Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	believe_v	certainty_n	faith_n	1,633	5	5.6217	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A00791	An answer to a pamphlet, intituled: The Fisher catched in his owne net In vvhich, by the vvay, is shevved, that the Protestant Church was not so visible, in al ages, as the true Church ought to be: and consequently, is not the true Church. Of which, men may learne infallible faith, necessarie to saluation. By A.C.	A. C.; Champney, Anthony, 1569?-1643?, attributed name.; Sweet, John, 1570-1632, attributed name.; Floyd, John, 1572-1649, attributed name.; Fisher, John, 1569-1641, attributed name.	1623 (1623)	STC 10910.4; ESTC S107710	44,806	106

answered nor consequently he satisfied Moreouer the same Gentleman being present whē the Earle of Warwick told M. Fisher that D. Featly should at another tyme come againe to giue Names of Protestants in other Ages he might easily and doubtles did vnderstand that as yet Names in all Ages were not giuen nor consequently the Question satisfied in which he expected answere Furthermore presently after he went away from the Conference he told M. Fisher himselfe that he was glad that at the next meeting his Question should be answered which shewed that as yet he did not conceiue it to be answered Lastly diuers dayes after all the trouble and styrre was past which was made about the Conference the old Gentleman was not so resolute a Protestant as the Relator pretendeth for meeting M. Fisher and M. Sweete he desired them to giue him a Catalogue of Names of Professors of the Romā Church saying that if after this the Doctors should not giue him a Catalogue of Protestants he should dislike their cause Which Catalogue M. Fisher and M. Sweete haue ready for him but will not deliuer till he get the Doctours to make theirs ready that he may bring to them the Doctours Catalogue with one hand and receiue theirs with the other to deliuer to the Doctours All that can be suspected is that in the very tyme of the sayd styrre when the old Gentleman eyther was or feared to be called in question it may perhaps be that he might say those words which the Relator mētioneth but this if it were was only vpon frailty or humane feare of trouble and not any firme and settled resolution grounded vpon the Conference sith both before and after he shewed a contrary mynd as hath byn sayd As for other idle and false reports of a great Lady or any other Catholiks sayd to haue ben turned Protestants vpon this Conference I neglect them as being notoriously false It may be that some Weaklings who not being present at the Conference nor hauing commodity to heare what passed but from the lying lyps of some Protestants Who reported that Fisher was ouercome and had yielded Christ and his Apostles to be Protestants some Weaklings I say might perhaps be staggered vntill they heard the true report that this was only an impudent slaunder vttered by D. Featly but in words and deeds contradicted by M. Fisher. But I make no question so soone as these shall see or heare what is heere related they will be well satisfied and confirmed in the Catholike truth and that euen Protestants themselues will be moued to harken more after the matter And in case their Doctours doe not giue them a better Catalogue of Names of Protestants in all Ages then they did in this Conference they will doubt as they haue cause that the Protestant Church hath not byn so visible in all Ages as euen by D. Featly his argument is proued the true Catholike Church ought to be and consequently that it is not the true Catholike Church which in their Creede they professe to belieue and out of which as euen Caluin confesseth they cannot hope for remission of their sinnes nor saluation of their soules CHAP. IIII. Contayning a Reuiew and Reflection vpon the Premisses NOw hauing made an end of this Relation I am to intreate the Gentle Reader to reuiew it or reflect vpon it and to call to mind and marke 1. The occasion and consequently the end of the disputation 2. The Question and true meaning of it 3. What Methode was most fit to haue been obserued in treating of this question 4. What course was taken by the Protestant Disputant what by the Catholike Respondent All which being duely considered thou wilt better see what is to be iudged of the whole Conference and wilt make to thy selfe more benefit of the matter treated in it then perhaps hitherto thou hast done §. 1. About the Occasion and end of the Conference 1. The occasion of this Dispute was as thou hast heard in the Relation that a certaine old Protestant Gentleman was told as the truth is that there is no saluation out of the true Catholike Church and that to belieue the Catholike Church is one of the Articles of the Creed which euery Christian is bound to belieue and know and that this Church was no other besides the most auncient and vniuersally spread ouer the world the knowne Catholike Roman Church which hath had and can yet shew visible Pastours other Professors in all Ages and that the Protestant Church wherof for the present he was a member sprung vp of late and could not be the true Church of Christ as not hauing had as Christs true Church ought to haue Pastours and Doctours and lawfully sent Preachers so visible as the Names of them may be shewed in all Ages out of good Authors And this was the occasion of the dispute for heerupon the old Gentleman was so much moued in conscience to doubt of the Protestants Religion that he could not be quiet till he had made meanes to get this matter discussed in a Conference betwixt Catholike and Protestant Deuines in such sort as in the Relation hath byn told And therfore the end of this Conference was to giue this old Gentleman and others that should heare it satisfaction in this most important necessary point I call this point most important and necessary in regard the certainty of euery other point belieued by infallible diuine Fayth necessary to saluation dependeth vpon it For although euery point belieued by diuine Faith be in it selfe most true and by reason of the Diuine reuelation made knowne to the world by Christ his Apostles most certaine and infallible yet this truth infallible certainty therof is not made knowne to vs according to the ordinary course of Gods prouidence but only by the meanes which God hath appointed to wit by Pastors Doctors and Preachers of the true visible Church of Christ. §. 2. About the Question and meaning of it The Question propounded to be treated in the Conference vpon the occasion and for the end aforesayd was Whether the Protestant Church was visible in all Ages especially in the Ages before Luther and whether the Names of such visible Protestants may be shewed in all Ages out of good Authors The reason why this question was proposed rather then any other was for that the old Gentleman was already perswaded that there must be in all Ages a visible Church of Christ hauing in it visible Pastors Doctors and lawfully sent Preachers who are by Almighty God appointed and authorized to teach and of whom all sorts of people are commaunded warranted to learne infallible Fayth necessary to saluatiō And further that this Church and these her Pastors Preachers haue byn in all Ages past not only visible but so visible as the Names at least of some Pastours teaching and some people learning the true Fayth in all Ages might be produced

be ridiculous impudency By this may appeare how notoriously the old Gentleman and the rest of the Protestant Audience were abused by D. Featly vndertaking so boldly to proue both by syllogisme and Induction the affirmatiue part of the aforesayd question which was proposed to be treated in the conference the Negatiue whereof is so plainely confessed by so many Prime Protestants as now we haue heard §. 3. About the Method Concerning the Method which had beene fittest to haue beene obserued in treating the aforesayd Question it is to be noted that there be two severall methodes of finding out infallible diuine truth in all points necessary to saluation the finding wherof was the chiefe end for which the aforesayd Question about the perpetual visibility of the Church was proposed to be treated of The first methode or way is that euery man eyther by his owne wit or by hearing another discourse do examine throughly ech particuler point of diuine Fayth about which Controuersy or Question is or may be made what is and what is not to be beleeued vnder payne of damnation the which requireth 1. Ability and strength of naturall wit and skill in Latin Greeke Hebrew and other languages and some art by which he may vnderstand the tearmes and state of the Question and all that is writen of it 2. That he reade or heare and vnderstand all that is written of that Question in holy Scriptures Councells Fathers and moderne Writers and in the originall Languages and Copyes and what els may be sayd of it pro and contra by learned Disputants 3. That he doe maturely weigh and ponder al that is sayd both for the affirmatiue and negatiue part of the Question 4. That by prayer and good life he obtaine the assistance of Gods spirit to illuminate his vnderstanding in matters which exceed the capacity of his naturall wit 5. That all this premised he of himselfe without relying vpon the Iudgement of any Church frame a firme and infallible Iudgement what is and what is not to be held for truth necessary to saluation and this being knowne by it as by a rule to iudge which company of men are or are not the true visible Church of Christ in al Ages Now who seeth not that this methode or way of attayning sound resolution in all particuler points of Fayth by that to iudge what company of men are or are not the true visible Church in all ages cannot be fit and conuenient to be prescribed to all or indeed to any sort of men and especially to such as neither haue extraordinary ability of naturall wit or skill in languages nor art requisite to vnderstand the tearmes and state of all Questions nor leasure to read or heare nor strength of iudgment to weigh and ponder all that is or may be sayd of them nor such extraordinary guiftes of prayer and other vertues as they may presume to haue gotten particuler assistance of Gods spirit more then other men whereby they may assure themselues that they in particuler without relying vpon any Churches iudgement can firmely and infallibly iudge in euery Question about points of Fayth what is and what is not to beleeued as a truth necessary to saluation The 2. methode or way which indeed is both most easy and may giue full satisfaction to all sortes consisteth in these 3. points 1. To beleeue and acknowledge as euery Christian is bound by the articles of his Creed that there is and hath beene in all Ages a visible Catholique Church of Christ which is the Pillar of truth and in it a visible company of Pastours and Doctours and lawfully sent Preachers assisted by the spirit of God who haue learned of their predecessours and they of theyrs still vpwardes vntill Christ his Apostles who learned of Christ and Christ of God his Father the infallible Truth in all pointes of fayth of whome by Gods appointment all sorts haue in all Ages past as appeareth by Historyes learned and must in tymes present and to come learne the infallible truth in all matters of Christian fayth necessary to saluation The 2. is to discerne which company of Christians are this visible Church of Christ and who be these Pastours Doctours and lawfully sent Preachers of whome all sorts of men may securely learne what is and what is not to be held for infallible truth in all matters of fayth necessary to saluation The 3. is to heare and belieue and obey whatsoeuer this Company of Christians haue in all Ages taught and what the present ordinary Pastours Doctours and Preachers thereof do teach to be diuine and infallible truth necessary to saluation which to do will not be hard to those who do truely feare and loue God and be meeke and humble in hart and who can and will for the loue and seruice of Christ captiuate their vnderstanding and submit it to the obedience of faith which must be done by mortifying and denying their owne priuate opinion that they may follow the sense and iudgment of Christ speaking in and by his Catholike Church VVhich whosoeuer heareth beleeueth obeyeth doth heare beleeue and obey Christ. And VVhosoeuer contemneth or will not heare beleeue and obey the Church he contemneth Christ and by Christs owne censure is to be accounted as an Heathen or Publican Now concerning the first and third of these points as no doubt or difficulty was moued either by the old Gentleman or Syr Humfrey Lynde or the Doctours or any other of the Company presēt at the Conference so there is no reason why any difficulty should be made therof at all And as for the 2. point it seemeth to me there should be no great difficulty in regard it is already agreed of all sides that there must be one or other such Company of Christians and among them Pastors preachers so visible as is said and none besides the Catholique Romaine hitherto hath shewed a sufficient Catalogue of names of men in al Ages who can with any colour be proued or defended to haue beene professors of the true diuine infallible Catholike primitiue vnchanged faith first deliuered by Christ and his Apostles after continued in an orderly succession of visible Pastors Doctours appoynted by God to be allwayes in the Church of purpose to preserue people of all ages from wauering in doubt of any point of faith or being carried about with the wind of any vpstart Errour Neither indeed can any such Catalogue be giuen but it may be manifestly shewed to be insufficiēt as either wanting names of men in some ages or containing names of such as may certainly be proued to be no Protestants but to differ in doctrine of fayth one from another and to condemne one or other of the 39. Articles vnto which English Protestant Ministers are sworne Neuertheles if any one be not yet satisfyed in this point but will haue the Question made whether the Protestant Church hath beene so visible in all Ages as

a Paper shewing briefely and plainely how the true visible Church of Christ must be so visible in al Ages as that the names of some principal Members thereof in euerie Age may be shewed out of good Authors A true Copie of which Paper I thinke fit here to set downe in regard it may serue others as wel as this old Gentleman to vnderstand Why Catholiques doe ordinarily so much presse Protestants to name if they can Protestant Professors in al Ages as Catholiques doe in printed Bookes ordinarily set downe a Catalogue of the Names of the chiefe Pastors and other principal Members of the Catholique Roman Church in al Ages A Copie of the first Paper which M. Fisher writ and deliuered to the old Gentleman before the meeting 1. It is certaine There is one and but one true infallible Faith without which none can please God nor consequently attaine eternal Salnation 2. This one infallible Faith cannot be had according to the ordinarie course of Gods prouidence but by hearing Preachers and Pastors of the true visible Church who onely are lawfully sent and authorized to teach the true Word of God 3. As therefore this one infallible Faith hath beene and must be in al Ages so there must needes be in al Ages Preachers and Pastors of the true visible Church of whom al sorts of people haue in time past as appeareth by Histories learned and must in al future times learne the said infallible Truth 4. Hence followeth That if Protestants be the true visible Church of Christ al sorts of men who in euerie Age haue had the aforesaid infallible Faith haue learned it by hearing Protestant Preachers whose names may yet be found in Histories as the names of those are found who in euerie former Age did teach and conuert People of seueral Nations vnto the Faith of Christ. 5. Hence further followeth That if there cannot as there cannot be found in Histories Names of Protestant Preachers who in al Ages did teach al sorts of faithful People and who conuerted seueral Nations vnto the Christian Faith Hence followeth I say That Protestants are not the true visible Church of Christ neyther are their Preachers lawfully sent or sufficiently authorized to teach nor People securely warranted to learne of them that one infallible Faith without which none can possibly please God nor if they so liue and dye be saued If any Protestant wil answer let him set downe Names of Protestant Preachers in al Ages who taught People Protestant Doctrine in euerie seueral Age or confesse there were no such before Luther or at least not in al Ages to be found in Histories After this M. Fisher let the old Gentleman see a little printed Booke in which was a Catalogue of visible Roman Professors in al Ages wishing him to vrge his Ministers to shew if they can a like Catalogue of their Protestant Professors And it is very likely that this Booke as also the foresaid Paper was by this old Gentleman carryed to Sir Humfrey from whom about two or three dayes before the meeting a Paper was sent to M. Fisher contayning the former Question and another like Question proposed to him to dispute vpon the contents whereof were as followeth The question proposed by M. Fisher in which he vndertaketh to maintaine the negatiue is set downe by him in haec verba Whether the Protestant Church was in al ages visible especially in the ages going before Luther and whether the names of such visible Protestants in al ages can be shewed and proued out of good Authors To this vniuersal demand requiring rather an Historical large volume then Syllogical briefe disputes we answer That although 1. Diuine infallible Faith is not built vpon deduction out of humane Historie but diuine Reuelation as is confessed by the Schoolemen and expressely by Bellarmine Historiae humanae non faciunt fidem nisi humanam 2. And this question is grounded vpon vncertaine and false supposals yet wee requite this Proponent putting him to his owne taske in his owne defence by propounding to him the like question viz. Whether the Romish Church that is a Church holding the particular entire doctrine of the now Romanists as it is comprised in the Councel of Trent was in al ages visible especially in the first 600. yeeres and whether the names of such visible or legible Romanists in al ages can be shewed and proued out of good Authors We wil answer negatiuely That no such Church or Professors can be shewed This Paper being deliuered to M. Fisher he writ a second Paper to explicate the meaning of his question to shew an equal method of proceeding in the Disputation A Copie of a second Paper written by M. Fisher before the meeting M. Fisher being requested thereunto for satisfaction of a Gentleman propounded two questions 1. The first Whether there must not be in al ages a visible Church of which al sorts are to learne the infallible Faith necessary to saluation 2. The second Whether the Protestant Church was in al ages visible especially in the ages going before Luther and whether the names of such visible Protestants in al ages can be shewed and proued out of good Authors To the first question Sir H. and others that were present assented so as it was subscribed with these words It is granted and so M. Fisher was content that his second question should be the only question Then Sir H hauing left it to the choice of M. F. whether he would answer or dispute M. F. did choose to answer and defend the negatiue part So as it lyeth vpon Sir H. and those whom he shal choose to make his party good to proue out of good Authors the affirmatiue to wit The Protestants Church was in al ages visible especially in the ages before Luther And likewise they must set downe the names of such visible Protestants in al ages as was demanded When Sir H. or his friends shal haue performed this their taske M. Fisher wil performe what is required in the Paper sent vnto him by Sir H. in the same sort and sense as he requireth Sir H. and his friends to performe their taske For auoyding therefore of al mistaking and consequently needlesse and fruitlesse Disputes M. F. in his question requireth 1. That names of men in al ages be set downe whom Sir H. and his friends conceiue to haue bin Protestants 2. That those men whose names they set downe be shewed out of good Authors to agree in holding some points of Faith in which Protestants differ from the Romane Catholikes 3. That Sir H. or his friends wil defend against M. F. that the same men held no other points of Faith one differently from another and from the present Protestant Doctrine contayned in the 39. Articles vnto which al English Ministers are sworne for otherwise they cannot make one and the same Protestant Church In this sort and sense when Sir H. or his friends shal haue shewed a visible Protestant

About this time M. Sweet propounded these Conditions to be obserued 1. That al bitter speeches should be forborne 2. That nothing should be spoken or heard but to the purpose Which second he did propound to preuent impertinent digressions Neuerthelesse after this D. Featly made a long digression altogether impertinent to the Question which he was to dispute of for in stead of prouing a Protestant visible Church and naming visible Protestant in al ages he made a vaine and vnseasonable bragging offer to disp●oue the Roman Church in diuers particular points as are rehearsed by the Protestant Relator which he read out of a Paper Whereunto as he was speaking M. Sweet according to the second Condition before propounded answered That th●se things were then impertinent and nothing to the purpose But M. Sweet did not say as the Relator reporteth They are Scholastical points not Fundamental Neyther was there any such Syllogisme then made as the Relator annexeth D. Featly hauing ended his long digression M. Fisher said as the Protestant Relator telleth After you haue proued your Church visible in al ages and named the Professors thereof I wil satisfie you in your particulars D. Featly In the meane while name but one Father but one Writer of note who held the particulars aboue named for fiue hundred yeeres after Christ. To which instant demand of D. Featly saith the Relator nothing was answered But neyther was this said neyther was it needful to answer First for that M. Fisher formerly answered That he would satisfie al particulars after the visibilitie of the Protestant Church in al ages was shewed as the present Question required Secondly because to dispute of these particulars was vnseasonable and not to the present purpose as likewise was that other motion made by Sir Humfrey Lynd to M. Sweet to dispute of Transubstantiation out of S. Augustine To which motion being as I said vnseasonable M. Sweet answered wel according to his second Prouiso saying That is not now to the Question Then D. Featly said saith the Protestant Relator there are two meanes onely to proue any thing by necessarie inference to wit a Syllogisme and an Induction other formes of Argument haue no force but as they are reducible to these I proue the visibilitie of our Church by both and first by a Syllogisme No saith M. Fisher you must not onely proue it to be visible but so visible as the names of Protestant Professors in al ages may be shewed out of good Authors To this D. Featly said There are two Qu●res in your Question First Whether the Protestants Church were in al ages visible And secondly Whether the names of such visible Protestants can be shewed No said M. Fisher my Question is meant to be but one entire Question and so to cut off al needlesse wrangling made by D. White and D. Featly about the Aduerbe Vtrum Whether and the Copulatiue Et And as if Grammar Schollers had beene disputing rather then graue Diuines who were not to stand vpon rigor of Grammar especially in this case where the sence of the Speaker is plaine and may wel stand with Grammar M. Fisher said The Question being mine it pertaineth to me to tel the meaning and my meaning was onely to make it one Question viz. Whether the Protestants Church were so visible as the names of visible Protestants in al ages may be shewed out of good Authors Wherefore if you wil dispute you must dispute in my sense and must conclude the Affirmatiue viz. The Protestant Church was so visible as the names of the Professors in al ages may be shewed out of good Authors Proue this or proue nothing D. Featly That Church which is so visible as the Catholique Church ought to be and as the Popish Church is pretended by M. Fisher to be is so visible that the names of the Professors thereof may be produced and shewed in al ages out of good Authors But the Protestant Church is so visible as the Catholique Church ought to be and as the Popish Church is pretended to be Ergo M. Fisher. I denie the Minor Minorem probate D. Featly That Church whose Faith is eternal and perpetual and vnchanged is so visible as the Catholique Church ought to be and the Popish Church is pretended by M. Fisher to be But the Faith of the Protestant Church is eternal perpetual and vnchanged Ergo To this M. Fisher answered first excepting against the Word Eternal saying Faith is not eternal or ab aeterno It is true said a Minister who sate by Faith is not eternal but euiternal Neyther so said M. Fisher for it is not to be for euer in Heauen It is eternal said D. White in Predestination So said M. Sweet D. White himselfe may be said to be eternal and he might haue added this present Disputation may be said to be Eternal D. Featly You haue a purpose M. Fisher to cauil you know my meaning wel enough by the terme Perpetual to wit that Christian Faith which hath continued from Christs first publishing it til this present and shal continue vntil his second comming c. If this were said by D. Featly which is doubted he should haue considered how he and D. White cauilled vpon the word Whether and And when they knew M. Fishers meaning wel enough yea after they had heard him plainely explicate his meaning Whereas M. Fisher onely put them in minde to speake properly like Scholers and did not cauil or reply after D. Featly did explicate his meaning But to returne to the argument D. Featly That Church which holdeth this Faith you beleeue shal be so visible that the names of the Professors thereof may be shewed in al ages But the Protestant Church holdeth this perpetual Faith Ergo M. Fisher. Your argument is a fallacie called Petitio principij D. Featly A demonstration a causa or a priori is not Petitio principij But such is my argument Ergo Is it not a sounder argument to proue the visibilitie of the Professors from the truth of their Faith then as you the truth of your Faith from the visibilitie of Professors Visible Pastors argue not a right Faith Heretikes Mahumetans and Gentiles haue visible Professors of their Impieties yet will it not hence sollow that they haue a right beleese On the contrarie we know by the Promises of God in the Scripture That the Church which maintayneth the true Faith shal haue alwayes Professors more or lesse visible M. Sweet You ought to prooue the truth of your Church a posteriori for that is to the Question and not a priori D. Fealty Shal you prescribe me my Weapons Is not an argument a priori better then an argument a posteriori c. To this M. Fisher said A proofe a posteriori is more demonstratiue then a priori Thus farre the Relator who hath here added much more then was said and in particular those formal words which he reporteth M. Fisher to haue said viz. A proofe a

argument according to the Protestant Relator M. Fisher. I distinguish the Maior That Church whose Faith is perpetual and vnchanged so as the names of the Professors may be shewed is so visible as the Catholike Church ought to be and as M. Fisher pretendeth the Roman Church to be I grant it That Church whose Faith is perpetual and vnchanged yet so as the names cannot be shewed in al ages is visible as the Catholike Church ought to be and as M. Fisher pretends the Roman Church to be I denie it To the Minor I apply the like distinction and consequently to the Conclusion in the same manner D. Featly What answer you to the Conclusion also This is a straine of new Logick This idle exception M. Fisher attending to the matter did not regard but might haue told him That it is not vnuseal after a distinction made both to Maior and Minor to apply the like to the Conclusion For although it be true That in a Syllogisme when Maior and Minor are absolutely granted the Conclusion must not be denyed nor distinguished but must be absolutely granted yet when Maior and Minor also be distinguished the Conclusion may be distinguished And I maruaile what Rule of Logick D. Featly can bring against this In like manner if D. Featly did say any such words as the Relator telleth viz. A strange distinction of the eternitie of Faith by Professors to be named and not to be named What are Professors nominable or innominable to the eternitie of Faith If I say D. Featly did say these words it is like M. Fisher did not regard them as being impertinent but might haue said That this distinction had not relation to eternal Faith but to a Church which hath eternal Faith about which it imports much to know whether it hath Professors nominable or innominable For if it hath not it is inuisible or at least not so visible as the true Catholike Church of which al sorts in times past haue learned and in time to come must learne the infallible Diuine Faith necessarie to Saluation ought to be Therefore M. Fisher might wel though I thinke he did not say as the Relator telleth Tolle distinctionem and conclude that which I denie That the Faith of the Protestant Church is so eternal as the names of visible Protestants in al ages may be shewed To proue this D. Featly made this argument according to the Protestant Relator D. Featly That Church whose Faith is the Catholike and Primitiue Faith once giuen to the Saints without which no man can be saued is so perpetual as the names may be shewed in al ages But the Faith of the Protestant Church is the Primitiue and Catholike Faith once giuen to the Saints without which none can be saued Ergo The Faith of the Protestant Church is so perpetual as the names may be shewed in al ages Note here That the Relator putteth in the Margent ouer-against the Minor Tollitur distinctio But how false this Marginal Note is appeareth to any who wil reflect vpon what the Distinction was and what I haue now said of it For this Minor speaking onely of Faith doth not take away the distinction applyed to the Church That which D. Featly thinketh to be a straine of new Logicke to wit to distinguish vpon a proposition without applying the distinction to any particular tearme is not so strange as he maketh it As for example When one saith An Aethiopian is white neyther the tearme Aethiopian alone nor the tearme White alone in it selfe needeth distinction because it is not Aequiuocal but the whole proposition being Amphibological needeth it being true if it be meant The Aethiopian is white in the Teeth and false if it be meant He is white in his whole Bodie To the argument M. Fisher said I denie the Minor But marking that hereupon D. Featly would haue transferred the Question to endlesse disputes about particular Controuersies from the present general Question about the perpetual visible Church whose Professors names as himselfe saith may be shewed in al ages M. Fisher I say marking this would not let D. Featly make his proofe but hauing said I denie the Minor he presently added by way of explication these ensuing words My first Question was Whether there must not be a true visible Church of Christ in al ages of which al sorts must learne that infallible Faith which is necessarie to Saluation and therefore we must first finde such a Church before men can know it to be such as they may securely learne of it what is the infallible Faith necessary to Saluation While M. Fisher was beginning to make this explication D. Featly insulted as if M. Fisher durst not for Conscience denie the Minor absolutely To whom M. Fisher said I doe absolutely denie it And then he went forward with the aforesaid explication Which ended M. Fisher said And hereupon I answer againe to the said Minor If this proposition be taken simply in it selfe I absolutely denie it but if this proposition be considered as it must be as related to the first Question and the end thereof I further adde That it is not pertinent to that end for which the whole Dispute was intended viz. To shew to those who were not able by their owne abilities to finde out the infallible Faith necessarie to Saluation without learning of the true visible Church of Christ and consequently Visibilitie of the Church is first to be shewed before the truth of Doctrine in particular shal be shewed To this as the Relator saith D. Featly replyed viz. First What speake you of those who are not able by their owne abilities to finde out Faith Is any man able by his owne abilitie without the helpe of Diuine Grace Secondly What helpeth the Visibilitie to confirme the Truth of the Church Visibilitie indeed proues a Church but not the true Church These words eyther were not spoken or M. Fisher did not regard them being in the middest of his answer in which he went on shewing the necessitie of a visible Church by a saying of D. Fields viz. Seeing the Controuersies of Religion at this day are so many in number and so intricate in nature that few haue time and leysure fewer strength of wit and vnderstanding to examine them what remaineth for men desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence but diligently to seeke out which among al the Societies of men in the World is that Spouse of Christ the Church of the liuing God which is the Pillar of the Truth that so they may embrace her Communion follow her Direction and rest in her Iudgement M. Fisher therefore I say being busily speaking this did not regard what D. Featly did then say but might easily haue answered First That he neuer meant that any were able of themselues without helpe of Gods grace to attaine the true Faith which hindreth not but that some may haue that abilitie of Wit and Learning by which they can