Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	world_n	worse_a	year_n	43	3	4.2518	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A88669	The ancient doctrine of the Church of England maintained in its primitive purity. Containing a justification of the XXXIX. articles of the Church of England, against papists and schismaticks The similitude and harmony betwixt the Romane Catholick, and the heretick, with a discovery of their abuses of the fathers, in the first XVI ages, and the many heresies introduced by the Roman Church. Together with a vindication of the antiquity and universality of the ancient Protestant faith. Written long since by that eminent and learned divine Daniel Featly D.D. Seasonable for these times.	Lynde, Humphrey, Sir.; Featley, Daniel, 1582-1645.	1660 (1660)	Wing L3564B; ESTC R230720	398,492	686

are very idle and all his instances in Turkes Iewes and Haeretikes nothing to the purpose for the unbeleeving Iewes and Turkes never were nor yet are members of the Catholike Christian Church the Arians Nestorians Eutychians and Marcionites have beene long agoe excluded out of the true Church of Christ and their Haeresies are by name condemned in ancient generall Councells approved by the whole Christian world These therefore come not within the verge of the Knights proposition which is restrained to Christian Churches and such whose Tenets have not in particular as yet beene cryed downe and censured as erroneous in any oecumenicall Councell among such doubtlesse those are in the safer way who hold nothing for an Article of faith necessary to salvation which is not clearely deduced out of Holy Scripture and assented unto even by the opposite part whose testimony saith the Iesuit Page 498. must needs proceede from evidence of truth To the second The Iesuit hath received answer already to the former of these demands where I shewed by twenty instances that we stand not single as they doe by affirming what they deny and denying what they affirme for the most if not all the affirmative Articles of our Creed are firmed and subscribed by Papists themselves whereas their additionalls to them are firmed by none but themselves and therefore herein our cause hath a great advantage on theirs For if their beliefe be true our beliefe in all the affirmative Articles thereof must needs be so but not on the contrary because they have many affirmative Articles which we give no credit unto To his second demand I answer that though a multitude of Professors is no perpetuall and infallible marke of the true Church Luke 12.32 Matth. 7.13 Apoc. 13.17 Apoc. 20.2 Apoc 1● 4 The woman arrayed in purple and scarlet called The Whore of Babylon had a cup of gold in her hand c. Apoc. 13.3 All the world wondered and followed the Beast ver 8. All that dwell upon the earth shall worship him whose names are not written in the Booke of Life for Christs flocke is but a little flocke in comparison and broade is the way that leadeth to death and destruction and though it is true that in the latter and worser ages of the Church especially after the yeare 666. which is the number of the name of the Beast and much more after the thousandth yeare wherein Satan was let loose the Romish Church was much more visible to the eye of the world then the Protestant as it is prophecied in the Apocalypse the 16. 6. that the false and malignant Church should be farre more glorious and pompous then the true Spouse of Christ yet in the first and best ages of the Church our adversaries have not so much as one single witnesse who can be proved to have given testimony to their Trent faith and since the happy reformation began by Martin Luther in King Henry the eights dayes the better part of Europe is fallen from the Pope adde we to them all those who in Asia and Africa professe the Christian faith and yet acknowledge not the Pope nor subscribe to the Trent faith and it will appeare we have neere a thousand for one in the Catholike visible Church scattered far and wide over the face of the earth as may be seene in the Mapps set forth in a booke printed the last yeare and intituled Christianographie or the Description of the multitude and sundry sorts of Christians in the World not subject to the Pope with their unity and how they agree with the Protestants in the principall points of difference betweene them and the Church of Rome To the third If the argument bee so weake let the Iesuit remember that it is his owne and that he confesseth as much in the first words of this Chapter which are these The substance of this Section is contained in the title and it is nothing but to turne the Catholike argument mentioned in the former Section the other way for the Protestant side The argument then is a Catholike argument of their owne and if it make for Haeretikes Iewes and Turkes as he saith it doth the blame and shame thereof must light upon the Iesuits that first framed it and not upon the Knight who retorteth it onely upon them for thus it mooveth upon their Axletree that wherein Professors of different religions both agree is safer to beleeve then that wherein they stand single but Iewes and Christians agree in the beliefe of the old Testament Christians and Turkes agree in the truth of Christs humane nature in other points the Christians are single therfore the beliefe of a Iew or a Turke is safer then the beliefe of a Christian The conclusion is here false and blasphemous the minor or assumption is evidently true and confessed on all sides the fault therfore must needs be in the major or ground of this argument but the major or ground is your owne as will appeare by reducing the Iesuits Argument propounded in the former Section into forme That Church wherein parties of a different Religion as Papists and Protestants agree is a safer way than that wherein one party stand single But Papists and Protestants both agree that salvation may be had in the Romish Church but the Protestants stand single in that they say salvation may be had in the Protestant Church therefore it is safer living and dying in the Papists Church than in the Protetestant In this Syllogisme the Knight and all Protestants though they answer to the Assumption by distinguishing as is expressed in the former chapter yet they simply absolutely deny the Major which is not universally true nor at all necessarie Secondly Dato non concesso that the Major is true the Knight nimbly turnes the mouth of the Papists owne Canon to batter their owne walls thus That position say you in which both Papists and Protestants agree is safer than that wherein one partie standeth single but in the eleven Points mentioned by the Knight Papists and Protestants agree in the twelve Articles coyned by Pope Pius the fourth the Papists stand single therefore the Protestant Faith is the safer To the fourth A strange Argument for the Iesuit to conclude other mens sight from his owne blindnesse because hee seeth not how the Knight can avoid the instances in Jewes Heretikes and Turkes whereby hee goeth about to disable the Knight his retorted Argument therfore will hee inferre that any man may see that the Knight is no good guide For pitty let some fit the Iesuit with a paire of Spectacles that he may better see the Knight his way and his own wandrings * How far the Romish Religiō is distant from Heresie Iudaisme and Turcisme or rather trencheth upon all three See P Croy his booke of Conformities and Sutcliffe his Turco papismus Iews and Turks are out of the Christian Church hold not all Positive Articles necessary to salvation and therefore they come not in the Knights way at all nor hath hee to doe with them in this Argument which proceedeth from professed Christians and not open enemies to the Faith For the Knight from his heart detesteth all pathes leading to any of those dangerous precipices and chaulketh to all men Viam vere tutam certam rectam regiam a faire and Safe Way and the very Kings High-way to his Pallace wherein wee have Christ and his Apostles for our Leaders the holy Spirit for our Guide the blessed Angels for our Convoy the ancient Fathers and Doctors of the Church for our fellow Travellers through the whole and the best learned of the Romane Popes Cardinals Bishops and Schoolemen to beare us companie the greater part of our way Wherefore I doubt not but that the indifferent peruser of the Knights Book and the Iesuits Answer and my Reply unto it will breake out into the Apostles exclamation and say to this Romish Sorcerer Acts 3.13 or rather if hee will so false Spectacle-maker Flood O full of all subtiltie and mischiefe thou child of the devill wilt thou not cease to pervert the right way of the LORD FINIS Laus DEO sine fine

the forme of Consecration may be called a Benediction for the reasons alledged by the Spectacle-maker Odo Camerac in can mis dist 4. benedixit suum corpus fecit qui priùs erat panis benedictione factus est caro non enim post benedictionem dixisset hoc est corpus meum nisi in benedictione sieret corpus suam yet it is certaine that Odo Cameracensis distinguisheth the one from the other and ascribeth the conversion of bread into Christs body to the vertue of the precedent benediction and not of the subsequent Consecration Christ blessed the bread hee made it his Body that which before was Bread by his blessing is made flesh for hee would not have said after hee had blessed it This is my Body unlesse by blessing it hee had made it his Body Yea but Flood threatneth to bring a place out of Odo expresly to the contrary which is this Take away the words of Christ Odo Camera expos in Can. miss dist 5. tolle verba Christi non fiunt sacramenta Christi vis sieri corpus fanguinem appone Christi sermonem and take away the Sacraments of Christ wilt thou have the Body and Bloud of Christ made put thereto the word of Christ but which word of Christ for therein is the cardo questionis whether the word of Benediction going before or the word of Consecration following after In Odo his judgement by the word of benediction for hee saith Benedictione factus est caro by blessing it became flesh and that before hee uttered the words This is my Body which in Odo his apprehension as wee heard before could not bee true unlelesse bread had beene turned into Christs body before he pronounced them To the tenth I.R. Here Iohannes de Rivis or Iohn of the Flood speaketh very disgracefully of his Father Christopher us de capite fontium Christopher of the head of the Fountaines Nay to a most reverend Father the Archbishop of Caesarea for the Archbishop of Caesaerea his booke saith hee De correctione Theologiae scholasticae I doe not so much as looke into him but remit it to the Roman Index where you shall find this booke by you here cited forbidden and even the arrogancie of the title sheweth it to deserve no better a place Solinus c. 43. Bonasus Tauri similis si insequantur Agasones vebementiùs fimum emittit per tria jugera quicquid tangit Vrit The Bonasus when hee is hard followed casts dung in abundance on the pursuer and brayeth hideously so doth I.R. cast filth and raile downe right when he is so hard pressed with a testimonie that he hath nothing to reply The Roman Index Prohibitorum librorum is to Flood like the Philosophers pons asinorum in all extremities hee flieth to it But what is this Index to us hee might as well alledge the Turkes Alcharon against the Knight This Index of prohibited bookes deserveth not only a prohibition but a purging by fire For in the first ranke we find the holy Bibles translated into vulgar languages to bee set and after them most of the prime and Classick Writers almost in all professions There is nothing so easie as to prohibit this or any other booke but unlesse our Adversariee back this Papall prohibition with detection of errours and heresies contained in such bookes and a solid confutation thereof this tyrannicall Prohibition of the workes of Authours wil prove an evident conviction that they forcibly smother that truth the light whereof dazleth their eyes Yea but saith Flood there is a grosse historicall errour in that he saith that in that opinion of his both the Councell of Trent and all the Writers did agree till the late time of Cajetan as if Cajetan were since the Councell of Trent No historicall errour at all in the Archbishop but a frivolous cavill in Flood For hee saith not that the Councell of Trent was before Cajetan but that the Councell of Trent and all Writers before it also did agree till the late time of Cajetan Yea but the Knight maketh Cardinall Cajetan and the Archbishop of Caesarea his two champions against the words of Confecration as if they did both agree in the same whereas here the Archbishop saith quite contrarie that all are for him but only Cajetan A ridiculous sophisme ex ignoratione Elenthi the Knight alledgeth both Cardinall Cajetan and the Archbishop of Caesarea against the words of Consecration but not ad idem not to prove the same conclusion hee alledgeth Cajetan to prove that there is nothing in the words hoc est corpus meum to enforce Transubstantiation but the Archbishop of Caesarea to prove that the supposed conversion is made not by the words of Consecration This is my body but by the precedent words of Benediction Christoph de correct theoscholast fol. 11.41 usque ad 63. nisi prius quàm ista verba diceret Christus corpus suum ex pane factum erat ista proposito non fuisset vera hoe est corpus meum c. Fol. 23. and this hee proveth against all Papists strongly after this manner Vnlesse before Christ uttered those words this is my body his body had beene made of bread this Proposition had not beene true This is my body for when Christ said take ye eate yee if at that time the Bread by benediction were not changed it will follow that Christ did command his Disciples to take and eate the substance of bread and so wee must denie the article of Transubstantiation therefore saith he certo certius constat Christum non solùm per ista sola verba non consecrâsse sed ne quidem illa partem aliquam fuisse consecrationis quam fecit it is most certaine that these words were no part of the Consecration And this hee proveth to bee the opinion of all the ancient Fathers by name of Iustine Martyr Dionysius S. Austine Hesichius S. Ierome Gregorie Ambrose Rupert Alquine Bernard Seotus Landulph Peter de Aquila Pelbert and others To the eleventh The Knight alledgeth not Salmerons opinion but his relation of the opinion of other men and although his credit bee cracked with Protestants yet it is whole with Flood and his fellow Iesuits as Chamierus on the contrarie his credit is good with Protestants though none with Pontificians P. 162. Yea but saith Flood Chamier discovereth the Knights bad dealing I would faine know how or wherein first how by the spirit of prophesie or by some letter sent to the Knight after Chamier his death for Chamier was dead many yeares before the Knight wrote Were he alive what bad dealing could he discover in the Knight Cham. de Euchar l. 6. c. 7. who out of him truly and sincerely relateth the words of Salmeron the Iesuite concerning the Graecians in these words seeing the benediction of the Lord is not superfluous or vaine nor gave hee simply bread it followeth that when hee gave it the transmutation was made and those

receive but the Knight must prove that S. Paul would not say Masse unlesse others would communicate with him or that he teacheth that other Priests must not Where S. Paul 1 Cor. 11. commandeth the people to tarrie one for another when they came together to cate hee speaketh to the people who made the suppers called Agape as is plaine by the text wherein bee reprehendeth the Abuses that were committed as that some did exceed others did want some were drunke some went away hungry which could not pertaine to the blessed Sacrament besides the distribution of that belonged to the Priests not to the people who are here instructed and reprehended for their manner of making their suppers The cup of blessing is called a Communion because it uniteth us to Christ our head and also among our selves as members of the same body and though it doe this most perfectly when it is also received sacramentally yet not only so but it doth the same also in some measure being spiritually received and as this union may remaine among us members though every one among us doe not receive every day so it may also remaine betweene us and the Priest though hee say Masse and wee not receive If this argument of the Knight were good it would follow that not only some but that all the people must receive together with the Priest The Catholique Doctours cited by the Knight say indeed that it was the practise of the primitive Church to communicate every day with the Priest but they say not that it was of necessitie so to doe nay some of them as Bellarmine and Durand prove manifestly that there was no such necessitie or dependence of the Priests celebrating upon the peoples communicating that they might not celebrate unlesse the people did communicate For S. Chrysostome saith of himselfe that hee celebrated every day though there were no body to participate with him The Councell of Nants forbidding Priests to celebrate alone speaketh only of not saying Masse all alone without one or two to answer to whom the Priest may seeme to speake when hee saith Dominus vobiscum and the like but what 's this to saying Masse without some body to communicate with him The Councell of Trent doth not blesse and curse out of the same mouth or approve or condemne the same thing when it commendeth sacramentall communion of the people together with the Priest and yet condemneth those who say private Masses are unlawfull For it is one thing for the Councell to wish that the people would communicate because to heare Masse and receive withall will be more profitable an other to say that if there bee no body to communicate such a Masse is unlawfull or that the Priest must not say Masse The Hammer THe Iesuits answer to this Section of the Knight wherein hee impugneth private Masse by foure texts of Scripture two Canons of Councells and twelve pregnant Confessions of Romish Doctours consisteth partly of sophismes and partly of sarcasmes to both which I purpose to returne a short and smart answer first by refuting his sophismes and after by retorting his sarcasmes To the first sophisticall answer I replie That the words of our Saviour Take eat Mat. 26.26 this is my body were spoken to all future communicants as well as to the Apostles then present for they containe in them an institution of a Sacrament to bee celebrated in all Christian Churches till the end of the world as the Apostle teacheth us from the 23. to the 28. especially at the 26 verse 1 Cor. 11. as often as yee eate this bread and drinke this cup ye shew the Lords death till he come This the Apostles in their persons alone could not fulfill for they lived not till Christs second comming they must of necessitie therefore bee extended to all that in succeeding ages should bee present at the Lords Supper who are as much bound by this precept of Christ to communicate with the Priest or dispencer of the Sacrament as the Apostles were to communicate with Christ himselfe when hee first in his owne person administred it otherwise if the precepts Take eate doe this in remembrance of mee appertained to the Apostles only what warrant hath any Priest now to consecrate the elements or administer the Sacrament nay what command have any faithfull at all to receive the Communion Yea but saith the Iesuit if not only the Apostles and their successors but all the faithfull are here enjoyned to eate it would follow that whensoever the Sacrament is administred all must communicate that are in the Church at the same time It will follow that all who are bid to the Lords table and come prepared to whom the Priest in the person of Christ saith Take eate this is my body ought to communicate De eccles observ sciendum juxta antiquos patres quod soli cōmunicantes divinis mysterijs inter esse consueverint Orat. de consecrat dist 2. peractâ consecratione omnes communicent nisi malint ecclesiasticis carere liminibus and this was the custome of the ancient Church as Micrologus teacheth Wee must know saith he according to the ancient Fathers that none but Communicants were wont to be present at the mysteries and therefore before the Communion the Catechumenie and penitents which were not prepared to communicate were commanded to depart ite Missa est and wee find an ancient Canon of the Roman Church attributed to Gelasius enjoyning all under paine of excommunication that are present after the Consecrationis finished to participate of the blessed Sacrament To the second The precept of the Apostle bee ye followers of mee as I am of Christ 1 Co. 11.1 is generall and reacheth as well to acts of pietie as charitie As non est distinguendum ubi lex non distinguit so non est restringendum ubi lex non restringit as wee may not distinguish where the law doth not distinguish so we must not restraine where the law hath no restriction The Iesuite himselfe saith that S. Pauls imitation is directed to all if to all then to Priests and againe hee saith these words come in very fitly to prove that in all things that appertaine unto salvation wee should seeke to imitate S. Paul as hee doth Christ And I hope the Iesuit holdeth the worthy receiving of the Sacrament a matter of salvation I am sure the Apostle saith 1 Cor. 11. Hee that eateth and drinketh unwerthily eateth and drinketh damnation to himselfe But what need wee dispute this point any further sith the Apostle after hee had delivered this precept in the beginning of the chapter in pursuit thereof at the 23 verse instanceth in the Sacrament it selfe saying What I received of the Lord that I delivered unto you that the Lord Iesus the same night hee was betrayed tooke bread c. Surely if wee are to follow the Apostle in the performance of morall duties much more of religious and this the Iesuit in the end is compelled

fiery Serpent yet perinutile vitiabatur it was corrupted and made scandalous and unprofitable by the peoples abusing it to idolatrie and if that Image being a type of Christ and set up by Gods speciall command was yet broken in pieces by good King Ezekiah after the people began to worship it how much more ought those images to bee knocked downe and stamped to powder which are set up in popish Churches against GODS commandement and have beene abused to idolatrie above eight hundred yeares in such a grosse manner especially by the vulgar that as Polydore Virgill ingenuously confesseth many of the ruder sort of them magis ijs fidunt quàm Christo put more confidence in the image then Christ himselfe Concerning Indulgences Spectacles paragraph 8. a page 319. usque ad 345. THE Knight himselfe granteth the use of giving Indulgences to have been in the ancient Church and that Bishops had power to grant them Christs Merits lying in store for the need of all men may be fitly compared to a common Treasure and be called by that name So farre forth then as those Pardons were grounded on Christs merits or granted by application of them to the penitent there is no difference betweene theirs and ours Saint Paul forgave the incestuous Corinthian not onely in the person of Christ but for their sake also which importeth the prayer and deserts of Saints to have some place in the bestowing of that Indulgence and so likewise it was the practise of the Primitive Church and what was this but by applying the superabundant merits in the one to supply the want in the other That the merits of Martyrs were applied to others appeareth by Tertullian who being become now an Heretike did reprehend that custome saying that a Martyrs merits were little enough for himselfe without having any surplussage to helpe others withall Many a man continueth his great austerity of Fasting Watching Praying and other exercises of all vertues after hee hath obtained pardon for the fault it selfe by hearty contrition and by humble confession obtained also remission of the temporall punishment within the space of 1 2 3 7 10 or 12 yeares for example sake hee then leading the same life for 20 30 40 50 or 60 yeares as many have done what shall become of all that satisfaction which is over and above for that sinne or sinnes which hee committed before It doth not perish or passe without fruit though not of him yet of others and if they be not applied presently why may they not then be said to lye in deposito as money in a Treasurie Sith all grant Indulgences for the living why not for the dead so long as they pertaine to the Communion of Saints and have need thereof The authority which the Knight citeth to make Indulgences applyed to the soules in Purgatorie to be ridiculous out of the old Sarum booke of the houres of our Lady doth not mention Purgatorie but onely saith That whosoever shall say these and these prayers shall gaine so many thousand yeares of pardon which is no more for the dead than for the living It is false which the Knight averreth that wee give Pardons for thousands of yeares in Purgatory after death For wee doe not so neither doe wee understand those Pardons wherein are mentioned such number of yeares so as if men were without those Pardons to remaine so long in Purgatorie but wee understand those yeares according to the penitentiall Canons by which many yeares penance were due for one sinne and many mens sinnes being both very grievous and as a man may say without number according to the account of the ancient penitentiall Canons they may soone amount to thousands of yeares which though a man cannot live to performe here in this world nor even in Purgatory for the length of time yet hee may in Purgatorie in few yeares space nay few months or few weekes space suffer so much punishment as is answerable to all that penance of many thousand of yeares which a man should have performed here if hee could have lived so long The Authours alleaged by the Knight against Indulgences prove no more than wee grant that there is not so expresse mention in Scriptures or ancient Fathers of them as of many other points because there was not so much use of them in those dayes Though some Fathers mention them not wee prove the use of them out of others more ancient to wit out of Saint Cyprian and Tertullian as you may see in Bellarmine lib. de indul c. 3. and besides them the authority of certaine Councels as that of Nice Ancyra and Laodicea Though wee had not either the testimonie of these Fathers nor of those Councells yet would not that follow which the Knight groundeth thereon to wit that wee want antiquitie and consent of Fathers for them for it is a most strong argument of antiquitie that it is the practise of the Catholike Church time out of mind and of consent that no man is found to have spoken against them but onely knowne Heretikes In contrariū est generalis consuetudo doctrina ecclesiae quae contineret falsitatem nisi per indulgentias dimitteretur aliquid de paenâ peccatori debitâ such as the Waldenses who were the first impugners of Indulgences Durand whom the Knight alleageth in the first place having propounded the question in 4. sent dis 20. q. 5. an aliquid valeant indulgentiae after the manner of the Schooles putteth two arguments against them in the first place and then commeth with his arguments Sed contra agreeing expresly with his conclusion On the contrarie saith he is the generall custome and doctrine of the Church which should containe falshood 13. De here sibus l. 8. tit indulg verum ●tsi pro indulgentiarum approbatione sacrae scripturae testimonium apertum de sit non tamen ideo contemnend e erunt quoniam ecclesiae catho licae usus a multis annorū centuriis tantae est autboritatis ut qui illam contemnat haereticus merito cen seatur if something of the punishment due to a Sinner should not be forgiven by Indulgences and presently after hee nameth Saint Gregory and saith of him that hee did institute Indulgences at the stations in Rome Alfonsus a Castro though hee confesse the use of Indulgences not to have beene so much in those ancient times as since yet hee alloweth them so farre as to condemne any man for an Haeretike that shall deny them 14. The Knight prateth very freely of the Popes selling of Indulgences and bringing money to his owne coffers by them but to that I need to make no other answer but that it is such riff-raff-stuffe as their Ministers are wont to eeke out their bookes Sermons without being able to shew any Bull of Pope or testimony of good authour of any Indulgence so granted For the Knights prophane jeast out of Guicciardine of playing a game at Tables for an indulgence suppose that

Popes superioritie to Councels before the Councell at Laterane under Leo the tenth nor most of Pope Pius the fourth his Articles before the late Councell of Trent wherein those points were first defined Then which what Argument can be more forcible to convince the novelty of the Romish Faith But whether an article of Faith is to be accounted such because it is defined to be such by the Church or whether it be defined to be such by the Church because it is such in its owne nature it will little serve the Iesuits turne to make up the breaches of the Roman Church For certaine it is that their Doctors differ amongst themselves even in points defined by the Church For after the bookes of the Old Testament with all the parts knowne by the name of Apocrypha by the Councell of Trent were defined to be of Canonicall authoritie Sixtus Senensis makes scruple of some of them Sixtus Senens bib Sanct. l. 1. After the immaculate conception of our Lady was defined by Sixtus the fourth and the feast in testimonie thereof authorised by him yet the Dominicans generally hold that shee was conceived in sinne After Justification by inherent righteousnesse De Caus instit l. 7. c. 21. was defined in the Councell of Trent Albertus Pighius and others cited by Vegas held the contrary And though the Councell of Trent stigmatize the doctrine touching assurance of salvation yet Ambrosius Catharinus a learned Papist set forth a learned treatise de certitudine salutis Lastly though Pope Leo the tenth in the Councell of Lateran defineth the Pope to be above a generall Councell yet the Sorbonists at this day maintaine that a generall Councell is above the Pope Therefore as St Thomas Moore said pleasantly of a poore Physitian that he was more then medicus to wit by one letter Mor. in Epigr. meaning that he was mendicus Vna tibi plus est litera quam medico so it may truely be said of the unity Papists brag so much of that it is more then Vnity by a letter to wit Vanity To the fourth If the Knight or any Protestant suspended the efficacy of their Baptisme upon the faith of their Parents or as all Papists doe upon the intention of the Priest the Iesuit might with some colour object to us the uncertainty of our Christendome but let him know if he doth not that we maintaine generally that the effect of Baptisme dependeth not upon the faith of the Parents and God-fathers nor yet upon the intention of the Priest knowne to God onely and himselfe but upon his outward action and his words knowne to all the Congregation We say that the observation of Christs institution in baptizing the partie in the name of the Father of the Sonne and of the Holy-ghost and not the Priests hidden intention makes Baptisme effectuall to all that belong to the covenant To the fift The Iesuit most absurdly inferreth absurdities upon his owne Tenet supposing it to be ours whereas we disclaime it affirming that although the Church useth in marriage all meanes possible by questions and answers by joyning hands by plighting their troth in most significant tearmes and confirming their mutuall promises by giving and receiving a ring and denouncing Gods judgments against them in most fearfull manner if they know any thing one by the other why they should not be ioyned in marriage yet because the heart is knowne to God alone the validity of marriage with us dependeth upon the outward profession and sacred action done before sufficient and undoubted witnesse and not the secret intentions of the partie What the Iesuit addeth by way of jeare that a small deale of orders serves our turnes for he seeth not any thing done by vertue of our ordination which any man or woman may not doe without it I hold it not worthy any other answer then that sith he professeth his eye sight to be so dimme he would make use of the Spectacles he made for the Knight by helpe of them if he be not starke blinde he may see that by vertue of our ordination men in holy orders preach the Gospell administer the Sacraments remit and retaine sinnes which if he thinke any man or woman may doe without ordination like the foole in the Poet Dum vitant stulti vitia in contrario currunt he is gone from one extreame to the other and of a Papist become an Anabaptist With us none may execute the Priests office but he that is called thereunto as was Aaron If the Iesuit meane that any man or woman may doe the outward acts of Priesthood de facto though not de Iure may they not doe the like also sometimes among them doth not their Legend tell us that some Boyes getting by heart and pronouncing the words of Consecration hoc est Corpus meum turned all the Bakers bread in the street into flesh Do not Lady Abbesses and Nuns chaunt Mattins together in Romish Chappels Do not Midwives christen children in their Church With what face then can he charge us with those disorders whereof all the world seeth we are free but he and his Church most guilty To the sixt If we can have but a conjecturall and wavering knowledge of our salvation what comfort can a true Christian have in life or death If his hope be onely in this life the Apostle affirmeth expressely 1 Cor. 15.19 that he is of all men most miserable and certainely he is but little better if all his hope in the life to come be no better then a guesse or slender conjecture Iustly therefore did Martin Luther tearme the Romish doctrine concerning uncertainty of salvation non doctrinam fidei sed diffidentiae no doctrine of faith but of diffidence and distrust which if this Iesuit stiffely maintaines I would faine know of him how he interpreteth that Article of the Creed I beleeve the remission of sinnes Is the meaning onely this that there is a remission of some sins in the Church if so then the Devill beleeves as much concerning this Article as he but if as he beleeveth in the Article of the Resurrection the Resurrection of his owne flesh so in the Article of remission of sinnes the remission of his owne sinnes then his owne justification and particular beliefe of his owne saltion is a part of his Catholike faith and if that be but conjecturall then there is no certainty in the Catholike Faith It is true that it is a different thing to dispute of the certainety of the Catholike faith in generall and of every mans private and particular beliefe of his owne justification and salvation yet there is such a dependance betweene them that if the former be uncertaine the latter cannot be certaine Yea but saith the Iesuit we are certaine by the certainty of divine faith not onely that there be seven Sacraments but that they are also truely administred in the Church so as there can be no danger of the failing