the absolute visibilitie of the Church necessitie of profession of faith to saluation required by the ordinance commaundement of Christ manifestlie convince the contrarie Well may our aduersaries out of their accustomed temeritie spirit of contradiction against the Roman Church because they haue no other meanes to maintaine the subsistance of their owne new Congregation affirme teach that internall faith alone without profession makes a true Church yet no iudicious man will euer be persuaded but that position is assumed by them mierlie for the aduantage of their owne ill cause which without the vse of it or some such other of like nature cannot possible be defended in the controuersie whether the true Church be ours or theirs To omit that if no externall profession of faith be required to the true Church it is impossible to conceiue how anie man could euer come to knowe that such a Church as consisteth of internall faith onely was euer extant in the world any in parte of time since it was once planted established by our Sauior his Apostles And yet admit that it is not wholely impossible to conceiue the possibilitie of a true Church without the attribute of externall profession yet this is but a Metaphisicall case grounded onelie in the discourse of him who so conceiueth it by consequence it is not secure for anie man to venture his saluation vpon it as being either plainelie false in it selfe or at the least verie subiect to error fallibiliâ—itie but euerie prudent man ought rather to followe the tenor of speach of the scripture Fathers in the places before alledged particularlie the sentence of sainct Augustin in the â—1 chapter of his 19. booke against Faustus In nullum nomen religionis seu verum seu falsuuâ— coagulari homines possunt nisi aliquo signaculorum vel Sacramentorum visibilium consortio colligentur Where he affirmes that men cannot be congregated or assembled together vnder one name of Religion vnlesse they be tyed together with some consorte or socictie of visible signes or Sacraments In which wordes althou ' he makes no expresse mention of profession of faith as required to a Church yet doth he in effect affirme the same in other wordes teaching the communication of Sacraments to be necessarie to the constitution of a Church Which communication of Sacraments is profession of faith in one of the highest degrees as no man can denie And now hauing sufficientlie confuted the foresaid euasion of our aduersaties touching the visibilitie I will yet further adde positiue proofes of the perpetuitie of the visible Church First therefore I proue it by those places of scripture which affirme that the Church of Christ shall neuer perish as math the 16. Porta insert non praualibuut aduersunam The Portes of hell shall not preuaile against it Where we see the Prophecie promisse of our Sauior touching the perpetuitie of his Church is generall without limitation of time he speakes here of the same Church of which those places of scripture speach which declare it to be visible which I haue alreadie cited to that purpose for the aduersarie to limit these wordes to the inuisible Church as if Christ had meant that the gates of hell shall not preuaile against his inuisible Church onelie is a miere voluntarie explication of their owne inuention repugnant both to the text itselfe reason to the text in regarde that all the words circumstances of it demonstrate that Christ speakes of his visible Church either onelie or cheefelie as is the gouernement of the Church by sainct Peter which Church was to consist of men whose sinnes the same Peter had power promised him to binde loose that vpon earth all which particularâ— sounde nothing but things visible Now the foresaid explication of our aduerfaries is also contrarie to reason First for that supposing Christ planted such a Church vpon earth in which there were to be alwayes visible pastors preachers to administere the Sacraments Ephes 4. 1. Cor. 12. Act. 20. Luc. 12. teach publish the Gospell as the scriptures testifie And supposing he did not onelie commande vs to haue his faith but also to professe his name before men it is most absurde to imagin that he would or did not vse his prouidence in the conseruation of the same visible Church in all times occasions as well as the inuisible Church if anie such he had established in the world Secondlie the same exposition is against reason in respect that by that limitation of our Sauiors wordes which our aduersaries vse they giue vs to vnderstand that Christ promissed much but performed little or nothing of importance in this particular For if he assisted his Church so weakelie that for the space of manie yeares together the members of it were driuen to conceile their faith which neuerthelesse he himselfe obledgeth them to professe in all occasions surelie he did not onelie come farre shorte of his promisse but also in a certaine manner contradicted himselfe deceiued them And if for the gates of hell to haue so fare much vrged vexed the Church as to haue leâ— all the members thereof with a bare secret dissembling faith onely without anie professing or vse of Sacraments for the space of manie succeeding ages is not absolutelie to haue preuailed against it consequentlie that Christs wordes are falsified then certainelie neither had they ben falsified in case hell gates had so farre preuailed as quite to extinguish euen the professors themselues yea by an impossibilitie to haueleft faith alone hanging vpon the hedges for want of other subiect all which sequels being most absurde yet consequent to our aduersaries glosse vpon the wordes of scriptures aboue cited they euidentlie argue the falsitie of that their construction An other pregnant place for the perpetuall continuation of the visible Church is that of the 4. to the Ephesians where the Apostle saith that Christ appointed Pastors c. Ad consummationem Sanctorum donecâ— occurramus omnes in virum perfectum That is he appointed some Bishops other pastors others
true rule of faith is of it owne nature certaine common knowne to all beleeuers not priuate vnknowne certaine to him onely who hath it Otherwise no man can certainely infallibly knowe what it is except himselfe consequētly none but he onely can followe it wheras the true rule of faith is such as euerie one is bounde to knowe imbrace vpon perill of his saluation Secondly I proue that this English rule is false because it is subiect to error the maintainers of themselues confessing that no man can infallibly interpreter the scriptures so that his expositions euen in the greatest matters of faith be vndoubtedly true certaine in such sorte as he can infallibly persuade others that they are according to that sense which the holye Gost intended when he dictated them to the diuine writers For confirmation of which I further adde that our aduersaries commonly teach that not onely euerie particular priuate person may erre in faith but also the whole number of Bishops 〈◊〉 Prelates of their Church assembled in a Synod or Councell Out of which it is infallibly consequent that their rule of faith is not certaine either in it selfe or at the least not to others neither can others lawfully follow it for the same reason that it is vnknowne vnto them subiect to error deceipte Besides altho ' the professors of the English Religion should denie this same 1. Cor. 2. yet is it conuinced concluded by scripture it selfe saying for what man knowes the things of a man but the spirit of man which is in him Thirdly if the English rule of faith were not false to wit scriptures expounded by euerie member of the Church it would thence necessarily followe that ther were no need of prechers teachers in the Church of England to propose declare the worde of God vn the people because euerie particular man woman that can read the Bible can sufficiently vnderstand expounde it them selues at the least for as much as concernes their saluation And for the ignorant sorte which can not read it were also in vaine for them to haue preachers in regarde they can propose vnto them no other rule of faith then scriptures expounded by their owne particular spirit which neuerthelesse euē according to their owne doctrine is fallible subiect to error by consequence obledgeth no man to followe it but rather to auoy de it by all meanes possible Fourthly I proue the same because this rule of our aduersaries serues no mans turne but his owne who hath it that but vnto wardely neither doth it obledge others to beleeue it neither is it one the same but as manie as ther be people in the whole Church of England all which is most absurde repugnant to the nature of true faith which ought to be one in all the Christian world certaine in fallible binding all persons to embrace it by diuine precept commaund which neuerthelesse could not be such if the rule which it followeth were not one without all multipllcation diuision And to this may be ioy ned for conclusion of the proofe of this argument that which I haue deliuered touching our aduersaries false translation erroneous manner of interpretation of diuine scriptures THE FIFT PRINCIPAL ARGVMENT MY fift principall argument in order to proue the falsitie of the English Religion is this That Religion is false which hath not a perpetuall disinterrupted succession of Bishops Preists deriued from the Apostles But the English Religion hath not a perpetuall disinterrupted succession of Bishops Preists deriued from the Apostles Ergo the English Religion is a false Religiō The maior proposition is so certaine and cleare that our aduersaries a the least all or most of those of the Protestant faith can not denie it And if perpaps anie of them or anie other Sectaries should be so frontlesse imprudent as to denie it they ar manifestly conuinced by those places of scripture which proue the perpetuitie of the gouernement of the Church of Christ in generall As in the fourth to the Ephesians where it is affirmed that Christ gaue to his Church Pastors doctors that is Bishops Preists to the consummation of the saints vnto the word of the ministerit that to rule gouerne feed the flock of the Church vntill the cōsummation of the world And the Prophet Dauid in his 47. psalme faith that God founded his citie that is the Church as S. Augustin expoundes it for euer And surely if God established his Church for euer as truely according to this he did it can neuer wāt Bishops Preists for that if it should wāt them then it were no more a true Church according to the saying S. Hierome Wher ther is no Preist ther is no Church In which word sacerdos Preist Contra Luciferianos he includeth also Bishops as being cheefely Preists those without whome no Preists can be made of ordained sainct Cyprian also in the second epistle of his fourth booke towardes the end teaches that the true Church cannot stand without Bishops Preists And sainct Augustin saith plainelie that it is the succession of Preists by Preists he meaneth also Bishops which keepes him in the Church Contra part Donat. And in his epistle 165. vpon the psalme against Donatus he chalengeth his aduersaries the Donatists to number the Preists which haue ben euen from the seat of sainct Peter see who hath succeeded each other in that Order of Fathers in which Order of Fathers meaning the Popes whose names he specifiech in his epistle to Generosus euen from S. Peter to Anastasius who was Pope in his time because he findeth not one Donatist therefore he concludes that their Religion is false not to be followed So that the reader may plainelie perceiue by these authorities of which kinde manie more might be alledged if need were the place did admit anie larger discourse that the ancient Fathers held the want of succession of Bishops Preists for a common infallible argument of the falsitie of that Religion which not obstanding whatsoeuer other colores of truth it might seeme to haue by pretext of scripture or otherwise was destitute of the same That which is sufficient for the proofe of the mator of my Sylogisme in case anie of the defenders of the English Religion should haue the face to denie it Wherefore hence I passe to the minor to wit that the English Religion hath not a continuall disinterrupted succession of Preists Bishops derined from the Apostles which I proue first Because it is certaine by the testimonie of all writers of those ages that frome the time of sainct Gregorie Pope of Rome who sent sainct Augustin the Monke into England to plant the then professed Roman faith ther were no other Preists or Bishops but such as had their authority deriued from the Roman seat such Bishops onelie as were
hath ben alwayes since the times of Christ so visible as the Romanists hould it to haue ben that is with visible Pastors teachers and a visible flock or congregation of people assignable in all ages and times therefore I will proue it first by plaine texts of Scripture then by authoritie of ancient Fathers first that the true Church is absolutely visible then that it is perpetually visible The absolute visibilitie of the Church is â—aught in all those places of Scripture which speake of the Church as of a knowne congregation or companie of people as S. Math. Die Ecclesiâ— coÌ„firma fratrâ—t tues Pasce oues meas Pascite qui in vobis est gregeÌ„ Dei the â—8 tell the Church S. Luc. 22. confirme thy brothers â—ohn 20. feede my sheepe 1. Pet. 5. feed the flocke 〈◊〉 God which is among you S. Paul 1. Cor. 15. Affirâ—nes that he himselfe did persecute the Church And most commonly his Epistles are directed â—o the Churches as to the Church of Rome Corinth Ephesus And finally ther is scarce â—nie mention of the Church in the whole Bible wher the visibilitie of the same is not plainely signified therefore it is compared to a citie vpon a mountaine Math. 5. In illo moÌ„te est qui impleuit orbeÌ„ terrarum nunquid sic ostend mus Ecclesiaâ— fratres noÌ„ne aperta estâ— nonnâ— manifesta c. Aug. trac 1. in r. ep loan according to the exposition of that place made by S. Augustin in his booke of the vnitie of the Church the â—4 20. Chapter Of which inuisibilitie ther are likewise plaine texts in the second chapter of Isaias the fourth of Micheas where conformable to the cited wordes of S. Math. the â— woe Prophets affirme that ther will be in the latter Dayes a mount aine prepared the house of God Which wordes Sainct Augustin most perspicuously interprets of the Church of Christ Also ther is a verie pregnant place to this putpose the 61. of Isai where speaking of the people of God the Prophet saith all that shall see them shall know them to be the seed which God hath blessed Euangelizare pauperibus mi sit me c. Luc. 18. Which wordes Christ himselfe in the fourth of S. Luke doth plainely insinuate to be meant of his Church in regarde he applies some of the precedent words of the same chapter of Isaie to himselfe the propagatior of the same Church by his preaching And according to these the like phrase of Scripture the ancient Fathers doe commonly speake of the Christian Church S. Augustin in his second Booke against Cresconius Saith thus Extat Ecclesia cuncta clara atque perspicua Cap. 36. quippe ciuitas quae abscondi non potest supra montem constituta The Church is all cleare perspicuous as being a citie which cannot hiden be placed vpon a mountaine And S. Chrysostome in hiâ— fourth homilie vpon the 6. chap. of Isaias hath that memorable sentence Facilius est solem extingui quam Ecclesiam obscurari The sunne mâ— more easily be extinguished then the Church obscured I could alledge most plaine words to thâ— same purpose out of the rest of the ancient Doctors but because those twoe alone are of segreat authoritie that they ought to satisfie aniâ— vnpartiall iudgement in matter of testification of the sense doctrine of ancient time touching this point therefore I esteemed 〈◊〉 supersluous to produce their seuerall sentences Perhaps some of our aduersaries will say the doe not denie but both scriptures and Father doe teach in generall that the Church is visible yet they denie that scriptures Fathers reach that it must necessarily be visible in all ages times but rather that like vnto the noone it suffers Eclypses and defects by perseeution or by other meanes To this which is a miere voluntarie euasion as anie one of iudgement may easily perceiue I answer first that supposing both the sentences of scriptures Fathers of the visibilitie of the Church are generall absolute without limitation it is manifestly conuinced that their meaning could not be that the Church is visible onely for a time or at certaine times and not perpetually by reason that according to â—he common rule of interpretation generall wordes are to be vnderstood properly with â—ll their extension as long as noe inconuenieÌ„ce followes thereof as certaine it is apparent that none can followe of the continuall visibiâ—tie of the Church wheras on the contrarie both manie great in conueniences insue of the want of the same as after shall be declaâ—ed Neither can anie one place either of scripture or Fathers be produced by the opposers of this doctrine in which anie such limitation of the sentences of the Fathers is contained either â—n wordes or sense or in anie other sorte so â—lainely as by the generalitie of the foresaid Phrases of Scripture ancient Doctors all reâ—riction is excluded Secondly I impugne the same euasion for that if it be once graunted that the Church is not alwayes visible then it followes that in the times of the inuisibilitie of the same there are no visible Pastors nor preachers to minister the true word Sacraments to the people yea that there are no such people in the world consequently that thereis noe Church either visible or inuisible by reason that a Church whether we feigne it to be visible or inuisible essentially consists of people which people are in like manner essentially visible as muchas corporall nor can they if they would be visible except it be either by miracle or else by arte magique or some such vnlawfull meanes Nay more if they were once inuisible either by miracles arte or nature how can it be knowne but by ther owne testimonie that they euer were truely extant to which neuerthelesse noe man can prudently giue credit especially in a matter of such importance And thus we see that out of this one absurâ—itie of the want of visibilitie in the Church a thousand others doe followe as that ther are vivisible Pastors vet inuisible that ther are visible people yet inuisible that ther is a Church yet noe Church And if our aduersaâ—ies say ther are true Pastors true faithfull people a true Church that ther wants onely a true profession of faith in the Pastors people Church Then I replie first it is manifest that if ther be no prefession of faith in neither Pastors people nor anie parte of the Church then can it not possible be a true Church or the Church of the Predestinate as they will haue it but a Congregation onely or companie of timerous cowardly people which dare not professe their faith Ore autem confessio fit ad salutim consequently not the Church of Christ in which not faith onely but also profession of faith is necessarie to saluation according to the doctrine of the Apostle saying that with the hart we beleeue