Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
church_n canon_n council_n nice_a 2,852 5 10.4936 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A10908 The Protestant Church existent, and their faith professed in all ages, and by whom with a catalogue of councels in all ages, who professed the same. Written, by Henry Rogers D.D. prebendary of Hereford. Rogers, Henry, ca. 1585-1658. 1638 (1638) STC 21178; ESTC S116092 131,830 215

There are 9 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

Romane Church may give testimonie against you and for me Caiphas even then when he persecuted Christ might prophesie truly of Christ Pilate who did crucifie Christ did write that of Christ which was true viz. that hee was King of the Iewes Matthew Paris was a member of the Romane Church who said that your Church did never reject any that came unto her if they brought white or red with them Silver or Gold This member of the Roman Church said that a principall member viz. That Pope Gregorie the seventh did confesse on his death-bed that by the instigation of the devill hee had troubled the world yet this was such a member as that Innocentius the fourth Matthew Paris the then Pope vvrote of him that hee vvas vir probatae vitae Religioris expertae Such a Writer as that Baronius giveth this testimony of him Take away from his Booke his calumnies Anno 996. n. 63 64. invectives taunts and blasphemies against the Apostolick See often repeated and you vvill say it is a golden Commentarie taken vvord by vvord out of the publike Records and very vvell compiled together Thus farre Baronius As if a man should except against a vvitnesse and say you must not believe him in this vvhich he sayes against me but in all things else you may believe him hee speakes nothing but vvhat is upon publike Record Cajetane was a learned member of your Church and yet he held the Canon of Scripture as vvee doe contrarie to that vvhich the Councell of Trent hath defined Sixtus Senensis vvas a member of the Roman Church and yet hee did denie some part of the Scripture to be Canonicall which the Councell of Trent defined for Canonicall and that after the Councell Bellarm. de Verbo Dei l. 1. c. 7. I will fit you with many such members in my Catalogue Fisher Neither can I see any reason why hee did not with like audacitie goe on in naming other famous Romane Catholickes in every Age but that as it seemeth hee was not resolved whether hee were better to put in his Catalogue the names of damned Haeretickes which disagree in divers points of Faith from all ancient and present Pastors and Doctors of the Church even from the Protestants themselves Rogers Who you meane by these Haeretickes I know not and therfore I need not reply unto you herein if you had laid that imputation upon us I would have enlarged my selfe in the defence but you say they differ in points of Faith from the Protestants Fisher Or else to put in names of Popes Cardinals Bishops Priests Monkes and other religious men whose Writings and profession of life palpably shew that they held the present Roman Doctrine and communicated with the Roman Church Rogers I have answered you already that I will name Popes Cardinals Bishops Priests Monkes and others of your Church and why but such as neither their Writings nor profession of life doe palpably shew that they held the present Roman Faith If their Writings expresse what you say I will yeeld but that their Roman profession of life should include the now present Roman Faith I deny and besides what I formerly spake concerning your Writers I will adde some few instances now Gratian. Can Comp. de consecr dist 2. Gelasius was a Pope and yet hee held your present halfe Communion to be Sacriledge and decreed thus Aut integra suscipiant aut ab integris arceantur Let them receive the Communion in both formes or in neithe● Nich Lyranus was a Catholick and yet hee held the Canon of Scripture contrary to that of the Councell of Trent as Bellarmine confesseth So did Hugo and Thomas de Vio two Cardinals Irenaeus Basil Chrysostome Augustine and others whom I cited before cap. 4. were Bishops and yet they held the fulnesse and perfection of Scripture without the supply of unwritten Traditions contrary to the Councell of Trent Ierome was a Priest and a Monke yet denied those Books to be Canonicall which we deny contrary to that the Councell of Trent hath taught and decreed As the hand of a man may smite himselfe and yet continue a member of his body so these might be members of the Roman Church and yet give testimonie in something against your Church The Embassador De Ferrias of France was a member of the Roman Church and a French man Histor Concil Trid when in the Councell of Trent speaking of the miseries of France hee said If they should demand why France is not in peace hee could answer nothing but that which Iehu said to Ioram How can there be peace there remaining and concealed the words following but added You know the Text. The Cardinall of Loraine was a principall member of the Roman Church and the second Clergie man in the Latine Church yet hee speaking of the miseries of France said in the Councell of Trent If you would demand who hath caused this tempest and fortune I can say nothing but this That this fortune is come by our meanes cast us into the Sea By Vs hee must understand the Roman Clergie Iudas that betrayed Christ gave a true testimonie against himselfe when hee said J have sinned in betraying innocent blood And the limbs of Antichrist may give a true testimonie against Antichrist Now whereas you say that they communicated with the Roman Church I grant they did in some things or else they had not beene members of that Church but not in all for not in those things they did disavow reprove condemn and that this may the better be understood I will enlarge my discourse herein CHAP. VIII What it is to communicate with others How farre wee yet communicate with the Roman Church and wherein wee refuse to communicate COmmunio est multorum unio Communio quid Communion is the union of many They that agree in one opinion are so farre united they are one They that enjoy any thing in common are so farre united Rom. 12. The Church is one body 1 Cor. 12. Christians are severall members of this one body as therefore the members being many are united in one body and doe communicate in divers of the selfe same things from that one body and communicate one unto another the service of those things that are proper unto them as they are severall members So in the Church all Christians make but one body collective which are united together by many things some outward some inward some both outward and inward because it is corpus vivum a living body wherein there is saith Saint Augustine a soule Augustin Breviculo Collat. 3. Collat. 9. and a body The soule are the inward gifts of the holy Ghost faith hope and charity c. The body are the outward profession of faith and receiving of Sacraments Whence it comes to passe that some are of the soule and of the body of the Church and therefore united to Christ their Head both inwardly and outwardly these are most
your tenet That there is no salvation out of the Roman Church which is the fame in effect with the doctrine of Bellarmine Valenza and Binnius bee true it must include all Christian Churches and it must agree to all the Christian Churches at all times but this definition did not agree to all Christian Churches as I have shewed by the testimony of your owne writers and Travellers for many thousands of Christian Nations in the world did not acknowledge your Pope and many never heard of your Latine Church neither did the Latine Church know them That it did not perpetually belong to the Church will appeare in that I thinke my adversary is not able to produce any in 1150. yeeres after Christs comming in the flesh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Idem Metaph 2. c. 3. that framed such a definition of the Catholick Church so that the learned must either be ignorant of the true definition or this must not be it Is it likely that all the learned Fathers who wrote upon this subject disputed upon this point Licet definitio definitum re idē sint tamen propositio in qua definitio de definito praedicatur non est identica sed doctrinalis quia in ea conceptus distinctus de confuso praedicatur Zuarez were ignorant what the Church of Christ was which is distinctly knowne onely by d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arti. 2. Post c. 2. a definition If this definition or your tenents were true all those Christians who dyed for Christ till Peter came to Rome were out of the Church were damned Stephen the first Martyr who dyed for Christ the same yeere that Christ dyed for him and all the world was out of the Church was damned lost his life in vaine shed his bloud to no purpose If it were so necessary that there must be a Bishop of Rome to whom all Christians must submit why did not the Primitive Christians entreate Peter to goe to Rome that they might have a Church The beleeving Iewes should have come to Peter and said if we die before there be a Bishop of Rome we dye out of the Church we are damned Definitio est principium finis logieae Zabarella therefore good Peter to Rome with all speed They of Antioch should have done the like and said to Peter sweet Simon what dost thou here to Rome that we may have a Church So should they of Alexandria have told him to Rome Peter what dost thou heere Sedit Antiochiae annis 7. Baron an 39.25 annis ut Euseb in Chro. why wilt thou so long delay the laying of that corner stone in Rome whereon all must be built wherein all must be saved why wilt thou hazard the salvation of so many soules as may die before thou hast settled a Church at Rome which must be the Mother of all Churches Pius 4. his Creed art 11. wilt thou make thy selfe guilty of the blood of so many beleevers as may dye whilst thou doest linger and loyter heere The Churches of Iudaea Galile and Samaria were excluded by your definitions Acts 9.10 11 12. and tenents for Peter had not as yet beene out of those coasts nay if this definition were true they were no Churches but the Scripture saith they were Churches ergo this is a false tenet a false definition The Christians of Ioppa were to blame to send for him Acts 9. to hinder him from a more necessary journey to Rome and Peter himselfe much to blame to tarry there many dayes Cornelius the devout Centurion if he had heard Acts 10. and believed your tenents and definitions might have stumbled at what the Angell commanded him doe and he might have said with himselfe if there be no salvation out of the Roman Church what good can Peter doe me before there be a Church there If none can be saved but who are in subjection to the Bishop of Rome what good can Peter doe me there being as yet no Bishop of Rome Then when Peter came unto him and preached Christ Iesus and remission of sinnes in his name if these men had beene there they would have said Peter you have forgot one principall Article of the faith that which is essentiall to the Church the being entity the definition of it That he must be obedient to the Bishop of Rome this might more neerely concerne him being Captaine of the Italian Band. But the Scripture saith that Peter did tell him that whereby he and all his house should be saved and yet no word of Rome or Roman Bishop The Christians of Antioch by this definition and tenet were no Church though the Scripture say they were Iames the brother of Iohn which was kild by Herod was of no Church by this definition and tenet and therefore was damned We desire not to be of any other Church then Augustine Ambrose Ierome the Councell of Africk the Councell of Nice the Church of Ioppa Caesarea Ierusalem Antioch were of We like no such definitions as exclude the Fathers Councells the Apostle Saint Iames the Martyr Saint Stephen and damnes them to Hell O let me live the life of these dye the death of these and rest in peace with these Thus much in justifying my definition and against your tenet and Iesuiticall definition of Bellarmine which I briefly urge thus That definition which belongeth to all Christian Churches and to none else is a good definition But such is mine Ergo It is a good definition That definition and tenet which excludeth and condemneth all the Churches of Africk Asia and a great part of Europe yea Stephen the first Martyr and Iames the brother of Iohn together with divers Councells and fathers is false and uncharitable But such is your definition such your tenet Ergo Your tenet and definition are both false and uncharitable CHAP. XI A true Copy of Mr. Fishers five Propositions IT is certaine there is one and but one true infallible faith without which none can please God 2. This one infallible faith cannot be had according to the ordinary course of Gods providence but by hearing Preachers and Pastors of the true visible Church who onely are lawfully sent and authorized to teach the true word of God 3. As therefore this one infallible faith hath beene and must be in all ages so there must needs be in all ages Preachers and Pastors of the true visible Church of whom all sorts of people have in times past as appeareth by Histories learned and must learne in all future times the said infallible faith 4. Hence it followeth that if Protestants bee the true visible Church of Christ all sorts of men who in every age have had the aforesaid infallible faith have learned it by Protestant Preachers whose names may be found in Histories as the names of those are found who in severall ages did teach and convert people of severall Nations under the faith of Christ 5. Hence further followeth that
promise to preach and teach This is say they the true faith by profession of which the Church through the whole world is reputed and proved to be Catholicke he that liketh not this faith let him be accursed He that shall despise the faith of the Councell of Nice of Constantinople of Ephesus of Chalcedon let him be accursed Then they repeat and record these Creeds Surius pag. 672. From the yeere 600. to the yeere 700. The seventh Age. 6. Vnivers Concilium Concilium Trullanum Surius Tom. 2. pag. 899. About the yeare 680 saith Baronius n. 41. their first Canon did decree that the Apostles Creed should be kept unchangeably without any innovation Balsamon p. 360. They confirme the foure precedent Generall Councels as also the fifth and sixth whereof this was a branch adding Canons to the fifth and sixth and therfore called Quinisexta stiled an aecumenicall Councell also by Baronius Balsamon Concilium Romanum Of 125 Bishops under Pope Agatho who sent their Legats with a profession of their faith to the sixth Councell approving all the precedent Generall Councells This is recorded in the fourth Act of the sixth Councell See Surius Tom. 2. pag 922. Concilium Mantuanum Which in all things consenting to the fifth Generall Councell were Catholickes sayes Baronius anno 605. numb 5. This sixth Generall Synod is called erroneous by Beda saith Bellarmine deservedly The reason I take it was because this Councell did condemne Honorius the Pope of Rome for Haeresie as appeareth by Surius Actione 12 13. and was found to be contained in his Epistles the Councell using all diligence in examining the Records of the Church of Constantinople to see if the originall Epistle sent from Pope Honorius to Sergius of Constantinople did accord with the extracts which were produced constitit it appeared to be so ait 12. apud Surium pag. 990. Bellarm. lib 4. de Pontifice Romano cap. 11. and Baron an 681. doth labour much to excuse this but with as little successe as Baronius would cleare Zosimus for forging the Councell of Nice The Councell was deceived saith Beda and Bellarmine The Tract of the Councell was forged saith Baronius n. 25. Peradventure those Epistles were forged saith Bellarmine loco citato From the yeare 700 to the yeare 800. The eighth Age. Under Charles the Great Concilium Francosurtense for the Historicall and Civill use of Images but against all religious worshipping of them Baron an 794. Here began the Greeke and Latine Church to be divided about Images The Emperors and Councels of the East being sometimes for them sometimes against them And in the West the Churches of France Spaine and Germanie under Charles the Great forbidding them to be worshipped the Pope and his adherents of Rome commanding to worship them Yet all these three Councels did receive and professe the Faith of the six precedent Generall Councels Balsamon pag. 494. cau 1. Coucil Niceni Baronius an 754. n. 30 Surius Tom. 3. pag. 182. Hence arose the division of the Empire Baron an 726. n. 38. Pope Gregorie the second forbidding the Italians to pay the Emperor Leo Isaurus tribute for this onely cause For hee doth commend in the Emperor an every way right religious and irreprovable profession of the Orthodox Faith in his Epistle to the Emperor an 726. Baron n. 26. Wherein Cutbert Archbishop of Canterbury Concilium Saxonum in Anglia an 747. with other Bishops of the Saxons amongst other things decreed that the Presbyters should in the English tongue learne and teach the Lords Prayer and the Creed and that Prayers should be made for Kings and Princes Malmsburiensis de Gestis Pontificum Anglorum cap. 1. The ninth Age. Concilium Aquisgranense From the yeare 800 to the yeare 900. Anno 809. n. 52. It received the six Generall Councels and did professe the Nicene Creed Baron loco citato Concilium Foroniliense This did professe the Nicene Creed and decreed thus Let every Christian commit to memorie the Creed and the Lords Prayer all age all sex c. for without this none can and with this so they abstaine from sinne all may be saved Surius Tom. 3. pag. 262 263. Concilium Constantinopolitanū Anno 861. saith Baronius stiled a Generall Councell by Michaell the Greeke Emperor who summoned it and was present at it consisting of 318 Bishops approving the Nicen Councell as appeareth Canon 8. and the 6th Generall Councell Canon 12. apud Balsamon Concilium Parisiense Anno 825. which condemned the second Nicene and an Epistle of Pope Adrian for worshipping of Images as superstitious holding it lawfull to set up Images but not to worship them Baron an 825. n. 4 5. an 794. n. 43 51. So here are two Councels approved by the Romans the first and second two by them rejected but received the one by the Greeke Church the other by the French Church but all foure professing our Faith and two of them denying an Article of the Roman new Creed videlicet worshipping of Images Tom. 3. pag. 530. Histories saith Surius speake of a three-fold eighth Generall Councell held at Constantinople the first that wherein Photius was made Patriarch The second that which restored Ignatius The third that which after the death of Ignatius restored Photius againe It is worth the note how Surius can deny that this Councell of Paris under Lewis and that of Francford under Charles did decree against the second Nicene Councell for advancing Image-worship and charge us with forgerie seeing all the Chronicles and learned men of that Age recorded it See Baronius an 794. n. 40. From the yeare 900 to the yeare 1000. The tenth Age. This is that Age which was commonly stiled a leaden iron obscure Age because it was as barren of good as iron loaden with a burthen of wickednesse as heavie as lead and obscure for want of Writers saith Baronius an 900. n. 1. An unhappy Age saith Bellarmine in his Chronologie in which were no Councels no Writers of note and the Bishops were such as tooke little care for the Church Surius in this Age recordeth no Councell Generall or Provinciall for after Triburense Concilium which was celebrated under Arnulphus the Emperor who died about the yeare 899. as Baronius accounteth some yeares sooner as Bellarmine Surius hath no Councell till we come to Alexander the third Pope of that name who began his Popedome Anno 1160. that is for two whole Ages and a halfe But Baronius will furnish us with some All three Councels held under Pope Iohn the ninth Concil Romanum 1. Concil Romanum 2. Concil Romanum 3. Con ilium Suessionen an 909. n. 1. Baron Concil Constantinop who in those three yeares of his Papacie held three Councels Ex quibus summam sibi laudem comparavit by which hee got to himselfe great praise saith Baron an 905. n. 1. no doubt these were orthodox Councels in the estimation of
I wrote thus As I did admonish Master Fisher to distinguish betweene Affirmation and Negation so I doe these men and that faith is Affirmation not Negation for no man beleeveth what he denieth Secondly In points of faith I like Master Fishers Rule They that are in the Affirmative must prove Now all that we affirme they affirme as one God three persons all the Creed So that we need not prove what our Adversaries do confesse But in those points in variance between us they are to prove because they are Affirmative we Negative as unwritten Traditions Latine Service Invocation of Saints c. Thus farre in my former Answer This is saying plainly this is not seeming Whereas you inferre that seeing all which is affirmed by Protestants is affirmed by Roman Catholikes and this Affirmative Doctrine onely doth pertaine to faith it will follow that Protestants have no faith different from Roman Catholikes I grant the Consequence what is this to the question whether we are of the visible Church or no this which you would inferre doth rather prove us to be a part of the visible Church then any way gaine-say it Thus They which have no other faith then that of the Church of Rome are parts of the visible Church But the Protestants have no other faith then that of the Church of Rome Ergo The Protestants are a part of the visible Church The minor Master Fisher would inferre out of my Grounds as if I would deny it no I grant it and so I hope will he the major then the conclusion must follow We differ from you in Ecclesiasticall Doctrines and Discipline which you terme to be points of faith but we deny They are corruptions of faith Innovations Idolatrous Antichristian Doctrines You would force them upon us as points of faith we refuse them because the Scripture doth not expresse them the Primitve Church did not know them and the greatest part of the Christian Church to this day doth not approve them And your owne writers are distracted into many and divers opinions concerning them Paulus venet l. 1. 2 What Antiquity have you for your halfe Communion Worshipping of Images c. What Universality seeing the Church of Greece of Syria the Georgians Circassians Mengiellians Breitenbachius Purgr c. de Iacobitis Vitrivius Histor orientalis c. 76. the Moscovits and Russians the Christians of Babylon of Assyria Mesopotamia Parthia Media of Cassar Samarcham Charcham Chinchtalis Tanguth Suchir Ergimal Tenduck Caracam Mangi the Iacobits whose Sect is extended and spred abroad in some fourty Kingdomes which I assure my selfe is more large then all the Roman Church do communicate in both kindes worship not Images deny Purgatory and which with you is more then all the rest deny the Popes Supremacy So you have neither Antiquity nor Universality to which I might adde nor Consent among your selves in those additions of yours contained in your new Creed As for one Instance the Councell of Trent hath made the bookes of Machabees Canonicall Melitus Sav. Origenes Athanasius Hilarius Epiphanius Cyrillus Nazianzen Amphiloch Hieronymus Ruffinus which is left out of the Canon by ten Fathers that is I take it by all the Fathers that dyed within 400 yeares after the Incarnation and wrot of that subject Your Nicholaus Lyranus Dionysius Carthusianus Hugo and Thomas de Vio Cardinals whereof this last was one of the most learned that ever the Church of Rome had insomuch that in the Councel of Trent it was said I thinke no man heere doth thinke himselfe so great a Divine but that he might learne of Cajetan All these I say of your side exclude those Bookes from the Canon as we doe yet will you not say they were of another faith then the Church of Rome which you must say if your new Creed and Decrees of Councels be points of faith as you here say And lest you should escape with your wandring discourses and your flying from the question I will presse my argument in forme Whosoever denyeth the new Creed or any Articles thereof the Councell of Trent or any Doctrine thereof is an Hereticke and denyeth the faith But Carthusianus and Thomas de Vio Cajetan both Cardinals deny some Articles of the new Creed and some Doctrines of the Councell of Trent Ergo Lyra Carthusianus and Thomas de Vio are Hereticks and deny the faith I am sure you will hold this Conclusion to be false if so then one of the premisses must be false not the minor ergo the major which is your Tenet whereby you would proue us to be Hereticks and to deny the faith Fisher Out of which it will further follow that those English Protestants who shall hold some of the 39 Articles and deny the rest may be said to have no faith different from those which subscribe to all the 39 Articles Rogers I grant it doth follow so that those same Articles which they deny be not those Articles which concerne the Unity of the Godhead the Trinitie of persons and all those things which are contained in the Creed I say therefore they differ in Ecclesiasticall Doctrines or Discipline not in faith so they receive the Scriptures and Apostles Creed Fisher Which last consquence if Master Rogers grant I aske why the bookes of Canons doth excommunicate ipso facto such halfe Protestants Rogers They may be excomunicated for gaine saying Ecclesiasticall Doctrines or the established Discipline of the Church they may be excommunicated as erroneous Shismaticks Fisher Why doe their Bishops imprison them as Hereticks and not account them members of their Church Rogers Andrewes in his Defence of the Apologie for the other Bilson in his perpetuall government of the Church Carleton against the Appeal They must be imprisoned as Schismaticks Our Bishops doe all professe that there are no Puritane Doctrines that the difference is onely in matter of Discipline they count them neither Hereticks nor wholly excluded out of the Church here you have supposed two falshoods in two lines those learned Protestants from beyond the Seas whose Discipline doth somewhat vary from ours doe testifie that the purity of Doctrine doth flourish in England purely and sincerely So Beza from Geneva that by Queeene Elizabeths comming to the Crowne God againe had restored his Doctrine and true worship So Zanchius that the whole compasse of the world hath never seene any thing more to be wished then is her Government So Daneus Fisher And why not Roman Catholicks by as good or better right account Protestants who deny so many points defined in both ancient and recent Generall Councels to be Hereticks Excommunicated and no members of the Ancient and present Catholick Church Rogers If we did the one you may doe the other but I have shewed the falshood of your supposition that we count them Hereticks who discent from us in any of our Articles they may be erroneous in a lesser nature then Heresie turbulent in those errours they may be Schismaticks
perfectly of the Church for they are as living members in the body Againe some are of the soule but not of the body as those which are instructed to beleeve the principles of Christian Religion but are not yet baptized or those who are excommunicated if they retaine faith and love which may bee done Lastly some are of the body but not of the soule as those who have no inward vertue but for some temporall ends do professe the faith and partake of the Sacraments under the government of Pastors and such are as the haire or nailes or ill humors in mans body Thus farre Saint Augustine This last doth make a man to bee a part of the visible Church Bellar. de Eccl. l. 3 c 2. As then in man there is the inner and the outward man the soule and the body the one is visible the other is not visible So in the Church there is a mysticall Church which is not seene to bodily eyes and an outward profession of Christ and receiving of Sacraments which makes the visible Church we can see the men we can see them baptized comming to the Temple receiving the Sacraments we can heare them make confession of the Christian faith call upon God the Father by Christ all these things are sensible and most of them visible as the men their meeting their receiving of the Sacraments the lifting up of their hands in prayer the opening of their lips in confession of their faith in prayer and thankesgiving Where there is a society of men thus professing the faith of Christ and partaking of his Sacraments under the government of Pastors there is a visible Christian Church These doe communicate in the same Sacraments in the same confession of faith and that maketh them to be of one Church of the visible Church though they be never so far remote one from another and unknowne one to another in the same essence of faith the principall and necessary articles whereof are contained in the Apostles Creed in the same essentiall forme of baptisme whereby men are admitted into the visible Church we communicate with the Roman Church and so doe all Christian Churches in the world that is in all that which must necessarily be professed and done to make a Church Now whereas my adversarie saith that those Popes Cardinalls Bishops others named by Gualterus and the Author of the Appendix to the Antidote did communicate with the Church of Rome that will not serve his turne for so doe we communicate with them in many things in the Apostles Creed in the principall Sacraments in the Iewish Canon of the old Testament and in all the new This doth make them and us a Church in these we have not left them but in their new Creed in their bookes added to the ancient Canon of the Bible in their unwritten Traditions in other their new false hereticall doctrines in their superstitious practise of Religion and Monarchicall discipline tyrannizing over the families of Christ These we hold to be the corruption sicknesse leprosie of their Church there we have left viz their Papacie not their Church we left them as an unsound Church not as a Church Thus the Primitive Church did deale with the Heathens Iewes and Hereticks as Saint Augustine writeth to the Donatists they retained what was good amongst them These Donatists held their owne society alone to bee the Church and excluded all others their owne baptisme to be true effectuall and no other so that they rebaptized those which were baptized by others in defence of their allegation objected thus Vsqueadeo meum est quod à me unicum datum est nec ab ipsis sacrilegis iteretur Sacrilegus non est qui unicum baptismum non quod tuum est sed quod Christi iterare non audet Etenim Christi est unica in baptismate consecratio Tua est unici baptismatis iteratio Corrigo in te quod tuum est agnosco quod Christi est hoc enim justum est ut cum mala hominum reprobamus quaecunque in illis bona Dei reperimus approbamus Hoc inquam justum est ut etiam in sacrilego non violem quod verum invenio Sacramentum nec sic emendem Sacrilegum ut in eo perpetrem sacrilegium Nam sic sunt isti mali in baptismo bono quemadmodum sunt Iudaei mali in lege bona Itaque ut illi per ipsam legem judicabuntur quam malitia sua malā fecerunt Ita isti per ipsum baptismum judicabuntur quod bonum mali tenuerunt Ergo quemadmodum Iudaeus cū ad nos venerit ut Christianus fiat non in eo destruimus bona Dei sed mala ipsius Nam quod errat non credendo quod Christus jam venerit natusque passus sit resurrexerit hoc emendamus eaque infidelitate destituta fidem qua haec creduntur instruimus Item quod errant umbris veterum Sacramentorum inhaerendo dissuademus jamque venisse tempus quo haec auferenda atque mutanda Propheta praedixerunt demonstramus Quod verò unum Deum colendum credit qui fecit Caelum terram quod omnia Idola Sacrilegia Gentium detestatur quod futurum expectat judicium quod vitam sperat aeternam quod de carnis resurrectione non dubitat laudamus approbamus agnoscimus sicut credebat credenda sicut tenebat tenenda firmamus Ita etiam cum ad nos venerit Schismaticus vel haereticus ut Catholicus fiat schisma ejus haeresim dissuadendo destruendo rescindimus Sacramenta verò Christiana si eadē in illo invenimus quicquid aliud veri tenet absit ut violemus absit ut si simel danda norimus iteremus ne dum vitia humana curamus divina medicamenta damnemus aut quaerendo sanare vulneratum quod non est hominem saucium ubi sanus est vulneremus August Tom 7. l. de un baptis cont Petil. cap. 2. 3. Possunt esse populi boni ubi fuerint Episcopi mali sicut potuit esse populus malus ubi fuit Moses Princeps Rector bonus li. 2. c. E. Parmen c. 4. In bonis quibus talia displicent semper manet mansit manebit Ecclesia l. 3. Nihl aliud est consentire male facientibus nisi mala facta eorum approbare atque laudare l. 1. Nemo conjungitur cum infidelibus nisi qui facit peccatum Paganorum vel talia facientibus favet nec quisquam fit particeps iniquitatis nisi qui iniqua vel agit vel approbat l. 2. c. 17. Vbi Moses Aaron ibi murmuratores sacrilegi ubi Caiphas caeteri tales ibi Zacharias Simeon caeteri boni ubi Saul ibi David ubi Ieremias ubi Isaias ubi Daniel ubi Ezechiel ibi Sacerdotes mali populi mali cap. 7. Et sicut grana inter paleas non videntur ita pie viventes inter iniquorum turbas non facile apparent My Baptisme is such and so
with him that hath gone 800. because I have not gone further whereas I had a neerer and safer way to my journeyes end viz by Scripture by demonstration by confession of my adversaries CHAP. X. Fisher NEither did hee sufficiently prove them he named to bee Protestants but by such false suppositions and bad definitions c. Rogers in his 1. Reply That my suppositions are false you say it I deny it when you shew any reason to convince them of falshood I will disclaime them If my definition bee bad you should have mended it and so much I requested you to doe and doe request it againe and againe But why is my definition bad why my suppositions false and why shifts because that Arrians Anabaptists or whatsoever other Sectarie may by the like defend the same persons to have beene of their Religion and Sect. What suppositions you meane I know not if you meane my distinctions I shall answer you when I come to your particular exception against them As for my definition it was this and thus delivered Master Fisher I desire you therefore to expresse without ambiguity the termes of this question whether the Protestant Church was visible in all ages what you meane by Church what by Protestants what by visible I will deliver my opinion in defining a Protestant Church The Protestant Church is a society of men professing the faith expressed in the Canonicall Scriptures acknowledged to be such in the Primitive Church comprized in the Apostles Creed explained in the other two Creedes of Nice and Athanasius ministring the Sacraments of Baptisme and the Lords Supper by men of lawfull calling and ordination Such a society as this was in all ages Ergo The Protestant Church was in all ages Thus farre in my former Reply this was the definition I brought and none other You say an Arrian may by this definition defend that those persons by me alleadged were of his Religion or Sect so may the Anabaptists or any other Sectary as you say what other Sectaries you meane I know not as for the Anabaptist I will answer you where you have made more full mention of him As for the Arrian because here only you name him here I will reply unto you concerning him You say that my definition may agree with an Arrian for so it must if thereby he may proove those to whom this definition doth belong to be of his Religion then which nothing could be spoken more ignorantly if you thought as you wrote or more impudently if you knew the contrary being so manifest a truth as nothing that ever happened in the Christian Church is more frequent in Ecclesiasticall Histories in Fathers in Councells then that Arrius was condemned in the Nicene Councell and the more full explication of the Apostles Creed was made in that Councell onely to exclude and condemne Arrius which explication is commonly called the Nicene Creed to the same purpose did Athanasius compose his explication of the same Creed I make mention of both these in my definition saying that the Protestant Church professeth that faith comprised in the Apostles Creed explained in the other two Creeds of Nice and Athanasius All these three doe say that Christ is God Arrius doth deny it these are contradictories can you reconcile them if you can you will doe more then all the Divines all the Philosophers could doe nay more then God himselfe can doe The Apostles Creed saith that Christ is the onely begotten Sonne of God and therefore God as the begotten Sonne of man is man the onely begotten Sonne of God because he alone is the Sonne of God by generation all others either by creation or by regeneration The Nicene Creed saith Christ is begotten of the substance of the Father God of God true God of true God Athanasius his Creed runnes wholly on the same straine that Christ is God that hee is uncreate eternall incomprehensible Almighty Arrius denyed all this in denying him to be God This definition I alleadge not as proper to the Protestants distinguished from other Churches but common to all true Christian Churches for two reasons first my drift is not to proove that onely the Protestants make the Church as I have fully expressed in my first Answer My words speaking to Mr. Fishers 4th proposition were these I would gladly know what they meane by those words if the Protestants be the true visible Church whether so as if we alone who are called Protestants were of the Church and no others wee leave such enclosing of Commons to the Romanists we chalenge it not we are a true Church not the true Church we are a part not the whole we include our selves we exclude not others whether Graecians Armenians Aethiopians Spaniards or Italians c. so they deny no fundamentall parts of the faith either directly or by consequence 2. Because there can be but one definition of one Church and such is the Catholick Church of Christ acknowledged to be and this one definition must accord and may be verified of every particular society that professeth the faith of Christ and ministreth those Sacraments which were ordained by Christ as necessary unto all men under the government of lawfull Pastors for these particular societies are of the same nature as the whole Partes homogeneae quarum idem nomen cum toto eadem nominis definitio parts of one kind with the whole and one with another which have the same definition because they have the same nature and essence as every drop of blood is blood and every little peece of flesh is flesh and have all the same definition As therefore when I would proove my selfe to be a man I would use no other definition then animal rationale a reasonable creature endued with a living sensible body Haec Articulis lex definiendi for singularia non habent definitionem nisi speciei particular and individuall things have no proper peculiar definition of their owne but all of one kind or species have the same definition so being to proove my selfe a Christian I will use no other definition then that of Christians in generall viz. that I hold the faith of Christ am admitted by baptisme into his visible Church wherein I doe continue under the direction and government of my Pastors If you should reply that is no good definition because it belongeth to you of the Roman Church to those of the Greeke Armenian Aethiopian Indian Churches and to all other sects of Christians as well as to me I answer that unlesse it doe belong to all Christians it were no good definition as animal rationale were no good definition of a man unlesse it did belong to every particular man excluding none for this is the rule of defining this is the direction that is given by the most learned that we must passe through every singular observing what is to be found in them all and at all times and put those things alone in our definition excluding
docuêre Patres 146. Baron An. 905. n. 4. Herveus Remensis who first converted the Normans to the Faith and held a Synod in which they said That the Rock whereon Christ promised to build his Church was the confession of Peter At this Councell were present also Rothomagensis Archiepiscopus Rodolphus Landunensis Episcopus Trodoardus Hist Rem l. 4. c. 13. Baron An. 930. Erlimus Bellovacensis Episcopus aliique multi Whose names are subscribed This Herveus held many Synods Vnus Hambargensis Archiepiscopus qui convertit Danos Glaber temporis ejus auctor Hist l. 2. c. 11 12. Baron An. 100 n. 4. Tom. 10. Lib. de officiis Missae edito Parisiis Anno 1610. Bellarm. de Script Ab Anno 1000 ad 1100. Lebuinus Episcopus in Gallis qui populum suum ex parte deceptum Catholicae plenius restituit fidei Anno 1000. Baronius n. 3. Petrus Archiepiscopus Ravennas qui Vilgardum Haereticum docentem fidei sacrae contraria damnavit Berno Augiensis Abbas qui testatur post Evangelium in missa recitari Symbolum Constantinopolitanum à Concilio Toletano statutum id omni die Dominico secundum morem Orientalium Ecclesiarum decantari In hoc Authore miror Bellarmini oscitantiam ne quid gravius dicam qui ita scripsit Ex quo libro cap. 2. viz. Baronius de officio Missae discimus hoc primum tempore coepisse in Rom. Ecclesia cani ad Missam Symbolum fidei Cum contrarium doceat Walafridus Strabo lib. de rebus Ecclesiasticis cap. 22. Qui vixit aliquot seculis ante Bernonem obiit enim ut placet Hiltorpio Anno 849. Berno autem Anno 1048. Et ipse ordo Romanus idem doceat apud Hiltorpium col 4. Miror inquam quod non distinxerit ambiguitatem vocis Romanae quae pro Latina Ecclesia saepe usurpatur cum hic intra urbem suburbicanas Ecclesias vel saltem intra Italiae fines claudatur ut apparet ex Bernone Micrologus whose Bookes of Ecclesiasticall Observations Pamelius doth preferre before all others that wrote upon that subject as Amalarius Walafridus doth witnesse Cap. 46. that Creed in Vnum c. viz. The Creed cōmonly reputed the Nicene Creed Iuxta Canones in omni Dominica debet cantari in omnibus c. according to the Canons is to be read upon every Lords day In his 19 chapter hee is very full for communicating in both kinds citing Ordo Romanus and Iulius Papa 36. Gelasius Papa 51. very peremptorie in this kind This Author lived about the yeare 1080 saith Pamelius in his Preface before the worke Ivo Carnotensis Episcopus who speaketh of our Sacraments and of the Apostles Creed professed in Baptisme Serm. de Sacramentis And in his Sermon De Convenientia veteris novi sacrificii he briefly proveth all the chiefe heads of Christian Faith who in the later end of that Sermon speaketh of communicating in both kinds And in his Sermon De coena Domini hee saith Let none of the Faithfull this day absent himselfe Dwell you in Christ that Christ may dwell in you and you be worthy Receivers of his Body and Blood Hee in his Sermon In Cathedra Sancti Petri saith That that Feast was in memoriall of that day wherein Peter at Antioch was made Bishop and Pastor of Gods people And that hee was called Peter because of the confession of his Faith Ab Anno 1100 ad 1200. Sanctus Bernardus Rupertus Tutiensis Algerus who denieth your halfe Communion citing those words of Pascasius under the name of Saint Augustine Nec caro sine sanguine Lib. 2. de corpor sang Christ cap. 8. Bellarm. nec sanguis sine carne ritè communicatur Rich. de Sancto Victore who refuseth your Canon of the Bible Hugo de Sancto Victore who denieth Penance to be a Sacrament Ab Anno 1200 ad 1300. Alexander of Hales who denieth the Sacrament of Confirmation as a Sacrament to be instituted by Christ parte 4. q. 5. membro 2. Hugo Cardinalis Bonaventura Both which denie your Canon of the Bible Hugo in his Prologue before Ecclesiasticus Bonaventura pr. parte q. 89. Art 8. ad 2. Gulielmus Episcopus Parisiensis Ab Anno 1300 ad 1400. Lib. 4. Sent. dist 26. Durandus hee denies Matrimonie to be a Sacrament Nicholaus Lyranus hee holdeth the same Canon of the Bible that wee doe and denieth yours Franciscus Mayron Qui inter alia scripsit de Articulis fidei Simon de Cassia Qui scripsit expositionem Symboli Apostolici Ab Anno 1400 ad 1500. Dionysius Carthusianus who denies your Canon of the Bible Prologo in Ecclesiasticum Gregorius Heymburgensis who wrote against the Popes Supremacie Panormitanus Picus Mirandula Hist Trid. Concilii Sleidanus in Commentariis Thomas Cajetanus who had conference with Luther All these are Latine Authors acknowledged by you of the Roman Church for Orthodox at least two of them in every Age which were sufficient but I can make it good for all out of Bellarmine Baronius Surius Hiltorpius or Synods allowed by your Church Thus therefore I argue Major All orthodox or right believing Christians doe receive and professe the Apostles Creed the Bookes of old and new Testament received for Canonicall by the Fathers of the first 400 yeares together with the Sacraments of Baptisme and the Lords Supper which the Protestants professe Minor But these Authors aforenamed in my Catalogue from the yeare 800 to the yeare 1500 are all orthodox or right believing Ergo Conclusio All these Authors aforenamed in my Catalogue from the yeare 800 to the yeare 1500 doe receive and professe the Apostles Creed the said Bookes of the old and new Testament the two Sacraments of Baptisme and the Lords Supper which the Protestants receive and professe Or thus Major Whosoever receive our whole Faith and all our Sacraments are of our Church and wee of theirs Minor But all these Authors receive our whole Faith and all our Sacraments Ergo Conclusio All these Authors are of our Church and wee of theirs But you having another Faith a new Creed new Articles cannot prove these or any other to have held that your new Faith entirely and I have shewed most of these Authors expresly to denie some one some another Article of your new Creed so that a man may be orthodox and yet denie your Faith your Creed No man can be saved that denieth the true Faith But many are saved who denie the Roman Faith Ergo The Roman Faith is not the true Faith The Major I know you will not denie The Minor you must grant or your Saints and greatest Writers were damned for want of your Faith A second Catalogue viz. of Greeke Authors who being of the Greeke Church did professe our Scriptures Faith Sacraments and Councels but doe reject divers points of the Roman Faith and all the Councels of the Latines since the yeare 800 as appeareth by their profession in the Councell at
Ferrara made by Marcus Bishop of Ephesus Sess 5. in a grave and learned speech recorded by your owne Surius in the fourth Tome of Councels imprinted at Colonia Agrippina Anno 1567. Definitiones Decreta aliarum omnium Synodorum recitanda nobis videntur ut haec nostra Synodus non solum ab illis non discrepare verumetiam ipsas in omnibus imitari velle videatur quoniam nos firmiter credimus majores nostros nil prorsus silentio praeterjiffe quod ad nostrum fidei Symbolum spectet Marcus Ephesinus in Generali 8. Synodo Sess 3. apud Surium Tom. 3. Pag. 375. Porro autem quoniam de Divinis primi ac alterius Concilii dogmatibus nil aliud reperitur nisi duae tantem fidei nostrae expositiones hoc est duo Symbola quae tamen pro uno a caeteris Conciliis suscepta fuerant idcirco à recitandis tertii Concilii gestis auspicandum nobis censemus vobis probare promittimus Christianorum omnium unam esse Catholicam fidem ad quam accessionem aliquem fieri aut quicquam ab ea non liceat auferri In primis ergo Nicenum Symbolum à trecentis decem octo Patribus Niceae celebratum recitetur Legatur etiam ejusdem Concilii definitio ut idem Nicenum Symbolum immutabile ac immobile permaneret neminique fas esset aliam fidem proferre Sess 5. Quartum Concilium viz. Ephesinum definit atque determinat ut aliam fidem conscribere aut componere aut sentire aut docere liceat nemini Concilium 5. viz. Constantinopol idem definit qui aliud Symbolum docuissent anathemati subjiciunt Sic etiam 6. Concilium seu Trullanum priora Concilia dictum Symbolum amplectitur obsignat Sic etiam 7. ac ultimum generale Concilium Hactenus Marcus Ephes ibidem Ab anno 800. ad 900. 1. Theodotus Melissenus 2. Iohannes Sixtus 3. Photius All these three were Patriarchs of Constantinople as is acknowledged by Baronius an 835. n. 25. All zealous adversaries to your worshipping of Images for which Baronius there calleth the first Haereticum Iconoclastam an haereticall Image-breaker The second Haeresis promulgatorem acerrimum The third namely Photius held a Councell at Constantinople planè numerosum admodum Concilium it was a very full Councell in so much as Michael the Emperour gloried that it equalled the number of the Fathers of the great Nicen Councell teste Baron an 861. n. 1. This was accounted a Generall Councell by Photius and by Theodorus Balsamon Comenting upon it Sic ait Baron ibid. n. eodem In this Councell was condemned the worshipping of Images Ab anno 900. ad 1000. Nilus Calaber Habuit hoc saeculo Graeca Ecclesia duos doctrina sanctitate illustres Nilum Calabrum Niconem Lacedemon Baron an 900. n. 8. Nico. Lacedemon Hic non à Graecis solum sed etiam à Latinis inter Sanctos est relatus Baron an 961. Ab anno 1000. ad 1100. Simeon Armenus Vir Sanctus verae fidei Professor Baro. an 1016. n. 7. 8. Theophilactus Episcopus Bulgarorum He in his writings imitateth Saint Chrysostome but he is a Schismaticke saith Bellar. de scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis Ab anno 1100. ad an 1200. Euthimius Zigabenus who wrote against all Haeresies and upon the 4. Evangel Bellarm. de Scriptoribus Ecclesiae Theodorus Balsamon Who commented upon Photius his Nicene Canon and divers Councels He was an enemie to the Church of Rome saith Bellarm. Ab Anno 1200. ad 1300. Arsenius Patriarcha Constantin A man for vertue and the service of God not farre short of the highest perfection ut Nicephorus Gregor lib. 3. p. 31. edit Basiliensis an 1562. cum Caesarea Majest privilegiis Gregorius Patriarcha Idem Gregor l. 6 pag. 80. Ioannes Glices Patriarch also of Constantin a most learned grave wise man above all men Nicephorus Gregoras lib. 8. pag. 123. 132. Ab Anno 1300. ad 1400. Catechuzenus Pachimaerus Nicephorus Gregoras These three were Fathers of the 14 age saith Bzonius in the end of that age Tom. 13. in his Supplement of Baron his Ecclesiasticall History an 1299. They did teach contrary to the doctrine of the Haereticks so Baronius calleth us but I may truly say that the first and last of the three teach contrary to their faith and so the other professed or he could not be of the Greeke Church who deny the Popes primacie of power deny Purgatory Communicate in both kinds For Catechuzenus in the election of Iohn Bishop of Constantinople doth say that all Bishops of greater or lesser Cities receive equall grace Baronius addeth his owne Glosse saying True equall grace of Order not of Iurisdiction Nicephorus in his 10 booke disputeth at large against the Latine Church à pag. 230 ad finem ejusdem libri To. 6. Bibl. Sanct. pag. 99. Ep. ad lect To these I may adde Cabasilas whom together with Balsamon Genebrard calleth two famous Greeke Fathers for which words he is blamed by M. De la Bigne who calleth the same men Schismaticks and enemies to the Church of Rome Tom. 6. Bibl. Sanct. pag. 101. 102. Gentianus Hervetus another of your side doth write in defence of Cabasilas in his Preface to the Reader before Cabasilas his booke intituled A Compendious Interpretation upon the Divine Sacrifice extant dicto 6 Tom. Bibl. Sanctae pag. 159. But he is thus blamed by your De la Bigne Dealbat Aethiopem Gentianus labouring to excuse Cabasilas doth but wash a Blackamoore for it is manifest he was a Schismaticke that he burned with hatred against the Church of Rome and wrote an Haereticall Booke against Tho. Aquinas Yet he is placed by Bellarmine amongst his Ecclesiasticall Writers in a distinct Columne also of his Chronologie from Haereticks Ab Anno 1400 ad 1500. Marcus Ephesinus Insignis Theologus as hee is stiled in the Acts of the Councell of Florence Sessione 2. apud Surium Tom. 4. Laonicus Chalcondilas who being of the Greeke Church testifieth that the agreement made at Florence was not received in Greece lib. 1. de rebus Turcicis non longè à principio Thus have I finished my Catalogue of Greeke Writers having many more to insert if any just exception can be given against these I will conclude concerning them with these two Arguments the one to prove that they were of our Faith and Church the other to prove that they were not of the Roman Faith or Church thus All they that doe professe the Apostles Creed as it was explicated in the Nicene Councell that receive the Scriptures received by the Protestants that receive the foure first Generall Councels and the two Sacraments of Baptisme and the Eucharist under lawfull Pastors are of the Protestants Faith and Church But those Authors as all others of the Greeke Church did professe and receive the said Creed Scriptures Councels and Sacraments under lawfull Pastors Ergo They are of the Protestants Faith and Church The Proposition is A definitione ad
he hath already seemed to say that none of their negative Doctrines pertaine to their faith and that all which is affirmed by Protestants is affirmed by Roman Catholikes and that this affirmative Doctrine onely doth pertaine to faith it will follow that Protestants have no faith different from Roman Catholikes out of which it will follow that those English Protestants who shall hold some of the 39 Articles and deny the rest may be said to have no faith different from those which subscribe to all the 39 Articles which last Consequence if Master Rogers grant I aske why the booke of the Canons doth excommunicate ipso facto such halfe Protestants Why doe their Bishops imprison them as Hereticks and not account them members of their Church And why may not Roman Catholikes by as good or better right accouunt Protestants who deny so many points defined in both ancient and recent Generall Councels to be Hereticks excommunicaeed and no members of the ancient and present Catholike Church Rogers That which you require heere I performed in my first Answer in my definition of a Protestant or else it had been no good definition had it not contained all that is essentiall this you know well enough but because you have nothing to answer you will demaund the same question againe Looke into my definition there you shall finde it and I made the same request unto you for a definition of the visible Church and what points you hold to be fundamentall to which you make no answer at all I there also undertooke to prove all our Affirmations which you deny so you doe the like by your Affirmations which we deny my words were these in my former answer Rogers in his first answer In all these I defend the Negative and so it doth belong to you to prove the Affirmative which when you shall doe by testimonies of Writers in all ages I will yeeld unto you for you proving the Affirmative the Negative will fall of it selfe as for example The first instance of Negation in our Articles is part of the sixt Article concerning those bookes of Esdras Tobit Iudith c. which we receive not for Canonicall you doe the proofe is on your side What I require of you I will performe on our side whatsoever is affirmative in our Articles I will maintaine to be affirmed and taught in all Ages as the 1 2 3 4 5 Articles the Affirmative part of the 6 the 7 8 and so in the rest or I will yeeld unto you Give me instance what Affirmation of our Articles you deny and I will prove it in all Ages And I desire you to set downe withall which of your affirmative Articles you receive and whether we agree in the Articles of the Creed or not I will doe the like by you and give you an instance in our Affirmatives Shew me who in every Age did receive the bookes of Esdras Machabees Tobit Iudith c. for Canonicall in the 1 2 3 4 Centurie of yeares This is one of the first points of your Tridentine faith Master Fisher I desire you also for the avoiding of confusion to deliver your opinion whether all the Affirmative Doctrines of the Councell of Trent are matters of faith per se fundamentall and necessary to be held for salvation fide explicita I speake de adultis quibus facultas discendidatur Thus farre in my former Answer to which you have made reply you have neither shewed which of our Affirmative Articles you deny nor which you receive nor have you proved one Instance I gave of your Affirmatives nor as much as expressed what you hold for matters of faith but dissembling all this passe it over with silence unlesse you had thought as the Boy did by his bodged verses that what you wrote would never be read but that men would reade the Titles and number the Pages and there finde written over head Master Rogers weake Grounds Master Rogers weake Arguments would take the rest upon trust would you ever have put Pen to Paper and yet in matters of Controuersies never expresse what your selfe held nor tell us being requested what your owne faith is or to give a reason of your owne faith nor to define your owne Church And answer formally and punctually to no one Argument and frame no one Argument of your owne Hominis est vehementèr abutentis otio literis That a man should offer to write a Tract and that in so sacred a profession as Divinitie and that in a question of so high a nature as these are what is the Christian faith what is the visible Church and herein not answer one question not to bring one Distinction or Definition or frame one Argument in forme or like a Scholler is a mispending of time wasting of Paper and abusing the very name of Learning Divinity as all other Sciences consisteth of Principles and Conclusions the Principles received on both sides are the Scriptures to which you would adde unwritten Traditions you bring not one place of Scripture to maintaine those Affirmative Tenents of yours which we deny you account Articles of faith And as for Theologicall conclusions you inferre none you frame no Argument you make no Syllogisme you give no reason of your faith though Saint Peter require it whom I thought of all the Apostles you did most respect what shall we thinke then but that you have neither Scripture nor reason for your faith I meane in your new Creed in which you dissent from us Fisher I require withall that he give me a substantiall ground well proved out of Scripture why those perticular points which he shall assigne are points of Protestant faith rather then others contained in the 39. Articles if he say as he hath already seemed to say that none of their Negative Doctrines pertaine to their faith and that all that is affirmed by Protestants is affirmed by Roman Catholikes and that this Affirmative Doctrine onely doth pertaine to faith it will follow that Protestants have no faith different from Roman Catholikes Rogers He calleth unto me to distinguish between points of Protestant faith and other points contained in the 39 Articles and yet in the next word he is faine to confesse that I distinguished if he say as he hath already seemed to say that none of their Negative Doctrines pertaine unto their faith This I had delivered in my first Answer and yet he still calleth for it yet he must mince it a little and say I seemed to say so great a friend he is to seeming that he will never leave it knowing it to be essentiall to the definition of Sophistry and a Sophister You might have left out your seeming and written plainly that I said so seeing in my Answer to your first Paper I spent nere a page in explicating and exemplifying this Distinction and in my Answer to your second Paper which was delivered me as the worke of five Jesuites then conversant about Gondamors house