having that saving faith the Romists shew want of charity in damning those who are saved Hee was againe out of the way in bringing his owne Romists into schisme and damnation by dividing them from Protestants which have that one saving faith And now he goes further out of the way in removing the reasons that may make for unity though by unity with Protestants Romists may avoid uncharitablenesse schisme and damnation so it seemes hee is so earnest for division and dis-union that to attaine it he will hazzard both charity and salvation to his owne fellow Romists as a high price and farre above the value of that which hee would purchase though it were the richest jewell in the world Yet on hee goes upon this adventure And whereas differences amongst Romists are brought forth to make Romists more equall to differences among Protestants or to some differences betweene Protestants and Romists and likewise to make Romists thinke there may be a spirituall unity notwithstanding some differences because notwithstanding their owne differences they affirme there is an unity among themselves this the Author thinkes too peaceable and therefore strives to take it out of the way Toward this he is willing to deny that there are such differences amongst Romists and he strives to shew that they agree even in those things wherein they differ But differ they doe and strong evidences wee have for it which may hereafter be produced Neither indeede their Poeticall Heade of unity the Pope nor any one man on earth can make the whole Church to bee inwardly of one minde and soule but onely that Lord and maker of Spirits by his owne Spirit his true and onely Vicar For that one Spirit enlightning and guiding the spirits of men with one faith of one word delivered by the ministery directed and enabled by the same one spirit can onely make a true reall internall and spirituall unity And accordingly S. Paul leading us to the unity of faith thus rightly ordereth his words toward unity One Spirit one Lord one Faith And thus hee goes on and sheweth how this one spirit of one Lord which inwardly workes this unity of faith in the Lords body outwardly also concurres to the working of it by the gifts given to the ministery For this working without in the ministery and inabling them to teach one and the same doctrine of saving faith and inwardly working in the hearts and soules of Christs members these members are brought into the unity of faith and so into one body of Christ and as in this body of Christ there are different members of different measures and capacities by the different gifts of the spirit so these different capacities doe not reach or containe one measure of divine truth Christ the Foundation and Head is made knowne to all his members for by this knowledge they become his members and so have they all unity in so much divine truth as knits them to Christ But by reason of their different measures some attaining such holy truths of which others are short there must needs bee a difference in the apprehension of those truths to which some attaine and others doe not come yet in all is a settled desire and purpose to beleeve the whole truth revealed by God if it be also revealed to them that it is the truth of God And so whatsoever force was in the Champions speech That true spirituall faith beleeveth the whole Body of divine doctrine makes not against us but for us and much more for us then for them For we upon the right motive which is God speaking in his word doe beleeve plainly whatsoever we conceive and what we doe not conceive wee beleeve in purpose and intention And thus have wee perfect unity while in the fundamentalls we have an actuall unity of faith and in the lesser points an unity of purpose and will But in this true and kindly unity one Spirit not one Pope doth cause inwardly one faith And againe that one spirit giving gifts to men not to one man outwardly bringeth to the inward unity of faith And indeede that none but the spirit the true vicar of Christ can make this solid spirituall and internall unity it appeares by the confession of the very Romish craft which hath coyned the Pope to be the head of unity For that they might make and prove him to be such they have put him into the place of the holy Ghost and made him the Vicar of Christ accordingly they say that the holy Ghost speaks by him and so the speech of the holy Ghost being infallible verity is a right ground of unity A foule errour and without ground of Scripture which never since the departure of Christ from earth tyed the holy Ghost to one man so that from him the whole Church should fetch Oracles and resolutions But indeed it is a high and blasphemous imposture which puts the Pope in place of the holy Ghost And when this man speakes it pronounceth of him as the people of Herod The voice of God and not of Man And how little this differs from Montanisme I wish Romists would consider who reduced the promise of sending the Comforter Christs Vicar as Tertullian cals him to be performed in Montanus And the very same place doe the Romists apply to the Pope which was applied to Montanus but yet thus it appeares That even they that erre in the application yet hold truth in the position That the holy Ghost is the true root of union though erroneously and blasphemously they put the Pope into his roome and make the voyce of the Pope to bee the voice of the holy Ghost And surely the Pope himselfe plainely shewes that hee doubts his owne spirituall power of making unity and therefore hee flyes to the grosse and materiall instruments of unity the Sword and Faggot And so calling downe fire on those that obey him not if he have any spirit it seems it is not that spirit which Christ said was the Evangelicall spirit of the Apostles but rather of him which is called the Destroyer And indeed this device of man to make unity of faith by one man called the Pope being thus thrust into the place of the Spirit of God as it proceeded from the spirit of errour so hath it made unity in errour as the last best of Popes Gregory the Great did in a manner prophecie but it never will make unity in solide and universall Faith and Truth for the beleevers in this counterfeit head of unity have both gotten from him an unity in many errors and have beene left in many great and weighty differences whereof there is little hope of resolving them into union the sight whereof turnes our eyes from this humane and fictitious Head of unitie to the true roote and meanes of unity set forth by the Apostle And because this Author strives to put away from mens eyes the differences which arise under this false Head of union let us shew him
Explicites or Fundamentals with some reasons of those differences and directions for discerning fundamentall points from others THe Cavalier thus goes on It is more then probable that one reason why they are so unwilling to give in any Catalogue of the fundamentall points is Because they know so well how ridiculous they would make themselves by the infinite variety of their Catalogues For if it be so familiar with them to bee of different mindes concerning particular doctrines how much more would they bee so in this which is a roote of many branches or rather a monster of many heads and so there can bee no doubt but that some of them would not bee more resolute in restraining the fundamentall points into a narrow compasse then others would bee in enlarging them into a broader The Authour here goes about to make the Fathers yea himselfe and his owne partners ridiculous for if varietie in the Catalogues of Fundamentals or chiefe heads and grounds of Christianity bee ridiculous how shall the Fathers escape the merriments of this Authour Yea how shall himselfe and his owne partners not bee mocked by himselfe For it is plaine that neither Irenaeus nor Tertullian in sundry patternes of the rule of Faith doe enumerate Articles just of the same number and breadth Neither doe the three usuall Creeds hold equall measure by the Authours ell yea let the Authour himselfe who confesseth that there are such Heads and Grounds of Christianity more fundamentall make a Catalogue of these Heads and hee can never agree with all his fellowes who agree not among themselves And thus if hee will looke into this glasse hee may see himselfe laughing at himselfe And indeed if the Reader will peruse the Romists where they write of their Explicites they may see the same variety wherewith the Cavalier here makes himselfe merry some contracting them into a narrower some enlarging them into a broader compasse And to save labour to the Reader I will here give him a Modell of this variety Bellarmine saith That there are some things in Christian Doctrine as well of faith as of manners which are simply necessary to all unto salvation as the knowledge of the Articles of the Apostles Creed tenne Commandements and some Sacraments other things not being so necessary that without their explicite knowledge and faith and profession a man may not bee saved But Vasques thus differs from Bellarmine in some Articles of the Creede There are saith hee some Articles in the Apostles Creed and the other of Nice which the ignorant are not commanded to know nor commonly the faithfull for all doe not know the Communion of Saints yea you shall finde not a few learned men that know not what the Communion of Saints is and the Article of the Church seemes hard to teach and learned men thinke that the ignorant doe commonly erre in it Yea hee comes at length to this short measure of faith I would not doubt to grant that there are not a few Countrey people that without fault are ignorant of some of those mysteries which are necessary Azorius the Jesuite speakes of other differences and varieties differing also himselfe from others First hee saith That every Beleever ought explicitely to beleeve all the Articles of faith either as according to the number of the Apostles they are accounted twelve or according to the sentence of Divines they are reckoned foureteene But then hee adds That some affirme the unlearned must beleeve more then these Articles because they must beleeve the immortality of the soule originall sinne c. Againe hee saith Some hold that both the twelve Articles and the fourteene must bee beleeved but himselfe thinks that it is sufficient to salvation if a man beleeve explicitely the one or the other Yea at length hee comes to shew That if a man bee so dull that hee cannot perceive the Article of the Trinity it will suffice if hee beleeve explicitely some other plainer Articles as that Christ the Sonne of God is borne of a Virgin that hee suffered was crucified dâ—ed and was buryed that hee rose againe from the dead and ascended into heaven Canisius as wee have seene before saith That the summe of faith or of all things to bee beleeved is the Apostles Creed And whereas Thomas Aquinas concludes that the Articles to bee beleeved of Christs Divinity and Humanity are fitly numbred either twelve or foureteene Lorca after this acknowledgement adds Perchance the Church did not intend in this summe to comprehend all these Articles which containe any speciall difficultie or ought explicitely to bee beleeved of all the faithfull And when hee comes to speake of those Explicites hee confesseth plainely That in assigning the Rule by which it may bee defined what the vulgar should beleeve Divines doe differ and doe put divers Rules the most common Rule is That they should beleeve those Articles which are by Solemnities celebrated in the Church and that it sufficeth if they beleeve these But this Rule seemes insufficient to others both in excesse and defect Scotus seemes to say That the common precept of faith doth onely binde to the beliefe of the easie which hee calleth grosse points Some of the later as Suarez It â—ufficeth the common people if they beleeve the Articles in the Creed But Lorca himselfe goes beyond all that hitherto have beene mentioned and saith These Rules being laid aside it is to bee affirmed That it is commanded to all the faithfull explicitely to beleeve first the Articles of faith both the foureteene and the twelve in the Creede They must also beleeve the Decalogue and the more common Precepts which are reduced to the Decalogue the doctrine of the seven Sacraments of Prayer of the Popes authoritie and the Prelates Behold a great variety in Romish Explicites Yet I confesse that I find not my selfe so merry hereat as the Cavalier at our supposed differences in Fundamentals but will rather strive to excuse them and to finde reasons for their varietie for the reasons seeme to bee serious as the matter which they goe about is weightie and profitable even the proposall of those grounds whose knowledge is necessary to salvation So farre is it from being a monster as this Authour termes it that his calling of it by this Title is so much the more monstrous as it is true that himselfe acknowledgeth that there are such Heads of Christianitie which himselfe thus calleth monstrous Behold a Truth of the Authours owne bringing forth and then mocked by him for a monster but I will goe on to speake for his Truth and against his Monster even against him to plead for him and his fellowes True it is that there may bee a different enumeration of the Articles in the Fathers Rules of faith in the Creeds and in the Explicites of later Writers as well as our Fundamentals and that for divers reasons One may bee this Because some Catalogues may put in more Articles for more full unfolding
many whatsoever this Authour saith have not deprived themselves voluntarily of marriage but have taken it upon them as a yoke and burden which neither they nor their Predecessors were able to beare many sinking under it unto the very pit of Hell And let them labour with their wits and pennes so much as they can they will never by reason nor by the lives of their Priests disprove Christs truth That all men cannot receive it nor prove their owne untruth That all men can receive it And surely the Fornications Adulteries Murders and pollutions that have issued from this Law of Coelibate I doubt not cry aloud to heaven against Rome as once against Sodome for that sore to which it is condemned Hee adds further In like manner Saint Peter saith That Saint Paul in his Epistles had written certaine things which were hard to bee understood and which the unlearned and unstable did pervert to their destruction Saint Augustine declares upon this place that the places misunderstood concerned the doctrine of Iustification which some misconceived to bee by faith alone by occasion of what Saint Paul had writ to the Romanes and of purpose to countermine that errour hee saith that Saint James wrote his Epistle and proved therein that good works were absolutely necessary to the Act of Iustification Hereupon wee may observe two things the one That an errour in this point alone is by the judgement of Saint Peter to worke their destruction who imbrace it And the other That the Apostles Creede which speakes no one word thereof is no good Rule to let us know all the fundamentall points of faith To this I answer First That this Authour goes on still upon a false ground as if wee said that all errours in faith that may damne men were fundamentall and expressely against some Article of the Creede Whereas wee have often affirmed That any errour though not fundamentall may damne men that by a lively faith hold not rightly the fundamentals and so are without Christ. And it seemes that these men were not well grounded and founded by fundamentals in Christ Jesus whom Saint Peter calls unlearned and unstable and their errour the errour of the wicked A generation of vipers turne wholesome food into poyson and abuse Scriptures to their owne condemnation But secondly That faith doth not justifie but that good workes are absolutely necessarie to the Act of Iustification is most untrue and against Saint Augustine himselfe Untrue for a man is justified by faith in Christ and not by his owne merits which in your language are good workes as divers of your owne Authours affirme And a man in the instant of his Justification may dye before he hath had time to do good works and yet his Justification may be good And it is against Saint Austin even in the same place whence the former saying of Saint Peter is taken where you may find that commonly knowne sentence of his Opera sequuntur justificatum non praecedunt justificandum Good works follow justification and doe not goe before it So that whiles this Authour observes two things hee gives more then two scandalls to his Reader For first hee chargeth falsly not Saint Austin onely but Saint Iames with holding this errour That good workes were absolutely necessary to the act of justification And then secondly he will make him to say that the not holding of this errour is an errour which may worke their destruction that embrace it Yea thirdly that the Apostles Creed is no good rule to let us know all the fundamentall points of faith because it speakes no one word to teach us that the Cavaliers errour is a fundamentall point of faith Lastly his owne Doctors doe bring into their Explicites our faith in Christs passion resurrection for justification but not this his Article That good workes are absolutely necessary to the act of justification And if they doe not why doth hee require it of us in our fundamentalls SECT II. Wherein his Exceptions against the 39. Articles of Religion established in this Church are answered BUt having quarrelled in vaine with the Creed to prove the insufficiency of it for fundamentalls now hee comes to the Articles where he thus begins Others say that the Booke of the 39. Articles declares all the fundamentall points of Faith according to the Doctrine of the Church of England but this also is most absurdly affirmed For as it is true that they declare in some confused manner which yet indeed is extremely confused what the Church of England in most things beleeves so it is true that they are very carefull that they bee not too clearly understood And therefore in many Controversies whereof that Book speakes it comes not at all to the main difficulty of the question between them and us and especially in those of the Church and Free-will While the Authour speaks of a confused manner and which is extremely confused his words do returne upon himselfe and his owne discourse For that he may make his discourse confused it seemes hee makes use of this doubtfull word Declare For if wee say That the Booke of Articles declares our fundamentalls of faith wee doe not say it declares all the knots of questions which are between us and the Romists For it is well knowne there are divers controversies between us and the Romists which are not of fundamentalls And neither the Fathers in their rules of Faith neither Romists in their Explicites doe declare the knots of questions which may arise even concerning fundamentalls themselves if the fundamentalls be so expressed that their true and saving sense may bee received and beleeved by the working of that Spirit which makes Christs sheep to hear Christs voice They that thus beleeve shall bee saved though they know not all the knots which cunning and erring men doe make They that write rules of Faith Explicites and Fundamentalls doe not in the same undertake to write all knots of controversies which concerne them And the Cavalier doth not find them in his owne Doctors among their Explicites wherefore the answer which he makes for them let him take for us Secondly for his particulars of the Church and Free-will First for the Church Doth our Church hold that the visibility and inerrability of the Church are fundamentalls And if shee doe not how can this Authour accuse her for not shewing fundamentalls because she shewes not those points which she doth not hold to be fundamentall The Church is not the foundation of the Church but she her selfe is built on that onely foundation Christ Jesus And even your owne men are not agreed about making the Article of the Church one of the Explicites or at least agree not in declaring these points of controversies concerning her to be explicitely beleeved And for Free-will I might aske first Doth this Authour find in any of his Doctors this knot of Free-will for an Explicite But secondly Doth the Councell of
being his owne and not the Texts onely wee may upon request allow this place and the next of Christs prayer for unity Iohn 17 to intend unity of affections and yet hee will bee short of his unity in all points of Doctrine And it is wel known that if this were meant the present Romists themselves have not that unity neither those who farre excelled them the ancient Martyrs and Fathers And farre more guilty are they against the prayer of Christ in maintaining division of affections towards Patriarchall Sees and many eminent parts of the catholick Church for the Pope is like Ismael his sword against every man that will not submit to his universall Supremacy And according to this dividing Spirit of the Papacie is it this Authors businesse in this worke to make a division in the Church for false proving is making even where there is an unity for is not this his employment in this Chapter and more hereafter in taking away the distinction of points fundamentall to set Christians by the eares and one to damne another for differing in every little point of doctrine For thus hee saith even soone after his former places of unity and hee would faine have Saint Matthew and Saint Mark to say so with him Whosoever should faile of beleeving any one point of Christian doctrine should be as sure of condemnation as if he had beleeved but any one or none A Foundation laid of Babel it selfe even of division and hatred in the Church of God A Position to which I cannot bee silent for Sions sake nor for my brethren and companions sake whom this Position hath often slaine with death temporall and adjudged to death eternall For let it look as smooth as it will doe you breake up the bowels of it and you shall finde it full of bloud division and damnation This even this is it which hath wrought those fearefull Massacres Treasons Excommunications Fires whereof many horrid spectacles in the second Chapter have been presented And how should it bee otherwise but that it should produce such hellish effects when it teacheth Christians for every failing in the beleefe of any one point of Christian that is in their language Romish or Popish doctrine to accompt other Christians in the state of damnation and to hate them more then heathens So that if the Pope say that the Worship of Images Prayer in an unknown tongue without understanding Rats eating the body of Christ and such other errors bee points of Christian doctrine the man that beleeves them not though hee beleeve in Christ yea all other points but one of these hath forfeited his salvation and is fallen into the odious state of a combustible heretick and of a damnable person But this Author might have beene put in minde of more mercy by one of his allegations for though Christ in the place of Matthew by him alledged willeth that all Nations bee taught to observe whatsoever hee hath commanded yet his owne fellow Romists allow that the breach of some of Christs Commands are not damnable I might alledge a Command of Christ in the Lords Supper Drinke yee all of this which as concerning the lay people they have turned into Drinke yee none of this But I will passe to other Commands such as those are which command the keeping of the morall Law Matth. 5.17.28.48 and forbid every idle thought but the breach of these Commands by inordinate thoughts or small deviations the Romists can make not mortall and damnable but veniall How comes it then that they will allow us no veniall errors and failings in small points of doctrine but any one point of Christian that is in his sense Popish doctrine not beleeved is damnably mortall Is there not in this a great piece of Popish leaven even of the wicked mystery that sinnes against Gods Commands of morall obedience may bee veniall but against the Popes Commands in the least point of doctrine are altogether mortall And doth not the reason appeare to bee this That in the breach of a morall Law as that of coveting our neighbours goods God is offended but the Pope is not hurt but by not beleeving any one point which the Pope delivers for Christian doctrine his Inâ—rrability fals to the ground and so his Supremacy And it were better according to the policie of this wicked Mystery that all the world were burned or damned or set at division then that the Papacie should fall But thus doth the Pope set himselfe above God by valuing offences against himselfe of a more damnable nature then sinnes against God But well it is withall that they shew hereby that God is yet farre more mercifull then the Pope for God they say makes little sins veniall whereas the Pope makes little errors against Popish doctrine deadly and damnable But the truth is to those that are in Christ Jesus God doth make veniall both errors in lesser points of faith which grow by ignorance blindenesse or weaknesse of faith aswell as lesser errors in life by infirmity and weaknesse Christs bloud is a propitiation for all our sinnes aswell sins in the understanding as in the will And to those who attaine to that measure of faith which knits them to Christ Jesus Christ Jesus by his bloud will make other ignorances and unbeliefes in those points of doctrine to which they cannot attain veniall and pardonable and surely our Author is hardly driven to get a shew of proof from Scripture of this doctrine of division and damnation The place of Matthew could not serve for there was only a command to the Apostles to teach all Nations to observe all Christs Commands But we have seene above out of Romists that the breach of some of Christs Commands is not damnable but veniall wherefore another place must be forced to confesse it Accordingly that of Saint Marke is set on the rack but this place speakes not of not beleeving all and every point of doctrine delivered and decreed by the Pope and his adherents but the maine scope of the place is a casting of damnation upon men for the great point of not beleeving in Christ for in the Gospel this is an usuall sense of the word beleeving especially when it stands upon life and death And it seemes this Author can bring no plain place of Scripture to prove that he who beleeves not every small point of doctrine decided by the Pope shall bee damned for if he could these places had not been so unmercifully racked toward it But thus still behold a going on of the Mystery of iniquity Unity unto salvation is urged thereby to make division unto damnation Words are taken from Christ the Head therewith to tear his body into pieces But hereof wee may make this use That when a Papist preacheth to Protestants of unity then let them expect beware of division SECT IIII. The place taken out of the 18. of Matth. is cleared which the Cavalier had perverted to the
Deum Where himselfe also makes an exact Catalogue of all the heresies which had sprung untill his time and where by the way I must needs observe in a word that hee recounts divers heresies which are held by the Protestant Church at this day and particularly that of denying prayers and sacriâ—ices for the dead and then hee concludes in the end that whosoever should hold any one of them were no Christian Catholick But here I must challenge this Champion first that hee deales not fairely with us in putting in these words In disobedience to the Church For let the world know that this is not our holding That a different opinion being held in a purposâ—d disobedience to the Church is safe or compâ—tible with unity of charity but that some different opinions in points of doctrine by darknesse of understanding or weaknesse of faith not apprehended or beleâ—ved yet not without a purposed disobedience to the Church may be compatible with unity and salvation Secondly if it were true which hee saith that unity were broken by the obstinate beliefe of any one doctrine joyned with disobedience to the Church how doth not this make against Rome which maintaineth her universall Supremacy and other errors directly against the Canons of the Church Thirdly wee deny Rome to bee that Church which the Fathers speake of Fourthly this Authors allegations make directly against his owne end and overthrow the authority of Rome which hee goes about to establish For let him speake upon his conscience and reputation Were all those heresies mentioned by Epiphanius and Augustine adjudged and condemned for heresies by the Church of Rome If not then it seemes there may bee hereticks without any judgement of the Church of Rome and there may be hereticks that hold some errors not adjudged heresies by the Church of Rome But if so then what is become of this Authors heresie described to be the obstinate beliefe of any one doctrine in disobedience to the Church the Church in the Authors sense being no other then the Church of Rome How was this Church disobeyed in those things which shee had not decreed and even his particulars of prayers and sacrifices for the dead Had the Church of Rome adjudged these at this time to bee points of faith Hee cannot say it How plaine deceit then is this to seeme to prove these to bee heresies because held in a disobedience to the Church when the Church in his Romish sense had not decreed the doctrines to bee beleeved which are contrary to these supposed heresies Let us now come to his particular citations and see yet more particularly how they make not against us but mostly against himselfe Hee begins with Saint Irenaeus lib. 1. cap. 3. The Church having received this word preached and this faith as was shewed before and having spread the same over the whole world doth diligently preserve it as inhabiting one house and doth likewise beleeve those things which are taught thereby as having one soule and one heart and in the same conformity shee preaches and teaches and delivers it as possessing but one moâ—th For though there bee in the world different expressions and tongues yet the vertue and power of Tradition is but one and the same And neither those Churches which are found in Germany nor those others in Spaine nor those in France nor they which are in the Easterne parts nor they which are in Egypt nor they which are in Lybia nor they which are in the middle parts of the world doe beleeve or make tradition of doctrine any otherwise in one place then they doe in another but as that creature of God the Sunne is one and the same in the whole world so is the preaching if the Truth And those Prelates of Churches who have most power and grace of speech will deliver no other things but these for no man is above his Master neither will such an one as hath meaner Talents in speech make this doctrine and Tradition lesse but since Faith is but one and the same neither doth hee inlarge it who is able to speak much of it nor that other diminish it who speakes lesse I answer that this place is produced improperly in regard of the Point deceitfully in regard of the Reader For Irenaeus in the second Chapter next preceding had set downe a forme of Faith and a summe of chiefe Articles agreeable to our Creed And then in the third whence this allegation is taken hee saith that the Church having received this faith doth uniformly preach it and with one Mouth through all nations neither doth the more learned increase it nor the lesse learned diminish it Now this being spoken of the principall points of faith â—oth rather prove our unity in fundamentalls but not prove our Champions entire unity in inferiour points therefore it comes not home to the Authors marke but indeed he goes about to deceive the Reader when he brings it in as a proofe of that which it proves not Secondly this place makes mightily against the Papacy and that Confederacy for in the faith which Irenaeus sets downe in the foregoing chapter there is not one Article concerning the Popes Supremacy nor worshiping Images nor of praying in an unknowne tongue c. These therefore being now decreed by the Pope are inlargements of faith wherefore the Popes that thus inlarge the faith are by Irenaeus censured not to bee these Prelates of Churches who have most power and grace of speech yea not so good as the others of lesse grace but withall hee censureth them that they are above their master and their master being Christ it fits right with the saying of Paul That hee sits as God and exalts himselfe above all that is called God Hee comes next to Tertullian Tertullian shewes plainly that whosoever denyes any one doctrine of the Church rejects all for thus hee saith upon occasion Valentinus approveth some things of the Law and the Prophets some things hee disallowes that is hee disallowes all whiles he approves some The Author here also imposeth upon his Reader if wee may beleeve Tertullians learned but Romish Adnotator Pamelius For not to insist on this that the words are Omnia improbat dum quaedam reprobat he disallowes all whiles hee refuseth some from Pamelius we learne that these words are not spoken of all points of faith proposed by the Church much lesse if the Church bee taken for the Papacy but of the bookes of the Law and the Prophets which Protestants do by no meanes reject For this is Pamelius his sentence immediatly after these words Quod usque adâ—o verum agnoverunt alii scriptores ut disertis verbis scribant inter caeteros Damascenus quod vetus Testamentum reprobaverit This by other writers is said to be so true that they expresly write and Damascen among others that hee refused the old Testament And indeede hee that did deny the old Testament did deny more then one doctrine of
the Church which is the Cavaliers point to be proved by this place for he denyeth many doctrines and fundamentall ones of the Law and the Prophets yea of God himselfe The next place doth much accuse the Cavaliers need of Allegations and yet withall excuseth him not from an indeavour to deceive his Reader The place alledged by him is this Quod apud multos c. That which is found to be one amongst so many is not to be thought to have crept in by errour but to have beene commended by Tradition The place cited is this Quod apud multos unum invenitur non est erratum sed traditum That which is one among so many is not an errour but a thing delivered The question in hand was concerning the rule of Faith or the Creed as the Reader may see by comparing the thirteenth chapter where the Creed is rehearsed and the end of the one and twentieth where he saith That it remained for him to shew whether the doctrine in the former rule came from the delivery or if you will Tradition so it bee not a Tradition beyond that which is written for there is no such in this rule of faith of the Apostles And having refuted these objections That the Apostles delivered not all and that they knew not all he comes after to this objection That the â—hurches did not purely reteine what the Apostles delivered and thus hee refells this objection Age nunc omnes erraverint deceptus sit Apostolus de Testimonio reddendo Nullam respexerit Spiritus sanctus uti eam in veritatem deduceret ad hoc missus à Christo ad hoc postulatus de Patre ut esset doctor veritatis neglexerit officium Dei Villicus Christi vicarius sinens Ecclesias aliter interim intelligere aliter credere quod ipse pâ—r Apostolos praedicabat Ecquid verisimile est ut tot ac tanâ—a in unam Fidem erraverint Nullus inter multos eventus est uâ—us exitus Varâ—asse debuerat error doctrinae Ecclesiarum â—aeterùm quod apud multos unum invenitur non est erratum sed traditum Whereof the summe is this that though the Holy Ghost the Vicar of Christ had not looked to his office of leading the Church into truth yet there is no likelihood that so many Churches had erred into one Faith But the Faith wherein there is such unity among many should not be an errour but a Truth delivered by the Apostles Now this place is so far from saying that all Churches agreed in sin all points beyond and besides the Creed that it speaks onely of their agreement in the rules of Faith and doctrine of the Creed And he saith that such an agreement comes not by errour which commonly is divers but by one uniforme delivery and doctrine of the Apostles So the Cavalier is still to seeke for a necessary unity in every smal doctrine and in points without the Creed Cyrill is mainly for the Protestants even as himselfe alledgeth him For we agreeably affirme That to be the Catholick Church which teacheth without defect all things necessary to salvation And in the doctrine of faith such things necessary to salvation are points fundamentall Cyprian comes or is rather drawne in next against his will and meaning and thus the Author produceth him The Church being stricken through by the light of our Lord doth send her beames throughout the whole world But yet that light which is cast so far abroad is but one and the same Shee spreads her branches over the whole earth after a plentifull manner Shee extends her flowing streames with great aboundance and to a great distance But yet is Shee one Head and one Root and one Mother who is fruitfull by such store of issue Now I thinke it were needlesse to help a Reader to take this place from the Author For it is plaine to every eye that this place speakes not of the unity of the Church in all points of doctrine but of their unity in one Love and one mysticall Body So that this place is not onely unserviceable to the Author but serves much against him and his lady Mother who cuts off noble and excellent members of the Church from her or rather her selfe from the Church if they doe not submit to her universall Tyranny Cyprian it seemes hath not said enough and therefore he must say more but indeed lesse Let us see how the Cavalier rather teacheth him then suffereth him to speake The same S. also speaking of the sin of Core Dathan and Abiram implies that the one Church must not onely be entirely beleeved but followed also in all her doctrines and directions For hee saith that though Core Dathan and Abiram did beleeve and worship one God and lived in the same Law and Religion with Moses and Aaron yet because they divided themselves from the rest by Schisme resisting their Governours and Priests they were swallowed up quick into Hell Here first wee may observe how hee tells his Reader what hee would have Cyprian say for hee saith not that Cyprian doth speake it plainely but the S. implyes and what doth he imply That the Church must not onely bee intirely beleeved but followed also in all her doctrines and directions But did Core Dathan and Abiram differ from Moses and Aaron in doctrine His owne place denyes it which saith They did beleeve and worship one God and lived in Moses his Law and Religion with Moses and Aaron And the place further assignes the true fault Division by Schisme They denyed the authority of those whom God had placed to be Governours over them Just the same sinne into which Pope Pius the fifth drew the English Papists by his Bull so that this place makes exceedingly against Romish doctrine of rebellion against Princes such as those of the North and in Ireland But let me give the Author one question at parting Was Aaron to bee followed in all his doctrines and directions what doth the Author think of this doctrine concerning the Calfe These be thy Gods O Israel which brought thee up out of the Land of Egypt Saint Basill is next produced thus speaking in Theod. They who are well instructed in holy writ permit not one syllable of divine doctrine to be betrayed or yeelded up but are willing to embrace any kinde of death for the defence thereof if need require Hereupon the Author thus commenteth That man of God had beene sollicited by some to relent for a time to yeeld though it were but to a little he refused in such sort as you have seene and he did it with much disdaine to be attempted in that kinde Now let the Reader see here the fairenesse of our Author Hee speakes of Basils not yeelding to a little and what was this little Denying the sonne of God to be God of one substance with the Father Is this a little Surely he should be a great Hereticke that should deny
next place it will onely remaine to be considered and resolved whether or no both the Catholickes and the Protestants can bee truly said to bee parts and members of this one and selfe same Church For if they cannot the case in question is already judged and there will be no colour of Reason why either of us should hereafter be charged with want of charity for affirming that the other is not saveable without repentance of his Religion Behold a knot of strange things knit together by an invisible cohaerence or a visible incohaerence For first whereas he saith that in the next place It will onely remaine to be considered whether the Protestants and Romists may bee truly said to be parts and members of this one Church For my part I am utterly of opinion that this doth neither in the next place nor at all remaine to bee considered toward the Authors end which is the saving of Rome from uncharitablenesse in damning Protestants For Protestants may bee members of the true Church wherein is salvation and Romists may be out of it and yet Romists may bee uncharitable for damning Protestants who are in the Church wherein is salvation But since hee is out of the way I will thus shew it to him His way of cleering Rome from this charge of uncharitablenesse hath been hitherto by proving it an untruth and his way of proving it an untruth by proving that Protestants are truely in the way of damnation And to prove this againe hee hath shewed that there is but one Church in which is salvation and from which men are excluded by Heresie and Schisme Now as I thinke in the next place to goe on in his way hee should prove that Protestants are guilty of such Heresie and Schisme as separate them from this one Church and so from salvation For then had hee slaine them out-right with a true damnation and had saved his mother Rome from S. Iohns truly mortall uncharitablenesse But it seemes wee are cleere in these points and therefore the Author would not goe against his conscience in a false accusation wherefore let his silence bee taken for a consent and confession But then it seemes the question is at an end we are absolved and Rome is condemned And indeed so it should bee but hee is resolved still to say on though not to the purpose For to what purpose is this that the Protestants and Romists are not one Church toward proving Protestants to bee in the state of Damnation whereby onely Rome can save her selfe from uncharitablenesse in damning us Surely this is so far from proving Protestants to bee in the state of damnation that it is more likely to prove them to bee in the state of salvation and Romists in damnation For Protestants being parts of the true Church by true faith and love are sure to be saved and Romists not being of this Church wherein Protestants are saved are by his owne Allegations in danger to be damned So Romists are both brought into the danger of damnation and the charge of uncharitablenesse layd on the Romists may still stand true because they falsely damne Protestants for being in the state of salvation A second strange position is this That if the Protestants and Romists bee not of one Church then there will be no colour of reason why either party should be charged with want of charity for affirming that the other is not saveable without repentance of his Religion For there is neither reason verity nor charity in affirming that Protestants who may be saved by their Religion are not saveable without repentance of the same Religion But this vanity if not impiety hath beene blowne away in the answer to his third Chapter But if this unreasonable position bee taken out of the way which is made the ground and reason of the future discourse concerning Protestants and Romists being of two Religions then the discourse built on it falls to the ground for indeede to what purpose is it to prove that Protestants and Romists are of two Religions except the Author may hereby save Romists from uncharitablenesse in falsly condemning the Protestants for being in a good religion different from their owne bad Popery For that is his errand and this errand hath hee lost in losing this last monstrous position which hee made for a bridge to his errands end So for ought I see this Cavalier is at the end of his journey in the midst of his way and the rest of his walke is a wandring and this voyage a sayling up and downe from his harbour CHAP. VIII Wherein the sixth Chapter of the Cavaliers is brought to examination which hath this title that Protestants and Catholickes meaning Papists cannot bee of one Religion Faith and Church in two Sections SECT I. First divers untruths of the Cavaliers are discovered touching the difference of Doctrine Sacraments and Discipline which are betweene Protestants and Papists Secondly an objection taken away that Protestants have made a reformation without ordinary Mission and Miracles Thirdly the censures of Lutherans against other reformed Churches not sufficient to prove either of them out of the Church ROme is left bleeding in her uncharitablenesse the bridge being broken down by which the Authors suppy should have come to her rescue so the businesse seems to be ended and therefore as of the tumult at Ephesus so of the throng of words that follow it may be said There can be no cause given of this concourse For though the Author have his purpose and Protestants and Romists bee not of one religion yet Rome may bee uncharitable for condemning Protestants who are of the true religion Yea Rome by the Author being cast out from the Church if Protestants bee in it may be in the state of damnation for the Authors owne title and ground even because there is but one Church and salvation whereof Protestants and Romists cannot be both partakers And now what would this Cavalier have his Antagonist and Answerer to doe would hee have him to prove for Romists that they are in the Church when himselfe proves that they are not surely I confesse that though there bee some untruthes by which hee would prove that Romists are not of the same saved Church which Protestants yet there are some truthes that I cannot answer but must confesse that they prevaile against me in putting Romists out of this Church I will first take notice of his untruths To make a Religion so intire as may make men to bee of one Church saith the Cavalier they must beleeve the same doctrine partake the same sacraments and be obedient to the same discipline and Prelates Here first I deny that there must bee an entirenesse in all points of doctrine and if hee will looke backe hee may see that hee hath laboured to prove it but hath lost his labour Againe hee hath been told that if all have not just seven sacraments yet they may bee saved Thirdly if they bee not under
divided Jesus from Christ and so themselves from Christians though as it hath been told them and as it is said by a Pope from S. Paul all Christians are called ad societatem Iesu Christi to the society both of Jesus and of Christ 1 Cor. 1.9 But surely if this be the Authors place in Calvin it is likely hee hath either forgotten Calvin or was not trusted with the reading of Calvin and some one that was trusted but not trusty told him it would serve his turne and deceived him As for the wonderfull wisdome which this Author speciously sets forth in the differences of those Order That wisdome is here come to passe which Solomon condemneth when he saith Be not wise over much for humane wisdome hath so far wrought herein that Orders have been multiplied far beyond the gifts of continency yea above the good both of Church and Common wealth And so far were they as this Author saith from stripping themselves from earthly incumberances to fly fast into heaven that too much they stripped both Laiâ—y and Clergy of earthly maintenances and therewith have made to themselves fleshly incumberances But of this wisdome before hath been given to the Reader such a representation that I think it appeared to him not to be spirituall but carnall earthly and divelish if not in the invention yet in the execution and therefore for brevity thither I remit the Reader Only I wish the Author would prove what hee saith by some place of Scripture That God inspired the Founders of Orders with severall spirits and that there is a speciall spirit with which an Order was first endued especially if that Scripture were rightly applyed by Abbot Whitgift That Monkery was a plant which the heavenly Father planted not and therefore should bee pulled up by the rootes Which Prophecie was soon after fulfilled in this Land The Cavalier comes now to dismount a third objection of Protestants concerning Romish difference which ariseth as hee saith in regard of the differences betweene learned and unlearned men which hee assayeth to take away by a distinction of explicite and implicite faith in this manner A man is said to have explicite faith of any article or doctrine when he hath heard it particularly propounded to him and hath some particular knowledge thereof and gives particular assent thereunto But as for implicite faith of any article or doctrine a man is then said to have it when hee beleeves that concerning it which the Church teacheth them explicitely who are capable thereof although for his owne part he have not perhaps so much as heard of it in particular or if he did hee hath forgot it or if he did remember it he hath not capacity enough to apprehend or understand it And when he hath shewed this distinction he labours with great vehemency to prove it and affirmes That without this it would be wholly impossible to maintaine any Church in any unity of faith at all and finally concludes That this sword of ours is turned into a buckler wherewith to defend them First for the pains he takes to make good this distinction hee takes it to make good our objection and so labours for us and against himselfe for upon this distinction being grounded we ground our objection and say that this distinction leaves even the like differences amongst Romists for which they accuse and damne us and leaves no better unity among them then it leaves among us And if thus then it is both a sword in our hand to hurt them and a buckler also to defend us against them neither have they any buckler to defend themselves against this sword much lesse will this sword that wounds them become a buckler to defend the wounds which it selfe gives But the onely safe way is with that King who comes with the weake side to send Ambassadors for peace to the stronger Now to shew that this distinction being strengthened doth strengthen our objection and so is a true sword against Romists I say That in those points of faith which are beyond the explicites or fundamentals are called implicites there are differences among Romists as well as among us and these differences are not onely such as are discovered by the ell by which the faith of the unlearned is found shorter then that of the learned but the Cloth it selfe within the measure of the learned is torne into pieces and the learned themselves doe differ in the beliefe of the said points among themselves as well as from the unlearned And this hath bin shewed before and is indeed a part of D. Whites undertaking formerly mentioned I may instance in a point or two Transubstantiation is an Article of their new faith and not usually reckoned among their explicites the one part of the learned hath beleeved that the substance of Bread being abolished the Body of Christ is brought to the place of it another part beleeves that the substance of Bread is changed into the substance of Christs Body which I nothing doubt was the first meaning of this new doctrine each confutes either And an unlearned man that stands by may easily being over-weighed with the reasons of both either beleeve neither or somewhat else of his owne And indeede I my selfe have asked one of their Proselites whether he would chew or teare the body of Christ with his teeth and he told me that he did not think that their Doctors would say it so also in the point of Image-worship a matter of deepe consequence and much concerning life and death yet by them left among Implicites One side of the Doctors holds a plaine worship of the Image of Christ with Latria or divine honour and others hold this honour given properly to Images to be Idolatrie and either give it improperly or give an inferiour reverence or no religious reverence at all But the unlearned man when he sees the Image set in Churches covered with gold turning his head and eyes weeping working miracls saith with the Lycaonians Gods are common to us in the shape of men and thinkes hee cannot worship God too much and therefore doth it with all his soule and all his might even with a perfect Idolatrie Now are not these differences of momeÌ„t among them in their Explicites many more such there are which it were too tedious to repeat indeed their differences must needs bee much more then ours because many of their learned Explicites are errours and in errours there can never bee a full agreement for if any one hath that good spirit which maks discovery of them he commonly is opposed and contradicted by the others errour as here the not worshippers of the Image with divine worship is opposed by the worshipper Besides he that is in the darke and sees not what to beleeve if he beleeve any thing he can but beleeve an imagination of his owne and not a reall ttuth and so must needs differ from him who seeth
others doe and therefore doe exact a more explicite beliefe and consequently may bee accounted in some respects more fundamentall This I desire the Reader to observe because this confirmeth that which hath beene formerly spoken concerning the agreement between Fundamentals and Explicites and must serve hereafter for a Confutation of his owne objections against Fundamentals In the meane time that which paines him for the present is this That wee doe not beleeve every Decree or Errour of the Pope as well as these important grounds of Christianitie for thus hee presently subjoyneth There is no doctrine at all concerning Religion the beliefe whereof is not fundamentall to my salvation if the catholick Church propound and command mee to beleeve it So the Cavaliers quarrell against us is this That wee doe not make the worship of Images kindred of Gossips and such popish vanities fundamentall to our salvation as the Articles of the Trinity and Christs Incarnation A fearfull blasphemy and which should make his heart hate his hand for writing it but they well deserve to bee given up to the beliefe of such impious errours who receive not the love of the truth revealed in the word with duâ— estimation For such will easily equall the word of Man to the word of God and will not suffer the word of God to stand for a sufficient saving verity nor a sufficient ground of unity except man give his word for the word of God and Man add his word to the word of God For if the Pope give his word for a doctrine contained in Gods word then his Popish disciples must receive it and untill that they may without heresie not beleeve it and if the Pope adde his word to the word of God Gods word is not a sufficient ground of unity but the unity made by that word is to be torne in pieces if withall we do not joyne the word of the Pope in one beliefe with it Thus is the Pope made Christs Rivall and takes the faith of the spouse from her husband to himselfe And so whereas he would accuse us of an high craft our craft is no other then that simplicity of S. Paul by which hee did labour to espouse the Church as a chaste Virgin to one Husband which was Christ But this Romish doctrine is the very craft of the old Serpent and Dragon which goes about to seduce Eve the patterne of the Church from her Husband and to marry her to the Pope or rather to make her his Adulteresse But let him remember Whoremongers and Adulterers especially such great ones God will judge Yet this would hee approve by that which followes For there is no errour in faith which may not bee made damnable by the manner of holding it when it is done so obstinately as that in defence thereof a man denyes the authority of the Catholick Church But briefly I answer First that the Church cannot make a point of faith of that which is none Secondly Stapleton tells us that the Church hath no promise to bee infallibly directed in the decision and resolution of small or light points and so the Church not having this infallible direction cannot have authority to make such points fundamentall nor to command faith to them where she hath no infallible direction in them Thirdly the Church in these lesser points not having this authority hee doth not disobey the authority of the Church who beleeveth not these points which she hath no authority to command as points of faith Fourthly if the Church were this foundation and could make a point fundamentall yet the Pope and his confederacy for whom this Author fights is not the Church Fifthly the same Popish Church hath taught and propounded many grosse errours and untruths for points of doctrine which are so farre from being fundamentall to salvation that they shake the very foundation and so are rather fundamentall to damnation But here I cannot but complaine of this Author in that hee useth craft which himselfe accuseth for while he goes about to lay the Pope the Chimera of Rome for a foundation of faith hee names him not in his whole booke but still tells us of the catholick Church let him come forth plainly out of his Covert and shew us his catholick Church even the Pope and his adherents if he be not ashamed of them and not thus draw disciples to a fancy and a piece of Poetry under the reall and reverend name of the catholick Church But this may serve as a caveat to the Reader that the Cavalier tells us of the Church when the Pope is his errand Another point whereof he seemes to be ashamed is the worship of Images which he never reckons among the doctrines of difference but if it please him he may now fitly conjoyne them together and then his discourse may runne thus If the Pope decree the worship of Images it may be fundamentall to salvation if with the deniall of Idolatrie the Popes authority bee denyed Yet our Author having spoken that which is proved to be fearfully untrue in his sense that what the Pope and his conspiracy under the name of the catholick Church doe propound and command to be beleeved is fundamentall he is bold to say This untruth is unanswerably proved by the meere catalogues of heresies which have beene made by severall Fathers of the Primitive Church and especially by S. Austin in his Treatise ad quod vult Deum which I have toucht before and which I earnestly exhort my Reader to peruse at large This is so farre from being unanswerable that it hath beene answered and our Author can never make it good that those points which hee acknowledgeth to be of little importance in themselves were there declared to bee fundamentall for being obstinately maintained against the decision command of the Pope and his Councell eâ—ther private or publick so that the Author onely makes up with boldnesse and undertaking what hee wants in evidence and proofe And as in the following piece hee preferres his Reader to the sixth and fifth Chapters so I also referre him to the answer of those Chapters and there besides other solutions hee may see that the example of Saint Cyprian makes mightily against the Popes authority since it plainly appeares that Saint Cyprian did hold the Popes fallibilitie when he plainly held the contrary to that which the Pope had decided And thus being put besides his premisses hee is also deprived of his conclusion The distinction of points of faith into fundamentall and not fundamentall doth stand still in such full truth and power that the unbeliefe of points not fundamentall doth not presently forfeit salvation though the same points bee decided by the Pope and his conspiracy much lesse doe worship of Images Prayer in an unknowne tongue salvation by merits the Popes supremacy especially taken for a foundation of faith though decided and commanded by the Pope cause damnation by being unbelieved but rather by being believed
SECT III. The Papists as much bounden to declare their Explicites as the Protestants their Fundamentalls This distinction may bee rightly used for the manifestation of our union with the Fathers to prove the perpetuall visibilitie of the Church professing the same Fundamentalls with us but unjustly objected as a ground of our severitie against Papists who are punished here as Traytors for overthrowing the foundations of State not as Hereticks for contradicting the foundations of Faith HEe goes on I should bee glad to know of the Authors of this distinction what points of their faith which are controverted betweene them and us or betweene the Lutherans and them are fundamentall and which are not fundamentall Then he sayes That a fundamentall point being such that whosoever beleeves it not cannot be saved there is nothing which more imports a man exactly to learne then what is fundamentall and what not and yet there is absolutely no one thing which hath beene so frequently and so importunately desired as that they would give in some exact List or Catalogue of all and the onely fundamentall points of faith and yet there is no one thing wherein wee are so little satisfied and which upon the matter they doe so absolutely refuse And yet as hath beene here expressed if according to their grounds a man should faile of beleeving any one fundamentall point of faith by his not knowing through their fault that the point which he beleeved not was fundamentall hee must bee sure to perish and that for ever First to his question what are fundamentalls and what not hee ought to give an answer himselfe for hee himselfe hath told us Page 74. That some doctrines are of farre more importance then others because they may containe the very heads and first grounds of Christianitie more then others doe and therefore exact a more Explicite beliefe and consequently may bee accounted in some respects more fundamentall It being then acknowledged by him that there are such doctrines of farre greater importance then others that exact a more Explicite beliefe and are more fundamentall why doth hee not answer himselfe concerning that which himselfe affirmeth and yet withall questioneth Let him truly tell us or himselfe if hee please which are those doctrines of more importance that containe the heads of Christianity and are more fundamentall and give us a List of them and wee may tell him or hee may tell himselfe an answer to his question And then also may he by this List as by a Touchstone and Rule finde what differences betweene us and any others are fundamentall and not fundamentall So that hee being herein ingaged himselfe either hee hath spoken that whereof hee cannot give an account or else askes of us an account of that which hee knowes and wherein hee can answer himselfe And indeede the Authors owne partners or rather leaders have layd the foundation of these fundamentalls in their Explicites for their Heads Articles and Grounds of Religion to which they require an Explicite beliefe are such as those which we call fundamentall yea not onely wee but the Author himselfe calleth such points more fundamentall and his owne Priests call them positively fundamentall Besides the very rules of faith mentioned and rehearsed by Tertullian and Irenaeus and other Fathers the Symboles and Creeds of Nice other Councels and of Athanasius and Lirinensis his precipua Capita or chiefe Heads yea hee hath the word fundamentall are summes and acknowledgements of such fundamentals And now how can this Authour either bee so farre uncatechised as not to know such grounds of Religion or call Protestants the authours of this distinction and how can hee object any thing against Protestants or require any thing of them but object the like against his owne Teachers yea against the Fathers of the Church and require the like of them Accordingly how can hee aske an exact List and Catalogue of Fundamentals of Protestants more then of Fathers yea of his owne Doctors and Masters And indeed let him bring an exact List and Catalogue of all the onely Articles of Faith contained in the Fathers rules of faith and an exact List of all and the onely Explicites of the Romists and hee may quickly receive a Catalogue of our Fundamentals But this Authour is here againe exceedingly out of his way and that the Title of his Chapter might tell him by the warinesse of it for his businesse is not to deny a distinction of fundamentals and not fundamentals in regard of greater or lesser importance of the Articles themselves but this being granted to adjoyne and superedifie that though this distinction doe stand yet even points of lesser importance and in themselves not fundamentall may bee made fundamentall by the command and authority of the Pope So that his quarrelling at this distinction is not onely a quarrell from his errand but a quarrell against the Fathers and a quarrell against himselfe and against his fellow-Romists and if hee make quarrels against himselfe and his fellowes why may wee not leave them and him to make up their owne quarrell among themselves And accordingly whereas this Authour makes a fearfull noyse how dearely it concernes men to know which are fundamentals wee might turne him to get an answer for this out-cry from himselfe and his fellow-Romists yea from the Pope himselfe for Romists say that the Explicites are such points that hee who doth not know them cannot bee saved Then the Authours terrible words doe thus warfare against himselfe putting Explicites for Fundamentals That there is nothing in all Christian Religion which imports a man more exactly to learne then what are these Explicites without the knowledge whereof none can bee saved And an exact List and Catalogue should be given of these Explicites which yet the infallible Pope hath never given to his Papists So that if a Papist should faile of beleeving an Explicite by not knowing it to bee an Explicite hee must be sure to perish and that for ever Yet the Cavalier in wrath and warre against unity proceeds further in fighting against his owne confessed and undeniable distinction of Explicites and Fundamentals and hee so proceeds that it may easily bee seene that his anger puts out the eye of his judgement or carryes him beyond the kenne of it For thus hee saith Whereas if either they framed not the distinction of Fundamentals at all or else would clearly let men know which points alone were fundamentall then this would follow That whensoever wee should convince them in any particular Doctrine which is denyed by them and which yet was beleeved by the ancient Fathers they would bee obliged to confesse that either that point was not fundamentall which would dis-able them from railing at us for beleeving the same or else that the Fathers were of a different Religion in fundamentall points from them and that in their owne opinion those very Fathers could not bee saved which would put them to much prejudice
another way Here leaving to the Authour his owne terme of railing wherein I wonder hee should delight but that I see elsewhere hee takes pleasure in the mentioning of scurrill and blasphemous Invectives I say that some errors bee not fundamentall which are found in the Fathers and now maintained by Romists yet wee are not disabled by this distinction to reprove Romists for them for wee doe not say in this distinction that no errours should bee reproved but those which are fundamentall for even lesser errours are to bee reprehended but wee say that these errours in lesser points doe not breake the unity which by greater and more fundamentall points is made betweene Christ and his members and betweene the members themselves And secondly wee say that Romists are much more to bee reproved if they hold any errours of the Fathers now in controversie betweene us for these controverted errours have beene now by the Scriptures more evidently discovered to bee errours and it is a thing farre more worthy of blame if a man should runne into a ditch by day then if he should stumble into it by night But whatsoever exactnesse this Authour may require or imagine in this distinction this exactnesse being granted it will never make it to appeare that wee differ from the unanimous beliefe of the Fathers in the maine points mentioned in their rules of faith now called Fundamentals And for his Argument concerning the Lutherans it doth not endanger us for if the Lutherans should bee found by this distinction to differ from us in these fundamentall points which should unite them to Christ it is no hurt to us to renounce the communion of those who renounce communion with Christ. And on the other side if by it they bee found to differ from us in points not fundamentall it would bee no danger nor just disreputation to us to avow those points wherein wee differ not to bee fundamentall but wee will much rather disavow the quarrels which are made where there is no fundamentall difference The period which followes as farre as it is a true Narration of our way of making peace by this distinction with the Fathers and the Lutherans is a commendation both of the distinction and our peace-making by it But by the way I deny That Romists have brought us from denying via facti That the Fathers taught the doctrine of Praying to the Saints or for the dead in the sense and manner of Rome for the Fathers did not unanimously teach praying to Saints I am sure Saint Augustine who was above 400. yeers after Christ doth deny Saints to know ordinarily the affaires of the living which happen after their decease And for prayers for the dead in Purgatorie the Cavalier cannot shew a good patterne for more yeares then the former As for the difference in the number of Canonicall Bookes which it seemes this Author is sorrie that it is not avowed to bee fundamentall it is not altogether new but ancient and wee see it at this day in the Syriack and it were pitie to cut off from salvation all the Churches and Fathers which ever differed in this number yea he must damne many Romists if hee will make this difference fundamentall They that beleeve all necessary saving truths though they bee not fully perswaded that just so many Books were wholly indited by some one of the Apostles or Evangelists I know now how this Author may damne them if these saving truths being beleeved doe save them sure I am that in their owne Explicites or points of importance which wee call fundamentall and they say must bee knowne and beleeved under paine of damnation they doe not mention any names much lesse the number of Canonicall Bookes So it seemes by their owne doctrines the names and full number of the bookes of Scripture are none of their owne Explicites and Fundamentals but other points beleeved may serve to save such beleevers And if such may bee saved though they know not the set number of Books why would you have us to breake unitie for a point the not explicite knowing and beleeving whereof in your owne doctrine doth not exclude salvation Hee goes on and objects a second good use that wee make of points fundamentall which is a proofe of the visibility of our Church And true it is That if there have beene still a visible Roman Church which hath held points fundamental until the Reformation begun by the Protestants then is that visibility since that time still continued by us The former we leave to the Romists to prove for their owne sakes and the later we can very easily prove for our selves And whereas hee repeats but confutes not that some of ours have said that there is no necessity that the Church must have been continually visible I tell him that if this were an absurd Doctrine as he terms it they were led to this absurdity with a great shew of reason For not to run out at large into the common place of visibility when Lirinensis saith at the deluge of Arianisme The whole Romane Empire was fundamentally overthrowne and removed And we reade elsewhere the Pope himselfe was turned Hereticke where was the visibility of the Cavaliers Romish Church it selfe But I need not to dwell much on the defence of this doctrine because he only confutes it by the Epithite Absurd and because that which followes next most concernes the present businesse though this also is a rehearsall and not a confutation Some few of them affirme when they are urged by us to shew that visible Church of theirs that theirs and ours doe make but one true Church and so in shewing the visibilitie of ours they doe withall as they say shew their owne to have beene visible And these men tread in this way because they well know that no other Church but ours can indeed be shewed to have beene visible through all ages since Christ our Lord. But I must here deny his repetition if by the word Church he meane the Pope and those that have made him the foundation of their faith for these and ours wee say not to be one Church with us because they have changed the foundation But if you meane those that by beleeving fundamentalls have fastned their faith on Christ the true foundation wee allow That our Church hath beene one with them and hath been visible in their visibilitie yet avoyding this That hee can ever prove that other Churches have not beene as truly and continually visible as Rome for it will still trouble the Author to shew that the Churches of Greece and Africk have bin lesse truly visible then Rome since the Primitive times of their first conversion And now this Authoâ— being past our use of fundamentalls for visibility yet walkes on though beyond his right businesse but hee that is out of the way in his maine matter of making division to excuse Romish uncharitablenesse may well walke into by-wayes in his prosecution
of it yet I cannot deny that hee hath two Errands one to bring forth a jest upon our Fox and his followers under the names of Fox and Geese But if it had pleased this Author duly to follow this Fox in the reading of his Martyrologie he might have found out the true Fox that followes and teares and destroyes those whom our Author by a new Metamorphosis and Romish transubstantiation hath changed into Birds His second Errand he thus expresseth I finde when they are put to name their particular Professors of former ages they doe but muster up those severall single false doctrines which have bin held by other heretiks by Retaile during ten or twelve 〈◊〉 since Christ our Lord many of which doctrines togethâ—r themselves doe now professe in grosse for what other men of former times did they ever or can they ever name as men of their Religion but such as beleeved some one or two of those hereticall doctrines which now themselves embrace and wherein they are contrary to us But all this as it is not very pertinently brought in to excuse Romish uncharitablenesse so it is not very truly objected for wee can prove our doctrines which hee calls heresies by the Fathers and Scriptures and the Scriptures he cannot deny have beene beleeved above twelve ages Besides Popish Authors doe acknowledge that the Waldenses agree with Protestants in more then one or two doctrines for they are said to bee more then twenty wherein wee agree with them And though afterward this Cavalier affirmes it yet hee proves not that for other points these were expresse hereticks in the Protestants opinion neither doe we hide any fundamentall errours in them which we object against Romists But if these had not beene in the world it is most true that the maine point of Popery which is the Popes tyrannicall headship of the Catholick Church the very root of Idolatries errours and divisions hath in all ages been denyed since it was first broached But our Author is still much displeased with fundamentalls because by them wee have unity with those who have heretofore differed in some doctrines from their Papacy for saith he If it were not for this distinction no man could bee of the same Religion with any other that is not wholly of the same Religion so farre forth at the least as that he must not obstinately deny any one doctrine thereof whether it bee important more or lesse when once as hath beene said it is lawfully and sufficiently propounded and commanded to bee beleeved by the true Church as it is true and certaine when Luther rebelled from the Church of Christ our Lord nor in any age before his time there was in the whole world any one Kingdome or Countrey or City or Town or Family of men or Pastours or Flock yea or any one single person so much as of Luthers own much lesse of the now Protestant Religion which is now forsooth so farre refined beyond his Here the Cavaliers true Church being that confederacie whereof the Pope is the head hee would faine dissolve that solid unity which is made by fundamentals in Christ Jesus the true head to mak a fictitious unity in the Pope But if hee should cast off this onely true and substantiall ground of unity which knits together all the sound Churches that are at this day or ever have been through all Nations on the face of the earth since our Saviour to make an unity by agreeing under paine of damnation in all points propounded and commanded by the Pope and his Church of Rome whether important more or lesse hee shall not onely by this meanes breake the unitie of all the true Churches on earth into pieces but of Rome it selfe For to returne almost his owne words Since the Pope who hath rebelled against Christ and usurped the Headship of the Church first coined and established a Religion in Trent neither then nor in any time before there was in the whole world any one Kingdome or Country or City or Towne or Family of men or Pasture or Flocke yea or any one single person who by a supernaturall Faith which this Authour onely approves did imbrace the whole body and every Article of the Trent Religion Yea even at this day it is not received in divers parts that beare the name of the Church of Rome much lesse in Greece Armenia Syria Ethiopia most of which either know not or acknowledge not this Councell nor the Popes Supremacie All these therefore refusing any of these Articles must be torne in pieces from the body of Christ and cast into Hell fire Thus the Scarlet Whore drunke with the bloud of the Saints speaks in the right voice of the Harlot If she may not have the whole childe let it bee cut in pieces Let the Church be distracted and damned if the Pope may not be her Lord and her Tyrant And so whereas Christ was a head that gave himselfe to death to save his body from damnation is not hee an Antichrist that throwes the body of Christ into hell and damnation to make himselfe the head But in a third place hee objecteth not an use of ours but an abuse of his owne For hee abuseth his Reader in saying to him That the making of this distinction betweene Fundamentall and not Fundamentall points of Faith and the resolving not to declare which is which doth save them with a great part of the ignorant world from the imputation of rigour in their proceeding with us For how could they persecute as they doe without extreme note of cruelty But neither the making nor hiding of Fundamentalls is the cause of prosecuting Romists in this Kingdome but the cause of their punishment hath been their owne making of Treasons miraculously revealed by Gods goodnesse notwithstanding their hiding even in the vaults and depths of the earth And though there were no Fundamentalls of Religion but only Fundamentalls of State the Fundamentalls of State are very plain and cannot well be hidden which justifie the execution of Rebells and Traitours But of this some proofe hath been given in the beginning of this Booke and the Authour will call for more towards the end As for that which followes Yea or even how could they dissent without apparent impiety from our beliefe and practice of those Doctrines wherein wee have had and still have prescription of so many ages if the contrary thereof should be confessed by themselves not to be Fundamentall It is so weak that I wish that some childe and not the Cavalier had spoken it to save his reputation For will any man say that it is impiety to dissent from others in ancient errours though these errours be not Fundamentall Tertullian might have taught our Authour much more wisdome who upon the custome of an errour not very Fundamentall thus saith They that have received the holy Ghost preferre truth before custome SECT IIII. Sheweth the differences amongst Popish Divines about their
Christendome and your owne fires which you have kindled to consume a world of Protestants will flash into your faces blast them and make them look red with the shame of this scandall And that which followes is a like empty of Truth but indeed that emptinesse is againe filled up with malice They desire to obey appetite and sense without being ever so much as told if they can chuse that they must lose heaven for their labour You have had Scriptures Fathers and Reasons for our Religion which never yet were nor never can bee answered and with these hath Popery beene battered into pieces Why then talke you of appetite and sense when your owne smart and shame can tell you that wee have had stronger weapons which have beaten you with sound blows Rather speake of sense and appetite when you see a Papist in his â—at dayes before Ashwednesday to make worke for the Priest or speak of sense and appetite when a King is moved to goe to the dames of Paris and then offered to have a Cardinall a man of sense and appetite to be his Confessor as Lewis the eleventh at the enterview told Edward the fourth rather speake of sense and appetite among the stalled Monks the fleshly Cardinals the luxurious Popes that may draw a world of soules into hell both by doctrine and example and who of you durst say to such a one What dost thou or in our Authours words tell them that they must have hell for their labour But indeed wee justly take it ill that Papists should tell us that when wee are going to heaven we should lose heaven for our labour onely because wee give not up our soules to this Man and Head of sinne by schisme and errour leading millions of soules from heaven to hell Hee goes on and sayes The children in this are as like their Mother as they can looke For who perceives not that the Protestant Church doth rather carry a respect to outward conformity then to reall unity in matter of Religion and that indeed they are but as in jest when there is speech of saving soules in any one Church rather then in another A large scandall cast on a whole Church and I doubt once this Authours Mother yet without proofe and against proofe for no proofe doth hee bring that our Church is in jest in matters of Religion or accounts all Religious alike and even his owne words next following might have holpen him to disprove his owne false witnesse It is true that they make both Lawes and Canons whereby they obliged men under a world of penalties to frequent their Churches and to receive their Sacraments For the Lawes and Canons which hee mentions doe expresse a care for the beleeving her doctrine since they command a subscription to it a teaching and preaching of it and preaching Saint Paul saith is the meanes of beleeving and lastly Excommunication against those that affirme the contrary But the Authour having spoken a broad scandall against the whole Church brings in a very narrow tax of some Ministers for a proofe of it For I put the case If a man who were knowne to be wholly affected in his heart of the Catholick faith should yet for the saving of his lands or goods resolve to comply with their Lawes by going to their Churches and by receiving their Communion yea and withall should declare in company the day before that hee was resolved to doe so the day after for the onely saving of his estate and for the shewing of obedience to the Kings Lawes though yet withall hee were perswaded that their Sacraments were unlawfull and their Church impure Would that Minister refuse to let him goe to his Service and for to communicate with the rest Infallibly hee would not and wee see daily that they doe not in like occasions for that Church as I said aspires not to unity but uniformity But here first let the Reader take notice That the Cavalier brings in sons of Rome as like the mother as they can looke and just the same which hee reproved before For hee speakes of a man who is wholly affected in his heart to the Romish faith and yet for saving his goods will come to the Church and receive our Communion Now let me borrow the Cavaliers words and see how his owne words doe fit with his owne Catholicks They professe according to the occasion and comply with the superiour Powers of this world and obey the motions of appetite and sense and are as like their mother Rome as they can looke who for a long time hath fitted Religion to temporall ends if wee may beleeve judicious and truth-telling Guicciardin But now for the admitting of such a one to receive as shall professe his beleeving our Church to bee impure and our Sacraments unlawfull I can hardly thinke that this Authour beleeves that our Church doth allow it For the Canons do excommunicate ipso facto those that say our Church is not true and maintaineth the Apostles doctrine or affirme part of the Articles is erroneous now the doctrine of our Sacraments is a part of the Articles Besides the Rubrick before the Communion doth order That if any have done any wrong to his neighbor by word or deed the Curate having knowledge thereof shall call him and advertise him in any wise not to presume to come to the Lords Table untill hee have openly declared himself to have truly repented Now I think our Church is a very neer and honourable neighbour and that hee who professeth that hee holds her impure doth also professe that hee exceedingly wrongs her and then you may see what doth follow But that I may somewhat speak for Romists Though Rome which is called an Harlot cannot but have a Whores forehead yet I professe that I know no Romist so impudent I never heard of one in charity I can hardly think there is such a one that will openly professe our Sacrament to bee unlawfull and yet receive it presently upon the saying of it for my part if I were a Romist though I indeed knew such Romish Catholicks I should not boast of their shame to the Protestants it shewing an extreme need of scandalous objections when a man must first cast the filth of a scandall at his owne wholly affected for so he termes them Catholicks that it may rebound from their faces and light on Protestants And for our aspiring to unity it is far more reall and solide then such a single and slight objection can dissolve or dissever for we have those mighty bonds of unity One God the Father of all one Lord and one Spirit one Baptisme and one saving Faiht Neither is our faith leâ—t loose to Libertinisme but the doctrine of it is contained in Articles agreed and subscribed to by the Clergy and enacted by the State and as hath been shewed there is Authority and Law for the punishment of those that cast scandals upon it SECT III.