professe and practise the contrary to Christ's precepts as in mutilating the Communion and severall kinds of superstition idolatry and tyranny We are not in a Schisme for not subscribing and obeying but He for imposing And also it will follow that Mons r. Daillé hath taken a very right method And that the question of schisme ought to follow and not go before that of heresie or errour For if the Bishop of Rome be in schisme we are not then in fault for not remaining under his government although we had been under it ever since the first plantation of Christianitie in England hoc dato non concesso since he now exacteth our assent subscription to a damnable errour as a part of our Communion And therefore I cannot but wonder That the contrary methode being so preposterous and against both reason and the practise and opinions of the Fathers should be so much used among the Romanists For thereby they do not examine but praesuppose the conclusion First they would have us grant That the Church of Rome is the onely true Church on earth and then examine whether she speak truth and whether we did well in separating from her But I wonder at Cardinal Perron more then at any man That he considering his vast understanding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and large preamble of two leaves concerning the benefit and necessity of a good definition should Repl. lib. 1. c. 8. define the Church to be a societie of those whom God hath called to salvation by the profession of the TRUE FAITH sincere administration of the Sacraments and adherence to lawfull Pastours and yet that he should both use the Romanists method and find fault with them that do not ibid. c. 4. For if the Church be such a Society Either every member of that Church is obliged to know and therefore to examine the true Faith and sincere administration of the Sacraments or he is obliged to make profession of that which he doth not know and hath not examined Which is far beneath a rationall man much more a Christian And in truth this I take to be the first particular that should be considered For unlesse men before they dispute will be perswaded to agree upon the state of the questions and in what order they should be handled they must needs end their discourse where they should have begun it as to instance in the point in hand D r Potter p. 81. proveth that it is lawfull to abstain from communicating with a Church that imposeth the profession of her corruptions as a condition of her communion Because 't is lawfull to separate from any other corrupted Societie in the like case as if a Monastery should reform it self and reduce into practise ancient good discipline when others would not c. or if a societie of men be universally infected with some disease c. M. Knot in answer alters the case very ingenuously to the quite contrary c. 5. § 31. M. Chillingworth moderates it to do him a courtesie c. 5. § 85. In requitall whereof M r. K. first blames him for it and then begs the question saying That in the question between the Church of Rome and us there is a divine command not to depart whatever she impose So that till the questions be stated right in due method that is till it be examined whether the Church of Rome have corruptions and impose them 't will never appeare whether she or we be in the schisme And certes methinks it is not fair to beg the question so oft as he doth tell us that we are no Christians unlesse we are infallibly certain that the Church is infallible and yet never pretend to prove it so by any other motives than those of credibility which at best are but probable and to me they seem not such I protest I have oft wisht heartily they did having found so many discouragements for a scholar in late years that I long since concluded him a wiseman who said He that encreaseth notions encreaseth sorrow Much study is a wearinesse to the flesh Eccles i. 18. xii 12. concluding that the love of learning and truth which is the most that I pretend to would not onely be tedious but sinfull if felicitie could be attained full as well without it which it might if it were infallibly certain that the Romane Church is infallible And so while M r. Knot goes about to prove that reason overthroweth Christian Religion and tells us that it must be built onely upon the Authority of the Church and then builds that Authoritie onely upon reasons and those very weak ones and no way able to support his superstructure he will let all fall unlesse the same faculty be a pillar under his arm and a bulrush under ours And though he make great use of interjections in exclaiming against Chillingworth and other Protestants in England for pulling down he will never deserve any thanks in my opinion of the Christian world for this building Which mindeth me of the second particular I intend to speak of viz. II. The occasion of printing this book I confesse though it were translated several years since at the urgency of some learned friends whose judgement concerning the acutenes of it I had more reason to trust then mine own yet I was very unwilling to publish it till now that I am convinced of the seasonablenesse of it being certified from English Seminaries beyond the seas indè Quòd nuper-veteres cōmigravere coloni and convinced by relations from Newcastle Brecknock and other places on this side the water That they are very busie at such harvest-work here as Parsons the English Jesuite in his Memorial written at Sevil 1596 and Contzen the Moguntine Jes in the second book of his Politicks and 18. chap. and Campanella in his Monarchia Hispan appointed them being told by the London Book-sellers who are the most competent judges quisque in arte sua Beacon fired p. 6. that at least thirty thousand Popish books have been printed there within these three last years and in a book entituled The Petition of the six Counties of South-Wales and the County of Monmouth to the late Parliament of whole Parishes faln off to Popery since the Ministers have been cast out and yet many men ask WHAT NEED OF A CLERGY Alas I cannot but tremble to see how passionately they are in love with ruine and pursue nakednesse vengeance and desolation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Prov. xxix 18. In a word knowing turpius ejicitur c. that men are with more ease kept within the Church of England then reduced to it and seeing many daily who formerly have been the most forward to cry Venient Romani posting out of it and furious for Romane superstition falling as 't is the custome of the giddy vulgar from one extreme to another Especially considering that the zeal of the greatest member of our Pastours most whereof might far better be spent in pressing
do not Protestants suffer more in most other parts of Christendome by the State or the Inquisition where some as our worthy Confessour M r Moll have been and are kept in a close prison or dungeon for above twenty years meerly for Religion or by both So that those arguments which their Christian Moderatour brings supposing them rationall in themselves cannot be such coming from a Romanist unless Quod tibi fieri non vis alteri nèfeceris be an unreasonable Law not Nature's Nay do not the Socinians Anabaptists Arians Atheists suffer too and burn rather then turn witnesse Servetus John of Leiden Hacket Vanninus Fontanier Ket Leggat Theophile Gentilis and many others 4. Victory over all sorts of enemies This makes more for Turcism then Popery for the Alcaron then the Conc. of Trent 5. CONVERSION OF INFIDELS I would fain know what he means by Infidels for he cannot but know that thousands have been converted by Protestants whether all of every nation or how many converts are required to make up this note and whether so many in every age 'T is certain that multitudes of Infidels have been converted to Mahumetanisme and more Christians of late years to Judaisme and Turcisme then Turks or Jews to Christianity or Popery And to see what manner of Christians the Romanists make in both the Indies you need read no other books then their own letters their own Bishop de las Casas book or Benzo's cited p. 30. To turn a rich fruitfull land into a desolate wildernesse is in the new Romane language conversion In a word who ever shall please to examine these notes which are M r Knot 's last argument and other mens first chief and ordinary for the infallibility of the Church or any other that he or his Society can bring shall find that they offend against those properties which Bellarmine Salmeron and other Romane Controvertists require in all Notes as That they should be verae manifestae propriae non communes inseparabiles c. It being the most undoubted note of a distinguishing Note Alteri non quadrare Indeed his marks seem to me so weak arguments that I cannot find how any man can be convinced by them unlesse through the Authority of the propounder so that if a man yields upon them it must be out of civility or fear of gainsaying But when men are resolved upon a Conclusion impertinencies are easily fancied to be as strong demonstrations as any in Euclide The Pythagorians being bred up in positions concerning numbers fancied them the principles even of Naturall bodies Every rack in the clouds is a Regiment in a young souldiers eye and the least scratch in the wall a babie in the childs all chymnes sound their Whittington I wish the best of M r Knots arguments were as concluding as the worst of Mons r Drelincourts 100 against Transubstantiation I heartily wish as I said before for an infallible Judge and shall come with as much prejudice against my own perswasion for as yet I see no hope of any in this world to hear M r Knots argument as he can desire in any Reader But I would be loth to run in a circle and mistake a wish that some person were infallible for a proof that he is And therefore if M r K. shall think this paper deserves any answer besides an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which I ever expected in this Controversie I shall beseech him that before he tell us again that he hath proved the Church of Rome infallible He would be pleased to resolve these following questions which I think must necessarily precede the examination of that which he in most leaves taketh for granted I. Whether there be any infallible Judge on earth II. Whether any Church be that Judge and not rather some one of those ten things which Mr. Chill nameth and bringeth Scripture for chap. 3. § 8 III. Whether the Romane Church be that Church IV. If it be in what capacity whether the Infallibility be 1. in the head the Pope as the Jesuites generally and many Canonists affirm or 2. in the body of the Church as Panormitanus Occam Waldensis Antoninus Clemangis Cusanus and others hold and give their reasons And then whether in the whole body diffusive or in the collective in a Councel And if a Councel be infallible then whether it be so onely with the Popes confirmation or without it And which way soever they say I enquire further V. How we shall certainly know who must be members of it 1. Clergy and Laicks or 2. onely Clergy And if so whether 1. onely Bishops as commonly they say or 2. Presbyters too and Deacons or Chorepiscopi at least for we find all these usually subscribing VI. Or let the Councel be as they would have it how shall I be sure they are infallible For 1. Are they so absolutely infallible as that they cannot determine falsly in rebus fidei do what they will Or 2. Are they infallible onely if they use all those good means which God hath given them to find truth that is if they read studie dispute search records pray and lay aside all passions private ends and interests VII How shall I know when they determine aright what is required to a Synodicall Constitution Must all concurre in the Vote or will the major part serve the turn VIII What makes a Councel Generall Must all the Bishops in the Christian world be called IX And when they are called must they all come else is it no General Councel X. Who must call the Generall Councel the Pope or Christian Kings and Emperours and how shall I be assured which of them must XI How farre are their determinations infallible whether in matters of fact as well as faith And XII If in matters of faith onely then whether in fundamentals onely as many Catholicks said of old and D r Holden the Sorbonist at present or in superstructures too as others believe And then XIII How shall I infallibly know which points are fundamental which not XIV But admit all this were determined and our infallible Judge were a General Councel with the Pope yet in a time of schisme when there be two or three Popes at once as there were Clement III Greg. VII Gelasius II and Greg. VIII Celestin II and Honorius II. Anacletus II and Innocent II. Victor IV and Alex. III. Clement VII and Urbane VI. Eugenius IV and Felix V. Gautier the Jesuite will help you to a larger catalogue and these warring one against another as when there were two triple-crowns one at Rome the other at Avignon the Italians for the first the French for the latter the Court and the Cardinals bulls and indulgences at both places And thus were there saith John le Maire many Popes at once one against another for 40 years together so that the learnedst Clergy-men alive knew not which was S t Peters true successour and thus saith reason may there be again Then I
King nor more openly renounce his subjection and that allegiance which he oweth him then by giving to some other besides him the name glory honour and service of his Soveraigne so t is not possible that we should offend God more mortally then in attributing to any other but His Majesty the name of our God and Lord which appertains to Him alone and so the honour and service agreeable to these names This was the main crime of the Gentiles who thus broke Gods Covenant and pulled upon themselves most dreadfull wrath and curses in this world and eternall death in the next S. Paul teacheth us Rom. i. 25. That this rendering to the creature a service due to the Creatour was the source and fountain whence all the mischiefs issued forth upon them And 1 Cor. vi 10. he saith plainly That idolaters that is to say Such as render to any creature the service due to God shall never inherit the Kingdome of heaven And conformably to this S. John Rev. xxi 8. protesteth That their portion shall be in the lake burning with fire and brimstone which is the second death For of all the truths that are taught in the Old and New Testaments there is not any one which is so clearly and so often expressed as this very thing not any one which hath been lesse contested by hereticks or more universally and affirmatively forbidden by the Church w ch hath ever constantly broke off from those that under any pretence whatsoever will render to the creature the service due to God Even Rome her self of whom we complain disagrees with us but very little if at all in this point For though she render great honours to divers creatures yet she ever acknowledged That there is a kind of religious service which cannot without sacriledge be given to any thing but God alone this she commonly termeth the adoration of latria to distinguish it from other honours and services which she beleeves may without sin be given to that which is not God If therefore there be any Article in all the Christian faith which should be called fundamentall it is this If there be any which we should preserve inviolably with the price of all that is deare unto us it is this Neverthelesse this very Article doth the Church of Rome oblige us to violate if we will communicate in her services For she doth most expressely command all such as be of her communion to render that soveraigne and highest kind of service which she calleth latria and confesseth to be due to none but God unto a thing which we believe to be a creature and not God himself She would have us to take for our great God for the Creatour of Heaven and earth for the Redeemer of mankind this sacrament which is indeed holy and precious but which yet our sense our reason and our faith grounded on the H. Scriptures findeth to be but bread She would have us give to this subject all the praise of the creation and redemption of the universe to invest it with all the glory that is due to our Soveraigne and highest Lord and hereupon prostrate our selves most humbly our bodies and souls before those altars whereon this is laid and in those streets where we meet it that we should celebrate the day which she hath consecrated to the honour of the Eucharist under the name of the feast of our great God and should pronounce anathema maran-atha against all them who approve not this doctrine and this practise Here I shall venture to addresse my self to any the most passionate among our Adversaries and take them for my Judges in this cause for my Counsellours in this difficultie You Sirs command me to adore the Sacrament of the Eucharist with the adoration of latria Now I cannot I must not conceal from you That I believe this Sacrament in its substance to be an inanimate creature having not yet been able to resist the Authority of my sense of my reason and of the H. Scriptures which tell me that it is nothing but bread My belief being thus what should I doe Shall I adore that which I know to be but a creature Why you cannot but see how God forbids the adoration of a creature under peril of eternall damation Your Authoritie pulls me on one side and Gods on the other In my judgement He forbids the very same thing that you desire Whither shall I turn me in this condition I doubt not but hereupon they 'l soon drive me from their Altars and forbid me to make use of that the Divinitie whereof I neither can nor will acknowledge For they oblige not men to adore their Host but because of a belief they have that it is truly Jesus Christ God blessed for ever Did they not believe it so to be they would not adore it they would not bring it to others to be adored So that since I have not that belief methinks they should not judge it fitting for me to adore it and if I should adore it they would impute this action to nothing but an extreme pusillanimitie and basenesse of spirit which for fear of men can cause me to doe a thing that I my self esteem unlawfull and unpleasing to God And let them not here alledge That I am deceived in the opinion that I have of the substance of the Eucharist For the question is not whether the Eucharist be bread or not this should be disputed apart but whether he who believes that it is bread in substance can adore it without making himself guilty of Sacriledge and giving a creature that honour which is due to the Creatour For if one should grant That he cannot which we now are coming to demonstrate from the premises very evidently I have gained the point that I intended to prove it being cleare that this supposeth We have had reason to separate from Rome seeing we believe that the Eucharist is bread in substance it being impossible for us to yield to that worship which she desires we should give it unlesse we give to a creature that which we are bound to give onely to the Creatour Whence all the odious question concerning schisme is ended For we call that schisme which is a separation made without necessity So that when my conscience forbids me under pain of Gods wrath and my own damnation to obey that which you command me in this particular 't is evident that it is not fancie pleasure or faction but a pure necessity that constraineth me to separate from you If you cannot tax this my opinion much lesse can you condemne my separation Accuse me if you please of stupidity For not being able to conceive how a body that is in heaven can be at the same time in a thousand places on earth how all the quantity of a complete man can be brought within one single point how a thing that my sense and reason knoweth to be bread and the H. Scripture calleth oftentimes bread can
ask how I shall know which is the infallible judge And if M r. K. give us in answer that generall rule which he sets down p. 369. When de facto any Pope defines some truth to be a matter of faith we are sure even by his doing so that he is true Pope Then I 'le reply to omit the circle he runs in that there may be not onely two but twenty true Popes together for twenty men may define twenty severall positions at the same time and all true and yet all these men may be foulely mistaken another time and if so I desire to know whether all these will be true Popes Or by what rule a Romanist may tell when a truth is defined and when not since Sixtus V. defined one Bible to be true Anno 1590. and Clemens VIII another two years after and each of them prohibited and condemned all but his own and these two Bibles contain many contradictions each to other See D r James of the contrariety of the vulgar Latine Bibles and certainly contradictory propositions cannot both be Gospel And if not then either one of these two was not such really whence inconveniences enough will follow or they were both true Popes and so both their definitions true and so no true Papist hath any true Bible XV. But suppose there be no schisme and all agreed on the Pope and a General Councel met How shall I be sure that he who is reputed Pope is so indeed seeing by their own principles Simonie makes him none See the Bull of P. Julius II. super Simoniaca Papae electione Si contigerit c. and Specul in tit de dispens § juxta vers 2. and Majolus de irregularitate l. 5. c. 47. p. 433. and that he was not Simoniacal it is impossible for me to know The election of Sixrus V. was notoriously Simoniacal For Cardinal d' Esté whom he bribed and promised to obey and defend against an opposite faction c. Sent all these obligations subscribed by Sixt. V. his own hand to Philip then King of Spain Who in the year MDLXXXIX sent to Rome to bid the Cardinals who had been elected before Sixt. V. came to the See to come to a Councel at Sevil in Spain where the original writing was produced and the crime was evidently proved And if so all the Cardinals which were made by this Sixtus were in reality no Cardinals and then all the Popes which have been made by those Cardinals since as Montaltus Sixtus his Nephew Urban VII Gregory XIV Innocent IX Clement VIII and Innocent X. that now is have been really no Popes See a book entituled Supplicatio ad Imperatorem Reges c. written at Rome by one that calls himself NOVUS HOMO and dedicated to K. James Anno MDCXII But testimony enough of such doings may be seen in the letters of Card. d' Ossat and the transactions of Card. de Joyeuse set down by Card. Pervon Heul sedes Apostolica orbis olim gloria nunc proh dolor efficeris officina Simonis Damian epist ad Firminum Baronius T. 11. 1033. XVI But admit the Pope were certainly known to be such and that neither he nor any of his predecessours came in by Simony yet how shall I know whether those Bishops who with him make up a Councel are Bishops indeed For if they be no Bishops then it is no Councel And that they are true Bishops it is for ever impossible for any Papist certainly to know For if he that did ordain them did not intend it when he gave Orders and whether he did or no God onely knows then by their own principles they are no Bishops and by consequence no Councel XVII But further how shall I know that the Pope and Bishops so met at Trent for example are Christians For if not then sure they are no legitimate Councel or Church representative And that they are Christians 't is impossible for any Catholick to know with any infallible certainty For if they be not baptized then I am sure with them they are no Christians and if the Priest that baptized them did not intend to do it then by the Canon of the Trent Councel they are not baptized Now what the Priest intended when he administred that Sacrament 't is impossible that any save God who knows the heart should certainly know without immediate revelation which they pretend not to and consequently 't is impossible that any of them should certainly know That ever there was a Pope or a Bishop or a Priest since our Saviours dayes nay impossible that They should know whether there he now one Christian in their Church and therefore much lesse that there is or hath been a lawfull Councel XVIII But admit all these doubts were clearly solved and a Councel in their own sense lawfull sitting and determining matters in Controversie yet how shall we know certainly with that absolute certainty M r Knot speaks of that these are their determinations specially since the Greek Church above two hundred years since accused the Romane for foisting a Canon into the Nicene Councels in behalf of the Popes being Head of the Universal Church which could never be found in the authentick copies though the African Bishops sent to Constantinople Alexandria Antioch to search for them Codex Can. Eccles Afr. Justel p. 39 40. We were not in the Councel nor ever saw any of the men that made the Canons we must rely on the honesty of the Amanuensis or of those other persons that conveigh them to us and those are certainly not infallible and we know there are such things as Indices expurgatorii foysting in and blotting out of Manuscripts XIX But admit all this cleared yet when I have indeed the genuine Canons and am sure of it how shall I be assured of the true meaning of them for M r K. tells us that we cannot without His Churches determination know what faith or repentance or any word else in the Scripture meaneth though I suppose the Apostles intended as well as he or I to be understood and though he tell us That the Scriptures are as perfect a rule as a writing can be I am fallible and may mistake and in his opinion so may any man but the Pope or a Councel This is no vain supposition for we know that Vega and Soto two famous and learned men in the Councel of Trent write and defend contradictory opinions yet each thinketh the Canon of the Councel to determine on his side Now of necessity one of them must mistake the doctrine of the Councel unlesse you 'l say the Councel determined contradictions and then the Councel is not infallible it self and if either of them mistook the Councel then it was not an infallible guide to him Now if learned men who were members of the Councel such as disputed much in it could not infallibly know the meaning of it how can I who am neither XX. Lastly not to trouble M. Knot with