Heresies did arise and with different names did end avour to teare in peices and devide Christ his dove and his queene or spouse was it not reason that the true Apostolicall Church should be called by her syrname of Catholicke thereby to discerne and distinguish her incorrupted unitie least that Vnspotted Virgin by other mens errors and mistaking might be devided u Reply pag. 6â c. What have we here for the unspotted Roman Church Here is nothing to exempt her from present staines or after pollutions That there was a Catholicke Church and not âespotted with the impurities of the auncient Herâticks who doth deny yet this doth not prove Augustine over-shot in his retractation or the Iesuite justified in âââ tearme Now as if hee had performed what he made us expect âe swels Might not a man now bee bold to bee tryed by the judgment of our Answerers owne conscience whether hee had any reason to except against me for tearming the ãâã Catholicke Roman Church unspotted x Reply pag. ââ And indiscreet man may be bould in an arme of flesh a âeed of Egypt a broken tooth but vainely and to his losse The most learned Answerers Conscience may for any thing you have said commiserate your confidence not justifie it unlesse you would have him to be convicted with forged words and bare names When as I have saith the Iesuite this generall warrant from the holy Fathers and Doctours of this Primitive times for the same y Reply pag. 67 The most learned Answerer by excepting at your unspotted Church did not charge the âniversall built upon the rocke confessed by Peter with desperate Heresie Particular members and Churches which have outwardly professed Christ have fallen into Heresie so may Rome z Frauciscus Picus Theo. 13 Iuxta Theoso gorumquotuâdam Iuris Interpretum aliquorum dogmata fieri possetut Romana Ecclesia quae particularis Ecclesia est contra universalem distincta infide aberraret but that the Catholick Church should forsake the foundation of faith this he well knew would crosse Christs promise and make the gates of Hell prevaile against his Church It would then be no rock upon which the Church was builded but the sand subject to wind weather The Iesuite in his Challenge did not stile the auncient Catholick Church which he here tearmeth Roman but the primitive Church of Rome unspotted in this sense it is there acknowledged by himselfe that the ancient Roman is by us confessed to be unspotted so that what he hath produced for their Catholick exemption from Heresie is nothing to his purpose But he proceedes in his Oratory The which being maturely pondered of thee Christian Reader thou mayest easily perceive how farre unlike our Answeters Church is unto that of the primitive confessed best times notwithstanding that he seemeth to claime so great affinitie therewith But wherein is this dissimilitude unliâenes In regard the Roman Church being head of all other Churches in earth c. thereupon rightly called the Vniversall or Catholick Church c is blessed with the prerogative of an inâincible perpetuity of an unspotted faith c. But our Adversaries Church saith the Iesuit forasmuch as by them it is confessed to want this infallible rule of faith to be lyable to error cannot with reason challenge unto it self the name of an unspotted Church therefore is rightly concluded to have no affiâity or aliance with the true ancient catholick Church at al a Reply pag. 67 and 68. In answer to this we have told the Iesuit truly that the Roman Church is so far from being the head over all other churches that for all the Iesuits proofs if it were utterly destroyed the Catholick Church would not faile 2ly that in no sense the Roman Church can be truly called Catholick or Vniversall And here Godwilling I will shew that no Church in the world hath beene more besmeared with spots staines even of misbeliefe then the Roman in her successioÌ And if an heretical Pope can bespot the primitive church of Rome with heresy which indeed we beleive not though Papists must not deny the same it will appeare that the Primitive Church of Rome was not blessed with the Prerogative of an invincible perpetuity of unspotted faith And first if we believe their owne Rhenanus Pope Zephsrinus was defiled with spots of misbeleife Montanizing which is warranted by Tertullians testimony that was well acquainted with the Favourers of Montanus b Bellarm. de Rom Pont. l. 4. c. 8. Zepherinus Victoris successor videtur haeresim Montani approbasse Scribit enim Tertullianus in libro contra Praxeam Romanum Pontificem agnoscentem prophetias Montani ex eâ agnitione pacem Ecclesijs Asiae Phrygiae inferentem à Praxea fuisse persuasum literas pacis revocare quas jam emiserat Constat autem ex historijâ to tempore Zepherinum fuisse Romae Pontificem Quare Rhenanus in annotationibus ad Tertâllianum ponit hoc loco in margine Episcopus Romanus Montanizat Neque dici potest eo tempore nondum fuisse damnatam ab Ecclesia haeresim Montani Nam ut ibidem Tertullianus dicit Praâeas persuasit Pontifici revocare literas pacis eâ praecipârè ratione quia praedecessores ejus haeresim illam antea damnavissent neither hath Bellarmine any better shift to excuse this Pope then by telling us as if a Montanist knew not a Montanist that faith is not to be given to Tertullian c Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 8. Respondeo non esse omnino fidem habendam Tertulliano in hac parte quandoquidem ipse Montanista erat Some hundred yeares after we finde an other bespotted Pope Marcellinus acknowledged for an Idolater by Câsterus d Costerus Enchirid. c. 3. p. 137. Fatemur siquidem ãâã posse ut Petri successor Idola eolat quod beatum Marcellinum fecisse aiunt Bellarmine e Bellarm recognit l. de ãâã Pont. p. 20. Concessimus S. Marcellinum Idolââ sacriââcasse and reported by a Councell of their friends making Sinâessa f Concil Sinuessanum Ecce introierunt testes 14. qui dicebant se Marcellinum vidisse in temple Veâta ãâã thuâificantem Ibid. In sinu autem trecenrorum Episcoporum caputeinere convolutum Marcellinus Episcopus urbis Romae voce clarâ ãâã dicebat Peccavi coram vobis non possum in ordine sacerdotum esse quoniam ãâã me corrupit auro Subscripserunt autem in ejus damnationem damnaverunt âââ exâââ civitatem by Pope Nicholas the first g Nicholaus â ad Michael Imperator Epist â Tempore Dioclesiam Maximiani Augustorum Marcellinus Episcopus urbiâ Romae adeo ãâã est à Paganis ut in tempâââ eorum ingressus grana thuris super ãâã ãâã Cujus nei gratia collecto numerosorum Concilio Episcoporum inquisitione facta hoc se idem Pontifex egisse confessus est Platina h Platina de vita
of Infants dying before Baptisme because they are sprung from faithfull parents and froÌ the virtue of the Eucharist received by the mother after conceptioÌ to sanctify the child in the womb shâlbe ãâã k Zag Zab. ibid. Thom à Iesu lib. 7. pa. 1. cap 8. cit per cundem 5. They baptize themselves every yeare vpon the Epiphany as the Muscovites in memorial of Christs Baptisme whom they thought to be baptized as that day l Zag Zab. ibid eit per cundem 6. The Egyptians have a custome to conferre holy Orders to Infants m Thomâ a Iesu lib. 7. pa. 1. cap. 5. cit per cundem 7. They deny all efficacy to Baptisme vnlesse celebrated in the Church by the Preist notwithstanding any necessity whatsoever neither doe they baptizâ till the fourtieth day though the child dye without Baptisme n Tho. à Iesu ibid. cit per cundem I could name the Iesuit many moââ but if he can shew the person time place by whom when where these points received birth with their opposers by demonstrable authority not by naked grounds we will spare him the rest confesse he may with good reason aske the question he doth and require our answere to it But till then let him not expect that from an other which the whole Roman Inquisition cannot discover vnto vs in the like kinde Yet for the present the Iesuite hath performed his promise as he supposeth in some particulars pointed out by himself First concerning the defection of the Greeke Church which indeed comprehendeth all the rest by you named o Reply pag. 9. c. Here we have the Iesuite myred in his first entrance For what hath he tu doe with generals Saphista versatur in generalibuâ he followeth not his answerer but forsakes him here Particulars are demaunded like a false Steward the Iesuite delivereth all in grosse fearing his prejudice if hee submit to a strict particular accompt All that he laboureth to prove here are two things First the beginning of the Greek Churches defection from the Roman which was not desired at his hands Secondly the beginning of severall errours which shal be observed in their place For the first the defection of Paulus Samosatanus Macedonius Nestoriuâ c. was not from the Roman but the Greeke a principall member of the Catholick Church Secondly the Greek Church did not fall with theÌ but condemâed theÌ neither doe they adhere to them or their doctrine at this day That there are in the East which are named from some of those condemned Hereticks yet follow not their doctrine p Onuphr in Iul 3. Uerum hie Nestoriani nomen potius Nestorij haeretici quam errores retinuisse mihi videntur c. there is no question But that the doctrine of those Hereticks is taught by the Greek Church is vtterly vntrue neither dare the Iesuite say it is althogh by his obscure generalities he wold insinuat that in what those differed froÌ the Roman church these close with theÌ And for the other several defectioÌs as he calleth theÌ thogh it were but ajust flight froÌ their tyranny he cannot tel how many they were but stiles them twelve or there abouts But to what purpose ãâã ãâã these ãâã vnlesse he shew vs the ãâã ãâã ãâã the ãâã by ãâã they were made And this will not ãâã ãâã ââ shew vnto vs what errour every ãâ¦ã in with ââ for otherwise his ãâã ãâã ãâã have ãâã ãâã then imployed to none âffect Whereas he maketh them oppressed by the Turke in regard of their ãâã from ãâã it ãâã Iesuites fancie I pray GOD ãâã theââ other ãâã ãâã ãâã separation they cast off ãâã ãâã though noâ all their slavery âut if it be ãâã ââ ãâã at the cause of their oppression which is not ãâã âaith where ãâã notwithstanding their persequââion they still ãâã but their persons many more probable grounds may be given of Gods putting them to this ãâã then this assigned by Iesuite vnlesse you have relation to politicke and worldly prudencyes of that Church and not to crymes that bring downe Gods judgments vpon them For we know some things ãâã not altogetheâ to be approved of but idolatrous as Image-worship are practised amongst them They deny indeed that which is practised by you in regard of the manner even Statues of stone or Marble and yet imbrace with an idolatrous love paper and pâinted representations This their sinne is not the least causer of Gods iudgment vpon them as we may coniecture from the IX of the Râvelation if Gods visiting them may bee imputed to their sinne and not to his secret will who tryeth his owne by affliction as the Church of the Iewes in Egypt and the Primitive in her sincereââ perfections Thirdly âs concerning the severall ãâã few in comparison wherein the Greek Church aâ this day dissenteth from the Roman their beginning and contradiction iâ noterious q Reply pag. ââ Here the Iesuite by way of preface makes the Greeke Church at this day to vary from the ãâã in regard of vs for so I conceive he desires to be vnderstood âut in a few points which is ãâã ãâã ãâã for they differ at thisday from them in most points that we ãâã them for So that I doubt not but they received scardall from your corruption which because yoââ pride would not âure they left you ãâã ââ your ãâã and adhered to thâ ãâã doctrine which ãâã ãâã every wheâ received at all times ãâã in the Catholicke Church And although they ãâã the ãâã of ãâã yet some of your owne r See before thinke their errour therein to be onely in the ãâã of expressing ãâã ãâã and not in the substance of doctrine it selfe And ãâã whereas he saith that their begiâning ãâã ãâã ãâã iâ ãâã I will beleive him when he hath answered those points which I have lay ãâã before for what he hath done by his owne election and choyce will declare vnto vs what great performance we may expect ââ his hands when an other may have the liberty to point out his taske And first he beginneth with their denyall of subjectionââ the Roman Sea c. This is the first ãâã and agreat one and as he tells vs was begââ by Iohn of Constantinople and he there âpon severally contradected by Gregory the great and by Pelagius in his epistle c. Å¿ Reply pag. ââ Here are two ãâã fashoodâ by this Iesuite in this particular supposed and ãâã First that ãâã ages before ãâã of Constantinople his ãâã the Bishop of ãâã ãâã in their sence was vniversally acknowledged Secondly that this controversie betwiââ ãâã Gregory was about the denyall of Papall ãâã âoth which shal be ãâã to be notoriously vntrue For the first ãâã the Iesuite orderly proceeded he should have proved the Roman Bishop the Monarch of the Church by vniversall confent before hee should have questioned the Greeke Church for the
sacred Scripture did burst forth of those libraries wherein it was ecclipsed and the most lucide starres the auncient Fathers waited upon that originall light then many of these poore meteors and fained appearances were quickely obscured and despised of some of your owne So that your Dilemma proves but a childish florish For although it is most true that you have done as much as you durst to pretend Fathers make Fathers detract from Fathers adde to Fathers forging clipping washing cankering them yet these things being detected and casheered the Fathers are restored to their authoritie they formerly had although they are not thought fit to bee used as a rule against those Hereticks that have not spared in this manner to abuse their writings Againe saith the Iesuite you have given us flatlie once to understand that the Scripture was the rocke upon which alone you build your faith and from which no sleight that wee could devise should ever drawe you and therefore you bade us to our face alledge what authoritie we list without Scripture and it could not suffice How is the winde now changed how come you now to falsifie this your former resolution m Reply pag. 49 Did ever any Iesuite trifle in this manner and speake more inconsequent The Scripture is the rocke upon which alone he will build his faith no authoritie can suffice without Scripture therefore the winde is changed hee falsifies his former resolution Doth not this rationall deserve to censure others for false Logicke that pleads with such a shape of reason himselfe The Iesuite promised in his Challenge to produce good and certaine grounds out of the sacred Scriptures if the Fathers authoritie will not suffice Did he cast off their rock of Fathers because he promised Scriptures I thinke hee will not acknowledge it and why should he vainely heere dreame that the Scriptures are rejected by the most reverend the Lord Primate when to stoppe the Iesuites boasting out of a well grounded confidence in the goodnes of his cause he will not in this place stand upon his right Besides let the Iesuite shew me the generall consent of Fathers in a matter of faith without the Scriptures if hee be able If he cannot his thoughts are confused when hee dreamed of their authoritie without Scripture if hee say he will let him produce them for surely it is hard to bee beleived Furthermore when the Lawyers urge Constantines denation for Papall possession I aske the Iesuite upon what authoritie he would build his title whether upon the donation it selfe or the Lawyers interpreting it If the Donation be sufficient why not the Scriptures If the interpreters must be added yet this is not to take away the power of the Charter Nay if they be added ãâã necessary testimonie the Charter were nothing without the Lawyers What followeth in the Iesuite hath received Answere in the fift Section only here he will not be perswaded that he chooseth his owne weapons n Reply pag. 49 but let the Reader judge for bibling in his judgment is but babling it is no other then fencing to fight with Scriptures and to appeale to sole Scripture is but to agree with auncient Heretickes So that Scriptures are none of his armorie and if the Fathers bee rejected also what remaineth further but ipse dixit assisted with pretended miracles lying wonders But let them be whose weapons they will Hee telleth us that hee will use them and the first encounter shal be concerning the dignity and preheminencie of the Church of Rome o Reply ibid. Indeed this is that fruitfull article of Faith that hath got all the new articles of the new Romane Creed This is the breast that nourisheth them that gives them strength The occasion wherefore he beginnes here is for as much as our Answerer taketh his first exception against him for styling all the auncient Doctors and martyrs of the Church universall with the name of the Saints and Fathers of the Primitive Church of Rome though he alledgeth heerein no more against me saith the Iesuite but this one bare Interrogaterie out of Albertus Pighius Who did ever yet by the Roman Church understand the universall Church p Reply pag. 49 What needes further proofe If neither the whole Roman Church neither your whole Roman world in the judgment of Albertus Pighius did ever take the Romane Church for the Church Vniversall is not this enough to lash the Iesuite for confounding Vrbem Orbem and mingling Heaven and earth together But he will take of Pighius by a Distinction If saith he the Roman Church be taken as it comprehendeth onely that Cleargie which maketh but one particular Bishoprick Diaces in the citie of Rome abstracting from that relation which it hath unto all other Christian Churches as the head unto the members then I say with Pighius who speaketh of it onely in this sense that no man ever by the Church of Rome did understand the Vniversall Church But if it bee taken as it is the Mother Church begunne in S. Peter under Christ and miraculously continued those of each one of the rest of the Apostles fayling by due succession of lawfull Bishops having a relation to all other Christian Churches as the head to the members then doe I say that it may rightly bee stiled with the name of the Vniversall Church And that all other Churches are to be accounted Catholick no further then they be linked in a subordinate obeysance thereunto q Reâââ pâg ââ Here are many prettie things By this meanes the Church of Rome the Mother must bee borne after the daughter for many particular Churches had birth before Rome was a Church or the Roman Inhabitants received the Faith of Christ Secondly that the Catholicke Church must be in a subordinate obeysance to the Church of Rome before there was any Church there Besides the Catholick Church was never enclosed in any other place but the world never restrained to any other habitation To chaine it âo any head out of Heaven or to confine it to any particular place on Earth were to make it schismaticall This Church concludes all Saints Noah's Arke was heere a Temple Christ delighted with this Church as in the Canticles before Rome was Rome or a Pontifex governed therein Some are in Heaven that never yeelded obedience to this Church or heard of Rome And it is more then probable some are in hell that were tearmed Holinesse it selfe whilst they remained in this Catholick here But what the Iesuite hath to make this Roman Church the Catholicke and mother of all other Churches in the next Section we shall examine SECT VIII THis Iesuite after hee hath obtained from the most learned Primate ex gratiâ libertie in his owne challenge to chuse his owne weapon would first use it to prove that The Auncient Fathers of the first Ages acknowledged the Roman Church to bee the head of all other Churches a Reply pag 40 I had thought
hath he thaâââ not concludent from the Scripture Not one unlesse you suppose that he keeps them as concealements yet he thinkes he doth something when he tels us from Hierome that the scriptures consist not in reading but in the true understanding of their sence meaning that by an evill interpretatioÌ the Gospell is no more the word of God but the word of man yea which is worse the word of the Divell i Reply ibid. As if this were not the matter that we complaine of that Popes will interpret as they please presume to say this shal be the sence of the Holy Ghost But to fit himselfe for performance of what he hath undertakes he saith that there be âââ three meanes or wayes by which a Conclusion deduced from the scripture may be pretended to be infallible k Reply pag. 97 But what is this to the foundation of Faith I hope every infallible proposition is not of such necessary beleife that a maâ must beleive it on paine of damnation You told us but ãâã that your new Creed was propounded onely to Scholleâs and cheifely unto such as are to receive promotions unto Scholasticall or Ecclosiasticall dignity l Reply pag. 98 what are all lay-men Clerks or is the nature of your faith changed Now the Iesuite nameth his three onely meanes the first humane discourse the second Private inspiration the third the authority of some externe meane ordained by GOD betwixt the Scripture and us c m Reply pag. 97 To avoyde the two first he makes a long discourse but he fights with his owne shadow for wee make not the Scripture of private interpretation as being against the Apostles rule * 2 Pet. 1. 20. neither doe we make our reason the onely Inquisitor to finde out the sence of Scripture knowing that the carnall man perceiveth noâ the the things that are of GOD Yet this we say that reason being assisted by grace becomes a divine instrument whereby the scriptures may be used to saving knowledge and to finde out the mysteries of our Faith Now seeing that neither humane discourse saith the Iesuite ãâ¦ã by God betwixt the Scripture and ââ such as is the authority of the Magistrate ãâ¦ã the Princes law and the people that it ãâã ãâã ãâã and propound unto us all decisions and ãâã whatsoever Reply pag. 97 The Iesuite shall never finde that there is any such exterââ infallible means ãâã by GOD betwixt the Scripture and ââ to ãâã ãâã and propound unto us all decisions and conclusions whatsoever that we are bound to beleive ãâã ãâã of ãâã Neither when they come to point it out are they agreed who it is For sometime it is the generall and uniforme consent of auncient Fathers that is the assured Touch-stone to try all controversies betwixt us o See the Iesuites Epistle to the King and this generall consent may consist of ãâ¦ã fathers p Reply pag. 94 âââ sometimes of fewer as in ãâã of the Commandements and leaving out the Second they cannot find the one halfe to reckon them after that sortâ sometime the practise of the Church sometime the rule of Faith sometime the Councels interpretations and sometime all must vanish and that which the Head determineth is a knowne truth that which the Head condemneth is a knowne error q Hart colloque cum Rainolds pag. 44. Now which of all these are infallible For Consent of fathers Cajetan will tell us that God hath not tyed the exposition of the Scriptures to the sence of the Fathers and therefore he resolves to follow a new sence agreeable to the Text. ãâã à ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã alienus though it be repugnant to the streame of the sacred Doctors t Cajetan in Prooem comment in Genes In like manner Andradius Andradius Defens Triden Fid. l. 2. pag. âââ Non ãâã debentur eorum explicationibus addicti alligarâ quin sit ãâã omnibus illis ãâã ãâã quid Dei praesidijs adjuti explicando valeamus sensum alium ãâã etiam dissimilem afferre atque noris explicationibus ãâã Ecclesiae sanctorum ãâã fidem atque pietatem illustraââ For the practise of the Church if they meane the Roman it is no good direction in regard as we have shewed before it is very subject to varietie as in the point of Childrens receiving of the Eucharist t See before pag. 25. â See before pag. 10â and in the point of Iudges and the like all which are full of uncertainty For their rule of faith we see that this may be in the Roman Church enlarged extended yea we have wits in the Church of Rome that can censure it making it in some considerations standalous hereticall x Censura Symboli Apostolorum censur ar 3. Tota Haec propositio equivocatione laâorat quae inducere potest in haeresim propter ambiguas particulas de ex quia ordinaria de habitudinem importat principij componentis c. Ideo propositio in hoc sensu falsa est scandalosa haeretica ãâã y Censur ar 4. Haec propositio ambigua est aliquo sensu haeretica Periculosa est propositio ãâã obrium illum sensum intellectâ quasâ diviniâas aliquid passa aut âââtua fuctit non solum haeretica est sed etiam impis â blasphema deceitfull z Censur ar 2. Tota haec propositio captiosa est ââllax blasphemous z See before lit erroneous See hereafter lit â false c See before lit â dangerous d See before lit 7. absurd Censura ar 9. Absurda ambiguous See before lit â contrary to the word of GOD the common sence of the Fathers and of the universall Church g Censura ar 7. Propositio ãâã est ãâã falsa erronea nec non verbo Dei communi Patrum totiusque Ecclesia sensui contraria â Wadding Legat. Phil. 3. Sect. 2. orat 9. § 9. Pro Petro in fide Petrâ succedentibus non pjo Concilio oravit exoravit Adversus hoâ adversus Ecclesiam in Petro in illisque fundatam non adversus Concilium dixit infernum non praevalituram ãâã âoncilia errâsse viderimus quando à suo capitâ à quo ãâã sanctius veritatis influentia recesserant vel dissenâârânt Non âââbuit ãâã ãâã âem Pontifici sed à Pontifice habet Concilitum ut sit ratum ac ãâã For Councels interpretations we shall have as much to doe for to finde out the sence of a Councell as of the Scripture it selfe Besides how many weake particulars may suspend a Councell from her pretended infallible authoritie as if not rightly called rightly headed c So that there remaines none but the Pope for whom Christ prayed It is he that gives authoritie to a Councell not the Councell to him But if this Lord that would be of our conferences prove a Lord of Mis-rule where then shall we
observed if the Truth were not before knowne The declaration doth not make it Faith but sheweth that the faithfull doe adhere unto it as revealed by God for if the truth were not there the declaration of it were an Hersie or error at least Neither doth hee produce any thing afterwards to make the Church the rule of faith Whereas he tels us that S. Augustine writing to S. Hierome requesteth him that setting downe the Catalogue of Heretickes he would joyntly expresse in what points they had beene condemned by Catholicke authoritie and againe in his Preface to the above mentioned Catalogue of Heresies hee mentioneth himselfe what the Church holdeth against such Heresies without making any mention of the authority of Scripture z Reply p. 10. I thinke the Iesuite would have a Church embracing heresie What doth the Churches adherence to truth make her the Iudge or rule of it and because Catholicke authority condemneth Herefie must therefore the contrary truth have its life from the declaration thereof Faith must then follow the Church not leade it The Iesuit may conceive that this Father meanes not by the Churches authority a power inherent in their Roman Apollo excluding all other assistance but a lawfull determination according to the Scriptures by the Bishops Preists of the Catholick Church For otherwise he must acknowledge in the Church such a domination as was amongst the Gentiles Luke 22. But sure it is that S. Augustine dreamed no more of your Iudge then the blessed Apostle S. Paul who in the enumeration of the divers degrees of the ministery Ephes 1111. v. 11. left him out Besides the Iesuite by Apostolicall directions in matters that concerne faith may see a Rule not a Iudge pointed out as having authority to guide us Phil. 3. 16. Gal. 6. 16. by which rule as the Church receiveth strength so limitation Finally saith the Iesuite observe how all the points layde down by me in my demand being declared by the Catholicke Church for articles of faith are of necessity to be beleived and held for such the contrary for dâââable Heresie Reply p. 104 What the Iesuite doth say for the expresse declaration of all his points of Faith wil be examined in their severall places here an induction he brings us a conclusion whereby he would prove that the onely Rule to know a point of faith from an indifferent opinion in Religion is the declared determined judgment of the Church by which all the points laid down in his demand being propounded unto them for such must of necessity be accounted cheife articles of Catholick beleife b Reply p. 105. 106. But from whence the Iesuite draweth this conclusion I cannot see for if the Church command by the expresse Scripture and sense agreed on in all ages the Church then doth judge at least with undependant authority but direct calling for obedience to a former judgment if it decree in points doubtfull the Churches declaration can bind us to peace and externall obedience but here no infallible judge is allowed to make matters that were doubtfull to be of faith or to create from uncertainties a new Creed That the Church by her particular ministers and body representative hath applied the Scriptures to severall heresies thereby detected condemned them we deny not but will this make every point decreed by a Councell wilfully from their owne ends without direction or limitation to be a cheife article of Faith Your Quartadecimani were convinced of heresie by the Scripture as Alphonsus de Castro telleth us c Alphons de Castro advers Haeâ l. 12. de Pascha Istorum ergo sententia inde convincitur haerescos quòd supra in titulo de lege oâtendimus esse hâresim asserere caeremonias judicia legis veteris obligare tempore legis evangelicae Nam Paulus reprehendens Galats co quod caeremonias legis observandas putaâent inter alia dicit Dies observatis menses tempora annos but where by the naked declaratioÌ of Pope Victor without this rule Neither did he excommunicate all the Bishops of Asia in this cause if Alphonsus speake truth but they escaped it by Irenâus his chyding of your Pope d Idem ibid. Fâcisset nisi illum Iraeneus ob hoc redarguisset Here you see that these hereticks of the East after the Pope had condemned them had one Catholick Bishop pleading for them In like manner the Novatians e Alphons de Castro adver haer l. 12. de ââân haeâ 3 Cum non sit alia res pluries apertius in sacris condicibus pâodita quà m misâricordia quam Deus erga peccatorâs maxime poenitentes exercet illis peccatorum suorum indulgentiam tribuens might be condeÌned as the Arians f Socrates Hist Eccles l. 1. c. 7. Evangelici enim Apostolici libri nâânon antiquorum Prophetarum ora cula planè instruunt nos inquit Constantinus Imperator in Nicaea Synodo sensu numinis Proinde hostili politâ discordiâ sumaââus ex dictis divini Spiritus explicationes quaestionum Haec his similia memorabat ille velut amans paterni nominis filius sacerdoâibus tanquam patribuâ cupions confiteri Apostolicorum dogmatum unitatem Quibus assensus maximae conventus partis acceââit Macedonians g Theodoret. Hist Eccles l. 5. c. 9. Iam enim semel formam protulimus ut qui se Christianum profiteatur server âa quae ab Apostolis tradita sunt quum dicat Sanctus Paâlus Si quis vobis annunciat aliud quam accepistis anathema esto Nestorians h Epistola Cyrilli Synodi ad Nestorium tom 1. Act. Concil Ephes Occum c. 14 Haec tenere haec sapere cum à sanctis Apostolis Evangelistis tum ab universa quoque sacra divina Scriptura tum ex veraci denique sanctorum patrum confessione edocti sumus Eâtich i Euagrius Histor Eccles l. 2. c. 4. Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum confitemur c. siâut antiquitùs Prophetae de âo postille ipse Christus nos docâât idem ipsum nobis Patrum Symbolum tradidit Pelagians k Concil Milevit c. 2. the Monothelites l Concil Constant Vniversale VI. Act. 1. 2. Propositis in medio Sanctis intemeratis Evangelijs but was this done by the judgement of the Church onely and absolutely surely no but by the Scriptures And it is more then cleare that the reason why you distast the Scriptures is as Clemens Alexandrinus observeth because you hold not the rule of faith Clemens Alexandr Stromat l. 7. Necesse est enim labi in maximis cos qui res maximas aggrediuâtur nisâ regâlam veritatis ab ipsa veritate acceptam tenuârint Qui autem sânt ejâsmoâi ut qui à recta via excideâint meritò etiam falluntur in pluâimis singularibus propterea quòd non habeant verorum âalsoâum judicium planâ exercitatum