Selected quad for the lemma: world_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
world_n catholic_a church_n universal_a 3,985 5 9.1776 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A19220 The Catholike moderator: or A moderate examination of the doctrine of the Protestants Prouing against the too rigid Catholikes of these times, and against the arguments especially, of that booke called, The answer to the Catholike apologie, that we, who are members of the Catholike, apostolike, & Roman Church, ought not to condeme the Protestants for heretikes, vntill further proofe be made. First written in French by a Catholike gentleman, and now faithfully translated. See the occasion of the name of Huguenots, after the translaters epistle.; Examen pacifique de la doctrine des Huguenots. English Constable, Henry, 1562-1613.; W. W., fl. 1623. 1623 (1623) STC 5636.2; ESTC S109401 62,312 88

There are 5 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

and nation With which definition the Fathers iointly consent All they saith Saint Augustine which are holy and sanctified which are haue beene and shall be are Citizens of the heauenly Ierusalem And S. Gregory the Pope that my proofe may be the more authenticall saith That all the Elect are embraced in the bosome of the Church and all the Reprobates are without And yet was poore Iohn Husse burnt for an Heretike for affirming the very same O wicked Catholikes that haue made a man to be burnt for an Heretike for affirming no more then what a Saint had done and which is more then a Pope had said before him So then in this signification neither the Church of Rome nor that which themselues call the Reformed Church can properly be called the Catholike Church but only parts of it Nay we cannot truly affirme that they be parts of the Catholike Church but that God hath both in the Romane Church and in the Reformed some that be members of the Catholike Church Which is as much to say as that diuers shall be saued in both Churches Like as there were many amongst the Iewes at the comming of Iesus Christ and at this day be in the Greeke Church and in Prester Iohns Country which doe embrace the Christian faith without acknowledging the Pope So that if we appropriate the title of Catholike to the Romane Church only taking it in this signification it must needs so low that either all the Catholikes are elected though the Catholikes themselues write that diuers Popes haue beene damned or else that no Iew was euer saued before Christs comming and that God hath not had his Church at all times or that no Greeke nor Affrican can be saued in our time and then God should not haue his Church in all places Againe if we attribute not this title of Catholike only to the Church of Rome I can see no reason why the reformed Church should be more excluded then the rest To be briefe when we passe our censure vpon any man whether he be of the Catholike Church or not we must speake either according to Faith or according to Charitie If according to Faith we cannot say that such or such a man is a Catholike because it is God that knoweth who are his saith S. Paul But if wee passe our iudgment according to charity this will haue vs esteeme all those to bee of the true Catholike Church which bee of the visible of which I will next speake and shew how it may bee termed Catholike 2 The Church as I haue proued already comprehends all the Elect those as well that be already in heauen as those that are yet on earth and remaine mingled among the wicked which last though generally more in number yet the Elect beare the name of the better part So that both good and bad which make an outward profession of the true faith are reputed members of the true Church According to the Parable of the net which held the bad fishes as well as the good This Church was separated from the rest of the Gentiles with a partition wall as it were and before the comming of Christ pend vp in one country and restrained to the Family of Israel But since Christs comming This partition wall is as S. Paul saith broken downe so that neither Iew nor Greeke are excluded And by reason of this difference that the Iewes in those dayes had onely this priuiledge and that now no one particular country hath it more then another the Church is called Catholike that is to say Spread all the world ouer And for that shee is so vniuersall shee is diuided into particular Churches As in Saint Pauls time into the Church of Ephesus of Rome of Galatia of Corinth c. and no one of these Churches hauing any priuiledge more then another they were all together called The Church Catholike not that it is alwayes euery-where but for that no country is excluded and no place priuiledged So then no place being excluded there may be other Churches besides that of Rome and no place being priuiledged euen Rome it selfe may be cut off from the Church 3 Thirdly the Church is called Catholike in respect of the Donatists who denied the Church to bee dispersed all ouer the world but held it to be coopt vp in Affrica wherevpon it came to passe that those Churches which held the contrary were called the Catholike Churches Euen as at this day these Churches that hold the Church to haue need of reformation are called The Reformed Churches Which is the reason why the more ancient Fathers neuer vsed this terme Catholike to distinguish the pure Churches from the hereticall but called them Orthodoxall But in processe of time by reason that the Orthodoxe Churches held that the Church was Catholike or Vniuersall these two words Catholike and Orthodoxall were taken in one and the same signification so that at last this title of Catholike was not onely giuen to the Church to distinguish the Orthodox from the Donatists but also from all other Heretikes For a Catholike in proper speech is not opposite to all sorts of Heretikes but to the Iewes onely and the Donatists But for as much as custome is the matter of words as we see in this word Tyrant anciently taken in good part for a King and now onely for a bad King this word Catholike is taken contrary to his nature in the signification of a pure Church in such a sense as that a particular Church may be called a Catholike Church and more or lesse Catholike proportionably as it is more or lesse pure So that the question betweene the Catholikes and the Huguenots lies not in this point viz. Which of the Churches is the Church Catholike but whether of them is most Catholike and which most corrupted for in some degree both of them may be Catholike so long as they hold the substance of faith as I shewed in the first Chapter and both of them in some sort may be corrupt it being a thing most certaine That euery visible Church may haue errors more or lesse The Church saith Saint Bernard as long as shee is in the tabernacle of this body hath not attained vnto the perfection of beauty and is not therefore absolutely faire For it is the priuiledge of the Church Triumphant onely to be faire and as S. Paul saith without spot or wrinckle True it is indeed that the Church is sometime called faire but this is euer comparatiuely wherefore the Bridegroome in the Canticles saith of his Spouse which is the Church that shee is the fairest of women that is not simply faire saith S. Bernard but the fairest among women And for that selfe same reason is she in one and the same verse styled both blacke and faire I am blacke saith the Spouse but I am comely I am not ignorant how that the Ancients also did vse this word Catholike for a distinction
King the Bishops the Clergie and likewise of all the people of France Admit it were so yet for all this does it not follow that it is receiued in France vnlesse hee can shew withall that all the Estates doe receiue it that is The Church the Nobility and the People But hee makes no mention of the Nobility but onely of the Church and the third Estate so that at the most it is receiued but of two of the three Estates which may be the cause that our Aduersary to keep vp the number diuides the Church into two parts viz. Bishops and Clergie The Councell saith hee is receiued of the Bishops the Clergie and likewise of all the people of France Which is a new diuision of the Estates neuer as I perswade my selfe heard of before Iudge then what iust occasion the Nobilitie of France now haue to reiect this Councell when as those who would haue the Councell receiued doe reiect the Nobility CAP. 6. That the Huguenots may very rightly bee accounted members of the Catholike Apostolike and Romane Church THis Chapter at the first blush seemes to treat of the same Argument that the first does for hauing there proued it That the Huguenots are of the same religion with vs Catholikes it may follow also that they bee of the same Church too And yet to my thinking these two Chapters may very well bee parted not so much in regard of the difference of the nature of the subiect as of the humours of the persons For commonly when a Huguenot would draw a Catholike to his opinion he begins euermore with the particular Controuersies and so vpon the purity of his doctrine hee inferres the verity of his Church A Catholike on the other side when hee would winne a Huguenot beginnes still with the Church and so by the verity of the Church concludes the purity of his doctrine and commonly when either of them gets the other out of this tracke they are to seeke which is one of the reasons that they cannot satisfie the aduerse partie For he that would perswade another must not begin with that principle which to him seemes best though indeed it be so but with that which seemes best in his opinion whom hee desires to perswade otherwise hee shall but lose his labour For when a Huguenot shall haue vrged a thousand passages of holy Scripture to proue the truth of his owne particular assertion hee shall not bee a whit the nearer and why For that a Catholike will say instantly with himselfe What though I cannot answer him yet another may and if I am to beleeue nothing which I am not able to maintaine by disputation then should I not beleeue the proceeding of the holy Ghost the vnion of both Natures in Iesus Christ the mysteries of the holy Trinity all which I haue beleeued without being able to maintain them or so much as vnderstand them And euen so the authority of the same Church which makes mee beleeue these mysteries without being able to maintaine them makes me also to beleeue the holy sacrament of the Altar Purgatory c. without being able to maintaine them So that if a Hugu proceeds no further does not shew a reason how a man may be assured of these mysteries without the Churches authority or else which I hold more reasonable why wee ought wholly to relye vpon the authority of the Church in one point and not in another hee shall neuer say ought to the purpose Nor can the Catholikes haue any happier success in their perswasiues for when they talke to the Huguenots of the Church how the Church saies this and the Church saies that and the Church cannot erre They who are not brought vp to such kinde of phrases and who found their faith vpon this perswasion That the Scripture is cleere on their sides What care wee will they say what the Church saith so long as wee agree in opinion with the word of God So that a Catholike shall neuer bee able to perswade them to any thing if hee beginnes not at their foundation and proue that the Scripture makes not so clearely for them as they imagine it does and then when they once perceiue that they cannot confute the Catholikes by Scripture they will bee compelld to confesse That a man can haue no assurance of his faith without submitting his own iudgment to the iudgment of the Church which as wee say according to Christs owne promise is infallibly accompanied with the holy Spirit For mine own part although it bee not my intention to entice any man either to one Religion or the other but to qualifie onely the passions of men yet for feare that I should commit the same errour in this Treatise of Pacification which they often doe in the course of their perswasiues I thoght good to subioine this Chapter also to the end that my reasons might be drawne from the principles of both Religions And thus hauing proued in the first Chapter by examination of the particular questions according to the Huguenots method That they be no Heretikes I was also desirous to adde this Chapter that according to the Catholikes manner of proceeding that is as much to say as according to the Nature of the Church I might also proue them the Huguenots to be no Heretikes For it were but labour lost to tell many of our Catholikes that the Huguenots hold many of the fundamentall points of faith as well as we seeing they take not the skantling of an heretike by his opinions but only by this marke That he is out of the Church vnderstanding thereby no other Church then that which we call Catholike Apostolike and Romane excluding all those out of the Church to whom these three titles may not be giuen what opinion soeuer they be of For which reason I resolued to proue that these three titles doe belong vnto the Huguenots And first touching the title of Catholike the Church is called Catholike in three respects First in regard of it selfe 2. In regard of the Iewes 3. In regard of Heretikes Now the Church is called Catholike in regard of it selfe because in the vniuersalitie thereof it comprehends all times and all places viz the whole number of the Elect as well those who haue beene since the beginning of the world and are now departed and triumphant in heauen enioying euerlasting blisse as those that are ordained to the like blessednesse whether now aliue or to be borne hereafter Which definition is founded vpon the Scriptures for S. Pauls words are The Church of the first-borne which are written in Heauen and who are written in heauen but the Elect from whom the reprobates are in this specialty distinguished That their names are not written in the Booke of the Lambe The Church then consists of the Elect who are not restrained to any place or time For Iesus Christ hath redeemed with his bloud saith Saint Iohn Out of euery kinred and tongue and people
from an Heretike in another signification which in truth was according to the proper interpretation of the word taking Catholike or Vniuersall for a marke of the true Church For which reason in the ancient Church when as the whole visible Church yet retained the faith receiued from the Apostles and that some part of it became corrupted for the exact discerning vnto whether side we ought to leane Vincentius Lyrinensis gaue this Rule What else should we doe saith he but prefer the safety of the body before a rotten member And therefore for that the body of the Church was at that time sound all the Church was called Catholike for so much this word Body as well as that word Catholike implies an vniuersality so that the distinction of Catholike and Heretike serues but to distinguish the sound body from a corrupted member But so soone as the body it selfe became corrupted then this rule and distinction failed For which reason Vincentius makes a difference betweene a Catholike in place and a Catholike in time And euer when a Catholike in place is not a sure marke he hath recourse vnto a Catholike in time But saith he if any new infection goes on not onely to corrupt a part but the whole Church then must we cleaue to antiquity So that the difference between the Catholikes and the Huguenots lying in this point Whether the body of the Church be corrupted or no wee must not speake of the Church which is Catholike according to place but according to time And that Church is Catholike saith Vincentius which holds that religion which hath beene euer hitherto embraced And to discerne which Religion hath beene alwayes embraced when as the body of the Church or the visible Church as saith the same Vincentius is corrupted we must still haue recourse vnto Antiquity and say with Tertullian Illudverum quod primum That is truest which is ancientest So as that is the Catholike Church which agrees in faith with the more Primitiue Church So that if wee would discusse it whether the Catholikes or the Huguenots be most properly the right Catholikes wee must consider first whether of them best holds of the faith of the Apostles and next of that of the ancient Doctors and Councels of the Church As for the Title Apostolike The Church may bee called Apostolike as well in regard of the Writings as of the Preaching of the Apostles As for their Writings those Churches which imbrace the doctrine deliuered in them are intituled Apostolike yea and more or lesse Apostolike as they do more or lesse agree or disagree to or from the said doctrine So that the word Apostolike is all one with the word Orthodox or with Catholike taken in the last signification And if the Church of the Huguenots may bee intituled Catholike or Orthodox they may also by the same reason be called Apostolike nay and more properly Apostolike then Catholike For the visible Church being as I haue shewed not absolutely but comparatiuely more or lesse Catholike or Apostolike the Huguenots though they may offend in default and so be lesse Catholike rather yet in this they offend rather in the excesse and are too Apostolike as being so strict that they will readily beleeue nothing but what the Apostles haue written Secondly those Churches were called Apostolike which were instructed by the liuely voice of the Apostles and where the Apostles haue had their seats as Ierusalem Antioch Ephesus Alexandria c. where the Apostles Peter Iames Iohn and Marke the Euangelist sate and are therefore from all Antiquity styled Apostolicall Seaes as well as Rome howbeit that this signification is rather an ornament then a mark of a pure Church For Antioch Alexandria and other Churches of Greece where the Apostles preached haue either altogether forsaken the name of Christ or are at the least according to the Catholikes Tenet quite cut off for Schisme and Heresie from the communion of the true Church and France Spaine Poland Germany England and Denmarke where the Apostles neuer had any Bishopricks haue sithence beene the true Churches So that in this signification a Church may bee pure and yet not bee Apostolike and a Church which is Apostolike may be impure The last title though first in estimation with the Catholiques is that of Roman which I haue obserued to haue beene taken in three seuerall sorts First the Roman Church is only taken for the Diocesse of Rome and was in the beginning for the Citie of Rome alone As in S. Pauls time who inscribed an Epistle seuerally to Rome alone as he did likewise to those Churches of Corinth Ephesus Galatia c. For had the Church of Rome beene euery where at that time spread abroad he had not needed to haue written to other Churches seuerally because that in writing to that of Rome he had then written to them all And yet would our people needs make vse of this Epistle to proue by it The Roman church to be the catholique Church because that in it S. Paul saies Your faith is spread abroad in all the world as if S. Paul had not said the same to the Church of Thessalonica Your faith which you haue to God-ward is spread abroad But had the Church of Rome beene as they would haue it esteemed by S. Paul as all one with the Catholique without all doubt his Epistle to the Romans had beene intituled Catholique as well as those of S. Iohn S. Peter S. Iames and S. Iude which are therefore stiled Catholique for that they were written to the Catholique Church Now taking the Roman Church in this signification I confes that not the Huguenots Churches alone are separated from the Roman Church but all other catholique Churches besides so that to this day they in France make a distinction of sundry customes of the Roman Church and of the Church Gallicane Secondly the Church of Rome is taken for the Westerne Church insomuch that the Roman Latine and Occidental Church doth signifie one and the same thing to distinguish it from the Greeke and Easterne Church iust as the Empire of the East and the Empire of the West were called the Empires of Rome and of Constantinople because that these two Cities were the chiefe seats of the Empire and so by reason of the dignitie of the Citie of Rome which was the seat of the Emperours that reigned in the West all this Westerne part was called the Roman Empire and all the Westerne Church the Roman Church that is to say The Church contained vnder the Roman Empire So then if we call it the Roman Church for distinguishing it from the Greeke and Easterne Churches then also may the Huguenots Churches be members likewise of the Roman Church for that they be Westerne and not Greeke nor Easterne Churches If in respect of the Roman Empire taking the Roman Empire largely as it was they also be vnder the Empire and by consequence vnder the Church But
of Rome doth agree with the ancient Church in the selfe same ceremonies Secondly that admitting that the ancient Church had them in vse yet are not the Huguenots to be condemned for hauing disused them For the first point my purpose is not to condemne the ceremonies of our Mother the holy Church but since that our side are so strait laced as to hinder our reconciliation for a thing so indifferent as these ceremonies are I haue taken the boldnesse to oppose them and to shew That the Huguenots may easily answer the argument which hee alleages which I write not to iustifie them but with a purpose that wee should not so confidently assure our selues that all is so cleare on our sides Let vs heare then how the Huguenots may answer the 15 examples which he bringeth The first example is the signe of the Crosse concerning which the Huguenots will confesse that it hath beene anciently vsed but that the vse of this was brought into the Church vpon a particular occasion and proper onely to that age For the Pagans amongst whom the Christians in those dayes conuersed were wont when they met with a Christian to make the signe of the crosse in derision of their Christianity for that the God whom they worshipped was hanged vpon a crosse so that the Christians to shew that they were not ashamed of such a death in al their actions would stil make the sign of the crosse But now this occasiō being taken away the Huguenots may likewise say that it is not necessary to cōtinue the practice no more then it is to apply a plaister to a woūd already healed As for praying to the East I neuer yet knew any Huguenot that held it vnlawfull to pray towards the East nor any Catholike that thought it vnlawfull to pray also towards other quarters of the world What more then is there to be said betweene them but onely that it is an indifferent custome which hath not beene alwayes so strictly obserued in all Churches For Socrates saith that in the Church of Antioch the high Altar was placed cleane contrary and towards the West As for the inuocation of the Eucharist our aduersary affirmes that it appeareth by Saint Basile That this inuocation was then and from the Apostles time practised when they shewed the Eucharist I answer that these words make nothing against the Huguenots for a man may very well vse inuocation in the time of the celebration of the Sacrament and all the while direct his inuocation to God and not to the Sacrament True it is that there was a speciall Prayer appointed for that purpose which Saint Basile thought to haue beene a tradition of the Apostles But now the Catholikes themselues doe not any longer obserue that forme of prayer and it cannot be found in any antiquity what forme of prayer that was which Saint Basile speakes of So that if this prayer were an Apostolicall tradition our Church hath had small care in preseruing it which made me beleeue that we haue some things put vpon vs vnder the title of Apostolicall tradition which are not so For it is still as easie to inuent some new tradition which wee haue not yet receiued as to forget those which we haue already entertained For God ordinarily where he takes away the memory supplies that defect with inuention and sufficiency of iudgement It being very wisely done when we haue lost one tradition to put another in the place thereby to keepe the number full still and entire The fourth example is of Hallowing the water in Baptisme Now the Huguenots will confesse with Saint Basile that the water of Baptisme ought to bee blessed But this they deny that this hallowing was such heretofore as that now in vse with vs. For as much as they say That water and all other creatures are sanctified by God already and particularly that the water of Baptisme needs no benediction to make it more holy because as saith Saint Chrysostome Christ by his Baptisme hath blessed all waters But if my Antagonist will proceed further to inferre that the water in Baptisme ought of necessity to be hallowed in the same sort that it is now I say that Eusebius writes that Constantine the Great would haue men to baptise in Iordan and yet I neuer heard that all the water of Iordan was made holy water They will say as much of the consecration of the Oyle the word consecration at the first signifying no more then the institution of a signe to an holy vse And as for the vse of oyle like as the ancient Church made vse of it in Baptisme so did they also of milke and honey neither of which are any more in vse no not in the Romane Church Why then should the Huguenots be blamed more for the want of one ceremony then the Catholikes would be for want of another And this also serues to disproue that other example which followes to wit that the Romane Church agreeth with the ancient in all the ceremonies of Baptisme His next example is of the Fast in Lent which Saint Hierome esteemes for an Apostolicall tradition To which the Huguenots will answer that Epiphanius saith that it is an Apostolicall tradition also to fast vpon Wednesdayes and Frydayes except vpon those betwixt Easter and Whitsontide in which time the said S. Hierome in the very book quoted by the Answerer saith that it is vnlawfull to fast yet do the Catholikes fast notwithstāding vpon Fridaies in that very time Why then are the Huguenots more to be blamed for disusing the custome of the ancient Church in the obseruation of the forty dayes before Easter then the Catholikes for dissenting from the same Church in the obseruation of the 50. dayes after Concerning the sacrifice for the dead it appeares by that Liturgy of the Greekes which is read in the fift Tome of Saint Chrysostomes workes that they made mention amongst the dead for whom they made their oblations of the Apostles and Marytrs who according to the iudgement of all parties doe goe directly into heauen and haue no need of any such oblation as men offer at this day for the easing of the soules departed So as the Huguenots will say that it must needs follow that the soules of the Saints which are in Paradise are holpen by such oblations which none of the wiser Catholikes will maintaine or else that the sayd sacrifice for the dead was no other thing then a Commemoration made in the time of the Celebration of the Eucharist and thus much the wiser sort of Huguenots will not find fault withall The next example is of the Baptisme of Infants which the Huguenots allow of as well as the Catholikes As for the mixing of water with the wine in the Chalice this in the iudgement of the better learned Catholikes is not a thing so necessarily required And why then should we blame the Huguenots
practised anciently notwithstanding that they doe now forbeare them especially when they haue obserued them to change into so much superstition as that our better learned Catholikes doe euen laugh at the poore people whom they themselues haue abused CAP. 3. That the doctrine of the Huguenots hath not beene condemned by any lawfull Iudgement before the Councell of Trent HItherto haue I spoken of the Huguenots Religion as it is in it selfe As well in Doctrine as in Ceremonies viz That Ceremonies be things indifferent And as for their errors in doctrine that they be not in the foundation of faith So that they not being Heretikes in respect of the wickednesse of their opinions let vs now trauerse the Inditement to finde whether they be so by condemnation Now our Aduersarie to conuict them produces the Decrees of diuers Councels to which before I make answer I will propose these 4 Considerations The first is this Whether a generall and lawfull Councell may erre or not in the substance of faith seeing that it is made vp of men in whose testimonie as saith S. Augustine there is so little certaintie his words be these A man may beleeue the Scriptu●es without doubting but for any other testimonies it is lawfull either to beleeue them or not to beleeue them So as this priuiledge to be of an irrefageable certaintie is only giuen to the Scriptures which if it be true then all the passages which are drawne from the authoritie of Councels are thus farre forth only of weight as they can be made good by the Scriptures Neuerthelesse this being the common answer of the Huguenots I will make no further vse of it but like a true Catholike confesse this to be an infallible Maxime That a lawfull and generall Councell cannot erre in the substance of faith The second is Whether if such a generall Councell may erre though not in the substance of faith yet at least in other points of Diuinitie of lesse consequence And if they may erre in these then seeing as I haue showne that the Huguenots errors be not in the substance of faith that it followes hereupon That the Councels may erre in their definitiue decisions of those Controuersies which are betwixt the Huguenots and vs being only points of lesser consequence Whereupon it followes That this second sort of heresie becomes supernumerary and their errors not being heresies in their owne nature cannot be made heresies by bare condemnation For the reason why he is counted an Heretike who resists the Decrees of a Councell is for that in doing so he resists the Iudgement of the Holy Ghost which doth still and infallibly accompany the Councell But now if the Holy Ghost be no further forth promised to assist the Councell then when it treateth of things necessary to saluation Then they who hold some tenets contrary to the Councell in other things do not herein resist the iudgement of the Holy Ghost and by consequence are no Heretikes Stapleton professor of the Controuersies at Doway and one of the most learned Catholikes of our times who hath written most accurately of this Argument holds That the holy Ghost is onely promised to assist the Councells in necessary things and that in other things they may erre And Andradius himselfe who defends the Councell of Trent in the very same Booke wherein hee does defend it as generall lawfull and sound in the matter of Faith condemnes the vulgar translation of the Bible as corrupted although the said Councell had authorized it for authenticall so little did hee trust to the iudgement of Councells in things which were beside the essence of faith But admitting thus much That a lawfull Councell cannot erre at all yet is there still a third difficulty viz. Whether these Councells which hee produceth against the Huguenots bee lawfull which euen a Catholike may safely deny for as much as there bee diuers nillities to bee found in them and namely in their manner of proceeding which are no where found in the ancient Councells as I will shew in the next Chapter when I treat of the Councell of Trent Now the Huguenots will bee very well content to bee tryed by the Ancient Councells held in the first 600 yeares of Christ namely vntill such time as the Pope as they say hauing gotten so absolute a Monarchie in the Church tooke away the liberty of Councells and subiected the suffrages of the other Bishops to giue with him now all the Councels alleadged by our Aduersarie are since that time There remaines a fourth difficulty namely Whether the Huguenots haue been iustly condemned by the latter Councells Now vpon these foure considerations a man may perceiue how friuolous his brags are of the Councels for as much as he is able to conclude nothing vnlesse he hath leaue granted him before hand to adde what authority to the Councels he pleaseth to make what Councells lawfull hee listeth and to force the Councells to speake what hee would haue them The most innocent man in the world might bee conuicted by such proofes if a man would beleeue without further examination whatsoeuer euery witness shall bring against him and when his Aduersary also shall haue leaue both to packe the witnesses at his owne pleasure and also to iudge of their testimonies But to returne to our purpose Let vs see next whether the Huguenots stand lawfully condemned by those Councells which hee produceth or not The Catholike Apologie denies it whereby in my conceit hee shewes a great deale of zeale to the Romane Religion For considering what a world of people are infected with the Huguenots doctrine by reason that it is not yet condemned by any lawfull forme of proceeding he endeuors to perswade with the Catholikes to cause a lawfull Councell to bee called to confute them to the end that the Huguenots might bee satisfied by being shewed their errors and bee left without excuse for reiecting the doctrine of the Church of Rome But obseruing that there bee many seditious Catholikes who rather thirst to kill their bodies then to saue their soules doe hinder so holy a designe vnder colour that they bee already condemned by other Councells The Catholike Apology doth very well herein to aduise them not to desist for all this but to pursue so good an enterprise for as much as the former Decrees by which the Huguenots stand condemned are not of such authority but that they may appeale from them to an higher power So that wee must sue out another Processe against them to get such a Iudgment as they themselues shal● neuer bee able to except against Now our Aduersary answers that there is no neede to take this course affirming that they bee indeed cast already by such a Iudgment which hee proues by two reasons One is that the doctrine of the Romane Church hath beene publikely confirmed by generall Councells before that of Trent The second is that the Huguenots religion is the same with that