aggregate of Iewes Manicheans Arians and other condemned sects which all good Christians ought to detest I hartily with their Conuersion yet if they will obstinately resist in despite of their inuentions the words of the Apostle will be verified Iesus Christ yesterday and to day Hebr. 13. â— the same also for euer And they shall giue a fearefull account for their contempt of al Churches and errours against Christian Fayth when repentance will nothing auaile Euen at that day when as S. Ambrose grauely sayth Lib. 5. de fide c. 7. The Iew shall perforce acknowledge whom he crucified when the Manichean shall adore whom he belieued not to haue come in flesh when the Arian shall confesse him to be omnipotent whom he denied And I may adde when all good Christians shall ioyfully behold him whose Fayth they laboured to Maintaine The Doctrines confuted in the ensuing Treatise THe first Doctrine That Fayth necessary to Saluation is not infallible Chap. 1. The grounds of this Doctrine lead to Atheisme Chap. 2. The second Doctrine That the assurance which we haue of Scriptures is but morall Chap. 3. The third Doctrine That the Apostles were not infallible in their Writings but erred with the whole Church of their tyme. Chap. 4. The fourth Doctrine Iniurious to the miracles of our Sauiour and of his Apostles Chap. 5. The fifth Doctrine By resoluing Fayth into Reason he destroyes the nature of Fayth and Beliefe of all Christian Verities Chap. 6. The sixt Doctrine Destructiue of the Theologicall Vertues of Christian Hope and Charity Chap. 7. The seauenth Doctrine Takes away the grounds of Rationall Discourse Chap. 8. The eight Doctrine Opens a way to deny the B. Trinity and other high mysteries of Christian Fayth Chap. 9. The ninth Doctrine Layes grounds to be Constant in no Religion Chap. 10. The tenth Doctrine Prouides for the impunity and preseruation of whatsoeuer damnable Errour against Christian Fayth Chap. 11. The Conclusion CHRISTIANITY MAINTAINED OR The discouery of sundry Doctrines tending to the Ouerthrow of Christian Religion The first Doctrine That Fayth necessary to Saluation is not Infallible CHAP. I. CHRISTIAN Fayth being the foundation of Hope the eye of Charity the lesser light appointed for the night of this world the Way to Heauen if this Foundation be faulty this Eye deceitfull this Light an Eclypse to it selfe this way erroneous our Hope Charity Light Happinesse and all Christianity must end Chap. 1. in worse then nothing in euerlasting vnhappines For as S. Thomas said to our Sauiour (a) Io. 14.5 We know not whither thou goest and how can we know the way So what will it auaile vs to know whither we goe if we follow a misleading way the Direction of a Fayth weake waueriug and subiect to Errour such is Christian Fayth in this man's iudgment deliuered in the Doctrine with which I thought fit to begin in regard it is the substance and summe of that which he deliuers and labours to prooue through his whole booke and is persuaded that it is of great and singular vse and demonstrable by vnanswerable arguments 2. I must confesse it is of great vse to ground Socinianisme which as the (b) Cap. 1. p. 7. Direction fortold reiecteth infallible supernaturall infused Fayth from being necessary to saluation and maketh our Christian Fayth of the Gospell and of Christ Iesus our Lord and Sauiour to be a meere human opinion resolued into the authority of men of no greater certainty then other human Traditions and Histories knowne by report Hence the saying in Charity Maintayned that an absolute certainty of Fayth is necessary to Saluation he taxeth deeply as (c) Pag. 328. most pernicious and vncharitable and els where (d) Pag. 325. n. 3. as a great errour of daungerous pernicious consequence yea pag. 37. thus he writeth Men being possessed with this false principle that Infallible Fayth is necessary and that it is in vaine to belieue the Gospell of Christ with such a kind or degree of assent as they yield to other matter of Tradition and finding that their Fayth of it is to them indiscernable from the beliefe they giue to the truth of other stories are in daunger not to belieue at all c. It is true that pag. 36. n. 8. he sayth We cannot ordinarily haue any rationall and acquired assent more then morall founded vpon credibilities wherby some may conceiue that besides human and rationall Fayth he supposes and requires Diuine Fayth which is a pure sincere firme adhesion to Gods word not caused by reason and discourse but infused by the Holy Ghost's inspiration into a belieuing soule But in truth he disclaimes from any necessity of Diuine Fayth or any diuine light aboue the light of meere reason and will haue men to be saued by the natiue forces of human rationall and fallible Fayth Men sayth he (f) Vbi supra pa. 36. n. 8. are vnreasonable God requires not any thing but reason They pretend that heauenly things cannot be seene to any purpose but by the midday-light but God will be satisfyed if we receiue any degree of Light which makes vs leaue the works of darknesses They exact a certainty of Fayth aboue that of sense and science God desires only that we belieue the conclusion as the premisses deserue wherof in rationall Fayth one is euer weake credible and not infallible And againe pag. 112. n. 154. Neither God doth nor man may require of vs as our duety to giue a greater assent to the mysteries of our Fayth then the motiues of credibility which are fallible deserue This is his doctrine which he deliuers often makes vse thereof to reiect the infallible Authority of Gods Church so prophane impious vnchristian as I wonder that a man professing himselfe a Christian durst venture to vent the same in print in a Christian country For is the certainty of the Fayth which Christians yield to the truth of the Gospell to the life of Christ Iesus our Lord and Sauiour to the histories of holy Scripture of no greater discernable certainty then the beliefe we yield to humane traditions I appeale to the conscience of euery true Christian whether he do not most cleerely discerne his assent to the Truths of holy Scripture to be superiour and incomparably more firme then his beliefe of meere humane storyes That the Serpent spake vnto Eue and persuaded her to eat of the forbidden tree that our first Parents were naked and did not perceiue it till they had eaten of the forbidden apple these storyes other the like would any Christian belieue them yea would they not laugh at them as they doe at Aesops Fables were they not of more credit with them then Caesars Commentaries or Salusts histories as this man * Pag. 327. n. 5. saith they are not That God requires not any thing of vs but only reason That he exacts no more then that we belieue the misteries of Christian Fayth with
I cannot perceiue some fallacy in my reasons against it or neuer hereafter open your mouth in defence of it I answere it seemes to me that your reasons are already sufficiently prooued to be fallacyes since from them either nothing can be deduced for your purpose or else you must acknowledge your selfe to haue no certainty that there is a God that vertue is to be imbraced or that Christian Fayth is euen probable 7. And yet I adde that you must in another respect also solue your owne obiections Remember these your words (zz) Pag. 36.37 Yet all This I say not as if I doubted that the spirit of God being implored by deuout and humble prayer and sincere obedience may and will by degrees aduance his seruants higher and giue them a certainty of adherence beyond their certainty of euidence And elswhere (a) Pag. 112. Gods spirit if he please may work more a certainty of adherence beyond certainty of euidence Now you caÌ„not deny but that these men may be tempted against their Fayth by inuoluntary doubting that they may increase in it that they may commit some deliberat sinne and may make daily progresse in Charity and good workes euen by the greater increase of their Fayth and yet you graunt them a certainty of adherence beyond their certainty of euidence And so in this case your selfe must answere your owne arguments and confesse them to be but fallacies Euen your maine reason that Christian Fayth can be endued with no stronger certainty then the probable motiues on which it relyes by this selfe same instance is proued a Sopbisme For now you grant a certainty of Fayth not without probable arguments of credibility yet not for them it being more certaine then they are and therefore you are still put vpon a necessity of answering your owne arguments And whereas pag. 330. you make a shew of answering this particuler obiection really you do not answere but plainly contradict your self labouring to prooue that it is impossible that there should be a certainty of adherence beyond the certainty of euidence as the Reader may cleerly see and shall be demonstrated in due time 8. One thing more I must not let passe and it is That whereas you say We would fayne haue Christian Fayth belieued to be infallible that there might be some necessity of our Churches infallibility it seemes you are apt inough to yield infallibility to Gods Church if once it be granted that Christian Fayth is infallible And with good reason For seeing you teach that vniuersall Tradition and other arguments of credibility cannot produce an infallible beliefe of holy Scripture and of the mysteries belieued by Christians it must follow that some other infallible meanes must be found out for the propounding to vs the holy Scriptures which other infallible meanes euen according to your persuasion being not Scripture it selfe nor euery mans priuate spirit there remaynes only the authority of the Catholicke Church which as an instrument of the holy Ghost may be an infallible propounder both of Scripture and all diuine verities Wherein there is a large difference betweene the Church and other Iudges These in their sentences or determinations intend not to deliuer points of infallible Fayth as the Church must intend and do it if once it be granted that from her we must receiue holy Scriptures and belieue them with a certaine and infallible assent of Christian Fayth The second Doctrine Chap. 3. That the assurance which we haue of Scriptures is but morall CHAP. III. 1. THis man magnifies holy Scriptures in many places as the only thing on which he relyes his Saluation but whosoeuer shall walke along with him from place to place marke well his wayes will find that they lead to the quite contrary and shew that he neither doth value them to their right worth nor doth lay any other grounds but such as are more apt to breed disesteeme then esteeme of them This may be seene in that he teacheth (b) Pag. 141. 62. That our assurance that the Scripture hath been preserued from any materiall alteration and that any other booke of any profance writer is incorrupted is of the same kind and condition both morall assurances 2. If this may be allowed it must necessarily follow that the assurance which we haue of Scripture must in degree be much inferiour to the assurance which we haue of such bookes of prophane Authors as haue a more full testimony and tradition of all sorts of men to wit Atheists Pagans Iewes Turkes Christians wheras the bookes holy Scripture are either vnknowne or impugned by all except ChristiaÌ„s by some also who would beare of Christians and consequently the morall assurance of them and of the incorruptednesse of them is the much the lesse and of lesse morall credit And by so same reason whosoeuer builds vpoÌ„ this mans grouÌ„ds cannot haue so great assurance that there was a Iesus Christ that he had disciples and much lesse that he wrought wonderous things and lesse then this that those wonders were true miracles as that there was a Coesar Alexander Pompey c. or that they fought such battailes and the like For these things descend to vs by a more vniuersall tradition then the former (c) Pag. 116. Do not your selfe speake thus We haue as great reason to belieue there was such a man as Henry the Eight King of England as that Iesus Christ suffered vnder Pontius Pilate You should haue said we haue greater reason to belieue it if we consult humane inducements only and consequently if Christian Fayth be not absolutely infallible euen aboue the motiues of credibility we are more certaine that there was a King Henry then a Iesus Christ A thing which no true Christian can heare without detestation 3. That which followes out of the same 116. page is of the like nature laying a ground for vn wary people to reiect Scripture For hauing spoken of some barbarous Nations that belieued the doctrine of Christ and yet belieued not the Scripture to be the word of God (d) Pag. 116. for they neuer heard of it and Fayth comes by hearing you adde these words Neither doubt I but if the bookes of Scripture had byn proposed to them by the other parts of the Church where they had been before receiued and had been doubted of or euen reiected by thâ—se barbarous nations but still by the bare beliefe and practise of Christianity they might be saued God requiring of vs vnder paine of damnation only to belieue the verities therein contained and not the diuine authority of the bookes wherein they are contained 4. If this be granted why might not any Church haue reiected the Scriptures being proposed by other parts of the Church And why may not we do so at this day Nay seeing de facto we know the verities of Christian Fayth by Scripture only according to your doctrine we cannot be obliged to belieue the Scriptures
68. n. 42. that the Controuersy about Scripture is to be tryed by most voyces and yet what is your greater number but most voyces And as for greater Authority what can you meane thereby except perhaps greater learning or some such quality nothing proportionable to that Authority on which Christian Fayth must relye The third Doctrine That the Apostles were not infallible in their writings but erred with the whole Church of their time CHAP. IIII. 1. IT can be no wonder that he should speake meanly of the necessity and infallibility of holy Scripture since he labours to fasten errour vpon the Canonicall writers and deliuerers thereof the Apostles themselues and the whole Church of their time Chap. 4. And this coÌ„cerning an Article of Fayth of highest consequence and most frequently reuealed in holy Scripture the deniall whereof had byn most derogatory from the glory of our Sauiour and from the abundant fruit of his sacred Passion to wit that the Ghospell was to be preached to all nations You shall receiue it in his owne words (m) Pag. 1â—7 n. 21. The Church may ignorantly disbelieue a Reuelation which by errour she thinkes to be no Reuelation That the Gospell was to be preached to all Nations was a Truth reuealed before our Sauiours Ascension in these words Goe and teach all nations Math. 29.19 Yet through preiudice or inaduertence or some other cause the Church disbelieued it as it is apparent out of the 11. and 12. Chapter of the Acts vntill the conuersion of Cornelius And that the Apostles themselues were inuolued in this supposed errour of the most primitiue Church he deliuers without ceremony in another place (n) Pag. 144. n. 31. That the Apostles themselues euen after the sending of the holy Ghost were and through inaduertence or preiudice continued for a time in an errour repugnant to a reuealed Truth it is as I haue already noted vnanswerably euident from the story of the Acts of the Apostles Is not this to ouerthrow all Christianity If the Blessed Apostles on whom Christians are builded as vpon their foundation Ephes 2. were obnoxious to inaduertence to preiudice to other causes of errour what certainty can we now haue The Apostles might haue written what they belieued and so we cannot be sure but what they haue written may contain some errour proceeding from inaduertence preiudice or some other cause If they euen after the receiuing of the holy Ghost and with them the whole Church of that time could either forget or transgresse so fresh a Commaund imposed by our Sauiour Christ for his last farewell at his Ascension it will be obuious for aduersaries of Christian Religion to obiect that perhaps they haue byn left to themselues to obliuion inaduertence and other humane defects in penning the Scripture If they erred in their first thoughts why not in their second With the assistance of the holy Ghost they can erre in neither without it in both 2. The Obiection which he brings is not hard to solue S. Peter himselfe neuer doubted That vision was shewed to him and he declared it to the conuerted Iewes for their satisfaction as it happened in the Councell held by the Apostles about the obseruation of the law of Moyses which some Christians conuerted from Iudaisme did much vrge But neither the Apostles nor the other Christians had any doubt in that matter as likewise in our present case not all the Church but only some Zealous for the Iewes did oppose themselues to S. Peter For before the conuersion of Cornelius other Gentils were become Christians as (o) Com. in Act. cap. 10. post vers 48 Cornelius à Lapide with others affirmes proues For which respect the text expressely declares (p) Act. c. 11. v. 2. that they who were offended with S. Peter were of the circumcision that is Iewes made Christians 3. He goes on in this conceit and addes a point no lesse daungerous then the former The Apostles Doctrine sayth he (q) Pag. 144. n. 31. was confirmed by miracles therefore it was entirely true and in no part either false or vncertain I say in no part which they deliuered constantly as a certaine diuine truth and which had the attestation of diuine miracles Thus you see he couertly calls in question all the Apostles writings and layes grouÌ„ds to except against them For if once we giue way to such distinctions and say that the Apostles are to be credited only in what they deliuered constantly as a certaine diuine Truth we may reiect in a manner all Scripture which scarce euer declares whether or no the writers thereof did deliuer any thing as a certaine diuine Truth and much lesse that they remained constant in what they deliuered by writing Or if it should expresse these particulars yet we could not be obliged to belieue it if once we come to deny to the Apostles an vniuersall infallibility For what reason can this man giue according to these grounds of his why they might not haue erred in that particular declaration 4. And besides will he not oblige vs to belieue with certainty any thing deliuered by the Apostles which had not the attestation of diuine miracles It seeemes he will not and thereby in effect takes away the beliefe of very many mysteries of Christian Fayth and verities contayned in holy Scripture For that miracles were wrought in confirmation of euery particular passage of Scripture we cannot affirme neither out of holy Scripture it selfe nor any other credible argument rather the contrary is certaine there being innumerable verityes of the Bible which were neuer seuerally confirmed in that manner and yet it were damnable sinne to deny them And moreouer where or when did the Apostles particularly prooue by miracle that their writings were the word of God Thus you see into what plunges he brings all Christians by his owne Inconstancy from which certainly ariseth this itching desire of his to put conceites into mens heades as if the Apostles also might haue byn various in their writings and not constant 5. I cannot omit another distinction preiudiciall to the infallibility of the Apostles of their writings which he deliuereth in these words (r) Pag. 144. n. 32. For those things which the Apostles professed to deliuer as the Dictates of human reason and prudence and not as diuine Reuelations why should we take them as diuine Reuelations I see no reason nor how we can do so and not contradict the Apostles and God himselfe Therefore when S. Paul sayes in the 1. Epist to the Corinth 7.12 To the rest speake I not the Lord. And againe Concerning virgins I haue no commaundment of the Lord but I deliuer my iudgment If we will pretend that the Lord did certainly speake what S. Paul spake and that his iudgment was Gods commandment shall we not plainly contradict S. Paul and that spirit by which he wrote which mooued him to write as in other places diuine Reuclations which he certainly
of no other Happines but the preseruation of their owne fortunes in this world for hauing punished Heretiques euen with death I leaue to be considered by higher Powers 2. Chap. 11. I grant he would seeme to mitigate his doctrine and confine it within certaine limits but such that his exception is worse then his generall Rule vnlesse I mistake his meaning therefore present his words as they lye to the Readers iudgment There is saith he no daunger to any State from any mans opinion vnlesse it be such an opinion by which disobedience to Authority or impiety is taught or licenced which sort I confesse may iustly be punished as well as other faults or vnlesse this sanguinary doctrine be ioyned with it That its lawful for him by human violence to enforce others to it Thus he As for his first limitation it either destroyes all that he said before or els it is but a verball glosse for his owne security For if he grant that euery Heresy is impiety and brings with it disobedience to Authority as certainly it does if it be professed against the lawes of the Kingdome or Decrees and Commaunds of the Church State Prelats where the contrary is maintained If I say his meaning be this then his former generall Doctrine vanisheth into nothing it will still remaine true that men may be punished for their opinions heresyes But if his meaning be that no opinion is to be punished except such as implyes disobedience to Authority or licenseth Impiety in things which belong meerely to Temporall affayres and concerne only the ciuill comportment of one man to another as theft murther and the like then he still leaues a freedome for men to belieue and professe what they please for matters of Religion And so if they iudge a thing to be vnlawfull which their Superiours affirme to be indifferent yet they may hold their opinion and disobey their Prelates and may be able to tel them from this mans doctrine that to enforce any man in points of this kind is vnlawfull Machiauillian Policy 3. His second limitation seemes to goe further telling vs that a maÌ„s opinion may be punished if this sanguinary doctrine be ioyned with it That it is lawfull for him by human violence to enforce others to it FroÌ„ whence for ought I can perceiue it cleerly followes that if any Church prescribe some forme of Beliefe and punish others for belieuing and professing the contrary the Prelats or others of that Church who coÌ„curre to enforce by punishment such contrary belieuers may themselues be iustly punished As if for example an Arian be punished with Death in any Kingdome the Prelats or other Persons of authority in that State may according to his doctrine be lawfully punished as holding it lawfull to enforce men against their conscience which he calles a sanguinary Doctrine How daungerous a position this might prooue if Arians or Socinians or any other sect or vnquiet spirit could preuaile in any Kingdome or Commonwealth where Hereticks are punished it is not fit for me to exaggerate being sufficient for my intention to haue made it cleere that the enemy of mankind could neuer haue inuented a more effectual meanes then this freedome of opinion and encouragement by impunity for the enlarging of his infernall Kingdome by Heresy Paganisme Atheisme and in a word by destroying whatsoeuer belongs to Christianity 4. As for punishing Heretiks with Excommunication in words he grants it may be done but I haue reason to suspect what his meaning is indeed whether he speake thus only for some respects For I know that a great Socinian hath printed the contrary Iren. Philal disp de Pace Eccles And if no man can be punished with temporall punishmeÌ„t for imbracing that which his Conscience persuades him to be Truth how can he be lawfully punished by Excommunication for doing that which to his vnderstanding he is obliged to do For not acknowledging any authority of Church or Prelats indued with infallibility he is still left to his owne reason Besides one effect of excommunication is to exclude the Person so censured from the ciuill conuersation with others other temporall punishments in all Courts being also consequent to it Seeing then he denyes that men are to be punished for their opinions by Temporall punishments he cannot with coherence affirme that they may lawfully be excommunicated This certainly being a greater enforcement then death it selfe to such as vnderstand the spirituall benefits and aduantages of which men are depriued by that Censure The Conclusion 1. By that which hath been said in these few precedent Chapters it euidently appeares first how fitting it was for the good of our Country in these present circuÌ„stances that people should haue learned by some such Treatise as the Direction to beware of impious Doctrines such as were foreseene that this maÌ„ would vent vnder colour of defending the Protestant cause and answering Charity maintayned And that although nothing could be intended more disgracefull to Protestant Religion then to see a Champion a way chosen to defend it which openly destroyes all Religion yet Compassion could not but worke in a wel-wishing soule and mooue it to desire and to endeauour that such a way should not be taken which might make people more and more insensible of any Religion by blurring the common principles of Christianity and digging vp the foundation thereof to lay insteed of them the grounds of Atheisme 2. Secondly though this hath not taken the full effect which could haue been wished that notwithstaÌ„ding the warning giuen he hath interlacâ—d his whole booke with such stuffe as here you haue seene yet this we haue gotten further that it is discouered cleerly to the world how deeply Socinianisme is rooted in this man and as it is to be feared in many others with whome he must needes haue had much conference since his vndertaking the worke in regard that no timely aduise or Direction no force of reason no feare of shame or punishment no former impressions of Christianity could withdraw him from steeping his thoughts and pen in such vn-Christian inke nor the many Corrections endeauoured by the Approouers of his Booke blot out his errours though in respect of the alterations which haue been by report made in it by them it is quite another thing from the first platforme which he drew and put into their hands and consequently how iust reason the Directour had to suspect that his true intention was not to defend Protestantisme but couertly to vent Socinianisme 3. Now thirdly whether it be not high time that people should now at the least open their eyes vpon this second warning and take that order which may be conuenient to preuent the spreading of so pernicious a Sect I must leaue to the consideration of euery one whome it may concerne I do only for the present wish from my hart that the maintayning of that Blessed Title and State of Christianity of which our Countrey hath been for so many ages possessed may be the effect both of this mans wauering and wandering trauells and of these my labours FINIS Errata PRaesat pag. 10. lin 25. to our nation corrige of our nation Ibid. pag. 11. lin 26. with corrige with Pag. 32. lin 3. is the corrige is so Ibid. lin 4. by so corrige by the Pag. 53. lin 21. Christ is God lege is the Sonne of God In the margent pag. 11. ouer against S. Bernard eited line 3. put Bernard Epist. 87.
CHRISTIANITY MAINTAINED OR A Discouery of sundry Doctrines tending to the Ouerthrovve of Christian Religion Contayned in the Answere to a Booke entituled Mercy and Truth or Charity maintayned by Catholiques Bringing into captiuity all Vnderstanding vnto the Obedience of Christ 2. Cor. 10.5 What is more contrary to Fayth then not to belieue any thing to which Reason cannot reach S. Bernard Epist 190. Permissu Superiorum 1638. TO THE HIGH AND MIGHTY PRINCE CHARLES King of Great-Brittaine France and Ireland c. May it please your Most Excellent Maiesty MY Presumption vvere not easily excusable Most gracious Soueraigne in flying to the Sanctuary of your Maiesty for the protection of this poore Treatise if the great importance of the Cause vvherof I vvrite did not change my Feare into Hope and raise vp my Hope as high as Confidence that Christianity Maintayned by vvhat pen soeuer it be performed needeth not feare to find benigne acceptance from so Gracious and Great a King as you are vvho glory more in that most Sacred name of being a Christian then in that most ancient Stocke of Royall Progenitours vvhich so gloriously adornes the Diademe of your Sacred Maiesty For I do not in this occasion pretend to act either the Offensiue or Defensiue part of any one particular Religion honoured vvith the Name of Christianity but I only come in the generall Name of a Christian Church vvithout treating vvhether it be Latin or Greeke East or VVest of England or of Rome and therefore I cannot despayre of being graciously admitted by your Maiesty My Scope and VVorke as I am saying is only to maintaine the authority of Holy Scripture the Mystery of the Blessed Trinity the Deity of our Blessed Sauiour the infallibility of his Apostles the povver of his Miracles the necessity of his Grace and of the absolute Certainty of Christian Fayth against an Aduersary vvho seeketh to turne the diuine beliefe of Christians into humane Opinion (a) Pag. 36. 37. pag. 112. n. 154. Who teacheth that our assurance of holy Scripture of all the verityes contained therein is but (b) Ibid. probable and credible and consequently such as may vvell be false Who continually vrgeth (c) Pag. 112. lin 3. that God as sure as he is good neither doth nor can require of Christians an infallible and certainly vn-erring Beliefe of his vvord That men neither are bound nor can belieue diuine Reuelations (d) Pag. 330. lin 13.25.33 further then they are made apparent euident to them and that it sufficeth vnto Saluation to belieue the Gospell (e) Pag. 37. lin 20. sâ—qu as vve do other Stories as much as vve do (f) Pag. 327 n. 5. lin 28. Cesars Commentaries or the Hi story of Salust Who proclaimes (g) Pag. 144. n. 31. the Apostles vvith the vvhole Church of their time to haue erred in matters of fayth euen after they had receiued the Holy Ghost That after their Deaths (h) Pag. 292. infine 293. Initio the vvhole Church vvas presently infected vvith vniuersall Errour and that the vvhole Church of the (i) Pag. 338. lin 5. Gentils may fall avvay into Infidelity Who shutteth (k) Pag. 292. 393. the gates of Mercy against penitent sinners Finally vvho openeth an easy vvay for the deniall of all those maine points of Christianity aboue mentioned as it vvill appeare in this ensuing Treatise Vouchsafe therefore Most gracious Soueraigne to consider hovv Christianity is impugned by some euen in this your Kingdome and the incoueniences and dangers thereof and preuent both them and such others of the selfe same kind as may grovv greater if they be not preuented by your Zeale and Care I cannot doubt but that your Maiesty vvill do it euen for the Piety of the thing it selfe though my Aduersary vvho yet pretends that he is vvholy of your Maiesties Religion giues you a more particular offence by departing from the very doctrines vvhich you belieue For besides diuers other single differeÌ„ces he neither allovves the Nine and thirty Articles vvhich your Maiesty in your Royall Declaration affirmes to containe the true Doctrine of the Church of England nor holds he the Succession of Bishops to be necessary in Gods Church Pag. 356. sequ vvhich experience teaches to tend expresly to the confusion of the said Church and destruction of Monarchy And though God hath made your Maiesty most happy both in a Royall Consort of singular and rare endovvments both of Body and Mind vvith a plentifull and most hopefull Issue vvhich vvith my hart I begge may euen last to the very end of the vvorld and vvith an Obedient Loyall People and vvith povver both at land and sea and vvith times both of Plenty and Peace vvhilst almost all your Neighbours are in vvarre and vvant yet nothing vvill euer be more able to establish You in all these Felicityes nor to auert all disasters from your Maiesty then not to permit that there be any conniuence at such enormous Errours as these vvhich partly openly partly couertly are vented against Christ our Lord and all Christian Fayth The God of Heauen preserue your Maiesty in all Health and Happinesse to his greatest Glory your Maiestyes ovvne Felicity and to the ioy comfort of all your Kingdomes Your Maiesties most humble and most obedient loyall subiect I. H. To the Christian Reader WONDER not Christian Reader That I entitle this Little Treatise Christianity Maintained I giue it that Name because that is the thing which I endeauour heer to make good against one who ouerthrows Christianity not by remote Principles or strained Inferences but by direct assertions cleere deductioÌ„s naturally flowing from diuers of his doctrines which if it be made appeare I cannot but hope that all who take comfort in the glorious and most happy name of Christian will giue me the right hands of fellowship in this Common Cause Ancient Pacianus sayes (a) Epist ad Semprou of euery orthodoxe belieuer that Christian is his name Catholicke his Surname Catholicke cannot be conceiued without Christian But Christianity so long as it is maintained wil afford some common Principles of beliefe which may direct men to find that one Catholicke Church of Christians by meanes whereof our Lord hath decreed to giue Grace and Glory Let therfore neither preiudice auert nor priuat respects diuert the good Readers vnderstanding from weighing in an equal ballance that which is herce layd before it God forbid any Christian should exceed the desper are folly of the Iewes who would not depose their priuat quarells euen while they were circled with a hostile army of Romans or be losse aduised then the Romans who tooke occasion to make peace at home by the pronocations of the Enemy abroad indging it wifedome to be swayed with feare of greater euill especially when they could do it vnder the honourable title of a Common (c) Liu. lib. 2. good In which
a human fallible assent That diuine illumination aboue the reach of the light of reason is not necessary that men may belieue as they ought to please and satisfy God That God is satisfied with any degree of light with the meere light of naturall Reason and with the weake and wauering Fayth which reason standing vpon probabilities can ground These be strange and dismall positions and such as ouerthrow Christianity as is euident by many reasons I will point at a few 3. First it is against holy Scripture Fayth sayth S. Paul is the substance of things to be hoped for the argument of things not appearing (g) Heb. M. v. 1. or as the translation receiued in England hath it the euidence or ground or confidence of things not seene All which signify a firme certaine and as I may say substantiall Fayth much different from whatsoeuer assent if it be only probable For as S. Bernard disputing against Abailardus who likewise taught that Fayth was but Opinion sayth touching this definition of S. Paul By the name of Substance we are determined to some certaine and setled thing Fayth is not Opinion but Certainty Audis (h) Epist. 190. sayth this Saint Substantiam Non licet tibi in fide putare vel disputare pro libitu non hac illacque vagari per inania opinionum per denia errorum Substantiae nomine aliquid tibi certum fixumque praefigitur Certis clauderis finibus certis limitibus coarctaris Non est enim fides aestimatio sed certitudo Doest thou heare the name of Substance It is not lawfull for thee in Fayth to thinke or to dispute at thy pleasure nor to wander hither and thither through the emptines of opinions or straying errour By the name of substance some certaine and setled thing is appointed thee Thou art shut vp within certaine bounds and confined within limits which are certaine For Fayth is not an opinion but a certainty This is also prooued by the words of the same Apostle (i) Gal. 1. v. 8. Although we or an Angell from Heauen euangelize to you beside that which we haue euangelized to you be he anathema and where he sayth (k) Heb. 6. v. 8. That by two things vnmooueable whereby it is impossible for God to lye we may haue a most strong comfort For how can it be most strong if it be groūded only vpon probabilities as this man sayth our Fayth and comfort is The falshood whereof is yet further declared by the same Apostle Ep. 1. ad Thessal cap. 2. v. 12. When you had receiued of vs the word of the hearing of God you receiued it not as the word of men but as it is indeed the word of God And S. Bernard Ep. 190. alleageth S. Paul to the same purpose in this manner Scio cui credidi certus sum clamat Apostolus 1. Tim. 1. tu mihi subsibilas Fides est aestimatio tu mihi ambiguum garris quo nihil est certius But this Truth being certainly belieued by all Christians it will be needlesse to alleadge more texts of Scripture in confirmation of it D. Potter in whose behalfe you stept forth doth euidently contradict your doctrine when he teacheth (l) Pag. 143. that the chiefe ground of Christian Fayth is diuine Reuelation and that nothing but this can erect an act of supernaturall Fayth which must be absolutely vndoubted and certaine and that without this Fayth is but opinion or persuasion or at the most an acquired human beliefe And Doctour Hooker whom you alleadge pag. 325. for your opinion in his Ecclesiasticall Policy pag. 117. writes most expressely in these words The greatest assurance generally with all men is that we haue by plaine aspect and intuitiue beholding c. Scripture with Christian men being receiued as the word of God that for which we haue probable yea that which we haue necessary reason for yea that which we see with our eyes is not thought so sure as that which the Scripture of God teacheth because we hold that his speach reuealeth there what himself seeth and therefore the strongest proofe of all and the most necessary assented vnto by vs which doe thus receiue the Scripture is the Scripture 4. If we haue recourse to reason grounded on principles which no Christian denyes this doctrine likewise cannot be tolerated For if a Christian be not certaine that his beliefe is true he may according to your owne confession doubt whether it be not false According to your owne confession I say seeing your selfe goe about to prooue (m) Pag. 326. n. 4. that Christian Fayth cannot be absolutly certaine because if it were so it would follow that any least doubting though resisted and inuoluntary would destroy it which manifestly declares that doubting can well consist with that sort of vncertaine Christian Fayth which you goe about to vent If once way be giuen for Christians to fall vpon doubting of their Fayth why may not they put themselues vpon an examination in good earnest and as doubting of the grounds thereof And if this kind of examination be lawfull who can discommend an alteration if they chance to find cause as it is very possible they may if their first assent was not infallible How then could S. Paul so absolutely say Although we Gal. 1.8 or an Angell from Heauen should euangelize to you beside that which we haue euangelized be he anathema 5. But let vs goe a step further This Assertion giues way to belieue that the contrary to Christian Fayth retaines some probability in regard that no high degree of probability can of it selfe wholy deuest the opposite part of all probability this being excluded by certainty alone Mistake me not as if I meant that the probability of one side were sufficient to bestow probability on the other This only I say that whosoeuer belieues any point only with probability hath in his vnderstanding no present disposition which of it selfe is repugnant to probability for the contrary side And if Christians must be of this disposition in their beliefe they can haue no setled or firme resolution neuer to imbrace the contrary of that which for the present is their beliefe which ought notwithstanding to be the resolution of euery true Christian belieuer 6. This is not all If we follow this doctrine this other vnchristian Consequence cannot be auoided That one may be saued though he belieue some sect contrary to Christian Religion as Iudaisme Turcisme Paganisme or Atheisme with as great or greater probability then he belieues the articles of Christian Fayth For proofe I need alleadg nothing beside what your selfe suggest In one place you tell vs that (n) Pag. 37. any fayth if it be but a graine of mustardseed if it worke by loue shall certainly auaile with God and be accepted of him In another (o) Pag. 327. you endeauour to prooue that a probable persuasion and hope of infinite and eternall happinesse prouided
for all those that obey Christ Iesus may be able to sway our will to Obedience and encounter with all those temptations which flesh and bloud can suggest to auert vs from it Ioine these two doctrines togeather the issue will be that any probable beliefe of Christian verities or euen of a God must suffice to saluation as enabling vs to worke by loue Now it is cleere that your graine of mustardseed your any probable persuasion or hope are verified in any low degree of probability of fayth in Christ or God and yet they do not exclude equal or greater probability in behalfe of the contrary part for example that Christ is not the Sauiour of the world or that there is not a God whence it followes that a man may attayne saluation though he belieue with equall or greater probability that Christ is not the Sauiour of the world or that there is not a God then is that wherewith he belieues the same and all other mysteries of Christian Fayth Whether this tend not to Iudaisme Turcisme Paganisme or Atheisme and to the ouerthrow of all Christianity I need not say 7. Moreouer who can oblige any vnderstanding man to dye for auerring the Truth of that Fayth wherof he proclaymes himselfe to haue no certainty And you O glorious Martyrs of Christ our Lord did rather spill then shed your bloud if you were so prodigall therof for a truth not certainly belieued to be such This is the very same argument which mellifluous S. Bernard brings against Petrus Abailardus a Progenitour of the Socinians who in those dayes taught that Christian Fayth was but opinion and not infallibly certaine (p) Epist. 190. Stulti ergo Martyres nostri sayth this Saint sustinentes tam acerba propter incerta nec dubitantes sub dubio remunerationis proemio durum per exitum diuturnum inire exilium S. Paul sayth (q) Rom. 5.7 Scarce for a iust man doth any dye And we may say who will giue his life for a Truth and most of all who will not only giue his life but thinke himselfe bound vnder paine of eternall damnation to lay it downe in testimony of that which for ought he certainly knowes may prooue to be an vniust and vntrue thing Was the precious bloud of Christ our Lord which by infinite degrees excelled that of Martyrs shed in such abundance for purchasing probabilities or for the impetration of Grace to enable his seruants to dye for the truth of things which in fine they esteemed but probable 8. Far be it from the harts of Christians to belieue and their tongues to professe that a God of infinite wisedome and goodnesse would oblige himselfe to reward men with euerlasting happines for imbracing the mysteries of Christian Fayth which may once proue false and to adiudge men to endles torments for adhering to the contrary which in the end may be found true if Christian Fayth can possibly be false as false it may be if it be but probable 9. Neuer could any doctrine be offered to the sonnes of Adam more plausible then that our beliefe of Heauen and Hell is but an opinion in it selfe and no way certayne concerning things of another world whereas worldly pleasures are in present possession and certaine If the greatest certainty wherewith all Christians hitherto haue belieued their fayth to abound hath not byn able to stay the cariere of mens licenciousnesse what shall we now expect but that flattered by this doctrine they who before did runne will now fly after the Idols of whatsoeuer may appeare to their soules or bodies obiects of delight 10. No lesse liberty doth this doctrine affoard for belieuing then it doth for liuing giuing scope to Apostasyes and endlesse changes of Religions as this man 's fourefold alteration makes manifest if all be true which is reported of him In which inconstancy notwithstanding he seemes to glory stiling it (r) Prefa n. 5. his Constancy in following that way to heauen which for the present seemes to him the most probable But of this more hereafter 11. I will doe him the fauour to suppose that he holds no Religion more certainly true then that of Christians which yet to him being not certaine what remaines in his persuasion and doctrine but that for matters of fayth and Religion God hath prouided no certainty on earth which is not only of very ill consequence as I haue said amōgst Christians themselues but exposeth Christian Religion to contempt among the enemies thereof and disbelieuers of it which this man it seemes doth not value a hayre but measuring euery body by himselfe taxeth Christians generally to be of the like weakenes vngroundednes vnsetlednes in their beliefe For sayth (s) Pag. 327. n. 5. he men may talke their pleasure of an absolute most infallible certainty but did men generally belieue that obedience to Christ were the only way to present and eternall felicity but as firmely and vndoubtedly as that there is such a Citty as Constantinople but as much as Caesars Commentaries or the history of Salust I belieue the liues of most men both Papists and Protestants would be better then they are I leaue the Censure of this Doctrine to others I only note first how poore a conceit this man himselfe hath endeauoureth to instill into others of the ground or adhesion which Christians vndoubtedly haue in their beliefe making it no more solid or firme then the beliefe of Caesars Commentaries c. And secōdly that it may perchance be his fortune to be really forbidden to write any more bookes if he can make no better consequences then to conclude the want of Fayth or firmenesse of Fayth in Christians from the faults in their liues seeing there may be in a manner infinite other causes why they do not liue as they most firmely belieue they should 12. This therefore you see is his doctrine concerning Christian Fayth that it is weake and weakely grounded that it is resolued into the authority of men as the beliefe of Constantinople Chap. 2. and Caesars Commentaries that a Christian may really and deliberatly doubt of the points of his fayth and yet be a Christian that is faythfull But that which doth most manifestly discouer the impiety of this doctrine and of this his manner of arguing is that the reasons by which he pretends to maintayne it induce plaine Atheisme that is they conclude as well that men can haue no certaine beliefe knowledge or assent that there is a God or that we are certaine that Christian Fayth is euen so much as probable which now I am going to shew The Grounds of this Doctrine leade to Atheisme CHAP. II. 1. I Said in the former Chapter that if a Christian be not certaine that his beliefe is true he may according to this mans owne cōfession doubt whether it be not false I pleaded his Confession vpon an Argument of his which perhaps seemed to him a great subtilty and hard to be
answered but is indeed a meere toye and if it prooue any thing it prooues the Title of this Chapter to be true If sayth he (t) Pag. 326. this Doctrine of the absolute certainty of Christian Fayth were true then seeing not any the least doubting can consist with a most infallible certainty it will follow that euery least doubting in any matter of Fayth though resisted and inuoluntary is a damnable sinne absolutly destructiue so long as it lasts of all true and sauing Fayth Doth not this Sophisme tend also to prooue that if one be tempted with inuoluntary doubts against the Truths I spake of he must forfeit his certainty that there is a God or that Christian Fayth is certainly probable and so either incurre damnation without his owne fault which is impossible or attaine heauen without any certaine beliefe or knowledge that there is a God or that Christian Fayth is certainly probable 2. As for the argument it selfe it is of no moment It doth not distinguish betwixt the Habit of Fayth whereby Christians are permanently denominated Faithfull and which remaines euen when we are a sleepe and the Act or exercise thereof which may be hindred by many good employments as study or serious attention to any businesse without the least preiudice to the Habit of which we are depriued only by Voluntary errours or doubts against it not by those which are inuoluntary and resisted If this answere giue not satisfaction let him either afford a better against his owne obiection or else professe that he doth not certainly belieue there is a God or that he is not certaine that Christian Fayth and Religion is so much as probable And by the way me thinks he should reflect that if he thinke euery Act destroyes the cōtrary habit and in that respect no doubting may consist with the habit of infallible fayth then the Doctrine of Catholicke Diuines that euery voluntary Act of Heresy or Infidelity is destructiue of the habit of Fayth should not in reason and true consequence be tearmed by him (v) Pag. 368. a vaine and groundlesse fancy 3. An other argument to prooue the fallibility of Christian Fayth in effect is this (w) Pag. 326. We pray for the increase and strengthning of our Fayth Therefore our Fayth is not infallible You might as well argue We may pray for a high degree of happines in heauen Therefore euery Saint in heauen is not perfectly happy Do you not know that there may be intension of degrees euen in qualities which haue no mixture of the contrary No light includes darknes yet one light may be greater then another Thus the most imperfect acte of fayth is most certaine in the most perfect kind of certainty though not most certaine in the most perfect degree of certainty and we may well belieue that the least degree of Christian Fayth is incompatible with any deliberate and not resisted doubt or vncertainty and yet pray for the increase thereof If you deny this then tell me whether you may not pray for the increase of your beliefe of a God and his Attributes and for the strengthning of it against all temptations rising either from the suggestions of the enemy or from the weakenesse of mans vnderstanding in order to so high misteryes as also of your certainty that Christian Religion is probable in the higest degree of probability and when you haue granted that you may as I hope you will then you will haue answered your owne argument vnlesse you will acknowledge your selfe not to be certaine that there is a God or that Christian Religion is probable 4. A third reason wherby he endeauours to prooue that Christian Fayth is not absolutely certaine is this in substance That seeing as S. Iohn assures vs (x) Pag. 326. our Fayth is the victory which ouercomes the world if our Fayth be a certaine infallible knowledge our victory ouer the world must of necessity be perfect and it should be impossible for any true belieuer to commit any deliberate sinne How this doth follow I cannot perceiue no more then one can inferre that Christians cannot commit as grieuous sinnes as men that reiect Christianity because the beliefe of Christians is true and the beliefe of others is false The Angels in heauen and Adam in Paradise were indued with infallible Fayth yea and with Euidence in the opinion of diuers good Diuines and yet the Angels and Adam sinned deliberatly and damnably Fayth doth direct but not necessitate the will which still remayning free may choose good or euill If he will still maintayne the argument for good then he must be conuinced to say that he doth not with certainty belieue a God or that vertue is to be imbraced because he can doubtlesse commit deliberate sinnes against God and vertue 5. Not vnlike to this is another reason (y) Ibid. That Charity being the effect of Fayth if our Fayth were perfect Charity would be perfect so no man could possibly make any progresse in it Giue me leaue to speake to your selfe do you not see that by this reason if you belieue in God with certainty your loue of God must be perfect without possibility to make any progresse in it which because it is false it must follow by force of your Argument that you do not with certainty belieue a God But as for the reason in it selfe because it concernes more then your selfe I must tell you that it doth falsly suppose that Charity is both an immediate and necessary effect of Fayth without interuention of Freewill which may refuse to follow the direction of Fayth and either wholy cease to loue God or loue him now more now lesse And therefore no wonder if vpon a false supposall that follow which is also false 6. This is not a time to enter into long discourses how you confound certainty with perfection as if because Fayth is absolutely certaine but yet obscure it must be also absolutely perfect which is a great mistake for it wants the perfection of euidence hath a possibility annexed to it that it may be both resisted and reiected But it will not be vnpleasant notwithstanding nor vntimely to stand a while and see how excessiuely confident you are of the strength and force of the foresaid Arguments and the contentment which you take in them Thus you speake of them (z) Pag. 326. 327. These you see are strange and portentous consequences and yet the deduction of them is cleere and apparent which shewes this doctrine of yours you meane our doctrine of the infallibility of Christian Fayth which you would faine haue true that there might be some necessity of your Churches infallibility to be indeed plainly repugnant not only to Truth but euen to all Religion and piety and fit for nothing but to make men negligent of making any progresse in Fayth or Charity And therefore I must intreat and adiure you either to discouer vnto me which I take God to witnesse
because the verities therein contained are necessary to be belieued for this very necessity you cannot belieue but by belieuing aforehand the Scripture but contrarily you may reiect the verities themselues if you be not preobliged to belieue the diuine authority of the bookes wherein they are contained 5. Againe you say that Scripture is the only Rule of Christian Fayth (e) Cap. 2 per totum yet it is not necessary to Saluation to belieue it to be a rule of Fayth no nor to be the Word of God The first part of this doctrine is the scope of your whole second Chapter The second is taught purposely and at large in the same Chapter (f) Pag. 116. pag. 116. n. 159. Ioyne these two assertions and the Conclusion will be That we are not obliged to receiue that which is the only ordinary meanes of attayning Christian Fayth namely the Scriptures And therefore in the ordinary way we cannot be bound to imbrace Christian Fayth seeing it cannot be compassed without the meanes to attaine to it For how can one be obliged to attayne an end and yet be left free to reiect the only meanes of atchieuing that end I am the freer to make this question because you concurre with me in the answere when you say (g) Pag. 16. It was necessary that God by his prouidence should preserue the Scripture from any vndiscernable corruption in those things which he would haue knowne otherwise it is apparent it had not been his will that these things should be knowne the only meanes of continuing the Knowledge of them being perished Now is it not in effect all one whether the Scripture haue perished or whether it be preserued if in the meane time we be not bound to belieue that it is the Rule of Fayth and word of God Nay seeing as things now stand we may find the verityes contayned in Scripture sufficiently expressed in innumerable other bookes we may at this present in conformity to your doctrine reiect all the holy Scripture contenting our selues with the contents thereof taken from other Authors and not from the writers of the Bible 6. The Doctrine which he carryeth through his whole Booke but particularly insisteth vpon in his third Chapter that we cannot learne from Scripture it selfe that it is Canonicall but only from Tradition of men deliuering it from hand to hand is no lesse iniurious and derogatiue to holy Scripture then the former speaking of men in his sense that is not as endued with any infallible assistance of the holy Ghost which Catholicks belieue of the Church but only as wise or many men or for the like human qualifications for to this effect he sayth (h) Pag. 72. n. 51. Tradition is a principle not in Christianity but in Reason not praper to Christians but common to all men This is certainly the right course to blast the Authority of holy Scripture not to maintaine it For besides that which I haue touched already that by this meanes we are not so certaine of Scripture as of profane bookes he must come at length to resolue the beliefe of Scripture into the Tradition or Authority of Pagans Iewes Turkes or condemned Hereticks as well as of true Christiās For seeing errours against fayth or Heresies cannot in his principles be discerned but by Scriptures before they be receaued the testimony of one man concerning the admittance of them must weigh as much as of another and be considered only as prooceeding from a number of men be they faythfull or Infidels true Christians or condemned Hereticks 7. And further according to the same principles he must acknowledge that he belieueth some parts of Canonicall Scripture with a more firme assent then others to wit as they haue been deliuered with more or lesse generall consent or haue been more or lesse once questioned which is to depriue Canonical Scripture of all Authority For if once we giue way to more or lesse in the behalfe of Gods word we shall end in nothing And this hath the more force in this mans doctrine who professeth that the greatest certainty which he hath of any part of Scripture is within the compasse of probability What certainty then shall those Scriptures haue which participate of that probability in a lesse and lesse degree according as they haue been deliuered with different tradition and consent How this doctrine will sound in the eares of all true Christians I leaue to be considered contenting my selfe to oppose your Assertion with the discourse of D. King afterward Bishop of London in the beginning of his first Lecture vpon Ionas where amongst other things he sayes Comparisons betwixt Scripture and Scripture are both odious and daungerous The Apostles names are euenly placed in the writings of the holy foundation With an vnpartiall respect haue the children of Christs family from time to time receiued reuerenced imbraced the whole volume of Scriptures You on the other side speake in a different strayne and say thus (i) Pag. 67. n. 36. I may belieue euen those questioned Bookes to haue been written by the Apostles and to be Canonicall but I cannot in reason belieue this of them so vndoubtedly as of those bookes which were neuer questioned And elswhere The Canon of Scripture (k) Pag. 69. n. 45. as we receiue it is built vpon vniuersall Tradition For we do not professe our selues so absolutly and vndoubtedly certaine neither do we vrge others to be so of those Bookes which haue byn doubted as of those which neuer haue By this meanes what will become of the Epistle of S. Iames the second Epistle of S. Peter the second and third of S. Iohn the Epistle to the Hebrewes and the Apocalyps of S. Iohn And what part of Scripture hath not been questioned by some and those some so many as would haue made vs doubt of the works of Tully or Liuy c. if they had affirmed them not to haue been written by such Authours And the only doubting of Erasmus or some such other about the workes of some Fathers hath caused them to be questioned by diuers vpon much weaker grounds as difference of stiles or the like 8. In another place you tell vs (l) Pag. 68. n. 43. that to receiue a Booke for Canonicall it is inough to haue had attestation though not vniuersall yet at least sufficient to make considering men receiue them for Canonicall which were sometimes doubted of by some yet whose number and authority was not so great as to preuaile against the contrary suffrages Obserue vpon what inextricable passages and lesse degrees of probability this man doth put vs in our beliefe of holy Scripture First we must settle our Fayth on men then on considering men though the consent be not vniuersall thirdly vpon the greater and more preualent number and authority of suffrages as if the greater number alone without infallible assistance of the holy Ghost were a sufficient ground for Christian Fayth You deny pag.
knew to be such so in this place his owne Iudgment touching some things which God had not particularly reuealed vnto him This doctrine is subiect to the same iust exceptions which were alleadged against the former For if once we deny vniuersall infallibility to the Apostles we cannot belieue them with infallibility in any one thing but still we may be doubting whether they speake out of their owne spirit and not by diuine Reuelation though they should euen declare in what sort they intend to speake because we may feare they are deceiued in those very declarations And as you will perhaps say they write Diuine Reuelations except in things which they professe to deliuer as the Dictates of human human reason and prudence another will say that they must or may be vnderstood to deliuer the dictats of human reason and prudence whensoeuer they do not in expresse rearmes professe to deliuer diuine Reuelations which is very seldome the ordinary custome of holy Scripture being to deliuer verityes without any such qualifying of them And if S. Paul when in the Epistle and Chapter by you cited v. 40. sayes of himselfe I thinke that I also haue the spirit of God might be deceiued in that thought of his we may also say he might be deceiued euen when he affirmes that he writes by the spirit of God and much more may we doubt when he expresses no such thing as commonly neither he nor any other Canonicall writers doe 6. In the words which you cite To the rest speake I not the Lord S. Paul treates of a very important matter that is of the wiues departing from her husband or the husbands from his wife Wherein if S. Paul were subiect to errour he might chance to haue taught a point of great Iniustice against the commaund of our Sauiour declaring the very Law of nature What God hath ioyned togeather let not man separate (s) Mat. 19.6 And as for the words you alleadge in the second place Concerning virgins I haue no commandment of our Lord but I deliuer my Iudgment the Apostle afterwards within the compasse of the selfe same discourse sayes that a man sinnes not if he marry wherin if S. Paul may be deceiued as speaking out of his owne spirit as you say he doth in some precedent words you will not only want this text to prooue with certainty that marriage is lawfull but whensoeuer marriage is allowed in any other place of Scripture as Hebr. 13. v. 4. Marriage is honourable in all you haue put into the mouthes of the old and moderne heretiques who impugned the lawfullnes of marriage a ready answere that those texts of Scripture were but the Dictats of human reason and prudence wherein the writers of Canonicall Scripture might be deceiued 7. The other words Speake I not the Lord shew only that our Sauiour left power for the Apostles and his Church to aduise counsaile ordaine or commaund some things as occasion might require which himselfe had not commaunded or determined in particular which truth if you hold to be only a Dictate of human reason you open a way for refractary spirits to oppose the ordinances of their Superiours and Prelats in things not expressely commaunded by our Lord. 8. The last Words v. 25. Concerniug virgins I haue no commandment of the Lord but I deliuer my Iudgment which we translate but I giue counsaile prooue indeed our Catholicke Doctrine concerning workes of supererogation or Counsayles in regard that the Apostle in this place persuades virginity as the better but commaunds it not as necessary Yet they do in no wise imply any doubtfulnesse or fallibility in the Apostles neuer any hitherto besides your selfe offering to answere our argumeÌ„t by saying the Apostle wrote only the dictate of human reason or prudence and so might be deceiued Which answere had been very obuious if they had presumed to be so bold as you are with the Apostles and therefore it is a signe that no man besides your selfe durst deliuer this doctrine 9. Certainly if the Apostles did sometimes write by the motion of the holy Ghost and at other times out of their owne priuate Iudgment or spirit though it were granted that themselues could discerne the diuersity of those motions or spirits which one may easily deny if their vniuersall infallibility be once impeached yet it is cleere that others to whom they spake or wrote could not discerne the diuersity of those spirits in the Apostles For which cause learned Protestants acknowledge that although ech mans priuate spirit were admitted for direction of himselfe yet it were not vsefull for teaching others Thus you say pag. 141. A supernaturall assurance of the incorruption of Scripture may be an assurance to ones selfe but no argument to another And as you affirme (t) Pag. 62. that bookes that are not Canonicall may say they are and those that are so may say nothing of it so we cannot be assured that the Apostles deliuer diuine Reuelations though they should say they doe nor that they deliuer not such Reuelations though they say nothing thereof if once we deny their vniuersall infallibility 10. Now I beseech the good Reader to reflect vpon this mans endeauours to ouerthrow the holy Scriptures and Christianity and to what at last he tends by these degrees First he sayth our beliefe that Scripture is the word of God exceedes not probability 2. Amongst those Bookes which we belieue to be the word of God we belieue some with lesse probability then others Thirdly we may be saued though we neither belieue that Scripture is the Rule of Fayth nor that it is the word of God Fourthly our assurance that Scripture or any other Booke is corrupted is of the same kind and condition both only morall assurances Fifthly the writers of holy Scripture might erre in things which they deliuered not constantly or not as diuine Reuelations but dictates of human reason or if they deliuered any doctrine not confirmed by miracles Sixtly vpon the same ground he might say that the Apostles were infallible only when they deliuered things belonging to Fayth Piety or Religion not when they wrote things meerely indifferent or of no great moment in themselues as some Socinians (u) Volkel l. 5. c. 5. Dom. Lopez de Authorit sac Script eyther grant or care not much to deny And then further it will be left to euery mans iudgement what is to be accounted a matter of moment And soone after it will be said that to search whether the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity for example be contained in Scripture or no is not much necessary since a man without knowledge of that speculatiue doctrine may belieue and loue God as a chiefe Socinian teaches (w) Iren. Philâ—leth dissertatione de Pace Ecclesiae and your selfe affirme (x) Pag. 37. that any Fayth if it worke by loue shall certainly auaile with God and be accepted of him And then will some say Why may not a
man loue God though he erre in the doctrine concerning Christ deliuered in Scripture so it will not be necessary to belieue that the Apostles were infallible in penning the Scripture but only in articlesd absolutely necessary to loue God and to haue a generall sorrow for all our sinnes And since to loue God haue contrition for our sinnes a probable beliefe will serue according to your (y) Pag. 327. Principles what need we any infallible Scripture at all but only some motiues sufficient to produce a probable assent that there is a God whether it be by Scripture belieued to be only a probable writing or by naturall discourse or any other meanes as you teach that one is not bound to belieue the Scripture to be the word of God but may be saued if by other meanes for example preaching he attaine the knowledge of the verityes contayned in Scripture (z) Pag. 116. And thus you see to what hauock these things lead not only touching Christianity but of all Religion The fourth Doctrine Iniurious to the miracles of our Sauiour and of his Apostles CHAP. V. 1. THE Disciple is not aboue his Mayster we may not wonder that a man should be free with the Apostles if he spare not Christ himselfe To the end that the entrance might be proportionable to the building which he was raising he plants in his Preface a Tenet which cannot but be as strange to all considerate Christians as it is dangerous to the weake It seemes he was not able to deny that true miracles haue been wrought by members of our Catholicke Church He comes therefore to this desperate euasion and giues vs these wordes in print (a) Pref. 〈◊〉 43. It seemes to me no strange thing that God in his Iustice should permit some true miracles to be wrought to delude them who haue forged so many as apparently the Professours of the Roman doctrine haue to abuse the world I shall wrong the Readers vnderstanding if for his sake I shall stand to dilate vpon that which is very cleer that by this meanes the miracles of our Blessed Sauiour and his Apostles cannot be knowne to be inducements to truth but may haue been snares to entrap the behoulders in pernicious errours To what end then doth S. Paul prooue his mission by miracles (b) 2. Cor. 12.12 Signa Apostolatus meifacta sunt supervos in omni prudentia in signis prodigijs virtutibus To what end did our Blessed Sauiour assigne miracles to confirme the preaching of his Apostles Signa autem eos qui crediderint hae sequentur In nomine meo daemonia eijcient c. (c) Mare vlt. v. 17. To what purpose did he send this message to S. Iohn Baptist Caecivident claudi ambulant (d) Mat. II. To what end did he say (e) Ioan. 15.24 si opera non fecissem in eis quae nemo alius fecit peccatum non haberent 2. Many other texts might be alledged These will satisfy euery good Christian that belieues the Scriptures But I confesse neither these or any other places of Scripture can prooue any thing with this man who by affirming that true miracles may be wrought to delude men doth depriue the Apostles of all authority which they could gayne by working miracles and consequently leaues men free from any obligation to belieue that their writings were infallible And then to what purpose doth he tel vs in the same place that the Bible hath byn confirmed with those miracles which were wrought by our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles since those very miracles might by the same ground be delusions rather then confirmations If true miracles may now be wrought in punishment of Christians for forging false miracles as you pretend what certainty can you giue a man that our Sauiour his Apostles did not the like Chap. 5. in punishment of the Iewes and Gentils for Idolatry Irreligiousnesse and other grieuous sinnes which are neuer wanting in the world and may be punished in the manner you speake of if once this assertion be admitted that True miracles may be wrought to delude men 3. But though by this impiety you depriue Scripture of all authority and cannot consequently be persuaded to any thing by Scripture yet there remaines one powerfull authority to conuince you euen in this your tenet It is your selfe For thus you speake to vs vpon another occasion (f) Pag. 144. n. 31. Yf you be so infallible as the Apostles were shew it as the Apostles did They went forth sayth S. Marke and preached euery where the Lord working with them and confirming their words with signes following It is impossible that God should lye that the eternall Truth should set his hand and seale to the confirmation of a falshood or of such doctrine as is partly true and partly false The Apostles doctrine was thus confirmed therefore it was intirely true and in no part either false or vncertaine Is it not cleere by these words that since the Doctrine of the Roman Church hath byn confirmed by true miracles as you affirmed in your Motiue and for ought I can perceiue deny it not in your answere she must be the true Church For euen against your selfe when you speake not in opposition to the Roman Church you confesse that the eternall Truth cannot confirme a falshood with true miracles Or if in opposition to our Church you will recall what you deliuer in your Booke and be constāt to that which you say in your Preface in answere to your Motiue I must still be enforced to affirme that you prepare a way to the ouerthrow of Christianity by euacuating the efficacy of miracles wrought by Christ our Lord his Apostles and all holy men in confirmation of Christian Religion 4. And to the end the Reader may not thinke I am too rigorous in pressing you vpon this one passage vpon which you were thrust by a hard necessity of answering your owne motiues I challenge you vpon this other wherein you say (g) Pag. 69. n. 47. For my part I professe that if the Doctrine of the Scripture were not as good and as fit to come from the fountaine of goodnesse as the miracles by which it was confirmed were great I should want one maine pillar of my Fayth and for want of it I feare should be much staggered in it Catholickes are most certaine that the doctrine of the Scripture is as good as the miracles by which it was confirmed were great But this certainty we do not ground vpon our owne Knowledge or Iudgment framed by considering the Doctrines in themselues as if we should be staggered if we could not find them to be such independently of miracles but because they are confirmed by miracles or otherwise testifyed to be good by them to whom we must submit whereas your way of beliefe leaues a man in a disposition to be perpetually altering opinions accordingly as the same things may
sometimes appeare true and other times false which diuersity of iudgments you must according to this your doctrine follow euen against any point confirmed by miracles if it chance to seeme not true to your vnderstanding which is the part and proper disposition of a Socinian The fifth Doctrine Chap. 6. By resoluing Fayth into Reason he destroyes the nature of Fayth and beliefe of all Christian verityes CHAP. VI. 1. THe source whence all the aforesaid and innumerable other pernicious sequels do follow Gentle Reader is that according to this mans doctrine Christian Fayth must be resolued into the euidence of naturall reason not as preparing or inducing vs to belieue but as the maine ground strongest pillar of our Fayth and in a word as the conclusion depends on the premises And to this purpose he builds much vpon this axiome (h) Pag. 36. n. 8. We cannot possibly be more certaine of the conclusion then of the weaker of the premises as a riuer will not rise higher then the fountaine from which it flowes Hence in the same place he deduceth that the certainty of Christian Fayth can be but morall and not absolutely infallible With this principle is connexed another vnlesse you will call it the same more expressely declared and applyed And it is this If vpon reasons seeming to my vnderstanding very good I haue made choyce of a Guide or Rule for my direction in matters of Fayth when afterward I discouer that this Guide or Rule leades me to belieue one or more points which in the best iudgment that I can frame I haue stronger reasons to reiect then I had to accept my former Rule I may and ought to forsake that Rule as false erroneous otherwise I should be conuinced not to follow reason but some setled resolution to hold fast whatsoeuer I had once apprehended What followes from this vast principle but that if holy Scripture for example propound things seeming more euidently cōtrary to reason or my opinion more plainly contradicting one another then the inducements which first mooued me to belieue Scripture were strong conuincing I must reiect the Scripture as an erroneous Rule and adhere to my owne Reason and discourse as my last and safest guide This certainly doth follow Especially if we remember another principle that the motiues for which we belieue holy Scripture are only probable for so they must in all equity giue place to reasons seeming demonstratiue conuincing as there will not want many such against the high misteries of Christian Fayth if once we professe that our assent to them must be resolued into naturall discourse How farre dissonant this is from the receiued persuasion and tenet of all Christians that their Fayth is not resolued into Reason but Authority it is easy to see by the effects For why do Socinians and such like deny the misteryes of the Blessed Trinity the Deity of our Blessed Sauiour and diuers other verityes of Christian Fayth but because they seeme manifestly repugnant to reason 2. It cannot be doubted but that any one to whom the saluation of his owne soule is deare will be wary in admitting doctrines deliuered in a Booke if with Truth it may be affirmed that the Author in point of beliefe is certainly no good Christian as one who denyes the Diuinity of Christ our Lord and the most Blessed Trinity which are misteryes most proper to Christian Fayth and most hatefull to Iewes and Turkes For what authority can he challenge with any iudicious Christian in matters concerning Fayth who confessedly erres in the prime articles of Christian Fayth as we feare euen a sound man if we thinke he come from the pest-house and none will trust the Diuell though transfigured into an Angell of light For which cause spirituall men bid vs examine not only what motions we find in our soule but also from what roote they proceed 3. I wil not take vpō me to say what you are or what you are not but in matters cōcerning articles of fayth we ought to speak plainly You tell vs (i) Praefat n. 5. that you belieue the Doctrine of the Trinity the Deity of our Sauiour and all other supernaturall verityes reuealed in Scripture The question is not whether you belieue some kind of Trinity nor whether our Sauiour be God in some sense by participation as Dauid sayes I haue said you are Gods Psal 81.6 and in that sense that they are contayned in Scripture But the question is whether you belieue those misteryes as they are generally belieued by Christians and expressed euen in the 39. Articles of the English Church or whether you belieue that in this sense they are reuealed in Scripture Be pleased then to declare your selfe whether you belieue that in the Godhead there be three Persons of one substance Power and Eternity the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost as is taught in the first article And then whether you belieue the second Article wherein is said The Sonne which is the word of the Father the very and eternall God of one substance with the Father tooke mans nature in the wombe of the Blessed Virgin of her substance So that two whole and perfect natures that is to say the Godhead and Manhood were ioyned togeather in one Person neuer to be deuided whereof is one Christ very God and very Man Thirdly whether you firmely belieue the contents of the fifth Article The holy Ghost proceeding from the Father and the sonne is of one substance Maiesty and Glory with the Father and the sonne very eternall God If these demaunds seeme harsh blame your selfe who were forewarned euen before that which they call the Direction was published when it was in your power to haue freed your selfe from this trouble and secured others from the scandall which your Booke may giue Neither are these questions from the matter but consequent to principles deliuered in your Booke 4. And let no man wonder that I desire plaine dealing For I haue seene a Socinian Catechisme in print which at first grants that Christ is God but then to the question whether he haue the diuine Nature it answers No because forsooth that is a thing repugnant both to Scripture and Reason It is apparent that the Socinians agree with the Manicheans that Fayth is resolued into Reason and that the Manicheans maintained a most strict brotherhood with the Priscillianists who taught that it is lawfull to dissemble a mans Fayth euen by oath For their saying was Iura periura secretum prodere noli And Arius who denied the Diuinity of our Sauiour Christ made no bones to forsweare himselfe by a profession of Fayth contrary to his internall beliefe And whether any one who is esteemed a Socinian do not hold it lawfull to deny or speake ambiguously against what he belieues that so in a very peruerse sense he may with the Apostle become all to all it is likely you know better then another can tell you 5. Howsoeuer
affections not of our assent but of the obiect of it (w) Pag. 328. which were a strange kind of Philosophy as if we should say God in himselfe is obscure and euident because some vnderstand him with an obscure and others with a cleere or euident assent Thirdly his discourse pag. 69. n. 48. about the eye obiect and act of Seeing with the proportion which he would make betweene them and the obiect and act of Fayth which must fall vpon an heresy condemned in the Pelagians besides some mistakes in Philosophy Fourthly another subtilty about the essence of Habits and formall motiue to any Act c. whereof he speakes pag. 138. n. 24. and does after his manner mistake Then also it shal be shewed with how little reason he despises (x) Pag. 195. n. 11. the distinction of being obliged not to disbelieue and of not being obliged explicitly to belieue and with as litle declaimes bitterly pag. 391. n. 8. against the doctrine that some things are necessary because they are commaunded and others commaunded because they are necessary And finally the Reader must not be depriued at that time of the recreation he will receiue by a speciall subtilty indeed about a saying in Charity maintayned That the Creed was an abridgment (y) Pag. 227. n. 65. Many more of the like nature will be then brought to the touchstone and layd as flat as now perhaps to some partiall men they may haue seemed lofty and learned My purpose here is only to giue the Reader warning Chap. 9. that there be in the current of his discourse such shelues as by crossing the general receiued principles among Christians destroy Fayth and reciprocally by the ouerthrow of Fayth come at length to ouerwhelme Reason it selfe The eight Doctrine Opens a way to deny the B. Trinity and other high misteryes of Christian Fayth CHAP. IX 1. I Cannot omit notwithstanding here to shew that one of the Reasons which he brings to prooue that one may at the selfe same tyme yield assent to contradictories must be ranked amongst the rest of his Doctrins which do cleerly tend to the ouer throw of Christianity It is the third reason wherin he argues thus (z) Pag. 215. They which do captiuate their vnderstandings to the beliefe of those things which to their vnderstandings seeme irreconciliable contradictions may as well belieue reall contradictions for the difficulty of belieuing arises not from their being repugnāt but from their seeming to be so But you he speakes to vs Catholicks do captiuate your vnderstandings to the beliefe of those things which seeme to your vnderstandings irreconciliable contradictions Therefore it is as possible easy for you to belieue those that indeed are so Change but a word and insteed of Catholicks put Christians and the Conclusion will be Therefore it is as possible and easy for Christians to belieue contradictions that indeed are so as to belieue those which to their vnderstanding seeme so And seeing it is the common conceit of men that one cannot at the same time belieue contradictions and he himselfe acknowledges in the same place (a) Pag. 217. n. 47. that men should not do so and that to do so is both vnreasonable and very difficult what will follow but that to belieue the highest mysteryes of Christian Fayth is if not impossible at least very difficult and vnreasonable and a thing that men should not doe 2. Now that Christians belieue mysteries which to human reason seeme to imply contradiction he himselfe will not deny For though all the mysteryes of Christian Fayth be in themselues most sacred true yet to the weake eye of human reason some of them seeme to be against the Goodnesse of God as that Many are called and few elected it being in his power to haue elected and preuented with congruous efficacious Grace as well those many as these few And our vnderstāding is apt to be the more staggard with the depth of this mystery by considering that Christ our Lord dyed for the saluation of all and that euery thought word or worke of his was superabundantly sufficient for the Redemption of infinite millions of worlds Other points of Christian Fayth appeare contrary to Gods infinite Mercy and Iustice Such is our beliefe that for euery deadly sinne committed in a moment and perhaps in a matter seeming but a trifle as the eating of an apple he should inflict an eternity of torments if it be not repented Or that Infants can be iustly depriued of Beatitude in punishment of Originall sinne to which they neuer concurred by any Act properly theirs And it might haue been to good purpose if this man had declared himselfe directly in these two points seeing he was not without good ground directed to doe so 3. But I goe on with the difficulty of Christian verities For as the former may seeme harsh and rigorous so others may seeme as it were silly vnreasonable if Fayth be resolued as this man will haue it into human Reason Others beare a shew of repugnance to the most receiued Principles of Philosophy and Metaphysicke as the Mystery of the most Blessed Trinity Others in appearance derogate from the supreme respect we owe to God as the mystery of the Incarnation and Death of the sonne of God Where I cannot but obserue that this man speakes so irreligiously sometimes that it may giue iust occasion for men to enquire what he belieues concerning the Diuinity of our Sauiour Christ as when he sayth (b) Pref. n. 8. that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation may bring a great many others as well as himselfe to Auerroes his resolution Quandoquidem Christiani adorant quod comedunt sit anima mea cum Philosophis seeing Christians adore what they eate my soule be with the Philosophers Is this matter of eating our Sauiour such a pill to your vnderstanding that rather then disgest it you will turne Turke or Infidell If you belieued indeed that our Sauiour Christ is truly God you would not be scandalized that Christians adore Him who would and could be eaten no more then Him who stood in need of eating and whom the Iewes were able to wound and murder and might haue eaten euen in a Capharnaiticall sauage manner farre different from the manner we receiue him in the B. Sacrament if it had beene his will to permit it Perhaps for these reasons hauing subiected Fayth to Reason you wish with Auerroes a professed enemy of Christians My soule be with the Philosophers 4. He giues another suspicion of it in the passage following For hauing alleadged diuers seeming contradictions in our Doctrine concerning the Blessed Sacrament of the Altar he concludes (c) Pag. 216. 217. that if I that is the Author of Charity Maintayned cannot compose the repugnance and that after an intelligible manner then I must giue him leaue to belieue that either we do not belieue Transubstantiation or els that it is no contradiction that men
should subiugate their vnderstandings to the beliefe of contradictions which yet as I said before he iudgeth either impossible or at least vnreasonable (d) Ibid. And who I pray can vndertake against a cauilling wit to answere all arguments obiected against the Blessed Trinity Incarnation and other sublime verityes of Christian Fayth and compose all seeming repugnances after an intelligible manner Deuines are not ignorant what inexplicable difficulties offer themselues euen concerning the Deity it selfe for example his Immutability Freedom of will voluntary decrees knowledge of creatures and the like Must we then deny them because we are not able to compose all repugnances after an intelligible manner It may seeme that you are of opinion that we must to which persuasion if you adde another Doctrine of yours That there is no Christian Church assisted with Infallibility fit to teach any man euen such articles as are fundamentall or necessary to saluation but that euery one may and must follow the Dictates of his owne reason be he otherwise neuer so vnlearned what wil follow but a miserable freedome or rather necessity for men to reiect the highest and most diuine misteries of Christian Fayth vnlesse you can either compose all repugnances after a manner euen intelligible to euery ignorant and simple person which I hope you will confesse to be impossible or els say it is reasonable for men to belieue contradictions at the same time which by your confession were very vnreasonable 5. And here I appeale to your owne Conscience whether in true Philosophy the obiections which may be made against the mystery of the Blessed Trinity and the Incarnation of the sonne of God be not incomparably more difficult then any which can be brought against Trāsubstantiation Some one whom you know could say in some company where there was occasion of arguing Either deny the Trinity or admit of Transubstantiation and it was answered We will rather admit this then deny that And with good reason For if we respect human discourse there are more difficult obiections against that mistery then against this And if we regard Reuelation Scripture is more cleare for the reall presence and Transubstantiation then for the mystery of the Blessed Trinity But no wonder if they who reduce all certainty of Christian Fayth to the weight of naturall reason are well content vnder the name of Transubstantiation to vndermine the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity and all the prime verityes proper to Christian Fayth For which cause I haue some reason as I touched before (d) Chap. 6. n. 6. not to be satisfyed that this man for all his bragges of belieuing Scripture doth make that account of it which Christians doe and ought to doe but deludes the Reader with specious words as for example when speaking of the holy Scripture he sayes (e) Pag. 376. Propose me any thing out of this Booke and require whether I belieue it or not and seeme it neuer so incomprehensible to human reason I will subscribe it with hand and hart as knowing no demonstration can be stronger then this God hath said so Therefore it is true These are glorious words but contrary to his owne principles For resoluing Fayth into Reason he cannot belieue that which to his reason seemes contradictory but must thinke that the Motiues for which he receiues Scripture being but probable and subiect to falshood must of necessity yield to arguments more then probable and demonstratiue to human reason And how then can he subscribe to Mysteryes incomprehensible to human reason and capable of obiections which cannot alwayes be answered after a manner intelligible as he requires And consequently he must to vse his owne words giue me leaue to belieue that either he doth not belieue those misteryes or els that he subiugates his vnderstanding to the beliefe of seeming contradictions which he acknowledges to be vnreasonable and a thing which men should not doe according to his owne words (f) Pag. 217. And the Reader had need to take heed that he be not taken also with that protestation of his (g) Pag. 376. I know no demonstration can be stronger then this God hath said so Therefore it is true since he teaches that he knowes not that God hath said so otherwise then by probable inducements and only by a probable assent So that in fine this must be his strong demonstration Whatsoeuer God speakes or reueales is most certainly true But I am not certaine that God speakes in the Scripture Therefore I am certaine that whatsoeuer is in Scripture is true Behold his demonstration that is a very false Syllogisme according to his owne discourse in another place where he not only graunts but endeauours to prooue that the minor of this Demonstration exceedes not probability and consequently cannot inferre a conclusion more them probable Somewhat like to this is an other cunning speach of his (h) Pag. 225. n. 5. That he hartily belieues the Articles of our Fayth be in themselues Truths as certaine and infallible as the very common principles of Geometry or Metaphysicke Which being vnderstood of the Obiects or Truths of Christian Fayth in themselues is no priuiledge at all For euery Truth is in it selfe as certaine as the Principles of Geometry it being absolutely impossible that a Truth can be falshood But the point is that he does not certainely know or belieue these Truths as he does the Principles of Metaphysicke but onely with a probable assent and so to him the Truths cannot be certaine The like art also he vses pag. 357. saying in these wordes I doe belieue the Gospell of Christ as verily as that it is now day that I see the light that I am now writing for all this florish signifies only that he is certaine he belieues the Gospel of Christ with probable assent As for the argument it deserues no answere For who knowes not that contradictories inuolue two propositions but he who captiuates his vnderstanding assents to one part only Chap. 10. and therefore is sure inough not to belieue contradictories at the same time as he pretends All which considered the Reader will easily see that his Doctrines vndermine the chiefest mysteries of Christian Fayth and ouerthrow Christianity The ninth Doctrine Layes grounds to be constant in no Religion CHAP. X. I. I Said in the beginning that as we could not know the way vnlesse we first be told whither we goe so it could litle auayle vs to be put in a way if by following it we might be misled But suppose the end of our iourney be knowne and the right way found what better shall we be if withall we be continually harkning to some suggestions which neuer let vs rest till we haue abandoned that path by following other crosse-wayes as we chance to fall vpon them This is the case of the man with whome we haue to deale I will not build vpon his deeds I meane his changes first from Protestant to
Catholique then from Catholique to Protestant then about againe to Catholique till at last he be come to that passe that it is hard to say What he is neyther Precisian nor Subscriber to the 39. Articles nor confessed Socinian nor right Christian according to the grounds which he hath layd If you will belieue himselfe for matters of Religion he is constant in nothing but in following that way to heauen which for the present seemes to him the most probable He followes that which at the present seemes most probable A poore comfort in matters of Fayth wherin errour is of so great consequence And yet this cold comfort is vpon the point of being lost for the probability is limited to the present 2. Would any man thinke that in matters of this nature and after so much profession that he is now satisfied he should (i) Pref. n. 2. professe himselfe still to haue a Trauellers indifferency most willing to be led by reason to any way or from it And accordingly to tell vs (k) Pref. n. 1. That had there been represented to his vnderstanding such Reasons for our Doctrine as would haue made our Religion more credible then the contrary certainly he should haue despised the shame of one more alteration with both armes and all his hart most readily haue imbraced it Such was the preparation which he brought to the reading of that Booke comming with such a mind to the reading of it as S. Austin before he was a setled Catholique brought to his conference with Faustus the Manichee Did S. Austin after he was a setled Catholicke come with the like disposition to conference with any Heretique or mis belieuer To what purpose then doth this man bring S. Austin here but to shew the difference betwixt the Fayth of one that is a Catholicke and of one that is not the difference I say in point of adhesion to his Fayth the Catholicke belieuing so assuredly that he may say with the Apostle If we or an Angell from heauen euangelize (l) Gal. 1. ◠to you besides that which we haue euangelized to you be he Anathema Others not being able euer to be certaine of what they belieue because they build vpon grounds which by their owne confession are not certaine and infallible 3. In which respect also it may be iustly wondred with what sense this man taking vpon him to be a guide to others and to leade them a sofe way to heauen professeth himselfe not to be setled in his way and stil to haue not only a (m) Prof. n. 2. Trauellers but an Ignorant Trauellers Indifferency willing to be led to any way or from it because he knowes not whether he be right or wrong otherwise if he know himselfe to be right certainly it were not his part to be so willing to be led to any way or from it which giues me hope that no man of iudgment and timorous conscience will aduenture the eternall saluation of his soule vpon the writings or Doctrine of one who is so vnsetled whom he either knowes not where to find or how long to keep in any one opinion or profession to whom the words of S. Bernard (n) Ep. 193. concerning Petrus Abailardus who taught that Fayth was but opinion may be applyed Homo sibi dissimilis est totus ambiguus He is a man who disagrees euen from himselfe wholely composed of doubtings I leaue out his middle words intus Herodes foris Ioannes 4. One thing certainly people would be very glad to know that whereas he maintaines that his Alterations were the most satisfactory actions to himselfe (o) Pag. 303. that euer he did and the greatest victories that euer he obtained ouer himselfe Men I say would be glad to know vpon what new and great Motiues these most satisfactory actions greatest victoryes were ouer throwne againe and frequent changes grounded For his first being Catholicke we haue Motiues in writing vnder his owne hand and now in print But what new reasons mooued him to forsake vs this would people willingly know If he had no better reasons then be the answers to his owne Motiues I scarcely belieue that any iudicious Protestant will allow the alteration to haue been good diuers of them being against Protestants themselues and some repugnant to all Christianity as may be well seene by the effects which they haue wrought in him to wit so much vnsetlednesse in beliefe and Religion that he knowes not to this day what he would be at But we may well suppose that as he willingly leaues all men to their liberty prouided that they improue it not to a Tyranny ouer others so he reserues the like liberty to himselfe and is in fine resolued to belieue whatsoeuer for the present doth seeme most probable to him and so liuing in perpetuall Indifferency be an example to others to be constant in no profession which is as good as to be of no Religion The tenth Doctrine Prouides for the impunity preseruation of whatsoeuer damnable errour against Christian Fayth CHAP. XI 1. HE is no lesse prouidēt to conserue then industrious to beget Vnchristian errours Atheismes Suppose an Orthodoxe Belieuer fall first into damnable Heresies then to Turcisme or Iudaisme afterward to Paganisme and finally to Atheisme Let him freely speake his mind to the learned and vnlearned to high and low to the Laity and Clergy to all sorts of persons Let him haue swarmes of followers let Circumcision be reduced the Saturday obserued for Sunday with Iewes or Friday with the Turkes and in confirmation of these sacrileges let Bookes be written What remedy Must these things be tolerated in a Christian Common wealth or Kingdome with resentment of a Christian Prince in despite of Christian Prelates vnder the eyes of Christian Deuines in the midst of Christian people They must be suffered if we belieue this mans doctrine (p) Pag. 297. that no man ought to be punished for his opinions in Religion We are willing sayth he to leaue all men to their liberty prouided they will not improue it to a Tyrāny ouer others (q) Pag. 179. n. 81. a good meanes to preserue euery one in his liberty without feare of punishment And the contrary persuasion and practise what is it It well becomes them who haue their portions in this life who serue no higher state then that of England or Spayne or France who thinke of no other happinesse but the preseruation of their owne fortunes and tranquillity in this world who thinke of no other meanes to preserue States but human power Machiauillian Policy How daungerous to Church euen to State this pernicious errour is and what encouragement it giues for vnquiet persons to oppose Authority and how deepely it taxes England other Protestant Churches of Machiauillian Policy and to be men who haue their portions in this life who serue no higher State then that of England or Spayne or France who thinke