originally primitiuely signiâ—â—eth Election or Choyce as is said in generalâ— yet because they who deuide themseluâ—â— by maintaining false opinions from tâ—â— Church of Christ do make choyce 〈◊〉 these their new opinions and so therbâ— do separate themselues from the Churcâ— therfore this word Haeresis loosing it foâ—mer generall signification is restraynâ— by the Apostles and the Ancient Fatheâ— through an Ecclesiasticall vse acceptancâ— and appropriation which course we finâ— houlden in diuers other wordes noâ— taken by the Church in a secondary aâ—ception to signifie anie false or neâ— opinion in Religion among Christian of which a man maketh choyce pertâ—naciously defendeth against the Churâ—â— of God and the maintainers therof aâ— commonly styled Heretikes Thus three things necessarily concurre to make any false opinion Heresy and the defendours â—herof Heretikes First it must be some erâ—our touching the Faith of Christ And the â—eason hereof is because he that neuer proâ—essed or imbraced the Christian Faith is not an Heretike though he erre but a Iew or a Pagan and Heathen This is the doctrine of S. (c) quast 11. art â— Thomas of all learned men The second condition necessarily â—oncurring to euery Heresy is that there â—e an erreneous iudgment in the vnderâ—tanding of him who maintayneth the Heresie from whence it followeth that â—n externall deniall of a mans Faith is not Heresy except it proceed from an interâ—all errour of the vnderstanding but is raâ—her to be accompted dissimulation or â—chisme as S. Thomas (d) quaest 10. 2. 2. teacheth The third and last condition is that this â—rrour be maintained with great obstinacie â—gainst the authority of Christs Church â—eaching the contrarie doctrine and that â—he defendour therof being admonished of â—is errour will neuerthelesse openly resist â—he authority of the Church therin seeing â—f he be admonished by the Church of his Errour and instantly therupon do forsake â—is false opinion he is to be accompted only erroneous and his false doctrine only an Errour This agreeth to that of S. Augustine (e) l. 18. de ciuit Dei c. 51. Qui in Ecclesia Christi aliquid prauum sapiunt si correpti vt sanum rectumque sapiant resistant contumaciter suaque pestifera mortisera dogmata emendare nolunt sed defensare persistant Haereticiâ— fiunt foraes exeuntes habentur in exercentibus Haereticis That is Who belieue any false or wrong opinion in the Church of Christ and being counsailed and admonished therof do contumaciously and stubbornly resist and will not recall their pestiferous and deadly opinions but do persist in defending of them they are therby become Heretikes and so departing out of the Church they are taken for such as vent forth open and willfull Heresies Thus S. Augustine This Construction both touching the foresaid definition of Heresy in taking the words Haeresis and Haereticus in an euill restrayned and appropriated sense is warranted by the Apostle by the Auncient Fathers and lastly to omit the like acknowledged iudgment of the Catholikes by the learned Protestants By the (f) 1. Cor. 21. Apostle for thus we find him to say There must be Heresies among you that they which are approoued among you may be knowne Againe (g) Galat. 5.19 vid e Testam nouum 1576. The workes of the flesh are manifest which are adulterie fornication c. seditions Heresies c. As also (h) Tit. 3. A man that is an Heretike after the first second admonition auoyde And (i) Act. 5. finally Those which were of the Heresie of the Sadduces c. laid hands vpon the Apostles By the Auncient Fathers For S. Ierome (k) in ca. 3. ad Titum shewing the difference betweene Heâ—esie and Schisme thus defineth Heresie â—aeresis est quae peruersum dogma habet Heresie is â—at which containeth a peruerse froward opiâ—on And S. Augustine (l) l. de fide simbolo ca. 10. defineth Hereâ—kes in these wordes Haeretici sunt qui de Deo â—â—sa sentiendo fidem violant Heretikes are those â—ho do violate their faith by houlding false opiâ—ons touching God By the Protestants For to name one or wo among many M. (m) Dial. 2. Ormerod a most â—orward Protestant thus defineth an Hereâ—ike He is an Heretike who so swarueth from the â—holesome doctrine as contemning the iudgment â—â—th of God and the Church persisteth in his opiâ—ion c. With whom conspireth D. Couell 〈◊〉 saying Heretikes are they who directly gainâ— some article of our faith Now out of this former definition of â—eresie I am to promonish the Reader of â—ee pointes the which in the perusing of is Treatise I would haue him often to â—ll to remembrance first that euery Heâ—y is maintained as is aboue taught â—â—th obstinacie against the authoritie of the Church of God and therfore the maintayners therof are said by the Apostle (o) Ioan. 2.29 that they went out of vs that is out of God Church and for the same reason the Apostle (p) Tit. 3. doth pronounce an Heretike to 〈◊〉 condemned by his owne iudgment because hâ— preferreth his iudgment before the iudgment of the whole Church From whicâ— consideration it followeth that what maâ— soeuer houldeth an erroneous opinion â— touching Christian Faith and being aduertized therof by Gods Church and nâ— captiuating his iudgment in all humiliâ—â— therto is therby become an Heretike Anâ— such is the state of Catholikes and Protestants since the one doth euer reciprocall charge and condemne the other with falâ— doctrine and therfore seing the Church 〈◊〉 Christ must be with the one of them it followeth that the other not submitting the iudgment to it are proclaymed therby Hâ—retikes And thus it may sometimes fall oâ—â— that the first Inuentour of a false opiniâ—â— may be no Heretike as maintayning it bâ—fore it be condemned by the Churcâ— wheras the Professours of it after its coâ—demnation are become Heretikes accâ—ding to that of (q) l. aduersus Haeres Vincentius Lyrinenâ— O admirable change of things the authours of 〈◊〉 and the same opinion are esteemed Catholikes 〈◊〉 their followers are iudged Heretikes Thus we see that pertinacity of iudgment doth euer consumate an Heresy The second that the denyall of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. are not properly called Heresies but rather blasphemies the denyers of them not to be accouned Heretikes but Infidels Iewes or Pagans From whence it proceedeth that what places of Scripture or of the Faâ—hers are spoken of Heretiks the same cannot be truly applyed to the denyers of the Trinity the Incarnation Passion c. The third is that the forsayd definition â—f Heresy being the only true definition â—nd acknowledged for such on all sides is â—ot restrayned eyther in it selfe or by the â—eaning of the Apostle only to the most â—upreme as they are called fundamental â—oints of Christian Fayth as of the Trinity â—â—e Incarnation of Christ his passion the â—ecalogue and the
thine O Florinus to speake friendly are not true nor wholsome These opinions are repugnant to the Church c. I may truly protest that if the holy and Apostolicall Priest Policarpus had heard of such opinionâ— as thou defendest he would haue stopped his eares cryed out according to his fashion o good God vnto what miserable tymes hast thou reserued me tâ— heare these things and presently would haue runâ— forth of the place where he had byn standing or sâ—ting where such doctrine had byn vttered Buâ— now to reflect a little vpon the premises Cerinthus Marcion Florinus did all belieue in the Trinity the Incarnation of oâ—â— Sauiour and receaued the Apostles creed and erred only in lesser points For if the had erred in denying the Trinity Incarnation Passion c. they had not byn repute for Heretikes but rather for Iewes Pagans â—or Infidells as aboue is noted and yet we â—ee what sharp reprehensions were vsed agaynst them by S. Iohn and S. Policarpe his â—choller as to flie out of their company to acknowledge them to be the Children of the Diuell to â—toppe their owne eares for not hearing of their Erâ—ours c. all which speaches had byn ouer much aggrauated and transcended the bond of Charity if their Errours had rested only vpon matters of Indifferency and had byn â—ut such as had byn compatible with mans Saluation But to proceed to the sentences of other Fathers in this point S. Ierome expresly thus writeth (n) Lib. 3. Apolg. contr Ruffin For one word or two contrary to the â—ayth many haue byn cast out of the Church Yea â—e pronounceth and proceedeth further exâ—ressely thus wryting Haeretici quicuÌ„que Chriâ—tiani non sunt whosoeuer are Heretikes those men â—re not Christians Basill was wont to say as (o) Lib. 4. hist c. 17. Theodoret recordeth Those who are truly â—nstructed in the diuine doctrine will not suffer any â—llable of the diuine decrees to be corrupted but for â—s defence if necessity forceth them will vndergoe â—ny kind of death (p) Lib. de praescript Tertullian that Aunciâ—nt Father hath a sentence not much diffeâ—ing from that of the former Father (q) Lib. 4. contra Do. cap. 8. S. Augustine Imagine a man to be chast continent â—â—t couetuous not seruing Idolls ministring hospitality to the poore enemy to none maligning no body sober frugall c. But yet if he be an Heretike certainly no man doubteth but for this alone that he iâ— an Heretike he shall not possesse the Kingdome oâ— God A dreadfull saying of so learned godly a Father The Donatists for disagreeing from S. Augustine in some Traditions not specifyed in the Scripture much lesse in the Creed are thus repreheÌ„ded by him In (r) Aug. in explan psal 54. these points those Heretikes were with me in Heresy not witâ— me in many thinges with me in a few not witâ— me the many could not help theÌ„ in which they weâ—â— with me And yet these Donatists belieued with Saint Augustine the Trinity the Incarnation and recited with him the Apostles creed Briefly S. Augustine in q. 11. in Matt. thus describeth an Heretike Hereticus est qui de aliqua parte doctrinae Christianae falsum credit He iâ— an Heretike who belieueth any false thing touching any part of Christian fayth within which definition it necessarily followeth that eytheâ— the Protestants for not belieuing Purgatory Prayer to Saints freewill merit of worke c. or the Catholikes for belieuing of them are to be included S. Gregory Nazianzeâ— orat 37. Vnum vni coharet c. One point oâ— fayth agreeth with another so as of them altogether there is made a certayne golden and wholesome chayne therfore if but one opinion or article be taken away or made doubtfull the whole chayne of fayth will become broken S. (s) Lib. 1. ad Mag. Cyprian Dominus noster Iesus Christus c. When our Lord Iesus Christ did testify in the Ghospell that those were his enemyes who were not with him he noted not any one Heresy but he manifestly sheweth that all Heretikes whatsoeuer are his enemyes saying He that is not with me is agaynst me and he that doth not gather with me disperseth S. (t) In Epist ad Galat c. 10. Chrysostome sayth Quemadmodum moneta Regia c. Euen as who pareth away a little of the Kings siluer maketh the whole peece to be adulterate EueÌ„ so who ouerthroweth the least branch or part of true Faith may be sayd to corrupt the whole he proceeding from these small beginnings to worser courses To come to an end of the Fathers iudgments in this poynt S. Ambrose shall (u) Lib. 6. in Luc. c. 9. conclude all who thus plainly writeth heereof Si vnum horum retraxeris c. If thou shalt recall or deny any of these points thou hast retracted thy owne Saluation for euen Heretikes seeme to challenge Christ to them for no man will deny the name of Christ neuerthelesse he indeed denyeth Christ who doth not confesse al points of sayth instituted by Christ Thus far of the Fathers iudgments in this matter where I am to aduertise the Reader first as aboue I haue touched in the Councells that if all false Doctrines whatsoeuer pertinaciously defended against the church of God be heresies as the definition of Heresy aboue explicated proueth them to be and as the Fathers of the Primitiuâ— church and in them the whole church of God haue maintayned then either the Protestants or Catholikes for their different houlding of contrary Doctrines touching Freewill Purgatory Prayer to Saints Sacrifice c. are to be accoÌ„pted Heretikes coÌ„sequently both cannot be saued in their Religion For that Heretikes continuing Heretikes cannot be saued is demonstrated first from the fearfull threats and comminations of the Apostles thundred out against Heretikes of which point I haue discoursed aboue Secondly from the Authority of the church of Christ which excludeth all Heretikes as I haue shewed from all hope of saluation and lastly to omit many other reasons from that principle that Heretikes are no members of Christ his Church of which point we are to dispute in the next place The Second thinge to be aduertised is that not any of the former authorities of the fathers against Heresy are restrayned by them to Heresies touching the Trinitie the Incarnation of Christ hiâ— Passion or the Articles of the creed supposing the denyall of them to be heresies aâ— indeed they are not but rather blasphemyes Infidelity for of these there is made no mention or intimation in their authorities within which compasse our Formallists in Religion seeke to confine their fayth but they are implicitely extended by the fathers to all Heresies whatsoeuer whether they concerne the supreme and fundamentall pointes of Christian Religion or any other secondary and lesse principall points of the sayd Religion THE SAME PROVED FROM that Principle That neither Heretikes nor Schismatiks are members of Christs Church
where for the better conceauing thereof we are to vnderstand that fayth is a supernaturall habit not obtayned by the force of nature Therfore to the beliefe of any one Article or point of fayth two things concurre the one is the first reuealing Verity as Scholemen speake which is God Himselfe the secoÌ„d is the Church propounding the article to be belieued Now when we belieue any point of fayth God who is the first reuealing Veritie as is sayd reuealeth it to the church and the church propounds it so reuealed to vs to be belieued And thus we belieue a point of fayth through the authority of God reuealing the church propounding and where we belieue any thing though it be true not through this authority this is not supernaturall beliefe in vs but only an opinion grounded vpon other reasons inducements Euen as the Turke belieueth that there is a God Creator of the worlde yet this his beliefe is no true fayth but only a meere opinion of a thing which is true since this his beliefe is grounded not vpon Gods authority reuealing this but only vpon his Alcaron being otherwayes a fabulous booke though of the being of one God it speaketh truly Now to apply this This first reuealing Verity which is God through whose authority we ought to belieue euery article doth with one the like authoritie reueale all Articles of Christian Religion to the church so as it is as forcibly reuealed to be belieued that there is for example a Purgatory or that we ought to pray to Saints graunting these articles to be true as that there is a Trinity or that Christ was Incarnate from whence it vnauoydably followeth that who belieueth in the Trinity and yet doth not belieue that there is a Purgatory or that we may pray to Saints hath no true and supernatural beliefe of the Trinity but only belieueth that there is a Trinity because he so vnderstandeth or is persuaded thereto only by his owne reason or through some other humane motiues according to that sentence of S. Augustine lib. de vtilitate credendi cap. 11. Quod intelligimus aliquid rationi debemus quod autem credimus authoritati For if he did belieue that there is a Trinity or that Christ was Incarnate through Gods authority so reuealing this truth to be belieued by the same authority he would haue belieued that there is a Purgatory or that we ought to pray to Saints seing both the Articles of the Trinity and Purgatory or praying to Saints are equally indifferently a like propounded by God and his Church to be belieued Thus we may demonstratiuely conclude that what ProtestaÌ„t doth belieue in the Trinity and yet doth not belieue that there is a Purgatory praying to Saints Freewill the Reall presence admitting them once to be true or any other point controuerted betweene Catholikes and Protestants the samâ— man hath no true fayth at all of the Trinity or Incarnation and consequently for wanâ— of a true and supernaturall fayth cannot bâ— saued since we read (a) Marc. 16. Qui non credit condemnabitur Who belieueth not shal be condemned And from this former ground it proceedeth thaâ— (b) 2. 2. q. 5. ar 3. S. Thomas all other learned Schoolemen teach that who belieueth not only for Gods authority so reuealing any poinâ— whatsoeuer great or small fundamentall or not fundamentall the same man belieueth not any other Article at all with a true and supernaturall fayth and heereto accord those wordes of (c) Lib. de praescript Tertullian against Valentinus the Heretike Some thinges of the law and Prophets Valentinus approueth some thinges he disalloweth That is he disalloweth all whilest he disproueth some Which sentence of Tertullian must of necessity be true since who reiecteth the authority of God in not belieuing any one article propounded by God to be belieued the same man begetteth a suspition or doubt of Gods authority for the belieuing of any other article how fundamentall soeuer Another reason may be taken from a distinction of fayth which according to the learned is of two sortes The one they call explicite fayth the other implicite Explicite fayth is that which all men vnder payne of damnation are bound to belieue As according to most of the Schoolemen the Trinity the Incarnation of our Sauiour his Passion the Decalogue or ten Commaundements the articles of the Creed Implicite fayth comprehendeth all those points which euery vnlearned man is not bound expressely distinctly to belieue and knowe in particuler though he be expressely bound not to beâ—ieue any thing contrary thereto but is to â—est in the iudgment of the church concerning all such points and what the church of Christ houldeth therein he is bounde â—mplicitely to belieue This distinction is warranted not only in the iudgment of all Catholike Schoolemen but also of the most â—earned (d) D. Bar. l. defide eius ortis p 40. Hooker in his Ecclesiast policy in the preface p. 28. by Melancton l. 1. Epist Epist ad RegeÌ„ Angliae Protestants though they commonly forbeare the phrase of explicite imâ—licite fayth particulerly of D. Feild who â—n these words following giueth the reason â—hereof saying For (e) In his Treatise of the Church in his Epist Dedicat to the L. Arch-Bishop seeing the Controuersies of Religion in our time are growne in number so many â—nd in nature so intricate that few haue time and â—â—asure fewer strength of vnderstanding to exaâ—ine them what remayneth for men desirous of saâ—isfaction in things of such consequeÌ„ce but diligently â— search out which amongst all the Societies of men â—s the worlde is that blessed Company of holy ones 〈◊〉 at househould of fayth that spouse of Christ and Church of the lyuing God which is the Pillar and ground of truth that so they may imbrace her communion follow her directions rest in her iudgments Thus D. Feild Now this distinction being presupposed I thus argue Both these kinds of fayth are necessary to saluation Explicite fayth because it comprehendeth all those fundameÌ„tall and supreme points of Christian Religion without which and the expresse and articulate beliefe of which a man cannot be saued And these be those only which our Newtrallists in Religion hold necessary to be belieued Implicite fayth of other points also is necessary to saluation because otherwyse then belieuing implicitely inuoluedly what the church teacheth therein we cannot according to the former Doctours words range our selues to the blessed company of holy ones the househould of fayth the spouse of Christ and Church of the lyuing God Againe seing Implicite fayth is necessary to saluation we must graunt that this Implicite fayth hath some Obiect This Obiect is not the Articles of the Trinity the Incarnation the Decalogue c. according to the foresaid iudgment of the Schoolemen since these are thâ— obiects of explicite fayth as is aboue mentioned therfore Articles of seeming lesser importance are the
throghout the world spending their whole liues in spreading and defending the same by their wrytings Finally seeing God did cut them off by such calamitous miserable and prodigious deaths which is to be feared were but presages of the eternall deaths of their soules who can otherwise be perswaded but that all this was wrought by the iust hand of God not so much for their personall sinnes proceeding of humane frailty for there were and are many others as great sinners as they and yet escaped such dreadfull ends but for their first inuenting maintayning and preaching of the Protestant fayth and Religion and empoysoning almost all Countreyes with such their false sensuall doctrines which being graunted how then can it with any truth of reason be supposed that the positions of Protestancy impugned by the Catholikes should contayne nothing but matters of Indifferency or that a man whether he belieue them or not belieue them may alike and indifferently be saued THE SAME PROVED FROM the doctrine of Recusancy taught both by Catholikes and Protestants CHAP. XIII I Haue thought good to draw another argument from the common taught and approued doctrine of Recusancy in euery ReligioÌ„ though this head may seeme to haue a speciall reference to the reason afore touched in part be therein implicity included wherein is shewed that nature herselfe hath imprinted in the professours of all Religions a Religious care punctually to keep and preserue euery article of their Religion Now heere we are to premonish that if in the iudgement of all learned men both Catholike and Protestant it is thought an action most wicked vnlawfull and not to be performed but without finall repentance vnder payne of eternall damnation that a man should communicate only in going to the Church and in hearing but a sermen contrary to that Religion which himselfe belieueth for true though this may seeme to be coloured vnder pretense of obseruing the Princes commaundement for feare of loosing our temporall estates I say if this action be thought vnlawfull wherin neuerthelesse the performers thereof doe not punctually vndertake to maintayne or belieue any one Hereticall or erroneous position how then can it be reputed as consonant to reason or Religion that men belieuing different opinions of fayth and promiscuously communicating in prayer with a contrary Religion to their owne should neuerthelesse all be saued since the first fault coÌ„sisteth as some would interprete though falsely only in an externall and materiall as the SchoolemeÌ„ speake going to the Church of a different Religion whereas this other doth directly and openly rest in defending articles at least in its owne iudgment of a Religion contrary to the truth of Christian Religion for such is the case herein eyther of Catholikes or Protestants But before we particulerly enter into this discourse we will heere insist as most pertinent to our purpose in relating the two most religious Examples of Eleazar and the Widow with her seauen Sonnes recorded in the Bookes of the Machabees Touching the first we reade (1) 2. Machab c. 6. that Eleazar being a most auncient graue and learned Man was so far from eating of the meates sacrifized to Idolls according to the prohibition of the Iewish lawe that when certaine men as tendring his old age and moued thereto as the Text sayth iniqua miseratione through vnlawfull pitty proffered him other flesh to eate vnder colour whereof they would tell the Tyrant King thereby to saue his lyfe that he had eaten of the sacrifized meates that he did choose rather to vndergoe a most cruell death then to feigne that he had eaten of the sayd sacrifized flesh And so accordingly he suffered â— most glorious Martyrdome thus speakinâ— to God in the middest of his torments (2) Vbi supra For thy feare ô Lord I do suffer these things As concerning the (3) 2. Machab c. 7. Widdow with bâ— seauen Sonnes O what spirituall resolutioâ— appeared in them all Indeed able to vpbrayd vs ChristiaÌ„s with our luk-warmnest in professing our fayth They all suffered most exquisit torments and in the end most bloudy deaths only because they would not at the Kings command eate of Swynes flesh which was contrary to the Lawe of Moyses And this both the Mother still exhorting her sonnes to constancy heerein all her seauen Sonns performed with such an admirable resolution both in their answeres to the Tyrant during their torments and in their patience of suffering death as that considering her sex and the tendernes of their yeares it might be truly sayd that weaknes was heere able to instruct strength and youth old age Now from these two most remarkable Examples I thus argue The tyme of the old Testament was much inferior in worth dignity and many priuiledges to the new testament seing to them in the Old things as the (4) 1. Cor. 10. Apostle witnesseth did happen as in a figure whereas the new Testament (5) Hebr. 8. as the sayd Apostle affirmeth is established in better promisses But now if in the old Testament men did choose to endure most cruel deaths rather then they would contrary to the Law eate forbiden Meates which in themselues were lawfully to be eaten were it not for the prohibition annexed vnto them And seeing though they had consented to the eating of them yet this being but anâ— externall Act or Ceremony they might neuerthelesse inwardly haue retayned and kept their true beliefe touching the Law yet since the performaÌ„ce of so small a matteâ— as it appeared in outward show could noâ— be without greate sinne and damnation oâ— the party so offending Shall any Christian thinke that now in the tyme of Grace anâ— of the New Testament which tyme exacteth more perfection at our hauds for 〈◊〉 (6) Luc. 12. whome much is giuen of him much shal be râ—quyred that men professing to belieuâ— with contempt of the Churches authoritâ— interposed therein contrary articles touching Christian Religion and dying sucâ— their different fayths in which the one sydâ— must of necessity mantayne a false fayth that men I say of both these sides can bâ— saued it is against all force of ReasoÌ„ againâ—â— the iudgment of the Primitiue Church â— finally against Gods Iustice And thus far concerning the two fore sayd exaÌ„ples in the Machabees Which Booke admitting them for the tyme not to be diuine Scripture yet it is acknowledged oâ— all sydes that the Histories recorded in the are true and that Eleazar and the Widâ— with her seauen Sonns performed most worth examples of piety and Religion and that they had yielded to the Kings Command in eating of forbidden meates they had as violating the law giuen to them by God without repentance incurred damnation And this is the iudgment of the auncient Fathers Catholike Doctours and the learned Protestants But let vs descend more particulerly to the doctryne of Recusancy and examine whether it be lawfull to exhibite our selues present at that Church in tyme of diuine seruice
such is the fayth of our Newtrallists is no true supernaturall fayth seing it beleiueth nothing through the authority of God and his church both which reueale propound all articles alike and indifferently to all men to be belieued Now what more crosse to reason then that a bare opinion not relying vpō any supernaturall grounds as neither hauing God for its Reuealer nor the Church for its Propounder conceaued only through morall inducements and therfore euer standing obnoxious to errour and mistaking should be able to purchase eternall Saluation to mans soule Againe how aduerse is it to all true iudgment to auerre that it is no preiudice or hinderance to mans saluation to belieue those principles of Religion which teach aduaunce all libertie sensualitie in cōuersatiō manners do depresse disparage all Chastity Fasting voluntary Pouertie keeping of the Commaundements and finally all serious and painfull labours and works of vertue piety and mortification for it is most contradictory in the very tearmes and no lesse repugnant to Gods sacred word that that doctrine which (u) 2. Pet. 3. promiseth lybertie and (x) Iudae vers 4. transferreth the grace of God into wantonnesse should be accounted the (y) Mat. 7. Luc. 13. straite way which leadeth vnto lyfe Furthermore can it be conceaued as sorting to Gods most mercifull proceeding with man that he should cut off the liues of those men with most fearefull sodaine and prodigious deaths and particulerly of Caluin who was eaten away with lyce a death peculiar to diuers of Gods most capitall Enemyes as to Antiochus Herod Maximinus others who first broached the Doctrines of Protestancy if the sayd Doctrines had either bene true in themselues or at least of that coldnes and indifferency as that they might comport and stand with the soules saluation No. God is iust withall mercifull therfore neuer extraordinarily punisheth but for extraordinary sinns Poore men that they were who comparted as it should seeme both in the diuulging of their mendacious and lying Doctrines as also in their vnexpected and sudden deaths with the false Prophets (z) 3. Reg. of Achab But to hasten to an end in the enumeration of the Absurdities following the foresaid Paradox of saluation in euery Religion and to come to that which within its owne largenes inuolueth many improbabilities If Catholikes Protestants notwithstanding the disparity of their fayth can both attayne to Heauen in vayne then is the doctrine of Recusancy ioyntly taught on both sides in vayne haue so many scores of Reuerend and Learned Priests and others of the Laytie in our owne Countrey whose blessed soules I beseech to pray to God daylie for the remission of my many sinnes suffered cruell deaths in the late Queenes raigne only because they refused to present themselues at the seruice of the Protestants But they are gone and most happily gone for (a) Tertul. de Praeser Clauis Paradisi sanguis Martyrum In vayne likewyse these later yeares haue diuers lay Persons endured cōtrary to his Maiesties naturall inclination most prone to mercy and commiseration great losses disgraces and imprisonments only for the said cause But who can thinke that vertuous and learned men are so prodigall of their lyues and bloud and English Lay Catholikes so insensible of their temporall states children and posterity as that they would wilfully precipitate and cast themselues into those miseries only for not belieuing and exercising points of Indifferencie and such as may stand with their soules eternall Happines In vayne also then haue the Learned men on both sydes spent out their whole liues in defending ech man his owne Religion in their most painfull and voluminous bookes and wrytings if so they dissented one from another in matters of such supposed small importance In vayne and without iust cause and therfore most cruelly haue many States in Christendome in our age imposed proscription banishments and other insupportable disgraces to such of their owne subiects as will not imbrace their owne doctrine though both sydes did conspire and agree in the fundamentall points of fayth In vayne also both euer since Luthers reuolt as also at this present haue there byn and still are such Insurrections of Subiects against their Princes such bloudy and implacable warres betweene absolute Princes themselues such deuastation and depopulation of whole Countreys such maine battayles and fieldes fought with losse of diuers hundred thousand lyues and lastly such incessant and interrupted besieging and taking of great Citties townes with effusion for the most part of much innocent bloud of Women and Children and all this originally and principally for matter of Religion I say in vayne and most iniuriously haue all these attempts actions byn vndertaken if the disagreements in Religiō for which they were vndertaken betweene Catholikes and Protestants were of that reconcileable nature as that the professours on both sydes notwithstāding their diuersity of fayth might ioyntly be saued What can we now reply heereto in the behalfe of our Newtrallists Shall we say that the most learned men of all Religions that Kings Princes States and many hundred thousand subiects of Christendome were and still are actually mad and out of their senses in menaging these their deplorable attempts for Religion that the all-reconciling peaceable Newtrallist who throgh his pliable sterne of disposition in these spirituall matters is become of the halfe-bloud with the Atheist and who wanteth as is commonly noted both learning grace vertue is particulerly enlightened by God in setting downe what articles of fayth are only necessary to mans Saluation and what are to be reputed but as accessory and of smaller importance To such straites we see is the defence of the former doctrine driuen vnto Seeing therefore this doctrine of our Omnifidians or rather Nullifidians for indeed while they seeme to allow all Religions they take away all Religion is encompassed on all sides with so many notorious absurdityes as are displayed in this Chapter and seing it cannot be true except there be a retrogradation of all matters heere on earth and a turning of the world as they say vpside downe that is except the most learned become most madde and the most ignorant most wise Therfore since such comportment and carriage of thinges is not sorting to Gods Prouidence and Charity towards manking let euery man who thinketh he hath a soule to saue or loose vndoubtedly assure himselfe that there is but one true Fayth or Religiō wherin he may auaileably expect saluation and that the sauing fayth of Christ wherewith the soule is cloathed is like vnto the inconsutible garment of Christ both being incapable of diuision renting or partition Now for the greater illustration of this point by way of similitude and as tending towards the closure of this treatise Imagine that a man pretendeth right and title to certaine Lands taketh aduice of all the learned Lawyers Coūsellours of the whole Realme to
whom he sheweth all his Euidences some of which Euidences do cary a title only in grosse and in generall others proue a more particuler more restrayned right to the sayd Lands Imagine further that vpon the diligent perusall of these Euidences the ioynt consent and iudgment of all the sayd Lawyers should after their longe and serious Demurrs conspyre in this one point to wit that for the recouering obtayning of the said Lands the foreshewed Euidences in generall are not sufficient alone seeing diuers other men not hauing any true interest in the sayd Lands may neuerthelesse insist and vrge their like generall clayme but that with the help of the sayd Common Euidences he must more punctually relye for the gayning of his presumed inheritance vpon other more particuler and personall Conueyances and Assigments Now all these learned Counsellours agreeing in this sentence fortyfying their iudgments herein with their owne experience in the like case with the new Reports warranting the same with the authority of all the auncient learned ReuereÌ„d Iudges before them lastly with the force of reason confirming no lesse If some one Empericke Atturney or other skilfull only by a litle experience in making a Nouerint vniuersi should steppe forth armed only with impudency and ignorance pronounce the foresayd sentence of all those learned Sages to be false and that the party pretending right to the sayd lands were sure by his generall Title and Euidences only to obtayne the same all other his more particuler Euidences being but vnnecessary needelesse theerunto who might not heere iustly contemne and reiect the rash censure of such a fellow Or could not the party clayming the former inheritance be worthily reprehended if by reiecting the graue Counsell of the learned Lawyers and following the aduyce of this ignorant man should finally loose all clayme title and possibility to his sayd Inheritance Our case is not much vnlike heerto Wee all pretend a right to the Inheritance of the kingdome of Heauen for we reade (*) lac 1. Coronam vitae praeparauit Dominus diligentibus se Our title in generall therto is our beliefe in the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. the beliefe whereof is most necessary but not sufficient All emineÌ„t men for learning both Catholikes and Protestants do proue from the Scriptures from the authority of Gods Church from the nature of Heresy from the definition of true fayth from diuers other principles and reasons aboue expressed that no man can attayne to his heauenly Inheritance by belieuing only the former fundamentall points of Christianitie if so he haue not a true and particuler fayth of many other lesse principall Articles of Christian Religion Nowe commeth heere a dissolute gamnelesse ignorant fellowe not practised in any kind of good literature for it is obserued as aboue is sayd that all our most forward Neutrallists are meÌ„ for the most part voyde of Learning Vertue and Conscience who pereÌ„ptorily out of his Pythagorean chayre that is without any proofe affirmeth that a beliefe in generall of the Articles of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion is only sufficient to mans saluation that the doctrines of Purgatory Freewil Reall Presence and other Controuersies betweene the Catholiks Protestants are not in any sort necessary to the purchasing of our eternall welfare what way soeuer we hould but are to be reputed in respect of that end points indiffereÌ„t vnauayleable and as the Greeke is meerely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Bye-matters Who would heere not commiserate the folly and ignorance of such a man but especially pittie the soules seduced by so blind a Guyde THE CONCLVSION of the whole Treatise CHAP. XVII HITHERTO Good Reader it is sufficiently I hope demonstrated that euery Religion though professing the name of Christ and belieuing in the Trinity the Incarnation and the like fundamentall points of christian Fayth if their beliefe in other secondary lesse principall points be erroneous cannot promise to it selfe any security of Saluation and consequently that the controuerted articles at this day betweene Catholikes and Protestants touching Purgatory Freewill Praying to Saints Sacrifice c. are of that great importance as that the professours on both sides to vse the phrase of a blessed martyr (*) Camp in decem rationib rat 10. in the same case vnuÌ„ caeluÌ„ capere non potest It now remayneth to shew that seeing at this day there are originally but two different Religions among christians to wit the catholike Religion and the Protestant within which are included all its branches and descendents whether the catholike or the Protestant Religion is that wherein a man may be saued But seeing this Subiect is most learnedly and painefully intreated â—f by many Catholike wryters who from 〈◊〉 authorities both Diuine humane haue â—efragably euicted the truth of their owne â—eligion and falshood of the Protestants â—ofession and consequently that in the â—atholike not in the Protestant fayth the â—ules eternall happynes is to be purchased â—erefore I doe remit the reader for his greaâ—er satisfactioÌ„ therin to the perusal of the said â—ookes particulerly to the studying raâ—er theÌ„ to the reading only of that most elaâ—orate learned and vnanswerable Worke â—f the Protestants Apology of the Roman Church Only before I heere end I must make â—ould to put the Reader in remeÌ„brance with that the Protestant Religion in this former Treatise though but casually and incidentâ—y is most truly charged to wit First with â—articuler coÌ„demnations passed vpon diuers â—f its chiefest articles euen by seuerall senteÌ„â—es iudgements of the Primitime church â—nd that therefore those doctrines so condeÌ„â—ed yet after defended with all froward â—ertinacy agaynst the church of God are hereby discouered for playne and manifest Heresies this point being further euicted â—mplicitely both from the testimonies of hoâ—y Scripture as also from the definition of Heresy aboue expressed Secondly that the doctrinall speculations and positions in thâ— Protestants fayth most strongly mooue tâ— Wills of such as beliefe them to all vice â—â—berty and sensuality Thirdly that God oâ— of the infinite abisme of his Iustice hath pâ—nished euen in this world as earnest giuen 〈◊〉 far greater punishment reserued in the lyâ— to come with most fearefull vnnaturall 〈◊〉 prodigious deaths the first InueÌ„tours in oâ— age Promulgatours of the sayd doctrineâ— and such deathes as his diuine Maiesty is accustomed to send to his professed enemyes Fourthly that Protestancy is torne asundeâ— with intestine diuisions diuers Professourâ— of it charging their Brethren-Professourâ— with Heresy despayring of their future saluatioÌ„ From all which we may conclude that except Heresy dissolution of manners most infamous and calamitous deathes anâ— disagreements in doctrine betweene one the same sect be good dispositions meanâ— to purchase Heauen the Protestant Religioâ— can neuer bring her Belieuers thereto What then remayneth but who will expect saluatioÌ„ should seeke it only in the Catholike
auditis nec vocatis Geneuae 1582. A threefold Answere to the Brethren of Tubinga their threefold writing concerning three most weighty Questions c. Of the supper of the Lord Of the Maiesty of Christ as Man And of not condemning the Churches of God before they be heard or called Ad Iohannis Brentij argumenta Iacobi Andreae Theses quibus carnis Christi omni praesentiaÌ„ nituntur confirmare id est aduersum renouatos Nestorij Eutichetis errores Responsum Geneuae 1570. An Answere to the Arguments of Iohn Brentius to the Conclusions of Iacobus Andreas by which they endeauour to confirme the Vbiquity or presence of Christs flesh euery where that is to say against the renewed Errors of Nestorius Eutiches Apologia ad omnes Germaniae Ecclesias reformatas quae sub Zwingliani Caluiniani nominis inuidia vim iniuriaÌ„ patiuntur Tiguri 1578. An Apology of all the Reformed churches of Germany which through the Enuy of the Name of Zuinglius Caluin do suffer violence iniury Christopheri Pezelij Apologia verae doctrina de dâ—â—â—itione Euangelij apposita Thrasonicis praestigijs Iohannis Wigandi Wittenbergae 1572. An Apology of the true Doctrine concerning the Definition of the Ghospell against the Thrasonicall enchantments of Ioannes Wigandus by Christophorus Pezelius Colloquij Montisbelgardensis inter Iacobum Andreae Theodorum Bezam Acta Tubingae 1584. The Actes of the Colloquy at Montbelgard betweene Iames Andrew Theodore Beza Veritatis victoria ruina Papatus Saxonici Losannae 1563. The Victory of Truth the Ruine of the Popedome of Saxony Hamelmannia siue Aries Theologizans Diaâ—gus oppositus duabus narrationibus historicis Herâ—anni Hamelmanni Neostadij 1582. Hamelmannia or the Theologizing Ramme A Dialogue against two Historicall Narrations of Hermanus Hamelmannus Christiani Kittelmanni decem graues perâ—iciosi errores Zwinglianorum in Doctrina de pecâ—atis Baptismo ex proprijs ipsorum libris colleâ—i refutati Magdeburgae 1562. Ten weighty pernicious Errors of â—he Zwinglians in the Doctrine concerning Sinne Baptisme Collected out of their owne books refuted by Christianus Kittleman Iohannis Mosellani Praeseruatiua contra venenum Zwinglianorum Tubingae 1586. An Antidote or Preseruatiue againsâ— the poyson of the Zwinglians by Ioannâ—â— Mosellanus De Vnitate personali supernaturali duarâ—â— Naturarum in Christo contra blasphemam Dispâ—tationem Eusebij Cleberi Pastoris Saugalensis iâ— Heluetia Tubingae 1586. Of the Personall Supernaturall Vnity of two Natures in Christ against the blasphemous Disputation of Eusebius Cleberus Pastour of Saugall in Suitzerland De gaudijs aeternae vitae quomodo Sacramentarij nobis illa gaudia imminuant Erfordia 1585. Of the Ioyes of Eternall life And how the Sacramentaries do in part defraude 〈◊〉 of them Now from all the premises aboue I hauâ— conclude that if the seuerall opinions among the Protestants be not in their iudgement maters of Indifferency but are by theÌ„selues truly reputed for Heresies the maintayners of them not houldden to be in state of Saluation as appeareth both from the Protestants reciprocall coÌ„demnations of one another as also from the former Titles of their owne Bookes written agaynst one another then with much more reason may the same sentence be pronounced of the many irreconciliable Controuersies differently belieued and houlden by the Catholikes and Protestants And the rather since as is aboue sayd there is a farre greater disparity and difference of doctrine betweene the Catholikes and the Protestants then betweene the Protestant the Protestant THE TRVTH OF THIS FORMER Doctrine demonstrated from the many Absurdityes necessarily accompanying the contrary doctrine CHAP. XVI SVCH is the sweet Prouidence of the Diuine Maiesty in disposall of thinges as that he euer causeth truth to be warranted with many irrefragable reasons and falshood to be attended on with diuers grosse and ineuitable absurdityes that so the iudgment of man may be the better secured for the imbracing of truth and remayne the lesse excusable if in place of truth it entertayne falshood Errour Of the reasons conuincing the infallible truth of our doctrine maintayned in this treatise I haue already discussed aboue in the tenth Chapter Now heere I will a little insist in disclosing the many and palpable absurdities accompanying the contrary doctrine which point will chiefly rest besides some other short insertions in a recapitulation of most of the former heads or braunches aboue handled For if this doctrine were true to wit that euery one might be saued in his owne Religion or that the beliefe only of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion or the Creed were sufficient thereto notwithstaÌ„ding the beliefe of other erroneous opinions and heresies Then would it follow First that the holy Scriptures of Christ and his Apostles were most false which haue inueyghed so much agaynst Heresies and haue denounced the heauy iudgment of damnation agaynst the professours of them as aboue is shewed which comminations and threats the scripture in some places not only extendeth to all Hersies or Heretikes in generall without (a) Tit. 3. Gal. c. 5. Rom. c. 16. 1. Tim. 1. any limitation but also in some other they are particulerly restrayded to certayne Heresies seeming of smaller importance then the denyall of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion the Creed c. as is euident touching the denying (b) 1. Tim. cap. 4.2 Tim. c. 2.1 Ioan. c. 2. of marriage and of eating of certayne meates and touching the Natures of Christ c. Now that the denyall of other inferiour articles of fayth then of the Trinity Incarnation c. is playne Heresy is demonstrated aboue both from the definition of Heresy and from the iudgment of the Primitiue Church Secondly the foresayd doctrine impugneth the definition of Fayth giuen by the (f) Hebr. c. 11. Apostle which definition of fayth comprehendeth a generall beliefe of all articles of Christian Religion and is not therefore to be limited to any one kind of them In like sort it destroyeth the priuiledges dignity of fayth set down by the foresayd Apostle who (g) Mat. vltimo Hebr. 11. promiseth saluation to him that hath faith as also that without fayth we cannot (h) Ephes 4. Act. 4. Rom. 12. c. please God but such excellencies cannot be ascribed to a Bastard fayth which belieueth some thinges true others false they are therfore eyther to be giuen to a true entire and perfect fayth in all points or els the Apostle grossely erred in assigning to fayth the aforesayd priuiledges seing a false fayth is no better then no faith at all Againe it depriueth a Christian faith of its true mark or character of Vnity so much celebrated by the (h) Ephes 4. Rom. 12. vide Cant. c. 6. Apostle Now then if Vnity of fayth be necessary to Saluation how can both Protestants and Catholikes expect saluation seeing there is no greater distance betweene the opposite parts of a Diameter then there is