where for the better conceauing thereof we are to vnderstand that fayth is a supernaturall habit not obtayned by the force of nature Therfore to the beliefe of any one Article or point of fayth two things concurre the one is the first reuealing Verity as Scholemen speake which is God Himselfe the secoÌ„d is the Church propounding the article to be belieued Now when we belieue any point of fayth God who is the first reuealing Veritie as is sayd reuealeth it to the church and the church propounds it so reuealed to vs to be belieued And thus we belieue a point of fayth through the authority of God reuealing the church propounding and where we belieue any thing though it be true not through this authority this is not supernaturall beliefe in vs but only an opinion grounded vpon other reasons inducements Euen as the Turke belieueth that there is a God Creator of the worlde yet this his beliefe is no true fayth but only a meere opinion of a thing which is true since this his beliefe is grounded not vpon Gods authority reuealing this but only vpon his Alcaron being otherwayes a fabulous booke though of the being of one God it speaketh truly Now to apply this This first reuealing Verity which is God through whose authority we ought to belieue euery article doth with one the like authoritie reueale all Articles of Christian Religion to the church so as it is as forcibly reuealed to be belieued that there is for example a Purgatory or that we ought to pray to Saints graunting these articles to be true as that there is a Trinity or that Christ was Incarnate from whence it vnauoydably followeth that who belieueth in the Trinity and yet doth not belieue that there is a Purgatory or that we may pray to Saints hath no true and supernatural beliefe of the Trinity but only belieueth that there is a Trinity because he so vnderstandeth or is persuaded thereto only by his owne reason or through some other humane motiues according to that sentence of S. Augustine lib. de vtilitate credendi cap. 11. Quod intelligimus aliquid rationi debemus quod autem credimus authoritati For if he did belieue that there is a Trinity or that Christ was Incarnate through Gods authority so reuealing this truth to be belieued by the same authority he would haue belieued that there is a Purgatory or that we ought to pray to Saints seing both the Articles of the Trinity and Purgatory or praying to Saints are equally indifferently a like propounded by God and his Church to be belieued Thus we may demonstratiuely conclude that what ProtestaÌ„t doth belieue in the Trinity and yet doth not belieue that there is a Purgatory praying to Saints Freewill the Reall presence admitting them once to be true or any other point controuerted betweene Catholikes and Protestants the samâ— man hath no true fayth at all of the Trinity or Incarnation and consequently for wanâ— of a true and supernaturall fayth cannot bâ— saued since we read (a) Marc. 16. Qui non credit condemnabitur Who belieueth not shal be condemned And from this former ground it proceedeth thaâ— (b) 2. 2. q. 5. ar 3. S. Thomas all other learned Schoolemen teach that who belieueth not only for Gods authority so reuealing any poinâ— whatsoeuer great or small fundamentall or not fundamentall the same man belieueth not any other Article at all with a true and supernaturall fayth and heereto accord those wordes of (c) Lib. de praescript Tertullian against Valentinus the Heretike Some thinges of the law and Prophets Valentinus approueth some thinges he disalloweth That is he disalloweth all whilest he disproueth some Which sentence of Tertullian must of necessity be true since who reiecteth the authority of God in not belieuing any one article propounded by God to be belieued the same man begetteth a suspition or doubt of Gods authority for the belieuing of any other article how fundamentall soeuer Another reason may be taken from a distinction of fayth which according to the learned is of two sortes The one they call explicite fayth the other implicite Explicite fayth is that which all men vnder payne of damnation are bound to belieue As according to most of the Schoolemen the Trinity the Incarnation of our Sauiour his Passion the Decalogue or ten Commaundements the articles of the Creed Implicite fayth comprehendeth all those points which euery vnlearned man is not bound expressely distinctly to belieue and knowe in particuler though he be expressely bound not to beâ—ieue any thing contrary thereto but is to â—est in the iudgment of the church concerning all such points and what the church of Christ houldeth therein he is bounde â—mplicitely to belieue This distinction is warranted not only in the iudgment of all Catholike Schoolemen but also of the most â—earned (d) D. Bar. l. defide eius ortis p 40. Hooker in his Ecclesiast policy in the preface p. 28. by Melancton l. 1. Epist Epist ad RegeÌ„ Angliae Protestants though they commonly forbeare the phrase of explicite imâ—licite fayth particulerly of D. Feild who â—n these words following giueth the reason â—hereof saying For (e) In his Treatise of the Church in his Epist Dedicat to the L. Arch-Bishop seeing the Controuersies of Religion in our time are growne in number so many â—nd in nature so intricate that few haue time and â—â—asure fewer strength of vnderstanding to exaâ—ine them what remayneth for men desirous of saâ—isfaction in things of such consequeÌ„ce but diligently â— search out which amongst all the Societies of men â—s the worlde is that blessed Company of holy ones 〈◊〉 at househould of fayth that spouse of Christ and Church of the lyuing God which is the Pillar and ground of truth that so they may imbrace her communion follow her directions rest in her iudgments Thus D. Feild Now this distinction being presupposed I thus argue Both these kinds of fayth are necessary to saluation Explicite fayth because it comprehendeth all those fundameÌ„tall and supreme points of Christian Religion without which and the expresse and articulate beliefe of which a man cannot be saued And these be those only which our Newtrallists in Religion hold necessary to be belieued Implicite fayth of other points also is necessary to saluation because otherwyse then belieuing implicitely inuoluedly what the church teacheth therein we cannot according to the former Doctours words range our selues to the blessed company of holy ones the househould of fayth the spouse of Christ and Church of the lyuing God Againe seing Implicite fayth is necessary to saluation we must graunt that this Implicite fayth hath some Obiect This Obiect is not the Articles of the Trinity the Incarnation the Decalogue c. according to the foresaid iudgment of the Schoolemen since these are thâ— obiects of explicite fayth as is aboue mentioned therfore Articles of seeming lesser importance are the
Heresies only in the greatest points admitting such meÌ„ for Heretikes would accordingly haue restrayned his words at least in some one â—ext or other among so many only to these kind of Heretikes But not to leaue the least â—hew of refuge or euasion herein I will produce some passage of holy Scripture in wchâ—he mantayners of particuler errours euen â—n lesser points then the highest articles of Christianity are censured by Christs Apoâ—tles to be depriued of eternall Saluation And first we find S. Paul thus to prophesie In the later (h) 1. Tim. cap. 4. times certaine shall depart from the Fayth attending to spirits of errour and doctrine of deuills and forbidding to marry and to abstaine from meates c. Heere the Apostle prophesieth according to the iudgment of (i) Hom. 12. in 1. Tim. S. Chrysostom (k) Vpon this place Ambrose (l) l. contra Iouin cap. 1. Ierom (m) Haer. 25. 40. Augustin of the Heretikes Encratites Marcionistes Ebionites c. who denyed matrimony as a thing altogeather vnlawfull prohibited absolutly and at all times the eating of certaine meates as creatures impure Now these Heretikes belieued in the Trinity the Incarnation c. yet euen for these two former Heresies touching mariage and eating of meates they are sayd bâ— the Apostle to depart from the Fayth of Chrisâ— and to attend to the doctrine of deuills But sucâ— as leaue the Fayth of Christ and attenâ— to the doctrine of Diuells are not iâ— state of Saluation In my iudgement thâ— one authority alone is sufficient to oueâ—throw this phantasie of our Newtrallists 〈◊〉 since the words are diuine Scripture thâ— Heresies reprehended no fundamentalâ— points of Religion but of as little or lesseâ— consequence then the Controuersies betwixt the Catholikes and the Protestants yet the maintainers of them are accompted to depart from the Fayth of Christ and to attend to the doctrine of deuills A second place shal be that of the former Apostle who writing of certayne Heretikes erring touching the Resurrection of the Body though the article of the Resurrection it selfe they belieued sayth thus (n) 2. Tim. cap. â— Their speach spreadeth like a Canker of whome is Hymenaeus and Philetus who haue erred from the truth saying That the Resurrection is allready past and haue subuerted the Fayth of some These men belieued all the mysteries of the Trinity the IncarnatioÌ„ c. yet for erring only touching the Resurrection of the body they are sayd to erre from the truth to subuert the Fayth of some and that as Canker neuer leaueth the body till â—y little and little it wasteth it away so â—heir speaches by degrees poyson and kill â—he soules of the hearers From which it â—uidently followeth that these Heretikes â—ontinuing and dying in the foresaid Hereâ—ie could not be saued since that faith which â—rreth from the truth which subuerteth the true â—aith of Christ in others and which in killing and â—estroying resembleth a Canker cannot affoard Saluation to its Professours Another passage which heere I will vrge â—s that of S. Iohn who calleth certaine Heâ—etikes Antichrists saying (o) 1. Ioan. c. 2. Now there are beâ—ome many Antichrists who went out of vs were not of vs for if they had byn of vs they would surely haue remayned with vs. These Heretikes belieued in the Trinity in the Incarnation of Christ that he dyed for the saluation of the whole world only they erred touching the Person Natures of Christ yet they are figuratiuely stiled Antichrists and are said to depart out of the Church of Christ but no saluation is reserued for Antichrists and Apostataes leauing the Church of Christ. And thus much out of Gods holy Writ expressely touching Heresie in generall particuler To these Texts I will adioyne though not immediately and directly raunged vnder the former head a place or two of Scripture in my iudgment most vnanswerable and by necessarie inference euicting the point heere vndertakeÌ„ The first place is those words of S. Peter where he saith (p) 2. Ep. c. 3. In the Epistles of S. Paul there are certaine things hard to be vnderstood which the vnlearned and vnstable do peruert vnto their owne destruction Now heere I thus argue But these thinges hard to be vnderstood in S. Paul his Epistles did not concerne the doctrine of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. and yet the misvnderstanding of them doth cause as the text saith the destruction that is the damnation of them who misunderstand them Therfore farre lesser points then the deniall of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. doe iustly threaten to the false belieuers of them daÌ„nation and consequently it followeth that a bare beliefe of those supreme points is not sufficient to Saluation That those difficulties in S. Paules Epistles intimated by S. Peter did not concerne the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. I prooue seuerall wayes first because S. Peter maketh no such mention which no doubt he would haue done if the subiect of them had only touched those supreme mysteries and were not to be extended to other inferiour pointes Secondly it is acknowledged by the writings and â—ommentaries of all the Fathers besides â—at the Epistles themselues shew no lesse â—at S. Paul is most euident and cleere in 〈◊〉 his Epistles touching the Trinity the â—carnation the Passion c. and therfore â—ere is no reason why the difficulties of â—hem should be applyed to those articles such lesse restrayned to them alone Thirdly the Fathers do vnderstand these â—â—fficulties in S. Paul his Epistles mentioâ—d by S. Peter chiefly touching Iustificaâ—oÌ„ as appareth by the testimony euen of S. â—gustine (q) l. de fide operibus c. 15. 16. himselfe who particulerly â—tanceth in that place 1. Corinth 3. If â— man build vpon this foundation gold siluer 〈◊〉 which text intreateth of Iustification â—nd workes and expresly saith that this is he of the difficult passages intended and â—ant by S. Peter With S. Augustine S. â—ome may seeme well to agree in these â—ords (r) Epist ad Algasiam quae 8. Epistola ad Romanos nimijs obscuriâ—bus inuoluta est The Epistle to the Roâ—â—ns is inuolued with many obscurities or â—ake places for it is found that the Epiâ—â—le to the Romans most entreateth of Iuâ—fication and of faith and workes Fourâ—ly and lastly the Protestants themselues 〈◊〉 vnderstand the said obscurities of S. Paul 〈◊〉 Epistles touching Iustification as appeareth to omit the testimonies of â— others herein from the words and Coâ—ment of Doctor Fulke against the Rhâ—mish Testament vpon the foresaid plaâ—â— of S. Peter And this farre of this text wheâ— we find by an ineuitable deduction that false Fayth touching Iustification only caâ—not stand with Saluation The second text of scripture is containâ— in those words of the Apostle where thus sayth (c) c. 11. ad Hebraeos s Credere oportet accedentem ad Dâ— quia
The LutheraÌ„s are generally â—he same opinion Protestants do interpret this article of Christs descending into his (p) D. Willet in his Lymbomastix D. Fulke â—ged by D. Willet in Synop. p. 605. 606. â—â—aue so by the word Hell vnderstanding â—â—e graue But (q) l. 2. Instit c. 16. §. 20. Caluin teacheth that by Christs descending into Hell is vndertood that Christ apprehended God to be â—ost angry and offended with him for our â—akes and that thereupon Christ suffered â—â—eat anxiety and griefe of soule and which is more most blasphemously Caluin teacheth that Christ vttered words of desperation in saying O God my God why hast thou forsaken me Touching the article of Christs ascending into Heauen we Catholikes and the Caluinists do belieue heerby that Christ truly in body ascended vp into Heauen wheraâ— all Lutherans (r) Luther in l. de Sacrament Coenae Domini tom 2. fol. 112. where he saith Credimus quòd Christus iuxta humanitatem est vbique praesens The same is taught by Brentius in Apolog pro Confess Wittenberg And finally by all the Lutherans do teach that Christs Body is in all places with the diuinity and that therfore it did not really after his Passion ascend vp into Heauen it being there both before and after his Passion Thus the Lutherans both in ours and the Protestants iudgments do destroy by this their construction the whole Creed and particulerly Christs Incarnation Natiuity Passion death ascending to Heauen and his comming to Iudgment for supposing Christs body to be in all places all these articles were but apparently or phantastically and not truly and really performed Touching the article of Christs iudging the quicke and dead We Catholikes do beleiue that Christ at his comming to iudgment will so iudge man as that his good workes receauing all their force from our Sauiours PassioÌ„ shal be rewarded wheras the Protestants denying all (s) Calu. l. 3. Instit c. 5. §. â— Bucer in actis Colloq Ratisbon Beza Zwinglius and most ProtestaÌ„ts merit of workes as iniurious and derogatory to his death and Passion doe hould that Christ shall then reward only a bare and speciall (t) Calu. in Antidoto Conc. Tri. Kemnitius in examen Conc. Trident. and most other Protestants fayth Concerning the article I beleiue in the holy Ghost Wheras all Catholikes and many Protestants do beleiue that the holy Ghost is the third Person in the most Blessed Trinity Caluin how euer he was persuaded of the truth or falsehood therof much laboureth notwithstanding to auoyde the force of arguments drawn from the chiefest places of scripture and vsually alleadged by al Antiquity in proofe of the holy Ghost being the third Person in the Trinity Thus we find that Caluin (u) Instit l. 1. c. 13. §. 15. will not haue coÌ„trary to all Antiquity that passage of Scripture Psal 33. By the word of the Lord the Heauens were made and al the Host of theÌ„ by the spirit of his mouth to be vnderstood of the diuinity of the holy Ghost In like sort he reiecteth the argumeÌ„t (x) See of this Subiect against the Trinity Aegidius Hunnius a ProtestaÌ„t in his booke entituled Caluinus IudaizaÌ„s drawn froÌ„ that other most â—â—markable text Iohn 5. There be three that giue testimony in Heauen the Father the word the holy Ghost and these three be one Caluin vpon this place thus saying heerby to take away froÌ„ thence the proofe of the holy Ghost Quòd dicit tres esse vnum ad essentiam non refertur sed ad consensum potiùs Finally Luther was so far from acknowledging the holy Ghost to be the third Person in the Trinity or to confesse the Trinity it selfe that thus he writeth (*) Luther Confut ration Lat. Anima mea odit hoc verbum Homousion vel Consubstantialis My very soule doth hate the word Homousion or Consubstantiall Concerning the article I belieue the holy Catholike Church The Catholikes do belieue this Church to be a visible company of men professing the present Roman Catholike fayth of which some are predestinated others reprobated The Protestants doe belieue this Church to coÌ„sist only of the (y) Confess Augustana Art 7. Luther l. de Conc Eccles Cal. l. 4. Inst. c. 1. §. 2. Elect and Predestinate Touching the Article the Communion of Saints The Catholikes doe heereby belieue such a CommunioÌ„ to be betwixt the Saints in Heauen the Soules in Purgatory men vpon earth that the one part doth help the other with their most auaylable prayers and Intercessions The Protestants deny all such entercourse of benefits betweene these seuerall parts â—f the Church of Christ (z) Calu. l. 3. Instit c. 5. §. 6. Centuriatores Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 4. col 460. Brentius in confes wittenberg c. de Purgatorio accounting the Catholikes doctrine heerein superstitious sacrilegious Lastly touching the Article of forgiuenes of Sinnes we Catholikes do belieue that this remission of sinnes is performed when the soule by a true and inherent Iustice and by the infused gifts of God enioyeth a renouation of herselfe and thereby becommeth truly iust in the sight of God The Protestants disalowing all inherent Iustice doe only acknowlege an (a) Keâ—nit in Examen Concil Trident. Cal. l. 3. Instit c. 11. imputatiue Iustice or righteousnes which coÌ„sisteth in that the Iustice of Christ is as they teach only imputed vnto sinners so as we remayne still sinners though our sinne be not imputed vnto vs through Christs Iustice A doctrine iniurious to the most meritorious Passion and death of Christ Thus haue we runne ouer the chiefe articles of the Creed from whence we collect that seeing as is aboue demonstrated He only belieueth auailably truly the Creed who belieueth it in that sense in which the Apostles did write it seing there are meere different or rather contrary constructions of euery Article giuen by the Catholikes and the Protestants so as if the construction of the Catholiks be true it followeth necessarily that the other of the ProtestaÌ„ts be false or contrarywise we may therefore iustly conclude that it is not sufficient to saluation for any one to say that he beliueth the Creed who belieueth the words of it in general without restrayning them to any peculiar construction giuen eyther by Catholikes or Protestants except he belieue it in that one particuler sense and none other which was intended by the holy Ghost when it was first framed by the Apostles Now in this next place we are to demoÌ„strate that graunting for a tyme by an Hypothesis or supposall that a man did belieue all the Articles of the Creed in their true sense and construction yet followeth it not that this beliefe though it be most necessary were sufficient for a man to obtaine his saluation hereby and the reason hereof is because it is most certayne that there are diuers points of Christian Religion houldeâ— necessarily to be belieued in
est inquirentibus se remunerator sit 〈◊〉 that commeth to God must belieue that God iâ— and is a rewarder to them that seeke him Hee is imposed a necessity as appeareth by tâ—â— word Oportet to belieue not only that the is a God but that this God giueth rewarâ— to such as seeke him to wit eternall lyâ— But to belieue that God is a rewarder of goâ— men is an article in it selfe wholy distinct 〈◊〉 differeÌ„t from the articles of the Trinity thâ— Incarnation the Passion c. and in natuâ—â— independent of these other for a man maâ— belieue that God is a rewarder of good meâ— with eternall felicity and yet not belieuâ— these other supreme Mysteryes as man vertuous men no doubt did in the law oâ— nature and in the time of the old Testâ—ment and on the contrary side a man maâ— belieue those chiefe articles of Christianity and yet not particulerly belieue that God is a rewarder of such as seeke him And yet we see the beliefe of this later point is necessarily exacted by the Apostle of all those who come to God consequently of all those who shal be saued seeing no man can be saued but such as come to God THE SAME PROVED FROM THE DEfinition Nature and Propriety of Fayth CHAP. III. IN this place we shall first take into our consideration the definition of fayth set downe by S. Paul Secondly the dignity worth of â—ayth much celebrated by diuers of the Aâ—ostles Thirdly the inseparable propriety â—f Fayth which is Vnity for so doth the â—cripture delineate and describe Fayth â—â—om all which it will ineuitably follow â—hat that Fayth which saueth man is not â—o be restrayned only to the Trinity the â—ncarnation and other such sublime points â—f Christian Religion though in other points it be erroneous but to all points whatsoeuer which the Church of God propoundeth to be belieued And to beginne with the definition of Fayth giuen by the Apostle He thus deâ—neth Fayth (a) c. 11. ad Hebraeos Fayth is the substance of thiâ— to be hoped for the argument of things not appâ—ring The sense wherof is this first thâ— Fayth through an infallible certainty caâ—seth those things to subsist and haue a bâ—ing in the mind of man which are yâ— to come but hoped and looked for Sâ—condly that fayth causeth the vnderstaâ—ding to giue an assent to those points whiâ— it vnderstandeth not acknowledging theâ— to be more certaine then any other thinâ— whatsoeuer according to those words of 〈◊〉 Thomas (b) quaest 4. art 8. Multo magis homo certior est de eo qâ—â— audit à Deo qui falli non potest quà m de eo quâ— videt propria ratione quae falli potest Now heeâ— I trust no man wil deny but the Apostle dâ—fined that Fayth of a Christian which sâ—ueth him This being graunted for to denâ— it were both impious in the denier moâ— iniurious to the Apostle we are to remember the nature of euery true definition sâ— downe by the Logitians to wit as is aboue intimated that the thing defined anâ— the definition be of one and the same extenâ— latitude so as whatsoeuer is compreheÌ„ded vnder the definitioÌ„ the same is also contayned vnder the thing defined This theâ— being presupposed by force of all reason foâ— Logike is but an artificiall haÌ„dmaid to Reason we find that this definition of Fayth â—mpriseth in it selfe not only the Doctriâ—e of the Trinity of the Incarnation c. â—nd this not articulately but only by way â—deduction but also it containeth all seâ—â—ndary points of Religion seeing the forâ—r definition doth predicate or may be â—â—d of all the sayd secondary and lesse prinâ—all points of Religion controuerted betâ—eene Christians at any time Therfore the â—ng heere defined which is the sauing â—ayth of a Christian is in like sort to exâ—â—nd it selfe to all the sayd secondary points â— Religion how indifferent soeuer they â—â—me in mans iudgment This inference is 〈◊〉 demonstratiue being taken from the forâ—er definition of Fayth as that the Apostle â—â—mselfe presently after the former words â—â—ginning to instance the seueral Obiect of â—â—yth among diuers other examples setâ—h downe that to belieue Noahs floud 〈◊〉 the deluge of the world by water for â—ne is an article of Fayth for thus he â—â—yth By Fayth (c) Hebr. 11. Noah hauing receaued an ansâ—â—re concerning those things which as yet were â—ot seene fearing framed the Arke for the sauing of â—is howse But to proceed further If the Articles of he Trinity the Incarnation and the like 〈◊〉 the only essentiall points of a true Christian Fayth it is more then wonderfull that the Apostle vndertaking to set down the true definition of an auailable Fayth and exemplifying it in it seuerall Obiects should wholy and silently omit the say articles of the Trinity Incarnation PassioÌ„ c. he in that Chapter not expresly speaking one word of them And thus much touching the definitioâ— of Fayth giuen by the Apostle from whicâ— definition we conclude that whosoeuâ—â— seeketh to haue a true Fayth necessary to saâ—uation must belieue besides the mysteriâ— of the Trinity the Incarnation c. diueâ— others dogmaticall articles of Christian Râ—ligion And therfore answereably therâ— we assure our selues that when our Sauioâ— sayd He (d) Marc. 16. that belieueth not shal be condemneâ— he did speake of the belieuing of the whoâ— corps of Christian Fayth and Doctrine aâ— not only of any part therof for so in this lâ—ter maner it would be both false absurâ— In like fort where our Blessed Sauiour 〈◊〉 the same Chapter sayth to his Apostle Preach the Ghospell to all creatures c. He dâ— vnderstand the whole Ghospell which câ—â—tayneth many other points besides the Tâ—â—nity Incarnation and Passion c. In this next place we will descend 〈◊〉 those passages of holy Scripture which much magnify the efficacy and vertue of â—â—yth And accordingly heerto we find it 〈◊〉 said (e) Marc. vlt. He that belieueth and is baptized â—â—albe saued but he that belieueth not shal be conâ—â—mned Againe our Sauiour said to the â—ind men praying to receaue their sight According to your faith be it donne vnto you (f) Mat. 9. â—nd further (g) Hebr. c. 11. Without fayth it is impossible to â—ase God And more (h) 1. Ioan. c. 5. Our fayth is the virie which ouercommeth the world Now in â—â—ese and many other such texts for breuity â—itted I demaund what fayth is vnderâ—od or meant If it be answered a true â—yre perfect faith belieuing all points Christian Religion proposed by Gods â—â—urch it is true and that which I heare â—e to prooue Yf an vnperfect and munâ—l faith belieuing some points of Chriâ—â—â—â—â— Religion and reiecting others and so â—rroneus faith being partly true partly â— I say it can neuer deserue these prayses â—n by the Euangelists and Apostles neiâ—â—â— can it produce such supernaturall efâ— aboue specifyed no
more then darkeâ— an produce light since Truth himselfe 〈◊〉 taught vs (i) Luc. 6. That we cannot gather figges â—ornes nor grapes of bushes And hence by premises we are to vnderstand that we â—n entyre perfect fayth that by the â—h we belieue all supreme articles of the Trinitie Incarnation Passion c. anâ— all the articles of the Creed expressely articulately in their true sense and do belieue all other inferiour articles at least implicitely that is that we haue a readie preparation of mind to belieue all other articles which the Church of Christ dotâ— propound to be belieued so as that thougâ— we do not belieue euery article of Chrâ—stian Religion with an explicite and expresse faith yet we are bound vnder painâ— of damnation nor to belieue any doctrinâ— contrary or repugnant to the said articleâ— which the Church of Christ doth prâ—pound to be belieued from which it vnauoydably followeth that once grauntinâ— that the Church of Christ propoundeth 〈◊〉 be belieued that there is a Purgatory â— that we may pray to the Saints he incureth damnation who belieueth that theâ— is no Purgatory or that we ought not 〈◊〉 pray to Saints Now in this third place we will toucâ— that inseparable Attribute of true Chrâ—stian fayth which is Vnity in fayth 〈◊〉 doctrine This marke is so indissolubâ—â— annexed to the true fayth of Christ as thâ— we find his Apostles euer readie most â—â—riously to inculcate the same to their dâ—ciples Thus accordingly the Aposâ—â— exhorteth the Ephesians saying (k) Ephes 4. Be you carefull to keepe the vnity of the spirit in the bond of peace And immediately againe (l) Ephes vbi supra There is one Lord one fayth one Baptisme Where we see that Vnity in fayth is expressely set downe As also in another place (m) Ephes loc cit I beseech you that you speake all one thing be you kâ—it together in one mind and one iudgment And as this was the exhortation of the Apostle To we read that the first belieuers followed â—he same of whom S. Luke thus saith The (n) Act. 4. multitude that belieued were of one hart and â—ne soule And hence it proceedeth that the Church of Christ which comprehendeth the Professours of this vnanimous faith is â—tyled by Gods holy writ (o) Rom. 12. One Bodie one (p) Cant. 6. Spouse (q) Ioan. 10. one flocke of sheepe A truth â—o euident as that besides the frequent teâ—timonies of the Faâ—hers (r) Athanasius orat 1. con Ani. Chrysost opere imperfecto in Mat. Hom. 20. Tertullian de praescript Irenaeus l r. c. 5. confirming the â—ame euer the Protestants subscribe in iudgâ—ent heerto For thus (Å¿) Luther tom 3. Wittenberg in psal 5. fol. 166. Luther himselfe to omit (t) see herâ—â—â—f the Deuines of Mansfeild against the Sacramentaries And the Deuines of Heidelberg against the Anabaptists others writeth A kingdome deuiâ—ed in it selfe shall not stand neither haue any â—eretikes at any tyme bine ouercome by force or â—btility but by mutuall dissention neither doth â—hrist fight with them otherwise then with a spiâ—â—t of giddines and disagreement Now then this Vnitie of faith is so to be â—nderstood as that it is not repugnant therto that one and the same point should at one time not be houlden as necessary to be belieued the which after it hath vndergone a definitiue sententionall decree of Gods Church is necessarily to be belieued As for example it was not necessary in the beginning of Christianity to belieue that the booke of the Machabees the Epistle of S. Iames S. Iude the second Epistle of S. Peter the second and third of S. Iohn to be Canonicall Scripture till they were defined so to be by the third Councell (u) Can. 47. of Carthage at which S. Augustine was present But after this Councell had by the assistance of the holy Ghost defined them to be Canonicall and this after confirmed by the consent of the whole Church then it was and is Heresy to deny them to be Canonicall And the reason of this disparity is because it is Gods good pleasure wisdome not to reueale to his Church all articles of faith in the beginning and at one time but at seuerall times and vpon seuerall occasions as to his diuine Maiesty best seemeth expedient Thus the fayth of a Christian is capable of dilatation and of a more large vnfoulding or exposition but not of any contrariety in beliefe chaunge or alteration Anâ— thus to insist in the former example yâ— may well stand with Christian faith in the â—eginning not to accept the former bookes or Canonicall till the authority of the Church had pronounced them for such But it standeth not with sound faith that one man should positiuely belieue now after the Churches definition therof giuen as an article of fayth that the Machabees and the rest of the bookes aboue specified are not Canonicall Scripture but the prophane writings of man and another man should belieue as an article of Faith that they are Canonicall Scripture since the one of these contrary beleifes must be Hereticall This verity of the Vnity of faith being warranted by the word both of God and man as is aboue said we will take into our consideration the Catholike and Protestant Religions both which ioyntly do professe to belieue in generall in the Trinity in Christs Incarnation his Passion and the Creed of the Apostles and so we shall discerne whether the faith of all these seuerall Professours doth inioy the foresaid marke of vnity in doctrine or noe But seing this Subiect is most ample and large I will therfore sepose this ensuing chapter for the more full and exact discouery of the many and great disagreements betweene the Catholikes and the Protestants in their fayth and Religion THE SAME PROVED FROâ— want of vnity in fayth betweene Catholikes anâ— Protestants touching the Articles of the Creed CHAP. IIII. VNDERTAKING in this place tâ— set downe the multiplicity of opinions betweene Catholikes anâ— Protestants though they all iointly belieue in the Trinity the Incarnation oâ— Christ his Passion and the like and consequently that this their general beliefe wanteth that true Vnity of fayth which out of thâ— holy Scriptures Fathers the Protestants I haue aboue shewed to be most necessary to Saluation I will first examine how the Protestants and Catholikes doe differ touching the beliefe of the Creed made by the Apostles Next I will demonstrate that supposing all Professours of both Religions should agree in the true sense and meaning of the Creed yet there are diuers other dogmaticall points necessarily to be belieued and are at this instant belieued both by Protestants and Catholikes which are not expressed or mentioned in the Creed nor by any immediate inference can be drawne from thence Lastly I wil set down the great difference betweene Catholiks ProtestaÌ„ts in other points of fayth of which the Creed makes no intimation or
iudgment both of Catholikes and Protestants and accordingly are belieued iontly both by Ptotestants and Catholikes yet the sayd pointâ— are not contained or expressed in the Creed Among others I will insist in these following First That there are certayne diuine writings oâ— infallible authority which we commonly callâ— the Scriptures of the old new TestameÌ„t of which Testaments we find no mention in the Creed and yet all men are bound vnder payne of damnation to belieue thaâ— there are such writings since other wayeâ— abstracting from the authority of thâ— Church there were not sufficient meane left to belieue that it were a sinne to breakâ— any of the ten Commaundements oâ— which is more that Christ Iesus was thâ— true Sauiour of the world for though wâ— read in the Creed that he suffered and died yet we read not expresly there that he dyed to redeeme man 2. That there are spiritual Substances which we call Angels which now enioy the most happy sight of God and that many thousands of them did fall presently after their Creation and are become those malignant Spirits which vsually are tearmed Diuells 3. That there is any materiall place of Hel where the wicked are tormented of which we find nothing in the Creed in the iudgment of the Protestants for though the word Hell be mentioned in that Article He descended into Hell yet by the word Hell the graue is vnderstood by most of the Protestants 4. That the paynes of the damned shal be for all eternity and not for a certayne tyme only 5. That Adam did presently vpon his Creation fall from the grace of God and thereby transferred Originall sinne vpon all mankind so as by reason of his fall all men are borne in Originall sinne 6. That the world was once drowned for sin which Inundation is coÌ„monly called Noës floud 7. That our Sauiour whiles he conuersed heere vpon earth did any miracles 8. That S. Iohn Baptist was our Sauiours Precursor or forerunner and that our Sauiour did choose vnto him certayne men for his Apostles which did first preach and plant the Christian fayth throughout the world 9. That Circumcision is now forbidden as a thing most vnlawfull vngodly 10. That there are any Sacraments of the new Testament as the SacrameÌ„t of Baptisme or Eucharist and instituted by Christ for the spirituall good of mans soule These points besides some others all christians aswell Protestants as catholiks do belieue and do hould that their beliefe of these points is necessary to saluation yet not any one of all these Articles is expressed or set downe in the Apostles creed From whence I would conclude that the Apostles Creed cannot be a sufficient boundary to contayne and limit an auayleable fayth For what hope can that man haue of his saluation who belieueth that there are neyther any diuine scriptures nor Angells nor Diuellâ— nor any Decalogue commonly called the Ten commaundements nor that Christ did worke any miracles nor that he dyed for man nor that he instituted any Sacrament and particulerly the Sacraments of Baptisme and the Eucharist nor finally to omit the rest that there is any place of Hell or any eternity of punishment for the damned And heere I am to premonish the Reader that it is no sufficient answere to reply that most of all the foresayd points are expressed in the Scripture and therefore are to be belieued This I say auayleth not seeing heere I dispute against those who maintayne with wonderfull pertinacity of iudgment that it is sufficient to saluation to belieue only the Articles and nothing els which are contayned in he Creed buâ— not any of the former Articles are contayned therein Agayne seing to belieue that there are any diuine scriptures is not expressed in the Creed it conduceth nothing to the answering of this our argument to say that the forementioned articles are proued out of Scripture and therefore are to be belieued Neither secondly can the force of our said argument be auoyded in replying that all the former articles are virtually and potentially comprehended in that article I belieue the holy Church because the Church teacheth that all these articles are to be belieued This is no warantable answere by reason that as these may be reduced to this Arâ—icle of the creed so also may all other points controuerted between the catholikes and the Protestants be in like maÌ„ner reduced to the said Article seeing the church of God setteth downe what is the truth and what is to be belieued in the sayd controuersies bynding her children vnder payne of damnation aswell to belieue the truth in the controuersies of our dayes as to belieue the former mentioned articles which are not expressed in the creed And yet these our Newtrallists in Religion who make the Creed the sole square of their Fayth doe not thinke that those questions of Religion insisted vpon betweene the Catholikes and the Protestants are in belieuing or not belieuing of them any way hurtfull to their Saluation THE SAME PROVED FROM the want of vnity in fayth betweene Catholikes and Protestants in Articles necessary to be belieued and yet not expressed in the Creed CHAP. V. IN this third and last place we wil â—nsist in certayne controuersies of Religion necessarily to be belieued the one way both in the iudgment of â—atholikes and Protestants and not contained in the creed and yet so differently maintayned by Catholikes and Protestants as that graunting the maintayners on the one side hould the truth it followeth that the other party vphouldeth falshood and Heresy Now for the more daungerous wounding of our Newtralizing Christians heerein I will omit heere to speake of the coÌ„trouersies touching Purgatory Praying to Saints Freewill Monachisme and diuers other such like will restrayne my selfe only to those Controuersies the subiect of which Controuersies are taught by the one side to be vnder Christ the immediate meanes of our grace and Saluation denyed by the other party to be of any such force or efficacy for the soules euerlasting good So as if it be shewed that the Protestants and the Catholikes doe maynely dissent in the meanes of obtayning grace and purchasing of saluation it must of necessity be inferred that both the Protestants and Catholikes continuing in such their contrary fayths cannot attayne grace and saluation since not only Philosophy but euen naturall reason teacheth vs that he neuer shall attayne the end who vseth eyther not the same meanes or contrary to those meanes which are only and necessarily instituted to the gayning of the sayd end But to proceed to these points first Concerning the Sacraments in generall the Catholikes do belieue that all of them where no iust impediment is doe conferre grace into the soule of man by the help and continuance of which grace the soule in the end obtayneth saluation The Protestants doe not ascribe any such supernaturall effect or operation of grace to them And to come more particulerly to the Sacraments
against Gods Church shal be damned But here I will stay my selfe wading no further in the disquisition and search of the great dissentions betweene Catholikes and Protestants touching faith and beliefe only I will reflect a litle vpon the premises And heere it is made most euident first that the Catholikes and Protestants do mainly differ in the sense and construction of the Articles of the Creede and consequently seing the sense and not the words do make the Creed that they both do not belieue one and the same Creede but haue to themselues seuerall Creedes from which point is sufficiently discouered the want of Vnity in faith among them both which Vnitie is so necessarily required to mans saluation as in the precedent chapter is demonstrated Secondly that though by supposition they did belieue the Creede and the true sense therof with an vnanimous consent yet it is proued there are diuers other articles not contayned in the Creed which are indifferently belieued as necessary to saluation both by Catholike and Protestant Thirdly seing also there are sundry Controuersies in Religion as is aboue exemplified which immediatly concerne saluation being houlden as necessary meanes therof by Catholikes but disclaymed from and abaÌ„doned by the Protestants as mayne errours and false doctrines Therfore from all the former premises I do auerre that it is a manifest errour to make the Creed the sole rule of Fayth and that he who maintaynes that both the Catholikes and Protestants notwithstanding their great disparitie of beliefe and fayth the one side necessarily belieuing maintayning Heresie can be saued or enioy one heauen is wholy depriued of all true iudgement reason and discourse and for want thereof may deseruedly be ranged among them of whome the psalmist speaketh (h) Psal 11. nolite fieri sicut equus mulus quibus non est intellectus THE SAME PROVED FROM the authority and priuiledge of the Church in not erring in her definitions and condemnation of Heresies and first of Councels CHAP. VI. FROM the inuiolable vnitie of faith we will next descend to the priuiledges of Gods true Church Of which priuiledges I will at this time take only one into my consideration that is that the Church of God is endued with a supreme priuiledge and prerogatiue of not erring in her definitions of fayth or condemnatioÌ„ of heresie This point is warranted by innumerable texts of holy Scripture as where it is sayd (i) Esay 72. Vpon thy wall ô Hierusalem I haue set watchmen all the day and all the night they shall not be silent But God did not set watchmen ouer his Church to teach errour And agayne The (a) 2. Tim. 3. Church of God is the pillar and foundation of the truth what more perspicuous And further whereas ech man â—s commaunded to repayre in difficulties matters of small consequeÌ„ces to the Church it is threatned by Christ himselfe that who wil not heare the Church shal be accompted â—s an Heathen or Publican according to â—hat his commination Si Ecclesiam non auâ—ierit (b) Mat. 18. sit tibi sicut Ethnicus Publicanus where we find no restriction but that in all things we are to heare the Church Agayne Christ himselfe speaketh to his Apostles and in them to the whole Church He (c) Luc. 10. that heareth you heareth me But if the church could erre neither would Christ refer vs to the church especially vnder so great a penalty neither by hearing the church could we be iustly sayd to heare Christ Finally the Church is so gouerned by Christ as its head or spouse and by the holy Ghost as its soule as therefore we find the Apostle thus to write (d) Ephes 1. thereof God hath made him head speaking of Christ ouer all the Church which is his body And agayne (e) Ephes 4. One body and one spirit yet more The (f) Ephes 5. man is the head of the woman as Christ is head of the Church From which texts it followeth that if the church should erre in its definitioÌ„s or resolutions of fayth and condemnation of Heresy this erring might well be ascribed to Christ and to the holy Ghost and consequently it followeth that the Apostles in making the creed would haue omitted that Article I belieue in the Catholike Church For why should we be bound to belieue the church if the church could erre This truth I meane that the church of Christ cannot erre in her sententionall decrees is so illustrious and euident that Tertullian speaking of certaine Heretikes of his tyme obiecting the erring of the whole church thus figuratiuely or Ironically writeth Age Omnes (g) in l. de praescript c. 28. Ecclesiae errauerunt nullam respexit spiritus Sanctus vti eam in veritatem deduceret ad hoc missus à Christo ad hoc postulatus de Patre vt esset doctor veritatis c. That is Go to Belike all the Churches haue erred and the holy Ghost hath regarded no Church that be might lead it into truth being sent for this purpose by Christ and to the same end begged by Christ of the Father â—hat it might be the teacher of truth And S. Augustine Disputare (h) Epist 118. contra id quod Ecclesia vniuersae sentit insolentissimae insaniae est To dispute agaynst any point maintayned by the whole Church is extreme madnes To whose iudgment herein most of the more sober and learned Protestants do indisputably subscribe since diuers of them doe with all feruour earnestnes maintayne that (i) D. Bancrost in his Sermon printed anno 1588. Fox Act. mon. fol. 464. b. art 4. The deuines of Geneua in their propositions and principles disputed c. p. 141. and diuers others the church of Christ cannot erre and that what she defineth for truth is most true or what for Heresy or â—alshood is hereticall and to be condemned This Basis or foundatioÌ„ of the church not â—rring being thus firmely layde we are heereupon to conclude that what points of Religion the catholike church of Christ hath condemned for Heresies the same are by vs to be reputed for Heresies since the churches condemnation or approbation is most infallible and the maintayners of the sayd Heresies for Heretikes and consequently that such Heretikes as departing out of the Church of God by their houlding of the sayde Hereticall opinions cannot be saued Now because the iudgment of the Church in matters of fayth is discouered two wayes first by the sentence of generall Councells secondly by the frequent attestations of the sayd chiefe Doctours of the Church in euery age in their particuler wrytings they not being contradicted therin by any other Orthodoxall Fathers or Doctours of the same age I will therefore distributiuely handle both these wayes shewing that both in generall by Councels and also by the particuler iudgement of the learned Fathers many opinions though not touching the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion or the expresse Articles of
that vpon the true or false beliefe of these Controuersies in Religion their soules Saluaâ—ion or damnation for all eternity were to depend For it is certayne that all these contrary partyes did agree and conspire in the generall beliefe of the Trinity Incarnation Passion death of our Sauiour and reciting of the Apostles Creed And therefore for these doctrines such bloudy proceedings were not attempted THE SAME PROVED FROM the Protestants mutually condemning one another of Heresy and for Heretikes CHAP. XV. IF Protestants doe maintaine that their different opinions seuerally houlden amonge themselues be Heresies and that the belieuers of them are for such their false beliefe if they so dye therein not capable of saluation then à fortiori may we be bould to pronounce that the Controuersies of fayth betweene the Catholiks and Protestants are not of that middle nature but that the opinions and sentences on the one syde are to be reputed for manifest Heresies and such as cannot stand with mans saluation This inference is most necessary since on all sides it is acknowledged that there is a farre greater disparity in Religion betweene the Catholikes and the Protestants then there is betweene the Protestants among themselues Now that the Protestants doe hould one another for Heretikes it cannot be denyed for to insist first in the Controuersies touching the reall Presence maintayned in their sense by the Lutherans but denyed by the Sacramentaries we find that Luther thus writeth of the Sacramentaries (h) Contra articulos Louanienses Thes 27. tom 2. We censure in earnest the Zwinglians and all the Sacramentaries for Heretikes and alienated from the Church of God And againe the same Luther thus writeth tom 7. Wittenb fol. 381. I do protest before God and the worlde that I doe not agree with the Zwinglians nor euer will while the world standeth but will haue my hands cleare from the bloude of the sheepe which these Heretikes marke his wordes do driue from Christ deceaue kill And againe in the former place Cursed be the charity concord of the Sacramentaries for euer and euer to all eternitie But Heretikes and men alienated from the Church of God and which do kill the sheepe of Christ during such their condition are not in state of Saluation Now of Luther and his doctrine we finde this bitter recrimination vsed by the Tigurine Deuines who were Zwinglians or Caluinists (i) Tigurini tract 3. contra supremam Lutheri Confessionem p. 61. Nos condemnatam execrabilem sectam vocat c. Luther calleth vs a damnable and execrable sect but let him looke lest he doth not declare himselfe an Arch-heretike being he cannot nor will not haue society with those that confesse Christ. And Zwinglius in tom 2. ad Respons Lutheri thus wryteth Behold how Sathan endeauours to possesse this man meaning Luther But to proceed to other points Nicolaus (1) In his Thesib Hypothesib Gallus an eminent Protestant and Superintendent at Ratisbone thus wryteth of the contentions betweene the Protestants themselues Non sunt leues c. The dissentions that are among vs are not light nor of light matters but of the greatest articles of Christian doctrine of the Law and the Ghospell of Iustification and good works of the Sacraments and vse of Ceremonies CoÌ„radus (2) In Theolog. Caluin l. 1. art 23. Schlussenburge an other famous Protestant alleadgeth Pappus a Protestant thus complayning against the Caluinists Etsi initio de vno tantum articulo c. Although in the beginning one only article was called into doubt c. Not withstanding the Caluinists are now so far gone as that they call in doubt neither few neither the least articles of Christian Doctrine for now we dissent from them touching the Omnipotency of God the Personall vnion of two Natures in Christ c. But to come nearer home The (3) In their mild defence of the silenced ministers supplication to the Court of ParlameÌ„t Puritanes heere of England thus complaine of the Protestants Doe we vary from the syncere Doctrine of the Scriptures Nay rather many of them doe much more swarue from the same c. And thus answereably we find that the Puritans hould the Bishops of England Antichristian whereas the Protestants do teach that of necessity Bishops are to be in the Church of God D. Willet (4) In his Meditation vpon the 122. Psalme speaking of diuers opinions taught by the more moderate Protestants as Hooker D. Couell and others thus wryteth From this foundation haue spronge forth these and other such wirlepooles and bubbles of new doctrine as that Christ is not originally God then after he thus concludeth Thus haue some bene bould to teach and wryte who as some Schismatikes meaning heerby the Puritans haue disturbed the peace of the Church one way in externall matters concerning discipline so they haue troubled the Church another way in opposing themselues by new quirkes deuices to the soundnes of Doctrine among Protestants M. Parkes in his booke dedicated to the then Archbishop D. Bancroft thus wryteth of the proceedings of some Protestants heere in England (5) Epist dedicat They are headstrong hardened in Errour they strike at the mayne points of fayth shaking the foundation it selfe and caâ—ling to question Heauen and Hell the diuinity humanity yea the very soule and saluation of our Sauiour himselfe And agayne more plainely in the former place he sayth thus They haue pestilent Heresies and yet more They are Hereticall sacrilegious To conclude this point of their particuler sayings and redargutions heerein D. (6) In his defence of Hocker pag. 65. 74. 75. Couell repeating registring the Positions of the Puritans heere in England among other of their positions setteth downe these following The Statute congregations of England are no true Churches And agayne The Protestant Church of England is no Church at all And yet more The Protestant Church of England hath no forme of a Church Now that all these dissentions among English Protestants cannot be interpreted only about indifferencyes Ceremonyes or about Gouerment as some Protestants doe answere when they are charged heerewith by the Catholikes besides that their owne former Confessions are extended to diuers high articles the foresayd M. (7) Vbi supra pag. 3. Parks plainly and truly confesseth the contrary saying The Protestants deceiue the world and make men belieue there is agreement in all substantiall points they affirme there is no question among them of the truth Now the former point is furthermore made euident by the reciprocall deportmeÌ„t and demeanour of Protestants amongst theÌ„selues for first besides the chaâ—ging one another with flat Heresy as is aboue shewed they do not only prohibit the (8) In Concil Theolog. part 1. pag. 249. reading of ech others bookes but also they set downe articles of visitation for the enquiry and apprehending (k) Hospinian vbi supra of such their aduersaryes
auditis nec vocatis Geneuae 1582. A threefold Answere to the Brethren of Tubinga their threefold writing concerning three most weighty Questions c. Of the supper of the Lord Of the Maiesty of Christ as Man And of not condemning the Churches of God before they be heard or called Ad Iohannis Brentij argumenta Iacobi Andreae Theses quibus carnis Christi omni praesentiaÌ„ nituntur confirmare id est aduersum renouatos Nestorij Eutichetis errores Responsum Geneuae 1570. An Answere to the Arguments of Iohn Brentius to the Conclusions of Iacobus Andreas by which they endeauour to confirme the Vbiquity or presence of Christs flesh euery where that is to say against the renewed Errors of Nestorius Eutiches Apologia ad omnes Germaniae Ecclesias reformatas quae sub Zwingliani Caluiniani nominis inuidia vim iniuriaÌ„ patiuntur Tiguri 1578. An Apology of all the Reformed churches of Germany which through the Enuy of the Name of Zuinglius Caluin do suffer violence iniury Christopheri Pezelij Apologia verae doctrina de dâ—â—â—itione Euangelij apposita Thrasonicis praestigijs Iohannis Wigandi Wittenbergae 1572. An Apology of the true Doctrine concerning the Definition of the Ghospell against the Thrasonicall enchantments of Ioannes Wigandus by Christophorus Pezelius Colloquij Montisbelgardensis inter Iacobum Andreae Theodorum Bezam Acta Tubingae 1584. The Actes of the Colloquy at Montbelgard betweene Iames Andrew Theodore Beza Veritatis victoria ruina Papatus Saxonici Losannae 1563. The Victory of Truth the Ruine of the Popedome of Saxony Hamelmannia siue Aries Theologizans Diaâ—gus oppositus duabus narrationibus historicis Herâ—anni Hamelmanni Neostadij 1582. Hamelmannia or the Theologizing Ramme A Dialogue against two Historicall Narrations of Hermanus Hamelmannus Christiani Kittelmanni decem graues perâ—iciosi errores Zwinglianorum in Doctrina de pecâ—atis Baptismo ex proprijs ipsorum libris colleâ—i refutati Magdeburgae 1562. Ten weighty pernicious Errors of â—he Zwinglians in the Doctrine concerning Sinne Baptisme Collected out of their owne books refuted by Christianus Kittleman Iohannis Mosellani Praeseruatiua contra venenum Zwinglianorum Tubingae 1586. An Antidote or Preseruatiue againsâ— the poyson of the Zwinglians by Ioannâ—â— Mosellanus De Vnitate personali supernaturali duarâ—â— Naturarum in Christo contra blasphemam Dispâ—tationem Eusebij Cleberi Pastoris Saugalensis iâ— Heluetia Tubingae 1586. Of the Personall Supernaturall Vnity of two Natures in Christ against the blasphemous Disputation of Eusebius Cleberus Pastour of Saugall in Suitzerland De gaudijs aeternae vitae quomodo Sacramentarij nobis illa gaudia imminuant Erfordia 1585. Of the Ioyes of Eternall life And how the Sacramentaries do in part defraude 〈◊〉 of them Now from all the premises aboue I hauâ— conclude that if the seuerall opinions among the Protestants be not in their iudgement maters of Indifferency but are by theÌ„selues truly reputed for Heresies the maintayners of them not houldden to be in state of Saluation as appeareth both from the Protestants reciprocall coÌ„demnations of one another as also from the former Titles of their owne Bookes written agaynst one another then with much more reason may the same sentence be pronounced of the many irreconciliable Controuersies differently belieued and houlden by the Catholikes and Protestants And the rather since as is aboue sayd there is a farre greater disparity and difference of doctrine betweene the Catholikes and the Protestants then betweene the Protestant the Protestant THE TRVTH OF THIS FORMER Doctrine demonstrated from the many Absurdityes necessarily accompanying the contrary doctrine CHAP. XVI SVCH is the sweet Prouidence of the Diuine Maiesty in disposall of thinges as that he euer causeth truth to be warranted with many irrefragable reasons and falshood to be attended on with diuers grosse and ineuitable absurdityes that so the iudgment of man may be the better secured for the imbracing of truth and remayne the lesse excusable if in place of truth it entertayne falshood Errour Of the reasons conuincing the infallible truth of our doctrine maintayned in this treatise I haue already discussed aboue in the tenth Chapter Now heere I will a little insist in disclosing the many and palpable absurdities accompanying the contrary doctrine which point will chiefly rest besides some other short insertions in a recapitulation of most of the former heads or braunches aboue handled For if this doctrine were true to wit that euery one might be saued in his owne Religion or that the beliefe only of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion or the Creed were sufficient thereto notwithstaÌ„ding the beliefe of other erroneous opinions and heresies Then would it follow First that the holy Scriptures of Christ and his Apostles were most false which haue inueyghed so much agaynst Heresies and haue denounced the heauy iudgment of damnation agaynst the professours of them as aboue is shewed which comminations and threats the scripture in some places not only extendeth to all Hersies or Heretikes in generall without (a) Tit. 3. Gal. c. 5. Rom. c. 16. 1. Tim. 1. any limitation but also in some other they are particulerly restrayded to certayne Heresies seeming of smaller importance then the denyall of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion the Creed c. as is euident touching the denying (b) 1. Tim. cap. 4.2 Tim. c. 2.1 Ioan. c. 2. of marriage and of eating of certayne meates and touching the Natures of Christ c. Now that the denyall of other inferiour articles of fayth then of the Trinity Incarnation c. is playne Heresy is demonstrated aboue both from the definition of Heresy and from the iudgment of the Primitiue Church Secondly the foresayd doctrine impugneth the definition of Fayth giuen by the (f) Hebr. c. 11. Apostle which definition of fayth comprehendeth a generall beliefe of all articles of Christian Religion and is not therefore to be limited to any one kind of them In like sort it destroyeth the priuiledges dignity of fayth set down by the foresayd Apostle who (g) Mat. vltimo Hebr. 11. promiseth saluation to him that hath faith as also that without fayth we cannot (h) Ephes 4. Act. 4. Rom. 12. c. please God but such excellencies cannot be ascribed to a Bastard fayth which belieueth some thinges true others false they are therfore eyther to be giuen to a true entire and perfect fayth in all points or els the Apostle grossely erred in assigning to fayth the aforesayd priuiledges seing a false fayth is no better then no faith at all Againe it depriueth a Christian faith of its true mark or character of Vnity so much celebrated by the (h) Ephes 4. Rom. 12. vide Cant. c. 6. Apostle Now then if Vnity of fayth be necessary to Saluation how can both Protestants and Catholikes expect saluation seeing there is no greater distance betweene the opposite parts of a Diameter then there is