point and Article of Christian Faith as well according to the substance resurget that our Saviour should rise again which Protestants grant to be a fundamentall point as the circumstance of time tertia die the third day Now suppose that some Christian to whom this whole sentence of Scripture is sufficiently propounded should firmly believe the substance of the Resurrection because he esteems it to be a fundamentall point but should disbelieve the precise circumstance of time that it was onely upon the third and no other day I demand seeing both the one and the other is propounded equally as expresly contained in that sentence of Holy Scripture whether he that disbelieves that the Resurrection happened upon the third day and dies in that belief can be saved To your distinction of fundamentall and not fundamentall Answ 15 it is as much yours as ours and what the late Reverend and Learned Archbishop of Cant. answered the Jesuit or A. L. in that point the same I give you and beseech you as you will answer it to Almighty God say whether you do not believe the Jesuit or A. C. was not fully satisfied by the Bishop If you will have more thus Points fundamentall without believing which an ignorant man cannot be saved are set down in the Creed points fundamentall which a learned man opposing that is Maliciously Schismatically Heretically opposing are many more even as many as the Scriptures propose or the Church the Catholick Church either Representative in a lawfull Generall Council or otherwise collected altogether shall determine from the Scripture either Divinely or deductively For your Catalogue and precise number of fundamentall Errors in Faith as it came from a cunning brain so I leave it where I found it To your more modest demand which are destructive of and which are consistent with Salvation I answer impugning any Article of Faith stubbornly and maliciously is destructive of Salvation disbelieving what a Church-shall determine though it consists not with yet is not destructive of Salvation To your Grecian Church erring fundamentally about the Procession of the Holy Ghost I say no more then what some of your own have said though they disagree in words yet they agree in sence and so erre not fundamentally thereby to make it no true Church of Christ but onely circumstantially and so remain a true Church of Christ which if you do not remember you may take it in this Distick Ex Patre Gnato procedit Spiritus Almus Quamvis dissideat nomine Graecafides An Erroneous Church they may be in this particular yet a true Church they are notwithstanding this particular because they deny not the Consubstantiality of the Persons For your lightness of matter which the Creed containes as it came in by a Parenthesis so I wish you had left it out for fear some whether yours or ours I fear both think lightly in time of all The circumstances of Time and Persons Pontius Pilate and the Third day are to be believed as well as the Substance Christ suffering and his Resurrection that is the circumstances being maliciously impugned not simply disbelieved will not consist with Salvation To your precise number of Canonicall Books of Scripture though the Creed define them not yet that doth not argue the Creed not to b◠in them or they in the Creed put both together and you have a sufficient Rule to know which are and which are not fundamentall points Though the Scriptures do not tell you which are and which are not Canonicall yet the Church hath and for all that the Scripture is the Rule of Faith not the Church because the Church is but the Door and Threshold the Scripture the house and Foundation The incorrupt purity of the Originall we enjoy in our Translations because our Translations agree with the Originall nor yet doth it follow that the determinate belief of what is true Scripture is necessary to Salvation that is to all men to all men fundamentall points are necessary to some onely all is necessary Nor is your Example so evident as you would have it appear for you begin it with a suppositum non supponendum make it your own not another mans case and deny the Resurrection of Christ upon the Third day or assign it to another if you dare I dare not nor dare I say you may be saved or shall be damned if you do such secrets belong not to me and I wish you not to be too busie with them lest you scorch your fingers I demand farther Quest 16 That seeing St. Paul Heb. 11.1 saies that Faith is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the substance or ground as the Protestants English Bible of Anno 1648. hath it of things hoped for and is reckoned up by the same Apostle Heb. 6.1 2. amongst those which are called by him Basis the Foundation one of them being Faith to God and the Apostle Eph. 2.20 saies we are built 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon the foundation of the Prophets and the Apostles which now according to the Protestants can be nothing else save the Writings of the Prophets and Apostles in Holy Scripture I demand whether to say that some points of Faith are not fundamental or belonging to the foundation be not as contrary to common sense as to say that some stone in the foundation of a building belongs not to the foundation or is not fundamental Sir Answ 16 whether the Translation be Ground or Substance needs not trouble you nor shall it me since the Original will bear either and Faith to God is one of them which are called Basis or foundation And we are built upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles may signifie the writings of the Prophets and Apostles in holy Scriptures This and all this will not bring in your demand whether to say that some points of Faith are not fundamental or belonging to the foundation be not as contrary to common sense as to say that some stone in the foundation of a building belongs not to the foundation or is not fundamental Or if it did what harm hence to the Church of England which saies not any points of Faith are not fundamental Further I demand Quest 17 That seeing St. Paul affirms in the forecited place Heb. 6.2 that Laying on of hands amongst many other points is the foundation how Protestants can deny that seeing the Laying on of hands is disbelieved and rejected by them in the Sacrament of Confirmation and by some in the Administration of Holy Orders as a Popish Superstition such Protestants differ fundamentally from those of the Roman Church Or if the Laying on of hands belong to the foundation as St. Paul here affirmed why Annointing with Oyle mentioned by St. James should not also be a fundamental point Or why Laying on of hands being onely as Protestants esteem it a Ceremony not Sacramental should be here termed the foundation and the substance of the Eucharist which all hold to be Sacramental and more than
It is not long since you said for 900. yeares now a thousand but to let that pass for it is but 100. yeares difference and we can well afford it you since it is said again as before prove any point that the Church of England holds was not the universall Doctrine of the Catholick Church for 900. yes 1600. yeares and then it shall be confest you have said something and therefore no danger yet but Christians were saved in and by the right way but not in and by the Roman way as the Roman way is now And yet more you had some that did tell you that the present Roman way was not is not a safe way to Salvation what else perswaded St. Bernard to deny praying to Saints What else before him put Gelasius to say taking the Cup from the Laity cannot be done without grand Sacriledge What else after both put Gerson to give this sage advice I see that the Reformation of the Church will never be effected by a Council without the Presidence of a well-affected wise and constant guide Let the members therefore provide for themselves throughout the Kingdoms and Provinces when they shall be able and know how to compass this work What else made Robert de Grosteste write a sharpe Letter to the Pope exhorting him to reforme some Monstrous Enormities which flew from Rome as a poysonous Fountain and infected the whole Church And this and a great deal more does tell you some in those times there were to shew you you were in danger Whether it hath any shew of probability Quest 14 that the said pretended Errors though they rase not the Foundation of Christian Faith as the late Protestants confess Bishop of Cant. p. 283. yet they may in time endanger the rasing and destruction of it as they argue seeing that after the universall belief of them for 1000. yeares together the Foundation yet remains undestroyed and entire For if 1000. years continuance of them hath stood with the integrity of the Foundation what appearance is there that they will ever cause or induce the destruction of it No indeed there is not a shew of probability Answ 14 but there is a sound probability of it and this the Archbishop p. 285. tells you such ill luck you have in quoting him saying that the Errors of the Roman Church are so many and some so great for which he cites Bellarmine In praefat operibus praefixa as weaken the Foundation that it is very hard to go that way to Heaven especially to them that have had the Truth manifested to them And surely the Foundation once weakned is in some probability of being rased and destroyed even by the vertue of Gutta cavat Lapidem Further concerning this Protestant distinction of Errors in Faith Fundamentall and not Fundamentall Quest 15 I demand first what they understand by fundamentall Errors for if they mean any nicety in speculation or Theologicall discourse it belongs not to the knowledge of the unlearned either therefore by a fundamentall Error such an Error in Faith as destroys Salvation howsoever that comes to pass or they say nothing to the present purpose This therefore supposed to be their meaning I demand secondly a Catalogue and precise number of the fundamentall Errors in Faith that is how many and which are those Errors in Faith which destroy Salvation For what helps it a Christian to know that there are such destructive and damnable Errors unless he knew whether he held any such Errors himself or no And how can he ever be certain of that so long as he is ignorant which are fundamentall Errors which not If this Catalogue be refused I demand at least some evident means or mark to distinguish Errors in Faith destructive to Salvation or damnable from others consistent with Salvation or veniall which is neither to deny any of the Articles contained in the three Creeds as some Protestants have thought for one of them puts the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son the denyall of which they neither do nor can hold to be a fundamentall Error unless they affirm the Grecian Church to erre fundamentally and so deny it to be a true Church of Christ which were quite against the said Protestants seeing they maintain the contrary Nor is the Creed of the Apostles alone a sufficient Rule to determine fully which are fundamentall which not both because there are some things in it which by reason of the lightness of the matter they containe come not by far so near the radicall and primary mysteries of Christian Faith as do many points controverted betwixt Protestants and those of the Roman Church and therefore cannot with any shew of Truth be termed fundamentall by Protestants such as are the circumstances of Time and Persons as that our Saviour suffered under Pontius Pilate and no other judge that he rose the third and no other day c. and because some points necessary to the subsistance of Christian Faith according to Protestants are not expresly defined in that Creed as that the Holy Scriptures are the Divine word of God which is the precise number of the Books of Canonicall Scriprure whether there is any written word of God or no or any Sacraments c. So that a Christian finds not all fundamentall points of Faith set down expresly in the Apostles Creed neither is the Scripture a sufficient Rule to know which are which are not fundamentall points for there are a thousand nay a million of Truths expressed in Scriptures which touch not immediately the Foundation of Faith as Protestants terme it and no small number of points according to them fundamentall which are not exprest in Scripture as the number of Canonicall Books the entire incorrupt purity of the Originall in any Copy or Copies which is come to the hands of Protestants c. which in their principles are such points of Faith that true Faith and consequently Salvation cannot be obtained without them For if sole Scripture as they affirm be the Rule of Faith and all that is in Scripture is to be believed and nothing to be believed but what is in Scripture or evidently deduced from it seeing Faith is necessary to Salvation the determinate belief of all that is true Scripture from which onely they say the true points of Faith are drawn must be necessary to Salvation and so a fundamentall point of Faith Thirdly I demand how any Christian can affirm that the danger of any point of Faith whatsoever being sufficiently propounded as such is consistent with Salvation seeing all such denialls or disbeliefs include this damnable malice of attributing falsity to that which is revealed by God himself as all points of Faith are how small soever the matter be which is revealed in them which appeares evidently by this example I suppose that this sentence of Scripture tertia die resurget he shall rise again the third day is sufficiently propounded to any one as a
solution may pass for current who can be certainly assured that there is any true Church of Christ visible or invisible existent now in the world for all the promises concerning the continuance of it to the worlds end may be as well said to be as well conditionall and frustrate by the malice of men as this Eph. 4 c. and who knowes that the said malice is not already grown to that height that it hath deserved that God should take his true Church quite out of the world and so that there is now no true Church existent in all the world Sir in this long passage Answ 22 you have fought onely with your own wind instead of a Question you have supposed an Answer and then given your own Answer to your own Questioning Answer or Answering Question both which being full enough of I leave it as I find it unless you will have a Syllogisme without a Syllogisme Answer a Question without a Question and then you shall have it thus That which was never Questioned or Answered ought not now to be Questioned or Answered but the frustrating of Gods predictions conditionall or absolute by mans malice or merits was never Questioned or Answeted therefore now ought not to be Questioned or Answered Such as these may well come out of a Jesuiticall Court but never yet came from the Catholick Church Sir I must and do tell you there is little less then Blasphemy in your supposition and somewhat more then little less in your position this is beyond Nihil dictum quod non dictum fuit prius Whether it be not evident Quest 23 that unlearned Protestants who cannot determine differences in Religion either by force of Argument or places of Scripture but must wholly depend in the choice of their Faith upon Authority and Credit of Christian Teachers are not obliged in Conscience to prefer that Authority and credibility of Doctors which all circumstances considered is absolutely and unquestionably the greater Authority No Answ 23 it is not yet evident for unlearned Protestants can determine differences in Religion if not by force of Argument yet by places of Scripture which they of Rome cannot do and the reason is ready they deny their Laity we allow ours to read the Scripture and therefore need not depend upon their Teachers but upon the Teacher of us all nor have you yet proved your Authority unquestionably the greater but unquestionably the least of all Authorities unless you take it Sensu Romano non Catholico what the next produces we shall see Whether that Authority of Doctors Quest 24 where those of one side are equall at least if not exceeding them of the contrary party in Learning Wisdome Zeal Sanctity Vertue Sincerity and all other Qualities and Perfections which confer to the accomplishment of complete Authority in Christian Teacher and with this equality incomparably exceed the Doctors of the other party in number is not in all prudence to be judged absolutely and unquestionably the greatest Authority To pass your impertinences of Idem upon Idem Answ 24 and your over-weening opinion of exceeding the Protestants party in Learning Wisdome Zeal Sincerity Virtue Sanctity to which adde but the Scripture and we will acknowledge a complete Authority and submit to the exposition of that Authority in the sense of the four first Generall Councils and the Fathers of the first 800. years or a present lawfully called Generall Council to which if you will do the like we shall then praise God for the fruition of what we yet pray for the Peace and Unity of Christendom Whether this equality at least in all the said perfections Quest 25 is not to be found in the Roman Doctors compared with those of the Protestants Let the equality at least Answ 25 be granted in all the said perfections Quoad hominem though the Comparison savers not well what you gaine by it we may see anon Whether this forementioned equalizing the Protestant Doctors those of the Roman Church Quest 26 the many yeares of their continuance and universall extent of their Religion considered exceed not incomparably in number those of the Protestants profession No it doth not Answ 26 neither incomparably nor yet comparably for the many years of continuance will exceed on our part so that you divide the years equally from 800. to 800. and then judge your selves which 800. years comes nearest to the primitive purity in matter of Religion your 800. or our 800. Name but one general Council or any number of Fathers for the first 800. exceeding our number actum est the field is yours Whether this equality in perfections Quest 27 and incomparable excess in number considered all unlearned Protestants are not obliged both in Prudence and Conscience to prefer the Authority of the Roman Doctors before that of Protestants and consequently to follow the Roman and desert the Protestant Doctrine No Answ 27 not yet for all this is but Idâ—m per idem still onely you have now added Conscience to Prudence adde but Scripture to your Roman Doctors and that Scripture expounded by the first 800. years either representatively or successively or by a present lawfully called general Council and we shall have conscience yours and ours ruled by prudence and prudence following conscience and by both Unity restored Whether upon the foresaid considerations the Authority of the Protestant Doctors Quest 28 in all things wherein they contradict the Romans is not contemptible and unable to sway the judgement of any prudent Christian to frame any moral esteem of it for though in matters wherein they are seconded or not contradicted by an Authority incomparably greater than their own they may deservedly be esteemed for their Naturall Abilities and Morall Qualities worthy of Credit yet in all things wherein they stand in opposition and contradiction against an Authority incomparably exceeding theirs they deserve nothing but to be sleighted and contemned by all those who are to be led by the sole force of Authority Thus when Protestant Doctors affirm that either the Scriptures or Fathers are for them and against the Roman Church what they say in this is not to be regarded seeing the Authority of the Roman Doctors absolutely greater then theirs unanimously affirm the quite contrary thus when they affirm that the Roman Church is full of Errors and Superstitions crept in they know neither when nor how their accusation is to be sleighted being clearly and constantly contradicted by a far greater Authority Thus when they say that Protestants may be saved living and dying wilfully in their Religion they deserve no Credit at all for the quite contrary is most constantly defended by the incomparably stronger Authority of the Roman Doctors the like is to be affirmed in all points of difference betwixt the two Religions so that a Protestant is not to consider the Abilities and Authority of his Doctors absolutely or in matters out of Controversie but as contradicting an Authority incomparably excelling theirs