another way Here leaving to the Authour his owne terme of railing wherein I wonder hee should delight but that I see elsewhere hee takes pleasure in the mentioning of scurrill and blasphemous Invectives I say that some errors bee not fundamentall which are found in the Fathers and now maintained by Romists yet wee are not disabled by this distinction to reprove Romists for them for wee doe not say in this distinction that no errours should bee reproved but those which are fundamentall for even lesser errours are to bee reprehended but wee say that these errours in lesser points doe not breake the unity which by greater and more fundamentall points is made betweene Christ and his members and betweene the members themselves And secondly wee say that Romists are much more to bee reproved if they hold any errours of the Fathers now in controversie betweene us for these controverted errours have beene now by the Scriptures more evidently discovered to bee errours and it is a thing farre more worthy of blame if a man should runne into a ditch by day then if he should stumble into it by night But whatsoever exactnesse this Authour may require or imagine in this distinction this exactnesse being granted it will never make it to appeare that wee differ from the unanimous beliefe of the Fathers in the maine points mentioned in their rules of faith now called Fundamentals And for his Argument concerning the Lutherans it doth not endanger us for if the Lutherans should bee found by this distinction to differ from us in these fundamentall points which should unite them to Christ it is no hurt to us to renounce the communion of those who renounce communion with Christ. And on the other side if by it they bee found to differ from us in points not fundamentall it would bee no danger nor just disreputation to us to avow those points wherein wee differ not to bee fundamentall but wee will much rather disavow the quarrels which are made where there is no fundamentall difference The period which followes as farre as it is a true Narration of our way of making peace by this distinction with the Fathers and the Lutherans is a commendation both of the distinction and our peace-making by it But by the way I deny That Romists have brought us from denying via facti That the Fathers taught the doctrine of Praying to the Saints or for the dead in the sense and manner of Rome for the Fathers did not unanimously teach praying to Saints I am sure Saint Augustine who was above 400. yeers after Christ doth deny Saints to know ordinarily the affaires of the living which happen after their decease And for prayers for the dead in Purgatorie the Cavalier cannot shew a good patterne for more yeares then the former As for the difference in the number of Canonicall Bookes which it seemes this Author is sorrie that it is not avowed to bee fundamentall it is not altogether new but ancient and wee see it at this day in the Syriack and it were pitie to cut off from salvation all the Churches and Fathers which ever differed in this number yea he must damne many Romists if hee will make this difference fundamentall They that beleeve all necessary saving truths though they bee not fully perswaded that just so many Books were wholly indited by some one of the Apostles or Evangelists I know now how this Author may damne them if these saving truths being beleeved doe save them sure I am that in their owne Explicites or points of importance which wee call fundamentall and they say must bee knowne and beleeved under paine of damnation they doe not mention any names much lesse the number of Canonicall Bookes So it seemes by their owne doctrines the names and full number of the bookes of Scripture are none of their owne Explicites and Fundamentals but other points beleeved may serve to save such beleevers And if such may bee saved though they know not the set number of Books why would you have us to breake unitie for a point the not explicite knowing and beleeving whereof in your owne doctrine doth not exclude salvation Hee goes on and objects a second good use that wee make of points fundamentall which is a proofe of the visibility of our Church And true it is That if there have beene still a visible Roman Church which hath held points fundamental until the Reformation begun by the Protestants then is that visibility since that time still continued by us The former we leave to the Romists to prove for their owne sakes and the later we can very easily prove for our selves And whereas hee repeats but confutes not that some of ours have said that there is no necessity that the Church must have been continually visible I tell him that if this were an absurd Doctrine as he terms it they were led to this absurdity with a great shew of reason For not to run out at large into the common place of visibility when Lirinensis saith at the deluge of Arianisme The whole Romane Empire was fundamentally overthrowne and removed And we reade elsewhere the Pope himselfe was turned Hereticke where was the visibility of the Cavaliers Romish Church it selfe But I need not to dwell much on the defence of this doctrine because he only confutes it by the Epithite Absurd and because that which followes next most concernes the present businesse though this also is a rehearsall and not a confutation Some few of them affirme when they are urged by us to shew that visible Church of theirs that theirs and ours doe make but one true Church and so in shewing the visibilitie of ours they doe withall as they say shew their owne to have beene visible And these men tread in this way because they well know that no other Church but ours can indeed be shewed to have beene visible through all ages since Christ our Lord. But I must here deny his repetition if by the word Church he meane the Pope and those that have made him the foundation of their faith for these and ours wee say not to be one Church with us because they have changed the foundation But if you meane those that by beleeving fundamentalls have fastned their faith on Christ the true foundation wee allow That our Church hath beene one with them and hath been visible in their visibilitie yet avoyding this That hee can ever prove that other Churches have not beene as truly and continually visible as Rome for it will still trouble the Author to shew that the Churches of Greece and Africk have bin lesse truly visible then Rome since the Primitive times of their first conversion And now this Authoâ— being past our use of fundamentalls for visibility yet walkes on though beyond his right businesse but hee that is out of the way in his maine matter of making division to excuse Romish uncharitablenesse may well walke into by-wayes in his prosecution
owne free wils which they beleeve doe bring the possibilitie of doing Gods will into effect But this is many wayes abominable One abomination it is to pray to God that I may doe his will and yet not beleeve that God worketh the will and the deed for which I pray Another not to pray indeed that Gods will may bee done though Christ hath commanded it but to pray that it may not bee done as well as bee done For if I pray onely to God that hee may meerely leave it to my will whether his will shall bee done or not I doe not pray certainely that his will may bee done but that it may stand in an even ballance whether it shall bee done or not and then it is very possible yea likely as wofull experience hath too often shewed that his Will will not be done But howsoever sure it is to God they cannot pray but which is another abomination must pray to their owne wils that Gods will may bee surely done the certainty of doing Gods will being suspended onely on their owne wils and not depending on Gods effectuall grace How much better doth our Liturgie imitate this patterne of Christ Jesus and fulfill his direction It prayes for the King That he may alway incline to Gods will and walke in his way and for the people That they may leade a godly righteous and sober life that they may in all things obey Gods blessed will that they may ever obey his godly motions in righteousnesse and true holinesse that they may please God both in will and in deede That his grace may prevent and follow us and make us continually to bee given to all good works And indeed these prayers and especially the Lords prayer being so soundly good that the soules of men cannot but approve and use them it doth seeme to evince that those who doe use these prayers though otherwise they seeme to favour this Romish free will yet doe not heartily beleeve that free will which crosseth and denyeth these prayers as on the other side it would bee a mighty accusation if they should so beleeve free will that they could not say the Lords prayer Lastly It takes from God the glory of praise and thanks for our obedience and especially for our differing from others for the free-will-men cannot praise God so well as the Pharisee who yet was not justified for they cannot say Father I thank thee that I am not like other men but they must say Father I thank thee that I was like other men and had the same free will and grace which they had but That I am not like other men I thank my owne free will which by a different use of the same grace wherein by thee I was made like other men hath made mee unlike to them To conclude This opinion of free will as it robs God of his glory so it robs man of his safety for it hangs mans safety upon mans free will God and his grace doe not keepe man but mans free will keepes grace and by grace keepes man grace dependeth on the will whether it shall bee kept it selfe and whether it shall keepe man or lose him But thus the will grace and the man are not safely kept by the power of God unto salvation Man is brought back againe into the state of free will which the old Adam had and lost but with this disadvantage that hee hath now a mighty law in his members rebelling against the law of his minde which the old Adam had not And now shall man with all his imperfections issuing from this body of sinne stand by free will wherewith Adam in his full perfection fell Whosoever thinks so hath need to thinke better of his imperfect selfe then of perfect Adam But for my part I see great cause to bee affraid of that free will which hath undone him Againe Is there no more stabilitie issuing from the second Adam Christ Jesus who is God and man then there would have beene by descent from the first Adam who was only a man Doth Regeneration from Christ give no more stabilitie with his seed then with Generation should have beene communicated to us descending from the old Adam if hee had stood in perfection Yet of Christ that is said which could never bee spoken of Adam nor can bee spoken of free will Hee is that Rock on which the Church being grounded The gates of Hell cannot prevaile against her And of the Seed of God given through this second Adam wee read It is a remaining Seede which keepes us from reigning sin Briefely as wee are borne of promise so God gave to the promised Seed a Land of promise and the bringing that Seed unto the Land of promise is sure to this Seede by the effectuall power of God the Promiser as the promised Seed was surely given by his promise And accordingly for the establishing our hearts wee doe often heare of the faithfulnesse of God who hath promised In God therefore is our safety and not in our owne free will Hee is our Shepheard therefore wee doe not feare his grace keepeth our wils and us and our wils fundamentally and finally keepe not this grace and us And thus Gods glory and mans safety are joyned together by Gods powerfull grace and therefore wee may close up this Point in the words of Saint Paul God shall preserve us unto his heavenly Kingdome to him bee glory for ever Amen Yet may wee add this Lesson as a Corollary from the joynt consideration of Saint Pauls Conversion and Doctrine That they who have felt most the effectuall power of Gods grace in their conversion from the kingdome of Sathan unto God will be most earnest in teaching this grace and in giving glory to God for that effectuall grace by which they have been converted Yea let us hereunto joyne that memorable Caution which may serve for a Load-stone to direct those that sayle in the deepe of this Controversie to the harbour of safety where they would bee That in all doubts and difficulties they incline to that opinion which gives most glory to God For as it hath beene well taught This is the disposition of godly mindes to attribute nothing to themselves but all to the grace of God whence it will come to passe that though a man should give never so much to the grace of God and thereby take away somewhat from the power of Nature and free will hee shall never depart from piety but when something is taken from Grace and given to Nature thence danger may arise Hee goes on So also doe they play at fast and loose when in the sixth Article of holy Scripture they enumerate all those Books of the old Testament which they allow to be Canonicall wherein by the way they are rather Iewes then Christians for not admitting the Books of Judith the Maccabees and divers others in the Canon This Authour
is still busie in bringing in the number of Canonicall Books for fundamentall as before in the Creed when his owne Masters put it not among their Explicites and Fundamentals But yet if the number were on all sides taken for a Fundamentall our Church hath sufficiently expressed her meaning to men whose eyes are single and not troubled with the fiery humour of uncharitablenesse and contention For first for the number of the old they enumerate as himselfe confesseth all the Bookes of the old Testament which they account Canonicall so then if the number of Canonicall Books bee a Fundamentall the Articles have shewed this Fundamentall concerning the old Testament Yet thus hee is not pleased but is still angry with the Articles to his owne hurt and runnes against them with a sword whose point he turns against his owne soule and the head against our Church For hee saith They are rather Iewes then Christians for not admitting the Bookes of Judith the Maccabees c. But the Authour endangereth himselfe in this point to be censured as neither good Jew nor good Christian. For Saint Paul who was an excellent both Jew and Christian saith That whereas great was the preferment of the Jew yet herein it stood chiefly Because that unto them were committed the Oracles of God So that if that was the chiefe preferment of the Jew under the Law and Old Testament that the Oracles of God were committed to them what shall we say of that Christian that takes this chiefe preferment from them and scandalizeth them and others for following them even in that wherein the holy Ghost by Saint Paul giveth them a chiefe preferment Againe if those were the Oracles of God which were committed to the Jewes and these of Iudith and Maccabees were not committed to them by God as his Oracles and accordingly not received by them either these are not Gods Oracles or Saint Pauls word will bee denied that Gods Oracles were committed to the Jewes So that the Authour hath herein good matter not for pennance onely but for true and hearty repentance for shaming the Jewes and us for following them in that very point wherein Saint Paul saith that their preferment or advantage chiefly consisteth Againe the Romists themselves hold the Church of the Jewes to have been the true Church in the time of the Law and the high Priest an unerring head of that Church as our Authour before hath taught us Now is it not against these Romists owne grounds to say That the Church of the Jewes when it was unerring did erre in the number of Canonicall Scriptures a fundamentall of this Authour or else an impertinency Therefore Lorca more warily alloweth though in danger to be censured for a Jew That those Books were anciently given to the Jewes Howsoever if the high Priest had not then the infallibility to discerne Canonicall Scriptures how hath the Pope now that infallibility For our Authour brings in the infallibility of the individuall high Priest to prove as it should seem the present infallibility of the Pope so that the high Priest either had this infallibility and so the Authour is put to shame for shaming the Jews in their discerning and numbering the Canonicall Scriptures or hee had not this infallibility and so he is put to confusion in his proving the Popes infallibility by him that was fallible But hee goes on and talkes of Trifling and not onely talkes of it but doth it They trifle also saith hee when they tell us that they understand those onely Bookes both of the Old and New Testament to be Canonicall of whose authority there was never any doubt in the Church For they know as well as wee that the Apocalyps the Epistle of St. James Saint Jude and one of Saint Peters were not acknowledged till proofes were made during the space of three or foure hundred years after Christ our Lord. But if a Romist had written the same words which our Articles do no question he would have found'out some gentle construction to have made it sound and good perchance hee would have said that there was never any generall doubt in the Church and that the universall Church never doubted them For wee know that the most ancient Fathers received them and used testimonies from them Or upon the word Doubt there was no just sound or sufficient doubt of them no doubt that was worth the name of a doubt But indeed this Article as it seemes mainly looking to the Apocryphals of the Old Testament wherein alone stands the doubt and difference of number between us and Rome it might hold it sufficient to use such words as concerned that difference not mentioning or regarding ancient differences in that of the New Testament wherein between us and Rome is present agreement But yet more trifling and frivolous is our Authours inference Thâ—sâ— men have been pleased out of thâ—â—â— great grace to admit them though the Maccabees must be rejected because they speak of prayer for the dead For we or rather the Scripture hath shewed before why the Maccabees are not received as Canonicall because contrary to this Authour but agreeabe to Saint Paul they were not committed to the Jewes as the Oracles of God So we found them left out of the Canon and doe not thrust them out But they are Romists that bring in the Maccabees to be Canonicall to prove prayers for the dead because they have no proofe for them in the Canon If the Canon prove not prayers for the dead being beneficiall to the Papacie the Papacie must make Canon to prove prayers for the dead For surely if Apocrypha had not been made Canon there had been no Canon to prove their Apocryphall prayer for the dead But now concerning the Bookes of the New Testament the Authour hath discovered an Elephant in an Atome Observe saith hee what this booke of Articles saith concerning the Canonicall Bookes of the New Testament it saith onely this All the bookes of the New Testament as they are commonly received wee doe receive and account them for Canonicall But why doe they not particularly enumerate all the bookes which they acknowledge to be of the New Testament as they had done them of the Old A strange wonder and one that deserved observation and an observation that well deserved a question but the question scarce deserves an answer especially seeing the Authour answers himselfe before he makes the question For first who doth not see that in the bookes of the New Testament there being no differences between us and the Romists it was sufficient to say That those are received for Canonicall which are commonly received And secondly this Authour himselfe so farre answers his owne question before he makes it that hee acknowledgeth the Page fore-going That these men have been pleased out of their great grace to admit Saint James Saint Jude c. Yet now he takes a deep exception for not naming St. Iames which is so admitted
the Law and the reigne of the letter should preserve knowledge now under the Gospel and Kingdome of light notwithstanding any grace or power from this Sacrament may leave the people in ignorance and the old complaint under the old may be renewed in the new My people perish for want of knowledge And if thus they perish it is very likely that notwithstanding any grace of this Sacrament it is not charity but uncharitablenesse that kils them Hee proceeds If hee have not spirit for so much as that but resolves to walk on in the broad way of a married life that state is honourable though it be inferiour to the former and shee joynes him to a wife by a Sacrament also conferring grace A strange opposition of things agreeing and a setting at ods of things which God hath set at friendship If hee have not spirit for so much as that saith our Author but resolves to walk on in the broad way of a married life c. as if hee that resolves to bee married may not have so much spirit as that which is fit for the Priesthood I cannot see in any place of Scripture but that the spirit of Priesthood may very well agree with marriage if the spirit of error that forbids marriage did not work in the Papacy to set them at discord yea our Author saith Order gives grace and Matrimony gives grace and I wonder how one of these graces falls out with the other I wonder also with what charity or rather uncharitablenesse Rome can deny Orders to a man that hath a gift of teaching because hee hath not the gift of continency surely shee is either uncharitable to Gods Church in thus denying Orders where God hath given a gift that deserves them or uncharitable to the Minister in tying him to that continency whereof the gift is not given him On the one side if this man want Orders a Congregation that wants him may starve for lack of him on the other side if hee want marriage his soule is tyed to the fire and so is in danger to bee consumed with the flames of it and either way is Rome still uncharitable even in these things by which our Author would prove her charity As for the sacramentality of Marriage and grace conferred by it I must take them but for empty words before I see Christs Institution in the Scriptures to put substance into them A Sacrament as Cassander from Hugo well gathers is a signe instituted by Christ to signifie and convey an inward grace which by some likenesse it representeth Now Marriage indeed representeth the union betweene Christ and his Church but it was not instituted by Christ that this union should be given by it and indeed that such grace is represented and given by Marriage as by a Sacrament wee read not in the Scriptures yea their own Peter Lombard Durand and Cassander deny that marriage giveth grace therefore it remaines onely as a Tridentine and not a divine Sacrament of grace and the gift of a supposititious Sacrament with fained grace is but a fruit of that carnall charitie which giveth stones for bread He goes on If in his last sicknesse hee be afflicted by those sharpest arrowes of his invisible enemy shee annoints him towards the combat and enables him by that extreme Unction and by the benedictions and prayers which accompany it to resist and conquer those adverse powers Behold a Romish Unction different from the ancient Unction even by the confession of Romists themselves for this Unction is given us as our Author tels us in his last sicknesse But the ancient Unction was given of purpose that it might not be his last sicknesse that was given to heale this because hee is condemned to death and thought past healing Saint Mark saith that the twelve did annoint with oyle many that were sick and healed them and S. Iames Let them pray over the sick annoynting him oyle and the prayer of faith shall save the sick and the Lord shall raise him up So wee see that healing or raising up is expected as a fruit of this ancient Annointing but death is expected as a follower of Romish Annointing for even Bellarmine's proofe of this Sacrament is drawne from the desperate and dying state of the sicke That since Sacraments were provided for our helpe in our ingresse into the Church and our progresse in the Church it is not to be beleeved that there should want one at our egresse See here that the Unction which anciently was used for our regresse is now used by Romists for our egresse And therefore it is not the same Unction yea it is not the same if wee beleeve their Cardinall Cajetane saying that Saint James his Unction agreeing with the Apostles Unction doth not agree with extreme Unction in word nor effect and indeed the effect of S. Iames his Unction was health but the expected consequence of Romish Unction is death Wherefore let them joine health to their Oyle which was anciently joyned to it and then wee will think they give that Unction which was the ancient Unction and a fruit of charity But if they give Oyle without health the signe without the thing what charity is there to give an empty signe in stead of a reality Yea how doe they abuse that Oyle aswell as the Receivers in misgiving it as a Sacrament of death which in the true use of it was appointed for a meanes of life SECT IV. Monasteries and other Romish works bearing a shew of charitie are proved to bee contrary to it BUt Romish charity seemes not to leave men when they bee dead but then followes them even dead men with dead prayers issuing from a blinde and therefore a dead charity For is it not a dead charity that in her prayers for the dead is not animated by a true and lively faith the want whereof turnes all things and therâ—fore both the shewes of charity and prayers into sinne And can there be any faith without the Word of God and doth the Word of God any where shew Purgatory so evidently that faith may assuredly beleeve it and thereupon offer up prayers for the deliverance of the dead from it A Work ascribed to S. Augustine plainly saith The catholick faith by divine Authority beleeves a first place The kingdome of Heaven it also beleeves a second which is Hell a third wee wholly know not yea wee finde that it is not in the holy Scriptures Now if it bee not in the holy Scriptures it is no matter of faith and if Purgatory be not of faith then the prayers for soules to bee freed from that Purgatory whereof there is no faith are prayers not of a true that is a beleeving and seeing charity but rather of blinde infidelity As for this Authors praying for the dead to the worlds end I wonder why he should speak of it when he should not be ignorant that if the living friends
being his owne and not the Texts onely wee may upon request allow this place and the next of Christs prayer for unity Iohn 17 to intend unity of affections and yet hee will bee short of his unity in all points of Doctrine And it is wel known that if this were meant the present Romists themselves have not that unity neither those who farre excelled them the ancient Martyrs and Fathers And farre more guilty are they against the prayer of Christ in maintaining division of affections towards Patriarchall Sees and many eminent parts of the catholick Church for the Pope is like Ismael his sword against every man that will not submit to his universall Supremacy And according to this dividing Spirit of the Papacie is it this Authors businesse in this worke to make a division in the Church for false proving is making even where there is an unity for is not this his employment in this Chapter and more hereafter in taking away the distinction of points fundamentall to set Christians by the eares and one to damne another for differing in every little point of doctrine For thus hee saith even soone after his former places of unity and hee would faine have Saint Matthew and Saint Mark to say so with him Whosoever should faile of beleeving any one point of Christian doctrine should be as sure of condemnation as if he had beleeved but any one or none A Foundation laid of Babel it selfe even of division and hatred in the Church of God A Position to which I cannot bee silent for Sions sake nor for my brethren and companions sake whom this Position hath often slaine with death temporall and adjudged to death eternall For let it look as smooth as it will doe you breake up the bowels of it and you shall finde it full of bloud division and damnation This even this is it which hath wrought those fearefull Massacres Treasons Excommunications Fires whereof many horrid spectacles in the second Chapter have been presented And how should it bee otherwise but that it should produce such hellish effects when it teacheth Christians for every failing in the beleefe of any one point of Christian that is in their language Romish or Popish doctrine to accompt other Christians in the state of damnation and to hate them more then heathens So that if the Pope say that the Worship of Images Prayer in an unknown tongue without understanding Rats eating the body of Christ and such other errors bee points of Christian doctrine the man that beleeves them not though hee beleeve in Christ yea all other points but one of these hath forfeited his salvation and is fallen into the odious state of a combustible heretick and of a damnable person But this Author might have beene put in minde of more mercy by one of his allegations for though Christ in the place of Matthew by him alledged willeth that all Nations bee taught to observe whatsoever hee hath commanded yet his owne fellow Romists allow that the breach of some of Christs Commands are not damnable I might alledge a Command of Christ in the Lords Supper Drinke yee all of this which as concerning the lay people they have turned into Drinke yee none of this But I will passe to other Commands such as those are which command the keeping of the morall Law Matth. 5.17.28.48 and forbid every idle thought but the breach of these Commands by inordinate thoughts or small deviations the Romists can make not mortall and damnable but veniall How comes it then that they will allow us no veniall errors and failings in small points of doctrine but any one point of Christian that is in his sense Popish doctrine not beleeved is damnably mortall Is there not in this a great piece of Popish leaven even of the wicked mystery that sinnes against Gods Commands of morall obedience may bee veniall but against the Popes Commands in the least point of doctrine are altogether mortall And doth not the reason appeare to bee this That in the breach of a morall Law as that of coveting our neighbours goods God is offended but the Pope is not hurt but by not beleeving any one point which the Pope delivers for Christian doctrine his Inâ—rrability fals to the ground and so his Supremacy And it were better according to the policie of this wicked Mystery that all the world were burned or damned or set at division then that the Papacie should fall But thus doth the Pope set himselfe above God by valuing offences against himselfe of a more damnable nature then sinnes against God But well it is withall that they shew hereby that God is yet farre more mercifull then the Pope for God they say makes little sins veniall whereas the Pope makes little errors against Popish doctrine deadly and damnable But the truth is to those that are in Christ Jesus God doth make veniall both errors in lesser points of faith which grow by ignorance blindenesse or weaknesse of faith aswell as lesser errors in life by infirmity and weaknesse Christs bloud is a propitiation for all our sinnes aswell sins in the understanding as in the will And to those who attaine to that measure of faith which knits them to Christ Jesus Christ Jesus by his bloud will make other ignorances and unbeliefes in those points of doctrine to which they cannot attain veniall and pardonable and surely our Author is hardly driven to get a shew of proof from Scripture of this doctrine of division and damnation The place of Matthew could not serve for there was only a command to the Apostles to teach all Nations to observe all Christs Commands But we have seene above out of Romists that the breach of some of Christs Commands is not damnable but veniall wherefore another place must be forced to confesse it Accordingly that of Saint Marke is set on the rack but this place speakes not of not beleeving all and every point of doctrine delivered and decreed by the Pope and his adherents but the maine scope of the place is a casting of damnation upon men for the great point of not beleeving in Christ for in the Gospel this is an usuall sense of the word beleeving especially when it stands upon life and death And it seemes this Author can bring no plain place of Scripture to prove that he who beleeves not every small point of doctrine decided by the Pope shall bee damned for if he could these places had not been so unmercifully racked toward it But thus still behold a going on of the Mystery of iniquity Unity unto salvation is urged thereby to make division unto damnation Words are taken from Christ the Head therewith to tear his body into pieces But hereof wee may make this use That when a Papist preacheth to Protestants of unity then let them expect beware of division SECT IIII. The place taken out of the 18. of Matth. is cleared which the Cavalier had perverted to the
sufficient to deprive any soule thereof and so Protestants may still suffer a false charge of Heresie to bee laid on them by Romists and yet bee sure enough of salvation And thus not any degree is yet made good toward the freeing of this charge of uncharitablenesse justly laid on the Romists So that the matter stands still though the Author moving his pen thinkes that the matter moves with it And for the Allegations that follow which seeme to labour for these two points That out of the Church is no salvation And that Heresie and Schisme doe put men out of the Church these being proved no way hurt us or help the Romists but helpe us and hurt the Romists among whom wee have found most fearfull and bloudy Schisme and wee may discover damnable Heresies but they can never prove that Protestant doctrine maintaines either Heresie or Schisme but by that which they call Heresie as relying wholy on Christs merits and not our owne for redemption and worshiping God in spirit and truth and not worshiping Images c. wee serve the God of our Fathers SECT II. The Allegations of Scriptures and Fathers made by the Cavalier are more forcible to exclude the Papists out of the Church then the Protestants against whom they are produced THat being yeelded which this Author indeavours to prove I know not what to doe with his Allegations but onely to turne them against Romists Therefore we very well allow the place alledged out of Esay and say it makes against the Pope who doth not submit himselfe to the Church in a generall Councell and so doth the place of Matthew formerly alledged and answered upon the same Reason And we very well allow those places of Paul to Titus and Timothy as making much against the Pope and his adhaerents and say that they give us just ground of avoiding him being Hereticall and Schismaticall after many admonitions But this Author did wisely in not naming Timothy in his margent but Titus though hee alledge these words out of 1. Tim. 4.1 2. That they attend to doctrines of Divels and spirits of Errour That they are Lyers and Hypocrites lest the Reader looking to the place might finde this which followeth Forbibbing to marry and commanding to abstaine from meats which wee know that Protestancie doth not but if Papistry doe then who are now his Hereticks Hypocrites and Lyers excluded from the Church and so from salvation Hee did also very discreetly in his namelesse alledging some pieces out of 2. Tim. 3. where is mention of Iamnes and Iambres and to make use of the verse fore-going having the form of godlinesse and the verses following That they are ever learning but without attaining to the knowledge of the truth but left out the middle verse which is this Of this sort are they which creep into houses and lead captive silly Women laden with sins and led with divers lusts which words being notable markes of seducers for what reason the Author left them out he best knowes but if wee may beleeve their owne Priest it doth rightly hit with some Romish proselite-makers so that the simple Reader if hee had seene this place wholy alledged might perchance have thought hee had seen in these the very Iamnes and Iambres of these times His last Scripture is out of S. Paul to the Galathians where striving to prove that the word Sects in Latin is Heresies in the Greeke he somewhat Heretically I doubt even when he speaks against Heresie leaves the decreed Latin to follow the Greeke But this being taken for a fault in the Latin let the word be as it is in the Greeke and then to the shame of the Papacy wee read indeed that Heresies are works of the flesh which certainly those are most likely to fall into that strive to set up a fleshly monarchy and to abound in the glory and wealth of the world For such men will sell heaven and truth and the Gospell for a messe of Pottage even for base and transitory vanity It is the sentence of Gods spirit that where is the love of the World there is not the love of God and where is not the love of God there cannot bee the love of the truth and where is not the love of truth there is a giving up to strong delusions to beleeve lyes that they all may bee damned who beleeved not the truth Now among innumerable examples of the Papacies love of the world and preferring temporall greatnesse and wealth above the truth let the lamentable conference betweene Adrian the sixth and the Cardinall be a lively proofe and spectacle where the poore Pope and herein not a Pope and therefore hee did well soone to bee gone speaking of the necessity of reformation There was no consideration of the truth of this necessity but a plaine confutation of whatsoever truth there was in it by the Popes Audit and Exchequer even by worldly profit But the Scriptures thus being lost except onely in making against their owne Papacy hee comes to Fathers not so much to hurt with them as to bee hurt by them Tertullian saith hee affirmeth That Hereticks cannot bee accounted Christians But of what heresies doth hee speake there Of any Protestant opinions He doth not say that any Protestants are hereticks He repeats there a rule of faith as it were the body of a Creed consisting of divers Articles Doe the Protestants deny any of these Articles True it is that of this rule of faith hee saith Nullus habet apud nos quaestiones c. There are no questions among us of this rule but those which Heresies make and doe make Hereticks But wee doe not make question of this rule and so are not made hereticks by it But they doe rather question this rule that bring in another faith the Popes Oracles and new Articles For whereas Tertullian here saith Fides in regula posita est The faith is set downe in that rule which before hee rehearsed the Romists faith is not in that rule For there was not one word of the Pope nor of Christs being under the forme of bread by Transubstantiation but In Coelos ereptum sedere ad dextram Patris misisse vicariam vim Spiritus Sancti qui credentes agat Being taken away into heaven hee doth sit at the right hand of his Father and hee hath sent his Vicar not the Pope but the power of the Holy Ghost which should leade those that beleeve And in the 33. Chapter making an Inventory of certaine Heresies amongst others hee names this which I doubt is some kinne to the Papacie Timotheum instruens Nuptiarum quoque interdictores suggillat He saith That S. Paul instructing Timothy doth condemne the forbidders of marriage Saint Cyprian is next brought in to say that thousand times produced sentence that Out of the Church there is no salvation Hereunto is added that There is no reward of any suffering whatsoever neither is hee a Christian
doth cause the contrary assertion to bee hereticall And accordingly Vasques saith not onely such a Position is called hereticall which is contrary to the definition of the Church but that which is contrary to Scripture And that wee may come to Saint Augustine wee shall finde that this contrariety to Scripture was that which Saint Augustine accounted heresie and not contrariety to the Pope and his Decrees For thus hee saith in the small matter produced by the Cavalier called by him Putting off shooes in prayer There is an heresie of those that ever goe bare foot because God said to Moses or Josua Put off thy shooes from thy feet and because the Prophet Esay was commandâ—d to goe bare foote But this is an heresie not because they goe thus for the humbling of the body but because they thus understand the Testimony of Scripture So we see that the Author is plainly told by S. Augustine that it was the falsifying of divine Testimonies even the alledged places of Scripture that gave their error the name of an heresie And it were pitie to put the Cavalier to prove that at this time the Pope had decreed and decided That men should not put off their shooes in prayer But the truth is the Fathers take this word heresie sometimes in a large sense accounting that an heresie which was an erring against any truth of Scripture but heresie in the most proper full and killing sense hath been taken to bee an error against the Rule of Faith even such an error as puts men off from the foundation for a soule being put off from the foundation which is God in Christ Iesus cannot possibly bee saved Yet it cannot be denyed but that if lesser errors be so plainly discovered to bee contrary to the Scriptures that this contrariety is made manifest to him that erreth this error being afterwards maintained may be a damnable heresie and the reason only be this Because such an heretick erreth in the foundation of Faith for hee doth not beleeve that God is true and not beleeving Gods Truth hee cannot beleeve the truth of his promises in Christ Jesus And because such lesser errors were sometimes plainly at least as some holy men thought convinced to bee contrary to Scriptures therefore these errors by them might perchance bee called heresies But yet it cannot bee certainely affirmed by any man that what himselfe seeth to bee manifestly against Scriptures and hath delivered this which seemes manifest unto himselfe to another that the other to whom hee hath delivered it doth see it also to bee manifest therefore no man meerely upon such a manifestation can say directly and positively That such an one doth wilfully not beleeve the Truth of God in the Scriptures Wherefore these smaller errors though they might be called heresies at large in regard that they were errors shewed to be contrary to the Scriptures and so there was a possibility that they might bee held wilfully against the known truth yet because there is also a possibility that it might not bee knowne to those that erred that their error was contrary to the Scriptures the sentence of killing and damning on such cannot certainly be pronounced For indeed no Father nor Divine can affirme That one erring not wilfully but by weakenesse or ignorance in such a point as praying bare foote cannot beleeve in Christ Jesus or so beleeving cannot bee saved But howsoever in all this which hee hath allâ—dged there is nothing that makes for the Cavalier but rather all against him For it is still an errour contrary to the Scriptures that makes the Heresie and not pride and disobedience against the Pope and his decisions And indeed this truth was so strong and so prevailed against the Cavalier that it forced him to speake some part of it even against his own proposition For he saith thus The Pride wherewith they presumed to abuse Scripture and to impose such a fond law upon mens consciences and a resolution not to leave it when they were commanded by the Church was that which made it Heresie in them Where the abusing of Scripture is indeed the chiefe if not onely cause of giving it the likenesse of Heresie For imposing it as a law upon mens consciences I hope this Author will not take for Heresie but rather for a vertue seeing he hath ofteÌ„ told us that those who suppose their religion to be true are not to blame if that they tel others that they are in danger by holding the contrary Howsoever I am sure this is not the life of Heresie as the Cavalier presently tels us in the next page But maintaining a doctrine discipline contrary to the judgment commandements of the Church But how he could know by the art of divination that these his barefoot Hereticks had a resolution not to leave their errours when they were commanded by the Church the Church being taken for the Pope and his adhaerents I cannot divine for it is very possible that they seeing the Popes glorious Pantofle adorned with the Crosse might perhaps thinke it more holy by the example of him whom they call his Holinesse to weare shooes of that fashion The Cavaliers misâ—haps still increase and the more comfortlesse because they are drawne by himselfe upon himselfe For this next proofe is from the Quarto Decimani the life of whose Heresie hee would make to be the holding of Easter at another time then was ordained by the Church But if the Pope bee as hee is said to bee the Church vertuall let the Cavalier remember that this Church vertuall was chidden by S. Irenaeus for excommunicating the Easterne Churches because they differed from him in observation of Easter So at that time neither the different observation of Easter nor disobeying the Popes command was accounted an Heresie Hee is also alike unhappy in his Heresie of Rebaptization where hee saith In Saint Cyprian it was but errour because the Church of his time had not absolutely condemned it but growing after to be condemned in the Donatists time it was Heresie in them not to forsake it which drew Vincentius Lirinensis to make this exclamation O admirable change of things The Authors of an opinion are held Catholicks and the followers of the selfe same are judged Hereticks For the Cavaliers matter is hereby overthrowne For the Bishop of Rome and his councell having condemned the errour of rebaptization Cyprian must be an Heretick who disobeyed the Bishop of Rome and his councell thus having condemned it yea having condemned the maintainers of it But if S. Cyprian was hereby no Heretick then the life of Heresie doth not consist in disobeying the Church speaking by the Pope Againe if S. Cyprian escape at this doore I do not see but that for ought the Cavalier saith the same doore stands open for the Donatists For his reason by which he would keepe in the Donatists is Because their errour grew after to bee condemned
But wee see their errour was condemned before by Cornelius and Stephen Bishops of Rome even in the time of S. Cyprian And therefore if there bee no other reason the Donatists may escape the note of Heresie with S. Cyprian But indeede there were other reasons that might aggravate the errour of the Donatists beyond S. Cyprian and make it look more like Heresie A first may be a maintaining of their errour after much evidence and conviction by Scriptures A second because they made this errour a ground of an other errour That it was a just cause to divide from the Church because the Church differed from them in their errour This Cyprian never did for though Cyprian yeelded not obedience to the Pope having decided the point yet he held union with the Church even with those who differed from him in this point of re baptization which may be spoken to the shame both of the old Donatists and the new even the Romists that teare the Church into pieces for every little difference Thirdly the Donatists were thought thereupon to raise another errour contrary to an Article of the Creed That the Church was not Catholick and this the Cavalier might have seene in this very Treatise of Saint Austin ad quod vult Deum from whence hee fetched his former objections Lastly if any man will see the reason of Lirinensis whom this Author produceth he may thus receive it and adde it for a Corollary The Masters are absolved the Disciples are condemned c. whose wickednesse I judge to bee worthy of double hatred both because they feare not to deliver unto others the poyson of Heresie and because with profane hands they tosse the memory of holy men as ashes which were quenched and spread abroad a reviv'd opinion which should have beene buried in silence following herein the steps of their Father Cham who not onely neglected to cover the nakednesse of reverend Noe but also shewed it to others to bee derided As for the answer of Cyprian to him that made the question concerning the doctrine of Novitianus it doth not shew that they that obey not the Popish Church are Hereticks but that Hereticks are cast out of the Church for their Hereticall doctrines And such doctrines whose Authors and Abettors are for them worthily cast out of the Church are not worth the enquiry The Cavalier having passed through many untruths now comes to an impertinence fraught also with untruths Hee would faine prove that because there are some quarrells betweene some Calvinists and some Lutherans therefore Protestants are damnable Hereticks for disobeying the Pope in small matters But he knowes not how to tye this together scarcely with the Jesuiticall cart-ropes of vanity and fraud called Equivocation and mentall Reservation For neither of them doe charge the other with Heresie for disobeying the Pope yea not for disobeying the Church but as they would perswade others in their disputing vehemence for not rightly conceiving some passages of Scripture and I dare so much trust the Cavaliers honesty that he will not say that himselfe beleeves some of those slanders which himselfe produceth from Lutherans against Calvinists Such are corrupting the Scriptures concerning the glorious Trinity the Deity of Christ and the Holy Ghost And hee knowes or might know if he have but begunne with Bellarmines coÌ„troversies whom he names what Greâ—zer speakes of Hunnius one of the Cavaliers chiefe Authors that casts scandalls upon Calvinists in his Epistle prefixed to Bellarmines controversies For there he saith That Hunnius began a kind of writing right Lutherane that is Thrasonicall vaine-glorious furious I had almost said drunken yea he goes from the man to the kind and saith The Lutheran Preachers doe set forth their disputations as if it were upon Meade and Beere and so that they may seeme to smell of that which ariseth from both railing-slanders and madnesse Now if this testimony of Gretzer be true and whatsoever it be I thinke this Cavalier will not give this Father of his the lye then I wonder he would produce testimonies of such whose Disputations as saith his Father Gretzer smell of rayling-Slanders and madnesse So that indeed this argument seemes not to be so much a matter of earnest as of mirth even to make himselfe and his Romish Readers infernally merry with the bitternesse and contentions of christians yet it were not hard to shew patternes of such vomits of Gall brought up from Romish stomacks and indeede here they lye in sight but I had rather they should bee covered with ashes then bee stirred to annoy my Reader and my selfe with the savour of them Only I will give this Champion some animadversions one is that this is a stale objection long since dissolved by that reverend and learned prelate the ever honoured Bishop Iewell And this Bishop hath so torne this objection to ragges that I wonder this Cavalier would stoope so low as to take up such ragges which can never bee well sowed together againe and cloath his book with them A second that it were farre more like the spirit of Moses to say Why doe yee strive seeing yee are brethren then to gather this uncharitable and false Inference Because yee strive yee are not brethren I am passing from this Champions Untruths to his Truth but I cannot passe over an abominable fearefull and manifold Untruth not so much bounded in one part of this Chapter as arising from the whole For his maine drift and plot is and his words doe tell it us That let a point of doctrine bee never so fundamentall and necessary to salvation if his Popish Church doe not decide propound and command it to bee beleeved it is not heresie not to beleeve it But bee the point never so small if the Popish Church decide and command it to bee beleeved then must it bee beleeved upon paine of damnation Now what can bee said more to put the Pope above God to make him Antichrist and his followers Antichristians That which God saith may bee unbeleeved without note of heresie though it bee this maine point This is my beloved Sonne in whom I am well-pleased But if the Pope decide and command to bee beleeved that Gossips are such kinne that they cannot marry without incest not to beleeve this is certaine damnation fearefull blasphemies and unhappy Christians whose God is lesse then their Pope and whose Pope is above the highest God But as this makes way for the Mystery of iniquity so it leades fitly to the next point which is this Champions Truth wherein this Mysterie will bee more fully revealed SECT II. The Idolatrie of Papists 1. In making the Pope the foundation of Faith 2. In giving Divine worshâ—p to the Sacramentall Elements and to Images 3. In attributing the merit of salvation to their owne works is such as may sinke many of them into a damnable estate though it may bee charitably hoped of others that they are
not white that hath but a few white haires on him they thought they might say the Church of Rome was the Synagogue of Satan and not a true Church because there is such a multitude of Ignorants Antichristians and Idolaters and so few true worshippers and beleevers But bee it that the Church of Rome being understood in this wide sense wherein it comprehends all that any way looke toward Rome in regard that there was once sowed good corne in it and some of it comes up in some corners of it shal be called a field of corne from that which is most excellent in it surely it concernes Protestants wisely to mannage their unity with it and the division from it When we pursue the unity of charity wee must take heed that we lose not saving verity and when we pursue saving verity we must take heed that we offend not against charity we must so converse with that Church as with a City overcome with the plague we should be very wary of infection in regard of the universall pestilence of it and if we may chuse some places and company that are healthy But from those that live the life of Grace though never so few affection may not be with-drawne but to them belongs both our pity and prayers Yet while we extend our charity to them let us take heede that wee lose not our selves and that our charity doe not swallow up verity and make great sinnes too small nor allow too easie a communion betweene Christ and Beliall nor make salvation larger then the Scripture doth make it For first the Beleevers in the Papacy which make the Papall Church are by their humane faith infected to death except there be a healing of their errour by repentance These are Idolaters for worshipping the Pope and making him their God and rock of their faith Neither will it excuse them that they beleeve what they professe for the more they beleeve by this carnall killing faith the more they are slaine and the deeper they are in damnation Secondly there are worshippers of Images and consecrated bread which are Idolaters in the common and knowne sense of Idolatry And the common sort are exceedingly possessed with this Idolatry and slaine to death with it and I doubt it will bee a difficult matter to save many of the Doctors whom this plague hath infected For though they beleeve this Idolatry which they pofesse to be lawfull yet Idolatry hath beene damnable to many which both thus professed and beleeved it Yea they that beleeve and trust in Idols are the more damnable for thus beleeving Besides many places of Scripture shew that saving grace and the true feare of God doth not commonly dwell especially with dwelling and raigning Idolatry For Grace doth commonly turne out such grosse sinnes when it enters into the soule and accordingly Saint Paul describes the conversion of the Thessalonians to bee a turning from Idols to the living God 1 Thes. 1.9 And so some of the Corinthians were Idolaters but they were washed by regeneration 1. Cor. 6. so that they are not now that which they were before I would have charity to save as many as she might but I know shee cannot save them truly without verity Now the verities of Scriptures seeme to withstand the easie and ordinary salvation of Idolaters and I am sure have made it damnable to many who beleeved it to bee the worship of God and therefore they should be cleered before charity can know that shee hath her desire in true saving of Idolaters And this I propose not to increase damnation which I abhorre in my opposite the Romish Champion but to increase salvation even to save some with compassion by pulling them out of the fire prepared for Idolaters and to save others from falling into it To this end let us behold in the Scripture of truth how Idolatry though professed and beleeved yea though mixt with some knowledge yea seeming feare or service of God hath drawne the wrath of God upon Idolators Israel to whom were anciently given the Promises and newly the Law while Moses was in the Mount made a god of Gold but in that worshiped the God that brought them out of Egypt and proclaimed a feast to him and we finde that presently Gods wrath was ready to wax hot against them to consume them yea though Moses was the meekest man on Earth yet his meeknesse was so incensed against this sinne and these sinners that hee commands every man to slay his Brother Companion and Neighbour And when hee goes to God for a pardon hee doth it not with an extenuation but an aggravation of this sin For hee saith Oh this people have sinned a great sin and have made them gods of Gold He doth not tell God that it is a veniall or not damnable sin or that their breeding in Egypt might excuse them the cause that made them beleeve that which they here act and professe That an oxe which eateth grasse might represent the Deity and bee worshipped for it But laying aside all excuses and extenuations he calls it a great sinne and thinkes that a blotting out of Gods booke belonged to this sinne and therefore hee offers his owne soule to this punishment for their ransome But behold how fatall a sentence God pronounceth on the sinners of this sinne so shewing it to be damnable Him that sinneth will I blot out of my book and it presently followeth In the day wherein I visit will I visit their sinne upon them Againe in a chapter nearly following this Idolatry wherein Moses is earnest with God for a pardon and God seemes to be so farre intreated as to lead them by his Angell to Canaan yet is he still so strange to them that he calls them still not his own people but the people of Moses Thy people and the people amongst whom thou art But withall hee injoynes them to destroy the Altars of Idolaters to breake downe their Images and to worship no other God and let the reason be observed for it is highly observable For the Lord whose name is Iealous is a jealous God Surely this Jealousie of God is not sufficiently considered by those that are over easie favourable to Idolatry They consider not duly the Nature of Jealousie nor the height breadth of a Jealousie of an Almighty God nor that it is so inward and essentiall in God that it is as it were God himselfe For his name saith hee is Iealous Now Iealousie is the rage of a Man and a man saith Salomon thus enraged will not spare in the day of vengeance What then is the jealousie of God but the wrath of God and what is God when hee is angry but a consuming fire And such hee testifies himselfe to be particularly against this sinne Jealousie in a man may passe by many faults in his wife but it will not indure Adultery for Adultery causeth a divorce which
the truth and beleeves it being seene As for their unlearned who walke most in the darke though sometimes it may happen two blinde men may stumble upon one path yet it is impossible but that mostly they must differ in their opinions concerning that which they know not And whereas our Author would faine make these differences to be an agreement by a resolution to beleeve what the Church teaches we have already shewed that this resolution doth no way make thē actually to agree that actually do disagree And the Canon of Sivill I think would scarcely have beleeved the Inquisitors if they had told him Wee agree with you about Image-worship because we both resolve to beleeve as the Church teacheth though we condemne you for an Heretick because wee doe not agree And indeede there is no possibility of making an actuall agreement in those lesser points because of the different capacities and degrees of faith And God in the Scripture hath not promised such an actuall agreement to all the members of the Church in all lesser points of doctrine for he hath not promised a full and uniforme discovery of them to all Yea it hath been shewed out of your owne great Doctor Stapleton by a Roman Catholick that in the discovery of small points the Church is not infallibly directed And even therefore I conceive that this distinction was first framed to give leave for that difference which necessarily followeth humane ignorance and which even by the Cavaliers confession cannot be avoided in different capacities and measures of faith And yet having acknowledged such a necessity of this distinction he both labours to deny the differences on his owne side for which this distinction was necessarily made and which the very making of it doth acknowledge and hee labours to accuse our differences which this distinction would excuse as well as his owne So it is still a sword against Romists to confound them whilest they deny their owne differences neither can the forge of Rome ever turne it to a Buckler to defend them in this deniall But it is a Buckler to us to defend us from their objecting of differences against us seeing this distinction doth both acknowledge a necessity of some lesser differences and so excuseth us And thus may wee come to a sight of the unity of faith in the Church For in the explicites that is in fundamentalls of absolute necessitie which knit unto Christ the foundation there is and ought to be an unity and this substantiall unity may cover the incurable differences in the lesser implicite points being held by Infirmity and not with Contention Scandall and Schisme For unity in fundamentalls doth take away the damning censure of differences in lesser points when there is a will of beleeving right in these points but a want of power to attaine this beliefe And so these differences in lesser points not being put upon account for the will of unity in them and for the reall unity in fundamentalls this reall unity in fundamentalls is accounted an entire or at least a solid and saving unity So that the unity is not to be reckoned from this that all doe actually agree in this beliefe of all lesser points for in divers of these points divers doe necessarily differ but because their unity in fundamentalls and a will of unity in these lesser points wherein they differ the imputation of smaller differences being thus taken away are accounted to them for an entire or at least for a sufficient unity And this truth is in not much unlike Tearmes to bee seene in Tertullian Regula quidem fidei una omninò est sola immobilis irreformabilis credendi scilicet in unicum Deum omnipotentem mundi conditorem Filium ejus Iesum Christum c. But hereof more must bee said in the following Chapters wherin the Author brings us to fundamentalls being himselfe indeed necessarily brought to them by this former distinction of Explicites and Implicites yet hee goes about to fight against that unity which is established by this distinction and against the distinction which himselfe hath established and so will bee accounted a Trespasser by destroying what hee hath built but indeede this distinction being resisted by him will resist and overthrow him In the meane time this stands still firme and unremoved That the Romists have great sharp and weighty differences among them as weighty if not farre weightier then Protestants and therefore they want charity to Protestants in damning Protestants for such differences while for the like or greater differences even de fide they are bountifull to give salvation each to other and this they doe because they are servants of one Master the Pope whose service wee wanting should indeed be no more hated for this freedome then Israel for being delivered out of the bondage of Egypt Yet both then and now wee see the Egyptians make after us with violence and malice hating us for no other fault but for our freedome from Egypt But God that then beganne and after made good his worke of deliverance I hope will do it also for us and he will be above them even in that wherein they were proud above us and cover the Sea of Rome the mother of uncharitablenesse with a Sea of confusion CHAP. X. Containing an answer to the Cavaliers eighth Chapter wherein he quarrells at the distinction of Fundamentall and not Fundamentall and is divided into three Sections SECT I. First Sheweth the Protestants separation from Rome to bee reasonable though it bee true that some in the Church of Rome may bee saved Secondly That the Papists are the faulty causes of that separation A City generally infected with the plague and a few persons onely being free will it bee thought a reasonable question to bee proposed to some that flye from this City Why doe yee flye since you know and acknowledge that all are not infected to death but some live in this City But if the King of that Citie should banish all that should say that the Plague were in the Citie yea would put them to death were it not yet a farre more unreasonable question to aske those who had given out such a report Why doe you flye that are banished and Why doe you flye that must die if you flye not Yet such are the questions of this Author in the head of this Chapter of which it seemes that the repetition might serve for a confutation It is the acknowledgement and complaint of a sonne of the Church of Rome The chiefe cause of the calamitie of the Church is to bee ascribed unto them who being puff'd up with the vaine pride of Ecclesiasticall power have proudly and contemptuously despised and driven away those who rightly and modestly admonished them c. And againe Those who speake to them of amendment that exhort them to bee healed yea that offer their helpe to effect it they not only cast out and drive from the fellowship
the point then the Chapter hath been hitherto to the Title You say there are great differences between the Protestants and you about the understanding of the Article of the descent of Christ into Hell and the other of the holy Catholick Church and the Communion of Saints c. But what doe you here talk of differences in understanding fundamentals where the present question is Whether the Protestants doe acknowledge their fundamentalls to bee contained in the Creed For if Protestants declare that their fundamentals are contained in the Creed then your Title is gone which saith That they do not nor dare not declare them And surely it will aske a greater strength and a farre bigger volume then Charity mistaken to prove that Protestants doe not rightly understand the Articles of the Creed But secondly the Authours objection is grounded not onely upon a new but upon a false supposition if his fellow Romists may bee Judges For his supposed proposition is this That all the Articles in the Creed are Fundamentall Now this is different from the first proposall of our opinion That all fundamentall Articles are in the Creed It is also denied by his owne fellowes For though all fundamentall Articles be there yet they say that some Articles that are there may not bee fundamentall or explicitely to be known upon losse of salvation as before hath been shewed out of Vasquez and Azorius Therefore to stand upon a different understanding of those Articles which are denied by your owne men to bee Explicites or doubted is besides the matter But thirdly Do we differ from you in understanding those points What is that to the point undertaken in the end of the last Chapter and promised to be shewed in this That wee differ among our selves in the number of Fundamentalls You are now gone â—â—om our ridiculousnesse by differing in the number of fundamentalls and are come to a ridiculousnesse of your owne by your differing from us in the false understanding of some Articles of the Creed which all your owne Prophets doe not account Fundamentals But you add It is to little purpose to know or confesse that the Creede containes all Fundamentals unlesse there were some certaine way to understand them right This is againe a ranging from shewing our differences among our selves or that wee have not these Fundamentals Yet I answer Wee have a certaine and the best way of understanding them right wee have a learned Ministery endued with gifts from on high which teacheth and preacheth these Fundamentals and the right meaning of them And the right meaning thus taught the Spirit in the hearers doth so discover and certifie the truth of them that the hearers see the Articles to bee Gods truth and not mans And accordingly their faith thus beleeving them resteth on God as the sole Foundation of their faith and this teaching of the Catholick Church wee use commend and allow But that The single Article of the holy Catholick Church should containe the reason of all our faith fundamentally seemes to mee an high kinde of Blasphemie And this blasphemous doctrine as wee have before shewed is the very spirit of Popery or Antichrist which sets up the Pope in Gods place and makes his beleevers truely Papists or Antichristians And this great offence and mysterie of iniquitie carryeth Papists by throngs into the Land of darknesse and into this secret of theirs the soules of the saved may not enter True it is that God useth the service of the Ministers or if you will of the Church in publishing the Articles of faith but no other Foundation of supernaturall faith there is but God himselfe though speaking by man unto man the Fundamentality of our faith passeth through man that is the instrument and resteth wholly upon God But saith hee If wee understand it otherwise the Scripture it selfe speakes of particular errours which are damnable in them by whom they are imbraced and yet they are not at all against any expresse Doctrine of the Creed As namely where Saint Paul calls it a Doctrine of Divels to forbid marriage and meates c. I answer first That the Authour hereby proves that which wee deny not and disproves not that which hee saith wee affirme For the point is not Whether there bee any damnable errours besides those that are against some expresse doctrine of the Creede But Whether there bee in the Creede those fundamentall points which being truely beleeved will cause unity with Christ the Head and unity with his Body the Church Other errours against other Truths in Scripture not fundamentall wee acknowledge there are many and proceeding from the Divell the Father of Lyes and in themselves damnable to such as hold not the true Foundation Christ Jesus by beleeving Fundamentals And it is to bee feared that such are many of those true Papists whose foundation is the Pope But otherwise they may bee rather damnable in themselves then actually damning to those who by infirmities hold them and by beleeving fundamentals are in Christ Jesus to whom there is no condemnation Secondly not onely Fathers in their Rules of faith but the Romists themselves doe not place the lawfulnesse of meates and marriage among their chiefe Heads of Christianitie or Explicites and Fundamentals and therefore this Authour doth ill require of us that which hee cannot obtaine of his fellowes Wherefore let him first make this objection against them and when hee hath their Answer then let him take it for us But being unhappily as well as impertinently fallen into the mention of these damnable errours hee saw that as soone as they were brought in they looked at least asquint on the Church of Rome and claymed kindred of her And therefore hee thought that there was need of an Apologie to put off this kindred and acquaintance Which by the way is not to bee understood of the chastity and fasts of the Catholick Church as Protestants doe most perversely affirme which knowes that those things are lawfull but that yet it is most gratefull to God when his servants for his love deprive themselves of those delâ—ghts But of the Heresies of the Manichâ—es as Saint Augustine doth expressely declare who forbad both marriage and meates as being abominable and impure through the institution thereof which they said was derived from a certaine second ill conditioned god of their owne making But this nor all the water in the Sea will wash away all the kindred betweene Romists and these errours For though Saint Augustine may apply this Prophecie to the Manichees yet may hee not also apply them to the Montanists Tertullian himselfe acknowledging that they have beene taxed out of this very place And if to the Montanists why not to those Romists who with Durandus maintaine a curse and so an impurity of flesh and cleannesse of fish who also forbid marriage to Priests which this place plainly condemneth And whereas this Authour talkes of voluntary deprivation it is certaine that