Paul euery spirit that confesseth that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God saith S. Iohn 1. Iohn 42. Where let the words of St. Paul interpret the meaning of St. Iohn that not onely euerie spirit which confesseth that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God if so be that in workes they deny him not with which condition some would haue those words to bee vnderstood for many thinke aright of the incarnation of the son of God who in other things are not answerable to their profession but that this their confession is of God and from him and that as the Deuill is the Author of all cuill so there is â—o good whatsoeuer but proceedeth â—rom God and his most blessed spirit When the Scribes and Pharisees â—orded it in the seat of Moses and the Prophets many there were no doubt who though they communicated with them in the outward Sacraments and discipline of the Church yet were the flocke of another fold and like a few Oliues at the end of a twig after the shaking of the tree claue to the right stocke and waited for the redemption of Israel by Christ And thus doubtlesse it was with many heretofore and with some at this day which beeing outwardly of the Church of Rome wee may iustly notwithstaÌ„ding challenge to our selues Some of Gods people Doctor Chaloner â—redo Eccles Râ—uel 18. 4. are certainely in Babilon seeing such are warned by the spirit to come out of her and it were in vaine to command a man to depart a place if hee were not there But to conclude our first argument who can denie which is the principall that God hath his Church where Antichrist hath his Throne seeing as the Apostle tels vs he musâ— 1. Thes ◠〈…〉 4 〈…〉 sit in the Temple of God its God Quò◠sedes ciâ—â— in Templo Dei collocatur itâ— innuâ—tur tale fore eius Regnum quoâ— nec Christi nec Ecclesiae nomen aboleat That the seate of Antichrist is placeâ— in the Temple of God thereby is intimated vnto vs that his Kingdome should be such as should abolish neither the name of Christ nor of the Church saith that great Geneua Light I permit it 〈…〉 to your wise considerations saith one of no meane credit in our Church whether it bee more likely that as frenzic though it selfe take away the vse of Reason doth notwithstanding proue them reasonable Creatures which haue it because none can bee franticke but they so Antichristianitie being the bane and plaine ouerthrow of Christianitie may neuerthelesse argue the Church wherin Antichrist sitteth to be Christian CHAP. IX Our second Argument prouing that Popery taketh not away from fundamentall truth but addeth to it AS an Infant at the first both little and vnable to helpe it selfe gathereth strength and stature by degrees and likewise insensibly till he become a perfect man such hath beene the growth of the Man of sin at the first a Pigmy but now become a Sonne of Anak By what meanes from so small beginnings he attained to so great an height the wisedome of the wise hath discouered vnto vs. Impossible it were for the Rulers of that Synagogue either to haue gotten that power into their hands which now they hold or to mainetaine it now they haue it by making an open inuasion vpon the truth and oppugning the bulwarkes of Faith with hostile fury No Popery is a clandestine conspiracie and opposeth Doctor Chaloner Vnde Z. zâ—nia the Faith not directly but obliquely not formally but vertually not in expresse termes but by consequences and therefore vntill the Trumpets sounded the alarum and the Thunders in the Reuelation gaue warning few suspected it Wherefore is it said to be a mysterie of iniquitie but that it subtilely and secretly vndermineth the Faith not bidding open defiance vnto it Arius of old boldly and plainely denied the Diuinity of Christ Macedonius openly opposed the Diuinity of the Holy Ghost and the like If Popery should goe thus to worke what mysterie were there in it What which were not obuious to euery mans conceiuing Yea Vid. Dr. Chal. Vnâ—e Z zâ—â—ia what errour in doctrine or discipline is there brought into the Church by those builders of Babel which had not its first Originall from truth as it is iudiciously obserued that scarce any errour hath crept into the 〈…〉 lib. 1. Caâ—â— Church which tooke not its Originall and sourse from the ancient approued Discipline of the Church Thus we see their generall policie If we enquire into their particular practice we shall finde that the Popes Arithmeticke Dr. Chaloner credo Eâ—clesiam sanctâ—m Cathol which hee vseth in calculating the Articles of Faith is not substraction but addition What we purely affirm the Popish Writers for the most part do affirme the same the difference is that they affirme somewhat more than wee do They deny not so much that our affirmations are truth as that they say we affirme not all the truth whereupon they vsually stile vs in their writings * Harding against B. Iewell Negatinists For example sake Wee agree on both sides That the Scriptures are the rule of Faith That the Bookes of the Old Testament written in Hebrew are Canonicall That we are iustified by Faith That God hath made two receptacles for mens soules after death Heauen and Hell That God may be worshipped in Spirit without an image That we are to pray vnto God by Christ That there be two Sacraments That Christ is really receiued in the Lords Supper That Christ hath made one oblation of himselfe vpon the Crosse for the redemption propitiation and satisfaction for the sinnes of the whole world But see our affirmations content them not To the Scriptures they adde and equalize vnwritten traditions to the Hebrew Canon the Apocrypha to faith in the act of Iustification works to Heauen and Hell Purgatory Limbus Patram and Limbus Puerorum to the worship of God in Spirit Images to prayer to God by Christ Inuocation and Intercession of Saints to Baptisme and the Lords Supper fiue other Sacraments to the reality of Christ in the Sacrament his corporal presence to the sacrifice of Christ vpon the Crosse the sacrifice in the Masse with other like and these we deny These things being well weighed wee see how iustly wee may say since the Councell of Trent as Luther did before it That vnder the Papacy is much good nay all yea the very kernell of Christianity for as much as such affirmatiues of ours at least such as concerne the foundation of Faith haue been in all ages professed by the Church of Rome it selfe The nature then of an addition being such that it doth not directly M. Hocker his discourse of iustification deny but by consequence at the most that if that which is added bee such a priuation as taketh away the very essence of that whereunto it is added then by sequell it ouerthroweth wee
haue beene too prolixe already for which my ensuing breuity shall make amends CHAP. XIII Our last Argument from the iudgement of the Learned ALthough wee iudge what wee haue already deliuered in this cause to bee abundantly sufficient and our arguments such as will not readily bee answered yet because wee would not bee thought to hold that which no one learned or godly hath done before vs and that it may appeare that if to say the Church of Rome is a true Church be to fauour Popery the greatest Aduersaries that euer that Church had haue beene fauourers thereof with whom they must bee content to absolue or condemne vs it shall not be grieuous to vs to alledge the Testimonies of a few whereby it shall appeare that the best learned in our profession are of this iudgement We heard something by the way before of Caluius opinion we shall finde that he is still the same I suppose saith hee that in the Papacie some Church remaineth Calu. Epist 104. a Church crazed or if you will broken quite in peeces forlerne mishapen yet a Church Againe Semisepultus illie Instit lib. 4. cap. 2. Sect. 12. iacet Christus obrutum Euangelium There is Christ halfe buried the Gospell ouerwhelmed with humane traditions I deny her not the name of a Morn de Eccles Church saith another no more than to a man the name of a man as long as he liueth what sickenesse soeuer he hath Heare another of as deepe iudgment as any in our Church I acknowledge Zanch. Praefat. de Relig. the Church of Rome euen at this present day for a Church of Christ such a Church as Israel vnder Ieroboam yet a Church Marke his reason Euery man seeth except hee willingly hoodwincke himselfe that as alwaies so now the Church of Rome holdeth firmly and stedfastly the Doctrine of truth concerning Christ and baptizeth in the Name of the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost confesseth and auoucheth Christ for the onely Redeemer of the world and the Iudge that shall sit vpon quicke and dead receiuing true beleeuers into endlesse ioy faithlesse and godlesse men being cast with Sathan his Angels into flames vnquenchable Heare another In hunc modum iudicium facimus de Ecclesiâ in quâ est Papatus â—unius 〈…〉 de 〈◊〉 Deus vocat cam c. This is our iudgement concerning that Church in which the Papecie is God calleth her c. Exparte Dei vocatur adhuc Hammi Populus méus Ruchama misericordiam consequuta quae verissimè enparte suâ Lo-Hammi non Populus meus Lo-Ruchama non assequuta misericordiam potest appellari vt apud Hoseam Prophetam legimus On Gods part sbe is yet called Hammi my People and Ruchama one that hath obtained mercy who for her owne part by reason of her disobedience may truely bee said to be Lo-hammi not my People and Lo-Ruchama one that hath not obtained mercy as wee reade in the Prophet Hosea At ista Ecclesia nihil non habet corruptum Fateor sed quòd Diuiâ—â— habet omnia in Scripturis à Deo est quòd corrupta habet omnia ab ipâ—â est quòd diuina habet omnia Ecclesia est quòd eadem habet corrupta omniâ— Ecclesia corrupta est But that Church hath nothing which is not corrupted I grant it but that shee hath all Diuine truth contained in the Scriptures it is from God that that truth is corrupted is from her selfe in that shee hath all diuine truth she is a Church in that she hath corrupted it shee is a corrupt Church Ecclesia non tollitâ—r corruptione nisi totali vt loquuntur quam vocant interitum Ecclesiam non tollit partialis corâ—â—â—tio sed infâ—â—mat Ecclesia Romana omnia habâ—t corrupta sed non omninò haec non interitus est sed pâ—â—tialis corruptio eius dicanda est The being of a Church is not taken away by corruption vnlesse it be totall as they speake which is the destruction of it Corruption in part doth not destroy the Church but weakens it The Romish Church hath all things corrupted but not altogether c. Let vs come nearer home Though M. Hooker his discourse of Iustificatâ—on the Church of Rome haue played the Harlot worse than euer did Israel yet are they not as now the Synagogue of the Iewes which plainly deny Christ Iesus quite and cleane excluded from the New Couenant Vtrobique Catholica Tortuâ—a Torti pag. 367. fidei professio qua ipsa in professionè non mutamus in quibus nobiscum estis in multis enim nobiscum estis With you and with vs is the profession of the Catholicke faith in which profession we alter not that wherein you agree with vs for in many things we agree Voâ—â—erè cum â—ulta apud vâ—s reâ—iqua sint adâ—uc de Cathotholicae fâ—dei dâ—â—mâ—â—ibus quanquam non nihil sermentata membra quidâ—â— Catholiâ—ae etsi non sâ—na membrâ—dice â—â—uâ—â—inemus pag. 40 saith the late Reuerend Bishop of Winchester And againe Seeing â—hat with you there yet remaine some opinions of the Catholicke faith howbeit somewhat sowred with Popish leauen we are content to account you members though vnsound members of the Catholicke Church Hear another who neuer yet was so much as suspected to fauour Popery Wee must distinguish the Papacy from â— Vsher in a Sermon of the Vniuersalitie of the Church of Christ before the King at Wansted pag. 13. the Church wherein it is as the Apostle doth Antichrist from the Temple of God wherein he fitteth The Foundation vpon which the Church standeth is that common Faith in the vnitie whereof all Christians doe generally accord Vpon this Old Foundation Antichrist raiseth vp his new buildings and layeth vpon it not hay and stubble only but far more vile and pernicious matter c. And after Poperie it selfe is nothing pag. â—6 â—lse but the botch and plague of the Church c. And againe If you demand where pag 30. was Gods Temple all this while the answer is at hand There where Antichrist sate Where was Christs People Euen vnder Antichrists Priests And yet this is no iustification at all either of Antichrist or of his Priests but a manifestation of Gods great power who is able to vphold his Church euen there where Sathans Throne is Reuel 2. 13. And sundry other witnesses might be produced which I had not leasure or opportunitie to enquire into In the meane while I would gladly seâ— the Testimony of but one in estimation for his learning amongst vs that euer affirmed the Church of Rome to deny the foundation of Faith directly The Verdict which the Church of England passeth vpon them is this The Church of Rome hath erred not onely in their liuing and Article 19. manner of Ceremonies but also in matters of Faith but that shee hath denyed the Faith and is become worsâ— than an Infidell I cannot finde to haue beene at any
time deliuered vnder her authority To draw therfore to a conclusion since the Scriptures affirme that many of Gods people are in Babyloâ— and that Antichrist must sit in the Church of God since that Popery taketh not away from the foundation but addeth to it * â—â—ndamento a◠〈…〉 â—aâ—itâ— noâ—â—tium Caput 〈◊〉 vâ—i sâ—pra Vide Dr. Prid. â—â—ct de â—isib â—â—clesia whence nothing is more frequent with ouâ— Diuines than to tearme Popery â—octriâ—am addititiam and their Reliâ—ion Popish additaments and Aquiâ—â—â— who gaue the Pope power to â—ake a new Creede neuer thought â—hat he might abrogate the old for â—s much as they haue that Baptisme â—hich maketh them members of the â—ue Church and Orders so good â—hat wee neuer iterate them seeing â—hat when wee dispute against them â—ee acknowledge them to hold funâ—amentall truth and that all our â—octors with an vnanimous consent â—ffirme so much and the sentence of â—ny one Classicall Author cannot be â—rought who affirmeth the contrary â—nd lastly seeing the Church our Mother imputeth vnto them errour â—nely in â—atters of Faith not abneâ—ation of the Faith it selfe we affirme â—hat the Church of Rome though otherwise wicked enough hath not â—et directly denyed the Foundaâ—ion of Faith and therefore that wee cannot deny her the name of a Christian Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is that we intended to proue The Second Part. Wherein the Reuerend Bishops Arguments are defended and Mr. Burtons Obiections answered CHAP. I. Containing an Introduction to the following discourse THere is in rectitude as the Philosopher wisely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 noteth that perfection and beautie whereby we discerne both it selfe and whatsoeuer is contrary vnto it For hee that knowes what is straight doth euen perceiue thereby what is crooked because the absence oâ— straitnesse in bodies capable thereo◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ariâ—â—â—â—e anima lib 1. is crookednesse yet because tâ— Iudge both of rectitude and obliqâ—tie is the Rule which all haue not tâ— skill few the will to apply it is necessarie sometimes to leaue the amiable discourse of truth and apply oâ— selues to set forth the knottinesse anâ— deformitie of error that error maâ— yet be more abandoned and trutâ— more heartily embraced Wee suppose that wee haue alreadie not onâ—ly fortified the cause it selfe whicâ— wee tooke in hand with good aâ— solid reason but laid downe thoâ— rules also whereby whatsoeuer câ— be probably obiected against thâ— truth may be fully answered â—â— namely if we marke in what senâ— we affirme the Church of Rome tâ— be a true Church in what respect sâ— is Babylon and in what consideration a true Church what it is to dâ—nie the foundation what likewisâ— to ouerthrow it and how farre â— Christian Church may ouerthrow it Yet to make the worke complete it will not bee amisse to examine the weight of those reasons which are opposed hereunto and to free the arguments already brought in defence not of the Romish Church or anie point of their Religion but of a true â—ssertion amongst Protestant Diâ—ines from the exceptions alledged against them And this we will doe Heb. 6. 3. â—f God permit Where by the way let mee aduerâ—ise that had the second Edition of â—he Reuerend Bishops booke * Of the old Religion I saw it not till I had quite finished the first part of this Treatise come sooner to my hands I thinke I had saued my paines and not proceeded â—hus farre not that I had not a good mind to the Bishops defence and yet haue but that it might seeme superâ—uous to adde to it vnreasonable to â—eply against it M. Burton as it is â—uident before the Edition of his booke saw and read the Reuerend Bishops Apologie wherein he sheweth that preferment hath not made him differ from what he was before nor self conceit to take vp a new opinion but loue of the truth to auerâ— that wherein he finds all Diuines tâ— conspire with him none gain sayinâ— him At M. Burtons hands he hath gâ—â—ned nothing hereby but the opinioâ— of pertinacie added to his error â—â— taketh him boldly by the sleeue anâ— calleth him to account not only fâ—â— his former assertions but for his Apologie also how iustly we comâ— now to enquire CHAP. II M. Burtons method and manner of prâ—ceeding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nazianzenus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All disputation consisting of twâ— parts the confirmation of trueth anâ— the confutation of error the first oâ— these wee haue absolued the laâ—â— now taketh place M. Burton tooke vpon him the interpretation of a portion of holy Scripture in the booke of the Apocalyps one of those two bookes which St. Austen said were reserued to be vnderstood in heauen The subiect of his discourse is the powring out of the 7. Vialls wherein The Cantic in the Old Testament and this in the New as if St. Iohn in the Spirit of prophecie had foreseene the errour of our most worthy Prelate and designed M. Burton for one of the 7 Angells he powreth out the second Viall wholly vpon him with how good successe let the euent decide In the meane while I shall returne him some of his owne dregges to drinke His proceeding is troublesome and tempestuous like the Sea one while affirming another while denying the same thing Scopae dissolutae Now he answers now he argues by by he declaimes altogether without order vt nec pes nec caput vni reddatur formae yet to reduce him to the best forme we can wee will obserue in his discourse these two parts 1. a generall proposition 2. the disputation it selfe In the first hee teacheth vs how to procced herein telling vs that it is a matter not to bee 7. Vialls Page 28. maintained by finenes of wit nor quaint Rhetoricall discourse but vpon sound ground and substantiall demonstration I need not tell you whom hee would decipher by this speech but I must needs wonder that hee is so witty at first and it calls to my remembrance the Infamous Paralleâ— written by Eudaemon Iohannes against the late Reuerend Bishop of Winchester wherein one maine head of hiâ— accusation against that worthie Prelate is that he was too conuersant iâ— the Comick writers his stile wâ—â— Vid 〈◊〉 Tortâ—r â—orti too curious his Latine too neat foâ— the Iesuits palate Thus M. Butrâ—â— least the Bishop by his diuine Esoquence and accurate speech shoulâ— preuaile too farre with his Readers strikes first at that by disgrace tearming it finenesse of wit and quainâ— Rhetoricke little hurting his aduersarie therreby but singularly dishonouring Almightie God For whose are the Arts whose is Eloquence and vtterance who gaue man the wit and the braine Demand of all the faculties of the Soule and bodie whose Image and inscription they beare they will tell you Gods In as much therefore as you offer â—niurie vnto the least of these you do â—t vnto God But who sees not whereunto