Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
doctrine_n	church_n	true_a	visible_a	8,362	5	9.3033	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A00791	An answer to a pamphlet, intituled: The Fisher catched in his owne net In vvhich, by the vvay, is shevved, that the Protestant Church was not so visible, in al ages, as the true Church ought to be: and consequently, is not the true Church. Of which, men may learne infallible faith, necessarie to saluation. By A.C.	A. C.; Champney, Anthony, 1569?-1643?, attributed name.; Sweet, John, 1570-1632, attributed name.; Floyd, John, 1572-1649, attributed name.; Fisher, John, 1569-1641, attributed name.	1623 (1623)	STC 10910.4; ESTC S107710	44,806	106

Church in al ages then M. F. or his friends wil in a like proportionable sort and sense shew proue and defend a visible Romane Church in al ages This Paper was deliuered to the old Gentleman and was confessed to haue beene receiued by the Doctors before the disputation and before the meeting The time and manner of which meeting is set downe by the Protestant Relator in manner following The 27. of Iune 1623. M. Fisher M. Sweet Iesuits and some others with them came to Sir H. Lynds house in a little dyning roome where they found the aforesaid M. Buggs his wife and children and others of Sir H. friends that had then dined with him together with some others also whose comming in as the said Sir H. did not expect so he could not with ciuilitie put them forth his house but did instantly cause his doores to bee locked vp that no more might enter notwithstanding which his command some others also came in scattering after the conference began In this parcel it is to bee considered how great care M. Fisher had to haue the meeting secret and how wel he obserued the fore-appointed conditions in which he was so punctual that after he had his number of one Assistant and foure Witnesses and a Writer he would not so much as tel a Gentleman of his acquaintance who had by other meanes vnderstood of the meeting and the place of meeting at what houre the meeting should be whereas on the contrary part so much speech was made of it by some of the Protestant side that beside the number appointed to bee Auditors many Protestant Gentlemen and Gentlewomen and some Noblemen and many Ministers did repaire to Sir Humfrey his house which M. Fisher found to be so filled as he complained to Sir Humfrey of the inequalitie of that Audience compared with the few he brought which Sir H. could not denie but excused himselfe in such manner as he could saying He could not helpe it c. CHAP. II. About that which passed in the Conference it selfe DOctor White and Doctor Featly being inuited to dinner saith the Protestant Relator by Sir Humfrey Lynd and staying a while after had notice giuen them that M. Fisher and M. Sweet Iesuits were in the next roome ready to conferre with them touching a Question set downe by M. Fisher vnder his owne hand in these words viz. Whether the Protestants Church was in al ages visible and especially in the ages going before Luther 2. And whether the names of such visible Protestants in al ages can be shewed and proued out of good Authors This Question being deliuered to the parties aboue named and it being notified vnto them that there were certaine persons who had beene sollicited and remaining doubtful in Religion desired satisfaction especially in this point they were perswaded to haue some speech with the Iesuites touching this point the rather because the Priests and Iesuites doe dayly cast out Papers and disperse them in secret in which they vaunt That no Protestant Minister dare encounter with them in this point Any man reading this parcel would be induced to thinke that D. White and D. Featly had neuer had notice before for what end they were inuited to Dinner or for what end they were to meet with the Iesuites but that they were on the suddaine summoned to this Conference without any preparation or knowledge of the Question Which not to be so is euidently conuinced partly by that which is alreadie said partly by that which I am after to say 2. This Relator would make his Reader beleeue that M. Fisher vnder his owne hand had set downe the words of the Question distinguished with the expresse figure of 2. Which is not so for M. Fisher did not write any such figure of 2. in the middle of the Question nor did not meane to make any more then one only entire Question as Sir Humfrey himselfe had desired 3. He seemeth willing to perswade that Priests and Iesuites doe dayly cast out Papers which is not true At the beginning of this meeting when the Disputants were set saith the Protestant Relator D. Featly drew out the Paper in which the Question aboue rehearsed was written with these words in the Margent viz. I wil answer that it was not and demanded of M. Fisher Whether this were his owne hand which after he had acknowledged D. Featly began as followeth D. Featly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To this vniuersal demand requiring rather an Historical large Volume then a Syllogistical briefe dispute we answer And then he read out of a Paper which this Relator would make men beleeue to haue beene said memoriter the same in effect which was written before the meeting to M. Fisher. 1. That although diuine infallible Faith is not built vpon deduction out of humane Historie but vpon diuine reuelation as is confessed by your owne Schoole-men and expressely by Cardinal Bellarmine Historiae humanae faciunt tantum fidem humanam cui subesse potest falsum Humane Stories and Records beget onely an humane Faith or rather Credulitie subiect to error not a diuine and infallible Beleefe which must be built vpon surer ground 2. Although this Question be grounded vpon vncertaine and false supposals for a Church may haue beene visible yet not the names of al visible Professors thereof now to be shewed and proued out of good Authors there might be millions of Professors yet no particular and authentical Record of them by name Records there might be many in ancient time yet not now extant at least for vs to come by Yet we wil not refuse to deale with you in your owne Question if you in like manner wil vndertake the like Taske in your owne defence and maintaine the Affirmatiue in the like Question which we now propound vnto you here in writing Whether the Romish Church that is a Church holding the particular entire doctrine of the new Romanists as it is comprised in the Councel of Trent was in al ages visible especially in the first 600. yeeres and whether the names of such visible or legible Romanists in al ages can be shewed and proued out of good Authors Here the Relator omitteth to tel how M. Fisher caused the two Papers written and giuen the old Gentleman as is aboue said to be publiquely read by the first whereof it appeared why he had propounded such a Question by the second the true sence and meaning of the Question was explicated and a conuenient Method of proceeding was prescribed with due proportion to be obserued on both sides Then D. Featly beginning to argue in this place and not in the end of the Disputation where the Protestant Relator placeth it did say M. Fisher I wish I warne I command I coniure you to answere truely and sincerely in the sight of God and as you wil answere it at the Day of Iudgement To this M. Fisher said I willingly accept your warning and I wish you to obserue the like

out of good Authors And therfore as he had heard the Roman Catholiks made no difficulty to produce out of good Authors the Names of their Pastors people in all Ages so he much desired to heare whether the Names of Protestant Pastors and Preachers in all Ages could not also be produced out of good Authors for if they could he meant to remaine a Protestant as he had been all his life time but if they could not he thought it necessary to leaue the Protestants and to adhere to the Roman Church to learne of it Faith necessary to saluation By this appeareth that the sense and meaning of the Question could be no other then that which M Fisher explicated in the Conference viz. Whether the Protestant Church was in all Ages so visible especially in the Ages before Luther as the Names of Protestant Pastors and Preachers in all Ages may be shewed out of good Authors And further that in case the Protestant Disputant should vndertake as he did tooto boldly vndertake the affirmatiue part saying and offering to proue in generall that the Names of such Pastors and Preachers of Protestāt Religion may be shewed in all Ages out of good Authors it should further be required as M. Fisher required of him that he should actually name in particular in euery seuerall Age such Pastors and Preachers as he thought he could proue and defend to be Protestants For if the Question had not been thus vnderstood it should not haue been answerable to the occasion and end aboue sayd Neyther could the Protestant Disputant sufficiently satisfie the doubt of the old Gentlemā being chiefly caused in that he had heard that no Protestant could name Pastors and Preachers of his profession in all Ages out of good Authors So as to satisfy this doubt it was not sufficient only to say nor only in generall to proue by such Syllogismes as D. Featly made which were such as the old Gentleman I dare say did not vnderstand that the Names of Protestants in all Ages may be shewed but as M. Fisher had shewed him a printed booke in which Roman Catholike Pastours and people were in particuler named in all Ages so he expected Protestant Pastours and people of all Ages to be named in particuler and after proued and defended to be Protestants as M. Fisher was ready to proue and defend whom he would in particuler name to be Roman Catholikes Furthermore although it may seeme to some not much materiall whether the Protestant Disputant hath begun to name first those of the first Age next of the second and so downward vntill Luther or cōtrary wise to beginne with Luther and so vpward till the Apostles and Christ yet both the words of the Question the doubt of the old Gentleman had byn far better satisfied and the Tergiuersation which D. Featly vsed in the first age auoyded if M. Fisher had vrged him as he might first to beginne with the Age immediatly before Luther a confessed Protestant and so go vpward vntill Christ the confessed Fountayne of infallible perpetuall vnchanged Truth for then it would haue been cleerly seene euen by the Confessiō of learned Protestants particularly Luther himselfe and others that those who eyther are named or can yet be named by D. Featly after he hath sought as I am told he went to seeke Records in the great Library in Oxford were not visible Protestants but of a different Profession Fayth and Religion and so different as that they cannot be iustly deemed members of one and the same Protestant Church with Luther after his Apostacy from his Religious Order and reuolt from the Roman Catholike Fayth For proofe wherof I for breuityes sake do refer euery one who desireth full satisfaction in this point to what is largely related and proued in the Protestants Apology in diuers places but particularly tract 2. cap. 2. sect 11. subdiuision 3. And will only content my selfe to cyte these few testimonyes for their sakes who haue not commodity to see that booke First therefore Luther himselfe sayth We dare boast that Christ was first published by vs. Wherefore the Latheran Conradus Schushelburg sayth It is impudency to say that many learned men in Germany and the like is of other Countreys before Luther did hould the doctrine of the Lutheran Ghospell And another of them not only sayth in effect thus much but proueth it by this argument If there had beene right beleeuers that went before Luther in his office there had beene no need of a Lutheran reformation Another sayth It is ridiculous to thinke that in the tyme before Luther any had the purity of doctrine and that Luther should receaue it from them not they from Luther considering sayth he it is manifest to the whole world that before Luthers tyme all Churches were ouerwhelmed with more then Cymerian darkenes and that Luther was diuinely raysed vp to discouer the same to restore the light of true doctrine And least this may be thought to haue beene only the conceipt of Luther and Lutherans who yet could better tell then D. Featly D. White and such other new Maisters I will add heereunto what is sayd first by Caluin who doth acknowledge That in this Lutheran reformation there was made a discession or departure from all the world Secondly by Bucer who calleth Luther the first Apostle of the reformed doctrine Thirdly by Beza a principall Caluinist who teacheth that at this tyme ordinary vocation of the Church-men was no where extant and consequently teacheth that ther was at that tyme no visible Church and so if any Church at all it was only inuisible as is affirmed euē by our owne English Protestant Deuines namely M. Iewel who sayth The truth was vnknown and vnheard of when Martin Luther and Vldericke Zuinglius first came to the knowledge and preaching of the Ghospel And M. Perkins who sayth We say that before the dayes of Luther for the space of many hundred yeares an vniuersall Apostacy ouerspread the whole face of the earth and that our Protestant Church was not visible to the World I might adde many more testimonyes of others who eyther in expresse tearmes or in effect affirme the Protestant Church to haue beene in many Ages before Luther latent and altogeather inuisible which indeed was the common opinion of Protestāts at their first vprysing who on the one side thought they could with shiftes bettter answere places of scripture which made often and honourable mention of the Church then they could answere the euidence of Histories and of their owne experience shewing that no visible Protestants were extant before themselues But now of late diuers plaine places of Scripture and Fathers hauing beene produced and such euident reasons deduced out of them prouing ineuitably that the true Church of Christ of which all sorts must learne infallible sayth necessary to saluation must needes be visible in all Ages as to omitt others

giuen speciall commendations of them far preferred them before his owne Church-men And as the methode which M. Fisher prescribed before the meeting is already shewed to be the fittest that could be for giuing good satisfaction to the old Gentleman and all others so in my opinion both he and M. Sweet did very well to stand as they did constantly to it prudently forseeing when the Aduersary would haue diuerted them from it and warily so answering his his arguments as that for all he could say they would not suffer themselues to be transported from the proposed Question and the prescribed Methode but stil kept the Aduersary to the point would not permit him to diuert either to dispute about Christ or his Apostles or any other point vntill names were giuen in all Ages which was the point demanded and vndertaken The which course they tooke vpon iust and good reason and not for any distrust or diffidence as some Protestants did inconsideratly imagine that they could not defend Christ and his Apostles not to haue beene Protestants or any particular point of those which D. Featly or D. VVhite vnseasonably proposed or any other held in such sense as it is held as a point of fayth by the Catholike Roman Church which they could and would haue defended proued if need had beene or if the meeting had beene intended and appointed for that purpose The reason therefore why M. Fisher might well refuse to enter into such particuler disputes before full Induction of Names were ended was for that this had beene to follow two Hares at once and so to catch neither and to leaue that which was most pertinent to the present Question and which most imported to be decided in the first place as being the ōly thing in which the old Gentleman and many other of the Audience did particulerly expect and desire to be satisfyed and being a most easy and assured meanes to help them to be satisfyed in all other matters in Controuersy without which it is most hard or rather impossible euer to attaine certaine and infallible Resolution in all particular euen most necessary points of fayth as M. Fisher expresely shewed and proued by a sentence aboue cyted out of D. Field A second reason might be for that all disputatiō about particulers before the true Church were by her perpetuall visibility or some such euident marks found out and acknowledged as a sufficient meanes appointed by God to instruct all sorts in matters of fayth and to preserue vnity and determine Controuersyes of fayth would haue beene fruitlesse endlesse Which was the reason why M. Fisher in another former conference had with a certaine Minister would not enter into any particulers vntill he had asked these generall Questions 1. VVhat grounds the Minister would stand vpon The Minister answered Scripture which M. Fisher accepting wrote downe and then asked 2. VVhether he would belieue nothing but expresse wordes of Scripture The Minister answered Yes he would also beleeue a good Consequence out of Scripture This also M. Fisher accepted and wrote downe and further asked 3. If it should happen that the consequence which the Minister should bring should not be thoght good by him and è contra the Consequence brought by him should not be thought good by the Minister who should iudge and end that fruitlesse and otherwise endlesse contention and Controuersy The Minister sayd The Church M. Fisher very willingly accepted and wrote it down 4. asked VVhether after the Church shall haue iudged and decyded such a Controuersy it should be lawfull for any priuate man to oppose his iudgement against that which the Church had so determined As for example when Cutholikes and Arrians hauing alleadged Scriptures and pro and contra brought consequences out of thē about the Diuinity of Christ our Lord The Church in a generall Councell iudged the consequences of Arrians to be naught and those of the Catholikes good The Minister sayd No it was not lawfull for any priuate man to oppose his iudgement against such a Iudgement of the Church These Questions being asked M. Fisher ioyned issue vpon a question bidding the Minister choose what he thought most materiall against Roman Catholikes and let it be tryed whether the Church did iudge for Catholikes or Protestants The Minister did choose the Question about Merits and tooke for his tenet That there was not any Merit of man before God And when the day of tryall came the case was so cleere against the Minister in the ancient Fathers whome the Minister granted to be the Church euen by confession of the Magdeburgians that the Minister had no shift but to diuert the disputation from the substance of the proposed Question to a circumstance of Commutatiue Iustice and that equality betwixt the VVorke and the Reward which is written of by Bellarmine About which circumstance M. Fisher was content to dispute after he had plainely shewed the substance of Merit out of the ancient Fathers Comming therefore to dispute about the aforesayd circumstance of Merit M. Fisher found that there would be no end nor fruit of the argument in regard the ancient Fathers had not spoken of it in expresse tearmes as they had done of the substance of Merit no other visible Church of this present age was agreed on to whose iudgement this matter should be finally referred By which experience M. Fisher hath learned how endlesse and fruitlesse it is to waste wordes about particulers vntill both partyes be agreed which is the true Church not only in ancient tymes but also of this age So as after ech party hath sayd what he can the finall resolution of the Question may be referred to that present Church which hauing without interruption of Pastours and Doctors and without change of doctrine successiuely descended from the true visible Church of anciēt tymes is by this and other Markes proued to be the pre-present true Church whose Iudgment no priuate man must oppose This Question therefore of the continual successiue visible Church being so necessary to end al Controuersies and being now proposed to be treated of betwixt M. Fisher and D. Featly M. Fisher had great reason not to permit speach of any other particular Question vntill by his prescribed Methode he had gotten it clearly seen that the Protestant Church was not and the Catholique Roman Church was the only true Church to whome it pertayneth to giue Iudgment of and determine Controuersies and to instruct all sorts of men in the true Faith and not to permit men by their priuate interpretations of Scripture to wander in errors or wauer in in certain ties or spend their tyme in fruitles and endles disputations about controuerfies of faith It being most certaine that these can neuer be with fruite and fully ended but by the censure of the true visible not only ancient but also present Church which must when doubt is as most often is made tell vs what particuler books be

a Paper shewing briefely and plainely how the true visible Church of Christ must be so visible in al Ages as that the names of some principal Members thereof in euerie Age may be shewed out of good Authors A true Copie of which Paper I thinke fit here to set downe in regard it may serue others as wel as this old Gentleman to vnderstand Why Catholiques doe ordinarily so much presse Protestants to name if they can Protestant Professors in al Ages as Catholiques doe in printed Bookes ordinarily set downe a Catalogue of the Names of the chiefe Pastors and other principal Members of the Catholique Roman Church in al Ages A Copie of the first Paper which M. Fisher writ and deliuered to the old Gentleman before the meeting 1. It is certaine There is one and but one true infallible Faith without which none can please God nor consequently attaine eternal Salnation 2. This one infallible Faith cannot be had according to the ordinarie course of Gods prouidence but by hearing Preachers and Pastors of the true visible Church who onely are lawfully sent and authorized to teach the true Word of God 3. As therefore this one infallible Faith hath beene and must be in al Ages so there must needes be in al Ages Preachers and Pastors of the true visible Church of whom al sorts of people haue in time past as appeareth by Histories learned and must in al future times learne the said infallible Truth 4. Hence followeth That if Protestants be the true visible Church of Christ al sorts of men who in euerie Age haue had the aforesaid infallible Faith haue learned it by hearing Protestant Preachers whose names may yet be found in Histories as the names of those are found who in euerie former Age did teach and conuert People of seueral Nations vnto the Faith of Christ. 5. Hence further followeth That if there cannot as there cannot be found in Histories Names of Protestant Preachers who in al Ages did teach al sorts of faithful People and who conuerted seueral Nations vnto the Christian Faith Hence followeth I say That Protestants are not the true visible Church of Christ neyther are their Preachers lawfully sent or sufficiently authorized to teach nor People securely warranted to learne of them that one infallible Faith without which none can possibly please God nor if they so liue and dye be saued If any Protestant wil answer let him set downe Names of Protestant Preachers in al Ages who taught People Protestant Doctrine in euerie seueral Age or confesse there were no such before Luther or at least not in al Ages to be found in Histories After this M. Fisher let the old Gentleman see a little printed Booke in which was a Catalogue of visible Roman Professors in al Ages wishing him to vrge his Ministers to shew if they can a like Catalogue of their Protestant Professors And it is very likely that this Booke as also the foresaid Paper was by this old Gentleman carryed to Sir Humfrey from whom about two or three dayes before the meeting a Paper was sent to M. Fisher contayning the former Question and another like Question proposed to him to dispute vpon the contents whereof were as followeth The question proposed by M. Fisher in which he vndertaketh to maintaine the negatiue is set downe by him in haec verba Whether the Protestant Church was in al ages visible especially in the ages going before Luther and whether the names of such visible Protestants in al ages can be shewed and proued out of good Authors To this vniuersal demand requiring rather an Historical large volume then Syllogical briefe disputes we answer That although 1. Diuine infallible Faith is not built vpon deduction out of humane Historie but diuine Reuelation as is confessed by the Schoolemen and expressely by Bellarmine Historiae humanae non faciunt fidem nisi humanam 2. And this question is grounded vpon vncertaine and false supposals yet wee requite this Proponent putting him to his owne taske in his owne defence by propounding to him the like question viz. Whether the Romish Church that is a Church holding the particular entire doctrine of the now Romanists as it is comprised in the Councel of Trent was in al ages visible especially in the first 600. yeeres and whether the names of such visible or legible Romanists in al ages can be shewed and proued out of good Authors We wil answer negatiuely That no such Church or Professors can be shewed This Paper being deliuered to M. Fisher he writ a second Paper to explicate the meaning of his question to shew an equal method of proceeding in the Disputation A Copie of a second Paper written by M. Fisher before the meeting M. Fisher being requested thereunto for satisfaction of a Gentleman propounded two questions 1. The first Whether there must not be in al ages a visible Church of which al sorts are to learne the infallible Faith necessary to saluation 2. The second Whether the Protestant Church was in al ages visible especially in the ages going before Luther and whether the names of such visible Protestants in al ages can be shewed and proued out of good Authors To the first question Sir H. and others that were present assented so as it was subscribed with these words It is granted and so M. Fisher was content that his second question should be the only question Then Sir H hauing left it to the choice of M. F. whether he would answer or dispute M. F. did choose to answer and defend the negatiue part So as it lyeth vpon Sir H. and those whom he shal choose to make his party good to proue out of good Authors the affirmatiue to wit The Protestants Church was in al ages visible especially in the ages before Luther And likewise they must set downe the names of such visible Protestants in al ages as was demanded When Sir H. or his friends shal haue performed this their taske M. Fisher wil performe what is required in the Paper sent vnto him by Sir H. in the same sort and sense as he requireth Sir H. and his friends to performe their taske For auoyding therefore of al mistaking and consequently needlesse and fruitlesse Disputes M. F. in his question requireth 1. That names of men in al ages be set downe whom Sir H. and his friends conceiue to haue bin Protestants 2. That those men whose names they set downe be shewed out of good Authors to agree in holding some points of Faith in which Protestants differ from the Romane Catholikes 3. That Sir H. or his friends wil defend against M. F. that the same men held no other points of Faith one differently from another and from the present Protestant Doctrine contayned in the 39. Articles vnto which al English Ministers are sworne for otherwise they cannot make one and the same Protestant Church In this sort and sense when Sir H. or his friends shal haue shewed a visible Protestant

argument according to the Protestant Relator M. Fisher. I distinguish the Maior That Church whose Faith is perpetual and vnchanged so as the names of the Professors may be shewed is so visible as the Catholike Church ought to be and as M. Fisher pretendeth the Roman Church to be I grant it That Church whose Faith is perpetual and vnchanged yet so as the names cannot be shewed in al ages is visible as the Catholike Church ought to be and as M. Fisher pretends the Roman Church to be I denie it To the Minor I apply the like distinction and consequently to the Conclusion in the same manner D. Featly What answer you to the Conclusion also This is a straine of new Logick This idle exception M. Fisher attending to the matter did not regard but might haue told him That it is not vnuseal after a distinction made both to Maior and Minor to apply the like to the Conclusion For although it be true That in a Syllogisme when Maior and Minor are absolutely granted the Conclusion must not be denyed nor distinguished but must be absolutely granted yet when Maior and Minor also be distinguished the Conclusion may be distinguished And I maruaile what Rule of Logick D. Featly can bring against this In like manner if D. Featly did say any such words as the Relator telleth viz. A strange distinction of the eternitie of Faith by Professors to be named and not to be named What are Professors nominable or innominable to the eternitie of Faith If I say D. Featly did say these words it is like M. Fisher did not regard them as being impertinent but might haue said That this distinction had not relation to eternal Faith but to a Church which hath eternal Faith about which it imports much to know whether it hath Professors nominable or innominable For if it hath not it is inuisible or at least not so visible as the true Catholike Church of which al sorts in times past haue learned and in time to come must learne the infallible Diuine Faith necessarie to Saluation ought to be Therefore M. Fisher might wel though I thinke he did not say as the Relator telleth Tolle distinctionem and conclude that which I denie That the Faith of the Protestant Church is so eternal as the names of visible Protestants in al ages may be shewed To proue this D. Featly made this argument according to the Protestant Relator D. Featly That Church whose Faith is the Catholike and Primitiue Faith once giuen to the Saints without which no man can be saued is so perpetual as the names may be shewed in al ages But the Faith of the Protestant Church is the Primitiue and Catholike Faith once giuen to the Saints without which none can be saued Ergo The Faith of the Protestant Church is so perpetual as the names may be shewed in al ages Note here That the Relator putteth in the Margent ouer-against the Minor Tollitur distinctio But how false this Marginal Note is appeareth to any who wil reflect vpon what the Distinction was and what I haue now said of it For this Minor speaking onely of Faith doth not take away the distinction applyed to the Church That which D. Featly thinketh to be a straine of new Logicke to wit to distinguish vpon a proposition without applying the distinction to any particular tearme is not so strange as he maketh it As for example When one saith An Aethiopian is white neyther the tearme Aethiopian alone nor the tearme White alone in it selfe needeth distinction because it is not Aequiuocal but the whole proposition being Amphibological needeth it being true if it be meant The Aethiopian is white in the Teeth and false if it be meant He is white in his whole Bodie To the argument M. Fisher said I denie the Minor But marking that hereupon D. Featly would haue transferred the Question to endlesse disputes about particular Controuersies from the present general Question about the perpetual visible Church whose Professors names as himselfe saith may be shewed in al ages M. Fisher I say marking this would not let D. Featly make his proofe but hauing said I denie the Minor he presently added by way of explication these ensuing words My first Question was Whether there must not be a true visible Church of Christ in al ages of which al sorts must learne that infallible Faith which is necessarie to Saluation and therefore we must first finde such a Church before men can know it to be such as they may securely learne of it what is the infallible Faith necessary to Saluation While M. Fisher was beginning to make this explication D. Featly insulted as if M. Fisher durst not for Conscience denie the Minor absolutely To whom M. Fisher said I doe absolutely denie it And then he went forward with the aforesaid explication Which ended M. Fisher said And hereupon I answer againe to the said Minor If this proposition be taken simply in it selfe I absolutely denie it but if this proposition be considered as it must be as related to the first Question and the end thereof I further adde That it is not pertinent to that end for which the whole Dispute was intended viz. To shew to those who were not able by their owne abilities to finde out the infallible Faith necessarie to Saluation without learning of the true visible Church of Christ and consequently Visibilitie of the Church is first to be shewed before the truth of Doctrine in particular shal be shewed To this as the Relator saith D. Featly replyed viz. First What speake you of those who are not able by their owne abilities to finde out Faith Is any man able by his owne abilitie without the helpe of Diuine Grace Secondly What helpeth the Visibilitie to confirme the Truth of the Church Visibilitie indeed proues a Church but not the true Church These words eyther were not spoken or M. Fisher did not regard them being in the middest of his answer in which he went on shewing the necessitie of a visible Church by a saying of D. Fields viz. Seeing the Controuersies of Religion at this day are so many in number and so intricate in nature that few haue time and leysure fewer strength of wit and vnderstanding to examine them what remaineth for men desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence but diligently to seeke out which among al the Societies of men in the World is that Spouse of Christ the Church of the liuing God which is the Pillar of the Truth that so they may embrace her Communion follow her Direction and rest in her Iudgement M. Fisher therefore I say being busily speaking this did not regard what D. Featly did then say but might easily haue answered First That he neuer meant that any were able of themselues without helpe of Gods grace to attaine the true Faith which hindreth not but that some may haue that abilitie of Wit and Learning by which they can

true bookes of Scripture and Fathers which be true translations and which be right interpretations for both about Scriptures Fathers such Questions may arise and cannot be well decided whout the Iudgement of the true present visible Church in regard Scriptures and Fathers do not alwaies sufficiently expresse what is to be held in the aforesaid Questions neither will one priuate man in such cases follow anothers opinion when ech man will be easily inclined to thinke that he hath as good Scriptures or Fathers or Reasons or all these togeather to plead for the truth of his opinion as another hath for his This reason may be confirmed out of Tertullian who in his golden booke of Prescriptions giueth diuers reasons why Heretikes who reiect the authority of the Church should not be admitted to dispute out of Scriptures First for that by their disputations they weary those that be fame they ouercome those which be weake and those which be in a middle disposition they dism●sse with scruple or doubt Another reason Tertullian giueth because this Heresy doth not receaue some Scriptures or if a receaue it peruerteth them to their owne purpose with additions and detractions and if it receaue some yet not whole or if whole in some sort yet by false expositions it turneth them from the right to a peruerse sense And a peruerse or corrupt sense sayth he is as contrary to truth as is a peruerted or corrupted Text. Tertullian therefore for these reasons iudged best not to make the combat in Scriptures but that this gappe should be stopt and that Heretikes should not be admitted to any disputation of Scriptures and he telleth how this may be done saying It must be examined to whome the possession of Scripture doth belong to the intent that he who hath no right vnto them may not be admitted vnto them And further he sheweth That the right order of thinges requireth that first it only be disputed to whom the Fayth belongeth As if he should say which is the true visible Church VVhose are the Scriptures From whome by whome when and to whome was deliuered that discipliae by which they are made Christians for where there shall appeare the truth of Christian sayth and discipline to be as doubtles it is in the true visible Church of Christ there shal be truth of Scriptures and expositions and al Christian Traditions And hauing shewed how Christ did promulgate his doctrine by the Apostles he further prescribeth That what Christ and his Apostles did preach must be learned no otherwise then by the Churches which they founded so as euery doctrine agreeing with those Apostolicall Mother-Churches that is to be deemed true and what doth not agree to be iudged false And therefore to make it apparent that the Heretikes opinions although pretended by themselues to be cc̄formable to Scriptures and such as may be proued out of Scriptures are not Apostolicall nor true he vrgeth them as M. Fisher vrged D. Featly to shew the beginning of their Churches and to vnfould the order of their Bishops so from the beginning running downe by succession as that their first Bishop had some of the Apostles or some Apostolicall man who perseuered with the Apostles for his Author and Predecessour and hauing giuen examples of the Catholike Churches who can thus vnfould the order of their Pastours and namely Rome for one he sayth afterwardes Confingant tale quid Haeretici Let Heretiques euen feigne some such like thing Thus we see what Tertullian did say to Heretikes of his tyme by which we may learne what we may say to the Nouellists of our tyme whome offering to dispute with vs about Scriptures we may altogeather debarre from Scripture and may examine them as Tertullian did those of his tyme saying VVho are you VVhen and whence came you VVhat haue you to do in my ground you that are not myne By what right dost thou O Marcion we may say O Martin Luther cut down my woods By what licence dost thou O Valentine O Caluin diuert or turne aside my fountaynes By what power dost thou O Apelles O Anabaptist remoue my limits VVhy do you O the rest of Heretikes sow and feed according to your owne will vpon my Land and pasture It is my possession I am the ancient possessour I haue the firme Originalls from the Authors themselues to whome the propriety did first belong I am the heyre of the Apostles as they did ordaine in their Testament and last will as they did commit it to my faythfull Trust as they did adiure me so I hold it But you they haue disinherited and cast out as strangers and enemyes c. So as by this prescription of Tertullian vntill D. Featly or some other can by other markes then by alleadging wordes of Scripture as by perpetuall visibility and interrupted succession of Bishops c. proue Protestants not to be Heretikes but the true Church of Christ and the right heyre of the Apostles to whome cōsequently belongeth the most ancient first possession of Scriptures M. Fisher had good reason and right to deferre disputing with him out of Scripture of Christ and his Apostles vntill he had made his full Induction of Names of Protestant Church-men and vnfoulded the orders of their Prostant Bishops so running downe from the beginning by succession as that their first Protestant Bishop had some of the Apostles or some Apostolicall man who perseuered with the Apostles for his Author Predecessour The which I accompt to be so impossible for him to doe as I dare and do challenge him saying with Tertullian Confingant tale quid Haeretici Let D. Featly or any of his fellow Protestants at least feigne because I am sure they cannot find Names of Protestant Bishops and Pastors whome they do imagine for proue they cannot out of good Authors to haue beene in all ages Which whiles they do not al sorts of people haue iust cause to thinke that neither D. Featly nor D. VVhite can performe that taske which they did tooto boldly vndertake of naming prouing and defending visible Ptotestants in al ages therupon al men may as I do conclude That the Protestant Church hath not beene so visible in all ages as the Cathelike Church ought to be and consequently the Protestant Church is not the true Catholique Church which we prosesse to beleeue in our Creed Neither consequently are their I'astours and Doctours and Preachers lawfully sent or sufficiently authorized to teach and expound Gods word nor consequently are people securely warranted to learne of them what is and what is not to be belieued by infallible diuine fa●th necessary to saluation nor indeed ought they to beleeue or heare them at all but ought to vnite themselues to that One Holy Catholike Apostolike perpetually visible Roman Church hearing beleeuing obeying the Pastors thereof whereby they may haue infallible iustruction in all matters of fayth secure direction for all matters concerning good life in such sort as they may attaine remission of their sinnes and saluation of their soules the grace of God in this life and endles heauenly happines in the next Vnto which I beseech sweet Iesus to bring vs all Amen FINIS Eudaimon Iohannes in defens p. H. Garn. D. Bishop against Rob. Abbots A very weake and Insufficient satisfaction as is showed hereafter Eph. 4. Heb. 11. Rom. 10. v. 14 15. Eph. 4. 11. Ose. 2. v. 19 20. Isa. 59. 20. Matth. 18. 20. Eph. 4. v. 11. 〈…〉 M. Fisher. D. Field in his Epistle Dedicatone Aug. lib. de vnitate Ecclesiae a This great Lady did expresly say that the conferēce did make against Protestants euen as it was related by you Protestant relator And another Lady who was present at the conferēce did protest to one that asked her how it moued her that she was by it confirmed in Catholique religion Lib. 1. Inst. c. 1. Sect. 4. Eph. 4. v. 11. c. Rom. 10. v. 14. c. 1 Luth. ep ad Argentin anno 1525. 2 Conradus Schushelb in Theol. Calu. lib. 2. fol. 130. B. versus finé 3 Geo. Mylli in Augustanae Confessionis explie art 7. de Eccl. pag. 137. 4 Benedict Morgést trac de Eccl pag. 145. 5 Calu. in I. epist. ep 141. 6 Bucer ep ad Epis. Hereford 7 Beza in Theol. ep epi. 5. 8 Iewell in his Apolog. of the Church 4 c. diuis 2. in his defence 42. 9 Perkins in exposit of the Creed † See the booke intituled The Author and substance of Protestant religiō Isa. 59. v. 21. Isa. 61 9 Isa. 60 11 Matth. 5 14 Matth. 18 17 Matth. 28 19 20 Coccius in thesauro Cōtrouersiarum tomo 1. lib. 8. art 1. Aug. in psal 47. lib. de vnit Eccles. cap. 16. 25. Isa. 59. v. 21. 60. v. 11. 61. v. 9. 1. Tim. 3. v. 15. Ephes. 4. v. 4. 11. 12. 13. 14. Tertul. lib. de praescript Luc. 10. v. 16. Matth. 18. v. 17 Tertull. de praescrip c. 15. Cap. 19. Cap. 20. 21. 22 sequent Cap. 32.

to insert heere as followeth Right Honourable Lord. I esteeme it a speciall prouidēce of God that your Lordship was present at a late Conference wherin D. White and D. Featly vndertooke to shew against me my companion that the Protestant Church had been visible in all Ages and that their Professors might be named especially in all Ages before Luther Your Lordship may remember the substāce of all the proofe to haue consisted in this That the true Church was alwayes so visible as the Professors therof in all Ages might be named But the Protestants was the true Church we refused to dispute of the Minor because it transferred the question and auoyded that plaine proofe of the visible Church which was then propounded and expected If as they conclude they are able to name their Professors in all Ages why did they refuse to giue vs a Catalogue of theirs as we were ready to haue giuen them another of ours Why went they about to proue they were able to name them when with lesse adoe they might haue named them Where deeds are iustly expected words without deeds are worthily suspected Certainly heerby they are so farr from hauing discharged themselues of the great enterprise they vndertooke as they stand more engaged then before to the performance of it for hauing now professed and acknowledged that the true Church or to vse their owne words the Church which is so visible as the true Catholike Church ought to be and the Church whose fayth is eternall and vnehanged must be is able to name her Professors in all Ages eyther for their owne honour and for the satisfaction of the world they must set downe the Names of their Professors in all Ages or els they shamefully discouer themselues not to be that true and visible vnchanged Church which is able to name them Againe at the length yealding as they did to shew the continuall visibility of their Church by a full induction of their visible Protestants in all Ages which they seemed to vndertake with great confidence why did they sticke in the first Age alone refusing to name their Professors in the Ages following vntill the first were tryed May not the Answerer choose to deny which parte of the Argument he pleaseth And was it euer heard that he should be inforced to reply to one proposition alone before the whole Argument whether it were Syllogisme or Induction were fully propounded Very Nobly therfore prudently your Lordship in the end desired another meeting not doubting that your owne party within 3. or 4. dayes would be content to giue vs the Names of their Professors in all Ages as we were ready to giue them the Names of ours that therby both sides might be the better prepared for a second Tryall which whē they haue performed we shall not fayle to encounter with them eyther by way of speach or wryting as your Lordship all things considered shall thinke fairest or safest or most conuenient for the discouery of Truth But if your Lordship shall not be able to obtaine at their hands this your most iust and important Request the defect of proof on their part must needs be accounted a plaine flight and no man hereafter can prudently relye his saluation vpon that Church which for want of perpetuall visibility proued they themselues shall haue concluded to be false and faygned Thus expecting the yssue heerof and your Lordships further pleasure from the mouth of this bearer I remaine this first of Iuly 1623. Your Lordships seruant in Christ Iohn Fisher. By this Letter it may appeare how willing M. Fisher and M. Sweete were and yet are of their part to haue the matter soundly prosecuted eyther by meeting or wryting And I haue heard that the Earle to whome this letter was written did send to D. Featly so as although there be a prohibition of meeting yet it is expected that by way of writing D. Featly goe forward to performe his vndertaken Taske and setting downe first the Names of such as he iudgeth to haue been Protestant Professors in euery Age since Christ And then prouing out of good Authors those whome he nameth to haue byn members of the Protestant Church not condemning any one point wherin Protestants at this day do differ from the auncient and Roman Church and especially in any one of the 39. Articles which English Protestant Ministers are sworne vnto and therfore so long as D. Featly and D. White shall be silent and not so much as by writing giue a Catalogue of Names of the Professors of their Church all sorts of people may iustly take this their fayling for a flight and for a silent graunting that they haue not had visible Protestants in all Ages whose Names may be shewed out of good Authors as the question required Wherupon followeth that the Protestant Church is not the true Church of Christ nor the Preachers theroflawfully sent to teach nor people securely warranted to heare and learne of them what is and what is not to be belieued by Fayth necessary to saluation CHAP. III. Of the yssue of the Conference THe Protestant Relator sayth that the issue of the Conference was that the aforesaid M. Bugges came to Syr Humfrey Lynd gaue him many thākes for the sayd meeting and assured him he was well resolued now of his Religion that he saw plainly that it was but the Iesuits bragging without proofes and wheras formerly by their Sophisticall perswasions he was in some doubt of the Church he is now so fully satisfied of the truth of our Religion that he doth vtterly disclaime the Popish Priests cōpany and their doctrine also I haue cause to doubt that this which the Relator sayth is not true for therby he maketh the old Gentleman to be but of a weake capacity or of a very mutable nature For first I am sure there was no cause giuen in the Conference of any such effectuall resolution to be made by the old Gentleman Secondly I cannot see when this speach should be made by the Gentlemā to Syr Humfrey If immediatly after the Conference it would argue toto much want of capacity for if he did but rightly conceiue the true state of the question in which himselfe had especially desired to be satisfied as I verily hope he did he might easily haue marked the insufficiency of D. Featly his diuerting proofes which also were so answered as the Audience for want of satisfaction in them vrged him to leaue off to produce Nàmes of Protestāts in all Ages the which producing of Names being so often and earnestly required to be done in all Ages and yet being only pretended and that most falsely to be done for one Age and the Cōference being so abruptly left of by D. Featly before he would go forward to name men in other Ages especially in Ages before Luther as the Question required any meane capacity might see that the Question in which the old Gentleman desired to be satisfied was not fully

are these My spirit which is in thee and my wordes which I haue put in thy mouth shall not depart out of thy mouth nor out of the mouth of thy seede nor out of the mouth of thy seedes seede from henceforth for euer Againe Their seed shall be knowne in Nations and their branches among people all that see them shall know them that these are the seed which our Lord hath blessed Againe Thy gates shal be opened continually day and night they shall not be shut that the strength of the Nations and their kinges may enter into thee for the nation and kingdome which shall not serue thee shall perish You are the light of the world a Citty built vpon a hill cannot be hid Tell the Church c. He that will not heare the Church let him be vnto thee as an heathen and Publican Going teach all Nations baptizing them c. Behould I am with you to wit your selues and successors teaching and baptizing all dayes vntill the end of the world Conformable to which Scriptures are also innumerable plaine places of ancient Fathers which may bee seene in Coccius and among others S. Augustine who saith that the Church being built vppon a moūtayne cannot be hid Out of these and other plaine places of of Scriptures Fathers euident Reasons also may be deduced shewing that the Church must needs bee visible in all ages As for example that otherwise it cannot bee such a Church as Christ did institute nor could it performe those offices which Christ appointed it to performe nor could those which were in it be instructed by it nor those which were out of it be cōuerted to it nor Heretiques pretending to be the Church cōvinced not to be it Wherfore out later Pro testants being not able to sayle any longer against this ineuitable Scylla without apparent daunger to split their boate would needes rather then turne back to the safe hauen of the visible Catholique Roman Church aduenture vpon the Charybdis of contemning all Monuments of ancient histories and the plaine experience of their primitiue Protestant Patriarches hoping to escape by landing vpon the imaginary Iland of inuisible recordes supposed to haue byn written and after suppressed in the pretended Popes persecution of the visible Members of their inuisible Church in the Ages before Luther a shift very vnsafe and such as if it were good might serue any other Sect of ancient or present Heretiques as well as our moderne Protestants if they would pretend to haue had a continuall visible Church of their profession But alas who seeth not that these be meere imaginary Chymaera's or dreames For if any such people had beene practizing especially rites of their religion though neuer so secretly they could not euen with a Giges ring haue passed vnseene but eyther with their positiue profession of their owne doctrine which in some cases obligeth all true beleeuers or at least with negatiue profession of fayth by which all faythfull men and at all tymes are obliged neuer to make shew and profession of a contrary religion they or some of them could not choose but to haue beene noted And if for that cause any persecution were in that age as is supposed infallibly they would haue beene taken as others of other Religions in like cases ordinarily are taken and imprisoned or otherwise so punished as the world could not haue beene ignorant of their persons nor Historyes set out by friendes or enemies silent in setting downe as vsually is done their names conditions opinions punishments and persecutions in such tyme such place c. And if such recordes of such conspicuous things had been set down in historyes it is not possible that the memory of such notorious matters could be razed both out of bookes and out of the mindes of men who without booke do continually deliuer in words to their successors what they saw with their eyes or heard with their eares of their predecessors or read in books to haue byn don to such persons as professed such a Religion or to haue beene done to such bookes in which mention was made of such persecution made against professors of that Religion To say therefore that such persons were and yet no record in any booke or other memory of them or that once such Recordes were but after were by the Pope razed or burned and yet no mention made in any booke or other monument that such razing or burning of bookes was by such a Pope at such a tyme c. as we can yet out of good Recordes tell the bookes burned by Dioclesian the Grande Persecutor of Christians To say I say this is senselesse and plainely sheweth that these men who sought to auoyd the Scylla of an inuisible Church by this shift fal into the Charybdis of speaking against sense and experience and indeed runne backe vpon the Scylla of the same inuisible Church for auoyding whereof they deuised this sandy shift of inuisible Persecutours inuisible Persecutions inuisible Recordes of nameles supposed to be visibly persecuted members of the Protestant Church in all Ages before Luther O misery O madnes of our poore deceaued Protestants What Is it possible that Luther and Lutherans Caluin and Caluinists yea our owne Countrey-men prime Protestants conuinced with the cleere euidency of things in their own dayes and with plaine Recordes of all ancient Monuments for former ages doe confesse as you heare euen now that Luther was the first that announced or published Christ that he was the first Apostle of the Reformed doctrine and this so certainely that they do account it impudency and ridiculous to say That there were other visible Protestants in Germany before Luther that they proue by argument this to be impossible that they acknowledge themselues in this Lutheran Reformation to haue departed from all the world that at Luthers and Caluins comming no ordinary vocatiō of Church-men without which the visible Church cannot be was extant in any place that the Church both then and for many hundred yeares before was wholly latent and inuisible Is it possible I say that all this should be cōfessed by the primitiue Parents and prime Doctours of Protestancy and that now their professed children schollers and in respect of them Punyes in Protestant diuinity dare be so bold as D. Featly was in the late conference to controlle and contradict those his grand Maisters in not only affirming but offering to proue by a Syllogisme and by a Demonstration à priori that the Protestant Church hath beene in all Ages visible and O wonder so visible as the names of the particular men may be shewed in all ages out of good Authors and further offering to second this Syllogisme by a full Induction in which he vndertooke actually to set downe their particuler names in euery seuerall age Surely the aforesayd Protestants if they had beene present would haue wondered to see such boldnes and would haue censured this attēpt to

be ridiculous impudency By this may appeare how notoriously the old Gentleman and the rest of the Protestant Audience were abused by D. Featly vndertaking so boldly to proue both by syllogisme and Induction the affirmatiue part of the aforesayd question which was proposed to be treated in the conference the Negatiue whereof is so plainely confessed by so many Prime Protestants as now we haue heard §. 3. About the Method Concerning the Method which had beene fittest to haue beene obserued in treating the aforesayd Question it is to be noted that there be two severall methodes of finding out infallible diuine truth in all points necessary to saluation the finding wherof was the chiefe end for which the aforesayd Question about the perpetual visibility of the Church was proposed to be treated of The first methode or way is that euery man eyther by his owne wit or by hearing another discourse do examine throughly ech particuler point of diuine Fayth about which Controuersy or Question is or may be made what is and what is not to be beleeued vnder payne of damnation the which requireth 1. Ability and strength of naturall wit and skill in Latin Greeke Hebrew and other languages and some art by which he may vnderstand the tearmes and state of the Question and all that is writen of it 2. That he reade or heare and vnderstand all that is written of that Question in holy Scriptures Councells Fathers and moderne Writers and in the originall Languages and Copyes and what els may be sayd of it pro and contra by learned Disputants 3. That he doe maturely weigh and ponder al that is sayd both for the affirmatiue and negatiue part of the Question 4. That by prayer and good life he obtaine the assistance of Gods spirit to illuminate his vnderstanding in matters which exceed the capacity of his naturall wit 5. That all this premised he of himselfe without relying vpon the Iudgement of any Church frame a firme and infallible Iudgement what is and what is not to be held for truth necessary to saluation and this being knowne by it as by a rule to iudge which company of men are or are not the true visible Church of Christ in al Ages Now who seeth not that this methode or way of attayning sound resolution in all particuler points of Fayth by that to iudge what company of men are or are not the true visible Church in all ages cannot be fit and conuenient to be prescribed to all or indeed to any sort of men and especially to such as neither haue extraordinary ability of naturall wit or skill in languages nor art requisite to vnderstand the tearmes and state of all Questions nor leasure to read or heare nor strength of iudgment to weigh and ponder all that is or may be sayd of them nor such extraordinary guiftes of prayer and other vertues as they may presume to haue gotten particuler assistance of Gods spirit more then other men whereby they may assure themselues that they in particuler without relying vpon any Churches iudgement can firmely and infallibly iudge in euery Question about points of Fayth what is and what is not to beleeued as a truth necessary to saluation The 2. methode or way which indeed is both most easy and may giue full satisfaction to all sortes consisteth in these 3. points 1. To beleeue and acknowledge as euery Christian is bound by the articles of his Creed that there is and hath beene in all Ages a visible Catholique Church of Christ which is the Pillar of truth and in it a visible company of Pastours and Doctours and lawfully sent Preachers assisted by the spirit of God who haue learned of their predecessours and they of theyrs still vpwardes vntill Christ his Apostles who learned of Christ and Christ of God his Father the infallible Truth in all pointes of fayth of whome by Gods appointment all sorts haue in all Ages past as appeareth by Historyes learned and must in tymes present and to come learne the infallible truth in all matters of Christian fayth necessary to saluation The 2. is to discerne which company of Christians are this visible Church of Christ and who be these Pastours Doctours and lawfully sent Preachers of whome all sorts of men may securely learne what is and what is not to be held for infallible truth in all matters of fayth necessary to saluation The 3. is to heare and belieue and obey whatsoeuer this Company of Christians haue in all Ages taught and what the present ordinary Pastours Doctours and Preachers thereof do teach to be diuine and infallible truth necessary to saluation which to do will not be hard to those who do truely feare and loue God and be meeke and humble in hart and who can and will for the loue and seruice of Christ captiuate their vnderstanding and submit it to the obedience of faith which must be done by mortifying and denying their owne priuate opinion that they may follow the sense and iudgment of Christ speaking in and by his Catholike Church VVhich whosoeuer heareth beleeueth obeyeth doth heare beleeue and obey Christ. And VVhosoeuer contemneth or will not heare beleeue and obey the Church he contemneth Christ and by Christs owne censure is to be accounted as an Heathen or Publican Now concerning the first and third of these points as no doubt or difficulty was moued either by the old Gentleman or Syr Humfrey Lynde or the Doctours or any other of the Company presēt at the Conference so there is no reason why any difficulty should be made therof at all And as for the 2. point it seemeth to me there should be no great difficulty in regard it is already agreed of all sides that there must be one or other such Company of Christians and among them Pastors preachers so visible as is said and none besides the Catholique Romaine hitherto hath shewed a sufficient Catalogue of names of men in al Ages who can with any colour be proued or defended to haue beene professors of the true diuine infallible Catholike primitiue vnchanged faith first deliuered by Christ and his Apostles after continued in an orderly succession of visible Pastors Doctours appoynted by God to be allwayes in the Church of purpose to preserue people of all ages from wauering in doubt of any point of faith or being carried about with the wind of any vpstart Errour Neither indeed can any such Catalogue be giuen but it may be manifestly shewed to be insufficiēt as either wanting names of men in some ages or containing names of such as may certainly be proued to be no Protestants but to differ in doctrine of fayth one from another and to condemne one or other of the 39. Articles vnto which English Protestant Ministers are sworne Neuertheles if any one be not yet satisfyed in this point but will haue the Question made whether the Protestant Church hath beene so visible in all Ages as