Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
doctrine_n	apostle_n	church_n	tradition_n	6,984	5	9.3566	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A15082	A replie to Iesuit Fishers answere to certain questions propou[n]ded by his most gratious Matie: King Iames By Francis White D: of Div· deane of Carlile, chaplaine to his Matie. Hereunto is annexed, a conference of the right: R:B: of St Dauids wth the same Iesuit*	White, Francis, 1564?-1638.; Laud, William, 1573-1645.; Baylie, Richard, b. 1585 or 6, attributed name.; Cockson, Thomas, engraver.; Fisher, John, 1569-1641.	1624 (1624)	STC 25382; ESTC S122241	841,497	706

1. Tim. 2 4. But without vnderstanding the qualitie of the Romane Church people may be baptised beleeue and repent and haue all the ordinarie meanes of saluation as appeareth by the Iewes Asts 2 41. and the Eunuch Acts 8 37. and Lydia Acts 16 14. and many Gentiles Acts 13 48. and the elect Ladie and her children 2. Iohn v. 1 2 4. and the Corinthians Galatians Ephesians and the seuen Churches of Asia Apoc. 2 3. c. Occham saieth that after Christs ascension many people were saued before the Roman Church had anie being and AEneas Siluius affirmeth That the first 300 yeares before the Nicene Counsell small regard was had of the Roman Church Iohannes Maior saieth It were ouer hard to affirme that the Indians and other Christans which liue in remote countries should be in the state of damnation because they were ignorant That the Bishop of Rome is head of the Church if they beleeue other necessarie Articles of Saluation And Alchasar saieth Before such time as the publique nuptials betweene the Roman and other Churches were celebrated by a common receiued custome a lesse frequent communion with that Church was sufficient Seconly It is no Article of the Apostles Creed or of any other ancient Creed neither is it delinered in any plaine text or sentence of holy Scripture That all Christian people must receiue their beleefe from the Roman Church or that the same intirely shall in all ages continue in the doctrine and faith receiued from the Apostles yea the contrarie is taught in holie Scripture Rom. 11 22. But if the doctrine aforesaid were fundamentall and of greatest importance the same must haue beene plainely deliuered either in holy Scripture or in all or some of the auncient Creedes IESVIT The Church is the pillar and foundation of Truth 2. Tim. 3 15. The eminent Rocke and Mountaine filling the whole world on the top whereof standeth the Tradition of sauing Doctrine conspicuous and immooueable Ergo Jt is the most important Controuersie of all other to know whether the Roman Church be the true Church ANSVVER Foure texts of Scripture are produced to proue that it is the most important controuersie of all other to know whether the Roman Church be the true Church but neither are the places of Scripture expounded rightly neither is the Iesuits islation from them consequent or firme 1 Although it were granted that the totall certaintie of Christiantie dependeth vpon the Church yet because the Roman Church is not the whole Church but onely a part and member thereof Rom. 1 6. and such a member as may erre and proue vnsound Rom. 11 22. The knowledge of the state and qualitie of that Church cannot be simply necessarie and consequently not a matter of greatest importance to be vnderstood 2 The places of Scripture 1. Tim. 3 15. Math. 16 18. Esay 2 1. Dan. 2 35. proue not the question The first place to wit Math. 16 18. is expounded by manie interpreters of Christ himselfe and by the most of the faith which S. Peter confessed touching Christ. And our Sauiour affirmeth not in this Text that the Roman Church of euerie age is a Rocke but that the Church of right beleeuers is builded vpon a Rocke and so the Church is one thing and the Rocke another because nothing is builded vpon it selfe The second place 1. Tim. 3 15. 〈◊〉 that the Church which is the house of the liuing God is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the pillar and ground of Truth 1. If by the Church we vnderstand the Catholicke Church as it containeth the holie Apostles then this commendation agreeth fully and perfectly to it in respect of the Apostles who were led into all Truth Iohn 16 13. and which taught whilest they 〈◊〉 all Truth and they do at this present day in the Scripture teach the fulnesse of Truth 2. If by the Church we vnderstand the Church of Christ liuing after the Apostles the same is by office and calling the pillar and ground of Truth in all ages And some part or other thereof Truth of God 〈◊〉 to saluation But the present Church is not 〈◊〉 and simply in all things the pillar and ground of Truth but so farre onely as it teacheth the doctrine reuealed by the holie Ghost and groundeth her faith vpon the word of God and this is proued because the Church Apostolicall was free from all errour but succeeding Pastors and Doctors may erre in Ecclesiasticall censures in degrees legislatiue in sermons disputations and other tractats as our Aduersaries themselues confesse and they which propugne the infallible authoritie of the present Church restraine the same to the Pope and Councell of which S. Paul is silent 1. Tim. 3 15. And from hence I inferre That the Church wherein the Apostles taught and gouerned was the ground and pillar of Truth fully intirely and in all things But the present Church is so with limitation conditionally and so farre forth onely as it deliuereth the Apostles doctrine Lastly the Roman Church can challenge no greater priuiledge of Infallibilitie from this Scripture than the church of Ephesus of which the Apostle speaketh litterally in the said Text. But although the Church of Ephesus was by office the pillar and ground of Truth yet the same did afterwards degenerate and depart from the right Faith which argueth that particular Churches such as were the Roman Ephesine Corinthian c. are not in such sort the pillar and ground of Truth as that they are in no danger of errour The other two places Esay 2 1. Dan. 2 35. are principally vnderstood of Christ and his Apostles and they proue not the Iesuits position which is It is the most important controuersie of all other to know whether the Roman Church is the true Church for the present Church of Rome is a Molehill and not the Mountaine prophesied of Esay 2. the same filleth not the whole world but onely a small part of the world neither did the same antiently for 500 yeares at the least fill the whole world for many people both in the East and West were Christians without depending vpon it neither is the same alwaies illustrious for Vertue and Truth but sometimes notorious for Superstition and Vice If our Adnersaries will contend That there is in all ages avisible Church like vnto a great Mountaine filling the whole world vpon the top whereof standeth the Tradition of all true doctrine conspicuous and illustrious 1. The places of Esay and Daniell affirme not this concerning all times and ages of the Church 2. The Scriptures foretell a large reuolt and apostasie from heauenly trueth 3. Our Aduersaries themselues acknowledge that the outward face of the visible Church at some times hath beene and againe may be miserably polluted with foule and enormious scandals and abominations IESVIT If this Church bee ouerthrowne the totall

cannot vse it so the Scriptures are a meanes to conuict proteruious 〈◊〉 as they were vsed by Christ and his Apostles and by the 〈◊〉 Councels or Papall Councels and the Bishops and Doctors of the Roman Church c. Answ. First Our Sauiour and his Apostles did both vse the Scriptures themselues and commanded others euen simple men to vse them Iohn 5 39. Ephes. 6 17. and they are commended who examined Doctrine by them Acts 17 11. Secondly they which vnderstand and applie the Scriptures truely vse them as Christ and his Apostles did and so the Scripture in their vse is a word of power and not as a sword in a childs hand Thirdly Scriptures were meanes to conuict Hereticks as they were vsed by the Fathers of the Church and other holie Persons before any generall Councells were gathered to wit the first three hundred yeares and before the Papall Supremacie was aduanced in the Church Fourthly it is ridiculous to imagine that the present Roman Church and the sole Adheres thereof according to the Trident Creed are the only true expositors of holy Scriptures or that 〈◊〉 exposition of Scripture repugnant and diuers from the present Roman Creed is false or Haereticall for neither hath the holie Ghost by expresse testimonie or euident demonstration appropriated the key of knowledge to this Church and few Heretickes haue more fouly corrupted and abused the Scriptures And the pillars of this Church 〈◊〉 sundrie times been vnskilfull Ideots vnlettered Gulls Monsters of mankind with whom the holie Spirit vseth not to haue commerce Wisdom 1. 2. Cor. 6. 15. Fiftly the place of Tertul. d. Praescript c. 19. doth not 〈◊〉 the imperfection of holie Scripture to conuict proteruious error according to the latter part of my former distinction for then he could not haue said Scripturae plenitudinem adoramus We adore the plenitude of the 〈◊〉 and Let Hermogenes teach that it is written and if it be not written let him feare the Wo denounced against them which add or detract any thing from the word of God but be 〈◊〉 of the Scriptures according to the first part of my distinction to wit That Heretickes blinded with malice and either denying or corrupting the text of the Scriptures cannot be so conuicted by them but they will still vse cauils and by Sophisticall slights borrowed from Philosophers elude the euidence of the plaine Texts of Scriptures But if this argue the Scriptures of imperfection it will also prooue the Authoritie of the Church and of Tradition to be insufficient as appeares in the Arrians and Donatists And Heretickes may with no lesse pretext take exception against Tradition and Ecclesiasticall Authoritie than against the Scripture Ireneus li. 3. ca. 2. When they are confuted by Scriptures they accuse them as being not well written and destitute of Authoritie or else so ambiguous that one cannot find the Truth by them c. And in like manner when we prouoke them to stand to triall by Tradition which came from the Apostles c. they oppose the same c. And thus they will consent neither to Scripture nor Tradition And Gregorie Valence himselfe saith The infallible teaching and proposition of the Church is no lesse obscure vnto vs than any other Article which we are to beleeue Sixtly we acknowledge the lawfull Power and Authoritie of the Church about expounding holy Scriptures and for maintaining Vnitie in right Faith and appeasing contention repressing proteruious Errants Heb. 13.17 Math. 18.17.1 Timoth. 3.15 2. Thessal 5.12 And in particular first wee beleeue the authority of Councels General and Nationall lawfully assembled and accordingly proceeding to be sacred And all Councels of this nature we reuerence with the same honour the ancient Church did affirming that priuate Christians and particular Churches are to submit their iudgement to the authority of the same except it bee manifest that they depart from Truth Secondly wee highly and reuerently esteeme exposition of Scripture deliuered by the vnanimous consent of the Primatiue Fathers and although wee yeeld eminent and supreme Authoritie to the holy Scriptures because the same is absolutely diuine yet when any question ariseth concerning Expositions we allow not priuate persons vpon vncertaine or probable reasons to reiect the sence which hath bin antiently and commonly receiued and against which no strong or solid exception can be produced Now this being obserued and other helps of expounding Scripture vsed there followeth nothing from our Tenet whereby Christianitie should be made vncertaine and Disputation from sole Scripture prooue fruitles or which may hinder apparent Victorie by the same against proteruious Error IESVIT The Preface ended our Aduersarie descendeth to his disputation and herein first he setteth downe a maine proposition which hee intendeth to prooue to wit The Roman Church is the onely true Church Secondly He deliuereth fiue Principles manifest in themselues and presupposed and confessed by Papists and Protestants Principle 1. No man can be saued without firme and sure apprehension of supernaturall Truth concerning his last end and the meanes to attaine thereunto Secondly Assurance of this kind is not had by cleere sight Demonstration humane Discourse or humane Authoritie but by Faith grounded vpon Gods Word reuealing things vnknowne by other meanes Thirdly God reuealed all Supernaturall Truth to Christ and Christ reuealed the same to the holy Apostles partly by vocall Preaching but principally by the immediate teaching of his holy Spirit to this end that they should deliuer them to mankind to bee receiued and beleeued euerie where ouer the World euen to the consummation thereof Fourthly the Apostles fulfilled this preaching to all Nations and deliuering partly by writing and partly by word of mouth the whole entire Doctrine of Saluation planted an vniuersall Christian companie and to deliuer vnto 〈◊〉 all they had 〈◊〉 from them Fiftly though the Apostles and their Primatiue Hearers be deceased yet there still remaines in the World a meanes by which men may assuredly know what the Apostles preached andthe Primatiue Church receiued of them because the Church euen to the endof the World must be founded on the Apostles and beleeue nothing as matter of Faith but that which was deliuered by them The former grounds being confessed a question remaineth to be examined What is the principall infallible meanes whereby a Christian may know what was and is the Doctrine of Faith originally preached by the Apostles Whether holy Scripture of the Apostles and Euangelists bee that meanes or perpetuall Tradition vnwritten deriued by Succession from the Apostles ANSVVER The Iesuit affirmeth the latter and produceth foure Arguments to prooue his Tenet and then supposing that he hath prooued the Question inferreth that the Roman Church is the only true Church because it is the only faithfull keeper and teacher of this Tradition IESVITS 1. Argument If the maine and substantiall points of our Faith are

meanes to know their Authours the one Ecclesiasticall to wit the perpetuall History of the Church since the Apostles departure whereby is produced a morall persuasion and credibilitie than which none can bee greater in that kinde by reason of the antiquity number consent and sanctitie of the witnesses which testifie this the other totally diuine to wit the matter and forme of Doctrine contained in the the said bookes to be 〈◊〉 and if they be can speake in them And that within those bookes is affirmed by the 〈◊〉 Among which 〈◊〉 are taken from the internall matter and maiesty of the bookes and Gregory Valence contained in the same Scripture c. And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the 〈◊〉 of God is seene by faith in the holy faith The Scripture is a faire 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You haue before 2. Pet. 1. 19. And 〈◊〉 August And therefore as a 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 others by the same light or 〈◊〉 manifests it selfe so the holy Scripture inlightning the Church demonstrates his owne 〈◊〉 and vertue And thus 〈◊〉 we be first directed and holpen by vnwritten Tradition to know the Scriptures yet the Tradition of the present Church is 〈◊〉 the onely last and principall ground whereunto we resolue 〈◊〉 If the Iesuits Argument be retorted vpon himselfe it will demonstrate that our Faith is finally resolued into holy Scripture and not into vnwritten Tradition for inuerting 〈◊〉 order of the 〈◊〉 and retaining the matter I argue as followeth If the maine and 〈◊〉 points of Faith are 〈◊〉 to be 〈◊〉 because of the 〈◊〉 of perpetuall Tradition vnwritten and 〈◊〉 Tradition vnwritten is beleeued to be Apostolicall because of the authoritie of the Scripture then our resolution that our Faith is Apostolicall resteth finally vpon the Scripture But the Antecedent is true Ergo c. The Assumption is confirmed two waies First by the practise of Papals which confirme their doctrine of Tradition by testimonies of Scripture alledging 2. Thess. 2. 15. 1. Tim. 6. 20. 2. Tim. 1. 16. Secondly because the credit of Tradition in respect of vs dependeth vpon the authoritie of the Church and the authoritie of the Church vpon the Scriptures Both these assertions are maintained by the Papals First They say that the authoritie of Tradition in respect of vs dependeth vpon the Church Gretsar def Bellarm. d. verbo Dei lib. 4. cap. 9. Vitus miletus cont 〈◊〉 loc 27. Error 615. Secondly They confirme the Churches authoritie by the Scriptures 1. Tim. 3.15 Math. 18.17 Eph. 4. 11 12 13 14. Gregorie Valence tom 3. disput 1. punct 1. pa. 40. ibid. punct 7. pa. 327. Driedo d. Eccles. dogm li 2. c. 3. pa. 59. Stapleton triplic c. 15. pa. 179. And thus will they nill they they are compelled to make holie Scripture the last and finall resolution of Faith for if we beleeue Tradition vpon the authoritie of the Church and the Churches authoritie for the Scripture then we must of 〈◊〉 make the Scripture our last and finall resolution of 〈◊〉 which is the Tenet of the Fathers S. Chris. sup Psal. 95. When any thing is deliuered without the warrant of Scripture the hearers thought staggereth sometimes consenting and then againe 〈◊〉 and another while reiecting the same as 〈◊〉 c. but when the testimonie of Diuine Voice is deliuered out of the Scripture it both confirmeth the saying of the Speaker and mind of the Hearer IESVIT So it is that the Scripture of the New Testament 〈◊〉 not be prooued to haue beene deliuered vnto the Church by the Apostles but by perpetuall Tradition vnderwritten conserued in the Church succeeding the Apostles for what other proofe can be imagined except one would prooue it by the titles of the Bookes which were absurd seeing doubt may be made Whether those titles were set on the Bookes by the Apostles themselues of which doubt Tradition only can resolue vs. Besides the Gospell of S. Marke and S. Luke and also the Acts of the Apostles were not written by any Apostles but were by their liuely voice and suffrages recommended vnto Christians as sacred otherwise as also Mr. Bilson noteth they should neuer haue obtained such eminent authoritie in the Church neither should they be now so esteemed but vpon the supposall of Apostolicall approbation but how shall we know the Apostles saw these writings and recommended the same vnto Christian Chnrches but by Tradition ANSVVER The point which the Aduersarie endeauors to prooue is That the Scriptures of the New Testament are beleeued by diuine Faith to come from the Apostles only and principally by the testimonie of perpetuall Tradition vnwritten he endeauoreth to performe this by disproouing other meanes to wit the titles of the Bookes c. The summe of his argument is Either perpetuall Tradition vnwritten is the only ground of this beleefe or else the Titles of the Bookes But the Titles of the Bookes are not the only ground because doubt may be made of their credit c. And some of the Bookes of the New Testament were not penned by the Apostles but by their Suffrages recommended to Christians and so became Authenticall in the Church And this approbation is not expressed in the Titles of the Bookes but is only made knowne by Tradition I answere It followeth not that Tradition vnwritten is the only or principall ground whereupon we beleeue the Scriptures of the New Testament to be Apostolicall although the titles of the Bookes alone are not so for besides the externall Titles there be three other grounds arguing the said Books to be Apostolicall First the inward Subscription 1. Corinth 16.21 and Inscription 1. Rom. 1. 1. of many of these Bookes and namely of all Saint Pauls Epistles except to the Hebrews together with the Reuelations of Saint Iohn and the other Canonicall Epistles Secondly In diuers Bookes there is found apparant testimonie within the same that the Apostles were the Authors Iohn 21. 24. 1. Cor. 15. 10. 1. Tim. 1. 13. Renel 1. 4. Thirdly In those Bookes which want such inward inscription or testimonie the matter and forme of the Bookes their harmonie with the Scriptures of the Old Testament and with those other of the New Testament which haue inscription and the voice of the holy Ghost speaking in them will prooue them to be diuine and if they be diuine then it followeth that they are Apostolicall either by the Apostles owne writing or approbation because the Church of the New Testament is builded vpon the foundation of the Apostles Eph. 2. 20. and our Sauiour himselfe did appoint their Doctrine and Ministerie to be the prime rule of Faith Math. 28. 20. Luc. 10. 16. c. 24. 48 49. And whosoeuer in their daies by preaching or writing instructed the Church must receiue approbation from them Gallath 2. 2. 9. The titles prefixed before the Bookes of the New Testament being ioined with these three grounds formerly

expressed are sufficient to prooue that the holy Apostles were the Authors or Approuers of all the Scriptures of the New Testament and if these with other humane motiues of credibilitie be not the same doubt which is made concerning them may with greater probabilitie be made concerning vnwritten Traditions And secluding the authoritie of the Scripture it selfe no other diuine testimonie can be produced to satisfie them which are doubtfull touching the veritie of vnwritten Tradition and the authoritie of the present Church If one will not beleeue the Scriptures because of the authoritie of God speaking in them neither will he beleeue the present Church consisting of persons in whom is possibilitie of error IESVIT For we may distinguish three properties of the Doctrine of Faith to wit to be true to be reuealed of God to be preached and deliuered by the Apostles The highest ground by which I am persuaded and resolued that my Faith is true is the authoritie of God reuealing it the highest ground on which I am resolued that my Faith is reuealed is the credit and authoritie of Christ Iesus and his Apostles who deliuered the same as diuine and sacred but the highest ground that mooueth me to beleeue that my Faith was preached by the Apostles is the perpetuall Tradition of the Church succeeding the Apostles that so teacheth me ANSVVER The last part of the former distinction is denied The highest ground meaning diuine which mooueth vs to beleeue that the doctrine of Faith was preached by the Apostles is not the perpetuall Tradition of the Church succeeding the Apostles but the holy Scripture of the New Testament for the perpetuall Tradition of the Church succeeding the Apostles is beleeued because of the authoritie of the said Church and whosoeuer beleeueth that Tradition or Testimonie must first of all know the Church to be an infallible witnesse But the word of God only the greater and most worthie part whereof by our Aduersaries confession is contained in the Scriptures giueth authoritie to the Church for the Church is founded vpon the word of God Eph. 2.20 and the word of God is the immortall seed which produceth and giueth being to the Church Luc. 8.11 Ia. 1.18 it selfe vpon the Apostles 〈◊〉 word and Doctrine which is principally contained in the Scripture 〈◊〉 Into this principle St. Augustine resolued his faith against the 〈◊〉 who pretended the Scriptures were corrupted confuting them by Tradition of the Church affirming that he would not beleeue the Gospell did not the authority of the Catholike Church induce him assigning this as the last stay of his resolution in this point for though he beleeued the Gospel to 〈◊〉 souer aignely certaine and true vpon the authority of God 〈◊〉 it and that it was reuealed of God vpon the authority of the Apostles who as sacred preached it yet that this Gospel as we haue it came incorrupt from the Apostles he could haue no stronger or more excellent 〈◊〉 than the testimony of the present Church descended by continued succession of Bishops from the Apostles neither can we imagine any higher except we flye to particular and to priuate reuelation which is absurd ANSWER St. Augustines words C. Epist. Manichei c. 4. doe not proue that after he was fully conuerted he resolued his faith finally and principally into the authority of the Church succeeding the Apostles First St. Augustine resolued his faith finally and principally into that which he knew to be infallible and totally diuine But he was not so persuaded of the Church succeeding the Apostles because he thought it possible for the principall members of that Church to 〈◊〉 and be deceiued and he prefers the authority of the Scriptures before the iudgement of Councels and Fathers in which some of our aduersaries place the 〈◊〉 of Ecclesiasticall infallibility Moreouer it appeareth by Saint Augustine in the second chapter of this Booke that he did not make the authority of the Church the highest ground of resolution of his faith for he saith that manifest verity is to be preferred before all other tbings whereby he was held in the Catholike Church but that whose authority must be preferred before all other things is the highest ground of faiths resolution Secondly because St. Augustines meaning in this place is obscure and dubious our aduersaries cannot conclude certainely from hence 1. Some Schoolemen hold that he speaketh of acquisite or Historicall Faith which is an introductiō to infused faith and then it is inconsequent to argue that because Saint Augustine at his first conuersion and being a Nouice in Faith did ground his Historicall faith vpon the authority of the Church therefore the authority of the Church is vniuersally and after men are conuerted the highest ground of resolution Most men are at first induced by externall motiues to giue credit to the Scriptures as the people of Samaria were by the testimony of the woman to beleeue that Christ was a Prophet Ioh. 4.42 Altisiodor summa in prolog li. 3. tr 3.9.4 But as these people afterwards beleeued because of Christs owne words so they which by the Churches authority are first persuaded to heare and reade the doctrine of the Scriptures afterwards by the light of grace doe perceiue the diuine Maiestie wisedome efficacie and verity of the said doctrine and resolue their faith into the diuine authority of the holy Ghost manifesting himselfe in the Scripture or doctrine of the Scripture Secondly other learned Papists hold that St. Augustine in the place obiected by the authority of the Church vnderstood the Church wherein the Apostles themselues gouerned and of which they were parts and then no meruaile if he resolued his faith into the authority of the Church because in this notion the Church comprehends the Colledge of the Apostles whose testimony concerning the Scripture was altogether Diuine And although St. Augustine conioyneth the authority of the latter Church with the former wherein were the Apostles yet he did not equally and with the same manner of beleeuing ground his faith vpon both for when a Preacher deliuereth Apostolicall doctrine we beleeue both the Preacher and the Doctrine and we could not haue knowne the doctrine but by the Preacher yet we resolue not our faith finally and principally into the authority of the Preacher but into the diuine verity it selfe preached by him Euery thing by which we are mooued to beleeue and without whose authority we should not haue beleeued is not the principall obiect whereunto diuine faith is finally resolued as appeareth by miracles preaching instruction of Parents c. IESVIT Vpon the former place of Saint Augustine the Iesuit inferreth That because we haue no stronger or more excellent proofe than the testimonie of the present Churcb descended by continuall succession of Bishops from the Apostles to confirme that the Gospell as wee haue it came incorrupt from the Apostles therefore Saint Augustine resolued his faith that

such power in Scripture inspired of God that the maiestie of God shineth in it And this speech is the same in effect with that of Constantine the great reported by Theoderet Hist. li. 1. ca. 24. Obseruans fidem diuinam adipiscor lumen veritatis sequens lumen veritatis agnosco diuinam fidem Marking the diuine Faith I obtaine the light of Truth and following the light of Truth I acknowledge diuine Faith Quod est manifestatiuum alterius simul potest manifestare seipsum sicut lux quo actu prodit colores prodit seipsam cum ego quicquam loquor eadem locutione manifesto rem loguelam sayth Petrus de Lorca 22. q. 1. ar 1. disp 4. n. 8. That which is a manifestator of another thing may together manifest it selfe as appeareth inlight which doth manifest it selfe by the same act whereby it sheweth colours and by speech for when I speake by one and the same speech I manifest the thing spoken and mine owne speaking The same is affirmed by Peresius Canus Fra. Petigianus and it is so farre from being vnlikely that the holy Scripture when it is receiued doth manifest it selfe and his author that it is most absurd to imagine the contrarie for the Scripture is a diuine light Psal. 119.105.2 Pet. 1.19.2 Cor. 4. 6. And it is the voice and speech of God Luc. 1. 71. And the Iesuit cannot persuade any reasonable man to thinke that God almightie who bestowed tongues and voices vpon men with abilitie so to expresse themselues that others might vnderstand their voice and know them by it should speake himselfe in the Scripture so darkely and secretly that people when they are eleuated by grace cannot discerne the same to be his word or voice We know other creatures to be Gods worke by footsteps of his power wisdome and goodnesse appearing in them The holy Scripture excelleth all created things in wisdome and perfection it cannot therefore be destitute of signes and impressions to manifest vnto them which are inspired with grace vnto beleeuing that God himselfe is the author IESVITS 3. Argument If the mayne and substantiall points of Christian faith must be firmely knowne and beleeued before we can securely reade and truely vnderstand the holy Scriptures then the mayne and substantiall points of faith are beleeued not vpon Scripture but vpon Tradition precedently vnto Scripture This is cleare because true faith is not built but vpon Scripture truely vnderstood of man neither can Scripture vntill it be truely vnderstood of a man bee to him a ground of assured persuasion But we cannot vnderstand the Scripture securely and aright before wee know the substantiall Articles of faith which all are bound expresly to beleeue the summarie comprehension of which point is tearmed The rule of faith Tertul. de prescrip c. 13. ANSVVER The sequel of the Maior is denied It followeth not that although the mayne and substantiall points of faith must be firmely knowne and beleeued before we can securely reade and truely vnderstand the holy Scriptures in the particular texts and sections thereof therefore the said substantiall points are not beleeued vpon Scripture but vpon Tradition vnwritten The reason of the inconsequence is for that the mayne and substantiall points of faith may be knowne and beleeued by the doctrine of the Scripture touching the said points deliuered to people by those which haue faithfully collected the same into a Summarie out of the particular and distinct sentences of the holy Scriptures And they that beleeue this doctrine of the Scriptures may attaine the knowledge and faith of substantiall points of Christianity before themselues can reade and vnderstand the said Bookes yet they resolue not their faith into vnwritten Tradition according to the Popish meaning where by vnwritten Tradition is vnderstood doctrine of faith neither expresly nor inuoluedly contained in holy Scripture but into the doctrine of the Scripture collected and deliuered vnto them by others and vertually and immediately into the holy Scripture it selfe as I haue formerly shewed in answer to the second Argument That which followeth in the obiection touching the rule of faith prooueth not that Christian beliefe is resolued lastly and finally into vnwritten Tradition because the rule of faith is not such vnwritten Tradition as is neither exprefly nor by consequent contained in Scripture but a Summarie of the principall Articles of Christian 〈◊〉 contained in the Apostles Creed and which may be gathered out of the plaine texts and sentences of holy Scripture and therefore all they which resolue their faith into the said rule refolue the same also into the plaine doctrine of the Scripture And that the rule of faith is such it appeareth First by the branches and Articles of that rule which are I beleeue in God the Father Almighty c. And in Iesus Christ his onely Sonne our Lord c. With the rest of the Articles of the Apostles Creed reade 1. Cor. 15.1 2 3.1 Tim. 3.16 And Tertull. in the place alleaged by the Iesuite and in his Booke d. vel virg rehearsing the ancient rule of faith doth not mention any one Article which is not expresly or by deriuation contained in holy Scripture Secondly the rule of faith extendeth not it selfe beyond the bounds of the Gospel Gallath 1.8 Tertul. de prescript c. 6. but all the mayne and substantiall Articles of faith necessary to bee beleeued generally to saluation are contained in the plaine places of Euangelicall Scripture as both 〈◊〉 Augustine and learned Papists themselues affirme wherefore if the rule of faith be only a summarie comprehension of the mayne and substantiall Articles of Christianity and all these Articles are contained in holy Scripture then it followeth that the rule of faith is not vnwritten Tradition alone according to the Popish meaning but a Summarie of beleese contained in the plainer sentences of holy Scripture either expresly or by deduction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 li. 3. d. doct Christ. c. 2. saith Let a man seeke the rule of faith which he hath learned of 〈◊〉 places of Scripture and of the authoritie of the Church now the plainer places of Scripture are a part of Scripture and the authority of the Church exceedeth not the bounds of the Scripture according to St. Hierom. com Mich. c. 1. And Durand the famous Schooleman 2. dist 44. q. 3. n. 9. Out of the former definition of the rule of faith it followeth That because according to our Aduersaries doctrine the beleefe of Christians touching all maine and substantiall points of faith is resolued into the rule of faith and the said rule exceedeth not the limits of holy Scripture being onely a summarie comprehension of the principall heads of Christian doctrine collected from the plainer places of Scripture and propounded by the authority of the Church confined to Scripture that therefore the finall resolution of faith is not made into Tradition vnwritten

erred in exposition nor differed one for the other Thirdly the Fathers affirme that the Scripture expounds it selfe Aug. d. verb. 〈◊〉 Serm. 2. d. vnit Eccles. c. 5. p. 427. Chrys. sup Gen. Hom. 13. And they doe not alwayes referre men to Tradition concerning exposition of Scripture but prescribe other rules and meanes also Aug. d Doctr. Christ. l. 4. c. 30. c. Chrys. sup Gen. Hom. 21. sup Rom. Hom. 13. sup Iohn Hom. 39. Tertul. c. prax Hilar d. Trinit l. 5. Ambros. 〈◊〉 Psal. 118. Serm. 8. Origen Mat. Hom. 25. Fourthly that which the Aduersarie affirmeth touching the Fathers to wit that they held the Scriptures to be cleare in all substantiall points onely to men beforehand instructed by the light of Tradition is vntrue neither doe the Fathers speake of Tradition according to the Romish acceptation First sometimes the Fathers exhort heathen men which were not instructed by Tradition to reade the Scriptures Theophilus Antiochenus saith to Autolicus being as then a Pagan Verum tu ipse si placet consule liter as sacras But doe thou thy selfe if it seeme good vnto thee consult with the holy Scriptures Also they prouoke Heretikes which denied the Tradition of the Church to examine truth by Scriptures August d. vnit Eccles c. 2.3.16 contra Maxim Arrian l. 3. c. 14. Socrates Hist. lib. 1. cap. 6. Secondly by Tradition they vnderstand not the fabulous dreames and inuentions of Papals who like the Pharisees corrupt the right sence of Scripture by their vnwritten Traditions and affirme those things to bee Apostolicall which agree with the confessed Doctrine of the Apostles like darkenesse with light But the Fathers by Tradition vnderstand such exposition of Scripture as was vniformely receiued and commended for Apostolicall by the Primatiue Church and which besides antiquitie or the report of men appeared to bee Apostolicall by an exact harmonie and consent with the Text of the holy Scripture to which it was applied St. August d. Bapt. c. Donatist l. 5 c. 26 St. Cyprian Epist. 74. Tertul. d. praescript c. 21 Ruffin Hist. Ecclesiast l. 2 c. 9 IESVIT I hope I haue in the opinion of your most learned Maiestie sufficiently demonstrated the first ground of Catholicke faith to wit that a Christian is originally and fundamentally built vpon the word of God not as written 〈◊〉 Scriptures but as deliuered by the Tradition of the Church successiuely from the Primatiue vpon the authority whereof we beleeue that both Scriptures and all other substantiall Articles of Faith were deliuered by the Apostles thence further ascending and inferring they came from Christ and so from God the prime veritie and Authour of truth ANSVVER You haue played the Paralogist and weaued a spiders web which is fitter to catch flyes than to persuade so religious learned iudicious and resolute a king who is like an Angell of God knowing good and euill Your obiections being weighed in the ballance of the Sanctuarie are found light they are Funiculus vanitatis a coard and bundle of vanitie a potsheard couered ouer with the drosse of siluer His most learned Maiestie as you truly stile him honoureth genuine and Orthodox all Tradition as no religious king or good Christian can doe more and hereupon to wit vpon the testimony of Tradition besides other Arguments he beleeueth that you and your consorts are deceiued when you hold that a Christian is originally and fundamentally built vpon the word of God not as written in Scripture but as deliuered by Tradition c. For if the Scripture according to the doctrine and Tradition of the Primatiue Church is eminentissimae authoritatis of most eminent authoritie If it be the seed of which faith is first of all conceiued if it is the Rocke whereupon the Church is built if the authoritie of vnwritten Tradition dependeth vpon it and must bee examined by it If the Churches authoritie is 〈◊〉 from it then a Christian is originally and fundamentally built vpon it First That which is most excellent in euery kind is the modell and paterne of all the rest but I trow you will grant the Scripture to be the most excellent part of Gods word 2. Pet. 1. 〈◊〉 S. 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 Manich. li. 11 cap. 5. d. Ciuit. Dei lib. 11. cap. 3. Ibid. 〈◊〉 14. cap. 7. d. Vnit. Eccles. 16. Chris. d. 〈◊〉 Hom. 4. Oecumen sup 2. Tim. 3. Ansel. sup 2. Tim. 3. Secondly A Christian is fundamentally built vpon the rock but the Scripture is a rocke Cardinalis Camaracensis 〈◊〉 vespert 〈◊〉 sacrae Scripturae In euery building orderly framed the foundation hath precedence then followeth superedification and lastly consummation According to this order Christ the most exact Architect did build his Church vpon the rocke of holy Scripture Thirdly The seed of Faith is the root and foundation of 〈◊〉 Christian the Scripture is the seed of Faith Iohn 20. 41. for it is the word of God Luc. 8.11 Iam. 1.18 1. Cor. 4 15. And were the Popish Tenet true that the Scripture is not the whole word of God but only a part thereof yet a Christian must be originally and fundamentally built vpon it together with Tradition And Tradition according to the Tenet of our Aduersarie in this place cannot be the sole foundation of Christianitie but only a part of the foundation Fourthly All Scripture giuen by diuine Inspiration is simply and without exception to be receiued and all Tradition repugnant to Scripture is to be refused From hence it followeth that Scripture is a rule of Tradition and not Tradition of Scripture and Scripture is the highest rule as both the Fathers and many Papists themselues affirme and thus it is certaine that a Christian is orignally and fundamentally built vpon the holy Scripture IESVITS 2d Ground That there is a visible Church alwaies in the world to whose Traditions men are to cleaue and the Church is one Vniuersall Apostolicall Holy ANSWER The subiect of this Proposition to wit Ecclesia the Church is a word or terme of diuers significations and therefore the Iesuit should haue declared in what notion he taketh the same when he saieth There is a visible Church c. First Cardinall Bellarmine with other Pontificians saith that the Church whereof he disputes is a companie of people linked together by the same profession of Faith and Communion of Sacraments vnder lawfull pastros 〈◊〉 vnder the Roman Bishop who is Christs Vicar Secondly The terme Church is taken in the holy Scripture for the vniuersall number of holy beleeuers in all ages and more strictly for the whole number of holy beleeuers vnder the New Testament Heb. 12.23 Apoc. 5.9 Ephes. 5.25.27 and thus it comprehendeth both the Church Militant and Triumphant Thirdly the Church is taken for the common and vniuersall multitude of Christian people of any one or more ages which

persecutions the loue of many may waxe cold Math. 24.12 and iniquitie and infidelitie so abound Luc. 17.26 cap. 18.8 that the number of right beleeuers shall be few and the same may bee compelled to exercise their religion in 〈◊〉 Secondly We deny that a naturall man is able infallibly to iudge and discerne by sence and common reason or human prudence only which is the true Church of Christ whereunto euery one that wil be saued must vnite and ioine himselfe 1. Cor. 2.11.14 Now the reasons for which we reiect or limit the Popish Doctrine concerning the Churches visibilitie are these and not what the same must be perpetually Some teach what the same is by outward calling and consequently what in right by precept and dutie it ought to be Some Texts of holy Scripture describe the inward and spirituall beautie of the sounder part of the Church by Allegories and similitudes taken from externall and worldly pompe and glorie Some places shew what 〈◊〉 ought to performe when the publike and common Ministerie of the Church is incorrupt and ordinarie Pastors in Doctrine and Discipline proceed according to the Ordinance of Christ. Lastly some of the Fathers liuing in Ages wherein the outward face of the Church was externally glorious not foreseeing what was imminent and future might probably suppose that the same should alwayes retaine the like beautie And yet S. Augustine who because of the Donatists speaketh most largely in this kind vseth words of limitation and exception and affirmeth that the splendor of the Church in time of Persecution may be eclipsed and the glorie thereof ouershadowed Secondly The Arguments against the glorious and perpetuall Visibilitie of the true Church according to our aduersaries Tenet are weightie First The best and worthiest members of the said Church may be persecuted disgraced and condemned as Heretikes and impious persons as appeareth by the example of Athanasius Hilarius Ambrosius c. And this may be done by great multitudes and by learned persons and by such as are potent in worldly and Ecclesiasticall power and in such times the true Church vnder the notion of a true Church cannot be generally and gloriously visible Secondly The prime Rulers and Commanders in the visible Church doe at some times by Ambition and other enormious Vices become enemies vnto Truth as our aduersaries themselues acknowledge concerning all other Bishops but onely the Roman and his adheres and that the Roman Popes and Prelates haue departed from right Faith and exceeded others in monstrous ambition and wickednesse is reported by many amongst themselues Now when these Master-builders fall innumerable multitudes of inferiour ranke for hope fauour feare and other humane and carnall respects concurre with them and then the number of Infidels which remaine without the Church being added to the Church malignant the totall summe of both amounteth to a great number and in comparison of them right beleeuers may be few and their reputation in the world so meane as that they shall not be generally knowne the true Church And if they be not knowne and esteemed a true Church by the greatest part of the world then they are not famously visible at all times as our aduersarie maintaines Thirdly The Scriptures foretell a comming and reigne of Antichrist a large Apostasie and reuolt from the right Faith a raritie of true beleeuers and decay of Charitie a flying of the true Church into the Wildernesse and grieuous persecutions of Gods Elect before the finall consummation of the World 2. Thess. 2.3 c. 1. Tim. 4.1 2. Tim. 3.1 c. Luc. 18.8 Matth. 24. 12 24. Reuel 12.6 But such a perpetuall visibilitie of the Church as Romists imagine is not compatible with the precedent Predictions But the Iesuit saith IESVIT Because the Tradition of the Church must be at all times famous glorious and notoriously knowne in the World therefore the true Church which is the Teacher Pillar and Foundation of Tradition must be at all times famously visible to the eye of the World ANSWER Neither the Antecedent nor Consequent of this Argument are firme It is not alwayes true that those things are visible which make other things famous glorious and notoriously knowne for that which is innisible to the eye of the World may cause other things to be famous as wee see in God himselfe in Christ in the holy Apostles c. Also persons liuing in disgrace and persecution may by writing from Exile Prison or vnknowne Habitations make Diuine Truth notoriously knowne to the making of the enemies thereof inexcusable and the conuersion of others as appeareth in Athanasius Secondly The Antecedent is false If the Iesuit by the word Must vnderstand that which by an immutable prouidence of the Almightie shall infallibly in all ages be fulfilled it is not decreed by the Almightie that the Doctrine and Tradition of Diuine Veritie shall in all Ages be generally famous and notoriously knowne to the World the same must alwayes in matters substantiall and necessarie be sufficiently knowne to some part of the World But many people for sundrie Ages haue beene ignorant of Christ and of the whole Tradition and Doctrine of the Apostles and a large tract of the World remaineth at this present day in Heathenish and damnable ignorance and consequently to a large part of the World Tradition is not in a famous and glorious manner notoriously knowne IESVIT Thirdly The Church is Apostolicall and that apparantly descending from the Apostolicall Sea by succession of Bishops vsque ad confessionem generis humani euen to the acknowledgement of humane kind as S. Augustine speaketh ANSWER The true visible Church is named Apostolicall not because of locall and personall succession of Bishops onely or principally but because it retaineth the Faith and Doctrine of the holy Apostles Eph. 2. 20. Reuel 21.14 Tertullian d. Prascript cap. 32. affirmeth That Churches which are able to produce none of the Apostles or other Apostolicall men for their first planters are notwithstanding Apostolicall for consent of Faith and consanguinitie of Doctrine And many learned Papists antient and moderne say The Church is called Apostolicall because it is grounded vpon the Doctrine of the Apostles in respect of Faith Lawes and Sacraments But personall or locall succession onely and in it selfe maketh not the Church Apostolicall because hirelings and wolues may lineally succeed lawfull and orthodoxe Pastours Act. 20.29 30. Euen as sicknesse succeedeth health and darkenesse light and a tempest faire weather as Gregorie Nazianzen affirmeth Orat. d. laud. Athanasij That which is common and separable cannot of it selfe demonstrate the true Church And the notes of the Church must be proper and inseparable agreeing to all times to euery true Church as Bellarmine affirmeth Also the same must be so conspicuous as that they cannot easily bee pretended by Aduersaries or be at all

Chastitie And againe There be few Priests in these dayes in Spaine and Apulia which doe not openly foster Concubines Dionysius Carthusian saith Paucissimi eorum proh dolor continenter viuunt Few of them out alas liue continently And S. Bridget the Nunne in her Reuelation saith Not one among a hundred And the same Bridget speaking of Nunnes saith Talia loca similiora sunt Lupanaribus quam sanctis Cellis Such places are more like Brothelhouses and common Stewes than holy Cells The Vow of Pouertie brought forth perpetuall Theft and Rapine and that from the Widow and fatherlesse The Vow of Chastitie filled all the Earth with the steame of Brothelsome impuritie and the Vow of blind Obedience caused hatefull and direfull Murthers euen of Kings and Gods annointed Concerning whom the holy Prophet saith Touch not mine annointed and the sacred Historie reports to all posteritie That Dauids heart smote him because he cut off a piece of the Kings Garment These voluntarie Exercises and Deuotions carrie a great shew of perfection and merit among worldly people euen as the Pharisaicall will-worship in ancient time did But yet experience taught them which beheld these things in the height of their pride that the more these Vowes and religious Orders encreased the more Ignorance Infidelitie Iniquitie and all manner of Plagues multiplyed in the World Antonin sum Histor. p. 3. tit 23. c. 9. § 5 IESVIT This sanctitie shineth not in all the Children of the Church but in the more eminent Preachers and Professors which kind of sanctitie together with Miracles if the Church did want she could not be a sufficient Witnesse of Truth vnto Infidels who commonly neuer begin to affect and admire Christianitie but vpon the fight 〈◊〉 sucb wonders of sanctitie and other extraordinarie workes ANSWER Sanctitie of Grace which is a perpetuall propertie of the true Church shineth in all the sound and liuing members of the Church Phil. 2. 15. And whereas the measure and degrees thereof are 〈◊〉 the most eminent degree of sanctitie is not alwayes found in Preachers or in Popes and greater Prelates or in persons professing Monasticall life but the same may be equall or greater in Lay persons or in people of meane esteeme as appeareth by the state of the Iewish Church in the dayes of Esay cap. 1.9 and of the Pharisees at such time as our Sauiour was incarnate Dominicus Bannes a famous Schoole-man treating of the sanctitie of the Church saith That the supreame Bishop the Pope is said to be most holy because of his State and Office although indeed hee is not so Rodericus speaking of the Clergie of his times saith Rectores moderni non Pastores sed raptores ouium tonsores non ad viridia pascua ductores non piscatores sed negotiatores non dispensatores bonorum crucifixi sed voratores c. Our moderne Church-men are not Pastors but Raueners they fleece their Sheepe and lead them not to the greene Pastures they are not stewards but deuourers of the goods of Christ crucified c. And Laurent Iustinianus saith The greatest part of Priests and Clerkes in our dayes liue voluptuously and after the manner of Beasts Paucissimi reperiuntur qui honestè viuunt rariores autem qui pabulum salutis gregibus valeant praebere fidelium Verie few are found which lead an honest life and a farre smaller number of such as are able to minister the food of saluation to their flockes In the next words our Iesuit affirmeth That if the Church wanted the sanctitie aforesaid together with Miracles shee could not be a sufficient witnesse of Truth to Infidels c. This Assertion concerning the perpetuitie and absolute necessitie of Miracles in all Ages is repugnant to the Fathers and to many learned Papists and it is voluntarily affirmed by our Aduersarie First If the gift and power of Miracles were perpetuall and inseparable from the true 〈◊〉 in all Ages this would appeare by some reuelation or promise of holy Scripture as well as other gifts and priuiledges of the same But there is no reuelation or promise concerning perpetuitie of the gift of Miracles more than of the gift of Tongues or of Prophesie or the giuing of the Holy Ghost by imposition of Hands c. And these gifts were neuer promised in the Scripture to be perpetuall and are long since ceased August Retrac Lib. 1. cap. 13. Secondly The Fathers which liued since the foure hundreth yeere affirme That outward Miracles such as the Apostles wrought were 〈◊〉 in their dayes and not absolutely necessarie for after times Gregor Moral 27. cap. 11. Lib. 34. cap. 2. super Euang. Hom. 29. August d. vera Relig. cap. 25. d. Ciuit. Dei Lib. 22. cap. 8. sup Psal. 130. Chrysost. in Matth. Hom. 4. Imperfect in Matth. Hom. 49. sup 1. Timoth. Hom. 10. Thirdly Many learned Papists hold That the gift of Miracles is rare and vnnecessarie in these later times Abulensis Leuit cap. 9. q. 14 Trithemias Abbas Lib. 8. Q. ad Imperat. Max. q. 3. Roffensis c. Luther a. Captiu Babylon c. 10. n. 4. pag. 81. Acosta d. Procur Indorum Salut Lib. 2. cap. 8. pag. 218 Stella in Luc. cap. 11. Cornel. Muss Conc. Dominic Pentecost pag. 412. And some of them censure the reporters of Miracles as Impostors and grosse Fabulers and Lyars Gerson Lib. c. Sect. Flagellantium Canus Loc. Lib. 11. cap. 6 Ludouicus Viues Erasmus Occham Espenceus Fourthly If Infidels cannot be assured that the Wonders which they outwardly behold are the workes of the true God and if the same may be the illusions of the Deuill then the operations of such Miracles can be no infallible argument of Veritie and consequently no meanes of conuerting Infidels But Bellarmine affirmeth That before the approbation of the Church which Infidels know not it is not euident and certaine by Faith concerning any Miracle that the same is true and Diuine and it is possible for the same to be an illusion of Sathan IESVIT Holy for doctrine in regard her Traditions be diuine and holy without any mixture of errour ANSVVER The Church which buildeth it selfe vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Eph. 2.20 And which heareth the voyce of Christ Iohn 10.27 is holy both for life and doctrine But as holinesse of life is compatible with some kind of sinne 1. Iohn 1.8 Euen so sanctitie of doctrine excludeth not all errour St. Augustine a man as holy as any since the Apostles saith I must not deny but that as in my manners euen so in my workes and writings many things may iustly and without any temeritie be reprehended IESVIT For if the Church could deliuer by consent of Ancestors together with truth some errours her Traditions euen about truth were questionable and could not bee beleeued vpon the warrant of her Tradition ANSWER If Ancestors may erre

compassed about with ignorance and infirmitie and at some times better or worse qualified than at other Also the true Church in firmissimis suis in her firmest members is 〈◊〉 holy for life because the Holy of Holiest sanctifieth and purgeth the same by his Word Sacraments and Grace Eph. 5.26 Tit. 3.5 6. But it is not absolute in holinesse Iam. 3.2 1. Ioh. 1.8 nor yet in euery age so remarkeably holy that it is thereby able to conuert Infidels And the true Church hath not in all ages the gift of Miracles and the pretext of Miracles is common to deceiuers Math. 24.24 25. 2. Thessal 2.9 Apoc. 13.13 And Suares the Iesuit saith Haec adulterari possunt ita exterius fingi vt non sint necessaria signa verae Fidei Miracles may so be adulterated and externally feigned that they may not be necessarie signes of Faith And Canus speaking of Popish miracles and legends saith Nostri pleriquè de industria ita multa 〈◊〉 vt eorum me pudeat taedeat sundrie of our men do so wilfully coine many things in their report of Miracles that I am ashamed and irked of them IESVIT That the Roman is the One Holy Catholicke Apostolicall Church from and by which we are to receiue the Tradition of Christian Doctrine These grounds being laid it is apparant that the Roman Church that is the multitude of Christians spread ouer the world cleauing to the Doctrine and Tradition of the Church of Rome is the One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicall Church ANSVVER The former grounds according to your deliuerie and exposition of them are partly false and partly ambiguous and captious and therefore it cannot be made apparant from them That the moderne Roman Church is the One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicall Church from which we are absolutely to receiue the whole Tradition of Christian Doctrine IESVITS 1. Argument There mnst be alwaies in the world One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicall Church that is a Church deliuering Doctrine vniformely therby making them credible Vniuersally thereby making them famously knowne to mankind Holily so making them certain and such as on them we may securely rely Apostolically so making them perpetually flow without change vnto the present Christianitie in the Channell of neuer interrupted succession of Bishops from the Apostles And this Church must either be the Roman or the Protestants or some other opposit to both Protestants cannot say a Church opposite to both for then they should be condemned in their owne judgement and bound to conforme themselues to that Church which can be no other but the Graecian a Church holding as many or more Doctrines which Protestants dislike than doth the Church of Rome as J can demonstrate if need be ANSVVER There must be alwaies in the world a Church One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicall that is A number of Christians beleeuing and 〈◊〉 professing Christianitie to the sounder part wherof the properties of One Holy Catholicke Apostolicall belong But there is not alwaies in the world an Hierarchiall visible Church consisting of Prelates and people vnited in one externall forme of Policie and profession of Religion vnder an vniuersall Pope to which alone these foure titles are proper or principally belonging And there may bee an Orthodoxall Apostolicall Church consisting of a small number of inferiour Pastors and right beleeuing Christians opposed and persecuted by the Hierarchiall part of the visible Church euen as in the raigne of king Manasses and other idolatrous kings of Iuda when Idolatrie preuailed among the Priests and generall multitude there was a remnant of holy people worshipping God according to his word and not defiled with the impietie of those times Now concerning the disiunctiue part of the Iesuits Argument which is This Church must either be the Roman or the Protestants or some other opposite to both It is answered The Protestant Church is that true and Orthodoxall Church which is One Holy Apostolicke and a sound part of the Catholicke For although the same may be supposed to haue had beginning in Luthers age yet this is vntrue concerning the essence and kind and is true onely touching the name and some things accidentall For in all ages and before Luther some persons held the substantiall articles of our Religion both in the Roman and Graecian Church And by name the Graecians maintained these articles in common with vs That the Roman Church hath not primacie of Iurisdiction Authoritie and Grace aboue or ouer all other Churches neither is the same infallible in her definitions of Faith They denie Purgatorie priuate Masses Sacrifice for the dead and they propugne the mariage of Priests In this Westerne part of the world the Waldenses Taborites of Bohemia the Scholers of Wiclife called in England Lollards maintained the same doctrine in substance with the moderne Protestants as appeareth by the confession of their Faith and by the testimonie of some learned Pontificians And concerning certaine differences obiected to haue beene betweene them and vs we shall afterward shew that the same are no greater than such as haue beene antiently among the Fathers and there are as great differences betweene the Elder and moderne Romists in many passages of their doctrine But now on the contrarie if it were so that we could not for certaine ages past nominate or assigne out of historie any other visible Church besides the Roman or Grecian yet because right Faith may be preserued in persons liuing in a corrupt visible Church as Wheat among Tares 1. King 19. 11. and because God hath promised there shall be alwaies in the world a true Church hauing either a larger or smaller number of professors if Protestants be able to demonstrate that they maintaine the same Faith and Religion which the holy Apostles taught this alone is sufficient to prooue they are the true Church IESVIT It is also most manifest and vndeniable that Protestants are not such a Church nor part of such a Church since their reuoult and separation from the Roman seeing confessedly they changed their Doctrines they once held forsooke the bodie whereof they were members broke off from the stocke of that tree whereof they were branches Neither did they departing from the Roman ioine themselues with any other Church professing their particular doctrines dissonant from it Ergo The Romane is the one holy Catholicke and Apostolicall Church c. ANSVVER Bold words It is most manifest and vndenyable miserable proofes they changed their Doctrine they once held c. If the Pharisees had argued in this manner against Saint Paul or the Manichees and Pelagians against Saint Augustine the one would haue told them That it was no fault to forsake the leauen of Traditions to imbrace the Doctrine of the Gospell confirmed by the Prophets and the other would haue pleaded most iustly That it is a vertue and honour to forsake errour and to imbrace veritie Gods people are commanded vpon a

Vertue Deut. 31. 21. Secondly Their doctrine of Pardons ministred daily occasion of intollerable wickednesse For although their Scholemen plastered the same with subtle distinctions yet the people entertained them according to the outward letter and practised accordingly Thirdly By some part of their doctrine they 〈◊〉 people to commit sinne Equiuocation is a doctrine of Periurie To affirme that it is lawfull to depose Princes and take away their 〈◊〉 in case of Heresie is a plaine doctrine of 〈◊〉 worse than murder and if the Pope may command murder why may he not also command adulterie theft and blasphemie The doctrine of the Popes authoritie to dispence with oathes is perilous and pernitio us to the safetie of mankind making way to all kind of fraud and iniustice If the Roman Church be so apparantly and infinitly holy why doth it openly maintaine Stewes and receiue yearely tribute and part stake with Harlots and wherefore are Sanctuaries the harbours and dennes of Assisines and other enormous delinquents tollerated and supported by this Church It is a monstrous doctrine which was hatched by Pope Vrban and approoued by Baronius That they are not to be iudged murtherers which slay excommunicate persons The exemption of 〈◊〉 from being tried in Causes Criminall before Christian Magistrates is a doctrine which maketh way to most outragious offences Gulielmus Nubrigensis lib. 2. cap. 16. The Iudges complained that there were many robberies and rapes and murthers to the number of an hundred then presently committed within the realme by Ecclesiasticall persons vpon presumption of exemption from the censure of the lawes We cannot be persuaded that the Roman Church is holy in such high and extrordinarie manner as our Aduersarie boasteth because the greatest Clerkes of that societie vndertake the defence of such impieties as are detestable in Nature and condemned by the light of common Reason Garnets Powder-plot hath many Patrons Cardinall Baronius commendeth to the skies yong Henrie the Emperors sonne for rebelling against his naturall father for deposing imprisoning and bringing him with sorrow to the graue what Turke or Sauage would be the encomiast of such vnnaturall and enormous villanie IESVIT Most 〈◊〉 Apostolicall 〈◊〉 a most glorious succession of Bishops and Pastors from the Apostles famous in all monuments of Historie and Antiquitie who were neuer noted as deliuering 〈◊〉 doctrines the one to the other In which proofe that these properties agree to the Roman and be wanting in the Protestant Church J will not inlarge my selfe as I otherwise might as well not to wearie your Maiestie as also not to seeme to diffide the matter being most cleere of your Maiesties judgement wherefore it is more than cleere That the Roman Church is the One Holy Catholicke Apostolicke Church by whose Tradition Christian Religion hath beene is and shall be euer continued from the Apostles to the worlds end ANSVVER First If the present Roman Church do want the life and soule of Apostolicall Succession to wit Apostolicall Doctrine locall and titular Succession is only a Pharisaicall cloake or a painted wall Acts 23.3 and common to Caiaphas Paul Samosaten Nestorius and to many other notorious Heretickes Secondly The visible Succession of the Bishops and Pastors of the said Church from the Apostles is not most glorious and famous by the report of all monuments of Historie and Antiquitie but the same hath beene notoriously distained in latter times by Simoniacall entrance of Popes and Prelats by Schysmaticall intrusions and by commutation of the forme of election of Pastors appointed by the Apostles and exercised in the Primatiue Church And whereas the Aduersarie contendeth that Roman Bishops and Pastours hane Succession of doctrine because Ecclesiasticall Historie is silent in noting latter Popes for deliuering contrarie doctrines the one to the other both the Illation it selfe and the antecedent or ground of the Illation are false First it is inconsequent to inserre negatiuely from humane Historie and to say Histories are silent and therefore no such matter was Our Sauiour prooueth the Pharisees and Sadduces to be errants because their present doctrine was repugnant to the Scripture and had the Pharisees or Sadduces replied That their doctrine was the same which Moses the Prophets taught because they had Snccession and Histories were silent when they changed the antient Faith they had iustified themselues vpon as good grounds as Papals do Secondly it is false which this disputer venteth so confidently That Histories and antient Monuments are altogether silent of the Innouations which were made by latter Popes and we are able as in due place it shall appeare to produce testimonies of Historie to the contrarie IESVITS 2. Argument Protestants haue the holy Scriptures deliuered vnto them by and from the One Holy Catholicke and Apostolical Church but they receiued them from no other Church than the Roman Ergo the Roman is the One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church ANSVVER This Sillogisme is peccant in forme and both the propositions are affirmatiue in the second figure which I note the rather because the Aduersarie at the end of his Argument cryeth Victoria saying An Argument conuicting and vnanswerable I must therefore reduce the same to a lawfull forme and then answer That Church by and from which the Protestants receiue the Scriptures is the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church The Protestants receiue the Scriptures from the Roman Church Ergo The Roman Church to the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church First If this Argument be conuicting and vnanswerable as the Iesuit boasteth then these which follow are such That from which the Russians receiued the Scriptures is the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church The Russians receiued the Scriptures from the Greeke Church Ergo The Greeke Church is the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church Also that Church from which the Apostles receiued the Scriptures was the true Church The Apostles receiued the Scriptures from the Sinagogue of the Iewes gouerned by the Pharisees Ergo The Synagogue of the Iewes gouerned by the Pharisees was the true Church The deliuerie of the Text of the holy Scriptures is common to the true and corrupt Church and not proper to the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church as appeareth by the Synagogue which being a corrupt Church at the time of our Sauiours Aduent yet by the speciall prouidence of God preserued and deliuered the Text of the old Testament Rom. 3.2 And S. Agustine testifieth of the Iewes That they were Librarie keepers to Christians of the Bookes of the Law and Prophets And S. Hierom saith That the Hebrews did not corrupt the Text of the old Testament Also the Donatists and Nouatians deliuered the incorrupt Text of holy Scripture to their followers Secondly the proposition of the former Argument hath another defect The Text of holy Scriptures may be deliuered by a particular Church which is but a member of the vniuersall and therefore it is

〈◊〉 institutum sed semper retentum est non nisi Authoritate Apostolica traditum rectissimè creditur That which the vniuersall Church holdeth and which was not appointed by Councels but alwayes obserued is most rightly beleeued to be none other than a Tradition of the Apostles Lastly that which is produced out of BB. Whitgift and M. Cartwright belongeth to the Titles or Names of Ecclesiasticall Rulers and to the matter of Ceremonies Cartwright had a sowre opinion against these being neuer so antient and inculpable The most reuerend BB. his Aduersarie answereth out of S. Augustine Epist. 118. Those things that be not expressed in the Scriptures and yet by Tradition obserued of the whole Church come either from Apostles or from generall Councels as the obseruing of Easter the celebration of the day of Ascension c. The Bishop disputeth of adiaphorous Ceremonies and Titles of Ecclesiasticall persons no wayes blameable but because they are not expressely found in Scripture and concerning such things he saith That because their originall cannot be found out it is to be supposed it is probable they haue their beginning from the Apostles But hee speaketh not in this manner touching dogmaticall points and Articles of Faith Therefore our Aduersarie peruerteth his words and meaning IESVIT The Spirit of Christ or Christ by his Spirit being still with the Church cannot permit Errors in Faith so to creepe into the Church as they grow irreformable euen by the Principles of Christianitie But if Errors could so creepe into the Church as their beginning could not be knowne since the Apostles and neuer be espyed till they be vniuersally receiued Errors could so creepe into the Church and preuaile that by the Principles of Christianitie they are irreformable This I prooue because Errors are irreformable by the Principles of Christianitie when whosoeuer vndertakes to reforme them by the Principles of Christianitie is to be condemned as an Heretike But he that will vndertake to reforme Doctrines vniuersally receiued by the Church opposeth against the whole Church and therefore is by the most receiued Principle of Christianitie by Christs owne direct Precept to be accounted as an Heathen and Publican And as S. Augustine saith to dispute against the whole Church is most insolent madnesse specially when the Doctrine is antient without any knowne beginning as are the supposed erronious Customes and Doctrines of the Romane Church for then the vndertaking Reformer must striue against not onely the whole present Church but also the whole streame of the visible Church time out of mind since the Apostles Et quis ad haec Idoneus Who is able to begin a new course of Christianitie and to ouerthrow that Doctrine which is vniuersally receiued and cannot be prooued by any Tradition of Ancestors to be otherwise planted in the World but by the Apostles themselues through the efficacie of innumerable Miracles Wherefore these Doctrines if they be Errors which by the Principles of Christianitie no man ought to goe about to reforme and seeing it is impossible that there should be any such Errors we must acknowledge that Principle of S. Augustine as most certaine That Doctrines receiued vniuersally in the Church without any knowne beginning are truly and verily Apostolicall And of this kind are the Roman from which Protestants are gone ANSWER The Point which you labour to prooue is That Doctrines vniuersally receiued whose beginning is not reported by Monuments of Historie and Antiquitie are Apostolicall You haue taken that as granted and presupposed which we denie to wit That your Popish Doctrine was for a thousand yeeres at least vniuersally receiued But this is a begging of the Question and a false supposition Wherefore I might according to the rules of Disputation passe by the other part of your Argument But to cleare all things more exactly I will ex abundanti answer that which followeth Your disputation about this part of the question being resolued into the seuerall Arguments and parts may bee thus conceiued No errours irreformable can be in the Church All errours vniuersally receiued without a knowne beginning are irreformeable Ergo No errours vniuersally receiued without a knowne beginning can be in the Church The Maior is confirmed by an Argument taken from the continuall presence of Christ by his Spirit to the vniuersall Church for wheresoeuer Christ is perpetually present and assistant by his holy Spirit there it is impossible that irreformeable errours should preuaile I answere No errours great or lesse absolutely irreformeable can bee in the Church as it signifieth the sounder and better part thereof but errours irreformeable Ex Hypothesi that is presupposing the ignorance and malice of some ouerruling Prelates may preuaile in the Hierarchicall Church which is vulgarly reputed the vniuersall Church for such a Church may be the seate of Antichrist and whiles he reigneth errours may be incureable Ierem. 51. 9. Apoc. 17. 5. Neither doth the presence of Christ and of his Spirit deliuer the malignant part of the Church from irreformeable errours but onely the liuing members of his mysticall Bodie which are actuated and mooued by influence of sauing Grace Iohn 8. 31 32. Rom. 1. 28. 2. Thes. 2. 11. Iohn 12. 40. The Assumption to wit All errours vniuersally receiued without a knowne beginning are irreformeable is denied For although the errours of the Pharisees were vniuersally receiued according to the vniuersalitie of the state of the Church in those dayes without such a knowne beginning as Papists require vs to exhibite concerning their errours yet the same were reformeable by the word of Christ and by the doctrine of the Prophets in all such as receiued the loue of the Truth that they might be saued But the Iesuite prooueth his Assumption by this reason All errours are irreformeable when they which seeke to reforme them are Heretickes by the Principles of Christianitie But all that seeke to reforme errours vniuersally receiued whose beginning is not knowne are heretickes by the principles of Christianitie Ergo All errours vniuersally receiued without a knowne beginning are irreformeable The Minor of this Paralogisme is denyed and it is false That all they which seeke to reforme errours vniuersally receiued are iustly condemned as heretickes by the principles of Christianitie And the Argument produced to prooue this Proposition is of no force Whosoeuer opposeth against the whole Church is by the most receiued Principle of Christianitie deliuered Matth. 18. 7. to be accounted as an Heathen or a Publicane and Saint Augustine saith That to dispute against the whole Church is insolent madnesse But whosoeuer seeketh to reforme errours vniuersally receiued whose beginning is not knowne opposeth against the whole Church Ergo All they which seeke to reforme errours c. are Heretickes by the Principles of Christiantie ANSVVER Whosoeuer opposeth against the whole Church taken as before for the Church Hierarchicall or representatiue is not by the doctrine of our Sauiour and Saint Augustine to be accounted an

Heathen or Publicane but euery one which opposeth against the true Church inordinately and without iust cause is onely so to be accounted First there is opposition by way of counsell and aduice and this maketh no man an Hereticke as appeareth by Paphnutius opposing the Councell of Nice Secondly there is opposition by way of reprehension and true confutation of errour by authoritie of the holy Scriptures And this also maketh no man an Hereticke because he that in a lawfull manner propugneth the faith of the Scriptures maintaineth the Law and veritie of God and fulfilleth the Diuine Precept requiring man to contend for the truth 1. Tim. 6. 11. 2. Tim. 4. 7. And also performeth a worke of charitie in labouring to conuert people from errour Iam. 5. 19 20. Saint Augustines place Epist. 118. c. 5. ad Ianuar. is vnderstood of outward ceremonies and adiaphorous rites in respect of their vse vnblameable and not of matters of faith and therefore it appertaineth not to the question in hand IESVITS 4th Argument That doctrine which Tradition hath deliuered as the doctrine of all Ancestours without deliuering any Orthodox opposition against it that is opposition made by any confessed Catholicke Doctours or Fathers is doctrine deriued from the Apostles without change ANSWER This Proposition is denied for new Doctrine may bee brought in after the decease of the antient Fathers and because the same was vnheard of in their dayes they could make no such plaine and direct opposition against it as that either Historians might take notice thereof or the maintainers of such Doctrine haue no euasion by distinctions and sophisticall slights to elude their Testimonies IESVIT But such is the Doctrine of the Roman Church which Consent and Tradition of Ancestors doth deliuer and doth not together deliuer that any confessed Orthodox Father opposed against it ANSVVER Some Doctrines of the later Roman Church were opposed by the antient Roman Bishops themselues to wit Adoration of Images by Gregorie the Great Communion in one kind by Leo the first Transubstantiation by Gelasius the first The temporall dominion of Popes and Bishops ouer Princes by S. Chrysostome Optatus Mileuitanus and Gregorie the first The dignitie and title of vniuersall Bishop by the same Gregorie And the Doctrine of Papals preferring the old Translation before the originall Text making Apocriphall bookes Canonicall prohibiting lay people to read the Scriptures and exalting the authoritie of the present Church aboue the Scriptures are condemned by many antient Fathers IESVIT We know indeed by Tradition that some in former times stood against many points of the Roman Doctrine as Arrius Pelagius Waldo the Albigenses Wiclife Husse and some others but they are not confessed 〈◊〉 Fathers but were noted for nouelty and singularity and for such by Tradition described vnto vs which kind of opposition doth not discredit the Doctrine of the Church but rather makes the same to appeare more cleerely and famously Apostolicall ANSVVER 〈◊〉 opposed the Doctrine of the holy 〈◊〉 and of the 〈◊〉 Church and was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 and the Fathers of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that by the Scriptures and the Pelagians were 〈◊〉 conuicted by S. Augustine and his Scholers out of the holy Scripture And although Pope Celestine approoued S. Augustines Faith and condemned these Hereticks yet that was not the principall reason whereupon they were reputed Heretickes by the Christian world but the falshood of their Doctrine prooued such by repugnancie with the Scriptures made them to be so esteemed And how many Heretickes were discouered and confuted by the Fathers of the first three hundred yeares out of the Scriptures before the Roman Church ascended to the height of authoritie The Waldenses were no Hereticks as I haue formerly prooued but were only branded with that aspersion by Papals whose pride and tyrrannie they did oppose and had S. Paul himselfe beene aliue and reprooued the errour and wickednesse of the Babilonian Harlot he must not haue escaped her censure and malice Wicliffe and Husse were blessed instruments of Christ vindicating and defending Gods Truth withheld in Iniquitie neither did they hold such blasphemies as the Romists cast vpon them They might haue some opinions in points lesse materiall wherein perhaps they concurre not with our Doctrine as likewise the Waldenses but as for those vile reports which Romists make of their Doctrine no indifferent person will regard it for euen at this day when things are in present view and action you calumniate the persons and falsifie the Doctrine of all your Opposites as grosly as euer Pagans traduced the Primitiue Christians And many of the Bookes and Writings of Wicliffe and Husse are extant wherein are found no such Doctrines as Papists haue charged them with IESVIT Seeing as euen Doctor Field doth confesse when a Doctrine is in any age constantly deliuered as a matter of Faith and as receiued from Ancestors in such sort as the Contradictors thereof were in the beginning noted for Noueltie and if they persisted in contradiction in the end charged with 〈◊〉 it is not possible but such a Doctrine should come by Succession from the Apostles What more euident signe of a perpetuall Apostolicall Tradition than this ANSWER You mistake the Doctors meaning for he speaketh of the most famous and eminent of euery age in sensu composito that is of the most famous and eminent of euery age which consent and agree the latter with the former But he affirmeth not in sensu 〈◊〉 that whatsoeuer the most famous in any one particular age constantly deliuered c. is descended from the Apostles Whiles this reuerend Diuine was liuing such passages of his booke were obiected against him by Papists which caused him to explane himselfe and among other things he saith I neuer make the judgement and opinion of present Bishops of Apostolicall Churches to be the rule to know Traditions by but denie it c. And make onely the Pastors of Apostolicall Churches successiuely from the beginning witnessing the same things to be a rule in this kind IESVIT Protestants answer that it is sufficient that the Roman Doctrine was contradicted by Orthodox Fathers and that this may be prooued by their writings which they haue left vnto posteritie though their opposition was not noted by Antiquitie nor by fame of Tradition deliuered vnto posteritie But this answere leaues no meanes whereby common people may know certainely the perpetuall Tradition of Gods Church without exact examining and looking into their workes which common people cannot do J prooue it if against euery Tradition of the Church difficill and obscure passages of the Fathers may be brought and this doth suffice to make the same questionable then no Tradition can be certainely knowne without exact reading and examining and looking into the holy Fathers But no Tradition or Doctrine is so constantly and cleerely deliuered

by the Fathers but diuers obscure and difficill places out of their workes may be brought against them with such a shew that common people shall not know what to say For what Tradition more constantly deliuered by the Christian Doctours than our Sauiours consubstantialitie with his Father according to his diuine nature And yet the new reformed Arrians bring very many testimonies of antient Fathers to prooue that in this point they did contradict themselues and were contrarie one to another which places whosoeuer shall read will cleerely see that to common people they are vnanswerable yea that common people are not capable of the answeres that learned men yeeld vnto such obscure passages What then shall they doe They must answere that Antiquitie did neuer acknowledge such dissention among the Fathers in the point of our Sauiours consubstantiality which they would not haue omitted to doe had there beene any such reall dissention seeing they noted the Fathers opposition in lesser matters ANSWER That which was brought in after the daies of the Fathers could not be confuted by them particularly and in expresse tearmes neither could Antiquitie or fame of Tradition make report to Posteritie of those things which happened afterwards But yet many things vttered vpon other occasion are found in the writings of the Fathers which prooue that our present Romists are degenerated and entertaine a beleefe repugnant to the Primitiue Church But it is obiected that common people cannot know certainely the perpetuall Tradition of Gods Church by such places of the Fathers partly because the exact examining of the workes and sayings of the Fathers requires great labour and skill and so it exceedeth the abilitie of these people partly because many obscure and difficile passages are found in the writings of the Fathers which will rather perplex common people than resolue them whereunto I answere That the rule whereby common people must examine Doctrine is the plaine sentence of holy Scripture and further triall and examination of Controuersies by the Fathers and Ecclesiasticall Writers belongeth to the learned and principally to the Pastors and Doctors of the Church who are to vse their gifts to the instructing of the common people If the Aduersarie shall obiect that Heretickes and deceiuers may impose a false sence vpon the Scripture I answere That notwithstanding this sufficient matter is found in the Scripture to confute hereticall exposition and God alwayes stirreth vp some Pastours or other learned persons to assist common people which haue receiued the loue of truth in true vnderstanding of diuine veritie necessarie to their saluation Secondly If the Scripture may bee abused and prophaned by heretickes Tradition may with greater colour be pretended or abused by them as appeareth by the Pharisees Thirdly Tradition is founded vpon the authoritie of a present Hierarchicall Church which may erre by the confession of many learned Papists But the Scripture is founded onely vpon the authoritie of Christ and his Apostles and is acknowledged to bee sacred and diuine by all Christian Churches IESVIT In the same manner Catholickes doe sufficiently answere Protestants that bring places of Fathers against the receiued Traditions of the Church as the reall Presence Inuocation of Saints and other the like to wit that Tradition deliuered these Doctrines as the vniforme consent of the Fathers and neuer noted such oppositions as Protestants frame out of their writings which is a cleare signe that Protestants either mis-alleadge their words or mistake their meaning For were that contradiction reall Why did not Antiquitie famously note it as it noted and conueyed by fame to posteritie their differences about disputable matters This Answere is full and a certaine ground of persuasion else as I said common people could neuer know the assured Tradition of their Ancestours vpon which they as I prooued build their Christian beleefe seeing as Doctour Field also noteth there bee few and verie few that haue leasure and strength of iudgement to examine particular controuersies by Scriptures or Fathers but needs must rest in that doctrine which the Church deliuers as a Tradition neuer contradicted To discredit therefore a constant receiued Tradition it is necessarie to bring an Orthodox contradiction thereof not newly found out by reading the Fathers but a contradiction by the fame of Antiquitie deliuered vnto Posteritie which kind of contradiction they cannot find against any point of Catholike Doctrine For let them name but one Father whom Antiquitie doth acknowledge as a contradictor of Inuocation of Saints Adoration of the Sacrament Reall presence Prayer for the Dead they cannot certainely though they bring diuerse places to prooue a thing which Antiquitie neuer noted or knew of before that the Fathers be various and wauering about these Points ANSWER The Doctrine of Reall Presence by way of Transubstantiation and the Doctrine of Inuocation of Saints imposed as an Article of the Creed c. were neuer deliuered by any vniforme consent of the antient Fathers neither hath antient Tradition affirmed That the Fathers vniformely taught and beleeued these points And as for later Tradition the authoritie thereof is doubtfull deseruing no credit further than it confirmeth that which it deliuereth by the testimonie of Witnesses more infallible than it selfe They which haue liued in succeeding Ages haue no certaine meanes to assure them what the antient Fathers taught but either their owne Bookes and Monuments or the testimonie of their Coaeualls And later Traditioners may both corrupt the Writings of the Fathers and also by report impose a false Tenet vpon them Our Aduersarie therefore beats the ayre when he laboureth to gayne the Fathers vnto his part vpon the sole Testimonie of latter Tradition and vpon a Negatiue Argument taken from the silence of the Romane Church omitting in partialitie towards it selfe the Narration of such Collections and Oppositions as were made against the Doctrine thereof out of the Fathers But when wee charge the Papalls with Noueltie wee proceed vpon more euident grounds First wee prooue that the Romish Faith opposed by vs hath no foundation or warrant in sacred Scripture Secondly the same is an addition to the antient Rule of Faith Thirdly the said Doctrine is not deriued by perpetuall and vniforme Tradition from the Apostles Fourthly the primitiue Fathers vertually opposed this Doctrine For although these Popish Articles as they are now explicitely maintained were not in perfect being in the dayes of the antient Fathers and therefore they could not so punctually or literally oppose them as wee doe yet in their Disputations Tractats and exposition of Scripture they vtter many things from which wee may collect that they beleeued not these Articles and that the same were no part of the Catholike Faith in their dayes and that if such Opinions had beene thrust vpon the Church for Articles of Faith in their dayes as now they are they would haue opposed them But our Aduersarie pleaseth himselfe immoderately with his Negatiue

though he lead vs to hell bring something euident and manifest out of the holy Scripture Si diuinarum Scripturarum earum scilicet quae canonicae in Ecclesia nominantur perspicua firmatur Authoritate sine vlla dubitatione credendum est 〈◊〉 vero testibus vel testimonijs quibus aliquid credendum esse suadetur tibi credere vel non credere liceat c. If saith S. Augustine it be confirmed by the perspicuous authoritie of those diuine Scriptures which are Canonicall it must without all question be beleeued but as for other witnesses and testimonies by which any thing is persuaded to be beleeued it is lawfull for thee to beleeue or not beleeue them as thou shalt perceiue them to deserue credit IESVIT Fundamentall errours of the first kinde Protestants haue 〈◊〉 particularly these Nine ANSWER Malice alwayes fighteth against Vertue and laboureth to impose and rub off her owne faults vpon it and all they whose brests and minds are inhabited by Satan testifie their venemous rage with furious words If this Traducer be able to conuince the Protestants of Nine or of any one fundamentall errour wee must acknowledge that we are in a perillous state but if hee onely depraue and falsifie our doctrine or affirme that to be fundamentall errour which is diuine veritie then he prooueth himselfe to be one of his Ministers of whom S. Gregory speaketh Perfidious dealing is in the Tabernacle of Antichrist whereby he gainesayeth the faith of the Redeemer IESVIT First their Doctrine against Traditions vnwritten whereby the foundation is ouerthrowne on which wee beleeue all other substantiall and fundamentall points as hath beene shewed ANSVVER Either you wilfully falsifie or ignorantly mistake the Protestants Doctrine concerning vnwrttten Tradition First we admit in generall all vnwritten Traditions agreeing with the holy Scripture which are deriued from the Apostles and deliuered vnto vs by the manifest and perpetuall testimonie of the Primitiue Church and by the vniforme consent of succeeding Churches in all ages Secondly we beleeue in particular the historicall Traditions of the Primatiue and succeeding Churches concerning the dignitie authoritie perfection authors number and integritie of the bookes of Canonicall Scripture and also the Historicall Tradition of the said Church concerning the perpetuall virginitie of the blessed Virgin Marie and concerning the baptisme of infants and all other genuine Traditions which maintaine the Faith and Doctrine contained expressely or by consequent in the Scripture Thirdly we embrace such exposition of holy Scripture as being consonant to the rule of Faith and to the text of Scripture is affirmed by antient Tradition to haue descended from the holy Apostles Fourthly we beleeue the rule of Faith contained in the Apostles Creed both vpon the authoritie of Christs written word and also vpon the voice and testimonie of vnwritten Tradition If it shall then be demanded Wherefore do the Romists and you so eagrely contend about the question of Traditions and wherein lies your difference we answer as followeth First we yeeld the highest and most soueraigne authoritie to the sacred Scripture and make the voice and sentence thereof a supreame rule and iudge of supernaturall Veritie and we make Tradition vnwritten subordinate and ministeriall to holy Scripture admitting the same so farre forth only as it is conformable to the Scripture and reiecting the contrarie Secondly we affirme that the Canonicall Scriprure containeth all supernaturall Veritie necessarie to saluation and being receiued and vnderstood is a sufficient and perfect rule of Faith and the sole doctrine thereof is sufficient to instruct the whole Church and euery member thereof to saluation And that Tradition vnwritten maketh no addition or increase of new Articles of Faith but is only an helpe and instrument to deliuer applie and interpret the doctrine expresly deliuered or intended by the holy Ghost in the Scripture Thirdly we receiue no Tradition as diuine or apostolicall but such as hath the plaine manifest and vniforme testimonie and approbation of the Primatiue Church But our Aduersaries either equall or preferre vnwritten Tradition before the Scripture and they make Tradition a diuers and larger part of the rule of Faith containing many Articles which are neither expressely nor inuoluedly reuealed in the Scripture and they make the present Roman Church an infallible witnesse of such Tradition affirming that we are bound to beleeue euerie Article which the said Church deliuereth as a Tradition with the same assurance of Faith wherewith we beleeue any written testimonie of S. Paul or the holy Euangelists And many of them teach That it is not necessarie to deriue Tradition by a perpetuall descent and current through all ages but the voice of the present Church is sufficient to make any Article ctedible and authenticall to vs Lastly many particularopinions of antient Fathers which they deliuered coniecturally or probably onely and concerning which they haue not affirmed that they were diuine or apostolicall Traditions are ranked by latter Pontificians in the number of diuine 〈◊〉 and made parts of the vndoubted word of God And thus the present Roman doctrine concerning Traditions vnwritten is a Seminarie of Errour and by pretext hereof Pontificians obtrude vpon the Church many prophane fabulous and superstitious 〈◊〉 fansies and nouelties repugnant to holy Scripture and the antient Catholicke Faith Let therefore impartiall Readers consider whether this Romish doctrine debasing the sacred Scripture and aduancing humane Traditions tendeth not to the corrupting of Christian Faith and consequently whether the same be not rather a fundamentall Errour than an Orthodoxall Veritie And on the contrarie whether the doctrine of the Protestants maintaining the supreame authoritie of the sacred Scripture which is Gods vndoubted word and withall yeelding to genuine Tradition the credit and honour which the antient Church gaue thereunto is not fundamentall Veritie and a soueraigne meanes to preserue right Faith IESVIT Secondly their questioning the infallibe authoritie of lawfull generall Councels thereby casting downe the foundation of Vnitie in Gods Church ANSWER They which will not permit generall Councels to assemble or to proceed lawfully and which oppose the decrees of antient Councels are the Romists and not the Protestants First The moderne Popes vsurpe the whole right and authoritieof calling and conuocating Councells contrarie to the antient custome and practise of the Church Secondly They receiue and admit no Assessors and Iudges in Councels but onely their fast friends to wit men aforehand oblieged by solemne oath to proceed according to the will and purpose of the Pope Thirdly The Pope alone is appointed the authenticall Iudge of all causes and matters which are concluded in Councels he approoueth or refuseth whatsoeuer himselfe pleaseth and all other Iudges and Assessors are onely his shadowes and creatures Fourthly Whereas in words and tearmes they seeme to aduance

Protestants vrge against vs make against their custome of making Images so that with no probabilitie or ingenuitie they thereupon mislike vs. if by the vse of Images there bee no danger of hurt to ignorant people which may not with very ordinarie diligence of Pastours and Teachers be preuented and otherwise the vtilities very great then there is no reason of iust mislike of this custome But this supposition is true as in the same order I will indeauour to shew in the soure Particulars ANSVVER This Aduocate of Imagerie should first of all haue declared what hee vnderstandeth by Worship of Images whether Veneration onely largely taken or Adoration properly so called Veneration may signifie externall Regard and Reuerence of Pictures such as is giuen to Churches and sacred Vessels and to ornaments of sacred places and according to this notion many haue approoued or tollerated worship of Images which denie Adoration Adoration properly taken among Schoolemen signifieth a yeelding of honour to things Worshipped by recognition of their dignitie and excellencie and by religious submission of Bodie and Soule to wit by inward motion of the Will and externall deedes and gestures of Honour as Kneeling Kissing Censing holding vp the hands c. The worshipping of Images in this manner by Religious Adoration either primarie or secondarie absolute or respectiue is neither grounded on the prime Principles of Nature and Christianitie neither was the same practised by the antient Catholicke Church But on the contrarie it is a superstitious dotage a palliate Idolatrie a remainder of Paganisme condemned by sacred Scripture censured by Primatiue Fathers and a Seminarie of direfull contention and mischiefe in the Church of Christ. First The Scriptures of the Old Testament are so apparantly against Adoration of Images Exod. 20.5 Leuit. 26.1 Deut. 5. 9. Psal. 106. 19. Esay 2. 8. Mich. 5. 13. that the best learned Papists themselues affirme the same to haue beene prohibited vnto the Iewes Aquinas saith The making of Images to bee worshipped was prohibited in the Old Law The same is affirmed by Alexander Hales Albertus Bonauenture Marsilius Rich. Mediauilla Gerson Abulensis and it is also the Tenet of many later Schoolemen to wit Soto Corduba Cabrera Palacius Tapia Oleaster c. Secondly The brasen Serpent was a figure of Christ Ioh. 3.14 The same was formed by Gods Commandement Num. 21.9 And yet the worship thereof being as Vasques saith no other than such as Romists vse towards their Images was vnlawfull 2. Kings 18.4 Thirdly The Scriptures of the New Testament neither expresly nor by Consequent maintaine the worship of Images Neither is there in all the Apostles Doctrine any abrogation of the Negatiue Precept deliuered to the Iewes concerning the Worship of Images And therefore the same Law is Morall and obligeth Christians as it did the Iewes Fourthly the worship of Images was not practised or held lawfull by the Primitiue Fathers And Gregorie the great six hundred yeares after Christ condemned the same The Councel of Frankford seuen hundred ninetie and foure yeres after Christ opposed the definition of the second Nicen Synod concerning worship of Images as besides more antient Historians Cassander and some other Pontificians affirme Agobardus the BB. of Lyons who liued as Ado saith about the yeare 815 in his Booke de Picturis Imaginibus saith That none of the antient Catholickes thought that Images were to be worshipped or adored and deliuering his owne iudgement he saith Nemo se fallat c. Let no man beguile himselfe whosoeuer worshippeth any Picture or moulten or carued Statue neither honoureth God himselfe nor Angels or Saints but Idols Fifthly many latter Pontificians haue condemned the worshipping of Images according as the same was practised by the vulgar and maintained by Aquinas and other principall Scholemen Holcoth saith No adoration is due to an Image neither is it lawfull to worship any Image Cassander writeth in this manner The opinion of Thomas Aquinas who holdeth that Images are to bee worshipped as their Samplers is disliked by sounder Scholemen and they affirme that the same is not very safe vnlesse it be qualified with fauourable interpretation Among these is Durand and Holcoth Gabriell Biel reporteth the opinion of them which say that an Image neither as it is considered in it selfe materially nor yet according to the nature of a Signe or Image is to bee worshipped Peresius Aiala saith All Scholemen in a manner hold that the Image of Christ and the Images of Saints are to be worshipped with the same adoration that their Samplers but they produce so farre as I haue seene no sound proofe of this Doctrine to wit neither Scripture nor Tradition of the Church nor common consent of Fathers nor the determination of a generall Councell or any other effe-Cuall reason sufficient to persuade Beleeuers Sixthly the varietie of opinions and the palpable discord among Pontificians concerning the manner of adoring Images their sandie and disjointed consequences their forging and purging Authors their knottie and labyrinthian distinctions wherein they ambush themselues and out face euident Truth are sensible arguments of corrupt and vnsound Doctrine in this Article of adoration of Images IESVIT §. 1 Worship of Images consequent out of the Principles of Nature and Christianitie AN Image is a distinct and liuely pourtraiture of some visible and corporall thing parts of the Jmage corresponding to the parts of the thing represented more or lesse particularly according as the Image is more or lesse distinct and liuely ANSVVER THis definition may perchance agree to some Images to wit to the pictures of persons visible creatures which were taken from the immediate beholding of the Prototype but not to such Images as are made by coniecture or vpon fabulous and Apocriphall reports such as are the Images of Christ and of the Prophets Apostles and many other Saints drawne and pourtrayed many ages since their departure out of the world Papists besides many other formes depaint the blessed Virgin like the Queene of Heauen with a crowne of Starres and clothed with the Sunne and treading the Moone vnder her feet This and the like Images are false represents neither haue they direct and immediate correspondence to the parts and qualities of the persons represented And whereas the Iesuit tearmeth an Image meaning such as is vsed in his Church A distinct and liuely pourtraiture c. he should rather haue said A confused and dead pourtraiture for who is able to deliuer a distinct and liuely Picture truely resembling Christs humane bodie or the countenance feature and proportion of many other Saints deceased And Clemens Alexandrinus speaking of a painted Image doth not call it liuely but saith that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a dead matter formed by a workemans hand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But we saith he

surely this Captiue should be redeemed and deliuered through the ransome paid by the King not by the merits of the Noble man interceding for him whose merits concurred thereunto onely remotely and afarre off To apply this similitude Christ Iesus hath paid an abundant price for mans Redemption yet none inioy the benefit thereof but they to whom by especiall grace he applyeth the same Sinners beseech him by the merits of Saints that made them gracious in his sight that he will vouchsafe to apply the merit of his Passion vnto them for the obtaining of fanours conducing vnto eternall life Christ grants their Petition and request and thereupon applies his merits vnto them These men cannot be properly said to be saued through the merits of Saints but only through the merits of Christ specially because euen the merits of Saints that concurred thereunto proceed originally from the merits of Christ. ANSWER First You are ignorant of the manner and particular matter of Saintly Intercession and it is more than you can prooue that blessed Saints pray expresly and distinctly for the remission of mens particular sinnes Secondly Blessed Saints by their Intercession in heauen can merit nothing for themselues or others for they are not in the state of meriting but of possessing the full reward promised to their labours neither can they apply their former merits to other men because they themselues haue reaped the full reward of them and how can the merits of a creature being finite and already requited beyond their desert and dignitie be imputed to others Your similitude of a King is nothing to the purpose because the ground whereupon you build it is false Kings grant fauours and pardons for the merits and intreatie of such as are gracious in their sight but God bestoweth his graces and pardons for the sole merit and intercession of Christ and we are sufficiently qualified on our owne part to receiue his benefits when we performe that which himselfe requireth and vse the meanes which he appointeth But it is not yet prooued that Inuocation of Saints is in the number of those meanes IESVIT §. 6. How it is lawfull to appropriate the obtaining of Graces and Cures vnto Saints OVr Aduersaries finding our inuocation of Saints for substance practised in Gods Church euer since the primatiue times take exceptions at some circumstances thereof which they thinke new and not iustisiable by antiquitie which are principally three whereon are grounded other three causes of Protestants dislike ANSWER IF inuocation of Saints hath not beene practised vniuersally in Gods Church euer since the Apostles times then the same is not Catholicke or originally diuine therefore you trifle and beg the question when you declame saying Our Aduersaries finding our inuocation of Saints for substance practised in Gods Church euer since the Primatiue times First you dare not say euer since the Apostles times but you equiuocate in the tearme of Primatiue Secondly you leaue out Vniuersally for you cannot demonstrate that the same was practised in all Churches or maintained generally by the Fathers Thirdly you seeke an euasion by a distinction of Substance Circumstance and acquaint vs not what shall be of the one and what of the other publicke and priuate freely and of necessitie may be circumstances yet they are such circumstances as varie the state of the question and Protestants dispute against your present doctrine and manner of inuocation which hath neither ground in the Apostles doctrine nor in the Tradition of the antient Church IESVIT The first of these circumstances whereupon they ground the sixt reason of their dislike is that we distribute amongst Saints offices of curing diseases and seeke some kind of fauour of one some of another of which practise there is no example in Antiquitie yea it seemes to resemble the leuity of Heathenish superstition who did multiplie gods according to the multitude of the things they thought to obtaine of them I answer that to seeke some fauours by the intercession rather of one Saint than another was the iudgement of the Fathers in S. Austines time which he himselfe did practise vpon this occasion In the towne of Hippo one of the familie of S. Augustine accused a Priest of an hainous crime making his accusation good by oath which the other did reiect in like manner purging himselfe by oath The fact being open and scandalous seeing of necessitie the one of them was periured S. Augustine sent them both into Jtalie to the Shrine of S. Foelix at Nola at whose reliques periured persons were vsually discouered In defence of which fact he writes an Epistle to his people of Hippo allowing of this proceeding to seeke recourse rather to one Saint than another wondring at the secret prouidence of God therein Although saith he men by experience see this to be true yet who is able to discouer the counsell of God why in some place such miracles are done in others they are not For is not Africa stored with shrines of blessed Martyres and yet do we not know any such myracles to be done here by their intercessions For seeing as the Apostle saith all Saints haue not the gift of curing diseases nor all the knowledge to discerne Spirits so likewise at the shrines of all Martyres these things are not done because He will not haue them euery where done who giueth to euery one particular gifts according to his pleasure ANSVVER To impose offices vpon Saints deceased and to attribute cures deliuerances opitulations power and actions to them vpon mans owne imagination and to persuade people which ought to seeke vnto God Psal. 121.2 Esa. 8.17 1. Sam. 17.37 to depend vpon creatures in their perils and aduersitie changing the names onely is Heathenish superstition And what doe Papists else in substance when they make Saints yea some perhaps which are in Hell particular regents of countries cities religious orders yea of the elements fire water c. and of beasts c. when they appoint vnto them distinctly and by name seuerall opitulations Apollonia is for the tooth ach Otilia for bleared eyes S. Rochus for the poxe Erasmus for the iliake passion Blasius for the quinsie Petronella for feauers S. Wendeline is for sheepe and oxen S. Antonie for hogs S. Gertrudis for mice and rats S. Nicholas is the patrone of sailers S. Clement of bakers S. George of horsemen S. Eulogius of smiths S. Luke of painters S. Cosmas of physitians c. There is no doubt but that this base superstition was deriued from the Pagans although it be now varnished and mantled by Papals with the habit of deuotion for S. Augustine d. Ciuit. Dei lib. 4. cap. 22. saith That Varro maintained it was profitable to know the power and working of euerie god in particular that men might be able to sue vnto them according to their seueral offices for euerie distinct or particular benefit least otherwise they might aske water of Bacchus the god of

certainetie of Christianitie cannot but with it fall to the ground ANSVVER The totall certainetie of Christianitie dependeth not vpon a Church illustrious and conspicuous to the eie of the whole world and hauing such externall pompe and Visibilitie as Papals imagine Therefore if such a Church be ouerthrowne that is be proued in sundrie Articles to be corrupt and vnfound which is our Tenet concerning the present Roman Church the certaintie of Christianitie may still subsist The Tenet which wee maintaine touching the qualitie of the present Roman Church 〈◊〉 to the reformation of errours and abuses in the same and not to the ouerthrowing of the lawfull authoritie of the Visible Church The certainetie of Religion in the time of the Iewes did depend as much vpon the authoritie of the Visible Church of Iuda as it can in our daies depend vpon the authoritie of the Roman Church or of any other for that Church was by office the keeper of the Canonicall Scripture Rom. 3 2. the teacher of heauenly trueth Ezek. 44 23 Mal. 2 7. a ministeriall Iudge of controuersies Deut. 17 9. Ezek. 44 24. and yet notwithstanding the said Church was reprooued by the holie Prophets Mal. 2 8. 2. Chron. 29.6 7. Esay 56 10. Ezek. 34. and the religious kings of Iuda reformed the same 2. Chron. 14.3 4. and cap. 17.7 8 9. and cap. 29.3 c. and cap. 34.3 4. and cap. 33.15 Now like as when a Physition discouereth the diseases of the bodie and prescribeth remedies and medecines he doth thereby heale and not destroy the state of the bodie so likewise they which out of the Oracles of God haue reuealed the errours and corruptions of the Roman Church and sought reformation thereof doe not ouerthrow the certainetie of Christianitie nor impaire the lawfull authoritie of the Church but repaire and establish the same IESVIT If it be hidden and made inuisible men must needs wander in the search of the first deliuered Christian Doctrine without end or hope of euer ariuing at any certaine Issue And if this Controuersie be not examined and determined in the first place disputation by Scripture will proue fruitlesse by the sole euidence whereof no victorie can be gotten against proteruious error or at least not victorie that is verie apparant neither will answers about particular Doctrines satisfie a mind preoccupated with a long continued dislike of them ANSVVER In this Section two things are deliuered First If the Church be hidden c. Secondly Controuersies cannot be decided by sole Scripture c. To the first I answer The Church that is the societie of Christian people professing sauing Faith is at no time totally bidden and inuisible but in Persecution the same may be hidden and vnknowne to them which 〈◊〉 no will to know it 2. Cor. 4 3. or which defire to know it that they may persecute and oppresse it Reuelat. 12 14. And the same may sometimes cease to be largely and in a 〈◊〉 and pompous manner visible Math. 10 23. and 23 34. Heb. 11 38. And in the state of Persecution when the same is hidden and vnknowne to enemies the friends of this Church to whom it is knowne may by the Ministerie thereof exercised in priuate receiue the certaintie of beleefe and if it be vnknowne or hidden to any of them these may by priuat reading or meditation of that which they haue formerly learned supplie the defect of publique Ministerie euen as some Christians at this day being slaues in Turkie or Barbarie may be saued without externall Ministerie And it is also possible for such to be Instruments of conuerting and sauing others Ruffin Hist. Eccles. li. 1. c. 9 10. Besides we do also acknowledge that the Popish Church although it were corrupt and vnsound in many things yet it preserued the Bookes of holie Scripture and taught the Apostles Creed and sundrie parts of Diuine veritie collected from the same and by these Principles of Christianitie preserued in that Church iuditious and pious men might with studie and diligence find out what was the first deliuered Christian Doctrine in such things as are necessarie to Saluation as in the Iewish Church when the same was corrupt in manners and doctrine Mal. 2 8. Esay 56 10. 2. Kings 16 11 16. Marc. 6 34. the Bookes of holie Scripture and many remnants of Diuine truth which were able to saue Gods elect remained and were sufficient Principles from whence all sauing truth might be deriued and pernitious errours and abuses discouered and reformed And thus although the true Church be granted at sometimes to be hidden and inuisible in manner before expressed well affected people shall not want all meanes to vnderstand what was the first deliuered Christian faith The Iesuit in the next passage laboureth to make it appeare impossible to end and determine Controuersies of Religion without the authoritie of a perpetuall visible Church whose iudgement is alwaies infallible and free from all error But if his speech be resolued from a Rhethoricall flourish into forme of Argument the loosenesse of it will appeare For he proceedeth in this or the like manner IESVIT By all such meanes as is of it selfe sufficient to declare what was the first deliuered Christian Doctrine apparant victorie may be gotten against proteruious errour and minds preoccupated with long dislike of particular Doctrines may be satisfied By sole Scripture no apparant victorie can be gotten against proteruious errour neither can long dislike of particular Doctrines be satisfied Ergo sole Scripture is not a sufficient meanes to declare what was the first deliuered Christian Doctrine ANSVVER First If by apparant Victorie be meant such Victorie as proteruious errants will confesse or persuade themselues to bee a Victorie against them then the Maior Proposition is false For when our Sauiour himselfe confuted the Pharisees by such demonstration as none could be greater yet they resisted the Truth and in like sort they resisted St. Stephen Acts 7 53. and S. Paul Acts 28 23. and in the best Councels of Nice Ephesus c. no such apparant Victorie was gotten of proteruious Heretiques Secondly If by apparant Victorie be meant a true and sufficient confutation and conuiction of Errants then the Minor is false for that is a sufficient means to obtaine Victorie by which our Sauiour himselfe subdued Sathan Math. 4.4 7. and the Heretiques of his time Math. 12 3. 22 29 43. and by which St. Paul confuted the Pharisees and other Aduersaries Acts 17 2. and 28 23. And whereby the Fathers of the Nicene Councell conuicted the Arrians Socrat. Hist. l. 1. c. 6. and which are giuen by inspiration to be an effectuall meanes to reprooue and confute error 2. Tim. 3 16. Chrys. d. fid leg nat But the Iesuit may cauil saying that euen as a sword in the hand of a Giant is sufficient to 〈◊〉 an enemie but not in the hand of a child who

persons Heb. 13.5 Our Sauiour granted ministeriall power to remit sinnes by speciall commission to the Apostles and deliuering this commission to them he breathed the holy Ghost into them saying Receiue yee the holy Ghost c. 〈◊〉 20.22 Neuerthelesse our Aduersaries affirme that this authority was not only granted them but to other Ministers of Christ which are not personally qualified as the Apostles were Secondly if the particular circumstance of Timothie his person expressed in the single word Thee 2. Tim. 3.15 do limit S. Pauls doctrine concerning the Scripture in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then where more circumstances are found in Texts concerning Traditions the same may be answered as the Iesuit doth this place of S. Paules For example 2. Thessal 2.15 The Apostle saith Therefore 〈◊〉 stand fast and hold the Traditions which 〈◊〉 haue beene taught whether by word or our Epistle In this Text so vehemently vrged by Papists for vnwritten Tradition is found a personall circumstance Tee 〈◊〉 Thessalonians which haue beene my immediate hearers 1. Thess. 1. 5. and thereby are infallibly assured that the Tradition which I exhort you to hold is diuine Also you 〈◊〉 which haue not receiued as yet a perfect Canon of the New Testament in writing I say to you stand fast and hold both written and vnwritten Tradition Thirdly admitting the Iesuits restraint and it being granted that the Scriptures do onely make those people wise to Saluation which are instructed aforehand and haue formerly beene taught the substantiall points of Christian Doctrine yet this argueth not the insufficiencie of Scripture to be the onely authenticall rule and ground of Faith because the said substantial Doctrines which in the Apostles daies before the Canon of the New Testament was finished were partly contained in Scripture and partly deliuered by their vocall preaching were afterwards when the Canonicall Scripture of the New Testament was finished and the holy Apostles were deceased wholly for matter of substance contained in the same Scripture 〈◊〉 Verily the Apostle in that place speaketh onely of the Scriptures of the Old Testament affirming them sufficient not for euery man but for Timothie and not sufficient for him by themselues alone but per fidem quae est in Christo Iesu that is 〈◊〉 with the Doctrine of Christian Faith which Timothie had heard and beleeued vpon 〈◊〉 liuely voice of Tradition ANSWER The Apostle in this place speaketh of the Scriptures of the Old Testament but not onely Timothie when he was a child learned onely the Scriptures of the Old Testament but after his childhood he read also the Scriptures of the New 1. Tim. 4. 16. This Epistle was written by S. Paul not long before his death 2. Tim. 4.6 at which time the greatest part of the Canon of the New Testament was finished therefore it is not necessarie that we should restraine these words Thou from a child hast knowne the holy Scriptures onely to the Scriptures of the Old Testament because Timothie who in his youth read onely the Old Testament in the progresse of his yeares read the New Testament also And although no Scripture is able to make wise to saluation without Faith in Christ Iesus yet this prooueth not the holy Scripture to be an imperfect Rule because if Tradition be added to Scripture yet both these are not able to make people wise to saluation without Faith Heb. 4. 2. But admitting that the Apostle in the first Clause Thou from a Child hast knowne the holy Scriptures speaketh of the Scriptures of the Old Testament yet adding to the same in the latter part of his speech through Faith which is in Christ Iesus if by Faith wee vnderstand the doctrine of Faith reuealed in the New Testament there is no materiall or necessarie part of doctrine touching Christ Iesus which is not contained in the Scripture 1. Cor. 15. 1 2 3 4. And this was the Tenet of the antient Catholike Church as appeareth by S. Augustine C. Petil. Lib. 3. cap. 6. who saith Proinde siue de Christo siue de Ecclesia siue de quacunque alia re quae pertinet ad fidem vitamque nostram non dicam nos nequaquam comparandi ei qui dixit licet si nos sed omnino quod secutus adiecit si Angelus de Coelo vobis annunciauerit praeterquam quod in Scripturis Legalibus Euangelicis accepistis Anathema sit I will not say if wee vnworthie to be compared to him that spake so but if an Angell from Heauen shall teach any thing either concerning Christ or the Church or concerning any other matter pertaining to Faith or good life besides that which you haue receiued in the Legall and Euangelicall Scriptures let him be Anathema IESVIT And in the consequent words of the Apostle so much insisted vpon All Scripture inspired of God is profitable to teach c. And if Protestants could so metamorphise the word Profitable as to make it signifie the same with the word Sufficient which is very hard yet were the Text much ouer-short to prooue their intent That Scripture alone is sufficient for euerie man seeing the Apostle speakes not of euerie man but expressely of him who is Homo Dei the Man of God that is one alreadie fully instructed and firmely setled by Tradition in all the maine points of Christian Faith and godly Life such a one as Timothie was The Scriptures for men in this manner afore taught and grounded in Faith are abundantly sufficient who will denie it But this prooueth at the most the sufficiencie of the Scripture ioyned with Tradition not of Scripture alone or of onely onely onely Scripture as Protestants Bookes in great Letters very earnestly affirme ANSWER S. Paul himselfe vseth both the word Profitable Vers. 16. and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are able to make wise to saluation which is equiualent to Sufficient Verse 15. And Protestants alone are not the men which expound the word Profitable by Sufficient for both the Fathers and many learned Papists doe the like Vincent Lirinensis C. Haeres cap. 2. The Canon of the Scripture is sufficient and more than sufficient Cyril of Alexandria C. Iulian. Lib. 7. pag. 150. The Scripture is sufficient to make them wise which are brought vp in it c. Anselm in his Commentarie vpon 2. Tim. 3. 16. They are able to make thee sufficiently learned to obtaine eternall saluation Gerson D. Exam. Doctr. Part. 2. Consid. 1. The Scripture is giuen vs as a sufficient Rule c. Scotus 1. Sent. Prol. q. 2. Supernaturall knowledge necessarie for a wayfaring man is sufficiently deliuered in sacred Scripture The same is affirmed by Espencaeus Commentar 2. Tim. 3. 16. and by Bonauenture Occham Waldensis and Gabriel Thom. Aquinas Lyra Durand c. But the Aduersarie saith That graunting the word Profitable did signifie Sufficient yet S. Pauls Text still falleth short of proouing the Scripture the

are baptised and externally professe Christianitie And according to this notion it comprehendeth both the good and the bad the cleane and the vncleane of that profession 2. Tim. 2. 20. Math. 13.25.47 Math. 3.12 c. 22.10 〈◊〉 it is taken for Particular Societies and congregations of Christians Apoc. 1.4 2.1 and sometimes it is taken for the Pastors of particular Churches Math. 18.17 sometimes for the People Acts 20.28 sometimes for the whole Flocke consisting of Pastors and People Apoc. 3.6 But it is neuer taken in holy Scripture for the Pope and Councell If the Iesuit in his Proposition There is a visible Church alwaies in the world c. understand the 〈◊〉 Church in the first Notion then it is denied that we are absolutely to adhere to the Traditions of this Church or that the same is alwaies and intirely One Vniuersal Apostolicall Holy according to the meaning of the Apostles and Nicene Creed Secondly according to the second Notion the Church is not visible for a principall part thereof is in heauen and the other moetie militant vpon earth being considered as elect and holy is knowne intuitiuely to God only 2. Tim. 2.19 and morally coniecturally and according to the iudgement of Charitie to men in this world 2. Thess. 2.13 Thirdly according to the third Notion the Church is visible in all ages and some part thereof teacheth and professeth right Faith in all substantiall and fundamentall articles And we are to cleaue to the Traditions of the same so farre as in the deliuerie thereof it exceedeth and transgresseth not the bounds of lawfull authoritie and teacheth according to the rule of Gods word S. Chrysostome saith Because Seducers are often found even in true Churches we are not to beleeue vnlesse they speake and do that which is consonant to the Scriptures And in another place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If the Priest teach any peruerse Doctrine giue no credit yea though he were an Angell Nay I will presume to say more than this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one ought not beleeue Paul if he should preach any thing humane or of himselfe but as he is an Apostle and hath Christ speaking in him Lastly according to the fourth Acceptation there are euer in the world particular Churches and societies of Christians and euery one of these Churches professe some portion of diuine veritie But we must enquire by the rule of Gods word which of these are pure and orthodoxall and on the contrarie which of them are infected with errors and imbrace the Doctrine of the one and auoid the Corruptions of the other Remarkable Obseruations concerning the Church OBSERVATION I. THe externall visible Church is an intermixed or compounded societie bodie and state of Christian people professing the faith and worship of Christ in which are found sheepe and goats wheat and tares gold and drosse good fishes and bad and vessels of honour and dishonour This common and generall societie and bodie consisteth of diuers particular Churches consenting and agreeing in the professing of some part of diuine veritie and of these Churches some are orthodoxall some are impure in faith and religion and also these being compared are respectiuely purer or impurer And within the compasse of each particular Church the members are better or worse more or lesse holy or corrupt OBSERVAT. II. Whereas the Church hath many Titles and Properties belonging to it and Christ Iesus the Head thereof hath made sundrie Promises and conferred diuerse Graces vpon it wee must consider which part of the Church is the proper subiect of these Qualities Promises and Graces For it is apparant That as Sheepe and Goats Chaffe and Wheat Gold and Drosse are of a contrarie kind although they are intermixed so likewise the Affections and Attributes of the same although they are spoken in generall of the whole Subiect as an Heape which hath Wheat and Chaffe a Field which hath Wheat and Tares are called an Heape of Graine a Field of Wheat yet many of them appertaine formally and indeed onely to the better part of the common Subiect OBSERVAT. III. In the visible societie of Christian people there are found according to S. Augustine Citizens of the heauenly Hierusalem and also Inhabitants of Babylon And as the same Father teacheth Notum est ciues malae Ciuitatis administrare quosdam actus 〈◊〉 Ciuitatis It is manifest that in the visible Church Burgers of the wicked Citie Babylon doe administer some Functions of the holy Citie Hierusalem Ioh. 12.6 2. Timoth 4.10 Apoc. 3.14 15. Phil. 〈◊〉 Ioh. 3.9 The Promises of Christ made to the Church concerning his presence and assistance to his Word and Sacraments preached and administred according to his commandement are fulfilled when wicked persons execute the office and performe the worke of outward 〈◊〉 For although wicked persons like the Carpenters of Noahs Arke reape no benefit to themselues yet God Almightie concurreth with their Ministerie being his owne Ordinance for the saluation of all deuout and worthie Communicants OBSERVAT. IIII. Some things are spoken of the Church in common or generall tearmes to shew what the whole is in respect of Gods outward vocation or what the office and dutie of the whole Church is but the same promises properties and priuiledges are really fulfilled or found in the better and sounder part thereof onely When our Sauiour promiseth that the gates of Hell shall not preuaile against the Church Matth. 16.18 he vnderstandeth such a Church as heareth and obeyeth his word and not a visible companie or Hierarchie of Prelates which forsake his word and doe what they list August d. Vnit. Ecclesiae cap. 18. Ecclesia in his est qui adificant supra Petram id est qui credunt verbum Christi faciunt d. Baptismo Lib. 6. cap. 24. Nonne illi sunt in Ecclefia qui sunt in Petra Qui autem in Petra non sunt nec in Ecclesia sunt iam ergò videamus vtrum super Petram aedificium suum constituant qui audiunt Christi verba non faciant Saint Augustine in these words deliuereth three things first The Church is in them which build vpon the Rocke secondly They are not in the Church which are not in the Rocke thirdly They onely build vpon the Rocke and are in the Rocke which beleeue and obey the word of Christ And this Doctrine of S. Augustine is taken out of the holy Scripture Matth. 7.24 1. Cor. 3.11 10.4 Also when S. Paul saith The Church is the ground and pillar of Truth 1. Tim. 3. 15. by the Church hee vnderstandeth the House of the liuing God as the precedent part of his speech sheweth to wit If I tarrie long that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behaue thy selfe in the House of God c. But they alone are verily and indeed the House of God which beleeue and loue the Truth

controuerted or doubtfull But personall succession may bee found in a false Church as appeareth by the Iewish Church in the time of the Pharisees and by the Churches of the East in the dayes of the Arrians and our Aduersaries affirme the Greeke Church to be vnsound notwithstanding it is apparently descended from the Apostles by a lineall succession of Bishops Cardinall Bellarmine perceiuing the weight of the former Argument departeth from the common opinion of other Papists saying That although personall succession alone or by it selfe is not a proper note of a true Church yet the absence thereof prooueth a nullitie of the Church in them which want it But if this be so then personall and locall succession must bee expuged out of the Calendar of Churches notes for all proper notes argue and demonstrate their subiect both 〈◊〉 and negatiuely also they demonstrate the same of themselues without the assistance of other things If therefore externall succession prooueth not a true Church except right Faith bee concurring and if as Bellarmine teacheth it rather serueth to prooue there is not the true Church where it wanteth than to argue a true Church where it is then the same is not proper and conuertible and consequently it is no essentiall marke because to bee proper and conuertible are of the being of notes according to the Cardinals owne description It is likewise remarkeable that the ancient Fathers doe not onely or principally vnderstand personall succession when they mention succession in their writings because they argue affirmatiuely from succession and not negatiuely onely Therefore Romists in this disputation shall doe well to begin with the questions which concerne Doctrine and prooue that they haue succession of Doctrine in all those Articles wherein they oppose other Churches before they mention locall and personall succession but the manner of these men is to obserue a contrarie proceeding and from the latter to conclude the former which is against good reason and against the Custome and manner of the ancient Fathers IESVIT For how can the Tradition of Christian doctrine be eminently and notoriously Apostolicall if the Church deliuering the same hath not a manifest and conspicuous pedigree or deriuation from the Apostles which is a conuincing argument vsed by Saint Augustine how can we thinke that we 〈◊〉 receiued manifestly Christ if wee 〈◊〉 not also 〈◊〉 manifestly his Church It is a Principle of Phylosophie Propter quod vnumquodque tale illud magis But the name of Christ his glory his vertue and miracles are to the world famously knowne from age to age by reason of the Church and her preaching that in her first Pastours saw them with their eyes Ergo This Church must needes be more famous more illustrious as able to giue fame vnto the being and Doctrine and actions of Christ. ANSVVER I haue shewed in the former Section that the visible Church is principally called Apostolicall because it imbraceth the doctrine of the holy Apostles And euerie Church is Apostolicall so farre foorth onely as it consenteth with the Apostles in Doctrine Sacraments Inuocation and in that which is substantiall in Ecclesiasticall policie And in a precedent Section I haue declared That the visible Church may at some times bee more or lesse Apostolicall holy c. But it is not at any time simply or principally Apostolicall because it hath externall personall succession Occham a famous Schooleman and some others with him affirme That a true and Apostolicall Church may consist of a few lay people and if all the Prelates and Clerkes throughout the world should become hereticall God may raise vp Pastours either extraordinarily or else hereticall Bishops 〈◊〉 Pastours the Church may be reformed by them But to the Argument I answere as followeth First if the same were wholly granted nothing could bee concluded against the Church of England from it because the Bishops and Pastours of this Church are able to exhibite a Pedigree or deriuation both of their Ministerie and Doctrine from the Apostles 1. Of Ministerie in that they haue for substance the same descent of externall Ordination which the Romane Church hath 2. Of Doctrine because they maintaine the Primitiue Faith and accord in the same with the soundest part of the Catholicke Church in all ages And where we may seeme to discent from the Antient the same is either in things humane and adiaphorous or in matters which were not fully discussed or in points which were not deliuered by an vnanimous consent or in things which are reprooued by plaine demonstration of holy Scripture and wherein the Fathers permit libertie of dissenting and the Papists themselues take the like libertie Secondly the Iesuits Interrogation How can the Tradition of Christian Doctrine be eminently and notoriously Apostolicall if the Church deliuering the same hath not a manifest and perspicuous pedigree or deriuation from the Apostles is answered this may be performed two waies 1. By the historie and monuments of the Primatiue Church whose descent and pedigree from the Apostles was perspicuous 2. The same may be made manifest by the Scriptures of the Apostles which are diuine and authenticall Records of all Apostolicall Doctrine and contain in themselues many liuely and effectuall Arguments proouing to such as read and examine them with diligence and vnderstanding that they are the Doctrine of the holy Ghost and consequently the worke of the Apostles And the maiestie and lustre of heauenly Doctrine is such that if it be propounded by meane and obscure persons it will appeare illustrious euen as a rich Iewell if the same be deliuered by a poore Artificer doth manifest his owne worth and therefore the sequell of the Iesuits Argument is denied for it followeth not because the Doctrine of Christ must be illustrious that the Church which deliuereth the same must be alwaies so Thirdly S. Augustine in the place obiected Epist. 48. confuteth the Donatists which confined the Church vniuersall to one countrie only excluding the rest of the world from the communion thereof against this error he saith How can wee thinke that we haue receiued Christ made manifest if we haue not also receiued his Church made manifest From hence nothing can be inferred but that we receiue the true Church not only at one time or in one place but at all times and in all places where it is manifest and that Christ is reuealed and made manifest by the Doctrine of the Apostles and that this Doctrine must be preached although not at one time yet successiuely throughout the whole world But all this which S. Augustine speaketh being granted prooueth not that the true Church shall be notoriously eminent and visible at all times neither doth this Father say that Christ cannot bee manifest but by such a Church only as can lineally deriue her pedigree by Records and Tables from the Apostles And howsoeuer Papists boast of their owne pedigree yet when their

part of them obserue Vnitie in the Bond of Peace in things essentiall and in the common Rule of Faith And although the qualitie of Teachers be a motiue of credibilitie yet the power of persuasion dependeth properly vpon the Word of Christ and they which disagree in other matters and with a common consent teach the maine and principall Doctrine of Faith must therein be credited because of the prime Author himselfe If humane frailetie discord and error in some things should totally discredit the Authoritie of Teachers the World must receiue no Diuine Veritie by the Ministerie of men because amongst men Non germinat granum Veritatis sine palea Vanitatis The good Seed of Veritie springeth not without some Chaffe of Vanitie S. Cyprian S. Augustine S. Hierome c. disagree in some things and Tertullian and Origen haue many errors and therein are reprooued by others and yet the rest of their Doctrine wherein they teach truly receiueth no preiudice from their contrarie errors The Iesuits and Dominicans and other Scholasticks desire to be esteemed credible Witnesses and yet there is no small contention betwixt them concerning sundrie Questions Although therefore some dissention bee found among Teachers yet their whole Doctrine is not thereby made incredible neyther is there perpetually in the true Church a visible and perspicuous concord in all things In the words ensuing the Aduersarie questioneth Doctor Field because hee affirmeth That Protestants Dissentions are not reall but apparent and verball Against this hee affirmeth That so long as Contentioners rest vnsatisfied and admit no Reconciliation saying That Reconcilers haue missed of their meaning it is vaine by distinctions to colour their Discord c. 〈◊〉 First To 〈◊〉 Discord by distinctions is no meanes of true 〈◊〉 but by 〈◊〉 to discouer and manifest that Contentioners 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 other and whereas they speake diuersty in 〈◊〉 yet they maintaine the same Veritie in substance this may be to good purpose Secondly Although A 〈◊〉 are many times froward and will not for the present admit the charitable constructions of moderate persons 〈◊〉 to reconcile them Exod. 2. 14. Act. 7.27 yet at the last Vnitie may be effected by this meanes and peaceable and moderate Christians ought in the meane season to gather the faire Lilly of sauing Veritie growing amidst the Thornes of humane Infirmitie IESVIT Fiftly I inferre That this Church is vniuersall spread ouer all Nations that she may be said to be euery where morally speaking that the whole knowne World may take notice of her as of a worthie and credible witnesse of Christian Tradition howsoeuer her outward glory and splendor peace and tranquilitie be sometimes obscured in some places more or lesse and not euer in all places at once ANSVVER The Church is vniuerfall First Because of time for it continueth successiuely in all Ages Matth. 28.20 Luc. 1.33 Secondly In regard of Persons and Places because no Countrey Nation State Age or Sex of People are excluded from being part of it Galat. 3.20 Act. 10.34 Apoc. 5.9 Thirdly In respect of Faith because Diuine Veritie constitutiue and which giueth being to the true Church continueth throughout all Ages 1. Pet. 1.25 Reuel 14.6 and is found in all the parts of the true Church But notwithstanding this the true Church is not perpetually vniuersall in regard of actuall amplitude and diffusion of visible Congregations throughout all Nations and inhabited Countreyes of the World for it may in some Ages in actu exercito and in regard of actuall residence remaine onely in a few Countreyes and Cardinall Bellarmine graunteth That if one sole Prouince of the World should retaine true Faith yet the Church might then be truly and properly called vniuersall if it could manifestly be shewed that the same were one with that Church which was once vniuersally spred ouer the world And although Deiure by right and according to the diuine Precept the true Church should at all times remaine and continue in those regions where it was once planted yet it happeneth by the malice and iniquitie of man that those places which once were a Sanctuarie of holinesse are afterwards changed into the habitation of Satan and into a cage of vncleane Birds The Iesuit perceiuing that it is impossible to defend a perpetuall actuall vniuersalitie of the Church presenteth vnto vs an imaginarie vniuersalitie his words are She may be said to be euerie where morally speaking c. I answere Morally speaking the Church cannot be said to be where it is altogether vnknowne and where no meanes are vsed or actions performed which are sufficient to make it knowne A king may morally be said to be in euery part of his kingdome because his lawes ministers and gouernment are extended throughout all his kingdome and king Richard the first when hee was in Syria might be said to be morally in England But the true Church in many ages hath no commerce with Infidels in things spirituall mediate or immediate the Faith Preaching and authoritie thereof is altogether vnknowne to many people to wit to the inhabitants of America for 1400. yeeres to many other nations of Affrica and Europe for 600. yeeres c. And many people which heare the fame of Christians in generall as they doe of the Iewes haue no meanes to distinguish Orthodoxe Beleeuers from Heretickes and they which vnderstand not the Doctrine of the true Church cannot take notice of her as of a worthie and credible witnesse of diuine Tradition IESVIT A truth so cleare that it may be euidently prooued out of Scripture that euen in Antichrists dayes the Church shall be visibly vniuersall for shee shall then bee euerie where persecuted which could not bee except shee were euerie where visible and conspicuous euen to the wicked ANSVVER Your former Proposition concerning the perpetuall locall vniuersalitie of the Church is as cleare as the Sunne-shine at midnight and the Arguments whereby you labour to prooue it are of no force First if it were granted that the true Church in the raigne of Antichrist should bee visibly vniuersall yet it is inconsequent Ergo The true Chnrch is perpetually and in all ages visibly vniuersall Separable accidents are sometimes present to the subiect and sometimes absent but visible vniuersalitie is a separable accident as appeareth by the state of the true Church in the first hundred yeere Secondly the words of Saint Iohn Apoc. 20. 8. are And when the thousand yeeres shall be consummate Satan shall be loosed out of his prison and shall goe foorth and seduce the nations which are vpon the foure corners of the earth Gog and Magog and shall gather them into battell the number of whom is as the sand of the Sea In this Prophesie nothing is deliuered which doth expresly or by consequence argue the visible vniuersalitie of the true Church in all ages 1. The nations which are vpon the foure corners of the earth seduced by

and be deceiued then the later Church may vpon their reports deliuer some errours together with truth and yet the Tradition thereof concerning matters which are grounded vpon diuine Testimonie is infallible The Church may speake of it selfe and vpon report of them whose Testimonie is humane and fallible And it speaketh also vpon the authoritie of Gods word In the first it may erre and bee deceiued and consequently the Testimonie thereof absolutely bindeth not people to beleeue But when it confirmeth her doctrine and Tradition by diuine Testimonie the Tradition thereof is the Tradition and voyce of God himselfe worthy of all acceptation Neither is her Testimonie fallible and doubtfull in this latter kinde because of errour in the first any more than the Prophesie of Nathan was fallible when he spake by inspiration to Dauid 2. Sam. 7.5 Although when he formerly answered by a humane spirit he was deceiued Balaam is a credible witnesse in all those verities which God put into his mouth Numb 23.5 18. 24. 1. And yet in other matters which proceeded from himselfe he was fallible And Iosephus a Iew is credited in the Testimonie which hee gaue of Christ Antiq. lib. 18. c. 4 although in many other reports he was deceiued The antient Fathers Iustin Martyr Ireneus Origen St. Cyprian erred in some things and yet their authoritie in other matters which they deliuered consonantly to holy Scripture is credible Our Aduersaries confesse that their Popes may erre personally and that their Popes and Councels may erre in the Premises and Arguments from which they deduce conclusions of Faith and yet they will haue their definitiue sentences to be of infallible authoritie Cardinall Iacobatius speaking in the Popes defence saith That it followeth not because one hath erred that therefore his testimonie is altogether inualid and to be refused And hee confirmeth this assertion by diuers Texts of the Canon Law IESVIT And whereas some Protestants affirme that the Church cannot erre in fundamentall points but onely in things of lesse moment The truth is that in her perpetuall Traditions she cannot erre at all If the Tradition of the Church deliuering a small thing as receiued from the Apostles may be false one may call into question her Traditions of moment especially if he please to thinke them not to be of moment for like as if we admit in the Scriptures errours in small matters wee cannot be sure of its infallibitie in substantiall matters So likewise if we grant Tradition perpetuall to be false in things of lesse importance we haue no solid ground to defend her Traditions as assured in other of moment wherefore as he that should say That Gods written word is false in some lesser matters as when it sayes That S. Paul left his cloake at Troas erreth fundamentally by reason of the consequence which giueth occasion to doubt of the truth of euery thing in Scripture Euen so hee that granteth that some part of Traditions or of the word of God vnwritten may bee false erreth substantially because he giueth cause to doubt of any Tradition which yet as I haue shewed is the prime originall ground of Faith more fundamentall than the verie Scripture which is not knowne to be Apostolicall but by Tradition whereas a perpetuall Tradition is knowne to come from the Apostles by its owne light For what more euident than that that is from the Apostles which is deliuered as Apostolicall by perpetuall succession of Bishops consenting therein ANSWER The true Church in her sounder members erreth not in points fundamentall nor yet in matters of lesse moment maliciously or with pertinacie But the same may be ignorant and also erre in secondarie Articles The reason of the first is because the same should then cease to bee the true Church by corrupting the substance of right faith expresly or vertually and consequently there should remaine no true Church vpon earth which is impossible The reason of the second is because the Church since the Apostles is not guided by immediate inspiration or by Propheticall reuelation but by an ordinarie assistance of grace accompanying the vse of right meanes which remooueth not possibilitie of errour but leaueth space for humane iudgement being regenerate onely in part Heb. 5.2 Gal. 5.17 Aug. Enchir. c. 63. to worke by his proper force and power Secondly the Church hath no perpetuall Traditions but such as are either contained in holy Scripture or which are subseruient to maintaine the faith veritie and authoritie of the holy Scriptures and the doctrine thereof Thirdly whereas the Iesuit saith That euen as no vntruth can be admitted in the holy Scripture in regard of such things as are of the least moment without ouerthrowing the totall authoritie thereof so likewise no errour great or small can bee admitted in the doctrine and Tradition of the present Church because vpon the same will follow the subuersion of all her Tradition euen in matters essentiall I answere That there is not the same reason of the Scripture and the Church for the Scripture is totally and perfectly diuine and must alwayes bee so esteemed and to admit any errour or possibilitie thereof in Scripture were to make God a lyar and consequently to ouerthrow all faith But the present Church is onely the seruant of God and of his word Iohn 10.27 and hath no credit or authoritie but from it and although the same may erre in some things yet there remaineth alwaies a higher and more soueraigne Iudge to wit the holy Ghost speaking in and by the Scriptures to whom Christians desirous of truth may appeale and by whose sentence the Doctrine and Traditions of the present Church are to bee iudged Whosoeuer admitteth any errour or vntruth in the holy Scripture taketh away all authoritie from that which is the prime foundation of supernaturall veritie But he that admitteth error or fallibilitie of iudgement in some Traditions and Doctrines of the Pastours of the present Church doth onely make the credit of a secondarie and inferior witnesse subiect to triall and examination of an higher Iudge And euen as in building the rule and measure of proportion must alwaies be euen and right in it selfe but the workemans hand may possibly leane or shake and applie his rule amisse so likewise the holy Scriptures which are the principles of Theologie and the most exact ballance and measure of diuine Veritie as S. Chrysostome speaketh must be free from all obliquitie of error and to admit the least error in the Scripture ouerthroweth the foundation of Faith But the Ministerie and Tradition of the Church is like an Artificers hand which may sometimes leane and goe awrie and yet the foundation of Veritie abideth firme in the prime authenticall rule and by the same the errour of mens Tradition and Doctrine may be corrected Fourthly the Iesuit affirmeth That Tradition to wit of the

Church since the Apostles is the prime originall ground of Faith more fundamentall than the Scripture This assertion is Antichristian and impudent for can any thing be more fundamentall than the foundation or of greater authoritie than the word of God S. Peter speaking of the Propheticall Scriptures equalleth the same to the sensible voice of God which was vttered in the Apostles audience from heauen Math. 3.17 c. 17.5 saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We haue the most sure word of Prophesie c. vpon these words S. Augustine d. verb. Apostoli serm 29. commenteth as followeth Et cum dixisset hanc vocem audiuimus de Coelo delatam subiunxit atque ait habemus certiorem propheticum sermonem sonuit illa vox de Coelo certior est propheticus sermo when the Apostle had said We heard this voice from heauen he addeth further and saith We haue a more sure word of prophesie That voice sounded from heauen and yet the propheticall word is more sure he said more sure not better or truer because that word from heauen was as good and as profitable as the word of prophesie Why therefore more sure Because the hearer was more confirmed by it Our Sauiour himselfe in the Gospell examineth the Traditions of the Pharises and of the Iewish Church then being by the Scriptures Math. 5.6 and 7. Ch. 12.5 c. 15.4 19.4 And the holy Ghost in the new Testament both in the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles confirmeth the Truth which was taught by the authoritie of the Scriptures and Christ Iesus perpetually submitteth himselfe and his doctrine to the triall of the Scriptures and the Apostles after him did the like Acts 26.22 The antient Fathers affirme that the Scriptures are of most eminent authoritie and that wee are aboue all things to giue credit to them and that they are the mouth of God and the verie hand of God and Paul and Peter and Iohn and the whole companie of the Prophets do speake with vs by them and that Faith it selfe by which a iust man liueth is conceiued by them and the Church it selfe is demonstrated to wit tanquam à priori by them But on the contrarie Traditions receiue their authoritie from the Scriptures and may not be admitted vnlesse they agree with the Scriptures And in our Aduersaries Tenet men must first beleeue the authoritie of the Church before they can receiue or beleeue Tradition from all which it followeth that Tradition of the present Church is neither the prime originall ground of Faith nor yet more fundamentall concerning Faith than the Scripture The Trident Councell held it sufficient to equall Tradition with the Scriptures This new master with Baronius Pighius preferreth them before the Scriptures These men perceiue that the Roman Faith cannot subsist vnlesse they depresse the written word of God and exalt the prophane bastardly and Apocriphall Traditions of the Pope They say the Scripture is a breathlesse lumpe a nose of wax a leaden rule Andradius writeth That in the Books of the Scriptures themselues there is no diuinitie or any thing else binding vs to beleeue Stapleton saith That being considered as written it can no way be called the Temple or Tabernacle of the holy Ghost Bosius saith The holy Ghost resideth in the Church more effectually and nobly than in the Bookes of the Scripture And Majoranus hath these words The consent of the Church alone which neuer wanted the spirit of God ought to be of greater esteeme with vs than all mute and tonguelesse Bookes and than all the written volumes which are or euer were and which haue in all ages ministred fuell of contention to the wits of men And Gretsar the Iesuit There would haue beene fewer contentions in the world as I supose if there had beene no Scripture at all Iacob Brower a Reader of Doway saith I would not beleeue the Gospell did not the authoritie of Pope Paul the fift mooue me And lastly it is one of the dictates of Pope Hildebrand canonised by Baronius That no Chapter or Booke of Scripture must bee esteemed canonicall without his authoritie I doubt not but that Romists are able with faire glosses and distinctions to salue these blasphemies and to reconcile dark nesse with light but he that diggeth a pit for people to fall into althought he couer the same with some superficiall tecture is accused by the antient sentence of diuine Law Exod. 21.33 Towards the end of this Section the Iesuit addeth First That the Scripture is not knowne to bee Apostolicall but by Tradition This is false for the Scripture is knowne to come from the Apostles by inward grounds and testimonies contained in it selfe and by the vertue and effects of it as well as by the Tradition of the Church Secondly it is most vntrue that Tradition is knowne to come from the Apostles by it owne light but not Scripture for what internall light hath Tradition more than or aboue the Scripture If it haue then the articles of Popish Tradition Purgatorie adoration of Images c. are more manifest than the articles which Scripture teacheth concerning the incarnation and resurrection of Christ than Heauen and Hell c. Also sacred Scripture is receiued as diuine by all Christians Popish Tradition onely by some The Catalogue of Romish Tradition could neuer to this day be specified and distinctly assigned but the Canon of holy Scripture may Moreouer holie Scripture hath the perpetuall and vnanimous consent of the Primitiue Church Popish Tradition hath not Againe Bellarmine confesseth that nothing is better knowne and more certaine than holy Scripture but if nothing be better known then nothing hath clearer light Thirdly the confirmation of the former to wit What more euident c. is insufficient because that which is known to come from the Apostles by their owne immediat testimonie in writing is more euidently knowne to come from them than that which is affirmed to come from them onely by the report of men which are deceiueable Diuine testimonie maketh things more certaine and infallible than humane The testimonie of the Apostles extant in writing is totally diuine the report of Bishops is in part humane IESVIT And this may bee clearely prooued to omit other pregnant testimonies by the words of our Sauiour in the last of Matthew Going into the whole world teaching all nations baptizing them In the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost teaching them to keepe all that I haue commanded you all dayes euen to the consummation of the world A promise of wonderfull comfort vnto them that pawne their soules and saluation vpon Gods word deliuered by perpetuall Tradition For in this sentence appeare these fixe things First That there is still a Christian Church all dayes not wanting in the world so

much as one day till the consummation of the world ANSWER The place of Saint Matthew chapter 28. 19 20. prooueth First that the holy Apostles receiued a Commission and Mandate from Christ to preach the Gospell to all nations both Iewes and Gentiles and to baptise them In the name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost Marke 16. 15 16. Luke 24.27 Acts 1.8 Rom. 1.14 Secondly that our Sauiour promised his Apostles a perpetuall presence and assistance of his diuine power and grace both in regard of the gifts of edification Acts 2. 4. And in respect of the grace of inward sanctification Iohn 17.17 Thirdly because the Apostles were mortall and not to remaine alwayes personally vpon earth and other Pastors must succeed in the office of Ministerie the promise of Christ touching his spirituall presence and assistance of grace is extended to these successours and when they teach and baptise in such manner as Christ commanded diuine grace is present to their Ministeriall actions and the holy Ghost co-worketh with them Fourthly But yet succeeding Pastors receiued not the same measure of diuine Grace with the Apostles neyther had they immediate and Propheticall reuelation but onely a measure of Grace ordinarie mediate and in some sort conditionall Also the said Promise Matth. 28. 20. was common and equall to all the Apostles and to the successors of one Apostle as well as of another to the successors of Saint Iames and Saint Iohn c. as well as to the successors of Saint Peter Fifthly Notwithstanding the said promise Bishops and Pastors succeeding the Apostles were in respect of themselues subiect to errors and their iudgement in matters of Faith was not absolutely infallible like the Apostles but so farre forth onely as they walked in the footsteps and followed the Doctrine deliuered by the Apostles Our Sauiour promised that he would be alwayes with the Apostles euen to the consummation of the World partly in their personall Teaching whiles they themselues liued in the World and partly in their permanent Doctrine contained in the Scriptures of the New Testament when the same was truly deliuered by their successors And he will be also with succeeding Pastors all Ages according to such a measure of Grace and assistance as is sufficient for the edifying of the Church if they for their owne part be studious to learne diuine Truth from the holy Apostles and carefull to preach the same to others But his promise concerning immunitie from error and mortall offences is not so absolute to successors as it was to the Apostles themselues Sixtly Many antient Expositors affirme That the Promise of Christ Matth. 28.20 is especially made to the iust and faithfull and some of them say to the Elect onely And Occham affirmeth That if there should be found in the whole World but one Orthodox Bishop or but one such Priest and a small number of Lay people professing right Faith in Articles essentiall and willing to embrace all other Diuine Vertie when the same should be manifested vnto them this were sufficient to make good Christ his Promise Matth. 28.20 In the next passage our Aduersarie inferreth and deriueth certaine Propositions from the former Text of Matth. 28. 20. First hee saith There is still a Christian Church all dayes not wanting so much as one day in the World till the consummation thereof I answer That there is still in the World a common Christian Church wherein some beleeuers hold the substance of right Faith But there is not perpetually in the World a Church the more potent and maior part whereof beleeueth and professeth right Faith without error in all points and so infallible in all her Doctrine as was the Primitiue Church which enioyed the immediate and actuall preaching of the Apostles IESVIT Secondly This Church is euer visible and conspicuous For the Church which alwayes teacheth and christeneth all Nations to which Christ saith I am alwayes with you not with you sitting in corners or hidden vnder ground but with you exercising the Office enioyned you in the words precedent Docete omnes gentes baptizantes eos c. ANSWER The Church is euer visible according to some degree of visibilitie but this Scripture teacheth not that the true Church is alwayes largely and gloriously visible The same doth not actually in euerie Age teach and christen all Nations and the Roman Church for sundrie Ages past teacheth and christeneth few or none within Natolia and other large Prouinces liuing in subiection to the Grand Seignior or Emperour of Constantinople And as Christ doth not say verbally in this Text I am alwayes with you sitting in corners so he doth not say I am alwayes with you when you are carryed vpon mens shoulders and tread vpon Emperours neckes and diuide and share the Kingdomes of the World and gather endlesse Riches by selling Pardons and preaching Purgatorie But yet of the two it is farre more agreeable to the Diuine Goodnesse who is a Father of the poore and oppressed to be present to his little flocke in persecution and when it flyeth as a Lambe from the Wolfe and hideth it selfe from the Oppressor Apoc. 12. 14 than that hee hath entayled his perpetuall presence vpon ambitious and oppressing Tyrants which stiled themselues Pastors and were rauening Wolues Scribes and Pharisees imposing insupportable burthens vpon others and not moouing them with one of their owne fingers And there is no cause why the good God which was present with Daniel in the Lyons Denne and with Ionas in the Whales Belly and with Ioseph in the Dungeon and with Iob vpon the Dunghill should in the dayes of the oppressing Antichrist withdraw his presence and assistance from his poore flocke yea although it were sitting in corners and hidden vnder ground IESVIT Thirdly This Church is euer Apostolicall for to his Apostles Christ said I am alwayes with you vntill the consummation of the World not with you in your owne persons but with you in your successors in whom you shall continue to the Worlds end Ergo a lawfull companie of Bishops Pastors and Doctors succeeding the Apostles must be perpetually in the World ANSVVER First The Church may be called Apostolicall because of Faith Plantation and Externall Ordination of Pastors According to Faith and Doctrine in all the maine and substantiall Articles the true Church is euer Apostolicall In regard of Plantation the Primitiue Church was Apostolicall because it was immediately planted and watered by the holy Apostles But Tertullian affirmeth That many particular Churches were not thus planted by Apostles or Apostolicall persons and yet they were truly Apostolicall by reason of consanguinitie of Doctrine with the holy Apostles According to the third manner to wit in respect of Externall Ordination and Imposition of Hands receiued from Bishops lineally succeeding the Apostles a false and corrupt Church may be Apostolicall as I haue formerly prooued And it is

not impossible for a true Church to succeed or come out of a false or for a corrupt Church to reforme it selfe And if this happen there is required no new Ordination of Pastors 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any Miracles to confirme their Vocation but they which 〈◊〉 ordained in a corrupt Church returning to the right Faith and worship of God make their former Ordination more legitimate holy and effectuall The Iesuit in the words ensuing collecteth from our Sauiours promise I will be with you c. that there must euer bee a companie of Bishops and Pastours succeeding the Apostles because Christ said to them and their successours I will bee with you c. But if this collection be good then euerie one of the Apostles must haue Bishops Pastours and Doctours succeeding them in right faith to the end of the world for Christ spake to them all in generall and also distributiuely to euerie of them c. But the Papals themselues at this day exclude all the successours of other Apostles excepting Saint Peter Neither yet doth our Sauiour limit his presence and assistance to generall Councels or definitiue sentences of Popes but hee speaketh of Preaching and Baptising and therefore if his presence with Pastours and Bishops doe free them from all errour it must free them in Preaching and writing Bookes as well as sitting in Councell Also they to whom Christ is alwayes present are not of infallible iudgement or free from errour in all matters but onely from damnable and malicious errour as appeareth by Saint Cyprian Saint Augustine and all the elect of God Wherefore this promise in regard of the perfection thereof did appertaine to the Apostles themselues and in regard of the veritie of it and for such a measure of assistance as is necessarie to constitute a number of faithfull people more or lesse in euery age to serue Christ truely in the substance of faith and pietie it is fulfilled alwayes euen to the end of the world But because our Aduersaries insist so much vpon this Text to raise their visible and personall succession I will reduce the Argument which they draw out of it into forme and then accommodate mine Answere If Christ will be with his Apostles all dayes to the end of the world then the Apostles not continuing aliue themselues they must remaine in Bishops Pastours and Doctours locally and personally succeeding them to the end of the world But the first is true Ergo c. First if the consequence of this Argument were good then all and euerie one of the Apostles must continue allwayes to the consummation of the world in Bishops Pastours and Doctours lineally succeeding them which Papals themselues denie Secondly lineall and personall succession is not the sole meanes by which the Apostles after their decease remaine in the world but they remaine also in the world by their Scriptures and also by the faith of Beleeuers receiuing and obeying their doctrine Thirdly that which is promised vpon condition is not absolute vntill the condition be fulfilled The presence of Christ is promised to the Apostles successours conditionally and as they were one with the Apostles by imitation and subordination that is so farre as they walked in their steps and conformed their Doctrine and Ministerie to the patterne receiued from them But successours did not alwayes performe this condition neither did the promise inable them to doe it without their owne care and indeuour which was contingent and separable and therefore many times deficient Fourthly Christs presence alwayes to the consummation of the world with some Bishops Pastours and Doctours lineally succeeding the Apostles prooueth not that these Bishops and Pastours cannot erre in any part of their Doctrine for then no particular Bishops hauing Apostolicall ordination could fall into any errour but it sheweth onely that Christ co-operates with them in such Ministeriall duties and actions as they performe according to his Ordinance And when they preach his Doctrine and administer his Sacraments hee himselfe will adde vertue and grace to their actions being duly performed IESVIT Fourthly this Church is vniuersall 〈◊〉 in mundum vniuersum Marc. 16. 15. where I will be alwayes with you ANSWER The true Church is vniuersall according to the manner formerly declared But the Argument taken out of Saint Marke 16.15 prooueth not that it is euer actually vniuersall in respect of place and multitude of professours For as it followeth not that because Christ said he would be with Saint Paul when he preached at Corinth Act. 18.10 therefore he will be euer at Corinth So likewise it is inconsequent to inferre Christ said he would be present in all places of the world with the Apostles when they baptised and preached as he commanded them Ergo he will alwayes be present in those places although their successours neglect his commandement Is God euer in the dungeon in Egypt because he was euer there whilst Ioseph a iust person continued in prison The promise of spirituall presence is annexed to the worke of Preaching and Baptising wheresoeuer it is performed according to the Diuine Ordinance but that which in some ages hath beene done in many places may at other times be performed in few IESVIT Fiftly the Church is one not diuided into parts because it teacheth and beleeueth vniformely all that Christ deliuered and commanded without factions Sects or parts about matters of faith ANSWER It is not affirmed neither can it be concluded out of Mat. 28. that the visible Church in all ages of the world teacheth and beleeueth either vniformely or expresly and distinctly all that Christ deliuered or commanded and in the same Churches which were planted by the Apostles there was discord among infirme Christians 1. Cor. 1.11 IESVIT Sixtly this Church is alwayes holy for doctrine neuer deliuering or teaching any falshood I who am the truth am alwayes with you teaching all nations Holy also for life Christ the Holy of Holies assisting and making her able to conuert Infidels which it could not well doe without signes and tokens of wonderfull sanctitie at the least in her more eminent Preachers ANSVVER Although the true Church is alwaies holy for Doctrine yet it is not perfectly and in the highest degree euer so And it is most inconsequent to argue Christ which is the Truth is euer with the Church Ergo the Church cannot erre or teach any falshood for Christ is alwaies with the faithfull Ephes. 3. 17. yet iust and faithfull people may erre Because Christ was with the Apostles by miraculous inspiration therefore they could not erre or deliuer any falshood great or small but he is present with the sounder part of the Church militant since the Apostles by ordinarie grace and assistance which freeth the same from damnable and malicious errour but not from all errour And this assistance of Grace is greater or lesse according to the good pleasure of Christ and the disposition of his people which are

inconsequent to conclude That because the Protestants receiued the Scriptures from the Roman Church therefore they receiued them to wit immediatly from the vniuersall Church The Minor proposition to wit the Protestants receiued the Scriptures from no other Church than from the Romane may be taken in a double sence For either it may be vnderstood originally and by way of authoritie that is The Protestants receiued the Scriptures both originally and deriuatiuely from and by the authoritie of the Romane Church onely or else it may bee vnderstood indicatiuely The Protestants receiued the Scriptures by the hand of the Romane Church and were first of all instructed and told by that Church that the same were diuine Bookes yet they receiued them not onely or principally from that church but also from the Primitiue Church which led them originally to the Apostles themselues And besides the former Tradition by reading and studying the holy Scriptures they learned sufficient matter out of those heauenly bookes to confirme them that they were diuine and of God Philemon receiued S. Pauls Epistle by the hand of Onesimus he did not esteeme Onesimus a seruant who had beene a fugitiue an infallible witnesse in himselfe but the argument and contents of S. Pauls Epistle persuaded him that S. Paul was the Author A man may receiue the Kings Proclamation from off a pillar or his great Seale by the hand of a meane clarke So likewise the bookes of holy Scriptures are first conueyed vnto vs by Ecclesiasticall testimonie and Tradition but they containe heauenly veritie and doctrine within themselues which persuade the diligent readers and learners of them that they are diuine IESVIT The Maior I prooue If Protestants haue not the Text of Scripture by and from the one holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church they cannot be certaine they haue the true incorrupt Text the Apostles deliuered and recommended as Diuine to the first 〈◊〉 seeing the Tradition of any other Church is fallible and may deceiue And if it may deceiue how can they be certaine that they are not deceiued seeing they themselues liued not in the Apostles dayes to see with their owne eyes what Copies the Apostles deliuered But Protestants as they pretend be certaine that they haue the true incorrupt Apostolicall Text of Scripture Ergo they haue it vpon the Authoritie of the holy Catholike Apostolike Church ANSWER The Argument whereby the Aduersarie confirmeth his Maior is this If the Protestants receiue the Scriptures from any other but the Holy Catholique Church they cannot be certaine that the same are incorrupt because a fallible Witnesse may deceiue Answ. They which receiue the Scriptures from the hands of a corrupt Church may be deceiued if there be not some other infallible meanes besides the Testimonie of that Church to assure them But if that Church be onely a Messenger to deliuer and there be found in the thing deliuered that which is certaine and infallible in it selfe to wit the Testimonie of the Apostles and of the Spirit of God speaking in and by those Scriptures Acts 24. 25. then they which immediately receiue the Text of the Scripture from a fallible Church may be certaine that they are not deceiued It is not necessarie that the Messenger by and from whose hands wee receiue immediately the Text of the Scriptures should be infallible in all things for then wee must receiue them from the hands of no particular Church or particular Councell vnconfirmed by the Pope or from any particular Pastour of the Church because these are fallible And according to our Aduersaries Tenet infallibilitie of Iudgement is found onely in the Pope and Councell confirmed by him And from hence it will in like sort follow that for the first two or three hundred yeeres beginning from the death of the Apostles in which time there was no generall Councell yea for certaine Ages after generall Councels began vntill the Canon of the Scripture was expressely assigned by some generall or particular Councell confirmed by the Pope Christians should haue remained vncertaine touching the sacred Authoritie of Diuine Scripture because the meanes by which they receiued them immediately were fallible The Authoritie of the holy Scripture dependeth vpon the immediate Messenger which deliuereth the Bookes vnto vs no more than the Authoritie of the Kings Proclamation dependeth vpon the Sergeant who proclaymes it or sets it vpon a Pillar to be read of all men but vpon the first Diuine Witnesses which wee know to be the Authors of the Scripture not because Pope Paul the fifth or Clement the eight say so but because the Witnesses themselues affirme it in their Scripture or deliuer that in their Scripture by which it is prooued to such as are eleuated by Grace and taught of God IESVIT Now the Minor That they haue the Scripture from the Romane is apparent For what other Church did deliuer vnto Luther the Text of the Bible assuring him that they had it by Tradition of Ancestors time out of mind as giuen originally by the Apostles which is accordingly acknowledged by M. Whitaker and others but particularly by Luther himselfe Ergo the Romane Church is the one holy Catholike Apostolike Church whose Tradition doth deliuer infallibly vnto vs the Text of Scripture ANSVVER The Protestants receiuing the Bookes of holy Scripture by the hand of the Roman Church proueth not the said Church to be the onely holy Catholike and Apostolike Church any more than the receiuing of Baptisme by Heretikes or the Old Testament by the Synagogue of which the Pharisees were a part proue the same to be the true infallible Church IESVIT And if the true Apostolicall Text then also the true Apostolicall Sense ANSWER The sequele is denyed For it is not necessarie that they which truly deliuer the Text shall also truly deliuer the Apostolicall sense and on the contrarie a lying sence may be deliuered by them which retaine the true and incorrupt Letter of the Text as appeareth by the Pharisees Arrians Donatists and many other Heretikes IESVIT This I proue If the Apostles did not deliuer the bare Text but together with the Text the true sense of Scripture to be deliuered perpetually vnto posteritie then they who by Tradition receiue from the Apostles the true Text must together receiue the true sense But all principall Protestants affirme No man doubteth but the Primitiue Church receiued from the Apostles and Apostolicall men not onely the Text of Scripture but also the right and natiue sense which is agreeable to the Doctrine of the Fathers that from the Apostles together with the Text descends the Line of Apostolicall interpretation squared according to the Ecclesiasticall and Catholike sense ANSVVER The Assumption of the former Argument to wit The Apostles together with the Text deliuered the true sense of all their Scriptures to those people to whom they wrote is vncertaine They deliuered no doubt the sense of the Scriptures

an vniforme Tradition of all ages that the place of Saint Paul 1. Cor. 3. 12. is vnderstood of Popish Purgatorie or Math. 16. 19. Iohn 20.23 of Iubilees and Indulgences or the place of Acts 10. 13. Rise Peter and kill of murthering Princes or of the temporall dominion of the Pope If the Papists would impose no other sence vpon the Scripture than such as is confirmed by vniforme Tradition the difference betweene them and vs would easily bee composed but these men euerie day hatch nouell expositions and when they are hunted out of one they flie to another They glorie of antiquitie succession vniforme Tradition and cry Victoria Inuincible Vnanswerable before the combate is finished but they are compelled to forge Authours to impose false expositions vpon the Texts of Fathers sometimes to abridge sometimes to inlarge the Tomes of Councells and to purge and corrade Ecclesiasticall writers old and new and yet being vnable to preuaile by all the former they are forced in many cases to presse the bare authoritie of the Pope and his adheres to warrant their Tradition IESVITS 3d. Argument My third proofe I ground vpon a principle most certaine and set downe by your most gratious Maiestie That the Roman Church was once the Mother Church and consequently the One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church all other Churches being her daughters and that she is not to be forsaken further than it can be prooued that she departed from her selfe that is from the Mother and originall Doctrine deliuered by the Apostles ANSWER This principle whereupon you ground your third Argument is neither true in it selfe nor yet confessed by his excellent Maiestie in the place whereunto you referre vs His Maiestie affirmeth That wee ought not to depart from the Church of Rome in Doctrine or Ceremonie further than she had departed from her selfe in her best estate and from Christ her head This sentence of our most religious King is consequent vpon S. Pauls doctrine Rom. 12. 18. Rom. 14. 13. and the same is consonant to Charitie and Reason and argueth a mind desirous of Concord and Peace and averse from vnnecessarie Innouations And as this moderation is commendable in all men so it is most agreeable to him that is a Father of peace whose word is Beati Pacifici But whereas you incroach vpon his Maiesties speech adding a glosse which is not warranted by the Text and infer a conclusion which the premises affoord not you are herein iniurious both to the Author you alleage and to the Truth The Roman was neuer by diuine institution the Mother Church in regard of all Christians neither Vniuersall in respect of an absolute command and iurisdiction ouer all particular Churches as is challenged by the Canon Dist. 12. c. 1. Non decet c. But it was once a Mother Church as the Seas of Patriarches are stiled Mother-Churches or a Mother-Church respectiuely to such people and nations as were conuerted by her preaching and other Churches were stiled with that title as well as the Roman Theoderet speaking of the Church of Hierusalem saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We make knowne vnto you that the most reuerend and godly Cyrill is made Bishop of Hierusalem which is the Mother of all Churches The Roman Church once a Metropolitan or patriarchall Mother Church since the daies of Hildebrand is suspected to be the Mother spoken of Apoc. 17. 5. and some of your owne part haue said that in these latter times Nontam se matrem exhibet quam Noueream she behaueth her selfe more like a stepdame than a naturall mother her brests haue beene verie drie for sundrie ages past and she depriued her children of a principall portion of the food of life and in steed of milke deliuered them water mixt with chaulke Her publicke readings and seruice were in an vnknowne tongue the holy Scriptures were closed vp that people might not cast their eies vpon them fabulous legends were read and preached in steed of Gods word and hereby it came to passe as some of their owne Authors say That the greater number of people vnderstood no more concerning God and things diuine than Infidels or Heathen people IESVIT But she cannot be prooued to haue changed her Doctrine since the Apostles by any monuments of Historie or Antiquitie yea the contrarie in my iudgement may be most euidently prooued in this sort ANSVVER If by monuments of Historie and Antiquitie be vnderstood Human or Ecclesiasticall Monuments it is inconsequent to inferre that the present Roman Church hath not changed her doctrine since the Apostles although this could not be demonstrated by monuments of Historie c. for there remaineth a more firme and demonstratiue Argument to prooue this to wit the holy Scripture and if the present doctrine of the Roman Church disagree with the Scripture then it is changed from that which it was antiently The rule by which we must trie doctrines is the word of God and not humane Historie and the word of God is true and abideth for euer whereas humane Historie is fallible contingent and corruptible 1. It is not absolutely necessarie that humane Histories of all matters should be composed and the world continued many ages without any written Historie Secondly When the same are written they cause onely humane Faith Thirdly they may totally perish and be suppressed or corrupted by the enemies of Truth Fourthly Historie may be repugnant to Historie and that which is affirmed by some may be contradicted or contrauerted by others and the largenesse and difficultie of the Monuments of Antiquitie may be such as that few people can be able to read and examine them and if they which read and compare them be opposite in iudgement each to other the greater part of people shall be perplexed and cannot know how to resolue themselues Our Aduersaries teach vs That the principall Monuments of Antiquitie to wit the ancient Councels haue not beene faithfully preserued Many things supposititious haue beene added to the workes of the Antient and bastardly Bookes and Sentences passe vnder the titles of Fathers Our Aduersaries being a party whose doctrine is to be examined according to their owne challenge by Monuments of Antiquitie haue presumed to correct purge and alter such Records Lastly when the testimonie of Historians repugnant to their present Tenet is produced against Papals they despise and reiect them to wit Eusebius Socrates Sozomene c. Baronius a new vpstart censureth all Historians Pighius after one thousand yeares controls the testimonie of generall Councels and it is a rule among them that the antient Fathers then much lesse Histories are not to be 〈◊〉 any 〈◊〉 than they 〈◊〉 the keyes and 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 Church IESVIT The Doctrines that were for diuers ages vniuersally receiued in the Christian Church and no time of their beginning is assigneable

must be Doctrines vnchanged comming from the Apostles ANSVVER This Proposition may hold in prime and essentiall Articles of Doctrine but not generally in all Doctrines and some learned Papists hold that it is possible for the visible Church of one age to erre or be deceiued by a blamelesse and inuincible ignorance in points of Doctrine the expresse knowledge whereof is not necessarie to Saluation IESVIT But it is most cleere and confessed by the Protestants whose testimonie plentifull in this behalfe if need require shall be brought First that the Doctrines of the Roman Church which Protestants refuse haue beene vniuersally receiued for many ages a thousand yeares agoe at least euer since Boniface the third ANSWER It is neither cleere in it selfe nor yet confessed by Protestants that the Doctrines of the Roman Church which Protestants refuse haue been vniuersally receiued for 1000 yeres at least c. The article of the Popes Supremacie and of Purgatorie Adoration of Images forbidding married Priests to liue with their wiues were euer opposed and reiected by the Greek Church The Doctrine of the Trident Councell concerning the Canon of the holy Scriptures and the preheminence of the vulgar Translation before the Hebrew and Greeke Text was not vniuersally 〈◊〉 for a thousand yeeres The temporal authoritie of the Pope the merit of Condignitie publicke seruice in an vnknowne language Iubilees and Popes pardons Communion in one kind Transubstantiation Blessing or baptising of Bells c. were not generally receiued in the Church vniuersall for a thousand yeeres at least And a great number of Beleeuers which in this West part of the world haue alwayes denied and resisted these Articles and among other opponents there were a people called Waldenses Leonistae pauperes de Lugduno c. many in number and largely diffused through diuers Countries who denied the foresaid Popish Articles and whose Doctrine in the most points was consonant to that which reformed Churches doe now professe Reinerius an Inquisitour of the Church of Rome liuing about the yeere one thousand two hundred fiftie foure in a Booke Printed at Ingolstade writeth in this manner of the Waldenses which hee calleth Leonists Among all Sects which are or haue formerly beene none is more pernicious to the Church than that of the Leonists First because it continued longer than any other for some say it hath lasted euer since Pope Siluester others say euer since the Apostles Secondly because no Sect is more generall than this for there is scarce any countrey in which it is not found Thirdly whereas other Sects deterre men with their horrible blasphemies this Sect of the Leonists maketh a great shew of godlinesse because they liue righteously before men and beleeue all things rightly touching God and concerning all other Articles of the Ceed onely they blaspheme the Romane Church and Clergie in which thing the Laitie is forward to giue credit vnto them IESVIT Secondly That Protestants cannot tell the time when the Church of Rome began to change and deuiate from the Apostolicall Doctrine deliuered by succession Ergo the Roman Church neuer changed her Faith ANSWER If the Antecedent were true yet it followeth not Ergo the same Roman Church neuer changed her Faith For although we cannot tell the time when the progenitors of Abraham first began to change and deuiate from the Doctrine of Noah and Sem yet it is certaine that they had changed their Religion Iosh. 24. 2. And were not the Sodomites transgressors of the Law of Nature because the first beginning of their transgression cannot be knowne How many wicked Customes haue beene common in the World whose authors and first beginners were vnknowne to Posteritie The time is not knowne when the late Iewish Church did first change and corrupt the sense of the Morall Law and brought in the Traditions condemned by our Sauiour and yet they had corrupted and changed the same Matth. 5. 6. 7. 15. 19. 23. If a Tenant haue by himselfe and his predecessors long held an House which is now in decay and readie to drop downe the Landlord by this Law of the Iesuits Ergo shall neuer compell the Tenant to make reparation vnlesse he be able to demonstrate to the Tenant in what yeere and moneth euerie Wall and Rafter began to decay A Physician shall not purge a malignant humor out of a diseased bodie vnlesse hee or his Patient be able to name the time and manner of that misdiet which bred the first seed of this distemper IESVIT So that her Doctrines are to be receiued as Apostolicall supposing the Maior of this Argument be true That Doctrines vniuersally receiued whose beginning is not knowne are to be beleeued as Apostolicall which is a Principle set downe by Saint Augustine allowed by Doctor Whitgift late Archbishop of Canturburie who in his Bookes written by publike authoritie against Puritans citing diuerse Protestants as concurring in opinion with him saith Whatsoeuer Opinions are not knowne to haue begun since the Apostles times the same are not new or secundarie but receiued their originall from the Apostles But because this Principle of Christian Diuinitie brings in as M. Cartwright speaketh all Poperie in the iudgement of all men I will further demonstrate the same though of it selfe cleare enough ANSWER If the Maior of this Argument were graunted to wit Doctrines vniuersally receiued whose beginning is not knowne are to be 〈◊〉 as Apostolicall yet the inference is false because the Romane Doctrines opposed by vs were neuer vniuersally receiued but by many eyther not heard of or reiected and contradicted Neyther is the former Principle sufficiently prooued out of S. Augustine First because hee speaketh in all the places obiected of Customes and matters of Fact and Practise the right and Doctrine whereof is found in holy Scripture Secondly the Iesuit conueyeth into his Proposition certaine words to wit Doctrines vniuersally receiued c. which are not found in S. Augustine And this Father did neuer allow that the vniuersall Church should beleeue any thing as Doctrine of Faith which was not contained expressely or deriuatiuely in holy Scripture And in the same bookes out of which these Obiections are collected he confuteth rebaptising by Scripture and confirmeth the lawfulnesse of Infants Baptisme by Scripture So that his meaning is when matters being in common vse and practise are questioned the right and lawfulnesse hath warrant from the Scripture although no especiall example be found in the written Bookes of the Apostles of such practise yet the generall custome and vse of the vniuersall Church in all Ages argueth that such practise receiued it beginning from the Apostles For example That the Apostles baptised Infants is not particularly reported in their Writings but sufficient grounds are found in them to prooue the necessitie and to warrant the practise thereof In this and in all other the like cases Quod vniuersa tenet Ecclesia nec

Argument concluding That because no Historicall and expresse opposition was made against these Doctrines by the antient Fathers therefore the Tradition of the present Romane Church concerning these Doctrines is Apostolicall As if a man should conclude That because no expresse opposition was made against the Pharisees by the antient Iewish Church therefore their Traditions were diuine But if the sequele of this Argument be good then the Proposition following is necessarie to wit Euerie Doctrine against which the antient Fathers haue not made expresse and literall opposition is Apostolicall But this is false because some Heresies sprang vp in the Church after the decease of the antient Fathers and against those they could make no such opposition vnlesse they had beene endued with Propheticall inspiration But if as our Aduersarie obiecteth euerie Doctrine is Apostolicall against which the antient Fathers made no expresse and Historicall opposition then the Articles following which Protestants maintaine are Apostolicall to wit The Romane Bishop and Councell may erre The substance of Bread and Wine remaine in the holy Eucharist after consecration The common Prayer and Seruice of the Church which the vnlearned frequent ought to be vttered in a knowne Language These I say and the like Articles according to the Iesuits Argument must be Apostolicall because no expresse Historicall or literall opposition was made against them by the antient Fathers But the Iesuit will peraduenture except That euerie Doctrine deliuered by the Tradition of the Romane Church against which the Fathers haue made no expresse opposition is Apostolicall and not euerie other Doctrine This verily or any thing else as wilde and absurd may be pretended but it must be prooued before it can merit any credit And if the Romane Church may erre and change her Doctrine after the decease of the antient Fathers then the Doctrine deliuered by the Tradition of the Romane Church is of the same qualitie with the Doctrine deliuered by the Tradition of other Churches But the first is true Rom. 11. 22. and there is nothing promised in Diuine Writ to the Romane Church to free the same from Error more than to the Churches of 〈◊〉 Antioch Ephesus c. For Hierusalem was the prime Mother Church Esa. 2. 3. Luc. 24. 47. and the first Seat of all the Apostles Ephesus was the Episcopall Sea of S. Iohn and it was once a Ground and Pillar of Truth 1. Tim. 3. 15. and Antioch was the Episcopall Sea of S. Peter Baron Annal. to 1. anno 39. nu 20. And yet euerie one of these Apostolicall Churches are departed from their antient integritie Wherefore except Romists can demonstrate by diuine testimonie that their Prelates and Pontifes haue singular and ample promises beyond other Apostolicall Churches they begge the question when they arrogate sole perfection infallibilitie and immutabilitie to themselues THE SECOND PART of the Iesuits Disputation concerning the supposed Errors of the PROTESTANTS IESVIT THe Conclusion of this Point shewing that Protestants erre fundamentally ANSVVER THis Conclusion is inferred vpon false Premises and therefore it is a Lying Conclusion And if Protestants erre not in all or any of the Articles obiected eyther materially or pertinaciously then they erre not fundamentally IESVIT Out of all this appeares that the Romane is the true Church and consequently that Protestants haue fundamentall Errors about Faith ANSWER If the Antecedent were graunted yet the Consequence is not necessarie for the Church of Africa in the dayes of Saint Cyprian was a true Church and yet they which beleeued otherwise touching rebaptising than that Church erred not eyther materially or fundamentally IESVIT Errours are fundamentall that is damnable either in regard of the matter because against some substantiall Article of Faith the knowledge whereof is necessarie for the performance of a required Christian dutie or in regard of the manner they are held to wit so obstinately as in defence of them one denies the Catholicke Church ANSVVER The distinction of errours into fundamentall and preterfundamentall is collected out of the Scriptures 1. Cor. 3. 12. Phil. 3. 15 16. 2. Tim. 2. 18. Col. 2. 19. Heb. 6. 1. And the same is found in the Fathers and in the Schoolemen in tearmes aequiualent As all verities according to St. Augustine are fundamentall without the knowledge and faith whereof people cannot attaine saluation so likewise all errours directly opposing and destroying right Faith concerning those necessarie and essentiall verities are fundamentall 1. Tim. 6. 3. 1. Cor. 15. 4 c. Gal. 5. 2. All necessarie and essentiall veritie either concerning Faith or good manners according to St. Augustine is deliuered in plaine places of holy Scriptures and therefore they which accuse others of fundamentall errour must produce plaine and manifest Scripture against them And if after such ostension Errants continue obstinate they are guiltie both before God and men of damnable Heresie and deserue the title and punishment of Heretickes These things being premised concerning the Subiect of the Iesuits Proposition I denie that errours in secondarie points defended against the common tenet of the Catholike Church are alwayes fundamentall for 〈◊〉 Cyprian with 80. Bishops of Affrica did stifly defend Rebaptising against the common iudgement of the Catholicke Church and yet S. August freeth them from the guiltinesse of damnable errour Secondly if all such errour be damnable yet the Protestants are innocent because they defend no errour great or small wilfully or obstinately neither doe they oppose but humbly submit themselues to the iudgement of the true Catholicke Church The Pharisees of Rome enroabe themselues with glorious titles but where doth the word of Christ endow them with priuiledges beyond other Churches shew vs out of the holy Euangelists or the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles that you are the onely Catholicke Church All fundamentall veritie is deliuered in the plaine Texts of Scripture Aug. d. Doct. Christ. l. 2. c. 9. And all fundamentall errour is condemned by manifest Scripture Et Catholica fides in Scripturis manifesta est The true Catholike faith is manifest in the Scriptures Aug. d. Agon Christ. c. 28. Ecclesia nonin parietibus consistit sed in dogmatum veritate Ecclesia ibi est vbi vera fides est The Church of Christ consisteth not of outward Titles and walles but of the veritie of Doctrine Wheresoeuer true Faith is there is the Church saith S. Hierom sup Psal. 133. Where Faith is there is the Church saith Saint Chrysostome Where right Faith is not there is not the true Church Et Ecclesia est Hierusalem cuius fundamenta posita sunt super montes Scripturarum And the Church is Hierusalem whose foundations are placed vpon the mountaines of the Scriptures Eruite igitur aliquid manifestum quo demonstretis Ecclesiam If therefore Papals will force vs to beleeue that they are the only Catholicke Church and that we must follow their Pope

rest of the Apostles with him Iohn 20. 23. Eph. 2.20 Apoc. 21.14 Matth. 28.19 Thirdly To be a Ministeriall Rocke and foundation of the Church is not to be the sole Monarch of the Church because St. Peter might bee such in regard of his Preaching and Doctrine as the other Apostles were and not in respect of Monarchicall dominion Heereupon Turrecremate in his Sum. d. Eccles. lib. 2. cap. 11. saith Non argumentati sumus Petrum primatum habuisse quia dictus fuit fundamentum aut Petra Ecclesiae sed quia singulariter c. Wee argue not Saint Peter had the Primacie because he was called the Foundation or Rocke of the Church but because he was in a singular manner so called But if the name of Rocke argueth not St. Peters supremacie the singular applying thereof in one Text of Scripture will not doe it both because the speaking to him in particular is onely a circumstance and relation of a matter granted by the words of Rocke and Keyes but no addition of any other essentiall gift and also because the same Title in tearmes equiualent is elsewhere made common to other Apostles The Iesuit addeth That we denie the primacie of Peters Successour and that this Successour is the foundation of the Church laid by Christ and necessarie for the perpetuall gouernment of the same I answere First St. Peter in one respect to wit in regard of his Apostolicall function had no successour for the Office of Apostles was extraordinarie appointed by Christ for the first planting of Faith and consequently it ceased with the Apostles Immediate calling Propheticall inspiration the gifts of Miracles and Languages authoritie ouer the whole Church and all the ordinarie Pastours thereof were proper to the holy Apostles and if none succeed them in these gifts and prerogatiues then it is manifest that in respect of their Apostleship they haue no Successours Secondly In respect of ordinarie Ministerie and in regard of the power and order of iurisdiction St. Peter hath successours in the same manner as the rest of the Apostles to wit all Bishops and Pastours teaching either where hee planted Churches or in any other part of the world the same Faith and Religion which himselfe and his fellow Apostles did Thirdly That St. Peter hath a speciall Successour differing in kinde from the Successours of the rest of the Apostles and which is to bee for euer a visible Head and Monarch ouer the vniuersall Church from whom all Ecclesiasticall power is deriued and to whose sentence in things diuine euery Chrstian must submit himselfe and that the Romane Bishop is the man is deliuered as a prime Article of Christian Faith by Papals but it is neither confirmed by the holy Scripture nor by any diuine Reuelation neither is the same deliuered in the holy Apostles Creed or by any antient generall Councell or by the vnanimous consent of the Primatiue Fathers And sundry Romists themselues haue made question of it and later Pontificians doe with so many subtill sleights and inuentions propugne it that all intelligent and impartiall men may plainely discerne That this Doctrine of Papall Supremacie is builded vpon the sand For if the Romane Bishop had beene appointed and established the perpetuall Successour of Saint Peter in manner before mentioned either our Sauiour himselfe would immediately expreslly and manifestly haue reuealed the same to his Church or the holy Apostles would haue taken notice thereof and declared the same to others Also Saint Peter must haue carried himselfe as a Monarch among the other Apostles and exercised the actions of Soueraigntie in the visible Church But we find in the holy Scripture no supereminent iurisdiction or Monarchicall actions exercised by him no vassallage and subiection yeelded him by the rest of the Apostles And if hee must haue had a Successour in his Monarchie the Apostles suruiuing him should rather haue beene his Successours than the ordinarie Pastours of one Diocesse The Spirit of God also together with so eminent authoritie would haue conferred vpon 〈◊〉 Successours extraordinarie graces of Learning Wisedome Holinesse c. necessarie for so high a calling Also it is not probable that Eusebius and other antient Ecclesiasticall Historians would altogether haue been silent of this Monarchicall authoritie of the Romane Bishop neither would any Orthodoxe Father or generall Councell haue confined the Romane Pontife to equall bounds with other Patriarkes But the antientest Ecclesiasticall Stories are absolutely silent of such a swelling preheminence as moderne Papals claime and the Fathers and Councells contest the same Pope Stephan was slighted by St. Cyprian and the Bishops of Affrica when he enterposed in their affaires and Pope Victor by the Bishops of the East The Oecumenicall Councell of Chalcedon equalleth the Patriarch of Constantinople to the Bishop of Rome Gregory the Great himselfe giueth the Papacie a deadly blow And a great part of Christianitie hath euer to this day opposed the Papall Primacie Therefore it is most improbable that this doctrine should be fundamentall veritie which hauing no 〈◊〉 or infallible grounds in diuine Reuelation wanteth also the suffrages of all antient Ecclesiasticall Testimonie IESVIT FOurthly Their denying the foundation of true 〈◊〉 which is one true Catholicke Christian faith about reuealed Mysteries bringing in a fantasticall faith pretending That euery man is iustified by beleeuing himselfe to be iust or one of Gods Elect. ANSVVER YOu ought first to haue weighed our Doctrine concerning the definition of Faith and haue compared the same with the Tenet of sundrie of your owne Doctours before you had accused vs of fundamentall Errour about the same First We maintaine that true Christian Catholicke Faith is a 〈◊〉 and foundation to wit on mans part of Iustification Heb. 11.6 Rom. 1.17 Iud. v. 20. Secondly We denie that euery man is iustified by only beleeuing himselfe to be iust for he must be truely iust before he can or ought to beleeue himselfe to be so The promise of remission of sinnes is conditionall Esa. 1.16 17 18. Ezec. 18. 21. Pro. 28. 13. Math. 6.14 15. Iohn 15. 10. 16 27. Heb. 5.9 and the same becommeth not absolute vntill the condition be fulfilled either actually or in desire and preparation of mind and the full assurance of remission of sinnes succeedeth Repentance Faith Obedience and Mortification 1. Iohn 3.19 20 21 22. Thirdly We denie that it is an action of Christian Faith praeuious or fundamentall to Iustification for a man to beleeue himselfe to be one of Gods elect and admitting that one do not attaine the certainetie of Faith but of Hope onely that he is elected if there be no other impediment found in him besides this we make no question but such a person may be 〈◊〉 Wherein then lyeth the fundamentall errour concerning Faith and Iustification wherewith we are reproched If it be answered That

we erre fundamentally by making sauing Faith not only an intellectuall but also a fiduciall assent to the promise of the Gospell the 〈◊〉 must remember that many of his owne Doctours affirme the same Vega. d. Iustiff lib. 14. Fides in Scripturis 〈◊〉 idem est quod fidueia 〈◊〉 idem quod considere Faith in the Scriptures is many times the same that Trust and to beleeue the same that to trust Iansenius Concord Euang. cap. 32. The name of Faith in the Gospell when Saluation is ascribed vnto it containeth both firme assent c. and also considence and trust conceiued vpon the apprehension of his 〈◊〉 and goodnesse Adam Sasboth sup Rom. 1. v. 17. The word Faith in S. Pauls desputation containeth not only Assent but also Trust in Christ the Mediatour Ferus sup Math. Non semper Fides est quod nos Fidem dicimus c. That which we call Faith to wit to assent to such things as are reported in diuine Histories and which the Church propoundeth to beleeue is not alwaies Faith c. for the Scripture speaketh of Faith in another manner for according to it Faith is a trust in the diuine mercie promised by Christ with these also concurre Guilliaudus Fredericus Nausea and Suares saith Multi Catholici putant saepe accipi in Scriptura Fidem pro fiducia Many Catholicks think that Faith is oftentimes taken in holy Scripture for Trust. The Iesuit therefore wanted matter to fraught his papers when he obiected this Article against vs as a fundamentall errour For if his owne Doctours and the holy Scripture it selfe take the word Faith in this notion wherein haue we merited so grieuous a sentence But I haue produced many famous Doctours of his owne part which say expresly the same that we doe concerning the signification of the word Faith when it is said to iustifie and in steed of many other Texts I referre him to the places of Scripture following Iam. 1.6 Math. 9. v. 2. 22. cap. 14.31 Rom. 9.33 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Euery one that beleeueth vpon him 1. Pet. 2.6 Now in regard of the matter of our Doctrine the assurance of remission of sinnes which we teach is no other than S. Bernard Iohn Bacon the Carmelite Caietan Catherinus Ferus and many other Pontificians haue formerly taught Caietan sup Rom. 8. We haue from the holy Ghost and our owne a most sufficient testimonie to make vs beleeue that we are the sonnes of God for by this testimonie we cleerely discerne that we ought to beleeue that we are the sonnes of God And S. Bernard If thou beleeuest that he only can blot out thine offences whom thou hast offended it is well but ioine this also to the former that by him thy sinnes are forgiuen thee This is the testimonie which the holy Spirit yeeldeth in our hearts saying Thy sinnes are remitted vnto thee and in this sort doth the holy Apostle thinke that a man is freely iustified by Faith Now from the precedent positions I argue thus First That Doctrine concerning the nature and actions of Faith which is taught in holy Scripture and which hath the consent of many antient Fathers and which was deliuered by many learned Doctors of the Roman Church is not fundamentall Errour But such is the Doctrine of Protestants concerning iustifying Faith c. Secondly No Church erreth fundamentally which teacheth such a kind of iustifying Faith as Abraham Iob S. Paul and other iust persons commended in holy Scriptures had But Abraham Iob S. Paul and other iust persons commended in holy Scriptures had such a iustifying Faith as was both an intellectuall and fiduciall assent to diuine Veritie and Promises Ergo The Church of the Protestants erreth not fundamentally teaching such a iustifying Faith as is both an intellectuall and fiduciall assent to diuine Promises and Verities The assumption is prooued by Rom. 4.18 19 20 21. Iob 19. 25. Rom. 8.38 Gal. 2.20 2. Tim. 4.7 And whereas Pontificians bequarrel vs in this argument two waies First saying That these holy men had a particular promise made vnto them Secondly That they knew by extraordinarie Reuelation that they were indued with Faith Hope and Charitie which wee know only by coniecturall or morall persuasion I answer First we haue particular promises contained in the generall and the generall promises are particularly applied by the word of Absolution and the Sacraments and by the testimonie of the holy Ghost speaking in the conscience of true beleeuers by effects of Grace Secondly they which want miraculous Reuelation may vnderstand by ordinarie Grace that they haue Faith Hope and Charitie because the holy Scripture commandeth all Christian beleeuers to trie and examine themselues concerning these Graces 1. Cor. 11 28. 2. Cor. 13.5 And godly persons which liued in former daies knew they had these vertues Psal. 119. 97. Esa. 38.3 Iob 27.5 6. 29.14 Luc. 9.24 Ioh. 21.15 And the Apostle speaking of other people as well as of himselfe saith We know the things which are freely giuen vs of God 1. Cor. 2. 12. And S. Iohn saith That he which receiueth the hidden Manna knowes it Apoc. 2. 17. The Fathers also and many Doctors of the Roman Church affirme the same S. Augustine I see that I beleeue if I beleeue and in another place These two things are not vncertaine to me the goodnesse of God and mine owne Faith and in another place Let euerie man enter into his owne heart and if he find there brotherly Charitie let him be secure for he is passed from death vnto life and in a fourth place 〈◊〉 man knoweth the Charitie wherewith he loueth his brother better than his brother But to the end the difference betweene our Aduersaries and vs concerning this question may the better appeare I will deliuer our Doctrine in certaine propositions First We maintaine that such persons only can haue true assurance and certaintie of their Iustification which beleeue and repent and are resolued to obey Gods commandements Secondly A Christian of a contrite spirit beleeuing only that his sinnes are remissible and which earnestly desireth remission of sinnes by the merits of Christ and ioineth with this desire the exercise of vertue receiueth forgiuenesse although he be vexed with scruples and temptations and want assurance and persuasion in himselfe that his sinnes are remitted Thirdly The particular certaintie of remission of sinnes which iust persons attaine vnto vpon their Repentance Obedience and Faith is not equall in the firmitie of assent to that assurance which they haue about the common obiect of Faith to wit concerning the articles of Creation Trinitie Incarnation Resurrection or the like because these articles are immediately and totally reuealed in the holy Scripture but that his sinnes in particular are remitted vnto a penitent person dependeth vpon an Argument whereof one

no Lye nor his Power any Inconstancie Because therefore Christ hath a true and perfect Bodie both in regard of substance and matter and also in respect of quantitie stature measure posture proportion c. and because euerie true humane bodie by the Ordinance of the Creator who hath formed and constituted the seuerall kinds and natures of things after a speciall manner is determined to one indiuiduall place at one instant and must also haue distinction and diuision of parts with a length latitude and thicknesse proportionall to the quantitie thereof Therefore except God himselfe had expressely reuealed and testified by his Word that the contrarie should be found in the humane bodie of Christ and that the same should haue one manner of corporall being in Heauen and another in the holy Eucharist at one and the same time a Christian cannot be compelled to beleeue this Doctrine as an Article of his Creed vpon the sole Voyce and Authoritie of the Laterane or Trident Councell Some learned Papists confesse ingeniously That secluding the Authoritie of the Church there is no written Word of God sufficient to enforce a Christian to receiue this Doctrine And moderne Pontificians are not able to confirme their present Tenet to wit That Christs humane bodie may be in many vbities or places at one time and that the whole bodie of Christ is circumscriptiuely in Heauen and according to the manner of a Spirit and of the Diuine nature it selfe without extension of parts in euerie crumme of the Sacramentall formes This Doctrine I say Papals are not able to confirme by the vnanimous Testimonie and Tradition of the antient Church Therefore because the same is grounded neither vpon Scripture nor Tradition they begge the question when they alleadge Gods omnipotent power for it must first of all and that vpon infallible Principles appeare That God will haue it thus before his omnipotencie be pleaded that he is able to make it thus But the Iesuites Sophisme whereby hee would intangle vs within the snares of fundamentall Errour when wee denie Christs bodily presence in many places at once proceedeth in this manner No bodie can be truely receiued in many places at once vnlesse the same be corporally present in many places at once The Bodie of Christ is truely receiued in many places at once to wit in euery place where the holy Eucharist is administred Ergo The Bodie of Christ is present in many places at once I answere The Maior Proposition is denyed for there is a twofold manner of true Presence and consequently of Receiuing one Naturall by the hand and mouth of the bodie Another Mysticall and Spirituall by the deliuerie of the holy Ghost and by the apprehension and action of the soule First The holy Ghost truely and verily reacheth and presenteth the Obiect which is Christs Bodie and Blood crucified and offered in Sacrifice for mans Redemption Secondly The reasonable soule being eleuated by a liuely and operatiue Faith apprehendeth and receiueth the former obiect as really verily and truely after a spirituall and supernaturall manner as the bodie receiueth any corporeall or sensible obiect after a naturall manner Iohn 1. 12. Ephes. 3. 17. Fulgentius saith Filium Dei vnicum per fidem recipiunt They receiue the onely Sonne of God by Faith Our Sauiour saith That holy Beleeuers receiue the Flesh and drinke the Blood of Christ Iohn 6. 50 53 54. Credendo by 〈◊〉 v. 35.47 Paschasius hath these words The flesh and blood of Christ c. are truely 〈◊〉 by Faith and vnderstanding It is not lawfull to eate Christ with teeth This Sacrament is truely his flesh and his blood which man eateth and drinketh spiritually 〈◊〉 saith Hold readie the mouth of thy Faith open the iawes of Hope stretchout the bowels of Loue and take the Bread of life which is the nourishment of the inward man Eusebius Emisenus When thou goest vp to the reuerend Altar to bee filled with spirituall meates by Faith behold honour and wonder at the sacred Bodie and Blood of thy God touch it with thy minde take it with the hand of thy heart and chiefly prouide that the inward man swallow the whole Saint Ambrose Comedat te cor meum panis Sancte panis viue panis munde veni in cor meum intra in animam meam Let mine heart eate thee oh holy Bread oh liuing Bread oh pure Bread come into my heart enter into my soule Saint Augustine There is another Bread which confirmeth the heart because it is the Bread of the heart And in another place Then is the Body and Blood of the Lord life to each man when that which is visibly taken in the Sacrament is in very truth spiritually eaten spiritually drunken Now from the former Testimonies it is manifest that the Bodie and Blood of Christ may truely and really bee eaten and receiued by operatiue Faith in the Sacrament And if it bee further obiected That spirituall eating and drinking of the Bodie and Blood of Christ may bee without the Sacrament I answere That the same is more effectually and perfectly accomplished in the Sacrament than out of the Sacrament because the holy Ghost directly and in speciall when the Sacrament is deliuered exhibiteth the Body and Blood of Christ as a pledge and testimonie of his particular loue towards euery worthie Receiuer and the liuely representation and commemoration of Christs death and Sacrifice by the mysticall signes and actions is an instrument of the Diuine Spirit to apply and communicate Christ crucified and to increase and confirme the Faith Charitie and pietie of Receiuers Lastly It is remarkeable that vntill the thousand yeeres and more after Christs Ascension Orthodoxall Christians beleeued that the Bodie and Blood of Christ were truely and really present and deliuered to worthie Receiuers in and by the holy Eucharist according to St. Pauls Doctrine 1. Cor. 10.16 And that the same must be spiritually receiued by Faith or else they profited nothing But the manner of Presence which some Modernes now obtrude by Consubstantiation or by Transubstantiation was not determined as an Article of Faith And to say nothing of Consubstantiation the defence whereof inuolueth them in many absurdities which vndertake for it it is apparant that Transubstantiation is a bastard plant and vpstart weed neuer planted by the heauenly Father but the same sprang vp in the declining state of the Church and it is perplexed and inuolued with so many absurdities and contradictions to Veritie formerly receiued that our Aduersarie was transported with partiall folly when he presumed to ranke the refusall of this new and prodigious Article among fundamentall Errours IESVIT EIghtly Their denying the Sacrament of Penance and Priestly Absolution the necessarie meanes for remission of finnes committed after Baptisme ANSVVER THe Obiector by Penance vnderstandeth not Repentance as it is a vertue for Protestants beleeue true

ought to know them and thud God himselfe forgiuing sinnes knoweth them Psal. 69.6 But they which forgiue sinnes declaratiuely and by publishing Gods iudiciall Act like as a Cryer pronounceth the sentence of a Iudge and by applying the Word and Sacraments to penitent persons vpon the holy and worthie receiuing whereof the holy Ghost himselfe conferreth the grace of Remission may performe that which belongeth to their office without distinct knowledge of all the particular sinnes whereof the penitent person hath repented himselfe in the sight of God as appeareth in Baptisme and generall Confession ioyned with Contrition And when a Priest applyeth the word of Absolution hee knoweth not whether the person confessing his sinnes performeth the same truely and with contrition of heart or not Iohn Medina Cardinall Caietan and Iansenius acknowledge the weakenesse of this Argument to prooue Auricular Confession And Vasques saith That a man can hardly find among those which maintaine Auricular Confession out of the place of Ioh. 20. 23. which doe effectually conclude the same from thence Ioh. Medina treating of Auricular Confession saith The Romane Catholike Doctors haue laboured till they sweat againe to find proofe for this veritie He might well haue said They laboured to as good purpose as the man who sought to finde Nodum in Scirpo or A Needle in a Bottle of Hay Mich. Palacius saith Diuines are perplexed in finding places of Scripture or other conuincing arguments to prooue Auricular Confession to be of Diuine Institution and it is worthie admiration what contention is about this matter and how badly Authors agree concerning the same Our Aduersaries labour tooth and nayle to prooue from the former Text in S. Iohn That Priests exercise a Iudiciall Power when they absolue sinners But if this were graunted they gaine nothing for this Iudiciall power is exercised according to the word of Christ And if that word absolue contrite and penitent persons vpon internall Confession to God himselfe and vpon their generall Confession before men without secret Confession then it followeth not That because a Priest exerciseth a Iudiciall power when hee absolueth Ergo Penitents must confesse all their knowne sinnes A penitent person may haue mortall sinnes which he remembreth not Psal. 19.13 and when vpon profession of his repentance he is absolued those sinnes are pardoned Psal. 103.3 and the Priest in giuing Absolution exerciseth a Iudiciall Act according to the Popish Tenet and yet those finnes are not disclosed or manifested vnto him Secondly The present Romish Doctrine concerning the absolute necessitie of Auricular Confession is not Catholique The Greeke Church both of antient and later times reiected the same as appeared by Nectarius S. Chrysostome and by the testimonie of learned Papists which affirme the same concerning that Church The Glosse vpon Gratian saith Auricular Confession is not necessarie among the Grecians Greg. Val. Lib. 2. d. Miss cap. 4. saith That Panormitan and Gerson maintained that secret Confession was not necessarie Andreas Vega Very many learned Catholikes haue doubted of this necessitie of Confession by Diuine Law Maldenat sum q. 18. ar 4. There be also among Catholikes which thinke there is no Diuine Precept touching Auricular Confession to wit all the Interpreters of the Decrees and also Scotus B. Rhenanus and Petrus Oxomensis denyed the said Confession to be of Diuine Institution And Gratian himselfe hauing disputed the Question pro con concludeth in this manner I leaue it to the Readers choyse which opinion to follow because each opinion to wit the one holding Confession to be of Diuine Institution and the other Ecclesiasticall hath fautors both wise and religious Now if Auricular Confession is not certainely and infallibly of Diuine Institution then it is impossible for the same conioyned with Absolution to be a Sacrament because Sacraments of the New Testament were immediately instituted by Christ and haue their institution matter forme visible signes and promises expressely and manifestly deliuered and appointed in the Scripture of the New Testament From hence I argue If that which Romists tearme Sacramentall Penance haue no word of Institution no visible and corporeall Element no expresse forme or word of Consecration neither any Sacramentall effect appropriated vnto it by Christ and his Apostles then the same is no Sacrament of the New Testament But all and euerie of these Conditions are wanting in Popish Penance Ergo The same is no Sacrament of the New Testament If Penitencie be not affirmed by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church to be a Sacrament properly taken then that the same is such in our dayes is not Catholique Doctrine But learned Pontificians haue narrowly searched euerie Sentence of Antiquitie concerning Penitencie and cannot yet produce one place where the same is plainely and expressely affirmed to be one of the Sacraments of the New Testament properly taken to wit such as is Baptisme and the holy Eucharist Therefore the present Doctrine of Romists concerning Penitencie That the same is a Sacrament is neither grounded vpon the Scripture nor the perpetuall Tradition of the Church And our Romish Aduersarie is the eight time guided by a lying Spirit when he accuseth vs of fundamentall Error because wee denie Popish Penance to be a Sacrament IESVIT NInthly Their denying the Catholique Church expressely set downe in the Creed which of all the other Articles is with greatest danger denyed For the standing out against this makes men Heretikes and without erring against this no man is guiltie of Heresie whatsoeuer Doctor Field to the contrarie saith That an errant against a fundamentall point is an Heretike though hee erre without pertinacie whereof he brings not any syllable of proofe And yet his Doctrine is against the whole consent of Diuines and expressely against S. Augustine who saith That a man holding with Photinus whose errors were most fundamentall against the Trinitie and the Godhead of Christ thinking hee holds Catholique Doctrine is not yet an Heretike till warned that hee holds against the Catholique Church hee chuseth to perseuere in his error ANSWER WEe beleeue stedfastly the Article of the Apostles Creed concerning the Catholique Church and denie onely the false sense which Romists impose and the absurd inferences which they draw from this Article And whereas the Iesuit affirmeth That this Article is with greatest danger denyed because the standing out against it makes men Heretikes c. Both the Proposition it selfe thus rawly and confusedly deliuered and the Confirmation are false The Article of the Catholique Church is not the most fundamentall and prime Article of the Creed for many other Articles are about a more principall and excellent Obiect to wit immediately concerning God the Creator and Christ Iesus the Sauiour and Redeemer and God the Holy Ghost c. whereas the Obiect of the Article in question is concerning the Creature The

commanded to inuocate God in the name of Christ Iohn 16.24 and our Sauiour himselfe inuiteth vs to approach with confidence to the throne of his grace Ioh. 14.13 cap. 15.16 cap. 16.23.24.26 Eph. 3.12 Heb. 4.16 He is rich in mercie to such as call vpon him Eph. 2.4 and more compassionate better able and more willing to helpe vs than any Saint or Angell and he is appointed by God to be our intercessor Rom. 8.34 Heb. 7.25 We read in the new Testament many examples of people which made supplication immediately vnto Christ but not of one which made intercession to the Virgin Marie or to the blessed Saints or Angels And the Fathers teach that we shall assuredly be heard although no other pray for vs but our selues if we be deuout faithfull feruent and perseurant and conioine good Workes with our Prayers Secondly But the Iesuit addeth That by refusing to make intercession to Saints we neglect a necessarie meanes which God hath appointed in his Church for the applying of his graces and fauour and that inuocation of Saints deceased is such a meanes he indeauoreth to prooue by vnwritten Tradition I answer Inuocation of Saints is not grounded vpon Apostolicall Tradition For the Iesuit cannot prooue by the vnanimous consent of the Fathers abutting vpon the Apostles age or by any other sufficient testimonie that the Apostles preached or practised this Doctrine And if he were able to produce many Fathers maintaining inuocation of Saints yet he must remember what one of the best learned of his owne part teacheth vs The consent of Fathers in any point which they hold to be a veritie prooueth not the same to be an Apostolicall Tradition vnlesse they consent in such sort that they affirme the same to be a Tradition But our Aduersaries are vnable to produce the antient Fathers maintaining by vnanimous consent this Doctrine as matter of Catholicke Faith or of necessarie practise and they are farre more vnable to make ostension that Ignatius Iustin Martyr Ireneus Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus S. Cyprian or any other of the first three hundred yeares did euer affirme That inuocation of Saints is an Apostolicall Tradition Tradition beginning in the holy Apostles must descend by a perpetuall current of all ages Inuocation of Saints began not in the holy Apostles neither is the same deriued to our daies by a perpetuall current and vnanimous consent Ergo The same is not grounded vpon Apostolicall Tradition IESVIT Jf reuealed Doctrine comming by succession of Bishops from the Apostles to vs will not alone winne beleefe euen the Scriptures afford vs sufficient testimonie hereof When Abimelech king of Gezara had offended God by taking away from Abraham his wife Sara and penitent of the fact though committed but in ignorance sought for pardon did not God himselfe send him vnto Abraham saying Restore his wife vnto the man for he is a Prophet and he will pray for thee and thou shalt liue By which example we see that Gods infinit mercie who saith Come to me all will not many times bestow fauours and graces without intercession of his Saints that men may know he loues and respects his friends When he was offended against Eliphaz and his companions did hee not send them vnto his fingularly beloued seruant Iob that he might be a Mediator for them Ite ad seruum meum Iob offerte holocaustū pro vobis Iob autem seruus meus orabit pro vobis faciem eius suscipiam vt non vobis imputetur stultitia Out of which place two things are cleerely gathered First that though Gods mercy be infinite yet many times he will not grant our prayers but in such manner as he will make vs beholding to his Saints Secondly that we ought to prostrate our prayers vnto him as with great confidence in his goodnesse so likewise with a most feeling humble distrust of our owne worthinesse which affection cannot but mooue vs to seeke the intercession of them we know to be most highly gratious in his fauour so that vpon pretence of Gods great mercie to reiect the mediation of Saints is zeale without science deuotion not throughly instructed about the lawes and orders that God hath prescribed vnto his measurelesse mercie by his imcomprehenfible wisdome Andif we greeue to humble our selues vnto Saints and repine at Gods prouidence that he will not many times grant our supplications without honouring his Saints and making vs bound vnto them we may iustly expect to heare what hee said to one in like case Friend I do thee not wrong May I not dispence my mercies as I please if I will bestow them in such sort as to ioine together with thy good the honour of my friends Is thine eye euill because I am good and courteous to them that haue loued mee more than their owne life ANSWER First If you had reueiled Doctrine comming from the Apostles by succession the same would merit beleefe but your present Doctrine of inuocation of Saints c. is not reueiled by the holy Ghost neither can the same be reduced to the Apostles Secondly Examples of Scripture Gen. 20.17 Iob. 42.8 prooue indeed that when God himselfe by a precept appoints a meanes whereby sinners must seeke his fauour the same meanes is necessarie or else the end cannot be obtained But where hath God appointed inuocation of Saints deceased to be such a meanes Thirdly Abimelech and Iobs friends did not inuocate Abraham or Iob but at the most which notwithstanding is not expressed in the Text Gen. 20.7.17 Iob 42.8.9 requested their prayers and sacrifice to God for them whiles these Prophets were conuersant in the world and were Gods Ministers and Priests appointed by him to make intercession for themselues and others Heb. 6.1 It may be also that herein they were figures of Christ Whiles Priests and Prophets were liuing and conuersant with men on earth God commanded his people to aske counsell of them and to seeke wisdome at their mouth Malach. 2.8 and to intreat their prayers But when Moses and Aron were deceased did he then appoint his people to do the like or did any man set vp Altars or Temples in honour of them and repaire vnto the same intreating to be taught by them or to be holpen by their merits or prayers The Argument therefore which the Aduersarie maketh from the liuing to the dead is of no greater force than these which follow Children may lawfully and with successe craue food and raiment of their parents whiles they be liuing Ergo Children may doe the like when their parents are defunct A parishioner may request his Pastor whiles he is liuing to instruct him or to absolue him Ergo he may pray to him to instruct and absolue him when he is dead When a mans office ceaseth the actions of his office surcease but when men depart this life their office which they exercised in the world ceaseth their actions

succeeded them for certaine ages continued in their Doctrine and exercised the deuotion of Prayer according to the forme appointed by them And concerning latter times our exception is the same with our Sauiours in another case Math. 19.8 From the beginning it was not so and we say with Saint Cyprian to all latter examples If veritie be changed or leane a toside wee must looke backe and returne to Diuine Euangelicall and Apostolike Tradition and deriue the order of our Action from the originall ground where it first began And Tertullian saith If a custome proceeding from ignorance or simplicitie be confirmed by vse of succession and opposed against veritie we must obserue that neither space of time nor priuiledge of persons may prescribe against truth for Christ is eternall and before all and in like sort veritie is most antient IESVIT I answer That the Primmar or Office so tearmed of our Ladie is not an Office properly and principally directed vnto her but an Office containing praises of God taken out of holy Scripture wherein commemoration of her is made so as I dare say That the Prayers of the Office of our Ladie that are directed towards her make not the hundred part thereof And seeing it is most certaine that the Christian Church in her best times did frequently pray vnto Saints what reason haue wee to thinke that in her set forme of Prayers she did not vse to craue the intercessions of Saints If it be lawfull pious and profitable when we pray vnto God to pray also to Saints by their Mediation offering our Prayer to him why should any dislike the doing of this in a set forme that is allowed by the Church why should this displease rather than an extemporall forme But further wee can prooue That the Church in her best times did pray vnto Saints in set formes as Catholickes now doe euen with a kinde of Lettanies a forme of Prayer acknowledged and confessed by the Magdeburgians to haue beene in vse euen in the fourth age after Christ. Jn which age the foure first generall Councells were held ANSWER You denie that the Primar or Office of our Ladie is an office properly and principally directed to her c. But the reason whereupon you ground this denyall is slight for although there is a mixture of Prayers and Praises to God contained in this Office yet the Virgin Marie is as directly and properly inuocated therein as God himselfe or Iesus Christ besides you haue many Psalters and Primers of our Ladie and in some of them the Virgin Marie is the most speciall Obiect and matter of the seruice The Romane Breuiarie saith In this day of solemnitie and gladnesse wee call vpon the sweet name of Marie And to the Apostles O yee to whose command the health and infirmitie of all is subiect heale all those that bee sicke in manners restoring vs to vertues To Thomas Didimus O Thomas Didimus by Christ whom thou deseruedst to touch we beseech thee with our loud sounding Prayers to succour vs wretches that wee be not damned with the wicked in the comming of the Great Iudge To the blessed Virgin Wash away our offences that we being redeemed by thee may be able to obtaine the seate of euerlasting glorie Also All haile holy Virgin the medecine of all our sorrowes by whom death was expelled and life brought in The Romane Breuiarie teacheth vs to pray That the merits of the Saints Abdon and Senon interceding we may deserue to be deliuered from all our necessities And for Leo his merits interceding absolue vs from all sinnes Also By the sword of sorrow which went thorow the Virgins heart and the compassion of teares which she shed vnder the Crosse haue mercie on vs. Also Let the Host to be consecrate bee pleasing vnto thee by the celebritie of the Martirs Primus and Faelicianus that by their glorious merits and Prayers it may purge our sinnes and reconcile to thee the Prayers of thy seruants The like superlatiue boldnesse was in the enditing and publishing Bonauentures Psalter wherein God and Christ are sacrilegiously robbed yea blasphemously dishonoured to embelish the Virgin Marie yet all this the Church of Rome digesteth permitteth authoriseth c. In that Psalter these and the like formes of Prayer are extant Oh blessed Lady my Sauiour I will put my confidence in thee and I shall not need to feare Oh blessed Ladie our Saluation is placed in thy hands who thou pleasest shall be saued and they shall perish eternally from whom thou turnest away thy face Blessed art thou my Lady the mother of the God of Israell who by thee hath visited and sent redemption vnto his people and hath raised vp the horne of Saluation euen thy chastitie in the house of Dauid thy seruant c. Thou ô Marie shalt be called the Prophet of God by thee hath he giuen the knowledge of Saluation for the remission of sinnes by the bowels of the multitude of thy mercies Visit vs ô thou day starre arising from an high Thou art the gate of Paradise the ladder of Heauen the Arke of Pietie and Grace the spring of Mercie the Mediatrix of God and men And in the same Psalter these words are found Whosouer will be saued aboue all things he must haue stedfast Faith of the Virgin Marie and the right Faith is among other Articles God assumed her bodily into Heauen where she sits on the right hand of Christ c. Secondly the Iesuit prooueth that set formes of prayers to Saints are lawfull by this Argument If it be lawfull to make intercessions to Saints then it is lawfull to performe this in a set forme But the first is true for the Primitiue Church did this and the Magdeburgians confesse That a kind of Letanie to Saints was vsed in Primitiue times Ergo c. I answer That if by Primitiue Church be vnderstood the Church Primitiue comprehending the Apostles and their immediate successours then the proofe of the assumption is false for that Primitiue Church vsed no such deuotion And if by Primitiue Church be vnderstood extensiue exclusiue the Church after the three hundred yeares inuocation of Saints was not vsed by the whole Church for three hundred yeares more neither can the practise of any Church excluding the Apostles produce doctrine of Faith or of necessarie duetie The Magdeburgians rehearse out of a counterfeit worke fathered vpon Athanasius a set prayer vsed to the Virgin Marie but they adde apparet multa esse deprauata supposita in istorum doctorum scriptis It is apparant that many things depraued and supposititious are found among the writings of these Doctors IESVIT But they will perchance say that they do not so much dislike set formes of prayer vnto Saints as some phrases and speeches in our praying bookes that seeme to giue too much vnto creatures as our calling the blessed Virgin Mother of

manners and tongues Thirdly it is repugnant to the nature and end of vocall Prayer that the same should be exercised in a forme of words which people that pray together vnderstand not for prayer is an ascending of the mind to God and according to Aquinas and other Schole-men it is an action of the vnderstanding facultie and in the same people confesse their sinnes and request of God such things as they haue need of They giue thankes for benefits spirituall and temporall general and speciall conferred vpon them and the effect of prayer dependeth vpon their inward humiliation and sence of their wants 2. Chro. 34.27 Psal. 51.19 and vpon their speciall faith in the diuine promises Math. 9.28 Marc. 9.23 and Marc. 11.29 And Tertullian saith God is not so much an hearer of the voice as of the heart But these things cannot be performed where people vnderstand not what they confesse request or praise God for And words are appointed to instruct excite and edifie men and if they vnderstand them not to what vse serueth vocall prayer for we vse not words to teach God but to instruct and excite our selues And hereby the Popish euasion is answered wherein they affirme that euen as When a Supplication is preferred to a King or Iudge which the Suppliant vnderstandeth not it is all one in what language soeuer the same be preferred the Iudge vnderstand it So likewise because God vnderstandeth all languages it mattereth not though people pray to him in a strange tongue for our words in vocal prayer concern our selues mutually principally but God himselfe requireth the vnderstanding and affection of our heart Read S. Augustines words cited in the margent Also the Iewes vnder the Law and the Prophets prayed in a language which they vnderstood our Sauiour and his Apostles and the Primitiue Church did the like and the gift of languages was bestowed vpon Pastors and people in common Act. 2.3 Also the former Doctrine is so apparant that some of the best learned Romists teach that publicke seruice in a knowne language is most fruitfull and conuenient Caietan saith It appeareth by S. Pauls Doctrine that it is better for the edification of the Church that common Prayers which are made in the hearing of the people be said in a vulgar tongue vnderstood indifferently by Priest and people than in Latine Lira saith If the people vnderstand the prayer of the Priest they are better brought to God and they answere Amen with greater deuotion And the reason hereof is manifest for deuotion compunction desire and affection depend vpon vnderstanding and follow the same and the more distinct and particular the vnderstanding of the obiect of these is the more feruent and perfect the actions are IESVIT For we may imagine a triple state of Liturgie in an vnknowne tongue The first in a language altogether vnknowne in which no man in the Church speakes no man vnderstands besides the celebrant himselfe nor he neither but by Enthusiasme or inspiration of the holy Ghost Without question it is inconuenient that publique prayer should be said in a language in this sort vnknowne and this is prooued by the reasons the Apostle brings against an vnknowne tongue in the Church ANSWER This first imagination is a Chimera or 〈◊〉 for there was neuer in the world any such kind of common or ordinarie Seruice or Liturgie And S. Paul 1. Cor. 14. condemneth in generall the vse of vnknowne tongues in the congregation vnlesse they be interpreted and referred to mentall edification As for the vnlearned Ideot which is ready to ioine with the Priest in prayer what is it to him whether the Priest speake by Enthusiasme or by discipline an vnknown language his ignorance and impossibilitie of speciall concurrence in prayer is the same as well in the one as in the other IESVIT Secondly in a language vnknowne to most euen of the better sort of the Church yet some know it and other may with facilitie learne it To vse a language in the Church for publique prayer in this sort vnknowne cannot be prooued vnlawfull nor forbidden by the Apostle seeing the reasons brought by him against a language vnknowne make not against this For S. Paul reprehends in the publique Liturgie a language vnknowne as the Minister of the Church that supplies the place of the Ideot and ignorant cannot vpon his knowledge of the goodnesse of the prayer say thereunto Amen in the name of them all But when the language is knowne to some of the Church and may with facilitie be learned of others there is or may easily be found one able to supplie the place of Jdeot and ignorant and answere in their person Amen out of his intelligence of the prayer in that vnknowne tongue ANSVVER That is forbidden by the Apostle to bee vsed in prayer and consequently it is vnlawfull whereby all states and sorts of people being of ripe yeres may not be edified in their vnderstanding and to which being read pronounced or heard they are not able to say Amen hauing some distinct vnderstanding of the things which are spoken 1. Cor. 14.16 17. 19 20. but all states and sorts of people being of riper yeares cannot be edified in their vnderstanding neither are they able to say Amen c. to prayers which are heard by them being read or pronounced in a strange language Ergo Common prayer read and pronounced in the Church in a strange tongue is prohibited by the Apostle and consequently such forme of ordinarie prayer is vnlawfull The Iesuit restraineth the words of S. Paul either to the Minister supplying the place of the Idiot or to the Clerke of the congregation But the Apostle requireth that all those which ioyne in prayer and among these the Idiots and vulgar sort be edified in their minds and they must pray and giue thanks vnderstanding the sence of words spoken and vpon this vnderstanding say Amen And except saith he ye vtter by the tongue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 significant words or words carrying a perspicuous sence with them ye shall speake in the ayre and be as Barbarians to the hearers v. 9.11 and the Idiot mentioned by him v. 16. is not the Priest or the Clarke alone but the vulgar sort of people ignorant of the language and words which are vsed in preaching reading or praying as all the Fathers and sundry Pontificians deliuer which comment vpon this text As for the Latine the same is as vncouth to a great part of the congregation as to the Chineses they can onely gape at it and returne home from Masse and Mattens as wise as they went for ought they learne by the language The old rule was Barbarus hic ego sum quia non intelligor vlli and accordingly your Masse Priests are meere barbarians to the ordinarie sort of people IESVIT Notwithstanding the Roman Church doth not

of Bread which was once substantially Bread cannot become substantially the bodie of Christ except it bee substantially conuerted into his bodie or personally assumed by the same bodie And seeing this second manner of vnion betweene Bread and Christs Bodie is impossible and reiected by Protestants as well as by Catholickes Wee may conclude that the mysterie of Christs reall presence cannot be beleeued in truth by them that deny Transubstantiation specially seeing our Sauiour did not say here is my Bodie which speech may be verefyed by the presence of his Bodie locally within the Bread but This is my Bodie which imports that not onely his Bodie is truely and substantially present but also that it is the substance contained immediately vnder the accidents of Bread ANSWER First if a substance be either by nature humane Custome or diuine Ordination appointed to containe another substance then demonstrating the externall substance which containes we may signifie the hidden substance contained But according to that Tenet which maintaineth Consubstantiation the substance of bread is by diuine Ordination appointed to containe the substance of Christs bodie therefore demonstrating by words the substance of bread one may signifie the hidden substance which is Christs bodie Secondly Scotus Durand and Paludanus affirme that although the substance of Bread remaine yet because the substance of Christs bodie is also present it might truely and properly be said by our Sauiour This is my Bodie Now if such profound Scholemen haue weighed the Iesuits obiection do find the same light the propugnors of Consubstantiation haue smal reason to regard it Thirdly the former obiection is nothing to vs which maintaine a true mysticall presence of Christ in the holy Eucharist and refuse both Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation for we beleeue and are able to demonstrate that our Sauiours words are figuratiue in part and yet the true Bodie and Bloud of Christ are really and verely communicated according to the manner formerly declared pag. 405. IESVIT Jf any man say that by this Argument it appeares that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is not expressed in Scripture but from the words of the Jnstitution subtilly deduced and so may perchance bee numbred inter scita Scholae not inter dogmata Fidei I answer That the consequence of this Argument is not good as is euident in the example of the Incarnation The Doctrine that the vnion of natures in Christ is proper not Metaphoricall substantiall not accidentall personall not essentiall is no where expressely set downe by Scripture but by subtile deduction inferred from the mysterie which Scripture and Tradition deliuers Notwithstanding because these subtile deductions are proposed by the Church as pertinent vnto the substance of the foresaid mysterie they cannot be denied without preiudice of Faith In this sort the Doctrine of Transubstantiation though not in tearmes deliuered by the Scripture but deduced by subtile and speculatiue inference may not be denied by them that will be perfect beleeuers because the Church hath declared the same to pertaine to the proper sence of Christ his words and substance of the mysterie ANSVVER I know at whom you glance when you say inter scita Scholae but your solution from the Doctrine of Incarnation is not leuell to the scope for illations are of two sorts some are immediate formall necessarie euident and illustrious to wit Christ Iesus is a true and perfect man therefore he hath an humane will some are obscure contingent remote and sophisticall to wit Christ said This is my bodie Ergo the consecrate host is Christs substantiall bodie by Transubstantiation Christ said Do this in remembrance of me Ergo he made his Disciples sacrificing Priests That which is deriued from Scripture the first way is Doctrine of Faith that which is inferred the other way may be loose vncertaine infirme and many times ridiculous and apparantly false Now let me intreate you vntill you prooue your deduction necessarie to ranke your Popish Masse and Transubstantiation among this latter kind of deriuatiue Articles Neither can the swelling vsurpation of Romish Prelates which you stile the Church make euery subtile speculation of Schoolemen and nice figment of humane wisedome an Article of Christian Faith any more than a bragging 〈◊〉 can by outfacing conuert copper into gold for Articles of Faith come downe from heauen by the holy Ghost and are such onely from their forme and originall causes As for your Romane Synode of Pope Nicholas and your Laterane vnder Innocent the third These were your owne Idols the definitions that passed in them were the breath of the Popes nostrils and therefore why are you so fantasticall as to enammell them with the title and authoritie of the Catholicke Church And in one of these conuenticles your Pope hath so rudely and grossely determined the Question of Reall presence that Romists themselues are now ashamed and forced to Glosses and strained Expositions to metamorphise and new mould those vndigested crudities IESVIT §. 3. Transubstantiation was taught by the Fathers IT is certaine the Fathers acknowledge a Transmutation of bread into the Bodie of Christ and that they meant Transubstantiation that is not onely a mysticall and significatiue but also a reall and substantiall change appeares by these fiue Circumstances of their Doctrine in this point ANSWER THat we may rightly vnderstand the testimonies of Fathers alleadged in this question wee are in the first place to examine what transubstantiation is according to Papalls The Trident Councell saith It is a conuersion of the whole substance of Bread and Wine into the substance of Christs body and bloud wrought by the words of consecration First by the whole substance they vnderstand the whole substantiall matter and forme Secondly they affirme that the whole substance of Bread and Wine is destroyed or ceaseth to be Thirdly the substance of Christs body and bloud are placed vnder the accidentall shapes of Bread and Wine Fourthly by the force of the words of consecration the substance of Bread and Wine ceasing the body and blood of Christ acquire a new manner of being vnder the externall formes differing from his being in heauen Fiftly the shapes and accidents of Bread and Wine subsist without any materiall subiect of inherencie and affect the senses and nourish in like manner as formerly they did This doctrine of Popish Transubstantiation is new according to the iudgement of many learned Schoolemen and the Primitiue Fathers neuer taught the same for many of them maintaine expresly That the substance of Bread and Wine remaine and none of them affirme either that the substance of Christs body and bloud are placed vnder the naked formes and shapes of Bread and Wine or that the Accidents haue no materiall subiect of inherencie or that the body and bloud of Christ acquire a new being in the Sacrament differing from that which they had

spirituall manducation alone without Sacramentall If the former illation of Romists were good it will follow likewise from thence that receiuing of Bread in the Eucharist is not of the substance of Christs Institution for whole and intire Christ according to bodie and soule and infinite person is in the blood alone if the Popish Doctrine of Concomitancie be true and if this be granted as of necessitie it must then Romists may mangle and transforme the holy Sacrament at their pleasure Secondly The end and fruit of the Sacrament is either common to the holy Eucharist with other meanes of Grace or else proper to it onely To eate the flesh and drinke the blood of the Sonne of God by recognition of Christs Passion and by Faith in the same may be an effect of the Gospell preached Ioh. 6. 54. But to eate the same flesh and blood communicated more distinctly and effectually by visible seales of the couenant of the new Testament is an end and fruit peculiar and proper to the holy Eucharist 1. Cor. 10. 16. A man may haue the same inheritance bestowed on him by the word and writing of the Donor yet when the same is confirmed by the seale of the Donor the donation is of greater validitie and if by Law or custome two seales should be appointed the apposition of one is not of equall force and validitie to the apposition of both so likewise because the Sonne of God made choyce of two outward signes namely Bread and Wine to represent and apply his Passion and Oblation and withall commanded the common vse and reception of both saying Drinke ye all of this and also annexed a speciall promise and blessing to both these outward signes ioyntly vsed therefore the vse sumption of one of these without the other cannot haue so great force to apply the effect fruit of the Sacrament as the vse reception of both And as in concauses or partiall causes the action of the one cannot produce the effect without the other and as when two keyes are prouided to open a locke the same is not opened by one of them onely so likewise Christ Iesus hauing instituted and sanctified two signes for the more proportionable and effectuall application of his Bodie and Blood it is grosse presumption in man to mutilate and cut off a part of that bodie which the wisedome of Christ hath framed in due and beautifull proportion and to diuide that which God hath ioyned together and without warrant from Gods reuealed word to attribute a totall effect to a partiall meanes and cause IESVIT Hence it is apparent that without any iust cause some Protestants inueigh against the Councell of Constance as professing to contradict the Precept of Christ because it decreed That the Sacrament may bee lawfully giuen vnder one kind Non obstante quod Christus in vtraque specie illud instituerit Apostolis administrauerit Notwithstanding Christs Institution and Administration thereof in both kinds to his Disciples This their bitternesse proceeds from zeale without knowledge not distinguishing the Jnstitution of God from his Precept which are very distinct for the Precept of both kinds if Christ gaue any doth bind whether both kinds be necessarie for the maintenance of mans soule in grace or no but the Jnstitution in both kinds doth not binde further than the thing instituted to wit Communion vnder both kinds is necessarie for the maintaining of spirituall life for which one kind being sufficient as I haue shewed Christs Institution of both kinds doth not inforce the vse of both If God should haue commanded the vse both of meate and drinke euery man should be bound not onely to eate but also to drinke though he had no necessitie thereof but now seeing God hath not giuen such a Precept a man that can liue by meate without euer drinking is not bound to drinke non obstante that God did institute both eating and drinking for the preseruation of life in euerie man ANSWER The Councell of Constance is iustly censured for presuming to alter and disanull the ordinance of Christ for if it be flagitious amongst men to alter and contradict the lawfull Will of a Testator Galat. 3.15 shall it not be much more vnlawfall to alter the Testament of the Sonne of God who disposed to the common people his Bloud as well as his Bodie saying Drinke ye all of this Math. 26 27. and except yee eate the flesh and drinke the bloud of the man c. Ioh. 6.53 And the words of the said Synod are most presumptious for this they pronounce Although Christ after supper instituted and administred to his Disciples vnder both kindes c. And although in the Primitiue Chruch this Sacrament was receiued of Beleeuers in both kinds yet notwithstanding the contrarie custome for Laicks to receiue in one kind is with good reason brought in and they are Heretickes which hold this sacrilegious or vnlawfull But what are these men in comparison of Christ and his Apostles and of the Fathers of the Primitiue Church If men may thus twit Christ and his Apostles what shall become of all religion The sole and totall rule to guide the Church in the matter of the holy Eucharist is Christs Institution and practise recorded by the Euangelists and testified by the Apostles and the Primitiue Church in their doctrine and practise followed this rule as some of our learned Aduersaries ingeniously confesse If therefore Christ Iesus and his Apostles and after these the Primitiue Church administred the Communion to lay people in both kinds as this Synod confesseth and on the contraie nothing is extant in holy Writ or in the monuments of the Fathers to testifie that Christ and his Apostles retracted or altered this first practise What audacious sacriledge was it in the Prelates of Constance vpon their owne priuate and childish reasons to cancell Christs last Will and Testament and to violate the sacred precept and ordinance of the Sonne of God But our Aduersarie laboureth by a distinction of Institution and Precept to plaister the vlcerous Doctrine of the 〈◊〉 of Constance saying or implying That although Christ did institute the holy Eucharist in two kinds yet he gaue no precept for the vse of it in two kinds But this plaister of sig-leaues healeth not the wound for there is both an institution and a precept for both kinds and more expressely for the cup than for the bread for Christ said expressely and literally Drinke yee all of this whereas he said not so literally and expressely eat yee all of this Besides his institution is a vertuall and interpretatiue precept as appeareth by S. Paul 1. Cor. 11.23 And Christ did institute the Eucharist in two kinds that people might receiue and vfe it in two kinds Also if the manner of the institution prooueth not the manner of the vse then the Eucharist may be vsed in another manner I meane in things substantiall than

God for then hee must free iust persons from all sinne but in respect of some particular Actions to wit whereas the Law of Charitie commandeth to distribute a portion of goods to the poore a man may bestow halfe his goods neuerthelesse he which performeth this may be deficient another way for he may fall short in the intension of his Charitie and also in the measure of his Hope Humilitie and other vertues The Iesuit concludeth the place of Saint Ambrose Lib. de viduis with an Exclamation saying What can bee more clearely spoken for Workes of Counsell and Supererogation But before his boasting he should haue aduised better touching these Fathers meaning First Ambrose teacheth that there is a difference betweene Precepts and Counsells Secondly That the obseruing of Counsells is not required of all but of some Thirdly They which besides Precepts obserue Counsells are more profitable seruants and shall receiue a greater reward Now the Argument for Workes of Supererogation from this Testimonie of St. Ambrose must be as followeth If they are more profitable seruants and receiue a greater reward which performe some vertuous and laudable Actions not inioyned by common Precept but by Councell then Workes of Supererogation must be granted But they are more profitable seruants and receiue a greater reward which performe some vertuous Actions not inioyned by common Precept but by Councell Ergo Workes of Supererogation must be granted I answere denying the Consequence for to the being and definition of Workes of Supererogation more is required than the performing of some vertuous and rewardable Actions inioyned by Councell and not by common Precept to wit First That the said vertuous and laudable Actions bee neither inioyned by strict and morall Precept nor yet by the Law of gratitude for when the Fathers oppose Precepts and Councels they vnderstand Precepts strictly and not the Law of Gratitude Secondly They which supererogate must doe the same vniuersally and transcend the common rule in euery Precept and vertuous Action and not in some alone Thirdly They must so transcend that they be guiltie of no Omission or Commission either against the substance or perfection of any morall Commandement IESVIT Neither is there any arrogancie as J said before in this Doctrine for neither the Fathers nor wee attribute more vnto man than Protestants doe but onely acknowledge one kinde of Diuine liberalitie towards man which Protestants bee somewhat backward to beleeue for Protestants will not denie supposing that God exacteth much lesse than man is able by his grace to performe but a man may offer vnto God some voluntarie seruices beyond commanded duties Catholickes also grant that had God vsed the vttermost seueritie in charging vs with debts as hee might hane done we could neuer by any measure of grace that now is ordinarily affoorded vnto men haue complied with vnrequired offices The difference therefore betweene them and vs is this They thinke that God seuerely exacteth of man that euer and in all 〈◊〉 hee worke according to the vttermost of his power yea commands him things impossible for him to performe Contrarywise wee 〈◊〉 that God to the end his Law may bee vnto men A sweet yoke A light loade and his Commandements not difficile doth not exact of man all that man is able to doe with his grace but much lesse and so much lesse as man is able through his remission to offer him liberalities What pride is it for man to acknowledge this sweet prouidence of this Creatour to praise his mercifull indulgence in not exacting so much as he might Especially beleeuing that this diuine indulgence not to exact of man and consequently mans abilitie to present vnto God more perfect and excellent seruice than he requires is giuen him through the merits of Christ Iesus ANSWER First You couple your selues with Fathers like as the Pharises did themselues with Abraham Sed quid Simiae prodest si videatur esse Leo saith Gregorie Nazianzen An Ape is but an Ape although he will seeme a Lyon Secondly A man may offer vnto God a free-will offering and yet herein he performeth no more than he is obliged vnto by the Law of gratitude Thirdly It is no part of our Creed that God in the Euangelicall Couenant seuerely exacteth of man any thing as necessarie to his saluation which is impossible for him to performe by the assistance of diuine grace and yet wee say againe That God by the rule of his Law commandeth a greater perfection of righteousnesse than man is able to performe in this life that all flesh may be humbled by the sight of infirmitie and consider the gracious indulgence of God in remitting sinne and his free bountie in conferring so great and so many vndeserued benefits Fourthly We praise God as much as any Romists can doe for his mercifull indulgence in remitting and not exacting so but with all we beleeue that God hath not 〈◊〉 his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vs from being stil his debtors and we stand perpetually obliged vnto him touching the debt of Obedience yea more after Grace receined than before Rom. 6. 18. And although he imputeth not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 defects when we obey him in the maine yet this indulgence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 power to man to merit his owne saluation much lesse to supererogate or to communicate his vertuous actions by way of satisfaction vnto others IESVIT §. 4. Workes with reference to the Treasure of the Church THe other part of this Controuersie proposed by your Maiestie about Workes referred vnto the Treasure of the Church concernes good Workes not as they are meritorious of reward but as they are satisfactorie for sinne for the workes of Saints as they are Merits be laied vp not in the Treasurie of the Church to bee applied vnto others but in the memorie of God to receiue their deserued guerdon in due time ANSWER TO the constitution of Popes Pardons three things are required by the Papals and reiected by vs. First Superfluous and redundant satisfactions of Saints Secondly A vast Treasurie in the Church militant to receiue and containe the same Thirdly An eminent authoritie and power in the Popes and Prelates of the Roman Church to communicate and applie the same to the liuing and defunct Protestants denie that any member of this Doctrine is Catholicke and Orthodoxall or that the holy Apostles or Primitiue Church maintained the same by teaching or practise We affirme also That the said Doctrine is nouell and deuised by Roman Prelates for filthie lucre The Aduersarie notwithstanding laboureth to vnderprop the tottering wall of Papall 〈◊〉 and Indulgences First by distinction of Merits and Satisfactions Secondly by explication of his Romish Tenet touching Satisfactions Thirdly by deliuering the maine grounds of the Doctrine of Satisfactions and Pardons His first Proposition is The merits of Saints are reserued and laid vp in the memorie of God and not in the Treasurie of the Church And on the

by a voluntatrie and prouisionall Mandate touching Recicide vnlesse you were otherwise proni ad rem bent to mischiefe Et luxato hoc freno and this Paper bridle being broken to broach and inculcate it If this your Masters hand shall cast Crosse in stead of Pile what shall we expect from such Gamesters Quibus ludus sunt capita diademata Regum IESVIT This onely I hope J may with your Maiesties good liking affirme That our Catholicke Doctrine in this Point is nothing so preiuditiall to Princes as are the Opinions of most Caluinists and Lutherans expressed in their Writings whereof we haue in this age but ouer-euident and lamentable examples to the world and your Maiestie not vnknowne And had the Authours of the Gunpowder Treason which from my soule I abhorre kept themselues within the bounds of Catholicke Doctrine they had neuer vndergone that most odious and abominable enterprise ANSWER By a draught of Sea water one may iudge of the brackishnesse of the whole His gratious Maiestie hath tasted alreadie of some fruits of Popish loyaltie and the Gunpowder Treason animalised by Iesuits but now disauowed for it succeeded not is a Watchword for prudent men not to confide in them whom the leuen of Superstition hath sowred But is the wit of a Iesuit growne so barren Haue you no other euasion but by recrimination and that impertinent For as concerning your Flim-flam of Caluinists and Lutherans I answere His Maiestie and the State of England hath felt no such disturbance but haue obserued by long experience that it cannot enter into any true Protestants heart vpon any occasion whatsoeuer to lift vp their heads against the Lords Annointed and if any vnsound or equiuocall member appeare among them diuerse from the true bodie let them receiue censure according to their demerits IESVIT As for the other Question which your Maiestie proposeth particularly to my selfe viz. What I thinke Subiects ought to doe in the case of Papall deposition of their Prince I can giue no better Councell vnto others than what J am resolued to take my selfe First to pray for peace and tranquilitie and true concord betweene both parties Secondly to exhort all to doe all other good offices tending thereunto and rather to suffer with patience than any way concurre to the preiudice of the Prince or disturbance of the Commonwealth Thirdly J doe protest before Almightie God that I would rather offer my selfe to die than any way to bee accessarie to your Maiesties death All which things most sincerely vttered by mee I humbly beg your Maiestie would vouchsafe to receiue as issuing from the conceits and hearts of all my Profession whose institutes particularly commandeth respect and obedience to all in authoritie as in the beginning of this Discourse I made plaine vnto your Maiestie vnto whom wee especially who are your borne subiects doe beare so vnfained affection that we should thinke our selues happie if your Maiestie would vouchsafe but to make tryall thereof not doubting but your Excellent Iudgement would soone discouer vs to be not onely as loyall as any other of your Subiects but more willing to imploy our wits pennes and labours euen with hazard of our liues in performing your Maiesties Commandements than many who inioying the fauour of the time make faire shewes of their owne affections and fidelitie and vncharitably traduce vs as capitall enemies to your Maiestes Person State and Dignitie ANSWER It is needlesse to make many words for if your heart and pen accord testifie the same by taking the Oath of Allegiance and by renouncing the pestilent opinion of Equiuocation therwise your Insinuations and Blandishments are but Maskes and Tectures of latent perfidiousnesse and they which are acquainted with Romish guile must still suspect that you play the Foxe Astutam vapido gestans sub pectore vulpem Ore aliud retinens aliud sub pectore Condens Now concerning this precedent passage let it bee obserued how the Iesuit hath not answered but declined his Maiesties Question And we must hold him to stand mute as one not daring to put himselfe to his Countrey lest he be found guiltie For the question is What ought the subiect to doe in case a Pope depose the King The Iesuits answere is I pray for peace I exhort others I would rather die c. Hansome complements but no securitie If his Holinesse send another wind you which haue vowed strict obedience to the Pope must turne your sailes your Votes and Prayers must bound another way you must exhort others to execute the Popes pleasure and if they and you perish in the Popes quarrell you die Martirs and goe to heauen in a string The IESVITS Conclusion HAuing performed your Maiesties will and pleasure in seeking to giue satisfaction about the Nine principall points that withhold your Royall assent from ioyning vnto the Roman Church my poore indeauours prostrate at your Maiesties feet to receiue their doome humbly beseech this fauor That your charitie and desire of the vnitie of the Church may ioyne together with your excellent Wisdome and Learning to pronounce the sentence Although I be confident that examining Religion by the meere rigour of only Scripture the Catholicke Doctrines would get the victorie more cleare and expresse Testimonies standing on our side than any that Protestants can bring for themselues as by the former Discourse may appeare although also I be much more confident in the Tradition perfect practise of the Church interpreting Scripture which by so full consent deliuers the Roman Doctrines that partialitie it selfe duely pondering can hardly in heart and in wardly iudge against them yet my chiefest hope is in those charitable thoughts and desires of Peace and Vnitie in the whole Christian world which the holy Ghost hath inspired into your Religious brest ANSVVER You deceiue your selfe touching his Maiestie for not onely these Nine points but many other detaine his royal assent from ioyning with the Romane Faith Secondly Your ostentation of proouing these Articles by the meere rigout of sole Scripture is Vanitas Vanitatum A vanitie beyond vanitie for the learned of your owne part acknowledge that many of your Romish Articles are neither expresly nor inuoluedly contained in holy Scripture Neither againe can your Faith subsist if it be tried by Genuine and Orthodoxall Tradition for your selfe in this Treatise wherein you performe as much in substance as your cause will beare haue made no demonstration of any one Article by the Testimonie of perpetuall Tradition and it seemeth to me that you are conscious hereof because in your Conclusion you fall vpon a new Disputation and seeke to inferre a necessitie of reducing all Controuersies to the meere and absolute determination of the Romane Church and Pope who will not faile to be fast friends to themselues IESVIT For suppose that praeconceit instilled into tender minds against them thinke comparing Catholickes with Protestants that Scriptures stand equally on both sides yea sifting

Church assembled in Gods feare and not factiously for their owne ends shall iudge aright than Popes which referre all things to their owne worldly ends Also it is one thing to contradict a Church defining and speaking of it selfe and another when it deliuereth the doctrine of Christ. Now whensoeuer the preaching of the Church is according to the rule of holy Scripture the voice thereof is the voice of Christ and all people learned and vnlearned are bound to heare and obey the same IESVIT If wetake out of the world a Church infallible whence shall ignorant men learne which is the Doctrine of saluation the Apostles deliuered It is as euident as the Sunne shining at noone day and the euidence of the thing hath forced some Protestants to acknowledge That the Controuersies of Religion in our time are growne in number so many and in nature so intricate that few haue time and leasure fewer strength of vnderstanding to examine them so that nothing remaines for men desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence but diligently to search out which amongst all the societies of men in the world is the Church of the liuing God the Pillar and ground of Truth that so they may imbrace her Communion follow her Directions rest in her Iudgement ANSWER If the rule be infallible and the Preaching of Pastours according to that rule ignorant persons by the assistance of Grace may learne the doctrine of saluation from their teaching without the least thought or reference more to the Romane Church than to any other Church for although Saint Augustine and Saint Cyprian were subiect to errour yet the vnlearned people of Hippo and Carthage receiued right Faith by their Ministerie with assurance that the same descended from the Apostles And it is as euident as the Sunne shining that the Word of Christ is the sole authenticall ground of Faith and the onely infallible rule to decide Controuersies and the Pastours of other Churches if they vse the meanes and haue sufficient knowledge and the assistance of ordinarie Grace may bee as infallible in their Doctrine as Romane Prelates And although vnlearned people depend vpon their Pastours like sicke men vpon their Physitions yet where they inioy the free vse of the holy Scripture as in antient times all people did and if they be carefull of their owne saluation and desire to know the truth God blesseth his owne ordinance and ordinarily assisteth them by his grace in such sort as that they shall not be seduced to damnation Math. 24.24 And if they be distracted in smaller points by the dissentions of Teachers their Errour in this case is excuseable But howsoeuer the Roman Church can be no greater stay to them than other Churches but onely by leading them to a blind obedience like as Pagans are led in another kind Dr. Fields testimonie concerning the necessitie of learning which is the true Church the ground and Pillar of Truth c. serueth not to prooue That the definition of any moderne Church is absolutely and vniuersally the rule of Faith and supreame Iudge of all Controuersies or free from all Errour for this learned Diuine speaketh of the Catholike Church in generall as it containes the holy Apostles and those which succeeded them in all ages in the teaching of the doctrine which they deliuered to the world And concerning the present Church he ascribeth no more vnto it but to be a manuduction and guider to sauing veritie confirmed and grounded vpon the holy Scripture neither maketh he the authoritie and definition thereof absolute but dependant vpon the word of God IESVIT Jf there be no Church besides the Roman in the world that can with any colour pretend infallibilitie of Iudgement Jf the most part of men cannot by their examining of Controuersie be resolued in faith and therefore must perish eternally except they find a Church that is an infallible Mistresse of truth in whose iudgement they may securely rest certainely those that haue bowells of charitie will accept of any probable answer vnto Protestants Obiections and accusations rather than discredit the authoritie of so necessarie a Church which being discredited no Church remaines in the world of credit sufficient to sustaine the waight of Christian that is infallible beleefe ANSWER Vnlearned people must relye vpon the Ministerie of some moderne Church not as a ground and rule of their faith but as an helper of their faith and although the Ministerie of the Church whereupon they depend is not absolutely infallible or free from Errour yet their saluation is not by this meanes impeached neither doe they perish eternally For it is not necessarie That a Church subiect to errour as Hippo Carthage Lions c. in the dayes of S. Augustine S. Cyprian S. Ireneus shall at all times actually erre or grieuously erre at any time and when it deliuereth the doctrine of holy Scripture it is herein free from errour and Christian people by comparing the doctrine thereof with the Scripture may certainely know that it erreth not Act. 17. 11. And touching the Roman Church Vpon what grounds are Christian people able to know by assurance of faith That the doctrine thereof is more infallible than the doctrine of other Churches But if Rome is Babylon described Reuelat. ca. 14. 8. 17 5. 18. 2. as weightie motiues induce some men to thinke then it is most safe for people to renounce the Communion of this Church as it now beleeueth and to liue in the fellowship of that Church which groundeth her faith on holy Scripture and not vpon the traditions of men Apoc. 18.4 IESVIT What amiserie will it be if it fall out as it is most likely it will fall out That at the day of Iudgement the most part of English Protestants be found to haue beleeued points of Doctrine necessarie to saluation not out of their owne certaine skill in Scripture as they should by the principles of their Religion but vpon the credit of the Church that teachech them which doth acknowledge her selfe to be no sufficient stay of assured beleefe for without question men cannot be saued who although they beleeued the truth yet beleeued it vpon a deceiueable ground and consequently by humane and fallible persuasion and not as need is by a diuine most certaine beleefe grouuded vpon aninfallible foundation which cannot be had without an infallible Church ANSWER What a miserie will it be if it fall out as it is certaine it will That at the day of Iudgement the greatest part of English Romists be found to haue renounced the expresse and manifest word of Christ and the sincere faith of the Primitiue Church and in stead thereof to haue imbraced lying vanities and the deceiueable Traditions of the man of finne the sonne of perdition who exalteth himselfe aboue all that is called God or that is worshipped 2. Thes. 2 3 4. For out of all doubt men cannot be saued

Church of which a Councell be it neuer so generall is a verie little part Yea and this verie Assistance is not so absolute nor in that manner to the whole Church as it was to the Apostles neyther doth Christ in that place speake directly of a Councell but of his Apostles Preaching and Doctrine 2. As for Christs being with them vnto the end of the World the Fathers are so various that in the sense of the antient Church wee may vnderstand him present in Maiestie in Power in Aid and Assistance against the difficulties they should find for preaching Christ which is the natiue sense as I take it And this promise was made to support their weakenesse As for his presence in teaching by the Holy Ghost few mention it and no one of them which doth speakes of any infallible Assistance further than the succeeding Church keepes to the Word of the Apostles as the Apostles kept to the guidance of the Spirit Besides the Fathers referre their speech to the Church vniuersall not to anie Councell or Representatiue Bodie And Maldonate addes That this his presence by teaching is or may be a Collection from the place but is not the intention of Christ. 3. For the Rocke vpon which the Church is founded which is the next place wee dare not lay any other Foundation than Christ Christ layd his Apostles no question but vpon himselfe With these S. Peter was layd no man questions And in prime place of Order would his clayming Successors be content with that as appeares and diuerse Fathers witnesse by his particular designement Tu es Petrus But yet the Rocke euen there spoken of is not S. Peters person eyther onely or properly but the Faith which hee professed And to this beside the Euidence which is in Text and Truth the Fathers come in with very full consent And this That the Gates of Hell shall not preuaile against it is not spoken of the not 〈◊〉 of the Church principally but of the not falling away of it from the Foundation Now a Church may erre and daungerously too and yet not fall from the Foundation especially if that of Bellarmine be true That there are many things euen de Fide of the Faith which yet are not necessarie to saluation Besides euen here againe the promise of this stable edification is to the whole Church not to a Councell at the least no further than a Councell builds as a Church is built that is vpon Christ. 4. The last place is Christs Prayer for S. Peters Faith The 〈◊〉 sense of which place is That Christ prayed and obtained for S. Peter perseuerance in the grace of God against the strong temptation which was to winnow him aboue the rest But to conclude an infallibilitie from hence in the Pope or in his Chaire or in the Romane See or in a Generall Councell though the Pope be President I find no antient Fathers that dare aduenture it And Bellarmine himselfe besides some Popes in their owne Cause and that in Epistles counterfeit or falsely alledged hath not a Father to name for this sense of the place till he come downeto Chrysologus Theophylact and S. Bernard of which Chrysologus his speech is but a flash of Rhetorike and the other two are men of Yesterday compared with Antiquitie and liued when it was Gods great grace and our wonder the corruption of the time had not made them corrupter than they are And Thomas is resolute that what is meant here beyond S. Peters person is referred to the whole Church And the Glasse vpon the Canon Law is more peremptorie than he euen to the denyall that it is meant of the Pope And if this place warrant not the Popes Faith Where is the infallibilitie of the Councell that depends vpon it And for all the places together weigh them with indifferencie and either they speake of the Church including the Apostles as all of them doe and then all graunt the voyce of the Church is Gods voyce Diuine and Infallible or else they are generall vnlimitted and applyable to priuate Assemblies as well as Generall Councels which none graunt to be infallible but some mad Enthusiasts or else they are limitted not simply into All Truth but All necessarie to Saluation in which I shall easily graunt a Generall Councell cannot erre if it suffer it selfe to be led by this 〈◊〉 of Truth in the Scripture and take not vpon it to lead both the Scripture and the Spirit For suppose these places or any other did promise Assistance euen to Infallibilitie yet they graunted it not to euerie Generall Councell but to the Catholike Bodie of the Church it selfe And if it be in the whole Church principally then is it in a Generall Councell but by Consequent as the Councell represents the whole And that which belongs to a thing by consequent doth not otherwise nor longer belong vnto it than it consents and cleaues to that vpon which it is a Consequent And therefore a Generall Councell hath not this Assistance but as it keepes to the whole Church and Spouse of Christ whose it is to heare his Word and determine by it And therefore if a Generall Councell will goe out of the Churches Way it may easily goe without the Churches Truth 4. Fourthly I consider That All agree That the Church in generall can neuer erre from the Faith necessarie to saluation No Persecution no Temptation and no Gates of Hell whatsoeuer is meant by them can euer so preuaile against it For all the members of the Militant Church cannot erre either in the whole Faith or in any Article of it it is impossible For if all might so erre there could be no vnion betweene them as members and Christ the Head And no vnion betweene Head and members no Bodie and so no Church which cannot be But there is not the like consent That Generall Councels cannot erre And it seemes strange to me that the Fathers hauing to doe with so many Heretikes and so many of them opposing Church Authoritie in their condemnation this Proposition euen in tearmes A Generall Councell cannot erre should be found in none of them that I can yet see Suppose it were true That no Generall Councell had erred in any matter of moment to this day which will not be found true yet this would not haue followed that it is therefore infallible and cannot erre I haue not time to descend into particulars therefore to the Generall still S. Augustine puts a difference betweene the Rules of Scripture and the definitions of men This difference is Praeponitur Scriptura That the Scripture hath the Prerogatiue That Prerogatiue is That whatsoeuer is found written in Scripture may neither be doubted nor disputed whether it be true or right But the Letters of Bishops may not onely be disputed but corrected by Bishops that are more learned and wise than they or by

it was Apostolicall finally and principally into the authority of the present Church ANSWER Saint Augustine deliuers not the former and therfore the Iesuit cannot inferre the latter we haue indeed no stronger or more excellent morall proofe than the perpetual testimony of the Church succeeding the Apostles but we haue a stronger and more excellent diuine proofe to wit the Prophesie of Christ and his Apostles concerning the perpetuall preseruation of the Gospell vnto the end of the world also that the Aposcolical Scriptures were once incorrupt is manifest because they were giuen by diuine inspiration And it is apparant that they were not afterwards corrupted because no authority or sufficient Argument can be produced to procue them in whole or in part to haue been corrupted Now that which being once knowne by diuine testimony to haue beene incorrupt cannot be prooued afterwards to haue been corrupted doth by diuine testimony appeare to be incorrupt because the first diuine testimony standeth still in force The Text of the Gospell was once knowne by diuine testimonie to haue beene incorrupt and it cannot be prooued to haue beene afterwards corrupted Ergo It doth still appeare by diuine testimonie that the Text of the Gospell is incorrupt and the resolution of Faith finally and principally resteth vpon that diuine testimonie and not vpon the 〈◊〉 of the present Church Lastly the harmony coherence of the Gospel both with the Scriptures of the old Testament Lu. 24.27 Act. 28.23 and of the seuerall parts of the Gospel among themselues do manifest that the text of the new Testament is incorrupt For if the same were corrupted in any part corruption of words would produce alteration and difference of matter but we find at this day a perfect harmonie of all the parts of the Gospell among themselues and a perfect agreement of the same with the Scriptures of the old Testament And from the same being an inward Argument we may collect that the text of the Gospell is at this day incorrupt Now hauing so many Arguments besides the authoritie of the present Church to prooue the integritie of the text of the Gospell we do not flie neither is it necessarie to flie to priuat Spirit or particular Reuelation for assurance and that which our Aduersaries obiect against vs saying that we resolue our Faith and Religion into the priuat Spirit is a foolish calumniation for we resolue our Faith into the authoritie of Gods outward word expounded vnto vs by such helpes and meanes as both the Scripture it selfe and the antient Church require as into the diuine motiue and obiect of beleefe and we affirme that his grace and holy Spirit working by the outward meanes inableth draweth and persuadeth the conscience to assent Iohn 6.45 12.37 38.1 Cor. 2.12 c. 12.3 2. Cor. 3.5 Act. 16.14 1. Iohn 2.20.27 Esay 50.5 And herein we flie to no priuat Spirit or Reuelation but maintaine the ordinarie assistance of diuine grace according to the doctrine of the holy Scripture and of S. Augustine and the common Tenet of the Scholemen themselues IESVITS 2. Argument Secondly J 〈◊〉 that common vnlearned people the greatest part of Christianitie are persuaded about all substantiall points of Faith by Tradition not by Scripture Common vnlearned people haue true Christian Faith in all points necessarie and snfficient vnto Saluation but they haue not Faith of all these maine and substantiall points grounded on Scripture for they can neither vnderstand nor read any Scripture but translated into vulgar languages and so if they beleeue vpon Scripture they beleeue vpon Scripture translated into their mother tongue but before that they can know that the Scriptures are truely translated euen in all substantiall points that so they may build of it they must first know what are the maine and substantiall points and firmely beleeue them so that they would not beleeue the Scripture translated against them for if they knew them not before how can they know that Scriptures in places that concerne them are truely translated if they do not before hand firmely beleeue them why should they bee readie to allow translations that agree with them and to reiect the translations which differ from them Ergo Originally and before they know any Scripture they haue Faith grounded on the Tradition of their ancestors by the light whereof they are able to judge of the truth of Translations about such substantiall points as they firmely beleeue by Tradition ANSVVER The question which the Iesuit vndertaketh to prooue in his foure Arguments is that our resolution of Faith stayeth finally vpon the perpetuall Tradition of the Church and not vpon the Scripture His second argument to prooue this is taken from the manner of vulgar and illiterate people in resoluing their Faith For if these being the greater part of Christianitie do ground their Creed touching all points of doctrine necessarie to Saluation vpon Tradition of their ancestors andif they haue true Faith before they know and vnderstand the Scripture then Christian Faith at least-wise among the greater part of Christians is resolued finally into the Tradition of ancestors and not of the Scriptures And he prooueth that these vulgar people haue Faith touching all points necessarie to Saluation before they know the Scriptures because it is impossible for them to read or vnderstand Scripture vntill it be translated into their mother tongue and they are not able to iudge of translations or know them to be true vnlesse they first beleeue the principall points of Christian Faith and by comparing translations of Scripture with the said doctrines of Faith formerly by them beleeued be inabled to iudge of the Truth of Translations This Paralogisme hath certaine ambiguous or equiuocall termes which must be distinguished and then I will applie my answer First the terme of Scripture may be taken for the letter and text of the Scripture together with the names of the seueral Bookes Authors and Sections and secondly it may signifie the doctrine of the Scripture without mention of the particular Bookes Iohn 7.38 Rom. 1 2 3 4. Secondly Resolution of Faith is either distinct and explicite wherein beleeuers are able to declare the seueral reasons of their Faith and to proceed from one reason of beleeuing to another vntill they ascend by degrees to the principall ground or else Implicit and Vertuall wherein beleeuers cannot proceed distinct ly and with explication of the seuerall reasons and grounds of Faith but resting themselues vpon one prime and radicall ground are readie for the authoritie of the same to beleeue all other particular reasons and verities of Faith when they are declared vnto them Thirdly Tradition may signifie either doctrine of Faith and good manners not contained or written in holy Scripture expressely or inuoluedly or else the same doctrine which is found in holy Scripture deliuered by Ancestors or Teachers by word of mouth These distinctions premised I answer the obiection 1.

Granting that some vulgar people and nouices in Faith may attaine beleefe concerning such verities of Christian Doctrine as are absolutely necessarie to Saluation by the Tradition of their Ancestors and Teachers without distinct and explicit resoluing their Faith into the Text of holy Scripture or the particular Bookes or Sections thereof But withall I deny that they can haue sauing Faith without resoluing the same into the doctrine of the Scriptures For example It is an Article of Faith necessarie to be beleeued by all Christians of riper yeres that Iesus Christ is the 〈◊〉 of the World and the same Article is reuealed and taught in many Texts of holy Scripture If a simple rurall person beleeue this Article taught him by his parents and other teachers he beleeueth the Doctrine of the Scripture and vertually grounds his Faith vpon the Scripture although hee know not the Bookes of the Scripture or the particular sentences contained in the same A man which drinketh water flowing from a fountaine or seeth day light although he haue no distinct knowledge of the fountaine or sight of the Sunne which is the cause of light yet hee receiueth water mediatly from the fountaine it selfe and his light principally from the Sunne so likewise rude and illiterate Christians reape the benefit and fruit of the Scriptures and vertually ground their Faith vpon them although they be not able distinctly to looke into them or to resolue their Faith into the seuerall parts and testimonies contained in them OBIECTION Vulgar andilliterate persons do not know or vnderstand the Scriptures neither can they be certaine by their owne knowledge that the same are truely translated in such points as the y are bound to beleeue therefore they cannot ground their Faith finally and lastly vpon the Scriptures ANSVVER 1. If this Obiection were good vulgar people could not ground their diuine Faith vpon Tradition because they haue not distinct knowledge of Tradition or of the qualitie or deriuation thereof Therefore I distinguish of Knowledge out of Bonauenture that the same is two fold to wit either confused and generall or distinct and speciall and a thing may be knowne two waies either in it selfe or in another If vulgar and illiterate people could know and vnderstand the Scriptures neither confusedly nor distinctly neither in themselues nor in any other thing then it were impossible that they should resolue their Faith into them but if they may know them by teaching of others and vnderstand the Doctrine of the Scriptures to be diuine by the light of heauenly veritie resplendent in the same and by the inward testimonie of the holy Spirit co-working with that Doctrine then it is possible for them to resolue their Faith into the Scripture because they which actually resolue their Faith into the Doctrine of the Scripture doe virtually and mediatly resolue the same into the verie Scripture euen as he that actually beleeueth the kings proclamation doth virtually beleeue the kings authoritie although he know the king or his authoritie confusedly and in generall only The Text of holy Scripture and the distinct sayings and sentences thereof are the principall and finall externall ground whereupon the whole bodie of the Church must ground their Faith But as there is a diuersitie of the members of the Church 1. Cor. 12.20 so likewise there is a difference betweene them in the manner of resoluing Faith for the stronger and firmer members are able to resolue their Faith distinctly into Scripture but the weaker members whose Faith as Bonauenture speaketh is diminuta seeble and imperfect in respect of the distinct apprehension of the obiect of Faith are guided by the stronger as children by a nurse And these little ones are taught the truth of heauenly Doctrine 1. By their parents or ecclesiasticall teachers and they know the Scriptures to be truely translated not by their owne skill but by crediting others which are able to iudge But being thus farre directed and persuaded by humane meanes then the light of Gods word it selfe by the power of Grace persuadeth them as a diuine cause to yeeld full assent to all such verities as are necessarie to be beleeued by them to saluation IESVIT And this is that which Protestants must meane if they haue any true meaning when they say that the common people knew Scriptures to be truely translated by the light of the Doctrine shining in true Translations to wit by the light of Doctrine receiued by Tradition of Ancestors and thereupon so firmely beleeue as they will acknowledge Scriptures to be truely translated so farre and no farther than they perceiue them consonant with the Faith deliuered vnto them so that their last and finall resolution for substantiall points is not into Scripture truly translated into their vulgar tongue but into Tradition by the light whereof they discerne that their Translations are true more or lesse according to the measure of knowledge they haue by Tradition ANSVVER The summe of the former obiection is Vnlearned people are not able without the helpe and instruction of others to resolue their Faith into the Scriptures Therefore the Scripture is not the finall and greatest stay and ground of Faith The Argument is denied for as in Arts and Sciences an vnskilfull person cannot resolue his knowledge into the first principles vntill he be taught the meaning of words and the sence of rules and precepts but when he is taught and vnderstandeth these then he maketh resolution into the very first principles themselues So likewise in beleeuing the Obiect of Faith must be taught the sence of the words and matter declared the grounds and reasons of credibilitie deliuered and then the beleeuer principally and immediately settles the resolution of his Faith not vpon these helps and instruments which are only dispofitiue and adiuuant causes but vpon the first principles themselues expressely or deriuatiuely contained in holy Scripture And whereas Dr. Ioh. Wh. is produced affirming in the behalfe of all Protestants that common people know Scriptures to be truely translated by the light of the Doctrine shining in true Translations First Dr. Wh. in the place assigned speaketh not in particular of common people but of the true Church in which are found many persons skilfull and learned Secondly he deliuereth other meanes besides the light of Doctrine whereby the Church may know that Translations are true to wit knowledge of Tongues rules of Art ministerie of the Word to which I adde analogie of Faith the testimonie of the 〈◊〉 Church and best learned in all ages All these are helpes and instruments of right Translations and when the Scriptures are translated they manifest their Author and sacred authoritie to such as in a right manner are conuersant in hearing or reading them And this is not only the Tenet of Protestants but besides the antient Fathers of moderate Papists themselues There is saieth one of them

as the same signifies Doctrine neither expresly nor inuoluedly contained in holy Scripture but into the Scripture or doctrine of the Scripture it selfe IESVITS 4. Argument Those that vnderstand the Scriptures aright must be such as they were to whom the Apostles writ and deliuered the Scriptures and whose instruction they intended by their writing But the Apostles as Dr. Field acknowledgeth wrote to them they had formerly taught more at large that were instructed and grounded in all substantiall and necessarie points of faith that knew the common necessary obseruations of Christianitie Ergo they that reade and presume to iuterpret the Scriptures without first knowing and firmely beleeuing by Tradition at the least all necessary substantiall points of faith cannot with assurance vnderstand them but may euen in manifest points mightily mistake for the blessed Apostles writing to Christians that were before hand fully taught and setled in substantiall Christian doctrines and customes doe ordinarily in their writings suppose such things as aboundantly knowne without declaring them anew onely tuching them cursorily by the way and therefore 〈◊〉 so that the already taught might well vnderstand their sayings and no other ANSWER The question is Whether the last and finall resolution of Faith is made into vnwritten Tradition and not into Scripture The fourth Argument produced by the Aduersarie to prooue this is taken from the necessitie of vnwritten Traditian to expound the Scripture And the summe of the Argument is Without a precedent instruction or teaching by Tradition vnwritten the necessarie and substantiall points of Faith wee cannot be firmely assured that we haue the right sence of the Scripture as appeareth by the example of the Primitiue hearers of the Apostles who were formerly instructed by them and had the right Faith taught them more at large and then being thus informed and prepared they receiued the Scripture and we haue no reason to promise vnto our selues more vnderstanding than the Apostles immediat hearers And the Scriptures without Tradition are obscure and do onely cursorily touch matters formerly taught more at large Ergo The last and finall resolution of Faith is made into vnwritten Tradition and not into Scripture In the Antecedent or leading part of this Argument some things cannot be admitted without distinction and some parts hereof are false and the Argument it selfe is inconsequent First they which in our daies vnderstand the Scripture aright must be such as they were to whom the Apostles wrote and deliuered the Scriptures c. not simply and in all things for many things are requisit for the first plantation of Faith which are not necessarie for the future continuance and propagation thereof but in such things onely as are common and ordinarie for all ages Wherefore they which in our daies vnderstand the Scriptures aright must ordinarily haue a preuious introduction by the teaching of others and also there must be in them a mind desirous of Truth and a resolution and diligence to vse the meanes appointed by God to learne the same but that they must be instructed in the same manner as the Apostles hearers were or learne all the necessarie points of Faith before they begin to read the Scriptures without any certaine vnderstanding is affirmed by the Aduersarie but not prooued Also many of the Apostles hearers read part of the Scriptures to wit the Scriptures of the Old Testament with profit and some right vnderstanding before they were generally taught all the grounds of the Gospell for otherwise how could they haue examined the Doctrine of the Apostles by the Scriptures Acts 17.11 And to what purpose did our Sauiour command the Iewes to search the Scriptures Ioh. 5.39 And why did the Apostles preaching both to Iewes and Gentiles confirme their Doctrine by the testimonie of the Scriptures Ro. 9.9 25 29 33. ca. 10.11.13.16 19. ca. 11.2.8.9 cap. 4.3.6.17 Iam. 2.23 1. Pet. 2.6 if the people to whom they preached could at all haue no right vnderstanding of the Scriptures before they were fully and perfectly grounded in the knowledge of all necessarie and substantiall points of Christian Faith Secondly whereas the Iesuit addeth for confirmation of his Antecedent That the Scriptures without Tradition are obscure and that the Apostles did in them onely cursorily touch matters formerly taught both those assertions according to the Popish meaning are false We acknowledge that many particular Texts and passages of holy Scripture are obscure and hard to be vnderstood 2. Pet. 3. 16. But in such points as are necessarie for Christians to vnderstand because they are primarie or fundamentall and in such things as are necessary for the declaring and applying that which is fundamentall the same is not so obscure but it may by diligent reading and vsing ordinarie meanes and helpes of knowledge be rightly vnderstood by the learned and also in a competent measure by the vnlearned after the same is expounded and declared vnto them For if the Scripture were generally and absolutely obscure to the vnlearned then God would not haue commanded them to read the same nor required them to heare the reading thereof much lesse would he haue said That by hearing the same they and their children might learne to feare him and keepe his commandements Deut. 31.11 12 13. And that the holy Scripture is in this manner perspicuous the antient Fathers constantly affirme S. Gregorie and S. Bernard compare the holy Scriptures to a Riuer wherein the Elephant may swim and the Lambe may wade S. Ireneus saith that some things in Scripture are apertly and cleerely without ambiguitie manifested to the eyes of our vnderstanding Saint Augustine Some things are set downe so plainely in the Scriptures that they rather require a hearer than an expositar And in another place Although some things are vailed with mysteries yet againe some things are so manifest that by the helpe of them obscure things may bee opened And againe All matters which containe faith and good manners are found in those things which are manifestly placed in the Scriptures Saint Chrysostome In diuine Scriptures all necessary things are plaine To the like purpose speaketh St. Hierom Fulgentius Hugo Victor Theoderit Lactantius Theophilus Antiochenus Clem. Alexandrinus and the same is the common Tenet of the Primatiue Fathers And Gregory Valence confesseth that such places of Scriptures as containe Articles of faith absolutely necessary are almost all of them plaine The like is affirmed by Aquinas Vasques and Gonzales The other clause of the Iesuits speech to wit That the Apostles in their Scripture did onely touch matters cursorily formerly taught is false First this Assertion is repugnant to Saint Augustine who speaking of the doctrine and deeds of our Sauiour saith Quicquid ille de suis factis dictis nos legere voluit hoc scribendum illis tanquam manibus suis imperauit Whatsoeuer Christ would

haue vs reade touching his owne sayings and workes this hee commanded the Euangelists as it were his owne hands to write And in another place Although Christ spake and wrought some things which are not written yet those things which seemed vnto him sufficient to the saluation of beleeuers were selected to be written Saint Cyrill also affirmeth that all things which Christ did are not written but so much as holy writers iudged sufficient both for good manners and godly faith to the end that we shining in right faith good workes and vertue may attaine the heauenly Kingdome By the iudgement of these Fathers the holy Euangelists committed to writing so much of our Sauiours Doctrine and deeds as is sufficient for people to know that they may bee illustrious in faith and vertue and by the light whereof they may come to saluation In these things therefore the Euangelists did not cursorily touch matters but largely and fully deliuer them Secondly if the Scriptures containe all things sufficient to saluation yea more than is sufficient then the Apostles in their Scriptures did not cursorily or by the way onely touch matters But the first is affirmed both by the Fathers and confessed by some learned Papists Vincent 〈◊〉 The Canon of the Scripture is perfit and in it selfe sufficient for all matters yea more than sufficient Antonius Perez Pentateuch fidei vol. 4. c. 21. If the Scripture be compared and applied with things which faith teacheth as necessarie to saluation the same is apparently redundant and superfluous according to the nature of a rule because there be many things yea most things in the same the knowledge whereof is vnnecessarie But if the Scripture containe many 〈◊〉 superfluous and more than is needfull it is improbable 〈◊〉 thinke that it is imperfect in Principals or deliuereth them 〈◊〉 onely or by the way Thirdly the variety and multitude of points and doctrines of faith and good manners and the often repeating and declaring of them in the holy Scriptures prooueth that the Apostles 〈◊〉 fully and perfectly deliuer in their writings the whole 〈◊〉 of Christian faith and not onely cursorily touch them For all supernaturall veritie concerning the sacred Deitie Trinitie diuine Attributes and Operations Creation of the world c. is taught in holy Scripture In like manner the whole doctrine of faith concerning the Incarnation Person and Office of Christ is reuealed vnto vs by holy Scripture And for this cause Saint Cyrill calleth the Scriptures Solos fontes veritatis The sole fountaines of veritie All things concerning Iustification Charitie and good workes being meerely supernaturall are taught in Scripture The doctrine of the Law Gospell Sacraments resurrection of the dead finall iudgement c. is intirely and fully reuealed in the holy Scriptures and the Church according to Saint Augustine hath onely two brests wherewith shee feedeth her children to wit the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament And that he alwayes vnderstandeth by the Old and New Testament the Scriptures of both appeareth by his words vpon Psal. 22. Aperi legamus c. Let vs open our Fathers last Testament and reade it And 〈◊〉 the great 〈◊〉 Apostolice 〈◊〉 nec non antiquorum Prophetarum 〈◊〉 plane 〈◊〉 de sensu Numinis The Euangelicall and Apostolicall bookes together with the Oracles of the antient Prophets doe plainely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euidently instruct vs concerning the minde of God And from all the former it is manifest that the Apostles writings are not patches and shreds onely of Apostolicall Doctrine as our 〈◊〉 against all antiquitie presumeth to affirme but the very substance and marrow of their whole Preaching containing the summe of the Gospell by faith and obedience whereof wee receiue euerlasting life And thus much touching the Antecedent of the Iesuits Argument The sequel of the former Argument which is Because without precedent instruction by vnwritten Tradition wee cannot be firmely assured that wee haue the right sence of the Scripture therefore the last and finall resolution is made vnto vnwritten Tradition and not into Scripture is inconsequent and the Antecedent proueth not the Consequent for precedent Tradition may bee necessarie to deliuer vnto vs the text of holy Scripture and Precpts how to expound and vse the same and by Tradition wee may receiue a Commentarie of some texts of holy Scripture yet euen as a Schollar although hee receiue the bookes of Euclid and Aristotle from a Master and precepts in what sort hee shall proceed in his studie and withall a Commentary declaring the meaning of these Authours yet hee doth not finally being made learned himselfe resolue his knowledge into the former but into the principles of these Arts themselues so likewise a nouice in faith receiueth the holy Scripture by Ministerie and Tradition of the Church and Precepts and Commentaries whereby hee is first inabled and afterwards holpen in the right exposition thereof yet after this Introduction by further studie and diligence hee collecteth Arguments from the Scripture it selfe and being instructed in the sence thereof he doth not finally resolue his beleefe into the Commentarie and Introduction but into the text or Doctrine of holy Scripture it selfe IESVIT Hence I may further inferre that Protestants haue not throughly pondered the place of the Apostle vnto Timothie which they 〈◊〉 vehemently vrge to prooue the sufficiencie of sole Scripture for euery man as though he had said absolutely that the Scriptures are able to instruct or make men wise vnto Saluation which he saith not but speaking particularly vnto Timothie saith They are able to instruct or make thee wise vnto saluation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hast been aforehand instructed by word of mouth and doost thereupon firmely beleeue all substantiall Doctrines and knowest all the necessarie practise of Christian Discipline ANSWER The Aduersarie in this passage vseth certaine Arguments to prooue that Protestants misunderstand the Text of S. Paul 2. Timoth. 3.15 16. when they vrge the same to maintaine the sufficiencie of sole Scripture to be a ground for all Christians finally to rest their faith vpon His first Argument is The Apostle saith not absolutely that the Scriptures are able to make all men wise vnto Saluation but particularly to Timothie a man instructed aforehand and formerly 〈◊〉 all substantiall grounds of Doctrine and Discipline they are able 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to make thee being such a one and so prepared wise c. To this I answere 1. That although sentences of holy Scripture are sometimes restrained to the personall or particular subiect of which they are first spoken yet this is not generall and when the same happeneth it must be prooued by better Arguments than by the bare Emphasis of a word For God said to Ioshua a man qualified aboue the ordinarie ranke I will not leaue thee nor forsake thee Ioshua 1. 5. yet the promise implied in this Text is generall and common to all iust

will not demonstrate that it is the Church vniuersall For both the Iewes and also sundrie Christians which are no Romists are largely diffused ouer the World and exercise their Religion in places where they make their abode and there is nothing more presumptuous than to make externall Fame and Amplitude which are things common and separable proper notes of a true Church and vpon this ground to reiect and censure smaller Churches which haue lesse fame in the World but more Veritie IESVIT Most manifestly Holy in all kind of high extraordinarie Sanctitie giuing notorious signes and tokens thereof striking admiration into carnall men that are not altogether prophane and diffusing abroad among Infidels the sweete Odour of Christ and the Christian Name ANSWER Passing by your boasting of Manifestly Holy in all kind of high and extraordinarie Holinesse notorious striking admiration c. And putting you in mind of Solomons Prouerbe There is a man that boasteth himselfe to be rich and yet hath nothing Prou. 13. 7. I answere the matter first You must be aduertised that Gregory Moral l. 33. c. 26. saith Praedicatores Antichristi sanctitatis sibi speciem arrogant sed tamen opera iniquitatis exercent Antichrists Preachers arrogate vnto themselues a shew of holinesse and practise the workes of iniquitie This will be verified in such as you are if your forme of externall holinesse bee not conioyned with holy and Orthodoxall Doctrine You must therefore first of all prooue your doctrine to be Orthodoxall in the Articles in question betweene the reformed Churches and you before your miracles and specious holinesse can stand you in any stead And there is no kind of externall holinesse which heretickes haue not pretended and practised in shew before men Secondly your owne friends and followers testifie That your Church hath beene for many ages notoriously defiled with the enormitie of vices Some of them say in generall tearmes that from the crowne of the head to the sole of the foot the vlcerous matter of enormous sinne hath defiled and deformed the whole body and state of Christianitie liuing vnder your profession Others affirme that all Ecclesiasticall and Christian discipline was in a manner extinguished in euery place Others say that oppression rapine adulterie incest and all pestilent vice did confound all sacred and prophane things and that the same beat S. Peters ship so impetuously that it began to hull or wallow vpon the to-side Others that vices were so exalted and multiplied that they hardly left any space to Gods mercie Others say there is no place wherein is found so little pietie and Religion as in those people which dwell neerest to Rome Others say that you haue not onely imitated and matched but surpassed all the auarice ambition lubricitie and tyrannie that was euer heard of amongst the heathen Sundrie of your owne part haue written volumes containing Narrations of the outragious wickednesse which raigned among 〈◊〉 They haue stiled your grand fathers Monsters of mankind The dregs of vice Incarnate deuils c One saith Nothing was more luxurious couetous and proud than Priests they spent the Churches patrimonie in gluttonie ryot vpon dogs and queanes and all their preaching was to Matthew Paris saith The 〈◊〉 of Rome seeke not to make people deuout but to fill their coffers with treasure they studie not to win soules but to 〈◊〉 vpon other mens reuenues they oppresse the godly and impudently vsurpe other mens right they haue no care of honestie or right King Iohn of England from whom Pope Innocent extorted fortie thousand markes at once and twelue thousand annually to absolue his kingdome being interdicted said That he had learned by wofull experience that the Pope was ambitious beyond all men liuing an insatiable gulfe and thirster after monie and readie for hope of gaine like waxe to be 〈◊〉 to any kind or degree of 〈◊〉 Aluares hath these words The mysticall Sion the Church which in her primitiue state was adorned of her spouse with such and so many royall graces is now clouded and eclipsed with the blacke mist of ignorance iniquitie and errour and we behold her cast downe from heauen and as a desart vnhabited of vertue and if any godly people remaine they are esteemed as Arabians and Saracens And in the same place The Prelates of the Church are an armie of deuils Potius depraedandis spoliandis scandalizandis hominibus quam lucris animarum operam dantes They rather labour to rob spoile and scandalise men than to win soules Honorius Angustodonensis who liued in the yeere 1120. hath these words Turne thee to the citisens of Babylon and obserue what manner of people they be and by what streetes they walke come hither to the top of the mountaine that thou mayest behold all the habitations of the damned citie Looke vpon her Princes and Iudges Popes Cardinals Prelates the verie seate of the beast is placed in them All dayes they are intent to euill 〈◊〉 occupied without satietie in the works of iniquitie they not onely themselues act but instruct others to flagitious wickednesse they make port-sale of things sacred they purchase that which is wicked and labour with all their might that they may not descend alone to hell Turne thy selfe to the Clergie and thou shalt see in them the tent of the beast they neglect Gods seruice they are slaues to worldly lucre they defile their Priesthood through vncleannesse they seduce the people by hypocrisie they deny God by euill workes they abandon all the Scriptures appointed for mans saluation they lay snares all manner of wayes to ruine the people and are blind guides going before the blinde to perdition Contemplate also the societies of Monkes and thou shalt discerne in them the tabernacles of the Beast by faigned profession they mocke God and prouoke his wrath they betrample their rule with vile manners they deceiue the world by their habit c. Many of them are deuoted to gluttonie and sensuall appetite they putrifie in the filth of vncleannesse Behold the habitation of Nunnes and thou shalt obserue in them a Bride-chamber prepared for the Beast These from their tender yeeres learne leaudnesse they associate many to them to accumulate their damnation They make haste to bee vailed that they may more freely let loose the reines of luxurie they are prostituted worse than any Harlots like an insatiable gulfe they are neuer satisfied with the dung of vncleannesse These insnare the soules of yong men and shee among them which transcendeth her fellowes in leaudnesse beares away the bell Thirdly the Roman Church hath many passages in the verie course of Doctrine to destroy or corrupt holinesse for to omit their grosse superstitions Pharisaicall Traditions and other impieties against God First They depriue people of the reading and hearing of the holy Scripture which is a principall meanes to destroy Vice and kindle

Christ to his heauenly Father are thereby made most highly venerable But the Crosse Nailes and Lance were those things which at the instant time of Christs Passion had a residence in Christs bodie and were ioined thereunto as instruments of his Passion and were offered by Christ to his heauenly Father Ergo The Crosse Nailes and Lance are thereby made most highly venerable Both Propositions are false in whole or in part First those things which at the instant time of Christs Passion had a residence in his bodie and were ioined thereunto per contactum phisicum as instruments of his Passion were not thereby made most highly venerable because there is no diuine authoritie or any other snfficient reason to prooue this assertion Secondly these things were seperate instruments and not perpetually conioined to his person and if none did worship them when they were actually conioined there is no reason to thinke that they are to be worshipped being diuided If apparrell when it is ioined to an honourable person may be coworshipped with the person yet when it is diuided from the person and hangeth in a wardrobe or is worne by a Page it is otherwise Whiles God appeared to Moses in the bramble bush the ground whereon Moses stood is called holy Exod. 3.6 But this holinesse being only relatiue transitorie and denominatiue and not inherent or durable the former vision and apparition being finished the ground whereon Moses stood returned to his old condition The like may be said of the water of Iordan considered when Christ was baptised with it and againe considered when his baptisme was finished and out of the vse An Embassador during his embassage is a publicke and honourable person when his office ceaseth the honour consectarie and dependant vpon his office ceaseth also Secondly the latter branch of the assumption to wit the Crosse Nailes and Lance were offered by Christ to his heauenly Father at his Passion is impiously false for nothing was offered by Christ to his heauenly Father at his Passion but himselfe and part of himselfe Heb. 7.27 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he offered vp himselfe Heb. 9. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through the eternall Spirit he offered himselfe without spot to God c. Heb. 10. 10. Wee are sanctified through the offering of the body of lesus Christ once for all 1. Pet. 2.24 Col. 1.22 Heb. 9.12 By his owne bloud he entred once into the holy place c. 1. Pet. 1. 19. And if the Crosse Nailes and Lance were offered by Christ to his Father then we were redeemed with corruptible things contrarie to the Apostles doctrine 1. Pet. 1. 18 and Wood Nailes and Yron were a part of the propitiatorie Sacrifice for the sinnes of the whole world which is a Iesuiticall or rather an Antijesuine doctrine that is a doctrine ascribing to dead creatures Yron Wood Steele Nailes c. that which is most proper to the pretious blood of Iesus This doctrine maintained by Loiolists is most sacrilegious and more to be abhorred than Iudas his lips But it is fulfilled in these men which Clement Alexandrinus saith of heathen Idolaters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are they not prodigious monsters which adore stockes and stones IESVIT Out of which J may conclude that Christ Iesus being a true man his Image hath a most euident and vndeniable right to represent him and so to be honoured for his sake ANSVVER Conclusions borrow their strength from their premises but the former premises haue no power to inforce this conclusion For although Christ is a true man yet his painted Image wanteth euident and vndeniable right to represent him because such right presupposeth diuine institution The same represents him and stands for him only by humane imagination which is all the Aduersarie is able to prooue but religious worship must haue a more sound and certaine foundation otherwise we must say to Papals when they are thus prodigall in giuing Christs honour to Idols 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ioh. 4. 22. ye worship ye know not what If in ciuile worship one should frame an Image or chaire of State in honour of a king and commaund people to kneele and bow to it none will be so foolish as to obey vnlesse such commandement be deriued from the kings authoritie or law But in things religious and heauenly men haue not the same libertie of deuising and commanding as appeareth by Gedeons Ephod Iudg. 8.27 Lastly if it should be granted that artificiall Images did represent figure or teach Christ Iesu by diuine institution as fully as the Bookes of holy Scripture or as the inward conceits and images of the mind yet it were inconsequent to inferre that the same were therefore to be worshipped in such manner as Papals require They were indeed to be vsed with reuerence but reuerent vsing and adoration are diuers actions IESVIT §. 2. THis Worship was euer since the Apostles in the Church without beginning ANSVVER IF it had no beginning how can this man prooue that the Apostles were the Authors IESVIT The disagreeing of Protestants about the time when Worship of Jmages began is a sufficient Argument That there is no beginning thereof assigneable ANSVVER The Iesuits Proposition is Worship of Images hath beene practised in the true Church euer since the Apostles c. His first Argument to confirme this is If Protestants disagree in assigning the time when the worship of Images first began in the Church Then the worship of Images was practised vniuersally and perpetually from the Apostles dayes But Protestants disagree in assigning the time when the Worship of Images first began in the Church Ergo The worship of Images was practised vniuersally and perpetually from the Apostles dayes and consequently the same worship is to be receiued and practised in these dayes First The consequence of the Maior Proposition is denied For is it not ridiculous to argue in this manner Learned Papists disagree in assigning the time when Heathenish Idolatrie first began Therefore Heathenish Idolatrie had his beginning in Paradise But learned Papists Bellarmine Pererius Barradias c. disagree in assigning and pointing foorth the moment of time when Heathenish Idolatrie fist began The time when people first began to offer their sonnes and daughters to diuells is not assigneable And who can certainely report when barbarous people first began to eate mans flesh or when the Assyrian matrons began first to prostitute themselues at the temple of Venus Is it therefore consequent that these customes had their beginning from Noahs dayes because their originall is not assigneable Our aduersaries Achilles therefore Protestants are not able out of approoued Historians to assigne the persons and time who and when began the worship of images in the Church Ergo the said custome is originally from the Apostles rather deserueth contempt and derision than an accurate solution 2. The assumption of the former argument is also denyed For Protestants disagree not in

Catholicke But necessitie hath no Law for if the Scriptures may be suffered to speake Papistrie must fall like Dagon before the Arke IESVIT Catholickes on the contrary side though they boast not of Scriptures as knowing that nothing is so clearely set downe in it but malapert errour may contend against it with some shew of probabilitie yet haue Scriptures much more cleare and expresse than any that Protestants can bring for themselues euen about the vse of the Image of Christ crucified in the first Apostolicall Church S. Paul to the Galathians saith O ye foolish Galathians who hath bewitched you that you should not obey the truth before whose eyes Christ Iesus is liuely set foorth crucified among you The Greeke word corresponding to the English liuely set foorth is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies to paint foorth a thing insomuch as euen Beza Iesus Christus depictus crucifixus Iesus Christ painted crucified before your eyes so that we haue in plaine and expresse tearmes that Christ was Painted crucified in the Apostolicall Churches which the Apostle doth allow thence drawing an Argument to prooue the Galathians were sencelesse and sottish that keeping in their sight Christ painted as Crucified they would be saued by the Law and not by the merits of his Crosse for it was madnesse and folly to paint Christ and honour him as crucified and not to thinke that by his death vpon the Crosse he redeemed the world ANSVVER There is reason why Romists which stile themselues Catholickes but are not should bee sparing in boasting of Scripture but the reason assigned by the Aduersarie which is that Scriptures may be peruerted by Errants is vnsufficient for it is common to Tradition and to Histories and monuments of antiquitie to be peruerted and abused and the same happeneth not by the kind and nature of the Scripture but accidentally through the malice and subtiltie of man peruerting the right wayes of the Lord. And there is sufficient matter in the sacred Scripture to demonstrate veritie and to conuince Errants when they peruert the right sence And whereas you affirme in the next place that Romists haue Scriptures more cleare and expresse than any that Protestants can bring for themselues euen about the vse of the Image of Christ. First If this were true it prooueth not the question That Images ought to be worshipped but onely that they may bee vsed for Historie Ornament and Signification as the Cherubins and other Pictures of the Temple in the old Law for Vse being a generall and Worship a speciall you cannot conclude affirmatiuely from the former to the latter Secondly You depart from your owne receiued Principles when you indeuour to prooue Image worship by Scripture for the same according to your doctrine is a diuine Tradition and such a Tradition according to learned Bannes as is neither expresly nor infoldedly taught in holy Scripture Wherefore then doe you attempt to prooue Iconolatrie out of Scripture which being in your Tenet a Tradition is Doctrina tantum non Scripta a Doctrine altogether vnwritten It is a vaine thing to promise to fetch Treasure out of a Chest or water out of a flint stone in which a man himselfe confesseth there is none Thirdly St. Paul his Text Galath 3.1 Nullis machinis can by no ingens or deuices be wrested to your Tenet All Expositors antient and moderne which haue Commented vpon this Text are against you and you haue neither the letter nor matter of the Text fauourable to you The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vpon which you insist is translated by your owne Interpretors Proscribed and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iud. v. 4. Prescribed and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 15.4 Haue beene written and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eph. 3. 3. I haue written before And whereas you flye to Beza translating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Depictus Painted before he telleth you in his Annotation that hee vnderstandeth not artificiall but Theologicall depainting not externall but spirituall to wit by the euident and powerfull Preaching and Doctrine of Saint Paul Christ Iesus was so liuely reuealed and set foorth to the vnderstanding of the Galathians as if they had indeed beheld him crucified before them And in this manner Chrysostome Theophilact and Oecumenius expound Saint Paul and with them agree your owne Doctors Aquinas Adam Sasbot Estius Cornelius Iustinianus Vasques Salmeron c. There is no small difference betweene vocall and spirituall depainting and betweene materiall or artificiall betweene painting vpon mindes and painting vpon materiall Tables betweene intellectuall beholding Christ Iesus crucified in the Storie of the Gospell or in the Sacrament and in a visible Statue or painted Table And therefore from St. Pauls affirming the former the Iesuits latter followeth not IESVIT I know that some Catholickes expound this place That Christ was painted out vnto the Galathians Metaphorically by preaching which I doe not denie but this doth not repugne with the other sence that he was also materially painted as crucified the which being more conforme to the natiue and proper signification of the words is not to bee forsaken but vpon euident absurditie especially seeing it hath more connexion with the drift of the Apostles discourse which is to prooue the Galathians sencelesse in forsaking Christ crucified painted before their eyes for to forsake Christ crucified set forth by preaching as the Sauiour of the world though it be impious yet is not sencelesse yea rather Saluation by the Crosse of Christ did seeme follie vnto the Gentiles But to haue Christ painted as crucified before mens eyes honouring him by Christian deuotion in regard of his crucifixion and death and not to expect Saluation by him is sottish and senceles And of this materiall painting of Christ Athanasius expoundeth this place whom Turrianus citeth wherefore I may iustly say that we haue more cleere and expresse Scripture for the vse of Images than haue Protestants for their vulgar Translations ANSVVER First yeeld vs but one Father or learned Papist who in their Commentaries expound this place literally according to your sence Secondly It is neither comformable to the signification of the words for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to be written afore and not to be pictured before neither hath it any necessarie connexion with the drift of the Apostles discourse c. For the Galathians being Christians conuerted from infidelitie and not Heathens or Iewes to whom the Crosse or death of Christ vpon the Crosse seemed foolishnesse 1. Cor. 1.18 were more sencelesse that is to say more void of right iudgement by forsaking Christ Iesus crucified which was by the preaching of the holy Ghost and Sacraments ordained by God euidently reuealed to their conscience and receiued by Faith than if they had forsaken him painted onely in a Crucifix for to forsake a thing written in the heart and beleeued

wine or wine of the Nymphs goddesses of water But our Aduersarie blusheth not to say That the former doctrine and practise is sutable to the iudgement of the Fathers and that S. Augustine maintained the same First I conceiue that by Fathers he vnderstandeth the Trident Fathers for could he haue named antient Fathers no doubt we should haue had them As for the narration out of S. Augustine Epist. 137. it falleth short of prouing the question in hand For no mention is made concerning inuocation of S. Foelix the Martyr nor of any vowes or oblations presented to him Neither was the discouerie of the fact mentioned in that Epistle required to be made by the Martyr but it was intended to be sought from God himselfe at the sepulchre of the Martyr Also after the suspected persons returned from Nola the matter hung still in suspence and consequently nothing was effected about the discouerie But if any speciall myracle had beene wrought in those daies at the Martyres tombe the same is to be ranked among things extraordinarie from which a Catholicke and perpetuall doctrine or practise cannot be concluded for one swallow maketh not a Summer and from miraculous and extraordinarie actions one cannot inferre a generall and perpetuall practise for all ages as appeareth by the poole of Bethesda Ioh. 5.4 and the riuer of Iordan Kings vlt. cap. 5.14 IESVIT This being a Doctrine taught by the learnedest Father Christianitie bred by him grounded on Scripture and on the vnsearchable course of the diuine prouidence neuer censured nor condemned by any Father we need not feare superstition in seeking some kind of fauors and benefits by the peculiar intercession of certaine Saints ANSVVER S. Augustine hath nothing in the former place which maintaineth the seeking of special benefits and fauours by the peculiar intercession of certaine Saints he hath no word concerning the particular protection patronage gouernement offices or deliuerance wrought by Saints deceased to which purpose you alledge him and therefore the Iesuit ouer-reacheth lowdly when he saith This being a Doctrine taught by the learnedest Father which Christianitie bred being by him grounded on Scripture IESVIT Specially seeing this was vsuall in the Church in her most flourishing age S. Lucie went on Pilgrimage vnto the body of S. Agatha for helpe of her mother putting peculiar confidence in her intercession as being a Christian Virgin of her Countrey and profession S. Iustina a virgin being by the deuill tempted against virginall puritie fled to the most glorious of Virgins Virginem Mariam rogauit vt periclitanti virgini opem feret as S. Nazianzen writes S. Martinian as Paulinus records hauing suffered shipwracke called with peculiar deuotion and trust vpon Saint Paul whose Epistles he did highly honour remembring that the same Saint yet liuing deliuered threescore soules from the like perill neither was his Petition frustrate ANSWER Your Argument to wit Saint Lucie Saint Iustina Saint Martinian sought deliuerance by Intercession of Saints Ergo This was Catholicke Doctrine in the more flourishing age of the Church hath two lame ioynts First The sequele is false for neither was this age the most flourishing age but farre inferiour to ages precedent neither doth the particular practise of certaine persons make this deuotion Catholicke because to the being of Catholicke it is required that the thing so denominate be originally Apostolicall and vniuersally practised in former ages as well as in the latter Secondly The Antecedent is not sufficiently prooued for no antient Author is produced concerning Saint Lucie And Iustina the Virgin according to the Narration of Gregorie Nazianzen being in distresse as Susanna sometimes was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. despairing of all other remedies she slieth to God then assumeth for her Patron and Protectour Christ Iesus her spouse and after this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. shee besought the Virgin Marie to succour her being a distressed Virgin First she slieth to God Secondly shee maketh Christ her Patron Thirdly she requesteth the Virgin Marie in zeale rather than vpon knowledge Fourthly shee is deliuered not by Pilgrimage to Saints but by prayer and fasting to God And although Gregorie Nazianzen speaking onely by hearesay reporteth that she supplicated not by any Collect or set forme of deuotion but by a short eiaculation to the Virgin Marie yet this was done by her in the last place and after she had first sought to God and Christ and her deliuerance is wholly ascribed by Nazianzen to Christ and in no sort to the Virgin Marie Martinian being in danger of shipwracke amased and affrighted at the present perill he tooke vp Saint Pauls Epistles and laid them to his brest and Paulinus saith That God by his grace did giue this man to Saint Paul whose Epistles and Doctrine hee esteemed so highly as that neglecting all other goods and stuffe which were in the shippe hee gathered vp onely Pauls Epistles I finde in this Poeme for the Iesuit vsed other mens eyes when he cited Paulinus his Epistles to Cythereus no pilgrimage or supplication made by Martinian to S. Paul but a singular deuotion to S. Pauls Epistles and Gods protection and fauour towards him for the loue he bare the Apostle and his Doctrine vpon which it pleased the Diuine Maiestie to bestow life and safetie vpon him and to deliuer him from perill as he did those for whom Saint Paul prayed Acts 27.24 But note here Saint Pauls Epistles saue a man from shirwracke and yet in the Ocean of the Papacie they must be the cause of many a mans shipwracke vpon the rocke of Inquisition I maruell if the Iesuite blushed not when hee wrote this well knowing what euill entertainement they giue Gods Booke that if it be but found in a ship it is so farre from sauing a man as it did Martinian in Paulinus that it confiscateth the whole fraught to the Holy house IESVIT Notwithstanding we confesse That heerein a discreet mediocritie is to be obserued and if any abuses bee crept in amongst common people we desire they should be reformed but so that paring away the abuse wee take not away the substance of a pious Christian Custome For wee cannot expect that simple people in matter of Religion will not sometimes foolishly and superstitiously mistake which when it happens we must as S. Augustine saith Ignorantiam instruere pertinaciam deridere ANSVVER Shamefull and intollerable abuses are committed by Romists in this kind and some learned Papists themselues haue desired reformation But one may as soone make the Morions skinne white as cleanse this leprosie and as in A dulterie so in Idolatry discreet moderation hath no place IESVIT §. 7. Concerning Oblations made vnto Saints ANother circumstance whereupon Protestants ground the seuenth cause of their dislike is our offering oblations vnto Saints which your Maiestie doth obiect peculiarly as done to the blessed Virgin Mary ANSWER IN the old law as

Sacrifices were offered to God onely Exod 22.20 Iud. 13.16.2 Chron. 34.25 so likewise oblations and vowes Deut. 23.21 Leuit. 24.5.6 and as the Lord condemned people of Idolatrie for sacrificing to creatures so the Israelites are reprooued for burning incense to the brasen Serpent 2. Kings 18.4 and to the queene of heauen Ierem. 44.25 This law in respect of the substance is morall and consequently obligeth Christian people as well in case of Oblations as of Sacrifices Now by what authoritie and right the Roman Church can abrogate this law in whole or in part and appropriating Sacrifices to God make prayer vowes Incense and oblations common to God and Saints our aduersaries haue not as yet made remonstrance and the Iesuit in this place alleadgeth no diuine authoritie to giue his Maiestie satisfaction but produceth onely an historicall narration out of S. Augustine and 〈◊〉 who report certaine miracles wrought by God Almightie at the Sepulchres of Martyrs IESVIT I answer if any Catholike should offer to the blessed mother of God by way of sacrifice any the least thing he were seuerely to be rebuked and better instructed for sacrifice is a religious homage due to God onely in which respect the sacrifice of the holy Eucharist is neuer offered vnto any but vnto God in memorie and honour of Saints herein the Collyridians women Priests did erre who did sacrifice a wafer cake vnto the blessed Virgin which kind of worship vnder the title of adoration S. Epiphanius reprooues allowing the Catholike worship as thereby tearming her honourable not for humane or ciuill but for diuine and supernaturall respects True it is that in Catholike countryes people offer vnto Saints lights flowers and cheynes not as sacrifices but as ornaments to set foorth their tombes and shrines wherein they doe not dissent from antiquitie nor from Gods holy will who hath confirmed such deuotions by miracle as diuers Authours worthy of all credit relate particularly S. Augustine by Protestants allowed as the most faithfull witnesse of antiquitie He tells that a woman starke blind recouered her sight by laying to her eyes flowers which had touched the shrine wherein were carried about the Relikes of the most glorious Martyr S. Stephan A more wonderfull example in the same kind he relateth done vpon an old man of good note who being sicke and readie to die did yet very obstinately refuse to beleeue in Christ and leaue his Idolatrie although he was very earnestly mooued thereunto by his children that were zealous Christians His son in law despairing to preuaile by persuasion resolued to goe and pray at the tombe of S. Stephan and hauing performed his deuotions with burning affection with many groanes and 〈◊〉 being to depart tooke with him some flowers that were on the shrine and laid them secretly vnder his father in law his head the night as he went to sleepe Behold the next morning the old man awaking outof his sleepe cryeth out desiring them to come to call the Bishop to baptise him He had his desire he was baptised afterwards as long as he liued he had this prayer in his mouth Lord Iesu receiue my spirit being altogether ignorant that that prayer was the last speech of S. Stephan when he was stoned to death by the Iewes which also were the last words of this happy old man for not long after pronouncing these words be gaue vp his soule Other oblations also Catholikes vse to offer vnto Saints not as sacrifices but as memories and monuments of benefits receiued as pictures of limmes by Saints prayers miraculously cured that therein they doe not deflect from antient Christian deuotion and that the Christian Church in her best times vsed vniuersally to make such oblations Theodoret is a sufficient witnesse who writing against the Gentiles alleadgeth as a manifest signe of Christs Godhead and omnipotencie that Idols being excluded he brought in Martyrs to be honoured in their roome not superstitiously as Gods but Religiously as diuine men inuocating and beseeching them to be Intercessours for them vnto God And those that piously and faithfully pray obtaine what they desire as testifie the oblations which they being therevnto bound by their vowes present in the Chappels of the Saints as tokens of health recouered for some hang vp images of eyes others of eares others of hands some made of gold some of siluer Thus he So generall and so notorious euen vnto Infidells was this Christian deuotion ANSWER Touching the Collyridians I answer that notwithstanding there is some difference in the materiall act betweene Romists and them yet because Epiphanius condemneth not onely externall sacrifice but all Oblation to the blessed virgin and alloweth onely that honour and not adoration shal be yeelded vnto her therefore Prayers incense-offerings and presents to Saints deceased were held vnlawfull in this Fathers dayes Secondly Saint Augustine de Ciuit. Dei l. 22. c. 8. doth not mention any Prayers Oblations Vowes or donatiues offered to Saints and Martyrs but he reporteth what miraculous cures were performed at the toombes of some Martyrs now because these things were extraordinarie and the credit of diuers of them dependeth vpon fame which is many times vncertaine and St. Augustine himselfe saith They are not commended vnto vs by such waightie authoritie as that without all doubt they must needs be credited they cannot be sufficient grounds or foundations of Catholicke Doctrine or Practise Thirdly Theoderit d. cur Graec. Affect lib. 8. saith Wee Oh Grecians neither offer sacrifice to Martirs nor drinke offerings but honour them as holy men and as the friends of God And whereas he further saith That some hang vp the shapes of eyes others of eares c. he meaneth that these were monuments of miraculous cures wrought in those dayes extraordinarily by God at the Sepulchres of Martyrs but he affirmeth not that they were oblations offered to Martyrs And yet the particular practise of some people in those dayes whatsoeuer it was if it haue not ground in Diuine Reuelation cannot raise an Article of Faith or necessarie dutie IESVIT § 8. The Romane Church set formes of Prayer without cause misliked FInally Protestants dislike the circumstance of praying in a set forme vnto Saints and that we appoint a particular office to the blessed Virgin Mary which cannot be proued to haue been vsed in the Primatiue Church ANSVVER THe Romish set formes of Prayers to the Virgin Marie and other Saints deceased are iustly condemned by vs not meerely because they are exercised in a set forme which is accidentall but in respect of the matter and substance of them neither can our Aduersaries demonstrate that such Prayers either in a set forme or by sudden inspiration were vsed in the Primatiue Church for the holy Apostles which are the prime Fathers and founders of that Church prescribed and practised no other forme of Prayer than such as was consonant to their Scriptures and the Churches which

Mercie floweth into the admirable Vessell and Basin the Virgin Marie and the other part to wit of Iustice which was poured vpon the Altar he hath left vnto Christ. Thus writeth Benzonius a famous Romane both by birth and Religion in our dayes Blasius Viegas a moderne Iesuit applyeth also this absurd comparison of Assuerus and Esther to Christ and the Virgin Marie And these Authors with the rest whom they follow doe not intend onely to teach That the blessed Virgin is very gracious with Christ in respect of her intercession but that shee hath a right and authoritie as a Queene Regent to distribute mercie and benefits where shee pleaseth and to dispence with the Lawes of Iustice when there is cause as appeareth by the words of Ozorius the Iesuite citing out of Nunne Bridgets Reuelations Christs words following My mother in my Kingdome ruleth as a Queene c. and therefore shee may dispence with Lawes made by me when there is iust cause And by this speech Nunne Bridget intendeth to shew that Christ did vse the helpe of his mother Marie in ruling his Kingdome now this Osorius was a Iate Preacher in Portugall Our English Iesuits when they returne to vs dissemble and cloake this Superstition not because they dislike it for they and the rest are all Birds of a feather and feed their silly chicks with the same carraine but they prudently consider that such notorious blasphemies being published would appeare odious and hinder their successe in beguiling vnstable soules and minister greater aduantage to their Aduersaries therefore like the Steward in the Gospell commended for his craft but not for his honestie when their Tenet is an hundred they write downe fiftie and when their Doctrine is blasphemous they confesse a pettie ouersight or vnfitnesse in the phrase and manner of speaking But if in good earnest they disliked the former assertions why hath not the grand Senior of Rome siue cum Concilio siue sine Concilio condemned rased and purged out these sacrilegious blasphemies especially because in other Authours their expurgatorius Index hath Eagles eyes and a line or sentence cannot escape these Critickes if there appeare obloquitie or antipathie to their inueterate forgeries Now for a Conclusion of the former Question let it be obserued That the Aduersarie is deficient in the demonstration of his Popish Tenet concerning Inuocation of blessed Saints and Angels for he hath produced no Diuine Testimonie from sacred Scripture no Tradition from the Apostles no plaine and resolute definition of approoued Councels or Primatiue Fathers no sufficient argument of naturall reason yea the mayne Principles of his Doctrine are litigious and dubious amongst Pontificians themselues Hee hath strugled playing fast and loose with our Arguments and spent himselfe in soluing or rather in eluding of obiections but he confirmeth not his owne St. Augustine saith That in things diuine or which concerne saluation they offend grieuously Qui certis incerta preponunt which preferre vncertainties before that which is indubitate Nostra fides certa est ex Doctrina Apostolica nouo veteri Testamento confirmata Our faith concerning the direct inuocation of the deitie by Christ our Mediatour of intercession is right and a certaine Apostolicall Doctrine confirmed by the Old and New Testament The Popish Appendix concerning Inuocation of Saints wanteth all Scripture proofe and whatsoeuer else may be pretended for it is dubious and litigious therefore our Doctrine is of faith and the Popish Tenet of humane opinion or presumption THE FOVRTH POINT THE LITVRGIE AND PRIVATE PRAYERS FOR THE IGNORANT IN AN vnknowne Tongue IESVIT THe Custome of the Romane Church in this Point is agreeable to the Custome of the Churches in all ages and also of all Churches now in the world bearing the name of Christian though opposite vnto the Romane only those of the pretended reformation excepted which constāt concurrence is a great figne that the same is very conforme vnto reason and not any where forbidden in Gods Word which will easily appeare if we looke particularly vnto the same ANSVVER YOu lay your foundation of this Article vpon two apparant vntruths for the Doctrine and custome of the present Romane Church is not onely not agreeable but opposite both to the Doctrine and Practise of the antient Catholicke Church and also to the custome of other Churches which are not absolute Protestants First It is the common voyce of the Fathers That the Liturgie and Seruice of the Church was in their dayes and ought to be vsed in a knowne tongue Origen saith That in his dayes euery nation prayed to God in their owne Language the Grecians in Greeke the Romanes in Latine and all other people in their proper tongue Iustin Martyr Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus affirme That the Priest and the people prayed ioyntly and in common in the publicke Seruice which argueth that the people vnderstood the Prayers And St. Cyprian requires That peoples hearts and words agree and that they heare and vnderstand themselues when they pray to God Saint Basil saith When the words of Prayer are not vnderstood by them which are present the minde of the Precant is vnfruitfull neither doth any man hereby reape any profit St. Chrysostome St. Ambrose affirme the like And St. Augustine requireth people to vnderstand what they pray and sing for if there be onely sound of voyce without sence they may bee compared to Parrats Owsells or Popiniayes And some of the best learned Papists to wit Thomas Aquinas Lyra Cassander acknowledge That in the Primatiue Church the common Seruice was vsed in the vulgar tongue Secondly it is false according to the Tenet of Bellarmine himselfe that all other Churches which differ from the Protestants haue their publique seruice in Hebrew Greeke or Latine Bellonius and Aluares affirme the contrarie of the Armenians and Abissines and Eckius of the Indians and Sigismundus Baro and Hosius of the Russians and Ledesma of the Egyptians and Armenians And AEneus Syluius reporteth That when Cyrillus and Methodius had conuerted the Saluons vnto Christ were suitors that they might administer the common Prayers and Seruice among them in their vulgar tongue The Pope in the Conclaue consulting about this matter a voice was heard as it were from Heauen saying Let euerie Spirit praise the Lord and let euerie tongue acknowledge him and hereupon they were permitted to vse their owne tongue And it appeareth by the Decretals that the Roman Church in former times did ordinarily appoint this for the words of the Canon are For as much as in many places within one Citie and one Diocesse there be nations mingled together speaking diuers tongues c. We therefore commaund that the Bishops of such Cities and Diocesses prouide meet men to minister the holy Seruice according to the diuersitie of their

for imitation Romists also haue yet a farther slight in their Checkstone trickes of beades forsooth to blesse and sanctifie them by the touch of Relickes or by the Popes benediction that such trash may be sold the dearer by their pettie Chapmen THE SIXT POINT THE DOCTRINE OF TRANSVBSTANTIATION IESVIT YOur Excellent Maiestie submitting your Iudgement vnto Gods expresse word doth firmely beleeue the body of Christ to be truely present in the most venerable Sacrament of the Altar which Doctrine doth naturally and necessarily infer whatsoeuer the Church of Rome holds as matter of Faith concerning the manner of his presence ANSVVER HIs Sacred Maiestie a true defendour of the antient Catholicke and Apostolicke Faith to his immortall praise submitteth his iudgement in this and in all other articles to the expresse word of God reuealed from Heauen by the holy Ghost and externally preached and penned by the Prophets and Apostles And concerning the sacred Eucharist he firmely beleeueth that in the holy vse thereof the verie Bodie and Bloud of Christ are truely really and effectually presented and communicated to all faithfull and worthie Receiuers But that the Romish Doctrine of Transubstantiation to wit that after consecration the substance of bread and wine is abolished and the shapes accidents and quantitie thereof onely remaine or that the Bodie and Bloud of Christ are inclosed substantially and corporally vnder the accidentall formes before participation or that dogs and swine truely eat the flesh and drinke the bloud of the sonne of man he cannot beleeue vntill demonstration be made that this Faith is taught by Gods expresse word and was antiently beleeued by the true Catholique Church IESVIT To declare this and together answer an obiection much vrged by some Protestants That they beleeue the bodie of Christ to be in the Sacrament but say they are not bound to beleeue the manner that not being expressed in Scripture ANSWER When the substance of a point is reuealed and the distinct and particular manner concealed it is sufficient to beleeue the former without searching into the latter And not only some Protestants but the Fathers also and some learned Pontificians deliuer thus much concerning the sacred Eucharist Bandinus and the master of the Sentences say Touching the manner of conuersion in the Sacrament some affirme one way and some another c. We say with S. Augustine This mysterie is safely beleeued but not with safetie searched into Cyrill of Alexandria We ought firmely to beleeue the holy mysterie but let vs neuer in matters thus sublime so much as imagine to vtter the manner how And againe The manner how this is done can neither be conceiued by the mind nor expressed by the tongue Theophilact When we heare these words of Christ vnlesse yee eat the flesh of the sonne of man c. Wee ought firmely to beleeue the same and not enquire after what manner And with these agreeth Caluin sup Ephes. 5.32 IESVIT We must note that men are bound firmely to beleeue the manner of a mysterie reuealed when the same belongs to the substance thereof so that reiecting the manner we reiect the beleefe of the substance of the mysterie This is euident and may be declared by the example of the mysterie of the Incarnation the substance whereof is That in Christ Iesus the nature of God and the nature of man are so vnited that God is truely man and man is verily God The manner of this mysterie is ineffable and incomprehensible yet we are bound to beleeue three things concerning it which if we denie we deny the mysterie in substance howsoeuer we may retaine the same in words First that this vnion is not onely metaphoricall by affection as two persons that are great friends may truely be said to be all one but also true and reall Secondly this reall vnion of Natures is substantiall and not accidentall so that thereby the nature of man is not only accidentally perfected by receiuing excellent participations of the diuine nature power wisdome and maiestie but also substantially the verie fulnesse of the Godhead dwelling corporally and substantially in him Thirdly this substantiall vnion is not according to the Natures so that the nature of God and the nature of man become one and the same nature as Eutiches taught but hypostaticall whereby God and man became one and the same person These particulars about the manner of the Incarnation though high and subtile and imcomprehensible to reason Christians may and must beleeue because they belong to the substance of the mysterie and are declared by the Church in generall Councells though the vulgar be not bound explicitly to know them ANSWER When the distinct and speciall manner is reuealed and belongeth to the forme and being of an Article we are obliged to inquire and firmely to beleeue the same according to the instance giuen about the personall vnion But when the same is not distinctly and plainely reuealed nor of the substance of the mysterie it is more safe according to the holy Scripture and Fathers to be ignorant of that which is abstruse and hidden than to be curious beyond our modell Exod. 19. 17. Pro. 25.27 Act. 1.7 Rom. 12.3 1. Cor. 4.6 Col. 2.18 Touching things inscrutable S. Chrysostome saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is better to be soberly ignorant than naughtily intelligent S. Hierom Melius est aliquid nescire securè quam cum periculo discere it is better to be ignorant of some things with safetie 〈◊〉 to seeke to learne them with perill S. Augustine Melior est fidelis ignorantia quam temeraria scientia and Iustine Martyr It is the part of euerie prudent and pious man in matters diuine sometimes to giue the wall to that which exceedeth his modell S. Athanasius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The verie Cherubims vaile their faces when it is come thus farre Saluianus in like manner saith Sacriligae temeritatis quoddam genus est si plus scire cupias quam sinaris It is sacrilegious temeritie to couet to know that which thou art not permitted But the questions of Theologie which are de modo concerning the distinct manner in many cases want sufficient grounds in diuine Reuelation to vnfold them and therefore in things of this nature humble scilence is more safe than temerarious definition IESVIT Jn this sort we say That the manner how our Sauiours bodie is in the Sacrament of his last supper must be beleeued and may not be denied as farre as it concernes the verie life being and substance of the mysterie reuealed which mysterie in substance is That the Bodie of Christ is present in the Sacrament in such sort that the Priest Minister thereof demonstrating what seemeth bread may truely say thereof in the person of Christ This is my Bodie This supposed as the substance of the Mysterie I inferre that two Catholicke Doctrines concerning the manner of this Mysterie

present and the Doctrine was personally pronounced to them alone Also Math. 18.9 15.22 the like is found concerning other doctrines and precepts and yet these doctrines and precepts are common to all Christians The Romists if they were not partiall could distinguish betweene personall precepts deliuered to the Apostles onely as they were by office Pastors of the Church and betweene common precepts deliuered vnto them as Christians and as they represented the whole body of the Church But the Obiectour addeth That we are not able to demonstrate that this Precept Drinke yee all of this was common I answere First if that which Christ said to the Apostles S. Paul spake to the whole multitude of Beleeuers then Christs words vttered to the Apostles were common But the first is true 1. Cor. 11. 28. And S. Hierome inferreth vpon the same Oportet Coenam dominicam esse communem quià ille omnibus Discipulis suis qui aderant equalitèr tradidit Sacramenta The Lords Supper ought to be common because Christ deliuered the Sacraments of his Bodie and Bloud equally to all the Disciples that were present Secondly If Communion in both kinds hath not foundation in Christs words vttered to the Apostles then Communion in one kind wanteth foundation in Christs words and institution and if it haue not foundation in Christs words then it wanteth all foundation for S. Paul grounds his whole Doctrine touching the holy Eucharist vpon our Sauiours words and institution 1. Cor. 11.23 Thirdly If the reason why the Apostles receiued the Cup was because they were Priests then all Priests being present at the communion ought to receiue in both kinds although they administer not but this is repugnant to the practise of the Romane Church Fourthly It is not certaine that the Apostles were Priests when Christ ordained and administred the Eucharist for that they were not Priests Math. 18. is affirmed by our Aduersaries and that they were made Priests Luke 22. by the words Hoc facite as Bellarmine Suares Henriques Hosius Canisius c. say can neuer be prooued for what force is there in Hoc facite to conclude Priestly Ordination and if Hoc facite prooueth Priesthood then Lay men are made Priests when the words Doe this in remembrance of mee are spoken to them in part or respectiuely Hitherto we haue found nothing in our Aduersaries but Sophistrie of words and Theomachie against Diuine Institution and Apostolicall Tradition But to hold correspondence with the rest the Iesuit addeth IESVIT Secondly These words Accipite manducate bibite Take eate drinke were certainely spoken vnto the same persons and they runne so together in rancke that no man can with probabilitie make the one outrunne the other But the command Accipite which signifies Take with your hands for it is a Precept distinct from Manducate which is take with your mouth was giuen to the Apostles onely not vnto all the faithfull else wee must say That all Communicants were bound to take the consecrated Bread and Cup with their hands who euer heard of such a Precept in the Christian Church ANSWER This Argument truely propounded is All persons commanded to eate were commanded to take None but the Apostles were commanded to take for if Lay men were commanded to take they must alwayes receiue the Eucharist in their hands Ergo None but the Apostles were commanded to eate This Obiection fighteth against Lay mens receiuing in one kinde which vntill 〈◊〉 we supposed Papists had permitted but it seemeth that they will haue the whole vse of the Sacrament depend vpon the Popes deuotion and pleasure But touching the Argument I denie the Assumption for Lay men were commanded to take that is to receiue at least into their mouthes and then to manducate that is to chew or swallow and to let the Element receiued passe into their stomack To take with the hand is agreeable to Christs manner of Administration and it was vsed in the Primitiue Church but the same is not of absolute necessitie for some Communicants may want hands or the naturall vse thereof but to receiue into the mouth and then to manducate or drinke is commanded The Iesuit imagineth that all taking is by the hand and thus he prooueth himselfe to be neither good Grammarian nor Diuine Virgill saith Illos porticibus rex accipiebat in amplis where accipio is to entertaine S. Paul saith Per quem accepimus gratiam Rom. 1. 5. By whom we haue receiued grace and Apostleship ca. 8.15 Ye haue receiued 〈◊〉 the spirit of Adoption The Angell said Ioseph thou sonne of Dauid feare not to take Mary thy wife Math. 1. 20. His Bishopricke let another man take Act. 1.20 IESVIT The third reason is because there was a peculiar and personall cause Why Christ should giue that particular Councellor Admonition for the imperatiue word doth not euer signifie a precept but often an aduise or a permission as your Maiestie well knowes to his Apostles at that time to wit because he would haue them all not onely drinke of his bloud but also would haue them drinke of the same Cup without filling and consecrating the same anew this is more manifest in the Protestants opinion who thinke the Chalice whereof Christ said in S. Mathew Bibite ex hoc omnes to be the same whereof he said in S. Luke Accipite diuidite inter vos non enim bibam amplius de hoc genimine vitis For this being supposed the words Drinke ye all of this imports the same as Diuide this Cup amongst you But Diuide this Cup amongst you was a personall precept giuen to all the Apostles importing that euery one should drinke but a part of that Cup and that also in such measure as the Cup without new filling and consecration might suffice for all to drinke therof What All men in the world Or all Christians that should succeede them to the Worlds end Christ neuer intended that one Cup for all nor is it indeed diuided or parted with vs but the Apostles dranke it vp amongst them Wherefore referring my saying to your Maiesties learned censure I conclude that to me it seemes cleere that the precept or rather direction Drinke ye all of this was but personall confined vnto the number of all there then present ANSWER The Precept Drinke ye all of this saith the Iesuit was personall and concerned the Apostles onely because our Sauiour commanded them All to drinke of the same Cup without filling and consecrating it anew But if Drinke ye all of this had imported a generall duty then Christ could not haue stinted them to one single Cup. This obiection is grounded vpon a false Principle which is all Precepts are Personall in regard of their substance wherein any circumstance is Personall Nothing can be more absurd and false than this Position for in the Decalogue it selfe some things were Personall as appeareth by the Preface Exod. 20.2 Likewise in many generall or common

question it can both prooue and approoue it selfe His words are So that vnlesse besides Scripture there be c. Besides Scripture therefore he excludes not Scripture but calls for another proofe to lead it in namely Tradition which no man that hath braines about him denyes In the two other places Brierly falsifies shamefully for folding vp all that Hooker sayes in these words This other meanes to assure vs besides Scripture is the Authoritie of Gods Church he wrinkles that worthie Author desperately and shrinkes vp his meaning In the former place abused by Brierly no man can set a better state of the question betweene Scripture and Tradition than Hooker doth His words are these The Scripture is the ground of our Beleefe The Authoritie of man that is the name he giues to Tradition is the Key which opens the doore of entrance into the knowledge of the Scripture I aske now when a man is 〈◊〉 and hath viewed a house and by viewing likes it and vpon liking resolues vnchangeably to dwell there doth he set vp his resolution vpon the Key that let him in No sure but vpon the goodnesse and commodiousnesse which he sees in the house And this is all the difference that I know betweene vs in this Point In which doe you grant as yee ought to doe that wee resolue our Faith into Scripture as the Ground and wee will neuer denie that Tradition is the Key that lets vs in In the latter place Hooker is as plaine as constant to himselfe and Truth His words are The first outward motiue leading men so to esteeme of the Scripture is the Authoritie of Gods Church c. But afterwards the more we bestow our labour in reading or learning the Mysteries thereof the more we find that the thing it selfe doth answer our receiued opinion concerning it so that the former inducement preuailing somewhat with vs before doth now much more preuaile when the verie thing hath ministred further reason Here then againe in his iudgement is Tradition the first inducement but the farther Reason and Ground is the Scripture and resolution of Faith euer settles vpon the farthest Reason it can not vpon the first inducement So that the state of this Question is firme and plaine enough to him that will not shut his eyes The last thing I shall trouble you with is That this method and manner of proouing Scripture to be the Word of God is the same which the antient Church euer held namely Tradition or Ecclesiasticall Authoritie first and then internall Arguments from the Scripture it selfe The first Church of Christ the Apostles themselues had their warrant from Christ their Tradition was euerie way Diuine both in the thing they deliuered and in the manner of their witnessing it But in after-times of the Church men prooue Scripture to be the Word of God by internall Arguments as the chiefe thing vpon which they resolue though Tradition be the first that mooues them to it This way the Church went in S. Augustine's time He was no enemie to Church-Tradition yet when he would prooue that the Author of the Scripture and so of the whole knowledge of Diuinitie as it is supernaturall is Deus in Christo God in Christ he takes this as the all-sufficient way and giues foure proofes all internall to the Scripture first The Miracles secondly That there is nothing carnall in the Doctrine thirdly That there hath beene such performance of it fourthly That by such a Doctrine of Humilitie the whole World almost hath beene conuerted And whereas ad muniendam fidem for the defending of the Faith and keeping it entire there are two things requisite Scripture and church-Church-Tradition Vincent Lirinensis places Authoritie of Scriptures first and then Tradition And since it is apparant that Tradition is first in order of Time it must necessarily follow that Scripture is first in order of Nature that is the chiefe vpon which Faith rests and resolues it selfe And your owne Schoole confesses this was the way euer The woman of Samaria is a knowne resemblance but allowed by your selues For quotidie dayly with them that are without Christ enters by the Woman that is the Church and they beleeue by that fame which she giues c. But when they come to heare Christ himselfe they beleeue his words before the words of the woman For when they haue once found Christ they doe more beleeue his words in Scripture than they doe the Church which testifies of him because then propterillam for the Scripture they beleeue the Church and if the Church should speake contrarie to the Scripture they would not beleeue it Thus the Schoole taught then and thus the Glosse commented then And when men haue tyred themselues hither they must come The Key that lets men in to the Scriptures euen to this knowledge of them that they are the Word of God is Tradition of the Church but when they are in they heare Christ himselfe immediately speaking in Scripture to the Faithfull And his Sheepe doe not onely heare but know his voyce To conclude then wee haue a double Diuine Testimonie altogether infallible to confirme vnto vs that Scripture is the Word of God The first is the Tradition of the Church of the Apostles themselues who deliuered immediately to the World the Word of Christ the other the Scripture it selfe but after it hath receiued this Testimonie And into these wee doe and may safely resolue our Faith As for the Tradition of after ages in and about whom Miracles and Diuine power were not so euident we beleeue them because they doe not preach other things than those former the Apostles left in scriptis certissimis in most certaine Scripture And it appeares by men in the middle ages that these Writings were vitiated in nothing by the concordant consent in them of all succeedors to our owne time And now by this time it will be no hard thing to reconcile the Fathers which seeme to speake differently in no few places both one from another and the same from themselues touching Scripture and Tradition and that as well in this Point to prooue Scripture to be the Word of God as for concordant exposition of Scripture in all things else When therefore the Fathers say Wee haue the Scripture by Tradition or the like either they meane the Tradition of the Apostles themselues deliuering it and there when it is knowne we may resolue our Faith or if they speake of the present Church then they meane that the Tradition of it is that by which wee first receiue the Scripture as by an according meanes to the prime Tradition But because it is not simply Diuine wee resolue not our Faith into it nor settle our Faith vpon it till it resolue it selfe into the prime Tradition of the Apostles or the Scripture or both and there we rest with it And you cannot shew an ordinarie consent of Fathers nay Can you or any

being a commandement IESVIT Secondly suppose Christ spake these imperatiue words Doe this after the giuing of the Cup yet are they to be vnderstood with this restriction Doe this that is all things that belong to the essence and substance of this Action in memorie of me for if we extend the Precept Doe this further than the substance of the Action vnto the Accidentarie circumstances thereof in which Christ did then institute and gaue the Sacrament many absurdities will follow By this rule wee must alwayes celebrate and receiue the Eucharist after supper as Christ did especially seeing this circumstance of after supper was chosen of Christ as being verie proper and mysterious for thereby is signified that this is the sacrifice which succeedes the Paschall Lambe that was offered in the euening the sacrifice whereof the royall Prophet saieth in the person of Christ Eleuatio manuum mearum Sacrificium vespertinum The Sacrifice instituted in the Euening of the World to continue vntill the end thereof We should also by this rule be bound stil to celebrate in Azime that is vnleauened Bread in which Christ did celebrate and giue the Sacrament saying Do this which circumstance was also mysticall signifying the puritie of our Sauiours virginall bodie and person which was without any leauen of finne And befides the Priest might not giue the Sacrament vnto any but such whose feet he had washedafore seeing Christ gaue the Eucharist with this preparatiue Circumstance which doubtlesse is verie pertinent and mysterious to signifie with what puritie of conscience men ought to approach vnto the sacred Table If to bind men to obserue these circumstances of our Sauiours Action though mysterious and Sacramentall were absurd as without doubt it is most absurd then we must not extend the Precept Doe this to the Circumstances of Christs Action but acknowledge that the Precept Do this onely includes the doing of that which pertaines to the substance of the Sacrament and so not to the giuing of both kinds the substance thereof being entire in one onely kind as hath beene prooued ANSVVER This precept is not extended to things adiaphorous and accidentall circumstances such as was the time after supper the place and vpper roome the persons men onely and no women the qualitie of the bread vnleauened the gesture of the receiuers the preuious washing of feet c. but it commandeth onely that which was of the substance of the holy Eucharist And the sacramentall signes of Bread and Wine or such as hath formerly beene prooued pag. 482. c. IESVIT The second Text much vrged for the giuing of the Cup vnto all men is the words of our Sauiour Bibite ex hoc omnes wherein some note our Sauiours prouidence saying That he foreseeing that some would take the Cup from the Laitie granting them the consecrated Bread said of the Supper Bibite ex hoc omnes but not of the Bread Manducate ex hoc omnes I answere The words of our Sauiour be plaine Drinke ye all of this but the difficultie is to whom they are spoken and who are these all Luther would haue all men for whom the bloud of Christ was shed whence is followes that as the Bloud of Christ was shed for all men euen Infidels Iewes Turkes Infants the Cup also should be giuen vnto all these which to say were verie absurd Others restraine the word All to the Faithfull come to the yeares of discretion who must drinke of the Cup all of them But what shall we say of them that are by nature abstemij who cannot indure the tast of any wine yet are not to be excluded from the Sacrament Wherefore the trueth is that these wordes were spoken vnto all the Apostles and to them All only And though it be enough for Catholickes to say it and put their Aduersaries to prooue their pretended precept which they call of the eternall King for the Cup and so long as they cannot cleerely conuince the contrarie good reason the word of the Church defined by Councels should stand yet exabūdanti we can very probably shew out of the sacred Text that the particle All concernes all the Apostles only First what one Euangelist saith was commanded vnto all Bibite ex hoc omnes Drinke yee all of this another relates to haue beene answerably performed by them all biberunt ex eo omnes all dranke thereof But the second All is restrained to all the Apostles and to them all onely What reason then is there to extend the words Drinke yee all of this further than to all the Apostles ANSVVER That which S. Stephen spake to the vnfaithfull Iewes Yee do alwaies resist the holy Ghost Act. 7. 51. is verified in the Pharisees of Rome for no light of heauenly veritie is so illustrious which this generation in fauour of their owne impietie will not indeauour to cloud Is it possible for any thing to be more euident for Communion in both kindes than this precept of Christ Drinke yee all of this especially when the same is expounded by the immediat practise of our Sauiour and by the practise of the holy Apostles and of the Primitiue Church But the sonnes of darkenesse hauing renounced veritie and chosen the way of errour blunder and grope in the cleere light and verba recta ac veritatis luce fulgentia tortuosis interpretationibus obscurare deprauare moliuntur as S. Augustine long since spake of the Pelagians The Iesuits euasion or starting hole is the words of Christ Math. 26.27 Drinke yee all of this containe a precept not generall to all Communicants but speciall or singular to the Apostles onely The reasons of this assertion are First if the precept were generall then all men for whom the Bloud of Christ was shed euen Infidels Iewes Turkes and Infants must receiue the Cup. A profound obiection and such as will take away the Bread as well as the Cup from Lay people For at the instant when Christ ordained and administred the holy Eucharist none were present for ought we know but only the Apostles And there is extant a speciall rule touching people of riper yeares and for Christians onely to receiue this Sacrament 1. Cor. 11.28 c. cap. 10.17.21 and Cardinall Caietan concludeth the same out of our Sauiors precept Math. 26.26 The consequence of this Obiection to wit the Precept of Christ is not generall in respect of all Christians rightly disposed because when the Eucharist was first administred and these words vttered none were present but the Apostles is like vnto these which follow None were present but the Apostles and the words were in speciall directed to them when Christ said Watch and pray least yee fall into temptation Math. 26.41 Ergo this precept concerneth the Apostles onely and not Lay men Also when our Sauiour said Math. 18.3 Vnlesse yee bee conuerted and become as little children yee shall not enter into the kingdome of God the Apostles onely were

whatsoeuer it may now determine into which Error some opposers of the Church of Rome haue fallen And vpon this is grounded your Question Wherein are wee neerer to vnitie if a Councell may erre In relating the B. his Answer to this you are not so candide as you confesse him ingenuous before For his words did not sound as yours seeme to doe That wee should hold with the Councell erre or not erre till another came to reuerse it As if grounds of Faith might varie at the Racket and be cast of each side as a cunning hand might lay them You forget againe omit at least and with what mind you best know the B. his Caution For he said The determination of a Generall Councell erring was to stand in force and haue externall obedience at the least yeelded to it till euidence of Scripture or a demonstration to the contrary made the Error appeare and vntill thereupon another Councell of equall Authoritie did reuerse it Thus then the B. But indeed he might haue returned vpon you againe If a Generall Councell not confirmed by the Pope may erre which you affirme To what end then a Generall Councell And you may answere Yes for although a Generall Councell may erre yet the Pope as Head of the Church cannot An excellent meanes of vnitie to haue all in the Church as the Pope will haue it what euer Scripture say or the Church thinke And then I pray to what end a Generall Councell Will his Holinesse be so holy as to confirme a Generall Councell if it determine against him I for my part am willing a little to consider hereupon the point of Generall Councels How they may or may not erre and a little to looke into the Romane and Protestant opinion concerning them which is more agreeable to the Power and Rule which Christ hath left in his Church and which is most preseruatiue of Peace established or ablest to reduce vnitie into the Church of Christ when that poore Ship hath her Ribs dashed in 〈◊〉 by the Waues of Contention And this Consideration I will venture to the World but onely in the Nature of a 〈◊〉 and with submission to my Mother the Church of England and the Mother of vs all the Vniuersall Catholike Church of Christ. 1. First then I consider Whether all the Power that an Oecumenicall Councell hath to determine and all the Assistance it hath not to erre in that determination it hath it not all from the Catholike vniuersall Bodie of the Church or Clergie in the Church if you will whose Representatiue it is It seemes it hath For the gouernment of the Church being not Monarchicall but as Christ is Head this Principle is 〈◊〉 in nature Euerie Bodie collectiue that represents receiues Power and Priuiledges from that Bodie which is represented else a Representation might haue force without the thing it represents which cannot be So no Power in the Councell no Assistance but what is in and to the Church But yet then it may be questioned Whether the Representing Bodie hath all the power strength and priuiledge which the Represented hath And suppose it hath all the Legall power yet it hath not all the Naturall eyther of strength or wisedome that the whole hath Now because tho Representatiue hath power from the whole and the maine 〈◊〉 can meet no other way therefore the Acts 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 of the Representatiue be it Ecclesiasticall or Ciuile are binding in their strength But they are not so certaine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 as that Wisedome which resides in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Assemblies meerely Ciuile or Ecclesiasticall all 〈◊〉 men cannot be in the Bodie that represents And it is possible so many able and sufficient men for some particular businesse may be out as that they which are in may misse or mis-apply that Reason and Ground vpon which the determination is principally to rest Here for want of a cleare view of this Ground the Representatiue Bodie erres whereas the Represented by vertue of these Members may hold the Principle vnuiolated 2. Secondly I consider That since it is thus in Nature and in Ciuile Bodies if it be not so in Ecclesiasticall too some reason must be giuen why For that Bodie also consists of men Those men neyther all equall in their perfections of Knowledge and Iudgement whether acquired by Industrie or rooted in nature or infused by God Not all equall nor any one of them perfect and absolute or freed from passion and humane infirmities Nor doth their meeting together make them infallible in all things though the Act which is hammered out by many together must in reason be perfecter than that which is but the Child of one mans sufficiencie If then a Generall Councell haue no ground of not erring from the men or the meeting either it must not be at all or be by some assistance and power vpon them when they are so met together And this if it be lesse than the assistance of the Holy Ghost it cannot make them secure against Error 3. Thirdly I consider That the assistance of the Holy Ghost is without Error that 's no question and as little there is that a Councell hath it But the doubt that troubles is Whether all assistance of the Holy Ghost be affoorded in such a high manner as to cause all the Definitions of a Councell in matters fundamentall in the Faith and in remote Deductions from it to be alike infallible The Romanists to prooue there is infallible assistance produce some places of Scripture but no one of them inferres much lesse enforces an infallibilitie The places which Stapleton there rests vpon are these I will send you the Spirit of Truth which will lead you into all Truth And This Spirit shall abide with you for euer And Behold I am with you vnto the end of the World To these others adde The founding of the Church vpon the Rocke against which the Gates of Hell shall not preuaile And Christs prayer for S. Peter That his Faith faile not 1. For the first which is Leading into all Truth and that for euer All is not alwayes vniuersally taken in Scripture nor is it here simply for All Truth for then a Generall Councell could no more erre in matter of Fact than in matter of Faith in which yet your selues graunt it may erre But into All Truth is a limited All into All Truth absolutely necessarie to saluation And this when they suffer themselues to be led by the blessed Spirit by the Word of God And all Truth which Christ had before at least fundamentally deliuered vnto them Hee shall receiue of mine and shew it vnto you And againe Hee shall teach you all things and bring all things to your remembrance which I haue told you And for this necessarie Truth too the Apostles receiued this promise not for themselues and a Councell but for themselues and the whole Catholike