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
since the Apostles and because those things which I shall alleage out of him being versed in the same Question betweene him and the Donatists concerning the Church are most proper to this question betweene us and the Romanists whether we bee a Church or no and will answere most doubts and objections that are made herein but seeing that this Chapter is growne so long I will reserve it for another CHAP. V. Shewing out of Saint Augustine and others that there is no other way to demonstrate a Church to bee a true Christian Church but by the Word of God I Desire you Mr. Fisher and whosoever will vouchsafe to reade these my poore Labours to take my meaning in citing these Fathers Schoolmen and Iesuites which I have alledged in the precedent Chapters not to be such as if by their authoritie alone wee endeavour to proove our selves to be a Church but to shew that in matters of Faith and in this Question of the Church no demonstrations no strong proper and necessitating Arguments can bee made but out of Scripture All other Arguments are but probable without any necessary illation and forrein not proper to Theologie As after I have done with S. Augustine I will shew out of your owne Schoolmen This Father is he out of whom our later Writers have had next after the sacred Scriptures most of the excellent solid deepe Divinitie which they have This was hee that was stiled Malleus Haereticorum the Hammer of Heretikes Sabellicus Vir super omnes qui ante eum post eum huc usque fuerunt mortales admirabili ingenii acumine praeditus A man as your Sixtus Senensis writeth of him indued with a sharpnesse of wit above all mortals that have been before him Bibl. 5. l. 4. or after him to this time full of humane learning but in the divine Scriptures by farre the most learned of all others and in the Exposition of Scriptures raised to so high a pitch of incomparable subtiltie or acutenesse ultra quam dici queat more than the tongue of man can expresse Dr. Kinge This was hee of whom a learned Preacher and powerfull speaker of ours spake in the Pulpit that hee confuted the Heretikes so fully answered all their objections and demands so weightily that of him next after the Sonne of God himselfe it may bee sayd they durst aske him no more questions And if I in my poore judgment and reading may expresse what I have observed and doe conceive that was the most fruitfull age of Heresies that ever was and some of those Heretikes so learned especially Pelagius the grand enemy of the grace of God that if Saint Augustine had not been borne in those times Pelagius and many more had not been confuted This man amongst other Heretikes wrote against the Donatists who did appropriate the Church to themselves as now the Romanists or Papists doe so that it is the same question now betweene us and the Papists which was then betweene Saint Augustine and the Donatists The Donatists did tye the Church to Africke the Papists to Rome not that either the one or the other did or doe denie Christians to be in other parts of the world but that all men in the world must bee of their Church and hold union with them and dependance from them The first place that I will cite out of Saint Augustine shall be his words in his second Booke of Christian Doctrine ca. 9. All those things which doe containe faith and manners of living are found amongst those things quae apertè posita sunt in Scriptura which are plainly put downe in the written Word This doth proove what wee intend namely that this Quaestion of theirs if it be necessary is found in Scripture and not onely so but in plaine Scripture which answereth the objection of obscuritie in the Scripture that though it bee true that in Scriptures some things be obscure some be plaine yet all necessary things are plaine in Scripture Ex Augustino lib. de Vnitate Ecclesiae cont Petilianum Tom. 7. p. 109. Cap. 2. Inter nos Donatistas quaestio est ubi sit Ecclesia Quid ergo facturi sumus in verbis nostris eam quaesituri an in verbis capitis sui Domini nostri Iesu Christi Puto quod in illius potius verbis eam quarere debemus qui veritas est optimè novit corpus suum novit enim Deus qui sunt ejus Cap. 3. Sed ut dicere coeperam non audiamus haec dico haec dicis sed audiamus haec dicit Dominus sunt certè libri dominici quorum authoritate utrique consentimus utrique credimus utrique servimus ibi quaeramus Ecclesiam ibi discutiamus causam nostram Auferantur ergo illa de medio quae adversus nos invicem non ex divinis Canonicis libris sed aliundè recitamus Quaerat fortassis aliquis dicat mihi Cur ergo ista vis auferri de medio quandò communio tua etiamsi proferantur invicta est Quia nolo humanis documentis sed divinis Oraculis sanctam Ecclesiam demonstrari si enim sanctae Scripturae in Africa sola designaverunt Ecclesiam in paucis Romae Rupitanis Montensibus in domo vel patrimonio unius Hispana mulieris quicquid de chartis aliis aliud proferatur non tenent Ecclesiam nisi Donatista Si in paucis Mauris Provinciae Caesariensis eam sancta Scriptura determinat ad Rogatistas transeundum est Si in paucis Tripolitanis Byzacenis provincialibus Maximianistae ad eam pervenerunt Si in solis Orientalibus inter Arianos Macedonianos Eunomianos si qui illic alii sunt requirenda est Quis autem possit singulas quasi Haereses enumerare gentium singularum Si autem Christi Ecclesia Canonicarum Scripturarum divinis certissimis testimoniis in omnibus Gentibus designata est quicquid attulerint undecunque recitaverint qui dicunt ecce hic Christus ecce illic audiamus potius si oves ejus sumus vocem Pastoris nostri dicentis Nolite credere Istae quippè singulae in multis Gentibus ubi ista est non inveniuntur haec autem quae ubique est etiam ubi illae sunt invenitur Ergo in Scripturis Sanctis Canonicis eam requiramus Cap. 4. Totus Christus caput corpus est quicunque de Christo rectè sentiunt sed ab Ecclesia ita dissentiunt ut eorum communio non sit cum tota quacunque diffunditur sed in aliqua parte seperata inveniatur manifestum est eos non esse in Ecclesia Gatholica Quapropter quia cum Donatistis nobis Quaestio est non de capite sed de corpore id est non de ipso Salvatore Iesu Christo sed de ejus Ecclesia ipsum Caput de quo consentimus ostendat nobis corpus suum de quo dissentimus ut per ejus verbum jam dissentire definamus Prioribus temporibus
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
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
some yeares after a reply was published whether by Master Fisher himselfe or some other in his behalfe I know not a sight whereof I could not get in a yeare or two after To that reply of his I answer in this ensuing Discourse with a Catalogue from the seventh Centurie to the fifteenth of such as professed our faith which Catalogue of perticular men being finished I have added a Catalogue of Councels in all Ages who professed our faith This booke of mine was finished seven or eight yeares past as a noble personage now imployed by our Soveraigne King in forraign parts can testifie who bestowed some books upon me which were very usefull unto mee in this Worke which he did read as did also many learned Doctors of our Church of Hereford D. Kernit D. Best D. Hoskinsed I was slow in publishing it having no desire to be in Print but the perswasions of some of our Church and the brags of some of our Adversaries saying that I neither had nor could answer Master Fisher caused me to present it to the licencer And so to send it into the view of the world requesting the Christian Reader first to peruse the former booke printed without my knowledge Secondly to observe how my Adversarie doth passe by many principall things in my first answer without any mention at all of the same Thirdly that of what he hath written against me I passe not by any one sentence unanswered My Booke hath two generall heads First what our Faith and Church is and how proved primarily and properly by Scriptures secondarily and improperly by reasons and humane testimony Secondly that by this way of a Catalogue of those who taught their faith or Trent Creed as distinct from ours they cannot prove their succession for many reasons alleadged by me in the thirteenth Chapter of this booke as first the uncertainty of humane testimony Secondly their purging out of Authors that which makes against them Thirdly their forging of Authors and Councels fourthly their slighting and abasing of the Ecclesiasticall Historians of the Primitive Church example whereof shall be shewed as occasion shall be offered I will conclude this my Preface with those words of Saint Augustine Ep. 48. Necesse est incerti sint qui pro societate sua testimonio utuntur non divino sed suo But let us with St. Augustine cleave to the Scriptures and say with him Ecce ubi didicimus Christum Ep. 166. ecce ubi didicimus Ecclesiam Loe where we have learned Christ loe where we have learned to find his Church Give the glory to God for what is well and impute the imperfections and defects to my weaknesse who will to my poore ability be Thine in the Lord. H. R A Table of the Contents CHAP. I. THe rules of answering 1. to lay downe his Adversaries words and 2. to answer to every particular Vel concedendo vel negando vel distinguendo either by granting denying or distinguishing by explicating of ambiguous termes observed by Mr R. but not by Mr. Fisher a comparison from the Dog drinking of Nilus and Anthony flying from Actium 1 CHAP. II. 1. The occasion of this Discourse 2. Mr. Fishers termes ambiguous 3. Distinctio vocis and definitio rei neglected by Master Fisher though requested by his Adversary 4. These are the grounds of all doctrinall Discourses 5. Master Rogers answer to Master Fishers first question That he will shew who professed the faith of the Reformed Churches in all Ages 6. Master Fisher cannot shew the names of Iesuites in all Ages 2 CHAP. III. 1. Master Fishers Rule That probatio est affirmantis non negantis They who affirme are to prove admitted by Master Rogers 2. A Church may be proved though the particular names not recorded as a Christian Church in this Iland before Austin the Monke came hither 3. M. Fisher doth confound two questions and commits a fallacie secundum plures interrogationes 4. Master Fisher by his rule of names in all Ages may be denyed to be a man to be descended of Adam if he admit no other proofe 5. Master Rogers Argument to prove himselfe a Christian confirmed out of Bellarmine Baronius Valenza c. 6. What is essentiall and necessary to an explicit faith set downe at large 7. The covenant of faith the same in all Christian Churches of the world Latine Roman and Reformed the Greeke Armenian c. 5 CHAP. IV. Of the totall object of faith as it includeth not onely the primary essentiall matters of faith but also the secondary and accidentall matters contained in the revealed truth And that from hence demonstrations may be drawne to prove the Protestants to be a Church 13 CHAP. V. Shewing out of Saint Augustine that there is no other way to demonstrate a Church to be a true Christian Church but by the word of God 120 CHAP. VI. The Roman polemicke Theologues likened to the Indian Apes that appeared to Alexander and to the Ligurians the difference betweene the ancient and present Church of Rome between the Ancient Monkes and the present the title of Roman Catholique a most impudent contradiction Two Impostors submitting themselves as two Patriaachs to the Church of Rome The whole faith of the Protestants confirmed by Popish Writers Yet the Romanists have another new faith of their owne 32 CHAP. VII Master Fisher pressed by his own rule to prove the new Creed wherein he is Affirmative we Negative 2. A member of the Church of Rome may beare witnesse against the Church of Rome 41 CHAP. VIII What it is to communicate with others how farre we yet communicate with the Roman Church and wherein we refuse to communicate 45 CHAP. IX 1. Some distinctions justified 2. Master Fisher puts false Titles over his booke as thus Master ROGERS his weake Grounds over his 26 and 27 pages and yet not one word spoken in both those pages of any of Master Rogers Grounds And page 28. Master Rogers most weake Arguments and yet not one Argument of Master Rogers mentioned in all that page Master Fisher changeth his termes for Faith puts Doctrines 52. CHAP. X. Master Rogers definition of a Protestant Church conformed The same definition agreeth with all true Churches in the world the rule of defining Bellarmines definion of the Church confuted together with the Romish Doctrine that none can be saved out of their Church 56 CHAP. XI M.F. puts false Titles upon the pages of his Booke As Master Rogers his most weak Grounds or Arguments where there is â—â—mention of his Grounds or Arguments The Protestants a true Church not the true Church Histories no good proofe of the Church All Doctrines not points of Faith M. Fishers reasons to prove that the Teachers of true and false Doctrine are to be found in Histories answered 71 CHAP. XII Negatives depend upon Affirmatives Master Fishers Tautologies He saith Master Rogers granteth what he never did grant 86 CHAP. XIII Foure Reasons to prove that Master Fishers
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
Creed 2. Some other secondary accidentall and common to other habits or vertues besides faith to other persons besides the faithfull as morall precepts belong to Charitie properly and are common to Christians and Infidels revealed not onely by the supernaturall light of Gods word but also by the naturall light of reason in man both from God but the one written by God in the day of Creation the other manifested by his Sonne in the day of Redemption Of the former sort are the ten Commandements which were knowne even to the Heathen Dixitque semel nascentibus author He that readeth Plato Lucan Aristotle Tullie Diogenes Laertius the Poets Greeke and Latine the Latine Greeke Aegyptian Chaldean Indian Aethiopian Lawes may there find though not in the same excellent order nor without some mixture of drosse all the Decalogue And so deepe was the impression of this Law in the wisest of those Heathen that no Oracle could prevaile with them to crosse or cancell what the Law of Nature delivered as Principles which alone is properly the Law of Nature Excellent in this kind is that speech of Catoes in Lucan who being advised by Labienus to consult with the Oracle of Iupiter Ammon said unto him What wouldest thou have mee to demand of the Oracle An noceat vis ulla bono Fortunaque perdat Opposita virtute minas laudandaque velle Sit satis nunquam successu crescat honestum Scimus hoc nobis non altius inseret Ammon He that shall reade Phocilides a very ancient Greeke Poet shall there finde a Store-house of excellent morall Precepts as consonant to the writings of Moses and Salomon as if they had been thence drawne Aquinas Bellarm. Valenza alij All Divines of greatest note of your owne side hold that of the Apostle Hebr. 11. v. 1. Faith is the substance of things hoped for the evidence of things not seene to be a definition of faith and then the proper object of faith must bee non apparentia non visa things not evident to the naturall man to the eye of reason such as these morall Precepts are which I last mentioned Lib. 1. de Iustific c. 4. So that howsoever Bellarmine doe cavill with that distinction of Historicall Faith and justifying Faith yet reason will evince the distinction to be good and needfull for those Histories of Esaus selling his Birth-right of Abrahams two wives of Dathans rebellion of Davids adulterie although they are not essentiall to explicite saving faith yet those Stories and whatsoever is recorded in the Word of God to have been done or spoken wee beleeve to have been done and spoken although the act sometime bee wicked and the speeches false and blasphemous as the murther of Vriah the rayling of Shimei the words of the Serpent to Eve So the beliefe and credit we give is not to those actions or speeches of theirs as if the one were well done and the other truly spoken for this were to justifie the false Prophets rayling Rebels and the Devill himselfe but wee beleeve that Historicall Narration of the Holy Ghost that such vvicked sinnes vvere committed such false blasphemous vvords spoken and shall vvee not call this Faith being a credit wee give unto the Relation because it is by divine inspiration in the Pen-men not in the Actors or first speakers Historicall If it bee faith L b. 1. de Iustific c. 9. either a justifying faith or an historicall faith or some other but no other is named and it is no justifying faith Ergo an historicall faith That it is not a justifying faith I proove against Bellarmine out of his owne vvords The whole object if justifying Faith is contained summarily and briefly in the Apostles Creed But those Stories of sinfull actions lying Prophets blaspheming Devills are not at all in the Apostles Creed Ergo The relations of them are no object no article no part of saving Faith If neither of saving Faith nor any other then of Historicall Faith Againe no division of things contained in Scripture is more frequent amongst Fathers Schoolemen and latter Writers Roman Reformed then that of Faith and life Credenda facienda what we should beleeue how wee should liue and if they be members of one division they cannot bee affirmed one of another As therefore those Morall precepts are rules of actions so they belong to Charitie it s their proper place As it is related they came from God so they are the object of Historicall Faith So that the Articles of the Creed wheresoever found in Scripture are the proper object of iustifying Faith And all things that are registred and declared by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Prophets and Evangelists inspired by the Holy Ghost are the object of our Faith Historicall I say the relation not every thing that is related which Historicall Faith I define to be a supernaturall infused assent or credit we give to the relation of things in the Word of God as revealed from him So that I thinke I may say that rightly understood both sides doe agree thus farre 1. That the primary materiall compounded object of Faith as the Schoolemen and Iesuits speake or more plainely that the principall propositions of Faith are in the Apostles Creede 2. The totall object of Faith are omnes revelationes divinae as Valenza or Verbum Dei as Bellarmine or rather the divine Scripture as the Fathers as Aquinas Carbo and the Reformed Churches doe say For Valenza doth aequivocate with his Revelationes Dei and Bellarmine with his Verbum Dei. Who would not be glad to reade in these two great Iesuits That such is the nature of Faith Tom. 3. di 1. q. 1. §. 4. p. 1. that it can assent to no Proposition but as it is revealed by God So Valenza and Faith ought to levell at nothing besides the Word of God for Faith cannot be certaine and infallible unlesse it relye upon his authority who can neither deceiue nor be deceived So Bellarm Who that desireth the peace of Sion would not be glad hereof Lib. 1. de Iustif c. 10. I did much rejoyce when at first I read it but when I saw that Valenza did extend his divine Revelations not onely to Canonical Writers but also to the Pope And Bellarmine to divide Verbum Dei the Word of God into Scriptū non scriptum written Word and unwritten Traditions my joy turned into griefe and searching better into the Questions I found these were poore shifts to hemme in their Pope for when they are prest with arguments or Authorities of Fathers concerning the fulnesse and sufficiency of the Word of God Bellarmine comes in with his distinction of Verbum Dei Scriptum non scriptum saying that the one alone is Regula partialis a piece of a Rule but both together are Regula totalis a whole Rule Tom. 3. d. 1. q. 1. p. 1. §. 4. So Valenza dealeth by revealed verities Vel per Canonicum
their society their own testimony not the testimony of God Vnlesse thou know thy selfe not in the word of cavelling people but in the testimonies of my Books In the Scriptures have wee learned to know Christ in the Scriptures have we learned to know his Church Wee have these Scriptures common to us both and why out of these doe not we hold Christ and his Church common to us both And againe Behold the Scripture common to both loe where wee have known Christ loe where we have known his Church Reflecting now upon what wee have cited out of this incomparable Father wee may observe how plainly how frequently how perseveringly he maintaineth that this Question concerning the Church may be proved plainly manifestly clearly out of Scripture That hee would not have men use Humane testimonie in this question and they which doe use Humane testimonies herein and not Divine stand upon uncertainties Aquin. 1. q. 1. art 8. Carbo to the same purpose the Schoolmen say That Humane reasons in hac doctrina non valent ad probandum are not of force to prove yet it useth Humane reason not to prove Faith and what it believeth but to declare other things as a forreine Argument and probable but it useth Divine Authorities as a proper and necessary Argument Secondly let us observe that this Father writing upon this Question so many Books as make more then halfe a great Tome yet never used any other Argument in those Bookes but Scripture hee never called upon his Adversaries to shew names of their Professors in all Ages nor did hee attempt that for himselfe but chose rather to cite the same Scriptures twenty times at least in severall Bookes of that subject out of which places I will collect two Arguments first desiring the Reader to observe That things expresly contained in Scriptures and things thence deduced are of a different nature these later inferior to those those are Principles these are but Conclusions those depend upon supernaturall light of Divine Revelation these Conclusions are grounded upon those Divine Principles which men apprehend by Faith and then doe search and find the illation and consequence of these Conclusions by the light of naturall reason improved by Industry and refined by Art I doe not say that I can shew in Scripture that the Protestants are the true Church which were to make it a point of Faith but out of Scriptures I can prove that the Protestants are a Church and so make it a Theologicall conclusion and the Arguments demonstrations because drawne out of the proper Principles of Theologie or Divinitie thus 1. Argument They who professe that Faith which was preached through the World are a true Christian Church But the Protestants holding the Apostles Creed and the doctrine of the Apostles doe professe that Faith which was preached through the World Ergo The Protestants are a true Christian Church 2. Argument They who hold Communion and acknowledge themselves to be a part of that Church which is dispersed through the World are a true Church But the Protestants doe hold Communion and acknowledge themselves to bee a part of that Church which is dispersed through the World Ergo The Protestants are a true Church Secondly out of the same Principles I will prove that the Church of Rome is not the Church as excluding all other Churches thus 1. Argument The Church doth professe that Faith which was preached and received through the World The Roman Church holding a new Creed of unwritten Traditions Transubstantiation worshipping of Images c. doe therein not professe that Faith which was preached and received through the World Ergo The Church of Rome is not the Church 2. Argument The Christian Church hath many more Children then the Church of the Iewes But the Romane Church hath not more Children then the Church of the Iewes Ergo The Roman Church is not the Christian Church The Major Saint Austine doth bring out of Scripture in those words The barren hath many more children then shee that hath an husband The Minor will appeare if we say unto these Romanist◠as Saint Austine did to the Donatists Let them compare their multitude with the multitude of the Iewes dispersed over the world and they shall see how few they are in comparison of them the Iewes being by the calculation of the a Brirewood in his Enquiries most learned in Historie and Geographie as many as will people all Europe The Roman Church when it was entire being not much more then halfe Europe if so much and now having lost halfe that it was is farre lesse This I shall enlarge morefully hereafter when I shall come to maintaine my former Arguments Now I addresse my selfe to Master Fishers Replie CHAP. VI. Fisher Concerning M. Rogers his Answer to M. Fishers five Propositions BY this which hath been said against Master Bernard his Looke beyond Luther it may be easily seene that M. Rogers hath not sufficiently answered M. Fishers question aforesaid for with a bold audacitie he nameth for Protestants famously knowne Romane Catholikes to wit these Writers of the first seven hundred yeeres and amongst others even Saint Bede whose Writings and profession of life being a professed Romane Catholike Monke shew him to bee no Protestant Rogers I can see no such thing in what you have said against Mr. Bernard neither have you said any thing there which may touch me but you have the same in this your Treatise against me you have written not halfe a sheet in Reply to Mr. Bernards Booke of eight or nine sheets and yet you would have men see in your short Reply to him a Confutation also of what I have written I have read that Alexander the Great seeing a companie of Indian Apes marching along a Hils side tooke them to be an armie of Enemies but when he came neere he found them to be as they were poore silly fearfull Apes that ran into the woods to hide themselves Hee that thinkes hee seeth in your Reply to Mr. Bernard a confutation of him or me is as much mistaken as Alexander was in the Apes the reason is hee looketh a farre off as Alexander did when hee tooke them for armed men but hee that commeth neere unto your Writings vieweth and examineth them diligently shall find that there is no armie there are no armed men no sword no weapon no Scripture no reason to wound us You strout and stalke a farre off but when wee draw neere you flye into the thickets of some darke speeches ambiguous phrases aequivocating termes like those Liguranes quos major aliquantò labor erat invenire quam vincere It is more labour to find you out then to conquer you Mr. Bernard I doubt not is able to answer any thing that you have objected unto him if he think such poore objections of yours to be worthy of any Reply I wil addresse my selfe unto what you object unto mee you say that I have not sufficiently answered Mr. Fishers
will grant him to be yours but of those Monkes and these I may say O quantum hic monachus monacho distabat ab illo How much doth your Parsons and other Monkes differ from Beda and those more ancient Friers or Monkes or religious Orders call them as you please Fisher The like may be said of divers others but at this time it may suffice to give this one example to shew that Mr. Rogers naming all those he named spake without Booke or without having at hand or looking into his bookes and that he might as well have named the Pope and Cardinalls and Bishops Priests Monkes and all other religious persons of the present Roman Church to be Protestants as he nameth the said ancient Fathers Rogers And so I will when I come to my Catalogue name Popes Cardinalls Bishops c. for confirmation of my faith whether it be for my Creed which are more principall and proper points or articles of faith or for all those bookes of Scripture which I beleeve or things therein revealed from God Because the testimony of an adversarie for an adversary is most strong and will take away your personall exceptions Thus Paul did cite a Heathen to perswade Heathens yea the inscription of an Altar dedicated to the unknowne God found amongst Heathen Idolls Thus the Fathers Augustine and others in the Primitive Church did cite the Iewes for confirmation of their doctrine and that they did not misaleadge the Prophets and writers of the old Testament Iudaei inimici nostri sunt de chartis inimici convincatur adsarius The Iewes are our enemies out of the bookes of our enemies wee convince our adversaries Augustine upon the 40th Psalme and often in other places Master Fisher or his Second would have exclaimed hereat saying what meanest thou Augustine wilt thou perswade mee that the Iewes are Christians if not why citest thou their bookes nay what meanest thou Paul to cite the Greeke Poets wouldst thou perswade me that they are Christians as if it must follow that they whose testimonie we cite in some things must be our friends in all All the faith of the Protestants is confirmed by the Papists all their explicite all their implicite faith all that belongs to our faith vel per se vel per accidens essentially or accidentally primarie or secundarily as an Article of faith or as an illustration of the same expressed in Scripture and yet the Protestants are no Papists the Papists are no Protestants because the Papists have a new Creed which Protestants deny and I call God to witnesse that I desire to die a thousand deaths rather then to approve it because I assure me it is false in all and in some things blasphemous The Papists have such exercise of Religion worshipping of Images praying to Saints which I abhorre as being Idolatry In discipline also they have such tenents of absolute supreme power over Bishops Kings Lawes oathes as is full of pride sedition usurpation and impiety Now here we differ here I am in the negative and so it doth belong to you to prove the affirmative It is a just law and your owne Master Fisher for these I need not produce testimony seeing I doe not avow maintaine beleeve any such Creed any such practise of Religion any such discipline But for my faith either explicite or implicite all that is revealed by God in his word I may bring my Adversaries to depose for me Paul said unto Agrippa a Iew no Christian Iuvenalis yea a wicked incestuous King if Roman Authors wrong him not incestae dedit hoc Agrippa sorori Yet to this bad man this unconverted Iew Paul saith O King Agrippa beleevest thou the Prophets I know thou beleevest them And may not I say Master Fisher beleeve you the Apostles Creed I know you doe beleeve it I have no other Articles of faith no other primarie propositions of faith againe for the totall object for the secondary propositions of faith contained in Scripture may not I aske you and say Master Fisher doe you beleeve the Bookes of Moses the Psalmes the Prophets and all those Bookes of the Iewish Canon as also all the new Testament I know you doe Master Fisher why then herein is my faith limitted whatsoever doctrine is plainely hence inferred or out of principles of nature I receive as doctrines or truths convincing my understanding but they are no part of my faith After these all doctrines and lawes Ecclesiasticall or civill in the Church or State wherein I live not contradicting the word of God or my conscience I receive with humility May I aske you Master Fisher againe whether the Apostles Creed and those bookes of old and new Testament received by our Church of England had not professors in all ages nay were not professed and beleeved of the Popes and Cardinalls of all ages I know you will not deny but they were so professed why then may not I vouch these Popes and Cardinalls for my selfe as I intend to doe when I come to my Catalogue CHAP. VII Fisher ANd I marvaile why having gone halfe the way as hee saith hee maketh a stop there and doth not with the like audacity goe on in naming other famous Roman Catholikes in every of the other ages Rogers Because Master Fisher offered in like proportion to name and defend Professors of Roman religion holding nothing contrary to the Doctrine defined in the Councell of Trent these were your words in the first Paper I received of yours I have gone halfe my journey you not a step in proportion you should have gone as farre as I did especially seeing you would have no other meanes of triall whereas I have and hold other and better meanes to prove my Faith and my Church yet to satisfie others to stop your mouth and to meet you at your owne weapon I undertooke this as a probable forreine humane uncertaine Argument yet such as maketh more for us then for you Fisher Namely such as Gualterus in Latine and the Author of the Appendix to the Antidote in English have set downe for members in the Roman Church Rogers If they have done it sufficiently and effectually it had beene the lesse labour for you Mr. Fisher to have transcribed them but wee may guesse what makes you neither take a Catalogue out of them nor make one of your owne after your example I might transmit you to Illiricus his Catalogus testium veritatis or The mysterie of Babylon vvritten by Sir Phillip Morney the learned Lord of Plessis who have performed this for the reformed Churches farre better then yours have done for your Church Yet when I come to the place where you have cited my Catalogue I will make it out but let mee aske you vvhy instead of naming such as professed the Romane Religion holding nothing contrary to the Doctrine defined in the Councell of Trent now you put members of the Romane Church as if it were the same a member of the
with him that hath gone 800. because I have not gone further whereas I had a neerer and safer way to my journeyes end viz by Scripture by demonstration by confession of my adversaries CHAP. X. Fisher NEither did hee sufficiently prove them he named to bee Protestants but by such false suppositions and bad definitions c. Rogers in his 1. Reply That my suppositions are false you say it I deny it when you shew any reason to convince them of falshood I will disclaime them If my definition bee bad you should have mended it and so much I requested you to doe and doe request it againe and againe But why is my definition bad why my suppositions false and why shifts because that Arrians Anabaptists or whatsoever other Sectarie may by the like defend the same persons to have beene of their Religion and Sect. What suppositions you meane I know not if you meane my distinctions I shall answer you when I come to your particular exception against them As for my definition it was this and thus delivered Master Fisher I desire you therefore to expresse without ambiguity the termes of this question whether the Protestant Church was visible in all ages what you meane by Church what by Protestants what by visible I will deliver my opinion in defining a Protestant Church The Protestant Church is a society of men professing the faith expressed in the Canonicall Scriptures acknowledged to be such in the Primitive Church comprized in the Apostles Creed explained in the other two Creedes of Nice and Athanasius ministring the Sacraments of Baptisme and the Lords Supper by men of lawfull calling and ordination Such a society as this was in all ages Ergo The Protestant Church was in all ages Thus farre in my former Reply this was the definition I brought and none other You say an Arrian may by this definition defend that those persons by me alleadged were of his Religion or Sect so may the Anabaptists or any other Sectary as you say what other Sectaries you meane I know not as for the Anabaptist I will answer you where you have made more full mention of him As for the Arrian because here only you name him here I will reply unto you concerning him You say that my definition may agree with an Arrian for so it must if thereby he may proove those to whom this definition doth belong to be of his Religion then which nothing could be spoken more ignorantly if you thought as you wrote or more impudently if you knew the contrary being so manifest a truth as nothing that ever happened in the Christian Church is more frequent in Ecclesiasticall Histories in Fathers in Councells then that Arrius was condemned in the Nicene Councell and the more full explication of the Apostles Creed was made in that Councell onely to exclude and condemne Arrius which explication is commonly called the Nicene Creed to the same purpose did Athanasius compose his explication of the same Creed I make mention of both these in my definition saying that the Protestant Church professeth that faith comprised in the Apostles Creed explained in the other two Creeds of Nice and Athanasius All these three doe say that Christ is God Arrius doth deny it these are contradictories can you reconcile them if you can you will doe more then all the Divines all the Philosophers could doe nay more then God himselfe can doe The Apostles Creed saith that Christ is the onely begotten Sonne of God and therefore God as the begotten Sonne of man is man the onely begotten Sonne of God because he alone is the Sonne of God by generation all others either by creation or by regeneration The Nicene Creed saith Christ is begotten of the substance of the Father God of God true God of true God Athanasius his Creed runnes wholly on the same straine that Christ is God that hee is uncreate eternall incomprehensible Almighty Arrius denyed all this in denying him to be God This definition I alleadge not as proper to the Protestants distinguished from other Churches but common to all true Christian Churches for two reasons first my drift is not to proove that onely the Protestants make the Church as I have fully expressed in my first Answer My words speaking to Mr. Fishers 4th proposition were these I would gladly know what they meane by those words if the Protestants be the true visible Church whether so as if we alone who are called Protestants were of the Church and no others wee leave such enclosing of Commons to the Romanists we chalenge it not we are a true Church not the true Church we are a part not the whole we include our selves we exclude not others whether Graecians Armenians Aethiopians Spaniards or Italians c. so they deny no fundamentall parts of the faith either directly or by consequence 2. Because there can be but one definition of one Church and such is the Catholick Church of Christ acknowledged to be and this one definition must accord and may be verified of every particular society that professeth the faith of Christ and ministreth those Sacraments which were ordained by Christ as necessary unto all men under the government of lawfull Pastors for these particular societies are of the same nature as the whole Partes homogeneae quarum idem nomen cum toto eadem nominis definitio parts of one kind with the whole and one with another which have the same definition because they have the same nature and essence as every drop of blood is blood and every little peece of flesh is flesh and have all the same definition As therefore when I would proove my selfe to be a man I would use no other definition then animal rationale a reasonable creature endued with a living sensible body Haec Articulis lex definiendi for singularia non habent definitionem nisi speciei particular and individuall things have no proper peculiar definition of their owne but all of one kind or species have the same definition so being to proove my selfe a Christian I will use no other definition then that of Christians in generall viz. that I hold the faith of Christ am admitted by baptisme into his visible Church wherein I doe continue under the direction and government of my Pastors If you should reply that is no good definition because it belongeth to you of the Roman Church to those of the Greeke Armenian Aethiopian Indian Churches and to all other sects of Christians as well as to me I answer that unlesse it doe belong to all Christians it were no good definition as animal rationale were no good definition of a man unlesse it did belong to every particular man excluding none for this is the rule of defining this is the direction that is given by the most learned that we must passe through every singular observing what is to be found in them all and at all times and put those things alone in our definition excluding
your tenet That there is no salvation out of the Roman Church which is the fame in effect with the doctrine of Bellarmine Valenza and Binnius bee true it must include all Christian Churches and it must agree to all the Christian Churches at all times but this definition did not agree to all Christian Churches as I have shewed by the testimony of your owne writers and Travellers for many thousands of Christian Nations in the world did not acknowledge your Pope and many never heard of your Latine Church neither did the Latine Church know them That it did not perpetually belong to the Church will appeare in that I thinke my adversary is not able to produce any in 1150. yeeres after Christs comming in the flesh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Idem Metaph 2. c. 3. that framed such a definition of the Catholick Church so that the learned must either be ignorant of the true definition or this must not be it Is it likely that all the learned Fathers who wrote upon this subject disputed upon this point Licet definitio definitum re idē sint tamen propositio in qua definitio de definito praedicatur non est identica sed doctrinalis quia in ea conceptus distinctus de confuso praedicatur Zuarez were ignorant what the Church of Christ was which is distinctly knowne onely by d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arti. 2. Post c. 2. a definition If this definition or your tenents were true all those Christians who dyed for Christ till Peter came to Rome were out of the Church were damned Stephen the first Martyr who dyed for Christ the same yeere that Christ dyed for him and all the world was out of the Church was damned lost his life in vaine shed his bloud to no purpose If it were so necessary that there must be a Bishop of Rome to whom all Christians must submit why did not the Primitive Christians entreate Peter to goe to Rome that they might have a Church The beleeving Iewes should have come to Peter and said if we die before there be a Bishop of Rome we dye out of the Church we are damned Definitio est principium finis logieae Zabarella therefore good Peter to Rome with all speed They of Antioch should have done the like and said to Peter sweet Simon what dost thou here to Rome that we may have a Church So should they of Alexandria have told him to Rome Peter what dost thou heere Sedit Antiochiae annis 7. Baron an 39.25 annis ut Euseb in Chro. why wilt thou so long delay the laying of that corner stone in Rome whereon all must be built wherein all must be saved why wilt thou hazard the salvation of so many soules as may die before thou hast settled a Church at Rome which must be the Mother of all Churches Pius 4. his Creed art 11. wilt thou make thy selfe guilty of the blood of so many beleevers as may dye whilst thou doest linger and loyter heere The Churches of Iudaea Galile and Samaria were excluded by your definitions Acts 9.10 11 12. and tenents for Peter had not as yet beene out of those coasts nay if this definition were true they were no Churches but the Scripture saith they were Churches ergo this is a false tenet a false definition The Christians of Ioppa were to blame to send for him Acts 9. to hinder him from a more necessary journey to Rome and Peter himselfe much to blame to tarry there many dayes Cornelius the devout Centurion if he had heard Acts 10. and believed your tenents and definitions might have stumbled at what the Angell commanded him doe and he might have said with himselfe if there be no salvation out of the Roman Church what good can Peter doe me before there be a Church there If none can be saved but who are in subjection to the Bishop of Rome what good can Peter doe me there being as yet no Bishop of Rome Then when Peter came unto him and preached Christ Iesus and remission of sinnes in his name if these men had beene there they would have said Peter you have forgot one principall Article of the faith that which is essentiall to the Church the being entity the definition of it That he must be obedient to the Bishop of Rome this might more neerely concerne him being Captaine of the Italian Band. But the Scripture saith that Peter did tell him that whereby he and all his house should be saved and yet no word of Rome or Roman Bishop The Christians of Antioch by this definition and tenet were no Church though the Scripture say they were Iames the brother of Iohn which was kild by Herod was of no Church by this definition and tenet and therefore was damned We desire not to be of any other Church then Augustine Ambrose Ierome the Councell of Africk the Councell of Nice the Church of Ioppa Caesarea Ierusalem Antioch were of We like no such definitions as exclude the Fathers Councells the Apostle Saint Iames the Martyr Saint Stephen and damnes them to Hell O let me live the life of these dye the death of these and rest in peace with these Thus much in justifying my definition and against your tenet and Iesuiticall definition of Bellarmine which I briefly urge thus That definition which belongeth to all Christian Churches and to none else is a good definition But such is mine Ergo It is a good definition That definition and tenet which excludeth and condemneth all the Churches of Africk Asia and a great part of Europe yea Stephen the first Martyr and Iames the brother of Iohn together with divers Councells and fathers is false and uncharitable But such is your definition such your tenet Ergo Your tenet and definition are both false and uncharitable CHAP. XI A true Copy of Mr. Fishers five Propositions IT is certaine there is one and but one true infallible faith without which none can please God 2. This one infallible faith cannot be had according to the ordinary course of Gods providence but by hearing Preachers and Pastors of the true visible Church who onely are lawfully sent and authorized to teach the true word of God 3. As therefore this one infallible faith hath beene and must be in all ages so there must needs be in all ages Preachers and Pastors of the true visible Church of whom all sorts of people have in times past as appeareth by Histories learned and must learne in all future times the said infallible faith 4. Hence it followeth that if Protestants bee the true visible Church of Christ all sorts of men who in every age have had the aforesaid infallible faith have learned it by Protestant Preachers whose names may be found in Histories as the names of those are found who in severall ages did teach and convert people of severall Nations under the faith of Christ 5. Hence further followeth that
by me I needed not to have set downe names of Protestant Pastors in all ages or in any age My two first Arguments the one a causis the other a signis might have served the turne without the third ab exemplis and I might have contented my selfe with going lesse then halfe that way which is your way and not mine I never tooke it for other then an uncertaine darke slippery cumbersome way it was your only way and yet you would not goe one step Did ever any Iudge citing a man by writ to appeare before him at Westminster limit him which way he should come would you thinke it reason that a Iudge should command a Herefordshire man to come to London not through Worcester or Glocester but through Shropshire Darbyshire Yorke c. The two Evangelists Saint Matthew and Saint Luke deriving the pedigree of our Saviour from David yet did it by different wayes De Doct. Christiana and divers lines Saint Augustine saith That two men differing in the exposition of some place of Scripture he that erreth yet if his exposition leade to charity hee is like unto a man which missing his way yet commeth to the end of his journey My journey is to Christ my scope to bring my faith and my Church thither you might leave me to chuse my owne way which was the way of Saint Augustine by Scriptures who doth disclaime and dislike your way by humane testimonies Yet even in this your owne way I doubt not but I shall goe as farre as you in a day and shall come sooner to my journeyes end then you shall for the reasons which now I will alleadge in the succeeding Chapter CHAP. XIII Humane Histories no proofe of any Church YOu would bring this great triall concerning the visible Church to Histories only which I might refuse briefly for these reasons First Histories humane in Divinity are weak improper and uncertaine proofes Secondly your Index expurgatorius blotting out of Authors that which maketh against you Thirdly You forge Authors Records and Councells to further your cause Fourthly You slight and deny the best Authors Yet to give others satisfaction I will enlarge these foure reasons in this Chapter not that your objections require any such full answer in this point that I have performed already First of the uncertainty of humane Histories Bodin in that learned discourse of his entitled The Method of Histories a man of your owne who also dedicated that booke unto the chiefe President of your Court of Inquisition doth make foure kindes of Histories First Humane Secondly Naturall Thirdly Mathematicall Fourthly Divine The first he saies is uncertaine and confused the second for the most part certaine the third more certaine the fourth most certaine and unchangeable Yet you Master Fisher in this divine question refuse the fourth which is divine most certaine and immutable and will have no other proofe then the first which is humane uncertaine and confused When Ticonius in the same question did alleadge Divini Testamenti tonitrua those thundering testimonies of the word of God against Parmenianus the Donatist Aug. cont ep Par l. 1. c. 1. which we doe produce against the Romanists making the same claime to the Church which they did and tying the Church to Rome as the Donatists did to Africk Parmenianus on the other side opposeth the relation of the Priests of his owne side say then saies Saint Augustine that we ought rather to beleeve your Colleagues then the Testament of God shall the smoake of earthly lyes prevaile against this light which came from Heaven If Parmenianus were not in love with his Episcopall Chaire he would rather choose to beleeve the written word of God then his fellow Bishops Thus much and much more to this purpose in that Booke and divers other Bookes of the seventh Tome but I will conclude this of the uncertainty of humane testimony with the words of that Father in his second Tome in his 48. Epistle Necesse est incerti sint qui pro sua societate testimonio utuntur non Divino sed suo It is of necessity that they must be uncertaine who defend their society not by the testimony of God but by their owne Thus much of the uncertainty in it selfe but much more uncertaine is all that you shall alleadge since you have by your Index Expurgatorius altered Authors to your purpose at your pleasure The Pope himselfe and the Ordinaries in their severall jurisdictions as also the Officers of Inquisition against Haeretickes are carefull to prevent the publishing of any Bookes which may seeme any way to derogate from the power of the Pope Widring in Apol. pro jure princ pag. 343. and if any such Bookes be published they endeavour wholly to suppresse the same or at the least forbid any man to reade them without speciall licence untill they be purged Thus a Priest of your owne hath written These your purging Tables are of two sorts some doe forbid whole Authors some doe blot out sentences or words so that if any Author speake against you you will either deny the whole Booke or produce some Edition licenced by your Inquisitors wherein those words are not to be found as having passed under the Purgatory of your penne Your severall bookes called Indices expurgatorij purging Tables printed in divers places as at b An. 1584. Madrid in Spaine at c An. 1607. Rome at d An. 1586. Lions are witnesses that you have left no witnesse in the world without exception If Saint Augustine say Tom. 4 ed Parisi apud Catol Guil. viduam etc. Anno 1555. Mortuorum animae non sentiunt res viventiâ—m The soules of the dead know not the estate or affaires of the living Your Belgian Index doth purge out this with a deleatur let it bee blotted out fol. 115. litera l. If Saint Gregorie Nissene say We have learned to worship and adore that nature alone which is uncreated you can purge out this with a deleatur dictio solummodò blot out this word alone saith your Spanish Index pa. 20. If Saint Chrysostome speake for the perspicuity of Scripture as hee doth in many places as namely in his third Sermon upon Lazarus deleantur let those words be blotted out saith your Index of Spaine reprinted at Samiur If the same Father speake for the sufficiency of Scripture as he doth in his Commentary on the 95. Psalme the same Index hath a deleatur for it If hee say the Church is founded upon the Rock of Faith and not upon Saint Peter the same Index hath a deleatur for it let it be blotted out Much could I cite to this purpose but as the rule is Qui semel pejerat c. He that is once convicted of bearing false witnesse is never after to be admitted for a witnesse so hee that is once found to falsifie and blot out Records looseth for ever his credit in any thing he shall produce out of his owne
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
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
docuêre Patres 146. Baron An. 905. n. 4. Herveus Remensis who first converted the Normans to the Faith and held a Synod in which they said That the Rock whereon Christ promised to build his Church was the confession of Peter At this Councell were present also Rothomagensis Archiepiscopus Rodolphus Landunensis Episcopus Trodoardus Hist Rem l. 4. c. 13. Baron An. 930. Erlimus Bellovacensis Episcopus aliique multi Whose names are subscribed This Herveus held many Synods Vnus Hambargensis Archiepiscopus qui convertit Danos Glaber temporis ejus auctor Hist l. 2. c. 11 12. Baron An. 100 n. 4. Tom. 10. Lib. de officiis Missae edito Parisiis Anno 1610. Bellarm. de Script Ab Anno 1000 ad 1100. Lebuinus Episcopus in Gallis qui populum suum ex parte deceptum Catholicae plenius restituit fidei Anno 1000. Baronius n. 3. Petrus Archiepiscopus Ravennas qui Vilgardum Haereticum docentem fidei sacrae contraria damnavit Berno Augiensis Abbas qui testatur post Evangelium in missa recitari Symbolum Constantinopolitanum à Concilio Toletano statutum id omni die Dominico secundum morem Orientalium Ecclesiarum decantari In hoc Authore miror Bellarmini oscitantiam ne quid gravius dicam qui ita scripsit Ex quo libro cap. 2. viz. Baronius de officio Missae discimus hoc primum tempore coepisse in Rom. Ecclesia cani ad Missam Symbolum fidei Cum contrarium doceat Walafridus Strabo lib. de rebus Ecclesiasticis cap. 22. Qui vixit aliquot seculis ante Bernonem obiit enim ut placet Hiltorpio Anno 849. Berno autem Anno 1048. Et ipse ordo Romanus idem doceat apud Hiltorpium col 4. Miror inquam quod non distinxerit ambiguitatem vocis Romanae quae pro Latina Ecclesia saepe usurpatur cum hic intra urbem suburbicanas Ecclesias vel saltem intra Italiae fines claudatur ut apparet ex Bernone Micrologus whose Bookes of Ecclesiasticall Observations Pamelius doth preferre before all others that wrote upon that subject as Amalarius Walafridus doth witnesse Cap. 46. that Creed in Vnum c. viz. The Creed cōmonly reputed the Nicene Creed Iuxta Canones in omni Dominica debet cantari in omnibus c. according to the Canons is to be read upon every Lords day In his 19 chapter hee is very full for communicating in both kinds citing Ordo Romanus and Iulius Papa 36. Gelasius Papa 51. very peremptorie in this kind This Author lived about the yeare 1080 saith Pamelius in his Preface before the worke Ivo Carnotensis Episcopus who speaketh of our Sacraments and of the Apostles Creed professed in Baptisme Serm. de Sacramentis And in his Sermon De Convenientia veteris novi sacrificii he briefly proveth all the chiefe heads of Christian Faith who in the later end of that Sermon speaketh of communicating in both kinds And in his Sermon De coena Domini hee saith Let none of the Faithfull this day absent himselfe Dwell you in Christ that Christ may dwell in you and you be worthy Receivers of his Body and Blood Hee in his Sermon In Cathedra Sancti Petri saith That that Feast was in memoriall of that day wherein Peter at Antioch was made Bishop and Pastor of Gods people And that hee was called Peter because of the confession of his Faith Ab Anno 1100 ad 1200. Sanctus Bernardus Rupertus Tutiensis Algerus who denieth your halfe Communion citing those words of Pascasius under the name of Saint Augustine Nec caro sine sanguine Lib. 2. de corpor sang Christ cap. 8. Bellarm. nec sanguis sine carne ritè communicatur Rich. de Sancto Victore who refuseth your Canon of the Bible Hugo de Sancto Victore who denieth Penance to be a Sacrament Ab Anno 1200 ad 1300. Alexander of Hales who denieth the Sacrament of Confirmation as a Sacrament to be instituted by Christ parte 4. q. 5. membro 2. Hugo Cardinalis Bonaventura Both which denie your Canon of the Bible Hugo in his Prologue before Ecclesiasticus Bonaventura pr. parte q. 89. Art 8. ad 2. Gulielmus Episcopus Parisiensis Ab Anno 1300 ad 1400. Lib. 4. Sent. dist 26. Durandus hee denies Matrimonie to be a Sacrament Nicholaus Lyranus hee holdeth the same Canon of the Bible that wee doe and denieth yours Franciscus Mayron Qui inter alia scripsit de Articulis fidei Simon de Cassia Qui scripsit expositionem Symboli Apostolici Ab Anno 1400 ad 1500. Dionysius Carthusianus who denies your Canon of the Bible Prologo in Ecclesiasticum Gregorius Heymburgensis who wrote against the Popes Supremacie Panormitanus Picus Mirandula Hist Trid. Concilii Sleidanus in Commentariis Thomas Cajetanus who had conference with Luther All these are Latine Authors acknowledged by you of the Roman Church for Orthodox at least two of them in every Age which were sufficient but I can make it good for all out of Bellarmine Baronius Surius Hiltorpius or Synods allowed by your Church Thus therefore I argue Major All orthodox or right believing Christians doe receive and professe the Apostles Creed the Bookes of old and new Testament received for Canonicall by the Fathers of the first 400 yeares together with the Sacraments of Baptisme and the Lords Supper which the Protestants professe Minor But these Authors aforenamed in my Catalogue from the yeare 800 to the yeare 1500 are all orthodox or right believing Ergo Conclusio All these Authors aforenamed in my Catalogue from the yeare 800 to the yeare 1500 doe receive and professe the Apostles Creed the said Bookes of the old and new Testament the two Sacraments of Baptisme and the Lords Supper which the Protestants receive and professe Or thus Major Whosoever receive our whole Faith and all our Sacraments are of our Church and wee of theirs Minor But all these Authors receive our whole Faith and all our Sacraments Ergo Conclusio All these Authors are of our Church and wee of theirs But you having another Faith a new Creed new Articles cannot prove these or any other to have held that your new Faith entirely and I have shewed most of these Authors expresly to denie some one some another Article of your new Creed so that a man may be orthodox and yet denie your Faith your Creed No man can be saved that denieth the true Faith But many are saved who denie the Roman Faith Ergo The Roman Faith is not the true Faith The Major I know you will not denie The Minor you must grant or your Saints and greatest Writers were damned for want of your Faith A second Catalogue viz. of Greeke Authors who being of the Greeke Church did professe our Scriptures Faith Sacraments and Councels but doe reject divers points of the Roman Faith and all the Councels of the Latines since the yeare 800 as appeareth by their profession in the Councell at
Ferrara made by Marcus Bishop of Ephesus Sess 5. in a grave and learned speech recorded by your owne Surius in the fourth Tome of Councels imprinted at Colonia Agrippina Anno 1567. Definitiones Decreta aliarum omnium Synodorum recitanda nobis videntur ut haec nostra Synodus non solum ab illis non discrepare verumetiam ipsas in omnibus imitari velle videatur quoniam nos firmiter credimus majores nostros nil prorsus silentio praeterjiffe quod ad nostrum fidei Symbolum spectet Marcus Ephesinus in Generali 8. Synodo Sess 3. apud Surium Tom. 3. Pag. 375. Porro autem quoniam de Divinis primi ac alterius Concilii dogmatibus nil aliud reperitur nisi duae tantem fidei nostrae expositiones hoc est duo Symbola quae tamen pro uno a caeteris Conciliis suscepta fuerant idcirco à recitandis tertii Concilii gestis auspicandum nobis censemus vobis probare promittimus Christianorum omnium unam esse Catholicam fidem ad quam accessionem aliquem fieri aut quicquam ab ea non liceat auferri In primis ergo Nicenum Symbolum à trecentis decem octo Patribus Niceae celebratum recitetur Legatur etiam ejusdem Concilii definitio ut idem Nicenum Symbolum immutabile ac immobile permaneret neminique fas esset aliam fidem proferre Sess 5. Quartum Concilium viz. Ephesinum definit atque determinat ut aliam fidem conscribere aut componere aut sentire aut docere liceat nemini Concilium 5. viz. Constantinopol idem definit qui aliud Symbolum docuissent anathemati subjiciunt Sic etiam 6. Concilium seu Trullanum priora Concilia dictum Symbolum amplectitur obsignat Sic etiam 7. ac ultimum generale Concilium Hactenus Marcus Ephes ibidem Ab anno 800. ad 900. 1. Theodotus Melissenus 2. Iohannes Sixtus 3. Photius All these three were Patriarchs of Constantinople as is acknowledged by Baronius an 835. n. 25. All zealous adversaries to your worshipping of Images for which Baronius there calleth the first Haereticum Iconoclastam an haereticall Image-breaker The second Haeresis promulgatorem acerrimum The third namely Photius held a Councell at Constantinople planè numerosum admodum Concilium it was a very full Councell in so much as Michael the Emperour gloried that it equalled the number of the Fathers of the great Nicen Councell teste Baron an 861. n. 1. This was accounted a Generall Councell by Photius and by Theodorus Balsamon Comenting upon it Sic ait Baron ibid. n. eodem In this Councell was condemned the worshipping of Images Ab anno 900. ad 1000. Nilus Calaber Habuit hoc saeculo Graeca Ecclesia duos doctrina sanctitate illustres Nilum Calabrum Niconem Lacedemon Baron an 900. n. 8. Nico. Lacedemon Hic non à Graecis solum sed etiam à Latinis inter Sanctos est relatus Baron an 961. Ab anno 1000. ad 1100. Simeon Armenus Vir Sanctus verae fidei Professor Baro. an 1016. n. 7. 8. Theophilactus Episcopus Bulgarorum He in his writings imitateth Saint Chrysostome but he is a Schismaticke saith Bellar. de scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis Ab anno 1100. ad an 1200. Euthimius Zigabenus who wrote against all Haeresies and upon the 4. Evangel Bellarm. de Scriptoribus Ecclesiae Theodorus Balsamon Who commented upon Photius his Nicene Canon and divers Councels He was an enemie to the Church of Rome saith Bellarm. Ab Anno 1200. ad 1300. Arsenius Patriarcha Constantin A man for vertue and the service of God not farre short of the highest perfection ut Nicephorus Gregor lib. 3. p. 31. edit Basiliensis an 1562. cum Caesarea Majest privilegiis Gregorius Patriarcha Idem Gregor l. 6 pag. 80. Ioannes Glices Patriarch also of Constantin a most learned grave wise man above all men Nicephorus Gregoras lib. 8. pag. 123. 132. Ab Anno 1300. ad 1400. Catechuzenus Pachimaerus Nicephorus Gregoras These three were Fathers of the 14 age saith Bzonius in the end of that age Tom. 13. in his Supplement of Baron his Ecclesiasticall History an 1299. They did teach contrary to the doctrine of the Haereticks so Baronius calleth us but I may truly say that the first and last of the three teach contrary to their faith and so the other professed or he could not be of the Greeke Church who deny the Popes primacie of power deny Purgatory Communicate in both kinds For Catechuzenus in the election of Iohn Bishop of Constantinople doth say that all Bishops of greater or lesser Cities receive equall grace Baronius addeth his owne Glosse saying True equall grace of Order not of Iurisdiction Nicephorus in his 10 booke disputeth at large against the Latine Church à pag. 230 ad finem ejusdem libri To. 6. Bibl. Sanct. pag. 99. Ep. ad lect To these I may adde Cabasilas whom together with Balsamon Genebrard calleth two famous Greeke Fathers for which words he is blamed by M. De la Bigne who calleth the same men Schismaticks and enemies to the Church of Rome Tom. 6. Bibl. Sanct. pag. 101. 102. Gentianus Hervetus another of your side doth write in defence of Cabasilas in his Preface to the Reader before Cabasilas his booke intituled A Compendious Interpretation upon the Divine Sacrifice extant dicto 6 Tom. Bibl. Sanctae pag. 159. But he is thus blamed by your De la Bigne Dealbat Aethiopem Gentianus labouring to excuse Cabasilas doth but wash a Blackamoore for it is manifest he was a Schismaticke that he burned with hatred against the Church of Rome and wrote an Haereticall Booke against Tho. Aquinas Yet he is placed by Bellarmine amongst his Ecclesiasticall Writers in a distinct Columne also of his Chronologie from Haereticks Ab Anno 1400 ad 1500. Marcus Ephesinus Insignis Theologus as hee is stiled in the Acts of the Councell of Florence Sessione 2. apud Surium Tom. 4. Laonicus Chalcondilas who being of the Greeke Church testifieth that the agreement made at Florence was not received in Greece lib. 1. de rebus Turcicis non longè à principio Thus have I finished my Catalogue of Greeke Writers having many more to insert if any just exception can be given against these I will conclude concerning them with these two Arguments the one to prove that they were of our Faith and Church the other to prove that they were not of the Roman Faith or Church thus All they that doe professe the Apostles Creed as it was explicated in the Nicene Councell that receive the Scriptures received by the Protestants that receive the foure first Generall Councels and the two Sacraments of Baptisme and the Eucharist under lawfull Pastors are of the Protestants Faith and Church But those Authors as all others of the Greeke Church did professe and receive the said Creed Scriptures Councels and Sacraments under lawfull Pastors Ergo They are of the Protestants Faith and Church The Proposition is A definitione ad
Definitum the most demonstrative substantiall proofe that reason can find The Assumption appeareth by the profession of the Grecians at Ferrara whereof I have cited a part above in the beginning of this Catalogue and it may be seene more fully in their owne Surius Tom. 4. Conciliorum loco supra citato None of those who denie the Popes Supremacie Purgatorie Transubstantiation and Communion in one kind are of the Roman Faith and Church But all these aforenamed being of the Greeke Church denie the Popes Supremacie Purgatorie Transubstantiation and Communion in one kind Ergo They are not of the Roman Faith and Church A Catalogue of Councels Generall or Provinciall in all Ages which did professe our Faith TO name particular men in all Ages who did professe our Faith receive our Scriptures and Sacraments is not to prove our Church extant in all Ages for one man is not a Church no more then one member as hand or foot is the body or one Citizen is a Citie or one subject is a Kingdome I have therefore thought it fit out of my many yeares reading observation and collection to prove that not onely some particular men but also whole Churches that is a societie of many men professing our Faith Scripture and Sacraments have beene in all Ages to this end I have put downe a Catalogue of Councels in all Ages which Councels are justly termed The Church representative who professe our Faith Scriptures and Sacraments although the maine proofe is in that of Faith which includeth the rest for this Faith hath no other object then the Scriptures Canonicall and receiveth no Sacraments but what are contained in the Scriptures and instituted by God And because all Councels did not record nor publish all those things which were done of course and observed at the opening and in the beginning of every Councell I thought it would prove satisfactorie to the Reader that he should be acquainted how they never began Councels without solemn Prayers or Masse as the Romanists call it and that in every Masse our Creed is repeated as appeareth by their Missals and those Authors in the Margin which are Expositors of the Masse so that seeing our Creed is professed in every Masse and all Councels begin with a solemne Masse it followeth that all Councels did professe our Faith Yea over and besides this I will adde other proofes as 1 an Injunction that it should be so 2. Historicall testimonie that it was so First Ordo Romanus published by Hiltorpius at Paris anno 1610. col 171. in the order for the first day of holding a Councell after some Prayers which are there set downe concludeth thus Then all men keeping silence Tunc tacentibus cunctis ex Niceno Concilio fides Catholica à Diâ—cono legatur let the Catholicke Faith be read by the Deacon out of the Nicene Councell I believe in one God the Father Almightie maker of all things visible and invisible Then the Deacon shall bring forth the Book of the Canons and reade the Chapters concerning the manner of holding Councels out of the fourth Councell of Toledo Thus you see it was commanded that the Creed which wee professe should be professed in the beginning and opening of every Councell since the time of that Ordo Romanus which whether it were as ancient as Charles the Great in which time it was brought to France Hitorpius in praefatione or more ancient in Rome as being for the substance made by Gregorie the first it will serue my turne for succeeding Ages But in my Historicall observation I will ascend higher and to the Apostles times This Creed saith Baronius An. 44. n. 18. Act. Conc. Calce Eph. Constin 2. et aliorum speaking of the Apostles Creed the Catholicke Church hath alwaies had in such esteeme as that in all sacred Generall Councels it was the custome to repeate it as a grround-worke or foundation of the whole Ecclesiasticall building All men thought it fit Prayers being solemnly performed and finished to make confession of their Faith after the manner of Generall Councels Conc. Tol. 6. apud Surium Tom. 2. pag. 741. col 1 2. The ancient Decrees of the Fathers were reverently confirmed in Consilio Romano more solito after the usuall manner Vrspergensis cited also by Baronius anno 102. n. 1. It was required by the Graecians in the Councell of Florence begun at Ferrara Sess 3. apud Surium That the Councell might begin with reciting the Definitions and Decrees of the seven precedent Generall Councels not onely say they that it may appeare wee dissent not from them but also that wee may imitate them for wee firmly believe c. And Sess 5 they cited the Decree of the fifth Councell saying thus All men should preserve the foundation of Faith and observe that Creed wherin they were baptized which the Nicene Councell commended to posteritie received by the Councell of Constantinople approved by the Councell of Ephesus and sealed up by the Councell of Chalcedon all which wee also receive Thus far the words of the fifth Councell then and there urged by the Graecians together with the 6th and 7th Councell to the same effect Having laid this ground-work that all lawfull Councels and orthodox recieved and published by the Romanists themselves for such did professe our Faith it were sufficient for mee to name approved Councels in every Age without any further observation in particular yet for the greater benefit of the Reader I will doe more beginning even with the Apostles themselves A Catalogue of Councels which did professe our Faith in every Age beginning with the Apostles the first Age from the Nativitie of our blessed Saviour Seculum 1. to the 100th yeare Act. 1. 1. Councell of the Apostles Act. 6. 2. Councell of the Apostles Act. 15. 3. Councell of the Apostles Act. 21. 4. Councell of the Apostles IN the yeare 34 saith Baronius n. 237. for to chuse an Apostle into the place of Iudas Surius Tom. 1. Conc. p. 17. Wherein the seven Deacons were ordained the first yeare after the death of Christ saith Surius Tom. 1. Conc. pag. 18. Anno 34. saith Baron Concerning Circumcision and the Ceremoniall Law of Moses This was 14 yeares after the death of Christ saith Surius in the place above cited An. 51. saith Baronius Wherein Paul was advised to purifie foure persons after the Law of Moses for to pacifie the Jewes who were incensed against him as an enemie to Moses The ordinary Glosse and Surius observe only these foure some adde two more one Acts 4. another Acts 11. I will adde one more not mentioned in the Scripture but mentioned by many Fathers as Ruffinus Ierome Augustine Leo Venantius Albinus Flaccus alii 5. Councell of the Apostles Wherein they composed the Apostles Creed being now ready to depart one from another as a Rule of preaching whereby it might be discerned who did preach Christ according to the Rules of the Apostles
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
will deny his owne faith To this my Adversary doth thus reply Fisher That faith is affirmation and not negation by which Rule it seemeth he would not have any negative propositions although found in Scripture to pertaine to faith Rogers You inferre that in your conclusion which is not in my grounds I say that faith is affirmation I doe not say that all that doth pertaine to Faith is affirmation I say that negations are no part of my faith you say that negations doe pertaine to faith Non facis elenchum you inferre not my proposition in your conclusion with a contradiction what you say is not contrary to my grounds for that may pertaine to faith which is not faith and that may pertaine to faith which is no part of faith as that may pertaine to Master Fisher which is not Master Fisher nor any part of Master Fisher The button of Master Fishers doublet doth pertaine to Master Fisher yet I may not say Master Fisher is a button or that this button is any part of Master Fisher A joyned stoole may pertaine to Master Fisher but I will not say Master Fisher is a joyn'd stoole The distinction of matters of faith out of Aquinas and others of that which belongs unto faith properly from that which belongs unto faith accidentally doth exclude those things which onely pertaine unto faith from being faith or any part of faith You know Master Fisher Aristot Zabarella that Propositiones per se habent essentialem connexionem Man is that which he is of himselfe properly and essentially a creature consisting of a humane body and a reasonable soule not that which is accidentall unto man as to be blacke or white to be a Musician to be a Carpenter to be a Fryer or a Priest a Jesuite or a Dominican These things are not man nor any part of man It doth not therefore follow that because negations pertaine to faith therefore they are faith or part of faith Your Argument from Scripture if I should grant your medium cannot inferre against my ground altering part of faith into that which pertaineth to faith Your Argument in forme will discover it selfe to be a fallacie All propositions found in Scripture pertaine to faith Some negative propositions are found in Scripture Ergo If you inferre against me your conclusion must be thus Negative propositions are faith or parts of faith This is no Syllogisme here are foure termes there is that in the conclusion which is not in the premisses but if you would have all propositions that are in Scripture to be matters of faith or parts or points of faith then I deny your major you know there are many propositions in Scripture delivered by wicked men yea some by the Devill himselfe As that which was spoken unto Eve you shall not die Whereas God told them they should die if they did eate of the forbidden fruit And shall these be parts of your faith will you beleeve the Devill when he speaketh against God But of this I have spoken more fully before Cap. 4. proving the contrary to this out of your own men Yet I will here adde some few reasons to shew that Negations or negative Propositions cannot be Articles of faith or Principles of faith Lib. 1. Poster c. 23. Aristotle doth prove by two Arguments that an affirmative proposition is better then a negative First because the affirmative is better knowne then the negative for the negative cannot be knowne without the affirmative but the affirmative may without the negative as the habit may be defined without privation but not privation without the habit as seeing may be defined without any mention of blindnesse but blindnesse cannot be defined without mention of seeing Secondly Affirmation doth speake of being Negation of not being but being is better then not being To the same effect in his bookes Lib. 2. c. 3. De Coelo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Affirmation is before privation He is the same man in his Metaphisicks where he putteth Negations inter entia rationis which have no being in themselves if no being how can they be principles in any Scicence much lesse in Divinitie It is a true note of your Zuarez upon the Metaphisicks that Mensura debet nota esse certa ut sit nota oportet ut entitatem habeat ut fit certa oportet ut in indivisibili consistat That cannot be knowne which hath not entitie reall entitie saith your Suarez when any Negation is knowne of necessitie we must first know that whereof it is a Negation Prima primae q. 72. 63 secunda secundae q. 79. 3. Andreas Vega Francisc Hist. Trid. Con p. 1. 179 In Metaph. â—5 c. 7. q. 6. Idem Suarez This is the Doctrine of your great Schooleman Aquinas He was one of your greatest Divines who said at your Councell of Trent that no true Negative hath in it selfe the cause of his truth but is so by the trutth of an affirmative Negations as negations nullam omninò dicunt entitatem sed solam absentiam ejus quod negatur they tell of no being but onely an absence of that which is denyed saith your Fonseca Seeing then that Propositions of faith are principles and principles cannot be proved by any thing that is before them or better knowne then they and that nothing can be known without reall being and that negations are proved by affirmations how can they be Propositions or principles of faith And lest you should wander in your Replie I will presse two Arguments out of your owne men Entia rationis non sunt principia in ulla scientia Suarez in his Metaphys in fine Negationes sunt entia rationis Ergo Negationes non sunt principia in ulla scientia praesertim in Theologia Principia fidei habent causam finalem Negationes non habent causam finalem Ergo Negationes non sunt principia fidei Propositions of faith are foundations and a foundation must be positive or it will beare nothing upon it go round about a building and say a thousand times over here is no stone and here is no stone and so all along you will never lay a foundation Shall the Mason by saying I will not lay this nor that foundation come and claime his wages Shall the Tyler by laying on no Tyle say that he hath covered the house or the Carpenter by squaring and joyning no Timber build the Walls The Articles of our faith are in the Apostles Creed all affirmative and positive there is not one Negation among them The question betweene us is about unwritten Traditions Purgatory Invocation of Saints Transubstantiation worshipping of Images and the rest before alleadged out of Paulus Secundus his Creed all which I deny and therefore are no Articles of my faith for no man would deny his owne faith All those we deny we lay no such foundation let them which have laid it maintaine it We are contented that Purgatory Transubstantiation
Verse Semper quotidiè sic jam nunc atque profectò To which another added Aedepol ecce quidem scilicet indè procul My Adversarie at the first made a short weake Answer to what I had written such as gave no satisfaction to his owne side for so Master Waterhouse who brought mee that Answer told mee Being afterwards called upon to make a more full and more satisfactorie Answer either by himselfe or some other of his fellowes made up this not so full as he should for hee passeth by more then halfe my grounds and Arguments with silence And that which hee hath answered is botched up with impertinencies and fallacies a great manie of those botches I have shewed before as Who doth not see I doe not see Master Rogers may grant If Master Rogers doe grant I see no reason why he should not grant c. And here to my grounds by which it seemeth hee would not To my first ground by which it seemeth to follow To my second ground as if there were not some points c. To my third ground and to the fourth As if an Anabaptist may judge it will be held so to be And to my fifth Hee may be yet further allowed to reject c. Here is neither granting nor denying nor distinguishing nor arguing but all is Seeming and As if it were all concurring to make his learning Sophistrie and himselfe a Sophister Arist in Elench 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sophistrie is seeming wisdome and a Sophister is hee that seeketh for gaine by seeming wisdome whereas there is no such matter and where hee seemeth to argue it is but the contentious discourse of a Sophister 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consisting of nothing but seeming probabilities as I have shewed in all instances which I have met with yet and so will in this My third ground was That what was no point of Faith in the Primitive Ages could be none afterwards ut suprà Vincentius Lirinensis Aquinas What saith hee to this doth hee grant it doth he distinguish doth he denie it No grant no distinction no direct deniall for that hee dares not least hee should denie that ancient Father and his great Schoolman yet hee saith something against it or rather maketh as if hee would Hee saith that some points were defined by Councels and so made necessary to be believed which before were not held necessary even by orthodox Fathers Ergo The Church may make new points or Articles of Faith His Argument and his Antecedent be both false his Antecedent is ambiguous for to believe may signifie an act either of humane Faith or religious divine Faith If hee understand believe in the first sense I grant his Antecedent viz. That wee are to give great credit unto the Decrees and Definitions of Generall Councels but yet inferior to that credit wee give unto the Word of God because he is Truth it selfe who cannot erre and they are man who may erre And therefore to take this viz That the Definitions of Councels are Articles of Faith thence to prove that wee have new Articles of Faith besides those of the Primitive Church is Petitio principii a begging of that for granted which he knowes wee denie Artic. 21. it is the Doctrine of our Church that Generall Councels may erre and that the Church ought not to inforce any thing to be believed for necessitie of salvation Whereas you say Artic. 20. the Decrees of Councels are held necessarie there is a two-fold necessitie of different degrees 1. Necessitas medii 2. Necessitas praecepti This later may belong to the Decrees of Councels not the former Here you might have remembred my distinction of 1. Doctrines of Faith 2. Doctrines of the Church 3. Doctrines of the Schoole Definitions of Councels are Church Doctrines not Doctrines of Faith and therefore have an inferiour necessitie without the knowledge whereof a man may be saved and thousands were saved before those Councels were heard of but no man can be saved without the Doctrines of Faith knowne and professed by himselfe if hee be in yeares of discretion or by his Parents and Sureties if hee be a child Whereas you say that those that refuse the Decrees of Councels are accounted Haereticks and take this for granted that so you might inferre an addition to Articles of Faith is the like begging of a Medium as the former you know wee doe not so define an Haereticke Iuel in his view of a seditious Bull. for with us hee is an Haereticke who denieth the Articles of the Christian Faith and so hee is defined by the most learned of your side holding that Haeresie doth directly and principally dissent from the Articles of Faith So Aquinas That Haeresie is opposite to Faith So Widrington a Priest of your owne Praefat. ante respond Apol. pro jure Princ. But with you and your Pope all things are Haeresies which you like not as Paul the second did pronounce them Haereticks Platina in vita Pauli ◠who should from that time forward in earnest or in jest mention the name of Academic did I thinke this Decree of your Pope were of force being an Oxford man I should be very sory for my selfe and others who in our oracles doe stile our Auditors by no name more frequently then Academici If you had ever thought your Answer should have beene read you would never have written upon the top of your Leaves Master Rogers his most weake grounds where there is no mention made of his grounds and Most weake Arguments where you make no answer at all to my Arguments and give no instance to those Arguments which cannot be answered without instances nor passed by many Arguments and grounds without any mention of them and those you mention to passe them over with It seemeth to the first Seemeth to the second As if to the third As if to the fourth Hee may be yet further allowed to the fift whereof I am next to speake Fisher And fourthly that the Anabaptist Faith is that which is contained in Scripture and the ancient Creeds and the Anabaptists Church is a societie of men which professeth the Faith contained in Scripture and the ancient Creeds as if an Anabaptist may be judge it will be held so to be Rogers I will grant that the Anabaptist is a member of the visible Church Ecclesia verae quamvis non sanae and that Church to have beene alwaies in Ages whereof hee is a member yea Membrum verum quamvis non sanum a true member though a diseased as a goutie foot of a man that is otherwise in health and sixtie or seventie yeares old is a true member though not a sound member of that body which in all other parts is sound and this foot thus gouty though it became gouty but within a few daies before may truly say that that body whereof it is a member hath beene 10 20 30 40 70 yeares the very same body which now
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
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
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