RUN FROM ROME. OR A TREATISE SHOWING THE necessity of Separating from the Church of Rome.  
Disputed in these Terms: EVERY MAN IS bound upon pain of Damnation to refuse the Faith of the Church of Rome.  
By ANTONY WOTTON. B. D.  REVEL. 18. 4. 
Come out of her my people, that ye be not Partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.  
LONDON, Printed by W. J. for Nicholas Bourne, and are to be sold at his Shop at the South side of the Royal-exchange. 1624.   

TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE EDWARD LORD DENNY OF WALTHAM, MY ESPECIAL GOOD LORD.  
Right Honourable,  
WHen the great God of heaven and earth proclaimed by his Prophet to Eli, 1. Sam. 2. 30 that he would honour them that honour him; he therein implied, both an example and a charge for all men to do the like. Therefore is this action of honouring them that honour God, one of those whereof the holy Ghost made choice, Psal. 15. 4. that he might by them give us notice of those men which shall abide in the Tabernacle of the Lord, and dwell in his holy hill. It is my desire to perform this duty to God, by this service to your Lordship: wherein I feel and confess, that I receive far more than I can possibly give. For by desiring to honour our Lordship for your zeal in honouring God, I increase mine own hope, that I am of their number, who have obtained already some part of his grace, and shall hereafter have entrance into his glory. Give me leave (noble Lord) to forget, in this respect, my particular obligation to your Honour, for your continual bounty to me, and good opinion of me, that I have an unfeigned desire to maintain the truth of God, professed in this famous Church of England, against the subtle and dangerous errors of the Romish Synagogue. For I truly and willingly profess, that the consideration of your Lordship's fervent zeal for the glory of God, zealous love of his truth, and true detestation of Popery, have so possessed and ravished my heart with a longing after your Honour, that it will not suffer any other of your noble virtues (though many and great) either to come into comparison with it, or to have the least place in my thoughts, while it is in presence. This (in my apprehension) is as much to true honour, as in Demosthenes' opinion, pronunciation was to true eloquence. Let them, that will dote, upon their worldly greatness, as the Peacock is in love with his own feathers. It is true honour to be honourable in his sight, who only is worthy of honour; and yet graciously vouchsafeth to give and to command that honour be give to his faithful servants. This is the foundation of your Lordship's honour in my heart, and upon this ground will I daily offer up my poor prayers to God for your good Lordship, your noble and truly virtuous Lady, and hopeful of spring, that it would please him to shower down every day more & more the comfortable dew of his grace and blessing upon every one of you, to the increase of all honour in this life, and happiness in the life to come, through Jesus Christ our Lord:  
In whom I shall ever be at your Lordship's service to be commanded, Antony Wotton. Tower-Hill May 3. 1624.   

TO THE CHRISTIAN READER.  
THe Council of Trent confirmed by the Pope, is the chief Oracle of the Church of Rome: from it she receives all doctrines necessary to be believed unto salvation; Romish Catholics hold it for a principle, that whatsoever is delivered therein for doctrine, is an article of faith, and must steadfastly be believed upon pain of damnation: he that doth not, is pronounced an Heretic, and is made liable to a (supposed) heavy curse. What little reason there is that Papists should yield such blind obedience to the Canons of that Council, may appear by a plain (but true) testimony which was given thereunto by a Bishop, a member of that Church and Council, who was present thereat; This testimony I have thought good to prefix to this my Treatise, because in it I dispute against the doctrine of faith delivered in the said Council.  
Andraeas Dudithius Bishop of Quinquecclesiae, 
Quinquecclesiae, is acitty in Lungarie, calle● in Germane ●uns●●rchin in Turkish ●nden or 〈◊〉.  and Ambassador in the Council of Trent for Maximilan the second Emperor: in an Epistle to the said Emperor, (wherein he delivereth his judgement about granting the Cup to the Laity, and the marriage of Priests,) writes thus of the Council of Trent.  
WHat good could be done in that Council where voices were taken by number, not by weight? If argument, if reason might have prevailed, if we had had some and those not many to take part with us, though we should have been but a few: yet had we overthrown the grenat forces of our adversaries: but when all stood upon number, wherein we were much inferior, we could not get the better, though our cause were the better. The Pope was able to set an hundreth of his against every one of ours: and if an hundreth were not sufficient, he could upon a sundaine have created a thousand to secure them that were ready to faint and perish. Therefore we might see every day hungry and needy Bishops, and these for the most part beardless younkers, and wastefully riotous, come in flocks to Trent, hired to give their voices according to the Pope's humour, unlearned indeed and foolish, but of good use to him for their audaciousness and impudency. When these fellows were ioyved to the Pope's old slatterers, than iniquity got the upper hand and triumphed: neither could any thing be decreed but according to their liking, who thought it the highest point of religion to defend the power and riot of the Pope. There was in the Council a grave and learned man who could not endure this indignity: but the Council by terror threatening and baiting him as one that was no good Catholic, drew him to yield to that which he did no way like of. In a word, things are brought to that pass by their dishonesty who came prepared and made for the nonce, that it seemed to be a Council not of Bishops, but of puppies: not of men, but of images, who (as it is reported of Daedalus Statues) were moved not by their own but by other men's nerves, and muscles. Those hireling Bishops most of them were like Country Bagpipes, which must have breath blown into them before they can sound. The holy Ghost had nothing to do with that Coventicle, all things were argued by human policy, which was wholly employed in maintaining the immoderate, & indeed most shameless Lordship & Domination of the Popet. From thence were answers looked and waited for, as it were from the Oracles of Delphos or Dodona: from thence the holy Ghost, who (as they brag) is Precedent of their Council, was sent shut up in the Carrier's budgets and packs, who (a thing worthy to be laughed at) when the waters were up as it falls out many times, was fain to stay till they were down again before he could repair to the Council. By this it came to pass that the Spirit was not carried upon the waters as in Genesis, but along besides the waters. O monstrous and incredible madness! Nothing that the Bishops as it were the Body of the Church resolved of, could be of any force, unless it came first from the Pope as the head of the body.  

Epigramma G. B. de Rome et papa.  
Non ego Romulea miror quod Pastor in urbe  
Sceptra gerat, Pasto● conditor urbis erat,  
Quumque lupae gentis nutritus lacte sit Author,  
Non ego Romulea miror in urbo lupos.  
Haectantum superat nostrum admiratio captum,  
Quomodo securum praestet ovile lupus.   

The same translated.  
It is not strange a Shepherd reigns in Rome.  
For he that built it, was a Shepherd's Groom.  
Nor is it strange that wolves in Rome abound.  
He sucked a wolse, that did the City found.  
But this is strange, and fare above my skill,  
How wolves should keep the flock secure from ill.    

CHAP. I.  
Declaring by way of Preface to the Reader, the matter and manner of this Treatise.  
A Good and careful Physician, doth not only prepare his portion according to Art, but also, if need be, persuade and entreat his patiented to take it. This example I have propounded to myself in this Treatise. In the former part whereof, I have faithfully, and with the best skill I could use, provided such a medicine, as in itself is not unfit, and (I hope) by the merciful blessing of God, shall be made effectual, to bring that to pass which is intended. My charge in this ministering is, rather a care to prevent what may happen, than a cure to remedy what hath happened. For the Papists, who are already fallen into sickness, not only like melancholic men, refuse all means of cure, upon conceit that they need it not; but also like Ulysses companions, have their ears stopped with the wax of prejudice, and their eyes sealed with blind obedience, that they can neither hear nor see in what case they are. I must therefore be content to let the mole think, that no creature can see better than she, and apply my waters and powders to their eyes, who are rather weak sighted, then stark blind.  
To you then I address my speech (beloved Christians) who see the truth, as he that had newly recovered his sight, did judge of men: he was able to perceive they were men, but they seemed to him to be as high as trees: so that he saw what they were, but could not discern their true proportion. So fareth it with a great part of those, who profess the Religion of God maintained in the Church of England: they have a strong persuasion that popery is to be de●ested, but they see not clearly what it is  maketh it detestable. josuah and the people of Israel perceived that the Lord was offended with 
Ibsua 7. 7.  them, but could not find out Achan that had provoked his displeasuie. Behold, by God's gracious assistance I have found him out, attached, indicted, and brought him to the bar, that all men may see the Babilonish stuff which he hath conveyed into the camp of the living God, and hidden there in such sort, that he hath notwithstanding a long time been taken for a true Israelite. Oh that it would please the Lord God, who only can work wonders, to give him an heart and tongue to glorify the Lord jesus by confessing of his theft, and restoring him his honour: whereof under a colour of doing him service, he hath traitorously rob him.  
The proof of this treason I leave to the ensuing disputation and discourse, with hope that I shall thereby (through God's blessing) both enlighten the understanding, and inflame the affection with detestation of popish errors. It remains, that (as briefly as I can,) I give an account of the course I have taken in debating so weighty a matter. I have herein gone a little out of the common highway, into the by path of School-learning: into which I either slipped, or thrust myself, partly of choice, and partly of necessity; Of choice, because this kind of writing in matters of this nature doth best content me; Of necessity, because I was asraide, least in so wide a sea I might lose myself, and either over shoot my port, or fall short of it.  
But why should I delight in such thorny and unbeaten ways: daily experience shows how hard a thing it is to give a reason of liking, and misliking. All I will say is this. It is in studies as in apparel. There are that think large discourses like lose garments, and regard neither the fineness of the stuff, nor the neatness of the workmanship, but only the fitness for the body it must serve. These consider what aptness and force there is in that which is delivered, to manifest and prove that which is undertaken. Othersome cannot abide to be kept to the point in question, no more then to be pinioned in a straight doublet; these men seem to love daintiness and easiness more than warmth and lasting: so that which they read or write, please for the present, they care not greatly whether it be little or much to purpose. Both nature and education have bred in me another humour, that I had rather read or writ that which may truly inform my understanding, than that which may tickle my affection. In these things I conceive the Heathen said well, that Nature is the best guide. For he that setteth himself to that, to which he hath no fitness by nature: doth like him that swimmeth against the stream, who being not able to hold out, is either driven back or drowned.  
What meaneth all this? may some man say. Nothing else but this, that I may the easier be excused for following that course, to which I find myself inclined, rather than that, which of itself might procure better liking. And this I trust, I shall the sooner obtain by signifying, that my breeding strengthened my inclination. For it pleased God, that at my first coming to Cambridge, I should be entered into the Kings-colledge, by that worthy and learned gentleman Sir William Temple, who in his Logic readings, always laboured more to fit us, for the true use of that Art, then for vain and idle speculations, and earnest wranglings about trifles of no profit nor certainty. Thus have you the reason of my choice: may it please you to take knowledge also of the necessity of this course.  
Custom is said to be an other nature; and is commonly called a tyrant: because many times it enforceth a man to that of which in his own disposition he hath no manner of liking. As I was brought up rather to the profitable use then vain ostentation of that noble Art of Logic: so (as new vessels do) keeping a tang of the first liquot, wherewith I was seasoned, I applied myself in the reading of Philosophy, History, Oratory, Poetry, to make use of that Instrument of instruments, as (Aristotle calleth it,) in every piece of work I undertook. By this means it came to pass, that I began to think, (as men commonly do account highly of that, wherewith they are most in love) that Logic was if not the only, yet the principal Art, for the obtaining of true knowledge in any kind of learning whatsoever. If I lighted in reading upon any thing that was hard, that I seemed to be in a Labyrinth, Logic was like Ariadne's clew of third, to guide me in it & to bring me out of it. Was I desirous in any exercise of learning to take the right course in speaking or writing? Logic, like Mercury's Statue pointed me out the way, and shown me all the turnings and windings in it. To conclude, my continual practice in this Art, hath given it such power over me, that with the Hebrew servant, my 
Exod. 21. 6.  ear is fast nailed to the doro post, so that I can neither stir from it, nor willingly hear any sound without, that may draw me from thinking on it. This is the first degree of necossitie by which I am bound to this kind of writing.  
The other is greater and straighter. And therein, as we are all ready, like our first parents to excuse our faults, I have a good mind● to make a virtue of necessity, by persuading myself, that I do that out of judgement, which I do indeed to help my weakness, in judging. For I must and do freely confess, that I have neither such quickness in apprehending, nor such sharpness in judging, but that I find myself many times at a stand in understanding, and at a loss in resolving. What help have I in this case, but to flee to Logic as to an Oracle. By that I am instructed to take the frame in sunder, to view every part by itself; to try how every tenant and mortuis is fitted each to other, which principals are too weak, which pieces are too long, which too short, whether they will serve in that building or no? if they will, how they must he ordered. If any man be able without this labour, at the first sight of a building, to say all is right & well, I would entreat him to bear with my slowness and backwardness, upon promise, that I will not repine at his quickness and forwardness.  
As for them that think I trouble myself more than needeth by taking this pains, I hope they are not like him in Seneca (as I remember Mendyrides) who would yawn and stretch, when he saw an other man labour, as if he had been wearied therewith himself. Long experience above 40 year, hath made me fearful & suspicious. I have many times persuaded myself of the strength & goodness of an argument, which upon trial I have found to be weak and naught. Many times I have thought I understood a thing at the first reading very fully, wherein upon the review I perceived I was deceived, In this disputation it had not been possible for me to have discerned the weakness and sophistry of the Papists arguments, if I had not brought them to the beam, and weighed them parcel by parcel as I have done. But if I had now forborn to run this course, and written more plausibly to every man's apprehension, yet I must have been fain to come to it hereafter, whensoever the adversaries shall assay to make good their arguments against my answers. If this course be followed in examining Popish books, we shall save them and ourselves a great deal of labour: for they will be afraid to come to such a trial, as will not suffer them to run the wild-goose chase, but will tether them, that they shall be kept within compass, as if they were coiured within a circle; By this sifting we shall sever the flower from the bran, that a bushel will be brought within a peck: that in a book of twenty sheets, there will be no more to be answered, then may well be contained in five or six.  
But this course will be too hard for ordinary men's understandings: it will, till they be acquainted with all, as strange things commonly use to be: perhaps they will not at the first be able to conceive fully of every answer: if they will but take the pains to pause upon it, they may learn more by a few lines often read, then by a great many once posted over; besides if they understand not all: yet I dare undertake, they shall by this course understand more, and more certainly in reading 3 leaves, then by iunning over 13 in a lose discourse. Logic (beloved,) is nothing else but the perfection of reason: it is not a devise of Scholars, but a plant of nature: every man useth it daily in his speaking or writing: the terms are unknown; so are the terms of war, of Navigation, of husbandry, and of the meanest trade and occupation: till they be known they are hard, when they are known easy. If I might find so much favour with you, as to get you to make a trial, I make no doubt but this course would soon have entertainment, and your knowledge thereby grow beyond your expectation.  
At the least, let me crave and obtain pardon of you for making so bold with you, in a matter (as I take it) so fit and needful. I hope it shall not fall out with us (reverend fathers and brethren in the ministry) as it did with Aristotle and Isocrates, they were both Plato's Scholars: but followed diverse professions: the one giving himself to Philosophy, the other to Oratory: each of them was so carried away with the pleasure he took in his own course, that he wholly despised the other. As it becometh me, I leave every one to his own judgement and practice, desiring to be directed and advised by any man, that can and will do it. At some of you I wonder with delight, other I commend: there is none but I excuse, as I desire to be excused myself. Great wits may make a shift without artificial Logic: ordinary men shall find extraordinary help by it. The Lord in mercy so direct us all, that we may seek and procure by his blessing, the manifesting and maintaining of his truth, to the glory of his name, the good of his Church, and our everlasting salvation in jesus Christ our Lord.   

CHAP. II.  
Of the state of the question to be disputed.  
THE Heathen taught by Plato, always held them for bad commonwealths men, who in a civil broil, when their country was in an uproar, would not labour to inform themselves whether part had the right, and join with them, but keep aloof from both, that they might strike in with the conqueror to their most advantage. And what kind of Christians shall we account those men, that seeing all on fire ever since they were borne about matter of Religion, have not all their life resolved what is true, what false, but are still to make their choice whon they are nearer their burial then their baptism? May we not justly rank them with those lukewarm 
Revel. 3. 15. 16.  Laodiceans, that were neither hot nor cold, fish nor flesh? And may not they certainly look for the event which our Lord jesus threatneth, that he will spew them out of his mouth? It is high time therefore for all men 
1. Reg. 18. 21.  to resolve themselves, whether they will follow God or Baal, Christ or Antichrist, and not to continue halting betwixt two opinions.  
I cannot reasonably conceive whence this want of resolution should proceed, in them that are not desperately careless, or profanely politic, but only from ignorance, of the necessity of being separated from the church of Rome. The clouds of this ignorance I desire and purpose to scatter by the light of truth, that all men, which will not shut their eyes against the beams thereof, may see both the way wherein they are, and the place it leads them too. Now, to the end I may the bettor understand myself, and be understood by them that seek for resolution, if they doubt, or confirmation if they be resolved; I will labour to speak as plain as the matter will give me leave to do, desiring to have that I deliver rather judged of, thèn wondered at. And because we are accused by the Church of Rome sometimes of heresy, sometimes of schism, I will apply my disputation and discourse to the justifying of our forefathers in separating from the popish religion, and ourselves in continuing that separation.  
Wherefore that we may proceed orderly and plainly, I propound the matter to be disputed in these terms.  
Every man is bound upon pain of damnation, to refuse the faith of the Church of Rome.  
This proposition or sentence hath two things in it to be proved; That 1. The faith of the Church of Rome is to be refused. That 2. It is to be refused upon pain of damnation. These two I will handle severally. First, by showing the necessity of that refusal; Secondly, by setting out the penalty if that faith be not refused. And that nothing may be wanting, which may help the simplest to conceive and judge aright of that which shall be spoken, (before I come to debate the point) I will declare the meaning of the terms in which I have delivered it, as shortly as I can with plainness.  
By the faith of the Church of Rome, I mean the Doctrine of the said Church delivered by it in certain Articles, propositions or sentences, to be believed by all men that desire to be saved as matters revealed by God to that end. This their faith I consider, as one individual or singular thing. For although it may indeed be divided into many several Articles, of which it consists, and is as it were compacted or framed; yet it is conceived by themselves as one entire body: because they are all knit together by the same bond, namely by being assented to, or believed upon one and the same ground or reason, which is the spirit of that body: and are all to be received a like under pain of the same Auathema or curse, if they be not received: and this is especially to be observed, as the main point in this iuquir.  
That the faith of the Church of Rome is so to be conceived of, it appeareth manifestly by Mr. Fisher the jesuits' 
Mr. Fisher. Trealise of saith, under the name of AD.  treatise of Faith, under the name of A. D. wherein the whole fourth chapter is spent to show that Faith must be entire. Faith (saith he) must be entire, whole and sound in all points: and it is not sufficient to believe steadfastly some points, misbelieving, or not believing obstinately other some, or any one. The reason thereof follows a little after, where he saith, that Not to believe any one point whatsoever, which God by revaling it, doth testify to be true, and which by his Church he hath commanded us to believe, must needs be damnable; as being a not able injury to God's verity, and a great disobedience to his will. To the same purpose writes the titular Archbishop of Spalleto, that All Articles of faith determined by 
Spalleto Consil. 〈◊〉 pag 20.  the Church are fundamental, and that none of them may be denied without heresy.  
By this it comes to pass, that whosoever is a true member of the Church of Rome, must as steadfastly and resolutely believe the least point of relics, and Images delivered by the Council of Trent, as the greatest mysteries of the Godhead, the Trinity, the Redomption of the world by the Lord jesus, and that if he deny any of the former, he is no less an heretic, then if he did refuse to believe any of the latter: yea, though he believe all they propound to be believed, save some one small matter, he is, for want of believing that one, (if he know the Church propounds it to be believed) a miscreant, and misbeleever; the reason of this is, that if the Church may err in one thing, it may err in an other, and so can be no sure foundation of faith.  
But what is it to refuse the faith of the Church of Rome? surely nothing else, but not to acknowledge the doctrine delivered by the Church of Rome to be true: but to abhoire it as false; I speak not of every particular point, but of all jointly together, according to my former exposition. For I do freely and willingly confess, that the Papists hold many great mysteries of divinity truly and sound, wherein also we agree with them; but yet I say, we may not at any hand receive their faith for true, as it is delivered by them for one entire body of divinity, revealed by God, to be acknowledged by all men that will be saved. So then to refuse the faith of the Church of Rome, is not to believe that it is true: or to believe  it is false; and this I say is required of every man upon pain of damnation. The exposition of the second point, upon pain of damnation, I refer to the place where it is to be handled, after I have dispatched that which is first to be debated.   

CHAP. III.  
Of the Authors that have formerly hold the proposition handled in this Treatise.  
THere are not a few that look more after the man, then after the matter, and inquire rather who is the writer, than what is written. Therefore lest the meanness of my condition and abilities, should bring some prejudice to the truth I search for, give me leave I pray you in the first place to show, that the point I intent by God's gracious assistance to prove, is no new conceit or device of mine, but a matter advisedly resolved of, and set down by more than one of the worthies of our church and nation.  
Amongst whom, the first in time and authority was that rare and precious jewel, Bishop of Salisbury. They 
B. jewel des. apol. paro ●, cap, 22. divis. 1.  have no cause (saith he of the Papists) to complain of our departing, and to call us again to be fellows and friends with them; If we should content ourselves to turn to the Pope, and to his errors, it should be a very dangerous matter both to kindle God's wrath against us, and to clog and condomne our souls for ever.  
And in another place he speaks thus to the same purpose. As for us, we have not fallen from the Bishop of Rome 
cap. 20. dirts: 2.  upon any matter of worldly respect: but so the case stood, that unless we left him, we could not come to Christ.  
Dr. Reynolds, another shining light of the University 
D. Renolds.  of Oxford, shows us the same truth in another manner; viz. in his verses upon the third conclusion, handled in the Schools Novemb. 3. 1579.  
If that ye seek eternal life, see that you Rome forsake.  
Of the same mind was Dr. Whitaker, a man for his learning, whether we respect reading or judgement, known and approved of the Churches of Christ, especially this of England. We say, (saith he) that the Church of Rome must be 
D. whitaker, de Eccles. count. qu. 6 cap. 1.  forsaken of all men that desire to be saved. And a little after he adds, that There can be no salvation hoped for in the Church of Rome.  
Lastlie Mr. Perkins, in knowledge and zeal a worthy Scholar of so excellent a Master, treading in his footsteps concludes: that All those that will be saved, must departed 
M. P●rlins Reformed Chath. n● the prolog sed. Thus then  and separate themselves from the faith and religion of the present Church of Rome.  
We have seen the judgement of these learned and reverend Divines, and therein the consent of both the Universities Cambridge and Oxford; for their books, especially the three last, were allowed for printing by the principal Doctors of the several Universities then resident in them; neither is it to be taken for the judgement of the Universities only: but also of the whole Church: as appeareth evidently by the continuance of it from time to time, in the writings of these famous learned men successively one after another. It was first propounded by that reverend Father in defence of the Church of England, to justify our departure from that strumpet of Babylon; diverse years after proclaimed openly in the public Schools by Dr. Reynolds; ratified afterwards by Dr. Whitaker in his public lectures of Divinity; and last of all confirmed by Mr. Perkins: and by every one of these published in print, with the approbation of our Church and State.  
And this (to say the truth) hath always been the judgement and practice of the Churches of God in all Protestant Countries, ever since the last birth and infancy of reformation in this age, for the space of more than an hundred years; for what else hath been aimed at in so many writings and disputations of protestants, but the iustifiing of our departure from the Synagogue of Rome; Not of a bodily departure (saith Mr. Perkins) in respect of cohabitation 
Peform chathol. in Prol gu●.  and presence, but of a spiritunall separation in respect of faith and religion. It cannot then reasonly be denied or doubted, but that our Church generally, holds separation from the Church of Rome to be a matter of great consequence, yea of absolute necessity: especially if we remember, that every Parish throughout the whole Land is enjoined to have the Book of Bishop jewel, with the rest of his works in their several Churches, for all men to read, and that they were all new printed to that end.   

CHAP. FOUR  
wherein the necessity of separating is proved.  
YOu see from whom I take the point that I have undertaken to maintain: from the same men will I ferch the grounds of my disputation. What is the reason by which these worthy, learned, and godly divines did justify the separation of our Church, and her continuing separated from the Romish faith? let us hear themselves speak: We have departed from that Church (saith thereverend Father B. jewel) whose errors were proved and made 
B. jewel juf. apol pag. 4. cap. 11. 〈◊〉. 1.  manifest to the world, which Church also had already departed from God's word: and yet we have not departed so much from itself, as from the errors thereof. What errors? They are generally implonyed in these words of his: chap. 10. divis. 2. Ignorance, error, superstition, idolat●● 〈◊〉 inventions, and the same commonly disagreeing 〈◊〉 the holy Scriptures. And again: These men have broke ● in pieces 
Apolog. p● 5. cap 13. divis. 1.  all the pipes and conduits: they have stopped all the springs, and choked up the fonntaine of living water with dirt and mire. And again: We have renounced that Church wherein we 
Cap. 15. divis. 2. Apol.  could neither have the word of God sincerely taught, nor the Sacraments rightly administered, nor the name: of God duly called upon: and wherein was nothing able to stay any wise man, or one that hath consideration of his own safety. To conclude, we 
part 6. chap. 22. divis. 2.  have departed from him (saith that learned B. of the Pope) who hath utterly forsaken the Catholic faith. For (as Dr. 
Bilson Dialogue ●●t 3.  Bilson saith most truly) No Article of the Church of Rome, wherein we descent from them is Catholic.  
D. Reynolds speaks not so plain, yet gives us sufficiently to understand, that he therefore concluded the Church of Rome was to be forsaken, because she was no sound member of the Catholic Church, nor held the right faith. Her unsoundness he thus sets out. The Church 
Reynolds conclu. 5.  of Rome is not distempered with a little ague, such as hindereth not the functions of life greatly; but is sick of a canker, or rather of a leprosy, or rather of a pestilence, in so much that she is past hope of recovery, unless our Saviour Christ the heavenly physician do give her wholesome medicines to purge her of permcious humours. Conclus: 5.  
And in his presace to his six conclusions? he writes thus. Sith ●● the fellowship of the Church of Rome it was not 
In Preface, at the 6. ●n. ●as●on.  lawful for us, either to serve God with a holy worship, or to believe God with a holy faith, as God hath commanded: s●●h the Church of Rome being taken with contagious diseases and a frenzy, did put her Counsellors to the fire, friends to the sword, brethren to cruel death, and stained the faith of Christ with reproaches, creatures with the Lords honour, God's service with Idolatry: we went away from Papists, not willingly as from m●n; not unwillingly as from heretics. But D. Whitaker, and M. 
〈◊〉 deecc●e●. co●●o 2. quist. 6. cap. 1.  Perkins are most plain. W● affirms (saith D. Whitaker) that the Church of Rome is to be shuned of all men, and that no salvation is to be hoped for in it; yea we say it is to be condemned as a deep pit of heresy and error.  
M. Perkins avoucheth our departure for the same reason. 
Perkins in prolog. Resor. Catho.  The cause of this Separation lieth in the Church of Rome, namely the cup of abomination in the whore's hand, which is their haereticall and schismatical religion.  
Upon this foundation of these learned men, I set this frame of disputation.  

Every erroneous faith is to be refused.  
The faith of the Church of Rome is an erroneous faith.  
Therefore the faith of the Church of Rome is to be refused.   
Can there be any question made of the first part or proposition of this reason, when the holy Apostle Saint jude exhorts all men without exception of person, time or matter, to strive for the faith delivered to the Saints? 
judev. 3.  But how strive we for that faith which is the revealed truth of God, if we can be content to believe errors which are against the truth? Yea, what do we else by holding errors for truth, but add to the divine revelation given by the Lord God himself, contrary to his charge? Deut. 4. 2. You shall put nothing to the word that I command you.  
The second part which we call the assumption or minor, 
Deutr. 4. 2.  is that wherein all the doubt lieth: for what is the Church of Rome the worse, for granting that an erroneous faith is to be refused, unless their faith can be proved erroneous. And whereas I say in my question and disputation erroneous, rather than heretical, I do it odd of purpose, because I would shun all needless wrangling about the word: for it seems to many somewhat doubtful what is properly to be called heresy; For my part I can not see that any false proposition delivered for an Article of faith, can be less than heresy: I doubt not but a man may think something to be true which is false, & be no heretic: bu● he th● shall obstinately hold such a point for an Article of faith, necessarily to be believed by all men upon pain of damnation, cannot for aught I see, be freed from heresy. As for the errors of the Papists, Dr. Reynolds, Dr. whitaker's, and Mr. Perkins, (as we have seen,) make no doubt to call them heresies.  
Now that we may the better understand whether the faith of the Church of Rome be erroneous or no, we must inquire how the truth and falseness of faith is to be discerned: which we cannot do either better or otherwise, then by considering how the Article of faith, or proposition enjoined to be believed, agreeth with the divine testimony concerning that point or Article; for the divine testimony is the thing or rule, to which the Article must be applied, and by which it must be squared; so that if it agree wholly with it, it is true: if in any part it differ from that testimony, it is false and erroneous. This 
Sess. 14. ca● Decret de necessitate satiffaction is Decoct. de sacram paenitentiae can. 6.  description of error and falsehood in matters of faith, is warranted by the Council of Trent, where they make falsehood consist in differing from the word of God: and That which differs from the institution of Christ, is called an humane tradition, and therefore is erroneous.  
According to this declaration of a false and erroneous faith, I proceed now to show, that the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous.  
That faith which hath a false and ertoneous foundation, is false and erroneous.  
Wherein first I take it for granted, that Faith must have an extrinsecall foundation out of the shing themfelues which are to be believed. This outward and extrinsecall foundation is the credit and authority of him, that delivereth those things for true, and requires assent or agreement to them.  
Secondly, I hold it for certain, and agrred upon by all, that faith is true or false, according to the foundation whereon it stands: as the divine testimony begets a divine faith, an humane testimony breeds an humane, which may thus appear. What makes the faith of the ancient heathen, and the now heathenish Turks, and all sorts of Infidels, who believe that there is but one God, to be humane false and erroneous; and the faith of Christians concerning the same point, to be divine and true: but the divers foundations of these faiths, the former depending upon the conjectures and testimonies of men: the other arising out of the witness of God himself. To come nearer home; why do the Papists deny that we are of their faith, although they confess we hold the very same Articles of the Creed that they profess, and aagree with them in most points of religion: but for that we have not the same foundation of our faith, which they have of theirs? It is then the goodness or badness of the foundation that make the faith good or bad: so that where the foundation is false, the faith whatsoever it be cannot be true.  
The proposition thus proved, I will add the assumptition to it: The foundation of the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous: For the foundation of their faith, is the authority of the Pastors of their Church, as it 
Sect. 4. Decret. de edit. scripture. sect. praeterea.  is manifest by the Council of Trent: It is the office of the Church (saith the Council) to give sentence of the true meaning and sense of the Scriptures. Now by the Church, they mean the Pastors of the Church, as their continual practice declareth, no man being suffered to give a voice in any Council, but their Bishops, whom only they hold to be the Pastors of the Church. By true sense and meaning they understand the doctrine of faith, which is nothing else but the Word of God, truly understood. By the Scriptures, they mean every particular place of Scripture; for, if they should mean some places only, there could be no certainty in this their decree, unless they had determined, what particular places they are, whereof the Church may give sentence.  
These things thus declared, I dispute thus:  
They that have the office to determine which is the true faith, their authority is the foundation of Faith.  
But the Church hath the office to determine which is the true faith: as it appears by the words of the Council erewhile recited.  
Therefore the authority of the Church is the foundation of their faith.  
That the Church of Rome claims this authority, it may further appear by those titles which it usurpeth in the said Council, that, The Bishop of Rome is God's Vicar on 
Sess. 6. de reformat. cap. 1. & Sess. 14. de poenitentia. cap. 7. Sess. 7. de Baptism. Can. 3. & Sess. 22. de sacrificio missae cap. 8 De verbo dei lib. 3. cap. 3. S●ct. Tota igitur. Cap. 5. Sect. Ex his.  earth. The Church of Rome is the mother and mistress of all Churches. Yea, every man may plainly see, that Bellarmine teacheth the same things of the church of Rome. The Church is the judge of the true sense of the Scripture, and all controversies. By Church, he understands the Pope with a Council: and this, he saith, is expressly to be found in the Council of Trent, Sess. 4. which is the place I alleged erewhile. It is committed singularly to Peter and his successors, that they should teach all men what is to be held concerning the doctrine of faith. For the expounding whereof, he saith a little after, Sect. Si etiam; that, The Lord speaks of a singular office of teaching the whole Church, by appointing and decreeing what is to be believed of all men. And again, he saith; that The Counsels, & Popes execute the office of a judge committed 
Cap. 10. Sect. Respond. aliud est.  to them by God. What the Office of a judge is, he shows in the same place a few lines before: To explication after the manner of a judge, there is authority required: A judge delivereth his sentence, as a thing that necessarily must be followed. To conclude, he tells us in the same tenth chapter; that, 
Sect. Septi●um argumentum.  Christians, who are sure the Church cannot err in expounding the doctrine of faith, are bound to receive that doctrine, and not to doubt whether those things be so or no.  
This matter Bellarmine makes plain to all men, by showing the manner of this Office, in this sort; The Scripture for 
Cap. 10. Sect. Responde●, Christus.  Itself needs not the witness of men, for it is most true in itself, whether it be understood, or not: but for our sake it needs the witness of the Church, because otherwise we are not certain, what books are sacred and divine, nor what is the true and proper meaning. In the same Chapter he gives us to understand, what manner of foundation the testimony of the church is. The word of God delivered by the Prophets and Apostles, is the first 
Sect. Respondeo, Ad hoc.  foundation of our faith, for, therefore we believe whatsoever we believe, because God hath revealed it by his Prophets and Apostles. But we add, that besides this first foundation, there is another secondary foundation needful, to wit, the testimony of the Church: for, we know not certainly what God hath revealed but by the testimony of the Church. Therefore our faith cleaveth to Christ, the first truth, revealing those mysteries, as to the first foundation: It cleaves also to Peter, that is, to the Pope, propounding and expounding these mysteries, as to a secondary foundation. And to make the matter yet more plain, he speaks thus in the same tenth chap. Sect. Respondeo, verbum. We are to know, 
Sect. Responde●, verbum.  that a Proposition or article of faith is concluded in such a Syllogism as this.  

Whatsoever God hath revealed in the Scriptures is true.  
But this God hath revealed in the Scriptures.  
Therefore this is true.   
Of the first of these Propositions no man makes any question. The second is held for certain truth amongst all Catholics, for, it is grounded upon the testimony of the Church, that is, the Council, or the Pope. By which it appears, how little Mr. Fisher understands the doctrine whereof he makes profession, or how unadvisedly he delivereth his opinion. For, whereas Bellarmine will have a twofold foundation, primary, and secondary, Mr. Fisher will acknowledge but one, namely; the authority of God, speaking by the mouth of the church: Christian belief (saith he) ought only to be 
Treat. of Faith in the Preface. Sect of which point.  grounded upon the authority of God, speaking by the mouth of the Church.  
We have seen Bellarmine's opinion of this matter: which indeed agrees very well with the words of the Council, where it challengeth the office of interpreting the Scriptures. For, in that claim it presumes, that the divine truth is already revealed, and that it is the first foundation of our faith; to which the office of the Church is added, which is but a secondary foundation. Now, by these places of the Counceil, and Bellarmine, it is clear, that;  
The foundation of the Romish faith, is the authority of the Church.  
This foundation of faith (say we) is false and erroneous: That our Saviour Christ and his Prophets and Apostles are the foundation of faith, we believe and acknowledge, and in this we and they agree. That secondary foundation which lieth in the authority and testimony of the church, we refuse as false and naught, and in this lieth the true difference betwixt us and them in this point: as besides other, 
De Script. quaest. 5. cap. 3. Apol. part. 2. chap. 3. diuis. 2. 11  Dr. Whitaker hath noted, and the reverend B. jewel. And this indeed is the main reason why we may not join with them.  
If they demand of us, Why we receive not this authority of the church, for a foundation of faith? We answer; Because we find no commission in the word of God, whereby any such office is conveyed unto it. Neither deal we herein any otherwise then reason and law direct men to do in the like case. For, is any man so destitute of reason, or so ignorant of the law, that he would receive a man for L. Chancellor, L. Treasurer, or Lord Chief justice, that were not able to show any commission for the having and executing such an office? And shall we in a business of such importance, that concerns our freehold, not only for our present being of the church, but for our future becoming heirs of glory in heaven, give credit to men upon their bare word, without sight of their commission? Werfore doth our Lord and Saviour so often in the Scriptures, plead his authority from God, warranted by the old Testament: and upbraid the jews with lightness and folly, for being ready to receive one that should come in his own name? If then the Papists would have us believe, that their church is appointed to be a foundation, let them show their warrant for it, and we will accept it, and build our faith upon it.  
But we look that their commission should be very plain and certain, because it is of such a matter as no natural reason can conceive to be true. For who would imagine or believe that the Apostles, who had a little before received full power of order and jurisdiction jointly and equally with Peter, (as Bellarmine himself confesseth) should suddenly 
De Rom. Po●t. lib. 1. cap. 12. Sect. ut autem.  have their authority abridged, and be made subject to Peter: yea, to his successors too, as it fell out with S. john, to learn of them which we books of Scripture, and what was the meaning of the several places or texts; and what was true, what false in Divinity.  
Besides, the matter itself is of such importance, by their doctrine, that without the constant belief thereof, and obedience according thereto, there is no possibility of salvation. For, Whosoever (saith Bellarmine) will not be said by Peter, 
De verb. Dei. lib 3. cap. 5. Sect. quartum.  that is, learn of him or his successors as judges and determiners, what he is to take for matter of faith, and what is the sense of the Scripture, is none of Christ's sheep.   

CHAP. V.  
Of the course that is to be followed in this disputation.  
I Have showed that the foundation of the saith of the Church of Rome, is the authority and testimony of the church; and have refused that foundation as unsound and erroneous. It will now perhaps be looked for, that I should proceed by proving that it is false and counterfeit. But I see no necessary or sufficient reason for this course, and therefore have rather chosen to follow tha● way in this disputation, which the matter itself leads me to, and in which it leads me.  
The question betwixt the church of Rome and us is this: Whether the articles or propositions to which they require our assent, as to certain truths, revealed by God, and commanded of him to be believed upon peril of damnation if we do not assent and believe, be revealed and commanded by God, or no, as Bellarmine himself putteth it in the assumption of his Syllogism, set down by me Chap. 3. num. 9 The church of Rome saith they are, and call for obedience thereto accordingly. We deny that they are revealed and enjoined by God, and therefore refuse to give assent to them. Who seethe not that the very nature of this difference betwixt us, layeth upon them a necessity of proving, that those points or articles are propounded by God, to be believed as matters of faith revealed by him?  
This made the reverend and learned B. jewel, in his Apology, 
3 B. jewel Apol. part. 1. chap. 10. diuis. 1.  tell the Doctors of the Romish church: that, It was their part to prove clearly and truly, that the Romish Church is the true and right instructed Church of God. And in his second answer to Dr. Cole, let. D D. E E. to affirm: that, It was unreasonable for that Dr, to call for the proofs of our doctrine. And therefore as it appears in that answer, let. O. he stands upon the negative (as he speaks) and putteth the Papists to their proofs, because they press us to receive those points for articles of faith.  
This course I have holden in those books that I have formerly published in this kind of writing, this I mean to hold now and hereafter, if it please God to afford me opportunity to go forward in the defence of his truth. Yet for their better satisfaction, and clearer manifesting of the truth, I will always give some reason of my denying the propositions I refuse: howsoever, it were enough for an answer, to deny that which of itself is not apparently true. And thus much of the course of this disputation.  
I return now to the disputation itself. The main ground for the proof of the authority of the church in this kind, is taken by Bellarmine, out of john 21. 15, 16, 17. 
joh. 21. 15, 16. De verbo dei. lib. 3. cap. 5. Sect. quartum testimonium, & seqq.  jesus said to Simon Peter, Simon the son of jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He said, yea Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He said unto him, Feed my sheep, etc.  
From these words Bellarmine disputeth thus:  
Feeding of Christ's sheep, joh. 21. 15. is a singular office of teaching the whole Church, by determining and judging what is to be believed of all men.  
To Peter and his successors the feeding of Christ's sheep is committed. joh. 21.  
Therefore to Peter and his successors, a singular office of teaching the whole Church, by judging and determining what is to be believed of all men, is committed.  
Upon this conclusion Bellarmine inferreth: that, he that will not be thus taught by Peter, is none of Christ's sheep.  
Many weighty points are huddled up together in this Syllogism, worthy of serious consideration and debating. In the Proposition, or first part, these four things are comprised:  

1. In those words, joh. 21. 15. a singular Office is contained.  
2 Feeding there, signifieth teaching.  
3 Feeding Christ's sheep is, teaching the whole Church.  
4 Teaching the whole church is, by way of determining what is to be believed of all men.   
All these are contained in the Proposition, and every one of them so necessarily required to the truth thereof, that if any one of them be untrue, the Proposition of necessity must be false. How then shall the conclusion be an article of faith, as the Papists will have it? I will therefore examine every one of them severally, and then go forward to consider of the Assumption.   

CHAP. 6.  
Of the two former points of the four.  
THE first of the four points to be discussed is this: In the words rehearsed, joh. 21. 15. a singular office is appointed.  
That Bellarmine speaks of a singular Office, the words themselves show: that he must needs be understood of appointing such an office, not of disposing of one already appointed, it is manifest: as well because there was no office yet ordained, but that which was common to Peter with the rest of the Apostles; and therefore not singular: as also for that it will not serve Bellarmine's turn to speak of an office common to all the Apostles, since he endeavours to settle such an office upon Peter, as was proper and peculiar to him, and such as no other Apostle ever had. This may farther appear by another place in Bellarmine, where he saith, that that very thing is really given john 21. 15. which was promised, Mat 16. 19 I will give thee the keys of the Kingdom of heaven: and as he there saith, given to the same Simon, to whom 
Bellar. de Rom. Pont. lib. 1. cap. 14. Sect. Ac primum & cap. 12. Sect Et propterea.  before it was promised: he saith, that the keys were promised Math. 16. 19 and delivered john 21. 15, 16, 17. Thus have we the first point in Bellarmine's proposition, now let us try the truth of it.  
For our parts we utterly reject it as false, because we are out of doubt, it cannot any way be sound proved. And we are the rather so persuaded because Bellarmine hath not once attempted to prove it; although he could not chose but see, that there was necessity of proving it: for it is not so plain and manifest in itself, that it needs no proof; and the conclusion drawn out of it is an Article of their faith; yea such an article, as, like Atlas, beareth the weight of the whole body of their faith. Besides, Bellarmine knew well enough that we deny it to be true. For he brings Luther's words to that purpose. Martin Luther (saith Bellarmine in his book de potestate Papae) affirms that by the word Feed, john 21. there is no new power given, but only the duty of loving 
Bellar. de Rom. Pont. la. ca 15. Sect. jam vero.  and teaching enjoined Peter, who was made an Apostle before.  
Neither doth the text itself, nor any other place of Scripture (for aught they say, or we see) afford us any proof thereof. If there be any thing in the text for their relief, it is in that Peter is commanded to feed. But this charge doth not so much as imply the appointing of an office: because feeding is many times enjoined, where there is no singular office ordained, but the executing of an office commanded, which had before been appointed. So the Apostle Peter, 1. Peter 5. 2. chargeth th' 〈…〉 were already 
1 Pet. 5. 2.  Ministers, to feed the flicke of God. And the Apostle Paul, Acts 20. 28. gives the like charge to the Elders or Ministers of 
Act. 10. 28.  Ephesus, Take heed to yourselves, and to all the flock, to feed the Church of God. And this Dr. Reynolds well observed, 
Dr. Reynolds against ●art, Chap. 3. diuis. 2.  and urged against Hart, You say true, we might therefore with good reason refuse this proposition, till it be proved. But I will deal more kindly with Bellarmine, and show that Luther truly affirmed, there was no new office erected by those words, but the execution of one formerly appointed, enjoined.  
If this feeding be the teaching, for which all the Apostles had commission, Mark. 16 15. Go ye into all the world, and 
Mark. 16. 15.  preach the Gospel to every creature: john 20. 23. Whose sins soever ye remit, they are remitted to them: then is it not the erecting of a new office: for this was at our Saviour's third appearing to his Disciples, john 20. 13. that, at his first, joh. 20. 
joh. 20. 19 Bellarm. de pont. Rom. lib. 1. cap. 12. Sect. Dices etc.  19 20. when (as Bellarmine affirmeth) they had power given them both of iudisdiction to govern, and of order to execute their sacrificing Priesthood. And it had been a thing not beseeming our Saviour's wisdom, to give a new Commission when there was no need, nor occasion of so doing. Yea, to say the truth, it had been altogether in vain, because the former being as sufficient and in force, there could be no place for this later.  
But this feeding, joh. 21. 15. is the teaching, for which they had commission Mark. 16. 15. joh. 20. 23. For we find no other kind of feeding but this one practised by the Apostles in the new Testament, namely, feeding by way of revealing. This appeareth touching the Scriptures, 
Bellarm. de Co●cil. authorit lib 2. cap. 12. Sect. Obseruandum, etc. and Sect. Di●untur Counc. Trent. Sess. 4 decretde Canon. scripturatum.  2. Tim. 4. 15. The Scriptures were given by inspiration. 2. Pet. 1. 21. Holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the holy Ghost: as Bellarmine also confesseth: The Scripture is the word of God immediately revealed. The holy writers had immediate revelation, and writ the words of God. As for traditions, which the church of Rome makes a second part of the divine testimony, or word of God, by their own confession, they are also by revelation, for so saith the Council of Trent: Traditions were either received by the Apostles, from the mouth of our Saviour, or delivered by themselves, the holy Ghost enditing them.  
Indeed this feeding, joh. 21. 15. is nothing else but an exhortation or charge for the performance of that duty, which was enjoined in that Commission, Mark. 16. 15. That it was such an exhortation, the manner of delivering the words showeth, which is, by repeating the same thing three several times. For this course is very fit to make an impression of a duty commanded, no way beseeming the giving of a Commission Besides, it answereth to Peter's denying of his Master thrice: as Cyril noteth in joh. Because 
Cyril supra joh. lib. 12. cap. 64.  he denied him thrice at his passion, therefore there is a threefold confession of love required of him. A threefold confession (saith S. Austin) answereth to a threefold negation, that the tongue may 
Aug. Tract. in joh. 123.  express as much love, as it did fear. Add hereunto, that our Lord calls for the performance of this duty, as a proof of Peter's love to him, wherein he had failed more than the rest, because he had made more protestation of it then the rest. For thus lies the reason. If thou love me as thou hast professed thou dost, show thy love by the performing of the duty of feeding. But what proof had it been of Peter's love to our Saviour, to become the visible Monarch of the whole Church? Well might the giving of such an office argue our Saviour's love to Peter, but the taking it upon him, could not testify any great love of his to our Saviour. For, who would have refused such an offer? The burden of teaching was laid upon the other Apostles, as well as upon him; the honour of the Supremacy (if this were true) was appropriated to him; yea, the rest of the Apostles, who before were equal to him, were now made inferior and subject to him.  
Lastly, in giving a commission, the authority of him that gives is ordinarily expressed, always employed. Mat. 28. 18, 19 All power is given to me in heaven and earth: Go therefore and teach all nations, joh. 20. 21, 22, 23. As my father sent me, so send I you, receive the holy Ghost: whose sins, etc. But here, although (as they say) it is the only place that speaks of this commission, there is no authority, either expressed or employed: only as Cyrill saith, It was a duty of love to feed, as it had been formerly a proof of fear to deny. What else then can this Feeding be, but the teaching, which was enjoined all the Apostles at our Saviour's first appearing to them? Whereupon I may safely conclude, that the word neither necessarily, nor in any likelihood of reason importeth, the erection of any new office in the Church.  
Let us now proceed to debate the second point: yet with this memorandum, that although it be never so plainly proved, yet Bellarmine's proposition of a new office appointed, joh. 21. 15. is false, because the first point contained in it, of a singular office here ordained, is neither true nor likely. The thing now to be discussed, is this:  
Feeding Christ's sheep, joh. 21. 15. is teaching.  
This sentence is plainly delivered by Bellarmine, in that proposition, as he that looks upon it cannot choose but see, and proved also by two reasons: the former; that, Reasonable sheep are fed by teaching: the latter; that The Lord saith by jeremy, I will give you Pastors according to my heart, which 
jer. 3. 15.  shall feed you with knowledge and understanding. But these proofs might have been spared; for we acknowledge, that Feeding is Teaching.  
But for the fuller discussing of this matter, we must remember, that Bellarmine, as we saw, chap. 4. numb. 9 telleth us: Teaching is double: by revealing, or propounding things revealed. We say, that the teaching here spoken of, is by revelation, not by propounding matters already revealed, as they would have it. But if they will have us yield to it, they must prove it, and not take it for granted, as Bellarmine doth. For, without it be proved, as I signified chap. 6. numb. 6. his proposition cannot be true. It is therefore as easy and reasonable for us to refuse his argument, grounded upon that, which we deny, as for him to affirm that he cannot prove.  
Yet, that we may deal more kindly with him, than he doth with us, we will give him a reason of our answer: which is, that, None of the Apostles did ever use any other kind of teaching, then revealing. If they deny this, let them show, that any Apostle did ever inform the Church, that, This or that book was scripture: that, this or that tradition was by divine authority: that, this or that place, had this or that sense. And that this information of theirs, was not by way of revelation: that is, of immediate inspiration and motion from God: whereby they were freed from all error. If they cannot do this, as I am out of doubt they cannot, it must needs be granted, that they taught only by revelation, not otherwise.  
They will perhaps object, Act. 15. 7. but in vain: For the Apostles do not there expound any place of Scripture formerly written, or propound matters already revealed by God: but by the immediate inspiration of the holy Ghost, resolve and enjoin what was to be done in that case. So that their determination was a law than first given by way of revelation from God, not by way of interpreting and propounding what the Lord had formerly delivered. For it is manifest, that the Lord hath no where taught in the old Testament (& the new was not then written) that the Gentiles converted to the faith, were to abstain from strangled things, and from blood: to the forbidding whereof, the holy Ghost directed them immediately, upon that occasion, for that time. From which after a time he freed them by the like direction and revelation given to the Apostle S. Paul, and by him to the Church, Rom. 14. And that this decree of the Apostles was made by revelation and inspiration of the holy Ghost, 
* De Rom. Pons. lib. 4. cap. 25. Sect. Responde● ad primum.  Bellarmine himself grants.  
Yea, the Apostles in that same place seem to take a contrary course to that: which, if they had expounded the former Scriptures, or propounded things formerly delivered, they must have followed. For as it appeareth by debating of the point by james and Peter, the old testament absolutely 
Act. 15.  freed the Gentiles converted from the ceremonial law. Why tempt ye God, (saith Peter, Vers. 10.) to lay a yoke on the Disciples necks, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? Yet the Apostles by this decree of theirs, bind them to part of that law, by enjoining them, Vers. 20. 29. To obstaine from blood, and that that is strangled. Which they might not have done, if they had propounded matters already resolved of, and not followed the immediate revelation and direction of the holy Ghost. To this I may add, the manner of this charge, given by the Apostles, which is by inspiration from the holy Ghost, whose authority in this case they allege, It seemed good to the holy Ghost: not, thus saith Moses, David, or the Lord by this or that Prophet. Therefore in that Council, the Apostles did reveal what was to be done, not propound what formerly had been revealed. And yet this is the only place in all the new Testament, wherein there is any show of Feeding by expounding and propounding, otherwise then by revelation.   

CHAP. VII.  
Of the two latter points in Bellarmine's Propositions.  
Having found the two former points to be light and false: I come now to weigh the third, which is set down as plainly as either of the former: that,  
Feeding Christ's sheep, joh. 21. 15. is teaching the whole Church.  
There hath been enough said already to discredit and disable the proposition: yet I will go forward, that it may appear what truth there is in it. Bellarmine laboureth 
De Rom. Pont. lib. 1. cap. 16.  much to prove, that by Christ's Sheep in this place, all Christians whatsoever are signified. But what needeth all this ado? We never meant to deny it, neither doth our granting, or his proving of it, any thing at all help them, or hinder us. For, there is nothing meant in this place by teaching, but revealing, as I shown in the former chap. numb. 10, 11, 12. But this the church of Rome claims not, but striveth tooth and nail for such a teaching as consisteth in expounding and propounding things revealed: yea I will grant him both proposition and assumption in the terms wherein they are delivered. Because the whole Church was to be instructed by the feeding here spoken of, and no man had or hath liberty either to refuse as untrue, or not to obey as needless any thing that should be delivered according to this commandment, Feed my sheep.  
The more doth Bellarmin wrong us, in saying, that we deny that the whole Church is meant by the name of sheep in this place. For whereas our Divines say that Peter was made a particular not an universal Bishop: they mean not thereby to deny his authority to teach all Nations whatsoever, and all congregations in all nations, as occasion was offered, but only to signify, that he had no commission given by those, or any other words to be sovereign Bishop of the whole Church, as they speak in the words going a little 
Sect. Primum.  before. As for that of john 21. 15. they show, that those words can argue no such authority, because than Paul might not have had the same office among the Gentiles, which Peter had among the jews: so that the universality denied in that, and other places by our Divines, is an authority of feeding those, who were joined with him in the same commission of feeding, and had equal authority with him to reveal the truth of God, to all the sheep of Christ without exception: which Caluin expresseth thus, If the 
Caluin. Institut. lib. 4. c. 6. n. 4.  same authority be granted to all which was promised to one, wherein shall he be above his fellows in office? As for n. 7. which Bellarmine quoteth, Caluin doth neither mention nor signify that place, john 21. 15. therein.  
There remaineth the fourth point to be considered, that seeding Christ's sheep, john 21. 15. is teaching by way of judging or determining what is to be believed of all men. This also is expressed in plain terms, and is of as much importance, as any of the other three. His proof is, that we cannot better understand it then in that sense.  
I see not, why I may not grant him this without any inconvenience. For indeed the Apostles feeding, either by word of mou●h or writing, was by way of sentence, so that no man might deny or doubt of any thing, which they delivered. Neither was there any higher court, to which there might be any appeal from their sentence, but all men were absolutely bound to believe and obey whatsoever they taught and commanded. This we grant, and herein we would agree with Bellarmine, if this were all he meaneth.  
But he contenteth not himself with this kind of teaching; but will have the teaching here spoken of, to be a difi●itiue sentence declaring and determining what is revealed, and what the sense and meaning of it is, as I shown chapter 4. numb. 7.  
To this must his proofs be applied, which lie thus.  
If feeding john 21. 15. be not teaching, by way of determing, what is reue●led, and what the meaning of it is: Then we must understand it of preaching or writing commentaries.  
How shall the consequence of this proposition be made good; since this feeding may (at the least as reasonably) be understood of revealing the sacred mysteries? yea this interpretation is more reasonable; because the words were spoken to him, whose office it was to reveal those mysteries by virtue of his Apostolical commission, as I shown numb. 4. yea they are the very same in sense and meaning, with those that are used in the commission, Go teach all Nations, Mark. 16. 16. and john 20. 23. as was declared c. 4. n. 4.  
But admit a man should say, it is meant of preaching or writing: how doth Bellarmine refute him? By telling us that if we so take it, we must condemn many Popes that have written nothing at all.  
As if that were any inconvenience to us; although to say the truth, most of the Popes that have written, might have had as much thank to spare their labours, as to write as they have done. Well, say we understand it of preaching. That may not be neither, saith Bellarmine. Why so? because the Pope cannot preach to all: no, not diverse Popes to any at all: For as their own Histories confess, some of them did not so much as understand their Grammar. But what if the Pope cannot? no more could any of the Apostles, nor Peter preach to all: yet had they authority to preach to all, as occasion might happen; and were not restrained to this or that congregation, diocese, province, nation, or Country; and in that respect were universal Pastors of the whole Church, yea every one of them.   

CHAP. VIII.  
Of the Assumption of Bellarmine's syllogism. c. 3. n. 5.  
HItherto I have showed, what little show of reason there is for that interpretation of john 21. 15. whereon the strength of Bellarmine's conclusion principally dependeth. I will now set myself to the sifting of the assumption or second part of his syllogism, which is.  
To Peter and his successors that feeding john 21. 15. is committed.  
As the proposition, so the assumption also, containeth four several points, distinctly to be considered, that  

1 Those words john 21. are spoken to Peter.  
2 The office of seeding is committed to Peter.  
3 Peter hath his successors.  
4 The office of seeding is committed to Peter's successors.   
The first of these four sentences or points is rather supposed then expressed in the assumption; but it is plainly delivered by Bellarmin. It is said to Peter only, Feed my sheep. 
Bel de Rom. Po●. l c. 14. Sect. Hacten●.  Who denyeth this, if it be ●ightly under?  
The speech was directed immediately to Peter with whom our Lord then talked: but not so to Peter, as if the duty, to which he is exhorted, belonged to none but to 
Institut. lib. 4. cap. 6. n. 4.  him. Therefore Calvin truly saith, that as Peter received mandem●m of 〈◊〉 john 21. 15. so all other ministers are exhorted to feed the sheep, 1. Pet. 5. 2. and by so saying he granteth, that those words were spoken to Peter, but he telleth the Papists withal, that if they will prove, that they avouch, they must show that whosoever are commanded ●o feed Christ's s●eepe, to them the power over the whole Church is committed: In which words he denieth the consequence of the proposition, which he doth not express; but acknowledgeth the assumption contained in those words, To Peter 
Bellar. de Rom. ponl. lib. 1. c. 14. Sect. Sed co●tra.  only Christ said, feed my sheep. By which it is manifest, that Bellarmine doth Caluin great wrong, in charging him with the denying, that those words john 21. are spoken to Peter only: and spendeth his time and strength in vain to prove by seven arguments against Caluin, that which Caluin never denied.  
But Bellarmine's meaning is, that the words are so spoken to Peter, that the thing signified by them belongeth not to the rest of the Apostles. And in this sense we say it is false, that those words were spoken to Peter only. If Bellarmine can not prove them true in this sense (as I am sure he cannot) his argument is nothing worth. For how shall that prove for Peter and his successors, against the rest of the Apostles, which was spoken to them, as well as to him: yet it is not to be wondered at, that Bellarmin goeth not about to prove it in that sense. For indeed there is no show or colour of proof for it, because the Word of God no where maketh any distinction betwixt this feeding, john 21. 15. and that teaching, Mat. 16. 16. john 20. 21. which was enjoined Peter, and the rest of the Apostles equally and alike, as Bellarmine 
De Rom. Pont. lib. 1. c. 12. Sect. vices.  confesseth. The keys were given, john 20. and 21. For when our Lord said, (john 20. 19) Peace, be unto you, as my Father sent me, so send I you, than he gave them the power or key of jurisdiction. For by those words he made them as it were Legates and Governors of the Church, in his name. But in the words following, Receive ye the holy Ghost: whose sins ye remit, etc. he gave them the power of order: And thus much of the first proposition of the four.  
The second followeth, namely:  
The office of feeding, joh. 21. is committed to Peter. This is affirmed in plain words; and must be understood of Peter alone, not of him and the other Apostles. For that will not serve Bellarmine's turn, because it proves nothing for the Pope's power, or against that we defend. Besides, Bellarmine strives here for an office proper to Peter, because he calls it a singular office. But how can that be proper to Peter which is cominon to the rest of the Apostles with him? This also we deny, as Caluin did long since; In this word 
Institut. lib. 4. cap. 6. n. 4.  feed (saith he) nothing is given to Peter, more than to the other. Bellarmine should have proved that this conveyeth a proper office to the Pope, and not have taken that for granted, which he knoweth we always deny. But he doth not so much as offer to make any proof of it, either de verbo 
Lib. 3. cap. 5. Lib. 1. cap. 14.  Dei, or de Roman. Pontif. in both which places he professedly disputeth the point. Indeed in the latter place, he proveth that the words, Feed my sheep, were spoken to Peter only. But what is that to prove that feeding, john 21. is committed to Peter only.  
Some man perhaps will imagine, that the latter dependeth upon the former, but he will quickly change his mind, if he do but look upon them both together in one proposition.  
If those words, feed my sheep, were spoken to Peter only, than the feeding is committed to Peter only; as if it were all one,  

To require or exhort Peter to feed, and  
To commit the feeding to Peter only?   
Put case a man that hath many servants to go about a piece of work, reaping, or the like, should say to some one of them whom he might suspect of idleness, Look that you reap clean and fair: Will any wise man conclude hereupon, that by these words he giveth him an office to oversee and judge of his other fellows work, or maketh him the only workman? And yet it cannot be denied that he speaketh to him only.  
But it will peradventure be replied in defence of the consequence of the form proposition, that if Christ required Peter only to feed, and did not commit that feeding only to him, than there was no end or reason of his speaking to him only; but it were absurd, yea blasphemous, to say of our Saviour, that there was no end or reason of his speech. It were certainly blasphemous for any man to say of the Lord jesus, that any action or speech of his was without reason, or not to good purpose. But it were also a bold and blind presumption, for any man to affirm, that there is no reason or end of our Saviour's speech at all, because there is none known to men. What if I know not the end or reason of it, may I conclude, that therefore there is none? So than if we should grant, that there can no reason be given by us, of our Saviour's speech, unless thereby such an office be bestowed upon Peter; yet it might well be, there was some reason thereof though unknown to us.  
But we can assign good reason of that speech: that is, we can show, that there was good reason, why our Saviour Christ should direct his speech in that sort to Peter only, though he meant not to place him in any office thereby. First therefore we say, that our Lord speak to Peter thus particularly, that he might give him occasion to make profession of his love to him, which he had brought into question, by denying his Master with swearing and cursing. And because there was no means more effectual to prove the continuance or renewing of Peter; love to our Saviour, than the feeding of his sheep, therefore our Saviour presseth him with this duty above the rest, because there was more need to have his love shown, than the others, who had not made their love to him so doubtful. Let me add to these two a third, that it was needful for Peter himself, that the execution of the commission formerly given should be viged on Peter, because it might seem, that by so soul a fall, he had wholly been put out of commission: which doubt is fully removed by our Saviour's charging him to go forward in the execution thereof. We shall not need then to make any such construction of the Lord jesus words, as if he had intended by them to seal a commission to Peter for an office to be newly erected; for fear it should be suspected that those words were to no purpose, or without reason. Nay rather most unreasonable is that consequence, that would have those things infer each other, betwixt which there is no kind of agreement.   

CHAP. IX.  
Of Peter's successors.  
NOw in the next place, the third proposition offereth itself to be considered, although it be but employed, not expressed, that  
Peter hath his successors, which is manifestly employed, For he that saith, The office is committed to Peter's successors, supposeth that Peter hath successors. This sentence is thus to be understood; Peter only hath his successors, so as none of the other Apostles have. For so Bellarmine expoundeth himself. 
De Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 9 Sect. Respondeo, Pontificatum.  The chief ecclesiastical power was given to Peter, as to the ordinary pastor, who was always to have successors: to the other Apostles as to the delegates, who were not to have successors. And he saith, that The Bishop of Rom● succeedeth Peter properly 
L. 4. c. 25. Sect. Respondeo, magnum.  as the ordinary pastor of the whole Church, but the Apostles were extraordinary, and as it were delegated pastors, and such have no successors.  
That Peter hath successors in the ministry of the Gospel, we confess, and profess: but we add, that this is common to him with the rest of the Apostles. For the farther explication whereof we say, that to succeed the Apostles, is either to succeed them properly, as one King succeedeth another, or in similitude or proportion, as Bellarmine truly saith. We grant that all the Apostles have 
De Rom Pon. l. c. 15. Sect. Dicun●ur.  successors in a proportion; namely, such as preach the Gospel, as they did, though not by revelation; and that also have power of ordination and jurisdiction fit for the good government of the Church. But we say none of the Apostles have any successors of the second kind. Therefore Bellarmine might have saved his labour in proving that the Apostles 
De Rom. Pont. l 4 c. 25. Sect. sta vero.  have no such successors.  
Let us see how he proveth that which we deny, that Peter hath successors properly. This he propoundeth in these terms.  
Some must succeed Peter in the Bishopric of the whole 
De Rom. Pont. l. 2. c. 12. Sect. Primum ergo.  Church.  
Which he doth more plainly declare, where he saith, that the Bishop of Rome succeeds Peter properly, not as an Apostle, 
lib. 4 c. 25. Sect. Respond●●, magnum.  but as an ordinary Pastor over the whole Church. This we utterly deny, that Peter was to have any such successor in the Bishopric of the whole Church. Our reason is, that Peter himself had no such office. But let us see how Bellarmine would prove, that he had such successors.  
Bellarmine's proof of this point is set down, and is thus 
De Rom. Pont. l. 2. c. 12. Sect. Nos ergo ●tramque.  to be framed.  
Either Peter hath successors in Episcopal office over the whole Church, or that office perished at Peter's death.  
But that office perished not at Peter's death; for that office was ordained for the good of the Church, and the Church hath had, and shall always have no less need of it, than it had while Peter lived.  
Therefore Peter hath successors in the Episcopal office, over the whole Church.  
Who seethe not, that in this argument Bellar. taketh that for granted, which he should prove, namely that Peter had such an office while he lived? For he was not ignorant that all Protestants deny it? What is this else, according to Aristotle's 
Topicorum l. 8. cap. 13.  Philosophy, but to beg the question? He (saith Aristotle) that takes that as granted which he ought to prove, manifestly beggeth the question. As for the proofs he hath formerly brought, touching this office of Peter, I have showed, that they are weak and vain, so that the point is still as questionable as it was before. Therefore Bellarmine is also guilty of a second begging of the question, because his proofs are by-matters, as doubtful, or more doubtful than that is which he would prove by them. And of this manner of begging the question, speaketh the forenamed Aristole, Begging of the question is, when the proof is from things less 
Prio. Analyt. l. 2. Cap. 16.  known, or equally unknown. And this is not (saith Aristotle) to demonstrate the question.  
But what if we grant Bellarmine that which he cannot prove, that there was such an office: yet may we nevertheless deny his assumption, and say that;  
The Episcopal authority over the whole Church, perished at Peter's death.  
Will he tell us that it was ordained for the good of the Church? What then? It will not follow thereupon that it must be perpetual, unless he can show, that our Lord appointed it should continue for ever by succession. For the whole course of publishing the Gospel, and bringing men to true faith in Christ, dependeth wholly upon the ordinance of God, who being able to make any means effectual to his purpose, is not tied to use any, but what please him. Therefore if Bellarmine cannot show that it was the ordinance of God, that such an Episcopal function as he imagineth Peter had, should be continued always in the Church, it is no inconvenience to hold, that it perished with Peter's death. And of this first argument enough.  
His second Argument is in the said twel●th Chapter, Sect. secundo, and it is thus to be disposed.  
If in the time of the Apostles there was one supreme Governor of the church, than there ought to be so now, because the form of the Church may not be changed, seeing it is one and the same at all times.  
But in the time of the Apostles there was one supreme Governor and head of the Church.  
Therefore there ought to be so now.  
The assumption, or second part of this Syllogism, is as doubtful as the conclusion inferred upon it, and therefore it is a begging of the question, not a proof of the former Syllogism. But were it never so true, he were never the nearer; for the consequence of the proposition is naught, because there is no necessity, that the Church should always have that office, which at any time it hath had. For, this necessity (if there were any such) must spring out of the nature, either of God himself, or of the Church, or depend upon the decree of Gods will. To say there is any necessity in the nature of God, or of the Church, which may enforce the continual being of that which once was, were absurd. It remaineth then, that there must be some act of Gods will, by which it is decreed, that whatsoever office hath once been in the Church, shall be in it for ever, as I answered numb. 5. Wherefore Bellarmine must show us some ordinance of God, for the continuance of such government (supposing there was once such an one) or give us leave to reject it.  
He would make good the consequence of the proposition, and the proof of it, against our exception, by this argument.  
If the Church be one and the same at all times, than the form of it may not be changed.  
But the Church is one and the same at all times.  
Therefore the form of it may not be changed.  
In the antecedent part of the proposition, and in the assumption, by One, Bellarmine meaneth essentially one: by form in the consequent part, he understandeth, form of government. According to this sense we say, the consequence of the proposition is naught: for the form of the government of the church, is not of the essence of the church, as Bellarmine here vainly supposeth, and falsely affirms in his 
* D● Eccles lib. 3. cap 2 Sect. Nostra autem.  definition of the church. The assumption rightly understood is true. The Church indeed is always one with Christ the head, because of one and the same spirit in him, and every particular member of it. It is also one in faith, because the true faith is one. But Bellarmine meaneth that the church is one and the same, in respect of the government and officers thereof. This we deny, and look for better proof of it from him, than his bare affirmation, in a matter of faith to be believed upon pain of damnation.  
There followeth a third proof in the some twelfth chapter, Sect. tertio, after this sort.  
If the Sheepefould endure to the end of the world, than successors to Peter in that his chief pastoral office must endure to the end of the world: For the office of the Pastors in the nature of the thing, must endure as long as the Sheepefould continueth, because it is an ordinary and perpetual office.  
But the Sheepfold endureth to the end of the world.  
Therefore successors to Peter in that chief Pastoral office must endure to the end of the world.  
Bellarmine keepeth his custom to beg the question. For here again he taketh it for granted, that Peter was Pastor of the whole church. But say it were so, what getteth he by it? For, the consequence of his proposition is naught, neither can the proof he bringeth make it good. The Sheepfold may endure to the end of the world, and yet that pastoral Office not continue. Because they do not go together in their nature; for if they did, than the one must be of the essence or being of the other, as a reasonable soul and man are: or arise out of the principles of the nature of the other, as speech doth from the reasonable soul, which no man will say. Neither is there any ordinance of God for the joint continuance of them together. Bellarm. seemeth to tell us, that there is some ordinance of God for the knitting of them together. For he saith in proof of his consequence, that, That pastoral Office is an ordinary & perpetual office: as no office can be in the church, but by the divine ordination. If he had showed us withal, where we may find that ordinance, he had said somewhat to purpose: Since neither he hath, nor we can find any such in the word of God, he must give us leave to take it for no article of faith.  
Touching his assumption, I answer; that, If by Sheepfold, he mean a company of people separated from the world by the profession of Christian Religion, and united together in obedience to the divine revelation: We grant that there is, and shall always be such a Sheepfold. But, if he dream of any other Sheepfold, he must prove his assumption, over we can believe it.  
Yet Bellarmine hath not done, but setteth upon us with a fresh charge, in the same twelfth chapter, Sect, quinto: which is thus in due form.  
Either some must succeed Peter in his Pastoral office over the whole church, or the church must be without an head at Peter's death and after.  
But the Church must not be without an head at Peter's death, and after.  
Therefore some must succeed Peter in his pastoral office.  
Here Bellarmine perceived, that we were like enough to deny the proposition, because the disjunction in it is naught, for that Christ the head of the church, continued to be the head thereof at Peter's death, and shall do so for ever. Therefore he telleth us, it is not sufficient for the Church to have Christ for head; but that the Scripture maketh mention of another head of the Church, his reason lieth thus:  
The head, 1 Cor. 12. 12. is not Christ, for that head 
1 Cor. 12. 12.  hath need of the members, which is not true of Christ.  
The head, 1 Cor. 12. 12. is the head of the Church:  
Therefore there is some head of the Church which is not Christ.  
We easily yield the proposition is true: and therefore Bellarmine needed not have troubled himself to prove it; especially since his proof is no better. For, our Saviour, considered as the Mediator, the head of the Church, cannot say to the Members, which make the body, I have no need of you, although, as he is God, he hath absolutely no need of any of them.  
The assumption, that the head, 1 Cor. 12. 12. is the head of the Church, we refuse, as false. And how doth Bellarmine prove it? As he doth many other points, by saying so. But this will not serve our turn in a matter of faith: Belike he looketh we should disprove it. Though it be no orderly course of disputation, yet I say in a word, the head in that 21 verse. in which the words quoted by Bellarmine, signifies the natural head, to which the principal members in the church are resembled; which, as principal as they are, cannot be without the feet, that is, the meanest members: And this interpretation is warranted by Chrysostome and Theophilact, who by head, understand, those which had received greater gifts. So that indeed, the place containeth a comparison, wherein the conjunction of the parts of the mystical body, is declared by the like in the natural body.  
There are two other arguments in the same chapter, Sect. Sexto, and Sect. Denique: the one is drawn from the succession of the high Priests in the old Testament: the other from the necessity of monarchical government in the church. But they are so sleight and idle, that I should but waste time, labour, and paper to meddle with them: wherei thus end this third point and this Chapter.   

CHAP. X.  
Of Feeding committed to Peter's Successors.  
THe fourth and last point to be considered in Bellarmine's 
1 Chapt. 5 num. 5. & chap. 8. num.  assumption, is this:  
Feeding, joh. 21. is committed to Peter's Successors also.  
This we say is untrue; and will make it appear to be 
1. joh. 21. 25.  so, by answering the arguments he bringeth to prove it. 
Bellarm. leverbo De, il. b. 3 cap 5. Sect. Quartum.  The first whereof is in this manner:  
Either our Saviour, when he required Peter to feed his sheep, joh. 21. spoke also to his successors: or else he provided for his church for twenty five years only, and not to the end of the world.  
But when he required Peter to feed his sheep, john 21. he provided for his Church, not for five and twenty years only, but to the end of the world.  
Therefore, joh. 21. he spoke also to Peter's successors.  
Concerning the assumption, we say, that we are out of doubt, our Saviour by those words provided for his church to the end of the world. For he thereby required Peter to publish the Gospel by revealing it. Now this revealing or preaching of the Gospel by revelation, is and shall be of great use to the Church, in all ages and times, so long as the world shall endu●e. And in this sens● I grant the assumption: but in Bellermines sense, that our Saviour provided for his Church by instituting such an Office as he fancieth, which the whole argument presumeth, I deny the assumption and proposition too.  
Indeed, the proposition is utterly false: our Lord provided for the Church to the end of the world, though he spoke not at all in that place to Peter's successors. For in those words he took order for the revealing of the Gospel, which revelation of Peter's, containeth provision for the Church to the end of the world.  
There is a second argument of Bellarmine's to the same 
Bellarm. do Pont. Rom. l. 2, cap. 12. Sect. quinto.  purpose.  
In which words Christ committed all his sheep, both for place and time to Peter; in those he spoke to Peter's successors also: for Peter was not to live always in the flesh.  
But in those words, joh. 21. Christ committed all his sheep, both for place and time to Peter. For, it behoved our Saviour to have no less care of us, then of our Predecessors.  
Therefore in those words, john 21. Christ spoke to Peter's successors also.  
Of the assumption, which speaketh of our Lords committing his sheep to Peter, by those words, there hath been enough said already in the former chapter, which needeth no repetition.  
The proposition I reject as false. For our Saviour might well by those words commit all his sheep, for place and time, to Peter's Feeding, by the doctrine of the Gospel to be revealed, which was to continue, as by God's blessing it hath done, and shall do; no less to us and our posterity, then to our predecessors, from time to time, whereby he showeth his care of us, as well as of them.  
Now for a conclusion of this fourth point, and a full satisfaction to this whole argument, drawn from those words john 21. 15. I will propound a reason or two out of the text itself, by which it shall appear, if not necessarily, yet with as great likelihood as any thing Bellarmine hath brought in this question, that our Lord spoke to Peter only, and not to his successors also.  
Of them to whom those words were spoken, our Saviour demanded whether they loved him, or no.  
Of Peter● successors, Christ did not demand whether they loved him or no: for they neither were there in presence, nor at all in being in the world.  
Therefore to Peter's successors those words were not spoken.  
He to whom those words were spoken, had given occasion, that our Saviour should repeat this question thrice. For it is not likely that our Lord would have repeated them so often, if there had not been occasion given: and we find just occasion of repeating them thrice, in Peter's denying him thrice.  
But Peter's successors had given no occasion of the threefold repetition: for, they neither were at that time, nor had been before in the world.  
Therefore to Peter's successors those words were not spoken.  
Thus have I at the last examined this argument of Bellarmine's, with all the proofs of every several part thereof, whereby it hath appeared (I doubt not) to every judicious and unpartial Reader, that there is no force in it to prove, that the Church or Pope hath a commission from our Lord jesus, to teach the whole Church by way of judging and determining, what is to be believed of all men, and what is not. It will be looked for perhaps, that I should proceed to the discussing of some other, that are brought for the proof of this question. But I think it would be but lost labour: for Bellarmine, who was as able as any Popish writer, that hath dealt with this matter, and had allowance of that he wirt (especially in a point that so nearly touched the Pope's freehold) if not from the Consistory immediately, yet with the knowledge thereof, from the office appointed for that purpose in Rome, setteth up his rest upon that place in john and telleth us confidently; that, Then only Peter received the keys of the kingdom, as principal 
Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. lib. 1. c. 12. Sect. ut autem.  and ordinary governor, when he heard those words, Feed my sheep: and then also (as he saith) the charge of the rest of the Apostles, his brethren, was committed to him.  
Therefore since we require a commission for such an office, and that is either here or no where to be found: to what purpose should we examine other arguments, which can prove no such matter? Now that we have good reason to call for the sight of a commission, by which, such an office should be erected, no reasonable man can doubt, if he consider, what himself would do, if any man should challenge to himself the authority of the Lord Chancellor, or Lord Treasurer of England: would he take his word without knowledge of his commission under the broad seal? And why then should we be so simple, as in a business of such importance, to take the word of a Cardinal, for the Pope's prerogative.  
Master Fisher the jesuit, after some other Papists, allegeth for the proof of this commission, Mat. 28. 19 Go teach all Nations. But Bellarmine hath disclaimed and disproved all commission in that place: and that not without reason. For (he saith) Then only he received the keys of the 
Bellar. de Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 12. Sect.  autem.  Kingdom, as principal and ordinary governor, when he heard, Feed my sheep. In this he disclaimeth it, his disproof is, that the commission, Mat. 28. 19 is all one with that joh. 20. 21. as that which by Bellarmine's confession Sect. Dices. containeth power both of order and jurisdiction: which is also conveyed to the Apostles, Math. 28. 20. Go teach and baptise. And this Master Fisher must needs acknowledge, if he will have that place be a commission for the Pope's authority. As for that john 20. 21. the power there was not committed severally to Peter alone, but to all the Apostles, as to Legates, not to ordinary pastors; as Bellarmine noteth. All other 
Sect.  autem.  places of Scripture brought by the Papists to this purpose, are of the same kind, and concern all the Apostles as well as Peter: wherefore all this considered, I hold it altogether needless, to meddle with those other eight arguments of Bellarmine's, which indeed are of another kind; and persuade myself, that I have said enough of that weak foundation of the Papists faith, the authority of the Church in person of the Pope for the time being. Whereupon I infer my former conclusion, that  
The saith of the Church of Rome is erroneous and false, even in the very foundation of it; and therefore to be refused and rejected of all men.   

CHAP. XI.  
Containing a second proof, that the faith of the Church of Rome is erroneous and false.  
Such as the foundation of the Romish faith is, such is the faith itself; namely, false and erroneous, as I will show by the argument that follows, in the several parts of it.  
If some of the Articles of the faith of the Church of Rome be false and erroneous, than the faith of that Church is false and erroneous.  
But some of the Articles of the faith of the Church of Rome are false and erroneous.  
Therefore the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous.  
Lest any man should hastily except against the consequence of the proposition, as if I went about to prove the whole by the part, which may not be; I must entreat him to remember, that (as I noted before) in this question, we take the faith of the Church of Rome, for one entire thing, because of that one bond, the authority of the Church or Pope, by which all the parts of it are so joined together, that they all make but one body. By reason of which bond he that refuseth any one part rejecteth the whole. For by that his refusal, he accuseth their Church of error, and failing in determining matters of faith, and so overthroweth the very foundation of their faith. Besides, the denying of any one such Article, let it be in itself of never so small importance, draweth upon the denier that Anathema or curse, which seizeth on all them which are not of the faith of the Church of Rome. Wherefore I may presume without presumption, that the consequence is good, seeing every Article is equally and alike a matter of faith.  
My assumption, I will make good by setting down out of the Council of Trent diverse Articles of the Romish saith, which are false and erroneous: and these they are,  
1 The saving verity [or truth] taught by Christ and his Apostles, is contained in written books, [or Scriptures] and unwritten traditions. Concil. Trident. Sess. 4. decret. de Canon. Scripturae.  
2 The books of judith, Tobit, Ester [chap. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16. Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, Daniel] chap. 3. 13, 14. Macchabees 1, 2. are canonical scripture. d. decret. de scripture.  
3 The whole books of Scripture, and every part of them, as they are in the vulgar Latin edition, are to be received for sacred and canonical. d. decret. de scripture.  
4 It is the office of the Church to judge of the true sense, [or interpretation] of the sacred [or holy] Scriptures. d. sess. 4. de edit. & usu librorum sacrorum, Sect. insuper.  
5 The Bishop of Rome is God's Vicar on earth. Sess. 6. decret. de reform. cap. 1. and sess. 14. de poenitentia, cap. 7.  
6 The Church of Rome is the mother and Mistress of all Churches. Sess. 7. de baptis. can. 3. and sess. 13. de extreme. unct. cap. 3. and sess. 22. de sacrif. missae. cap. 8.  
7 Grace [bestowed in baptism] doth take away whatsoever hath the true & proper nature of sin. sess. de pec. orig. can. 5.  
8 Concupiscence in the regenerate is not truly and properly sin. d. canon. 5.  
9 Man doth freely assent to, and cooperate [or work together] with God's exciting and cooperating grace, so that he can also reject [or refuse] the same grace. Sess. 6. de iustif. cap. 5. And dessent if he will. can. 4.  
10 The only formal cause of justification, is justice [or righteousness] inhaerent. d. sess. de iustit. cap. 7.  
11 By keeping the commandments of the Church, a man doth increase in the justice, which he received by the grace of Christ, and is more justified. cap. 10.  
12 The just in some actions do not sin venially. cap. 11.  
13 By every mortal sin a man falleth away from the grace of justification, which he had received. cap. 14, 15. and can. 23.  
14 By the Sacrament of penance the grace of justification, which was lost, is recovered. cap. 14.  
15 The good works of a man that is justified, are his merits. can. 32.  
16 The just truly deserve everlasting life by works wrought in God. cap. 16. and can. 32.  
17 unless a man faithfully and firmly believe the Catholic doctrine of the Council of Trent touching justification, he cannot be saved. cap. 16. Sect. Post hanc.  
18 Some that are not predestinate receive the grace of justification. can. 17.  
19 The Sacraments of the new Testament are neither more nor fewer than 7, to wit, 1 Baptism, 2 Confirmation, 3 The Lords Supper, 4 Penance, 5 Extreme Unction, 6 Ordination, 7 Matrimony: and every one of these is truly and properly a sacrament. sess. 7. de sacram: in genere, can. 1.  
20 Baptism, Confirmation, and Ordination imprint in the soul a character that cannot be blotted out. can. 9  
21 The sacraments of the new Testament, contain the thing they signify, and bestow it upon them, that hinder it not. can. 6. And upon all as much as is required on God's part. can. 7. And that by the work wrought. can. 8.  
22 After the consecration of the bread and wine in the Lord's Supper, our Lord jesus Christ true God and man is contained, truly, really and substantially under the shows of those sensible things, sess. 13. de sacram. Eucharist. cap. 1.  
23 The holy Eucharist is to be reserved in the Chancel, and carried honourably to the sick. cap. 6.  
24 The tenth Commandment, Thou shalt not covet, is rend in sunder and made two by the Council of Trent. sess. 14. de poenitentia, cap. 5. and can. 7.  
25 The time of Lent is holy and most acceptable. sess. 14. de poenitentia, cap. 5.  
26 No man that knows himself to be guilty of mortal sin, how contrite soever he seem to himself to be, may come to the holy Eucharist, without sacrament all confession going before. d. sess. 13. cap. 7. and can. 11. that is, Until he have confessed all and every one of his mortal sins, and also those circumstances, which change the kind of the sin, sess. 14. de sacram. poenitentia, c. 5. And that to a Priest in secret. can. 6. 7.  
27 Power [or authority] was given to the Apostles and their lawful successors to remit and retain sins for the reconciling of such of the faithful as fall after Baptism. sess. 14. de sacram ent. poenitentiae, cap. 1.  
28 It is utterly false and differing from the word of God to say, that the Lord God never remitteth the fault, but with all he pardoneth the whole punishment. d. sess. 14. de poe●it. cap. 8. & can. 12. & sess. 6. de iustif. cap. 14. can. 30.  
29 Neither the Laity, nor any Clergy man that doth not consecrate, is bound by any Commandment of God, to receive under both kinds. sess. 21. de sacram. sub utraque specie, cap. 1.  
30 The Church hath decreed it for law, that all the Laity, and the Clergy, that do not consecrate should receive under one kind only. d. sess. cap. 5.  
31 We may make satisfaction to God through jesus Christ by temporal afflictions laid on us by God, and borne patiently by us. sess. 14 de sacram. penitent. cap. 9 & can. 13.  
32 The Priesthood was not to be abolished by the death of Christ, sess. 22. de sacrif. missae. cap. 1.  
33 Our Saviour Christ by these words, This do in remembrance of me, charged his Apostles and their successors to offer his body and blood under the signs of bread and wine, d. cap. 1.  
34 Water is to be mingled with wine in the Chalice that is to be offered, d. sess. cap. 7.  
35 The names of Subdeacons', Acolytes, Exorcists, Lectors and Doorkeepers, and the proper office of every one of these, hath been ever since the beginning of the Church. sess. 23. de sacram. o●dinis, cap. 2. and de reformat. cap. 28.  
36 Matrimony contracted, not consummated is dissolved by the solemn profession of religion by either party. sess. 24. de sacram. Matrimon. can. 6.  
37 There is a Purgatory, sess. 25. decret. de purgat.  
38 The souls which reign with Christ do offer up their prayers to God for men. sess. 25. decret. de innocatione sanctorum.  
39 It is good & profitable humbly to call upon the saints forenamed, and to fly to their prayer, help, and furtherance, for the obtaining of benefits, [or blessings] from God by his son jesus Christ our Lord. d. decret. de invocat.  
40 Veneration and honour are due to the relics of the Saints Sess. 25. decret. de invocat. venerat. & reliq. sanctorum.  
41 The Images of Saints, and other sacred monuments are not honoured without profit, etc. The memories [or monuments] of the Saints are not frequented in vain for the obtaining of their help. d decret. de venerat.  
42 The Images of Christ, and the Virgin Mary, and other Saints are to be had and retained especially in Churches, and due honour and veneration is to be given them, d. sess. 25. de sacris Imaginum.  
43 The power of granting indulgences was committed by Christ to the Church, and the use of them is helpful to Christian people. d. sess. 25. decret. de indulgent.   

CHAP. XII.  
That many Articles of the faith of the Church of Rome are false and erroneous.  
Upon the 43 propositions set down out of the Council of Trent in the former chapter, I thus argue to prove the faith of the Church of Rome erroneous.  
The aforesaid Articles or propositions are false and erroneous.  
The aforesaid Articles or propositions are articles of the faith of the Church of Rome.  
Therefore some of the Articles or propositions of the faith of the Church of Rome are false and erroneous.  
Touching these propositions, that they are articles of the saith of the Church of Rome, it is evident, because we find them in the Council of Trent, propounded to be believed of all Christians. Are these all, will some man say, wherein we descent from them, and which we reject as erroneous? No, there are many other and some of them of no small moment. But I hold these only needful to be debated: because the other so depend upon these, that if these be false, none of them can be true. For example, It is said article 36. that there is a purgatory, if this cannot be proved, than it is false, that the Saints in Purgatery are helped by the suffrages of the faithful, or sacrifice of the altar: which yet is delivered as an article of faith in that decree. Again, it is affirmed article 32. that Christ appointed his Apostles and their successors to offer his body and blood under the signs of bread and wine. If there be no such commandment of our Saviour's, then 1 There is no Mass. 2 The virtue of the bloody sacrifice is not applied by the sacrifice of the Mass. 3 The sacrifice of the Mass is not truly propitiatory. All which are propounded for Articles of saith by the forenamed Council, sess. 22. de sacrificio Messae. I might say the like of many other points, but these may suffice.  
It remaineth that I prove the proposition, which must be done by handling the points severally: First therefore I thus begin with the first.  
The saving truth [or verity] taught by Christ and his Apostles 
Concil. Trid. Sess 4. decret. de Can. Script.  is contained (saith the Council) in written books [or in the Scriptures] or in unwritten traditions.  
In this proposition or Article we must understand, that the Scriptures and traditions are made diverse parts of that record, wherein the saving truth is contained: so that neither of these parts containeth all, but the one some, the other some, which appeareth plainly by the Council itself, where, describing Traditions, it saith, that They are not written, that They were received by word of mouth from the Apostles and were delivered to them either by our Saviour, or by his spirit, and have been so conveyed from hand to hand to the present Church. And indeed if this were not the Councils meaning, they said nothing at all against us: who make no question, but that the Christians, which lived presently after the Apostles, did truly gather diverse points out of the Scriptures, which have worthily been received and maintained from time to time. Such for instances, were these points; that our Lord jesus is true God, that the holy Ghost is true God, that our Saviour Christ consisteth of two distinct natures, that He is but one person, not two. These points the Christians rightly drew out of the Scriptures. For they be not expressed there in so many words: and these were acknowledged to be Articles of faith by the four first general Councils against Arius, Macedonius, Eutiches, and Nestorius. Of this kind there are many traditions in the Church, and will daily be more, as it shall please God to bless the labours of his servants in the reading & understanding of the Scriptures. Of these we dispute not, but only of such, as are not comprised in the Scriptures.  
It would also be observed, that the Council saith not barely and simply truth, but saving truth: which, in all likelihood, was put into the decree, because we grant that some things concerning rites and ceremonies, were delivered by 
Bellar de verbo Dei non scripto l. 4 c 3. Sect Secundo dissidemus  our Lord or his Apostles, which are not recorded in the Scriptures, as Bellarmine confesseth.  
Lastly, whereas the Council saith, the saving truth, taught by Christ and his Apostles, we must inquire whether they mean universally and wholly whatsoever our Saviour and his Apostles taught, not any one sentence excepted; or only so much, as was intended for the perpetual use of the Church: That it meaneth absolutely all saving truth so taught, it may be probably gathered out of the very words of the Council. For it saith, that The preaching of Christ and his Apostles is the fountain of all saving truth; and by and by addeth, which truth is contained in written books and unwritten traditions: which is all one, as if the Council should have said in plain terms, All saving truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is contained in written books and unwritten traditions.  
Thus have we the meaning of the Council, now that it may appear what is true in it, what false, I will draw it into several propositions, namely these 3.  
1 All saving truth taught by Christ and his Apostles, is recorded for future ages.  
2 Some saving truth is contained in written books.  
3 Some saving truth is comprehended in unwritten traditions.  
The two latter propositions, viz. the second and third, are manifestly in t●at article of the Council: the first of the three is necessarily employed: For if some things taught by them remain not to posterity, than all saving truth so taught, is not to be found in the Scripture and tradition, because some of it is not at all recorded. In the second proposition: that, Some truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is contained in the Scripture: we wholly agree with them, and say farther in particular: that, All such truths are contained therein, as the Lord appointed for the salvation of the Elect in all ages. And this is the meaning of our Divines, when they say; that, All things necessary to salvation are comprehended in the Scriptures. Which is manifest by Dr. Reynolds: for, 
D. Reynolds proface to his six conclusions, at conclusion first. D Whitaker de script. q. 6. c. 6.  saying; that, The Lord teacheth the Church all things necessary to salvation, he expoundeth necessary to salvation, thus; which lead the faithful to salvation and life. And Dr. Whitaker, propounding our opinion of the same matter, in the same manner, interpreteth, necessary to salvation, in these words; by the way of life: signifying thereby; that, Those things are necessary to salvation, which teach us the way to everlasting life. Reverend B. jewel speaks to the same purpose; 
B. jewels Apol. partly .. 2. c. 9 diuis. 1.  that, The Scriptures do fully comprehend all things whatsoever be needful for our health: and that they be the very might and strength of God to attain to salvation.  
Whereby it is manifest, that Bellarmine dealt falsely and 
De verbo Dei non scripte l. 4. l. 3. Sect. Controversia.  deceitfully when he propounded the question. The controversy (saith he) betwixt us and the Heretics, is, that we say, The whole doctrine necessary to faith and manners is not contained in the Scriptures expressly; and therefore besides the written word of God, there is also an unwritten word of God required; that is to say: Divine and Apostolical traditions. Wherefore I will leave Bellarmine with his frauds, and debate the point as it is delivered in the Council of Trent.  
For the first: that, All saving truth, taught by Christ and his Apostles, is recorded for future ages, Bellarmine bringeth no proof: and yet he could not choose but see, that there is no necessity in the point itself, why we should take it for true. For it might well be, that our Saviour and his Apostles taught some things, which tended to the salvation of some particular men, not of all men, and therefore might be left unrecorded without any loss, or damage, to the Church. Therefore we may justly call for proof of a point so uncertain, that is made by Bellarmine a matter of faith.  
The third proposition at numb. 5. is; that, Some saving truth is comprehended in tradition. For the better understanding and clearing whereof, we are first to learn, what unwritten traditions are. Which the Council of Trent teacheth us. Unwritten traditions, are things indicted by our 
Concil. Trident. Sess. 4. decret. de canon script.  Saviour, by word of mouth, or by the holy Ghost, and kept in the Church by continual succession. We may content ourselves with this description, without seeking any explication out of Bellarmine. or any other, because Bellarmine's definition, that, A tradition is a doctrine, not written by the first author thereof, is so far from making the meaning of the Council of Trent plain, that indeed, it doth rather more obscure 
Bellarm. de verb. De●l 4. c. 2. Sect. Vocatur.  it. The Council setteth down no distribution of traditions but this; that, some of them concern faith some manners. But Bellarmine, wearieth himself and his Reader, with a number of distrib●●ions, which, as I said of his description, are of no use, but to darken the question. Tradition being thus understood, I say, that third proposition is false, and the contradictory thereof, true. No saving truth, taught by Christ or his Apostles is contained in unwritten traditions: which may thus appear: If no part of the Scripture refer us to tradition, for some part of God's word, not contained in the said Scriptures, then have we no reason to seek for any part thereof in tradition. For the Scriptures do send us to the scriptures for the knowledge of saving truth, joh. 5. 39 Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think to have eternal life. And the Apostle Paul, 2 Tim. 3. 15. saith: that, The 
2 Tim. 3. 15.  Scripture is able to make us wise to salvation. And would not the scripture, trow we, have sent us to tradition for supply of that which was wanting in it, if there had been any supply to be had therein? For, it was as easy and as orderly for the Scripture to refer us to tradition, as to itself: and as well beseeming the wisdom and providence of God, to have sent us to both parts of his word by the Scriptures, as to the one of them: yea, it was a great deal more needful, For no man could doubt, but he was to have recourse to the Scriptures, because they were known to be the word of God. But who could have imagined that the Lord God, teaching us so plentifully in the Scriptures, would leave out some part of the saving truth, and not so much as give us any inkling thereof, nor direct us where we might find it.  
But they tell us, the Scripture doth put us over for some of the divine truth, to unwritten traditions. Let us see and examine the places that are brought to this purpose by Bellarmine: 
Bellarm. de verb. Dei non scripto l. 4. c. 5. Sect. Ac primum.  who made choice of the best places, that had been, or could be alleged in this matter. The first whereof is thus to be concluded.  
Those things which our Saviour spoke of, joh. 16. 12. and 
joh. 16. 12. and 21. 25.  21. 25. Act. 1. 3. are comprehended in tradition. For they are not written: and it is not credible, that the Apostles which heard them did not deliver them to the Church. Surely they were neither so envious that they would not, nor so forgetful that they could not.  
But those things which he spoke in those places, were saving truths.  
Therefore some saving truths, taught by Christ, or his Apostles, are contained in tradition.  
Ere I answer to this argument particularly, I must note in general, that every proposition of every argument brought in this question must be certainly and evidently true, because the point concluded is an article of faith, which must be either expressly set down by the holy Ghost, or collected from the word of God, by manifest and necessary consequence. Therefore if we find any proposition in any argument, that is not in such sort true, the conclusion cannot be an Article of faith, because of those premises: but is only at the most probable, as they are.  
Particularly I say of this argument, that no Article of faith can be concluded by it, because the proposition or Mayor, with the proof of it, are at the most but probable, as the examining of the reason will show.  
Either our Saviors' speeches the●e mentioned are contained in tradition, or else they remain not at all to posterity.  
But they remain to posterity: for the Apostles did not omit the recording of them, since they were neither envious nor forgetful.  
Therefore our Saviour's speeches there mentioned are contained in tradition.  
First, this argument presumeth that whatsoever our Saviour spoke, was some way or other committed to posterity. And this was the first proposition in this doctrine of the Council, & denied by us, n. 5. & 7. therefore Bellar. doth but play the sophister by begging the question, & proveth nothing. Secondly, I answer, that if I should grant him that he beggeth, yet his proposition would be false. For the disjunction is nought. What if I say, those speeches of our Saviour neither perished, nor remain in tradition, but are recorded in some part of the Apostles writings in the new Testimē●. For since our Saviour promised joh. 16. 13. to send them his spirit which should lead them into all truth, and joh. 14. 26 bring to their remembrance all things, which he had told them. and performed what he promised, Acts 2. 3. It is more than likely, that they did commend the things to posterity, which he caused them to remember: for why else were they brought to their remembrance? But we find no other course, that ever they took to deliver the Gospel to posterity, but writing. Why then should these points be kept unwritten? Surely they are neither greater mysteries, nor smaller matters, than some that are written.  
The proposition than is either false or doubtful, and the assumption little better. For how can Bellarmine tell whether those matters be recorded in any of the Apostles writings or no, unless he know what they were, as he will not for very shame say he doth.  
But If we doubt of it, he would make us believe we accuse the Apostles of envy or negligence. God forbidden. We will grant him any thing almost, rather than lay such an imputation upon those glorious instruments of our salvation. We have a better way to answer then so, namely, that Bellarmine cometh short of his reckonig, either of negligence or envy. What needeth that? It may well be, that they did not record every one of our Saviour speeches, because they had no commission to leave them on record: and they were to do according to their commission; being to deliver the word of God, as they were inspired by the holy Ghost, not to set down every thing they could remember, as men do that follow their own natural discretion.  
Neither can Bellarmine any way make good the assumption of the principal Syllogism negative, that Those things, which our Lord spoke of in those places, were saving truths, except he can certainly tell, what they were.   

CHAP. XIII.  
Of Bellarmine's second and third Arguments to prove unwritten traditions.  
Bellarmines' second argument in the place above named, must be thus ordered. 
a Bellar. de verbo Dei non script. lib. 4. cap. 5. sect. Secundum test●. mon●im.   
The ordinances which the Apostle speaketh of, 1. Cor. 11. 2, are not written; for they concern the manner of praying and receiving the Sacraments: and these we find not written any where.  
The ordinances which the Apostle there speaketh of, are saving truths; for he commendeth the Corinthians for keeping them.  
Therefore some saving truths are contained in unwritten tradition.  
The proposition taketh it for granted, that whatsoever the Apostles taught, is committed to posterity. But this we deny: as I shown cap. 12. n. 7. How then shall this argument prove, that the conclusion is an article of faith?  
Well, admit it were true: yet is, the proposition uncertain, as the proof showeth; For out of doubt, it is no● manifest of itself. The proof lieth thus.  

Whatsoever was delivered to the Apostles, and is not found written any where, that is kept in unwritten tradition.  
The ordinances the Apostle speaketh of, were delivered by him, and are not found written any where.  
Therefore the ordinances the Apostle speaketh of, are kept in unwritten tradition.   
The proposition of this Syllogism is untrue. For although it be not found, yet it may be written: diverse things are contained in the Scriptures, which are not known to be there contained, but may in time be manifested: as I signified cap. 11. n. 2.  
Now concerning the principal assumption n. 1. The ordinances which etc. I answer, that it is neither clear in itself, nor proved by Bellarmine. For every precept of the Apostle, the keeping whereof deserveth commendation: it is not therefore a saving truth. Obedience to any commandment, or advice of an Apostle touching but a rite or ceremony: yea the smallest matter that can be imagined, though it be no saving truth, deserveth due commendation: and Bellermin hath nothing else in this disputation that may be applied to the proof of that point.  
But say we grant Bellarmine, that the precepts signified verse. 2. are saving truths. (as we may do with great likely hood, understanding thereby the doctrine delivered in the former part of the Epistle to that 11. Chapter.) What will it avail him, seeing the assumption than will convince the proposition of falsehood, because the precept is there written? Therefore this second argument is to as small purpose, as the former. I come to the third argument in the same place.  

Those things which the Apostle disposed, 1. Cor. 11. 34. 
Bellar. de verbo Dei non scripto. lib. 4. cap. 5. sect. alteram quastio●em.  are contained in tradition; for we find them not written any where.  
But the things he there disposed were saving truth.  
Therefore some saving truth is contained in tradition.   
Both the faults of the former proposition are in this also; first, that he taketh it for granted, that whatsoever the Apostles taught is recorded: which we always deny. Secondly, that he saith confidently, these things are not written, and yet knows not what they are: so that he may find them, and not know of it.  
Let us pass by the proposition: yet will Bellarmine come short of his conclusion, because the assumption is full of doubt; for how will he be able to prove that the things disposed by the Apostle, were saving truth. He confesseth that some of them were matters belonging to rits & ceremonies: but he telleh us, with all that Catholics worthily think that he delivered also some greater matters, concerning the ordination of Ministers, the sacrifice of the Altar, and the matter and form of other Sacraments: and he addeth, that The heretics cannot disprove them.  
That we may the better judge of these worthy thoughts of Beauties Catholics: we will set his reason in frame.  

Whatsoever Catholics worthily think, and heretics cannot disprove, that is to be holder. for true.  
But that the Apostles disposed of those weighty matters Catholics worthily think, and the heretics cannot disprove.  
Therefore that the Apostles disposed of those weighty matters, it is to be holden for truth.   
A stout argument, and well worthy such Catholics who seethe not the absurdity of the mayor? Truth is not to be measured by their affirmation or conceit, and our unableness to disprove, but by the adaequation or full agreement of the thing,, and our apprehension of it. For a man then only speaketh the truth of a thing, when he speaketh as the thing is indeed.  
But the assumption presumeth we cannot disprove it. That were hard. Why should not our saying, we think he did not mean those matters, be as good a disproof of it, as their saying you think he did, is a proof? Such answers are good enough for such arguments. But surely me thinketh, we may bring some likelihood of reason for our opinion. For who would imagine that the Apostle would spend so many lines as he doth in this chapter, about matters of so small importance, as long hair, and bare heads, which were not for the perpetual practice of the Church, as experience showeth: and put off matters of so great weight till his coming to them, which might have been never.  
And that they may not say, we conjecture this without any likelihood; as Beauties catholics worthily do, let them hear what Chrysostome saith upon the place. He 
Chrysost. Homil. 28. ad 1. Cor. 11.  meaneth either some other things, or the same that he hath mentioned. For seeing it was likely that they would bring other cases and he could not redress allthings by letters: Let those things (saith he) that I have admonished you of be observed; and if any other thing need redress, let is be referred till my coming. He speaketh (as I said) either of the same thing, or some matter not greatly urgent.  
He speaketh (saith Theophilact) of some other faults of 
Theophilact. ad 1. Cor. 11.  theirs, which had need of correcting, or of some which he had mentioned. It is likely (saith he) that some men are praparing to defend themselves against that which I have said, but in the mean time let thom observe that I have charged them to keep, ad 1. Cor 11.  
When he had written of those things that were more necessary, he reserveth the rest, for his presence with them.  
The Interlinear gloss expoundeth it thus: Other things concerning the Sacrament I will order when I come; but you might not be without direction for those things that I have delivered. ad 1. Cor. 11.  
Other things (saith Lombard) which pertain to order in the same Sacrament. I will order when I come. ad 1. Cor. 11. Other things which are not of so great danger, I will order ●●resence. Thomas ad 1. Cor. 11.   

CHAP. XIIII.  
Of some other Arguments of Bellarmine to the same purpose.  
LET us see if Bellarmine's fourth reason be any better than the former.  
That which the Apostle commanded the Thessalonians to 
Bellar. ubi supra Sect. tertium.  keep, 2. Thess. 2. 15. is contained in tradition: for it was not written, but delivered by word of mouth.  
That which the Apostle commanded the Thessalovians to keep, was a saving faith.  
Therefore some saving truth is contained in tradition.  
There is no end of Bellarmine's begging. We must deny as before, that whatsoever the Apostles taught is recorded and come to posterity.  
To the proposition I answer in particular, that being understood of that time when the Apostle writ that Epistle, it is true: he had then delivered some things by word of mouth, and not written them: and those he commandeth them to keep. But what proof can Bellarmine make, that those things were not written afterwards?  
The assumption is not easily to be proved, that those things were saving truth. Why doth not Bellarmine tell us what they were? Me thinks he dareth not so much as guess at them: otherwise he would let us know at the least, what his Catholics worthily take them to be. Would any man dally thus in a matter of faith, to be believed upon pain of damnation?  
Bellarmine will make amends for the want of weight in his reasons, by the number of them: and he propoundeth his fift thus to be delivered. 
Bellar. ubi supra sect. quaitam.   
That which was committed to Timothy, 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2. is contained in tradition.  
That which was there committed to Timothy, is a saving 
1. Tim. 6. 20. 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2.  truth.  
Therefore some saving truth is contained in tradition.  
Here he beggeth again as before: but we cannot grant, that whatsoever the Apostles preached, is remaining upon record to posterity.  
If that were granted: yet should I think the proposition no sufficient warrant for an Article of faith. Therefore Bellarmine offereth proof of it on this manner:  
That which Timothy had heard of Saint Paul, 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2, and was to deliver to faithful men able to teach other also, that is contained in tradition.  
But that which was committed to Timothy, 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2, he had heard of Saint Paul, and was to deliver to faithful men able to teach other also.  
Therefore that which was committed to Timothy, 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2, is contained in tradition.  
Lest we should deny the first part or Proposition of this Syllogism, because the things so delivered, and given in charge by the Apostle, might be matter for the present use of the Church, and such as needed not to be always known, Bellarmine telleth us, that by those things so heard, and so to be committed, the understanding of the sense of the scriptures, and other doctrine is signified: so that the whole force of his Argument lieth in this interpretation, which he never offereth to prove. Therefore unless we will take his bare word for proof, we are as fare to seek, as we were before. Now that we have no reason to do so, I think it may appear by those things, which I will now propound to the consideration of all reasonable men.  
First then, I would know o● Bellarmine whether by Understanding of the sense, he mean general rules for the understanding of it, or the sense of particular places? Secondly, I demand whether he delivered to him the sense o● every place of Scripture, or of some only? Whether he answer this or that; I ask thirdly: what is become of those rules and expositions? How will he prove to us, that they have been continued from time to time till now? If they have not been continued, what have we to do with them, who dispute only of such traditions as are in the possession, and use of the present Church?  
Fourthly, is it likely, even in Bellarmine's judgement, that Saint Paul would take upon him to instruct Timothy in the sense of any place of Scripture, when as the office of interpreting the Scripture is committed by the Council of Trent to the Church, that is (as Bellarmine expoundeth it) to Peter and his successors? Did he mean ambitiously to usurp Peter's office, or to send him to Peter or his successors, to learn of them whether the interpretation he had given were true or no. Touching the second part of the first Syllogism, that Those things which were committed to Timothy, were saving truths: Bellarmine saith nothing: which argueth that he knew not what to say. What reason have we then to imagine that they were saving truths, or that this argument concludeth any thing for the doctrine of the Council of Trent concerning traditions?  
There is yet one argument more in the same fift chapter, thus to be concluded.  
Those things which john had to write, 2. joh. 11, and 
Bellar. ubi supra Sect. ultimum testimonium.  3. joh. 14. are contained in tradition; for he saith, he would not write them.  
But those things which he had then to write, were saving truths taught by the Apostles.  
Therefore some saving truths taught by the Apostles are contained in tradition.  
I am enforced here also to repeat my former answer: that Bella●mine still takes it for granted, that whatsoever the Apostles taught is continued to posterity; which we deny: and no papist can prove.  
His assumption or minor is to weak to bear up the weight of an Article of faith, unless he be able to ●●ll 〈◊〉 certainly what the things were which the Apostle would not write: and to whom he did, or at the least, that he did afterward deliver them to some body, from whom the Church hath received them. Till we know what they were, how shall we be sure they were part of the saving truth?   

CHAP. XV.  
Of two other arguments of Bellarmine.  
WE have done with the fift Chapter: and are now to examine two arguments, set down chap. 4, the former I frame thus.  
That there are Scriptures: that these we have he they is 
●. Bellar de verbo Dei non scripto cap. 4 Sect. quarto, quinto, Soxio.  contained in tradition; For we cannot find them in the Scriptures.  
But that there are Scriptures; that these we have are they, is part of saving truth taught by Christ and his Apostles.  
Therefore some saving truths taught by Christ and his Apostles, are contained in tradition.  
It hath appeared by my answer to Bellarmine's arguments, that he can find no place of Scripture, that sendeth us to tradition for any part of saving truth, taught by our Lord or his Apostles; We might therefore conclude, that there are no such traditions, without troubling ourselves any further. But that we may dit up the mouths of the Papists, we will bestow a little time and pains in these arguments.  
If there had been no more intended by the Council of Trent in the decree touching tradition, but to signify that these three points are contained in tradition, the danger had not been great: for then both the number and the particulars had been determined; but the Papists by virtue of that Article take authority to thrust what they list upon the Church, and warrant it by tradition.  
Thus much to the argument in general: Particularly I answer, that the first part of it and the proof thereof, suppose that those two propositions, There are Scriptures: These we have be they, are formally, that is expressly contained either in the Scriptures or tradition; But this say we is false: they are contained formally in neither; where then shall we find them? Radically and originally in the Scriptures themselves: which of themselves afford just occasion to all men to conceive, both that There are Scriptures, and that These are they; They are contained formally in the apprehension of every man's understanding that believeth them: and that this belief is divine faith, not humane conjecture it appeareth, because it is wrought in men by a special providence of God, which persuadeth and draweth men to acknowledge the things to be as they are in themselves: and is farther grounded upon the divine authority, virtually affirming that they are both true indeed.  
And yet we make not a private spirit the ground or rule of our faith, or the judge to determine what is matter of faith, what is not; As Bellarmine slandereth us: and 
Bellar de verbo Dei non scripto lib. 3. cap. 5. Sect. Norum & cap. 9 sect. quod 〈◊〉.  after him Mr. F●sher, and other. But we only attribute to that special providence the office of in lightning, and moving the understanding in lightened, to give assent to the books of Scripture, that they are the word of God: as indeed and truth they are. Now to this assent it moveth us by many reasons fit and effectual for such a work: as namely by the continual consent and testimony of the Church: by the matter delivered in the books themselves: by the style or manner of delivering it, and the like as diverse of our divines have showed at large; and that this assent of ours is a true faith, it is very manifest: because it conceiveth of the thing delivered as in truth it is: which is the very rule of truth, and wherein the nature of truth consisteth.  
The assumption is false. The last proposition, is not part of saving truth taught by our Saviour Christ and his Apostles. Neither all nor any of the Apostles (for aught appeareth in the word) did ever set down a Catalogue of the Books of the New or Old Testament: neither indeed was it possible for any of them to do it but S. john, who out lived them all, and writ after them all. As for S. john, he neither might nor could do it, because that was only Peter's office or his successors, to declare which were Scriptures, and which were not, as we learned out of Bellar. Chap. 3. 11. 9 
P●●ar. ubi supra sect, d●nique.   
The second and last argument lieth thus.  
This Proposition, There is no word of God besides that which is written, is contained in tradition not written.  
This proposition is a saving truth taught by Christ and his Apostles.  
Therefore some saving truth taught by Christ and his Apostles, is contained in tradition not written.  
First it is to be considered, that Bellarmine bringeth this assumption as a proposition of ours, and from thence concludeth for the Church of Rome against us; For if he brought it as his own, and acknowledged by him for true, he should thereby gain say the Council of Trent, affirming that There is some part of the word of God contained in tradition, which is not to be found in the Scriptures. But in this Bellarmine doth us wrong: for although we say, that there is no word of God but that which is contained in the Scriptures, as 
a Rellar. de verbo Dei lib. 4. cap. 3. Sect. adipsi.  Bellarmin allegeth out of 
b Caluin. Instit. lib, 4. cap. 8. ●. 8.  Caluin; yet we say vot, that this proposition is a saving truth taught by Christ & his Apostles: neither indeed need we say so; For by that proposition we only deny that which the Council affirmeth, and set it down as a contradictory thereto: and Bellarmine himself in the place for enamed bringeth it to the same end. The reason of our denial is, that the Scripture doth no where send us to tradition, nor hath any word to that purpose; as hath appeared in the former disputation. And this reason is very sufficient: because nothing is to be received for an Article of faith, but that which is taught in the word of God.  
The like answer is to be made to the proposition. If it be true in Bellarmine's judgement, than the doctrine of the Church of Rome in his judgement is self. For the Council of T●ent teacheth, that There is some word of God contained in tradition; but this proposition affirms, that There is no word of God besides that which is written. If Bellarmine would father it upon us, he accuseth us falsely. For we never sai● nor thought that that proposition was contained in tradition; but perhaps he thinketh it will follow upon that we say: but in so thinking, he thinks idly; for we do no more hereby, but deny that which they say: and neither do nor need affirm that it is contained either in the Scriptures, or in tradition. It is enough for us in matter of faith, to refuse whatsoever is not taught in the Scriptures.  
But it may be said, that this proposition, There is no word of God besides that which is written, is either true or false; we grant it: because it is certainly true, that in every contradiction properly so called, the one proposition is true, the other false. What of this? It will farther be said; If it be false, than the contradictory to it which we hold, is true. We grant this too: what more? If this be true, it is contained either in the Scripture, or in tradition. This we deny; It may be true, and yet contained in neither of them; For the truth of this proposition is not positive, whereby one thing is affirmed of, or joined to another: but negative, by which one thing is denied of, or severed from another. Now propositions of this kind are then true, when the things comprehended in them are indeed severed the one from the other: for then the proposition speaketh of the thing as it is. Therefore it is enough to make this negative proposition true, that the Scripture is silent in that which they affirm, and doth not join 
Heb. 1. 5.  them together, as they do. And this is the ground of those negative disputations we find in the Scriptures 
P. jewels answ. to D●. Coals second 〈◊〉. let. O. P.  especially, To which of the Angels said be, etc. He that desireth to see more of this, may read the reverend Bishop jewel in his answer to Dr. Cole.  
I should now go on according to the order followed in the Council of Trent, to examine the rest of the Articles set down by me chap. 11. num. 3. But for this time I think it enough that I have debated these two questions: because if these prove false, as I trust they have done, all the other differences betwixt us and the Church of Rome, will easily be decided to the confirmation of the truth we maintain, and the overthrow of their false and erroneous faith. I have already in another disputation in Latin, discovered and proved the erroneousness of the faith of that Church in the seventh, and tenth Articles of the eleventh Chapter before mentioned, touching grace and justification. The like I will do in the rest, if it please God to give me opportunity and ability.   

CHAP. XVI.  
An answer to those things which the Church of Rome bringeth against the necessity of separating from it.  
ALthough the point propounded by me to be disputed, is sufficiently proved by that which hath past: and all men may see a necessity of separating from the Church of Rome: yet that the truth may be the more clear, and all men's consciences the better satisfied, and fortified against the devices of the Romish seducers: I have thought good to examine two principal motives of theirs, by which they misled many that are simple or careless; and in handling of them, I will take the same course that hitherto I have followed, for the more plainness and certainty in judging what is true, what false.  
The former of the two is this:  
Every man must receive his faith by the teaching of the Romish Church  
That it may appear what force there is in this to conclude any thing for the Church of Rome against the question hitherto disputed, I will apply it to the matter in question, and answer to it accordingly.  
They that must receive their faith by the teaching of the Church of Rome, must join in faith with that Church.  
Every man must receive his faith by the teaching of the Church of Rome.  
Therefore every man must join in faith with the Church of Rome.  
The proposition or first part of this reason I acknowledge for true: because the teaching of the Church of Rome giveth being to the faith of that Church.  
The assumption is false, being grounded upon that false foundation, that The Pope of Rome is to feed the whole Church as Peter's successor, by determining what is matter of faith, what is not. But this appeared to be manifestly false, chap. 8. and 10. wherein I propounded and handled the question.  
The second devise is commonly delivered by way of question. Where was your Church before Luther? Now this question implieth a negation; as if they should say: The Protestants Church was not before Luther. This must be applied to the point in question, after this sort.  
Every man must join in faith either with the Church of Rome, or with the Protestant Church.  
But no man may join in faith with the Protestants Church.  
Therefore every man must join in faith with the Church of Rome.  
Let the proposition pass for true: to which we may justly add an assumption contrary to theirs; No man may join in faith with the Church of Rome: and this assumption is already made good by the foregoing disputation, through this whole treatise: which hath showed that the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous.  
But to answer directly to their assumption, we say it is utterly false, and the contrary to it evidently true, that Every man is bound to join in faith with the Protestants Church. For our faith is nothing else but Every article or proposition to be assented to, or believed as true upon the authority of God the revealer of them by his holy servants the Prophets, and Apostles. The Articles which we assent to or believe in this sort, are either expressly set down in the Scriptures in direct words, so that the sense of them cannot reasonably be doubted of: or else gathered, and concluded from such places by necessary consequence: so that if the one be true, the other must needs be true also. Whatsoever proposition is not of this nature, we allow not for an article of faith, how likely soever it seem to be. Now in this faith of ours there can be no danger: seeing whatsoever proposition is plainly expressed in the Scripture, or necessarily concluded from it, is undoubtedly the divine revelation, which is the only foundation of true faith.  
More particularly I say touching the said assumption, that it must be understood of the Protestants faith, so far forth as it differeth from the faith of the Church of Rome, else by it they should dissuade men from the faith of their own Church.  
Besides, It is to be considered that this assumption supposeth, that the Protestants have a faith opposite to the faith of the Church of Rome; Which is utterly false. All the opposition we make to them is, by refusing their faith, not by delivering any of our own, and by ansswering to their arguments: so that we hold the negative part of the contradiction, in all points, wherein we descent from them, although in some we add a contrary affirmative, where the Scripture affirmeth that which they deny. For example, they say The Pope is God's Vicar. This we oppose by saying, that The divine revelation doth not teach us, that the Pope is God's Vicar. Again, they deliver this for an Article of faith: that Concupiscence in the regenerate, is not properly sin. To this we answer by way of opposition as to the former: The divine revelation doth not say, that Concupiscence in the regenerate is not properly sin; Yea in this point we say further: the Scripture saith it is properly sin: but our opposition to them in this point stands in this, that the Scripture doth not say it is not properly sin, so that though there were no word to the contrary of it in Scripture, yet that propos●●on of theirs were utterly false. By which it is manifest, that in those things wherein we descent from them, we have not articles of faith contrary to the articles of faith which they propound: but only deny, that Those they would thrust upon us are articles of faith.  
If any man object (as Stapleton and Wright do,) that Our religion is negative; we answer, that if they mean we hold no articles of faith which are affirmative, they charge us untruely; for we consent with them in many affirmative articles of faith. As for those points wherein we descent from them, it is no fault in us to hold the negative; for there is no other way for us to oppose the errors they bring for matters of faith, but by denying them to be matters of faith.  
So then this is that they avouch in the former assumption:  
No man may join in faith with the Protestants Churches, in those points wherein they descent from the Faith of the Church of Rome.  
The reason is, because the faith of the Protestants in those points is false; which they thus prove:  
The true faith hath been professed so publicly in all ages since the Apostles, that the professors of it from age to age may be named.  
The Protestants faith hath not been so publicly professed in all ages since the Apostles, that the professors of it from age to age may be named.  
Therefore the Protestants faith is not the true faith.  
Before I answer directly to the parts of this Syllogism, I hold it needful to note a few things concerning the reason in general. The first is, that in this question we inquire not of such professors only as our Saviour Christ and his Apostles were, who delivered the Articles of faith by way of revelation: but of such as have believed and professed those articles, as they have been gathered out of that which they revealed. Secondly, it is worth the doing, to consider a little way of guess, what the reason should be why the Papists are so loath to make trial of their faith by the Scriptures, and cry so loud for a catalogue or register of the names of such as have from time to time believed as now we do. This may well seem strange to all men, who understand that the divine revelation is a most faithful record, and most certain rule in all matters of faith: so that whatsoever is agreeable thereto, is a part of true faith: whatsoever differeth from it either positively by affirming that which is not revealed, or negatively by denying that which is revealed, is untrue, and may not be taken for an article of faith. As for a beadroll of names, who knoweth not that it must needs be made out of humane story. Where as Divine and infallible faith is not built upon deduction out of humane history, but divene revelation; as is well observed by the learned & reverend D. Featly And how can that be any foundation of divine faith, when it is not divine authority, nor free from error: but humane only, and subject to error: yea among all kinds of humane authority of least credit? Our of doubt then the Papists would never have pursued this course so eagerly, but for some especial advantage to thei● cause, which in all likely hood is this; that they saw well enough, it was not for their religion to abide the trial by Scripture in those articles of faith. But what saith the Prophet Isaiah? If they refuse the Law 
Isa. 8. 20. 8  and the testimony, it is because there is no light in them.  
Now in particular, I say that the proposition is faulty diverse ways. First whereas it supposeth that the true faith hath been in all ages in the word: if they mean it hath been in the Scriptures in all ages: we grant that they say is true, but we add that it is not to purpose; for our question is not of faith as it is revealed in the Scriptures, but as it is gathered out of them, and particularly believed; and in this latter sense, we deny that the true faith hath been in all ages.  
For proof of our denial we allege the experience of all ages: by which it is manifest, that some articles of faith have been obseruned and concluded out of the Scriptures from time to time, and were not all known and believed for articles of saith at once. I may bring for instance those great points debated and determined in the 4 first general Counsels. For certainly if The godhead of our blessed Saviour, and the holy Ghost, the distinction of the divine and humane natures of our Lord jesus, the Unity of his person, had been resolutely holden in the Church for articles of faith: Arius, Macedonius, Eutyches, and Nestorius would not have durst to speak of them so wickedly and heretically as they did; neither would the Church have assembled Counsels to advice of the points, but have cast out those wretches as enemies of the faith. The like might be said of Pelagius touching grace: and of many other points of no small importance.  
To come nearer to this our age, there is no Papist of any reading and judgement, but will confess that diu●rs propositions in tholate Council of Trent, which ended since I was borne, were never received for articles of faith, till they were never received for articles of faith, till they were propounded for such by that Council.  
Secondly, to grant them as much as they desire; I yet except against their proposition as false: because there is no necessity, that the being of true faith, and such a profession thereof must always go together; For such a public profession of faith, is neither of the essence of true faith, as a reasonable soul is of the essence of a man: nor proceedeth from the essence thereof, as the faculty of speech doth from the essence of man: neither are they linked inseparably together by any ordianance of God, as faith and justification are. The two former I am not out of doubt all Papists will grant; If they fly to the last, let them show the record or deed, wherein that conjunction of true faith, and such a public profession of it is enrolled and engrossed. Will they tell us I know not what goodly matters of the visibility of the Church? what is that but to beg the question? For we deny that, as no less uncertain and untrue, than the other.  
The assumption also is false, which avoucheth so confidently that:  
The professors of the Protestants faith in such things As they descent from the Church of Rome in, cannot be showed in all ages from time to time since our Saviour Christ and his Apostles.  
If we call for a proof of this: they bid us show a beadroll of their names that were professors of our faith; what if we cannot? will they conclude thereupon that it cannot be done? there may be a Catalogue, though we cannot show it; Which cannot seem strange to any man that shall consider, that the Papists had for many years, yea, ages the whole sway & command of Christendom, and laboured all they could to make away (if it had been possible,) not only the writings, but the memory of all such as made any kind of opposition to their doctrine or proceed; Yet by the gracious & mighty providence of God it hath come to pass, that the registers of their own bloody persecutors have by the worthy pains of some of our writers, afforded the world a view of the names, of many holy Martyrs & confessors, which from time to time have refused as we do now, to acknowledge many of the points wherein we descent from the Church of Rome: and it cannot be looked for, that we should show that all of them have been denied, because many of them were first bred and hatched in the late Council of Trent, and were never articles of faith till then. Wherefore to return to my first conclusion: since the faith of the Church of Rome is erroneous, both in the foundation of it: which is the authority of the Church, and in many particular articles thereof; I may boldly affirm, that it is to be shunned as a perilous rock, whereon many have suffered shipwreck of their eternal salvation.   

CHAP. XVII.  
That the faith of the Church of Rome is to refused upon pain of damnation.  
When I first delivered the proposition I intended to handle, (that there might be no ignorance by error, nor shifting by wilful mistaken) I began to declare the meaning of the terms, in which I propounded my question; but because I purposed to examine the matter in two several disputations, I forbore to expound the last words, till I should come to the particular debating of the second point. Now I am to enter upon it, and must therefore show what I mean by those words, Upon pain of damnation: and then prove, that the faith of the Church of Rome is to be refused upon so grievous a penalty.  
Those words Upon pain of damnation, are not so to be understood, as if I took upon me to pronounce sentence of condemnation against all that believe as the Church of Rome teacheth: but I would thereby give all men to understand, that the believing of that doctrine as matter of faith, is a thing in itself damnable, and such as maketh a man liable to damnation. How it shall fall out with particular men in the event, I neither know, nor mean to inquire. Only I say again, that their misbelief is a sin, which setteth them in the state of damnation.  
Now having proved already that their faith is erroneous, I shall not need to make many words about the point. For the Church of Rome against which I dispute. holdeth it for a ruled case, that an erroneous faith is damnable. Wherefore else do they thunder out so many 
I●ai. 8. 20.  curses in the Council of Trent, against all that shall conceive otherwise of the matters of faith determined by that Council, then is therein decreed? Notwithstanding that I may the better persuade all men to keep good watch, for fear they be suddenly surprised, or unawares entrapped by the great army of locusts, the Priests and jesuites, which have almost covered the Land from sea to sea, I will bestow a little pains to give them warning of the danger.  
There are two ways by which sin leadeth a man into to the state of damnation: the one is the desert or fitness it hath to procure damnation: the other is the actual meriting or deserving of damnation. Into the former, sin casteth a man off itself. Into the latter he falleth, as by sin, so by the ordinance or decree of God, who hath laid a penalty of damnation upon it. Out of this I raise this disputation against receiving the faith of the Romish Church.  
That which maketh a man unclean in God's sight, hath a fitness to procure damnation. For unclean things are unmeet for the presence of God: and consequently are meet for damnation.  
But the faith of the Church of Rome maketh a man unclean in the sight of God.  
For it is erroneous in so high a nature, that it maketh a man guilty of treason against God, by installing the Pope in the Throne of God, giving him power and authority to determine as a judge what is matter of faith, what not, without commission or warrant from God, as I have showed in the former part of this disputation; Neither do they only give him authority to interpret the Scriptures: but also allow him to set up a forge, where he hammers what he list, and venteth it to be received upon pain of damnation, for the word of the ever living 
2. Thes. 2. 4.  God. What is it To sit in the Temple of God, showing himself that he is God, if this be not? And are not they accessaries to this high treason that acknowledge this authority, and yield obedience to it? How can it then reasonably be denied, that there is a worthiness and fitness in the faith of the Church of Rome to procure damnation? hereupon it followeth, that every one that joineth in faith with the Church of Rome is liable to damnation.  
There remaineth nothing now but the ordinance or decree of God, to appoint damnation as a punishment of this sin, according to the desert thereof: but that was passed long since by the Lord himself, You shall put nothing to the word which I command you. The penalty is expressed. 
Deut. 4. 2 & 12 30. Revel. 21. 18.  If any man shall add to those things, God shall add to him the plagues that are written in this Book●. But more plain. The Lord shall send them strong delusions, that they 
2. Thes. 2. 11. 12.  should believe lies, that all they might be damned which believed not the truth. Behold the Lord wrappeth them up in damnation, by his sentence that believe lies: (that is) false and erroneous doctrine not agreeable to the truth, which they ought to believe. What is wanting then to make the faith of the Church of Rome damnable, and the professors thereof liable to damnation: when both the thing itself deserveth it, and the Lord hath decreed, that they which believe it, should have according to their desert?  
I might, as our writers commonly do, add to that which hath been said, diverse foul and gross errors, which seem more specially to touch the glory of God, and secretly to undermine the very foundation of our salvation: namely the Mediatorship of our Lord and Saviour jesus Christ. But this (as I take it) will more plainly appear, and be more throughly enforced against them, in the particular handling of the several Articles; to which I reserve it.  
Neither will I enter into the common way of proving popery to be damnable, because it is Antichristianisme; much hath been disputed by our men to this purpose: and it is like enough that much more may, and will be added to their disputations. But the controversy is long, and requireth more time than I can now afford it: only this I will say for the present, that (as his Majesty hath prudently observed) there is no Church, State, nor man that hath been since the penning of the Revelation, to whom those things foretold by the Apostle from the mouth of the Lord jesus, can in any reasonable sort agree, but the Church and Pope of Rome alone. And it is utterly against reason to imagine, that the Lord jesus would direct john to spend so many words in delivering prophecies for some three years and a half in the end of the world, and leave so many years betwixt unspoken of, wherein such strange matters have befallen the Church.  
It is manifest, that the History is prophetically continued for the first 300 years at the least: and of that, because it seemeth not much to concern them, the Papists make no great doubt; he that will take the pains to read the whole advisedly, may easily discern that our Lord continueth his discourse to his beloved Disciple, of such things as were to fall out to the very end of the world. I forbear to show how unlikely, (that I may speak most favourably of the point, because it hath some collourable allowance from antiquity) I will not say how impossible it is, that any man should imagine he can deceive Christians, as Antichrist (by their conceit) must do: or force them generally to deny the Lord jesus, and take himself to be either God, or any man sent from God. This appeared plainly in that cozening compannion Mahomet: who yet was not so mad, as (in their opinion) Antichrist will be, to require that all men should acknowledge and adore him for God.   

CHAP. XVIII.  
A conclusion of the whole Treatise by way of exhortation, to separate from the Church of Rome.  
I Said a little more in that matter of Antichrist, than I purposed to do when I entered into it: for it was my meaning only to touch it by the way: and that rather because I thought it would be looked for, then that I found it greatly necessary; for what need I seek any other reasons to enforce a necessity of separating from the Church of Rome, than those I have already alleged? Therefore I will now add a few words of exhortation, and so end both the readers, and mine own labour.  
It is reported by Irenaeus, & by Eusebius, of the holy Apostle 
Irenaeus contra hares. lib. 3. c. 3. Euseb. eccle. hist. lib. 3. cap. 25.  Saint john, that when he spied Ceri●thus the heretic in the bath where he was, he made all the hast he could to be gone, thinking it dangerous to be under the same roof with him. Yea the very Heathen (as Tully saith) being at sea in a sore storm, were much afraie they should 
Tully de natura Deorum lib. 3.  have been cast away, because they had Diagoras the Atheist aboard amomg them. I would to God some Protestants were as chary of their souls, as, (I say not the Apostle) but the Heathen of their bodies: and had as much care to provide for their eternal salvation, as they had to procure their temporal safety; neither the Apostle, nor the Heathen had any thing to do with the impiety of Ceri●thus or Diagoras: and yet both he and they doubted some evil might befall them, because they were in in the company of such profane wretches. And can any Protestant imagine that he may be free from danger, though he join in faith with the Pope of Rome? It cost jehosophat dear, though he were otherwise a good King, for going to war with Ahab against a common enemy. What said Havani the Seer? wouldst thou help the wicked, 
2. Chr. 19 2.  and love them that hate the Lord? therefore for this thing the wrath of the Lord is upon thee.  
What then may they look for, who like the Ladiceans 
Reu. 3. 16.  are lukewarm neither boat nor cold, altogether indifferent, whether they be Papists or Protestants? They are in better case, yet not safe neither, who are persuaded that Popery is erroneous, but do not think it so dangerous a matter to be a Papist, that a man need flee out of the Romish Church, as Lot did oun of Sodom. That I may pluck or thrust these men out, as the Angels did Lot, I have undertaken this discovery of the danger, by labouring to inform their judgement with the knowledge of the truth. I must now proceed to inflame their affection with detestation of error. The glory of the understanding is truth: the height of the affection zeal. To be zealous without knowledge, is to fight without arms, like the Israelites, that had not a shield nor spare amongst forty thousand of them. judges 5. 8. To have knowledge without zeal, is to have arms without courage, as the Ephraimites had. Psal. 78. 9 Who went up armed with bows, but turned their backs in the day of battle. In this fight against Popery, you have need of know ledge; because your enemy is subtle to deceive; of zeal, because your quarrel is great. For you are to fight, not for your wives and children only, but also for your God, and your religion: not against an error or two that disgrace your profession, like a wen in a fair body: but against such an heretic, as like the disease in the hart, will undermine and overthrew the whole state of the body.  
For as judas kissed his Lord and Master that thee might betray him; so the Pope of Rome under a show of humility, hath taken the honour of God to himself, and pretending to be his factor, intendeth to rob & undo him. Will he with the stubborn jews in Mallachy ask me wherein? I will not answer him as the Prophet doth, In tithes and offerings. What are tithes & offerings to supremacy & sovereignty? This, this is the robbery, the Sacrilege whereof we accuse the Pope of Rome. If he had but taken from his fellow Bishops, and appropriated to himself the honour & authority that is common to them with him, we would have holden our peace: although this proud Haman could no way have made recompense to the Church of Christ, for the loss she sustaineth thereby. Yea, though he have with the evil servant in the Gospel imprisoned, beaten, murdered his fellow servants for doing their master's work, we would as we have done, in dure it with patience and silence. Shall I say more? Albeit he had maintained, as he doth, diverse foul and gross errors against the truth of God, we would have contented ourselves with dissenting from him therein, without breach of the band of peace. But now so standeth the case, that he hath claimed and usurped the prerogative of the great God of heaven and earth. Should we now forbear to speak? Should we in such a case look for commendation of modesty, and peaceableness? Have we no more zeal of the glory of our father, our King, our God? Hath the love of our most dear Lord and Saviour jesus Christ, deserved no more kindness at our hands? If we could be so monstrously unthankful, the very stones in the Church walls, and the becames in the roofs would cry out against us and him.  
For hath he not made himself a foundation of the faith of all men, yea the next and immediate foundation of all divine faith, so that nothing may be taken for matter of saith but upon his authority? Neither doth this authority of his lay hold on us only, which are as it were of the lower house, but it reacheth also to the upper house of the Apostles themselves; For by virtue of that commission (saith 
joh. 21. 15.  Bellarmine,) The rest of the Apostles were made subject to Peter, and his successors the Bishops of Rome. O ridiculous conceit! O presumptuous ambition! was it not enough for you to trample on the necks of other Christians, many of whom were (at the least) equal to the best of your Popes for learning and pity, but that you may bring the Apostles heads under your Idols girdle?  
Hear O heaven, and hearken O earth! The holy Apostle Saint john lived by the record of Histories, till the year after our Lord's birth 100; Saint Peter was (as it is also written) martyred at Rome in the year 68: therefore there were 32 years betwixt the death of Peter and john. In these 32 years (not to reckon Linus, who is thought to have been Pope) there were 4 several Bishops of Rome, Clemens, Cletus, Anacletus, and Euaristus. By popish divinity S. john was so subject to these successors of Peter, that he was to receive from them assurance of the truth that he delivered: of them he was to know whether his own Epistles were the word of God or not: yea whether they were his own Epistles or not: they, or some of them were to assure him from God, that his Revelation was from God, and not from the devil: if any doubt arose about any sentence in his Gospel, Epistles, or Revelation he could not know by divine faith, what the true meaning of the place was, but was to learn that of Euaristus then Pope: whose office it was to deliver an interpretation of the text to the Apostle, or to allow of the interpretation made by the Apostle, if he judged it to be true. Poor S. john was an underling in all this business, the Pope was Magister fac totum.  
Most glorious Lord jesus, thou didst vouchsafe to show thine extraordinary love to this thy holy Apostle, & tookest order to have it made known to all posterity, wouldst thou so much abase him, as not only to take from him the honour thou hadst bestowed upon him, by making him inferior to S. Peter, to whom before he was equal in authority and dignity: but also to appoint him to lackey, (if occasion fell out) upon four Popes one after another, to learn of them what was divine revelation, or the word of God, what was not? Wherefore didst thou solemnly promise thy Apostles, and john amongst the rest, that thou wouldst send them the comforter, the holy Spirit, to lead them into, and to direct them in all truth? Alas it was a poor comfort for them so to be taught by him, that they must be fain to travel or send to Rome, to know whether he had taught them right or no. But who can be patiented in this indignity offered to the holy Spirit? Shall a wretched and ignorant man (that I say no worse) sit in judgement to give sentence of thy divine Majesty, whether thou hast inspired thy servants with truth or no? Didst thou instruct the Apostles, as the devils amongst the heathen did their counterfeit prophets, that they either knew not what they uttered, or could not be assured what they meaned, without the Pope like an Oracle made them understand themselves; as Daniel told Nebuchadnezar his dream, and the interpretation thereof?  
If these things seem to be, as indeed they are absurd, monstrous, impious, blasphemous, what is the doctrine think you, upon which they are grounded? I will repeat it again, that all men may learn to know and detest such foolish wickedness and wicked folly. S. Peter (saith Bellarmine) was made by Christ ordinary pastor of the whole Church: his ossice was to determine what was matter of faith; The Bishops of Rome. Peter's successors, have the same authority of ordinary pastourship which he had; Whosoever will not be thus fed by Peter and his successors, belongeth not to the sheepfold of the Lord jesus. This is the arch, whereon the Pope's supremacy is built. For the upholding of this, all the Romish Clergy are in arms. If you hold not this, whatsoever you hold, you can be no true Roman Catholic.  
From whence ariseth the impossibility of reconciliation betwixt us and them: we cannot be members of their Church, but we must join with them in this acknowledgement of this Papal authority. They cannot renounce this opinion, but they must withal utterly dissolve their Church, the form whereof (as we heard out of Bellarmine) consisteth in this very manner of government. This is th● bond, these the ligaments by which the whole body of their Church is coupled and knit together. From the Pope thus feeding (that is teaching and governing) as from the head, all life and motion is conveyed into the rest of that huge chaos; take away the head, all life and motion ceaseth, and the parts fall asunder one from another, that it can no longer be accounted the Church it was, nor as they hold any Church at all. We see the prophecy of the Apostle Paul fulfilled. God hath sent these men strong delusions to believe lies. 
2. Thes. ●. 11.  For what greater delusion can there be, then for a man to believe that of every Pope, that no Pope ever believed of himself, or of any of his successors.  
And shall we notwithstanding all this, still halt betwixt two opinions? Shall we suffer ourselves to be so swallowed up by the cares of this world, that we can have no leisure to know what belongeth to our salvation? Shall we so melt away in continual voluptuousness, that we will not spare one hour to learn which is the right way to true happiness? Shall we so please ourselves in wilful ignorance, that we despise the knowledge of truth in matter of religion? Do these things concern Preachers only? If our fore fathers had been of that mind, the troops of holy Martyrs, that now gloriously follow their puissant & victorious leader the Lord jesus in triumph, would have been very thin; Oh that you could see them with your bodily eyes: How many blessed Saints should you behold now triumphing in heaven, that were as you are, not Preachers, but ordinary professors of the truth? Brethren deceive not your own souls: cast not yourselves away wilfully. Are not the people to be saved by the same means by which the Preachers are? Is not the same faith in the Lord jesus which must save the Ministers, required of the people also? The Lord indeed hath given us special charge to study, and know the holy Scriptures; to what end think you? surely as for our own comfort, so for your instruction; The affairs of the world in your several callings draw you away from opportunity of study; the Lord in mercy to you, hath commanded us to labour in it: that your want may be supplied by o●r abundance. Now especially he looketh for this duty of us, because he will now especially make trial of your knowledge and constancy.  
Do you not see many fall daily on your right hand, and on your left? It is not your strength, but God's merciful providence that holdeth you upright: he hath graciously vouchsafed to keep you hitherto from occasion of being seduced: he hath afforded you more time yet before the temptation, like an armed man shall assault you: if you prepare not now for the day of battle, the enemy will surprise you are you be ware, when you shall not be able to make resistance; Many of you scarce know a friend from an enemy, you are not able to discern which be your own colours. It is an easy matter to carry you into the midst of Dothan, while you seek for the Prophet, whom you know not if you meet him. As he that walketh into the fields, where there grow as well poisonous weeds as wholesome herbs, if he know not the one from the other, may as easily light upon that which shall kill him, as that which shall nourish him. So he that is ignorant what is true, what false in matters of faith, is as like to be led into error that shall damn him, as to be taught truth that shall save him.  
If then there be any desire in us to obey the commandment of God; if any fear of erring to damnation; if any care of believing aright to salvation, let us labour to understand the mystery of iniquity in the Romish faith: that knowing it, we may abhor it, and may avoid: avoiding it we may embrace the love of the truth, and be saved. What is it that leadeth thee out of the way to destruction? doth the glorious outward show of the Popish Churches blind or dazzle thine eyes? It may perhaps admit some excuse in children, that they have been deceived by such toys and gewgaws; But it is ridiculous and untollerable for men to run after sights and shadows. Surely if thou hadst lived in our Saviour Christ's days, or his Apostles times, thou wouldst have chosen the Temple and the beauty thereof, with the Priests, Scribes, and Pharises, rather than the barren mountains or wilderness with our Lord and his Disciples.  
But what is it that maketh thee a papist? discontent that thou art not honoured or enriched as thou desirest to be? Perhaps thou overualuest thine own worth, and thinkest there is more due to thee, then indeed there is; but say thou hast not thy due? dost thou not know, that these things are ordered by the providence of God? shalt thou have no cause of discontent if thou become a papist? are all papists respected and rewarded? I could name two great Earls, the experience of whose misery abundantly refuteth this conceit. Well, say thou attain to all thou hopest for: the reckoning is behind; What shall it profit a man though he win the whole world, if he lose his own soul? Antigone 
Math. 8. 36.  in Sophocles was so wise, that when her sister Isment demanded of her how she durst bury her brother Polynices body against Creon's commandment, she answered her resolutely, like a noble Lady, that she knew it was a duty acceptable to the gods, with whom she was to live longer, then upon the earth with men: and therefore had more care to please them. Shall not this Lady, this heathen, condemn many men, many Christians, that choose rather to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season, then to reign eternally in the glory of the Lord jesus in his heavenly Kingdom?  
Doth antiquity, universality, visibility, consent, like a loo●stone draw thee after them? Antiquity is then only a rule of truth, when the pedigree of it can be fetched from the beginning. For if every opinion be truer, as it is ancienter, why should not the Scribes and Pharises traditions, be of more account than our Saviour Christ's instructions? certainly they had been received and used in the Church of the jews many years before he was borne: yea they had universally the approbation and allowance of the whole Church: and continued in good liking, except with a few that followed our Lord, for all his preaching, to the end of his life; what greater consent could there be? all the jewish Clergy, Priests, Levites, Scribes, and Pharises agreed as one man, to maintain their own superstitions, and keep down the religion of our Lord jesus; These men the people depending upon them, were, and had been time out of mind the visible Church. Oh that they had been as wise and learned as our papists now are, to have called to our Saviour for a Catalogue of their names, that had from time to time professed the Religion which he sought to bring in, contrary to that they held. doubtless he must have been fain (unless he had used his divine knowledge) to confess, that at the least, for the last 300 years, there was no such beadroll of names to be found. I confessest Saint Luke in the geneallogy of our Saviour, rehearseth the names of his ancestors, who were questionless holy and religious worshippers of God, and trusted in the Messiah to come. But I suppose it could hardly have been made plain by any record of the jews (and yet they were more diligent and careful in such matters than Christians have been) that the points wherein our Lord dissented from the Scribes and Pharises, were distinctly known, and publicly professed by them one after another  
But of this matter, so much as concerneth the difference betwixt us and the Church of Rome, I said enough in the former Chapters, and will not repeat it needlessely. This one remaineth for conclusion, that I humbly entreat all men which have any true care of their own salvation, that they would not be carried away with words: but endeavour to enable themselves to judge how those plausible fancies, with which they are seduced, may be applied to prove that which is undertaken thereby. To this end I have employed myself in this course: they that are desirous to see the truth, may find direction therein for the judging of it: and thereby arm themselves against the assaults, and undermining of furious soldiers, and crafty pioneers, by observing their approaches, and discovering their works, to the defeating of all their enterprises. The greatest matter of all is, that you would embrace the love of the truth, and resolve with yourselves, as those glorious martyrs I spoke of did, rather to endure torments and death, then to forsake the religion of the Lord jesus, or to join in profession with the Church of Rome.  
This resolution will bring safety in peace, in war victory, that no ill tidings shall affright you, no losses discourage you, no discontent turn you out of the right way. The Lord jesus himself like the Angel in josua, will march on the head of your troops, and be as a cloud to refresh you in the heat of Summer, and as a fire to warm you in the cold of winter: your swords shall eat the flesh of your enemies, your pikes and bullets shall be drunk with their blood: one of you shall chase a thousand, and an hundred of you put ten thousand to flight: Babylon shall be cast like 
Math  a millstone into the sea, and be found no more: you shall reward the scarlet-coloured strumpet, as she hath rewarded you, and give her double according to her works, and in the cup that she hath filled to you, fill her the double; to the glory of God that hath appointed her this punishment, the increase of religion, the safety of the State, and your honour in this life, and everlasting salvation in the life to come, through jesus Christ our Lord, to whom with the Father and the Holy Spirit, one God in three Persons, be all glory, praise, obedience, and thanksgiving now and for ever. Amen.  
FINIS.