as abandon Christ's Body which is the Church according to the expresse words of the Apostle Colos. 1.24 4. Proofe out of Fathers S. Austin l. 4. de Bapt. cont Donat. C. 1. having sayd that the rivers which risse in Paradise watred Mesopotamia Aegipt thô these countryes were not partakers of the happinesse of Paradise so Baptism may be had out of the Church yet could not conveigh eternal Blis but to those who are within It which hath received the keys to bind loose And lib. cont Faustum manich 12. C. 17. Praeter arcam omnis caro c. Out of the Ark all creatures living on the Earth were destroyed by the deluge because out of the Communion of the Church the water of Baptism althô it be the same out as in the Church yet it avayles not to salvation but rather to ruin S. Cyprian hath a long treatise against Schismaticks In it he says they are the work of the devil who finding his Temples abandoned his Altars overturned his sacrifices contemned his rites slyghted his kingdom destroyed by the conversion of the world to Christianity with design to recover his interest on Earth introduced Schismes multiplyed Schismaticks And what opinion he S. Cyprian had of them take in these words Can he retain his Faith who dos not retain the Communion of the Church can any man hope to be in the Church who resists it who abandons the Chair of Peter vpon which the Church is built whosoever leaving the Church cleanes to the Harlot forgoes all promises made to the Church he becomes a stranger a prophane man an enemy God is not a Father to him who ownes not the Church his mother And he assures that nether Faith nor working of miracles nor knowledg of mysteryes not martyrdom it self can entitle a man to eternal life who dyes in a Schism that is out of the Communion of the Church To be short see what the Fathers say severally against the Meletians the Quarto decimans the Novatians the Donatists others With what fervour they plead the necessity of Communion with the Church with what horror they reject the crime of Schism which some think the greatest of crimes My 5. proofe is Remission of sins is necessary to attain Heaven That is not to be found but in the Church Wherefore in the Creed after the Article of the Holy Catholick Church two others are added the Communion of Saints Remission of Sins as being sequels of dependants on that other Which is Calvin's Reflection My 6. Proofe is from the Testimony of such as were actual Schismaticks themselves Calvin l. 4. Instit C. 1. S. 4. says Discamus ex hoc vno matris Elogio quam vtilis sit nobis Eccesiae Communio imo necessaria quando non alius est ad vitam ingressus nisi nos ipsa concipiat in vtero nisi pariat nisi nos alat suis vberibus denique sub custodiâ gubernatione nos teneat donec exuti carne mortali similes erimus Angelis .... Adde quod extra eius gremium nulla speranda est peccatorum remissio nec vlla salus The Church is our Mother out of which title wee may learne how vsefull nay how necessary is our Communion with her seing there is no possibility of attaining to life vnlesse shee conceiues vs in her wombe brings vs forth suckles vs with her breasts protect defends vs till leaving this mortal life we become like vnto Angels .... Out of her bosome no hopes of Remission of Sins nor of salvation Whence he concludes Semper exitialis est ab Ecclesiâ discessio It is always damnable to depart from the Church Thus this grand sower of Schismes the greatest Enemy to Church Communion that ever was whose furious spirit communicated with his writings hath caused more discords Schismes Seditions Rebellions Murthers than all other sects together His followers sometimes wanting Power but never the will to introduce those plagues their ordinary Attendants How odjous this sin is appeares by the industry all Hereticks vse to remoue it from themselves charge it on the Catholicks as knowing it to be of so deformed a nature that nothing can excuse it the stain it leaues of soo deep a dye that a floud of Teares cannot wash it out Thus much to proue the major or first Proposition I passe now to the minor or second 2. That Protestants are out of the tru Church the body of Christ tru Schismaticks is evident Luther their Pratriarck renounced all Communion with the Roman Church nether before nor after communicated with any Church even Schismatick So he separated when he began to Dogmatize from all Christians living for he had not gotten followers consequently had not framed them into a Church Wherefore if ever any one was a Schismatick he was one Such were likewise those who joyned with him in that sinfull separation And he and they continued such till their dying day even when framed into a Congregation for Non firmatur tractu temporis quod ab initio de jure non subsistit Reg. Iuris Processe of time cannot make an Action legal which from the beginning is contrary to law Perseverance in sin is a circumstance which aggravates it it is a Paradox to say that a hainous crime should cease to be such for being long continued as if the devil could become a saint by being obstinate in his wickedness A new way to sanctity vnknown to ancients So my minor is vndeniable So then the first Protestant made a tru Schism those who joined in Communion with him joined in a tru Schisme those who continu in it are in a tru Schisme tru Schismaticks So The guilt of Schisme a sin of the first magnitude lyes at the Protestanes doore they are Say Papists If they liue dye Protestants with out hopes of salvation as living dying in a greivous mortal sin Which is the conclusion of that syllogisme You say 1. that we forced you vpon the Separation by imposing vpon our Communion vnlawfull conditions Which is Gratis dictum sayd without any sufficient proofe for no one point of our faith was ever proved false by you we having much stronger grounds for than you again it So the most you can draw from your reasons is that our doctrine is not absolutely certain whereas nothing can excuse your Schisme but an absolute total certainty that the thing is naught which we enjoine v. c. Prayers to Saints because you ran in to Schisme to avoyd a thing which you know not certainly whether it be good or bad Nay you haue much greater reason to judge good than otherwise 1. for the authority of the past present Church practising it 2. because you rather reproach vs with indiscreet speeches of pious men or some practice of silly women then with the doctrine of the Church defined in our Councils Which shews you haue little to say against our
being vncyp hered by their actions the best interpreters of them Wherefore F. Darcy's argument remaines in force that it is safer to joine with the Catholicks than with the Protestants as it was safer to avoyd Treason to joine with the king than with the Parliament there being no sin in remaining in the Communion of the Catholick Church two great sins Schism Heresy in joining with the Protestants You say that this Reason would proue that in S. Austin's time it was safer to joine with the Donatists than with the Catholicks seing both sides agreed that the Donatists could be saved the Donatists denyed that possibility to the Catholicks Answer you are here grossely mistaken pardon that word for S. Austin never sayd a Donatist remaining such Could be saved nay a great part of his workes against them is employed to proue that they cannot be saved that their Baptism avayles them nothing but serues for their greater damnation Let me beseech you only to open any leafe any page of the several bookes written against them there is none which will not correct that mistake What you should say is only that both sides owned tru Baptism amongst the Donatists which these denyed amongst Catholicks Which argument the Donatists not only myght but did make vse of to pervert Catholicks as you may see in S. Austin L. 1. de Bapt. cont Donat. c. 3. l. 2. cont Petilianum c. 108. else where To this I answer that such a reason from a Donatist to a Catholick is of no force he having no good ground at all for that reason to rely on therefore denying Baptisme in the Catholick Church only out of a peevishnesse of nature Religion it was by them sayd with no more cause than Quakers had to say Thou art damned when they had nothing else to say Where as Catholicks proue that Assertion of theirs with jrrefragable reason drawn from those two crying sins Schisme Heresy of which we accuse the Protestants these do not nay cannot sufficiently cleere I haue all ready explicated these reasons That those of the Donatists were frivolous is evident for they sayd some Bishops of the Catholick Communion were Traditores had delivered the sacred bookes to the Persecutors that all Catholicks by communicating with them did contract the same guilt had lost the Holy Ghost And hence they inferred there could be no valid Baptisme in the Catholick Communion for those who haue not the Holy Ghost cannot give him to others To which the Catholicks answered 1. that those Bishops accused of that shamefull compliance with the jmperial Edicts against Christians were jnnocent of that crime which was never sufficiently proved vpon them no man ought to be condemned vnlesse the crime be evidently proved against him 2. They answered that althô the persons accused were really guilty yet their personal guilt could not prejudice all Catholicks communicating with them because another man's sin cannot prejudice me vnlesse J make it my own by commanding or perswading approving defending or imitating it Now the Catholicks were so far from being accessory to that pretended sin in another that they detested the sin always condemned it in all persons who were really guilty of it but never could find sufficient grounds to pronounce those accused by the Donatists guilty of it as those would haue them doe They answered 3. that supposing not granting that the Persons accused were really guilty that guilt had infected the whole body of Catholicks by communicating with them yet their Baptism myght be valid this not depending on the Personal sanctity of its Minister but on the justitution promises of Christ the operation of the Holy Ghost Hence S. Austin sayd he did not regard Peter when he Baptizes nor Paul nor Iohn nor Iudas but he considered the Holy Ghost who is the Baptist who ever he be who washes the body pronounces the words as Minister of that Sacrament You se how frivolous the reasons of the Donatists were to deny the validity of Baptism in the Catholick Church Shew that ours are as frivolous J will grant the parity but this you can never doe So our Reason stands good against you that of the Donatists against vs falls to the ground It seemes not discreet in an English Protestant to mention the Donatists there being so great a resemblance betwixt these two schismatical Churchs that they may seem sisters the later to haue copyed the other which appeares by these paralel points 1. Donatists were no where out of one corner of the world Africa Protestants of the Church of Eng. that is such as agree with her in points of Doctrine Hierarchy no where out of England 2. Donatists sayd theirs was the only perfect vnspotted Church you say yours is the only Apostolical Church perfectly reformed c. 3. Those endeavoured to justify their separation with some pretended faults of particular men you to justify yours alleadg some indiscreet devotions of old women and vnwary words of some otherwise pious Authours 4. Those appealed to some parts of scripture which you vse against vs And the Fathers proved against them the Vniversality of the Church the necessity of Communion with her out of the same texts which we vse against you 5. Donatists called Rome the seat or Chair of pestilence you call it a Pest-house letter to her R. H. P. 17. the seat of Antichrist 6. Those had their Circumcellions who thought to do God good service in murthering Catholicks you haue some of the same perswasion as appeares by their workes Yet I own a great difference betwixt the old Circumcellions the new ones Those when the toy took them would ether break their own necks or force others to cut their throates the new ones in this do not imitate them they loue too much their mothers sons 7. Those had the Maximianists who left them for the same reasons they had broken off Communion with the Church these haue the Presbiterians others who will not conforme with them vpon the same grounds for which they refuse to conform to the Catholick Church 8. And lastly the Non-conformist donatists made evident to the world that the Donatists had no real ground to break the Catholick Communion by forcing them to solue their owne Objections against the Church of which S. Austin l. 2. Retract C. 35. And your Non conformists with the same successe force you to answer all your pretences against vs breake those weapons with which you haue hitherto fought against the Church Those who will take the paines to examin further the Donatists principles will discover more points of agreement betwixt them you These are sufficient to shew that what is now hath been before will be that as the Church sticks constantly through all ages to the same Faith ways of defending it so Factious spirits seditious Brethren break her Communion turn Schismaticks
destructiue to Salvation It is vndeniable that Schismaticks remaming such cannot besaved They shall not haue God for their father who haue not the Church for their mother S. Cyprian And you are in a Schisme I myght alleadge several other things destructiue to Salvation but this one is enough D. M. p. 17. 18. The Papists say there is no salvation out of their Church The Donatists sayd so too And was it not for that saying so that they were pronounced Hereticks Revisor Here are three grosse mistakes of which I haue spoken sec 4. The 1. that the donatists sayd there was no salvation out of their Church Their grande errour was that the Church was lost by communicating with a sinner All their other errours were but sequels of this viz that there was no Church but theirs the rest of the Christians communicating with Cecilianus who had delivered vp the holy bookes 2. That there was no valid Baptisme but in their Communion 3. That the son was lesser than the father the Holy ghost than the son See S. Austin l. de Hereticis ad Quod vult Deum § 69. Epi. Baronij ad annu Dom. 321. n. 4. For these errours the donatists were tru Herticks But for saying that Heresy destroys salvation they could not be Hereticks vnlesse you will make S. Athanasius one who says in his creede Quam fidem nisi quisque integram inviolatamque servaverit absque dubio in aeternum peribit No hopes of salvation where any point of Faith is denyed The 2. That they were pronounced Hereticks for saying so They were pronounced Hereticks for saying other things as J haue shewne The 3. that they were held for Hereticks The Catholick Church held them at first for Scismaticks such they were but not for Hereticks The Catholicks exacted nothing of them but that they should joine Communion with them they offred to that intent that in those cittyes which had two Bishops one of each Communion the surviver which soever it was should governe alone the Diocese that by that meanes the Schisme myght be extinguisht A condition never offred to any Heretick or Hereticks what soever At last indeed they turned tru Hereticks as I sayd on another score D. M. p. 19. For you to conclude in favour of Popery without hearing Protestants is that which cannot be done either in Equity or Conscience Rev. She did not conclude for one side without hearing the other She had heard Protestants from her jnfancy had weyghed maturely what they could say for themselues or against Popery It is wonderfull that a short Conference with some Papist it could be no more if there were so much should be of force sufficient to roote vp all those prejudices against God's Church which you so carefull instill to those vnder your conduct althô they had bin confirmed by long practice reiterated Acts contrary to the Catholick Faith all these backed with almost the greatest temporal interest in the world for on the one side she saw honour Riches the probable expectation of our Imperial crowne on the other Reproaches Calumnyes disgrace probably a tragical End for such had been the fate of her Father-in-law indeed what misery or vnjustice is so evident so greate as a Papist may not feare from a Tru Protestant But Magna veritas praevalet Truth seconded by God's interiour grace assisted by her generous resolution never to admit the whole world into consideration when her soul was concerned overcame all those difficultyes With this Truly Heroical resolution you acquaint vs. For you say to her D. M. p. 21. You your selfe haue told me more then once even since this false report hath beene raysed of you that you would not do any thing whereby you myght seeme to be of a Church or Religion which you are not of indeed no not for any wordly consideration whatsoever And p. 22. you are wont to say that no wordly either Advantage or Prejudice is to be considered when the gaining of the One or the avoyding of the Other comes into competition with the hazarding or securing of our spiritual everlasting jnterest of our souls consequently that if you were convinced there were no Salvation to be had but in the Church of Rome no consideration either of Losse or of Danger here in this world you myght incur by it should keepe you from it Rev. Out of these truly Christian Resolutions often declared to you I gather many material points either vnknowne before or not sufficiently knowne 1. That her R. H. was really enclined to be a Catholick So that Report was grounded 2. That you knew this inclination 3. That you endeavoured to divert her from it alleadging cheifly temporal interest to divert her from becoming a Papist This J gather out of those declarations which she so often made out of this very letter which containes little if any thing at all else 4. That either you which I do not beleiue or some other Protestant advised her to dissemble in matter of Religion professe her self a Protestant thô she were not so What other occasion could she haue to make that declaration that She would not do any thing to seeme to be of a Church of which she was not for all the world Lastly that she was too generous to be fryghted with such Bug beares When her soul lay at stake knowing full well it Would availe her nothing to gaine the whole world if she lost that Mar. 8.36 5. Thus this letter confirmes what was sayd but not commonly beleived of the Religion in which her R. H. dyed that she truly was a Catholick or as you call vs a Papist for you owne her inclination that way you had little to alleadge to divert her from it but temporal interest which was as little able to retaine her as a cobweb to hold a Lion so it is impossible to misse in the conjecture of the event But what judgment will the world make of your Church out of this letter The concerne you writ for was as greate almost as could occurre the retaining within your Communion a person as considerable almost as any whatsoever a person worthily esteemed as greate for her qualifications of mind as to vertu vnderstanding as for her dignity in the Kingdome a person who was a greate ornament to your Church nay a Piller of it So no doubt but all industry was vsed to prevent her leaving you that whatsoever your Art your wit learning could doe was employed to that intent we may guesse that as the cause was common so the concurrence was therefore we may conjecture that all the nerues of the Protestant Church joined to giue this Blow Yet how weake how inconsiderable is it And is then your Glorious Apostolical reformed Church come to this Haue you no motiues to commend her Communion retaine pious souls in it but Temporal will these weygh downe in the scales
of reason all considerations of Eternity And if they should be judged weyght by men will God judge so too At the greate day will it be a sufficient excuse for Schisme Heresy to say I was affrayd of loosing my estate of hindring my fortune of offending my freinds of giving advantage to my Enemys Will not Christ answer Seing You haue disowned me my Church before men I will disowne you before my father I will not deny but you haue given satisfaction as to what concernes your self that you are a Protestant Yet J must professe you giue little satisfaction as to your Church Nay I do declare that I would never desire other nor better grounds to vindicate the Truth of Catholick Religion the necessity of living in the Communion of the Catholick Church than what this letter affords For by it we may gather the condition of the Protestant Church to be like that of Laodicea Apoc. 3.17 Wretched miserable poore blind naked I hartily wish you those of your ranke were truly sensible of this Truth that you made a ryght vse of it by seeking ways to returne to the Communion of the Catholick Roman Church so put an end to this horrid Schisme Though the difficultyes to be overcome were greate yet greate difficultyes ought not to fryght vs from so greate so necessary a good as that of the Peace of the Church But in reality they are lesse then apprehended which you must say if you beleiue what you report after Bishop Andrews that the Pope was willing to confirme all that Q. Elizabeth had done in matter of Religion provided she would acknowledge his Supremacy This is then the grand nay the only obstacle Now all who haue been conversant in Catholick countryes see their customes even where that Supremacy is acknowledged see cleerly that this is no such formidable thing as to excuse justify a separation by consequence can be no just hindrance of Peace which the God of Peace grant vs giue all Schismaticks a tru desire of Amen SECTION XX. A Revision of his Letter to a Preist WHo this Regular Preist is you do not tell vs yet what you say of him he of himself describe him by infallible notes You endeavour to proue in this letter to him three things 1. That being so perswaded as he was he was bound in Conscience to leaue the Communion of the Roman Church 2. That he was bound to joine Communion with the Protestant Church of England 3. That he was bound to do it out of hand Which Propositions are built one vpon another the third on the second this on the first Which being Conditional not Absolute supposing his Present perswasion we must see what that is according to this Meridian we must calculate his Duty What this poore man's Perswasion is if he haue any setled is hard to judge of He hath vowed Obedience to his Regular Superiour will not keepe it He hath vowed Poverty breakes that vow He professe the Catholick Faith beleiues it full of Errors nay Heresyes He says he will remaine in the Communion of the Roman Catholick Church yet beleiues her to be Heretick Schismatick He hath beene ordred backe to his Convent he refuses to returne he hath been Canonically admonisht of his extravagances he slights it he hath been Excommunicated he Laughs at it In fine in him Hereticks find a constant freind Schismaticks a sure Advocate Apostates a certaine Patrone Catholicks an implacable Enemy yet he pretends he is nether Heretick nor Schismatick nor Apostata but a Catholick member of the Roman Church Who can square these circles reconcile these Contradictions betwixt his Declarations Actions that so a judgment may be framed of his Tru Persuasion Whither shall we giue credit to his declarations Or his Actions Those speake his being a Catholick he is nothing lesse These declare his hatred to Catholicks their Religion which yet he professeth So we must conclude him a Chimera one composed of contradictions his Religion is made vp of parts mutually destroying one another Or else that he hath no Religion for as a Chimera cannot haue a being In rerum naturâ so there can nether be an Entity composed of Contradictions nor a Religion for the same reason At least at the greate Audit he can never fayle to heare Discede a me c. Begon from me whither so ever Religion he be of his owne words will condemne him Ex ore tuo te judico serve nequam What can hence be gathered but that his Perswasion being so vncertain his Religion so dubious or certainly none at all nothing can be thence gathered as to the Communion which he should enter into If you think him well disposed for your Church you discover what kind of men it is composed of Ours that is the Catholick Church doth not desire such nor tolerate them further than there is hopes of their amendment little or none at all being left of this man she hath cast him out by Excommunication As I learne from your owne letter So by what I see I conclude that You haue spoyled a Catholick not made a Protestant Yet to moue him to come quite over you very learnedly distinguish three ages of the Church The first whilest she continued in that Faith which was once delivered to Saints p. 31. The second p. 32. from the time the Pope tooke vpon him the title of vniversal Bishop Yet you are not resolved what time to allow to this Second age whither one thousand or eleven or twelue hundred yeares The third p. 42. from the two Councils of Lateran vnder LEO X. Trent jmplying that all were bound to communicate with the Church of Rome in its first age myght communicate with it in the second must not in the third Jn the first Communion with it was a necessary duty in the second it was lawfull but not necessary in the third vnlawfull a sin And these dreames take vp aboue 30. pages Rev. All this is a dreame for the second age which you speake of is yet to come the Pope never having taken the title of Vniversal Bishop Besides this Christ promist his assistance to the Church not for any determinate time but for all times assured her of his presence till the end of the world now when you shall proue that Christ hath broken or can or will breake his word we will think your second age possible not till then so the first age in which all are obliged to joine in Communion with the Church of Rome is not expired nor will nor can ever expire D. M. p. 62. Having quitted the Communion of the Roman Church he is bound to joine with that of England in Conscience it being the most perfectly reformed Church in the world in Prudence in order to the protection of his Person provision
A REVISION OF DOCTOR GEORGE MORLEI'S IVDGMENT IN MATTERS OF RELIGION OR AN ANSWER TO SEVERAL TREATISES WRITTEN BY HIM VPON SEVERAL OCCASIONS CONCERNING THE CHVRCH OF ROME AND MOST OF THE DOCTRINES CONTROVERTED BETWIXT HER AND THE CHVRCH OF ENGLAND TO WHICH IS ANNEXT A TREATISE OF PAGAN IDOLATRY BY. L. W. Permissu Superiorum 1683. THE PREFACE SEing my Lord of Winton is pleased to wipe off that odious aspersion of his being a Papist which myght in the late conjuncture haue cost him his civil endangered his natural life by declaring not only his judgment in matters of Religion but also the grounds on which it relyes contained in severall treatises long since compounded but never till now made publick I presume he will not be offended that with the respect due to his quality of Peere of the Realme these be reviewed Reviewed I say for althô Appellations lye only to hygher Revisions are committed to equal or even inferiour courts He protests he is no Papist I think so too I wish it were as easy to cleere him of Calvinisme of which he ownes pag. XII that he hath beene suspected to it he seemes enclined when he says that God by Miracles promoted the Jdelatrous worship of the Pictures Relickes of Saints This I think in reality is to make God the Authour of sin Which Blasphemy I do not beleiue the Church of England will owne thô it be a choice flower in Calvin's garden He declares his loyalty to the government establisht the Royal Family c. And J beleiue him in this also nay I judge as favourably of the greatest part of his rank moreover that they are loyal not only for their Interest but for conscience out of a sense of their duty to God their soveraigne their country that he they will oppose to their Power Schisme in the Church Faction in the State Yet I think all their endeavours will be ineffectual to prevent ether considering the constitution of the Protestant Church qualifications of its Clergy For as in some natural Bodyes there is a defect which maugre all care of Physitians cuts the thred of life before it be spun to its ordinary length so in some Bodyes Politick that of the English Protestant Church in particular Here are some reasons to proue this 2. The first Protestancy is a Schisme those who liue in it liue in a Schisme It is a Schisme because it is a party separated from the whole Catholick Church Luther was a Schismatick so was Calvin so was Zuinglius so was each Patriark of your Reformation for each of these at their first breaking forth left the Whole Catholick Church or Congregation of Christians of what denomination soever not any one single Person in the whole world to whome he or they did joine himself So that if ever any man was truly Schismatick each one of these was such Wherefore all who joined to them as all Protestants did were Schismaticks Now it is not probable that God will giue that greate Blessing of Ecclesiasticall Peace to Schismaticks who hate it oppose it My 2. is Protestants are Hereticks that is Choosers of the points which they beleiue For the Catholick Church delivered to her children not only what they beleiue but also many articles which they reject Each Protestant takes this complex examins it finding some Articles not to please him he casts them out of his creede Hence one rejects the Real presence another Free will A third Merits a fourth the Possibility of keeping God's Commandments c. Each one culling out what Articles he pleases composing of them not a Catholick but a Protestant Faith not a Faith of the Ghospels but of this time their Phancyes What more evident signes of Hereticks Now if they be such can we think them fit instruments to oppose Heresy who did introduce do still defend it This shall be further confirmed by my fifth Reason My 3. Protestants are a Cadmean broode they sprung out of the Earth armed no sooner did their soveraigne Lords see their faces but they felt their Jron hands Witnesse Germany France Hungary Bohemia Scotland swethland Denmark the Low countryes Geneva Our English Protestants say they are not concerned in these Rebellions but that is not tru for by approving applauding them they make them their owne encourage the Practice by commending the precedent With what force can they teach Obedience to his Majesty who praise Rebellion against other Or divert men from Treason who transforme Traitors into Heroes canonize Regicides My 4. There nether is nor ever was any Authority vnder the Heavens better grounded than that of the Catholick Clergy consisting of the Pope Bishops was before the Reformation It was establisht by Christ setled by the Apostles ratifyed by general particular Councils confirmed by an vninterrupted Possession of almost fifteene hundred yeares backt by all Laws Ecclesiastical Civil acknowledged by all Christians then aliue What gentleman can say so much for his estate What officer for his Authority What King for his crowne What Parson for his Tith What Protestant Bishop for his miter When a Calvin a Luther c. to say no more private men starte vp declame against that Clergy as a humane invention an Antichristian establishment you applaude them with them trample vnder feete the whole sacred Order teach your followers no submission no obedience is due to it When you haue taught them to breake such cables can you expect to bind them to their duty with single threds The English Protestant pretence to Bishops doth no satisfy 1. Because in reality they had no canonical ordination as we say proue 2. Althô they had imposition of hands were real Bishops which we deny See Anti-Haman Chapt. xxxv yet They entred not by the doore but climed vp some other way Iohn X. 1. Were not promoted according to any canonical forme ether ancient or moderne Wherefore what can we judge of them but according to Christ's words Loco citato 3. Your first Protestants promoted their Religion Spreade their noveltyes contrary to all even English Bishops in contempt of them first in Henry VIII his time Tindale others Secondly in Q. Elizabeths time when all the Bishops aliue detested your Reformation were for that stript of their jurisdiction deposed from their seates confined What wonder then your followers doe not regard that Crosier which you haue broken nor honour the Miter which they haue seene you trample vnder your feate Lastly suppose your Bishops wereas validly canonically consecrated as any ever were can you say that their Authority is better grounded than that of all the Catholick Clergy Sure you cannot pretend to better grounds for your Authority than our Clergy had As it was than lawfull laudable to three or four private men to contradict our whole Clergy then in being why may not
Schismaticks Many followed Absalom to Hebron without any design against their lawful Monark David althô they were after engaged in the Rebellion And many follow Heresiarks intending no evil but hoping good from such as pretend nothing else who would hate these perfectly if they knew their Hypocrisy or malice who are insensibly engaged in the guilt of separation which they strengthen with their presence These nether having the guilt of a sin against the Holy Ghost vpon their Conscience nor their soulhardned against the Call of God we hope may be reclaimed And a Conference severally to such as these may proue beneficial Though not to the whole body of Separatists vpon which the more factious heads will always haue too great an influence How fruitlesse of old were the Conferences of S. Peter with Simon the magician of S. Athanasius with Arrius of S. Austin with Felix with Pascentianus Felicianus Emeritus or the Arrians of Lanfrancus with Berengarius of S. Bernard with Peeter Abaylardus what good came of the Conference of Catholicks Hugonots at Poissy in France Of those betwixt Catholicks Lutherans in Germany And that betwixt Protestants Presbiterians at Hampton-court brought no good althô directed by K. Iames a learned wise Prince to whom both Partys owed Obedience in Ecclesiastical matters as to one whom both owned to be head of their Church With great reason then Tertullian Prescrip c. 15.16.17 advises out of the Apostles words to Avoyd a Heretick after twice warning him not to meet Hereticks except only to Warn them That much harm may be feared but no good hoped for by Disputes with them That we ought to presse them to declare whence they had the scriptures If from Catholicks as most certainly Protestants had then they must from them also receiue the sense of scriptures Thus he Out of which it doth not follow that Catholicks are bound to receiue the sense of scripture from the Iews from whom they received the Holy scriptures because those same Persons who brought vs the scriptures from them proved their Mission from God declared the blindnesse Apostasy of the Iews warned vs as from God the Authour of Scriptures to be ware of them S Austin 13. cont Faustum c. 12. is of the same mind that all such Disputations are fruitless Hunnericus King of the wandals proposed a conference betwixt his Arrian Bishops those of the Catholick Communion But Eugenius Bishop of Carthage in the name of all the rest rejected the Proposition saying they could not accept it without consent of other Bishops cheïfely of him of Rome Victor of Vtica lib. 2. de Persec wandalicâ The Civil Law forbids all disputations L. Nemo C. de summa Trinitate The same are forbidden to seculars by the Canon law C. Quicumque de Haereticis in 6. For some particular reasons without any prohibition from the Church by common consent Catholicks refused to encounter some Hereticks Such was Sisinnius who because he had a pleasant drolling wit would seeme victor by turning all discourse into ridicule when he had nothing substantial to reply S. Austin when a Manichaean was avoyded for his singular skill in Logick For a like reason J beleiue Christians were warned by the Apostle Colos 2.8 To beware of being deceived through Philosophy Yet we cannot we dare not vniversally blame those who by Conferences or Disputes endeavour to bring back straglers into the way of salvation For Christ disputed with the Pharisees S. Stephen with the Iews in Hierusalem S Paul Apollo with the same else where S. Hilarius with the Arrians S. Austin with the Donatists Manichaeans others This Saint Epist 48. Says Cum Hereticis verbis agendum est disputatione pugnandum ratione vincendum Treate with Haereticks with words fyght them with discourse overcome them with reason Hence Divines do nether absolutely approue nor absolutely condemn such Conferences but hold them law full on some conditions in certain circumstances which may be found in them This honourable man hints at two conditions 1. that the Disputants on both sides be learned moderate 2. That They proceed freely charitably Which are good but scarce sufficient For 1. it is no easy matter amongst those who sincerely haue any Religion to find such as are Moderate in his sense And 2. even the most Moderate men may be so pinioned by jnstructions from those who depute them that their Personal Moderation will signify nothing for they must follow their jnstructions vnder pain of being disowned by their party left to make good their own Acts. Thus Melancthon Bucerus who were esteemed Moderate could effect nothing at the several meetings to which they were deputed The same I say of the 2. condition debating Freely Charitably which signifyes nothing vnlesse the whole Party 1. giue a full power to its deputyes without any reserue oblige it selfe to ratify approue what so ever shall be agreed on consented to by them And 2. would assuredly stand to that Power Do we not see that a separation is first resolved on errours sought out alleadged only to colour it Did not Luther laugh at the labour in vain of the Catholicks who confuted his errours saying that before they had dispacht the old ones he would find them more worke by broaching new And how often are the same objections renewed after a full satisfactory answer That for example of Pagan Idolatry reproached to vs lately by E. S G. B. R. C. but answered so home by T. G. W. E. that it will be layd aside till these are forgotten then we may expect to see some huffing minister thunder all the curses of scripture from the beginning of Genesis to the end of the Apocalypse against the Church of Rome as guilty of the very Pagan Idolatry Thus Trita haereticorum arma colligunt Says S. Prosper They take vp the broken weapons of their brethren As some rivers pass vnperceived for some space vnder ground then rise again so that so other Objections against the Church And if J am not mistaken in the Horoscope of this Argument drawn from sense against Transubstantiation it will run the same fate for while a loue of separation continues these or some other pretexts will be vsed to excuse it Wherefore The only meanes to put a good end to all Disputes in Religion is to procure a sincere Loue of Peace mutual communion The differences says this Lord are not so many nor so great but meanes may be found to reconcile the two Churchs I hope there may be meanes found thó this grounds not my hope for J do on the contrary aver that there never were any Hereticks of one denemination who haue erred in more or more material points then Protestants For to say nothing of several all most all antiquated Heresyes received by them they haue cut off all the vnwritten a great part of the written word of God destroyed
be proved to be vniversal or in vse in the Roman Church Some think the Pelagians introduced that custome that S. Austin proues thence the necessity of Baptism argumento ad hominem By a reason drawn from their own sentiments The same I say of Binius S. Austin for both speake of the practice which they found without citing any publick decree for indeed there was none ever made even by Innocent I. whom you cite For the place you mean is in his answer to a letter written to him by the Fathers of the Council of Milevis in Africa which had condemned Pelagius Celestius who taught there was no need of the grace of God to keep the commandments that children myght be saved without Baptism Innocent approves their decrees proves none can be saved without Baptism because none can be saved Without eating the Body drinking the Bloud of Christ And he addes Qui vitam ijs sine regeneratione defendunt videntur mihi ipsum baptismum velle cassare cùm praedicant hos habere quod in eos creditur nonnisi baptismate conferendum Those who hold they the children may be saved without being regenerated seeme to me to take away Baptism it self teaching that they haue without it what we beleiue is not giuen but by Baptism Thus he which words are cited by S. Austin l. 2. cont duas Ep. Pelag. c. 4. so what explicates one will serue the other both saying the same thing Where it is certain that he thinks a Participation of the Body Bloud of Christ necessary to salvation Now whether he meanes a real sacramental Participation by receiving the Sacrament or only a mystical or spiritual Participation which both you we beleiue is attained by the Sacrament of Baptism is the constant doctrine of the Church to this day seemes not so evident You say he meanes the first I say the second this is my reason He doth not speake of the participation by Communion or the Eucharist but of that by Baptism for he doth not say Cum Baptismate conferendum as if some thing different from Baptism administred with it were the medium of that Participation but Baptismate conferendum as if Baptism were the sole cause or meanes of that Participation Now the participation of Christ's body by Baptism is mystical not sacramental Therefore he speakes of the mystical Participation of Christ's Body averres that to be necessary to salvation Which both you I both Protestants Papists do admit for tru Catholick doctrine How can you then hence inferre that the Church hath erred may erre This is my first answer A second is that he S. Austin speake of participation of the Body Bloud of Christ In voto in desire which all haue are bound to haue when they are baptized .... A third is that in decrees of Faith or doctrinal we make a great difference betwixt what is Ex professo directly treated discussed defined such other things as are only accidentally mentioned Infallibility in the later points is by vs esteemed a Priviledge reserved to the writers of Holy scripture not pretended to even by general councils we make likewise a great difference betwixt a decree a reason for making the decree on which it is grounded For example in the 7. general Council it is said that Angels may be painted because they haue bodys We think our selves oblidged to beleiue Angels may be painted but not that they haue Bodys for our Divines commonly teach the contrary Now to your objection J answer that Innocent mentions only accidentally that point of Infants Communion intends by it only to proue that Baptism is necessary to salvation So the real Communion is not held by vs a decree of Faith Thus I haue once again broken that weapon which you brandish a new althô you know it had been broken in Viscount Falkland's hand whence you took it SECTION IV. 1. No possibility of salvation in schisme 2. Protestants truly Schismaticks 3. Catholicks hold their salvation desperate 4. A paralel betwixt Protestants Donatists D. Morley The Iesuit sayd that doubless it was more prudent safe to venture a man's self in that Church where in all agree he may besaved than in one where in all Catholicks say a man cannot be saved The Doctor replyed it was rather the vsual saying than the setled jugdment of all Catholicks for F. knot says the case may be such that a Protestant dying such may be saved which is as much as Protestants grant to Papists And then it would out of this reason follow it were more safe to be of the Donatists perswasion than a Catholick for S. Austin granted that a Donatist could be saved where as the Donatists did affirm that who soever was not a Donatist could not besaved Revisor all the substance of what J will here say is contained in this syllongisme None out of the true Church of Christ a schismatick can be saved The Protestants are out of the tru Church of Christ or schismaticks Therefore they cannot be saved The first Proposition or Major that none can be saved out of the tru Church of Christ is so cleere in scripture in Fathers even in Hereticks themselues that all must see it who do not wilfully shut their eyes My first Proofe the Church is the Body of Christ. Colos. 1.24 For his Christ's Body which is the Church Vpon which words S. Austin discourses thus 1. lib. Cont. Epistolam Petiliani Donat. c. 2. Vnde manifestum est eum qui non est in membris Christi Christianam salutem habere non posse Membra vero Christi per vnitatis charitatem sibi copulantur per candem capiti suo cohaerent quod est Christus Iesus Hence it is evident that who is not part of Christ's body cannot attain to Christian salvation And those are in Christs body who are linked together to their head with the loue of vnion And in his 19. Chapter Ad salutem vitam aeternam nemo pervenit nisi qui habet caput Christum Habere autem caput Christum nemo poterit nisi qui in eius corpore fuerit quod est Ecclesia No man can be saved vnlesse Christ be his Head But Christ can be head to no man who is out of his Body which is the Church My 2. proofe Rom. 8.9 If any man haue not the spirit of Christ he is none of his S. Austin alluding to these words tract 27. in Ioan says Christi spiritus neminem animat qui non sit de corpore eius Christs spirit doth quicken none but such as are in his Body that is in the Church 3. Proofe It seemes the express words of Christ Ioan. 15.6 If a man abide not in me he is cast forth as a branch is withered men gather them cast them into the fire they are burnt This is the doom of such
Church doctrine which is the only thing we enjoin So you are inexcusable Indeed these reproaches of errours are not the cause but the effect of your separation For out of loue to dear lyberty you resolved to renounce all subjection to Christ's vicar vpon earth then to secure this you resolved to separate from his Communion by a Schisme to justify this Schisme these pretexts were invented And by a just judgment of God the disobedient children of your Church haue meeted you the same mesure framed in your bosome another Schisme on the same pretences You say 2. Our excommunicating you was the cause of the Schisme so the causal Schisme is on our side But this is far from satisfiying any thinking man who calls to mind that you had forced the excommunication by precedent justifyed it by subsequent crimes Before any sentence was pronounced against you you had broke the interiour Communion with the Church by altering Faith the exteriour Communion by renouncing obedience to the Head of the Church so the Excommunication was subsequent to the Schisme what did the Reformation begun before but perfected after that clap of thunder Erection of one Altar against another or rather destruction of all Altars profanation of Churchs robbery of all sacred vessels ornaments pursuing with fire sword these who for conscience sake remained in the Catholick Communion Now what hopes of salvation left None vnlesse Schism sacriledge rapine CALVMNY PERIVRY MVRTHER Heresy be venial sins though vnrepented leaue hopes of salvation For the guilt of all these many more ye haue contracted since your separation from the center of Ecclesiastical Communion So your debt contracted by the separation is great but your following demeanour hath enflamed your reckoning to a prodigious summe not to be discharged with any ordinary satisfaction which is yet encreased by a pretence to jnnocency a resolution to justify all these crying sins I acknowledge with S. Austin l. 6. de verâ Relig. C. 6. that some jnnocent persons by Ecclesiastical censures may be cast out of the exteriour Communion of the Church that De facto this hath hapned to some that such Persons interiourly retaine the Communion with the faithfull provided they containe themselves Intra limites inculpatae tutelae do nothing vnlawfull beare their crosse patiently invent no errours practice nothing for revenge attempt not to break open the Church dores to force a readmittance nor barre them vp to hinder it do not endeavour to withdraw others from the Church to encrease the number of separatists make themselves considerable by becoming heads of a Party Giue me such a man thô he seeme to liue dye in a Schisme J shall hope for his salvation with S. Austin Whose words are these Sinit diuina providentia per nonnullas nimium turbulentas carnalium hominum sediditiones expelli de Congregatione Christianâ etiam bonos viros quam contumeliam vel iniuriam suam cum patientissimè pro Ecclesiae pace tulerint neque vllas novitates vel schismatis vel haeresis moliti fuerint docebunt homines quam vero affectu quantâ sinceritate charitatis Deo serviendum sit Talium ergo virorum propositum est aut sedatis remeare turbinibus aut si id non sinantur vel câdem tempestate perseverante vel ne de suo reditu talis aut gravior oriatur tenent voluntatem consulendi etiam ijs ipsis quorum motibus perturbationibusque cesserunt sine vllâ conventiculorum segregatione vsque ad mortem defendentes testimomio iuvantes eam Fidem quam in Ecclesiâ Catholicâ praedicari sciunt Hos coronat in occulto Pater in occulto videns Thus S. Austin divine providence some times permits that even good men are by turbulent spirits cast out of the Church who if they beare patiently this disgrace wrong for the Peace of the Church without endeavouring to frame a Shisme or broach Heresyes they will by their example teach men with what sincere charity they ought to serue God Such men intend ether to return to the Church when the storme is blown over or if they cannot return ether because the stormes ceases not or to prevent another storm continue quietly without gathering conventicles defending to their Power that Faith which they know is taught in the Church Such as these are crowned in secret by the Father who seeth in secret How many are there of your Party who haue thus peaceably demeaned themselves I meane of the more conspicuous governing or leading part Vix totidem quot Thebarum Portae vel divitis ostia nili Scarce as many as the Muses or even the Graces Soe the number that on this score can pretend to salvation is very inconsiderable For the rest how different is their proceeding from the others of whom S. Austin hopes well these beare the wrong done to them patiently for the loue of peace of the Church you by tongue pen hands shew your Passion These introduces no noveltys cause no Schismes or Heresyes you do the contrary These desire to return to the Church the storme being over you raise new stormes endeavour to perpetuate the separation These defend the Faith preacht in the Church you impugn it Those loue Peace you hate it persecute all promoters of it These are guilty of no crime which may deserue the Churchs censure you haue provoked the Heads of the Church to inflict on you such a punishment These are ready to vndergo any Penalty without deserving it you deserue it will vndergo none Jn fine these are jnnocent you guilty guilty of a great crime aggravate it by glorying in it Peccatum suum sicut Sodoma praedicaverunt So we must conclude that their example serves not to justify but to condemne you who differ so much from them therefore thô we grant with that great saint that There is life in the way of these yet your way leads to Death 3. Wherefore it is both an Vsual saying a Setled judgment of Catholicks that Protestants remaining such cannot be saved Because that name imports two greivous sins Schisme by separation from the Communion of the Church Heresy by beleiving errours contrary to Faith Which two sins taken severally or together make vs despayr of their salvation You pretend Protestants will say the like of Papists I reply it may be so but haue they such strong grounds for that saying as Catholicks haue Jn 1642. the Factious part of the Parliament did vie with the loyal peaceable party in verbal expressions of Duty Allegiance to their soverain But on the one side were only words reality on the other it was J think not necessary to cast a figure to discerne which side only pretended Allegiance but intended the contrary And it is as visible whether side in Religion aimes at Peace maintaines the ancient Faith which innovates the wordes of both partys
broach Heresyes impugn her defend themselves with the same principles I am now arrived at the end of this real or pretended Conference without omitting any one material point of it I hope I haue given reasonable satisfaction of which others will judge more impartially then my selfe if I am mistaken by judging too favourably of my owne labours my replyes be found vnsatisfactory J desire that defect be charged on my weakenesse not on the cause I defend which is invincible being secured by the promise of Christ from all possibility of errour for Against it the gates of Hell shall never prevayle I haue given a reason in the preface why I take no notice of the Father's answers as they are couched in this Relation My intention is only to defend the Church from the Objections of the Learned Doctor To which it is enough to shew as I think I haue don that his Premisses are false his Jllations incoherent his whole discourse not convincing Thus Wisdome is justified of her children Mat. 11.19 THE SECOND BOOK A REVISION OF THE ARGVMENT FROM SENSES AGAINST TRANSVBSTANTIATION THE PREFACE I Never began to read any Treatise with greater Horrour nor ended with greater Indignation than this which J now come to review Horrour to see doubts of divine Doctrine submitted to the depositions of facultys common to Beasts a jury of the Senses impanelled to decide controversys of Faith set on a throne to judge the judg of the world determine the meaning of the words of eternal Truth of divine veracity althô they are vncapable of vnderstanding the words of the meanest vnderstanding most illiterate Pesant I expect shortly to see some other appeal to Beasts seing many of the better sort of these surpasse man as to quicknesse of Senses which in them are much more perfect then in most if not al men therefore may be sayd to be more competent judges of the objects of Senses then men can be Indeed Seducers proficiunt in peius wax worse worse 2. Tim. 2.13 it is not so great a step from the Senses of men to those of Beasts which are of the same Species are rather more than lesse perfect in their kind J as it is from the Church directed by the Holy Ghost for our jnstruction in Faith to Carnal senses That having something of divine by reason of the Holy Ghost assisting these being meere Corporal below all that hath any thing of Reason A fit judge indeed for such a Church as the Protestant is My horrour changed into Indignation when I heard the Verdict brought in by this Iury the Sentence pronounced by this Vmpire this Brutish judge yet from such a Iudg little lesse could be hoped for in such a matter by which the Scripture is silenced Tradition trampled vnder foot Fathers rejected the Practice Faith of the whole Catholick Church condemned the Communion with all Faith full all the Catholick Church renounced a horrid execrable Schisme authorized And all this vpon the deposition of so vile a witnesse by the Sentence of so contemptible a judg as Carnal sense And this Sentence accepted of recommended by a learned Doctor of divinity a pretended Ryght Reverend Bishop Is Christianity is Divine Faith brought to this Yet J find one sign of Modesty vnlesse it were rather Cunning craftinesse in adorning the stage for this piece of Pageantry disposing for this extravagant judgment that there is ether no mention at all of the grounds of Catholick Faith in this treatise or else it is so silent low a mention that it is scarce perceptible For had you set before the eyes of your Readers the practice of the Church the Testimonys of Fathers the decrees of councils the written vnwritten word of God in fine the vnanimous vote of the primitiue present Church averring that to be Christs Body Bloud the Readers would not haue heard the sentence of this mock judg would haue pulled him off the Bench forced him to yeild the victory to Truth For if we Must pull out our eye if it scandalize vs we must shut our eyes stop our cares renounce all our Senses when thy contradict God's expresse word But if by this you made sure of such a sentence as you wisht you discovered the vnjustice of it by not admitting the plea of the contrary party For qui statuit aliquid parte inauditâ alterâ aequum licet statuerit hand aequus fuit This argument is not of the Doctors invention it is as old as the Sacramentarian Heresy Berengarius vsed it so did Zuinglius Calvin F. Stillingfleet G. Burnet And the answer is as common To confute this Treatise it were enough to reprint the 33. Chapter of Anti-Haman so no new reply is necessary Yet least he think himself neglected I will review what he says SECTION V. 1. Ancient Fathers re'yed not on sense 2. S. Paul teaches the senses are not to be relyed on 3. Reason convinces the same SEnses no competent judges in this Controversy Are not our Senses the same now as they were a thousand or sixteen hundred yeares ago Are their objects changed Are not the sensations they cause the same now as then Did not Bread tast like Bread wine like wine than as well as now Are not their colour odour the same at all times And had not men then as much reason to rely on their Senses in framing a judgment of their objects as now Sure they had Now what judgments did Ancients frame of this object in debate Let S. Cyril of Hierusalem speak for all the rest Althô it seemes to be Bread yet it is not Bread Althô it seemes to be wine yet it is not wine Thus this great saint ancient Father delivering Christian Doctrine in a Catechisme So this is not his private sentiment but that of the Church not things of his own invention but of publick Tradition Till then Christians retained a sincere entire veneration for the word of God they harkned indeed to Senses but more to God when these two interfered one saying That is Christ's Body the other it is not such It is Bread they did not hesitate which to follow they easily resolved pronounced in favour of Faith subscribed to the son of God Who had words of life even life everlasting Io. 6.69 Animalis homo non percivit ca quae sunt spiritus Dei c. says the Apostle 1. Cor. 2.14 The natural man as your Translation hath-it Receiues not the things of the spirit of God for they are foolishnesse vnto him nether can he know them because they are spiritually discerned Thus the Holy Apostle is not Faith one thing of the spirit of God Is it not of Faith or revealed Truth preached by the Apostle that he speakes in that place Now if Faith be aboue the reach of the whole Natural man how comes it to be below Senses which
Then we must blot out of our Catalogue of Miracles a greate part of those recorded in Scripture it self But you say No doubt it would haue called it so I say I doubt of it my doubt is confirmed by many instances of Miracles recorded in scripture without being called so That of rayes for example on Moses I ace But you say this was Sensible which the other is not And J say that is nothing to the purpose as I haue often shewed How ever it is evident enough for it appeares by the words of Christ that he is there our Senses tell vs that he is not visible there D. M. p. 19. It is no Miracle because it is not onely not evident to Sense but moreover it is contrary to Sense Rev. Here you serue vp againe your cold cabbadge which how insipid they were at first we haue Seene now we nauseate them Yet for four pages you afford vs no other foode D. M. p. 23. God never workes a Miracle but for some greate good End which cannot be obtained without it for God doth nothing in vaine Now such a Miracle would be to no purpose for Christ sayd the flesh profiteth nothing Revisor The Apostles the Fathers the Church the Faith full all over the world had haue a far different opinion of the sacramental Communion of the Body Bloud of Christ than you haue S. Paul makes vse of that consideration to moue men to try themselues before they approach the Divine Table least by receiving it vnworthily they become guilty of the Body Bloud of Christ S. Cyril of Hierusalem says that by it we are Christophori Bearers of Christ jtem Consanguinei his kinsmen S. Chrisostome yOu desire to see Christ to heare his voice to touch the hemme of his garment more is granted to you that you eate him c. Againe when describes a Preist at the Altar with quires of Angels round about him the Heavens open over his head God the holy ghost cooperating with him God the son in his hands to be offred to the Eternal Father who is aboue expecting to receiue that most gratefull offering doth all this avayle nothing Was the centurion moved with the consideration of his owne vnworthinesse being to receiue Christ vnder his roofe is our Faith so dead as to be insensible when he vouchsafes to come into our bosomes What can if this doth not stir vp in vs sorrow for having offended Almyghty God Faith in him whome we beleiue present Hope that he who hath giuen himself vnto vs will not can not refuse vs any thing And an intire sincere Loue of him who hath loved vs doth loue vs so much as to giue himself for all in general to each one in particular Besides acts of Devotion of Adoration of Humility of Zeale c. All which if you esteeme inconsiderable to Profit nothing I desire you to tell me what doth profit in the way of vertu You will say Faith And J will answer we haue that as well as you that quickned strengthned by the consideration of him really present who is both Authour Object or last end the Λ. Ω. of our Faith Jn fine S. Eucherius sayd Tria sibi Deus struxit tabernacula c. God hath set vp for himself three tents the Synagogue the Christian Church Heaven In the first there is nothing but Types of things hoped for in the last Substance without any Types in the Christian Church Substance vnder Types That same Christ who was figured to the Iews is cleerely seene enjoyed by the Blessed in Heaven being really present vnder Types on our Altars And you Protestants by denying this presence of Christ in this Divine Sacrament what do you but degrade your Communion from the dignity of a Sacrament of the new law bring it to the condition of a jewish rite of a base Beggarly element But The flesh profiteth nothing say you I grant it if it be taken carnally without spirit or Faith without discerning betwixt that other Bodily food not otherwise For can you or will you say that That flesh avayles nothing by which we were redeemed Will you say with your late tru Protestant Oracle that we were never the better for Christs being crucifyed for vs D. M. p. 24. 25. Lastly there can be no such Miracle as Transubstantiation because all Miracles are possible Transubstantiation is impossible And you send vs to see this proved in D. Whitaker Bishop Morton Mr. Chillingworth who shew say you that this implyes contradiction such things cannot be done nay it would argue rather an impotency than omnipotency in God to doe such things Revisor You had done vs appleasure Protestants would haue thought your time well spent in producing Reasons to proue this implicancy not to send vs them on this wild goose chacé to find what those learned men say in this point The meane while what you haue sayd proues nothing the beleife of Transubstantiation remaines firme God and his Church Tru. D. M. p. 27. There is therefore no such Miracle as Transubstantiation it being not onely an vselesse thing if it were so but an impossible thing that it should be lo. Revisor That Transubstantiation is a Miracle is a thing so evident to Reason that J never feare to see the Reasons for it answered That it is Vselesse impossible you say but you will never be able to persuade the first to any pious man nor the second to any learned man THE FOVRTH BOOK A REVISION OF D. M.'s ANSWER TO Mr CRESSEY'S LETTER HIS SERMON BEFORE THE KING HIS LETTER TO HER ROYAL HYGHNESSE ET HIS LETTER TO A PREIST THE PREFACE THese three pieces containing not many doctrinal Points controverted betwixt the two Churchs of Rome England will not detaine me long in reviewing your judgment declared in them especially considering that a greate part is personal of Mr. Cressey the Gun powder Plotters her R. H. which kind of things whither tru or false may be let pa se without any prejudice to the Catholick Caeuse For Personal sanctity of all Catholicks spread all over the world is a thing to be wisht not hoped for And althô some faults even of the first magnitude could be proved vpon some of them yet that ought no more to moue any man to abandon the Communion of the Church now than it did to abandon it in the Apostles times when some of her children were Detractors Gluttons Incestuous Contentious Proud Avaritious men as may be seene in S. Paul's Epistles In these indeed mention is made of a Church free from spot wrinkle that we hope for in Heaven But at present there are in the net good bad fish in the feild Corne Darnel in the barne wheate Chaffe in the house Vessells to honour to dishonour Amongst the virgins some foolish amongst the Apostles a Iudas
are his lowest facultyes Just as if what the Apostle says is over my head you should say is vnder my feet But why doth not the Natural man receiue Faith Because It is foolishnesse vnto him And just such is Transubstantiation to you therefore is laught at by you the other reason is convincing He cannot receiue Faith Becaus it is spiritually discerned Are Senses spiritual facultyes can they Spiritually discern If not as certainly they cannot pull them off the throne on which you placed them of which they are vnworthy as being vncapable of discerning the thing in question which is of The spirit of God spiritual discerned only spiritually No lesse but rather more evident are the words of the same Apostle 2. Cor. 10.4 The weapons of our warfare says he are not carnal but myghty through God to the pulling down of strong holds casting down imaginations every hygh thing that exalteth it selfe against the knowledge of God bringing into captivity every Thought to the obedience of Christ .... do ye look on things after the outward appearance Thus your own Translation Which words decide the thing in question For first it is evident he speakes of the Doctrine he preacht which is Faith And in the first place he cleerely discards outward Senses from any share in this judgment The weapons of our warfare are not carnal now Senses are Carnal as is cleere 2. He rejects inward Senses Casting down all jmaginations 3. He teaches that our vnderstanding must also be subject Bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ Thus according to the Apostle all facultys of soul body spiritual carnal interiour exteriour must vayle bonnet to Faith which is termed Myghty through God The last question Do ye look on things according to their out ward appearance Is a conclusion of the foregoing discourse cuts all the nerves of the Doctors argument Which is totally grounded Vpon out ward appearance to carnal sense Let vs apply the Apostles meaning to our present purpose by some few questions What will you say that is on the Holy Altar Mr. Dr Answer Bread wine But why do you think it to be bread wine Answer wee looke on the out ward appearance judge of the thing after that You know sir that the Catholick Church all over the wor'd even Luther himself beleived it to be the Body Bloud of Christ with what weapons do you combat their opinion Answer The weapons we fyght with are Carnel they are the senses Now let vs propose such questions to a Catholick What do you beleiue that to be which is on the Altar Answer the tru Body Bloud of Christ But why do you beleiue it to be the Body Bloud of Christ Answer Because Christ says it is so the Church teaches me his words are so to be vnderstood Doth it appear to be the Body Bloud of Christ Answer no. But We look not on things after the out ward appearance when that is not conformable to the word of God delivered to vs by the Church With what weapons do you combat the contrary errour Answer The weapons we vse Are not carnal sense But myghty through God to destroy all jmaginations beate downe all thoughts which are raysed in vs in opposition to the divine revealed truth 3. If we consult Reason in this debate we shall see that Senses ought not to be admitted as judges it being absolutely impossible they should vnderstand the matter in question therefore cannot possibly pronounce sentence on ether side For what is the question What is the meaning of those words of our Blessed saviour This is my Body this is my Bloud for I suppose your jmpiety is not arrived to that heygth as to deny his words to be tru or say you would not beleiue any thing to be what he plainly vndeniably says it is That is you do not beleiue that God doth or can tell a Lye Otherwise farewell all Faith we must make vse of other Mediums to deale with you Our dispute then being about the sense of those words of Christ J proue that our senses cannot judg in it with this argument Senses cannot judg of things which are not their proper objects But such are the things in debate in this controversy Therefore senses cannot judg of these things The major or first Proposition is cleere For the eye cannot judg of a found because it is not its proper object Nor the eare of a colour for the same reason The same of all other senses Wherefore no sense can judg of any thing that is not its proper object The minor or second proposition viz things in debate here are not the proper object of Senses is also selfe evident For the proper meaning or signification of words is the proper object of no sense But the matter here in debate is the proper meaning or signification of the words of Christ Therefore it is the proper object of no sense These Premisses are so evidently tru that J think it enough only to proue the first Proposition this I doe by induction for nether eye nor nose nor palate nor hand nor eare can see tast smel feale or heare the signification of words wherefore no sense can perceiue it The only doubt can be about Hearing by reason of the convexion betwixt the sound of an Articulate word which is the object of the eare the signification of it yet even here my Proposition is tru for the same articulate sound is insignificant to one who vnderstands it not sometimes signifyes different things to persons of different langages v. c. Lego to a Latinist signifyes I reade to a Grecian I speake to an English man nothing Yet the sound in the eare is the same to all these three Jndeed if it were not so by learning anew language our eares should be changed framed in a different manner to represent the new signification Which I suppose no body will say As to the other Proposition the minor that our dispute is about the signification of those words is as evident For our sentiment is grounded on the words being taken litterally yours vpon their being taken figuratively Both which are the severall significations One thing only occurres in answer to this viz that the litteral signification is so absurd that it cannot be admitted Answer this is sayd but not proved in du place these absurditys will be confidered J hope found to be no bsurditys Answer 2. this doth not satisfy my reason for no Absurdity can make any faculty judg of what it cannot know As no Absurdity can make me a competent judg of a composition in the Chinese language of which J am entirely ignorant Here I myght lay down my pen it already appearing that all you can alleadg from Senses can signify nothing seing they cannot depose of a thing they are totally strangers to you say nothing but
the liberty to propose his Argument am ready to heare him SECTION X. 1. The Catholick Doctrine of Transubstantiation 2. D Morley's argument against it returned vpon him 4. Nether scripture nor Church prejudiced by our Doctrine 4. Nor senses 1. D. Morley The Doctrine of Transubstantiation Or the Church of Rome's Interpretation of those words This is my Body Is that in Sacrament of the Altar the whole substance of Bread is changed into the Body the whole substance of wine into the Bloud of Christ so that after Consecration there Remains nether Bread nor wine but only the Body Bloud of Christ vnder the species or accidents of Bread wine Revisor Why you should say it is the sentiment of the Church of Rome particularly when it is common to all other Oriental Christians is not hard to guesse at you would insinuate what you dare not speake out it is so evidently false that she the Ch. of R. stands alone in this point of Doctrine whereas all other Christian Churchs extant when your Reformation began agreed in substance with that of Rome their mother in this point But let that passe J acknowledge that you represent our sentiment ryght What haue you to say against it 2. D. Morley Against this Position I argue thus that which frustrates all the vse end of scripture cannot be the tru interpretation of any one place of it But that interpretation of those words of scripture frustrates all the end vse of scripture Therefore the Ch. of Romes interpretation of this place of scripture cannot be tru I proue the minor or second proposition thus that which necessarily implyes our Senses are or may be deceived in their proper objects so that what all men's Senses represent as one thing may be is indeed another must needes frustrate all the end vse of all scripture But that interpretation doth necessarily imply that our senses may be are deceived in their proper objects by teaching that to be Flesh Bloud which to all men's Senses appeares to be Bread wine Therefore our interpretation of those words doth frustrate the vse end of all scriptures Revisor I deny the minor or second Proposition of your first syllogisme To the proofe of it 1. I will let the maior or first Proposition passe althô it be not tru for mine all men's senses in the world represent the moone bigger in the east west then in the south which is evidently falfe yet the Scripture is not Frustrated by that Epidemical errour of all men's Senses Our Reason is superiour to Senses doth correct that errour without prejudicing Scripture by it why may not Faith which is superiour to both Sense Reason correct both when they go astray yet Scripture remaine entire seing Faith is but the Doctrine of Sripture as it were its soul Yet I will Gratis admit your Maior 2. I deny your minor or second Proposition for it appeares to no man's Hearing to be Bread wine but Flesh Bloud This is my Body this is my Bloud are the expresse words of Christ now sir you know out of the Apostle I haue minded you of it that Faith comes by Hearing And Hearing is not mistaken in this matter Hence S. Thomas of Aquin. Visus Tactus Gustus in te fallitur Sed auditu solo tuto creditur Credo quidquid dixit Dei Filius Nihil hoc verbo veritatis verius We acknowledg that Syght Feeling Tast are mistaken here we correct their mistake by the expresse word of God by Hearing conveyghed to our minds to which word we owe greater obedience than to all our Senses together So your minor is false Thus your Conclusion that Our jnterpretation doth frustrate make voyde the end vse of scripture that came limping in on two bullrushes for crutches fals to the ground one of them being broken the other insufficient to beare such a weyght 2. Now I desire you to shew your skill in sophistry answer this syllogisme by which I draw the same Conclusion out of your Doctrine exposition of Christ's words That interpretation which is plainely contradictory to the expresse words of Scripture doth frustrate the end vse of Scripture But such is your interpretation of those words of Christ Therefore your interpretation frustrates the end vse of Scripture The maior or first Proposition is evident for what vse can be made of Scripture to what intent can it serve if we take the liberty to beleiue teach the direct contrary Doctrine to what it delivers For example if when the scripture says God Created Heauen Earth we say God did not create Heauen Earth When it says The word was in the beginning We say The word was not in the beginning When it says The word was made Flesh we say The word was not made Flesh. And so of the rest What can Scripture signify to what vse to what intent can it serue when such interpretations are made of it Soe my maior stands good The minor 2. Proposition is evident that Such is your jnterpretation of Christ's words For Scripture says That is Christ's Body you say That is not Christ's Body Scripture says That is Christ's Bloud you say That is not Christ's Bloud Let those frame an interpretation more opposit to Scripture who can I confesse my skil in Logicke reachs not to frame any more directly opposite I feare you will find it as much harder to answer this Argument than J shall to answer yours as it is to cure a real than to cure afeigned sicknesse 4. D Morley p. 4. All scripture being written for our learning as S. Paul Says it is there being no other meanes whereby we can come to know what is written in Scripture but our Senses either reading it our Selues or hearing it read if I be not certain of what I see when I reade my selfe nor of what I heare when I am read to by others it is impossible for me to know what the Scripture teacheth by consequence the Scripture it self must be vselesse or to no purpose Thus you Here Goliath like you bring a sword to cut off your owne head We say the words of Scripture are cleere that whither we Reade or Heare them they signify the same thing we vnderstand them in their plaine obvious sense as any man would vnderstand them who is resolved to submit his reason to them which we doe not make them stoop to some of our fleshly Senses as you doe Wherefore your method interpretation frustrates all vse of Scripture ours leaues it in its full force vigour You make Scripture weare the chaines of Senses we bind senses Reason too to the triumphant chariot of Scripture Then you discover an vnexpected concerne for the Church Authority after having spent your whole life in fyghting against it as if that were prejudiced by our Doctrine Not only the scripture
D. M. p. 12. Isaac Could not know his sons Esau Jacob from one another by feeling Iacob's hands being rough like those of Esau but by hearing he myght distinguish them Revisor To what intent this is brought is not easily discernable that Isaac hearing Iacob's voice surmised it to be like to that of Iacob is very tru but that he certainly knew him to be Iacob is not certain nay the astonishment into which the tru Esau asking his Blessing cast him is an evident signe that till then he was not quite free from the errour into which Iacob's goatish hands greasy clothes had brought him You seeme to think it necessary that our Senses either severally or at least conjointly be able to discerne betwixt any two objects proposed I think it were well that they could do so but do not beleiue that any greate danger would hang over the world if the Senses should be found insufficient sometimes They are all together vnable to distinguish betwixt two glasses of water two egges two twins a wolfe some dogs c. as hath beene often observed yet the sun keepes on his course women bring forth at their ordinary time Pompey's father was often taken for his Cooke Monogenes Pompey himself could not be distinguisht from Vibius Publitius both obscure men the later newly made free Comelius Scipio was often saluted by the name of Serapio a poore Sexton These other mistakes are recorded in Valerius maximus l. 9. c. 14. Yet that ignorance of the Romans did not ruin their state Why then are you so solicitous to provide a Remedy against it Or if a remedy be necessary why may not our Vnderstanding act the Apothecary provide it as well as our Senses Methinks it should rather belong to the vnderstanding to compare several objects together state wherein the agree wherein they differ then to the Senses Otherwise we shall find it no easy matter to fix the bounds betwixt these spiritual carnal facultyes for you will adjudge to Senses what hath hitherto owned the jurisdiction of the Vnderstanding as to what will be left to this queene of our facultyes our Reason this shall onely be tenant at will to Senses who by the same Topick may claime the rest leaue the Vnderstanding as the Covenanters left the King 3. D. M. p. 14. 15. Hath along discourse about the conditions necessary to make vs infallibly certain of what we see Viz 1. An eye well disposed 2. The medium betwixt that the object as it ought to be 3. The object at a convenient distance These conditions being observed the syght cannot be deceived in judging of colours or coloratums as such Revisor I would not mingle in this place meere Phylosophical matter with the rest if possible so J passe by these conditions onely proposing some questions 1. what certainty haue we that there are no more ways to deceiue our Syght than these conditions provide against Cannot swiftnesse or slownesse of motions alter the appearance of Colours coloratums Are there not some Colours various according to the situation of the silkes that for example which the french call Du Diable coessé something of the nature of a doves necke Do not Mountebanks find meanes to deceiue the eyes of their spectators thô their eyes be good the Medium distance competent 2. What certainty haue we those three condition be exactly observed As to the first may not our eyes be defectiue we not perceiue it Doth not Seneca write of an old woman who complained of all roomes being obscure yet never would acknowledge any fault in her eyes which were the only faulty As to the second may there not be a considerable difference in the Medium enough to Refract the Visual rays we not perceive it As to the third what certainty haue we that the object is at a competent distance Do we certainly know what is the exactest distance Do not painters direct vs who are vnskilled in that Art what is the proper Distance to see a Picture And in how many other things may the distance proper for such a determinate object be vnknowne to vs Againe what certainty haue we of the tru Distance it self Doth not the moone rising over a house seeme to touch it When a thing is within 20. yeards or a mile of vs we discerne the different distances but can we perceiue the different distances of several parts in the surface of the moone or sun Or of those of Other Planets the fixt stars How can the Distance competent secure our eyes from mistakes when distance it selfe is so obscure vncertaine When you haue answered all these questions I shall require you to answer two more The 1. what vnquestionable certainty you haue of all those Answers Jf you haue none then these conditions cannot secure vs from all possibility of errour in crediting our Senses The 2. whither the certainty of these conditions being exactly observed be equal to that we haue that what God says is tru If the certainty of the truth of God's words be greater then that of those conditions than we must conclude that To appeale to Senses in opposition to God's expresse words is rash dangerous obnoxious to Errour SECTION XIII Reasons for the credit of senses 1. We may rely on our senses 2. Courts of Iustice as free from errour amongst Catholicks as others 3. Depositions of senses subordinate to those of God 4. Our Doctrine doth not ground scepticisme 5. Scriptures Church not prejudiced by Transubstantiation 6. Conclusion 1. D. M. p. 17. What can be more knowne than Bread wine If than we may be mistaken in these what vse what certainly of Senses in any thing else And if there be not certainty of Senses why doth God command the Israelits to remember what they had Seene Heard teach it their Children Rev. J do not see that Faith is lesse taught or lesse strongly beleived where Transubstantiation is taught then where t is rejected Or that seasons would be changed the Earth lesse fruitfull or men lesse wise or lesse knowne to Relations or Freinds should God worke some other Changes vnobservable to Senses reveale it to vs. We credit our Senses as much as you where God doth not reveale the contrary what more can be due to any Created faculty Can we not prefer God's veracity before our Senses but we must absolutely vniversally reject these even where they conforme with Faith All discourse relyes on that principle Eadem vni tertio sunt idem inter se which is hardly reconcilable with the mystery of the Trinity Yet we do not suspect a fallacy in all other discourse because we make no exception but where God excepts he excepts only in that one mystery So we excepting against senses only in this particular where God excepts leaues them at full liberty in full credit in all things else D. M. p.
an Ismael in Abraham's family an Esau in Isaacs a Ruben in Iacob's an Absalom in David's an Adam in the terrestrial Paradice a Lucifer in the Celestial All which bad men did nether excuse a separation from the Church in which they lived nor prejudice the rest who did not approue or abette the sins as the Church hath long since declared against the Donatists We professe we beleiue the Sanctity of the Catholick Church which consists in her Doctrine her Laws her Rites many of her children not all And it is the goodnesse of God to make vs partakers of all the good workes which any one doth but not of the bad For we beleiue a Communion of Saints not of sinners of merits not of offenses So the guilt of sin is confined to the person sinning but the merits of vertuous actions spreades to all the faithfull who are in the state of grace Wherefore we ought not to think the worse of the Church for any fault committed by any of her children seing she nether teaches nor commands nor approues it But the Protestant Church cannot so easily cleare her selfe from such spots as the sins of her children leaue her Doctrine of the impossibility of God's Commandments that we are nether the better for good nor the worse for bad actions which are nether meritorious nor demeritorious in the praedestinate of Evangelical liberty the roote of all Sedition Rebellion in Church State c. These I say the like having beene taught by same of her children never condemned by her make her answearable for all sorts of sins which are but the natural sequels of those Premisses effects of those causes fruits of that tree which the first Protestants planted their followers water cherish In Catholicks a bad life is contrary to Catholick Doctrine laws in Protestants it is a natural sequel of both J do not say this to excuse any fault with reason charged vpon the persons mentioned except the gun powder plotters or to forestall my Readers judgment in favour of the Church if those accused should be really found guilty There is no cause for such an Apology The faults alleadged against Mr. Cressey are at the worst indiscreete expressions of edjous things which he thought tru D. M. thinks not so And her R. H. did shew in effect that no Wordly consideration should moue her to professe a Religion of which in her conscience she was not Of which more hereafter Who but Atheists Libertins can blame this Which is only a preferring Heaven to Earth Eternity to time the soul to the body God to man the Peace of a good conscience before the reproach of some bad men Those who think all Religions indifferent that the King is to determine which we are to follow the Hobbians may blame this but not a Disciple of Christ his Apostles SECTION XVII Mr. Cressey excused 1. Whither the Kingdome may be sayd to haue taken the Covenant 2. Whither the K. was the only sufferer for his Religion 3. Many of the Protestant Clergy renounc't their Dignityes 4. Whither the Clergy suffred for their Loyalty or their Religion 5. Of the Actings of the English Protestant Clergy in the troubles 1. D. M. p. 7. It is false injurious to say that the Presbiterians did constrain the whole kingdome to forswear their Religion for it must be the whole Kingdomes taking not the Presbiterians imposing generally of the Covenant that must proue this assertion Revisor You take Mr. Cressey's words in a very strict sense that you may accuse them condemne him Yet I think in good Phylosophy divinity too Propositions In materiâ contingenti althô they seeme Vniversal are not such but only Indefinite For example Philip. 2.21 All seeke their owne not the things which are of Iesus-Christ T it 1.12 The Cretans are always lyars evil Beasts slow bellyes These Propositions are as to their forme Vniversal the first with a distributiue particle to Persons All the second with alike particle of time Always Yet nether are truly Vniversal not the first for nether S. Paul nor several of the Apostles then aliue Sought their owne In alike manner amongst the Cretans some were very good sincere vertuous men Such Propositions are frequent in common discourse v. c. All Spainards are Graue All French men civil All Italians cautious All young men rash All women talkatiue All old men morose c. Which are taken as tru because commonly they are so taken Indefinitè But taken as Vniversals they are false seing several instances can be brought in which they are not tru greate warinesse is necessary in applying any one of them to particulars This is my first Answer Another is that the Kingdome by an ordinary figure is taken for the governing part of it so what is decreed by that may be sayd to be decreed by the Kingdome Which is tru thô some of this part oppose it Thus a Peace or Truce is sayd to be made by the Republick Of Venice v. c. when the Senate decrees it or when the major part of Senators resolue it althô some Senators oppose it are for war Livy Vbi semel decretum erit omnibus id etiam quibus ante displicuerat pro bono atque vtili foedere erit defendendum Plinius l. 6. Epist 13. Quod pluribus placuit omnibus tenendum Dionisius Halicarnassaeus Parendum his quae pars maior censuerit Even those who dislike a decree before it be made are bound to approue it after it is made Provided it containe nothing against Conscience Indeed we see in all Assemblyes where things are carryed by plurality of votes all even the NOES are bound to approue the order vnlesse in some cases when they are admitted to a Protestation Now the major part of the then Gouvernours of the Nation or Kingdome decreed the taking of the Covenant the major more conspicuous part of the subjects may be sayd to haue admitted that decree althô very many considerable both for number quality by some industry shifted off the taking of it so the Kingdome may in some sort be sayd To impose the Covenant also To take it Thus we say that England changed its Religion such a yeare thô a very greate number at that time did not admit of any change And we may say that the Oaths are imposed vpon taken by the Kingdome thô several refuse them Were not Mr. Cressey a Papist I beleiue either of these answers would suffice 2. D. M. p. 8. His second crime is his saying The King was almost the only man who remained so constant to his Religion as to hazard for it the losse of his estate life too This is false say you for many thousands did the same Revisor In the ruin of others there was a complicancy of causes which procured it loyalty to their King hatred to their persons for fyghting against them their
estates c. For Naboth was not the only man who lost his life for his inheritance Now there was a time when the demands of the Presbiterians seemed not intollerable to the King who only stucke at the destruction of the Bishops So Mr. Cressey myght say he was Almost the only man who suffred on the score of his protestant Episcopacy I haue not heard of very many ruined killed because they Would not renounce the Bishops Nether did the Rebels vse to say Renounce Bishops or we will hang you Several sayd renounce Popery or we will kill you many were killed by the Rebells for not complying But to no Protestant was giuen such sowre sawce that J heard of 3. D. M. p. 8. Thirdly he says Several of the wisest learnedest of the English Clergy were content to buy their security with a voluntary degrading of themselues from their offices Titles Which say you is injurious to the Bishops Rev. Why the Bishops should be vnderstood in that proposition J know not In our Canon law when only an inferiour generical degree is named in odious thing 's as this it in your eye the superiour particular is not comprehended vide C. Sedes Apostol de Rescriptis the glosse vpon it now Mr. Cressey mentions only The Clergy which is the lowest most common degree Wherefore nether Bishops nor Deanes nor any Person in Ecclesiastical Dignity must necessarily be comprehended What then doth offend you in this Proposition Did not several of the English Clergy become Catholicks Did not these degrade themselues From the offices titles which they enjoyed in the Church of England Could they retaine them remaining Catholicks Did not some of the English Clergy yeild to the streame comply with the times Did not some beare armes Did not one he a Metrapolitan lay aside his Crozier take vp a sword Did not all these degrade themselues May not these different sort of Desertors be named Several of the English Clergy Were it not in the book of a Papist probably they myght so the book passe without offense But Mr. Cressey says that he meanes the Vniversality of the Bishops who seemed to degrade themselues by not filminating any censure against the Rebells Answer If he doth so he says more than what was necessary to make good his first Proposition You say that censures are not a Necessary duty of a Bishop So you both agree that To censure is a duty of a Bishop in time place yet with this difference that you think it is not a Necessary duty of a Bishop he thinks it is doth this diversity of Thoughts make him Criminal Especially being conformable to scripture 2. Trin. 4.2 Reproue Rebuke exhort Tit. 1.13 Rebuke them sharpely Did not Christ giue power to bind as well as to loosen To retaine as well as to release To shut as well as to open If on pressing occasions they neglect the vse of that Power To bind retaine shut is it not as much as to renounce that Power if they renounce that do they retaine the other Is not Episcopacy one individual Power I desire you to shew me any one Catholick country where such a Rebellion hapned all the Bishops remained silent By what doth Christ distinguish a Pastor from a Mercenary Joan. 10. The first sees a Wolf coming exposes his life for the defence of his flock the later seing the wolf coming runs away lets the wolf worry his slocke at Pleasure Which of these two did our English Bishops imitate But J leaue the application to the Reader But what can you alleadge to excuse this silence in such an occasion as would make even the dumbe son of Craesus speake you haue three motiues The first is that it was not seasonable But doth not S. Paul command that it be done even Out of season The second that it would haue done no good But that was De futuro contingenti How ever in a desperate sicknesse is it not better to apply an vncertain remedy than none at all Would any one haue thought that the Layty had complyed with their duty to serue the King in his wars if they should haue remained at home sayd Our fyghting for the King will do no Good The third you would not tempt God nor expose your order to their malice who myght extinguish it The others are but pretended this is the tru reason here the shoo wrings you thought it good sleeping in a whole skin were desirous to keepe your mather's sons out of harmes way Indeed you would secure your persons not your order for the Rebells had before vowed to roote out your degree so that could not be brought into greater danger than it was in Wherefore your feare was for your dearly beloved persons D. M. p. q. His 4. crime is saying that Though many of the Clergy suffred in extremity yet it was not properly with an eye to their Religion but to their fidelity loyalty to their Prince A bold vncharitable Assertion Revisor Why so 1. Because says the Doctor they did not tell him so Answer the factious Rebells did tell him so declaring they did not persecute for Religion but for the security of the state Name any Protestant Parson hanged for being such Dr. Hewit was executed for ether real or pretended crimes against the state not for Religion So the rest Your other reason is because Loyalty is a point of your Religion Answer then Susan is innocent all M. Cressey's fault comes to this that he thought some crimes against the state were not against Religion And if this be a crime there are so many so greate offenders that you will scarce find a Iury to passe vpon them D. M. p. q. I think those Martyrs who suffer in defense of the V. commandment as well as of any other Rev. You will I hope find a place in your catalogue of Martyrs for those Papists Iesuits who chose rather to dye than To beare false witnesse 5. What motiues the Regicides may haue had to leaue vnmolested some obscure Parsons is to me as vncertain as what you say p. 14. is improbable Viz that it was Out of seare of their interest reputation in the countryes where they lived They had cut downe the stately Cedar would they sticke at a shrub They cut off the Head of your Church would they feare the toe or paring a nayl They pulled downe King Nobles the primate his Brethren would they be awed by a country Parson scarce knowne even by name fiue miles from the place of his residence To morrow I may beleiue this not to day D. M. p. 17. Providence seemes to haue suffred that those heroical Confessors should be ejected out of their stations that being disperst over the Nation they myght sow the seedes of Loyalty Truth Rev. Very pretty As if the Hay of a greate medow were Disperst by being
gathered into stackes or the Atlandick Ocean by ruming into halfe a dozen Fish-ponds What corner in all the Kingdome without some of your ministry before the troubles How then did this mysterious Dispersion spread them some of them travelled it is tru but haply as many did so before what Seeds did they sow abroade You your self were so wary as not to speake of Religion till you had a Iesuits hand word that it would not be ill taken A broade then you did not sow those seedes Did you sow them in England who sowed the Seedes of Treason falshood of which there was such store that it overrun the Nation are not as yet weeded out Were the Ministers negligent in sowing those good seedes before the war Or was their labour industry lost And how was it so successefull after the wars that it should be a work of Providence But you thought it honourable that Providence should appeare in the concernes of your Ministry so you bring it in without well considering to what intent purpose 5. D. M. p. 18. Begins to excuse the Bishops neglect of Excommunication all the time of the troubles Vpon which I aske him some questions Haue not the Bishops Power to excommunicate Js not that Power to be vsed against obdurate sinners Were there none such from 1640. till 1650 Sure there were How comes this censure to be forgotten The Parliament say you p. 21. could not be excommunicated Ryght but the Persons in of the Parliament myght if the censure did not bring them to their wits nor restore them to their duty it would haue fryghted many well meaning men who adhered to the others innocently Which is one effect of censures 1. Trin. 5.20 Vt caeteri timorem habeant D. M. p. 22. We would not cast our Pearls vnto swine nor our holy things to dogs p. 26. nor expose Christ to contempt who sayth who so ever despiseth you despiseth me Rev. A pretty pretext for all hen-harted Prelates The Apostles Fathers were of a far different opinion let one speake for all Non calcatur qui persecutionem patitur sed qui persecutionem timendo infatuatur Aug. l. 1. de serm D. in mon. c. 6. Heis not despised who suffers persecution but who through Feare of persecution is infatuated so as to neglect his duty Had the Apostles primitiue Bishops been so timorously prudent Paganisme had never been destroyed Semen est sanguis Christianorum says Tertullian Plures efficimur quoties metimur Our Bloud is seed our number encreases by our being mowed downe with your swords One graine falls hundreds grow vp One Christian is martyred thousands of Pagans embrace his faith the remnant honour Christ his Vicegerents even when they persecute them But this lesson is not learnt in the Protestant Church D. M. p. 22. Thirteene Bishops made a trial of their Authority when they made a solemn publick Protestation against the forcible keeping of them out of the House of Peeres were for that impeached of Hygh Treason clapt vp in the Tower Rev. What is this to the purpose Is Protestation an Episcopal Act Cannot meere lay men enter a Protestation Is your seate in the house of Peeres of Divine Ryght Shew the canon of a General Council or a text of Scripture that ground either of these two things If you can shew none no wonder the thing should not succeede which is not of your Ecclesiastical Function But how comes that concerne for your seate in Parliament to be greater than for all other things how sacred soever You see Faith destroyed by Heresy you are silent the Church torne in pieces by Schismes you are silent the Royal Power vndermined by Factions the King 's sacred person endangered by Seditions affronted by Insolent varlets souls poysoned with damnable opinions you are silent You are debarred sitting in the house of Peeres you cry out so loud as to provoke the Rebells to shut you vp in a Cage Js this seate of greater importance than souls than the King's person than Royal Authority than the Church than Faith D. M. p. 24. The Bishops thought they were obliged not to draw that sword of Excommunication to cut nothing but the Ayre with it or by striking on a Rocke to blunt or breake the Edge of it Rev. A straw is as good as such a sword which must strike only the Ayre or it will fly in pieces Oh but we must not strike Rockes Are then all the children of your Church as insensible of your censures as a Rocke of the stroke of a sword If so whose is the fault but yours who haue the breeding of them D. M. p. 25. By Excommunication they had exposed not only their Persons but their Order it self to be ruined for who can tell whither those who imprisoned some for the Protestation would not haue taken away their liues if they had interdicted the houses of Parliament and excommunicated their adherents And then what would haue become of the Episcopal Order it self of our Church Rome would giue vs no Bishops Lutherans Calvinists can giue none other Churchs are too far off Tarbox Revisor Did I not know your intention I should think you prevaricated your reasons are so far from giving satisfaction to a Christian so contrary to what hath been practiced Nothing but temporal motiues humane respects in all your discourse Was not the whole Catholick nay Christian Church in as greate danger when all the Bishops in the world were in Hierusalem And did this make them be silent Quite contrary they resolved to preach on beseeched God to confirme tem in this resolution Behold their threatnings sayd they Act. 4.29 grant vnto thy servants that with all boldnesse they speake thy word D. M. p. 29. We think the Power of Excommunication in the Church to be more then either a Political a Parliamentary or a meerly Ecclesiastical constitution as being an Ordinance Institution neither of the State or of the Church but of Christ himself Rev. It is not worth the while to examin whence you haue it when many doubt whither you haue it at all this neglect of vsing it in such vrgent occasions confirmes them in that doubt The same of other questious which pa. 29. You propose why the Pope did excommunicate Henry VIII Why not Charles V. Which are nothing to our purpose J will only say that if the Pope had no better nor other grounds than you alleadge his case is hard to be excused D. M. p. 32. Cressey May confesse truly that this whole passage was put into his Book by another hand without his knowledge that as he was forced to owne it at first so he was not permitted to retract or correct it in his second edition Rev. Here are three odious Accusations 1. Against the Benedictins of corrupting another man's workes making him say what he never sayd The 2.
you a father of the Protestant Church publish those betwixt your Penitent you And J heare that some persons of your Communion haue found that they had not made their Confessions themselues to Mute fishes Witnesse Capt. Hinde Catholickes haue indeed printed a letter of a Preist to my Lord of Stafford something written as is beleived by her R. H. but nether of these comes home to the point of this letter For what was written by her R. H. was probably designed to be seene at least it was not written to her Confessor nor was that letter to my Lord of Stafford by his Confessor it myght probably did come from one who never saw him nor knew of him but onely that he was preparing for Death Another reason why I was surprized at the syght of this letter is that it doth in a manner confirme the Report of her being a papist Now this lady being by alliance entred into the Royal Family making a very eminent figure in it I thought shee should haue beene partaker of that priviledge that none should publish their being Papists for if this be Treason by law when sayd of the head of that Family it ought to be held a hainous offence when spoken of others Besides this we learne in Tobie 12.11 That it is Good to reveale the secrets of God to conceale those of the King So that whereas Divines are permitted to dine as deepe as they can into Divine mysterys as to those of the King they are to remember that Qui scrutator est Majestatis opprimetur a gloriâ He that pryes into Majesty shall be opprest with glory Prou. 25.27 Death to the foole hardy 2. The booke called Anti Haman p. 309. hath these words There seemes to be as much difference betwixt the spiritual food which souls receiue in the Catholick Church that of Protestants as there is betwixt the nourriture a child receives sucking a breast stretched with milke that he gets by sucking a moistned finger We haue an occasion here to see whither this judgment be well grounded Two things are remarkable in the instructions which Ministers giue to the souls vnder their direction as appeares by their sermons spiritual bookes 1. A horrour hatred of Popery 2. A slyght touch of some holesome Catholick Truths yet so handled as not to moue considerably the soul for feare it moue them too far For example they speaking of some former sins the sorrow for them the purpose of amendment the preventing God's judgments by judging our selves appeasing his wrath by Penitencial workes they do it well yet knowing that those points are meere Popery to prevent their passing over to it they added an Antidote which destroyes all they had sayd One instance shall suffice Dr Hewit Repentance Conversion p. 51. hath these words we must confesse to men that both privately publickly according to the quality of the sin This is catholick Doctrine now he corrects it For though we condemne Auricular Confession as a trick of state Policy yet we allow exhort all Christians to a tru voluntary sincere Confession of their sins to the Bishop superintendents of the Church Thus he Now what is Private Confession but Auricular Confession Yet to the one he exhorts the other he condemnes or rather he approues condemnes the same thing vnder different names And what is this but to build with one hand pull downe with the other to plant roote vp the same thing To teach in Churchs as tru Protestant evidences depose in Courts plaine Downe ryght contradictions Now what can a soul do hearing this if she be truly desirous of salvation Practice those Truths They bring her to Popery Then they cannot seriously practice what you teach This inward combate seldome ceases till they leaue the Protestant Communion for either they become immediatly Papists if the loue of vertu overcomes or Presbiterians if the hatred of Papists prevailes by the helpe of a Morose nature Thus the surest tyes to Protestaney seeme to be 1. a carelessenesse of what is to come in the next world 2. a Presumption of God's goodnesse 3. Temporal motiues of all sizes All which are insignificant to a soul that prefers her eternal concerne before her temporal resolues to advance in vertu an Earth that shee may be more gratefull to her celestial spouse in Heaven 3. For this reason the report of the change in Religion of her R. H. easily found credit with me Of which report you speake p. 4. 5. God had giuen her a serious desire to serue him as he would be served I heard she was earnest in pursuing what she thought was for his glory attentiue in her Devotions exact in performing what seemed to be the will of God for the good of her soul that though her Fortune was exceeding greate yet she would rather forgoe it all then hazard her soul that Jewell being too precious to be compensated with any thing God had Giuen her an extraordinary good vnderstanding say you p. 14. with which she could easily discerne betwixt what was Tru what onely Seemed to be so Whence without any helpe of Bookes or instructions of men by only Hearing the discourse of Religion which is the most common in England will be so till men talke themselues either out of all Religion or into a good one either into Atheisme or Popery she myght easily discover that the devil was not so vgly as he was painted that somethings were charged on vs which we did not hold that what we really taught was not Blame worthy soe on both sides we were jnnocent And probably she myght declare so much being vnwilling to heare vs wronged Which gaue you occasion to say p. 4. that shee Declared in favour of Papists grounded that Report of her being one Then you spend several pages in proving how fatal a like Report had beene to her Father-in-law K. Charles I. what prejudice it had like to haue done to Charles II. altho both were jnnocent of that Crime averse to the Religion Which confirmes what I sayd how dangerous it is to entertaine that animosity against Popery which enables knaues to compasse the ruin of honest men even the King himself with only traducing him or them as Papists how jnnocent soever they be averse to that Religion D. M. p. 12. It is Impossible to silence this Report of your being a Papist vnlesse you your self appeare in it vpon all occasions declare your detestation of it c. Rev. How insignificant this remedy would haue proved appeares by its successe in the late King's time Whose declarations of that nature even at the Communion could not silence his Enemyes nor check a like report D. M. p. 15. None shall ever be able to proue that either we omit any thing necessary to salvation or teach any thing destructiue to it Rev. Your Schisme is
for his future subsistance Rev. You boast much of the perfection of your Reformation yet were never able to get it approved by any one externe Church of what denomination soever how many or rather how few do vniversally approue it in England appeares by the number of your Sectaryes Schismaticks At what tribunal haue you not beene condemned whereever you appeared The Pope hath anathematized your Reformation so hath the General Council of Trent that Church representatiue This Amphibium this your Anonimous Preist says you appealed to the Church diffusiue which he gathers by the Apologyes you publisht for all men to see But you haue had as ill successe here as at Trent or Rome having never been able to find any one Kingdome or Province or Citty or any considerable number of particular men who in all things approue your Reformation So that you are in this inferiour to the Lutherans to Calvinists to Anabaptists to Adamists nay to Independents Quakers c. Who all haue in several countryes some of their Perswasion but of yours none out of England how many even there owne their vocation to your Reformation more to the Royal Authority than to the force of the Truth you teach or the Beauty of your Church which you commend D. M. p. 63. Prudence obliges him to the same for He can hardly be safe any where beyond seas by joining with vs he will as also find provision for his subsistence which you say you will vndertake shall not be wanting Rev. You sow the fox's skin to that of a Lyon Spiritual motiues falling short you piece them out with Temporal When we call to mind that within these fifty yeares your whole Church was turned out of God's Blessing into the warme sun that within these fiue yeares she was very neere the same fate we may conclude that there is not much greater assurance of your Temporal than of your Spiritual promises Here I obserue two things The first that Temporal motiues are never omitted when there is any hopes of gaining a Proselit Indeed they are your best Card as appeares by your vsing it so frequently by vsing it you shew what weyght it hath with you The second that in this you differ very much from Papists who propose hopes of eternal life indeed but as for this they promise nothing but what Christ promist his Disciples 30.16.32 In mundo pressuram habebitis you shall be hated calumniated persecuted imprisoned Opprest hanged In this world But better all this than to loose your soul by Schisme Heresy D. M. p. 64. It remaines therefore that being obliged to quit the Communion of the Church of Rome joine with ours of England you are obliged to do this speedily c. Rev. All this falls to the ground for there nether is nor can be an obligation to quit the Church of Rome there being an obligation to conforme to her to submit to her devisions in matter of Divine Truths to renounce all errours contrary to the tru Doctrine of Faith which she teachs will teach to the end of the world Imprimatur Act. in Vïc die duodecima May 1683. De Mand. Ampliss ac RR. adm DD. meorum praefat B. D. SECRET DUARUM EPISTOLARUM GEORGII MORLAEI S.T.D. ET EPISCOPI WINTONIENSIS AD IANVM VLITIUM REVISIO In quâ de Orationibus pro Defunctis Sanctorum Invocatione Dijs Gentilium Idololatriâ agitur AVTHORE IOANNE WARNERO S. I. THEOLOGO M.DC.LXXXIII Superiorum Permissu PRAEFATIO DVae istae Epistolae quarum summam tibi hic exhibeo Erudite Lector vná cum responsionibus ad earum singula capita pars sunt Libri ante quinque circiter menses in Angliâ typis editi á Dom. ac Mag. nostro Georgio Morlaeo S. T. D. Oxoniensi ac Episcopo Wintoniensi qui Regem exulem olim secutus inter Catholicos degens aliqua zeli sui pro matre suâ Ecclesiâ Protestanticâ Anglicana specimina dedit cum vivâ voce tum calamo varia Fidei Ortodoxae capita impugnando Quae omnia libro isto continentur additis alijs quae Patriae postliminio restitutus dixit scripsit Adeoque complexus est hoc vno volumine quod cento vocari potest ex varijs tractatibus conflatus nihil praeter odium in Ecclesiam orthodoxam commune habentibus hoc inquam complexus est quidquid longissimo vitae tempore octogenario major est adversus varia Ecclesiae Romanae dogmata improbo labore continuo studio colligere potuit Putabamus bonum Senem contentionum istiusmodi pertaesum cogitare cogitationes Pacis charitatem potius quám schisma promovere malle vnionem inter discordes Ecclesias illi cordi esse quam Prudentiores multi ex illâ sectâ aut seriò aut simulatè optant Et quidem aetas ingravescens planè capularis vt receptui caneret suadebat turpe fenex miles Cum ecce subitò nemine de certamine ab illo futuro cogitante in arenam descendit seniles lacertos juveniliter jactat de victorijs praeteritis sibi gratulatur easque ita praedicat vt non senili Prudentiâ sed juvenili levitate sortis humanae propriae infirmitatis parùm memor novas laureas futurosque triumphos sibi polliceri videatur Quominus cum hac in re imiter facit rerum humanarum incertitudo propria infirmitas quas prae oculis semper habeo Quo facilius judicium ferat Lector Eximii Domini argumenta ipsiusmet verbis expresla meis responsionibus praemitto non sum mihi conscius me vspiam eorum vim dissimulasse An planè ijs satisfecerjm iudicent alij Novi hominum studia suos cuiquam affectus haud ita facilè avelli nec incompertum quantam isti vim habeant ad judicium inflectendum ne dicam corrumpendum Hinc in causâ nostrâ non praejudico neque veluti de partâ victoriâ in antecessum glorior haud tamen exiguam spem in sinu foveo ex bonitate causae ex assistentiâ Spiritus Sancti Ecclesiae promissâ ex tuâ Lector veritatis amice humanitate responsiones nostras Eruditis aequis Iudicibus à partium studio liberis probatum iri Docet nos Epistolarum Auctor eximius eas ante viginti quatuor annos fuisse scriptas quia posterior data est anno MDCLIX in lucem prodiit tantum hoc anno MDCLXXXIII Vnde non ad novem annos tantum vt consulit Poeta sed ferè ad ter novem eas penes se retinuit Ego verò ne quidem totidem dies ad responsa concinnanda impendi licet variis interea temporis aliis implicarer occupationibus illa siquidem auspicatus sum XI Aprilis I. Maji absolvi Quod non ita accipi velim quasi laudem aliquam ex festinato opere sperem quod novi ancipitis esse ad laudem vituperium aestimationis sed vt ostendam nullam in iis Epistolis
of our Charity Which three vertues are Cheifly or rather solely aimed at in Religion Haec maximè imo vero sola in Religione sequenda sunt Aug. Enchir. c. 4. Now if Moss the cheifest noblest of Religions Actions be Idolatry as you say elsewhere how do you say now it is Lawfull nay Commendable Worthy the imitation If it be so certainly it is not Idolatry But Contradictions are vnavoidable when we combate a known truth which by surprisal will force an acknowledment of it self altho we arm our selues against it when advertised Hence you approue here the same thing in Gross which you condemn in retail I leaue you this bone to pick proceed SECTION II. 1. Conferences to compose differences in Religion seldome successefull why 2. Security of Preists in England danger of Ministers at Brussels D. Morley 1. My lord Andover wisht that some learned moderate men of the Churchs of Rome England might meet debate freely charitably the Differences between the two Churchs which are not so many nor so great but they might find out some expedient to compose them 2. D Morley Sayd it would be imprudent vnsafe for him to disoute of Religion in Brussels thô the Preists in England had often with all boldnesse freedome safety before many witnesses mantained their opinions So vpon my life may you do here sayd F. Darcy be so far from offending me as J shall take it as a favour 1. Revisor Altho I readily grant the capacity of that noble man to be great yet I must beg leaue to dout whether he were a competent Judg of the most ready way to end the Differences in points of Faith betwixt dissenting Churchs this requiring a greater search into points of Doctrine interest then Persons of his quality education are willing commonly to vndergo Truth is ever pretended on both sides but it is onely pretended on the one side which in reality applyes all its industry to suppresse it for ether motives of Passion Interest Envy Spite Reveng what else is contrary to the law of God When these possesse the hart the head is busyed to make Vertu pass for vice vice for vertu to adorn Falshood with the dress of Truth by sophistical reasons make Truth be suspected of Falshood He will by calumayes as black as Hell reader odjoas or contemptible the persons who oppose his Passion thwart his Jnterest Cross his design procure his real good by discovering his errours by that inviting him to return to the ancient Faith Communion of the Church which he broke through want of Charity It is hard to discover the wiles of those Foxes ways of these wolves the fraudulent or fierce enemys of the Churchs Peace to see through that mist which they raise on purpose not to be seen to fathom these Depths of Sathan Apoc. 2.24 Now thò this noble man's capacity was great yet perchance not sufficient for so obscure intricate a work Yet when all the doubling of these Foxes are discovered the secrets of their harts layd open yet the work is not half don The greatest difficulty remaines to wean them from those beloved wandrings it being one of the dismallest effects of these sinfull errours that by secret yet power full charmes they fix the will in the loue of them Hence S. Prosper Tantum nocet error Vt juuet errare veteris contagia morbi Tam blande obrepunt vt quo languetur ametur Such charmes before our eyes doth errour lay That it e'en makes vs loue to go astray Whilst th' evil spreads we vnconcerned go Deceiu'd yet contented to be so The secretary of nature Aristotle never div'd deeper into the hart of man then when he sayd that althô Reason seemes to hold the scales discern betwixt two contending parts yet in reality it is the hart the will which deliberates decides the thing in question Hence comes that variety of judgments on the same individual Action of which one shall make a Panegyrick another a Satyre And thô the lyght of Truth the appearance of God be so cleer as not to be concealed yet this shall be as ineffectual as to all influence on our Actions as if they were dreames a sensual man prefers Pleasure before his Honour A vertuous man the contrary So we judg as we are affected not as we should our will doth not follow but lead nay drag after it our Reason that with so sweet a violence that it is not perceived without much labour great attention strict search into the beginning progresse end of our Actions This is the root of all incoherent discourses illogical deductions of Passion interest or self-loue which in many prevail over Truth controul the inclinations to good make men break all their dutys to God their country to Prince frends Relations thô they see what is better yet do the contrary Video meliora proboque Deteriora sequor This difficulty seemes invincible when strengthned with the content which Proud Ring'eaders find in having their followers harts at a beck being esteemed by them as Oracles a satisfaction sayd St Francis Bacon as much aboue that of Tyrants as mens souls are aboue their Bodys In the whole black list of Heresiarks only two occur to my mind who truly repented viz Eutichius Patriark of Constantinople who denyed the Resurrection of the Flesh was converted by S. Gregory our Apostle Berengarius Patriark of the Sacramentarians Only these two to my remembrance dyed well professing the tru Faith contrary to their several errours Without doubt some if not all other Heresiarks were convinc'd of the vntruth of their doctrines were as the Apostle says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Condemned of themselves or knowing that they deserved condemnation doubtlesse all felt those reproachs of conscience which follows all guilty Actions yet Pride hardened their harts against all Now what can work vpon these men in order to their Conversion set before theyr eyes Truth they know but will not acknowledg it Reproach vnto them their perfidious abandonning God and his spouse the Church the Holy Ghost doth it inwardly they slyght him Threaten Hell damnation to torrify them They are self condemned yet are vnconcerned this opposing known Truth is a sin against the Holy ghost impossible to be forgiven because it is morally impossible to be repented This is proved by Reason confirmed by experience delivered by the Apostle Which is to be vnderstood of Heresiarks such as school men call Formal Hereticks Yet I know many I hope most of those who liue in schism or Heresy do so either by misfortune of their birth or education or by weakenesse of reason or strength of Passion or fear of punishment or loue of goods of fortune rather then hatred to the Church or loue to Heresy therefore are not Formal Hereticks or