Scriptorem vel per alium legitimum definitorem fidei whom he afterwards concludes to be the Pope I therefore chuse to speake as the Fathers doe yea and as the more Ancient Schoolemen did Aquinas Carbo and others That the Scripture is Regula credendorum which excludeth Bellamines Verbum non scriptum and Valenzaes Papall decisions And to this purpose I will cite such places of the Fathers which are acknowledged by the Adversaries to be true Fathers and true quotations The sacred Writers Evangelium in Scripturis nobis tradiderunt fundamentum Irenaeus l. 3. c. 1. columnam fidei nostrae futuram haue delivered the Gospell unto us in the written Word to be the foundation and pillar of our Faith Here Bellarmines Verbum non scriptum his unwritten Word hath no place This Father who lived in the first Age after the Apostles saith In Scripturis in the written Word Here Valenza's unwritten Revelations of Traditions or Papall decisions being his definitor fidei have no place to reconcile these two Scriptum and non Scriptum is to overthrow the first fundamentall Propositions of all learning in the world to reconcile contradictions The most incompatible opposition that is without which being laid as a ground-worke no man may treate of any thing Arist Meta 4. ca. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is impossible that the same thing at the same time should bee and should not bee this no man can bee ignorant of this is the first principle in Metaphysicke in Logicke though in other termes viz. two contradicting Propositions cannot be both true nor both false This is the first principle of all other Sciences as the fornamed Author Fonseca Suarez as Aquinas your great Schooleman Fonseca and Swarez your fellow Iesuits and great writers upon Metaphysicke your learned writer upon the Demonstrations Zabarel and others whom I could name doe undoubtedly teach Reconcile me Irenaeus his Scriptum est and your non scriptum Bellarm. de Verbo Dei and as you have taken away the Rule of divine knowledge by denying the sufficiencie thereof by denying it to bee a totall Rule but a part a piece of a Rule which is as much as no Rule as a part or piece of a man is no man so by denying this first principle of all humane knowledge you take away all Naturall and Morall Philosophie all Logicke all Metaphysicke and then what remaineth but that we be no more creatures endued with reason and your Pope shall rule us as please him Sed habebit imperium in belluas hee must transforme us into this beastly ignorance Thus having taken away your distinction of Scriptum non Scriptum which I desire may be observ'd in the rest of the Fathers that follow for I will cite none who use not this word Scriptures which is the written word I will presse my Argument thus First Argument Whosoever doth hold the foundation and pillar of Faith is of the Church But the Protestants believing the Scriptures doe hold the foundation and pillar of Faith Ergo The Protestants are of the Church What will you Master Fisher answer to this Argument will you distinguish Verbum Dei with Bellarmine or Revelatio Divina with Valenza ad terminos what word in my Syllogisme doe you distinguish or what proposition doe you deny Lib. cont Gentes seu contr Idola The second testimony shall be Athanasius his words are these Sufficiunt sanctae ac divinitùs inspiratae Scripturae ad instructionem veritatis out of which I thus argue Second Argument Whosoever doe professe that which is sufficient to instruct them in the truth are of the Church The Protestants professing the Scriptures do professe that which is sufficient to instruct them in the truth Ergo The Protestants are of the Church Neither is here any place for Bellarmines unwritten word or Valenzaes unwritten revelations Basil It is an Argument of infidelity and a sure token of pride to reject any thing that is written or to bring in any thing that is not written saith Saint Basil in his Sermon of the confession of Faith Third Argument But the Romà nists doe add vnto the Faith things that are not written Ergo The Romanists are proude Infidels The Maior is Saint Basils the Minor is your owne not only delivered by private men but also enacted by your Councell of Trent Sess 4. Anno 1546. Fourth Argument Chrysost Whatsoever is requisite unto Salvation is wholly fulfilled in the Scriptures saith Chrysostme Com. in 22. Matth. But the Protestants doe professe all that is fulfilled in the Scriptures Ergo The Protestants doe professe all that is requisite unto salvation And doing so sure they are of the Church because none are saved out of the Church Idem Chrys Seing we have a most exact Ballance Levell and Rule of all things the sayings of the Law of God I beseech you all that forsaking what seemeth to this man or what seemeth to that man you would enquire after these out of Scripture Thus the same Father Hom. 13. in 2. Ep. ad Cor. I argue thus Fifth Argument They who professe and believe the most exact ballance levell and rule of Christians doe continue in the Christian Church But the Protestants beleeving the Scripture or written Word doe beleeve a perfect ballance levell and Rule of all things belonging to Christians Ergo The Protestants are in the Christian Church I reverence the fulnesse of Scripture Tertull contra Hermog Let Hermogenes shew me that it is written if it be not written let him feare the woe that is denounced against them that adde or diminish Sixth Argument They who adde to the fulnesse of the written Word are thereby subject to a great Woe But the Romanists denying the fulnesse of Scripture adde thereto unwritten Traditions Ergo The Romanists are subject to great woe Seventh Argument Diabolici spiritus est aliquid extra Scripturarum Sacrarum authoritatem putare divinum It is devilish to accompt any thing divine that is not in the written Word Theoph. But the Romanists doe accompt unwritten Traditions and Papall determinations to be divine Ergo The Romanists are devilish or have a devilish spirit in them I will conclude with Saint Augustine Eighth Argument Aug. l. 3. cont Petil. cap. 6. If any one either concerning Christ or his Church or concerning any other matter which belongeth unto Faith or life I will not say if wee but as Saint Paul added If an Angell from heaven doe declare unto you any thing besides that which you have received in the writings of the Law and the Gospell let him be accursed But the Romanists doe tell us of unwritten Traditions concerning masters of Faith and life besides the written word of the Law and the Gospell Ergo The Romanists are accursed I will adde more testimonies out of the same Father both because by consent of all Divines that I have reade both Roman and Reformed hee is the chiefest Divine
some yeares after a reply was published whether by Master Fisher himselfe or some other in his behalfe I know not a sight whereof I could not get in a yeare or two after To that reply of his I answer in this ensuing Discourse with a Catalogue from the seventh Centurie to the fifteenth of such as professed our faith which Catalogue of perticular men being finished I have added a Catalogue of Councels in all Ages who professed our faith This booke of mine was finished seven or eight yeares past as a noble personage now imployed by our Soveraigne King in forraign parts can testifie who bestowed some books upon me which were very usefull unto mee in this Worke which he did read as did also many learned Doctors of our Church of Hereford D. Kernit D. Best D. Hoskinsed I was slow in publishing it having no desire to be in Print but the perswasions of some of our Church and the brags of some of our Adversaries saying that I neither had nor could answer Master Fisher caused me to present it to the licencer And so to send it into the view of the world requesting the Christian Reader first to peruse the former booke printed without my knowledge Secondly to observe how my Adversarie doth passe by many principall things in my first answer without any mention at all of the same Thirdly that of what he hath written against me I passe not by any one sentence unanswered My Booke hath two generall heads First what our Faith and Church is and how proved primarily and properly by Scriptures secondarily and improperly by reasons and humane testimony Secondly that by this way of a Catalogue of those who taught their faith or Trent Creed as distinct from ours they cannot prove their succession for many reasons alleadged by me in the thirteenth Chapter of this booke as first the uncertainty of humane testimony Secondly their purging out of Authors that which makes against them Thirdly their forging of Authors and Councels fourthly their slighting and abasing of the Ecclesiasticall Historians of the Primitive Church example whereof shall be shewed as occasion shall be offered I will conclude this my Preface with those words of Saint Augustine Ep. 48. Necesse est incerti sint qui pro societate sua testimonio utuntur non divino sed suo But let us with St. Augustine cleave to the Scriptures and say with him Ecce ubi didicimus Christum Ep. 166. ecce ubi didicimus Ecclesiam Loe where we have learned Christ loe where we have learned to find his Church Give the glory to God for what is well and impute the imperfections and defects to my weaknesse who will to my poore ability be Thine in the Lord. H. R A Table of the Contents CHAP. I. THe rules of answering 1. to lay downe his Adversaries words and 2. to answer to every particular Vel concedendo vel negando vel distinguendo either by granting denying or distinguishing by explicating of ambiguous termes observed by Mr R. but not by Mr. Fisher a comparison from the Dog drinking of Nilus and Anthony flying from Actium 1 CHAP. II. 1. The occasion of this Discourse 2. Mr. Fishers termes ambiguous 3. Distinctio vocis and definitio rei neglected by Master Fisher though requested by his Adversary 4. These are the grounds of all doctrinall Discourses 5. Master Rogers answer to Master Fishers first question That he will shew who professed the faith of the Reformed Churches in all Ages 6. Master Fisher cannot shew the names of Iesuites in all Ages 2 CHAP. III. 1. Master Fishers Rule That probatio est affirmantis non negantis They who affirme are to prove admitted by Master Rogers 2. A Church may be proved though the particular names not recorded as a Christian Church in this Iland before Austin the Monke came hither 3. M. Fisher doth confound two questions and commits a fallacie secundum plures interrogationes 4. Master Fisher by his rule of names in all Ages may be denyed to be a man to be descended of Adam if he admit no other proofe 5. Master Rogers Argument to prove himselfe a Christian confirmed out of Bellarmine Baronius Valenza c. 6. What is essentiall and necessary to an explicit faith set downe at large 7. The covenant of faith the same in all Christian Churches of the world Latine Roman and Reformed the Greeke Armenian c. 5 CHAP. IV. Of the totall object of faith as it includeth not onely the primary essentiall matters of faith but also the secondary and accidentall matters contained in the revealed truth And that from hence demonstrations may be drawne to prove the Protestants to be a Church 13 CHAP. V. Shewing out of Saint Augustine that there is no other way to demonstrate a Church to be a true Christian Church but by the word of God 120 CHAP. VI. The Roman polemicke Theologues likened to the Indian Apes that appeared to Alexander and to the Ligurians the difference betweene the ancient and present Church of Rome between the Ancient Monkes and the present the title of Roman Catholique a most impudent contradiction Two Impostors submitting themselves as two Patriaachs to the Church of Rome The whole faith of the Protestants confirmed by Popish Writers Yet the Romanists have another new faith of their owne 32 CHAP. VII Master Fisher pressed by his own rule to prove the new Creed wherein he is Affirmative we Negative 2. A member of the Church of Rome may beare witnesse against the Church of Rome 41 CHAP. VIII What it is to communicate with others how farre we yet communicate with the Roman Church and wherein we refuse to communicate 45 CHAP. IX 1. Some distinctions justified 2. Master Fisher puts false Titles over his booke as thus Master ROGERS his weake Grounds over his 26 and 27 pages and yet not one word spoken in both those pages of any of Master Rogers Grounds And page 28. Master Rogers most weake Arguments and yet not one Argument of Master Rogers mentioned in all that page Master Fisher changeth his termes for Faith puts Doctrines 52. CHAP. X. Master Rogers definition of a Protestant Church conformed The same definition agreeth with all true Churches in the world the rule of defining Bellarmines definion of the Church confuted together with the Romish Doctrine that none can be saved out of their Church 56 CHAP. XI M.F. puts false Titles upon the pages of his Booke As Master Rogers his most weak Grounds or Arguments where there is â—â—mention of his Grounds or Arguments The Protestants a true Church not the true Church Histories no good proofe of the Church All Doctrines not points of Faith M. Fishers reasons to prove that the Teachers of true and false Doctrine are to be found in Histories answered 71 CHAP. XII Negatives depend upon Affirmatives Master Fishers Tautologies He saith Master Rogers granteth what he never did grant 86 CHAP. XIII Foure Reasons to prove that Master Fishers
per Prophetas sonuit verbum deindè per seipsum deindè per Apostolos In his igitur omnibus quaerenda est Ecclesia Hoc etiam praedico atque propono uti quae aperta manifesta deligamus quae si in sanctis Scripturis non invenirentur nullo modo esset vndè aperirentur clausa illustrarentur obscura Seponenda sunt quae obscurè sunt posita figurarum velaminibus involuta In talibus figuris nolo quaeramus Ecclesiam non quia falsae sunt sed quia interpretem quaerunt Cap. 6. O Donatistae Genesin legite Benedicentur in semine tuo omnes Gentes terrae Genes 22. Quid dicat Apostolus audiamus Gal. 3. In semine tuo quod est Christus Ecce Testamentum Dei quare vos irritum facitis Testamentum Dei dicendo nec in omnibus Gentibus esse completum periisse jam de Gentibus in quibus erat semen Abrahae Quare superordinatis dicendo in nullis terris haeredem permanere Christum nisi ubi poterit cohaeredem habere Donatum Non invidemus alicui Legite nobis hoc de lege de Prophetis de Psalmis de ipso Evangelio Apostolicis literis legite credimus sicut nos vobis legimus de Genes de Apostolo benedicentur in te omnes tribus terrae in semine tuo Date mihi hanc Ecclesiam si apud vos est ostendite vos communicare omnibus Gentibus quas jam videmus in hoc semine benedici Cap. 7. Quid in Prophetis quam multa quam manifesta sunt testamonia Ecclesiae per omnes Gentes toto orbe terrarum diffusae Isa 11. Repleta est vniversa terra ut cognoscat Dominum Isa 27. Germinabit florescet Israel replebitur Orbis terrarum fructu ejus Psal 27. Posui te in lucem Gentium ut sis salus usque ad fines terrae Laetare sterilis quia non paris erumpe exclama quoniam multi filii desertae magis quam ejus quae habet virum Comparent isti multitudinem suam in Aphrica constitutam cum multitudine Iudaeorum per omnes terras quacunque dispersi sunt et videant quam sint in illorum comparatione paucissimi Quomodo ergò de se dictum assignabunt multi filij desertae quam ejus quae habet virum Rursus comparent multitudinem Christianorum per omnes Gentes quibus non communicant videant quam pauci sint in comparatione omnes Iudei tandem aliquandò intelligant in Ecclesia Catholica toto orbe diffusa istam prophetiam esse completam Iam pauca de Psalmis audiamus Cap. 8. Dabo tibi Gentes haereditatem tuam possessionem tuam fines terrae Nonne Apostolus de Praedicatoribus Novi Testamenti dictum exposuit quod scriptum est in omnem terram exivit sonus eorum Psal 18. in fines orbis terrae verba eorum Psal 56. Et super omnem terram gloria tua undè gloria ejus super omnem terram nisi quia Ecclesia ejus per omnem terram replebitur gloria ejus omnis terra Psal 71. fiat fiat Ite nunc vos Donatist clamate non fiat non fiat Vicit vos Verbum Dei dicens fiat fiat Quid ad haec dicturi sint quae commemoravi ex Lege ex Trophetis ex Psalmis Audiamus ipsius verbi vocem ore propriae carnis expressam Sic scriptum ect sic oportebat Christum pati resurgere à mortuis tertio die Hic ipsum caput ostenditur quod ipsum se manibus discipulorum prebuit contrectandum Vide quemadmodum de corpore adjungat quod est Ecclesia ut nos nec in Sponso nec in Sponsa errare permittat Et predicari inquit in nomine ejus poenitentiam remissionem peccatorum per omnes Gentes incipientibus ab Hierusalem Quid hac voce veratiùs quid diviniùs quid manifestiùs Me piget commendare verbis meis haereticos non pudet oppugnare verbis suis Dicant ea testimonia quae posui de Lege Prophetis Psalmis obscura esse figuratè dicta etiam aliter posse intelligi quanquam in eis egerim quantum potui ut nec audeant dicere Sed ecce dicant nunquid obscure dictum aut aenigmatis velamento adumbratum est quod ipse Christus dixit quia sic scriptum est sic opportebat Christum pati resurgere tertio die predicari in nomine ejus poenitentiam remissionem peccatorum per omnes Gentes Epist 48. Audi dicit Dominus non dicit Donatus aut Rogatus aut Vincentius aut Hilarius aut Ambrosius aut Augustinus sed dicit Dominus Quomodo ex divinis literis confidimus accipisse nos Christū manifestum si non indè accepimus Ecclesiam manifestam Necesse est incerti sint qui pro sua societate testimonio utuntur non divino sed suo Nisi cognoveris teipsum non in verbis calumniosorū sed in testimoniis librorum meorum In Scripturis didicimus Christū Epist 116. in Scripturis didicimus ecclesiam Has Scripturas communiter habemus quare nō in eis et Christum Ecclesiam cōmuniter retinemus Ecce Scripturae communes ecce ubi novimus Christum ecce ubi novimus Ecclesiam Those words of St. Augustine I apply to our present purpose concluding in the same manner against the Romanists as this Father did against the Donatists changing onely Donatist for Romanist Cap 2. The Question betweene us and the Romanists is where is the Church What then shall we doe shall we seeke for the Church in our owne words or in the words of her Head and our Lord Christ Iesus I think we ought rather to seeke her in his words who is the Truth and best knoweth his owne body For the Lord knoweth who are his Cap. 3. But as I began to say let us not heare these words I say this thou saist that but let us heare this thus saith the Lord Our master hath left books unto us to the authority of which Bookes wee both consent wee both beleeve we both submit there let us seeke the Church there let us examine our cause Away with those words from amongst us which we cite not out of the Canonicall Books of God but elswhere Some man peradventure wil say unto me why wil you have those things taken away seeing your cause though those things were alleaged will stand invincible Because I would have the Church demōstrated not by human reason but by divine oracles For if the holy Scriptures haue designed the Church to be in Italy alone in those few which concur with Rome whatsoever may be brought out of other Bookes none but the Romanists do possesse the Church If the holy Scripture doe limit the Church to a few more of the Province of Caesarea we must passe unto the Rogatists If it be amongst those
will grant him to be yours but of those Monkes and these I may say O quantum hic monachus monacho distabat ab illo How much doth your Parsons and other Monkes differ from Beda and those more ancient Friers or Monkes or religious Orders call them as you please Fisher The like may be said of divers others but at this time it may suffice to give this one example to shew that Mr. Rogers naming all those he named spake without Booke or without having at hand or looking into his bookes and that he might as well have named the Pope and Cardinalls and Bishops Priests Monkes and all other religious persons of the present Roman Church to be Protestants as he nameth the said ancient Fathers Rogers And so I will when I come to my Catalogue name Popes Cardinalls Bishops c. for confirmation of my faith whether it be for my Creed which are more principall and proper points or articles of faith or for all those bookes of Scripture which I beleeve or things therein revealed from God Because the testimony of an adversarie for an adversary is most strong and will take away your personall exceptions Thus Paul did cite a Heathen to perswade Heathens yea the inscription of an Altar dedicated to the unknowne God found amongst Heathen Idolls Thus the Fathers Augustine and others in the Primitive Church did cite the Iewes for confirmation of their doctrine and that they did not misaleadge the Prophets and writers of the old Testament Iudaei inimici nostri sunt de chartis inimici convincatur adsarius The Iewes are our enemies out of the bookes of our enemies wee convince our adversaries Augustine upon the 40th Psalme and often in other places Master Fisher or his Second would have exclaimed hereat saying what meanest thou Augustine wilt thou perswade mee that the Iewes are Christians if not why citest thou their bookes nay what meanest thou Paul to cite the Greeke Poets wouldst thou perswade me that they are Christians as if it must follow that they whose testimonie we cite in some things must be our friends in all All the faith of the Protestants is confirmed by the Papists all their explicite all their implicite faith all that belongs to our faith vel per se vel per accidens essentially or accidentally primarie or secundarily as an Article of faith or as an illustration of the same expressed in Scripture and yet the Protestants are no Papists the Papists are no Protestants because the Papists have a new Creed which Protestants deny and I call God to witnesse that I desire to die a thousand deaths rather then to approve it because I assure me it is false in all and in some things blasphemous The Papists have such exercise of Religion worshipping of Images praying to Saints which I abhorre as being Idolatry In discipline also they have such tenents of absolute supreme power over Bishops Kings Lawes oathes as is full of pride sedition usurpation and impiety Now here we differ here I am in the negative and so it doth belong to you to prove the affirmative It is a just law and your owne Master Fisher for these I need not produce testimony seeing I doe not avow maintaine beleeve any such Creed any such practise of Religion any such discipline But for my faith either explicite or implicite all that is revealed by God in his word I may bring my Adversaries to depose for me Paul said unto Agrippa a Iew no Christian Iuvenalis yea a wicked incestuous King if Roman Authors wrong him not incestae dedit hoc Agrippa sorori Yet to this bad man this unconverted Iew Paul saith O King Agrippa beleevest thou the Prophets I know thou beleevest them And may not I say Master Fisher beleeve you the Apostles Creed I know you doe beleeve it I have no other Articles of faith no other primarie propositions of faith againe for the totall object for the secondary propositions of faith contained in Scripture may not I aske you and say Master Fisher doe you beleeve the Bookes of Moses the Psalmes the Prophets and all those Bookes of the Iewish Canon as also all the new Testament I know you doe Master Fisher why then herein is my faith limitted whatsoever doctrine is plainely hence inferred or out of principles of nature I receive as doctrines or truths convincing my understanding but they are no part of my faith After these all doctrines and lawes Ecclesiasticall or civill in the Church or State wherein I live not contradicting the word of God or my conscience I receive with humility May I aske you Master Fisher againe whether the Apostles Creed and those bookes of old and new Testament received by our Church of England had not professors in all ages nay were not professed and beleeved of the Popes and Cardinalls of all ages I know you will not deny but they were so professed why then may not I vouch these Popes and Cardinalls for my selfe as I intend to doe when I come to my Catalogue CHAP. VII Fisher ANd I marvaile why having gone halfe the way as hee saith hee maketh a stop there and doth not with the like audacity goe on in naming other famous Roman Catholikes in every of the other ages Rogers Because Master Fisher offered in like proportion to name and defend Professors of Roman religion holding nothing contrary to the Doctrine defined in the Councell of Trent these were your words in the first Paper I received of yours I have gone halfe my journey you not a step in proportion you should have gone as farre as I did especially seeing you would have no other meanes of triall whereas I have and hold other and better meanes to prove my Faith and my Church yet to satisfie others to stop your mouth and to meet you at your owne weapon I undertooke this as a probable forreine humane uncertaine Argument yet such as maketh more for us then for you Fisher Namely such as Gualterus in Latine and the Author of the Appendix to the Antidote in English have set downe for members in the Roman Church Rogers If they have done it sufficiently and effectually it had beene the lesse labour for you Mr. Fisher to have transcribed them but wee may guesse what makes you neither take a Catalogue out of them nor make one of your owne after your example I might transmit you to Illiricus his Catalogus testium veritatis or The mysterie of Babylon vvritten by Sir Phillip Morney the learned Lord of Plessis who have performed this for the reformed Churches farre better then yours have done for your Church Yet when I come to the place where you have cited my Catalogue I will make it out but let mee aske you vvhy instead of naming such as professed the Romane Religion holding nothing contrary to the Doctrine defined in the Councell of Trent now you put members of the Romane Church as if it were the same a member of the
as if it were our Tenet and this must be our ground to inferre that Proposition this is your Petitio principii you beg a Principle which I will not grant you and so the building fals for want of a foundation Your Argument is thus Major If Protestants be the true visible Church of God then all sorts of men who in every Age had the foresaid infallible Faith have learned it by hearing Protestant Preachers whose names may yet be found in Histories as the names of those are found who in every former Age did teach and convert the people of severall Nations unto the Faith of Christ Minor But the Protestants are the true Church Ergo All sorts of men c. Not to meddle with the sequel of your Major which is false as I will shew when I come to answer your reasons for the same your Minor is most false wee alwaies did and ever will deny it wee are A true Church not The true Church a part not the whole c. Whatsoever is in your Proposition more then what I expressed for the summe thereof I granted not and therefore you have committed so many falsifications as there are words in your Proposition more then this If the Protestants be a true Church their Faith hath beene taught in all Ages by lawfull Pastors I never granted that all sorts of men in every Age did learne their Faith by hearing Protestant Preachers I never granted that their names or the names of all other Preachers were to be found in Histories yet you say I granted all this Is there no truth no modestie no meane no measure of falsifying Are you not ashamed to write that a man granted that which hee denied so fully so frequently Fisher Onely it may be hee will make a bogge at the word Histories as not finding it in his Copie not thinking it perhaps necessary that the names of Protestant Pastors who have taught the Protestant Faith in all Ages past be found in Histories Rogers What you meane by Bogge I know not unlesse it be a hollow myrie ground whereon a man can set no sure no firme footing but hee that trusting to a greene surface shall walke thereon sinketh in and sticketh in the myre such indeed are humane Histories in matters of Faith But why should Master Rogers make the bogge who proveth his Faith and his Church by other Arguments and not by these who out of Saint Augustine hath already protested against humane proofe in so divine a Question Aug. de veritate Ecclesia Quia nolo humanis documentis sed divinis oraculis sanctam Ecclesiam demonstrari I would not have the Church demonstrated by humane learning but by the oracle of God And with your Schoole That nothing but divine authoritie Th. Aquin. 1. quaest 1. Art 8. neither humane reason nor authoritie of holy Fathers are proper unto Divinitie or doe properly demonstrate But you that shun the proving of your Church of your Faith by other course and flye onely to Histories you make the bogge and such a bogge whereon you dare not walke without you fill it up with the rubbish of some other kind of Records or Monuments If you meane by making a bogge at the word Histories that I should be afraid to admit the same now because it was not in my former Copy you are deceived I feare it not let it come in though with a Parenthesis and let Histories extend to Records or Monuments so they be without exception I well receive them in their degree as a humane probable uncertaine unnecessitating proofe and yet such and so uncertaine proofe as it is if you can shew mee your now Faith out of Histories for the first foure hundred years which you your selves doe not accuse of errour falshood wilfull deceit juggling partialitie heresie I will be of your Faith of your Church Fisher Things past cannot be shewed but by Histories Rogers I have admitted your extension of Histories to Records and Monuments Fisher I doe not see why Master Rogers may not absolutely grant the fourth Proposition even as it was set downe by Master Fisher himselfe Rogers Within twelve lines before you say Neither doth Master Rogers make any bones to grant and here now you say I doe not see why Master Rogers may not absolutely grant it there you say I did grant it here you suppose I did not grant it You see no reason why I should not grant If it be evident it hath reason why it is evident and being your Proposition you must shew that reason and what your reasons are and how proposed let us see Fisher For if any visible Protestant Pastors were in all ages teaching especially any such Protestant Doctrines as now are taught they would have beene named and spoken of and written of as well as others are who have in Ages past taught all sorts of true and false Doctrines Rogers First you play the Sophister in changing your termes in your three first Propositions you speake of Faith here you leave out Faith and put in Doctrines as if they were the same whereas you know that the ancient Fathers and late Writers of your side and ours doe confesse that there are many Doctrines in the Church of different nature and necessitie but let us see your proofe Others who have in all Ages past taught all sorts of true and false Doctrines are named spoken of and written in Histories Ergo The Protestant Pastors in ages are named spoken of c. First tell mee whether your Antecedent be universall or particular if particular you conclude nothing you know the old rule Syllogizari non est ex particulari or if you will have it in the words of Aristotle the rule is this Arist lib. Prior 1. c. 19. If both Premises be indefinite or in part it can be no Syllogisme and such is yours namely an indefinite Proposition which must be resolved either into universall or particular If yours be universall thus All others who have in all Ages past taught all sorts of true and false Doctrines are named in Histories I denie it It is related by many Historians that there were Christian Churches in Britaine in the third fourth and fifth Age. But no man hath put downe all their names who were their Bishops or inferior Ministers if you can doe it shew it mee Againe the Arrians were so many in the fourth Age as that a Father saith Miratus est mundus se subitò factum esse Arrianum The world wondered how it came on a sudden to be of the Faith of Arrius And can you Master Fisher shew mee the names of these Arrian Teachers I could be copious in alleaging divers false Doctrines whose first Authors are not named are not knowne much lesse all that taught the same so that if your Proposition be universall it is false I denie your Antecedent If particular thus Some others who taught all sorts of true and false Doctrines are named in Histories
Ergo I dâ—â—ie your Argument and as well I might say Some men have no Noses Master Fisher is some man Ergo As you inferre any conclusion out of your particular Antecedent Fisher In regard there cannot be assigned any reason either of the part of Gods providence or humane diligence why the names of others even false Teachers in all Ages should be set downe and preserved in Histories yet extant rather then the names of such as Protestants deeme to be the onely true Teachers of pure Doctrine Rogers Yet you are in your indefinite saying others even false Teachers you will neither adde all nor some to make it universall thus The providence of God and diligence of man hath preserved the names of all false Teachers in Histories For then the falshood would be cleare neither have you made it particular thus The providence of God and diligence of men have preserved the names of some false Teachers Ergo of Protestant Teachers for then it would appeare that this were a Non sequitur that particulars can inferre no conclusion Fisher For doubtlesse both God who is zealous of his honour and carefull to honour and preserve the memorie of them that would honour him would for his honour sake have procured honourable memorie of such as did by teaching truth honour him Rogers Ergo Their names must be found in Histories Negatur Argumentum Is this the honour Is this the glorie that God hath provided for his children to be recorded by man It is written as you have cited in your Margin 1 Reg. 2.30 Whosoever shall glorifie mee I will glorifie him and whosoever shall contemne mee shall be ignoble Who ever expounded this place of Scripture to be meant of humane testimonies of being recorded in humane Histories and not of that honour which is usually termed the state of glorie The other place cited in your Margin is The just shall be had in everlasting remembrance Ergo Psal 111.7 Their names shall be recorded in humane Histories Who ever made such collections God hath promised eternall glorie unto his servants and you will turne it to temporall for what is humane testimonie and humane glorie but temporall which shall end either before or at least with time O presumptuous blindnesse of man to accuse the providence of God as defective if it record not all their names in humane Historie whose names are written in the Booke of Life I am loath to spend many words in answering such poore objections but the impietie prophanenesse Atheisme that is implied in this Argument opens my mouth to speak somewhat more Whereas you say If God will glorifie his servants hee must record them in humane Histories this must imply that God hath no other way to glorifie his servants as that there were no resurrection of the flesh no immortalitie of the soule no Book of Life no Heaven no happinesse in another world Fisher And men carefull of their soules health which they cannot attaine according to the ordinary course but by hearing such Pastors onely who have had lawfull succession from Christs Apostles have more reason diligently to looke that memorie be preserved of such Pastors and of pure divine Truth taught by them then of others who taught any other false and not pure Doctrine Rogers Here are two trickes of a Sophister the one to obscure a Proposition with a multitude of needlesse and impertinent words for seeing hee was to prove this plaine and short Proposition That the names of Pastors teaching divine Truth are to be found in Histories and that the Medium whereby hee would prove this hee tooke from the diligence and dutie of Godly men what needs all those additions which come in by Parenthesis viz. which they cannot attaine according to the ordinarie course but by hearing such Pastors onely who have had lawfull succession from Christs Apostles The second tricke of a Sophister is to speake indefinitely and so making it doubtfull whether your Proposition be universall or particular not joyning either all or some unto others as I have observed before Your Argument which I must frame for you or I am like to have none is this Men carefull of their soules health have reason to preserve the memorie of their Pastors Ergo They did so Or to make it more large thus Men carefull of their soules health have more reason diligently to looke that memory be preserved of such Pastors and of pure divine Truth taught by them then of others who have taught any other false and not pure Doctrine But they continued the memorie of the false Teachers Ergo They continued the memorie of the true Teachers First you conclude not what you were to prove viz. That the names of all true Teachers in all ages are to bee found in Histories Secondly for your minor if it be universall it is false if it be particular it doth not inferre it doth prove nothing as I have already shewed more fully Thirdly your Argument hath foure termes in the major your medium is the duty of men what they ought to doe In the minor you speake of what they did and suppose a falsehood viz. that men carefull of their soules health have recorded the names of all false Teachers and so you would inferre they did record the names of all true Teachers and thus to prove the act from the duty in weake sinfull man is no proofe is like the rest an egregious non sequitur And as well I might argue thus Master Fisher ought to have replied punctually in order and alleadging my words in my answer to him ergo he did it Or thus Eve should have abstained from the forbidden fruit ergo she did abstaine from it Or thus Adam had more reason to hearken unto God forbidding him to eate of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evill then to his wife perswading him to eate thereof ergo he did not hearken unto his wife Or thus Iudas had more reason to defend his Master then to betray him ergo he did not betray him Or thus Peter had more reason to confesse his Master then to deny him ergo Peter did not deny his Master If this kind of arguing were good it were happy for us all in the day of Iudgement when the Idolater should say I had more reason to worship God then to worship Idols ergo I did not worship Idols The murtherer would say I had more reason to save then to kill ergo I did not kill The drunkard would say I had more reason to be sober then to be drunke ergo I was not drunke And so might all other sinners plead if this argument were good Fisher Certaine therefore it is that the names or some thing equivalent to names and the doctrines of true Pastors who did in all ages past teach true divine doctrine may be found in Histories as well as the names and doctrines of others are found who did teach any other doctrine Rogers I have shewed it to be
hee had some other grave Historian of those times to crosse and contradict Sozomen No such matter the other famous Historians of that Age were Eusebius and Socrates though Eusebius somewhat more ancient beginning his Historie of the Church from Christ and continuing it untill the death of Constantine Socrates and Sozomen to whom wee may adde Theodoret all three began their Historie where Eusebius ended continuing the same unto the raigne of Theodosius junior which was about the yeare 400. All these were Greeke Writers and of the Greeke Church to whom if wee adde the short Historie of Ruffinus who was a Presbyter of the Latine Church wee have all the professed Historians of note that I have seene and read for those times so that if the authoritie of these men be slighted and excepted against as erroneous false impudent lying Haereticks I know not what Histories Master Fisher will produce for the chiefest time of the Primitive Church the first 400 yeares Of Sozomen I have already spoken the next shall be Eusebius who was of that repute in the Age wherein he lived and the next succeeding Age that the other Historians Ruffinus Socrates and Sozomen doe begin their Histories where hee left onely speaking something more fully concerning Arrius and the Councell of Nice Sozomen stiling him a man most expert in holy and humane learning This man besides his Historie wrote a Chronologie which Baronius truly stileth a Ground-work Baron an 325. n. 213. n. 215. and foundation whereon the whole fabricke and frame of Historie must relie yet herein hee is so erroneous as that Baronius must correct him What so erronious in the foundation the whole building must fall then Thus Diodorus Siculus of whom Iustine Martyr the Christian Phylosopher writeth saying Diodorus Siculus whom you account the most famous Historian so divided his Historie as to terme his Relations before the Trojan wars The Narration of Res fabulas matters mixed with fables because hee had no certaine ground how to describe the times Varro a man admired for learning dividing time into three portions the first before the Flood which he calleth Obscure the second from the Flood unto the first Olympiad which hee termeth Fabulous the third after the Olympiads because of a computation of time hee calleth Historicum So great a matter in Historie is Chronologie and yet herein Eusebius Socrates Sozomen Ruffinus are charged to be erroneous very often by Baronius and besides this hee layeth other imputations upon them Eusebius was an advancer of the Arrian Heresie a cunning Juggler in his Historie he doth favour the Arrians he doth omit many things Anno 318. n 79 80. an 324. n. 154. n. 45. n. 144. an 340. n. 40. n. 38. hee doth deale deceitfully hee doth falsly relate the time and place of Constantines baptisme hee is false in the storie of Estathius like a Stage-player being an Hereticke hee acted the part of a Catholick he was called the Ensigne-bearer of the Arrians Socrates dealbat Aethiopem doth but wash a Blackamoore in seeking to cleare him from the Arrian Heresie though hee subscribed to the Nicene Councell yet hee afterwards returned like the Sow to wallow againe in the mire and like the Dogge unto his vomit Hee and Eusebius of Nicomedia like two Coach-horses drawing the chariot of Impietie did run headlong with equall pace and violence to their owne destruction and the destruction of others being driven by a wicked Spirit Thus far Baronius saying moreover That Sixtus Senensis a learned Writer of his owne side may be ashamed that hee reputed him a Catholick Writer Doth not Baronius rave like Hercules furens upon the Stage to deprave a learned painfull Bishop a great Writer and the chiefe Ecclesiasticall Historian of the Primitive Church who is his chiefest Author for those times cited by him in his three first Tomes 700 times at least so well reputed that Ruffinus translated his Historie into Latine Sozomen stileth him A man full of Learning both divine and humane to whom these two together with Socrates and Theoderet did succeed in compiling the Ecclesiasticall storie The last of these Theodoret alleaging a large Epistle of his in defence of the Nicene Creed against Arrius All these and besides them Acasius who succeeded him in his Bishoprick of Caesarea doe cleare him from such imputations and did reverently esteeme of him and shall we thinke that these men who lived in the same Age and within few yeares after Eusebius did not know Eusebius better then Baronius who lived twelve hundred yeares after his time and more then 1200 miles from the place where hee was Bishop where hee lived and died and where those occurrences of the Councell of Nice of Arrius of Athanasius were better knowne then in Rome a Church more remote and of another language then that wherein that Councell was celebrated and those Fathers did write I may not insist much upon the other Ecclesiasticall Writers before named but they are all reputed ignorant false erroneous by Baronius Theodoret Socrates Sozomen Baron an 34. n. 29. and they which followed them erred in the time and fell into other lyes Socrates is accused of him for falshood neere twentie times and most of them in those matters which were of greatest note and wherein hee and Sozomen doe agree concerning the Councell of Nice Athanasius Paphnutius Eusebius and Arrius the Heretick Ruffinus is accused of him for the like falshood in the same matters concerning Arrius Athanasius An. 338. n. 2. as also concerning Saint Hilarie Gregorie Nazianzen and Basil He saith That Ruffinus was an inverter of times that hee was unlearned that hee did mis-interpret the sixth Canon of the Councell of Nice I will adde one example more The renowned Athanasius saith That hee wrote his Creed in his banishment No saith Baronius Non exul sed reus tunc Romae fuit An. 34. n. 13. He was not then in his banishment but called to answer before the Bishop of Rome as his Judge What authoritie what reason doth Baronius produce none at all And you must believe Baronius a Sycophant of the Roman Church before Athanasius that most glorious Confessor Shall wee thinke that hee would lie who was in trouble 40 yeares for the truth or doth Baronius 1200 yeares after without any Author to leade him know better what Athanasius did then Athanasius himselfe I should be thought very impudent if I should say That being here in England I did see of my selfe and know what Baronius did in his studie in Rome better then himselfe There are not more miles betweene England and Rome then are yeares from Athanasius his time to Baronius Linceus the Son of Amphiaraus Valerius Maximus that could see through the walls and that other Sicilian Linceus who could number the ships comming out of the Haven at Carthage himselfe being at Litybed in Sicilie 130 miles off could not see so well as those men Honorius primus the
it is the very same essentially though not accidentally still a body and still the same body though sometimes more healthy then other and in some parts more sound then other Now Master Fisher to what end is your great discourse of Anabaptists seeing I grant him to be of the Church If hee be such a one as you suppose him who agreeth with mee in all things else viz. in the Scripture in the Creed in the Sacraments in the essence of the Sacraments in their matter and forme in their force and efficacie onely differs from mee in the circumstance of time namely when Baptisme is to be conferred and bestowed upon Children of Christians whether before or after they are come to yeares of discretion CHAP. XXI Fisher AND fifthly That having distinguished Faith as Master Rogers doth into Doctrines fundamentall and necessary and Doctrines not fundamentall but accessory or not necessary hee may be yet further allowed to reject all Church authoritie and not to be satisfied with what is taught by any Church ours or his owne as Master Rogers confesseth hee is unsatisfied and consequently being left to his owne libertie may apply this distinction as hee shall please accounting onely that to be necessary which hee listeth so to account I wish I say that such an Anabaptist were imagined and that Master Rogers were to be his opponent That it might be seene whether this Anabaptist could not as well by these aforesaid Rules Definitions and Distinctions affirme prove and defend his Faith and Church to have beene alwaies visible against Master Rogers as Master Rogers doth or can by his Rules Definitions and Distinctions affirme prove and defend the Protestant Church to have beene alwaies visible against Catholicks or whether Master Rogers could better convince such an Anabaptist not to have the ancient Faith or not to be a member of the continuall visible Church then a Catholicke can convince Master Rogers Rogers Concerning this Distinction I have spoken afore that some Doctrines are more necessary then others now let us see whether this man saith any thing against it and what it is I doe not find hee doth denie it or grant it so that I know not what hee meanes by the words following viz. He may be yet further allowed to reject all Church authoritie and not be satisfied with what is taught by any Church ours or his owne as Master Rogers confesseth he is unsatisfied First you mightily falsifie this Parenthesis upon mee my words were these I doe confesse that none of your side or ours have given me full satisfaction in this point what are res fidei per se And in the words next going before I said thus Master Fisher I desire you also for the avoiding of confusion to deliver your opinion Whether all the Affirmative Doctrines of the Councell of Trent are matters of Faith per se fundamentall and necessarie to be held for salvation fide explicita I speake de adultis quibus facultas datur discendi who being come to yeares of discretion have capacitie to learne This much in my first Answer to this my request he makes no reply either hee is ignorant or dare not expresse whether all the affirmative doctrines of his Councel of Trent are matters of Faith and necessary to be knowne and believed though I then told him I proposed this question as desirous to learn This much concerning my question and my request Now to my Assertion viz. That none of his side or ours hath given me full satisfaction herein he hence infers that I am unsatisfied without any limitation or if wee will looke backe beyond the Parenthesis as if I were unsatisfied in that which is taught in any Church ours or his This is the right fallacie à dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter I said I was satisfied by none of theirs or ours in the instances of one distinction what Doctrines were to be reduced to either member of the Distinction namely what Doctrines were necessary what not necessary what was fundamentall what accessory what matter of Faith properly what accidentally and hee would traduce mee as if I were unsatisfied in all other Doctrines this is the Devils Logicke Master Fisher who is the father of lies to say I confessed that I never did As well I might prove that you have never a nose on your face or that you are blind thus Mr. Fisher hath never a Nose on his brest Ergo Mr. Fisher hath no Nose As you say Master Rogers doth confesse hee is unsatisfied in some things belonging to one distinction Ergo Master Rogers is unsatisfied in any Doctrine Or thus Mr. Fisher doth confesse that hee doth not see why Master Rogers may not absolutely grant his fourth Proposition Ergo Master Fisher doth confesse he doth not see Master Fisher I am satisfied in the doctrines of my faith in the doctrines of my Church in the truth of ours and the falshood of yours as that I desire to die rather then receive your faith or forsake any of mine and I doe hold your Roman Church the most corrupted erroneous usurping part or member of the Christian Church that is in the world I distinguished between doctrines of Faith the Church and of the Schoole These latter being private opinions of men in distinguishing defining or arguing being neither contained in Scriptures nor delivered by the Church I might be unsatisfied in and the rather because the greatest Writers of your side and ours doe vary herein or speake indefinitely which is no resolution Thomas secunda secundae quest 2. saying one thing Occham another and Valenza differing from both Tom Lib. 4. c. 11. de verbo Dei 3 disp 1. q. Bellarmine speaking indifinitely some things in the Doctrine of Christianity as well belonging to faith as manners are simply necessary to all men that will be saved such is the knowledge of the Apostolicke Creed of the ten Commandements and of some Sacraments non nullorum Sacramentorum not defining which and giving small satisfaction with his individuum vagum of some Sacraments not telling which so also amongst our Writers Calvin Hooker Doctor Field Doctor Vsher doe all thus distinguish but when they come to expresse what belongeth to either member they doe not all speake alike Calvin Institut l. 4. cap. 1. n. 12. saith some things are necessary for all men to beleeve as that there is one God that Christ is God and the Sonne of God that our salvation consisteth in the mercy of God similia and such like This word similia leaves it undetermined Hooker holdeth these three to be fundamentall necessary and essentiall unto the Church one Lord one Faith one Baptisme but under that of faith he understandeth as necessary the Articles of the Apostles Creed so that he and Doctor Vsher differ very little or nothing at all Doctor Field is somewhat more full in his third booke of the Church the fourth Chapter yet not in reall addition but
disobedient unto Government and so excommunicated and imprisoned for either of those without Heresie If all Decrees of Councels be Doctrines of faith as you affirme your Cardinall Bellarmine is deceived who saith that in Councels the greatest part of those things which are done doe not belong to faith neither the Disputations concerning faith nor the reasons which are added nor those things which are brought for explication and illustration but onely the very naked Decrees and not all those but they alone who are proposed as matters of faith To this subscribed Widrington in the Preface above alleadged and he voucheth Canus for the same opinion CHAP. XXIIII Fisher I Aske what Scripture or reason assureth that no Negative Doctrine pertaines to faith for Scripture having in it so many Negative sentences which are to be beleeved assureth the contrary neither is there any reason which can assure a man that he is freed from beleeving for example this Negative Deus non mentitur God doth not lie rather then from beleeving this Affirmative Est Deus Verax God is a true speaker for both being said by one and the same God our Lord Trueth it selfe and both being propounded by one and the same Catholicke Church his Spouse assisted by his Spirit the Spirit of truth as spoken by God in holy Scripture both are equally to be beleeved neither can any without danger of eternall damnation deny or doubt of either those or any other even the least point of Catholike faith as we may learn out of Saint Athanasius Creed saying that Whosoever will be saved it is needfull that he hold the Catholike faith which unlesse each one hold entire that is in all points and inviolate that is in the true uncorrupted sense of the Catholike Church without doubt he shall perish everlastingly So as whether the Doctrine be Negative or Affirmative whether fundamentall or accessory supposing it to be a Doctrine propounded by the Catholike Church as revealed by God it must be beleeved explicite or implicite and may not rashly or which is worse advisedly be denyed or doubted of and much lesse may the contrary be obstinately maintained against the knowne judgement of a lawfull Generall Councell or the unanime consent of the Pastors of the Church in regard our Saviour hath expresly averred That he who despiseth them despiseth himselfe and him that sent him to wit God his Father And againe he that will not heare the Church let him be to thee as an heathen and Publicane All which sheweth that such as do obstinately deny or doubtingly dispute against any the least point knowne by Church proposition to be a point of Catholike faith is worthily accounted an Heretike a despiser of God an excommunicated person and no member of the true Catholike Church and one who if he so live and die without repentance cannot be saved But as Athansius without any want of charity pronounceth he shall without doubt perish everlastingly Rogers I have answered you more then once and given you reasons more then one or two why Negations are not matters of faith per se fundamentall and necessary for I brought this distinction of Affirmation and Negation after those distinctions of Doctrine 1. Accessorie of res fidei per se res fidei per accidens 2. Doctrine fundamentall of res fidei per se res fidei per accidens Then I added this distinction of Affirmation and Negation so that my meaning appeared by the connexion it had with that which went before that Negations are not points or Articles of faith are not fundamentall doctrines are not res fidei per se I did not say but they might be res fidei per accidens as all propositions revealed in Scriptures whether affirmative or negative are besides those Articles of faith Here then you doe not dispute ad idem non facis elenchum you prove what I doe not deny you prove that Negatives contained in Scripture pertaine to faith which I do not deny but you do not prove that they are points of faith fundamentall Doctrines res fidei per se things proper and essentiall unto faith as your great Schooleman Aquinas your Bellarmine and Valenza have written cited by me afore where I have also shewed the difference betweene being a matter of faith and pertaining to faith neither doe I say that any man is freed from beleeving this Negative God doth not lie or any other Negative revealed in Scripture but that an implicite faith may serve in all Negatives as well as those Affirmatives which are not Articles of the Creed I say againe that Negatives in Scripture are res fidei per accidens non per se They are accidentall unto faith not essentiall There is no generall necessity to beleeve them fide explicita so to beleeve them as actually to know them but it is sufficient to beleeve them fide implicita with a minde prepared actually to beleeve them when they doe appeare unto us actually to be revealed in Scripture All things revealed in Scripture have aequalem veritatem non aequalem utilitatem They are equally true but not equally profitable For these propositions God is not a lyer God is not as man the heathen hath no knowledge of his Law Pharaoh was not obedient And all that are Negatives in Scripture being put together cannot informe a man in that saving truth which is sufficient for his soules health to beleeve but a few Affirmatives twelve Propositions contained in the Creed can doe it Againe I say that All things revealed in Scripture have aequalem necessitatem credendi non aequalem necessitatem cognoscendi It is not a like necessary for us to know all things revealed in Scripture but it is a like necessary for us to beleeve them when we know them As you have falsified the predicate of my Proposition by changing points of faith unto that which pertaineth unto faith fundamentall into accessory proper and essentiall into that which is accidentall so have you falsified the subject of the same Proposition for immediately after that distinction of Affirmation and Negation my words were these In those Articles of our English Church our Negation is partly a traversing partly a condemning of your novelties and additions and therfore no part of our faith for no man would deny his owne faith Thus farre in my former Answer as also in a few lines after my words were these The first instance of Negation in our Articles is part of the sixth Article concerning those Bookes of Esdras Tobit Iudith c. whereby it appeareth manifestly that I spake not of Negatives revealed in Scripture but of Negatives in Doctrines Ecclesiasticall Now that you should argue from Negatives in Scripture to Negatives out of Scripture is à baculo ad angulum from the staffe to the corner my Tenet therefore is that Negatives revealed in Scripture are res fidei per accidens non per se Negatives not revealed in Scripture are not res fidei