The LutheraÌ„s are generally â—he same opinion Protestants do interpret this article of Christs descending into his (p) D. Willet in his Lymbomastix D. Fulke â—ged by D. Willet in Synop. p. 605. 606. â—â—aue so by the word Hell vnderstanding â—â—e graue But (q) l. 2. Instit c. 16. §. 20. Caluin teacheth that by Christs descending into Hell is vndertood that Christ apprehended God to be â—ost angry and offended with him for our â—akes and that thereupon Christ suffered â—â—eat anxiety and griefe of soule and which is more most blasphemously Caluin teacheth that Christ vttered words of desperation in saying O God my God why hast thou forsaken me Touching the article of Christs ascending into Heauen we Catholikes and the Caluinists do belieue heerby that Christ truly in body ascended vp into Heauen wheraâ— all Lutherans (r) Luther in l. de Sacrament Coenae Domini tom 2. fol. 112. where he saith Credimus quòd Christus iuxta humanitatem est vbique praesens The same is taught by Brentius in Apolog pro Confess Wittenberg And finally by all the Lutherans do teach that Christs Body is in all places with the diuinity and that therfore it did not really after his Passion ascend vp into Heauen it being there both before and after his Passion Thus the Lutherans both in ours and the Protestants iudgments do destroy by this their construction the whole Creed and particulerly Christs Incarnation Natiuity Passion death ascending to Heauen and his comming to Iudgment for supposing Christs body to be in all places all these articles were but apparently or phantastically and not truly and really performed Touching the article of Christs iudging the quicke and dead We Catholikes do beleiue that Christ at his comming to iudgment will so iudge man as that his good workes receauing all their force from our Sauiours PassioÌ„ shal be rewarded wheras the Protestants denying all (s) Calu. l. 3. Instit c. 5. §. â— Bucer in actis Colloq Ratisbon Beza Zwinglius and most ProtestaÌ„ts merit of workes as iniurious and derogatory to his death and Passion doe hould that Christ shall then reward only a bare and speciall (t) Calu. in Antidoto Conc. Tri. Kemnitius in examen Conc. Trident. and most other Protestants fayth Concerning the article I beleiue in the holy Ghost Wheras all Catholikes and many Protestants do beleiue that the holy Ghost is the third Person in the most Blessed Trinity Caluin how euer he was persuaded of the truth or falsehood therof much laboureth notwithstanding to auoyde the force of arguments drawn from the chiefest places of scripture and vsually alleadged by al Antiquity in proofe of the holy Ghost being the third Person in the Trinity Thus we find that Caluin (u) Instit l. 1. c. 13. §. 15. will not haue coÌ„trary to all Antiquity that passage of Scripture Psal 33. By the word of the Lord the Heauens were made and al the Host of theÌ„ by the spirit of his mouth to be vnderstood of the diuinity of the holy Ghost In like sort he reiecteth the argumeÌ„t (x) See of this Subiect against the Trinity Aegidius Hunnius a ProtestaÌ„t in his booke entituled Caluinus IudaizaÌ„s drawn froÌ„ that other most â—â—markable text Iohn 5. There be three that giue testimony in Heauen the Father the word the holy Ghost and these three be one Caluin vpon this place thus saying heerby to take away froÌ„ thence the proofe of the holy Ghost Quòd dicit tres esse vnum ad essentiam non refertur sed ad consensum potiùs Finally Luther was so far from acknowledging the holy Ghost to be the third Person in the Trinity or to confesse the Trinity it selfe that thus he writeth (*) Luther Confut ration Lat. Anima mea odit hoc verbum Homousion vel Consubstantialis My very soule doth hate the word Homousion or Consubstantiall Concerning the article I belieue the holy Catholike Church The Catholikes do belieue this Church to be a visible company of men professing the present Roman Catholike fayth of which some are predestinated others reprobated The Protestants doe belieue this Church to coÌ„sist only of the (y) Confess Augustana Art 7. Luther l. de Conc Eccles Cal. l. 4. Inst. c. 1. §. 2. Elect and Predestinate Touching the Article the Communion of Saints The Catholikes doe heereby belieue such a CommunioÌ„ to be betwixt the Saints in Heauen the Soules in Purgatory men vpon earth that the one part doth help the other with their most auaylable prayers and Intercessions The Protestants deny all such entercourse of benefits betweene these seuerall parts â—f the Church of Christ (z) Calu. l. 3. Instit c. 5. §. 6. Centuriatores Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 4. col 460. Brentius in confes wittenberg c. de Purgatorio accounting the Catholikes doctrine heerein superstitious sacrilegious Lastly touching the Article of forgiuenes of Sinnes we Catholikes do belieue that this remission of sinnes is performed when the soule by a true and inherent Iustice and by the infused gifts of God enioyeth a renouation of herselfe and thereby becommeth truly iust in the sight of God The Protestants disalowing all inherent Iustice doe only acknowlege an (a) Keâ—nit in Examen Concil Trident. Cal. l. 3. Instit c. 11. imputatiue Iustice or righteousnes which coÌ„sisteth in that the Iustice of Christ is as they teach only imputed vnto sinners so as we remayne still sinners though our sinne be not imputed vnto vs through Christs Iustice A doctrine iniurious to the most meritorious Passion and death of Christ Thus haue we runne ouer the chiefe articles of the Creed from whence we collect that seeing as is aboue demonstrated He only belieueth auailably truly the Creed who belieueth it in that sense in which the Apostles did write it seing there are meere different or rather contrary constructions of euery Article giuen by the Catholikes and the Protestants so as if the construction of the Catholiks be true it followeth necessarily that the other of the ProtestaÌ„ts be false or contrarywise we may therefore iustly conclude that it is not sufficient to saluation for any one to say that he beliueth the Creed who belieueth the words of it in general without restrayning them to any peculiar construction giuen eyther by Catholikes or Protestants except he belieue it in that one particuler sense and none other which was intended by the holy Ghost when it was first framed by the Apostles Now in this next place we are to demoÌ„strate that graunting for a tyme by an Hypothesis or supposall that a man did belieue all the Articles of the Creed in their true sense and construction yet followeth it not that this beliefe though it be most necessary were sufficient for a man to obtaine his saluation hereby and the reason hereof is because it is most certayne that there are diuers points of Christian Religion houldeâ— necessarily to be belieued in
Articles of the Creed â—â—t it is extended in it own nature consiâ—ering that according to al Art the definitioÌ„â—â—d the thing defined ought to be of an eâ—all latitude or extent to any erroneous â—â—inion whatsoeuer frowardly defended 〈◊〉 a man and impugned by the Church of â—od So as it is as perfit an Heresy and â—e belieuers therof are as true Heretikes to deny that there is a Purgatory or to deny Freewill praying to Saints the doctrine oâ— Indulgences the necessity of Baptisme oâ— any other Article affirmed by Catholikes granting the doctrine of Catholiks in thesâ— Articles to be true as to deny the Trinity the IncarnatioÌ„ of Christ his death Passion c. supposing the denyall of these to bâ— but Heresies And a man shal be aswell daÌ„ned in Hell for denying these former as foâ— these other though the denyall of these lâ—ter do exceed the other in malice since thâ— blasphemies of them are in themselues moâ— wicked heynous And thus much toâ—ching the definition of Heresy or an Heretikâ— which being iustly premised we will conâ— now to the mayne Controuersy handleâ— in this Treatise THAT EVERY CHRISTIAN CANNOâ— be saued in his owne Religion Proued from tâ— holy Scripture CHAP. II. NOw then to beginne to fortify anâ— warrant this vndoubted truth that euâ—ry Christian cannot be saued in his owne Religioâ— I will draw my first kind of Proofe froÌ„ tâ— sacred wordes of holy Scripture And theâ— testimonies shal be of three sorts One coÌ„ceâ—ning Heretikes textes which are not-restrâ—ned to any particular Heresies but deliuered of Heresy in generall The second branch of authorities shall touch Heretikes euen for certaine particuler Heresies different from denying the Trinity the Incarnation of our Sauiour his Passion other like principall and fundamentall articles of Christian Religion The third shall containe the necessity and dignity of Fayth without any restriction to the pointes or articles which are to be belieued And first to beginne with the first We read the Apostle thus to speake of an Heretike in generall (a) Epist ad Tit. c. 3. A man that is an Heretike after the first or second admonition auoyd knowing that he that is such is subuerted and sinneth being condemned by his owne iudgment Where we see the Apostle commaundeth vs to auoid an Heretike which he would neuer haue done if the sayd Heretike had bin in state of Saluation The Apostle further adding this reason in that he sinneth and in that such a maÌ„ as being a pertinacious willfull Heretike is condemned by his owne proper iudgment that is because he aduaunceth his own iudgment aboue the iudgment of Gods Church and because he needeth not that publike coÌ„demnation of the Church which vpon other offenders by way of Excommunication is inflicted Of which text of the Apostle Tertullian both pithily and excellently giueth his glosse saying (b) Lib. de praescript c. 6. Quia in quâ— damnatur sibi elegit Moreouer the Apostle elsewhere coniureth as it were in the name of Christ thaâ— we should auoyd all false belieuers in thesâ— words (c) 2. Thess cap. 3. We denounce vnto yow Brethren iâ— the name of our Lord Iesus Christ that you withdraw your selues from euery Brother walking in ordinatly and not according to the Tradition whicâ— they haue receiued of vs. This place concernetâ— Fayth and doctrine as the whole Chapteâ— sheweth But if those men heere to be eschewed were in state of Saluation theâ— ought not then to be eschewed Agayne this text cannot haue refereÌ„ce to those whâ— deny the Trinity Incarnation and PassioÌ„ seeing the denyers of those high Articleâ— are not Brethren in Christ and yet the Apostle styleth them Brethren whom he heeâ— reprehendeth The Apostle also in anothâ—â— place thus forewarneth (d) Epist. ad Galat. c. 5. The workes of thâ— flesh be manifest which are fornication vncleaneâ— impurity c. dissentions (*) or Heresies according to the Testament of an 1576. Sects c. They whicâ— do these things shal not obtayne the kingdom of Goâ— where we see there is expresse mentioâ— made of Sects and that the maintainers oâ— any Sects in opinion of Fayth much morâ— of any Heresy which is euer auerred witâ— greater contumacy and frowardnes anâ— with neglect to the Churches Authority shall not enter into the kingdome of Heauen From which testimony we may furâ—her conclude that as one only act of fornication barreth a man from the kingdome of God so also one Heresy excludeth him froÌ„ the same A fourth place is this (e) Epist. ad Rom. c. 16. I desire you Breâ—hren to marke them that make dissentions and scandalls contrary to the doctrine which you haue learned and auoyd them for such do not serue Christ our Lord. But if such men be to be auoyded and do not serue Christ then no doubt they continuing in that state cannot be saued Fiftly the Apostle speaketh of certaine men saying of them (f) 1. Tim. 1. Quidam circa fidem maufragauerunt Certaine men haue made shipwracke of their Fayth Where the Apostle vseth the Metaphore of shipwracke therby to expresse more fully that Heretikes once falling out of the shippe of the Church of Christ are cast into the sea of eternall damnation To conclude the EuaÌ„gelist S. Iohn speaketh of all Heretikes in generall not imbracing the Doctrine of Christ within which all secondary questions of Christian Religion are contayned in this sort If any (g) 2. Ioan. man come to you and bring not the doctrine of Christ receaue him not into your house nor sâ—â— God saue you vnto him But a man is bound â— charity to suffer any one which is in staâ— of Saluation to come into his house and â— salute him or say God saue him Now whâ— can be replyed against these former texts â— cannot be sayd that they are meant only â— such Heretikes as deny the mysteries of tâ— Trinity the Incarnation of Christ hâ— Passion and such like supreme points â— Christian Religion This I say cannot 〈◊〉 auerred for these reasons following Fiâ— because those who in the Apostles tymâ— denyed these principall points of Christiâ—nity could not be truly termed Heretikeâ— but rather Iewes or Heathens seeing he 〈◊〉 an Heretike truly as is aboue shewed whâ— was once a member of Christs Church bâ— Fayth 〈◊〉 1 but after ceaseth to be therof by erring in some secondary points touchinâ— Christian Fayth Secondly by reason thaâ— according to the true definition of Heresâ—â— or Heretikes aboue set downe the formeâ— texts haue a necessary reference to all Heresies and Heretikes whatsoeuer whetheâ— the subiect of the sayd false opinions be smaâ—â— or great Thirdly because that in the former texts of Scripture there is no restriction of the word Haereticus or Haeresis to the chiefe or highest points of Christian Religion but it is extended to all kind of Hereâ—ikes and Heresies whatsoeuer euen by the Apostle without exceptioÌ„ who no doubt â—f he had vnderstood Heretikes or
est inquirentibus se remunerator sit 〈◊〉 that commeth to God must belieue that God iâ— and is a rewarder to them that seeke him Hee is imposed a necessity as appeareth by tâ—â— word Oportet to belieue not only that the is a God but that this God giueth rewarâ— to such as seeke him to wit eternall lyâ— But to belieue that God is a rewarder of goâ— men is an article in it selfe wholy distinct 〈◊〉 differeÌ„t from the articles of the Trinity thâ— Incarnation the Passion c. and in natuâ—â— independent of these other for a man maâ— belieue that God is a rewarder of good meâ— with eternall felicity and yet not belieuâ— these other supreme Mysteryes as man vertuous men no doubt did in the law oâ— nature and in the time of the old Testâ—ment and on the contrary side a man maâ— belieue those chiefe articles of Christianity and yet not particulerly belieue that God is a rewarder of such as seeke him And yet we see the beliefe of this later point is necessarily exacted by the Apostle of all those who come to God consequently of all those who shal be saued seeing no man can be saued but such as come to God THE SAME PROVED FROM THE DEfinition Nature and Propriety of Fayth CHAP. III. IN this place we shall first take into our consideration the definition of fayth set downe by S. Paul Secondly the dignity worth of â—ayth much celebrated by diuers of the Aâ—ostles Thirdly the inseparable propriety â—f Fayth which is Vnity for so doth the â—cripture delineate and describe Fayth â—â—om all which it will ineuitably follow â—hat that Fayth which saueth man is not â—o be restrayned only to the Trinity the â—ncarnation and other such sublime points â—f Christian Religion though in other points it be erroneous but to all points whatsoeuer which the Church of God propoundeth to be belieued And to beginne with the definition of Fayth giuen by the Apostle He thus deâ—neth Fayth (a) c. 11. ad Hebraeos Fayth is the substance of thiâ— to be hoped for the argument of things not appâ—ring The sense wherof is this first thâ— Fayth through an infallible certainty caâ—seth those things to subsist and haue a bâ—ing in the mind of man which are yâ— to come but hoped and looked for Sâ—condly that fayth causeth the vnderstaâ—ding to giue an assent to those points whiâ— it vnderstandeth not acknowledging theâ— to be more certaine then any other thinâ— whatsoeuer according to those words of 〈◊〉 Thomas (b) quaest 4. art 8. Multo magis homo certior est de eo qâ—â— audit à Deo qui falli non potest quà m de eo quâ— videt propria ratione quae falli potest Now heeâ— I trust no man wil deny but the Apostle dâ—fined that Fayth of a Christian which sâ—ueth him This being graunted for to denâ— it were both impious in the denier moâ— iniurious to the Apostle we are to remember the nature of euery true definition sâ— downe by the Logitians to wit as is aboue intimated that the thing defined anâ— the definition be of one and the same extenâ— latitude so as whatsoeuer is compreheÌ„ded vnder the definitioÌ„ the same is also contayned vnder the thing defined This theâ— being presupposed by force of all reason foâ— Logike is but an artificiall haÌ„dmaid to Reason we find that this definition of Fayth â—mpriseth in it selfe not only the Doctriâ—e of the Trinity of the Incarnation c. â—nd this not articulately but only by way â—deduction but also it containeth all seâ—â—ndary points of Religion seeing the forâ—r definition doth predicate or may be â—â—d of all the sayd secondary and lesse prinâ—all points of Religion controuerted betâ—eene Christians at any time Therfore the â—ng heere defined which is the sauing â—ayth of a Christian is in like sort to exâ—â—nd it selfe to all the sayd secondary points â— Religion how indifferent soeuer they â—â—me in mans iudgment This inference is 〈◊〉 demonstratiue being taken from the forâ—er definition of Fayth as that the Apostle â—â—mselfe presently after the former words â—â—ginning to instance the seueral Obiect of â—â—yth among diuers other examples setâ—h downe that to belieue Noahs floud 〈◊〉 the deluge of the world by water for â—ne is an article of Fayth for thus he â—â—yth By Fayth (c) Hebr. 11. Noah hauing receaued an ansâ—â—re concerning those things which as yet were â—ot seene fearing framed the Arke for the sauing of â—is howse But to proceed further If the Articles of he Trinity the Incarnation and the like 〈◊〉 the only essentiall points of a true Christian Fayth it is more then wonderfull that the Apostle vndertaking to set down the true definition of an auailable Fayth and exemplifying it in it seuerall Obiects should wholy and silently omit the say articles of the Trinity Incarnation PassioÌ„ c. he in that Chapter not expresly speaking one word of them And thus much touching the definitioâ— of Fayth giuen by the Apostle from whicâ— definition we conclude that whosoeuâ—â— seeketh to haue a true Fayth necessary to saâ—uation must belieue besides the mysteriâ— of the Trinity the Incarnation c. diueâ— others dogmaticall articles of Christian Râ—ligion And therfore answereably therâ— we assure our selues that when our Sauioâ— sayd He (d) Marc. 16. that belieueth not shal be condemneâ— he did speake of the belieuing of the whoâ— corps of Christian Fayth and Doctrine aâ— not only of any part therof for so in this lâ—ter maner it would be both false absurâ— In like fort where our Blessed Sauiour 〈◊〉 the same Chapter sayth to his Apostle Preach the Ghospell to all creatures c. He dâ— vnderstand the whole Ghospell which câ—â—tayneth many other points besides the Tâ—â—nity Incarnation and Passion c. In this next place we will descend 〈◊〉 those passages of holy Scripture which much magnify the efficacy and vertue of â—â—yth And accordingly heerto we find it 〈◊〉 said (e) Marc. vlt. He that belieueth and is baptized â—â—albe saued but he that belieueth not shal be conâ—â—mned Againe our Sauiour said to the â—ind men praying to receaue their sight According to your faith be it donne vnto you (f) Mat. 9. â—nd further (g) Hebr. c. 11. Without fayth it is impossible to â—ase God And more (h) 1. Ioan. c. 5. Our fayth is the virie which ouercommeth the world Now in â—â—ese and many other such texts for breuity â—itted I demaund what fayth is vnderâ—od or meant If it be answered a true â—yre perfect faith belieuing all points Christian Religion proposed by Gods â—â—urch it is true and that which I heare â—e to prooue Yf an vnperfect and munâ—l faith belieuing some points of Chriâ—â—â—â—â— Religion and reiecting others and so â—rroneus faith being partly true partly â— I say it can neuer deserue these prayses â—n by the Euangelists and Apostles neiâ—â—â— can it produce such supernaturall efâ— aboue specifyed no
more then darkeâ— an produce light since Truth himselfe 〈◊〉 taught vs (i) Luc. 6. That we cannot gather figges â—ornes nor grapes of bushes And hence by premises we are to vnderstand that we â—n entyre perfect fayth that by the â—h we belieue all supreme articles of the Trinitie Incarnation Passion c. anâ— all the articles of the Creed expressely articulately in their true sense and do belieue all other inferiour articles at least implicitely that is that we haue a readie preparation of mind to belieue all other articles which the Church of Christ dotâ— propound to be belieued so as that thougâ— we do not belieue euery article of Chrâ—stian Religion with an explicite and expresse faith yet we are bound vnder painâ— of damnation nor to belieue any doctrinâ— contrary or repugnant to the said articleâ— which the Church of Christ doth prâ—pound to be belieued from which it vnauoydably followeth that once grauntinâ— that the Church of Christ propoundeth 〈◊〉 be belieued that there is a Purgatory â— that we may pray to the Saints he incureth damnation who belieueth that theâ— is no Purgatory or that we ought not 〈◊〉 pray to Saints Now in this third place we will toucâ— that inseparable Attribute of true Chrâ—stian fayth which is Vnity in fayth 〈◊〉 doctrine This marke is so indissolubâ—â— annexed to the true fayth of Christ as thâ— we find his Apostles euer readie most â—â—riously to inculcate the same to their dâ—ciples Thus accordingly the Aposâ—â— exhorteth the Ephesians saying (k) Ephes 4. Be you carefull to keepe the vnity of the spirit in the bond of peace And immediately againe (l) Ephes vbi supra There is one Lord one fayth one Baptisme Where we see that Vnity in fayth is expressely set downe As also in another place (m) Ephes loc cit I beseech you that you speake all one thing be you kâ—it together in one mind and one iudgment And as this was the exhortation of the Apostle To we read that the first belieuers followed â—he same of whom S. Luke thus saith The (n) Act. 4. multitude that belieued were of one hart and â—ne soule And hence it proceedeth that the Church of Christ which comprehendeth the Professours of this vnanimous faith is â—tyled by Gods holy writ (o) Rom. 12. One Bodie one (p) Cant. 6. Spouse (q) Ioan. 10. one flocke of sheepe A truth â—o euident as that besides the frequent teâ—timonies of the Faâ—hers (r) Athanasius orat 1. con Ani. Chrysost opere imperfecto in Mat. Hom. 20. Tertullian de praescript Irenaeus l r. c. 5. confirming the â—ame euer the Protestants subscribe in iudgâ—ent heerto For thus (Å¿) Luther tom 3. Wittenberg in psal 5. fol. 166. Luther himselfe to omit (t) see herâ—â—â—f the Deuines of Mansfeild against the Sacramentaries And the Deuines of Heidelberg against the Anabaptists others writeth A kingdome deuiâ—ed in it selfe shall not stand neither haue any â—eretikes at any tyme bine ouercome by force or â—btility but by mutuall dissention neither doth â—hrist fight with them otherwise then with a spiâ—â—t of giddines and disagreement Now then this Vnitie of faith is so to be â—nderstood as that it is not repugnant therto that one and the same point should at one time not be houlden as necessary to be belieued the which after it hath vndergone a definitiue sententionall decree of Gods Church is necessarily to be belieued As for example it was not necessary in the beginning of Christianity to belieue that the booke of the Machabees the Epistle of S. Iames S. Iude the second Epistle of S. Peter the second and third of S. Iohn to be Canonicall Scripture till they were defined so to be by the third Councell (u) Can. 47. of Carthage at which S. Augustine was present But after this Councell had by the assistance of the holy Ghost defined them to be Canonicall and this after confirmed by the consent of the whole Church then it was and is Heresy to deny them to be Canonicall And the reason of this disparity is because it is Gods good pleasure wisdome not to reueale to his Church all articles of faith in the beginning and at one time but at seuerall times and vpon seuerall occasions as to his diuine Maiesty best seemeth expedient Thus the fayth of a Christian is capable of dilatation and of a more large vnfoulding or exposition but not of any contrariety in beliefe chaunge or alteration Anâ— thus to insist in the former example yâ— may well stand with Christian faith in the â—eginning not to accept the former bookes or Canonicall till the authority of the Church had pronounced them for such But it standeth not with sound faith that one man should positiuely belieue now after the Churches definition therof giuen as an article of fayth that the Machabees and the rest of the bookes aboue specified are not Canonicall Scripture but the prophane writings of man and another man should belieue as an article of Faith that they are Canonicall Scripture since the one of these contrary beleifes must be Hereticall This verity of the Vnity of faith being warranted by the word both of God and man as is aboue said we will take into our consideration the Catholike and Protestant Religions both which ioyntly do professe to belieue in generall in the Trinity in Christs Incarnation his Passion and the Creed of the Apostles and so we shall discerne whether the faith of all these seuerall Professours doth inioy the foresaid marke of vnity in doctrine or noe But seing this Subiect is most ample and large I will therfore sepose this ensuing chapter for the more full and exact discouery of the many and great disagreements betweene the Catholikes and the Protestants in their fayth and Religion THE SAME PROVED FROâ— want of vnity in fayth betweene Catholikes anâ— Protestants touching the Articles of the Creed CHAP. IIII. VNDERTAKING in this place tâ— set downe the multiplicity of opinions betweene Catholikes anâ— Protestants though they all iointly belieue in the Trinity the Incarnation oâ— Christ his Passion and the like and consequently that this their general beliefe wanteth that true Vnity of fayth which out of thâ— holy Scriptures Fathers the Protestants I haue aboue shewed to be most necessary to Saluation I will first examine how the Protestants and Catholikes doe differ touching the beliefe of the Creed made by the Apostles Next I will demonstrate that supposing all Professours of both Religions should agree in the true sense and meaning of the Creed yet there are diuers other dogmaticall points necessarily to be belieued and are at this instant belieued both by Protestants and Catholikes which are not expressed or mentioned in the Creed nor by any immediate inference can be drawne from thence Lastly I wil set down the great difference betweene Catholiks ProtestaÌ„ts in other points of fayth of which the Creed makes no intimation or
commauÌ„ded by the church not to performe the publike lyturgy of the church if he did contrary therto he was adiudged by the church to sinne mortally In like sort a Bishop leauing his Fayth and maintayning any one Heresy did thereby loose all his authority of Iurisdiction and thereupon during such his state all his AbsolutioÌ„s censures punishments and sentences practiced by him towardes any Person were adiudged by the church of God to be of no force or validity To which practice of the church (a) In 3. p. q. 39. ar 3. Saint Thomas subscribeth in these words Haeretici non possunt absoluere nec excommunicare nec Indulgentias facere aut aliquid huiuscemodi quod si fecerint nihil actum est Heretikes speaking of Cleargy men cannot absolue any one nor excommunicate nor giue Indulgences nor exercise any such like point of spirituall Iurisdiction and if they attempt contrary heereto they do but practice in vayne Touching Politicall or ciuill censures or punishments anciently inflicted vpon Heretikes The first may be that such men were forbidden to contract any marriage with other Religious and faythfull Christians and such of the faythfull christians as did marry with them did sinne mortally This is proued out of the (b) Can. 31.32.33 Laodicean councell aboue touched prohibiting all such mariages also all praying and communicating in Sacraments with Heretiks of which point I will heerafter intreate more fully Another punishment was that Heretiks were wholy restrained by the church from all practice of their Religion This appeareth from the actions of Constantine the Great who was so farre from graunting liberty of Religion to the Arians as that he threatned banishment to all who would not subscribe to the Nicene councell The same is proued from the like iudgement of Iouinianus who being elected Emperour by the souldiers admitted the acceptance thereof with this condition and not otherwayes to wit that all the subiectes of the Empire would promise to keep an entire vnity of christian beliefe practice The like iudgment herein is of the Auncient Fathers And first S. (c) Epist. 33. ad Mar. cell soror Ambrose though sollicited therunto by the Emperor Valentinianus would not suffer the Arians to haue within his Iurisdiction any one Church for the practice of their Religion to be allotted for them (d) As appeareth out of Theodor. l. 5. c. 32. S. Chrysostome being mooued by the Emperor of his tyme to graunt a Church to one Gayn as a Duke for the practice of his Heresy with great Christian courage openly withstood the same (e) Ep. 76. S. Leo did much reprehend Anatholius Bishop of Constantinople for permitting Heretikes to liue promiscuously with Catholikes Finally (f) Ep. 29. S. Augustine did vehemently persuade one Olympius an Earle that he would diuulge and put in practice the lawes of the Emperour made against the Heretikes Donatists who taught the Inuisibility of the Church that so throgh force of the lawes they might not be suffered to make any profession of their Religion A third punishment concerneth thâ— books of Heretikes which the Church 〈◊〉 God euer prohibited to be read indiffereÌ„tlâ— of all but only by such learned men 〈◊〉 were able to refute the Errours and Heresie contained in the sayde books And hence 〈◊〉 is that we finde that the fourth Counceâ—â— of (g) Ca. 18. Carthage admonished the Bishop that they would reade the bookes of Heretikes 〈◊〉 only for necessity In like sort the seauenth Câ—uncell prohibited the books of the I conoch Heretiks who did write virulent Treatises against the Religious vse of Images To proceed further there were diuers other chasticements appointed for Heretiks in the auncient Church (h) Wherof see L. Ariani ca. de Haereticis and by the auncient Christian Emperours in their lawes as Bannishment a pecuniary (i) L. Cuncti Haeretici mulct or fine the losse (k) L. Manichaeri of all their goods And lastly when the insolencie of Heretiks did grow insufferable euen death it selfe which punishment of death Valentinian and Marcian the Emperours did first decree of which point see the iudgment of the Councell (l) Act. 1. of Chalcedon of (m) In c. 5. ad Galat. Ierome and lastly of (n) Li. 2. contra literas Petiliaeni c. 83. Augustine who ex professo proueth that Magistrates haue power to punishe Heretikes euen which the sword Thus far touching the punishments auncieÌ„tly appointed by the church of God against Heretiks Now to apply this to our purpose I do heere wish the reader to take into his consideration two things first that here is no mention made in the former authorities what the Heresies were against which such seuere proceedings were put in execution neither is there any intimation in them of the deniall of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. but the sayd punishments were extended to all Heretiks indifferently and without any limitation of peculiar Heresies Now that these punishments were not ordayned for the denyers of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. is euident for two reasons first because as is often aboue sayd the denyers of these supreme poynts are not Heretykes but Infidels or Iewes secondly because the punishment of death only and no inferiour punishment aboue mentioned was appoynted by the church for those who once were Christians but after did fall into Infidelity by denying those supreme poynts of Christian fayth Secondly the Reader is to obserue that seing Heretikes though not denying the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion the Decalogue c. did vndergoe the foresayd punishments the whole Church oâ— God with is gouerned with the spirit of the holy Ghost would neuer haue inflicted vpon them erring only in lesser matter then about the Trinitie IncarnatioÌ„ Passioâ— c. such seuere and rigorous punishments aâ— are aboue meÌ„tioned if she had thought thaâ— the defence of those errours how small soâ—uer they seemed could haue stood with thâ— saluatioÌ„ of mans soule since otherwaies thâ— church should haue discouered her selfe 〈◊〉 be a most cruell Tyrant and not an Induâ—gent mother to her Children members THE SAME PROVED FROM Arguments drawne from Reason CHAP. X. TO passe froÌ„ the authority of Gods sacred word his holy church the Auncient Fathers the pillars thereof touching the nature of Heresy and Heretiks as also touching the vnity and Infallibility of the same church and the persons disincorporated separated from it from all which heads it hath been euidently euicted that a man obstinatly defending any one Errour in faith and Religion cannot expect saluation It now remaynes that the same be made euident euen by force of reason that therby all men enioying the faculty of reason may the more easily subscribe to so vndeniable a veritie say with the Psalmist heerin (i) Psa 91. Testimonia tua credibilia facta sunt nimis Well then the first and cheifest reason is taken from the causes of true fayth
where for the better conceauing thereof we are to vnderstand that fayth is a supernaturall habit not obtayned by the force of nature Therfore to the beliefe of any one Article or point of fayth two things concurre the one is the first reuealing Verity as Scholemen speake which is God Himselfe the secoÌ„d is the Church propounding the article to be belieued Now when we belieue any point of fayth God who is the first reuealing Veritie as is sayd reuealeth it to the church and the church propounds it so reuealed to vs to be belieued And thus we belieue a point of fayth through the authority of God reuealing the church propounding and where we belieue any thing though it be true not through this authority this is not supernaturall beliefe in vs but only an opinion grounded vpon other reasons inducements Euen as the Turke belieueth that there is a God Creator of the worlde yet this his beliefe is no true fayth but only a meere opinion of a thing which is true since this his beliefe is grounded not vpon Gods authority reuealing this but only vpon his Alcaron being otherwayes a fabulous booke though of the being of one God it speaketh truly Now to apply this This first reuealing Verity which is God through whose authority we ought to belieue euery article doth with one the like authoritie reueale all Articles of Christian Religion to the church so as it is as forcibly reuealed to be belieued that there is for example a Purgatory or that we ought to pray to Saints graunting these articles to be true as that there is a Trinity or that Christ was Incarnate from whence it vnauoydably followeth that who belieueth in the Trinity and yet doth not belieue that there is a Purgatory or that we may pray to Saints hath no true and supernatural beliefe of the Trinity but only belieueth that there is a Trinity because he so vnderstandeth or is persuaded thereto only by his owne reason or through some other humane motiues according to that sentence of S. Augustine lib. de vtilitate credendi cap. 11. Quod intelligimus aliquid rationi debemus quod autem credimus authoritati For if he did belieue that there is a Trinity or that Christ was Incarnate through Gods authority so reuealing this truth to be belieued by the same authority he would haue belieued that there is a Purgatory or that we ought to pray to Saints seing both the Articles of the Trinity and Purgatory or praying to Saints are equally indifferently a like propounded by God and his Church to be belieued Thus we may demonstratiuely conclude that what ProtestaÌ„t doth belieue in the Trinity and yet doth not belieue that there is a Purgatory praying to Saints Freewill the Reall presence admitting them once to be true or any other point controuerted betweene Catholikes and Protestants the samâ— man hath no true fayth at all of the Trinity or Incarnation and consequently for wanâ— of a true and supernaturall fayth cannot bâ— saued since we read (a) Marc. 16. Qui non credit condemnabitur Who belieueth not shal be condemned And from this former ground it proceedeth thaâ— (b) 2. 2. q. 5. ar 3. S. Thomas all other learned Schoolemen teach that who belieueth not only for Gods authority so reuealing any poinâ— whatsoeuer great or small fundamentall or not fundamentall the same man belieueth not any other Article at all with a true and supernaturall fayth and heereto accord those wordes of (c) Lib. de praescript Tertullian against Valentinus the Heretike Some thinges of the law and Prophets Valentinus approueth some thinges he disalloweth That is he disalloweth all whilest he disproueth some Which sentence of Tertullian must of necessity be true since who reiecteth the authority of God in not belieuing any one article propounded by God to be belieued the same man begetteth a suspition or doubt of Gods authority for the belieuing of any other article how fundamentall soeuer Another reason may be taken from a distinction of fayth which according to the learned is of two sortes The one they call explicite fayth the other implicite Explicite fayth is that which all men vnder payne of damnation are bound to belieue As according to most of the Schoolemen the Trinity the Incarnation of our Sauiour his Passion the Decalogue or ten Commaundements the articles of the Creed Implicite fayth comprehendeth all those points which euery vnlearned man is not bound expressely distinctly to belieue and knowe in particuler though he be expressely bound not to beâ—ieue any thing contrary thereto but is to â—est in the iudgment of the church concerning all such points and what the church of Christ houldeth therein he is bounde â—mplicitely to belieue This distinction is warranted not only in the iudgment of all Catholike Schoolemen but also of the most â—earned (d) D. Bar. l. defide eius ortis p 40. Hooker in his Ecclesiast policy in the preface p. 28. by Melancton l. 1. Epist Epist ad RegeÌ„ Angliae Protestants though they commonly forbeare the phrase of explicite imâ—licite fayth particulerly of D. Feild who â—n these words following giueth the reason â—hereof saying For (e) In his Treatise of the Church in his Epist Dedicat to the L. Arch-Bishop seeing the Controuersies of Religion in our time are growne in number so many â—nd in nature so intricate that few haue time and â—â—asure fewer strength of vnderstanding to exaâ—ine them what remayneth for men desirous of saâ—isfaction in things of such consequeÌ„ce but diligently â— search out which amongst all the Societies of men â—s the worlde is that blessed Company of holy ones 〈◊〉 at househould of fayth that spouse of Christ and Church of the lyuing God which is the Pillar and ground of truth that so they may imbrace her communion follow her directions rest in her iudgments Thus D. Feild Now this distinction being presupposed I thus argue Both these kinds of fayth are necessary to saluation Explicite fayth because it comprehendeth all those fundameÌ„tall and supreme points of Christian Religion without which and the expresse and articulate beliefe of which a man cannot be saued And these be those only which our Newtrallists in Religion hold necessary to be belieued Implicite fayth of other points also is necessary to saluation because otherwyse then belieuing implicitely inuoluedly what the church teacheth therein we cannot according to the former Doctours words range our selues to the blessed company of holy ones the househould of fayth the spouse of Christ and Church of the lyuing God Againe seing Implicite fayth is necessary to saluation we must graunt that this Implicite fayth hath some Obiect This Obiect is not the Articles of the Trinity the Incarnation the Decalogue c. according to the foresaid iudgment of the Schoolemen since these are thâ— obiects of explicite fayth as is aboue mentioned therfore Articles of seeming lesser importance are the