them for ever into and in Hell fire That every man is as he is Predestinate a Sinner or Beleever NECESSARILY unavoideably That the Reprobate are incited on and PROVOKED to sinne by GOD. That GOD was the Author of IUDAS treason and the like None of these dropped out of my pen against you therefore that Depravation of YOUR Doctrine or odious relating of it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That which I relate is confessed by your selves That PETER could not perish IUDAS could not but perish Whether this be good Catholick doctrine I did not touch CHAP. VII Lutherans averse from the doctrin of Calvinists The moderation of the Church of England in these great and unsearchable mysteries The Author's submission thereunto The doctrine of Predestination Man the Author of his owne destruction and not GOD. The doctrine of Antiquitie contemned by Novellers The Synod of Dort no obligation to us The saying of DEODATE The Articles of Lambeth forbidden by Authority Forraine Doctrine maintayned to bring in forraine Discipline The Church of England no Patronesse of Novell opinions INFORMERS BUt I make the world beleeve that the Church of England doth oppose the doctrine of absolute and irrespective Election which the SYNOD of DORT concluded upon and determined and that it agreeth with the Lutherans in this point MOUNTAGU DOE I make men Beleeve it How can you tell that the world is so perswaded through my words It is probable enough that the world thought so and Beleeved so before that my name or the Gaggers came into play among you or were heard of in the world And for the Lutherans this is all I say The Lutherans abhorre it It that is That opinion as I then spake indefinitely not imposing it on you or YOUR Divines as gently as I could as tenderly as was possible And I pray you for the Lutherans is it not so out of your knowledge or heare-say doe not they detest it as horribiliter in DEUM contumeliosum generi humano perniciosissimum and that so farre with such vehemency as their custome is in every thing to be vehement and violent that they sticke not to professe they will rather come off roundly unto Poperie againe than joine with YOUR Divines upon any termes in these Questions of Prescience Perseverance Election and Reprobation wherein they say that by your Tenents Non Diabolus sed DEUS erit AUTHOR mendacij GOD not the Divell is made AUTHOR of sinne But concerning the Church of England's consenting with the Lutherans your Glosse corrupteth my Text. I say no such matter That which I say is this The Gagger objecteth unto us as held by us that which you call the Doctrine of YOUR Divines My answer thereto is Negative Absque hoc no such matter For the Lutherans in Germany doe detest and abhorre it the Church of England hath not taught it And yet this is not enough to inferre that we consent with the Lutherans eyther in their Abhorring and Detesting of it or in those Opinions which they hold against it except there could be given Nihil tertium I adde The Church of England doth not Beleeve it and why may I not say so except you shew the contrary or bring me forth a Creed a Canon a Conclusion in being for Beleeving it in the Church of England What our Church resolveth touching this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 resolved in the XVII Article the very words of that Article being expressed in termes as farre as concerned that Decree But touching the execution of that eternall purpose both for inchoation by Grace here and consummation in Glory hereafter thus much is tendred in the selfe same place and Article Therefore they that be endowed with so excellent a Benefite from GOD be called according unto GOD'S purpose by his Spirit working in due season They through GOD'S grace obey that calling they be justified freely they be made sonnes of GOD by adoption they be made like unto the Image of his only begotten Sonne IESUS CHRIST they walke religiously in good works and at length by GOD'S mercy attaine unto everlasting felicity In all which passage both containing GOD'S Decree and execution of that Decree is not one word syllable or apex touching your absolute necessarie determined irresistable irrespective Decree of GOD to call save and glorifie S. PETER for instance infallibly WITHOUT any CONSIDERATION had of or REGARD unto his FAITH OBEDIENCE REPENTANCE and to condemn IUDAS as necessarily without any RESPECT had at all unto his SINNE which say I there and I say truely is the private fancy of some particular men and as I conjecture you are professedly of those SOME And whereas you would make the World beleeve that Ecclesia Anglicana Calvinistat as if he were the father and founder of our Faith as if our Beleefe were to be pinned upon his sleeve and absolutely to be taught after his Institutions shew mee good warrant for it and I yeeld I may rather say that the Church of England hath opposed this doctrine because that many of the Learned your selves will not denie in that Church and most conformable unto the Discipline and Doctrine of the Church have mainly opposed it and the Church it self hath directly and in EXPRESSE words overthrown the ground therof in teaching thus that a Iustified man and therefore Predestinate in your doctrine may Fall away from GOD and therefore become not the Child of GOD. The truth is our Church in these deepe and high points hath in great Wisedeme and Prudence gon on warily and suspensely not presuming 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as you and YOUR Divines have done and doe to conclude upon GOD'S Secrets not straightning narrowing of mens consciences by determining specially in those Mysteries at which that great Apostle stood at gaze with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Would you and your Party bee advised I would counsaile you that which I desire to follow in this particular my selfe Ne curiosus quaere causas omnium Quaecunque libris vis Prophetarum indidit Afflata caelo plena veraci DEO Nec operta sacri supparo stlentij Irrumpere aude sed prudenter praeteri NESCIRE VELLE QUAE MAGISTER MAXIMUS DOCERE NON VULT ERUDITA EST INSCITIA I must confesse my dissent thorough and sincere from the Faction of novellizing PURITANS men intractable insociable incompliable with those that will not aedificare ad dissensiones but in no one point more than in this their desperate doctrine of Predestination In which as they delight to trouble themselves and others in nothing more so I professe I doe love to meddle nothing lesse I have not I did not desire nor intend to declare my owne opinion in that point evermore with reservation of my dutifull consent with and unto my Mother for I needed not doe it being not forced so to do in following of the Gagger but because I am challenged for Dangerous Doctrine therein
it were true which is most false wherewith I am charged by these honest men yet I might answer and what if I doe Who bound the Church of England or Me a Priest and a Member of the Church of England unto defence of all the Decrees or Determinations of that Synod Hath Prince or Parliament or Convocation Edict Statute or Canon I knowe none I have heard of none nor ever shall I hope And till I heare of such quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I answer Let them that are interessed plead for themselves For my part I nor have nor ever will subscribe that Synode absolutely and in all points for in some it condemneth upon the Bye even the discipline of the Church of England but so farre forth onely as their Determinations shall bee found and made conformable unto the doctrine of OUR Church nor I think will the Ferventest amongst you subscribe it in every point For sure I am YOUR Divines as you call them have disavowed sometimes some things resolved of in that Synod as for instance Cooperation of Free-will and Grace Reprobation negative rather than positive But as I said the Synod of Dort is not MY Rule and your Magisteriall Conclusions are NO Rule I hope all not violently precise will say Ampliandum upon your bare imputations who bring nothing to prove me an ARMINIAN but your 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hee saith thus and thus and we say this is ARMINIANISME Absque hoc And thus much for Arminianisme THE SECOND PART TOUCHING POINTS OF POPERY IN GENERALL CHAP. I. The Author uncharitably traduced His profession for the doctrine and discipline received and commanded in the Church of England Conformable Puritans Furious zeale The Church of Rome not a sound yet a true Church Private opinions disclaimed The Church of England asserted to her owne publick and proper Tenents The cause of all these Imputations NOw come they to POPERY in a larger extent A strange imputation in my opinion considering the subject upon which they work which may argue in them with any indifferent Reader an uncharitable unchristian fiery Puritanicall zeale malice and indiscretion too For did I prevaricate was it a compact between Me and the Papists to collude If I favoured them would I so have handled them as few have beside me in so exasperating a stile Sure A Kingdome I know divided cannot stand But the truth is As with the IESUITE he is an Heretick that is not furioso more a Roman Catholick so with the PURITAN he is a Papist that will not run a-madding with them It is not the first time for this very cause I have been talked of esteemed of traduced as a Papist which I can the better brooke because they have meted this measure to the Church of England it self as sympathizing with Papists in her Liturgy Discipline and Doctrine too It were to be wished that such transported spirits were taught to be more submisse and sparing in their talk I call GOD and all his holy Angels to witnesse I nor am nor have beene nor intend to be heerafter eyther Papist or ROMISH Catholick a Papist of State or of Religion but a Priest a member a follower of the Church and Doctrine of the Church of ENGLAND The Originall grounds of Popery are to my understanding against Reason have not their warrant from revealed Truth stand not with the purer practice of prime Antiquity I have been born and bred and brought up in the Confession of the Church of England I have learned loved admired and proposed unto my selfe to follow indeclinably not onely the Discipline of the Church of England whereunto the Puritans and Schismaticks themselves at least the wiser and subtiller sort of them come off roundly now for ends best known amongst themselves remaining quod erant quoad doctrinam tantum non in EPISCOPATU Puritani but the whole and entire Doctrine of that Church proposed in Synods confirmed by Law commanded and established by Act of PARLIAMENT This totall both Doctrine and Discipline I willingly and thoroughly embrace In profession thereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have lived and will die and will maintaine it by GOD'S grace to bee Antient Catholick Orthodox and Apostolicall I say it againe a never was or will be a Papist no not in heart though many be arrant Puritans in heart that onely for preferment do conforme hold with the Hare and runne with the Hound who so they might vivere and valere would as willingly have up the Presbyterian Anarchie as would THO. CARTWRIGHT were he living though many once Puritans turne often Papists And no marvell for fleeting is commonly from one extreme unto another Men of moving violent Quick-silver Gun-powder spirits can never rely upon middling courses but dum furor in cursu est runne on headlong into extremes And so I may avow I will not bee a Papist in haste because I never was a Puritan in earnest or in jest having found it true in my small observation that our Revolters unto Popery were Puritans avowed or addicted first And yet it must bee granted All powder doth not take fire alike nor are all Puritan Spirits of one disposition With some of them more braine-sick than the rest all my Booke against the Gagger is quickly branded with Popery or scurrility With others more discreet I doe but walk upon the brinks of Popery wherein is some allaying of that former fervency for upon their better advice I am but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at the next dore unto it What they thinke or speake I cannot hinder nor doe I greatly care I professe my selfe none of those furious ones in point of difference now-a-dayes whose profession and resolution is That the farther in any thing from communion with the Church of Rome the neerer unto GOD and Truth that we ought to have no commerce society or accordance with Papists in things divine nor almost humane upon pain of eternall damnation but must bid defiance irreconcileable unto them for ever I am absolutely perswaded and shall bee till I see cause to the contrary that the Church of Rome is a true though not a sound Church of CHRIST as well since as before the Councell of Trent a part of the Catholick though not the Catholick Church which wee doe professe to beleeve in our Creed a Church in which among many tares there remaineth some wheat In Essentials and Fundamentals they agree holding one Faith in one Lord into whom they are inserted through one Baptisme Ecclesia Papalis saith FRANCISCUS IUNIUS neither Papist nor Arminian quâ id habet in se quod ad definitionem Ecclesiae pertinet est Ecclesia And I verily am perswaded that I ought not to goe farther from the Church of Rome in these her worst daies than she hath gone away from her selfe in her best dayes I hold it to bee furious zeale without discretion issuing out of ignorance or malice or both in them who proceed so farre in their extravagant
think and speake and write otherwise or you eyther yet both of us may bee deceived But somewhat there was which these men intended and would have said if so bee they could have hit upon it It is a Conclusion of the Romane Schooles The Church cannot Erre which Proposition I may both affirme and deny as it is proposed The Church CANNOT Erre The Church CAN Erre For first it i◠ambiguous subiectivè What the Church is which cannot Erre The word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and must be distinguished And secondly we may consider it obiectivè In what things the Church cannot Erre and Quousque that Not erring doth reach forth Extensivè To this purpose I differenced Churches two wayes into Topicall or Particular Churches into Catholick or Vniversall I divided also the objects of erring or not erring two wayes into Fundamentalls or superstructives For Particular locall Churches such as Corinth Ephesus Smyrna Thyatyra Laodicea c. it is in Confesso on both sides that They may Erre for it is evident that they have Erred both in inferiour and in higher points of Faith And so have Erred oftentimes that through their Erring in Fundamentalls in that sort they have ceased to be Churches any more The Catholick or universall Church I considered two wayes conceiving it to be Diffusive or Representative and that diffusion to runne out two wayes into Vniversality of ALL both Time and Place or into Vniversality of Time alone The first is so ample that it fetcheth in the APOSTLES and all and so includeth within the Verge that part of the Catholick Church which is now regnant in heaven and free from all Error as partaking of that blisse which leadeth infallibly holdeth inseparably in all Truth In this sense and acceptation the proposition is not quarrelled The Church so hath not cannot Erre The second divided part stinted from so large an extent is yet enlarged respectively to all members to every member in particular of the Catholick Church living any where at any one time so that the whole aggregation of all Christian professors make and compose this Church And as yet I thinke the Informers doe not quarrell us for Popery Their whole stitch is against the Church Representative in a Generall Councell In which though I should resolve simply and punctually thus A Generall Councell cannot Erre yet could I not be counted a Papist For the Tenent of the Papists if you my Informers know it not in their Schooles is this A Generall Councell can no way Erre in the Decisions finall thereof which is allowed by the POPE By which they necessarily inferre as also they stick not to expresse that unlesse the POPE give ratification any Generall Councell whatsoever may erre in any point of Faith of what nature soever And therefore such is their Doctrine since the IESUITES have domineered in their Schooles all the validity and assurance of not Erring which a Generall Councell hath or can have either in fide or moribus is onely from that impossibility of Erring which the POPE hath as Haeres ex asse unto S. PETER to whom our SAVIOUR behighted that impossiblity alone So that pretend the IESUITES as long as they will that fair and specious shew and title of the CHURCH never so much have they nothing in their mouthes but The CHURCH the CHURCH the POPE is that Church and their conclusion heer is not for the Church but for HIM Now doth Mr. MOUNTAGU come up unto nay looketh he toward this Catholick Roman fancy and infallible madnes Nothing lesse Hee directly pitcheth upon the Church Representative in a generall Councell WITHOUT the Pope I meane without the Pope as Head or exceeding the bounds and limits of a Patriarchicall Bishop I go not unto all things discussed or determinable in a Councell but rest upon that which is Fundamentall Nor doe I resolve it as certum de fide or tender it unto others to be beleeved I say no more but I see no cause why I may not so resolve and that also but upon suppositions if the Councell be truely GENERALL indeed and of SUCH none yet ever erred that ever I yet read or observed in Points Fundamentall And therefore I saw and see no cause but a man may say Such a Councell shall never erre in Fundamentals But concerning Fundamentals if your stitch bee against them I answer with B. MORTON in his Appeale THE beleefe of some Articles is so absolutely necessary for the constitution of a true Church as a reasonable soule is for the essentiall being of a man In such as these are shew me an error Dr. REYNOLDS himself though maintaining the contrary was not able in his VI. Conclusions out of all his reading and yet therein was his excellency to afford us so much as a peece of an example in Antiquity for a Generall Councell erring in FUNDAMENTALS and I am perswaded no man living can instance it Of such onely doe I speak and in such onely do I conceive infallibility and so as I conceive it the promise of OUR SAVIOUR may and doth hold HEE shall leade you into ALL TRUTH as also that other to the same purpose Where two or three are gathered together in my Name I AM THERE in the MIDDEST of them The Church of England may seem to have been of a contrary minde in her determinations and to have taught and prescribed to be so taught that such Generall Councels true and lawfull not onely may erre for possibilitie but also have erred in reality For Artic. XXI we reade thus GENERALL Councels may not be gathered together without the commandement and will of Princes And when they be gathered together for as much as they bee an Assembly of men whereof all be not governed with the Spirit and word of GOD they MAYERRE and sometime HAVE ERRED even in things appertaining unto GOD. Which decision of the Article is not home to this purpose First the Article avoucheth that GENERALL Councels have erred which cannot be understood of my limitation Fundamentals because there is no such Extat of any Generall Councell true and lawfull Secondly things appertaining unto GOD are not all Fundamentals but points of Piety GOD'S Service and Religion which admit a very large interpretation For many things appertaine unto GOD that are not of necessity unto salvation both in practice and speculation In these haply Generall Councels have erred in those other none can erre The Councell of Nice determined the controversie of Easter it was not Fundamentall I put the case that in it they erred It was a thing appertaining unto GOD in his service this may come under the sense and censure of the Article but this toucheth not my opinion concerning only Fundamentals Thirdly the Article speaketh at large concerning Generall Councels both for debating and deciding I onely spake of the determination wherein it may be possible they nor can nor shall erre that may and have erred in the discussing In that very Councell of
mission and commission You cannot produce any time out of any Records or Memorials extant or remembred in which and by which it may appeare that these things were otherwise The Churches of the East Asia Greece and Africa were a long time visible eminent and glorious The Churches of the West have held it out longer Since there first was a Church in England France Spaine and Rome there hath not ceased to bee a Church there And if in any of these places or all these places the Church should cease or not bee visible yet would it be still visible otherwhere though not ever alike nor to like purpose Againe I do call those Some mens doctrines in this point Private Opinions and so well may I doe in respect of the disinvalidity and disproportion of them being private mens opinions and no publick proposals or resolutions of the Church I call them not so in regard of paucity of proposers for they may bee many a strong potent prevailing partie that thus opine and runne a course to themselves in their owne Tenents against or beside publick enacted and authorized doctrine And yet even private opinions also are against you That worthy Divine my deare friend while he lived D. RI. FIELD lib. 111. pag. XIX saith It cannot bee but they are the true Church must by profession of the truth make themselves knowne in such sort that by their profession and practice they may be discerned from other men But without all question that Church must needs be visible the members whereof doe make open and publick profession of their Faith in such sort that by their practice and profession they may be knowne and distinguished from other men And therefore that learned man rightly resolveth That BELLARMINE laboureth in vaine to prove that there is and alwayes hath beene a VISIBLE Church and that not consisting of some few scattered Christians without order or Ministry or use of Sacraments for all this we do grant and most willingly yeeld unto howsoever perhaps SOME FEW have been of ANOTHER OPINION Marke my good Informers D. FIELDS Popery to the purpose and with all D. HUMFREYES another Papist SECRET abodes are no Christian Convocations because this communion of Saints is an OPEN testification of Christianity and D. WILLET no Papist I hope unlesse your selves be saith that The ONLY absence of word and Sacraments doe make a nullity in a Church therefore an existence in a Church is made by their presence But how can you or any man possibly conceive that the Word should be preached and Sacraments administred in a Church Invisible The L. Bishop of LICHFIELD hath as much Popery in this point as M. MOUNTAGU hath In his Appeale thus he writeth Now Protestants and Romanists doe concarre in words and almost in sence So that the difference is not so much in the position as in the application of the Invisibility of the Church And before him long since that IEWELL of his time hath uttered these expresse words The generall or outward Church of GOD is VISIBLE and may be seene in his Defence against HARDING And this Doctrine is sufficiently and to this purpose explaned by that right worthy and learned Deane Dr. WHITE in his just Defence of his deceased Brother against the cavills of a Iesuite And he that hath read moe Papists than ever you have heard of concludeth thus Whereunto our learned adversaries for the greater part agree Great Ignorance then it must be or malice or faction or all that by the Information of these poore Divines M. MOUNTAGU is promoted for a Papist for saying that with moderate men on both sides this Controversie might cease or for calling the opinion of the INVISIBILITY of the Church a private opinion But as I said so I see it fareth still now adayes as with the Iesuite and Iesuited Papist such as be by farre the major part of that side every man is an Heretick a Lutheren a Calvinist I know not what that is not a desperate Papist to goe unto the Divell with them though it be upon a second pouder-plot so also with our Puritans very Sibs unto those Fathers of the Society every Moderate man is bedaubed with these goodly habiliments of ARMINIANISME POPERY and what not unlesse hee will be frantick with them for their Holy Cause Yet well fare BELLARMINE a man of a better spirit than some of the Paternitie who ingenuously confesseth concerning this particular Notandum est multos ex nostris tempus terere dum probant ABSOLUTE Ecclesiam non posse deficere nam CALVINUS caeteri Haeretici id concedunt And that learned Deane of CARLILE of late against FISHER saith the same It is but lost labour to spend time in proving against us that there is alway in the world a true Church for we have ever acknowledged it and have ever been Papists in opinion for so doing or else these good Fellowes are and ever will bee I know what I could have produced many moe to purpose and amongst them diverse whom they will not cast off for Papists as M. PERKINS M. CLAPHAM D. SPARKS c. I will yet adde a little more Poperie to the former and so leave my friends and Informers to chew the Cud upon it as they do after Lectures The Church of Rome hath ever beene visible The Church of Rome is and ever was a true Church since it was a Church Therefore the true Church hath been visible I say Remember it lest you mistake my saying or maliciously mistake it a True Church ratione essentiae and Being of a Church not a Sound Church every way in their Doctrine CHAP. V. Touching ANTICHRIST The Pope and Prelacy of Rome Antichristian That hee is Magnus ille Antichristus is neyther determined by the publick doctrine of the Church nor proved by any good argument of private men Difference among Divines who The Man of sinne should be The markes of the great Antichrist fit the Turkish Tyrannie every way aswell as the Papacie The peace of the Church not to bee disquieted through varietie of Opinions No finall Resolution to bee yet had in this point INFORMERS COncerning ANTICHRIST thus hee writeth I professe ingenuously I am not of opinion that the Bishop of ROME personally is THAT ANTICHRIST nor yet that the Bishops of ROME successively are THAT ANTICHRIST Chap. X. pag. 74. MOUNTAGU WHat if I am not of that opinion what if ingenuously I professe so much that I am not of that opinion as indeed I am not I was occasioned to shew my opinion in the point by the Gagger who charged our Church in generall with the private Fancy and opinion of some men that the Pope of Rome was that very Antichrist mentioned and foretold in the Scripture I must needs avow it or disclaime it That I could not doe without wronging the Church and my selfe therefore I thought it an honest mans part ingenuously to professe what I thought Sure it
would be more pleasing unto GOD and commendable with men if your selves and such Halfers in opinions omnium horarum homines for your private ends would openly avow what covertly you conceale and publickly professe that in which animitùs being rotten at the Core you are dissentients indeed from the Church of England than to be and call your selves at least Conformitants for fashion sake in some few and indifferent points of Ceremony and to be opposites in Truth both from them and most points of Doctrine of the Church of England For the point in question what if I for my part professe so much you may for your part professe the contrary if you please so be it you trouble not the Church with it nor would pin my Faith unto your opinion One thing I promise you for my part I will not lightly talke of my opinion in Pulpits will you say as much for your opinion I thinke not I know nay For your opinions must bee all THE LORDS HOLY TRUTH I am not anie way offended with you for your opinion that The Pope is Antichrist yet much rather might I because you presume to determine so peremptorily of future Contingents which being ever uncertaine quoad nos those things cannot but rashly be defined or absolutely taught as true the event whereof may hap afterwards to prove otherwise Why should you be angry with mee in such points of no assurance because I doe not subscribe unto you I am not tyed unto you more than you to me Who concluded it but your selves to be flat Popery not to Beleeve or Preach that the Pope is that Antichrist or to professe the contrary that he is not that Antichrist Who can finde it to be the doctrine of the Church of England What Synod resolved it Convocation assented to it What Parliament Law Proclamation or Edict did ever command it to be professed or have imposed penaltie upon repugnants or non-consentients unto it Some Protestant Divines at home and abroad I grant have thought so wrote so disputed so in good zeale no doubt against that insolent and insufferable and outrageous Tyrannie and Pride of the Bishops of Rome and their infinite enormities in the Church and out of that affection have been too violently forward out of conjectures and probabilities to pronounce The POPE is that MAN OF SINNE and SONNE OF PERDITION The Synod of GAPP in France made it a point of their Beleefe and concluded it peremptorily to be so And let them and you beleeve it so if you will Their inducements doe not convince or perswade me I never yet saw proofe or argument brought that was perswasive much lesse that was demonstrative in the case I never yet met with argument or reason to the point but at least to my owne satisfaction I was able to answer it If you can give better I am like to yeeld Till then there being no conviction nor compulsion in foro externo or interiori I would gladly know why it should not be as lawfull for mee to opine The Pope is NOT that Antichrist as for others to write to preach to publish to tender unto Proceeders this Proposition The Pope Is Antichrist They thinke one way I am of another minde and so are infinite others with me Why may not I sedatè and tranquillè as well deliver my Negative as M. GABRIEL POWELL publish and print as if the Church of England were of his minde out of violent and transported passion no doubt thus I am as well assured and as throughly perswaded that the POPE is THAT ANTICHRIST as I am resolved IESUS CHRIST was the Sonne of GOD or to that purpose for I have not now the booke by mee Surely this man made it an Article of his faith so will not I. And yet I will not deny but the Pope is an Antichrist I doe not deny it I doe beleeve it These honest Informers should not so have dealt with mee as by a knack of concealement to have done me so palpable a wrong as if my meaning were the Pope was no Antichrist at all So I might have walked not onely upon the Brinks but have come much within the Verge of flat Popery and not injuriously as now have been slandered for and stiled a Papist For that imputation might more than grate upon an universall approoving of the totall doctrine of the Church of Rome in as much as there were of old are now and alway will bee many Antichrists and hee that any way opposeth CHRIST in his Kingdom his Word his Church is an Antichrist which as ingenuously as the former I professe the Pope and the Church of Rome doth And therefore when out of my private opinion onely for which I will not trouble the peace of the Church I denied that the Pope was THAT Antichrist then yet and there I added withall AN Antichrist notwithstanding I hold him or them carrying themselves in the Church as they doe Which Passage and Proposition had bin sufficient with men not partially addicted unto a Side and maliciously bent to calumniate an Opposite as it is too manifest my Informers bee to have discharged mee from guilt or tincture of Popery For will or can any Papist living say that the Bishop of Rome now is an Antichrist But so have I said and written and professed so if these honest Informers had been pleased to have reported it so But it stood not with their prime purpose of calumniating directly it gave check unto their detraction in chief and so they passed it slightly over But as concerning the maine the question on foot Whether the Pope of Rome or the Popes of Rome either are or may be accounted or is THAT Antichrist or Antichrists my irresolution grew as I have remembred from the much insufficiency of their proofes that tender it stoutly strongly affectiouately and tantum non as a point of faith Not any one of their arguments is not all their arguments together are convincing Secondly because it is in Scripture every where tendred as a Prophecy and therefore a Mystery sealed up obscure not manifested nor to bee understood but by evident and plaine event without divine revelation How then these are the very words of Bishop MORTON in excuse of the Fathers concerning their erring in this verie case of ANTICHRIST can ignorance of those things which cannot possibly be understood before the time of their accomplishment in the last daies be held prejudiciall unto the wisedome of the Fathers of former times I may adde thereunto Or the cautelousnes of suspenders and not forward concluders in these times And yet farther because Protestants are divided in the question For all doe not determine or resolve that the Pope is THAT Antichrist remembred in the Scripture and yet none of them have hitherto at any time beene stiled or reputed Papists no not by Puritanicall Opposites The Scriptures as is apparent doe in this question propose us two persons AN Antichrist one with many THE
that point And these honest well-meaning Informers if they had imagined indeed that I did so acquit them rather should have challenged mee of contradiction than of Popery For it seemeth as much Popery to accuse the Fathers of Errors as to excuse them of Erring seeing those three IESUITES than whom scarce were ever three more eminent in the Society doe not excuse or acquit them but accuse them rather for going so farre in applauding of Free-will In this point it is plaine my meaning was that their Vnderstandings were not so darkened as their words at first apprehension may seeme to import to erre so grossely in the point as they seeme to doe nor did then and in that particular those worthie Lights of the Church of GOD faile in discerning of the Truth of GOD in that particular as to use the words of the forenamed learned Bishop they inclined contrary to Scripture unto Pelagianisme For things must bee taken and considered as they are spoken and upon what occasion and ground they are spoken If you were not so acute to conceive this indeed so honest to expresse it yet your dullest Readers would have observed it had there beene in you so much ingenuity as to have added that which ensueth in M. MOUNTAGU thus That they being to deale against fatall Necessity urged by many PATNIMS Philosophers in those dayes as also against the execrable impiety of the MANICHEES they extended the power of FREE-WILL unto the uttermost and set it upon the Tenters especially having then no cause to fear anyenemy at home unto the contrary ante mota certamina PELAGIANA There being yet no PELAGIANS sprung up in the world enemies to Grace advancers of Nature and Naturall powers beyond degree of Power and of Possibility In effect M. MOUNTAGU as touching freewill heer in this case hath said the same and no more but the same that before him Bishop MORTON did in his Appeale pag. CCII. THE occasion of this difference we learne to have beene a whirlwind of contrary Heresies wherewith in those dayes the Church of GOD was miserably afflicted Then the MANICHEES and before them the STOICALL CHRISTIANS had taught an absolute fatall Necessity of every mans Actions thereby taking from man the guilt of sinne For the overthrow of which pestilent Heresie as is confessed concerning S. CHRYSOSTOME some FATHERS did contrarily yeeld too much unto the power of will This was the occasion of their by-sliding who notwithstanding did often recover their footing and in their more intimate meditations gave direct acknowledgement of our Orthodoxall Defence Iust to an haire up and downe the same Popery that M. MOUNTAGU hath Delivered That Bishop and my poor self say one and the same thing and yet will even the Informers I dare say acquit Him of Popery why not Me as well in the selfe same case with him CHAP. IV. Private and publick doctrine differenced In what sense the Church is said to be alwaies visible The Author acquitted from Popery againe by others learned Divines Of the Church of Rome INFORMERS HE calleth the doctrine of the INVISIBILITY of the Church a private opinion no doctrinall decision nor to bee imputed unto the resolved doctrine of the Protestants Nusquam est saith hee quod nun quam videtur CHAP. V. pag. XLVIII And againe pag. L. Moderate men on both sides doe confesse that this controversie may cease MOUNTAGU MY words were onely these It may be some private opinions have run upon Invisibility of the Church But since you put me to it if there bee any such doctrine as you speak of it is a private opinion and I will now say expressely I hold that doctrine a PRIVATE opinion yet then and there I did not ponere that any had so said in terminis or runne that way but onely with restriction by a May-be of concession that some men singular from the doctrine of the Church in their owne private opinions had fallen upon and supported an Invisibilitie Now every man but your selves knowes that the doctrine of a Church Publick and Authorized is one thing and your doctrine or my doctrine and private opinion is another thing For such doctrine as you talk of I know none I acknowledge none but that of Libertines and Brownists with whom if you have any commerce intercourse or confarreation look unto it the Church of England as it detesteth them so is it for and of another straine ARTIC XIX touching the Church thus we read The VISIBLE CHURCH of CHRIST is a congregation of faithfull men in the which the pure word of GOD is preached and the Sacraments be duely ministred c. Where Church and Visible are convertible tearmes That doctrine then to which you should and would seeme to have subscribed talketh of no invisible but a visible Church tendreth no Invisibility And it is a Position drawne out from thence and published that there is a Church of CHRIST not onely invisible but also visible Though for invisible it is more than that Article specifieth yet is it most true that there is a Church also invisible which was never denied or thought upon to be denied Secondly it is also concluded thence that the visible Church is a Catholick Church So the Church is visible and the Church is invisible both which I beleeve and professe distinctly taken and as it ought to bee understood For these though seeming are not contradictory Propositions The Church is invisible in her more noble parts the Saints both regnant in heaven and militant in earth such as be secreti and occultè intus such as bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the secret hidden the reserved Ones of GOD Psal LXXXIII IV. as Iewels of price of value of account I doe also beleeve and professe a visibility of the Church on earth necessarily toto sui though not totâ se in some part or other at all times though in all parts of the world or it selfe intire at no one time Nothing visible in the amplest maner that can be is so visible that there is nothing in it or of it but is visible It never was it never shall be it is wholly impossible to bee that at some time or other there could not be found in any one part or corner of the world not any part visible of that Church Catholick The Divell never did nor ever shall so farre and fully prevaile against GOD and GOD'S Kingdome as to effect or procure such an absolute desolation And so is it true for of this onely restrainedly I spake Non est quod nusquam videtur not generally true I grant and without limitation There ever was and will bee ever upon earth a visible Church some where or other with visible cognisances marks and signes to be discerned by such as be assigned by the XIX Article to which men may repaire to heare GOD'S Word where Sacraments are ministred and may be received unto salvation where Priesthood and Ordination is and may be had according to CHRIST'S
Antichrist one eminent above all All and every one that oppugneth or opposeth CHRIST and his Kingdome his Word and Doctrine is an Antichrist So was SIMON MAGUS ELYMAS MENANDER the NICOLAITANS and other Heretickes abroad and risen up in the very Apostles times of whom S. IOHN himselfe said And now are many Antichrists These are all more or lesse Antichrists as their opposition is more or lesse unto CHRIST and his Kingdome in points of higher nature or of lower Tenure But beside all these more particularly and especially there is designed out in Scripture an egregious eminent and transcendent ANTICHRIST called there THE MAN OF SINNE THE SONNE OF PERDITION Concerning him not them there is diversity of judgements discrepancie of opinion among Divines both old and new First some of the antient Fathers and most of the Writers in the present Church of Rome understand the propheticall prediction of and apply it unto one singular individuall man onely and no otherwise and him to bee an Hereticke in opinion extreamly and with all vehemency opposing the saving truth of GOD prodigiously impious and beyond measure who shall by all signes and wonders with maine force and opposition set himself against CHRIST IESUS and his Kingdome towards the later end of the world not long before the day of Doome Other Divines as namely the major part of Protestant Writers not all understand the prophecy and prediction not of any one man or singular person so much as of any hereticall wicked tyrannicall State and Polity directly opposing the Kingdome State and Doctrine of CHRIST IESUS But heer is some difference among them For there are that by Antichrist doe understand MAOMET or the Turkish State and Tyranny erected against CHRIST and Christians directly and the Pope and Papacie opposing the same indirectly and in oblique sort both combined in one confederacy and combination that both these though opposite ad invicem in Temporalibus may and doe make one conjoyned opposition unto IESUS CHRIST and his truth in Spiritualibus And although that externally and in regard of Civill Policy they differ and doe deadly hate each other and mainly one oppose against the other yet nihil impedit but they may as indeed they do conspire in opposing CHRIST and his Gospell his Kingdome differently Other more precise Protestant Divines do not nor yet will in any hand extend Antichristianisme beyond the Papacy nor yet will admit or hear of any other great Antichrist past or to come but onely the Bishop of Rome which is it seemeth the opinion or rather faith and beliefe of these Informers together with M. POWELL and the Synod of GAPP as it is of most but not of all the Divines whom these men think it an honor to call CALVINISTS I say not of all for ZANCHIUS ZEGEDINUS GRYNAEUS and FAIUS of Geneva himselfe are not so yet perswaded For my owne private opinion I said and so I say still Though I cannot nor yet will sweare unto either being but probable and conjecturall yet I rather incline unto the more moderate and temperate Tenent and rather of the two embrace that The Turkish and Popish State not severall but conjoyned and opposite unto CHRIST though severall waies doe much rather and may so constitute THAT Antichrist than any one man or private person whatsoever than either of the two States disjoynedly and of the two States rather the Turke by much than the Pope rather the MAOMETAN iniquity than the HILDEBRANDINAN impiety at least wise as much every way because the Signes and Tokens and Marks and Cognisances of that eminent and great Antichrist foretold extant and designed in Scripture do all as much accrue unto and fit the Turk or rather and indeed more Him and Them than they doe the Popes in their State and Government ad oppositum First in Apostasie they are both interessed both are departed away but rather the Turk than the Pope is enteressed For whether we take that Apostasie to bee a departing away from CHRIST and his Kingdome and his Doctrine MAOMET himselfe apostated drew away his Followers and Sectaries sometime CHRISTIANS and so they continue yet unto this day Reprobates Renegadoes Apostataes Deniers of that faith which sometime they did professe The Churches of Asia those seven unto which S. IOHN sometime wrote those which S. PAUL planted and which APOLLOS watered where S. PETER S. ANDREW and the rest preached those manie famous Churches of Africa and others are fallen from GOD his Kingdom his CHRIST the SPIRIT of his Grace profession of his Name and received the marke and stampe of the Beast Or whether we understand Apostasie and defection from the Romane Empire the Turke is enteressed as much or more than the Pope both are growne great through the ruines thereof but rather the Turke than the Pope Indeed both from the Scepter of CHRIST and the Romane Empire is this Apostasie and so the signes marks and tokens hold on either side but upon due examination rather upon the Turke than the Pope as yet Then for Deceiving signes and wonders howsoever that cognizance holdeth in the Papacy and Sea of Rome we are assured out of Story that MAOMET tooke that course to beguile the simple to insinuate into the fancies of his deceived Proselites and to make himselfe esteemed a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being a false Prophet a Deceiver a teacher of lyes in regard of GOD and CHRIST Such he pretended he desired to be accounted so he was estemed and held in his time during life and so is he reckoned of by his followers at this day which hitherto secundum literam and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was never verified in Pope or Bishop of Rome personally nor in succession of Popes collectively Again the number of the name of the Beast doth agree unto one as much or more than unto the other whether wee take DCLXVI for the Number of the Name of a man or for the Number of the Time assigned when he should rise The time of MAOMETS rising in the East against CHRIST and the Romane Empire was in the sixt Centurie and Ierusalem was taken in by HOMAR successor unto MAOMET neere about the yeare DCLXVI The name of MAOMET written in the Greek that tongue in which S. IOHN wrote and to which he had reference doth make up that Number unto an haire as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so much insisted upon thus 40 I 70 40 5 300 10 200 μ α ο μ ε τ ι σ in all DCLXVI Fourthly as the Learned have made observation the word TURCA the name of the chiefe Prince of Gog and Magog doth signifie the same that doth Apollyon and Abaddon which is a Name ascribed and fastned unto that man of Sinne in holy writ Fiftly the Turkish MAOMETANS of these dayes and so the SARASINS of old are the grand professed enemies of CHRISTIANS Christianity CHRIST quà tales for that Name that Profession that Religion make warre against hate detest persecute Christians with
Cardinall BELLARMINE Quod omnia CHRISTI beneficia recordari nos faciat YOU need not that help Happy men that are ever in actu exercitato and need no rubbing of your memory And that worthy Divine D. WHITE in his Brothers Defense pag. 61. hath these words The SIGNING of the body with the SIGNE OF THE CROSSE as it was anciently used by the prime Christians to these ends I. To professe that they were not ashamed of CHRIST crucified 2. nor of the persecution and crosses which befell them for his sake 3. that they hoped for redemption and salvation by CHRIST crucified whom Iewes and Gentiles despised our Divines acknowledge to be lawfull What saith M. MOUNTAGU more in his So do wee and then remembring some abuses of it in the Church of Rome addeth In regard of these abuses our Church observeth not so common an use of the signe of the Crosse as was in former Ages neverthelesse we condemne not the same signe in regard of it self You do I do not And heerin you see I am not alone IUNIUS Animadv c. BEL. de Imag. ca. 29. Respectus Crucis etiam Crucis CHRISTI ut historicus non malus simpliciter sed bonus Malus verò efficitur si proficiscatur ex animo praesumente mereri ex opere operato Nos in rebus sacris non improbaremus planè SIGNUM CRUCIS si abesset superstitio c. Rem non adeò fugeremus si abessent vitia indignè rem illam fermentantia Tolle errorem superstitionemque nemo vestrum aut illorum factum improbaturus est M. PERKINS in his Probleme though he faine would puritanize it and so goeth on heawing hoofe against hoofe yet confesseth that the Fathers used to arme themselves against the Divell with the signe of the Crosse but addeth They did not ascribe unto the outward signe any power or to opus operatum any efficacy As if we imagined so we say with himselfe that it is an idle and foolish forgery And one day you may reade if you will what M. MOUNTAGU hath written against ROSW the Iesuite to that very purpose But setting this superstition aside neyther can any moderate Protestant disallow the use of the Crosse as the Fathers used it nor can Master PERKINS refell it You are of THO. CARTWRIGHT'S minde I make no question that great Apostle of Puritanicall Schisme That that reason which moved the Fathers to use should move us not to use the signe of the Crosse They lived with Heathens who had the CROSSE of CHRIST in contempt we with such as ADORE the CROSSE Where first I answer with that incomparable HOOKER You erre not knowing the Fathers reasons This was one but this reason was not all because they lived with Pagans that did despite it Secondly wee live not so with Papists as they did with Pagans For the State and Prince in State is for us against the Papists so was it not for Christians against Pagans But thirdly I come home to you indeed The same reason that moved them may move us to use it more frequently than we are enjoyned more ordinarily than wee doe For wee live with Puritans and opposite Factionists that have the Crosse of CHRIST in as great contempt and despight as ever had IULIAN or any Pagan But as the Fathers when the CROSSE of CHRIST was in utter contempt did not superstitiously adore the same but rather did declare that they so esteemed it as was meet In like maner if wee finde the Crosse to have that honour which is due to CHRIST is it not as lawfull for us to retaine it in that estimation which it ought to have and in that use which it had of old without offence as by taking it cleane away to seeme followers of their example who doe cure wilfully by abscission that which they might both preserve and heale So that worthy HOOKER most learnedly and rightly For your resolution I am enjoyned to use it in Baptisme and so are you I doe so use it do you I scarce beleeve you doe it willingly I am not enioyned to use it in other actions places or times But am I inhibited to use it so Shew where how by whom I see reasons to my selfe peradventure to use it so or so and thus doe or may other as well as I. It is superstition you say pardon me if I take not your words for Gospell Prove it superstition and I yeeld The rule of your consciences is not the square of mine nor shall be except it were more regular perfect and exact than it is Enjoy your opinions to your self let me alone with mine in things indifferent that are not prohibited by lawfull authoritie any way For saith the XXX Canon and I embrace it Things of themselves indifferent doe in some sort alter their natures when they are eyther commanded or forbidden by a lawfull Magistrate and may not be omitted at every mans pleasure contrary to the law when they bee commanded nor ùsed when they are prohibited Till then at least I may use the signe of the Crosse You say it is Popery but you must remember that all your words are not Gospell nor all Popery that displeaseth a Puritan CHAP. XXV The practice of the primitive Church approved Vnadvised Informers Novellers rejected INFORMERS HEmentioneth and approveth the practice of the ANCIENTS They signed saith he their foreheads their hands c. MOUNTAGU IT Is true he mentioneth that practice of Antiquity it is false that hee approveth it in that passage of his for he barely relateth it and no more But you knew his heart peradventure by instinct For though it then dropped not from his pen what hee thought thereof yet seeing you put him to it to discover himselfe he hath done it and doth assure you he doth approve it And it seemeth strange to him that some few Pigmies of these times should presume to controll the practice of those Ancient Heroes of former ages and to doe it so with an high-hand wherein unadvisedly they runne upon that rocke which of all they cannot endure to fall upon For they confesse therein that Popery is ancient which M. MOUNTAGU saith all the Papists in the world cannot prove For they say in direct tearms M. MOUNTAGU approveth the practice of the Ancients and that which he approveth is by themselves censured for Popery Nay more they professe themselves therein Papists that give so much credit unto Popery as to confesse it so directly to bee ancient Out of this ground è lege â—alionis because they have now more than once informed against mee for Popery I might as well pay them in their owne coine Howsoever let all Novellers knowe I had rather venture to approove a supposed error with those Ancients the learnedst in the primitive Church of old than an imaginary truth or not so good with these Younglings according to that dictate of the Councell of Niee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 CHAP. XXVI The testimony of S. ATHANASIUS vilified by the