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
this little So that this being not a little but a great point S. Basill doth not speak against us but for us who sayes that in these great points there should be no difference Now it might be called little by some not for the little weight of the point but for the litte odds in the sound of the word so that in the little difference of a syllable the great point lay affirmed or denyed And indeed it were better that death were imbraced then any such point of divine doctrine should bee betrayed Besides â—s there a desire on our side of betraying or delivering up any lesser points of divine doctrine but rather a charitable hope that men may be saved though differing in opinion concerning some lesser matters by not knowing that they be divine doctrines or not reaching to them by a weake and inferiour degree of a faith But who so will truely judge our maine quarrell with Romists hee shall finde it to be a defence of divine doctrine against humane fictions and traditions And Romists most grossely offend against the words and example of S. Basil who permit many syllables of the divine doctrine in the second Commandement forbidding worship of imâ—ges to be left out of their Catechismes and the divine doctrine of halfe a Sacrament to be denyed and made voyd to the people and the divine doctrine of praying in a known tongue in the Church to be actually betrayed Saint Gregory Nazianzen is next who as our Author saith thus delivers himselfe Nothing can be more dangerous then those hereticks who when they run straight through all the rest doe yet with one word as with some drop of poyson infect the true and sincere faith of our Lord. If this Champion had gotten this place by his owne knowledge he could not well but take notice that the sincere faith whereof Gregory speaks is the faith contained in the Nicene Creed which Creed is set at the head of the Tractate and accordingly the one word of which hee speaks as being dangerous to the faith is the word that giveth not to Christ one Substance with the Father This word Nazianzen often names in this discourse so that the Cavalier could not well oversee it if hee had seene the place yea hee saith plainly that it lets in the Arian heresie And if it be thus this Champion is yet far from his Conclusion by this Antecedent which must thus lead the way It is most dangerous to differ in one word of the Creed which concernes a point fundamentall even the Deity of Christ therefore it is most dangerous to differ in points out of the Creed which are extra-fundamentall and of the Popes decreeing But let Romists look whether this place doe not fight against them who thrusting the word Roman after or into the word Catholick have drawne the soules of too many to beleeve in the Pope or Popish Church in stead of God and so have changed the very foundation of their faith Saint Hierome must have the same answer no man denying but that for some one word or two contrary to the faith or Creede in points fundamentall many heresies have been and ought to bee cast out of the Church It followes Saint Leo saith That out of the Catholick Church there is nothing pure According to that of the Apostle Whatsoever is not of faith is sinne But what doth this here where the question is not Whether they sin that be out of the catholick Church but Whether they be out of the catholick Church that differ in any smal point of doctrine from some other members of the same Church But because this place wants help hee adds a second If it be not one it is no faith at all We acknowledge there is but one saving and fundamentall Faith in Christ Iesus as but one Baptisme and this faith was once delivered to the Saints and the Saints still doe so uniformely receive it as that they who have any other fundamentall faith have none at all But if Romists will have faith to bee one in all points then by this Popes doctrine they have no faith for their faith is not one in all points with the one faith once delivered to the Saints nor with the faith in the time of Leo for in that one faith there was no worship of Images no universall Monarchy of the Pope no worship of Bread The Cavaliers first place of Augustine I am loth to bring forth to spare both the Cavalier and the Reader It is somewhat long but very short of the Cavaliers mark it proves against the Donatists That the Church in earth and the Church in heaven are not two Churches but one But who denyes this yea who denyes the true Church on earth to bee but one and this is the Protestants maine businesse to keep it one though differing in some lesser points of doctrine And it is our Authors businesse to breake this unity even by this place which he produceth under a shew of proving unity but not proving by it such an unity as by it hee may make a division hee is faine to set a second Buttresse to support his wall of separation Thus hee reareth it To shew moreover by the judgement of Saint Augustine that the Church in her doctrine was to be truly one hee spake thus of the Donatists who called upon the same God preached the same â—ospel sung the same Psalmes had the same Baptisme observed the same Easter and the like in those things they were with mee yet not wholly with mee in schisme not with mee in heresie not with me in a few not with mee but in regard they were not with mee in a few their being with mee in many could not help them If the Cavalier had gone on in his Allegation the very next words would have given him an answer to the objection which hee drew out of the former for those words say that the one thing wherein they were not one was Charity And the want of this hee proves out of Saint Paul 1 Cor. 13. to make all the rest unprofitable But our question is not of want of charity but of differing in some small point of faith True it is that this uncharitablenesse was back'd with an error which hee called an heresie That the Catholick Church was onely in the part of Donatus and so as Saint Augustine infers that the Church was not catholick But let our Author remember That this voucheth an Article of the Creede as denyed by the Donatists but with the denyall of any such Article he cannot charge us But yet that their error did not kill nor cut them off all from being truly of the Church except the error were accompanied with the want of that one thing which was true charity we have great probabilities if not proofes out of Optatus and Saint Augustine the former of which commonly calls them brethren and the later denies not but some of them might be
that abides not in Christs doctrine and faith But in all this hee doth not say that the Protestants are not in the Church neither that they remaine not in Christs Doctrine and Faith but it may rather concerne the Papacie which hath made a new Church against the Church of Christ and a new Faith by adding twelve Articles more to the former It doth also plainely shew them that they suffering for Treasons of Powder Rebellion c. cannot expect thereby a Crown of faith but a punishment of perfidiousnesse Saint Augustine is next alledged and hee useth the like or very same words and so the like or the same answer might serve But indeed Augustine so punctually speaketh against the Papacie and pierceth it through that no one place can well bee lost because every one is serviceable against the Papacy for which it is produced These are the words first alledged out of Saint Augustine Would you have men so blinde and deafe as not to heare or reade the Gospel where they may know that faith our Lord left to his Apostles concerning his Church Now what the Papists will answer to this I know not who make many men so blinde as not to reade at all and so deafe as not to heare the Gospel but in Latin And secondly hee sayes that Saint Augustine puts himselfe to shew That this is that Church of Christ which is spread over the whole world Who can more plainly say that the Roman Papacie is not this Church whose universall power and extent is denyed by other Patriarchs and is unbeleeved yea and unknowne in a great part of the Christian world The last place out of Augustine seconded with the consent of Cardinall Perron hee turnes to this use That Catholick is not onely a name of beleefe and faith but of charitie and communion which whosoever should want should also want salvation But withall I must say that long before I knew this opinion of Perron I beleeved this truth and I also beleeved that it did make mightily for us and mightily against the Papacie That it makes mightily for us I have shewed in the first Chapter who doe imbrace a catholick love with the whole body of Christ which is his Church That it makes mightily against the Papacie I have shewed in the second Chapter because it excludes from love and communion many eminent parts of the Church even so much of the Church and body of Christ as extends beyond subjection and obedience to the Papacie And indeed this Champions allegations doe so fight for us against his owne Papacie that a suspicious Reader may doubt hee hath been hired by us But by the next allegation perchance hee thinkes his suspicion may be somewhat cleered where thus hee commenteth in the behalfe of his mother Saint Hierome writing to Pope Damasus saith not onely of the catholâ—ck Church indefinitely but denoting that to bee the Roman that that Church is the Arke out of which whosoever liveth shall bee drowned in the deluge and that that Church is the House out of which whosoever should eate the Lambe were a profane person But doth Hierome here denote the catholick Church both for breadth and length to be Roman and no Church to be catholick which was not Roman that is under the Roman subjection this was farre from his meaning Hee meant that at that time the Roman Church was by one faith the same with the catholick Church anâ— in union with it as a member of the body and that out of this one Church wherewith Rome was then one in faith there was no salvation Secondly Hee did not say that that Church shall bee the Arke out of which shall bee no salvation but that Church is the Arkâ— shewing what it then was and not what it shall be Indeed the Papacie even the Man of sinne the Head and his members in the Mystery of iniquity now call themselves the Church of Rome But Rome at the best had never Religion and the Church faster tyed to it then Jerusalem and therefore we may take leave to say of Rome as it was said of Jerusalem How is the faithfull Citie become an Harlot It hath been manifestly proved that this Mysterie of iniquitie or Papacie is farre different from the ancient Church of Rome and Saint Hierome himselfe hath taught us that Rome should bee the seate of Antichrist and hee did not meane that when Rome is the seate of Antichrist shee should bee taken for the Arke out of which no man should bee saved Therefore this place that made for Rome then while shee was a pure part of the catholick Church makes against her now when she is the seate of the Man of sin or Antichrist and they that might be invited to come to her then as an eminent part of the Arke and catholick Church may now bee driven out from her by a voice from heaven Come out of her my people that ye be not partakers of her sins and that ye receive not of her plagues There follow two places out of Lactantius whereof the first indeed saith for us and against these Romists that are divided from us and our Church That they that enter not into the Temple of God or depart out of it shall bee deprived of the hope of salvation But the second place I know not how it may serve for the point in hand but it otherwise is an wholesome exhortation for Romists and I wish it may doe good to the Author No man must flatter himselfe with an obstinate kinde of contention for the questions here about salvation and life which if it bee not watchfully and diligently provided for it will be extinct and lost The Cavalier ends in a tempest which he puls downe on his own head S. Fulgentius hath this dreadfull saying wherewith I will conclude this point c. where he brings in Fulgentius saying That neither Baptisme nor Almes nor Martyrdome can be of any benefit towards his salvation that holds not unity with the Church A place indeed that ought to be dreadfull to the Romists for their Schism described in the second Chapter but no way dreadfull to us for our catholick Charity expressed in the first SECT III. The Cavaliers indeavour to prove that the Protestants and Papists cannot bee both members of this one Church doth not absolve the Papists from uncharitablenesse ANd having thus concluded the Allegations hee thus gives a reason of his conclusion Nor will I so much distrust either the attention or the discretion of my Reader as to thinke that I need presse this point any further A saying good at last but much better at first for if there had bin at first no distrust of the Readers discretion there had beene no neede of any one of those Allegations which have beene brought forth to prove a point not denyed There is but one Church out of which there is no salvation But let us see what immediatly followes So that now in the
saved who avoyd the mortall infection of these points and what caution must be used to preserve this Charity from crossing with Truth HAving discovered many Untruths in at least foure maine points of this Chapter wee are come to a fifth point whose truth is so powerfull that it overcomes mee and makes mee to acknowledge with the Author That it divides Protestants and right Romists so farre as salvation and damnation And I must cleere either side from uncharitablenesse in saying that these who faile in this point are in a state of damnation And it is very true that hee promiseth That this Reason strikes at the roote which is taken from the nature and propertie of Faith The point is this That whosoever doth give his faith and assent to all the Articles of Christian doctrine yet if hee doe it not upon the right and infallible motive hee hath no saving Faith Now hereunto wee subjoyne That true and right Papists or Romists doe not beleeve upon the true and infallible motive Therefore they can have no saving Faith And indeed though they have many and pernitious errors yet this is the great and generall error that makes up the Mystery of iniquity which wee call the Papacie and the Papists call the Church For the ordinary motive of faith in those who are the right and naturall members of the Head of that Mysterie is to beleeve the Articles of Faith because the Church whose mouth head and spirit is the Pope propounds and commands them to bee beleeved And this Author saith that the onely true and infallible ground is The Revelation of Almighty God and the proposition and direction of the Church Wherein first hee joyneth the Church with God in this ground of Faith and so gives as it were halfe of the ground of Faith to the Church from God and makes it halfe unsafe and damnable But even this halfe hee seemes elsewhere wholly to take away and so to leave men wholly to bee damned by a Faith wholly grounded on a motive which cannot raise a saving and supernaturall Faith for hee saith That if the Church hath not decided propounded and commanded a doctrine to bee beleeved by her children a man may thinke and doe as hee sees cause without incurring the crime of heresie Thus wee see that the Revelation of God is not a motive of Faith of it selfe but the Church is the motive of beleeving Gods Revelation so first wee see the Church to put God aside and to take place of him and knowing who is the Head Heart if not the Whole of this Church wee finde him just in his owne place and that is lifting himselfe up above all that is called God And secondly wee see the deadly motive and ground of Faith proposed by Papists to Popish soules even the word of a man and a Man of sinne on whom whatsoever Faith is finally grounded it can give nothing but damnation Neither are wee put by other Papists to lay pieces together to prove this their damning motive of Faith for besides the common voice of the people that they beleeve as the Church beleeves wee have before heard that the Rhemists acknowledge the Popes to bee an Order of Governors to whom wee are bound to cleave in Religion and to obey in all things And thereupon they infer that A Papist is a Christian man a childe of the Church and subject to Christs Vicar So the Christianity of a Papist and his being a child of the Church depends on his cleaving to the Pope and obeying him in all things But yet againe we may see it more acknowledged in their Writers Lorca brings forth Medina affirming that The Testimonie of the Church doth so farre partake of being the formall object or motive of faith that the utmost resolution of faith is into the authoritie of the Church and the proofes produced for it are to bee heard in the common language of Romists If it bee asked why thou beleevest the Trinity in Unity and thou answer Because God saith it It will then bee demanded of thee how thou knowest that God saith it thou hast no other Answer left but this Because the Church saith it and so are they taught in the Catechisme and so answer both the learned and unlearned Behold the common answer and common faith of Romists Now this object of faith being man and not God it cannot raise that supernaturall and saving faith whose object is the prime Veritie even God speaking to the soules of his servants And seeing this humane faith hath so possessed Romists that their Prophets doe make the obeying and cleaving to the Pope in his doctrine the very Character of a Christian and childe of the Church this Church consisting of these children thus adhering to the Pope is against such truely affirmed not to bee the Church and so may the Homily of our Church clearely bee interpreted which denyeth the Church of Rome that is the Pope and his Adherents to bee the true Church for thus to adhere unto the Pope and to lay beliefe on him is so farre from making a true childe and member of the Church that it makes a member of the Papacie and so of Antichrist it makes a Synagogue for Sathan and Hell and not a Church for Christ and salvation And whereas this Author both in this Chapter and the beginning of the eighth objects it to us that wee condemne their doctrines and account the Church of Rome to bee the Seate of Antichrist and the Synagogue of Sathan Hee hath here seene one reason of it and it is a reason of his owne and his fellowes even because the Romish Doctors and Champions tell us that the Church of Rome is made of those children which beleeve in the Pope And this faith being humane cannot make a Church to Christ but to the Pope and thus the Pope stands in the place of Antichrist for putting Christ out of his place and stepping into it whiles thus hee makes his sheepe to heare his voice before Christs yea both herein and often otherwise against Christ. But a second Reason may bee given of their calling the Church of Rome the Synagogue of Sathan the Church of Rome being taken in a larger sense even for all those parts of mankinde that have reference to Rome For they finde this Church of Rome overspred not onely with this false and Antichristian faith but with other mortall errours and abhominations such are grosse and almost universall Idolatry in the worship of Images and especially of the Sacrament confidence in workes for justification and merit and a grosse ignorance even a not knowing of Christ which before hath beene touched Now many seeing a field overcome with these deadly and killing weeds and so overcome that they seemed to cover the face of the field they tooke it to bee a field of Weeds and not of Corne And because the usuall manner of speaking is to say that a horse is blacke and
other that hee erreth in the faith and the other retorts the same against him yea this happeneth not only between two particular Divines but between one Schoole and another And indeede these dissentions even to the imputation of heresie doe shame the Pope this infallible judge of controversies for not resolving them and doe almost plainly confesse that he mistrusts his owne infallibilitie and that he doubts it is scarce trusted by others for it is likely the feares either that hee shall not rightly resolve or that both sides will not quietly submit but that some of those who have that burning zeale which consumed the Dominican will bee inflamed against him for his resolutions Fourthly even against decision there is opposition and so are they at division and particularly in that great and weightie point of Idolatrie For that which the Romists call the second Councell of Nice and acknowledge to be a lawfull Councell saith plainely of Images thus Illis salutationes honorariam adorationem tribuant non tamen secundum fidem nostram veram Latriam quae solum divinae naturae competit So that Lorca after the producing of divers testimonies of this Councell thus inferreth Vis autem omnium testimoniorum consistit in hoc quod Imaginibus expressè conceditur adoratio expresse etiam eis negatur Latria And soone after Concilium non solum excludit Latriam sed explicat speciem adorationis dicit enim adorandas esse honoraria adoratione sicut Liber Evangeliorum And hereunto agreeth Pamelius speaking of this Councell as hath before beene alledged Yet Latria or divine worship being thus plainly and as Lorca 〈◊〉 expreâ—sly denied to Images by the Câ—unâ—â—ll great and learned Romists plainly say that Latria or divine worship is to be given to Images even the same worship which is due to the patterne So saith â—â—zorius and Bellarmine acknowledgeth that this was the dâ—ctrine of Alexander Aquinas Cajâ—tâ—ne Bonaventure Marsilâ—us Almaine Carthusian Capreolus and others And accordingly wee reade of a Doctor of Sivill questioned of Heresie for agreeing with the councell in denying Latria contrarie to these Doctors Upon that which hath beene said I inferre that our objection of Romish disunions yet stands firme because there are maine disunions objected by us against Rome which this Author hath not touched and so stand still strong against him among which is eminent that incurable difference of headship it selfe betweene the Pope and the Councell to which some adde the fearfull division of the Popedome when in a schisme the Papacy is two or three headed two or three sitting at once as heads of the Church and others adde the division of successive heads the one denying and annulling the acts of the other SECT III. The weaknesse of the Cavaliers answers are manifested First for Romish differences are not onely of such points as are left at liberty by this Church Secondly their pretended religious orders are so many different Sects and Fashions in the Church Thirdly the distinction of explicite and implicite faith doth fortifie the Protestants objections and no way salve them WHereas to our first objection of difference concerning varietie of opinions in some points found in their Books he gives this first answer That wheresoever they finde our Doctors to bee of a contrarie opinion they shall also finde those points in question not to have beene defined by the Church but left at libertie to bee debated and disputed as men see cause This is plainly overthrowne by that which hath been produced in our fourth observation of Romish differences For there wee see a point oppugned and denied by Romish Doctors which hath been defined yea the power of the Councell above the Pope hath beene defined by Councels and is denyed by Romists To which I may adde that the Popes power hath beene bounded within the limits of a Patriarchate by divers Councells which yet Romish Doctors doe not onely dispute against but utterly deny Besides when they object one to another de Fide The meaning of it in plaine English is this They tell their fellowes that they hold a point contrary to the definition or doctrine of the Church And whereas hee speakes of unity by referring themselves to the future definition of the Church this is no answer for the differences of those who do dispute and deny those points which by the Church are already defined for it were absurd to say that they who doe now not submit to the definition of the Church are ready to submit to it hereafter Againe for those points which have not beene defined certaine it is that for the present they are at very hot contention and difference and their resolving to obey the future definition of the Church doth no whit prove their present unity who are presently at division while the Church doth not by defining make unity betweene them Two that have a question and a quarrell upon the question and upon this quarrell kill one another may as well bee said to agree because they both would referre themselves to the next man that comes Which man not yet coming nor reconciling the difference they in the meane time notwithstanding this supposed future agreement doe presently fight and truly kill one another Except by this Popish sleight wee may truly say that these men being at full agreement and unity were divided and upon this division which was indeede an agreement did fight and kill one another True it is that it is the more shame for the Pope who hath knowne these controversies of the Dominicans and others of a long time And for a while as Vasques saith did forbid them but most wisely though not like an infallible Head of unity deferres to resolve them and so to set them at unity but gives them leave still to dispute and differ being affraid perchance on one side to run against the chiefe Disciples of Evangelicall Thomas and on the other side to lose the profit that comes by the many pretious consequences of free-will Besides when they be not agreed which is the Church that hath supreme power to decide controversies whether the Pope be above the Councell or the Councell above the Pope and if the Pope be of one opinion and the Councell of another how doth he that submits himself to the Church by this submission put himselfe into a way of unity or not rather of division And if such a submission make an unity the Protestants are at unity much better then Romists for they submit themselves to the one and undivided word of God truly opened by Apostles and Pastors endued with gifts from on high by the same spirit which endited it and was given of purpose to cause unity of faith And whereas hee gives a second plaister to that first objection of differences of points not defined that they doe not breake unity of peace nor erect Altar against Altar I say this plaister is much shorter then the sore for
that hee himselfe can by name say that we admit him So it seems wee had no great depth in hiding the name of Saint Iames which our Authour as shallow as his pen runs did so easily find But I confesse I am sorry both for him and my selfe for him that hee is troubled with working such Cob webs and for my selfe that I have the labour of sweeping them away Yet will hee needs goe on in such industrious vanities But abstracting from all these insincerities wherewith that booke of Articles is full fraught they doe not so much as say that the Articles of Doctrine which they deliver are fundamentall either all or halfe or any one thereof or that they are necessarily to be beleeved by them or the contrary damnable if it be beleeved by us But they are glad to walk in a cloud for the reasons which have been already toucht Our Author commends the booke of Articles while he calls the Insincerities of it These Insincerities that is these which before have been shewed to be invisible and no Insincerities Insincerities only in the eye of the Author which did cast the shape of them on the booke when he read it But saith he They shew not which are fundamentall and which are not Neither did they ever promise you that they would do so The fundamentalls are said to be there but no man said for ought I know that there it was shewed which are fundamentalls and which are not Your selves hold points of importance which are more fundamentall and to bee explicitely knowne and doth every Romish Councell tell you which are these points and which are not And if it doth not why doe you demand it of our Church in her Synod more then of your own Or if you can excuse your own why doe you quarrell with ours It was not the intended much lesse promised businesse of our Church there to distinguish fundamentalls from superedifications but to set downe both fundamentalls and superedifications And these being taught to her children the Spirit of Christ the foundation will discover the fundamentalls to his members and thereby settle them on Christ and further build them up by the superedifications according to their appointed measure And I have before shewed how our fundamentalls may bee discerned though I may say somewhat like to that of our Saviour to the Jewes Why of your selves discern ye not that which is right and rightly fundamentall For if you know how to find out these grounds of Christianity which must bee explicitely knowne which your selves acknowledge to be more fundamentall you may easily find out our fundamentalls so that all this is but an empty out-cry to affright the Reader with noise without reason thus to call for a designment of fundamentalls where none was undertaken and where in like case your selves do it not and to quarrell with fundamentalls which your self and yours do acknowledge Yet when Romists have agreed of the set number themselves let them send to us their Catalogue defined by a Synod and it may be we may deale with them upon exchange The Cavalier goes on Master Rogers indeed in the Analysis which hee makes of those nine and thirty Articles speakes loud enough by way of taxing the Doctrine of the Church of Rome as being contrary to that of the Church of England and hee gives it 〈◊〉 many ill names as his impure spirit can devise and affirmes among other things that many Papists and namely the Franciscans blush not to affirme that S. Francis is the holy Ghost and that Christ is the Saviour of men but one mother Jane is the Saviour of women a most execrable aspersion of Postellius the Iesuite with a great deale of such base trash as this And yet his Booke is declared to have beene perused and by the lawfull Authoritie of the Church of England permitted to be publick But yet even Master Rogers himselfe is not so valiant as to tell us in particular which point of their doctrine is fundamentall to salvation and which is not True it is that Master Rogers doth very clearely and audibly speake against and condemn divers errours of the Church of Rome as being not onely contrary to the doctrine of the Church of England but to the Word of God with which commonly he confronts the errours which hee brings forth to judgement And among them hee sheweth some errours of a high nature which make Saviours of Merits and Masses and Popish Pardons yea which carry the faith of the soule from God unto man the Pope and his Councels And for ought I see hee doth not give worse names then the purest and holiest Spirit gives to the Pope who calleth him the Man of sinne and sonne of perdition c. And the impurity which this Authour at his owne costs and upon his owne word layes on him Mr Rogers layes on Rome by proofes and allegations as in divers places so particularly in the nineteenth Article Propos. 7. whereof the Title is this That the Church of Rome most shamefully hath erred in life ceremonies and matters of faith But for that to which this Authours spirit gives the ill name of base trash it is brought in as the filth of his owne Associates and testified by other Writers and therefore the basenesse of it most justly should light on them that are the first Authours of it Neither is it strange amongst Papists to make creatures to share salvation with our Saviour the hymnes concerning the milke of the blessed Virgin the bloud of Thomas the vertue of the woodden Crosse singing it aloud in the ears of the world Filthinesse and basenesse most abominable and that deserves to bee swept out of the Church with detestation and to bee carried out as the Filthinesse out of the holy Place in the Reformation of Hezekiah And why in an equall judgement should not Master Rogers his Books much rather be permitted to bee publick for naming such filthinesse with detestation then Rome allowed to bee Catholick though using such filthinesse with practicall approbation Lastly The want of valour in Master Rogers to tell us which point of our doctrine is fundamentall and which is not I thinke is no just accusation because for ought I know hee did not undertake this as his businesse neither had any Romish Cavalier yet challenged him upon this quarrell SECT III. Wherein is discovered the vanity of his boasting That the Protestant Church is unlikely to define which are the fundamentall differences betwixt them and the Papists since they scarce dare avow any difference at all HEe goes on Much lesse is there any appearance that ever the Church of England should doe it since even now wee have seene that it dares not in divers points so much as declare in publick manner that it professes the expresse contrary of what wee held Nay wee are not likely to see the fundamentall points of faith whereof they talke so loud to bee avowed by so much as either
CATHOLICK CHARITIE COMPLAINING AND MAINTAINING That Rome is unchaâ—itable to sundry Eminent parts of the Catholick Church and especially to Protestants and is therefore Uncatholick And so A Romish Book called CHARITIE MISTAKEN though undertaken by a Second is it selfe a Mistaking By F. ROUS OPTATUS Lib. 2. Quia noluerunt fratres agnoscere nullam habuerunt charitatem LONDON Printed by R. Young for Iohn Bartlet at the signe of the gilt Cup neer S. Austins gate 1641. REcensui Librum hunc cui Titulus CATHOLICK CHARITY in quo nihil reperio fidei orthodoxae aut bonis moribus contrarium quo minus summâ cum utilitate Typis mandetur JOH HANSLEY R. P. Episc. Lond. Capel Domest Decemb. 2. 1640. The Publisher to the READER IT might well have beene wished that the growth of Romish errours and superstitions the complaint of this time had not made this Worke too seasonable True it is though it doe but now see the light yet it came to the birth before any other Answer of Charity Mistaken was knowne to the Authour it came indeed to the birth but there was no strength to deliver the judgement of those times not giving way to any other besides those whose Answers have beene already made publick But though they have run before like Cushi this like Ahimaaz yet perchance not altogether without tidings may run after and with Ahimaaz it may make the better speede because with him it goes the way of the Plaine it goes a plaine way speaking plainely the Protestant Shiboleth and it useth plainnesse and evidence of speech in which way it is likely to meet with most Readers Neither doth it come altogether without tidings for it brings with it the tidings of Truth and Love and by both a remedy against error and uncharitablenesse And as it is a worke of charity so is it sutably fitted with charitable expressions for it doth not take up those sharpe arrowes which in these Concertations too often are shot at mens persons besides the Marke of the Matter True it is that where the Writer doth put his faults into the matter of his Booke and doth publish them of purpose to have them seene and by the sight of them to make others faulty there it will bee a duty of obedience as well as of necessary providence for the Readers safety to take notice of them Controversies certainely looke like breaches of love and therefore the Authour hath not been much in love with them But if love will bee lost except it be kept by a Controversie there the Controversie that keepes it is a worke of love To strive against uncharitablenesse that it may be removed and charity put in the roome of it is an act of charity and this charity is the businesse of this work The Reader may also take notice that divers passages not insisted on by the other are here examined because this worke surveyeth the whole Booke which it answers more particularly then the other There hath indeed come forth a Reply in defence of Charity Mistaken But both the one and the other turne mainely on these two hinges That there must be an entire unity of faith in all Truths revealed by God and proposed by the Church And That if unity were to be held by the faith of Fundamentals a perfect and uniforme List should be given of those Fundamentals Now these two hinges being taken off in this Book I hope it may give a fall to the maine matter of them both And whereas the Replyer strives to divide our unity by this Engine That some Protestants directly wittingly and willingly dis-beleeve what others do beleeve to bee testified by the Word of God and herein is no difference between Fundamentall and not Fundamentall It is rejoyned for a defence against this Engine of division That if herein be no difference betweene the one and the other in Fundamentals there is no proofe that they are not united members in the body of Christ For hee that wittingly and willingly dis-beleeves that which the other beleeves to bee testified by the Word of God may know as the terme wittingly seems to import that the point dis-beleeved is not testified by the Word of God and so hee may bee safe and is still one with Christ and his Members Againe the other who beleeves it to bee testified by the Word of God may bee deceived yet the point not being fundamentall his errour may not divide him from the other which is a member of Christ. Indeed if a Protestant should know a point to be testified by the Word of God and then dis-beleeve it that might prove him not to be in the Body of Christ but first This would bring him within the difference of Fundamentals and not Fundamentals contrary to the Replyers Affirmation for it is a maine Fundamentall to beleeve God whom that man beleeves not who wittingly and willingly denyes the Word of God And secondly It is meerly inconsistent and incompossible That hee who beleeves Fundamentals should wittingly and willingly dis-beleeve what hee knows the God of Truth hath spoken And if out of weaknesse errour and ignorance hee doth not beleeve that God hath spoken it this ignorance if it be not in Fundamentals doth not inforce a disunion from other Members of the Body of Christ. Thus the Replyers objected Not-beleeving either falls under Fundamentals and then his case is not rightly put or else it falls not under Fundamentals and then it doth not conclude a disunion betweene Protestants This having received my selfe I impart to the Reader with a Prayer that in reading this Worke hee may bee enlightned with that Spirit of Truth which alone can kindly discover both the Mystery of godliness and the Mystery of iniquity and that the same Spirit may hold him in the one and keep him from the other CATHOLICK CHARITIE CHAP. I. Of Christian Love and Peace SECT I. Concerning the Excellency Necessity and other motives of Christian Love with an exhortation to the imbracing of it THE Spouse of Christ Jesus when shee shines in Love shee is amiable in Beauty precious in the eye of her Husband powerfull with God her Father prosperous in her owne spirituall health and vigour and prepared for her consummate marriage in celestiall glory Her husband is God and God is love and God cannot but love that love which is like himselfe And that hee may love his Spouse for her love when shee becomes one Spirit with him by this unity of Spirit hee gives her an uniformity of love the oyntment of Christ Jesus the Head floweth down into all his members and breatheth love into them and as farre as his life goes so far goeth his love therefore no love no life in Christ Jesus Agreeably the beloved Disciple and an especiall Teacher of love having shewed that the new-birth brings love with life he fitly addeth Hee that loveth not abideth in death No wonder then if the great Master and Lover of this Disciple
and that with a vehemencie for hee injoynes them not barely to follow but as it were to persecute even with a swift and eager prosecution to run after the things of peace yea he adjures the Philippians by all consolation in Christ and by the fellowship of the Spirit and by the bowels of mercy that they be of one accord Finally the Sonne of God our Saviour of whom Melchisedech was a type is the King of peace as well as the King of righteousnesse and his subjects who will partake of his righteousnesse must also partake of his peace Christ hath made peace betweene God and us even peace between heaven and earth not that men being at peace above with God should have discord below among themselves but the peace which is begun in heaven must come downe and dwell among his members on earth wee must be one as he and his Father are one the peace which wee receive from God by Christ wee must impart each to other yea it must rule in our hearts being called to it in one body Accordingly as wee expect peace from God through Christ so let us heare and obey Christ commanding peace amongst our selves Have peace one with another and then let us not doubt but if the Peace of God bee among us the God of peace is also with us Deus semper in pace est Where spirituall and true peace is there ever God is SECT III. That this love and peace are catholick and universall extended to all the members of Christ and that our Church by professing this Catholick love declares her selfe to be a truly Catholick Church THe two excellent and powerfull Graces Love and Peace may not be bounded by us but by God himselfe the Author and Commander of it Him must we follow in the inlarging or straitning of it and not goe from his leading to the right hand or to the left where God commands love and peace we may not forbid them neither whom God by sanctifying hath made fit for our peace must wee accompt common or uncleane and fit for separation Now the extent and bound which God appoints for our love and peace is no lesse then all the Saints even the whole body of Christ the bond of peace is not one jot shorter then the unitie of the spirit If then God have not disdained to bestow on any man his sanctifying Spirit let not man scorne on such a one to bestow his love and peace for hee that denyeth his love and peace to that man in whom is the Spirit hee denyeth his love and peace to the spirit which is in that man Therefore if God have gone before with his saving grace and sanctifying spirit let us not doubt to follow God with our love and peace Now we know that God according to his promise to Abraham hath an holy seed out of all Nations which is the catholick and universall Church if then the Church bee catholick and universall let our love and peace bee also catholick and universall And to this end our affections must be enlarged and made capable of the whole world For hee that will love a catholick Church with a catholick love must not have a narrow love contracted and confined to the measure of one City Kingdome or Nation but extended and enlarged to the measure of all Cities Kingdomes and Nations even of the whole world If that which is to bee loved bee universall the affection which loveth must not be partiall For if the love be but to a part when it should bee to the whole this is not that catholick love which belongs to the Catholick Church and whatsoever title such men may take to themselves they are not true but counterfeit Catholicks for they have not that catholick spirit of love which is in the true catholick Church and by which the catholick Church doth love it selfe with a catholick love But such men by likelihood have a private spirit by which they love a private part and faction and are short of that universall spirit which loveth the universall Church with an universall love for there is a private spirit of love aswell as of faith and it is that kind of spirit which Saint Iames mentioneth a spirit that lusteth after envie after sects and divisions But let us never rest untill wee get that catholick spirit by which we may embrace the catholick Church with a catholick love and then we may bee assured we are not titular but true and reall Catholicks Hereby wee know that wee are of the truth saith Saint Iohn and wee shall assure our hearts before God And wee know that we have passed from death to life because we love the brethren even the brethren without exception and reservation and hee that dwelleth in this generall and unreserved love God who is love dwelleth in him and he in God And we know that we dwell in him and hee in us because he hath given us his spirit even the spirit of this catholick and universall love Let no man therefore say of another He is of such a Nation with which my Nation is at enmity or of such a Church which professeth some differences with the Church in which I live and therefore I will by no meanes have love and peace with him but remember that in every Nation hee that feareth God and worketh righteousnesse is accepted of God and therefore doe thou enquire whether this spirit of feare and holinesse be in him which those that have are accepted of God if he be accepted of God take heed hee be not rejected of thee It were a madnesse in thee for Gods sake to hate one whom God loves and for Christs sake to hate a member of Christ. Indeed if he be of a Church infected with errors thou must be wary of him that hee infect thee not with those errors but bee also wary of not hating the spirit of Christ in a member of Christ It is an Apostolicall and so an undenyable Inference If yee have put on the New-man in which is neither Greeke nor Jew Circumcision nor Uncircumcision Barbarian Scythian bond nor free but Christ is all in all Put on therefore there is a binding force in this therefore as the elect of God holy and beloved bowels of mercy kindnesse c. And above all these things put on charity which is the bond of perfectnesse and let the peace of God rule in your hearts to which ye are called in one body Let us then have love and peace with a beleeving Muscovite Grecian AEthiopian Indian if hee be of that one body wherein Christ is all in all and by the unity whereof we are called to love and peace yea from this universall peace and love may not bee excluded any remnant according to the election of grace pertaining to the body of Christ though sojourning in the tents and territories of Rome we may not
him a right Citizen of Sodom And now call him a Monk if you will hee shall bee but a Monk of the Order of Sodome his function farre from sacred farre from the Spirit but even a hellish trade of fleshly abominations And so I think we have drawn up these conclusions First That it should not bee true Christian charity which by excessivenesse gives that provision which makes such a childe of hell Secondly It may bee no charity because it may bee an erroneous opinion of merit and satisfaction And it is too well knowne that the supposed expiation of crying sins hath laid the foundation of too many Monasteries Thirdly This Provision may be a fruit not of Romish Charity but of Romish Policy for Rome may cherish this provision and enriching of Monasteries that they may serve as so many Garrisons for Rome against Princes for by them they may diminish Kingdoms and as much as they take from these so much they adde to the Kingdome of Rome The Champion passeth on and having wrought a glittering curtaine bespangled with the seeming good works of Visiting the condemned Redeeming captives Instructing the ignorant hee spreads this curtaine before the eyes of his Readers at once to dazle them with this glorious shew and to cover from them the horrid spectacle of Romes bloudy uncharitablenesse That there are no good works in the limits of Rome I will no more say then I will say there are no knees there â—hat doe not bow to Baal And these as I said before serve well the turne of the Beast to make his hornes shew like those of the Lambe as they doe at this time serve our Author to make a shew that Rome is charitable But take out of his Inventory those works that are done for satisfaction to pay God the debt of sins and so to make them Saviours or for merit and supererogation to bring God in debt unto man I doubt not the remaining works like Gideons Army will abate from thousands to hundreds And indeed the greater multitude there is of erroneous works the more Arguments not of Romish charity but of Romish error and superstition But when among these works of Romish charity I see the Instructing of the ignorant I wonder at the Cavaliers blinde partiality that could not see this which hee brings forth as a proofe of Romish charity to bee an high proofe and accusation of Romish uncharitablenesse and this uncharitablenesse is the greater for his owne reason because soules are more precious then bodies So that the great deluge of this transcendent uncharitablenesse to soules seemes to drowne all the former wâ—rks of charity to the body And indeed what instruction can a Latin Pater noâ—ter a Latin Creed a Latin Ave Maria a Latin Masse give to an ignorant soule It hath been to mee a spectacle of compassion when beyond the Seas in some principall City I have met with a poore Popish soule that spake some of these her devotions in that which was thought to be Latin but could not bee understood to bee Latin by those who knew that language much lesse by the party that knew it not what instruction can these words give to the ignorant which the ignorant know not This is not to take away ignorance but to add new ignorance to the old And surely they need not to send men to compasse sea and land to convert Infidels abroad untill they have converted their ignorant unbeleevers at home for if they make no better Christians abroad then they leave thousands at home it is but to pollute that glorious Name wherewith wee are called and to put the name of Christians on those that know not Christ. Now that Rome is this cruell Stepmother whose children thus lye swowning dying in the streets for hunger though our eies have seen it let Romish words speak it Let us hear their great Jesuit Navarre setting forth the ignorance of the Romish Church as her shame whereas the Cavalier sets forth the Instruction of the ignorant as her glory Hee sins mortally saith he who being come to the judgement of reason neglects explicitely and particularly to know the second Person of the Trinity that is That the Sonne of God the Father was made man was born and dyed c. And he that is ignorant of other Articles of the Creed at least those which the Church doth solemnize by Festivall dayes c. Wherefore we desire all Curates Godfathers Parents Confessors especially of the common people and all Preachers of Gods Word that they will not cease to inculcate this particular and explicite faith of these Articles and of those other which are contained in the Apostles Creed which the holy Church of Rome doth use For in the whole Church of Christ there is so great negligence about these that every where you shall finde many that beleeve no more explicitely and in particular of these then an heathen Philosopher endued onely with the naturall knowledge of one true God And now if the Reader withdraw this painted and deceitfull curtaine that seemes to represent a Heaven sprinkled with the Starres of seeming good works and looke into the Hell of Romish uncharitablenesse whereof a small but true modell was represented in the former Chapter Or if he see it not there he will look into the Inquisition House and there behold it set forth to life or rather to death in severall torments I doubt not but this pleasant image will soon be frighted out of his Imagination by the terrible shape of Rome appearing all bloudy and drunken with the bloud of the saints And so the improbability of Romish uncharitablenesse to Protestants will vanish away like a fantasie and a Poeticall fable And indeed if the Pharisee notwithstanding his tyth-paying and fasting went away condemned because proudly and uncharitably hee despised and damned the Publicane though hee did neither imprison noâ— burne him how shall Rome escape this condemnation which both despiseth and damneth and imprisoneth and tortureth and burneth Protestants whom shee accounteth worse then Publicans and Heathens And thus though the Cavaliers words may bee true that At the first sight it is wholly improbable that Rome is uncharitable yet at the second sight it is more then probale because it is proved This Chapter is almost ended but before the end of it the Champion shoots an arrow like a Parthian flying even then to hurt us when hee seemes to looke from hurting us Hee would seeme to spare Protestants in not recriminating yet in naming this not recriminating hee did not spare us but indeed hee did spare himselfe most in not urging it more for wee have such proofs of Protestant charity as may shame his Recrimination For they are ready to bee brought forth against a Recriminator and may binde his Recrimination as a crown to the head of the Protestants And when a catalogue of them is brought forth wee may boldly say and that not without Recrimination to Romists that
maintenance of foure Popish grounds First The perpetuall visibility of the Church of Rome Secondly The absolute authority of this Church in judging controversies Thirdly The Inerrability of this judgement Fourthly a Necessity of submission thereunto whereby their imaginary unity is produced I Might here bee at rest for this Chapter but that this Champion besides two impertinent places one of which speaks of unity of Affection and a second of the unity of Spirit in the bond of Peace brings forth a third even the often answered place of S. Matth. which hee perverts to divers ill uses whereof this imaginary Popish unity is one For hee assayes hereby to prove the Church to be the judge of controversies to prove her visibility to prove her inerrability and thereupon he thinkes presently should follow an unity First to remove the stumbling blocke of visibility for which the Author went out of his owne way that hee might lay it in ours I answer That this Text may teach what is to bee done where there is a Church as commonly there is where there is a Brother and a Brother but it doth not teach that there shall be a Church visible in all places and at all times But notwithstanding this text a Church may be visible sometimes in one Nation and somtimes in another according to the fruitfulnesse of the people and the just pleasure of God who sometimes removeth the Gospell and the Candlesticke from a Nation that bears no fruit to another that shall beare it And so wee see that there are no Churches now to be seene where there have beene famous Churches in times past Accordingly the Church may be visible in Greece in AEthiopia in Armenia yea in England though it be not visible in Rome and so the visibility thereof may bee true though there were no Rome and no Pope So that neither this nor any other text though they say the Church is visible yet they doe not say that Rome or the Pope shall still be the visible Church but contrarily the Scripture giveth us good hope that Rome shall be invisible yea it gives us great proofe that shee is now the Scarlet Lady that persecutes the Church and is now the Mother of abominations Secondly no Scripture doth say that in time of persecution or prevailing Heresie the Church shall there bee visible where this persecution drives it into corners that it may escape the fury of it by a kinde of invisibility And when the Arian heresie had covered the face of the Earth and the Roman Bishops or Pope had subscribed to it this Scripture doth not say that then the Pope or his Adhaerents were the visible Church nor that they shall be so when the Pope turnes Antichrist For the second point that the Church is the judge of controversies I could perchance say that there appeares very probable reasons why this text doth not speak of the Churches authority in judging of controversies of faith but of her authority in admonishing her children and requiring reconciliation satisfaction from one brother to another in evident wrongs even faults without controversie For the text saith If thy Brother sinne or trespasse against thee go and tell him his fault So that there is a sinne and a fault without controversie and such a fault that the offended Brother himselfe may first judge and tell him of it that hath offended And according to this beginning may bee the proceeding that is that the two witnesses and so the Church may be not to judge of the fault whether it bee a fault or no but to witnesse and condemne the contumacy of the party in denying satisfaction and reconciliation after an evident fault And when the offending Brother will not heare the Church thus admonishing perswading and injoyning him satisfaction and reconciliation then hee is to bee cast out of that Church which hee hath thus contumaciously disobeyed Agreeable to that of S. Paul If any man obey not our word have no company with him But be it that the Church be the judge of controversies this also may bee true in Russian AEthiopian and Protestant Churches And so the Church may judge controversies though there were no Pope and where the Pope hath no power Besides the Romists themselves differ concerning the meaning of the word Church So that while wee labour in this text to finde a Judge of controversies for reconciling them wee are left unreconciled by being at controversie about the Judge of controversies mentioned in this text For some say the multitude is this Church and they have for them the most usuall acception of the word Church in that sense through the new Testament And the current of the place seems to him that way according to proportion For first the offended Brother alone was to admonish his Brother and next with one or two witnesses and lastly hee was to be admonished by the congregation So it is a doctrine of degrees from one to two and from two to many And if it be thus then the Popes power of judging controversies hath no footing here But thirdly and so withall to include and resolve the question of inerrability If the Prelates be meant by the Church which Lorca saith is the most usuall opinion amongst Romists yet doth not this place say that Romish Prelates shall have still an unerring judgement in controversies especially any single Prelate as the Pope Againe it can hardly bee thought that when a Brother hath offended a Brother this text would have him presently to call a Councell or Synod of Prelates and so complaine to many Prelates at once and so to the Church But if it be his owne Prelate of whom hee must aske doth this place promise that no Prelate shall erre in judgeing of controversies it is well known that in the Jewish Church which was undeniably the true Church before Christ Priests did not judge controversies without errour Yea God Himselfe complaineth of the contrary when he saith The Priests lippes should preserve knowledge and they should seeke the Law out of his mouth for hee is the messenger of the Lord of Hostes But Ye are departed out of the way Yee have caused many to stumble at the law Yee have corrupted the Covenant of Levi. Accordingly wee finde in the Prophets a continuall out-cry upon the Priests for mis-leading the people yea the Priests are chiefe in false judgements and injuries of the true Prophets Accordingly Pashar both prophecied lies and did cast Ieremy into the stockes for prophecying truth yea the High Priest himselfe falsly judgeth Christ to have spoken blasphemy And S. Peter tells the High Priest and his associates that they were the builders that despised the Corner stone and crucified Christ. And thus wee see it plaine in the Scripture that the Priests and Prelates did erre even when our Author ascribes that inerrability to them by which hee would prove the inerrability of Rome yea we see farther that
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
not white that hath but a few white haires on him they thought they might say the Church of Rome was the Synagogue of Satan and not a true Church because there is such a multitude of Ignorants Antichristians and Idolaters and so few true worshippers and beleevers But bee it that the Church of Rome being understood in this wide sense wherein it comprehends all that any way looke toward Rome in regard that there was once sowed good corne in it and some of it comes up in some corners of it shal be called a field of corne from that which is most excellent in it surely it concernes Protestants wisely to mannage their unity with it and the division from it When we pursue the unity of charity wee must take heed that we lose not saving verity and when we pursue saving verity we must take heed that we offend not against charity we must so converse with that Church as with a City overcome with the plague we should be very wary of infection in regard of the universall pestilence of it and if we may chuse some places and company that are healthy But from those that live the life of Grace though never so few affection may not be with-drawne but to them belongs both our pity and prayers Yet while we extend our charity to them let us take heede that wee lose not our selves and that our charity doe not swallow up verity and make great sinnes too small nor allow too easie a communion betweene Christ and Beliall nor make salvation larger then the Scripture doth make it For first the Beleevers in the Papacy which make the Papall Church are by their humane faith infected to death except there be a healing of their errour by repentance These are Idolaters for worshipping the Pope and making him their God and rock of their faith Neither will it excuse them that they beleeve what they professe for the more they beleeve by this carnall killing faith the more they are slaine and the deeper they are in damnation Secondly there are worshippers of Images and consecrated bread which are Idolaters in the common and knowne sense of Idolatry And the common sort are exceedingly possessed with this Idolatry and slaine to death with it and I doubt it will bee a difficult matter to save many of the Doctors whom this plague hath infected For though they beleeve this Idolatry which they pofesse to be lawfull yet Idolatry hath beene damnable to many which both thus professed and beleeved it Yea they that beleeve and trust in Idols are the more damnable for thus beleeving Besides many places of Scripture shew that saving grace and the true feare of God doth not commonly dwell especially with dwelling and raigning Idolatry For Grace doth commonly turne out such grosse sinnes when it enters into the soule and accordingly Saint Paul describes the conversion of the Thessalonians to bee a turning from Idols to the living God 1 Thes. 1.9 And so some of the Corinthians were Idolaters but they were washed by regeneration 1. Cor. 6. so that they are not now that which they were before I would have charity to save as many as she might but I know shee cannot save them truly without verity Now the verities of Scriptures seeme to withstand the easie and ordinary salvation of Idolaters and I am sure have made it damnable to many who beleeved it to bee the worship of God and therefore they should be cleered before charity can know that shee hath her desire in true saving of Idolaters And this I propose not to increase damnation which I abhorre in my opposite the Romish Champion but to increase salvation even to save some with compassion by pulling them out of the fire prepared for Idolaters and to save others from falling into it To this end let us behold in the Scripture of truth how Idolatry though professed and beleeved yea though mixt with some knowledge yea seeming feare or service of God hath drawne the wrath of God upon Idolators Israel to whom were anciently given the Promises and newly the Law while Moses was in the Mount made a god of Gold but in that worshiped the God that brought them out of Egypt and proclaimed a feast to him and we finde that presently Gods wrath was ready to wax hot against them to consume them yea though Moses was the meekest man on Earth yet his meeknesse was so incensed against this sinne and these sinners that hee commands every man to slay his Brother Companion and Neighbour And when hee goes to God for a pardon hee doth it not with an extenuation but an aggravation of this sin For hee saith Oh this people have sinned a great sin and have made them gods of Gold He doth not tell God that it is a veniall or not damnable sin or that their breeding in Egypt might excuse them the cause that made them beleeve that which they here act and professe That an oxe which eateth grasse might represent the Deity and bee worshipped for it But laying aside all excuses and extenuations he calls it a great sinne and thinkes that a blotting out of Gods booke belonged to this sinne and therefore hee offers his owne soule to this punishment for their ransome But behold how fatall a sentence God pronounceth on the sinners of this sinne so shewing it to be damnable Him that sinneth will I blot out of my book and it presently followeth In the day wherein I visit will I visit their sinne upon them Againe in a chapter nearly following this Idolatry wherein Moses is earnest with God for a pardon and God seemes to be so farre intreated as to lead them by his Angell to Canaan yet is he still so strange to them that he calls them still not his own people but the people of Moses Thy people and the people amongst whom thou art But withall hee injoynes them to destroy the Altars of Idolaters to breake downe their Images and to worship no other God and let the reason be observed for it is highly observable For the Lord whose name is Iealous is a jealous God Surely this Jealousie of God is not sufficiently considered by those that are over easie favourable to Idolatry They consider not duly the Nature of Jealousie nor the height breadth of a Jealousie of an Almighty God nor that it is so inward and essentiall in God that it is as it were God himselfe For his name saith hee is Iealous Now Iealousie is the rage of a Man and a man saith Salomon thus enraged will not spare in the day of vengeance What then is the jealousie of God but the wrath of God and what is God when hee is angry but a consuming fire And such hee testifies himselfe to be particularly against this sinne Jealousie in a man may passe by many faults in his wife but it will not indure Adultery for Adultery causeth a divorce which
many other crimes doe not accordingly God often calls Idolatry by the name of Adultery and thereupon threatens a divorce to his people And in that commandement alone which forbids this Spirituall Adultery doth God onely mention his Jealousie Againe if a man be jealous let a stranger be never so like him his jealousie will not suffer his wife to love that stranger as himselfe yea he will not indure it though shee say it is for his sake and for likenesse to to her Husband How much more should the jealousie of God arise when his worship is given to things infinitely inferior to himselfe and so farre below that it is a kinde of blasphemy to name them in a comparison Accordingly God casts it off with a scornefull indignation To whom will yee liken God If this jealousie of God could not indure that Dagon should stand in one place with the Arke shall we thinke that the same jealousie will indure an Idol to dwell quietly with him in the soule of that man which is truly the Temple of God What agreement saith S. Paul hath the Temple of God with Idols For yee are the Temple of the living God And if Saint Paul aske this question as if it could not receive an answer How dare men to answer this question at least with such facility to dissolve it how dare they say Yes S. Paul It hath beene seene very generally that the Temple of God even ignorant Christians have had agreement with Idols for if Christians knew not but that the Idols ought to bee worshipped with divine worship they beleeving this might give divine worship to idols and this Idolatry is not damnable Surely if such an answer may thus get safe passage through this Text by some narrow way to make Idolatry to agree with God and salvation doubtlesse it seemes by Saint Pauls question the common and ordinary relation between them is disagreement and there is some great difficulty or some great rarity in this agreement And this great danger and difficulty should bee greatly pressed at least not lesse then the narrow way of escaping And indeed to expresse this danger and difficulty is my businesse at this time and for a further expression of it let the words of Iosua bee considered Yee cannot serve the Lord for hee is an holy and a jealous God Hee will not forgive your transgressions and sinnes except yee put away the strange gods which are among you I might add from many places of Scriptures That they who feared the Lord and served their own gods did not feare the Lord. And in the daies of good Iosiah God would Cut off those that worship and sweare by the Lord and sweare by Malcam And that Idolatry is generally clothed in Scripture with the title of Abomination and it is not easie nor usuall with God to dwell with Abomination But referring the Reader to his owne reading I conclude with that piercing and affrighting speech of Saint Paul There is a brother and it is a weake brother and this brother out of his weaknesse eates things sacrificed unto Idols with conscience of religious honour of the Idols the same weake brother seeing a strong brother eating in the Temple of Idols is strengthened in his making conscience and giving honour and worship to the Idoll and yet of this weake brother Saint Paul saith that Hee perisheth No doubt this weake brother making conscience of the Idoll beleeved this honour which his conscience gave to the Idoll was due and lawfull yea he beleeved it the more as Saint Paul saith by seeing a strong brother in the Idols Temple whom hee thought to have made the same conscience of the Idoll yet this brother for whom Christ dyed thus weake thus beleeving and upon such a tentation if wee beleeve Saint Paul perisheth by this Idolatry There is yet a third dangerous yea deadly infection of Rome in the Idolatry of Merits of which soules should bee wary for generally those merits are by by them made Saviours while they think that they are able to justifie or stand in judgement before Gods Justice and that they deserve life eternall yet Christ Jesus who is God blessed for ever could onely performe such merits for mankinde As for us when wee speake most of our good works Let us say with that holy man Remember me O Lord concerning this and spare mee according to the multitude of thy mercy and then put this clause to it from our Saviour When wee have done all wee are unprofitable servants Let not this Idolatry seeme small to us which the chiefe of them dare not maintaine when they dye though the Papall profit makes it pleasant whilest they live But let it bee as one of the botches of Egypt which kill the soules of thousands with death eternall Thus have wee seene errors deadly and damnable to many that professed them in the Church of Rome and beleeved what they professed wherefore the safest way by which charity joyned to verity may more clearly save some in this Church is to finde some that are cleare from these errors And these being produced may serve for patternes to others to drive them from these errors And accordingly it is possible to find some within the Romish territories that have been cleer from these Idolatries yea some that have beene Teachers and Writers and no doubt they have begotten some Auditors and Readers like to themselves And first for the killing error of making the Pope or his Church the god and utmost foundation of faith there are not a few of the late Writers as Lorca tels us that wholly deny it The authority and testimony of the Church doth nothing pertain to the assent of faith neither as part of the object nor as a condition without which faith cannot bee which opinion of Canus not a few of the later men doe imbrace to this hee adds which was the opinion of Calvin And to make this yet more cleer that often objected place of S. Augustine I would not beleeve the Gospel except the authority of the Church did move mee Lorca saith Canus Calvin answer with the very same words That Augustine meant nothing in this sentence but that the Church is an apt beginning and as it were an introduction by which a man wholly ignorant of the faith is fitly led unto it but not that the Church should bee the reason of beleeving for that is Because God speaks in the Scripture and it is an infallible instrument of the divine Testimony And Lorca afterwards affirmes That the resolution of this question Why you beleeve is lastly and directly resolved into the testimony of God and this is the adaequate reason of beleeving Because God saith it Thus are there some and not a few of the Church of Rome as Lorca tels us that avoid the shipwrack of soules which is visually suffered by faith in the Pope or testimony of man even
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
a more full spectacle of them which may serve to prove that disunion which hee goes about to confute and to confute that union which hee goes about to prove SECT II. Wherein severall heads and springs of division amongst the Papists are opened 1. The controverted Supremacie of the Pope or Councels 2. Their affected ambiguity in deciding controversies 3. The great number of Questions purposely left undecided 4. The opposition betwixt the Preachers and publick Professors of that Church IN the view of this division wee may first take notice That there is an opposition and division even betweene this supposititious Head of unity and his members and even in this radicall and head-point Whether hee be the Head of unity or not for the Head is divided from much of the Body and the Body within it selfe even about the Head The Pope hee will bee above the Councell and the Councell is thought by many to bee above the Pope And this hath beene decided by Councels and by them the Councell was set above the Pope which indeed agrees much better with the Councell in the Acts and with Saint Paul to the Ephesians lately alledged yea it was made hereticall to deny this Supremacy of the Councell above the Pope And if that the Head of unity bee divided into two how can two Heads bring men onenesse yea how can two Heads but divide the Church into two Bodies It is an undeniable truth That two Masters opposing each other can never cause unity in their servants he that is at unity with some fellow-servants by cleaving to the one Master is at division with others that cleave to the other And they that maâ—e the Councell the Head and root of unity as the Councell of Constance and Basil and many that followed them especially in France how must they not needs differ from those that make the Pope to be Head and Lord of unity by a controlling power over the Councell And accordingly in those points which the Councell decreeth as by a supreme power and the Pope againe dissolves as by a supreme power how can Romists be at unity that are divided in the different beliefes of these two Supremacies Even in that point resolved in Basil That it is hereticall to beleeve the Pope not to be subject to the Councell how is it possible that Romists should bee at unity of whom a part beleeves and a part beleeves it not yea each seeme Hereticks thereby unto the other And thus if in the roote of unity there bee division how great is this division and who can shew how ever this division can bee reconciled by Romists For if there be a free Councell no doubt such a Councell will decree the Pope to be subject to it as they have good reason from Scripture and Antiquity But if the Pope be free and may command the Councell who can expect but that the Pope shall judge for himselfe and subject Councels to his headship and infallibility Behold the great Citie divided into great parts and division growing even from their roote of unity Againe many members of this Head of unity are at division about the Popes earthly Supremacy some hold that hee may onely excommunicate Kings and then can doe no more his power being meerly spirituall others hold that after excommunication hee can depose Kings yea cause their subjects to kill them a weighty controversie and hardly to be decided amongst Papists but onely by the unity of Kings agreeing together to depose Popes Againe in some things hee takes power to dispense and in the same things his Doctors say he hath not power to dispense A paterne of which opposition we may plainly and actually see in the Popes Bull of Dispensation to Henry the eighth for marrying his Brothers wife and the Testimonies under Universitie Seales of the Doctors denying him the power of this Dispensation These and the like questions concerning the power of this Head of unity make division betweene the Head and members and make division betweene the members themselves Secondly wee see divisions doe againe arise from this Head of unity because this Head leaves many things of controversie so doubtfully decided in Councels that their very decisions breed controversies And what unity is to be expected from such a Head who by decisions gives occasion of dissentions and leaves division when he sits of purpose in his Chaire under pretence of making unity So wee know Vega and Catharinus against Soto and upon the Popes Decree in the Councell of Trent entred into mighty Controversies and no wonder for it was a speciall craft in that Councell to use such generall words as might be large enough to hold two differing opinions in them and so leave the controversies not reconciled but still at liberty and distance And now againe where is that vaine shift or rather blasphemous abuse of Scripture in saying that Papists by submission to the Popes Church doe captivate themselves to the obedience of Faith and so keepe unity when the Pope having judged and they submitting to his judgement are yet in division What is this but by submitting to their meanes of unity to be still at division If the Head of unity by deciding make division how endlesse and incurable is that division Thirdly This Head of unity leaves divers controversies wholly undecided so that as it hath not been untold by some of his owne hee doth as it were leave strife and division to them In their Schoole writers bee farre more differences then disputations because divers in one disputation and perchance in one neere a thousand disputations yea in some points foure of five severall opinions each confuting one another and these not of light matters only but of many if not of all the Cavaliers prime points The catholick Church Justification of soules Communion of Saints Purgatory Indulgences Yea Doctor Iohn White in his way to the true Church Digr 24. undertaketh to demonstrate that there is no one point denied or affirmed against us wherein Papists doe not vary amongst themselves and of these differences he gives there divers patternes And many more are to bee seene in Bishop Mortons catholick Apologie And this division hath bin so deadly that we read that the Dominicans have charged the Franciscans with heresie and the Franciscans at length had the burning of foure Dominicans Let us hear a strong Dominican and a cathedrall Professor describing the differences of these Romists even to the charging one another with heresie It often fals out that one Divine doth most constantly affirm that he hath a Theologicall demonstration for some point of doctrine and that hee deduceth it by evident consequence from the sacred Scriptures and the traditions of the Fathers But then another on the contrary doth most certainly affirme that hee hath a Theologicall demonstration that this is heresie and an error in faith and that the contrary is deduced from scriptures by evident consequence Hence he saith of the
first there hath beene shewed a sore called difference in points defined and points de fide And by the Authors rule they that hold any one point of faith contrary to Romish definition are not of Romish faith nor Church therefore if they bee of a divers faith or Church their Altar is against the Romish Altar Secondly for their peace notwithstanding these differences I dâ—sire to know whether that should be called peace when a Dominican is burned by Franciscans and a Canon in Sevill is condemned as an Heretick for a point either not defined or defined for him by the second Councell of Nice And againe what peace is that betweene the Priests and Jesuits when the Priests call them Hereticks Traytors c. Surely hereby it seemes the peace that is among such is but a warre under the name of peace and this name or title is forced by feare of the forged but fiery and burning head of unity for even the infernall kingdome it selfe hath some bond of unity though not of verity and charity And accordingly the Papacy agreeth under a head called Abaddon and Apollyon And indeede this Author himselfe hath shewed us that where there is a difference in any point of faith upon such a difference one should be to another as Cerinthus to Saint Iohn So that if they hold communion still it seemes by his rule it is not a spirituall but a carnall communion not a communion of Saints but a communion that is faulty and whose fault is this that it is a communion But I say againe to this Author that his owne Answer will be turned against him as an unanswerable objection For if Romists being at such differences in opinions can yet hold communion one with another why do they not hold the like communion with other Christians that maintaine the like differences But herein lies a mystery and it is the mysterie of iniquity And if the Reader know it not I will bring him one that shall teach him Lorca plainly tels him that he is no heretick that beleeves contrary to any Article of faith so he do not rebell against the Church So the Pope the Church vertuall is the whole matter of Popish religion and Popish unity Beleeve the Pope and obey him in what hee saith upon his word and though you beleeve not Christs word in any Article of faith you have both faith and unity Disobey Christs command of beleeving the very Article of Christs Incarnation if you beleeve the Pope and bee the Popes good subject you shall not be an heretick Accordingly it is said of the Divines of Coleine they held an hereticall opinion in that point which the Cavalier magnifies by calling it the Justification of souls yet they were not hereticks but godly Catholicks And of Catharinus he held contrary to the Councell in the point of assurance yet was a catholick Bishop And others before named by Bellarmine contrary to the Councell of Nice in the point of Image-worship yet in being good Papists they are good Catholicks So the Pope is the summe of Popish religion and unity And is it our unhappinesse that because we beleeve not in the Pope but beleeve in Christ our beliefe in Christ will not serve our turn for religion unity and salvation But now in his Answer to the second objection somewhat like a right Cavalier of Rome he runs at Tilt against Calvin and thus he breaks his Lance on him The next objection is yet more stupid then the former and I wonder how Calvins rage against the Church could put him so farre out of his wits as that hee would ever take it into his mouth For it is hee who being pricked with our noting their want of unity towards their fellow Brethren thinks to retort it back upon us by saying that wee are not in case to object any such thing against them for asmuch as that forsooth wee have as many Sects among us as we have severall Orders of religious men and then hee reckons up Benedictines Carmelites Dominicans Franciscans and whom he will Wicked man who well knew that none of these holy Orders doth differ in any point of doctrine from any of the rest and are so farre from breaking communion with them as that still they prevent one another in all honour and good respect All this wee must take upon his bare word and his title also which he giveth to Calvin wicked Calvin yet well fare the honest Belgicks purgers for when Calvin was named they in stead of Calvin did put in studiosus so upon the matter they called him not wicked but studious Calvin But why wicked Calvin because he knew that no one of those Orders doth differ in any point of doctrine Did Calvin know this or doth any man yea the Author himselfe yet know it We come but now from the differences of Jesuites and Priests Dominicans and Franciscans c. And this Authour himselfe confesseth there that each opposeth the contrary opinion by all arguments that occurre Besides it is no new nor strange objection that divers covents have their severall Masters whom they follow Againe look on the Jesuites doctrine of killing Kings doe all Friers agree in these doctrines upon which much more justly may be cryed out wicked Mariana wicked Friar Clement wicked Barradius wicked Garnet doctrines in my opinion plainly contrary to the faith since the faith is plainly taught by the Scripture in this point And I think more hereticall it is to deny and contradict such a point being thus plainely taught in the Scripture by David Solomon Peter and Paul then to deny what the Pope hath decided by letters sent from Rome unto Trent But will you see this Authors ingenuity hee accuseth Calvin but produceth not the place whence hee taketh his accusation the neerest place that I finde is not for the Authors purpose for there Calvin retorts not the want of unity of faith among the Friars by the diversity of Sects among them But Calvin shewes That the Friars by dividing themselves from others in the Sacraments and publick Assemblies did dissolve the Communion of the Church and depart from it and excommunicate themselves And he saies that so many Ministeries as there be of this kinde so many Assemblies of schismaticks he saies not hereticks as differing in faith which troubling the Order of the Church are cut off from the lawfull fellowship of the faithfull And that this departing should not bee secret they have given to themselves divers names of Sects Neither were they ashamed to boast of that which S. Paul doth so much detest In stead of Christians wee heare some called Benedictines some Franciscans some Dominicans So that here we find neither mention of Carmelites nor indeed of differing in points of faith but of a schismaticall separation from other Christians by different sects expressed by different names And to them hee might have added Jesuits who by a more neer separation have
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
the truth and beleeves it being seene As for their unlearned who walke most in the darke though sometimes it may happen two blinde men may stumble upon one path yet it is impossible but that mostly they must differ in their opinions concerning that which they know not And whereas our Author would faine make these differences to be an agreement by a resolution to beleeve what the Church teaches we have already shewed that this resolution doth no way make thē actually to agree that actually do disagree And the Canon of Sivill I think would scarcely have beleeved the Inquisitors if they had told him Wee agree with you about Image-worship because we both resolve to beleeve as the Church teacheth though we condemne you for an Heretick because wee doe not agree And indeede there is no possibility of making an actuall agreement in those lesser points because of the different capacities and degrees of faith And God in the Scripture hath not promised such an actuall agreement to all the members of the Church in all lesser points of doctrine for he hath not promised a full and uniforme discovery of them to all Yea it hath been shewed out of your owne great Doctor Stapleton by a Roman Catholick that in the discovery of small points the Church is not infallibly directed And even therefore I conceive that this distinction was first framed to give leave for that difference which necessarily followeth humane ignorance and which even by the Cavaliers confession cannot be avoided in different capacities and measures of faith And yet having acknowledged such a necessity of this distinction he both labours to deny the differences on his owne side for which this distinction was necessarily made and which the very making of it doth acknowledge and hee labours to accuse our differences which this distinction would excuse as well as his owne So it is still a sword against Romists to confound them whilest they deny their owne differences neither can the forge of Rome ever turne it to a Buckler to defend them in this deniall But it is a Buckler to us to defend us from their objecting of differences against us seeing this distinction doth both acknowledge a necessity of some lesser differences and so excuseth us And thus may wee come to a sight of the unity of faith in the Church For in the explicites that is in fundamentalls of absolute necessitie which knit unto Christ the foundation there is and ought to be an unity and this substantiall unity may cover the incurable differences in the lesser implicite points being held by Infirmity and not with Contention Scandall and Schisme For unity in fundamentalls doth take away the damning censure of differences in lesser points when there is a will of beleeving right in these points but a want of power to attaine this beliefe And so these differences in lesser points not being put upon account for the will of unity in them and for the reall unity in fundamentalls this reall unity in fundamentalls is accounted an entire or at least a solid and saving unity So that the unity is not to be reckoned from this that all doe actually agree in this beliefe of all lesser points for in divers of these points divers doe necessarily differ but because their unity in fundamentalls and a will of unity in these lesser points wherein they differ the imputation of smaller differences being thus taken away are accounted to them for an entire or at least for a sufficient unity And this truth is in not much unlike Tearmes to bee seene in Tertullian Regula quidem fidei una omninò est sola immobilis irreformabilis credendi scilicet in unicum Deum omnipotentem mundi conditorem Filium ejus Iesum Christum c. But hereof more must bee said in the following Chapters wherin the Author brings us to fundamentalls being himselfe indeed necessarily brought to them by this former distinction of Explicites and Implicites yet hee goes about to fight against that unity which is established by this distinction and against the distinction which himselfe hath established and so will bee accounted a Trespasser by destroying what hee hath built but indeede this distinction being resisted by him will resist and overthrow him In the meane time this stands still firme and unremoved That the Romists have great sharp and weighty differences among them as weighty if not farre weightier then Protestants and therefore they want charity to Protestants in damning Protestants for such differences while for the like or greater differences even de fide they are bountifull to give salvation each to other and this they doe because they are servants of one Master the Pope whose service wee wanting should indeed be no more hated for this freedome then Israel for being delivered out of the bondage of Egypt Yet both then and now wee see the Egyptians make after us with violence and malice hating us for no other fault but for our freedome from Egypt But God that then beganne and after made good his worke of deliverance I hope will do it also for us and he will be above them even in that wherein they were proud above us and cover the Sea of Rome the mother of uncharitablenesse with a Sea of confusion CHAP. X. Containing an answer to the Cavaliers eighth Chapter wherein he quarrells at the distinction of Fundamentall and not Fundamentall and is divided into three Sections SECT I. First Sheweth the Protestants separation from Rome to bee reasonable though it bee true that some in the Church of Rome may bee saved Secondly That the Papists are the faulty causes of that separation A City generally infected with the plague and a few persons onely being free will it bee thought a reasonable question to bee proposed to some that flye from this City Why doe yee flye since you know and acknowledge that all are not infected to death but some live in this City But if the King of that Citie should banish all that should say that the Plague were in the Citie yea would put them to death were it not yet a farre more unreasonable question to aske those who had given out such a report Why doe you flye that are banished and Why doe you flye that must die if you flye not Yet such are the questions of this Author in the head of this Chapter of which it seemes that the repetition might serve for a confutation It is the acknowledgement and complaint of a sonne of the Church of Rome The chiefe cause of the calamitie of the Church is to bee ascribed unto them who being puff'd up with the vaine pride of Ecclesiasticall power have proudly and contemptuously despised and driven away those who rightly and modestly admonished them c. And againe Those who speake to them of amendment that exhort them to bee healed yea that offer their helpe to effect it they not only cast out and drive from the fellowship
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
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
the point then the Chapter hath been hitherto to the Title You say there are great differences between the Protestants and you about the understanding of the Article of the descent of Christ into Hell and the other of the holy Catholick Church and the Communion of Saints c. But what doe you here talk of differences in understanding fundamentals where the present question is Whether the Protestants doe acknowledge their fundamentalls to bee contained in the Creed For if Protestants declare that their fundamentals are contained in the Creed then your Title is gone which saith That they do not nor dare not declare them And surely it will aske a greater strength and a farre bigger volume then Charity mistaken to prove that Protestants doe not rightly understand the Articles of the Creed But secondly the Authours objection is grounded not onely upon a new but upon a false supposition if his fellow Romists may bee Judges For his supposed proposition is this That all the Articles in the Creed are Fundamentall Now this is different from the first proposall of our opinion That all fundamentall Articles are in the Creed It is also denied by his owne fellowes For though all fundamentall Articles be there yet they say that some Articles that are there may not bee fundamentall or explicitely to be known upon losse of salvation as before hath been shewed out of Vasquez and Azorius Therefore to stand upon a different understanding of those Articles which are denied by your owne men to bee Explicites or doubted is besides the matter But thirdly Do we differ from you in understanding those points What is that to the point undertaken in the end of the last Chapter and promised to be shewed in this That wee differ among our selves in the number of Fundamentalls You are now gone â—â—om our ridiculousnesse by differing in the number of fundamentalls and are come to a ridiculousnesse of your owne by your differing from us in the false understanding of some Articles of the Creed which all your owne Prophets doe not account Fundamentals But you add It is to little purpose to know or confesse that the Creede containes all Fundamentals unlesse there were some certaine way to understand them right This is againe a ranging from shewing our differences among our selves or that wee have not these Fundamentals Yet I answer Wee have a certaine and the best way of understanding them right wee have a learned Ministery endued with gifts from on high which teacheth and preacheth these Fundamentals and the right meaning of them And the right meaning thus taught the Spirit in the hearers doth so discover and certifie the truth of them that the hearers see the Articles to bee Gods truth and not mans And accordingly their faith thus beleeving them resteth on God as the sole Foundation of their faith and this teaching of the Catholick Church wee use commend and allow But that The single Article of the holy Catholick Church should containe the reason of all our faith fundamentally seemes to mee an high kinde of Blasphemie And this blasphemous doctrine as wee have before shewed is the very spirit of Popery or Antichrist which sets up the Pope in Gods place and makes his beleevers truely Papists or Antichristians And this great offence and mysterie of iniquitie carryeth Papists by throngs into the Land of darknesse and into this secret of theirs the soules of the saved may not enter True it is that God useth the service of the Ministers or if you will of the Church in publishing the Articles of faith but no other Foundation of supernaturall faith there is but God himselfe though speaking by man unto man the Fundamentality of our faith passeth through man that is the instrument and resteth wholly upon God But saith hee If wee understand it otherwise the Scripture it selfe speakes of particular errours which are damnable in them by whom they are imbraced and yet they are not at all against any expresse Doctrine of the Creed As namely where Saint Paul calls it a Doctrine of Divels to forbid marriage and meates c. I answer first That the Authour hereby proves that which wee deny not and disproves not that which hee saith wee affirme For the point is not Whether there bee any damnable errours besides those that are against some expresse doctrine of the Creede But Whether there bee in the Creede those fundamentall points which being truely beleeved will cause unity with Christ the Head and unity with his Body the Church Other errours against other Truths in Scripture not fundamentall wee acknowledge there are many and proceeding from the Divell the Father of Lyes and in themselves damnable to such as hold not the true Foundation Christ Jesus by beleeving Fundamentals And it is to bee feared that such are many of those true Papists whose foundation is the Pope But otherwise they may bee rather damnable in themselves then actually damning to those who by infirmities hold them and by beleeving fundamentals are in Christ Jesus to whom there is no condemnation Secondly not onely Fathers in their Rules of faith but the Romists themselves doe not place the lawfulnesse of meates and marriage among their chiefe Heads of Christianitie or Explicites and Fundamentals and therefore this Authour doth ill require of us that which hee cannot obtaine of his fellowes Wherefore let him first make this objection against them and when hee hath their Answer then let him take it for us But being unhappily as well as impertinently fallen into the mention of these damnable errours hee saw that as soone as they were brought in they looked at least asquint on the Church of Rome and claymed kindred of her And therefore hee thought that there was need of an Apologie to put off this kindred and acquaintance Which by the way is not to bee understood of the chastity and fasts of the Catholick Church as Protestants doe most perversely affirme which knowes that those things are lawfull but that yet it is most gratefull to God when his servants for his love deprive themselves of those delâ—ghts But of the Heresies of the Manichâ—es as Saint Augustine doth expressely declare who forbad both marriage and meates as being abominable and impure through the institution thereof which they said was derived from a certaine second ill conditioned god of their owne making But this nor all the water in the Sea will wash away all the kindred betweene Romists and these errours For though Saint Augustine may apply this Prophecie to the Manichees yet may hee not also apply them to the Montanists Tertullian himselfe acknowledging that they have beene taxed out of this very place And if to the Montanists why not to those Romists who with Durandus maintaine a curse and so an impurity of flesh and cleannesse of fish who also forbid marriage to Priests which this place plainly condemneth And whereas this Authour talkes of voluntary deprivation it is certaine that
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
best is hee who by a fundamentall faith is built upon Christ the true foundation can never be damned by unbeleeving any Article of faith created and coined by the Pope a counterfeit foundation And here while the Authour doth quarrell with the poornesses of the Doctour not being able to maintaine a combate with his richâ—s it seemes hee doth it with a greater poornesse For what a poore quarrelling is it with the Doctour for saying That Papists will not let Protestants to bee saved though they beleeve the same Creed except they will beleeve the same Mathematicks and govern themselves by the same Kalendar when thiâ— Authour knowes his meaning and expressed it himselfe in the words nearly preceding That the Romane Church makes â—oyes fundamentalls And might not the Pharisees thus have taken a poore exception at our Saviour for saying that they strained Gnats whereas they strained not Gnats but payed the tythe of Mint and Cummin Besides he doth not say that it is really so done but premising this When every thing must be called Foundation wee shall never know where to stop where to consist If we should beleeve their Sacrificium incruentum their unbloudy sacrifice in the Masse if we did not beleeve their Sacrificium cruentum too that there was a power in that Church to sacrifice the bloud of Kings wee should be said to be defective in a fundamentall Article If we should admit their Metaphysickes their transcendent Transubstantiation and admit their Chimiques their Purgatory fires and their Mythologie and Poetry their apparitions of soules and spirits they would bind us to their Mathematicks too and they would not let us be saved except we would reforme our Almanackes to their ten daies and reforme our clockes to their foure and twenty houres for who can tell when there is an end of Articles of faith in an arbitrary and occasionall Religion So the Doctour only shewes how such an unlimited making of fundamentalls may goe on in a perpetuall procession it having already made things not so profitable as Clocks and Kalendars Articles of faith and points fundamentall Witnesse the Service in an unknowne tongue the Lords Supper without wine c. But the Cavalier fights in earnest with this supposition and tells us that Romists doe rather governe themselves with the lesse perfect Kalendar which now is used in this place Yea hee gives a morall of this their deed letting the world see thereby how willingly we can accommodate to them in all things which belong not meerly to Religion The controversie of Kalendars I leave to the Critickes of time to bee decided and rectified in their emendatione Temporum But the argument of accommodation taken from our Almanackes is retorted by a greater argument remembred in our Almanackes For when in them wee see the Papists Treason on the fifth of November wee are thereby put in mind that Papists doe not accommodate to Protestants in all things that belong not meerly to Religion For it is not meerly a matter of Religion for a King to sit in Parliament and yet the Papists would have accommodated him by blowing him up with powder thus sitting in Parliament But the Cavalier having thus spoken to ill effect to amend the matter brings not forth the Doctours words but his saying to this effect But that the Reader may be his owne guide and the Doctour the speaker of his owne effect and the Cavaliers faire carriage may more plainly appeare I will here confront the Doctours words with the Cavaliers The Doctours words are these Call not superedifications foundations nor call not the furniture of the house foundations call not ceremoniall and rituall things essentiall parts of Religion and of the worship of God otherwise then as they imply disobedience for obedience to lawfull authority is alwaies an essentiall part of Religion The Cavalier thus repeats him That difference in beliefe in points which are not very important is not to prejudice a mans salvation unlesse by not beleeving them hee commit a disobedience withall For saith he obedience indeed is of the essence of Religion I thinke that the Cavalier seeing his face in this glasse finds that it lookes red with blushing at the mis-reporting of the Doctour The Doctour speakes of ceremonies the Cavalier reports him speaking of differences in beliefe The Doctour speakes of ceremonies commanded by lawfull authority the Cavalier of points of faith commanded by the unlawfull authority of the Pope But if it please him to remember what hath been already told him That the Church much lesse the Pope hath an Inerrability in points of small importance and where she hath no Inerrability she hath no authority Again in respect of the different capacities of the hearers all are not capable of every little point and subtlety of faith and I thinke no Pope hath power to command his disciples to beleeve that which their capacity is not able to understand But lawfull Rites or Ceremonies not being points of faith but of action and being easie to bee understood the obedience to lawfull authority in them may more concerne the essence of Religion then obedience to the Pope in those small points of faith wherein the Pope hath no unerring power and no authority to make a lawfull command for the people doe not sinfully disobey where the Pope hath no lawfull authority to command The Author having thus lost his premisses and proofes yet goes on to a conclusion which cannot but be lost in the losse of his premisses so that his concluding inferences This shall serve for discharge both of what they object against our unity in faith and of what they alledge in the behalfe of theirs And I conceive that I have sufficiently secured these two maine grounds upon which this whole discourse is turned are but commendations of a false conception and of a discourse which is turned upon grounds over-turned For neither is his first ground sufficiently secured That there is but one true Faith and one true Religion and Church out of which there is no salvation the word Out being understood in the sense of the Authour that is That if a man be out of the faith professed in the Church in the least haire part or degree that there can bee to him no salvation Nor more secured is his second ground That Catholicks and Protestants cannot possibly be accounted of that one Religion Church and Faith For as it may be true that Protestants and all Catholickes doe not agree in every small title and mite of faith yet it is most true that true Catholickes and Protestants are so entirely of one saving Faith and Religion that they are also of one Church And from these Catholickes I desire not to exclude all of the Romane Diocesse But indeed Papists whose humane faith is grounded on the Pope as their foundation being ready to beleeve Idolatry Treason or whatsoever the Pope shall decree for a matter of faith these I know not how to account members with us
of that true Church whereof Christ is the Head They are not so truly Christians of Christ as Papists of the Pope But still I inferre that when the Authour hath his two grounds granted That if Protestants and Papists bee not of that one Church wherein is salvation yet Papists are uncharitable for damning Protestants who are of that Church wherein is salvation so that neither are his grounds sufficiently secured neither if they were are Papists secured sufficiently from uncharitablenesse But after his pretended sufficient securing of his grounds either by way of supererogation or because hee was not secure of his securing hee yet brings in more proofe that we are of two Religions And now for the finall proofe of this last point according even to their practice as well as ours Let my Reader but look upon the body of their Lawes made against us and especially upon the Preambles thereof wherein they plentifully shew how hatefull an opinion they have of our Church Let him looke upon the severall Acts of State which have issued from my Lords of the Councell Let him look upon the Proclamations which have beene made and published from time to time Let him looke upon the large Commissions which have beene granted to Pursuivants whereby that scumme of the world hath beene and is enabled both to ransome and ransack us at their pleasure Surely thus farre there is little said but that many of the late Traytours against the French King may take up for a proofe that they were not of one Religion with that King because against them there issued Acts of State Proclamations Messengers or Pursuivants though all of them perchance were not the scumme of the Countrey to apprehend and ransack them But hee goes farther Let him looke upon those speeches which have beene uttered in both Houses of Parliament not onely against Professours but even the Profession it selfe of our Religion and how his most excellent Majestie hath beene importuned by their petitions to add more weight to our miseries for thus it will easily bee scene how false how rotten how superstitious how idolatrous how detestable how damnable and even destructive of all truth and goodnesse they professe themselves to esteeme our Religion And in fine that wee carry such a marke of the Beast in our foreheads as must needs in their opinion shut up the gates of heaven against us and set open the gates of hell to devoure and swallow us up So that certainly wee are no more of one Church with them in their opinion then they are of one with us in ours Here indeed hee hath many good Epithites of Popery rotten superstitious idolatrous c. but I finde one great one wanting and that is trayterous for this Epithite had a great share in the Parliamentary Complaints and Accusations of Popery But to answer his many words in few because they were answered in that which last preceded wee deny not but that which wee call Popery and Papists call their Religion that is a beleeeving in the Pope and obeying of him commanding Idolatry Treason Rebellion and whatsoever else hee shall please to decree for a point of faith is a rotten superstitious idolatrous and traiterous Religion And of this it is truely said in the prayers of the fifth of November This their Religion is Rebellion their faith is faction their practice murdering of soules and bodies But yet wee charitably hope that there are some though two few who have not so bowed the knees of their soules to this Baal of Rome that they submit their soules and faiths to him in all his idolatrous and trayterous Doctrines Decrees and Commands but being rather in Rome then of Rome are Christs and not the Popes and therefore will heare Christs voice and not the Popes when the Popes voice is the voice of a stranger and an enemy to Christ. CHAP. XII Wherein the Cavaliers tenth and last Chapter is annihilated which hee calleth a Recapitulation SECT I. The totall of the Cavaliers many nothings is cast up in two short Conclusions contrary to all that which hee hath indeavoured to prove And some additionals to that totall examined viz. The false remedies of his impertinent feare lest Papists should grow in love with the civility of Protestants THe Cavalier having said many nothings in his former discourse hee now summes up these nothings which being never so many yet it is well knowne they can amount but to nothing Wherefore not to make this work tedious by unnecessary repetitions I referre the Reader to the former severall confutations and annihilations of the particulars out of which he would here frame this Recapitulation and insteed of the Authour 's not inferred but intruded Conclusion upon forlorne and vanishing premisses this Conclusion still stands right and strong for us that since there is but one true Church and one saving faith and the Protestants notwithstanding any of this Authours hollow answerable and answered objections from difference in Sacraments Traditions c. doe hold and beleeve this saving faith and so are the true Church the Papacie and adherents thereof professing a difference and division from them so farre as to bee of another Church and faith doe excommunicate themselves most heavily even to damnation And secondly The Protestants being the true Church the Romists separating themselves from us persecuting us and pronouncing damnation against us doe herein exceeding uncharitably while they cut off hate persecute and sentence unto hell and damnation the true Church even the living members of Christ Jesus For indeed Papists can never prove against us any change of the Foundation and therefore are uncharitable in damning those who are lively stones built on that onely Foundation and corner stone Christ Jesus But as if Rome were not enough uncharitable and though the Title seemed to tell us that the Cavalier would but have recapitulated his former uncharitable speeches yet hee breakes forth into new Capitulations and Incentives of uncharitablenesse He doubts yea seemes to bee grieved that some of the Romish Communion seeing the faire and just conversation of Protestants may grow into love with them and their Religion But let the Cavalier upon better consideration remember that this is not the great and most dangerous and suspicable fault of Popery that it is so in love with Civility that for it it neglects Religion but that Popery hath so mightily depraved and corrupted Religion that Popish Religion hath destroyed Civility and fairenesse of Nature So that whereas Religion should have advanced men beyond naturall candour and fairenesse Popish Religion hath destroyed this naturall fairenesse and made them worse then men whom true Religion would have lifted up above men unto Saints an evident mark that it is not a true but a false and foule Religion This appeareth plainely in those of the powder Treason divers of which were men of candid natures and ingenuous dispositions yet by Popish Religion turned out of nature made worse then themselves and brought
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.
the Pope otherwise to determine But whereas this Authour saith That the guilty consciences of Protestants make them not dare to punish Priests capitally as for a corrupt Religion I leave it to the wisdome of State to consider how farre such an imputation of guilt deserves to bee removed And let his owne fellowes weigh with themselves whether this Authour hath acted the part of a Cavalier both valiant and wise thus to provoke clemencie armed with power by putting the scandall and shame of guiltinesse upon it And whether hee hath not brought a kinde of necessitie of capitall punishments for the removing of his owne objection of guilt especially since they who thus provoke patient clemency to turne into severity have also already made smooth the way for it for they have plentifully proved That Idolatry should bee punished with death And the other halfe have the Protestants mightily and inevitably evicted That right or very Popery is right Idolatry And now what hinders but that this Authour may have his desired conclusion of capitall punishment for an Idolatrous Religion and not onely for Treason But as here his valour was inconsiderate so now his inconsideration is valiant For not weighing the Treasons of Priests nor indeed the reasons by which they have approved the Justice of Lawes made against them this Authour in a blind hardinesse to his owne shame doth accuse Protestants of Impudence and Falsehood For that many Priests have been actuall Traitors our Chronicles too plentifully shew and their owne Pens have witnessed to the world the justice of our Lawes even against those Priests who have not bin taken in actuall Treason And now that this Authour may help us as hee usually doth towards his owne confutation hee giveth us a sentence that is a sword for the slaying of his owne Charity Mistaken His words are these As the Catholick Church is most perfectly charitable so withall shee thinkes shee cannot expresse the vertue better then by clearely distinguishing betweene truth and falshood and by exhorting men to imbrace the one and to avoid the other so far off is she from demeriting by letting Protestants know that if they dye impenitent in that Religion they lose their soules Here is that truth which I told him long since and which hath already served to overthrow a great part of his former discourse That Charity cannot be better expressed then by clearly distinguishing between truth and fashood and by exhorting men to imbrace the one and to avoyd the other For herein doe the Romists exceedingly offend against Charity and can hardly better expresse the contrary Uncharitablenesse then by putting truth into place of falsehood and by exhorting men to imbrace falsehood and to avoyd truth And untill the Authour hath disproved this mistaking our Accusation of Romish uncharitablenesse still stands on foote and his owne plea for Rome lyes still unproved And Rome though very meritorious yet doth much demerit yea sinne against Charity for falsly telling Protestants That they lose their soules if they dye impenitent in a true Religion CHAP. XIII Wherein are discussed divers false inferences from some Protestants doctrine urged by the Cavalier in the Conclusion of his Booke to seduce men to Popery and encountred with some true inferences drawne from Popish doctrines the better to perswade men from that Sect. SECT I. The Protestants denyall of Merit no principle of corrupt living THis Authour having lost or rather given away his cause in the premisses of his discourse the conclusion sutable to such losing premisses should have been a meere surrender and accordingly he should have said That notwithstanding all improbabilities it is very probable that Romists want charity to Protestants when they take them for odious persons fall foule on them blow them up burne them and damne them And secondly That though it be true that there is but one Church and one Faith wherein is salvation yet Protestants being of this one Church and having this Faith and so being in the way of salvation it is not an untruth but a truth that they want charity who hate and damne the Protestants which are saved Yet our Authour goes on like Pharaoh and to him as to Pharaoh may be said Knowest thou not yet that Egypt is destroyed Doth he not know the citie which is spiritually Egypt and Sodome is going to destruction and the probabilities and reasons are dead by which as by garisons this Egypt is maintained and defended Wherefore it were good that both he and Rome would let the men goe that they may serve the Lord their God But Rome still goes on in her purpose of holding the Church in bondage yea shee sends forth Souldiers and Cavaliers to fetch back those who are gone out from her yoke whereof this Champion is one And now that the sonnes of Rome may imitate the infirmities of Saint Peter wherein especially their Fathers are his Successors hee comes with a piece of that pitie wherewith Saint Peter would have Christ to have pitied himselfe but so that without pitie hee should have lost the salvation of the whole world so would this Authour have Protestants to pity themselves even to the danger of their salvation and by a deadly Apostacie to turne from the living God to Romish Idolatry But hee doubts his pitie will prove but a sleight and empty perswasion and therefore to a vaine pitie hee addeth some reasons which want nothing more then truth to make them forcible Hee saith That Protestant doctrine under his false Title of heresie is a Nursery of corrupt principles concerning life and when hee hath said it hee brings as hee is wont proofes that do not prove it yet thus hee begins even in his Conclusion When they teach men that there is no merit belonging to good workes though they bee confess'd by us to flow but from the grace and goodnesse of Christ our Lord what courage doe they give men to bee frequent and chearfull in doing of good works But is not this speech unworthy of a noble Cavalier much more of a Christian For were it not ignoble in a Knight when his Father commands him to doe some valiant service for his honour or defence to answer him hee hath no courage to doe him service because thereby he cannot merit any thing from him seeing hee oweth all his service and himselfe unto him Thus because his Father hath deserved all therefore hee will doe nothing Againe If a Father should tell his Sonne Doe what thou canst to please mee or as Isaac Goe kill mee some venison and I will freely give thee a blessing though the venison deserve it not should the Son wisely returne this answer to his Father Sir I have no encouragement by your free promise or gift of this blessing except I can merit it from you by my venison But ingenuous Christians Saints and Sonnes of God whose understandings and wils are truely ennobled by the Divine Spirit are farre of another minde they
Pelagian businesse of the possibilitie of keeping the Law which S. Hierome long since told them was but to speak of a power which was never brought to effect For it is affirmed by the Fathers and too much experience confirmeth it that how possible soever the keeping of the Law is yet no man ever brought this possibility to an actuall keeping of the Law To what end then doth hee talk of this possibility which gives such small encouragement by being ineffectuall that his owne words may neer bee retorted against him For what encouragement doe Romists give to the keeping of the Commandements when they speake of such a possibility of keeping them by which no man yet did ever keepe them So that a man may thus only encourage himselfe by this possibility that except he do that by it which never man did before him hee shall never keepe the Commandements by it Besides S. Paul saith That the flesh so lusteth against the spirit that Christians cannot do what they would which is as much as if he had said They cannot be perfect if they would for even Paul saith of himself That the good which he would do he had not power to effect neither had he yet attained a full resurrection from the dead and yet no doubt he improved the power which he had beyond any Romist For hee saith he did reach forth a terme of straining and mighty indeavour yea hee did presse towards the marke yet notwithstanding all this he confesseth that hee had not attained he was not already perfect And now let Romists encourage their disciples by proposing a perfection of righteousnesse to which S. Paul attained not And the question lies not in this what the grace of God can do but what man can do having grace only in measure and withall a great measure and remainder of concupiscence and law of the members For though the foot of grace would go upright yet the other foot of corruption addeth a lamenesse and so the best Christian like Iacob goes halting Neither therefore is it a just reason for a son that goes halting yet with halting is able to perform some messages of his father not to performe what hee may being commanded by his father yea he may be hereby encouraged to indeavour the more to do his fathers commands because he hath a father that knowes his infirmity and his striving against it and the more he strives the more hee will reward him A learner that cannot write so well as his coppy yet is to bee encouraged to write so well and so like it as he can And surely if it were otherwise the Cavaliers reason might discourage most Schollers from the study of Philosophy because they cannot bee so good Philosophers as Aristotle And it might have discouraged the Cavalier from writing Controversies because there was no possibility for him to do it so well as Bellarmine But to give this point a more serious conclusion This state of imperfection wherein with the new man begotten by grace there is left a remnant of the old man begotten by nature doth not lessen the power of Gods grace but sets forth the wisdome of Gods dispensation God whose Spirit bloweth where and how hee listeth for many wise ends and especially for his owne glory dispenseth his grace in this manner and measure and mixture For first the corruption remaining with grace doth humble man before God and cause him to have a low conceipt of himselfe and an high estimation of Gods grace of which hee hath continuall need the sufficiency whereof alone can forgive his falls and raise him from falling and enable him to stand and walke in the pathes of holinesse in such a manner as the same grace will accept Secondly This life being appointed to the Church militant for a warfare and the warfare for a way to the Crowne this contrariety of the flesh to the spirit is not the least part of this warre and to those that fight the good fight of faith it serves for a way of advancement to the Crowne For the more combates of the flesh the more conquests of the spirit and so the greater enjoyings of the celestiall Crowne And thirdly God is mightily glorified who by a little grace even a graine of mustard-seed opposed by a strong concupiscence and that backed by a world of tentations and by those Tempters which are Principalities and Powers though through many foyles faintings and failings the little graine becomes a tree the smoking flaxe becomes a fire and judgement is brought to victory Though wee lose in some single combats yet wee are gainers in the whole warre and wee become more then Conquerours through him that loveth us And indeed this growing nature of the seed of grace and especially the victorious successe which Gods grace giveth to it is a most strong encouragement to good works even such as all objected imperfection of righteousnesse can never overthrow for though it bee so little either at first in the beginning of it or perchance after in some spirituall desertions for there are ebbs and flouds of grace yet wee are mightily encouraged to good workes because that seed is not onely a remaining but a growing seed the house of Saul growes weaker and the house of David stronger wee come still neerer to perfection though wee doe not fully attaine it wee grow from babes to young men from young men to that measure of stature which is appointed to us in Christ Jesus Lastly our state of imperfection doth serve for an incentive to spur up our desires towards the state of perfection For when wee draw up hardly and painfully towards Gods holy mountaine with a weight of flesh pressing downe and a body of sinne cleaving fast wee pant towards heaven and send up grones of the Spirit which speake in their language when shall wee come and appeare before God Wee desire to bee delivered from the body of sinne unto the glorious liberty of the sonnes of God our soules being wearied and parched and dryed up with the flames and vexations of tentations and sinnes thirst for the living God and desire to satisfie their thirst in the River of pleasures which floweth from his presence whose streames are perfect holinesse and perfect happinesse SECT III. That the doctrine of denying free will doth not abridge the doing of good and justice of punishment for evill doing THere is yet one question more which must have an answer rather for some weakenesse which it may meet then for any strength which is in it When they profess that men have not so much as free will to doe any good work at all when they are first moved and assisted to it by the good grace of God with what sense can they encourage men to do any thing which is good or with what justice can they punish them for omitting the same The Cavalier is deceived himselfe as it seems and goes about to deliver
Articuli praescribunt Mihi â—amen videtur dicendum satis â—sse ad salutem cuique fidelium credere explicitè quatuordecim Articulos fidel vel Symbolum Apostolicum Quaeritur An si quis adeò hebeti obtuso sit ingenio ut ipsos Articulos secundùm substanâ—iam capere nequeat fidei praecepto satisfaciat si aliquos clariores Articulos explicitè credat reliquis verò quos non asâ—equitur credat implicitè c. Respondeo satisfacere Quarâ— si quis Trinitatis Articulum nequeat perâ—ipere satis est si credat explicitè alios clariores nimirum Châ—istum Dâ—i filium natum ex Viâ—gine passum cruci affixum mâ—â—tuuâ— sepultum ex mortuis resuâ—rexisse in câ—elos conscendisse Azâ—r Tom. 1. lib. 8. cap. 6. a Aquâ—2 â—2 Q. 1. Art 8. Lorca Expos. Art Conclusio est conveniens est sufficiens distinctio numeratio Articulorum qua vâ—l duâ—decim vel quatuordecim potiùs numerari â—olent For tasâ—e mens Ecclesiae in hac summa Articulorum non fuit compâ—ehendâ—re omnâ—s Articuloâ— qui vel speciâ—lem dâ—â—sicultatem continent vel ab omnibus fâ—delibus explicitè credendi sunt Ib. b Omnes concedunt minoribus necessarium esse credere aliqua explicitè licet non obligentur ad omnem latitudinem fidei In assignanda tamen Râ—gula quâ diffiniatur quae credere teneantur dissentiunt diversas Regulas statuunt Communis Regula ferè ab omnibus Theologis â—radita est Omnes fideles dâ—bere credere expliciâ—è Articulos qui solenni ritu celebrantur in Ecclesia sufficere sibi â—i â—os credant Hanc Regulam tradunt S. Thomas Art 7. aliâ— Scholâ—stici in 3. distinâ—i 25. c. Hec tamen Regula quibusdam insufficiens apparet tam excessu quam defectu Scoâ—us quaest 1. Art 2. indicare videtur praeceptum commure fidâ—i solum constringere ut credantur â—aciliora quae ipse voâ—â—t â—rossa Quâ—dam ex juniâ—â—â—â—us Suarez in 3. Tom. 2. d. 43. affirmant sufficere communi plâ—bi si credant Aâ—ticulos qui in Symbolo continentur His ergò Regulis omissis asserendum est omnibus fidelibus inesse praeceptum expliâ—itâ—â—ide credere haec Primò Articulos fidei tam secundùm illam numeratiâ—nem quà quatuordecim numerantur quam â—os qâ—â— in Symbolo Apostolorum exprimuntur Tenentur pâ—â—â—terea credere Decalogum communiora praecepta quae ad Decalâ—gum reducentur dociâ—â—nam etiam de septem Sacramentis de Oratione de authoritate 〈◊〉 Pralatorum Ecclesiae Haec omma 〈◊〉 â—ideli 〈…〉 docet 〈◊〉 in Summa verbo Ignoraâ—tia 〈…〉 Ignorantia Lorca in 22. 〈…〉 a Eâ—ag l. 2 c. 4. b Propter nonnullos haereticos addita quaedam videntur per quae novellae doctrinae sensus videretur excludi Ruff. in Symbol c Variatuâ— fides augetur vel diminuitur ratione dispositionis hominis nam fides potest esse major in uno quà m in alio non ratione primae veritatis quae cum sit unica simplicissima non diversificatur in credentibus sed est una in omnibus Tamen ea quae materialiter credenda proponuntur sunt plura sic ex parte credendorum personarum temporum potest fides accipi major minor Reyn. Pant. de Fide cap. 1. a Rom. 4.24 25. Rom. 10.9 1 Cor. 15.1 2 3 4. In absoluto nobis ac facili est aeternitas Jesum suscitatum à mortuis per Deum credere ipsum esse Dominum confiteri Hilar. de Trinit lib. 10. where he calls it also Religionis portum Itaque sine ista Fide hoc est sine Fide unius Mediatoris Dei hominis hominis Christi Jesu sine Fide inquam Resurrectionis ejus quam Deus hominibus definivit quae ut que sine Incarnatione ejus ac morte non potest veraciter credi Sine Fide ergo Incarnationis Mortis Resurrectionis Christi neque antiquos justos ut justi essent potuisse mundaâ—i Dei gratiâ justificari veritaâ— Christiana non dubitat Aug contra Pelag. Coelest lib. 2. cap. 24. The most fundamentall is the Incarnation of the Deity For the foundation it selfe is God with us For there is no Rocke but God Psal. 18.31 And all the Church is built on this Rocke unto salvation Mat. 16.18 Therefore Arians or any others that build not their faith on the Godhead of the Son are not built on the Rocke but on the sands And the Judge himselfe hath made knowne his judgement on them They shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on them John 3.18 36. So also John 20.31 1 Tim. 3.16 2 Corin. 5.18 19. Colos 2.8 9 10 11 12 13. 2 Cor. 4.3 4. Wherfore Ignorantes eum qui ex Virgine est Emanuel privantur munere ejus quod est vita aeterna Iren. l 3. c. 21. a See before Romish Authours alledged who say that twelve or fourteen Articles whereof these of the Canon and Sacraments are none doe suffice to be explicitely beleeved and divers Romish Authours alledged by Lorca that differ in the number of the Canonicall Books b Si finis Sacramentorum esset excitare fidem Baptismus non prodesset infantibus sed iis â—otius qui pâ—aesentis sunt ItoÌ„ illi dicunt Sacramenta ideo instituta esse ut excitent fidem ex quo sequitur effectum illorum esse fidem 〈◊〉 jaâ—â— reâ—utaâ—i Becan Manuâ—â— c. 11. n. 3â— 31 seq And Vasquez brings in divers great Doctors that distinguish between the mysteries of Faith without the knowledge of which a man cannot be saved and Baptisme and other Sacraments Ex his tamen Doctoribus Alexander Bonaventura Gabriel Adrianus loquuti solùm videntur de ignorantia Fidei circa mysteria sine quibus salus non contingit alicui caeteri verò de ignorantia cujuscunque praecepta divini positivi quale est Baptismi Cum praedictis Doctoribus concordat Corduba quod attinet ad fidem mysteriorum quae ad salutem necessaria sunt non tamen in eo quod spectat ad praecepta positiva Dei qualis est Baptismi aliorum Sacramentorum Vasquez m. 1.2 Disp. 120. cap. 1. a It is a Romish distinction Reatus simplex redundans in personam b Sequitur illum solum amittere fâ—dem qui peccat contra fidem sciens prudens errans voluntariè aut dubitans Ille tamen qui peccat ignorantià quamvis crassa culpabili culpâ mortali sicut non est haereticus sic etiam nec fidem perdit ut satis clarè S. Thomas Articulo illo tertio q. 5. docuit illis verbis si enim non pâ—â—tinaciter dissentit non est haereticus sed solum errans Lorca in 22. Sect. 1. Disp. 33. a Semel in totum macellum in Apostolo admissà detestatione eorum qui sicut nubere prohibent ita jubeant à cibis abstinere à Deo conditis ideo nos esse jam tunc praenotatos in novissimis
sufficient to deprive any soule thereof and so Protestants may still suffer a false charge of Heresie to bee laid on them by Romists and yet bee sure enough of salvation And thus not any degree is yet made good toward the freeing of this charge of uncharitablenesse justly laid on the Romists So that the matter stands still though the Author moving his pen thinkes that the matter moves with it And for the Allegations that follow which seeme to labour for these two points That out of the Church is no salvation And that Heresie and Schisme doe put men out of the Church these being proved no way hurt us or help the Romists but helpe us and hurt the Romists among whom wee have found most fearfull and bloudy Schisme and wee may discover damnable Heresies but they can never prove that Protestant doctrine maintaines either Heresie or Schisme but by that which they call Heresie as relying wholy on Christs merits and not our owne for redemption and worshiping God in spirit and truth and not worshiping Images c. wee serve the God of our Fathers SECT II. The Allegations of Scriptures and Fathers made by the Cavalier are more forcible to exclude the Papists out of the Church then the Protestants against whom they are produced THat being yeelded which this Author indeavours to prove I know not what to doe with his Allegations but onely to turne them against Romists Therefore we very well allow the place alledged out of Esay and say it makes against the Pope who doth not submit himselfe to the Church in a generall Councell and so doth the place of Matthew formerly alledged and answered upon the same Reason And we very well allow those places of Paul to Titus and Timothy as making much against the Pope and his adhaerents and say that they give us just ground of avoiding him being Hereticall and Schismaticall after many admonitions But this Author did wisely in not naming Timothy in his margent but Titus though hee alledge these words out of 1. Tim. 4.1 2. That they attend to doctrines of Divels and spirits of Errour That they are Lyers and Hypocrites lest the Reader looking to the place might finde this which followeth Forbibbing to marry and commanding to abstaine from meats which wee know that Protestancie doth not but if Papistry doe then who are now his Hereticks Hypocrites and Lyers excluded from the Church and so from salvation Hee did also very discreetly in his namelesse alledging some pieces out of 2. Tim. 3. where is mention of Iamnes and Iambres and to make use of the verse fore-going having the form of godlinesse and the verses following That they are ever learning but without attaining to the knowledge of the truth but left out the middle verse which is this Of this sort are they which creep into houses and lead captive silly Women laden with sins and led with divers lusts which words being notable markes of seducers for what reason the Author left them out he best knowes but if wee may beleeve their owne Priest it doth rightly hit with some Romish proselite-makers so that the simple Reader if hee had seene this place wholy alledged might perchance have thought hee had seen in these the very Iamnes and Iambres of these times His last Scripture is out of S. Paul to the Galathians where striving to prove that the word Sects in Latin is Heresies in the Greeke he somewhat Heretically I doubt even when he speaks against Heresie leaves the decreed Latin to follow the Greeke But this being taken for a fault in the Latin let the word be as it is in the Greeke and then to the shame of the Papacy wee read indeed that Heresies are works of the flesh which certainly those are most likely to fall into that strive to set up a fleshly monarchy and to abound in the glory and wealth of the world For such men will sell heaven and truth and the Gospell for a messe of Pottage even for base and transitory vanity It is the sentence of Gods spirit that where is the love of the World there is not the love of God and where is not the love of God there cannot bee the love of the truth and where is not the love of truth there is a giving up to strong delusions to beleeve lyes that they all may bee damned who beleeved not the truth Now among innumerable examples of the Papacies love of the world and preferring temporall greatnesse and wealth above the truth let the lamentable conference betweene Adrian the sixth and the Cardinall be a lively proofe and spectacle where the poore Pope and herein not a Pope and therefore hee did well soone to bee gone speaking of the necessity of reformation There was no consideration of the truth of this necessity but a plaine confutation of whatsoever truth there was in it by the Popes Audit and Exchequer even by worldly profit But the Scriptures thus being lost except onely in making against their owne Papacy hee comes to Fathers not so much to hurt with them as to bee hurt by them Tertullian saith hee affirmeth That Hereticks cannot bee accounted Christians But of what heresies doth hee speake there Of any Protestant opinions He doth not say that any Protestants are hereticks He repeats there a rule of faith as it were the body of a Creed consisting of divers Articles Doe the Protestants deny any of these Articles True it is that of this rule of faith hee saith Nullus habet apud nos quaestiones c. There are no questions among us of this rule but those which Heresies make and doe make Hereticks But wee doe not make question of this rule and so are not made hereticks by it But they doe rather question this rule that bring in another faith the Popes Oracles and new Articles For whereas Tertullian here saith Fides in regula posita est The faith is set downe in that rule which before hee rehearsed the Romists faith is not in that rule For there was not one word of the Pope nor of Christs being under the forme of bread by Transubstantiation but In Coelos ereptum sedere ad dextram Patris misisse vicariam vim Spiritus Sancti qui credentes agat Being taken away into heaven hee doth sit at the right hand of his Father and hee hath sent his Vicar not the Pope but the power of the Holy Ghost which should leade those that beleeve And in the 33. Chapter making an Inventory of certaine Heresies amongst others hee names this which I doubt is some kinne to the Papacie Timotheum instruens Nuptiarum quoque interdictores suggillat He saith That S. Paul instructing Timothy doth condemne the forbidders of marriage Saint Cyprian is next brought in to say that thousand times produced sentence that Out of the Church there is no salvation Hereunto is added that There is no reward of any suffering whatsoever neither is hee a Christian