A TRIAL OF THE ROMISH CLERGIES TITLE TO THE CHURCH: By way of answer to a Popish Pamphlet written by one A. D. and entitled A Treatise of Faith, wherein is briefly and plainly showed a direct way, by which every man may resolve and settle his mind in all doubts, questions and controversies, concerning matters of Faith. By ANTONY WOTTON. In the end you have three Tables: one of the texts of Scripture expounded or alleged in this book: another of the Testimonies of ancient and later Writers, with a Chronologie of the times in which they lived: a third of the chief matters contained in the Treatise and Answer. A. D. Esai. 30. Haec est via, ambulate in ea. This is the way, walk in it. A. W. 2. Tim. 3. 15. The holy Scriptures are able to make thee wise to salvation. LONDON▪ Printed for Elizabeth Burby Widow, and are to be sold at the sign of the Swan in Paul's Churchyard, 1608. TO THE CHRISTIAN READER. IT standeth not either with my occasions or my liking, to make a long preface to that discourse, which of itself seemeth to me overlong. Only give me leave to inform the unlearned of some few things, which may further him in the understanding of it. The manner of my answer is such, as I have used in my former writings. First I set down the Papists Treatise words forword: then I draw it into a right form of reasoning, that the truth may more evidently appear: Lastly, I frame as direct and plain an answer to it, as conveniently I can with shortness. If thou desire fully to conceive the whole course of this kind of answering, I must entreat thee to have recourse to the Preface, which I set before my answer to the 12 Articles; where the matter is delivered largely and plainly enough. For the understanding of this present answer, it may suffice thee to know what is the meaning of certain words of Art, as we call them, which I am enforced to use very often. First then, a Syllogism is a certain form of reasoning, which consisteth of three sentences, whereof the second is drawn out of the first, and the third ariseth as a conclusion from them both. The first of these three, is called the Proposition or Mayor: the second the Assumption or Minor; both of them jointly together are named the Antecedent: the third is termed the Consequent or Conclusion. Therefore if I deny the Antecedent of a Syllogism, I mean to signify that both the Proposition and the Assumption are false: so must you conceive severally, that which soever of the three sentences I deny, that I take to be false. The consequence is the dependence of one upon another: so that when I say, I deny the Consequence, my meaning is, that the latter part doth not follow upon the former: for example, pag. 47. you have this Syllogism: Antecedent. Propos. If faith cannot be one unless it be entire, than it must be entire. Antecedent. Assump. But faith cannot be one, unless it be entire. Consequent. Concl. Therefore it must be entire. My answer to this Syllogism is, I deny the consequence of your Proposition, that is, I say, it doth not follow that faith must be entire, if it cannot be one, unless it be entire. There is also another form of reasoning, called an Enthymeme, which indeed is nothing else but an unperfect Syllogism, consisting of either part of the Antecedent, and of the Consequent. To this I answer, by denying either the Antecedent or the Consequence. For example, pag. 177. Our Saviour himself citeth some words out of that Chapter, and expoundeth them to be fulfilled in himself. Therefore that Chapter is to be understood of our Saviour Christ and his Church. To this Enthymeme I answer thus: this Consequent doth not follow upon that Antecedent, which is all one, as if I should have said, I deny the Consequence, that is, I say, that Chapter is not therefore to be understood of our Saviour Christ and his Church, because our Saviour citeth some words out of it, and expoundeth them to be fulfilled in himself. An example where the Antecedent is denied, though the Enthymeme be not plainly set down, you have pag. 327. The Pope is Peter's successor: Therefore he cannot err. Here I deny the Antecedent, that is, I say it is false, that the Pope is Peter's successor. And this may serve for sufficient instruction to the unlearned, that they may be able to understand and judge both of the reasons and the answers to them. It remaineth that I commend thee Christian Reader, whosoever thou art, that unfeignedly desirest the advancing of God's glory by thine own salvation, to the gracious direction of the holy Spirit, that he may teach thee to understand and believe to the praise of his name, and thy present and everlasting comfort, through jesus Christ our only Lord and Saviour. Amen. From my house on the Tower hill. january 20. 1607. Thine assured in the Lord jesus, Antony Wotton. A. D. §. 1. A TREATISE OF FAITH, WHEREIN IS BRIEFLY AND PLAINLY showed, A DIRECT WAY, by which every man may resolve, & settle his mind, in all doubts, questions, or controversies, concerning matters of Faith. A. W. THis Title is like the Apothecary's boxes & pots; which promise goodly matters by the inscriptions, but within have either nothing, or some ordinary drugs. A treatise of faith, showing a direct way, by which every man may resolve, and settle his mind, in all doubts, questions, or controversies, concerning matters of faith: makes show of instructing him, that shall read it, what faith is, what kinds of faith there are; and (above all) what a justifying faith is; how to be attained unto; how used, to the obtaining of everlasting life. These principally, and many more like these are required in a Treatise of faith; of never a one whereof there is any one Chapter, or piece of a Chapter, in this whole Discourse. Neither hath he done that little he hath done, either briefly; as the heaping up of unnecessary testimonies, in matters not doubtful, in the very first Chapter, evidently proves; or plainly; because, though in his Preface he sets down what he means to prove, yet it is very hard for a man to apply his several Chapters to the general matter propounded by him, as the handling of them will show. A. D. §. 2. A Table or brief summary of the whole treatise. Chap. 1. That faith is absolutely necessary to salvation. Chap. 2. That this faith is but one. Chap. 3. That this one faith must be infallible. Chap. 4. That this one infallible faith must be entire. Chap. 5. That Almighty God hath provided some sufficient means whereby all sorts of men, may at all times, learn this one infallible, and entire faith. Chap. 6. What conditions or properties are requisite, in this rule or means, provided by Almighty God. Chap. 7. That Scripture alone, cannot be this rule or means. Chap. 8. That no natural wit of man, or human learning, either by interpreting Scripture or otherwise, can be this rule of faith. Chap. 9 That private spirit cannot be this rule. Chap. 10. That the doctrine or teaching of the true Church of Christ, is the rule or means, whereby all men must learn the true faith. Chap. 11. That this true Church of Christ, of which we must learn the true faith, is always to continue, without interruption, until the world's end. Chap. 12. That this same Church must always be visible. Chap. 13. How we should discern or know, which company of men is this true visible Church, of which we must learn true faith. Chap. 14. That those Notes or marks which heretics assign: to wit, true doctrine of faith, and right use of Sacraments, be not sufficient. Chap. 15. That these four, una, Sancta, Catholica, Apostolica, One, Holy, Catholic, apostolic, be good marks, whereby men may discern, which is the true Church. Chap. 16. That these four marks, agree only to the Roman Church. That is to say, to that company of men, which agreeth in profession of faith, with the Church of Rome. §. 1. That the Roman Church only is One. §. 2. That the Roman Church only is Holy. §. 3. That the Roman Church is only Catholic. §. 4. That the Roman Church is only apostolic. Chap. 17. The conclusion of the whole discourse: viz. That the Roman Church is the only true Church of Christ, of which, all men must learn, the one, infallible, entire faith, which is necessary to salvation. And that the Protestants Congregations cannot be this true Church. THE PREFACE. BEing moved by some friends, to confer with one of indifferent good judgement, and of no ill disposition of nature; though very earnest in thaet religion which he did profess: I was desirous to do my best endeavours, to let him plainly see, that the Catholic Roman faith was the only right. A. W. Being requested by some friends to maintain the truth of Christian religion professed amongst us, against the antichristian cavils of this popish proctor; I thought it my best course, first to answer in general to the whole substance of his book; and then to examine every particular Chapter. In the former, I first consider his drift and scope: then how he proves that which he intends. His drift is to show, That the Catholic Roman faith is the only right: wherein he craftily begs that which is in question; That the Roman faith is the Catholic faith; & which himself propounds, as the second thing to be proved by him: That those only which profess the Roman faith, are the true Catholic Church. Neither can it be avouched by the authority of any ancient writer, or by any good reason, that it is lawful or fit to join the term Catholic (as Papists take it) to any particular Church whatsoever. There was great strife about the Catholic Church upon earth in Augustine's time, which the Donatists * August. ad Bonif. Epist. 50. ad Honor. Ep. 161. de Agone Christian. c. 29. would have confined to Africa: but the true Christians freed it from that bondage, and bounded it with no other limits than the compass of the whole world. Let the Papists show, if they can, that in this whole controversy, the Catholic Church was ever restrained or coupled to any one City, Diocese, Province, or Nation, as it is now by them to Rome. If they cannot, let them acknowledge, and renounce this their novelty. A. D. §. 3. For which purpose, I did choose to let pass disputes about particular points, and in general to show; First, that it is necessary to admit an infallible authority in the true Cathòlique Church: by reason whereof, every one is to learn of it only, which is the true faith of Christ. Secondly, that those only which profess the Románe faith, are the true Catholic Church. The which having proved, I did consequently conclude; that the faith and belief which the authority of the Roman Church doth commend unto us, ought, without doubt, to be holden for the true faith. A. W. Indeed the best, and only way to avow the doctrine of the Romish Church, is to lead men hoodwinked in ignorance of the particular points it holds, many whereof are so palpably false, that he that knows them, will easily be persuaded to abhor them. But let us see what you show in general. Thus you dispute: The general syllogism. The faith, which the authority of the true Catholic Church commends unto us, ought, without doubt, to be holden for the true faith. But the faith, which the authority of the Church of Rome commends unto us, is the faith which the authority of the true Catholic Church commends unto us. Therefore the faith, which the authority of the Church of Rome commends unto us, ought, without doubt, to be holden for the true faith. The conclusion of this syllogism is set down by you in plain words, there; The which having proved, I did consequently conclude, that the faith, etc. The proposition, or major is not expressed; no more is the assumption or minor; but instead of them you have delivered the proofs of them, thus to be concluded. First for the proposition; at those words: That it is necessary to admit an infallible, etc. Proof of the proposition. If it be necessary to admit an infallible authority in the true Catholic Church, by reason whereof every one is to learn of it only, which is the true faith of Christ: then the faith, which the authority of the true Catholic Church commends unto us, ought, without doubt, to be holden for the true faith. But it is necessary to admit such an authority in the true Catholic Church. Therefore the faith, which the authority of the true Catholic Church commends unto us, ought, without doubt, to be holden for the true faith. Only the assumption of this syllogism is propounded, the rest omitted. The proof of your principal assumption is at those words: That those only which profess the Roman, etc. And (as in the former syllogism) the assumption only is expressed, the rest understood. Thus: Proof of the Assumption. If those only which profess the Roman faith, are the true Catholic Church, than the faith which the authority of the Church of Rome commends unto us, is the faith which the authority of the true Catholic Church commends unto us. But those only which profess the Roman faith, are the true Catholic Church. Therefore the faith which the authority of the Church of Rome commends unto us, is the faith, which the authority of the true Catholic Church commends unto us. We see now what his drift is; how he proves that he intends: and by what reason he confirms his proof. It remains that we consider in general, to what part of his proof, or confirmation thereof, every Chapter in his Discourse appertaineth. In the 4. first Chapters he layeth certain grounds concerning faith: in the 13. following he disputeth the matter propounded. First he shows the necessity of faith, Chap. 1. than he delivereth three properties required to true faith. That it is one, Ch. 2. That it is infallible, Chap. 3. That it is entire, Chap. 4. In his dispute, the twelve former Chapters, from the beginning of the fifth to the end of the sixteenth, contain the antecedent, or first part of his reason, and the proofs thereof. The seventeenth addeth and enforceth the main conclusion. The assumption of the second syllogism: That it is necessary to admit, etc. is handled from the fourth Chapter to the tenth. The proposition of the first syllogism: That the faith which the authority of the true Catholic Church commendeth to us, ought, without doubt, to be holden for the true faith: is proved by another reason, from the ninth Chapter to the thirteenth. The assumption of the third syllogism: That those only which profess the Roman faith; are the true Catholic Church: is debated from the twelfth Chapter to the seventeenth. This is the general frame of the whole Treatise, as far as I am able to conceive of it. Now let us examine the truth thereof. Wherein that I may proceed the more orderly and plainly, I will first speak a word or 2. of some matters that seem fit to be understood, ere I answer particularly to the several propositions. What the diverse significations of this word faith are, and how many sorts of faith there be, I will inquire (as far as it is needful for this Treatise) in my answer to the first Chapter: only we are now to know, that by faith and belief, this Papist understands the matter or doctrine which is to be believed. This appears in the rest of this Preface, and namely at these words: Fourthly because these few plain points, etc., as also every where in his Treatise; though sometimes (as I will show in due place) he take it otherwise. The like I say of the word Church: which being diversly taken in Scripture, is here to be restrained to a certain company of men upon earth, as this Author himself shows in this Preface, at the place aforenamed. Now then to answer directly to his principal syllogism; I deny the whole antecedent thereof. Because it takes some things To the principal syllogism. for a known truth, which are either false, or, at least, full of doubt. As for example, that the true Catholic Church is a company of men upon earth: whereas who knows not, that the saints, that have been, are, and shallbe in all ages, are members of the true Catholic Church, which consists of them all jointly? That all the several congregations, which hold the true doctrine of the Gospel, are one and the same Church. A doctrine (in his meaning) without any warrant of Scripture, as it shall be showed hereafter. That there is authority in a certain company of men upon earth, to require, that whatsoever they deliver, be held for an undoubted truth, under pain of damnation to all that will not so believe them: whereas God useth not the authority of men, but their ministery, to the begetting of faith in them that shall be saved. In particular I deny the proposition; because all the Churches To the proposition. in the world may err, either in some one point not fundamental; or some in one, some in another. And therefore some things may be propounded by the true Church of Christ, which notwithstanding are not, upon any authority of theirs, to be held for true. To the proof of the proposition set down in the second syllogism I answer, by denying the assumption: That it is necessary To the proof of the proposition. to admit such authority in the Church. The reasons of my denial are: 1: That God hath given no such authority to any company of men, since the Apostles, or besides them; who had it severally, every one in his own person. 2. That there is no necessity of any such authority, for the salvation of the elect, or damnation of the reprobate. 3. That the Scriptures are left unto us for an absolute rule, whereby all things that are to be believed must be tried. I deny also the assumption of the first principal syllogism; To the Assumption, and the proof thereof. and to the proof of it, contained in the third syllogism, I say further, that they which profess the doctrine that the Church of Rome now teacheth in many points, are members of the Church of Antichrist, under the Pope the head thereof. But if, as you say, Those that profess the Roman faith, are the true Catholic Church, how ignorantly and absurdly do your Monks In fidei profess. anno 1585. art. 60. of Bourdeaux write, in their solemn profession of religion; where they say, that the holy, visible, catholic, and apostolic Church dispersed over the whole world, hath communion in faith & manners with the Church of Rome? If the Catholic Church have communion with the Church of Rome, sure the Catholic Church and the Church of Rome are not all one. A. D. §. 4. Upon which points, when he had heard my discourse, he desired me, for his better remembrance, to set down in writing, what I had said. The which I had first thought to have done briefly, and to have imparted it only to him: but by some other friends it was wished, that I should handle the matter more at large; they intending (as it seemed) that it might not only do good to him, but to others also, that should have need of it, as well as he. Of which sort of men standing in this need, as I could not (considering their miserable case) but take great pity: so I was easily moved, especially at my friend's request, to be willing to do my endeavour, which might be for their relief and succour: and to take any course which might turn to their help and profit. A. W. The title of your book professeth brevity; here you say, that you had thought to set down your discourse briefly, but have handled the matter more at large. Either your Title or your Preface is to blame. Your Title is justified afterward, where you say, that your course of writing is very brief and compendious. Papists talk of pity, who, without mercy or conscience would have murdered so many thousands by treason, & (as they thought) have sent them almost quick to hell, souls and bodies together? It is not any pity of us, but your slavery to the Pope, and proud conceit of (I know not what) merit, with hope of making your part strong for rebellion or massacre, that draw from you these goodly treatises. A. D. §. 5. Now of all other courses, which have been, and might be undertaken; that, which in my speech I did choose as most expedient for him with whom I did confer, seemed best also for me to prosecute in this my writing, for the benefit of him and others, and this for four reasons. A. W. I know not what he was, with whom (as you say) you did confer, but I am sure his judgement was (at the most) but indifferent good, if such a course as begs the question, would be any way liked of him. You undertake to show, That it is necessary to admit an infallible authority in the true Catholic Church: which you expound to be, A company of men upon earth. What Protestant is there of any knowledge, but understands, that by Catholic Church we mean ordinarily, not any company in this world, but the whole society of the faithful, from time to time? But these gay shows of Catholic Church, Universality, antiquity, unity, succession, and such like, are fit to deceive the ignorant; for which purpose your discourses are written, & with whom they prevail, by the just judgement of God, who sends them 2. Thes. 2. 9 10 strong delusions, that they may believe lies, because they have not embraced the love of the truth, that they might be saved. A. D. §. 6. First, because it is very brief, and compendious; and consequently such, as every one might have leisure, and should not be much weary to read it. A. W. You deal in your corrupt writings, as lewd men do in slanderous reports: who speak any thing, at adventure, though never so untrue, or unlikely. It is hard but some men will either believe, or make doubt of it, at the least. So all men read your writings, you care not. Though they, that are of knowledge, and judgement, discern your falsehood: yet it is twenty to one, but some ignorant fellow will light on them, that may be seduced. And this practise you follow the rather, because you are, for the most part, out of fear of being shamed by confutation; for that you are unknown, and know well enough, that our answers to you, are commonly, and many times must be so large, that one amongst many can hardly find leisure to read them. Whereas if the authors of your treatises were known amongst us, and our answers applied shortly, and plainly to the very point of the argument, that being disrobed of the idle ornaments you cloth it withal, and laid naked to the view of true reason, we should have as few of your discourses, as we have now of your replies, to our refutations of your treatises; which are so few, that, in many years, it is rare to have any second charge by you; unless it be in such a fight, as requires no more but a bravado, without coming to handy blows. A. D. §. 7. Secondly, because, it, standing only upon few, but most certain conclusions, and grounds; is free from many cavils of the captious, which more ample discourses are subject unto. A. W. To speak truly, and properly, there is but one conclusion in your whole Treatise, as I have showed out of this your Preface. Against which we also oppose one as brief, and more certain than yours. Your conclusion is, That the faith, and belief, which the authority of the Roman Church doth commend unto us, ought, without doubt, to be holden for the true faith. Ours, That the faith which the Scripture teacheth us, is the only true faith. If you speak of the several conclusions belonging to the proof of the general, there are (at the least) as many as there are Chapters. But if you mean the three grounds, which you signify before, and repeat afterwards, they are so far from being certain, that there is never a one of them true, as you understand them. A. D. §. 8. Thirdly, because, the matter handled in it, is not very high nor hard, but common, easy, and plain: and such, as may be understood of any, who, having but a reasonable wit, or understanding, will carefully read it (as the importance of the matter requireth) with judgement, deliberation, and (which is chief) with prayer to God, and a resolute good will to follow that, which he shall find to be right. A. W. The matter is as hard, by your handling of it, as sophistry can well make it; as high, as the deep foundation of religion. Yet I deny not, but it may be understood by a man of such parts, and pains, as you require: and add farther, that the like may be avowed of the true grounds of religion, as they are contained in the Scripture: to the reading, and meditation whereof the Lord himself hath promised such a blessing, as your treatises, Psal. 1. 1. 2. joan. 5. 39 if they were never so true, could not look for. Is not the fountain better than the channel? A. D. §. 9 Fourthly, because, these few plain points, which are here set down, include all other: and whosoever shall, by the help of God's grace, and the force of these, or other reasons, yield assent to the points proved in this discourse: must by consequence, without further disputing or difficulty, yield to all particular points, which the aforesaid Church commendeth for points of faith, and will be moved to settle himself in the steadfast belief of all. For if he once admit, that there is a Church, or company of men, on earth, infallibly taught by the holy Ghost, what is the true faith in all points: and that this Church is, by God's appointment, to teach all men in all matters of faith, which is the infallible truth: and further, that this Church, which is thus taught, and must teach us, is no other but that visible company, which professeth the Roman faith: then he shall not need to strain his wits in studying, or to waste words in wrangling, about particular points of controversies, or to use any such troublesome and uncertain means to find out the truth: but may easily, and most certainly be instructed in all, by only inquiring and finding out (which all sorts of men may easily do) what is generally held by the Church, for truth, in all particular points, whereof they doubt. A. W. If these few points be so convenient, because in them all other are included; why should not our doctrine of the Scripture be as convenient, by the same reason? Let us compare our assertions together. The first of yours is, That a man must admit, that there is a company of men on earth, infallibly taught by the holy Ghost, what is the true faith, in all points. The first of ours, That a man must believe, that there is a written word of God, wherein the holy Ghost hath certainly taught, whatsoever is needful to be known to salvation. Your second is: That this company of men is, by God's appointment to teach all men, in all matters of faith, which is the infallible truth. Our second: That this written word of God is appointed by him to teach all men in all matters of faith, what is true, what false. Your third: That this company of men is no other, but the visible company, which professeth the Roman faith. Our third: That this written word is no other, but the books of the old and new Testament. The proof of your positions, and the exceptions, you take against ours, shallbe handled (if it please God) in their due places; in the mean time, if any man be troubled with those ordinary doubts, which you have buzzed into the common people's ears, concerning the uncertainty and hardness of the Scriptures, let me entreat him to stay himself a while upon these considerations. First that the books of the old and new Testament acknowledged by us, are also confessed by you to be the very word of God; in the penning whereof * Bellar. de Concil. lib. 2. cap. 12. §. Dicuntur. the penners were so directed by the holy Ghost, that they could not err. Therefore whatsoever the means be, whereby we come to assurance, that these books are the word of God, let it suffice all men, that both we, and you agree, they are so. But I pray tell me: Are the determinations of the Church any more certain? What ground have I, but the word of some men, that the Church hath so determined? It is not a matter so agreed upon betwixt us, as the books of Scripture are. Out of question the odds is on our side. It is doubtful, whether you Romanistes are the Church or no: it is out of doubt, these books are the infallible word of God. But you will say, the Scriptures are hard to be understood; as well because they are written in Hebrew, and Greek, as also for the kind of writing. Are not all the Decrees of your Counsels, and determinations of your Pope's Consistory, written either in Greek, or Latin, or in the Italian language; in none of which one man among ten thousand hath any skill? And is there not as great reason to think, the Scriptures are rightly translated, as your Decrees, Decretals, and Determinations? Especially when as we (commonly) allege the interpretations of the ancient Fathers, and learned Papists for the avowing of our translations. But the Scriptures are hard to be understood, though a man be skilful in the tongues. And are the Decrees of your Counsels so easy, that every man may understand them, who knows the language they are written in? Doth not a Bellar. tom. 3 de Sacram. passim: & ubique. Bellarmine condemn, and confute our writers, Calvin, Chemnitius, and other, for not understanding the Decrees of your Council of Trent written in Latin; which language they were as skilful in, as himself? If they be so easy, how chance b Dominic. Sotus in Apol. contra Catarrh. cap. 2. Bishop Catharin and friar Soto, that were both present at the Council, and heard the debating of matters, can not agree about the doctrine of it, concerning assurance of salvation? which (as c Vbi supra. Soto affirms) was the longest and most troublesome disputation of all in the Council: and therefore should have been best understood, and plainliest delivered. Yet is it so propounded by the holy fathers, the authors of it, that d Vbi supra. Catharin saith boldly, e Ambros. Catharin. tract. 1. Verba decreti aliter plerosque accepturos, quam fuerat mens sancte Synodi. he foresaw, that most men would understand the words of the Decree otherwise then the holy Synod meant them. Was there not great contention within these very few years, betwixt f Christophor. de Cap sont, archiepisc. Caesariens● de necessat. correct. theology scholast. Archbishop Christophor. de Capite fontium and many other Divines, about the means of transsubstantiating the bread, though in his judgement the Council of Trent makes manifestly for him? I forbear to say, that some points seem to have been craftily set down of purpose, like the oracles of Apollo, that which way soever they be taken, the Church may not seem to have erred. Neither will I add, that g Bellar. de Concil. lib. 2. c. 12. §. Quartum. diverse matters are delivered by Counsels, not as points of faith, but as probable conjectures: which yet may be, and are taken by some of your own h Clement. Vnic. de summa Trinit. & fide catholica. learned writers, as if they were resolutely determined for certain truth. These things considered, I see no sufficient reason, why it should not be as fit, and safe to learn of the Scripture, i Canus loc. come. lib. 5. q. 4. cap. 5. which is the infallible truth, as of any company of men whatsoever. But you labour to commend to us this resting on the authority of the Romish Church by some especial commodities, that shall ensue thereupon. The first whereof is ease: the 2. certainty of knowledge. He shall not need (say you) to strain his wits in studying etc. If ease were not too much delighted in by men of your profession, there would not be such swarms of idle Monks, Friars, Nuns, non-resident Bishops and Priests amongst you. But true Christians understand, that it was not God's purpose to provide so much for their ease, by giving them leave to believe at adventure, hand over head, whatsoever it should please men to enjoin them; but that it is his good pleasure, that k Psal. 1. 2. ● 119. per tot. all men should carefully and painfully exercise themselves, night and day, in reading and meditating of the Scriptures. He is too nice and dainty a professor of religion, that is loath to strain his wits to the uttermost, in the study of any thing revealed by God in Scripture. What shall I say of him, that calls conference and disputation about, even the greatest points of faith and justification, wasting of words in wrangling: l ovid. Metamor. lib. 13. Nec se magnanimo maledicere sentit Achilli? It is strange you should not have the wit to perceive, that, by this censure, you condemn Lombard, Thomas, and all your school men: yea the Pope, and general counsels, m Bellar de pontiff. Rom. lib. 4. cap. 7. ad object 2. who are bound to use such means, for the finding out of the truth: and (as n Sotus. Apol. contra. Catarrh. cap. 2. Sotus saith) did use them in a long and troublesome disputation, yet forsooth neither the one, nor the other, at o Cap. 16. sect 1. post. med. least both together cannot err. No man then ought to refuse study, or disputation of controversies in divinity, because they are troublesome. Therefore, to mend the matter, you add that they are also uncertain: what can be certain, but only revelation, if the true use of reason can breed nothing but uncertainty? How idly and vainly did your schoolmen employ themselves: if all their study and labour must end in uncertainty? What use is there of Counsels for finding out of the truth, since the help to be had of them, is debating of matters by reasoning? Do we not find in daily experience, that as flint and steel stricken together bring forth fire: so truth is, as it were, beaten out by disputation? It is reported you make great shows of desiring a disputation. I marvel to what end: If, when all comes to all, your auditors shall still remain uncertain what is true. Shall I go yet farther? You tell us the Church cannot err; we believe you not: you allege some places of Scripture to prove it to us: we say they prove no such matter: what course will you take? It is in vain to dispute of it: that is, (as you say) to waste words in wrangling about it. p See 12. Art. part. 1. art. 5. For that is but an uncertain means to findout the truth. Have you not brought matters to a good pass, think you, when you profess that there is no means to discern certainly whether the Church can err or no, but only to take her own word for it? Yea no means left to know that she is the Church. For if you will again fly to the Scriptures; you run into the former difficulties, and end as before in uncertainty. Who would have to do with such unreasonable men? But that you may not seem to leave us in uncertainty; you tell us, that we may most certainly be instructed in all particular points of controversies, by only inquiring and finding out what is holden generally by the Church for truth, etc. You send us to the faith of the Church, and namely of the Church of Rome. Which (say we) is only so far forth to be yielded unto, as it is agreeable to the Scriptures. Neither do we say so only, but a Ambros. in Lucam. lib. 6. cap. 9 Ambrose, long before our time, hath said the like. We are commanded (saith Ambrose) to inquire after the faith of the Church, and that b In primis quaerenda. especially: in which Church if Christ be a dweller, c Haud dubiè legenda. it is doubtless to be made choice of. But if the people be unfaithful, if an heretical teacher deform the dwelling; the communion of heretics is to be avoided, the congregation must be shunned. And a little after: If there be any Church that refuseth the faith, and d Possideat. holds not the foundation of the Apostles preaching, it is to be left, lest it taint us with some spot of e Perfidiae. unbelief, or unfaithfulness. Neither will it serve the turn; that you refer us to that which is generally holden by the Church: for both the general faith depends upon the particular belief of the Church, or Pope of Rome; and is not to be taken for truth, because it is generally received, but because it agrees with the Roman faith; as we learned before of your f Profess fidei art. 60. Monks of Bourdeaux, who make the Catholic Church to have communion with the Church of Rome, as the fountain of truth; and of greater authority, in their judgement, than the Catholic Church. But let us admit that you desire, of believing whatsoever is generally holden by the Church: I am half afraid, this conceit, be it never so strong, will not procure the quietness you promise us. The causes of my fear are these two. First, I may doubt of such a point, as is not yet determined by the Church; for example, I make question of the Pope's authority above Counsels, or theirs above him. How shall I most certainly be instructed in the truth of this question? Inquire (say you) and find what is generally holden by the Church. What if the Doctors of your Church cannot agree about this point? That they cannot, it appears by your own doubting; g Chap. 16. Sect. 1. where you make it questionable, whether the Pope alone or the Pope with a general Council be free from error. And h Bellar. de Concil. author. lib. 2. c. 13. 14. 15 16. 17. Bellarmine is fain to take a great deal of pains, in answering the arguments of divers Papists, i Nicol. Cusan. Concor. cathol. li 2. cap. 4. 12. Panorm. in c. significasti. extra. de electio. some of them equal to himself for learning, judgement, and authority, who make the Pope subject to general Counsels. But of this in due place. Say it were generally agreed on: Could I thereby be most certainly instructed what is truth in this point? May not all save the Pope be deceived? and perhaps he to; without the advice and assent of a general Council: at least, if he have not in his consistory, upon good deliberation, Abulens. in Math. 18. q. 108 & alij apud Bellar. ubi supra. Christop. de Capite fontium de necessary. correct theol. schol. fol. 53. b. resolved of the matter? What shall it avail me then to know, that (generally) it is thought the Pope is above any Council? Supposing this point were generally held to be true, though indeed, as I said before, it is denied both by private men & by 2. counsels; that of k Concil. Basil. sess 2. & Basil, & the other of l Concil. Constant. sess. 4. Constance which deposed two Popes, john the three and twentieth and Benedict the thirteenth. And m Bellar. de Concil. author. l. 2. ca 13. §. Deinde. Bellarmine saith, that to this day it remains in question, even among the Catholics. Well, put case all men thought, as Bellarmine, and all such Popish parasites would have it, what were I the nearer, as long as there can be no certainty of truth, (in your opinion) where nothing is judicially determined by a Pope, & Council? The second reason of my doubt is, that I know not how to find out, either easily, as you say every man may, or certainly, though with some pains, what is generally held by the Church for truth, in all particular points, whereof I doubt. Shall I look into the confessions of several Churches? Where are they to be found? Shall I travail into every particular country, to learn what they hold of this, or that point? What assurance can I get hereby, but from some special men? And it is a venture, but they will not all agree in every point. What remains? Forsooth that which is all in all; I must believe, Watson, or Clerk, or Blackwel the archpriest, or if all these will not content me, Gerrard, Tesmond, Hall, or, without all doubting, Garnet the superior of the Jesuits, who questionless is as void of error, as the Pope himself. Have I not, trow you, a sound foundation, to build my faith upon, when I have the word of these equivocating traitors, Priests and jesuits? And yet this is the most I can have in this case, if I be a man unlearned, especially unable to read. Is it possible, any man should be so senseless as to hazard his everlasting salvation, upon such an uncertainty, to believe he knows not what, because a Priest, or a jesuit tells him, that the Church generally doth so believe? But what if it fall out, as it may do, that the Priests persuade him the Church holds one thing; and the Jesuits affirm it maintains the contrary; how shall a poor soul either settle his judgement, or quiet his conscience? Quid sequar, aut quem? Were it not a director, and certainer course, to hold nothing for truth in religion, but that which is proved to us by plain testimonies of Scripture, or certain consequence of reason, drawn from principles evidently expressed, or apparently contained in the known word of God? The difficulties of translation and interpretation shall be handled in their places; n See 12. Art. part. 1. Art. 3. & 5. which also, as I showed ere while, accompany all your writings of private men, Popes or Counsels. Now than if their be many particular points of controversies, whereof I may doubt, which are not resolved of by any judgement of the Church, nor agreed upon by the learned of your own side; if I cannot certainly know what is generally held for truth, by the Church, but as I give credit to the report of a Priest, or jesuit, whom I know to be partial in the matter, because he is one of the Pope's vassals; subject to err, because he is a private man; likely enough to lie because he maintains equivocation; what madness were it for me to forbear searching and studying of the Scriptures, where I am sure the truth of God is to be found, and to lose my time, and labour in seeking what the Church generally holds, and that of those men who perhaps understand not what is held, but as they have been informed by others, who may themselves have mistaken the true meaning of the Church in that it holds? A. D. §. 10. Of which points also, (If they be desirous) they may have sufficient authority and reason yielded, by the learned of the same Church; though they should not so desire reason to be yielded, that without reason be given, they would not believe at all, or as grounding their faith upon the reason given: sith Christian belief ought only to be grounded, upon the authority of God, speaking by the mouth of the Church, who ought to be believed in all matters, without giving any reason. A. W. There is no sufficient authority for a man to ground his faith upon, but the truth of God revealed. a Hieron. ad Math. cap. 23. Whatsoever is taught without that authority, is as easily contemned as alleged. Therefore b justin. contra Trypho. p. 207. justine wills him, that would be settled in the truth, to fly to the Scriptures. And c Tertullian de carne Christi. cap. 7. Tertullian rejects that which is brought, if it be not in the Scriptures. d Origen in Cantic. hom. 3. Origen saith, Christ is nowhere to be sought, but in the mountains of the law and the Prophets. Yea e Hieron. in Mich. lib. 1. c. 1. Jerome makes the Scriptures the bounds of the church beyond which she may not go. Are you able to show this authority in all particular points of Controversy, whereof a man may doubt? Are you not fain in many particulars, to deny the sufficiency of the Scriptures, and to run a-madding after traditions? What talk you then of showing sufficient authority? The bestauthority you can allege for many matters, is the Pope's will, who cannot err, as you ridiculously imagine. And this authority is all the reason you have in divers points; except such stuff as f Durandus in Ration. Divinor. officior. passim. Durand brings in his Rationale divinorum officiorum; whereof many of your own men are ashamed. I had thought your friars vow of obedience to their superiors, or, at least, the g Constitut. jesuit. par. 3. cap. 1. Maffae. lib. 3. cap. 7. jesuit. Catech. lib. 2, cap. 17. jesuits special vow of blind fold obedience, head been the height of all perfection in this life: but I perceive now, that there is a greater opinion of holiness in these vows, than there is cause why. For you tie the obedience of every Christian in such sort to the authority of the Church, and indeed, of his particular pastor, yea of every Priest, or jesuit, that comes licensed by Blackwell, or some new Garnet, that be must believe, without inquiring any reason, whatsoever such a fellow shall deliver to him for truth. This is the obedience, one of your Cardinals speaks of. Obedience without reason (saith h Nicol. Cusanus. excitat. lib. 6. ubi ecclesia. Cusan) is full and perfect obedience, namely when a man yields obedience, without requiring any reason; as i jumentum. a beast (horse or other) obeys his master. So doth your Popish Clergy use the people, as men do their Asses; make them bear, and do what they list, yea even to the attempting of most horrible and incredible treasons against their Sovereign and country. I will not now dispute what agreement there is betwixt faith and reason; nor whether of them is the former; nor, in what case, a man may require reason; only that no man may conceive amiss of our doctrine, concerning our demanding of proof for that we are enjoined to believe; he is to understand, that we ask no farther proof, but to be persuaded that the point delivered to us, is warranted by Scripture. Let it be never so much in (seeming) contrary to reason, if it be agreeable to Scripture, we hold ourselves bound in conscience to take it for truth, though we be no way able to answer such reasons, as we know are brought against it. Neither yet do we rest satisfied, as soon as some place of Scripture is alleged in a doubtful matter; but, here indeed we hearken after reason. Yet not to prove that true, which we find affirmed in Scripture; but to make us perceive, that such, and such is the meaning of the Scripture. Whatsoever the Scripture saith, we acknowledge to be absolutely true, so far as it is delivered for true by the holy Ghost. But what the sense of the Scripture is, we think it must be proved by the true use of reason, according to the certain principles of divinity, and such helps, as observation of circumstances, understanding of the tongues, conference of like places, & logical discourse, with such other helps, reasonably afford us. But why should you find fault with demanding reason, or not be most willing & ready to join it to your authority, since (as k Nicol. Cusan. Excitat. lib. 3. Serm. perfectus omnis eris. Cusan saith) faith is not abased by reason, but exalted: even as water in a vessel supports and lifts up oil. As for your proof, that therefore we may not demand a reason, nor so much as inquire, whether the points that are taught us, be suitable to the Scripture or no, because Christian belief must only be grounded upon the authority of God speaking by the mouth of the Church: we say that you avouch that which is not true. For Christian faith must be grounded upon the authority of God, speaking by the pens of his Apostles, and Prophets in the Scripture; not upon the authority of any company of men living, from time to time, in the world. The Church you dream of, will, I doubt not, in another part of my answer be showed to be nothing, but a fancy, and a gay word to deceive the simple; when as by it you mean no more, but your clergy, or perhaps your Bb. only assembled in a Council, or the Pope himself alone, who can with no more reason be called the Church, than l See 12. Art. part. 1. art. 5. pag. 63. the head may be termed the body, or the whole man, if I should grant you, that he is the head, which is both m Reynald. confer. with Hart. Clamierus de Oecumen. Pontif. lib. 2. arg. 1. false and absurd. The Lord useth not the authority of men, to enjoin what they list for a matter of faith, but their ministry, to beget faith (by declaring what he hath revealed in the Scripture) through evidence of truth, and power of exhortation, testified and made effectual by the mighty grace of the holy Ghost in the hearts of them that shall be saved. A. D. §. 11 The which brief and compendious resolution of faith, whosoever will (as every one may securely, and (as in the discourse following shall be declared) must necessarily embrace: beside the ease, he shall also reap this commodity, that, cutting off all occasions of needless and fruitless doubts, questions and disputes, concerning matters of faith: wherein unsettled minds spend their time and spirit, he shall have good leisure, and better liking, then ordinarily such unquiet minds can have, to employ his endeavours more fruitfully otherways; to wit, in building upon the firm foundation of steadfast faith, the gold and precious stones, of God's love, and other virtues, in practice whereof consisteth that good life, which maketh a man become the living temple of almighty God: the which temple, God's spirit will not only visit, with holy inspirations and blessings oftentimes, in this life, but he will also inhabit and dwell continually in it, both by grace, here, and by glory, in the other most happy, and everlasting life. A. W. The security, that ariseth from resting upon the authority of the Church, is freeness, not from danger, but from care. This latter, I confess, will easily be wrought by this persuasion in the heart of a careless worldling, or a man superstitiously ignorant, if he can be senselessly obstinate enough, in keeping his eyes and ears from seeing and hearing the truth of God, in the Scripture: for to such men n 2. Thess. 2. 9 10. God sends strong delusions to believe lies, that they may be damned which have not received the love of the truth, that they might be saved. But alas! what shall this ease advantage them, but only that they may o Prou. 7. 22. go laughing to destruction, as a fool doth to the stocks and whip? What necessity can there then be, of embracing such a dangerous resolution? Besides the ease, you tell us now of another commodity, that may be reaped by embracing that compendious resolution of faith. Which before I examine, let me here again put you in mind, that you condemn the greatest part of all your Schoolman's writings, as needless and fruitless doubts, questions and disputes; and call them unsettled minds, that spend their time, and spirits in such matters. And surely such were many of the points they handled, having nothing in them but vanity and vexation of spirit: as may appear (to name one for all) by their articles and questions upon * In 4. senten. dist. 8. Lombard and a In 3. Thom. q. 73. etc. Vide Christop. de cap fontium ubi supra. Thomas, about the Mass. But is any man to be found so shameless, as that he dare call it a needless and fruitless labour, b joan. 5. 39 to search the Scripture, for the finding out of the truth, in such matters as are necessarily to be believed for the attaining to salvation? Doth the neglect of this duty bring a man good leisure and liking, to build himself up in the love of God? What love of God can there be, where there is no delight in his word? c Psal. 1. 2. & 119. 103. 127. David makes it his meditation day and night: and prefers the sweetness he finds in it, and the account he makes of it, before honey and the honey comb, fine gold and all manner of riches. But what should I heap up unnecessary testimonies, in a case not doubtful? Is it possible they should be Christians, that make so small reckoning of the testament of jesus Christ? Can he be said truly to love his father, that never cares to see what his father's love to him is; but contents himself with so much knowledge of it, as men list to impart to him; yea that knows not whether he had such a father or no, but only, as other men have told him? We say not, that every man is bound upon hazard of his salvation, to know every point of difference betwixt you and us, or to understand the sense of every place of Scripture; but that all true Christians must labour for as much knowledge, as, by diligent hearing, reading and meditating of the Scirptures, they can attain to. Neither shall they, by this study and endeavour, either abate their love to God, or deprive themselves of the sense of his love to them. Nay rather both the one and the other shallbe increased when a man shall feel the work of God's spirit in his heart, kindling in him a desire to understand the mystery of his redemption by jesus Christ, to comprehend the infiniteness of the love of God the Father, and enlightening him to conceive that, which, by his own skill, he never were able to discern. But they that follow your resolution, never come rightly to understant what the love of God to them is: but if they will consider things advisedly, must needs think God hath dealt hardly with them, as with servants, not with sons; whom he shuts out from the knowledge of his will, and view of his wisdom & majesty, manifested in the writings of the old and new Testament; affording them no more of that heavenly Manna, but such chip and pare, as their idle and proud prelate's will vouchsafe to cast them. He, that finds the love of God toward him, in opening to him the true sense of the Scripture, in matters concerning his everlasting salvation, doth bear more true love to God for it, than any Papist can do, that glorieth in his blind obedience to men, & maketh the end of his loving God the deserving of everlasting life, by his ignorance of the Scriptures. As for true holiness of life, whence doth it arise, but from the feeling of God's love to us; whereby the spirit of God which dwells in us, inflames our hearts with the affections of kind children to so loving a father? Can you imagine, that he, who hath at most, but a kind of persuasion, of I know not what holy inspirations & blessings of God's spirit, upon some Priests or jesuits word, can love God as truly, and fervently, as he, that knows by the truth of God in the Scripture, d Rom. 8. 9 Gal 4. 6. that the spirit of God dwells in all God's children, e Rom. 8. 16. one of whom the same spirit assures him he is? Your Papist must live holily, that he may become the temple of God; a true Christian knows he cannot live holily, but by the holy Ghosts dwelling in him, and making him the temple of God. And can it be a question, whether of these two loveth God more deatly? But I have been too long in your Preface. Now to the Treatise itself. A. D. A TREATISE OF FAITH, CHAP. I. That true faith is absolutely necessary to salvation. A. W. TRue faith, whether we take it for an assent to the truth of that which God hath revealed, or for believing in God, is absolutely necessary only for those which are come to years of discretion, not for them that die in their infancy. Which I deliver, not by way of confutation, but of explication, because I am persuaded you and I agree in this point. A. D. §. 1. Whosoever hath a true desire to please God, and an earnest care to save his own soul, (the which should be the chiefest desire, and care of every Christian man) must first resolve, and settle himself in a sound belief of matters of faith: holding it for a most assured ground, That there is a faith, which, whosoever wanteth, cannot possibly please God (nor consequently be saved, sith none are saved that do not please God.) A. W. Faith being so diversly taken, both in Scripture and other writings, it had been fit for him, that professeth plainness, either to have set down the several significations of the word, or to have showed in what sense, he himself useth it, in this treatise. f Bellar. de justif. lib. 1. cap. 4. §. jam verò. Bellarmine gives it four significations. g Saunder. de justif. lib. 2. cap. 2. pag. 174. Sanders, six. h Andr. Vega qq. 15. q. 1. Vega nine. Yea this author himself (as it shall appear) taketh it not always in one and the same sense, but diversly, as it best fitteth his present purpose: especially in one of these two significations, either for the habit, or quality of faith, whereby we are enabled to believe; or for the object of the same faith, that is, for the things that are to be believed. Example we have of both in this first Chapter. Matters of faith, are such points as we are bound to believe. That faith, which, whosoever wanteth, cannot please God, is the quality of faith in the soul. And these divers uses of the word, are within the compass of three lines. To which I may add a third sense out of this same chapter: where by faith, actual believing is understood; as in the places of Scripture alleged. For i. is not the having, but the using of faith, that justifieth. So then where he saith, that i Chap. 3. è Basilio. cap. 15. p. 85. true faith is absolutely necessary to salvation, his meaning is, that no man can be saved, unless he do assent to the truth of those matters which God hath enjoined all men to believe: or, that there are certain points to be believed, without assent to the truth whereof, no man can be saved. But what need was there of this discourse, since both parties that were to confer, agreed about this point without any doubting? Or if there were any doubt, it was on the Papists side, rather than on ours, because k Bellar. de Eccles. milit. lib. 3 cap. 10. ad object 1. they require not true faith to make a man a member of the Church, but only the outward profession of belief. Yea l Melchior Canus. loc. come. lib. 6. cap. 8. pag. 418. the Pope may be head of the Church, though he believe not with his heart. And therefore it may not seem strange to us, that a jesuited Priest in Wisbich castle should affirm, m Declar. mot. inter jesuit. & sacerdot. pag. 29. That * Homo non Christianin. one that was no Christian, might be Pope of Rome. But such a glorious title of the necessity of faith, maketh a goodly show to the ignorant; yet let no man deceive himself herewithal. For this faith, which the Papists in words so magnify, is not that belief in jesus Christ, whereby a Christian man, resting on him for pardon of his sin, is justified: but only an agreeing to the truth of Scripture. So that a man may be full of this their, faith, and n Bellar de Sacr. Bap. lib. 1 cap. 14. §. Quod antem. yet be everlastingly damned. A. D. §. 2. This ground is set down by S. Paul himself, who saith, Sine fide impossibile est placere Deo: without faith it is unpossible to Heb. 11. Ser. 38. de Tempore. please God. The same is confirmed by S. Augustine who saith, Constat, neminem ad veram posse pervenire beatitudinem, nisi Deo placeat: & Deo neminem placere posse, nisi per sidem. Fides namue est bonorum omnium fundamentum. Fides est humanae salutis initium. Sine hac, nemo ad filiorum Dei consortium pervenire potest; quia sine ipfa, nec in hoc seculo, quis quam iustificationis consequitur gratiam, nec in futuro, vitam posside bit aeternam. It is certain, that none can come to true hap pinnace, unless he please God: and that none can please God, but by faith. For faith is the foundation of all good things. Faith is the beginning of man's salvation. Without this, none can come to the fellowship of the children of God: because without this, neither doth any, in this world, obtain the grace of justification, neither shall ●e, in the next, possess eternal life. Thus saith S. Austen. A. W. Well might this whole chapter have been spared; especially since your proof is no more direct for your purpose. For o Heb. 11. 6. Saint Paul, in that place, speaketh of p Defence of Refor. Catho. pag. 202. a true justifying faith, which presupposeth a belief of all things, known to be revealed by God, and requireth, that a man should not only acknowledge God to be a rewarder of them, that come unto him, that is, q joan. 6. 35. believe in him, but also, that he should rest upon him, as upon such a one: without which, questionless no man can please God, though he assent never so steadfastly to the truth of those, and such like points. But if you will needs expound the Apostle of assent only, I must put you in mind, that by this place you can prove necessity of faith no farther, then for the believing of those two points he specifieth, That God is, and That he is a rewarder of them, that come unto him. Indeed whosoever doubts of these particulars thus declared in Scripture, can neither be saved, nor please God: but it doth not follow hereupon, that therefore there is a necessity of faith, to the believing of other matters, many whereof have no dependence upon either of these. A. D. §. 3. And the same might be confirmed out of other * Rom. 2. Gal. 3. Eph. 2. Scriptures and * Conc. Milev. Can. 4. Concil. Trid. sess. 6. cap. 7. 8. Iren. l. 5. cap. 29. Chrysost. hom. 32. in joan. & serm. de Fide & Char. Cyril. Alex. in joan. lib. 4. Fathers, but that the matter is clear enough. A. W. The first of these places r Rom. 3. 22. Rom. 2. is (I take it) misquoted by the Printer, 2. for 3. In the second there is not one word of faith: the Apostle there labouring to convince both Gentiles and jews of sin against God, by the breach of the law of nature, & Moses. s Gal. 2. 16. Ephes. 2. 8. The other two are to be understood of true justifying faith, which must needs be more than assenting to the truth of that which God speaketh; as the very phrase of believing in jesus Christ proveth: which cannot with any likelihood of reason, be taken for giving credit to those things which are spoken by, or of our Saviour Christ. It is one thing to believe that God is, Credere Deum, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: another thing to believe in God, Credere in Deum, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: though the latter always imply the former, and the former sometimes the latter. t Iren. lib. 5. cap. 29. Irenaeus hath not a syllable of the necessity of faith, in the place which you quote: and u Lib. 4. cap. 10. 14. where he speaks of it, he only shows, it was necessary that God should reveal his truth by his Word, which was his Son; because, by the light of natural reason, all things necessary to salvation could not be found out. This knowledge Irenaeus tieth to the Scriptures. Had it not been better for you to have spared these needless allegations, in a matter that was out of question? A. D. §. 4. Only this I will add, that when the Scriptures do require faith, as a thing absolutely necessary to salvation; the common tradition of Counsels and Fathers do interpret, not only that there is a positive precept of faith, (for if it were but a positive precept, ignorance might excuse in some case) but that at least some kind of faith is necessaria necessitate medij, that is to say, is ordained as a necessary means, without which, no man can attain salvation in any case: and that in this matter, si quis ignorat, ignorabitur, if any man by ignorance do not know, he shall not be known, as S. Paul speaketh. 1. Cor. 14. A. W. This interpretation of the Scriptures meaning, in requiring faith as a thing absolutely necessary to salvation, is altogether unnecessary. For who knows not, that there can be no salvation without that which is absolutely necessary thereunto? Therefore it was more then enough to name the common tradition of Counsels and Fathers. But such gay terms make a goodly show in the eyes of the simple. But I pray tell me, what have you got by this learned interpretation? Is there any Christian man so ignorant, as to deny, that some kind of faith is ordained as a necessary means, without which men cannot attain to salvation in any case? Sure, this can neither hurt us, who acknowledge faith to be necessary, and (if you speak of justifying faith) altogether sufficient to justification: nor help you, who allow no faith, but that which depends upon the authority of the Church. But the Counsels and Fathers say, that kind of faith is necessary. What of that? Do they therefore hold it necessary to salvation for a man to believe whatsoever the Church shall teach, though without the warrant of Scripture? Can a man in no case attain to salvation, without this faith? May not the very reading of Scripture, without any ministry of man, be a means, by the work of God's spirit in his heart, to breed true faith to justification and salvation? The necessity of faith is double. First concerning faith, as you take it, for an assent; it is not possible for any man to be saved, that doth not certainly believe, that x Act. 4, 12. there is no name under heaven, by which he may be saved, but the name of jesus; and that in him there is salvation: yet may a man attain to salvation, that is not resolved of many points, which are determined by the Church, that is, by any company of men whatsoever. Secondly, faith is necessary to salvation, because no man can be saved that doth not believe in jesus Christ: that is, that doth not wholly renounce himself, and rest upon jesus Christ to be justified by his obedience and sacrifice. But the Lord hath not so tied his own hands, that he cannot work both these in the heart of whom he will, without some man to tell him by word of mouth, that he must thus believe. y 1. Cor. 14. 38. The proof you bring out of the Apostle, is utterly false, both for the translation and application. z 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The word used by the Apostle, is nowhere to be found either in the passive or middle voice, as it must needs be, if it should signify shall not be known; but is merely active, the first present tense of the Imperative mood, or (as Ramus calls it) the first future infect: and is as much in English, as let him be ignorant: so do the learned of your own side translate it, a Ignoret. Vatablus. Vatablus, b Ignarus esto Pagnin. Pagninus, c Ignorabitur: pro ignoret. Caietan. Caietan, d Alions. Salm. comment. in evang. proseg: 10 quinquag. 2. can. 17. Salmero; so do they expound it: as if he should say (quoth e Vatablus. ad 1. Cor. 14. Vatablus) If any man will not know these things, and will be ignorant, let him be ignorant, at his own peril. I will not strive (saith Cardinal f Caietan. ibid. Caietan, with them that know not these to be the Lords commandments: but if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant. The same sense give g Chrysost. ad 1. Cor. hom. 37. Chrysostom, h Theoph. ibid. Theophylact and i Oecumen ibi. Oecumenius. As if the Apostle by a kind of ironical concession should (as it were) leave every man to himself, to think and do in those matters as should please him. And therefore Chrysostome expounds it by that, k 1. Cor. 11. 16 If any man list to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor the Churches of God. As if he should say, let him that will, refuse to be ruled by me, in these cases: it is enough for us, that the Churches of God and we Apostles have no such custom. It is further to be observed, that the Apostle speaks not of such points, as by their being unknown, might endanger a man's salvation, but of matters of less moment, concerning the orderly and decent carriage of things in the public congregation. This l Chrys. ubi sup. Chrysostome notes, saying that the Apostle doth not use thus kind of reproof every where, but m Quoties non magna peccata sunt. when the faults are not great. But it is an exceeding great fault for a man not to acknowledge the truth of those points, without belief whereof he cannot be saved. Therefore in Chrysostome his judgement, the Apostle speaks not in that place of the want of such a faith, as is so necessary a means to salvation, as that without it, a man cannot attain thereunto. A. D. CHAP. II. That this faith necessary to salvation, is but one. A. W. If the plainness, pretended in the title of this book, had been truly intended, and performed, we should not have had the contents of this chapter so obscurely delivered. This faith necessary to salvation is but one. What should a man make of these words? An ordinary Reader would think, you meant, that there is but one kind of faith necessary to salvation; how easy had it been for you to have said so plainly, to the capacity of the simplest? But it is a humour in men (commonly) to wonder at the depth of that, they understand not; and these great scholars may not abase themselves, to speak like us of the meaner sort: and yet n Aristot. Eth. lib. 1. cap. 2. a wise Philosopher said, That a man should think as the wise do, but speak as the people do. But we must remember, that in popery there is most devotion, where there is least understanding. Well, let us take the words as they are; once his meaning is, as himself afterwards expresseth it, that o Bellar. de Roman. Pont. lib. 1. ca 9 §. 8. the belief of one man differeth not from the belief of another: and that p Bellar. de justif. lib. 1. ca 5. §. Sed ista. every faithful man believeth every point, for one and the same reason. A. D. §. 1. This faith (which I have showed to be absolutely necessary to salvation) is but One only. This is plainly proved out of Saint Paul, who saith, unus Dominus, una fides, unum baptisma, signifying, that, like as there is but one Lord and one Baptism: so there is but One faith. A. W. Faith (as I showed before) is taken sometimes for the habit, virtue, gift, grace, quality, (call it what you will) whereby we have power to believe: sometimes for the points that are to be believed. Here the question is of the former, as any man would gather, both by the title, and by some of the proofs. The first whereof is a place of Scripture, q Ephes. 4. 5. There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism: of which I say first, as of the whole Chapter, that it might well have been spared, considering that we acknowledge the truth of the matter in the same sense, in which himself propounds it: Secondly, I think it had been a point of good judgement to have forborn the allegation of a text so insufficient for the purpose: for the Apostle hath no meaning to show by those words one faith, that one man's belief (taking faith for the inward quality) differeth not from another man's; but that all the believing Ephesians, and so all true Christians, profess one and the same religion, as they worship the same Lord, and receive the same baptism: and therefore aught to agree in peace one with another, and not r Hieron. ad Eph. 4. to make the gifts of God diversly bestowed upon divers men, an occasion of schism and division. This might you have learned of s Salmer. in evang. prolegom. 14. formul. 8. Alphonsus Salmero a jesuit, who brings this place to prove, that nouns, that signify qualities or habits, are taken also for the objects to which they appertain: as faith signifieth (saith he) the articles which are believed by faith, according to that of Paul: There is one faith. The like hath t Bellar. de justis lib. 1. ca 4. §. jam vero. Bellarmine. By the name of faith (saith he, speaking of this place) the object of faith seems to be noted out. So that the sense is, we all believe the same thing, as we have been all baptised after the same manner. One faith (saith u Catharin. ad Eph. 4. 5. Catharin) because we believe one thing. And this interpretation is acknowledged for good, by x Lombard, Thomas, Caiet. ad Eph. 4. Lombard, Thomas, and Caietane; though they allow of the other also: which notwithstanding I am the bolder to refuse, because the places you bring out of the fathers, agree better to the former exposition. A. D. §. 2. The same is confirmed, with the authority of the ancient Fathers. Ser. 4. in natiu. Dom. Nisi una est (saith S. Leo) Fides non est, dicente Apostolo, unus Dominus, una fides, unum baptisma. Unless it be one, it is not faith, sith the Apostle saith, one Lord one faith, one Baptism. A. W. y Eides integra magnit praesidium. Faith that is sound (saith z Leo 1. ser. 4. in N●ti●. ca 5. In qua nec quicquam augeri potest. Leo) faith that is true, is a strong bulwark; to which faith nothing may be added by any man, from which nothing may be taken; because unless it be one, it is not faith: sith the Apostle saith, one Lord, one faith, one baptism. Is it not evident, that he speaks of the points of faith that are to be believed? For to them may a man add, (I speak of power, not of lawfulness) from them may he take; whereas the quality of faith seated in the soul, is free from all such danger. The learned father had found by experience, that heretics from time to time took upon them to diminish and augment the faith of the Church: that is, the articles of religion; and therefore denieth them to have any faith, that hold not firmly and only the truth of doctrine, according to the faith of the Church, agreeable to Scripture. A. D. §. 3. Omni study (saith S. Hierome) Laborandum est, primùm In cap 4 add Eph. ocurrere in fidei unitatem. We must labour with all diligence, first to meet, in the unity of faith. A. W. a Hieron. ad Eph. 4. 13. jeroms testimony (wherein either the printer, or you read unitatem for unitate, which is also the word in the text) is to the same purpose, that Leos was. There are (saith Jerome) many winds of doctrine, and by their blast, when the waves are raised, men are carried hither and thither in an uncertain course, and with b Vario errore. divers errors; then follow the words you allege. Therefore we must labour with all diligence, first to meet c In unitate. in the unity of faith then in the same unity to have the knowledge of the son of God. Which last point is added; because d Vide Hieron. ibi ad v. 5. 11. of Sabellius, who denied the distinction of the persons, and against whom Jerome speaketh professedly in that chapter, as also against Arius, Macedonius, and Eunomius about the holy Ghost, and our Saviour Christ. A. D. §. 4. Hanc fidem (saith Irenaeus) ecclesia in universum mundum disseminata diligenter custodit, quasi unam domum inhabitans: & similiter credit iis, quasi unam animam habens & unum cor: & consonanter haec praedicat, & docet, & cradit, quasi unum possidens os. Nam quamuis in mundo dissimiles sint loquelae, tamen virtus traditionis una & eadem est. This faith, the Church spread over the whole world, doth diligently keep, as dwelling in one house: and doth believe in one like manner those things, (to wit, which are proposed for points of faith) as having one soul and one heart: and doth preach, and teach, and deliver by tradition those things, after one uniform manner, as possessing one mouth. For although there be divers and different languages in the world, yet the virtue of tradition is One and the same. Thus saith this Father. By whose words we may understand, not only, that there is but one faith, but also, how it is said to be one; which might seem not to be one, considering there are so many points or articles, which we believe by our faith; and so many several men, who have in them this faith; yet One (saith this Father) it is, because the whole Church doth believe those points in one like manner. That is to say, because the belief of one man, is in all points like, and nothing different from the belief of another: or, because every faithful man believeth every point or article, for one and the like cause, or for maul reason: to wit, because God hath revealed it; and delivered it to us, by his Catholic Church, to be believed, For which reason every one should believe, whatsoever he believeth as a point of Christian faith. A. W. e Iren. li. 1. 6. 3. Irenaeus (as the two former) speaketh of the articles of religion, many whereof he had recited in f Cap. 2. the next chapter before: whereupon he infers the words, you set down. The Church (saith he) having received this doctrine, or preaching of this faith, g Et quidem in universum mundum. though it be spread over the whole world, keeps it diligently, etc. And this yourself acknowledge in these words, To wit, which are proposed for points of faith; whereby you expound that which Irenaeus said, The Church believes those things; which is all one with his former words in sense. This faith the Church holds. So doth h Fevard. ad Iren. lib. 1. cap. 3. annot. 1. Fevardentius one of your learnedst Friars understand Irenaeus, telling us, that he sets the consent of all Churches, as a brazen wall that cannot be overthrown, against heretics. Of the same things (saith Fevardentius) they think, believe, write and teach the same. By this place it is manifest that you take faith as it is a quality: because you distinguish the points we believe, from our faith, by which we believe: and so speaking of faith in that sense, never a one of your proofs is either plain or certain. But let us see how you interpret Irenaeus. He saith, The whole Church doth believe i Similiter. alike: meaning that all believe the same things; not that the habit by which they believe, is of like force & like strength in every particular Church or man: which neither belongs to his purpose, nor is true. k Intentio cumulatior. The intention or inward strength even of the Catholic faith may be greater in one man (saith l Sotus Apol. contra Catarrh. cap. 2. Domingo à Soto) then in another: and according to that increase, our faith. Therefore your former reason which you give, why faith is said to be one, namely because the belief of one man is in all points like the belief of another, must be understood of likeness, in regard of the articles they believe, not of any equality in the habit or quality itself: and in that sense only doth Irenaeus say that faith is one. Which (saith he) no man by his eloquence maketh greater, no man by his weakness in speaking of it, less. We see (saith m Fevardent. ubi supra. annot. 11. Fevardentius) that Irenaeus vehemently urgeth the unity of doctrine and consent of faith, which we affirmed to be one of the notes of the true Church. Therefore whereas you said of Irenaeus, that he affirms faith to be one, because the whole Church doth believe those things (points of faith) in one like manner: you mistake his meaning, and avow that which is untrue. It is great pity, but that such as you are, coming in the name, and by the authority of the Church, should have absolute credit given to that you teach, without doubting or examining it at all. Your second reason, why faith is said to be one, neither agrees with Irenaeus meaning, as appears by that which hath been already said, and in the latter part is false too: for both it is a fancy of yours, that God hath delivered it to us by the Catholic Church, since the Prophets, Apostles and Ministers are not the Catholic Church, but members of it: the last, all of them severally and jointly subject to many errors though not fundamental. And n Bellar. de justif. lib. 1. cap. 5. §. Denique quod. the reason of believing, is simply and only the authority and will of God made known to us by the ministery of men, the holy Ghost enlightening our understanding, and inclining our hearts to believe. But of this matter we must speak more at large hereafter. A. D. CHAP. III. That this one faith necessary to salvation, is infallible. A. W. If you had been desirous, that every man should understand you, instead of infallible, you would rather have said certain, or without doubting: especially since yourself divers times used the word in the passive signification, for that which may not be doubted of, as being most certainly true. In this sense you say afterward, in this Chapter, that the word of Christ is absolutely infallible: and again in the end of the Chapter, that we must account the word of faith absolutely infallible. A. D. §. 1. This one faith, without which we cannot be saved, must be infallible, and most certain. This is clear, because faith is that credit or inward assents of mind, which we give to that which God (who is the prime or first verity, which neither can deceive, nor be deceived) hath revealed unto us by means of the preaching or teaching of the true Church: as we may gather out of S. Paul, when he saith: Quomodo credent ei, quem non audierunt? quomodo audient, sine praedicante? quomodo praedicabunt nisi mittantur? etc. Rom. 10 ergo fides ex auditu, auditus autem per verbum Christi. The sense of which words is that, sith we cannot believe unless we hear: nor bear, unless some lawfully sent do preach unto us: faith is bred in us by hearing, and yielding assent or credit to the word of Christ made known unto us by the preaching of the true Church, which only is lawfully sent of God: wherefore like as the word of Christ, being God, is absolutely infallible, so also the credit given to this word (which is our faith) must needs be also most certain and infallible. A. W. The title and beginning of the Chapter speak of faith, as it is a grace or quality; but the conclusion of the Chapter is concerning the infallibility or certainty of the word of faith, as you call it, that is, the thing to be believed: so do you run from one thing to another. But I may say of this Chapter, as I have done in part of the former, that we acknowledge the truth of both these points, and think your labour in proving them, altogether unnecessary: only in the former there may be some doubt. For though it be out of question, that we are to endeavour for the perfection, as of all other graces of God, so of that faith, whereby we assent to the truth of that which God hath revealed: yet it comes to pass, sometimes by our infirmity, that our faith is accompanied with doubting. And this (as we heard before) o Sotus Apol. contra. Catarrh. cap. 2. Sotus grants to be true of a Catholic faith: and proves it by the prayer of the Apostles, p Luc. 17. 5. Lord increase our faith: to which I may add the like request of him, that crying with tears said, q Mark. 9 24. Lord I believe, help my unbelief. But if any man desire to see a lively pattern of this doubting, let him look upon David, as he describes himself in the Psalm; r Psal. 73. 13. Certainly I have cleansed my heart in vain, and washed my hands in innocency etc. Then thought I to know this, but it was too painful for me. And afterward; Vers. 16. so foolish was I and ignorant, I was a beast before thee. And yet the point he speaks of, is a ruled case in Divinity, propounded Vers. 22. by him in the beginning of the Psalm: namely that the providence of God watcheth over the righteous for their good, and that he will be avenged of the wicked. That faith which some Divines call historical, is indeed such an assent, & goeth always before justifying faith; at the least, for the believing of so much, as is necessary to justification. Which I note by the way, that no man may be deceived with an opinion, that justifying faith is an assent to the truth of God's word: whereas it is quite of another nature, and hath place in the will, rather than in the understanding. If you had said, that God hath revealed his truth to us by the preaching of them that were in the true Church, you had spoken more plainly and truly. But how the true Church, or any Church at all, should be said to preach, I profess, I understand not. Neither can any such thing be gathered out of s Rom. 10. 14. Saint Paul, who speaks not a word of the Church, true or false. And to say the truth, what a strange kind of speech is it to say, The Church is sent to preach, when as only the Ministers preach, and not the Church: unless perhaps john Baptist only for a time, was the Church: when he preached alone, before our Saviour was baptized. But this same Church is a goodly fair word, and covers a great many foul errors, with the very name of it: The Apostles who were they that God employed at the first beginning of the Gospel, both in preaching and writing, were undoubtedly of the true Church, both in respect of their election to everlasting life, and of the truth of the doctrine they held. It is also true that God ordinarily begetteth faith in the hearts of men, by the ministers of the true Church. But it is not true that such an assent as you speak of, cannot be wrought in a man by the ministry of Schismatics or Heretics, though they be perhaps, in neither respect, any members of the true Church. Did not Arius, Macedonius, Eutyches, Nestorius, and many other wretched heretics assent in general, to the truth of God in Scriptures, because they held it to be the very true word of God? And might not men by their preaching be brought to the same faith? For our parts, we make no doubt, but that, in the midst of ignorance and superstition, many came to this faith by the preaching of your Antichristian Priests, and so do at this day; yea we add further, that we doubt not, many have (we are sure they might and may) attain to the same faith (what if I say to justifying faith too) without any preaching, by the reading of the Scriptures. For since it is partly the matter, that must argue the Scripture to be the word of God, partly the majesty which any man may discern in the manner of writing: unless it can be poooved out of the Scripture, that the holy Ghost will not work by these upon the heart of him that readeth, but only of him, that heareth a man expound this word unto him, I see no sufficient reason, why faith may not be had by reading, where God's ordinance of preaching is only wanting, and not wilfully neglected. But you will say, the Apostle tieth faith to hearing. First, this is little advantage for you Papists, amongst whom (till shame & emulation drove you to it, within these last fifty or threescore years) no man could ordinarily hear the word of God in any tongue, that he understood; and so all your hearing was to no purpose. Secondly, if hearing be sufficient, where there is nothing but reading, without any exposition of that, which is read; give me some reason, why reading should not be more sufficient; since he that readeth, may easier understand, and better weigh that, he readeth, than he that doth only hear an other read. But of this point I shall have occasion to say more t Chap. 9 hereafter. Now for the second point, that we cannot hear, unless some lawfully sent, that is (as you understand it) unless some sent by the authority of the Church, do preach unto us; first how shall this warrant the Apostles preaching, of which S. Paul here speaketh? For who knows not, that u Matt.. 28. 19 they were sent immediately by our Saviour, & not by any ordinary course in the Church? Secondly it seems you fortet, what is written in x Ruffin. histor. eccles. lib. 1. cap. 10. the Ecclesiastical histories of a captive maid, that converted the queen of Iberia, she the king, & he his country. y Theodorct. lib. 1. histor. eccles. cap. 22. What is recorded of Aedesius & Frumentius, by whom the Indians were brought to the knowledge of the Gospel. How z Eusebius hist. eccle. lib. 6 cap. 19 Alexander Bishop of jerusalem, and Theoctistus Bishop of Caesarea defend origen's preaching publicly, when as yet he was not allowed by the Church for a minister. Which fact of his they maintain by the like examples of Euelpis, Paulinus, and Theodorus, who had preached without any ordinary sending: And it is very likely (say they) that the same hath been done in other places, though we know it not. How little care you had of writing plainly, any man may guess by this one sentence; wherein this needless word infallible is used in two divers senses: for certainty of truth, where you speak of that we are to believe; for assurance of belief, without doubting, where you mean faith itself. A. D. §. 2. Fides (saith S. Basile) est, eorum quae dicta sunt, assentiens approbatio, sine ulla haesitatione, cum animi persuasione de eorum Ser de Fidei confession. veritate, quae Dermunere praedicata sunt. Faith is a consenting approbation of those things, which are said; & an undoubted persuasion of mind, of the truth of those things, which are preached by the gift of God. Fides, (saith Saint Chrysostome) dici non potest, nisi circa ea quae non videntur, ampliùs quam circa ea Hom. 12. in epist. ad Hebraeos. quae videntur, certitudinem quis habeat. It cannot be called faith, unless one be more certain of those things which are not seen, then of those things which are seen. The reason whereof, the same Saint Hom. 83. in Matth. Chrysostom declareth in an other place, saying: Superet sensum & rationem nostram sermo ipsius (Dei:) nam verbis eius fraudari non possumus: sensus verò noster deceptu facillimus est. Let God's word (saith he) surmount our sense and reason: for we can not be deceived by his words, but our sense is most easily deceived. A. W. These testimonies are more for ostentation to show your learning, then for necessity to confirm a matter not doubted of. Yet I must put you in mind, that these descriptions and commendations of faith are not brought by the authors to condemn all as castaways, that sometimes doubt, but to declare what faith is in it own nature. A. D. § 3. Sith, therefore, our faith is grounded on the word of God, revealed to us by jesus Christ our Lord, speaking by the mouth of the Church, as he saith himself, * Luc. 10. Qui vos audit, me audit: he that heareth you, heareth me: we ought to receive the word of faith preached by the true Church, * 1. Thes 2. not as the word of man, but, as it is truly, the word of God; and consequently, we must account it a thing most certain, and absolutely infallible. A. W. Our Saviour Christ doth no farther speak by the mouth of the Church, than the Church speaks according to the Scripture, whom so speaking, whosoever heareth, without doubt he heareth God; both because it is the word of God that is spoken, and because God hath commanded us to hear them that so speak. But here again for a show, the name Church is brought in, whereas a Luc. 10. 16. the testimony belongs only to the Apostles (if you take it for them, that must absolutely be heard, without all doubting of that, they deliver) and to b Bellor. de Roman. pontiff lib. 4 cap 16. § Quae verba. every one of them severally, who doubtless is not the Church; or else to all Ministers of the gospel from time to time, but not without that restraint, I mentioned before, of speaking agreeably to the word. If you will stretch the place to other beside the Apostles, in that point of being absolutely heard, show some reason why every Pastor and licenced Preacher may not claim the same privilege of being heard and believed, whatsoever he teach. But that this is absord, it may appear. because c Mat. 24. 24. our Saviour Christ foretold, that there should come false prophets, who always are to be discerned by their d Mat. 7. 16. doctrine. And who is ignorant, that the greatest heretics, had (many of them) lawful calling in the Churches, and yet ran into monstrous heresies? Doth not e Mat. 23. 3. our Saviour also will the jews to hear the Scribes and pharisees? what? absolutely? If they will teach their own devices (saith f August. ad 100 tract. 46. Austin) hear them not, do not as they say. But what name I Austen? Doth not Christ himself give the same charge? g Mat. 16. 6. Vers. 12. Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Scribes and pharisees. And what is their leaven but their doctrine, by the holy Ghosts own exposition? h jansenius in concor. Exchange. cap. 80. jansenius Bishop of Gant expounds the place of the Apostles; and though he gather from thence the power of the Ecclesiastical governors, yet he restraineth it to their enjoining of that which is right. We are to note (saith he) how great the authority of Ecclesiastical governors is; since we must obey them, no otherwise then we must Christ, i Recta praeci. pientions. when they command those things, that are right. Do you not see your own Bishop's limitation upon this very place, you allege? The k Cyrillus apud Thomam in Catena. Irenaeus lib. 3. in praef●●. ancient writers expound the place of the Apostles. Your l Lyra ad Luc. 10. 16. gloss requires devotion and reverence to the hearing of Christ's Disciples, for the reverence of God, whose doctrine principally it is, which they deliver: So that they, which preach not Christ's doctrine, cannot look for so much as reverence. There fore true doctrine is always to be received, whosoever deliver it, whether he be lawfully sent or no, and false doctrine never, though it be preached by a Pope; who being no Apostle, can show no charter for his being kept from error, though his prive, and your flattery, exalt him above all save Peter. A. D. CHAP. four That this one infallible faith necessary to salvation, must also be entire. A. W. Whereas you say obscurely in your title, Faith must be entire, your meaning is, that a Christian must believe all things appointed by God, & propounded by the Church to be believed. Would you not have said so, if you had loved plainness? What if I should ask you a reason, why the title of this Chapter is not set down in the same form the rest are? Faith is necessary, Chap. 1. is one, Chap. 2. is infallible, Chap. 3. But in this 4. Chap. must be entire. Can you give me a sufficient reason of this difference? A. D. §. 1. This one infallible faith, without which we cannot please God, must also 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. A. W. There are two things to be considered in your propounding of this question, concerning the entireness of faith: in what sense all points must be believed, and what it is to misbeleeve, or obstinately not to believe. Whatsoever is delivered in Scriptures, is a matter of faith, because it is the word of God, who can neither deceive, nor be deceived, and hath propounded it to men for a truth to be believed. But yet there is a great difference betwixt things set down in Scripture: and that difference is in 2. respects. For neither are all points therein true, in the like sense, m Thom. opus. 3. in compend. Theol. cap. 1. Holcot. in 1. q. 1. ad 6. argum. princip. et in 3. q. 1. art. 6. prim. neither is there like necessity of believing every particular. Concerning the former, the general reason why all things in the Scriptures are true, is this, because all things therein are recorded, & delivered by God for true; therefore questionless they are true: yet (as once before I noted) only so far forth true, as they are intended to be held for true by the holy Ghost, the author of the Scripture. Whatsoever is registered therein by way of report, as a story, is to be taken as true, only in respect of story, that we may not doubt whether such or such things were done and said, or no. There is no doubt to be made, but that the five books of Moses, the books of josua, judges, Ruth, Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, etc. contain a true and certain story of those things whereof they entreat. But in these books we have some worthy and holy speeches of godly men: some lewd and blasphemous words of profane wretches. The former are to be acknowledged for the truth of God every way. As for example, it is true that * Gen. 49. 1. 2. etc. jacob uttered those prophecies of the twelve patriarchs his sons; and it is also true, that those prophecies of his, were the very truth of God. It is as true, that n 2. Reg. 18. 30 & 19 4. 6. Rabshaketh delivered those blasphemous threatenings against the Lord and his people; but it is not true, that those words came from God, as Jacob's did: so Jacob's were to be taken as every way true; Rabshakeths only as truly reported from his mouth. Now that all points are not alike necessary to salvation, no man can make any question, if he remember that a man may be saved, though he have never heard of many things that are recorded in the Scripture: which is the case generally of the greatest part both of Protestants and Papists, and hath always been the case of Christians in all ages. As for misbelieving, or not believing obstinately, one of these differs a great deal from the other, and the latter of the two was needless, if the former can be proved. For if mistaking some point of doctrine be damnable, it is out of doubt that obstinate refusing to believe the same point, must needs make a man much more liable to damnation. But indeed misbelieving is not in all points so dangerous, though of itself as a sin, it is subject to be punished o Rom. 6. 23. with the eternal wrath of God in hell fire. To make plain that I say, A man may misunderstand divers places of Scripture, and thereupon hold that to be true which is false, and yet be saved for all this error. For example, that I may give instance in a matter of no small importance. How many Christians, yea how many great Divines have been deceived, in the understanding of p Mat. 1. 1. 2. etc. Luk. 3. 23. our Saviour Christ's genealogy, and by their misconceiving of the Evangelists, have fallen into no small error, that Solomon was the father of the Messiah? By which opinion (to omit many other things that I may not be too long) the truth of a prophesy uttered by q jer. 17. 29. 30 jeremy, which makes jeconiah childless, hath been overthrown; from whom our Saviour must needs have descended, if he had been the son of Solomon, as some erroneously gather out of Saint Matthew; and not of r Luk. 3. 31. Nathan, as it is manifest by S. Luke, he was. Shall I exemplify this matter in another point? The Apostles themselves for a long time, even s Act. 1. 6. till after the ascension of our Saviour into heaven, and t & 2. 2. 3. till the coming of the holy Ghost upon them, looked for the establishing of an earthly kingdom in this world by their Lord and master. Did they not slip into this error by misbelieving the u Psal. 72. 17. Dan. 2. 44. prophecies of the old testament, concerning the Messiahs kingdom? yet were they out of danger of damnation, and in the state of grace all that time, because x joan. 1. 29. & 6. 68 69. they rested on our Saviour Christ, as the spiritual Saviour of their souls, that should take away their sins, and bring them to everlasting life in heaven, though they erroneously hoped for a temporal kingdom also. The other branch of this distribution, which concerns obstinately not believing, though it be a far greater sin, than the former: yet it is not such, that it doth absolutely cut a man off from salvation. This obstinate refusal to believe, is either of ignorance, or of wilfulness: if a Christian stand stiffly in some false opinion, which he certainly holdeth to be true, in his error; the fault of his judgement may continue, without the damnation of his soul. If wilfully he refuse to believe that truth of God, which he discerneth, no man can promise him any hope of salvation, without true repentance. This I speak upon a supposition, that it is possible for a man not to believe that, which he perceiveth to be true, though indeed there is a contradiction implied herein. For to believe is to assent to the truth; which a man cannot choose but do, that sees it: that is, no man can think the same thing, in the same respects, true and false. But this not believing in such a case, is a frowardness of the heart, not yielding to acknowledge that he knows, rather than a false opinion in the brain, by which a man is misled. We are further to observe, that there is a second difference in this point, in regard of the matter, which is not believed. If a man in his ignorance deny to believe, that there is but one God, that there are three persons, that jesus is the Messiah, that we are redeemed by him, that we are justified by faith without works, or any other fundamental point of religion; he doth thereby shut himself out from all possibility of salvation, as long as he continues in these errors, or any of them. But other points there are, and those many more in Thomas opusc. comp. Theol. c. 1 number, which a man, by reason of his ignorance, may obstinately refuse to believe, and yet not be excluded out of heaven for such his error. Let the former examples serve for brevities sake: I have been longer than I would or meant to be; but I was desirous to speak plain, in a matter of such weight. The conclusion is, that howsoever it is indeed a sin, and so (in itself) damnable, to misbeleeve, or not believe all and every thing which God hath revealed; yet a man may be in the state of grace and salvation, though he misbeleeve, or (through ignorance) obstinately not believe something so revealed. In a word, Not right believing is never able to deprive a man of salvation, but when that we believe amiss, is a main point of salvation: obstinately not believing only then shuts up heaven against us, when either the points we will not believe, are fundamental, or our refusing to believe, is against our own judgement and conscience. If you had no further reach in this Chapter, we were of the same mind with you: but in propounding the reason of your assertion, you bewray a further matter, then at the first a man would imagine. A. D. §. 2. The reason of this is, because every point of doctrine, yea every word that almighty God hath revealed, and by his Church propounded unto us to be believed, must, under pain of damnation be believed: as we may gather out of Saint Mark; where when Mark. 16. our Saviour had given charge to his Disciples, to preach the Gospel to every creature (the which charge he also gave in Saint Matthew, saying: Docete omnes gentes, etc. docentes eos servare omnia Math. 28. quaecunque mandavi vobis: Teach all nations, etc. teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you,) he pronounceth indefinitely, Qui non crediderit, condemnabitur: He that shall not believe, shall be condemned: not excepting, or distinguishing any one point of doctrine, as needless to be believed, or which a man might at his pleasure misbeleeve, or doubt of without danger. A. W. Your first reason lieth thus: If every point and word revealed by God, and propounded by his Church to be believed, must, under pain of damnation, be believed, than faith must be entire. But every word so revealed and propounded, must, under pain of damnation be believed. Therefore faith must be entire. The conclusion of this Syllogism is acknowledged by us for a certain truth, Faith must be entire: but the premises seem liable to just exception. For first, the antecedent and the consequent To the Proposition. of the proposition are all one; and so the proof, and that which is proved, differ not. What is it to say, every word revealed by God, must be believed, but to affirm, that faith must be entire? Indeed if the question were of faith as it is a quality, than the consequent might be inferred upon the antecedent: but since we speak of the things to be believed, both are one. If every such word must be believed, than we must believe every such word. It is the same faith, by which all, and by which some is believed: but as the object or things believed make a difference, which reacheth not to the faith itself within the soul. Secondly the Assumption, though it be true, yet doth it contain something that had need to be warily considered. First To the Assumption. you so couple the revealing by God, and the propounding of a thing to be believed by the church, as if the latter were no less necessary than the former, to make a matter of faith: whereas all things that God hath revealed, aught to be believed, whether the Church propound them for such or no. For the reason why they are to be believed, is, that they proceed from God, who must needs be credited in whatsoever he shall say; in respect both of his truth in speaking, and his authority in commanding obedience. But y Stapl. contra Whitak. de autorit. script. cap. 1. sect. 1. 2. you Papists make the authority of the Church, the very foundation of our belief. The Scripture (you say) is in itself the word of God, and so worthy of all credit; but to us it is not so, but by the authority of the Church; upon the credit whereof we take it for the word of God. Yea farther, you limit faith in particular points, by the determination of the Church, so that no man shall be bound to believe, as a point of faith, any doctrine never so certainly proved out of Scripture, unless the Church have resolved of it, that it is true: and whatsoever is by the Church concluded for true, must be acknowledged for such by faith, though it be beside or against the Scripture, which (as z Cusan. ad Bohem. epist. 2. Cardinal Cusan is not ashamed, nor afraid to say) is fitted for the time, and diversly understood. So that it may at one time be expounded one way, according to the general current order of the Church, and the same order being changed, the Scripture also is changed. And why should it not, if (as a Syl●●est. Prierias cont. Luth. another Papist saith) the holy Scripture take strength and authority from the doctrine of the Church and Bishop of Rome? The Apostles (saith b Pigh. Hier. lib. 1. cap. 2. Pighius) have written certain things, not that their writings should be above our faith, but that they should be under it. But what should I stand to recite your blasphemies in this kind, which are many and monstrous? That which is not to day a point of faith, shall be one to morrow, if it please the Pope to propound it to be believed. It is farther to be considered in your Assumption, that although whatsoever God revealeth is to be believed, upon pain of damnation: yet a man may be saved without believing every thing so revealed; always provided that he do not against his conscience obstinately refuse to acknowledge any truth. If our Saviour have said, that he which believeth not all that his Apostles teach shall be condemned; then every word so revealed and propounded, must be believed, under pain of damnation. But our Saviour hath said so: Therefore every word so propounded must be believed, under pain of damnation. This is a proof of your Assumption; wherein for the consequence To the Proposition. of your proposition, I would have all men understand, that although you craftily imply therein a comparison of equality, betwixt the charge of believing the Apostles, and all other Ministers allowed by you, whom you call by the name of the Church, to deceive simple people with so glorious a title: yet the truth of that proposition depends not thereupon, but only upon the necessity of believing that which God hath revealed. It is a certain truth, that God is to be believed in all things he hath revealed, by whom soever he propound it: & in this respect the consequence of your proposition is true: That if it were damnable not to believe the Apostles delivering that which God had revealed, it is also damnable not to give credit to Ministers now, when they propound that to be believed, which God hath revealed; because the reason of believing is, that God hath revealed the things that are delivered. But yet here are two differences to be observed: first, that it is less sin to doubt of that, which any man, besides the Apostles, delivers, though it be the word of God, then to make question of the same matter uttered by the Apostles: because they spoke immediately by the direction of the spirit, and therefore could not possibly err in any point; whereas all other men are subject to error, and their doctrine to examination, ere it need be credited. Secondly, we must remember, it doth not follow, that if our Saviour said, whosoever believed not the Apostles, should be damned; then he that believes not the Ministers now, in all they propound to be believed, should be therefore liable to condemnation. I have stood the more upon this proposition, because the consequence being true, may breed an error in the conceit of many, if the reason of it be not truly understood. Your Assumption or minor is thus to be limited, according To the Assumption. to that which I before delivered, He that believes the Apostles spoke immediately by the inspiration of the spirit of God, and yet doubts of the truth of some things they preached, cannot without reforming this error be saved; because he holds that the holy Ghost may inspire an untruth. No more can he that doth not believe they spoke by such inspiration. For of them our Saviour hath absolutely said, c Luk. 10. 16. He that despiseth you, despiseth me. The second limitation is about the things themselves. The ignorance of some points delivered by the Apostles, utterly excludes a man out of heaven: some other again may be unknown, and a man, notwithstanding that his ignorance, be saved. Therefore though our Saviour except no point, nor distinguish betwixt matters of doctrine, yet the not believing of some, is no farther damnable, than a man doth wilfully refuse to believe that, which he confesseth to be truth in his heart; or at the least, in which he thinks the Apostles were deceived, or which he despiseth as needless, and so condemns the wisdom of God, in propounding it to be believed. A. D. §. 3. And this not without reason: for not to believe any one point whatsoever, which God by revealing it, doth testify to be true, and which, by his Church, he hath commanded us to believe, must needs be damnable, as being a notable injury to God's verity, and a great disobedience to his will. But all points of faith are thus testified by God, and commanded to be believed; otherwise they be not points of faith, but of opinion, or some other kind of knowledge. Therefore all points of faith must under pain of damnation, be believed; believed (I say) either expressly and actually, as learned men may do: or implicit and virtually as unlearned Catholics commonly do: who believing expressly those articles, which every one is bound particularly to know, do not in the rest, obstinately doubt, or hold some error against the Church, but have a mind prepared to submit themselves in all things, to the authority of the Church, (which they are sure is taught and directed by the spirit of God) and do in general hold for undoubted truth, whatsoever the Catholic or universal Church doth believe. A. W. Now followeth the second proof of your assumption, in this manner: Every notable injury to God's verity, and disobedience to his will, is damnable. But misbelieving, or absolutely not believing any one point revealed by God, and propounded by his Church to be believed, is a notable injury to God's verity, and a great disobedience to his will. Therefore misbelieving or obstinately not believing any one point revealed by God, and propounded by his Church to be believed, is damnable. To let pass this crafty conveyance, whereby you still shuffle in the Church, whereas without it, the matter is as true, and To the assumption. the proposition as perfect: I answer to your assumption; that all misbelieving, or obstinately not believing is not a notable injury to God's truth, nor a great disobedience to his will: where it proceeds simply of ignorance, and not of wilfulness; except in such cases as I showed in the end of the last section: which I speak, not to excuse any man, as if he did not sin, in misbelieving, or as if there were some sin not deadly, according to your erroneous conceit: but only to distinguish notable injuries, and great disobedience from some kind of misbelieving. The conclusion is thus to be conceived: That misbelieving is in itself damnable, not, that no man can be saved, which misbeleeveth. Of the conclusion. This distinction of believing expressly, and implicitly, as you term it, confirms part of that, which I have hitherto said: for by your confession, there are some points, to the belief whereof a general faith will not serve the turn, but a man must know the particulars, and assent actually to the truth of them. For example, it is not enough for a man to believe in gross, that he must be saved by such means only, as God hath revealed; and the Church hath propounded to be believed; but it is absolutely necessary to salvation, that he know what the Church holdeth in this case, concerning redemption by our Saviour Christ; and in his heart acknowledge the truth thereof. Again, there are many other points, which, so a man neglect not the means to know them, may be unknown, and believed only in general, without danger of damnation, by reason of such ignorance. Now this general belief, is not (as you falsely say) to be folded up in the faith of the Church; but to be tied to the Scripture; all things wherein I acknowledge to be most true, and believe all points whatsoever, as they are either expressed, or contained in Scripture: howsoever I be ignorant what is true, touching, (perhaps) very many particulars. To the authority of the Church, I willingly submit myself thus far, as that I hold it a sinful presumption for me, or any man, either to compare my private opinion, with the general judgement of other Christians, especially Ministers, or to condemn, or suspect that of falsehood, which they deliver, unless I have apparent proof for the one, and great likelihood for the other. In which cases I set not my own conceit, against the doctrine of the Church, but prefer the truth of God before the opinions of men. As for any infallible authority in the Church, upon supposal of such a certain direction by the spirit of God, I hold it neither for true, nor probable, as shall appear hereafter. In the mean while, I desire the Reader to consider these few testimonies concerning the authority of men. Other writers (saith d August. ad Hieron. Epist. 19 Austin) I read with this proviso, that, be their learning or holiness never so great, I will not think a matter true, because they have thought so; but because they have been able to persuade me, either by other Canonical writers, or by some likely reason. In e Aug. de unit. Eccles. cap. 10. an other place, We may not consent to Bishops, though they be Catholic, if at any time they be deceived, so that they judge contrary to the Canonical Scripture of God. Of necessity (saith f Origen. in jer. Hom. 1. Origen) must we call for the testimony of the Scriptures; for our senses and declarations, without them, as witnesses, have no credit. And this charge g Basil. in moral. Reg. 72. Basil layeth upon us, that, when we hear, we examine the points that are delivered by our teachers, and receive those that are agreeable to the Scriptures, and reject those that are divers from them. h Hieron. ad jerem. cap. 7. Other things that men invent of their own head (saith Jerome) as it were by Apostolical tradition, without the authority and witness of the Scriptures, the word of God smiteth. A. D. §. 4. Secondly, that man which believing some points, should deny others: cannot while he doth thus, have one and the same faith, which other Christians have. Sith he doth not (as Irenaeus requireth to the unity of faith) believe the points of faith in a like; but in a different manner from other Christians. That is to say. Neither doth he believe all the points which they do: neither doth he believe those points wherein he doth agree with them, for the same reason that they do; that is to say: He doth not believe those points which he seemeth to believe precisely, for that God hath revealed them, and by his Church propounded them: for if he did, sith this reason is common to all points of faith, he should assoon believe all, as any one. He hath not, therefore (I say) one and the same faith, which other Christians have, (who notwithstanding have the true faith.) And sith as S. Leo said, Nisi una est, fides non est: If it be not one faith, it is no faith at all: It followeth that he, that believeth not entirely all points of faith, hath no faith at all: and consequently, sith one that hath no faith, can no way be saved: it is evident that he that believing some articles, doth obstinately deny others cannot be saved. A. W. Your second reason, to prove that faith must be entire, is thus to be framed. If faith cannot be one, unless it be entire, than it must be entire. But faith cannot be one, unless it be entire. Therefore faith must be entire. I deny the consequence of your proposition. For it is not To the proposition. absolutely necessary to salvation, that faith should be one, in such sort as you imagine. There is indeed an absolute necessity, that all men should agree in the belief of certain points, without the belief whereof, there can possibly be no salvation. But that there should be such an agreement in all points, though it be necessary positively, to speak as you do, because God's truth is in every particular to be believed; yet it is not required as a means, without which a man cannot be saved, as I have already showed. I grant the assumption in that sense you understand being one; otherwise I deny it. Faith may be one in all points necessary to To the assumption. salvation, and yet not entire in believing all things that God hath revealed. To your allegation out of i Iren. li. 1. ca 3 Irenaeus, I answered k Chap. 1. sect. 5. before: the exposition you make of it, as I then signified, in regard of the latter part thereof, cannot be drawn out of Irenaeus, who speaks not a word of the reason whereupon men believe, but only of the principal articles of faith every where believed; in regard whereof there was, as he saith, an unity of belief. Neither is your proof sufficient, if we grant your exposition. For a man may believe that which he doth believe, because God hath revealed it, and in that respect have one faith with other Christians, and yet doubt of, or deny some other points which are commonly held; because he cannot persuade himself that they are revealed by God: though it be generally so believed. I may say the like of matters propounded also by the Church, because the decrees thereof are not so plain, but that they may admit divers senses. But I respect not that clause, as being a point foisted in by you, without any warrant of Scripture or reason. Though it be no great matter what you build upon so slippery a foundation: because it cannot long stand: yet perhaps it is not amiss to push it down presently, that it may not continue to make a show. Thus you build. He, that hath no faith at all, cannot be saved. But he, that believes not entirely all points of faith, hath no faith at all. Therefore he that believing some articles, doth obstinately deny any others, cannot be saved. I deny your assumption. A man may doubt of, and deny To the assumption. many points as I have showed, and yet both have faith, and be saved. Your proof to the contrary out of Leo was answered l Chap. 2. sect. 3. before. Your conclusion is not so large as it should be. For you restrain Of the conclusion. it to obstinately not believing: which cannot bar a man from salvation, but in those points alone, which are necessary as means, to bring him to everlasting life. A. D. §. 5. Thirdly, to believe some points of faith, and to deny others, or any one, is heresy: as to deny all, is absolute Infidelity. But it is sure, even out of Scripture, that Heretics shall not be saved, no more than Infidels. For as it is said Q●i non credit, iam indicatus est, he that believeth not, is already judged: so the Aposile Saint joan. 3. In the Greek text, Haireseis Gal. 5. Paul reckoneth heresies among the works of the flesh; of all which he doth pronounce. Qui talia agunt, regnum Dei non consequentur. Those which do such like things, shall not attain the kingdom of God. A. W. Heretical faith is liable to damnation. That faith which is not entire, is heretical. Therefore, that faith which is not entire, is liable to damnation. I must entreat the Reader to call to mind, what I answered To the proposition. m Sect. 1. before in general concerning this point, about liableness to damnation. There is no heresy nor error in matter of Religion, but it is a sin: and being so, makes the party that doth err, liable to damnation. But yet many errors and heresies are of so small moment in comparison of other, that he which holdeth them, may, notwithstanding such his error or heresy, be saved. I gave examples before, and will not stand to repeat them. So then the proposition is thus far true, and no farther: Heretical faith in matters necessary to salvation, is simply damnable: so that he which continueth in such an estate, cannot possibly be saved. Again, Heretical faith in any point of God's truth whatsoever, of itself deserveth damnation: yet he that doth err in some points, may be saved: else I think there are few men living, or ever have been, that could have come, or shall come to heaven. As for the authority of the Church, it is not of force to make that simply damnable, which in itself is not so: though it much increase the sin, whensoever it determineth truly of any point in question. You will say n Gal. 5. 20, 21 Saint Paul reckoneth heresy amongst the works of the flesh. So doth he contentions etc. yet may a man in ignorance be contentious, thinking he doth well, and o jud. vers. 3. contends for the true faith, as he ought to do; and for all this contention, not deprive himself of the interest he hath to the kingdom of heaven in jesus Christ. I deny your assumption. To the assumption. Chap. 1. sect. 5. A man may be excused, in your judgement, by ignorance, concerning any positive commandment of God: but out of doubt, there are many points of truth revealed by God, only as positive, not as such means to salvation, that without the belief of them a man cannot be saved. Add hereunto, that a Christian may be ignorant of many points held by the Church, and that by negative ignorance, because he could never come where he might hear, that the Church believed such and such things. It is therefore an unreasonable thing, to condemn all ignorance for heresy: and a most uncharitable conceit to cast all into hell fire that believe not in every point, as the Church generally doth, yea though they know what the Church maintains, & be of a contrary mind. Your proof, which is a comparison of likeness or equality betwixt infidelity in denying all Christian religion, and heresy in not believing some points of it, is a great deal too weak. Similitudes argue indeed, but rather by way of illustration than proof. And there is no equality betwixt denying all, and doubting of some. The former absolutely overthrows true religion: the latter only misconceives some points, leaving the grounds of truth untouched and believing them as most certain. A. D. § 6. Fourthly, I may confirm the same, with the testimony of the ancient Fathers. First of S. Athanasius in his creed, which is commonly Athanas. in Symb. known and approved of all. Quicunque (saith he) vult saluus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat Catholicam fidem: quam nisi quisque integram, inviolatamque seruaverit, absque dubio in aeternum peribit. Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is needful that he hold the Catholic faith: which unless every one do keep entire and unviolate, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. A. W. If the ancient writers should affirm a thing so unreasonable, there were good reason for a man to look for some proof of it, out of the Scriptures. But (no doubt) we shall find your citations of their writings as much to the purpose, as we have done your former arguments. The first you allege is Athanasius in his Creed; to which I answer, that p See my answer to 12. Art part. 1. art. 4. Athanasius speaks not of all points revealed by God, but of those substantial matters, which are there set down by him, and namely, of the Trinity of persons, and Godhead of our Saviour jesus Christ. This appears by the last verse of the same Creed, where he thus concludeth: This is the Catholic faith, which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved. But Athan●siu● hath not comprehended all points of religion in that Creed, (for he leaveth out the burial of our Saviour Christ, unless you will say he put his going down into hell for it,) neither doth he require, in that place any other point, as necessary to be believed to salvation, but those only, that he there reciteth, which must be kept entire and unuiolate of every man that will be saved. A. D. §. 7. Qui sunt in sacris literis eruditi, (saith Saint Basil) ne unam Teste Theodoreto lib. 4. Eccles. histor. cap. 17. quidem sillabam divinorum dogmatum prodi sinunt: sed pro istius defension, si opus est, nullum non mortis genus libenter amplectuntur. Those that are well instructed in holy Writ, do not suffer one syllable of divine doctrine to be betrayed or yielded up: but for the defence thereof, if need be, do willingly embrace any kind of death. A. W. That of r Basil apud Theodoret. hist. lib. 4. cap. 17. Basil is less to the purpose. For first, he saith nothing of any doctrine propounded by the Church, or of your unwritten traditions, but only of the Scriptures. And how makes this for the believing whatsoever the Church will deliver, without which, in your judgement, faith cannot be one, or entire? Secondly, he speaks not of all ignorant men, whose faith, upon pain of damnation, you will have entire, concerning every point; but of those only that are learned in the holy Scriptures, or at the most, so far as they are learned in them. I astly, what saith he of these, but that which we always require, that a christian should not suffer any syllable of true doctrine to be betrayed? This makes against you, who rest wholly upon Popes and Councils, and by that means oftentimes betray the truth of God manifested in the Scripture; yea so far are you from maintaining every syllable of it, with hazard of your lives, that you do what you can for shame, to destroy it all. s Azorius Moral. instit. lib. 8 cap 26. § Quaeres. You Papists deprive the people of them altogether, at least for their private reading; howsoever your Pope Pius 4. makes a show of permitting it. You have thrust out the t Concil. Trid. sess 4. de edit. & usu sac. litter. Authentical copies of Hebrew and Greek, and, in steed of them authorised a corrupt Latin translation, which no man may refuse, upon any pretence; though it have 8000 places (as u Isidorus Clarius praef. in Biblia. Isidorus Clarius a great learned man of your own affirmeth) in which, the sense of the holy Ghost is changed: yea Cardinal x Hosius contr. Brent. prolegom Hosius blusheth not to write: That it were better for the Church, if there were no written Gospel extant. I omit your blasphemies against the Scriptures, whereof I have spoken otherwhere. A. D. §. 8. Nihil periculosius (saith Nazianzen) his haereticis esse potest, qui cum integrè per omnia decurrant; uno tamen verbo, quasi Greg. Nazian. tract. de Fid. veneni gutta, veram illam ac simplicem fidem dominicam inficiunt. Nothing can be more perilous than these heretics, who, when they run uprightly through all the rest, yet with one word, as with a drop of poison, do infect that true and sincere faith of our Lord. A. W. What if y Nazianzen. de Fide. Gregory Nazianzen complain, that heretics which held most points sound, according to truth, as Arius, Eutyches, Macedonius, Nestorius, and divers other did, were very pernicious to the Church, because they did more easily and secretly poison the truth of doctrine by their heresies? Will it follow hereupon, that therefore a man cannot be saved, unless he believe every point of truth revealed by God? or that a man hath no faith, because his belief agrees not in every small matter with other Christians? Remember I pray you, we deny not that faith should be entire, but that it cannot be available to salvation, if in any one point it misbeleeve. Thus have I examined the first part of this your Treatise of Faith, which I know not how I should apply to your main syllogism, implied in your preface: when you show the use of it in any part thereof, I will give you answer accordingly. A. D. CHAP. V. That there must be some means provided by almighty God, by which all sorts of men may learn this faith, which is so necessary to salvation. A. W. The title of this Chapter is so propounded, that your meaning may easily be mistaken. There must be (say you) some means provided: May not a man gather by these words, that as yet there are no such means provided? where as you would have us believe, that God hath already made provision of fit means to that purpose. A. D. §. 1. As this one, infallible and entire faith is necessary to salvation, to all sorts of men, as well unlearned, as learned: so we must say, that almighty 1. Tim. 2. God, Qui vult omnes homines saluos fieri, & ad agnitionem veritatis venire, who would have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of truth, hath (for proof that this, of his part, is a true will) provided some rule or means, whereby every man learned and unlearned, may sufficiently in all points, questions or doubts of faith, be infallibly instructed, what is to be holden for the true faith: and that the only cause, why any man misseth of the true faith, is either because he doth not seek out and find this rule and means; or having found it, he will not use it, and in all points (submitting his own sense, self opinion, and proper judgement) obediently yield assent unto it; as the nature of divine faith, and the duty of every Christian bindeth him to do. This is proved, because if Almighty 1. Tim. 2. 1. Tim. 4. 2. Pet. 3. Aug. lib. de Sp. & lit. c. 33. Prosper. lib. 2. de vocat. gent. cap. 23. 25. 28. D. Ambros. ser. 8. in Psal. 118. Jren. l. 4. ca 71. God hath a true will, of his part, to lead all men to this happy end of eternal salvation, (as it may be plainly proved that he hath, out of Scripture and Fathers) he must needs provide them sufficient means, by which it may at least be possible for them to attain that end. For we never say, that God hath a will to do any thing, unless he do either absolutely work the thing, or at least provide means sufficient, by which it is possible to be done. But unless there be such a rule or means provided, by which every one learned and unlearned, may attain to this one, infallible and entire faith, of which I have spoken before, there are not sufficient means provided, by which it is possible for all men to come to salvation; sith (as I proved) without that faith it is unpossible for any one to come to salvation. Therefore we must needs say, that Almighty God hath provided this rule or means, by which every man, even the most unlearned, may sufficiently be instructed in matters of faith. A. W. Whether your comparison, by which you propound this point, be of likeness or equality, I see not what agreement the one part can have with the other. But to let that pass, because it is of no great moment; I am now earnestly to request all men, Protestants and Papists, who will vouchsafe to read my answer, that they would give me leave to examine this treatise by the light of true reason, and themselves take a little pains, more than ordinary in the understanding of it. We are then first of all to remember, that the sum of this treatise was propounded by the author himself in his preface, to this effect: That the faith which the authority of the true Catholic Church commendeth to us, is, without doubt, to be holden for the true faith: and that the faith which the authority of the Church of Rome commendeth to us, is that faith. Now than these two points being proved, that which was intended, is dispatched; and either of these failing, the matter is still in question. For proof of the former proposition or sentence, he disputeth on this manner: That we must needs admit an infallible authority in the Catholic Church, by reason whereof every one must learn of it only what is the true faith. Now he addresseth himself to the proof of this last proposition, which, as I showed in my answer to the Preface, is the assumption of his second Syllogism: and thus he reasoneth: If God have not provided some rule or means, whereby every man learned and unlearned, may sufficiently in all points, questions or doubts of faith, be infallibly instructed, what is to be holden for the true faith, unless we admit such an authority, than we must needs admit it. But God hath not provided any rule or means, unless we admit such an authority. Therefore we must needs admit such an authority in the Catholic Church. The ground of the proposition, or mayor, is this, that God will The Proposition. have all, as well unlearned as learned to be saved. Which being understood, I answer concerning the consequence of the proposition, that it is false. I will be as plain as I can, that every one may understand me. If his meaning be, that we must admit such an authority in the Catholic Church, because without it there are no sufficient means of salvation for every particular learned and unlearned man. I deny the consequence of his proposition. For neither is it necessary to salvation, that a man should be infallibly instructed in all points, questions, & doubts of faith, and God never had any purpose, that every particular man should be afforded that means of salvation. I will not spend time nor labour in this point: it may be proved sufficiently by this his argument. For these means, he imagineth of a visible Church always continuing, are not such, but that before the coming of our Saviour, and since also, many thousands have lived and died, which could never have any suspicion or thought of such a Church. Till it pleased our Saviour z Mat. 28. 19 to send his Apostles with a general commission, the knowledge of him was shut up within a Mat. 10. 5. & 15. 24. the land of jewry, or at the most, was heard of but in the countries near adjoining. After the commission given, it asked some time for the Apostles to disperse themselves over the world; and in that time many thousands must needs die, without the knowledge of our Saviour Christ. But what speak I of the beginnings of the Gospel? How many countries are there, in which no steps of the Gospel have been, to which no little sound of it hath come for many hundred years? b August. de unit. Eccles. cap. 14. Austin saith, that in his time there were many nations, to whom the Gospel had not then been preached: yea it c August. Ser. Dom. in monte. lib. 2. Origen. ad Mat. homil. 28. was commonly held amongst the ancient writers, that the day of judgement should speedily ensue, after the Gospel had been preached in all the world. If you urge that d 1. Tim. 2. 3. place of Timothy, that God will have all men to be saved: you shall be answered by one of your own side; that e Luc Brugen. ad Mat. 22. (all) signifies all kind of men, not every man of every kind: of every kind many. They are called all (saith f Fulgent. de incar. cap. 31. Fulgentius) because God saveth them out of every nation, condition, age: out of every province, of every language. So doth g August. En. chir. ad Lauren. cap. 103. De correp. & great. cap. 14. Austin expound that text in divers places, though he bring also some other interpretations, but all against the conceits of men, that would have all taken for every one. The like exposition he giveth of that in the Gospel, h August. in Joan. tract. 52. Holk. in 2. q. 1. ad 4. princip. art. 1. I will draw all to me: All kinds of men, in all languages, in all ages, in all degrees of honour, in all diversities of dispositions and wits, in all professions of arts lawful and profitable, etc. Holkot not the meanest of your schoolmen, maketh this sense of those words, God will have all men to be saved: that is saith he, God hath made all men capable of salvation, and given commandments, which if all men should observe, they should be saved. But what need I be long in this matter, when as yourself (as it should seem) so understood it? In the title you say, All sorts of men, in the Chapter you repeat those same words, and add two sorts, learned and unlearned; which also you do afterward. It may therefore seem strange (perhaps) to some man, that I trouble myself and the reader with this exception against your proposition. But I do it not without just cause. For although both title and chapter make profession as it were, of that meaning: yet within half a dozen lines after, you give me occasion to suspect the other sense: where you say, God hath provided means whereby every man learned and unlearned may sufficiently be instructed. And indeed, whereto else tendeth that discourse of the visibility of the Church, so much magnified and urged by you? In that sense than I deny the consequence of the proposition. But if you understand it according to the plain words, not of every man, but of all sorts of men. I still deny the consequence. For though it be out of doubt, that God hath appointed as well unlearned as learned to everlasting life; yet it is false, that there needeth any such rule or means, as of necessity to salvation. I deny your assumption. For God hath provided a rule, To the Assumption. whereby a man may be instructed in all points and questions of faith. Let them that would attain to salvation (saith i Chrysost. ad 1. Cor. hom. 6. Chrysostom) bestow their time in the Scriptures. And again, k Ad Joan. homil. 52. If we search the Scriptures diligently, we shall attain to salvation. We are not commanded (saith l justin. in dialog. cum Tryphon. justin the martyr) by Christ to give credit to the doctrines of men, but to those which the holy Prophets have published, and Christ hath taught. Therefore doth m Tertul. contra Hermog. cap. 22. Tertullian call Hermogenes to the Scripture, and adore the sufficiency thereof. By which only (as n Opus imperf. in Mat. homil. 49. one saith) after heresy once hath possessed the Churches, the true Church of Christ is to be found. A little after, He that would know which is the true Church of Christ, how shall he know it, but only by the Scriptures? From, and in which only, o Firmitatem. assurance of faith is to be had, as he saith presently after. God hath a true will (which also certainly taketh effect) that some men of all sorts should be saved, but not that every particular man should: as I proved before by your reason, because he hath not vouchsafed every one the means. Concerning p 1. Tim. 2. 3. the first place alleged by you, the Apostles own interpretation seemeth to allow that which I brought before out of Austin, of the divers conditions and sorts of men. For so himself speaketh. I will ver. 1. 2. that prayers, supplications and intercessions be made for all men: for Kings, and for all that are in authority. He showeth in these last words what he meaneth by all men, All sorts of men. The reason why he nameth Kings and magistrates, is, because they were at that time, not only heathen, but also enemies and persecutors: so that no such doctrine can be certainly and necessarily concluded out of this text, that God would have every particular man to be saved. For the avowing of the former exposition, we must understand, that the word all is often used in Scripture for every kind. q Mat. 4. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. jesus healed every sickness and every disease: not every particular, but all kind of diseases. r Mat. 12. 31. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven: not every particular sin, but every kind of sin, save only that against the holy Ghost. We heard before that of john, s joan. 11. 32. I will draw all to me: and t August. tract. 52. Saint Augustine's judgement thereupon. And if it were true, that God had (as you speak) a true will, that all men should be saved, how can that be true, which not we only, but the learnedst of your Papists hold, according to the Scriptures, that he appointed some to damnation, as well as other some to salvation; and that there can be no reason given why this man in particular is vouchsafed faith and salvation, that man is not, but only the will of God. As it is evidently proved by u Thomas ad Rom. 9 in. qq. disp. de praedest. q. 6. art. 2. 1. q. 23. art. 5. in 1. dist. 41. q. 1. ar. 3. Lombard. 1. dist. 41. & ibi Petr. de Aliac. Joan. Capreo. & alij. Thomas of Aquin, Rom. 9 and long before him, by S. Austin in many places. Ad Simplician. lib. 1. q. 2. de praedest. & great. cap. 46. Enchir. ad Laurent, cap. 32. 99 Epist. 105, ad Sixtus: you therefore do Austin wrong, who allege him in your margin, as if he thought that God would have every particular man to be saved; against which his doctrine x August. de spir. et. lit. c. 33. De correp. & great. cap. 14. in so many places is direct, and which (as I showed before) he purposely refuteth. y Prosp. epist. ad August. & in resp. ad excerpt. Genue. Prosper also is of the same opinion, as having defended that doctrine of Austin, against his adversaries: which also is the title & matter of a whole chapter z Prosp. de voc. gent. lib. 1. c. 12. Lib. 2. ca 2. 25. 28. cap. 19 in one of his books: That the saying of the Apostle, God will have all men to be saved, is meant of all kind of men. Therefore the place you bring must be understood according to the course of Prospers writings in the same treatise, that God hath not barred any nation, nor kept back any man from hearing & believing the Gospel. And farther, hath by his general providence and benesiles afforded means to stir up all to seek God: as himself speaks in two of the places you bring, and in some other. In a Prosper. de lib. arbitr. ad Russia. one place when he had said, that many infants are dead, who certainly have no part in the city of God; he addeth: And where is that, which by some that understand it not, is objected to us, as contrary hereunto, that God will have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of his truth? Are not they to be reckoned among those All men, who heretofore from time to time have perished without the knowledge of God? This might serve for answer to you in this point, concerning Gods will to have all men saved. But for your better satisfaction, or if that will not be, for the closer stopping of your mouth, I will add that solution, which your great Cardinal Bellarmine gives to these three places of Scripture that you allege, though in another question. These places (saith b Bellar. de great. et lib. arb. lib. 2. ca 3. §. 8. Bellarmine) only signify that God hindereth no man from salvation, yea that he hath appointed remedies and helps in common, and that he would have the preaching of the word and the sacraments to be common to all. In the same sense is God said to be c 1. Tim. 4. 10. the Saviour of all, because by his general providence he hath care of all, and hath left no man untouched, but either by the Gospel, or by the law, or by nature itself hath moved him to seek after God; as d Prosper. de voc. gent. lib. 2. cap. 25. & add cap. Gallor. cap. 8. De voc. gent. lib. 2. c. 10 Prosper saith: yea hath afforded means whereby every man may be saved. This place (as e Bellar. de great. & lib. arb. lib. 2. cap. 5. §. Illud item. Bellarmine saith) can hardly have any other exposition, than that latter. f Glossinterli. ad 1. Tim. 2. 3. Your Gloss expoundeth it of God's goodness to all men in respect of outward blessings, who makes his Sun to shine (saith it) upon good and bad. The other place of g 2. Pet. 3. 9 Peter (as we heard h Bellar. de gr. & lib. arb. lib. 2. cap. 3. Bellarmine say) signifieth no more, but that God keeps no man from being saved, but hath vouchsafed the word and sacraments in common to all. Your i Gloss. interl. ad 2. Pet. 3. Gloss restrains that Any to them that are to be converted, that is to the elect. That other which are to be converted, may be convertea. k Thomas ad 2. Pet. 3. Holk. in 2. q. 1. ad 4. princip. ●t. 1. Thomas and Holkot interpret it de voluntate signi: of that will of God, which we may gather by the signs he showeth: as for example, God calleth all men from danger of damnation, by precepts, counsels, threatenings, rewards. These are signs to us, that God would have all men to be saved: but there is another will called volunt as beneplaciti, the good pleasure of God, which is indeed truly that which God intendeth. Thomas addeth also a second exposition out of Damascen, but it can prove nothing, because it cannot be necessarily enforced out of the text, rather than the other, which is also more warrantable for the truth of it, as I will show another time, upon more just occasion, if it please God. l Caietan. ad 2. Pet. 3. Caietan allegeth three several interpretations, that of Damascens, a second of All kind of men, whereof before, and a third of the elect, which also he doth exemplify in the person of Peter. Thus I have showed, that the main foundation you build upon, is but weak, wanting ground of warrant from the word of God. But admit it were never so true, that God would have every man to be saved; which in some sense, as I have said, indeed is most true; yet were not the consequence of your proposition proved. For there might be sufficient means for every man's salvation, though there were no means to bring him to that same one, infallible, entire faith, which you conceit; but only to so much faith and knowledge as is necessary to salvation, by which he might be sufficiently instructed in matters of faith: which is all that you craftily seem to require in the conclusion of this section; whereas before, in your proposition, no less would serve the turn, then infallible instruction in all points, questions, and doubts of faith. A. D. §. 2. To this purpose saith S. Austin: Si Dei providentia praesidet Lib. de util. credendi. rebus humanis, non est desperandum, ab eodem ipso Deo auctoritatem aliquam constitutam esse, qua, velut certo gradu, nitentes attollamur in Deum. If God's providence (saith he) rule and govern human matters, (as he proveth that it doth) we may not despair, but that there is a certain authority appointed by the same God, upon which staying ourselves as upon a sure step, we may be lifted up to God. Saint Austin therefore doth acknowledge some authority to be needful, as a means whereby we may be lifted up to God. The which lifting up to God, is first begun by true faith. And because this authority is so needful a means, he would not have us doubt, but that God, whose providence stretcheth itself to all human matters, hath not failed to provide this means for us, it being a principal matter, and so principal, as upon which (according to the ordinary course) dependeth the sum of our salvation. We are not therefore (I say) to doubt, but that Almghtie God hath provided a means whereby Animalis homo qui non percipit ea que sunt spiritus Dei, a sensual man who hath no understanding of 1. Cor. 2. the divine mysteries of faith, may come to know them by a firm and infallible belief. A. W. To what purpose doth m August de vtil credon. cap. 16. Saint Austin bring this? To prove that God hath appointed a rule, by which all men may come to your infallible faith? Nothing less: but to show that where truth is not evident, as to men ordinarily it is not, there God hath provided means to stir them up to a diligent inquiry after it; or rather (as he plainly affirmeth) to a ridding of themselves of the cares and pleasures of this life, which he calls purging of the soul, that so they may be fit to embrace the truth. Authority (saith n August. ibid. Austin) is at hand for a man that is not able to discern the truth, that he may be fitted to it, and suffer himself to be purged. What is this authority? what is the use of it? Miracles & multitude make up this authority: whereby men not able to see truth, in itself, are moved to a reverend respect of the Church, & so to an examination of the doctrine, which upon trial is found true. Thus doth the wisdom of God provide for men's ignorance, that authority of miracles and multitude may draw them to a consideration of the truth: which, whensoever it shows itself so plainly that it cannot be doubted of, is to be preferred before all other means of persuading a man to believe, or holding him in belief whatsoever; as the same o August. cont. epist. Fundam. cap. 4. Austin saith: we deny not these to be good helps and strong means to the searching and finding of the truth, but to be sufficient and infallible grounds of religion, that a man should rely upon them, without trying the doctrine by the truth of God revealed in the Scriptures. It is indeed out of doubt among Christians, that God hath provided some means, by which a natural man (whom you absurdly call sensual) whereas p Rom. 8. 6. Ephes. 4. 18. the Apostle meaneth a man in his best natural estate since his fall) who cannot discern of God's truth, nor admit of it, may come to the knowledge thereof. Because it was impossible (saith q Iren. lib. 4. cap. 77. Irenaeus) to learn God without God, he teacheth men by his word (his son) to know God. It is he, that hath vouchsafed us this knowledge by the ministry of men, & work of the spirit in their hearts, that believe according to the word of God in the Scriptures. Let us not hear (saith r August. de unit. Eccles. cap. 3. Austin) This I say, This thou sayest, but let us hear, This saith the Lord; there are the Lords books extant, to the authority whereof both of us consent, both of us give credit, both of us obey: there let us seek the Church, there let us discuss our question. Other means of trial, then by the Scripture s August. cont. Donat. lib. 2. cap. 6. he accounteth, and calleth deceitful. The Scriptures are t Hieron. ad Mich. li. 1. ca 1 the bounds of the Church, beyond which she may not wander. u Ad Psal. 86. Whatsoever any man since the Apostles hath seen without warrant of Scripture, let him be never so holy, never so eloquent, it is of no authority: but only to move us to a consideration of that he saith. A. D. §. 3. Only the question is, what manner of thing this means must be; and where every man must seek and find it, that having found it he may (as S. Austen speaketh) stay himself upon it, as upon a sure step, thereby to be lifted up to a true faith, and by faith to God. The which question being of so great consequence, that it being well determined, a man need never make more question in matters of faith; I will (God willing) in the chapters following, endeavour to resolve it as clearly as I can. And this I purpose to do, first by setting down what conditions or properties this rule of faith must have: afterwards by proving particularly, that neither Scripture alone: not any natural wit or human learning: nor private spirit, can be this rule of faith. And finally that this rule which all men may safely, & must necessarily follow, can be no other, but the teaching of the Catholic Church. A. W. It is only thus far agreed betwixt us, that there must needs be means appointed by Almighty God, whereby all sorts of men may come to such a measure of knowledge, and faith, as is necessary to salvation, not whereby every man may be infallibly instructed in all points of religion, that he need never make more question in any matter of faith: though we grant that there is such a means provided by God, howsoever we in our weakness cannot make such use of it. But that we may understand matters aright, as we go forward; I must entreat the Reader to remember, that if all things to come in this your Treatise be sufficiently proved; yet you fail much of your main purpose. For this last Syllogism is the foundation of all yet behind, concerning one of the principal points which you propounded in the beginning, viz. That it was necessary to admit such an infallible authority in the Catholic Church. Now the proposition of this Syllogism I have denied, and refuted. Therefore if the assumption thereof were most certainly true, as it is undoubtedly false, yet could your conclusion be nothing sure: because the syllogism fails in the proposition: but let us see how you prove the assumption: If neither the Scripture alone, nor natural wit or learning, nor a private spirit, can be such a rule, than God hath provided no such rule, unless we admit an infallible authority in the Catholic Church. But neither the Scripture alone, nor natural wit or learning, nor a private spirit can be such a rule. Therefore God hath provided no such rule, unless we admit an infallible authority in the Catholic Church. This proposition is not set down by you in plain terms, but necessarily and certainly gathered out of the course you hold in the five next chapters: wherein the assumption and conclusion are manifestly contained; that in the four former; this in the tenth. The consequence of your proposition is very weak: For, To the Proposition. what if none of these (severally) be such a rule? may not all these together be? Sure there is nothing brought by you to the contrary. But if all these fail, what can you say to the contrary, why a general Council without the Pope's authority, should not be such a rule? Or, to go farther, do you not think that the Pope alone may serve the turn? And yet, in your opinion: neither the Council nor the Pope (severally considered) are the Church. Therefore it seems there may be such a rule, though there be no company of men, that hath any such authority as you speak of. Secondly, your consequence is but feeble in an other respect. For it presumeth, that if there be such an authority, there is such a rule. Whereas many thousands in the world may be utterly without means of knowing that there is such an authority, and so the means, as in regard of them, insufficient. Add hereunto, that although it were possible, and easy for every man to know and see the Church: yet the means might be insufficient: because there is no certain reason to persuade them, that they must believe this Church in all things: so that still, according to your doctrine, the Lord must needs have failed much in his providence, though he have given this authority to the Church: because he hath provided no means whereby every man may certainly be persuaded, that the Church hath such authority. Will you say, He hath appointed that all men should believe the Church? What can that help, when he hath not provided means, for all men to know, that they must believe her? Must we not come now to a private spirit, that is, to the teaching of God's spirit in the hearts of particular men? And if this must needs be in this one case, how prove you, it may not be so in other? To answer, we must believe the Church, is to beg the question, against all reason. A. D. CHAP. VI What conditions or properties must be found in the rule of Faith. THis rule, which Almighty God hath provided, as a sufficient means to direct men to the knowledge of true faith, necessary to salvation; must have three conditions or properties. First it must be certain and infallible; for otherwise it cannot be a sufficient foundation, whereupon to build faith, which (as is proved before) is absolutely infallible. Secondly it must be such, as may be certainly, and plainly known of all sorts of men. For if to any sort, it could not be known, or not certainly known, it could not be to them a rule or means, whereby they might direct themselves, to the certain knowledge of the true faith. Thirdly it must be universal, that it may not only make us know certainly, what is the true faith in some one or two, or more points, but absolutely in all points of faith. For otherwise it were not a sufficient means, whereby we may attain to an entire faith: which integrity of faith is necessary to salvation, in such wise, as hath been declared and proved before. A. W. Your assumption had three points, and, as it were parts, making three several sentences or propositions, which for the more To the assumption. plainness I will handle severally, as you have done. First of the Scripture. The rule of faith must be certain, and infallible, certainly and plainly known, and universal. The Scripture alone is not so. Therefore the Scripture alone is not the rule of faith. Ere I come to answer your Syllogism, give me leave to show how obscurely and doubtfully these properties are delivered by you. First infallible is taken in two divers senses. Faith must be infallible. The rule must be infallible. In the former we must needs expound infallible, not being deceived by holding any error, or nor doubting of that which it believeth. In the latter, what can infallible signify, but either that, which is certainly true, or that, which may not be doubted of? Is it plain dealing to speak so doubtfully? Or is it a good kind of reasoning to run the ring, and to dispute in a circle, as they speak in the Schools? x Chap. 3. Sect. 3. Before, you would prove the infallibility of faith, by the infallibility of the word of God, which it must believe: now you conclude the infallibility of the rule, from the infallibility of faith. Is not this to trifle, rather than to reason? Would you not laugh at us, if we should dispute thus? The elect cannot fall away, because the holy Ghost, that upholds them, is true God. The holy Ghost is true God, because the elect, whom he upholds, cannot fall away. View yourself in this glass. Secondly, what would a reasonable man conceive by these words, The rule must be certainly and plainly known: but that every man must be able to perceive that this, or that is the rule? What is your meaning? That y Chap. 7. Sect. 2. the rule must not be hard to be understood. Thirdly, your term of universality is not so plain, as it might have been; because it is commonly, I think every where in this Treatise, save in this one chapter, taken for that which belongs to all persons, times and places: no where for all points of doctrine, no not there, z Chap. 4. where you speak of the entireness of faith. And I pray you tell me, why, as you apply infallibility to faith and the rule, you do not in like sort deal with entireness, and say that the rule must be entire, because faith must be entire. I come now to your proposition, which I deny: because it To the proposition. is not necessary, that the rule of faith should be such, as may be certainly and plainly known, that is understood in every point. It is sufficient, if it may be understood in those points, that are necessary to salvation. Who would say, that he, which is to measure out timber in length, had not a perfect rule to that purpose, having an ordinary Carpenters rule, because there are upon the rule some figures, circles, triangles, squares and such like, the use whereof he understandeth not? If you run back to the entireness of faith, I will follow you for a refutation of my answer thereunto, and a founder proof of that your conceit. A. D. CHAP. VII. That Scripture alone cannot be this rule of Faith. A. W. The title of this chapter, as it shall appear by and by, agreeth not with the discourse in the chapter; and besides, propoundeth very craftily a matter, which is no way in question betwixt us and the Papists. For there is no Protestant divine, that thinks the Scripture alone, that is, without the ministery of man, a sufficient means for the salvation or instruction of all men, to which the fond example of this Author tendeth, where he talketh of locking up an unlearned man that cannot read, alone, without any help but a Bible. A. D. §. 1. Out of these former grounds four conclusions. The first conclusion is, that Scripture alone, especially as it is by Protestants translated into the English tongue; cannot be this rule of faith. This I prove. First, for that these translations fail in the first condition; that is to say, they are not infallible (as the rule of faith must be); for neither were the Scriptures written in this language, immediately by the holy Ghost: neither were the translators assisted by the same holy Ghost infallibly. Infallibly (I say) that is, in such sort, as it were unpossible that they should err in any point. Sith, therefore, the translators, as being but men, may err. (To say nothing of that which by Gregory Martin is proved: and by the often changes of new and variable translations is showed that some have erred) how can a man, (and especially an unlearned man, who hath not sufficient means, learning, nor leisure to compare the translations with the prime authentical original) how can (I say) such a man be infallibly sure, that this particular translation, which he hath, doth not err? And if in some places it err; how can he be infallibly sure, that in those places, which do seem to favour that sect, which he followeth, it doth not err? unless he will admit an unfallible authority in the Church, to assure us, that such, or such a translation doth not err, in any point; of which authority, I shall speak more hereafter. A. W. The Scripture is, in itself, such a rule or means, and (no doubt) so made effectual to some by reading, without any other outward help of man: but this is not the ordinary course, that God hath appointed, for the instruction of the people, in the knowledge of his truth. Therefore, if at any time we say, that the Scripture alone, is the rule of faith, by Alone, we sever it from the traditions and authority of men, not from their ministery: and ascribe unto it sufficiency in respect of the matter to be believed, not simply of the means to bring men to belief. The assumption, which you should prove (as also the title of your chapter professeth) is this, That the scripture alone, cannot be the rule of faith. By what reason do you prove it? Truly by none at all: but leaving the question, you dispute against the English translation. Wherefore I take it for granted, that, in your conscience, you acknowledge the sufficiency of the Scripture, to direct us in all matters and questions of faith. And thereupon I infer, that the infallible authority, which you would tie to the Church, is needless; because, without it, there is a sufficient rule of faith provided by Almighty God, whereby every man, learned and unlearned, may be instructed in all points of faith, what is to be holden for true. Hence it followeth, that the first of your main points, set down in the preface is false, and so your whole Treatise void & untrue. You tell us indeed afterward, that some of your reasons against the English translation have also force to prove, that the Scripture alone, in what language soever, is no sufficient means: but you neither show us, which those reasons are, nor are there any of sufficient weight to that purpose. Let them judge, that will read my answer. But first I will propound certain testimonies of the Father's concerning the infallibility & sufficiency of the Scriptures. When heresy (saith a Opus imperf. in Mat. 24. hom. 49. one) hath once gotten footing in the Church, there can be no refuge for Christians, which desire to know the true faith, but only to the Scriptures. And afterward, Christ commands, that they, that desire to have certainty of faith, fly to no other thing but to the Scriptures. In the same place, three several times in one half page, he assureth all men, that in the most dangerous days of Antichrist, there will be no way to know the true Church of Christ, b Nisi tantummodo per scripturas. but only by the Scriptures. If certainty of faith, & knowledge of the true Church may be had from the Scriptures, & in time of heresy, cannot else where be had: out of doubt the Scripture is certain and infallible, and so consequently the rule of faith. c Irenaeus li. 3. cap 1. Irenaeus tells us, that the Gospel is left to us in the Scriptures, to be the foundation and pillar of our faith. d Tertul. cont. Hermog. cap. 22. Tertullian calls to Hermogenes for proof of that he said, out of the Scriptures, and warneth him and his complices to beware of the woe, that is threatened against them, which add to, or take from the Scriptures, If they bring any doctrine, that is not written therein. e Origen. ad jerem. hom. 1. ad Rom. lib. 3. ad cap. 3. Origen is ours every where in this question, allowing not any expositions or senses, but those that are warranted by the Scriptures: requiring of us, to bring not our own, but the sayings of the holy Ghost, when we teach. This was the rule, which f Theodoret. hist. eccle. lib. 1. ca 7 Constantine the Emperor enjoined the Fathers of that first famous Council of Nice to follow, and which they accordingly followed. The books of the Evangelists and Apostles, and the Oracles of the old prophets, plainly instruct us (quoth that worthy Emperor) what we are to judge of matters g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. de divina voluntate vel lege, ut Cassiodorus. Triport. concerning God. Therefore laying aside all enemie-like discord, let us debate ad determine the points in question, by the testimonies of the Scriptures inspired by God. These, as we heard before, h Hieron. ad Mich. li. 1. ca: 1. Jerome makes the bounds of the Church, within which she must keep herself; and i Proclus. de Fide ad Armen. Anno. 430. Proclus Archbishop of Constantinople confineth faith to the same place. Faith (saith he) must abide within the evangelical, and Apostolical bounds. k Paschasius contra Macedon. lib. 1. cap. 1. Anno. 500 Paschasius a Cardinal of your Church (as you say) many years since, tied Macedonius the heretic to the Scriptures equiring him, either to show by evident testimonies of the word of God, that we must believe in the Church, or else to urge the point no further. For (as l Chrysost. ad 2. Tim. homil. 9 Chrysostome truly affirmeth) If there be any thing needful to be known, we shall learn it in the Scriptures. I mightfil whole sides with testimonies out of the Fathers, to this purpose, but I let them pass as needless: especially since yourself before confessed, that the word of God is infallible, and therefore, in that respect, sufficient to be the rule of faith. Now to your conclusion. The first part of this first conclusion is false, in regard of the infallibility of Scripture: which it should seem you saw well enough, and therefore balked that matter, and devised an other point, concerning our translation, to play withal. For what is it but trifling, when a man leaves the thing in question, and busies himself about the refuting of that, which besides himself, no man ever dreamt of? What English protestant ever affirmed, that our translation was infallible, that is, such as had no error in it, or might not be doubted of? Or who ever took it for the rule of faith? You make babies, which you beat as you list. Against the Scriptures being the rule of faith, which we affirm, you say nothing. Against the infallibility of our translation, which we grant not to be the rule of faith, you discourse at large; wherein I entreat the Reader to consider these few things with me. That which he speaks in disgrace of our translation, makes no more against it, then against all other whatsoever. For neither is any translation the language in which the Scripture was written; and no translators ever had any such infallible assistance by the holy Ghost. m Remember the 8000. places Chap. 4. sect. 10. Sure the author of the vulgar Latin translation had not such help as the Hebrew and Greek originals, which the translations of all the learned Papists themselves declare; n Pegnm, Vatablus, Isidorus, Clarius. Pagnin, Vatablus, Isidorus, Clarius, etc. As for o Martin was set out 1582. Fulks answer 1583. Gregory Martin's cavils, they were answered long since by D. Fulke: and I marvel that you can name them without blushing, seeing never a one of you durst undertake the defence of them, for the space of these 23. years. Nay, which is worse, you were not ashamed, in p Printed at Antwerp. 1600. the second edition of your Rhemish Testament, to blear your blind followers eyes, with a table of heretical corruptions in translating the Scriptures, as if you had propounded some new matter, whereas they were all taken out of that book of Martin's, and had long before been justified by D. Fulke, without any reply on your parts. You demand, how any unlearned man can be infallibly sure, that in those places which do seem to favour our sect, our translation doth not err. I answer, that there are better means of assurance for unlearned Protestants, concerning the truth of our translation, than any Papist can have by your imagined authority, for your vulgar Latin. First, it is no slender persuasion to any reasonable man, that those places you speak of, if not wholly, yet for the most part are translated with the same sense in other tongues which they have in ours; as in Spanish, French, Italian, Flemish, Dutch. Secondly, it is a great confirmation of the truth, that many of those texts which seem most to favour us, are the same in your vulgar and Rhemish editions, that they are in ours. Thirdly, the truth of ours is yet more clear, because every man may see, that in books of controversy betwixt us, our translations are seldom denied by the learned of your side, though you condemn our expositions. Fourthly, who may not easily discern how much more faithful our translation of those places, & all others is, than yours; seeing we are ready to make trial of it by the originals, the learned on your sides being judges: you are afraid of nothing more, then to have yours examined by the Hebrew and Greek? Fiftly, in the places you speak of, our translations deserve the more credit, because we labour to make them plain for every man's understanding, and show how they agree with the rest of the book and chapter: whereas your Rhemish Testament is so handled, that an English man of good understanding can hardly tell what to make of it, for the very words themselves in many places, as if you avoided nothing more than plainness. Sixtly, we persuade all men, as much as we can, to labour for the knowledge of the original tongues, that so they may be able to judge of our translation: you do all you can to keep men in the mist of ignorance, because you are afraid to have your corruptions discovered. Seventhly, though we allow not our ministers such an infinite authority as you give your Clergy: yet we teach, that it becomes Christian charity and modesty, neither to suspect a translation where the analogy of faith is kept, and the plain meaning of the holy Ghost not manifestly altered; nor to rest upon private conceit, against the general judgement of the learned, without very evident proof of error. These, amongst other, are reasonable grounds for a Christian to build upon, that he may have some good assurance of the truth of our translation. Now let us examine yours. We must (say you) admit an infallible authority in the Church, to assure us that such or such a translation doth not err in any point. First, this is more than needs. For if that authority can assure us, that the translation erreth not in any point needful to salvation in regard of the sense, it may be a sufficient ground for us to build our faith upon, though it should mistake some words in many points, and the sense too, in matters of less importance. Secondly, though we do admit such an authority in the Church, yet may we be far enough from any such assurance. For how shall I be sure, that the Church hath so affirmed of this, or that translation? How shall I know, what the Church is? A company (you say) of men upon earth, infallibly taught by the holy Ghost, what is the true faith in all points. Is this teaching common to every one of this company severally, or only annexed to them all jointly when they are together? What if all, what if the greater part assemble not? Is this company of Clergy men only, or of Lay men also? If of them, than belike these are none of the Church. But let us grant that, which (as it shall appear in due place) is neither true nor probable, that the Clergy only is the church, howsoever they may be so representatively. What assurance can any man have, who liveth not in the time of this assembly (I might say, in the place too, where it is) that there was any such assembly? that the greatest part agreed to the approving of such a translation? that this is the translation they agreed to? Especially seeing two q Bellun Papate Popes, since the last Conventicle of Trent, have set out your authentical translation diversly. Whether of these two was agreed on? How shall I be infallibly assured, that these Pope's altered nothing in the translation allowed by the Council? Shall I say more? What if this Council used not the means of examining this translation by the originals? What if most of them (as it is most certain) had no skill in the originals? and so did but leap after some few, like sheep, not understanding what they did? yet the shoot Anchor holds: the Pope allowed of their judgement. What if his skill were but indifferent? He could not err, you will say. What was the reason, why he allowed that translation? because the Council examined and approved it. But without him, all they might err, especially if they did not use all good means to find out the truth. Who assured him they did? Shall we have the holy Ghost like Mahomet's dove, to come and certify the Pope of this doubt? This is a matter of fact; and in things of such nature the Pope may err, even judicially. Well, I will deal bountifully with you. Put case all this be true. How shall I attain to infallible assurance hereof? Forsooth some Priest or friar, jesuit or other, telleth me, that things so passed, and therefore I am bound to believe it. Then my faith resteth not upon the authority of the Church, but upon the credit of him that saith, he is sent by the Church to make such report. Thus it cometh to pass, that the belief of unlearned Papists is nothing else but a persuasion they have, that such a priest knoweth what is true, and will not deceive them with any false informations. Tell me not of other Priests and jesuits consenting with him, that was thy spiritual father: for all these together, if there were ten times as many of them, are not the Church, in which only this infallible authority is to be found. And so there can be no such assurance in any unlearned Papist of the truth of your vulgar, or any other translation. I confess it is against both Charity and Civility to suspect a man of untruth, without just cause of suspicion: but such fruits grow upon such roots of Popery, that a man must needs be either uncivil in giving credit to nothing, though upon never so good reason; or else ridiculously credulous in believing every thing that shall be told him, though never so much against reason. But the spirit of God teacheth and persuadeth men to believe the Church. Are you they that mock at private spirits, and yet are glad to fly to that help? Is it not as likely the spirit should teach men which is the Scripture, as which is the Church? And assure them of a translation, as of this or that man's ordination and priesthood? If such proofs, as I have spoken of before, will serve, we are nothing inferior to you, but as well for weight as number, superior. If you say, the Scriptures enjoin us to believe the church: How shall I be assured that they are not in those places that seem to enjoin such a belief falsely translated? Because the Church saith, they are true in all points. What if the Church be deceived? It cannot be. Who saith so? The Scripture. Who tells you the Scripture saith so? The Church. What is to be ridiculous, if this be not? It might seem exceeding strange, that ever any reasonable man should be led away with such fopperies: if the holy Ghost had not foretold us of it, that r 2. Thess. 2. 11, 12. God would send men strong delusions, that they should believe lies, that all they might be damned which believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. These delusions poor ignorant Papists trust to, and to none more than to those which are the mainest of all, the authority of the Church, and impossibility of the Pope's erring: to which whosoever firmly cleaveth, can never be good Christian or faithful subject in any Church or state whatsoever. A. D. §. 2. Secondly, they fail in the second condition or property, which the rule of faith should have. For the Scriptures themselves alone, in what language soever, be obscure, and hard to be understood, at least to unlearned men, who cannot read them; and therefore the Scriptures alone cannot be unto unlearned men, a sufficient rule to instruct them in all points of faith; as is plain. For lock up an unlettered man, and an English Bible, for a time in a study, and he will come forth (I warrant you) as ignorant in matters of faith as he went in, if we add no other means to instruct him but the bare written word, which he cannot read. And yet unlearned men may be saved; and saved they cannot be, without an entire and unfallible faith: and this they cannot have, unless there be some certain rule and unfallible means provided by Almighty God, meet for their capacity, to teach them this faith: and Scripture alone (as is now proved) is not a rule meet for the capacity of unlearned men, or apt to instruct them sufficiently in all points of faith. But what speak I only of unlearned men? sith also learned men cannot by only reading the Scriptures, be unfallibly sure, that they do rightly understand them. For while they understand one way, perhaps they ought to understand another way: that which they understand plainly and literally, ought perhaps to be understood figuratively and mystically; and contrary, that which they understand figuratively, ought perhaps to be understood properly. And seeing that it is most certain, that all do not expound right, sith the exposition of one, is contrary to the exposition of another; (as right is never contrary to right) how should one be unfallibly sure, that he only expoundeth right; having nothing to assure him, but the seeming of his own sense and reason, which is as uncertain and fallible, as the judgements and persuasions of other men, who seem to themselves to have attained as well as he, the right interpretation or sense. Moreover there be many things required to the perfect understanding of Scripture, which are found but in very few: and those also in whom those gifts are, are not unfallibly sure, that they are so guided by those gifts, but that both they and others may prudently doubt, lest sometimes in their private expositions, as men, they err. And consequently, their private expositions cannot be that rule of faith, which we seek for; which must on the one side be determinately and plainly understood: and on the other side it must be unfallible, certain, and such as cannot err. A. W. That second condition of easiness to be understood, is no property necessarily belonging to the rule of faith: unless perhaps you imagine that God fails in his providence, if a man may not come to the knowledge of the truth, and everlasting life, without any pains. Is it not enough that the rule is such, as may be understood of every one, unless a man may know it by dreaming of it? Is not the knowledge of the means of salvation worthy of some care and labour? Are the Scriptures obscure and hard, that they cannot be understood? How then saith the holy Ghost, that s Psal. 19 8. they give wisdom unto the simple, and light to the eyes: that t & 119. 105. ver. 13. they are a lantern to our feet, and a light to our paths: that the entrance into them showeth light, and giveth understanding to the simple? Why doth the Apostle call them u 2. Pet. 1. 19 a light shining in a dark place? And yet all this is spoken of the Scriptures of the old Testament, which, in comparison of the new, are indeed obscure. Your Gloss expounds that place, x Glossa ad Psal. 119. Thy word is a lantern, of all the holy Scriptures. Your Cardinal y Joan. de Turrecrem. ad Psa. 18. & ad Psal. 118. vers. 130. Turrecremata seeing the plainness and clearness of the word of God, so directly and expressly commended, applieth those places to the new Testament, which (as he said) is bright and clear, which enlightens our darkness, and gives understanding to the humble. And who can doubt that the Scriptures are such, as may be understood by all men, seeing the Lord writ them for the instruction of all men: and our Saviour Christ in the Gospel commendeth the jews for searching the Scriptures, affirming that z joan. 5. 39 in them there is proof of his nature and office? But to what purpose were this search, if nothing could be found by it? So clear is this truth, that the ancient writers avow it without any doubting. a Clem. Alexan. orat. ad gentes. Hearken ye that be far off, hearken ye that be near: The word of God is hid from no man, it shineth to all men; there is no great darkness in the word. The Scriptures (saith b Jren. lib. 1. cap. 31. Irenaeus) are plain, and without doubtfulness: and may be heard alike of all men. Give heed (saith c justin. contra Tryph. justin the martyr) to those things that I will rehearse out of the Scriptures, which are such as need hearing only, and not any expounding. This, as the Greek showeth, is to be understood not only of those places which he was then to deliver, but generally of the Scriptures: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. d Cyrill. Alex. contra julian, lib. 7. That the Scriptures might be known to all men great and little, they are profitably commended to us in a familiar speech, so that they are not above any man's capacity. Yea there is nothing in them hard (saith e Lib. 9 the same author) to them that are conversant in them, as they ought to be, though every sentence be obscure to julian and his complices. The like hath f Epiph. haeres. 79. Epiphanius: All things are clear in the Scriptures to them who will bring to the understanding of the word of God, a religious kind of discourse. Where that same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which Epiphanius requireth, seemeth to be nothing else but a reverend examining of the Scripture, according to the holy Ghosts manner of speaking and reasoning in the Scripture. g Haeres. 69. In another place he saith, that All things are clear & plain in the holy Scriptures. So also saith h Chrysost. ad 2. Thess. hom. 3. Chrysostom. And a little after, he teacheth us how to restrain those All things. All things (saith he) that are necessary, are open and manifest. i Chrysost. hom. 3. de Lazaro. In another place comparing the Apostles with the Philosophers, he saith, that the Philosophers indeed writ obscurely, that they might be had in admiration for their eloquence and learning; but the Apostles and Prophets take a contrary course, delivering all things plainly and clearly to all men, as being the common teachers of all the world; that every one by himself might be able to learn those things that were taught, even by the only reading of them. He saith yet further, that k In Mat. hom. 1. the Scriptures are easy to be understood, of servants, of country people, of widows, of children, yea and of him that is very unskilful. I could be large in this matter: a few more testimonies shall suffice. God (saith l August. ad Psal. 8. Austin) hath applied the Scriptures to the understanding of infants and sucklings. Therefore m Contra julian. lib. 1. cap. 5. August. de peccat. mer. & remiss. lib. 2. cap. 36. he justly reproveth julian, who (as you Papists do now) laid out with many words the hardness of the Scripture: yet is it not to be denied, that the Scriptures are hard: but as hard as they are, enough may be learned out of them, even by the simplest, for his salvation. There is meat for strong men (saith n Fulgent. in serm. de Confessor. Fulgentius) and milk for babes. There hath God altogether provided for the salvation of all, whom he vouchsafeth to save. Every man (saith o August. de util. eredendi. cap. 6. Austin) may draw from thence as much as is sufficient for him. But is this knowledge to be had with idleness and carelessness? Nothing less. If you will persuade yourselves (saith p Chrysost. in Prologad Roman. Chrysostome) to bestow pains and diligence in reading, surely nothing shall be wanting for your understanding of the Scriptures. There are indeed (as q August. de doct. Christ. lib. 2. cap. 6. 9 Austin saith) hard places in the Scripture: yet no other, then are other where in plain terms expounded. There is great obscurity (saith r Ambros. ad Psal. 118. ser. 8. Ambrose) in the writings of the Prophets: but if thou knock at the gate of the Scriptures with a certain hand of thy mind, and diligently examine those things which are hidden, by little and little thou shalt begin to gather the sense of that which is spoker, and it shall be opened to thee by no other but by the word of God. For it is the order of the Scriptures (saith s Hieron. ad Esai. cap. 9 Jerome) to hard things, to join other that are plain. The circumstance of the Scripture (saith t August. qq. 83 q. 69. Austin) doth give light to the sense of it. The fewer (saith u Tertull. cont. Praxeam. Tertullian) must be understood by the more. That rule of x August. de util. cred. cap. 6. Augustine's must always be remembered, that we come with devout and religious affection to the reading of the Scriptures, as true religion requireth. And (as y Chrysost. in. Prologue. ad Roman. Chrysostome saith) we must seek, namely by prayer, if we will find the sense of the Scripture. For (as z Origen. in Exod. hom. 9 Origen saith upon the like occasion) it is hidden from them that are negligent, but opened to them that knock, and found of them that seek. The reason why God hath so tempered all things in scripture, writing some where plainly, some where obscurely, is given by a August. de doct. Christ. lib. 2. cap. 6. Austin: That it is done by God's provident care, that by labour he might beat down our pride, and draw away our minds from loathing: things easily attained to seem of little worth. Gloriously therefore (as b Cap. 9 he saith) and wholesomely hath the holy Ghost so tempered the Scriptures, that by plain and easy places he might provide for the satisfying of our hunger, and by hard and dark, take away loathing. But (as c Cap. 9 he addeth) in those places which are plain in the Scriptures, all those matters are found which contain faith and good manners: that is, hope and charity. This is that which d Marsil. Patavin. de fens. pacis. part. 1. cap. 9 Marsilius of Padua, above 800 years since, disputed against the Pope, That the Gospel was very sufficient, perfect & clear of itself, that by it we may be directed immediately, concerning, and in all things, which belong to a man's obtaining of everlasting life, and avoiding misery. As in the former property, having propounded your matter against the Scripture, you reason only against the English translation; so in this, that one may be some what suitable to the other, being to speak of the obscurity of the Scripture, you show that it is hard to one kind only, viz unlearned men: though you help the matter a little, afterward, by avouching the hardness of it, even to the learned also. The Scriptures (say you) are not the rule of faith. Why so? Because they are hard to be understood of those unlearned men, that cannot read them. Is not the teaching of the Church, whereto you ascribe so much, unpossible to be understood by them, that cannot hear? Is it therefore no sufficient rule? But the Scripture is not so hard, as you imagine: no not to them that cannot read, as long as they may hear it read, and have care to understand, and remember what they hear. Yea there are many in England, that know never a letter on the book, who notwithstanding are able to give a better sense of many places of Scripture, than some of your mass-priests, that can read their whole Portuise & Service book. Idle therefore and ridiculous is your example of a man locked up with a Bible: since by hearing it read, though himself cannot read, he may attain to more knowledge, than many of your blind guides have: who for all their skill in reading, understand never a word of their Epistles & Gospels, which they daily say at Mass, like prating parrots. Now for your conclusions inferred hereupon; the first, as I have showed, is false, that any such entire and infallible faith is necessary, so that without it a man cannot be saved: the second, of the means without which, such a faith cannot be had, is ordinarily true; the third, which denies the Scripture alone to be such a means, is either false, and not proved by you, or nothing to the purpose. Can any man truly say, that God hath not provided sufficient means for every man's salvation, because some men are unable to read the Scriptures, which are those means? Hath not God done his part, in making all men capable to read, though many neglect to learn? Therefore if the Scripture be sufficient for all men's instruction, as I have proved it to be, for all your supposed obscurity: God cannot be charged with want of care, because men are careless to use the means of their own salvation. But if by Scripture alone, you mean Scripture without any help of man; all you say is besides the matter. For no man ever was so foolish, as to make Scripture alone, in that sense, either the rule of faith, or a means of any good whatsoever: unless perhaps you Papists, according to the rest of your superstition in Agnus This, hallowed Grains, and such like, may have a conceit, as those priests (of whom e Opus imperf. in Math. hom. 43. an ancient writer speaketh) had, that a part of the Gospel hung about one's neck, may be a preservative against I know not what bodily or ghostly danger. You have undertaken to prove, that the scriptures are not the rule of faith, because they are hard to be understood. Their hardness, in respect of the ignorant, was avowed by you only against those, that cannot read. Now for the learned you tell us, that they cannot, by only reading the Scriptures, be infallibly sure, that they rightly understand them. What then? Therefore can they not at all be sure? Because reading only will not assure them: therefore is there no means, whereby they may be assured? Call to mind what I alleged before, out of Ambrose, Origen, Chrysostome, and Austin: who doubt not to assure men, that they may come to the understanding of the Scripture, if they will use the means of prayer and diligence. Whom shall we believe? These worthies of the Church, speaking also upon manifold experience; or you, whom we know not so much as by sight or name? If you can so far bewitch any of your own poor ignorant souls, yet sure there is no man of any indifferent good judgement, that will be carried away with this your simple authority, against the joint consent of those famous Divines. But you will add reason to your authority: let us hear it. It may be (say you) they ought to be understood otherwise. Therefore they cannot be sure, they rightly understand. Tell me, I pray you, for my better instruction, whether you make this doubt of all places of scripture, or of some only. It will not sink into my head, that you do so much condemn the scripture of obscurity, that you think no one place of it, can be certainly understood. Nay it is unpossible you should so despise the judgement of those, I named er while, or condemn your own capacity, as to deny, that f Canus loc. Thcol. lib. 3. c. 2 many texts of scripture are so evident, that a child cannot mistake the meaning of them. Then, that antecedent, It may be they ought to understand otherwise, in some places of scripture can have no place. Let us limit it, that the truth may appear. Some places of scripture are so hard, that a man may understand them otherwise, then, in truth, they are to be understood. This proposition is out of all question: what will you conclude hereupon? That men cannot be sure they rightly understand these places. I grant this too. Therefore these doubtful places are not to be made the foundation of our faith: but (as g August. ad Marcel. de Baptis. paruulo. Austin saith) We must rest upon those places of scripture, which are very manifest, that by them the harder may be expounded. But admit there were divers texts of scripture, which can by no means be certainly understood (which yet for my part, saving other men's better judgement, I do not think to be true, because God hath appointed every syllable of the scripture for our instruction in this life) but admit (I say) there were such places; yet would it not follow hereupon, that because those texts cannot be understood, therefore the scripture is so obscure, that it cannot be the rule of faith. For there may be sufficient means of salvation plainly discovered in the scriptures, though these places be not understood: yea it may be, and it is very likely, that the very same things which in these places are signified, are otherwhere in scripture apparently set down. You will say, this proveth that the scripture is obscure in some places. Who ever denied it? But this doth not prove, that it is hard to be understood in those points; that are necessary to salvation. Remember, I denied that second property of your rule, when I answered to your proposition. A man may be saved, though he understand not the true sense of every verse in the Bible; so he do not acknowledge it to be the word of God, and withal deny it to be true. But if it be so hard to understand the Scripture aright, is it good dealing in you to urge the expositions of men, with such peren ptorinesse, as if it were an heinous sin not to give credit to every interpretation of the Fathers? We h See my answer to 12. art. part 1. art. 5. acknowledge their learning and piety: but we remember they are men, and therefore may be deceived. Where they bring reason for their expositions, we consider of it with reverence to them: where they bring none, we try whether we can bring any proof of their interpretation. If we find none, we labour to expound the text so, as true reason (so far as we can judge) shows that we ought to do. Where our weakness affords no proof for our interpretation, nor against theirs, we are willing and ready to give more credit to them, then to ourselves. But it is no disgrace to them, that process of time, by God's blessing upon men's endeavours, should bring somewhat to light now, which in former ages hath not been understood. It cannot be hidden from any man (saith your i joan. Roffens. cont. Luth. art. 18. Bishop of Rochester) that many things are now more clearly beaten out and understood, as well in other things, as in the Gospel, than heretofore; because the ancient writers had not the Ice broken before them, neither did their time suffice to sound the depth of Scripture in all places. We may add hereunto another reason, observed by k Stella in Luc. 10. confiteor tibi pater. Stella, that, though of ourselves we were but Pigmees or dwarves, yet being carried upon the shoulders of them, as it were upon Giants, we may see farther than they could. Which is the reason, why l Salmero ad Rom. 5. disp. 51 an other of your writers doubts not to affirm, that the latter doctrines or expositions are the quicker sighted. But divers men (you say) expound diversly: and thereupon you demand, how any man can be sure he expounds truly, having nothing to assure him, but the seeming of his own sense and reason. When I read this objection, me thought I saw one of m Cicero in Acad. the old Academics or Sceptics, sweeting to prove, that there is no truth in any thing to be known, but that we must be content to rest upon likelihood. I pray you answer me, in good earnest: Are you persuaded of yourself (I speak to a Scholar) that you understand not the true meaning of any one place in Aristotle's Physics, with the commentaries upon him expounding diversly? Surely if your ignorance had been so great, I presume neither Rome, Rheims, Douai, nor any other University or College would have vouchsafed you the degree of a Bachelor in Arts. And yet n Arist. in Epist. ad Alexan. Aristotle himself professeth of that book, that he set it out, as if he had not set it out; because no body (for sooth) could understand it, but he, that had, or should hear him teach by word of mouth; as you speak of the preaching of the Church. If then it be possible to understand Aristotle's meaning, and that certainly, for all the divers interpretations of his expositors, and his own intended obscurity: give us leave to think, that the Lord God purposing to reveal his will by the scriptures, hath written in such sort, that man his creature, to whom (as o Gregor. 1. Epistola. 84. Gregory saith) he writ them, may without any just cause of doubting, understand so much at the least, as is necessary for his salvation; p joan. 20. 31: which was God's end in writing. But every interpreter thinks that himself hath attained to the right sense. What of that? Therefore, is there no means to discern, which interpretation is true, which false? Doth not this doubt accompany the writings of the Philosophers, as well as the scriptures? Never go about to persuade us to such an injurious and unthankful conceit towards God, as to imagine, that he hath vouchsafed us the use of reason, and the treasure of his word, to so little purpose. If it be unpossible to know, when we have the true sense of the scripture it had been far better, that no scripture had been written, but all left to the direction of your Pope, from time to time. Such blasphemies, as I have showed, some of your side utter: but a true Christian is so thoroughly persuaded of God's wisdom, that by his giving the scripture, he seeth all these your cavils & shifts refuted. Now in the last place you tell us, that there be many things required to the perfect understanding of scripture, which are found in very few; If by perfect understanding you mean an exact knowledge of all places: that you say is true, but not much to the purpose. For there is no such knowledge necessary, but that the scripture may be the rule of faith, though every text in it cannot be certainly understood. But consider a little, that if there be means of attaining to a perfect understanding of scripture, though they be many, yet by your confession they may be had: else are they in vain, if neither any man, nor all men can attain unto them: some to one, some to more, as it pleaseth God to bestow his gifts severally. If you mean, that many things are required to a perfect understanding of points necessary to salvation: see how much you differ from the judgement of the ancient Fathers. The truth is not hid (saith q Chrysost. in Math. hom. 24. Chrysostom) but from them, that will not seek it. And in r In Gen. hom. 3 an other place; The Scripture expoundeth itself, & suffereth no man to err. Let him that hath an heart (saith s August. de doctr. Christ. lib. 2. cap. 6. Austin) read those things, that go before, and those that follow, and he shall find the sense. For (as t Hieron. in Psal. 86: Jerome truly saith) the Lord hath spoken by his Gospel, not that a few should understand him, but that all should. u August. de doctr. Christ. lib. 2. cap. 6. Austin gave us the reason before, why he speaks plain in some places and not in all; To feed our hunger, and to keep our queasy stomachs from loathing our meat. But you require I know not what infallible assurance, that they which have these gifts, may be sure, they never err, in any of their private expositions. What assurance look you for? No revelation I hope. They may be sure not to err, if they deliver no expositions, but such, as they can evidently prove to be true. For other places, where the sense is hard, let them use all the diligence they can, and if it prove not very plain and certain, let them leave it ʸ uncertain, till it please God some other man may find the true meaning of it, and so make it known to men for the rule of faith, in that point it concerneth, as it is always in itself. Are you afraid, lest it should come to pass hereby, that many matters of faith should be unknown? The ignorance of these things, cannot hinder a man's salvation, and this inconvenience followeth the preaching of your Church, as well as the reading of the scripture: For how many points of doctrine are there, not yet decreed of by your Church? How many thousand places of scripture, not yet expounded by it? If then it be no hindrance to salvation, for a man to be ignorant of the truth, in many points and places of scripture, may not the written word of God be the rule of faith, though divers things in it be not certainly understood? A. D. §. 3. Thirdly, they fail in the third condition. For the Scriptures are not so universal, as the rule of faith had need to be. For this rule ought to be so universal, that it may be able, absolutely to resolve and determine all doubts and questions of faith, which either have been, or may hereafter be in controversy; for otherwise there were not sufficient means provided, by which, schism and heresies might be avoided: unity of faith, (so necessary to salvation) might be conserved among Christian men. A. W. The last imperfection, you note in the Scripture, whereby you would make it insufficient to be the rule of faith, is the scantness of it, that it containeth not all things necessary to be believed: which you go about to prove thus. The rule of faith must be able absolutely to resolve all doubts of faith, that have been, or may be. The Scripture is not able absolutely to resolve all such doubts. Therefore the Scripture is not the rule of faith. I should have let your proposition pass, without any question, To the proposition. but that I am so used to your craft in speaking doubtfully. For fear whereof I would fain understand, what the reason is, why you put in absolutely. If your intent be to signify, that the resolution must be certainly true, you might have spoken plainly, as you meant. But it may be you understand by resolving absolutely, such a kind of resolution, as shall take away all outward contention, which sometimes is indeed brought to pass by the Decrees of your Popes, no man daring, for fear of his life, once to open his mouth against them: Such a resolution the scripture cannot give, neither is it to be looked for, that the rule of faith should be of that nature. It is enough that it show plainly and certainly, what is true in all matters of faith. Secondly, the controversies of faith, you speak of, must be indeed matters, that require belief, otherwise the rule of faith is not to meddle with them. To speak more plain; It is not to be held as a duty of the rule of faith, that it should be able to determine of every idle question, that curious and contentious heads can devise. For example, if any man will make question of the Virgin Marie, whether she were (as x Lady hungerford's meditations upon the Beads, you teach) fifteen year old, or, perhaps eighteen or nineteen when our Saviour Christ her Son was borne; whether she were threescore & three when she died, or more or less. In these, & a thousand such matters, delivered as points of faith by your Priests and jesuits, it is not to be expected that the rule of faith should afford any resolution. We grant that infinite questions of your schoolmen, & positions of your Divines, cannot be determined by the rule of faith: but only thus, that they may be convinced to be no matters of belief, that a Christian must needs think thus or thus of them; because they cannot be proved, either one way, or other by scripture: your proposition therefore is true only of those things, that are needful to be believed, all which may be certainly resolved by it. What cannot, is not of necessity to be held by faith. Your proposition you prove, as you think, by this reason. If there be no sufficient means provided, by which schisms and Proof of the proposition. heresies may be avoided, and unity among Christians conserved, unless the rule of faith be able to resolve all such doubts, than it must be able to resolve them. But there is no sufficient means provided, whereby schisms and heresies may be avoided, and unitic conserved, unless the rule be able to resolve all such doubts. Therefore the rule of faith must be able to resolve them. If the proposition be taken in that sense, which the former may seem to have, as I showed, than I deny the consequence To the proposition. thereof; that is, I say it doth not follow, that if there be no sufficient means provided, whereby schisms and heresies shall de facto, and in event be avoided, unless the rule of faith be able to show what is true, what false in all questions, that any man will move, than the rule must be able so to do. The reason of my denial is, that, as before I answered, it is sufficient for the rule to show what is true, in matters of faith; and let us know, that those are not needful to be believed, of the truth whereof it saith nothing any way. The assumption also is false, though you speak not of actual To the assumption. avoiding of heresy and schism. For there is sufficient means provided for the avoiding of schism; because nothing must be held for certain truth, which cannot be proved to be according to the rule, which is the only measure of true unity among Christians. A. D. §. 4. But the Scriptures be not thus universal. For there be divers questions or doubts moved now a days, and those also touching very substantial matters, which are not expressly set down, nor determined by only Scripture. For where have we any express Scripture, to prove, that all those, and only those books which Catholics or Protestants hold for Scripture, are indeed God's word, and true Scripure? This we shall not find expressly set down in a part of Scripture. This point therefore, whereupon dependeth the certainty of every point, proved out of Scripture, cannot be made certain to our knowledge or belief, unless we admit some other infallible rule or authority, whereupon we may ground an unfallible belief: which infallible rule if we admit, to assure us, that there is at all any Scripture; and that those books and no other be Canonical Scripture; why should we not admit the same to assure us unfallibly, which is the true sense and meaning of the same Scripture? Hereupon S. Austin Lib. de utilit. credend. cap. 4. saith very well, Cur non apud eos diligentissimè requiram, quid Christus praeceperit, quorum auctoritate commotus, Christum aliquid praecepisse iam credidi? Tune mihi meliùs expositurus es, quid ille dixerit? etc. Why should I not most diligently ask or learn of those (he meaneth of the Catholic Church) what Christ hath commanded, by whose authority I was moved to believe, that Christ commanded any thing at all? What, wilt thou expound unto me better, what he hath said? that is to say, the meaning of his words: Quae Ibidem. (saith he) ista tanta dementia est, illis crede Christo esse credendum, & à nobis disce quid ille dixerit? multo facilius mihi persuaderem, Christo non esse credendum: quam de illo quidquam, nisi ab iis, per quos ei credidissem, discendum. What a madness is this in thee, to say, believe them (to wit the Catholics) that we must believe Christ (and the Scriptures to be his word), yet learn of us what Christ said? that is to say, what is the meaning of his word. I should (saith S. Austin) much more easily persuade myself that I ought not to believe Christ at all, then that I must learn any thing concerning him of any, except of those of whom I have already learned to believe in him. A. W. I deny your principal Assumption, wherein you deny the sufficiency of the Scripture for the determining of all matters of To the principal assumption. faith. For if the Scripture were not sufficient to this purpose, it might be lawful for men to add to the word of God, that which is wanting: but y Deut. 4. 2. that God hath precisely forbidden all men; Ye shall put nothing to the word which I command you, neither shall you take any thing from it: out of which, Cardinal z Caietan. ad Deut. 4. Cajetan saith, we may gather that the law of God is perfect. But of this place I have said more a Defence of the Reform. Cath. pa. 405. etc. other where; and our Divines are large and plentiful in this argument. b Act. 26. 12. The Apostle Paul affirmeth of himself, that he preached nothing but that which had been spoken by Moses and the Prophets: yea our Saviour every where avoucheth his doctrine by the writings of the old Testament. Indeed of whom should we know the will of God, but of God himself? who doubtless hath not delivered it so sparingly, in so many several books, but that it containeth whatsoever is needful to salvation. All things indeed that our Lord did, are not written, but those (saith c Cyril. Alexan. in Joan. lib. 12 cap. 68 Cyril) that the writers thought to be sufficient for manners and doctrine. I could overwhelm you with testimonies of the Fathers in this matter. A few shall serve. The Canonical Scripture (saith d August. de peccat. mer. lib. 3. cap. 7. Austin) is the rule of all. The letters of Bb. are reprehended by some other of graver authority. e Plenaria. General Counsels correct provincial, and the former are amended by the latter. Let the Scripture be judge (saith f Basil. epist. 8. another) and let those doctrines be held for true that agree with it. For the law of God or Scripture (as g Chrysost. ad 2 Cor. hom. 13. Chrysostom saith) is a most exact balance, square, and rule. Therefore let us pass by that which he or he thinks, and let us inquire all things of the Scriptures. h Athanas. con. gentes, vel idola. The holy Scriptures inspired by God, are sufficient to show the truth. And therefore (as i Hilar. de Trin. lib. 3. Hilary saith wisely and religiously) It were well we would content ourselves with those things that are written. If we will not, this is k Basil. de vera ac pia fide. Basils' censure of us, that we are without faith, and proud. It is a manifest argument of infidelity (saith Basil) and a certain sign of pride, if any man reject aught that is written, or attempt to bring in any thing that is not written. Therefore l joan. Damas'. orth. fid. lib. 1. cap. 1. Damascen saith, that the Church receiveth, acknowledgeth and reverenceth all things that are delivered by the law, the Prophets, the Apostles and Evangelists, and further seeketh not for any thing. I pray you show me some reason, if you can, why the Lord that doth not omit necessary matters, & repeateth those that are less needful to be known, should fill so many books of Scripture with the same histories and points of doctrine oftentimes rehearsed, and quite leave out many things of far greater importance, than some of those are which he hath caused to be written. Without the knowledge of many things recorded in the Scriptures, a man may be saved; but you deny salvation to all men that believe not whatsoever you teach them (and there is no end of your devices) though it have no warrant in any part of Scripture. Is it not better then to rest only upon that which both you and we acknowledge to be the word of God, then to give an infinite liberty to men of devising what they will; & to lay a grievous burden upon ourselves, to believe under pain of damnation, whatsoever they will father upon, I know not what impossibility of erring? Let him that hath eyes see, though the blind delight in blindness. The weakness of your principal Assumption, concerning the insufficiency of the Scriptures, you strive to fortify with this slender reason. If there be divers questions moved now a days, touching substantial Proof of the principal assumption. matters, which are not expressly set down, nor determined by only express Scripture, than the Scripture is not able to resolve all such doubts. But there are divers such questions. Therefore the Scripture is not able to resolve all such doubts. Ere I answer directly to your syllogism, I must note two To the Proposition. things in the propounding of it. First, by whom the questions you speak of, are moved. If by Papists, it is the shame and sin of your Church, to suffer idle and needless questions to be moved, of which there can be no determination but by a Council, to be held, no man knoweth how many years hence, ever or never. If you say, these questions are set on foot by us; all the world may discern your untruth. For we are certainly persuaded, that it is not lawful to accept any doctrine, as a point of faith, which cannot be proved by the Scriptures. But you will say, We think they are determinable by Scripture, though indeed they be not. At the least then, answer the proofs we bring out of Scripture, and on our part the controversy is ended. You will reply, that we will not be answered, but interpret Scripture as we list. Who sees not that this is a mere slander, since we stand not upon any private revelations, but on those rules of interpretation, which the fathers, according to the light of true reason, have left us, as it were by legacy? But this reply is also otherwise insufficient. For whereas you yield, as appears by this reason, that some things may be determined by Scripture; this objection denies that any point of doctrine whatsoever can be resolved of by it; because if that you say, be true, we will in all cases interpret Scripture as we please. Secondly, I observe another point, in respect of the time. If the questions you mean be such, as were never moved till now, and the Scripture never failed in any former doubts, which seems to be implied in that speech Now a days: me thinks there is no show of reason to imagine, that so many and so capital heresies, for the space of 1500 years should be refuted and overthrown by Scriptures; and now at the last, matters of less importance, and yet as you say, very substantial, should have no means of satisfaction by the like course. Doubtless if the Scripture hath hitherto been sufficient, it is no small wrong to suspect and accuse it now of insufficiency, especially in very substantial matters, necessary to be believed. Now concerning your syllogism, I deny the consequence To the proposition. of your proposition. What? is the Scripture so poor and weak, that it can determine nothing which is not expressly set down therein? What art, what writing of any man is so bare? Are the Scriptures only, that come immediately from the author of true reason, to be barred of that privilege, which all other writings justly challenge? Is not a necessary consequence, according to the rules of logic and reason, to be allowed of in Divinity as well as in the Mathematics, where consectaries are as certainly true, as the theorems, out of which they are drawn? Is it not as certain by Scripture, that there are three persons distinct each from other, and all three but one God, as if these very words had been expressly set down? But we must bear with you in this matter, who learned this shift of your great Cardinal Bellarmine. We say (quoth m Bellarm. de verb Dei non script. lib. 4. c. 3 in princip. Bellarmine, where he delivereth the opinion of your Church) that the whole doctrine of faith and manners, is not expressly contained in the Scriptures. Expressly contained? To be expressed, and to be contained, are (at the least) divers, if not contrary. But I pray you, who saith otherwise? Not the Protestants doubtless: whose opinion he propoundeth presently, after this sort. They preach (saith n Vbisuprae. Bellarmine, speaking of us) that all things necessary to faith and manners, are contained in the Scriptures. What is become now of expressly? For pure shame he was glad to leave out that word, though he had craftily stolen it in before. Well, this may serve to make good my denial of your proposition. A thing may be determinable by Scripture, though the determination be not expressly set down therein. Take not advantage of my words, because I say determinable, and you determined. For the question is not what is determined, that is, set down in plain words; but it is sufficient if the Scripture afford us the determination of matters by certain consequence, upon truth therein delivered. Therefore whereas you add, by only express Scripture: only and express are but mere shifts, nothing at all against that we affirm: who require besides only express words of Scripture, the ministry and industry of man, to gather and conclude points of doctrine out of that which is written in the Scripture. Your assumption is true, that there are divers questions not determinable To the proof of the assumption. by express Scripture, and yet (as I have showed) the Scripture is sufficient for the determining of all points of faith necessary to salvation. Concerning the particular question, you bring for the proof of your assumption. First you seem to grant (and that grant is as much as we require) that it may be gathered out of the Scripture by consequence, that those books which we and you acknowledge to be the word of God, are so indeed: otherwise, why say you, that we shall not find it expressly set down in a part of Scripture? Secondly, I demand, as before, who moveth this question? Not the Protestants, who account it a kind of blasphemy to deny it, and of infidelity to doubt of it. Your holy Church of Rome is she that hath buzzed this matter into Christian men's ears, so that religion is thereby become a scorn to Atheists, while you make no conscience of discrediting the word of God, so you may by any means increase the reputation of your Apostatical sea. The truth is, that this opinion is not a matter now a days first set abroach: for Atheists (such as o August. cont. Faust. lib. 32. cap. 21. julian) have from time to time objected it; therefore might you have spared to mention it, as a question now a days moved. But it is new and strange, yea almost incredible, that Christians, and those Divines, yea such as think religion resteth on their shoulders, as the Poets feign heaven doth upon Atlas, should make a question whether the Scriptures be the word of God or no, and so give men occasion to doubt thereof. Thirdly, if this matter cannot be resolved of by the Scripture, we shall be little the nearer for the infallible authority you have devised. Christians need it not, who are already persuaded, that the books of the old and new Testament are the undoubted word of God: and with Christians only, to speak truly and properly, hath the Church to do, ordinarily. But it falleth out sometimes, that amongst those which make profession of Christianity, there are some found who are in doubt of this point. If this doubt arise in the heart of a man that maketh conscience of religion, he is to be taught, that it is but a tentation of Satan, and therefore not to be harkened to. Further, we must demand the reasons of his doubting, p August. confess. lib. 6. ca 5. De morib. Eccles. Cathol. cap 29. showing him how absurd and unreasonable a matter it is, to make question of that, which generally both Protestants and Papists hold, and which hath been held by the space of 1500. years, unless he be able to give very sufficient cause why he may doubt. His arguments, if he bring any, must be answered, and the Scriptures avowed by the matter and manner of writing; which is such, as will certainly, if not convert, yet q Agrippa de vanit. scient, cap. 100 convince any man in the world, that man is not the deviser of those books. If he be an Atheist, that derideth religion, and withal so unreasonable, that the former and many other important proofs will not persuade him, what remains, but that the magistrate whom God hath appointed to see true religion established, cut off so corrupt a member by lawful authority? Where this course is not taken, what means have you to help the matter? Will you tell him of an infallible authority in the Church? He will laugh at your folly, who instead of proving beg the question. I do not believe (saith he) there is any such Church or authority. If I doubt of the Scripture, you prove it by the Church: if I believe there is not any such Church, or authority in the Church, you will persuade me by Scripture. To say the truth, who can be so patient, or foolish rather, as to suffer himself to be led up & down in a ring, as it were a door turning upon hinges, still in the same place? The authority of the Church is an argument of such weight, as that he is not to be counted either a Christian, or a man of reason, that is not much moved therewithal: yea so much, as that he will not dissent from the continual judgement of it, unless he be driven to it by certain reason: but yet this authority is not infallible. Christ evermore judgeth truly (saith r August. cont. Cresc. lib. 2. cap. 21. Austin) but the Ecclesiastical judges, as being men, are very often deceived. And therefore he saith s De nat. & great. cap. 61. in another place, that he is not bound to give his consent, without liberty to refuse, to any thing but the Canonical Scriptures. And in t Epist. 19 ad Hier. & add Paulin. epist. 112. cap. 1. an Epistle to Jerome, I have learned (saith he) to give this reverence and honour only to those books that are called Canonical, that I constantly believe that no writer of any of them hath erred. But to make an end of this needless question, where both sides are agreed, let us hear Saint Austin speak to the Manichees: If you ask us (saith u August. cont. Faust. lib. 32. cap. 21. he) how we know that these be the Apostles writings, we make you this short answer, Thence we know these to be the Apostles, whence you know that Manicheus was the author of yours. And x Confess. lib. 6 cap. 5. in his Confessions he setteth out the matter more at large, that when he considered how many things we are fain to believe, for which we have no certain proof, it pleased God, at the last to persuade him, that they were worthy of just reproof, which would not give credit to those books of God, which he had established almost in all countries with such authority: and that they were (at no hand) to be harkened unto, who would ask him how he knew that those books were vouchsafed to mankind by the spirit of the only true God. This (as y Greg. de Valent. Analys. fid. lib. 1. c. 15. Valentia saith) may be known by the admirable effect these books work in the hearts of men, in stirring them up to virtue, without any such eloquence and persuasions, as other writer's stuff their books withal, and yet never move us as these do. The like hath z Staple. de autorit. script. lib. 2. cap. 5. Stapleton, where he speaks of the means which the Church useth to discern of the Scriptures. It is not our meaning to shut out the holy Ghost, who is the teacher of the children of God, as in other points, so also in this, but to stop the mouths of Atheists and importunate men, who object so unreasonably against the judgement of the whole Christian world, without authority or reason. But of the spirit, and teaching thereof, hereafter. Whatsoever you gather upon the former point, it must needs be of small strength, because that hath need of better proof. But let us grant that it is true: doth it therefore seem necessary or reasonable to you, that we should admit the interpretation of the Church, as you speak, without any trial; because by the authority thereof we believe that the Scriptures are the word of God? What if God gave the Church no further authority, but only to assure us of the Scripture? It doth not follow that we must give credit to whatsoever a man will say, because in some one point he must be believed. We may not in reason doubt, but that the records which we find in an office, are true, because they are avouched so to be by the clerk and master of the office. But what of that? may we therefore take them for competent judges, so that we must of necessity hold that to be the meaning of the record, which they deliver to us as such? I am persuaded no man of any understanding will say so. Yet do we acknowledge that a August. ad Honor. de util. creden. contra Manich. Austin speaketh with very great reason. For where should an ignorant man inquire of the sense of the Scripture, rather than there, where be learned it was scripture? He shall not deal either kindly or reasonably, if he refuse their judgement, other things being alike, for any man's else whatsoever; and therefore I pray you be not offended, if we, that lived not in the times of Popish ignorance, do give credit to our own Church, by which we have been persuaded, that these are the scriptures of God, rather than to your Priests and Clergy, from whom we have not received this persuasion. But the case, in Saint Augustine's time, was far otherwise. The Manichees against whom he wrote that Treatise, would not suffer a man to believe any thing, though it were written in scripture, unless it were proved true by reason: and yet themselves, as b Cap. 14. Austin showeth in the chapter you allege, were driven to allow faith without reason: and to lay this for a ground, that a man must believe Christ, that is, he must believe that there was such a man, though he have no proof for it, but report generally continued a long time: which Austin confesseth to have been the authority, that first moved him to believe. Now the Manichees acknowledging thus much of Christ, and that only upon belief, without reason, brought in monstrous opinions of their own: which could in no sort agree with the scriptures. Therefore being pressed hard by the Divines of that age, with scripture, they denied all authority thereunto; farther than they in their ignorance and heresy, could make it serve for their unreasonable conceits. Yea c August. contra epist. fundament. Manich. they made small or no reckoning of the scriptures, in comparison of their fundamental Epistle, and such other blasphemies written by Manes their founder, and some of his followers. Had not Austin great reason then, to answer as he doth? not concerning the sense of scripture, to which you falsely apply his words, but touching those books of theirs, d August. de haer. cap. 46. wherein they had written horrible and senseless absurdities against religion and reason. Surely (saith e August. contra epist. fund. Austin) since by their authority I have been brought to believe, that there was such an one as Christ, because it was so generally held, time out of mind; I will never run to a few of yours, who learned of them, that Christ was, to know what I must believe of him. Why should I not rather believe them, that the scriptures teach, what is to be held of Christ, than you, that, in your writings only is the truth: since in this matter you can bring no reason, why I should believe you rather than them? For since by them (saith Austin) I have believed, being moved, by the authority of their general consent: if they should fail, and could teach nothing (which words you craftily leave out) I should easilier persuade myself, not to believe Christ, then to believe any thing of him, by any man's report but by theirs, who first made me believe in him. Your gloss, of believing the scriptures to be his word, and what is the meaning of his word, agree not either with the place you allege (as may appear evidently to him that will read it) or f August. de haeres. cap. 46. Epiphan. lib. 2. hares. 66. with their heresy; but of both I have spoken sufficiently. A. D. §. 5. Thus I have proved, that those English translations, whereupon Protestants commonly build their faith, cannot be a sufficient rule of true Christian faith. First because they are not infallibly free from error. Secondly, for that all men cannot read them; neither can any by only reading, be sure to attain the right sense, without which to have the words of Scripture, is to have them, as Austin saith, ad speciem, non ad salutem, for a show, but not to salvation. Lastly, for that all points of doctrine, which appertain to true Christian faith, are not expressly set down in scripture, as, beside my proof Saint Austin, Saint Basil, and Epiphanius do affirm. Some of Aug. l. 5. de bap. con. donat. c. 23 Basil. lib. de Sp. cap. 29. Epiph. haer. 61. which reasons have also force to prove, that scripture alone, in what language soever, is not a fit means, to instruct sufficiently, all sorts of men in all matters of faith. Wherefore I may absolutely conclude, that Scripture alone cannot be that rule of faith, which we seek for. A. W. Thus in steed of disputing against the scriptures being the rule of faith, which was the matter you propounded, you have made a discourse against our translations, having fancied to yourself a conceit, which besides yourself, I think no man ever dreamt of; viz. that we commonly build our faith upon our English translation. So that the Scripture may well be the rule of faith, for aught that you have said against it, concerning the first property of certain truth, which it were blasphemy to deny of the scripture. For the second, that the rule must be easy to understand: I have showed, that there is no necessity of that condition, and that the scripture is easy in matters necessary to salvation. In the last point, of the scriptures defect, touching many things, that must needs be believed, you do both wrong God, in making his word written so unperfect, and by a foolish craft, instead of proving, that the scripture containeth not all matters of faith needful to salvation, undertake to show (that which no man denieth) that all points of belief are not expressly set down and determined by scripture. And lest we should forget your shuffling, in this point, you offer new proof of a needless matter, from the authority of Austin, Basil, and Epiphanius: whose testimonies I alleged before, to prove the sufficiency of the scripture, in all matters necessary to salvation. The places by you alleged are not of such matters, neither speak of things not expressly contained, but only show, that for matters of fact & ceremony, the Apostles have not determined all particulars. The Apostles (saith g Aug. de baptis. contra Donat. lib. 5. ca 23 Austin) have commanded nothing, touching not rebaptising them, which have been baptized by heretics, but the custom which was pleaded against Cyprian, is to be believed to have had beginning from their tradition: as there are many things, which the Church every where holdeth, that we well believe therefore to have been enjoined by the Apostles, though they are not found written. What is this to prove, that there are matters necessary to be believed to salvation, which are not expressed in the scriptures? h Basil. de spirsancto. Basil was not the the author of that Treatise, at the least of the latter part of it, from about the 17. chapter, and so forward. That appeareth first, by observing the difference of style, being neither like Basils' writing, nor in one place like an other, as i Erasm. in praef ad illum librum Erasmus hath truly observed, who translated it. Secondly, by the fond discourse he maketh, propounding one thing, handling an other, and concluding a third, which not only Basil would never have done, but no man of any discretion. Last of all, he k Cap. 27. 29. bewrayeth himself to be a counterfeit, by speaking of Meletius, as one dead long before, who lived in his time, & overlived him, as it is manifest by l Socrat. lib. 4. cap. 26. & lib. 5. cap. 8. the Ecclesiastical history. But admit the book were Basils': what is there in it to prove, that all points of doctrine, which appertain to true Christian faith, are not expressly set down in Scripture? This Author saith, that we must believe oraditions. What? In matters of doctrine? There is no such word in him. He speaketh of outward carriage in ceremonies and phrases of speech. The question, m Cap. 25. 27. 29. in that part of his Treatise, is of the preposition with, that is (to speak that every man may understand) whether it be lawful to say in the Church service, and otherwise, Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, with the holy Ghost; or whether we must needs say, and to the holy Ghost, not with. For this speech that author pleads tradition. Do we deny any such matter? Or do we not acknowledge the liberty and authority of the Churches, in such matters? Who sees not, that our custom now is to say, Glory be to the Father, to the Son, and to the holy Ghost? Not that thereby we condemn the other kind of speech, but because in matters left to our liberty, we take that which seemeth fittest. n Epiphan. li. 2 cap. 61. Epiphanius speaking of prayer for the dead, which hath no warrant of Scripture, is glad to help himself with the authority of tradition: telling us, that some things must be held by tradition, and not all taken out of the scriptures. But Epiphanius doth not say, that this is a doctrine, or action necessary to salvation. A. D. §. 6. Some object against this conclusion, that place of S. Paul. Omnis Scriptura divinitùs inspirata, utilis est ad docendum etc. ut perfectus sit homo, etc. But this place proveth nothing against that which I have said. For it saith not, that scripture alone is sufficient to instruct a man to perfection, but that it is profitable for this purpose, as it is indeed; and the rather, because, it commendeth unto us the authority of the Church, which (as I shall afterwards prove) is sufficient. Now it is certain, that to be profitable, and to be of itself alone sufficient, be far different things. Stones and Timber be profitable to the building of an house: yet they alone, without a workman to square them, and set them in order, be not sufficient for this purpose. A. W. o 2. Tim. 3. 16 17. Of this place I have spoken sufficiently p Defence of the reformed Catholic. page. 416. otherwhere, and showed that the Scriptures are able to make us wise to salvation, and therefore sufficient to that purpose, Now the Apostle having given that commendation to the scripture, vers. 15. proceedeth in the next to exemplify that in particular, which he had before said in general, It is able to make thee wise to salvation, it is able to fit thee to teaching, reproving, correcting, instructing. Can any reasonable man think, that the Apostle, delivering (by way of amplification) his former commendation of the scripture, that he might the rather stir up Timothy to the study of it, would say less, than he had done before? But it is a great deal less, to say no more, but the scripture is profitable to such purposes, then to commend it, as able to make a man wise to salvation. Therefore, though the word indeed do not expressly signify sufficiency: yet it cannot be doubted, but the profit Hugo Cardinalis ad 2. Tim. 3 mentioned implieth such a sufficiency; especially since he addeth perfection, which must arise from this word of God. And so (as q Defence of the reformed Cathol. pag. 416. I have showed elsewhere) do r Chrysost. & Theophyl. ad 2. Tim. 3. 16. Chrysostome and Theophylact understand it, who make the Apostle speak to Timothy to this effect, that he being now to be offered up, leaveth the scriptures in his steed of which he may in all things take advise, and counsel, as if the Apostle himself were present with him. But you forsooth would make us believe, that the scripture is indeed profitable to this end, but not sufficient. Is not the knowledge of arts & tongues, philosophy and history, of very good use also to this purpose? Slender then, & too slender is the commendation our Apostle giveth the scriptures, if it be of no greater excellency than these human furtherances, but only in a certain degree of profit. To help the matter you propound one particular, for which the scripture is profitable: namely to commend unto us the authority of the Church. But neither doth it commend to us any such authority, as you imagine, &, if that be the rule of the scripture, one sentence had been as good & better than the whole volume of the Bible: which to say, were no less than blasphemy. But I am afraid the scriptures, that Paul there speaks of, which were the books of the old Testament, are rather unprofitable, than profitable to that purpose. For they often amplify & magnify the word of God written, in so plain terms, that eveuery man may understand them: as for the authority, you fancy to yourself, they speak either nothing, or little, and that very obscurely thereof. But we shall see, in the rest of your Treatise, what proof you can find of this authority in Moses and the Prophets, and the writers of the old Testament. Now at the last, you remember yourself again, and return to your old shift of Scripture alone. Which you devised of your own head, that you might have somewhat to confute. It is not all one (say you) to be profitable, and to be of itself alone sufficient. And you tell us, This is certain. Who ever denied it? Or who but he, that wanted matter to reply against, would cast such doubts? Especially who would have wasted time and paper to prove or declare a thing so certain and clear, by a needless comparison? The scripture without any doctrines of men (call them what you will, & imagine what assistance of the spirit you list) is sufficient to teach all men the true & certain way to salvation. This is that we affirm, not as you ridiculously slander us, that there needs no ministery of man, for the instructing of any one in the understanding of any place of scripture, or knowledge of any point of religion. These are your own fancies, or monsters rather, with which like bugbears, you scare your poor seduced followers, and blear the eyes of the ignorant, that they may not inquire, what we teach indeed, but hate our doctrine, before they any way understand it. But they that have any care of their own salvation, will not suffer themselves to be led by you hoodwinked to destruction: if any man will needs be wilfully ignorant, the Lord shall require his blood at his own hands: we have done our duty in teaching and proving the truth. A. D. CHAP. VIII. That no natural wit or learning can be the rule of faith. A. W. If you had bestowed that pains and time in confirming your proposition, which you waste needlessly in proving that, which no man denieth: you might perhaps have spoken somewhat more to the purpose, but it is lost labour to go about the refutation of that, which besides yourself, no body ever thought on. That natural wit or learning should be the rule of faith, is a conceit, amongst Christians never heard of, yet this have you propounded for to exercise your strength upon. A. D. §. 1. The second conclusion is, that no one man's natural wit and learning; neither any company of men never so learned (only as they are learned men, not infallibly assisted by the holy Spirit of God) can, either by interpreting Scripture, or otherwise, be this rule of faith. A. W. Here you set out the former proposition more at large, in respect of the Antecedent, or first part of it. Neither any one man's natural wit, nor many men's joined together, whatsoever their learning be, or what course soever they take, as natural men, can be the rule of faith: either for any doctrine, they shall deliver, or for any interpretation, they shall make of Scripture. But what needeth all this ado? you do but fight with your own shadow, yet let us see how you have bestirred yourself. A. D. §. 2. This I prove. Because all this wit and learning, be it never so exquisite or rare, is human, natural, and fallible: and therefore it cannot be a sufficient foundation, whereupon to build a divine, supernatural, and infallible faith. This reason I confirm. Because whatsoever a man, never so witty and learned propoundeth to others, to be believed, upon the only credit of his word, wit, or human study and learning: it can have no more certainty, then is this his word, wit, and learning. But these being all natural and human, are subject to error, and deceit. For Omnis homo mendax, there is no man, but he may, Rom. 3. 4. both deceive, and be deceived: and may (if he have no other help, but of nature, and industry) both be deceived, in thinking that to be God's word, which is not: or that to be the true meaning, and sense of God's word, which is not: and may also deceive others, whilst being too confident of his wit and learning, he presumeth to teach others, these his erroneous opinions. Therefore the belief which shall be built upon such a man's word, and teaching, is, or may be a false belief: and always is uncertain and fallible: and therefore can never be a true Divine and Christian faith, which always is most certain and infallible. And this which I have said of the wit and learning of one particular man: may also be applied, to prove against the wit and learning of any company of men, having no assistance, but their own natural gifts, and industry of study or reading. A. W. No human, natural, and fallible thing can be the rule of faith. Natural wit and learning, though never so exquisite, are human, natural, and fallible. Therefore no human wit nor learning can be the rule of faith. I grant this reason and conclusion to be sound and true: only in the confirmation of it, I find some occasion to note one thing for the better understanding of the matter, we have in hand. If any man would speak for natural wit, and learning in this question, he would not say, as the matter is here propounded, that any man's wit or learning were the rule of faith, but that the wit and learning of man might find out somewhat at least in the Scripture, whereupon faith might safely be grounded. For example (as I said once before) though it be not written any where in the Scripture, that there are three persons distinct each from other, and all these three but one God: yet may a man by natural wit and learning gather this out of the Scripture, and confirm it thence so plainly, and certainly, that any Christian may hold those points as Articles of faith. Not that they are to be taken for such, upon the only credit of his word, (which is a second thing, wherein you mistake the matter) but because, though every man be a liar; yet a man may see and show a truth, which cannot, nor may be suspected of falsehood or error. And a belief, builded upon Doctrine so taught, shall be free from possibility of erring, and as you speak, infallible. This I thought good to observe by occasion of your confirmation, where you suppose, that a man delivereth matters to be believed, upon the bare credit of his word, by reason of his wit and learning. In this sense it is out of all question, that no natural wit or learning of any, many, or all the men in the world, can be the rule of faith, but that, which a man deduceth by necessary and certain consequence, through his wit and learning, out of the Scriptures, is as strong and sure a foundation of faith, as that, which is expressed there in plain terms. We may see by this, it was not for nothing, that f Bellar. de verb. Dei non script. lib. 4. cap. 3. Bellarmine, and you by his example, foist in expressly into the question, which is betwixt us, concerning the sufficiency of the Scriptures to be the rule of faith. But of this enough. A. D. §. 3. This same reason I confirm yet again more strongly. For the rule of faith must be able to propose to us unfallibly, not only the letters and seeming sense, but the true sense of God's word, and the sense intended by the holy Spirit of God, the author of this word; otherwise it cannot be a sufficient means to breed in us an infallible Christian faith and belief, which is only grounded upon the true sense intended by Almighty God, the prime or first verity, the speaker of this word. But no man, nor no company of men can by their natural wit and learning tell unfallibly what (especially in all points of faith) is the true intended sense of God's word. For as S. Paul saith, Quis cognovit sensum Domini? Who hath known (to wit, by nature, art or learning) the sense of our Lord? Quae Dei sunt (saith the same S. Paul) nemo cognovit nisi spiritus Dei: those things which are of God, no man hath known, but the spirit of God. And therefore that knowledge which himself had of divine matters, came not from any natural wit of man, but (as he plainly affirmeth) from the spirit of God: Nobis revelavit Deus per Spiritum suum: God hath revealed unto us (saith he) by his Spirit. Therefore we may well conclude, That no one man, nor no company of men (without the assistance of God's spirit) can either by interpreting Scripture, or otherwise be the rule of faith. A. W. It seemeth the former reason did not fully satisfy yourself, because you make profession of a more strong confirmation thereof: which lieth thus: The rule of faith must be able to propose infallibly to us the true sense of the word of God, intended by the holy Ghost. But no natural wit or learning is able to propose infallibly that sense. Therefore no natural wit or learning can be the rule of faith. I have made bold to alter your proposition or mayor a little, To the Proposition. as I persuade myself not without reason. You make a kind of difference betwixt the true sense of God's word, and the sense intended by the holy Ghost. These two in my poor opinion are all one: for there is no sense of any piece of Scripture to be accounted true, but that which delivereth the holy Ghosts meaning in that place. The reason is, for that the use of interpretation is nothing else but to make us understand what the Lord meant to teach us, or to say to us by those words. I deny not, that a man may deliver true and sound divinity, though he misconceive & misinterpret a text of Scriptures but this is that I say, that howsoever he teach true doctrine by his exposition, yet he doth not give us the true sense of that word of God, if he propound nor the sense which was there intended by the holy Ghost; every truth of God, is not the true sense of every place of Scripture. I will not except against your Syllogism, though you put somewhat more into the Assumption, than you propounded in To the Assumption. the mayor: yet let me put you in mind, that both natural wit and learning can show the true sense of God's word in very many places; and also that by your confession this may be done. Whence it will follow, that in all likelihood of reason, many points of faith are so delivered in Scripture, that there needeth no infallible authority of the Church to teach us what is true in those points, what false. To answer more directly to the Assumption; I see no sufficient reason, why a man by wit and learning may not be able to understand, and that infallibly, what is true according to the letter of the Scripture, in matters necessary to salvation. I think I may truly say, that many a man attaineth to this knowledge, without any infallible assistance of the holy Ghost, whose principal office it is, so to sanctify, direct, and preserve the children of God, that they never fall away by any such opinion as shall make them lose their interest they have to the kingdom of heaven. Your proof, if it be sufficient, showeth your exception, especially in all points, to have been altogether needless. For if the t 1. Cor. 2. 16. Apostle in the place alleged, speak of understanding the true sense of the Scripture, no one place can be understood by any natural wit or learning. Who hath known the sense of our Lord? Is not this speech general, as well of one place as of another? But it is evident, that the Apostle speaketh not of understanding any or all places of Scripture. For the spiritual man he speaketh of, attaineth not to that height of knowledge, no not in your own judgement, unless perhaps no man be spiritual but your Pope. And yet a man may well doubt, whether he be able to understand the meaning of the holy Ghost in every place or no, though it be granted he cannot err judicially. But Saint Paul thinketh not in that place of interpreting scripture. Of what then? Surely of acknowledging or assenting to the truth of the Gospel, concerning salvation by jesus Christ. u 1. Cor. 2. 9 Hugo Cardin. ad 1. Cor. 2. The things that God hath prepared for them that love him (viz. the means of salvation and glory by Christ) are such as eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, yea such as never entered into any man's heart. For who was able to have devised by any experience and observation (to which the eye and ear are especial helps) or by any discourse of reason (wherein the heart is exercised) that the Son of God should take our nature, and procure forgiveness of sins, and inheritance vers. 16. of heaven for all them that would believe in him? This was only Gods will and counsel, which no man was privy to, no man could instruct him in, or persuade him to. These things God only knew, these he revealed by his spirit to the patriarchs, vers. 10. Prophets and Apostles, who without such revelation, could never have suspected any such matter. Now the question is not in the Apostles course of writing, whether a man without revelation can understand the meaning of the Scripture; but whether he could of himself know, that there must be such a means of salvation, or acknowledge the doctrine thereof to be true, without the teaching of the holy Ghost. The natural man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 receiveth not these things for true, or if you will, perceiveth not that there are such means of his salvation. As for understanding of Scripture, since it is more than manifest, that a mere natural man may find the true sense intended by the holy Ghost, at the least in many places, it cannot be the Apostles meaning, that no man knoweth the sense of our Lord in the Scripture. But the more you mistake the sense of the holy Ghost in Scripture, the better you prove your opinion, that no natural wit or learning can bring a man to the understanding thereof: only you must take heed of overweening your own wit and learning, and so of erring, by drawing a general conclusion against all men from your own defect: which also perhaps is not so much for want of wit or learning, as for lack of pains taking, and because of a prejudicate conceit against the truth. A. D. §. 4. Hence I infer that those, who, for matters of faith, rely wholly, either upon their own private opinion or judgement, of the sense and meaning of Scripture, or upon the learning and judgement of others, who are but men, not infallibly assisted by the holy Ghost, nor by him unfallibly preserved from error: (as many, or rather all Protestants do) those (I say) cannot have divine and Christian faith, but only fallible opinion and human faith. As before I granted your conclusion, that natural wit and learning cannot be the rule of faith: so I now acknowledge the truth of your illation, which you bring in thereupon, that he which relieth wholly upon his own private opinion, or any other man's judgement, can have no true faith. Yet must I again remember, that to rely upon such opinion or judgement, is to take that for truth, which is taught barely upon the credit of the teacher. For otherwise, a man may have a true faith, that is a certain and infallible assent to the truth, though he believe upon evident reason those points & interpretations, which are proved to him by men, without any infallible authority of the Church. But whereas you charge many, or rather all Protestants to rely so upon the judgement of men, I hope you do it without the authority of your Church that cannot err; for I am sure you do it without any show of truth. No Protestant of any discretion (not only not all) believeth the doctrine of the Gospel in general, or any one particular interpretation as a matter of faith, upon any man's credit whatsoever. This reverence indeed we give to our teachers, that we rather trust their judgement then our own, and dare not dissent from them, but where we have great likelihood of reason, at least to the contrary. Howsoever, we ground no point of faith upon any interpretation, which is not plain and evident to any man that will take pains to examine it according to true reason. A. D. CHAP. IX. That a private spirit cannot be the rule of faith. A. W. A man may easily perceive that you choose to say any thing, rather than nothing: and therefore you make yourself work, Chapter after Chapter. I shall not need to repeat that which I have noted before; this Chapter giveth sufficient evidence of that I say. What a strange kind of speech is this, that a private spirit is the rule of faith? No spirit, neither private nor public, is ordinarily the rule of faith, no not the most holy spirit of God, but only as he speaketh in the Scripture, who always teacheth one and the same truth publicly and privately. A. D. §. 1. The third conclusion is, that no private man, who persuadeth himself to be singularly instructed by the spirit, can be this rule of faith; especially so far forth as he believeth or teacheth, contrary to the received doctrine of the Catholic Church. A. W. This is the interpretation of the title of your Chapter: No private spirit, that is, no private man, who persuadeth himself to be singularly instructed by the spirit, etc. I cannot tell whether I should think you have forgotten to speak English, or purposely affect, as strange doctrine, so strange speech also. To be singularly instructed, with us plain Englishmen, is to be taught in rare and excellent sort; not to be apart, or severally alone instructed, which is your meaning. I grant men's private opinions are called singular, and the men themselves, that have such conceits, are also so termed; but he that professeth plainness to teach all kind of men, should labour to speak so, that all might understand him. But to the matter. Whose opinion is it, that any such man as you conceit, or any man at all, can be the rule of faith? Sure not ours; who (as it hath often been said) give this honour only to the word of God. If any man hold that opinion (unless perhaps the senseless Anabaptists, with whom we have nothing to do) you are they, who as it seemeth by the exception you add, grant that with limitation, a man may be the rule of faith. For you say, he cannot be the rule of faith, especially so far forth as he believeth or teacheth contrary to the received doctrine of the Catholic Church. Do you not imply in this speech, that so far forth as he agreeth with the doctrine of the Catholic Church, he may be the rule of faith? But I observe one rare thing in your course of disputing; that you ordinarily propound your matter in such sort, that you are fain presently after to make one exception or other. x Chap. 7. Scripture alone (say you) cannot be the rule of faith: is this all you mean? No: a limitation followeth: Especially as it is translated by Protestants into English. y Chap. 8. No natural wit or learning can be the rule of faith. What? by no means? except they be infallibly assisted by the holy spirit of God. In this Chapter we have the like course held by you. But leave we this, and be take ourselves to consider your proof. A. D. §. 2. This I prove: first because Saint Paul saith, Si quis vobis evangelizaverit Gal. 1. 8. praeter id quod accepistis, Anathemasit: pronouncing generally, that whosoever teacheth or preacheth contrary to the received doctrine of the Catholic Church, should be held Anathematized or accursed. A. W. Your reason is thus to be framed. He that must be accursed for his teaching, cannot be the rule of faith. But a private spirit, that teacheth contrary to the received doctrine of the Catholic Church, must be accursed for his teaching. Therefore a private spirit that teacheth contrary to the received doctrine of the Catholic Church, cannot be the rule of faith. First, I desire all men to observe, that this argument of yours doth not prove that a private spirit cannot be the rule of faith, but only so far forth as he doth disagree from the doctrine of the Church; otherwise, for all this reason, he may be. Wherein you speak absurdly and falsely. Absurdly, in propounding such a question to refute, as neither we whom you profess to refute, nor any reasonable man would ever once imagne, viz. that a private spirit teaching an untruth, might be the rule of faith. For, how can that be but an untruth, which is contrary to that the Apostle delivered by his preaching and writing? Further, it is false, that a private spirit agreeing with the Catholic Church in doctrine, can be in that point of agreement, the rule of faith. For although the doctrine he teacheth be true, yet is it not the rule of faith (much less is he himself) because of his authority; but either as you say, by reason of the authority of the Church, or indeed, as we truly affirm, for that it is agreeable to the word of God in the Scripture, called canonical, because it is z 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. A rule. To the Assumption. the rule of faith and manners. Now for answer to your Syllogism; I say your Assumption is not simply true, but only so far forth as the received doctrine of the Catholic Church (I speak as you do) agreeth with the truth in the Scripture revealed. Neither doth a Gal. 1. 8. Saint Paul speak of whatsoever doctrine received by your imagined Catholic Church of Rome; but of that which he himself or some other of the Apostles had taught the Galatians, to whom he writeth that Epistle. This it should seem you saw well enough, and therefore in your crafty discretion, for bare to translate the Apostles words, which for the most part you set down always as well in English as in Latin. The reason lieth thus: He that teacheth contrary to the doctrine which the Galatians had received of the Apostles, is to be accursed for his preaching so. But a private spirit that teacheth contrary to the received doctrine of the Catholic Church, teacheth contrary to the doctrine which the Galatians had received by the Apostles. Therefore a private spirit teaching contrary to the received doctrine of the Catholic Church, is to be accursed for his preaching so. Who seeth not, that the truth of this Assumption dependeth upon this point, that the Catholic Church hath received no other doctrine then that which the Apostles taught the Galatians? But this hath as much need of sound proof, as that, for the proof whereof it is brought: and therefore to dispute thus against any man that would hold a private spirit to be the rule of faith, were to give him occasion to laugh at you, for begging the question in stead of proving it. But to make all men see, how small force there is in this your reason, for the keeping of a private spirit from being the rule of faith, I will frame two other syllogisms against a public spirit or Council, and against the Pope. 1. He that must be accursed for his teaching, cannot be the rule of faith. But a public spirit or Council, that teacheth contrary to the received doctrine of the Catholic Church, must be accursed for his teaching. Therefore a public spirit or Council, that teacheth contrary to the received doctrine of the Catholic Church, cannot be the rule of faith. 2. He that must be accursed for his teaching, cannot be the rule of faith. But the Pope that teacheth contrary to the received doctrine of the Catholic Church, must be accursed for his teaching. Therefore the Pope that teacheth contrary to the received doctrine of the Catholic Church, cannot be the rule of faith. Have you not spun a fair thread (think you) to choke the Popes and the Counsels authority withal? Call your wits about you, and devise some cleanly shift for the matter, or I can tell you, all will be nought. For your Religion is no more able to hold up head, if the Pope's authority be cast down, than a man that hath never a leg, is able to stand upright. It will go the harder with you in this matter, because if I grant that the Pope cannot err, you are never a whit the nearer, for the answering of my syllogism: as you may perceive, if you will but assay to apply that point for answer to either part thereof. There is no other way, but to give over this your first reason against a private spirit, and to make amends for it in the second, if you can. A. D. §. 3. Secondly, the rule of faith must be infallible, plainly known to all sorts of men, and universal; that is to say, such as may sufficiently instruct all men in all points of faith, without danger of error: (as hath been proved before.) But this private spirit is not such. For first, that man himself cannot be unfallibly sure, that he in particular is taught by the holy spirit. For neither is there any promise in Scripture, to assure him infallibly that he in particular is thus taught: neither is there any other sufficient reason to persuade the same. For suppose he have such extraordinary motions, feelings or illustrations, which he thinketh cannot come of himself, but from some spirit; yet he cannot in reason straightways conclude, that he is thus moved and taught by the spirit of God. For sure it is, that every spirit is not the Spirit of God. As there is the spirit of truth: so there is a spirit of error. As there is an Angel of light: so there is a Prince of darkness. Yea sometimes Ipse Sathanas transfigurat se in Angelum lucis: Satan himself doth 2. Cor. 11. transfigure himself into an Angel of light. Wherefore he had need very carefully to put in practice, the advise of Saint john, who saith. Nolite credere omni spiritui, sed probate spiritus, si ex Deo sint, 1. john. 4. Do not believe every spirit, but prove and try them, whether they be of God or no. Neither doth it seem sufficient, that a private man try them, only by his own judgement; or by those motions, feelings or illuminations, which in his private conceit, are conformable to Scripture; because all this trial is very uncertain, and subject to error; by reason that our own judgement (especially in our own matters) is very easily deceived: and that Satan can so cunningly cover himself under the shape of a good Angel; and so colour his wicked designments with pretence of good; and so gild his dark and gross errors, with the glistering light of the words, and seeming sense of scripture, that hardly, or not at all, he shall be perceived. Wherhfore the safest way were to try these spirits, by the touchstone, of the true Pastors of the Catholic Church, who may say with S. Paul. Non ignoramus cogitationes Satanae, we are not ignorant of the cogitations of Satan: and who may also say with 2. Co. 2. 11. S. john. Nos ex Deo sumus, qui novit Deum, audit nos: qui non 1. john. 4. 6. est ex Deo, non audit nos. In hoc cognoscimus spiritum veritatis, & spiritum erroris. We are of God, he that knoweth God, heareth us: he that is not of God, doth not hear us. In this we know the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error. Now, if any will not admit this manner of trying, & discerning the spirit of truth, from the spirit of error, but will trust their own judgement alone, in this matter: fear they may justly, nay rather they may be sure (as Cassian saith) Collat. 61. c. 11 that they shall worship in their thoughts, the Angel of darkness for the Angel of light, to their exceeding great harm. And, at least, how soever their private affection & self-love incline them to think well of themselves, and of that spirit, which they permit to teach them those singular points of new & strange doctrine: yet sure it is, that this their persuasion of the goodness of their spirit, is not infallible, as the rule of faith must be: sith divers now adays, persuade themselves in the same manner to be taught by the holy spirit: and yet (one of them teaching against another) it is not possible, that all, that thus persuade themselves, should be taught by this spirit; sith this spirit doth never teach contrary to itself. And therefore some in this their persuasion, must needs be deceived. And therefore who, having no testimony of evident miracle, or some other undoubted proof, dare arrogantly affirm, that he only is not deceived, especially in such sort, as to condemn all other, and to propose himself to himself and others, as the only sufficient rule of faith, considering that others, who presume, & persuade themselves altogether in like manner, are in this their persuasion, deceived. A. W. I must again put the Reader in mind, that no Protestant maintains, that a private spirit is the rule of faith; neither will I undertake the defence of any such matter: but only examine his reasons against it, as I have done in the former chapters, in the like case. His reason is thus to be concluded. The rule of faith must be infallible, plain, known to all sorts of men, and universal. A private spirit is not such. Therefore a private spirit is not the rule of faith. Of the proposition, I spoke at the sixth chapter, and showed b Chap. 6. the fault of it, in respect of the second property, which is easiness c Chap. 7. to be understood of all men, as it is expounded by yourself. All the doubt now is in the assumption, of the three points, wherein you go about to prove but only the first, of infallibility. It should seem your stomach is greater against the scripture, then against either natural wit & learning or private spirit. For you disprove the ability of these two, but in respect of one property, namely the first, as if for the other two, they or either of them were sufficient enough. But you allow the Scripture never a one of the three, you condemn it of obscurity, you accuse it of defect for wanting divers points necessary to salvation. And although you do not simply deny the infallibility of it, yet you make all knowledge, that can be had out of our English translation, very uncertain; so that none of our people can have any benefit by the scripture, as by the rule of faith, or word of God, but only some few, that understand Hebrew or Greek. But I perceive you were more afraid that the scripture would be taken for the rule of faith, than you were, that either of the other would. Let us see how you prove your assumption, since you will needs put yourself to more pains than was looked for. He (say you) that cannot assure himself, and other men, that he is taught by the holy Ghost, cannot be the rule of faith. But a private spirit cannot assure himself, and other men, that he is so taught. Therefore a private spirit, cannot be the rule of faith. There is some cause to doubt of your mayor. For it is not necessary, To the proposition. that the rule of faith should know itself to be the rule. The Pope, you think, is the rule of faith: Put case that some Pope should doubt, whether himself were infallibly directed in all his determinations by the holy Ghost or no: should he, by reason of this doubting, cease to be the rule of faith? I dare say, you think not so. Never urge me with the impossibility of this matter. For both it is possible, if d Declarat. mot. Wisbic. pag. 29. he, that is no Christian may be Pope of Rome, If john the 22 doubted of the immortality of the soul, if Leo 10. counted the history of our Saviour Christ a fable: and it is all one to my answer whether it may be or no; it is enough for me, if the Pope may be the rule, though he should so doubt. You should have done well, if you had kept your former To the assumption. wary course of adding some exception to your assumption. It had not been altogether without need. For out of question, a private spirit may be so assured by revelation, as the Prophets and Apostles were. And by such means a man may come to assurance, for all the subtlety of Satan; the Lord being able to make the motions of his spirit known to whom he please, what shift soever Satan use to the contrary. The Minor therefore Holkot. in 2. q. 4. ad 7. arg. princip. without this exception be either expressed or understood, is untrue, otherwise it is true. As for the trial you propound, by the touchstone of the true pastors of the Catholic Church, it is utterly insufficient in this case. It may be, and is indeed a means of great authority, and use to direct a man in finding out, and holding the truth: but it is no certain proof, that a man hath found, or doth hold the truth in all points, because f Bellar. de. Concil. lib. 2. cap. 11. those pastors (as in due place shall appear) may all be deceived, without the Pope's especial direction. But admit their judgement or authority were, in the matter, infallible: yet could no man thereby be assured, that himself is taught particularly by the holy Ghost. For many men hold the truth of God, as the true Church doth, and yet have no such teaching by the spirit: since it is certain, a man may deliver truth, and he himself not believe. Of your testimonies out of scripture, touching the Pastors of the Church, I will say only thus much by the way; that the Pastors can speak neither of those sentences truly of themselves, but in a measure. g 2. Cor. 2. 11. They know the devices of Satan, but in part, not wholly. h 1. john. 4. 6. He that knoweth God, heareth them, not simply in all points; for he that knoweth God, may doubt of some point delivered by the true Pastors of the Church, who also are no farther to be heard, than they can show that, they speak, to be from God. The Apostles, every one of them severally, knew all things, which the Lord thought fit to make known to men, and were to be heard, without any doubting of that, they delivered: with them that privilege died, and all men now are tied to the trial of their doctrine by the scriptures. The conclusion of this discourse concerneth either no man in the world, or if any, the Pope of Rome, i Extra. joa. 22 de verb. signif. cap. quum inter. your Lord God. For the Anabaptists themselves, are not so absurd and shameless, as to make any one of their sect the only sufficient rule of all men's faith: but every man claimeth (though falsely and lewdly) a privilege of not erring, for himself. Only your insolent Pope will have all men to depend upon his judgement, and in comparison of himself, disdaineth all writers, and all Councils whatsoever. What promises he hath, whereupon he beareth himself so high and stout, I make no doubt but we shall hear of you in this Treatise; till when I forbear to say any more. A. D. §. 4. But suppose one could assure himself, that he were taught by God's Spirit immediately, what is the true faith in all points, in such sort, that he could err in none, (as it is not the manner of Almighty God, to teach men immediately by himself alone, or by an Angel; but rather as the Scripture telleth us, Fides ex auditu. Faith is bred in us by hearing: and is to be required ex ore Sacerdotis Rom. 10. 17. out of the mouth of the Priest: and is to be learned of Pastors Mal. 2. 7. and Doctors, whom God hath appointed in his Church, of purpose, to instruct us, and continue us in the ancient faith. But suppose (I say) that one could assuredly persuade himself, to be immediately taught of God, what is the truth in all points: how should he, without testimony of miracle, give assurance to others, that he is thus taught? Especially when he teacheth quite contrary to the Catholic Church, which, by plain promises and testimonies of Scripture, we know to be taught of God. A. W: Hitherto you have proved, that a man cannot assure himself, that he is infallibly instructed by the holy Ghost. Now you are to show, that howsoever the point might be clear to him, yet he hath no means to persuade other men thereof, but that still there will be cause of doubting, whether he be so taught or no. But by the way, you tell us, that it is not God's manner to teach us immediately by himself alone, or by an Angel, but rather, as the scripture telleth us, faith is bred in us by hearing. For the general, that God teacheth not immediately, we are wholly of your opinion, and that the ordinary means of faith is preaching: but we see no sufficient reason to disable the word of God in the scripture, as if it were not of force to bring forth the same effect, where God's ordinance of preaching cannot be had, or is not neglected. For since the matter delivered in true preaching, and reading the scripture, is all one, unless it be very apparent that the holy Ghost will not give a blessing to him that readeth, having not opportunity to hear; out of question faith may come by reading. Faith (saith k Bellar de sacr. Bapt li. 1. cap. 11. §. Tertio. Bellarmine) cannot arise in the heart, but by divine revelation, which is either immediately from God alone, or by the instrument of the word preached, or read. And whereas the Apostle speaketh l Rom. 10. 14. in that place of preaching and hearing, it is not his purpose to disable the word read, but to show partly, (as m 1. Cor. 2. 9 10. otherwhere) that the means of salvation, were not, nor could be devised by man, but proceed wholly from God: partly, that no man may excuse himself by ignorance, because God hath sent his servants n Mat. 28. 19 into all parts of the world, to give notice of the way of salvation, without which commandment of his, no man might have undertaken the office of preaching the Gospel, either by word of mouth or o 1. Pet. 1. 25. writing; and without the Gospel had been published, no man could have believed. For as it is in the same chapter, a little before. p Rom. 10. 14. vers. 18. How shall they believe in him, of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear, without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? Faith than is by hearing, that is, q Whitaker. de Script. q. 5. cap. 8. arg. 2. as one rightly expoundeth it, by the sense of the scripture truly understood. I do not equal reading to preaching, nor promise any blessing, but rather threaten a curse, where men refuse to hear the Pastors and Ministers of the several congregations, wherein they live; or any other, that by lawful authority preach truly and faithfully: but I would have no man, by any conceit, weaken the power of God, speaking in his word, to all that can, and will read and hear. Now to your argument. He that hath not testimony of miracles, cannot give assurance to others, that he is infallibly taught by the Spirit of God. But a private spirit hath not testimony of miracles. Therefore he cannot give assurance to others, that he is infallibly so taught. First, I note two things in the propounding of this reason: the one that you add an exception, according to your custom, the other that you seem to give over great force to miracles. Your exception is, that he can give no assurance, if he teach contrary to the Catholic Church: why so? Because we know that she is taught of God. Suppose that to be true, yet may he give assurance to them, that know no such thing of the Church, and so be to them the rule of faith. But it is worth the marking, that you prefer miracles before the authority of the Church. For by them, a man (in your opinion) may have assurance to others, that he is taught by the holy Ghost, though he teach quite contrary to the Catholic Church. But r Gal. 1. 8. the Apostle hath accursed them, that receive any other doctrine, than he taught, though it be preached by an Angel from heaven. What will become of the faith of such men, when s 2. Thes. 2. 9 Antichrist comes with signs and lying wonders? But why should I ask that question? Yourself and the rest of your popish brood have answered it already. For you are t Apoc. 17 2. made drunk with the cup of fornication of the whore of Babylon, and bewitched with the miracles of that great Antichrist the Pope of Rome, to u 2. Thess. 2. 11 believe lies, against the manifest truth of God in scripture. But x 2. Pet. 1. 19 we have a most sure word of the Prophets, confirmed, & expounded by the Apostles, contrary to which, or without warrant of which, we will believe nothing, as necessary to salvation, for all the miracles that your Antichrist, or the Devil himself can work. For mine own part (under correction I speak it) I am not persuaded, that ever any true miracle was, or shall be wrought, for confirmation of false doctrine, how soever the Devil may serve his turn, by a show of such matters. But it is all one to the moving of a man, whether the thing done, be in truth a miracle, or only such in his opinion. Be it never so true, it may bring no credit to any point of doctrine contrary to the word of God, in the scripture. Yet since false shows will work the same effect in their hearts, whom God hath given over to the believing of lies, that true miracles will, me thinks I see no sufficient cause to imagine, that God will employ his infinite power to the countenancing of any untruth, where no such thing is needful. I say then, for your proposition, that no assurance can be Of the proposition. given either without, or with never so many miracles, if a man's doctrine be contrary to the teaching of the Church, when the Church teacheth according to the Scripture. But in those points, wherein the Church shall fail of her duty, the exposition of the word may give assurance of truth spoken by him, that delivereth the contrary. But this I speak by way of explication, not of refutation. For I grant your proposition: So revelation be excepted, as before. To the assumption. If you mean, that every private spirit, hath not miracles to testify of him, or that none hath true miracles to avow false doctrine by, I grant your Minor. But if you would have us believe, that no man hath power by the devils assistance, to make show of such matters, as cannot by man be discerned from true miracles, I deny your assumption: and refute it by that former instance of Antichrist, Whose y 2. Thes. 2. 9 coming is by the effectual working of Satan, with all power and signs, and lying wonders. A. D. §. 5. Perhaps he will allege that general promise of scripture, Omnis Math. 7. qui petit, accipit, assuring them thereby, that every one that prayeth for any thing, receiveth it: and that he hath earnestly prayed for the spirit, therefore he must needs have it. But to this argument, we may easily answer; that this promise of our Saviour, is not so universally to be understood, as though every one that prayeth for a thing, shall infallibly obtain it, without any condition (at least in the manner of praying) required of our part. For we read, even in Scripture, Petitis, & non accipitis, eo quòd malè petatis. You ask or pray, and receive not (the thing requested) because you ask amiss. By jacob. 4. which place we learn, that to obtain any thing by prayer, requireth a condition of praying well, or in such sort, as is fit, the which condition, doth (as learned men observe) include many circumstances, for fault of the due observance whereof, it may and doth often happen, that our prayer is not well made, nor in such sort as is fit: and is consequently frustrate of the efficacy, which otherwise by the promise of our Saviour it should have had. Now these circumstances being many, and divers of them very inward, it is not very easy for any man, to be absolutely sure, that he hath observed them, in such sort, as is fit: and therefore he cannot be absolutely sure, that his prayer hath taken effect; and therefore it is not sufficient proof, whereby one may persuade others, that he hath the Spirit of God, to say, he hath prayed for it; especially considering, that we may find very many most contrary, in religion, one to another, who notwithstanding will say, that they daily pray for the holy Spirit: and I doubt not, but many of them in some sort, yea earnestly, after their manner, do pray for it: yet sure it is, that all these (being thus contrary) have it not. How shall we then be assured, that this or that man, who, presuming upon the assistance of this Spirit, (which he thinketh he hath obtained by prayer) setteth abroach a singular and new invented doctrine, how shall we be sure (I say) that such a man hath the Spirit of God indeed? A. W. This objection you make, is so void of all likelihood, that I persuade myself, no man would ever be so foolish as to allege it in this question. For who can choose but see at the very first reading of it, that if it may be had by prayer, one may have it as well as another? and therefore there is little reason, why all should rely upon any one in such a matter. Besides, what a ridiculous thing is it for me to imagine that every body will believe me on my word, when I tell them that I have prayed earnestly for the spirit, and therefore must needs have it? Wherefore your objection and answer are not worth the considering or reading. Only of the place you allege, in a word, thus much may be said, that our Saviour by it a Mat. 7. 7. encourageth and persuadeth us to pray, assuring us of gracious acceptance by God his Father in all our petitions, so far forth as the obtaining of them shall make for his glory, the good of his Church, and our own spiritual and bodily comfort. And though it be most true, that we can never pray as we ought, yet may we be assured to have our requests granted (the former conditions remembered) whensoever we pray for any thing belonging to the general estate of Christians, or our particular callings, with a true acknowledgement of God's power, feeling of our own wants, and resting upon his promise to us in jesus Christ. Particularly, concerning the understanding of Scripture: for any thing belonging to the general estate of Christians, or our particular callings, which belongeth to the question we have in hand, thus speaketh b Chrysost. in praef. ad Rom. Chrysostome of this place. If you will persuade yourselves (saith he) to read the Scriptures diligently and carefully, there is nothing farther to be required of you for the understanding of them. His reason followeth: For Christ hath truly said, Seek and you shall find, knock and it shall be opened to you. A. D. §. 6. Some will perchance say, that we may safely believe them, because they preach nothing but pure Scripture, while as for every point of their doctrine, they cite still sentences of Scripture. But this answer will not serve. First, because for and in the name of Scripture they bring forth their false and corrupt translations, which do differ in some places, even in words, from true Scripture. Secondly, supposing that they did always cite the true words of Scripture, yet they may easily apply them to a wrong sense or meaning; to wit to that which they falsely imagine (being seduced by their own appetite, or by their own former error) to be the true sense. For as Saint Austin saith, Ad imagines phantasmatum suorum carnalls anima convertit Lib. 3. de bapt. cont. Donatist. cap. 19 omnia sacramenta & verba librorum, sanctorum: a carnal and sensual mind (such as heretics are not without, sith heresy itself is accounted by Saint Paul a work of the flesh) doth convert or turn all the mysteries and words of holy books unto his own imaginations and fantasies. Whereupon it cometh to pass, that as the same Saint Austin saith: Omnes haeretici, qui in authoritate Scripturas recipiunt, Ep. 222. & tract. 18. in joan. ipsas sibi videntur sectari, cum suos sectentur errores. All heretics that receive and admit the authority of the Scriptures, seem to themselves to follow the only Scriptures, when they follow their own errors. And as they may seem to themselves to follow only the Scriptures, when they follow their own errors: so they may seem, especially to the simple people; or to those, who being seduced by them, wholly build their belief upon them, to preach nothing but pure Scripture, when indeed they preach their own erroneous opinions, coloured and painted with words of Scripture; as it is the manner of every sect master to confirm his error with words of Scripture: yea the devil himself doth sometime for his purpose allege words of Scripture. A. W. It appeareth by this second objection, that this discourse was intended against us, who call you for the trial of all questions of Religion, to the Scripture of God. But how injuriously you deal with us herein, a blind man may see. For we neither claim any such privilege of being free from error in citing and understanding Scripture, nor desire to be any farther believed for translation or interpretation, than we can approve them by evident reason. And this you knew well enough, and are ready with the rest of your complices, to accuse us of referring all to every man's private spirit. But malice is as well without sight, as without shame. That of Saint Austin we acknowledge to be most true, and find it verified by your Rhemish translation, and the application of Scripture in your Canon law, and Schoole-mens writings: out of which it is easy to bring a cloud of witnesses to this purpose. For the other place of Austin, you quote two treatises, his 18. tract upon john, and his 222. epistle to Consentius. In the former whereof, there is no such word to be found, nor any such epistle either in the Basil, or c 1523. the old Paris print. But in your d 1586. late edition of Austin at Paris, both the epistle and the words are, wherein Austin maketh the misunderstanding of the Scriptures the occasion of heresy. Who denieth it? This may serve us to prove, that e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. the ignorance of the Scriptures is exceeding dangerous; even as f Chrysost. ad Coloss bom. 19 Chrysostome saith, g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. the cause of all evils. In another place the h August. de Gen. ad lit. lib. 7. cap. 9 same Austin telleth us, that men are for nothing else heretics, but because not rightly understanding the Scriptures, they obstinately maintain their own opinions against the truth of them. And i Tertul. de resur. carnis. cap. 63. Tertullian goeth somewhat further, showing that heresies durst not peep up without some occasion taken by the Scriptures. But he adds, that those very heresies may be convinced by the Scriptures. If we misinterpret the Scriptures, why do not you great clerk, that have the spirit tied to your Church, refute our false interpretations by the Scriptures? Do we refuse this trial? Is it not that we still urge, to have all things examined by the Scriptures? or is there any thing you more fear, then to be confined to the Scriptures? What though the devil and heretics allege them? Did not our Saviour himself say so too? k Opus imperf. in Math. hom. 48. What plea can you make, wherein some heretics have not gone before you? Will you brag of the Church? Heretics also both think and say they are of the Church: yea they are in all things so like true professors, that in antichrist's time (as l Opus imperf. in Math. hom. 49. an ancient author speaketh) there is no means of trial left but the Scripture. If you urge tradition, so do heretics too, running up and down (right like you Papists) m Jren. lib. 3. cap. 1. 2. from tradition to Scripture, and from Scripture to tradition. They plead Counsels as well as you. The n August. cont. Maxim. lib. 1. Arians object divers against Austin and other writers. As for the Fathers: was not o De bapt. con. Donat. lib. 3. cap. 2. Austin priest by the Donatists with Agrippin and Cyprian? Did not the heretic Dioscorus cry out p Concil. Chaiced. Actio 1. in the Council of Chalcedon, I have the testimonies of the holy Fathers, Athanasius, Gregory, Cyrill. I vary not from them in any point, I am cast out with the Fathers, I defend the father's doctrine, I have their judgement extant in their books. Neither may we rest upon miracles. To let pass what before I said of that point, remember what q August. in joan. tract. 13. Austin saith, Pontius (say the Manichees) did a miracle, Donat prayed, and God answered him from heaven. The Scripture only is the true touchstone in these cases, if it be hard, Let him that hath an heart (saith r August. de doct. Christ. lib. 2. cap. 6. Austin) read those things that go before, and those that follow, and he shall find the sense. A. D. §: 7. Wherefore there is no reason, whereby we may be assured, that such men have the spirit of God: but we may find many reasons to convince that they have not this spirit. And to omit, for brevitic sake, the seeking out of any other, even the singularity or privateness of their spirit, is sufficient not only to move us to suspect it, but also to condemn it, and to assure us, that it cannot be the spirit of truth: as it is very well signified by Saint Austin, who saith, Veritas tua, Lib. 12. Confess. cap. 25. Domine, nec mea est, nec illius, sed omnium quos ad eius communionem publicè vocas; terribiliter admonens nos, ne eam habere velimus privatam, ne privemur ea. Nam quisquis id quod tu ad fruendum omnibus proponis, sibi propriè vendicat, & suum esse vult, quod omnium est, à communi propellitur ad sua, id est, à veritate ad mendacium. Thy truth (O Lord) is neither proper to me, nor him, but common to all, whom thou dost publicly call to the common partaking of it; warning us terribly to take heed, that we will not have it private to ourself, lest we be deprived of it. For whosoever doth challenge that to himself privately, which thou dost propose publicly to be enjoyed of all, and will have that his own, which is common to all, he is driven from the common to his own, that is to say, from the truth to a lie. A. W. To refute this conceit of a private spirit (which was not worth this ado) you argue from the singularity or privateness of it; as if it could not be true, because it is not agreeable to the common opinion. And surely he that shall be so arrogant and shameless, as to deny all the points of Religion commonly held, upon a presumption that himself only hath the spirit of God, is fitter to be cut off by the Magistrate's sword, then confuted by the word of Scripture. But it is very possible, that in some points and places, some one man, without any revelation, by diligent searching and prayer, may find out that, which no other man yet knoweth, at least for interpretation of Scripture, as it falleth out every day amongst both Protestants and Papists. Therefore your s Caietan. praef. in lib. Mosis. Cardinal Caietan doubteth not to say, that God hath not tied the exposition of the Scriptures to the senses of the Fathers: and therefore asketh no more than reason, when he willeth the Reader not to be offended or mislike it, if sometimes himself hit upon a new sense agreeable to the text, though it go against the stream of the fathers. For which, though t Canus loc. Theol. lib. 7. cap. 3. Canus reprove him without cause, u Andrad. defence. fid. Trid. lib 2. Andradius justly defendeth him. And why should he not? since, as Domingo a Soto witnesseth, one man's authority and learning draweth numbers after him to his opinion. By reason of a saying of Saint Augustine's, (saith x Sotus de nat. & great. l. 3. c. 4. Soto) all the fathers after his time, and all the Divines, with one consent have worthily affirmed, that the glorious Virgin never committed any actual sin, for all Chrysostome, ancienter than he, thought the contrary. Yet was Augustine's judgement in this case, but private, and for truth, inferior to Chrysostom's. If publicness or general consent should carry the matter, how chance y Sozom. lib. 1. cap. 23. Paphnutius withstood all the rest of the famous Council of Nice, and prevailed? We ought (saith z Picus in quaes. An Papa sit supra Concilium. Picus Earl of Mirandula) to believe a simple husbandman, a child, or an old woman, rather than the Pope, and a thousand Bb. if these speak against the Gospel, and the other with it. Then belike a private man may see some truth, which is not generally discerned. The place of a August. conf. lib. 12. cap. 25. Austin you bring, doth not condemn all interpretations or opinions, which some one man findeth out, and holdeth, but only reproveth them, who in expounding the places of Scripture, which will bear a divers sense, urge one only, not because it is truth, but because they like it best. His example is out of Genesis concerning the sense of those words: b Gen. 1. 1. In the beginning God created heaven and earth. They know not which of those divers senses that may be, Moses did intend (saith c August. ubi supra. cap. 11. 12 Austin) but they love their own opinion, not because it is true, but because it is their own. What doth this concern us? who, as we give every man of judgement leave to propound his interpretation to be examined: so permit no man to thrust any exposition upon the Church, which he cannot make evident proof of, by sound reason. Neither is it then taken as his private conceit, but acknowledged as the truth of God, manifested by his industry. In doubtful places we follow the likeliest sense, without any resolute determining what is true, what false: & therefore d See my answer to 12. art. part. 1. art. 5. cannot with any show of reason be charged to appropriate the knowledge of God's truth to ourselves, where it hath pleased his Majesty so to propound it, that of divers senses a man cannot certainly affirm, that this or that is true. A. D. CHAP. X. That the doctrine and teaching of the true Church, is the rule of faith. A. W. If you had mentioned nothing but the doctrine of the true Church, we might have understood you, without any cause of doubting: but now you add teaching to doctrine, we are enforced to inquire farther into your meaning. For we are uncertain, whether by those words you mean one and the same thing, or no. The doctrine of the Church, is that which the Church propoundeth to be believed, whether by word of mouth, or in writing. Teaching, if we make it differ from doctrine, is that only which is delivered by voice to the ear. If we understand you in the former sense for teaching by writing, as well as by word of mouth, the latter word was needless; if in the latter of writing only, than the same doctrine written, is not the rule of faith, which uttered by a teacher will become such a rule; not because it is true, but because it is taught by authority. A. D. §. 1. The fourth conclusion is, that this infallible rule, which every one ought to follow in all points of faith, is the doctrine and teaching of the true Church, or company of the true faithful of Christ. A. W. That we may the better understand what you say, and how you prove your saying, there are a few things to be considered in this fourth condition. First, by the faithful of Christ, you must mean those that profess Christian Religion, whether they believe as they profess, or no; as I have showed out of e Bellar. de Eccles. mil. lib. 3. cap. 10. Bellarmine, who doubtless knoweth what the Church is, as well as you. If you be of any other opinion, by f Chap. ●. your own rule we may reject it, for the privateness thereof. Secondly, where you say the true faithful, it is not your purpose to speak as we, for whom you writ this, commonly do, of them that have a true justifying faith; but of them that profess the doctrine of the Gospel, according to the true sense and meaning of it, whether they have any justifying faith or no. Thirdly, by this company or Church, whom understand you? If the whole number of the believers, as well laity as Clergy, I oppose the judgement of your own Doctors against you, who speaking of the Church's doctrine and teaching, restrain the word only to the Pope and Bishops. The spirit (saith g Bellar. de verb. Dei. lib. 3. cap. 3. §. Tota igitur. Bellarmine) is certainly found in the Church, that is, in a Council of Bishops, confirmed by the chief Pastor of the whole Church, or in the chief Pastor with a Council of the other Pastors. If you follow Bellarmine, I demand whether your Laity be none of the true faithful of Christ, nor parts of the Church. But to leave this doubt, we are thus to conceive your meaning, that the doctrine which the Pope and other Pastors of the Church, namely Bb. deliver in a Council, is the rule of faith. Now let us propound your reason, and examine it; but first I confess, that I dare not resolutely determine whether it be brought in by you, for a proof of any thing that hitherto hath been spoken, or intended only, as a discourse concerning the authority of the Church. If we apply it to any matter already past, as far as I am able to conceive, it must be a second proof of the proposition or mayor of your main Syllogism in this manner. If the doctrine and teaching of the true Church be the infallible rule which all men ought to follow, than the faith which the authority of the true Church commends to us, is to be holden for the true faith. But the doctrine and teaching of the true church, is the infallible rule, that all men ought to follow. Therefore the faith which the authority of the true Church commendeth to us, is to be holden for the true faith. This reasonable coherence we may make betwixt this Chapter and your former course, without changing or weakening any part or point of your proof, which is applied to the confirming of this last minor, the argument of this Chapter. A. D. §. 2. This I prove by this reason. If our Saviour Christ hath promised to any company of men, the presence of himself, and the assistance of his holy spirit, of purpose to instruct and teach them all truth: giving withal peculiar charge and commission to them, to teach all nations, and to preach to every creature: giving also warrant to all, that they may safely hear them: giving also commandment, whereby he bindeth all, to do in all things according to their saying: and threatening greatly those who will not hear and believe them: then certainly the doctrine and teaching of these men, is in all points most true and infallible; and such, as (if the other conditions required in the rule of faith be not, as they are not, wanting) may well be proposed to all sorts as an assured ground, whereupon they may safely build an infallible Christian faith. For look what our Saviour Christ hath promised, must needs be performed; and whatsoever he warranteth or commandeth, may safely and without danger of error be done, nay must of necessity be done, especially when he threateneth those that will not do it: and consequently if he have promised to send his holy Spirit to teach any company of men all truth; it is not to be doubted, but that he sendeth this his holy Spirit, and by it teacheth them all truth: and sith the teaching of his Spirit is unfallible, we are not to doubt but that this company is in all points infallibly taught the truth. If also the same our Saviour gave warrant and commandment, that they should teach us, and that we should hear them, and do in all things according to their saying: we may not likewise doubt, but that they shall be able to teach all sorts of men, in all points, the infallible truth; and that all sorts of men may, if they will, learn of that company, what in all points is the infallible truth. For otherwise by this general commandment of hearing them, and doing according to their saying, we should be bound sometime to hear and believe an untruth, and to do that, which were not upright and good: which without blasphemy to Christ his verity and goodness can no way be thought. A. W. 1 If our Saviour Christ (say you) hath promised to any company his presence and assistance of his spirit, of purpose to instruct and teach them all truth. 2 If he have given them charge and commission to preach to every creature. 3 If he have given warrant to all, that they may safely hear them. 4 If he have given commandment to all, to do in all things, according to their saying. 5 If he have threatened them, who will not hear and believe them. 6 If the other conditions required in the rule of faith be not wanting, than the doctrine and teaching of the true Church is the rule, that all men ought to follow. But our Saviour Christ hath so 1. promised, 2. charged, 3. warranted, 4. commanded, 5. threatened, and 6. the other conditions required, are not wanting. Therefore the doctrine and teaching of the true Church is the rule that all men ought to follow. I have propounded this Syllogism, as yourself have set it Of the proposition. down, save only that I have endeavoured to make it somewhat shorter, keeping your sense whole and full. Now for the proposition, I grant the consequence, upon all those conditions jointly considered, to be sound and good: Howsoever some of them might well have been omitted: for example. 1 If our Saviour have promised his presence and assistance of his spirit, of purpose to teach a certain company of men all truth, than the doctrine of the Church is the rule of faith. This consequence is but weak: for Christ may afford such presence and assistance to such a purpose, and yet the effect not ensue, by reason that those men fail in some duties required on their part. Do not you affirm h Chap. 5. in this Treatise, that God hath appointed means of salvation for all men, with a true will to have them saved; and yet very many, yea the greatest part are not saved? 2 If he have given them charge and commission to preach to every creature, than their preaching is the rule of faith. Their commission is not simply to teach, but to teach i Math. 28. 20. those things, that our Saviour himself commanded, and therefore their doctrine can be no farther the rule of faith, than they preach according to their commission. If I, or an Angel from heaven (saith k Gal. 1. 8. the Apostle) preach unto you, otherwise, then that you have received, let him be accursed. The same may be objected against the third, and the fifth points: It doth not follow that their doctrine is the rule of faith, because all men have warrant to hear them safely: or because, they are threatened, who will not hear and believe them. For first, they may be free from danger of erring, and yet not know all points of faith, l Chap. 6. which is made by you one condition of the rule. Secondly, unless you enlarge the warrant, as far as the commandment, in the fourth point, (which is in a manner to confound them) so that they may safely hear them in all things, your consequence will still be nought. Thirdly, they may hear them safely, though the other may err, if they have means afforded to examine that they deliver, & skill and care to use those means. Fourthly, the threatening, for not believing, is to be restrained to their teaching, as they ought. Are not they threatened m Luc. 10. 16. by our Saviour, who believe not any Minister lawfully authorized, and preaching the truth? Yet doth it not follow hereupon, that they cannot err, or that their preaching is simply the rule of faith. But these feeble consequences might all have been omitted by you, and your matter as fully proved, if you had set down none, but the fourth and sixth points thus. If God have commanded all men to do, in all things, as the Church teacheth, and the other conditions required in the rule be not wanting, than their preaching is the rule, that all men ought to follow. This consequence is true, and sufficient for your purpose; the other serve for number to make a show, rather than for substance of weight. But of your Mayor this may be sufficient, especially since I acknowledge the truth thereof. A. D. §. 3. But so it is, that Christ our Saviour hath in holy Scripture promised, given commission, warranted, commanded, and threatened in manner aforesaid. Therefore we cannot doubt, but that there is a certain company (the which is called the true Church of Christ) which both is, in all points of faith, infallibly taught, by the holy Spirit; and is likewise to teach all sorts of men, in all points of faith, what is the infallible truth: and therefore the teaching of this company, may well be assigned, and proposed to all men, as an undoubted, sufficient rule of faith. A. W. I deny your Minor, first in general; because our Saviour did To the assumption. not so promise, charge, warrant, command, threaten, in regard of any company of men, as if there had been some joint teaching appointed by him: but in respect of his Apostles, and Ministers severally, who, in their proportion, have as much authority, for necessity of being believed, severally one by one, as jointly all together; though such a joint consent is the more to be reverenced, and respected. Secondly, I deny it also, in the fourth point, which is the strength of it. There never was since the Apostles, any man, or any company of men, according to whose saying we were commanded to do in all things. Lastly, I say the conditions required in the rule of faith, are wanting in the teaching you understand. This conclusion of yours giveth me occasion to speak somewhat Of the conclusion. at large of the Church, with the name whereof applied n Heruaeus de potest Papae. cap. 23. to your Pope alone, or Pope and Clergy, you daily seduce many unsettled and ignorant people. The word Church in our English tongue seemeth first of all to have been applied to the Temple, or place of God's service, as if it were called Kyrke, of the Greek o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as you would say the Lords house. But the Hebrew & Greek words, which must be the judges in this matter, signify a Company, Congregation, or Assembly. The Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 words are two, the Greek as many; the Latin, besides the two Greek made Latin, are divers, Populi, people: Coetus, company, congregatio, congregation: multitudo, multitude: turba, troup: concio, assembly: exercitus, army. But the two Greek words are best known, p 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Ecclesia and Synagôga: the former whereof cometh of the Hebrew, retaining almost the signification, and sound thereof. In this, they all agree, that they note unto us a company or assembly. But because the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the word, that most of all concerneth this question, let us inquire of that the more diligently. The word, for the nature of it, signifieth any company called together; generally any assembly lawfully or unlawfully, orderly or disorderly assembled. Of lawful assemblies there is no question, of unlawful we have an example q Act. 19 25. 29. 40. 41. in the Scripture, where the people of Ephesus, tumultuously ran together against Paul and Apollo's. So doth the Hebrew word signify in the Psalms, where r 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & ecclesiam. the Greek and Latin translate by the same word: s Psal. 25. 5. I have hated the assembly of the wicked. But in the new testament, except that one place of the Acts, it is always applied to them, that make profession of religion. In which sense it is sometimes used indefinitely, t 1. Cor. 12. 28. God hath ordained some in the Church, first Apostles etc. So the Apostle Paul saith, that u & 15. 9 Phil. 3. 6. he had persecuted the Church of God. Thus may we also understand that, x 1. Tim. 3. 15. The house of God, which is the Church of the living God: If we conceive that the Apostle speaketh to Timothy, as to an Evangelist, and not as to the Pastor or Bishop of Ephesus. Hitherto may those places be referred, y Act. 2. 47. The Lord added to the Church from day to day: And z & 5. 11. great fear came on all the Church. Herode stretched forth his hand to vex certain of the Church: and such like, though they may also be understood of the believers, at those times ordinarily abiding in jerusalem, and assembling themselves together in one, or (which is the likelier) in divers congregations, for exercise of religion. More particularly, and usually, the Church is taken for any one congregation assembled about matters of religion: a Act. 15. 22. It seemed good to the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church. Not as if the Apostles and Elders had been no members of that Church, but the principal being first named, the general term is added, which comprehended all: as if they should have said: The Apostles and Elders, and all the rest of the Church at jerusalem: whereof, as it was a particular congregation, the Apostles, at that time were not members. And in this meaning may a Council of divers parishes, provinces, or nations be called by the name of a Church; and in the like sort may we call the assemblies & congregations in Rome, Coriath, Ephesus, the Churches of Rome, Corinth, Ephesus: because of some common synod, or because by the term Church, the believers are signified. Most usually, the several congregations in any country or City are called Churches, because of their ordinary assembling. b Act. 9 31. Then had the Church's rest, through all judea. c & 14. 23. When they had ordained them Elders by election in every Church. d 1. Cor. 11. 16 We have no such custom, nor the Churches of God. When the title is applied to particular families, it hath no other meaning, as I take it, then to note them for Christians or believers. e Rom. 16. 5. Philem. ver. 2. Greet the Church (that is the believers) which are in their house. And thus much of the Church, as it signifieth generally Believers. The word Church, is used in the scriptures, and that very often, not for all, but only for some believers, namely, for such as are indeed true believers, in respect of true faith in jesus Christ: and these are always of the elect: who are then called the Church, when they are brought to the knowledge of the truth, and to justifying faith: Therefore when we say that the Church signifieth the elect, or predestinate, we mean only such of the elect, as by faith are members of our saviours body, he being the head. For howsoever, in the secret Counsel of God, many not yet borne, be predestinate to everlasting life; yet they are not to be accounted of this Church, before it hath pleased God to call them to believe in Christ. Examples of the Church thus taken, amongst many are these. f Mat. 16. 18. Upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. g Eph. 1. 22. & 5. 23. God hath given Christ above all, the head of the Church. So h Col. 1. 24. the Church is called Christ's body. This may serve, concerning the meaning of the wotd: out of which I observe this point, that since the term Church is so diversly taken in the scripture, no argument from any place of Scripture can be of force to prove any question, till the signification of the word, in that place, be evident and certain. And therefore it is not enough, for proof of a matter in controversy betwixt us, to allege a text of Scripture, where such a thing is spoken of the Church, but it stands us upon to prove, that in the place we allege, by Church, the company we intent, is signified. This being understood and remembered, I come now to the several points in your Minor. A. D. §. 4. The promise of our Saviour Christ we have first in the Gospel of Mat. cap. 28. Saint Matthew: Ego vobiscum sum omnibus diebus, usque ad consummationem seculi: I am with you all the days, until the end of the world: in which words is promised the continual presence of Christ himself, (who is veritas the truth itself) with his Church; not for a while then, or for a while now; but, all the days until the end of the world. Secondly, we have an other promise in the Gospel of Saint john: Ego rogabo Patrem, & alium paracletum Joan. 14. dabit vobis, ut maneat vobiscum in aeternum, Spiritum veritatis. I will ask my Father, and he will give you an other paraclite, the spirit of truth, that he may remain with you (not only for 600. years) but for ever. And again (in the same Saint john) to show us, for what purpose he would have his holy Spirit remain among us for ever; he saith, Paracletus quem mittet Pater in nomine joan. 14. meo, ille vos docebit omnia, & suggeret vobis omnia, quaecunque dixero vobis. The paraclite, whom my Father will send in my name, shall teach you all things, and shall put you in mind of all things whatsoever I shall say unto you. And again, Cum venerit ille Spiritus veritatis, docebit vos omnem veritatem. joan. 16. When that spirit of truth shall come, he shall teach you all truth. A. W. The first point of your Minor is, that Christ promiseth his presence, and the assistance of his spirit, to teach them all truth. First I demand, whether our saviours presence be for the teaching of all truth, or no: or whether that be only the office of the spirit? If the former, to what purpose is the spirit promised, whom our Saviour hath appointed his vicegerent, as it were, in that matter; as the other places you allege prove? If it belong to the spirit, how is the presence of Christ applied thereunto? But to answer directly to the place, thus you dispute. If Christ have promised to be with a company of men, till the end of the world: then he hath promised it, that he might teach the Church all truth. But he hath promised to be with a company of men, till the end of the world. Therefore he hath promised it, that he might teach them all truth. Admit all this were granted: yet would it not follow hereupon, To the whole Syllogism. that the Church therefore could not err: because, as I answered before, perhaps they would not have care to learn and remember all, though our Saviour were ready to teach them all. I deny the consequence of your proposition. First, because To the proposition. they, to whom our Saviour maketh this promise, are not the Church, as you understand the Church, that is, the Clergy, of whose teaching you wholly speak, but the faithful jointly, and severally, as well hearers as teachers, as well every one, as all together. This appeareth by the text, i Mat. 28. 19 20. Go teach all nations etc. and behold I am with you, till the end of the world. With whom? With you that teach only? Nay rather with all believers, k joan. 17. 20. for all which he prayed, as well as for the teachers. So have the ancient writers expounded and understood this place. He doth not say, he will be with them only (saith l Chrysost. in Math. hom. 91. Chrysostome) but also with all, that shall believe after them. For the Apostles were not to continue to the end of the world, but he speaketh to the faithful, as to one body. Christ showeth (saith m Hieron. ad Matth. 28. Jerome) that he will never depart from them that believe. So doth n Cyprian. epistola. 81. §. 1. ad Serg. Rogat. & caeteros. Cyprian make it common to all believers, that confess the truth of God in time of trial. So doth o Leo. ser. de resurrec. 2. Leo, to all, that are adopted. He that is gone up into Heaven (saith Leo) doth not forsake them, that are adopted. So p Beda apud Thoan Cate. ad Mat. 28. Beda, he remaineth with his elect in this world protecting them. To which purpose q August. in joan. tract. 50. S. Austin saith, that this promise is fulfilled by our Saviour, in that he is present, according to his majesty, according to his providence, according to his unspeakable, and invisible grace. With all that believe, (saith r Gaudent. ad Neophyt. de promis. Paracl. Gaudentius) I will be with you that is (saith s Dionys. Carthus. ad Mat. 28 Denys the Charterhouse monk) with you, and your successors, and with all the faithful, or militant Church. And thereupon he gathereth, that the faith shall never wholly fail, but Christian religion shall continue in some till the end of the world. The like collection t Raban. Maur. ad Math. 28. Rabanus maketh, Hereby (saith he) it is understood, that there shall never be some wanting, till the end of the world, who shall be worthy, or fit for God to dwell in. The Council of Vienna (as u Gregor. de Val. de present. Christ. in Eucbar. cap. 11 Gregory de Valentia saith) expounded the place of Christ being present in the Sacrament: which is common to all believers, lib. 3. Clement de relic & vener. sanctorum c. si Dominum. Secondly, the consequence is nought, because the end of Christ's presence is not to teach the Church all truth, but to protect and defend them by his power, in the profession of the truth. So it is applied, as we heard before, by x Cyprian. epistola 81. §. 1. Cyprian to the comfort of the Christians then imprisoned for religion. So doth y August. in joan. tract 50. Austin take it, that he is present by his providence and divine Majesty. The same is z Haymo. in homil. far. 6. post pasch. Haymo his judgement and exposition. But a Martial. ad Tolos. cap. 25. Martialis is most plain, who by this promise exhorteth them of Tholouse in France to persevere in the profession of religion, because our Saviour Christ will never leave them, but always be present with them. He confirmeth and encourageth them (saith b Theoph. ad Mat. 28. & Chrysost. ibid. Theophylact) because he sent them to the Gentiles, into dangers and hazards of their lives: And c Chrysost. ad. Mat. 28. Chrysostome thinketh (wherein also Theophyl. secondeth him) that our Saviour mentioneth the end of the world, because he would have them with more patience and constancy, endure what soever hard measure for a time upon earth, in regard of the joys whereof they should be made partakers in the world to come. If then this promise of our Saviour, belong to all & every true believer, if it be uttered for the comfort of all such, that they may rest upon his mighty protection, who seeth not that an impossibility of your Clergies erring cannot be concluded from it? 1 The places of john are thus to be concluded. If our Saviour have promised the spirit of truth to a certain company of men, to abide with them for ever, & teach them all truth, than the teaching of these men is an assured ground of faith. But Christ hath promised the spirit so to a certain company of men. Therefore the teaching of these men is an assured ground of faith. First I answer, that your conclusion proveth not the point in question; because this company, to which the promise is made, is not the Church from time to time, but that promise belongeth to the Apostles, either only, or at the least principally, in such a measure of being taught. The former may thus appear, because our Saviour speaketh of another comforter, in respect of his own bodily departure from them, which cannot belong to the Church now, with which Christ was never present in that sort. Secondly, this spirit promised, was to bring all things that Christ had taught, to their remembrance, whom he should teach. But this cannot belong to the present Church, nor to any Church since the Apostles. Thirdly, this sending of the spirit was performed d Act. 2. 3. 4. when the holy Ghost came upon the Apostles; which doth not befall the Church now a days. Fourthly, the same spirit was to show them the things to come, either concerning themselves in particular, or by giving them the gift of prophesy, which now the Church hath not. Thus do e Tertul. de praescrip. cap. 8. Tertullian and f August. in joan. tract. 75. Austin understand these places, applying them to the Apostles: so doth g jansen harm. cap. 134. jansenius bishop of Gaunt; so h Chrysost. in joan. hom. 74. Chrysostome and i Theophyl. in joan 14. Theophylact; so your ordinary Glosses and Lyra. And whereas this interpretation may seem to be refuted by the place itself, because the spirit must abide with them, to whom he is promised, for ever: that is expounded by k Neque post mortem abit. Chrys. ubi supr. Chrysostome, to signify his continuance with them, even after death also. Which l Hugo Cardin. ad joan. 14. Theoph. ubi supra. Theophylact sets out more at large. His company with you (saith our Saviour) shall not be for a time, as mine; but shall continue for ever: neither shall it fail when you are dead, but shall remain with you, and shall make you more glorious. He promiseth (saith m Gloss. ordin. ad Joan. 16. your Gloss) that the spirit shall do all; not that all is fulfilled in this life. This Comforter (saith n Lyra ad Joa. 14. Lyra) shall not be taken from you, as my human nature is drawn away by death: but shall be with you eternally, here by grace, but in the world to come by glory. We may (perhaps) conceive our saviours meaning to be no more, but that the spirit which he would send, should not leave them as he was to do, but should abide with them to the very end of their lives, for their instruction and comfort: neither of which are needful any longer than while we are in this world. They that apply these promises to all the elect also (for to any visible company of men, I think besides you Papists, no man doth) neither make for your opinion; because they tie them not to any company, but give every true Christian his like part in the privilege of this spirit, and (as we heard ere while out of your o Gloss. ordin. uti supra. ordinary Gloss) leave some truth to be revealed in the life to come. I do not think (saith p August. ad joan. tract. 96. Austin) that in this life the promise of being taught all truth, can be fulfilled in any man's mind. For who living in this body which is corrupted, and presseth down the soul, can know all truth; when the Apostle saith, We know in part. By which it is also apparent, that according to Augustine's judgement, for ever, may be understood of continuing after this life. Secondly, if these places prove, that the Church is a sure foundation or rule of faith; it must follow, that every particular Of the Assumption. teacher is so. For everyone of them, to whom our Saviour made these promises, was severally according thereunto taught all truth, and not all jointly; as if they might have erred being severed, which you confess of your Church: and therefore this teaching appertaineth not to it. Of the several places I say further, that q joan. 14. 17. in the first of them there is no mention of teaching all truth, but only of sending the spirit of truth. That is (saith r Theophyl. ad joan. 14. Hugo Cardin. ibi. Theophylact) the spirit, not of the old Testament (for that was a figure and a shadow) but of the new, which is the truth. The spirit of truth (saith s Lyra. ibi. Lyra) because he is essentially the truth, and teacheth the truth. He calleth him the spirit of truth (saith t jansen. harm. cap. 134. jansenius) because he is the author of all truth, and the only giver of pure and sound truth. For he only teacheth the truth, without mixture of any falsehood or error: Also he only teacheth the truth, wherein the salvation of man consisteth. u Joan. 14. 26. In the second place you have followed the vulgar Latin against the truth of the Greek and sense of the text. The Greek is, x 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 All that I have told you: not as you translare it, All that I shall say unto you. It is the praeter tense (saith your B. y jansen. uti supra. jansenius) not the future, in the Greek. So do Pagnin, Vatablus, and Montanus translate it. The holy Ghost (saith z Theophyl. ad Joan. 14. Theophylact) shall make you understand those things that are obscure and hard. For those things that seem hard unto you, I told you when I remained with you. Your interlined Gloss referreth teaching to the understanding, and putting in mind to the will. He shall teach you (saith the a Gloss. interl. ibi. Gloss) that you may know; and b Suggerit, ut velitis. suggest, that you may will. Tell me then, why I may not gather from hence, that the Church shall not err in manners; or at least shall have true faith in heart, not only in profession? But it is certain, that it is possible, the greater part of a Council, yea and the Pope himself may be without true faith: and it is enough to make a man a member of your church, c Bellar. de Eccles. mil. lib. 3. cap. 10. that he profess outwardly. By all truth d joan. 16. 13. our Saviour meaneth all truth necessary to salvation, saith e jansen harm. cap. 134. jansenius. f Gloss. ordin. ibi. So your Gloss. g Theophyl. ad Joan. 16. Hugo Cardin. ad joan. 16. Theophylact referreth it to the truth of those things which were shadowed out in the law: and by the discovery of the truth to be abolished. Hugo restraineth it to all truth, concerning Christ himself. But let us take all truth as largely as you can reasonably conceive it. Will it follow thereupon trow you, that therefore the teaching of the Church is the rule of faith? May not the Church be taught all truth by the holy Ghost, and yet teach some device of her own which she never learned of him? It is one thing to teach a man all truth, and another to keep him so, that he shall deliver nothing but that truth. Your Minor therefore is false, because this first part of it is so. A. D. §. 5. The charge and commission is plain in S. Matthew: Euntes docete omnes gentes: Going teach all nations. And in S. Mark: Euntes Math. 28. Mark 16. in mundum universum, praedicate evangelium omni creaturae: Going into the whole world, preach the Gospel to every creature. A. W. The charge which h Math. 28. 19 our Saviour gave for preaching the Gospel to all nations, was no commandment to his Church, that is, to the company of the believers, or to the Clergy, as you speak, in all ages; but a commission to the Apostles and first Disciples, for the performance of that duty. The reason, why it is delivered so at large, may be gathered out of i Mat. 10. 5. Matthew 10. ch. where at their first sending they were limited to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, and barred from going to the Gentiles. Go not (saith our Saviour) into the way of the Gentiles, and into the cities of the Samaritans enter not: but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And that this charge belongeth not to men now a days, it is evident, because neither doth our Saviour bestow the gift of tongues to that purpose, as k Act 2. 5. he did on those whom he sent to that work; neither can we have any calling to such a purpose, having no gifts for it: yet do not we deny but that it is lawful for Princes, who have by conquest or otherwise the government of strange nations, to see that they be instructed in the faith; yea we think this lieth upon them, as a necessary duty. Neither do we bar any man of taking whatsoever opportunity God shall give, to preach the Gospel to any people. l Russin. hist. lib. 1. cap. 10. A captive maid was by the blessing of God made the means of converting the Iberians from heathenism to Christianity: the King of that people (as the history saith) becoming the Apostle of his nation. m Sozom. lib. 2 cap. 23. Frumentius and Aedesius being carried into India when they were young, were afterward employed by God for the instructing of the Indians in true religion. But your minor is not proved by that commission. Christ commanded his Apostles and Disciples in the beginning of the Church, to preach to all nations: therefore the Church hath commission to do the like now. Besides, this charge was laid upon every one of the Apostles and all the disciples so furnished with the gift of tongues, according as the Apostles thought it meet to employ them. Doth this commandment bind your church, that is, either your Pope who will not preach at home, much less will he go abroad to all quarters of the world; or your Counsels, who several are not the church? And this charge lay upon them, to whom it was given, severally, and was not a matter to be performed by all together in one place. Therefore your minor is false also in the second part of it, concerning the charge, which (you say) is given to the Church, to preach to all nations. For your Church is (as I have said) your Bb. assembled in Council, not your Clergy men severally one by one. And it is not our saviour's meaning to have such a kind of teaching. A. D. §. 6. The warrant we have in S. Luke: Qui vos audit, me audit: He Luk. 10. that heareth you, heareth me. By which words appeareth plainly, that our Saviour Christ would have us to hear and give credit to his church, no less then to himself. A. W: Our Saviour n Luk. 10. 16. by this place hath warranted all men to hear them that teach those things which he commanded to be taught; besides which, if any man teach his own fancies for matters of faith, that of the Apostle belongeth to him, o Gal. 1. 8. Let him be accursed. The Apostles were absolutely to be heard, without exception, as Christ himself: all other teachers, only so far as they speak according to the word of God. He teacheth by this (saith p Cyril. Alexan. apud Thom. in catena. Cyril) that whatsoever the holy Apostles deliver, is to be received: because he that heareth them, heareth Christ. Our Saviour addeth this in the end (saith q Lyra ad Luc. 10. 16. Lyra) to show that the doctrine of his disciples is devoutly and reverently to be heard, at the least for reverence of God, whose principally that doctrine is. But what doth this concern the church? Surely, if it may be enforced to make us hear any besides the Apostles, without limiting of our hearing, we are bound so to hear at the least every B. These words (saith r Bellar. de pontif.. Rom. lib. 4. cap. 16. §. Quae verba. Bellarmine) belong properly to the Apostles and to their successors: neither may it be said that this was spoken to all of them jointly, and not to every one severally. Now if it be absurd, and worse, to hold that we have warrant to hear every B. whatsoever he teach, doubtless this place proveth nothing for hearing the Church. For by virtue of this speech, the Apostles were to be heard, without any exception. If then it belong to their successors, which are (as you say) Bb. as fully as to them, every B. must be heard and believed, teach he what he wil I will yet say more: our Saviour speaketh this of the 72. disciples, and s Luc. 10. of every two of them at the least. Now your opinion is, that your ordinary Priests succeed them, as Bishops do the Apostles. Hence it will follow, that whatsoever any two Priests preach, that must be holden for as certain a truth, as if Christ himself had spoken it. Do you not see then, that this must needs be restrained either to the Apostles, or to the doctrine taught? He that heareth you, preaching that which I have charged you to preach, heareth me. So doth t Gloss. interl. ad Luc. 10. your Gloss limit the latter part of the sentence, He that despiseth you, that is, He that will not believe in Christ. Indeed he that refuseth to believe in Christ, by the ministery of men, refuseth Christ himself, whose doctrine it is, that we should believe in him. Therefore your minor is false also in regard of the third part thereof: We have no warrant to hear any man, the Apostles being dead, but so far only as he agreeth with the Scriptures. A. D. §. 7. The commandment is expressed in S. Matthew: Super Cathedram Mat. 23. Moysi sederunt Scribae & Pharisaei. Omnia ergo quaecunque dixerint vobis, seruate & facite. The Scribes and pharisees have sitten upon the chair of Moses, All things therefore whatsoever they shall say unto you, observe and do. Out of which words we may gather, that we are bound in all points to do according to the doctrine of the Prelates of the Catholic Church, yea, although it should happen that their lives were not laudable but bad. For although our Saviour in this place doth only in express words make mention of the chair of Moses, in which the Priests of the old Law did sit: yet he is to be understood to speak also of the chair of S. Peter, his own Vicegerent, in which the Priests of the new law do succeed. And this à fortiori, because we have greater reason to think that our Saviour intended in his doctrine to give rules to the Priests and people of his new law, which was presently to begin, and to continue till the world's end, then only to give documents to those of the old Law, considering he knew that it should so shortly cease. Wherefore the ancient fathers do understand that place to be meant of the Priests of the new Law, and namely S. Augustine, who saith thus: In illum ordinem Episcoporum, qui ducitur ab ipso Petro ad Epist. 165. Anastasium, qui nunc in eadem Cathedra sedet, etiamsi quisquam traditor per illa tempora subrepsisset, nihil praeiudicaret Ecclesiae, & innocentibus Christianis; quibus providens, Dominus ait, de praepositis malis: quae dicunt, facite; quae faciunt, facere nolite. Into that order of Bishops, which is derived from S. Peter himself unto Anastasius, who now sitteth upon the same chair, although some traitor had crept in, in those times, he should nothing hurt the Church and the innocent Christians, for whom our Lord providing, saith of evil Prelates: What they say, do; what they do, do not. A. W. This is the only point, which is able to make good the consequence of your proposition: and therefore if you fail in the proof of this, all is nought. But out of doubt, you fail here exceedingly, and so your reason comes to nothing. He that commands the jews to do whatsoever the Scribes and pharisees who sit upon Moses chair say, bindeth all to do in all things according to the saying of the Church. But u Mat. 23. 2. our Saviour so commandeth the jews. Therefore he bindeth all to do in all things according to the saying of the Church. First I say of this syllogism as of the two last points, that if it give any authority to your Church, it giveth the same to every particular teacher. For the Scribes and pharisees did expound the law of Moses, not in Counsels only, but every one severally in the synagogues where they were appointed to teach. Therefore if it be absurd to conclude upon this text, that every Scribe and Pharisey was then, and every Preacher lawfully called is now to be heard, whatsoever he teach, sure no such matter can be wrung out of this place for the Church. Secondly, this reason maketh the Scribes and pharisees the Church, shutting out the high Priest himself, and all other priests that were not either Scribes or pharisees: yea it presumeth (which is utterly false) that the Scribes and pharisees were successors to Moses in an ordinary course of authority, as you say your Church, that is your Pope and Bb. succeed Peter and the rest of the Apostles. Can such an argument prove a matter of such importance and doubt? Your proposition implieth, that our Saviour intended to give rules concerning Saint Peter's authority, whom you call Of the proposition. his Vicegerent. Who would trifle so, in a question of such weight? First prove his office, and your Pope's right to it; and then frame such arguments: otherwise any man of never so little judgement may find more cause to pity or disdain your proof or presumption, then to stagger at the force of your reason. All things in the Scripture were indeed written for our learning, and therefore belong to us so far as the general doctrine reacheth, & the particular circumstances are alike. Wherefore I grant your proposition, not because of any succession, which could not be in those Scribes and pharisees, being of divers tribes, and (as your x Genebrard. chron. lib. 2. Genebrard saith) having thrust themselves into the chair of Moses being empty: but because they expounded the law of Moses among the jews, as the Ministers of Christ do the Gospel, at this day to the Christians. Ere I answer to your Assumption, I must speak a word of To the Assumption. your translation, y 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. have sitten. The Greek indeed is so, but (as z Vatablus ibi. Vatablus noteth) the praeter tense is put for the present tense. Therefore a Pagnin. ibi. Pagnine doubteth not so to translate it, sedent, sit. Which must needs be our saviours meaning. For how were it agreeable to reason, that he should charge us to hear the Scribes and the pharisees, because they did sometimes sit upon Moses chair, if now they sit beside it? It is our saviours purpose to signify, that the expositions of the former pharisees, and of those that taught in his time, were not to be rejected: or rather, it is all one, as if he had said, b Alfons. Salm. prolegom. 15. Reg. 3. sederunt. i e. sedent. do sit. But let us read the place which way we list, it is all one to your minor; which I deny. To the proof of it out of the text, I answer: First, the sitting upon Moses chair, signifieth not succession, but teaching the law of Moses. For c Exod. 3. 10. & 19 20. & 21. 1. Moses calling was altogether extraordinary from God, both for governing and teaching. In the former, josua and the judges succeeded him, d 1. Sam. 8. 7. till the people were weary of Gods ruling of them. The other part of his office was to be discharged ordinarily by the Priests and levites. e Leuit. 10. 11. Deut. 31. 9 19: That ye may teach the children of Israel all the statutes which the Lord hath commanded them by the hand of Moses. f Mal. 2. 7. The Priest's lips should preserve knowledge, and they should seek the Law at his mouth. g Neh. 8. 8. 9 jeshua and Bani, etc. and the Levites caused the people to understand the law. And they read in the book of the Law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading. It was one thing to succeed Aaron, another to sit on Moses chair. The chair of Moses (saith h Cyril. Hieros'. catech. 12. Cyril) signifieth power of doctrine. They sit in Moses chair (saith i Orige. in Mat. hom. 24. Origen) which interpret Moses sayings well, and according to reason. And a little after: The Scribes and pharisees sit naughtily upon Moses chair: they sat well, that well understood the law. What is the meaning of that (saith k Ambr. enar. in Psal. 43. Ambrose) The Scribes sat; but because letters are written? whereupon the Scribes in Greek are called l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek is a letter. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, following the interpretation of the letter, not the sense of the spirit. And afterward: Therefore they teaching those things that Moses wrote, etc. So doth m Theophyl. ad Mat. 23. Theophylact expound it. They that sit in Moses chair: that is, that teach the things, that are in the law. And immediately before. They that exhort to evil life, do not then teach out of Moses chair, nor out of the Law. Therefore to sit upon Moses chair, is nothing else, but to have authority to expound Moses Law, as he himself did expound it. So the Ministers of the Gospel may be said to sit upon the Apostles chair, because they have authority to interpret the Gospel, which the Apostles themselves preached. Secondly, I deny that our Saviour commanded the jews, or doth now charge us, to believe whatsoever, they that have authority to teach us, deliver, or to do whatsoever they enjoin. This is apparent, because himself refuteth & condemneth their interpretations and doctrines many times: as Mat. 5. In many points of which, that one is most clear, n Mat. 5. 43 44 Ye have heard, that it hath been said, thou shalt love thy neighbour, & hate thine enemy: but I say unto you, love your enemies etc. o Mat. 15. 11. In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines men's traditions. And in the same place, he calleth them blind leaders of the blind: and addeth further, that if the blind lead the blind, both fall into the ditch. Now vers. 14. can any man be so impious, I might say blasphemous, as to say, that our Saviour commanded the jews to take such a course, as should certainly bring them to destruction? Nay rather he warneth them to take heed of their doctrine. p Mat. 16. 6 Take heed and beware, (he doubleth his admonition to make them more careful) of the leaven of the pharisees: And what was this leaven? q vers. 12. The doctrine of the pharisees, saith the Evangelist. But what need we go out of this chapter for the point in question? Doth he not afterwards call them r Mat. 23. 16. blind guides, vers. 16. 24. fools & blind, vers. 17. 19? Doth he not in the same places, condemn and confute their absurd and lewd doctrine of swearing? A man would wonder, that ever any man professing himself a scholar or teacher, should bring such miserable proofs in matters of so great weight. But alas we must bear with you, you bring such as you have; if you knew any better, we should be sure to have them. But these serve to deceive your devoted followers; who wilfully shut their eyes against the truth. The judgements of God are past searching out, and his mercy in opening our eyes to see your grossness, greater than we are able to conceive. Well, yet perhaps you have some colour from antiquity to countenance your exposition withal. You quote Austin: what? None but Austin in a matter of so great doubt? But let us see why you quote him. If to prove that the pharisees were to be heard and obeyed in all things, there is no such word in his sentence alleged by you. For he saith no more, than we grant, that s August. epistola. 165. Our Saviour provided before hand, that we should not refuse good doctrine, because it was delivered by wicked men. Indeed that was the very purpose of our Saviour, and to that doth t August. in joan. tract. 46. Austin apply it otherwhere, according to the true sense of it. What saith he else, but hear the voice of the shepherd, though by hirelings? such as Austin in that place saith the Pharifies and Scribes were: and such as u Mat. 23. 5. 6. 13. 14. 23. our Saviour proveth them to be by their hypocrisy, ambition, & covetousness. The Apostle showeth (saith x August. de bapt. contra Donat. lib. 4. cap. 11. Austin in an other place) that men without charity may teach somewhat, that is wholesome: of such our Lord speaketh, They sit upon Moses chair etc. Whereupon also the Apostle speaking of envious and malicious men, yet such as preached salvation by Christ, saith; y Phil. 1. 18. Whether by occasion, or in truth Christ be preached, Ireioice. And z August. de decked. Christ. lib. 4. cap. 27. in a third place, He that speaketh wisely and eloquently, but liveth wickedly, teacheth many that are desirous to learn, but is unprofitable to his own soul, as it is written. The Scribes and pharisees sit in Moses chair, do that they say, but do not that they do. For they say & do not, to which he addeth that to the Philippians, as in the other place. But yet Austin was so far from tying either the jews, because of our saviours speech, or any men, upon any pretence, to believe whatsoever should be taught them, though by men lawfully authorized, that he forbids all to hear, when men preach their own devices. By sitting on Moses chair (saith a August. in joan tract. 46. he) they teach the Law of God, therefore God teacheth by them. But if they will teach their own sayings (observe that Austin thinks it is possible they should) hear them not, do not. An evil man (saith b August cont. litter. Petilia. lib. 2. cap. 6. the same author) out of the evil treasure of his heart, bringeth forth evil things. But when he preacheth the word of God, when he ministereth the Sacraments, he preacheth not, nor ministereth not of his own, if he be a wicked man, but is to be counted among them, of whom it is said, do that they say, but do not that they do. For as we heard before out of c Theophyl. ad Mat. 23. Theophylact, he that exhorteth to evil life, speaketh neither from Moses chair, nor from the Law. Therefore (as it followeth in him) they that teach the Law of God, are to be heard, though they do it not. So doth d Chrysost. ad Hebr. hom. 34. Chrysostome understand and apply this text, What then will some men say? shall we obey our Prelates, when they are evil? How mean you evil? If it be in a point of faith, sly and avoid him, not only if he be a man, but if an Angel come down from heaven. But if you mean, that he is evil in his behaviour, be not curious. Neither speak I this of myself, but of the Scripture. For e Mat. 23. 2. Christ saith, the Scribes and pharisees sit on Moses Chair. And when first he had recited many evil things of them, than he faith: They sit upon Moses chair, All things, that they say unto you, do; but do not, as they do: They are to be reverenced (saith he) though they be of a wicked life: but heed you not their living, but their preaching. For concerning their manners, no man can be hurt by them. How so? Because that they do, is manifest to all, and though they should come to the height of iniquity, they could not teach other men that their evil. But when a point of faith is in question, neither doth every body perceive manifestly that which is spoken, neither will a lewd fellow be afraid to teach contrary to truth. For whereas as it is said, f Mat. 7. 1. judge not, that ye be not judged, that is spoken of life, not of faith. This is Chrysostom's judgement, and that where he expoundeth g Heb. 13. 17. one of the principal places, which you bring to support your unreasonable authority. The Scribes and pharisees (saith h O pus imperf. in Mat. homil. 43. another) sit on Moses chair: that is, there are many Priests, and few priests; many in name, few in deed. Take heed therefore how you sit upon that seat: for the seat maketh not the priest, but the priest the seat: the place sanctifieth not the man, but the man the place. Your own writers are of the same opinion, concerning this place. Two things (saith i janse. harm. cap. 120. jansenius) are here signified: first that obedience is due to them which teach and command by authority, not in respect of their life, but of their authority, which they have, and because of God, whose Ambassadors they are. Secondly that we must not obey them, if they command or teach any thing wickedly. For if they are to be obeyed, because they sit in Moses chair, them are they not to be obeyed, when they teach or command any thing against that chair. The Lord saith absolutely, All, and whatsoever, that he might show, that they must be perfectly obeyed; but yet with such an obedience, as layeth this for a ground, that we must obey God, rather than man: as k Col. 3. 20. the Apostle Paul saith. Children obey your parents in all things. Christ (saith l Montanus' elucid. in Mat. 23. Arias Montanus) taught his Disciples to observe, and do whatsoever the Scribes and pharisees commanded, by the prescript of the Law, that is out of Moses chair. Christ did not mean (saith m joan. Ferus in Math. lib. 3. Ferus) that they should observe all the decrees of the pharisees, but so far forth as they agreed with the Law. As far as they teach those things, which Moses taught in the chair, they are to be beard, otherwise to be taken heed of, as saith n Stella. ad Luc. cap. 12 Stella. The Lord (saith o Maldonat. ad Math. 23. one of your famous jesuits) by the chair of Moses, doth not understand the doctrine of the pharisees, but the doctrine of Moses Law: For it is all one, as if he had said, All that the Law and Moses say to you. Christ (saith p Cassander consult. art. 7. See Dionys. Carthusian. ad Mat. 23. Cassander) commandeth us to hear the pharisees, yet so, that we must take heed of the leaven of the pharisees, that is corruptions of their life and doctrine. But you will say q August. epist. 165. ad Generosum. Austin telleth us, that it should nothing have hurt the Church, and innocent Christians, if some traitor had crept into that sea. What else have we showed all this while, but that the wickedness of evil Prelates must not make their doctrine, as long as it is true, less regarded? Austin, in that Epistle, answers a certain Donatists letter, who bragged of succession from Donatus the author of that sect: against whose brag he setteth that Catalogue of the Bishops of Rome, amongst whom there was never a Donatist; but if there had been, yet should not that have prejudiced the Church, or the innocent Christians: as if the doctrine, they held, were not true, because some lewd or heretical reacher, had sometime been Bishop of that City. r August. epist. 265. 160. & contra lit Petilian. lib. 2. cap. 14. 23. We know it was usual with the Donatists, to cry out against the true Catholic Bishops, for their conversation, which they also slandered: therefore had Austin good reason to speak, as he did, that no man might be carried away from the truth of then doctrine, by the supposed wickedness of their lives. I have been somewhat the longer in this point, because (as I signified) it is the only proof of this controversy. Now I leave the consideration of it to all reasonable men, that they bethink themselves, whether it be not mere simplicity, or rather wilful ignorance, to be drawn away from the truth of the Gospel upon a pretence of hearing the Church, when there is not a syllable, nor a letter, in the scripture, to tie a man to such blind obedience, whereupon nothing can ensue, but destruction. A. D. §. 8. The threats we may gather first out of Saint Luke, when our Saviour Luc. 10. saith, Qui vos spernit, me spernit. He that despiseth you, despiseth me. Signifying, that look what sin it were, not to hear, but to despise our Saviour Christ himself, that we should account it the same, to despise, and not to give ear, and credit, to the Catholic Church. Insinuating thereby, that the like punishment is to he expected, for the said contempt. Secondly, in Saint Matthew, the same our Saviour expressly saith; Si Ecclesiam non audierit, sit tibi Matth. 18. sicut Ethnicus & publicanus, If he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee like an Ethnic and a Publican. Finally, in Saint Mark, after he had given charge and commission to preach the Gospel to every creature, he pronounceth this threat to those that will not believe, saying: Qui non crediderit Mark. 16. condemnabitur, He that will not believe, shall be condemned. A. W. This is the last point in your Assumption, and thus it is to be concluded. He, that despiseth our Saviour, that is to be accounted as an heathen or Publican, that shall be condemned, is greatly threatened in Scripture. But he that will not hear the Church, and do in all things according to the saying thereof, despiseth our Saviour, etc. Therefore he that will not hear the Church, and do in all things according to the saying thereof, is greatly threatened in Scripture. I deny your Minor: and will answer to the several proofs To the asassumption. of it. To f Luc. 10. 16. the first whereof I shall need to say little, because I spoke sufficiently of the former part of that text, at the third point. The sum is, that this threatening (as the warrant) is not uttered, in respect of any Church, or company, but of several teachers, and preachers; and therefore, if we may not conclude from hence, that he, which heareth not every minister, and doth in all things according to his saying, is guilty of these crimes; no more is he, that performeth not the like duty to a company of Pastors or bishops assembled together. Secondly, if it were spoken of the Church, yet were not any man to be held faulty in such a measure, but he only, that refuseth the ministery of the Gospel, and embraceth not the doctrine thereof, as the only way of salvation. Therefore said our Saviour in the same chapter and matter: t Luc. 10. 10. 11 Into whatsoever City ye shall enter, if they will not receive you, go your ways out into the streets of the same, and say, even the very dust, which cleaveth on us of your City, we wipe off against you. So did u Act. 13. 51. the Apostles against the jews of Antioch in Pisidia, for their contempt of the Gospel. They shook off the dust of their feet against them. Thus (as I signified before,) x Gloss. interl. ad Luc. 10. your gloss understandeth it: He that despiseth you, so that he will not believe in Christ. Is it all one to despise a man, and not to assent to the truth of whatsoever he speaketh? This may proceed, and doth ordinarily, from an error of judgement; that cometh always from a resolute determination of the will. Thirdly, as hearing, so despising must be understood, not simply but when the parties to be heard or despised, preach the truth of jesus Christ, according to his word. For there is no commandment, as I showed in handling of the last point, that bindeth us any farther to obedience, or makes us liable to punishment, than the things delivered are agreeable to the word of God: unless we do against our conscience. Therefore your speech of your Catholic Church, is but idle, there being no speech, nor thought of it in this place, but only a charge to hear the Apostles simply, because they could not err: other teachers jointly, or severally, though the latter be properly intended, so far forth, as they speak agreeably to the Scriptures, and so do not err. First, I say y Mat. 1●. 17. this place is not to purpose, because it speaketh of a man already in the Church, a believer by profession: whereas your question is of him, that is no Christian, but to be made a believer by giving credit to that, which shall be preached to him. That it is to be understood of believers only, the text itself speaketh. If thy brother: z 1. Cor. 5. 11. If any man that is called a brother. Thy brother: that is a Christian (saith a Theophyl. ad Mat. 18. Theophylact) For our Lord hath appointed no such course to be taken (saith b Chrysost. in Mat. hom. 62. Chrysostome) with them, that are out of the Church. But this is meant of him, that under the name of a believer (saith c Hieron. ad Mat. 18. Jerome) playeth the Infidel. A brother (saith d jansen. harm. cap. 72. jansenius) is here understood not to be every neighbour, or every man, but he, that is a Christian of the same religion with us. His reasons are, first, because our Saviour saith, Tell the Church; but the Church hath nothing to do, in such cases, with those that are not members of it: What have I to do (saith e 1. Cor. 5. 12. Paul) to judge them, that are without? Secondly, because an Heathen and Publican are already out of the Church, and so the censure here appointed cannot concern them. Secondly, by not hearing the Church, our Saviour doth not mean, not believing all points of doctrine, the Church delivereth, (of which there was no occasion for him to speak, at that time) but refusing to be ordered by the Church, and despising the admonition thereof. So is hearing and not hearing there to be understood. If he hear thee: what is that? If he believe the doctrine thou teachest? No such matter. But if he take thy admonition in good part, and accordingly reform himself. So afterwards: If he refuse to hear the witnesses. This refusal hath a kind of contempt joined with it. If he contemn the Church, saith f Cyprian. epist. 76. ad Magnum. §. 1. Cyprian. Despising the commandment of his prelate: saith g Lyra. ad Math. 18. Lyra. Thirdly, by Church, no man in this place can reasonably understand a general Council, either without, or with the Pope. For questionless our Saviour would never speak so obscurely to the jews, for whom it was impossible to understand his meaning, and whom that matter did not concern. But he speaketh either of the governors of several Churches, or of the congregations & governors, which are properly the Church Rhem. test. in the marginal notes Mat. 18. in those places where they live. In the former sense do h Chrysost. in Mat. hom. 62. Chrysostome and i Theophylact. ad Mat. 18. Theophylact take it, and your Rhemists by Chrysostom's authority: Tell the Prelates and governors. Tell them (saith k Bellar de Pontif. Rom. lib. 1. cap. 6. Bellarmine) that are public persons in the Church. And in an other place: l De verbo Dei. lib. 3. cap. 5. Every man's Prelate, or a company of Prelates is meant. The latter opinion your m janse. harm. cap. 72. Bishop jansenius maintains: He saith, tell the Church, not tell the Bishops and governors of the Church, though they especially are to be told, & the Church is not to be told, but in their presence: as a company of believers, is not to be called a Church, if the governors thereof be not present. He saith, tell the Church, that he may reverence the agreement of the multitude. n Glossa. interl. ibi. That the reproof by many may correct him. To this purpose o Hieron. ad Mat cap. 18. Jerome saith, It must be told to many. And therefore if any man think, that by telling the Church, it is meant we should tell the Pope: besides the absurdity of the interpretation, the Pope being but one, and the Church (by your own definition) a Company, both our Saviour Christ's course is perverted, Tell him alone, them with one or two witnesses; & lastly, tell one again: & jansenins, & Ierom are professedly against him. Fourthly, it may be, that by the Church our Saviour understandeth, according to the custom of the jews in those days, not any assembly of the Clergy, about Church causes, but generally the Council of the Elders, which had power to end divers matters betwixt parties of their own nation. After which example p 1. Cor. 6. 4. 5. the Apostle willeth the Corinthians to appoint judges amongst themselves, that they might not dishonour God, & the profession of christianity, by going to law one with another under infidels. If this course take not effect, then, saith our Saviour, deal with him as thou wouldst & mightst deal with an heathen, or Publican, by following the Law against him in what Court thou thinkest best for thy advantage. And this exposition (as far as I can yet see) seemeth agreeable to the text itself, & the purpose of our Saviour, who seemeth to speak only or especially of private abuses and quarrels: as might be showed by divers reasons, and in part hath been by r Bilson. perpet. govern. cap. 4. pag. 29. etc. a learned writer, to whom I refer the Reader in this point. Fiftly, it is more than manifest, that our Saviour speaketh not of hearing or not hearing the word, but of some quarrel, or sinful action at the most: which also is to be determined or corrected in each several congregation: as the testimonies of f Vbi supra. Chrysostome, Theophylact, jansenius and Bellarmine declare. Tell the Church, not the universal Church spread over the face of the earth; but that particular Church, in which every man liveth, and to which he is subject, saith t Luc. Brugens. ad Math. 18. Lucas of Bruges. There is u De 12. abus. saecul. cap. 10. a treatise that goes under Cyprians name, wherein the author out of this place concludeth, that every man must seek to his own Bishop. All these things considered, let every one judge, whether this piece of scripture be fitly applied by you to prove that we must believe without doubting, whatsoever the Church delivereth. But I will propound the reason, that all men may understand, and consider it. If he that being proceeded withal first by admonition of one man alone, then by the like with one or two witnesses, lastly by the governors of the Church, concerning some quarrel or matter of fact, will not obey the voice of the Church, must be to us as an heathen or a Publican: than whosoever will not believe whatsoever the Church teacheth, is greatly threatened in the Scripture. But he that being so proceeded against, in such a matter, will not obey, is so to be accounted of. Therefore he that will not believe whatsoever the Church teacheth, is greatly threatened in the Scripture. I have framed this Syllogism, as every man may see, with the greatest advantage that can reasonably be taken by this place to your purpose; whereas I needed not have allowed the interpretation, on which the reason is grounded All which notwithstanding, who discerneth not the weakness of the consequence in the proposition? What if such a man be so to be accounted of? doth it follow thereupon, that every one who believeth not the Church in all points, is threatened? First, unless the same course of proceeding be held, why should the party be threatened, because where such a course is taken, there a man is to be so reckoned of? Secondly, how doth it follow, that if in judgement concerning a matter of fact, the Church must be hearkened to for reformation, then in all matters whatsoever, it is absolutely to be heard by all men? Such are your proofs in points of greatest importance. I refer the Reader to that which I answered before, concerning x Mark. 16. 16. Chap 4. sect. 2 this place; to which I add upon the present occasion, that y Mat. 28. 19 our Saviour sending forth his Ministers to preach the Gospel, chargeth them to square their doctrine according to those things which they had received in commission from him: z Luc. Brugen. ad Marc. 16. therefore are they no farther to be obeyed, than their preaching is warrantable for the particulars out of our saviours instructions given them; which the Apostles directed by God's spirit, truly and faithfully delivered, first by word of mouth, and after by writing, to be the pillar (as a Iren. lib. 3. cap. 1. Irenaeus saith) and foundation of our faith. And if this place convey any such authority to the Church, it giveth the same to every several teacher, as it did to every one of the Apostles severally; and so every priest secular or regular, must be heard and believed whatsoever he teach. A. D. §. 9 Thus you see our Saviour Christ hath promised to his Church the continual presence of himself and of his holy Spirit, to teach that company all truth. Whereof followeth, that it is infallibly taught all truth. Moreover, he hath given charge and commission to that Church to teach us, and hath warranted and commanded us, in all points to hear and do according to the saying of this Church: which proveth, that it appertaineth to this church to instruct us in all points of faith, and that we ought to learn of it, in all matters of religion, what is the infallible truth: and consequently, that the doctrine of this Church is the rule of faith. A. W. Neither we nor you can see any such thing, if we look no farther than the holy Ghost directeth us: who assureth us of no more but that the Apostles should be so instructed and guided, that they should not err in their teaching, either by word of mouth or by writing, by reason of ignorance, or any other perverse affection; and that all the children of God shall be so taught and protected, that they shall never fall away from salvation by Christ. As for your Church or certain company, that is your Clergy and Pope assembled in a general Council, neither those places of Scripture you have brought, nor any other you can bring, once make mention of any such promise to them. Therefore have we no warrant to hear and do in all points according to the saying of any Church, (not only not of yours) but so far as that Church teacheth according to the doctrine of our Saviour Christ in the Scripture, which is the rule of faith. A. D. §. 10. Worthily therefore doth S. Paul call this Church columnam & 1. Tim. 3. Lib. 1. cot. Crescon. cap. 33. firmamentum veritatis, the pillar and ground of truth. Worthily also saith S. Austin: Scripturarum à nobis tenetur veritas, cum id facimus, quod universae placet Ecclesiae, quam earundem Scripturarum commendat authoritas: ut quoniam Scriptura sancta fallere non potest, quisquis falli metuit huius obscuritate quaestionis, Ecclesiam de illa consulat, quam sine ulla ambiguitate, Scriptura sancta demonstrat. The truth of the Scriptures is holden of us, when we do that which pleaseth the universal or whole Church, the which is commended by the authority of the Scriptures themselves; that because the holy Scripture cannot deceive, whosoever feareth to be deceived with the obscurity of this question, let him require the judgement of the Church, which without any ambiguity, the holy Scripture doth demonstrate: by which words he showeth plainly, that the sentence of the Church is of infallible and undoubted truth, and that the way not to be deceived in an obscure question, is to ask and follow the judgement of the Church. Wherefore worthily also do we all say, Credo Ecclesiam Catholicam: I believe the Catholic Church: and worthily also may I conclude, that neither Scripture alone, nor natural wit and learning, nor private spirit, nor any other thing, but only the teaching of the true Church of Christ, is that ordinary means which Almighty God hath provided, whereby all men may learn that one, infallible, entire faith, which I proved to be necessary to salvation. A. W. b 1. Tim. 3. 15. Saint Paul doth worthily call the Church, the pillar and ground of truth: but not (as you would have us believe) because it is the rule of faith. c Oecumen. ad 1. Tim. 3. 15. è Chrysost. The Greek Scholiast taketh that speech of the Apostle to be uttered by way of comparison, betwixt the Church of Christ and the jewish Temple. Not as the jewish Temple (saith Oecumenius) but the pillar and ground of truth: for the Temple was the ground of the shadows of the truth. Out of which we may gather, that as the jewish synagogue was the pillar and ground of those shadows of the truth: so is the Church of Christ the pillar and ground of the truth itself. But that synagogue was not the rule of faith in that point, because whatsoever it taught, was to be held for infallible truth; but for that Rom. 3. 2. to it were committed the oracles of God, and the knowledge and use of those ceremonies: so hath the Church of Christ the truth of doctrine in the scripture, and the exercises of God's worship and religion. Therefore is it called the pillar and ground of it, because it constantly maintaineth that truth, preaching and professing it, in despite of all the practices and power of Satan, and tyrants of the world. As the thighs (saith e Philo episc. Carpath, in Cantic cap. 4. circa ann. 410. an ancient writer) sustain and bear up the weight of the whole body: so also the Apostles like pillars, valiantly carry the universal Church of Christians over the whole world; being for the value of their invincible courage and steadfastness of their holy purpose, called marble pillars. And a little after: They preached the Gospel with such wisdom and constancy, that as if they had been of marble or adamant, they were afraid of no violence nor adversity, but always continuing firm and invincible against all the forces of men and devils, shining as it were in the dark, by that light of their wisdom, by preaching, admonishing, teaching and glistering with miracles, at the last they most happily became conquerors. To this effect speak f Lyra ad 1. Tim. cap. 3. your Glosses: The ground of the truth of the Gospel, which the Church constantly maintained even in the greatest persecutions. Well upholding the truth in itself (saith g Gloss. ordin. ibi. another Gloss.) h Ne corruat. That it may not fall to the ground, though it be afflicted, saith i Lombar. ibi. Lombard. But let us bring your reason into due frame. The pillar and ground of truth is the rule of faith. The Church is the pillar and ground of truth. Therefore the Church is the rule of faith. Your proposition or mayor is false, unless you restrain it, as To the proposition. I have often said, to the truth; and than it is so far the rule of faith, as it is the pillar and ground of truth. Whatsoever it holdeth truly, according to the scripture, is the rule of faith for those points: not because of the Church's authority, but for the truth of the doctrine. Yet may it easily come to pass, that a Church maintaining the general truth of the Gospel, and all particulars necessary to soluation, may fail in many other points of great importance, and for all that, continue both a true Church, and the pillar and ground of truth, though not the rule of faith. Your minor also (as you understand it) is untrue. First because To the Assumption. the Apostle speaketh not of any such company as you imagine, Pope, Bishop, Council; but either of the Church of Ephesus, in which Timothy, to whom he writeth, than abode; or indefinitely of any and every Church whatsoever, where the true Religion of our Saviour is or shall be professed, according to the Gospel. If Timothy were (as you will not deny) Bishop of Ephesus, than it is apparent, that the Apostle calleth the Church of Ephesus, wherein Timothy lived, taught and governed, the pillar and ground of truth: yet was it not the rule of faith; for than had the rule of faith perished long since with that Church of Ephesus. If he speak to him as to an Evangelist, who was to follow him from place to place, and to establish the Churches which the Apostle had planted, then must every one of those Churches, wherein Timothy was to behave himself, as he had done in Ephesus, be understood to be the pillar and ground of truth: and yet neither any, nor all of them were the rule of faith, which else must have been lost with them. What remains then? Shall we expound it of all believers in general? I grant it reacheth to all the faithful: but as to them considered in their several Churches, because among them so disposed of, was Timothy to perform that duty which the Apostle there enjoineth him. But let us so conceive of the Church. What shall it avail you, or endamage us? All believers are not the company you plead for, but only the Pope and your Bishops, whom you would have taken for the rule of faith. Secondly, I deny your minor, in respect of the sense you give of those words, the pillar and ground of truth. For you so understand them, as if the truth of God depended upon the verdict of the Church, so that nothing may be held for truth, but what the Church delivereth for such; and whatsoever she so propoundeth, must so be received upon pain of certain damnation. How contrary are you in this interpretation and doctrine to the ancient fathers? The Apostles (saith k Iren. lib. 3. cap. 1. Irenaeus) left us the Scriptures to be the pillar and ground of our faith. Nay (say you) they left us the Church to be the pillar and ground of the Scriptures. The Gospel and spirit of life (saith l Cap. 11. the same father in the same book) is the pillar and ground of the Church. Nay, by your leave (reply you) the Church is the pillar and ground of the Gospel. But m Chrysost. ad 1. Tim. hom. 11. Chrysostome handling this place of the Apostle, is not afraid to affirm, that the truth is the pillar and ground of the Church: not as if he would deny that which the Apostle saith: for the Church indeed is the upholder of the truth; but to show, that although the Church maintain and avow the truth, yet it is built and founded upon the truth, which (as n Hicron. ibi. Jerome saith) upholds the building. Therefore to make short, when the Apostle saith, that the Church is the pillar and ground of truth: his meaning is, that amongst Christians, and among no other sort of men, the truth is to be found; and amongst, and by them it is constantly and worthily maintained. The Philosophers indeed (as o Thom. ad 1. Tim. cap. 3. lect. 3. Thomas saith) had a kind of notion of some points thereof, but they had no certainty: as well because they were corrupted with errors, as for that very few of them are found to have agreed in the same truth. But in the Church is certain knowledge and truth. Which (as p Caiet. ad 1. Tim. 3. Caietan saith) is upheld aloft in it, because it is avowed, reverenced and honoured above all things: and it is so founded in the Church, that out of it, it is not to be found. This is the reason (as they truly say) why the Church is called a pillar. q Thomas ubi supra. Thomas addeth that it is termed the ground in respect of others, because men cannot be confirmed in the truth, but by the sacraments of the Church. r August. cont. Crescon. Lib. 1. cap. 33. This testimony of Austin is alleged by you otherwise, than it was written by him. For whereas he spoke of that which had then already been resolved of by the whole Church: you make him speak indefinitely of any thing that pleaseth the Church, turning iam placuit into placet. But we must understand, that he writing in that place concerning the rebaptizing of heretics, which question had been agreed upon (as he saith s Cap. 32. in the former chapter) before the hatching of Donatus heresy, saith, that the judgement of the Church in that case is to be held as agreeable to the Scripture. This might the Reader have seen in his words, if you had not changed the tense in placet, and left out etiam in hac re, in the beginning of the sentence: The truth of the Scriptures (saith Austin) is held by us even in this thing. If you reply farther, that the reason which Austin useth, is general for all questions whatsoever, namely the authority of the Church, commended by the Scriptures, which cannot err: I answer you, first that we have seen Augustine's judgement directly to the contrary, viz. that whatsoever is of necessity to salvation, is plainly delivered in the Scriptures, and that the authority of men without Scripture, is insufficient to propound any doctrine as a matter of faith: and therefore if he should write otherwise in this place, we might with good reason make question of his authority. Secondly, I answer, that Austin speaketh here of those points only which are not determinable by Scripture, such as he taketh the question of rebaptizing heretics to be, as it appeareth in the words immediately before those you allege, being also a piece of the sentence by you omitted. Although (saith Austin) there be no example to be brought out of the Scriptures concerning this matter, yet the truth of the same Scriptures is (even in this matter) also held by us, when we do that which hath now already pleased the whole Church, etc. Now in such cases as cannot by Scripture be decided, who would or may be so presumptuous, as to withstand or mislike the practice of the church in all places? Surely t 1. Cor. 11. 16. the authority of the church is so far commended in the Scriptures, that it ought in all things of such nature to overweigh our judgement, and incline our affection to the liking of that which is agreed on by so general a consent of so many churches in all nations. Therefore that which you gather out of Augustine's words, of following the judgement of the church in an obscure question, is to be restrained to such questions as cannot be determined by the Scriptures (and those are few or none of any importance, of necessity to salvation none at all) or else your consequence will be nothing worth. Austin saith, that in questions not determinable by Scripture, we must follow the judgement of the church. Therefore we must follow it in all obscure questions whatsoever. Augustine's foundation will not bear your building. Is it a good reason to say, In cases not provided for by law, custom must bear sway: therefore it must be followed in all cases? So, and so weakly do you dispute. It is not enough for you to teach us new divinity, but you will drive us to learn new Latin too: Caesar could make men free of Rome, but not words. Credere Ecclesiam Catholicam, to believe the Catholic Church, in ordinary Latin, is to believe that there is a Catholic Church. Credo (esse) I believe there is: but you would make the ignorant believe, that credo Ecclesiam and credo Ecclesiae is all one. For how else can this sentence reasonably depend upon the former: We must follow the judgement of the Church: Therefore worthily also do we all say, Credo Ecclesiam Catholicam? What can you mean by this, but I believe, that is, I give credit to the Catholic Church: that is, I believe that to be true which the Catholic Church teacheth? But the article of the Creed hath no such sense, as it may appear by the other that follow, all being alike in respect of our belief. I believe the communion of Saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and life everlasting: To which of these four dough give any such credit? But we believe that there is a Church of Christ, to which all these privileges belong. He that translated Epiphanius into Latin, more curiously then truly made a difference betwixt believing the church and the other articles. We believe (saith u janus Corua. in transl. Anchorat. Epiph. in extremo. he) one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, we confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins, and look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. But the Greek which Epiph. reciteth out of the Nicene creed, is alike in all the articles, x 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Church, in the baptism of repentance, in the resurrection of the dead. And y Paschas. diac. Rom. Eccles. contra Maced. lib. 1. cap. 1. Paschasius doubteth not to say, that the ignorance of some drew the preposition z In praefat. ibi. in from the former sentence concerning belief in the holy Ghost, into the article of the church: yet (as he showeth) credere Deum, & in Deum greatly differ. That there is a God, the Apostle saith, the devil believeth: but no man is held to believe in God, but he that a Piè in cum speraverit. religiously puts his trust in him. b Cyril. Hierof. catceh. 18. Cyril also reciteth the articles after the same manner, without any difference in the particulars, yet with In, to every one of them, and in that sense, in which we take them. c Ruffin. in sym. Apost. sect. 35. Ruffin (as Paschasius before) denieth that the Creed saith: In the holy Church, in the forgiveness of sins, in the resurrection of the flesh. Because that were to equal our belief of these points, with our believing in the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost. But of these articles we are to believe, that they are true, that there is a Church, gathered unto God, that there is a remission of sins, that there is a resurrection of the flesh. So doth d August. Serm. de tempore. 115 Austin (if those Sermons be his) read and understand it. I believe the Catholic Church etc. We must believe, that God will vouchsafe the resurrection of bodies, and the forgiveness of sins. And whereas e Serm. 119. in an other Sermon, he saith in the Church, so doth he also, in the forgiveness of sins, and the meaning is all one. And f Serm. 131. in a third Sermon he giveth us this caveat: we must know (saith he) that we must believe the Church, not believe in the Church, that is, must believe there is a Church. So then, g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Credere Ecclesiam. Heb. 11. 6. To believe the Catholic Church, is not to believe all that the Church saith (which neither the Greek nor the Latin will bear) but to believe there is a Church; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Credo esse Ecclesiam: which in the phrase of the new Testament, for the Greek, might be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Which is word for word, I believe that there is a Church. Now if any man shall demand of me, what the meaning of this article is, or what we believe, by believing there is a Church, and what that Church is, to which so many gracious promises are made, and of which so many glorious things are spoken in the scripture; I will endeavour to satisfy him, as briefly as I can with plainness. First then (leaving the holiness and catholicness of this church to be discussed h Chap. 15. in due place) I say, that by believing the Church, we believe that there is a company of men called to true faith in jesus Christ, and to the participation of those privileges, which belong to all the true members of his mystical body, some of the principal whereof are recited in the articles following. But we may not imagine, as the Papists do, without any likelihood of true reason, that this company is their Pope and Bishops assembled in a general council, or that they of this company make one visible congregation, but that they are all one Church in regard of the common means of salvation, which they embrace, and their dependence upon on mystical head jesus Christ, of whose body they are all members. So that by Church in the Creed, we understand such of the elect, as are by faith lively members of our saviours body, or at the least, are by the baptism of the spirit and water in corporated into that body, howsoever as yet they have not faith. I deny not that all the elect, even those, which are yet unborn, belong to the Church of Christ, but I think the Creed doth not stretch so far, but only to them, that are actually members of Christ, not to all, that are so in God's everlasting predestination. In this sense, namely for the living members of Christ's body, the word Church is often used in the Scripture. i Mat. 16. 18. Upon this rock will I build my Church. k Act. 20. 28. The Church, which he hath purchased with his blood. l Eph. 1. 21. 22. God hath given Christ over all things to be the head of the Church, which is his body, the fullness of him, that filleth all in all things. m & 5. 23. Christ is the head of the Church, and the same is the Saviour of his body. So is it taken in the same chapter divers times. n vers. 25. 27. 29. 32. He is the head of the body of the Church. Thus do the ancient writers speak of the Church. o August. de bapt. cont. Donat. lib. 5. cap. 27. Austin denieth, that he dares take any for the Church of Christ, but those that are just, and holy, no though they have been baptized: For (as he saith p Cont. Cresc. lib. 2. cap. 21. in another place) they that are condemned by Christ, are not now in his body, which is the Church: because Christ cannot have members condemned. As for the reprobate (saith q De bapt. cont. Donat. lib. 1. cap, 17. the same Author) whether they seem to be within the Church, or be apparently out of it, they are always divided from the unity of the Church, which is without spot or wrinkle. The Church (saith r Clem. Alexan. Strom. lib. 7. Clement of Alexandria) is the company of the elect. Therefore saith s Cyprian. epist. 49. Sect. 2. add Cornel. Cyprian, that the unity of Christ and the Church is coupled together with indivisible links. For (as he saith t & epist. 55. Sect. 8 add eund. Cornel. otherwhere) the Church that believeth in Christ, and holds that which once it hath received, never departeth wholly from him: they are the Church, that continued in the house of God: but they are not a planting planted by God, who are not settled with the fastness and soundness of wheat, but are scattered like chaff by the breath of the enemy Satan. The Church standeth on the right hand (saith u Hieron. epist. 140. Jerome) and hath nothing in it, belonging to them, on the left hand. And x Hieron. ad Ephes. 5. again: He that is a sinner, and defiled with any filthiness, cannot be called one of Christ's Church, nor be said to be subject to Christ. There are many such sayings in the writings of the Fathers, grounded upon the book of Canticles; which all men know entreateth of the true church. There is no doubt (saith y Bernard. in cant. ser. 78. Bernard upon the Canticles) but the elect are the Church of God. But the reprobat (as one of your z joan. de Turrecremata lib. 4 sum. part. 2. cap. 20 Cardinals saith) are not truly members of the Church. Of many believers purged from their sins, there is made one Church, saith a Albert. in Math. cap. 26. Albertus magnus, Thomas his master. b Thomas in Apoc. cap. 3. Thomas himself expounding that place of the Revelation, In the Temple of my God, saith, that by the temple of God, the Church of the faithful is understood, which is the special temple of God: and to that purpose he allegeth that of the Apostle: c 1. Cor. 3. 17. The temple of God is holy, which you are. And in d Thomas ad Rom. cap. 12, an other place he saith, that the mystical body of Christ is the Church. Now the union of this mystical body is spiritual, by which, through faith and charity, they are united to God, and one to another. As the godly, or they that are holy, are the members of Christ, so the wicked (saith e Ambros. in Psalm. 35. Guliel. Altisses. in sum. lib. 3. tract. 2. cap. 1. q. 5. Ambrose) are the members of the Devil. The congregation of them that believe aright, is the Church, saith Altissiodorensis. Who can reasonably doubt whether this be the Church spoken of in the Creed, or no? As for the promises, and commendations given to the Church in the Scripture, to what other Church should they appertain? The Dove, and the perfect one praised in the Canticles, is (as f Epiphan. hares. 35. Epiphanius truly saith) the holy spouse and Catholic Church. Whereas, the Church in the Canticles (saith g August, de bapt. contra Donat. lib. 5. cap. 27. Austin) is described to be a garden enclosed, a fountain sealed up, a well of living water etc. I dare not understand this, but of the holy and righteous, not of covetous men, not of deceivers, extortioners, usurers, drunkards, envious persons, although they have received the same baptism, but have not the same charity, or sanctifying grace. The promises & praises belong either severally to every one of the elect called; as that h Mat. 16. 18. & Theophyl. ad cum locum. the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church: that i Ephe. 5. 23. 25 the Church is loved and cherished by Christ her husband & head: or to the congregations of believers, in regard of the elect amongst them. Once this I dare boldly affirm (let any Papist disprove it if he can) that the Church is no where in all the Scripture taken for one company through the world, in respect of any outward government or dependence: which is the foundation of all your doctrine, touching the Church: but in regard of the common means of salvation by faith in Christ. And here I might well make an end of answering to this treatise, because I have overthrown the main strength of your discourse, and discovered to all men that will not be wilfully blind, the weakness of your reason: but for the better satisfaction of the unlearned, I will follow you from Chapter to Chapter, that the truth may the more easily be discerned. A. D. CHAP. XI. That the Church, whose doctrine must be to us the rule of faith, must always continue without interruption, from Christ his time, till the world's end. A. W. That there always hath been, since the beginning of the world (excepting perhaps the time betwixt the fall of our first parents, and their faith in the Messiah) that there is, and always shall be a Church, viz. certain men that are predestinate to life, and actually believe in jesus Christ, it never came into any of our minds to be doubted of: that there should be such a company as you conceit, all the Papists in the world cannot prove. A. D. §. 1. Considering what hath been proved in the former Chapter, about the infallible authority of the doctrine of the true Church: I hope no Christian will deny, but that so long as this Church doth continue, we have of it a sure pillar and a firm foundation, whereupon we may safely build our belief. For either a man must deny, that ever our Saviour did make any such promise, gave such charge and commission, left any such warrant, set forth such a commandment, or thundered out any such threats, as before is rehearsed: which were to deny the Scriptures, which scriptures are generally received by all Christians, no otherwise then (as they are) the undoubted word of God: or else he must wrest the interpretation thereof, both from that which the words, of themselves, naturally yield, and also from the common sense and understanding, either of all, or the most learned, and almost of the unlearned also, of the whole Christian world: or else he shall be forced to confess that, which, not I, but Saint Paul hath 1. Tim. 3. said: Ecclesia est columna & firmamentum veritatis: the Church is the pillar and ground of truth. Only it may perchance seem to some (of those, that do, at this day oppose themselves against the authority of the Church,) that this was true, for Saint Paul's time, and perhaps for some three, four, five, or six hundred years after: but not to be presumed upon in latter times, and namely when Luther began his reformation (as they term it) or now adays. A. W. Considering how weak your proofs have been, as in the former Chapters, so namely in the last, about the infallible authority of the doctrine of the true Church: I hope there is no reasonable man, not only no Christian, that will build his faith and salvation upon so tottering a pillar, and so slippery a foundation. But because you seem to dote so much upon your last Chapter, I will once again be content to examine the substance of it, as it is here repeated by you, with some little alteration. Either we must deny that our Saviour, hath so promised, charged, warranted, threatened, or we must falsely interpret the scriptures; or else we must grant, that the authority of the Church is a sure pillar, and firm foundation, whereupon we may safely build our faith. But we neither may deny that our Saviour hath so promised, charged, warranted, commanded, threatened, neither may we falsely interpret the Scriptures. Therefore we must grant, that the authority of the Church is a sure pillar and firm foundation, whereupon we may safely build our belief, First in general for your whole syllogism, if the conclusion you To the syllogism. intent, were no other, than that you pretend & propound, that the Church is the pillar & ground of truth, as S. Paul saith, there would be no question in this matter betwixt us. For we have learned to acknowledge the truth of all and every part of the scripture. But the beginning of this Chapter showeth, that you mean, by the Churches being the pillar and ground of truth, that we may safely build our belief upon the Church's authority: which, as I proved in my answer to that Chapter, is no part of the Apostles meaning. In this sense must we take your conclusion. Secondly, in particular, I deny your Mayor; because your disjunction To the proposition. is nought: presuming a necessity, where there is none: For neither we need to deny that our Saviour hath so promised, charged, warranted, commanded, threatened; neither is there any cause why we should falsely interpret the Scriptures: and yet we have no reason to grant, that our faith may safely be built upon the authority of the Church. No such thing (as I have showed) can follow upon the words of scripture alleged by you. Therefore we need not deny the promises, charge, warrant, commandment, or threatening of our Saviour, or else grant the Church, such an unlimited authority. Neither will the true sense of those Scriptures, either enforce or bear any such illation or conclusion, touching the infallible authority of the Church. And whereas you think to face out the matter, with naming the common sense and understanding, either of all, or the most learned, and almost of the unlearned also of the whole Christian world: my answer propounding the judgement of many excellently learned, and ancient writers of those places, proveth that to be but a vain popish brag, without all likelihood of truth, especially since you, that k Chap. 1. spare not to heap up testimonies of Fathers, when they are needless, and l Chap. 14. to quote their books and chapters, sometimes for a bare phrase, allege not so much as the name of any one author, for the proof of your interpretation of twelve several places of scripture. Your proffered service, in helping us with this distinction, hath more show of kindness, then good meaning. For it is not brought in, to confirm our answer, but to give yourself occasion of uttering that, which you are taught to urge for proof of this question. But we neither need your aid, and have good cause to suspect your favours. In a word, your distinction is such as none of us ever brought, or would bring to answer those places of scripture. We confess, that whatsoever was promised to the Church in those texts, was promised for continuance to the end of the world: but we say, that the first promise was not concerning the Churches not erring, the three last are particular to the Apostles, at least for such a measure of teaching. But what should I repeat that, which was delivered in the very last Chapter? The thing you harp upon, though untunably, is, that your Romish church, or rather the Church of the East & West, were indeed the pillar and ground of truth, for the space of some 600. years after Christ, but afterwards fell away from that soundness of doctrine, which before it had cleaved unto. Such a matter there is acknowledged by our Divines; yet no man saith, either that the Church erred not, in any point, during that time (for all men know it erred in divers though not fundamental, if we may guess by the writings of the learned in those ages) or that the Church hath, or shall want the performance of Christ's promise, at any time, for a moment. But what is all this to the matter we have in hand? Well: Let us see yet, what you say. A. D. §. 2. Against these men I set down this assertion. The true Church of Christ (which the forenamed testimonies of Scripture do commend) was, and is to continue, without interruption, till the world's end. This I prove: First, out of the very words of those promises which I cited out of Saint Matthew, and Saint john. For how can Christ our Saviour, or his holy Spirit, be with his Church, in such sort, as there is promised; to wit till the world's end, and for ever: and especially, as is said in Saint Matthew: Omnibus diebus usque ad consummationem seculi: All the days, even to the end of the Matth. cap. 28. world; unless the Church also be all the days, until the end of the world? For if the Church for any time, days, months, or years do cease to be: Christ cannot for these years, months, and days, be truly said, to be with his Church (sith he cannot be with that which is not) and consequently he cannot be said, to have fulfilled his promise, wherein he said, he would be with his Church, all the days, until the end of the world. A. W. The men, against whom you set down this Assertion, are of your own making, that you might have, against whom to show your valour: once it cannot concern us, who acknowledge the continuance of Christ's Church, without interruption, till the world's end. As long as these times shall run on (saith m August. in Psalm. 71. Austin) the Church of God, that is, the body of Christ, shall not be wanting upon earth. This is the Church, spoken of in as many of these testimonies, as are not peculiar to the Apostles, namely the elect, from time to time: not your Romish synagogue, wherein n Bellar. de Eccles. milit. lib. 3 cap. 7. per lot. many of the reprobate also are included, and that as members of your congregation, who cannot without dishonour of our Saviour Christ, be accounted parts of his glorious body. The truth of your Assertion needeth no proof, and the weakness of your proof is a disgrace to your Assertion. Christ will be with his Church, at all times whensoever there are any that believe in him, not only whilst the Apostles live: therefore there shall always be some in the world without interruption, that shall believe in him. This is but a loose consequence: I grant the conclusion, or consequent, that there shall be a Church always: but I deny that therefore there shall always be one, because our Saviour promiseth to be with it, whensoever it is. Put case our Saviour had thus spoken; I will be with you, in your persecution, all the days, even to the end of the world: might a man reasonably conclude from hence, that therefore the Church shall be always persecuted, without any interruption, or ease one day from persecution? Such is your consequence, and as such, insufficient to prove your Assertion. A. D. §. 3. Secondly, I prove the same, out of an other promise, or prophesy of our Saviour Christ, to his Church, wherein he saith: Portae inferninon praevalebunt adversus eam: the gates of hell shall not Matthew. 16. prevail against it. For how was it true, that the gates of hell shall not prevail, if they have prevailed so much, as utterly to abolish the Church, or at least, to banish it quite out of the world, for so long a time? Granting therefore (which every Christian must needs grant) that the prophecies & promises of our Saviour, are always fulfilled, and that they are unfallibly true; we may not doubt, but that the church hath ever been since Christ his time, and shall never cease to be in the world. A. W. This proof is little or nothing better than the former: thus you conclude. If Christ have promised, that the gates of hell shall not prevail against his Church, than it must continue without interruption till the world's end. But Christ hath promised, that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Therefore it must continue without interruption, till the world's end. I deny the consequence of your mayor: first because the To the proposition. Church in this place doth not signify such a company of men as you by that name understand; but the congregation of the elect, who by true faith confess, as Peter did, and being built upon our Saviour the rock, shall never be removed and perish. And this promise is made not only to all jointly, but to every one severally, as it was to Peter and all the rest of the Apostles. If there be any (saith o Origen. in Mat. cap. 16. Origen) against whom the gates of hell shall prevail, such a one is neither the rock upon which Christ buildeth, nor the Church, which is built by Christ upon the rock. p Petra est omnis. Every one (saith q Apud Thom. in caten. ad Mat 16. the same Origen) that is a follower of Christ by imitation, is a rock or stone. But he, against whom the gates of hell prevail, is neither to be counted a rock nor the Church, nor part of the Church, which Christ builds upon the rock. Again, whosoever is Christ's disciple (saith r Ad Mat. 16. the same author) is a rock: but many are called, and few chosen. As if he should have said, that the Church, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail, is every one of the elect; and that he against whom those gates do prevail, is none of the elect or church, to which that promise of our Saviour was made. s Theophyl. ad Mat. 16. Theophylact, though he expound the place of the Church somewhat generally, yet he doubteth not to add, that every one of us also is the church, which is the house of God: if therefore we be confirmed in the confession of Christ, the gates of hell, that is, sins, shall not prevail against us. The gates of hell (saith r Gloss. ordin. ad Mat. 16. your Gloss) are sins, threatenings, flatter, heresies, whereby they that are weak, run into destruction: who are not to be thought to have built the house of their profession of believing sound upon the rock, but upon the sand: that is, to follow Christ with a simple and true intent, but to have made a show for some earthly respect. For he that receiveth the faith of Christ with the inward love of his heart, easily overcometh whatsoever outwardly befalleth him. u Lyra ibi. Lyra saith, that the church here spoken of, consisteth of those persons, in whom there is true knowledge & confession of the faith & truth; & not of any men, in respect of their power or dignity ecclesiastical or civil; because many Princes, Popes, and other inferior Christians, are found to have made Apostasy from the faith. x Lucas Brugens. ibi. Luke of Bruges, though he will not have this promise of victory belong to every particular member of the church, yet he granteth that every living member thereof, steadfastly cleaving unto it, may conceive good hope of triumphing over all Satan's forces. I think (saith y Hieron. ad Mat. 16. Jerome) the gates of hell are vices and sins, or surely the doctrines of heretics, by which men being enticed are led to hell. Doth any of these writers expound this place of such a company as you dream of? Nay, doth not our Saviour himself restrain it to the elect, and yet apply it to every one of them? For who beside them, is built upon the rock? or which of them in his due time, is not so built? z joan. 6. 37. All that the Father giveth me, shall come unto me: and him that cometh to me, I cast not away. And again, a Ver. 40. This is the Father's will that sent me, that of all which he hath given me, I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. Secondly, the consequence of your mayor is yet more weak, because you misinterpret the text: as if our Saviour meant to promise a perpetual continuance of his Church upon earth, by saying that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. For hereby it must needs be granted, that the gates of hell do prevail against all such Christians, as by persecution or any violence are taken out of the world. Yea Peter himself, and his fellow Apostles, to whom this promise was first made, found not the true performance of it in their own persons, but were overcome by the gates of hell. Do you magnify our saviours promises, that make them fail so notoriously, even to the Apostles themselves? The gates of hell (saith b Theophyl. ad Mat. 16. Theophylact) are temporal persecutors, who endeavour to send Christians to hell. Heretics also are gates leading to hell. The Church therefore hath prevailed against many heretics and persecutors. The gates of hell (saith c Gloss. interl. ibi. your Gloss) shall not separate the Church from my love and faith. Persecutions of tyrants (saith d Lyra ibi. Lyra) assaults and temptations of wicked spirits shall not prevail, by subverting the Church from the true faith. e Luc Brugens. ibi. Brugensis speaketh yet more plainly: The gates of hell shall not prevail (saith he) so that the Church shall be overthrown, that is, separated from Christ, or f Salute in Christo excidere, aut frustrati fall away from salvation by Christ, or fail of it. The Apostles and other holy Martyrs and Christians, were overcome in regard of their continuance upon earth; but not separated from Christ: nay rather they are more nearly joined to him. It is one thing to say the Church, that is, they that truly believe in Christ, shall by no power of Satan and his instruments, either inward or outward, be severed from Christ, or fail of salvation by him: another to affirm that there shall always be some on earth that shall believe and make profession of the Gospel. g Bellar. de Concil. lib 2. cap. 2. §. Secunda classis. Bellarmine applies this text one while to the general Counsels approved by the Pope, which (as he saith) by reason of this promise cannot err, either in believing or in teaching: h De Pont. Rom. lib. 1. c. 9 §. Quinta. another while to the universal Church and to the sea of Rome, which absurdly and falsely he maketh the rock, upon which the universal Church is built: so that by the Church, according to Bellarmine, Rome, or Peter's seat (as he calleth it) must be meant first and principally, from which at the second hand, the universal Church must have her perpetual stability. But what should I stand any longer upon this place, having showed that the promise is not of the Church's continuance, without interruption, but of the certainty of their salvation, that believe truly in our Saviour Christ, and so being built upon the i Math 7. 25. joan. 10. 28, To the Assumption. rock, cannot be shaken down or overthrown by any storm. In this sense I grant the minor: our Saviour hath made a promise, that no one member of his shall perish, though the gates of hell send out and employ all their forces against him. He that confesseth and believeth with Saint Peter, shall be saved with Saint Peter. But I deny the minor, according to the sense you make of it, concerning the perpetual continuance of a certain company, without interruption or error: and yet I believe the Catholic Church; and that at all times there are some true members thereof upon earth, chosen to life, and justified by faith in Christ. A. D. §. 4. Thirdly, I may confirm the same out of other Scriptures, where the perpetuity of the church is either affirmed or promised: of which kind of testimonies, being very many, I will only rehearse some few. Of the Church (if we will believe S. Austin his exposition) it is said, Deus fundavit eam in aeternum: God hath established it for ever. And of it, signified by the name of the kingdom of Christ, the Prophet Psal. 47. Daniel saith: Suscitabit Deus coeli regnum, quod in aeternum non dissipabitur: The God of heaven shall raise up a kingdom, Dan. 2. which shall not be broken in pieces for ever. As is also said in S. Luke: Regni eius non erit finis: there shall be no end of his kingdom. Luc. 1. A. W. These few are more than need, for the proof of that, whereof no man doubteth: but if they were twice as many, their weight would be too small for the matter you undertake to prove by them: as it will appear by the weighing of them in the balance of true reason. That (say you) which God hath established for ever, so that there shall be no end of it, must always continue without interruption, till the world's end. But God hath so established the Church, that there shallbe no end of it. Therefore the Church must always continue without interruption, till the world's end. That the Church shall continue in all times and ages, as I have often said, we grant and maintain: that such a Church To the proposition. as you fancy to yourselves, either shall be always, or ever was in the world, since the Apostles, we utterly deny. Farther, I say your proposition is false: because the continuance of the church dependeth not upon her being in the world, but upon her being joined to Christ. And if the Church shall remain even after this world is ended, and then especially flourish; what folly is it to think it continueth not, unless it be upon the earth? May I not certainly conclude, that it shall continue after this world, because it is established for ever? How then do you gather hereupon, that it ceaseth to be, if it be not in this world at all times without interruption? Was not this spoken of the Church of the jews also? Is not the like affirmed of the ceremonies? And yet neither of these hath continued, nor did continue without interruption, while they stood, before the time of their abolishing. That l Psal. 48. 1. the Psalm was written either wholly or principally of jerusalem, and of the Church of the jews belonging thereunto, both the course of it manifestly showeth, and he that considereth the expositions of it by m Hieron. & August ad Psa. 47. per tot. Jerome and Austin, and what ado they have to fit the several verses thereof to the Church of Christ, will easily be persuaded. But what Church mean they, think you? Such a company of men as you talk of? Let n Hieron. ibi. ad ver. 1. Hierome speak. If you would know of him, what that city of our God is: he answereth, that it is o Anima sancta. An holy soul: and by the citizens and householders of it, he understandeth p Boni actus. good actions. Again: What is the Lords holy mountain? q Assump. dom. homin. corpus. The nature of man, which our Lord took upon him. I might go forward with the rest of the Psalm in like sort, but it is enough that I have given a taste of this exposition. The like difficulties may be observed in Augustine's interpretation; besides the great difference betwixt him and Hierome, in their commentaries upon this Psalm. Now that the people, and worship of God among the jews had the like said of them, it may appear by these places. r Psal. 111. 9 ●● He hath commanded his covenant for ever. s 133. 3. There, that is, upon the mountains of Zion, the Lord promised his blessing and life for ever. t 132. 13. 14. The Lord hath chosen Zion, and loved to dwell in it, saying, This is my rest for ever, here will I dwell, for I have a delight therein. If then, for all these promises and commendations, the Church and service of God be perished from among the jews; how can you from this only conclude, that the Church of Christ shall continue without interruption? Your minor also is false, understanding by Church (as you do) To the Assumption. a certain company of men, infallibly taught in all points of faith, and infallibly to be believed by all men. To the proofs of it I answer, that they are all insufficient; which I will show in particular. u Psal. 48. 8. The Psalm (as I have showed) belongeth to the city of jerusalem, to the Temple and Church of the Jews. The phrase doth not necessarily require any such continuance, without interruption. x Psal. 105. 8. The Lord (saith another Psalm) remembered his covenant for ever. The Prophet speaketh of the performance of that point of God's promise to Abraham, which concerned the outward prosperous estate of the jews: so it is expounded in the next verse: y vers. 9 The covenant that he made with Abraham, and the oath that he swore to Isaac: yet did the Lord punish them oftentimes himself, and give them up into the hands of their enemies, z Psal. 106. 40 41. 42. 43. as the history of the Scripture showeth, from time to time. So speaketh the Prophet a Isai. 63. 9 Esay also of his kindness toward them: In all their troubles he was troubled, and the Angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his mercy he redeemed them, and he bore them, and carried them always continually; yet was not this without interruption, either in the wilderness, or in the land of jewry. Therefore b Gloss. interl. ad Psal. 47. your Gloss expoundeth for ever, c Stabiliter. steadfastly: and d Gloss. ordin. ibi. another Gloss taketh it as spoken in comparison of the ceremonial Law: not for an hour or short time, as (before) the tabernacle of Moses was: signifying that there was no change in religion to succeed the Gospel of Christ, as the Gospel was to succeed the law of Moses. What is this to continuing without interruption? First I oppose to your bare word, whereby you so peremptorily affirm, that by the name of e Dan. 2. 44. the kingdom of Christ, the Church is signified, the authority of f Theodoret. ad Dan. 2. 44. Theodoret, who understandeth it of our saviours eternal government: The Prophet showeth (saith Theodoret) the end of things present, and the kingdom of heaven without end. And whereas you will have his kingdom in this world to be meant, he refuteth that conceit by this reason: If they stand upon it, that our saviours former coming is signified by these words, let them show (saith that ancient Father) that the Roman Empire perished, as soon as our Saviour appeared. And afterward: At his second coming he shall strike the image upon his feet of Iron and clay, etc. and having destroyed all kingdoms, and made them as it were to be forgotten, he shall bestow his kingdom upon them that are worthy of it. The kingdom of Christ (saith g Lyra ibi. Lyra) is especially in heaven, where the citizens are immortal. Hitherto belongeth that in h Apud Iren. in arg. lib. 5. c. 26 Irenaeus, in the argument of a chapter, that john and Daniel foretold the dissolution & desolation of the Roman Empire, which should go before the end of the world, and our Saviour Christ's everlasting kingdom. So doth Barradius expound i Num. 24. 17. that prophecy of Balaam, concerning our saviours destroying of Moab and Sheth: Christ (saith k Sebast. Barra. in concor. evan. lib. 9 cap 9 he) shall smite the captains of Moab, and destroy all the sons of Sheth at the last day of judgement. I doubt not, but in any reasonable man's judgement, the authority of these writers is of weight enough to crush your bare affirmation to powder, that, for ought you have said, we may interpret these places of our saviours kingdom in heaven. But that I may answer the place to the full, I grant that the prophecy belongeth to the kingdom of Christ, even in respect of this world also; as it is plain by the time the Prophet speaketh of, namely the destroying of the kingdoms of Syria and Egypt, the remains of Alexander's conquest. And so Theodoret is answered, who grounded his exposition concerning Christ's second coming, upon a mistaking of daniel's image, as if that belonged to the Empire of Rome, which was prophesied of the Syrian and Egyptian kingdoms. I say then, first, that this kingdom of Christ is not any outward state of the true Church, which should continue without all manner of interruption. For who knoweth not, that divers heresies have for a time mightily prevailed against the Church outwardly, so that they seemed to have gotten the upper hand? Who hath not heard, that l Hieron. dialo. contra. Luciser. the whole Christian world sometimes wondered at itself, that it was become an Arian? Was it not almost four hundred years, before the Church came to be of so great account in the world? Is it not prophesied in the m Apoc. 12. 6 Revelation, that she should be forced to fly into the wilderness for the space of 1260. days? How then should the outward kingdom of Christ be said to continue (simply) without interruption? Some subjects of the kingdom might live scattered here and there, but out of question the kingdom was not in those times to be found, if we measure it by any outward state. I say therefore secondly, that by the kingdom of Christ in Daniel and Luke, the spiritual government of our Saviour is signified, whereby he ruleth in the hearts of his chosen; so that no force of Satan or his instruments can dispossess him of this kingdom, but that it shall always continue in despite of the gates of hell. This appeareth in that place of n Luk. 2. 32. 33 Luke more manifestly. For what is the throne of David, what is the house of jacob, but the elect of God among the jews and Gentiles? All are not Israel (saith the o Rom. 9 6. 7. Apostle) that are of Israel: neither are they all children, because they are the seed of Abraham: but in Isaac shall thy seed be called. The kingdom of Christ is over p Gal. 6. 16. the Israel of God, and they are that house of jacob, of which the Angel speaketh to the virgin Mary, concerning our saviours kingdom, which shall have no end. A. D. §, 5. Lastly, I might confirm the same with the testimony of the ancient Fathers, Origen, Saint Chrysostome, S. Bernard, and especially of S. Austin, who disputing against the Donatists, saith thus, as rehearsing In Psal. 101. one of their speeches: Sed illa Ecclesia, quae fuit omnium gentium, iam non est, perijt: That Church, which was of all nations, Conc. 2. is not now, it is perished. Unto which their speech, he answereth; O impudentem vocem! Accounting it great impudency to say, the Church is perished. And in the same place he bringeth in the Church, as speaking personally thus: Quam diu ero in hoc seculo? Ibidem. annuncia mihi propter illos qui dicunt: Fuit, & iam non est: apostatavit, & perijt Ecclesia ab omnibus gentibus. Et annunciavit, nec vacua fuit vox ista. Quis annunciavit mihi nisi ipsa via? quando annunciavit? Ecce ego vobiscum sum omnibus diebus usque ad consummationem seculi. How long shall I be in this world? tell me in regard of them who say, the Church indeed was, but it is not now: it is become apostata, and is perished out of all nations. And he told me, neither was this word in vain: who told me but the way itself? (to wit Christ, who saith, I am the way:) when did he tell? Behold I am with you until the end of the world. A. W. Here is a flourish of names to little purpose, especially since these authors you mention, agree with us about the true Church, that consisteth only of the elect, & not (as you teach) of all sorts good and bad, elect and reprobate, so they make an outward profession of believing: But Austin condemneth the Donatists of impudency, for saying that the Church was in their time perished out of the world, save that it remained in a part of Africa amongst them that held with Donatus. So would he cry out against you Papists, if he lived at this day, and heard you complain, that there is no Church in the world, but only in Rome, & in those countries, which depend upon the Church of Rome. Only Donatus his part (as q August. ad Psal. 101. concio. 2. Austin calleth it) was the Church with them: and only the Pope's part is the Church with you. You are not indeed as yet come so far, as they were, because some other countries, besides Italy, are content to be ruled by your Pope: but when it shall please God to leave that strumpet, the Church of Rome destitute of friends (as her wound is unrecoverable, and she draweth every day nearer and nearer to her end;) r August. contra part. Donat then will you take up the very same complaint, that the Donatists used, and there shall be no Church at all but in Rome, or where the Pope shall lurk, in some other corner of the world. We deny not that the Church, s Mat. 28. 20. to whom our Saviour maketh that promise, shall continue till the end of the world, and we detest Donatus heresy, in affirming, that it was then to be found only in Africa. But (as I said before) what maketh this for the continuance of such a Church, as you imagine? This rather belongeth to the visibility and famousness of the Church, whereof in the next chapter. A. D. CHAP. XII. That this Church, which must be to us the rule of faith, as it must always continue, so it must also always be visible. A. W. It is yet to prove, and always will be, that there is any such Church, as must be to us the rule of faith: what should we then strive about the continuance and visibility thereof? But you must needs be answered, according to the counsel of Solomon, Lest you be wise in your own conceit, to the hurt ● Prou. 26. 5. of other. A. D. §. 1. Now having proved that the true Church of Christ must always continue, without interruption, till the world's end: it remaineth that I show also in what manner it is to continue; to wit, whether it shall always be visible. That is to say, whether, in all ages, it was, and shall be a company of men, who may be seen, and in some sort, plainly known to be that company, which men are to believe, by faith, to be the true Church of Christ: or that it shall be, sometime at least, invisible; that no man can see those men, nor know them to be that company, which we must believe, to be the true Church of Christ. A. W. That the Church of Christ must always continue, is a point that needeth no proof: that it is to continue without interruption, if we did not believe already, we should never be driven or persuaded to it by your weak reasons. But (as me thinks, I must be fain to tell you oftener) the continuance of the true Church without interruption makes nothing at all for that imaginary Church of your devising, of the visibility whereof you entreat in this Chapter. Wherein, first you go about to propound, and expound the question; than you make a show of proving it, according to the conceit, you have of it. In the propounding of the question, for the readers better understanding, I must let him know, that howsoever your words, shall always be visible, seem to tie the question only to the time hereafter to come, yet your meaning is to inquire, whether the Church of Christ have not always, since his first coming, and shall not always, till his second coming, be apparent and visible. This is manifest by your exposition, In all ages it was, and shall be: and by your proofs, which at the least in your opinion, concern the whole Church of Christ, ever since his coming in the flesh. Your exposition rather darkens, then clears the State of the question. For who would not think, by your words, that one part of the controversy betwixt you and us, is, whether the men, the company of whom is the church, may at all times be seen or no; as if we were so void of sense as to imagine, that men could be at any time (except by miracle) invisible? Do not your words imply thus much? I pray you consider them a little with me. The question is (say you) whether the Church be always a company of men, that may be seen. If you answer, that I must add that, which followeth, And in some sort plainly known to be that company: I reply, that yourself afterward make those two distinct parts of the question, when you expound what is meant by Invisible, that no man (say you) can see those men, nor know them to be that company; wherein you may reasonably be thought, first to speak of those men's being seen, and secondly of their being known to be such a company. But to make short, and to speak plain withal; the question of the Church's invisibleness is double. First whether a man by his bodily sight can discern, who they are, that be members of Christ's mystical body or no? that is, who be elect, and who be not. This we say (& herein you agree with us) is unpossible: because God doth not reveal this point to men, neither are they able to judge, who are truly justified and sanctified, and who are not. Secondly the question is, whether the catholic Church, spoken off in the Creed, can be discerned by the same bodily sight, or no: we say it cannot, because it containeth none but the elect; you say it can, u Bellar. de Eccles. milit. lib. 3. cap. 2. Turrian. de Eccles. & ordin. ministr. because it consisteth of all them that make profession of christian Religion, under the absolute government of the Pope of Rome. The only true means to make a full end of this controversy, is to show what the Church is, of which the Creed & the Scriptures speak so many, and so glorious matters. This point you have not once touched, but either ignorantly, or craftily concealed that difference betwixt us, and allege that for the definition of the Church, which if it were true, as it is evidently false, yet is but one privilege of the Church, and expresseth not the nature of it. But let us leave these matters, and consider what it is, that according to your former discourse, you are to prove. Now, that is (say I), that there always hath been, since our saviours coming, is, and shall be, to the end of the world, a company of men famous, and visible in the world, so that all men, at all times, may discern, that they are the true Church of jesus Christ. For (that I may, in part, use your own words, as they follow in this chapter) if at any time it could not be known, than the men, that lived in that time, wanted necessary means, whereby they might attain to the knowledge of true faith, and consequently, whereby they might come to salvation. Give me leave to apply that to all men, which you speak of all times. If there ever were, are, or shall be any men, to whose sight the Church was not so visible, that they might discern and know it; then those men wanted necessary means whereby they might attain to salvation: which if it were so (say you) how is it universally true, which is universally said in Scripture, God would have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth? Do you not perceive that your reason necessarily requireth to have it proved, that the Church is visible, as at all times, so to all men? For if it fail in either of these respects, your consequence will follow, that some men have wanted necessary means of salvation, and so God would not have all men saved. Therefore you propound the question very insufficiently, when you say, We inquire, whether the Church at any time be invisible, so that no man can see those men etc. For though at all times some men may see and know it; yet unless all men, at all times may, you have proved nothing to purpose in this whole Treatise. A. D. §. 2. In which matter my Assertion is, that the Church of Christ (of which the places of Scripture afore cited do speak) must always be visible. This I prove: first by that plain prophesy of Isaias in the 61. Chapter. (Which Chapter to be understood of our Saviour Isa. cap. 61. Christ and his Church, we may gather out of Saint Luke, where our Saviour himself citeth some words out of that Chapter, and Luc. 4. expoundeth them to be fulfilled in himself.) The words of the prophesy are these. Foedus perpetuum feriam eyes, & scietur in gentibus Isa. 61. semen eorum: Omnes qui viderint eos, cognoscentilloes, quoniam isti sunt semen cui benedixit Dominus. I will make a perpetual covenant or league with them, and their seed shall be known among Nations: all that shall see them, shall know them, that they are the seed, which our Lord hath blessed. How could he more plainly have foretold the visibleness of the Church? The places of Scripture afore cited speak not all alike: some of them concern the Apostles only, and that not only as they are a company, but as they are several teachers authorized by our Saviour Christ, with so high and absolute a commission: some belong to all true christians, as well severally considered one by one, as taken jointly all together. Some appertain to all Ministers, some reach to all professors of the truth of the gospel. How then can you truly say, that the true Church of Christ (of which the places of Scripture afore recited do speak) must always be visible? The Apostles have not been visible these 1500 years. The elect, that is the Church, built upon a rock, never was, nor ever shall be visible in this world. All Ministers were not, nor can be visible to all men. All professors neither are the true Church of Christ, nor can by any means possible be seen of all men, as one church, but with the eyes of the mind. Particulars are subject to sense, but universals are discerned only by understanding. Your assertion then is false: but we will take it, as it is set down by you, supposing that those places of Scripture speak of the Church in general. Yet we may not forget that the second point must needs be added, concerning all men; and so your assertion must be this, The true Church of Christ must always be visible, to all men living. To make way to your argument out of this prophesy, you go about to prove that the x Isai. 61. 8. 9 Chapter is to be understood of our Saviour Christ & his Church: your proof lieth thus. Our Saviour himself citeth some words out of that Chapter, & expoundeth them to be fulfilled in himself. Therefore that Chapter is to be understood of our Saviour Christ and his Church. This consequent doth not follow upon that Antecedent First because the whole chapter may be written of our Saviour himself, and yet not of his Church also. Secondly because some part of it may be of our Saviour, and yet not those words you allege. For who is he that knoweth not, that one and the same Chapter often times, containeth divers prophecies, belonging to divers matters and parties? But though your proof be nought, your opinion is true. For those words & that whole chapter concern our Saviour, and his Church. Let us see how you reason. If our Saviour promise to make a perpetual covenant with his Church, and that their seed shall be known among nations, and that all that shall see them, shall know them that they are the seed, which our Lord hath blessed, than the Church must always be visible to all men living. But our Saviour hath promised to make a perpetual covenant with his Church, & that their seed shall be known among nations, and that all that shall see them, shall know them, that they are the seed which our Lord hath blessed. Therefore the Church must always be visible to all men living. I deny the consequence of your Mayor: Though our Saviuiour To the proposition. made such a promise, and indeed hath, and doth daily perform it; yet it doth not follow thereupon, that the Church must always be visible to all men. Shall the promise of our Saviour fail, if the Church at some time be not y Apoc. 12. 6. apparent to all men? z 12. Art. part. Take heed we give not the Atheists of the world occasion to say, that his promise was never fulfilled, because the 1. art. 1. Church was never known to all men living at any one time. The Lord by this prophecy foretelleth the enlarging of the Church amongst the Gentiles, not the visibleness of it, at all times, to all men. But the covenant (y you will say) is perpetual. True: that is (saith a Gloss. ordin. ad Esai. 61. your gloss) not as the old Testament, to which the new hath succeeded; and therefore he expoundeth the perpetual covenant, to be b evangelium aeternum. the eternal Gospel, which shall never be abolished for any other, as the ceremonial Law was, by the sacrifice of our Saviour Christ. c Glos. inter l. ibi. An other of your Glosses calleth it a perpetual covenant, because it shall be certainly performed, applying to that purpose, the place of Matthew. d Mat. 5. 18. Heaven and Earth shall pass, but one jot or title of the Law shall not pass, till all things be fulfilled. The other clause is as little to your purpose. The Prophet saith not that all men, at all times shall, or may see the Church, but that all, which shall see it, shall know it. Neither is that sight an outward beholding of those men, that are members of the Church, but a discerning spirit given by God to them, whom he hath appointed to everlasting life, by faith in Christ. For if we strictly press the words, who seeth not, that this promise hath failed, since there have been many in all ages, yea in our saviours own days, who for all his powerful miracles, divine doctrine, and unspotted conversation, acknowledged neither his Church nor himself? Say not, they might have done. For that is not the question. The Prophet saith, All that see them, shall know them, not may know them. e Gloss. ordin. Your ordinary gloss applieth this to f Apostolos & eorum imitatores. the Apostles, and their followers, or those that imitate their works. So doth g Vatablus, opera eorum. Vatablus expound them, their works. And h Lyra, operibus miraculosis, & virtuosis. Lyra more particularly showeth what works are meant. They (saith Lyra) that shall see them distinguished from other men, by their miraculous and powerful works, wherein the Apostles, and other their successors excelled the common people, and yet excel them in many things. Now the Apostles themselves, for all their many, and strange miracles, might have been, and had been unknown, I will not say to many men, but to many nations, and the far greatest part of the world, if they had not, i Math. 28. 19 according to their commission, traveled from place to place, and so into divers countries brought the first tidings of themselves. How can it be then, that at all times since the death of the Apostles, the Church hath been visible to all men, seeing there hath been neither charge, nor warrant, nor practise of any such universal ministery? If any man had rather understand this Prophecy of the knowledge, that the unbelievers have of the Church, the meaning Os●rius in Esa. lib. 5. ad ca 61. is, that the Lord will bestow such graces of Sanctification upon his children, that even their very enemies, amongst whom they live, shall be driven to acknowledge them for the people of God. But what is this to the visibleness of the Church, to all men at all times? A. D. §. 3. Secondly our Saviour hath ordained this his Church to be the light of the world; according as he saith, Vos estis lux mundi, Matth. 5. you are the light of the world: and to be a rule or means, by which all men, at all times, may come to the knowledge of that One, infallible, entire faith, which is necessary to salvation, as hath been proved. But how can it be the light of the world, if itself be invisible? (Nemo accendit lucernam, & ponit eam sub modio. No man lighteth a candle, and when he hath done, setteth it under a bushel, where it cannot be seen.) And how can it be a means, by which, at all times the infallible truth may be made known, to all sorts of men; if itself at any time, could not be known of men? Or if you say, that sometimes it could neither be known itself, nor be a means, by which the true faith might be made known; then, sith that I proved that it is a necessary means, and so necessary, that without it, according to the ordinary course, there is not sufficient means provided by Almighty God to instruct all men infallibly in all points of faith: Then (I say) men, that lived at that time, wanted necessary means, whereby they might attain to the knowledge of true faith, and consequently, whereby they might come to salvation. Which if it were so, how is it universally true, which is universally said in Scripture? Deus vult omnes homines saluos fieri, & ad agnitionem veritatis venire. God would have men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of 1 Tim. 2. the truth. For how can he be said, to have a true will to save all men, If he have not, at all times, provided means sufficient, whereby, all men may come to the knowledge of true faith, and thereby, by degrees, to salvation? Sith especially, he hath power to provide these means: and knoweth, that without these means provided, it is unpossible for men to attain true faith, and eternal salvation. For knowing it unpossible, he cannot be said to will it; sith no wise man willeth that, which he knoweth perfectly to be altogether unpossible; and much less may Almighty God be said, to will any thing, which is absolutely unpossible, considering that his wisdom is infinite, and that his will is always joined with some work or effect, by which work or effect, that which he willeth, at least, is made possible to be done. Wherhfore to verify that Almighty God would have all men saved, we must needs say, that he hath provided, for all men, these means, which be necessary, and without which, it is unpossible for them, to come to the knowledge of true faith, and thereby to salvation: One of which means, is a visible Church, of which they must hear and learn the true faith; which is the first, and a necessary step to salvation. The Church therefore must needs be always visible. This your second reason is thus to be framed: If the Church be not visible to all men, at all times, than it is not ordained by our Saviour to be the light of the world, and a rule or means by which all men at all times may come to faith and salvation. But it is ordained by our Saviour to be such a light, and such a rule or means. Therefore it is visible to all men at all times. That I may be the more easily understood by the ordinary Reader, I will apply my answer to the course that you have taken in setting down your reason: where in the first place we have your minor, and one proof of it; another followeth after your proposition, and there shall be examined. Concerning your Assumption, I say it is false. The Church is To the Assumption. not ordained to be such a light, rule and means: To k Math. 5. 14. your proof touching the light, I answer, with divers of the ancient, that our Saviour speaketh to, and of the Apostles, not of the Church in succession from time to time. All the Apostles (saith l Chrysost. ad Psal. 38. Chrysostome) are the light, to whom he said, Ye are the light of the world. These were the light of the eyes of the two testaments, the Law and the Gospel. For they by the light of our Lord, m Illuminant nobis. enlightened for us the old and new testaments. He that reproveth those things that are done secretly, is the light (quoth n Theophyl. ad Math. 5. Theophylact.) For all that maketh any thing manifest, is light. But they (the Apostles) enlightened not one nation, but the world. So doth o Aug. in joan. tract. 23. & De Sanctis. ser. 43. Austin sometimes expound it. So p Hieron. ad Math. 5. jerom, q Hilar. apud Thom. in caten. ad Math 5. Hilary, & Remigius. r Luc. Brugen. ad Math. 5. Lucas Brugensis a learned Papist, not only applieth this text to the Apostles, but also affords us a second answer. You are, that is (saith he) you must be, or aught to be the light of the world, that you may carry the light of the Gospel into the world, he set round about with darkness. And thus in a manner do Austin and Hilary expound it. But let us understand it of all teachers, that they are the light of the world, as indeed they are, in a certain proportion. What then? Will it follow hereupon, that therefore the Church is at all times visible to all men? The Apostles themselves, whom this doth especially concern, were not so. For many thousands in the world died, after s Mark. 16. 15: the general commission given to the Apostles, before it was any way possible for them to take any knowledge of such Preachers, or of the Gospel. Your great Cardinal t Bellar. de verb Dei scrip. lib. 3 cap. 2. ad arg 3. Bellarmine will needs have the place expounded, not of the Apostles doctrine, but of their conversation: which is not so easy and ready to be known as their preaching was. Tertullian applieth it to the behaviour of all Christians. Why hath our Lord (saith u Tert. de cultu foemina. cap. 13. he) compared us to a light, and a hill, if we shine not in the midst of the darkness, if we hold not up our heads in the middle of them that lie drowned? But out of question, this holiness of true Christians, is not always visible to all men, neither can it belong to your Church, the x Bellar. de Eccles. milit. lib. 3 cap. 2. §. Atque hoc. members whereof may be utterly void of true faith and love, save only in the outward profession. Take it how you will, for doctrine or manners, or both, you are never a whit the nearer. If I would press the words, I could say, that our Saviour requires no more in this place of the light, but that it give light y Mat. 5. 15. to all them that are in the house: that is, to all in the Church, or at the most, to them that are near neighbours thereunto. For what z Apoc. 1. 12. 20. & 2. 5. candle is there so bright, that the light of it can be seen over all the world? What though our Saviour call his Apostles the light of the world? doth he meave, that they all jointly together considered, as a company, are so; or that every one of them (severally) is the light of the world? If you will have it spoken of them as the Church (and else it cannot serve your turn to prove the perpetual visibleness of the Church) I doubt how you will be able to show, that they were the light of the world. For they did not enlighten the world by any joint act of them all together, but by their several preaching in several places. Neither did they persuade men to believe, because they were such, or such a company; but every one of them taught the doctrine of the Gospel, and was of himself without relation to all, or any of the rest, the light of the world in that part, where it pleased God to bless his labours, to the begetting of faith. If you say, that every one of them was the light of the world (as doubtless every one was) then will it not follow, that because the Church is the light of the world, therefore it must be at all times visible to all men. For never any one of the Apostles was so; no nor all of them, as I said before, many thousands being taken out of the world, after the Apostles began to preach, ere they could possibly have any glimpse of such a light. To conclude, the Apostles were, and the Ministers (in some sort) now are the light of the world, because by their preaching, it pleaseth Almighty God to open the eyes of worldly men, that a Act. 26. 18. they may turn from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith in Christ: not as if any, or all these must at all times be visible to all men; but that there may be means for the salvation of those whom the Lord (of his infinite love) hath chosen out of the world, to be heirs of his endless glory. By all men, we may understand either every particular man, or Of the proposition. all sorts of men. If you would prove that which you undertake, you must mean every particular man, as I have showed in answering the fifth Chapter; and as it is apparent in this afterward, where you repeat that which before you had delivered concerning Gods will to have every man saved, one and other. But I know not how, in the proof of your proposition, you seem to expound all men by all sorts of men. How can it be a means (say you) by which at all times the infallible truth may be made known to all sorts of men, if itself at any time could not be known of men? In this sense, if I should grant your whole fyllogisme, yet would the point in question remain still unproved. For the Church may be ordained for the light of the world, and for a rule or means whereby all sorts of men may come to faith and salvation: and yet at no time be visible to every particular man. To speak more plain; your proposition may be understood two several ways; first thus, that all men shall be taken in the one part of it, namely in the antecedent or former part, for every particular man; in the other for all sorts of men. If it be thus understood, I say the consequence is nought. Secondly, those words All men, may have the same signification in both parts of the proposition, yet in two divers senses. For they may be taken either for All sorts of men, and then, as I have showed, the syllogism proveth not that which is in question: or for every particular man, in which sense only I allow of the proposition, as true and to the purpose. It had been better therefore that you had spared the proof of it, especially unless you could have done it better. b Math. 5. 15. The light which is not put under a bushel, is not the church, but the apostles. He teacheth them (saith c Theophyl ibi. Theophylact) to endure the trial, and to have great care of their conversation, as they d Aspectabiles eritis. on whom all men gaze. Think not therefore (saith our Saviour) that ye shall lie hid in a corner: Ye shall be the light of the world: and therefore see that you live unblamably, and become not an offence to other men. Who can gather from hence the consequence of your proposition; If the Church be not visible to all men at all times, it is not ordained by our Saviour to be the light of the world? Your second proof, concerning the rule and means, is no less insufficient. If the Church at any time could not be known of men, (you must needs mean of every particular man, if you will speak to the purpose) it cannot at all times be a means, by which the truth may be known to all sorts of men. This is the consequence I denied before, either brought by you for a new proof, or repeated idly within 3. or 4. lines after it was first delivered. Here you return to your minor, and to prove the latter part To the proof of the latter part of the assumption. of it, propound the second time your main reason, answered at large in the fifth Chapter. It would be tedious, and loss of time and labour, to repeat all that was then said: I will therefore content myself to draw it into form, as it lieth, and to deny the false propositions, without any more ado, unless I meet with somewhat by the way, which was not in your former discourse. Thus you reason. If the Church be not ordained by our Saviour, to be a rule or means, by which all men, at all times, may attain to faith and salvation; then some men, at some time, have wanted one necessary means to that purpose. But no man at any time hath wanted any necessary means to that purpose. Therefore the Church is ordained by our Saviour to be a rule or means, by which all men at all times may attain to faith and salvation. I deny your Assumption; which you endeavour to prove in this sort: If any man at any time hath wanted any necessary means, than it is not universally true, that God hath a true will to have all men saved, and come to the knowledge of his truth. But it is universally true, that God hath a true will to have all men saved, and come to the knowledge of his truth. Therefore no man, at any time, hath wanted any necessary means. Again I deny your minor, referring the Reader, for the true sense of e 1. Tim. 2. 4. that Scripture, to my answer in the fifth Chapter. The proof of your consequence, about which you labour like a man that claps plaster upon plaster on a sound place, is altogether needless, and not worth the examining; save only that in the last clause thereof, you confidently harp upon the former string, which soundeth nothing but the necessity of a visible Church to salvation. But the Apostle, f Rom. 10. 14. 15. where he showeth what is of necessity to faith, neither mentioneth, nor any way implieth a visible Church, but only requireth a sending of some to preach: and that may be from God immediately, not by succession, g Gal. 1. 1. in and by men. Did not our Saviour Christ's preaching bring many to faith in him, and so to salvation? Did not Peter h Act. 2. 41. convert 3000. at one Sermon? Did not the Apostle Paul plant many Churches? Was any of these a visible Church? or did the people to whom they preached, either seek to them, as to a visible Church, or believe that they delivered, because they were sent by a visible Church? It is true, that no man (ordinarily) can believe, unless he hear; no man can hear, unless there be one to preach to him: no man can preach, unless he be sent. But what is all this to the necessity of a visible Church? Look through the whole history of the new Testament, and see how many examples you can find of any, that were but so much as occasioned to believe, by the means of a visible Church. The same of our saviours miracles drew many to the hearing of him, not the knowledge of any visible Church. i Act. 10. 3. 5. Cornelius a devout man, and one that feared God, living near to the places where the Gospel was preached, was not moved by the visible Church, but by a vision from heaven, to send for Peter, that he might hear and believe. I might show the like in divers other examples, that the Apostles were fain severally to go from place to place to preach the Gospel, and not to stay, till the fame of them, or a visible Church should move people to inquire after them. I deny not, that k 1. Cor. 14. 23 25. occasion may be given to men to hearken after the Gospel, by reason of some visible Church, whereof they may by divers means have understanding: but, that it is unpossible for men to come to the knowledge of true faith, and hereby to salvation, without a visible Church; or that a visible Church is always the first step to salvation, though sometimes it may be the first occasion of hearing and believing. A. D. §. 4. Thirdly, if the universal Church of Christ, should for any space of time be invisible: it should for that space cease to profess outwardly that faith, which in heart it did believe. For if it did outwardly profess, how should it not by this profession be made visible and known? But if the universal Church should for such a time fail to profess the faith, hell gates (contrary to Christ's promise) did mightily prevail against it. For, were it not a mighty prevailing, that the whole Church should fail in a thing so necessary to salvation, as we know, outward profession of faith to be necessary, both by that of our Saviour: Qui negaverit me coram hominibus, Math. 10. ego negabo illum coram Patre meo: He that shall deny me before men, I will deny him before my Father? And, Qui Luk. 9 me erubuerit & sermons meos, hunc Filius hominis erubescet: He that shall be ashamed of me and of my words, him the Son of man will be ashamed of. And by that of S. Paul: Cord creditur ad justitiam, o'er fit confessio ad salutem: With heart we believe Rom. 10. to justice, with mouth we confess to salvation. Which place learned men interpret to signify, that profession of faith is sometimes necessary to salvation: and they say further, that this sometimes is so oft, as either the glory of God, or the profit of our neighbour, doth of necessity require it: the which cases of necessity do happen very often; and great marvel it were (or rather unpossible) that they should never have happened, for so long a time as the Protestants would have their Church to have been invisible. A. W. If the universal Church of Christ (say you) should for any space of time be invisible, it should for that space cease to profess outwardly that faith which in heart it did believe. But it may not for any space cease to profess that faith. Therefore it may not for any space of time be invisible. To omit that fancy, that there is one such universal Church To the proposition. of Christ upon earth (whereof hereafter, when I come to speak of the Catholic Church,) I deny the consequence of your proposition. For it is possible, that all the Churches in the world should gloriously profess the true faith, and yet many thousands be utterly ignorant, that there are any such Churches. Was not your Church of Rome (which hath been famous enough for outward state) altogether unknown (at the least a long time) in the Indies and America, till within these 100 years, or thereabouts? And yet do you ask, If it did outwardly profess, how it should not by this profession be made visible and known? Hath not the kingdom of China, if we believe the report of your Jesuits and other Friars, been a mighty and rich estate many hundred years; and yet not heard of till of late, in most parts of Christendom? If you reply, that the Churches must needs be known to them, amongst, or near whom they are: I answer, that this proveth not their visibility to all men at all times; no nor to them, in the midst of whom they dwell, unless the Churches be settled in some outward peace, that the members thereof may freely show themselves. Your minor is false: it may come to pass, that the Church To the Assumption. may cease for a space to make open profession of that faith, which in heart it doth believe: else how could l 1. Reg. 19 18. Eliah, living in the kingdom of Israel, have been ignorant, that there were 7000. true worshippers of God in that country? Your proof is insufficient. If it might come to pass (say you) that the Church should cease to profess outwardly, then should the gates of hell mightily prevail against it, contrary to our saviours promise. But the gates of hell shall not mightily prevail against it, contrary to his promise. Therefore it may not come to pass, that the Church should cease so to profess. The consequence of your mayor is too weak. Our saviours promise is neither to the whole Church, considered as a company jointly together, but to every true believer, as I showed before; nor concerning outward profession, against which Peter (the head of the Church, as you dream) grievously sinned: but of continuing joined to jesus Christ, as the head, by a true justifying faith, resting on him for salvation. In which estate Peter always was preserved by our Saviour, though m Mat. 26. 70 72. 74. the devil prevailed against him to the denial of his Lord and Master, for feat of death. But let us see your proof. If outward profession be a thing necessary to salvation, then if the church fail in that, the gates of hell mightily prevail against it, contrary to our saviours promise. But outward profession is a thing necessary to salvation. Therefore if the Church fail in outward profession, the gates of hell mightily prevail against it, contrary to our saviours promise. I deny your minor. Such outward profession as you mean, is not To the Assumption. necessary to salvation. For the better clearing whereof, we must a little examine what it is, for a thing to be necessary to salvation; then, what profession may be counted necessary. For the former: that is necessary to the salvation of a man, without which he cannot possibly be saved. Now these things are either simply necessary, so that the absence of them shuts a man out of heaven; or necessary only in some sort. Simply necessary, on man's part (for in that sense we speak now of things necessary) are, acknowledgement of sin, faith in jesus Christ, and repentance: wheresoever any of these is wanting, there is no possibility of salvation, so long as they are wanting. Other things there are only so far necessary, as that the contempt or neglect of them, ba●s a man of salvation. Such are the Sacraments and outward profession: both in general, by becoming a member of some true visible Church, and in particular, by witnessing the truth, as oft as the Lord shall minister just occasion. Concerning this latter kind of things necessary, we are to know that if we truly repent our contempt and neglect of these duties, and believe in jesus Christ, there is mercy for us with God, though for want of opportunity we can never come to the performance of them. Touching the latter point of outward profession, it is (as I signified ere while) of two sorts: either a joining of ourselves to some Church professing true Religion, or a bearing witness of the truth of God, which we profess. To this latter especially belong the two former places of Scripture alleged by you. To the former, that text which you set in the last place, as it shall appear by and by. You will ask me perchance, whether of these two, is the profession you speak of. Surely to speak plainly and properly, neither of them. For it is a conceit of your own devising, without any authority or warrant of Scripture; and namely of those places you bring for proof of it: yet may it in some sort be referred to the latter, as being a means whereby we may avouch the truth of God, whereof we are professors. So then the answer is, first, that no kind of outward profession is simply necessary to salvation, as if the absence of it, were in itself damnable, though the contempt or neglect of the duty, not repent of, brings certain damnation. Secondly, that it is not necessary to salvation, either simply, or in any sort, that a whole Church should at all times make open profession to the world of that Religion which they hold, and secretly practise. This is that outward profession, which is meant in your minor: by which conceit you shut out of heaven all Churches, that is, all assemblies of the faithful, which at any time have for borne to cast themselves wilfully into the mouths of the blood-thirsty and ravening persecutors, by proclaiming openly their faith in Christ. It is too true, that an overgreat zeal of martyrdom carried n Ignatius ad Rom. Cyprian. de Martyr. joan. 4. 1. 2, 3., & 8. 59 & 9 39 Act 8. 1. & 9 24. 25. some men, now and then, farther than they should have gone, to the endangering and losing of their lives. But it is as true, that our Saviour, his Apostles, and the Churches, from time to time, have been careful to hide themselves from the sight of Tyrants, when the Gospel was persecuted, as far as their callings, and other occasions would give them leave. Indeed they they never would (neither is it lawful) deny the truth of God, or themselves to be professors of it, if they were called in question for it: yet did they conceal, as much as they could, from the persecutors, their times and places of meeting, and also the several members of their Churches. To deny Christ, or the truth of his religion is always damnable, and without repentance, bringeth damnation unavoideably; not to make public profession of religion is not always so; but then only, when the Lord, by some special occasion, according to the general duty of a Christian, or a man's particular calling, thrusteth or draweth him forth to give testimony to the truth, by maintaining it, or suffering for it. Which yourself also afterward acknowledge, by the judgement of the learned, who teach that profession of faith is sometimes necessary to salvation. Now for answer to your proofs, I say (as before) that the two former concern especially, the denying either of religion in general, or some special truth in question, when the Lord, as it were, calleth us out to profess and avouch it: as he did the Apostles o Mat. 10. 5. in that place, by sending them abroad to preach the Gospel. If you (saith our Saviour in effect) or any other minister shall forbear to discharge your duties, by preaching my truth, and maintaining it, if you be called in question for it, I will never acknowledge you for mine, in the kingdom of heaven. p Mat. 28. 19 Act. 10. 42. The Apostles calling necessarily required preaching of the word, and for them to have failed in that duty, for fear or shame, or otherwise, had been to deny their Lord and master. Yet were they not so tied to this duty, that they must needs continue their public preaching, in those places, where persecution was raised against them, but q Mat. 10. 23. they might flee from one City to another: and yet not be counted to deny the Lord jesus. As for the Churches, that were gathered by the Apostles preaching, there is neither charge, nor reason to be showed why they should bewray themselves to their persecutors, by open practice of religion in the eyes of the world. Indeed the worship of God is not to be neglected, though we cannot perform it without manifest danger of our lives; but there is no necessity to worship God publicly, where the truth is persecuted. Therefore did the ancient Christians, in such places assemble as secretly as they could, neither leaving the exercises of religion for fear, nor by an inconsiderate zeal, hazarding their own lives. To deny Christ is not to conceal himself from persecutors, but being found by them, to renounce his profession: and so is the place ordinarily applied by r Cyprian. epist. 56. ad Thibar. Sect 3. Cyprian, s Clerus Roman, ad Cyprian. epist. 30. 31. Cypria. epist. 55. add Corncls. sect. 13. Delapsis. sect. 14 Ad Novatian. haer. sect. 7. the Clergy of Rome, and t Tertul. in Scor. cap 10. 11. Tertullian, men enough favouring martyrdom. Yea u De fuga in persec. cap. 14. Tertullian in that very book, wherein he labours to prove, that it is not lawful for a man to fly in time of persecution: yet adviseth men to hold their assemblies for the exercises of religion, in the night time, if they cannot have them conveniently in the day. x Theophyl. ad Math. 10. Theophylact expoundeth this confession and denial, of acknowledging, or denying Christ to be God. y Luc. Brugen. ibi. Brugensis somewhat more particularly, He that denieth me to be his Lord and Saviour, that he believeth in me, that he sticketh fast to me, and my doctrine. So doth z janse. harm. cap. 55. jansenius understandit, though he stretch it also to the denying of Christ, by wicked conversation. The denying of Christ's name (saith a Lyra. ad Mat 10. 33. Lyra) is always a mortal sin, Not to confess or be silent (concerning it) is sometimes a mortal sin: As if a man be silent, when he is asked of it; If he profess it, being not asked, it is a work of supererogation. Doth any of these, or any man else, conclude the visibility of the Church from these, or the like places of Scripture? No man is to deny our Saviour, nor to be ashamed of his truth. What then? Therefore must they that believe in Christ, openly make profession thereof, at all times, without b Mat. 10. 16. any wisdom of the Serpent, for their own preservation: or else can they not be saved? A cruel and foolish conceit. This proof is to as little purpose as the former. Confession by mouth is required to salvation: therefore outward profession of faith Rom. 10. 10. is at all times necessary. Who sees not the weakness of this consequence? Doth not he confess with mouth, that joins himself to some known Church of Christ, and communicates with them (ordinarily) in the outward worship of God: though all the world know not there are any such believers & professors; yea though the people, among whom they live, be not privy to their meetings and profession? There may be occasion for a man, or a Church to manifest themselves unto the world: and they that in such a time shall fail, can look for no mercy at the hands of God, without true and earnest repentance. But this proves not, that therefore the Churches must make such public profession, that they may at all times be known to all men. To persuade us of the former (wherein there is no doubt) you tell us that Learned men (authors in the air, as c D. B. P. against the reformed Catholic. pag. 677. one of your side saith, in the like case) interpret this place, to signify that profession of faith is sometimes necessary. Who ever denied it? But doth any learned man say, that therefore the Church must always make such profession? That is the point in question: and of that you are as dumb as a fish: yea do you not perceive, that d Lombard. & Gloss. Ordin. & interlin. ibi. your learned men, refute that conceit? Doth not he, that expoundeth that place of necessity at sometimes, deny that it requireth such necessity at all times? It is necessary (saith friar e Dominic. Sotus ad Rom. 10. Soto) for a righteous man, that he may obtain everlasting life, to confess his faith with his mouth, wheresoever the time f Necessarium praecepti tempus. necessarily required by this precept offers itself. Catharin your Bishop speaketh yet more plain: g Ambros. Catharin. ibi. Such confession (namely, that a man confess with his mouth, that which he believeth in his heart, as he expounded himself a little before) is not always required, but (as Thomas saith) according to the time and place. h Thomas. ibi. vide Thom. 2. 2 q. 3. art. 2. And indeed so Thomas saith, adding withal, that i Praecepta affirmativa obligant semper, scel non ad semper. Affirmative commandments bind at all times, but require not performance at all times. Your interlinear and ordinary Glosses, and Lombard restrain it to the time of persecution: or at least, when the truth is called in question. Caietan makes this k Caietan. ibi. when more general, but signifieth, that this confession is not at all times necessary. As for the times, when it is to be held for necessary, your learned men do somewhat more particularly deliver the point, than you report it. Confession of God's truth (quoth l Sotus ad Rom. 10. Sotus, and therein he folowtheth m Thomas. ibi. Thomas) is necessary upon pain of losing salvation, either when it is required by a persecutor of the faith, which confession the martyrs made with their blood: or when it is necessary for those n Subditis that belong to our charge, by danger of heresy likely to ensue: which duty of confession properly concerneth Prelates, etc. These occasions have many times been offered, and accordingly o See Acts & monuments of the Church. many professors of that truth which we now maintain, have, with the shedding of their blood, given testimony of the Gospel, against the errors and tyranny of your Antichristian Prelates. Those holy martyrs, who from time to time have been butchered by your Synagogue of Satan, were of the same Church with us, howsoever they saw not the truth of God in many points so clearly as it hath pleased him to reveal it to us by the ministery of his servants in these latter days. If they used their best discretion and endeavours, to hide themselves (as much as might be) from your fury, they did no more than the light of nature and Scripture warrant, to preserve life, without denying their faith in the Lord jesus, or refraining to perform true worship to him, though they did it secretly. And thus much of your argument. A. D. §. 5. Fourthly if the Church were not visible, we could not fulfil that Math. 18. commandment of our Saviour, wherein he said: Dic Ecclesiae: Tell the Church. For how can we tell the Church any thing, if we cannot tell where to seek it: neither if we did by chance meet it, could we know it to be the Church? A. W. If the Church (say you) be not visible to all men, at all times, then can we not tell the Church, according to our saviours commandment. But we must tell the Church, according to his commandment. Therefore the Church must be visible to all men, at all times. That I may answer directly and plainly to your Syllogism, To the Proposition. I must understand what you mean by Church and we. The Church may signify in this place, either the whole company of the faithful, or severally every particular congregation, which yet properly is not the Church, but a Church. So may the other word We be taken for All men whatsoever, or only for such as make profession of Religion. Taking Church in the former sense, I deny the consequence of your Mayor. We must fulfil that commandment of our Saviour, though the whole company of the faithful be not at all visible. For the charge is not to tell the whole company, but the several Churches whereof we are members. I have showed this before: I will only put you in mind of a learned Papists exposition, formerly alleged. We are not willed (saith p Lue. Brugens. ad Mat. 18. 17. Brugensis) to tell the universal Church spread over the earth, but that particular Church, q Cui convivit & subject. etc. to which every man is subject, and wherein he lives. If by we, you mean none but professors of Religion, as our Saviour Christ doth, and as r See Chap. 10 sect. 8. Brugensis, and all other interpreters understand it; then howsoever you take the Church for the whole company, or the several congregations, I deny your consequence in that respect also. The faithful may tell their particular Churches, whereof they are members, though the Church be not visible to all men, at all times. It is enough if every man know his own Church, to which he belongeth, though he know not of any other in the world. Your minor is utterly false, if (as you must needs do, according To the Assumption. to that you intent) you mean either all men, or the whole Church. For as I said before, our saviours charge is neither to all men, but only to Professors of Religion: nor concerning the whole Church, but particular congregations. And so your fourth reason proving the visibility of the Church, at all times to all men, by our saviours commandment, to tell the Church, is of as small force as the former. It is sufficient, as I noted ere while, for the fulfilling of this charge, that every man know the Church, of which himself is a member, and which he is to tell: and in this sort the Churches are always visible. A. D. §. 6. Fiftly, it is certain, that once the true Church of Christ was visible, to wit, when it first began in jerusalem, in the Apostles and Disciples of our Saviour Christ, and that company, which by their preaching was converted to the faith. But there can no reason be showed, why it should be visible then, and not now. If it were needful to be visible then, because otherwise it could not be a Church, that is, A Society of men linked together, in the profession of one faith: in the use of the same Sacraments: under the government of lawful Pastors: for the same reason, it must needs be visible now; because, (as in the last Chapter is proved) there must be a Church now: and therefore it must be a society of men, professing the same faith: using the same Sacraments: living under the government of lawful Pastors. For all this pertaineth to the very essence of the Church. If also it were needful to be visible then, that those offices and functions, which must be done in the Church, might be well performed: to wit, as there were in the Church some Pastors, & some sheep, (as Saint Gregory Nazianzen saith) some to command, some to obey: some to teach, some to be taught: some to feed the flock of Oratione de moderate. in disput. habenda. Christ, some to be fed: so (that every one of these, might do what pertained properly to his duty;) it was needful, that the Pastors must know their sheep, and the sheep their Pastors, and that those that should teach, and rule, and minister the Sacraments, must see, and know them, whom they were to teach and rule, and to whom they were to give the Sacraments. And on the contrary side, the other had need to have known those, of whom they must be taught, whom they must obey, & from whom they were to receive the wholesome food of the holy Sacraments. If (I say) this reason prove, that it was needful then, that the Church should be visible and known: for the same reason, it will be also needful to say, that the Church must be visible, now, and at all times. For, at all times, there must be Pastors and sheep in the Church, being the sheepfold of Christ. And at all times these Pastors must govern, instruct, and minister the holy Sacraments: and the other must receive government, instruction, and the food of the holy Sacraments, at their hands. And consequently, there had need be some visible tokens, at all times, by which the Pastors may know their sheep, lest for want of this knowledge, they may unawares, Dare sanctum canibus, & proijcere margaritas ante porcos, Give that which is holy to dogs, and Matth. 7. cast margarites before hogs, which our Saviour commandeth them not to do. And on the other side, there had need be some visible marks, by which the sheep may know and discern their lawful Pastors, and true preachers, from false teachers, and intruding usurpers. For otherwise, they could not tell, whom to hear & obey, and whom to repair to for the Sacraments: and contrary, whom to take heed of, as of false Prophets: whose voice to neglect, as of strangers: and whose poisoned food of polluted Sacraments to reject, no less than a bait laid to kill them by thieves and robbers; as it importeth greatly every one to do. If lastly it were needful to be visible then, that those, which were out of it, might join themselves unto it, and become members of it; thereby to participate the graces and benedictions, which Christ our Lord communicated only to it; and to escape the deluge of eternal damnation, wherewith all was sure to be drowned, that were found out of it, as it were, out of another Noah his Ark: this reason also requireth and urgeth, that the Church must be visible now, and at all other times. For if, at any time, it were not visible; how could men, that were out of it, come unto it? Or how could they attain salvation, if they did not enter into it? Sith at all times, the merits and fruits of Christ's passion are enclosed in it: and the means of salvation, and to escape eternal damnation, are only found in it. The Church therefore is visible at all times. For at all times, that prophecy of Isaias must be true, wherein our Lord speaketh thus to the Church: Aperientur portae tuae iugiter, die ac nocte non claudentur; ut afferatur ad te fortitudo gentium, & reges earum adducantur; Isa. 60. Gens enim & regnum quod non seruierit tibi, peribit. Thy gates shall be continually opened, day & night they shall not be shut, that the strength of nations & the kings thereof may be brought unto thee; for the nation & kingdom which shall not serve thee, shall perish. A. W. This is your fifth argument, wherein you have wasted more paper, then in all the former. Let us see if your pains be not to as little purpose. If the true Church (say you) was once visible (you should add, to all men) and no reason can be showed, why it should be so then, and not now, than it is so now. But the true Church was once visible, and no reason can be showed why it should be so then, and not now. Therefore the true Church is now visible. Who denies this conclusion? or what do you get by it? The To the Syllogism. question is, whether the Church of Christ be always visible to all men, or no. You conclude, that it is now visible, speaking neither of all men, nor of all times; in which two points the whole controversy betwixt us lieth: save that we also deny that there is any such one Church, as you fond suppose, without any show of proof. But that I may let nothing pass which is worth the answering, I will apply this argument of yours, as directly to the question as I can. To speak plain to every man's understanding: the doubt is, whether there be not at all times some one company of Christians or other, that maketh public profession of religion, so that all men whatsoever and wheresoever, may take notice of them, as the true Church of Christ, or no. In this question we differ from you in two points. First we say, that there never was any such company in the world, that could be known to all men. Secondly we add farther, that every true Church may be so oppressed and driven into a corner, that it can be discerned by none but the members of it; and yet may continue in the practice of religion by the ministry of the word, sacraments and censures. Now then, I thus frame your reason, for proof of the question. If at any time there were a company of men visible to all the world, and no reason can be showed why there should at that time be such a company, and not at all other times also; then there hath been always, is now, and shall be for ever such a company visible to all men. But there was once such a company visible to all men, and no reason can be showed, why there should be at any time, and not at all times. Therefore there always hath been, is, and shall be such a company visible to all men. I deny the consequence of your mayor; though there had To the proposition. been sometime such a company, and no man were able to show sufficient reason, why there should be such a company then, and not always; yet I say, it doth not follow, that therefore there must at all times be such a company. The ground of my denial, is, that God hath not revealed to men the reason of all his decrees and actions. Your Pope himself (as presumptuous as he is) I think, dares not undertake to declare or determine, why many things fall out, which we see daily come to pass. I presume all this while, that you deny this possibility of giving a reason, to men only, not to God also: for else your minor will want little of blasphemy. Your minor hath two parts, and it is false in both. For neither To the Assumption. was the Church (as you speak) in the Apostles time visible to all men; and there may be some reason, why though it had been so then, yet it should not continue so always. Of the former I have said enough heretofore; and it is a conceit without truth or likelihood, that all the world might take knowledge of the Church, when it began in jerusalem. For the other point, though I might stand upon it, and put you to prove, that there can no reason be given; yet will I endeavour for your better satisfaction, if it may be, to show some reasons why it must needs be visible in the beginning (yet was it not then visible to all men) and need not be so at all times. But first let us examine your proof. I will propound your reason in a syllogism, and then answer to it. If the Church were in the Apostles time to be visible, 1. because otherwise it could not be a Church: 2. the offices and functions of the Church could not else be well performed: 3. else men could not join themselves unto it: and these reasons, why it should be visible, still continue; then no reason can be showed, why it should then be visible, and not always. But it was then to be visible for those reasons, and they always continue. Therefore no reason can be showed, why it should then be so visible, and not always. I do purposely omit the former part of the Assumption, that the Church was visible to all men, because I spoke sufficiently of it before, and it will but hinder the examining of this syllogism. To which that I may answer orderly and plainly, I deny To the proposition. the consequence of the mayor. Although these three had been some of the reasons (whether they be or no, we will consider in the Assumption) why the Church at the first must needs be visible: and these reasons still continue: yet would it not follow, that then no reason can be showed, why it should be visible then, and not so always. For there may and shall be other reasons given of the necessity of visibility in those times. Your minor also is false. Never a one of the three alleged To the Assumption. by you, is any necessary reason of the Church's visibility in the Apostles times; as shall appear in the handling of them. Wherein first I must speak a word or two of the definition of the Church, as it is propounded in this place. In the whole course of your treatise, as I have noted in my answer here and there, you mean by the Church nothing else but your Clergy, or rather your Bb. assembled together in a general Council. Here (belike upon better advice) you are content to allow the people also for parts of the Church. But to let that pass: the first fault in your definition is, that you fancy to yourself one visible universal Church, consisting of all such as you account true Christians throughout the world: whereas you are not able to bring any place of Scripture, in which the holy Ghost so speaketh of the church. I deny not, that all Christians agreeing in one profession, may in some sort be said to be of one church: but that the Church whereof the Scripture speaks, and of which we therefore must speak, if we will speak to any purpose, is to be conceived as any one such society. The same word, the same sacraments, the same kind of governors may be in divers churches, and yet not all these be one society. We may imagine the like in common wealths or kingdoms, that several states may have the same kind of laws, customs and magistrates, and yet not be all one kingdom or common wealth. Your second fault is, that undertaking to define the true church, you content yourself with the same faith, and the same sacraments: whereas no company nor man can be of that church, but they that hold the true faith of Christ, and the right use of the sacraments. The third thing I will observe, is rather by way of explication, then of refutation: you require the government of lawful pastors, as a thing essential to the church. If you speak of that church, to which our Saviour makes those goodly promises s Mat. 16. 16. & 28. 20. in the Gospel, it may be for a time without such governors: the promises themselves not concerning the whole body, in respect of their lawful Pastors, but every particular, in regard of his faith in jesus Christ. And indeed, howsoever it be true, that to the being of a Church, as it is commonly taken, it is necessary that there be both a pastor and a people: yet a people deprived of their pastors by what means soever, and having no dependence upon any other congregation, doth not cease to be such a Church as our Saviour promiseth to protect from spiritual and bodily enemies: yea a people so destitute, hath power to choose a pastor for themselves, and therefore are still in some sort a Church, because that power is nowhere out of a Church, but is appropriated to the companies of believers, who make several Churches, though not properly and fully Churches, for want of lawful governors. In the last place, I may not omit to note your craft, in adding to your definition of the Church, the government of lawful Pastors; as if you would have the ignorant imagine, that there were certain Pastors who had some joint government of the Church: for example, perhaps your Pope, and his Council of Cardinals, or a Council of Bishops assembled by his authority, and governed by his direction. In this sense we utterly deny, that any government of Pastors is necessary to the being of a Church; though we gladly embrace the helps of synodal, provincial, national and general Counsels. All true Churches properly so called, are governed by their several Pastors: but this makes them not one church, as long as there are not more, or at the least one, governor common to them al. This t Bellar. de Eccles. milit. lib. 3 cap. 2. Turrian. de Eccles. & ordin. ministr. Stapl. princip. doct. controu. 1. lib. 1. cap. 3. the learned of your side discerning (though you cannot or will not see it) never define the Church without relation to one general pastor, the Pope of Rome. As for the several pastors, be they never so lawful, they do no more make their congregations one Church, in respect of their government, than the Companies of London, because they are governed by their Master and Wardens, (severally) make one body, without respect of their common subjection to the Lord Mayor of that city. You will then perhaps demand of me, whether the Church be not a mere sound only, having nothing truly answerable thereunto indeed? I answer to this question, that the Church is more than a mere sound, and hath a thing in nature truly answerable to the name, and that in two respects. For the Church may be taken for the whole multitude of them, that in all places of the world profess the Gospel of jesus Christ: and in this sense it contains all, save the jews and the heathen. Secondly, the Church truly and properly is the company of the elect, that are called to true faith in jesus Christ. More particularly it signifieth such of the elect believers, as are living in the world. And this is that Church, to which those glorious and comfortable promises of our Saviour do appertain: though there be also some promises of outward blessings, which are common to all Churches and professors of Christian Religion. Now these elect thus called, are truly a Church, because they are a company linked together in the sound profession of the same true faith, and members of the same mystical body of jesus Christ, under the government of the holy Ghost his Vicegerent. I do not take upon me exactly to define the Church, but only to show in gross, what is necessary to the being of it; nor perhaps all that, but the especial point, where in you have failed, which is subjection to one and the same Lieutenant and Sovereign, not to divers of the like kind severally, as your definition seemeth to require. But of this matter enough. Now I answer to your minor, that there was no necessity of the Church's visibility, that it might be such a society as you imagine. For there have been, and easily may be such societies, which may be, and have been hid from all the world, save those of their own company. Consider I pray, what should hinder this. Is it not possible for a company of men to profess the same religion, but other men must needs be prive to that their profession? It is like enough, that such a company growing to a great multitude, and ordinarily. holding the exercises of their Religion, will in time be discovered: as it fell out with the true Christians in the late persecution under Queen Marie. But this proveth not, that therefore there cannot be any such society, but the world must needs take knowledge of it. Could your detestable traitor's band themselves together in that monstrous plot of treason and murder by gunpowder, yea and assemble so often, and work so hard in the devils service, without being descried: and cannot God by his providence keep his servants, meeting together for his worship, but that Satan shall certainly discover them? It is more than manifest (how long or short a while soever they may keep themselves unknown) that they may be such a company, and not by and by be known. The second point in the first part of your minor is this, and thus concluded. If the Pastors were to know the sheep, and the sheep the Pastors, and this could not be, unless the Church were visible; then was this one reason of the Churches being visible. But the Pastors were to know the sheep, and the sheep the Pastors, and this could not be unless the Church were visible. Therefore this is one reason of the Churches being visible. I may grant you the whole Syllogism, in the terms it is To the Syllogism. propounded by you, and yet neither I lose, nor you get any thing. For there is no more concluded by it, but that the church must be visible to the members of it: the Pastor must know the sheep, and the sheep the Pastor: Which of us ever denied this visibility? or what is this to prove, that the Church in the beginning of the Gospel was to be famously visible in the eyes of all the world? In a word then to your propositions severally: you must add To the proposition. to your mayor, one of these two clauses, either to the members of it, signifying that the Pastors and sheep could not know one another, unless the Church were then visible to the members of it; or to all men, meaning that there could not be such mutual knowledge betwixt the Pastor and the sheep, unless the church were visible to all men. In the former sense your proposition is true, but altogether wide from the mark you aim at. In the latter you shoot right, but a great deal over. For though your consequence by this means will prove true, and to the purpose; yet your minor will be overlarge, and your question still remain unproved. For it is ridiculous to imagine, not only to affirm, To the Assumption. that the Pastor and flock cannot know each other, except all the world know them too. Why may not the like be said of the husband and the wife, the father and the children, the master and the servants? May there not be governing and obeying, but where all men see these actions performed? But I dwell too long upon so clear a matter. Only I was desirous to suit my answer somewhat like to your argument, for the length of it, lest shortness might make your followers think it not well answered. We are now come to the third point of the former part, which you conclude thus. If men, that were out of the church, were to come into it for salvation, and this could not be unless it were visible, then was this one reason of the visibility thereof. But men out of it, were to come into it for salvation, and this could not be, unless it were visible. Therefore this is one reason of the Church's visibility. This is the only argument of the three, that hath any show To the Assumption. of reason in it: and yet this also is far from any necessary proof. For if in your minor you mean, that all and every man was to come into the Church for salvation, as if God had intended the salvation of every particular man by the publishing of the Gospel: your said minor is in that respect false. For our Saviour himself u Luk. 10. 21. giveth his Father thanks, that he had hid the mysteries of the Gospel, even there where it was publicly preached, from the wise and men of understanding, and revealed it to babes or simple men. Yea he professeth, that there was an especial act of God his Father required x joh. 6. 44. 65. to the drawing of men to belief, even there where himself preached most powerfully, and that some only and not all, were so drawn by God. Neither doth the difference in this case proceed from man, but from God; lest that man, which makes the difference betwixt himself and another, should have just cause to boast, as if he were more beholding to himself, of whom he had the very act of being willing to be saved, then to God, who only gave him power to be willing. Therefore y Thom. ad Rom. 9 See Chap. 5. sect. 1. C. your glorious and Angelical Dr. Thomas saith, that there can no more reason be given why God intendeth the salvation of this man, and not of that man, then why the Mason layeth this stone above, and that below, each of them having a like fitness to each place. But if by men, you understand those men that were chosen of God to everlasting life, z Act. 13. 48. to whom only the preaching of the Gospel was effectual to true faith and salvation, than I deny your minor in regard of the latter part also. For there was no necessity of the visibility of the Church to that purpose, as if God could not otherwise have procured that they should believe and be saved: I add farther, that the means which it pleased God to use, for the converting of those that were then to be saved, and ordinarily for publishing the glad tidings of the Gospel, was not the visibleness of the Church, but the preaching of his Apostles. So that (as I signified before) the greatest nations of the world embraced the Gospel of jesus Christ, not because they saw some visible Church, to which they might adjoin themselves, but for the evidence of the truth which some one man or other preached to them, without any reference or respect to any visible Church whatsoever. a Act. 8. 4. The dissolving of the visible Church at jerusalem, was the occasion of preaching the Gospel through the world. Having thus examined your several proofs, I return now to your principal assumption; for the farther confuting whereof, I must show, that there may be some reason given, why it might please God to have the Churches visible in the beginning, and not always. To which purpose I must first entreat all men to understand, that I do not undertake precisely to set down the reasons why God will have his churches sometimes famously known, sometimes hidden from the knowledge of the world. For his counsels are unsearchable, and his ways past finding out. Farther, I acknowledge in all truth and humbleness, that I hold the revealed will of God for a sufficient reason of any thing which he doth will, though I could in my ignorance object something against it, which might afford some cause of doubting. With this protestation I say, these might be some reasons. First, whereas the means of salvation had been, for a long time, shut up in the land of jury, and in a manner, made proper to the jews; now the partition wall being broken down, the Gentiles also were to be received into the Covenant; which (to our reason at least) could not conveniently have been done, unless the profession of the truth had been famous and visible. But when once by this means the sound of it was gone over the world, there was no such necessity of continuing visible Churches. Secondly, this visibility was at the first the more necessary, because otherwise the jews, b Act. 2. 38. to whom first the Gospel appertained, being dispersed in many nations, could not so easily take knowledge of it: now c & 13. 46. they have judged themselves unworthy of it, and the Lord hath given it to us Gentiles. Thirdly, it was no small proof of the truth of the Gospel, and the power of God working by the ministry of the word, that so great multitudes should so speedily be converted by so weak means: there is not always the like use of the Church's visibleness. Fourthly, though the Lord in his mercy, would have the Gospel published to the world, yet when it became generally abused to wantonness, that men's ears itched after new doctrines, and esteemed more of their own devices, then of the true worship of God, appointed by himself; it pleased his majesty to leave men to their own blindness, and presumption, reserving to himself a small company here and there, whom he kept, as the 7000 in Elias time. Lastly it was requisite that the prophecies in d 2. Thes. 2. 10. Paul and e Revel. 17. 1. john, concerning Antichrist, and his tyranny, and universal Apostasy, should be fulfilled; which could not have come to the just height of extremity, if any Churches, at least in those parts where Antichrist prevailed, had continued visible. These are a few of those reasons, which in the blind judgement of man, not able to sound the depth of God's secrets, might be an occasion of making the Churches of Christ cease to be famous, and of keeping the true professors f Revel. 12. 6. shut up in the wilderness; till the time appointed by God for antichrist's decay and ruin approached. Yet did not the Lord all this time, leave himself and his truth without witness, but from time to time, stirred up the spirits of his children, to make the world search the Scriptures, and discern, if they would, that your Church of Rome so famous & visible, was corrupted with many errors, and become the very seat of Antichrist. Thus I have answered your fifth reason, in the conclusion whereof you add a testimony of Scripture, to confirm the necessity of the Churches perpetual visibleness to all men. If (say you) g Esai. 60. 11. that prophecy of Esay (Thy gates shall be continually open) must at all times be true, than the Church is visible at all times, to all men. But that Prophecy must be true at all times. Therefore the Church, is visible at all times, to all men. Though you ordinarily leave out that clause of the Church's To the syllogism. visibleness to all men, yet I make bold to supply it; because I am desirous to persuade myself, that you do so, rather for shortness sake, then in a crafty purpose to deceive the Reader. I deny the consequence of your Mayor: first, because that prophecy may be always true, and yet the Church not always To the proposition. visible. For all prophecies in Scripture are always true, as being from God, and yet doth it not follow hereupon, that therefore whatsoever is prophesied must always be true. It was prophesied by God himself, that h Gen. 15. 13. the children of Israel should be servants in Egypt: May I then say as you do If this prophecy must always be true, they must always be servants in Egypt? I trow not. Prophecies are always true; but true only, according to the meaning of them: that such or such things must be, at the time, and in the manner signified by them. If you say, your meaning is no more, but that if that prophecy be true, than the Church is always visible to all men; I answer, that At all times was put in without cause, and might as you see, breed a question in your proposition. Secondly, taking your Mayor in that sense, I still deny the consequence of it. For the gates of the Church may be open at all times, & yet all men neither see them always open, nor know that there are any such gates, or Church. Might not the gates of Mexico, or some City in the East Indies, China, or America be always open, and yet none in these western parts ever hear of any such City? You will say perhaps, that the Prophet by the gates being open, signifieth the visibility of the Church. It is not enough to say so, unless you prove it too. But that I may yield somewhat of my right in this case, and not put you to your proofs in so hard a matter: I answer with i August. de civit. dei lib. 20 cap. 68 Austin speaking of such prophecies and promises, that this place belongeth properly to the Church of the elect, into which, without any restraint, many of the Gentiles do enter continually from day to day, by their actual believing truly in jesus Christ. Which answer may the better appear to be true, if we consider that this promise is made to the jews, whose Church-gates must always stand open to entertain the Gentiles coming unto it. But this can no way be true of the outward Church of the jews, which then flourished in jerusalem, & was utterly destroyed some forty years after our saviours ascension. Therefore it must belong to that remnant of Israel, k Rom. 9 6. 7. & 11. 2. 7. which is according to the election of grace. Do not reply to this answer, that the gates of this Church were always open, even before our saviours coming. For this Church, in respect of the Gentiles, had not a gate then, but a little wicket, which stood not always open, but was opened now and then, upon occasion, when it pleased God, to bring some one or other of the heathen, extraordinarily to salvation, by the acknowledging of the Messiah to come. These gates are now, & have been this 1500 years and upward shut up against the jews: as l Rom. 9 & 10 the Apostle lamentably coplaines, not, as some imagine, because the visible Church was translated from the jews to the Gentiles, which Paul would never so ambitiously have affected, as in respect of that m Rom. 9 3. To be contented to become Anathema, that his countrymen might enjoy the glorious smoke of such an outward privilege (I speak in comparison of election to everlasting life:) but for that the Lord would give over his people the jews, and not choose (ordinarily) out of them, heirs of his heavenly kingdom, as before he had done. We see, and rejoice at the sight, that the Lord of his great mercy, calleth out some few from amongst that desperate multitude of the jews, as before he did out of the Gentiles, but the gates are now set open, for the Gentiles, and a small postern for the jews. But what if I should grant you, that this prophecy may also be expounded of the outward profession of Religion, must the Church then needs be visible at all times to all men? The main reason of the gates continual standing open, is signified by the Prophet to be this: That the strength of the nations, and their kings may come into the Church. But this was long ago fulfilled, by the judgement of your own writers. The strength of the nations, that is the most warlike nations saith Vatablus: which (saith n Vatabl. ad Esay. 60. 11. he) was fulfilled; when the Romans were added to the Church. The opening of the gates, o Lyra. ibi. Lyra referreth to Constantine's time, and therefore in his judgement, they were shut more than 300. years after Christ. And so far is he from once thinking on the visibility of the Church, prophesied of in this place, that he brings three other interpretations, and not mentions your conceit. The gates shall be open: because (saith Lyra) Constantine commanded, that the Church gates should be opened, which before were shut, and that new Churches should be built. This also may be expounded (saith he) of spiritual opening, because the Church is always open, to receive them, that repent. And because, since Constantine's time, men began to flock to the Church of Christ without fear. The strength of the nations was brought, because (saith the same Author) by the example of Constantine, many Potentates and kings came to the faith of Christ. The gates of the Church (said p Hieron. ad Esay. 60 li. 17. Jerome, before Popery was hatched) shall always be open to them, that desire to be saved, that entrance may not be denied, either in prosperity or adversity, to them that will believe. Thus this place of Esay will not prove the visibility of the Church, to all men at all times. A. D. §. 7. Sixtly, the only reason and ground, by which heretics hold the Church to be invisible, is, because they imagine the Church to consist only of the elect, or only of the good. But this is a false ground, as appear by the name of Church in Greek Ecclesia, which even by the Etymology of the word, doth signify the company of men called: now sure it is, that more are called then elected, as our Saviour saith, Multi vocati, pauci electi. Again, this ground is showed to be false, by those parables, in which the Church is compared to a Math. 20. Math. 3. Math. 23. Math. 13. floor, wherein wheat and chaff are mixed. And to a marriage, to which came good and bad. And to a net, wherein are gathered all sorts of fishes good and bad. And to ten Virgins, whereof five were foolish, and excluded from the celestial marriage. This ground is Mat. 25. also showed to be false out of Saint Paul, who commandeth the Corinthians, to expel an incestuous person out of the Church. Ergo, 1. Cor. 5. before this expulsion, there was such a person in the Church, and therefore the Church doth not consist, only of those, that be good. A. W. Because your own reasons are not strong enough, to prove the point in question, you think to help the matter by overthrowing the ground, whereupon only, as you confidently avouch, we build our denial of the Church's visibility at all times. But neither is that our only ground, and if it were, you are not able to shake it. Concerning the former, we deny the visibility of the Church, as it is understood in those places, where our Saviour promiseth spiritual graces to it, and as it is taken in the Creed; because that Church is the mystical body of Christ, and therefore can consist of none but those, that are truly justified and sanctified, as none but the elect are. But we farther deny the same visibility, because you would have us believe that the Catholic Church is visible. To which we answer, that this catholicness (let the Church be what it will) maketh it invisible: because Aristot. & omnes logici. that which is Catholic, is general, consisting of many particulars: and we have learned, that universals are not subject to sense, but only to be conceived by the mind, as having no outward shape, which can be seen or known by any of the five senses. Moreover, if we take the question, in the most reasonable sort that may be, (and so it is very seldom handled by you) Whether there must always be some one or other company of men, that may be famously known of all the world, to be a true Church of Christ: Still we continue in denying that visibility. First, as it is propounded by you, for an Article of Faith, and an essential property of the, or a true Church. Secondly, because we are taught in the Scriptures, that the true Church, that is, the professors of Christ's true Religion, shall be fain to fly into the wilderness, and so must needs be out of the sight of (at least) the greatest part of the world. I am loath to repeat these things so often, but you drive me to it: my help is to do it, as shortly as I can. All the forces you bring to overturn the ground, upon which our denial of the Church's visibility standeth, are divided by you into two bands, with the former whereof, thus you set upon us. The company of men called, consisteth not of the elect only. The Church is the company of men called. Therefore the Church consisteth not of the elect only. I deny your Minor: many men are called, that are not of the To the assumption. Church, which consisteth of such only, as being called, are also elect. It is true that the word Church is sometimes so generally taken, that it compriseth all such, as make profession of faith in Christ, but this is not the Church, of which the Creed speaketh, and to which our saviours promises apppertaine: yea besides this Church, there is the true Church of Christ, whereof he is head, whose body hath never a rotten or dead member, such as over many, perhaps the greatest part of them, that make profession of belief, commonly are. In a word, the whole course of your Treatise fails in this point, that whereas the word Church is diversly taken, you apply that to it, in the general meaning of the word, which was spoken of it by our Saviour, the Prophets and Apostles, in that special signification, by which it containeth none but the elect. To your proof I answer farther. First that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in the very nature of it, doth not signify The company, that is any certain company called, but generally a company, that is any such company whatsoever. Secondly I add, that the word is also sometimes taken for a company, whether called or not called: as, r Psal. 26. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. I have hated the company of the wicked. Where the Prophet speaketh not of any company called together, but absolutely of the wicked, howsoever assembled, or not assembled. Thirdly, I say it is enough, in respect of the nature, and Etymology of the word, that the Church be a company of men called, neither can it any way be enforced from the signification of it in Greek, that the Church must needs comprehend all, that are in any sort called. Indeed the elect only may Rom. 8. 30. truly be said to be called, in an especial manner: because they have besides the outward sound of the preacher, the inward voice of the spirit, and are not only called to believe the truth of the Gospel, but also to believe truly in jesus Christ to salvation: This is your rearward, with which you charge us afresh, and that as it were, both with foot and horse. First you throng together many places of Scripture, as if your confidence were greater in your number, then in your valour: Let us encounter you. That, which is compared to a floor, wherein wheat and chaff are mixed. To a marriage, to which come good and bad. To a net, wherein are gathered all sorts of fishes, good and bad. To ten virgins, whereof five were foolish and shut out from the celestial marriage, consisteth not of the elect only. The Church is compared to such a floor, marriage, net, virgins. Therefore the Church consisteth not of the elect only. A very hot assault: but your bullets fall a great way short of To the syllogism. the mark, you do, or should aim at. For all you prove by this reason is only this, that the Church, taken for the whole company of them, that make profession of the Gospel, consisteth not only of the elect. Who ever dreamt it did? You are so far from overturning our ground, that you never once come near it, for all this brave show you make. In particular, I deny your Minor. The Church we speak To the assumption. of, is not compared to any such things. The Church (saith s August. epist. 48. ad Vincent. Austin) which groweth in all nations, is preserved in the lords wheat, and shall be so preserved to the end, till it have taken possession of all, yea even the most barbarous nations. The floor (in t August. ubi supra. Augustine's judgement) is not the Church, but the place rather, in which the Church is kept: for that (as he truly saith) is the wheat. And in the same Epistle he speaketh yet more plain of an other of your parables. That is the Church, (saith u Vbi supra. Austin) which swimmeth in the Lord's net with naughty fishes, from which in heart and behaviour, it always is separated. Could any thing be spoken more direct? The floor and the net are, in a general sense, the Church; but the true Church indeed is, in the one the wheat, not the chaff, in the other, the good fishes, that swim among the naughty ones. I may also farther except against these Parables, because they are otherwise applied, than they are intended by our Saviour; who never meant, by any one of them to teach, that the Church consisteth not of the elect only. Who (saith x August. ad Vincent. epist. 48. Austin) can, without great impudency, go about to prove anything for his purpose, by interpretation of any Allegory, unless he have manifest testimonies, whereby those matters, that are obscure in it, be cleared? This is your last charge, to as small purpose, as either of the former. If there may be an incestuous person (say you) in the Church, than it consisteth not only of those, that be good. But there may be an incestuous person in the Church. Therefore the Church consisteth not only of those, that be good. It is apparent that by good, you understand those, that cannot be charged with any gross outward sin, as Incest, or such To the syllogism. like. In which sense, I say your conclusion is nothing to the purpose. For we do not affirm, that no man is of the Church, which by any occasion falleth into some grievous sin: so should we exclude Peter, y Mat. 26 70. when he denied his master; David, z 2. Sam. 12. 9 when he committed adultery and murder; No, a Gen. 9 21. when he was drunk; Abraham, b Gen. 12. 23. & 20. 5. when he lied, and many other: who for all these sins, held fast their faith in the Messiah, and continued true members of jesus Christ, according to God's election, howsoever those sins of theirs deserved separation from Christ, and damnation. The Church may consist of some, who for the present, are in regard of some great sin, not good, and yet consist of the elect only, as the former examples show. Farther, I deny the consequence of your Mayor. It is not To the proposition. all one to be in the Church, and of the Church, that is, to be an outward professor, and to be a true believer. And that the Church is the company of the elect, in the judgement of the ancient writers, these testimonies show. c Ambros. ad Eph. 3. Ambrose maketh the Church, the people, whom God hath vouchsafed to adopt. Whereas the Church (saith d August. de bapt. contra Donat. lib. 5. cap. 27. & lib. 6. cap. 3. Austin) is so described in the Canticles, that it is called a fenced garden, my sister, spouse, a fountain sealed up, a well of living water, a paradise with fruit; I dare not understand this but of the holy and righteous. The holy Church (quoth e Greg. in Cant. & in job 28. cap. 9 Gregory) is a garden, because when it begets many to the faith, it sends forth fair flowers, like a good ground. And it is well called a fenced garden, because it is fortified round about with the trench of charity, that no reprobate may come into the number of the elect. If the spouse of Christ, which is the Church, be a fenced garden (saith f Cyprian. ad Mag. epist. 76. sect. 2. Cyprian) being shut up, it cannot lie open to the profane and strangers. But what should I recite several testimonies? Look g Origen. & Bernar. in can. serm. 78. Origen, Bernard, and other writers upon the Canticles, and you shall easily see, that the spouse of Christ is the company of the elect. A. D. §. 8. Lastly, the ancient Fathers did teach, that the Church is visible. Hom. 30. in Mat. Origen saith, Ecclesia plena est fulgore ab oriente usque ad occidentem: The Church is full of brightness from the East to the West. Ecclesia (saith S. Cyprian) Domini luce persusa, radios suos per orbem spargit: The Church being bright with the light Lib. de unitate Eccles. of our Lord, doth spread her beams throughout the world. Facilius est (saith S. Chrysostome) solemn extingui quam Ecclesiam obscurari: Lib. 4. in cap. 6 Isa. It is more easy that the Sun should be extinguished, then that the Church should be obscured, that is to say, darkened and quite without light. Saint Augustine also alluding to (or rather expounding) those words of our Saviour, Non potest civitas abscondi supra montem posita, saith, Ecclesia supra montem constituta, Lib. 3. x epi. Parm. cap. 4. abscondi non potest: The Church being built upon a mountain, cannot be hid. And again in another place he saith, Quid amplius dicturus sum quam caecos, qui tam magnum montem non vident, Troct. 2. in ep. joan. qui contra lucernam in candelabro positam, oculos claudunt? What shall I say more, but that they are blind who do not see so great a mountain, who shut their eyes at the candle set upon the candlestick? A. W. These and such like speeches of the Fathers, were uttered by them for the most part, concerning the Church, as it flourished in their days; and not of the perpetual estate thereof, from time to time. Neither speak they properly of the Church, which is indeed the spouse of our Saviour the bridegroom: but of the multitude of them, who hold the truth of doctrine against all cavils and oppositions of heretics; amongst whom only the Church of the elect ordinarily was preserved. Your reason then is little worth. The Fathers say, the Church is visible. Therefore it is always visible to all men. The consequence of your Enthymem is nought, as well because it might be visible in those times, and not always; as also for that it is not all one to say it is visible, and it is visible to all men at all times. Now to the particulars. First I answer to h Origen. in Mat. hom. 30. origen's testimony, that he speaks not of the Church's visibility, but affirms that the truth (which is the brightness or light he mentions) is in the Churches every where, East and West. That this is his meaning, it is plain by the beginning of that homily, and the whole course of it, to the very place you allege. Origen expounds there that place of the Gospel, As the lightning cometh out of the East. This exposition begins thus. We must know (saith Origen) that the brightness of the truth doth not appear in one place of Scripture, and cannot be defended by another, but that it may be maintained out of all parts of Scripture, the Law, the Prophets, the Gospels, and the Apostles writings. And this truth arising from the East, that is, the beginnings of Christ, shineth to the very time of his passion, in which was his setting or fall. A little after: We may also thus understand it, that Christ appeared to be the word, and the truth, and wisdom, from the beginning of the creation of the world, to the last writing of the Apostles, that is from Genesis to the Apostles books; after which there are none of like authority or belief. Or thus, that the Law and the Prophets continued till john, in whom the brightness of truth was. The East was the Law: the West, john, the end of the Law. Now only the Church neither takes away the word and sense of this brightness, nor adds any thing else as prophetical. The place you bring, lieth thus: Every doctrine professing itself to be truth, when it is not truth, either among the Gentiles, or among the Barbarians, is in some sort Antichrist, going about to seduce, as truth, and to sever us from him that said, I am the truth. Therefore we must not give ear to them which say, Behold here is Christ; but do not show him in the Church, which is full of brightness from the East to the West, which is full of the true light, which is the pillar and ground of truth, in which whole Church, the whole coming of the Son of man is. Now the coming of the Son of man, is before expounded by him to be the word of truth. Doubtless if you had not taken this proof upon i Bellar. de Eccles. milit. lib. 3 c. 12. §. Vltim● Bellarmine's, or some other man's credit, you would never have brought it to prove the visibility of the Church to all men at all times. What saith k Cyprian. de unit. eccle. §. 4. Cyprian in the place alleged, but that the Church is dispersed over the whole world? Doth this prove, that it is at all times visible to all men? Or hath Cyprian any such purpose in that place? Is not his whole drift to show, that there is but one Church, because the truth they profess is but one? The title of his book, is Of the unity of the Church. The place you bring, concludes, that howsoever the beams are scattered or spread here and there, yet the light is but one. The Church, that is true believers, were in this land in the days of persecution, and is now in Spain, Italy; and perhaps in Rome itself. This proves not a perpetual visibility. What need we any other answer to this testimony of Chrysostome, then that which your own exposition affords us? Chrysostoms' meaning is, that the Church cannot be quite without light, say you. What then? Must it needs be visible then to all men? The Moon is never wholly darkened, no not in the greatest eclipse, nor in the change, but is always in the one half light: and yet he were mad that would conclude hereupon, that therefore it may be seen at all times of all men. Indeed Chrysostome speaketh of the continuance of the Church, not of the visibleness thereof. That may appear by his saying, that the Church hath her root in heaven rather than in the earth. This argues stability, not visibility. And what Church hath rooting in heaven, but only the Church of the elect? The Church (saith l Chrysost. in cap. 6. Esai. homil. 4. Chrysostome in the same place) is more honourable than heaven, because heaven is made for it, not it for heaven. Is heaven made for any Church, but that of the elect? Besides, it was not the visibility, but the being of the Church, against which those tyrants whom Chrysostome there mentioneth, so mightily laboured; which yet continued in despite of them all. These and such like places of Austin, show the flourishing estate of the Churches in those times, and convince the Donatists, against whom Augustine writ, of woeful blindness, who would see no church, but their own heretical assembly in a part of Africa. But they neither were intended, not can with any reason be applied to prove that the church is always visible to all men. m August. con. epist. Parmen. lib. 3. cap. 5. The former of the two places, as I showed before, is interpreted by the Fathers, of the Apostles: That the Apostles (saith n Hieron. ad Math. 5. Jerome) should not hide themselves for fear, but freely show themselves, he teacheth them to preach boldly, when he saith, A city set upon an hill, cannot be hid. But let us take it to be meant of the Church. It must needs be a monstrous hill, that can show a city set upon it to the whole world. A city standing on a hill, is the easier and the farther to be seen; but there is no hill high enough to be seen over the whole world. I would farther know, whether every particular Church be not a city upon an hill or no. And yet is no such Church to be seen of all men. Concerning o August. in 1. loan tract. 2. the latter place, Austin worthily calls them blind, that could not, or rather (as he truly saith) would not see that great mountain, upon which the Church then stood, but would shut their eyes against the light that shined upon them. Yet who is so ignorant, that he knows not, or so shameless, that he will not confess, that there were many alive at that very time, which had no knowledge, that there was any Church in the world? But there neither were, nor could be any such among the Donatists, or other like heretics, who forsook the Church to follow their own fantasies. p Revel. 1. 20. & 2. 5. The candle is the Minister or the word, shining by his ministry; the candlestick is the particular Church, where that ministry is: if any living in or near the place where such a candle burneth bright, will not see the light of it, he may well be called wilfully blind. So may not they which are so far, that the beams of the light cannot shine unto them. Now the sum of that which hath been answered, concerning the perpetual continuance and visibleness of the church, is this: that the church, to which that continuance is promised, is the number of the elect, and not any one outward company of men, succeeding one another in a famous and visible profession of Christian Religion. Yea farther, though we do not undertake to affirm, that there hath not been at all times some one company or other of true Christians known to them, among whom they lived, to be professors of the Gospel: yet we doubt not to say, that there can be no sufficient proof brought out of the Scriptures, that there must of necessity be always such a company: as if our Saviour Christ's promises to his church were not performed, unless the world might at all times perceive where such a company were to be found. A. D. CHAP. XIII. How we should discern and know which is the true visible Church of Christ. A. W. It may perhaps seem needless that I should proceed any further in the confutation of this treatise, because still the main point, that there is such a Church, is presupposed, and not proved. But howsoever it be true, that there is indeed no one visible church of Christ, which may challenge or bear the name of the whole church; yet it will be worth the doing, to find out the marks or signs, by which we may discern which congregation is a true church of Christ, and which is not. Let us therefore proceed in examining this discourse. A. D. §. 1. Hitherto I have showed that the rule of faith (which all men ought to seek, that by it they may learn true faith) is the doctrine of the Church of Christ: and that this Church doth continue, and is always visible, that is to say, such as may be found out and known. Now the greatest question is (sith there are divers companies of them that believe in Christ; every one of which, challenge to themselves the title of the true Church) how every man may come to know assuredly, and in particular, which company is indeed the true visible Church of Christ, whose doctrine we must in all points believe and follow. To this question I answer, that every company which hath the name of Christians, or which challenge to themselves the name of the Church, are not always the true Church. For of heretics we may well say, as S. Austin doth: Non quia Ecclesiae Christi videntur habere nomen, idcirco pertinent ad eius consecrationem: They do not therefore pertain to the consecration of the Church of Christ, because they seem to carry the name of the Church of Christ. For (as the same S. Austin saith in another Lib. contr. epist. Parm. cap. 7. place) heretics are only whited over with the name of Christians; when indeed Si haeretici sunt (as Tertullian saith) Christiani esse non possunt: If they be heretics, the cannot be true Christians. Lib. de praescrip. The reason whereof, the same Tertullian insinuateth to be, because they follow not that faith which came from Christ (to his Apostles and Disciples, and which was delivered by them, from hand to hand to our forefathers, and so to us) but they follow that faith which they chose to themselves: of which election or choice, the name of heretic and heresy did arise. A. W. Hitherto you have laboured to prove the mayor of your main syllogism, propounded in your preface, namely that the faith, which the authority of the true Catholic Church commends unto us, is to be held for the true faith. What success you have had in this proof, let them say that have compared your arguments and my answers together. Now you are to proceed to the proof of your main assumption, that they only are the true Church, which make profession of the Roman faith. Your syllogism is thus framed. They only are the true Church, to whom the certain marks, by which the Church is to be known, belong. But they that profess the Roman faith, are they to whom those marks belong. Therefore they only that profess the Roman faith, are the true Church. The proposition or mayor of this Syllogism is not expressed by you, but necessarily implied in this thirteenth Chapter: where you say, that the way to discern which is the true Church, is first to set down, which be the certain marks whereby all men may easily know the Church. The assumption or minor you endeavour to prove in the five Chapters following by a Syllogism thus concluded. They only who are one, holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church, are they to whom the certain marks of the true Church belong. But they that profess the Roman religion, are they who are one, holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church. Therefore, they only that profess the Roman faith, are they to whom the certain marks of the true Church belong. Your proposition or mayor is in the two next Chapters; your assumption or minor in the sixteenth. In handling the proposition, first you labour to disprove the marks of a true church, which we assign: and that in Chapt. 14. then you assay to propound and confirm other of your own; as we shall see hereafter, if God will, when we come to Chap. 15. Whereas you expound what you mean by a visible Church, viz. such a one as may be found out and known: you straighten the question, and avow that which no man denieth. For the question betwixt us, is not whether the Church may be found out or no, but whether it be so visible and famous a congregation, that it may at all times be known of all men. If this be not that you should prove, what will become of your grand reason, that therefore q Cha. 5. & 12 there must always be a known Church, the doctrine whereof every must rest upon in all matters of faith, because otherwise it cannot be universally true, that God will have all men to be saved? It is indeed a matter worth the inquiring, which companies of them that profess Christian Religion, are the true Churches of Christ. For that all are not, it is apparent by your Antichristian Synagogue: and that all true Christians are bound (as much as lieth in them) to become members of some true church of Christ, it is manifest, because else they cannot ordinarily perform the duties of his true outward worship, which are nowhere done but in his true churches. If the choice of any doctrine not received from Christ, be sufficient to make men heretics, and churches heretical; what may the world think of your synagogue, which is not ashamed openly to profess, that she holdeth many points of doctrine, which have not proof out of the written word of God? For whereas to shift off the matter, you come in with delivery of I know not what, from hand to hand by the Apostles and your forefathers: who sees not that this conceit of yours both condemneth the Scriptures of insufficiency, and maketh the reports of men the rule of the true faith, and openeth a wide gate to let in all devices of man's corruption? What avails it, to know, that all doctrine is heresy, which comes not from our Saviour Christ, if we must believe that all came from him, which your Pope and his Council tell us, they have received by tradition? why should we not rather hearken to r Occam in opere 90. dierum your Occam, who truly affirmed that heresy is an opinion chosen by a man, contrary to the holy Scripture? Surely there is great cause to suspect them of heresy, who refuse to make trial of their doctrine by Scripture, whatsoever they talk of tradition from the Apostles by their forefathers. A. D. §. 2. The way therefore to discern which is the true Church, is irst to set down, which be the certain marks, by which all men may easily know the Church: and then to examine to whom these marks do agree. The which, that I may the better perform in the Chapter following, here I think good, first briefly to note what belongeth to the nature of a good and sufficient mark. Note therefore that two things are required in every sufficient mark. The first is, that it be not common to many, but proper, and only agreeing to the thing, whereof it is a mark. As for example, it is no good mark whereby to know any particular man, to say he hath two hands or two ears, because this is common to many, and therefore no sufficient note or mark whereby one may be distinguished or known from all other. But a mark, whereby we may discern one special man from all other, must be some one thing, or more, which he hath, and others have not. As if he were longer, larger, or fairer than the rest; or if some others were Taller, bigger Tall. Fair. as long, and other some as fair, yet none were long, and fair both, but only he. The second thing, required in a good mark, is, that it be more apparent, and easy to be known, than the thing. For example, If I were to describe and make known a certain man, who were otherwise unknown. I must not think it sufficient to give the definition of his essence, or to assign the secret disposition of his heart, liver, and other inward parts, which are commonly harder to be known, than the man himself. But I must declare some apparent thing in his face, hands, or some outward part of his body: or in his voice, apparel, behaviour, or such like; which agreeing only to that man; and being easy to be known, may be a means to make us know the man we seek for. A. W. He that professeth to set down certain marks, whereby all men may easily know the true Church, that is, which Church indeed holdeth the true religion of jesus Christ: undertaketh that, which he will never be able to perform. For it is a matter not easily to be discerned by natural men, no though we should admit those for sufficient marks of it, which are falsely propounded by you, to that purpose. s Bellar. de Eccles. mil. lib. 4. cap. 5. Bellarmine, from whom you took this, as (in a manner) all the rest of your Treatise, assigns three properties of your marks: those two, that you name, and a third, that they must be inseparable from the true Church. Now such plain men, as we are, have conceived by the first and last properties, that no mark is to be taken for a note of the true Church, but that, which cannot be common to it, with any other Church, But you having learned of t Gregor. de Valent. Analy. fid. lib. 6. cap. 7. Gregory de Valentia, or discerned yourself, that the four marks you give, are not such, if we consider them severally; tell us here afore hand, that we must take them altogether, or else we mar all. So that, whereas afterward you seem to make a show of teaching us u Chap. 15. four certain marks, to know the true Church by, when all cometh to all, we have but one mark made of those four botched up together. But let us take a view of these two things, that you require, in every sufficient mark; the former whereof is, that it be proper to the thing, of which it is a mark. This, you say is true, but not sufficient: For some mark may casually be proper to a thing at this time, which an other time may neither be proper to it, nor belong to it at all. Witness your long and fair man, who may lose his legs, and his beauty, or be overgrown by some other, and so can by no means be known, for the longest and fairest. Persecution was sometimes a mark, whereby the true Church might be discerned: for it was proper to it; no men but Christians being killed or punished for religion. Yet I think no man would give this for a mark to know the true Church by. Once x Bellar. de notis Eccles. lib 4. cap. 18. your Cardinal Bellarmine, is so far from it, that he maketh the outward prosperity of the Church, one of his fifteen notes, y Lib. 4. cap. 3. whereby he would have the true Church discerned. Therefore every sufficient mark of the Church must be such, as is always to be had in the Church, not now present, an other time absent. Generally, to make a mark truly proper to a thing, it is required: first that it always agree to the thing: Secondly, that it never agree to any other thing whatsoever. This second property of a mark, that it must be more apparent, and easier to be known then the thing, I acknowledge to be true: so you tie not this always to outward sense, whereof you bring example. For that greater apperancie to sense, is there only required, where the thing we seek for, is to be judged by sense: but it is not requisite, that in matters which we can not know by any outward token, the mark, whereby they are to be known, should be outwardly more apparent: it is sufficient, if by search, and discourse it may more easily be discerned. A. D. §. 3. Wherefore, when we will assign some good marks, by which, all sorts of men may, in some sort, discern, which particular company of men is the true Church, we must have special regard to assign those things, which in some matters may be apparent to all sorts of men; sith all sorts of men had need to seek out, and according to their capacity discern which is the true Church: we must also assign those things, which agree to no other company, but that which is the true Church; to the intent that when a man shall see all those things, which be assigned as marks, to agree to any company, he may straightways conclude, that company to be the true Church: as on the contrary side, if he perceive, either all, or any one of them to be wanting, in any company, he may be sure, that, that company is not the true Church. A. W. In the former part of this chapter, you told us, that the way to discern, which is the true Church, was to set down, which be the certain marks, by which all men may easily know the Church. Here in the conclusion, you mince the matter, I know not how, that All sorts of men may in some sort discern, and in some matters, may be apparent to all sorts of men. If it be enough to discern in some sort, that is, to give a blind guess, which is the true Church, what should certain marks need: or why may not some common signs serve the turn? Neither will it fit your purpose, that the notes be such, as that all sorts of men may by them discern the Church: but they must be so apparent, by your doctrine, that every man of every sort may easily, and as it were, with playing, be able to judge which is the true Church. Your last clause, that the marks in some matters, must be apparent to all sorts of men (that I may freely profess my dullness) passeth my understanding. What is the meaning of these words, in some matters? If they signify no more, but in some sort: it had been good, you had spoken plain, and not vexed your Readers with a needless labour of guessing at your meaning. Especially since (for all your fair promise of I wot not what easiness in discerning, which is the true Church) all men may see, they must be driven to bestow much time and pains, in examining the marks, you will set down: because they are such as do not singly every one by itself, show which is the true Church, but must all be joined together to breed this knowledge: A. D. CHAP. XIIII. That those marks of the Church, which Heretic assign, be not good marks. A. W. This is a very general title, implying, as a man would guess, by the words, that you meant to refute all marks, that ever were set down by any Heretics. But if we should take your meaning, in that sense, your discourse would not answer our expectation. Besides, if all marks assigned by heretics be nought, yours cannot possibly be good, which are brought by the grand heretics of the world, the vowed vassals of the great Antichrist, the Pope of Rome. A. D. §. 1. Out of that which in the former chapter, I briefly noted, about the nature of a good mark, we may easily gather, that those marks, which some heretics assign, to wit, the true doctrine of faith: and the right use of the Sacraments, are no good marks, by which all sorts of men may come to know, which is the true Church, but are means (as Heretics use them) to cast a mist over the whole matter, when as they know, that they can, most easily, convert all the Sacraments, and holy words of Scripture, Admetus imagines phantasmatum suorum, unto their own imaginations and fantastical opinions (as out of Saint Austin we may gather, that the manner of heretics is,) especially when the authority of the Church, (which should correct those depravations and false expositions) is not first, by other marks, known and admitted. A. W. You would seem to have an especial gift of making things easy: by your marks the Church may easily be discerned: out of the former Chapter we may easily gather. But I think it will prove to be so easily gathered, that a weak man may easily make you lose your labour in gathering. That place of Austin doth so fit you Papists, as if he had spoken it of you by name. For to go no farther, than the matter in hand, who ever wrested the Scriptures, more to their fantasies, than you Papists, who are not ashamed nor afraid to apply the most gracious and comfortable promises of our Saviour Christ to his mystical body the Church, to an heap of profane misbelievers, so z Bellar. de Eccles mil. lib 3. cap. 10. they make outward profession of the Gospel in obedience to the Pope of Rome? It is enough, by your doctrine, to make a man a true member of the mystical body of the Son of God, if he profess, as I before said, though he have no part of the life of jesus Christ in him. A. D. §. 2. The doctrine of faith, therefore (I say) and the right use of Sacraments, be not good marks, whereby men may discern which is the true Church. This I prove. First, for that by the true doctrine of faith (which they assign for a mark of the Church) either they mean, true doctrine in some points only, or in all. True doctrine in some points only, is no good mark, because the heretics teach the truth in some points. This therefore being not proper to the Church, but agreeing rather to heretics, can be no good mark of the true Church: because it wanteth the first condition of a mark, which is, to be proper, and agreeing only to the thing, whereof it is a mark. True doctrine also in all points, although it be proper (if we join to it the right use of Sacraments, with obedience to lawful Pastors) and agree only to the true Church, yet it is no good mark: because it faileth in the second condition, which is requred in a good mark, that is to say, it is not apparent or easy to be known of all those, who should seek out the true Church. As I may easily prove, because to know which company teacheth the truth in all points, requireth first learning, whereby one may understand the terms, and state of the question, or controversy: besides, judgement to discuss and weigh prudently the worth and sufficiency of the authorities and reasons of both parts, that upon this pondering of reasons, he may prudently conclude which is the better part. Moreover one had need to have a supernatural light of God's grace and assistance of his spirit, whereby he may discern and see those things, which be above all natural rules and reasons. Ad haec quis idoneus? Who can say that himself is sufficiently furnished with these helps? Who can be infallibly sure, that he hath all these, in such sort, as is requisite, for obtaining, by his own industry, true and infallible faith, in all points? Surely, at least, the unlearned must needs confess, that in divers mysteries, they do not so much as understand the terms & state of the question: & much less are they able, to examine sufficiently the worth of every reason: neither are all such as can persuade themselves, that they are singularly enlightened, and immediately taught of God's spirit: neither, if they did thus persuade themselves, could they be unfallibly sure, that in this their persuasion they were not deceived; sith it is certain, that some of them, that most strongly persuade themselves to be thus taught, are in this their persuasion deceived: neither can the unlearned sufficiently know the truth, in every particular point, by giving credit to some one, or other learned man, or any company of the learned: unless that company be first known, to be of the Church, and consequently to be guided in their teaching, by the holy Ghost, as I proved before. So that it is most hard or rather unpossible for a man, and especially for an unlearned man, in all points, Liquidam à tot erroribus discernere Li. 3. con. Faust. cap. 13. veritatem, to discern the plain truth from so many errors, as S. Austin saith. It is also most hard for a man of himself to judge, which use of Sacraments is right, if he be not first taught by the Church: sub this is a principal point of the true doctrine of faith, which is (as I said) very hard or rather unpossible to be perfectly known by a man's own self. But to know, first, which company is the true Church: and then, by giving credit to it, to learn which is the true faith, and which use of Sacraments is right, there are not so many things required, nor any great difficulty, as shall be declared. For the Church is that direct way, which Isaias speaketh of, when he saith: Haec erit vobis directa via, ita ut stulti non errent per eam. Isa. cap. 35. This shall be to you a direct way, so that even fools, (to wit simple and unlearned men) may not err in it. A. W. These are the two only marks, whereby the true Church may be known, or to speak more plainly, whereby we may judge of any company of men professing Christian Religion, whether they be a true Church of Christ or no. For the better understanding whereof, we must know, that howsoever we join the Sacraments with the word, in this matter: yet we do not think them to be absolutely of equal necessity with it, to the being of a true Church. The true preaching of the word is so simply necessary, that wheresoever it is, it maketh the Church, in which it is, a true Church of Christ: and wheresoever it is not, there is no true visible Church. We deny not, that in time of persecution, many true Christians may be without opportunity of meeting together, for the true worship of God in hearing his word, and calling upon his name, which always accompanieth true preaching, and yet still continue true members of Christ's mystical body the Church. But we say, that these men cannot be truly called such a visible Church of Christ as we now seek for. Yet if these men shall ordinarily assemble themselves together, to offer up prayer to God, and by mutual conference to edify each other in knowledge and obedience: though they have no certain minister appointed for the performance of these duties: there can no reason be alleged, why they should not be held for a true Church, though not perfect & complete; or why men should not join with them, having no means to become members of any complete congregation, properly being a Church. The word then, in our opinion, is simply necessary: and of itself sufficient, (as a Luther. de Concil. & eccl. Luther truly saith) where no other sign of a Church can be discerned, to convince a man's conscience, that there is a true Church, where he findeth the word truly preached. Now the administration of the Sacraments is not so necessary, but that there may be a true Church without it, upon occasion: as b Ios. 5. 5. the jews had no circumcision amongst them, all the forty years, when they traveled through the wilderness. The reason of this difference is assigned to be this: that the word is as it were, the cause efficient of the Church, so that without it, there can be no Church: but the Sacraments are only seals of God's mercies, and helps for the increasing of those graces, which are received by the ministery of the word. Now these seals and helps are not requisite simply, to the being of that they seal & help us in, but only to the better being, and increase of them. But if I may be bold, with reverence of other men's judgement, to speak my poor opinion, I think this reason showeth the different necessity of the word, and the Sacraments, rather to the making of particular men true Christians, them to the giving of this or that company the true being of a visible Church. And therefore (under correction) I would rather say, that the truth of doctrine delivered in the ministry of the word, and prayer are absolutely necessary, & the administration of the Sacraments not so altogether: because the former are such parts of God's service, as may and must always be performed, when the Church is assembled, but the Sacraments, neither can always, nor need, at all such meetings, to be administered. Which we speak not, as if the true use of the Sacraments, were not a necessary part of God's service, to be done, upon all opportunities, with reverence and willingness; but for that (as before I noted) there cannot be (at all times) such opportunity. Yea it may fall out, that in some true Church of Christ, there shall be no occasion to administer the Sacrament of Baptism in many years. This then is that, which we hold concerning the marks of a true Church: First, that wheresoever we see the word of God truly taught, and the Sacraments truly administered, there we may be sure, there is a true Church of Christ: Secondly, that wheresoever the former of these is wanting, there is no true Church, whatsoever show, or mark otherwise there be. Thirdly, that wheresoever the word of God is truly preached, and accordingly professed, there is a true Church, though the Sacraments upon occasion as is aforesaid, be not there administered: so that they be not neglected, upon any contempt, or erroneous conceit of their not being necessary. To disprove our doctrine, concerning the marks of the, or rather of a Church, you bring this reason. If true doctrine be a mark of a true Church, than either true doctrine in some points, or true doctrine in all. But neither true doctrine in some points, nor true doctrine in all, is a mark. Therefore true Doctrine, is not at all a mark of a true Church. I deny you Minor. True doctrine in all points is so certain a To the assumption. mark of a true Church, that wheresoever we find that, we may be sure there is a true Church. But because we inquire after such a mark, as may not only assure us, which is a true Church, but also teach us to know every true Church: I answer more particularly, that true doctrine in some points, viz. such as are fundamental, is so necessary a mark, as that there is no where any true Church, but where there is such true doctrine; and that there is undoubtedly a true Church, wheresoever that truth is taught and held. Your Minor you prove thus, first, that true doctrine in some points is no good mark. That which is not proper to the true Church, but agrees rather Proof of the Assumption. to heretics, is no good mark of the true Church. But true doctrine in some points only, is not proper to the true Church, but agreeth rather to heretics. Therefore true doctrine in some points only, is no good mark of the true Church. Again I deny your minor, taking it in the best sense: for if I To the Assumption. should take it in the worst, your whole syllogism would be nothing to the purpose. My answer shall (I trust) make both these points plain to every man. I say then, that true doctrine in all the fundamental points of religion, is proper to the Church: so that no heretics hold all such points, though some have held many of them. Or if any company do hold them all, and yet for some error in other points of less moment, be counted, and be heretical, their heresy is not such as may make them cease to be members of a true Church, Thus much of your assumption in the best sense. By true doctrine in some points only, you may mean that it is not a property belonging to the true Church, to believe truly some points only, and not all: and this indeed is rather proper to heretics, than the true Church, because it is the duty of all true Churches to believe all things that the Lord hath taught in the holy Scriptures; whereas heretics take up conceits of their own, which they mingle with the truth of God, either ignorantly or deceitfully. I have reason to suspect this meaning, because you thrust in this word only. In this sense your conclusion fighteth with a shadow. For we do not make it a mark of a true Church to believe some points only, but say it may be, and is a true Church, though it err in some points, so it hold the fundamental points sound and truly. This is the proof of the second part of your minor, that true doctrine in all points is not a good mark of the true Church: and it is thus concluded. Every good mark of the true Church is apparent, or easy to be known of all those who should seek out the true Church. But true doctrine in all points is not apparent or easy to be known of all such as should seek out the true Church. Therefore true doctrine in all points, is no good mark of the true Church. Your mayor is false. It is not required that every good mark be To the proposition. apparent or easy: if it may be at all found, though with difficulty and labour, that hardness cannot hinder it from being a good mark. Do not yourself acknowledge afterward, that there is some difficulty in learning to know which company is the true church, and which use of sacraments is right? What else mean you, when you say, there are not so many things required, nor any great difficulty? Indeed (as I doubt not but to make it appear) there is never a one of those four marks you assign, but asketh great labour, and requires many things to the true and perfect knowledge of it. How then should all four be apparent or easy to be known? Yea, I will say more; some of them are such, if not every one of them, that a man can never come to the certain knowledge of them by any labour whatsoever. And therefore if this be a sufficient exception against the doctrine and sacraments, why they may not be marks, either you must devise some easier and plainer marks than you have yet propounded, or do propound any where in this treatise, or else there will be no certain means to know which is a true church of Christ, and which is not. The rest of your long discourse concerning this first proof, To the Assumption. is spent in proving that which no man ever denied, viz. in confirming your minor, that true doctrine in all points is not easy to be known: which we all grant, and so pass over to the next point of the sacraments. It is most hard (say you) for a man of himself to judge, which use of sacraments is right. What mean you by saying of himself? If he be not first taught by the Church: what needs this by the Church? It is hard indeed for a man of himself, without any teaching, to judge of any such matter: but it is not hard for any man of reasonable understanding, to discern by a little teaching, what is right in this point, what wrong. For he may easily learn with small help, the institution of both the Sacraments out of the Scriptures, wherein all things are set down which belong necessarily to the right administration of them. As for matters of circumstance, which appertain not to the being of the sacraments, a man shall not need to make any so great question, whether they be rightly administered or no, as long as he seeth the substance kept whole & sound, according to our saviour's institution: as if the sacraments were not truly sacraments, and such as may be taken, though some matters in the administration of them, be not so well ordered as they might and ought to be. That the sacraments be in all substantial points rightly administered, it is a matter of necessity, whensoever they be administered: and that may be judged of, without giving credit to whatsoever the church will teach in that behalf: which is your teaching by the Church, and on which you still harp, though very untuneably. You fall now from simple disproving of our mark, by reason of the hardness to know what is true doctrine in all points, to procure a dislike of it, by comparing it with the easiness of yours: but of this I spoke somewhat before, and must say more when I come to examine your marks, so much commended. In the mean while, I may not forget to show the poorness of the proof you allege for this surmised easiness. The matter you undertake to prove, is, that to know first which company is the true Church, and then by giving credit to it, to learn which is the true faith, and which use of sacraments is right, is a point of no great difficulty. This you would prove by that place of Isay: This shall c Isa. 35. 8. be to you a direct way, so that even fools shall not err in it. But what a weak proof is this? First, how shall I know that the Prophet speaketh here of the Church? You say so. Would any man dispute so loosely? If the Church (say you) be that direct way I say speaketh of, then to know first which company of men is the true Church, and by giving credit to them, to learn what doctrine, and what use of the sacraments is right, is a point of no great difficulty. But the Church is that way he speaketh of. Therefore to know first which company of men is the true church, is a point of no great difficulty. To the proposition. First I deny the consequence of your proposition. For though the Church were that way the Prophet speaketh of, yet might it still be an hard matter to know where that way lieth. Put case I cannot miss when I am in the way; will it follow hereupon, that therefore it is a point of no difficulty to find it? Secondly I deny your minor also: The Church is not that way. To the assumption. Was it not mere you should have proved a matter of so great importance? Your bare word is a poor proof; and yet that is all you bring us. I omit the error of the translation, and the variety of translations. There is a note d Edit. vulgar. apud Vatabl. in the margin of your vulgar edition, as it is printed with Vatablus, that expoundeth the way to be Christ. Is not this interpretation of as great credit as your word? Vatablus speaketh much to the same purpose. The way (saith e Vatabl. ad Isa. 35. he) that leadeth to God by Christ, shall be so certain, that even they who have no skill in traveling, shall not stray out of it. Your f Gloss. interl. ibi. Gloss, by the way, understands the faith of Christ. And so doth g Tertul cont. Martion. lib. 4 cap. 24. Tertullian, who also in the translation differeth much from your vulgar. The meaning is (as these interpreters have truly said) that the doctrine of the Gospel is a sure and plain way to life everlasting: in which way the simplest soul that believeth in jesus Christ, shall be safely conducted by God spiritually into heaven: as the Israelites (to which story the Prophet seems to allude) were guided by him corporally into the land of Canaan. This is that which the same Prophet speaketh of in h Isa. 30. 21. an other place: Thine ears shall hear a word behind thee, saying, This is the way, walk ye in it. Whereby the gracious direction of God is signified, teaching his children by that spirit i jer. 31. 31. which he gives them, to go forward in the right way that leadeth to everlasting life. Who ever expounded these places of the Church? A. D. §. 3. Secondly I prove the same, because when we seek for the true Church, we seek it principally for this end, that by it, as by a necessary and infallible means, we may hear and learn of it the true faith in all points, which otherwise in itself is hidden, obscure and unknown to us: according to that of S. Paul: Animalis homonon 1 Cor. 2. percipit ea quae sunt Spiritus Dei: The sensual man doth not perceive those things which are of the Spirit of God. For sith none by the only power of natural wit (which in understanding useth the help of outward senses) can obtain the supernatural knowledge of divine mysteries, which we believe by our faith: neither doth the Spirit of God (who as the principal cause, infuseth this gift of faith into our souls) ordinarily instruct any man in the knowledge of true faith, immediately by himself alone, or by an Angel sent from heaven: we must needs if we will have true faith, seek first for that which it pleaseth Almighty God to use, as the ordinary instrument and as a necessary means by which men may learn true faith; the which is no other but the preaching and teaching of the true church, according to that saying of S. Paul: Quomodo credent ei quem non audierint? quomodo audient sine praedicante? quomodo Rom. 10. praedicabunt nisi mittantur? How shall they believe him, whom they have not heard? how shall they hear without a Preacher? how shall they preach, unless they be sent? Therefore the true Church, which only hath preachers truly sent of God, must first be found out, that by it we may hear and know which is the true faith. Therefore of the two, the true Church is rather a mark, whereby we may know the true preaching, and consequently the true doctrine of faith, then contrary, that (as heretics say) the doctrine should be a mark, whereby all men must know, which is the true Church. A. W. Belike, as you had good cause, you suspected your ability, to prove simply, that the true preaching of the word in all matters fundamental, and the right administration of the sacraments, are not a good mark of a true Church. And therefore you rather chose to prove, by way of comparison, that the true church is rather a mark to know true doctrine, then true doctrine a mark to know the true Church by. For so runs your conclusion directly. If the end of seeking the true Church (say you) be principally, that we may by it, as a necessary and infallible means, learn true doctrine in all points, to which otherwise we cannot attain, than the true Church is rather a mark to know true doctrine, then true doctrine a mark to know the true Church by. But the end of seeking the true Church, is principally that we may by it, as a necessary and infallible means, learn true doctrine in all points, which otherwise we cannot attain to. Therefore the true Church is rather a mark to know true doctrine, then true doctrine a mark to know the Church by. Though the conclusion as I said, be not directly to the question, To the Syllogism. which is not comparative but simple, whether true doctrine be a good mark to discern a true Church by, or no: yet I will take it as it is, and answer to the parts of it. Your mayor in the antecedent may have a double meaning: First, that we cannot in any point learn true doctrine but by To the proposition. the Church; and then I deny the consequence. For true doctrine in the fundamental points of Religion may be a good mark of the true Church, though we seek the true Church, because there are many points which we cannot learn without it. But howsoever you understand the mayor, the minor is evidently To the Assumption. false. First, because the principal end of seeking the true Church, is, that we may truly worship God in the assembly of his children, to his greater glory, and our farther assurance of his love to us; as we may see k Psal. 42. 1. 2. & 47. 5. 6. & 48. 8. 9 & 84. 1. 2. 10. every where in the book of the Psalms. Secondly, because we are not to learn of the true Church, as a necessary and infallible means, but of the ministers thereof, who are appointed by God to give us knowledge of the means of salvation, by expounding the word of God to us; not to bind us to belief, by their authority. Your minor you offer to prove in this manner. If no man without faith can obtain the supernatural knowledge of divine mysteries, and faith be not to be had, but by the teaching of the true Church; then the end of seeking the true Church, is principally that we may learn by it, as a necessary and infallible means, true doctrine in all points, to which otherwise we cannot attain. But no man without faith can obtain the supernatural knowledge of divine mysteries: nor faith be had, but by the teaching of the true Church. Therefore the end of seeking the true Church, is principally that we may by it, as a necessary and infallible means, learn the true faith in all points, to which otherwise we cannot attain. The consequence of your mayor is nought. It doth not follow, To the proposition. that we seek the true Church, to learn of it as a necessary and infallible means; because we cannot know the mysteries of Religion without faith, which cometh by the teaching of the true Church: For there may well be teaching and learning, without any such authority in the Church that teacheth. Your minor is very doubtful, as I will show in answering severally To the Assumption. to the parts of it. First then, whereas you say, that no man without faith can obtain the supernatural knowledge of divine mysteries: if you mean that a man cannot acknowledge the truth of such mysteries without faith, your minor in that part is true: but if your meaning be, that a man cannot understand what the means of salvation appointed by God, are, without faith; I take your minor to be false. For though those means be indeed such, as no discourse of man ever could devise or think on, being utterly supernatural, yet it is possible for a mere natural man to learn what they are out of the Scriptures, and that without faith: because the Scriptures may be understood by such helps of the tongues and arts as human learning doth afford us; though to the saving knowledge thereof, the especial grace of God be absolutely necessary. The other point, that faith cannot be found but by the teaching of the true Church, may also have a double sense. The first, that faith cannot be wrought in any man's heart but by the preaching of some man authorized to that purpose by the true Church: and this as I showed before, is not always true: for faith may be, and hath been begotten in some by l Chap. 3. the reading of the Scriptures, where the ministry of the word was not to be had; and by the teaching of ordinary Christians, not set apart to preach the Gospel. The other meaning is this, that faith cannot be attained to, but by our hearkening to the voice of such a Preacher as we already know to be sent by the true Church. And this indeed specially fits your purpose, but hath no likelihood of truth in it. For they that came to faith by the Apostles preaching, did not believe them as men authorized for their instruction by the true church, but as being convinced in their consciences by the evidence of the truth they delivered, without any regard or knowledge of their being sent by the true Church. This weak minor of yours is vnderpropt in each part with a pillar of the holy Scripture: the former thus. No sensual man can obtain the knowledge of divine mysteries. Every man without faith is a sensual man. Therefore no man without faith can obtain the knowledge of divine mysteries. If by obtaining the knowledge of divine mysteries, you mean assenting To the syllogism. to the truth of God concerning salvation, I grant your whole syllogism: and in this sense it was needless to prove that part of your minor. In the other sense, that a man cannot attain to the knowledge of them but by faith, which the words manifestly import, I deny To the proposition. the mayor, for the reason before alleged: but whatsoever your meaning be, the m 1. Cor. 2. 14. Anselmus. ibi. Apostle saith no more, but that a natural man, without the grace of God, can neither once imagine any such means of salvation (and other there is none) nor acknowledge those means as true and sufficient. Of the former, the Apostle speaks in the ninth verse, affirming that the means of salvation prepared by God for men, are such as neither eye vers. 9 hath seen, nor ear hath heard, nor ever entered into any man's heart. Of the latter is the place alleged by you, where the word signifieth vers. 14. rather an approving and n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. receiving, than a perceiving: and the spiritual man, whom he there opposeth to the natural, is said to discern of spiritual things, rather by acknowledging the vers. 15. truth of them, then by understanding the meaning of the word preached concerning them. Your translation (which I touched before) where you term hominem animalem, a sensual man, is senseless. For who knows not, that by a sensual man, we mean a voluptuous man, given up to his pleasures and sensuality? But the Apostle speaks not of such only, but even of the wisest and most virtuous that ever were amongst men, without grace: so that in his meaning, as well temperate Xenocrates and learned Aristotle (called for his knowledge o Naturae genius. nature's darling) virtuous Socrates and wise Solon, as Sardanapalus, Thersites, Nero, and such like, are natural men: that is, such as have no grace of God, but that shadow of it, which remaineth in all men, by nature; and is helped by education and human learning. It is true, that p Fernel. Physiol. lib. 4. c●. 7. Animalis & naturalis, is not all one in nature: yet doth Natural better express the Apostles meaning, then sensual; and generally, q August. de nat. & gra. Sotus de nat. & gra. all writers have made an opposition, in this sense, betwixt Nature and Grace, not betwixt Sensualnesse and Grace: as you may see throughout Augustine's, Prospers, Jerome's, and your own Schoolman's writings. Neither will it help the matter to say (as you do) that Natural wit in understanding useth the help of outward senses. For sensual signifieth not him that useth his senses, to the understanding of this or that, but him that is drowned in Sensuality. Besides, natural wit doth not use the help of the outward senses, always in understanding; yea, there are many, and the most excellent points of Philosophy, in which, Sense hath nothing to do, as in the discourse of Reason, and the knowledge of Logic; with all those hard, and worthy Questions of the Soul, and of God himself, as far as they are to be conceived of, by the light of nature. If you will say, that we learn these things, partly by reading and hearing: I answer, both that we find out many things in Philosophy, of ourselves by study, without any help of Sense (which rather is an hindrance to the soul in the search of such points,) and also, that the knowledge we have of divine mysteries, is first brought to us, and continually increased in us, by the same Senses of seeing and hearing: else were your Church as good be without those preachers you so much brag of. The other part of your Minor, that faith cannot be had, but by the teaching of the true Church, you prove, or rather endeavour to prove in this sort. If no man can believe without he hear, nor hear without one preach, and no man can preach except he be sent, than Faith cannot be had, but by the teaching of the true Church. But no man can believe, without he hear, nor hear without one preach, and no man can preach, without he be sent. Therefore faith cannot be had, but by the teaching of the true Church. I deny the consequence of your Mayor, and affirm that faith may be had without the teaching of the true Church, though To the proposition. no man can believe without he hear, etc. For r Chap. 3. I have showed that some countries have been brought to belief without any such teaching by authority from the true Church. I also refer the Reader to my answer to your Minor. That place of the Apostle concerneth not the ordinary ministery To the Assumption. of the word, but the knowledge of the means of salvation: which (as s Rom. 10. 14. the Apostle truly saith) could never have been thought on by any man, if it had not pleased God, to give notice thereof to the world, by men appointed and authorized to that purpose by himself. But of this place and matter I spoke sufficiently before, in this, and t Chap. 3. in a former chapter. A. D. §. 4. Thirdly, true faith is included in the true Church, and as it were enclosed in her belly; as Saint Austin saith, upon those words of the Psalm, Erraverunt ab utero, locuti sunt falsa. In ventre Ecclesiae In Psal. 57 (saith he) veritas manet; quisquis ab hoc ventre separatus fuerit, necesse est, ut falsa loquatur. Truth remaineth in the belly of the Church, whosoever is separated (to wit by difference in doctrine) from this belly of the Church, must needs speak false. Therefore like as, if a man had Gold in his belly, we must first find the man, before we can come to see the gold itself: so we must first by other marks, find out the true Church, which hath the gold of true faith, hidden in her belly, before we come to see the gold of true faith itself. Sith especially, we cannot see it, unless she open her mouth, and deliver it unto us, and that we cannot (being spiritually blind) certainly know it to be true, and not counterfeit, but by giving credit to her testimony of it. According as the same Saint Austin saith, evangelio non crederem, nisi me Ecclesiae authoritas commoverer. I should not believe the Gospel Lib. con. Ep. Fund. cap. 5. itself, unless I were moved by the authority of the Church. For if we had not the testimony of the Church, how should we have been infallibly sure, that there were any Gospel at all? Or how should we have known, that those books, which ●eare title of the Gospel, according to Saint Matthew, Mark, Luke, and john, are true Canonical Scripture; rather than those books, which are written in the name of Nicodemus, and Saint Thomas, bearing the same title or inscription of Gospel? A. W. Your third reason is thus to be framed. That which is shut up in the belly of the Church, so that we cannot see it, unless she open her mouth, and deliver it to us, nor certainly know it to be true, but by giving credit to her testimony of it, is not a good mark to know the true Church by. But true doctrine is so shut up in the belly of the Church, that we cannot see it, unless she open her mouth, and deliver it to us, nor certainly know it to be true, but by giving credit to her testimony of it. Therefore true doctrine is no good mark to know the true Church by. Your Minor is false, in both parts of it. First, it is untrue, To the Assumption. Part. 1. that true doctrine is so shut up in the belly of the Church: yea many a true Church may hold some errors, and many an heretical Church some truth; only the fundamental points are necessary to the being of a true Church. Secondly though true doctrine be in the belly of the Church, as indeed there is no true Church, in which it is not: yet is it not so shut up in it, as you imagine. For it is first and principally in the Scriptures, where it may be found without any such authority of the Church, as you dream of: yea I have showed, that the Apostles themselves did not beget faith in the hearts of them, to whom they preached, by any authority of the Church, but by evidence of the truth itself, which they taught. Concerning your proof from u August. in Psalm. 57 Augustine's authority; I first answer, that he expoundeth not that place according to the literal meaning of the Prophet, who speaketh not of any belly of the Church, but saith that those lewd men, of whom he speaketh, have always been given to naughtiness, from their mother's womb. These wicked ones x Vatablus ibi, (saith Vatablus) have gone astray ever since, they came forth of the womb, they they have erred, ever since they were borne. Yea Austin himself, as your y August. in Gloss. interlin. Gloss saith, sometimes expoundeth it otherwise then here: God (saith Austin (foreknew sinners, even from the womb: as he said to Rebecca. So doth z Hieron. ad Psal. 57 & Jerome also understand it; so a Theodoret. ibi. Theodoret. But let us take it, as Saint Austin doth here mystically expound it: what will you prove by it? That truth is so shut up in the belly of the Church, that we cannot see it, unless she deliver it by her mouth? There is no such word in him, no such thing to be gathered out of him. His conclusion is, that therefore they, which differ from the true Church in doctrine, are in error: which is certainly true, concerning fundamental points, and very probable, in all other points whatsoever. The other part of your Minor is, that true doctrine is so shut up 2. Part. within the Church, that we cannot certainly know it to be true, but by giving credit to her testimony of it. For the disproouing whereof, it shall be sufficient, to call to mind that, which I have often answered, concerning those who believed by the Apostles ministery, without any consideration or thought of their being sent by the true Church: but only being convinced by the manifest truth of that which they delivered, concerning forgiveness of sin by our Saviour jesus Christ. Your proof out of Austin is insufficient, as it may appear in this sort. If Austin say, that he should not believe the Gospel, unless he were moved by the authority of the Church, then true doctrine is so shut up within the Church, that we cannot certainly know it to be true, but by giving credit to her testimony of it. But Austin saith so. Therefore true doctrine is so shut up in the Church, that we cannot certainly know it to be true, but by giving credit to her testimony of it. I deny the consequence of your Mayor. First, because (as To the proposition. b August. cont. Crescon. lib. 2. cap. 31. Austin himself saith of Cyprian) we are not bound by the authority of Augustine's judgement, as if his writings were Canonical. We do Cyprian no wrong (saith Austin) when we distinguish his writings whatsoever they be, from the Canonical authority of the divine Scriptures. And again, I take not Cyprians writings for Canonical, but consider of them according to the Canonical: and allow of that, with his commendation, which agreeth to Scripture, but, by his leave, refuse that which disagreeth from Scripture. This mind carried c August. ad Fortun. epist. 111. Austin to other men's writings, this mind he desired other men should carry to his. Secondly, I deny the same consequence, because Austin might be moved, by the authority of the Church, to acknowledge the Gospel for true, and yet, without the same authority, learn out of the Gospel so acknowledged, which is true doctrine, which false. Concerning Augustine's testimony, first, it is manifest, that he To the Assumption. delivereth not a rule, for all men to follow, as if by should not believe he meant, that a man ought not to believe the Gospel; nor showeth an impossibility of believing it, unless a man be moved, by the authority of the Church: but at the most, declareth, that the authority of the Church, prevailed with him so far, as to make him acknowledge the Gospel for true, which else he had either not known, or doubted of. Secondly, it is observed according to the rest of his writings, that the Latin word he useth, in the African dialect, signifieth Had not believed: so that the sense is, I had not believed the Gospel, as the truth of God, if the authority of the Church, had not moved me thereunto. The first motive was the authority, that is, the learning, consent, holiness of so many worthy men, as from time to time had held, and did hold the Gospel, to be the truth of God. Upon this ground Austin gave himself to the study of the Scriptures, and by the evidence of truth delivered in it, discerned that it was the word of God, according to the report and reputation commonly held of it. This sense agreeth with Augustine's purpose, who to refute the Manichees, that took their master Manes for the Apostle of Christ, thus reasoneth against them. I believe not (saith Austin) that he is Christ's Apostle, and then demandeth of the Manichee what course he would take to prove it to him. Perhaps (saith he) you will read the Gospel to me, and assay to prove Manichaeus person out of it: But what if you should light upon one, that doth not yet believe the Gospel? Then follow the words alleged by you, I truly had not believed the Gospel, if the authority of the Church had not moved me. This is yet more clear, by that which Austin writeth afterward. First (saith he) we believe, that which yet we cannot discern, that being made stronger in faith, we may attain to the understanding of that we do believe, not men now, but God himself, confirming & enlightening our mind within. But howsoever we understand it, Austin speaketh not of true doctrine shut up in the Church, so that it cannot be known to be true, but by giving credit to the Church's testimony, which is the point in question: but only of acknowledging the Gospel, to be the word of God. Now the same Church, or party, which assureth us, that the Gospel is true, may notwithstanding err in the meaning of some points in it; and a man may discern these errors, by the light, which shineth in the Scriptures, thus acknowledged. First it is here confessed by yourself, that Augustine's speech is not of all fundamental points of true doctrine, but only, (as I said) of knowing the Scripture to be the word of God: for so only you reason out of it, and thereby show plainly to all, that will see, that it cannot prove the matter, for which you brought it. Secondly you proceed farther to prove the point by an other reason, but faulty like the former. If (say you) without the testimony of the Church, we could not have been infallibly sure, that there is any Gospel at all, nor have known that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and john, are true Canonical Scripture, rather than those of Nicodemus and Saint Thomas; then we cannot know true doctrine to be true, but by giving credit to the Church's testimony of it. But we could not have known those things without the testimony of the Church. Therefore we cannot know true doctrine to be true, but by giving credit to the Church's testimony of it. A man that is so full of his compound syllogisms, as you To the proposition. are, might learn to make better consequences in his Mayor, than you commonly bring us. Let us grant you, that we could not know that there is any Gospel, or which is the Gospel, without the testimony of the Church. All that will follow thereupon, is this, that we cannot know these two points of doctrine to be true, without giving credit to the testimony of the Church. Yea if I were disposed to trouble you, I would yet farther deny your said consequence, because though we cannot know these matters, without the Church's testimony: yet we might know them without resting upon the Church's authority. For the testimony of the Church may be had by the ministery thereof, without any such absolute authority of enjoining belief, or giving credit to that she affirmeth, as an undoubted truth. This Minor, as the former in this chapter, consisteth of two To the assumption. Part. 1. parts, and is false in both of them, as I will show particularly. First you say, that without the testimony of the Church, we could not have been infallibly sure, that there is any Gospel. Your meaning is, that we could not have known this certainly, but by giving credit to the report of the Church, as a certain truth. First, for the doctrine of the Gospel to salvation, it hath been had, and may be had without any testimony of the Church at all: taking the testimony of the Church as you do, for the preaching of men publicly authorized to this duty, by a company of men so qualified, as you before describe your Church. I shall need no better proof, then to put you in mind again of those nations, many and great, who attained to faith and salvation, by the teaching of the Apostles severally, without any such argument of the Churches absolute authority. Secondly taking the Gospel, for the 4. books of the Evangelists, I answer, that there may be true faith & true Churches, without the knowledge of those books, yea without the very being of them: as it is manifest by the former example, many thousands being converted, and many Churches settled, without the knowledge, and before the publishing, or penning of them. But to come to the very point, I answer further, that it is a gross absurdity to make men believe, that there can be no certain knowledge had, that there is any Gospel, but by giving credit to the Church: whereas no man can know, that there is any such authority in the Church, or any Church at all, but by the authority of the Scripture. It is more than ridiculous for me to believe, that there is a company of men infallibly taught of God, which is the truth, with authority to enjoin obedience to all men, in whatsoever they will teach, if I have no better proof of it, than their own word. For since God hath endued man with reason, it is both simpleness and sin for him, to believe that, which is utterly against the light of reason, if he have no warrant from God so to do. But warrant he can have none, to believe such a conceit of any company, but from the scriptures; as it is evident by your own d Chap. 5. course, who make a place of scripture the ground of your whole disputation. Therefore whereas you teach men first to know the Church, and then by the Church, the Scriptures; we say this course is utterly unwarrantable, having no foundation, either in reason or revelation. Yea chose we truly affirm, that the Scripture must first be known, at the least in that point, of the authority of the Church; and then the Church by the Scripture. And this is Augustine's judgement directly. Let us not hear (saith e August. de unit. Eccles. cap. 3. he) this I say, this you say, but let us hear, this saith the Lord. There are the Lords books, to the authority of which both of us consent, both of us give credit, both of us yield obedience: there let us seek the Church, there let us discuss our question. And afterward, I will not have the Church to be showed by men's doctrines, but by the Oracles of God. And again, f Chap. 16. Let us seek the Church in the Canonical Scriptures. The like speeches are every where in that book. Whether we be schismatics, or you (saith the same g August. cont. lib. Petil. lib. 2. cap. 85. Austin) let neither you, nor me, but Christ be asked, that he may show us his Church. But where shall we know, what our Saviour saith concerning his Church, and how he would have it known, but in the Scriptures? Yet I deny not that the ministery of men is necessary to give notice, that there are certain books, in which it hath pleased God, to reveal the means of salvation to mankind; though I acknowledge not any authority in the Church, whereby men should be bound to believe this their report, when as yet they are ignorant, that there is any such Church. You will say then, what shall we do? or how shall we know that there is any Gospel? If you will give me leave, I will show you what course is to be taken. When you understand that there hath been, and is still an opinion, that there are certain books written by God's authority and appointment, to teach men the way to salvation, do as any reasonable man would do, in a matter of such importance. Get the books, read and study them, with a true desire to see whether they be such as they are reported to be, or no. And because thou knowest by nature that there is a God, and that he only is all-sufficient to discover the truth of his own purpose, touching the estate of his creature, call upon him, though in ignorance and weakness, that it would please him to direct thee in this inquiry after the means of thy salvation or happiness. This done, thou shalt be sure to find, by the evidence of truth manifested in those books, that they are sent from God, and not devised by man. If thou live in such a place as affordeth the interpretation of these books by the ministry of men, use that singular blessing of God with reverence and care to understand, and thou shalt by the merciful teaching of God, acknowledge these books to be the word of God, ordained for the salvation of thyself and other. This (will some man say) may perhaps breed a persuasion, that these books are from God, but how shall we come to be infallibly sure of it? How else, but by the work of the spirit of God in thy heart? What (say you) must we run to revelations? h 1. Cor. 2. 10. Who knows the secrets of God, but the spirit of God? The truth itself discerned by that light which the spirit kindleth in our hearts, worketh assurance of belief; to which the testimony of the spirit is added for our further confirmation. Neither is this any other revelation, than you Papists require in this case. For according to your doctrine, no man can be persuaded infallibly of the truth of the Scripture, either for the text, or the interpretation, but by the especial teaching of the spirit: otherwise he hath not faith, but opinion of these matters. i See my answer to 12. art. part. 1. art. 3. Only herein stands the difference betwixt us, that you say, the argument whereby the spirit persuades us to acknowledge the Scripture, is the authority of the Church: we affirm it is the evidence of truth, which he makes us to discern, by our understanding enlightened, and to approve by our will thereto inclined, through his mighty and gracious work upon our souls. The second part of your minor, is, that we could not have Part. 2. known the Gospels of the four Evangelists to be canonical Scripture, rather than those of Nicodemus and Thomas, if we had not the testimony of the Church. Of the falseness of which opinion, I shall need to say little, because it is refuted in my answer to the former part. For this knowledge is not bred in us by resting upon the Church's authority, but by yielding to the evidence of the truth, discovered to our hearts by the teaching of the holy Ghost. Concerning the authority of the Church in this point, it were a presumptuous and unreasonable thing for any man (without very good proof, or great likelihood of reason) to deny or doubt of that which hath been avouched so many years by the whole Christian world. But to make question of the books of Scripture, whether they be the word of God or no, and to deny that there is any means to know them for such, but the authority of the Church, is the next way to open a gap to Atheism, & to lay open Religion to the scorn of the world. Can I not know the Scripture to be of God, but by the authority of the Church? How shall I then know it at all, since it is not reasonable to believe there is any Church that hath such authority, but by the warrant of the Scripture? They do all they can, to turn reasonable creatures into beasts, who teach us, that we must believe the Church cannot err, because the Scripture saith so: and yet deny that we can know there is any Scripture but by believing it, because the Church saith so. This is to dance in a circle, as if a man were conjured, that he could not get out of it. How shall I know there is a Church? by the Scripture. How shall I know there are any Scriptures? by the Church. Would your proud Clergy thus make fools of Christian men, if they did not despise them, as void of all reason? I wonder how your Pope, Cardinals, Bishops, and the rest of your Clergy, can for bear laughing when they look one upon another, and remember how they cozen, and (if I may use the word in a matter of such importance) gull the world with such palpable fooleries. But k Revel. 17. 2 your strumpet of Babylon hath made the Kings of the earth, and all nations drunk with the cup of her fornications, exalting herself above all that is called God, and making herself l Gloss. ad extra. joan. 22. de verb. signif. cap. quum inter. the God of her slavish vassals. But the Lord is just, who (according to m 2. Thess 2. a 1 the Apostles prophesy) hath sent the world strong delusions, that they should believe lies, that all they might be damned which believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. And certainly if there were not a great measure of 12. blindness and sottishness in the hearts of men, that God's purpose might take effect, it were unpossible that reasonable men should so be lead by the nose to error and destruction. A. D. §. 5. Fourthly, if the true doctrine of faith, in all particular points, must be foreknown as a mark, whereby to know the true Church, than (contrary to that which hath been proved) the authority of the Church should not be a necessary means whereby men must come to the knowledge of the true faith. For if before we come to know which is the true Church, we must by an other means, have known which is the true faith; what need then is there, for getting true faith already had, to seek or bring in the authority of the same Church? A. W. This fourth reason and the next, labour to prove that part of your first assumption in this Chapter, which we deny not, that the true doctrine of faith in every particular point, is not a good mark of the Church. It would therefore be but lost labour to spend much time in the examining of them; yet somewhat I must say, and first to the former. If the true doctrine of faith in all particular points, must be foreknown, as a mark to know the true Church by: then is not the authority of the true Church a necessary means to know the true doctrine of faith by. But the authority of the true Church is a necessary means to know the true faith by. Therefore the true doctrine of faith must not be foreknown in all particular points, as a mark to know the true Church by. Your conclusion is no more than we grant; the consequence To the Syllogism. of your mayor, about which you take some pains, needs not your help for the proof of it. Your minor is false. That which you brought before to prove it, before was answered. A. D. §. 6. Fiftly, if before we give absolute and undoubted credit to the true Church, we must examine and judge whether every particular point of doctrine which it holdeth, be the truth, with authority to accept that only which we like, or which seemeth in our conceit right and conformable to Scripture, and to reject whatsoever we mislike, or which in our private judgement seemeth not so right and conformable: then we make ourselves examiners and judges over the church; and consequently we prefer our liking or disliking, our judgement and censure of the interpretation and sense of Scripture, before the judgement and censure of the Church of God. But it is absurd both in reason and religion, to prefer the judgement of any private man (be he never so witty and learned, or never so strongly persuaded in his own mind, that he is taught by the Spirit) before the judgement and definitive sentence of the Church of God; the which is a company of men, many of which, both are, and always have been, virtuous, wise and learned, and (which is chief) is such a company, as according to the absolute and infallible promises of our Saviour, hath undoubtedly the holy spirit among them, guiding them and teaching them all truth, and not permitting them to err, as before hath been proved. A. W. There is the same fault in this fifth argument which was in the former, that it is brought to prove a proposition, which we deny not. If before we give absolute credit to the Church, we must judge whether every particular point it holdeth be true or no, than we may make ourselves judges over the true Church. But we may not make ourselves judges over the true Church. Therefore we must not judge whether every particular point the Church holdeth, be true or no, before we give absolute credit to the Church. This conclusion supposeth that which can never be proved, To the syllogism. that we are, first or last, to give absolute credit to the Church: whereof in this Chapter there is no question. The point you undertake to disprove, is, that the true doctrine of faith, in every particular point, is a good mark of a true Church. This therefore you should have concluded, though indeed it make nothing against our opinion, who require not for a mark of the true Church, truth of doctrine in every point, but in all points fundamental. Your proposition is deceitfully propounded, as if we granted Of the syllogism. a company to be the true Church, and yet would take upon us to receive and reject what we list: whereas we hold that we cannot acknowledge any true Church, but we must withal yield, that it maintaineth all substantial points of Religion, from which we may not vary. Secondly, for a man to make himself judge over the Church, is to take authority upon him to censure, reprove and condemn the Church: whereas all that we desire, is, that it may be free for us to discern that the doctrine held by this or that Church, is agreeable to the Scriptures, before we acknowledge it to be a true Church. It is mere absurd and unreasonable, to prefer any private To the Assumption. man's judgement before the definitive sentence of the church of God. But it is agreeable both to reason and Religion, that every private man, whose salvation lieth upon his true or false believing, should consider whether that which he is enjoined by men to believe, be warrantable by the word of God or no. n Mat. 15. 14. The Scribes and pharisees were the leaders of the people in the matters of Religion, yet were they blind guides: and the blind people, by depending upon their judgement, were carried headlong into the same pit of destruction with them. Were not the men of Beroea commended o Act. 17. 11. by the holy Ghost, for searching the Scriptures, that they might see whether the doctrine delivered by Paul were agreeable thereto or no? And yet shall it be a fault in us to inquire of the same Scripture, concerning the doctrine of your Apostatical synagogue? I say farther, it is against reason and Religion, to prefer any one man's judgement before the definitive sentence of many wise, virtuous and learned men; such as the Church hath usually some amongst the members thereof. But it is most reasonable and religious, to prefer the truth of God manifested by one simple man, before the contrary determination of all that ever have been, or shall be of the Church, though never so wise, virtuous and learned. This is that which we teach concerning this matter: First, that no man is bound to take any thing for a matter of faith, but that which is proved to him by the Scriptures, the rule of faith. Secondly, that no man is to condemn any thing held by the Church, unless he have evident proof on his side out of the Scriptures. Thirdly, that every man, in matters not determinable by Scripture (none of which are necessary to salvation) should yield to the judgement of the Church, whereof he is a member; and every Church to the judgement of the Christian Churches other where, unless there be some good reason to the contrary. It is very possible for wise, virtuous and learned men to err (for your privilege of not erring hath been found to be counterfeit) who oftentimes follow the opinion of some one man, whose learning and piety they cannot choose but admire. p Sotus de nat. & great. lib. 3. cap. 4. Domingo à Soto affords us an example of this matter, where having alleged a sentence out of Austin, he addeth these words: By reason of this saying of Austin (quoth Soto) all the Fathers afterward, and the whole multitude of Divines have by good right delivered it as a truth, that the glorious Virgin never committed any actual sin; though Chrysostome, ancienter than he, were of another opinion. Let it be then unlawful, as it is, for a private man to prefer his own opinion before the judgement of a whole Church; and in this sense I grant your minor: yet is it not unlawful for him to examine what any or all Churches teach, or to dissent from it, if he have the Scripture for his warrant. A. D. §. 7. But you may perhaps say, that in Scripture we are willed, not to 1. john. 4. believe every private spirit, but to try spirits, whether they be of God or no: and that therefore we must examine and try the spirit of the Church, by looking into every particular point of doctrine which it teacheth. I answer: that in that place of Scripture, it is not meant, that it belongeth to every particular man to try all spirits; but in general the Scripture giveth the Church warning, not to accept every one that boasteth himself to have the Spirit, and willeth that they should try those spirits: not that every simple or private man should take upon him to try them, but that those of the Church, to whom the office of trying spirits doth appertain, to wit, the Doctors and Pastors, which Almighty God hath put in his Church of purpose, Vt non circumferamur omni vento doctrinae, that we may not Ephes. 4. be carried away with every wind of doctrine: and Vt non simus paruuli fluctuantes, that we may not be little ones, wavering with every blast of those that boast themselves to be singularly taught by the spirit. So that this trying of spirits, is only meant of those spirits, of which men may well doubt, whether they be of God or no: and then also this trial belongeth to the Pastors of the true church. But when it is certain that the spirit is of God, we neither need, nor ought doubtfully to examine, or presumptuously to judge of it, but submitting obediently the judgement of our own sense and reason, we must believe the teaching of it in every point. Now it is most certain, that the spirit of the true visible Church, is of God, as out of holy Scripture hath been most evidently proved. And therefore our only care should be to seek out those marks, by which all men may know, which particular company of men is the true Church of Christ: whose doctrine, we neither need, nor lawfully may examine and try in doubtful manner, but must obediently and undoubtfully in all points believe, as the only assured and infallible truth. A. W. For the better strengthening of your minor, you assay to make, and answer an argument, which our Divines use to allege against it: and this it is. They that are willed in Scripture not to believe every spirit, but to try the spirits, whether they be of God or no, may judge whether every particular point the Church holdeth, be true or no. But every Christian is willed in Scripture not to believe every spirit, but to try the spirits, whether they be of God or no. Therefore every Christian may judge whether every particular point the Church holdeth, be true or no. The Assumption of this Syllogism, we prove by q 1. joh. 4. 1. that place of john, Dear beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God. To this our proof, you answer two ways: First concerning the spirits to be tried; then concerning them that are to make trial. Of the former, your answer is, that this trying of spirits is only meant of those spirits, of which men may well doubt whether they be of God or no. First, this answer cannot be warranted by the text, which is general: Try the spirits, that is, all spirits that come to preach unto you, if we apply it to the teachers, rather than to the doctrine they deliver. And surely if the Apostle had meant as you expound him, he would not have said, Try the spirits, but try some of them. Believe not every spirit, but try those of which you may well doubt: but he saith generally the spirits. Secondly, what may we imagine to be a cause of doubting? If want of lawful sending, which is the great point you always urge; either we must know the spirits we may doubt of, to be unlawfully sent, and then (by your doctrine) we must utterly reject them without any farther trial: or else the trial we are to make, if we doubt, is whether they be lawfully sent or no: for till that appear, we may not hear them. But our Apostle appointeth us to make trial by their doctrine. Thirdly, the reason and end of this exhortation, is, that we might take heed of false Prophets and false Apostles, which were crept into the Church. Many false Prophets were stirred up by the devil, feigning that they had Apostolical doctrine to deliver. Therefore (saith r Didym. Alex. ad 1. joan. 4. Didymus) the gift of discerning spirits is necessary. Now these false apostles were not such as came without any calling; for the devil must needs have known, if he had been then acquainted with your doctrine, that it was not possible for him to prevail by men not authorized by the Church; but as the Apostle teacheth us, they were such, as had gone from amongst the true Christians, not by schism, in refusing communion with them, so much as by heresy, in departing from the truth of doctrine, in main points of religion. Fourthly, false teachers do so nearly resemble true, and s Mat. 7. 15. come (many times) with such show of holiness, that a man cannot tell whom he should trust or suspect, but as he finds his doctrine to be suitable, or contrary to the word of God. Therefore Ferus a writer of your own, and one of no mean account, understandeth by spirit, doctrine. The Apostle warns us (saith t Ferus ad 1. joan 4. 1. Ferus) that we believe not every spirit, that is, every doctrine and persuasion. To which purpose he allegeth also that of Saint Paul, u 1. Thess 5. 21 Try all things, hold fast that which is good: alleged by x Thomas ad 1. joan. 4. Thomas, in the same matter. To make this your answer the more likely, you tell us, that when it is certain that the spirit is of God, we neither need, nor ought doubtfully to examine, or presumptuously to judge of it: as if we thought any such doubtful or presumptuous course lawful. Yet in this case there is a difference to be observed: If we know the preacher to be sent of God, in such sort, as the Apostles were, that he cannot err, than every least doubt of that which he delivereth, is presumption and sin. But otherwise, though it appear to us, that he be authorized by God, we may safely take liberty to examine whatsoever he teacheth, without any presumption to judge, or needless doubting of that he delivereth. In a word, if we hear such a man, it is our duty not to suspect his doctrine, but where we have some good appearance of Scripture for our suspicion. In which case we are to search the word of God, and to open our doubts to him, that we may be satisfied. If the matter be such, as we cannot clearly prove to be false by Scripture, we are with all reverence and humility, to suspect our own judgement, rather than his, whom God hath appointed and authorized to be our teacher: so far must we be from presumption. Your second exception is against them, that are to try the spirits, who are not (say you) every simple or private man, but the Pastors of the Church, to whom the office of trying spirits doth appertain; as being put by God in his Church of purpose, that we may not be carried away with every wind of doctrine. That this exhortation belongeth to all Christians, it may appear by these reasons. First, we have the like general admonitions in other places of Scripture to all Christians, not only to Pastors and Doctors. y Mat. 7. 15. Beware of false Prophets (saith our Saviour to all men) which come to you in sheep's clothing. Try all things (saith z 1. Thess. 5. 21 the Apostle) and hold fast that which is good: which latter place, as before I noted, is brought by a Vhi supra. Thomas of Aquin and Ferus, to expound this text of Saint john. Secondly, the whole Epistle is written to all in general, without any particular instruction, or exhortation to this or that kind of Christians, as teachers, learners, masters, servants, or such like. Thirdly, it is b 1. Pet. 2. 18. & 3. 1. 7 Ephes. 5. 22. 25 Col. 3. 18. 19 the course of the Apostles, where they descend from generals to particulars, to give some special notice of that change by naming severally the estates, to which they speak, and not continuing only the common titles of beloved or brethren, as the Apostle in this place doth. Fourthly, himself professeth, that his Epistle is written in general to all men, yea even to young men and babes in Christ. Neither doth he, in this exhortation, restrain his words to them, that are teachers. Fiftly, if it be not lawful for private men to try the spirits, then are they to receive whatsoever is taught by any particular Doctor or Pastor; and so be bound to believe mere contradictions, if it fall out, as sometimes it doth, that one man preach contrary to that, which an other hath taught. Sixtly, the Lord hath imparted the scriptures, and enjoined the search of them, as well to private men, as to Pastors and Doctors. Seventhly, and last, blind people shall perish everlastingly, with their blind guides: and therefore it cannot be, but that God hath given Holkot. in 2. q. 4. ad r. arg. princip. them liberty to try the spirits, that they that will not, may have no excuse for their erring, but be justly damned. The place you bring out of the epistle to the c Ephes. 4. 14. Ephesians, doth not prove that Pastors & Doctors only are to examine spirits, though this belong in special sort to them, d Act. 20. 28. whom the holy Ghost hath made overseers of the flock of Christ. God's end, in appointing them, is, that we should not be carried away with every blast of doctrine: but we must needs be so carried, if we receive without choice, whatsoever is delivered. They are helpers of our faith, not Lords over it. Their duty it is, to teach us, how to discern of true doctrine, and to persuade us to embrace it, not to enforce us to give credit to all they say. Thus have I answered all those arguments, that you thought good to propound: all which notwithstanding, our conclusion standeth sound and firm, that true doctrine in points fundamental, is a certain, and necessary mark of a true Church of Christ. A. D. CHAP. XV. That these four, una, Sancta, Catholica, Apostolica, that is to say, One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, are good marks, by which men may know, which is the true Church. A. W. The second main part of your whole treatise is this, that they which profess the Roman faith, are the true Church. Your proof is, that To them only, the certain marks, whereby the Church is to be known, belong. Which that you might make clear unto us, you reason in this sort. They only, who are One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church, are they to whom the marks, by which the true Church may be known, belong. But they only that profess the Roman Religion, are they who are One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church. Therefore they only, that profess the Roman Religion, are they to whom the marks, by which the true Church is to be known, belong. The Mayor of this syllogism you seek to prove, in this Chapter by showing, that these properties are good marks to know the true Church by. Now properties, if we shall speak properly according to Logic, are Accidents or Adjuncts agreeing to every particular of that kind, whereof they are properties, and that always: never at any time, to any thing of any other kind. Therefore the properties of a true Church, must be such, as agree to every true Church at all times, & at no time to any other Church or thing, but to a true Church only. These the Logicians call Propria adiuncta, or propria quarto modo. Whether these four alleged by you be such or no, taking them according to your sense, we shall see in examining your proof. That in some sense they are certain marks of a true Church, we make no question. A. D. §. 1. Sith our Saviour Christ hath thought good to plant a visible Church upon earth, which he would have to continue, until the world's end, for this special intent and purpose, that all men in all ages, by means of it, may learn the doctrine of the true faith: the true worship of God: the right use of the Sacraments: the wholesome laws of good life: and generally all good things that appertain to the glory of God, and the salvation of our souls; we have not any reason to doubt, but that the same our Saviour (for the exceeding love, which, of his part, without exception or respect of persons, he beareth to all mankind) hath ordained some marks or notes, by which all sorts, and consequently even simple men may sufficiently discern which company (among many which challenge to themselves the title of the true Church) is indeed the true Church. For sith, he would have every one to hear, and learn things necessary to salvation, only of the true Church: we must needs think his wisdom and goodness to have marked this his Church with such manifest signs and properties, that all men may easily know it, and discern it from others, whom he knew would take upon them (though falsely) the title and profession of the true Church. This seemeth to have been expressly foretold by the prophet Isaias, when he saith: Scietur in gentibus semen eorum, & germane eorum in medio populorum. Omnes qui viderint eos, cognoscentilloes, Isay. cap. 61. quia isti sunt semen, cui benedixit Dominus. Their seed shall be known in the nations, and their of spring in the midst of the people; all that shall see them shall know them, because these are that seed, which our Lord hath blessed. Which is as much, as if he should say, that the Church shall have such manifest marks, that it shall be easy for every one to know them to be the true Church. Some of these marks are set down by Saint Austin, who calleth them bands or chains, which do hold a faithful man in the Catholic lib. con. Ep. Fund. cap. 4. Church; although for the slowness of his wit, or for some other cause, he doth not evidently see the truth of the doctrine in itself. A. W. Ere you come to prove that which you have propounded, you fall into an unnecessary discourse, about the marks of the Church: wherein first you prove, as you can, that our Saviour hath left certain marks, whereby all men in all ages may know the true Church. Secondly you set down some names of these marks, given them according to the effects they work in men. The proof of your former point lieth thus. If our Saviour have planted a visible Church upon earth, to the end that all men in all ages, might learn of it only all good things appertaining to the glory of God, & their own salvation, them he hath ordained marks, by which every man may know the true Church. But our Saviour hath to that end, planted a visible Church. Therefore he hath given marks, by which every man may know etc. Though there be nothing in this proof, which hath not been answered already yet I mull be fain to say something to it. I To the Minor. deny the Minor, having showed in answer to e Chap. 5. the fifth chapter, that it never was God's purpose to have every particular man partaker of salvation by jesus Christ. Now it is needless to add that our Saviour being f Mat. 3. 17. joan. 5. 30. & 6. 38. sent by God, with perfect knowledge of his purpose, would not intend any thing contrary to the will of his Father, or otherwise then he was directed by his commission. g joan. 17. 9 I pray not for the world, but for them, that thou hast given me out of the world. h Rom. 11. 5. All this present time there is a remnant, according to the election of grace. Therefore visible Churches (for to dream of any one universal visible Church is against reason, not only against Scripture) were ordained properly (as the ministry of the word, & i Heb. 2. 14. the service of Angels) for their sakes that are to be saved, according to the election of God. Secondly, and as it were accidentally, for the hardening of them, that will not believe, to leave them without excuse. To make your matter the more likely, you tell us of our saviours love to mankind, which in your divinity is without exception, or respect of persons. How then can it suit with the purpose of God his Father, k Rom. 9 11. l Tit. 2. 4. who hath chosen some to glory, & refused other, merely of his own just will, without respect of difference in the parties so chosen & refused? As for I that love of mankind, whereupon some men conclude, that either all, or the greatest part of men are loved by God to eternal life, it is not to be understood by comparison of men to men, but partly of men to the Angels that fell; in which respect the Apostle amplifies the mercy of God to us, m Heb. 2. 16. He took not the Angels, but he took the seed of Abraham: partly of men, to all other creatures; none of which, besides man, is vouchsafed the honour to be joined in unity of person with the Son of God, and so to be made heir of everlasting glory. It is needless to repeat what I answered before to this place of Isay, only I will say thus much of your exposition, that though all, that see the Church, may know it: yet it doth not follow, that therefore all men may see it: which you make the end of planting a visible Church, that every man may learn how to be saved. We deny not, that the marks of the Church, are such as that any man, who hath the means, and will use them with conscience and diligence, may come (by the grace of God) to the acknowledging of it, and by the ministery of it, to salvation. Such is the truth of doctrine, wherein every man may be instructed, who will submit his reason to the evidence of truth contained in the holy Scriptures, and not wilfully resist, or carelessly neglect the work of the spirit in the ministery of the word. The bands and chains, n August. cont. epist. Fundam. cap. 4. Austin speaketh of, are not said to draw a man out of the world unto the Church, but to hold him in it, that is in already. And surely he were unreasonably absurd, that being borne in the profession of Christianity, or by any other occasion, brought to join himself unto this or that Church, would not continued his belief upon those grounds, that Austin there mentions, as long as there could be no sufficient reason brought to the contrary, yea though he could not discern the truth of many points, which he held as he had been taught. But Austin in the same place professeth, that the marks, he names, and all other whatsoever, whereby he is held in the Catholic Church, are nothing worth in comparison of truth manifestly proved out of the Scripture. But of this matter I shall have occasion to speak again hereafter, where you propound some of Augustine's words more at large. A. D. §. 2. Of these marks, divers authors have written at large. I (for brevity sake) have chosen out only these four: una, Sancta, Catholica, Apostolica: One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic: because I hope these will be sufficient, and because I find these especially, set forth in Scriptures: commended by Counsels: and generally admitted, of all sorts, both Catholics and Protestants, as now I am to declare. First, for the general admittance of these properties of the true Church, I need no other proof, but that both Catholics and Protestants allow of the Nicene, and Constantinopolitan Creed, wherein we profess to believe the true Church, the which Church, is there described with those only four properties which before I named, as though by those only, every man might sufficiently know that Church, which in every point, they are bound to believe. Now if besides this proof, out of the generally received Counsels, some precise man would have me prove these properties to agree to the true Church, out of the Scripture itself, this also I may easily do. A. W. So many and divers are the marks of the Church, propounded by o Bellar. de not. Eccles. li. 4. cap. 3. your Popish writers, that you had good cause, to give some reason, why you cull these four out of all the rest. First you allege brevity: whereof if you had been so desirous, you would not so often have repeated the same matters. You add the sufficiency of these, their being mentioned in the Scripture, commended by Counsels, and generally admitted by all sorts, both Catholics and Protestants. All which, taking them in your sense, are generally false, as shall appear in the particular handling of them. But indeed the true cause is, though you will not be known of it, that Bellarmine out of whom you have patched up your whole discourse, though he bring fifteen: yet confesseth that they may all after a sort, be reduced to these four. There are two faults in this proof, whereby you labour to persuade us, that these properties are generally admitted, both by Protestants and Papists. First, though both admit them, yet in divers senses; we according to the true meaning of those Counsels; you according to those fantasies you have devised, for the establishing of your Apostatical Synagogue. Secondly, we admit them not all as marks of the, or a visible Church, but as hidden properties of the Catholic Church, the mystical body of jesus Christ, which are not to be discerned by the eye of the body, but by the light of faith, as all other articles in the same Creed are. What though there be no more properties, but those four there set down? will it follow thence, that therefore they are named, as though by those only; every man might sufficiently know the Church? Is that the use of those points which are delivered concerning the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost? Or rather, are they not set before us, as principal matters to be believed, of them? So are also these properties of the Church. If any man be so simple, as to take your former proof for good, whereas it faileth in the chief point you would, prove by it, as I have showed; he is fitter to be pitied then instructed. But, is it a note of preciseness, to desire proof, for matters of faith out of the scripture? Doubtless it was then no less preciseness, to appoint the scripture for a rule of our faith; and as great, for our Saviour Christ and the Apostles to confirm their doctrine out of the scripture. For this course of theirs makes us the bolder to require the like of you, whose authority we more doubt of: whereas if they had stood upon their privilege, and never troubled themselves with proving that they delivered, or leaving their doctrine in writing, we should easily have persuaded ourselves to rest upon men's authority, and not to look for any proof by scripture. But give me leave a little to consider of this course of yours. The question is, whether the true Church be with you or with us. You tell us we shall know that, by seeing whether you or we have the marks of the true Church: we accept of this trial. How shall we inform ourselves what these marks are? Tush (say you) for that matter you must be ruled by the Counsels. Why? but the Counsels, as you would make us believe, were wholly for you, and consisted of Popish Bishops: what reason have we then to stand to their judgement, in a controversy betwixt you & us? You will answer that we say, they were not Popish. We say so indeed, and have proved it in divers points, as occasion hath been offered. But we add further, that these Counsels might err, you deny it. How will you persuade us the contrary? When all is done, we must come to trial by the Scriptures, or else take your word for it. And is it for all this, preciseness to require proof out of the Scriptures, of those marks you would prove your Church by? I have showed before, that there is no means to know certainly there is any Church of Christ, or any Christ, but by the Scriptures. Are not the Scriptures than the fittest means to teach us by what marks this Church may be known? The Counsels tell us, what they are. Who told them? the holy Ghost. Let it be so. But how did he tell them? by some revelation, utterly beside the Scriptures, or by truth in the Scriptures? If the former; we ask how we may be so persuaded? The church tells you so. Yet again the church? How knows the church that they had such revelation? What help now, but about again to the scriptures? Think not much then, if in this question concerning the marks of the church, we desire to be taught by the Scriptures what those marks are; especially since (as you profess) you may do it so easily: but I am afraid you will do it with more ease than truth. A. D. §. 3. The true Church is signified to be one, by those words of the Canticles, una est columba mea; if we will believe the exposition The first mark una proved out of Scripture. Cant 6. Cypr. l. de unit. Ecclisiae. August. l. 6. in joan. job. c. 10. Rom. 12. 1. Cor. 10. joh. 17. of Saint Cyprian and S. Austin. Also we may gather the same out of those words of our Saviour, in which he calleth his Church unum ovile, one sheepfold. Also by those places of S. Paul, where he termeth the Church unum corpus, one body. Moreover, Christ our Saviour praying for his Church, did specially entreat, and without doubt obtained, ut omnes unum sint, that all the members thereof should be one thing, to wit, that at the least they should all profess one and the same faith, all partake of one and the same baptism, and other sacraments, all live under one and the same Lord, in due subordination and subjection to that uniform and orderly government of lawful pastors, ordained and appointed in the Church by him. The true Church of Christ therefore is one. Contrary, the conventicles of heretics are destitute of this mark of unity, according as Tertullian affirmeth, saying, Denique penitus inspectae haereses omnes, in multis deprehenduntur cum auctoribus Lib. de Praescr. suis dissentientes: Finally all heresies, if they be well looked into, are found to differ in many things from their first founders. And the reason of this disagreement among heretics, the same Tertullian assigneth very well in the same place, saying, Variant inter se Ibidem. haeretici, dum unusquisque pro suo arbitrio modulatur quod accepit, quemadmodum ea pro arbitrio composuit ille qui tradidit. Heretics do differ (in points of doctrine) among themselves, while as every one taketh upon him to fashion the faith which he received, according to his own liking or fancy: like as he that first delivered it unto them, did invent it according to his own will and pleasure. A. W. We are now come to the very point, for proof of your mayor, that they only who are one, holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church, are they to whom the marks, by which the true Church is to be known, belong. To make this proof good, you dispute in this manner. If One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, be good marks to know the true Church by, than they only who are One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church, are they to whom the marks by which the true Church may be known, belong. But those four properties, One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, are good marks by which the true Church may be known. Therefore they only who are One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church, are they to whom the marks, by which the true Church may be known, belong. The consequence of your mayor is but weak. For these To the proposition. four properties may be good marks to know the true church by: that wheresover we see them, we may be sure there is a true church: and yet there may also be some true church, where they are not. I dispute not, whether the true Church may be without these; but deny, that because these, where they are, are good marks, therefore there is no true Church where these are wanting. This proposition, though your proof be lame without it, you wholly omit, and so propound us a reason which we need not yield to, though you were able to prove the minor never so sufficiently. Your minor, as before I answered, is true, if we rightly understand To the Assumption. the meaning of those several properties. But the proof you bring is scarce warrantable. All properties of the Church, belonging only thereto, and apparent This syllogism is gathered out of the conclusion of this Chapt. sect. 7. to be seen where they are, are good marks to know the Church by. But these four properties are such. Therefore these four are good marks to know the Church by. There is a third thing omitted by you, necessarily required To the proposition. to make any property a good mark, viz. that it be such as always agrees to the Church. For otherwise it can serve, as I answered to your former proposition, but only for the half duty of a mark, because at some times I may see the Church, and not know it for all this mark. If I find these properties, I may assure myself that I have found the true Church, because these never are but in the true Church; yet if the true Church may at any time be without these, as it may, for aught contained in your mayor, then missing my mark, I shall be unable to discern of the true Church. This minor, for the first part of it, is true, in such sense as I To the assumption. granted the former: these properties rightly understood, belong only to the true Church. If the latter part also be true, that they are apparent to be seen, doubtless truth of doctrine, which maketh the Church one, must needs be a certain mark of the true Church, though you deny it that prerogative. Let us now see how you prove the parts of your minor, with this proviso, that though you do prove them, yet you are little the nearer, because divers former propositions, upon which this depends, remain still unproved by you. It is a property belonging only to the true Church to profess one Proof of the Assumption. Part. 1. and the same faith, etc. But to be one, is to profess one and the same faith, etc. Therefore to be one, is a property belonging only to the true Church. I deny your mayor: professing one and the same faith, is not To the proposition. proper only to the Church; but common to it, with some false Churches which have for a long time continued in one and the same heresy, as the Mahometans above a thousand years, the Arians above 1200. Secondly, if this mark be proper to the Church only, then as long as heretics continue in one and the same heresy, I may conclude that they are a true Church. But to make your proposition true, you must say instead of one and the same faith, one and the same true faith, which is the mark we set up, to know the true Church by: and the reason why the Church is said to be one. There are (saith p Theodoret. ad Psal. 47. Theodoret) infinite and innumerable Churches in the Isles and in the Continent: but generally all of them are made one by their agreement in true doctrine. The Church is said to be one (saith q Ferus ad joa. 10. 16. Ferus) because of the unity of faith, hope and charity. Your minor also is false, unless you add true, to profess one and the same true faith: as the place whereon you ground your large To the Assumption. exposition, might have taught you. For our Saviour did not pray that his Church might profess one and the same faith at adventure, as if he had not cared what it professed, so it always professed the same faith; but that it might always profess the true faith, which he delivered to his Apostles, and taught by his spirit. But indeed r john. 17. 20. that prayer of our Saviour was not made for any company of outward professors, but only for those, and particularly for every one of them that attain to true faith in him. As for the profane and reprobate, what is it less than blasphemy, to say that our Saviour prayed that they might be one with him and his Father, as they are one? especially since in the same chapter he denieth that he prayeth for the world; vers. 9 vers. 20. and namely restraineth his prayer to them who by the ministry of the word believe in him, that is, rest wholly and only upon him, not only make profession of believing the Gospel, which is enough without any inward grace, to make any man a member of your true Church. Thus have I spoken of this mark, as you should have propounded your argument, according to the course of your disputation. Now that I may leave nothing of any moment unanswered, I will speak to it as it is set down by yourself. The matter you assay to prove, is, that the Church is signified to be one, or is one. To prove this, you allege four several places of Scripture. The first is this, s Cantic. 6. 8. My Dove is one. Where by Dove, you understand the Church: by being one, professing one faith, etc. To this I answer, first, that it is no good course of disputing, to prove a matter in controversy by a place that is figurative and allegorical: because such texts (as t Thom. in Boet. q. 2. Thomas saith) afford no certain arguments: yea (as u August. epist. 48 ad Vincen. Austin saith) it is impudency for a man to expound any allegory to his purpose, unless he have manifest testimonies for the clearing of that which is doubtful. Secondly, this interpretation of yours, is directly contrary to Cardinal x Bellar. de eccles. milit. lib. 3 cap. 7. Bellarmine, and by him refuted, who makes this Dove to be the soul of a Christian in the state of perfection, and delivers it as a certain ground, that those things in the Canticles which are spoken of the Spouse, are not necessary to be understood of the Church, but may also be expounded y Psellus apud Theod. in Cant. of the Virgin Marie, or of every perfect soul. Thirdly, if we take it to be spoken of the Church, as it is generally, and (as I am persuaded) truly expounded; yet doth it not signify any outward company, but the true Church of Christ, the company of the elect, called to the knowledge and profession of the Gospel: every one of which is in his place and measure, that perfect soul whom the spouse of Christ so commendeth. Know (saith z Origen. in Cant. hom. 1. Origen) that the Bridegroom is Christ, the Bride the Church, without spot or wrinkle; of which it is written, that a Ephos. 5. 27. he might make it glorious, etc. And b Hieron. prooem. in Cantic. Jerome, who translated that commentary of Origen, saith, that the church spoken of in the Canticles, cleaveth and is joined to Christ above the heavens, as being made one spirit with him. So doth c Epiph. haer. 33 Epiphanius understand the place, affirming that the Church is perfect, because she hath received from God grace and knowledge of our Saviour Christ by the holy Ghost. d Bernard. in Cant. ser. 98. Bernard, no enemy to your Church, saith in plain terms, that the spouse is the Church of the elect: which is said to be one: because all together are the spouse of jesus Christ, one chaste virgin. e joan. 10. 16. The sheepfold our Saviour speaketh of, is the same spouse, in respect of the spiritual feeding, which the sheep have in this life from him: or to speak more directly, it seems to be that state of grace, into which the shepherd Christ leadeth his sheep, that they may be folded up, and safe from all spiritual dangers, which might destroy them. Once, that he means not an outward profession, common to sheep with goats, it may appear by the whole course of the Chapter before, wherein all the sheep of that fold, are not only said to be Christ's sheep, but also to hear his voice, yea so to hear it, that they will not hearken to a stranger. His sheep hear vers. 4. 5. 8. his voice (saith f August. in joan. tract. 45. Austin) and he calls them by name: for he hath their names written in the book of life. Hereupon saith g 2. Tim. 2. 19 the Apostle, The Lord knoweth who are his. This sheepfold than is that estate into which Christ the true Shepherd bringeth his elect, by the profession of his truth in the visible Church. If any man had rather apply this text to the outward estate of the Churches, I will not strive with him, so that withal he remember, first that in these outward Churches the elect only are the sheep, one with Christ their shepherd, as members of his mystical body. Secondly, that this one sheepfold is not to be considered in regard of the Churches being one in profession, but in respect of the Gentiles admitted to have place in Christ's mystical body, as well as the jews, all difference betwixt people and people being taken away. In h Rom. 12. 5. 1. Cor. 10. 17. the next two places the church is compared to a body (note that the comparison is chiefly of particular Churches, in respect of the several members thereof) because of the mutual conjunction and help which each part hath with other, and is to afford to other. So doth i Lomb. Gloss. interlin. Lyra, ad Rom. 10. & Catharin. ibi. Lombard truly expound it, so you Gloss, so Lyra. If we stretch it farther, the chief cause why the church is one body, is assigned by Cardinal k Caietan. ibi. Caietan to be the spirit of Christ. For Christ (saith he) is as the soul, giving life, by the holy Ghost, to his whole mystical body. But the holy Ghost quickens only the elect, not the reprobate too. l 1. Cor. 10. 17. In the latter of the two places, m Caietan. ubi supra. the same Cardinal expounds that being one, in respect of charity: and n Catharin. ubi supra. Catharin a learned Popish Bishop, understands this body to be the holy Church consisting of them that are predestinate and called, and justified, and glorified, holy and faithful. Of the last place I spoke sufficiently joan. 17. 20. before. Agreement in the truth, is the mark we look at. This you add to prove, that to profess one and the same faith, that is, to be one, is proper to the true church. Your proof is, that p Tertul de praescr. cap. 42. Tertullian saith, that all heresies, if they be well looked into, are found to differ in many things from their first founders. Tertullian might truly say so, of all heresies then known; & yet there may have been some since his time, perhaps that have kept always the same errors, without any change, worth the speaking of. But (as I noted before) since all heresies for a time hold their first errors, continuance in the same profession, can be no good mark of the true church, unless you can set down a certain number of years, during which they must continue in one and the same faith, or else be held for heretics because of their changing. Now in conclusion of this first mark, I must observe a few points for the Readers instruction. First I desire it may be noted, that whereas unity is made a principal mark by your writers; they understand as well unity of love as of faith: you require but the one of them, and so give us but half a mark. Secondly, let it be observed, that this mark is either no mark at all, or all one with ours; so that whereas you trouble us with more than this, you make it much harder than we do, to find out the true Church. In the third place it would be considered what you mean by one and the same faith: I press you with your own argument, q Chap. 14. Continuing in one and the same faith, in regard of some points only, is no good mark, because heretics continue in some points of truth. Continuing in all points can be no good mark: for it is not only hard, but unpossible for a simple unlearned man to be assured that any church hath always continued in profession of one and the same faith, in every point: yea this is infinitely harder, then to discern of all truth, because the one is to be learned out of the Scriptures: the other cannot be known, but by searching the records of the church from time to time. Of the one there is certain knowledge to be had, because the Scriptures are the word of God: of the other, the best assurance we can have, is but the testimony of men, that might err by ignorance or partiality. Whatsoever doubts or difficulties you can imagine concerning the false translation or misunderstanding of the Scriptures, the same will accompany all the writings of men, touching the doctrine of the Church in all ages. Then let any reasonable man judge, whether you or we show them a better mark to know the true Church by. A. D. §. 4. The true Church is also proved to be holy, by that of S. Paul: The second mark, sancta. 1. Cor. 3. Templum Dei sanctum est, quod estis vos: The temple of God is holy, which temple you are. By which place notwithstanding S. Paul did not mean to signify, that every one of this company was holy. For a little after in the same Epistle, he saith to the same company: Omnino auditur inter vos fornicatio, & talis fornicatio, qualis 1. Cor. 5. nec inter gentes: There is plainly heard fornication among you, and such fornication, as the like is not among the heathen. He doth not therefore (I say) mean that every one of the Church is holy, but that the whole company is to be termed holy, because the profession thereof doth of itself wholly tend to holiness: the doctrine being such as withdraweth from all vice, and instructeth and moveth men to virtue: the Sacraments also do not only signify, but in the virtue which they have from Christ his passion, they also work in us (as instrumental causes) true and inward sanctity. Wherefore although every one that is in the Church, be not holy, yet no doubt, always some are: the which their holiness, it pleaseth Almighty God to testify and make known sometime by miracle; and ordinarily he useth to make it apparent enough by the light of their virtuous actions, which at all times in many members of the true Church, do so shine before men, that by it men are moved to glorify God, and sometimes to imitate in their own life that, which in others they admire. And whatsoever member of the Church faileth from this holiness of life, it is evident that the fault is only in himself, who liveth not according to the prescript of his profession, nor useth in due sort those means which it hath of the holy Sacraments, which (as I said before) are effectual instruments of sanctification. chose, no sect of heretics is truly holy; neither was there ever any person that did invent, or obstinately adhere unto any sect of heresy, which had in him true sanctity. And no marvel, because the very profession and doctrine itself of every heresy, is opposite to the very roots of true sanctity; the which roots be true Christian faith and humility. For how can he be truly holy and just, who being possessed with the spirit of heresy, must needs be deprived of true faith, without which the just man cannot live? according to that saying of S. Paul: justus ex fide vivit. Or how can he be holy, that doth not only Hebr. 10. Mat. 18. 1. Pet. 2. not humble himself like a little one, submitting himself to every human creature, for God's sake: but doth proudly oppose himself against the universal Church itself, whom God hath willed and commanded us to hear, no otherwise then himself? For wanting Luk. 10. this humility, and consequently the grace of God, which is denied to the proud, and given to the humble, there is no doubt but that howsoever Jam. 4. such a man seemeth in his outward behaviour, he can have no true sanctity within him: the which true sanctity failing inwardly, it is hard for him to bear himself so, but that sometime or other, by one occasion or other, he shall even outwardly manifest this his inward want; as in these our days, heretics commonly do, in such apparent manner, that it is no hard matter to discern, that they be not (as some of them would have the Church defined) a company of Saints. A. W. Having showed before, that this discourse proceedeth not orderly, as it should, to the proof of that which is propounded by you, and denied by us; I will not stand to lay out the fault, in every particular, but content myself with having done it once for all. It is your purpose in this place to prove that the Church is holy. A labour that might well have been spared: for who ever denied it, or doubted of it? But let me again put you in mind, that when you have proved the Church to be holy, you have got nothing: because every quality of the Church is not by and by a mark▪ whereby it may be known. It may be proper to the Church, so that it can never be found but in the Church, and yet not be always there to be found. It may also be true always, and yet not be always visible. But let us see your proof. The Temple of God is holy. The Church is the Temple of God. Therefore the Church is holy. The holiness you mean, as you expound yourself, is true and inward sanctity, which you say is wrought by the Sacraments. And this indeed is the holiness, which only can make a man a Christian. For ( a Thomas opus. 6. in expos. symboli. sect. Sanctam Ecclesiam. Thomas truly saith) He that is not anointed with the grace of the holy Ghost, is not a Christian. Hereupon, before I answer to your Syllogism, I will make it manifest, by your own argument, that holiness is no good mark to know the Church by. Every good mark of the Church must be easier to be known, than the Church itself. True inward sanctity is not easier to be known, than the Ch. itself. Therefore true inward sanctity is no good mark of the Church. The Mayor is yours, in plain words generally delivered: r Chap. 13. The second thing required in a good mark is, that it be more apparent, and easy to be known, than the thing is. The Minor is proved by these words of yours in the same place. The secret disposition of a man's heart is harder to be known, than the man himself: how then shall true inward sanctity be easier to discern, than the men in whom it is? If by Temple you understand the whole company, as you plainly To the proposition. s1. Cor. 3. 17. avouch, and by holiness true inward sanctity, I deny your Mayor. Because the whole company makes not one person or subsistence, wherein only there is place for such habits or qualities. True inward holiness is a quality no where resident, but in some special substance, and therefore if the whole company of the Church, have not a general soul as Auerrois dreamt of the world, it is unpossible it should have true inward holiness. It should seem also you saw as much yourself, and therefore give us an other exposition of the place, that the whole company is to be termed holy. In this sense you must conclude thus. The Temple of God is to be termed holy. The Church is the Temple of God. Therefore the Church is to be termed holy. But this proveth not, that the Church is holy. Do you think, that the Nicene Council, when it delivered it as an article of faith, that we are to believe One holy Church, meant nothing, but that the Church was to be termed holy? Yes: they meant to teach us, that the true Church is truly holy, being purged from the guilt of sin, by the sacrifice of our Saviour jesus Christ, and endued with true habitual righteousness by the spirit of sanctification. It is a poor mark to know the Church by, to tell us, it is a company that is to be termed holy. What then is the Apostles meaning, when he saith the Temple of God is holy? t Chrysost. ad 1. Cor. homil. 9 & ibi Ambros. &. Theophyl. Many interpreters take this whole passage of the Apostle, from the beginning of the 16. verse, to be a reproof particularly of the incestuous person, and generally of all unclean livers: and they by Temple understand several Christians, sanctified by the Spirit of God, who dwelleth in them, and maketh them holy. Thus do u Cyril. Hieros'. Catech. 4 Cyrill, x Irenae. lib. 5. cap. 6. Irenaeus, and y Cypr. testim. ad Quirin. lib. 3. sect 27. Cyprian apply the place. z Lombard. Thom. Lyra. Caietan. Catharin. ad hunc locum. Other, whose judgement in this text I rather follow, think that the Apostle in these verses continueth his former discourse, concerning the ministery of the word, diversly used by divers teachers: some building upon the foundation gold, silver, and precious stones; other laying on it timber, hay, or stubble. A third kind destroying the foundation by false doctrine, of whom the Apostle here speaketh, threatening them destruction, because they destroy the Temple of God. The reason whereof a Catharin. ibi. one of them gives in these words, The Temple of God is holy. To defile that which is holy (saith Catharin) deserveth destruction even among the heathen. For if any man hurt the walls of the City, which the heathen accounted holy, he was to die for it. Now if this law were executed for the profaning of walls, and temples made with hands, how much more ought the destroying of Christians, who by faith and love have received the Lord jesus, be so severely punished? Even so much more (saith b Lyra. ibi. Lyra) as spiritual things are to be preferred before corporal. By the Temple of God then, the Apostle meaneth the congregations or Churches of professed Christians, such as that of Corinth was. These (he saith) are holy: that is, either consecrated to the worship of God, which is the professed end of Christian assemblies: or truly holy, in regard that they make profession, and so in charity are to be taken (but where the contrary evidently appeareth) of being justified and sanctified by the death and resurrection of jesus Christ. You give two other reasons of their being termed holy; the one that the profession of religion, of itself, wholly tendeth to holiness. How can this be a good mark to know the true Church by, when every company will say, their doctrine hath the same end, and he that will believe it of any company, must know and be able to judge of every point they maintain? Your second is, that the Sacraments work in us (as instrumental causes) true and inward sanctity. I will not enter into the question about the Sacraments, what or how they work: it is nothing to the purpose. But to the point: what heretical Church will not, or may not say the like? whether truly or falsely it skills not: because that will ask a new examination, such as every one that must know the Church, cannot make. Therefore this mark of holiness is not a good mark, to know the true Church by, being inward and claimed by all companies of Christians. Not only some, but all the members of the true Church of Christ, are inwardly and outwardly holy, being purged by his blood and spirit. And this their holiness is so manifest ordinarily, that there need none of your counterfeit miracles for the countenancing thereof: especially since God never took that course in his Church, to approve any man's holiness, by the gift of miracles, the use whereof is to confirm doctrine, when need requireth: neither can any man from miracles conclude, that he which worketh them, is inwardly truly sanctified. c Mat. 10. 8. Was not judas one of them, to whom power was given even over the devils? Yet was he d joan. 12. 6. a thief, e Luc. 22. 48. a traitor, and f joan. 6. 70. a devil. Many will say unto me in that day (saith g Mat. 7. 22. 23 our Saviour) Lord, have we not by thy name prophesied, and by thy name cast out devils, and by thy name done many great works? And then will I profess to them, I never knew you, depart from me, ye that work iniquity. But it is strange that you should make true inward sanctity, the mark of the true Church, and so confidently affirm, that no doubt in the Church there are always some holy: when as you maintain, that h Bellar. de Eccles. mil. lib. 3. cap. 10. it is enough to make a man a true member of the true Church, that he profess outwardly, though he have no one virtue within him at all. If all the members of the Church may be void of holiness, how is holiness a good mark of the Church? Certainly it is (at the most) but accidental, and such as the Church may have, or lack, without being, or ceasing to be a Church thereby. He is well holp up no doubt, that must learn how to know the true Church, of such teachers. You have proved after your fashion, that the Church is holy; now you will prove, that no company, but the Church is holy. No sect of heretics is truly holy. All companies of Christians (besides that of the true Church) are sects of heretics. Therefore no company of Christians (besides that of the true Church) is truly holy. If by heretics you understand only those, that err in some To the proposition. fundamental points of religion: I grant your Mayor, and Minor. As for the conclusion, I am resolved of the truth thereof, without any proof from you. But if you account all heretics, who in the error of their judgement, descent from other Churches of Christ, in matters not fundamental, though true, I deny your said Mayor: and affirm, that divers Churches may differ in opinion one from another, and continue in that difference, & maintain it confidently, so they do it not against their knowledge and conscience; and yet all of them be true Churches of Christ, and truly holy. For as long as the opinions a man holds, do not cut him off, from being a true member of the mystical body of jesus Christ, they make him not cease to be a true Christian, truly justified and sanctified. But he that believeth truly in jesus Christ, and holds no fundamental error, continues by faith a member of our saviours mystical body. For as the just lives by faith, so wheresoever there is true faith, there is life also: but, there is no life out of the body of Christ, because the spirit of Christ is not to be had, but in his body. And therefore he that by faith remaineth a member of Christ's body, is a true Christian, truly justified and sanctified, though not perfectly holy. Here we have the proof of your Mayor, such as it is. If the doctrine itself of every heresy be opposite to true Christian Proof of the proposition. faith, and humility, the roots of true sanctity; then no sect of heresies is truly holy. But the doctrine itself of every heresy is opposite to true Christian faith and humility, the roots of true sanctity. Therefore no sect of heretics is truly holy. If by true Christian faith, you mean any particular truth (as To the proposition. a Christian ought to believe every truth of God, though not so, as that ignorance, or misbelieving of every point can make him cease to be a true Christian) I deny the consequence of your Mayor. I deny your Minor: Not every heresy, but that which is against the foundation only, is opposite to true Christian faith & humility, To the Assumption. understanding by Christian faith, such a faith as is necessarily required, that a man may be a true Christian, by which only he lives: not by believing every truth, though that be required of him, as a duty of sanctification. And so your proof also is answered. A man may have that faith, by which a Christian must live, though he be ignorant, or misinstructed in divers points of doctrine. I have severed this part concerning humility from the former, because it seemeth you took it to be of more importance, and therefore labour more in the proof of it. He that doth not humble himself to every human creature for God's sake, but proudly opposeth himself against the universal Church, cannot be holy. But no heretic doth so humble himself, and every heretic so oppose. Therefore no heretic can be holy. I showed before, that there is no such universal Church, as you often name, but never prove: and therefore this argument To the proposition. grounded upon opposing against that which is not, in regard of such a commandment, as God never gave, is idle and vain. More particularly I answer concerning your Mayor: that although pride be always a sin, yet it may sometimes be found in in a man truly sanctified, & that in opposition against men in a matter of doctrine. But your proposition in regard of the former part of it, as you understand it, is utterly false. For it is (no way) against holiness, for a man not to believe every doctrine that men will propound. i Gal. 18. If I or an Angel from Heaven preach any otherwise to you, than we have preached, let him be accursed. k 1. joan. 4. 1. Try the spirits, whether they be of God or no. As for that place of the Apostle which you allege, your own interpreters expound it, not of the Church, but of the civil Magistrate. He calls the office of a King, a human creature (saith l Caietan. ad 1. Pet. 2. 13. 14 Caietan) because a King is created by the voices, or consent of men: and he addeth every, that he might take away all distinction betwixt Heathen and Christian kings, in respect of obedience to them. m Rhem. Test. ad 1. Pet. 2. 13. 14. The Rhemists are yet more against you. So he calleth the temporal magistrate (say they) elected by the people, or holding their sovereignty by birth and carnal propagation, ordained for the Worldly wealth, power, and prosperity of the subject, to put a difference (directly against your interpretation) betwixt the human superiority, and the spiritual Rulers, and regiment, guiding and governing the people to a higher end. But what need we any other expositor, since n 1. Pet. 2. 13 14. the Apostle in the next words, directeth us how to understand it? Whether it be unto the King, as unto the superior, or unto governors, as unto them that are sent of him, o Rom. 13. 3. 4. for the punishment of evil doers, and for the praise of them that do well. But let us take it as generally as you will, if it be against humility, not to be subject to the Church, it is also against it, not to be subject to the King. Yet I hope no man is so mad, as to say, that he refuseth to be subject to him, that doth not absolutely obey him in all things. How then can this place prove, that it is against true Christian humility, not to believe the Church, whatsoever she propound to be believed? None but heretics do so humble themselves; and many To the assumption. dissenting from their brethren in divers opinions, neither deserve to be counted heretics, though they cannot be reclaimed from their errors, nor to be held for schismatics, as long Thomas. 2. 2. q. 39 art. 1. as they break not off communion with them, which yet may be done by ignorance, without pride. If many heathen men have so demeaned themselves, as that they could hardly, or not at all be charged with any gross outward fault, doubtless it is possible for heretics to do the like. At the least, what a gay mark of the Church is this holiness, which (for a long time) may be, for aught men can discern, in an heretic: who, all that while, may be taken for a true Christian? Besides, if truth of religion be to be judged of by holiness of conversation, as a certain mark (for that within cannot otherwise be seen) why may not a man change his conceit of any religion, when he seeth any notable professor thereof fall into any grievous sin, as p 2. Sam. 12. 9 David, and q Mat. 26. 70. Peter did? As for us, whom you term heretics at your pleasure, if our worst Protestants be not far passed in villainy by your Papists, for treasons, murders, and generally all kind of uncleanness; I will confess, that you live better than the grounds of your religion require, and we worse than ours. But I leave this point till I come to examine your Assumption, concerning the holiness of your Church of Rome. A. D. §. 5. The true Church is proved also to be Catholic, that is to The third mark. Catholica. Isay. cap. 59 say, universal; first, in time, by most plain prophecies and promises of the Scripture, as I have already showed in the eleventh chapter; unto which here I will only add those words of Isaias: Hoc foedus meum cum eis dicit Dominus: Spiritus meus qui est in te, & verba, quae posui in ore tuo; non recedent de ore tuo, & de ore seminis tui, & de ore seminis seminis tui, dicit Dominus amodò usque in sempiternum: This is my covenant with them, saith our Lord: my Spirit which is in thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart from thy mouth, and from the mouth of thy seed, and from the mouth of the seed of thy seed, saith our Lord, from henceforth for ever. It may also be easily proved to be universal in respect of place, by these plain testimonies of holy Scripture. Conuertentur ad Dominum universi fines terrae, all the bounds of the earth shall be Psalm. 21. Psalm. 71. converted to our Lord. Dominabitur à mari usque ad mare, & à flumine usque ad terminos orbis terrarum. He (to wit Christ) shall rule and have dominion from sea to sea, and from the flood, until the furthermost limits of the earth. Omnes gentes seruient ei. All nations shall serve him. Upon all which places and some other, see Saint Ibidem. Austin in his exposition of the Psalms; and among other things, which he speaketh to the purpose, note his interpretation of those words à flumine usque ad terminos orbis terrarum. Which words (saith he) do signify, that the dominion of Christ began à flumine jordano, from the flood of lordan, where he, being baptized, was made manifest, by the descending of the holy Ghost, & the sound of his Father's voice: from whence he began to choose his Disciples: & from Aug. in Psa. 71 hence (saith he) Doctrina eius incipiens dilatatur usque ad terminos orbis terrae, cum praedicatur evangelium regni in universo orb, in testimonium omnibus gentibus, & tunc veniet finis. His doctrine beginning is dilated or spread abroad, unto the furthest parts of the earth, when the Gospel of the kingdom is preached over the whole world, for a testimony to all nations, after which done, the end (of the world) shall come. See also the same S. Austin in his book de unitate Ecclesiae, especially in the ninth & tenth chapters, where he eiteth & urgeth that place of S. Luke, where our Saviour saith, Necesse est Luc. 24. impleri omnia quae scripta sunt in lege, Prophetis & Psalmis de me, etc. quoniam sic scriptum est, & sic oportebat Christum pati & resurgere à mortuis, & praedicari in nomine eius poenitentiam & remissionem peccatorum in omnes gentes, incipientibus ab jerosolyma: It is needful that all things should be fulfilled which are written of me in the Law, the Prophets and Psalms, etc. for so it is written, and so it was needful that Christ should suffer, and rise again from the dead the third day, and that penance and remission of sins should be preached in his name throughout all nations, beginning from jerusalem. By which place, and divers others, he showeth plainly, that the true Church of Christ cannot be contained in a corner of the world, but must be universal, that is, diffused and spread throughout the whole world: as the same S. Austin, beside his other proofs, gathered out of the very name Catholica, the which name (saith he) was imposed on the Church by our forefathers, ut ex ipso nomine Aug. l de unit. Ecclesie. ostenderent quia per totum est, secundum totum enim Catholon Graecè dicitur: that by the very name they might show that the Church is throughout the whole world. For (saith he) the word Catholon in Greek (whereupon Catholic is derived) signifieth a thing which is general or agreeing to the while. But we must note here, that when we say the true Church is Catholic or diffused throughout the whole world, it is meant, that at least by succession of time it hath been, or shall be dilated more and more in every nation, till it have gone throughout the whole world. Moreover it is termed Catholic, not only because it shall be spread over the whole world in process of time, but also because even in every age it hath been, and shall be always in very many nations: and indeed in every nation, where any Christian religion is; which is in a sort to be spread over the whole world. This doth S. Austin in his book de unitate Ecclesiae, most diligently prove out of the Scriptures themselves. The effect of his argument is this: The Church must be such as it is described in Scripture. But in Scripture it is described to begin at jerusalem, and to proceed into all jewrie, and to go forward Act. 1. into Samaria: and to stretch itself further and further, usque ad ultimum terrae, even unto the uttermost of the earth. And (saith he) the seed of the Gospel once sown in the field of the world, fructificat & crescit, doth (not universally or for the most part Coloss. 1. perish, but) fructify and grow or increase, in omni mundo, in the whole world, and doth continue to grow or increase, usque ad messen, until the harvest of the consummation of the world, as our Saviour Math. 13. signifieth: the which consummation will be when this seed is come to the full growth: praedicabitur evangelium in universo mundo, Math. 24. in testimonium omnibus gentibus, (saith our Saviour) & tune veniet consummatio, the Gospel shall be preached in the whole world, for a testimony to all nations, and then the consummation shall come. This is S. Augustine's discourse, by which he proveth that the true Church of Christ is not contained in a corner of the world, but must be dilated and spread in a sort over the whole world. On the contrary side, the congregation of heretics is not Catholic, neither in time nor place. And first for time, it is evident, because true doctrine was first preached and believed, as the good seed was first sown in the field, and afterward the cockle, that is false doctrine, was over sowed. Saint Paul did for three years space teach the Ephesians the true doctrine of faith, and had conversed among them like a lamb, seruiens Domino cum omni humilitate, serving our Lord with all humility: but after his departure, he said, Act. 20. he knew that ravenous wolves would enter in among them, not sparing the flock; and that even out of their own company, there would arise viriloquentes perversa, ut abducant discipulos post se, men speaking perverse things, that they may lead away disciples after Ibidem. themselves. And as this happened at Ephesus, so doubtless in all other places, where there hath been any alteration of Christian doctrine; first the true faith was planted by some Apostle or Apostolic man, and afterward the contrary was brought in by some speaking perverse things, thereby leading away disciples after themselves. So that it is certain, that no heresy is so ancient as the true faith: neither is any one of them of so long continuance for the time to come, as S. Paul signified, when having described heretics of the latter days, he addeth, sed ultra non proficient, insipientia enim eorum manifesta erit omnibus: but they shall prosper no further, for their 2. Tim. 3. folly shall be manifest to all. The same doth S. Austin aptly express, expounding those words of the Psalm: Ad nihilum devenient tanquam Aug. in psal. 57 aqua decurrens. Non vos terreant fratres (saith he) quidam flwij qui dicuntur torrentes; hyemalibus aquis implentur, nolite timere, post paululum transit, decurrit aqua, ad tempus perstrepit, mox cessabit, diu stare non possunt. Multae haereses, iam emortuae sunt, etc. My brethren, let not certain floods called land-brookes terrify you; they are filled with winter waters, fear them not, after a while the water doth pass and run down, for a time it maketh a noise, but it will cease by and by, those floods cannot stand long. Many heresies are now already dead, etc. Now if we will have respect of place, it is certain that no heresy is by process of time to spread itself absolutely over the whole world, as I have proved that the true Church shall do, and the reason hereof may be assigned, because as S. Austin saith, diu stare non possunt, they cannot continue so long, as were needful to get them so universally spread over the whole world; especially considering that as S. Paul saith, when they have continued a while, Insipientia earum manifesta fit 2. Tim. 3. omnibus, their foolishness is made manifest to all, and so no marvel, si ultra non proficiant, if they prosper not, nor make no further progress. Neither ordinarily in any one age is heresy so universal in place as the true Catholic religion, but for the most part it is contained in one or two countries, as it were in a corner of the world. So that of heretics we may well say, as S. Austin doth, that they are those which say, Ecce hic est Christus, ecce illic, Behold Christ is here, behold Aug. l. de Vnit. Eccles. cap. 3. he is there, (that is to say, the true doctrine of Christ is only truly preached in this country or that country) of which kind of people our Saviour giveth us warning, and biddeth us, saying, nolite credere, Mat. 24. believe them not. We may well say also of these, as the same S. Austin doth, Quaecunque congregatio cuiuslibet haeresis in angulis August. l. de. Symb. cap. 10. sedet, concubina est, non matrona: Whatsoever congregation of what heresy soever sitteth in corners (that is to say, is but in few provinces, and in the rest of the Christian world, either is not at all, or at the least is not manifestly known to be) is a concubine, not a matron, to wit it is not the spouse of Christ, nor the lawful mother of the children of God. Wherefore sith there is this difference betwixt heresy and true Christian religion, that as the same Saint Austin saith, Singulae haereses in multis gentibus ubi Ecclesia est, non inveniuntur: Ecclesia autem, quae ubique est, etiam ubi illae sunt, Aug. l. de Vnit. Eccles. cap. 3. invenitur: Heresies are not found in many nations where the church is: but the Church, which is every where, is found in those nations where heresies are. This difference (I say) being betwixt heresy and the true religion, we need not doubt, but that to be Catholic, or universally received in the Christian world, especially at all times, is a note of the truth: And that therefore the company which professeth the faith, which at all times, and in a sort, in all places, hath been received of Christians, is undoubtedly the true Church of Christ. A. W. What if the true Church be proved to be Catholic, will it follow thereupon, that therefore it is always Catholic: so that a man cannot know which is the true Church, but by knowing which Church is Catholic? For such must every good mark be, proper to, and all times present with that whereof it is a mark. But let us see a little better, what catholicness this is, which you deliver for a mark of the Church. If you mean by the name Catholic, as if that were the true Church, which calls itself the Catholic Church, what is more easy then for any false church to take unto itself that name? Did not Theudas and judas profess themselves r Act. 5. 36. 37. to be the Messiah? Hath not s Mat. 24. 24. our Saviour forewarned us, that there should arise false Christ's and false Prophets? Yea the Donatists, who shut up the church in a corner of Africa, were not ashamed to call themselves the Catholic Church. And (as t Aug. epist. 48. ad Vincent. & contr. epist. fundam. cap. 4. Austin saith) All heretics would be called Catholics. If you urge the thing signified by the name: first, not one of your Papists among a thousand, understands what this word Catholic means; but only that it is the name of every one that holdeth of the Church of Rome. Secondly, if by Catholic Church, you mean such a church as hath been ever since the coming of our Saviour Christ, and shall be at all times, and over all the world (as you expound yourself:) how can it be a good mark of the true Church, when as it is an impossibility, that every man should be able to search and know, which church hath always been, which hath not: which hath been every where, which only in some places? and much more unpossible is it (if there be degrees of impossibility) that every either learned or unlearned man should certainly know, which church shall always continue, till the end of the world. A man may find in the Scriptures, that the true Church of Christ shall never fail: but which outward company of men is this true Church, no man by this mark of future continuance can by any means discern. Whereupon I conclude, that your catholicness is neither for the name, nor for the thing, any good mark of any true Church whatsoever. That by catholicness universality of time should be signified, you presume, but prove not: and yet I am persuaded, you are not able to allege any one ancient author but late Papists, that by the Catholic Church understands a company that hath been always since the beginning of the Christian Church, and shall always continue till the second coming of our Saviour Christ. I doubt not that the true Church spoken of in the Scripture, and the creed, hath so been, and shall be: but I say that no man conceives this property to be signified by the word Catholic. The ground of my opinion is, that having found divers reasons alleged by the Fathers, why the Church is said to be Catholic, I could never light upon that, concerning the time. u Aug. de Gen. ad lit. cap 1. Epist. 170. add Sever in. Austin ordinarily restrains Catholicness to place: as also x Optat. contra Parmen. lib. 2. Optatus doth. y Pacian. ad Sympr. epist. 1. Pacianus where he purposely inquires the reason of the name, never once mentions it: no more doth z Cyril. Hiero. catech. 18. Cyril, who yet assigns six several respects, in which the Church may be said to be Catholic. And surely, if by catholicness, universality of time be signified, I see no reason, neither (I think) can you show me any, why it should not as well include the time before our saviours coming, and so the Church of God that then was, as that which hath been since his coming, and shall continue till the end of the world. So doth Thomas understand Thom. in expos. Symb. §. Sanct. Eccles. the catholicness of the Church, stretching it from Abel's time to the end of the world. But your great master a Bellar. de Eccles milit. li. 3. cap. 16. Bellarmine utterly denies that the Church before our saviours coming was Catholic, restraining this catholicness to the Church of the Christians. But because I acknowledge the truth of the doctrine, I will not strive about the word, though you should have proved the sense of the word, and not have given too much credit to Bellarmine, who brings a place of b August. de unit. Eccles. c. 6. apud Bellar. de Eccl. milit. li. 4 cap. 7 §. Sunt autom. Austin to prove that universality of time is required to make the Church Catholic; whereas there is not a syllable or a letter touching that matter in the place alleged. No more is there in that other place of Bede, (which also he brings) but rather we may prove thence, that Catholic belongeth to place. It is therefore Beda exposit. in Cant. lib. 5. ad cap. 6. called Catholic (saith Bede) because it is edified in one and the same faith, over all parts of the world. In the sentence next before, he speaketh thus: Whence the Church is called Catholic, he teacheth, saying, All the Churches through all jewry, Galilee and Samaria had peace. So doth your Canon expound Catholic: Dist. 11. cap. Catholica. Durand. in rat. divin. office li. 1 cap. 1. nu. 2. so Durand, though he add also two other reasons of the name: but not that you bring, As for c Isa. 59 21. the place you quote to prove a needless question, what doth it concern the visible Church, being spoken (as d Hieron. ad Isay. li. 16. c. 59 Jerome showeth at large, and proveth out of e Rom. 11. 26. the Apostle) of the Church of the elect jews, or (at the most) of the elect in general. Before I examine that which you have here delivered, touching the Catholicness of the Church in respect of place, I hold it very needful to consider what was intended by the name Catholic, and how it hath been understood of ancient writers. And because this latter point may be a means to give us some light for the discerning of the former, I will begin with it in the first place. Whether the word were in use in the time of the Apostles or no, so that any man was called a Catholic, f Pacian. ad Sympro. epist. 1: de Cathol. nom. Pacianus seems to stand in some doubt; yet he lets it pass as granted, that no man was then so called. Once it is out of all doubt, that it is no where in the Scriptures applied to any church, or to any man, or at all used. As for the title Catholic given to the Epistles of james, Peter, the first of john, and Jude, it came not from the holy Ghost the inditer of those Epistles, but was added afterwards by some man, when the books of the new Testament were gathered together into one volume: which may better appear by the titles of the other Epistles also, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. of Saint or holy Paul: which inscription questionless never was of the Apostles own setting down. That which I would have observed, is, that this name Catholic was devised and applied to the Church not by God in the Scriptures, but by man: and therefore it is of less importance, and more uncertainty; yet no doubt, not given at adventure, but upon good ground, and to good purpose. For the original of it, it is Greek, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, through the whole, or all: which we commonly call by two Latin names, universal or general: so that the Catholic Church, and the general or universal Church are all one. To avow the antiquity of this title given to the church, the confession of faith, which is commonly called the Apostles creed, may be alleged; wherein we profess that we believe the holy Catholic Church. That this creed is very ancient, it is out of question; but that it was penned or indicted by the Apostles themselves, we have no certain proof. But to leave this point, and to return again to the meaning of the words Catholic Church: the ancientest authors in whom I find them (for they are not in Dionysius, Ignatius, Martialis, Polycarpus, nor in justine, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, or any man within the first 200. years) are a Clem. Alexan Stron. li. 7. anno 200. Clemens Alexander. about the year 200. and b Anno 250. Cyprian about the year 250. After them it grew very common, especially in the Latin Church. Cyprian himself hath not (that I know of) any where delivered the reason of that title Catholic. But c Pacian. de Cathol. nom. ubi. supra. Anno 380. Pacianus Bishop of Barcelona in Spain, purposely disputeth the question against Sympronian a Novatian heretic, assigning two reasons of the name, in this sort: If (saith he) I must give a reason of the word Catholic, and express the Greek in Latin, Catholic is every where one; or (as the learneder think) obedience to all God's commmandements: so that by his interpretation the Catholic Church must be the company of them who in all places, here and there, profess one faith, and live in obedience to all the commandments of God. This unity of true faith d Cod. de sum. Trin. c●nctos populos. Anno 372. the Emperors respected, Valentinian, Gratian and Theodosius, when they commanded that all they should be called Catholics, who follow the faith that S. Peter delivered to the Church of Rome. To this purpose is that of e Cyril. Hier. catech. 18. Cyril, where he saith: The Church is called Catholic, because it teacheth all things necessary to be known. This interpretation of the word, and reason of the title, f August. ad Vincen. epi. 48. Brevic. collat. 3 diei. cap. 2. the Donatists gave, saying that the Church was not termed Catholic, because of the communion that one Church hath with another, throughout the whole world, but because it observeth all the commandments and sacraments of God. To make short, the reason of the title Catholic attributed to the Church, in the judgement both of Greek and Latin writers, is, first the universal dispersion of the church through all part, of the world. The Church (saith g Cyril. Hiero. catech. 18. Cyril of jerusalem) is Catholic, because it is spread all over the world. It is called Catholic (saith h August. ad Se verin. epist. 170. Austin) because it is dispersed through the whole world. See brethren (quoth i Aug. ad Psal. 65. the same Austin in another place) how the universality of the Church spread over the whole world is commended. The Church (saith k August. de Gene. ad lit. cap. 1. he) is called Catholic, because it is universally perfect, and fails in nothing, and is spread over the whole world. Where, though he seem to acknowledge the Donatists interpretation, yet he adds the other as more principal. And in l Augus. Brevic. collat. 3. diei. cap. 2. the conference betwixt the catholics and Donatists, the true Christians proved themselves to be Catholics, and so rightly called, because they held communion with the Church spread over the face of the earth. This is that unity which accordingly was implied in the title of the Catholic Church, signifying an agreement in matters of faith, which was betwixt the several true Churches in all places. Hitherto may we reasonably refer that of Pacianus, who saith that m Pacian. ubi. supra. Catholic is every where one. The unity is signified, in that so many several congregations make but one church, in regard of that one faith which is common to all: the universalnesse of this church in the particular assemblies, is noted to us by the word catholic. The Fathers in the Nicene council thought good to express that unity by professing to believe one Church, to which they added also Catholic. So saith n Alexander in ep. ad Alexand. Constant. episc. apud Theodor. hist. eccls l. 1 c. 4. Alexander Patriarch of Alexandria, who was in the time of that Council: We acknowledge one only Catholic and Apostolic Church. So o Theod. ad Psal. 47. Theodoret afterward: There is one Church scattered over sea and land, wherefore we pray, saying, For the holy and only Catholic and Apostolic Church. And in another place: Paul (saith p Theod. in Cant. lib. 3. ad cap. 6. he) nameth many churches, not by any division of spirit, but severed by distance of place. It appeareth then, that by Catholicness, the universalnesse of the Churches being in all places is signified. But what was the reason why this title was added to the church? In all likelihood it was first devised and applied to the Church, to signify the breach of the partition wall, which sometimes stood betwixt the jews and Gentiles, till by our saviours death it was cast down. This I speak upon this supposition, that the word Catholic was as ancient in the Church, as the time of the Apostles. But if it were brought in afterward (as I could easily persuade myself, but for reverence of other men's judgements) we may very well assent to q Pacian. ubi supra. Pacianus, who writes of it in this manner. When after the Apostles times, heresies sprung up, and men went about to pull in pieces the dove of God, that same Queen the Church, by diversity of names (as every several heresy had a proper name:) did not the Apostolic people (they that followed the doctrine of the Apostles) require a surname for themselves, whereby they might make difference of such as remained uncorrupted (with heresy,) lest the error of some should rend in pieces the unspotted virgin of God? Was it not meet that the principal head (the true Church) should have a proper name to be known by? It appeareth by these words, that the reason of the name Catholic was, at the first, that there might be a title, to distinguish sound Christians, and true Churches, from heretics, & heretical assemblies. To which purpose, that he might avow the use of this name, he signifieth, that it had before been used by Cyprian. And afterward he affirmeth directly, that the true Christian people are divided from the heretical, when they are called Catholic. But you will perhaps demand, why Catholic should be applied to make this distinction. The reason thereof (as I think) is this. The Gospel by the preaching of the Apostles, was spread far & near over the face of the earth, & accordingly divers Churches in divers places established: all which agreed in the unity of the same faith and doctrine. But Satan, r Mat. 13. 25. who is always watching to sow cockle, and darnel among the wheat, stirred up here and there s Act. 20. 30. certain perverse and trouble some men, who set abroach errors to corrupt the truth of Doctrine. Now these teachers being discovered, that there might be a difference of name betwixt true Christians and them (for the name of christian was common to both) so that every man might learn, by the very name to avoid the heretics; it was thought meet by the learned and careful governors of the several Churches, that heretics should be called by some special name, either of their author, or of some point of error, which they held: and the true professors should have the title of Catholics, because they maintained the truth of that doctrine, which was generally professed by the Churches of God. In this sense t Pacian. ubi supra. Pacianus saith, that Christian was his name, and Catholic his surname. He that shall advisedly consider the use of the word in u Cyprian. ad Cornel. Epist. 41. Epist. 45. Sect. 10. Epist. 71. ad Quintum. Cyprian, shall perceive that Catholic is opposed by him to schism and heresy; and that said by him, to be done against the Catholic Church, which is done contrary to the practice of the several Churches in all countries. So x Clemens Alexander. Stromat. lib. 7. Clemens saith, that heresies labour to rend the Church in pieces: and he calleth the Church Catholic, because of the unity of one faith, generally received, as may be gathered out of him: though indeed the chief thing, which he respecteth in the unity of the Church, is, that All the elect are made partakers of one and the same salvation, according to the covenant of God, which in all ages hath been one and the same. Wherein he seems to apply the term Catholic to time: but the reason of the name by the general and constant judgement of the ancient writers, is rather the generality of the Church, professing the same doctrine in all places. Therefore your great Bishop y Canus loc. Theol. lib. 4. cap. postre. Melchior Canus, expounding this title, saith that the Church is called Catholic, because in every country, people, and nation, sex and condition, it is spread far and near. And by this difference (saith he afterward) it is distinguished, not only from the Synagogue (or jewish Church) but also from the conventicles of heretics. So doth your z Catechis. Concil. Trident. in expos. symb. catechism of Trent, set out by Pius Quintus, understand Catholic. The Church is called Catholic, because it is spread, in the light of one faith, from the East to the West, receiving men of all sorts, be they Soythians, or Barbarians, bond or free, male or female. Then followeth, the universality of time, containing all the faithful, which have been from Adam even till this day, or shall be hereafter till the end of the world, professing the true faith, and being built upon Christ, upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles. If then we restrain the catholicness of the Church, to universality of place, wherein (as we have seen) persons are also contained, The Catholic Church is nothing else, but the company of the elect, taken now ordinarily not only out of the jews, as heretofore till the coming of our Saviour, but also out of all nations and people whatsoever. If we stretch it farther to universality of time also, which can hardly be proved out of the ancient writers, it comprehendeth all the elect that have been, are, and shall be, from the beginning of the world, to the end thereof. And thus much of the Catholic Church, concerning the meaning; and reason of the word. Now to your proof, as it lieth, not by way of refutation, but of explication. We grant (as I have said often) that the Church is common to all people, and places, not shut up any longer within the land of jewry, nor appropriated to the jews; and we condemn them of error, who teach (as sometimes the Donatists & Rogatians did) that it is enclosed in Africa or Europe, or Asia, or America, or any of these, and not common to every one of them, aswell as to any of them. But this is not so to be understood, as if the Church of Christ must needs be in all these, or many of these at once in any one time. It is enough that we acknowledge the universality of it de iure, though we deny it to be here, or there de facto: To speak plain, it belongeth to the nature of the Church of Christ, to have all places open to it, & it is no more tied to Rome or jerusalem, than it is to London or Paris, yea it hath spread itself over the face of the whole earth, and hath been, or shall be in every particular country: but this largeness, hath not been, nor perhaps shall be, at any one time, but by succession, as it hath pleased God to afford the means of the Gospel, and give a blessing to it, sometimes in one place, sometimes in an other, as yourself presently acknowledge. But this doth not prove, that it is a mark to know the Church by. This reason of the name Catholic, is a mere devise of your own, and without warrant of antiquity. I say more, it is false too, understanding it as you do, not of the Church of the elect, but of a company of men making known profession of the true faith. For in a Act. 2. 1. 2. the beginning, when the Church of Christ was as pure and as glorious, as ever it was since, it stretched not itself beyond the borders of jewrie, but was for a time shut up within the walls of jerusalem: b Act. 8. 4. till the Lord by Herod's persecution, made way for it to pass into all the world. From that time forward it grew mightily, and settled itself in many countries, yea it ceased not to multiply till the revealing of Antichrist, who by little and little, corrupted the truth of doctrine, even in the fundamental points, and so destroyed the Church of God out of these parts of the world; where it had flourished some hundreds of years. Yet was not the world left without a true Church, no not in these western countries: but such was the state of it, as that it remained in a few chosen servants of God, who were hidden, c 1. Reg. 18. 13. like those fifties in Israel, from the eyes of your ravenous wolves, the bloodthirsty Clergy of your Romish Synagogue. Saint Austin in that book, you allege, had to do with the Donatists, who insolently and wickedly rend themselves from the union of all the christian Churches then in the world, allowing no other Church of Christ, but that faction of their own in a part of Africa. d Aug. de unit. Eccle. cap. 12. They neither could, nor did charge the Churches, which they condemned, with any gross error in doctrine: but confidently affirmed without all ground of truth, or likelihood of reason, that the Churches planted by the Apostles, were vanished out of the world: for supply whereof, I know not by what miracle, their Church forsooth sprung up upon a sudden in that corner of Africa. This ridiculous conceit of theirs Austin refuteth, by showing that the Church is to be sought and found in the Scriptures, and not in the devices and dreams of men. Let us not hear (saith e Vbi supra. cap. 3. Austin) this I say, this you say, but let us hear, this saith the Lord: The Lords books are to be had, to the authority whereof both of us consent, both give credit, both of us obey. There let us seek the Church, there let us try our cause. And a little after, I will not have the Church showed me by men's devices, but by the Oracles of God. And again afterward, when the heretics expound the performance of the promise made to Abraham. f Gen. 15. 5. Thy seed shall be as the sand of the sea, and as the Stars of heaven; as if it had been fulfilled in Donatus and his company, g Vbi supra. cap. 6. Austin answereth: Read us this, out of the Law, out of the Prophets, out of the Psalms, out of the Gospel itself, out of the Apostles writings; read it, and we believe it. This foundation being laid in the five first chapters, Austin proceedeth to prove the universalnesse of continuance of the Church, out of the Scriptures; out of the old Testament, h Out of the Law. cap. 6. Out of the Prophets. c. 7 Out of the Psalms. c. 8. in the three next chapters, out of the new in the test. So that the argument you speak of, beginneth at the sixth chapter, the Mayor or proposition is in the first chapters to the sixth, the Assumption or Minor in the other that follow. But because you leave those three chapters, that show what the Church should be out of the old Testament, I will follow your course, and begin at the ninth: where Austin showeth that the Church was to begin at jerusalem, and so to pass into Samaria, and from thence to spread itself through the whole world. To this he bringeth in the Donatists thus answering. These things (say they) we believe, and confess that they are fulfilled: but afterward the world fell away, and only Donatus company remained. What doth Austin reply? Let them read this to us (saith i Chap. 12. Austin) as they read of Enoch, of Noah, & of Abraham, Isaac, and jacob, and of the Tribes which remained, the rest rending themselves away, and of the twelve Apostles, who continued faithful, when all other fell away. These examples the Donatists had brought to countenance their schism. Austin willeth them to prove their steadfastness, when all other Churches failed, by the same Scriptures, which were to bear witness of those, whom they alleged. He goeth forward to refute other arguments of theirs in the chapter following, still pressing them with this, that they should show out of the Scriptures, that the Church founded by the Apostles was to vanish away, and their faction only to remain sincere. This was his course, and indeed, what other course could he have taken? The heretics, as before I have noted, did not accuse the Catholics of any error, against the foundation, whereby they might prove, they had ceased to be of the Church: but only urged very absurdly a dream of their own, that all, but they of Donatus part, were fallen away. What is this to the question betwixt you and us? We show evidence of Scripture, to prove that k 2. Thess. 2. 3. See D Abbot and D. Downam of Antichrist. there was to be a defection, that Antichrist, the head of that defection, is to be the chief governor of the Ecclesiastical state, that his seat is to be at Rome: yea we manifestly convince your Apostatical Church of many and gross heresies: some of them directly overthrowing the foundation of our Saviour Christ's mediatorship, for the whole punishment of all our sins, and the love of God in choosing us to everlasting life, without respect of any thing on our part, whereby we, & not he, make difference of ourselves from other: that is, we prove that the doctrine of your Church is utterly false, in the main points of predestination, & justification, without the true belief whereof, there can hardly be any true religion: because the greatest part of God's glory, which is the end of all religion, is overthrown, or hidden by such errors, as your Church maintains in these matters of justification and predestination. But to the matter. This general ground of Augustine's disputation we acknowledge to be good and sound: as for that which he addeth, and you especially urge, I answer with Augustine's good leave, that the place he brings, proves not a continual increase of the Church, from Anselmus ad Col. 1. 6. time to time, but only, that when the Apostle writ, there had been a good growth of the seed of the Gospel, as among l Col. 1. 6. the Colossians, so in the whole world. And whereas he doth assay to prove, that there must be an increase of the Gospel, till the end of the world, because our Saviour in the Parable saith, that m Mat. 13. 30 the good seed must grow till that time: we crave leave to dissent from him, till it be proved, that the Parable is so to be understood, and that the Apostle so intended that speech of his. For Parables, Austin himself hath taught us, in this very question against the Donatists, n Aug. ad Vincent. epist. 48. that no man may apply any thing out of a Parable, to prove his purpose by, unless he can show evident and clear reason for his interpretation. But this evidence seems to be wanting in this exposition of the Parable. For the scope of the Parable is not to prove, that the Church shall continually increase till the end of the world: but to show that in the outward congregations, good and bad shall be always mingled together, and so doth o Aug. contr. epist. Parm. lib. 1. cap. 7. & lib. 2. cap. 2. Contr. lit. Petil. lib. 3. cap. 2 Contr. Crescon. lib. 2. cap. 35 Contr. Donat. post. Collat. cap. 6. 8 Austin himself every where expound the place. And surely if from hence we may prove such a continual growth of the Church, may we not from the same place conclude the like of heresies? p Mat. 13. 38 Let them both grow together until the harvest, saith the text. But what should I make many words about this Parable? Our Saviour himself expounds it q vers. 37 afterward, and makes no such collection of the Church's increase, till the world's end. And r Hieron. ad Math. 13 Jerome willeth us not to be over hasty to guess at the meaning of the Parable, because the exposition of it in the text, is deferred from the 13. verse to the 37. but to wait till our Saviour give us the interpretation; who hath given us to understand, that the good seed are the children of the kingdom, not as in the Apostle, the Gospel: how then are they all one? Beside, the Parable speaketh not of the outward Church, that is, of all professors, all which are members of your Church, if they hold of your Pope; but of the true Church indeed, the elect of God, called s vers. 43 the children of the kingdom: all the good seed (saith our Saviour) are just men, and shall shine as the Sun in the kingdom of their Father: So shall not all your Church do, many of your number, by your own confession, being wicked and reprobate, neither just, nor to have any place in heaven. But the decay of your own Popish Church (me thinketh) should sufficiently refute this conceit. u Math. 24. 14 The other place alleged to prove that the propagation of the Gospel must increase till the end of the world, is neither rightly understood, nor of any force to the matter in question. To speak of the latter point in a word. Let us grant, that by the end, the end of the world is signified. What of that? Our Saviour doth not say, that the Church shall grow greater and greater till the end of the world, but that the Gospel shall be preached in all places, before the world have an end: so may it be, though after it is once preached for some few years, it be out of the world for many years together, and afterward be again begun: and this may befall it oftentimes for all that prophecy. Let us further yield, that it shall always continue in the world, (as doubtless it shall;) yet is there not hereupon any such necessity of this growth to be inferred. For it may be preached in all places, and yet lose more in one country, than it getteth in three, passing along with a small retinue, from one land to another. Now for the other point, it is apparent that our Saviour, at the least in that former part of the Chapter, prophesieth of the destruction of jerusalem; before which (saith he) the Gospel shall be preached through the whole world. The end (saith x Chrysost. ad Mat. hom. 76. Chrysostome) namely the end of jerusalem. And he proveth that the Gospel was so preached by y Rom. 10. 18. Col. 1. 6. two places of Scripture, the one whereof is, that out of the Epistle to the Colossians. Of the same opinion is z Thophyl. ad Mat. 24. & ibi Gloss. ordin. & Lyra. Theophylact, and your ordinary Gloss, and Lyra, who undertaketh to show, that the Gospel had been preached in the three known parts of the world, Africa, Asia, and Europe, before jerusalem was destroyed by Titus and Vespasian. a jansen. harm. cap. 22. jansenius Bishop of Gaunt disputeth the point, and concludeth, for all Augustine's authority, and reasons, that it seemeth we are rather to hold with Chrysostome, that our Saviour speaketh of the end of jerusalem. Which (saith he) is evidently gathered from this, that after our Lord had said; Then cometh the end, he presently addeth: when therefore you shall see the abomination of desolation, etc. For, the bringing in of this signifieth, that he observeth the order of things to come, and teacheth, what was to be done, when the end whereof he spoke, should come. All this part of your discourse, to prove that heresies are not Catholic, either from time or place, might very well have been spared. For who ever imagined, that error was before truth, when as it is nothing else but a straying from the truth? Yet have some heresies been of long continuance, as Arianisme for a great while; which was also so universal for a time, that (as b Hieron. dialog. contr. Lu●●fcrian. Jerome saith) the world wondered at itself, that it was become an Arian. But what should I waste time and labour about these things, wherein we are of one mind? Let it be enough for me again to put you in mind, that this catholicness can be no good mark to discern the Church by, from heretics, because it wanteth your second property of plainness and easiness to be known: yea there is a mere impossibility that any man should know, that any heresy shall have an end before the end of the world: or that it shall not spread far and near over the world: yea it passeth the reach of ordinary men to know certainly, that any heresy hath not been since the beginning of the Gospel, because this matter requireth some special knowledge of story, whereof most men are ignorant. The Church in c August. lib. 4. de Symb. c. 10. Saint Augustine's time, by the blessing of God was so enlarged, that it had possession of many parts of the world; and in comparison of it, heresies (yea the Arian heresy) was but in corners. In this goodly estate continued it for the most part, till (as before I observed) Antichrist broke out, and overthrew the very foundation of faith. But if any man will so far press Augustine's authority, as to make universality a certain mark of the church; how will he credit the holy Ghost affirming by d 2. Thess. 2. 4. Saint Paul, that there must be a general falling away; and by e Apoc. 12. 6. Saint john, that the church must fly into the wilderness, and there lie hidden a long time? The f August. de unit. eccls cap. 3. other testimony out of Austin, you translate falsely, to make it serve your turn the better. For Austin saith not, that Heresies are not found in many nations, but that every several heresy is not found in many nations where the Church is. But admit there were some churches without any heresy for a time, and never any heresy but where there is also a true church; yet g Singulae haereses. doth not Augustine say, that every man may easily discern the true church from heretical assemblies: because it may fall out, as it hath done, that heresy, as Arianisme, shall be more general than true Religion. Let us father grant, that whatsoever hath universally been received in the Christian world, especially at all times, is true: yet cannot this catholicness be a good note of the church, because (if I shall make bold to repeat the same again) it is hardly possible for any man to understand what points have been so received. But you forget yourself very much: for by this rule you appoint them that will judge which is the church, to enter into such a maze, as they shall never get out of, if they shall not acknowledge any church for true, but that which holdeth all things that have ever generally been held in the Christian world. But of catholicness this may suffice. A. D. §. 6. Lastly, the true Church is also Apostolic, that is to say, such as hath her foundation from the Apostles, according to that saying of the Apostle S. Paul: Non estis hospites & advenae, sed estis Ephes. 2. cives sanctorum & domestici Dei, superae dificati supra fundamentum Apostolorum & Prophetarum, ipso summo angulari lapide Christo jesu: You are not strangers and foreigners, but you are citizens of the saints and the domesticals of God, built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, jesus Christ himself being the highest corner stone. This we may gather out of that which is already said. For if the Apostles were they which were appointed by our Saviour, to be under him the founders of his church, which by their preaching began at jerusalem, and from thence by Act. 1. Act. 2. Aug. l. de Pastor. cap. 8. them, and those that received authority from them, tanquam vitis crescendo ubique diffusa est, (as S. Austin speaketh) like a vine by growing was spread abroad every where: and being thus first planted and spread abroad, was afterwards by the ministry of lawfully succeeding Pastors and Doctors continued without interruption till now, and shall be also continued till the world's end: there is no doubt but that this company (descending thus lineally from the Apostles, and depending of them as their lawful progenitors, and being built upon them, as (after Christ himself) upon principal foundations) may well be called Apostolic, that is to say, such as derive their pedigree from no other author or founder, later than the Apostles themselves. All this doth Tertullian briefly, but pithily comprehend in this short sentence: Apostoli apud unamquamque civitatem Ecclesias condiderunt; ab his autem civitatibus seu Lib. de praescrip Ecclesijs ab Apostolis constitutis, traducem fidei, & semina doctrinae, caeterae exinde Ecclesiae mutuatae sunt, & quotidie mutuantur ut Ecclesiae fiant, ac per hoc & ipsae Apostolicae deputabuntur, ut soboles Apostolicarum Ecclesiarum: The Apostles (to wit, either immediately by themselves, or by means of others) founded Churches at every city: from which cities or Churches being thus founded by the Apostles, other Churches afterward did borrow, and do daily borrow the offspring of faith, and the seeds of doctrine, that they may be made Churches, and by this means these also shall be accounted Apostolic, as being the issue of the Apostolical Churches. chose, no conventicle of heretics can be Apostolic, by reason that heresy (being an upstart novelty, contrary to the former received faith of the Church) cannot have any Apostle or Apostolic man for author and founder, but is forced to acknowledge some other, of whom as it received the first being, so most commonly either the doctrine or the men that follow it, or both, receive also their name, as of Arius came Arianisme and the Arians, of Montanus came the Montanists and Montanisme; and there was never yet heretic, which could derive the pedigree of his congregation by uninterrupted succession from the Apostles: which maketh Tertullian to urge them so earnestly, saying: Edant haeretici origines Lib. de praescrip Ecclesiarum suarum, evoluant ordinem Episcoporum, ita per successiones decurrentes, ut primus ille Episcopus, aliquem ex Apostolicis viris, qui tamen cum Apostolis perseveraverit, authorem habuerit & antecessorem: Let the heretics show the beginning of their Churches (or, as they had rather say, of their congregations) let them unfold the order of their Bishops or superintendents, so running down by successions, that the first of them shall have for his author in doctrine, and predecessors in place, any Apostolic man, who did persevere, and did not forsake the Apostles. Thus did Tertullian urge them, because he knew well that they could never make this proper note of the true Church to agree to their company. A. W. This last part of your discourse, should prove the fourth point of your former assumption, that, to be Apostolic, is a property belonging only to the true Church, and not hard to be discerned in any company wheresoever it is. If all this were proved, yet were your syllogism nothing worth, because I justly excepted against the consequence of your proposition, which remains still without any confirmation. But to let that pass: how idle is this proof of yours, wherein the latter part of that you should prove, is quite omittted, that it is no hard matter for any simple man to discern which Church is Apostolic, which is not? If you make not this clear, you prove nothing: and yet every man may see, that it is a matter of no small study, nor short time, to examine what Churches were first founded by the Apostles, and have had an orderly succession without interruption from time to time: yea when a man hath made the best search he can, what hath he to rest himself upon, but the report of men, who might deceive, and be deceived? And yet this ado every poor soul must have before he can tell to what Church he may join himself for his spiritual instruction in matters concerning everlasting life. You will ask, what course we take for a man's direction in this case? Surely the very same which the Scriptures testify we ought to follow. We propound out of the Scriptures the means of salvation: we give our people liberty to examine that we deliver, by the touchstone of truth, the same Scriptures of God: we desire not to have any credit given to that we teach (as a matter of faith) but so far forth as we can prove it manifestly by the word of God. Thus we begin with men, thus we continue; leaving the success of our poor ministry to the blessing of God's Spirit, in the hearts of them that vouchsafe us the hearing. But for better direction in the trial of our doctrine, we give this rule, that true religion first respects the glory of God, and then the present comfort and everlasting salvation of them that profess it. Whether course, yours or ours be more reasonable, and more agreeable to Scripture, I leave it to the consideration of all men whom it doth concern, and return to the examining of your proof: whereof there are these two parts, that the true Church is Apostolic, that no conventicle of heretics can be Apostolic. Of the former thus you dispute: If every true Church must have such a foundation as the Church of the Ephesians had, and she had her foundation from the Apostles; then every true Church must have her foundation from the Apostles. But every true Church must have such a foundation as the Church of the Ephesians had, and she had her foundation from the Apostles. Therefore every true Church must have her foundation from the Apostles. I would make no question of any part of your Syllogism, if To the Assumption. by foundation from the Apostles, you understood nothing but Apostolical doctrine, which is indeed the main foundation of all true Churches: but you afterward expound your meaning, and acknowledge no foundation from the Apostles, but by the ministry of such as can derive their succession from the Apostles, without any interruption. In this sense therefore I deny your minor, because the former part of it is false. For every true Church hath not, nor need have, to make it a true Church, such foundation as the Church of the Ephesians had. Yea though we doubt not, but that the Ephesians were converted to the faith by some of the Apostles, and perhaps by the h Act. 18. 19 Eph. 2. 12. Apostle Paul: yet we do not believe that the Apostle, in the place alleged by you, speaks of any such foundation, but of the truth of doctrine taught by the Apostles. This may appear, because the Apostle makes the Prophets their foundation, as well as the Apostles. But certain it is, that neither the Prophets, nor any by succession from them, laid the foundation of the Gospel amongst the Ephesians. He means (saith i Theodo. ad Ephes. 2. Tertull. contra Martion. lib. 5. cap. 17. Ambros. ad Ephes. 2. Theodoret) the Prophets of the old Testament, not of the new: lest you should cavil about the name Prophets. Besides, the foundation of the Apostles must be conceived, as our Saviour Christ is the corner stone to the Ephesians: not because he preached to them, but for that they rested upon him as a corner stone, the doctrine of the Apostles being the foundation. And if we will tie this to the persons that deliver Thomas in exposit. Symb. §. Sanct. Eccle. the doctrine, then to be the foundation is so proper to the Apostles, as that it cannot agree to any other man whatsoever, how Apostolic soever he may be imagined to be. For k Apoc. 21. 14. this was their special honour above all other Christians. Thus do the best interpreters expound the place: Upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, that is (saith l Ambros. ad Eph. 2. Ambrose) upon the new and old Testament. For that which the Apostles preached, the Prophets foretold. As for the Prophets of the new Testament, They (saith m Ambros. ad Eph. 2. 20. Ambrose) are for the ordering of the Church founded, and not for the founding of it. Upon Christ (saith your n Gloss. interl. ad Eph. 2. 20. Gloss) or upon the doctrine of the Apostles. So o Lyra. ibi. Lyra, Upon the doctrine of the new and old Testament. With whom p Lombard. ibi. Lombard agreeth, though he expound it also of Christ. So doth q Thomas ibi. Thomas: Upon their doctrine. So doth r Caietan. ibi. Caietan understand it; that a man may wonder at your ignorance or boldness, in going against the stream of your own Doctors, without any show of reason for it. Wherefore if your minor intent no more, but that every true Church is builded upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, in respect of their doctrine, no exception could be taken against it. For s 1. Cor 3. 11. other foundation no man can lay but jesus Christ: according to the preaching and prophesying of the Apostles and Prophets. This foundation had the Church of Ephesus, Ansel. ad Eph. 2. and in this must every true Church agree with it. But you apply this to I know not what dependence of succession, which hath no kind of warrant from that place of the Apostle. To supply your want of proof from the Scriptures, that every true Church must have her foundation from some Apostle, or some man who can fetch his pedigree, without interruption, from the Apostles: you seek to draw in Tertullian for a witness of your error. Let us hear his deposition. The Apostles (saith t Tertul. de praescrip. cap. 20. Tertullian) founded Churches in every city. Here to help yourself, you add this gloss: To wit, either immediately by themselves, or by means of other. What reason is there, that he that is a party in the suit, should have the expounding of the witnesses meaning? Tertullian saith, the Apostles founded Churches: you tell us, he means they did so by themselves or by others. How shall we know, that you are so privy to his meaning? If you ground your exposition upon those words (in every city,) whereas the Apostles came not in divers cities that were then in the world: I pray remember that there were at that time many cities, into which we are not sure that the Gospel had before tertullian's time been received. The learned man may speak in general, and yet with special relation to those places which were then known to be Churches founded by the Apostles, as jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, Alexandria, Ephesus, etc. He adds farther, that From these Churches founded by the Apostles, other Churches afterward had borrowed, and (in his time) daily did borrow the x Traducem. propagation of faith, and seeds of doctrine. I make bold to alter your translation: let the skilful Reader judge whether I have cause or no. But what of all these? Tertullian doth not say, that no Church is to be accounted Apostolic, but that which can without interruption show her descent from the Apostles; nor that every Church is true, that can make such proof of her original. But y Cap. 13. whereas the heretics, against whom he there dealeth, rejected and received Scripture at their choice and would never leave wrangling; Tertullian appeals to the judgement of those Churches which were known to be founded by the Apostles, and in which the truth was most likely to be found. As for your argument of succession, you shall hear tertullian's judgement of it. Let heretics (saith z Tertull. de praescr. cap. 32. Tertullian in the same book) fain a succession from the Apostles: they shall get nothing by it. For their doctrine compared with that the Apostles taught, by the diversity and contrariety thereof will declare, that it came not from any Apostle or Apostolic man: because as the Apostles would not teach contrary one to another: so Apostolic men would not deliver doctrine contrary to the Apostles, unless they were such as were fallen away from the Apostles, to preach otherwise then they did. So then the chief trial of a true Church, is by the doctrine of the Apostles and their successors in the truth, because it is possible for heretics to show their descent from the Apostles, or some Churches which had their beginning from the Apostles or Apostolic men. Yea a Scor. hist. l. 1. cap. 3. Augu. de haer●s. cap. 91. 92. 51. it is manifest, that the greatest heresies (as the four main ones condemned in the four first general Counsels) had their beginning of them who could show their pedigree step by step from the Apostles, in respect of outward succession. We have soon how weakly you have proved that personal succession is a thing belonging to the true Church: it remains that you prove it to be proper to the church, and not common to it with heretics. To which purpose you thus reason: No upstart novelty contrary to the former faith of the Church, can have any Apostle or Apostolic man for founder thereof. Every heresy is an upstart novelty, contrary to the former faith of the Church. Therefore no heresy can have any Apostle or Apostolic man for the founder thereof. How much more truly and reasonably spoke Tertullian of To the proposition. the like matter, when he said, that b Tertull. de praescr. cap. 32. no Apostolic man taught contrary to the Apostles, unless he were such a one as was fallen from the Apostles? He saw and acknowledged, that it was possible for a man instructed by the Apostles themselves, to forsake the truth of doctrine, and become an author or maintainer of heresy. Doth not c 1. joan. 2. 18. 19 Saint john speak of some, who being bred up in the church, by heresy departed from it? What should I name d 1. Tim. 1. 20. Hymenaeus, Alexander, e 2. Tim. 1. 15. Phygellus, Hermogenes, f Apoc. 2. 6. Nicolas, and such like? Hardly can you name me any heresy that ever took rooting, but the first plant of it sprung up in the nursery of the Church. Therefore your mayor is altogether untrue, being understood as it is, of Apostolic men, in respect of personal succession, not of succeeding the Apostles in truth of doctrine. But you think to make good your proposition by tertullian's Tertull. de praescr. cap. 32. authority, who challengeth the heretics to show the beginning of their Churches from some Apostolic men. Is it possible you should either write or read that sentence of Tertullian, and not perceive that it cuts the very throat of your cause? Doth not Tertullian in the sentence alleged by you, directly confirm our opinion, and overthrow yours? Let them show us their beginning (saith Tertullian) from some Apostolic man. Is that enough? I: if we believe you, who define Apostolicknes by personal succeeding the Apostles. But what saith Tertullian? He in plain terms requires such an Apostolic man as persevered with the Apostles, and forsook them not. Now that by this persevering with the Apostles, and not forsaking them, he means agreement in doctrine; I prove it evidently by that which followeth in the same Chapter. First, Tertullian shows that it is in vain for them to plead succession in place, if their doctrine be found contrary to that which the Apostles delivered: I set down the sentence before. Secondly, he doubts not to say, that by the heretics disagreeing from the Apostles in doctrine, those Churches which cannot prove themselves to be Apostolic, by naming any Apostle, or Apostolic man, as the first founder of them, may yet convince them not to be Apostolic; and are themselves to be counted Apostolic, because of their consent in doctrine, with the Apostles. This is the sum of tertullian's words: the words themselves run thus. To this trial (namely by doctrine, as the next sentence before showeth) shall the heretics be called by those Churches; which though they cannot allege any Apostle or Apostolic man for their founder, as being of late, and now daily planted: yet agreeing in the same doctrine are nevertheless counted Apostolic, by reason of their h Consanguinitate doctrinae. agreement in doctrine. Do you not see, that Tertullian disputeth for us, against your pretended succession? That he confesseth, heretics may allege personal succession? That he acknowledgeth those Churches for true, which cannot derive their pedigree from the Apostles, or any Apostolic man? That he maketh the truth of doctrine agreeing with the Apostles, a certain and necessary mark of the true Church? And are you not ashamed, for all this, to bring Tertullian for an author of so gross an error? Were you so blind that you discerned not this yourself, or did you so despise your Readers, that you presumed, they would never have the wit to see your ignorance or craft? It is now discovered sufficiently, and yet this one point more must be added: that Tertullian requireth this show of their Church's beginning, not of all heretics, as you deceitfully allege him (if you read him yourself, and took him not upon credit, at some other man's hands) but only of those, who plead their continuance from the time of the Apostles. If any heresies (saith Tertullian) dare fetch their continuance from the Apostles time, that therefore they may seem Apostolic, because they were, while the Apostles lived; we may say, let them show the beginning of their Churches, let them unfold the succession of their Bishops, etc. With such learning and conscience do you Papists allege the Fathers, that he must needs be honester, and wiser than you, that will not believe you, upon your bare word. We see then, that to be Apostolic, in your sense, is no good mark of a true Church: because Heretical Churches may so be Apostolic, and true Churches not Apostolic; and chose, that to be Apostolic in doctrine, as we expound it, is a most certain note, whereby a true Church may be known, and the same, that we only allow of. A. D. §. 7. It appeareth therefore plain enough, that these four properties, One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic agree only to the true Church; and sith it is no hard matter for any to see or know, which company of Christians hath these properties (as in the next Chapter I shall declare,) it is also plain, that these four, One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, (being proper to the true Church: and apparent enough) are good notes or marks, by which men may discern, which company of those, which have the name of Christians, and which profess (as every company professeth themselves) to teach the true doctrine of Christ, is indeed the true Church, which doubtless teacheth in all points, the true doctrine of Christ. A. W. Nay rather it hath evidently appeared, that never an one of these, nor all of them together, as you understand them, are any good marks of the true Church: because every one of them is such, as that either a true Church may be without them, or at the least, that no ordinary man is able to judge, which Church hath these properties in it, and which hath not. Whereupon I may safely conclude, that your grand syllogism in this Chapter, which any man may gather out of this last part of it, is neither rightly applied to that, which you were to prove, as I showed in the beginning; nor true itself, either for the Mayor, or Minor, as by my answer to it, hath been proved. And whereas you add in the end, that the true Church, doubtless, teacheth in all points the true doctrine of Christ: we have had too much trial of your weakness in judging, and boldness in affirming, to believe this Cuckoo's song of yours, though you chant it over never so often. A. D. CHAP. XVI. That the Roman Church is One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, and therefore the true Church. A. W. Although the Roman Church were One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, in such sense as you understand these titles, yet were it not therefore the true Church: because there is never an one of these properties, except it be holiness, (which can be a mark of the Church to no man, because no man can judge of it) but may, for the nature of it, agree to some heretical assembly. A. D. §. 1. Thus far my discourse hath gone along all in generalities, in showing the necessity of true faith: and that this faith is to be learned of the true Church: and that this Church continueth always, and is visible, as being a visible company of men professing the true faith of Christ: partaking his Sacraments: and living under the government of lawful Pastors his substitutes: and that, (whereas divers companies of men take upon them the title of this Church, whereby same do stand in doubt, which company is the true Church) there be certain marks, by which the true Church may be certainly known, and discerned from all other companies or congregations: and finally, that these marks be those four, One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, which are certainly known to be the properties of the true Church, both by the Nicene Creed, and also by plain testimonies of Scriptures and Fathers. A. W. This general discourse of yours hath been generally so weak, and so little to purpose, that you are now as new to begin, as you were at the first. Shall I run over these particulars here mentioned? i Chap. 1. True faith is necessary to salvation. But not such a faith, as you require, which must be k Chap. 4. entire, whole, and sound in all points, so that the misbelieving of any one should be damnable. 2. This faith is to be learned (ordinarily) of the ministers of the true Church: but not to be taken upon their credit, without any examination of that they deliver, by the word of God. 3. l Chap. 5. There is no such Church, and much less any such m Chap. 11. & 12. continuance and visibility of it, as you imagine, though it may be said, there is one Church: because all true Churches agree in the same doctrine of the Gospel, as far as is necessary to salvation, so that none of them overthroweth the foundation. n Chap. 13. There are also certain marks, by which true Churches may be discerned from false: but o Chap. 15. those you name, as you understand them, neither are to be found in every true Church, and (to the uttermost of man's judgement) may be in heretical Churches. Now whereas you say, that those four One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, are certainly known to be the properties of the true Church; there is no certain knowledge which are good marks, either by the Nicene Creed, or by the Fathers, but only by the Scriptures: and neither that Creed, nor the Fathers do approve of these for marks of a true Church, in such sense as you urge them. A. D. §. 2. Now it will be good to see, if we can by these general grounds conclude, which particular company of men is the true Church of Christ: a conclusion of exceeding great consequence, as touching all matters in controversy concerning the doctrine of faith, as may appear, by the drift of all my former discourse. For the framing of which conclusion, we shall not need to bring in comparison, all the companies or sects of divers religions, that have been and are in the world: because every one can easily discern of themselves, and especially by the help of that which hath been said, that neither Turks, nor jews, nor whatsoever other infidels, can be the true Church of Christ; because these neither have the name of Christians, neither do they profess to have the name of Christ. Neither am I now to meddle with heretics and schismatics of former ages, the which as they have been condemned, by the general consent of the Church, so in continuance of time, they have been worn out by the same Church, in so much, that even the memory of them (God be thanked) seemeth to be perished with them. A. W. Out of all doubt, if your general grounds be true, it is possible to conclude by them, which particular company, or rather companies, are true Churches of Christ. For neither can the marks of a true Church agree to a false: neither are they such, as cannot be discerned where they are. Of jews and Turks indeed there can be no question: but what say you to the Greek Churches, and their patriarchs, who plead all these points for themselves, as well as you do, and are able to make as good proof of their Unity, Holiness, catholicness, and Apostolicknesse? Yet are you far from acknowledging these to be true Churches of Christ, because forsooth they will not come under the slavish yoke of your Romish Antichrist. Concerning the heretics, and schismatics of former ages, I would to God Christian Churches were as free of them, as we desire. But Satan, who in the beginning of the Gospel laboured p to choke the good seed with his cockle and darnel, though for a time he continued in security, and like a strong man armed at all points, possessed his house in peace, having procured a general subjection to his eldest son Antichrist your Pope; yet when in this, as it were second birth of the Gospel, he saw his kingdom again in hazard, he betook himself to his former shifts, and spread abroad the poison of heresy in divers countries; that he might give you his vassals occasion to slander the doctrine of the Gospel, as if from it these heresies had risen. This is one of his delusions, whereby he deceives and misleads many to damnation, though the children of God perceive his subtlety, and rest upon the manifest truth of the Scripture, for all Satan's practices to discredit it by this and such other inconveniences, with which he endeavours to have the preaching of the Gospel accompanied, for the disgrace thereof. This course also he took in the first beginning of the Gospel, as it is manifest by the multitude and grossness of those heresies, which broke out within the first 400 years, and were never since equalled, for number or heinousness, in twice so long a time: that the likeness of Satan's dealing may be an argument of the like truth, he now laboureth to overthrow or discredit. A. D. §. 3. My chief question and comparison therefore shall be betwixt the Roman Church (that is to say, that company which communicateth, & agreeth in profession of faith, with the Church of Rome, and liveth under the obedience (as touching spiritual matters) of the Bishop of Rome, and other Bishops and Pastors under him,) and the Protestants (that is to say, that company, which from Luther his time hitherward, have opposed themselves against the Roman Church) either all or any one sect of them; my question (I say) or comparison shall be, to which of those two, the four forenamed marks agree, and consequently, which of them is the true Church. A. W. Here you propound the matter, and argument of this chapter, which you call a comparison: as if the question were, whether of the Churches be beautified with those four properties, & consequently, whether of them is the true Church. But to speak properly, there is no comparison intended therein. For our question is not, whether your Synagogue, or our congregations, come nearer the state of true Churches (which seemeth to be implied in making a comparison betwixt them) but whether of them are indeed true Churches? If I should compare your Church of Rome, with the Synagogues of the jews, the profession of the Mahometans, or the companies of Anabaptists, or other Heretics, I might find that your doctrine came nearer to the truth, in many points, and so were more likely to show me the true Church, or that these four properties agreed better to you then to them. But this comparison would not settle me in the knowledge of a true Church. The point is, as before I showed, the proof of your Minor, that the Church of Rome is she, to whom those properties belong. For the further confirmation whereof, you undertake to prove, that our congregations have no interest to these titles, and this you do, not by way of comparison, but by an argument of contraries. But let us take it, as it is, and fall to the examination of your proofs, yet still with this proviso, that the Church of Rome, cannot be concluded to be the true Church, nor our congregations false Churches, though you had, and we wanted all these marks, as you understand them. A. D. §. 4. §. SECT. I. That the Roman Church only is one. First I find that the Protestants Church is not perfectly One, or uniform in dogmatical points of faith, but variable, according to the variety of times and persons, now holding one thing, than an other; and that the learned men thereof, are so much at jar among themselves, in matters of faith, that it is hard to find three, in all points, of one opinion, and (which is chiefly to be pondered, as principally appertaining to the mark of Unity) they have no means to end their controversies, so to return to Unity, and to continue therein. For while as they admit no rule of faith, but only Scripture: which scriptures divers men expound diversly, according to the divers humours and affections, opinions and fantasies of every one, never one admitting any one head or chief ruler, infallibly guided by the holy Ghost in his doctrine to whose censure in matters of faith, every one should of necessity submit themselves, Vt capite constituto, schismatis tollatur occasio: that, (as Saint Jerome speaketh) a Lib. 2. cont. jovin. head or chief ruler being ordained, occasion of schism or division may be taken away. Whilst they do thus (as they all do thus, all proclaiming to be ruled by only Scripture, and yet almost in every one, in one point or other, expounding Scripture diversly, and one contrary to an other, according to the divers seeming of every one's sense; and never one admitting any one superior, infallibly guided by the holy Ghost, to whose definitive sentence he and the rest will be bound to submit their doctrine and expositions): whilst (I say) they do thus, it is unpossible that they should In fidei occurrere unitatem, S. Hier. in cap. 4. ad Ephes. meet (as Saint Hierome counseleth) in the unity of faith. The which unity in profession of faith notwithstanding, is one principal thing pertaining to the unity of the Church: and unity of the Church, is one chief mark, by which we must discern which is the true Church. chose the Roman Church is always one and uniform in faith, never varying, or holding any dogmatical point contrary to that, which in former times, from the beginning it did hold. The learned men thereof, though sometimes differing in opinion, in matters not defined by the Church, yet inmatters of faith all conspire in one. And no marvel, because they have a most convenient means to keep unity in profession of faith, sith they do acknowledge one chief Pastor appointed over them (to wit the successor of Saint Peter) to whose definitive censure in matters concerning religion, they wholly submit themselves, knowing that to Saint Peter (and Matth. 16. his successors) Christ our Saviour promised the keys of the kingdom of Heaven: and that he would upon him (and his successors) as upon a sure rock, build his Church. Knowing also that the same our Saviour did specially pray for Saint Peter (and every Luke. 22. one his lawful successor) that this faith should not fail (at least so far, as to teach the Church a false faith) to the intent, that he might be always able to confirm his brethren, if at any time, they should fail in the doctrine of faith. Knowing last, that to Saint Peter and his successors (which word I add, not without sufficient Chrysost. lib. 2. de Sacerdotio. S. Leo Ser. 2. de annivers. assumpt. suae ad Pontif. joan. 21. authority and reason) Christ our Lord gave most ample power over his universal Church, saying, Pasce oves meas, feed my sheep: that is to say, Rule or govern as chief Pastor under me, my sheep; that is, all those that pertain to the sheepfold, which is the Church; giving him and his successors charge to feed them, with the food of true doctrine of faith: and consequently binding these his sheep, to receive obediently this food of true doctrine of faith at their hands: and consequently tying himself so to assist him, and his successors, with the guiding of the holy Ghost, that they should always propose unto the flock of Christ (which is his universal Church) the food of true faith, and that they should never teach (ex Cathedra) any thing contrary to true faith: sith if he should not thus assist, but should permit them to teach the Church errors in faith, than the Church, which a Luke. 10. Matth. 23. Matth. 16. john. 16. he hath bound to hear this Pastor in all points, might contrary to his purpose, err, nay should by him be bound to err, which without blasphemy cannot be said. All Catholic learnedmen therefore knowing this, do acknowledge that the definitive sentence of this chief Pastor (either alone, or at least with a general Council) must needs be always an unfallible & undoubted truth; and that therefore they may safely, yea they must necessarily submit all their judgements and opinions, either in interpreting scripture, or otherwise in matters concerning religion, to the censure of this Apostolic seat. The which while they do, (as they must always do, if they will be accounted Catholic men, and will not cast out themselves, or be cast out of the company of Catholics) how is it possible that one should dissent from another in matters of faith, or at least obstinately (as heretics do) err in any point of Faith? So that this difference may be assigned betwixt any sect of heretics and the Roman Church, that heretics are a company not united among themselves by any link, which is able to contain and continue them in unity of faith: whereas the Roman Church is Plebs sacerdoti adunata, & grex Pastori suo adhaerens, as S. Cyprian saith, a Church should be a people joined to their Priest, and a flock cleaving to their Pastor, whom whilst it heareth, as it is alway Cypr. lib. 4. Epist. 9 bound to do, it is unpossible, but that it should retain the unity of faith: like as on the contrary side, according to the saying of Saint Cyprian: Non aliunde haereses obortae sunt, aut nata schismata, Lib. 1. Epist. 3. quam inde quòd sacerdoti Dei non obtemperatur; nec unus in Ecclesia ad tempus Sacerdos, nec unus judex vice Christi cogitatur: Not from any other root have heresies and schisms sprung up but from this, that men do not obey the Priest of God, neither do they consider how that in the Church there is one Priest and one judge, for the time, in steed of Christ. A. W. In propounding these matters against us (of your proof I will speak afterward) there are a few things worthy observation, that your dealing may be manifest to all men. First, you talk of the Protestants Church, as if we (like you) fancied to ourselves some one church, beside which there should be none in the whole world: whereas we acknowledge several Churches in divers countries to be entire in themselves, without dependence of any one upon any other. Yet do we not deny, that there is a certain communion betwixt and among all true Churches, which consists in their agreement in doctrine, about all matters of the foundation, and the mutual helps of prayer, and of other Christians duties to be performed by one congregation to and for another. In this respect there is one Church of Protestants; and whatsoever company holdeth not the foundation, is no true Church, nor to be counted a member of the Protestants Church. Secondly, I would know why you require that our Church should be perfectly one: since you mentioned no such matter, in setting down & expounding the first property of the Church. If you answer, that to be one, and to be perfectly one, is all one: I pray you remember, that this term perfectly should either have been put in before, or been left out now. Otherwise, seeing you never tell us, that it is all one, whether a Church be one, or perfectly one, why should we not make our advantage of your words, and presume that our Church is held by you to be one, though it want somewhat of I know not what perfection imagined by you: which yet you forget, when you come to show that your church is one. Thirdly, how doth this strange speech, uniform in dogmatical points of faith, agree with that plainness which you profess, for instructing of the simple? But in good earnest, what mean you by dogmatical points? It had been very fit you should have used other terms, or at least have expounded these for the understanding of the ignorant. But this dark speech makes more for you, because it may perhaps afford you some starting hole, if you be hard driven. Yet a man may guess at your meaning, because when you come to prove that the Church of Rome is one, you seem to interpret dogmatical points to be matters of faith defined by the Church. If we take it in this sense, I marvel how you can charge our Churches with variableness in this respect? What one point was ever defined by the general consent of our Churches, which hath been since altered by like consent? If you can show none, as I may well presume you cannot; till you do, then are our Churches in dogmatical points of faith, as perfectly one, as yours so much bragged of. Now to your argument, which is thus to be concluded: That Church which is variable, according to the variety of times and persons, etc. the learned men whereof are at jar among themselves in matters of faith, etc. and have no means to end their controversies, is not one. But such is the Protestants Church. Therefore the Protestants Church is not one. I deny your mayor: variety of opinions, differences of learned To the proposition. men, without means to end their controversies, do not prove any Church, not to be one, unless the matters, about which they differ, be of the foundation: so that the ignorance of them, or error in them, be in itself damnable. To make my answer plain, I will handle as shortly as I can, the several points of your proposition. The Apostles, disciples and other believers, in our saviours time were (doubtless) the true Church, and so always continued in general, though some of them haply fell away: being the true Church, they were also one by your own confession; yet did they not always hold the same dogmatical points of faith, but varied in matters of very great moment. For a time, yea all the time of our saviours Christ's life, q Act. 1. 6. till his ascension, they believed that his kingdom was not only spiritual, but also of this world. r Mark. 16. 11. They were ignorant of that high point concerning his resurrection, s Rom. 4. 25. 1. Cor. 15. 14. 17 without which there is no justification. Yea after the descending of the holy Ghost upon them, t Act. 10. 15. they held it unlawful to impart the Gospel to the Gentiles. Put case now, that some of those who followed our Saviour, had continued in these opinions, and that you had been to give sentence, whether they & their company had been the true church, or the Apostles and people that clave to them: surely you must needs, according to this first part of your reason, have condemned the innocent, and justified the wicked. For the Apostles Church was not one, because it had varied from some opinions formerly held by it, which the other company still retained. As for your odious manner of propounding the point, according to the variety of times and persons, it is but a froth of words, and might in regard of the change, have been charged in like sort upon the Apostles. As for the dissent of learned men one from another, neither was the Church ever so happy as to be without it, and you acknowledge it among your own writers, though not in matters of faith; the contrary whereof I will show when I come to that place. But if by matters of faith, you meant such points as are fundamental, I could somewhat the rather hearken to you. And yet what shall it hinder a Church from being one, that the learned men of it make question of such main matters, as long as the Church is not tainted with their private errors? Did the Churches of Corinth or Galatia cease to be true Churches, because some among them (and as it should seem no small number) u 1. Cor. 15. 11 in the former denied the resurrection of the flesh; x Gal. 3. 4. 5. in the other joined the works of the law with faith to justification? yet were both these fundamental errors, the continuance wherein without repentance, must needs bring certain damnation. But your matters of faith are all points, though never so frivolous or false, that your Church hath determined by her lawless tyranny: whereas many matters of far greater importance, not so decreed, are left free for every man to err in, or to be ignorant of, without any danger of damnation, or breach of unity. This last point (as you say) is the principal matter appertaining to unity, that there be means in the Church to end controversies. But why, or how should this be so principal, when as the Church may agree in the same points of doctrine, though private men descent from each other? Indeed to the procuring of an outward peace, it is very requisite that particular men be not suffered to preach or write one against another. But neither is this peace so much worth, as that for it the Church should be corrupted with errors: and the chief power for the remedying of this inconvenience, is in the hands of the chief Magistrate, whose duty it is to provide that his subjects y 1. Tim. 2. 2. may lead a quiet and a peaceable life, in all godliness and honesty. Therefore neither doth this disagreement among the learned, make the Church cease to be one, though there be no means to end it; which yet are not wanting in the true Churches. Your minor also is false in every part of it. Variableness in points of faith according to the variety of times and persons, is when To the Assumption. (in regard of these two) the doctrine of the Church is altered. Now who is so shameless as to charge us with having altered, and daily altering our judgements in respect of either of these? What necessity or occasion can variety of time bring for the change of doctrine? But for persons, what sect, profession, church or company in the world, ever was or could be freer from depending on any man's person, than we are, who absolutely disclaim all men's authority over our faith? Are not you they, that z 12. Art. Part. 1. art. 2. charge us with leaving the interpretation of Scripture, and consequently the belief of every man to his own private humour? And yet you are not ashamed, to accuse us for variableness in our doctrine, according to the variety of persons. If malice were not blind, it were unpossible you should slander us, with so manifest contrarieties. You are the men, whose faith dependeth upon the persons of your Popes, whom you follow blindfold, whither soever any of them leadeth you. We attribute to our teachers no impossibility of erring, though we have a reverend opinion of their knowledge and faithfulness; in regard whereof we do not lightly reject any doctrine, or exposition delivered by them, unless it be apparently false. Yet do we not tie ourselves to take whatsoever they teach, as a matter of faith, though we are ready to yield to any thing which is plainly proved to us out of the word of God, how contrary soever it be to our former opinions. For we know, that men are subject to error, and that God doth not miraculously reveal all truth at once to any man; but as it seems good to his gracious wisdom, piece by piece enlighteneth the understanding of his servants with the knowledge of his will and word, according to their sincerity in depending on him, faith in calling upon him, & diligence in searching the Scriptures, the only sufficient means of instruction. The second part of your slander is, that our learned men so jar in matters of faith, that it is hard to find three in all points of one opinion. Remember what you call matters of faith, points of doctrine defined by the Church: and forbear blushing if you can, when you read this your accusation against us. What other refutation shall I need to use, than the bare naming of the harmony of our confessions, wherein the most partial Reader of your side may discern your shameless hyperbole, that I may give it a cleanlier term than it deserveth. To requite your kindness, I challenge you to name me (if you can) any one of your schoolmen, that hath not refuted some of his own fellows in some points, or been refuted by them. I confess there are many of them, that I have not read: but I am so well acquainted with their courses, and contradicting of one another, that I may venture without adventure, to make this challenge. Last of all your minor affirms, that a See my answer to 12. art. part. 1. art. 5. our learned men have no means to end their controversies. If you speak of the event, that our means are not sufficient de facto, to make them that strive, to agree in one opinion, or to make all men to be of one mind: I grant that you say to be true; but I add withal, that we may have, when we will, as good means to this purpose, as your Church hath. For it is no more but to appoint some man, to whose judgement we will stand in all matters of controversy. What heretical Church may not have the same means of unity, if it please? But if you deny that, de iure, we have means sufficient for the ending of all questions: I say your minor is utterly false, because we have the Scriptures appointed and blessed to that end by God himself. Now as the ministery of the word is most sufficient for the begetting of faith, and saving of men, though it have not this excellent effect in all: so the Scriptures are of absolute sufficiency to cut off all controversies, howsoever men will not always be ruled by them. Your minor (as we have seen) contains a grievous accusation of us in three points of no small importance. To which we plead not guilty, and look to hear what evidence cometh against us, to prove the inditement. But you, rather like the foreman of the grand inquest, than the plaintiff that endites us, instead of proving, come in with I find that the Protestants Church is not perfectly one. This will not serve the turn: we must know how you find it, or at least be assured that you have found it. Who would not laugh at such an evidence? But though you leave the two former points to the credulousness of your Popish followers, yet you attempt the proof of the last by this Syllogism. They that admit no rule of faith but only Scriptures, and allow no infallible interpreter thereof, to whose judgement they will stand, have no means to end their controversies, and return to unity. But the Protestant Churches admit no rule of faith, but only Scriptures, and allow no infallible interpreter thereof, to whose judgement they will stand. Therefore the Protestant Churches have no means to end their controversies, and return to unity. I deny your mayor: for the Scripture alone contains all truth necessary to be believed, and that so plainly, that without any To the proposition. such sovereign judgement of any man, it is possible for a reasonable man to discern truth from falsehood. But if any man will be contentious, we have the sword of the magistrate, and the censure of excommunication to bring him into order, or to cut him off if he be incurable, that the unity of our Churches be not dissolved either by heresic or schism. But to confirm your proposition: you allege b Hieron. adu. jovin. lib. 1. Jerome's authority, that there must be a head or chief ruler, that occasion of schism may be taken away. The danger of schism that Jerome speaks of in his first book against jovinian (not as your Printer quotes it, in the second) was not in respect of doctrine, but of outward peace. Neither was this course held from the beginning (as Jerome saith) but in discretion appointed upon occasion. Before that, by the malice of the devil (saith c Hieron. ad Tit. cap. 1. Jerome) the Church was divided into factions, and one man held of Paul, another of Apollo, another of Cephas, Churches were governed by common consent of the Presbyters; but after that every man began to think, that those which he had baptised were his and not Christ's: it was decreed over all the world, that one chosen from among the Presbyters, should be set over the rest, to whom the whole care of the Church should appertain, and that the seeds of schisms might be taken away. Out of which sentence of Jerome, we may observe these points: First, that this means of procuring unity, belongeth not (necessarily) to the nature of the Church: for than it must needs have been as ancient as the Church. But Jerome telleth us, that there was a time when the Church was without it, and that in her best estate while the Apostles lived. By little and little (saith d Hieron. ubi supra. Jerome afterward) that the plants of dissension might be plucked up, the whole care was laid upon one. Secondly, whereas in the place alleged by you, Jerome acknowledgeth such a superiority in Peter above the other Apostles, in respect of age, for which (as he saith) he was preferred before john: yet there is more heed to be taken to his judgement in this place, where he disputes the question without all passion, then to that which he speaks in the heat of disputation against jovinian. But what need we any better proof of this point, than Saint Paul affords us? He blameth the Corinthians, because some held of Paul, some of Apollo's, some of Cephas. Cephas or Peter is the last: why not the first rather, if he were (as you say) the head? Or why should the Corinthians be reproved for cleaving to him especially, if he were appointed to be the chief? It might be a fault to depend on Paul or on Apollo's, who were (in your judgement) underlings: but it was a great virtue to hang upon Cephas the head. How forgetful was the Apostle Paul both of his duty to Peter his head, and of so ready a means to end that schism, that would not tell them that Peter was appointed head, to the end all occasion of schism might be taken away? Thirdly, we are not so to understand Jerome, as if he had said, that there was one head appointed over the whole world, but that in all places where there were multitudes of Presbyters, order was taken that some one chosen from among the rest, should be chief and principal in that Diocese, as I may speak, and over all them which were in some sort accounted to be but one body. This agreeth with the practice of those times, and with that of f Cypr. ad Corn. epist. 55. §. 6. Vide ibi Goulact. ad annot. 17. Cyprian: Here of spring heresies, and schisms arise, that the Priest of the Lord is not obeyed. Which Cyprian speaks of every several Bishop in his Diocese. Whereunto also belongs that of g Hieron. ad Rusticum. Jerome: There be several Bishops of Churches, several Archbishops, and several Archdeacon's, and all the Ecclesiastical order is stayed by the governors. Whereby (saith h Gloss. ad 7. q. 2. c. in apib●●s the Gloss) Jerome proveth that there may not be two or more Bishops in one Church: but that there must be a several Bishop in every several Church. To which purpose I may farther allege another place of Jerome: Unless (saith i Hieron. contra Luciferian. Jerome) the Bishop have a special power above other, there will be as many schisms in the Church as there be Priests. This course then of authorizing some one of the Presbyters above the rest, was for the preserving of order, and keeping out of schism, not for the determining of controversies in Religion, as if all must have stood to one man's judgement in questions of Divinity: which either may be ended by the authority of the Scriptures, if they be necessary to be determined, or if they be not, may be forbidden to be proceeded in, without any danger to the Church's liberty. So that the Protestant Churches fully agree in matters of substance, and want not means to settle peace in questions of less importance: or if they did, might easily have as good means as your Church, by appointing a Pope over themselves, as in policy you have done. But as yet they find no such need, especially where the remedy is worse than the disease, as it must needs be in so lawless a tyranny. Is it not more for the glory of God, & good of the Church, as I have said k Answer to 12. Art part. 1. art. 5. otherwhere, that there should be continual disagreement in some matters of Religion, then that all should believe & maintain false doctrine? Were not our Saviour Christ better have a troubled church, than none at all? Honourable war is to be preferred before dishonourable peace, in the judgement of any wise statesman. And can it be more glorious to God, to have outward quietness in the Church with heresy, yea with Antichristianisme, than truth with contention? True Christian unity consists principally in truth of religion, without which the greatest agreement is but a conspiracy against God. We are now come to the principal point of your Minor, wherein it stands you upon to play the man, and to make good those four properties on the behalf of your Church of Rome. I must needs say, it would grieve a man to take so much pains to so little purpose; because if you prove all that now you undertake, all that is as good as nothing, till your Mayor and your former syllogisms be better confirmed. But yet if you quit yourself well in this, your Church shall be more beholding to you, than it was ever yet to any of your fellows, in this question. To begin withal, you propound the question somewhat favourably, that the Roman Church holds not any dogmatical points contrary to that, which in former times, from the beginning it did hold. It were much indeed, your Church should teach contrary doctrines to those it hath heretofore taught, & I think you can hardly name me any heresy so gross, as to fall from one contrary to an other. Your schoolmen have set up a mint, wherein they coin us every day new distinctions, to colour matters in such sort, that your new opinions shall never appear to be contrary to your old doctrine. Having thus pitched the state of the question, it seemeth you thought there needed no proof thereof; once it is apparent you offer not (directly) to bring any in this whole discourse: but rather endeavour to show us the reason of this their agreement, because forsooth they acknowledge, that the definitive sentence of the Pope, (either alone, or at least with a general Council) must needs be always an unfallible undoubted truth. Of which in due place. But to take your matter as it lies. That Church (say you) which holdeth no dogmatical point contrary to that, which informer times from the beginning it did hold, is always one. But the Church of Rome holdeth no dogmatical point contrary to that, which informer times, from the beginning, it did hold. Therefore the Church of Rome is always one. The question is not, which Church is always one, in regard of To the proposition. not varying from that, which first it held, but which is always one, according to the meaning of the Nicene Creed, that is, which Church continueth in the truth of the Gospel. For otherwise an heretical Church might be acknowledged to be one, and so a true Church, because it remaineth obstinate in that heresy, which at first it embraced. Therefore your Mayor is not true simply, but only upon this supposition, that your Church at the first held the truth. But because we gladly acknowledge, that the Church of Rome was at the first sound in faith, I will leave your Proposition, and come to your Assumption. Your Minor is excepted against by us (as you cannot choose but know) in very many points, and some of them concerning To the Assumption. the foundation of Christian Religion. For trial whereof we appeal to the Epistle to the Romans, about matters of Faith, Grace, justification, Free will, Predestination, and other that necessarily depend upon these. Here are you as dumb as a fish, and like a man that had neither ears nor eyes, pass by this exception, without taking any knowledge of it. Is this a direct way (according to your promise in your title) to settle men's minds in all doubts, questions and controversies, concerning matters of faith? You might as well without all this ado, have told them in one word, that the Church of Rome is the true Church, and cannot err. For in effect what do you else, when after many circumstances, the question is brought to this issue, whether the Church of Rome hold the same doctrine, which in the Apostles time she professed? You tell us she doth, without any proof of that you say, or answer to our manifold exceptions. I will not enter into particulars, as well because I see my answer grows greater than I intended or like of, as also for that the several controversies betwixt you and us, are so many several exceptions against this Assumption. For very pure shame, you are driven to confess, that there are differences of opinion, among the learned of your side. But to help the matter withal, you qualify it with sometimes. Sometimes say you? Either your reading must be very little, or your boldness exceeding great, that you mince the matter in this sort, with sometimes. Answer my former challenge, if you can, concerning the wars among your schoolmen; or do but look into Cardinal Bellarmine's controversies, and then tell me, whether these differences be but sometimes, or no. What learned writer almost is there of any fame on your part, whom Bellarmine doth not dissent from, in one point or other? I might give many instances, but there is no man that reads him, ignorant of that I say, and you have found a shift for this matter, by interpreting dogmatical points of Faith, to be matters defined by the Church. Wherein we are first to consider how absurdly you limit matters of faith: Secondly to show, that even in these matters so limited, there is not always agreement amongst your writers. The use and office of faith (as it is only an assent) is to give undoubted credit to the whole truth of God, by acknowledging it both to be from God, and to be true. For proof of this, if any man desire it, I refer him, l Chap. 3. & 4. to the third and forth Chapters of this treatise, where you speak of the infallibleness and entireness of faith. But though this be the duty of faith, it hath pleased God to deal graciously with men, touching the means of their salvation, and not to exact upon absolute necessity, an acknowledging, or knowledge of every particular point of his truth. Some things are such, as I showed before, as that without them there is no possibility of salvation, but that whosoever is ignorant of them, m Ignorantia. Pr●uatiua. Negativa. either by neglecting the means of knowledge, or by having no possibility to attain unto it, he is utterly shut out (for aught we know) from the kingdom of heaven. Other points there are, which every man must labour to know, and believe, because they are to that end revealed by God; but yet the simple ignorance of them, so it be without contempt or carelessness, doth not deprive a man of salvation by Christ. The former of these two kinds are more properly matters of faith, being absolutely necessary to salvation. You speak of matters of faith, as though not the points in themselves, but the determination of the Church should make a necessity of them to salvation. So that the not believing of the least matter of ceremony enjoined by the Church, shall be more damnable than the ignorance of the greatest point of Divinity, being not so determined. But I would fain know of you, how I shall understand what is to be accounted determined by the Church? You confess afterward, that it is questionable whether the chief Pastor, that is the Pope alone, or he with a general Council, be the Church which cannot err. Doubtless, if it be (as you n Chap. 4. taught us before) of necessity to salvation, that we believe entirely all points of faith, without misbelieving any one; what hope of salvation shall be left to any Papist, who cannot by any means know what is determined by the Church, and what is not? Or if he may be sure that matters defined by the Pope and a Council, are decided by the Church; yet since it is not so determined, whether the Pope alone be sufficient to determine of points in controversy, he may refuse to obey some constitutions of the Pope, or to believe some questions decided by him; and thereby shut himself out of heaven, for not giving credit to the determination of the Church, if that authority of determining be in the Pope, and he command men so to believe. But if this determination of the Church be jointly in the Pope and Counsels, and that nothing is a matter of faith, but that which is so determined to be, than was there almost no matter of faith at all in the Church, till within these last 800 years. For it is more than evident to any man, that will not be wilfully contentious, that the Pope never bore any extraordinary sway in Counsels, till he had proclaimed himself universal Bishop, which was by the grant of the murderer Phocas, six hundred years after the beginning of the Gospel. What shall we think of the Churches in the Apostles times, and so forward, o Anno. 325. till the Council of Nice, in which the Pope's supremacy was not heard of? Had Christians then no matters of faith to believe? How should they, if all depend upon the Pope and a general Council? Let me grant that those Counsels in p Act. 15. 29. the Acts were general: what was there determined, but that the Gentiles were to abstain from things offered to Idols, and blood, and that which is strangled, and from fornication? Was nothing a matter of faith, but these few points: which also till this time were not matters of faith? Either show some good reason, why matters of faith were not, at this time of the Apostles living, to be tied to general Counsels and the Pope, & yet now must be; or confess the truth to the glory of God, that matters of faith have their authority, to be matters of faith, from the word of God, and not from the determination of Pope or Council, or both. Neither think to shift of the matter, by saying they are indeed matters of faith in themselves, but not to us. For so it will come to pass, that we shall say, the first Christians had no points that were matters of faith to them, because they had none determined by the Church in a Council, which opinion is I know not whether of more absurdity or impiety. Now that you agreement in matters of faith, after the determination of the Church, is not so great, as you would make the world believe; it may appear by the very ground of religion, the Canon of the Scripture: which was determined of (by your judgement) in q Concil. Carthag. can. 47. the Council of Carthage: wherein the Apocryphal books (say you) were allowed for Canonical: yet (saith r Bellarm. de verbo Dei lib. 1. cap. 7. Sect. Hactenus. Bellarmine) Nicholas Lyra, Denys the Carthusian, Hugo de sancto victore, & s Cardinalis Caietan. Thomas de Ʋio, both these (at least the last) Cardinals, follow jerom in rejecting them, as Apocryphal. But if this Council may be excepted against, sure (in your judgement) the Council of Trent may not, t Concil. Trident. Sess 4. which hath received those books into the canon of the scripture. Yet for all that, u Sixtus Senensis. biblioth. sanctae. lib. 1. & 8. Sixtus Senensis keeper of the Pope's library, maketh bold to deny them such authority, even since that Council, as x Bellar. ubi supra. Bellarmine himself confesseth. And y Arias Montanus praef ad biblia interlin. Arias Montanus, since that time, doubteth not to say, that the Orthodox or true Church, following the Canon of the Hebrews, accounteth those books of the old Testament, written in Greek, to be Apocryphal. What say you to your Bishop Catharin, who being one of the Council of Trent, after the determination of the Council, against assurance of salvation, z Sotus in Apolog. contra Catharin. defendeth that such assurance, (notwithstanding that decree of the Council) may ordinarily be had by them that believe? You would persuade us, that it is a ruled case of your Church, long ago, that the Scriptures are not sufficient without tradition. What saith a Scotus prolog. in 1. senten. q. 2. Scotus in this case? Whatsoever pertaineth to heavenly and supernatural knowledge, and is necessary to be known of men in this life, is sufficiently delivered in the holy scriptures. The holy scripture (saith b joan. Gerson. serm. in die circumcis. consid. 1. Gerson) is sufficient for the government of the Church: or else was Christ an unperfect Lawgiver. I might run on in the like course, touching other points, but these shall serve for a taste: and so I pass over to your proof, that the learned on your side, cannot possibly dissent one from another. They which acknowledge, that the definitive sentence of the Pope is to be rested upon, as an undoubted truth, cannot possibly dissent in matters of faith. But all Catholic learned men acknowledge, that the Pope's sentence is such. Therefore no Catholic learned men can possibly dissent in matters of faith. All you conclude is, that in matters determined by the Pope and a Council, your learned men cannot disagree, To the syllogism. because they hold, that such a determination is certainly true: yet for all this (as I have showed) your Church may be rend in pieces with contrary opinions in matters of as great moment, as most are in religion: & if, for all this, it cease not to be a true Church, why should not the Protestants have the like privilege, who have the same opinion of the Scriptures, that you have of the Pope? Be not so injurious to reason, or blasphemous against God, as to avouch that no controversy can be ended by the word, because divers men will expound it diversly. For it is contrary both to religion and sense, to imagine that the Lord would give his people such a Scripture as cannot be certainly understood in all points necessary to salvation, but by I know not what revelation to some one man. More particularly I deny your Mayor. They that acknowledge To the proposition. such an authority in the Pope, may yet differ in opinion about matters of faith. I bring you example in that point of assurance, wherein Catharin disputed against that doctrine, which Sotus and your writers generally since the Council of Trent, affirm to have been the certain decree of the Council. Yet were they both present in the Council, and none of the meanest there assembed. The reason of that their dissent, and the possibility of the like betwixt other men, ariseth from this, that decrees of Counsels and Popes, being set down in writing, may be diversly interpreted, and so the meaning of them mistaken, as c Catharin. tract. 2. Catharin saith, that he foresaw some men would misunderstand the Council of Trent in that point. This is all the inconveniences, you can allege in admitting the Scripture for judge, and this followeth the decrees of Counsels and Popes at the least, as much as the writings of the holy Ghost: who was as able, and as careful to speak so, that all whom it concerned, might understand him, as the holiest of your Counsels or Popes. I can hardly persuade myself, that any man of learning, let To the Assumption. him be never so Catholic, as you term him, can believe, that the Pope alone, or the Pope, and a Council cannot err. But it is an opinion devised and retained in politic discretion, to keep things in an outward quietness, & to advance the estate of your Clergy. I may not enter into the discussing of this privilege you claim: for it would ask much time, and a long discourse, but I will touch it, as far as you give me necessary occasion, and so proceed to that which followeth. And first concerning the Popes own person; which seemeth to be your best plea, being alleged in the first place, and almost wholly stood upon: you cannot be so ignorant, as not to know that divers learned men on your side, confess and maintain, that the Pope may err. Many Popes (saith d Lyra. ad Mat. 16. Lyra) have been found to have been Apostates from the faith. The Pope (saith c Ambros. Catharin. ad Galat. 2. conclus. 1 Catharin) may err, and fall utterly from the faith. And although in f Conclus. 2. his second conclusion he tells us, that the Pope, as Pope, that is sitting (you call it ex Cathedra, out of his chair) and lawfully, (according to the rite of using the key of knowledge particularly committed to him) determining a matter of faith, cannot err; so that he shall define any thing against faith: yet he addeth afterward that the Pope may decree, by way of a commandment, or Law, some false, or unjust thing: so that (saith he) there are many decrees of Popes found to be divers, and contrary one to another. And can every learned man, think you, judge, which decrees the Pope made, as Pope, and which as a man? What idle and uncertain fooleries are these distinctions? I do not believe (saith g Alfons à Castro. contr. haeres. lib. 1. cap. 4. Christoph. de ca font. de necess. cor. theol. schol. fol. 53. b. Alfousus) that the Pope hath any flatterer so impudent, to grant him this prerogative, that he can never err, nor be deceived in expounding Scripture. I have learned of the school Doctors (saith a late Archbishop of yours) that any Pope may err as a Doctor, or as a man, but not as a judge. And this he speaketh of a decree of Pope Eugenius the fourth, which many Divines (as himself confesseth) take to be a decree of the Council of Florence. Yet Bishop Catharin boldly affirmeth, that there are many things, in the said decree, which if they be strictly taken, and according Apud Christoph. ubi supra. to the proper meaning of the words, will be found to be false, and therefore (as he saith) need a favourable interpretation. Yea the same Archbishop is not afraid to refute (as he pretendeth by the authority of the Council of Trent) the judgement and determination of three Popes, Eugenius the fourth, Clemens the Eugen. in decr. Clew. & Pius. in praefat. ad. Missa. Roman. eight, and Pius the fifth: the two last having set out their Missals since the Council of Trent, and yet (as he thinketh) resolving concerning the words of consecration, contrary to the judgement of the Council. It may appear also by his Epistle dedicatory, that a fourth Pope Sixtus the fifth, to whom he writeth that Treatise, was of the same opinion in that matter, with those his predeceslors, from whom the Archbishop maketh bold to dissent, as he doth from Thomas of Aquine and all his followers. But what name I private men, although excellently learned? Let us hear a whole general Council speak. We condemn and depose (saith h Concil. Basil. sess. 34. the Council of Basil,) Pope Eugenius a despiser of the holy Canons, a disturber of the peace, and unity of the Church of God, a man notoriously scandalous to the universal Church, a Simoniac, a for sworn man, incorrigible, aschismaticke, fallen from the faith, and an obstinate heretic. And for the avowing of this their act, they speak thus i Concil. Basil. inter epist. Syn. in another place: We have heard and read, that many Popes have fallen into error and heresy: it is certain that the Pope may err. The Council hath often condemned and deposed the Pope, both for his heresy in faith, and his lewdness in life. I might add hereunto the authority of the k Concil. Const. sess. 4. Council of Constance, which binds the Pope to be obedient to the decrees of Counsels. But that which I have said, may suffice to show, that all learned Papists do not know, the Pope cannot err. But you undertake to prove they do know it, because of certain places of Scripture, wherein our Saviour makes a promise of not erring to Peter and his successors. To all which I answer in general, that those learned men and Counsels before alleged, did know that these places were brought to prove the Pope's privilege of not erring, and notwithstanding held it for an undoubted truth, that he might err: you may bear with us then, though we make question of it. In particular I answer to the places alleged, concerning Saint Peter's privilege. l Math. 16. 19 The keys signify nothing but power to open and shut heaven, to bind and loose, by retaining or remitting the sins of men. The plain sense of those words (saith m Bellar. de Rom. Pont. li. 1. cap. 12. §. Verun. Bellarmine) is this, that first the authority is promised, or the power noted out by the keys; then the actions and office are expounded by those words, to bind and loose. And in the verse before, he finds fault with n Caiet. de insti. & author. Rom. Pont. cap 5. Caietan for endeavouring to stretch that grant, to I know not what farther matter. I forbear to set down any proof of this exposition, because it is clear enough of itself, if we compare this promise with the performance of it in john's Gospel: o joa. 21. 22. 23 Receive the holy Ghost (saith our Saviour) whose sins soever ye remit, they are remitted unto them: and whose sins soever ye retain, they are retained. Secondly I say, that p Bellar. ubi supra. §. Dices. this power was not peculiar to Peter, but common to him with all the Apostles, yea with all ministers, who are their successors in preaching the Gospel, shutting and opening, binding and losing. We affirm (saith q Bell. ubi supr. §. His igitur. Bellarmine) that in those words, Math. 18. (which are of the same nature with the other, Math. 16.) nothing is granted, but only it is there declared and foretold, what power the Apostles and their successors were to have. Those things (saith r Maldonat. ad Math. 18. Maldonatus) that are here promised to Peter, agree not only to him, but to all Apostles, Bishops, and Priests. Whereupon s Theophyl. ad Mat. 18. Theophylact saith, that although it was said to Peter only, I will give thee the keys: yet the keys were granted to all the Apostles: when? when he said, whose sins you forgive. Therefore this promise of giving the keys, conveys no other privilege to Peter then to all the Apostles, yea to all true ministers of the Gospel, by the judgement of your own jesuits. But t Luc. 22. 32. Christ prayed especially for Peter, that his faith might not fail. And good reason, not without need: for he knew that Satan would tempt him shrewdly, and give him a fouler foil than ever he gave any of his other Apostles. Yet u August. de verb. Dom. secund. Lucam. serm. 36. Austin brings in our Saviour speaking in general: I have prayed the Father for you all, that your faith might not fail. As for your Gloss, that our Saviour prayed for him, that his faith should not fail, (at least so far, as to teach the Church a false faith:) what one word is there in the text, to enough any such conceit? Beside it is apparent, that our Saviour spoke not x Luc Brugens. ad Luc. 22. of his Apostleship, but of his faith, as he was a Christian, wherein he had failed finally, if our Saviour had not mightily upheld him: and in this faith was he fit to confirm his brethren, as y Heb. 4. 15. & 2. 17. having had so extraordinary experience of Satan's temptation. But if this prayer were made for Peter, that he might not teach false doctrine, belike either he was more subject to that danger then the rest of the Apostles, or they were left by our Saviour in a continual danger of erring: which opinion is a very near neighbour to blasphemy. But what a pitiful consequence is this, Our Saviour prayed that Peter's faith might not fail; therefore the Pope cannot err? All the hold you have left, is in the charge given to Peter, z joan. 21. 15. to feed Christ's sheep: that is, to be painful and faithful in preaching of the Gospel. And this interpretation is agreeable to reason, that our Saviour requiring a proof of Peter's love, should charge him to make it manifest, by taking pains to feed his sheep. But your exposition is absurd, whereby you would have livery and seisin of sovereign authority in the Church given to him by these words: If thou love me (saith our Saviour, according to your exposition) take upon thee the sovereign government of the Church. This were a poor proof of Peter's love, which is there demanded. You will say, the charge of feeding was common to all the Apostles; but here the Lord speaketh particularly to Peter. He doth indeed. And do you not see the reason of it? Peter, because of his grievous fall, had need of such a charge, both for his better autorizing, and his greater care. He speaks chiefly to Peter (saith your friar a joan. Ferus ad joan. 21. 19 Ferus) and to him escecially commends his sheep, that he might utterly abolish the remembrance of his denial. For because he had fallen more grievously than the other, and had more obstinately denied Christ, he stood in need of peculiar charge, lest by the remembrance of his denial, he might suspect that the common charge of the Apostleship belonged not to him. He remedies his denying thrice, by his confessing thrice, saith b Theoph. ibi. Theophylact: the like hath c Aug. in. joan. tract. 123. Hieron. in epit. Fabiola. Austin. Peter blatted out his three denial. (saith Jerome) by his three confessions. So then all that you have said of Peter not erring in matter of doctrine, is nothing worth: yet do we thankfully acknowledge that Peter could not err in matter of faith: but we say, that this was no privilege peculiar to him, but common also to the other Apostles, by virtue of their Apostleship. Wherein if no man succeed them, as questionless there are now no Apostles, no man can claim a privilege of not erring by any right from them, or any promise made to them. It is needless therefore to make many words concerning any successor of S. Peter: only I will signify how uncertain your Religion must needs be, that depends upon such points as these. You tell us the Pope cannot err. We believe you not, because we know he is (at the best) but a learned man, oftentimes not so much, sometimes d Alfons. á Castro. scarce able to understand his grammar. You prove he cannot err, because he is Peter's successor. We deny the consequence. Because he may succeed Peter in place, and yet not in office of Apostleship, whereby Peter had that privilege. But principally we deny your antecedent, that the Pope is Peter's successor. Now we look for some certain & evident proof. But alas there is none to be had. We therefore thus except against this imagined succession: First we say, there is no word of scripture to prove that ever Peter came at Rome. How then can it be a matter of faith, to hold that he was Bishop of Rome? Do not say, you must believe the Church: for the question is, whether you be the true Church or no. Secondly, we say farther, that it is somewhat uncertain, even in human stories, whether ever Peter were at Rome or no: and if it were certain, yet it were nor a certainty of faith, but of opinion. But that the force of your argument, and the truth of my answer may the better appear, I will propound your reason in form, and my exceptions against it. Peter's successor cannot err. The Pope is Peter's successor. Therefore the Pope cannot err. To the Mayor I answer, that he which succeeds Saint Peter To the Proposition. in his whole right, or in all his privileges, and namely that of his Apostleship, cannot err; but any other successor of his may err, because his privilege of not erring is a property of his Apostleship. The proof of your Mayor is thus to be framed: Proof of the Proposition. He to whom the keys are promised, for whom Christ prayed, that his faith might not fail, whom he charged to feed his sheep cannot err. But to Peter's successor Christ promised the keys, for him he prayed that his faith might not fail, him he charged to feed his sheep. Therefore Peter's successor cannot err. I deny the Mayor, if you take it in such sense, as though the To the proposition. power of not erring had been conveyed to Peter, by reason of this promise, prayer and charge: otherwise notwithstanding by him, Peter, I grant that he to whom this promise was made, that is Peter, could not err; yet was he not free from error by virtue of this promise, prayer or charge, as I showed before. The Minor is utterly false: the promise was made in general to all the Apostles; the prayer and charge were peculiar To the Assumption. to Peter's person, for such especial reason as I showed before, concerning his temptation to deny Christ, and his denial of him. But you tell us, that you do not apply that charge of feeding the sheep to Saint Peter's successors, without sufficient authority and reason. Then questionless you must be able to show us some warrant for your doing out of the Scriptures. For the testimony or opinion of man, is too weak a ground to build a matter of faith upon. And yet you bring us nothing but the word of a man to persuade us, and scarce that too. For whereas you allege d Chrysost. li. 2. de Sacerdot. Chrysostome to countenance the matter, it is but a copy of your countenance, rather to fear then hurt us. Chrysostome saith, that our Saviour shed his blood to purchase those sheep, the care whereof he committed to Peter and his successors. But who are these successors? All ministers, or (at the least) all Bishops. If you have read the place, I need not prove it to you. Chrysostome had caused Basil to be preferred to a Bishopric against his will. Hereupon Basil complains of unkind dealing. The other to excuse himself, undertakes to show that he had not only not hurt him, but also done him a pleasure, because he had thereby given him occasion and opportunity to manifest his love to Christ, by feeding of his flock, which he had committed to Peter and his successors. Now if Basil (in Chrysostoms' judgement) had not been one of Peter's successors, this had been a poor reason to persuade him that Chrysostome had not done him wrong. For than had he not received that charge, nor discharged that duty, to testify his love to Christ, since the love was to be testified by feeding the flock committed, according to that charge of our Saviour. e Leo serm. 1. de annivers. assump. sua ad Pontif. Leo indeed makes the Bishop of Rome Peter's successor. But he is too partial a man to be judge in his own cause. I deny not, but that he was ancient and learned, and I am persuaded, a holy man too; but yet there appear in him every where apparent marks of ambition, for the advancing of his own sea: which may perhaps be excused by human frailty, but cannot serve to prove a matter of so great importance. Your principal minor is false also, that the Pope is Peter's successor. To the principal assumption It was true of the first Bishops of Rome, that they were Peter's successors in the ministry of the Gospel, wherein they laboured faithfully and carefully. But this point of succession died long since, with the care to discharge that duty. For these last 800 years and upward, the Popes (generally) have succeeded the first revealed Antichrist, Boniface the third, in pride, tyranny, idleness, riot, and all kind of excess, no way resembling Saint Peter, either in truth of doctrine, or painfulness in preaching. That which you add, of I wot not what necessity lying upon God, to teach the Church all truth, and preserve it from erring, because he hath enjoined all men to hear it, without excepting or doubting, is an idle fancy of your own, without any likelihood of truth; as hath appeared in my former answers. But howsoever the Pope alone may err, yet in a general Council he cannot. I hear you say so, but I see no proof of it, not indeed any show of reason for it. Whence ariseth this impossibility of erring? Not from the Pope: For no man will flatter him so shamefully (saith f Alfons. à Castro. lib. 1. ca 4. Alfonsus') as to make him believe he cannot err. Perhaps than it resteth in the Council. That cannot be neither. For g Bellar. de Concil. lib. 2. ca 11. Bellarmine tells us, that Counsels, be they never so general, and never so lawfully assembled; may err, but only so far as they follow instructions given them by the Pope. But the Pope may err in giving instructions: and how can freedom from erring ensue upon his instructions, if he himself were not certainly freed from erring in giving them? And that this power of not erring, is wholly from the Pope, no way from the Council, it is evident by this, that h Bellar. de Concil. lib. 2. cap. 5. particular Counsels are as free from error as general, if they follow the Pope's direction, or be confirmed by him. But this will be yet more evident, if we consider the course that is to be held in Popish Counsels. First, the Pope sends his Legates (saith i Bellar. ubi supra. cap. 11. §. Quod ut melius. Bellarmine) instructed concerning the judgement of the Apostolic sea (that is, with knowledge of his mind, in all points that shall be handled) and that upon condition, that if the Council jump in opinion with the Pope, than they may proceed to make decrees; if it do not, than no decree may be made until the Pope's pleasure be further known. Secondly, k Confirm. Concil. Trident. Vide Concil. Tria. Sess. 25. c. illustrissim. when the Council is ended, certain of the Cardinals bring the decrees thereof to the Pope, and entreat him, that it will please his Holiness to confirm them; which, if he like them, he doth; if not, they are utterly dashed. This being the course, how can it be imagined, that the Pope should be any more exempted from erring with a Council, then without one? I grant he hath better helps to discern of the truth, if matters be orderly and thoroughly debated; but we look for an impossibility of erring, which cannot be conveyed from the Council to the Pope, because it is not in the Council, but so far as they follow the Pope's instructions: neither can it be imparted to the Council by the Pope, because he hath it not in himself alone: neither lastly can it be in Council and Pope together, because then neither can be above other; but all Papists are of opinion, that there must needs be a superiority in the one, though they cannot agrtee in whether, howsoever l Bellar. de Concil. lib. 2. ca 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Bellarmine takes upon him to determine it. I say then, it is merely impossible, that any Papist, learned or unlearned, should know that the Pope with a Council or without a Council cannot err, as well because the thing in itself is false, as also for that there is no agreement about the point amongst them: and therefore the Papists have no certain means to keep them in any true unity. If you will assign a difference betwixt sects of heretics and the Roman Church, you must say, betwixt other sects of heretics and the Roman Church, which is of all other, indeed, the most heretical. But your difference is nothing worth. For many sects of heresies have at least for a time been a flock cleaving to their pastor, and holding certain grounds true or false, whereby their Church was to be determined. As for us, whom you strike at, we have the most sure bond that may be, to tie us all together, even the truth of God, and are in our several Church's people cleaving to our pastors: and such must every true church be, where there is a true Pastor: without whom how far a company may have the name of a Church, and in what respect, I showed before. The testimonies alleged out of m Cypr. ad Pupian. epist. 68 sect. 7. Cyprian, are not delivered by him, concerning your Roman Church, but spoken of himself and his flock, and so generally to be applied to all other Churches in like sort. Pupianus, to whom he writes that epistle, charged Cyprian with dispersing the flock of Christ, by his over great severity against them, that had fallen into idolatry in time of persecution. Cyprian answers in his own defence, that though some stubborn and disobedient people, refusing to show themselves truly penitent for so grievous a sin, left his communion and congregation: yet the true Church was not thereby scattered, but continued steadfastly, cleaving to their pastor, namely himself. The chaff only (as n Cypr. ad Cornel. epist. 55. sect. 6. he said before) not the wheat, can be severed from the Church, forsaking their lawful Pastor, without any just cause. The other place also is of particular Bishoprics, not of your imagined universal Church, as before. A. D. §. 5. §. II. That the Roman Church only is holy. Secondly, I find that the Protestants congregation is not holy: because not only most of their men be evidently more wicked than men, which both in old time and in latter years lived in the Roman Church; as those can tell which have seen both, and is confessed by Luther himself, who saith thus: Sunt nunc homines magis In postilla super evang. Dom. primae adventus vindictae cupidi, magis avari, magis ab omni misericordia remoti, magis immodesti & indisciplinati, multoue deteriores quam fuerunt in Papatu: Men are now more revengeful, more covetous, more unmerciful, more unmodest and unruly, and much worse than when they were Papists. The like testimony you may find given by another of their Doctors, called Smidelinus, which for brevity Conc. 4. super cap. 21. Luc. sake I omit. But chiefly their company is not holy, because there was never yet Saint or holy man of it: neither is their doctrine such as may of itself lead the most precise observers of it to holiness, but doth (by divers points which have been taught) rather incline men to liberty and looseness of life. As for example, it inclineth them to break fasting days, and to cast away secret confession of sins to a Priest: both which are known to be sovereign remedies against sin. Also it inclineth them to neglect good works, for they hold them either not to be necessary, or not meritorious of life everlasting, which must needs make men less esteem the practice of them. Also it maketh men careless in keeping Gods commandments, because divers Protestants (if not all) hold them unpossible to be observed; and (as it is said) impossibilium non est electio. No man chooseth or laboureth to achieve that which he thinketh to be altogether unpossible. It maketh men also not to fear, or not to be careful to avoid sin, because it is held among them that whatsoever we do is sin, and that we cannot choose but continually sin, and that all sins are of themselves mortal: which whosoever thinketh, how can he be afraid to sin, sith stultum est timere, quod vitari non potest, it is foolishness to fear that which no way can be avoided? Finally their doctrine of predestination is able to make men careless or desperate in all actions and consultations, sith some of them hold all things so to proceeds of God's eternal predestination, that man (in matters of Religion at the least) hath no free-will to do well, or to avoid ill, but that God himself is author, and moveth them effectually and forcibly, not only to good works, but in the same sort unto the act of sin. Lo whither this doctrine leadeth a man, which giveth grounds, which of themselves incline a man, to neglect all endeavour, in the study and practise of virtue, and to cast away care of avoiding sin and vice: and consider whether this can be a good tree, which of Mat. 7. it own nature bringeth forth so bad fruit. And see whether this company, which teacheth and believeth such points of unholy doctrine, can possibly be a Holy Church. In the Roman Church, I confess there be some sinful folk, all in it are not good. For the Church is called nigra & formosa, Cant. 1. black and fair: in it are mixed good and bad, as out of divers parables of our Saviour I proved before. But there are two differences betwixt the sinful, which are in the Roman Church, and those which are among Sectaries. The first difference is, that among heretics there are none, which we may call truly holy, of which, as of the better or more worthy part, their congregation may be termed Holy: as the Roman Church may. It may be perhaps, that one may find divers of them, who abstain from gross outward sins, as stealing, swearing, etc. And that some of them do many works morally good, as to give alms to the needy, and that they live at least in outward show, in upright & moderate sort. But alas, these be not sufficient or certain signs of sanctity; all this, and perhaps far more, we may read of heathen Philosophers. These outward actions may proceed of natural, and sometime of sinful motives: and consequently, they may be very far from true holiness, which must be grounded in true charity; for as Saint Paul saith, to distribute all that one hath to feed the poor, or to give one's body to burn, doth nothing avail without 1. Cor. 13. charity: which charity must proceed de cord puro, & conscientia bona, & fide non ficta, out of a pure heart, and a good 1. Tim. 1. conscience, and an unfeigned faith. The which things being most inward; and consequently hidden in secret, cannot sufficiently be showed to others, by those outward actions, which may come from other causes as soon as from these. Nay, they cannot be known certainly of the party himself. For nescit homo utrùm odio vel amore dignus sit, a man knoweth not whether he be worthy of hate or Eccles 9 love: and quis potest dicere, mundum est cor meum? Who can say, my heart is clean? but these things are reserved to him only, Prou. 20. qui scrutatur corda, who searcheth the hearts, to with Almighty God, and it cannot be perfectly known of men, who have them truly, and consequently who be truly Saints, unless it please him to reveal it by miracle, or some other certain way unto us. But hitherto See Staphil. in absolute. respons. Cochlae. in acts Lutheri. it was never heard that Almighty God did by miracle, or any such certain way, give testimony that either Luther or Calvin, or any of their fellows or followers had in them this true holiness, or that they were saints: but rather while as they presumptuously attempted to work Anno. 1523. Bolsec. in vita Calvin. cap. 13. miracles, it hath pleased God, by giving either none, or evil success, to testify that they were not Saints. Whereas on the contrary side, it hath pleased God to give testimony by miracles of the faith and holiness of life of divers, which professed the Roman faith; of which sort I might bring in many examples, but I will at this time only name Saint Bernard, Saint Dominicke, Saint Francis, who on the one side, were certainly known to have been professors of that religion, which was then, and is now professed at Rome; as may appear, both by that which is left written of their lives, and also by this, that they were chief fathers and founders of certain Religious orders of Monks and Friars, which yet continue there: and on the other side, they are certainly known to be holy men, partly by their sober, chaste, and virtuous life, partly by the gift of miracles, in so much, that even Luther himself, and other of our adversaries confess them to have been Saints. The which being confessed of Luther. lib. de captain. Bab. Philip in Apol. art. 5. & 17 these, must needs infer the like confession of the sanctity of mante other, who were also professors of the same Roman faith, whose names we may find registered in the Calendar, even in books set out by Protestants, and whose virtuous life, holy death, and miraculous deeds, we may find in good Authors. See Saint Athanas. in vita S. Antoniuses apud Surium. S. Bernard. in vita S. Malachiae. S. Antoninus 3. part hist. titulo 23. & 24. Surius throughout his large volumes of the lives of Saints, and others. Now this being confessed, that divers whom we know to have been members of the Roman Church, are Saints: we may well infer that at least, some part of this Church is holy, and that therefore of this part (per synecdochen) the whole may be termed Holy: especially considering that the faith of this part, (which was a principal root, out of which their holiness did spring) is all one in substance with the faith which we all profess: and therefore we may say that our faith and profession inclineth & leadeth to the same holiness of life that theirs did. And therefore though many, through their own fault, fail in the practice of virtue and holiness, yet our profession (being all one with the profession of these holy men) is to be termed holy, as theirs was. Of which holy profession in some sort, all our whole company may be called Holy, as of the art of painting or any other art, all that profess them are commonly termed by a name proper to their profession, though it happen that divers of them, be not very skilful, nor do not much exercise his art. And from hence riseth the second difference betwixt Protestants and us, to wit, that the very doctrine itself, which Protestants teach, doth (as I showed before) induce men to liberty, and consequently to lewd life: whereas the Roman faith, which we profess, both expressly for biddeth all vice, & prescribeth laws contrary to liberty and looseness of life; and containeth most sovereign means, to incite and move a man to all perfect virtue, and holiness of life. As for example. It teacheth, that notwithstanding the prescience or predestination of Almighty God, man hath free will, wherewith (being aided by God's grace, which grace, through the merit of Christ's Passion, is ready for all, that with humble, devout and perseverant prayer will ask, and by frequenting in due sort the holy Sacraments, will seek for it) he may avoid sin, and embrace virtue, the which taketh away despair of shunning evil, and doing well, which easily followeth of the contrary opinion. It teacheth also that God's commandments be not unpossible to be observed; nay nor hard (through help of grace, which is always at hand) to be observed of one, which hath but a good will; according as Saint john 1. joh. 5. saith, Mandata eius gravia non sunt, his commandments be not heavy; yea that they may by the same grace, be easily observed, according to that of our Saviour, jugum meum suave, & onus meum Mat. 11. leave, my yoke is sweet, and my burden light. The which moveth a man to conceive great hope of eschewing evil and living well, which hope, (and consequently heart) to do well, a man cannot have, who persuadeth himself, that God's commandments be unpossible to be observed, as I showed before. Again it teacheth, that as a man may by grace avoid sin, and easily keep God's commandments, and by doing good works, live well: so this good life is pleasing and acceptable unto God, and these good works (as proceeding from grace, and receiving virtue from the merits of Christ, of which this grace doth depend) are meritorious, & such, for reward whereof, God will give to them that perseverantly do them, everlasting bliss in the kingdom of heaven. The which doctrine will, doubtless if it be duly considered, breed in a man's mind great love and delight to do well; as the contrary must needs breed, at least a coldness in devotion, if not a contempt and loathing of good deeds, and specially of those good deeds, which have any difficulty annexed to them. It teacheth also that for sinners are prepared exceeding great punishments in the next life; and that though there be means in the Church to get remission of sin, and pardon of the pain, yet it teacheth that a man cannot ordinarily be absolutely certain, that he hath so used those means, as that he hath thereby gotten that remission or pardon; which is a great motive to make men wary not to fall into sin, and to move them, Cum metu & tremore operari salutem, with fear & trembling to work their salvation: whereas Philip. cap 2. Protestants upon supposed certainty of salvation cast away this wholesome fear, and so may easily become careless of avoiding any sin. Furthermore it prescribeth wholesome laws and customs of fasting and prayer, and of other exercises of virtue and piety, whereby the flesh may be subject to the spirit, and the spirit to God. It maintaineth also secret confession of sins to a Priest; as being a thing necessary, and commanded by our Saviour himself, the which both is a great bridle to hold men back from sin (as experience teacheth) and is a special means, whereby the Pastors of the Church, knowing the inward conscience of their flock, may better apply fit remedies to their spiritual diseases, and prescribe to every one fit exercises, for their practice and progress in virtue. Finally the profession of this Church is such, that even simple Protestants, when they see any Catholic do a thing amiss, will ordinarily say, You should not do thus, or, a man of your profession should do otherwise. So that those which be sinful in the Roman Church, cannot in any sort, ascribe their sins to any defect, or perversity of the doctrine of the Church, but must needs acknowledge them to proceed from their own frailty or malice, contrary to the teaching of the Church, and sometimes even contrary to their own conscience, and actual knowledge. Wherefore I may conclude, that although there be some sinful men in the Roman Church, yet it may well be called Holy; because the doctrine which it believeth and professeth, of it own nature, inclineth and directeth a man to the true holiness, and consequently is of itself Holy: and also because there be many holy persons in it, some of which are certainly known in particular to be such, by proof of miracle. Others are only known by this probable reason, to wit, that they hold the same faith, which was holden by those, who have been certainly known be holy men; and holding the same faith (which must needs be the true faith, sith none are truly holy, or can possibly please God, without the right faith, which is but one,) they have in them a root, out of which true holiness is apt to spring. And therefore, when we see no apparent evil fruit, whereby we may discover some evil root, but only good, which is apt to spring of this good root; and especially when we see the fruit of their good works, to be conformable, and like to the works of those, which are known Saints; we have great cause to judge, that they also are just men, and in some sort holy, if not perfectly Saints. Sith therefore many men which have been and are members of the Roman Church, have been & are known, either by absolute proof of miracle, or at least in this other manner to be holy; of these as of the better, more worthy and principal part, the whole may be (as I said before) termed Holy; as a tree that having a root apt to give life to the branches, some of which being dead, others have life, is absolutely said to be alive; which if we should see to have a corrupted root, and could not perceive it to have any living branches, we should have cause to affirm absolutely, that it were dead, and not alive. A. W. He that doth not find that you are a shameless slanderer, looks very slightly into your report of the Protestants congregation. You find it is not holy. No doubt you are a man of great intelligence, and have made diligent inquiry after the matter. But it well becometh the pharisaical pride of your Romish Synagogue, to boast of your own righteousness, and in comparison of yourselves, to despise all men. Let us see what evidence you bring to prove so grievous an accusation. Most of our men (you say) are evidently more wicked than men which lived both in old time, and in later years in the Roman Church. How evident you make this, we will consider by and by. For the present, I say no more, but that you speak craftily to deceive us, in comparing most of our men, with I know not what men, that have lived in the Roman Church. There is no question, but that (generally) the most are the worst, every where: because all men are naturally evil, and none good, but by the especial grace of God working in them. But if you would have dealt plainly, you should have showed, that most men in our Churches are more wicked, than most men that have lived in your Romish Church, since it became the body of Antichrist revealed. For we acknowledge, that the Church of Rome was sometimes a true Church of Christ, yielding many worthy martyrs, confessors, and other holy men and women, to the honour of the Gospel of jesus Christ; yea we deny not, but that even at this day, there are some true Christians in your Churches: and that the general sort of Protestants, are inferior to some amongst you, in regard of outward holiness: as for true inward sanctity, neither the one, nor the other, have any part of it; I mean neither ordinary Protestants, nor the best of your side, who continue in the whole doctrine of your Church. To prove that you say against our Church, you bring us in two kind of witnesses: first generally those men, that have seen the conversation of your Papists, and our Protestants, then particularly Luther & Smidelin: In the former, consider how vain a flourish it was for you to compare our men now with Papists that lived in old time, and to appeal for proof to them that have seen both: as if you were able to show us some men of 700, or 800. years old, or of 300. or 400, who have known and considered the behaviour of your men and ours. As for them, that by traffic or travail otherwise, have had sight and experience of both, I dare stand to their judgement, in comparing our lives with yours, for all parts of outward carriage. In which matter, I have been credibly informed by them, whose credit I have no cause to suspect, that the abomination of your Clergies, and people's lives, hath partly bred, & settled in them a resolute abhorring of your religion, to which otherwise they were indifferently affected. But you press us with Luther and Smidelin, who in their earnest exhortations and reproofs, accuse our men for increase of sin, after the preaching of the Gospel. Is this strange? Doth not o Rom. 6. 1. 14: the holy Apostle tell us, that the Gospel in his time, was abused to wantonness, profane men (which yet made profession of religion) taking advantage of God's gracious mercy preached in the Gospel, to provoke themselves to sin? Besides, the greatest part at the renewing of the Gospel, clave unto Luther, rather in a detestation of your religion, the falseness whereof was most evident to them, then in a certain knowledge of the truth of that, which he taught them. But of whom spoke Luther and Smidelin? Of all Protestant Churches? How can that be, when they knew not the one half of them? Is it a good reason then to condemn all Protestant Churches, or the Protestants Church in general, because Luther and Smidelin complain against the congregations, in which they taught? And yet, what say they more than the Apostle Paul doth, who chargeth p 1. Cor. 1. 1. & 15. 12. & the Corinthians with many gross errors, & grievous sins, yea q 5. 1. & 6. 1. 5. with such fornication, as was not to be heard of among the Gentiles? What say you to that sore accusation even against the ministers of the Gospel; r Phil. 2. 21. All seek their own, and not that which is jesus Christ's? A man of your humour and wisdom would by and by conclude hereupon, that the Church of God in the Apostles time, was an unholy congregation. If you jesuits & Priests (what you are in particular, I neither know nor care) bestowed as much pains in preaching, as you do in plotting treason, and hearing concessions, such speeches would not seem any thing strange unto you. But that you may the better perceive the weakness of this your reason, hearken a little, what is said of your Church. What one can you name me (saith s Bernard. in Cant. ser. 77. Bernard) among all those, that are (spiritual) rulers, that doth not take greater care, how he may empty the people's purses, than how he may root out their sins? You say the most of our men are wicked. Bernard, to quit you for it, pronounceth, that there is not one of your Clergy, that maketh any conscience of discharging his duty. Have you forgotten what a Bishop of yours said in the late Council of Trent, (lest any should think that you are better now, than you were in Bernardes' time?) The people (saith t Cornelius. Bitonti. Episc. in Council Tridet. the Bishop) are fallen away from Christ to Antichrist, from God to Epicurism; and the Priests have been their ringleaders, to all kind of lewdness. Yea Adrianus in instruc. ad Cler. Pope Adrian the sixth, (I am sure you will believe him) speaking of your Prelates, saith, that All of them (he putteth in himself too) x Declinavimus. were declined, every one to his own ways: And that there had been none of them, a great while, that had done any good, y Non fuit usque ad unum. no not one of them. If such were, and be the state of your Clergy, guess you, what the common people be. Compare your witnesses and mine, and tell me whether we overmatch you or no, both in number and weight. Never any Saint of our Church? Why do you not refute that which we allege for ourselves against this slander? We plead that Adam, Abel, Enoch, Abraham, and all the holy men named in the Scriptures, with the Martyrs and confessors, since our Saviour Christ's coming in the flesh, that all the Apostles (except judas, whom we leave to your Simoniacal congregation) yea that many Bishops of Rome were of our Church. To all this you reply not so much as one word; but tell them that will believe you, that there never was any Saint or holy man of our Church. I cannot greatly blame you, though you bind your followers to give credit to you, without looking for proof of that you deliver. For if you should be put to that, all were marred. But I will render you a reason, why we lay challenge to all those men, as members of our Church, and not of yours. They agree (say we, disprove us if you can) with us in the substance of doctrine, concerning salvation by jesus Christ, and other points of the foundation. If you were able to show the like (which is unpossible) yet would it not follow that they were of your Church: because no man is, in your account a member of your Church, but he that agrees with you in all matters defined by your Church; wherein I confidently enough (and am ready to justify it) there is no ancient writer in the first thousand years, that is of your opinion; though in some one point or other they may agree with your doctrine. But indeed we have no saints canonised by our Church, and made mediators betwixt God and us, to rob jesus Christ of his office, and God the Father a See my answer to 12. art. part. 1. art. 4. of thanks due to him for granting our requests. And if this want make our Church unholy, the Church in the time of our Saviour himself and of his Apostles was most unholy, in which there never was any such practice or doctrine. Indeed this is the main holiness, whereby z Bellar. de notis Eccles. lib. 4 cap. 11. the learned of your side seek to prove the truth of your Church, and not that other of particular men's conversation. And what say you against our doctrine in this behalf? Forsooth, that it cannot of itself lead the most precise observers of it to holiness. The particulars of our doctrine accused by you, shall be defended in their several places: now a word or two only in general. How doth any doctrine lead to holiness, but by propounding the rules of true obedience to God, wherein all holiness consists? How do the arts of Grammar, Logic, Arithmetic and Geometry lead a man to speak, reason, number, and measure well, but by delivering the true rules to these purposes, which in themselves direct to perfection in every one of these professions? And can our doctrine be said to be insufficient, which acknowledgeth the scriptures of God to be the rule of all righteousness, and all men bound to live in obedience to the will of God, contained and revealed in them? Do not we teach men, that upon pain of damnation they must labour to keep all God's commandments whatsoever? Are not our expositions of the commandments as large in duties prescribed, and sins forbidden, as yours are? Do we, or you, persuade men that there are some venial sins, small breaches of God's law, not to be regarded: whereas we show that every least transgression of the law is damnable? But because you charge us with particular points, which incline men (as you say) to liberty and looseness of life, I will come to the examination of them severally, yet but shortly, for that I have answered them all in a Answer to 12. Art part. 2. art. 4. another treatife against certain articles propounded by one of your Popish faction. It is utterly untrue, that our doctrine inclines any man to break fasting days: nay rather we enjoin all men to observe days lawfully set apart for fasting, with all care and good conscience, both for preparation to, and carriage in the action. As for your days of abstaining from flesh, we hold the institution of them to be void of Religion, and unlawful, as making them in themselves a part of God's service: whereas a man, for all your fasting, may glut and gorge himself with wine and all dainties, so he eat no flesh, and yet keep your Popish fast, without danger of any censure for transgressing your law of fasting. Confession of sins to a minister, we neither command as a necessary duty, nor forbid as a sin, but leave it free to every man's conscience, as he findeth need of instruction or comfort. It is so far from being a remedy of sin, as it is used by your church, that it rather provokes men to sin, because they have so ready and easy a means to disburden their consciences (as they think) when they have sinned. A worthy gentleman that hath seen the experience of this matter, doubteth not to avouch as much as I say: that b Relation of religion in these Western parts. sect. 7. your people sin, that they may have somewhat to confess: and confess, that they may return to sin: yea I can name, and if need be, bring forth one, who hath been fain in confession to accuse himself of sins which he never committed, because his ghostly father would not be persuaded but that being a young man, and living in one of your Popish countries, he must needs be defiled with the corruptions of the place and age. There is no one point, wherein you more bewray yourselves to be servants, and not sons of God, than this confession against your own souls, that you would neglect the doing of good works, but that you look to merit everlasting life by them. This motive to good works is so base, that no man of a free nature would yield unto it. The very Philosophers could teach you, that virtue is to be loved for virtue, and not for any outward respect or consequent that may follow thereupon: and God is more dishonoured by your opinion of meriting, then honoured by any your supposed good works whatsoever. If you had ever felt, what a sharp spur to holiness of life the assurance of forgiveness of sins is, you would never think that the practice of good works is lightly esteemed, where the mercy of God hath brought peace to the damned conscience. And yet we want not that other help, expectation of reward, which we are sure shall be given to the least of our good works, though not upon their desert, but of the mere mercy of God in jesus Christ. That wicked opinion of merit, either before or after grace, doth puff up the pride of man's nature, and diminish the glory of God's mercy in jesus Christ. Wages upon desert, is the hire of servants; reward bestowed in love, is the gift of a kind father to a gracious son, who hath showed himself willing to perform duties of obedience. What men doth it make careless, but those proud pharisees that stand at the staves end with God, and think scorn to labour in keeping the commandments, unless they may so keep them, as to claim heaven upon desert by keeping of them? Is it not enough to stir up any poor Christian soul to obedience, that God will accept of his weak endeavours, being performed in truth and singleness of heart, and reward them with an unspeakable measure of glory? There is no man, unless he be more desirous of his own glory then Gods, but will be content and glad to confess his unability to perform the whole will of God perfectly, and yet strive from time to time to do as much as his corruption will give way to. It seems, that not divinity only, but also common reason fails you. Shall I be careless in bearing my horse head, and holding him up from falling, because I am sure he treads never a sure step, but will stumble or trip continually, do the best I can? Put case we said, as you slander us, that whatsoever we do is sin: are there therefore no degrees in sin? or is it all one, to sin by infirmity and wilfulness? What if a sick man cannot by any means recover his perfect health again? shall he therefore refuse to keep a good diet, and grow to as much strength as for his weakness he can attain to? But what Protestant ever said, that whatsoever we do is sin? It is one thing to say (as we do) c Answer to 12. art. part 2. art. 2. that sin by our corruption cleaves fast to our best works, another thing to avouch (as you falsely charge us) that all we do is sin. Neither is it foolishness to fear that which cannot be avoided, if by our fear we can make it less hurtful to us. Yea it is a point of great discretion, to labour all we can against sin, though we cannot wholly rid ourselves of it, because by this means our actions shall be free from the imputation of those sins, and receive an undeserved reward at the hands of God, our merciful Father in jesus Christ. You undertook to prove, that the doctrines of our Church are unholy: now you tell us that some Protestants hold this and that. Is this to make good that you propounded? But what Protestants can you name, that ever taught that God moveth men effectually and forcibly, not only to good works, but in the same sort See my answer to 12. art. part. 2. art. 5. to the act of sin? Is it your ignorance or your malice, that maketh you charge us with that which we always deny and refute? We say, there is no force or coaction either in good or evil actions, and distinguish betwixt necessity and constraint. All things come to pass necessarily, in regard of the event, according Vide Durandins in 2. dist. 25. q. 4. n. 7. & ibi Lomb. et Thom. in 1. dist. 38 q. 1. et Capreol. in 1. dist. 38. q. 1. art. 2. ad 2. pro 4. conclu. to the providence and predestination of God. But this hinders not the working of secondary causes, according to their several natures. Besides, though we hold that there is a necessity of infallibility, as well in good actions as in sins, so that whatsoever God hath decreed (and he hath decreed all things that come to pass) shall certainly fall out according to his decree: yet we make a great difference betwixt good and evil actions, by teaching that the one are done by the work of God's spirit in our hearts, the other by the corruption of our nature, without any warrant or motion in us from God. Further, in those good actions which we perform, the Lord doth not only work by us, as by instruments without sense or reason, but according to our nature, enlightening our understanding, and sweetly inclining our affection, without any force against our nature, to the approving of that which he would have us do, and following us by the persuasion of his spirit, till he have brought us inevitably to the performance of that which he hath decreed. So that we do nothing, but willingly: but to good we are made willing by God, both for the power and act: to evil we need no assistance, but the corruption of our own hearts, and the temptations of the devil. Lo whither the malice of antichrist's vassals drives them: both to avouch that for truth against the Church of God, which is utterly false; and to gather lewd consequences of true doctrine: and consider whether they have cause to brag of holiness, who will do nothing that is good, but for hope of hire, and advance their own deservings above God's bounty; and then tell me, if you can persuade your conscience, that such a company of pharisaical merit-mongers are likely to be the true Church of God. You confess there be some sinful folk in the Roman Church: but your confessions (if a man might have the hearing of them) would testify that there are none but sinful folk amongst you. It is rehearsed by the secretary of Sixtus 5. for a singular commendation of Pius the fifth, that the Cardinal of Theano, and d Girol. de Catena in vita de Pio 5. pag. 33. the Bishop of Bagnarea, who had been his confessors many years, affirmed, that he never accused himself in confession of any mortal sin. And do you come out with There are some sinful folk, and all in it are not good? Call to mind what I alleged before out of Bernard, against your whole Clergy, that is, as you count, your whole Church. Or let that pass, and hear him speak more generally: From the head to the foot (saith e Bernar. de conver. Pauli. ser. 1. Bernard of your Church) there is no part whole. And again: The whole multitude of Christian people hath conspired against Christ. In f In Can. ser. 33 another place he saith, that a filthy contagion had spread itself over the whole Church. The law (saith g Breidenb. in hist. peregr. suae. Breiden bachius) is departed from the Priests, justice from the Princes, counsel from the ancient, faith from the people, love from parents, reverence from subjects, charity from prelate's, religion from Monks, good order from young men. Neither was it thus only in places far distant from your holy Father's sight, but in his court, under his nose, in his bed chamber and study. There (saith h Bern. de consid. ad Eugen. l. 4 Bernard of your Pope's palace) the wicked grow forward, the godly grow backward. Whatsoever perfidiousness and deceit (saith i Petrarc. epist. 19 See Petrarch's sonnet. 92. 107. 108. Petrarke, who lived in Rome perhaps, secretary to the Pope) whatsoever unmercifulness and pride, whatsoever impiety and lewdness of behaviour the world hath, or hath had scattered here and there, all that you may see and find heaped up together in the city of Rome. k Giovan. Boccac. novel. 2. john Boccace, who lived at the same time, complaineth, that not only the courtiers, but also the Pope, Cardinals and Prelates lived most filthily, and sinned not only by natural lust, but by that too, which is against nature, without bridle, remorse of conscience, or shame. I forbear to set down any particulars, whereof Platina and other that write the lives of your Popes, are full: because I take no pleasure in laying open your shame, and it is already performed l john Bale Eng. votaries. D. Downam of Antich. lib. 1. cap. 6. in divers of our writers. Only I must needs say, that I cannot sufficiently wonder at your boldness, who talk to Englishmen of your holiness, when there is no man of our nation so young, or so ignorant, but is able to convince the Pope himself, and his Priests and Jesuits of horrible rebellions and treasons against our late Queen of blessed memory, and our whole estate. But what shall I need to seek far off? Was there ever the like monstrous and unnatural example of treason & murder (among the most savage of the heathen) to that incredible attempt of your holy ones, for the destruction of King, Queen, Prince, Nobility, Counsel, judges, Gentry and Commons, all at one blow? a Sueton. in Neron. Barbarous and bloody Nero is abhorred by all men, because he did wish that all the Senators of Rome had but one neck, that he might cut them all off at once. But your savageness justifies his cruelty: he was but a piddler to your Jesuits and Papists, who with one crack would have taken away both Senate and people. There is more cause of fear, that posterity will never believe the true report of this execrable attempt (it is so like rather to a devise of a Poet, than a discourse of an history writer) then that they will condemn your whole congregation of more than Turkish, or any other heathenish barbarousness. And do you, with a shameless brazen forehead, come upon the stage to brag of holiness? Despise not so much the long suffering of God, as to make a show of religion, after so many abominable treasons and murders, arising (directly) from the principles of your profession, and agreeing exactly with the ordinary plots and courses of your holy Father: b See Girol. de Caten. in vita di Pio 5. pag. 112. 113. who in the reign of our late gracious Sovereign, practised divers treasons by his wicked instruments. For proof of that I say, let them which understand Italian, read the report of his Secretary, who propounds divers of them to the commendation of his masters zeal, for labouring to reduce to the Church, them that were fallen from the obedience thereunto. But the memory, and in a manner the feeling of that horrible treason, Novemb. 5. 1605. is yet so fresh and green, that he deserves not to be held either for a Christian, a true hearted Englishman, or a reasonable man, that looks for fruits of holiness from trees planted in the Pope's orchard. Alas, this proof might well have been spared. For there is no doubt but your Church of Rome hath store of wicked men: and that you bring out of the Canticles, neither belongs to your Church, nor concerns the ungodly. The Church spoken of in that excellent song, is the spouse of Christ, one flesh with his holy majesty: the company of the elect, called to true faith in the Son of God. Among these there is not one profane Esau or bloody Cain; such as c See Platina in Syluest. divers of your Popes have been, not only your ordinary Papists. But this blackness and beauty, how contrary soever they seem (as d Bern. in Can. Ser. 25. Bernard truly saith) belong to one and the same person. Wilt thou have me show thee a soul (saith he) that is both black and beautiful? e 2. Cor. 10. 10. His epistles, say they, are of some worth, but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech contemptible. The blackness is outward in men's sight, the beauty in ward, seen of God. Therefore he addeth f Bern. ubi supr. Origen. in Can. homil. 2. a little after, that A true Christian soul is black in the judgement of the world, but fair in the sight of God and of his Angels. The spouse (saith g Bern. in declam. Ecce nos reliqu. omnia. Bernard in another place) is black, but beautiful. The Apostles are men full of sorrow, yet always rejoicing. Christ himself if you look upon him with such eyes as the jews did, had neither form nor beauty. Other refer this to the estate of men, before and after their calling: before they are black, afterward fair. Other ( h Theod. in cant. Tres patres apud Theod. for allegories afford variety of interpretation) apply it to the Church, mixed of jews and Gentiles: which is black because of the Gentiles, who before knew not God. i Psellus apud Theod. Psellus maketh the blackness to arise from our estate in Adam, the beauty from our righteousness in Christ. k Gloss. ord.. Bern. in Canti. Ser. 25. Thom. in Cant. cap. 1. lect. 3. Gloss. interlin. Many understand by blackness, the outward affliction of the Church. None that I have seen, but l Lyra in Cant. Lyra, expound it of the wicked; and yet he also rather liketh of that other interpretation, which maketh this blackness to be according to the conceit of the world. But I will not greatly strive about the true sense, which is so doubtful: only I take that exposition which you bring, to be the worst, because it cannot agree to the true Church of Christ, the company of the elect called; among whom there are none black, that is, wholly wicked, though all be black in regard of their nature, and fair in their head Christ. You have laboured to show that the Protestants Church is not holy, because it hath no holy men in it. From that point you posted over to prove your own Church to be holy. Here you return again to the disgracing of our Church, as if your holiness were so dark in itself, that it needed ours to be laid under it for a foil, that it might show the better. But let us examine your proof in this comparison. If that Church be holy, some members whereof have been holy; that unholy, no members whereof have been holy: and some members of the Roman Church have been holy, none of the Protestants Church; then the Roman Church is holy, the Protestants Church unholy. But that Church some members whereof have been holy, is holy: that unholy, no members whereof have been holy: and some members of the Roman Church have been holy, none of the Protestants Church. Therefore the Roman Church is holy, the Protestants Church unholy. Your Minor is false, in both parts of it. For the former, if by To the Assumption. holiness, you understand true inward holiness, m Chap. 15. according to your former exposition, no company may be counted truly holy, because some few among them are holy. For true holiness is a quality proper to them, in whom it is, and such as cannot be communicated to any multitude jointly considered, nor affirmed of it, unless the greater part be truly holy. If any man will press me with the Apostles authority, who calleth, n 1. Cor. 1. 2. & 2. Cor. 1. 1. the Corinthians, and all Christians in Achaia Saints: I answer, that the reason of his so calling them, is not because some among them were truly holy, but because they all made profession of true faith in Christ, which is always accompanied with sanctification. According to this profession of theirs, the Apostle charitably judgeth of them, and terms them o 1. Cor. 1. 2. Saints by calling; as if he should say, that they are Saints, because they profess themselves called to holiness of life. This appeareth the rather, because p Ephes. 1. 1. Coloss. 1. 2. otherwhere, to be Saints, and to be faithful is all one: where faithfulness is ascribed to whole congregations, professing the faith of the Gospel. Therefore the holiness of some few, maketh not all the Church truly holy, no more than Eliah, and those seven thousand reserved by God, made the whole Church of Israel holy in the sight of God; which was an idolatrous congregation, and unholy, for all these holy men were in some respect outwardly members thereof. But let us grant, that the holiness of foam few may privilege all for this title of holiness: yet in the second place, we may justly except against the stretching of this privilege to all that ever shall be, by succession, of that company. Were it not ridiculous trow you, for you Romans that now are, to claim the reputation of valour, or the jews the opinion of holiness, because the estate of Rome, and the Church of the jews had many valiant & holy men some hundreds of years since? How then can it be true, that a Church is holy, because it hath had, I know not how long ago, some holy men members of it? The other part of your Minor I acknowledge to be true, that no Church is holy, which hath not some holy men members of it. But I see not how this can stand with your doctrine, q Bellar. de Eccles. milit. lib. 3. cap. 10. that it is enough to make a man a true member of the holy Catholic Apostolic Church, that he make outward profession of believing the Gospel, and obeying the Pope, though he have not Christian virtue in him, no not so much as that faith, he maketh show of. For if this serve to give us the right of being true members, the Church may well be quite without inward holiness, as a matter not appertaining to the essence, or nature of it. The last part of your Minor is false the, Protestants Churches have had many thousand holy men, even all that ever held the truth of the Gospel, according to the Scriptures: and your Church never had, nor shall have any one truly sanctified, that was wholly a member thereof, after your account, that is, which agreed, or agreeth with you in all points of Antichristianisme. But I will follow you in your courses, and of this say more afterward. First you prove the latter part, and dispute against our Church in this sort. That Church which hath had no members of it revealed to be holy by miracle, or any other certain way from God, hath had no members of it holy. But the Protestants Church hath had no members of it revealed to be holy, by miracle, or any other certain way from God. Therefore the Protestants Church hath had no members of it holy. I deny your Mayor, because it will follow upon granting it, To the proposition. that no man is truly to be counted holy, but he that is declared to be so, by miracle or some other certain way from God. For your whole discourse showeth, that this is your meaning, where you tell us, that No man can be known to be holy, but by God's testimony of his holiness by miracle, or some other certain way: Of miracles by and by: In the mean while I would fain know, what these other certain ways are, which God useth, to give us assurance of this, or that man's holiness: will you tell us a tale of I know not what revelations, out of your Legends and books of examples, which are full of such feigned apparitions? Legend. aurea, & speculum exemplar. passim. Put case those lewd lies were true tales, and that the miracles devised by some of your complices, were worthy of credit: surely the number of them that have been truly holy, Gabriel. Biel. in Can. miss. lect. 49. hath been very small, if no more have been holy, then can plead such miracles or revelations for proof of their holiness. As for those, that have testimony of their holiness from God in the Scriptures, both they are very few, in comparison, for so many thousand years: and that means of showing who are holy, ceased above one thousand four hundred years since. Now concerning Miracles, why should we in these days, Mat. 16. 3. 4. gape after them, like the unbelieving jews, for the confirmation of any man's holiness, since we have no warrant, nor example of Scripture, to apply them to any such purpose? Bring me one example, if you can, out of the whole Scripture, of any miracle wrought, to prove any man to be holy. The use of miracles is the confirmation of doctrine, or rather the avowing of men's calling from God, that their doctrine may be received. If I do not the works of my Father (saith t joan. 20. 37. 38. our Saviour) believe me not: but if I do, then though ye believe not me, yet believe the works, that ye may know, and believe that the Father is in me, and I in him. u joan. 20. 31. These things are written, that ye might believe that jesus is that Christ the son of God. To that end did our Saviour furnish his Apostles with power to work miracles: x Mat. 10. 7. 8 As ye go, preach, saying, the kingdom of God is at hand. heal the sick, cleanse the leprous, raise up the dead. Therefore doth y Pacian. ad Sympro. Epi. 3. Pacianus require miracles of the Novatians, because they brought in a new Gospel. And why (I pray you) do z Mat. 24. 24. false Prophets that arise, show many great signs and wonders? To prove themselves to be holy? No surely: if they desire an opinion of holiness, it is that their doctrine might the rather be received. But to proceed yet further; if no man be holy, that hath not miracles, to testify his holiness, I doubt much, whether any man may be thought holy or no. For it is out of question, that wicked men have wrought miracles, either truly, or at least (which I rather believe) in show, so that men could not discern the contrary. Shall I need to name a Exod. 7. 21. 22. & 7. 8. Pharaoes' sorcerers? Doth not b Mat. 24. 24. the Scripture tell us, that false Christ's, and false Prophets shall show signs and wonders? Doth not c 2. Thess. 2. 9 the Apostle forewarn us, that Antichrist shall come with signs, and lying wonders? Your own schoolman, d Gabr. Biel. in Can. Missae. lect. 29. Gabriel Biel telleth us, that miracles are wrought often times, by the operation of devils. And e Lyra. in Dan. cap. 14. Lyra is not afraid to say, that Now and then there is great deceit used in the Church, by miracles feigned by the Priests, or some that are about them, for their worldly commodity. Your Church affordeth us examples of notorious lies in this kind. I will name two of your principal Saints. f Tom. 2. opusc. tract. de concept. virg, ca 5. Saint Bridget avoucheth that it was revealed to her, that the Virgin Marie was preserved from Original sin: g Kather. ser. 5. Saint Katharin of Syena had a quite contrary revelation. From whom rrow you came these miracles? Many miracles (saith h Theophyl. in Luc. 9 Theophylact) have been done by the devil. And i August. de unit. Eccles. cap. 16. Austin speaking of such wonders alleged by the followers of Donatus, rejecteth all such, as devices of lying men, or illusions of deceitful spirits. Let us hear your great Master Bellarmine's judgement of this matter, where he maintaineth miracles, as a mark of the Church. Till the Church hath approved those things that are done, for miracles, (saith k Bellar. de notis. Eccles. lib. 4 cap. 14. sect. Est autem. Bellarmine) it is not evident or certain, by assurance of faith, of any miracle, that it is a true miracle: His reason followeth. That it is not evident, it appeareth, because then faith should be evident. That it is not certain by assurance of faith, it is manifest, because it is not clear to us by such assurance as cannot be false, that the thing done is not an illusion of the devil. For though the devil cannot work any true miracle, yet can he in show do any thing never so wonderful. If then there be no means to judge any man holy, but by miracles, nor any certainty but by the testimony of the Church, to know which are true miracles; doubtless you can never prove, that your Church is holy, because there have been holy men members of it, till you have first proved it to be the true Church. But of your proof enough. To your Minor I answer, that Bellarmine, out of whom you To the Assumption. took all this, maketh the holiness of your men, and their miracles two several proofs, though under the note of holiness I Bellar. de notis Eccles. lib. 4. ca 13. 14. of life. Out of him I say farther, that the patriarchs, Prophets, and Apostles, yea all that ever were holy, were members of the same Church with us, holding the same doctrine that we do, for the substance of it. You bid me prove it. But by your leave the duty of proving lies upon the replier, whose place you have taken, not upon the answerer, whose person in this case, I sustain. Besides I bring you the same proof, that Bellarmine bringeth for himself, that is, I say they were all of our Church. If it be absurd to do so, let your Cardinal learn to dispute better. It were long to enter into particulars, yet if I had brought the argument, I would for shame have said some what in proof of it: but let it pass as it comes for this once. Against whom make you all this discourse, to prove that it is not possible to know certainly, who are holy, and who are not? Surely not against the Protestants, who confess as much. If hereupon you conclude, that our Church hath had none holy, because it hath had none certainly known to be holy, the Mayor of your syllogism will be false, as before: viz. That Church which hath had no members of it revealed to be holy by miracle, or any other certain way from God, hath had no members of it holy: and I will answer to your Minor, as I did, that the patriarchs, Prophets and Apostles were members of our Church, certainly known to be holy by revelation from God. But whereas you say, that no man can tell, whether himself be truly sanctified or no, you afford me proof of that, which before I affirmed, that the Apostles were of our Church. Prove yourselves (saith m 2. Cor. 13. 5. the Apostle Paul) whether you be in the faith: examine yourselves: know ye not your own selves, that jesus Christ is in you, except you be reprobates? And how doth n Rom. 8. 16. the spirit of God, bear witness to our spirit, that we are the children of God, if it be not possible to discern his voice, from the delusion of Satan? God hath given (saith o Bernard. serm. 1. in septuag. Bernard) certain manifest signs and tokens of salvation, that it cannot be doubted, but that he is in the number of the elect, in whom those signs continue. And p Bernard. Juper. Cant. ser. 8. in an other place, whatsoever soul among you (saith the same man) hath at any time felt in the secret of his conscience the spirit of the Son, crying Abba Father: let that soul presume, that he is loved with a fatherly affection, which feeleth himself endued with the same spirit, which the Son had. Be confident, whosoever thou art, be confident, nothing doubting. By the spirit of the Son, know thou art the daughter of the Father, the spouse and sister of the Son. Do you name Bernard for a principal Saint of your Church, and go so directly against his doctrine? As for that place of q Eccles. 9 1. Ecclesiastes, what proveth it, but only, that r See defence of the reformed Catholic. Pag. no man can truly judge, whether he be in God's favour or no, by the outward things of this life, or at the most, that an ordinary natural man can give no true judgement of the matter? This place (saith s Alfons. Salmero. in 2. cor. 12. disp. 14. Alfonsus Salmero, no mean jesuit) doth not prove that, which some men draw from it, that a man knoweth not the love of God toward him: because it followeth in the text, he knoweth not whether he be worthy of hatred. But the wicked know that they are most worthy of God's hatred, by reason of their grievous sins: The other place, that t Prou. 20. 9 No man can say his heart is clean, maketh nothing against the point, you would disprove. For what though every man be tainted with natural corruption, which hath even the nature of sin in it, may be not have, withal, assurance, according to his measure of God's love in Christ? Yet if want of a pure heart, be all the hindrance, your doctrine teacheth us, that the u Concil. Trident. sess. 5. cap. 5 party baptized, before he fall into some deadly sin, is wholly clean, original sin having lost in him the nature of sin. But the knowledge of the favour of God dependeth not upon the measure of our holiness, but upon the truth of it. Wheresoever x Rom. 8. 9 10 the spirit of God hath begotten true faith, there he hath begun true sanctification, which according to his divine power and pleasure, be will in time bring to full perfection. As if our Church had been begun with Luther, and not Thom. in expos. Symb. sect. sanctam Eccles. rather with Adam, and the world; continued in the patriarchs and Prophets, and at last showed most gloriously in the Apostles and Disciples of our Saviour Christ? As long as God hath given testimony of the holiness of these worthies, our Church cannot be said to have had none certainly known to be holy. But though we build not upon any such ground, tell me what it wanted of amiracle, that a poor Friar should set himself against the Pope, and the whole state of your Church: and for all the malice & persecution of the Pope, the Emperor, and generally all the estates of these western parts, as well civil, as Ecclesiastical, except a Prince or two in Germany converted by him, continue and grow so many years, and leave behind him, (after a peaceable and godly death) so many heirs of his doctrine, daily increasing and multiplying? It is enough that the word of God beareth witness to the truth of his doctrine, though we have neither miracle, nor revelation of his holiness. But you would make the world believe, that he and Calvin attempted to work miracles. If it had been so, it was not to breed an opinion of their holiness, but to avow the truth of their doctrine. But to whom can it seem likely, that they which denied, that any miracles were to be looked for, and taught that Antichrist should come with signs and wonders, would go about such a needless, and doubtful piece of work? What tell you us of the Apostata Bolsec, or Staphylus, who sold themselves to lie for the Pope's advantage? At the least name some likely men, though partial, and not such known enemies and Sycophants. I marvel you prove not this point of holiness by the examples of your Popes, in whose persons holiness is invested, and from them derived to all other, as honour is in, and from temporal Princes. If the Pope's holiness, be not extraordinarily holy, what should a man look for of inferior Papists? Who would not rather name the Sun, than any star of the first magnitude, or the Moon herself, to prove that there is light in the sky? But you knew how filthy that fountain of your holiness is. Well, let them go as they are: you have named us three: the ancientest of whom is not yet six hundred years old. What say you of them? First, that they were certainly known to have been professors of that same Religion, which was then, and is now professed at Rome. To whom is this certainly known? How many of our men have showed that the Religion of the Church of Rome is altered in divers points, since Bernard's time? The Council of Trent is the pit, out of which the religion of your present Church is digged. I refer the Reader, for this point, y Doct. Field of the Church lib 3. cap. 7. to a Treatise lately written by a learned Divine, wherein many particulars to this purpose are delivered. Bernard was indeed a member of the Church of Rome, as than it was: yet either he dissented from the doctrine of that Church, in the fundamental points of justification, or rather your Church now is fallen away from the truth, in that matter. Thou (saith z Bernard. in Cant. ser. 61. Bernard to our Saviour Christ) art made unto me of God righteousness: shall I fear lest that one be not sufficient for us both? It is not a shore cloak that cannot cover, it will cover both thee and me largely, being both a large & eternal justice. As for our righteousness, Bernard altogether (as we do) acknowledgeth it, to be true but unperfect: a Bernard. in ser. 5. de verb. Esaiae. Our humble righteousness, if there be any, is true perhaps (saith he) but not pure, unless perchance we think ourselves better, than our forefathers, who said no less truly, then humbly, all our righteousness is as the clouts of a menstruous woman. For how can there be pure righteousness, whereas yet there cannot be fault wanting? We will not strive greatly with you for Francis or Dominicke, though many absurd doctrines, which your Church now holds, were not in their days, nor before them, defined by any Council, nor acknowledged by many of your Divines. To prove that these three were of your Church, as it is now, you allege that which is left written of their lives, and the religious orders of Monks and Friars founded by them. What is written of them, and by whom? Doth any man in penning their lives, affirm, that they held the same things in all points that your Church now holds? I trow not. But if he do, who told him so? If he lived in their times, he was no prophet to foresee what would be maintained in your Church some hundreds of years after his death. If he be a late writer, what reason have we to give credit to him in such a matter, farther than he is able to make good that he saith, by showing such an agreement betwixt their doctrine, and that which now you teach? That they have left certain orders behind them, we deny not; which may serve to prove, that they thought it needful to have people instructed in the knowledge of the Gospel by preaching, and some trained up of purpose to perform that duty, which was the first end of monasteries. But it is no easy matter to show that your Monks and Friars are now governed according to the rules appointed by them, nor any inconvenience for us to grant that they were of your opinion touching Friaries and monasteries, which are matters far from the foundation of Religion, as long as there is no opinion of merit or perfection annexed thereunto. The second thing you affirm of them, is, that they were holy men, certainly known to be so. We are willing in charity to think the best we may, and therefore are not hasty to condemn them we know not. But this our judgement is not of certainty, unless we may have better proof for it then this you bring. Their lives (you say) and miracles testify as much. But first, who shall assure us that they lived so holily, and wrought such miracles? We must have certain knowledge that they were holy men, who writ and reported these things, ere we can upon their credit believe, that they so behaved themselves. Secondly, put case that their lives were as they are said to have been: have you forgotten what you writ a little before? It cannot be perfectly known of men (say you) who have truly a good conscience, and an unfeigned faith, and consequently who be truly saints, unless it please God to reveal it by miracle, or some other certain way unto us. Thirdly, if you think to strike it dead by the report of their miracles, b Biel. in Can. Misslect. 29. Biel hath taught us, that they are oftentimes wrought by the devil, or show made of them by Priests, as c Lyra in Dan. cap. 14. Lyra saith. And d Bellar. de notis eccles. lib. 4. cap. 10. Bellarmine resolves, that we cannot be assured which be true miracles, which false, but by the judgement of the Church. Then are we very far from certain knowledge that these men were holy: I mean such knowledge as you speak of, that may be a ground of faith, to teach us infallibly which is the true Church, by the holiness of the members thereof. But Luther and other of our men confessed them to have been saints. It had been plain dealing to have said holy men: whereas you craftily say saints, as if Luther had given some approbation of your saints canonised. But do Luther and Melanckthon hold them for saints, because of their miracles, or as a thing certainly known to them? How could they understand what they were, but by report? They judged charitably of them, according to the opinion that was of them in the world. And for my part, I am persuaded of Bernard, that he was a man of a sincere heart, and true sanctification. But for Francis, if the report of his five wounds be true, I will not doubt to affirm, that he was either a wretched hypocrite in feigning that miracle, or a silly idiot to be so abused by the devil. The tale lies thus: that this same Saint Francis forsooth should have in his side, hands and feet, such wounds as our Saviour had, which continued always green, and were made in his body by I know not what streams that issued from the Crucifix, from the side, hands and feet thereof, to his side, hands and feet. This matter being cunningly carried by this Popeholy saint, a woman saint, one Katherine of Sene counterfeited the like, and with like success. Afterward e Relation de la santidad yllagas de la etc. en Sevilla 1589. even of late years there was the like practice by one Marie a Prioress in Portugal, of Saint Dominicks order: who carried the matter very cleanly for a time, till it pleased God to discover her cozenage by means of certain of the Nuns, who thought scorn that she should be a saint rather than they; and therefore watched her so narrowly, and gave out such suspicious speeches of her, that at last the whole pack of her dissembling was opened, and she enjoined favourable penance of fasting and praying, etc. There is extant a most abominable treatise of Saint Francis conformity to Christ, Barthol dePists conform. S. Francisci. wherein he is at the least equalled, if not preferred before him. But because this was none of Francis own doing, let it be as it is, the blasphemous sin of your Church. Dominicke was little better than his fellow Francis, as his Legend showeth. Upon these premises thus weakly proved, you bring in two conclusions: the former, that this holiness being confessed of those three, must needs infer the like confession of the sanctity of many other, who were also professors of the same Roman faith. If their profession had been the cause of their holiness, than you had not gathered much amiss. But their holiness (if the two latter had any) arose from their true faith in Christ, wrought in them by the holy Ghost, the author of that faith. But there were many in their times, as resolute maintainers of the Romish Religion as they, who never attained to any such opinion of holiness: and the faith you Romanists now profess, is in main points of justification and free-will, other than that which Bernard taught. For though I have followed you in saying their holiness, yet I acknowledge none of the three to have been holy, but only Bernard. Neither are our Calendars any evidence to prove the holiness of the rest of your Saints, though their names are continued by Almanac writers; because many old deeds and evidences are dated by their names, and not by the days of the month. The Saints Athanasius and Bernard write of, were none of your Church, and yet (by your judgement) both of them might be deceived in determining who were Saints. As for Antoninus and Surius, two of your Pope's vassals, their testimony is little worth, in any indifferent man's opinion. Your latter conclusion is, that some part of your Church is holy, and that therefore the whole may be termed holy. But, as I have said, whatsoever holiness was in any of the professed members of your Church, it sprung from another root than grows in your church. Neither is there any reason to term your whole company holy, because a few among them are holy; who in regard of their holiness, are indeed none of your company. That which they have common with the rest of you, makes them not holy, but rather unholy; namely their profession of subjection to your sea of Rome, and their erring with you in divers points of doctrine: their holiness grows from a true acknowledgement of salvation by faith only, and a resting upon jesus Christ accordingly, without any opinion of merit in their own actions, either before or after grace; together with a belief and feeling, that not they themselves by their free will enlightened, but God by his mercy and grace made difference betwixt them and other, vouchsafing them the gift of faith, and not bestowing it upon other. Your similitude of painting, painteth out the fondness of your conceit. For being a Christian, answers to being a painter, in this similitude, and being holy, to being skilful. Now as every man that is free of that Company, is by his freedom a painter, but not thereby skilful: so all that profess Christian Religion, are thereby Christians, but not therefore holy. Neither if one or two, or a few of these painters were skilful, would any discreet man say, that the whole company might be termed skilful, because all make profession of the same art of painting, wherein some of them are skilful. How falsely our doctrine was slandered by you, with inducing men to liberty, I showed in my answer to your accusation: now let us see wherein yours is better. First you propound two general points, that it forbids expressly all vice, and prescribes laws contrary to liberty. And are you able to charge us with the contrary? Do we not more strictly interpret the laws of God than you do? Are we not further from idolatry, allowing no religious Homily against peril of idolatry. par. 3. pag. 94. use of any image? Do we not more abhor swearing, and expound the third commandment against your profane oaths of Mass, Marry, Lady, and all your Saints, which you account matters of small moment? Who teach men to keep the whole Sabbath, you or we? Who make a main point of God's law, the love of our enemies, a counsel, and not a commandment; we or you? Who maintain equivocation & officious lies, but you? Are not you they that hold murdering of Princes, yea even of your own Sovereigns, to be meritorious works? What should I name particulars? You are the men that make the corruption of our nature to be nothing else but the want of righteousness, that aught to be in us. You are the men who teach us, that original sin in the regenerate, is not properly sin; that unclean, unnatural, unruly, ambitious, covetous, murderous, and such like thoughts and motions are no sins, unless we yield to them, or delight in them. Do not you persuade men, that many sins are not mortal, but venial; and so make men rush into them, without fear or shame? Your second point is, that your religion contains most sovereign means to incite men to perfect virtue and holiness of life. What, more sovereign, than God hath appointed in his word? You will not dare to say so, for very shame of the world. It remains then, that you show what means we neglect of all them that God hath commanded us to use. Do we not minister the sacraments to our people? Do we not offer up prayers, supplications, and intercessions to God for them? But, that I may not run through all particulars at once: let us see what you bring piece by piece. This first point giveth a taste of that main difference, which may be observed betwixt your Religion and ours. You so carry the matter, that you always provide for the freedom of man's will, whatsoever become of the glory of God. We make it our chief care to advance God's glory, though thereby we take somewhat from the pride of man. Let us make this manifest in the particular question we have in hand. Wherein first we grant as much as you affirm: that God's predestination doth not take away man's free will. But herein lies the difference betwixt you and us: you teach that God doth only give a man ability to believe, and do good works, leaving it to himself, to believe or not to believe, to do good, or not to do good. We chose avouch, that God, besides this ability, doth also incline our hearts to believe, and do, according to his own holy purpose: yet do we not any way imagine, that a man is forced to believe; but only teach, that whereas any man believeth it was foreappointed by God, that he should believe: neither could it in the event otherwise fall out, though he did believe willingly, and by his own choice. f See my answer to 12. art part. 2. art. 4. Your doctrine maketh a man more beholding to himself then to God, for his faith and good works: because God did no more for him, than he doth ordinarily for many other men, who are yet utterly cast away. God indeed gave him ability to believe, if he would; but for all that, he might have refused to believe, and so have been damned. Therefore whereas he doth believe, and is saved, he may thank himself, and not God. Thus you provide for man's free will, with the impeachment of God's glory. We on the other side acknowledge, that as we have power to believe, from the grace of God, so it is he that worketh our hearts to believe, and certainly and necessarily in regard of the event, though freely in respect of our will, brings us to believe in jesus Christ. So that you by this opinion, give man the glory of his salvation: we leave it wholly to God. Now for the despair of shunning evil, and doing well, which (in your conceit) ensueth upon our opinion: there is no such matter. Who shall be in despair of shunning sin, by this doctrine? No man that hath grace. For with him the spirit of God is always present, to provoke and incline him to well doing. And this must needs encourage him thereto much more, because he is the abler to perform any good action. As for him that is still in his natural estate, I hope you grant, that there is no good to be looked for at his hands: I mean such good, as may further him to everlasting life. But (say you) he can have no hope to obtain faith and grace, because it is not within the compass of man's free will to make choice of it, when it is offered. What though it be not? Do not we teach withal, that every man, to whom God affordeth the means of faith, that is the ministery of the word, may and aught to assure himself, that the spirit of God will be get faith in him, if he will show himself willing to be instructed and inclined, as he may do, if he will advisedly consider what his estate is by nature, and what offer is made him by God? only he cannot feed his natural pride with a conceit of being the chief procurer of his own felicity. It is not unpossible to observe the law, but to keep it perfectly, so that a man cannot be charged with the breach of it in any point. Why doth g Psal. 143. 2. David cry out, Enter not into judgement with thy servant, O Lord: for in thy sight shall none that liveth be justified? Why doth h Dan. 9 20. Daniel confess his sins to God? i See my answer to 12. art. part. 2. art. 4. It is very like, that many of your Friars are able to perform that, in which these worthies of the Church failed. The commandments of God indeed are not grievous to any man regenerate by God's spirit, because (as k Rom. 7. 21. the Apostle saith) he delighteth in the law of God: and by reason of his love to God, thinketh nothing too heavy or too hard: as l Oecum. ad 1. joan. 5. 3. Oecumenius expoundeth the place of john. But it doth not follow thereupon, that therefore the whole law may be perfectly kept. Yea m Hieron. ad Math. 11. 30. Jerome upon that place of Matthew, directly affirms, that many things are commanded in the law, which (saith he) the Apostle most fully teacheth us, cannot be fulfilled. n Beda. ibi. Bede maketh this burden and yoke, not the commandments of the law, but the doctrine of the Gospel. What? cannot a man have any heart to do well, unless he puff up himself with a proud conceit of being able perfectly to fulfil the whole law? How did David and Daniel? These are the pharisaical thoughts of you Papists, who think scorn to be beholding to God for his mercy, in forgiving your sins after baptism, without your own satisfaction: and who will have all of desert, in the rigour of justice. Is it not enough for a poor soul, who is privy to his own grievous infirmities, many slips and great corruptions, that the Lord vouchsafeth to accept of his weak endeavours, and will crown them with reward of glory, for all their imperfections; but that he must also presume of his power to keep the whole law? You are the men that value the pride of your corrupt nature, at an higher rate, than the glorious riches of God's mercy in jesus Christ. Here you manifestly bewray the pride of your hearts, and o o See my answer to 12. art. part. 2. art. 7. your servile nature, who will do nothing in thankfulness to God, but upon persuasion of meriting by that you do. We acknowledge, that our unperfect obedience is acceptable to God, and that he will certainly reward every least good work of any of his children, with a great measure of glory in heaven. Only the doctrine of the scriptures, the knowledge of our own imperfections, and our desire to give all glory to God, makes us to renounce all opinion of merit, & to appeal to God's gracious promise only for our reward. If these respects be not of sufficient force with any man (as with none of you that are grounded Papists, they are) but that he can contemn or loath doing of good, for all them; what should I say, but that he shows himself to be a servant, and not a son: and therefore can have no claim to the kingdom of heaven, which is the inheritance of children? Luc, 12. 32. Whereas, to deceive your own hearts with an opinion of desert, you ascribe the merit of your works to the merits of Christ, and teach that they are meritorious, by being dipped in his blood: you show either your ignorance or your dallying. If you think as you speak, you bewray your ignorance: if otherwise, you dally with our Saviour and his blood. Are you able indeed to keep the commandments perfectly? what need have you then of Christ's blood, to dip your works in? For the perfect observation of the law, brings of itself everlasting life, without any merit of Christ. Let it be from his merits, that you have this ability to perform the law. Upon the performance of it, the hire of eternal happiness is absolutely due unto you. Why do you then trifle thus with our Saviour, as if you would make him believe, that you think yourselves more beholding to him, than indeed you can do? If you need Christ's blood, your works are unperfit: if they be perfect, you need it not. Leave this halting betwixt Christ and yourselves, lest he be avenged of your dallying. To what purpose do you mention this your teaching, that exceeding punishment is due to sin in the next life? Do not we teach this more effectually than you? We make the least sin liable to everlasting condemnation: you teach, that q Bellar. de amiss. great. lib. 1. cap. 3. there are many venial sins, which r Vbi supra. cap 13. Bonavent. in centiloq. cap. 6. Thom. in 4. dist. 85. art. 3. Rhem. Test. ad Math. 10 v. 12 Extra. de paenit. & remiss. cap. omnis utriusque in Glossa. deserve little or no punishment: in so much, that a knock on the breast, or a sigh, or the saying of one Auemarie, maketh satisfaction to God for it. But the point is, that you persuade men, there is no assurance to be had of any forgiveness of sins committed after baptism. We teach the contrary, that as many, as in the sight of their sins, with true sorrow for them, cast themselves upon Christ by faith to be justified by him, both obtain pardon of all their transgressions, and also receive every one in their measure, and time, assurance that they are pardoned. Your doctrine (you say) maketh men wary, not to fall into sin. It restraineth mortal sin only. For venial sin cannot be punished but in Purgatory, unless a man be guilty of mortal also: and if a man can make friends to the Pope, as it is no hard matter to do, especially if he be well moneyed, he may easily avoid all those exceeding great punishments. Or if he can but have a Priest to sing mass for him every Vide speculum exemplar. passim. day (and masses are not very high rated) he shall be sure to be delivered, within a short space. If the worst come to the worst, Purgatory cannot out last the world, and then he goeth up to heaven, without any more ado. But yet men are kept in awe from committing of deadly sins. Never a whit. For it is generally preached by your Friars and Priests, that confession purgeth all sins: and your people (ordinarily) are not so skilful (no not one among a thousand) as to distinguish betwixt sins in this sort: but they believe, that upon their confession, and absolution (if they do the penance appointed by their ghostly Father) they are as free from all their sins, as when they were newly baptized. Now concerning our doctrine, though we teach men, that assurance is to be had; yet we withal instruct them, that it is never in this life absolutely without doubting, at all times: and s See my answer to 12. Art. part. 1. art. 5. that no man can be assured that his sins are forgiven, but he that with fear and trembling maketh conscience of falling into sin; which are especial means provided by God to keep men from sinning; and without which, sin will so overtake us, and the sense of God's wrath so follow, & vex us, t See my answer to 12. art. part. 2 art. 1 that a man were better fry a year in your Purgatory, knowing that he shall one day get out of it, then lie one month under the heavy hand of God, pressing him with the remembrance of his sin, and for the time hiding his gracious countenance from him. If you never felt this, offer not to judge of the extremity thereof, for you will never come to give any reasonable guess of the terribleness of it. To prescribe laws of fasting, and prayer as you do, that A man refrain, upon such and such days from flesh, or patter over a number of Paternosters, Aves, and Creeds, is so far from teaching men to avoid sin, that it thrusts them necessarily into it. For both the opinion and doing of it as a service of God, is a grievous sin, as if the Lord hated flesh more than fish, or cared Durand. ration. lib. 6. cap. 7. n. 22. for such vain lip-labour; and also the very conceit that men have, of doing such extraordinary service, maketh them presume, that God will bear with them, though they chance to sin against him. The like I say of confession, but of these two I spoke before in defence of our doctrine. u See my answer to 12. art. part. 2. art. 4. With what fitness your remedies are applied, or rather penance is enjoined, the veriest child may see; when for the most part they are such, as I named ere while, abstaining from flesh, mumbling up a certain number of prayers, going on pilgrimage to some shrine, or such like. As for true comfort in affliction of conscience, or good direction in time of temptation, or wise instruction for a man's spiritual behaviour, few of your ordinary Priests, Sir john's Lacke-Latine, have any knowledge or care of them. This last point concerneth you, no more than us. For who knoweth not, that we continually teach, that God hath called Christians to holiness, whereof they make profession, and wherein, if they do not daily exercise themselves, they can have no sufficient assurance, nor reasonable persuasion, that they are justified by the blood of Christ. Because as many as have any part of redemption by him, x Gal. 4. 4. 5. have received his spirit, and y Rom. 8. 9 11 If the spirit of him that raised up jesus from the dead, dwell in us, our mortal bodies shall be quickened by the spirit dwelling in us. Only it may seem, that your disgrace, and danger should be the more, if you live not holily: because you brag, that you are able perfectly to keep the Law, and your Plea for heaven, is the desert of your good works, together with the inward grace of faith, hope, and charity. Because there is nothing in this glorious conclusion, but a heaping up of those false assertions, which I have already confuted, I will never make the Reader more work than needs, by repeating of that which hath been formerly delivered. A. D. §. 6. § III. That the Roman Church only is Catholic. Thirdly I find that the Protestants company is not Catholic, that is to say universal, neither in time, nor in place; for it came up of late, and is but in few places of Christendom: neither in points of doctrine; for their doctrine consisteth chiefly of negatives, that is to say in denying divers points, which have been generally held in former ages: as appeareth by the Chronicles of the Magdeburgenses their own Doctors, who confess that the ancient Fathers held this and that, which they now deny. And there is no learned Protestant (unless he be too too impudent) but he will confess, that there cannot be assigned a visible company of men (professing the same faith, which they do) ever since Christ his time, continuing without interruption till now. And therefore, will he, nill he, he must confess, that the Protestants Church is not universal, and therefore not Catholic, as out of Scripture, I showed Christ's true Church must be. But the Roman Church is Catholic. For first, it hath been continually without ceasing since Christ and his Apostles time, still visibly (though sometimes in persecution) professing the same faith which is received from the Apostles, without change till this day. It is therefore Catholic or universal in time. It hath also had, and hath at this day, some in every country, where there are any Christians, (which is almost, if not absolutely every where) that communicateth and agreeth with it, in profession of faith. Therefore it is also Catholic or universal in place. It teacheth also an universal and most ample uniform doctrine of God, of Angels, of all other creatures, and specially of man, of man's first framing, of his final end, of things pertaining to his nature, of his fall by sin, of his reparation by grace, of laws prescribed unto him, of virtues which he ought to embrace, of vices which he ought to eschew, of Christ our Redeemer, his Incarnation, life, death, resurrection, ascension, and coming again to judgement, of Sacraments, and all other things, that any way pertain to Christian religion. Neither doth it at this day deny any one point of doctrine of faith, which in former times was universally received, for a verity of the Catholic Church. The which if any man will take upon him to gainsay, let him show and prove if he can, what point of doctrine the Roman Church doth deny, or hold contrary to that, which by the Church was universally held before: as we can show divers points that the Protestants so hold or deny. Let him (I say) show and prove by setting down the point of doctrine, the author, the time, the place, and what company did oppose themselves against it, and who they were that did continue (as the true Church must still continue) in the profession of the former faith, lineally, without interruption, till these our days: as we can show and prove against them. Let him also show what country there is, or hath been, where Christian faith either was first planted, or afterwards continued, where some, at least have not holden the Roman faith: as we can show even at this day, divers places where their religion is scarce heard of, especially in the Indian, japonian, and China countries, which were not long since, first converted to the Christian faith, only by those, who were members of the Roman Church, and chiefly by Jesuits sent thither by the authority of the Pope. And to go no further than our dear country England: we shall find in the Chronicles that it was converted by Augustine a Monk, sent by Saint Gregory the Pope, and that it continued in that faith, without knowledge of the Protestants religion, which then, and for divers See the History of Saint Bede, lib. 1. cap. 23. hundred years after, was never heard off, as being then unhatched. The like record of other countries converted by means of those only, who either were directly sent by the Pope or Bishop of Rome, or at least, communicated and agreed in profession of faith, with him, we may find in other Histories. Lastly let him show some space of time, in which the Roman Church was not since Christ and his Apostles time, or in which it was not visible & known: as we can show them many hundred years, in which theirs was not at all. Let him (I say) therefore show and prove, (which never any yet did or can prove) that ever the Roman Church did either fail to be, or to be visible: or being still visible, when the profession of the ancient faith, which it received from the Apostles, did fail in it, and when, and by whom the profession of a new faith began in it. As we can show when, where, & by whom, this new (no) faith of theirs began. Certain it is that once the Roman Church had the true faith, and was a true Church, to wit, when Saint Paul wrote to the Romans saying, Vestra fides annunciatur in universo orb, your Rom. 1. In ration. redditis academ. ra. 7. faith is renowned in the whole world. When therefore, I pray you, (as the learned and renowned Master Campian urgeth) when (I say) did Rome change the belief and profession of faith which once it had? Quo tempore? quo Pontifice? qua via? qua vi? quibus incrementis urbem & orbem religio pervasit aliena? Quas voces? quas turbas, quae lamenta ea res progenuit: Omnes orb reliquo so piti sunt, dum Roma, Roma inquam, nova Sacramenta, nowm sacrificium nowm religionis dogma procuderet? Nullus extitit Historicus, neque Latinus, neque Graecus, neque remotus, neque citimus, quirem tantam vel obscurè iaceret in commentarios? At what time? under what Pope? what way? with what violence or force? with what augmentation or increase did a strange religion overflow the City and the whole world? What speeches or rumours? what tumults or troubles? what lamentations (at least) did it breed? Was all the rest of the world asleep, when Rome (the Imperial and mother City, whose matters for the most part are open to the view of the whole world) when Rome I say, did coin new Sacraments, a new sacrifice, a new doctrine of faith & religion? Was there never one Historiographer, neither Latin nor Greek, neither far off nor near, who would at least obscurely cast into his commentaries, such a notable matter as this is? Certainly it is not possible, if such a thing as this had happened, but that it should have been resisted, or at least recorded by some. For suppose it were true, (which the Protestants imagine) that some points of the faith and religion which Rome professeth at this day, were as contrary to that which was in it, when Saint Paul commended the Roman faith, as black to white, darkness to light; or so absurd, as were now judaism, or Paganism (as one of their Holinshead in the description of Brittany. Folly 11. Historiographers accounteth it worse, saying, that indeed Augustine the Monk converted the Saxons from Paganism, but as the prover be saith (saith he) bringing them out of God's blessing into the warm Sun:) Suppose, I say, this were true. Then I would demand, if it were possible, that any Prince in any Christian City, and much more that the Pope in Rome the mother City, could at this day bring in any notable absurd rite of jewish or Paganish religion; for example, to offer up an Ox in sacrifice, or to worship a Cow as God: and not only to practise it privately in his own Chapel, but to get it publicly practised and preached in all Churches, not only of that City, but also in all the rest of the Christian world: and that none should in Christian zeal, continually oppose themselves, that no Bishop should preach, no Doctor write against this horrible innovation of faith, and the author thereof; that none should have constancy to suffer martyrdom, which Christians have been always most ready to endure, rather than to yield to a profession and practice, so contrary to their ancient faith; that there should be no true hearted Christians, who would speak of it, or at least lament it, nor no Historiographer that would so much as make obscure mention of it. Could all be so asleep, that they could not note, or so cold and negligent in matters concerning their souls good, as generally, without any care to yield unto it? No certainly, though there were no promise of Christ his own continual presence; no assurance of the infallible assistance of his holy spirit: yet it is not possible that such a gross error should arise among Christians, & overwhelm the whole world, without some resistance. The Bishops and Pastors could not be so simple, or so unmindful of their duty, but they would first note such an evident contrariety, to the ancient and universally received faith; and noting it, they would, doubtless with common consent, resist, contradict, and finally, according to Saint Paul his Gal. 1. rule, accurse it. If therefore this could not happen now, nor ever heretofore was heard, that any such absurd error or heresy did or could arise, without noting or resisting; what reason can any man have, to say, that this hath happened at Rome? Not being able to allege any writer, that did note the thing, the person, the time, and what opposition was made and continued against it, as in all heresies that have sprung up of new, we can do. If there could not a little ceremony be added to the Mass, but that it was set down in history, when and by whom; how could the whole substance of the Mass, (which consisteth in consecration, oblation, and consumption of the sacred Host) be newly invented, and no mention made, when or by whom, or that ever there was was any such new invention at all? If also Historiographers were not afraid to note personal and private vices of the Popes themselves; which they might well think Popes would not willingly have made open to the world: why should they have feared to have recorded any alteration in religion? Which if it had been, had been a thing done publicly in the view of the whole world; or if there were any fear or flattery, which might tie the tongues and pens of those, that liled near hand, that they durst not or would not mention such a matter: yet doubtless others, which lived in places further off, should not have had those causes, and consequently would not have kept secret such an open and important a thing as this. If lastly the histories which make mention of these private vices of Popes, and other Christian Princes, could not only first come out, but also continue without touch, till these latter times: what reason can any have to doubt or dream, but that the like would have been set out about the alteration of religion, if it had happened? And that, if any such History reporting any true accident of alteration or change of religion, had come out; it should partly by God's providence, partly by human diligence, have been preserved till these our days: especially considering, that such records had been so requisite, for discerning the ancient, unchanged, true Christian Religion, from upstart novelty, which must needs be false. So that we may well conclude; that if Christian Religion had, since the Apostles time, altered in Rome; it would have been recorded in histories, as other things, and especially such notable alterations are recorded: and those histories would have been preserved till this day, as other Christian monuments have been preserved, even in time of persecution, yea even then, when the persecutors made particular inquiry for Christian books, to burn or consume them. But in those ancient Histories, there is no mention made of any such alteration of Religion in Rome. Wherefore it followeth that there was no such alteration or change at all. No such alteration being made, it is evident that the same faith and Religion, which was in Saint Paul's time, hath always continued, and is there now. That which was there then, was the true faith and Religion, as appeareth by that high commendation, which Saint Paul hath left written of it. Therefore that which is there now, must needs be the only true holy and Catholic faith; and that company which professeth it, must needs be the Only true Holy and Catholic Church. Neither can I see what answer can, with any probability, be forged against this reason. For to say, that the errors of the Church of Rome crept in by little and little, and so, for the littleness of the thing, or for negligence of the Pastors, were not espied; is an idle fiction already refuted. For first those matters, which the Protestants call errors in the Roman Church, be not so little matters, but that less, even in the like kind, are ordinarily recorded in stories. Nay, some of them are in the Protestants conceits, (and consequently if men of old time had been Protestants, they would have been also in their conceits) as gross superstition as Paganism itself, namely to adore Christ our Saviour, as being really and substantially present in the Blessed Sacrament; the which Sacrament Protestant's hold to be, (really and substantially) but a bare piece of bread. Also the Protestants account the use of the Images to be Idolatry, and say (very ignorantly or maliciously) that we adore stocks and stones, as the Paynims did. The which things could not so have crept in by little and little, but they must needs be espied: Neither could the Pastors of the Church, at any time, be so simple and ignorant, so sleepy and negligent, but they must needs have seen: and seeing must needs in some sort have resisted, as before I have said. For to imagine all the Pastors, of any one age, to have been in such a deep Lethargical and deadly sleep, that they could not only not perceive, when the enemy should over sow Cockle in the hearts of some; but also when this Cockle of false belief should grow to outward action, and especially to public practice, the which could not be but most apparent: to imagine (I say) all the Pastors to be so simple and sleepy, not then to mark, or not to resist, is rather the dream of a proud man in his sleep, who is apt to think all men fools beside himself, than a iudictall conceit of a waking man of any understanding; who ought to think of things past, either according to the verity recorded in stories, or when this faileth, by comparing the likelihood of that which he thinketh was done by men of that time, with that which most men of their quality would do in like case. Finally, if these things were so, & that the church did by this means, for so long space, in such important matters, universally err, Neglexerit Lib. de praescrip officium Spiritus sanctus (as Tertullian speaketh, refuting the like cavil of heretics) the holy Ghost should have neglected his office: which is (as I have proved before out of Scripture) not to permit the universal Church to fall into error, but to suggest unto it all things that Christ said unto it, and to teach it all john 14. john 16. truth. A. W. catholicness especially as you understand it, is not such a property of the Church, but the Church may be without it: as it is plain by that Church which was in our Saviour Christ's time, only in the land of jewrie; and after his death, z Act. 8. 4. till the Church was scattered abroad in the world. Yet let us see what you bring to prove, that our Church is not Catholic. If there cannot be assigned a visible company of men professing the same faith which the Protestants do, ever since Christ's time, continuing without interruption till now: then the Protesiants' Church is not Catholic. But there cannot be such a company assigned. Therefore the Protestants Church is not Catholic. I deny the consequence of the mayor: First, because that To the proposition. may be Catholic, which is not visible: as the Church of the elect is dispersed in all places, and yet no where to be seen. Secondly, because catholicness belongs neither to time nor doctrine, but to place and persons. Thirdly, because it is not required, that the same faith in all points should be professed, (which you mean by the same faith) but only the same in matters fundamental. I grant your minor, that we cannot assign you any such company, Of the Assumption. though we doubt not but that there was always such a company greater or less, as appears by them which from time to time have by their writings or sufferings maintained the substance of that doctrine which we now profess. To prove that our doctrine is not universal, you say, a See my answer to 12. art. part. 2. art. 4. it chiefly consisteth of negatives: whereas you cannot be ignorant that we hold all the articles of the creed, and that in the same sense as you do, save only in some few differences, about the understanding of belief, what it is to believe in the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost; and what it is to believe the Church, and in what respect the Church is called holy and Catholic, and what the Church is that we believe. But we deny some things that some ancient writers have held. Do you follow them in all points? You will not say so for very shame. But our Church is truly Catholic, because it is not tied to the jews or jerusalem, no nor to any other place or persons, but common to all that will believe in jesus Christ. What get you if you prove your Church to be Catholic: since that alone, without the two former points already disproved, cannot make any company a true Church? But neither can you prove your Church to be Catholic: let your argument speak. That Church which is universal in time, place and doctrine of the Apostles, without change, is Catholic. The Roman Church is universal in time, place and doctrine of the Apostles, without change. Therefore the Roman Church is Catholic. If to make a Church Catholic, it be required that she continue Of the proposition. in the doctrine of the Apostles, how did you before deny that the doctrine of the Apostles is a necessary and certain mark of the true Church? But if you leave this out, and affirm that Church to be Catholic which is universal in doctrine, and think it not needful, that the doctrine professed be the Apostles: I deny your mayor. The reasons of my denial, I delivered in the former Chapter, when I showed, that truth of doctrine was the most proper and true mark of the Church. But whatsoever your mayor be, your minor is evidently false To the Assumption. in every part of it. The very foundations of the doctrine of the Apostles, are overthrown by your Church, in the heresies you hold concerning predestination, justification, free will, the insufficiency of the Scriptures, and the headship of Antichrist your Pope. Neither do you only fail in the doctrine of the Apostles, but in your universality of time. For how can that doctrine be said to have been always, which was not taught by our Saviour and his Apostles? As for universality in regard of the ample uniformity of your doctrine; if you speak of your Church's determination, many points of great moment are not as yet defined by it: for example take those main questions, whether the Pope be above the Council or no: whether he have without a Council privilege of not erring or no: whether there be any merit of congruity or no, and such like. Yea your Church denieth the chief point of all, which in the Apostles time was held by all true Christians, that justification is by faith, without the works of the law. I forbear to show the reasons of that I affirm, because any man may fetch them out of my former answer in this and the last Chapter. I looked for proof of your minor: but you were too wise to undertake a matter so unpossible: and therefore in stead of that, you challenge us to show and prove the contrary, forgetting that it is the repliers part to prove, and not the answerers. But I pray you tell me in earnest, did you never hear of any particulars, whereby we except against your doctrine as none of the Apostles? What a vain flourish is this then, to demand new proofs of us, and never once assay to answer those we have already brought? But I have made answer to your challenge in my refutation of your proof, that your Church is one. Yea our men's books are full of these points and proofs, both out of Scriptures and Fathers. As for your brag, of being able to show divers points that we hold or deny, otherwise then the true Church did in the time of the Apostles: it is well known, that in most controversies betwixt us, you are fain to fly from the Scriptures of God, to the writings of men, and devise interpretations to serve your turn. In some points we deny not, but that we descent from the opinion of some writers of former ages; but that we go against the judgement of the whole Church before it became Antichristian, neither we grant, nor you can prove. And even for those times of error, we want not the testimony of learned men to avouch our doctrine against your heresies. But you call upon us to set down the point of doctrine, the author, the time, the place, what company did oppose themselves against it, and who they were that did continue in the profession of the former faith. What needs all this ado? Will it not serve the turn, if we make it manifest, that your doctrine is contrary to that the Apostles taught, unless we can show you when every one of your errors was first hatched? What if the Scribes and pharisees had demanded the like questions of our Saviour Christ, touching their errors reproved by him? There is no doubt, but that as he was God, he could have declared every one of these particulars; but do you think he would have fed their foolish humour in this case, and not have contented himself with showing that it was not so from the beginning? b D. Abbot against D. B. P. Some of our Ministers have truly and wittily refuted this conceit of yours, by showing how absurd it is for a man that is sick of the plague, a surfeit, or any such disease, to deny that he is so diseased, because the Physician cannot tell him at what time, and in what place, upon what occasion, in what company he first took the infection, or distempered his body by ill diet. Is it a good plea against plain and sound evidence, whereby I prove that such a Lordship ought to be mine, that I cannot show when and how I lost the possession of every several close and meadow, farm and cottage? But to take away all just excuse from you, our writers have showed the first beginnings of many of your errors, and might have done of more, if all were extant that hath been written; and your inquisitors and censurers had not (as you call it) purged, indeed corrupted and maimed the writings of former ages, wheresoever they made against you, if you could light on them before they were too well known in the world. This challenge hath as much reason as the former. We must prove that there have not been some in every country, where the Gospel hath been professed, that have held your Roman faith. Or rather must not you prove your catholicness by such induction? But we confess it to be likely, that the devil hath from time to time sowed some of your tars amongst the Lord's wheat. But that your whole faith, as now you hold it, was ever maintained any where, till the last Council of Trent, we challenge you to prove if you can. Surely the Greek Church even till this day, dissenteth from you in many, and some no small matters, as your Pope's supremacy; that I may not name those Christians who are in precious john's country, in Armenia, Jean. Belul. and other parts of the world: to whom your doctrine is as little known in a manner, as ours is to those Indians you spoke of. Amongst whom, for ought you can prove or know to the contrary, there may be, and in all likelihood are some, to whom the Lord hath given grace to rest wholly upon jesus Christ for pardon of their sins, without any mingling of their own works with Christ's, to procure them the inheritance of heaven. All such we challenge to be of our Church, though they agree with you in many of your errors, through their ignorance of the Scriptures. As for our country of England, which d 1. Reg. 3. 26. like that harlot, you call dear, as oft as you conceive hope of bringing it into subjection to the Pope, but otherwise wish it wholly destroyed, as she did the child; it neither was converted by your proud Monk Austin, but perverted rather: and long before he was borne, had many congregations in it, who held the same faith that we now do. You confess they were not of your Church: for than what needed, or how could they have been converted by Austin? That the Gospel was here long before that time, even in a manner from the first preaching of it, e Poly. Virgil. hist. Angl. lib. 2 Polydor Virgil no Protestant may teach you out of Gildas a British writer, ancienter than Bede: Gildas witnesseth (saith Polydore) that the Britain's received the Gospel presently upon the first publishing of it abroad in the world. Yea f Beda hist. gent. Angl. lib. 2. c. 2. Bede, your own author avoucheth, that seven Bishops of the Britain's, and many very learned men refused to receive Austin for their Archbishop. And g Galsr. Mon. lib. 8. cap. 4. Geffrey of Monmouth testifieth, that Ethelbat king of Kent caused 1200. monks of Bangor to be slain in one day, because they would not yield to Augustine's archbishopric: of whom that writer saith, that they decked with martyrdom, entered the kingdom of heaven. Mark you what he saith? They were martyrs, that chose to die rather than to yield to your Popish Archbishop. The like conversion we may find in the Indies, especially the West, where your Catholic nation the Spaniards have destroyed in few years, more souls, then all sent by the Pope, or agreeing in faith with him, ever converted in five times so many. Although, what tell you us of men communicating with the Pope in the same faith? How dared they attempt any such matter, without special commission from him? Is his authority no more amongst you? The Roman Church hath indeed always been visible: but it hath not always been the same Church. For many hundred years it was ours, and not yours, though the devil laboured to sow the tars, you now sell for corn, among the wheat, and prevailed by little and little. It is therefore ridiculous for you to challenge us, that we should show when the faith, received by the Church of Rome from the Apostles, began to fail in it. It was done ( h Mat. 13. 25. as our Saviour speaks in the like case) while men slept: and so slily, piece by piece, that the corn was overgrown ere the tars were perceived: most men took them for wheat: they that saw some difference, thought them too deeply rooted for them to pluck up: and if any man offered to touch them with his weeding hook, Satan had taken order by your Pope and his Clergy, that the hook should be wrung out of his hands; and if he held hard, his head be wrung off his shoulders. Thus one man being taught by another's calamity, as in hunting with the Lion, the Fox was by the Asses misery, every one thought it best to sleep in a whole skin, and to bear with that they could not help. Yet are there many examples of those, who from time to time have withstood the tyranny of your Pope, and your heresies in Religion: and many more we should have heard of, if your Popish Clergy had not been chief commanders through all Europe. What is all this painted discourse, but a flourishing repetition of that which hath been often answered, like coleworts twice sod, and strewed over with sugar? Only to grace the service you send in the dish by one, who in your eyes is a proper man. But do you not know, that as well his own treason, as the continual practices of his companions, and above all, the late devilish fire work of your superior Garnets' approbation, have made Campions authority light, and the name of a jesuit odious to all true hearted Englishmen? Let us take the Traitor at the best, and give him some commendation of wit, and of a quick cornicall stile. If once his writings be stripped of their rhetorical habit, and set naked before the light of true logic, it will appear to all the world (I will say no more than I am able to manifest) that never any man so doted upon by them that would seem to be great clerk, writ more weakly or unsoundly. You tell us, that the Roman Church was once a true Church. We acknowledge it with thanks to God, and due commendation thereof: and are loath to say any thing, whereby the best opinion of it might be diminished; but that you drive us to it, by building upon that high commendation, which S. Paul (say you) hath left written of it: as if it had once been so extraordinarily rooted, that no blast could shake it. But how vain a conceit this is, it will easily be seen, if we consider that other Churches, which have had as great commendations, are now no Churches at all. What is become of that famous Church at Corinth, of which the Apostle testifieth, that i Cor. 1. 5. In all things it was made rich in Christ, in all kind of speech, and in all knowledge: so that they were not destitute of any gift? yea the Apostle addeth, that vers. 7. jesus Christ shall also confirm them, unto the end, that they may be blameless in the day of our Lord jesus. This passeth that he saith of the Romans. The like he saith of k Phil. 1. 3. 5. 6 the Philippians, I thank my God, because of the fellowship which you have in the Gospel, from the first day until now: and I am persuaded of the same thing, that he, which hath begun this good work in you, will perform it, until the day of jesus Christ. How (would you have triumphed) if the Apostle had said as much of your Church? But what say you to the Church of Thessalonica? From you (saith l 1. Thess. 1. 8. the Apostle of the Thessalonians) sounded out the word of the Lord, not in Macedonia and Achaia only: but your faith also, which is toward God, is spread abroad in all quarters. Are not these commendations as great as those that are left written of the Romans? Yea, what if that which the Apostle speaks of them, be not to commend their faith, but to show the reason of his joy, and thanks to God for their conversion? As if he should have said, that he did thank God for them, because of their believing: and the report thereof through the world, was like to prove an occasion of spreading the Gospel, and drawing many other by their example to the profession of Christian Religion, and confirming them that did believe. He declares (saith m Caietan. ad Rom. 1. 8. Caietan) that the cause of his thanksgiving was, that the fame of their believing was profitable to all the world. For Rome at that time was the head of the world: and therefore the report of the Christian faith being at Rome, was spread abroad into all places, and was profitable to all, as being a means to provoke them to believe. Of the confirming of others n Lombard. ibi. & Ambros. Lombard saith, that they which believed were strengthened in faith, seeing that their rulers were made their brethren in faith. So do o Origen. Origen, p Theodoret. Theodoret, q Gloss. ordin. interl. your Glosses, r Lyra. Lyra, s Thomas. Thomas, t Catharin. Catharin, and other, understand the Apostle. u Ambros. ibi. Ambrose is not afraid to say plainly, that the Apostle rejoiceth for their good beginning, knowing that they might go forward to perfection. For as yet (saith x Thomas ibi. Thomas) they had not perfect faith, because some of them were by false Apostles seduced, so that they thought the cermonies of the law were to be joined with the Gospel. He doth not (saith y Gloss. interl. your interlinear Gloss) commend their faith as perfect, but their readiness and desire to embrace Christ. All which notwithstanding, we willingly grant, that the Roman Church was at that time, and long after, a true Church: what gather you of this grant? I hope you will not say, that therefore it must needs be a true church still. But we shall better understand your meaning by that which followeth. There is nothing you Papists are more afraid of, then to be drawn to justify your doctrine by Scripture. Therefore you always keep aloof, and tell us of the Church, the Church, as the jews did jer. 7. 5. jeremy of the Temple. The Roman Church (say you) was once a true Church. Who denieth it? Therefore is it so still? I (say you) that it is, unless you can show, at what time it departed from the true faith. Did you never know any man, who in his youth had black hair, and now being old is all white headed? Put case I would stand very stiffly upon your argument, and say that his head is black still, and urge you to tell me, when the first hair changed white. Would you answer me, or laugh at me for my folly? But such changes in faith (say you) would have been resisted, or at least recorded by some, and you prove it thus. If no heresy as contrary to truth, as black is to white, was ever heard of; to have arisen, without noting, or resisting, nor any such could now possibly so arise; then no such thing is to be believed of the Roman Church. But no such heresy was ever heard of to have arisen, nor can so arise, without noting or resisting. Therefore no such thing is to be believed of the Roman Church. That I may answer directly to your Syllogism, remember To the syllogism. (which I also noted before) that you take it, as granted, that there was never any noting or resisting of errors, but there is yet record remaining of it. Whereas we guessing reasonably of that which is past, by that we see every day, persuade ourselves, that your Popish inquisitors and censurers have razed and destroyed many records, wherein the arising of your errors, and the resistance made against them have been noted. I would speak more of this matter, but that almost every child knoweth, how shamefully, and lewdly you deal every day, with your own men's writings, who forced by the evidence of truth, here and there give witness to our doctrine in their books. We see not then, why we may not yield this conclusion, for aught that it can advantage you, or hurt us. All such errors doubtless have been noted, and resisted; though the records thereof be perished, defaced, or destroyed by your Antichristian Prelates. Secondly, though it were granted to be true, that No heresy as contrary to the truth as black is to white, ever could arise without being noted or recorded: yet might your Popish errors have stolen in, for the most part, unperceived. Because they were not apparently contrary to the known truth, as the absurd examples you bring of sacrificing an Ox, or worshipping a Cow, are. Popery (as the a 2. Thess. 2. 7. Apostle saith of it, under the title of Antichristianisme) is a mystery of iniquity, which began to work in his days, and by little and little, with colourable pretences, wrought itself into the Church, till it came to that height, in which all the world now seeth it. I might exemplify this matter, in that great point, of your Pope's licentious and unlimited authority; how it began, by reason of the place, Rome being the chief seat of the Empire: how it grew by the favour of the Emperors, and the worthiness of some Bishops of that sea, and so crept on, till it had gotten See Doctor Reynolds confer. with Master Hart pag. 313. etc. strength to trample the Emperors themselves under foot. It is said by way of proverb, that Rome was not built in one day. The speech is as true of your Pope's Romish government, as of Romulus first founding the City. The occasions and pretences of your Pope's greatness were reasonable fair to show, and seemed to promise, I know not what security to religion, and peace to Christendom: but the eventhath showed, that the one by it was, for a time, quite overthrown, & the other partly destroyed, and altogether brought into great hazard. But I may not enlarge my answer to far. b Hollinshead description of Britan. fol. 11 Our Historiographer whom you find fault with, no doubt spoke in that just indignation he conceived against the intolerable pride of the Romish Monk Austin, & in pity of that bloodshed, which ensued upon his finding favour with the Saxon kings: whom he caused to embrew their hands in the blood of many thousand poor Christians: because forsooth they would not submit themselves to his insolency. If his speech sound unpleasantly in your ears, how would you have liked c Mat. 23. 15. that of our Saviour in the Gospel? Woe be to you Scribes and pharisees, Hypocrites. For ye compass sea and land to make one of your profession: and when he is made, you make him two fold the child of hell more than yourselves. For (saith d Hieron. ad Mat. 23. Jerome) he that before did but simply err in his ignorance, by your lewd conversation, is driven from his profession back again to Gentilism. Surely they that before were heathen, and might by God's blessing have been won to the truth of the Gospel, through the preaching of the Britan's, and their humble conversation, by this Austin lost the opportunity, and became persecutors of true Christians, for your pride and superstition, with which afterward the whole nation was miserably overwhelmed, and at last almost perished under the Normans. But to give you some better satisfaction touching this point, hear I pray you in a few words, what one of your own writers saith: It is a thing full of horror (saith e Bucchinger. hist. Eccles. pag. 217. Bucchingerus) either to read or remember, that the Popes of Rome practised such tyranny, one against another. O how are they degenerated from their Ancestors? It could not be, that in the time of such cruelty, there should be any regard had of Christian piety. Let no man then marvel if some abuses, and perverse opinions crept into the Church. There was great ignorance of the Scripture, and love of superstition, f 2. Thess. 2. 11. The Lord sending men strong delusions, that they should believe lies, because they had not received the love of the truth. You press us here, (as you think) with some probability, that if there had been any alteration of religion, it would certainly have been recorded. But how should it have been recorded, when it was not seen? You dream of a sudden change: where as the alteration grew from good to bad, yet with show of some goodness; and from bad to worse, so nicely, that few or none could discern it. Your probabilities are two. The former in this manner. If there could not a little ceremony be added to the Mass, but that it was set down in history; how could the whole substance of the Mass be newly invented, and no mention made of it? This consequence is weak. For those additions to the Mass were matters enjoined by your Popes, and recorded by your writers of Histories, not as errors, but as virtues, to the commendation of the Authors thereof, the world growing every day more and more superstitious, and yet there are some ceremonies, & other patches of your Mass, about the Author whereof there is no great agreement to be found in your writers of histories. But the substance of your Mass was long coming in, and the words themselves in it, having been devised to no ill purpose, were at at last occasion of error upon error; as it is worthily declared, by g Lord Plessy of the Mass. the Lord Plessy in his book of the Mass, to which I refer all men, that desire to be satisfied in this matter, and where (I dare undertake) they may find good satisfaction. The learned know of themselves, how to have it also otherwhere, in the writings of our divines, h D. Sutliu. de Missa. Doctor Sutcliffe, and divers other. Your latter objection carrieth some more show of likelihood with it, in this sort. If Historiographers were not afraid to note personal and private vices of the Popes themselves, why should they fear to record any alteration in religion? Do you not know why? Or can you not discern the difference in this case? Of whom should they be afraid? Your Popes for the most part, were so notoriously lewd, that all, your Historiographers write of them, was well known to the world, before they writ, so that they could not for shame, but say in a manner, as much as they did. But the chief matter was, that the latter Popes had quarrels to their predecessors, which was very ordinary: and then it was not only safe, but as it were meritorious, to display their villainy to the world; or at the least, they might imagine that the vices of their predecessors would serve for a foil to their virtues. Sometimes also it fell out, that the Pope in very civil honesty, had a detestation of such bad courses as other before him had taken; & that gave men some liberty to write more freely. But your change of doctrine neither could easily, nor might at all be discovered, because it was a privity of your estate, and a principle of your religion, with Arcanum reipublicae. your Pope and Prelates, that Saint Peter's vicar could not err in doctrine. As for them in other countries, who knoweth not, how few monuments of antiquity remain? Or who suspecteth not justly, that they have come through hucksters handling, as in divers it is more than apparent? Yet are there also divers records in the writings of learned men, wherein any man may see direct opposition to many points, held at this day in your Romish Church. After many idle repetitions, turnings and windings, at the last you are lighted upon a part of our answer, that those errors and abuses, crept in by little and little unperceived. For reply whereto you say, it is an idle fiction already refuted. How idle then is this new discourse of yours, against a point, which you have overthrown before? But you knew well enough, for all your saying, that it asked further help, than you could yet afford it. Well, what say you at the last? just nothing at all to purpose. For what though the matters be of great moment, and less points noted by some writers? We speak not of that, but of the small difference from the truth, which at the first appeared in the bringing in, and beginning of your heresies. A matter of small importance, being apparently contrary to that, which is generally held to be true, shall find more to note and resist it, than an error in the very foundation of religion, so closely carried that it cannot at the first be perceived. You give us two examples of very important matters, the Mass and Images. But you offer not to show, that they broke out all at once, to the height of impiety: No, no, they came in by degrees, under a colour of reverence, and help to further men in devotion. I wittingly for bear to enter into discourse of these points, because I should be too long, and the matter is already performed very excellently by that honourable parsonage the Lord Plessy: i Plessy of the Mass. lib. 1. chap. 6. 7. 8. for the Mass in his first book, k Lib. 2. cap. 2. 3. 4. and for Images in his second. l See our Homilies of the peril of Idolatry. But I may not forget to answer the imputations you charge us withal. First concerning the Sacrament, you confidently avouch that we hold it to be (really and substantially) but a bare piece of bread. Wherein you show that, wherewith afterward you charge us about Images, either your ignorance, or your malice. By Sacrament we understand, according to the truth, the whole action of blessing, giving, receiving the bread and wine. The bread which you call the Sacrament, is but part of the matter of the Sacrament. But what? Do we make this bread, to be really and substantially bare bread? Surely, for the nature of it, we say and are sure, that it never ceaseth to be bread, till it be digested in the stomach. But for the use, we acknowledge it, so far as it is used, to be holy bread, and not bare bread, bread appointed, blessed, and made effectual by God, to seal up in our hearts the assurance of his love, in giving his son for our redemption, and the forgiveness of our sins, resting upon him by faith for pardon. Indeed we do not, as you do, blasphemously call the bread our Creator, or God; upon a conceit, that (forsooth) the substance of the bread, is either vanished away, or else turned into the body of jesus Christ, to be torn in pieces with our teeth, or swallowed down into our bellies, and from thence bestowed in a worse place. This senseless, and monstrous opinion hath been, and is amongst you, the cause of the most gross and barbarous idolatry, that ever was committed in the world. It is neither ignorantly nor maliciously done of us, to charge you, for adoring stocks and stones, as the Paynims did. Compare the things, and the worship, and then show me a true difference. Are not your Images of wood, gold, stone, as the Gentiles were? Have they not the shape and proportion of men and women, as theirs had? Do not you worship them, as divers of the Heathen were wont to do? You m Baruc. cap. 6 vers. 3. vers. 12. vers. 18. 20. cover them with clothing of purpose, and wipe their faces, because of the dust of the Temple. You light up candles before them: you make their faces black through the smoke of your incense, you bear them in procession upon your shoulders, you set gifts before them: your Priests have their heads and beards shaven: you call upon them for help: you present the blind, the halt, and sick before them to be healed. vers. 25. 26. vers. 30. vers. 31. 40. But what mean I to reckon up so many particulars? Who sees not the agreement betwixt the heathen and the Papists, for the matter, form, and worship of their Images? Your idle distinctions of Idol, and Image, of service and worship, of religious and civil worship, I have n Defence of the Reformed Catholic. Pag. 544. 545. otherwhere examined and refuted. If you say, that you worship not the Image; it is too manifestly apparent, as a ruled case amongst you, that o Thom. 3. q. 25. art. 3. the Image must have the same worship, p See my defence of the Reformed Catholic. Pag. 569. that belongeth to the thing, whose Image it is. But you do not take the Images to be Gods. If you speak of all your ignorant people, I scarce believe you. But this maketh no difference in worship. The heathen, at least the learned and wiser sort of them, did not hold their Idols to be Gods, but representations of their Gods. And you Papists, in making them mediators of intercession, and so acknowledging but one God, do little better than the Pagans: for they had but one sovereign God jupiter, who commanded all the rest. Not only Dij minorum gentium, their Gods of the third and fourth form, but also those of the second and first, as Hercules, Apollo, Venus, yea and q Virgil Aeneid. lib. 12. juno herself too, who was both wife and sister to jupiter, depended upon him, and were glad to be mediators of intercession to him for their favourites: as is every where to be seen in Homer, and Virgil. All the difference of any moment, that I perceive, is, that some of the heathen Gods, were imagined to be such by nature; and all your Divi or Saints, pety-gods, have both their places and offices by favour. But I am weary of these abominations and fooleries of yours. The Pastors of the Church being employed in withstanding manifest and dangerous heresies, neither did nor could, though they slept not, perceive and reprove every error; yea it is more than likely, that they were content to bear with many things, as long as the main points were held sound: lest by striving for matters of less weight, greater things should be neglected, and they that erred in small things, upon resistance, quite fall away to join with the heretics. This in the beginning, for some five hundred years, was the estate of the Church. And afterward plenty bred pride and idleness: the chalices were turned into gold, and Priests into wood or lead, that partly ignorance, & partly slothfulness gave the devil opportunity to sow what errors he would in the midst of the Church. If any man of more learning or grace, than the ordinary sort perceived and reproved the errors of his time, he was by one means or other suppressed or disgraced: all men & their writings, especially r Anno. 609. after the revealing of Antichrist, being at the devotion of your persecuting Clergy. Yet did not Almighty God leave his truth without witness, as it appeareth s Illyricus in Catal. testium. veritatis. by record of them who from time to time, misliked and withstood your Antichristian doctrines. These are no dreams of a proud man in his sleep, but likely conjectures, or rather apparent truths, as any indifferent man may discern, and will confess. To shut up the matter, you be take yourself to your general rendezvous of the Church, which forsooth, if those former imputations were true, should have erred; and so the holy Ghost have neglected his office, which your Pope hath assigned him, to keep the universal Church from erring. It had been well, your Antichrist would have contented himself, with his sauciness toward his t Leo. Epist. 50. Lord Saint Peter, in appointing him to the Portership of heaven gates, and not have presumed to enjoin the holy Ghost also such an office, as our Saviour never committed to him. The charge our Saviour left with that his glorious Lieutenant, specified in that part of his joan. 14. 17. & 16. 15. Patent, which you glance at, was not concerning the universal Church, a thing (in your sense) not once signified in the Scriptures: but touching the Apostles absolutely, and all true Christians in general and particular, for matters necessary to salvation. This accordingly hath always been performed, no man that ever truly believed in jesus Christ, having fallen into any such error, as might utterly sever him from the body of the true Church, that is, the company of the elect believers, whereof our Saviour Christ is the head: as I have showed in my special answer to these places before. But Tertullian saith, that the holy Ghost had neglected his duty, if the Church, had universally erred. in such important matters. x Tertul. de prescript. cap. 28. Tertullian speaketh not of any universal Church, but of several particular Churches: which you grant may err, and yet the holy Ghost not fail in his commission. Besides, y Tertul. de praenit. cap. 10. Tertullian himself saith otherwhere, that the Church may be preserved in one or two: and therefore your Catholic Church of Rome might well fall into such gross heresies, without any disgrace to the Spirit of God. A. D. §. 7. §. four That the Roman Church only is Apostolic. Fourthly, I find that the Protestants Church is not Apostolic, because they cannot derive the pedigree of their Preachers lineally, without interruption, from the Apostles: but are forced to acknowledge some other, as Luther or Calvin, or some such, for their first founders in this their new faith; from whom they may perhaps show some succession of the preachers of their faith: but they can never show, that Luther or Calvin themselves (who lived within these hundred years) did either lawfully succeed, or was lawfully sent to teach this new faith, by any Apostolic Bishop or Pastor. Nay Luther himself doth not only confess, but also brag, that he was the first preacher of this new found faith, Christum à nobis primò vulgatum Epist. ad Argentan Dom. 1525. audemus gloriari, (saith he) We dare boast that Christ was first published by us. For which his glorious boasting, me thinks he deserveth well that title which Optatus giveth unto Victor the Lib cont. parm. first bishop of the Donatists, to wit, to be called filius sine patre, discipulus sine magistro, a son without a father, a disciple without a master. On the contrary side, the Roman Church can show a lineal succession of their Bishops, without interruption, even from the Apostle Saint Peter, unto Clement the eight the Bishop of Rome, which liveth at this day, The which succession from the Apostles, which we have, and the Protestants want, the ancient Fathers did much esteem, and used it as an argument, partly to confound the heretics, partly to confirm themselves in the unity of the Catholic Church. So doth Irenaeus, who saith, Traditionem ab Apostolis, & annunciatam Lib. 3. cap. 3. hominibus fidem, per successiones Episcoporum pervenientem usque ad nos, indicantes, confundimus omnes illos qui quoquo modo, vel per sui placentiam malam, vel per vanam gloriam, vel per caecitatem & malam sententiam, praeterquàm oportet colligunt: Showing the tradition from the Apostles, and the faith coming unto us by succession of Bishops, we confound all them, who any way through evil complacence of themselves, or vain glory, or through perverse opinion do collect (and conclude) otherwise than they ought. So also doth S. Austin, who saith, Tenet Cont. epist. Fundam. cap. 4. me in Ecclesia Catholica, ab ipsa sede Petri Apostoli, cui pascendas oves suas Dominus commendavit, usque ad praesentem Episcopum, successio Sacerdotum: The succession of Priests from the very seat of Peter the Apostle, to whom our Lord commended his sheep to be fed, until this present Bishop, doth hold me in the Catholic Church. See the same S. Austin, Epist. 150. Optatus li. 2. cont. Parmen. S. Epiphani. haeres. 275. S. Cyprian lib. 1. epist. 6. S. Athanas. Orat. 2. cont. Arianos', who pronounceth them to be heretics, qui aliunde quam à tota successione Cathedrae Ecclesiasticae Athanas. orat. 2. cont. Arian. originem fidei suae deducunt, who derive the beginning of their faith from any other ground, then from the whole succession of Ecclesiastical chair. And this (saith he) is eximium & admirabile argumentum ad haereticam sectam explorandam, an excellent and admirable argument, whereby we may espy out and discern an heretical sect. The which argument these Fathers would never have urged and extolled so much, if they had not thought that this succession was an undoubted good mark of the Church, and that with this lawful, uninterrupted, Apostolical succession of Doctors and Pastors, the true Apostolic faith and doctrine was always conjoined. The which to be conjoined, we may easily prove out of S. Paul himself, who saith: Dedit pastors & Doctores ad consummationem sanctorum, in opus ministerij, in aedificationem corporis Ephes. 4. Christi, donec occurramus omnes in unitatem fidei, & agnitionis filii Dei, in virum perfectum, in mensuram aetatis plenitudinis Christi: Signifying that Christ our Saviour hath appointed these outward functions of Pastors and Doctors in the Church, to continue until the world's end, for the edification and perfection thereof, and especially for this purpose, ut non simus paruuli fluctuantes, & circumferamur omni vento doctrinae: that we may not Ibidem. be little ones wavering, and carried about with every wind of doctrine: Wherefore that this ordinance and appointment of Pastors and Doctors in the Church, made by our Saviour Christ, may not be frustrate of the effect intended by him: we must needs say, that he hath decreed so to assist and direct these Pastors in teaching the doctrine of faith, that the people (their flock) may always by their means be preserved from wavering in the ancient faith, and from being carried about with every wind of new doctrine. The which cannot be, unless with succession of Pastors be always conjoined succession in true doctrine, at least in such sort, that all the Pastors cannot at any time universally err, or fail to teach the ancient and Apostolic faith. For if they should thus universally err, than all the people (who do, and aught like sheep, follow the voice of their Pastor) should also generally err, and so the whole Church, which (according to S. Gregory Nazianzen) consisteth of sheep and pastors, should contrary Orat. de moderatione in disput. habenda. to divers promises of our Saviour, universally err. So that we may be sure, that the ordinary Pastors shall never be so forsaken of the promised Spirit of truth, that all shall generally err, and teach errors in faith: or that there shall not be at all times some sufficient company of lawful succeeding Pastors, adhering to the succession of S. Peter (who was by our Saviour appointed chief Pastor) of whom we john 21. may learn the truth, and by whom we may always be confirmed and continued in the true ancient faith, and preserved from being carried about with the wind of upstart error. The which being so, it followeth that the true Apostolic doctrine is inseparably conjoined with the succession of lawful Pastors, especially of the Apostolic sea of Rome. Wherefore we may against all heretics of our time (as the ancient fathers did against heretics of their time) urge this argument of succession, especially of the Apostolical succession of the Bishops of Rome. We may say to them as S. Augustine saith to the Donatists: Numerate sacerdotes ab ipsa sede Petri, & in illo ordine Patrum, quis, cui successit, videte: Number the Priests from August. in Psal cont. partem Donat. the seat itself of Peter, and in that order or row of Fathers, see which succeeded which. We may say with Irenaeus, Hac ordinatione & successione Episcoporum, traditio Apostolorum ad nos pervenit; Iren. lib. 3. c. 3. & est plenissima ostensio unam & eandem fidem esse, quae ab Apostolis usque nunc confirmata est: By this orderly succession of Bishops, the tradition of the Apostles hath come unto us; and it is a most full demonstration, that the faith which from the Apostles is confirmed even until now, is one and the same. We may tell them with Tertullian, Nos communicamus cum Ecclesijs Apostolicis, Lib. de praescrip quod nulla adversa doctrina facit; & hoc est testimonium veritatis: We do communicate with the Apostolic Churches, which no contrary doctrine doth, and this is a testimony of the truth. A. W. That Apostolicknesse, which is a mark of the true Church, is as I showed Chap. 15. an agreement and succession in doctrine, with and to the Apostles; not as you would have it, a personal descent from them. And therefore your reason against our Churches, is nought. Every Apostolic Church (say you) can derive the pedigree of their preachers lineally, without interruption, from the Apostles. The Protestant Churches cannot so derive their pedigree. Therefore the Protestant Churches are not Apostolic. Your mayor is evidently false, because otherwise some church To the proposition. professing the true faith, and not keeping record of the succession of their teachers, might be held not to be Apostolical. But z Tertul. de praescrip. ca 32. Tertullian affirmeth the contrary directly, that those Churches which agree with the Apostles in faith, though they can allege no Apostle or Apostolic man for their first founder, yet are never the less to be counted Apostolical, because of their consent in doctrine. And indeed it is both impious and absurd, to deny any Church to be Apostolical, that holdeth that faith, by the preaching whereof the Apostles planted Churches. Your minor also is untrue: because it is well known, that if you have any such succession amongst you, we have it too. For Luther, To the Assumption. Calvin, and some other of our Divines, were ordered by bishops of your church. Concerning Luther, what reasonable man can be so absurd, as to think that Luther would make any man believe, that the Gospel was first preached by himself: whereas he continually appeals for the proof of his doctrine to the writings of the Prophets and the Apostles? But Luther might truly say, that he was the first which had in those times published Christ; especially in the chief point of the Gospel, which is, justification by faith in Christ. And in this respect it is an honour to Luther, to have been a son without a father, and a disciple without a master: and no more glory to your Popish Bishops and Priests, to have had so long a succession in error and heresy, then for the Arians to have been able to reckon up so many Bishops of their faction. Vincentius acknowledgeth a succession, continued though secretly, Vincen. Lyrin. from Simon Magus to Priscilian. Let us see ' now whether you bring any better reason for yourselves, than you have done against us: They are even much about one. That Church which can show a line all succession of her Bishops, without interruption, from the Apostle Peter to Cloment now living, is Apostolic. But the Church of Rome can show such a succession, without interruption. Therefore the Church of Rome is Apostolic. c Tertul. de praesc. cap. 32. Tertullian thought it sufficient to prove the heretics not to To the Proposition. be Apostolic, that their doctrine agreed not with the Apostles. And d Ambros. de paenit. cap. 6. Ambrose truly affirmed, that they have not the inheritance of Peter, which have not the faith of Peter. He (saith e Greg. Nazian. de laudib. Athanas. Nazianzen) that professeth the same doctrine of faith, is partaker of the same throne. But he that embraceth contrary doctrine, must be thought an adversary, even in the throne. He may have the name, but the other hath the truth of succession. Therefore f Iren. lib. 4. cap. 43. Irenaeus saith plainly, that those Bishops only are to be obeyed, who together with succession have the truth. But of this I spoke before, Chap. 15. Where there is no beginning, what continuance or succession To the Assumption. can there be? Is not the question, whether Peter were ever at Rome or no, full of doubt? Are you able in any sort to resolve it by Scripture? unless perhaps we may say, that he never came there, because it is nowhere plainly set down, nor probably to be gathered from thence, that ever Saint Peter was at Rome. But it is more unlikely, that ever he was Bishop of Rome. I might go forward, to ask you who was his successor, Linus or Clement: which is a point not agreed upon by ancient writers. Since that time, you have had 32. schisms in your Church, sometimes two, sometimes three Popes at once, that your succession cannot be so clear as you would make it. To prove your minor, you tell us, that the ancient Fathers did much esteem succession from the Apostles, and used it as an argument to confound the heretics, and to confirm themselves in the unity of the Catholic Church. Who denieth that succession is to be esteemed, and that it hath some force to confute and confirm? But what succession is it, that is of such price & force? Personal succession alone without truth? We heard ere while, what Tertullian, Irenaeus, Nazianzen and Ambrose say concerning succession, that without truth it deserveth no credit. Yea g Bellar. de Eccle. mil. l. 4. c. 8 §. Dicosecundò some of your own writers confess, that an argument from succession doth not hold affirmatively, as if there were a true Church, wheresoever there is succession. Whereby doth Irenaeus confound heresies? by showing a personal succession of Bishops from the Apostles? What could that help the matter, unless he be also able to prove that the doctrine he maintains, hath come successively from the Apostles by them? He speaks plain enough, h Iren. li. 3. c. 3 We confound all errors by the doctrine of the Apostles, and the faith preached to men by them. Let not the word tradition trouble any man. i Lib. 3. cap. 1 Irenaeus for that expounds himself where he saith, that the Apostles first preached the Gospel, and afterward by the will of God k Tradiderunt delivered it to us in the Scriptures, to be the pillar and foundation of our faith. The continuance of this doctrine, by succession, is used by Irenaeus as a motive to persuade men to the liking of that truth which had received so good acceptation, and was warranted by so good authority, as the teaching of the Apostles themselves. In a word Irenaeus saith, that heresies might then be refuted, by showing that they who had been ordained Bb. by the Apostles and their successors, continued in the doctrine received, without any approbation of such heretical fancies. l August. contr. epist. Fundam. cap. 4 Austin (you say) was held in the Church (as himself professeth) by the succession of Priests from the very seat of Peter. And why should he not be held by that, rather than leave the Church for the dreams of the Manichees? We say, as Austin did, that such a succession is a better proof of the Church, than their bare promise of truth; especially since (as the same m August. brevic. collat. Austin showeth otherwhere) they would have their word to be taken, as you now would have yours, for sufficient proof. But Austin in the very same place you allege, addeth withal, that if they could show that the truth was on their side, he would prefer it before succession; and whatsoever other reason, that made him continue a member of the Church. In this sense did those other ancient writers esteem and urge succession, whose names you muster to small purpose, but only for show of authority. Concerning that speech of n Athan. contra Arian. orat. 2 Athanasius, be not so injurious either to him or yourselves, as to press his testimony to so lewd a purpose. Would you have men think that he which refuted and confounded Arius and his complices by so many and so worthy proofs out of the holy Scriptures, would condemn not only other men, but himself also for deriving his faith in that point from the Scriptures? But though you care not what become of all the Fathers, so your Popery may flourish: yet like a reasonable man, consider what a terrible blow you give your own cause. Is there no other mark of the Church but succession? Then, by o Bellar. de eccle. mil. l. 4. c. 8 Bellarmine's judgement, there is none at all; who allows it not, as a certain light, to show us the Church. But what wants it of blasphemy, to pronounce men to be heretics for making the Scriptures the foundation of their faith: to which purpose p Iren. li. 3. c. 1 Irenaeus saith that they were left? And I pray you, answer me directly, why it should not be as lawful for me to ground my faith upon the beginning of this succession in the Apostles, as upon the continuance of it in other men. Yet might Athanasius well say, concerning that point of our Saviour Christ's Godhead, that he was to be counted an heretic, that should derive the beginning of his faith from any other ground then the whole succession: wherein the Apostles were comprehended, and whose doctrine the Churches of Christ till that time, in that matter had followed. But how will you prove out of this place of Athanasius, that this should be a mark to discern heretics by always? It was then an excellent and admirable argument in that point, not of it own nature, but because the truth had successively been held till those times. How will you answer q Bellarm. ubi supra. Bellarmine, who affirms confidently and truly, that truth goes not always with succession? For if it did, why should not succession be a certain mark of a true Church? But Bellarmine saith, it is not. You tell us, that otherwise the ordinance of Pastors made by our Saviour Christ, shall be frustrate of the effect intended by him. What? unless there be truth wheresoever there is succession? Then can it not come to pass, that any Pastor having lawful ordination, can err. For if one may, for all the privilege of succession, doubtless succession doth not by the nature of it, free a man from erring. But they cannot all universally err. What is that to purpose, unless this impossibility of erring proceed from succession? Let us draw your reason into form, that we may the better see the force or weakness of it. If our Saviour have appointed a succession of Pastors, that the Church may not be carried away with every blast of doctrine, than succession and truth go together. But our Saviour hath appointed Pastors to that purpose. Therefore succession and truth go together. Now the weakness of your reason easily bewrays itself: To the proposition. the consequence of your mayor is so feeble. r See my answer to 12. art. part. 1. art. 5. Shall I show it you evidently in a like matter? If God appointed David and his successors to rule his people according to his will and word, that they might truly serve him: than whosoever succeeded David, did so rule, and the people so served God. But God did appoint David and his successors to that end. Therefore whosoever succeeded David, did so rule, and the people so served God. I shall not need to make any further answer to your mayor, unless perhaps I may bring the like reason from Gods appointing a succession of Priests and Levites in the Church of the jews, to the very same end, that the people might know and do his will: which intent of his notwithstanding was often made void both by Priests and people. Yet do not we say, that the world hath at any time been without true Pastors, and their flocks in some one place or other, in a greater or less number, who have taught and believed the true faith of jesus Christ in all points fundamental: without distinct belief whereof, no man can be saved. But we deny, that either all or any Pastor hath this privilege, because of his succession: yea s D. Sutcliffe against D. Kellisons' survey: pag 5. we affirm, that a Christian congregation, where the ordinary means cannot be had, may choose and authorize any man able and fit to teach, for their Minister; and the truth of God may be in such companies preserved, without any plea of not erring, by reason of succession established, by virtue of our saviours appointment. To t Greg Nazian. de compos. disserend rat. orat. 7. In Ecclesiis. that of Nazianzen I answered before: he speaketh not of the universal Church, as you falsely avouch, but of several congregations, as his very words show: Order (saith he) hath decreed in Churches (not in the universal Church) that the flock and the Pastor should be divers, the flock one thing, the Pastor another: or that some should be the flock, othersome the shepherds. You may say what you will, and be never a whit the nearer, if you bring no better proof than yet you have done. u August. in Psal. contra partem Donat. Saint Augustine biddeth the Donatists number the Priests, and see who have succeeded one another in the Bishopric of Rome. What conclude you from thence? That the Church of Rome was at that time Apostolic, in regard of personal succession. Who denieth it? But it followeth not hereupon, either that it is still in that sort Apostolic, about which we will not strive; or (which is the principal matter) that it hath therefore such Apostolicknesse as is required to make a true Church: namely truth of doctrine; which must needs be meant by Augustine, in the words that immediately follow: That is the rock, against which the proud gates of hell prevail not. For it is more than absurd, to make personal succession the rock, on which the Church is builded, and against which hell gates cannot prevail. It was a likely argument against the Donatists, that in so long a succession there had been never a Donatist: which Saint Augustine himself in another place concludeth, after he hath reckoned up all the Roman Bishops, from Linus to Anastasius then living. In the rank of this succession (saith x August. epist. 165. Augustine) there is not one Bishop found that was a Donatist. This testimony of Irenaeus was never of your own reading in him, as the corrupt alleging of it persuadeth me. I will set it down as it is y Iren. l. 3. ca 3. in the author himself. z Ordinatione & successione. By this ordination and succession (saith Irenaeus) the tradition of the Apostles hath come to us: And a Haec ostensio. this is a most full demonstration, that b Fidem esse. it is one and the same quickening faith, c Conseruata & tradita in veritate. which hath been preserved and truly taught in the Church, from the Apostles till now. What one word or letter is there in this sentence, to prove, that your Church of Rome, at this day, is Apostolic, or that bare personal succession is enough, to make a Church Apostolic? Rome, in Irenaeus time was an Apostolical Church, because it had preserved, and truly taught successively, Bishop after Bishop, the doctrine which was delivered by the Apostles. Is it therefore Apostolic now, when it hath overthrown the very foundation of the Apostles doctrine? I marvel what Apostolic Churches they are, with which you communicate, whereas you say, that there is no Church, that hath succession from the Apostles but yours? d Profess. fidei per Monach. Burdegal. art. 60. Your Monks of Bordeaux draw the universal Church to the communion of the Romish Church. It was indeed a testimony of the truth, to communicate with the Apostolic Churches, e Tertul. de prescript. c. 21 in tertullian's time, while the truth was, for the substance of it, preserved amongst them. But let us apply this to our purpose: what would you prove by it? that the Church of Rome is Apostolic? Here is no mention, nor thought of your Church in particular. But Tertullian saith, it is a testimony of truth, for a man to communicate with the Apostolic Churches. It was then a testimony, but now those Churches are decayed: or if some of them remain amongst the Grecians, will you grant that all they hold is true? How will you prove, that tertullian's general speech belongeth more to your Church, then to those of the Greeks? f Tertul. de prescript. cap. 32. Tertullian telleth you afterward, that contrariety to the Apostles doctrine, may convince Churches not to be Apostolic, though they allege succession from the Apostles. But his opinion may sufficiently appear by that, which hath been formerly alleged out of him: and the truth of this whole question, by your discourse, and my answer to it. A. D. CHAP. XVII. The Conclusion of the whole discourse. A. W. The conclusion of your whole discourse (as yourself expound it in your preface) is this, that the faith which the authority of the Roman Church commendeth to us, aught without doubt to be holden for the true faith. But this Chapter is such, as that you might rather term it a recapitulation, than a conclusion of your discourse. For the greatest part of it by far, is spent in a needless repetition of that, which was before delivered, and that which should be indeed your conclusion, is scarce signified in it. A. D. §. 1. Now to make an end, considering all this which I have said and proved, to wit, that there is but one, infallible, entire faith, the which is necessary to salvation, to all sorts of men: the which faith every one must learn by some known, infallible, and universal rule, accommodate to the capacity of every one: the which rule cannot be any other but the doctrine and teaching of the true Church: the which Church is always to continue visible until the world's end, and is to be known by these four marks, una, Sancta, Catholica, Apostolica, One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic: the which marks agree only to the Roman Church, (that is to say, to that company, which doth communicate, and agree in profession of faith, with the Church of Rome:) whereupon followeth, that this Church or company is the only true Church, of which every one must learn that faith which is necessary to salvation. Considering (I say) all this, I would demand of the Protestants, how they can persuade themselves, to have that faith, which is necessary to salvation, sith they will not admit the authority and doctrine of the Church, of which only they ought to learn this faith? Or how they can (as some of them do) challenge to themselves the title of the true Church, sith their company hath never one of the four marks, which by common consent of all, must needs be acknowledged for the true marks of the Church? How can their congregation be the true Church, which neither is One, because it hath no means to keep unity? nor Holy, because neither was there ever any man of it, which by miracle or any other evident testimony, can be proved to have been truly holy: neither is their doctrine such as those that most purely observe it, do without fail, thereby become holy: nor Catholic, because it teacheth not all truths, that have been held by the universal Church in former times, but denieth many of them; neither is it spread over all the Christian world, but being divided into divers sects, every particular sect is contained in some corner of the world. Neither hath it been in all times ever since Christ, but sprung up of late, the first founder being Martin Luther an Apostata, a man after his Apostasy from his professed See Prateolus verbo Lutherani. religious order, known both by his writings, words, deeds, and manner of death, to have been a notable ill liver. Nor Apostolic, because the preachers thereof cannot derive their Pedigree, lineally, without interruption, from any Apostle, but are forced to begin their line, if they will have any, from Luther, Calvin, or some latter. How can they then brag that they have the true, holy, Catholic, and Apostolic faith; sith this is not found in any company, that differeth in doctrine, from the only true, holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church? For if it be true (which Saint Austin saith) that in ventre Ecclesiae veritas manet, the truth remaineth in the belly In Psal. 53. of the Church: it is impossible that those who are disjoined by difference of belief from that company, which is known to be the true Church, should have the true faith. For true faith (as before hath been proved) is but one; wherefore he that differeth in belief from them which have the true faith, either he must have a false faith, or no faith at all. Again, one cannot have true faith, unless he first hear it, according to the ordinary rule of Saint Paul, saying, Fides ex auditu, faith cometh of hearing: but how can one Rom. 10. hear true doctrine of faith sine praedicante, without one to preach truly unto him? And how should one preach truly, at least in all points, nisi mittatur, unless he be sent, and consequently assisted by the spirit of God? Now, how should we know that Luther or Calvin, or any other that will leap out of the Church, & leave that company wherein is undoubted succession, and by succession lawful mission, or sending from God; how should we (I say) know that these men teaching a new, and contrary doctrine, were indeed sent of God? Nay certainly we may be most sure, that they were not sent of God. For sith Almighty God hath, by his Son, planted a Church upon earth, which Church he would have always continue until the world's end, and hath placed in it a visible succession of lawful ordinary Pastors, whom he will, with the assistance of himself, and his holy Spirit so guide, that they shall never universally fail, to teach the true faith, and to preserve the people from errors; we are not now to expect any to be sent from God, to instruct the people, but such only as come in this ordinary manner by lawful succession, order, and call, according as S. Paul saith: Nec quisquam sumit sibi honorem, sed qui vocatur à Deo, tanquam Aaron. Neither doth any Heb. cap. 5. man take to himself the honour, but he that is called of God, as Aaron was: to wit, visibly, and with peculiar consecration, as we read in Leviticus. cap. 8. To which acordeth that which we read 2. Paralip. 26. where Azarias said to king Ozias: Non est tui officij, Ozia, ut adoleas incensum Domino, sed Sacerdotum, hoc 2. Paral. ca 26 est filiorum Aaron, qui consecrati sunt ad huiusmodi ministerium: egredere de sanctuario, etc. It is not thy office, O Ozias, to offer incense to our Lord, but it is the office of Priests, to wit, of the sons of Aaron, who are consecrated to this function or ministery: go out of the Sanctuary. Which bidding when Ozias contemned and would not obey, he was presently stricken with a leprosy, and then being terrified, feeling the punishment inflicted by our Lord, he hastened away, as in the same place is declared. By which places we may learn that it doth not belong to any one to do priestly functions, (as to offer incense or sacrifice to God, or take upon them the authority to preach and instruct the people) but only to Priests called visibly, and consecrated for this peculiar purpose, as Aaron and his children were. For though the priesthood of the Pastors of the new law be not aaronical; yet it agreeth with the Priesthood of Aaron, (according to S. Paul his saying in the foresaid place) in this, that those that come to it, must not take the honour of themselves, but must be called unto it of God, as Aaron was, to wit, visibly, and by peculiar consecration. In which ordinary manner whosoever cometh, he may be truly called Pastor ovium, a Pastor of Christ's flock: because joh. 10. Ibidem. intrat per ostium, he entereth in by the door, to wit, by Christ himself, who first visibly called, consecrated, and sent immediately the Apostles: and the Apostles by authority received 2. Tim. 4. from him, did visibly by imposition of hands, call, consecreate, and send others: and those in like manner, others from time to time, without interruption, until these present men, who now are Priests of the Catholic Roman Church. These therefore enter in by Christ, who is the door, and therefore these be true Pastors: and whosoever entereth not thus in at the door, but cometh in another way, our Saviour telleth us, how we should account joh. 10. of him, when he saith. Qui non intrat per ostium in ovile ovium, sed ascendit aliunde, ille fur est & latro. He that entereth not in by the door, into the sheepfold, but ascendeth by some other way, he is a thief and a robber; who cometh not to feed the sheep, but to steal, kill, and destroy them. So that we have not (I say) to expect any to be sent of God to feed us, with the food of true doctrine of faith, but such only, as come in this ordinary manner; (as it is certain that Luther and Calvin, when they left their former profession, and took upon them to preach this new faith, did not come visibly, called, consecreated and sent, for this purpose, by any lawful authority, according to the ordinary manner:) or if it should please God to send any one in extraordinary manner, it appertaineth to his providence, to furnish him with the gift of miracles, as he did his Son our Saviour Christ; or with a miraculous conception, & with strange and extraordinary sanctity of life, as was seen in S. john Baptist: or finally with some evident token, that it may be plainly known, that he is assuredly sent of God. Otherwise the people should not be bound to believe him, but might without sin, reject his doctrine: according as our Saviour said of himself, Si non facio opera patris mei, nolite john. 10. credere mihi. If I do not the works of my Father, do not believe me. And again, Si opera non secissem in eyes, quae nemo alius fecit, john. 15. peccatum non haberent. If I had not done works among them, that no other hath done, they should not have sinned, to wit, in not believing. Nay, the people should now, (an ordinary course being, by our Saviour set down, to continue till the world's end, as before hath been proved) the people (I say) should now sin, in believing any one, that shall come, and tell them that he is extraordinarily sent of God, if he teach contrary to that doctrine, which by ordinary Doctors and Pastors of the Catholic Church is universally taught. For although it should happen, that the lives of these Pastors should not be so commendable, or be sometimes evidently bad: yet their doctrine must always be regarded and observed, according to that saying of our Saviour, Super Cathedram Moysisederunt Scribae & Mat. 23. Pharisaei: omnia ergo quae cunque dixerint vobis, seruate & facite: secundum verò opera eorum nolite facere. Upon the chair of Moses the Scribes and Pharisees have sitten: all things therefore whatsoever they say to you, observe ye and do; but according to their works do ye not. By which saying we are assured that notwithstanding the Pastors of the Catholic Church should at any time in their lives be like Scribes and pharisees: yet we may always safely, yea we must necessarily follow their doctrine, and must not in any wise admit any that shall offer to teach us a contrary doctrine, according as we are willed by Saint Paul, who saith: Si quis vobis evangeliz averit Gal. 1. praeter id quod accepistis, anathema sit. If any shall evangelize or preach unto you, beside (or contrary to) that which you have already received, be he anathema. So that sith the people did once receive from the ordinary Pastors that doctrine, which hath descended from hand to hand, from Christ and his Apostles themselves, (according to that of Saint Austin: Quod invenerunt in Ecclesia, tenuerunt: quod didicerunt, docuerunt: quod à patribus 2 Contra julia. acceperunt, hoc filijs tradiderunt: That which they found in the Church, they held: that which they learned, they taught: that which they received from their fathers, that they delivered to their children) whosoever he be, that shall evangelize any thing opposite to this received doctrine, whether he seem to be an Apostle, or an Angel: and much more if he be another, to wit one of these new masters, who fail very much (to say no more) from Apostolical perfection, and Angelical purity of life, according to Saint Paul, anathema sit, be he anathema. Yea such a one that doth not only not bring this Catholic or generally received doctrine, but bringeth in a new and contrary doctrine, we should not (according to Saint john) salute him (unless upon some Epist. 1. need or some good respect) or say ave unto him: and much less should we give credit to his words, or use him as a rule of our faith, or prefer his teaching before the teaching of the Catholic Church. And surely me thinks, though there were none of these evident proofs, which I have brought out of Scripture: yet even reason itself would teach, that we ought to give more credit to the universal company of Catholics, which have been at all times, and are now spread over all the Christian world, then to any particular private man, or some few his fellows and followers. It is a proverb common amongst all men: Vox populi, vox Dei, The voice of the people or whole multitude, is the voice of God; that which all men say, must needs be. And on the contrary part, to that particular man or his private company, which will oppose themselves against this general voice of all, (like Ishmael, of whom it is written, Manus eius contra omnes, & manus omnium contra cum, his hands are against all men, and the hands of all are against him) it may well be objected that which Luther (who was the first in this our age which did so) confesseth was objected to himself by his own conscience, or rather principally by the mercy and grace of the Almighty God, seeking to reclaim him from his error, while there was any hope. Num tu solùm sapis: Art thou only In Praef. Lib. de abrog. Missae, privatae ad fratres. Aug. Ordin. in caenob. Wittenberg. wise? Luther's words be these. Quoties mihi palpitavit tremulum cor, & reprehendens obiecit fortissimum illud argumentum, Tu solus sapis? Totne errant universi? Tanta secula ignoraverunt? Quid si tu errs, & tot tecum in errorem trahas damnandos aeternaliter? How often did my trembling heart pant, and reprehending me, did object to me that most strong and forcible argument: Art thou alone wise? have there so many universally erred? have so many ages been blind and lived in ignorance? What rather if thou thyself err, and drawest so many after thee into error, who (therefore) shall be damned eternally? This did Almighty God object to Luther, the which might doubtless have done him good, but that he (presuming upon his own understanding of Scripture, and preferring his own judgement before the judgement of the Church) hardened his heart against such heavenly inspirations, which he termed Papistical arguments. And this same may well be objected to any private man, or any few, who leaving the King's broad street, or beaten high way of the Catholic Church, will seek out a bypath, as being in their conceit, a better, easier, & more direct way to heaven. To them (I say) well may be said, Are you only wise? are all the rest in former ages fools? have you only after so many hundred years after Christ found out the true faith, and the right way to heaven? have all the rest lived in blindness, darkness, and error? consequently, are you only they that please God, and shall be saved? (for, as I have proved before, without true and entire faith none can be saved) and were then all the rest, so many millions, your own forefathers and ancestors, (many of which were most innocent men and virtuous livers, and some of which shed their blood for Christ's sake) were (I say) all these hated of God? did all these perish? were they all damned? shall all these endure unspeakable pains in hell for ever? O impious, cruel, and incredible assertion! Nay surely, I am rather to think, that you are unwise, who pretending to travel toward the happy kingdom of heaven, and to go to that glorious city the heavenly jerusalem, will leave the beaten street, in which all those have walked that ever heretofore went thither: who by miracles sometimes, as it were by letters sent from thence, have given testimony to us that remain behind, that they are safely arrived there. You (I say) are unwise that will leave this way, and will adventure the lives not only of your bodies, but of your souls, in a path found out of late by yourselves, never tracked before: in which whosoever have yet gone, God knows what is become of them, sith we never had letter of miracle, or any other evident token, or ever heard any word from them, to assure us that they safely passed that way: me thinks, I may account you most unwise men, that will adventure such a precious jewel as your soul is, to be transported by such an uncertain and dangerous way. I must needs think, that sith there is but one right way, and that the way of the Catholic Church is a sure and approved safe way, you are very unadvised, who with the adventure of the irreparable loss of your dearest and peerless treasure your soul, will leave this safe and secure way, to seek out a new uncertain and perilous way. I must needs think, sith the Catholic Roman Church is (as I have proved) the light of the world, the rule of faith, the pillar & sure ground of truth: that you leaving it, leave the light, and therefore walk in darkness; forsaking it, forsake the direct path of true faith, and therefore are misled in the mist of incredulity, into the wilderness of misbelief: and finally that you having thus lost the sure ground of truth, do fall into the miry ditch of many absurdities, and must needs be drowned in the pit of innumerable errors; and erring thus from the way, the verity and the life, which is Christ jesus residing, according to his promise in the Catholic Church, must needs (unless you will, which I heartily wish, return to the unity of the same Church) incur your own perdition, death and damnation of body and soul: from which sweet jesus deliver you, and us all, to the honour and perpetual praise of his holy name. Amen. A. W. To these idle questions of yours, I answer first in general, that we may with reason enough persuade ourselves that we have the true faith and true Churches; because we see, that the very quintessence of Bellarmine's sophistry distilled again in your limbeck, is of no force to purge out or alter such persuasion. This appears in the particulars viewed and examined. To which I answer severally in a word: The doctrine of the true Church we gladly admit and receive, yet not upon the authority thereof, but because it is agreeable to the Scriptures. If you ask us then, why we are persuaded that we have true faith; we return you answer, that we are therefore so persuaded, because we find that which we believe avowed in Scripture, and confirmed in our hearts by the witness of the holy Ghost. Hereupon we conclude (as well we may) that we are members of the true Church, & our congregations true Christian churches. For whereas you charge some of us, but craftily forbear to name them, with challenging to ourselves the title of the true Church; See my answer to 12. art part. 1. art. 5. it is a slander of yours, and no challenge of ours; save only thus far, that we affirm there is no true Church, which agreeth not with us in the fundamental points of the Gospel. But we are far from appropriating the Church to our congregations, as if all true Churches depended upon us, according to that you teach of your Romish synagogue. And whereas you condemn us for no true Churches, because we want the marks of true Churches: we say that you take those for marks, which are not so, as you understand them; and farther, that every one of them rightly conceived, is to be found in our several congregations. It is one, because it holdeth that one means of salvation preached by the Apostles, even faith in jesus Christ, without mingling of any works therewith of the ceremonial or moral law, before or after grace, to deserve justification of congruity, or everlasting life of condignity. The contrary errors held by your synagogue, make and prove it to be no true Church. But how foolish is the reason you bring against us? The Protestants Church is not one, because it hath no means to keep unity. It hath means sufficient, viz. the truth of the Scriptures, and teaching of the spirit of God. Put case it wanted means to continue unity; would it follow thereupon, that it is not One? Surely no more, then that a man is not alive, because he hath not means to keep himself alive. Our Church hath had, and by the blessing of God hath many holy men and women, whose works have given, and daily do give clear testimonies of their inward graces. Indeed we want unholy legendaries, to devise and publish monstrous lies for miracles, by which you have gotten the advantage of us, in the conceits of them, to whom God hath sent strong delusions, that they might believe lies. But wisdom is justified of her children, though you proud pharisees despise her. Our doctrine teacheth nothing but holiness: that we were Ephes. 1. 4. Luk. 1. 74. 75. 1. Cor. 6. 11. Rom. 6. 3. 4. chosen to be holy: that we are freed from our sins, to the end we might sin no more: that we are washed, justified and sanctified by the blood of Christ; buried with him in baptism, that we might die to sin; raised from sin to righteousness, by the power of his resurrection: that holiness of life is a part of our glory, without which no man shall ever see God: that he which saith he is justified, and shows himself to be unsanctified, deceives his own soul, and is in the state of damnation: Only we neither give the glory of our salvation to ourselves, as if by the power of our free-will, without special inclination thereof by the holy Ghost, we had received faith, which other men have refused: though they might have embraced it as well as we, for aught God did for or to us, more than for or to them; nor look to merit heaven by the worthiness of our works, as if it were the wages of servants, and not the inheritance of children. The universal Church (as you speak of it) is a mere name, without any thing answerable to it in nature. That which was generally held (while the Churches of Christ were not subject to Antichrist) concerning the substance of Religion, by which true and false Churches are to be judged, we gladly and constantly maintain. The errors which some men defended, and corrupted the Churches withal, we refute and reject. But it is no mark of the true Church, to hold all that hath been generally maintained in true Churches; but the duty of it to acknowledge for true, whatsoever was taught by the Apostles, and is recorded in Scripture. How far our Church is spread, it passeth your skill truly to affirm: and we may with good reason persuade ourselves, that it is in all places, where the Gospel is preached, and the Scriptures known; because daily experience showeth, that it hath some members in those countries where your bloody and tyrannous butchery of Inquisition doth most rule, and under the nose of your grand Antichrist, in the city of Rome. But it is enough to make it Catholic, that it acknowledgeth itself to be common both to jew and Gentile, not tied to any country, people or person whatsoever, as yours is to the Pope and Rome. We are not ashamed of Martin Luther, whom it pleased God to use admirably, if not miraculously, to rake from under the ashes the light of the Gospel, covered and choked with your errors and superstitions. Not as if it had been all that while out of the world, but as g 12. art. part. 1. art. 1. one of your own fellows speaks of it, as being in the eclipse, overshadowed and darkened with the thick mist of your Popish decrees, decretals, and schoolmen's tricks, and other such lewd trumpery. Our Church, that is the true Church of Christ was all that time in the world, but not to be seen of every man: though from time to time there were still found some who durst maintain the truth of Christ against your Antichristian heresies. Luther's writings, words, deeds, and manner of death, were such as might manifest to all men both his true zeal of the glory of God, and Gods especial favour to him, whatsoever such lying sycophants as Prateolus fain. If we would stand upon Apostolicknesse in succession, what have you, that we want; save only that you continue in succession of error, longer than we do? But it is an idle plea, to avouch personal succeeding, where there is manifest contrariety in doctrine: by which, as we heard out of h Tertul. de praesc. cap. 32. Tertullian, howsoever you brag of Apostolicknesse, you may be proved not to be Apostolical. We differ not in doctrine, touching the fundamental points of Religion, from any true, holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church: neither doth your synagogue agree with any such. Therefore whereas you demand, how we can brag that we have true faith, which is not to be found out of the true Church; we answer you, as oft we have done, that we are sure the faith we hold is true, because it is agreeable to the Scriptures, and being so, we cannot be out of the true Church, as long as we are in the true faith. True faith cannot be had by any light or discourse of nature, but only by revelation from God. For i 1. Cor. 2. 9 neither eye hath seen, nor ear hath heard, nor the heart of man can imagine, what the means are, whereby God decreed in himself to save those whom he hath chosen to glory. Now it was not the purpose of God in these latter times, as in the first before the law, to reveal his will immediately from heaven; but he sent his Son in the nature of man, and that Son his Apostles, to give knowledge of those means of salvation; both by preaching for that present age wherein they lived, and also by writing, for that age, and all that were to succeed till the end of the world. This is all that the Apostle teacheth k Rom. 10. 16. in the place alleged by you. Yet we deny not, that the principal ordinary means to bring men to faith, is the ministry of man, by word of mouth expounding the word & will of God according to the Scriptures. First then, all men to whom the Scriptures are vouchsafed, have means of hearing. For in them they may, if they will, hear men appointed by God, speak to their instruction and salvation. Secondly, the same God hath ordained, that besides the former teaching, there should be certain men set apart and deputed for the ministry, whose duty it is to preach in their several charges the word of truth. This setting apart & deputing, is that sending which is now required; and is to be performed by such as are, & shall be authorized to that purpose. Thirdly for our particular case, we are to understand that Luther and these other worthies, by whose ministry it pleased God to revive the knowledge of the Gospel decayed, were authorized to preach by your congregation, which was at that time in appearance the true Church of God. Therefore were they sent, if your church have any sending: and according to their calling, they laboured in opening the truth of God, as it is revealed in the Scriptures. Thus by the gracious mercy of God, it came to pass, that they teaching the word of truth, found divers, both men and women, whose hearts the Lord by his spirit opened, so that they embraced the love of the truth delivered by them, and accepted them for their pastors, and submitted themselves to become their flocks. By this means they had both a general authority to preach, from that company, which (by profession) was the Church, and also a particular charge of those who were now become indeed (in regard of their professed faith) a true Church of God. We have then in our Churches, for the late reforming of them, first, your calling, such as it was, and secondly the approbation of true Christians, of which true Churches consist. Therefore by your own rule, since we have some amongst us that are sent, we may also have faith and true faith, though we abhor your Antichristian heresies. To what purpose is this idle discourse, but to show your own errors? We neither look for, nor allow any opinion of extraordinary sending from God, because we have no warrant for any such in the Scriptures. But we say, the restorers of the Gospel, in this last age, had ordinary allowance of that Church which bore the show of the true Church, and professed the believing of the Gospel, which is the foundation of the Church. But you require peculiar consecration, because it pleased God to appoint such a course for the Priesthood of the Law. Do you not know, that the consecrating and anointing of Aaron, was a part of the ceremonial law, signifying the anointing of the spirit, which our Saviour was to receive: to whom, according to those shows, l joan. 3. 34. the Lord gave the spirit without measure? The consecration that now remains, is nothing but the setting a part of some men for the work of the ministery by prayer and laying on of hands. m 2. Chron. 26 18. Your example of Oziah, is little to the purpose. For it had not been lawful for him to offer incense, though he had been consecrated with all the ceremonies that belong to the office of the priesthood, because the office of offering incense was appropriated by God to the house of Aaron, as Azariah signifieth in his speech to Vzziah. This appointment of God was their calling: n Heb. 5. 4. the outward ceremonies were but to shadow forth the excellency of our Saviour Christ's priesthood. Neither doth the Apostle prove the lawfulness of Christ's priesthood, by his consecration answerable to Aaron's, as your alleging of the place intends, but only by the Lords authorizing of him to that office. o vers. 5. Christ took not to himself the honour to be made the high Priest (saith the Apostle) but he that said unto him, Thou art my son, this day begat I thee, gave it him. p vers. 6. As he also in an other place speaketh, Thou art a Priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedech: what word is there here of our saviours consecration? You proceed to heap error upon error, to the prejudice of God's truth, and destruction of his people. If every man be to be held for a true Pastor, and as such a one to be believed, if he have an orderly admission and allowance to teach: had not Arius, Nestorius, Eutyches, Macedonius, and many other heretics lawful ordination, according to the custom of the Churches in those times? Yea, were not Luther, Bucer, Martyr, authorized by your Church, and Calvin too, as you say afterward, when you accuse Luther and him for leaving their former profession? Come no hirelings in by the door, if lawful outward admission be the door? How many that enter lawfully become wolves afterward? I know this (saith q Act. 20. 29 Saint Paul to the Ephesians) that after my departure, grievous wolves shall enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Moreover, r vers. 30. of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things. Who can doubt, but some of these might be even of the number of them who were lawfully admitted by imposition of hands and prayer, the only means of consecration in those times, before your shaving and greasing was heard of in the Church? But you ignorantly or wilfully abuse s joan. 10. 1. 21. that place of the Evangelist, by applying it to the ordinary ministery of the Gospel: whereas it belongeth to the office of the Messiah, and the calling that he had from God, to be t Heb. 13. 20. the great shepherd of our souls. u joan. 10. 8. All that came before him, professing themselves to be the Messiah, as x Act. 5. 36. 37 judas and Theudas did, were thieves and robbers: entering not in by the door, that is y joan. 6. 27. Mat, 3. 17. by commission from God, but coming in another way, by their counterfeiting of a patent from God. Neither was the preservation of the people, but their own advancement the mark they shot at. But the true shepherd jesus Christ came to give his life for his sheep, that they might be saved. This is the true sense of that worthy sermon; which if we will apply to ministers, they must be held for true Pastors, which being authorized thereunto, do preach Christ jesus truly, without mingling any such doctrines as may by any means draw us from the acknowledging or resting upon him for salvation. He that so teacheth and is authorized thereunto, cometh in by Christ the door, especially if he have withal a true desire to feed the flock committed to him, in the sincerity of his heart. But if you stand only upon outward calling, the Priests and levites wanted it not, who yet were thieves, because they endeavoured to steal away the hearts of the sheep from Christ the true shepherd. That which followeth of the necessity of miracles or extraordinary sanctity, concerns not us, who plead not any extraordinary sending. Luther was appointed by your Church, to preach the Gospel. That duty, according to his calling, he faithfully performed: never requiring to be credited, because he was extraordinarily sent by God; but because he taught that which God had left in the Scriptures, for the instruction and edification of his Church, in all ages till the end of the world. What need was there now of miracles, or any other extraordinary course? z joan. 10. 37. & 15. 24. The places you bring, we answered before. The universal consent of Pastors and Doctors, in that they teach, hath been found to be but a crooked rule to measure truth by; though we are persuaded, that the world was never without some that held and taught so much of the truth, as is absolutely necessary to salvation. But that is universally or generally taught, which is the common doctrine of ordinary teachers, howsoever some one or two here and there may be of a contrary opinion. a Mat. 23. 2. How far the Scribes and pharisees were to be heard, it appeared before, where this place was alleged and answered. Surely he, b Mat 16. 6. & 23. 16. 17. 19 that charged his Disciples, to take heed of the leaven of the pharisees, and called them fools and blind, would never command them to take their doctrine, for the rule of truth. Neither could c Gal. 1. 8. Saint Paul mean, that every man should be accursed, who taught at any time otherwise, than men commonly believed; he speaketh not a word of any common consent in teaching, and he knew that d 2. Thess. 2. 3. there was to be a general Apostasy: but his meaning was, that they should hold him for accursed that delivered any other doctrine of salvation, how generally so ever it were taught, then that which he himself had preached to them. But of this also before. I hope you are not so mad, as to imagine that any man will believe, that Saint Austin so many hundred years ago, prophesied, that your Pastors and Doctors should from time to time teach nothing else generally, but that which had e August. cont. juli. Pelag. lib. 2. in his days descended from hand to hand, from Christ and his Apostles. Or do you think it would prove a good reason to say, Austin affirmeth that Ambrose and other learned men, who lived in the first 400. years, held that which they found in the Church, and taught that which they had learned. Therefore it cannot be that since his time other men have preached or written otherwise? But be like this place was alleged by you rather for ornament and show, then for proof or use, and so let it pass. Though there were no other reason to make us mislike your Church: yet this were cause enough of doubt, that the foundation whereon you build it, in this Treatise, and the like, is so weak and uncertain. We must believe you, because you are the Church. Who saith so? Yourselves. But you will prove it by Scripture. How shall I know that you bring, to be Scripture? The Church telleth you so. Shall I laugh at you, or pity you? You are the Church, because the Scripture saith so. The Scripture is Scripture to us, because you say so. f Gal. 3. 1. Were the Galathians so senseless, as they that believe such absurd fooleries? Or is it possible that any man should believe them, but he that is given up by God to strong delusions, that he may believe lies? Bethink yourselves, and return ere it be too late. The Lord will be merciful to your former ignorance, if at the last you embrace the love of the truth. Leaving those evident proofs, you speak of (proofs indeed of your manifold errors) you assay to draw us by reason, because it is more likely, that the universal company of Catholics deserveth credit, than any particular man or his followers. First, you beg that which is in question. No true Catholic ever held all the errors that your Antichristian Church maintaineth: nor any one of those, whereby you cast down the foundation of religion. Secondly, the comparison is not betwixt the authority of a multitude, or a few, wherein number may either help or hinder, but the reasons of each side are to be weighed, all other respects whatsoever set apart. And yet if we look to reason: are not the greatest number (for the most part) the worst? Christ's true flock is a little one, g Iuc. 12. 32. Fear not little flock. h 1. Co. 1. 26. Not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble. Was not the voice of the people, even of God's people, i Exod. 32. 1. Make us Gods to go before us? The voice of God is to be heard in the Scriptures, k Paphnutius in Concil. Niccno. One man that speaketh according thereunto, is to be preferred before the whole world speaking otherwise. Those objections made to Luther in his private meditations proceeded from the same spirit, by which the pharisees spoke to Nicodemus in their Council, Doth l joan. 7. 48. any of the Rulers, or of the pharisees believe in him. m Gal 1. 16. This was that communicating with flesh and blood, which the Apostle would not once hearken to: Luther in his weakness was drawn into it, and had perished in it, if the Lord of his infinite mercy, had not drawn him out of it, with a worthy and admirable resolution. With the like (that it may appear whose scholars you are) you jesuits, and Priests set upon simple people, 'ticing them on in their ignorance, & your own, though the broad way, that leadeth to destruction. But let us consider this your fleshly eloquence and answer to it. You ask, if we only be wise, and all the rest in former ages were fools. As if we did not acknowledge that it is the mercy of God, and not our wisdom that hath given us the ability, and will to understand his truth. We are not wiser than any other, but have found more mercy, than many have done at the hands of God, for our salvation. Many in former times have been partakers of the like mercy, and been made wise to salvation by the same truth we now profess: yea it was generally held many hundred years, till your master Antichrist drove it into holes and deserts. After the revealing of his pride and tyranny: the true way to heaven ceased not to be found, though not so commonly, till it pleased God to scatter those cloudy mists of ignorance and idolatry, by which you had hidden it, that it could very hardly be known. divers heretofore, and more now adays find favour with God to discern and walk through it, to the certain, and everlasting salvation of their souls and bodies. So judge we as it becometh us in charity of our forefathers: that he which hath looked in compassion upon us their seed, did not fail to show mercy unto them, who never understood the mystery of your iniquity: but in the singleness of their hearts embraced the general doctrine of the Gospel, concerning salvation by faith in Christ. This is the only way, by which all men have gone, that ever came to heaven, and in this way we travel with danger of the lives of our bodies (as you speak) because we are continually in hazard by reason of your conspiracies, treasons, massacres, underminings and fierworks; but with assurance of the salvation of our souls: if we hold fast the shootanchor of our hope, and renouncing our own righteousness, repose ourselves by faith upon the gracious mercy of God our Father in jesus Christ. This doing we have better certificate, both for the security of our way, and the end of our journey out of the Scriptures, and by the witness of the Spirit of God in our hearts, than that lying Carrier the devil can bring by any show of your counterfeit miracles whatsoever. I must needs persuade myself, sith that Apostolical Romish Synagogue is (as I have showed) the seducer of the world by show of authority, without reason, the overthrow and destruction of truth, by denying the sufficiency of the Scripture, and taking the use of it from the people of God; that all you which cleave to it, plunge yourselves in hellish darkness, by refusing to see the light of God's word; and by drinking of the cup of abomination presented to you by that strumpet of Rome, lose the taste of truth, and run forward in wilful ignorance, to most certain damnation. The Lord is my witness, whom I serve weakly as I can, in the Gospel of his Son jesus Christ, that if it were possible and lawful for me, I could be content to procure your salvation, by pouring out my heart blood for every one of you, that jesus Christ my master might have the glory of your true conversion. To that purpose, and for the establishing of them, which already believe: I first undertook, and have now at the last (by the merciful assistance of God) finished my answer to this subtle Treatise. Let me now earnestly entreat you by the care of your own salvation, by the zeal you have (in ignorance) to glorify God, by the infinite love of jesus Christ, by the undeserved mercy of God the Father, by the continual gracious motions of the holy Ghost, and by whatsoever is, or aught to be dear unto you, that you would vouchsafe seriously in the sincerity of your hearts, without prejudice to consider; whether it be not more ageeable both to the Scriptures, and the light of reason, to give the whole glory of our salvation to the mercy of God in jesus Christ, then to ascribe the enabling of us to save our souls to God, and the use or employing of this ability to the choice of our own free-will. If your opinion be true, n See my answer to 12. Art. part. 2. art. 4. every man that is saved, is more beholding to himself, then to God for his salvation. For though he have power from God, to be saved, if he will: yet neither hath he this power, but upon preparation, depending on his free-will; and when he hath it, the using of it well is from himself, and not from God. You will say, he could not use it well, unless he were assisted continually by the grace of God. I answer, that for all this assistance by that grace to use it well, the well or ill using of it, when God hath done all, he will do, ariseth from the choice of a man's own will. That it was possible for me to be saved, it was Gods doing: that this possibility took effect in me, I may thank myself, more than God: so that by this doctrine, the glory of every particular man's salvation is more due to the party saved, then to God the Saviour. Now on the contrary side; if that we teach be true, the loss falls on man's part, and not upon Gods. Is any man drawn out of the jaws of hell and damnation? The whole glory redounds to God. It was he that provided means of salvation: it was he that gave me, in particular, knowledge of that means. It was he, that when I was as untoward, and unwilling to be saved, as the most damned reprobate, wrought me to believe (can I ever be unmindful or unthankful!) by inclining my heart to like, and accept of his grace, and faith in Christ. But in the mean while I lose the commendation, and the glory of using the grace of God well, by my free-will. O Adam, Adam, earth and ashes, how fast doth that pride of nature, whereby thou wast destroyed in thyself, though in thee it were not natural, cleave to every one of thy posterity! o Gen. 3. 5. 6. We had rather be thought able to govern ourselves, then be governed by God. It is more pleasing to us, to hazard our salvation upon the nice choice of our own free-will, then to be assured of it, by the mercy of God, working in us this choice to will. O that, as we are all partakers of Adam's pride, so we might also partake with his repentance and faith! Would Adam (trow ye) if it might be put to his choice, again venture upon his own free-will, though he were as pure as ever he was, rather than rest secure upon God's almighty, and most certain protection? No, no, blessed soul, he knoweth by woeful experience (though by Gods unspeakable goodness, to his and our greater glory) that he, and he only is out of danger, who resigns himself into God's hands, to be disposed of at his gracious pleasure. Why refuse we to be like to Adam in this? Will we follow him in that only, of which only he is ashamed? Is it not more glory to arise with him, then to have fallen with him? O why do we every day renew the memory of his fault, by committing the like! Doth the brightness of the truth in these points dazzle your eyes? Me thinks I see many of you offering to press forward, as it were to take the kingdom of heaven, the doctrine of the Gospel, by violence: why recoil you? Why quail you on a sudden? The bare name of the Church, not only stayeth you, but beateth you backward. The Romish Church cannot err. Who telleth you so? Surely they, that can err, your Priests and jesuits. Give me leave I pray you, to question with you a little, and for a minute of an hour, be content to make use of that reason and knowledge, which God hath given you, without forestall your judgements, by prejudice of the authority of the Church. Doth it not appear to you by the light of natural reason, that the main end of all religion is the glory of God? Do not your own consciences testify in the simplicity of your hearts, that it maketh more for the glory of God, that men should be beholding to his Majesty for their salvation, then that they should procure it to themselves? Is it not also apparent to you in the secret of your own souls, that our doctrine by beating down the pride of man's free-will, advanceth the glory of God's mercy: and yours, by hoisting up the conceit of man's good choice, presseth down the estimation of God's unspeakable goodness? And shall an idle sound weigh more with you, then sound reason? Consider, I beseech you, what weak grounds you build this opinion of the Church upon: I will point at that, which in my answer I have handled. Can you in any sort compare the opinion of the Church's authority, with the evidence of those matters, wherewith before I pressed you? Is it as clear that there are certain men, whom I must believe, whatsoever they teach, as it is, that I must seek the advancing of God's glory, more than of mine own pride? Are you as sure, that these Priests and jesuits which are your teachers, be sent by the true Church, and deliver nothing, but the doctrine of the true Church; as you are, that they, who persuade you to rest wholly upon God, and not at all upon yourselves, show you the right way to procure God's glory, and your own salvation? Tush (say you) all is nothing unless I believe it, upon the credit of the Church. Alaste, how did the first Christians, who never thought on the authority of the Church, when they heard and believed the Apostles doctrine? Look over all the History of the Acts, peruse the Sermons of Peter and Paul, and tell me whether you find, that ever they pleaded the authority of the Church, to procure belief of their doctrine. After men are converted, the authority of the Church, hath her due place, and must bear sway in matters in different, but for the avowing of truth, her bare word is never of sufficient importance. It was the doctrine of the Apostles, that wrought upon the hearts of men, by the clear evidence of it, through the power of the Spirit, wherewith it was accompanied. What that doctrine was, where should we learn but in the scriptures, wherein they have written what they preached? These (you say) give such authority to the Church. This were somewhat, if you made not their authority in respect of us, to depend upon the Church. The scriptures (say p Stapl. de author. Eccles. li. 1. your Doctors) have in themselves authority, as being from God: but they are not of authority to us, but only by the authority of the Church. I perceive you are ashamed of these absurdities. The Church must be believed upon her word. Why so? The Scripture saith so. How shall I know that these books are scripture? The Church saith so. The Church and the scripture prove each other, by their mutual testimony, they give each of other: I believe the Church because the scripture biddeth me, I believe the scripture, because the Church biddeth me. If these things seem to be absurd, as indeed they are most absurd, blind not yourselves any longer with such mists of error, but come out of them, to the clear light of the scriptures: read them diligently, meditate in them carefully, call upon God for his grace earnestly, resign yourselves, and your free-will to him sincerely: and the Lord that is most ready to bless them, that use the means of knowledge and faith, in humility, and singleness of heart, will assuredly enlighten your understanding, and incline your affections, that you shall discern, like of, and embrace the true doctrine of justification by faith in jesus Christ: and shall renounce your own righteousness, and free-will, to the glory of his grace, and the present comfort, and everlasting salvation of your bodies and souls, through the same his son, to whom with the Father, and the holy Ghost, be all glory, praise, obedience, and thanksgiving, from this time for evermore. Amen. FINIS. Texts of Scripture expounded or applied. GEn. 1. 1. pag. 121. 3. 5. 6. p. 417. 9 21. p. 212. 12. 13. p. 212. 15. 5. p. 288. 15. 13. p. 206. 20. 5. p. 212. 49. 1. 2. p. 38. Exod. 3. 10. p. 140. 7. 8. p. 352. 7. 21. 22. p. 352. 19 20. p. 140. 21. 1. p. 140. 32. 1. p. 414. Leuit. 10. 11. p. 140 Num. 24. 17. p. 171 Deut. 42. p. 86. 31. 9 19 p. 140. josu. 5. 5. p. 227. 1. Sam. 8. 7. p. 140. 2. Sam. 12. 9 pag. 212. 275. 1. Reg. 3. 26. p. 377. 18. 13. p. 288. 19 18. p. 187 2. Reg. 18. 30. p. 38. 19 4. 6. p. 38. 2. Chron. 26. 18. pag 410 Nehe. 8. 8. 9 p 140 Psal. 1. 1. 2. pa. 10. 13. 20. 19 8. p. 74. 22. 27. p. 276. 25. 5. p. 128. 26. 5. p. 210. 42 1, 2. p. 234. 48. 1. 8. p. 168, 169. 48. 5. 6. p. 234. 57 3. p. 238. 72. 8. p. 276. 72. 17. p. 39 73. 13. 16. 22. p. 33. 84. 1. 2. 10. p. 234. 105. 8, 9 p. 170. 106. 40. 41, 42, 43. p. 170 111. 9 p. 169. 119. 103. p 20. 119. 105. p. 74. 119 127. 130. pag. 20. 74. 133. 3. p. 169. 143. 2. pag. 363. Prou. 7. 22. p. 19 20. 9 p. 334. 354. 26. 5. p. 173. Eccles. 9 1. p. 334. 354. Cant. 6. 8. p. 264, Isa. 30 21. p. 232. 35 8. p. 226. 231. 59 21. p. 276. 282. 60. 11. p. 196. 206. 61. 9 p. 176. 177. 256 63. 9 p. 170. jer. 7. 5. pa. 380. 17. 29. 30. p. 39 31. 31. p. 232, Dan. 2. 44. pa. 29. 168. 170. 9 20. p. 363. Malac. 2. 7. p. 112 140. Math 1. 1. 2. p. 39 3. 12. p. 208. 3. 17. p. 257. 42. 4. 23. p. 57 5. 14. p. 179. 181. 5. 15. p. 182. 184. 5. 18. p. 178. 5. 43, 44. p 141. 7. 1. p. 143 7. 6. p. 195. 7. 7. p 117. 7. 15. p. 253. 7. 16. p. 36. 7. 22, 23. p. 272. 7. 25. p. 167. 10. 5. pa. 55. 135. 190. 10. 7, 8. p. 272. 352 10. 23. p. 190. 10. 33. 186. 11. 30. p. 336. 12. 31. p. 57 13. 25. p. 284. 378. 13. 30. p. 278. 290. 13. 37, 38. 43. p. 291. 13. 48. p. 208. 15. 11. 14. pa. 141. 249. 15. 24. p. 55. 16. 3, 4. p. 351. 166. 12. p 37. 141. 413. 16. 16. p 199. 16. 18. p. 129. 158. 159. 164. 16. 19 p. 307. 325. 18. 4. p. 268., 18. 17. p. 145. 147. 193, 194. 20. 16. p. 208. 22. 10. p. 208. 23 2. pa. 138, 139. 143. 413. 23. 3. p. 36. 23. 5, 6. 13, 14. p. 142. 23. 15. p. 382. 23. 16. p. 141. 23. 2. 16. 17. 19 p●. 413. 24. 14. p. 178. 291. 24. 24. pa. 36. 280. 352. 25. 1, 2. p. 209. 26. 70. 72. 74. p. 188 212. 275. 28. 19, 20. p. 35. 41. 55. 113. 135. 150 163. 179. 190. 126 199. 130. 131. 173 Mark. 9 24. p. 33. 16. 11. p. 311. 16. 15, 16. p. 41. 135 145, 146. 150. 181 Luke 1. 32. 33. pa. 168. 172 1. 74. 75. p. 407. 3. 23. p. 39 3. 31. p. 39 4. 18. p. 176. 9 26. p. 186. 10. 11 p. 137. 10. 11. p. 146. 10. 16. pag. 36. 44. 126. 136. 137. 145. 268. 308. 10. 21. p. 203. 12. 32. p. 364. 414. 17. 5. p. 33. 22 32. p. 364. 22 48. p. 272. 24. 44. p. 277. john 2. 29. p. 39 411. 3. 34. p. 410. 4. 1, 2, 3. p. 189. 5. 30. p. 257. 5 39 p. 10. 20. 74. 6. 27. p. 412. 6. 35. p. 24. 6. 37. p. 166. 6. 38. p. 257. 6 40. p. 166. 6. 44. p. 203. 6. 65. p. 203. 6. 68 p. 39 6. 70 p. 272. 7. 48. p. 414. 8. 59 p. 189. 9 30. p. 189. 10. 1, 2 p. 411. 10. 4. 5. 8. p. 265. 412. 10. 16. p. 261. 265. 10. 28. p. 167. 10. 37. p. 412. 11. 32. p. 57 12. 6. p. 272. 14. 27. p. 130. 134. 373, 388. 14. 26. p. 130. 134. 15. 24. p. 412. 16. 15. p. 130. 135. 137 388. 17 9 pa. 257. 264. 266. 17. 20. p. 131. 264. 266. 17. 21. p. 261. 264. 20. 31. p. 81. 351. 21. 16, 17. pa. 308. 391. 21. 22, 23. pa. 325. 326. Acts 1. 4. p. 1. 6. p. 39 310. 1. 8. p. 277. 294. 21, 2. p. 288. 2. 2, 3. p. 39 133. 2. 5. p. 136. 2. 38. p. 205. 2. 41. p. 185. 2. 47. p. 128. 4. 12. p. 26. 5. 11. p. 128. 5. 36, 37. p. 280. 412 81. p. 189. 8. 4. pa. 288. 373. 204 9 24. 25. p. 189. 9 31. p. 129. 10. 3. 5. p. 185. 10. 15. p. 311. 10. 48. p. 190. 13. 46. p 205. 13. 48. p. 204 13. 51. p. 146. 14 23. p. 129. 15. 22. p. 128. 15. 29. p. 321. 17. 11. p. 249. 18. 19 p. 297. 19 25. 29. 40. 41. p. 128. 20. 19 p. 278. 20. 28. p. 158. 254 20. 29. 30. p. 278. 285. 26. 12. p. 86. 26. 28. p. 183. Rom. 1. 8. p. 369. 3. 2. p. 152. 3. 4. p. 99 3. 22. p. 24. 4. 25. p 311: 6. 1. 14. p. 339. 6. 3, 4. 407. 6. 23. p. 39 7. 21. p. 363. 8. 6. p. 61. 8. 9 16. p. 21. 355. 8. 16. p. 354 355. 8. 30. p. 210. 9 3 p. 207. 9 6, 7. p. 107. 172. 9 11. p. 257. 366. 10. 10. p. 186. 191. 10. 14 p. 32. 33. 113. 10. 14. 15. pa. 185. 233. 10. 17. p. 114. 129. 11. 5. p. 257. 11. 26. p. 282. 11. 2. 7. p. 207. 12. 5. p. 261. 266. 13. 3. 4. p. 275. 16. 5. p. 129. 1. Cor. 1. 1. 2. pag. 340. 349. 15. p. 379. 1. 26. p. 414. 2. 9 p. 102 113. 409 2. 14. p. 232. 236. 2. 16. p. 60. 102. 3. 11. p. 298. 3. 17. 159. 267. 167 270. 5. 1. p. 267. 340. 5. 4. 5. 13. p. 209. 5. 11. 12. p. 147. 6. 1. 5. p. 340. 6. 4. 5. p. 148. 6. 11. p. 407. 10. 17. p. 261. 266. 11. 16. pa. 26. 129. 155. 12. 28. p. 128. 13. 3. p. 334. 14. 23. 25. p. 186. 14. 38. p. 25. 26. 15. 9 p. 128. 15. 11. p. 311. 15. 12. p. 340. 15. 14. 17. p. 311. 2. Cor. 1. 1. p. 349. 2. 10. 245. 2. 11. p. 109. 112. 10. 10. p. 348. 11. 14. p. 108. 13. 5. p. 354. Gal. 1. 1. p. 185. 1. 8. pag. 105. 106. 114. 126. 137. 274. 413. 1. 16. p. 414. 2. 16. p. 24. 3. 4. 5. p 311. 4. 4. 5. p. 365. 4. 6. p. 21. 5. 20. 21. p. 49. 6. 16. p. 172. Ephes. 1. 1. p 265. 1. 4. p. 407. 1. 21. 22. p 129. 158. 2. 8. p. 24. 2. 12. p 297. 2. 13. p. 294. 4. 5. p. 28 4. 14. p. 254 390. 4. 18. p 61. 390. 5. 22. 25. p. 254. 5. 23. pa. 129. 158. 160. 5. 25. 27. 29. 32. px. 158. 160. 254 5. 27. p. 265. Phil. 1. 3. 5. 6. pa. 379. 1. 18. p. 142. 2. 12. p. 336. 2. 21 p. 340. 3. 6. p. 128. Col. 1. 2. p. 349. 1. 6. pa. 278. 290. 292. 1. 24. p. 129. 3. 18. 19 p. 142. 3. 20. p. 144. 1. Thess. 1. 8. pag. 379. 5. 21. p 253. 2. Thess. 2. 4. pag. 292. 2. 3. p. 290. 413. 2. 7. p. 382. 2. 9, 10, 11, 12. p. 19 72. 114. 115. 205 247. 352. 383. 1. Tim. 1. 5. p. 334. 1. 20. p. 300. 2. 2. p. 312. 2. 3. 4. p. 53. 55. 57 180. 185. 3. 15. pa. 128. 151. 161. 4. 10. p. 53. 58. 2. Tim. 1. 15. p. 300. 2. 19 p. 265. 3. 9 p 278. 279. 3. 16. 17. p. 96. Tit. 2. 4. pa. 257. Hebr. 2. 14. p. 257. 216. p. 257. 2. 17. p. 3●6. 415. p. 326. 54, 5, 6. p. 411. 10. 38. p. 268. 351. 11. 6 p. 23. 24. 157. 178. 13. 17 p. 143. 13. 20. p. 412. james 4. 6. p. 268. 1. Pet. 1. 25. p. 114 2. 13. p. 268. 275. 2. 18. p. 254. 3. 1. 7. p. 254. 2. Pet. 1. 10. p. 115. 1. 19 p. 74. 39 p. 53. 58. 59 1 john 2. 18. 19 p. 300. 4. 1. p. 109. 251. 274. 4. 6. p. 109. 112. 5. 3. p. 334. 363. Jude vers. 3. p. Revel. 1. 20. p. 216 2. 5. p. 216. 2. 6. p. 300. 126 p. 171. 205. 293. 17. 1. p. 205. 17. 2 p. 114. 247. 21. 14. p. 297. A Table of the Authors alleged. A An. Dom. RObert Abbot An Dom. 1596 Adrian. 6. 1522 Cornelius Agrippa 1550 Albertus Magnus 1220 Alexander Alexand. Episcopus 320 Alphonsus a Castro 1546 Alphons. Tostat. Abulens. episc. 1430 Guliel. Altissiodorensis 1320 Ambrose Mediolan. episc. 380 Anselmus Cantuariens. episc. 1080 Antoninus Florentin. episc. 1450 Athanasius Alexander. episc. 340 Augustinus Hippon. episc. 400 Azorius 1580 B john Bule 1560 Sebastianus Baccadius 1597 Bartholomaeus de Pisis 1500 Basilius magnus 370 Basiliense Consilium 1430 Beda 700 Bellarminus 1575. Bellum papale 1600 Bernardus 1130 Thomas Bilson 1587. William Bishop 1603 Gabriel Biel 1449 Bolsec 1565 Breidenbacchius 1580 Bridget 1518 Bonaventura 1260 Boccacio 1375 Bucchingerus 1542 Burdegalens. monachi 1585. C Thomas de vio Caietanus 1520 Melchior Canus Canar-episc. 1560 Edmundus Campianus 1570 joannes Capreolus An. Dom. 1415 Carthagin. Concil. 3 400 Catechismus Trident. Concil. 1565 Catharina Senensis 1370 Catharinus 1550 Cassianus 430 Cassander 1530 Daniel Chamierus 1605 Chalcedon. Concil. 455 Girolamo de Catena 1586 Christophor. de Capite fontium 1570 Chrysostom. Constantinop. episc. 400 Clemens P P. 1342 Clemens Alexandrinus episc. 200 Cochlaeus 1519 Codex justinian. 529 Constantiens Concil. 1417 janus Cornarius 1540 Cornelius Bitontinus episc. 1545 Cyprianus Carthag episc. 250 Cyrillus Alexander. episc. 430 Cyrillus Hierosolymit. episc. 370 Nicol. Cusan. 1464 D joan Damascenus 700 Declaratio motuum Wisbic. 1601 Decretorum liber 1151 Didymus Alexander. 360 Dionys. Areopag. noth 100 Dionys. Carthusian. 1460 George Downam 1598. Guliel. Durand. 1236 E Epiphanius Salam. episc. 390 Erasmus Roterodam. 1528 Eugenius 4. 1430 Eusebius Caesariens. episc. 320 Extra joan. 22. 1315 F john Field An. Dom. 1606 joan. Fernelius 1547 joan. Ferus 1554 Francisc. Fevardent. 1584. joan. Fisher Roffens. episc. 1530 joan. Fox 1567. Fulgentius 500 William Fulk. 1576 G Galfridus Momunet. 1152 Gaudentius 400 Gerson 1429 Genebrardus 1530 Glossa. interlin. Ansel. Laud. 1100 Gloss. ordin. Strab. Fulden. 840 Goulartius 1590. Gregorius P P. 1. 590 Gregor. de Valentia 1580 Gregor. Nazianzen. episc. 380 H Haymo Halberstadt. 820 Heruaeus 1560 Hieronymus Stridon 390 Hilarius Pictavien. episc. 350 Holinshead 1570 Holcot 1350 Book of homilies 1560 Hosius Cardinal 1530 Hugo Cardinal. 1240 Lady hungerford's medita. 1605 I Ignatius 100 Illyricus 1540 Irenaeus 180 Isidorus Clarius 1540 jansenius Gandau. episc. 1581. jesuits Catechism 1590. jesuiticae Constitut. 1573 justinus Martyr. 160 L Petrus Lombard. episc. 1140 Leo P P. 1. 450 Lucas Brugens. 1530 Martin. Lutherus 1520 Nicolaus Lyranus 1320 M Maccdonius 500 Maffaeus An. Dom. 1590. Maldonatus 1572 Marsilinus Patavin. 1324 Martialis Burdeg. 100 Gregory Martin 1582 Philippus Melanchth. 1530 Arias Montanus 1570 Philippus Mornaeus 1580 Milevitan. Concil. 407 O Guliel. Occam 1320 Oecumenius 1050 Opus imperf in Math. 450 Optatus Mileu. episc. 380 Origines. Adamant. 200 P Pacianus Barcel. episc. 380 Pagninus 1532 Panormitanus 1470 Paphnutius. 320 Paschasius 500 Petrarcha 1330 Petrus de Alliaco 1400 Philo Carpath. episc. 410 Picus Mirandula 1494 Pius P P. 5. 1566 Pighius 1525 Pizamanus. 1497 Platina 1451 Polycarp. Smyrnen. episc. 140 Polydorus Virgil. 1525 Prateolus 1568 Prierias 1530 Proclus Constantinop. episc. 430 Prosper Aquitan. 450 Psellus 400 R Rhabanus Maurus 850 Revelation of Religion 1605 Rhemish Testam. 1582 john Reynolds 1580 Ruffinus Aquileiens. 390 S Alphonsus Salmero 1597 Nicolaus Sanderus 1569 joan. Scotus 1308 Sixtus Senensis An. Dom. 1570 Smidelinus 1560 Dominicus Sotus 1554 Sozomenus 430 Speculum exempl. 1605 Staphylus 1560 Didacus' Stella 1560 Matthew Sutcliffe 1590. T Tertullianus 200 Theod. Cyrens'. episc. 440 Theophylact. Bulgar. episc. 900 Thomas de Aquino 1260 Trident. Concil. An. Dom. 1545 Turrianus 1580 joan. de Turrecremata 1460 V Vatablus 1545 Vega 1568 Whitaker 1586 Anno Mundi. Aristoteles 3640 M. Tullius Cicero 3980 Homerus 3003 Virgilius 3998 A TABLE OF THE CHIEF MATTERS contained in the Treatise and Answer. A THe Academics denied that there is any truth to be known. pag. 80. All, often was put for every kind. p. 57 Allegories are not fit to prove points of doctrine. p. 264. Boniface 3. the first revealed Antichrist. p. 330. Antichrist revealed, bare sway over all men and their writings. p. 387. The Apostles were absolutely to be heard, as well severally as jointly. p. 36. 43. 44. 112. 127. 137. 177. No joint consent in teaching required of the Apostles or any Ministers. p. 127. Sought to many nations, were not sought to by them. p. 179. 186. Were the light of the world. p. 181. Severally every of them. p. 182. Did not enlighten the world by any joint act of them all together. p. ead. Were not believed, because they were sent by the Church, but for their doctrine. p. 185. 235. 239. 240. 243. Might and did fly in time of persecution. p. 190. Looked for an earthly kingdom. p. 39 Yet were in the state of grace by resting upon Christ for salvation. p. ead. Thought it unlawful to impart the Gospel to the Gentiles. p. 311. Were over come by the gates of hell, according to the doctrine of Popery. p. 166. Apostolicknesse, what it is, according to the Papists. 297. Apostolicknesse of a Church, not easy to be known to all men. p. 296. Unpossible to be known, but by report. p. ead. True Apostolic succession is in Apostolic doctrine. p. 298. 292. 293. Arianisme was very universal, and of very long continuance. p. 292. Aristotle's Physics set out, as if they had not been set out. p. 81. The main Assumption of the general Syllogism. p. 218. Answer to the general Analysis. p. 6, 7. Our answers are commonly so long, that few find leisure to read them. p. 7. Authority how a means to beget faith. p. 60. One man of authority and learning draws many atter him. p. 121. B To believe in Christ, what it is. p. 26. To believe the Catholic Church, what it is. p. 156. We do not believe in the church, because that were to equal it with God p 157. They that truly believe in Christ, shall not err out of the way that leadeth to everlasting life. p. 232. Belief how wrought p 362. No man is forced to believe. p. 361, 362. No man withheld from believing by God. p. 58. A man may deliver the truth, and himself not believe. p. 112. Believing expressly, implicitè. p. 44, 45. To believe, that is, to assent, is not in the power or choice of man's will. p. 40. For what reason we must believe or assent to the truth p. 30. 31. 42. 43. 47. True believers cannot be separated from Christ by death. p. 167. Misbelieving and obstinately not believing, differ much. p. 39 Misbelieving how far daminable. p. 51. Obstinately not believing, how not damnable. p 39 40. 49. Refusing to believe against conscience, always damnable. p. 40. 41. C Catharin foresaw the Council of Trent would be misunderstood. p 323. Catholic what it signifieth. p. 280. 281. Few ordinary Papists know. 280. What the Catholic Church is, & why so called. p. 280. 283. 284. 285. 286. 374. Not all one with Roman. p. 7. As Papists understand it a mere name. p. 187. 199. 373. 407. Said to be Catholic in six respects. p. 281. In respect of all places & persons. p. 285. catholicness seldom taken for universality of time. 281. 373. No particular Church Catholic, as Papists understand Catholic p. 3. The Church before our saviours coming not Catholic, as the Papists teach p 281. The Catholic Church continueth from Adam to the end of the world. p. 160 164. 281. The church not called Catholic by any author within the first 200. years. p. 283. No man called a Catholic in the Apostles time. p. 282. The word Catholic not used in the Scriptures. p. ead. The title Catholic not given to any of the Epistles by the Apostles themselves. p. ead. The teaching of the Catholic Church the rule of faith. p. 61. 151. Teaching contrary to the Catholic Church, how far accursed. p. 106. The Catholic Church is as well in heaven as in earth. p. 6. 8. Not visible. p. 209. The protestāns church Catholic. p. 408. The Church what it is. pag. 6. 10. 26. 71. 150. 169. 170. 175. 199. 225. 393. Not the Clergy only. p. 71. 123. 131. Papists define it with relation to the Pope of Rome. p. 200. A Council of Bishops the Popish Church. p. 136. 150. All professors are not the true Church. 177. The congregation and governors are properly the Church where they live. p. 148. 227. divers significations of the word Church. 127. 128. see Ecclesia. All believers. p. 120. 210. The elect believers living in the world. p. 201. 210. Generally a company, assembled or not assembled. p. 210. Where the Church is to be sought p. 61. To be known only by the scriptures. p. 56 How it is to be known p. 221. How the pillar and ground of truth. pa. 151. 152. Built and founded upon the truth. p 154. The faith thereof how far to be inquired after. p. 14. The authority thereof how far to be yielded to. p. 45. 50 54. 91. 111. 151. 246. 250. 275. A main delusion and needless. p. 67. 72 90. 104. 238. 239. Cannot make that damnable, which is not so of itself. p. 49. Increaseth the sin of not believing, when it determineth truly p. 49. Not spoken of in the old testament. p. 97 How far commended to us by the Scripture. p. 96. 97. How Austin was moved to believe by the authority of the Church p. 93. The authority of the Church is great in matters not to be decided by scripture. p. 95. 96. 155. 250. The testimony and authority thereof is but human. p. 242. 243. What it is for a man to make himself judge over the Church. p. 249. Not to hear the Church. p. 147. All Churches may err. p. 6. 46. 135. What is necessary to the being of a true Church. p. 239. Many reprobates are members thereof according to the Papists. p, 164. Outward profession enough to make a man a member thereof according to the Papists. pa. 23. 123. 224. 264. 272. 350. Why we ought to seek for, and join ourselves to a true Church. p. 219. 234. God's true public worship cannot ordinarily be performed but in a true Church. p. 219. The Church not holding the foundation of the Apostles doctrine is to be left. p. 14 Truth of doctrine in points fundamental, a certain mark of a true church. p 240. 249. Succession to the Apostles in doctrine makes Churches Apostolic. p. 301. Was never without some diversity of opinions among the learned. p. 311. The Church erred in divers points within the first six hundred years. p. 163. How it is one. p. 158. 160. 201. 215. 263. 264. 266. 284. 309. 318. The Protestants Church is one. p. 406. Adam, Abel, Enoch, etc. were of the Protestants Church. p. 341. 353. No writer within the first thousand years agrees with the Papists of the Council of Trent in all points. p. 341. The Popish Church hath not yet determined all points. p. 14. 375. The Church that ignorant Papists believe, is a Priest or a jesuit. p. 15. 16. 17. 71. The Papists circled of the Scripture & the Church. p. 72. 91. 244. 246. 261. 413 How a whole Church may be counted holy. 271. Many thousands never had knowledge of any Church. p 55, No man can certainly know that there is any true Church but by the Scriptures. p 244. The Church hath properly to do with none but Christians. p. 90. 193. The Church was confined to Africa by the Donatists. p. 3. 173. 216. 288. It is not all one to be in the Church and of the Church. p. 212. What it is to sit in Moses chair. p. 140. 141. Who are meant by the Church believed in the Creed. p. 157. 158. 168. 175 210. The elect called are properly the church p. 158. 159. 165. 168. 211. 212. 213. 217 265. That Church is not visible. p. 174. 177. To that only is continuance promised. p. 217. The continuance of the Church dependeth upon her being joined to Christ. p. 168. The Church in the Apostles time did not always hold the same points of faith. p. 310. To believe in the Church, were to equal it with God. p. 157. The ceremonies before Christ were not continued without interruption. pag. 170. 227. Communion with a Church may be refused by ignorance without pride. p. 275. Confession to a minister neither commanded nor forbidden by Protestant Churches. p. 342. Popish confession rather provokes men to sin, then restrains them from it. 342. 343. Credere Ecclesiam and Credere Ecclesiae, not all one but divers. p. 156. Credere Deum, Credere in Deum, differ very much, p. 156. The perpetual covenant. p. 178. Christians how called Saints. p. 349. What makes a man cease to be a Christian. p. 273. There is no constraint used toward the will, either in good or in evil. pag. 344. How Constraint and Necessity differ p. 344. 345. Counsels may err. p. 260. Are hard to be understood, and may be misunderstood. p. 11. 12. 323. Are bound to use all means of disputation to find out the truth. p. 13. Deliver some things as probable conjectures. p. 12. The course that hath been and must always be held by Popish general Counsels. p. 330. Whether the Council be above the Pope or no, it is not determined. p. 14 15. 375. The Council hath often deposed the Pope. 324. 325. The Council of Constance makes the Pope subject to the decrees of Counsels. p. 325. The Council of the Elders among the jews. p. 148. D What it is to deny Christ. p. 190. 191. Always damnable. p. 190. Most devotion in Popery, where there is least understanding. p. 27. Disputation about points of Divinity necessary. p. 13. Dissension among Papists about matters of faith. p. 321. 322. 324. Bellarmine dissents in one point or other from almost all learned Papists before him. p. 319. Every dissent in opinion makes not churches cease to be churches, or holy. p. 273. Dissension is better than maintaining of false doctrine or worship. p. 319. Doubting of some points, how it overthrows not religion. p. 50. How far the doctrine of one that is lawfully sent, may be examined. pa. 253. E 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what it signifieth. p. 128. Any assembly. pag. ead. Especially about matters of religion. p. ead. Generally all believers. p. 129. 201. 210. Particularly several congregations. p. 129. How arguments may be drawn from those places where the word is used. p. 129. 130. Ecclesiastical governors to be obeyed when they command that which is right. p. 37. The Elect before the coming of Christ were chosen ordinarily out of the jews, since, out of the Gentiles. p. 207. The Elect only are truly called. p. 210. 211. May fall into grievous sin, and yet not cease to be elect. p. 211. England not converted but perverted by Austin the monk. p. 377. Popish errors crept in by little and little unperceived. p. 382. 383. 387. F divers significations of faith. p. 6. 22. 28. Faith is absolutely necessary to salvation. p. 22. 25. 26. Faith for assent to the truth, what it is. p. 35. 319. May be had without the authority of the Church, p. 104. 113. Is in some greater, in some less. p. 31. Goeth before justifying faith. p. 33. Is accompanied with doubting. p. 32. 33 Perfection thereof is to be laboured for. p. 32. Is tied to the Scripture, not to the church. p. 46. May come by the preaching of the schismatics or heretics. p. 34. Not to be built on the testimony of man. p. 329. How it is one. p. 30. 31. 47. 51. Entire and infallible faith necessary to salvation. p. 73. How faith may be begotten. p. 25. 26. 33 34. 60. 66. 75. 76. 113. 114. 235. Is to be learned of the Ministers, not of the Church. p. 234. Matters of faith according to Popery. 311. 320. Are indeed to be proved by scripture. p. 250. 319. 320. Fundamental points of faith. p. 40. 239. Obstinately not believing them damnable. p. 40. No matter of faith according to Popery, till within these last 800 years, 320. 321. All popish faith dependeth upon the authority of the Church. p. 25. The rule of faith what properties it must have. p. 61. 63. 64. 94. 108. Easiness to be understood no property of the rule. p. 74 94. How far the rule need be understood. p. 65 94. All truth must be proved by the rule. p. 84. 87. 115. What points the rule must resolve, and how far. p. 84. Natural wit and learning cannot be the rule of faith p. 98, 99, 100 No private spirit can be the rule of faith 105. The teaching of the Catholic Church the rule of faith. p. 61. 122. 42. He that hath Popish faith may be damned. p. 23. justifying faith, what it is. p. 24. It is in the wil p. 33. The just lives by faith; and where there is faith there is life. p. 273. Lively faith may be in him that is ignorant, or misinstructed in many points. p 274. The foundation of the Apostles doctrine is overthrown by Popery. p. 375. Fasting not condemned, but especially commended by Protestants p. 342. A Popish fast may be kept with gluttony and drunkenness. p. 342. 366. The interpretations of the Fathers reverenced by the Protestants. p. 80. Friaries and monasteries. p. 357. Saint Francis five wounds. p. 358. G God calleth all men from damnation. p. 56. Decreed all things, that are or shall come to pass. p. 345. Worketh not alike in good and evil actions. p. 345. The glory of God is the end of all religion. p. 290. 296. The heathen had one sovereign God above all the rest. p. 387. To whom the rest were mediators of intercession for their favourites, as the Popish Saints are. p. 387. How we may know, that there is a gospel. p. 245. The doctrine of the Gospel is simply necessary to salvation, not the books of the four Gospels. p. 243. The Gospel hung about the neck for a preservative. p. 78. Many nations in Augustine's time had not heard the Gospel. p. 55. The Father's thought the world should end presently after the preaching of the Gospel in all places. p. 55. Many thousands died in the Apostles time, ere they could by any means hear of the Gospel. p. 181. 182. 183. H Heresy what it is. p. 220. A work of the flesh. p. 52. 118. May be more general, for a time, then true religion. p. 293. No man can certainly know how long any heresy shall continue. p. 293. Heresies spring from misunderstanding the Scripture. p. 119 300. May by it be convinced. p. 119. Great heretics have had lawful calling to the ministery. p. 36. 411. Heretics plead all for themselves, that Papists do. p. 119. They that refuse to make trial of their doctrine by Scripture, are heretics. p. 220. Some heretics have continued a long time in one and the same doctrine. p. 263. Heretics may be free from all gross outward sin. p. 275. The first 400. years were most fruitful in monstrous heresies. p. 305. Some heretical Churches, may be true Churches. p. 219. Some heretics could plead personal succession from the Apostles. p. 299. Any heretical Church may have as good means to end controversies, as the Church of Rome hath. p. 313. Holiness whence it springeth. p. 21. 360. Only true inward holiness can make a man a true Christian. p. 269. Holiness is resident only in several persons, not in a company. p. 270. 249. Is invested in the Pope's person. p. 356. I Comparison betwixt heathenish & Popish Idolatry. p. 386. 387. Distinction of Idol and Image. p. 386. Papists worship the Image itself. p. 386. No religious use of any Image to be allowed. p. 360. Ignorance the strength of Popery. p. 4. 70. All ignorance is not heresy. p. 50. How it shuts men out from salvation. p. 40. 44 49. 50. 274. Ignorance can excuse no man, the Gospel being preached every where. p. 113. jeconiah childless. p. 39 K 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 283. The keys and power to bind and loose common to all the Apostles. p. 325. 326. Why kings are called human creatures. p. 274. He refuseth not to be subject to the king that doth not absolutely obey him in all things. p. 275. L The Law cannot be kept perfectly. p. 363. How it is not gricuous. p. 363. One learned man's judgement oftentimes draws many to it. p. 250. The leaven of the pharisees what it is. p. 37. 141. No life but in the body of Christ. p. 273 The light must shine to them that are in the house. p. 182. The love of God whence it ariseth. p. 20 Is not alike to all. p. 257. M Gregory martin's eavils were answered long since. p. 69. Marks of the Church. p. 221. 222. 226. 259. Must be proper to it always. p. 222. 280. Easier to be known then the Church itself. p. 222. 223. True doctrine in the fundamental points is a sure mark of the Church. p. 228. 229. 301. 374. 375. The Mass was brought in by piece meal. p. 384. Overgreat zeal of Martyrdom. p. 189 Messiah not Salomon's son. p. 39 The ministry, not the authority of men is used to beget faith. p. 6. 19 234. 243 244. Needful for the instruction of the ignorant. p. 98. No charge, practice or warrant for any universal ministry since the Apostles time. p. 179. Luther's prevailing in his ministry, and his preservation wanted little of a miracle. p. 355. Ministers to be heard so far as they speak according to the Scriptures. p. 36. 112. 137. 142. 146. Yet less danger not to hear them so speaking, than not to hear the Apostles. p. 43 112. Origen preached before he was a Minister. p. 35. antichrist's miracles. p. 114. 352. Miracles are often counterfeited. p. 352. 358. Preferred before the authority of the Church. p. 114. The use of miracles is to confirm doctrine, not to testify of holiness. pa. 172. 351. There never was any true miracle wrought for confirmation of false doctrine. p. 115. Miracles are not to be believed for any doctrine against Scripture. p. 115. False miracles cannot always be discerned by men. p. 115. 352. 353. Luther and Calvin did not attempt the working of miracles. p. 355. N A natural man what he is. p. 61. 236. Absurdly called sensual. pa. 60. 61. 236. 237. May understand the Scripture, though not believe it to salvation. p. 236. Necessity, not constraint taught by Protestants. p. 344, 345. P Papists treason. novemb. 5. 1605. pa. 8. 346. 347. 379. The wickedness of Papists testified by their own writers. p. 340. 346. Papists rest upon the Pope and Counsels. p. 51. 312. Are pharisaical boasters. p. 338. 363. No Papist holding the authority of the Church, and the impossibility of the Pope's erring, can be a good Christian or a faithful subject. p. 72. Papists not sons of God, but servants of the law. p. 343. 364. Papists count murdering of Princes a meritorious work. p. 361. Outward peace is not so t●●ch worth, as that for it the Church should be corrupted with errors. p. 312. Must be provided for by the civil magistrate. p. 312. Saint Peter the Pope's Lord. p. 388. Why our Saviour prayed especially for him. p. 326. Why he asked him thrice, if he loved him. p. 327. Peter's accepting of the sovereignty, a poor proof of his love to Christ. p. 327. His superiority was in respect of age. p. 315. It is uncertain whether ever he were at Rome or no. p. 328. 393. The Pope the Papists Lord God. p. 112. How he came to his height. p. 382. Head of the Church, though he believe not in heart. p. 23. He that is no Christian may be Pope of Rome. 23. 111. The Pope cannot err: p. 71. Can show no charter for his not erring. p. 37. 71. 72. May err, by the judgement of Papists. p. 323. Even with a general Council. p. 330. 331. It is not determined that the Pope alone cannot err. p. 320. Pope john 22. doubted of the immortality of the soul. p. 111. Pope Leo 10. counted the history of Christ a fable. p. 111. Many Popes have been found to be Apostates from the faith. p. 323, 324. Many decrees of Popes are contrary one to another. p. 324. Pius 5. and Clement 8. ●●●olue concerning the words of consecration contrary to the Council of Trent. pag. 324. Popish religion cannot hold up the head without the Pope's authority. p. 108. The Pope appoints the holy Ghost an office of his own devising. p. 388. Our Saviour and his Apostles hid themselves from persecutors. p. 186. No necessity to worship God publicly in time of persecution. p. 190. 191. The pharisees were blind guides. p. 249. To what purpose our saviour's perpetual presence serveth. p. 132. Predestination doth not take away free will. p. 361. Without true belief of predestination and justification, there can hardly be any true religion. p. 290. Prayer for the dead. p. 96. How every one that prayeth, receiveth. p. 116, 117. Preaching the ordinary means of faith. p. 113. 409. No man might have preached the Gospel without warrant from God. pag. 113. How Luther may be said to have first preached Christ. p. 392. Pride in opposition against a matter of doctrine, is sometimes in a sanctified man. p. 274. What outward profession of religion is: how far necessary. p, 188, 189, 192. What it is to confess with the mouth. p. 191. False Prophets to be known by their doctrine. p. 36. How all prophecies in the scripture are always true p. 206. Purgatory ends with the world. p. 365 Q Questions of religion how to be decided. pag. 61 R Reason how far it may be required in points of divinity. p. 16. 17. 18. Light of reason cannot find out all things necessary to salvation. p. 25. The reason of God's counsel and doings is oftentimes hid from men. p 204. Nothing against reason is to be believed without warrant from God. p. 244. The religion of the Popish Church at this day is fetched from the Council of Trent. p. 358. 377. Our Saviour did not pray that the reprobate might be one with his father and him. p. 264. Revelation of the spirit required by the Papists to believe that the Scriptures are the word of God. p. 245. The Church of Rome sometimes a true Church. p. 338. Rome was not built in a day. p 382. S What is absolutely necessary to salvation. p. 46. 55. 59 65. 77. 188. 243. 319. Assurance of salvation. p. 150. 354. Sufficient means of salvation provided for every man. p. 53. 55. 58. Every man hath not the means. p. 57 God will have all men to be saved, not every man. p. 53. 55. 57 58. 203. 257. The means of salvation by Christ are such as no man could devise. p. 102. 103. 113. 235. May be known what they are by the Scriptures without faith, but not acknowledged to be true without faith. p. 235. 236. Contempt or neglect of some things not absolutely necessary to salvation, may yet deprive a man of it p. 188. The graces of sanctification shall make the enemies of God's children acknowledge them. p. 179. That this man is saved rather than that, it proceedeth from the will of God. p. 203. Sacrament what it is. p. 385. Administration of the sacraments not absolutely necessary to the being of a Church. p. 226. 227. All things that belong to the right administration of the sacraments, are set down in Scripture. p. 230. There have been 32. schisms in the Romish Church. p. 393. None are properly schismatics but they that refuse communion with some true church. p. 275. Schoole-mens writings full of needless and endless questions. p. 20. All the schoolmen have refuted some of their fellows, or been refuted by them. p 313. Interpret and apply the scripture falsely. p. 118. Scribes why so called. p. 140. What is meant by Christ's sheepfold. p. 265. Similitudes how they argue. p. 50. Scripture the epistle of the Creator to the creature. p. 81. Acknowledged by Protestants and Papists to be the word of God. p. 87. 42. May be known to be so, by the matter. p. 89. Written for the instruction of all. p. 74. 79. 82. Of greater authority than any man's writings, or then all men's. p. 241. The bounds of the Church. p. 61. Ignorance thereof the cause of all evils. p. 119. Condemned by the Papists of hardness and uncertainty, and unsufficiency. p. 11. 73. 79. 22●. Are not hard. p. 74. 75. 76. 77. 82. 94. Papists blasphemies against the Scripture. p. 42. 5●. 81. Depriving the people of them. p. 52. Hard places of Scripture must be expounded by the plain. p. 79. Some places of Scripture so plain, that they cannot be mistaken. p. 79. Why some places of Scripture are hard, some easy. p. 76. 82. Scripture expoundeth itself. p. 82. Reading thereof may breed faith: how? p 25, 26. 34, 35, 36. 75, 76. 114. 235. Exposition of the scripture not tied to the senses of the fathers. p. 121 No exposition to be thrust upon the church, that cannot evidently be proved. p. 122. The scriptures left instead of the Apostles, to be advised with in all points of faith. p 97. May be understood by natural wit and learning. p. 102. 103. Papists glad to fly to the private teaching of the spirit to know the scriptures. p. 72. 245. Scripture why called Canonical. p 106. Christians doubting of the scripture, how to be dealt withal. p. 90. Atheists in the same question how to be dealt withal. p. 90 92. Knowledge of scripture to be laboured for. p. 20. 74. How far the scripture must be known before the church. p. 244. 247. Many things required to the perfect understanding thereof. p. 73. 81, 82. This word Expressly foisted in by the Papists into the question of the scripture. p. 88, 89, 100 The Hebrew and Greek originals rejected by the Papists. p. 52. Interpretation of scripture. p. 73. 80. 82. 92. 101. 118. 120. 121. Scripture an absolute rule for salvation. p. 7. 17. 96. 97. 322. How alone sufficient to salvation. p. 65. 66. 73. 78 96. 97. Sufficient for all matters of faith and manners. p. 56. 67. 68 83. 86. 87. 89. 94. 250. 260. 314 395. All parts of scripture not true in like sense, nor of like necessity to be believed p. 38 By what argument the spirit persuades us that the scripture is from God. p 245. Private spirit when to be rejected p. 120. What spirits are to be tried p. 252. Who are to try them. p. 254. Sins of infirmity less heinous than sins of wilfulness. p. 344. Suspicion without just cause against christianity and civility. p. 72. What succession is to be esteemed. p 2. 393. 394. Succession no good mark of the church. p. 394, 395. Protestants have succession, if Papists have it. p. 392. 409. T The English Translation reproved. p. 66 Defended. p. 69. 70. Not held by us to be infallible. p. 68 94. The Rhemish Translation hard to be understood p. 70. The vulgar Translation corrupt in eight thousand places, by the judgement of a learned Papist. p. 52, Doubts concerning it. p. 71. The general Analysis of the Treatise. p. 4. 5. The sum of it. p. 54. What Traditions are to be held for Apostolical. p. ●5. The spirit is to teach all truth: how? p. 130 God doth not miraculously reveal all truth at once to any man. p. 313. Truth manifested by one simple man, is to be preferred before the judgement of never so many wise and learned in a Council. p. 249. 250. Truth must be received, though delivered by evil men. p. 143. 144. Belief of every truth is required as a duty of sanctification. p. 274. The truth hath had witness of men from time to time. p. 205. From whom truth is hid. p 82. Evidence of truth, not visibility of the church the means of conversion. p. 204 The speedy conversion of great multitudes by preaching, a great argument of truth. p. 205. Truth with contention is better than agreement with Antichristianisme p. 317 Without truth the greatest agreement is but a conspiracy against God. p. 317. V The Protestants Churches have means to continue unity. p. 314. Universality. p. 65. Cannot be seen but only conceived. p. 177. No certain mark of the Church. p. 293. The state of the question concerning the visibility of the Church. p. 197. 209. 219 visibility of the Church. p. 174. 176. 198 202. 20●. 214. A Church may for a time be invisible: how? p. 202. And yet the flock and Pastor know each other. p. ead. Why it was necessary that the churches at the first should be visible. p. 204. 205 The Catholic Church invisible. p. 209 To whom the churches are visible. p. 216 Voluntas signi, beneplaciti. p. 58. 59 W The will of God ought to be a sufficient reason of his doings to all men. p. 204 Man's free-will preferred before God's glory by the Papists. p. 361. Men commonly wonder at that they understand not. p. 27. Good works shall be rewarded, though not upon desert. 343. Good works are not made meritorious by being dipped in Christ's blood. p. 365. Faults escaped. Page. 61. line. 16. for seen, read said p. 69. l. 9 for which, r. with. p. ead. l. 11. Isidorus Clarius, put out the comma. p 74. l. 4. in the marg for 13. r. 130. p. 80. l. ult. for with. r which. p. 92. l. 28. for be, r. he. p. 93 l 26. for yours, r. you p. 96. l. ult. for expressly. r. properly. p. ●7. l. 19 for rule, r. use. p. 119. l. 24. put out, say. p. 134. l. 17. in the mar. for uli. r. ubi. p. l. 1. in the marg. for 2, r. 1. p. 163. l. 10. for Church, r. Churches. p. ead. l. 13. for it, r. they. p. 180. l. 17. for have men, r. have all men. p. 144. l. 7. in the marg. for lib, r. lit. p. 223. l. 35. for heretic, r. heretics. p. 292. l. 5 in the marg, for Thophyl, r. Theophyl. p. 316. l 4. in the marg for Goulact, r. Goulart. p. 292. l. 27. for from, r. for. p. 298. l. 5. for intend, r. intended. p. 302. l. 27. for itself, r. in itself. p. 307. l. 8. put out, in. p. 309. l. 20. for Christians, r. Christian. p. 321. l 22. for you, r. your. p. 331. l. vlt for implied, r. applied p. 339. l. 20. for and settled, r and partly settled. p. 347. l. 22. for his, r. a Popes. p. 347. l. 23. for his Masters, r. Pius 5. his. p. 352. l. 27. for rrow. r. trow. p. 354 l. 34 for be, r. he. p 367. l. 31. for is, r. it. p. 371. l. 17. for led, r. ved. p. 378. l. 1. for Ethelbat, r. Ethelbert. p. 380. l. 8. for and the, r. and because the. p. 384. l. 4. put out at. 386. l. 22. for purpose, r. purple. p. 412. l. 30. for we, r. were.