more then darkeâ— an produce light since Truth himselfe 〈◊〉 taught vs (i) Luc. 6. That we cannot gather figges â—ornes nor grapes of bushes And hence by premises we are to vnderstand that we â—n entyre perfect fayth that by the â—h we belieue all supreme articles of the Trinitie Incarnation Passion c. anâ— all the articles of the Creed expressely articulately in their true sense and do belieue all other inferiour articles at least implicitely that is that we haue a readie preparation of mind to belieue all other articles which the Church of Christ dotâ— propound to be belieued so as that thougâ— we do not belieue euery article of Chrâ—stian Religion with an explicite and expresse faith yet we are bound vnder painâ— of damnation nor to belieue any doctrinâ— contrary or repugnant to the said articleâ— which the Church of Christ doth prâ—pound to be belieued from which it vnauoydably followeth that once grauntinâ— that the Church of Christ propoundeth 〈◊〉 be belieued that there is a Purgatory â— that we may pray to the Saints he incureth damnation who belieueth that theâ— is no Purgatory or that we ought not 〈◊〉 pray to Saints Now in this third place we will toucâ— that inseparable Attribute of true Chrâ—stian fayth which is Vnity in fayth 〈◊〉 doctrine This marke is so indissolubâ—â— annexed to the true fayth of Christ as thâ— we find his Apostles euer readie most â—â—riously to inculcate the same to their dâ—ciples Thus accordingly the Aposâ—â— exhorteth the Ephesians saying (k) Ephes 4. Be you carefull to keepe the vnity of the spirit in the bond of peace And immediately againe (l) Ephes vbi supra There is one Lord one fayth one Baptisme Where we see that Vnity in fayth is expressely set downe As also in another place (m) Ephes loc cit I beseech you that you speake all one thing be you kâ—it together in one mind and one iudgment And as this was the exhortation of the Apostle To we read that the first belieuers followed â—he same of whom S. Luke thus saith The (n) Act. 4. multitude that belieued were of one hart and â—ne soule And hence it proceedeth that the Church of Christ which comprehendeth the Professours of this vnanimous faith is â—tyled by Gods holy writ (o) Rom. 12. One Bodie one (p) Cant. 6. Spouse (q) Ioan. 10. one flocke of sheepe A truth â—o euident as that besides the frequent teâ—timonies of the Faâ—hers (r) Athanasius orat 1. con Ani. Chrysost opere imperfecto in Mat. Hom. 20. Tertullian de praescript Irenaeus l r. c. 5. confirming the â—ame euer the Protestants subscribe in iudgâ—ent heerto For thus (Å¿) Luther tom 3. Wittenberg in psal 5. fol. 166. Luther himselfe to omit (t) see herâ—â—â—f the Deuines of Mansfeild against the Sacramentaries And the Deuines of Heidelberg against the Anabaptists others writeth A kingdome deuiâ—ed in it selfe shall not stand neither haue any â—eretikes at any tyme bine ouercome by force or â—btility but by mutuall dissention neither doth â—hrist fight with them otherwise then with a spiâ—â—t of giddines and disagreement Now then this Vnitie of faith is so to be â—nderstood as that it is not repugnant therto that one and the same point should at one time not be houlden as necessary to be belieued the which after it hath vndergone a definitiue sententionall decree of Gods Church is necessarily to be belieued As for example it was not necessary in the beginning of Christianity to belieue that the booke of the Machabees the Epistle of S. Iames S. Iude the second Epistle of S. Peter the second and third of S. Iohn to be Canonicall Scripture till they were defined so to be by the third Councell (u) Can. 47. of Carthage at which S. Augustine was present But after this Councell had by the assistance of the holy Ghost defined them to be Canonicall and this after confirmed by the consent of the whole Church then it was and is Heresy to deny them to be Canonicall And the reason of this disparity is because it is Gods good pleasure wisdome not to reueale to his Church all articles of faith in the beginning and at one time but at seuerall times and vpon seuerall occasions as to his diuine Maiesty best seemeth expedient Thus the fayth of a Christian is capable of dilatation and of a more large vnfoulding or exposition but not of any contrariety in beliefe chaunge or alteration Anâ— thus to insist in the former example yâ— may well stand with Christian faith in the â—eginning not to accept the former bookes or Canonicall till the authority of the Church had pronounced them for such But it standeth not with sound faith that one man should positiuely belieue now after the Churches definition therof giuen as an article of fayth that the Machabees and the rest of the bookes aboue specified are not Canonicall Scripture but the prophane writings of man and another man should belieue as an article of Faith that they are Canonicall Scripture since the one of these contrary beleifes must be Hereticall This verity of the Vnity of faith being warranted by the word both of God and man as is aboue said we will take into our consideration the Catholike and Protestant Religions both which ioyntly do professe to belieue in generall in the Trinity in Christs Incarnation his Passion and the Creed of the Apostles and so we shall discerne whether the faith of all these seuerall Professours doth inioy the foresaid marke of vnity in doctrine or noe But seing this Subiect is most ample and large I will therfore sepose this ensuing chapter for the more full and exact discouery of the many and great disagreements betweene the Catholikes and the Protestants in their fayth and Religion THE SAME PROVED FROâ— want of vnity in fayth betweene Catholikes anâ— Protestants touching the Articles of the Creed CHAP. IIII. VNDERTAKING in this place tâ— set downe the multiplicity of opinions betweene Catholikes anâ— Protestants though they all iointly belieue in the Trinity the Incarnation oâ— Christ his Passion and the like and consequently that this their general beliefe wanteth that true Vnity of fayth which out of thâ— holy Scriptures Fathers the Protestants I haue aboue shewed to be most necessary to Saluation I will first examine how the Protestants and Catholikes doe differ touching the beliefe of the Creed made by the Apostles Next I will demonstrate that supposing all Professours of both Religions should agree in the true sense and meaning of the Creed yet there are diuers other dogmaticall points necessarily to be belieued and are at this instant belieued both by Protestants and Catholikes which are not expressed or mentioned in the Creed nor by any immediate inference can be drawne from thence Lastly I wil set down the great difference betweene Catholiks ProtestaÌ„ts in other points of fayth of which the Creed makes no intimation or
against Gods Church shal be damned But here I will stay my selfe wading no further in the disquisition and search of the great dissentions betweene Catholikes and Protestants touching faith and beliefe only I will reflect a litle vpon the premises And heere it is made most euident first that the Catholikes and Protestants do mainly differ in the sense and construction of the Articles of the Creede and consequently seing the sense and not the words do make the Creed that they both do not belieue one and the same Creede but haue to themselues seuerall Creedes from which point is sufficiently discouered the want of Vnity in faith among them both which Vnitie is so necessarily required to mans saluation as in the precedent chapter is demonstrated Secondly that though by supposition they did belieue the Creede and the true sense therof with an vnanimous consent yet it is proued there are diuers other articles not contayned in the Creed which are indifferently belieued as necessary to saluation both by Catholike and Protestant Thirdly seing also there are sundry Controuersies in Religion as is aboue exemplified which immediatly concerne saluation being houlden as necessary meanes therof by Catholikes but disclaymed from and abaÌ„doned by the Protestants as mayne errours and false doctrines Therfore from all the former premises I do auerre that it is a manifest errour to make the Creed the sole rule of Fayth and that he who maintaynes that both the Catholikes and Protestants notwithstanding their great disparitie of beliefe and fayth the one side necessarily belieuing maintayning Heresie can be saued or enioy one heauen is wholy depriued of all true iudgement reason and discourse and for want thereof may deseruedly be ranged among them of whome the psalmist speaketh (h) Psal 11. nolite fieri sicut equus mulus quibus non est intellectus THE SAME PROVED FROM the authority and priuiledge of the Church in not erring in her definitions and condemnation of Heresies and first of Councels CHAP. VI. FROM the inuiolable vnitie of faith we will next descend to the priuiledges of Gods true Church Of which priuiledges I will at this time take only one into my consideration that is that the Church of God is endued with a supreme priuiledge and prerogatiue of not erring in her definitions of fayth or condemnatioÌ„ of heresie This point is warranted by innumerable texts of holy Scripture as where it is sayd (i) Esay 72. Vpon thy wall ô Hierusalem I haue set watchmen all the day and all the night they shall not be silent But God did not set watchmen ouer his Church to teach errour And agayne The (a) 2. Tim. 3. Church of God is the pillar and foundation of the truth what more perspicuous And further whereas ech man â—s commaunded to repayre in difficulties matters of small consequeÌ„ces to the Church it is threatned by Christ himselfe that who wil not heare the Church shal be accompted â—s an Heathen or Publican according to â—hat his commination Si Ecclesiam non auâ—ierit (b) Mat. 18. sit tibi sicut Ethnicus Publicanus where we find no restriction but that in all things we are to heare the Church Agayne Christ himselfe speaketh to his Apostles and in them to the whole Church He (c) Luc. 10. that heareth you heareth me But if the church could erre neither would Christ refer vs to the church especially vnder so great a penalty neither by hearing the church could we be iustly sayd to heare Christ Finally the Church is so gouerned by Christ as its head or spouse and by the holy Ghost as its soule as therefore we find the Apostle thus to write (d) Ephes 1. thereof God hath made him head speaking of Christ ouer all the Church which is his body And agayne (e) Ephes 4. One body and one spirit yet more The (f) Ephes 5. man is the head of the woman as Christ is head of the Church From which texts it followeth that if the church should erre in its definitioÌ„s or resolutions of fayth and condemnation of Heresy this erring might well be ascribed to Christ and to the holy Ghost and consequently it followeth that the Apostles in making the creed would haue omitted that Article I belieue in the Catholike Church For why should we be bound to belieue the church if the church could erre This truth I meane that the church of Christ cannot erre in her sententionall decrees is so illustrious and euident that Tertullian speaking of certaine Heretikes of his tyme obiecting the erring of the whole church thus figuratiuely or Ironically writeth Age Omnes (g) in l. de praescript c. 28. Ecclesiae errauerunt nullam respexit spiritus Sanctus vti eam in veritatem deduceret ad hoc missus à Christo ad hoc postulatus de Patre vt esset doctor veritatis c. That is Go to Belike all the Churches haue erred and the holy Ghost hath regarded no Church that be might lead it into truth being sent for this purpose by Christ and to the same end begged by Christ of the Father â—hat it might be the teacher of truth And S. Augustine Disputare (h) Epist 118. contra id quod Ecclesia vniuersae sentit insolentissimae insaniae est To dispute agaynst any point maintayned by the whole Church is extreme madnes To whose iudgment herein most of the more sober and learned Protestants do indisputably subscribe since diuers of them doe with all feruour earnestnes maintayne that (i) D. Bancrost in his Sermon printed anno 1588. Fox Act. mon. fol. 464. b. art 4. The deuines of Geneua in their propositions and principles disputed c. p. 141. and diuers others the church of Christ cannot erre and that what she defineth for truth is most true or what for Heresy or â—alshood is hereticall and to be condemned This Basis or foundatioÌ„ of the church not â—rring being thus firmely layde we are heereupon to conclude that what points of Religion the catholike church of Christ hath condemned for Heresies the same are by vs to be reputed for Heresies since the churches condemnation or approbation is most infallible and the maintayners of the sayd Heresies for Heretikes and consequently that such Heretikes as departing out of the Church of God by their houlding of the sayde Hereticall opinions cannot be saued Now because the iudgment of the Church in matters of fayth is discouered two wayes first by the sentence of generall Councells secondly by the frequent attestations of the sayd chiefe Doctours of the Church in euery age in their particuler wrytings they not being contradicted therin by any other Orthodoxall Fathers or Doctours of the same age I will therefore distributiuely handle both these wayes shewing that both in generall by Councels and also by the particuler iudgement of the learned Fathers many opinions though not touching the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion or the expresse Articles of
Heresies only in the greatest points admitting such meÌ„ for Heretikes would accordingly haue restrayned his words at least in some one â—ext or other among so many only to these kind of Heretikes But not to leaue the least â—hew of refuge or euasion herein I will produce some passage of holy Scripture in wchâ—he mantayners of particuler errours euen â—n lesser points then the highest articles of Christianity are censured by Christs Apoâ—tles to be depriued of eternall Saluation And first we find S. Paul thus to prophesie In the later (h) 1. Tim. cap. 4. times certaine shall depart from the Fayth attending to spirits of errour and doctrine of deuills and forbidding to marry and to abstaine from meates c. Heere the Apostle prophesieth according to the iudgment of (i) Hom. 12. in 1. Tim. S. Chrysostom (k) Vpon this place Ambrose (l) l. contra Iouin cap. 1. Ierom (m) Haer. 25. 40. Augustin of the Heretikes Encratites Marcionistes Ebionites c. who denyed matrimony as a thing altogeather vnlawfull prohibited absolutly and at all times the eating of certaine meates as creatures impure Now these Heretikes belieued in the Trinity the Incarnation c. yet euen for these two former Heresies touching mariage and eating of meates they are sayd bâ— the Apostle to depart from the Fayth of Chrisâ— and to attend to the doctrine of deuills But sucâ— as leaue the Fayth of Christ and attenâ— to the doctrine of Diuells are not iâ— state of Saluation In my iudgement thâ— one authority alone is sufficient to oueâ—throw this phantasie of our Newtrallists 〈◊〉 since the words are diuine Scripture thâ— Heresies reprehended no fundamentalâ— points of Religion but of as little or lesseâ— consequence then the Controuersies betwixt the Catholikes and the Protestants yet the maintainers of them are accompted to depart from the Fayth of Christ and to attend to the doctrine of deuills A second place shal be that of the former Apostle who writing of certayne Heretikes erring touching the Resurrection of the Body though the article of the Resurrection it selfe they belieued sayth thus (n) 2. Tim. cap. â— Their speach spreadeth like a Canker of whome is Hymenaeus and Philetus who haue erred from the truth saying That the Resurrection is allready past and haue subuerted the Fayth of some These men belieued all the mysteries of the Trinity the IncarnatioÌ„ c. yet for erring only touching the Resurrection of the body they are sayd to erre from the truth to subuert the Fayth of some and that as Canker neuer leaueth the body till â—y little and little it wasteth it away so â—heir speaches by degrees poyson and kill â—he soules of the hearers From which it â—uidently followeth that these Heretikes â—ontinuing and dying in the foresaid Hereâ—ie could not be saued since that faith which â—rreth from the truth which subuerteth the true â—aith of Christ in others and which in killing and â—estroying resembleth a Canker cannot affoard Saluation to its Professours Another passage which heere I will vrge â—s that of S. Iohn who calleth certaine Heâ—etikes Antichrists saying (o) 1. Ioan. c. 2. Now there are beâ—ome many Antichrists who went out of vs were not of vs for if they had byn of vs they would surely haue remayned with vs. These Heretikes belieued in the Trinity in the Incarnation of Christ that he dyed for the saluation of the whole world only they erred touching the Person Natures of Christ yet they are figuratiuely stiled Antichrists and are said to depart out of the Church of Christ but no saluation is reserued for Antichrists and Apostataes leauing the Church of Christ. And thus much out of Gods holy Writ expressely touching Heresie in generall particuler To these Texts I will adioyne though not immediately and directly raunged vnder the former head a place or two of Scripture in my iudgment most vnanswerable and by necessarie inference euicting the point heere vndertakeÌ„ The first place is those words of S. Peter where he saith (p) 2. Ep. c. 3. In the Epistles of S. Paul there are certaine things hard to be vnderstood which the vnlearned and vnstable do peruert vnto their owne destruction Now heere I thus argue But these thinges hard to be vnderstood in S. Paul his Epistles did not concerne the doctrine of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. and yet the misvnderstanding of them doth cause as the text saith the destruction that is the damnation of them who misunderstand them Therfore farre lesser points then the deniall of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. doe iustly threaten to the false belieuers of them daÌ„nation and consequently it followeth that a bare beliefe of those supreme points is not sufficient to Saluation That those difficulties in S. Paules Epistles intimated by S. Peter did not concerne the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. I prooue seuerall wayes first because S. Peter maketh no such mention which no doubt he would haue done if the subiect of them had only touched those supreme mysteries and were not to be extended to other inferiour pointes Secondly it is acknowledged by the writings and â—ommentaries of all the Fathers besides â—at the Epistles themselues shew no lesse â—at S. Paul is most euident and cleere in 〈◊〉 his Epistles touching the Trinity the â—carnation the Passion c. and therfore â—ere is no reason why the difficulties of â—hem should be applyed to those articles such lesse restrayned to them alone Thirdly the Fathers do vnderstand these â—â—fficulties in S. Paul his Epistles mentioâ—d by S. Peter chiefly touching Iustificaâ—oÌ„ as appareth by the testimony euen of S. â—gustine (q) l. de fide operibus c. 15. 16. himselfe who particulerly â—tanceth in that place 1. Corinth 3. If â— man build vpon this foundation gold siluer 〈◊〉 which text intreateth of Iustification â—nd workes and expresly saith that this is he of the difficult passages intended and â—ant by S. Peter With S. Augustine S. â—ome may seeme well to agree in these â—ords (r) Epist ad Algasiam quae 8. Epistola ad Romanos nimijs obscuriâ—bus inuoluta est The Epistle to the Roâ—â—ns is inuolued with many obscurities or â—ake places for it is found that the Epiâ—â—le to the Romans most entreateth of Iuâ—fication and of faith and workes Fourâ—ly and lastly the Protestants themselues 〈◊〉 vnderstand the said obscurities of S. Paul 〈◊〉 Epistles touching Iustification as appeareth to omit the testimonies of â— others herein from the words and Coâ—ment of Doctor Fulke against the Rhâ—mish Testament vpon the foresaid plaâ—â— of S. Peter And this farre of this text wheâ— we find by an ineuitable deduction that false Fayth touching Iustification only caâ—not stand with Saluation The second text of scripture is containâ— in those words of the Apostle where thus sayth (c) c. 11. ad Hebraeos s Credere oportet accedentem ad Dâ— quia
mention at al and yet the different beliefe of them is houlden necessary to SaluatioÌ„ both by Catholike Protestant From all which it shall appeare how farre distant the Catholike and Protestant Religion are from that vnity in doctrine so necessarily required to that fayth wherby a Christian is to be saued I do heere begin with the Apostles Creed first because the articles of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion are included in the Creed Secondly by reason there are many Adiaphorists in Religion as I may terme them who seeme to deale more largly and liberally heerin seeing they are coÌ„tent to extend the necessary Obiect of Fayth not only to the articles of the Trinity the Incarnation and the Passion but to all points set downe in the Creed who assure themselues that God exacteth at our hands the beliefe of no other articles then are contayned in the Creed Now heere aforehand we are to conceaue that true Fayth resteth in the true sense meaning of the words of the Creed which was intended by the Apostles and not in the words themselues seeing both in the iudgment of all learned Catholikes and Protestants to belieue the words of the Creed in a sense different from the intended sense of the Apostles and consequently in a false sense is no better then not to belieue the Creed at all And the reason herof is because a false construction drawne from the Creed no lesse then from the Scripture is not the word of God but of man and coÌ„sequently the sayd letter of the Creed so interpreted is subiect to the same censure wherunto the word of man is lyable from whence it followeth that whosoeuer belieueth the words of the Creed in another sense then was intended by the holy Ghost and the Apostles doth not belieue the Creed at all but only belieueth the word of man which euer standeth subiect to errour and mistaking So as that sentence of S. Ierome deliuered only of the Scripture may iustly be applyed to the Creed (a) In Epistola ad Paulinum Scripturae non in legendo sed in intelligendo consistunt Scriptures or Creed do not coÌ„sist in the letter but in the sense and true vnderstanding of the letter This then being thus iustly presupposed let vs beginne to examine the articles of the Creed and see how we Catholikes and Protestants do differ in the construction vnderstanding therof And first touching the first article of our Beliefe in God obserue how different it is The Catholikes do belieue that their God no way formally cooperateth or willeth sinne in man that he hath but one simple and expressed will touching Sinne and this in detesting or hating of Sinne that he will not punish vs for not keeping of such precepts the which are not in our power to keepe that he imputeth sinnes to euery man that committeth sinne briefly that he giueth to all sufficient grace to saue their soules and desireth that al men may be saued Wheras the Protestants belieue the meere contrary to all these points for they belieue that God (b) Beza his display of Popish practises p. 102. saith God exciteth the wicked will of one thiefe to kill another see Swinglius tom 1. de Prouiden c. 6. fol. 365. Calu. Instit l. 2. c. 18. sect 1. cooperateth forceth and willeth a man to sinne That he hath a double will and therfore a dissembling will the one expressed in Scripture according to which he forbiddeth man to sinne the other concealed to himselfe by the which he impelleth man to sin that he will (d) D. Reynolds in his 2. Conclusion annexed to his Conference p. 697. punish vs for transgressing the ten Commaundements it not being in our power to keep the sayd Commaundements (e) Luther tom 2. wittenb de capt Babilon fol. 74. D. VVhitaker de Eccl. contra Bellarm controuersia 2. quaest 5. p. 301. that to the faythfull sinning neuer so wickedly no sinne shal be imputed Finally that to (f) Calu. de Inst l. 30. 23. sayth Confilio nutuque c. God doth ordaine by his counsaile that among men some be borne to certaine damnation froÌ„ their mothers wombe See Willets Synopsis p. 554. affirming the same certaine men he giueth not sufficient meanes of Saluation but purposeth and decreeth from all eternity that some men lyuing in the eye of the world in their owne consciences neuer so vertuously shal be damned thrall to sempiternall perdition Thus we see how great a difference there is betweene the Catholikes and the Protestants in beleiuing the first article of the Creed And how necessarily it followeth that eyther the Catholikes or Protestants do stand subiect and obnoxious to that saying of S. Augustin (g) q. 29. sup Iosue Who imagineth God such as God is not he carieth euery where another God a false God in his mind Touching the second article which is And in Iesus Christ his only Sonne We (h) Concil Trid. Catholikes belieue in Christ who is God of God and equall to his Father a Sauiour who suffred death quoad sufficientiam for all mankind and who accomplished the function of his Sauiourship only according to hiâ— humanity a Sauiour who dyed only in body and not in soule finally a Sauiour who from his first conception was endewed with all knowledge wisdome and prouidence and exempt from all ignorance passion and perturbation Wheras diuers cheife Protestants do belieue in Christ as their Sauiour who according to their faith is God of (i) D. Whitaker approueth this opinion alleadging Caluin in prooffe therof Contra CaÌ„pianum p. 121. himselfe and (k) Melancton in loc comm edit 1561. p. 41. inferiour to the Father who dyed only for the (l) So doth D. Willet teach in Sinopsi printed anno 1600. p. 780. as also Caluin and Beza in whole Treatises Elect who performed his mediation not only according to his humanity but also according to his diuinity though in the iudgment of all earned men true Diuinity is impassible who in the time of his Passion besides the death of the body as insufficient for our â—aluatioÌ„ suffred in soule the tormeÌ„ts (m) Melancton vbi supra D. fulke in his retent p. 89. (m) So teacheth Caluin Instit l 2. c. 16. sect 10. D. Whit. contra Duraeum l. 8. p. 556. of Hell briefly who laboured with ignoraÌ„ce (n) So teacheth Beza in resp ad act Colloq Montisb part 1. p. 147. D. Willet Synop. p. 599. 600. passion and euen desperation it selfe Touching the Article of Christs descenâ—â—ng into Hell the Catholikes do belieue â—â—ereby that Christ descended in soule after his Passion into that part of Hell with is called Lymbus Patrum to deliuer from thence the soules of the Iust there detayned till â—is comming of which iudgment are also some learned Protestants But the greatest part of (o) So D. Bilson in his Suruey of â—â—â—ists suffring c. p. 650. 651. 652.
CHAP. VIII IN this last place concerning the church we will set downe another Principle of Christian fayth and after will deduce from thence by way of most necessary infereÌ„ce our conclusion here handled The Principle is this That Heretikes houlding any Heresies whatsoeuer are no members of the Church of Christ the deduction is that Heretikes therfore cannot be saued since none can be saued but such as are members of Christs church This principle is proued as aboue is intimated out of Gods holy worde as where it is (a) 1. Tim. 1. sayd Certaine men made shippewracke touching fayth that is they fell out of the shippe of the church by forging of Heresies And againe (b) 1. Ioan. 2. They went out of vs that is as S. Augustine expounds it out of the church whereof we are The exposition of which texts are warranted euen by force of Reason for seing the church is an vnited multitude for it is one kingdome one people and one bodye and this vnion cheifly resteth in the profession of one fayth it is repugnant to reason that they should be reputed as members of the body of the church who haue no coniunction at all in the cheifest matters with the body If we proceed to the testimonie of the Auncient Fathers we shall finde them of an vnanimous iudgment heerein to wit that Heretikes are no members of Christs church therfore cannot be saued And first occurreth (c) Lib. 3. c. 3. S. Irenaeus who sayth that Policarpe did conuerte many Heretikes to the Church therfore it may be concluded that those Heretikes before their conuersion were not of the church S. (d) Epist ad Iubaianum Cyprian saith Heretikes though they be out of the Church do challenge to themselues the authoritie of the Church after the manner of Apes who not being men would be accounted to be men The same father thus in another place wryteth Cum (e) Lib. de vnitate Ecclesiae Deo manere non possunt qui in Ecclesia Dei vnanimes esse noluerunt They cannot remayne with God who dissent in iudgment from the Church of God And yet more fully in the same place Non peruenit ad Christi praemia c. He arriueth not to the rewards of Christ who leaueth the Church of Christ he is an alien he is profane he is an enemie he shall not haue God for his father who hath not the Church for his mother S. Ierome Qui non à Domino Iesu Christo sed ab alio (f) In dialogo coÌ„tra LuciferiaÌ„ c. Who take their denomination or name not from our Lord Iesus Christ but from some other as the Marcionists Valentinians Montanists c. are not the Church of God but the Synagoge of Antichrist Finally S. Augustine for I haue allready dwelled ouer longe in the authoritie of the fathers pronounceth that Nihil sic formidare debet c. (g) tract 27. in Ioannem A Christian ought to feare nothing so much as to be separated from the body of Christ which is his Church and which is one and Catholike for if he be separated from the body of Christ he is not a member of Christ then is he not strengthened with his spirit But who hath not the spirit of God the same man is not of God Thus far S. Augustine with whom euen the Protestants do ioyne heerein in iudgment for D. Doue thus saith This proposition that Heretikes are not to be communicated withall is vndoubtedly true And D. Sutcliffe in his examen p. 9. alleadgeth the Laodicean councell Can. 31.32.33 in proofe therof thus concluding The Laodicean Councell doth directly coÌ„demne Communion with Heretikes either in Marriage or Prayer This allready alleadged may serue to proue that Heretiques are no members of the Church of Christ and consequently cannot attaine saluation since it is agreed amongst all learned men that only the members of the church of Christ can fynd Saluation in Christ Now heere by Heretikes we cannot vnderstand those who deny the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. seeing the denvers of these Articles are not Heretikes as is aboue shewed in the definition of Heresy but they are either Iewes Pagans or Infidels froÌ„ which it followeth that the fathers authorityes aboue set downe against Heretykes cannot be applyed to the denvers of the Trinity the Incarnation c. but they are to be limited to such Heretyks who maintayne lesser errours touching Christian fayth We will in this place descend to Schismatiks who if they be neyther of the church of God nor can iustlie expect any saluatioÌ„ during such their state then a fortiori no Heretike can expect anie saluation since a schismatike belieuing all articles of Christian fayth doth only in will diuide himselfe by disobedience in not communicating with the church in Prayers and Sacraments wheras an Heretike with greater malice as is aboue sayd willfully and contumaciously maintaineth in his iudgmeÌ„t Errours and false opinions condemned by the church Now that a Schismatike is not a member of Christs church is first proued from those texts of scripture aboue in part touched where the church is called one sould of sheepe Iohn 10. one Body Rom. 12. one spouse and one Doue Cant. 6. But now Schisme according to its Etymologie diuideth that which was one into parts for Schisma being a greeke word commeth of the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is scindere therfore as a member being cut from the body is no longer a part of the body so a schismatike diuiding himselfe by his owne disobedience from the communion of the church is no longer a member of the sayd church This verity to wit that Schismatiks are not members of Christs church is besides the former proofs warranted with the authoritie sentences of the Auncient fathers And first S. Cyprian thus purposely writeth of Schismatikes (h) Lib. 41 Epist â— ad Florinum Qui cum Episcopo non sunt in Ecclesia non sunt Those who agree not with the Bishop meaning the supreme Bishop of Gods church are 〈◊〉 in the Church The sayd (i) Lib. de vnitate Ecclesiae Father most elegantly compareth Schismatikes to beames diuided froâ— the sunne to boughes cut from the tree and to Ryuers wholly separated from theiâ— springs S. Chrysostome discoursing of Schismatikes thus (k) Hom. 1. in Epist 1. ad Cor. sayth Schismatis significatio satiâ— eos arguit c. The very signification of the woâ—â— Schisme doth sufficiently reprehend them or rathâ—â— the verie name of Schisme is a vehement condemnation of them c. which Father in anotheâ— (l) Homil. 13. in Epist ad Ephes place coÌ„pareth a Schismatike to the hanâ— cut from the body which therupon ceasetâ— to be a member and expressely affirmeth that Schismatikes though they consent with the Church of Christ in Doctrine yet anâ— not in Christs church but in altera Ecclesia meaning in a Church differing from Christs
throghout the world spending their whole liues in spreading and defending the same by their wrytings Finally seeing God did cut them off by such calamitous miserable and prodigious deaths which is to be feared were but presages of the eternall deaths of their soules who can otherwise be perswaded but that all this was wrought by the iust hand of God not so much for their personall sinnes proceeding of humane frailty for there were and are many others as great sinners as they and yet escaped such dreadfull ends but for their first inuenting maintayning and preaching of the Protestant fayth and Religion and empoysoning almost all Countreyes with such their false sensuall doctrines which being graunted how then can it with any truth of reason be supposed that the positions of Protestancy impugned by the Catholikes should contayne nothing but matters of Indifferency or that a man whether he belieue them or not belieue them may alike and indifferently be saued THE SAME PROVED FROM the doctrine of Recusancy taught both by Catholikes and Protestants CHAP. XIII I Haue thought good to draw another argument from the common taught and approued doctrine of Recusancy in euery ReligioÌ„ though this head may seeme to haue a speciall reference to the reason afore touched in part be therein implicity included wherein is shewed that nature herselfe hath imprinted in the professours of all Religions a Religious care punctually to keep and preserue euery article of their Religion Now heere we are to premonish that if in the iudgement of all learned men both Catholike and Protestant it is thought an action most wicked vnlawfull and not to be performed but without finall repentance vnder payne of eternall damnation that a man should communicate only in going to the Church and in hearing but a sermen contrary to that Religion which himselfe belieueth for true though this may seeme to be coloured vnder pretense of obseruing the Princes commaundement for feare of loosing our temporall estates I say if this action be thought vnlawfull wherin neuerthelesse the performers thereof doe not punctually vndertake to maintayne or belieue any one Hereticall or erroneous position how then can it be reputed as consonant to reason or Religion that men belieuing different opinions of fayth and promiscuously communicating in prayer with a contrary Religion to their owne should neuerthelesse all be saued since the first fault coÌ„sisteth as some would interprete though falsely only in an externall and materiall as the SchoolemeÌ„ speake going to the Church of a different Religion whereas this other doth directly and openly rest in defending articles at least in its owne iudgment of a Religion contrary to the truth of Christian Religion for such is the case herein eyther of Catholikes or Protestants But before we particulerly enter into this discourse we will heere insist as most pertinent to our purpose in relating the two most religious Examples of Eleazar and the Widow with her seauen Sonnes recorded in the Bookes of the Machabees Touching the first we reade (1) 2. Machab c. 6. that Eleazar being a most auncient graue and learned Man was so far from eating of the meates sacrifized to Idolls according to the prohibition of the Iewish lawe that when certaine men as tendring his old age and moued thereto as the Text sayth iniqua miseratione through vnlawfull pitty proffered him other flesh to eate vnder colour whereof they would tell the Tyrant King thereby to saue his lyfe that he had eaten of the sacrifized meates that he did choose rather to vndergoe a most cruell death then to feigne that he had eaten of the sayd sacrifized flesh And so accordingly he suffered â— most glorious Martyrdome thus speakinâ— to God in the middest of his torments (2) Vbi supra For thy feare ô Lord I do suffer these things As concerning the (3) 2. Machab c. 7. Widdow with bâ— seauen Sonnes O what spirituall resolutioâ— appeared in them all Indeed able to vpbrayd vs ChristiaÌ„s with our luk-warmnest in professing our fayth They all suffered most exquisit torments and in the end most bloudy deaths only because they would not at the Kings command eate of Swynes flesh which was contrary to the Lawe of Moyses And this both the Mother still exhorting her sonnes to constancy heerein all her seauen Sonns performed with such an admirable resolution both in their answeres to the Tyrant during their torments and in their patience of suffering death as that considering her sex and the tendernes of their yeares it might be truly sayd that weaknes was heere able to instruct strength and youth old age Now from these two most remarkable Examples I thus argue The tyme of the old Testament was much inferior in worth dignity and many priuiledges to the new testament seing to them in the Old things as the (4) 1. Cor. 10. Apostle witnesseth did happen as in a figure whereas the new Testament (5) Hebr. 8. as the sayd Apostle affirmeth is established in better promisses But now if in the old Testament men did choose to endure most cruel deaths rather then they would contrary to the Law eate forbiden Meates which in themselues were lawfully to be eaten were it not for the prohibition annexed vnto them And seeing though they had consented to the eating of them yet this being but anâ— externall Act or Ceremony they might neuerthelesse inwardly haue retayned and kept their true beliefe touching the Law yet since the performaÌ„ce of so small a matteâ— as it appeared in outward show could noâ— be without greate sinne and damnation oâ— the party so offending Shall any Christian thinke that now in the tyme of Grace anâ— of the New Testament which tyme exacteth more perfection at our hauds for 〈◊〉 (6) Luc. 12. whome much is giuen of him much shal be râ—quyred that men professing to belieuâ— with contempt of the Churches authoritâ— interposed therein contrary articles touching Christian Religion and dying sucâ— their different fayths in which the one sydâ— must of necessity mantayne a false fayth that men I say of both these sides can bâ— saued it is against all force of ReasoÌ„ againâ—â— the iudgment of the Primitiue Church â— finally against Gods Iustice And thus far concerning the two fore sayd exaÌ„ples in the Machabees Which Booke admitting them for the tyme not to be diuine Scripture yet it is acknowledged oâ— all sydes that the Histories recorded in the are true and that Eleazar and the Widâ— with her seauen Sonns performed most worth examples of piety and Religion and that they had yielded to the Kings Command in eating of forbidden meates they had as violating the law giuen to them by God without repentance incurred damnation And this is the iudgment of the auncient Fathers Catholike Doctours and the learned Protestants But let vs descend more particulerly to the doctryne of Recusancy and examine whether it be lawfull to exhibite our selues present at that Church in tyme of diuine seruice
whom he sheweth all his Euidences some of which Euidences do cary a title only in grosse and in generall others proue a more particuler more restrayned right to the sayd Lands Imagine further that vpon the diligent perusall of these Euidences the ioynt consent and iudgment of all the sayd Lawyers should after their longe and serious Demurrs conspyre in this one point to wit that for the recouering obtayning of the said Lands the foreshewed Euidences in generall are not sufficient alone seeing diuers other men not hauing any true interest in the sayd Lands may neuerthelesse insist and vrge their like generall clayme but that with the help of the sayd Common Euidences he must more punctually relye for the gayning of his presumed inheritance vpon other more particuler and personall Conueyances and Assigments Now all these learned Counsellours agreeing in this sentence fortyfying their iudgments herein with their owne experience in the like case with the new Reports warranting the same with the authority of all the auncient learned ReuereÌ„d Iudges before them lastly with the force of reason confirming no lesse If some one Empericke Atturney or other skilfull only by a litle experience in making a Nouerint vniuersi should steppe forth armed only with impudency and ignorance pronounce the foresayd sentence of all those learned Sages to be false and that the party pretending right to the sayd lands were sure by his generall Title and Euidences only to obtayne the same all other his more particuler Euidences being but vnnecessary needelesse theerunto who might not heere iustly contemne and reiect the rash censure of such a fellow Or could not the party clayming the former inheritance be worthily reprehended if by reiecting the graue Counsell of the learned Lawyers and following the aduyce of this ignorant man should finally loose all clayme title and possibility to his sayd Inheritance Our case is not much vnlike heerto Wee all pretend a right to the Inheritance of the kingdome of Heauen for we reade (*) lac 1. Coronam vitae praeparauit Dominus diligentibus se Our title in generall therto is our beliefe in the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. the beliefe whereof is most necessary but not sufficient All emineÌ„t men for learning both Catholikes and Protestants do proue from the Scriptures from the authority of Gods Church from the nature of Heresy from the definition of true fayth from diuers other principles and reasons aboue expressed that no man can attayne to his heauenly Inheritance by belieuing only the former fundamentall points of Christianitie if so he haue not a true and particuler fayth of many other lesse principall Articles of Christian Religion Nowe commeth heere a dissolute gamnelesse ignorant fellowe not practised in any kind of good literature for it is obserued as aboue is sayd that all our most forward Neutrallists are meÌ„ for the most part voyde of Learning Vertue and Conscience who pereÌ„ptorily out of his Pythagorean chayre that is without any proofe affirmeth that a beliefe in generall of the Articles of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion is only sufficient to mans saluation that the doctrines of Purgatory Freewil Reall Presence and other Controuersies betweene the Catholiks Protestants are not in any sort necessary to the purchasing of our eternall welfare what way soeuer we hould but are to be reputed in respect of that end points indiffereÌ„t vnauayleable and as the Greeke is meerely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Bye-matters Who would heere not commiserate the folly and ignorance of such a man but especially pittie the soules seduced by so blind a Guyde THE CONCLVSION of the whole Treatise CHAP. XVII HITHERTO Good Reader it is sufficiently I hope demonstrated that euery Religion though professing the name of Christ and belieuing in the Trinity the Incarnation and the like fundamentall points of christian Fayth if their beliefe in other secondary lesse principall points be erroneous cannot promise to it selfe any security of Saluation and consequently that the controuerted articles at this day betweene Catholikes and Protestants touching Purgatory Freewill Praying to Saints Sacrifice c. are of that great importance as that the professours on both sides to vse the phrase of a blessed martyr (*) Camp in decem rationib rat 10. in the same case vnuÌ„ caeluÌ„ capere non potest It now remayneth to shew that seeing at this day there are originally but two different Religions among christians to wit the catholike Religion and the Protestant within which are included all its branches and descendents whether the catholike or the Protestant Religion is that wherein a man may be saued But seeing this Subiect is most learnedly and painefully intreated â—f by many Catholike wryters who from 〈◊〉 authorities both Diuine humane haue â—efragably euicted the truth of their owne â—eligion and falshood of the Protestants â—ofession and consequently that in the â—atholike not in the Protestant fayth the â—ules eternall happynes is to be purchased â—erefore I doe remit the reader for his greaâ—er satisfactioÌ„ therin to the perusal of the said â—ookes particulerly to the studying raâ—er theÌ„ to the reading only of that most elaâ—orate learned and vnanswerable Worke â—f the Protestants Apology of the Roman Church Only before I heere end I must make â—ould to put the Reader in remeÌ„brance with that the Protestant Religion in this former Treatise though but casually and incidentâ—y is most truly charged to wit First with â—articuler coÌ„demnations passed vpon diuers â—f its chiefest articles euen by seuerall senteÌ„â—es iudgements of the Primitime church â—nd that therefore those doctrines so condeÌ„â—ed yet after defended with all froward â—ertinacy agaynst the church of God are hereby discouered for playne and manifest Heresies this point being further euicted â—mplicitely both from the testimonies of hoâ—y Scripture as also from the definition of Heresy aboue expressed Secondly that the doctrinall speculations and positions in thâ— Protestants fayth most strongly mooue tâ— Wills of such as beliefe them to all vice â—â—berty and sensuality Thirdly that God oâ— of the infinite abisme of his Iustice hath pâ—nished euen in this world as earnest giuen 〈◊〉 far greater punishment reserued in the lyâ— to come with most fearefull vnnaturall 〈◊〉 prodigious deaths the first InueÌ„tours in oâ— age Promulgatours of the sayd doctrineâ— and such deathes as his diuine Maiesty is accustomed to send to his professed enemyes Fourthly that Protestancy is torne asundeâ— with intestine diuisions diuers Professourâ— of it charging their Brethren-Professourâ— with Heresy despayring of their future saluatioÌ„ From all which we may conclude that except Heresy dissolution of manners most infamous and calamitous deathes anâ— disagreements in doctrine betweene one the same sect be good dispositions meanâ— to purchase Heauen the Protestant Religioâ— can neuer bring her Belieuers thereto What then remayneth but who will expect saluatioÌ„ should seeke it only in the Catholike