THE FIRST MOTIVE OF T. H. MASTER OF ARTS, AND LATELY MINISTER, TO SUSPECT THE INTEGRITY OF HIS Religion:  
Which was DETECTION OF FALSEHOOD in D. Humphrey, D. Field, & other learned Protestants, touching the question of Purgatory, and Prayer for the dead.  
With his PARTICULAR CONSIDERATIONS persuading him to embrace the Catholic doctrine in these, and other points. * ⁎ *  
An Appendix entitled, TRY BEFORE YOU TRVST.  
Wherein Some notable untruths of D. Field, and D. Morton are discovered.  
Printed 1609.   

S. AUGUSTIN. de utilit. credendi, contra Manichaeos. cap. 14.  
NVllis me video credidisse, nisi populorum, atque gentium confirmatae opinioni, ac famae admodum celeberrimae; hos autem populos Ecclesiae CATHOLICAE mysteria usquequaque occupásse. Cur non igitur apud eos potissimum diligentissimè requiram, quid Christus praeceperit, quorum authoritate commotus, Christum aliquid utile praecepisse, iam credidi? Túne mihi melius expositurus es, quid ille dixerit? Quem suisse, aut esse non putarem, si abs te mihi hoc commendaretur esse credendum. Hoc ergo credidi, ut dixi, famae, celebritate, consensione, vetustate roboratae. Vos autem & tam pauci, & tam turbulenti, & tam novi, nemini dubium est, quám nihil dignum authoritate praeferatis. Quae igitur ista tantae dementia est? Illis crede Christo esse credendum; & a no bis disce, quid dixerit. Cur obsecrote? Nam si illi [Catholici] deficerent, nec me quicquam docere possent: multò faciliùs mihi persuaderem Christo non esse credendum, quàm de illo cuiquam, nisi ab jis, per quos ei credidissem, discendum.   

TO THE PROTESTANT READER.  
IT was my purpose to be silent, until I was enforced to speak; for the public proceeding against me, hath drawn me unto this public defence; and specially, because it was by those persons, whom I have reverenced from my heart, and in that place, which must always challenged an interest in my poor, unworthy self.  
Wherefore, being invited, and compelled unto this curtsy, I present unto thee (loving contreyman) one MOTIVE of my change; the first in order, and (with me) very effectual in weight.  
Expect not any curious, or ample discourse; for I do here intend to deliver only such peculiar things, as prevailed with me in the beginning, & rousing me out of my lethargy in schism, and heresy, provoked me unto a diligent investigation of the truth. My other 
* T●●.  motives shall remain prisoners in my custody, unless the importunity of friends, or malignity of adversaries may (perhaps) extort their enlardgement from me, against the proper inclination of my will.  
Mean while accept this little schedule (is it not a little one, and thy soul shall live?) 
Gen. 19 20  with kind affection. And though I may require it as justice, yet I will desire it as a favour; let not prejudice forestall thy judgement, nor passion supplant thy reason. Peruse diligently, compare exactly, and give thy verdict uprightly, in presence of the all-seing eye. Then I doubt not, but seeking thou shalt find, and finding will't confess, God was here, 
Gen. 28.16.  and I knew it not.  
Thy devoted contreyman Theophilus Hyggons.   

THE GENERAL CONTENTS OF THIS TREATISE, DIVIDED INTO 2. BOOKS.  

1. In the First book are expressed two Reasons, the one DOCTRINAL, the other MORAL, which swayed my understanding powerfully, to yield firm assent unto the Catholic faith, touching Purgatory, and Prayer for the dead.  
2. In the Second book are laid forth certain egregious falsehoods of D. Field, D. Humphrey, M. Rogers, and others, in their exceptions against the same.   


THE PARTICULAR CONTENTS IN EACH BOOK.  

IN THE FIRST BOOK, AND FIRST PART, CONTAINING THE DOCTRINAL REASON.  
CHAP. 1. 

§. 1. Purgatory proved by the clear authority of Scripture. Matth. 12.32.  
§, 2. The Father's judgements touching the said parcel of holy Scripture.  
§. 3. Three reasons, which moved me to follow the doctrinal expositions of the Fathers, rather than of Caluin. Luth. etc.    
CHAP. 2. 

§. 1. Of a trial by the Fathers, Protestants in England condescend thereunto.  
§. 2. Prayer for the dead is an Apostolical Tradition by the testimony of the Fathers. The same appeareth by the rules assigned by Protestants, to know, what is an Apostolical Tradition.  
§. 3. Prayer for the dead, & Purgatory do mutually prove each other.  
§. 4. The ancient Catholic Church (unto which the Protestants in England appeal) did intend in her Prayers, and Oblations, to relieve some souls departed, and afflicted with temporal pain.  
§. 5. The collusion of D. Field, in delivering the purpose of the ancient Catholic Church, in her Prayers, and Oblations for the dead.  
§. 6. Reason's persuading me rather to follow S. August. & the ancient Church, then D. Field, and his reformed Congregations.      


IN THE SECOND PART OF THE FIRST BOOK, CONTAINING THE MORAL REASON.  
CHAP. 1. 

§. 1. The PROVIDENCE of God, preserving a visible Church in all ages.  
§. 2. This visible Church is free from damnable error. The Protestants looseness, and confusion in their delineation of the Church.  
§. 3. Protestants condemn Purgatory, and Prayer for the dead, as heretical, and blasphemous.  
§. 4. This doctrine was embraced by the universal Church, & consequently is approved by the singular PROVIDENCE of almighty God.    
CHAP. 2. 

§. 1. The base, and impious condition of Aërius and Henricus, who first impugned this doctrine.  
§. 2. The WISDOM of God, appointing fit messengers to be Reformers of his Church, doth excellently confirm this doctrine.    
CHAP. 3. 

§. 1. The nature, and use of Miracles, by which God doth bear witness unto some TRUTH. A triple consideration of Miracles, according to the triple distinction of the Church.  
§. 2. A miracle wrought by S. Bernard to the confusion of Henricus, and his doctrines.  
§. 3. There is no exception against the said Miracle.  
§. 4. The said Miracle doth evidently convince the Protestants in this, and other points.  
§. 5 An exception of D. Field (pretending, that no particular, defended by the Papists against Protestants, was ever confirmed by Miracle) is refelled by our Conversion from Paganism to Popery (as it is termed) and by the authority of Gerson, whom D. Field hath magnified, as one that desired the same Reformation long since, which Protestants have lately effected.    
CHAP. 4. 

§. 1. The grounds, which I followed in the precedents, are invincible.  
§. 2. The particulars therein are very clear. A direction for the Reader to judge orderly, & substantially concerning the same. A conclusion of the first Part, with a Protestation unto the Reader.       



IN THE SECOND BOOK, AND FIRST PART, CONTAINING THE UNTRUTHS OF D. FIELD.  
CHAP. 1. 

§. 1. S. Gregory. the 4. glorious Doctors of the Latin Church, abused by D. Field, in this doctrine of Purgatory, & Prayer for the dead.  
§. 2. S. Augustin. the 4. glorious Doctors of the Latin Church, abused by D. Field, in this doctrine of Purgatory, & Prayer for the dead.  
§. 3. S. Hierome. the 4. glorious Doctors of the Latin Church, abused by D. Field, in this doctrine of Purgatory, & Prayer for the dead.  
§. 4. S. Ambrose. the 4. glorious Doctors of the Latin Church, abused by D. Field, in this doctrine of Purgatory, & Prayer for the dead.    
CHAP. 2. D. Field doth unjustly accuse CARD. BELLARMINE of trifling and senseless foolery in this matter. Caluin doth truly confess, that the Protestats are opposite unto Antiquity therein.  
CHAP. 3. 

§. 1. D. Field himself doth trifle, and (if it be justice to repay him with his own) he committeth senseless foolery in describing the heresy of Aërius; whereof all Protestants are guilty, & consequently are not Catholics.  
§. 2. The contradiction, vanity, & falsehood of Protestants; some accusing, some defending Aërius in his impugnation of Prayer, and Oblation for the dead.  
§. 3. D. Field maketh a lamentable apology for the Protestants diversity in their censures, touching the aforesaid heresy. The true, and proper reason of their diversity therein, is assigned. Their strandge, and variable deportment toward the ancient Fathers.    
CHAP. 4. A notable untruth of D. Field in proposing the difference betwixt the Protestants, and Papists in the question of Purgatory. By which dealing, he hath utterly overthrown his highly respected book, and brought eternal confusion unto his Church.    


IN THE SECOND PART OF THE SECOND BOOK.  
CHAP. 1. 

§. 1. M. Rogers abuseth Dionys. Carthusian.  
§. 2. He brandeth S. Gregory with the name of a Papist, and traduceth Eckius. Temporal punishment inflicted after remission of the guilt of sin.    
CHAP. 2. 

sect;. 1. D. Humphrey doth singularly abuse a certain testimony of S. Augustine. The detection of which falsehood, ministered the first occasion of my change.  
§. 2. An other of his unfaithful practices, against the same Father. etc.        

AN ADVERTISEMENT TO THE READER, TOUCHING THE ORDER, AND METHOD OF THIS TREATISE.  
COurteous Reader; though the beginning of my alienation from the Protestants, did arise from the detection of some egregious falsehoods in D. Humphrey (perverting S. Augustine) & in D. Field (traducing S. Ambrose) whence I was excited to spend much time in searching out the doctrine of the ancient Church, concerning PURGATORY, and PRAYER FOR THE DEAD; yet I have not always followed that order (precisely) in this ensuing Treatise: but for thy better direction, and instruction, I have thought it expedient, FIRST, to lay forth the truth of this doctrine, and SECONDLY to acquaint thee with their falsehoods against the same.   

THE FIRST BOOK Wherein THE CATHOLIC DOCTRINE OF PURGATORY, AND PRAYER FOR THE DEAD, IS CLEARLY proved.  

THE FIRST PART OF THE FIRST BOOK, CONTAINING A DOCTRINAL REASON, which persuaded me to entertain the aforesaid doctrine.  

CHAPTER I. The Reason taken from HOLY SCRIPTURE to prove PURGATORY.  

§. 1. The sense of the Evangelist S. Matthew; Chap. 12. v. 32.  
1. AMONGST sundry testimonies of holy writ, this one seemed (in mine opinion) to be of singular force; viz. Whosoever shall speak a word against the holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him in this world, nor in the world to come. For as this Text doth imply in the immediate sense thereof, that the Sin against the holy Ghost shall never be forgiven, so it doth imply farther a distinction of sins, some whereof are remissible, and some irremissible: some are pardoned in this world, and some in the world to come.  
2. This interpretation is founded upon a special reason; because S. 
a 3. 2●.  Mark (entreating of the same matter) saith, that blasphemy against the holy Ghost shall never be forgiven [non in aeternum] and S. Matthew divideth this space of eternity into seculum praesens, & seculum futurum, the world present, and the world to come, as being two several, and distinct parts thereof; so that the same thing is noted by each Evangelist, but coniunctively in the one, and distributively in the other.  
3. The Protestants derive this text after an other manner, and say, that S. Matthew is to be expounded by S. Mark, and so the intendment of this Scripture is precisely, and merely to show, that the great sin (being irremissible in an eminent degree) shall never be forgiven.  
4. But this simple gloss could yield me no satisfaction. For though it were the purpose of our Lord to declare that one sin shall never be forgiven, yet he expresseth himself by such a distinction, as doth manifestly enforce the remission of some sins in the future life. And forasmuchas S. Matthew dealeth more copiously herein then S. Mark, there is no reason why the first should be contracted by the second, but rather it is necessary to enlarge the second by the first.  
5. Neither did it seem a probable conceit unto me (though it be entertained by many) that our Saviour did not make a partition of sins (some to be remitted in this world, and some in the next) but used an exaggeration to show the irremissibillity of one sin, as if I should say, A barren woman shall not bear a child neither in this world, nor in the world to come: For though the WORD did speak, 
b Io. 7.46.  as never man spoke (in respect of Majesty, gravity, and power) yet he doth not so decline the accustomed manner of speech, as that he would speak against the rules of prudency, and moral understanding; as this speech is, if it be sensed in this manner. And who would not esteem him to be a ridiculous, and absurd Orator that should say, This woman shall not bear a child in this world, neither in the world to come?  
6. Wherefore seeing that the Protestants exposition is form against discretion, and that it is not warrantable by any other parcel of Scripture, which is to be interpreted in this manner, I was fearful to be entangled by their collusions: and because I would deal unpartially in a matter of such consequence, as this is, I held a very indifferent course, whereby I might not attribute any thing unto mine own judgement, nor yet detract from their estimation; and therefore I remitted this point unto the decision of the blessed Fathers; knowing well, that it is a precept of the Highest, 
c Deut. 32.7.  Ask the Fathers, and they shall tell thee; the Ancients, and they shall show thee: and thus did D. Toby Matthew apply this Text, 
d See D. Humphrey in resp. ad 5. rat. Edm. Campiani.  when he flourished in his concional answer to remove that disgrace, which 
e Rat. 5.  Edm. Campian had fastened upon him; and not unjustly, as many men conceive.  
7. Besides; since it is the monition of S. 
f 1. Cor. 14.32.  Paul, that the Spirits of prophets, are subject unto the prophets, the rule of equity doth prescribe, that in the interpretation of holy writ, the fewest should yield unto the most, and the later unto the former; they also being more competent judges to determine a strife, who never were Actors (personally) in the contention.   

§. 2. The Father's judgement of this Scripture.  
1. I Was assured by D. 
g Of the Church pag. 170.  Field that S. Augustine (I am bold to entreat his leave to honour Augustine with the name of SAINT, howsoever he hath not once vouchsafed in his four books to grace him, or any Father with this glorious title) is the greatest of all the Fathers, and worthiest Divine, that the Church of God ever had since the Apostles times. Wherefore I was emboldened to rest securely in his excellent resolution, which here ensueth. 
h De civit, Dei l. 21. c. 24.  The prayer of the Church, or of godly persons is heard for some men deceased out of this world; but yet for such only as (being regenerated in Christ) did neither live so ill, that 〈◊〉 they be made unworthy of mercy; nor yet so well, 〈◊〉 that they have no need thereof. At the resurrection of the dead there shall be some found, to whom mercy shall be granted, that whereas their souls have suffered 
* Purgatory.  pains after death, they shall not be cast into everlasting fire. Neque enim VERACITER diceretur etc. For it could not be said TRULY of some men, that their sins should not be forgiven in this world, nor in the world to come, unless there should be some men, who though they are not pardoned in this world, yet they should be pardoned in the world to come. So he: in whose profound, and judicious apprehension, there is a penal estate of souls temporally afflicted after their dissolution from the body, if there be any truth in the holy Scripture itself; which some Protestants have been more ready to abjure, then to relinquish their own prejudicate opinions.  
2. My second Author, was that worthy Pope S. Gregory, surnamed the Great; who as he was dear unto me for many respects, so principally, because he was the Apostle of our nation; for 
i S. Bernard de considerate. lib. 3.  he destinated Augustine to deliver the faith of Christ unto the English: and hence our Venerable country man 
k Eccles. hist. l. 2. c. 1.  S. Beba feareth not to say, though he be not an Apostle unto others, yet doubtless he is so unto us, for we are the seal of his Apostleshipp in our Lord. His sentence is this. 
l Dialog. l. 4. c. 39  We must believe that there is a Purgatory fire before the day of judgement, because the Truth doth say, If any man shall utter blasphemy against the holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come. In which saying we are given to understand, that some sins may be released in this world, and some in the next. Quod enim de uno negatur, consequens intellectus patet, quia de quibusdam conceditur. For that which is denied of one, is consequently yielded of the other. So he; whose reason seemed very powerable unto me in this behalf.  
3. My third Author was S. Isidore (Bishop of Seville) a reverend person, wise, virtuous, learned, and always accepted as an eminent Doctor of the Catholic Church. His judgement is this. 
m De divinis officijs l. 1. c. 18.  Whereas our Lord saith, that, Whosoever sinneth against the holy Ghost, his sin shall not be forgiven in this world, nor in the world to come, he doth demonstrate, that sins shall be remitted unto some men in an other world, and cleansed with the fire of 
* S. August. in Psal. 37. calleth it the fire of emendation.  Purgation.  
4. My fourth Author was S. Beda, one of the principal ornaments of our nation, and renowned in the Christian world for his many, and learned volumes, which are extant at this day. His judgement is this. 
n Comment. in Matth. 12.  Whereas our Lord denieth pardon [unto him that despaireth] both in this life, and in the life to come, without all question he doth declare, that there is remission of some sins after this life. Again. 
o Comment in Marc. 3.  Whereas it is said in the Gospel, that he who blasphemeth the holy Ghost, shall have no remission in this world, nor in the world to come, we are informed, that some sins are remitted in this world, and some in the next. For that which is denied unto one, is consequently granted unto an other.  
5. My fift Author, was S. Bernard, whom I did always affect by a secret, and peculiar instinct. And though the common proverb goeth thus, Bernardus non vidit omnia, Bernard saw not all things, yet that was not otherwise intended of him, then S. Augustine writeth touching an honourable Martyr; Cyprian saw not all things, that so some more excellent thing might be seen through him. And thus they are not abased, but advanced rather; who though they were men of admirable value, yet they were not exempted from the errors of infirmity, attending upon the condition of mankind.  
6. The sentence of S. Bernard is this. 
p Serm. 66. in Cantic.  These men [viz the 
* progenitors of the Waldensian sect.  Henricians etc.] do not believe that there remaineth a Purgatory after death, but that the soul being separated from the body, doth pass immediately either unto rest, or unto damnation. Let them ask therefore of him that said, there is a sin which shall not be remitted neither in this world, nor in the world to come, why he spoke thus, if there remain no forgiveness, nor purgation of sin in the world to come?   

§. 3. My reasons to follow the doctrinal expositions of the Fathers (and chief where they consent) rather then of ZANCH. LUTH. ZVINGL. CALV. etc.  
1. WHen I had premised these considerations, I could not approve the censorious, and rash humour of Hierome Zanchy (an Author, unto whom I had dedicated no small part of my affection) who 
q De Naturâ Dei, l 4 c. 4.  discoursing lardgely of prayer for the dead, concludeth thus: If the Fathers did intend, that some sins are remitted in the next world, which were not remitted in this, we may reject them all in this arcicle with a good conscience.  
2. For I did conceive first, that Zanchius (in the multiplicity of his reading) could not be ignorant of the Father's resolution herein; and therefore his supposition [if the Fathers etc.] was very frivolous. Secondly I considered, that in this dispute, or in the like, I could with greater reason, and better conscience admit the interpretation of the Fathers, then of any late Professor in the reformed Churches (as they are styled) and I was induced hereunto for three necessary respects.  
3. FIRST; because john Caluin (whom certain 
* Pinczoviens.  Ministers in Polonia do gloriously entitle, the Doctor of Doctors, the Divine of Divines, who alone is of more value, than an hundred Augustine's; and hence it is, that in the large 
* Imprinted at the Black Friars.  Table of God's faithful witnesses, he is extolled thus; No man could expound the Scriptures more 
q His cunning herein is declared by D. Hunnius (a Lutheran) saying, that Caluin was an acute Instrument of the Devil.  cunningly than he) renouncing the judgement of all the Fathers (yea of the first sacred Council of Nice itself) and concurring with the damned Arrians in his exposition, saith expressly, 
r Comment. in joh. 10.30. Ego & Pater unum sumus.  Scio veteros abusos suisse hoc loco etc. I know that the ancients abused this place to prove homousia, that is to say, the consubstantiality of the Father, and the Son. Wherefore (being so guided by his Spirit) he giveth the arrianical gloss upon that Text, and saith, that the Unity whereof our Saviour speaketh, is to be understood of Consent, and not of Essence. This rare impiety in so great a Person (discovered unto me first of all by D. 
s Caluin. judaiz.  Hunnius, the Professor in Luther's own chair) did treat with me more than two years ago (as some of my kindest friends in England can bear me witness) to renounce my Allobrogian Apostle, and to be suspicious of new interpretations; but specially, which concern matters of doctrine, and faith, as this particular doth. For, it may please you to consider with me, that though the Fathers ere sometimes in their expositions, secundum analogiam loci, in respect of the analogy of the place, yet they are sincere, and respective to preserve the analogy of faith. And where their interpretations agree, we may resolve infallibly, This is the doctrine of the Catholic Church.  
4. SECONDLY, because I saw the strandge mutability of Luther himself (whose Gospel was cast in the mould of a 
* See the Orthodox Confession of the Tigarines, who complain of his inconstant humours.  variable fancy) in his judgement of the Scripture. This is the man (nay the Angel rather) who is the first mover of all late evangelical spheres. But when he is divided into his three parts, it will appear, that he was not the flying Angel mentioned in the 
t 14.16.  Apocalyps (as M. 
u de Antichristo; pag. 324.  Gabriel powel fancieth) but a lying Devil, as captain 
x Tom. 2. contra L●theri Confess.  Zuinglius doth no less truly, then severely chastise him for his false doctrines, & intemperate deportment.  
5. First; Martin Initiant, made an earnest protestation in his public disputes at Lipsia, & said 
y See Eckius in Homil. Tom. 3. homil. 4. in die Animaerum; circa med. ; I, who believe strongly that there is Purgatory, yea I am bold to affirm, I know that there is Purgatory, am easily persuaded that there is mention of it in Scripture.  
6. Secondly; Martin Progredient, was some what changed from his former self, and now the angels feathers began to appear by little, and little. 
z Roffens. contra Luth. artic. 37.  I do believe (saith he) that there is Purgatory, and I do give men counsel to believe it; but yet (o tender hearted man) I would have no man compelled to believe it; for I find no mention thereof in the Scriptures.  
7. Thirdly; Martin Consummated gave this incouradgement unto a rebellious faction; 
a in epist. ad Waldens  Whereas you deny Purgatory, and condemn Masses, Vigils, Monasteries, Cloisters, and whatsoever was erected by this imposture, I approve you altogether therein. Thus did M. Luther behave himself in this particular, and thus violently he rejected, what soever was distasteful unto his uncertain, and misguided humour. Wherefore I perceived now, that though the censure of Zuinglius was very sharp, yet it was grounded upon equity, whereas he saith, that 
b Tom. 2. contra Luth. confess.  Luther is a false Prophet; an incorrigible Heretic; an Impostor; Antichrist; a Devil; a fool; a brabbler, and not a Divine; one, whose books contain nothing else in them, but a manifest oppression of the pure truth, and evangelical light. etc. To which purpose he violated the holy Canon of sacred Scripture, & dispundged the 
c This point is fairly aimed at by D. Field pag. 252.  epistle of S. james with great contempt.  
8. My last, and THIRD reason was taken from a consideration of Zuinglius, the first Patriarch of our late English Gospel. For he 
d De subsid. Sacrum.  acknowledgeth, that he was informed by a certain admonitour (in his sleep) how in this proposition [Hoc est Corpus meum] the verb est is put for significat; and saith; whether he were White, or Black, I remember not. But 
e In pro●…m. Caluinist. Theolog. Many heretics have had contrary Devils; as Nestorius, Enryches etc.  Conradus (a great superintendant in Luther's gospel) showeth that it was a black one; and no doubt but he was of the same colour as those companions were, by whom Luther was attended (no vulgar Devils, in his opinion) and they propounded unto me (saith 
f See justus Calvinus, annotat. in prescript. Tertull. cap. 43.  Luther) the arguments of the Sacramentaries (to wittt of Zuinglius, Oecolampad. etc.) but I overcame them all by the word of the Lord.  
9 Now let any Christian heart uprightly, sincerely, and feelingly weigh, whether finding this pride in some, this Divelry in others (they being the first, & principal masters in our gospel) and mutual oppugnation of their own senses in holy Scripture, I had not reasonable, yea necessary, and ponderous motives to fly unto the religious, learned, and reverend Fathers of the Catholic Church, to understand the true sense, and purport of the aforesaid Scripture. They favoured no Arrian heresy, they hated society with Devils; they were guided by the sanctifying Spirit, and therefore, as I concluded then, so I conclude now; Let my soul rest with them in peace; these are the men whose sense I will entertain, rather than the new glosses of these late Professors. Thus by the validity of this Text, I was led powerfully into the approbation of this doctrine.    

CHAP. II. The Reason taken from FATHERS, and APOSTOLICAL TRADITION, to prove PURGATORY.  

§. 1. Trial by the Fathers.  
1. MAny learned Protestants conceive, that the controversies of these unhappy times will be extended without any measure, unless Antiquity be made the umpire in this quarrel. For the holy Fathers are witnessing judges, and judging Witnesses in this behalf. To this end, and purpose D. Lilly (a man of excellent literature) did allege, 
In a sermon at Oxford within these few years.  and applaud the wise, and necessary process of Theodosius (a most Christian Emperor) against certain insolent, and supercilious heretics, whose pride in 
* Neque enim consimiliter singuli de veterum scriptis sentiebant, etc. See Sozom. l. 7. c. 12. & compare this with the Protestants case. Citant & ipsi Patres: Deus bone, quâ fide, eat Gregor. de Valent. in analies. Fidei; pag. 18. Talis est phrenesis nostrorum Romanistarum, & eò maior, etc.  rejecting the Fathers did seem a desperate disease; and to be cured rather by sharp laws, then by farther dispute.  
2. For mine own part; I protest freely from my heart, that I was secured to make a trial of this present cause by the worthy Fathers; being warranted thereunto, not only by my private sense, but much more by the testimony of sundry Protestants, and specially of two, whose names were (sometimes) full of reverence in my thoughts.  
3. The first was D. HUMPHREY; whose highly respected answer to Edm. Campian draweth to a conclusion with this sentence. Thrasilaus in his mad humour took all the ships, which he beheld in the Attic haven, to be his own, though he possessed not any vessel. Such is the frenzy of our Romanists, yea greater also, because they see, and yet seeing they dissemble, that they are destitute of all defence from the Fathers. Thus to clear himself from that folly, which 
g Rat. 5.  Edm. Campian objecteth unto him, and unto M. jewel (his dear Achates) he stretched his style, until it broke into a vast, and notable untruth.  
4. The second was D. FIELD, whose praise is in the gospel of England; a man, upon whom the eyes of our 
* Oxford.  University are cast, as a sans pareill of this age for subtle dispute, and profound science. We reverence (saith 
h pag. 148.  he) and honour the Fathers much more than the Romanists do etc. Again. 
i pag. 204. in mark  Though Luther, and the rest in the beginning did seem to decline the trial by the Fathers, because the corruption of their writings were so many, as could not be discovered at the first; yet now having found out by the help of so many learned men both of our adversaries, and amongst ourselves (who have traveled in that kind) which are their undoubted works, and which are doubtful, or undoubtfully forged, 
Not●.  We willingly admit trial by the Fathers.  
5. Though D. Field doth untruly allege the cause why Luther, Zuinglius, etc. declined trial by the Fathers, and mitigateth their folly with a fair pretence, that (forsooth) they seemed to do so; yet it was not my purpose then, nor now to employ my thoughts in dismaking the vanity of these suggestions. It was, and is sufficient for me to consider; that as his assertion concerning a trial by the Fathers is plain, so it is countenanced by the authority of him who is the great Metropolitan of our English Church. 
It pleased your Grace favourably to approve these my poor pains, etc. See the epist dedicat. to the Archbish. of Camnt.  And therefore, such as profess themselves members of her society, cannot renounce that position, which in the name of all, and in the authority of the chiefest, is so freely recommended unto the world.  
6. Finally; I concluded with that famous prescription of S. 
k Contra julian. Pelag.  Augustine, saying; let us refer ourselves unto the Ancients, who were offended neither with us, nor you: but what they found in the Church, they retained, and what they learned they taught, and what they received of their Fathers, they delivered unto their children. Thus the question is translated à jure ad Factum, from the right unto the fact; for all wise, and ingenious men will easily discern that (in this case, and many like unto it) the later which is more clear, will lead us unto the former, which seemeth more obscure.   

§. 2. Prayer for the dead is derived from the blessed Apostles.  
1. I Considered that one thing may have a double proof; to wit, by Scripture, and by Tradition also. And hence it is that the most holy, and most blessed Irenaeus (as he is truly 
l Epiphan. heres. 34.  called) confuteth the Valentinians first by the evidence of Scripture, and secondly by the tradition of the Apostles, but specially in the Roman Church; unto which (as he 
m Lib. 3. cap. 3.  saith) all Christians must necessarily repair, because she is of more powerful principality than the rest. A point very remarkable by the way; for (upon my knowledge) it driveth the Protestants unto many dishonest, and impertinent evasions.  
2. I might give instance in sundry doctrines, which admit this double proof; and therefore I was desirous to understand; why D. 
n Pag. 240. 241.  Field (amongst other particulars) should esteem it a folly, and an inconstancy in his Romanists to say, that Purgatory is holden by Tradition, and yet it is proved by Scriptures also.  
3. But forasmuch as I saw that his desire to contradict, doth transport him beyond his reason to conceive, I passed over this matter, and I came unto an other sentence (fit for my purpose) which he affordeth with greater equity, and moderation; viz. 
o Pag. 232.  It is not the writing which giveth things their authority, but the worth, and credit of him that delivereth them, though but by word, and lively voice alone. And; the Papists have good reason to equal their traditions unto the written word, if they can prove any such unwritten verities. Wherefore it was my desire (upon the security of such grounds) to find out the fountain, and origin (at least in the time of the Gospel) of prayer for the dead. And here divers testimonies presented themselves unto me, and specially two, which rested my searching thoughts in good tranquillity, and peace.  
4. The First was taken from S. Chrysostome (the principal Father of the Greeks) who in a 
p Homil. 75. add Pop. Antioch.  sermon unto the people, delivered this proposition; It was not unadvisedly decreed by the Apostles, that in the fearful mysteries [Sacrifice of the Mass] there should be a commemoration of the dead: For they knew that the dead receive great benefit, and utility thereby.  
5. The Second was taken from S. Augustine; 
In Instit.  who being the chieftayn of Divines (as Caluin doth agnize) and the hammer of heretics (as he is confessed by the public voice of the Catholic Church) gave me this solid, clear, and ponderous information 
q Serm. 32. de verb. Apost. ; There is no doubt, but that by the prayers of holy Church, and by the healthful Sacrifice, and by alms, the souls of the dead are relieved; that God may deal more mercifully with them, than their sins have deserved. For this (being delivered by our Fathers) is observed by the Universal Church.  
6. Here I considered with myself, that whereas Traditions have a quadruple distinction; first from their Authors, into Divine, Apostolical, and Ecclesiastical; secondly from their Matter, into Doctrinal, Moral, and Ceremonial; thirdly from their Place, into General, and Particular; four from their Time, into Perpetual, and Temporal: that S. Augustine doth entreat here of an APOSTOLICAL Tradition, doctrinal, general & perpetual. And the reasons which persuaded me to conceive so, were many, but principally these three, which here ensue. FIRST, because he doth not say, inventum, but 
* Tradere tradita (by a perpetual succession) is an infallible note of the Catholic faith.  traditum; not invented, but delivered by our Fathers; according to the sweet, and sure prescription of 
r cap. 27.  Vincentius Lirinensis in his little, golden book against the innovation of profane heresies; 
* 1. Tim. 6.  Custodi depositum, etc. Keep that which is committed unto thee. And what is this depositum? That which thou hast received, and not devised; that which is brought down unto thee, and not brought forth by thee; that, wherein thou art a scholar, and not a master; a follower, and not a guide, etc.  
7. SECONDLY; because the rule of S. 
s Contra Donatist. de Baptisms l. 4 c. 24.  Augustine (which D. 
t pag. 242.  Field himself doth accept) was so clear, and weighty, that I could not resist the power thereof; viz. Whatsoever is frequented by the Universal Church, and was not instituted by councils, but was always held, that is believed most rightly to be an Apostolical Tradition. Such is the custom of Prayer for the dead. For first; It was practised in all ages, and in all places, as the most venerable Authors do constantly, and uniformly teach. Supplications for the souls of the dead, were powered forth by the Universal Church in 
u de curâ pr● mort. cap. 1.  S. Augustine's time; and the like testimonies were afforded unto me by the Fathers of the Primitive Church; namely, S. 
x Epist. 1. It is mentioned by Concil. Vasens. 1. c. 6.  Clemens the Martyr, in the year of our Lord 110; 
y de Coron. Milit.  Tertullian in year of our Lord 210; who 
z de Monogam.  prescribeth (according to the doctrine of the Catholic Church) unto the wife, that she should pray for the soul of her husband, to procure his rest, and ease. Secondly; I could not possibly design any Council, Ecumenical, Nationall, or Provincial; any Bishop, Supreme, or Subordinate, by whom this custom was brought into the Church. And here I considered, that heresy doth always spring from some certain Person, Time, and Place; 
Vincent. Lir.  and so it is discoverable by these circumstances. But if the Author cannot be specially named (which is a rare accident) yet this was sufficient unto me, to conceive; that as Catholic Religion implieth three things, viz. Antiquity, Universality, and Consent; so Heresy (being opposite thereunto) implieth necessarily the three contraries, viz. Novelty, Particularity, and Distraction.  
8. My THIRD reason to believe that this is an Apostolical Tradition, was derived from the liberality of D. 
a pag. 242.  Field himself. Whatsoever all, or the most famous, and renowned in all ages, or, at the least, in divers ages, have constantly delivered, as received from them, that went before them (no man doubting, or contradicting it) may be thought to be an Apostolical Tradition. This rule was very appliable unto my purpose. For first; I had many pregnant demonstrations, and conformable testimonies of the most famous, and renowned in all ages, constantly delivering this thing, as received from them that went before. 
See the 2. Part; chap. 2.  And secondly; I found that no man did contradict, or doubt herein, but such only, as were damned heretics, and are so recognised by the public voice of the Church. Wherefore I concluded inevitably (by D. Fields allowance) that Prayer for the dead may be thought to be an Apostolical Tradition; and 
b Decad. 4. serm. 10.  Bullinger himself feareth not to say, that this is the judgement of the Fathers. Whence I was compelled to infer, that D. 
c against D. Bishop; part. 1. pag. 80.  Abbott doth willingly deceive himself, saying; that Prayer for the dead is a Tradition, and an ordinance of the Church; to which purpose he misinforceth the testimony of 
d Hares. 75.  Epiphanius, whereby he would exempt Aërius from the crime of heresy, justly laid unto his charged by S. 
e Hares. 53.  Augustine, and many others. Lastly, I was compelled to disallow the groundless opinion of 
f de Naturâ Dei lib. 4. c. 4.  Zanchius, and some others, who refer the origin of prayer for the dead, unto human affection, and imitation of the Gentiles.   

§ 3. The mutual dependency of Purgatory, and Prayer for the dead.  
1. WHen I had thus ascended unto the fountain of Prayer for the dead, I reflected upon myself, and demanded of mine own heart, saying; but what is this unto PURGATORY? For that was the issue, unto which my thoughts did finally incline.  
2. Wherefore, for better illustration of this matter, & information of the Reader, I will here lay down a necessary point, derived out of the testimonies which ensue in the next section of this chapter; and so you shall clearly perceive the connexion, and dependency of these things.  
3. Though Purgatory, and Prayer for the dead, are things severally distinguished in their nature, yet they are so inseparably tied in their bond, that each doth mutually prove the other. Prayer for the dead proveth Purgatory per modum signi, by the way of a sign, or declaration; for it doth presuppose a penal estate, wherein some souls are afflicted temporally after this life. Purgatory proveth the necessity of prayer for the dead per modum causae, by the way of a cause; for we are obliged by the law of Charity to make supplication unto God in behalf of our brethren of the Church Patient in Purgatory, 
Qui securi estis de vobis, soliciti est●te de nobis. S. August. meditat. cap. 24.  as they being translated into the Church Triumphant in Heaven, are led by the abundance of their charity, to make intercession for us, of the Church Militant in Earth. Which triple distinction of the Church I did embrace willingly, forasmuch as it was confessed solemnly by Sir john Oldcastle himself; howbeit M. Fox seeing that this was no small disreputation unto the faith of our traitorous Martyr, mingleth a 
* if any such place [as Purgatory] be found in the Scripture.  few words to abate the force of his confession. This poor subtlety of Fox is dismasked in the 
g Part. 2. chap. 9 num. 18.  three Conversions of England.  
4. Thus I considered that not the Name, but Thing, and that things, not accidental, but essential were to be inquired by me in this dispute. I observed farther, that men are not the Authors to make, but Expositors to declare their faith. And as we do penetrate more excellently into the knowledge of any thing, so we are enabled accordingly to express the same in proper, and significant words. For as the imposition of words ariseth from the freeness of our will, so the aptness of their imposition floweth from the clearness of our understanding.  
5. Finally; I called unto remembrance, that the Church of God hath drawn many large doctrines into compendious names; as Trinity, Sacrament, and the like, Thus the doctrine of Homousia, or the consubstantiality of the Father, & the Son, 
Io. 10.30.  is really contained in the holy Scripture [I, and my Father are one: 
See before; Chap. 1. §. 3. num. 3.  a plain Text; howsoever it be Arrianically violated by Caluin] but the word itself was established by the first sacred Council of Nice. Thus also I saw that (in the opinion of the Papists) the doctrine of Metousia, or Transubstantiation in the Sacrament, is implied in the Scripture [This is my body: which little sentence is distracted by us Protestants into 
* 9 are noted by Bellarm. de Euchar. l. 1. c. 8. You shall find 84. noted by Claud. de Saint. in lib. de Euchar. Repetit. 1. cap. 10.  many interpretations] but the word itself was confirmed by a 
* 3. Lateran.  general Council, not inventing a new faith (for the whole Church past, and present consented therein) by an audacious decree, but expressing the old by a significant name. For it is judiciously observed by 
h Part. 1. Serm. pro viago Regis Rom. secunda part principali. direct. 3.  Gerson (against the innovations of Wickliff and Husse) that in the Church we must keep a certain form of speech, and that it is an evil liberty to speak erroneously, and amiss. Wherefore as the holy Council of Nice did wisely restrain all men to acknowledge the word Homousia, so the catholics in the Ariminian Council saw (too late) the great inconvenience in leaving men unto a liberty of speech in this behalf; For the world did sigh (as S. 
i contra Lucifer.  Hierome saith) and wondered to see itself become an Arrian; not by any heretical decree (as M. 
k Cathol. doctrine of the Church of England pag. 114.  Roger's doth untruly insinuate) but by permitting such a freedom, as we Protestants affect; viz. to define [as we see cause] in matters of faith, according unto the Scriptures; whence they, & we gain advantadge to erect our own fancies.   

§. 4. The Ancient Catholic Church in her Prayers for the dead, in her Oblations etc. did intend (precisely) to relieve souls, afflicted temporally in a penal estate.  
1. WHen I had thus derived prayer for the dead by a perpetual line from the holy Apostles, I proceeded farther to examine the purpose, & intendment of the Catholic Church in this religious act; for I could not content myself with this simple gloss of 
l Tom. 1. Epicher. de Canou● Missa.  Zuinglius; viz: If it be so as Augustine, and Chrysostome affirm, that prayer for the dead is referred unto the Apostles, I think that the Apostles did only permit it unto the infirmity of some Christians, etc.  
2. This seemed unto me an heathenish evasion, and injurious unto the sincerity of the Apostles. Besides; was Aërius the only man, filled with the spirit, to impugn this thing, which suffered no contradiction unto his time? Wherefore having many reasons to amandate Zuinglius with his black admonitour, I repaired unto them who were of more candid, and honourable disposition. And here I singled forth two Fathers, the one of the Greek Church, the other of the Latin; esteeming this a sure, and convenable means to lead me into a solid apprehension of the truth.  
3. The FIRST was S. 
m Cateches. mystagog. 5.  Cyrill Archbishopp of Jerusalem; who, in his instructions of the people (whom he was careful to inform herein according to the simplicity of the Catholic faith) hath this ponderous, and effectual sentence: When we offer up the Sacrifice [commonly known by the name of Mass; a thing which should not be ingrate unto us Englishmen, 
See Beda in his Eccles. histor. lib. 1. c. 26.  forasmuch as it was a part of that Christian faith, which we received in our first conversion] we make mention of all them, who are fallen asleep before us. First of the Patriarches, Apostles, and Martyrs, that God by their intercession may receive our prayers. Then we pray for our deceased Fathers, and Bishops, and finally for all men departed amongst us (viz. in the 
* See S. August. de cura pro mort. c. 4.  Catholic communion) For we believe that this is a very great help for the souls of them, in whose behalf we offer that holy, and fearful Sacrifice, which is laid upon the Altar.  
4. A powerable testimony. But he goeth yet farther, and saith; We offer up Christ once slain for our sins, that so we may make him, who is most kind, to be 
* A propitiatory Sacrifice.  propitious, and merciful unto the quick and dead. This is one of those deadly heresies (as M. 
n de Antichristo, pag. 254.  powel is pleased to affirm) which was devised by the Pope himself, and a parcel of his Anti-christian doctrine.  
5. But as Vincentius Lirinensis testifieth of himself, 
Contra haeres. in praef●t.  that he came forth non tam Authoris praesumptione, quàm Relatoris fide, rather by the fidelity of a relator, then by the presumption of an author, so this Catholic Archbishopp (a professed, and zealous enemy of all heretics, as his own 
* Catech. 6. circa med. etc.  sayings may witness unto us) propounded this doctrine unto his own flock (whose salvation was dear unto him) not by his peculiar authority, as being a father of his children, but by the warrant of her, whose son he was, and which is pia matter communis (as S. 
o de curam pro mort. cap. 4.  Augustine speaketh) the pious, common Mother of us all, and prayeth for all the departed, by a general commemoration.  
6. For this cause he saith, WE offer; WE pray etc. intending hereby to express the custom of the Universal Church, whose doctrine was famous, & renowned in this behalf. And though we Protestants do often venditate the private conceits of some, & veil them under the pretence of a general consent, viz. WE say thus; WE think thus; 
So D. Mor●on in Cathol. Apol. Part. 1. lib. 1. in quaest. ac descensu Christi ad inferos, pretendeth thus: WE confess that Christ went [truly] into hell; viz. in soul, as Bellarmine himself doth teach etc. Many such false protestations are used by him, by D. Field, and others. As for the vanity of D. Morton herein, it is abundantly refuted by that, which M. Rogers himself delivereth in his Cathol. doct. pa. 16.  WE do thus &c. (which is a mere toy; for the very nature, and foundation of our Religion is such, that, as every one conceiveth by his spirit, so he is in travail to bring forth his own Church) yet S. Cyrill, and the religious Fathers were more respective in their words; weighing them in the balance of a good conscience, and a sober heart.  
7. Wherefore addressing my thoughts unto a serious meditation of these things, I began more sensibly to discover, how vainly, and foolishly I had been terrified by the spectrical names of Popery, Papists and the like (the late inventions of an apostatical Friar) inasmuch as the best, the wisest, the most learned Fathers, did speak, and write, and practise directly herein, as the Papists [Catholics; for popery, being translated out of S. 
* Sainted by M. powel, de Antich. pa. 68  Luther's language, signifieth the Catholic religion] do speak, and write, and practise at this day.  
8. The SECOND Father, was S. Augustine (I was desirous to seek after no more, because I was assured that I could find no better) unto whom I did appeal, as unto the best, and most faithful witness of antiquity. For so he is approved by john Caluin himself (and this opened the way unto the conversion of 
* Apol. p. 5.  justus Calvinus, as he hath testified unto the world) how beit, as 
* Suet. ●o Ner. c. 56.  Nero had little respect unto his Gods, save only unto his Goddess Syria, and yet he defiled her idol with his urine; so joh. Caluin doth frequently make his repair unto S. Augustine (with neglect of other Fathers) and yet 
* Instit. l. 3. c. 5. § 10. c. 11 §. 15. l. 2. c. 3. §. 7. etc.  he asperseth his name also with no small disgrace. But resting myself upon that commendation, which it pleaseth john Caluin in his liberality to afford unto S. Augustine, I referred the matter unto his exact decision; knowing well, that his ability to conceive, and fidelity to relate the truth, were sufficient to put an end unto my laborious disquisition thereof; and specially, because that wise counsel, which he gave unto his seduced friend, seemed to appertain also unto me, viz. 
De utilit, credendi, cap. 8.  If thou art now sufficiently tossed in thine own opinion, & wouldst finish this travail, follow the way of the Catholic doctrine, which even from Christ by his Apostles is descended unto us, & from us shall descend unto our posterity for ever. Which sentence did prepare my heart unto a serious deliberation in this particular, forasmuch as I saw, that Prayer for the dead hath descended lineally unto the Papists, howsoever it is abandonned by our evangelical Churches; whence it followeth clearly, either that the Catholic doctrine did not descend unto S. Augustine's Church, or else, certainly our Church is not Catholic, which hath renounced that point of ancient faith, & many more.  
9 Amongst an Ocean of testimonies, which presented themselves unto me in S. Augustine's works, I selected two, which I will here tender unto your wise considerations. The FIRST was in his 
p Cap. 110.  manuel directed unto Laurentius (and it is repeated in his resolutions which he maketh unto the 
q Quaest 2.  questions of Dulcitius) where he randgeth the dead into three orders. Some live so well as that they need not these helps [Sacrifice, Prayers, Alms] Some live not so well, as that they need them not; neither yet so ill, as that they can receive no benefit thereby. Some live so ill, as that they are made incapable of any such relief.  
10. Now, since there is this triple estate of men deceased, I was driven perforce to conclude, that the First are in Heaven; the Second in Hell; the Third in some temporal pain. For though S. Augustine doth profess 
r Hypognost. l. 5. this place is cited by D. Abbot against D. Bishop; p. 1. pag. 89. To the same effect is a sentence in S. Aug. de peccat. merit. & remiss. lib. 1. c. 28. cited there also by D. Abbot.  elswere, that there is no third place besides heaven, and hell, yet I conceived that there are 5. differences in this case. First; because the Pelagian heretics (against whom S. Augustine doth purposely dispute) assigned a third place unto children dying without baptism; but as S. 
s De civit, Dei lib. 21. c. 16.  Augustine teacheth that baptised Infants suffer not the pains of Purgatory at all, so he affirmeth likewise, that 
t De Genes. ad lit. l. 10. c. 15.  Infants unbaptized, are excluded out of the heavenly kingdom etc. and so they suffer the pain of loss for ever. Secondly; because the Pelagians place is perpetual, but Purgatory is temporal: for though the same space shall always remain in nature, yet not in the same use. Thirdly; because the Pelagians supposed place is full of delights, but Purgatory is full of pain outwardly, howsoever there may be great comfort inwardly, in the security of salvation. Fourthly; because the Pelagians place is on earth, but Purgatory is subterranean, according to the most common, and received opinion. Yet I rather followed the judgement of 
u Dialog. de particulari judicio animae; cap. 30. See Geryon, part 4. serm. 2. de defunct.  Dionysius the Carthusian saying, that by ordinary designation, there is one general place of Purgatory; but by special dispensation of the judge, there are many places. And this may be testified by sundry examples in the dialogues of S. Gregory, and other venerable authors. Fiftly; because the Pelagians imagined place is to be after the general judgement, and not before; but Purgatory is before, and not after; as S. 
x De Civit. Dei. l. 21. c. 13.  Augustine witnesseth, saying; Some men suffer temporal punishments only in this life; Some after death; Some both now, and then; but yet, before the last, and most severe judgement.  
11. I proceed unto the rest of S. Augustine's former discourse, which hath been interrupted, as you see, by a pertinent, and necessary digression. As the Offices for the dead are three in number [Sacrifice, Prayer, and Alms] so, in reference unto the estate of men deceased, S. Augustine distinguisheth them into three kinds; Propitiations, Consolations & Thanskgiving.  
12. The application is this. First he saith; for men very good, these things are THANKSGIVINGS unto God; to wit, for their felicity, and joy. And here I remembered the testimony of 
y Haeres 75.  Epiphanius (whom S. 
z Epist. ad Quod. vult D. praefix. Tract. de haeref.  Augustine reverenceth as an holy man, and famous in the Catholic faith; howsoever it seemeth good unto D. 
a Against D. Bishop. part. 1. pag. 86. D. Abbot. pag 8● perverteth the sense of Epiphan. as though the Church had prayer for the Saints etc.  Abbott to justify Aërius, a damnable heretic, against him) reporting, that when we make a memorial of Patriarches, Prophets, Apostles etc. We separate Christ from the order of men by the honour, and adoration which we perform unto him; that is to say, we do not offer thanks for him (as we do for some other men) but unto him, as being God of equal majesty with his Father. And thus it is a great honour for the Martyrs (saith S. 
b Homil. 21. in Act.  Chrysostome) to be named in the presence of their Lord. For now [in the holy Sacrifice] Angels stand before him, and tremble in his sight: Yea they adore him there (like true Popish I dolaters) as S. 
c De Sacerdot. l. 6. c. 4●.  Chrysostome doth elsewhere very excellently declare. A point which convinced me to the full; for I was compelled to renounce all my former Protestanticall expositions 
* As namely his hyperbolising, etc.  of S. Chrysostome, when I was strongly pressed with this testimony [in England] by a learned, & virtuous Priest.  
13. Secondly he saith, that for men very evil these things are not helps, but yet they may be some CONSOLATION unto their surviving friends. This particular I found exactly treatised by him in sundry places, & namely in his incomparable work 
d Lib. 21. cap. 24.  de Civitate Dei, where he maketh this demand: If any men have an impenitent heart even unto death, and be not converted from enemies into sons, doth the Church now pray for such men, that is to say, for the Souls of men thus deceased? He resolveth, 
Some private men were led into an error herein: but (saith S. Aug.) the Church was not.  no; that is not the intention of the Catholic Church. For S. Augustine doth there well observe, that in this life we pray for all men, and yet we have a reference (precisely) unto such, as pertain unto the secret election of God. Likewise in prayer for the dead, the Church maketh a 
e S. August. de cura pro mort. cap. 4.  general commemoration of all, that so they, who want friends, or kinsmen to perform this duty on their behalf, may be partakers of this benefit, by the means of her, who is the pious, and common mother of us all. and yet her purpose in this general commemoration is restrained particularly unto such, as are conceived to stand in exigence of her relief. For, of some men's good estate she hath a certain evidence; of some, a probable reason; of others, a comfortable hope. But if she have singular, and plain inducements to persuade her otherwise, she affordeth not this kind of piety unto incapable persons. And here I remembered a domestical example (which I had lately read in our venerable contreyman S. 
f Eccles. histor, l. 5. c. 15.  Beda) of a certain Brother, who lived an ignoble life in a noble monastery, and deceased without repentance: for which cause, no man durst presume to celebrate Mass, nor to sing psalms, nor to pray for him after his decease. Wherefore I considered, that though S. 
g Enchirid. ad Laur. cap. 110.  Augustine pronounceth thus; Whom these things do profit, it is unto this effect, either that there may be a full remission, or a more tolerable damnation; yet he doth not intend, that the souls of Reprobates have utility by these things (for then he should oppose the Catholic Church, whose judgement he doth often relate to be otherwise; yea he should here also absurdly contradict himself within the compass of three lines: for he said immediately before, that these things are not helps for men very evil) but such only as suffer temporal DAMNATION; for, to want the joys of heaven, and to endure the sharpness of Purgatory, it is poena Damni & poena Sensus, though each be for a little time. And thus it is true, that these things do avail unto a full remission, or unto a more tolerable damnation; because the temporal pain of some soul's [in Purgatory] is thereby either shortened in time, or lessened in degree.  
14. Thirdly he saith, that for men not very good, nor very evil, these things are PROPITIATIONS; that is to say, certain means which we adhibit to entreat mercy at the hands of the sovereign judge. They are propitiations, not by the payment of the price of sin (for that is 
* 1. joh. 2, 2.  proper only unto that blood, which was of inestimable value) but through application thereof, 
Mater mea desideravit memoriam sui ad altare tuum fieri, unde sciret dispensari victimam sanctam etc. S. Augustin. Confess. lib. 9 cap. 13.  ministerially by the Priest, and effectually by our Lord; for the first useth his petition, and the second bringeth his performance. This I knew to be the doctrine of the Papists; for thus I found it expressed long since by D. 
h Answ. to M. jewels challenged; Artic. 19  Harding, our contreyman of great esteem.  
15. Thus far I proceeded in the First testimony of S. Augustine. And though it were clear, and ponderous (in mine opinion) yet it was inferior unto that, which now ensueth; for I must freely confess, that it sealed up my heart, and left no place unto any farther doubt.  
16. The SECOND testimony is this. 
i Serm. 17. de Verb. Apost. See also Tract. 84. in joh.  The faithful [because I desired to be in the number of the Faithful, therefore I was moved powerfully with this consideration] do know, according to the instruction of the Church [therefore it was not a new, nor a private opinion; and this I considered diligently with myself] that when Martyrs are recited at the altar of God, this is not done with intention to pray for them (it being an injury to pray for a Martyr, unto whose prayers we ought to be recommended) but we pray for 
* These [other] were not known to be in the same acctual bliss with Martyrs: otherwise, the Church would have prayed for them no more, than she prayed for the Martyrs.  other deceased men, whose commemoration is there made. Oh how unlike a Protestant doth S. Augustine speak, and how much Popery (as the vulgar hath it) is contained in this little passage? Where could I find any evasion against so manifest a testimony as this is? Should I renounce the instruction of the Church? It were intolerable pride. Should I say unto S. Augustine, thou art a foolish Papist, and thou knowest not the instruction of the Church in this behalf? It were a miserable conceit.  
17. This was the secret dispute of mine own heart, which now (beloved Contreyman) I present unto thy Christian view; that so either I may learn by thee, what answer is to be framed unto this difficulty; or else thou mayest learn with me to follow the way of that Catholic doctrine, which descended unto S. Augustine, 
See before num. 8.  and unto the Church in that blessed time.   

§. 5. D. Fields collusion in delivering the sense, and purpose of the ancient Church touching Prayer for the dead.  
1. BEing now mightily convinced in mine understanding, I began to compare S. Augustine with D. 
k Pag. 98. D. Field maketh the Ancients speak like Protestant's.  Field, who had informed me much otherwise in this particular; deriving it in this manner. The ancients did name the names of the departed, at the holy Table, in the time of the holy mysteries, and offering of 
* The Sacrifice is Eucharistical in respect of our thankfulness performed therein unto God; but it is Propitiatory also in respect of his help entreated thereby for us.  Eucharist (that is, the sacrifice of praise) for them etc. The ancients kept (in this manner) a commemoration of the Patriarches, Apostles, Prophets, yea of the blessed Virgin, at the Lords table: to whom they did not wish deliverance from Purgatory (sith no man ever thought them to be there) but if they wished any thing, it was their deliverance from death, which as yet tyrannizeth over one part of them, to wit, the body etc. Here he quoteth the Liturgy of S. Chrysostome in these words: We offer this reasonable service, that is, the Eucharist of praise, and thanskgiving to thee, o Lord, for all that are at rest in the faith; even for the Patriarches, Prophets, etc.  
2. But having now attained unto some experience of M. Doctors unfaithful dealing, I could not suffer myself to be deluded by such pitiful conceits. Wherefore I directed my thoughts uto these 4. considerations, which here ensue. FIRST; that it is a vanity in us Protestants sometimes to 
* So doth D. Field here; and Zanch. de Natura Dei l. 4. c. 4. and others.  accept this Liturgy, as composed by S. Chrysostome, and sometimes to 
* So doth M. jewel: & M. powel de Antichr. p. 235.  reject it (for our own advantadge) because we can not justly insist upon the testimony of any Author (by way of proof) which we ourselves deny to be delivered by him. For though it hath force against him that admitteth it, yet it is of no efficacy for him that refuseth it. SECONDLY; that S. 
* Iwetur mortuus non lachrymis, sed pr●cibus etc. Hom. 41. in epist. 1. ad Cor.  Chrysostome did pray, and exhorted others to pray for the souls of the dead; and therefore (in all probability) his Liturgy, and his doctrine do conspire (substantially) in this issue. THIRDLY; I found, that when the Church offered the Sacrifice of our Lord's body for the Apostles, Martyrs etc. it was by way of 
* See Gabriel Biel, lect. 85. in Can. Missae.  thanskgiving, not of petition; and this was confirmed unto me by the testimony of S. Augustine; viz. The faithful do know by the instruction of the Church, that we pray not for Martyrs, as we pray for other men; that is to say, the Martyrs are recognised by us, as Citizens of the heavenly kingdom: but we pray for others, as being yet in temporal pain, or, at least, conceived to be so by us; and thus (to wit respectively unto this end) we make our supplications unto God in their behalf. Farther; as it is not absurdly delivered (saith 
l part 1. lect. 2. super Marcum. See Biel. in the aforesaid place.  Gerson) by the learned Divines that there is an addition, or increase of accidental felicity in the Saints, so it is not inconvenient, if, in this respect also, we recommend them unto God in our devotions.  
3. FOURTHLY; though D. Field, in his greater wisdom, than integrity, doth conceal it (and so the Tempter made his assault upon our Saviour; cast thyself down headlong, for it is written, 
Matth. 4.  He shall give his angels charged over thee, that thou dash not thy foot against a stone: but he omitted a principal point, viz. that they may keep thee in all thy ways) yet S. Chrysostome in the same Liturgy, doth plainly refute his pretenced exposition of prayer for the dead. For thus he saith: By the supplication of these [Patriarches, Apostles etc.] have respect unto us o Lord; 
If D. Field will stand unto this Liturgy (to gather the sense of Antiquity by it) he must admit also such an exaltation of the blessed Virgin, as will hardly stand with his liking.  and he addeth immediately; Remember all the faithful departed (who sleep in the hope of resurrection) and make them to be at rest, where the light of thy countenance is seen.  
4. Thus S. Augustine, and S. Chrysostome (if their sayings be fully related, and truly weighed) do hold a just correspondency herein; and each of them (in the essential point) doth follow the instruction of the same Church. Wherefore though 
* Contra Henric. 8.  Luther did basely esteem of a thousand Augustine's, and Cyprians if they were repugnant unto his judgement in the Scripture, yet I saw necessary reasons, why I should prefer one Augustine before ten thousand Luther's, Fields, and all such, as are exorbitantly carried against the stream, and course of the ancient Catholic Church.   

§. 6. Reasons, which moved me rather to believe, and to follow S. Augustine herein, and the Catholic Church in his time, then D. Field, and his reformed Churches. A conclusion of the first Part; with an admonition to all Calvinian Readers.  
1. WHen I had brought my discourse unto this effect (as you have already seen) I considered seriously in my private meditations, that whereas we Protestants make a glorious show of Antiquity, 
D. Field. pag. 47. assumeth that he will prove the Papists NOTES of Antiquity, etc. to be really the same with ours.  Universality, Succession, etc. to justify our Religion thereby, it would prove a most ridiculous suggestion, if in this particular itself, we hold not conformity with the ancient, Catholic Church. Here also (by the way) I remembered that S. 
* heres. 53.  Augustine registering the heresies of Aërius (in the number whereof is his derision of Prayer, and Oblation for the dead) concludeth in the peroration of his treatise, that, whosoever maintaineth any of the precedent opinions, he is not a Catholic Christian.  
2. How nearly this censure appertaineth unto us Protestants, the 
* See; book 2. Part. 1, chap. 2.  sequel will declare. Mean while, it may please you to observe with me, how plausibly, and artificially D. Field demeaneth himself, to escape the pressure of that difficulty, which is to heavy for him to bear. It is most certain (saith 
m pag. 98.  he) that many particular men extended the meaning of these prayers [for the dead] 
* viz. then he hath delivered before. See §. 5. num. 1.  farther, and out of their private errors, and fancies, used such prayers for the dead, as the Romanists themselves (I think) dare not justify. And so it is true, that many of the Fathers were led into error in this matter of Prayer for the dead, and not all; as if the whole Church had, FALLEN FROM THE TRUTH, as Bellarmine 
* See. book 2. Part. 1. chap. 3.  falfely imputeth unto Caluin, who saith no such thing.  
3. Now forasmuch as M. Doctor doth clearly insinuate, that such Fathers, as extended this religious duty [prayer for the dead] beyond the narrow compass, which is assigned by 
n Insi. l. 3. c. 5.  Caluin, and 
o pag. 98. & 139.  himself, did follow a private error, and fancy herein, and that they did fall away from the truth, I was desirous to know (without Lies, Obscurity, and Circuitions; the best Sanctuaries of our evil cause) either from D. Field, or from any discreet Protestant in Christendom (howbeit I may contract my speech, and say; in Europe; for our new faith hath scarce peeped out of her confines) whether S. Cyrill of Jerusalem, concurring absolutely with the Papists in this point, 
See before; §. 4.  and whether S. Augustine conspiring with him; and whether S. 
p lib. 1. de divin. office c. 18.  Isidore consenting with them both [Unless the Catholic Church did believe that sins are remitted unto the faithful after this life, she would not offer the Sacrifice unto God, for their souls] & finally, whether all others, joining with them herein, fell away from the truth, or not? And if they did, I was desirous to see, what one man there was (besides Aërian heretics) in whom the truth was visibly preserved?  
4. Here I gave myself unto a long, and earnest meditation; remembering a renowned sentence of S. 
epist. 118.  Augustine, who saith; that, to call any thing in question which is frequented by the universal Church, insolentissimae est insaniae, it is the part of most insolent madness. Which sentence applying itself clearly unto my purpose, enforced me to conclude, that either S. Augustine was a prodigious ass in his carriage of this matter, or else, that we Protestants are insolently mad, who partly in the violent stream of passion renounce the instruction of the universal Church herein, and partly by sinister interpretations, derive it against her known intention, expressed so abundantly by her chiefest Doctors, 
Consuetudo est optima legis interpres.  and perpetuated so eminently by a continual succession.  
5. Wherefore retiring my thoughts a little, and drawing them from their former meditations, I began to speak thus feelingly unto my soul. Canst thou desire testimonies more grave than these in respect of the Authors, more perspicuous in words, or more effectual in weight? Where doth S. Augustine contradict this relation, or who did ever contradict him therein? Is Doctor Field a better witness, and more to be respected in this decision, then S. AUGUSTINE, who being greatly experienced in the customs of the Universal Church, hath (in his maturity of judgement) left unto thee a fair, and evident prescription in this behalf, never reversed by himself, nor impugned by others, having also the voice of all ages (both in doctrine, and practise) for its corroboration, and strength? Truly if it were so, that in his ignorance, or malice, or some other obliquity, and defect, he had exceeded the purpose of the Catholic Church herein, it is very probable, that this error could not escape him unespied in all his diligent Retractations. And if he were so unhappy, that he had no friend to inform him for his amendment, yet he could not be so happy, as that no enemy should note it for his disgrace.  
6. Now therefore (dearly beloved contreyman) tell me, I pray thee, tell me in the uprightness of thy conscience, and in the presence of him who searcheth the heart, and reins; to whose direction, guydance, and instruction, could I (in this case) commit a poor, afflicted soul (which I should endeavour to save with care, since Christ died for it in love) and whom could I follow herein, with more alacrity, and confidence; S. AUGUSTINE, or D. FIELD, with all the troop of Lutherans, Caluinists, Protestants, Puritans, or others, howsoever they are distinguished in name, or divided in opinion?  
7. I saw antiquity in the first; novelty in the second. I saw fidelity in the first; 
* See the second Book, Part. 1.  unfaithfulness in the second. I saw profound learning in the first; very commendable also, but yet much inferior in the second. And though I perceived that his own book doth justly afford that censure against him, which is delivered against Nestorius by a worthy 
q Vincent. Lirinens. cap. 16.  Author; viz. Plussemper admirationis in illo, quàm utilitatis, plus famae quam experientia fuit; yet I will rather say, that the 
* Bellarmine is no ways matchable with Caluin, and others, in piety, or learning though he wear a cardinals heart.  comparison, which 
r pag. 149.  he is pleased to make betwixt C. Bellarm. & M. Caluin, hath a more due proportion betwixt S. August. and himself.  
8. Finally, I considered, that none of the Fathers resisted the first herein; but who doth assist the second? The doctrine of the first is now confirmed by the practice of that Church, which we phrase a Popish, Antichristian Synagogue etc. but the reformed Congregation of D. Field hath no resemblance of these things. For though 
s Contra Campian. pag. 262.  D. Humphrey in his rhetorical flourishes doth pretend, that in our Colleges we retain the [ancient] commendation of the dead, yet I noted that the differences are many, and chief these three. First; in respect of the PLACE; for the ancient commendation of the dead was at the 
* In precibus Sacerdotis, quae Domino Deo ad eius ALTARE funduntur; locum suum habet commendatio mortuorum S. Aug. de cura pro mort. cap. 1.  Altar; but we have none. Secondly; in respect of the ACTION; for it was in the holy Sacrifice; but we contemn it. Thirdly; in respect of the INTENTION; for it was to relieve the souls of the dead; but we disclaim this doctrine. Besides; since our Zwinglian Communion is such a naked, and contemptible feast, as 
t See his Confess.  Luther himself abhorred, and his disciple Conradus did tremble to behold (for they had a more religious estimation of our Lord's Supper, than the Sacramentaries; who deride the LUTHERANS, because they absurdly, and superstitiously attribute a sanctifying virtue unto the 
* Hoc est Corpus meum.  words of Christ; as it pleaseth 
u Decad. 5. Serm. 6.  H. Bullinger to speak) I was desirous to understand, how a piece of bread, and a draft of wine, may have any power, & validity for these purposes, unto which the holy 
* See S. Au. de Civit. Dei l. 22. c. 8. how one of his Priests, offering the sacrifice of our Lord's Body in the house of a lay person, delivered his family from the vexation of unclean Spirits.  Fathers did often refer the sacred Oblation (in the divine Sacrifice of the MASS) or how our Zwinglian Communion can be a reverend, and dreadful mystery (such, as wherein the holy Angels humble themselves unto our common Lord) by the offering whereof, the mercy of God is entreated for the Souls of some men, deceased in Charity, and in the Catholic faith? For I must profess, that a serious consideration of these things wrought a deep impression in my heart.  
9 This was the sum of my DOCTRINAL REASON, branched (as you have seen) into two Parts; that is to say, derived partly from Scripture, and partly from Tradition; in both which I followed the impeachable resolution of Antiquity, and with it I must either stand, or fall. It is my comfort (though it were sometimes my grief) to see, that as Dagon fell on his face before the Ark, 
1. Reg. 5.  so Protestancy suffereth utter confusion, when it is presented before the Tribunal of the ancient Church. I deliver this assertion faithfully, and justly; I speak the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience bearing me witness in the holy Ghost. I have tasted the wines of Caluin, and Augustine; I have digested both; I have judged of both; and out of some experience, which I have had of both, I am bold to assure you (loving contreymen) who spend your precious time, and exercise your noble wits in many frothy volumes, that if you will repair discreetly, and conscionably unto the blessed Fathers, you shall draw better wine at the latter end, then at the beginning. Then you will clearly discern, 
See before; § 1. num. 3.  whether Doctor Humphrey had any reason to impute Frenzy unto his Romanists, or not; than you will ingenuously confess with the penitent Donatists, 
* See S. August. epist. 48.  and say; Nesciebamus hîc esse veritatem, nec eam discere volebamus, etc. We knew not that the truth was here, neither would we learn it. But thanks be unto God, who hath taken away our fear, and taught us by experience, how vain, and empty those suggestions are, which lying fame hath cast out against his Church. etc.    
The end of the first Part.   

THE SECOND PART OF THE FIRST BOOK, CONTAINING A MORAL REASON, which persuaded me to entertain the Catholic doctrine of Purgatory, and Prayer for the dead.  

CHAP. I. The PROVIDENCE of God in preserving a visible Church, free from any damnable error, doth confirm the doctrine of Purgatory, and Prayer for the dead.  

§. 1. The FIRST Consideration; touching a visible Church.  
I Considered First, that God hath promised unto us a perpetuity of his Church, both by his Son and Servants. For thus saith his only begotten; 
Matth. 2●. 20.  I am with you always, unto the end of the world.  
2. A comfortable saying o Saviour jesus. I [not in body, but in Spirit] AM [yea I will be also; but 
* Before Abraham I am. joh. 8.58.  thus I express myself, because I am eternal, and immutable] WITH YOU [not in your persons only, but in your succession for ever: and not invisibly by grace alone, but visibly also in a sincere profession of the truth] ALWAYS, UNTO THE END OF THE WORLD; my Church shall endure throughout all generations. Thus the promise of God made unto David (historically) concerning his seed, 
Psal. 88 etc.  is referred (mystically) unto Christ; in whose seed (to wit his Church) it is, & must be absolutely performed.  
3. I had yet a farther assurance from God by his Servants. 
Ephes, 4.11.  For thus saith S. Paul. He [Christ] hath given us Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists [men of extraordinary vocation in the beginning] pastors, and Doctors [men of ordinary vocation to the end] for the consummation of the Saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, UNTIL we all meet in the unity of faith, and knowledge of the Son of God, into a perfect man, into the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ.  
4. This Text of holy Scripture I knew to be diversly, and preposterously sensed, as well by the 
* M. Cartwright against D. Whitgift.  Presbyterians against the Formalists, as by the 
* D. Soteliffe against D. Kellison.  Protestants against Cath. The first exclude Archbish. & the second (by the same reason) exclude the Pope. But I secured myself in the true, and genuine interpretation thereof, which did infallibly, and clearly demonstrate unto me these two points. First; that the Church of Christ must perpetually subsist without decay. Secondly; that it must be visibly extant without obscurity, and concealment. For how can Pastors preach the gospel, and administer the holy Sacraments, where people are not assembled to that purpose, and gathered into a society of faith?  
5. As for the example of Eliah, I always esteemed it a lamentable suggestion in this case. For his complaint [
* 3. Reg. 19  I am left alone] extendeth only unto the kingdom of ISRAEL, wherein he then conversed, and wherein he (with many others) was persecuted by jezabel, under Ahab, her infortunate husband. But at the same time, the law was read, the Sacrifice was offered, pure Religion was professed, and protected in the kingdom of JUDAH, under josaphat a blessed Prince, 
* 3. Reg. 22.43.  walking in the good ways of Asa his father. This josaphat survived unto the 
* 4. Reg. 3.2.  coronation of joram, the younger son of Ahab; and so the example of Eliah can not be of any force to defend the opinion of many Protestants, concerning the invisibility of the Church.  
6. Wherefore, seeing how D. 
Apolog. Cathol. part. 1. lib. 1. c. 14.  Morton doth still reinforce this point (though cleared sufficiently by sundry Catholics, even in the confession of a learned Protestant in England, from whose mouth I received this instruction many years ago) as though the aforesaid complaint of Eliah pertained likewise unto the kingdom of judah, I did often, and greatly wonder that such a man, against his own conscience, should deal so fraudulently in this behalf. For first he saith that Lombard doth give this exposition; viz. When the daughter of Ahab was married unto 
* 
The son of josaphat.  
The younger son of Ahab was called lord likewise.   joram the king of judah, than all the jews seemed to be, Idolaters; so that Eliah thought himself to be left alone: and upon this authority of Lombard, the Doctor buildeth his exception against the former answer. Now, is this (I beseech you) an ingenious, and honest deportment in the Doctor, thus to press the authority of Lombard, whom he knew to be singularly mistaken herein, and to ere most plainly against the historical evidence of sacred Scripture? Secondly; the Doctor is pleased to colour, and cloak the said exposition of Lombard with the name of S. Ambrose; and for this purpose he frameth his quotation in the margin thus; Lombard in Rom. cap. 11. EX AMBROSIO. But I found, that as S. Ambrose hath not one syllable to justify this exposition in the least degree, so Peter Lombard himself doth not assume it from him, nor once use his name therein; howbeit both before, and after, he gleaneth up some sentences from that excellent Father. Is this a faithful course in a Minister of simple truth?  
7. Renouncing the opinion of our Inuisibilists, as an impious, and contemptible fancy, I embraced a position of 
h pag. 19 etc.  D. Field, which, though it be mingled with some corruptions, and untruths in his discourse, yet, in itself it is very effectual, & sincere. The Church can not be invisible in respect of Profession: and this Profession is known even unto the profane, and wicked of the world. Again. It can not be, but that they, 
Apply this rule to the Protestanticall Churches.  who are of the TRUE Church, must by profession of the TRUTH make themselves known in such sort, that by their profession, and practise, they may be discerned from other men.  
8. For this cause S. Augustine saith in a plain, and familiar kind of speech; 
See the 3. Conversions of England. Part. 2. chap. 1. throughout.  digito ostendimus Ecclesiam, we show forth the Church with our fingers, in this place, and in that; here she is conspicuous, and thus she hath descended unto us by a fair, and spectable succession.  
9 Non sic Protestants, non sic: as for the Protestants, it is not so with them: their Church was hatched in corners, and enclosed long in Cymmerian darkness. Wherefore, as the good sinful woman complained mournfully, saying; 
joh. 20.13.  They have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him: so I was enforced to take up a just complaint against all novelizing heretics, and say; They have taken away the Church of my Lord, and I know not where they have placed her. They can not assign unto me any persons, time or place, wherein their Synagogue had a resplendent face, and a laudable dilatation.   

§. 2. The SECOND Consideration; touching a visible Church free from any damnable error. The Protestants looseness, and confusion in their description of the Church.  
1. I Considered Secondly, that this VISIBLE Church can never be tainted universally with any error, and specially if it be such, as either expressly, or implicitly endangereth the principles of salvation; for, in matters of the necessity of saith, she is freed from the possibility of error.  
2. Hence it is that 
i Part. 4. de Vnit. Grac. Considerate. 6.  john Gerson (a man highly 
* See afterward; c. 3. § 3. num. 4. etc.  advanced by D. Field) prescribeth this ensuing observation, as an infallible rule. Whatsoever is determined by the Pope of Rome (together with his general Council of the Church) in matters appertaining unto faith, that is undoubtedly true, and to be received of all the world. For this consideration is founded in the articles of our faith: We believe that there is an HOLY, CATHOLIQVE CHURCH, which is exempted from error in her faith, etc.  
3. As this position was credible with me for the Authors sake, and he upon D. Fields singular commendation, so I was induced farther, and more strongly persuaded to entertain it, by the certain warrant of him, who is TRUTH itself, and promised his Spirit unto the holy Apostles, with assurance, 
Io. 16.13.  that he should lead them into all Truth.  
4. In quality, it is Truth without error. In quantity, it is All truth, necessary, and expedient for them, or us, in this peregrinant estate. For as this promise belonged then particularly unto each Apostle, so it belongeth now generally unto the whole Church; which, being taken either in her latitude, as she is diffused over the world, or in her representation, as she is collected into a lawful Synod, is privileged from error in her doctrinal determinations.  
5. And this was clearly imported unto me in a sentence of S. 
1. Timoth. 3.15.  Paul unto his beloved Timothy, whom he instructed how he should behave himself in the house of God, which is the ground, and PILLAR OF TRUTH.  
6. For howsoever it pleaseth D. 
k Pag. 199. The church of Ephesus hath erred damnably in faith.  Field to elude the gravity, and power of this Scripture, by restraining the Apostles sense therein particularly unto the Church of Ephesus, which was committed unto the Episcopal care of Timothy; yet, as many reasons did prevail with me to reject his exposition, so I preferred the authority of S. 
l Comment●r. ibid.  Ambrose, saying; that Whereas the whole world is Gods, the Church is said to be his house; of which [universal Church] Damasus [the Pope] is rector at this day. This Universal Church is the Pillar of truth, sustaining the edifice of faith.  
7. Hereupon 
l Prascripe. cap. 28.  Tertullian (deriding the heretics of his time) esteemeth it a base, and gross conceit in any man to suppose, that the holy Ghost, who was asked of the Father, and sent by the Son to be the Teacher of TRUTH, should neglect that office, unto which he was designed, and that he should permit the Church to understand the Scriptures otherwise, than he spoke by the mouth of the Apostles. And farther. Is it probable (saith he) that so many, and so great Churches (if they did err) should err thus conformably into the same faith? VARIASSE debuerat ERROR doctrinae Ecclesiarum. Caeterùm, quod apud multos VNUM invenitur, non est erratum, sed TRADITUM. Error bringeth variety; but where unity is, there is the truth. Thus the Churches are many in number, but one in faith; divided in place, but joined in opinion.  
8. Mine earnest meditation in this point taught me to lament the confusion of our Protestants, admitting innumerable sectaries, into our vast, and incongruous Church; 
Fox in Act. & Mon. See the 3. Conuers. of England.  which is a very Chimaera, thrust together, and fashioned in specifical disproportions. But this was our necessity (hard necessity) and not our choice, to make such a pitiful delineation of our Church. For whereas we had not any certain succession, to derive her descent, and pedigree from the Ancients, we were compelled (in this respect) to deal liberally (like good fellows) and take sundry heretics, with incompatible factions, into our society; lest by the same reason, for which we exclude others, we should exclude ourselves also from the communion of the Church.  

pag. 137.  9 Hence it is that D. Field (laying the foundation of his Babel) feareth not to say, that the Churches of Russia, Armenia, Syria, AEthiopia, Greece etc. are, and continue parts of the TRUE, CATHOLIC CHURCH. A position manifestly repugnant unto Reason, and Authority. Unto reason; for if truth of doctrine be a Note of the Church (as we defend) how is that a true, Catholic Church, which impugneth the truth, and how is that one Church, which is distracted into many faiths? Unto authority; for S. 
* de haeres. in perorat. See the 3. conuers. of England; Part. 2. chap. 10. num. 10.15.16.17. etc.  Augustine doth constantly affirm, that whosoever maintaineth any heresy (registered, or omitted by him in his Treatise) he is not a CATHOLIQVE Christian; and consequently, no member of that Church, wherein (alone) we have the promise of salvation. For as our 
* Fides in Christum;  faith in Christ must be TRUSTFUL, lively, and active, by a special application of his merits unto ourselves, so our 
* Fides de Christo.  faith of Christ must be TRUE, sincere, and absolute, by a just conformity unto the will of God, revealed by him, and propounded by his Church. And therefore D. Fields 
* Part. 4. de unit. Graecorum; considerate. 4.  Gerson (entreating of peace, and UNITY in the Church) laboureth to draw all men into a communion of faith; and judgeth it a great folly in any man to conceive, that we may be saved in our particular sects, and errors.  
10. When I had discovered (by an earnest prosecution of this point) how naturally, and powerfully our Protestanticall 
* The Church may err, divers Churches (though erring grossly in faith) make up one Catholic Church; etc.  doctrines convaigh men into Laodiceanisme, and a careless neglect of undefiled Religion (whence Atheism must necessarily ensue) I resolved with hearty affection, to unite myself unto that Church, which is pure, and single in Religion, wheresoever I should deprehend the same. For though I saw that the Protestants religion was false in some things, yet I had great hesitation, and doubt, whether the Papists were true in all: as S. 
* Confess. lib. 6. cap. 1.  Augustine spoke sometime unto his loving Mother; I am now no Manichee, nor yet a Catholic Christian. And so mine estate (as well as his) might be resembled unto the case of that patiented, 
* S. Mark. 8.24.  who saw men walking like trees, until he had a perfect restitution of his sight.  
11. Wherefore resting myself a while upon a profitable, and sound instruction of 
m Lib. imperfect. in Gen. cap. 1.  S. Augustine; viz. God hath constituted a mother Church, and she is called CATHOLIQVE, because she is universally perfect, and halteth in 
* Therefore, not in this particular of prayer for the dead.  nothing, I referred the success unto a future trial; having a constant, and unchandgeable purpose, never to decline, nor vary from this ground, which I have here presented unto your Christian examination.   

§. 3. The THIRD Consideration; touching the Protestants zeal in condemning this doctrine of Purgatory, and prayer for the dead, as heretical, blasphemous, etc.  
1. I Considered Thirdly, that this doctrine of Purgatory, and Prayer for the dead, as it is generally renounced by our evangelical congregations, so it is severely censured by many of our writers.  
2. Hence it is that 
n Pag. 79.  D. Field himself chargeth Purgatory with the disgraceful imputation of HERESY; and yet he graceth it so far, as to affirm, that Augustine gave occasion unto this heresy in the beginning.  
3. Hence it is that M. Rogers in the 
o Pag. 121.122.  Catholic Faith of our English Church, spending his tempestuous phrases against the doctrine of Purgatory, saith, that hereby the Papists nourish most cursed, and damnable errors; and that 
* Pag. 123.  it teacheth us to be our own saviours.  
4. Hence it is, that M. powel (in his inconsiderate violence) assigning many goodly reasons why 
p De Antichr. pag. 453 NULLUS, NULLUS (inquam) PAPICOLA SALVARI POTEST.  no Papist can be saved, includeth 
* Pag. 123.  the figment of Purgatory in that number. Likewise (in the same kind of precipitation) setting down 23. 
q De Antichr. l. 2. c. 19  blasphemous opinions, delivered by the Church of Rome against the doctrine contained in our LORDS PRAYER, he inserteth this particular, viz. 
* Pag. 457.  She teacheth, that WE MU PRAY FOR THE DEAD.  
5. But forasmuch as the glorious Emperor CONSTANTINE (Great in birth, Greater in victory, and Greatest in Christian Religion; which, till his time, was planted in the continual effusion of blood) building a magnificent 
* At Constantinople. See Euseb. in vita Constant. l. ●. c. 60.  Church in honour of the 12. Apostles, did foresee (in his religious providence) that the people (moved with the celebrity of that place) would flow thither, and there pray for him after his decease, whereby he should be partaker of their devotions for the benefit of his soul, I was desirous to understand here briefly by the way, whether this incomparable Prince (following the instruction of the Catholic Church herein) and whether the Priests, together with the people, supplicating unto God pro anima Imperatoris, for the 
* D. Field talketh of naming names &c. (see before▪ pag. 31) But it is evident, that the Catholic Church in her best age prayed for the SOULS of the dead. And this example itself is an invincible demonstration thereof.  SOUL of the Emperor, after his death (as 
* Ibid. cap. 71.  Eusebius relateth; who was a reverend Bishop, and in special grace with Constantine) were guilty of a blasphemous opinion against our LORDS PRAYER, or not?  
6. And my desire to receive full satisfaction unto this point, was the rather enkindled within me, because our Sovereign Lord the King (to whom all good Catholics wish the happiness of Constantine, in faith imitating his blessed Mother; a true Helena in her virtues, though not in her fortunes) made this just demand, according to the sublimity of his excellent apprehension; 
r See the book of the Conference at Hampton Court; pag. 69.  What? is it now come to pass, that we shall appeach 
* Omnes nôrunt Constantinum fuisse admirandum in Christianismo etc. Epiphan. hares. 69.  CONSTANTINE of Popery, & superstition? If the Cross in baptism were then used, I see no reason but that we may still continue it. Which royal sentence I applied duly unto this particular [of prayer for the dead] and how effectual it was with me, the ingenious Reader may well perceive, if he will vouchsafe to make a little experience thereof in his own respective meditations.  
7. I returned speedily unto my purpose; for I was not willing to eclipse the light of my discourse with the interposition of M. powel's dark conceits. Finally therefore remembering that M. CALVIN is the Ipse dixit in the purest Gospel (in which respect it pleased 
* In a sermon at S. Mary's Church in Oxon. 4. years since.  D. Airay to exhort his Auditors; persuading them very earnestly, and entreating them, that they would by all means defend the estimation of M. Caluin; and the rather, because he is the man against whom the 
* And what think you of the Lutheransi doth not D. Hunnius himself beseech God to preserve his Church mercifully from th● infection of Caluin? See Caluin. judaiz. in fine.  Papists do principally bend their forces) I contented myself with his s Eldershippes' censure; viz. PURGATORY is a pernicious fiction of Satan, disgraceful unto the great mercy of God, evacuating the Cross of Christ, dissipating, and subverting our faith; pure, and horrible blasphemy against the blood of jesus Christ, etc.  
8. Hence it is, that we Protestants have sentenced Purgatory to be an Antichristian Doctrine; For 
* And what think you of the Lutheransi doth not D. Hunnius himself beseech God to preserve his Church mercifully from th● infection of Caluin? See Caluin. judaiz. in fine.  he is Antichrist, that denieth Christ to be come in the flesh. And we pretend, that howsoever this doctrine doth not positively deny that Christ is come in the flesh, in regard of his Incarnation, and Nature as he is a MAN, 
s Institut. lib. 3. cap. 5. §. 6.  yet it denieth the same consequently, in regard of his Satisfaction, and Office, as he is a REDEEMER.  
9 In which our specious venditation of reserving inviolated honour unto Christ, 
* Epist. joh. 2. verse 7.  I saw that we insist directly in the steps of Novatians, Nestorians, and the like; The first pretended that they (forsooth) did exhibit 
* See S. Ambros. de Penitent. cap. 2. in initio.  reverence unto God by their doctrine, inasmuch as they teach that he only (and no man) can forgive sins; The second could not endure that a woman should be styled the Mother of [their] God. Thus also the infatuated Presbyterians glory in their excellent cause, saying; 
* See M. Rogers in the Preface of his Cathol. doctr. num. 16.  Our controversy is, whether jesus Christ shall be King, or no. The end of all our travail is to set up the throne of jesus Christ, our heavenly King, etc. Which colourable piety, and popular zeal in ancient, or later Heretics (advancing their opinions, as Mountibancks extol their wares) did move me unto a just suspicion of their integrity, because S. Cyrill (Archbishopp of Jerusalem) gave me this infallible prescription; 
t Cateches. 4.  Heretics hide the venom of their opinions grato nomine Christi, under the acceptable name of Christ. And as the dignity, the glory, the exaltation of Christ is the mark, whereat they all pretend to shoot, so they will take their aim from holy Scripture alone, 
Cap. 37.  and (as Lirinensis doth well observe) they spice, and sprinkle their heresies with innumerable sentences of the word.   

§. 4. The FOURTH consideration; touching the large diffusion of this doctrine, received by the universal Church. Whence it followeth, that either God's PROVIDENCE hath failed, and that he hath not performed his promise, or that this doctrine of Purgatory is not erroneous.  
1. I Considered Fourthly, that this doctrine of Purgatory, and Prayer for the dead (things of mutual dependency) hath been spread over the face of the 
* See before, pag. 16. & 17.  universal Church, both Greek, and Latin.  
2. For though I was informed by our 
u D Field, pag. 99 D. Abbot against D. Bishop, Part. 1. M. Rogers, Cath. doctr. pag. 120. etc.  principal Authors, that the Greeks' never entertained this doctrine, yet I found that their suggestion was untrue, inasmuch as the writings of the 
* See afterward; Book 2. Chap. 1. §. ●2. num. 6.  Ancient Greeks, and the practice of the whole Church (including them in that generality) did testify the contrary unto me, in most abundant manner. And if any prejudice could accrue unto this doctrine, because it is denied by some men in the Greek Church, a greater inconvenience (by the Force of the same reason) must ensue unto the doctrine of the Procession of the holy Ghost from the FATHER, and the SON, because this is more generally, and earnestly impugned; their heresy also herein being such (if we believe the Creed of Athanasius, which is accepted by our * English Church, 
Artic. Relig. 8.  though sometimes ill expounded) as excludeth men from the possibility of salvation.  
3. But whereas my learned Authors do extend the denial of Purgatory generally unto the Greeks, they err, not knowing, 
See the Censure of the Oriental Church.  or else dissembling the truth. For jeremiah, the Patriarch of Constantinople, in his rescript unto the Lutherans, delivereth clearly, that the Greek Church prayeth for the dead, with intention to relieve some souls afflicted with temporal pain; and for a more copious explication of his mind, he remitteth them unto an 
w De fidel. desunct.  oration of S. john Damascen, wherein this matter is lardgely handled. For he testifieth, that in the unbloody Sacrifice, the Catholic, and Apostolic Church maketh a memorial of the dead. Why? to relieve their souls. Again. God grant me so to fashion my life that I may not stand in exigence of these helps after death. But if my life be intercepted, and cut of before I can fulfil my duty, God grant that my friends may entreat his mercy on my behalf. And thus S. Chrysostome (the divine Preacher) speaketh in these golden words. If in thy lifetime thou hast not so exactly composed thy soul as thou oughtest, give commandment unto thy friends to transmitt their help unto thee, by alms, and oblations.  
4. Wherefore I conceived, that howsoever some Greeks', did not, or do not admit the doctrine of Purgatory, precisely under this 
* Quis nid haereticus negare audehit Transubstant, Pracess. Sp. Sancti a P. & F. Purgator, quia apud priscos sub talibus NOMINIBUS non commemorantur? Alfons. à castro, contra bears. l. 8. titde Indulgent.  name, & with some other circumstances, yet the Church of Greece (generally) doth retain the thing itself. And this was farther illustrated unto me by the confession of the Greeks' themselves in the Florentine Council; for it appeareth by their public protestation, that they agreed fully with the Roman Church in the essential doctrine hereof; howbeit they dissented from her in some points, which are not absolutely pertaining unto the necessity of faith.  
5. Now concerning such as have denied this doctrine as well in nature, as in name, in substance, as in circumstance, I noted a great difference in the manner, and course, and reason of their denial. For some denied it Secondarily, and by way of inference, that is to say, by reason of a precedent error. Thus the Armenians, & certain Greeks' have been devolued into a foolish imagination to conceive, that the soul hath no sense of joy, nor pain, until her reunion with the body; and hence it followeth necessarily, that there is no Purgatory after death. Some have denied it Primarily, and simply; that is to say, not in regard of any precedent error inferring this denial, but directly, and precisely in regard of the thing itself. Thus only our Aërians, Henricians, Waldensians, and finally we Protestant's (issuing from such progenitors) have rejected this doctrine, by a violent separation of ourselves from the visible society of the Church.  
6. But forasmuch as these Henricians, and Waldensians (in whom we glory; and Catholics do not envy us this honour) were sometimes members, as truly, and really connexed unto the Papists, as any other men, and fell away afterward from their communion (as Wickliff also did) I entertained myself a while in this consideration; viz. Since there was a time (yea many hundred years) when no Wicklevian, no Waldensian, or Henrician did appear; who did then deny Purgatory, & who did then oppose himself against this heresy, this damnable, and blasphemous doctrine (as we call it) for many generations? Wherefore as Tertullian doth excellently say; There was a time when such, 
Prescript. cap 30.  and such heresies were not known; Vbi tunc Martion, ubi tunc Valentinianus? etc. where was Martion, and where was Valentinian then? It is manifest that they themselves were sometime no heretics, but that they observed the Catholic Religion etc. So I spoke in my secret thoughts, and said; there was a time, when our opinions were not known: where was Henricus, or Waldo then? It is manifest that they themselves were sometime no impugners of this doctrine, but that they did meekly, and dutifully observe it as a part of the true, and Catholic Religion.  
7. I proceeded yet a little farther, and considered, that we Protestants could not possibly assign so much as the shadow of any one man (our Henricians, and Waldensians excepted) denying, or doubting of Purgatory, who was not heretical in some other doctrine, even such, as we ourselves confess to bring very great, and eminent danger unto salvation. And what advantadge, or defence could I take from any heretic, to secure myself in such a case? For if any man did please me in denying Purgatory, yet he did displease me also by some odious, and hateful opinion, wherewith he was infected: and then I could not find out any true, and Catholic Church, unless I would distill it mystically out of sundry persons, and compound their simples into one body of Religion. Which though it be such an ignoble, and an ungodly derivation of the Church, as tendeth unto the great contempt, and ignominy of Religion, yea the pure subversion, and annihilation thereof, yet necessity hath enforced us Protestant's unto these paradoxical fancies; for thus, & no otherwise can we sustain the essence, and existency of our Church.  
8. The conclusion, which yielded itself unto me out of the former consideration, was this; Whereas there hath been no visible Church, nor member thereof for many hundred years, which was not HERETICAL in an high degree (as our doctrines do clearly import) it followeth, either that the PROVIDENCE of God hath failed, or that the true Church was invisible, or else that the true visible Church may ere damnably in faith. None but Atheists will affirm the first: the learnedst Protestants deny the second; Scriptures, and Fathers convince the third. Wherefore reflecting upon our accusation of this doctrine, I saw that it was unjust: and thus I resolved by a powerful demonstration (issuing from the premises) that Purgatory is no heresy, nor Antichristianisme (as we pretend with greater violence, than reason) but a parcel of the true, ancient, Catholic, and Apostolic faith, as the Papists do confidently believe.    

CHAP. II. The WISDOM of God in designing fit Instruments to be the Messengers of his will, and Reformers of his Church, doth confirm the aforesaid doctrine of Purgatory, and Prayer for the dead.  

§. 1. Who were the first enemies of this doctrine, & what was their condition.  
1. IT is a grave, & weighty testimony which S. john Damascen delivereth in his Oration concerning them who are departed in the faith. Our merciful Lord doth appoint (saith he) and gratefully accept our duty in that mutual relief, which we exhibit one to an other, both in our life, and after our decease. For otherwise he would never have ministered this occasion unto us to remember the departed in the time of the holy Sacrifice, unless this service were approoveable in his sight. Neither is there any doubt, if this were a ridiculous, and fruitless act, but that, whereas there have been many holy men (Fathers, Patriarches, and Doctors) inspired with the holy Ghost, he would have put it into some of their minds, to repress such an error. But there is none of them all, no not one, that ever entertained a conceit to subvert, or impugn the same.  
2. As this laudable custom of prayer for the dead was thus perpetuated without any interruption, opposition, or dislike of the best men in the best age (even of Constantine himself) so the first enemy thereof [AERIUS] was an insolent, and graceless wretch, 
Anno Don. 354.  a disciple of the Arrian heresy, and such perfidious doctrines; as 
x Contra Campian. pag. 261.  D. Humphrey himself doth liberally confess, though otherwise there are some things in Aërius, which were not distasteful unto his palate.  
3. But this rare illuminate did not contain himself within these limits. Wherefore pretending a farther access of heavenly light (as the nature of heresy did incline him; for it is full of vanity, & 
* Idem licuit Martionitis quod Martioni [Lutheranis quod Luthero] de suo ingenio fidem innovare etc. Tertul. praescrip. cap 42.  innovation; making poor seduced people to hunt counter in their own fancies, and prescribing no certain rule unto the instability of their hearts) he vented three peculiar heresies, devised, and fabricated in the shop of his own brain. The FIRST: that there is no disparity betwixt a Bishop, and a Priest. The SECOND: that it is a folly to pray, or offer sacrifice for the dead. The THIRD: that it is against Christian liberty to have any general, and appointed days of fasting: for than we should seem to be under the Law. etc.  
4. These heresies are no small part of the Genevian Gospel; and therefore I have observed it diligently in our Authors (as a very remarkable point) that howsoever they corrade, and heap up sundry heresies, fiercely objecting the same unto the Papists, yet they are silent in three; Vigilantianisme, jovinianisme, and 
* The true Caluinists admit the 3. heresies of Aërius; as we foe in France, Scotland etc.  this Aërianisme whereof I now entreat. For these are goodly stars in our firmament, and shine most brightly in our Sphere. Notwithstanding my learned Authors do exceed Aërius also, forasmuch as he did not wholly impugn the dreadful Sacrifice, but esteemed it unprofitable for the the dead; whereas they reject the thing itself, and this use of it, with like contempt.  
5. This Aërian heresy was extinct, and buried (some few, scattering fellows excepted) until the year of our Lord 1156; when it was raised, 
See afterward, chap. 3. §. 4.  and enlivened again by Henricus, a Frenchman (in whom our Protestanticall Religion did more spectably rear up itself, than before) furbishing up some old rags of S. 
* Sainted by D. Fullees authority in his answ. to the Rhem. Testam. in 1. Timoth. 3. Annotat. 7.  Vigilantius, and others, for the resplendency, and completeness of his gospel.  
6. Nunc audi quis ille sit (saieih 
y Ep. 240.  S. Bernard unto Hildefonse, the Earl of S. Giles) now it may please you to understand, what was the quality, and condition of this Apostle. First, a Monk, and then an Apostata from his order. So was our S. Luther, Secondly; a pretendent of Apostolical life. Such sheepbiterss were our freese-gowne Preachers, whose doctrines enkindled the furious people, 
See the statutes of King Rich. 2. etc.  and seasoned them with the principles of rebellion. Thirdly; a violatour of Chastity. So was S. Luther; even 
* M. powel de Antichr. pag. 324.  Magnus ille Reformator, he our Great Reformer. An example unknown to reverend Antiquity, and reserved unto our gospel, that a vowed Monk should conjoin himself in marriage with a professed Nun; which, though it be not adultery, yet peius est adulterio, it is tarr worse, in S. 
* De bono Viduit. c, 11.  Augustine's censure; howsoever D. Field minceth it, and saith, 
Pag. 153.  Augustine MISLIKETH them that vow, and perform not.  
7. Finally; I saw a connfluence of impieties in our French Apostle, whether I respected his Religion, or Conversation. And therefore I could not withstand this just sentence pronounced by S Bernard, 
Ibid.  saying; Non est hic homo à Deo, qui sic contraria Deo & facit, & loquitur; this man is not sent from God, who acteth, and speaketh things so repugnant unto his will.   

§. 2. God useth no such instruments to reform his Church.  
1, HEre (inlardging my meditations) I considered more exactly, that the supreme Majesty of heaven, & earth, is respective of his honour, & the incolumity of his Church; and as it is against his gracious Providence, that the Spouse of his Son, and the Mother of the faithful, should suffer a general, and diuturnal eclipse in her profession, so now it is farther against his high WISDOM, that, when she wanteth a due reformation, he should not design honourable, and condign Instruments for such an excellent purpose.  
2. Where is the difficulty, and impediment in this case? Is it in his Prescience, that he cannot foresee what is to come, or is it in his Power, that he cannot effectuate, what he desireth? Not in the First; for I have his own testimony by the mouth of Samuel, his prophet, saying; 
1. Reg. 13.14,  QVAESIVIT etc. God hath sought a man according unto his heart; to wit, David, his servant. What he sought, he found; and yet he found no good thing in David, which was not his own gift. Not in the Second; for I am ascertained by the Forerunner of my Lord; 
Luc. 3.2.  POTENS etc. God is able, even of these stones, to raise up children unto Abraham.  
3. And if Caesar could say in the pride of his mortal heart; Inueniam, aut faciam viam, either I shall find a way, or I will make one; did it not concern the Wisdom of God (to speak no more of his Providence; which we Protestants have already destroyed, by enforcing a damnable error upon his universal Church) either to find out some man already endued with convenient gifts, or else to prepare some (in case none were yet adorned by him) to undertake such a royal, and incomparable work of REFORMATION?  
4. For how can I suppose, or once imagine (without injury unto my Lord, & expectation of his revendge) that any base, and detestable Caitiffs (falling away from the sweet communion of the Church into accursed heresies, and being thereupon the prophets of hell) should then also (and never before) be stirred up, and excited by God to redress his Church, the Pillar, & Firmament of truth? Is it probable, nay is it possible, that they, who remained not in the duty of her Sons, should be advanced unto the dignity of her Fathers? Are men actually inspired by God, and by the Devil, to impugn, and to defend her, to destroy, and to maintain her, to infect, and to preserve her? Were her sworn enemies more tender of her good, than her best friends, and were vile Rebels more respective of God's honour, than his dearest Servants?  
5. You that have the common instinct of moral reason, and the ordinary light of human understanding, judge, I pray you, judge unpartially in this case; 
Luther; thou art the scourdge of God etc. See Sir Th. More contra Luth. de Sacram.  whether such disastrous Reformers as Henricus, Aërius, and the like, were not rather ministers to execute the justice of God, than counsellors to promulgate his will, and whether he doth not rather correct, then direct; punish, then prescribe by such men. It was a tyranny in Mezentius to bind living men unto dead carcases. But the Wisdom of God doth assure me, that he will not tithe living body of his Church, unto the dead, and putrefied members thereof.  
6. The consideration of which point was of great power, and efficacy in my heart, to make me disclaim, and abandon the proceed of our GREAT Reformer, 
M. Luther.  in whom there was no true resemblance of a pious, and divine Spirit. Witness, his furious declamations against Zuinglius, and all Sacramentaries (the Patriarch, and Brethren of our gospel) his rude, and unsaintlike invectives against King Henry the eight, his heretical, and grievous assertions; his contemptuous 
* This is peremptorily denied by D. Abbot (against D. Hill, pag. 307) with a marginal reference unto Whitak. answ. to Camp. But Whitak. (in his answ. 10 Raindas' c 7.) being better advised in this matter, maketh some confession thereof; howbeit he interlaceth dishonest evasions, and gross untruths.  rejection of some Canonical Scriptures: his beastly, and unchristian positions, his light, and vain imaginations; his familiar conversation with Devils. All which (and many more) odious things are extant in his own works; things incredible unto such as do not yet know them, and fearful unto such as have experience therein.  
— 
* Iuue●al.  Felicia tempora, quae te  
Moribus opponant; habeat iam Roma pudorem.  
O happy times that brought thee forth,  
to thunder out complaint:  
Now Rome may blush to see herself  
opposed by such a Saint.  
7. But I will omit the work of our late Reformation (transacted by this boisterous Friar) and return unto my other reforming gentlemen, with whom I made this brief conclusion.  
9 The admirable WISDOM of God doth confirm, and aught to establish me in the doctrine of Purgatory, and Prayer for the dead, inasmuch as the first adversaries thereof were desperately affected against his Truth, and exercised open hostility against his Church. There is an Aërius, and an Henricus; here is an Augustine, and a Bernard: the first deny it, & follow their peculiar imaginations; the second affirm it, & rely upon the conformable judgement of the Catholic Church: choose now, whom thou wilt follow in this case, and with which of these thou wilt adventure the eternity of thy soul.  
9 Shall I answer, and say: I respect not, what the first, or second have delivered, but what the Scripture itself hath taught herein? A poor evasion: for the Scripture is clearly against me in this point, and I can not gainsay it, unless I will come forth with a non obstante of mine own sense; and yet I am bound (in all humility) to subordinate my understanding unto the instruction of my Superiors. But if in pride, and insolency (as S. 
* Furiosus mente, clatus opinion etc. See Epiphan. haer. 75. The same censure belongeth unto the rest.  Aërius, Henricus, Luther and others have done) I should prefer mine own judgement before the learned Fathers, and renounce that due, and convenient subjection which I should have toward the ancient, Catholic Church (she that must, and shall judge me, and all my Protestanticall Doctors) oh what monsters of opinion might I conceive, and what certainty of truth can I bring forth? Truly, as Aaron form many precious jewels into the similitude of a calf, 
Exod. 32.4.  so I might (haply) fashion unto myself many foolish conceits, by casting the precious word of God into the mould of my private, and misguided fancy.    

CHAP. III. The TRUTH of God hath confirmed this doctrine by a renowned Miracle. An exception of Protestants refeled.  

§. 1. The nature, and Use of Miracles.  
1. I Considered first, that as a Miracle is a Divine work in its nature, (because it can not be wrought without the special concurrency of God's power) so in its use, it is a Divine testimony, because it hath a reference unto some truth; and principally, when it is exhibited unto that purpose: for it procureth an inward conviction of the understanding, 
A mystery is secret, & hidden; and so it differeth from a miracle in respect of the USE, though it agree with it in the NATURE thereof.  by an outward demonstration unto the sense. In which respect I may truly say, that a Miracle is the broad Seal of Heaven, affixed unto some writing, or evidence of Gods own hand, bearing his image, and superscription.  
2. I considered secondly, that though Heretics, and Pagans, do often counterfeit this broad Seal, yet their falsehood is discoverable by men of judgement, weighing the Circumstances with due examination. Nay farther; though it please God that a true miracle shall be performed by them (as sometimes it hath come to pass) yet there is always a certain limitation therein precisely unto this, of that 
* As the maintenance of justice; or some other such moral, and civil respect. 1. Cor. 10.13.  peculiar end, so that it serveth by no means to give assistance, and validity unto their heretical, or paganical conceits. For the end, and use of God's works is always good; beside; he is faithful, who will not suffer us to be tempted above our power.  
3. I considered thirdly, that Miracles may have a triple respect, according to the triple distinction of the Church. For the Church hath three estates; viz. of PLANTATION; of PROPAGATION; of REFORMATION.  

De Civit. Dei lib. 22. cap. 8.  4. In the first estate, there was a necessity of Miracles (as S. Augustine doth well insinuate) to this end, that men might believe. For whereas our Lord did intend, that his Gospel should be the ordinary means of salvation for ever, he thought fit to gain sufficient authority unto it by an extraordinary means in the beginning.  
5. In the second estate, there was no such necessity of Miracles; and therefore S. Augustine saith very excellently; 
Ibid.  
* The Protestants do frequently, & earnestly allege this sentence but they cunningly suppress that which followeth. I hearty request you to read the whole chapter in S. Aug.  whosoever requireth miracles now to this end, that he may believe, he is a miracle himself, forasmuch as he will not believe, when the whole world believeth. Notwithstanding in this estate also, there is an utility of Miracles, for the glory, and splendour, and exaltation of the Church. Wherefore S. Augustine proceedeth farther, and speaketh to this effect: My former answer may be sufficient for the conviction of infidels; but I stay not here: Nunc quoque fiunt miracula; for now also (even in this large propagation of the Church) miracles are done in sundry places. Fiunt nunc multa miracula: Many miracles are done in these days. Some he reporteth upon his own experience, others upon certain information, and they are (generally) such, as wound our Protestanticall Religion to the death. And S. Augustine (as it were foreseeing the judgement of Infidels, and Protestants, and what exceptions they would take against his report) is very earnest in the delivery of these things, adding in conclusion of one miracle; Some men will not believe that this was so: but who are they? even they, that believe not, how our Lord jesus was borne of a Virgin, and yet her womb remained entire; or that, he came into the room, where his Apostles were assembled, and yet the doors were shut.  
6. In the third estate, Miracles are more 
* If Luther's reformation were good why was it not graced with so me evident miracles, & specially since so great a mutation hath followed ic as was never seen, in the Church of God? Nay, why are many miracles now done in that church which he renounced? Beda; hist. Eccles. l. 1. c. 21. Beda; l. 2. c. 2.  necessary then in the second, though not so necessary as in the first. For whereas it hath seemed good unto the singular wisdom of God to adorn his Church with some miracles always in the second estate, (even when no heresy assaulted her) it was very convenable that he should much rather afford this power in the third, for the extirpation of heresies, and for redress of great disorders. Examples whereof were frequent in the days of our forefathers, & Britanny itself hath copious testimonies in this kind. For thus the holy Bishop S. German confounded the Pelagians; and thus S. Augustine (our Apostle) reproved the schismatical bishops of Britanny, in the public conspect of the people.   

§. 2. A miracle wrought by S. Bernard, to the confusion of Henricus, and his doctrine.  
1. These considerations being premised, I took a serious review of an history, which though I had read long before, yet it did not prevail with me so far, as the dignity thereof did justly require. For partly the veil was so closely drawn over mine eyes, that I could not see the truth, and partly I passed over it with a negligent levity, and carelessness, as many Protestants do; not willing to entertain the knowledge of any doctrine, which sorteth not with the public State, or their private fortunes. 
Genes. 11.7.  Howbeit I know, that as the tongues of the Babylonians were divided, and one conceived not what an other spoke, so the tongues of many principal Scholars in England are divided from their hearts, & they speak not what themselves conceive.  
2. I come unto my history. S. Bernard hearing of the spoils which 
* Huius rei gratiâ, licet in multa corporis infirmitate, iter arripui in has parts etc. Bernar. ep. 240. S. Bernard. ibid.  Henricus made in the vineyard of our Lord, repaired into the parts of Tholouse which were greatly infected with his contagion (for now the Churches were left without people, people without Pastors, and Pastors without honour) and there, in a frequent assembly, he countermanded the fancies of this Apostata with learning, and gravity, and in the plain evidence of the Spirit.  
3. At the end of his sermon, many of the auditors presented unto him certain quantities of bread, and requested his fatherly benediction. The devout Abbot performed their desire with gladness, assuring them that they should discern the truth of his doctrine, and the falsehood of Henricus, if their sick, and languishing friends should immediately recover their strength upon the taste thereof.  
4. A venerable Bishop being there present, and fearing the success, added this clause (by way of caution) si bona fide sumpserint, if they receive it with a good faith. But S. Bernard, being secure in the power of almighty God, answered publicly, non ego hoc dixerim, no, I said not so; only this I said, and this I proclaim unto you, Let your sick people eat of this hallowed bread, and they shall be made whole; for hereby you shall know us to be 
* Viz. in the doctrines which he defended against Henricus, in the name of the Catholic Church.  TRUE Servants of God. His word was fulfilled & the fame of this miracle was so dispersed in all the country, that the blessed man, declining the intolerable concourse of the people, returned home an other way.   

§. 3. There is no evasion against the clearness of this Miracle.  
1. THe exceptions, which my heart could apprehend in this case, were three; but when I had weighed them all in the balance of my reason, I dismissed each of them successively with a part of Balthazars judgement; 
* Thekel Dan. 5.27.  thou art weighed in the balance, and art found too light.  
2. FIRST, to deny the fact it seemed an unreasonable conceit, because as it was done in a public, and solemn conuenti●, so it is recorded in very authentical manner by a reverend 
a Gulielm. Abbas in vitâ S. Bernard. l. 3. c. 5.  person, of S. Bernard's familiar acquaintance.  
3. If this be not sufficient, yet 
b Epist. 241.  S. Bernard himself did give me such a pregnant intimation, as satisfied me abundantly in this behalf. For thus he wrote unto the people of Tholouse after his return. Our abode with you was short but not unfruitful, inasmuch as the TRUTH was manifested by us, not only in speech, but in POWER also.  
4. Wherefore that excellent commendation wherewith M. Luther is advanced by one of his 
c joh. Aurifaber, in colloq. mensal. Luth.  disciples (but very unjustly; since that notable Apostle, as 
d Contra Pighium.  Caluin styleth him, 
e See Luth. in Esaiam. cap. 37.  did never cure so much as a lame horse) doth justly appertain unto this worthy Saint, viz. Vir potens erat in dictis, & factis, he was a man mighty both in word, and deed; as 
f Prophet● erat, & operator miraculorum. Part. 2. Serm. de S. Bernardo, See Guliel. Abbas in vita S. Bernardi lib. 3. cap. 6. etc.  john Gerson himself delivereth suitably to the same purpose.  
5. SECONDLY; to impute this fact unto sorcery, and incantations, it were a jewish, and heathenish folly; so the miracles of Christ himself, and of his Apostles, and Martyrs were traduced by their enemies. Besides; since all ingenious Protestants confess, that Bernard was an holy man, and replenished with divine grace (as his life, and his writings do contestify unto the world) how could I stain his honourable name with such ignominy, and disgrace?  
6. No; I will leave that humour unto M. 
g Centur. 14. c, 85.  Bale; let it be an argument of his ungentle nature, and not of mine, to accuse this glorious Saint, and to crucify his name with bitter reproaches; Coecus, & blasphemus ille Bernardus; that blind, and blasphemous Bernard.  
7. But forasmuch as I knew very well, that M. Bale was imbued with a 
h See the 3. Conuers of England. Part. 2. c. 5. num. 25. etc. 6. num. 32. etc.  malignant disposition against this, and other Saints (some of them being the honour, and crown of our nation) I remitted him unto the sweet, and modest answer of 
i De Considerate. lib. 2.  S. Bernard, saying; If one of the two must needs be, that either God, or I must be reproached, it is well for me, if he vouchsafe to use me as his buckler. I do gladly receive the darts of venomous tongues against me, that they may not come unto him. I refuse not to be inglorious, if I may defend the glory of my Lord. It is my honour to participate with him that said; 
Psal. 68.11.  Opprobria exprobrantium tibi ceciderunt super me.  
8. THIRDLY; to pretend, that howsoever (perhaps) some opinions of Henricus were expugned by this Miracle, but not (precisely) this concerning Purgatory, and Prayer for the dead, it was the last refuge which I could make, and the fairest suggestion, which I could conceive; and yet as joab perished at the Altar (a place of protection) so you will fail in this anchor of your hope. 
3. Reg. 2.   
9 My secret dispute in this point, was somewhat large; but I will contract it as briefly as I may, because I am unwilling to abuse your patience with any long, and tedious discourse.   

§. 4. Two Considerations: the first, General; touching the Catholic articles, which HENRICUS impugned: the second Particular, touching Purgatory. The Protestants are convinced.  
1. I Considered FIRST; that whatsoever Henricus disapprooved in the Church, he is imitated therein by Luther, or by some of his gospel, which is branched into much variety, and difformity of sects. For a more exact demonstration whereof, I laid down a catalogue of the particulars impugned by Henr. (which I will exhibit here unto your sight) and weighed every one singly by itself.  

1. Purgatory; Prayer, and Oblation for the dead.  
2. Invocation of Saints.  
3. Excommunication by Priests.  
4. Peregrination.  
5. Temples.  
6. Festivities.  
7. Consecration of oil, and chrism.  
8. Ecclesiastical sanctions.  
9 Transubstantiation.  
10. Baptism of Infants.   
2. The Waldensians following the Henricians; the Albigensians (Professors of the same faith, and religion, which we now profess, as D. 
k Against D. Bishop▪ part. 2. pag. 55.  Abbott testifieth to our great 
l See the 3. Conuers. of England. Part. 2. c. 10. num. 2. etc. Also the Examen of Fox his Calendar-Saincts. chap. 3. num. 17.18.19 etc.  disreputation) following the Waldensians; Wiclevians consorting with them all (though not in every particular) do symbolise very much in their impugnation of these things.  
3. I descended unto our later Churches (more evangelically ordered, and more speciously collected then these former were) and making a several inquisition touching the ten precedent articles, I found that the FIRST, and SECOND are contemned generally by all the Brethren of my Gospel. In the THIRD there is no small difference amongst them. For 
m Erastus etc.  some wholly reject that terrible censure. Sundry Divines also of good regard (saith 
n Cathol. doctr. pag. 191.  M. Rogers) conceive that Christians (cleaving unto Christ their foundation) are not to be excommunicated either for any error, or misdemeanour whatsoever. The Presbyterians derive the validity of this censure not from the Clergy, 
See M. Rogers, ibid.  but from a Clero-laicall Consistory, the creature of Caluins' imagination.  
4. I considered farther, that as some amongst us do entertain a base conceit of this high matter, so others do unjustly claim the exercise of this power. For since it belongeth unto spiritual jurisdiction, and since this jurisdiction belongeth unto no 
* Ordinarily.  man, who is not lawfully consecrated, and since we have no consecration, but 
* We plead so.  such as came directly from the Pope, and since he is 
o D. Fields rumbling phrases pag. 64.  Antichrist, the child of perdition, with the foam of his impure mouth, and froth of his words of blasphemy etc. I could not perceive, what just title we can have unto these celestial, and divine offices in the Church. For what communion is there betwixt Christ, and Antichrist?  
5. The FOURTH is cashiered by all, as superstitious, and profane. The FIFT article concerneth the Anabaptists, and Brownists most properly, who detest all Churches, because they were polluted with Antichristian abominations of the God Maozim etc. And truly their opinion herein floweth naturally from our principles; for if the Pope be Antichrist, and if the Churches were the temples of such Idolatry (as we pretend) then these men do laudably hate the very place of such untmachable impiety, and desolation.  
6. The sixth article pertaineth unto the rigid, and sincere Caluinians, whose Congregations are purified, and cleansed from the festinities of the ancient Church. Witness Scotland, France etc. where the zealous professors imitate their Forefather Aërius [of unholy memory] and renounce the Christian feasts, as 
p Epiphans de Aërdo; haeres. 75.  judaical fables etc.  
7. The SEVENTH hath been ridiculous unto us all; and yet some blessing (perhaps) was powered forth upon that oil, wherewith his MAJESTY received his first unction, to be the King anointed of our Land.  
8. The EIGHT article is despised by such pure Caluins, and severe Luther's, as measure the truth of all things by the yard of their own fancy. Hence it is that Luther reduceth the definitions of holy Concells unto a popular approbation, and consent of the unlettered people; for (saith 
q Tom. 2. l. 2. de rat. jud. Eccles.  he) they are the sheep of whom our Saviour testifieth, that they hear his voice. Hence it is, that his Apostolical self feareth not to pronounce; 
r Contra Henric. 8.  When bishops arrogated power to enact Canons etc. without doubt these were the cogitations of Satan: yea the first Council of Nice (saith he) committed sacrilege, and impiety against the most evident, and invincible scriptures of God. Hence followeth the contempt of sacred Synods, and neglect of their decrees.  
9 The NINTH is a damnable point in our eyes; and 
s M. Powel de Antichristo; pag. 254.  one of those deadly heresies, which was devised by Antichrist himself. The TENTH, and last article hath special reference unto the Anabaptists who repudiate the 
* S. Aug. de Genes. l. 10. c. 23.  tradition of the Apostles therein, as 
t See M. Rogers, Catl●. doctr. pag. 169.  the invention of a Pope, yea of the very Devil. So zealous are they against all things, not literally expressed in the word.  
10. But, when I searched into the fountain of this error, I saw that a singular disgrace ensueth thereby unto the gospel of our reformed Churches. For whereas S. Luther doth often couple the Anabaptists, and Sacramentaries in one string (protesting that they 
u Defecerunt ● nobis primò Sacramentarij, pòst Anabaptistae etc. See Luth. in 5. ad Galat.  fell away from him; & therefore he often defieth them both, as hateful, and execrable heretics) I 
w Staphyl. in lib. de Concord. Luther. & alij.  found that he ministered just occasion unto the former's vanity, by his unjust position, inasmuch as he taught, that Children have ACTVALL Faith; and that otherwise they should not be baptised. Whereupon some of his disciples (assuming that Children have no such faith) inferred necessarily, therefore they are not to be baptised.  
11. Thus the Anabaptisme of 
* See the Examen of Fox his Calendar-Saints cap. 3. num. 43.  Pacimontanus (a chick of Martin's eggs) was an infallible conclusion, by a true negative of that, which Luther did falsely affirm. This point 
x Cathol. doctr. pag. 170.  M. Rogers aimeth at very fairly, saying; Some are of opinion that none are to be baptised, which believe not first: and hence the ANABAPTISTS teach, Infants believe not, therefore they are not to be baptised. Hence also the LUTHERANS teach [so it pleaseth M. Rogers to speak; and yet D. Field is driven into a great passion against the Pope, because Bellarmine useth these 
* Lutherans: Caluinist. etc. pag. 179.  names of faction, and division] Infants do believe, and therefore they are to be baptised.  
12. As for the principal SACRAMENTARIES (for thus the Zwinglians, Oecolampadians, Carolostadians etc. are commonly phrased by S. Luther; howbeit it pleaseth 
y Pag. 170.  D. Field to say, that Some men's MALICE called them so) I saw that great ignominy doth attend them also in this behalf. For 
z Tom. 2. de baptism.  Zuinglius (our renowned, & military Patriarch) invaighing against this doctrine, Baptism confirmeth faith etc. sentenceth it to be a rash, and inconsiderate opinion. Yea (saith he) for this cause it was to be expected, that some men should deny baptism unto Infants. And I do ingenuously confess, that (being sometimes deceived with this error) I thought it more safe, that they should be baptised, when they are come unto a just age.  
13. Which Anabaptisme, though he disclaimed afterward, yet this heresy festered so deeply in his heart, that he always esteemed the baptism of children to be an external, or ceremonial thing, dispensable by the law of Charity, which the Church may well, and honestly use, or omit, as it shall seem good for the edification of our neighbour. The same opinion was taken up by 
* Inter ●p. Zuingl. & Oecol. l. 2. fol. 80.  Oecolampadius, the 
* See Bellarm. de Notis Eccles. cap. 8.  first [pretenced] Bishop of Basill. Truly a fit doctrine for a Bishop of such a stamp.  
14. This was the sum, and effect of my first, and general consideration; viz. that all the innovations, which Henricus propounded unto the Church, were such, as make up a goodly mess to furnish our evangelical table; and thus I saw no reason why the Miracle of S. Bernard should not be as sufficient a proof of all, as of some, and why not as specially of Purgatory, as of any other point.  
15. Wherefore I proceeded unto a SECOND consideration, which is more peculiar, and which did more forcibly procure my firm resolution, and indubious assent.  
16. For since our Lord did give his own testimony from heaven (and we know that his testimony is true) in defence of S. Bernard against Henricus, without all question, this doctrine of Purgatory was so included in the whole number, that it was no less clearly fortified by this miracle, than any other point. And my reason to conceive thus, was, because as S. Bernard delivered it, and the people accepted it no less freely than any other, so likewise God himself did concur in the operation of this miracle for a noble end; viz. the confusion of heresy, the manifestation of the truth, the honour of his name, the safety of his Church, the satisfaction of men present, and the instruction of succeeding ages.  
17. Yea forasmuch as he that wrought this illustrious Miracle, did then, and there (in the voice, and authority of the Catholic Church) publicly teach, and earnestly persuade, and constantly defend this doctrine, how shall the wit of an Archangel distinguish, what was, & what was not confirmed by this Miracle, in case the glorious Saint, and the visible Church were erroneous in the 
* See before; num. 1.  said opinions (as far as the substance thereof extendeth itself) & principally in the FIRST, it being a chief article in that catalogue?  
18. I concluded. As God will not (nay he can not; and this is a powerful impotency in him) bear witness unto any falsehood, so he doth never implicate, and obscure the truth in such manner, that we should be necessarily entangled with error, for want of possibility to discern it, and specially when the thing is such, as is heretical in nature, and damnable in effect.   

§ 5. An exception of D. Field against Miracles, refelled by the authority of GERSON whom he magnifieth, as a man that wished our Protestanticall Reformation.  
1. I Loved, & sometimes esteemed the Church-book of D. Field, as the best oracle of our days; and as the work commended the Author, so the Author did reciprocally commend his work in my simple thoughts.  
2. Amongst sundry positions which he there frameth, as bulwarks of our Religion, and impregnable forts thereof, I applauded this, which here ensueth: viz. 
a Pag. 185.  We say, that howsoever it may be, some miracles were done by such good men, as lived in the corrupt state of the Church, yet that is no proof of those errors [Purgatory, Transubstant. etc.] which the Romanists maintain against us. For WE PEREMPTORILY DENY, that ever any Miracle was done by any man in times past, or in our times, to confirm any of the things, controversed between the Papists, and us.  
3. In this resolution I was undaunted, because I took it to be substantial; & I embraced it as a necessary principle, because if it should fail, than it followeth most evidently, either that God is not true, or that our Religion is false.  
4. But now after my long, and serious discourse concerning the aforesaid miracle, I was compelled to sound retreat, and to deny my peremptory denial; for my reason did inform me that S. Bernard hath long since by miracle confirmed the doctrine of Purgatory; it being one of those things, which are controversed between us, and the Papists at this day.  
5. Besides; since any man, who is meanly instructed in the writings of the Ancient, doth know, that S. Gregory was a Papist (for which cause 
b Cathol. Apolog. in Secunda Classi.  D. Morton hath stalled him in the catalogue of Popish Doctors) and that S. Augustine (his messenger unto us) delivered the same Popish faith in England (as 
c Centur. 1. fol. 35.  john Bale confesseth, saying; Augustine the Roman was sent as an Apostle from Gregory the first, to season the English-Saxons with a popish faith; whence the same Bale is pleased to affirm that King Ethelbert died 21. years post susceptum papismum, after he had received Popery) & finally, that this holy, & blessed man (who came from far to sing the Lords song in a strandge land) did work many rare miracles, by cooperation of the Divine Power (for this is evident by the testimony of 
d Lib. 7. ep. 30.  S. Gregory the Great; of 
e Eccles. hi. l. 1. c. 26. 31. l. 2. c. 2. etc.  V Beda, and of sundry others; yea 
f Act. & Mon. pag. 105.  john Fox himself can find no exception against this point, howsoever he participateth with the malignity of 
g Contra Camp. Rat. 5.  D. Humphrey, 
h In his Reply pag. 185.  M. jewel, 
i Centur. 1.  john Bale, etc. and throweth out his contumelies against so worthy a Saint, to disgrace the work of our happy Conversion from Paganism unto Christianity) I desired to understand, whether we could truly deny (since we do PEREMPTORILY DENY) that none of those things were ever confirmed by Miracle, wherein the controversy standeth betwixt us, and the Papists, at this day? For I argued thus in my private cogitations, and said. Did God concur with our Augustine, and his assistants, by any FALSEHOOD to strengthen the (supposed) heresies, which they did then, and Papists do now maintain? No; for this were against his Truth; & I know that he neither deceiveth, nor is deceived. Or did he concur with them by CONFUSION, to strengthen some part, but not all that faith which they preached in the name, and authority of the Roman Church? No; for this were against the sweet disposition of his gifts, and works; and I am assured, that he is the God of order, and not of confusion, as I see in the Catholic Church.  
6. But there is yet an other evidence, which, as it is more particular, so it was more potent, and persuasive unto me then the former. And because, as it was a key to unlock my understanding, so since it doth most highly import yourselves (dear Contreymen) to take good notice thereof, I will here deliver it unto you, briefly and plainly; branching it into three considerations.  
7. FIRST therefore it may please you to be informed by 
k Pag. 171.  D. Field, that TRANSUBSTANTIATION is one of the greatest mysteries of Popish religion, which all Papists at this day do most firmly hold, and believe. Whence it followeth: if so special a 
* Miraculum in Mysterio.  Mystery of Popish faith, as this is, were justified by any Miracle, than all the Religion of the Papists is thereby confirmed, and established eminenter; that is to say, in a principal, or eminent manner.  
8. SECONDLY, it may please you to be farther indoctrined by the mature resolution of 
l Pag. 186.  D. Field, and the grave judgement of the Metropolitan himself (for this CHVRCH-booke was composed at his 
* See D. Fields ep. dedicat. to the Archb. of Cant.  direction, approved by his censure, and publicated by his authority) that there is NO BETTER proof of the goodness of our [the Protestant's] cause, then that that, which we [Luther, Zwinglius etc.] have done in the REFORMATION of the Church, was before wished for, expected, and foretold by the BEST men that lived (in former times) in the corrupt state of the Church. In the number of which best men, he recompteth GROSTHEAD, and GERSON; whom (with some others) he doth 
* Pag. 85.  elsewhere entitle Worthy Guides of God's Church. But how good a proof this is, and how laudable our Reformation is, which standeth, and supporteth itself chief upon the same, you may perceive by the little Appendix, which ensueth in the conclusion of this Treatise. Which when you have carefully perused, and discreetly weighed, then reflect upon this matter, and then speak in the uprightness of your consciences (betwixt God, and yourselves) whether the Cause be not very bad, and the patrons thereof much worse. Let that be an example unto you for ever to see, what immoderate affectation of untruth possesseth your most eminent Authors; and how miserable your Religion is, of whose goodness there is no better proof.  
9 THIRDLY; and lastly, it may please you to understand, that this worthy Guide of God's Church, and one of our (pretended) Fathers, 
m Part. 4. Serm. in festo Corporis Christi.  john Gerson (the most Christian Doctor; as he is commonly styled by the Church) discoursing upon the aforesaid great mystery of Popish Religion, and reproving INFIDELITY [to wit of Berengarius, and, in him, of Caluin: for it is a memorable point to consider, that though Berengarius did abjure his error against the Real presence, and died 
* See Gerson ibid.  penitently for the same; yea though the 
n Centur. 11. c. 10. pag. 527.  Lutherans of Magdeburge themselves do expressly say, that Pope Leo the 9 did merit great praise by condemning the heresy of Berengarius in a Synod at Rome, 
o Admonit. vlta●d We stphilum.  yet john Caluin protesteth, that he doth, and will follow Berengarius in his opinion; and it is clear, that our English Church concurreth with them both] which brought many FRIVOLOUS reasons [the very same, which we now produce, and allege at this day] against the blessed Sacrament of the Altar, delivereth his mind herein fully, and saith, that We ought to believe this truth [Transubstantiation] and to give credit unto God's word without any pledges, or depositions. as Miracles are. But if any man will" desire these things for his assurance, he may" have a thousand, and a thousand persons of most holy life, and profound knowledge, who have testified this truth unto death, by a thousand, and a thousand 
* Some are remembered by Claud. de Saint. de Euchar. Also by Bellarm. de Euchar. l. 3. cap. ●.  MIRACLES.  
10. Wherefore being thus encompassed on every side, and having no possibility to escape the pressure of this difficulty, nor to withstand the singular, and effectual power of this evidence (for one of the greatest mysteries of popish Religion is now confirmed by many Miracles, even in Gersons testimony, which I was bound to admit; because as his Person deserveth high respect, so it deserveth far greater with them, that will so graciously applaud him) I was forced either to disclaim D. Fields book, or to renounce my Protestanticall belief; but yet the later seemed a more reasonable course, because that Religion can not be good, which is so falsely, and absurdly defended by him, and all the chiefest Authors, that ever applied their pains unto this service.  
11. What remained now, but that I should conclude with S. AUGUSTINE (the 
* D. Field.  greatest Divine, which ever lived since the Apostles time, and the 
* Caluin.  best witness of Antiquity) and say with 
p De utilit. credones cap. 17.  him; Since we behold such a special assistance of God, such progress, and such fruit, shall we doubt to hide ourselves within the lap of 
* Not of Donatists, Aërians, Berengarians, Lutherans, etc.  that Church, which hath obtained the height of authority, partly by the judgement of the people, partly by the gravity of councils, partly by the Majesty of MIRACLES, and is descended by the succession of Bishops in the APOSTOLIQVE Seat [of S. Peter at Rome; a point, which 
* Velenus: Funccius etc. See Bellarm. de Pontifice Rom. l. 2. c. 2. 4. etc.  some men, filled with a spirit of contradiction, deny without honesty, wit, or learning] frustrà circumlatrantibus haereticis, the heretics barking round about in vain?  
12. Let your own consciences (kind Readers) make a secret application of these things in the closet of your hearts Which that you may more easily, and effectually do, I shall entreat you to cast back your eyes of consideration with me, and to reflect upon the premises (ingenious Academics) as it becometh men that rather have a care to see the truth, than a desire to impugn the same.    

CHAP. FOUR A Reflection upon the premises contained in this book.  

§. 1. Of the grounds, which I followed in this discourse.  
1. FIRST I considered that the grounds, and authorities, upon which I builded my discourse, were so clear, and solid, that no wit could dissolve, or impeach their strength. For if I accepted the Fathers, they did convince me; if I rejected them, my folly would be great, and my dispute uncertain. And thus I saw that the judgement of 
q Ret. 5.  Edm Campian must necessarily take place, viz. AEternam causae maculam coguntur [Protestants] inurere, sive recusent patres, sive deposcant; nam in altero fugam adornant, in altero suffocantur. Which points I prosecuted yet farther (though briefly) in this manner.  
2. If I ACCEPT the Fathers to be be my judges, as they are Churches Witnesses, I have the face of all Antiquity confronting me, and speciallly S. Augustine, whom, for some just respects, I do specially esteem. Was he a Protestant, and a Papist? then two different Religions are compatible in one soul; whence must ensue as great a strife, 
Genes. 25.22.23.  and colluctation, as Rebecca felt in her womb, when two Nations contended in her body. Or was he a Protestant, and not a Papist? why then is he so perspicuous against me in this matter? Or was he a Papist, and not a Protestant? why then do we so triumph, and glory in his name? Or finally; was he neither Papist, nor Protestant? Then both these Religions (in all probability) are false, and then (perhaps) none is true. Thus from an uncertainty, men run into a nullity of faith, and so the end of heresy is Atheism, because there can be no other issue, unto which it doth finally propend. And verily, who doth not conceive (upon due ponderation) that, if the CATHOLIC Religion, being so spectable in dignity, so continued in succession, so enlardged in diffusion, and so eminent in all respects, should notwithstanding seem false, or dubious, by reason of some cavillations framed against it by her enemies, it will rather come to pass, that no Religion should be true, then that the Protestants faith, which hath such a late entrance, such base founders, such uncertain grounds, such infinite divisions, should be more credible, and probable than the said CATHOLIC belief?  
3. I proceed. Since I was so powerfully expugned by the Fathers, as you have seen, how could I elude the gravity of their testimonies, which pressed, and oppressed me on every side? Should I (Alexander-like) cut the knot insunder with violence, which I could never untie with skill?  
4. There remained one principal shift for me, but yet it was of no value, or substance. For though later ages speak more copiously in this particular, and in many others, than the former, yet I saw, that it was by way of explication, not innovation; of declaration, not alteration; of exposition, not addition etc. For it is an excellent prescription, which Lirinensis delivereth in this case; viz. Fides habet profectum, 
1 Cap. 29.30.  non permutationem: faith hath a progress, or increase, but without any change. Matters of Ceremony are in their nature indifferent, and in their use dispensable; and herein no private man may prescribe unto the wisdom of the Church, or limit her power. Matters of Doctrine have their inlardgement, and amplification; but yet so, as that no other foundation be laid, than the same which we received in the beginning. Thus Pelagians may not complain, if the doctrine of Grace were more clearly illustrated by S. Augustine, then ever it was discussed before. Thus the Arrians may not complain, if the doctrine of Homousia were more fully explicated by the Fathers of Nice, then ever it was unfolded until that time. Thus also we Protestant's cannot justly complain, if the Catholic doctrine in this particular, were more abundantly expressed by S. Augustine, and by succeeding ages, than ever it was resolved unto his days. 
Lirinens.  Intelligatur te exponente clariùs, quod anteà obscuriùs credebatur etc.  
5. In REJECTING the Fathers, and recurrring unto the Scripture alone, I saw that I should strive without success; not because the truth wanteth defence in this kind, but because I feared, lest I might swear fealty unto mine own sense, and dwell therein, as a snail taketh impotent sanctuary in the shell, which her natural art hath fashioned out of her proper stuff.  
6. Thus jovinian (a worthy Progenitor of Luther's gospel) did so wrest, and pervert the sacred writ to establish his sottish heresy concerning the equality of joys in Heaven, and Pains in Hell, that 
s Contra jovinian. lib. 2. paulò post med.  S. Hierome himself is forced to confess, Quis electorum Dei non tentetur etc. who even of Gods elect children may not be tempted with these Scriptures, which this subtle disputer hath artificially, and cunningly inflected unto his purpose? In which scriptures jovinian did so exult, and triumph, that, being construed by his own spirit, they seemed invincible in his conceit.  
7. But the desperate folly of such as renounce the judgement of the Fathers, and dwell in their own sense of holy Scripture, discovereth itself most plainly in the late Founders of our Gospel. For thought 
t Tom. 1. in explanat. Art. 64.  Zwinglius (declining the trial of Antiquity) saith; whereas Papists cry out, Father's Fathers; I answer, that neither Fathers, nor Mothers shall carry it away, but the word of God alone, & we will endure no other judge; yet every simple fellow doth know that Zwinglius erred notoriously, and damnably in his exposition of the scriptures; whence Luther protesteth, that he was insathanized, persathanized, 
See the Tigurin Confess. See Luth. Confess. etc.  and supersathanized; and in sundry places of his works he challendgeth him for intolerable corruption of the Scripture.  
8. Howbeit Luther himself was not inferior unto Zwinglius in this kind. And hence it is, that 
u In respon. ad Luth. Confess.  Zuinglius biddeth all men to behold, & consider, how Satan endeavoured to possess this whole man. For whereas he doth err very often, and is miserably deceived in the sense of Scripture, he will compel God to excuse him, & to satisfy for him; devising this refuge, and shift, viz. If I be seduced, 
Quàm certum est Deum esse Deum, tam certus, & diabolicus mendax est Lutherus; saith Campanus a renowned Zwinglian. in colloq. lat. Luth. tom. 2. fol. 351.  or mistaken, God hath seduced, & deceived me, etc.  
9 Werefore, seeing, and estimating uprightly, what immortal contentions, and intestine conflicts passed betwixt our Founders, and how this hereditary war is descended unto us with farther addition, and increase, how could I believe them, or why should I not distrust myself hereafter in building my faith upon that peculiar sense, which a new, and late Spirit suggesteth contrary unto the resolution of Fathers, and councils, and the clear consent of the Christian world? O how justly, and fitly doth 
w Prascript c. 17.  Tertullian insinuate unto us the condition of wrangling Heretics! He that is most exercised in holy Scriptures (saith he) may lose his voice by contention with them, & purchase choler by their blasphemies. For if we affirm any thing, they will deny it; if we deny it, they will affirm it; and thus the victory will be none, or very dubious, or not certain by this course.  
10. For these, and many more weighty considerations, I settled my thoughts in this infallible position (not doubting to find the concurrency of all wise, discreet, and learned Protestants with me in this behalf) viz. 
See S. Aug. ep. 118. This epistle is often cited against the Puritas & namely by D. Whitgift against T. C.  No exposition of Scripture is sound, and perfect, which is form against the doctrine, or practise of the known, visible, professing Church. Whereunto I may add (in remembrance of M. jewels challenged) this clause; viz. for the space of 600. years after Christ.   

§. 2. Some chief points in the former discourse, to be observed.  
SECONDLY, I considered the particulars of this discourse, and weighed every syllable as uprightly, as I could balance it in my unpartial reason. For I did not favour the poor thing for the Author's sake; nay, I was more severe unto it in that respect.  
2. The conclusion of all was briefly this; that the said discourse is TRUE or FALSE; and so consequently, either I must refute it, or it must convince me.  
3. If it be TRUE, than my faith is conquered absolutely in this point, and probably (at the least; if not necessarily) in all the rest; and specially, wherein I have dissented from the Roman Church.  
4. For Charity, and Faith resemble each other in the nature of their process. Charity is the common bond of the Decalogue, and tieth all the precepts together. Whence 
x Rom. 13.10.  S. Paul sayeth, that Love is the fulfilling of the law; and 
y 2. 10.  S. james testifieth, that Whosoever breaketh one commandment, he is guilty of all.  
5. Likewise, Faith is 
* Ephes. 4.4.  one; not in the matters believed, but in the manner of believing; not in the object, but in the habit. All the Articles of our Creed, all the doctrines of Christian Religion have a just connexion in the order, course, & assurance of our belief; whence moral reason doth dictate this rule unto all men's understandings, that the certainty of error in one point of faith, doth prove the uncertainty of truth in all; even as an error in any one parcel of the King's Patent, maketh a nullity in his whole grant.  
6. I noted farther, that as this Rule is infallible in all points of my faith [a negative faith; built, for the most part, ex destructione veritatis, as 
z Prescript. cap. 42.  Tertullian speaketh of the heresies in his time] so principally in this, which consisteth in the impugnation of Purgatory, and Prayer for the dead; because I conceived, 
Nota.  that the Papists doctrine herein was no less weak in foundation, than it seemed dangerous in consequence.  
7. For which respect, I promised a certain victory unto myself, when first I singled forth this matter to be the subject of my 
* With a Catholic in England.  dispute; relying more upon the weakness of mine adversaries cause, then upon the confidence of mine own strength.  
8. If it be FALSE, than the contrary unto it must needs be true. For as there is a Truth in all things (though more difficile, and obscure in some, then in others) so it is but one, and simple. Yea truth, and falsehood are so diametrically opposed (the one affirmative, the other negative) that, where all due circumstances are observed, there a Contradiction must necessarily ensue.  
9 Here I attempted, as fairly, and substantially, as I could devise, to oppose a CONTRARY assertion unto each particular going before. For I conceived, that as this was a sincere, and perfect way for me to discover falsehood, and to discern the truth, so, if any one man (perhaps) would make a full, and satisfactory answer unto me (in case I should object the said particulars unto some 
* Caeteri eorum, in quos fortè incurtislem illum [Faustum] mihi. promittebant etc. S. August, Confess● l. 5. c. 6. So these men turned me over to D. Field etc. of whose collusions I. had too great experience before.  learned Ministers; as truly I did; pretending, that the schedule which I offered unto them, was directed unto me from a Seminary-Priest) he must follow the same method: and whatsoever he will oppugn therein as false, he must prove, that the Contrary unto it is true: Otherwise, he shall throw dust into the air with more contention, then profit. And truly nothing is more common, and trivial in our Authors, then to bombast their leaves with impertinent stuff, containing an uncertain sense of matter in an empty sound of words.  
10. Now for the better instruction of the good Reader, I will express my meaning familiarly, by some few particulars in this discourse. As for example; Whereas I had deduced the custom of Prayer for the dead from the holy Apostles [during the time of the gospel; for the jews, who are most strict in the observation of their law, practise it by an everlasting Tradition of their Fathers] I said, no; it came not from the Apostles. But how could I justify, and maintain this assertion; and why should I credit my private opinion, or the judgement of Luther, and his compeers, against the testimony of the Fathers, and prescription of all ages? Or why should I think, that any damnable error, springing from natural affection, and imitation of the Gentiles, could thus invade the universal Church, without any resistance?  
11. Whereas I had inferred Purgatory from the perpetual custom of Prayer for the dead, I said, no; the Catholic Church had no purpose in the commendation of the dead, to free their souls from any temporal pain. But how could I defend my conceit herein against the clear, and irrefragable authority of 
* See before pag. 35.  S. AUGUSTINE, ISIDORE, CYRILL, & others; whose 
* It goeth hard, if for a matter of history, the Fathers can find no better credit (saith D. Bancroft in his Survey, pag. 338.) with the Presbyterians. The Fathers should know, as well as Cartwright what was then in fact etc. The like did I conceive also in this case.  report was strengthened by the conformable practice of all, and impeached by the contrary assertion of none?  
12. Whereas I had declared, that none but Heretics did reject this doctrine, I said, no; they were not heretics at all, or else they were not heretics precisely in this point. But I saw that the same Catholic Church which reputed them [Aërius etc.] heretics in other things, condemned them likewise in this, and there was no possibility for me to defend Aërius from the crime of heresy, but by imputing it unto S. Augustine, Epiphanius etc. which were a desperate attempt.  
13. In a word. Whereas I had noted the virtues, and manifold graces, which shined in those Fathers, by whom this doctrine was propugned, I could not prove the contrary. Whereas I had described the vile, and contemptible estate of Aërius, & Henricus by whom it was impugned, I could not prove the contrary. Whereas I had informed myself, how Henricus was confounded by a singular miracle of S. Bernard, I could not prove the contrary; neither could I learn, that he, or Aërius, or Luther, or Zwinglius, or Caluin or any other Mint-maister of our late gospel, did give the least resemblance of any rare, and divine work, whereby I might perceive, that God did concur with him for the approbation of his new-coined faith, and warrant of such inordinate proceed.    

The Conclusion; with the Authors protestation unto the Readers.  
Thus being not able to disprove my former Treatise, I was enforced to approve it, and therefore I must necessarily persist in this opinion, until it be refuted in such manner, as that the CONTRARY also unto it, and every particular therein (pertaining directly, or indirectly unto this issue) be clearly, and substantially confirmed.  
If my reasons prevail not with you, yet despise me not; I am your contreyman, your flesh, and blood, tied unto you by the strong obligations of nature. Charity compelleth me unto this act of love, that I should wish you that happiness, unto which we all aspire; but how shall we meet in one end, who insist in such diversity of way?  
Let moral reason assure you, that I am not transported by any light, or sudden motion, to submit myself unto a Religion, which is neither delightful unto carnal affection, nor profitable in these days of mourning. I had my portion of hopes, as well as many others; Fortune beheld me with a benign, and comfortable aspect; and if I could prefer such entanglements before that TRUTH, which crieth mightily in my reins, I know no reason, why I should want that commodity, which I have been invited to enjoy.  
But as I give most humble thanks unto them, whose will to do me earthly pleasures, hath showed itself no less ready in promise, than their place doth enable them unto the performance, so I must be bold to say, with their permission, that my estate (since I am conscious unto mine own thoughts, and am resolved, that neither fear, nor hope shall foil my Religion, by his gracious assistance, upon whose mercy I depend) would be uncertainly good, or certainly evil, when other men's will to command, should be my reason to obey.  
Finally therefore, let your reciprocal Charity teach you to conceive, that I would not strive unwisely against the benefits of Fortune, or unkindly against the duty of Nature, unless some superior, and more excellent consideration, than these, did obtain a powerable authority in my soul. And as you have already seen one parcel of that Motive, which made an entrance unto my Royal Exchandge, so, when you have examined the second, I hope that you will entertain a gentle censure of your poor friend, and that you will not torment his name upon the rack of unchristian, and excessive speech.    
The end of the first Book.   

THE SECOND BOOK; WHEREIN THE FALSEHOODS, AND CORRUPTIONS OF SOME LEARNED PROTESTANTS are detected. * ⁎ *  
Behold, you trust unto yourselves in the words of lying, which shall not profit you.  jerem. 7.8. * ⁎ * 

The Preface.  
IT hath pleased many men, partly out of that opinion, which they conceive of their own cause, and partly out of that affection, which they bear unto me, to praise, and dispraise me with this Apostolic sentence; He did run well; 
Gal. 5.7.  who did let him, that he obeyed not the TRUTH?  
Unto these men I return a loving, a faithful, and just answer, founded in the demand of an eminent Professor of their gospel; 
D. Abbot against D. Bishop; Part. 2. in fine.  Will you be any longer led by them, who thus grossly abuse you? My willingness to believe, meeting with other men's facility to deceive, did captivate my blind thoughts into the society of their error.  
For as judah committed folly with Thamar, 
Genes. 38.  because her habit was changed, and her face covered; so I was entangled with their conceits, because they mask their intolerable falsehood, & disguise it under the shape of great sincerity, and truth. Thus D. MORTON protesteth, 
In Cathol. Apol. Part. 1. Epist. ad Lector.  that he may call God to be a witness, and revendger against his soul, if he deceive any man 
* Si sciens fallo.  with his knowledge. Nay, God forbidden, that, for defence of truth, which is life, he should procure the assistance of a , which slayeth the soul.  
But 
* Ipse legendo reperiet etc. See S. Aug Conf. l. 3. c. 12.  discovering their vanities at the appointed time, and seeing how pitifully I had been 
* Vsque ad annunaetatis 28. etc. See S. August. Confess. l. 4. c. 1. jerem. 17.11. See S. Hierom. in hunc locum. Also S. August. contra Faustum l. 13. c. 12.  seduced by them, whose words seemed unto me divine Oracles, I could not be any longer led by them, who do so grossly abuse their own knowledge to deceive poor, ignorant, credulous souls.  
And thus as Nature teacheth the young Partridge to forsake the false dam, & to receive more sweet protection under her wings, by whom she was brought forth, so Grace teacheth me to disclaim heretical Congregations, and to submit myself unto the direction of that Mother-Church, which brought me forth unto God by baptism; and therefore doth challenged right in me, as in her own child.   

THE FIRST PART, CONCERNING THE UNTRUTHS, AND CORRUPT DEALING OF D. FIELD, IN THE question of Purgatory, and Prayer for the dead.  

CHAP. I. How the 4. Doctors of the Church, viz. S. Gregory, S. Augustine, S. Hierome, and S. Ambrose, are traduced by D. Field, in this particular.  

§. 1. S. GREGORY abused by D. Field. A note concerning S. BERNARD.  
THE substance of D. Fields discourse concerning the CHURCH (the greatest, and most ponderous subject in all religious disputes, as he affirmeth 
* In his epist. to the Archb.  saying; that men, desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence, as the matters, now controversed, are, must diligently search out the true Church; that so they may embrace her communion, follow her directions, and 
* Nota.  rest in her judgement) consisteth principally in this issue; to wit; that the opinions, wherein the Papists descent from the Protestants at this day, were not the doctrines of the Church, 
See his third book. chap. 6. 7.  but of a faction only, predominating in the same.  
2. Now forasmuch as the copious declaration of this point would exceed the convenient quantity, 
Chap. 7.  or compass of that chapter, wherein the several differences betwixt the Papists, and Protestants are briefly (and 
* See one example afterward; chap. 4.  falsely also, in some part) set down, it pleased him to frame a certain Appendix, which he annexeth unto his third book, and therein he undertaketh to justify the aforesaid position, by the testimonies of sundry Fathers, & Schoole-authours, whom he there calleth worthy, and learned men. For so he is accustomed to speak honourably of his enemies for his own advantadge.  
3. Descending unto the controversy, 
* Chap. 20.  Whether any sins be remitted after this life, or not, he useth this pretence; viz. Whereas Lombard, and others do say, that some venial sins are remitted after this life, we must so understand their sayings, that therefore they are said to be remitted after this life, because they are taken away in the very moment of dissolution; and the last instant of life, is the first after life etc. This is the sum of that exposition, which he maketh of Lombard's, and other men's opinion concerning the remission of sins after this life; wherein how sincerely, and exactly he dealeth, I will not now dispute.  
4. I come unto his proof (brought forth by him, to corroborate the aforesaid exposition) which I will here relate, word, by word, as it standeth in his book. Hereunto seemeth 
* Dialog. l. 4. cap. 46.  GREGORY to agree saying; that the very fear, that is found in men dying, doth purdge their souls, going out of the body, from the lesser sins. Seeing therefore, as 
* In Psalm. Qui habitat ser. 10.  BERNARD saith, if all sin be perfectly taken away, which is the cause, the effect must needs cease, which is punishment; it followeth; that seeing after death, there is no sin found in men dying in state of grace, there remaineth no punishment, and consequently, no Purgatory. So he.  
5. But when I viewed the Author himself, I found that the sentence of S. Gregory doth bear much otherwise, than it is here delivered by M. Doctor's pen; for thus it soundeth in a true, and faithful translation. FOR THE MOST PART very fear alone doth purdge the souls of IVST men going out [of their bodies] from their LEAST sins. Wherefore I noted three points of fraudulency committed by the Doctor in a few words. First; by an Omission: for whereas S. Gregory saith, PLERUMQVE, for the most part it is so, he cashiereth this particular, and vouchsafeth it no mention at all. Secondly, by his Reddition; for whereas S. Gregory saith, MINIMIS, the smallest sins, he chandgeth the degree, and translateth lesser sins; which was no little deceit in him, that had a purpose to collude. Thirdly, by an Extension; for whereas S. Gregory saith, JUSTORUM, the souls of just men, he rendereth the speech in a more general, and unconfined manner; viz. the souls of men dying: and thus he mangleth a clear sentence, to derive a conclusion from it, 
Many such tricks were discovered by the B. of Eureux in the writings of the L. Plessis. See the defence of the Relation of a trial concerning Religion in France. It is annexed to the Examen of Fox his Calendar-Saints; Part. 1. a Cathol. doctr. pag. 121.  contrary to the purpose of the author there, and his doctrine in other places.  
6. For, if not all light sins, but the LEAST; in the souls of IVST men, to wit such, as are of singular sanctity (and not generally of men dying in state of grace) are FOR THE MOST PART (and not always) purdged out by fear, at the time of their death; than it followeth by inevitable deduction, that some sins are purdged in an other world, and consequently there is a Purgatory for this use. This is the intendment of S. Gregory: and therefore a M. Rogers (that Catholic Author) dissembleth not this matter in S. Gregory, but saith plainly, as the truth is (which fault he is not much subject unto) Some Papists [viz. Gregor. dialog. l. 4. c. 39] do think, that only venial sins are purdged in Purgatory.  
7. In which passage three things offered themselves unto my consideration. First; the limitation of his speech, SOME; a particle merely superfluous. 
See afterward Part. 2. chap. 1. §. 2.  For all Papists are of this opinion, viz. that no sins, but venial only, shall be expiated in Purgatory fire. Secondly; the imputation of POPERY fastened upon him, from whom we Englishmen received our first instruction in the faith. This was a good motive unto me, to embrace Popery (as passionate Sir Martin Luther phraseth the Catholic Religion; whom I might more justly call a foul mouthed dog, then 
b Against D. Bishop Part. 1.  D. Abbott bestoweth this homely courtesy upon a very learned 
* T. W.  Priest) since we were translated immediately from Paganism unto this belief, by the wonderful, and gracious operation of almighty God. Thirdly; his confession of S. Gregory's judgement concerning the remission of some sins after this life; which D. Field would infringe, as you see, by misinforcing his testimony against his evident purpose in that 
* Lib. 4. dial. 39  place, and his resolution elsewhere.  
8. For in his exposition of the penitential Psalms, he delivereth, in 
* Psal. 1. & 3. in the beginning of each.  two several places (and strengtheneth himself in the first, with the authority of S. AUGUSTINE, whom he there expressly nameth) that some men pass into heaven by the fire of purgation, and are expiated thereby, in the future life. Can I desire a more copious satisfaction in the truth of this matter? Or could I wish a more abundant redargution of D. Fields falsehood, in traducing the Testaments of the dead (for so their works are) to establish that doctrine, which they did wholly disclaim?  
9 Now a word, or two, concerning S. Bernard, whom he coupleth very plausibly with S. Gregory (as you may see) to infer a conclusion against that faith, which they both professed. I turned unto the place in S. Bernard; which, truly, can by no means admit such an interpretation, as M. Doctor doth colourably pretend. For it is not the meaning of S. Bernard to deny, that God doth at any time inflict a temporal pain after the remission of the guilt of sin; because this position were extremely repugnant unto Scriptures, and Fathers, and Reason (as I shall briefly declare 
* Part. 2. chap. 1. §. 2.  afterward) and unto the very condition of the Sacrament of Penance itself, wherein S. Bernard knew right well, that sin is remitted, and yet all future punishment is not thereby taken away. This was the conform doctrine of the Catholics in his time: and who is so meanly skilled in S. Bernard's faith, as to conceive, that he would oppugn a matter of such sublimity, and so correspondently entertained by the Church?  
10. But the truth is this: S. Bernard persuadeth men to fly from the contagion of sin, the effect whereof is such, that as by natural death it severeth the soul from the body, so by spiritual death, it sundreth God from the soul. And as sin brought forth punishment, so the cessation from sin preventeth punishment; because no punishment doth follow, where no sin is gone before. What then? doth no effect of sin remain, where the guilt of sin is remitted? S. Bernard 
* He esteemeth death itself to be a punishment of sin, as you may see by the sequel.  denieth it; and therefore showing in what sense he there intendeth, that When ALL sin shall be 
* Prorsus. D. Field himself confesseth (pag. 98.) that Death tyrannizeth over the body etc. Serm. in ●bitu Huberti.  WHOLLY taken out of the way, then shall no effect of it remain, he subnecteth this sentence in his sweet, and divine manner; viz. Happy is our expectation, and blessed is our hope, whose Resurrection shall be much more glorious, than our first estate [of creation, before our fall] forasmuch as neither sin, nor punishment; neither evil, nor scourdge shall reign, or dwell, or have possibility to reign, or dwell, either in our bodies, or souls.  
11. To conclude; it may please you to read, and to ponderate this one, little saying of S. Bernard, by which you may take an estimate of his judgement in these matters. My brethren; while you think to avoid a very small punishment in this world, you incur a greater in the next. For you must understand, that you shall pay an hundred fold in 
* In purgabilibus locis.  Purgatory for those things, which you neglect in this life.  
12. I know (most kind Readers) that you marvel no less now, than I did, by what art D. Field can distill his Church out of the writings of these worthy, and learned men; or how their authorities may be honestly alleged to prove, that Papists are nothing else, but a faction in the Church; forasmuch as those Authors (generally) whom he produceth in his glorious Appendix, are really interessed in that faction, and enemies of our Protestanticall Church. Wherefore I did now sufficiently understand, that we Protestants, assuming the name of Israel unto ourselves, and imputing the name of Philistims unto the Papists, could not justify our affectation therein, by any better resemblance than this, viz. As the poor, 
1. Sam. 13.19.20.  distressed Israelites were constrained to repair unto the Philistims for the sharpening of their dulled tools; so we miserable Protestants (having no better means) are enforced to go unto the Papists, to procure some weapons, for our defence, from them, which we turn ungratefully, and unjustly against their own bowels.   

§. 2. S. AUGUSTINE abused by D. Field.  
1. YOu have 
* Pag. 13.  seen the goodly pretence of D. Field, assuring you, that the Protestants honour, and reverence the Fathers much more, than the Papists do. Which venditation if it did proceed from a sincere heart, then D. Field should not stand in need of his inflexions, and corruptions, to sustain his cause with their disgrace, and much less with infaming the greatest of them all in this manner, which I will here represent unto your Christian view.  
2. The Romish manner of praying for the dead (saith 
c Pag. 99  he) hath no certain testimony of Antiquity; for NO MAN ever thought of Purgatory TILL Augustine, to avoid a worse error, did DOUBTINGLY run into it; 
d And none before? that is false.  after whom 
e And not all? that is false.  many in the Latin Church embraced the same opinion, but the 
* See before pag. 54.  Greek Church never received it to this day.  
3. He is yet more severe unto S. Augustine, unto the Papists, and unto this doctrine; saying; that 
f Pag. 79.  Augustine doubtfully broached that opinion, which gave occasion to the Papists of their HERESY touching Purgatory. This imputation [of heresy] doth cleave as strongly unto the Fathers (whom he pretendeth to honour, and reverence) as unto any Papist at this day; for what should I speak of 
g Part. 4. Serm. de defunct. & in Querelâ defunct.  GERSONS heresy in this point, whom he honoureth, and reverenceth so far, as to entitle him a 
* Pag. 85.  worthy guide of God's Church? etc.  
4. Now, though I observed many untruths, which are sparsed in these little sentences of D. Field, yet I will exhibit the chief only unto you at this time; reducing the said accusation unto threc, particulars. The first noteth the TEMERITY of S. Augustine, as though he had been the Author of a new fancy. The second noteth his IRRESOLUTION, as though he had been uncertain, and dubious in this conceit. The third noteth his FOLLY, or want of judgement, as though he had run (inconsiderately) into an error in this point, to avoid a worse in some" other. Concerning each of these particulars, I will offer unto you the fruits of my late Protestanticall meditations.  
5. In the FIRST branch of this accusation, I found the dealing of D. Field to be so corrupt, and uncapable of defence, that thereupon I conceived an extraordinary detestation of my cause, which, surely, is so evil, that our greatest Divines fall from a good conscience, while they employ their art to sustain it from falling; and no doubt, but, if D. Fields advantadge against Cardinal Bellarmine (worthy of immortal honour) were suitable unto this, than his censure were not unjust, which 
* Pag. 1●7.  he delivereth in these words; here Bellarmine showeth 
* Divide that word for D. Field● own use.  plainly, that his impudence is greater than his learning.  
6. The suggestion of D. Field against S. Augustine in this particular, discovered itself unto me to be vain, and empty, for two respects. First, because our own writers teach the contrary; & secondly, because the Fathers themselves, both Greek, and Latin, are clear witnesses against him in this behalf.  
7. For first, I was informed by M. Rogers in his 
h Pag. 120. See M. Perkins in his problem. pag. 185.  Catholic doctrine, that the Papists are new, and renewed Heretics, forasmuch as they consort, in the doctrine of Purgatory, with the old Montanists, who thought that there was a purdging of souls after this life. Likewise M. Gabriel powel (patching together a farthel of heresies, and laying them upon the Pope's back) saith, that 
i De Antichristo pag. 243.  the Pope hath taken Purgatory from Montanus; a miserable heretic in the ancient, primitive Church. But here I would be instructed by these gentlemen Catholics; why neither 
* Haeres. 26. etc.  S. Augustin, nor Epiphanius (promising to deal 
* Haeres. 48. propè sinem.  exactly in registering the heresies of Montanus, and others) nor any Catholic Authors (who were careful to observe the entrance, and progress of heresy) did never reprehend this (supposed) heresy in Montanus, nor in Tertullian (whose testimony my Brethren have alleged) but did receive, embrace, and deliver the same (really) as true, legitimate, and Apostolical doctrine? Every thing is not heresy which an heretic doth maintain, but that precisely, wherein he dissenteth from the conformable opinion of the Church. I proceed.  
8. The Magdeburgian 
k Centur. 3.  Centurioators seem to lament, that the seeds of Purgatory are dispersed in the works of Origen; but as for Prudentius, Lactantius, and S. Hierome, they accuse them in express terms, as men wholly imbued with this conceit.  
9 I came (secondly) unto the Fathers, as well of the Greek, as of the Latin Church, and was furnished by each, with singular, and abundant proofs; some small parcel whereof I will here tender submissively unto your view. S. 
l In Esaiam c. 9  Basill, surnamed the GREAT, saith, that God doth intimate unto us an expurgation according to the sentence of the Apostle; 
m 1. Cor. 3.15.  if any man's work burn, he shall be safe, but as it were by fire. Likewise S. 
n Serm. de defunct.  Gregory Nyssen (an holy Bishop, and most worthy, in the judgement of 
o Cap. 42.  Vincent, Lirinensis, to be the brother of Basill, in respect of his faith, conversation, integrity, and wisdom) writeth copiously of this matter, and teacheth, that the fire of Purgatory shall cleanse the soul, and purify her, before she take possession of eternal joy.  
10. This noble payr was of some more antiquity then S. Augustine; for S. Gregory Nazia●z. (the 
* See G. Nazianz. in orat. funeb.  companion of S. Basills' labours) was the instructor of 
* S. Hieron. in apolog. adversus Ruffin.  S. Hierome; and S. Hierome himself was a venerable old man, when S. Augustine was in his flourishing age, as the sequel shall more amply declare. Now though S. Basill, and his brother may be sufficient witnesses in this behalf, yet because the 
p Deut. 19.15.  Scripture saith, that in the mouth of two, or three witnesses every word shall stand, I will adjoin a third, to wit 
q Homil. 3. de Epiph.  Euseb. Emissenus (more ancient than them both) who affirmeth, that such as have committed things worthy of temporal punishment, shall pass through fire, and shall there pay the uttermost farthing, etc.  
11. The Latin Fathers conspire with the Greeks herein. For S. Hierome, who was well stricken in years, when S. Augustine was in his strength (whence it is, 
Vid. epist. Aug. 11. & 14.  that he taketh up this proverb against him; A wearied ox treadeth sure; and useth this complement unto him; Farewell dear friend, my son in years, my father in dignity) sayeth, without all ambiguity; that some souls shall be afflicted with temporal pain after this life. But I will refer this point unto the next section, where S. Hieromes name must be delivered from D. Fields unjust calumniation.  
12. I come therefore unto a payr of excellent men, with whose verdicts I will here rest content. The first is 
r In Psal. 37.  Ruffinus, averring, that Purgatory fire is more grievous, than any punishment inflicted in this life. The second is S. Ambrose, witnessing, that some souls shall suffer temporal pain by fire, and endure a penal expurgation therein. 
In Psal. 118. Serm. 20. ● In psal. 36. v. 14. etc. See S. Aug. Confess.  The first was little inferior, in his age, unto S. Hierome; the second was the Father of S. Augustine's faith; for he begat him with the word of truth.  
13. These things being thus premised, and duly weighed, judge now with me (courteous Readers) whether there be any colour of truth in the first part of D. Fields accusation, devised against S. Augustine; viz. No man ever thought of Purgatory TILL Augustine ran into it etc. And so much for this.  
14. In the SECOND branch of his accusation, I saw that the learned Doctor doth earnestly seek after some delusions, to entangle his unrespective, and incompetent Reader therein. For, though he pretendeth, that as S. Augustine was the man who, before all others, did run into this opinion, so, likewise, it was with a perplexed, and uncertain mind: yet many evidences did occur unto me in his works, which clearly dismaske the vanity of this unreasonable suggestion.  
15. Out of a great number, I selected two, and they are sufficient to enervate the disguised shifts of all Protestants in this behalf. The FIRST. 
s De verb. Apost. Ser. 32. See also de curâ pro Mert. cap. 1.  Non est dubium etc. There is no doubt, but that the dead receive help by the prayers of holy Church, by the healthful Sacrifice, and by alms. The SECOND. 
t De civit, Dei lib. 21. c. 24.  Non veraciter diceretur etc. It could not be said truly, that the sin against the holy Ghost shall not be forgiven in this world, nor in the world to come, unless some sins were remitted in the future life. And, in the same place, he speaketh most constantly of temporal pains, which the souls of some men sustain, after their dissolution from the body.  
16. Wherefore, I reflected now upon D. Fields assertion, and was amazed to behold such a repugnancy betwixt these things; viz. Augustine ran doubtingly into Purgatory; and yet he affirmeth; There is no doubt, but that some souls are relieved by the Sacrifice etc. Again. Augustine did broach this opinion doubtfully; and yet he sayeth in great confidence; It cannot be said truly, that one sin shall not be forgiven in this world, nor in the next, unless some sins, not remitted here, should be forgiven there. Was S. Augustine so simple, as not to regard his own positions? or are not other men dishonest rather, in contorting his words against his purpose, and intention?  
17. But forasmuch as I knew, that our best, and most respected Authors do insist everlastingly in this point, I adhibited all possible diligence to find out the doubtful sentences in S. Augustine, which may seem to give way unto this pretenced IRRESOLUTION; and specially such, as belong unto this business, directly without deductions, inferences, glosses, interpretations, 
NOT ●  or the like devices, whereby men are wont to heap up many testimonies out of the Fathers, and to make their conclusions against some doctrine, which is not particularly handled by the Fathers in those places, whence they assume such proofs.  
18. The principal therefore, and most pertinent sentences, which I could find, are two; which here ensue. FIRST. Some men are of opinion (saith 
u Enchirid. ad Laur. cap. 67.  S. Augustine) that such as are baptised, and continue Christians (not divided by any schism, or any heresy from the Catholic communion) how wickedly so ever they live, and never wash away their sins by repentance, nor 
* Daniel. 4.24. Is this doctrine repugnant unto our Redemption by the blood of Christ alone? Truly as much as the former doctrine of Propitiation etc. See before, pag. 29.  redeem them with alms, but persist therein most pertinaciously unto their last day, yet they shall be saved by fire; howbeit their punishment shall be extended according to the quality of their offence. But they, who say thus, and yet are CATHOLIQVES [viz. not separated from the Church by any heresy; as Arrians, Marcionites etc.] seem (in my opinion) to be deceived by a certain human benevolence.  
19 Here S. Augustine, in his mild, and gentle disposition, though he rejecteth this conceit in some private men, yet he referreth the cause of their error, unto the simplicity of their love. Neither doth he propound any scruple against Purgatory, but only he denieth it unto such persons, as, by an evil life, and impenitent death, make themselves uncapable of this 
* Misericor. & Iudi●. cantabo tibi Domine etc. Psal. 101. Which S. Augustine, and his company did sing, after his mother's decease See Confess. l. 9 c. 12.  merciful justice. As for example. The law in England doth provide a mitigation of penalty for some offenders; as burning in the hand, pillory, or some like chastisement, and depriveth them not of their life; because she would, in her justice, punish sin, and yet, in mercy, she would preserve the person. Now, if any man would exceed the purpose of the law, and, in his affection, would grant this indulgence unto Murderers also, his error must be corrected by such, as are more equal in the courses of justice than he is; and yet they, who deny this benefit unto a Murderer, do not thereby subvert the Law, which showeth mercy unto some transgressors, but they reduce the practice of it unto the intention of them, by whom it was respectively decreed.  
20. The SECOND sentence in 
w Enchirid. cap. 69.  S. Augustine, is this. It is not incredible, that some such thing may be done after this life, and yet it may be questioned, whether it be so, or not. For it may be found out, or it may lie hid, whether many faithful men shall be saved by a certain Purgatory fire, either more slowly, or more speedily, as they have more, or less affected these temporal goods. Howbeit these men also are not such, of whom the Scripture sayeth 
* 1. Cor. 6.10.  they shall not possess the kingdom of God; that is to say, unless their sins be remitted unto them upon their convenient repentance.  
21. Here S. Augustine doth not leave it as a thing uncertain, and disputable, whether there be any temporal pain, or penal expurgation of some souls after this life (for he doth affirm it confidently in many places, and doubteth of it in none) but he leaveth it as a thing questionable, whether any earthly affections (remaining actually in the separated soul, and cleaving thereunto) be purdged out after this life, 
He might doubt also de qualitate poenae, viz. whether FIRE be the Instrument which God useth in the purgation of souls, or not. For though this be most credible, yet no man is obliged to receive this opinion, by absolute necessity of faith.  by affliction, pain, and sorrow, as they are purdged out in this life, very often, by tribulation, and grief. This is clearly imported by his own words; TALE aliquid fieri etc. It is not incredible that some such thing may be done after this life, and yet we may doubt, whether it be so, or not.  
22. Wherefore, as in the 
* num. 18.  former sentence S. Augustine disputed of the PERSONS, unto whom Purgatory may appertain, so here he disputeth of the QVALITIES, which are to be cleansed out of their souls; but he disputeth, or doubteth in neither, of Purgatory itself, or a penal estate (for, to litigate concerning names, & words, it were a childish folly) wherein the souls of some men shall receive a castigation for their sins. That this is the true, and genuine sense of S. Augustine in the aforesaid places, all intelligent Readers will easily perceive by the connexion, and dependency of his discourse.  
23. But I proceeded yet a little farther, and considered yet more exactly with myself, that the very prescription ensuing 
x Cap. 110.  there in S. Augustine's profound discourse, doth invincibly, and substantially demonstrate unto me (always presupposing him to be no simple fellow, nor gross companion) that he had no purpose, nor intention, in the aforesaid places, to admit any doubt concerning PURGATORY (really, and purely conceived in the nature of the thing itself) but only concerning some accidental respects. For (saith he) Negandum non est &c. It is not to be denied, that the souls of [some] men deceased, have relief by the piety of their living friends etc.  
24. Now, what an absurdity were it in S. Augustine, to affirm with great confidence, that some souls are relieved by the piety of their friends, and yet to be in doubt, whether there be any distinct estate of souls, afflicted with a temporal pain? But, whether it be more probable, that S. Augustine was thus carried into a brainless conceit, or that the Protestants derive his words against his clear purpose, I remit me unto your ingenious, and wise determination.  
25. Mean while, I shall entreat D. Field to take notice of one question, which I desired long since to propose unto him, and to crave his plain resolution therein, without ambiguous, or perplexed speech. Forasmuch as S. AUGUSTINE doth often, and constantly deliver unto us (not only by the known instruction of the Catholic Church, but by the certain evidence of holy scripture) that there is a temporal pain inflicted upon some souls in a future estate, why doth D. FIELD conceal this point from his Readers, and why doth he 
* Pag 7●.  muster up such sentenes only, as bear a show of doubt, and then make a pretence, that Augustine did DOUBTINGLY run into Purgatory, and that he DOUBTFULLY broached an opinion, which gave occasion to the Papists heresy in this matter? Besides; if the Papists were as greatly proud, as 
* Pag. 71. 170. 1●9. in epist. dedi● etc.  D. Field doth earnestly object this crime unto them, yet were they so foolish, and obtuse also, that they would rather assume this doctrine from S. Augustine's▪ DOUBTFUL sentences, then from his perspicuous, and irrefragable authorities in this behalf?  
26. To conclude this second branch of D. Fields accusation; it may please you to consider with me, that as piety doth oblige us to reconcile all places of sacred Scripture (which seem to imply any contradiction) in such manner, that the truth of each may be inviolably preserved, according to the intendment of the holy Ghost: 
See Zanch. de Redemp. in quaest. de invocat. Sanct. what rules he prescribeth in this case.  so wisdom doth prescribe unto us, that no doubtful sentence in the Fathers should be expounded, or admitted against their certain doctrine in other places, and specially, when it is strengthened by the public approbation of the Church. For as it is a singular impiety in Luther, and in his truest disciples, to reject the Epistle of S. james, upon a supposed, or seeming 
* We are justified by faith, without the works of the law. Rom. 3.28. We are justified by works, and not by faith only, james 2.24.  contradiction therein against S. Paul (whence 
* See Duraeus in respon ad Whita●●rū pag. 9  Pomeranus, in his lutheranical violence, saith, that the Author of S. james his epistle, bringing an impious argument, and making a ridiculous collection, allegeth Scripture contrary unto Scripture; and thus he renounceth a part of holy writ with extreme defiance) so it is a remarkable folly in any man, to enforce conclusions out of some obscure, or dubious places in the Fathers, sensed against their evident, and perpetual doctrine elsewhere; a course, which the chief Protestants despise, and contemn in the Puritans at this day.  
27. In the THIRD branch of this accusation, D. Field is very injurious unto the dignity of this blessed, and renowned Father. For he knoweth that S. Augustine doth not fearfully impugn this error [viz. all rightly believing Christians shall find mercy in the end, whatsoever their wickedness were, etc.] inasmuch as many testimonies are extant in his 
* Enchi●id. ad Lau●. c. 67. De fide, & ope● c. 15. De Civit. Dei. l. 21. c. 26.  works, whereby it doth appear, that he disclaimed it absolutely, and disproved it fully; howbeit he is modest, and temperate in his disputes, and not of that rusticity, as our brethren in Luther's, and Caluins' gospel, who, like Cadmaean upstarts, convulnerate themselves with mutual reproach, whereby they are exposed unto a public, and just contempt.  
28. But now, o 
* This honour may be as duly given by me unto S. Augustine, as it is given by M. Rogers (in his Cathol. doctr. epist. dedicat. num. 4) unto M. Latimer.  sacred, and reverend Augustine, I will turn my speech unto thy religious, learned, and excellent self. Didst thou so fear to oppugn an error, that thou didst not fear to violate the truth? Couldst thou not reprove a falsehood in some men, without giving occasion of heresy unto others? wouldst thou so peremptorily affirm, and yet immediately doubt in the same thing, and specially, the matter being such, as, in extension, did belong unto the whole Church (for so thou hast informed me) and, in consequence, doth evacuate Christ's merits (for so we pretend) and impart his office unto our proper satisfactions?  
29. If this be so, then 
a Contra Hen●ic. 8.  S. Luther had a good reason for his contemptuous demand: Quis est Augustinus, & quis nos coget illi credere? Who is Augustine, and who shall compel us to believe him? If this be not so, why then do we traduce thy glorious name, to destroy the ancient faith, and why do we depress thy incomparable worth, to sustain our ruinous cause?   

§ 3. S. HIEROME abused by D. Field.  
1. I Come unto the third Doctor of the Latin Church, S. Hierome, whom our Great Reformer doth not only 
b Luth. in Gen. 22.  trample under his feet, but also 
c Luth. in colloq. convival. in cap. de Scholast. Theol.  expelleth out of the number of Doctors, and pronounceth him to be an Heretic: for thus he honoureth, and reverenceth the Fathers much more, than the Romanists do.  
2. Though D. Field hath moderated his style toward S. Hierome, and (using the testimonies of this Saint at his pleasure) dismisseth him  a more gentle imputation, saying, that 
d Pag. 166.  Hierome was a man of a violent spirit, yet as the abuse, which he offereth unto him (in the question of Purgatory) is subtle in the manner, and hateful in the matter thereof, so he doth plainly discover his affection toward the Truth, and the Fathers to be such, that he neither respecteth how vainly he doth elude the first, nor how unconscionably he doth entreat the second. Mark therefore 
e Pag. 79. This opinion he putteth upon S. Hierome, as you shall see presently.  his artificial passage, which here ensueth.  
3. It was an error of sundry of the Ancient, that all Catholic Christians, how wickedly so ever they live, yet, holding the foundation of true Christian profession, shall in the end (after great tormen endured in world to come) be saved, as it were by fire. They durst not say (as Origen) that the ANGELS, who fell, 
Note these 4. opinions.  shall be restored in the end; nor (as some others) that all MEN, whether Christians, or Infidels; nor (as a third fort) that all CHRISTIANS, how damnably so ever erring in the faith, should in the end be saved; but thought it most reasonable, that all RIGHT believing Christians should find mercy, what so ever their wickedness were. This [fourth] opinion was so general in Augustine's time, that very fearfully he opposed himself against it; and not daring wholly to impugn that, which he found to have so GREAT, AND REVEREND AUTHORS, he qualified it what he could, and so doubtfully broached that opinion, which gave occasion to the Papists of their heresy touching Purgatory, etc.  
4. Here the Doctor (sorting his terms wisely for his own advantadge) 
* ad Literan K.  quoteth S. Hierome; as though the reverence, which S. Augustine yielded unto his person, made him fearful to impugn his error. But what overture is there of S. Hieromes error in this point? Behold two places, alleged by the Doctor out of his works. FIRST. 
f Hierom. in Esaiam cap. 66.  As we believe, that the torments of the Devils, and of all deniers of God, and of all the wicked (who have said in their heart, there is no God) shall be eternal, so we think, that in respect of the sinners, and ungodly, 
* Et tamen Christiancrum, saith S. Hierome.  whose works shall be tried in the f●re, the sentence of the judge is moderate, and mixed with mercy. SECOND. 
g S. Hierome. contra Pelag. l. 1.  He writeth, that Christians, being prevented in sin, SALVANDOS POST POENAS, are to be saved after pains.  
5. Now consider, I pray you, with what art D. Field seeketh to obtain his purpose. For, intending to dazzle the understanding of his Readers, he adjoineth this sentence immediately unto the former (as jacob followed Esau in the birth, 
Genes. 25.26.  and held his brother by the heel; which signified, that he would, in time, supplant him viz. Augustine saith in his Manuel to Laurentius, chap. 67. that such as think, that ungodly men, and sinners POST POENAS SALVANDOS, seem, in his opinion, to be deceived by human benevolence. Hence a credulous, and ignorant Reader must necessarily conceive, even for the similitude of these words [post poenas saluandos] that the opinion of S. Hierome is here particularly aimed at, and reproved by S. Augustine; and, for this end, D. Field hath craftily convaighed those words into S. Augustine: howbeit they are not found at all in the designed 
* Euchirid. ad Laur. c. 67.  place; as you may perceive by that exact, and faithful translation of S. Augustine's sentence, which you shall find in the 
* §. 2. num. 18.  precedents; unto which I must remit the courteous Reader, because I have confined myself unto a certain quantity, which I may not exceed in this discourse. For as Procustes extended their legs, which were shorter than his iron bed, and contracted them, which were longer; so many men are tyrants unto their own conceits, enlardging, or abbreviating them according to the capacity of their paper. I affect not a vanity with the first, but I suffer a necessity with the second.  
6. I proceed. As D. Field would infer out of the two former sentences in S. Hierome, that he was entangled with the 
* See before; num. 3.  fourth error [viz. all right believing Christians shall find mercy, whatsoever, their wickedness were] so I might infer by the same reason, 
NOTA.  that he was entangled with the third error [viz. all Christians, how damnably so ever erring in the faith, shall in the end be saved] and, if any man will stand so ill affected unto S. Hierome, as D. Field doth, he may enforce the one, as well as the other, out of the aforesaid places.  
7. But I satisfied myself, for two considerations, that good S. Hierome (a great, and reverend Author indeed, as D. Field confesseth truly; howbeit with a purpose to deceive) was guilty neither of the third, nor fourth opinion (as you see them randged 
* num. 3.  before) nor to be accused (reasonably) by any man in this behalf. FIRST; because some particulars in the aforesaid sentences, exempt from this suspicion; as namely; 
* In the first sentence.  QVORUM opera, whose works shall be tried in the fire etc. which word [quorum] is not taken explicatively, to signify all Christians, but distinctively, to note forth unto us one certain 
* What degree this is, you may conceive by his doctrine, which here followeth. num. 3.  degree of Christians, who shall suffer a temporal punishment in fire. Again: S. Hierome 
h Lib. 1. contra Pelag.  disputing learnedly against the Pelagians, speaketh thus, in the name of the Catholic Church; WE say, that Christians, prevented in sin, shall be saved after the infliction of some pains. What we? I, and a faction only, consenting with me? No; but that Church, which you impugn, and which I defend. And if S. Hierome had exceeded her known intention, he were guilty of notorious treason against the integrity of her faith.  
8. SECONDLY; because many grave sentences in S. Hieromes works, do clear him wholly from that unjust imputation; and 
* If occasion required it.  so I had greater reason to use D. Fields direction in this case, than 
i Pag. 166.  he had to use it in some other; viz. Hierome wrote many things, that must have a favourable construction, to make them accord with that, which, elsewhere, he hath delivered. Consider therefore, with me, the weight, and efficacy of these testimonies. 
k S. Hierom. in S. Matth. cap. 26.  It is not sufficient [unto salvation] to have faith, unless faith be confirmed with good works. Again. 
l S. Hierom. in Hos. c. 4.  When heretics see men offend against God, they say, that God seeketh nothing of them, but the 
* Heretics faith is false: but as they think it to be true, so S. Hieromes purpose is to show, that true faith without good works, availeth not unto salvation.  VERITY OF FAITH. For this cause the people are not humbled, but they rejoice in their sins, and go forward with a stiff neck. Wherhfore the People, and Priest, Master, and Scholars are bound up in the SAME JUDGEMENT.  
9 I considered farther, that S. Augustine refuting this error, which D. Field deriveth upon S. Hierome (as though he were 
* He nameth none other. See before, num. 3.  one of those great, and reverend Authors, for whose sake S. Augustine fearfully opposed it, and durst not wholly impugn it, etc.) produceth a very forcible, and powerful reason to expugn it; viz. 
m S. August. in Enchirid. ad Laur. c. 67.  if men of Catholic, and entire faith, should be saved in the end, notwithstanding their wicked lives, and perseverance therein unto their last hour, than it would follow, that faith may save a man without works. But that is impossible (saith he) even by the testimony of S. james; and of this matter I have treatised elsewhere, in a 
* De fide, & operibus c. 15. etc.  book written by me to this effect. Now, were it not a sottishness in me to conceive, that Saint Hierome (let not D. Field, nor Luther be offended with this reverence, and honour, which I yield unto the Fathers, by their just title of SAINTS) is guilty of that error, which S. Augustine disprooueth, since he also controlleth it, by the validity of the same reason precisely, which S. Augustine hath alleged, and urged to this purpose? Were there any congruity, or coherence in such a fancy?  
10. Wherefore, as I was directed by these considerations, to entertain a more reverent opinion of S. Hierome, then ever I admitted unto this time, so that high conceit, which I had of D. Fields extraordinary value, languished in me daily; and the 
* The Protestants CHURCH.  cause itself, which he undertaketh to defend, seemed worse, and worse in my thoughts, forasmuch as the chiefest patrons thereof, are continually driven unto such dishonourable, and unworthy shifts.   

§ 4. S. AMBROSE abused by D. Field.  
1. SAint Ambrose maketh up the mess, and beareth his part of disgrace amongst his friends.  
2. But as the carriage of this matter is very smooth, so it seemeth to be very sincere, and grave. For when the learned Doctor hath laid forth the sense, 
See before, pag. 31.  and intendment of Antiquity in her prayers for the dead, he goeth forward, with a specious pretence, 
Pag. 98.  to unfold the truth more amply, and to detect such errors, as were embraced by some men, contrary unto the designment, and purpose of the Catholic Church.  
3. It was an opinion (saith he) of many of the Fathers, that there is no judgement to pass upon men, till the last day; and that all men are holden either in some place under the earth, or else in some other place appointed for that purpose, so that they come not into heaven, nor receive the reward of their labours till the general judgement, etc. Of this opinion was justin Martyr, 
* He taught the doctrine of Purgatory; and so did Lactantius also, by the confession of sundry Protestant's. 1 De natué Dei, l. 4. c 4.  Tertullian, Clemens Romanus, Lactantius, Victorinus Martyr, AMBROSE, joh. Pontifex Rom. and sundry other.  
4. Here I did suspect the integrity of D. Field in his manifold turnings, and inflexions, because I was informed long before by n Hierome Zanchy, that prayer for the dead had not a reference particularly unto the soul, but rather unto the body (a point not omitted by 
o Pag. 98.  D. Field himself) and his collection is framed in this manner. Ambrose, in his funeral oration, upon the death of Valentinian the Emperor, confesseth, that 
* Aeterna vi ●. fruitur viluptate a●e S. Ambrose his words.  his soul is in heaven, and yet he addeth farther, that he will be mindful of him in his prayers, and oblations. Wherefore either Ambrose doth contradict himself (which, in so little a passage, is unlikely) or else, he referred his prayers unto the resurrection of the Emperor, and unto his corporal estate.  
5. But Zanchius is egregiously mistaken in this collection, and his partition is unsufficient; for S. Ambrose doth not contradict himself, neither yet did he refer the execution of these religious duties unto the body alone, and resurrection of the Emperor (as it appeareth by his express testimony in this oration; viz. Let us prosecute the godly SOUL with our oblations: likewise in his oration for Theodosius, he desireth God to take the emperors SOUL into his rest; thus also in his oration for Satyrus, he maketh a special commendation of his SOUL unto almighty God: and this was the practice of the Church) but as many probable reasons did induce him to conceive, that Valentinians soul was now in actual possession of eternal joy, so for want of infallible assurance in this behalf, he would not intermit his duty, nor neglect his office toward the dead, which charity prescribed, and the Church appointed in this case. In like manner 
p In obitis Humberti.  S. Bernard, out of his singular hope, which was founded upon very probable reason, saith, that Humbertus (lately deceased) iam obtinet gaudium etc. doth now obtain those joys, which shall endure for ever. Notwithstanding, it were a folly to imagine, that S. Bernard would neglect the accustomed piety, and devotion of the Church, which (haply) might be expedient for his soul. To conclude. Hence it is that S. 
q Confess. l. 9 c. 13.  Augustine, supplicating unto God for his deceased Mother, saith; I believe, o Lord, that thou hast already performed the thing, which I desire (for she was a woman of singular virtue; and the premises of her good life inferred the conclusion of her happy death) but yet accept the voluntary petition of my lips. The first proceeded out of a pious belief, the second out of a wise fear, and there was charity in both. Which point I wish that 
r Cathol. Apolog. Part. 1. l. 1. c. 87. q 2.  D. Morton had duly weighed within his heart, before he branded S. Augustine with this improper censure, Magis affectionis, quam rationis oratio, the oraison of Augustine [for his mother] came rather from affection, than reason. I return now unto D. Field.  
6. Being tormented with a necessary suspicion, rather of D. Fields unfaithfulness in his report, then of S. Ambrose his folly in this matter, I made haste unto the Author, whom he allegeth to justify his assertion: viz. SIXTUS SENENSIS bibliothec. sanct. lib. 6. annotat. 345. I turned unto the place, where I found Senensis discoursing to this effect. The opinion of Bernard [viz. that the blessed souls content themselves with the aspect of our saviours humanity etc.] though it be condemned (as Castrensis doth observe) yet I think, that the Author is to be excused with a grateful, and benign affection, because many excellent Fathers in the Church, SEEMED, by their testimonies, to give authority unto his opinion; as namely, Irenaeus, justin Martyr, Lactantius, AMBROSE, Chrysostome, Augustine etc.  
7. When I had diligently perused the place, I noted a subtle collusion in the Doctor, forasmuch as he singleth forth S. Ambrose, & omitteth S. Augustine; knowing, that the first might be jaded more coulorably than the second, and that every nose would not have this crafty dealing so quickly in his scent, because the savour is not so strong. I considered also; if D. Field had never been acquainted with S. Ambrose his works, or if he had not distinctly remembered his opinion in this point, yet the learned Author (whose testimony he abuseth to the injury of an other) did prohibit him to condemn S. Ambrose with such haste; for he saith, that many of the Fathers 
* Visi sunt.  SEEMED to give warrant unto this opinion: and therefore, if Senensis had not added any interpretation to clear S. Ambrose from that folly, yet this limitation itself might have mitigated his censure, and it could be said at the utmost, that Ambrose did seem to be of this opinion: thus one half of the wrong had been abated, whereas now it is doubled, yea tripled by this unfaithful dealing; and so the last error will be worse than the first.  
8. For though Senensis doth presently answer in behalf of S. Ambrose, and some 
* August. Chrysost.  others, that he, and they speak of the perfect, and consummate felicity, which the souls expect to enjoy after the resurrection of their bodies (thus, saith he, we have interpreted the sentences of AMBROSE, Aug. Chrysost. annotat. 64. & 169. lib. 1. annot. 264. in this book, and elsewhere) yet D. Field suppresseth that resolution, and so exposeth this good Father unto the mercy of all enemies, that will calumniate his name. This is the faithfulness, and such is the exactness of D. Field, to conduct his Readers into the true apprehension of the ancient Church's purpose in the religious duty of prayer, and oblation for the dead.  
9 With these, & other devices parallelable thereunto, he hath replenished that whole 
* 17. in the third book.  chapter, wherein he treatiseth of this matter, & concludeth it with this reproachful derision of BELLARMINE; Truly, I am weary in following of him in these SENSE LESS FOOLERIES. But the Reverend Cardinal hath now gained a just defence for himself, from D. Fields unjust accusation of other men, and may take comfort in this plea; am I better than my FATHERS? I am well content to bear my part in their fortune, and to participate in their disgrace; Yea, considering the dignity of their persons, the excellency of our common cause, and the disposition of him, who standeth out in defiance of me, and it, and them, I regard not the folly of his malice, but I compassionate the misery of his case.    

CHAP. II. D. Field accuseth BELLARMINE unjustly of trifling, and senseless foolery in the question of prayer for the dead. CALVIN doth truly confess, that the Protestants repugn Antiquity in this matter.  
1. LEt the Reader observe (saith 
s Pag. 97.  D. Field) what it is, that 
t De Notis Eccles. c. 9  Bellarmine is to prove, and he shall find, that he doth nothing but trifle. For he is to prove, that 
u Instit. l. 3. c. 5. §. 10.  Caluin confesseth, that more than 1300. years since, the Popish doctrine, and custom of PAYER FOR THE DEAD did prevail, and was generally received in the whole Church of God throughout the world. This if he will prove, he must argue thus. 

The custom of praying to deliver the souls of men out of the pains of PURGATORY, is the custom, and practise, which the Roman Church defendeth, and Caluin impugneth.  
But this custom, Caluin confesseth to have been in use, more than 1300. years since  
Therefore Caluin acknowledgeth the doctrine, and practise of the Roman Church, to be most ancient, and to have been received 1300. years ago.   The Minor proposition of this reason is false; and Caluin, in the place cited by Bellarmine, protesteth against it, most constantly affirming, that the Fathers knew nothing of PURGATORY, and therefore much less of prayer, to deliver men from thence. So he.  
2. I turned unto the disputations of Bellarmine; where he proveth by the confession of Caluin, and some others, that many doctrines, now impugned by the Protestants, and defended by the Catholics, are the doctrines of the ancient Church. Amongst other particularities in his discourse, the Cardinal allegeth this sentence of john Caluin; viz. It was received into use above 1300. years ago, to make prayers for the dead. But those ancients (I confess) were 
* Abrepti in errorem etc.  carried away into an error. Whence it followeth (in my poor capacity) that Caluin doth confess, that he, and his reformed Churches, are opposite unto Antiquity in this doctrine. For, doth he not impute it unto the Fathers, as an error, and doth he not censure them most indignly in this behalf, saying, that they yielded herein unto their natural affection, and unto 
* thus the, Puritans. pervert the testimonies of Epiph. etc. & say, they wrote, according to the custom, & manner of their age etc. See D. Bancroft in his Survey. pag. 337.  custom, but were destitute of precept, and example in the Scripture?  
3. Nay he goeth yet farther, and, in the sublimity of his pride, he saith; Whereas Augustine reporteth that Monica desired to have a commemoration made of her at the 
w Confess. l. 9 c. 13.  Altar after her decease, this was an old wives request, which the son never examined by the rule of the Scripture, but, according to his natural affection, would have it allowed of others. But did not the gentle Monsieur understand, or did he not regard, that neither the old wife (as his Eldershipp speaketh in his Lucianicall vain) nor her son did perform any thing herein, but what the Catholic Church did warrant, and prescribe unto them? Did he not conceive, that it was Aërian heresy to impugn this duty? And could the Mother, or the Son neglect the same, without a singular offence, and just suspicion of that crime?  
4. Wherefore though Caluin having confessed his dislike of Antiquity in this doctrine, doth afterward frame his cunning exception against the Papists, and deriveth it in such sort, that they (forsooth) can not glory in the ancient Church, as partaking with their error, forasmuch as she affirmed nothing of Purgatory, whereof they dream etc. yet I saw, that this was a piece of his cogging art, and dicing skill (as 
x calvinus jud viz. pag 59  D. Hunnius writeth) whereby he eludeth the gravest, and most perspicuous Scriptures, to the great advantadge of jews, Arrians, and such like pestiferous enemies of our Lord jesus Christ. Again; as sundry testimonies in the Ancients did assure me, that the general custom of Prayer for the dead was referred unto the benefit, and comfort of their souls, so, for the conviction of Protestants, and for demonstration of their repugnancy unto the Catholic Church in her most venerable times, it was sufficient for me to know, that Caluin doth abundantly declare his improbation thereof; & that therefore Bellarmine doth not trifle in this issue.  
5. For we must distinguish here betwixt this ACTION, which was performed by the Church, and her INTENTION therein. Caluin confesseth the first, and litigateth about the second. Now it was evident unto me, that the Cardinal (in the aforesaid place) doth allege him precisely in the first respect; but as for the second, it is a matter of farther dispute.  
6. That this was the purpose of the Cardinal, I was induced to conceive, not only in regard of his excellent understanding, but also by a plain, and substantial overture in his own works. For, 
y De Purgators l. 1. c 6.  discussing the question of Prayer for the dead, he reproveth Caluin in 4. points. FIRST; because he condemneth himself by his own mouth, inasmuch as he freely agnizeth the great antiquity, and large propagation thereof, and yet feareth not to say, that the Fathers were carried away into an error in this matter. SECONDLY; because he pretendeth that the Fathers, in their prayers for the dead, did seek to express a kind affection unto them, but intended not to procure ease unto their souls. Which untruth, because it is notorious, and suggested out of malice, Bellarmine calleth it a lie, and saith, that it is refuted by the testimony of 
x Euchir. ad Laur. c. 110.  Augustine himself.  
7. I pretermitt the two other points; it was a copious satisfaction for me to understand, that Bellarmine doth distinguish here betwixt the action, and the intention; and, consequently, that D. Field doth calumniate a worthy person, to defend the inexcusable folly of our Genevian Apostle, who depraveth all things in the excessive liberty of his Spirit.   

CHAP. III. D. Field doth nothing but trifle in his accusation of BELLARMINE, and defence of CALVIN. His untrue construction of the heresy of Aërius; the great contradiction of Protestants in this point, being all guilty of this heresy, and, consequently, no Catholics.  

§. 1. D. Field refuted by S. Epiphanius, and S. Augustine.  
1. AS the confession of Caluin, and practise of our Congregations did inform me, that the Protestants renounce the custom of prayer for the dead, and wholly disclaim the ACTION itself; so many forcible reasons did resolve me, that the Papists, retaining the action, do likewise herein preserve the INTENTION of the ancient Church; notwithstanding the gloss of D. Field, who, to confirm, and establish the injury, which he hath already done unto the Cardinal, annexeth this passage immediately unto the 
* After those words— to deliver men from thence. See before; Chap. 2. num. 1.  former viz. But Bellarmine will reply, that the custom of praying for the dead was most ancient. We answer: The custom of remembering the departed, naming their names at the holy Table, in the time of the holy mysteries, and offering the Eucharist (that is, the sacrifice of praise) for them, was a most ancient, and godly custom, neither is it any ways disliked by us. And surely it appeareth, this was the cause that AERIUS was condemned of heretical rashness, in that he durst condemn this laudable, and ancient custom of the commemoration of the dead.  
2. How doth it appear, that SURELY this was the cause, & c? Behold the proof; Epiphan. haeresi 75. But surely this is a miserable proof. For when I consulted with Epiphanius, I found that our forefather Aërius did pick a quarrel against this religious duty, in the same manner, and to the same effect, as we do at this day, saying; if the prayers of the living may be profitable unto the dead, then let a man live as he li●t; only let him procure some to pray for him, when he is dead, ne quid patiatur, that he may suffer no pains.  
3. Here I considered, that if the Catholic Church (against which Aërius contended in the vanity of his heart) did not believe, and teach, that the Sacrifice of our Lord's body was offered, and prayers were powered forth to relieve the souls of the dead (not all, but some) afflicted with temporal pain; the exception of Aërius were senseless, and the defence of Epiphanius were absurd; for, as the first doth object that opinion unto the Church, so the second denieth it not; nay he declareth, that the prayers of the living are beneficial unto the dead.  
4. But this point was more excellently cleared unto me by S. Augustine, the best, and most faithful witness of the ancient Church. For this worthy Father, contexing a catalogue of heresies, registereth this heresy (amongst the rest) viz. 
Haeres. 53,  We must not pray, nor offer sacrifice for the dead. A fancy begotten by Aërius, and by him first hatched into the world.  

See the Peroration of S. Augustine's treatise.  5. Now whereas Quod-vult-Deus (unto whom S. Augustine directeth the aforesaid catalogue) desired to receive instruction, how he should deport himself against all heresies, and what opinion he should entertain thereof, the reverend Father maketh this short, and weighty answer; It is a superfluous demand to ask, what the Catholic Church thinketh of 
* As namely of this particular.  all these heresies? For it sufficeth thee to know, that the Catholic Church doth hold, and maintain the CONTRARY assertion unto each.  
6. Wherefore it now remained, that I should acquaint myself with the purpose of the Catholic Church in her prayers, and oblations for the dead, since she defended the contrary opinion unto Aërius in these laudable, and Christian offices, as S. Augustine prescribeth unto his well respected friend.  
7. What was the success of my study, and meditation in this point, you may see 
* Book 1. part. 1. chap. 2. §. 4.  before, where this matter is more particulary discussed. There you shall find, that the intention of the universal Church in these things, was (precisely) to relieve some souls: and hence it followeth, that Aërius (teaching the CONTRARY hereunto) vomited out this heresy; viz. We must not pray, nor offer sacrifice for the souls afflicted with a temporal pain; and this is licked up by S. Luther, our GREAT Reformer.  
8. Thus the Papists concur with the ancient Church in prayer for the dead, and Protestants join hands with Aërius to deride, and subvert the same. And now I perceived, that 
a Ratione. 3.  Edm. Campian did not object this infelicity unto us without a grave consideration, and necessary cause; viz. The Protestants are enforced to venditate such a Church, as lay in obscure, and dark corners, unless (perhaps) they will rejoice in some heretical progenitors; AERIUS, jovinian, Vigilantius, Berengarius, etc. from whom they have begged the fragments of certain pestilent opinions.   

§. 2. How some Protestants seem to defy Aërius, and how others yield him their protection. Their contradictions, vanities, and falsehood.  
1. I Found that our Authors are here distracted into variable, and uncertain conceits; some, in their subtlety, dissembling the truth of the matter; and some, in their vanity, neglecting the judgement of the Church.  
2. In the FIRST rank this learned Doctor may challenged a due place; and he shall be assisted with his compeers, M. jewel, and Ph. Melancthon, men of great account. The one cometh forth with this plausible suggestion; 
b jewel, in Apolog.  We hold 
* Therefore not this of Aërius. But here you speak untruly.  none of those 80. heresies which are mentioned by Epiphanius, nor any of those, which are recorded by Augustine. The other, flourishing at random, saith expressly; 
c Melancth. in apolog. Augustana confess. art. 22.  We do not forbid prayer for the dead, and much less do we defend Aërius, etc.  
3. In the SECOND rank, the Magdeburgians (gentlemen of the freest spirits, that ever lived, to censure the sacred writ, the holy councils, the reverend Fathers, and all antiquity, in ignominious sort) may vindicate the highest room. The things (
d Centur. 4. c. ● col. 401.  say these good fellows) which Augustine, and Epiphanius noted as errors in AERIUS, seem not so: but rather the contrary. And so, in their verdict, the Church of God seemed to deserve more blame, than this heretic, who is branded with just infamy, and perpetual disgrace.  
3. Though Bullinger was fiery, and boisterous against our brethren of the house of Saxony (the ancienter family of the young gospel) yet he doubteth not to hold some good correspondency with them in this particular; and therefore, whereas he had made a large confession (to his everlasting shame) saying, 
e Decad. 4. Serm. 10.  I know that the Ancients prayed for the dead; I know what Augustine (the noble Doctor) and what Chrysostome (the eloquent Preacher) have written of this matter: I know that the Fathers say, it is a Tradition of the Apostles; and how Augustine affirmeth, that it is a custom of the universal Church to pray for the dead; I know also that Aërius was condemned, because he did oppose himself against it etc. he taketh upon him, in his liberty, to reprove the Fathers, and to debilitate the sovereign authority of the Church. But as the levity of this man doth justly deserve, that the severe 
* Quanta vanitas, q●ā ta impudentia Bulli●geri etc. See Brē●ius contra B●●ling. pag. 105. etc.  reprehension of Brentius should be duly applied unto him in this case, so the pretence of 
* Against D. Kellison book 2. chap. 4.  D. Sutcliffe, saying, that Aërius was reputed an heretic for Arrianisme, and not for finding fault with 
* Such superstition, as the whole Church embraced. See before; pag. 60.  superstitious oblations for the dead, is such a folly, as wise men would contemn, or such an ignorance, as a mean Scholar would commiserate, and pity in a Doctor of so great celebrity, and renown. For, though it be true, that Aërius was infected with Arrianisme, yet forasmuch as he devised new opinions, repugnant unto the Catholic faith, he hath a peculiar, and distinct place in the 
* Made by S. Aug and Epiphan.  catalogue of heretics: which were a superfluity, and an absurdity also, if Arrianisme had been the proper cause, for which he was condemned by the Church.  
5. I will leave these foreign Authors, and repair unto our domestics; to wit, D. Humphrey, D. Abbot, M. Cartwright, and D. Morton, who being of greater value, than many others, may stand forth, and speak in the name of all the rest.  
6. The foreman is 
f Contra Campian. pag. 261.  D. HUMPHREY, whose resolution seemeth to be the public, confession of our Church. NOS non improbaemus, etc. WE disallow not any thing, wherein Aërius did think 
* Quod rectè sensit Aërius.  truly, etc. Truly? The Papists themselves will join issue with us in this assertion. But the question is, whether Aërius did think truly in this particular, or not? Here the learned Doctor showeth the perplexity of his heart; 
See afterward; Part. 2. c. 2. § 1.  and yet, adorning a fowl matter with fair words, he slideth forward, and discovereth in plentiful sort, that our Church doth propend wholly unto the doctrine of Aërius in this point.  
7. The second is D. ABBOT, whose authority must componderate with D. Fields, and will discountenance his exposition of this matter. 
g Against D. Bishop Part. 1 pag. ●6.  In the time of Epiphanius (saith he) there was an alteration made of the custom of Prayer for the dead. Other devotions were added unto it, with opinion to mitigate, if need so required, the very pains of hell. This AERIUS spoke against; and indeed spoke against it with greater reason, than Epiphanius hath defended it etc. Here Master D. Abbot dealeth injuriously with Epiphanius, in whose behalf S. Augustine shall witness, that 
* See before; pag. 27.  he was a man very renowned in the Catholic faith. But in the mean time, do not these men agree like harp, and harrow? One saith, 
h See before §. 1. num. 1.2.  SURELY it appeareth etc. The other saith; THIS Aërius spoke against etc. Thus they differ in their expositions (as you see) betwixt themselves, and yet neither agreeth with the truth. And no marvel, for 
i Lactant.  haec est mendaciorum natura, ut probè cohaerere non possint. May I not say of these men, as 
k Offic. 1.  Cicero sayeth of peddling merchants; nihil proficiunt nisi admodùm mentiantur?  
8. The third is M. CARTWRIGHT, who being an 
l See the opinions of Aërius before pag. 60.  Aërian heretic in a farther degree than they are, who principally obtain the name of Protestants in our country (howbeit that is the proper inheritance of Luther's more natural children in his faith) and reintegrating the heresy of Aërius, 
* Pag. 403.  touching the equality of a Bishop, and a Priest, is justly noted by 
* So where D. W. objecteth the Council of Nice unto him, he turneth it off, affirming that it is spotted with infamy, by decreing that single men, admitted to holy orders, shall not marry afterward. Which point is fit to be considered by M. Rogers. saying (p. 115.) that if Paphnutius had not been at Nice, that Council had erred.  D. Whitgift (justly in respect of the thing; unjustly in respect of their profession) upon the conformity, which he embraced with Aërius in this matter. And truly, the pure, or rigid Caluinists are guilty thereof, without all possibility of defence. But how doth the Presbyterian remove this disgrace from himself, and from the consorts of his folly? I am not to regard (saith he) what Epiphanius delivereth in this matter: for he was a man obnoxious unto error; and if his authority could inconvenience me herein, it might likewise confirm the [popish] error of prayer, and oblation for the dead; which things are in no wise retained by our Church.  
9 This is the sum, and substance of his answer; whereby I was excited to consider, that as the 
* Aristot. de histor. animal.  irchin, in her natural providence, maketh a double prospect in her nest, that she may, by this means, defend herself from the injury of all weather; so the Protestants furnish themselves with a double principle, viz. Scripture, and Fathers. In their conflict with Papists, they limit, and confine all things unto the Scripture, sensed by themselves conveniently for their own security, and advantage. If they encounter the Puritans, they reduce them unto the judgement of Antiquity, and suffer them not to randge up, and down in their vast, and unsettled imaginations. In these principles they are very inconstant, and, run into a circular absurdity, without any certain, and indubious resolution of their faith.  
10. The fourth, and last, is 
o Cathol. Apolog. Part. 1. l. 1. c. 33.  D. MORTON; who seeing our reformed Churches deeply touched with Aërianisme, seeketh by all means to decline the point, and seemeth fearful in handling his own wounds; or (as Luther observed in Zuinglius) he paseth it so gingerly, as if he trod upon eggs; and like a sheep in the briars, the more he struggleth, the more he is entangled. Behold therefore his triple evasion.  
11. FIRST he useth the art of recrimination; saying, that Aërius held some heresies, wherein the Papists have great affinity with him, and with other 
* Tarian●. etc.  heretics; namely in that they taught, it is not lawful to eat flesh; and in that they admitted none, but continent persons, unto the communion. But as this was nothing pertinent unto the business in hand; so conscience, and equity might have treated with the Apologist, to despise such a poor, and unlearned pretence. For first; what doth the heretical prohibition of flesh belong unto the Papists? I do sometimes abstain from flesh (saith 
p Serm. ●●. Cantic.  S. Bernard) but my abstinence is a satisfaction for sins, not a superstition for impiety. If any man abstain from flesh, by the rule of Physicians, we reprehend not the care, which he hath of his own body. If any man abstain by the discipline of 
* Carthusians; whom Gerson defendeth; Part. 2.  such, as refrain it, we approve his virtue. If any man abstain in the frenzy of Manichees, I detest his blasphemy, etc. Secondly; what doth the exclusion of incontinent persons from the participation of the Sacrament, appertain unto them? Do they interdict marriage, and do they abrogate the institution of God? Or, if they do not so (as 
q See S. Bernard Serm. 66. in Cantic.  their works testify in their defence, that they do not) how then doth the aforesaid heresy assimilate them unto Tatians, and unto such profane imps? The Author of the Treatise concerning the 3. Conversions of England, discovering our imperfections in this kind [of objecting heresies unto the Catholics] 
r Part. 2. chap. 2. num. 18.  layeth down two rules, whereby all our arguments (of this nature) are abundantly dissolved. For (saith he) EITHER we do not hold that, which the Sectaries object unto us, (or, at least, not in the sense, which they object it) OR else the thing is no error in itself, according to the sense, in which we hold it, etc. Howbeit this is not a peculiar fault in my brethren; for thus also the 
s See S. Aug. de nupt. & e●cupisc. l. 2. c. 2●.  Arrians objected Sabellianisme unto the Catholics; and thus the Pelagians charged them with Manichisme; and so did jovinian likewise, because they then against him (as now against Luther) did constantly affirm, that Virginity excelleth marriage. But what pronounceth S. Augustine of these disordered companions? They do not, or they will not understand, what we say. Again. 
t Ibid. c. 3.  Definite obijcere nomen, & dogma alienum: leave of this foolery, to object unto Catholics the name, and fancy of Heretics. Which counsel if 
u Against D. Kellison book 2.  D: Sutcliffe, 
w In his picture of a Papist.  M. Ormerod (the 
*— Pictoribus atque Poëtis. etc.  Painter) 
x De Antichr. pag. 243.  M. powel, and others had observed in their writings (wherein I always found more heat, than wit) they had brought less disgrace unto their persons, and smaller disadvantage unto their cause, which, being evil in itself, is made worse by their defence.  
12. SECONDLY; he answereth by a demand, saying; What Council did ever condemn this proposition [WE MU NOT PRAY FOR THE DEAD] as heretical? But this simple device yielded me no satisfaction. For, as 
* Ep. 118.  S. Augustine protesteth, that the Universal Church (successively from the blessed Apostles) made supplications for the dead, so he prescribeth this admonition, of singular importance, viz. To call any thing in question, which is frequented by the UNIVERSAL CHURCH, it is the part of most INSOLENT MADNESS. Farther; do not the solemn provisions of sundry 
* 1. Nicem. can. 65. ex Arabic. 3. Carthag. can. 29. 4. Carthag. can. 79. 1. Braccarens. cap. 34.2. Cabilonens. can. 39 Tribur iens. cap. 15. See S. Cyprian. lib. 1. ep. ●.  councils touching prayer, and oblation for the dead, sufficiently declare, that to impugn, and reject the same, it were an heresy, and that the contemners thereof are guilty of this crime? Finally; S. Augustine, S. Epiphanius, and the Universal Church (with mutual voice, and conformable judgement) have passed sentence upon AERIUS; as an heretic, even in the aforesaid proposition: and will D. Morton be his advocate now, and will he now require, what Council did ever condemn it, as HERETICAL? Besides; D. Morton can not be ignorant, that, whereas some truths are taught correspondently by the Protestants, and Papists against Heretics; and whereas he conceiveth, that many truths are delivered by the Protestants also against the Papists, it would be an extreme difficulty for him to show, what Council condemned all the contrary propositions thereunto, and pronounced them to be heretical; if any man would require this service at his hands.  
13. But now, at length, M. Doctor would seem to come unto the point; and yet he never deflected from it more admirably, then in his answer, which he reserveth unto this last place. THIRDLY therefore he saith, that this proposition [WE MU NOT PRAY FOR THE DEAD] is so far from being heretical, as that true Antiquity giveth her approbation unto the Protestants in this behalf. And what is your reason? Because INVOCATIO MORTVORUM NON VERE ANTIQVA, invocation of the dead is not truly ancient.  
14. The manner of this speech is heathenish, the matter absurd. For, did Antiquity teach the Apologist to phrase the SAINTS so scornfully, & to term them DEAD men, in such disgrace? No: but julian, the famous Apostata, hath learned him this lesson; who, in derision of the Christians piety, saith that they tumbled at the sepulchres of the DEAD. 
Contra julian. l. 10. object. 1.  Let any man read S. Cyrills' excellent repulse of this accusation, and he shall find, that Protestants do symbolise with julian, and reinforce his stolen objections.  
15. I passed by the manner, and came unto the matter of the aforesaid speech; wherein I regarded not his exception against the antiquity of Prayer to the Saints (howbeit I knew long since, that M. Rogers, translating the sweet Meditations of S. Augustine, thought good to pretermitt one whole 
* 24.  chapter, wherein S. Augustine invocateth the blessed Saints: and therefore, whether D. Fields assertion, 
Pag. 148.  viz. The Romanists dare not abide the trial of their doctrines by the indubitate writings of antiquity, be sincere, or not, the reader may discreetly judge) but I noted, and pitied the unaptness, and inconsequence of his discourse. For how do these things cohere? INVOCATION OF SAINTS is not truly ancient; therefore PRAYER FOR THE DEAD is not defensible by Antiquity.  
16. Peradventure M. Doctor wanted sufficient leisure, and so he may plead the immaturity of his labours for the protection of his error. And the Reader may well conceive it so, forasmuch as (in the next 
* Cap. 35.  chapter, save one) being drawn, by the objection of 
* De notis Eccles. c. 6.  Bellarmine, to apologize for Luther's uncivil and base folly [viz. The state of married persons is, in its nature, spiritual, divine, heavenly, and as it were gold; the state of single persons, is secular, earthly, and as it were dirt] he vouchsafeth to yield this worthy answer, in defence of our Great Reformer; Lutheri verba mihi nunc legere non licuit, I could not read the words of Luther now; howbeit Bellarmine doth particularly design the 
* Luth. in Epithalamio.  place.  
17. But M. DEANE (advanced unto this honour for his rare dexterity against the Papists) hath unfortunately prevented this excuse. For, remembering the wise counsel of an heathen 
* Horat. de art Poëtica●.  Poet, who prescribeth that (in a thing of lesser importance, than the controversies of Religion are) a writer should bring forth nothing into public view, which hath not been discussed, even 
*— Nonumque prematur in annum. a In his ep. unto the Archbish. of Cant.  nine years space, with great exactness, he took very special deliberation to compose, and divulge this renowned Treatise. I bestowed (saith a he) 
* Quidque domum fert is DECIMO, nisi dedecus, ANNO● ovid.  TEN YEARS pains upon this work, with most ardent desire to find out the truth, lest some man, perhaps, might object unto me either prejudice, or temerity therein. Moreover, the book which I used, was of a second impression, and beautified with this advertisement, Editio castigatior, a more exquisite edition than the former. Wherefore, now that little spark of poor hope, which remained in me, to find some show, or shadow of probable satisfaction touching the heresy of Aërius (so severely censured in him, by the Fathers, and so earnestly objected unto us, by the Papists) became utterly extinct.   

§. 3. How vainly D. Field excuseth the folly of Protestants, which showeth itself in the diversity of their censures, touching the aforesaid heresy of Aërius. The true reason of their difference herein is assigned. Their perverse dealing with Antiquity.  
1. Unto this wound (very deep, and large) 
b Pag. 139.  D. Field hath thought it expedient, for our security, to apply a rare, and sovereign plaster. viz. If it be said, that sundry of our Divines seem to acquitt Aërius herein, they are to be conceived, as understanding his reprehension to have touched the errors, and superstitions, which even then perhaps began in some places, and amongst some men. For otherwise, his reprehension, if it be understood to extend to the general practice, and judgement of the Church, it is not, nor may not be justified.  
2. As Sir 
c In respon ad Epist. Pomerani; pag. 8. If Luther do complain; of Luther do say etc. D. Field, pag. 192.  Th. More answered unto Pomeranus (extenuating the heinous crimes of our brethren, even in the hatching-time of our gospel) though you mince the matter, with si qui, and si quid, and si alibi, and si non Christianum, etc. yet it is well known, that you do generally perpetrate diabolical, and barbarous attempts; so though D. Field doth here limit, restrayn, and obscure a most eminent truth with if, perhaps, some men, some places, seemed &c. yet I saw most clearly (let the precedents testify in my behalf) that we do notoriously conspire with Aërius in this issue: what he denied, the very same thing do we deny; what he affirmed, the very same thing do we affirm. Es nimium similis patri etc. o Luther, thou art too like unto Aërius; thy whole lineaments descry him to be thy Father in this particular conceit. As his reprehension extended unto the general practice, and judgement of the Church, so doth thine likewise; and we employ our best skill to justify, and maintain the very same reprehension, against the faithful relation of her chiefest Doctors, and the perpetual succession of all ages.  
3. But forasmuch as I perceived, that the Doctor doth wisely conceal, and providently dissemble the quality, and reason of that difference, which our Divines are charged with in this matter, I entered into a serious consideration thereof, and observed, that it doth arise, and flow, 
NOTA.  not out of their divers apprehension of the thing itself, but out of a different opinion, which they entertain concerning the authority of the Church. Hence it is, that Luther, Zwinglius, and such passionate gentlemen, neglecting the trial of their faith, by the testimony of Fathers, and plausibly reducing all things unto the Scripture (either simply; by admitting no other proof at all: or respectively; by admitting the Fathers as far as they agree with the Scripture; and so far they may admit a trial by the Devil himself, and yield as much respect unto him, as unto them) confess plainly, and sincerely, that Aërius did not ere in his reprehension, but that the Church erred in her practice. On the contrary; other men pretending to deal more fairly with the Church (their mother) and to defend themselves under her protection, will not (forsooth) seek her ruin, by whom they would seem to stand, and therefore they are compelled to frame most improper, vain, and frivolous interpretations of this, and other things, to maintain the goodness of their cause, according to the nature of their defence.  
4. Briefly therefore, I noted a triple variety in our courses, which consist (generally) either in the Rejection, or Misallegation, or Misconstruction of the ancient, and venerable Fathers. For in the beginning and entrance of our Gospel, nothing was more trivial, then to speak contemptuously of the Fathers, and to disclaim their witness in the controversies of this time. Shall I name the persons? Nulli nota magis domus est sua; no man kenneth his own house more familiarly, then that Luther, Zwinglius, Musculus, and our primitive Fathers, are principals in this rank. Or if you will ascend a little higher, and come nearer unto the days of Wickliff himself, you shall find this article ascribed unto Reginald Peacock (whom, for this, and others of this kind, 
d De Antichristo pag. ●7.  M. powel hath registered in the Catalogue of our evangelical Forefathers; and M. Fox hath favourably granted him a place in the 
* Febr. 11.  Calendar of his Saints) viz. Veterum doctorum authoritati, parum, aut nihil tribuendum, little, or nothing is to be yielded unto the authority of the Fathers.  
6. In the progress of our gospel, others pretending a more wise moderation in this case (but performing as little honesty here, as some showed humility before) would not so intemperately reject the Fathers, and therefore they excel in misalleadging their testimonies; as 
e Analys. Fidei, pag. 18. Ego habeo testimoniae sanctorum Patrun; ego defendo Patrum dogmata; said Dioscorus the heretic. See Council. Chalcedon. Act. 1.  Gregor. de Valentia doth complain of many Protestants, and more specially of Kemnitius, that Examiner (saith he) of the Tridentine Council. If this collusion fail, then succeedeth the third, which is, misconstruction of things, by deriving the testimonies of the Fathers to an other purpose, than ever they did, or could intend. A, for example. 
f Lib. 3. c. 3.  S. Irenaeus pronounceth, that all the faithful must necessarily repair unto the Church of Rome. Why? For she is of more powerful principality than the rest. Whence is that? Because she was founded by the two glorious Apostles, S. Peter, and S. Paul. Against the plain evidence whereof, 
g Against D. Harding.  M. jewel assumeth, that Irenaeus did refer this more powerful principality unto the Emperor, and unto the civil State. But all history doth proclaim, that the Christians were cruelly persecuted in those times, and that they had no intercouse with the political affairs. Behold also an other example of the like nature. For whereas 
h In 1. Timoth. 3.15.  S Ambrose doth positively affirm, 
i Answ. to the Rhem. Testam. ibid.  that Damasus [then Bishop of Rome] is RECTOUR of the Church, D. Fulke frameth an answer to this effect. The Church was then afflicted with Arrianisme, and because Damasus did oppose himself eminently against it, he might be called the rector of the Church; and yet so, as the same title may belong also unto other bishops. Which poor elusion suiteth well with the palpable vanity of M. Cartwright (justly reproved by 
k Survey; chap. 27.  D. Bancroft in this behalf) pretending, that S. Chrysostom's vigilancy over the Churches of Pontus, and of Thracia, was none other than such, as every godly minister ought to have over all Churches in the Christian world.  
6. Wherefore I shall now remit myself unto the consideration of all wise, and ingenious men, whether that true censure, which 
* Ibid.  D. Bancroft (the L. Archb. of Cant) hath passed upon the Presbyterian faction, may not have a convenient application unto the whole fraternity of our gospel; viz. When, for the proof of sundry matters, impugned by them, they are urdged with the testimonies of the ancient Fathers, and of the Ecclesiastical histories, they either shift them off with their own false glosses, or, if that serve not their turn, they disgrace them, as much as they can, and so reject them etc. 
2. Sam. 13.  As when Amnon had incestuously abused his sister, he dismissed her with contempt.    

CHAP. FOUR D. Field showeth himself a 
* This is his censure of Bellarmine, pag. 16●.  notable trifler (in the question of Purgatory, and Prayer for the dead) to the utter confusion of his Book, and the Protestanticall Church.  
1. NO particular in D. Fields highly esteemed Book, did more lively discover unto me the just correspondency betwixt his cause, and conscience, than this, which now ensueth. But for the more clear and perfect understanding hereof, I must entreat you (gentle Readers) to reflect upon the 
* Chap. 1. §. 1. num. 1. & 2.  precedents, and diligently to review, what is the pith, and quintessence of his book, and wherein it doth consist. For you must remember, that as the strength of Samson lay in his hair, 
judic. 16.  so the supportation of D. Fields Church, and Book standeth chief in this issue, viz. 
l D. Field, pag. 74.  the things WHEREUPON the difference groweth betwixt the Romish faction, and us, were never received generally by the Church.  
2. The several points of difference (as being most material) he layeth down (to the number of twenty, and seven) in a 
* Chap. 7. book 3.  chapter framed to this purpose; where he assigneth the difference betwixt the Romish faction, and the Reformed Churches, touching 
* It is the one, and twentieth point: pag. 75.  Purgatory, and prayer for the dead, precisely in these words. That Church, wherein our Fathers lived, and died, did not hold the tormenting of the souls of men (dying in the state of salvation) IN A PART OF HELL; HVNDRED OF YEARS; BY DEVILS; IN CORPORAL FIRE, out of which, prayer should deliver them. Wherefore in the 
m Chap. 21.  Appendix (unto which he reserveth the proof of all his assertions, delivered in this chapter) he accommodateth his style in this manner. Touching Purgatory, whether they, that are to be purdged, be purgded by 
* Bellarm. de Purg. l. 2. c. 11.  material fire, or no, it is doubtful. Likewise, touching the 
* Ibid. c. 6.  place, the Roman Church hath defined nothing; neither is there any more certainty touching the 
* Ibid. c. 9  continuance of sinful souls in their purgation etc. Thus than we see, that, notwithstanding any thing defined in the Church, the souls of 
* Of SOME; but not of ALL. Remember your dealing with S Gregory.  men may be purdged from all the dross of sinful remainders, and freed from all punishments in the very moment of dissolution; which is the thing, that we say.  
3. I deal not now with the conclusion, which M. Doctor hath artificially drawn out of his premises; but I come unto his poynt-devise itself, and the detection thereof, whereby the very sinews of his book, and Church, are cut in sunder, and dissolved.  
4. Whereas his promise was to explicate, what those things are, whereupon the difference groweth betwixt the Romish faction, and us, & to demonstrate, that the said things (wherein this difference now standeth betwixt us) were never entertained by the Church (but only by some particular men) he yieldeth not the true difference in this matter, nor proposeth the question, as in learning, and honesty, it became so grave a man, and specially, having thus obliged himself thereunto, by an extraordinary venditation. For your ingenuity will acknowledge, that, whereas in this dispute (and so in many more) we must distinguish the matter of SUBSTANCE from matter of CIRCUMSTANCE (forasmuch as it is sufficient to have fundamental unity in the first, howsoever there may be accidental diversity in the second) the matter of substance here is precisely this; viz. Whether, after this life, a temporal pain be inflicted upon some souls, or not? The matter of circumstance is, whether hell be the place; whether fire be the instrument; whether Devils be the tormentors; whether the duration of this pain be 10. 20. 100 years etc.  
5. The point controversed betwixt us, and the Papists herein, is the matter of substance, and thereupon the difference doth arise. For the question is, an sit, whether (simply) there be any such thing: not quid sit, whether it be of this, or that quality, and nature. It is de subjecto, whether there be a Purgatory after this life; not de praedicato, of those particulars, which belong thereunto. We all believe, that there is an hell, wherein the Devils, and reprobates shall drink their full in the cup of everlasting wrath; but where the designed place, or what the instrument of sensible pain is etc. we may probably collect, we can not clearly define. Or (to instance in a more gracious, and comfortable subject) it may please you to consider, how we all believe; that our Lord JESUS did suffer, and died, and was buried, and arose, and ascended into heaven. But with what kind of whips he was scourdged, at what age he deceased, how many hours he lay in the grave etc. we may conjecture, we cannot determine; we have semblable reasons, but no invincible proofs.  
6. Wherefore, D. Field hath not propounded unto us the difference betwixt the Protestants, and Catholics, but that difference alone, which is merely betwixt the Catholics themselves; who teach most consonantly, uniformly, and perpetually, that there is a Purgatory, and that there is a temporal pain inflicted in the future life. Thus they grant the thing itself, and presuppose it (as 
* Poster Analytic.  Aristotle saith, that Subiectum must be praecognitum, the subject must be foreknown, and admitted, before we will demonstrate any thing upon the same) and then afterward, they dispute concerning other accidental points; such as are here remembered by D. Field. And what is this, but the liberty of Schools, which may well consist with the purity of Religion? It is an exercise of wit, without destruction of faith. The Sun delighteth to run his course as a Giant, 
Psal. 18.6.  and yet he never exceedeth his annual, or diurnal confines; for he knoweth his rising, 
Psal. 103.19.  and his going down. Likewise, the Catholics may liberally expatiate in these points; provided always, that they contain themselves within the obedience of the Church, and the compass of approved truth. Otherwise, 
2. Reg. 2.37.  as it was death for Shemei to transgress the precinct, assigned unto him by Solomon, so it is at their peril, if they go beyond the limits, which the spouse of the wisest Solomon hath prescribed in this case.  
7. But we Protestant's (for whom D. Field hath advocated in this business) deal herein after an other manner; for we first deny that there is any Purgatory, or temporal pain in a future estate; we damn it as blasphemous, heretical, and Antichristian doctrine: then consequently (and necessarily) we deny the place, the time, the instrument etc. Which are certain accidental, secondary, and subsequent respects. For in our disputes with the Catholics, we propose not the question thus; Whether some souls suffer in corporal fire, tormented there by Devils, an hundred years &c. (for this is the difference amongst themselves only) but, Whether there be any Purgatory, or temporal pain of souls, or not? As for example; if any man should demand, Whether in the country of UTOPIA, the soil be fertile, the situation pleasant, and the air healthful, I would prevent him, and say; Sir there is no such country, and therefore your demands of the fertility, pleasure, and healthfulness, are superfivous, and to no purpose.  
8. Thus I was now sufficiently instructed to perceive, that though D. Field doth glory in these positions, viz. The things, whereupon the difference groweth betwixt us, and the Romish faction, were never received generally by the Church; and: 
* See his ep. dedicat.  the things which Papists now publish as articles of faith [PURGATORY is in that number] were not the Doctrines of that Church, wherein they, and WE [viz. Waldensians, Albigensians, Lutherans, etc. who were sometime actual, and true members of the Roman" Church] lived together in one 
* That is to say, when our Father's Wickliff, Luther &c.) were Papists, & not separated from the visible communion of the Roman Church.  communion, yet he doth miserably collude herein, against his own conscience; which, in so principal an Author, throwing down his gauntlet of defiance in such manner, is a very lamentable case.  
9 For where is that man (in the time of the aforesaid communion) who denied Purgatory, or showed any doubtfulness therein against the essential doctrine, in which the true difference betwxit the Papists, and Protestants doth stand most eminently at this day? I did employ much time, I searched into the volumes of antiquity, I neglected no means to gain all possible satisfaction in this thing; and yet I could not find so much as the shadow of any one man, 
See before, pag. 54. etc. how Purgatory hath been denied, and by whom.  by whom this particular was impugned, unless he were in the number of such, as departed from the visible society of the Church.  
10 Thus necessity compelled me to infer, that D. Field hath disabled his own book, and overthrown his Church; Papists may triumph in the victory, which their chiefest enemies have wrought in their behalf; yea they may joyfully applaud the excellency of their cause, which enforceth her greatest adversaries to prostitute themselves unto such base, and dishonest courses.  

Confess. l. 5. c. 7.  11. Finally therefore, as S. Augustine was in despair, to receive contentment from any Manichee, when Faustus (the most renowned in that sect) yielded no sufficient answer unto his doubts; so now I could not expect a fair, 
Magis desperab am de cateris corum doctoribus, quando in multis, quae me movebant, it a ille nomitus apparuit.  and just resolution from any professor of our gospel, when D. FIELD himself (inferior to no Divine in England: for which cause he was selected by the Archbishopp to treatise of that 
* Of the CHURCH.  subject, which is the very centre, and circumference in all religious disputes) appeared so untrue, and so mean in this particular [of Purgatory, and prayer for the dead] which we deride, and contemn as a foolish, detestable, impious opinion, and void of any reasonable defence. To conclude; here I took an argument, first à Personis, and said; if D. FIELD deal thus, what conceit shall I entertain of all other Professors? Secondly, à Rebus; and considered; if D. Field deal thus in THIS MATTER, what shall I conceive of his deportment in all other things? Truly I have necessary reasons to persuade me, that the cause being very bad will discredit all her patrons, but the patrons, being never so good, can not by any means support their cause.   
The end of the first Part.   

THE SECOND PART, CONCERNING SOME FALSEHOODS AND CORRUPTIONS OF M. ROGERS, AND D. HUMPHREY, in the question of Purgatory, and Prayer for the dead.  

CHAP. I. of M. ROGERS.  
I Had just reasons to esteem highly of this man's work. FIRST; the Subject of it; to wit the Articles of Religion, approved by the bishops, 
1162.  & Clergy of our kingdom: in which respect, the book is adorned with this resplendent title; The faith, doctrine, and religion, professed, and protected in the realm of England, and in the dominions of the same. SECONDLY; the quality of the Author; who is a chaplain unto the Archbishop, and conversant in our Ecclesiastical affairs: For so he testifieth of himself, in his 
* num. 37.  epistle dedicatory unto his Lord, and Master, saying; Years have made mine hairs grey; much reading, and experience in theological conflicts, and combats, have bettered my judgement etc. THIRDLY; the special approbation of this book, viz. Perused, and by lawful authority of the Church of England, allowed to be public.  

§. 1. Dionysius Carthusianus abused by M. Rogers. 
Pag. 121.   
1. PApists agree not amongst themselves (saith M. Rogers) about the time, which they, that be tormented, shall abide in Purgatory. For some have given out, how the poor souls there, be continually in torments, till the day of judgement; as 
* De offic. mort. l. 7.  DIONIES. CARTHUSIANUS: others, as 
* De offic. mort. l. 7.  DURANDUS, 
De 4. Noviss.  do think that they have rest sometimes; as upon Sunday, and holy days: others are of mind, that they shall be set free, and at liberty, because their punishment is but temporal etc.  
2. Here is an ample testimony of an unfaithful heart. For whereas this man of great experience is pleased to affirm, that some Papists imprison the souls in Purgatory until the day of judgement, and that, by this opinion, they descent from others, who conceive that their pain is not of such perpetuity, and length, he offereth a general injury unto them all, and more particularly unto that Author, whom he allegeth to this purpose. It is most untrue that Carthusianus did deliver such a fancy, or that he was of such opinion; witness that little treatise de modo liberandi animam è Purgatorio. Witness his clear assertion, that souls, 
* Dialog. de particulari judicio ani me cap. 30.  being cleansed in Purgatory, mount up, and fly into the celestial paradise. etc.  
3. What evidence therefore hath M. Rogers to justify this imputation? I find none but this ensuing. 
De 4. Noviss.  Dionysius reporteth a certain vision of an Englishman, who beheld a soul grievously afflicted in a place of torment, from which he received this answer; I know that I shall not obtain mercy till the day of judgement, etc.  
4. But is this a sufficient reason for M. Rogers to pretend, that, in the opinion of some Papists, the souls, which suffer in Purgatory, shall not come thence till the last day? And now, hath your experience, good Sir, thus bettered your judgement? That, which is peculiarly spoken of one soul, will you thus extend generally unto all? The example itself here affordeth no such conclusion, and the Authors doctrine elsewhere, doth plainly control the same.  
5. Whereas you say farther, that some Papists, and namely Durandus, do think, that the souls in Purgatory have rest upon sundays etc. I will not rashly condemn your falsehood therein, but you must give me leave to be doubtful of your truth. For I have diligently, and carefully revolved the Author, and yet I find no such assertion in all that book. Peradventure you relied upon them, who lied unto you, and so you have told a tale after a Crete. As for example; you 
* Pag. 115.  affirm, that, if Hierome had not been at Chalcedon, that Council had erred. What is your proof? B. jewel, det. fol. 58. Though here your experience did fail you (for S. Hierome was gathered unto his fathers many years before the celebration of that Council) yet your greatest fault was your credulity in believing B. jewel upon his naked word; which hath been the destruction of many souls.   

§. 2. S. Gregory noted for a Papist by M. Rogers: how Eckius is abused by him.  
1. PApists agree not amongst themselves (saith he) about the causes of Purgatory torments: 
Ibid.  for some do think that only VENIAL sins; others think that MORTAL sins also, for which men have done no penance in this life, are there purdged.  
2. The first opinion, concerning Venial sins, he attributeth unto S. Gregory, & termeth him a PAPIST; either forgetting, or not regarding, that our Christian faith descended originally from him, and that it was received conformably by our State, and that it was protected openly for 930. years by our worthy Princes (in the number of whom, many were pious in religion as David, wise in counsel as Solomon, valiant in war as josuah) in a word, that this faith hath been glorious in dignity, and fruitful in good works. And truly these cogitations did enter so forcibly into my heart, even while I was a member actually of the Protestanticall Church, that, in my secret thoughts, I could not but acquitt the Papists from the crime of disobedience, and undutifulness unto the State, forasmuchas they made not themselves contrary unto it, but it is made contrary unto them; the change being in the State, which propoundeth a new faith, & not in them, who conserve the old. And so much briefly touching the Popery of that illustrious Saint.  
3. As for the particular, wherewith he is charged by M. Rogers, it is no shame, nor disreputation unto him; 
* Tom. 10. homil. 16.  S. Augustine himself is no less deeply engaged therein, saying; that there idle speeches, evil, and sordid thoughts, and the multitude of light sins, which infected the purity of our excellent nature, shall be consumed, etc. Lastly; Whereas M. Rogers saith, that, in the opinion of some Papists, only venial sins are purdged etc. he can not but know, that their assertion is to be understood of the guilt, and not of the pain, as you shall immediately perceive.  
4. I come therefore unto the second opinion, concerning Mortal sins, which he ascribeth unto 
* Posit. 6.  Eckius; as though this famous Antagonist of our great Reformer, had taught, that Mortal sins as well as Venial, are remitted, or expiated after this life. Whence it followeth, that he incurred the same fancy, 
See before; pag. 121.  which (as D. Field pretendeth) S. Augstine did fearfully impugn in his time, because it was embraced by great, and reverend Authors.  
5. But here M. Rogers doth abuse his Author, and deceive his Reader. For the position of 
* See Tom. 1. Luh. Wittember. fol. 241. b.  Eckius is this. The souls in Purgatory do satisfy for the pains of sin, from the guilt whereof they were absolved before, and made not satisfaction in this life. So than it is a falsehood in M. Rogers to pretend, that, in the opinion of Eckius, mortal sins are purged, etc. For Eckius affirmeth, that the guilt being taken away (& consequently the sin itself) there remaineth a temporal pain to be inflicted upon the soul. For better illustration of which point, it may please thee (gentle Reader) to observe with me, that as by mortal sins, we are obliged unto a double penalty, to wit eternal, & temporal, so whensoever the guilt is pardoned, the eternal (which is most properly consequent unto it) is pardoned likewise, but not the temporal. Thus the Prophet giving David his absolution [thy sin is forgiven] added also, thou shalt not die; 
2. Reg. 12:  and yet he imposeth a penance, to wit, the child shall die: the reason whereof is this, 
* See how Bell●rmine presseth this against Caluin: in his fourth book de penitent. cap. 2.  because thou hast made the enemies of our Lord to blaspheme; & so it was an affliction for sin past, & not only a caution against sin to come. For though it be true, that God doth rather intend the safety of his children, than the punishment of their sin, yet he punisheth sin in his children, & the pain is more durable than the fault (as 
* Tract. 124. joh.  S. Augustine speaketh) lest the fault should seem small, if the pain were finished with it.  
6. Now, as the temporal pain of sin is justly reserved after the remission of the guilt, so it is not always inflicted in this life, 
De Civit. D●l. 21. c. 13.  but sometimes in the next. Wherefore, S. Augustine confessing, that God doth design poenas temporarias pro peccatis praeteritis, distinguisheth immediately, and saith; poenas temporarias alij in hac vita tantùm, alij post mortem, alij & hîc, & illîc patiuntur.  
7. Thus I found a double reason of Purgatory; the FIRST; because some smaller sins, (wherewith grace may consist in the soul) are there expiated, both in respect of guilt, and pain: the SECOND; because some temporal pain (reserved by the justice of God, after forgiveness of the guilt by his mercy) is there sustained by them, who have not been exercised with condign penance in this life. And here ariseth a proper solution unto the subtlety of D. Field, 
See before; pag. 103.  who would conclude; that, if all sin be taken away, which is the cause, the effect must cease, which is punishment, etc. For though the obligation unto eternal punishment, ceaseth actually upon remission of the guilt, yet the obligation unto temporal punishment doth remain by the justice of God; & his ordinance concurring with our desert, is a sufficient cause to produce such effect. Therefore till his justice be satisfied, the cause of punishment doth still endure.  
8. To conclude. Whereas M. Rogers would enforce an absurdity upon Eckius, & other men, as though they were distracted into great variety of opinion concerning the cause of Purgatory, he misreporteth their intentions. For though some few men did conceive, that all venial sin is wasted, and taken away from the soul, immediately upon her separation from the body, yet I saw that they, and all other Papists (to speak in my old language) do concordably, and uniformly teach, that no mortal sin (such as 
* See D. Field; pag. 146.  excludeth grace from the soul, and 
* See S. Au. Enchirid. ad Laur. c. 69.  excludeth the soul from heaven) is purdged after this life, otherwise then in reference unto temporal pain, reserved, and inflicted after remission of the guilt. But M. Rogers would lead his reader to conceive, that the Papists are singularly divided in their opinions; some affirming, that only Venial sins, others resolving, that Mortal likewise are cleansed in a penal estate.  
9 Many such collusions, and devices, I observed in this Author; but I will not trouble your patience any longer with the recapitulation of his untruths, forasmuch as by this little, which you have already seen, you may conjecture of the rest, which I conceal. What can you expect from them, whose Religion is founded upon the sands of falsehood, and not upon the rock of truth? Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Wherefore I will now make haste unto the conclusion of all, and I will end my discourse briefly with him, from whom my conversion did happily begin.    

CHAP. II. Of D. HUMPHREY, and his book entitled, Secunda pars jesuitisini; containing his answer unto the 5. former Reasons of EDM. CAMPIAN.  
COncerning the Author, and his work, I will say little; it is the judgement of many principal Divines in England, that D. Humphrey was worthy to endito such a book, & that the book is worthy to proceed from Arch a man, who was reputed sound in the faith, for which he suffered voluntary banishment, & profound in that science, wherein he was a Doctor by his degree, & 
* At Oxon.  Professor by his place.  
Besides; as the quality of the adversary deserved good respect, and the weight of his reasons required condign satisfaction (which neither himself, nor D. Whitaker have yielded thereunto) so it did greatly import him to deal uprightly, & substantially in his answer, forasmuch as he designed two 
* Burleigh. Leycester.  honourable Persons to be the patrons of his labour, & two learned 
* Oxford. Cambridge.  Universities to be the judges of his exactness.  
But when I found his unfaithfulness in his relations, his digressions from the matter, 
Non ideò vera mihi videbantur quia deserta etc. See S. Aug. Conf. l. 5. c. 6.  & the general imbecility of his discourse (flourished with a certain stream of eloquence, and beautified with pleasing phrases) I could not esteem that to be a true, & venerable Religion, which is so basely & slenderly supported by them, who are accounted Pillars in our Church.  

§. 1. S. AUGUSTINE notoriously depraved by D. HUMPHREY.  

Rat. 3.  1. WHereas that excellent, and renowned F. Campian, in those short Reasons, which bring eternal memory unto their Author, doth object unto the Protestants the invisibility of their Church, and that it was not otherwise visible for many ages, then in some scattering heretics, AERIUS, Vigilantius, Berengarius etc. from whom they received not an entire religion, but begged certain pestiferous fragments alone; D. 
c In resp. ad Camp. p. 261. 262.  Humphrey finding himself taken in an inexplicable difficulty, windeth up and down to find some plausible evasion, and therefore he sayeth; Wherein Aërius did err, we reject it; wherein he held any thing agreeably with the Scripture, we receive it, etc.  
2. After this obscure, and uncertain oracle, he resolveth most plainly, that he, and his Church will not digress from Aërius in this point; and therefore he addeth: We do not disapprove that, which Aërius thought, and Augustine hath related, that we ought not to pray, nor to offer oblation for the dead, because this is not contained in any precept of the Scripture; which 
d He quoteth Aug. de cura pro mortuis.  Augustine also doth seem to signify, when he sayeth, that this commendation of the dead ●s an ancient custom of the Church. Thus Aërius is justified against the universal Church, and his heresy is preferred before the Catholic faith. But of this matter I have entreated more particularly 
* Pag. 14. I wanted D. Hunfrey his book when I cited his opinion; which I have faithfully delivered: & though the word (rectè) be not in my author; yet it i● sufficiently implied in him.  before.  
3. The thing which I yield now unto your consideration, is, the subtle, and artificial collusion of this renowned Doctor. For whereas he pretendeth Scripture (negatively) against prayer for the dead, and that S. Augustine had only custom to maintain it, I found that S. Augustine premiseth Scripture in defence thereof, & then confirmeth it by that authority, which to 
† Epist. 118.  impugn, is the part of most insolent madness. For (
e de curâ pro mort. cap. 1.  saith he) We read in the books of the 
* 2. 12. 4●.  Maccabees, that Sacrifice was offered for the dead. But if this were read no where in the OLD Scriptures, yet there is no small authority of the UNIVERSAL CHURCH, which shineth in this custom: for in the prayers of the Priest, which he poureth forth to God at his Altar, the COMMENDATION of the dead hath its place.  
4. Hear three things occurred unto my ponderation. FIRST; that S. Augustine doth justify prayer for the dead by the Canonical Scripture; for so the books of the Maccabees are recognised by a 
† 3. Carthag. ca 47.  Council, wherein S. Augustine himself was present, and 
* ca 50.  subscribed thereunto. Wherhfore, in his censure, the Sacrifice for the dead was firmly established by the testimony of sacred writ: and this being so; how can it be true, that Augustine could not plead this authority in defence thereof? And if he did plead it, why doth D. Humphrey pretend the contrary in this place?  
5. SECONDLY; S. Augustine maketh mention here of the OLD Scripture; whereby he intimateth that in the NEW Testament, some relief for the dead is either plainly expressed, or sufficiently 
† see before pag. ●. etc.  deduced from thence. THIRDLY; S. Augustine adjoineth the Church unto the Scripture; & because there is impeachable sovereignty in the UNIVERSAL Church, therefore he saith, that if other proofs were wanting in this matter, yet this alone may satisfy, & give contentment unto her obsequious Children: Which plea seemed unto me so full of equity, that without insolency and madness (both which must inevitably fall upon D. Humphrey, and his Church) I saw no possibility to decline the same.   

§. 2. An other of his unfaithful practices against S. Augustine.  
SAint Augustine maketh mention in the former sentence, of a COMMENDATION of the dead; from which word the Doctor taketh an advantage to show, 
Pag. 262. See before, pag 38.  that in your Colleges you now retain this pious custom of the ancient Church. But he deludeth you with ambguity of speech. For the commendation, whereof S. Augustine speaketh, is referred unto the SOULS of the dead, which, in the sacred Mysteries, were specially recommended unto our Lord: but the commendation of your Founders in your Colleges, is a memory of their names, which you celebrate with commemoration of their liberality, whereby your studies are maintained. And this is not to conform yourselves unto antiquity, nor to execute the testaments of your honourable Founders.  
2. This noble figment in the Doctor is presently attended with a more eminent depravation. For, though Paulinus firmly believing (according to the instruction of the Catholic Church) that great utility ensueth unto the dead by the prayers of the living, desireth an explication of that scripture, which sayeth; 
2. Cor. 5.10.  We shall all stand before the Tribunal of Christ, and every man shall receive according to that, which he hath done in this life, whether it be good, or evil; and though S. Augustine yieldeth this resolution, viz. 
Ibid.  according to the quality of this life, men receive help after their decease etc. yet D. Humphrey, supressing both these points, flourisheth in his unprofitable rhetoric, and handleth the matter artificially to make a credulous Reader believe, that S. Augustine himself doth convell the use of Prayer for the dead by the testimony of this Scripture.  
3. The detection of these unfaithful courses, which till this time mine eye saw not, neither did my heart once suspect, did conduct me, occasionally, unto the truth. Ita ille qui multis laqueus mortis extitit, meum, quo captus eram, relaxare jam ceperat, nec volens, 
S. Aug. Conf. l. 5. c. 7. de FAUSTO.  nec sciens, sayeth S. Augustine of a man happy in name, but unhappy in deed; and the like I may justly pronounce in my success; thus he, that was the snare of death unto many, began to lose the snare, wherewith I was entangled; and this he did, though neither by his will, nor knowledge.  
FINIS.      

The correction of the principal faults passed only in some copies.  
P signifieth the page; L the line; M the margin.  
P. 5. l. 15. read. Beda p. 8. l. 19 leave out scio, and read, Veteres abusi sunt etc. p. 10. l. 32. read wit. p. 17. 19 21. 23. 25-27. in the title, Chap. 2. p. 21. m. 116. in stead of 114. p. 26. l. 4. elsewhere. p. 32. l. 7. unto. p. 34. l. vlt. extended. p. 45. m. §. 5. num. 8. in stead of §. 3. n. 4. p. 51. l. 17 incomparable. p. 52. m. from the infection etc. p. 61. l. 20. sayeth. p. ●5. m. Rainolds. p. 72. l. 12. convent. p. 75. l. 27. after censure. add these words; as a thing not to be exercised against any professor of the gospel. p. 76. l. 2. from l. 28. unmatchable. l. 32. Church. p. 78. l. 9 taught that. p. 82. l. 3. retreat. p. 87. l. 26. are the Churches. p. 90. l. 5. without. l. 12. gospel. p. 91. 14. Wherefore. p. 112. l. vlt. Church. p. 120. l. 15. with. p. 121. m. ad literam. p. 122. l. 4. place the parenthesis after him. p. 123. l. 16. exempt him from. p. 125. l. 16. dishonourable. p. 130. l. vlt. PRAYER. p. 134. l. 21. construction p. 149. l. 21 Divines. p. 151. l. 10. testimonies. l. 28. intercourse.   

A BRIEF, PLAIN, AND effectual instruction concerning Purgatory, and Prayer for the dead.  
COurteous Reader; the intended brevity of my discourse did not permit me so to enforce, 
Book 1. Part. 1. Cha. 2. §. 4. num. 16.  and to illustrate the testimony of S. AUGUSTINE in this matter, as I had conceived, nor as the dignity thereof doth justly require; and especially for their sake, who either in regard of their weakness cannot, or in regard of their negligence care not, or in regard of their perverseness will not see the clear, and irrefragable truth. Wherhfore, having a little remnant of vacant paper, I have thought good to employ it unto this profitable end; assuring myself that every Reader may inform his understanding, and settle his conscience herein, by the weight, and evidence of these THREE ensuing propositions.  

The FIRST proposition.  
1 THere was always, and now is, and ever shall be a CATHOLIC Church, which is free from any 
The Protestants account this doctrine of Purgatory &c. to be damnable.  damnable error. This assertion is very often delivered by S. Augustine, and the very same (though not precisely in these words) is yielded by 
Pag. 203.  D. Field in the name of his Church.   

The SECOND proposition.  
2. THe instruction of this Church is the last, and final judgement, wherein all men may, and must rely, as in the PROPOUNDER of truth. This assertion is strengthened by sundry testimonies of the Fathers, and 
In his ep. dedic.  D. Field approveth it, saying, that men desirous of satisfaction must diligently search out the true Church, and 
Therefore it must be known; & therefore it must be visible.  rest in her judgement etc. In which respect he sayeth, that, 
Pag. 193.  if the reprehension of Aërius [touching PRAYER FOR THE DEAD] be understood to extend unto the general practice, & judgement of the Church, it is not, nor may not be justified. Whereas he sayeth, it is not justified [by Protestant's] that is not true; whereas he sayeth, it may not be justified, that is very certain. Wherefore I desire you to stand constantly unto this position, and not to fly your ground.   

The THIRD proposition.  
3. THe judgement, and purpose of the ancient CATHOLIC Church is discoverable unto us by two meaenes; viz. the perpetual succession of PRACTICE, and the conform testimony of the FATHERS. For where we find no substantial mutation of PRACTICE, 
All men know, that the practice of praying for the dead is the same now sustantially, as in S. August. time: and, I hope, it was not begun then but continued. See before; pag. 25.  but see it perpetuated in all descents, and derived unto us by the long hand of time, we may infallibly conclude, that the later ages of the Church conspiring with the former, are free from just reproof. Again; the testimony of the FATHERS convaigheth us unto the knowledge of the Church's judgement; so that we require fidelity in them, authority in it; they are the witnesses, she the judge; they relate her voice, she pronounceth the sentence.  
These propositions as they are very perspicuous, & ponderous, so they will excellently, and forcibly apply themselves in decision of this controversy, touching PURGATORY, and PRAYER FOR THE DEAD.  

The testimony of S. AUGUSTINE.  
The faithful do know, according to the instruction of the Church, that, when MARTYRS are recited at the Altar of God, this is not done with intention to pray for them (it being an injury to pray for a Martyr, unto whose prayers we ought to be recommended) but we pray for other deceased men, whose commemoration is there made.   
Now, for your full satisfaction in this point, you must here observe three things; viz. the quality of the WITNESS, the competency of the JUDGE, the resolution of the MATTER.  
1. Concerning the FIRST; it importeth the witness only to express, what was the intention of the Church in this practice. And as S. Augustine is a most faithful witness of Antiquity (in M. 
Inst. l. 3. c. 3. §. 10. etc.  Caluins' opinion) so it goeth hard, if for a MATTER OF HISTORY, the Fathers can not find credit at your hands; they should know, as well as you, what was then in FACT. Which sentence being very justly delivered against the Presbyterians by the 
Survey pag. 338.  L. of Cant (in the question of bishops &c.) ought to be considered exactly in this issue.  
2. Concerning the SECOND; you see that the Church's instruction touching this matter, was known familiarly unto all the faithful: so that you must either unnaturally, and impiously (as Aërian heretics) reject your Mother's instruction, or else as dutiful, and obsequious children, you must submit yourselves unto her doctrine. Which lest you should intemperately renounce, I pray you to remember that famous sentence of S. Augustine; viz. 
Ep. ●18.  to call any thing in question, which is frequented by the UNIVERSAL CHURCH, it is the part of most INSOLENT MADNESS.  
3. Concerning the THIRD; you can not but perceive the clearness thereof expressed in this distinction; We do not pray for Martyrs: and, We do pray for other men, By which manifest difference, S. Augustine doth sufficiently declare, that the memory of Martyrs was celebrated at the Altar, by way of thanksgiving, and gladness: but the names of other men were remembered by way of PETITION, and desire. The reason whereof ariseth out of their estate. We pray not for a Martyr; and, it were an injury to pray for him: Why? Because we know that he is in heaven; and to have any diffidence of his beatitude, it were injurious unto his cause, and derogatory from his passion; therefore we pray not FOR him, as though he wanted our relief, but UNTO him rather, that he may assist us with his charitable intercession.  
But we pray for others; that is to say, for all them, of whose actual felicity the Church hath not yet attained a secure, and infallible persuasion; otherwise, if she knew that they were in present possession of joy, it were as great as injury to pray for them also, as for the Martyrs themselves, since the reason, why she prayeth not for Martyrs, is, because she is confidently resolved that they, being in heaven, stand not in any exigence of her devotion.  
Wherefore, since the CATHOLIC Church prayed for other men, as not being in heaven (or not certainly known to be there) she did conceive that they were, or might be (for aught she knew to the contrary) in some third place, and consequently in some temporal pain: and so (necessarily) she did believe, that there is a PURGATORY after this life. To contend about WORDS, and NAMES, it is a vanity; for it is sufficient to have a sure apprehension of the THING itself. To litigate about things ACCIDENTAL, it is a folly; for it is enough to be certain of the SUBSTANTIAL point: the rest have their probability in their several degrees, and are permitted unto free dispute. Finally; later ages may amplify, not alter the doctrine of the former; faith hath an augmentation, to perfitt her progress, not innovation to change her pureness. JESUS proficiebat sapientiâ, 
Luca. 2.53.  & aetate, etc. Now since he, that is WISDOM itself did profit in sapience; and he, that is ETERNITY, did increase in age, it may well become the Church to show a conformity unto her head, and Lord.  

The petition of S. AUGUSTINE.  

Confess. l. ●. c. 13.  Inspire, o Lord my God, inspire thy servants, & my brethren, that, at thy Altar, they may remember Monica thy handmaid, with Patricius sometimes her husband.    
FINIS.   

TRY BEFORE YOU TRVST.  
OR AN ADMONITION Unto the credulous, and seduced Protestants, to examine the fidelity of their Writers, and particularly of two principal Doctors; viz. D. FIELD, & D. MORTON.  
A Detection of their falsehood in some matters of great importance: and a discovery of sundry vanities in the new Gospel according to LUTHER, ZVINGL. and others.  
BY T. H. Master of Arts, and lately Minister.  
Added by way of APPENDIX unto his FIRST MOTIVE.  
1609.   

TO THE WORTHY GENTLEMAN Master S. E.  
SIR; though the propriety of this little Treatise be yours (it being first addressed for your private information) yet the use thereof may be derived unto others under your honourable name; buried here, and entombed in a parcel of itself.  
For as my hearty affection did single you forth to be the principal object of my thoughts, so my compassion enlardgeth itself toward all my loving contreymen, wholly ensnared with you in the same danger, and are held captive therein by the same credulity, and facility of belief, 
Popidum, qui sibi credat, habet. S. Bernard. de Henrico haeretico ep. 240.  which hath prevailed with your noble heart, to admit the assertions of your guides, without a trial of their exactness.  
In which course, though I may commend the goodness of your nature, which, being free from entertainment of base, and dishonest cogitations, doth not suspect any collusion, where it seethe a great venditation of 
† Singuli dicurit, ego verum dico, S. Chrys. de haereticis Hom●l. 33. in Act. Veritas, & veritas; was the saying of the Manichees. See S. August. conf. l. 3. c. 6.  truth, and never had experience of falsehood, yet it doth import you in JUSTICE, and in WISDOM, to try a little, before you trust too much.  
For as equity doth require all men to avoid partiality in decision of ordinary causes (which can not be performed without the indifferent audience of each party; for, si satis est accusâsse, quis erit innocens? Yea, saith SENECA; Qui statuit aliquid part inauditâ alterâ, Aequum licet statuerit, haud aequus fuit.) so discretion prescribeth unto them, that they should be very deliberate, and circumspect in the matters of Religion, which, in their nature, are sublime, and, in their weight, concern our interminable, & everlasting estate either in the joys of heaven, or in the pains of hell.  
But since GOD hath given you eyes to be your immediate witnesses, and endued you with an excellent portion of understanding, to be a sufficient judge in this behalf; I desire you, that you would not be ungrateful unto him for his benefits, but that, with a temperate, and composed mind, you would exercise these means, which are afforded unto you for a glorious end.  
And forasmuch as I know that D. FIELD, and D. MORTON do shine as Castor, and Pollux in your Church (howbeit, as the house of these brethren was reputed Castor's alone, 
Sueton. in julio Caesare.  by a certain prerogative, and superiority which rested in him; so D. Field hath obtained the chiefest, if not the only name) whose writings are esteemed the divinest oracles of this age; I have deemed it most convenable for me, to make choice of them only at this time, and to give you so much instruction concerning their works, as may demonstrate their obliquity, and unfaithfulness; which your ingenuous disposition did never yet suspect.  
But what truth can you expect from the children, whose Fathers were remarkable liars, and are so recognised by M. LUTHER himself, the great Reformer of the Church, and grand progenitor of your gospel? These SACRAMENTARIES (saith 
* See Brent contra Bullinger. in Recognit. prophetic. & apostolic. doctr. pag. 276. impress. Francosurti. 1585.  he) are non solùm mendaces, sed ipsum mendacium, fucus, et simulatio; not only liars, but a very lie itself, deceit, and simulation: which ZWINGLIUS doth show in word, and deed. I mervayle not, if they lie 
† They pretended that Luther was vanquished by them at Marpurg.  so impudently; for I perceive that they can do nothing else: and I do rejoice in this event, seeing that they (the DEVIL reigning) do now manifest themselves not only by craft, but by open lies.  
As your Professors are lineally descended from these Crete's, so they degenerate not from their primitive manners, and conditions. You may not think that doves have followed those ravens, as Noah first sent a raven out of the Ark, 
Gen. 8.7.8.  and then a dove; but you must remember the ancient, and true proverb; mali corui malum owm; of an evil stock cometh an evil breed. Behold the continual decourse, and propagation of your pretenced gospel: such root, such branches; such tree, such fruit; such masters, such scholars; such founders, such followers; 
† Tit. 1.12.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 always liars. Thus their Religion was newly implanted, and thus it is perpetuated unto this day.  

* Pag. 183.  For though it pleaseth † D. FIELD, & 
* In his ep. to the King prefixed before his book, entitled; A full satisfaction. etc.  D. MORTON to make a very special ostentation of Truth (the one pretending, that the Spirit of TRUTH doth teach us; the other professing himself to be a Minister of simple truth in his disputes) yet the sequel will discover such voluntary falsehood in both, that as they can not but 
† Mirum est. si non riferit Acuspex quā●o Aruspicem viderit.  smile each at others labour (which 
* In his ep. dedicat. pag. 3 l. 32.  Doctor FIELD had just reason to suspect also from his compeers, at whom he giveth a secret gird) so yourself cannot henceforth believe coloured, & painted fictions in your Writers, nor give an hasty assent unto their protestations, without a condign trial of their performance.  
Never the less; I am not so unequal in my desire, that you should subtract your credulity from them, and translate it unto me, or unto any other: but measure me, and them with my own prescription; TRY BEFORE YOU TRVST: See both, compare both, examine both; 
* 1. Thess. 5.21. Nemo nostrummdicat; ia●n inveni veritatem: sed sic came quaeramus, quasi ab utrisque nesciatur. Ita enim diligenter & conformiter quaeri coterie, si nullâ t●merariâ presumptione inventa, & cognisa esse credatur. S. Aug. contra epist. Manich. c. 3.  Try all things, and keep that which is good. Try the cause, and try the persons; try the faith, and try the Professors; try the solidity of the first, & try the fidelity of the second: follow that which is most credible, & believe them that best deserve your credit.  
My request is little (as you see) but the reason thereof is very great. For what is more easy, then to suspend your credulity for a week, nay for one day, or (if that seem too long) for a few hours? And what can be more necessary, then to adhibitt circumspection, where the danger is in quality extreme, in evidence probable, in time imminent, as you may behold in your own case? You know that as heresy doth exterminate her unhappy disciples out of the Catholic Church, so it doth precipitate them into an endless perdition. You shall know likewise that your credulity hath (actually) engaged your soul into this miserable estate. Finally, you know that as life is short, and death uncertain, so you shall stand immediately before a judge, whose anger will be inflexible in that hour, & his sentence irrevocable for ever.  
Wherefore, that religious, and grave counsel, which 
† De util. cred. cap. 1●.  S. AUGUSTINE gave unto his well respected friend, I will affectionately give unto you. Which I am the rather invited to do, because I, being mercifully delivered out of the bands of death, have learned, with 
* Contra epist. Manich. cap. 3.  S. August. to be compassionate unto seduced souls; and because yourself doth symbolise with his friend; for he was misguided by them that pretended sanctity in their demeanour, & did iliaqueate much people with their plausibility of speech: such also hath been your case. He was 
* Honoratus.  honoured in name; you are honourable in deed. Consider the advise now; apply it seriously unto your heart. Si quid te vel ratio, vel oratio nostra commovit, et si veram, ut credo, tui curam geris, velim ut me audias, et bonis praeceptoribus Catholicae Christianitatis te piâ fide, alacri spe, simplici charitate committas; Deumque ipsum, cuius unius et bonitate facti sumus, & justitia poenas luimus, & clementia liberamur, orare non cesses, etc. Hos autem verbosos, & miseros (quid enim aliud dixerim?) penitus desere.  
I cease to trouble you any farther with my rude lines. In respect of your wisdom, a little is enough; in respect of my love, nothing can be too much. God open your eyes to see his truth, & incline your will to embrace it. Amen.  
Yours in all duty T. H.   

THE FIRST PART CONCERNING D. FIELD.  

CHAPTER 1. D. FIELD doth notoriously abuse the name, and authority of GERSON, GROSTHEAD etc. to defend the late (pretenced) REFORMATION.  

§. 1. D. Fields positions concerning the Church. Gerson alleged by him.  
1. FOUR remarkable positions are delivered by D. Field, which comprehend the substance of his 
* Of the Church.  discourse. FIRST. 
(a) Pag. 19  There was always a true visible Church. SECOND. 
(b) Pag. 76.  This true visible Church was not planted only in Wickliff, Husse, and others (either before, or after) who departed from the visible society of the Roman Church. THIRD. 
(c) Pag. 72. 73. 74.  The Papists were not the true Church, but merely a faction in the same. FOURTH. The Church wanted a necessary Reformation, which was desired by her worthy guides, Gerson, Cameracensis etc. long before, and is now effectuated by Luther, Zwinglius, and the like.  
2. For this end, and purpose, it pleased D. Field to entertain his Reader before hand with a singular venditation; viz. 
(d) Pag. 59  That the Church needed Reformation when LUTHER began, and that it was not necessary nor behoveful to expect the consent of the whole Christian world, I will make it evident, when I come unto the due place.  
3. The principal passages concerning this matter, are these four, which here ensue. FIRST. 
(e) Pag. 77.  Gerson 
* Dialog. apologetic. ●udicium de Concil. Goust.  reporteth that there were sundry lewd assertions, prejudicial to the states of Kings, and Princes, which the Council of Constance could not be induced to condemn, by reason of a mighty faction that prevailed in it, though many great ones much urdged it, and though they made no stay to condemn the positions of Wickliff, and hus, seeming to derogate from the state of the Clergy, though many of them might carry a good, and Catholic sense, if they might have found a favourable construction. Whereupon he breaketh out into a bitter complaint of the partialities, and unequal courses holden in the Church, and protesteth, that he hath no hope of a Reformation by a Council, things standing as they did.  
4. The SECOND passage is a very admirable devise. For whereas 
* De notis Eccles c. 10.  Bellarmine doth object the intestine divisions, and conflicts of the pretenced Ghospellers, the doctor turneth him off with this answer; 
(f) Pag. 169.  We say, that th●s diversity is to be imputed WHOLLY unto our adversaries. For, when there was a Reformation to be made of abuses, and disorders in matters of practice, and manifold corruptions in very many points of Christian doctrine; and in a Council, by general consent, it could not be hoped for (as 
* Ibid.  GERSON long before, out of his experience, saw, and protested) by reason of the prevailing faction of Pope's flatterers, but this was necessarily to be assayed severally, in the particular kingdoms of the world; it was not possible, but that some diversity should grow, while one knew not, nor expected to know, what an other did.  
5. Then he subnecteth an other defence, and saith; Yet it fell out by the happy providence of God, that there was no material difference amongst them etc. But of this matter, I will entreat more particularly in the second chapter, Mean while, observe the THIRD passage, which is more excellent than the former. 
(g) Pag. 18 6.  Many men, that lived in the days of our Fathers, and were of the TRUE CHURCH, did most certainly foresee, & foretell the ruin of the Pope's estate, & the alteration, and Reformation of the Church in our time, and gave most clear testimony unto that, which we have done. Neither is there ANY BETTER PROOF of the goodness of our cause, then that that, which we have done in the reformation of the Church, was before wished for, expected, and foretold by the best men, that lived in former time, in the corrupt state of the Church.  
6. If D. Field can justify this glorious assertion, he deserveth to be received in triumph, and to be advanced with immortal commendation, as David himself, 
1. Sam. 18.  when he obtained a great victory over the proud, uncircumcised Philistim. Otherwise, as Samson overthrew the house, 
judic. 16.  wherein the Philistims were assembled, by demolition of the pillars, 
* Quibus omnis domus imminebat, etc. vers. 26.  upon which it was sustained: so forasmuch as the Protestants cause hath no better proof etc. it is evident, that whosoever can disable this proof, bringeth a necessary ruin unto their cause. For just experience whereof, I remit me unto the sequel in this Chapter.  
7. But who are these best men, in whom D. Field doth plant the strength, and validity of his cause? Behold his marginal annotation, and that directeth you unto the persons, viz. GROSTHEAD, GERSON, SAVANAROLA, and many other, mentioned before. That is to say, in the third book, and 12. chapter; where I noted his FOURTH, and last passage, which is delivered by him precisely in these words 
(h) Pag. 85. . What is now done in this Reformation [made by Luth. Zwingl. etc.] which Cameracensis, Picus, Savanarola, Gerson, and innumerable other WORTHY GVIDES OF GOD'S CHURCH long before, thought not necessary to be done, as appeareth by that, which we have already delivered touching that matter?  
8. These are the several passages of greatest importance, which I noted in his discourse. In all which there is such falsehood, and collusion, as redoundeth not only unto the shame of the Author himself, but unto the subversion of the Protestanticall Church. And forasmuch as Gerson is the most eminent person, whom he hath cited frequently for his purpose, I will acquaint you first with his clear resolutions in these matters, and afterward I will reflect upon certain particulars going before, which are of especial consideration.   

§. 2. Positions of Gerson; by which it doth appear, that he utterly detested the Reformation, which hath been transacted by Luther, Zwinglius, and the like.  
1. WHen I addressed myself unto a serious, and continual lection of Gersons works, upon those extraordinary praises, which D. Field doth attribute unto him, I found many evidences, (some PARTICULAR, some GENERAL) which countermand the suggestions of D. Field. A small parcel whereof I will now present unto your view.  
2. The particular evidences, are his several opinions in the matters of faith, which are controversed betwixt the Catholics, and Protestants at this day. As for example. GERSON believed the doctrine of 
(i) See before; pag. ●5.  Transubstantiation; which D. Field abhorreth, 
* pag. 171.  saying, that it doth imply sundry consequences of horrible impieties. GERSON was a patron of the 
(k) Part. 4. serm. 2. de defunct, etc.  Mass; which Luther hated as impious, and wicked, and was so 
* See Serarius de Lutheri Magistro.  instructed by the arguments of the Devil: with both whom D. Field 
(l) pag. 192.  doth absolutely conspire in this issue. GERSON was resolute in the doctrine of 
(m) See before; pag. 108.  Purgatory, which D. Field hath pronounced to be an 
* pag. 79.  heresy of the Papists.  
3. If I would proceed unto other particularities (as namely Invocation of Saints, Indulgences, Communion under one kind, etc.) I might fill many pages, in laying forth the irreconcilable differences betwixt D. Field, and this worthy guide of God's Church. But I will pretermitt the rest, and come to the supreme difference, unto which all other points are subordinate, and inferior, as I conceive; that is to say, the sovereign primacy of the Roman Bishop, in whom 4. principalities concur. For he is a Diocesan in one precinct, an Archbishopp in one Province; a Patriarch in one part of the world; finally the chief Pastor of all; in which administration he succeed unto S. Peter, as holy 
(n) de considerate. l. 2.  Bernard doth excellently speak. Thou [Eugenius] art he, to whom the keys are delivered, and to whom the sheep are commended. There are other janitours of heaven, and other Pastors of the flock, but thou much more gloriously than they, by how much thou dost obtain each name more eminently than the rest. They have their flocks assigned unto them; every bishop his peculiar charged; but all are credited unto thee, and all are one flock unto thee, who art one pastor of all, for thou art the pastor not only of the sheep, but of the pastors themselves. Dost thou ask me, how I prove it? By the word of our Lord. For, to whom, I say not of 〈◊〉 the Bishops, but of the Apostles are all the sheep so absolutely, and so indifferently committed? If thou love me PETER, feed my sheep. What sheep? The people of this, or that city, of this region, or of that kingdom? No; but my sheep, saith he: and who doth not 
* Cunctis evangelium scientibus liquet quòd voce Dominicâ sancto, & onmium Apostolorum principi Petro totius Ecclesiae cura commissa est: saith S. Gregor. Registr. epist. l. 4. c. 76.  plainly see, that our Lord did not here design some, but assign all unto his care? There is no exception, where there is no distinction, etc. So he.  
4. Behold now also two very effectual testimonies of Gerson to the same purpose FIRST. 
(o) Part. 1. de Auferib●. Papae considerate. 8.  The forms of civil government are subject unto mutability, and alteration; but it is otherwise in the Church. For her government is MONARCHICAL, and is so appointed by the institution of our Lord. If any man will violate this sacred ordinance, and persist obstinately in his contempt, he is to be judged an heretic, as Martinus of Padua, and some others consorting with his fancy. Likewise, prescribing many directions to compose the differences betwixt the Greek, and Latin Church, he premiseth this consideration as a fundamental point; viz. 
(p) Part. 4. de Vnit. Graecorun. Considerate. 3.  There must be one head in earth, unto which all men must be united. For though God himself, who in the second Person assumed our nature, be the principal, and essential head, yet he hath constituted a vicarian head, to be his deputy amongst us, for the administration of his Church, for the preservation of unity, for the communication of the faith unto all the members thereof, etc. Which head we call the POPE, and OUR HOLY FATHER. etc. If any man either in malice, or folly disturb this union, he is a schismatic. As we must employ our diligence to procure unity, so we must endeavour to bring all men unto the obedience of one head.  
5. Here Gerson declareth himself truly to be a worthy Guide of God's Church, and a singular enemy of the Protestanticall Reformation, which hath convelled, and dissipated this ground, and principle of unity, by impugning the supremacy of the Pope. Wherefore, as the 
(p) In his Survey; pag. 140,  Lord Archb. of Cant. had good reason, in his experience, to say: those Churches, that have followed the humour of BIZA, in the abolishing of their Bishops, and Archbishopps, may they not justly wish, that he had never been borne? So there is greater reason, upon more lamentable experience to say; those Churches, that have followed the intemperate humour of LUTHER in abolishing the sovereign Bishop, may they not justly wish that he had never been borne? For the sects, factions, and divisions which have ensued upon this breach, are in number many, in quality odious, and there is no certain end unto which they finally incline. Which evils are well expressed by the Author of them all. 
(q) Luth. in Galat. c. 5. 15.  The concord of the Church being once violated, there is neither measure, nor end of dissensions. When Aphrick was subverted by the Manichees, than succeeded the Donatists, who, contending also amongst themselves, were parted into three sects. Likewise in our time, first the SACRAMENTARIES fell away from us, than the ANABAPTISTS, and neither of these agree together. Thus one sect breedeth more, and each condemneth the other.  
6. But if we would reflect upon the true cause hereof, thou, o Luther, thou art the cause of these perturbations: for thou hast taken away the means of unity, by displacing the head of the Church, in whom it should be eminently preserved, as Gerson (that worthy guide) doth gravely, and wisely teach. Wherefore let any man of conscience, and discretion examine the truth, and substance of D. Fields assertion, saying; 
(r) Pag. 179.  it is the pride of Antichrist [the Pope] that hath made all the breaches in the Christian world, and would have laid all waste, if God had not preserved a remnant. Of whom? Lutherans, Sacramentaries, and the like.  
7. I come unto a SECOND proposition delivered by the said worthy guide of God's Church. 
(s) Gers. Part. 4. Contra bullam mendicant.  If you demand, whether a man may be saved, though he reject the true 
* Martin. 5.  Pope? I answer. he may; if ignorance excuse him, and if he have a good will, or a mind prepared to yield obedience, when the truth shall be explained unto him: for than he departeth not from Christ (the essential head) and from his ordinance, viz. THERE MU BE ONE POPE IN THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH. To which effect (as I conceive) certain penitent Novatians did confess, and 
(t) Lib. 3. ep. 11.  S. Cypriaen doth record it, that there is one God, one Christ, one holy Ghost, and that there ought to be ONE Bishop in the Catholic Church: not one without others, but one above others; as S. 
(u) Epist. 84.  Leo the Pope writeth unto a Grecian bishop; We have called thee in partem solicitudinis, non in plenitudinem potestatis, into a part of our care, not into the fullness of our power: and this sentence 
(w) De Considerate. l. 3.  S. Bernard bringeth unto the consideration of Eugenius the Pope, sometimes his 
(x) Ibid. l. 1. praefat.  son by institution, but now his father in administration of the Church. To conclude; the inequality of all other bishops, is by human law, the Pope's superiority is by divine right. Other bishops are equal unto him in respect of their ORDER; he is superior unto all, in respect of his JURISDICTION. I proceed.  
8. Compare this severe judgement of D. Fields WORTHY GUIDE with the violent opinion of M. powel's GREAT REFORMER, and behold as great difference therein, as betwixt the light of the Sun, and Egyptian darkness. And that you may conceive it fully, see, I pray you, the censorious temerity of Luther, as it is represented by M. powel (in the end of his inhuman 
(y) De Antichr. pag. 68  compellation unto the jesuits) in this manner.  S. LUTHERUS. Non potest is salutem consequi, qui non ex toto cord Antichristum [
* T●CE●Tò SCIO Papam esse magnum dium Antichristum, quàm D●um ips●m esse●m coelis etc. M. powel's protestation in the first leaf in his book.  Papam] & Papatum oderit. 
I Will not ask M. powel by what authority he hath canonised Martin Luther, for I know, that he hath a warrant from (z) Luther himself, saying, jam, by the grace of God one of the TRUE SAINTS. Wherefore as the Athenians made a decree, Quoniam Alexander vult esse Deus, esco; so since Luther will be a Saint, let him be so, by my consent.  
9 But now, for the correspondency betwixt Gerson, and Luther (the second effectuating that, which the first desired, if you will believe D. Field) in their Reformations, consider, I beseech you, the resemblance, and similitude of these things. He that rejecteth the Pope, shall not be saved, saith the one; He that doth not hate him, and the Popedom with his whole heart, shall not be saved, saith the other. Thus they damn themselves mutually in a capital point, and exclude each other from the possibility of salvation. And, if M. powel's judgement be of any value, I may undoubtedly pronounce, that Gerson is damned unto the nethermost hell. For the truest formality, and essence of a PAPIST is his union, and conjunction with the Pope; Whence it followeth, by 
(a) de Antich. pag. 453.  M. powel's rule [No man dying a Papist, that is to say, truly, and formally a member of the Papacy, or Popish Church, did ever obtain the kingdom of heaven, or escape hell] that Gerson living, and dying a true, formal Papist, could not be made partaker of Luther's beatitude in the number of the SAINTS. What? And yet hath Luther accomplished that Reformation, which Gerson did expect?  — risum teneatis amici? 
10. I will knit up this matter with the counsel of 
(b) part. 1. de Eupt. ●hri●●, & Ecclesiae.  Gerson, which he prescribeth unto the spouse of Christ, saying; The Church must entreat the Pope (the vicegerent of Christ in 
* the holy Ghost is Vicarius Christi by spiritual influence, etc.  external administration) with all honour, and call him FATHER; for he is her Lord, and Head. We may not expose him unto detractions etc. And hence it is, that he maketh his protestation; Nolo de Sanctissimo Domino nostre, & Christo Domini, velut os in coelum ponendo, loqui; I will not speak of our most holy Lord, and the Lords anointed, as it were by setting my face against heaven. But did the Cham of Saxony thus demean himself toward his spiritual Father? No; but setting his face against heaven, he uttered the words of blasphemy, and intolerable reproach against all dignity (withstanding his violence) Papal, Imperial, and Regal. And thus he discovered himself to be guided by the Spirit of AERIUS, concerning whom it is 
(c) Epiphan. haeres. 75.  reported, that ipsi sermo furiosus magis, quàm erat humana conditionis. Doth not 
(d) pag. 64.  D. Field also approximate unto them both? We have not received (saith he) the mark of this Antichrist [the Pope] and child of perdition in our foreheads, nor sworn to take the foam of his impure mouth, and froth of his words of blasphemy. Truly you never learned this tempestuous language from your worthy guide, but from your great Reformer.  
11. I have insisted long in the particular evidences; Wherefore I will deal more briefly in the GENERAL, out of which I have selected these two ensuing.  
12. The FIRST concerneth the infallibility of the Roman Church, A QVA CERTITUDO FIDEI PETENDA EST (saith 
(e) Part. 1. Serm. coram Alexandro Papa 5.  Gerson) from whence we must receive the certainty of our faith. From thence we Englishmen received our faith, by the vigilancy of S. GREGORY, the glorious Pope of blessed memory for ever. From thence the britains received their faith (in their second conversion) by the fatherly provision of Eleutherius, a renowned Martyr. From thence the Indians, and sundry people, who sat in darkness, and shadow of death, have lately received the abundant light of the gospel. Mean while, the Protestants disseminate 
* See Tertull. prescript. cap. 42. Old heretics followed the same course as Protestants now do.  heresy at home, and revile them, who plant the Catholic religion abroad.  
12. Now for this particular assertion, delivered here by the worthy guide of God's Church, I will remit me unto the consideration of the discreet, and ingenious Reader, to take a resolution from his own heart, whether Gerson, or any man (who maintaineth the same principle with him) can tolerate the Protestanticall Reformation, which is reared up against the faith of the Roman Church, and founded in the ruins thereof.  
14. The SEGOND general evidence is yet more potent, and effectual than the rest; for it shall now sensibly appear unto you, that Gerson damned your articles, and detested the truest progenitors of your gospel. Observe therefore a memorable protestation of this worthy guide. 
(f) Part. 3. dialog. Apoget. de Concil. Constant.  The Council of Constance was celebrated especially for the extirpation of 
* Protestant's Religion.  heresies, and errors; which was attempted first, by imprisoning the offenders, and by committing some of them [Husse, and Jerome of Prage] unto the fire. The Bohemians exhibited 45. errors of WICKLIFF unto the Council; the English men brought in more than 200. For the condemnation whereof, I was as zealous, as any other, and preached publicly [in Constance] to this effect.  
15. Here you may perceive that Gerson had an eminent part in condemning the articles of john Wickliff (the first, and principal Saint in Fox his Calendar) and that (in all probability) he gave his furtherance to the just, and necessary execution of the said Bohemian Martyrs. Which proceeding against rebellious, and insolent persons, the Protestants do continually exagitate with infinite calumniations. But I will confine myself unto D. Field, and unto his Reformer. The FIRST speaketh in this manner. 
(g) Pag. 76.  We acknowledge Wickliff, Husse, Hierome of prague, and the like, who with great magnanimity opposed themselves against the Tyranny of the See of Rome, and the impiety of those, who withheld the truth of God in unrighteousness, who being named Christians served Antichrist (as 
* Serm. 33.  Bernard complained of some in his time) to have been the worthy servants of God, and holy Martyrs, and Confessors, suffering in the cause of Christ against Antichrist. The SECOND (in a certain epistle to the Earl of Passun, 
Tom. 2.  prefixed before his Satirical script against King Henry the eight) thundereth out this terrible denunciation: Homicidae & Antichristi Papitta joannem Hussium innocentem virum exusserunt, ipsi septies heretici: The Papists, being homicides and Antichrists, burned that innocent man john hus; but they were seven times heretics themselves.  
16. Compare these things together, and judge indifferently in this case. Gerson was a worthy guide of God's Church; There is no better proof of the goodness of our cause, then that our Reformation, was long since desired by him etc. And yet, this Worthy Guide was 7. times an heretic; yea a Patron of the Antichristian cause; a sworn enemy of hus, and Wickliff, the most illustrious Saints in the pedigree of the Reformed Church. Is there any sense in these devices, or is there any conscience in the Authors? Woe be unto them, whose souls are pinned upon their sleeves; and most unhappy men, that tread in their deceitful steps.  
17. I might proceed now to unfold sundry falsehoods, & artificial tricks in the 4. precedent 
* §. 1. num, 3. etc.  passages; but before I dismiss this last assertion of D. Field, I may not forget, how subtly he convaigheth a sentence of S. Bernard into the same, whereby the matter should seem more odious against the Papists, forasmuch as Wickliff, Husse, and others, opposed themselves against the impiety of those, who withheld the truth of God in unrighteousness, and being named Christians served Antichrist, even by the verdict of S. Bernard himself.  
18. But how fraudulently the learned Doctor hath demeaned himself in this suggestion, I remit me unto the conscience of all indifferent Readers, to determine thereof in their private cogitations. For, it may please you to consider, that the purpose, and intention of S. Bernard in that place, is, to reprehend, and to censure the evil manners, which reigned generally in the Church. 
What verdict Luther hath passed upon the general impiety of his new Ghospellers, see just. Caluin. In Apolog. Pag. 115.  She hath been afflicted (saith he) by the cruel persecution of the HEATHEN, and molested by the perverse opinions of HERETICS. The first affliction was repelled by the patience of the Martyrs; the second, by the wisdom of the Saints. And though the Church be now delivered from both, yet 
* Esay. 38.  ecce in pace amaritudo mea amarissima, may she say; behold, in peace is my bitterness most bitter. It was bitter before, in the death of Martyrs; than it was more bitter in the conflict of heretics; but now it is most bitter in the manners of her own household. She hath peace from heathen, and peace from heretics, but not from her own children. For now the wickedness of men is so great, that as for the abundance of it, they can not, so for their impudence, they care not to conceal the turpitude of their life. Hence it is, that lamenting their dissolute conversation (even in the integrity of the faith) he breaketh forth into this complaint; All are her friends, and all are her enemies: all are her allies, and all are her adversaries: all are her domestics, and none are peacemakers: all are near unto her, and yet all seek their own: the 
† D. Field translateth it, named Christians. But S. Bernard speaketh of true Catholics in religion.  ministers of Christ, serve * ANTICHRIST. Honorati incedunt de bonis domini, qui domino honorem non deferunt etc.  
19 * What similitude now is there, I pray you, betwixt S. Bernard, and Wickliff in their desires? S. Bernard extolleth the Religion, which Wickliff destroyed; S. Bernard's complaint extendeth merely unto the evil manners of men; Wickliff impugned the good faith of the Church. Wickliff made war against her peace, which she had from heretics; S. Bernard grieved to behold the molestation, which she suffered from her own children. 
* Who? the Pope? He knoweth not S. Bernard, that dareth impute this opinion unto him.  What should I say more? Doth not every man sufficiently understand, that the opposition betwixt S. Bernard, and Wickliff is very great, and founded in many differences, which admit no reconciliation? To conclude; I say briefly; Wickliff was so far from conspiring with S. Bernard, that he hath pronounced an heavy judgement against him, 
† Concil. Constant. Sess. 8. Artic. Wickliff. 44.  saying; Augustin, Bennet, and BERNARD are damned (unless they repent) because they had possessions, and because they instituted, and entered into religious orders, etc. Truly if this were a sufficient reason to condemn S. Bernard with such severity, how much rather may Wickliff give his censure against him, in respect of all those doctrines, which seemed Antichristian, and damnable in his sight? But of his intemperate humour, you shall 
* §. 3. num. 14. etc.  receive presently more copious information.  
20. The thing, which I now offer unto your consideration, and which I do most earnestly beseech you to ponderate in your religious heart, is, the falsehood, the inflexions, the pretences, and subtleties, which this learned Doctor doth mingle in his discourse; being a very labyrinth, and maze, of intricate, and perplexed paths: a dark oracle of uncertain resolutions; whereby the simple, and credulous Reader is carried into an obscure, and misty confusion; not knowing how he may find any secure, and infallible ground, to rest his thoughts therein, with sweet, and comfortable peace.   

§. 3. A reflection upon the 4 passages of D. Field, cited in the first §. of this Chapter. A detection of sundry untruths, and vanities wilfully committed by him in the same.  
1. SInce it is most perspicuous, and evident by the premises, that the Reformation of Luther must necessarily be odious, and execrable unto Gerson, or unto any man imbued with the principles of his Catholic Religion, I will reflect upon the former 4. 
See before; pag. 1. 2. 3.  passages of D. Field, and discover his futility therein, as briefly, as the matter itself (being of such consequence) can permit.  
2. In the FIRST passage, you may observe 4. remarkable points; in all which, the Doctors craft redoundeth unto his own loss.  
1. First; he saith, that Gerson reporteth sundry lewd assertions prejudicial to the states of Kings, and Princes, which the Council of Constance could not be induced to condemn, etc. And hereupon he protesteth, that he hath no hope of a Reformation by a Council.  
2. Secondly; he saith, that THEY made no stay to condemn the positions of Wickliff, and hus.  
3. Thirdly; he saith, that they condemned the positions of Wickliff, and hus, seeming to derogate from the state of the Clergy.  
4. Fourthly, he saith, that they condemned the said positions, though many of them might carry, a good, and Catholic sense, if they might have found a favourable construction. 3. In all these propositions, there is nothing else but subtlety, and circumvention, as you shall perceive by these particulars ensuing, which I observed long since, and will now communicate unto you, for your instruction, because I know, that your good nature is much abused by these pretences, unto the eminent perdition of your soul.  
4. Concerning the FIRST, you must understand, that amongst many scandalous, and erroneus assertions (as well in faith, as in manners) his was presented unto the Council of Constance, viz. Every tyrant, may, and aught to be lawfully, 
Sess. 15.  and meriteriously slain by any of his vassals, or subjects, by deceit, & flattery, or adulation; Notwithstanding any oath, or confederation made with him; and without expectation of sentence, or mandate from any judge whatsoever. This assertion was condemned by the Council, as heretical; and 
* In the place cited by D. Field.  Gerson himself setteth down the councils definition touching this matter, wishing more over, that it had been prosecuted more particularly, for the better satisfaction of himself, and others, who did instantly desire the same. Then he goeth farther, complaining of the perverse humours, which reigned in some men to the disturbation of the tranquillity of the Church.  
5. But what advantadge can D. Field gain from Gersons improbation of the aforesaid lewd assertions, prejudicial to the states of Kings, and Princes? etc. Why doth he press the authority of Gerson, whose medicine he knoweth to be very sharp against the disease of all such Princes, as by the infection of heretics, are seduced from the integrity of the Catholic faith? I take no pleasure in the mention thereof: for I am, and shall be careful in all things, to decline the exasperation of the State. But now in this case, when by sinister, and intolerable depravations, D. Field will thus endeavour to extort a patronadge for his cause, by wresting Catholic authors out of the Catholics hands, and by claiming interest in GERSON, and others, who hated our Reformation, even with a perfect hatred; this injury can not be repelled, nor this collusion displayed, without a simple, and sincere narration of their judgements. Wherefore as S. Paul maketh a good plea for his imprudency (as he censured himself) saying; vet me coegistis, 
2. Cor. 12.  you have compelled me unto it: so I doubt not but mine offence (if it be any) shall be excused, and mitigated, since it proceedeth from that defence, which doth inevitably force me unto the same.  
6. Behold now the assertion, and monition of this WORTHY GUIDE. 
Part. 4. Decom Considerate. contra adulatores Principum.  Every Christian King, and Prince must take heed before all things, lest that by evil information, or by any other means, he fall into errors, repugnant unto our holy faith, and wholesome doctrine; that he may justify himself in all his doings, and that he may appear wise, howsoever he be a great sinner by human frailty. For there is no sin (that he can commit) which maketh any King, or Prince so displeasing unto God, and so infamous unto the world, even unto persecution by fire, and sword, etc. And to this end, the laws Ecclesiastical, and civil do conduce.  
7. I leave it unto the conscience of all Readers to entertain such a conceit of these things, as their own discretion shall suggest; and so I proceed unto a farther, and more weighty consideration.  
8. If the Reformation, which Gerson wished, did consist only, or principally, or at all, in the redress of sundry lewd assertions, prejudicial to the state of Kings, and Princes etc. then it is most certain, that the Protestants have not effectuated his desire. For their positions are execrable, and their practices are odious in this kind, as their own seditious writings, and as the perturbations of many common wealths do testify by a bitter, and woeful experience: and for a copious illustration of this point, I remit you unto the learned 
* Of P. R. against Tho. Morton pag. 38. 39 etc. pag. 122, 123. etc.  Treatise tending to Mitigation, where this matter is excellently discussed.  
8. Notwithstanding, lest I should be too injurious unto myself by passing over this matter wholly in silence, I will acquaint you with some observations, which, as I conceive, are of very special importance. For, I beseech you, who are the most eminent progenitors of your gospel? Are not Wickliff, and after him, hus, and after him Luther, and then Zuinglius, and finally Caluin? Are not they the chief instruments (as you esteem them) of God, raised by him for the purgation of the Church?  
9 The opinions of Wickliff herein are most desperate: 
See Concil. Constant. Sess. 8. Artic. Wickliff, 15. 17.  namely: No man is a Bishop, or Prelate, or temporal Lord, while he is in mortal sin. Again. The people may, at their own arbitrement, correct their Lords, when they offend. These are lewd assertions indeed, and these were condemned by the Church. Hence issued rebellions, and insurrections, hence treason, and complotments of seditious people against their sovereign Prince, 
See Stow; in Henry 5.  as the tumultuations of Sir john Oldcastle, and others may witness unto us.  
11. As for john Husse, I need not say much of him: Wickleffi discipulum possis agnoscere: such pernicious doctrines as he sucked out of Wickliff, he propounded unto the people; and hence came the miserable evisceration of the Bohemian state. I come therefore unto Luther, whose bloody, & barbarous heart was the centre, whence treasons, wars, and plentiful effusion of blood, in later years, hath proceeded to the unrecompensable damage of the Christian world. Will you know the reason, why the Protestants rebelled against CHARLES the fift, a Prince of sweet, and amiable disposition? john Sleydan shall yield it unto you in these words. Quia Caesar religioni [viz. 
Commentar. l. 18.  Lutheranae] eiusque libertati moliebatur exitium, causam prabebat, cur ipsum oppugnarent bona conscientia; they had just reason to oppugn Caesar with good conscience, because he laboured to extinguish the gospel, and to hinder the liberty thereof. 
In Galat. c. 5. v. 12.  Will you know the resolution of Luther himself? Benedictus dies, in quo ista videre licet, etc. Blessed is the day, wherein we may see wars, seditions, tumults, which have followed upon my doctrine. To conclude; admire, with me, the fury, 
Tom. 1. pag. 364. b.  and insolency of his implacable spirit. Whereas, thou sayest (o Spalatine) that my 
* The Elector of Saxony.  Prince will not suffer me to write against the Archbishopp of Mentz, lest this might disturb the common peace, etc. quin te potiùs, & Principem ipsum perdam, & omnem creaturam; which is such a raging speech, as if the Author had been a Bear spoiled of her whelps.  
11. But, was Zuinglius possessed with the same distemperature also? His counsel was dangerous, but this words are smooth, 
Lib. 4. epist. fol. 186.  where he persuadeth the Ghospellers of ulme's, and Memming to renounce their obedience unto the Roman Empire, and to root the name thereof out of Germany, to the uttermost of their ability, and power.  
12. As for john Caluin, his expulsion of the Bishop from his just authority, temporal, and spiritual over the City of Geneva, may be an example for ever, how peaceable the fift Gospel is, which beginneth by craft, and goeth on by fury, to attain unto its end, and purpose. The treasonable complotments in that place, 
See P. R. Ibid.  the dangerous propositions, hatched, and allowed in that Zion (as some men call it) are recognised for all ages.  
13. Thus much, I have thought it expedient, to intimate unto you (though very briefly) that you may not be any longer blinded by the golden, and fair pretences of them, who never cease to exclaim against the Papists, as men wholly imbued with lewd assertions, prejudicial unto their King, and country. Finally therefore, upon due consideration of the premises, I doubt not, but you will easily discern, how impertinent, and how empty the suggestion of D. Field is in the first particular; and by this you may learn to be suspicious of the rest, which now come orderly unto their several examination.  
14. Concerning the SECOND particular, I say briefly, that though Master D. Field would derive the hatred upon others, by concealing Gersons forwardness, and alacrity in the condemnation of Wickliff, Husse etc., and would lay it upon those men in the Council, against whom Gerson taketh his exceptions for other things, yet (as you have already seen) this Worthy guide himself did provoke, and instigate the Council against their heresies, and he did enkindle his audience against the same, according to the place, which he sustained there, and the gift wherewith he was endued. Now, is it not a marvelous contradiction (in your judgement) that Gerson should wish your Reformation, & be a worthy guide of God's Church, and yet, that Husse also should suffer in the cause of Christ against Antichrist? Alas, good Sir; what certainty of truth can you expect from them, who thus involve you, and themselves in such paradoxes, as are impossible, and ridiculous even in the light of nature, and unto moral reason?  
15 Concerning the THIRD particular, I shall inform you of a double collusion, which the learned Doctor hath notoriously affected therein. First, he extenua●eth the turbulent, and impious positions of, Wickliff, and hus, saying, that they SEEMED to derogate from the Clergy etc. But if their positions (of this nature) were now in force, D. Field, and all his Clergy might wring their hands for woe, and lament the time, which brought forth such monstrous opinions. As for example; It is against the holy Scripture, that Ecclesiastical men should have possessions. Again. 
See Concil. Constant. Se●● 8. in Artic. Wickl.  Temporal Lords may, at their pleasure, take away temporal goods from the Church etc. Farther. Tithes are pure alms, and the parishioners, for the sins of their prelate's, may take them away as their will. To conclude. It is against the rule of Christ, to enrich the Clergy. The Emperor, and secular Lords were seduced by the Devil, 
Act. & Mon. in the history of Wickl.  to endow the Church with temporal goods &c. What censure hath john Fox passed upon these exorbitant humours? Perhaps, saith he, some blemishes may be noted in his assertions. And, if he have blemishes etc. See the pitiful carriage of this man; for though the matters be most odious, and apparent, yet he cometh in with his mitigation, and hesitation to take away the infamy of Wickliff, which cleaveth fast unto him, and unto his disciples, as the leprosy unto Gehezai, and unto his posterity for ever. I will end therefore with Melancthon, 
In Apolog. tit. de human tradit.  and say with him; planè furebat Wickliffus etc. Wickliff was stark mad, when he denied, that Priests might retain any thing in proper unto themselves.  
16. The second vanity of the Doctor (in the aforesaid particular) is a singular demonstration of his unfaithful mind. For as he diminisheth the folly of Wickliff in one point, so he concealeth his impiety in the rest, and would make a simple Reader believe, that the positions of Wickliff against the Clergy, were the only, or principal matters, which drew some men in the Council to proceed against him with greater malice, than reason.  
17. But you may perceive by the 
* Concil. Const. etc. Fox Act. & Mon. powel de Antichr. pag. 20. and others. Pag. 77.  Catalogue of Wickliff's opinions, that the points, wherein he dissented from Gerson, as they are many so they are capital; yea such, as do necessarily exclude one of them from the participation of heaven. Why do I name Gerson only? I must enlarge my style, and say, that Wickliff dissented therein from the whole Christian world. For whereas D. Field informeth us out of Gerson, that certain matters, concerning the Pope's power, were defined in the Council of Constance by the universal consent of the whole Christian world, I may most justly assume the like in this case, concerning all the opinions of Wickliff, either embraced, or renounced by your Church. I might here take good occasion to discuss many things, but the opportunity is not so convenient; wherefore I will knit up this point with a double consideration. The first appertaineth unto the ingenious, and learned Academics, whose dignity, honour, and livelihood must suffer a necessary dissipation, if way were given unto the fury of Wickliff, and of his truest disciples. 
Concil. Constant. sess. 8. in artic. Wickl. 29.  Universities, studies, colleges, degrees, and maistershipps in the same, are brought in by vain Gentility, and they profit the Church, as much as the Devil himself.  
18. This is the verdict of your dearest Father; and were they not your brethren also, who affirmed, that the Papists built Seminaries to advance the kingdom of the Devil? 
See D. bancroft's Survey. pag. 232.  Let other men conceive, as they see cause; for mine own part I am resolved with confidence, that they, and Wickliff, did seek the ruin of the Church by the inspiration of the Devil; and that the followers of their impiety, shall be partakers of his pain; God grant you grace to hate the one, and so you shall escape the other.  
19 The second consideration is more important than the first. For though the rivers of our late gospel are issued from Wickliffs' fountain, yet Melancthon himself (no small Saint in john Fox his Calendar) shall testify, that there is no correspondency betwixt him, and your evangelical Churches, even in some principal articles of your faith. 
Melancth. in ep. ad F●eder. Micon.  I have looked (saith he) into Wickliff, who behaveth himself very tumultuously in this controversy [of the Lords supper] and more than this, I have found many errors in him, by which a man may take judgement of his spirit. It is certain, that he did neither hold, nor understand the justice of faith: he doth make a foolish confusion of the gospel, and temporal affairs. He brawleth sophistically, and seditiously concerning the civil Magistrate etc. These things being duly, and conscionably weighed, I see not what advantadge the Protestants can take from such a base, and unworthy progenitor of their Religion. But whereas D. Field doth artificially pretend smaller things, and conceal the greater, you may see with what skill, and subtlety he laboureth to sustain an evil cause, which can admit no competent defence.  
20. Concerning the FOURTH particular, I will not say much; though in this also the Doctor hath used a very cunning depravation. For, as before he laid the condemnation of hus, and Wickliff upon other persons (but not upon Gerson) and allegeth no other reason thereof, but only his positions against the Clergy, so now he addeth farther (as a parcel of Gersons continuate discourse in the same 
* in dialog. apologetic.  place) that many of those positions might carry a good, and Catholic sense, if they might have found a favourable construction.  
21. Good Reader have a little patience in thy admiration of this faithless dealing; for I assure thee, that Gerson, in all that discourse, hath not one syllable directly, or indirectly sounding, unto this purpose; neither doth the learned Doctor insinuate unto us, whence he took, or where we may find that extenuation of Wickliffs' crime. Howbeit, perusing the works of Gerson almost from the α to the ω thereof (D. Fields marvelous suggestions inviting me first unto that happy labour) I 
* Part. 1. Serm. pro Vi●gio Regis Romsecund● part principali directione 3.  found this assertion delivered by him; viz. A general Council may condemn many propositions, with their authors, though they may have some glosses, or expositions, or true logical senses. This rule was practised by this Council in many articles of Wickliff, and hus, some whereof might receive some defence either by the force of logic, or grammar etc. But the Council did carefully attend that speech of Hilary saying; intelligentia dictorum ex causis est assumenda dicendi etc. and that of Augustine, saying; Theologis ad certam regulam loqui fas est etc.  
22. I remit you unto the author, for the rest, only I will now entreat you to consider these three points. First; the Doctors craft in convaighing those things into one sentence, which are dispersed in sundry places; and thus he entangleth his Reader with perplexed, and obscure devices. Secondly; he pretendeth, that the positions of Wickliff (which might bear a Catholic sense by a favourable construction) were such, as seemed to derogate from the state of the Clergy. But as Gerson giveth no signification thereof by any one instance, so it is evident, that those positions, can not possibly receive a favourable construction to yield any Catholic sense; as you may judge by your own wisdom, and discretion; and for a just experiment hereof, I report me unto the 
* num. 15.  precedents. Thirdly, and lastly; you see, that though D. Field would exaggerate the severity of the Council herein, forasmuch as, it did not condescend unto a favourable interpretation etc. ye● Gerson himself (whom he would seem to follow in this matter) doth approve the councils prudency and he prescribeth it as a direction also in the like cases. And thus (gentle Readers) I have compendiously noted forth unto you many frauds, and corruptions of this Doctor in his FIRST passage; the farther prosecution whereof I leave unto your wise, and religious hearts, nor doubting, but that you will remember my advise, for your soul's health; TRY BEFORE YOU TRVST.  
23. I come now unto his SECOND passage, wherein I might abound, and furnish you with plentiful matter; but I must not forget, that I writ an Appendix only at this time, and therefore I shall be enforced to contract myself, and to draw my discourse into a narrow compass.  
24. You must remember that in this passage, the Doctor hath found a means, how the disgrace of that hostility, which reigneth betwixt the Lutheran, and Calvinian factions, may be derived upon the Papists: yea this diversity (saith he) is to be imputed wholly unto them, because a Reformation was to be effected in the Church, and the faction of the Pope's flatterers being an impediment thereunto, so that it could not be done in a general Council (as 
* part 3. in dialog. apologetic.  Gerson foresaw out of his experience) it was necessarily to be assayed in the particular kingdoms of the world. Whence some diversity could not but ensue, while one knew not, nor expected to know what an other did.  
25. That Gerson did earnestly desire a Reformation, his own testimony will evince. I see (saith 
* ibid. in fine.  he) that the Reformation of the Church will never be made by a Council, without the presidency of a well affected Guide, wise, and constant. Let the members therefore provide for themselves throughout all kingdoms, and provinces, when they shall be able, and know how to compass this work. Here D. Field triumpheth, 
See before. § 1. num. 4. etc.  applying this counsel of Gerson unto the tumultuations of Luther, and Zwinglius and such disastrous Reformers. But with what conscience, with what honesty, with what respect of God, or man, could D. Field thus deprave the intention of Gerson, and thus obscure the light of the truth, and thus abuse the credulity of his Reader? For doth not Gerson, in the words immediately subsequent, most abundantly demonstrate, that there is no proportion, nor conformity betwixt his desire, and their fact? Compare therefore their proceed with his prescrition, and the difference will soon appear. They must achieve this Reformation (saith he) not by multiplying new constitutions (which is rather an hindrance, than an advantadge) but by a lively, and couradgious execution of the laws all ready made in great plenty; the superuacaneous being either cut of or quite omitted.  
26. I must entreat you now to consider the resemblance betwixt Gerson, and Luther in this issue, The first referreth us unto the provision of the laws; but what laws did the second follow in his disordered innovations? The first requireth an execution of the Ecclesiastical decrees; but what decrees were then enacted by the Church, to regulate such exorbitancies, as were incurred by the second? What councils, what constitutions, what sanctions did he, or could he propose unto himself? Wherefore since Gersons laws are such, as ●end unto the castigation, and suppression of Wickliffians, Hussites, and all other sectaries proseminated from such fathers, it followeth clearly that Luther hath performed the contrary unto his designment, and, consequently, that D. Field hath delivered a vast untruth, not only unto his own just disreputation, but unto the certain evident, inevitable ruin, and subversion of his Church.  
27. Here also the wise, and ingenious Reader may observe the great disparicy betwixt the Catholics, and Protestants in their courses. The first proceed in legitimate manner against the second, by virtue of Canonical, and Ecclesiastical process. The second proceed against the first by laws temporal, and by Parliamentary decrees. The first proceed against the second directly, and without circuitions, as guilty of schism, and heresy; and to this effect they bring forth the ancient, and the modern constitutions of sacred councils, Ecumenical, Nationall, Provincial etc. The second proceed against the first really, and merely for their Religion itself, but under the name of treason, and disobedience, and such like pretences. Which preposterous order of unjust justice doth irrefutably convince the Protestants of heresy, and impiety against the Catholic faith. For, doth not every man (endued with any measure of understanding) conceive, that the Church of God (the pillar of truth) as it hath, and must preserve the faith of our Lord jesus Christ, pure, and immaculate from the contagion of heresy (or else there was no Catholic Church; and then there is no Christ, no God, no hell, no heaven, no immortality, no retribution) so it is, and was furnished, and strengthened with proper laws for the due correction of heretics, and for the extirpation of their errors? I say, that to suppose the contrary, it is a senseless imagination; and to affirm the contrary, it were an Atheistical position. Reflect now, I pray you, upon your own Congregation, she that hath invested herself with the glorious title of the CATHOLIC Church, Where are her ancient Ecclesiastical laws, her Canons, her constitutions wherewith she is armed, and assisted to proceed against the Papists, whose heresies you exclaim against with violence, supporting your mighty accusations with slender proofs? But I return unto the farther prosecution of D. Fields untruths; for these things are manifest unto all men, and need not any copious explication.  
28. Whereas it pleaseth the learned Doctor to say, that it was not possible, but some diuersi●y should grow [betwixt Luther, Zwinglius etc.] while one knew not, what an other did, this excuse also is too short to cover the turpitude of their dissensions. For you see, that the laws, which were of force in Gersons time, had been an infallible rule to preserve conformity in their proceedings, if their intention had been suitable unto his prescription in this behalf. But these immoderate Reformers, entertaining no such rule for their direction (Word, and Spirit was the burden of their song) were necessarily distracted in their actions, while they followed the variable illuminations of their uncertain fancies.  
29. Let me proceed yet a little farther, to consider the inordinate, and distempered passion of these men. They rejected laws (as you see) because they attempted a lawless action; and this is sufficiently proved unto you by the grave authority of Gerson, a WORTHY GUIDE of God's Church. Now also you may behold their pride, temerity, and singular precipitation; for this shall be proved unto you by D. Field himself, who hath accused them by his own defence, saying; one knew not, nor expected to know, what an other did. Why did they not know? were they disterminated by sea and had they not means of access each unto the other? Was there a great 
* Luk. 16.26.  chaos betwixt them, so that they could not have passage, and transmeation from Zu●ick unto Wittenberg, and from Wittenberg unto Zurick? No man, be he of mean capacity, will suffer himself to be abused with this pretence.  
30. But, did they not expect to know, what an other did? It is an argument of their folly, and insolency, who in a matter of such consequence, (as from the first plantation of Christianity, can admit no example to parallel it by innumerable degrees) would not consult, nor retain familiar intercourse in so important affairs.  
31. I must now address myself unto the plain narration of this matter, wherein the learned Doctor hath trifled with you all this while, and concealed the truth from your knowledge by his false, paradoxical, and impertinent suggestions. For you must understand, that all Sacramentaries (in which number you are) fell away from Luther, and departed from the communion of his Church. Do you require my proof? The demonstrations are many, and irrefragable; but I will content myself with the protestations of them, whose authority is free from all exceptions. Let Bull●nger know (saith 
* Recognit. propheticae, & Apostolica doctrinae etc. pag. 10.  Brentius; a venerable old man in M. jewels verdict) that from the beginning, since the Zwinglians departed from us (that is to say, from the true doctrine) I was not a clandestine, but an open adversary of their impious opinion concerning the supper of the Lord etc.  
32. What need I drink of the rivers, when the fountain itself is so near at hand? Behold therefore the constant asseveration of M. LUTHER, the third Eliah, the Germayn Prophet, a true Evangelist, a singular Apostle, the great Reformer, the man of God, the flying Angel, etc. (for this, and much more is spoken of him by your ghospellers) who 
* Tom. 3. in Genes. cap. 41.  saith, that, now the refined doctrine of the gospel hath gained many, who where oppressed by the tyranny of Antichrist; but yet withal the Anabaptists the 
† See before; pag. 6.  SACRAMENTARIES, and other fanatical men are gone out from us etc. They were not of us, though for a time they were with us, they sought their own glory, and estimation.  
33. Again. There is no wickedness (saith 
* Tom. 2.345.  he) not cruelty, which Zwinglius layeth not unto my charged, so that the Papists, mine enemies, do not tear me, as those my friends, who without us, and before us, were nothing, and durst not stir one jot; but now being puffed up with our victory, they turn their force against us. These perturbations in the gospel (which he began, and preached alone, without any copartner; as 
* See justus Calvinus, in apolog. pag. 78  himself doth often witness) did work great affliction, and vexation within his bones, yea they did excruciate, and torment his soul (as 
† See locos come. Luth. part. 5. pag. 36.  he complaineth) even unto the extreme danger of his faith. Howbeit, resumpsi animum, & dixi &c. I took couradge again, and said; these things are done without my fault; therefore let the authors vex themselves, and not I Verily I will attempt, by all means possible, to cure these evils; but if I can not do it, yet I will not be consumed with grief. If one Munzer, one Carolostadius, one ZWINGLIUS be not sufficient for the Devil, excitet plures, 
Zwinglius was raised by the Devil to afflict the Church.  let him raise up more.  
34. This is the perpetual style of Luther against the Sacramentaries, whom he damneth unto the lake of fire, and brimstone; as obstinate, and malicious heretics, fallen away from his Church by apostatical defection. And here you may see how the nature of heresy is always variable, and uncertain, as Tertullian observed long ago; 
Prescript. c. 4●.  saying; Heretics differ amongst themselves, while the scholar doth modulate, at his pleasure, that which he received, as the Master did compose, at his pleasure, that which he delivered. The progress of the thing doth acknowledge the condition of it, and the manner of its beginning. The Valentinians, and Mart●onites may change their faith at their own arbitrement, as well as Valentine, and Martion themselves. Denique penitùs inspectae haereses omnes in multis cum authoribus suis dissentientes deprehenduntur etc.  
35. Thus I have truly discovered unto you the deportment of your pretenced Reformers: the crime, and cause of whose implacable dissensions, D. Field would unconscionably derive upon the Papists, by abusing the authority of Gerson; whereas it is most evident, that these men sought not the end, at which Gerson aimed, nor followed the means, which he prescribed; but as Luther did boisterously impugn the Catholic Church, so Zwinglius, and all the troop of Sacramentaries fell away seditiously, and factiously from his society, and communion. And so much concerning the SECOND passage.  
36. In the THIRD passage, there are some memorable points; as namely, the Doctor doth confess freely, and plainly, that Gerson, Grosthead etc. 
3. Reg. 2. 2●.  were of the TRUE CHURCH. But here I may say of D. Field, as Solomon pronounced of Adoniah, his brother; contra animam suam locutus est Adonias verbum hoc; against his life, and the life of his Church hath D. Field spoken this word. For, was not Gerson, and likewise Grosthead, a member really, and essentially of the Roman, or POPISH Church? The precedents may testify for the first, and the 
* §. 4.  sequel shall witness for the second: wherefore I must infer necessarily, that the Popish Church was the TRUE CHURCH in their time; and that it is so at this day, because it still continueth the same, Finally; as Wickliff, Husse etc. were not of the true Church, because they were not of the same Church with GERSON; so the Protestants are not members of the true Church, because they are excluded from the society of the Church of Rome, which is the 
* See S. Cyprian l. 4. ep. 8.  root, and mother of the Catholic Church. For, in that See, semper Apostolicae cathedrae viguit principatus, as 
† epist. 162.  S. Augustine himself doth witness.  
37. A second point i● this. Gerson, Grosthead etc. gave testimony unto the work, which WE have done. What we? LUTHER, and ZWINGLIUS? You know that the SACRAMENTARIES are exiled out of the fellowship of Luther's Church. 
contra artic. Lovan. thesi 27.  Censemus serio etc. We think seriously (saith Luther) that all Zwinglians, and Sacramentaries are heretics, and aliens from the Church of God. Which severe, and true sentence of the great Apostle himself, a Synod of Lutherans hath established by a solemn decree; 
Epitome Colloq. Maulbrunae. Anno 1564. pag. 82.  viz. Zwinglianis nullum locum in Ecelesiâ concedimus etc. we grant the Zwinglians no place in the Church. To what purpose then serveth this particle of extension, WE have done & c? But I will admit, that you, and the Lutherans are of one Church: howbeit I must absolutely, and confidently deny, that you, or they, or both have the testimony of GERSON for the approbation of your work; and this is so copiously declared already, that I need not allege new proofs, no● reinforce the old.  
38. Thirdly, it pleaseth M. Doctor to advance Gerson, Grosthead etc. with the resplendent title of BEST men that lived in the corrupt state of the Church. Truly they were so good, that Luther (your great Reformer) was dirt and dung (to speak of him in 
* See before; pag. 146  his own phrases) in comparison of their excellent demeanour; and they shined as gold, in respect of his ignoble conversation. And yet was he (sweet Saint) peculiarly inspired above them all?  
39 I am weary (and, I fear, troublesome unto you also) in the prosecution of these lamentable devices: but I am now come unto the last, and FOURTH passage, wherewith I will briefly conclude this whole matter, and then proceed unto some farther issue.  
40. In this passage there are 2 points, which do specially require your very deliberate ponderation. FIRST; you shall there find, that Cameracensis, Picus, Savanarola & GERSON (he is the principal man) and innumerable others (for so the learned Doctor amplifieth his vanities) were the WORTHY GVIDES OF 
* therefore the Protestants Church is not God's Church.  GOD'S CHURCH. But what Church, I pray you, did they guide, administer, and direct? That Church, whereof the Protestants are members? No; for they detested your opinions. That, whereof the Papists are members? Yea; for they were firmly united unto the Church of Rome, and unto the Pastor of that See; and therefore heretics, and proud Romanists, and Antichristian Vassals, sworn to take the foams of the child of perdition, and Vassals of the man of sin, etc. all which hobgoblin-termes the Doctor hath congested upon such men, as now retain the very same faith, which Gerson constantly professed, and are knit unto that Church, which he humbly obeyed. And yet is a Gerson also a WORTHY GUIDE OF GOD'S CHURCH? You may remember, that D. Field, (and hi● Church) doth willingly admit a trial of your cause by the testimony of the Fathers. 
See before; book 1. Part. 1 chap 2. § 1. num. 4. etc.  Do you admire that venditation, and wonder at that assertion, when Gerson himself shall be made a worthy guide of the Church & c? I leave it unto your ingenuity, and wisdom (since it doth import your eternity) to consider, what truth, what solidity, what assurance you, or I, or any other may expect at these men's hands, for the information of our understandings, the satisfaction of our doubts, the direction of our souls in the way of secure, and certain peace.  
41. The SECOND particular is this. It appeareth by that, which we have already delivered touching that matter, how nothing is done in our Reformation, which these men [Gerson, Grosthead etc.] long before thought not necessary to be done. But where is that delivered, and how doth that appear? I know that the Doctor hath pitifully mangled some sentences, and notably depraved the intention of GERSON, throughout 2 whole 
* 10. & ●●.  chapters going immediately before; as you shall perceive by this example, which hath more show of probability on his side, and is of more importance, than all the rest. His words are they. 
† pag. 83.  Touching the second cause of the Church's ruin (which is, the ambition, pride, and covetousness of the bishops, and Court of Rome) 
* Part. 1. in 4 considerate. post Tract. de unitate Ecclesiastical.  Gerson boldly affirmeth, that whereas the bishops of Rome, challendging the greatest place in the Church, should have sought the good of God's people, they contrarily sought only to advance themselves; in imitation of Lucifer they will be adored, and worshipped as Gods. Neither do they think themselves subject to any, but are as the sons of Beliall, that have cast off the yoke; not enduring, whatsoever they do, that any should ask them, why they do so. They neither fear God, not reverence men.  
42. What credulous, and ignorant Reader, may not be entangled by such sugared speeches, so full of deadly poison? For first to deal with some of his words, and then to come unto his matter; why doth the Doctor produce Gerson boldly affirming, that the bishops of Rome CHALLENGED the greatest place in the Church? Doth not Gerson say boldly, that the Bishop of Rome is a Monarch in the Church by divine right? 
* Pag. 5.6.  See before; and deal unpartially in this matter. Again; whereas it may seem an odious imputation, and specially out of Gersons mouth, that the bishops of Rome would be adored, and worshipped [which word M. Doctor supplieth out of his own store, for exaggeration sake] as God's, you may consider, that without all question, Gerson doth not reprove the exhibition of condign honour unto the vicegerent of our Lord, and Saviour jesus Christ. For 
* Part. 1. de Potestate Ecclesiasticâ considerate. 11.  Gerson doth freely agnize, that, in respect of the admirable power, which is committed [by Christ] unto the Pope (as Pastor of the universal Church) though he be most wicked [in person] yet [in respect of his place] he may be called most holy [which assertion is extremely repugnant unto the temerarious malice of john Husse, saying, that 
† See Concil. Constant. Sess. 12. in Artic. Huss. 23.  the Pope may not be called most holy in respect of his office, for then the Devil himself may be called holy also] and that he may be adored cultu duliae even unto the kisses of his feet; and so in other honours. Which humble dejection will hardly agree, as I conceive, with the proud Spirit of Luther, Zuinglius, or their compeers.  
43. I pretermitt my just exception against some words (whence the Doctor sucketh no small advantadge) and come unto the purport of the matter itself, wherein you may behold his general obliquity, and deceit. Far● was it from Gersons heart to impayr the dignity of our Lords anointed (as 
* See before; pag. 8.  himself speaketh) and to scandalise the Apostolical See; much less did he intend to yield the least defence unto any man of Wickliffs' race. But you may be pleased to understand, that the Catholic Church had suffered much divexation in his time by the pernicious schism of Antipopes (the 
† See Gerson a little before, in his treatise Quot schif mata, etc.  two, and twentieth schism of that kind) by whom a great distraction ensued among Christians, as he doth bitterly complain. To extirpate this evil a Council was indicted at Pisa, and thither the prelate's of the Church flowed in great abundance. Wherefore this worthy guide of God's Church (and severe enemy of all Wickliffian heretics) laid down certain weighty considerations for the direction of so important a business; 
See the place cited by D. Field. num. 41.  in the number whereof is this particular ensuing. The unity of the Church (now to be procured in the Council of Pisa) unto one certain VICAR of Christ, aught to rest more solidly upon the sentences, and deliberations of the Council and of the wise men, that will repair thither (yea though they offer no evident reasons) then upon the allegations, and assertions, or excusations, or justifications either of them, who now contend about the Papacy, or of any their abettors. This consideration is easily deduced from hence; viz. that the mean of virtue is to be accepted, as a wise man shall judge thereof, and as a spiritual man, who discerneth all things, shall say, but not as a carnal man, who favoureth not the thing, that are of God, shall fain unto himself. For, who will doubt (when more causes concur in their behalf, who shall assemble together in the Council) but that such as employ their diligence to make union in the Church, should be credited, rather than 
* The Antipopes.  they, woe strive to possess that presidency, which they already obtain? forth too much, and carnal love of a man unto himself, and unto his necessaries, is it not wont to deceive, and to carry into impious errors, even unto the imitation of Lucifer, that they would be adored as Gods, and repute not themselves subject unto any man (as sons of Beliall without an yoke) and that no man may say unto them, Why dost thou so? They fear not God, nor reverence man, whereas they ought to be more humble, and more prompt to serve in the office of their prelacy, by how much they see themselves more obliged to render their account.  
44. Thus I have presented the matter completely unto your view, with the true substance, and due circumstance thereof. I know that your excellent apprehension will not suffer you to be transported by vain pretences against the clear light of unresistible truth. Wherefore your prudency shall ease me of farther pain in the explication of this thing.  
45. Finally; to give a plenary satisfaction unto you, and others concerning GERSONS opinions (generally) & your REFORMATION (the ruin of the Church being masked in that glorious name) you must understand, that whereas he reproveth the ambition of some Popes, you have renounced the institution of Christ. He accuseth the exorbitancy of some disordered persons; you disclaim the verity of the Catholic faith. He dispraiseth the unlawful abuse of things; you contemn their necessary use. He wished a remedy of some evils; your remedy is worse than the evils themselves. He desired to evacuate the bad humours; you have le●t forth the lifeblood of the Church. In stead of conversion, we see subversion, in stead of reformation we behold deformation; Church against Church; faith against faith; intestine conflicts with endless strife. And whence is this? Because unity is necessarily dissolved, where all the members are not conjoined unto one head; a mischief, which had never been known, if Luther had applied Gersons 
* See before; num. 25.  remedy in the curing of her sickness. To conclude therefore; there is a resemblance betwixt joabs cruelty against the son of his Master, and Luther's insolency against the Father of the Church. When joab pursued Absalon in his rebellion, 
2. Sam. 18, 5.  he had a charged from David saying, Seruate mihi puerum Absalon etc. Save my son Absalon, and the people heard the King, when he gave this commandment unto his Princes; so Gerson did most strictly prescribe unto all men, that they should not reveal heir Father's nakedness, nor disleize him of his rightful inheritance, (howsoever his evil manners might deserve a just reproof) nor put their hand to violate the sacred ordinance of Christ: and all the world may take notice of this injunction. But as joabs sanguinarious heart neither respected the compassion of a father, nor the commandment of a master, to Luther, in his insatiable fury, regarded not his saviours institution, his Church's safety, the judgement of Fathers, the decree of councils, but trampled all thei● under his feet, and insulted against our Lords anointed with diabolical contempt. Pardon me (good Sir) if I seem earnest against him, who was so singularly opposite unto the worthy guides of God's Church. I remember that Sueton dividing the gests of Caligula into two parts, giveth this censure of him; that in the former, he had spoken tanquam de homine, as of a man; but in the rest, be is to speak tanquam de monstro, as of a monster, and of no man. Likewise, whensoever I make mention of your other Reformers (as you call them) I will speak of them all, as of men, participating human nature with me; but I cannot conceive a thought of Luther, which doth not represent a very monster unto my understanding: so unlike I find him in all his courses, unto the worthy guides of God's Church, and consequently your Reformation most dissonant from the purity of their faith, and contrary unto their designments; notwithstanding all the shadows, colours, and gloriations of D. Field.   

§. 4. The name, and authority of GROSTHEAD abused by D. Field to justify the Lutheran (pretenced) Reformation.  
1. IS not the gleaning of grapes of Ephraim better than the vintage of Abiezer? 
Iudi●. 8.2.  Though D. Field hath placed Gerson in the front of his battle against the Papists, and seateth him forth in complete armour, as you have seem, yet a principal, yea the greatest part of his victory may seem to depend upon Grosthead, whose name is gracious unto us for country sake, and venerable also in respect of that dignity, which he enjoyed in the Church. Wherefore a little, a very little signification of his mind, warping toward this late, pretenced Reformation, may justly prevail with us much more, than the profuse, and copious discourses of other men not so much endeared unto us, as this worthy guide of God's Church: concerning whom you have received this instruction from D. Field 
* pag. 84.  When the Pope resolved to accurse, anathematize, and excommunicate GROSTHEAD, the renowned B. of Lincoln, because he contemned his Papal Bulls, and Letters (who was therefore, in his time, named Romanorum malleus, & contemptor) the Cardinals opposed themselves saying, that he was a right good man, and holier than any of them; that the things wherewith he charged the Pope, were most true, etc.  
2. To deal with every particular in this artificial passage, it requireth much pain, and the sum thereof would exceed that quantity, unto which I am now confined. But I will direct myself first unto the main issue and then I may draw you unto a consideration of the inferior points.  
3. You know that the scope, and purpose of D. Field is to justify your Reformation by the testimonies, and verdicts of Gerson, of Grosthead, of Savanarola, and the like. Now if this worthy guide of God's Church were a true, formal, essential Papist, I appeal unto your conscience, whether it be probable, or possible, that he could wish, or tolerate the Reformation (of Luth. Zuingl. etc.) which D. Field pretendeth to be conformable unto his desire? To satisfy you in this matter unto the full, I pray you, (good Sir) take notice, that a 
* D. Godwyn in his catalogue of BB.  Bishop of your own, hath freed this worthy guide from all suspicion of propending unto your reformed Church. For thus he writeth. 
† pag. 240.  The Pope having read the letters of Bishop Grosthead grew into great choler, and breathing out many threats, intended some terrible revendge of this so intolerable reproach (as he took it) until such time as one Giles, a Cardinal of spain, stepping unto him, used these words: Holy Father; it shall not do well, in my opinion, to take any hard, or extreme course against this man; it is but too true that he hath written; he is, for Religion, 
NOTA.  a CATHOLIC as well, as we, etc.  
4. Here you may demand of your highly esteemed Doctor first; Whether the Cardinals of Rome were not real members of the Antichristian Synagogue, and whether, to be a Catholic AS WELL AS THEY, it be not (identically) as much as to say, a proud Romanist, a factious Papist &c. terms much affected by himself. You may demand of him secondly; Whether they, or any man participating with them substantially in the same Religion, could ever cast a favourable, and propitious eye toward the Lutheran, or Zwinglian Reformation of the Church? You may demand of him thirdly; Whether it were ingenuous, and honest dealing in him to give such a singular applause unto the excellency of Grostheads virtues, that so (dissembling his correspondency in faith with the Roman Church) he might colour, and beautify his evil cause with fictions, exaggerations, and other pretences of the same nature?  
5. Consider a few of them, and by these you may conceive the quality of the rest. Your Doctor, for his own advantadge, doth liberally permit the title of a renewned Bishop unto this worthy guide. Truly Sir, I doubt not, but if Grosthead were now surviving, and knew by what manner of men, he is thus praised, he would say, what evil have I done, that they should speak well of me? But this is a trivial art in Protestants to elevate men, and to depress them again, as their humours do propel them; and therefore their language is always varied according to their occasions. Hence it is, 
de Antichr. pag. 23.  that M. powel hath a trick to place William Wickam in the catalogue of his evangelical fathers, and to style him a most godly Bishop; howbeit john Fox, knowing him to be a most infense adversary unto the gospel of Wickliff, phraseth him the wicked Bishop of Winchester etc. But forasmuch as my original discourse is concerning a Bishop of Lincoln, I will exemplify rather in Rich. Fleming (sometimes a Prelate of that See) 
ibid. pag. 42  to whom M. powel doth afford very special commendation, for his evangelical truth, for his affection unto the word of God etc. To conclude; he also did rerceive, that there must be a Reformation of the Church. Notwithstanding 
* in his catalogue of BB.  D. Godwyn may inform you, that B. Fleming was the man, who (according to the decree of the Council of Constance) did exhumate the bones of Wickliff, and commit them unto the fire. Which proceeding drew this angry sentence from M. powel's pen; 
ibid. pag. 22  Vah inauditam tyrannidem!  
6. I point at these things by the way, that you may see how your Protestants are omnium horarum homines; praising, dispraising; advancing, depraving whom they please, and as they please, to extort any shadow of defence for their unhappy cause; so that every writer amongst them may garnish his title page with this Horatian motto, Quò me cunque rapit tempestas, deferor. I proceed. Your Doctor telleth you, that Grosthead contemning Papal bulls, and letters, was therefore named Romanorum malleus, & contemptor. But he should inform you, that Grosthead was so named, because he would not permit Italians (who in many respects were incompetent for the places designed unto them in England, by the Pope) to possess Ecclesiastical dignities within his episcopal precinct; and howbeit sundry letters were directed unto him from the Pope, yet he thought it lawful for him to gainsay an unlawful demand, and therefore he would not condescend unto that, which he esteemed utterly unjust. Whereas your Doctor sayeth farther, that the Cardinals opposed themselves etc. he should say, that they interposed themselves; by counsel also to entreat, not by authority to control.  
7. I will not exercise your patience any longer in detection of your Doctors crafty, and subtle fetches to entangle his Reader both in his matter, and in his words; a snare is laid in every line, and the foolish among the people are taken therein; wise men, and circumspect, and endued with mean knowledge, and solicitous of the truth, will soon discover the obliquity of his paths.  
8. Thus much (most dearly respected Master S.) out of my heartiest love unto your noble, and heroical self, I have thought good to set down briefly, and plainly, and (perhaps) effectually, concerning some worthy guides, whose names are exceedingly abused to prove that, which they disapprooved, and to support that cause, which they abhorred as exitial, and deadly heresy, from the very bottom of their hearts. There remain yet other worthy guides, viz. Camoracensis, Savanarola, etc. traduced also, and enforced to give testimony unto that, which they did always disclaim. As for Cameracensis (or Petrus de Aliaco) he was the instructor of Gerson, and you may discern the Master by the Scholar. 
See Gers. part. 3. in dialog. Apologetic. In the Examen of Fox his Calendar. chap. 9 num. 9 10. etc.  As for Savanarola, he is quite discharged from the communion of john Fox his Saints, as you may see in the right excellent Treatise of the three Conversions of England (a book, which I do specially recommend unto you for matter, for method, and for style; assuring you, upon my own experience, that you shall read it with great profit, and incredible delight) where the vanity, and falsehood of that deceiver is dismasked, and laid forth in such manner, as it doth justly require.  
9 Now it remaineth, that, according to the acuteness, and vivacity of your ingenious spirit, you should penetrate deeply into a consideration of your present estate. Out of the Church there is no salvation (as all men perished out of the Ark, which was a type thereof) and that you are not within the Church, as I do certainly know, so yourself can not but necessarily suspect. For you see that the guides of your soul are deceitful, and that the grounds of your Religion are absurd. If you repair unto such worthy guides as Gerson, Grosthead etc. they condemn you; if unto Wickliff, Husse, etc. as they descent from you in many things, so there was a time, when they did not exist, and they were Papists also before they apostatised from the Church. Where was your Religion then, and in whom was it perpetuated for many ages? Will you recur unto an invisible Church? S. Augustine's disputation: against the Donatists do clearly convince you, for he proveth that the Church neither was, nor can be invisible, and concealed; 
pag 19 etc.  yea your learned Doctor doth liberally confess the same. Will you content yourself with a linsey wolsey, mixed, heterogeneous Church, which hath not a pure, 
See before; book 1. Part. 2. chap. 1 §. 1. & 2.  immaculate faith, but is composed of sundry factions, imbued with different, and incompatible opinions? This were to make the Virgin-Church of Christ an harlot, & to turn the Catholic religion into heretical confusion. And yet unto these impious paradoxes your Professors are inevitably driven for the maintenance, and supportation of their cause.    

CHAP. 2. The singular vanity of D. Field, pretending that there is no material difference betwixt the Luthérans, Zwinglians &c.  

§. 1. Their difference about the question of ubiquity. D. Fields pseudo-theologicall determination thereof. Their difference about the Sacrament.  
1. AS one wave in the sea followeth immediately upon the neck of an other, so the untruths of D. Field come rolling together, and where one hath ended, there an other beginneth;— finis alterius mali Gradus est futuri.  
2. You have seen 
* pag. 2.  before, that he imputeth the diversity of his Cadmaean brethren wholly unto the Papists; and then, without any intermission, he yieldeth a farther plea in their defence, saying; Yet it fell out by the happy providence of God, and the force of that main truth they all sought to advance, that there was no material, or essential difference amongst them, but such as, upon equal scanning, will be found rather to consist in the divers manner of expressing one thing and to be but verbal upon mistaking, through the hasty, and inconsiderate humours of some men, than any thing else. Yea, I dare confidently pronounce, that after due, and full examination of each others meaning there shall be no difference found touching the matter of the SACRAMENT, the VBIQVITARY presence, or the like, between the Churches reform by Luther's ministry in Germany, and other places, and those, whom some men's malice called SACRAMENTARIES etc. And this shall be justified against the proudest Papist of them all.  
3. I find no justification made by your humble Doctor concerning the Sacrament; but in the question of ubiquity he hath given just advantadge unto the Papists, if they were proud before, 
See Fabricius in loc. come. Luth. part. 4. p. 55. pag. 1●1.  to remember what M. Luther hath left written unto posterity; viz. Scio me in hac causâ non fuisse tam animoso & SUPERBO spiritu, quàm sum modò etc.  
4. Wherefore, I pray you see the salve of a misappled distinction, by which he seeketh to heal the wound of your incurable dissension: saying; the human nature of Christ hath two kinds of being; the one NATURAL, the other PERSONAL; the first limited, and finite, the second infinite, and incomprehensible. For, seeing the nature of a man is a created nature, and essence, it can not be but finite; and seeing it hath no personal subsistence of it own, but that of the Son of God communicated unto it, which is infinite, and without limitation, it can not be denied to have an infinite subsistence, and to subsist in an incomprehensible, and illimited sort, and consequently every where. Thus than the body of Christ secundum esse naturale is contained in one place, but secundum esse personale may rightly be said to be every where. So he; and then he glorieth of the facility to reconcile all the assertions of your Divines touching this part of Christian faith, to stop the mouths of your prattling adversaries etc. Truly the Genevians themselves (who excel in the art of 
* See D. bancroft's Survey; pag. 195.  reconciliation) may yield the buckler unto him.  
5. But yet he hath failed exceedingly in two points, FIRST, in saying that there is no place, where the body of Christ is not united personally unto that God, who is every where; and that it doth subsist every where etc. For though the divine Person, wherein the human nature subsisteth, be every where, yet the human nature subsisteth therein finitely, and in one determinate place; the union itself being a created thing. You may take a familiar example to illustrate this point for your more exact comprehension thereof. 
tota in tato, & tota in qualibes part. So the whole divinity of Christ assumed the humanity.  The soul of man is every where in the body, and is not divided in quantity, but hath different operations according to the disposition of the organical parts, wherein, and whereby she exerciseth her functions. Now, though it be indivisibly in all the parts of man, (the head, and feet being united unto the same soul) yet the head is not united unto the soul in the feet, nor the fear unto the soul in the head; howbeit she is the same equally, & impartibly in both. Likewise, the similitude holdeth in this case. For the divine Person is essentially present in all places alike, as much without heaven, as within; but yet to say, that the body of Christ hath union with his person in all places, because it is united unto that, which filleth all places, it is an heresy, which the Doctors falsehood hath cast him into, as you may sensibly perceive.  
6. The SECOND error is notorious, viz. the human nature of Christ may rightly be SAID to be every where, in as much as it is united personally unto that, which is every where. For it is a known, & infallible maxim in your schools; that by virtue of the personal union in Christ, the proprieties of the divine nature are attributed unto the Person in concrete viz, GOD, and MAN: not unto the human 
* quando ●a, quae sunt propria divina natura, non possunt participari ab humanam etc. See S. Thomas p. 3. q. 16. art. 5. ad tertium.  nature in abstract, viz. unto the manhood. For as we may say truly, that GOD suffered, but not the 
Luther saith, that divinitas passa est.  GODHEAD; and MAN raised up Lazarus, but not the MANHOOD; so, in regard of the personal union, we may truly say, that the Man Christ is every where, but not the manhood. And therefore in this point also your learned Doctor hath abused you with a pseudotheological conclusion.  
7. This shall suffice briefly concerning the matter of ubiquity; and no doubt, when he hath scanned the doctrine of the SACRAMENT, but his reconciliation therein will be proportionable unto his device in this. And that you may be furnished to expect his skill therein, I will prepare some observations for your better direction in this important matter.  
8. To this end, you must conceive how your Euangelicks differ from the Catholics, and from themselves also in this issue. The CATHOLICS teach with one consent, that after the words of consecration [This is my body; 
1. Transubst.  This is my blood] there is the true, real body, and blood of Christ contained under the similitude of bread, and wine. For, benedictious etiam natura mutatur, by the benediction the nature itself is changed. As the word of Christ can make something of nothing, 
De mysterijs init. cap. 9 2. Consubst.  so it is able to turn one thing into an other; as S. Ambrose doth perspicuously, and irrefragably deliver unto us touching this sacred transelementation.  
9 The LUTHERANS teach, that in the Sacrament there is the true, real body, and blood of Christ together with, or under the bread, 
Sir Th. More.  and wine. A good child was Luther, that would not eat his flesh without bread, for fear of breeding worms in his belly.  
10. The SACRAMENTARIES (so styled by Luther; and you may not forget it; because the Doctor saith, that some men's malice called them so) have many idle, and base interpretations of this mystery. The Sacramentary sect hath now six heads, as I take it (saith M. Luther) borne in one year; 
See Fabric. in loc. come. Luth. part. 5. pag. 48.  it is a wonderful spirit that so dissenteth from himself. But the fairest, and best exposition, which any Sacramentary hath made, is this; viz. the body of Christ is truly, and really exhibited unto us in the Sacrament, to be participated only by a true, and a lively faith. This is the proper doctrine of john Caluin, whereby he would seem to speak more magnifically, then Zwinglius, and the rest. Howbeit they and he concur absolutely in two points; wherein they all differ from the Catholics, and from M. Luther himself. FIRST; that Christ is not otherwise in the Eucharist, then by a sacramental union of the thing signified in, and with the sign. SECONDLY; that he can not be participated there otherwise, then by the act of faith; and consequently the faithful only do eat his body, and drink his blood in the holy communion. This also is the doctrine generally of your English Church. 
See M. Rogers in his Cathol. doctr. pag. 178.   
11. Now whether your learned Doctor can possibly excogitate, or scan out any reconciliation betwixt the Lutherans, and Sacramentaries in this matter, you may inform yourself by him, and use him as the living commentary of his dead letter. Mean while three reasons do very strongly persuade, yea assure me, that their difference herein is not capable of any reconciliation. My FIRST reason is derived from M. LUTHER, writing thus unto his friend; 

See Fabricius, in loc. come. Luth. part. 5. pag. 49.  
Fabric. ibid.   The opinion of Zwinglius, and Oecolampadius spreadeth itself far, and hath divers sects within itself. But thou, if thou regardest my counsel, shalt fly it as the pestilence: for it is blasphemous against the word of Christ, and against our faith.  
12. To the same effect he enditeth a letter unto an other friend, and sayeth. Unless I knew the wrath of God, and saw the experience of it, I could never have been persuaded that so many, and so great men could be seduced by such base, silly. and childish reasons into this testilent, and sacrilegious 
* of Zwing. etc.  heresy. For, what argument, I beseech you, is this? Christ is at the right hand of his Father, therefore he is not in the Sacrament. The flesh profiteth nothing; therefore the body of Christ is not there. And these are their principal 
† the same they bring against the Catholics also.  arguments. But it is a madness to be moved by these toys from the simple, and plain words of Christ; THIS IS MY BODY. Which clear sentence the Sacramentaries deprave by their interpretation, viz. this is a sign of my body. An exposition no less absurd (
* Tom. 7. contra fanaticos Sacramentariorum Spiritus.  sayeth Luther) then if a man should make this gloss upon the Scripture; In the beginning God made heaven, and earth; that is to say, the cuckoo did eat up the titling bones and all: or, The Word was made flesh; that is to say, a crooked staff was made a kite.  
13. But I will leave Sir Martin in his facetious vain, and come unto a farther point, which toucheth your religion to the quick. For, in his commentaries upon the epistle to the Galathians (a work, which I know to be singularly magnified by your Ghospellers; and it is translated into our mother-tongue for the public utility of your Church) he maketh sundry digressions against the Sacramentaries (but I suspect your translation to be unfaithful in this behalf) and namely in his exposition of this sentence, 
* Chap. 5. vers. 9  a little leaven corrupteth the whole lump, he sayeth; We must highly esteem of this cautel in our age. The SACRAMENTARIES, who deny the corporal presence of Christ in the Lord's supper, object unto us, that we are intractable, and contentious etc. These are the collusions of the Devil, whereby he laboureth to subvert, not that article alone, but all Christian doctrine. 
A true saying of M. Luther.  To deny God in one article, is do deny him in all, for he is not divided into many, but he is all in everyone, and one in all. Charity in this case is not to be exercised, neither is error to be approved. For here [viz. in the Sacramentaries heresy] the word, faith, Christ, eternal life are all lost. Wherefore, we continually return unto them this proverb of the Apostle, a little leaven corrupteth the whole lump.  
14. This is such a weighty, and severe reprehension of your Sacramentarisme, as would move any heart amongst you (tenderly affected in matters of so great consequence, and sublimity) to be fearful, and suspicious of his soul's estate. But I will proceed unto an other consideration of greater importance, and far more effectual than the rest. For what can be more horrible, and dreadful unto you, then that the Devil himself should urdge Luther (your great Reformer) and press him with the arguments of Zwinglius, & his confederates, 
See the places cited by justus Calvinus in his annotat. upon Tertull. prescript. cap. 43.  to draw him unto your Sacramentary opinion? And though the Devil disputed earnestly with Luther to this effect (as he confesseth) yet he solved the devils objections, and vanquished him (and therefore all your English professors in him) by the power, and majesty of the word.  
15. By this evidence you may well conjecture, what admonitour he was, that instructed your Patriarch Zwinglius in his fanatical interpretation of these words, hoc 
* est pro significant; see before; book 1. part. 1. chap. 1. §. 3. num. 8.  est corpus meum; and by it also you may know, that the spirit of truth doth not teach you; though 
† pag. 183.  D. Field hath confidently affirmed it, where he speaketh of the inward testification, and of the great, happy, and heavenly alteration, which you find in your hearts, upon the receiving of your doctrine. Which internal persuasion, the Brownists, the Anabaptists, and other sectaries do boast of, as well as any Sacramentary ever did, or can. But what verdict M Luther hath passed concerning the Spirit, and truth of Sacramentaries, you can not but tremble to understand. 
* Brent. in Recognit. pag. 277.  Vos habetis alium Spiritum quàm nos, said Luther unto Zwinglius; you, and we have not the same SPIRIT. And as for your TRUTH, he giveth this terrible censure upon the perfidiousness (for so he speaketh) of Bucer in this Sacramentary doctrine; 
† Fabric. in loc. come. Luth. part. 5. pag. 50. 2.  He that taketh pleasure in his own damnation, let him believe that the TRUTH is taught by these SPIRITS, since they began, and defend their opinion by lies.  
16. I leave the due ponderation of these things unto your best thoughts, and so I proceed unto my SECOND reason, which is derived from the Magdeburgian Centurioators, who (in their 
* Ceatur, 4.  epistle unto Q. Elizabeth) complain, that some men [viz. the Caluinists] evacuate the testament of our Lord by their philosophical reasons, when, against the most clear, most evident, most true, and most powerful words of Christ [This is my body] they remove the presence of his body, and blood out of the Sacrament, and deceive men with their wonderful perplexity of speech etc. Likewise 
† Centur. 11. cap. 10. col. 527.  they do expressly commend Pope Leo 9 because he damned the Berengarian heresy [which now is a piece of your Calvinian gospel] with the author, as soon as it peeped forth. In the same 
* ibid. cap. 11. col. 656.  history, they place Berengarius in the catalogue of Heretics, saying, that he transmitted his poison by wicked scholars, and impious writings, into sundry regions. Howbeit, 
† in resp. ad Campian. rat. 3.  M. Doctor Humphrey feareth not to affirm, that Vigilantius Berengarius, calvinus, homines profectò singularibus divinae gratiae muneribus prastabiles etc. And no doubt but D. Field hath taken order to draw all these men, with Gerson himself, into the communion of his true, visible, Catholic Church. Which is a device to turn religion into a fable.  
17. My THIRD, and last reason is derived from an authority which, with you, is free from all exception. For your Church delivereth this assertion, 
See M. Rogers in his Cathol. doctr. pag. 178. 179.  as her CATHOLIC DOCTRINE in this matter; The wicked, and such as be void of lively saith, do not eat the body, nor drink the blood of jesus Christ, in the use of the Lords supper. Which assertion being explicated by M. Rogers, he proceedeth (according unto the accustomed manner of his discourse) to note the errors, and adversaries unto this truth, and sayeth; The adversaries of this doctrine are the VBIQVITARIES, both Lutheran, and Popish. For the Lutherans teach, that the very body of Christ, at the Lords supper, is eaten aswell of the wicked, as of the godly; and that, the true, and real body of Christ, In, With, Under the bread, and wine, may be eaten, chewed, and digested even of Turks, which were never of the true Church.  
18. Here it importeth you very much, to entreat your Doctors resolution unto their three particular demands. FIRST: since it is infallibly evident by the testimony of your own Church (for by her approbation the book of M. Rogers hath a singular warrant, as you may see 
* pag. 160.  before) that your Catholic doctrine in this point is impugned substantially by the Lutherans, why doth he pretend, that the difference between the reformed Churches, is merely verbal in this issue? SECONDLY; since your doctrine herein is graced with the name of Catholic, is not theirs heretical, and consequently are not they heretics, and excluded thereupon from the society of your Church? THIRDLY; since M. Rogers, by the lawful authority of your Church, brandeth the truest disciples of your great Reformer, with the name of LUTHERANS, 
pag. 179.  why doth D. Field disclaim it with contempt of Card. Bellarmine, and why doth he say, that it pleaseth the Antichristian sectaries odiously to name them so? It is not possible for any man to conceive, or to express your Euangelicks without these distinctive 
* Lutherans, Caluinists.  appellations, or some others equivalent thereunto.   

§. 2. Three false, and empty pretences of D. Field to mitigate the scandal of the dissensions, which rend, and tear his evangelical Churches.  
1. AS your learned Doctor hath a special talon in the reconciliation of your differences, so he hath an excellent art to extenuate the scandal thereof, saying that whereas the Tigurines, Gesnerus & others disliked the distempered passions of LUTHER, it is not to be marveled at; 
pag. 192.  or that some differences were amongst them; seeing the like were in former times between Epiphanius, and Chrysostome; Hierome, Ruffinus, Augustine, and others.  
2. Nothing but fraud, and falsehood. For though your Doctor telleth you, that the Tigurines, and Gesnerus did (forsooth) DISLIKE the distempered passions of Luther, yet you must know, that they did execrate this great Reformer, and detest him with a deadly, and immortal hatred. Peruse the orthodox confession of the Tigurines, and you shall find, that Luther was possessed with a legion of Devils. See the writings of Gesnerus, and you may perceive, that Luther was a man of an impudent mouth; and these are moderate censures in comparison of the rest, which are afforded in their virulent, and fiery discourses. Wherefore, though D. Field sayeth farther, that it is not to be marveled at etc. yet how just occasion there is for you to tremble at these things, I remit me unto the secret testimony of your inward judge.  
3. I proceed unto the brief discussion of his other falsehoods, which are transparent unto every eye. For what can be more untruly suggested, 
ibid.  then that the LIKE differences were sometimes betwixt the ancient Fathers, as passed betwixt Luther, Zwinglius, and others of the reformed Church? S. Augustine dissented from S. Hierome; 
See S. Aug. epist. 8. 9 etc.  but whether you respect the * matter, or manner, their difference was far unlike unto your capital, 
* concerning S. Paulls reprehension of S. Peter.  and immortal belligerations. S. Augustine speaketh 
† See S. Aug. contra julian. Pelag. l. 1. & 2.  honourably of S. Hierome, and calleth him that holy Priest; that holy man etc. Yea, in his epistles, he saluteth him by the name of fellow-Priest and much desired BROTHER etc. Which kind, and familiar nuncupation, 
† See Brentius contra Bullinger. in Recognit. pag. 276.  Luther would not vouchsafe your dear Patriarch Zwinglius, though he sought it with many tears. Likewise S. Hierome speaketh respectively of S. Augustine, and calleth him true Father, and Lord, etc. But how obsequiously 
* See Fabric, in loc. come. Luth. part 5. pag. 49.50.  Zwinglius demean himself toward Luther, and what acerbity of style he exercised against him, Luther shall deliver unto you. Zwinglius sent a most vain book unto me, and an epistle (written with his own hand) well befitting that most proud spirit of his: he rageth, and fumeth, and threateneth, and raveth so modestly, that he seemeth unto me past all recovery, being convinced by the manifest truth, Now whether the difference betwixt Augustine, and Hierome were LIKE unto the furious, and implacable assault of these men, I leave it unto your wise, and religious determination.  
4. The mutual contention of Ruffinus, and S. Hierome was sharp, but far unlike unto the garboils of Luther, and Zwinglius; which surpass the conflicts of S. Chrysost. and Epiphanius themselves. Wherefore it may please you to consider the dissimilitude of these things, which I will briefly tender unto your careful examination.  
5. FIRST, if you respect the quality of the persons, you shall find that S. Hierome, Chrysost. Epiphan. and Ruffinus, though they were men endued with excellent gifts, yet they had an ordinary function only, and continued in the faith of the universal Church. 
See Zanch. de Redempt. in explicat 4. praecepti; quaest. de vocat ad minister. etc.  But you pretend, that Luther, and Zwinglius were extraordinarily stirred up by God to reform his Church, and to replant the decayed faith of Christ. Yea Zanchius feareth not to say, that they (principally) are the 
* Apocal. 11.  two Witnesses, that should contend against Antichrist, the Man of sin; for which cause, as we are bound to require a special sign of their vocation unto that excellent office, so, above all things, we must expect Unity, and consent both in their words, and deeds.  
6. SECONDLY; if you observe the cause of their dissensions, you may note, that the quarrel as well betwixt Epiph. and Chrysost. as betwixt Hierome, and Ruffinus, concerned the writings of Origen, and the inprobation thereof. But the terrible fulminations of Luther, and Zuinglius, each against the other, were founded originally in matters of faith, pertaining unto the necessity of salvation. Hence it is, that Luther saith, 
Luth. tom: 2. de Caenâ Dom.  I reckon not Zwinglius any more to be in the number of Christians. He saith farther; I have damned Zwinglius, Oecolompaduis, and all Sacramentaries to the uttermost of my power; and this glory I shall carry with me unto the tribunal of Crist,  
7. THIRDLY; if you consider the extent, and duration of their hostility, you shall see, that it was soon extinguished, and not derived as an hereditary war unto posterity, and unto entire Churches. But it is otherwise in the case of Luther, and Zwieglius: for their personal strife is general unto whole Churches, propagated in succession, increased with continual addition, so that we may sooner expecta ruin of their gospel, than a reconciliation of their differences, the measure whereof is unmeasurable, and consequently the end is endless. And this event agreeth with the prophecy of Luther, the man of God (as 
* in loc. con. Luth. part. 5. pag. 43. See also. pag. 41. lin. 2. 3. etc.  Fabricius sayeth) who foresaw this misery, and dissipation of the Church by SACRAMENTARIES, and other heretics.  
8. And here you may perceive the singular falsehood of M. 
† in apolog.  jewel pretending, that they, whom Papists do contumeliously call Lutherans, and Zwinglians, are truly FRIENDS, and BRETHREN. For as S. Luther himself would by no means permit the name of BRETHREN unto the Zwinglian, but repelled them for heretics (as he testifieth in a certain 
* cited by Brentius in Recognit. etc. pag. 276.  epistle) so 
† ibid. pag. 282.  Brentius and Melancthon resolved, that they could not acknowledge them to be their brethren, in regard of their impious, and vain opinions. And though the judgement of Melancthon changed as the moon (whence his name is 
* See the examen of Fox his calendar. chap. 16. num. 72. 7●. etc.  odious unto the truest disciples of Luther) yet the Lutheran part of the Synod holden at Maulbrune (1564.) make this declaration; Whereas the Zwinglians have delivered abroad that we agnize them to be our BRETHREN; this is feigned by them so impudently, that we cannot sufficiently admire their impudence herein. For as we grant them no place in the Church, so we do not take them to be our brethren, whom we have found to be carried with the spirit of lies, and to be contumelious against the Son of man.  
9 These things are very plain, and therefore I refer the decision of this whole matter unto yourself: let your own heart be the oracle, whence you may assume a faithful resolution. And if your conscience shall assure you, that the LIKE differences were not betwixt the ancients, as are, and were betwixt the primitive fathers, and brethren of your gospel, then judge of your Doctors fidelity, wherein you have (formerly) had such a firm repose.  
10. I come unto a SECOND pretence of your learned Doctor, saying, that the Papists themselves have divisions, and differences, 
pag. 168. etc.  and that therefore nothing can be concluded against the Protestants, or for the Papists from the note of Unity, or from division, which is opposite thereunto.  
11. But this poor recrimination can yield you no defence. For, if the eye may be a judge in this case, we see a comfortable harmony in the Catholic Church; the same doctrine preached, the same Sacraments administered, the same government established. But as your Ecclesiastical government in England, in Scotland, in Helvetia, in Saxony is distinct, so the doctrines betwixt your said Churches conspire not in some essential points. In a word; The Catholics in Asia, afric, Europe, America have a just correspondency in faith: but the Protestants in Europe (for in it, and some part of it alone, are they confined) have great diversity in faith, and one faction doth prosecute the other with Vatinian hatred.  
12. Wherefore a THIRD pretence, which your learned Doctor doth affect against the certainty of our experience, will easily refute itself. We want not a most certain rule (saith 
* D. Field. pag. 169.  he) whereby to judge of all matters of controversy, and difference; to wit, the Scripture, or written word of God, expounded according to the rule of faith, practise of the Saints, and the due 
† Ad alium scripturae locum recurrendum est, & non expectanda hominis sententia ad litem dirimendam, saith Zwingl. tom. 2. in respons●ad epist. Eckij.  comparing of one part of it with an other, in the public confessions of faith, published by the Churches of our confession. In all which there is a full consent, whatsoever our malicious adversaries clamorously pretend to the contrary etc.  
13. If this rule be most certain, how cometh it to pass, that the difference betwixt Lutherans, and Caluinists standeth uncomposed at this day? Why did 
* See loc. con. Luth. part. 5. pag. 52.  Luther pronounce so severely, that the Anabaptists, and Sacramentaries contemn the WORD, howsoever they make a show of religion? Why did Zwinglius so peremptorily affirm, that Luther oppressed the evangelical truth? Why did M. Cartwright so constantly protest, that the Church of England is destitute of one moiety of the word? Finally; why do all your sects, as well the supreme [of Lutherans, and Caluinists] as the subordinate factious in each, cry out continually, the word, the word, and yet no rule hath drawn them unto a conformity of sense therein?  
14. Give me leave therefore to except against the pretended rule of D. Field, for three respects. FIRST, because the Principle of your religion excludeth the means of reconciliation; viz. the gravity of councils, the dignity of Fathers, the authority of the Church. For though D. Field (in his epistle unto the Archb. of Cant.) doth judiciously advise all men to rest in the judgement of the Church, and saith elsewhere, that you admit a trial by the Fathers, yet your ghospellers have not accepted, nor practised this direction. It is not accepted by you; for Clebitius (to name one amongst many) setting down the laws of a Synod betwixt the Lutherans, and Zwinglians, saith precisely; Solum Dei verbum sit judex; let the word of God be the only judge. Likewise, Zwinglius delivereth this assertion against the Catholics; we will endure no other judge, but the word alone. Now where is the means to define the questions of religion, 
See F. Cam● pians fourth reason, and compare it with the assertion of D. Field (pag. 168.) viz. the authority of a Council is not the  if the Church of God (represented in a lawful Council) hath not authority to judge of the sense of Scripture, and to oblige men to rest in her decision? But this prescription is not practised by you; for you receive the ancient, Ecumenical councils, with this restriction, as far as they agree with the scripture; and so every man is left unto his own choice to determine whether this, or that particular in the Council be agreeable unto the scripture, or not. Notwithstanding, this liberty is not permitted by your bishops unto their own inferiors; for they know, what inconvenience would follow by leaving the * Ministers unto that uncertain limitation; and so they presume to require more duty of their children, than they dare yield unto their Fathers: but with what equity, and indifferency, your wisdom may easily conceive; as also, how the unity (such as it is) in your Church, proceedeth only from the vigour of law, and not from the principles of Religion.  
15. My SECOND exception against D. Fields pretended rule, is taken from a consideration of your persons, which have not that subordination, which is requisite in this behalf. For, 
lib. 1. ep. 3.  whereas S. Cyprian doth excellently observe, that heresies arise from no other cause, then that the Priest of God is not obeyed, and that men think not of one Priest, and judge in stead of Christ, it is most evident, that heresies will increase daily in your Churches, and no conclusion of peace can possibly ensue, because there is not submission of judgement, nor subjection of spirit, nor union of members unto their head. Lutherans seek to predominate; Caluinists will not obey; where is the umpire of their contention?  
16. It is a memorable history, which Sturmius recordeth in his book 
* fol. 33.  de ratione concordiae ineundae; complaining pathetically against the Lutherans, who are so deeply exasperated against the Zwinglians, that they will not endure any conference with them, but reject them as damned heretics, 
anno 1560.  unworthy of any farther dispute. Thus the jenensian Lutherans made their supplication unto the Princes, that a lawful Synod (consisting only of such, as embrace the confession of 
* Sacramentaries deny to subscribe thereunto, whatsoever D. Field pretendeth. See josias Simlerus in vita Bulling.  Augusta.) might be assembled to condemn the Zwinglians, and all other enemies of their religion. Likewise the Flacians (a particular sect of Luther's gospel) desired to have a public Synod, but with this caveat, that all Sacramentaries, Swhenchfeldians, Osiandrines should be excluded from the same. Which unequal courses stirred up Bullinger to write, that since the Lord hath freed us from the servitude of the Pope, we will not suffer ourselves to be oppressed by the new tyranny of such, as under the pretence of the gospel, aspire unto a primacy, and dictature in the Church. We w●ll not be shut out from the company of Saints at their choice, and pleasure etc.  
17. But their mutual fury is so augmented, that Sturmius, seeing no submission on either side, professeth, unless the evangelical kings, and princes interpose their authority to take away these contentions; without doubt the Churches will be infected with many heresies, and hence a great vastation of Christianity will ensue, as it came to pass in Asia, Greece, and afric for the like causes. The foundations of our Religion are convelled, the chief articles are called in question, a plain way is prepared for turcism, and Atheism to enter in upon us▪ If I would proceed farther in this argument, I might inform you, how fatal, and unhappy the convents of your Ghospellers have been at Marpurge, at Swabach, at Smalcald, at Maulbrune, where they treated about their own Religion; and at Ratisbone, where they should have entered into a conflict with the Catholics: but the precedents are sufficient to let you understand, that you have not a due subordination of persons, and consequently no rule of peace; 
pag. 169.  howsoever D. Field is pleased to affirm, that, with your Churches, an end is made of all controversies etc. See the place, and judge of his exactness.  
18. My THIRD exception against D. Fields pretended rule, is in respect of the matters, wherein your dissension doth consist. For they are many in number, real in evidence, substantial in weight, as I could prove abundantly out of the writings of Luther, Hunnius, Conradus etc. of the one part: Zwinglius, Sturmius, Clebitius etc. of the other: to the just reproof of D. Field, who saith, that your differences admit an easy reconciliation, and that this shall be justified against the proudest Papist of them all.  
19 My counsel unto you is always the same; TRY BEFORE YOU TRVST; you have already seen an example of his reconciling art in one point, and by that, you may take an estimate as well of his sincerity, as of his solidity in the rest. If your excellent, and heroical Spirit will be so grossly abused, and deluded by him, or any other to the certain peril of your soul, you can never plead invincible ignorance for a just excuse.  
20. Now to conclude this chapter; good Sir; if I did not experimentally know the variety, and vanity of opinions in your Church, 
2. Timoth. 4.  and that as some men heap up a multitude of teachers unto themselves, so others confine all things unto their own sense, and spirit, I could easily believe that you would admit a trial by the Fathers, and that you would rest in the judgement of the Church. But forasmuch as I know that neither all, nor the greatest part of ghospellers in England will submit themselves dutifully, and humbly unto this rule (though I may, and do challenged it at their hands) therefore I will lay down three considerations, whereby you may see the equity, yea the necessity of the said rule, and how you are bound, in Christian simplicity, to accept it with true, and hearty obedience.  
21. FIRST; it is impossible (without extraordinary revelation) to distinguish Canonical Scripture, from Apocryphal, otherwise then by the testimony of the Church. SECONDLY; when by the testimony of the Church you can thus distinguish the Scripture, yet you must give credit unto some translators (since you understand not the original text) and if they render the Scripture unfaithfully, how can you build your faith upon it with infallible evidence? THIRDLY; when by the authority, and warrant of the Catholic Church you have the Scripture faithfully translated, the principal point is yet behind, 
Tantum obstrepit veritati adulter sensus, quantum & corruptor stylus. Tertull. in prescript. c. 17.  to wit the sense, which is the very soul thereof. If pure necessity compel you to fly unto the Church for your assurance in the first, and second points, will you rely upon your own discretion, and wisdom in the third? If you object your Spirit, I also object mine. If inward testification; I have the same. You compare Scriptures; so do I. You pray; I do the like. You are sure; my certainty is as great. You have reason; mine is as strong. You have faith; mine is not inferior. Thus our contention is earnest, and our success is none.  
22. What remaineth, but that we both should try our Spirits, and examine our private thoughts according to the perpetual, and general doctrine of that Catholic Church, from which we received the Scriptures, and which, by singular notes of Antiquity, Universality, Consent, Succession etc. is most eminently approved unto us? For which cause 
† cap. 15.  Tertullian doth excellently prescribe (and, if I be not much deceived, 
* in his epist. to the Archb. of Cant.  D. Field doth condescend unto him) that, Whereas Heretics pretend the holy Scriptures, and as they move some men with their boldness before hand, so in the congress of disputation they tyre the strong, and ensnare the weak, and dismiss the middle sort with scruples; we must prevent them in their course, and not admit them unto any disputes concerning the Scripture; and if this be their strength, we must consider first of all, to whom the possession of Scriptures doth agree, lest he be admitted unto them, who hath no right therein etc. The residue I commend unto your own perusal: and so I refer the event of all unto the blessed disposition of our only Lord, and Saviour jesus Christ.    

CHAP. 3. The falsehood, and incivility of D. Field traducing Card. Bellarmine.  

§. 1. Three criminations devised against the worthy Cardinal by D. Field.  
1. Your learned Doctor hath sprinkled many untruths in his discourse to the personal disgrace of Bellarmine, and then triumpheth in his own fictions. But since the number, and quality thereof require a copious explanation, I will present unto you three criminations only at this time, connexed, and couched immediately together in his 
* pag. 167.  discourse.  
2. The FIRT crimination against Bellarmine is framed in these words. 
† de notis Eccles. c. 10,  Bellarmine saith, that all Churches in the world, that ever divided themselves from the fellowship of the Roman Church, like boughs broken from a tree, and deprived of the nourishment, which they formerly received from the root, did presently whither away, and decay. But the falsehood of this saying of Bellarmine is too apparent. For the Churches of Greece, Armenia, Aethiopia and Syria continued a long time after they had forsaken the communion of the Roman Church. Yea many of them continue to this day, holding a more sound, and sincere profession of Christian verity, than the Romanists do.  
3. Here your learned Doctor hath made a bad translation of Bellarmine's words, and a worse construction of his mind. For Bellarmine's assertion beareth directly thus; Videmus con●inuò aruisse etc. We see that all Churches, divided from this" head [viz. the Bishop of Rome] have incontinently withered. He saith not, that they withered away, and decayed, as though they had not retained some principles of Christian Religion (for then your Doctor might justly impute apparent falsehood unto him) but that their glory, splendour, and dignity was forthwith impaired, and that their ancient lustre was exceedingly abated, by the contagion of heretics, and by the incursion of enemies: as history, the witness of time, and mistress of truth, doth sufficiently relate.  
4. Wherefore, though Bellarmine doth not affirm, that these Churches did whither away, or that they do not continue at this day (nay he calleth them expressly by the name of CHURCHES; and saith that the Churches of Asia, and afric do remain at this day, howbeit in very great ignoranrance) yet (as I conceive) he may justly apply that sentence of S. Augustine unto them: non quia videntur Ecclesiae habere nomen, idcircò pertinent ad eius consecrationem; they do not therefore pertain unto the consecration of the Church, because they seem to be invested with her name. The crime of heresy, and schism doth amputate them (for the most part) from the blessed communion of the CATHOLIC Church; howsoever it pleaseth D. Field to say, that some of them hold a more sound, and sincere profession of Christian verity, than the Romanists do.  
5. If this be so, it shall be your honour, and safety to associate yourselves unto those Churches, more sincere, than the Church of Rome is. But which, I pray you, seemeth most sincere in your judgement? Doubtless the Church of GREECE: and yet 
† 
See justus Caluin. in apolog. pag. 11.  
Graeci nobiscum sunt, et nosunt; iuncti fide, pace divisi etc. S. Bern. de Considerate. lib. 3.   jeremiah (the Patriarch of Constantinople) in his rescript unto the Lutherans, who desired familiarity with his Church, doth utterly renounce your society, and allegeth that counsel of S. Paul; reject an heretic, after the first, or second admonition.  
6. The SECOND crimination is contrived in this manner. Bellarmine saith that NONE of the Churches, divided from Rome, had ever any learned men, after their separation. But here he showeth plainly that his impudence is greater than his learning. For what will he say of Oecumenius, Theophylactus, Damascenus, Zonaras, Cedrenus, Elias Cretensis, Nilus Carbasilas, and innumerable more living in the Greek Churches, after their separation from the Church of Rome? Surely these: men were more than matchable with the greatest Rabbins of the Romish Synagogue.  
7. Truly, as Bellarmine will leave impudence for your Doctors use; so he will not respect the note of ignorance, because he desireth to know nothing, but Christ jesus, 
1. Cor. 2.  and him crucified: howbeit, other men will say in his defence, that so much modesty, with so great learning did seldom meet together in one man; and as far less of each is in D. Field, so far less was also in his Bucer, Melancthon, and Caluin, with whom (as he saith) Bellarmine is NO WAYS MATCHABLE either in piety, or learning. 
Nos despiciunt tanquam idiotas, & nihil scientes, scipsos autem extollunt; saith Irenaeus of the Gnostics.   
8. But I come unto the matter itself, and whether it may deserve that ungentle imputation, which your Doctor fasteneth upon the Cardinal, I remit me unto your own wisdom. You must understand therefore, that when the Cardinal had delivered this general proposition, We see that ALL Churches divided from this head did incontinently whither, he addeth this limitation in the words immediately following; certè Ecclesiae Asiaticae, & Africanae, quae quondam ita florebant etc. truly the Churches of Asia, and afric, which sometimes did so flourish, that they celebrated very many councils, and always had sundry men, famous either in sanctity, or in science, or in both: have celebrated no councils since they made their schism from the Roman Church, and have not had any men known unto the whole world for the renown of their learning, or holiness; and at this day they abide in exceeding ignorance.  
9 The FIRST untruth therefore in your Doctor is an intolerable abuse; for whereas he chargeth Bellarmine with this assertion, NONE of the Churches divided from Rome had any learned men after their separation, and then confuteth it by his instances of such, as lived in the GREEK Churches, you see that Bellarmine doth (even in this respect) purposely decline the mention of the Greek Church, by restraining his former general proposition particularly unto the Churches of Asia, and of afric: which limitation, otherwise, had been ridiculous, and absurd.  
10. The SECOND untruth is, that Damascen lived " after the separation of the Greeks from the Church of Rome: which is not so. For Damascen lived about the year of our Lord 740. (as 
† de Eucharist. l. 2. c. 33.  Bellarmine doth truly affirm) and opposed himself religiously against Leo Isauricus (the Protestanticall Iconoclast) who deceased about the year our Lord 741. as 
* in Annal. ad annum D. 741.  Baronius doth witness. But the violent separation of the Greeks' from the Latins was occasioned principally about the year of our Lord 
† See Baron. tom. 9 pag. 277.  766▪ by reason of their different opinion concerning the procession of the holy Ghost; and this is not obscurely signified by 
* pag. 62.  D. Field himself.  
11. The THIRD untruth is, that surely these men, in the Greek Churches, were more than matchable with the greatest Rabbins of the Romish Synagogue, that is to say then any Doctors, who (in their times) were members of the Rom. Church. But here you may plainly see, that your learned Doctor doth, in the violence of his passion, exceed the limits of his reason. For though S. john Damascen hath no peer amongst all those Greeks, yet out own country shall yield his match, to wit, V Beda (a rabbin of the Romish Synagogue) who lived in the same age, and may be parallel with Damascen for his singular piety, and admirable science.  
12. As for the rest, either expressed, or concealed, we will find their matches also, yea their superiors by many degrees; as namely S. Anselme, Lanfranck, S. Bernard, Hugo de S. Victore, P. Lombard, Alexander of Hales, S. Thomas of Aquine, S. Bonaventure, Scotus, Lyranus, GERSON (a worthy guide of the Church; and a rabbin of the Romish Synagogue; for both these terms are afforded by your Doctor) Tostatus, and (to use his own words) innumerable others, with whom these Greeks (generally) are no ways matchable, but much inferior in all respects.  
13. The THIRD crimination is fashioned on this wise. Bellarmine saith that they [viz. NONE of the Churches separated from Rome] could ever hold any council since their separation. If Bellarmine mean General councils, it is not to be marveled at, seeing they are but a part of the Christian Church. If Nationall, or Provincial, it is most childish, and by sundry instances to be refuted.  
14. The Cardinal speaketh of Nationall, and (as I take it) of Provincial councils; howbeit your Doctors Eldershipp doth wrongfully impute Childishness unto a reverend person, whose years, and dignity, and other ornaments, deserved more urbanity at his hands. For the Cardinal attributeth this infelicity unto the Churches of Asia, and afric, but not of Greece: and if your Doctor can reprove him by any instance in the former, there is some equity in his accusation, which, otherwise, will prove (as indeed it is) to be merely calumnious, and unjust. If Bellarmine had enlardged his style, said, that the ORIENTAL Church hath been thus unfortunate, since the time of her separation from the Church of Rome, the Doctors exception might seem very reasonable, and the cardinals fault inexcusable in this behalf, because Greece is a part thereof, no less than Asia itself.  
15. But as the Cardinal doth plainly disjoin the Church of Greece (which is placed in the table of Europe) from the Churches of Asia, and of afric, so D. Field doth often, 
pag. 167. 173. etc.  and truly distinguish the Church of Greece from the Churches of Syria, Armenia, Aethiopia, Russia, and the like, being several parts of the Oriental Church. And though custom (founded upon just reasons) doth warrant us to comprehend Churches of Asia under the name of GREEK Churches, yet there is no reason, why the Church of Greece (being parcel of Europe) should be comprehended under the names of the ASIAN, or AFRICAN Churches, in which the Cardinal doth particularly instance, saying, that THEY celebrated no councils, and that THEY brought forth no men known unto the whole world (that is to say, men of public renown) either for learning, or sanctity, since the time of their segregation from the Church of Rome.  
16. Thus you may clearly discern the conscience, and integrity of your principal Doctors in their deportment toward the Catholic religion, and the greatest lights, that shine most gloriously in the Church; whose names will be transmitted with honour unto posterity, when their adversaries shall be forgotten, and lie buried in silence, or be remembered to their infamy, and disgrace.   

§. 2. The incivility of D. Field toward the Cardinal.  
1 IT will not be impertinent (and specially because I writ unto a Gentleman, whose generous, and noble disposition can not approve calumnious, and opprobrious insultations) to add a word, or two concerning your Doctors discourteous, and uncivil entreaty of the Cardinal; whom he traduceth, not only by imputation of false crimes, but by aggeration of base, odious, and unworthy names.  
2. As for example; he phraseth him 
* pag. 154.  Cardinal heretic, 
† 148.  heretical Romanist, 
* 152.  impious Idolater, 
† 128.  shameless jesuite, 
* 135.  shameless companion, with 
† 180.  his idle brain, 
* 100  his senseless fooleries, etc. Which usadge of a most learned, and honourable person, whether it be tolerable, or not, I remit me unto your own discretion; who, being learned above many of your rank, and honourably descended, are able to judge more competently in this case, than others, either meaner in knowledge, or inferior in birth.  
3. And though I need not inform you, either of the profound learning of the CARDINAL (which expresseth itself in his own works; for they do testify of him) or of his virtues (a greater commendation than the former: o hominem bonum is preferred by Seneca before o hominem literatum) yet I will make a brief recapitulation of both, that you may perceive how much it doth concern your Professors to deal ingenuously with a man of his quality, and desert; & secondly, whether D. Field hath any just reason to postpose him so far unto Caluin, and others, in LEARNING, and PIETY, that" he is NO WAYS MATCHABLE, forsooth, with him," or them in these respects.  
4. FIRST therefore, for his intellectual parts: his excellency therein is so celebrious, and renowned, that the praise, which common fame did attribute unto S. Hierome, viz. Nemo omnium scivit, quod Hieronymus ignoravit, may truly belong unto the Cardinal; in whom Nature, being the guide, and Industry, her companion, have wrought an admirable perfection. For NATURE hath prodigally bestowed her greatest riches upon him: as namely, sharpness of wit, solidity of judgement, tenaciousness of memory, facility of deliverance, grace of elocution.  
5. And here, by the may; whereas it pleaseth 
† pag. 176.  D. Field to lay a crime unto Bellarmine's charged (and then to 
* let us pardon him etc.  pardon it also, in his courteous malice) forasmuch as Bellarmine (showing himself to be in their number, who are liars of the worst MEMORIES) saith in 
† de notis Eccles. c. 2.  one place, that Sanctity of doctrine is no note of the Church, and in an 
* 
ibid. cap. 11.  
This untruth of D. Field is accompanied with more, which I refer unto your perusal.   other, that Sanctity of doctrine is a note of the Church, I must assure you, that Bellarmine is neither iniudicious, nor oblivious, but D. Field traduceth his author, and abuseth his reader. For Bellarmine, in the former place, maketh no mention of the Sanctity of doctrine; and, in the later place, his whole discourse is to prove, that the assertions of pagans, and heretics contain absurdity in reason, and impiety in manners; from both which the doctrine of the Catholic Church doth utterly abhorred. See the particulars, and judge wisely, what cause D. Field hath to impute a fault unto Bellarmine, or what need Bellarmine hath to desire the pardon of D. Field. I proceed.  
6. His INDUSTRY is famous in those Churches, 
Lovayn. Rome.  and Schools, which have acknowledged him a Chrysostome in sermons, and an Augustine in disputes. Whatsoever is most commendable in Humanity, for tongues, or arts; whatsoever is most respected in Theology, for scholastical, or positive; he hath attained the flower therein by his long study, and much pain; so that Catholics rejoice in his worth, and Heretics tremble at his name, which is dreadful unto them, as HANNIBAL was sometimes in Italy, or SCIPIO in afric.  
7. Now SECONDLY, for his moral parts; they are such, as envy itself can stain with no reproach. And herein one thing is very memorable; to wit his humility, and contempt of honour, which though he fled in his youth against the will of others, yet it followed him in his age against his own liking, and that, which he deserved by his virtues, he accepted only upon his obedience. To explain myself more familiarly in this matter; it may please you to understand, that he being nephew unto Pope Marcellus (the second of that name) refused a cardinals dignity, and made himself a member of that SOCIETY, which professeth a special abdication, and incapability of preferment in the Church. In which estate he conversed with such piety toward GOD, and affability toward men, that as he feared the one, so he was beloved of the other, and grateful unto both.  
8. But the necessity of obedience did compel him at length to accept that honour with renitency, 
he was made Cardinal by Pope Clem. ●.  which some affect with care; so that I may truly say, it was an exercise of patience unto him, and never elevated his heart in pride: a mutation was made not of him, but in him (as 
* de considerate. in praefat.  S. Bernard speaketh of his Eugenius) that is to say, his state of life was changed, but not the disposition of his mind. Let Capua testify how he lived therein his archiepiscopal function, with what vigilancy, with that zeal, and devotion, with what pastoral regard of his flock, with what paternal love of his children; with what levity in correction, with what indulgency in justice, with what unpartiallity towards all, without the just offence of any.  
9 When the public affairs of the Church, and the voice of the chief Pastor required his presence at Rome, his people lamented his departure, and expressed their grief with the truest signs thereof; which affection in them is an argument of his desert. And because the care of the common good did hinder him from the execution of his private duty, he voluntarily resigned his Bishopric; his tender conscience not permitting him to swallow down a perpetual, or long non residency without regret, or perturbation of his heart. Here also I may not forget his religious, and grave sentence (worthy to be written in letters of gold) which he delivered by way of answer unto a reverend person (our contreyman) admiring his exemplary course of life. I may not lay a Bishopric under my feet, 
A memorable sentence of Card. Bellarmine.  and make one dignity a step unto an other; but I must lay it upon my shoulders, and remember, that as bishops enjoy honour by their place, so they sustain a burden in their office.  
10. It was not my intention to write an history, or panegyrical oration (when our Basill is dead, and gathered unto his fathers, some Nazianzene will perform this duty) but I have briefly, and faithfully related so much, as may reprove the temerity of D. Field, and others, whose pens are steeped in gall, & wormwood, to vent malicious untruths against this happy, and blessed man; yea more happy, and blessed, because he suffereth such contumelious usadge at their hands. But I must entreat their leave, and tell them plainly, that since he was lately an ARCHBISHOPP (invested with that dignity in as justifiable manner, at the least, as my Lord of Cant. himself is) and since he doth yet retayn the place of a CARDINAL, the consideration hereof might plead with Scholars, who profess ingenuity, to deal more uprightly with his GRACE in all their controversies, and more respectively in their demeanour toward his Person.  
11. I conclude; and now (kind Master S.) I will turn my speech again unto your noble self Whereas you have seen, that your learned Doctor rejecteth all conscience of truth, and civility of manners in his accusation of Bellarmine, this may be a document, and instruction for you to know a lion by his paw, and to conceive the proportion of Hercules his body by the quantity of his foot. You may take measure of D. Field by himself, and of your chiefest Professors by him: for his (supposed) fidelity hath been a special anchor of your hope. Wherefore I will remit you unto your own thoughts, and consultation with your wise heart, whether you may expect condign satisfaction from him, or others in private conference, when he, & they are not ashamed to publish their falsehoods unto the whole world, and to eternize them for all ages.    
The end of the first Part.   

THE SECOND PART, CONCERNING D. MORTON.  

THE PREFACE.  
IF you consider the 
† see before pag. 147.  deliberation of D. MORTON in the contexture of his APOLOGY, or his 
* ibid. & pag. 99  pretended sincerity therein, it may seem very strange, that this work, which was borne after so long travail, should be surcharged with impertinent trifles, or subtle collusions, or malicious untruths. For which respects, 
† defence. Bellarm pag. 435.  james Gretzer (a very noble Author) hath exotned it with a special encomion; viz. Hoc opus, merito suo, inter stultissima, qua ex Novatorum officinâ prodierunt, sedem sibi deposcit: adeò fatuè, stolidè, & insulsè non dissertat, sed delirat. etc.  
This censure, because it proceedeth from an adversary (and a JESVITE also; with whose order, it pleaseth D. Morton to contend more eminently, then with any other) may peradventure seem unjust; but yet the equity of it, or credibility (at the least) may appear unto you by the sequel, which, being a part, doth delineare the condition, and quality of the whole. Believe me, Sir, that I writ this out of my certain experience; not provoked by any personal dislike of the Author himself (for I may freely say with the Apostle; he hath not hurt me at all) but moved thereunto by tender compassion of your estate, 
Galat. 4.12.  and others, lending your credit unto them, who pay you with falsehood, and build up their fortunes in the ruin of your Souls.   

CHAP. 1. D. Mortons' untruth in his defence of LUTHER, and CALVIN.  

§. 1. How D. Morton diverteth the scandal of the devils dispute with Luther against the Mass.  
1 THat the lying Devil had familiar conversation with your flying Angel, himself doth liberally confess; as namely; that he was as much, or more accompanied by him then by Kate, his wife; & that he had eaten much salt together with him. For he remembered the saying of antiquity; 
Cic. de Amicit.  Multi modij salis simul edendi sunt, ut amicitiae munu● expletum sit.  
2. But one particular conflict, which he had with his good Master touching the MASS, is famous above the rest. And though 
* Part. 1. l. 2. c. 21.  D. Morton would decline the infamy of that memorable dispute, wherein Luther was 
† See Serarius de Lutheri Maegistro  convinced by the arguments of the Devil, yet why should it not seem as credible, and reasonable (in your judgement) that the Devil did dissuade Luther from the MASS (which 
* lib. 5. epist. 33. considerit● for surely that Mass was not a Zwinglian communion.  S. Ambrose celebrated according to the public custom; and the same descending unto 
† see Bellarm. de Misiâ. l. 1. c. 23.  S. Gregory without any substantial mutation, is now continued in the Catholic Church) as he laboured to persuade him unto the SACRAMENTARY opinion?  
3. I will not handle this controversy now: wherefore I come unto D. Morton, who expediting the same in 6. questions, proposeth this in the third place, viz. Ought the MASS to seem HOLY, because the Devil did reprehend it? He answereth; no: and yieldeth this reason of his denial. Apud 
* Delrius. jesuit. lib. 4. de Magia cap. 1. q. 3. § 5.  Surium liquet, DIABOLUM in specie Angelica apparuisse, & statim Abbatem, ut MISSAM CELEBRARET, HORTABATUR. Do you see how the infernal serpent doth implicate, and wind himself? He objecteth the MASS unto Luther as a thing execrable, and odious unto God; the same [Devil] endeavoureth to allure the Abbott unto it, as it were to kiss God's dearest daughter. Therefore, the MASS is no more to be accounted HOLY because Satan seemed to reprehend it, than it is to be accounted EXECRABLE, because he seemed to allow it. And thus the one may componderate with the other; the Devil is always a knave.  
4. But, do you see how this glorious Doctor doth implicate, and wind himself? Before I go any farther, I must put you in mind of his protestation; viz. I may call God to be witness, and revendger against my soul, si sciens fallo. Again; you may perceive here, that he cannot possibly derive the cause of his error upon the weakness of his memory; for he is very exact in his quotation of book, chapter, question, section; & therefore you will see, that I had just cause to charged him with malicious untruth, when you have examined the Authors discourse, which he hath mangled by a rare depravation. For thus writeth his Author. Item DIABOLI revelatio censenda est, si suadeat aliqua contra Canon's, vel constitutiones, vel regulas, vel alia praecepta maiorum. Hoc indicio B. Simeon, Monachus Treverensis, cum deprehendit. Narratur historia ab 
* apud Surium. 1. Junii.  Euerwino Abbate. In verticem montis Sinai jussu superiorum cùm missus fuisset, ibi habitaturus; nocturnis horis illi specie Angelicâ Daemon apparuit, &, ut Missam celebret, hortatur. Ipse, nec planè dormiens, nec perfectè vigilans, contradicit; 
NOTA.  non debere SINE PRESBYTERII ORDINE hoc ministerium implere. Contrà, inimicus instat, se Dei legatum esse, Christum hoc velle, nec decere sanctum locum ministerio tali diutiùs privari. Renitentem ergo, & contradicentem, adiuncto sibi consortio alterius Daemonis, de lectulo educunt, ante altare iam vigilantem statuunt, albâ induunt, de stolan utrimque altercantur, hostis more presbyteri, Simeon more diaconi cotendebat sibi imponi debere. Tandem Dei famulus, ad se reversus, virtute orationis, & sign Crucis inimicum repellit, seque delusum ingemiscit.  
5. This is the narration of Delrius; concerning this matter. And now (all circumstances duly weighed) I dare be bold to say, that, if D. Morton himself, or any other in his behalf, can clear this corruption from the just imputation of voluntary, known, resolved, determinate malice, than the infernal Serpent (as he speaketh) did never tell a lie, for which he, or they, may not likewise extort some colourable defence.  
6. Finally; doth D. Morton believe that this history is true, or doth he repute it to be false? If false; why doth he urdge it? If true; then he must remember, that there is some efficacy in the sign of the Cross, to terrify his infernal Serpent. If he say with Brentius, that the Devil doth fly it in subtlety, to draw men into superstition, I answer, that Pagans, and Protestants do symbolise as well in this devise, as in many others. 
Theodoret. hist. l. 3. c. 3.  For when julian admired to see, that the Devils fled away at the sign of the Cross, the Magician answered, oh Sir; it was not for any fear of that sign, but for detestation of your fact.   

§. 2. How D. Morton defendeth Caluin from the note of jovinianisme. A contradiction of D. Field.  
1. AMongst sundry errors of jovinia (a Father of Protestants; whence 
* Loc. come. Luth. part. 4. pag. 44.  Luther saith, that Hierome wrote pestilent books against jovinian; but he at that time, had more learning, and judgement in his little finger, than Hierome in all his body) this was one; A man cannot sin after baptism; if he were truly baptised: that is to say; if he truly received faith, and grace. This error is imputed by 
† de notis Ecclesic. 9  Bellarmine unto Caluin; and the reason is, because Caluin teacheth, that true faith (which, in his opinion, is inseparable from grace,) can never be lost. For though Caluin doth not, by way of position, defend, that a faithful man cannot sin, yet the question is now, whether it follow out of the aforesaid principle, by way of necessary deduction. Bellarmine affirmeth it, 
* Part. 1. lib. 1. cap. 34.  D. Morton denieth it; and pretendeth, that this jovinianisme may be imputed as well unto Augustine, or Campian, as unto Caluin.  
2. The sentence, which he produceth out of 
† de corrept. & great. cap. 7.  S. Augustine, is this. Horum fides, quae per dilectionem operatur, aut omninò non deficit, aut reparatur, priusquàm haec vita simatur. I grant that S. Augustine saith so; but what is this unto Caluin? For first; S. Augustine doth not teach, that faith can not be severed from grace. Secondly, he doth not affirm, that a man can never fall from faith, or grace. Thirdly; he doth not teach that only the elect can have these gifts, but he showeth the contrary in that place; and who knoweth not that many have lost both faith, and grace? last; S. Augustine doth there distinguish betwixt the elect, and reprobate; and teacheth that the faith of 
* Horum fides etc. that is spoken of the elect.  elect, which worketh by Charity, either doth not fail at all; or if it do [as sometimes it doth] yet it is repaired again, before their departure; but in the reprobate, the case is very different; for they may have faith, and grace; but faith & grace endure not in them with perseverance; a gift proper only unto the elect.  
3. Wherefore, there is no correspondency betwixt S. Augustine, and Caluin in this point. For Caluin annexing grace inseparably unto faith, and averring, that faith can never be lost; must inevitably thence infer, that a faithful man doth never lose grace also; and consequently he doth never sin mortally, because a mortal sin excludeth 
* grace inherent.  grace from the soul. And this I will prove unto you by D. Field; who 
† pag. 176.  accusing the Papists to be liars of the worst memories, (whence it is, saith he, that every second page in their writings, if not every second line, 
pag. 147.  is a refutation of the first) doth perplex himself about this matter very strangely, within the compass of a few lines, and involueth himself in manifest contradictions.  
4. For first he saith, that the Elect, notwithstanding any degree of sin they run into, retain that GRACE, which can, and will procure pardon for all their offences. In which respect also he sayeth, that the reprobate have no GRACE in them, which may cry unto God for remission; and hence it cometh to pass, that all sin is venial unto the one, and all is mortal unto the other. But see how, within 3. or 4. lines, he contradicteth this assertion: saying; All sins (that against the holy Ghost excepted) are venial ex eventu; that is to say, such, as may be, and oftentimes are forgiven through the merciful goodness of God, though there be NOTHING in the parties offending, while they are in such state of sin, that either can, or doth cry for pardon. Who are they, unto whom God vouch safeth this goodness? Surely the elect; for D. Field saith, that in other men, who are strangers from the life of God (as he speaketh) all sins are mortal, and not remitted, for want of Grace, which may cry unto God for pardon. Well then; in the elect oftentimes there is 
* therefore, no Grace.  NOTHING that can, or doth cry unto God for pardon; and yet the elect also do still retain that GRACE which can, and will procure pardon for all their offences. Is not this a real contradiction? Again; he 
* lin. 37.  sayeth. We confess that all sins, not done with full consent, may stand with grace; wherefore it followeth by the contrary, that all sins, done with full consent, exclude grace. Now since it is manifest, that many elect, after grace received, do sin with full Consent (for such was David's case) it is clear likewise, 
2. Sam. 11.  that they fall from grace; which is restored unto them afterward, as 
† de corrept. & great. c. 7.  S. Augustine doth excellently discourse; and Catholics concur with his opinion.  
4. I conclude this passage with the public testimony of your Church: 
* Artic. Relig. 16.  After we have received the holy ghost, we may departed from 
* if they lose their faith also, then Caluin saith falsely that true faith can NEVER be lost. If they do not lose i●, them Caluin saith falsely that true faith can not be separated from GRACE..  grace given, and by the grace of God we may rise again. Whereby it is plain against D. Field, that the elect do not retain grace in them, notwithstanding any degree of sin; but they fall not from that grace of God, by which they are infallibly destinated unto salvation, and therefore unto a newness of life also, which is necessary unto this end.  
5. Thus much for S. Augustine. The sentence of 
† Rat. 10.  Campian is cited in these words. Nisi divi è coelo deturbentur, cadere ego nunquam potero; and here your Doctor pretendeth that Campian, even as Caluin himself, did believe constantly, that he could never fall from faith, but was certain of his salvation. Which if it were so, then judge of the soundness of your Devinity, according to the principles whereof, Campian, a resolute Papist, and opposite unto your Religion, might be infallibly secure of his salvation: and the like all sectaries may, (as many do) apply unto themselves, with a supposed certainty of perseverance. But as F. Campian doth 
* Rat. 8. Age, somuiet hocised unde etc. post medisi·  elsewhere particularly reprove this conceit, and taxeth your Caluin precisely for the same; so in 
† in the conclusion of his tenth Reason.  this place he is far from that imagination, howsoever it pleaseth D. Morton to propose his words by the half, & to pervert his meaning in the whole. For that blessed Martyr having yielded a reason of his confidence (which he deriveth from all kinds of witnesses in heaven, earth, and hell itself) non diffiteor (saith he) animatus sum, & incensus ad conflictum; IN QVO, nisi divi de coelo deturbentur, & superbus Lucifer coelum recuperet, cadere nunquam potero.  
6. Now I remit me unto your ingenuity, and conscience, whether D. Morton did not with voluntary, and determinate malice (as I said before) abridge the sentence, and violate the intention of Campian, to deceive the Reader, with, 
sciens fallit.  and against his knowledge. For what doth F. Campian affirm? but only this; since I have these testimonies of my religion, it is not possible that, relying thereupon, I should ever causâ cadere, be vanquished in that combat, which I do seriously desire.  
7. This may be a sufficient instruction for you; and by it alone, you may perceive, whether his heart be single, and sincere in his impugnation of the Catholic faith; which he laboureth to extinguish by these miserable inventions. But it will flourish much more, even for his sake God, of his infinite mercy, will either mollify his affection, or cohibit his purpose. And now (kind Master S.) I might ease myself, and you from any more pain in this kind, if one more vast untruth than all the rest, did not compel me to proceed yet a little farther; the master being of great importance, and, for many respects, not to be passed over in silence.    

CHAP. 2. D. Mortons' untruth concerning the article of Christ his descent into Hell.  

§. 1. The necessity, and weight of this article.  
1. AMongst sundry difficulties, which did sometimes afflict my conscience, when I was a brother of your society, this was not the least, viz. What is that, which doth properly, and entirely make a man to be a member of your Church, so that, precisely, for defect thereof he ceaseth absolutely from being of that communion? In which argument though 
* book. 1. chap. 7. 8. etc.  D. Field hath bestowed his diligence, and pain, yet he is so full of perplexity, and uncertainty, that I could never settle my conscience firmly, and unmooveably in his dubious, and enigmatical resolutions. 
† in his Reply. Book 2. chap. 6. num. 11.  D. Kellison hath lately proposed this question unto D. Sutcliffe; and though he hath handled it briefly, yet he hath performed his designment with such facility, and such gravity, so appositely, and so punctually, that any man would be moved thereby to pity, and commiserate your chaos, and Babylonian confusion.  
2. But this position (with me) is an impregnable bulwark of my Religion: viz. Whosoever doth pertinaciously reject any point of faith (accepted by public consent of the CATH. Church) he is an HERETIC, and no member of her communion. For which consideration, I am as tenderly affected in this article, as in any other of my Creed; esteeming myself obliged thereunto for two respects. FIRST; because the essential truth thereof, is clearly revealed unto me by God, both in his word written; and by Apostolical Tradition. In his word written; for what can be more perspicuous, than this saying? 
* Act. 2.27.  Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell etc. By Apostolical Tradition; for what can be more plain, than this article? He descended into hell. That the common Creed is an Apostolical Tradition, your chiefest writer H. 
† de Pedempt.  Zanch us doth confess, and (as I conceive) 
* pag. 238.  D. Field dissenteth not from his judgement therein. What 
† de Antichr. pag. 48.  M. powel, or his proud Peacock, or some precipitate Spirits imagine to the contrary, I am not to regard. But if this Creed be an Apostolical Tradition, than it is 
* See D. Fields rule, which I have cited before; Book 1. part. 1. c. 2. §. 2. num. 3.  equal unto the written word of God, even for that cause. For it proceedeth from divine inspiration, and so it hath sufficient authority of itself. Wherefore it was not respectively decreed by your 
† Artic. Relig. 8.  bishops, that this Creed ought thoroughly to be received, because it may be proved by most certain warrants of holy Scripture.  
3. SECONDLY; I am moved by the authority of the Church. For who (saith 
* epist. 99  S. Augustine) denieth that Christ descended into hell, unless he be an INFIDEL? And for the sense of this article, 
† Tract. 78. in joh.  he hath this clear resolution. Who is he that was not left in hell? Christ jesus: but in his SOUL only. Who is he that lay in the grave? Christ jesus: but in his FLESH only. For the NATURAL union of his body, and soul was dissolved, but not the HYPOSTATICAL union of either with his Person.  
4. This truth being so potent, and perspicuous, I ask you now; what reason have you for any part of your faith, if you have not assurance in this? And if you fall from this, 
See Luther's saying, before; pag. 40.  what certainty have you in any other point? Therefore it importeth your Church to show a due conformity in this article of the Creed. Finally; you may remember, that S. Athanasius in his Creed (which your 
† Artic. Relig. 8.  Church pretendeth to admit thoroughly etc.) having premised this denunciation; Whosoever keepeth not the Catholic faith entire, and inviolate, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly; doth afterward subnect this article of Christ his descent into hell, as parcel of that CATHOLIC faith.   

§. 2. D. Mortons' pretence of his Church's unity in this point, is clearly refuted.  
1. NOw see your Doctors sincerity, who may call God to revendge it upon his soul, if he deceive any man with his knowledge. First, he citeth the opinion of 
* l. 4. de Christo. cap. 15.  Bellarmine in these words: Opinio Catholica haec est; CHRISTUM VERE SECUNDUM ESSENTIAM FVISSE IN INFERNO. As much as to say; Christ, in his soul substantially, did descend into hell. Then he addeth. Hanc vestram sententiam NOS quoque iuxià cum Augustana confession libentissimè profitemur; non tamen quatenus vestram, sed quatenus veram. WE also, together with the Augustane confession, do most willingly profess this opinion etc.  
2. It is well that he left out the Scottish, French, Belgian, and Helvetian confessions; for he knoweth, that the true Caluinists are heretics in this behalf. And this is an incuitable conclusion; because they do obstinately, and wilfully reject the true, and Catholic opinion, and so, defending an opinion CONTRARY unto CATHOLIC verity, they can not be exempted from the crime of heresy; which casteth them into a damnable estate. But, I beseech you, do YOU (that is to say, your Church of England) most willingly profess this Catholic opinion? Alas, that your Apologist hath so justly called God to revendge this falsehood upon his soul: let him entreat our Lord to pardon that provocation of his judgement, and, in the mean time, I will demonstrate his falsehood by four evidences. FIRST; if YOU be of this opinion (as he pretendeth) why are your Bible's infected with this absurd Translation? 
Act. 2.27. some say life; or person. some body; or carrasse.  Thou wilt not leave my soul in grave. Is this to submit your sense unto the Scripture, or is it not rather to draw it unto your prejudicate opinion? This is to measure the yard by the cloth: and thus, while you should be faithful translators, you become corrupt Interpreters of the Scripture. SECONDLY; why was your Church so distracted in this matter upon the Sermon, and Treatise of D. Bilson? How came it to pass, that D. Rainolds his Calvinian resolution in this matter, was confuted by M, Perks, and why did M. Willet (the synoptical Theologue; as he is phrased by 
† in his epist. prefixed before the book of Conference at Hampton Court.  D. Barlow) oppose himself against M. Perks his answer? Why do your Ministers publicly in Sermons, and in print, impugn this true, and Catholic opinion? THIRDLY; Why is no Minister punished for his repugnancy unto this truth? which is of greater consequence, then cross, cap, surplice, or any ceremonious thing, or whatsoever institution of your Church, for which many have suffered deprivation of their livings. FOURTHLY; the testimony of M. Rogers (whose book hath a special approbation, as you may see 
* pag. 160.  before) will convince D. Morton of notorious falsehood. For though his purpose was to deliver the 
† that is the title of all his pages.  Catholic doctrine of YOUR Church, yet when 
* pag. 16.  he cometh unto this article, he saith, that, in the interpretation of it, there is not that consent, which were to be wished; some holding one opinion thereof, and some an other. Wherefore, yielding no certain doctrine, but leaving men unto their choice, he addeth; TILL we know the native, and undoubted 
* Faith consists not in the words, but in the sense.  sense of this article, etc.  
3. If this be not a sensible conviction of M. Doctors singular untruth, I must confess that I have done him injury, and will be ready to make any satisfaction, that he can reasonably demand. Mean while, he must give me leave to detect an other of his excellent sleights, and then I will refer him unto his best thoughts. As it was a notable vanity in him to affirm, that YOU do willingly embrace the Catholic opinion in this article, so that is a delicate collusion, which ensueth within the compass of three lines: viz. à VOBIS etc. WE [in England] differ from YOU [Papists] concerning the place, unto which Christ descended. For WE say that he descended unto the hell of the damned; but YOU say that he descended only ad limbum Patrum, the region of the Fathers.  
4. The author cited by him, is 
* Theomach. l. 7. c. 1.  Fevardentius, whose opinion he imputeth here as generally unto the Papists, as he applied the other unto your English Church. But, forasmuch as M. Doctor doth continually deal with BELLARMINE, and in the words immediately precedent, alleged him particularly also in this matter (as you 
† num. 1.  see) why did he now pretermitt him, and select an other? I will show you the reason; for Bellarmine himself in the very next chapter, is of a contrary opinion unto that, which M. Doctor deriveth generally upon the Papists. What piety then, or humanity was in this preposterous devise?  
5. Know you therefore, FIRST; that the opinion, which he here imputeth unto US without exception, is as falsely attributed unto all Catholics, as the other unto YOUR English Church. SECONDLY; that your difference is in the substantial sense, and meaning of this article; but our difference is a scholastical disceptation in a matter of greater, or lesser probability, which, being a doubt not resolved by the Church, may be indifferently accepted by her children, without breach of charity, or violation of faith.  
6. Thus I have given you a little signification of those many untruths, which I have observed in this Doctor. If it consist not with his credit, or profit to yield, yet it concerneth you to beware of his sirenical incantations. Your benefit shall be my reward; if not so, yet this schedule may be a token of my love; and be you well assured, that either, by following my counsel [TRY BEFORE YOU TRVST] you shall prevent an heavy doom; or, by neglecting it, you shall increase your judgement.    
FINIS.   

A TABLE OF THE GENERAL CONTENTS.  

IN THE FIRST PART.  
CHAP. 1. §. 1. GERSONS' testimony alleged by D. Field to justify the pretenced REFORMATION.  
§. 2. It is impossible that GERSON could wish, or tolerate this REFORMATION;  
§. 3. A detection of D. Fields untruths in citing the testimonies of GERSON.  
§. 4. The name, and authority of GROSTHEAD abused by D. Field to the same effect.  
CHAP. 2. §. 1. D. Fields untrue suggestion, concerning the unity of Lutherans, and Caluinists, is refuted. Their difference touching ubiquity, & the Sacrament.  
§. 2. D. Fields excuse of their litigation, is refelled. They neither have, nor can have any conclusion of peace.  
CHAP. 3. §. 1. D. Field deviseth criminations against Bellarmine.  
§. 2. His incivility toward the CARDINAL; whose excellent parts are briefly noted.   

IN THE SECOND PART.  
CHAP. 1. §. 1. D. Mortons' untruth in defence of Luther.  
§. 2. His untruth in protection of Caluin.  
CHAP. 2. §. 1. Of the article concerning Christ his descent into hell.  
§. 2. D. Morton doth untruly pretend the unity of his English Church, in the sense thereof.   
The PARTICULAR contents are many; which I refer unto the diligence of the courteous Reader.   

THE CORRECTION OF FAULTS, PASSED IN SOME COPIES.  
P. signifieth page; I line; M. m●●gent, p. 10. l. 40. read, the same p. 12. ●● num 15. p. 22. l ● proceed. p. 26. l. 6. brimtione. p. 60. l. 27 ●●dery. p. 44 l. 15. 〈◊〉 p. ●5. l, 4. improbation, 12. l. ●●ist. 17. 〈◊〉, p. 48. l. 1● judes p. 5●●●: with any p. ●●. l. 8. his style, and said pag. 58. l. 15 what 〈◊〉 p. 59 l. 22. your p. 64. l. 26. ●●cl●sasti●.