mentioned by Plutarch which hath a body like a sword but wants a heart they had at least in the opinion of some a shew of strength and sharpnesse but inwardly had no power Spirit or vigour And that all their specious shewes of purity Reformation and Evangelicall truth were but like a shallow brook or plash of water wherein we may discern the Sun or moone and stars with the whole face of heaven as if it were as deep as heaven is high when if we but sound it with our little finger we pierce it through even to the earth So their pretences of the pure Word of God heavenly truth and nothing but the truth as if like Prometheus they had fetch'd it themselves from heaven being fathomed I found no deeper than the shallow conceits of private heads And that like Micol they had sent away David and laid an Image in his place 1 Kings 19. they had renounced the true and living Word of God which is the true sense thereof and laid an image of their owne fancy drest in the same letter in the room thereof and so were though not of Saints and Images which they ought yet worshippers of their owne imaginations which they ought not as being a high Idolatry § 8. These these are the motives which have inclined me to believe that the Church of England and all other Protestant Churches are guilty both of Heresie and Schisme two sinnes of highest nature the one against God the other against our neighbour the one against faith the other against charity by denying their beliefe to doctrines revealed by God the supreme Author and proposed by the Catholique Church the supreme witnesse of divine truth and by rending the seamlesse coat of Christ separating from the Communion of his Church and that as some of their most learned say for things not fundamentall and what can be more imprudent than for an unfundamentall error to commit a fundamentall sinne And such it is to separate from the true Church as the learned amongst them confesse the Church of Rome to be And as the pretended errors for which they did separate they confesse were not fundamentall so for ought they know for they confesse that the judgement of their Church may erre they were no errors at all and so again for ought they know they have not reformed but deformed themselves and are gone out of Gods blessing as we say into the warm Sun What madesse it is to make or continue a separation from a true Church so acknowledged by all Christians upon pretences not accounted true by any but themselves and nor certainly known to be true so much as by themselves And as S. Augustine de unit Eccles c. 3. argues against the Donatists If both sides were true they had no cause to separate and to fly from those whom they had in possession If both false there was no cause of separation that they should fly from those who were no more faulty than themselves If our doctrines are true and theirs false there was no cause of their separation because they ought rather to have amended themselves and continued in unity and if ours are false and theirs true there was no cause of their separation because they ought not to have forsaken the innocent world to whom either they would not or they could not demonstrate their truth Nor can it excuse them to say that such or such things are against their conscience for as much as they ought to regulate their consciences by the Word of God in the mouth of the Church not of themselves otherwise contentious and self-will'd Spirits will never want this plea to separate from the Church and so to serve God with their Will-worship and not to demand of the Church that she make her conscience stoope to a compliance with theirs which is insolent and unreasonable 'T is true that he that doth any thing against his conscience sins so also if he do not that which he is commanded he sins therefore to reconcile this conflict of conscience men may and must though it go against the grain of their private judgement submit themselves by an implicite faith to the Church by believing her to be wiser than themselves and so believing what she saith to be true Otherwise this conscience would be a plea for all disobedience and impiety when wicked men might say that they could not be perswaded in their conscience that the things they were commanded to believe or do were good but rather the contrary were so and therefore they would do them Thus erroneous men may think it lawfull to commit murder or adultery as all Rebells do the one and Familists and Adamites the other And we see that Protestants who make conscience their Plea against the Church of Rome and a ground of Separation will not admit this from others that are under their command The legall Protestants of England would not permit any man under pretence of conscience to refuse the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy but thought all men bound to submit their beliefes therein to them And now the Reformers of the reformed who heretofore complained of it as an Egyptian burden to have any thing imposed on them against their conscience make no scruple to impose upon other mens consciences in their oaths Protestations and Covenants of conspiracy and Rebellion against their lawfull Prince and of believing a Religion not only now in Being but whatsoever hereafter shall be by them contrived nor will they suffer any mans tendernesse of conscience to be a ground for the separation of his obedience So that the separation of all Protestants from the Church of Rome under pretence of conscience as it hath no ground of truth so hath it not either of prudence or justice § 9. And if the Protestants especially the Chilling worthians will be as they pretend the servants of reason and follow her whither she shall guide them I cannot see how they can avoid coming to the Catholique Roman Church For seeing that according to them there is no infallible certainty of the truth of any point of Faith for if there be so it is in their fundamentalls yet seeing they have no infallible knowledge what those fundamentalls are they must needs slide back againe to their former universall uncertainty all the assurance they have in matter of religion can be but probable Now Aristotle the great Master of reason gives this rule of probability That saith he is probable which seems so to all or to the most or to the most wise and amongst them to all or to the most or to the most famous and eminent which rule is so consonant to reason as I think no reasonable creature will deny it Nor can any Protestant except pride and ignorance shut the doore of his confession deny that this rule of probability amongst all sorts of Christians is applyable only to the Roman Catholique Church there having been infinitely more and more wise and learned people
being once evident to the world are by the worlds full report declared unto us which is a morall infallibility So that if we have not a Metaphysicall or Mathematicall infallibility of the truth of Miracles yet we have a Physicall and morall infallibilitie as much as we have of any thing we either hear or see Nor doth this Physicall evidence take away the merit of faith because this evidence not being altogether and in the highest degree infallible in it self for our senses may somtimes be deceived it is not sufficient to conquer the naturall obscurity darknesse and seeming falshood of things to be believed upon the testimony of those miracles For the mystery of the Trinity of the Incarnation Reall presence and the like seem as far above the reach of reason as any Miracle can seem evident to sense hence when faith is proposed by Miracles there ariseth a conflict betwixt the seeming evidence of the Miracles and the seeming falshood and darknesse of Catholique Doctrine against which obscurity a man cannot get the victory by the sole evidence of miracles except he be inwardly assisted by the light of Gods Spirit moving him by pious affection to cleave to the Doctrine which is by so cleer testimony proved to be his Word Even as a man shut up in a chamber with two lights whereof the one makes the wall seem white the other blew cannot be firmly assured what colour it is untill day-light enter and obscuring both those lights discover the truth so a man looking upon Christian Doctrines by the light of miracles done to prove them will be moved to judge them to be truth but looking upon them through the evidence of their seeming impossibilities unto reason they will seem false nor will he be able firmly to resolve for the side of faith untill the light of divine grace enter into his heart making him prefer through pious reverence to God the so-proposed authority of his Word before the seeming impossibility to mans reason CHAP. VII That Catholique Tradition is the onely firm foundation and motive to induce us to beleeve that the Apostles received their doctrine from Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ from God the Father And what are the meanes by which this doctrine is derived downe to us § 1. AS Catholique Tradition is infallible in it self so is it most necessary for us there being no other certaine testimony to any prudent man no firme ground or motive to believe that the Primitive Church received her doctrine from the Apostles the Apostles from Christ Christ from God nor no way to bring it downe from those times to these but only the Tradition of the Church For we may observe three properties of the doctrine of faith to be true to be revealed of God to be preached and delivered by the Apostles The highest ground by which a man is persuaded that his faith is true is the authority of God speaking and revealing it the highest proof by which a man is assured that his faith is revealed is the authority of Christ and his Apostles who delivered the same as descending from God but the highest ground that moveth a man to believe that his faith was preached by the Apostles is the perpetuall Tradition of the Church succeeding the Apostles unto this day assuring him so much according to the saying of * De praescr c. 21. 37. Tertullian who maketh this ladder of belief in this sort what I believe I received from the present Church the present from the Primitive the Primitive Church from the Apostles the Apostles from Christ Christ from God and God the prime verity from no other fountaine different from his own infallible knowledge So that he that cleaveth not to the present Church firmely believing the Tradition thereof as being come down by succession is not so much as on the lowest step of the ladder that leads unto God the revealer of saving truth successive Tradition unwritten being the last and finall ground whereon we believe that the points of our belief came from the Apostles which may be proved by these arguments § 2. First if the maine points of faith be to be believed to come from the Apostles because they are written in Scriptures and the Scriptures are believed to be the Word of God upon the report of universall Tradition then our belief that the things which we believe come from the Apostles and from God resteth upon the Tradition of the Church but it is most certaine that the Scriptures cannot be proved to have been delivered unto the Church by the Apostles but by the perpetuall Tradition unwritten conserved in the Church succeeding the Apostles all the other waies by which the Protestants endeavour to prove the Scripture to be the word of God being vaine and insufficient as I have proved before Secondly common and unlearned people which comprehend the greatest part of Christians may have true faith yet they cannot have it grounded on the Scripture for they can neither understand nor read it or if read it yet but in a vulgar language of the truth of whose translation they are not assured therefore must rely upon the testimony of the present Church that that which they believe is the Word of God Thirdly if all the maine and substantiall points of Christian faith must be believed before we can securely read and truly understand the holy Scripture than they are believed not upon Scripture but upon Tradition going before Scripture and that it is so is manifest because true faith is not built but upon Scripture truly understood according to the right sense thereof nor can we understand the Scripture aright unlesse we first know the main Articles of Faith which all are bound expresly to believe by which as by a rule we must regulate our selves in the interpretation of the Scripture otherwise without being setled in the rule of faith by Tradition men are apt to fall into grievous errors even against the main articles of the faith as of the Blessed Trinity and Incarnation of the Son of God as experience doth sufficiently testifie so that reading and interpreting Scripture doth not make men Christians but supposeth them to be made so by Tradition at least for the main points such as every one is bound expresly to know Fourthly they to whom the Apostles wrote and delivered the Scripture were already converted to Christianity and instructed in all necessary points of faith and in the common practises of Christianity and so by what they knew by Tradition could easily interpret what was written but otherwise might easily have failed in the mainest points as some forsaking Tradition did for example the Arrians who were confuted by the Catholiques not by bare Scripture for of that the Arrians had plenty but as it was interpreted by Tradition Therefore none can be supposed to understand the Scripture aright so to know the true word and will of God but by being such as they were to whom the Apostles
higher then the fountain from whence it springs if therefore particular reason be the governour of our faith which reason is a humane and fallible thing it cannot rise to nor support a divine faith But divine faith is that which God requires of us in the businesse of Religion and that which is not such is none And it is convenient that as God ordained man to a supernaturall end namely the blissefull vision of himselfe which is a thing far above all excellencies of nature so he should bring him to this blisse by believing things above the reach of reason which in man is his nature and to beget this faith by Miracles his owne acts which are above the power of nature and by the testimony of those that do those supernaturall acts to whom if he have given his deeds it cannot be doubted but he hath given his word of any part whereof to make any doubt is to call the credit of all into question the house of Faith being like some artificiall buildings whereof if you pull out one pin you loosen the whole frame So if a man disbelieve any one point delivered him by the Catholique Church he unjoynts the whole frame of faith and virtually denies it all and that because they have all the same height of proof to wit the testimony of the Church which if she can lie in one thing she may for ought wee know in another and so in all and thus bring a man to doubt of all and then to denie all And that those men that doe denie some one point of Catholique Tradition though unwritten doe not denie all is not for that they have any faith but out of secular ends and deceiptfull reason § 4. Indeed some Protestants grant that if Tradition be universall and perfectly Catholique it doth oblige to the belief thereof but not otherwise by which universall Tradition they meane such as never any one gainsaid But if such onely are to be called Catholique Traditions there is scarce any thing left for Christians to believe and indeed to that passe have many brought it for some have denied the distinction of Persons in the Trinity others the Divinity of our Saviour others his humanity others the Deity of the Holy Ghost and a hundred more now if no Tradition be to be called Catholique but such as was never denied by any one or some number of Christians then a man may deny the fore-mentioned and many other points and Articles of faith because their Tradition hath not been so universall but that some have denied it yea some books of the Scripture it self were not universally received till about four hundred years after Christ By Catholique or universall Tradition then must be understood that which the Catholique Church hath alwaies taught not which all Christians for then we must look for Tradition in the mouths of Heretiques whose property it is to deny some Tradition or other under pretence that it is opposite to Scripture And if any have taught contrary the Catholique Church hath condemned them for Heretiques which is a sufficient proof that untill such Hereticall Spirits opposed some one or more Traditions of the Church they were universally believed As for example the Doctrine of Christs consubstantiality or being of the same substance with the Father no reasonable man will deny but that it was generally believed in the Church before the daies of the Arch-heretique Arrius and that the Councel of Nice condemning of him was a sufficient proof that the doctrine he opposed was the universall Tradition of the Church by force whereof he was overthrowne and not by Scripture only there being no place of Scripture so plaine but he would give some answer to it and likewise alledge plenty of Scripture in the proof of his own Heresie while he took upon him to interpret it himself forfaking the traditionall sense thereof and would receive no answer to it And if Arrius his denyall of that point of Faith will make it universall for place or the doctrine it self new and so universall for time as some in other instances do alledge because it was then first declared by reason of that opposition then it may be lawfull under the same pretence for men to deny all the Traditions of the Church all the decrees of Generall Councells of the Church and to revive all the Heresies that were in the Church § 5. Moreover to attribute conditionall infallibility to the Church and not absolute in all that she delivers * Chillingworth pag. 118. Pet. Martyr loc Com. clas 4. c 4. sect 21. Confess Helvet c. 17. as some Protestants doe making her infallible onely while she followes the Scripture and Vniversall Tradition is to give her no more priviledge than to a child or fool who are also infallible while they affirm nothing but what is agreeable to Scripture and universall Tradition But if we know not Scripture nor Tradition but by the Churches direction how shall we know in her exposition of Scripture and deciding of controversies that she doth erre unlesse we know it from her also seeing her authority in the one is as good as in the other and by those reasons that we may deny the truth of the one we may deny the other And if she say she have expounded Scripture truly and decided controversies aright by the rule of Scripture and Tradition who shall gainesay her Can any man be so foolish as to think his word is of more credit than the whole Churches Or that his reason is better then hers Or that if she may erre from her rule he may not do so also And if their infallibilities be both of the same strength who in his right mind would not believe millions affirming the same thing rather than one or some few affirming the contrary If there were a rule so plaine and clear that all men understood it and none could pervert it then there were no need of a judge or directer but if the rule be obscure or liable to misinterpretation as all words are let them be expressed never so plainly then it is meet that there should not onely be a Judge but that this Judge should be infallible seeing the businesse concerns the salvation of mankind and not be subject to the petty after-examinations of proud and discontented people as if one or more of them did know the meaning of the rule better than the Judge when that Judge is the universall Church And that which these men affirm in this matter amounts to this wise Maxime That the Church is infallible while she is infallible and so is the Devill § 6. Frivolous then and without foundation is that late started distinction of points fundamentall and not fundamentall and the assertion built thereon That the Church may erre in the one and not in the other and so by consequence we are not bound to believe her in all things Indeed in regard of the materiall object or thing to be believed some points
endewed with so much zeal and courage as to professe her Religion and to propagate it in the world which cannot be Therefore it is impossible that the true Church should not be ever universall and famously known Sixthly this Church is holy both in life and Doctrine Holy for life shining in all admirable sanctity the rayes whereof do overcome the hearts of the beholders such as the Holy Apostles gave example of as of poverty chastitie obedience charity in undergoing all forms of labour and danger for the safety of soules patience invincible in the rough handling of themselves by wonderfull fastings and all kind of austerities fortitude heroicall in suffering martyrdome not onely with patience but with joy though given them in all the most hideous shapes that mans imagination steeled with malice could invent And although this kind of sanctity does not shine in all the members of the Church but in the more eminent professors and principally in the Pastors yet if this kind of sanctity together with Miracles were wanting she could not be so sufficient a witnesse to Infidells who ordinarily are not won to the affection and admiration of Christianity but by beholding such wonders of power and sanctity in the Professors thereof Holy shee is also for doctrine in regard her traditions are divine and holy without commixture of error for if the Church could deliver any one or few errors intermingled with many truths her Traditions even of the truth were questionable and could not be believed upon her word Even as if we admit in Scripture any error in smaller matters we cannot be sure of its infallibility in matters of greatest moment as he that shall say Gods written word is false or uncertaine when it tells him that S. Paul left his cloake at Troas may also say with as much reason that it is false or uncertain when it tells him that Christ was borne of the Virgin Mary Even so he that grants that some part of Traditions or the Word of God unwritten may be false inferrs by consequence that every part thereof may be so and that because we have no antecedent ground or touch-stone to try Traditions by but they must be believed for their own sakes being therein more fundamentall than the Scripures which are not known to be Apostolicall but by Tradition whereas perpetuall Tradition is knowne to come from the Apostles by its own light for what can be more evident then that that is from the Apostles which is delivered as Apostolicall by perpetuall succession of Priests and people affirming and believing the same § 2. But against this truth that if the Church may erre in one thing neither wee nor shee can be sure that shee speakes truth in any thing Chillingworth makes these in my judgement impertinent interrogations A Judge may possibly erre in Judgement can he therefore never have assurance that he hath judged right A travayler may possibly mistake his way must I therefore be doubtfull whether I am in the right way from my hall to my chamber pag. 117. sect 106. In which he weakly falls into comparison betwixt matters which are the object of the sense or of the understanding and of faith which in this case have no proportion betwixt them For the doctrines of faith as they are of faith being altogether and all equally without the reach of our knowledge we have no way to attaine to but by the help of others whom we must absolutely believe and if we know that they may deliver that which is false to us wee can never be sure that any thing they deliver to us is not false unlesse we had some superiour rule to try and examine their Traditions by which certainly we have not Nor can the Church it selfe if shee may erre in the delivery of one thing be sure that shee doth not erre in every thing because shee hath no infallible rule to examine her doctrines by out of her selfe who if shee be assisted by the Holy Ghost cannot erre in any thing if not for ought shee knowes shee doth in all things Now that the Church is assisted by God and that mans reason cannot be the highest judge to whom the last appeal is made in matters of faith which descend from God I have shewed before As for a humane Judge as he may erre through ignorance wilfulnesse or negligence which to conceive of the Church is absurd yea blasphemous shee having Christ for her Head and the Holy Ghost for her Spirit so he cannot bee more certaine of the truth of his judgement than his reason can make him which will not reach to an absolute infallibility And as a travayler may mistake his way in one journey so he may in another if he have no more certainty nor better guide of the one way than of the other which is the Churches case in propounding and believing matters of faith revealed to her by God which like the Circumference from the Center are all equally distant from our knowledge and the Church hath an equall Prerogative of infallibility by the guidance of the Holy Ghost in all who therefore can erre in nothing or in all things which she saith she so receives and delivers Yet Chillingworth saith that his consequences are as like the other as an egge to an egge or milk to milk but more truly they are as like as an egge to an oyster or milk to ink § 3. And lest any Protestant who honours the Scriptures much with his lips though he be far removed with his heart should think that I am injurious to the Scripture in saying that Tradition is more fundamentall than Scripture it selfe I desire him to take notice that Tradition and Scripture according to different comparisons are equall and superior the one to the other Compare them in respect of certainty of truth they are equall both being the Word of God the one written the other unwritten and so both infinitely certain Compare them in respect of depth of sublimity and variety of doctrine the Scripture is far superiour to Tradition Tradition being plaine and easie doctrine concerning the common capitall and practicall Articles of Christianity whereas the Scripture is full of high hidden senses and furnished with great variety of examples discourses and all manner of learning Compare them in respect of antiquity and evidence of being the Apostles the Scripture is inferiour to Tradition in time and knowledge and cannot be proved directly to be the Apostles and therefore Gods but by Tradition As Philosophy is more perfect than Logicke and Rhetoricke than Grammar in respect of high and excellent knowledge yet Logicke is more prime originall and fundamentall than Philosophy Grammar than Rhetorique without the rules and principles whereof they cannot be learned Even so Tradition is more prime and originall than Scripture though Scripture in respect of depth and sublimity of discourse be more excellent then Tradition CHAP. X. That the Roman is that one holy Catholique
third mark of the Church And of the vanity of Protestants supposition that the true Church is sometimes invisible That Protestant Churches have not alwaies been visible § 1. The third mark we will seek the true Church by is Visibility which was foretold by the Prophet Esay 2.2 Micah 4.1 It shall come to passe in the last daies that the mountaine of the Lords house shall be established in the top of the mountaines and shall be exalted above the hills and all nations shall flow unto it Also Ezek. 37.28 The nations shall know that I am the sanctifier of Israel when my sanctification shall be in the middle of them for ever And S. Augustine resembles it according to the saying of our Saviour Matth. 5.14 A city placed on a hil that cannot be hid And he hath placed his tabernacle in the sun Psal 18.6 that is in open view c. his tabernacle his Church is placed in the Sun not in the night but in the day Tom. 9. in Epist Jo. Tract 2. And further saith of the Church that e Cont. Petil. l. 2. c. 104. she hath this most certain marke that she cannot be hid she is then known to all Nations the sect of Donatus is unknown to many Nations that then cannot be she To the children of the Church it is appointed by Christ that for the redresse of their grievances they tell the Church Mat. 81.17 which were a delusion unlesse the Church were alwaies visible who did also forewarn us against all obscure congregations saying If therefore they shall say unto you behold he is in the desert go you not forth behold he is in secret places believe it not Mat. 24.26 Now according to these assurances I found that the Roman Church was alwaies and eminently visible but the Protestant never eminent and for the most part not visible at all Concerning the visibility of the Church of Rome it is proved before by those testimonies which shew the antiquity perpetuall continuance thereof which cannot be proved but with the granting of her visibility Nor have I found the Protestants denying it the thing being so visible that it leaves no place for objections But they think to wipe out this mark by saying that it is not necessary to a true Church to be alwaies visible but others disliking that assertion by reason of the absurdity thereof do affirme to counterpoize the Roman that the Protestant Church hath been alwaies visible § 2. And first they that hold that the Church hath been invisible and that therefore visibility is not a certain mark of the Church indeavour to prove it by the example of the Church of the Jewes in the daies of Elias 3 King 19.10.18 who complained that the Prophets were slaine and he only was left alive and God answered that there were left seven thousand that had not bowed the knee to Baal To which objection I found the answer of Catholiques very true namely that this complaint of Elias was uttered with relation to the Kingdome of Israel onely wherein Elias then was and was persecuted by King Ahab but in the Kingdome of Judah the Church did florish and was sufficiently known to him and all men under the reigns of Asa and Joshaphat 3 Kings 22.41 who reigned in Judah when Achab reigned in Israel As what time the number of true believers was so great 2 Chron. 17.14 15 16 17 18 19. that the men of war only did amount to many hundred thousands And whereas M. Meade makes reply to this answer saying that the Church was invisible in the Kingdome of Iudah also in the daies of Manasses because it is said 2 Chron. 33. that Manasses set up Idolatry committed all impiety and caused Judah and Jerusalem to erre I answer that this comes short of a proof for though the Kings example in all cases though never so bad have a mighty influence on the people yet this proves not but that the Kingdome or an eminent part or at least a visible part both of Priests and people was still untainted even as it was in the daies of the persecution of Antiochus against the Jewes who set up the Abomination of desolation the Idoll of Olympick Jupiter in the Temple and compelled men to worship it Besides if it were as he would have it the case is much different between a very short time of the invisibility of the Church of the Jewes for we read in the same Chapter that Manasses quickly repented and amended all and the invisibility of the Protestant Church which by their own confessions was above a thousand years Also the comparison between the Church of the Jewes and Christians is not equall the New Testament being established in better promises Heb. 8.6 and therefore that may be incident to the one which is not to the other Moreover if there had been this totall eclipse it had relation but to the Nation of the Jewes only besides which were many other faithfull people in all ages as appears by the examples of Melchizedek Job c. in the Old Testament and in the New of Cornelius and the Eunuch to the Queen of Candace amongst which the Church might be visible though amongst the Jewes invisible § 3. Others I have heard say that by Catholikes own confession in the daies of Antichrist the Church shall be invisible But I never have read any Catholique that said so yet on the contrary I have found Protestants affirm a Bullinger in Apoc. 20. Fulk against Rhē in Thes 2. sect 5. the visibility of the Church and that universally even all the daies of Antichrist which makes against themselves if they account the Pope Antichrist as most of them do and themselves the Church Yet Doctor White contrary to his brethren saith that b F. VVhites Reply p. 61. lin 15. 26. in time of persecution the true Church may be reputed an impious Sect by the multitude and so not be known by the notion of true and holy nor can her truth be discerned by sense and common reason To which I answer that as there are four properties of Church-doctrine so there are foure notions of the Church The first is to bee Mistresse of saving truth and according to this notion the Church is invisible to the naturall understanding both of men and Angells for God only and his Blessed see our Religion to be the truth The second is to be Mistresse of Doctrine truly revealed by secret inspiration according to this notion ordinarily speaking the Church is invisible to almost all men that are or ever were the Apostles and Prophets only excepted The third to be Mistresse of the Doctrine which Christ and his Apostles by their preaching and miracles planted in the world according to this notion the Church was visible to the first and Primitive times but now is not The fourth is to be Mistresse of Catholique doctrine that is of Doctrine delivered received by full Tradition and profession all the
adversaries thereof that are under the title of Christian being divided amongst themselves and notorious changers and according to this notion the Church is ever visible and sensible to all men even to her enemies Otherwise there is no ordinary meanes left for men to know what the Apostles taught nor consequently what God by inspiration revealed to them And if she and the light of truth she carries with her should be hidden and lost we must begin again anew from a second fountain of immediate revelation from God and build upon the new planting thereof with Miracles in the world by some new Apostles And if this be absurd then there must ever be in the world a Church visible whose Traditions are famously Catholique and consequently shewing themselves to be the Apostles to all men that will not be obstinate And that the Church shall be universally visible even in the daies of Antichrist may be gathered out of the Scripture Rev. 20.8 For she shall then be every where persecuted which could not be unlesse she were visible and conspicuous even to the wicked And even during the first 300. years after Christ wherein the Church indured incomparably more universall and raging persecutions than ever were yet the a Magd. cent 1 2 3. Fulke cont Stapleton de success Eccl. p. 246. Century-writers and sundry others do take certain and particular notice of the Catholique Bishops and Pastors by name in those very ages of their administration of the Word and Sacraments and their open impugning of Heresies And surely our Lord himself had been which is blasphemy to think of him who is the eternall wisdome of the Father the most imprudent of all Law-makers to have a Law so obscure and exposed to so many suppositions depravations and false expositions whereto the malice of the Heretiques of all ages hath subjected it without leaving a depository to keep it and a judge to interpret it or to leave it to such a keeper and such a judge as should be invisible § 4. Other Protestants I have observed who though they confesse the invisibility of their Church yet professe the being thereof and assigne the place for it to be in the Roman Church mixed like a great deal of ore with a very little pure gold so that it was not discernable But this assignation of their Church seemed to me very unreasonable for either those Protestants did professe their owne faith or they did not if they did then doubtlesse they were visible and the Roman Church would soon have taken notice of them as she did in all ages of such though it were but one man that differed from her If they did not make profession of their faith what wretched sonnes of fear were they that to preserve their temporall security durst not publiquely avow their own Religion but comply in all things with a Religion in their opinion false and impious and dissemblingly do all the externall acts thereof and this all their lives for many generations successively This was not the part of a true Church or of any true member thereof who will surely die rather than deny his Saviour as he doth who believing himselfe to be of the true Religion makes profession of that which he deemes to be false Nor did they fulfill the Prophesie of Esay concerning the true Church which saith I have set watchmen upon thy walls which shall never hold their peace day nor night Esay 62.6 But Doctor Feild hath a new fancy of his owne which I never observed in any but himselfe who saith to this purpose that before the separation of the Protestants from the Church of Rome the Church of Rome it selfe was the Protestant Church and that the Papists were but a faction of the Court of Rome an assertion so grosly false that all the world is a witnesse against it yea even I think all other Protestants themselves and needs no confutation § 5. Others taking all these Pleas for insufficient do affirm that their Church was in being and in sight also in all ages but that through the injury of later times no testimony thereof is now remaining but that all their records through the violence of the Pope and his Clergie have been utterly suppressed Of which vaine conceipt there is no proof at all and if the assertion without proof will serve their turne it may serve also for any other Religion Christian or not Christian who if they please may say the same thing but are never like to be believed by any man of common understanding Besides it thwarteth all experience as appeares by the example of Husse and Wickliffe whose writings are yet extant of Charlemaines pretended Book against Images and Bertrams concerning the Sacrament Also by the decrees of Catholique Councells and the large writings of Catholique Doctors reciting and condemning all opinions contrary to the Roman faith Lastly by the Ecclesiasticall Historiographers of every age who make this the argument of their writings yea even from them the Protestant * Centurists of Magdeburg Cent. Madg. Osiand Ep. Illyricus Catol VVhitak cont Duraeum pag. 276. 469. and others do recite the opinions mentioned and condemned in every age by the Church of Rome of which some were the very same that have since been revived by Protestants So that the Church of Rome hath been so far from extinguishing their records that she hath been the chief recorder of them and their doctrines § 6. The last and most valiant attempt of Protestants is to affirme that as the Church must be allwaies visible so theirs hath been in persons distinct from the Roman Church and thereby invite us to * A Protestants book so entituled look beyond Luther Which barren endeavour of theirs hath been like Peters fishing all night and catching nothing For they whom the Protestants claime for their predecessors were neither of their Religion nor yet alwaies visible there happening huge gaps betwixt them nor can the Protestants by any art or industry bring both ends together First they were not of the same Religion for to be of the same Religion or Church with another imports an agreement in all points of faith for the truth of doctrine being of the essence of the Church whosoever erres in any little thereof he ceaseth to participate of the soule of the Church which is the Spirit of truth and is but a dead member one equivocally and in name but not in truth We see that the Arrians Macedonians and many other Heretiques were accounted and are so by many Protestants not of the Catholique Church for one single error against faith now the Protestants disagreeing in many points not only from one another at this present but from all that went before them and that in points which they believe to be revealed in the Scripture their only rule are neither one Church amongst themselves at this present nor any one of them one with any society that hath gone before In particular the Grecians whom
not prove it shewes the interruption of their succession and while they affirm it shewes that they believe their succession and calling insufficient unlesse they derive it from the Church of Rome thereby acknowledging the Church of Rome the true Church which they in their Doctrine and dependence have forsaken and there can be no reason to forsake the true Church upon what pretence soever For the errors of the Church of Rome are but supposed and their Reformation neither is but supposed they being infallibily sure of nothing since they hold their Church may erre and so for ought ought they certainly know it did in accu and forsaking the Church of Rome and in their own imaginary amendment and instead of Christ have chosen Barrabas And what can be more inconsiderate than to forsake the true Church by their own confession upon pretences of whose truth they are by their own confession also uncertain For he that confesseth he may erre in that wherin he may erre being an object of the understanding not of the sense cannot be sure that he doth not erre And so they are altogether at a losse and a ground not infallibly no nor prudently sure of the least tittle they affirm They cannot be infallibly sure because they may erre as themselves confesse they cannot be prudently sure seeing there is a hundred voyces and judgements of men for the Roman Church to one for any Protestant Church They had therefore done much more wisely to have followed the admonition of S. Paul to Timothy DEPOSITUM CUSTODI keep that which is committed to thy charge 1. Tim. 6.20 and what is that saith Vincentius Lirinensis He answereth Comomnit advers haer c. 27. It is that which thou art trusted with not that which is found out by thee that which thou hast received not which thou hast devised a thing not of wit that is of thine own fancy but of learning that is which thou hast learnt not of private usurpation but of publique Tradition a thing brought to thee not brought forth by thee wherein thou oughtest to be not the Author but the keeper not a Master but a Scholler not a leader but a follower § 2. As for their assertion who say that Roman Catholiques and Protestants are all one Church it is both false foolish False it is because the differing in any one point of faith proposed by the Church makes one party not to be of the true Church it is certain that the Church of Rome and England differ in many Doth not the Church of England account the four grand Heretiques who were condemned in the first four Generall Councells to be out of the Church and not one with her that condemned them and they held each of them but some one or very few points different from the Church of Rome So that either they must confesse themselves also not to be one with the Roman Church or else that all Hretiques are of it which is absurd and contrarie to the mind of d De fide Symbolo c. 10. S. Augustine who saith that neither Heretiques nor Schismatiques are of the Church If Protestants say that they that were condemned in those Councells did indeed hold Heresies and so were not the Church but their own are truths and amendments of the Doctrine of the Church I answer so did those Heretiques also say yea and prove it by Scriptures and Fathers in their own sense and did believe their Doctrines to be the pure Word of God as confidently as any Protestants in the world do theirs who cannot say more for themselves than they did and they were some of them as numerous and as learned as Protestants are nor was there more authority against them than against the Protestants which is The Catholique Roman Church guided by the Spirit of God and the Word of God written unwritten Moreover they were the parties accused so are the Protestants it is not fit therefore that they should be the Judges If they say that they also accuse the Church of Rome of errors and therefore it is not fit that she should be Judge I answer some body must if ever we will have an end of controversie and then whether the whole society of Christians or some one or few men for so all Heresies began and so did the Protestant Religion in one Luther let any indifferent man judge Moreover God hath made the Church the Judge saying tell the Church and that is the Church of Rome as those Protestants must grant who say they are one with it and that it was the Church when they revolted from her And to consider the matter according to reason seen in the practise of all societies and bodies whether Ecclesiasticalll or Civill if any one or few members break the law and rule of the whole who shall judge whether it be well or ill done Surely either the head or the head and whole representative body together And this was the proceeding against Luther and the Protestants in a Generall Councell by which they were condemned and cast out of the Church Which judgement if it be not sufficient but that the condemned party justifying himself by his own bare affirmation or interpretation of the Law according to his own particular fancy contrary to the whole body whereof he is or was a member may be admitted what Heretique or Rebell will ever be found guilty or will not in despite of all mankind be accounted a true Christian and loyall subject and the soundest member of the whole body Secondly it is both poore and absurd for Protestants to seeke for shelter and countenance under that Church which they have abandoned disgraced and cruelly wounded though to their owne destruction thereby also abusively perswading many people to keep still in the Protestant Church while they think they are of the Roman they being as their new Masters teach them both but one Church § 3. But Catholiques whose consent it is very fit should be taken in this matter acknowledge no such union of Churches betwixt themselves and Protestants for Catholiques doe not allow their Ordination and Consecration of Bishops and Priests for good which appeares in that if a Priest of the Roman Church revolt to the Protestant party he is allowed by them to be a lawfull Priest but not so if a Protestant Minister returne to the Roman Church Also some Protestants grant that Roman Catholiques may be saved in their Religion but Catholiques doe not grant the like to Protestants which they would doe surely if they thought they were all one Church Besides the denying to communicate with each other is a proof that in the opinion of both they are not all one Church And whereas Protestants magnifie their own charity in this kind conceit of theirs and accuse Catholiques of the want therof it is very idle for the controversie about the meanes of salvation and the Church wherein it is to be had is not to be determined by
directions only not obligations Therefore in England many both of the people and Clergie also doe deny some one some another particular according to their pleasure and yet the Generall Church of Protestants and the particular of England doth suffer men teaching and professing contrary doctrines as points of faith to abide in her communion and passe under the name of Protestants And seeing that of contrary doctrines one side must needs be false while the Protestant Church permits both sides to be preached as matter of faith and the Word of God she knowingly suffers the profession of false doctrine and so is the mother of falshood as much as truth and therefore cannot be the true Church The Church of Rome doth not so but if any preach or professe contrary to that which is decreed she shuts them out of her Communion and disinherits them of the title of Catholique As for other points which are without the compasse of her decrees wherein there is a mighty latitude according to the extent of mens reasons she permits every man to hold as his particular understanding shall direct him The Puritanes will have all governed by the written word of God The Chillingworthians will have all guided by particular reason and both sorts differ amongst themselves The Church of Rome more wisely in matters of faith and Religion is directed by the Word of God either written or unwritten and therein her children never differ or if they do are renounced In Schoole points and things undefined her children are guided by their particular reason and herein they do and may differ yet without disunion as well as in points of Philosophie For Schoole points are not points of Religion properly religion being derived à RELIGANDO from binding but in School points men are not bound to the belief of either side but have free liberty to hold or change as they think they have cause untill it be otherwise determined by a Councell And this may be done without the just imputation of division as S. Augustine De Bapt. cont Donat. l. 1. c. 18. l. 2. c. 4. saith Divers men be of divers judgements without breach of peace untill a generall Councell allow some one part for pure and cleer Thus doth he excuse S. Cyprians disagreement and error concerning the baptizing of such as were baptized by Heretiques saying that himselfe durst not have condemned the same unlesse I had been strengthened with the most agreable authority of the Catholique Church to which Cyprian himselfe no doubt would have yeelded if at that time the truth of the question had been made cleer and manifest by a generall Councell Which some refusing to doe after that that opinion of Cyprians was by a Councell condemned to shew the difference of holding against a point defined and not defined Vincentius Lyrinensis chap. 9. thus breakes out O admirable change the authors of one self opinion are called Catholiques and the followers of it heretiques Secondly there is in doctrines a difference between the conclusion or point of faith it selfe and the reason or manner thereof in the former of these unity is required and is performed most axactly amongst Catholiques but in the later which concernes but the reason of that conclusion which reason is for the most part reduced to some Scholasticall subtilty learned men have in all ages and may without breach of unity maintaine their difference For although all men be bound to the decree'd point of faith yet they are not so to the reason and manner thereof unlesse the same also be defined by the Church And hereby are answered all the objections of Protestants concerning the disagreement of Catholiques as of the Thomists and Scotists concerning the Conception of our Blessed Lady of the Dominicans and Jesuites about the concurrence of Grace and Freewill with such like in which the Church hath not yet interposed her Decree And some Protestants affirm out of their profound politicall insight that she never will and that because forsooth she dares not out of fear to displease so mighty a party as each opinion hath And yet they know that the Church was not afraid to decree against the opinions of Luther and his brood notwithstanding she lost some Kings and much people thereby but the losse was not only hers but theirs much more she lost some incurable members but they lost themselves And doubtlesse when she sees it meet to determine any of the controversies amongst the learned shee will doe it without any fear but of God In the mean time we see that their differences of opinions breed no more disturbance in the Church nor rancor amongst themselves than their different colours and shapes of apparrell Brotherly charity is not violated amongst them they will all goe to the same Church they will communicate together and confesse to one another nor is there any of them but if he be asked will say that he will stand to a Generall Councell in any of the points of difference amongst them and submit his judgement to hers But Protestants have no Councells nor any authority to call a Councell out of the extent of their temporall dominions the Articles of Religion which they have agreed upon apart are very different one from another as may be seen in their Harmony of Confessions nor in the same Dominion will they stand to any determination of Convocation Synod or Assembly further than it decrees according to the Word of God of which every one will be a judge for himfelfe And in the mean time they violate brotherly charity make schisms and separations one from another refuse to goe to Church or communicate together and in defence of their differences wage war one against another So that their Harmony of Confessions may more truly be called the confusion of Confessions and their Churches the tumults of Religion The greatest unity they have is not in believing but in not believing though therein they are not exact as I have shewed before their faith as they call it being for the most part negative consisting in denying what Catholiques affirme as denying and not believing the infallibility of the Church the Reall Corporall presence seven Sacraments Invocation of Saints Purgatory and Prayer for the dead with many other abating their positive faith almost to nothing now not-believing is not believing and their profession and union in the most is not of faith but of infidelity And for their positive belief I think it consists in two Articles only That there is a God and that Jesus Christ died for the sinnes of the world and whosoever affirmes more than this it will be no hard matter to find some other Protestants that will deny it what union then is there amongst them but that which was betwixt Symeon and Levi to be brethren in evill and in writing the Articles of their Religion as Draco did his lawes in blood For what nation is there where the Protestant Religion hath settled her foot where they did
though the Apostles their hearers be departed out of this life yet there still remaines a meanes in the world by which all men may assuredly know what the Apostles preached and the primitive Church received of them seeing the Church to the worlds end must be built on the Apostles and beleive nothing as matter of Faith besides that which was delivered of them as S. Paul saith Ephes 2.20 and are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Jesus Christ being the chiefe corner stone CHAP. II. Of the meanes to know which is the Word of God And that all the Protestants Arguments to prove that the Scripture and it onely is the Word of God are insufficient And that the generall Tradition of the Catholike Church is the only assured proof thereof § 1. THese things being supposed the chief difficulty to my seeming consisted in this how we might certainly know now adaies so many ages after the Apostles death what all necessary points that they taught and preached the Protestants said that this was to be found in the Scriptures which were written by them but this did not satisfie my doubt for supposing the Scriptures to be the word of God delivered by the Apostles and others inspired by him yet I wanted some sufficient witnesse or proofe to assure me so much for of my selfe I could not find it The bare word of the Protestants I saw I had no reason to take because they confesse that they may erre and I in this matter not being able to discover whether they did erre or no relying upon a fallible guide must alwaies remaine in uncertainty and fear I observed moreover that although in most of their assertions they might upon examination prove false yet in saying that the Church might erre and taking themselves for the Church they had said most true finding that they indeed had erred in this most important Particular of declareing what is the word of God and what not the Lutherans affirming much lesse for the word of God then the Calvinists and the Church of England doth § 2. Now of necessity one of these sorts of Protestants must erre and that most dangerously the one by beleiving that to be the word of God which is not but the invention of men and perhaps false and foolish Praefat. in Epist Iac. in Edi◠levens as Luther said of S. Iames his Epistle or the other by renouncing that which is indeed the Word of God and so not believing what God himself hath spoken Their Authority being by themselves in their evident disagreement thus broken I descended to consider the reasons by them alledged to induce men to believe that the Scriptures are the Word of God which in general I apprehended to be insufficient because they did not lead the Protestants themselves to an agreement in the quantity thereof But I further weighed them particularly the principall whereof are these § 3. First they say the Scriptures are knowne to be divine by their owne light shining in them Cal. lib. 1. Inst cap. 7. Sect. 2. infine Even as sweet and bitter are knowne by the tast white and blacke by the sight which assertion to me seemed very absurd I confesse indeed much of the Scripture is but the amplification of the Morall Law which is a knowledge engrafted in man by nature by the light whereof we may see that it is true but this proves it not to be the Word of God For though all truth be from God as he is the prime verity and so may be called in some sense his Word yet by the Word of God in this case is meant truth revealed by God immediately unto the pen-men thereof and though we find much thereof to be true as agreeing with the engrafted principles of reason yet this proveth not that it was revealed immediately and extraordinarily which is the circumstance that makes it the Word of God in the sense of those that dispute about it As for the historical parts both of the Old and New Testament the institution of Sacraments with the like they have no affinity with the in-born principles of reason and are therefore not knowne to be so much as true by any light they carry with them much lesse to be extraordinarily revealed by God and so to be his Word Besides if it could be discerned what were the Word of God and what not by the resplendent light thereof as easily as the light is knowne from darknesse as some of them say how could there be so much dissention about the parts thereof as it is knowne there is the Calvinists seeing more to be the Word of God then the Lutherans do and lesse then the Catholikes and yet if it shew it selfe by its owne light the Turks may see it as well as any of them And heere I observed that many had blinded themselves with looking on the light and could not see so far as to discern between corporall and spirituall light but because the Prophet David saith Thy word is a lanterne unto my feet and a light unto my paths Psal 118.105 they conceived the Scripture was as easily discerned by its own light as the Sun True it is that every corporall light that doth enlighten the eye of the body must be evident in it selfe and originally cleer but not so every truth that doth illustrate mens understanding The reason is because the eye of the body cannot by things seen inferre and conclude things that are hidden but can only apprehend what doth directly and immediately shew it selfe but mans understanding apprehends not only what shewes it selfe but by things knowne inferres and breeds in it selfe the knowledge of things hidden Hence though things shewing themselves directly and by their own light be prime principles of the understanding and the meanes to know other things yet also things hidden in themselves being formerly known by the light of authority may thereby become lights that is meanes to encrease our knowledge of hidden things So that speaking of spirituall and intellectuall lights it is false that all lights that enlighten mans understanding to know other things are evident in themselves yea some secondary principles and lights there are which must be shewed by a superiour light before they become lights themselves In which kind is the Scripture being a light only to the faithfull because known by the Churches Tradition to be from the Apostles by the Apostles authority confirmed by miracles to be of God by Gods supreme verity who cannot deceive nor be deceived to be the truth Moreover this conceipt of theirs doth utterly extinguish faith and beleife of the word of God for every thing is so far forth the object of faith that it is not seen as S. Paul saith Faith is the argument of things not seen Hebr. 11.1 In Evang. Ioan. Tract 40. and S. Augustine What is faith but to believe that which thou dost not see If therefore they do see it they cannot properly
be said to believe it but to know it and if so what excellency what vertue what merit what pious affection towards God to believe that which they see plainely before their eyes A bold presumption also it is in them to claime a cleerer degree of knowledge then the Apostles had for they did but see through a glasse darkely 1 Corinth 13.12 but these men are convicted of the divine truth of the things they believe Fran White Orthodoxe p. 107. by the lustre and resplendent verity of the matter of Scripture which is a priviledge which whosoever hath equalls the blessed Saints in heaven whose happinesse it is to see what we believe especially seeing one point of the Doctrine Protestants pretend to see is the mysterie of the Blessed Trinity the true light resplendent veritie wherof no man can see manifestly out of the state of Blisse § 4. Secondly they pretend to know the Scriptures to be the Word of God by the * Whites Reply p. 16.30.68 Feild Appendix pag. 34. Cal. Inst l. 1. c. 7. majestie of the matter and purity of the Doctrine but I conceived that though some mysteries of the Scripture carry a majesty in them in respect of naturall reason and an elevation above it as of the B. Trinity yet other matters of Scripture seem unto reason ridiculous as the Serpents talking with Eve and Balaams Asse reproving of his master with many others Nor could the purity of the doctrine convince me seeing we know that many learned and godly men have written very holily whose writings are not therefore accounted the word of God Besides there are many historicall parts of the Scripture which do not at all touch upon purity therefore cannot be discerned by it Againe they affirme that the Scripture may be knowne by the stile but I considered that God hath no proper stile or phrase of his owne but can at his pleasure al stiles that he did vse the pens of those whom it pleased him to inspire couching his heavenly conceipts under their usuall language and ability of expression whence issueth so great difference of stiles as is on all sides acknowledged amongst sacred Writers and that God did only guide them in the truth they wrote not in the stile for then all their stiles in likelihood should have been alike Indeed God hath an eternal increated manner of speaking which is the production of the eternall word by which the blessed do discern him from all other speakers by the evidence of blissefull learning but no created manner of speaking no not his speaking inwardly to the soule is so proper to God as that it can be knowne to be his speaking by the meer sound of the voice or by the stile without especiall revelation or some consequent miraculous effect § 5. Thirdly the * VVhites Reply p. 19. Harmony of the Scriptures is alledged by some as an argument to prove them to be the Word of God But though this Harmony appeare in divers things yet it is most certaine that there are very many seeming contradictions many of which are but probably answered by Commentaetors by assuming some things without proofe because otherwise they must admit contradictions some places are not fully answered but the Fathers were forced to fly from literall to allegoricall senses as appeares particularly in the foure first Chapters of Genesis the Genealogy of our Saviour and in the reconciling of the Chronologies of the Kings And seeing no man is infallibly sure that all the answers used to reconcile the seeming contradictions of Scriptures are true no man can be assured by the evidence of the thing that there is this perfect harmony in them nor consequently that they are thereby knowne to be the Word of God Moreover if we were infallibly assured that there were this perfect harmony in the Scriptures yet this to me seemed not a sufficient proofe that they are the Word of God because there is no reason forbids me to believe that it may not be also found in the writings of some men yea I make no question but it is to be found and that with lesse seeming contradiction then is in the Scripture yet no man accounts that this proves their writings to be the Word of God Neither as I saw could these pretences before mentioned be laid hold on by the unlearned multitude an innumerable company whereof cannot read at all and when they heare them read if they were asked would say that they see not this light this majestie stile and harmony which their learned men talk of nor do they know what it meanes nor that a tittle of it is the word of God but only because they are told so Indeed S. Peter saith in the behalf of the old Testament 2 Pet. 1.21 That holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy Ghost But we are as uncertaine by any thing in the words themselves that S. Peter said this as of all the rest that is altogether § 6. So that I could not find that there was any more then probable arguments to be drawn from the Scriptures themselves to prove them to be the word of God For that which is the word of God and the rule of faith must be certaine not only in some parts but in every part and particle book chapter and line thereof which is impossible to be knowne by the light and evidence of the sense and doctrine seeing many places even by * Field of the Church lib. 4. cap. 15. VVhites Reply p. 35 Protestants confessions are darke obscure and full of difficulties and how can that be knowne to be the Word of God by the light thereof when the light thereof is not knowne As uselesse also to their purpose is the majestie purity stile harmomony or any the like for we believe it to be harmonious because it is the Word of God not to be the Word of God because it is harmonious which wee doe not infallibly see So that upon these considerations I saw no evident certainty out of the Scriptures that they were the Word of God but that they are believed to be such without being seen upon some other Word of God more cleerly appearing to be the Word of God and lesse liable to corruption then the Scriptures are assuring us so much and that is the Tradition of the Church according to the saying of S. Augustine * Aug. contra Epist fundament c. 5. I would not believe the Gospell unlesse the Authority of the Catholike Church did move me To which Hooker one of the learnedest men that ever the Protestant party could boast of agreeth saying * Eccl. Pol. lib. 1. sec 14 p. 36. Of things necessary the very chiefest is to know what books we are bound to esteem holy which point is confessed impossible for the Scripture it self to teach * Ibid. l. 2 sec 4.102 for if any one book of Scripture did give testimony to all yet
and divers other points but only because they seem repugnant unto reason And in these horrible opinions do these reasonably unreasonable men fall by just consequence from their owne principles For if as they say there be no Christian Church assisted with Infallibility fit to teach any man even such Articles as they count fundamentall and necessary to salvation but that in every particular even one may and must follow the direction of his owne reason be he never so unlearned what will follow but an unhappy liberty yea necessity for men to reject the highest and most divine mysteries of Christian faith unlesse they can compose all repugnancies after an intelligible manner as he speaks even to every ignorant and simple person which is impossible or els say that it is reasonable for men to believe contradictions at the same time which as he saith is very unreasonable For doubtlesse in true Philosophy the objections which may be made against the mystery of the Blessed Trinity and the Incarnation of God are much more difficult than any that can be brought against Transubstantiation he then that will follow these new principles must if he deny the one deny the other also which as yet the greatest part of Protestants will not do in time perhaps they may or which is much better observing the impiety of this opinion confesse both § 3. This I conceive was the reason why S. Paul saith 1. Cor. 1.23 that the Apostles did preach foolishnesse in the opinion of the Grecians namely because they sought wisdome and what was that wisdome but humane the dictates of naturall reason which the mysteries of the Gospell exceeding they counted them foolishnesse but to those that were called it was the power of God and the wisdome of God By which it appears that the wisdome of God and the wisdome of the Grecians which was humane wisdome the light of naturall reason and discourse were very different wherein the Apostle gives as it is meet these wise men should do the preheminence to God for that which seems foolish in God is wiser than whatsoever is in men and so the mysteries of faith which seem so contrary to humane reason have more wisdome in them than their reasons have that oppose them who do therefore but prove themselves cum ratione insanire to be mad with reason This doctrine also of giving reason the tribunall in matters of faith and that as it is in every particular man is an inlet for every man to be of a severall Religion by differing from others in what points soever according to the direction of his own reason yea possibly to be of no Christian Religion at all For what makes the Jew to continue such but only because he sees no reason to believe the New Testament and if a Christian should chance to be indued with the same reason that a Jew is he must then become a Jew or if of a Heathen he must become a Heathen And for the ignorant and unlearned people to whom this is a rule as well as to others what pitifull absurd Religions or none at all will be amongst them who have so small abilities of reason as the world knowes they have § 4. Though reason be in its owne nature the same and as it proceeds from God the author thereof in whose mind the universall idaea thereof is placed yet as it exerciseth it selfe in severall men since the ruine thereof in Adams fall it is of severall dimensions according to their naturall constitution morall education and industry whence it must needs follow that according to the different latitude of mens understandings they must embrace more or lesse of divine truths and so be every one of a larger or stricter belief and of as many several Religions as they are of different degrees of understanding Yet notwithstanding this admirable variety of Religion charitable Chillingworth doth not doubt but that God considering humane frailty and the power of education which instils in us many false apprehensions and that hereby excellent judgements are corrupted will not condemne men for such errors as by reason of the former circumstances were unavoidable but conceives that they are in a Religion whatsoever it be in which they may attaine salvation So that by consequence any man may be saved following but the direction of his owne reason although that reason direct him to deny not only one point but even all the Christian faith thus Jew Turk or Heathen may by this platform be saved § 5. And truely if a man do not believe upon this one and virtually all reason to wit that the Church is to be believed he according to my reason should be a Heathen rather than any thing else because their Religion ariseth only from the principles of reason implanted in man by Gods Commissary Nature wherein all men whose understandings are not by accident eclipsed do agree as that there is a God that he is to be worshiped that we must do as we would be done unto with the like but all other Religions depend upon testimony as the Jewes and Turkes and their testimony far inferiour to that of the Christians so that if I were not a Catholique according to the direction of my reason I ought to bee a Heathen But if I will be a Christian I ought to be such a one as will according to our Saviours command deny himselfe Math. 16.24 And a mans understanding is a chiefe part of himselfe even the chiefest according to most mens account as we may perceive in that they do more abhorre to be counted fools which is a defect contrary to the understanding than to be counted vicious which is a defect contrary to the will yet this must be denied and is by all good Christians who submit to that which as the Apostle saith brings into captivity all understandings to the obedience of Christ 2 Cor. 10.5 § 6. Besides whatsoever Religion any of them that are guided by this principle is of for the present no man is sure nor he himselfe that he shall hold it to morrow for if his reason howsoever deluded with false apparitions guide him to the belief of any thing contrary to that which he now holdeth he is presently obliged to follow it though it be to the deniall of his whole present faith and to change his purpose in matters of Religion as oft as he doth his apparell and so float in a giddy irresolution and inconstancy led by the ignis fatuus the foolish fire of his owne reason untill at last he sink into the depth of Atheisme and damnation Now how sutable this doctrine is to the peace and tranquillity of Common-Wealths and Kingdomes wherin every man is left to his own liberty in the choice and change of Religion though it be to Arrianisme to the Heresie of the Macedonians Manicheans or to any the most blasphemous absurd or turbulent and that with impunity as he challengeth they that sit at the helme of
government can best determine § 7. Lastly if any of these fore-mentioned waies of Protestants for the knowledge of the Word of God the guide to eternall life were sufficient what need were there of preaching and instructing of the people at least of them that can read but let them take the Bible and let nature work which in the co-operation of their owne wise fancies will hatch a goodly Religion no doubt borne like Minerva of the brain of Jupiter and be as comely as a Chymera of many seuerall shapes tackt together and to them instead of the ancient heathens houshold-Gods which every one must adore as his private God within himselfe O sacras gentes quibus haec nascuntur in ipsis Numina Who prove the truth of this saying in themselves that He that is Schoole-master to himself is Scholler to a fool § 8. Observing thus the weaknesse and absurdity of all the Protestants alledged in proof that the Scripture is the Word of God easie to be understood at least in all things necessary to salvation and that it is to be interpreted by it self or by the Spirit to everie particular man so making way for as much variety in Religion as there may be diversity of opinion I saw that although some probable arguments may be drawn from the Scriptures to prove them to be of God yet there was no other infallible way to know what is the true Word of God first taught by the Apostles and their hearers but by the testimony of some sure certain and agreeing witnesses and what is the meaning of this Word of God in case there should be any important difference about it thereby to give a period to all controversies but by some society of men renowned for their wisdome And this I conceived in common prudence a far better way than for a man to rely upon himselfe But though this were a better way than those of the Protestants yet if this society of men were not in these matters free from error although it is more likely they should tell truth than the Protestants yet I could not have an immovable foundation for my saith but it would be subject to wavering and inconstancy and so there could be no prudent setlednesse in Religion nor any well-built hope of the end thereof eternall life I saw then that it was needfull that there should be a faithfull witnesse a wise judge and so wise and faithfull that he should not be subject to falshood or error otherwise it seemed to me that God had not contrived a competent way to his own glory or mans salvation which to be wanting in is neither sutable to his wisdome nor his goodnesse I therefore concluded that there was some society of men who must instruct us in the premises and that this society in reason ought to be infallible and that none could with any colour pretend to be this society but that which we call the Catholique Church which all Christians professe to believe according to the Creed of the Apostles But before I could proceed any further I was cast upon the examination of the sense of the words Church and Catholique finding therein much difference amongst the pretenders to these titles CHAP. V. Of the meaning of these words Church and Catholique and that neither of them belong to Protestants § 1. THere were seven Cities that strove for the body of Homer And very many societies of Christians there are that lay claime to the body of Christ which is his Church And as when Telesius a young Grecian having won the prize in the Pythian games was to be led in triumph there arose such a dispute between the severall Nations there present every one being covetous to have him for their owne that one drawing one way another another instead of receiving the honour that was prepared for him he was torne in pieces even by those who seemed most ambitious to honour him So happens it to the Church all those that beare the name of Christians avow that to her only appertaines the victory over hell and that whosoever will have part in the prize and glory of this triumph must serve under her Ensigne but when they come to debate about the body of this society then every Sect desirous to draw her to themselves they rend and teare her in pieces and instead of embracing the Church which consists in unity they embrace Schism and Division which is the death and ruin of the Church § 2. The Protestants do somtimes give a strict definition of a Church somtimes a large somtimes they restraine her to the number of the predestinate only somtimes they enlarge her so far that they imbrace within her compasse because they will be sure not to leave out themselves all the variety of Christians whatsoever But by all the former they exclude the visibility of the Church which is an inseperable companion thereof as I shall shew hereafter for the predistinate are not knowne to any body nor ordinary unto themselves But those that are so presumptuous as very many are to assume unto themselves the assurance of their predestination do easily lay hold on this tenure which they do the more boldly by how much it is more difficult for another to disprove but as it is not easie for another to disprove so it is as hard for them to prove and concludes nothing therefore in the behalf of the Churches description in generall or of their share in particular Beside the word Ecclesia Church is derived from a verb which signifies to call not to predestinate And the Church is a society but the predestinate are a multitude and there is this difference between a societie and a multitude that a society hath a certain form and vertue whereby they communicate together which the other without this association have not Now predestinaton as it is meere predestination establisheth nothing in the predestinate nor is it made in them but in God only and by consequence doth not make them actuall parts of the society called the Church It is not the union of predestination but of vocation that builds men into a Church By the later definition of a Church they deny the very being of Heresie and Schisme for if the whole Masse of Christians be the Church notwithstanding the errors in faith which some of them hold or separation in communion which they make then there are none that can be called Heretiques or Schismatiques or else which is equally absurd all Heretiques and Schismatiques are of the Church and this destroyes the holinesse of the Church in doctrine which is another inseparable ornament thereof Others which are some of the subdivisions of sects amongst the Protestants as Brownists Anabaptists and the like say each sect for it selfe that that is the Church excluding all others from that title even their fellow Protestants but this excludes the universality of the Church another inseparable companion thereof at least after the Apostles had
propagated it But the Church having in it the property of heat which as Philosophers say is to gather together things that are of the same nature and separate things that are of different natures includes all that are of the same faith and admitteth no other § 3. I therefore conceived according to the judgement of the most learned the Church to be a society of those that God hath called to salvation by the profession of the true faith the sincere adminstration of the Sacraments and the adherence to lawfull Pastors Which description of the Church is so fitted and proportioned to her that it resembles the nest of the Halcion which as Plutarch saith is of such a just and exact size for the measure of her body that it can serve for no other bird either greater or lesse Then for the meaning of the word Catholique the Protestants say that that Church is Catholique which holdeth the true faith which though it be not spread universally over the world yet it ought to be so say they and therefore it is Catholique By which they leave men in a labyrinth of finding out the true faith in all the particulars thereof which as they say must guide a man to the Church that is truely Catholique which being the object of the understanding is much more difficult to find out than that which is the object of the sense as is its being Catholique And therefore it seemed to me as proposterous as to set the cart before the horse to prove a Church Catholique because it is true whereas it should be proved true because it is Catholique Beside the name Catholique is not a name of belief only but of communion also else antiquity would not have refused that title to those which were not separated from the belief but only from the communion of the Church S. Aug. Ep. 50. nor would they have affirmed that out of the Catholique Church the faith and Sacraments may he had but not salvation So that Catholique imports thus much both the vast extension of doctrine to persons and places different and the union of all those places and persons in Communion Therefore allbeit the Protestants should hold the same belief that the ancient Church did yet if they did not communicate with the same ancient Church which by succession of Pastors and People is derived down to this present time I could not see how they could with justice assume to themselves the title of Catholiques CHAP. VI. Of the Infallibility of the Church § 1. NOw that the Catholique Church which society of Christians soever it be of which we shall deliberate hereafter is the only faithfull and true witnesse of the matter of Gods Word to tell us what it is and what is not it the only true interpreter of the meaning of Gods word and the last and finall judge of all controversies that may arise in matters of Religion and that shee is not onely true but that shee cannot be otherwise seeing shee is infallible I was perswaded to believe by many reasons In the alleadging of which I will avoid the accusation of Protestants of the circular disputation of Catholiques saying they believe the Scripture because the Church saies it is so and the Church because the Scripture bids them do so First then without dependence on the Scripture I conceived the Catholique Church to be infallible in her Traditions in that which she declareth to us concerning the doctrine of Christ and the Apostles and that even in the very nature of her testimony and tradition For Tradition being a full report of what was evident to sense namely what doctrines the Apostles taught what Scripture they wrote it is impossible it should be false Worlds of men cannot be universally deceived in matters evident to sense as are the things men heare and see and not being so it is impossible they should either negligently suffer it or maliciously agree to deceive others being so many in number so distant in place so different in affections conditions and interests Wherefore it is impossible that what is delivered by full Catholique Tradition from the Apostles should be by the deliverers first devised as Tertullian saith Tert. de praesc cap. 28. That which is found one and the same amongst many is not an error but a Tradition Yet supposing universall Tradition as it is meerly humane be in its nature fallible yet the Tradition of the Catholique Church is by God himselfe preserved from error which is thus demonstrated God being infinitely good and ardently desiring the salvation of mankind cannot permit the meanes which should convey the Apostles doctrine to posterity by the belief whereof men must be saved to be poisoned with damnable error to the destruction of their salvation now the onely meanes to convey this doctrine is the Tradition of the Catholique Church Tert. de Praes cap. 21. as Tertullian saith what the Apostles taught I will prescribe ought no other wayes to be proved than by those Churches which the Apostles founded All other means as I have shewed you before are insufficient and if this Tradition of the Church should be insufficient also by reason of its liablenesse unto error then were there no certainty at all of the truth of Christian Religion no not so much as that there was such a man as Jesus Christ but all men would be left to grope in the wandring uncertainty of their owne imaginations which for God to suffer cannot fall under any prudent mans belief § 2. Secondly that which bindeth men to believe a thing to be Gods Word God cannot suffer to delude men into error whereby for their devotion unto his truth they may fall into damnation now Catholique Tradition from the Apostles is that which bindes men to believe the same to be the Word of God and that because it is thereby sufficiently proposed the World affording no higher nor surer proposall so that either this must be infallible or else God hath left us to the guidance of our own weak understandings the weaknesse of which conceit I shewed even now and all Christians to that confusion which all different opinions yet reputed the Word of God by them that hold them may produce § 3. Thirdly God being the Prime Verity he cannot so much as connive at falshood whereby he becomes accessory of deceiving them who simply readily and religiously believe what they have just reason to think to be his Word but there is most just and sufficient reason to believe that the doctrine delivered by full and perpetuall Tradition from hand to hand even from the Apostles is undoubtedly their doctrine and the Word of God therefore he cannot suffer Catholique Tradition to be falsified Nor can as I conceive any prudent man imagine that God having sent his Son into the world to teach men the way to heaven every moment of whose life was made notable by doing or suffering somthing to that end should suffer the efficacy and
to be reputed a matter of faith which is not formally and expresly to be proved by the Word of God either written or unwritten and delivered by full Ecclesiasticall Tradition and seeing the Protestants doe not nor can pretend to this Tradition nor yet can prove their tenets by Scripture in expresse and evident termes but such as themselves confesse to receive probable solutions it must hence necessarily follow that their doctrines are false without foundation and to be rejected by every Christian § 6. Lastly whereas Protestants object that the Pharisees are reproved by Christ for the observation of Traditions it is altogether impertinent for the Scripture doth not say that their Traditions were derived by succession from Moses the first deliverer of their law nor did the Pharisees pretend to it but they were Traditions of their owne whereof some were frivolous and superstitious some impious some pious The frivolous and superstitious were their washing of hands pots dishes the like supposing that otherwise they might have some spirituall impurity in them which our Saviour confutes saying There is nothing without a man entring into him which can defile him Mark 7.15 The impious were such as whereby they violated the commandements of God under the pretence of observing their Traditions as when they allowed a man under pretence of giving something to the Church to neglect his duty to his parents Mar. 7.11 Neither of these kinds is the Catholike Church guilty of Of their pious we have an example in their paying Tithes of mint a very small herb which was a Tradition of their owne not commanded in their law yet this our Saviour approves and binds them to it saying this you ought to have done Luc. 11.42 And it is worth the observation that the thing most of all objected against our Saviour was the written word and Tradition of God by Moses about keeping the Sabbath day as appeares in all the Evangelists from which precept not by Tradition unwritten but by logicall inferences of their owne they concluded that our Saviour brake the Sabbath by healing or doing some small labour thereon So that the Pharisaicall Traditions were not pretended to be doctrines unwritten derived from the first deliverer of their religion but doctrines concluded from the Scripture by the rules of Logick and reason as they conceived according to the present manner of the Protestants CHAP. VIII That the Church is infallible in whatsoever she proposeth as the Word of God written or unwritten whether of great or small consequence That to doubt of any one point is to destroy the foundation of faith And that Protestants distinction between points fundamentall and non-fundamentall is ridiculous and deceiptfull § 1. HAving thus found out that the Church was shee from whom I was to receive assurance what is the word of God and that otherwise it was impossible for me to know it and that shee could not mistake nor erre in her directions I conceived then that I was bound to believe all that shee propounded to me as the word of God whether it were written or not written writing being no testimony of the truth of any thing seeing it may be false as well as speaking and that to doubt of any thing was to call all into question and to dissolve the whole nature of divine faith For to believe hath a threefold signification in speech first it is taken for knowledge as where our Saviour saith Thomas because thou hast seen me thou believest John 20.29 to wit that I am risen now he that sees one knowes so much Secondly for opinion which is an assent begot by probable reason so men delivering their opinions use to say I believe thus or thus Thirdly and most properly for an assent unto such things as doe not appear but are assented unto by a firm reliance on the truth of him that reports them as S. Paul saith Faith is the argument of things not seen Heb 11.1 And this reliance on an Author such as cannot deceive or be deceived at least in those things which he propounds unto us to be believed must beget in us an equall belief of things that have humane possibility or probability on their side and of things that are clean against it the matter propounded makes no matter nor yet the manner of propounding it is the Author and our apprehension of him that controles all opposition By this do we believe the inexplicable mystery of the Trinity the Incarnation of God the Mother-hood and yet Virginity of the B. Virgin Mother with many others with as much ease as we believe that Noah had three sons or that S. Peter had neither silver nor gold and by this do we believe the latter with as much strength and firmnesse as the former For he that believes a thing because such an one sayes it who he believes cannot lie must believe all that he sayes and that with the same firmnesse because the reason of his belief still remaines namely the inerrability of the speaker But if he apply his belief according to the probability of the thing spoken and no further then he doth not believe because of the truth of the speaker but of the thing spoken which he must gather from probabilities of reason wherein he doth not believe the thing for the truth sake of the speakers testimony but for the likelihood thereof which he finds by the measure of his own understanding which is not to believe the other but himselfe and the other no more than he would do the arrantest lyer in the world yea the Devill himself that is so far as he by his reason conceives that he speakes the truth Which reason of his if it be infallible he doth not believe the thing properly but he knowes it if it be but probable he believes it not properly but hath an opinion of it and no more assurance than of other humane reports whose authors have no security from error which as they may be true so they may also be false And thus to believe is not to believe by divine and infallible faith but by humane and fallible and so it cancells divine supernaturall faith the first in order of the three theologicall vertues without which no man can be saved § 3. So that all the place that reason hath in the government of our faith is this to lead us to believe that testimony which cannot deceive us and for the particular objects of beliefe to take them upon trust of that testimony without checking at them whatsoever they be and though they be bones to Philosophy yet make them milke to faith and not as Heretiques doe make us demand a reason of every particular point of faith which if it square not to their apprehensions they cashiere This is not faith but fancy For to rely upon a humane basis such as reason is will not support such a mighty statue as divine faith And to use Chillingworths own similitude Water will not rise
are fundamentall others not that is some points are to be believed explicitely and distinctly others not and more points are to bee believed explicitely by some than by others as I have shewed before speaking of points necessary to salvation But in regard of the formall object and motive for which we believe namely the truth of God revealing it by his Church there is no distinction of points of faith we being equally bound to believe all that is sufficiently proposed unto us as revealed by God whether the matter be great or small and whether the points be fundamentall in their matter or no yet they are proposed unto us by the same authority therefore we are bound equally with the same firmenesse of faith to believe every one as any one For example the Creed of the Apostles containes divers fundamentall points as the Diety Trinity of Persons Incarnation Passion and Resurrection of our Saviour it containes also some points for their matter and nature in themselves not fundamentall as under what judge he suffered that he was buried and the circumstance of time when he rose againe to wit the third day Now whosoever knowes these to be contained in the Apostles Creed is bound to believe them as firmely as the other and the denyall of any one of them is a fundamentall and damnable errour a giving of God the lie For the nature of faith doth not arise from the greatnesse or smalnesse of the thing believed for then there should be as many different faiths as there are points to be believed but from the motive for which a man believes which is Gods revelation testified by the Church which being alike for all objects it is manifest that they that in things equally revealed by God do grant one thing and deny another do forsake the very formall motive of faith Gods revelation and so have no true divine faith at all § 7. Moreover if the Churches infallibility be tied to a certain matter in Religion then it is meet we should know that first that so we may accordingly apply our belief if it be fundamentall then without doubt to imbrace it if not to exercise our liberty and believe it so far as we see cause but then we must know the matter wherein she is infallible distinctly and particularly as also infallibly or else we may mistake and believe when we need not and disbelieve when we ought not Now from whence shall we have this knowledge God hath no where revealed it and it ought to have been revealed together with the Commission given to the Church to teach or else shee might have deceived us before the caution came but the Church it selfe hath told us no such matter we have no such Tradition therefore we must have this most fundamentall point of all the rest which is to know what is fundamentall and what not either by inspiration or by the strength of reason both which are ridiculous or by some authority coequall to the Churches and yet not hers which is most absurd And in this businesse the Protestants seemed unto me to deal as obscurely and deceiptfully as did once Richard the second King of England who in a return to peace betwixt him and his subjects granted pardon to all except fifteen but would not declare what their names were but if at any time he had a mind out of some new displeasure to cut off any man he would say he was one of the fifteen whom he excepted from the benefit of his pardon In like manner the Protestants say we will believe the Church in all points but those that are not fundamentall not expressing what they are and when they have a wanton disposition to deny their belief to something that the Church hath declared they shelter their denyall under the protection of this unlimited distinction and say it is a point not fundamentall And if on the other side they find it for their advantage to close with other Churches they say they are all one Church with them because forsooth they agree in they know not what that is in their inexplicable fundamentalls § 8. But Chillingworth hath undertaken to give us though not a catalogue yet a description as he supposes by which we may discern between fundamentalls not fundamentalls or circumstantialls as he calls them pag. 137. sect 20. The former being such as are revealed by God and commanded to be preached to all and beleived by all The later such as though God hath revealed them yet the Pastors of the Church are not bound under paine of damnation particularly to teach them unto all and the people may securely be ignorant of them And this is even the same obscurity in more words for what is to be preached to all and believed by all and what the Pastors may forbear to preach and the people may be ignorant of especially seeing the same degree of ignorance is not secure to all people alike but receives infinite variety according to their meanes of knowledge is as undeterminable as what is fundamentall and what not But suppose the Pastors doe preach more than they are bound to preach and reveal that truth which if it had not been revealed the people might safely have been ignorant of may they be ignorant or unbelieving now it is revealed to them If they be then they deny that very authority upon which they believed the most fundamentall points which is the ground of all belief and by consequence deny the whole faith From whence wee may see that the Pastors teaching is not to be stinted by the things the people ought necessarily to believe but the peoples necessity of believing ought to be enlarged according to the measure of the Pastors preaching The Church is not confined to the teaching of fundamentalls only for the matter but whatsoever shee teacheth is fundamentall for the forme and motive of beliefe The circumstantialls are as he confesseth revealed by God to the Church and if the Church reveal them to the people the people must either believe them or deny to believe God And though common people and others also may safely be ignorant before they have been instructed yet they may not be so after nor hath God confined the Pastors instructing of the people to any certain matter to fundamentalls only for Christ bids his Apostles teach all nations to observe all things whatsoever he commanded them Matth. 28.20 And though common people may safely be ignorant of many things yet they must not be unbelieving of any thing but by an implicite faith at the least believe all that the Church believes by adhering and resigning themselves to her being prepared to believe explicitly what and when shee shall declare it to them Which faith is originally and fundamentally built upon the Word of God not as written but as delivered by the Tradition of the Church successively from the Apostles upon the authority whereof we believe that both Scriptures and all other Articles of
and Apostolique Church THese premises considered I look'd round about to see amongst al the societies of the world professing the name of Christ to which of them the title and dignity of the Church might most justly be applyed and I found that the Roman Church that is the multitude of Christians spred over the face of the known world adhering to the doctrine of the Church of Rome is the One Holy Catholique and Apostolique Church The vulgar objection against the title of Catholique Roman that is say they universall and yet but particular seemed very childish the one title being applyed in regard of the doctrine and the extent thereof which is universall the other of the discipline and the fountaine and head thereof which is particular from the Bishop of Rome For the word Catholique is taken three waies to wit formally causally and participatively Formally the universall Church only that is to say the society of all the true particular Churches united in one selfesame Communion is called Catholique Causally the Roman Church is called Catholique for as much as shee infuseth universality into all the whole body of the Catholique Church For to constitute universality there must be two things one that may be instead of matter thereto to wit the multitude and the other instead of form thereto to wit unity for a multitude without unity doe not properly make universality Take away vnity from the multitude saith S. Augustine and it is a tumult De verb. Dom. sceundum Luc. Serm. 26. but bring in unity and it is a people Therefore the Roman Church which as the center and beginning of the Ecclesiasticall Communion infuseth unity which is the forme of universality into the Catholique Church may be called Catholique causally though in her own being shee be particular Even as the chief Captaine of an army on whom all the inferiour Captaines Officers and common Souldiers have their dependency and with whom they hold correspondency is called The Generall though he be but one particular man because it is he that by the relation that all others have to him gives unity to the whole body of the Army And thirdly particular Churches are called Catholique participatively because they agree and participate in doctrine and Communion with the Catholique Church § 2. Now I was induced to believe that the Roman Church is the only true Catholike Church by these ensuing reasons First God being the Prime Verity revealing truth cannot suffer the knowledg of saving doctrine to be impossible but it is impossible if it be hidden or if a false meanes of knowledge thereof be so drest with the marks of the true as that the true become undiscernable from it And if the Roman be not the true Catholique Church and Tradition then the true Catholique Church and Tradition is hidden and a false Church hath the marks of the true so cleerly that no other can with any colour pretend to be Catholique rather than it that is to have doctrine delivered from the Apostles by whole worlds of Christian Fathers to whole worlds of Christian children Hence either there is no meanes left assuredly to know the saving truth or else it must be inward teaching by immediate revelation without any externall infallible meanes or the Scripture known to be the Word of God and truly interpreted by the light and evidence of the things or by the force of naturall reason the vanity and falshood whereof I have already shewed for knowledge of supernaturall truth by the light and lustre of the doctrine is proper to the Church triumphant inward assurance without an externall infallible ground is proper unto Prophets and the first publishers of Religion Hence it may be concluded that if God be the Prime Verity teaching Christian Religion darkely without making men see the light of things believed and mediatly by some externall infallible meanes upon which inward assurance must rely then he must ever conserve the Catholique Church and Tradition visible and conspicuous that the same may be by sensible marks discerned And if any object that the senses of men in this search may be deceived through naturall invincible fallibility of their organs and so be no ground of faith that is altogether infallible I answer that evidence had by sense being but the private sense of one man is not ordinarily fallible but when the same is also publique generall that is when a whole world of men concur with him then his evidence is altogether infallible Besides seeing God will not teach men immediatly but will have them cleave to an externall infallible means and to find out this means by the sensible evidence of the thing he is in a manner bound by the perfection of his veracity to assist mens senses with his providence that therein they be not deceived when they use such diligence as men ordinarily use that they be not deceived by their senses Now what greater evidence can one have that he is not deceived in this matter of sense that the Roman doctrine is the Catholique that is doctrine delivered from the Apostles by worlds of Christian Ancestors unanimous amongst themselves in all matters of faith what greater assurance I say can one have that herein he sees aright than a whole world of men professing to see the same that he doth And surely this was the meaning of God by the Prophet Esay when speaking of the Church of Christ he calls it a direct way so that fools cannot erre therein Esa 35.8 which cannot be but by following a world of Ancestors going before them in the same Tract Otherwise it is not only possible for fools but even for them that seem to be wisest to erre yea in this case it is impossible to be otherwise And if it be further objected that I believe the Catholique Church is an Article of Faith and Faith is the argument of things not seen I answer an Article of Faith may be visible according to the substance of the thing and yet invisible according to the manner it is believed in the Creed The third Article He suffered under Pontius Pilate was crucified dead and buried according to the substance of the thing was evident to sense and seen of the Jewes and is now believed of their posterity but according to the manner that it is believed in the Creed to wit that herein the Word of God by his Prophets was fulfilled and that it was done for the salvation of man in this manner this visible Article is invisible and so it is believed in the Creed In like manner that there is in the world a Catholike Church and that the Romane is this Catholique Church Pagans Jewes and Heretiques if they shut not their eyes against the light do clearly behold but that herein the Word of God concerning the perpetuall amplitude of his Church is accomplished that this is an effect of Gods varacity to the end that the meanes to learn saving truth may not be hidden this is a
examine the matter and being infallibly assisted by the Spirit of truth which our Saviour promised should be with his Apostles to the end of the world that is with the Church their Successor which was to continue to the worlds end shee declares what is true and what is false as agreeing with or disagreeing from that doctrine which shee hath received from her Fore-fathers the Prophets and Apostles upon whom shee is built as S. Paul saith built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Ephes 2.20 For as in a building there is not the least stone which rests not upon the foundation so in the doctrine of the Catholique Church there is not the least point which is not grounded on or contained in that which was delivered by the Apostles For example in the principles of every Science are contained divers truths which may be drawn out of them by many severall conclusions one following another These conclusions were truths in themselves before though they did not so appear to us till wee saw the connexion they had with the premises and how they were contained in them And by the many severall conclusions so drawn the truth of those principles doth more shew it selfe but doth not receive any change in it selfe thereby even so in the prime principles of our faith revealed immediately by God and delivered to the Church are contained al truths that any way belong to our faith but it was not necessary that the Church should manifest all these at their first meeting in Councell but only so much in every severall Councell as should concerne the present occasion of their meeting which is some particular heresie or heresies then sprung up and so more according to the successive growth of heresies which when shee hath done shee cannot be charged with creating of a new faith or altering of the old but shee doth only out of old grounds and premises draw such conclusions as may serve to destroy new heresies and shew them to be contrary to the ancient faith In this manner the Church hath grown and increased in knowledge by degrees and shall still do so to the end of the world And as the sun spreads the raies of his light more and more betwixt morning and noon and his beames display themselves in a valley or some roome of a house where they did not before without any change of light in the sun himselfe So may the Church spread the light of her faith shewing such or such a point to be a divine truth which before was not known to be so or which though it were a divine truth in it selfe yet it was not so to us for want of sufficient proposall that is of the Churches wherein the Church resembles our Blessed Saviour her Lord and Spouse who though he never received the least increase of grace and knowledge from the first moment of his being conceived yet the Scripture saith He grew in wisdome and age and in favour with God and men Luc. 2.52 to wit because he shewed it more and more in his words and actions This also further appeares by the method which Catholique Fathers and Doctors observe in and out of Councells in proving and defining points of faith namely by having recourse to the authority of Gods Word conteined both in Scripture and Tradition and to the belief and practise of the Church in searching whereof the Holy Church joynes humane industry with Gods grace and assistance For when any question or doubt of faith ariseth particular Doctors severally dispute and write thereof then if further cause require the Holy Church assembles her Pastors and Doctors together in a generall Councell to examine and discusse the matter more fully as in that first Councell of the Apostles whereof the Scripture saith The Apostles and Elders assembled together to consider of this word Acts 15.6 The Pastors being thus come together and having the presence of our Saviour and his Holy Spirit according to his promise amongst them out of Scripture and Traditions joyning therewith the consent of holy Fathers and Doctors of foregoing times she doth infallibly resolve and determine the matter not as new but as ancient orthodox and derived from her forefathers making that which was ever in it selfe a divine truth so to appeare to us that now wee may no more make question thereof So that from hence it appeares that the Church makes no new Articles of faith such as then may be said to have their beginning but only explications and collections out of the old which were delivered to the Apostles and by them to us And though the Church doe thus grow in the knowledge of points of faith yet this is no newnesse of faith but a maintenance of the old with a kind of increase by way of explicating that which was involved cleering that which was obscure defining that which was undefined obliging men to believe more firmly and explicitly that which before they were not bound so to believe That is only to be called a new faith which is contrary to that which was held before or hath no connexion with it and when we cease to believe that which we believed before this indeed is change of faith the other is but encrease And if this encrease of faith by the declaration of Councells may be called a change and innovation of faith there is no Heretique but may challenge antiquity to himselfe and put novelty on the score of the Church For he may say such a thing for example that the Sonne is of the same substance with the Father was not held de fide a matter of faith before the Councell of Nice therefore it is new That Baptisme administred by Heretiques is good baptisme was not held as a matter of faith before the daies of S. Cyprian therefore it is new And the Heretique may say that he believes only that which was believed before such or such a Councell which he please for the case is alike in all and therefore he believes the antient Faith By which way of arguing he may renounce the decrees of all Councells as Novelties and maintaine many Heresies as the antient Faith Yea by this absurdity a man may deny divers Books of the Scripture as the Epistle to the Hebrewes the second Epistle of S. Peter the Epistle of S. Iames of S. Iude and the Apocalyps with some others because they were not admitted for Canonicall untill 300. or 400. yeares after they were written Yet when they were declared to be Canonicall there was no change of faith in the Church thereby for the believing of these Books was involved in this revealed Article I believe in God and the believing of them to be Canonicall was involved in this revealed Article I believe the holy Catholike Church onely hereby was an increase of the materiall object of our faith to us not in it selfe we being bound upon the declaration of the Church to believe that thing firmely and without dispute
blood of Christ the purest sacrifice that can be imagined In this age also Justin Martyr saith In Apol. 2. ad Anton. Imperat prope finem * For we do not take those things as common bread and common drink but as Jesus Christ our Saviour made flesh by the word of God had both flesh and blood for our Salvation so the bread and wine being made the Eucharist by the praier of the word proceeding from him by which our flesh and blood are nourished by change we are taught that it is the flesh and blood of the same Jesus Christ incarnate Lastly in the first age S. Ignatius Martyr and Disciple of S. John the Evangelist speaking of the error of the Saturnians saith a Epist ad Smynium ut citatur à Theodoreto Dial 3. They do not admit Eucharists and oblations because they do not confesse the Eucharist to be the flesh of the Saviour which suffered for our sinnes which the Father by his â—ounty raised And S. Andrew the Apostle saith b lib. pass S. Andreae apud SuriuÌ„ I daily sacrifice an immaculate Lamb to the omnipotent God which when it is truly sacrificed and the flesh thereof truly eaten of the people doth continue whole and alive Concerning the honour and Invocations of Saints in the fift age S. Augustine saith c Serm. 17. de verbis Apost prope init It is an injury to pray for a Martyr to whose prayers we ought to be commended And accordingly he did commend himself in these words d Meditat. c. 40. Holy immaculate Virgin Mary Mother of God and Mother of our Lord Jesus Christ vouchsafe to intercede for me to him whose Temple thou hast deserved to be made Holy Michael holy Gabriel holy Raphael holy Quires of Angells and Archangells of Patriarchs and Prophets of Apostles Evangelists Martyrs Confessors Priests Levites Monks Virgins and all the just both by him who hath chosen you and in whose contemplation you rejoyce I presume to ask that you would deign to beseech God for me a sinner that I may deserve to be delivered from the jaw of the Devill and from eternall death And again he saith a Lib. de loquutionibus in Gen. prope finem Jacob blessing his Nephewes the sonnes of Joseph among other things he saith and my name shall be invoked in these and the name of my Fathers Whence it is to be noted that not only hearing but also invocation is somtimes said which are not things pertaining unto God only but unto men In the fourth age we find S. Gregory Nazianzene speaking thus to S. Basil the great b In Orat. 20. quae est in laudem Basilii Magni But thou holy and heavenly head I pray thee behold us from heaven and either with thy prayers stop the provocation of the flesh which God hath given us for instruction or truly perswade that we may beare it with a valiant mind and direct all our life to that which is most availeable and after that we shall passe out of this life receive us also there in thy Tabernacles And S. Hierome against Vigilantius saith c Cont. Vigilant c. 3. initio Thou saist in thy book that while we live we may pray for one another but after we shall be dead the prayer of no man is to be heard for another especially seeing the Martyrs regarding the revenge of their blood shall not be able to obtain to which he answers ' If the Apostles and Martyrs being yet in the body can pray for others when as yet they ought to be solicitors for themselves how much more after crowns victories and triumphs And a little after he answers to the objection of their being dead saying To conclude the Saints are not said to be dead but asleep In the third age Origen giues us this example d Initio sui Lamenti I will begin to prostrate my self on my knees and to beseech all the Saints that they help me who dare not beg of God by reason of the abundance of my sin O Saints of God I beseech you with tears and weeping full of griefe that you fall down to his mercies for me miserable wretch And after woe is me Father Abraham pray for me that I be not estranged from thy bosome which I have greatly desired not condignely truly by reason of my great sin In the second age Justin Martyr speaks thus d Apol. 2. ad Anton Pium Imper. non longe ab initio Moreover we doe worship and adore him to wit God and the Son who came from him and taught us these things and the Army of others that followed and of the good Angells assimilated and the propheticall Spirit reverencing in word and truth and fairly delivering it as we are taught to all that will learn And in the first age in the Liturgie of S. James the lesse Ante Med. we have these words e Let us make commemoration of the most holy immaculate most glorious our blessed Lady Mother of God and alwaies Virgin Mary and of all Saints and just ones that we may all obtain mercy by their prayers and intercessions § 5. Thirdly for the use and veneration of holy Reliques and Images and chiefly of the holy Crosse hear what S. Augustine saith in the fift age * Tract 118. in Ioan. fine What is the signe of Christ which all have known but the Crosse of Christ which signe unlesse it be applied whether to the foreheads of believers or to the water wherewith they are regenerated or to the oile wherewith they are anointed with the chrisme or to the Sacrifice wherewith they are nourished nothing of them is rightly performed In the fourth age we shall find Athanasius speaking thus and expressing the manner of Catholiques worship of Images * ad Antiochum Principem Let it be far from us that we Christians adore images as Gods as the Greeks do we declare only our affection and the care of our love towards the figure of the person expressed by his image therefore oftentimes we burne as unprofitable the wood which ere while was an image if the figure be worne out Therefore as Jacob when he was to die adored the top of Josephs rod not honouring the rod it selfe but him who held the rod So we Christians do no otherwise adore images but even as moreover when we kisse our Fathers and children we declare the desire of our mind Even as the Jew also did adore in times past the Tables of the law and the two golden Cherubins and certaine other Images not worshiping the nature of the stone or gould but our Lord who commanded them to be made a Homil. 8. in diversos Evangelii locos In the third age * Origen saith thus To conclude * in Ezekiel the Prophet ch 9. v. 4. when the Angell who was sent had slaine all and the slaughter had begun from the Saints they only are kept safe whom the letter
but that it is necessary and fundamentall to believe God in all that he saith whether the matter be great or small now Protestants professing to believe nothing necessarily but what may be proved by the Scripture and their differences being in the things which they believe it followes that their differences are in things which are proved by Scripture that are the pure Word of God and the meaning of the Holy Ghost as they use to speak and therefore must needs be in the severall opinions of them that hold them fundamentall and necessary to salvation To instance in some particulars of their disagreement for to speak of all were to enter into a Labyrinth First concerning Scripture it selfe I think they will grant it is a fundamentall point I am sure their learned Hooker doth so Eccles Pol. lib. 1. sect 14. who saith Of things necessary the very chief is to know what books we are bound to esteem holy and as sure I am that in this there is great disagreement for the Lutherans do deny besides those books of the Old Testament which the Calvinists also deny * Châ—mnit exam conc Trid. part 1. pag. 55. also Enchyrid p. 63. the second Epistle of S. Peter the second and third Epistle of S. John the Epistle to the Hebrewes of S. James of S. Jude and the Revelation all which the Calvinists and the Church of England do undoubtedly believe to be the Word of God And if they disagree about their prime Principle how can agreement be expected in the things that they derive from thence Secondly concerning their translation of Scriptures in the truth whereof consists the truth of Gods Word to those that understand it not but as it is translated very great are the disagreements and bitter the reprehensions between Luther and Zuinglius between Calvin and Molineus between Beza and Castalio between legall Protestants and Puritans of England each party condemning the others translation I will instance chiefly in the English The Ministers of Lincoln Diocesse in a book delivered to King James being an abridgement of their grievances say pag. 11.13.14 that the English translation of the Bible is a translation that takes away from the text that addes to the text and that sometimes to the changing or obscuring the meaning of the holy Ghost And Broughton the great Linguist in his Advertisement of Corruptions tels the Bishops that their publique translations of Scripture into English is such as that it perverts the text of the old Testament in 848 places and that it causeth millions of millions to reject the new Testament and to run into eternall flames And yet the translators of the Bible and the Bishops were of another mind or else surely they would not have commended it to the use of the people And what a wofull condition were the people in who must be guided by such a Bible in which either there was certaine falshood or they were not certaine that it was the truth Secondly the Reall presence of Christs body in the Eucharist by consubstantiation and to the bodily mouth of the receiver is affirmed by the Lutherans but denyed by the Calvinists Thirdly that Christ descended into Hell which is an article of the Creed is affirmed by Hill in a Treatise of that subject by Nowell and by many Protestants but is denyed by Carleil in a book written to that purpose and commonly by all Puritans Fourthly Evangelicall Councells are affirmed by Hooker Eccles Pol. l. 3. sect 8. p. 140. but are denyed by Perkins Reformed Cath. p. 241. and most of the Church of England Fiftly concerning the head of the Church or the supreame governour in causes Ecclesiasticall which one would think a fundamentall matter the Church of England holds that the King or Queen when the Kingdome is governed by a Woman is the head thereof but the Church of Helvetia saith f Harmony of Consess p. 308. forward we acknowledge no other head of the Church but Christ and that he hath no deputy on earth and many there are in England of the same opinion who are not afraid to say so now though it be by law a capitall offence Sixtly the government of the Church by Bishops one would think were a fundamentall point for it is affirmed to be jure divino by divine law by many Protestants in England and particularly Bishop Hall wrote a book a few yeares since to that purpose and yet this is denyed by a great party in England as the Bishops by woefull experience do know A hundred other differences might be named in the maintenance whereof books have been written one against another one side holding with the Catholiques so that there is scarce any point of Catholique doctrine but is maintained by some or other Protestants amongst them all almost the whole Catholique doctrine If therefore they differ from the Church of Rome they differ from one another And that their differences are not light but about most important matters in their own opinions being about matters as they conceive revealed in the word of God to which all men are bound to adhere even their persuit of those differences doth plainly demonstrate which stretcheth to the g Luth. con art Louan Thes 27. condemning of one another for Heretiques h Osiander â—pit Eccl. hist cont 16 par altera p. 805. and banishing each other from their severall territories i Hospi hist Sacrament par alt fol. 393. 395. 397. 398. forbidding the reading of each others books imprisoning of their persons and finally breaking into open Arms one against another are not al these tragical particulars to our infinite grief now acted on the stage of England the chief pretence is Religion And surely they are guilty of extreme folly that will fight to the fundamentall overthrow of themselves families for ought they know of the whole Kingdome for matters which they hold not-fundamentall § 4. But the Protestants think to wipe off this staine of disagreement by retorting it upon the Catholiques accusing them of as great disagreement as is amongst themselves which when I considered I found altogether impertinent For amongst Catholiques there are two sorts of points some defined by the Church in a Generall Councell and so infallibly certain others not defined In the former they all exactly agree in the later each man follows the direction of his particular reason Like to this there are amongst Protestants certaine Articles as they call them which are agreed upon in each severall dominion of Protestants which are set down in their Harmony of confessions concerning which first it is to be noted that there is great disagreement in generall betwixt their Churches they never meeting all together in any one Councell to determine any one thing so that they are not united in any one point by consent Then in particular dominions the decrees that they publish are not firmely believed by all under those dominions but are accounted as
in you Joh. 6.54 And taking the Chalice he gave thanks and gave to them saying drinke ye all of this Mat. 26.27 Also In like manner the Chalice after he had supped saying this Chalice is the New Testament in my blood this do ye as often as yee shall drinke in remembrance of me 1 Cor. 11.25 But none of these places rightly understood nor any other do prove what the Protestants pretend to Particularly to the first of these places I answer that seeing the Protestants do generally interpret this Chapter of S. John not of receiving the Sacrament of the Eucharist but onely of believing in Christ it is no objection for them but because most Catholique Divines do interpret it of the Blessed Sacrament it is an objection against us to which therefore I further answer First that all words of Scripture that in their forme seem to import a Precept do not so indeed as where our Saviour saith to his Apostles that they ought to wash one anothers feet Joh. 13.14 yet no man ever held it for a matter of necessity But supposing for the present that it include a Precept I further answer that as we distinguish in the Sacrament the substance and the manner the substance being to receive Christ the manner to receive him in both kinds by formall eating and drinking So the same distinction is to be made in our Saviours Precept about this Sacrament For howsoever his words may sound of the manner of receiving in both kinds yet his intention is to command no more than the substance to wit that we really receive his body and blood which may be done under one kind The truth whereof will appeare if we consider first the occasion of the words objected which was the incredulity of the Capernaites whose doubt was not whether the Sacrament was to be given in one or both kinds but as Protestants still doubt whether he could give us his flesh to eat Secondly the manner of his speech which was not by making mention of any kind at all in the said words but only of the things themselves for he doth not say unlesse you eat the bread and drink the wine you have no life but unlesse you eat the flesh and drink the blood both which are equally contained under either bread or wine So that if a man receive the forme of bread only or of wine only he doth therein both eat and drinke the flesh and blood of Christ. And in other places of this Chapter where he makes mention of one kind it is of bread only and not at all of wine so that this place is of no force for the forme of wine unlesse the body and blood of Christ be separated and that receiving the form of bread we receive the body onely and of wine the blood only which must suppose Christ still dead which is most impious and impossible § 5. And if any think that because it is said unlesse you drinke therefore Christ must be received under a forme that may be drunke as well as eaten or else it is not drinking his blood but eating his blood as well as his body I answer it is called eating and drinking not so much in regard of the action as the subject so that flesh being the usuall subject of eating when the Sacrament is called flesh the action is called eating and blood being the usuall subject of drinking when there is mention of receiving the blood the action is called drinking and we are not bound to receive him in a drinkable forme because we are bid to drink his blood but we may be said to drink because we receive that which is in its nature drinkable to wit blood which we doe when we receive the body And if this will not serve the turn they may further argue against us that if we swallow the Host whole we do not eat it eating implying chewing more or lesse and so do not fulfill the precept of eating the flesh And we may argue in like manner against them that if they do not take wine enough to make a draught they do not drinke but onely tast or sip thereof and therein also do not fulfill that which they think they are here commanded But as a Protestant I suppose if the bread and wine should be so mixed together in a cup that both might be drunk together or else eaten with a spoon or in the manner of a moist piece of past or swallowed like a pill will believe that he receives in both kinds and fulfills this in his opinion Precept of drinking the blood So the body and blood being joyned together in either kind to us that believe Transubstantiation we receive both when we receive either kind which act of receiving with relation to the flesh may be called eating to the blood drinking yea though it should be taken in such a manner as strictly speaking should bee neither eating nor drinking I adde moreover with relation to them that do not believe Transubstantiation that the conjunctive particle And doth frequently signifie disjunctively that is Or For example the Apostle saith Acts 3.6 Silver and gold have I none where it is manifest that the sense is silver or gold I have none for if he had had either he had had no excuse of want for his not giving of almes So also S. Paul speaketh of this very Sacrament 1 Cor. 11.29 27. He that eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh judgment to himselfe which he interpreteth in the same Chapter saying Whosoever shall eat this bread or drink the cup of our Lord unworthily In like manner those words Except ye eat the flesh and drink the blood if they be taken for eating and drinking under the severall formes of bread and wine are to be understood disjunctively thus Except ye eat the flesh or drink the blood of the sonne of man you shall not have life in you Which disjunctive sense is proved to be the sense intended in this place because else Christ should contradict himself for he promiseth in this same Chapter life eternall to eating only He that eateth me the same shall live by me and he that eateth this bread shall live for ever now if he require unto life eternall eating and drinking both under distinct forms and kinds it is manifest he should contradict himselfe and because this is impossible we must necessarily interpret this place with relation to the severall formes of bread and wine disjunctively thus unlesse you eat or drink The second text urged for Communion in both kinds is Drinks ye all of this Mat. 26.27 which being rightly understood will appeare to be spoken neither to all mankind as to Jewes Turks Infidells as Protestants also acknowledge nor yet to all the faithfull but to all the Apostles and to them all only Which is manifest out of the Text it self for what one Evangelist saith was commanded to all another relates to have been answerably performed by all They drank all
English translates it thus whosoever shall eat this bread and drink the cup of the Lord unworthily putting and for or thereby making the Apostle speak of the receiving of the bread and wine unworthily in an united sense whereas he speakes of them in a divided sense Thus in very many places do they deal with the Scripture like the Elephant when he goes to drink who troubles the cleer water with his feet because he will not see the deformity of his face So they trouble and defile the sense of Scripture either in words or exposition because they would not see the deformity of their Errors Many falsifications also and corruptions of Catholique Authors by the Protestant writers I have met with as where they speaking something by way of supposition they alledge them as if they speak it positively and absolutely where they bring the objections of Heretiques they alledge them as speaking the words in their owne names where they relate with reprehension the sayings of wicked men they alledge them as saying those words themselves which is as if they should charge S. Mathew himselfe with the words of the Pharisees against our Saviour Behold a glutton and a drinker of wine Math. 11.19 But I will not be particular in this matter because many that have been guilty in this case have been called to a strict account by their Catholique answerers And when they are pressed by Catholiques with plaine and direct proofes O what serpentine wriglings and windings to escape the assaulters doe they make O what perverse ridiculous contradictory answers and evasions do some of them make in which they doe at once shew both much wit and much folly for fooles could not speak as they doe and wise men would not In so much that a Answer to a Jesuites challenge chapt of limb Patrum Bishop Vsher Primat of Armagh a very learned man to avoid the confession of Christs descent into hell according to the Article of the Creed in the plaine sense thereof doth so turn it and winde it that he makes the sense of the words He descended into hell to be He ascended into heaven to such pittifull refuges doth the weaknesse of a bad cause drive them And thus they that have the most learning amongst them being by unhappy accident bred up in an erroneous Religion and thereby presuming it to be true do bend all the endeavours of their learning to the maintenance of their errors and the obscuring of the truth which learning if it were directed to the right end might by just title claime a place in the first file of desert even like a torch which turned downward is extinguished with that wax which held upward would make it bright and glorious But though their learning were a hundred times doubled yet as Aarons serpent devoured the Magicians serpents Exod. 7.12 so the wisedome of God which is in his Church will confound the sensuall wisdome of all her opposers seeing there is no wisdome nor prudence nor councell against God Prov. 21.30 § 3. I further observed that the arguments of Protestants for themselves were very fallacious most frequently in that which the Logicians call FALLACIA CONSEqUENCIA which is when the consequence is not justly inferred for example they argue thus the Sacrament is called a figure of Christs body therefore it is not his true and reall body which is a false Consequence for it may be both even as Christ is called a figure of the substance of his father Heb. 1.3 and yet is also the same substance Christ saith come unto me therefore we may go to no body else which is false for we may go to him and others also The Apostle saith that we are Justified by faith therefore say they not by works whereas we are justified by both We must confesse our sinnes to God therefore not to a Priest whereas wee must do both Christ is the head of the Church therefore the Pope is not whereas both are in severall capacities The like might be said in many others by which kind of arguing unlearned people are exceedingly deluded think that while one thing must be done that must be done only the veine of that word only invented by Luther in the matter of justification by faith running through the whole body of their Religion § 4. Moreover I found this contradiction amongst the Patrons of Protestancy that some of them reject the Fathers and accuse them of being infected with the errors which prevailed in their times and what were their errors even all that they taught contrary to their Protestant doctrines so making themselves the rule to judge the Fathers by and not the Fathers which any wise man would think more fit a rule to themselves who no doubt knew the Scriptures also and what was agreable or contrary to them better than they Protestants being herein like carpenters who wear their rule at their backs casting behind them neglecting those that should guide their belief But other Protestants ashamed of this insolency pretend for the credit of their cause that the Fathers are altogether on their side and then with much labour hunt out some obscure passages most liable to be wrested and triumph therein as if they had found a demonstration which when they are sifted either they make nothing for them or else quite against them who in this case are like to a man ready to be drowned who to save himselfe will catch hold on a naked sword with which he cuts his fingers So Protestants sunk into the despaire of their cause think to save themselves by that which serves but to encrease their overthrow They pretend also to answer many plaes of the Fathers alledged by Catholiques and to give their words a Protestant meaning and thereby run the Fathers into manifest contradiction of themselves in regard that the Fathers have but some oblique passages which seem and but seem to make for them as whoever spake so exactly nay who can possibly speak so exactly as that his words may not be made to seem different from his meaning but they have whole Bookes Sermons Tractates and a world of dispersed places of purpose in the maintenance of Catholique truths And though they say that the Fathers taught Protestant doctrine and they give a Protestant sense though very incongruous to many of the places of the Fathers alledged by Catholiques yet they dare not use those words and Phrases of the Fathers as of the Masse the Altar the Sacrifice concerning reall presence prayers to Saints and for the dead merits satisfaction and Purgatory with the like in their prayers Sermons and books which if they speak Protestant Doctrine in the true sense of the Fathers as they say they do why do they not with the sense make use of the words and speeches also I can conceive no other reason but for fear the peoples understandings not so fraught with prejudice nor acquainted with their uncouth evasions should carry them