was thought by Her Majestie dangerous to Monarchy Therefore the titles of Archbishops Bishops Deanes and Chapters were retained as also in her owne Chappell some Images the Altar and a Crucifix upon it Though the titles of the Catholick Clergy were bestowed upon persons who favoured the new Religion yet the Ordination was not because that which was instituted by Edward the VI. was judged invalid by all Catholicks and so declared by publick judgement in Queene Marys reigne in so much that leases made by King Edwards Bishops though confirmed by the Deane and Chapter Brooks novell cases Placito 463. fol. 101 printed at London 1604. were not esteemed available because they were no saith the sentence consecrated nor Bishops Some Protestants are so charitable as to say that King Edwards Bishops were declared no Bishops to the end Bonner and other Catholick Bishops restored by Queene Mary might make the leases voyd let the world judge whether 3 Bonner and others who loft their Bishopricks for conscience sake alone would commit so great a sacrilege as must needs follow out of declaring invalid King Edwards new forme of Ordination They who renounced the propriety for Religions sake would not damne themselves for the profit of new leases 14 Seeing therefore it concerned the Queene to have consecrated Bishops and that in King Edwards reigne the Catholick Consecration was held to be superstition most of the Clergy then being Zuinglians or Puritans the Queene endeavoured by all possible meanes to have such as she named for the Bishopricks consecrated by Catholicks but they all resolved not to make Bishops in that Church whereof themselves refused to be Members An Irish Archbishop prisoner in the Tower was offered his liberty and great rewards if he would consecrate the newly elected but he denyed to commit so great a sacrilege CHAP. II. Of the Nullitie of the English Protestant Clergy 1 THe Queene notwithstanding all this reluctancy of Catholick Bishops named in her Letters Patents Anthony Kitchin Bishop of Landaf amongst others to consecrate Parker and his fellowes because he was the onely man amongst all the Catholick Bishops that tooke the oath of Supremacy in her reigne But this frailtie was not a sufficient ground to thinke that he would consecrate Parker and others whom he knew to be Hereticks and averse from the Doctrine of the Roman Catholick Church which himselfe so constantly adhered unto the Supremacy onely excepted during his life Sacroboscâ— lib. de investig Christi Ecclesia cap. 14. D. Champ. cap. 14. Many others of the Catholick Bishops complyed with Henry the VIII in that particular who now refused to ordaine Parker the same was Landaffe resolved to do but at last by faire words and promises they prevailed with the old man to give them a meeting at the Nags head in Cheap-side where they hoped he would ordaine them Bishops despairing that ever he would doe it publickly in a Church because that would be too great and too notorious a scandall for Catholicks amongst whom Landaffe desired to be numbered Bonner Bishop of London being well informed of all that passed sent one Master Neale his Chaplaine an honest and learned man who had formerly beene Lector in Oxford to the Bishop of Landaffe forbidding him under paine of excommunication to exercise any such power of giving Orders in his Diocesse wherewith the old man being tertified and otherwise also moved in his owne conscience refused to proceed in that action alledging chiefly for reason of his forbearance his want of sight Which excuse Parker and the rest interpreting to be but an evasion were much moved against the poore old man and whereas hitherto they had used him with all curtesie and respect they then turned their copy reviling and calling him doating foole and the like some of them saying This old foole thinketh we cannot be Bishops unlesse we be greased alluding to the Catholick manner of Episcopall unction 2 Being thus deceived of their expectation and having no other meanes to come to their desire they resolved to use Master Scoryes helpe an Apostata religious Priest who having borne the name of Bishop in King Edward the VI. time was thought to have sufficient power to performe that office especially in such a streight necessity as they pretended He having cast off together with his religious habit all scruple of conscience willingly went about the matter which he performed in this sort having the Bible in his hand and they all kneeling before him he laid it upon every one of their heads or shoulders saying Take thou authoritie to preach the VVord of God sincearly And so they rose up Bishops of the new Church of England 3 This story of the Nags-head was first contradicted by Mason in the yeare 1613. yet so weakly and faintly that the attentive Reader may easily perceive he feared to be caught in a lye and convinced by some aged persons that might then be living and remember what passed in the beginning of Queene Elizabeths reigne In the yeare 1603. none of the Protestant Clergy durst call it a fable or a tale of a Tub as some now doe Bancroft Bishop of London being demanded by Master VVilliam Alabaster how Parker and his Collegues were consecrated Bishops answered He hoped that in case of necessity a Priest alluding 〈◊〉 Scory might ordaine Bishops This answer of his was obâ—â—cted in print by Holiwod against him and all the English â—lergy in the yeare 1603. not a word replyed Bancroft â—imselfe being then living I have spoken with both Caâ—â—olicks and Protestants that remember neare 80. yeares â—nd acknowledge that so long they have heard the Nagsâ—ead story related as an undoubted truth In the beginâ—ing of the late Parliament some Presby terian Lords preâ—nted to the upper House a certaine Booke proving that â—â—e Protestant Bishops had no succession nor consecraâ—ion and therefore were no Bishops and by consequence â—ad no right to sit in Parliament Hereupon Doctor Morâ—on pretended Bishop of Durham who is yet alive made 〈◊〉 speach against this Booke in his owne and all the Bishops behalfe then present he endeavoured to prove succession from the last Catholick Bishops who said he â—y imposition of hands ordained the first Protestant Bishops at the Nags-head in Cheap-side as was notorious â—o all the world c. Therefore the aforesaid Booke â—ought to be looked upon as a groundlesse Libell This was told to many by one of the ancientest Peeres of Engâ—and present in Parliament when Morton made his speech And the same he is ready to depose upon his oath Nay he can not believe that any will be so impudent as to deâ—y a thing so notorious whereof there are as many witnesses living as there are Lords and Bishops that were that day in the upper House of Parliament 4 This narration of the Consecration at the Nags-head have I taken out of Holiwood Constable and Doctor Champneys workes they heard it from many of the ancient Clergy who were prisoners for
A TREATISE OF THE NATVRE OF CATHOLICK FAITH AND HERESIE WITH Reflexion upon the Nullitie of the English Protestant Church and Clergy By N. N. Printed at ROÃœEN in the yeare 1657. Permissu Superiorum THE PREFACE TO THE READER IF Heresie could have been brought to a stand in its owne opinions it would long since have been sunke in the opinion of all but finding it selfe upon quick sand it is forced to change footing and not to stay long upon the same ground for fear of sinking under ground and falling from its present state of improbabilitie to its ancient state of invisibilitie And albeit by this often shifting it appeares to be brought to desperate shifts yet is it content rather to appeare any thing then utterly disappeare into its owne nothing A Cheate must often change his disguise a Mountebank his market a Sophister his Medium and an Army of defeated disordered Troopes can not long with securitie keepe the same place and posture It is not so hard to rout them as to find them out so unarmed unfortified so disbanded and scattered they are for want of a Commander in chiefe that they are no sooner in sight then put to flight and forced to retreate to some new passage of lesse perill First Scripture alone was thought a sufficient defence but finding it failed them they found it necessary to change and even cut off some parts of this fortification which were of advantage to their enemies After an outwork of Tradition was judged expedient for more securitie although in effect nothing proves of more danger unto them Bishops and Priests formerly cast out as of more expences then profit were soone called back and desired to appeare armed with true Orders received not by extraordinary vocation but by legall succession Faith alone was thought armour of proofe before they had found by experience the need of good workes The Church which in the beginning they gave out for lost and utterly perished for many ages they came at length to seeke out with more solicitude then successe being resolved not to find it in that place in which alone it is to be found and now they seeme willing to open the doores of the Church to all Christians that they in the croud may get in with the rest The pretended clearnesse of Scripture in it selfe or at least as subsigned with the testimony of the private spirit made the definitions of Councells seeme of no use now upon better consideration foreseeing the prejudice they doe to their cause by appealing from the verdict of all Councells in generall they thinke expedient to admit of some in particular but namely such as treated of matters not apertaining to our present controversies by which evasion they engage themselves in greater difficulties then those they pretended to avoyde for no just exception was or can be alleadged against the Councell of Lateran deciding the question of Transubstantiation which may not be urged against those Councells which obliged all Christians to believe the mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation They have been so beaten from place to place and so battered and broken in every place they undertooke to maintaine that divers of the best understanding and least passion would be glad to capitulate and come to an accommodation with us as farre as it may stand with their honour and interest They are content to wave that maine article of the Popes Antichristian tyranny and yeeld him a preeminencie in stead of a supremacie The respect we give Images most will free from the sinne and many from the danger of Idolatrie so it may be left as a matter of superfluitie in which rank they will place our prayers to Saints without imputing hereafter unto us any injury done to Christs mercies or merits Upon the score of Tradition they will graunt us prayer for the dead provided we leave it to their private intention whether it be to diminish their paines or increase their glory As to the reall presence so much excepted against by their Predecessors they refuse not to accept of upon condition they may shape Christs power and words to the narrow model of their own senses and be exempted from the labour of searching so farre into Metaphysick a science not sutable to the grosser heresies of this age as to finde a distinction betwixt the appearance and substance of bread Notwithstanding their want of speculation in the Theoriques they might in this mystery as well as in that of the Trinitie have learned this practicall morall Lesson that Reason is never more reasonable then when it leaves reasoning in things above reason Auricular Confession heretofore traduced for a torture of Consciences and Tyranny of the Clergy many confesse to be of good use but few of necessity and none can be brought to descend to particulars for want of humility in themselves and for want of secrecy in their Ministers Reason of state will make them subscribe to the article of Bishops that the Prince may have so many Peeres of his owne creation and at his owne devotion and a chaine of consequence drawes after them Priests and Deacons for to say the truth their winking so long at the cleare signes of their Bishops invalid Ordination is a shrewd signe of their looking more upon their Votes in Parliament then their functions in the Church They are willing to fall thus farre and yet further from their ancient Tenets with hopes to be admitted as part of our Church and cleared of the reproachfull name of Hereticks as not dissenting in the fundamentall points of Catholick Faith But whilest they talke of fundamentalls they never passe the meere superficialls and they are farre from digging so deepe as to come to the maine foundation of Faith It is in vaine to decide fundamentall matters before we resolve upon the fundamentall motive of Christian beliefe No man calls in question the truth of Gods Word but the question is about the sufficient proposall of it That is a fundamentall article of Faith and undeniable under paine of damnation which is sufficiently proposed as revealed by God we relying upon the infallible and unchangeable Truth of the Churches proposall remayne setled in the same Tenets notwithstanding the opposition of Luther Calvin and other Sectaries whilest they on the contrary accepting Gods Word upon the proposall of private inspiration or human persuasion neither agree with us nor with one another nor even with themselves in different times As to our new English Religion it is very remarkable how the pretended supernaturall inspiration and naturall persuasion hath beene alwayes flexible to temporall respects First they were inspired and persuaded to pull downe Monkes and cry downe the Pope and proceed no further this being sufficient to comply with King Henry the Eighths lewdnesse and coveteousnesse After they went on as farre as they were led by the interest of the Protector Seamour But when Queen Elizabeths illegitimacy made the Popes authority be judged wholy inconsistent with
the Catholick Religion in VVisbich Castle as Master Bluet Doctor VVatson Bishop of Lincolne and others These had it from the said Master Neale and other Catholicks present at Parkers Consecratiod in the Nags-head as Master Constable affirmes The story was divulged to the great griefe of the newly consecrated yet being so evident a truth they durst not contradict it notwithstanding that not onely the nullitie of their Consecration but also the illegalitie of the same Counterblast fol. 301. was objected in print against them not long after by that famous Writer Doctor Stapleton and others whose words I will set downe in the proper place 5 Parker and the rest of the Protestant Bishops not being able to answer the Catholicks arguments against thâ— invaliditie of their Ordination nor to cry downe the illegall and extravagant manner of it at the Nags-head werâ— forced to beg an Act of Parliament whereby they mighâ— enjoy the temporalities notwithstanding the knowne defects of their Consecration against the Canons of thâ— Church and the Lawes of the Land For albeit Edwarâ— the VI. Sanders lib. 3 de schism Mason Pag. 121. Poulton in his Kalend. pag. 141. n. 5. Rite of Ordination was reestablished by Act oâ— Parliament in the first yeare of Queene Elizabeths reignâ— yet it was notorious that the Ordination of the Nags head was very different from it and framed ex tempore bâ— Scorys Puritanicall spirit that hated no lesse a set forme oâ— consecrating Bishops then of praying to God The word of the Act are Such forme and order for the consecrating 〈◊〉 Archbishops Bishops Priests c. as was set forth in the timâ— of King Edward the VI. shall stand and be in full force and effect and all Acts and things heretofore had made or done by any person or persons in or about any Consecration Confirmation or Investing of any person or persons elected to the office or dignitie of Archbishop Bishop c. by vertue of the Queenâ— Letters Patents or Commission sithence the beginning of he reigne be and shall be by authoritie of this Parliament declared and judged good and perfect in all respects and purposes any matter or thing that can or may be objected to the contrary thereof in any wise notwithstanding 8. Eliza. 1. By which Act appeares that not onely King Edwards Rite but any other used since the beginning of the Queenes reigne upon her Commission was enacted for good and consequently that of the Nags-head might passe Hence it waâ— that they were called Parliament Bishops 6 Master Mason a great stickler for the valid Ordination of Parker Pag. 133. of whom depends that of all the Protestanâ— Clergy seeing this to be over cleare to be denyed laboureth to shadow it at least in some sort saying that thâ— Queene did but dispense with the trespasses against her own Lawes not in essentiall points of Ordination but onely in accidentall not in substance but in circumstance But if the Consecration was at Lambeth and according the forme oâ— King Edward the VI. what ueed was there of any dispensation especially given not in conditionall but in very absolute termes both substance and circumstance was acâ—ording the Protestant Lawes The truth is all the world â—ught at the Nags-head Consecration and held it to be â—valid not so much for the circumstance of being perâ—rmed in a Taverne as for the new forme invented by â—ory differing not onely from that of the Church but alâ—â— from that which is prescribed in the English Ritual of â—dward the VI. and confirmed 1. Eliza. 7 This is demonstrated in the publike Abridgement of Diers reports 7. Eliza 234. and notorious â—se of Bishop Bonner who being prisoner in the Marshalâ—a was indited by Master Horne one of the first Protestant â—â—shops consecrated by Master Parker or together with â—m for refusing to take the oath of supremacy He apâ—eared before the Judges of the Kings Bench. The indiâ—ment being read he excepted against it because the oath â—as said to have beene tendered unto him by Robert Horne â—â—shop of VVinchester who was by no Law Bishop and â—herefore had no authoritie to tender him the oath After â—uch debate at the barre and after by all the Judges at â—argeants-Inne in Fleetstreete in Judge Catline the chiefe â—ustice his Chamber it was resolved by all the Judges â—hat Bishop Bonner his plea upon this issue that he was not â—ulpable because Horne was no Bishop when he tendered â—im the oath should be received and that the Jury should â—y it noâ— what the triall was appeareth by that he was â—t condemned nor ever troubled any further for that â—se though he was a man specially shot at Hereupon in â—e next yeare following 8. Eliza. the aforesaid Act of â—arliament was made 8 Notwithstanding all these testimonies and evidences â—f Protestants against themselves and the constant prause of Catholicks reordaining their Ministers not condiâ—onally but absolutely an evident argument of their â—eere secularitie and laytie the moderne Protestant â—ergy endeavour to make the world believe that Parker â—d the first Protestant Bishops were consecrated by imâ—sition of hands of true and lawfull Bishops with great â—â—lemnity at Lambeth This they prove by certaine Reâ—rds produced by Master Mason in the yeare 1613. fifty â—ares after they ought to have beene shewed and in a tiâ—e it can not be testified by any lawfull witnesses of â—eirs that they were not forged There can not be a more evident marke of forgery then the concealment of Registers if they be usefull and necessary to the very same persons in whose custody they are if they did produce none when their adversaries did insult and triumph over them it s as impossible any should be then extant as it is that men should conspire with their greatest adversaries to take upon themselves and their Church an everlasting infamie It is not worth the refuting that which some moderne Protestants say Ye have no Witnesses for the storâ— of the Nags-head and other things objected against Protestants but Roman Catholicks we value not their testimony because they are our knowne adversaries a party concerned against us c. This weake answer is very frequent though no lesse ridiculous then the exception that a certaine Officer of the Parliament in Ireland made against the testimony of all the Inhabitants of a Village he had pillaged They complained to his Commander who shewing unto the Officer how many witnesses there were of his misdemeanour he replyed there was not one lawfull witnesse amongst them because they were all concerned in the businesse and a part when Protestancy begunne in England and the first Protestant Bishops were consecrated at the Nags-head all who were not Protestants were Roman Catholicks no others could be witnesses of their Ordination but Catholicks or themselves and truly their owne silence in a matter that concerned them so much to speake against doth demonstrate they had nothing to say against the testimony of Catholicks Silent witnesses in
the truth to give way to the Parliament to pull downe Parliament Bishops who were so farre from being de Iure Divino that they were not so much as de Iure Ecclesiastico 30 And thus much I thought fit to produce at the present in confutation of what either hath or may be said in behalfe of the English Protestant Clergy and report me to the judgement of the impartiall Reader how much he ought to rely upon their ministery that by so many titles is proved to be null But though any person should not be convinced of the nullitie of their Ordination he can not but harbour a prudent doubt thereof there being so evident reasons and motives for it as have beene set downe in this Chapter Now to receive the Sacraments from Priests of so doubtfull authority is without all doubt a damnable sacrilege it being a thing in the highest degree against the light of reason and the rules of Faith to expose to so manifest hazard the reverence of the Sacraments and the remedy of our soules It is time now to passe from the historicall relation of the introduction of a new found Heresie and the intrusion of a new fashioned Clergy to a more strict and Scholasticall examination of the nature of Heresie and Catholick Faith CHAP. III. Of Heresie 1 BEfore Protestancy be compared with Heresie its necessary to declare what Heresie is Catholick Divines commonly define it to be an obstinate errour against any Doctrine of the Catholick Church But because Protestants do not agree with us in determining what the Catholick Church is that we may not be engaged in a new dispute before we explaine what we have in hand I thought fit to define Heresie in such a sort that the definition may seeme indifferent to all Christians and suppose or beg nothing to favour Catholicks or condemne Protestants because if adversaries agree not in some principles they can not come to an issue to end the Controversies 2 The definition is this Heresie is an obstinate errour against the VVord of God or the true sense thereof sufficiently proposed as Divine Revelation How shall it be knowne when any verity is sufficiently proposed as Divine Revelation The bare word or testimony of men doth not seeme to be a sufficient proposall of Gods revealed truths because every Sect give their word and testimony in favour of their owne Religion assuring us that God revealed the doctrine and interpretation of Scripture which they follow And yet the contrary is evident seeing God can not reveale the contradictions nonsence and contrary Tenets which are taught in so contrary Religions Therefore the testimony of men if not confirmed by some supernaturall signe or miracle can not be a sufficient proposall of Divine Revelation 3 But if any Doctrine be testified by lawfull witnesses to be Divine Revelation and their testimony be confirmed by miracles all men are bound to believe that the said Doctrine was revealed by God This is the reason why the perfidious Jewes did sinne grievously in not believing the Doctrine of Christ being confirmed with so many evident miracles It is not necessary every person see a miracle that the true Faith and Doctrine of the Catholick Church be sufficiently proposed to him as Divine Revelation it s enough that he can not prudently deny or doubt that miracles have beene wrought in confirmation of the Doctrine proposed Christs Doctrine was sufficiently proposed as Divine to many Jewes who were not present at his miracles it s enough they were credibly reported Saint Augustine proved that miracles were wrought in confirmation of Christian Religion by this ingenious Dilemma Either the world believing such strange and improbable things to human sense as our Faith teacheth and so contrary to our naturall inclinations did see them confirmed by miracles or no. If they did see miracles we have our intent If they did believe without seeing any miracle we have our intent also because that very beliefe is the greatest of all miracles for how is it possible that sober and wise men should be so mad as to believe and embrace a new and strange Doctrine so repugnant to their senses and contrary to their liberty and naturall inclinations if they had not beene wrought upon by some supernaturall power and signes In one word therefore we may conclude that onely Faith or Doctrine is sufficiently proposed as Divine Revelation which is not onely proposed as such by the testimony of a Church but of such a Church whose testimony hath beene confirmed by unquestionable miracles either seen by the believer or at least so credibly reported to him by the testimony of honest and learned men that it were want of prudence in any person whosoever to deny the truth and sufficiency of such a testimony and proposall CHAP. IV. In what doth the obstinacy of Heresie consist 1 THere was never any Heretick so madly obstinate as to give God the lye to his face and in plaine termes all Sectaries acknowledge him to be Truth it selfe and therefore not capable of deceiving or of being deceived The obstinacy of Hereticks is against Gods verities not as they are uttered immediatly by himselfe but as they are proposed by his Church If God himselfe were pleased to speake immediatly to men in such a manner that it were evident and cleare to them the words and sense which the Church proposeth were dictated by himselfe we should be little troubled with Heresies none would be obstinate All the obstinacy of Hereticks proceeds from the difficulty they finde in believing that God doth speak or declare his sense by the Church this once granted our understanding hath no difficulty to ubmit by an implicite Faith to whatsoever the Church proposeth as Gods Revelation or Word 2 Against cleare evidence there can be no obstinacy the object of it must be involved in some obscurity otherwise the will which is the source of obstinacy could not master the unstanding He who denyes what is cleare and evident is more mad then obstinate There is nothing more generally acknowledged or more cleate and evident to the understanding of all Christians then this proposition If God said or meant any thing it s very true The obstinacy therefore of Hereticks doth not contest with this cleare and confessed truth it onely doubteth or denyeth that God said or meant any such thing as the Church pretends but no Heretick ever denyed or doubted but that if God meant or said what the Church pretends it must be true 3 The difference therefore betweene an Heretick and a Catholick is not that the Heretick denyes or doubts all that to be true which he thinks God revealed or meant but the difference consists in this that the Heretick doth obstinatly deny or doubt that God said or meant what â—he Church proposeth as Divine Revelation and the Catholick doth firmely believe he did say and meane whatsoever the Church proposeth as revealed The Heretick believes what the Church proposeth onely conditioâ—ally If
both may be part of the Catholick Church Protestants as wâ— have seen in the former Chapter say that aâ—â— Christian Congregations are parts of the Catholick Church as well as we Roman Catholicks Thiâ— assertion they ground upon the signification of the worâ— Catholick which is as much to say as Vniversal In the saâ— me sense they explicate Catholick Tradition to be onelâ— that which is contradicted by any Christian Church According to this opinion no Congregation of Christian can be Hereticks because Hereticks must be obstinate against the Doctrine of the Universall or Catholick Church but no Christians can be obstinate against thâ— Doctrine of the Catholick or Universall Church seeinâ— themselves are part of it and they can not be obstinate against themselves or their owne Tenets and Doctrine therefore none can be Hereticks This absurd and hereticall sequele is a sufficient refutation of the Protestant principle and their explication of the word Catholick 2 But let us prove directly that neither all Christians nor any two Churches dissenting in their testimonies concerning whatsoever matters of Faith can be the Catholick Church My proofe is this The testimony of the Catholick Church concerning what is pretended to be revealed or not revealed by God must oblige all persons who are informed of it to believe what it saith and proposeth But if all Christians or any two Churches not agreeing in their testimonies suppose Roman Catholicks and Protestants be parts of the Catholick Church the testimony thereof can not oblige any sober person to believe what both say and propose First because one Church contradicts the other and its impossible to believe contradictions at one and the same instant Secondly when witnesses do not agree in their testimonies if they be of equall authority no man is obliged to believe either side but rather is bound in prudence to suspend his judgement Therefore if the Catholick Church be composed of all Congregations and Churches of Christians or of any two Churches not agreeing in their testimonies concerning matters of Faith no man is obliged to believe the testimony of the Catholick Church but rather to suspend his judgement and credit nothing which sequele is absurd and contrary to the Doctrine not onely of Catholicks but also of Protestants Therefore the Catholick Church must not be all Congregations of Christians or any two dissenting but one onely Congregation of persons who agree in one Faith CHAP. VII VVhether the testimony of the Catholick Church be infallible not onely as Protestants terme them in fundamentall but also in not fundamentall articles of Faith 1 THough we Catholicks say that all articles of Faith if once sufficiently proposed are in one sense fundamentall because under paine of damnation they must be believed yet in ananother sense we admit a distinction betweene fundamentall and not fundamentall articles of Faith Fundamentall articles may be called such as no ignorance of them can excuse men from damnation for not being believed Not fundamentalls may be called such articles as if proposed must be believed but if not proposed sufficiently the ignorance of them is excusable 2 But whether these articles be both called fundamentall or onely the first sort of them our controversie with Protestants is the same and the question is not set here out of its proper place because the resolution of it is necessary to answer an objection which Protestants make against the Doctrine of the former Chapter All Christians say they do agree in fundamentall points of Faith as in the Trinity Incarnation c. what great matter is it if they agree not in other things of little importance without the knowledge and sufficient proposall whereof they may be saved as Purgatory Transubstantiation c Why should we be obliged to believe things that are not absolutely necessary for salvation especially seeing Roman Catholick Divines do not deny that ignorance of not fundamentalls is not damnable Therefore all Christians though dissenting in not fundamentalls may be called Catholicks and the universall Church because they agree in all necessary articles of Catholick Religion and though their testimonies do not agree in Purgatory v.g. being an article of Faith why should their disagreement in that petty point invalid their testimony concerning the mystery of the Trinity Incarnation and other fundamentall articles 3 This discourse and objection of Protestants hath damned many a soule because they did not examine the truth of it as they ought But to declare the fallacy of it something must be said of the Churches infallibility Most Protestants do grant that the testimony of the Church is infallible in proposing the fundamentall articles of Christian Religion as in delivering Scripture to be Gods Word and in declaring the mystery of the Trinity c. because Christian and Catholick Faith must admit of no doubts concerning the truth of fundamentalls and if the Church be not infallible in proposing those to us we must necessarily doubt of their truth for though we doubt not that whatsoever God said is true yet we can not but doubt whether he revealed or meant any such thing as the mystery of the Trinity or Incarnation if we do not believe that the Church is infallible in proposing the said mystery God therefore in his Providence can not permit the Church to erre or deceive us in fundamentalls seeing its necessary for our salvation not to doubt of the truth of fundamentall mysteries but if the Church may erre in proposing them we can not but doubt of their truth This reason say Protestants can not be applyed to not fundamentalls because they are not absolutely necessary for salvation and our salvation is the onely motive that God had to make the Church infallible in proposing articles of Religion Therefore none is bound to believe that the Church is infallible in not fundamentalls 4 If the onely motive that God had to make the Catholick Church infallible were our salvation this discourse of Protestants might have some colour of truth but Gods motive in all his actions is not onely our salvation but in first place his owne honour and glory There is nothing concerns Gods honour more then that whatsoever is sufficiently proposed as revealed by him be credited by us without the least doubt whether the matter be great or of little importance Therefore the Churches infallibility and our obligation of believing it ought not to be measured by the greatnesse importance or absolute necessity of the matter proposed in order onely to our salvation but also by the sufficiency of the proposall in order to Gods honour and veracity If a matter not absolutely necessary for salvation be as sufficiently proposed to be revealed by God as the mystery of the Trinity the obligation is as great of believing the one without any doubt as the other The reason is cleare because there is as great an injury done to God by denying or doubting of his veracity and revelation in a small matter as in a great In believing