cast a dart or shoot an Arrow This is Pugna levis bellumque fugax turmaeque vagantes Lucan de Parthis Et melior cessisse loco quam pellere miles Illica tela dolis nec Martem comminus unquam Ausa pati virtus sed longe tendere nervos Et quò ferre velint permittere vulnera ventis Light armed men who flying fight and never firmly stand Better in skipping up and downe then fighting hand to hand Their poisned darts they send and shoot but will not closely fight Wounds which they dare not bring themselves they send by winged flight Had the Argument been so easily answered you would not have answered it by a manifest untruth as you have done by saying That the Protestants Faith is not contained in Scriptures whereas it is one of the greatest Controversies betweene you and us whether the Scriptures be the onely rule of Faith which wee affirme and you denie it is the sixth Article in the Doctrine of our Church of England the Title is thus Of the sufficiencie of holy Scripture for salvation The Article it selfe is this Holy Scripture containeth all things necessarie for salvation so that whatsoever is not read therein nor may be proved thereby is not to be required of any man that it should be believed as an Article of the Faith or to be thought requisite and necessarie to salvation c. To this Article of ours agreeth the Helvetian Bohemian French Belgian Saxonian Suevian confessions Reade the Bookes of Luther Brentius Melancthon Chemnitius Calvin Zanchie Whittaker and you shall find that they all doe professe this and write at large in defence thereof We proclaime it in our Pulpits we maintaine it in our Schooles wee will shed our blood rather then admit any Articles of Faith which are not contained in the Scriptures Is it not strange you should have the face to denie that wee professe that which is printed in the Doctrine of our Church preached in our Pulpits every day maintained in our Schooles defended by all proclaimed to the world What doth Chemnitius maintaine in the first part of his Examen Concilii Tridentini but this This the first Controversie which hee there handleth against you What doth Calvin labour in his first Booke of Institutions cap. 6 7 8 9. in his third Booke and second Chapter where hee speaketh of the nature of Faith but this And it is not a little that he writeth to this purpose in his fourth Booke and tenth Chapter Hath not Zanchie written a whole Booke to this purpose Against whom doth Bellarmine write his third and fourth Booke de verbo Dei which tend onely to this purpose to denie the fulnesse of Scripture and to extend matters of Faith to unwritten Traditions but against the Protestants There hee putteth Luther and Brentius in the forefront of his Adversaries Doth not Valenza in his third Tome upon Thomas disputatione 1a. quaest 3ª 4ª 5ª 6ª 7ª octava maintaine the same Tenet against the same men This is the maine Question betweene your Jesuited Schoolmen and us when they write de objecto fidei what those things are which are to be believed with a religious assent of divine Faith Whether onely those things which are contained in Scriptures as the Protestants doe professe or also unwritten Traditions as the Church of Rome doth professe let us then view the Argument and see how you answer it 1. Arg. First a Causis thus The Faith contained in the Scriptures hath had visible Professors in all Ages But the Protestant Faith is contained in the Scriptures Ergo The Protestant Faith had visible Professors in all Ages M. Fisher denieth the Minor or second Proposition which I have proved in the last Page before out of the publike Doctrine of our Church and chiefest Writers of our side and theirs neither can hee be ignorant of the same but the Argument troubles him and something hee must say Neither is hee ignorant that in this Controversie of the visible Church betweene them and us It is not the inward habit but the outward profession of Faith which maketh a visible Church Ecclesia constat professione ejusdē fidei Bellarm. Tom 2. l. 3. c. 2 3 4. etc. cōmunicatione eorundem Sacramentorum The Church doth consist in professing the same Faith and cōmunicating the same Sacraments Cap. 9. And againe the same Author cap. 10. writeth thus I answer Formam Ecclesiae non esse fidem internam nisi Ecclesiam invisibilem habere velimus sed externam id est fidei confessionem c. The forme or essence of the Church is not the inward Faith but the outward profession of Faith L. 19 c. 11. which Saint Augustine declareth most plainly against Faustus the Manichee and experience doth testifie the same for they are admitted into the Church who professe the Faith Thus farre Bellarmine So then by Faith in this Argument of the visible Church is alwayes understood the outward profession of Faith whereas the Protestants doe professe that they believe nothing but what is contained in the Scriptures this Respondent hath the face to say wee doe not professe it If but one man should come into the face of a congregation and say I doe professe and believe onely those things which are contained in Scriptures were not hee very impudent and had a face harder then brasse who would say to this man Thou dost not professe that Faith which is contained in Scriptures That Argument is not easily answered which driveth the Respondent to such miserable shifts Wee professe no Articles of Faith but those which are contained in the Apostles Creed which of these Articles are not contained in Scriptures Ad Partes Master Fisher this is the law of answering to a Proposition that hath many members wee professe that with a religious divine Faith wee receive nothing but what is contained in the five books of Moses or Ioshua Iudges Ruth the two books of Samuel the two books of Kings the two books of Chronicles the two books of Esdras Esther the booke of Iob or the Psalmes or Proverbs or Ecclesiastes or the Canticles or the foure greater or twelve lesser Prophets Or in the foure Evangelists or in the Acts of the Apostles or the Revelation and Epistles of Saint Iohn or the Epistles of Saint Paul Saint Iames Saint Peter Saint Iude which of these bookes is not Scripture Thus wee professe our Faith doe not wee every where professe with Saint Augustine De Doct. Christiana l. 2. c. 9. and against you That all things concerning Faith and life necessarily to be knowne and believed are plainly set downe in Scripture With Saint Basil Serm. de fidei confess Lib. cont Hermogen and against you That it is pride and infidelity to adde unto the Scriptures With Tertullian against you and Hermogenes Scriptum esse doceat Hermogenis officina Si non Scriptum timeat vae illud c. Shew where it is written or else feare that woe
of Scriptures and Fathers even by confession of learned Protestants themselves I will prove it yet first let me tell you that here you deliver a most grosse untruth if by Catholick you meane Roman to say that divers learned Protestants doe confesse that your Roman doctrine may be and is ordinarily proved by plaine testimonies of Scriptures and Fathers This I say is a most manifest and grosse untruth seeing no learned Writers of our side doe say so much Why doth Bellarmine make Scripture a part of the Rule not the whole Rule but to bring in unwritten Traditions writing a whole Booke de verbo Dei non scripto of the unwritten Word of God And Valenza in his fourth Tome upon Thomas Aquinas is very full in seeking to prove the same in his first disputation de objecto fidei delivering these Propositions viz. That the authoritie to judge in matters of Faith is not contained onely in Scripture Disputatione prima puncto septimo quaestione tertia Sect. 4. And againe Sect. 5. The Scripture alone is not the Judge of Faith As also Sect. 6 7 8 9 10 11. As also in the eight question Sect. 44. in his Tract de Traditionibus Apostolicis Neither doe I remember that ever I read any of your late Writers but hold as these men did so that in the opinion of these men you must be but halfe a Papist because you receive but halfe that Rule of Faith which the Church of Rome receiveth for not to trouble the Reader with the opinions of private men it is the first Doctrine the first Decree of your Councell of Trent the puritie of the Gospell Fontem omnis salutaris veritatis Sess 4. morum disciplinae contineri in libris scriptis sine scripto Traditionibus The fountaine of all saving Truth and the guide of life is contained in the written Bookes and unwritten Traditions Have you any other Faith then the Councell of Trent This is to be a Protestant in the maine point in that which is the Rule of all other points of Faith and life necessary for all men to know Is this your easie answering Master Fisher to grant your Adversarie that which hee most desireth to dissent from your Councell of Trent would you but adde this to what you have written which followes necessarily I will not subscribe to Bellarmine I will not be led by Valenza herein I will leave the Councell of Trent I will hold no Doctrine which is not proved by plaine testimonie of Scripture without flying unto unwritten Traditions I would rejoyce to see you a Protestant in the maine ground-worke and Principle of all our Religion hoping that if you continue in this mind you will shortly agree in the rest Now let us see how the second Argument may be retorted against the Protestants by onely changing the word Protestant into Catholicke 2. Arg. A Signis The Faith which hath testimonies of Antiquitie Vniversalitie and consent of Fathers and other Writers in all Ages had visible Professors in all Ages But the Faith of Catholickes had these testimonies Ergo The Faith of Catholickes had visible Professors in all Ages What one word is here against Protestants wee grant both the Premises and Conclusion so doe not you For they be your owne words within a few lines viz. That some points were at first not held necessarie to be believed even by Orthodox Fathers which after by examination and definition of the Church in Generall Councels were made so necessarie to be believed as that whosoever did not believe them were accounted not Orthodox but Haereticks These are your owne words from whence it doth follow that many necessarie points were denied in precedent Ages by Orthodox Fathers and thence it must follow againe that they wanted the testimonie of all Ages being denied in some Ages by the Orthodox Fathers Such testimonies the Articles of your Roman Faith may have yet Orthodox Fathers denie them and therefore to frame the Arguments againe not according to your words which I have done already by changing Protestant into Catholicke but into Roman for that I thinke you understand by Catholicke Let it be thus The Faith contained in the Scriptures had visible Professors in all Ages But the Roman Faith is contained in the Scriptures Ergo The Roman Faith had visible Professors in all Ages Would to God your Minor were true I would be glad to meet with you in the Conclusion But I have already shewed out of your owne Writers and Councell of Trent that you hold the contrary and your new Creed being examined by Scripture will finde more contradiction there then proofe unwritten traditions equalled to the word of God Seven Sacraments improperly so called halfe Communion Transubstantiation Invocation of Saints worshipping of Images have neither testimony of Scriptures nor Fathers this you know well enough and therefore you could passe over a great deale of my Reply without any mention of what I had replied My words were these Having gone thus farre at this time I undertake for the rest and doe require the like from the Romanists viz. That they would shew me the names of such as taught the now faith of the Church of Rome in all ages and let them set me downe the names as I have done And for instances in points of Roman faith in all ages I require these men to shew me the names of those who in the first second third Centurie of yeares did preach or professe unwritten Traditions to be the rule of faith Secondly that the vulgar Latine translation is authenticall Thirdly that there are seven Sacraments improperly so called and no more Fourthly that the bookes of Machabees are Canonicall Fiftly Transubstantiation Sixtly Invocation of Saints Seventhly worshipping of Images c. This rule of shewing the names of such as professed the faith in all ages is proposed by them which though it be no necessary consequence of faith yet it bindeth them that propose it to make it good in particular Out of their owne Position thus I argue First Argument That is a true Church whose faith hath had visible professors in all ages whose names may be shewed out of good Authors to be such The Romish faith had not such visible professors in all ages Ergo The Roman is not a true Church Second Argument The true faith hath the testimonies of Vniversalitie Antiquitie and Consent But the Romish faith as farre as they differ from the Protestants faith which they doe in all the points above alledged hath not testimonies of Vniversalitie Antiquitie and Consent Ergo The Romish faith in those points wherein they differ from the Protestants faith is not a true faith Let the Romanists answer these two Arguments in those particular points above written and I will be of their Church Thus much in my former answer to which you have made no replie at all you have neither given any instance which point of my faith is not contained in Scriptures or wanteth
Scriptorem vel per alium legitimum definitorem fidei whom he afterwards concludes to be the Pope I therefore chuse to speake as the Fathers doe yea and as the more Ancient Schoolemen did Aquinas Carbo and others That the Scripture is Regula credendorum which excludeth Bellamines Verbum non scriptum and Valenzaes Papall decisions And to this purpose I will cite such places of the Fathers which are acknowledged by the Adversaries to be true Fathers and true quotations The sacred Writers Evangelium in Scripturis nobis tradiderunt fundamentum Irenaeus l. 3. c. 1. columnam fidei nostrae futuram haue delivered the Gospell unto us in the written Word to be the foundation and pillar of our Faith Here Bellarmines Verbum non scriptum his unwritten Word hath no place This Father who lived in the first Age after the Apostles saith In Scripturis in the written Word Here Valenza's unwritten Revelations of Traditions or Papall decisions being his definitor fidei have no place to reconcile these two Scriptum and non Scriptum is to overthrow the first fundamentall Propositions of all learning in the world to reconcile contradictions The most incompatible opposition that is without which being laid as a ground-worke no man may treate of any thing Arist Meta 4. ca. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is impossible that the same thing at the same time should bee and should not bee this no man can bee ignorant of this is the first principle in Metaphysicke in Logicke though in other termes viz. two contradicting Propositions cannot be both true nor both false This is the first principle of all other Sciences as the fornamed Author Fonseca Suarez as Aquinas your great Schooleman Fonseca and Swarez your fellow Iesuits and great writers upon Metaphysicke your learned writer upon the Demonstrations Zabarel and others whom I could name doe undoubtedly teach Reconcile me Irenaeus his Scriptum est and your non scriptum Bellarm. de Verbo Dei and as you have taken away the Rule of divine knowledge by denying the sufficiencie thereof by denying it to bee a totall Rule but a part a piece of a Rule which is as much as no Rule as a part or piece of a man is no man so by denying this first principle of all humane knowledge you take away all Naturall and Morall Philosophie all Logicke all Metaphysicke and then what remaineth but that we be no more creatures endued with reason and your Pope shall rule us as please him Sed habebit imperium in belluas hee must transforme us into this beastly ignorance Thus having taken away your distinction of Scriptum non Scriptum which I desire may be observ'd in the rest of the Fathers that follow for I will cite none who use not this word Scriptures which is the written word I will presse my Argument thus First Argument Whosoever doth hold the foundation and pillar of Faith is of the Church But the Protestants believing the Scriptures doe hold the foundation and pillar of Faith Ergo The Protestants are of the Church What will you Master Fisher answer to this Argument will you distinguish Verbum Dei with Bellarmine or Revelatio Divina with Valenza ad terminos what word in my Syllogisme doe you distinguish or what proposition doe you deny Lib. cont Gentes seu contr Idola The second testimony shall be Athanasius his words are these Sufficiunt sanctae ac divinitùs inspiratae Scripturae ad instructionem veritatis out of which I thus argue Second Argument Whosoever doe professe that which is sufficient to instruct them in the truth are of the Church The Protestants professing the Scriptures do professe that which is sufficient to instruct them in the truth Ergo The Protestants are of the Church Neither is here any place for Bellarmines unwritten word or Valenzaes unwritten revelations Basil It is an Argument of infidelity and a sure token of pride to reject any thing that is written or to bring in any thing that is not written saith Saint Basil in his Sermon of the confession of Faith Third Argument But the Romà nists doe add vnto the Faith things that are not written Ergo The Romanists are proude Infidels The Maior is Saint Basils the Minor is your owne not only delivered by private men but also enacted by your Councell of Trent Sess 4. Anno 1546. Fourth Argument Chrysost Whatsoever is requisite unto Salvation is wholly fulfilled in the Scriptures saith Chrysostme Com. in 22. Matth. But the Protestants doe professe all that is fulfilled in the Scriptures Ergo The Protestants doe professe all that is requisite unto salvation And doing so sure they are of the Church because none are saved out of the Church Idem Chrys Seing we have a most exact Ballance Levell and Rule of all things the sayings of the Law of God I beseech you all that forsaking what seemeth to this man or what seemeth to that man you would enquire after these out of Scripture Thus the same Father Hom. 13. in 2. Ep. ad Cor. I argue thus Fifth Argument They who professe and believe the most exact ballance levell and rule of Christians doe continue in the Christian Church But the Protestants beleeving the Scripture or written Word doe beleeve a perfect ballance levell and Rule of all things belonging to Christians Ergo The Protestants are in the Christian Church I reverence the fulnesse of Scripture Tertull contra Hermog Let Hermogenes shew me that it is written if it be not written let him feare the woe that is denounced against them that adde or diminish Sixth Argument They who adde to the fulnesse of the written Word are thereby subject to a great Woe But the Romanists denying the fulnesse of Scripture adde thereto unwritten Traditions Ergo The Romanists are subject to great woe Seventh Argument Diabolici spiritus est aliquid extra Scripturarum Sacrarum authoritatem putare divinum It is devilish to accompt any thing divine that is not in the written Word Theoph. But the Romanists doe accompt unwritten Traditions and Papall determinations to be divine Ergo The Romanists are devilish or have a devilish spirit in them I will conclude with Saint Augustine Eighth Argument Aug. l. 3. cont Petil. cap. 6. If any one either concerning Christ or his Church or concerning any other matter which belongeth unto Faith or life I will not say if wee but as Saint Paul added If an Angell from heaven doe declare unto you any thing besides that which you have received in the writings of the Law and the Gospell let him be accursed But the Romanists doe tell us of unwritten Traditions concerning masters of Faith and life besides the written word of the Law and the Gospell Ergo The Romanists are accursed I will adde more testimonies out of the same Father both because by consent of all Divines that I have reade both Roman and Reformed hee is the chiefest Divine
Romane Church may give testimonie against you and for me Caiphas even then when he persecuted Christ might prophesie truly of Christ Pilate who did crucifie Christ did write that of Christ which was true viz. that hee was King of the Iewes Matthew Paris was a member of the Romane Church who said that your Church did never reject any that came unto her if they brought white or red with them Silver or Gold This member of the Roman Church said that a principall member viz. That Pope Gregorie the seventh did confesse on his death-bed that by the instigation of the devill hee had troubled the world yet this was such a member as that Innocentius the fourth Matthew Paris the then Pope vvrote of him that hee vvas vir probatae vitae Religioris expertae Such a Writer as that Baronius giveth this testimony of him Take away from his Booke his calumnies Anno 996. n. 63 64. invectives taunts and blasphemies against the Apostolick See often repeated and you vvill say it is a golden Commentarie taken vvord by vvord out of the publike Records and very vvell compiled together Thus farre Baronius As if a man should except against a vvitnesse and say you must not believe him in this vvhich he sayes against me but in all things else you may believe him hee speakes nothing but vvhat is upon publike Record Cajetane was a learned member of your Church and yet he held the Canon of Scripture as vvee doe contrarie to that vvhich the Councell of Trent hath defined Sixtus Senensis vvas a member of the Roman Church and yet hee did denie some part of the Scripture to be Canonicall which the Councell of Trent defined for Canonicall and that after the Councell Bellarm. de Verbo Dei l. 1. c. 7. I will fit you with many such members in my Catalogue Fisher Neither can I see any reason why hee did not with like audacitie goe on in naming other famous Romane Catholickes in every Age but that as it seemeth hee was not resolved whether hee were better to put in his Catalogue the names of damned Haeretickes which disagree in divers points of Faith from all ancient and present Pastors and Doctors of the Church even from the Protestants themselves Rogers Who you meane by these Haeretickes I know not and therfore I need not reply unto you herein if you had laid that imputation upon us I would have enlarged my selfe in the defence but you say they differ in points of Faith from the Protestants Fisher Or else to put in names of Popes Cardinals Bishops Priests Monkes and other religious men whose Writings and profession of life palpably shew that they held the present Roman Doctrine and communicated with the Roman Church Rogers I have answered you already that I will name Popes Cardinals Bishops Priests Monkes and others of your Church and why but such as neither their Writings nor profession of life doe palpably shew that they held the present Roman Faith If their Writings expresse what you say I will yeeld but that their Roman profession of life should include the now present Roman Faith I deny and besides what I formerly spake concerning your Writers I will adde some few instances now Gratian. Can Comp. de consecr dist 2. Gelasius was a Pope and yet hee held your present halfe Communion to be Sacriledge and decreed thus Aut integra suscipiant aut ab integris arceantur Let them receive the Communion in both formes or in neitheâ— Nich Lyranus was a Catholick and yet hee held the Canon of Scripture contrary to that of the Councell of Trent as Bellarmine confesseth So did Hugo and Thomas de Vio two Cardinals Irenaeus Basil Chrysostome Augustine and others whom I cited before cap. 4. were Bishops and yet they held the fulnesse and perfection of Scripture without the supply of unwritten Traditions contrary to the Councell of Trent Ierome was a Priest and a Monke yet denied those Books to be Canonicall which we deny contrary to that the Councell of Trent hath taught and decreed As the hand of a man may smite himselfe and yet continue a member of his body so these might be members of the Roman Church and yet give testimonie in something against your Church The Embassador De Ferrias of France was a member of the Roman Church and a French man Histor Concil Trid when in the Councell of Trent speaking of the miseries of France hee said If they should demand why France is not in peace hee could answer nothing but that which Iehu said to Ioram How can there be peace there remaining and concealed the words following but added You know the Text. The Cardinall of Loraine was a principall member of the Roman Church and the second Clergie man in the Latine Church yet hee speaking of the miseries of France said in the Councell of Trent If you would demand who hath caused this tempest and fortune I can say nothing but this That this fortune is come by our meanes cast us into the Sea By Vs hee must understand the Roman Clergie Iudas that betrayed Christ gave a true testimonie against himselfe when hee said J have sinned in betraying innocent blood And the limbs of Antichrist may give a true testimonie against Antichrist Now whereas you say that they communicated with the Roman Church I grant they did in some things or else they had not beene members of that Church but not in all for not in those things they did disavow reprove condemn and that this may the better be understood I will enlarge my discourse herein CHAP. VIII What it is to communicate with others How farre wee yet communicate with the Roman Church and wherein wee refuse to communicate COmmunio est multorum unio Communio quid Communion is the union of many They that agree in one opinion are so farre united they are one They that enjoy any thing in common are so farre united Rom. 12. The Church is one body 1 Cor. 12. Christians are severall members of this one body as therefore the members being many are united in one body and doe communicate in divers of the selfe same things from that one body and communicate one unto another the service of those things that are proper unto them as they are severall members So in the Church all Christians make but one body collective which are united together by many things some outward some inward some both outward and inward because it is corpus vivum a living body wherein there is saith Saint Augustine a soule Augustin Breviculo Collat. 3. Collat. 9. and a body The soule are the inward gifts of the holy Ghost faith hope and charity c. The body are the outward profession of faith and receiving of Sacraments Whence it comes to passe that some are of the soule and of the body of the Church and therefore united to Christ their Head both inwardly and outwardly these are most
he hath already seemed to say that none of their negative Doctrines pertaine to their faith and that all which is affirmed by Protestants is affirmed by Roman Catholikes and that this affirmative Doctrine onely doth pertaine to faith it will follow that Protestants have no faith different from Roman Catholikes out of which it will follow that those English Protestants who shall hold some of the 39 Articles and deny the rest may be said to have no faith different from those which subscribe to all the 39 Articles which last Consequence if Master Rogers grant I aske why the booke of the Canons doth excommunicate ipso facto such halfe Protestants Why doe their Bishops imprison them as Hereticks and not account them members of their Church And why may not Roman Catholikes by as good or better right accouunt Protestants who deny so many points defined in both ancient and recent Generall Councels to be Hereticks excommunicaeed and no members of the ancient and present Catholike Church Rogers That which you require heere I performed in my first Answer in my definition of a Protestant or else it had been no good definition had it not contained all that is essentiall this you know well enough but because you have nothing to answer you will demaund the same question againe Looke into my definition there you shall finde it and I made the same request unto you for a definition of the visible Church and what points you hold to be fundamentall to which you make no answer at all I there also undertooke to prove all our Affirmations which you deny so you doe the like by your Affirmations which we deny my words were these in my former answer Rogers in his first answer In all these I defend the Negative and so it doth belong to you to prove the Affirmative which when you shall doe by testimonies of Writers in all ages I will yeeld unto you for you proving the Affirmative the Negative will fall of it selfe as for example The first instance of Negation in our Articles is part of the sixt Article concerning those bookes of Esdras Tobit Iudith c. which we receive not for Canonicall you doe the proofe is on your side What I require of you I will performe on our side whatsoever is affirmative in our Articles I will maintaine to be affirmed and taught in all Ages as the 1 2 3 4 5 Articles the Affirmative part of the 6 the 7 8 and so in the rest or I will yeeld unto you Give me instance what Affirmation of our Articles you deny and I will prove it in all Ages And I desire you to set downe withall which of your affirmative Articles you receive and whether we agree in the Articles of the Creed or not I will doe the like by you and give you an instance in our Affirmatives Shew me who in every Age did receive the bookes of Esdras Machabees Tobit Iudith c. for Canonicall in the 1 2 3 4 Centurie of yeares This is one of the first points of your Tridentine faith Master Fisher I desire you also for the avoiding of confusion to deliver your opinion whether all the Affirmative Doctrines of the Councell of Trent are matters of faith per se fundamentall and necessary to be held for salvation fide explicita I speake de adultis quibus facultas discendidatur Thus farre in my former Answer to which you have made reply you have neither shewed which of our Affirmative Articles you deny nor which you receive nor have you proved one Instance I gave of your Affirmatives nor as much as expressed what you hold for matters of faith but dissembling all this passe it over with silence unlesse you had thought as the Boy did by his bodged verses that what you wrote would never be read but that men would reade the Titles and number the Pages and there finde written over head Master Rogers weake Grounds Master Rogers weake Arguments would take the rest upon trust would you ever have put Pen to Paper and yet in matters of Controuersies never expresse what your selfe held nor tell us being requested what your owne faith is or to give a reason of your owne faith nor to define your owne Church And answer formally and punctually to no one Argument and frame no one Argument of your owne Hominis est vehementèr abutentis otio literis That a man should offer to write a Tract and that in so sacred a profession as Divinitie and that in a question of so high a nature as these are what is the Christian faith what is the visible Church and herein not answer one question not to bring one Distinction or Definition or frame one Argument in forme or like a Scholler is a mispending of time wasting of Paper and abusing the very name of Learning Divinity as all other Sciences consisteth of Principles and Conclusions the Principles received on both sides are the Scriptures to which you would adde unwritten Traditions you bring not one place of Scripture to maintaine those Affirmative Tenents of yours which we deny you account Articles of faith And as for Theologicall conclusions you inferre none you frame no Argument you make no Syllogisme you give no reason of your faith though Saint Peter require it whom I thought of all the Apostles you did most respect what shall we thinke then but that you have neither Scripture nor reason for your faith I meane in your new Creed in which you dissent from us Fisher I require withall that he give me a substantiall ground well proved out of Scripture why those perticular points which he shall assigne are points of Protestant faith rather then others contained in the 39. Articles if he say as he hath already seemed to say that none of their Negative Doctrines pertaine to their faith and that all that is affirmed by Protestants is affirmed by Roman Catholikes and that this Affirmative Doctrine onely doth pertaine to faith it will follow that Protestants have no faith different from Roman Catholikes Rogers He calleth unto me to distinguish between points of Protestant faith and other points contained in the 39 Articles and yet in the next word he is faine to confesse that I distinguished if he say as he hath already seemed to say that none of their Negative Doctrines pertaine unto their faith This I had delivered in my first Answer and yet he still calleth for it yet he must mince it a little and say I seemed to say so great a friend he is to seeming that he will never leave it knowing it to be essentiall to the definition of Sophistry and a Sophister You might have left out your seeming and written plainly that I said so seeing in my Answer to your first Paper I spent nere a page in explicating and exemplifying this Distinction and in my Answer to your second Paper which was delivered me as the worke of five Jesuites then conversant about Gondamors house
proofe by Histories cannot be effectuall and satisfactorie 1. For the uncertainty of humane Stories 2. Because of their Index expurgatorius 3. Because they have forged many authorities of Councels and Fathers 4. Because they have excepted against all the Ecclesiasticall Historians of the Primitive Church as falsaries 91 CHAP. XIIII Master Fishers Answer to Master Rogers Arguments and Grounds 100 CHAP. XV. The Protestants Faith contained in Scripture The Articles of their faith in the Apostles Creed Master Rogers Arguments maintained against Master Fishers first Answer by denying the minor 103 CHAP. XVI Master Fishers second Answer by changing Protestant into Catholike refuted retorted a bold manifest falshood of Master Fishers Master Fisher but halfe a Papist 109 CHAP. XVII The Romanists can bring no Authors for 400 yeares for their halfe Communion Worshipping of Images c. nor for any else in some Ages for want of Wtiters in times of ignorance No Councell no good Writers no good Pope Saculo 9. In which 9 Age nothing was visible in the Roman Church but vile and lewd Popes or Intruders proved at large out of Baronius 114 CHAP. XVIII A threefold Catalogue 1. Of Latin 2. Of Greeke Authors 3. Of Councels who professed our faith maintain'd our sacraments but not the faith and sacraments of the Roman Church 119 CHAP. XIX The distinctions of Doctrines Accessory and Fundamentall of Affirmation and Negation 142 CHAP. XX. The same distinction maintained Iohn Ellis his comparison The Ape with his youngling The boy with his bodging Verses Decrees of Councels not Articles of faith What makes an Hereticke The Anabaptist as he is supposed by Master Fisher a member of the Church but membrum non sanum 148 CHAP. XXI Of Doctrine fundamentall The Roman Church the most corrupted part of the Church 155 CHAP. XXII Of Baptizing of children The errour of the Anabaptist in practise not in point of faith 159 CHAP. XXIII The Papists affirme all our faith but differ in Ecclesiasticall Doctrines which they terme points of faith in which they want Antiquity Vniversality and Consent 164 CHAP. XXIIII The same grounds of doctrines accessory and fundamentall of affirmation and negation maintained 2. Negatives in Scripture pertaine to faith per accidens not per se All things revealed in Scripture have equall truth but not equall profit equall necessitie of being beleeved being knowne but not equall necessity to be knowne Negatives not revealed in Scripture are res fidei neither per se nor per accidens The Church of Rome most hating and most hated by all Churches in the world as Innovators Schismaticks and Hereticks The Conclusion of the whole Booke 171 Recensui hunc librum cujus titulus est The Protestant Church existent c. in quo nihil reperio bonis moribus aut sanae Doctrinae contrarium quo minus imprimatur modo id fiat intra annum proximè sequentem Secus ista licentia effectu carebit Johannes Oliver Reverendiss in Christo Patr. Dom. Domino Arch. Cant. Capell Dom. Ex Aedi Lamb. Apr. 15. 1637. THE PROTESTANT CHVRCH EXISTENT CHAP. I. Master Fisher observeth neither Art nor Order in answering Master Rogers MAster Fisher or whosoever you are that undertake for him if you would have done by me as I did by Master Fisher namely have set downe all my grounds and answered to them in particular as I did to Master Fishers Propositions it might have given the Reader better satisfaction who thereby might see whether we doe agree in any thing that I have written or dissent in all whether you reject all those grounds which I laid or admit of some as I did by your Propositions approving some rejecting others In solutione argumentorum duae tātum solutiones distinguendo vel tollendo Ego autem hic de Propositionibus loquor and in those you reject if you would have answered to them in their place punctually and not go roving so to puzzle the Reader with disorder I tooke those Propositions that were offered to me as they lay I answered to every period vel concedendo aut distinguendo aut negando either granting distinguishing or denying and where I found any ambiguity in your termes or sentences I desired you to explicate and cleere the same which you have not done yet you know that no disputation may be undertaken no Argument framed no Treatise composed without this no not so much as one bare Proposition or Sentence may subsist with aequivocation and amphibologie words or sentences of double signification and doubtfull sense untill they be cleared by explications and distinctions This you know to be the advice and practise of the Philosophers and Divines which have written But such are your termes Propositions as that they seeme to be made of purpose in ambiguous words or contexture so to leave open some starting hole or evasion and answering your Adversary out of order to draw a curtaine before the understanding not onely of the Reader but also of your Adversary Aristot Elench 2. We are ignorant of what wee formerly knew when it is misplaced and disordered and your selfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thus have I beene served by others besides you Is not this catching at a word here and passing by a whole side of a leafe elsewhere without saying one word to it afterward leape backe a leafe or two and snarle at an Argument or snap at a distinction and so away Is not this I say like the Dog drinking of Nilus lap a little and runne away lap againe and runne away This was applyed by one to Antony flying after Cleopatra from the Battell at Actium who being asked Quid agit Antonius Answered Quod canis ad Nilum lambit fugit so much was hee besotted with that Harlot Thus you the Champion of that Purple Harlot that sitteth upon the seven hils fight her quarrels a snatch and away a snap and be gone or if you make a short stand you will but shew your teeth grin snarle but hardly bite That I may draw you from this course of disorder I will put downe what Master Fisher proposed vvhat I answered and then vvhat this Author replied or vvhere hee did not reply CHAP. II. The occasion and time when this Author Master Rogers was first interessed in this matter ATt that time when our now Soveraigne was in Spaine a Gentleman delivered me those Propositions following in the presence of divers I being then in London 100. miles from my dwelling and my Bookes That night I delivered this answer following after Master Fishers Propositions The Gent was then almost become Romanist having beene not many dayes before at Masse in the Spanish Embassadors house and Master Fisher coming to this Gent Chamber left those Propositions with him The like verbatìm the Right Honourable Earle of O. did shew me saying that it vvas all written with Master Fishers owne hand The Propositions are these Fisher IT being granted that there must bee a Visible Church in
hee were a man or not and whether hee could shew mee the names of his Ancestors in all ages untill Adam would you give me one answer unto both if affirmative then you had a great taske and such as I think you neither can performe nor would undertake if negative were your answer to both then you are no man You would think it unreasonable that I should tye you thus to prove your selfe a man Thinke it as unreasonable that you should tye me thus to shew my selfe a Christian especially considering this kind of proofe is but weake uncertaine full of exceptions and at the most but humane Cui potest subesse falsum the testimonies of men qui falli possunt fallere who may deceive and be deceived You would thinke it reasonable that if you were to prove your selfe a man a humane creature or that you are descended from Adam I should leave the maner of proofe to your self you would go to work a shorter way more effectually thus Every living creature consisting of a reasonable soule and humane bodie is a man I am a living creature consisting of such a soule and such a bodie Ergo I am a man This would give me satisfaction I would not reject it and bid you shew the names of your Ancestors out of Histories in all ages or you are no man You would have me prove my selfe a Christian give me leave to chuse and frame mine owne Argument thus Whosoever doth professe that faith which is and ever hath bin required of those who by Baptisme are made Christians is therein baptized doth therin continue is a Christian But I was baptized in that faith and doe therein continue and professe the same Ergo I am a Christian. Will you now M. Fisher say unto mee Not so but you must shew me a Catalogue of those who held your faith in all ages or you are no Christian you have no Church Is this your charitie M. Fisher will you not grant me as a Christian what I grant you as a man Bellarmine Baronius Valenza Aquinas and ascending higher Ruffinus Cyrillus Tertullian Irenaeus tell mee you can require no more for an explicit faith such as profession requires at my hands then this which all children in our Churches are taught to beleeve to know and to professe adding this implicit faith that they besides the Articles of the Apostles Creed are prepared to entertaine will believe all things revealed in the word of God I will begin with Valenza who saith Tom. 3. disp 1. c. 1. p. 5. Nota inter omnes orthodoxos convenire articulos fidei Catholicis credendos esse illos qui Apostolorum Symbolo continentur Note that it is agreed amongst all those who are right beleevers that the Articles of faith which Catholiques ought to beleeve are those which are contained in the Apostles Creed If there were any other Articles he should not have said these were the Articles but some of the Articles Againe the same Valenza saith Now in the time of grace there is a command said upon all that of necessitie they must explicitè credere i. actually know and immediatly beleeve those Articles of faith which are contained in the Apostles Creed Et sic decent communitèr Theologi D. Thomas This is the common doctrine of Divines and so saith Aquinas But other truths of faith which besides those Articles of the Creed are contained either in the holy Scriptures or in the definitions of the Church Non necessarium est necessitate medij an t praecepti explicitè credi à vulgaribus fidelibus They are not necessarily to be beleeved by common Christians either as a meanes without which men cannot be saved or by a necessitie imposed or commanded Wherein observe how the Iesuit addeth and paralelleth Definitions of the Church to the Scripture whereas Aquinas cited by him saith thus Dicendum est ergò quod fidei objectum per se Q 2. Art 5. est id per quod homo beatus efficitur ut supra dictum est Per accidens autem aut secundariò se habent ad objectum virtutis omnia quae in sacra Scriptura divinitùs tradita continentur sicut quod Abraham habuit duos filios quod David fuit filius Isai alia hujusmodi Quantum ergo ad prima credibilia quae sunt articuli fidei tenetur homo explicitè credere sicut tenetur habere fidem Quantum autem ad alia credibilia non tenetur homo explicitè credere sed solum implicitè vel in preparatione animi in quantum paratus est credere quicquid divina Scriptura continet sed tunc solum hujusmoditenetur explicitè credere Q. 1. Art 8 quando hoc ei constiterit in doctrina Fidei contineri Wee must therefore conclude that the proper object of Faith is that by which a man is made happy as we have said before But accidentally and secondarily all those things belong unto the object of that vertue which are delivered from God and contained in Scripture as for example that Abraham had two Sonnes and that David was the Sonne of Ishai and such like Therefore as farre as concernes those prime objects of mans beliefe which are the Articles of Faith a man must beleeve the same expresly as hee must have Faith But as for other objects of Faith a man is not bound to believe them expresly but onely implicitely or in a preparation of minde to belieue whatsoever is contained in the holy Scripture but then he is bound to belieue those things expressely when it shall plainely appeare unto him that they are contained in the doctrine of Faith Thus farre that Schooleman To the same effect Carbo the best Epitomizer that I haue seen who in his smaller Booke hath all the marrow of Aquinas his Summes The next shall be Baronius Hoc ipsum Symbolum Catholica Ecclesia semper adeo est venerata ut in sanctis Conciliis Oecumenicis Baron 44. n. 18. quasi basis quaedam fundamentum structurae Ecclesiasticae consueverit imprimis recitari The Catholique Church did alwaies so farre reverence this Creede that it was a Custome to repeate the same in holy Generall Councels as a ground-worke and foundation of all Ecclesiasticall buildings saying moreover concerning the Romane Church that it had preserved the same Apostles Creed sincerè illibatè without any addition or diminution as Ruffinus hath testified in these words In divers Churches some things haue beene added but in the Church of Rome Adjectionem unius saltem sermonis non admittit auditus Their eares abhorre to heare the addition of one sentence Bellarm. Tom. 4. lib. 1. de Iustificatione cap. 9. I am verò quod vetus Ecclesia senserit ac tradiderit de fide ad justificationem salutem necessaria quid ea videlicet sit quod objectum habeat non potest clarius intelligi quam Symbolo fidei quod Catechumenis initio traditur ut
undoubted as that the sacrilegious hereticks themselves will not rebaptize those whom I have baptized Saint Augustine doth answer thus He doth not commit sacriledge who dares not rebaptize after that baptisme which is not thine but the baptisme of Christ The baptisme is Christs the rebaptizing is thine I correct in thee that which is thine and acknowledge that which is Christs for this is just that when wee reproove the evils of men we should approve whatsoever good things we find in them because they are Gods I say this is just that even in a sacrilegious person I should not violate that true Sacrament which I find in him neither that I should so correct a sacrilegious person as thereby to commit a sacrilegious sinne For they are evill though the baptisme amongst them bee good as the Iewes were evill though the law was good And even as the Iewes shall bee judged by that law which they though defiled could not defile So the Donatists they shall be judged by that baptisme which they could not deprave though themâ—elves be depraved Wee therefore thus deale with a Iew when he commeth unto us to bee made Christian wee doe not destroy in him the good that he hath from God but the evill that he hath of himselfe for we amend and destroy in him his infidelity whereby hee doth not beleeve that Christ is come already was borne hath suffered is risen againe and we instruct him in the faith of these things Wee also disswade him from those errors whereby he still sticketh to the shadow of the old Sacraments and we shew unto him that the time is come already wherein the Prophets foretold that these things were to bee taken away and changed But in that hee beleeveth one God is to bee worshipped which made Heaven and Earth that he doth abhorre all the Idolls and sacriledges of the Gentiles that hee doth expect the day of Iudgement that hee doth hope for eternall life we commend him approve him acknowledge him wishing him to beleeve as he had beleeved to hold as he had held So also when a Schismatick or an heretick doth come unto us to bee made a Catholick we disswade destroy and take from him his schisme and his heresie but as for the Sacraments of Christ if wee finde them in him and whatsoever other truth he holdeth farre be it from us that we should violate or minister againe that baptisme which was once received least while wee cure the vices of men wee condemne the saving graces of God and seeking to heale that which is not wounded we should wound a man there where he was whole Thus farre Saint Augustine These words of this Father make so plaine for our reformed Churches as that they need no application let the Reader understand Papist where he readeth Donatist and he shall find the Argument to follow We so left you as that we retained whatsoever you had from God and reject that which was from man we retained that which made you a Christian Church we rejected that which made you Popish and Antichristian In the former we communicate with you in the latter we disclaime So those whom I have and shall cite did communicate with you in some things but not in all for if they had communicated with you in all things they would not have reproved Aug. l. 2. cor op Par. c. 21. and disliked so many things Qui communicat consentit qui consentit corrumpitur If hee communicate hee doth consent if hee consent hee is corrupted To consent to evill is nothing else but to approve and commend that which is evill neither is there any man joyned in evill but he that doth commit evill or favour it act it or approve it In those good men which are displeased with those evills the Church doth continue hath continued and will continue for ever And as the graine unwinnowed is hid in the chaffe So the godly doe not easily appeare amongst a multitude of the wicked The people may be good where the Bishops are bad as the people were bad though Moses a good man was their Prince where Moses and Aaron were there also were sacrilegious murtherers Where Caiphas was and many like unto him there were also Zacharias and Simeon and others like unto them Saul and David were in the same Synagogue c. So that I doubt not but some may be found in all ages who did not communicate with your new doctrines superstitious worship tyrannicall discipline although they did communicate with you in the Scriptures and Apostles Creed as wee and all the famous Christian Churches in the world doe Know then that whereas you say that the Fathers and others alleadged by some of your men did communicate with the Roman Church unlesse you can say in all things you conclude nothing Syllogizari non est ex particulari for otherwise I might argue thus Some living creature is an Anabaptist Master Fisher is a living creature Ergo Master Fisher is an Anabaptist Because they communicate with you in some things thence to inferre you are the same in all things is fallacia à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter CHAP. IX Fisher AND as ancient Fathers have done before them condemned some or other Protestants Doctrine even of those 39 Articles of the English Protestant Church although they be more craftily composed then the Articles of other Protestant Churches Rogers I told you in my first Answer that it is no prejudice to our Faith if the same Authors doe differ from us in other opinions not concerning Faith as long as they maintaine our Faith and that the Church of Rome cannot produce Fathers in all Ages who doe not contradict the Councell of Trent in some Doctrines established in the said Councell These were my words in my first Answer to which you reply not at all to this purpose I also used that distinction of Discipline and Doctrine and distinguished between Doctrine Accessary and Fundamentall Adding also that matter of Faith consisteth not in Discipline but Doctrine and that Doctrine not Accessary but Fundamentall By which distinction I meane as I then expressed the same which Aquinas doth by res fidei Per Se Per accidens To this purpose I then distinguished Dogmata 1 Schola 2 Ecclesiae 3 Fidei Between 1 Opinions of Schoole 2 Doctrines of the Church 3 Articles of Faith To all which grounds of mine and more which I thâ—n layed you make no reply at all saving that some other grounds of mine you cavill at viz my Definition of a Protestant and my Distinction of Affirmation and Negation which I will justifie in their places Why would you say nothing to these grounds Master Fisher If they were true why would you not grant them If false why not deny them If ambiguous why not distinguish them I know no other Answer but one of these three wayes Concedendo negando vel distinguendo You will doe none of these to
those other things which we find in some singulars or particulars but not in other or at sometimes but not at other This is the rule of reason but you of Rome contrary to this course in framing your definitions have collected those things which are to be found in one particular Church viz. your owne and wherein you conceive other particular Churches to be defective things accidentall to the Church as without which the Christian Church hath beene and may be hereafter wheras all those things that belong to the definition of any thing must be essentiall universall inseparable and being taken alltogether must shew and explicate the whole nature of the thing and exclude all things else of a different nature or kind as for example Bellarmine after a long dispute concerning the definition of the Church rejecting all other concludeth thus Nostra autem sententia est Ecclesiam unam tantum esse non duas illam unam veram esse caetum hominum ejusdem Christianae fidei professione eorundem Sacramentorum communione colligatam sub regimine legitimorum Pastorum ac praecipuè unius Christi in terris Vicarij Romani pontificis Ex qua definitione facile colligi potest qui homines ad Ecclesiam pertineant Tres enim sunt partes hujus definitionis professio verae fidei Sacramentorum communio subjectio ad legitimum Pastorem Romanum Pontificem Ratione primae partis excluduntur omnes Infideles tam qui nunquam fuerunt in Ecclesia ut Iudaei Turcae Pagani quam qui fuerunt recesserunt ut Haeretici Apostatae Ratione secundae excluduntur Catechumeni excommunicati quoniam illi non sunt admissi ad Sacramentorum Communionem isti sunt admissi Ratione tertiae excluduntur Schismatici qui habent fidem Sacramenta sed non subduntur legitimo Pastori ideò foris profitentur fidem Sacramenta percipiunt Includuntur autem omnes alij etiamsi Reprobi Scelesti Impij sunt But this is our opinion that the Church is onely one not two and that one and true Church is an Assembly of men knit together in the profession of the same faith with Christ and Communion of the same Sacraments under the government of lawfull Pastors and especially under one Vicar of Christ on Earth the Bishop of Rome Out of which definition may easily bee collected who are of the Church and who are not for in this definition are three parts 1. profession of faith 2. communion of Sacraments 3. subjection to a lawfull Pastor the Bishop of Rome The 1. of these doth exclude all Infidells aswell Iewes Turkes and Heathens as Heretickes and Apostates which having beene of the Church departed from it The 2. part doth exclude those Catechumeni that are instructed in the principles of Christian Religion but are not yet baptized and those that are excommunicate for the first of these were never admitted to the Communion of the Sacraments these latter were admitted but are by excommunication excluded By the 3. part are excluded Schismatickes which have the faith and the Sacraments but are not subject unto the lawfull Pastor and therefore doe professe the faith and receive the Sacraments out of the Church All others are of the Church although they bee Reprobates wicked ungodly men Thus farre Bellarmine Valenza to the same effect writeth thus Vera Ecclesia non est alia Tom. 3. in Tho. pa. 144. nisi ea fidelium congregatio quae paret Romano Pontifici pro tempore existenti There is no true Church but that Congregation of faithfull people which is obedient to the Bishop of Rome for the time being Binnius the last and largest compiler of the Councells hath this Illam dicimus Ecclesiam quae decreta Sancti Consilij Tridentini universalis aecumenici tenet pariter honorat To. 2. pa. 721 notis in Corc Tolet. 3. We call that the Church which doth hold and honour the decrees of the Holy generall Councell of Trent Thus wee see that obedience to the Bishop of Rome is put by your late great Goliahs in the definition of the Church and by consequence it is of the essence and being of the Church so that no man can be saved by their Doctrine which is not obedient to the Bishop of Rome Nay the Christian Church cannot subsist without the Bishop of Rome and obedience unto him because nothing can subsist without his owne being If this be a true definition of the Christian Church then millions of Soules were damned when the Church of Rome was divided for many yeares and many descents for there could be but one true Pope at the same time some cleaving to one Pope some to the other this Schisme during seventy yeares The want of this obedience if their Doctrine be true hath excluded all the reformed Churches from hope of salvation which containe many millions of Christian Soules which receive and believe the Scriptures of old and new Testament as they were received in the first second third fourth Centurie of yeares which receive and professe the Apostles Creed are therein baptized and receive for Orthodox Doctrine the Decrees of the foure first Generall Councels and some of them receive six of the first Councels and yet must they be damned to the pit of hell because they will not be obedient to the Pope Histor Concil Trid. p. 450. The Queen of France somewhat above sixty yeares since wrote unto the Pope that there being none of the Reformed who deny the Articles of Faith nor the six Councels many thought it fit to receive them into Communion Let us passe from the Latin Church to the Greeke a Church larger in extent then the Latine Church This with all the number of Christian Soules therein contained for denying the Popes Supremacie are out of the Church have lost their hold of Christ have no interest in his sufferings although most of them suffer much for the profession of Christ under Turkes and Tartars Let us goe somewhat further and observe the miserable condition of the Churches of Africke which when they were at the best were three times as large as the Roman Church and yet though the Mahometans have much prevailed against them not inferior to the Latine Church all these are without hope of Heaven damned for ever to the pit of Hell if this definition be true Eusebius the compiler of the Ecclesiasticall History for the first three hundred and odd yeares assisted therein by Constantine the Great and esteemed by him worthy to be Bishop of all the world writeth Lib. 3. c. 14. that The Church was dispersed through the world by the Apostles Then speaking of the next Age viz. Anno 137. writeth Lib 4. c 6. c. 28. that The Churches did then shine like bright starres through the world and the faith in Jesus Christ did flourish in universo humano genere amongst all mankind As in Mesopotamia in France in Asia in Phrygia Lib. 6. c.
first Pope of that name was condemned for an Hereticke in three Councels accursed for an Heretick by two Popes that succeeded after him his owne hereticall Epistles are found in the Acts of the sixth Councell besides divers other Writers Latin Greek that relate it Yet Bellarmine hath the face to denie all this Pope Joane is recorded by Writers of their owne is denied by these late Romans that will blush at nothing When the Carthaginians in the end of the second Punick Warre sent to Rome to sue for peace a Roman Senator asked them by what Gods they would now sweare seeing they had broken the promise they had formerly made and swore by the Gods to observe So I may aske you what Historie you will alleadge for the first 400 yeares whose testimonie you will admit who have rejected and reviled all Historians of those times calling them erroneous partiall false deceitfull lying impudent Heretickes CHAP. XIIII Fisher AVthoritie as for example the Scripture saith nothing of this or that or the Fathers of the first three hundred yeares make no expresse mention of this or that Ergo No such thing is or is of no force Yet when the Negative Argument is grounded in an already granted Affirmative Proposition as it is in this our case the Negative Argument is of great and undeniable force As for example if wee did grant this Proposition if such or such a thing were holy Scripture would have spoken of it or the Fathers of the first three hundred yeares would have made expresse mention of it If I say wee granted this wee could not deny the aforesaid Negative Argument usually made by Protestants to be of force against us Now Master Rogers doth not nor in reason cannot deny Master Fishers fourth Proposition which is an Affirmative whereupon his fifth Negative Proposition is grounded And therefore Master Rogers ought not to deny but must needs grant Master Fishers fifth and so all his five Propositions Which being granted if hee will make a good answer as hee pretendeth hee must first set downe names of Protestant Pastors in all Ages and not content himselfe with naming some whom he thinketh to be Protestants and with saying hee hath gone halfe the way Secondly If hee will satisfie Master Fishers other Paper as he pretendeth to doe hee must prove and defend them to be Protestants as Master Fishers Paper requireth and must bring some or other good Authors who doe clearly shew them to hold all or some principall points of Protestants Faith differing from Catholicke Roman Faith and not to condemne any of the 39 Protestant Articles and must not content himselfe with making such Arguments as hee maketh which are most insufficient either to convince or probably to perswade either his Adversary or any indifferent judicious Reader for these be his Arguments First a Causis thus The faith contained in the Scriptures hath had visible professors in all ages But the Protestant faith is contained in the Scriptures ergo Secondly a Signis thus The faith is that which hath testimonies of Antiquities universality and consent of fathers and other writers in all ages But the faith of Protestants harh these testimonies ergo Thirdly ab Exemplis thus Names of such as professed the Protestants faith in all ages Christ and his Apostles St. Iohn Ignatius Polycarpus Iustinus Martyr Irenaeus Tertullian Clemens Alex Origen Cyprian Lactantius Athanasius Cyrill Hierosol Ambrozius Nyssenus Hieronimus Ruffinus Chrysostomus Augustinus Cyrillus Alex Theodoretus Socrates Sozomenus Fulgentius Evagrius Gregorius primus Beda Damascenus Alcuinus Thus having gone halfe way I conclude with this Argument The Protestant faith being that which is contained in Scriptures was received and taught by all the Orthodox Fathers But the Fathers above named be all Orthodox ergo Now who doth not see that these Arguments be most insufficient and that they may be most easily answered by denying the Protestant faith to be contained in Scriptures or to have testimony of antiquity universality and consent or to have beene professed by those Fathers which Master Rogers named Who doth not also see that the same Arguments may be more strongly retorted against Protestants by only altering the word Protestant into Catholick in regard our Catholick doctrine may be and is ordinarily proved by plaine Testimonies of Scriptures and Fathers even by confession of divers learned Protestants themselves I marvaile therefore that M. Rogers being accounted a worthy Oxford Divine would affirme and offer to prove and defend Protestants to have beene in all ages upon so sleight grounds which if they be admitted for good every sect of Hereticks may affirme and prove and defend men of their sect to have beene in all ages For tryall whereof I wish it may be imagined that there were an Anabaptist for example who held all the Protestant faith saving onely some few negatives and namely that it is not lawfull to baptize Infants and that this Anabaptist had framed to himselfe such false Rules as Master Rogers hath set downe to himselfe Rogers I desire Master Fisher and the Reader to looke backe to the former page of the precedent leafe to which I have already answered for in matter it was the same with that which went before contained in the 26th and 27th pages of Master Fishers Booke against me which were all spent in seeking to strengthen his owne Propositions his owne grounds yet the Title he gave unto both those Pages was Master Rogers his most weake grounds there being in both those Pages not one sentence nor line nor word concerning any grounds of mine so in the 28th Page of his Booke he hath put this Title Master Rogers his most weake Arguments Whereas there is not one Argument nor one Proposition of mine in all that Page as may easily appeare to him that will but reade the same onely he speaketh something in defence of his owne grounds to which I have already answered Yet because of the Title agreeing with the 29 and 30 pages which follow next after I have copied them out and placed them altogether that have this title viz. Master Rogers his most weake Arguments Which I thinke he did to gull his Proselytes who reading but the Title must thinke that Master Fisher hath shewed my grounds and Arguments to be weake when and where hee hath not made any mention of any Arguments of mine CHAP. XV. Fisher NOw who doth not see that these Arguments be most insufficient and they may be most easily answered by denying the Protestant faith to bee contained in Scriptures or to have testimony of Antiquity Vniversality and Consent or to have bin professed by these Fathers which M. Rogers named Rogers I doe not think that you did see any insufficiency in the Arguments or that they were easily to be answered for then you would have answered punctually to every argument apart and not thus confusedly and altogether as if you had been afraid to come to close fight but standing a farre off to
which is denounced against those who adde unto the Word of God And will you say that wee professe any Faith besides that which is contained in Scriptures This is your easie answering Master Fisher to denie that wee professe that which we doe professe in all our Bookes in all our Schooles in all our Pulpits in all our Discourses of this subject viz. What wee ought to believe You will as easily answer the other Argument let us see the Argument and your answer 2. Arg. A Signis thus The Faith which hath testimonies of Antiquitie Universalitie and consent of Fathers and other Writers in all ages had visible Professors in all ages But the Faith of Protestants hath these testimonies Ergo The Faith of Protestants had visible Professors in all Ages To this you answer by denying the Minor or second Proposition thus The Protestant Faith hath not testimonies of Antiquitie Universalitie and consent Ad partes Master Fisher which Article of the Apostles Creed doth want the testimonie of Antiquitie Universalitie and consent which of those Bookes received for Canonical of the Church of England and named of mee a little before want these testimonies of Antiquitie Universalitie and consent Is it Genesis or Exodus or any other Booke of Moses Is it the Psalmes or Proverbs or Histories that want this testimony Or is it Esay or Ieremie or Ezekiel or Daniel or any other of the Prophets Is it Matthew or any other of the Evangelists or Apostles name the man name the Church name the time if you cannot then say your easie answering is no answer 3. Arg. Ab Exemplis thus Names of such as professed the Protestants faith in all ages Christ and his Apostles St. Iohn Ignatius Polycarpus Iustinus Martyr Irenaeus Tertullian Clemens Alex Origen Cyprian Lactantius Athanasius Cyrill Hierosol Ambrozius Nyssenus Hieronimus Ruffinus Chrysostomus Augustinus Cyrillus Alex Theodoretus Socrates Sozomenus Fulgentius Evagrius Gregorius primus Beda Damascenus Alcuinus Thus having gone halfe way I conclude with this Argument The Protestant faith being that which is contained in Scriptures was received and taught by all the Orthodox Fathers But the Fathers above named be all Orthodox Ergo Now what answer doe you Master Fisher give to this Argument of mine not a word unlesse to denie the conclusion be to answer an Argument I hope you will not acknowledge your selfe to be so ignorant in Logicke you know the Rule Ex veris possit nil nisi vera sequi If my Premises be true my Argument in forme as you neither deny my Premises nor except against the forme of my Argument the conclusion must follow must be true for out of true Premises can follow no conclusion but what is true Arist De Sophist Elench c. 17 18 c. this is not easie answering but not answering Looke into Aristotle concerning the duty of a Respondent and the divers kinds of answering You not being able to answer this Argument say I must bring out some or other good Authors who doe clearly shew these before named to hold all or some principall points of Protestant Faith differing from the Catholicke Roman Faith I have proved what I undertooke and what is sufficient by such Arguments as you cannot answer you dare not examine but flye from them knowing their strength and your weaknesse But you will have me prove them by Authors is any humane authoritie of a private man better then reason And what Authors would you have will not their owne profession and their owne workes together with the esteeme and reputation of Orthodox Writers which they have had in all Ages serve the turne to shew what their Faith was doe any men know what they did believe or what they did professe better then themselves As for your Roman Catholicke Faith I have alreadie shewed how fond how vaine how simple a conjunction you make of them that no child ordinarily of seven yeares of age understanding the termes but will wonder with what face you can say That a part of a Church is a whole Church that a part of a Kingdome is a whole Kingdome that a part of mans Body is the whole Body You say also that I must prove out of good Authors that they doe not condemne any of the 39 Protestant Articles Here you not being able to answer as I thinke doe dissemble conceale and passe by what I did put downe in answer to this demand of yours viz. 1. It is no prejudice to our Faith if the same Authors doe differ from us in other opinions not concerning Faith as long as they maintaine our Faith 2. The Church of Rome cannot produce Fathers in all Ages who doe not contradict the Councell of Trent in some Doctrines established in the said Councell This you can conceale and passe over knowing that you are not able to performe it for your Councell of Trent I undertooke for matters of Faith not for secondarie Doctrines to produce Authors in all Ages professing our Faith though they might dissent from us in other Doctrines of an inferior nature not revealed in Scripture nor belonging to the foundation and Principles of Christian Religion As for the sufficiencie of my Arguments I have already made it good for any thing that you have yet spoken against them Let us now see what you say further against them CHAP. XVI Fisher WHo doth not also see that the same Arguments may be more strongly retorted against Protestants by onely altering the word Protestant into Catholick in regard our Catholick Doctrine may be and is ordinarily proved by plaine testimonies of Scriptures and Fathers A most bold falshood even by the confession of divers learned Protestants themselves Rogers All the proofe that this man will bring is for ought I can see or thus Who doth not see I doe not see If it be granted c. as I have observed before for if these Arguments might be retorted against the Protestants by changing of one word why did hee not performe the same I must doe it for him Major The Faith contained in the Scriptures had visible Professors in all Ages Minor But the Catholicke Faith is contained in the Scriptures Conclusion Ergo The Catholicke Faith had visible Professors in all Ages Here I have onely changed the word Protestant into Catholicke and what one word is here against Protestants who doe hold and professe no other Faith then what is contained in Scriptures as I have already shewed out of our sixt Article wee grant this whole Argument Major Minor and Conclusion which if you doe grant I will take the Minor and inferre a dangerous Conclusion against the Church of Rome thus The Catholicke Faith is contained in the Scriptures The Roman Faith is not contained in the Scriptures Ergo The Roman Faith is not the Catholicke Faith If you denie this Minor as it seemes by those words of yours before alleadged you will denie viz. Our Catholick Doctrine may be and is ordinarily proved by plaine testimonies
cap. 5. This Councell did professe our Faith and receive our Councels and Sacraments though they added five Sacraments more reade Surius Tom. 4. Sessione 3 4 5. Thus have I travelled through Histories Fathers Schoolmen and Councels to satisfie the demand of them who when all is done will denie all Histories Fathers and Councels which make against them I might have gone a neerer way thus You baptize Children daily in your Church and then you professe my Faith the Apostles Creed and minister our first Sacrament You have your Masse or Common Prayer with the Communion often in your Churches then also you professe my Faith reade parcels of our Scriptures and minister our other Sacrament intire to the Clergie though by halfes to the Laitie You have published many Missals under the names of Saint Iames Saint Marke Saint Chrysostom and others every one of these allow and use my Faith Scriptures and Sacraments You have your Ordo Romanus that approveth my Faith Scriptures and Sacraments You have published many writers upon the Masse in your auctionary of Bibliotheca Patrum as Walafridus Strabo Ino Corvotensis and others named by mee in my Catalogue all these professed our Faith and received our Sacraments and also our Scriptures But as for your Creed it was never professed in Baptisme it is found in none of those Missals nor in your Ordo Romanus nor in any of those Expositors of your Roman Masse for one thousand five hundred yeares Let mee conclude with the words of Vincentius Lirinensis The holy Church a diligent and wary keeper of those Doctrines which were committed unto her doth not change adde or diminish any thing therein it doth not cut off any thing that is necessary nor adde any thing that is superfluous it doth not lose that which is proper to Christianitie nor usurpe that which belongeth to other Sects of Religion in the world CHAP. XIX Fisher 1. THat faith is affirmation and not negation by which rule it seemeth he would not have any negative propositions although found in Scriptures to pertaine to faith 2. That they that are in the affirmative must prove and not those who are in the negative but which seemeth to follow that a man who had time out of minde quietly possessed his land or Religion were bound to prove his right before his upstart Adversary who denyeth him to have right have given a good reason of his denyall 3. That what was not a point of faith in the Primitive Ages cannot after be a point of faith as if there were not some points which were at first not held necessary to be beleeved even by Orthodox fathers which afterward by examination and definition of the Church in Generall Councels were made so necessary to be beleeved as that whosoever did not beleeve them were accounted not Orthodox but Hereticks And 4 that the Anabaptist faith is that which is contained in Scripture and ancient Creeds And the Anabaptist Church is a societie of men which professeth the faith contained in Scripture and the ancient Creeds as if an Anabaptist may be Iudge it will be held so to be Rogers Master Fisher hath in many pages written this Title Master Rogers his weake grounds where he spake not one word of my grounds and here he doth passe over the most with silence but he speaketh against some few of them In my former answer after my definition of a Protestant I laid some few distinctions or grounds thus I desire you to distinguish between matter 1. Of discipline and 2. Of Doctrine Secondly to distinguish between 1. Doctrine accessory and 2. Doctr. fundamentall Matter of faith consisteth not in discipline but Doctrine and that Doctrine not accessory but fundamentall By this distinction I meane the same which Aquinas doth by res fidei 1. Per se 2. Per accidens These 3 distinctions passe without exception saving that he maketh mention of the second viz 1. Doctrine accessorie 2. Doctrine fundamentall As if he would overthrow it but indeed saith nothing in the world against it nor can for it is the distinction of Saint Augustine of Bellarmine of all the Schoole Lib. 4. de verb. Dei c. 12. In Scripturis plurima sunt quae ex se non pertinent ad fidem being the same with that of Aquinas in matters of faith into res fidei 1. Per se in themselves 2. Per accidens or accidentally The words of Aquinas are these and thus cited by Valenza Tom. 3. d. 1. q. 1. p. 2. § 1. as an undoubted ground or principle Habitus fidei 1. Per se primariò respicit ea circa quae distinguuntur articuli fidei 2. Alias verò propositiones quae divinis Scripturis continenter respicit secundariò per accidens The habit of faith 1. In it self and principally looketh upon those things which are contained in the Articles of our Creed 2. Vpon other propositions which are contained in Scripture it looketh accidentally and secondarily This is the Doctrine of the Reformed Church Non enim unius sunt formae omnia verae doctrinae capita All heads of true Doctrine are not of one nature Some are necessary to be knowne which all men ought to receive as undoubted there are others Quae inter Ecclesias controversa fidei tamen unitaetem non dirimant Wherein particular Churches may dissent and yet not breake the unity of faith Thus Calvin Instit l. 4. c. 1. n. 22. I could cite Luther and others but I will onely cite Saint Augustine who in his first booke against Iulius Pelagius writeth thus Alia sunt in quibus inter se aliquando etiam doctissimi atque optimi Regulae Catholicae defensores salva fidei compage non consonant etalius alio de una re meliùs aliquid dicit verius Hoc autem vnde nunc agimus ad ipsa fidei pertinet fundamenta There are other things wherein the most learned and best defenders of the Catholicke Rule may dissent one from another and one man speaketh better and more truely then another upon the same subject But this whereof we now speake belongeth to the very foundation of faith Thus farre Saint Augustine This is the first of my grounds that he finds fault with but not in that order as I placed them but after two or three other grounds of mine which in mine answer were placed after this Thus he to puzzle the Reader that he may not so easily perceive what he doth answer what he doth not answer never observes order Yet I that he may in nothing escape my hands will follow him in his order so that I must answer what he objecteth against this ground in the next Chapter My next ground was this I distinguish between 1. Affirmation In those Articles of our English Church and 2. Negation In those Articles of our English Church Our Negation is partly a traversing partly a condemning of your novelties and additions and therefore no part of our faith for no man
it is the very same essentially though not accidentally still a body and still the same body though sometimes more healthy then other and in some parts more sound then other Now Master Fisher to what end is your great discourse of Anabaptists seeing I grant him to be of the Church If hee be such a one as you suppose him who agreeth with mee in all things else viz. in the Scripture in the Creed in the Sacraments in the essence of the Sacraments in their matter and forme in their force and efficacie onely differs from mee in the circumstance of time namely when Baptisme is to be conferred and bestowed upon Children of Christians whether before or after they are come to yeares of discretion CHAP. XXI Fisher AND fifthly That having distinguished Faith as Master Rogers doth into Doctrines fundamentall and necessary and Doctrines not fundamentall but accessory or not necessary hee may be yet further allowed to reject all Church authoritie and not to be satisfied with what is taught by any Church ours or his owne as Master Rogers confesseth hee is unsatisfied and consequently being left to his owne libertie may apply this distinction as hee shall please accounting onely that to be necessary which hee listeth so to account I wish I say that such an Anabaptist were imagined and that Master Rogers were to be his opponent That it might be seene whether this Anabaptist could not as well by these aforesaid Rules Definitions and Distinctions affirme prove and defend his Faith and Church to have beene alwaies visible against Master Rogers as Master Rogers doth or can by his Rules Definitions and Distinctions affirme prove and defend the Protestant Church to have beene alwaies visible against Catholicks or whether Master Rogers could better convince such an Anabaptist not to have the ancient Faith or not to be a member of the continuall visible Church then a Catholicke can convince Master Rogers Rogers Concerning this Distinction I have spoken afore that some Doctrines are more necessary then others now let us see whether this man saith any thing against it and what it is I doe not find hee doth denie it or grant it so that I know not what hee meanes by the words following viz. He may be yet further allowed to reject all Church authoritie and not be satisfied with what is taught by any Church ours or his owne as Master Rogers confesseth he is unsatisfied First you mightily falsifie this Parenthesis upon mee my words were these I doe confesse that none of your side or ours have given me full satisfaction in this point what are res fidei per se And in the words next going before I said thus Master Fisher I desire you also for the avoiding of confusion to deliver your opinion Whether all the Affirmative Doctrines of the Councell of Trent are matters of Faith per se fundamentall and necessarie to be held for salvation fide explicita I speake de adultis quibus facultas datur discendi who being come to yeares of discretion have capacitie to learne This much in my first Answer to this my request he makes no reply either hee is ignorant or dare not expresse whether all the affirmative doctrines of his Councel of Trent are matters of Faith and necessary to be knowne and believed though I then told him I proposed this question as desirous to learn This much concerning my question and my request Now to my Assertion viz. That none of his side or ours hath given me full satisfaction herein he hence infers that I am unsatisfied without any limitation or if wee will looke backe beyond the Parenthesis as if I were unsatisfied in that which is taught in any Church ours or his This is the right fallacie à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter I said I was satisfied by none of theirs or ours in the instances of one distinction what Doctrines were to be reduced to either member of the Distinction namely what Doctrines were necessary what not necessary what was fundamentall what accessory what matter of Faith properly what accidentally and hee would traduce mee as if I were unsatisfied in all other Doctrines this is the Devils Logicke Master Fisher who is the father of lies to say I confessed that I never did As well I might prove that you have never a nose on your face or that you are blind thus Mr. Fisher hath never a Nose on his brest Ergo Mr. Fisher hath no Nose As you say Master Rogers doth confesse hee is unsatisfied in some things belonging to one distinction Ergo Master Rogers is unsatisfied in any Doctrine Or thus Mr. Fisher doth confesse that hee doth not see why Master Rogers may not absolutely grant his fourth Proposition Ergo Master Fisher doth confesse he doth not see Master Fisher I am satisfied in the doctrines of my faith in the doctrines of my Church in the truth of ours and the falshood of yours as that I desire to die rather then receive your faith or forsake any of mine and I doe hold your Roman Church the most corrupted erroneous usurping part or member of the Christian Church that is in the world I distinguished between doctrines of Faith the Church and of the Schoole These latter being private opinions of men in distinguishing defining or arguing being neither contained in Scriptures nor delivered by the Church I might be unsatisfied in and the rather because the greatest Writers of your side and ours doe vary herein or speake indefinitely which is no resolution Thomas secunda secundae quest 2. saying one thing Occham another and Valenza differing from both Tom Lib. 4. c. 11. de verbo Dei 3 disp 1. q. Bellarmine speaking indifinitely some things in the Doctrine of Christianity as well belonging to faith as manners are simply necessary to all men that will be saved such is the knowledge of the Apostolicke Creed of the ten Commandements and of some Sacraments non nullorum Sacramentorum not defining which and giving small satisfaction with his individuum vagum of some Sacraments not telling which so also amongst our Writers Calvin Hooker Doctor Field Doctor Vsher doe all thus distinguish but when they come to expresse what belongeth to either member they doe not all speake alike Calvin Institut l. 4. cap. 1. n. 12. saith some things are necessary for all men to beleeve as that there is one God that Christ is God and the Sonne of God that our salvation consisteth in the mercy of God similia and such like This word similia leaves it undetermined Hooker holdeth these three to be fundamentall necessary and essentiall unto the Church one Lord one Faith one Baptisme but under that of faith he understandeth as necessary the Articles of the Apostles Creed so that he and Doctor Vsher differ very little or nothing at all Doctor Field is somewhat more full in his third booke of the Church the fourth Chapter yet not in reall addition but
I deny If the delay of seven or eight yeares for Baptisme doe exclude them out of the Church because many thereby are deprived of Baptisme then a shorter delay of fourty daies or eighty daies should exclude men out of the Church because many children may die at twenty or thirty dayes old and yet we know many Churches in the world as the Coftie in Egypt doe not baptise their children before the fourtieth day though they should die without Baptisme Th. a Ies lib. 7. p. 1. c. 5. So Th. ibid. c. 6. Leo primus The Maronites whose Patriarch resideth in Syria Baptize not their male children till fourty dayes nor their female till eighty dayes after their birth He was a Pope of Rome which commanded that Baptisme should not be ministred at any other time then at Easter and Whitsontide and can we thinke but that many children in the meane space did die Socrates Scholasticus testifieth Hist Eccl. 5. c. 21. l Tom. 4. disp 4. puncto 4. that in Thessalie by reason of deferring of Baptisme untill Easter it happened that many yea the most dyed before Baptisme Your Gregory de Valenza doth confesse that in the Primitive Church many holy and godly men did deferre their Baptisme for a long season Disp de Sacramentis Tom. 1. Concil in decretis Leonis primi Can. 6. And your Suarez and Binius doe say that the former custome of the Church and Decree of Pope Leo were changed by the Church because of the danger which by so long delay did ensue If therefore the Anabaptist bee excluded from the visible Church because of the danger which by delay of Baptisme doth ensue to children Then Pope Leo the first for Decreeing a delay of Baptisme with the like danger and a great part of the Christian Church for observing the same were excluded out of the visible Church This was it you should first have proved that the Anabaptist is out of the Church afore you tooke it as a premise or undoubted Proposition thence to inferre a Conclusion let me propose the Argument againe in that forme which you most affect with Iffs and Ands. If Master Rogers Grounds be true the Anabaptist receiving the Scriptures Apostles Creed and agreeing with the Protestants in all things saving this that he will not Baptise children is of the Church But such an Anabaptist is not of the Church Ergo Master Rogers Grounds be not true Negatur minor you have not spoken one word to prove that such an Anabaptist is not of the Church which till you prove your conclusion cannot follow all that you say is in proofe of the major which I grant Whereas you say and would have it supposed that I cannot produce as many proofes against this Negative of the Anabaptist as the Romanists doe usually produce against Negatives is most false for instance if you will bring me one Author for your halfe Communion your Transubstantiation the Bookes of Machabees Irenaeus Origen Cyprian confessed by Bellarm. lib. 1. de bap cap. 8. to be Canonicall in all which you are Affirmative and I Negative I say if you bring one Author in the first 300 yeeres for these your affirmatives I will bring three to one for our Affirmative of Baptizing In the same time I will produce for this my affirmative Antiquity Vniversality and Consent doe you the like for your Affirmatives and I will be of your Church All the rest of your frivolous chat concerning the Annabaptist what he may say what exceptions he may take against Authors against Translations is nothing against any thing that I have written you name no Authors you name no particular exceptions So you cavill againe with my distinction of Doctrines fundamentall and doctrines accessory not being able to produce one Argument against them and ignorantly or impudently deny a destinction delivered by Saint Augustine received by your great Schoolman Aquinas by your great Iesuites Bellarmine and Valenza acknowledged by the Divines of our Church as I have formerly shewed out of these Authors and the thing doth manifest it selfe doe not some things that are contained in Scripture more neerely concerne our salvation then others Can any man be saved without knowing Christ to be the Saviour of the world And may not a man be saved without knowing that Iacob loved Rachel better then Leah Or that Pharaoh dreamed of fat and leane Kine To what tends your Schoole distinction Of 1. Fides explicita 2. Fides implicita of necessitas 1. Medii 2. Praecepti And their large disputes what are to be beleeved necessitate medii without which a man cannot be saved and what necessitate praecepti things that they ought to beleeve and offend if they doe not but not with so great danger as if they beleeve not the former What meane these two Distinctions and that which I cited out of Aquinas and by which I explicated my owne distinction of fundamentall and accessorie I meane res fidei Per se Per accidens If this be answering to except against the Grounds of Fathers Schoolemen Iesuites and reformed Divines without framing one Argument against them it is easie answering indeed Whereas you say that none of the Authors by me alleadged not Luther himselfe held the entire Protestant Faith is untrue and you bring no proofe but a false supposition that all Protestant Doctrines different from the faith of the Roman Church may be called Doctrines of Protestant faith this I formerly denyed and you bring no reason to the contrary yet still you urge it as your onely medium or principle I have shewed you reasons to the contrary which when you answer I will eat Pauls Steeple one thing which I delivered in my first Answer maketh it cleare the question betweene you and me is of Transubstantiation Invocation of Saints Purgatorie Indulgences worshipping of Images c. Which you affirme I deny and therefore they are no points of my faith for no man would deny his owne faith I will reduce it into forme No man will deny the points of his owne faith But we Protestants deny Transubstantiation Invocation of Saints Purgatorie and all your new Creed Ergo Neither Transubstantion nor Invocation of Saints nor Purgatory nor any part of your new Creed are points of Protestant faith And they being your faith you are bound by the rule of Saint Peter to give an account of your faith 1 Pet. 3 v. 15. CHAP. XXIII Fisher BUt if all Protestant Doctrines which be different from the Roman Church her faith be not Doctrines of Protestant faith I require Master Rogers to shew me which in particular be and which be not Doctrines of Protestant faith that it may be discerned who did and who did not hold the Protestant faith and that withall he give me a substantiall ground well proved out of Scripture why those particular points which he shall assigne are points of Protestant faith rather then others contained in the 39 Articles If he say as
I wrote thus As I did admonish Master Fisher to distinguish betweene Affirmation and Negation so I doe these men and that faith is Affirmation not Negation for no man beleeveth what he denieth Secondly In points of faith I like Master Fishers Rule They that are in the Affirmative must prove Now all that we affirme they affirme as one God three persons all the Creed So that we need not prove what our Adversaries do confesse But in those points in variance between us they are to prove because they are Affirmative we Negative as unwritten Traditions Latine Service Invocation of Saints c. Thus farre in my former Answer This is saying plainly this is not seeming Whereas you inferre that seeing all which is affirmed by Protestants is affirmed by Roman Catholikes and this Affirmative Doctrine onely doth pertaine to faith it will follow that Protestants have no faith different from Roman Catholikes I grant the Consequence what is this to the question whether we are of the visible Church or no this which you would inferre doth rather prove us to be a part of the visible Church then any way gaine-say it Thus They which have no other faith then that of the Church of Rome are parts of the visible Church But the Protestants have no other faith then that of the Church of Rome Ergo The Protestants are a part of the visible Church The minor Master Fisher would inferre out of my Grounds as if I would deny it no I grant it and so I hope will he the major then the conclusion must follow We differ from you in Ecclesiasticall Doctrines and Discipline which you terme to be points of faith but we deny They are corruptions of faith Innovations Idolatrous Antichristian Doctrines You would force them upon us as points of faith we refuse them because the Scripture doth not expresse them the Primitve Church did not know them and the greatest part of the Christian Church to this day doth not approve them And your owne writers are distracted into many and divers opinions concerning them Paulus venet l. 1. 2 What Antiquity have you for your halfe Communion Worshipping of Images c. What Universality seeing the Church of Greece of Syria the Georgians Circassians Mengiellians Breitenbachius Purgr c. de Iacobitis Vitrivius Histor orientalis c. 76. the Moscovits and Russians the Christians of Babylon of Assyria Mesopotamia Parthia Media of Cassar Samarcham Charcham Chinchtalis Tanguth Suchir Ergimal Tenduck Caracam Mangi the Iacobits whose Sect is extended and spred abroad in some fourty Kingdomes which I assure my selfe is more large then all the Roman Church do communicate in both kindes worship not Images deny Purgatory and which with you is more then all the rest deny the Popes Supremacy So you have neither Antiquity nor Universality to which I might adde nor Consent among your selves in those additions of yours contained in your new Creed As for one Instance the Councell of Trent hath made the bookes of Machabees Canonicall Melitus Sav. Origenes Athanasius Hilarius Epiphanius Cyrillus Nazianzen Amphiloch Hieronymus Ruffinus which is left out of the Canon by ten Fathers that is I take it by all the Fathers that dyed within 400 yeares after the Incarnation and wrot of that subject Your Nicholaus Lyranus Dionysius Carthusianus Hugo and Thomas de Vio Cardinals whereof this last was one of the most learned that ever the Church of Rome had insomuch that in the Councel of Trent it was said I thinke no man heere doth thinke himselfe so great a Divine but that he might learne of Cajetan All these I say of your side exclude those Bookes from the Canon as we doe yet will you not say they were of another faith then the Church of Rome which you must say if your new Creed and Decrees of Councels be points of faith as you here say And lest you should escape with your wandring discourses and your flying from the question I will presse my argument in forme Whosoever denyeth the new Creed or any Articles thereof the Councell of Trent or any Doctrine thereof is an Hereticke and denyeth the faith But Carthusianus and Thomas de Vio Cajetan both Cardinals deny some Articles of the new Creed and some Doctrines of the Councell of Trent Ergo Lyra Carthusianus and Thomas de Vio are Hereticks and deny the faith I am sure you will hold this Conclusion to be false if so then one of the premisses must be false not the minor ergo the major which is your Tenet whereby you would proue us to be Hereticks and to deny the faith Fisher Out of which it will further follow that those English Protestants who shall hold some of the 39 Articles and deny the rest may be said to have no faith different from those which subscribe to all the 39 Articles Rogers I grant it doth follow so that those same Articles which they deny be not those Articles which concerne the Unity of the Godhead the Trinitie of persons and all those things which are contained in the Creed I say therefore they differ in Ecclesiasticall Doctrines or Discipline not in faith so they receive the Scriptures and Apostles Creed Fisher Which last consquence if Master Rogers grant I aske why the bookes of Canons doth excommunicate ipso facto such halfe Protestants Rogers They may be excomunicated for gaine saying Ecclesiasticall Doctrines or the established Discipline of the Church they may be excommunicated as erroneous Shismaticks Fisher Why doe their Bishops imprison them as Hereticks and not account them members of their Church Rogers Andrewes in his Defence of the Apologie for the other Bilson in his perpetuall government of the Church Carleton against the Appeal They must be imprisoned as Schismaticks Our Bishops doe all professe that there are no Puritane Doctrines that the difference is onely in matter of Discipline they count them neither Hereticks nor wholly excluded out of the Church here you have supposed two falshoods in two lines those learned Protestants from beyond the Seas whose Discipline doth somewhat vary from ours doe testifie that the purity of Doctrine doth flourish in England purely and sincerely So Beza from Geneva that by Queeene Elizabeths comming to the Crowne God againe had restored his Doctrine and true worship So Zanchius that the whole compasse of the world hath never seene any thing more to be wished then is her Government So Daneus Fisher And why not Roman Catholicks by as good or better right account Protestants who deny so many points defined in both ancient and recent Generall Councels to be Hereticks Excommunicated and no members of the Ancient and present Catholick Church Rogers If we did the one you may doe the other but I have shewed the falshood of your supposition that we count them Hereticks who discent from us in any of our Articles they may be erroneous in a lesser nature then Heresie turbulent in those errours they may be Schismaticks
disobedient unto Government and so excommunicated and imprisoned for either of those without Heresie If all Decrees of Councels be Doctrines of faith as you affirme your Cardinall Bellarmine is deceived who saith that in Councels the greatest part of those things which are done doe not belong to faith neither the Disputations concerning faith nor the reasons which are added nor those things which are brought for explication and illustration but onely the very naked Decrees and not all those but they alone who are proposed as matters of faith To this subscribed Widrington in the Preface above alleadged and he voucheth Canus for the same opinion CHAP. XXIIII Fisher I Aske what Scripture or reason assureth that no Negative Doctrine pertaines to faith for Scripture having in it so many Negative sentences which are to be beleeved assureth the contrary neither is there any reason which can assure a man that he is freed from beleeving for example this Negative Deus non mentitur God doth not lie rather then from beleeving this Affirmative Est Deus Verax God is a true speaker for both being said by one and the same God our Lord Trueth it selfe and both being propounded by one and the same Catholicke Church his Spouse assisted by his Spirit the Spirit of truth as spoken by God in holy Scripture both are equally to be beleeved neither can any without danger of eternall damnation deny or doubt of either those or any other even the least point of Catholike faith as we may learn out of Saint Athanasius Creed saying that Whosoever will be saved it is needfull that he hold the Catholike faith which unlesse each one hold entire that is in all points and inviolate that is in the true uncorrupted sense of the Catholike Church without doubt he shall perish everlastingly So as whether the Doctrine be Negative or Affirmative whether fundamentall or accessory supposing it to be a Doctrine propounded by the Catholike Church as revealed by God it must be beleeved explicite or implicite and may not rashly or which is worse advisedly be denyed or doubted of and much lesse may the contrary be obstinately maintained against the knowne judgement of a lawfull Generall Councell or the unanime consent of the Pastors of the Church in regard our Saviour hath expresly averred That he who despiseth them despiseth himselfe and him that sent him to wit God his Father And againe he that will not heare the Church let him be to thee as an heathen and Publicane All which sheweth that such as do obstinately deny or doubtingly dispute against any the least point knowne by Church proposition to be a point of Catholike faith is worthily accounted an Heretike a despiser of God an excommunicated person and no member of the true Catholike Church and one who if he so live and die without repentance cannot be saved But as Athansius without any want of charity pronounceth he shall without doubt perish everlastingly Rogers I have answered you more then once and given you reasons more then one or two why Negations are not matters of faith per se fundamentall and necessary for I brought this distinction of Affirmation and Negation after those distinctions of Doctrine 1. Accessorie of res fidei per se res fidei per accidens 2. Doctrine fundamentall of res fidei per se res fidei per accidens Then I added this distinction of Affirmation and Negation so that my meaning appeared by the connexion it had with that which went before that Negations are not points or Articles of faith are not fundamentall doctrines are not res fidei per se I did not say but they might be res fidei per accidens as all propositions revealed in Scriptures whether affirmative or negative are besides those Articles of faith Here then you doe not dispute ad idem non facis elenchum you prove what I doe not deny you prove that Negatives contained in Scripture pertaine to faith which I do not deny but you do not prove that they are points of faith fundamentall Doctrines res fidei per se things proper and essentiall unto faith as your great Schooleman Aquinas your Bellarmine and Valenza have written cited by me afore where I have also shewed the difference betweene being a matter of faith and pertaining to faith neither doe I say that any man is freed from beleeving this Negative God doth not lie or any other Negative revealed in Scripture but that an implicite faith may serve in all Negatives as well as those Affirmatives which are not Articles of the Creed I say againe that Negatives in Scripture are res fidei per accidens non per se They are accidentall unto faith not essentiall There is no generall necessity to beleeve them fide explicita so to beleeve them as actually to know them but it is sufficient to beleeve them fide implicita with a minde prepared actually to beleeve them when they doe appeare unto us actually to be revealed in Scripture All things revealed in Scripture have aequalem veritatem non aequalem utilitatem They are equally true but not equally profitable For these propositions God is not a lyer God is not as man the heathen hath no knowledge of his Law Pharaoh was not obedient And all that are Negatives in Scripture being put together cannot informe a man in that saving truth which is sufficient for his soules health to beleeve but a few Affirmatives twelve Propositions contained in the Creed can doe it Againe I say that All things revealed in Scripture have aequalem necessitatem credendi non aequalem necessitatem cognoscendi It is not a like necessary for us to know all things revealed in Scripture but it is a like necessary for us to beleeve them when we know them As you have falsified the predicate of my Proposition by changing points of faith unto that which pertaineth unto faith fundamentall into accessory proper and essentiall into that which is accidentall so have you falsified the subject of the same Proposition for immediately after that distinction of Affirmation and Negation my words were these In those Articles of our English Church our Negation is partly a traversing partly a condemning of your novelties and additions and therfore no part of our faith for no man would deny his owne faith Thus farre in my former Answer as also in a few lines after my words were these The first instance of Negation in our Articles is part of the sixth Article concerning those Bookes of Esdras Tobit Iudith c. whereby it appeareth manifestly that I spake not of Negatives revealed in Scripture but of Negatives in Doctrines Ecclesiasticall Now that you should argue from Negatives in Scripture to Negatives out of Scripture is à baculo ad angulum from the staffe to the corner my Tenet therefore is that Negatives revealed in Scripture are res fidei per accidens non per se Negatives not revealed in Scripture are not res fidei
vel per se vel er accidens Are neither essentially nor accidentally the object of faith That which you alleadge out of Athanasius I willingly embrace I receive his Creed I have often professed it in publicke but what is that to your new Creed I finde in Athanasius his Creed neither Purgatory nor Indulgence nor Transubstantiation nor Invocation of Saints nor seven Sacraments nor worshipping of Images Wheras you say I must hold it in the uncorrupted sense of the Catholike Church I doe imbrace it but I will not understand the Church of Rome or the Pope for the Catholike Church as you doe The Catholike Church never received your Purgatory your halfe Communion your worshipping of Images as I have shewed already I will obstinately maintaine nothing contrary to the known judgement of a lawfull Generall Councell but your Councels of Trent and Lateran are no such they are but fopperies and the jugling tricks of the Popish faction to cozen the world Whatsoever we deny when you prove it out of Scripture we will beleeve it here is no obstinacie Whatsoever is determined by Councels we will receive fide humana but not divina as the saying of Reverend men but not as the Oracles of God So also we approve the unanimous consent of the Fathers in receiving all revealed truth we are farre from Heresie in submitting to the Catholike Church and Decrees of Councels we clear our selves from being Schismatikes in following the unanimous consent of the Fathers we shew our selves to be no Innovators but you by worshipping of Images shew what respect you have to Scripture by your new Creed you shew what reverence you have to Generall Councels seeing the Councell of Calcedon decreed having repeated that which is commonly called the Nicene Creed Isidor fol. 83 and urged by the Grecians in the Councell of Florence Surius Tom. 4. Ses 5. Ferrariae habita Lib. 7. c. 1. de loc The. pag. 422 423. De rebus Muscovitarum pag. 38. In apara Sacr. in Diamperi Conc. that no man should write or say other Creed and whosoever did if Bishops and Clergie-men let them bee deposed if Monkes and Lay men let them be accursed What regard you have to the unanimous consent of the Fathers appeareth by your Doctrine that the Virgin Mary was conceived without originall sinne contrary to Chrysostome Ambrose Augustine Bernard and all the holy men that made mention of that point as your owne Canus confesseth and so you are Innovators Schismaticks and Heretikes despised and excommunicated by all other Christian Churches in the World By the Graecians as appeareth by Posevine your owne Jesuite by the Indians as is acknowledged by the same Author by the Coftie of Aegypt and consequently by all the rest of the Iacobites the Aethiopians and others acknowledging all subjection unto the Patriarch of Alexandria so that upon you alone that curse is fallen Nec amet quenquam nec ametur ab vllo You hate you condemne all Churches of the World and they condemne you you account them for Schismaticks and Hereticks and they you for Schismaticks Hereticks and Idolaters your worshipping of Images hinder the conversion of the Iewes and Turkes who for this cause esteeme you for subtill Atheists and heathenish Idolaters falling downe to a blocke and worshipping the worke of mens hands We worship God Fisher Whereas therefore it is certaine that Protestants hold divers Negative Doctrines not onely not found in but contrary to Scriptures Councels and Fathers and other Orthodox Authors in all Ages It evidently followeth that Master Rogers hath not yet named nor can name nor hath proved nor can prove or defend any of those he named or undertaketh to name to have beene visible Protestants in all Ages before Luther and consequently he cannot be said to have made any good answer either to Master Fishers Question or to his five Propositions or to his other Paper written to explicate the sense of the said Question Rogers What you say certainely is most false that Protestants hold divers Negative Doctrines contrary to Scriptures Councels and Fathers if you understand Generall Councels and unanimous consent of Fathers We hold many Doctrines not expresly set downe in Scriptures but none contrary to Scriptures neither doe we count any thing matter of faith but what is expresly contained in Scriptures Whereas you say that I have not yet named nor proved Authors of the Protestants faith in all Ages the present discourse will shew to be false which I referre to the Reader Deo gloria in aeternum FINIS