Credo Ecclesiam Sanctam Catholicam.  
I believe the holy Catholic Church.  
THE Authority, Universality, and visibility of the CHURCH, handled and discussed.  
By EDWARD CHALONER, Dr. in Divinity, and Principal of ALBAN Hall in OXFORD.  
LONDON Printed by William Stansby, and are to be sold in Paul's Churchyard at the sign of the Greyhound.  
1625.    

TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE, WILLIAM, Earl of PEMBROKE, Lord HERBERT of Cardiff, Lord Par and Rosse of Kendal, Lord Marmion, and Saint Q●intin, etc. Lord Chamberlain of his MAJESTY'S Household, Lord Warden of the Stanneries, Knight of the most Noble Order of the Garter: Chancellor of the University of Oxford; And one of his Majesty's most Honourable Privy Council.  
MY LORD,  
THe first assault which was ever made upon mankind, appeared in the shape of a 
Gen. 3. 1.  question, for in that manner did the Serpent set upon Eve; and the victory then purchased, hath ever since animated the Viperous brood of that arch-enemy, to encounter the Church of God with the same engine. Aristotle's positive forms of disputing, suit not so well with their distempered materials as those of Socrates, which conclude in Questions. As it was at the building of Babel, so is it now in Babylon, their confounded language serves only to ask and demand, not to reply. For what are the cries of Rome, which more frequently walk the streets, and fill them with louder clamours than those of London, other than these? Whereupon do you lastly ground your belief? How do you know the Scriptures to be the Word of God? Where was your Church in all ages? If the Church of Rome profess not the same faith which anciently it did, when did it alter or vary from her first integrity? Argumentations of other natures, are forbidden the Laiety under pain of curse, this kind only of disputing by Questions, is dispensed unto the rudest by the proverb, which saith, An Idiot may propound more in an hour, than the learnedst in a Kingdom can resolve in a year. Having therefore discoursed upon these subjects, partly in some Lectures had in a famous Metropolitan Church of this 
Canterbury.  Kingdom (where for a time abiding, I adventured to thrust in my Sickle into the Harvest of more worthy Labourers) partly in my several attendances upon our late Sovereign of happy Memory, and his Gracious Majesty now being, I presume in humble acknowledgement of your noble favours conferred upon me, to present these my poor endeavours to your honourable protection, beseeching your Lordship to pass a favourable construction upon my boldness, and to accept of them as from him, who is, and always will remain  
Your Lordships humbly▪ devoted; ED. CHALONER▪   


The Contents of the first Part of this Book.  
SECT. I. THe Preface and partition of the ensuing subject. pag. 1.  
SECT. II. What act of Faith is employed in this Article of the Church, and the errors of Romish Interpreters touching the same. pag. 3.  
SECT. III. The Romanists distractions touching the Church, set down in eight Gradations.  
SECT. FOUR The palpable abuse offered the Laiety, by obtruding the Church unto them as their sovereign judge, displayed by the present practice of the Jesuits. pag. 26.  
SECT. V. The objections out of the Scriptures touching the Church's infallibility, answered. pag. 30.  
SECT. VI The objection drawn from the question, how we may know the authority, sense, purity and perfection of the Scriptures, handled and resolved. pag. 36.  
SECT. VII. The new sleights and devices, which the Jesuits use in enforcing these arguments touching the Church and the Scriptures. pag. 51.   

The Contents of the second Part.  
SECT. I. THe first way whereby one may know the Church to be Catholic or Universal. pag. 71.  
SECT. II. The second way whereby one may know the Church to be Catholic or Universal. Together with an Application of the same to the present question of these times, touching the existency of our Church in all Ages. pag. 83.    

Errata.  
Page 58. The ● which is in lin. 7. aught to be in lin. 14. ibid. lin. 12. for obligation, r. Religion. ibid. lin. 14. for but search, r. but by search, pag. 91. lin. 19 for The fifth, r. The sixth.   

Credo Ecclesiam Sanctam Catholicam.  
I believe the holy Catholic Church.  

SECT. I. The Preface and partition of the ensuing subject.  
THis parcel of the Creed, how compendious soever it seems in words, yet is it in signification so ample, that if the Jesuits Comment exceeds not the Text, this, alone, is an abridgement of Divinity, this, a Catechism sufficient to engross the Laities whole study and belief. It is not a matter of small consequence to them which oppose names to things, and triumph in the naked sounds of Church and Catholic, whether you apparel the sense in any other furniture of Language than this: they cannot reply as 
a Augustin. Cont. Crescon. gram. lib. 2. c. 1.  Demosthenes did to Aeschines, when being vpbrayded with the improper use of a word, he answered, that the fortunes of Greece consisted not therein; No, in hoc sit a sum fortunae Romae, in these Syllables the fortunes of Rome are entrenched; not the seven Hills whereon she is seated, not her extended Walls whose ancient Tracts are almost en●omb'd with Age, not her Castle of Saint Angelo are half so relied upon by her, as this single Article; For why? She hopes, the Church will serve her for a Cittadle or Tower of defence, Holiness will colour her title, and Catholic will from all quarters furnish her with a voluminous Army of ancient and experienced soldiers. Howsoever therefore I am not able to undertake this subject, either with that power or skill, as those which have preceded me in the same, yet because, as Rome was not built in a day, so neither can she be surveyed in an hour, or as she is 
b Reu. 13. 1.  the Beast with seven heads and ten horns, resembling Hydra, which as soon as Hercules had smitten off one head, maintained the fight with another; so there may remain after those greater labours of others, something for us of succeeding times and ages to meet withal; Be it as it will, I shall not think my pains misspent, if whilst others have pared off an head, my weaker strookes force her but so far as to shrink in a horn.  
But to leave Prefaces, and come to the handling of the point. The words now read unto you, containing in them a matter of Faith and Belief, do present two things to our consideration; Viz. 

1. First the act of Faith, in these words, (tacitly implied) I believe.  
2. Secondly the object of this Faith, the Church, pourtraited and described by two properties. Viz. 

1. Sanctity in that it is called, Holy.  
2. Vnjuersalitie, in that it is styled Catholic.       

SECT. II. What act of Faith is implied in this Article of the Church, and the errors of Romish interpreters touching the same.  
COncerning the act of this faith (I believe) though it be not prefixed to the beginning of this Article, as neither to the rest which follow it; yet is it to be understood; the former (I believe) which precedes the Article of the holy Ghost, communicating itself to this and the subsequent, and that chiefly for two reasons.  
The one, to teach us, that the principal object of our faith is God himself, considered in unity of Essence, and Trinity of persons, and therefore to each of the persons, there is either a (Believe) prefixed, or the Particle (in) set before, to show that on them we are to build the certainty and assurance of our hope; but as for these Articles of the Church, the forgiveness of sins, the Resurrection of the body, and the like, they being creatures, are but the secondary objects of our Faith, not to be trusted upon immediately in themselves, but only under God and through God, and therefore have not a Credo a (Believe) a part to themselves, but prefixed to one of the persons (I believe in the holy Ghost.)  
The other, to set out and divide by this means unto every of the persons an appropriate and special work. For as God the father hath Creation in the Articles attributed unto him, and the Son Redemptionem merito, Redemption by the merit of his Death and Passion, unto him; so the holy Ghost by the (Believe) which is prefixed to his Article, and is in part of sense to be conveyed unto the following; hath the application of our redemption, Virtute & efficacia, by his virtue and efficacy appropriated unto him also; to wit, The sanctifying of the holy Catholic Church, the uniting of the members in a communion with their head, the infusion of justifying faith, which apprehends the remission of sins, the quickening of the dead in the Resurrection, and the conferring of life, both vitam gratiae, the life of Grace, and vitam gloriae, the life of glory in the world to come.  
So then, the act of faith (I believe) which belongs to this Article of the Church, is to be fetched and derived from the preceding Article of the holy Ghost. And yet because it descends not in the same form and garb of sense altogether, which it bears there, but something altered and transfigured, the question will be, what act it properly imports in this place towards his object, the holy Catholic Church.  
For the better resolving whereof we must necessarily call to mind that ancient distinction of 
c Aug. 181. serm. de temp. P. Lom. 3. sent. dist. 23. Thom. 2. 2. q. 2. art. 2.  Saint Austin's, and the Schoolmen touching Credere to believe: That there is 

1. Credere in aliquem, to believe and put one's trust & confidence in one.  
2. Credere alicui, to believe or give credit to one.  
3. Credere aliquem, to believe that one is in being, or to believe that one is after this or that manner in being.    
The first of these, which is Credere in aliquem, to believe in one, doth virtually indeed include the other two, for one cannot believe in one, but he must presuppose that he is, and that he is to be credited, but yet the proper object of it, is bonum, a thing as it is good, and the formal act which it exerciseth, is chiefly an act of the will; whereas the rest have rather for their object, verum a thing as it is true, and the act which they exercise, appertains only to the understanding; but with this difference, that when I say, credo alicui, I give credit to ones saying, the act of faith hath relation to his object, as to obiectum formale, a kind of principle for whose sake and cause I believe; but when I say, Credo aliquem, I believe that one is in being, the act of faith hath relation here to his object, as only to obiectum materiale, or quod, (as the Schoolmen speak) a conclusion, which it believes, and not as to the motive or inducement for which it believes.  
Now to bring this home to the mark; The Church of Rome and we do agree, that the (believe) which is prefixed to the Article of the holy Ghost, doth not communicate itself with the restriction caused by the Particle (in) to this Article of the Church and the rest which follow it (for that were to believe in them, and then no difference should be made between the Creator and the Creatures) but simply and without addition, and the question is, what act it now exerciseth; whether such an one as whereby our faith hath relation to the Catholic Church, as only to a material object or bare conclusion which it believes, by reason whereof we may say, Credo Ecclesiam, I believe that there is a Catholic Church, or moreover, such, as whereby our faith may reflect upon the Church as a formal object, cause and principle, for whose sake it yields credit and assent to all other things, so that thereby, though not expressly yet tacitly is implied, Credo Ecclesiae, I yield faith & belief To the Catholic Church?  
The 
d Greg. de Valent. in Thom. Tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 1. §. 6.  Jesuits, howsoever they would palliate the matter, and make show, that the Church is only a condition, and not a formal cause of our belief, yet others of them speak more plainly what the rest aim at; 
e Scot 3, sent. dist. 23. q. un. Gab. q. 2. Can. lib. 2. c. 7. Durand. 3. d. 24. q. 1 Et d. 25. q. 3.  For Scotus and Biel, to whom Canus joins Durand, do teach that our faith is last resolved into the authority of the Church; and 
f Staplet. cont. Whitak. de authorit. scripture. l. 1. c. 14. §. 6. & lib. 8. princip. doct. cap. 21.  Stapleton yet more punctually affirms, that this Article of the Church is inserted into the Creed, Tanquam medium credendi alia omnia, as the only means whereby we believe all other things, importing thus much, Credo illa omnia, quae Deus per Ecclesiam me docet, I believe all those things which God teacheth me by the Church. Whereby we may easily collect, that the Papists by this Credo Ecclesiam, I believe that there is a Church, do understand also, Credo Ecclesiae, I yield faith and belief to the Church.  
We for our parts do reverence the name and testimony of the Church, we acknowledge it to be of all humane the greatest, we confess moreover that the Catholic Church in the whole never hath erred, nor ever shall err in fundamental points, the providence of God sustaining it. In regard whereof, it hath the promise of our Saviour 
g Matth. 16. Joh. 16. 13. 1. Tim. 3. 15.  that the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it, that the spirit shall lead it into all truth, and it is called by the Apostle, the pillar of truth, as who would say, that it retaineth a saving profession of heavenly truth, and upholdeth the same against all the stratagems of Satan and his complices. But that it is not either in itself, or in this place to be taken, for the formal cause of our belief, that is, the foundation of our faith, upon whose credit and authority we are wholly to depend, I shall by these following reasons drawn out of the Creed itself easily make apparent.  
First by the Grammatical construction of this Credo, I believe, which when it imports to yield credit or assent to a thing, is not joined with an Accusative case, as here in the Creed, but with a Dative, whereas we say not, Credo Ecclesiae, but Credo Ecclesiam, to show that the Creed in this place implies veritatem in essendo, a belief of the Churches being; and not veritatem in significando, a belief of the Churches saying: 
h Staplet. lib. 8 princip. doct. cap. 21.  Stapleton notwithstanding would fain find an cuasion from this argument, saying, that to yield belief to the affirmations of the Church, is the Theological sense of the Creed, though it be not the Grammatical; much like as Bellarmine, who endeavouring to prove Purgatory from these words of Christ, Matth. 12. It shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come, 
i Respondeo non sequi secundum regulas dialecticorum, id quod inferimus ex verbis Domini sed tamen sequi secundum regulam prudentiae. Bell. lib. 1. de purgat. cap. 4.  Confesseth in the end, that it follows not indeed according to the rules of Logic, but only according to the rule of Prudence, as if forsooth the Arts were contradictory to Divinity and not subordinate unto it, and that one might not justly suspect something to be amiss in that house, where the Mistress and her hand maids are at variance.  
Secondly I argue from the word Catholic in the Creed, which by the 
k Precipuè vero in hoc articulo non praesides solum sed etiam qui parere debent significat. Catech. Roman. part. 1. cap. 10. §. 9 & 13.  Tridentine Catechisms own confession, signifying the Flock as well as the Pastors, and excluding no time, no persons, nor any condition of men, is not possible to be seen, nor capable to be heard, nor able to be consulted with, and therefore according to the sense which the Church believes in this place, it is absurd to conceive that these words Credo Ecclesiam, I believe that there is a Church, should be equivalent to these, Credo Ecclesiae, I yield faith and belief to the Church.  
But for brevity's sake, omitting other proofs as more behooveful for those which write large Tracts, than for myself, who desire to observe as near, as I can the laws of Catechising, my third reason shall be drawn from the word Church, which being by the Papists involved with so many contrarieties and contradictions, from it, I thus argue.  
That which is to be the foundation of my faith, and to which I am to yield assent in all things, that must be a thing certainly known and determined, what it is; It is not sufficient to be acquainted with the word, but we must also understand the thing; for faith is not verbal but real, neither are we conveied to heaven by bare sounds, as by Magic spells, but by truths and verities which are couched under them. But according to the Papists own assertions, this Church, which they here would make to be the foundation of their faith: and to which (say they) we are to yield assent in all things, is not to them a thing, as yet certainly known and determined what it is, which by these Gradations following I shall demonstrate.   

SECT. III. The Romanists distractions touching the Church, set down in eight Gradations.  
THe Church is divided by some of the Popish 
I silvest Prierias in Luth. tom. 1. pag. 159. fundam. 1.  Doctors into the Church, 

1. Essentially, which they make to be the Convocation of all that believe in Christ.  
2. Representative, which they say, are either the Bishops assembled in a general Council, as most do affirm, or the College of Cardinals, as Silvester Prierias imagines.  
3. Virtually, which they conceive to be the Pope.    

The first Gradation.  
1. NOw grant the Church to be such a Pillar of truth, that who so hears it cannot err, yet, First, it is not determined by Popish writers which is that Church, to whose Oracles and definitive sentence we are to listen.  
1. The 
m Cap. 24. q. 1. c. a recta. Quaero de qua Ecclesia intelligas quod hic dicitur, quod non possit errare? Resp. Ipsa congregatio fidelium hic dicitur Ecclesia.  Gloss upon Gratians Decrees, which contain the Popes own laws and constitutions, ask the question, what Church it is to be meant off, when it is said, that the Church cannot err, answers, that it is to be meant not of the Pope but of the Congregation of the faithful, that is the Church Essentially.  
2. But this opinion of the Church is generally by almost all the Papists rejected, for being the judge of Controversies, and consequently the foundation of our faith; the reasons are, First, 
n Neque tamen debere Pontificem fidelium omnium Sententiam inquirere; Hoc enim neque fieri potest, neque si possit expediret. Fere enim eiusmodi sunt quae in controversiam fidei adducuntur, ut captum vulgarium fidelium longe superent Valent. in Thom Tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 7. § 47.  because such a multitude dispersed far and wide throughout the face of the earth, cannot be so marshaled as to have their opinions calculated. Secondly, because the greater part of these are Lay-people, whose apprehensions oftentimes reach not unto the matters controverted. Lastly, 
o At posset tamen nihilominus errare maior illorum pars. Valent. 16. §. 45.  because there is no promise made either to the flock or to the Pastors and doctors of the Church, that a greater part of them shall not err, but only that all of them shall not err. Wherefore though the whole Church in this sense cannot err, errore personali, with a personal error, yet Bellarmine in his fourth Book De Rom. Pont. and fourth Chapter, tells us, that we must seek out for one that cannot err, errore iudicali, with a judicial error.  
Some therefore of the Papists are of opinion that the Church in this sense, as it is taken for the judge of controversies and foundation of faith is the Church, representative in a general Council of Bishops, no matter whether with the Pope or without him, because the Pope 
p Bell. lib. 2. de council. cap. 14. §. At alij auctores.  (say they) though he be the head of all Christians and all Churches in several, yet is he not of all the Church assembled in a Council together. And of this opinion, besides those which 
q Bellarm. 16. § Porro de proposita. Ocham in dialog. Dried. de deg. Eccles. lib. 4. c 4. Concil. Constant. session. 4. Basil. act. 2. & 18.  Bellarmine reckons up, as Cardinalis Cameracensis, joh. Gerson, jacobus Almanus, Nic. Cusanus, Panormitanus, Cardinalis Florentinus, and Abulensis, we may join, Ocham, Driedo, the Bishops assembled in the general Counsels of Constance and Basill, and in a word the University of Paris, as Coriolanus in his Preface to the Counsels Praelud. 5. doth confess.  
3. But many of the later Papists and especially 
r Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 7. §. 45.  the Jesuits, perceiving that the former opinion touching the Authority of a general Council above the Pope, (
s Ideo usque ad hanc diem, quaestio superest, etiam inter Catholicos, Bell. lib. 2. de council. c. 13.  howsoever the contrary be not yet determined) doth indeed overthrow the very faith of the Pope's Primacy, and finding (as they say) no promise made to a general Council without the Pope, for that the Church is to be built upon the rock; and not the rock upon the Church, they do concur, that the Church whose definitive sentence we are bound to believe, is nothing else but the Church virtually, that is the Pope, whereby they delude, and impose upon the world more than ever, for whilst they boast of the Church their Mother, they mean and intend nothing else thereby, but only the Pope their father.   

The second Gradation.  
But secondly, grant for the Church at the Jesuits request, that it be the Pope, upon which we are to rely, yet is it not agreed upon by them for the manner, whether it be the Pope alone, or whether the Pope in an assembly of the Church representative, and again whether this Church representative be the College of Cardinals, or whether a general Council.  
1. For no mean Writers amongst them do hold that the Pope may err if he define without a general Council, as besides many of the Parisiens 
t Alphons. a Cast. lib. 1. cont. haeres. c. 2. Adrian. 6. quest. de confirm. Vid. Bellarm. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. cap. 2  Alphonsus a Castro, and Pope Adrian the sixth do aver, that we may see not only private men, but also Popes themselves to have suspected the Papal authority in this point. And here though Bellarmine vaunts, that all Catholics do conspire in this, that when the Pope defines any thing in a general Council, he is then out of danger of erring, either in faith, or general precepts touching manners, yet it is not decided say 
u Resp. secundum Abb. in cap. nimis de praeb. in fi. quod non reperitur Specificè decisum, qui debeant Concilio universali inter esse, nec in text. nec in glossa. Gloss. i● institu. jur. Can. lib. 1. tit. 3. in princip.  Canonists, of whom this general Council is to consist. For as it is generally defined it imports 
x Instit. Canon. ibid. Bell. lib. 1. de council. c. 4.  an assembly of Bishops or holy Fathers, met together out of all quarters of the earth. But 
y Si omnes, nullum suit ergo hactenus concilium generale, neque videtur deinceps futurum, Paulo post. Sic in concilio Nicaeno primo ex occidente Solum fuerunt duo Presbyteri missi ex Italia, unus Episcopus ex Gallia, unus ex Hispania, unus ex Africa. In Concilio secundo & tertio, nulli fuerunt ex Occidente, Bellarm. li. 1. de council, c. 17.  Bellarmine in his first Book, De Concil. & 17. Cap. saith that such a general Council never was, nor possibly can be, since in the first general Council there were present but two Priests out of Italy, one Bishop out of France, one out of Spain, and one out of Africa. In the second and third there were none out of the West, and in the fourth, only the Legate of Leo, which delivered the consent of the other Bishops of Spain, France and Italy, who had before sent the same in Writing unto the Pope forth of their own Provinces. And on the contrary in Counsels celebrated in the West, few Eastern Bishops have been found. What then thinks the Cardinal best to be done? 
z Quatuor conditiones sufficere, Prima ut evocatio sit generalis, ita ut innotescat omnibus maioribus Christianis provinc iis. Bell. ibid.  Why, he tells us, it is enough if it be published and made known to all the greater Christian Provinces, neither matters it (say 
a Canus lib. 5. de loc. Theolog. c. 2. Turrecrem. lib. 3. de Eccles. c. 16. Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 7. §. 45. Vid. Bell, ut sup.  Canus, Turrecremata and Gregory de Valentia) that all be Cited, much less that all do Come; sufficient it is (saith Bellarmine) if no Bishop be excluded, if out of the greater part of Christian Provinces some do appear, and if the four chief Patriarches, which are beside the Bishop of Rome, be present, either by themselves or by their substitutes, though he thinks that this Condition be not very necessary at this day; considering they are either Heretics or Schismatics. So that here they commit main Contradictions. For first, they make a Council to be general, and to represent the whole Church, and yet to 
b Ex quo sequitur posse interdum concilia nationalia esse multo maiora generalibus, quoad numerum Episcoporum. Bellar. ibid.  consist oftentimes of fewer Bishops than a national, and those for substance but of one Angle of the World only, the rest either not cited, or not expected. Secondly, they judge it sufficient for the Patriarches which are absent, to depute others in their room, 
c Vid. Catalogue. ad fin. Concil. Trident.  the which was also practised by their Bishops at Trent, and yet (as 
d Quia ut Turrecremata lib. 3. de Eccles. c. 6. 8. & 38. & Canus lib. 5. de locis Theol. c. 5 recte docent, potestas ipsa Pontificis ad infallibiliter definiendum deligari aliis nequit. Valent. in Thom. ut sup.  Valentia and others well dispute in the Case of the Pope's Legates) the assistance of the holy Ghost is a thing personal, and cannot be delegated unto another. Wherefore to salve all sores with one plaster, 
e Quin etiam licet non convenerint in eiusmodi aliquibus Romanis Concilijs Episcopi variarum Provinciarum, tamen ratione Pontificiae authoritatis, quae universalis est, Vniversalia quodammodo dici possunt, ut notavit Turrecremata, lib. 3. de Eccles. cap. 3. Valent. in Thom. ibid. Vid. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Concil. cap. 5.  Valentia and Turrecremata, do affirm, that considering those difficulties, the Popes own authority (it being universal) is capable to make a particular Council to be Universal, as it hath done in some of the Roman. But see then a third contradiction, no less misse-shapen than the former, ascends the Stage; for whereas, 
f Bellar. lib. 1. de Concil. cap. 15. §. prior autem sententia refellenda nunc est, ac primo ratione desumpta ex Scriptura. Item, Fran. Longus a Coriol. praelud. 4. ad Sum. Concil.  Bellarmine in his first book de Council. and fifteenth Chapter, and others, and endeavour to prove jure divino, by the Law of God, that Bishops only have deciding voices in a general Council, and that the promise of delivering the truth is made to them only, as being the sole Pastors of the Church, 
g Ex privilegio autem & consuetudine, etiam Cardinals, Abbates, & Generales Ordinum licet Episcopi non sint. Bellar. lib. 1. de Concil. c. 15 Vid. subscript. ad fin. Concil. Trident.  they confess notwithstanding in their writings and declare by the practice of the Tridentine Council, that Cardinals, Abbots, and Generals of Orders have voices there, though not ordinary and by right, yet by privilege and custom, whence it follows, that either the Church hath that prerogative to assign and appoint whom the holy Ghost shall assist; or else that a major part in a Council may be made up by those to whom the holy Ghost hath passed no promise that they shall not err.  
2. These absurdities therefore considered, some of the Church of Rome do abase that high esteem which for a long time was conceived of general Counsels, making either their first original to be but humane, as 
h Albert. Pigh. lib. 6. coelest. Hierarch. cap. 1.  Albertus Pighius, or their use not absolutely necessary, as 
i Bellar. lib. 1. de Concil. c. 10.  Bellarmine and others. Hence it is that a second sort contracting the face of the Church into a lesser model, do teach that the Church here disputed of to be the judge of Controversies, is the Pope in the Church, represented, not by Bishops in a Council, but by the College of Cardinals in the Consistory, which opinion is recited by 
k Valent. to. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 7. §. 42.  Greg. de Valentia, in his Disputations upon Thomas.  
3. But because the College of Cardinals seems too compendious a walk wherein to impale the greatness of the Pope, and a general Council too uncertain a path to tread, therefore the greater cry rings this peal, that the Church we talk of is the Pope himself, whether with a Council or without a Council, whether with the Cardinals or without them, as in the next Gradation shall appear.   

The third Gradation.  
But thirdly; grant for the manner, that it be the Pope himself, which is this Church, whether with a Council or without a Council, whether with Cardinals or without them, yet is it not determined for the time when, it is the Pope.  
1. For some teach, that it is the Pope at all times, in that he cannot possibly be an Heretic or publish a falsehood, and of this opinion is Albertus Pighius, in his fourth book de Hierarch. eccles. cap. 8.  
2. But others hold, that it is the Pope then only, when he publisheth a doctrine under this condition, to be believed by the whole Church as an Article of Faith, and of this opinion is 
l Bell. lib. 4. de Rom. pont. c 2. Aquin. 22. q. 1. art. 10. Walden lib. 2. doct. fid. c. 47. &. 48. Turrecrem. lib. 2. Summae. c. 109. Dried. lib 4. de eccles. dog. c. 3. part. 3. Caiet. in opusc. de potest. Papae & council. c. 9 Hos. lib. 2. cont. Brent. de legit. iudic. Eck. lib. 1 de prim. Petri. joh. a Lou. de perpet. cathed Petri protect. cap 11. Pet. a Soto in Apolog. part. 1. c. 83. Can. lib. 6. c. 7. de locis. Valent. tom. 3. disp. 1. p. 7. q. 1. §. 40. Becan theol. Scholast.  Bellarmine himself, and by his account, Thom. Aquinas, Waldensis, joannes de Turrecremata, Driedo, Caietan, Hosius, Eckius, joannes a Louvain, Petrus a Soto, Melchior Canus, besides Valentia, Becanus, and the whole fraternity of Jesuits.   

The fourth Gradation.  
But fourthly, grant for the time, because haec est communissima opinio, this is the most common opinion of all Catholics (saith Bellarmine) that the Church is then the Pope, when he propounds a doctrine to be believed by all men as an article of Faith, yet is it not sufficiently resolved by them, for the matters, what matters they must be, in resolving whereof his proposition is infallible.  
1. For you have been hitherto made believe, that whensoever he buckles himself to define any thing to be believed as an Article of Faith, that then he is in his Chair, and then he cannot err, and amongst other points in which they say that we are to believe assuredly that the Pope cannot err, Bellarmine, and Greg. de Valentia reckon up 
m Bell de sanct. beat. lib. 1 cap. 12. Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q 1. p. 7. § 41.  the Canonization of Saints to be one, and that the 
n Bell. lib. 2. de Rom. Pont. cap 12. Valent. ut. sup. §. 37.  Pope is the successor of Peter to be another.  
2. But on the other side, it is first confessed by 
o Bell. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. cap. 2. Conueniunt omnes Catholici posse Pontificem etiam ut Pontificem & cum suo caetu confiliariorum, vel cum generali Concilio, errare in controversijs facti  Bellarmine, and as he saith by all Catholics, that the Pope may err even with a general Council at his elbow, in matters of fact which depend upon information, and the testimonies of men, and such is the question touching the legitimacy of the Pope, confessed to be by 
p Bell. lib. 4. de Ro. Pont. c. 12.  Bellarmine. And because the Canonization of Saints is of the same nature, 
q Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. punct. 7 §. 41. Non est autem ita prorsus ab Ecclesia tradita haec doctrina, qua ponimus Pontificem non posse etiam errare in Canonizatiorne Sanctorum.  Valentia confesseth that the Pope's infallibility therein is not so altogether delivered by the Church, and Canus in his fifth book de locis theolog: chap. 5. saith that it is not certain, de fide, as a matter of faith, neither will he pronounce him to be an Heretic who after so great a pother as hath been kept about Saint Francis, shall yet deny him to be in heaven. Secondly 
r Turrecrem. lib. 2. de eccles. cap. 112. ad arg 7. & lib. 4. part. 2. cap. 16. sylvest in Sum. Verbo. Opinio.  Turrecremata in his second book de Ecclesia, and Sylvester in his sums do grant that the Pope may so far as in him lies, endeàuour to establish his own heresy, and obtrude it upon the Church; nor do 
s Valent. ibid. Namsi tantummodo voluerunt Pontificem ut privatam Personam errare posse, aut etiam privatum aliquem suum errorem in fide manifestum, perverse velle Ecclesiae ipsi, adversus exploratam aliorum in eadem Ecclesia fidem obtrudere, rem illi opinantur non penitus improbabilem. Sic Bellarm. lib. 4 de Ro. Pont. c. 7.  Valentia and Bellarmine disallow their position under these two prouisoes, the one, that if he do it effectually, than the contrary hath been formerly determined by the Church; so that the Church can then receive no danger thereby of erring; the other, that if the contrary was never before determined, than the Pope may indeed attempt it, as did 
t Valent. ut sup. §. ad confirmationem. & Bell. l. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 14. Voluit autem lobannes questionem definire, etc.  joh. 22. in a question touching the state of the soul after death, but God in his providence will take such course, as that he never shall accomplish it.   

The fifth Gradation.  
But five, grant for the matters, that the Pope be this Church in determining any matter of Faith whatsoever, yet is it not resolved clearly by them for the person in general, whether the Pope upon which we are so to rely, be the present Pope, or whether the Pope's deceased.  
1. For the voice of the Jesuits speaks this, that it is the present Pope, nay 
u Valent. tom. 3. in Thom. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 7. §. 3.  Gregory de Valentia is so confident therein, that neque Scriptura sacra (saith he) neque etiam sola traditio (si ab ea separes praesentem in ecclesia authoritatem) est illa authoritas infallibilis, magistra fidei etc. that is, neither the Scriptures, nor yet traditions, if you separate from the present authority in the Church, is that infallible mistress of Faith & judge of controversies. So Bellarmine, 
x Bell. lib. 2. de Sacram. cap. 25  omnium conciliorum veterum, & omnium dogmatum firmitas pendet ab authoritate praesentis Ecclesiae, the strength of all ancient Counsels and all assertions, doth depend upon the authority of the present Church; and 
y Valent. ibid. §. 12. Sicut de authoritate scripturae, necesse est per aliquam aliam certam authoritatem constare, ita etiam de authoritate traditionis. Et Paulo post. Cum traditio fere scriptis doctorum conseruetur, questiones moveri possunt de sensu illius, &c Bell. ibid. Non enim habemus testimonium infallibile, quod Concilia illa fuerint & legitima fuerint, & hoc aut illud definierint, nisi quia Ecclesia quae nunc est, ita sentit & docet.  their reasons alleadgedare, for that without the authority of the present Church, we neither can be assured of the certainty of Traditions and Counsels, nor of the sense & meaning of them.  
2. But chose, the case being put (as you have heard) by Turrecremata and Silvester; that the Pope may do, what lies in him to propose an heresy, both 
z Valent. ibid. § 41. Bell. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. cap. 7.  Valentia and Bellarmine grant the position not to be impossible, upon condition that the heresy have been condemned formerly by the Church, for then according to their doctrine the Church is to examine the errors of the present Pope, by truths resolved by precedent Popes. So that if in all points necessary to salvation the truth have been already determined by former Popes (as in 1600. years' space they have had leisure enough to do it) the present Pope ceaseth to be a competent judge in such matters, he may err touching them he may do his best endeavour to obtrude upon the Church heresies concerning them, nay he stands himself to be arraigned at the bar, and Tribunal of his Clergy, whether he be Orthodox or no and that by the prescripts of his predecessors.   

The sixth Gradation.  
Sixthly, grant for the Person in general, that it be the present Pope which is the Church, in that no danger can accrue from the Pope's propounding an heresy, if that heresy have been formerly condemned, because 
a Bellar. lib. 2. de Rom. Pont. c. 30. §. Est ergo quinta opinio vera.  (as they say) the Church may then know him not to be their Shepherd, but a Wolf, yet is it not agreed or determined sufficiently amongst them for the means, how the Church may be able to judge or truly discern him to be such an one.  
1. For they which hold a General Council to 
Vid. Grad. 1.  be above the Pope, and that it cannot err, as Gerson, Cameracensis, and others above mentioned, do hold likewise that the Pope so erring may be judged both for his person and doctrine by the church in a General Council.  
2. But they which hold a General Council not to be above the Pope, but that wanting his company it may err even in matters of faith, as 
b Bellar. lib. 2. de Concil. cap. 11. Valent. ut sup. §. 45. Cajet. in Apolog. part. 2. c. 21. Turrecrem. lib. 3. c. 23.  Bellarmine, Valentia, Cajetan, Turrecremata, and others, these disable any for being competent judges of the Pope's doctrine. For howsoever they may pretend that the Council proceeding according to former Pope's declarations cannot err, yet because they teach that the certainty & sense of former Decrees depends upon the judgement of the present Pope, I cannot see what means may, according to their opinion, be afforded for the trial of the Pope's doctrine, if he should chance to err.   

The seventh Gradation.  
Seaventhly, grant for the means that the Church never need to pass verdict upon the Pope's doctrine, yet is it not agreed upon by them for the See, whether the Popedom be necessarily united to the See of Rome, so that the word Roman for aught they know assuredly, is not convertible with Catholic, but that he which brags he is a Roman Catholic to day, may, if the Pope should chance to die, prove a 
c Vid. Bellar. lib. 1. de Sacram. in Gen. c. 27.  Geneva Catholic tomorrow.  
1. For 
d Dom. a Soto in 4. sent. dist. 24.  Dominicus a Soto upon the fourth of the Senten. saith, that the Apostolical seat and power of universal Bishop is annexed to the Bishopric of Rome only jure Ecclesiastico, that is, not by the Law of God, but by the Church's constitution, so that by the authority of the Church, a Bishop of another See may be chosen Pope. And 
e Bellar. lib. 2. de Rom. Pont. c. 12. & lib. 4. c. 4. Quod non sit omnino de fide, a Romana Ecclesia non posse separari Apostolicam sedem, patet, quia neque Scriptura, neque Traditio habet sedem Apostolicam ita fixam esse Romae, ut inde auferri non possit.  Bellarmine grants, that it is no matter of faith, that the Apostolical seat may not be separated from the Church of Rome, forasmuch as neither Scripture nor Tradition do avouch it.  
2. But 
f Canus lib. 6. loc. Theol. c. 4, 5. & 6. Dried. lib. 4. de varijs dogmat. c. 4. part. 3. Turrecrem. lib. 2. de Eccles. c. 40. Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 7. §. 38.  Canus, Driedo, Turrecremata, and Gregory de Valentia, do hold the contrary, that the Bishop of Rome is Peter's successor, not only by the constitution of the Church, but also by the institution of Christ, though Valentia confesseth, varias hac de re doctorum sententias, that the opinions of the Doctors be diverse in this point.   

The eighth Gradation.  
EIghtly (for I shall not yet leave them) grant for the See that the Bishop of Rome be the ordained Successor of Peter by the institution of Christ, not only in the Popedom, but also in the particular See of Rome, yet is it not certain for the particular person of this or any present Pope, whether he be the true and lawful Bishop of Rome or no?  
1. For although 
g Valent. ib. §. 39 Atque ipse mihi persuadeo nunquam futurum, ut incapax eligatur, Deo id prohibente. Sed quia graues etiam doctores eiusmodi casum tanquam possibilem admittunt, etc.  Gregory de Valentia doth think that God's providence will always secure the Church of a lawful Pope. 2. Yet he confesseth that grave Doctors do admit the case as possible, and this according to them, may fall out diverse ways.  
First, if the Pope be promoted by Simony, and that this is not impossible, Aquinas affirms it, 2a. 2a. q. 100 where he saith, Papa potest incurrere vitium Simoniae sicut & quilibet alius, the Pope may incur the sin of Simony as well as any other. The which opinion Cajetan and others upon Thomas do follow, and it is moreover a clause in the Bull of Pope julius the second, That if any Pope happen to be chosen simoniacally, the same election shall be actually void, although inthronization, protraction of time and adoration of the Cardinals have established him in the See.  
Secondly, if the person elected by the Cardinals be not of the 
h Valent. ib. Mulier autem & infidelis Pontificatus minime sunt capaces.  masculine gender, as not a few of their own writers do affirm to have been sometimes experimented.  
Thirdly, 
i Valent. ib. Praeterea idem patet, si errore eligeretur infidelis quispiam non baptizatus. & Bellar. lib. 1. de Sacram. cap. 28.  if the party chosen Pope were never truly baptised, and of this by their Tenants one can never be assured. For the Papists do make the Sacraments to depend upon the intention of the Priests, and therefore Bellarmine in his third book de justif. and eight chapter, disputing against Ambrose Catharinus concerning the certainty of grace, Neque potest quis esse certus certitudine fidei, se percipere verum sacramentum, cum sacramentum sine intentione ministri non conficiatur, & intentionem alterius nemo videre potest; that is, no man can by the certainty of Faith be assured that he receives the true Sacrament, seeing that the Sacrament without the intention of the Priest is not made, and the intention of another doth no man see. To these 
k Turrecrem. lib. 4. p. 2. c. 20.  joh. de Turrecremata adds, that the Pope is deposed by God even for mental heresy, which we know, is a thing not liable to the sense.  
Whereby we may behold into what labyrinths the Papists do cast themselves by projecting their faith upon the Pope. For if he have intruded upon the Papacy by Simony, or be of the wrong Sex, or that the Priest at his baptism owing his parents a spite, or his wits being a woolgathering, intended not to baptise him; nay, put the case that he be rightly baptised, yet if the Bishop which conferred priesthood upon him, or those which baptised or ordained that Bishop miss their right intention, or farther, if any of his predecessor Popes which either made Laws for the form and manner of electing the Pope, or created so many Cardinals as might make a major or exclusive part, in the election of succeeding Popes, failed by reason of the forenamed Cases, or lastly (according to Turrecremata) if being truly elected, he chance to fall into mental heresy, then is not such a man by their own positions true Bishop of Rome, that supposed Bishop of Rome not lawful Pope, that Pope hath not the spirit of infallibility annexed unto him, and yet this may happen 
l Vid. supplicat. ad Imperat. Reg. Princip. etc.  (nay, by some it is proved to have happened) and yet the Church never the wiser.  
For howsoever 
m Francisc. Long. sum. Concil. praelud. 10. assert. 2.  Franciscus Longus in his late Sums of the Counsels, finding that their faith must needs stagger which depend altogether upon the infallibility of the Pope, if it may not be certainly known who is true and lawful Pope, makes this assertion, De fide est dicere, hunc numero Papam viz. Gregorium XV. esse verum successorem Petri & Christi Vicarium, that is, That it is an article of faith, to say, this very Pope in particular, to wit, Gregory the fifteenth, is the true successor of Peter and Vicar of Christ; yet by his leave, I should hardly grant that privilege to a privateman, which is not due to a General Council, and the Pope himself; or think it equity to impose any thing upon men to be believed as an article of faith, concerning which the Doctors of the Church, and the Bishops of Rome themselves may err and be deceived.  
Now, who knows not, that Pope Stephen the sixth in a Council of Bishops, did disannul the acts of Formosus his predecessor, and commanded those which had been ordained by him, to be reordayned again, as not acknowledging him for a true and lawful Pope. Again, how john the ninth disannulled the acts of Stephen the sixth, and approved the acts of Formosus; yet farther, how Sergius the third reestablished the acts of Stephen, and made void the acts of Formosus, and by consequence those of john, both which notwithstanding, all succeeding Popes have received as right and undoubted successors of Peter in the Papal Throne. Nor doth 
n Bellar. lib. 4 de Rom. Pont c. 12. Respondeo errasse Stephanum 6. & Sergium 3. said in quaestione facti non iuris. Et paulo post, Praecipua ergo quaestio fuit, an Formosus fuisset Papa legitimus, necne? in qualibus quaestionibus non negamus posse errare Pontifices, & de facto errasse Stephanum & Sergium.  Bellarmine otherwise defend these errors of the Popes, then by saying that they erred, in quaestione facti non iuris, in a question of fact not of right, and concludes, that the chief question was, whether Formosus were lawful Pope or no, in which kind of questions (saith he) we deny not but the Popes may err, and that Stephen & Sergius erred indeed. In like manner, did not john the three and twentieth sit five years as Bishop of Rome, and moreover in that rank which is esteemed by the Jesuits to be the right Line; yet 
o Bellar. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 14.  Bellarmine tells us, that he was not a certain and undoubted Pope, and therefore not needful to be defended, considering that there were three at the same time; neither could it be easily decided amongst so many learned Patroness which each of them had, whether of them was legitimate. And if it be true which the 
p Bellar. lib. 2. de Concil. c. 19  Cardinal tells us in another place, disputing the deposing of this john, that dubius Papa habetur pro non Papa; a doubtful Pope is held for no Pope, surely of whose election we may any way doubt, his decisions we may justly fear, and the validity of his pardons providently suspect.    

SECT. FOUR The palpable abuse offered the Laiety, by obtruding the Church unto them as their sovereign judge, displayed by the present practice of the Jesuits.  
NOw by this which hath been already spoken touching the Church and the Pope, may appear what sophistry is currant in the Romish pale, and what legerdemain, is practised in popish markets, whilst one thing is showed and another sold, the Title of the Church being used but as a cloud, wherein they carry poor people, whilst the mystery of iniquity more covertly works; which being revealed, it will appear that a lay-papist (whose faith is leapt up in the implicit belief of the Church) being defined, will prove no better, than a creature that believes he knows not what, and credits it he knows not why, resembling somewhat the patient which received this praecipe of his physician.  


q If thou wouldst be cured of I know not what disease, thou must take an herb I know not what, put it I know not where, and thou shalt be cured I know not when.  Si vis sanari de morbo nescio quali,  
Accipias herbam, qualem sed nescio vel quam,  
Ponas nescio ubi, sanabere nescio quande.   
To make this the more palpable and evident to the sense, I will wade a little into the practical part of this doctrine, and show to what miserable shifts the learnedst of the Romish side are driven, by undertaking the defence of the Church's preeminency in matters of faith.  
Imagine therefore, a poor papist thus tormented in his conscience. I am (saith he) enjoined by my Confessor, to ground my faith and belief upon the authority of the Church. Now, woe is me, what shall I do? Our Masters which should be lights to the blind, and inform us, which is that Church whereon we are to depend, they are distracted in their opinions, one saith a General Council, although without the Pope, another a Council and the Pope together, a third that it is the Pope alone, and surely there is but one Truth, besides which can there possibly be (in so important a business as this is) hope of salvation? Yes (will 
r Bellar. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 2. Non est haeretica, nam adhuc videmus ab Ecclesia tollerari, qui illam sententiam sequuntur etc.  Bellarmine resolve you) for though it be heretical not to believe the Church in gross, yet is it not heretical to mistake the acception of the Church, which is in effect to believe a false Church; for examples sake, To take a General Council without the Pope for the infallible Church, inasmuch as we see (saith he) these tolerated by the Church which defend that opinion, although it be erroneous and next to heresy. But alas (replies the poor man) now that I am come so far by your instructions, as to know that the Pope is the Church, which is a great deal farther than many of my ghostly Fathers are come, yet because I perceive a dissension amongst you, and that you which hold this Tenent are not agreed, when and in what matters, it is that the Pope cannot err, I find my conscience but a little eased by your resolution. No matter for the Pope's erring or not erring, will Bellarmine answer, for all Catholics 
s Bellar. ibid. Deinde omnes Catholici conveniunt, Pontificem solum, sive errare possit, sive non, esse ab omnibus fidelibus obedienter audiendum.  (saith he) do accord in this, that the Pope, whether he may err or no, is yet to be heard with all obedience. But what comfort (will the man object) can this be to me, that live haply in England or Spain, far remote from Rome; It is the present Pope (you say) upon whose judgement I am to depend, whom I am neither able to hear, neither doth your 
t Bellar. lib. 3. de verbo Dei, c. 5. § Si etiam intelligamus, etc.  Cardinalship think it necessary that he should be a preacher to be heard. Tush (saith 
u Bellar. ibid. Ne enim potest Pontifex omnibus ho. minibus concionari, nec est opus, cum sint in singulis Ecclesijs qui concionentur.  Bellarmine) it is not material that you hear the Pope, when as there be Preachers in your own Parish who may inform you. But (faith the man) there is no promise made, that whatsoever my Parochian teaches me, is forth with the true and undoubted doctrine of the Church, considering that he may err and be deceived. Nor have you (will Bellarmine tell you) more assurance of the Pope's word, if you and your whole Nation should travail to Rome to hear his resolution, 
x Bellar. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 14. §. Quadragessimus est Innocentius octaws.  For as much as when he teacheth not the whole Church, he is in as much possibility to err, as Innocent the eighth was, when he permitted the Norwegians to celebrate the Eucharist without wine. What then is to be done? 
y Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. quaest. 2. punct. 5. Nam ut infra quaest. 11. docebimus, quandoque potest contingere, ut quis teneatur conari ad eliciendum assensum fidei supernaturalé, circaid cuius contrarium reipsa est verum. Vt si, Verbi gratia, Synodus Episcopalis, aut etiam communis consensus plurium Theologorum statueret aliquam propositionem esse propositam ab Ecclesia ut de fide, atque adeo iuberetur quis praebere illi propositioni assensum fidei; tunc talis teneretur conari ad eliciendum talem assensum ex praecepto fidei, & tamen cum Synodus Episcopalis & plures etiam Theologi errare possint, posset contingere etc.  Greg. de Valentia in his third tome upon Thom. 1. Disp. makes this answer, That if you find but an Episcopal Synod, or the consent of diverse Divines only affirming such a doctrine to be the sentence of the Church, you are bound to believe it, though it be a lie. But is it not a sin (will the man reply) to believe a lie. 
z Gab. lib. 3. dist. 25. q. un. art. 1. Si quis ipse simplex & in eruditus audire praelatum suum praedicare aliquid contrarium fidei,— putans hoc a Praelato suo sic praedicatum esse creditum ab Ecclesia, talis non solum non peccaret, sed etiam sic credendo falsum, meretur.  Gabriel Biel, and 
a Tollet. de instruct. Sacerdot. lib. 4. cap. 3 §. 7. Rursus si rusticus circa articulos credat suo Episcopo proponen. ti aliquod dogma haereticum, meretur in credit dendo, licet sit error; quia tenetur credere, donec ei constet esse contra Ecclesiam.  Tolet the jesuit (to the end that we may see how both ancient and later Papists have been forced to the same straits) will answer, that if one hear his Bishop or Prelate preach contrary to the Faith, thinking that it is so believed by the Church, such an one shall not only not sin, but also in believing that falsehood, shall commit an act meritorious.  
It is no marvel then if the Romanists boast so much of visibility, considering that their faith is built five stories high; the Laities belief upon his Pastor, the Pastors upon the common opinion of neighbour Divines, or an Episcopal Synod, that Episcopal Synod upon the Church, the 
b Bell. lib. 3. de Verbo Dei. c. 10. §. Respondeo ad hoc argumentum.  Church upon the Pope; and the Pope upon Christ. Wherein how skilful Artisans soever the Jesuits are in other Trades, I know not, surely in architecture they show but little skill, having not provided any thing to supply the room of the Pope in the vacancy, so that for a year, and more, sometimes, the upper stories must like Esop's Towers be seen to hang in the air For howsoever 
c Vid. Bell. lib. 2. de council. cap. 14.  those which hold the supreme authority, to be subiectively and formally in the Church, and instrumentally only in the Pope, may supply the place of the dead Pope with a general Council, yet the Jesuits and others which with open cry, now adays condemn this opinion as false and next to heresy, may be challenged of more folly, than 
d Matth. 7. 26.  he which built his house upon the sand.   

SECT. V. The objections out of the Scriptures touching the Church's infallibility, answered.  
WHat now remains, but that we answer those arguments, whereon our adversaries seem to ground this supposed power of the Church, in challenging absolute belief to what she affirms.  
The first rank of arguments contains such places of Scripture as concern the privileges of the Church in general. As 1. Tim. 3. 15. That thou 
Rhem. Transl.  mayest know how thou oughtest to converse in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of truth. I answer that the Church here mentioned is not that Church, which the Papists make to be the judge of Controversies, that is, either the Church representative, which is a general Council, or the Church virtual, which they imagine to be the Pope; but the Church essential, in whole or part, which is the congregation of all faith full believers and therefore not to the purpose. For the Papists themselves do discharge it in this sense from the office of defining, because in part it is fallible, and in whole it is avast body, composed of parts far asunder, and wanting a speaker. And that the Church in this place is so taken, besides the confession of 
e Bell. lib. 3. de Eccles. cap. 14. Probatur haec veritas, primo de Ecclesia universa, ut continet omnes fideles, ac primum ex illo 1. Tim. 3. Eccle sia Dei est collumna & firmamentum veritatis.  Bellarmine who acknowledgeth it; the very circumstances of the place do carry it; for Saint Paul tells Timothy here, that he wrote this Epistle unto him, that he might know how to converse or behave himself in the house of God, which he expounding to be the Church, it must on necessity be construed of the Church essential as consisting of the faithful, in gross, unless one should be so absurd, as to say that Saint Paul delivered directions unto Timothy in this Epistle, how he should converse in a general Council, whereof there were none in three hundred years after, or else (which is more absurd) how he should behave himself discreetly and with circumspection in the Pope's belly.  
So Matth. 18. 16. And if he will not hear them, 
Rhem. Transl.  tell the Church; and if he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee, as the Heathen and the Publican. I answer, that here be three degrees of admonitions and reproofs set down by our Saviour, in case that one brother trespass against another. Viz. 

First corripiendus amore, he is to be reproved with love, verse 15. go and rebuke him between thee and him alone.  
Secondly corripiendus pudore, he is to be reproved with shame, verse 16. if he will not hear thee, join with thee besides one or two.  
Thirdly corripiendus timore, he is to be reproved with fear, verse 17. if he will not hear them, tell the Church.    
So that I willingly grant this honour to have been here given by our Saviour, to his Church, that the last resort and appeal upon earth should be made unto it; but you must remember withal how far this present case will besteed you. For he saith not absolutely, whatsoever thy brother shall say or believe, but if thy brother shall offend or trespass against thee, which (make the most we can) 
f Bell. lib. 3. de Verbo Dei. cap 5. Obseruandum hic quidem dominum loqui de iniurijs quas unus ab aliquo paitur.  is but quaestio facti non iuris, that is, a matter of fact, not of faith; it is only touching some personal and particular injuries, in deciding whereof, the Papists themselves deny not, but the Church may err. See above, Grad. 4.  
So Matth. 23. 2. Upon the chair of Moses have 
Rhem. Transl.  sitten the Scribes and the Pharisees, all things therefore whatsoever they shall say unto you, observe ye and do ye. I answer, that these words whatsoever they shall say unto you, are either to be taken conditionally, that is, with this provise; that they speak the truth, otherwise not and then advantageth it nothing the Papists cause; or else absolutely, and then our Saviour should contradict himself, who reproved the errors of the Scribes and pharisees, Math. 5. and forewarned his Disciples to take heed of their leaven. Matth. 16. 6. Besides, all precepts concern the time present or future, now 
g Bell. lib. 2. de council. c. 8. Respondemus Pontifices & Concilia judaeorum, non potuisse errare antequam Christus veniret, sed eo praesente potuisse. Sic. lib. 3. de Ecclecap. 17. §. ad tertium.  Bellarmine himself confesseth that the high-Priests Counsels of the jews were at this present, liable to error, nay farther, that it was prophesied that they should err and deny Christ. Isa. 6. Dan. 9 and therefore this could be no such absolute precept of obedience, as the Papists imagine, especially to those which now lived, when (by their own acknowledgement) such as possessed the Chair of Moses might err and be deceived.  
Other places are alleged by our Adversaries, which, because they run rather in the plural number with vos, you, arguing a democracy or aristocracy in the Church, then with te, thee, implying a Monarchy, (which to maintain the Jesuits bend all their forces) and for that they are to be understood primarily, totally, and absolutely of the Apostles, secondarily, partially, and conditionally only of other pastors, as john 16. The spirit of truth shall lead you into all truth, and Luke 10. He which heareth you, heareth me, therefore the weight and load is laid upon such particular promises, as our Saviour is thought to have made unto Peter in the Gospels. Where, to omit that of our Saviour to Peter, Luke 22. 32. I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not for which, the Cardinal cannot produce one ancient father (Popes excepted) to prove that our Saviour intended therein any special benefit to Peter's Successors, save only to his personal faith; as also that which he spoke unto him, john. 21. 15▪. Feed my Sheep, which of a precept, they would willingly change into a promise, contrary to the rules of Grammar or Logic, as if Saint Peter had made Popes of the inferior pastors of the Church and their Successors, when he bade them in like manner, Feed the flock of Christ, forasmuch as Christ's word is the same in his own mouth, and in the mouths of his Apostles. The main foundation whereon at length they pitch, is that of our Saviour's to Saint Peter, Matth. 16. 18. And I say unto thee, that thou art Peter; and upon this rock will I build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. In which words, they let not a tittle fall to the ground without admiration. Our Saviour (say they) speaks not as at other times, Simon thou son of jonas, this was his vulgar style, he brought with him from home, and it was of his father's bequeathing; nor as otherwhile he did by the surname imposed by himself pronouncing it barely without an Emphasis, only Peter and no more; but making as it were a preface to some new dignity which he purposed to bestow upon him, I say unto thee, thou art Peter, as who would say, thou art a rock, and upon thee, that rock I will build my Church. To give more colour to this interpretation, they will us to take notice how our Saviour spoke not in the Greek, but in the Syriack language, in which Cephas, the name of Peter, is the same in termination, sound and sense, that Peter is, implying both of them a rock. This is a fair gloss if they were Masters of Languages, and had commission to set forth new Calepines. But first, how chance that the Apostles which were better seen in the Syriac Tongue (it being their natural dialect) than you can be, understood not this elegancy, but did afterwards quarrel about precedency, not knowing that their Master had before past his promise thereof unto Saint Peter. How comes it that the Fathers picked not out your sense, who lived nearer the times of the Apostles, as S. Austen, Chrisostom, Hilary, Basill, Ambrose and others, by this rock, understood not Peter, but either his confession, or Christ whom he confessed, seeing this knowledge of the Church, how by Scripture it is built upon Peter, was as behooveful for them as for us. But secondly, what if our Saviour foreseeing that this Rock would be lapis offendiculi a stone of offence (and that some supposing Peter to be it, would at the sight thereof, no less then at Gorgon's head; be stupefied and turned into stones) hath in the Greek edition of Saint Matthewes Gospel (which themselves deny not to be authentical) distinguished between the one & the other by a threefold Grammatical difference? then we cannot without contempt offered to Grammarians admit it, or at least the syrup of blind obedience, swallow it down. Now our Saviour saith not, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thou art Peter and upon thee Peter, or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thou art a rock and upon thee, that rock I will build my Church, but with a triple mutation and alteration in the construction, first of the Person, thou Peter in the second, and that rock, in the third; secondly of the gender 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the masculine and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the feminine; thirdly of the sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which by the judgement of the most judicious Grecians signifies usually but a single stone and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which implies a Rock; so that as our Saviour in another place tells us, that God can of stones raise up children unto Abraham, in like manner he doth now by a nominal Metamorphosis convert a Son of Abraham into a stone, and a stone of his building too, yet he doth not by this Charter so enlarge his shoulders, as to serve for a rock, whereon to support his whole building. Say farther he did make him a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a derivative or denominative from that rock, and so (as the Fathers sometimes used the word) by a Metonymy term him a ministerial rock, by which he built his Church, yet did he not by this make him the principal rock, on which he built it. Grant again, that he was taught, that amongst the ministerial rocks, he should be Petra primaria, a prime rock, yet was he not made Petra solitaria, the only rock. In a word he might be admonished by this name, to be Petra devotione, a rock for devotion and zeal in adhering, and yet not promised to be petra virtute, a rock for virtue in sustaining. So that to conclude, there may be (as you see) in many things a likeness between petrus & petra, this rock and that stone, yet not so much, as that a reasonable lapidary may not distinguish them.   

SECT. VI The objection drawn from the question, how we may know the authority, sense, purity and perfection of the Scriptures, handled and resolved.  
THe last form of argumentation which they use, is drawn from the dependency, which (they say) the Scriptures have upon the Church, though not absolutely in themselves, yet in respect of us & our discerning of them. Whence they thus argue; if the testimony of the Church be not infallible, how shall we be resolved in these three interrogatives.  
The first is touching the Scriptures authority, whether they be the undoubted Word of God, or no?  
The second touching their interpretation, what their sense and meaning is?  
The third concerning their purity and perfection, whether they be perfect and entire, or maimed and corrupted?  
To prepare the way for the resolving of these questions; we are to note, that as to the right apprehension of an object by the sense, so to the due comprehension of the Scriptures by the soul, three things are ordinarily required. Viz. 

1. First, that the Scriptures be an object capable to be apprehended and discerned.  
2. Secondly, that there be organs and faculties, as those of the body, so these of the soul, fitly disposed and qualified to receive and discern that object.  
3. Thirdly, that there be a medium, that is, a middle instrument, or means, to convey, present, and unite the object to the organ.    
1. For the first, we agree, that to the end, the 
1. Object.  Scriptures should be an object capable to be seen and discerned, it is requisite, that they should be endowed with such remarkable properties and notes, as may distinguish them from other writings. For we take not to task to teach unreasonable creatures as did Saint Francis, neither do we dream of fanatical inspirations, imagining that God reveals things unto us over and beside the Word, but we invite you to look upon the marks and characters of the Word, and we say as Philip did to Nathaniel, joh. 1. Come and see. Now these properties, notes, and Characters, by which the Word of God becomes an object, distinct and capable to be known by us, are Either 

1. Outwardly accompanying it, as antiquity, miracles, fulfilling of prophecies, testimonies of Martyrs, and the like, which do only procure attention, and prepare men to believe probably, and with less difficulty.  
2. Inwardly imprinted in it, as first, the divine and spiritual matters therein contained, surpassing all humane wisdom, being things which neither eye hath seen, nor ear hath heard, neither have entered into the heart of man. Secondly, The form of the style, void of affectation, yet transcending in quickness, majesty, and fullness, the Masterpieces of the most polite and elaborat Orators. Thirdly, The sweet harmony and consent of parts with parts. Lastly, The efficacy and virtue which it hath to produce the love of God and our Enemies, to procure the peace of our Consciences, to alienate a man from the delights of the Flesh and the World, to make him rejoice in afflictions, to triumph over Death, all which do necessarily conclude the divine authority of the Scriptures, seeing nature itself is thereby vanquished, and a strong man cannot be bound, but by a stronger than himself.    
2. For the second, we agree, that seeing we are 
2. Organ and Faculties.  not able to discern the Scriptures, by any natural habit or inbred quality of our own, For the natural man (as the Apostle speaks) receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, because they are foolishness unto him, neither can he know them, for that they are spiritually discerned, 1. Cor. 2. that therefore we are enabled thereunto by faith, and by the inward enlightening and persuasion of God's Spirit. But I need not insist upon a point, which Bellarmine himself labours so to prove in his 6. lib. de Grat. & lib. Arbit. cap. 1. 2. and is confirmed by the Tridentine Council in the 6. Sess. & 3. Can.  
3. For the third, which is the medium; we are 
3. Medium.  not of Democritus opinion, who thought, that if the air (which conveys the beams of the Stars unto us) were away, one should be able to spy a pismire in heaven, but rather with Aristotle, we think we should then see nothing, according to that axiom in philosophy, In vacuo & per vacuum nulla fit visio; we conseut therefore, that God hath appointed an ordinary means to convey and present such celestial objects as the Word of God, to our view, and this ordinary means we say is the Church; to which we willingly attribute these two ordinary uses in that employment. Viz. 

1. First, of a witness, testifying the authority and sense of the Scriptures unto us, wherein for the effect, the papist and we differ but this, that we say it produceth a faith no more than humane; they, less than divine.  
2. Secondly, of God's instrument, by whose ministry in preaching & expounding the Scriptures, the holy Ghost begets a divine Faith and other spiritual graces within us.    
So that the question between us, is not whether 
Stat. quaest.  we are to exclude the ordinary ministry of the Church testifying and propounding the Scriptures unto us, for this, we do not: Nor on the other side, Whether the authority of the Church, be a sufficient argument of itself, to produce a divine assent unto the same, for this the learneder sort of them (as anon you shall hear) will not affirm; But this, Whether to the end that we may by the assistance of God's Spirit, and those inward notes and properties found in the Scriptures, discern the Word propounded by the Church unto us, to be the Word of God, infallibility be a requisite condition in the Propounder? As if in plainer terms one should say, whether to the end, that I may by the visage, gesture, and garments discern my friend approaching towards me, to be such an one, it be needful that the air which conveys those forms to my eye, be never and at no time capable by reason of mists or other accidents, to represent false and deceitful forms? Or this, whether to the end, that a Goldsmith may by his touchstone discern a piece of gold delivered him, to be good and currant, it be required, that the party's credit which sells it him should be unquestionable? This is that which in effect they affirm, and this we deny.  
To resolve therefore the difficulty; We grant, 
resolute.  that where the Propounder is the principal, final, and only cause, for whose sake we believe a thing, there, if the Propounder be liable to error and deceit, a firm and undoubted belief of such a thing cannot be had. As for example, if one only Traveller have been in the Indies, and brings relation by word of mouth, touching the commodities of the Country, and of the privilege of traffic which the King thereof tenders to our countrymen, in this case, if the Relators credit be suspicious, it were dangerous to build upon his report, because here he is the principal and only cause, upon whose sole affirmation we can finally rest. In like manner, if two persons only be present at the death of a friend, and depose, that in this or that manner he bestowed legacies: in this case, if they be of doubtful repute, it will be hard to determine positively, what is the truth, because that here they are the principal and only witnesses, and there are no other authentic proofs whereby their depositions may be examined. But where the Propounder is only the instrument, by whose means, we are brought to see proofs of an higher nature, and by whose ministry, arguments of greater importance do display themselves; (as if the Traveller shall bring letters of Credence, under the Hand & Seal of the Prince confirming his Relation, or if the persons present at the death of their friend, shall, besides their own testimony, produce a formal will, subscribed by the hands of lawful witnesses, and strengthened by an authentic seal) here the possibility of erring in the Propounder, takes not away the certainty of the things propounded by him, because, in this case, the same may be supplied by other more sufficient demonstrations, upon which, as the principal causes of our belief, we may finally rest. Now to apply this to the Church. I say, that if the Church were the principal or only Cause, for whose authority, our faith doth finally assent to the mysteries propounded by her, then and upon this supposition, it were to be acknowledged, that if the Church might err, and that her testimony were not infallible, the assured truth of things, so assented unto could not be attained by us. But we say, that in working an undoubted assent unto the mysteries propounded and delivered unto us, the Church, though it be one cause, to wit, an inductive or preparative, 
h Sed non propterea ultima fidei nostrae ratio & suprema causa haec vox & determinatio Ecclesiae est. Quia tota haec vox, tota haec determinatio, una tantum causa fidei nostrae est, eaque minus principalis. Stapleton. triplic. adversus Whitak. cap. 16.  yet is it not the only, no nor the principal or final upon which we lastly depend. The principal and final causes, for whose sake we firmly believe those truths which the Church propounds unto us touching the Scriptures, are two. The one the Word of God itself with the properties, notes, and characters (above mentioned) imprinted in the letter thereof, which serve as the hand-writing and Deed of the great Maker, produced by the Church in confirmation of what she utters. The other, the inward testimony of God's Spirit, enlightening the eyes of our understanding to discern the Scriptures, by those notes, and persuading us what we discern, steadfastly to believe, serving as a seal which confirms to the consciences of the Elect, the Deed to be lawful and authentic.  
The former (which is the Word itself and the notes thereof) cannot be denied by an ingenious Papist to bee there found; for howsoever some of them, by a just judgement of God for being injurious to the Scriptures, in branding them with obscurity, imperfection, etc. have been so blinded by the Prince of darkness, that (setting aside the judgement of the Church) no reason to them hath appeared, wherefore Aesop's Fables should not as well as the Scriptures themselves be thought Canonical, yet others, as 
i Bellar. lib. 1. de verbo Dei, c. 2. Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. Gretserus' tract. de agnoscendis Scripturis Canonicis, cap. 4.  Bellarmine, Greg. de Valentia, Gretser, etc. do acknowledge these distinguishing notes to be in their kind argumentative, and to shine in them, as the excellency of the Doctrine, concord, efficacy, and the like, whereby may be verified of the whole Book of God, what the Officers sent by the pharisees and Priests, said of our Saviour, joh. 7. Never man spoke like this man.  
Nor is the later (which is the inward testimony of the Spirit) denied by the learneder sort of Papists to possess another chief place in the discovery of the Scriptures. For although in popular air they seem to vent the contrary, yet when they are called to give a more sober account in writing, they utter the same in effect which we do. 
k Staplet. lib. 5 de authoritate Script. c. 12. §. 11. Vt denique intelligas Ecclesiam quidem ratione sui ministerij & magisterij a Deo accepti, facere ut credamus, formalem tamen rationem, non esse cur credamus, sed Deum intus loquentem, suoque divino spiritu omnem nobis veritatem intus testificantem. Staplet, ibid. §. 12. In hoc quidem judicio acquiescit fidelis animus, sed non per hoc iudicium, sed per internam divini Spiritus gratiam. Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. punct. 1. §. 7.  The Church (saith Stapleton) by reason of her ministry and mastership received of God, doth make us to believe, but yet the formal reason wherefore we believe, is not the Church, but God speaking within us. Again, The mind of a faithful believer (saith he) doth rest in the judgement, but not by the judgement of the Church, but by the inward grace of the holy Spirit. So Gregory de Valentia; The infallible proposition of the Church (saith he) is as obscure to us, as any other article of faith whatsoever, alleging out of Canus, That if a man should ask wherefore he believes the Trinity, he should answer incommodiously, in saying, because the Church doth infallibly propose it. And Canus 
l Can. loc. lib. 2. c. 7. etc. 8. Vltima fidei resolutio, non fit in Ecclesiae testimonium, sed in causam interiorem efficientem, hoc est, in Deum intus monentem ad credendum.  gives the reason, Because the last resolution of faith (saith he) is not into the testimony of the Church, but into a more inward efficient cause, that is, into God inwardly moving us to believe. 
m Becan, Theol. Scholast. part. 2. tom. poster. tract. 1. c. 8. q. 8.  If therefore (adds Becanus) you be asked, wherefore you believe, that God revealed such a thing, and you answer, that you believe it for the authority of the Church; it is not the assent of a theological faith, but of some other faith of an inferior rank. Many more testimonies might be added, it being a firm position amongst the Schoolmen, that principles of faith, such as the Scriptures are, cannot be believed (as they ought to be) but by infused faith. But I will conclude where: I began, with our Countryman Stapleton, because he lays down the very fundamental reason upon which this Doctrine is grounded. 
n Staplet. lib. 8 princip. c. 20. Fides eadem est in reliqua tota Ecclesia, quae est in Prophetis, Apostolis, etc.  There is the same faith (saith he) in the rest of the whole Church, which is in the Prophets, Apostles, and all those who are immediately taught of God. They have one and the same formal reason of their act of believing. But the faith of the Apostles and Prophets which was by immediate revelation, was lastly resolved into God alone the Revealer, and did end and rest upon him only, as the supreme and last cause of believing, therefore the faith of the rest of the whole Church, hath the same formal object.  
These foundations being laid, it shall not be hard to shape distinct answers to the several questions above propounded. To the first, if the testimony of the Church be not infallible, how shall we undoubtedly know the Scriptures to be the Word of God?  
I answer, that we may know them to be so, partly, by the light of the Word, that is, the divine notes and characters therein imprinted, and partly by the enlightening and persuading grace of God's Spirit, enabling us to see, and moving us to believe what we see.  
Now on the contrary, I demand of them; (If one cannot be assured of the certainty of the Scriptures propounded by the Church, unless the proposition of the Church be infallible) how the lay Papists in this Land do know any article of faith to be infallibly true, considering that few or none of them ever heard the voice of that Church, which they suppose to be infallible; (that Church being according to their supposition, either the Pope in his chair, or a General Council) but are engaged altogether to the reports of particular Priests and Jesuits, whom none will exempt from being subject to error and deceit.  
2. To the second question, if the exposition of the Church be not infallible, how do we know the sense and meaning of the Scriptures?  
I answer, that although all places of the Scripture are not alike perspicuous, as all are not alike necessary to salvation, yet for the opening of the sense thereof, so far as is behooveful for his Church, God is the best Interpreter of his own meaning, expounding outwardly one place of the Word by another, & inwardly both opening ones eyes to discern, and inclining one's heart to assent unto the truth. As for those which cannot see but with the Pope's spectacles, and pretend the Scriptures to be every where throughout so overshadowed with a mist, that nothing presents itself clearly to their view, I wonder the less at them, because their blindness is such, that they cannot see to serve God, without burning Tapers and lighted Candles at noon day.  
Now, on the other side I demand of them, if one cannot know the certain meaning and sense of the Scriptures, unless the exposition of the Church be infallible.  
1. Wherefore hath not the Church of Rome all this while published a set interpretation upon any one book of the Bible, considering, that they say, it is so necessary, and that the Pope's Commentaries upon it, have for so many Marts been expected?  
2. How a man which cannot discern the sense of the Scriptures in plain places, shall be able to shun the process in infinitum, and not run his wits out of breath, considering that according to the Papists themselves, the voice of the Church uttered in former Decrees, requires the exposition of the present Church, meaning the Pope, and that the Church's Canons are inuoled with no less, if not more perplexeties than the Scriptures? I could instance in ancient Counsels, as the Nicen, and ask whether the sixth Canon, wherein these words be, Quoniam talis est Episcopo Romano consuetudo, are to be understood, according to the opinion of Ruffinus, or Balsamon, or Caranza, or Bellarmine, which four are recounted by Bellarmine lib, 2. de Rom. Pont. c. 13. But because I desire to confine myself to that which is pure Roman, let's cast the water of the Tridentine Synagogue, and see whether that runs so clear as they pretend. I ask therefore, first, touching the Canonical books, the number and names whereof the Fathers therein assembled, were so careful to set down, Sess. 4. whether that which we call the Apocrypha. Esther, be there canonised, as Bellarmine affirmeth, lib. 1. de verbo Dei c. 7. or whether that book and those which are called additaments, be there excluded from the Canon, as Sixtus Senensis in lib. 1. & 8. biblioth. sanct. doth avouch? Secondly, for the intention required by the Council in him which administers the Sacrament, Sess. 7. I ask, whether the words of the Council, be to be understood according to Catharinus opinion, in opusc. or Bellarmine's lib. 1. de Sacram. in Gen. c. 27. Thirdly, I ask how it comes to pass, that Priscian and our old Grammarians will not serve to construe the text of the Council (if the Roman Church can indite with so perspicuous a style) but that Sess. 7. Can. 8. Opus operatum, must, contrary to the Grammar rules (as Bellarmine confesseth, lib. 2. de Sacram. c. 1.) be understood passively. And that in the sixth Sess. cap. 5. de iustif. it is said, Neque homo ipse nihil omninò agate, wherein 
Vid. hist. Concil. Trident. lib. 2.  contrary to Grammar, are two negatives expressed, which cannot be resolved into an affirmative. Fourthly, if the interpretations of the Church are so facile and easy, whether was the Council of Trents meaning concerning Original sin and justification, the same that 
o Vide, Dominici a Soto, de Natura & Gratia libros tres, ad sanctum Concilium Tridentinum. Item, Apologiam Dom. a Soto, qua Ambrosio Catharino de Certitudine gratiae respondet. Item, Expurgationem Ambros. Catharini, adversus Apologiam Domin. a Soto. Denique, confirmationem defensionis Catholicorum pro possibili certitudine gratiae, Amb. Catharini ad Dominicum Soto.  Dominicus a Soto affirms it to be, or that which Ambrose Catharinus attributes unto it, seeing both were present at the drawing of the Canons, both presented books for proof of their opinions to the Council (which are now extant) and the 
p Hist. Concil. Trident. lib. 2.  Council itself being appealed unto, could not decide the Controversy, nor agree what was her own meaning therein.  
To the third question, if the tradition of the Church be not infallible, how shall we know, whether the Scriptures be perfect and entire, or maimed and corrupted? I answer, that there is a double perfection of the Scriptures, the one of integral parts, which appertains to the perfection of each book, Chapter, and verse in particular, the other of essential parts, which pertain to the perfection of saving knowledge. If the question be of the integral purity and perfection, how I know, that there be copies of the Scriptures in the world, by judicious comparing whereof, light may be given to correct all manifest errors and defects crept into the Text, whether by negligence or ignorance of the transcribers or otherwise, I answer, that I am assured thereof, by the promises of God in general to establish a perpetuity of saving knowledge and true belief in his Church, and consequently, by that firm foundation of his providence, which appointing the end, to wit eternal life, will never suffer the means conducting thereunto, either to perish, or being disparaged by corruptions, to become fruitless. Neither doth 
q Greg. de Valent. in Tho. tom. 3. disp. 1. qu. 1. p. 7. §. 41. §. Respondeo ad hoc argumentum. & §. 43. §. Ad primumigitur.  Greg de Valentia run for farther proofs to secure the Pope's legitimacy, and salve the danger to which the Latin vulgar edition of the Bible is liable by often impressions, than this providence of God. But if the question be of the essential purity and perfection of the Scriptures, how one may be assured, that so much as contains points necessary to salvation, is preserved perfect and entire in them; I answer, that to resolve one's self herein, he hath (besides the general promises of God, and his never failing providence) an experimental knowledge, also springing from that amplitude of comfort and consolation, which Gods Spirit effects by the Scriptures in the hearts and consciences of true believers. For such is the union and coherence of points necessary to salvation on with the other, that one works not his proper effect, where the other is not, at least in some reasonable and convenient measure known and believed.  
Now on the contrary, I demand of them, (if we cannot be assured of the purity and perfection of the Scriptures, unless the Tradition of the Church concerning it, be infallible) how a man can ever be resolved thereof from the Church of Rome?  
Which, first could neither heretofore preserve her Latin vulgar editions of the Bible, (which she prefers before the original) from manifest Corruptions, as may appear by the corrections of Origen and Hierom, 
r Sixtus Senensis. Bibliot. lib. 8. pag. penult. De erroribus vero quos Hieronimus in veteri translatione annotavit, & recentiores in hac nova editione pariter annotarunt, ingenue fatemur & nos multos errores ab Hieronimo emendatos, in veteri traductione, & similiter in hac nostra nova editione nonnullas inveniri mendas, solaecismos, barbarismos, hyperbata, & multa parum accomodate versa, & minus Latine expressa, obscure & ambigue interpretata, itemque nonnulla superaddita, aliqua omissa, quaedam transposita, immutata, ac vitio Scriptorum depravata, quae Sanctis Pagninus, Th. Caietanus, Franciscus Forerius, & Hieronimus Oleastrius, viri ex Dominicano ordine eruditissimi interpretationibus & explanationibus suis indi carunt.  nor at this day hath been able to Canonize any edition, without permitting faults, solecisms, Barbarismes, Misinterpretations, Ambiguities, Additions, Subtractions, Transpositions, Immutations, Depravations and the like, which are confessed by Pagnine, Caietan, Forerius, Oleaster, Sixtus Senensis, 
s Bellarm. lib. 2. de Verbo Dei. cap. 2. §. Dices si ita est.  Bellarmine and others, to be found in their newest and most approved Bibles.  
Secondly, which disparageth the Church's fidelity and care, teaching that it hath lost many books of the Old Testament, of which 
t Becan theol. scholast. tom. post. part. 2. tract. 1. q. 7.  Becanus reckons up particularly no fewer than 18. theol. scholast. part. 2.  
Thirdly, which actually hath lost many articles of faith, heretofore defined & declared by it, as 
u Valent. in Thom. tom 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 7. §. 12. Postremo multae in Ecclesia varijs temporibus definitae ac declaratae sunt senten. tiae, fidei, de quibus non ex. tet usque adeo expressa traditio.  Valentia grants, Tom. 3. in Thom. disp. 1.  
All arguing her to be an incompetent Mistress of other men's purses, which hath been so negligent a guardian of her own.  
So then let us cast up the reckoning, and see what small advantage the Papists have of us in these questions of the Scripture: We run on thus far together, that to a distinct resolution of them, there is required the testimony of the word speaking outwardly to our ears, the testimony of the spirit speaking inwardly to our hearts, and the testimony of the Church preparing the way by her message for the other two. The combat stands chiefly in this, that they believe the message, because they think the Messenger cannot lie, we believe the message not because we think the Messenger cannot lie, but because he which sent him speaks the same by his deed and seal; nay farther, comes in person along with him, and by a double affirmation, the one of his word, the other of his spirit, confirms the Messengers saying in this particular to be true; so that in fine, their lusty brags obtain but this issue, that we believe the man for the master's sake, they believe the master for the man's sake.   

SECT. VII. The new sleights and devices, which the Jesuits use in enforcing these arguments touching the Church and the Scriptures.  
But see, what the Lion's paws can effect, they think to compass by the Fox's wiles, and therefore they have instilled a method of disputing into the common people, which howsoever it will not hold water in the schools, yet because it haply passeth the throng in the streets, it shall not be amiss to discover some tricks and devices of theirs in this kind, that you may see how they detain the truth in unjustice (as the Apostle speaks) and that the penury to which they are driven, is such, that now their chiefest war is but defensive.  
The first trick of theirs is, to teach the people to require us to prove and show by evident demonstration, the Scriptures to be the Word of God, and that to those which believe them not. As if one should say; Imagine that I gave no credit to the Scriptures, how will you (which depend not finally upon the authority of the Church) make it appear by evident convincing proofs and reasons unto me, that they are the Word of God? I could retort, and how will you convince me by the authority of the Church that they are the Word of God, if first I believe them not to be so; considering that your own Divines, 
* Bel. lib. 4. de Eccles. cap. 3. Dicimus ergo notas Ecclesiae quas adferemus, non facere evidentiam veritatis simphciter— apud eos autem qui admittunt Scripturas divinas &c: faciunt etiam evidentiam veritatis. Tametsi enim articularum fidei veritas non potest nobis esse evidens absolute tamen potest esse evidens ex hypothesi, id est, supposita veritate Scrip turarum.  Bellarmine by name lib. 4. de Eccles. cap. 3. confess, that one cannot evidently demonstrate the true Church by any notes, to be the true one, but to such an one as first believes and receives the Scriptures, because the notes of the Church are from thence to be taken and deduced. But by this question you may perceive, that Popery is a disease working upon corrupt humours, and cannot domineer, but there, where the flesh and humane reason wear the breeches. First they require one to prove that by such evidence as it is not capable of. For principles of faith (such as the Scriptures are) are apprehended by faith, and this faith, howsoever it bringeth with it certainty, yet it doth not clearness, Whether you reflect upon the matter, which are things not seen, Heb. 11. or the manner, it being through a glass, darkly. 1. Cor. 13. Again, that certainty being inward, it serves but for the satisfying of one's self, not for the conviction of others. Secondly they bid us prove it to one, who by Aristotle's 
Aristot. 1. Eth. cap. 3.  rule, in a like case, should be excluded from being partaker of so high mysteries, in that he is not idoneus auditor, that is, one that by reason of unbelief is not capable of the right & proper proofs, which is as much, as if one should dispute of colours with a blind man. Against which fopperies, Thomas Aquinas lays down two remarkable propositions. 1. part. q. ●. art. 8. The one, that Divinity is not argumentative, to prove her principles, but only to prove her conclusions. The other, that against one which absolutely denies her principles, and namely the Scriptures, one cannot proceed probando, but soluendo, that is, not by proving the truth thereof, but by dissolving the reasons brought to the contrary.  
Their second device is, to question us not only how we prove the Scriptures in general to be the Word of God, but also in special, how we know the Gospel of Saint Matthew to be the Gospel of Saint Matthew? how we are assured of the sense and interpretation of such a particular verse? how we rest satisfied that this or that syllable is correctly imprinted, or that haply not understanding Hebrew and Greek, one may be confident that our translation accords throughout with the original? This form of questioning might indeed carry some credit with it, if we either dreamt of a perfection of knowledge in this life, or conceived a parity of gifts in all men for the discerning of this Word, or an equality of necessity in the things therein contained. But forasmuch as we acknowledge neither perfection nor parity of gifts to be found here, nor lastly an equality of necessity in the things; to require a distinct answer to all such questions from all men, is most unjust, and altogether besides the purpose. For as touching perfection, we confess with the Apostle, that we know but in part, and prophesy but in part, 1. Cor. 13. 9 And as for equality, as we ascribe not that degree of judgement to any one member which we do to the whole Church, so we make the skill of discerning to differ in the members, and that in a threefold respect.  
1. First, in respect of the grace of God enlightening us, which is given unto every one, not equally, but according to the measure of the gift of Christ. Ephes. 4. 7.  
2. Secondly, in respect of the means wherewith the holy Ghost cooperates, which are hearing of the Word of God preached, meditation, study, skill of tongues and the like, which are diverse in all. For we rely not (as I said before) upon special and immediate revelations, as the Prophets and Apostles did, but on the grace of God concurring with our meditations, and the use of the public means.  
3. Thirdly, in respect of the matters contained in the Scriptures, whereof all display not themselves alike, being not all equally and alike necessary to salvation, some imposing an absolute necessity of belief, others only a conditional, that is, a preparation of mind to give fuller credence, when it shall please God farther to enlighten one; as in the question of the authority of the Scriptures, the knowing of the Instrument or Penman, whether it be Saint Matthew or Saint Paul, is not simply so requisite, as to know the principal Author which is God, nor to determine punctually of the words so obliging, as to believe the sense; nor again of the sense of some places and texts as of other; all are to strive unto perfection, but as the difference is in the gifts of art, grace, and nature, so shall the difference be in the measure of the knowledge of all or some.  
The third trick and sleight of theirs, which they put upon the people in this kind, is, that bidding them to urge us to prove the Scriptures to be the Word of God, or that they are clear and easy in points necessary to salvation, and knowing that the chief proofs upon which we rest, are emboweled in the very body of the Text itself; first, they forbid the lay people to read the Scriptures, unless they obtain special licence from the Bishop or Inquisitor to do it; as appears by the fourth rule of prohibited books, which is at the end of the Tridentine Council. And the granting of these licences, is now again taken away by Clement the eighth as may be seen in his Index of prohibited books, printed at Paris by Laurentius Sonius, and cited also by justinianus a Priest of the Congregation of the Oratory, lib. 1. de Scriptura, cap. 9 Secondly, because they know that some people will be itching (notwithstanding this prohibition) to look into the Scriptures, and to see whether matters be so as we affirm them to be, therefore they cry down our Bibles, and present a Bible of their own translation, which (to argue the obscurity of the Scriptures) they patch up with such gallimaufry and inkhorn terms, that an ordinary man may be confounded with the strangeness of the words. As in the old Testament published by the College of Douai; in stead of Foreskin, they put Prepuce; Gen. 17. for Passeover, Phase; for unleavened bread, Azims, Exod. 12. for high places, Excelses, 2. King. 15. for the holy of holiest, Sancta Sanctorum, 1. Chr. 6. Nor are they less ridiculous in the new Testament, set forth by the College of Rheims, where you have these English words piping hot out of the Pope's mint, Depositum, Exinanited, Parasceve, Didragmes, Neophyte, Gratis, with the spirituals of wickedness in the Celestials, and many more, labouring by what means they can (as our learned Fulke shows in his Preface to that Testament) to suppress the light of Truth under one pretence or another.  
Their fourth stratagem is, that after their lay disciples have given so loud a defiance to our Cause, as may make simple standers by conceive, so great a cry must needs carry some wool with it; (then if by chance any of the company undertake to answer them) to fetch them off again with advantage, by making it known aforehand unto their Pupils, that howsoever they may brag, it is forbidden yet unto a lay man under pain of excommunication, to dispute of matters of faith, which constitution is in the Pope's own Decretals, and 
De haereticis, cap. Quicunque, in 6. Inhibemus quoque ne cuiquam laicae personae liceat publice vel privatim de fide Catholica disputare, Qui vero contra fecerit, excommunicationis laqueo innodetur. Eman. Sa, Aphorism. voce, fides, §. 3. Prohibitum laico sub excommunicationis ferenda paena, disputare de fide, cap. 1. lib. 6. de haeret. quam prohibitionem si sciens contra faciat, peccabit mortaliter.  Emanuel Sa hath it in his Aphorisms, voce, fides. By which means, they both bar us, after just provocation, to inform and satisfy their adherents, and with all cherish presumption in their followers, as not being silenced by the weakness of their cause, but by the command of their Superiors.  
Their fifth device is, that if notwithstanding the prohibition to dispute, above mentioned, some of their lay Auditors should be so hardy as to venture a skirmish, then to divert them from reasoning out of the Scriptures, lest the light thereof should some manner of way or other display itself, they busy their heads with questions above their capacity, as where was our Church before Luther, what the exposition of the Doctors in all Ages, what the Doctrine of the Fathers, Counsels, and Schoolmen? which is the common Theme of this Age; hoping that either a few old wife's fables or fragments of antiquity, shall serve to puff up their men with conceit of victory; where they find not equal opponents; or where they do, yet they shall not abate thereby any whit of their courage, as being for want of arts and languages, unable to see the point of the weapon which is darted at them, I mean the truth of those things which are alleged.  
Their sixth device is, that if any of their laiety, notwithstanding those prohibitions and this diversion, will presume so far upon the indulgency of their ghostly Fathers, as to hazard a dispute out of the Bible, yet to do it with advantage enough on their side, they counsel him to make no thrusts, but to lie only upon the ward, and therein to enjoin us, to show the articles of Faith established in our Church, in just so many words and syllables in the Scriptures and (as if grace destroyed nature) to forbid us the benefit of Reason or Consequences.  
1. If we infer any thing by way of consequence, they tell us, that we violate that which we have promised to the World, which is, to prove all our Assertions out of the pure Word of God. Whereas, according to the grand principle of 
x Arist. lib. 1. Prior. Analyt. cap. 1.  Logic, De omni & de nullo, a truth deduced out of another truth, is acknowledged to be contained therein; for otherwise it could not be drawn from thence. So that to be in the Word of God, is to be the Word of God. As 
y Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 6.  Gregory de Valentia saith, of the more distinct conceptions of any object, that they are contained implicitly in the more general, as particulars are in universals. And therefore 
z Bellar. lib. 3. de justif. cap. 8. Non potest aliquid certum esse certitudine fidei, nisi aut immediate contineatur in verbo Dei, aut ex verbo Dei per evidentem consequentiam deducatur.  Bellarmine speaking of matters of faith, makes those things as well to be known by certainty of faith, which are deduced by necessary consequences from the Scriptures, as those which are immediately contained therein.  
2. If we deduce an article from premises, whereof any one proposition is not in the Bible, (though otherwise it be a principle of nature) as for example, that a body cannot be in two places at the same time, they ask how such a Conclusion can be of faith, or how we can aver that our articles of faith are proved out of the pure Word of God, 
Bellar. lib. 3. de Eccles. c. 15. Quod ut melius intelligatur, notandum est, omnem sententiam de fide nasci vel ex duabus propositionibus de fide, & tunc totam conclusionem inevidentem esse, vel ex una de fide, altera evidenti, etc. Talis est ista conclusio, Isti homines qui nunc profitentur fidem sub Rom. Pont. sunt Ecclesia Christi.  considering that a Conclusion takes his efficacy not from one, but from both the premises? Which argument concludes our Adversaries as much (if not more) than it doth us. For the mainest principle of their to wit, That those which profess the faith under the Bishop of Rome, are the Church of Christ, cannot be deduced by Bellarmine's logic, but search made in the Court Rolls of Nature, and by borrowing an Evidence from thence to supply the place of one of the premises. But to speak more punctually, we say, that those principles of Nature which we employ in this kind, are also virtually included in the Scriptures, though not expressly. As he that faith, Socrates is a man, faith also by consequence that Socrates is a substance, that he is a living creature and that he is reasonable, because Man contains all these things in his nature. So the Scripture saying that Christ hath a body, saith by consequence, that according to his humane condition, he is finite, and being finite hath a limited and bounded existency, and therefore cannot be in many places at the same instant. For art in this, is grounded upon nature, and in nature the immediate cause implies the effect, the species the genus, the subject the properties, the whole the parts, & one contrary remooves the other, so that these Maxims of Philosophy are but dilated verities, being before contractedly contained in the Letter, and add not any thing to the Scriptures fullness, but only are displayed by the understanding faculty, as the species and forms of an object are by a perspective glass multiplied and made more visible.  
3. If we press them with the force and necessity of our consequence, they bid them, demand of us, whether we cannot err in the deducing of a Consequence? if we say we cannot, then to tell us that we oppugn a doctrine of our own, which determineth that the Church may err; and if we say we may, than they will them to ask us, how we can build an article of faith upon a Consequence which by our own confession is fallible. To which we say, first, that a posse ad esse non valet argumentum, from a possibility of erring, to an actual erring, an argument will not follow. Again, the necessity of a Consequence depends not upon the person of him which deduceth it, but upon the intrinsical union and real affinity between the terms of the Antecedent and Consequent. But lastly, because they press us, to show, how we can assure ourselves that in this or that particular Consequence we do not err, considering that there is no subject wherein we do not acknowledge, that we may err. Let me ask them again, how any of them can assure themselves that they know the meaning of the Church in any one article of faith, considering that there is none of them in particular (the Pope in his chair excepted) which may not (by their own Tenets) mistake a word, or misse-conceive the Church's meaning. Sure if this reason were of force, we should for the same Cause take away all certainty of knowledge which comes by the sense, which was the error of the academics and Pirrhonians. For what sense is there which at sometimes by reason of the Medium, Organ, or Object, is not liable to err and be deceived? But as Nature, which (Philosophers say) is not defective in things necessary, hath for the remedying of these inconveniences endowed man with reason, common notions and principles, whereby he is able to judge of the due site, habitude, and disposition of things, so the God of Nature, which is also the God of Grace, and knows the necessity of his children, gives unto them (besides that portion of reason, common notions and principles abovementioned) the spirit also of discretion, for the spiritual man judgeth all things, 1. Cor. 2. So Saint john, These things have I written unto you, concerning them that seduce you, but the anointing which you have received of him, teacheth you all things, 1. joh. 2. 26.  
4. If the Consequence be so evident, that they cannot for shame deny it, than they counsel them to ask us, where the Scripture saith in express terms, that whatsoever followeth by evident and necessary consequence from her Pages, is an article of faith. Where they hope to choke us with an equivocal acception of the word article. For an article of faith is sometimes taken strictly, for one of those verities which so nearly touch the foundation of faith, that a man cannot be saved unless he expressly know and believe it, sometimes largely for any Catholic truth whatsoever. If they take it in the former sense, they fight with their own shadows, for which of our men ever said, that whatsoever followeth from the Scriptures by evident and necessary consequence, is in such manner and sense an article of faith. But if they take it in the latter sense, we need not run far for Texts to prove that such consequences are articles of faith, and require (according to the nature of the subject and evidence of the deduction) a belief, either explicit, or implicit of them, because that conclusions, as I showed before, lie hid in their principles, as a kernel in the shell, and that consequences are materially in their premises, and being in them, are to be esteemed part of them, and therefore he which is bound to an absolute belief of the one, is bound also, at least conditionally, that is, upon the appearance of the evidence of the consequence, to believe the other.  
5. If we dispute syllogistically, they bid them tell us, that not the Scriptures, but Aristotle prescribes rules for syllogisms, and that Aristotle's rules cannot bind the faith. As though syllogisticke forms were principal causes of the truth of things, and not only instruments, whereby the Truth which was before, and might otherwise by natural Logic and the strength of the common apprehension be perceived, is made somewhat the more easy and apparent. For many Conclusions follow necessarily in regard of the matter, which are vicious in regard of the form. Galen invented a fourth figure which others reject. And therefore we build no more upon Aristotle in matters of faith, than an house is built upon the Carpenter's Hammer, Square or Rule, which are neither whole nor part of the building, though otherwise they conduce thereunto as instruments.  
6. If we stop their mouths, either with manifest Texts of Scripture or pregnant consequences, than they bid them demand of us Who shallbe judge? Which is a piece of Sophistry beyond the Devils, 
Matth. 4. 6.  who being taken tardy by our Saviour in misse-quoting places of Scripture, forgot to ask the question: Who shallbe judge? This cavil is squint-eyed, and looks three ways at once. If we say the Holy Ghost, than they upbraid us with flying to private spirits, and making ourselves judges in our own cause. If we say the Scriptures, they reply, that the Scriptures are not sufficient to execute the place, being mute and wanting a voice to declare, which (amongst many senses) is their own; and if we say the Church, than they conceive the victory to run on their side, and think we have granted them their Conclusion. But what if we make neither the one nor the other sitting alone, to be this judge, but acknowledge a Concurrency (though not equal) in all of them, and that Concurrency (though not to the enacting of the sentence) as it is considered in se, in itself, yet to the publication of it, quoad nos, as it hath reference to us? What then shall become of these sequels? And so it is indeed. For howsoever we make one supreme judge in this high Court of Verity, yet we do not imagine him to speak but by writing, nor that writing to be ordinarily read and declared without an Herald. The principal judge, we say, is God himself, from whom proceeds the knowledge of all supernatural truths whatsoever. The instruments, whereby he communicates them unto us, are threefold; first, his Spirit, whereby he speaks inwardly unto us, both enlightening us to behold, and persuading us to believe the sense and meaning of his mysteries. Yet is not this a private spirit, because it reveals not aught unto us besides the public writing, nor ordinarily without the ministry of the Church. For to speak more clearly, a spirit may be termed private. Either 

1. Ratione Principij, in regard of the author and efficient from whence it comes.  
2. Ratione Subiecti, in regard of the subject or person in which it dwells.  
3. Ratione Medij, in regard of the means which it useth.    
Now the spirit whereby we judge of divine truths, howsoever it may be termed private, in regard of the Subject or Person wherein it inhabits, he being haply (as most men are) of a private condition; yet we allow it not to be private, either in regard of the means which it useth, which are the reading of the Scriptures, public ministry of the Church, Counsels, Fathers, etc. or in respect of the Author & efficient thereof, which is the Holy Ghost, the common father of light and grace, at which kind of spirit Saint Peter specially aims, when he saith, no Scripture is of private interpretation. 2. Pet. 1.  
The second instrument whereby God declares his sentence, is the Scripture; which is the only outward infallible rule whereby Controversies may be resolved and decided, and is not to be accounted imperfect or unsufficient, for this purpose, because all men are not able to pry forth with into the meaning thereof throughout; or for that it wants vocal organs to express, which (amidst variety of senses attributed unto it) is his own. For it promiseth not to do this, but to those who are enlightened with the spirit, and which make right use of the public means, as the ministry of the Church, reading of Authors, comparing of places, and the like; Logicians telling us, that an instrument is then said to be sufficient, not when it serves for all uses and in all manners whatsoever, but when it serves to such an end, and in such sort applied, as the principal efficient hath ordainedit; as a writing is then sufficiently legeable, if those which have eyes and a will thereunto, can read it, though to the blind and negligent it seem otherwise.  
The third instrument whereby God publisheth his decrees, is the Church, and in it the Bishops and Pastors thereof, whether assembled in Counsels, or otherwise considered in their ordinary ministry. This holds the place of an Herald, and howsoever it stands not in equipage with the two former, yet God hath commanded us to hear it, and promised that it shall never err in fundamental points either totally or finally;  
So that in sum the total and plenary indicature of matters of Faith, belongs to the Holy Ghost, whereby the judge of these things properly taken, is he alone; the gift of his spirit, the Scriptures and the Church, are but partial instruments of promulgation, serving only as several trunks and pipes, whereby his decree arrives at the ears of our understanding; yet if any shall compare the outward instruments together, the Church and the Scriptures and demand, by which of the two it is that the Holy Ghost speaks properly; as he is judge of Controversies, and on which we are finally to rest for his infallible sentence; I answer, not the Church, but the Scriptures. First in respect of their dignity, because the Scriptures are the immediate work of God, dictated by his Spirit; Whereas the expositions of the Church proceed not immediately from God, but mediating the voice of the Scriptures. Secondly in respect of their certainty, for the church is subject to error, the Scriptures are not. Again the truth in regard of the Scriptures is fixed, and therefore easy to be there found, she being always lodged in the same books, but in regard of the Church it is ambulatory, and therefore needs more search to discover it there, as not being entailed either to chair, place or person. Thirdly in respect of the order and manner of knowing them, for howsoever by a confused knowledge, the Church may be notior Scriptures, known better than the Scriptures, and-before them, yet according to a distinct knowledge, are the Scriptures notiores Ecclesia, known better and sooner than the Church; for the true Scriptures, are known by their own light, but the true Church, is not known but by the light of the Scriptures.  
The conceit, that the Church must be accompanied with infallibility, if to no other end, yet to make a final end of Controversies upon earth, is ridiculous; for if they suppose a final end of Controversies amongst all men, whatsoever, first, they suppose that which shall never be whilst the Church is militant upon earth, for the Apostle tells us, that there must be heresies. 1. Cor. 11. Secondly, they present a means uncompetent to compass that which they design, by naming the Church of Rome, to that office; both in that she is a party, and hath not as yet cleared her title to that dignity, and in that infallibility in the judge is not sufficient to compose differences in supernatural matters, without grace in the hearer, which is no coin, that comes out of the Pope's treasury, nor hear be that grows in his Garden, but raines from heaven where and what measure God pleaseth. On the other side, if more particularly, they require an end of Controversies amongst those whom God hath elected, and that so far as is necessary for the salvation of their souls, it is needless to attribute infallibility to the Church, for the serving of this Cure; because to them, God supplies the infallible assurance of his truth by means more excellent and agreeable to the nature of his spiritual Kingdom, to wit, by his Wisdom, in furnishing them with a rule, both able to be known by its notes and characters, and also sufficient to decide all necessary questions that may at any time be incident; by his Grace enabling them to see the truth and demonstrating the certainty thereof to their consciences, and by his Providence raising up faithful Pastors in one place or other, to prepare, open and display those verities and decisions to the flock.  
Many like crotchets to these, and answered by the same grounds, do issue daily out of the jesuits warehouse, as for example, if we produce one place of Scripture to prove the meaning of another, they bid them call upon us to allege a third place, which shall say that this place ought to be expounded by that, as if we needed a Text to prove God no liar, or that he doth not contradict himself. If in disputing upon any subject, we go about to destroy their Assertion, they will them to press us to show not only our affirmatives, as before, but also our negatives just in so many vowels and consonants in the Bible, as we express them; whereas not only consequences drawn from thence are sufficient for that purpose, but also this one thing, not to be contained in the Scriptures either directly or by consequence, is in effect all one, as to be no article of faith. In a word, if to these and the like mountebank affronts, we answer them not according to their mind, they furnish their Scholars with premeditated speeches and scoffs, to say, that they brought us to that plunge, as to use these words, 
Vid. M. du Moulin. jesuit evasions.  that is to say, and it is so by consequence, and to say that a Coach is also a consequence, because it followeth the Horses.  
This method of disputing was invented first by 
Methodo Veronica, cap. 7.  Gontier a French jesuit; polished by Veronus, sometimes one of the same Order; practised by Arnoldus the Confessor in most of his late bicker; approved by the Prelates of France assembled at Bordeaux, 
See the book entitled, L'establissement de la Congregation de la Propagation de la Foy, & de Missionnaires generaux de Prelats de France, pour conferer avec les Ministers, & Prescher aux portes de leur Temples, etc. approvee par N. S. P. le Papa & le Prelates de France. Par M. Francois Veron Predicateur de sa M. pourles Contreverses. A Lion chez Claude Armand. 1624.  An. 1621. as also at Rome and by sundry Universities; commended by the Pope, and the Society newly erected at Rome by the Bull of Gregory the fifteenth, for the Conversion of Heretics, entitled, The holy congregation of the propagation of the faith; and so far admired, that this Veronus, hath in imitation of that Roman society procured letters Patents for the establishing of a French Congregation of Missionaries, as he terms them, culled out of all Orders and Universities, who dispersing themselves throughout the Kingdom, shall after the Sermon ended, by this method alone so blank the Ministers of the Reformed side, that within four or five years he doubts not but to convert all within that Kingdom to the Roman faith. To be short, this method hath travailed most parts of Christendom, being translated into several languages, and (as outlandish toys cannot long want a Merchant to transport them hither) so this hath been lately taught to speak English, and applied to the articles of our Church, as before it was to the Articles of the French reform; wherein such confidence is put, that Veronus under-takes to make a Cobbler able thereby to put the learnedst Minister of France to a non plus, though he deal so favourably with him as to allow him the Geneva Bible or what translation else, he best likes, to boot. It seems, a Cobbler's disputations are thought good enough to beget a Collier's faith, which to effect in the common people, is the Jesuits greatest ambition.  
It needs not be doubted, but that this method may as easily, if not with more advantage to us, be retorted upon our adversaries; and that it is no difficult task to beat them with their own weapons. But it shall not be amiss to observe, from these new invented shifts of the Jesuits, into what a strait they are brought, that they dare not enter the lists, but upon most unjust and unreasonable conditions. They bid us to demonstrate that by sensible evidence and reason, which themselves confess cannot be rightly apprehended without faith, which is as much as if one should bid his fellow to see with his Nose, or smell with his Eyes. They require the meanest of our side, to prove that which is not absolutely requisite for every man to know. They challenge us to show, and threaten their pupils with thunderbolts if they see. In a word, they are contented to venture a disputation, provided we forbear therein the use of Consequences or Reason, as if Popery could no longer subsist, unless the reasonable soul should resign her office, and men could be persuaded to turn either beasts, madmen or fools.  
And hitherto have I treated of the act of faith employed in this article, which at the first appearing no bigger than a man's hand, grew at length, like Elias cloud, so great that it well-nigh over-shadowed 
2. King. 18. 44.  my whole text, and I was drenched therein, ere I could arrive at jesrael. But now I hope, the threatening storm is overpassed, and the object of this faith, the holy Catholic Church, like the City of God, discovers itself to your view, upon whose description I purpose (God willing) to adventure, in that which followeth.    

Credo Ecclesiam Sanctam Catholicam. I believe the holy Catholic Church.  
The second Part.  

SECT. I. The first way whereby one may know the Church to be Catholic or Universal.  
Having in the former part treated of that act of Faith, which is employed and intimated in this present Article, the course and order of the words, lead me unto the object of that act, the Church; whose definitions being many, and those not a little controversed, I shall content myself with that description of it which is insinuated in the Creed, that it is a society of men professing the Faith, called out of the world (for so doth the word Ecclesia imply) and qualified with two attributes or properties, Holiness and Universality.  
Concerning the first of these, which is Holiness, I purpose not to insist long upon it at this present; sufficient it is, that it is called Holy in three respects. Viz. 

1. First, in respect of the Righteousness and Holiness of Christ imputed, which may be termed sanctitas imputata, an imputed sanctity.  
2. Secondly, in respect of those degrees of sanctification, wherewith it is endowed in this life, which may be termed sanctitas inchoata, an holiness begun here, and consummated in the world to come.  
3. Thirdly, in respect of the rule and law by which it is directed to serve God with holiness and righteousness, all the days of our life, which therefore may be termed sanctitas imperata, an holiness commanded and enjoined.    
The second property of the Church, is Catholic, concerning which, two things may be deduced out of the Creed; modus essendi, the manner of its so being, and modus cognoscendi, the manner of knowing it to be so.  
Modus essendi, the manner of the Church Catholics being, cannot better be expressed then by the word Catholic itself. For Catholic implies that the Christian Church is no peculiar, copt and shut up within the Land of Canaan, or the Territories of jacob; no tenure entailed to the Heirs of Abraham according to the flesh; or Lease expiring with the death and funeral of our Saviour, such as was the Church and Synagogue of the jews, but general and universal, and that in three respects. Viz. 

1. First, in respect of place, because it is diffused and dispersed through all Lands and Countries, as it is written, Revel. 5. Thou hast redeemed us with thy blood, out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation. Not that the Church is to be in all Provinces of the world, simul & semel, at one and the same time, but as Bellarmin in his fourth book de Ecclesia and seventh chapter, gathers out of Driedo, it sufficeth that it have been or hereafter be in all Lands and Nations, at least successiuè, successively one after another.  
2. Secondly, in respect of the persons, because it excludes no sort or condition of men. There is neither jew nor Greek, there is neither Bond nor Free, there is neither Male nor Female, for ye are all one in Christ jesus, saith the Apostle, Gal. 3.  
3. Thirdly, in respect of time, because it shall never cease nor fail, but continue in one place or other, until the last day, according to that promise of our Saviour, that he would be with us always, even unto the end of the world, Matth. 28.    
Thus you see modum essendi, the manner of the Church Catholics being, but modus cognoscendi, the manner of knowing it, is more questionable; for on it depends that great question of our days, wherein the Jesuits so triumph, concerning the perpetuity and visibility of our Church in all Ages. For our better progress wherein, we are to note, that a thing may be known two manner of ways. Viz. 

1. The one a priori, that is, by arguments drawn from causes, or principles, which force an assent to a thing, though as yet one sees not the truth of the same by experience. Thus from that principle in Philosophy, that heavy things tend downwards to the centre, I know that a plummet of lead, would fall to the centre of the earth, if no thick or gross body interposed itself, although I never saw any conclusion or practice of the fame. Thus from that principle in Divinity, that there is a resurrection of the body, I believe that who ever lie buried in their Sepulchers, shall rise again, although mine eyes were never witnesses of any such resurrection.  
2. The other a posteriori, that is, by arguments drawn from the effects to the cause, or by grounding one's knowledge and certainty upon the sense of an experiment, as when one believes that the fire is hot, because he feels it burn, or that the Sea is salt because he tastes it brinish.    
Both these have their uses being rightly and with due circumspection applied, but they are not always and in all subjects alike demonstrative, and therefore the question will be, which of them the Creed requires for the procuring of a firm belief and assent to this article of the Catholic Church.  
I must confess, that arguments a posteriori, that is, from testimonies of men, pointing out by name the Professors and upholders of any Religion in all Ages, is a great motive and inducement to persuade, that such a Religion is Catholic, that is universal in respect of place, persons, and time; and that the Church professing such a Religion is of the like amplitude and antiquity. But yet this is not that modus cognoscendi, that manner of knowing the true Church, to be Catholic, which is proper to the Creed, or by which Faith cleaves unto it, and believes it, as an article of salvation: that manner of knowing it to be so, is only a priori, by divine principles, that is, by God's promises made unto it in the Scriptures, where we read, that of Christ's Kingdom there shall be no end, Psal. 2. that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, Matth. 16. and that our Saviour will continue with us unto the end, Math. 28. these are the pedigrees of Christ's Church, by these it proves itself to be of an ancient stem, that it had noble Progenitors: he which plays the Herald and points out the several descents of her sons, with their lots and portions in all Ages, he may somewhat illustrate the Church Catholic, he cannot strengthen or confirm it; he may be a Thomas Didimus, which will not believe unless he sees, he cannot be any of those blessed of our Saviour, which see not, and yet believe, joh. 20.  
Now that the Catholicism of the Church, that is, the universality, duration and perpetuity thereof (so far as it enters the Creed) is to be known only a priori, by the promises made in the Scriptures unto it, and not a posteriori, that is, by instances showing the visible Professors of the same in all Ages, I shall not need to travail farther than the Creed itself to make it good.  
My first reason shall be drawn from the condition of the Church Catholic as it is an article of our Creed, and as we say, I believe the Catholic Church. From whence I thus argue. Whatsoever we are to believe as an article of the Creed, the same must be endowed with these four conditions, The first, that the proof of it be perfect, for otherwise, if it prove but in part, it cannot suffice for an article of faith. The second, that the ground upon which it depends be some divine and infallible principle, for otherwise it may create an opinion in one, but it cannot beget a faith. Thirdly, that all those who are bound to believe it be capable of the manner of proving it, as 
a Gregor. de Valent. in Tho. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. punct. 7. §. 18.  Valentia requires in these cases. And lastly, that it be not the object of sense. For Faith (saith the Apostle to the Hebrews, chap. 11.) is the evidence of things not seen, and Thom. Aquin. 2●. 2●. q. 1. saith plainly, ut fidei obiectum sit aliquod visum fieri non potest, it cannot be that the object of faith should be any thing seen. But the proof of the universality of the Church which is a posteriori, by the several visible Professors of the same, first, is no perfect proof, for it depends upon the testimony of Doctors whereof in some ages, few have written, and those which have written, have not written of all points, so that their consent in diverse Articles is rather charitably presumed, than certainly known Secondly, it is no proof depending upon divine and infallible principles, but upon the testimony and credit of men, who may err and be deceived. Thirdly it is not a proof, of which all men are capable, for it consists partly of the voluminous writings of Historians, partly of the immense dictates of the Fathers, partly of the perplex and inextricable subtleties of the Schoolmen, to which, few have time and means, all not capacity to attain. Lastly, by demonstrating the universality and perpetuity of the Church from the visibility of it, it makes the Church as Catholic to be the object of the sense, and so by consequence makes it to be no Article of Faith.  
My second reason shallbe drawn from the nature of the Church Catholic in itself, and the incapability of it, to be subject to arguments a posteriori, that is, of sense & visibility; it being not properly, or if properly yet not always snfficiently visible for this purpose Forth better understanding whereof, we must premise some distinctions touching the Church Catholic.  
The Catholic Church may be considered either in respect of its. 

1. Matter of which it is composed which are men.  
2. Form.    
In respect of its Matter, so it may be taken either according to its full Latitude and extent, excluding no time, no places, nor any condition of men; or in a limited sense in respect of its parts, and those considered not together, but severally, with relation to their proper times and places.  
In respect of its form, so likewise it hath sundry considerations: for the form of it, is Either 

1. Internal, which is the mystical union, which the members thereof have with Christ, and through Christ, one with another; which union is wrought by faith.  
2. external, which is the uniformity, the parts have one to another in the profession of the truth, and the right administration of the Sacraments; which truth and right administration, we say must be, if not in all points whatsoever, yet at least in all points fundamental and necessary to salvation.    
Now to bring this home to my argument; the Church Catholic, of these four ways that it may be considered, is not visible at all three ways, and the fourth, it is not always so clearly visible, as that the visibility should serve for a note whereby to come to the knowledge of the universality and perpetuity of the Church. It is not visible at all. First in respect of its matter taken in the full Latitude thereof, excluding no times, no places nor any condition of men. In which sense by the Tridentine catechisms own confession it is taken in the Creed. For nothing is visible which is not present: I may remember times past, or read of men absent, or conjecture things to come, but I can see only those things which are present. Secondly it is not visible at all, in respect of its inward form, which is the mystical union of the members with Christ, and one another wrought by faith, for this is rooted in the heart, and the heart of man God only seeth. Thirdly, not in respect of its outward form, which (as it enters the Creed) is not only an outward profession of a Doctrine or Discipline, but a profession of the same under the notion of truth; and that the Church in this sense is invisible, 
b Valent. in Thom. disp. ●. q. 1. p. 7. §. 16.  Gregory de Valentia confesseth in his 3. Tom. upon Thomas, and 1. disput. and Bellarmine in his 3. book de Eccles. and 15. chap. where he saith, In Ecclesia aliquid videri & aliquid credi; videmus eum caelum hominum, qui est Ecclesia, sed quod isle caetus sit ipsa vera Christi Ecclesia non videmus sed credimus, That is, in the Church something is believed, and something seen; we see that company of men which is the Church; but that this company is the true Church, we do not see it, but believe it.  
Again, the Church considered in her most favourable sense for the Papists, that is, according to her matter, which are men, and that again, in a limited acception, not as she is taken in her Latitude and extent, for the whole, but in respect of her parts only, with reference to their proper times and places, yet in this sense, I say, is not so clearly visible at all times, as to have her visibility to serve for a note whereby to know it to be Catholic and universal. For, Not a sufficiens ac propria ad dignoscendum Ecclesiam, omnino necesse est, ut sit omni hominum generi atque conditioni accommodatum, it is Gregory de Valentia's own rule in the place above cited, q. 1. punct. 7. §. 15. that is, that for a sufficient and proper note to know the Church, it is necessary, that the note be fit for all sorts and conditions of men, and that all men be qualified and capable to discern the Church by it; But the Church even in this sense, by his own confession in the 16. §. is sometimes so tossed with the floods of error, schisms and persecutions, that to the unskilful, and such as cannot prudently weigh the reasons of times and circumstances, it is hard to be known; so that by consequence the visibility of it is not always so apparent unto all sorts of men, as to serve for a note or proof of the Church as Catholic. To make our argument yet more pregnant, let us but ask where the Church was in the time that the Arrian heresy overspread, and he will tell you out of 
c Hieron▪ cont Luciferian.  Hierom, that the ship of it was almost sunk, and out of 
d Hilar. cont. Auxent. sub. finem.  Hilary, that it was then none in tectis, exteriori pompa querenda; sed potius in carceribus & speluncis, not to be sought for in buildings or outward pomp, but in Prisons and Caves. Ask Turrecremata and others, where the Church was in the passion of our Saviour, and they will tell you, that it remained only in the Virgin Marie, which they say, is signified in the Church of Rome by the putting out of all the Tapers save one only in the celebration of the passion. Nay 
e Bell. lib. 3. de Ecclesia. c. 17.  Bellarmine though he oppugnes this opinion of Turrecrematas the most he can, yet he is contented to concur with 
f Abulens. q. 24. prolog. in Math.  Abulensis in this, that howsoever the Apostles might believe, yet he thinks that the Virgin Mary only had fidem explicitam, an explicit belief of Christ's resurrection, without which the Apostle saith, that our faith is vain, we are yet in our sins, 1. Cor. 15. Now, grant that the Apostles believed as well as Marie, yet if their belief was but implicit, their profession could not be visible, idem est non esse & non apparere, it is all one not to be and not to appear in this case. Nay, ask Bellarmine, but how the Church shall be in the days of Antichrist, and he will answer in his third book de Rom. Pont. and seventh chap. 
g Bellar. lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. cap. 7. certum est Antichristi persecutionem fore gravissimam, ita ut cessent omnes publicae religionis caeremoniae & sacrificia.  that it is certain the persecution than shall be so great, that all public ceremonies of Religion and Sacrifices shall cease.  
How unjustly then do the Papists deal with us in this question, touching modum cognoscendi; the manner of knowing the Church to be Catholic, that is, universal and perpetual, by tying us to prove it a posteriori, instancing who were the Professors, who the Pastors, what their Names, where they abode in all Ages, as if ignorance of a thing were a Cause sufficient to make it not to be, or God's promise were not a gage strong enough for such an incredulous generation as theirs is, unless there were Registers to show how and in what manner he kept his word. Certainly, if God in his wisdom had thought these kind of proofs necessary for his Church, he would have erected an Office and Officers for the purpose; now he hath given us indeed his Royal promise, that it shall be so, but no promise hath he given that there shall be Scribes in all Ages to commit to writing the names and persons of those by whom it came to be so.  
If therefore a Papist should in this manner question me, Where was your Church before Luther, or what Professors of your doctrine were there, or what assemblies of men professing the same faith that you do, ever since the time of our Saviour until this present? I would thus answer him out of the Creed. That the Church of which I am a member was before Luther, that there were assemblies of men professing the same faith that I do, and that ever since the time of our Saviour unto this present, I do believe with the same faith, and upon the same grounds that I believe the Catholic Church (because I believe our Church of England to be a member of the Catholic) and this, I believe a priori, that is, for the promise sake made in the Scriptures that it shall be so. But where our Church was before Luther, or who were the Professors of it ever since the time of our blessed Saviour until this present, is no part of my Creed. There is not a syllable in it which invites me to proceed that way. Do, I say, I believe the universality of Christ's Church, and must my foundation be such only as can breed in me but an opinion, or naked hope? do I begin in Faith, and with the Galathians must I end in the flesh, that is, with sense? Do I build with one hand a Church Catholic, which cannot be seen, and with the other must I draw it in a Map, or point it out to the eye? Nay, set the Church as Catholic aside, and consider it but in her parts (which consideration of it belongs not to the Creed) yet in this sense also is the Church at sometimes so obscured, that by our Adversaries own confession, none but the prudent and wise are able to discern it. The Church, is (I confess) compared in the Revelation 
Reuel. 12.  to a woman clothed with the Sun, in Isaiah to a 
Isay 2. 2.  City built upon an Hill; and by the Fathers to the Moon; the Sun, the Moon, and a Hill, are things most easy to be discerned; yet we know, this Sun may be obscured with a Cloud, an Hill may be hid with a mist, and the Moon (as Saint Austen in his 119. Epist. alluding to the Church, observeth) hath her wanes and eclipses in the time of her peregrination.   

SECT. II. The second way whereby one may know the Church to be Catholic or Universal.  
IF any should mistake me, and think that pressing so earnestly the preeminency of knowing the Church to be Catholic and Universal a priori, that is, from the promises made unto it in the Scriptures, we do suspect our proofs a posteriori, from the Professors of our Religion in all Ages, to be either none or weak, let them know that we want not those who have scored out variety of sufficient paths to proceed this way also, which howsoever they be not like the testimony of our Saviour to beget a faith; yet are they like the testimony of the Samaritan woman to induce a credulity.  
For not to tire you with large discourses, which were to exceed my limits (only for satisfaction herein to the reasonable and impartial Hearer) let us take along with us these few considerations.  
1. The first, that we are to distinguish between our affirmatives, that is, such things as are purely affirmed by us, and our negatives, such as in whole or in part we deny, between which there is a great difference to be made in all sciences. For, affirmative propositions only are the proper parts and ingredients of a discipline, Negatives are admitted (say Logicians) not so much by way of Precept as of Cautel and of Commentaries to vindicate the other from misconstruction.  
2. The second, that such affirmatives of ours as are established by our Church of England, at least such as concern the foundation of faith, have been in all ages professed by the Church of Rome itself; For explication whereof, we are to observe, that the Pope's Arithmetic which he useth in calculating the articles of faith, is not substraction but addition: what we purely affirm, the Popish writers for the most part do affirm the same; the difference is, that they affirm somewhat more than we do. They deny not so much that our affirmations are truth, as that they say we affirm not all the truth, whereupon they usually style us in their writings Negativists. For example sake: We agree on both sides, the Scriptures to be the Rule of Faith, the Books of the old Testament written in Hebrew to be Canonical, that we are justified by Faith, that God hath made two receptacles for men's souls after death, Heaven and Hell, that God may be worshipped in spirit without an Image, that we are to pray unto God by Christ, that there be two Sacraments, that Christ is really received in the Lord's Supper, that Christ made one oblation of himself upon the Cross for the redemption, propitiation, and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world. In a word, where they take the Negative part, as in withholding the Cup from the Laiety, forbidding the administration of the Sacraments in the vulgar tongue and restraining the marriage of Priests, yet even in these they condescend unto us for the lawfulness of the things in themselves, and in respect of the Law of God, and oppose them only in regard of their necessity and conveniency, and for that the Church of Rome hath otherwise ordained.  
But see, our affirmations content them not. To the Scriptures they add and equalise unwritten Traditions; To the Hebrew Canon, the Apocrypha; To Faith in the act of justification, Works; To Heaven and Hell, Purgatory, Limbus Patrum, and Limbus Puerorum; To the worship of God in spirit, Images; To prayer to God by Christ, invocation and intercession of Saints; To Baptism and the Lords Supper, five other Sacraments; To the reality of Christ in the Sacrament, his corporal presence; To the sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross, the sacrifice in the Mass; with other like; and these we deny.  
3. The third, that our affirmations (by the judgement of the Church of Rome) have been in all ages deemed sufficient to salvation, so that our Negatives take not away any doctrine, the explicit belief whereof is absolutely necessary.  
For first, in regard of knowledge, the Schoolmen hold that much less is needful to be explicitly believed then what is contained in our affirmations. For whereas we entertain and embrace amongst our affirmative articles, not only the doctrine of the three Creeds, but also sundry other assertions as may appear by the book of Articles and Homilies established in our Church. 
h Albert. Mag. In 3. dist. 25. art. 6. Bonauent. ead. dist. art. 1. q. 3. Richard. ib. art. 4. q. 1. Durand. ead. dist. q. 1. num. 6.  Albertus Magnus on the contrary with Bonaventure, Richardus and Durandus, think that so much only of the Creed is necessary as the Church solemnizeth in her holidays; 
i Aquin. sum. 2. 2. q. 2. art. 7. Scotus in 3. sent. dist. 25. q. 2. Gabriel. ib. q. unica. art. 2. Adrian. quodlibet. 3.  Thomas Aquinas, Scotus, Gabriel Biel, and Pope Adrian the sixth, which go farther, think it needful to believe but the whole Creed, and 
k Alex. ab Hal. part. 3. q. 82. memb. 3. art. 1.  Alexander ab Hales which goes farthest, thinks that one need but add to the Apostolical Creed the Nicen and Athanasian, to make a complete believer, quanquam hoc nimis durum videtur, though this seems too hard an imposition, saith Gregory de Valentia in his third Tom. upon 
l Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 2. q. 2. punct 4. Quanquam hoc nimis durum videtur— & postea. Satis fuerit illorum substantiam simpliciter credere, sicut continetur in symbolo Apostolorum: ita videlicet ut sensus verborum proprius utcunque intelligatur, etiam non admodum propria notitia.  Thom. 1. disp. although one wade no farther therein than the proper sense, and have no great distinct knowledge of the matters. Nay, 
m Bell. lib. 4. de verbo Dei, cap. 11. Quaedam in doctrina Christiana tam fidei quam morum, esse simpliciter omnibus necessaria ad salutem, qualis est notitia articulorum symboli Apostolici, item cognitio decem praeceptorum & nonnullorum Sacramentorum; caetera non ita necessaria sunt ut sine eorum explicita notitia & fide & professione, homo saluari non possit. Et postea. Ea quae sunt simpliciter necessaria Apostolos consueuisle omnibus praedicare, aliorum autem non omnia omnibus, sed quaedam omnibus, quae nimirum omnibus utilia erant; quaedam solis praelatis, etc.  Bellarmine is so confident in this point, that he sticks not to say, that the Apostles themselves never used to preach openly to the people (much less propounded as common articles of faith) other things than the articles of the Apostles Creed, the ten Commandments, and some few of the Sacraments, because (saith he) these are simply necessary and profitable for all men, the rest beside, such as that a man may be saved without them.  
Secondly, for practice, they grant, that one may attain salvation without the performance of such duties as we refuse to undergo; For if one believes no more than what is written in the Scriptures, he believes (as 
n Bellarm. ib.  Bellarmine confesseth) as much as is necessary and profitable unto all men. If one worship's God without an Image, they deny not, but that this worship is acceptable; If one pray immediately unto Christ & repeats the Lord's prayer, they will not say that his devotion is fruitless; If one perform the best works he can (which we also require) and stand not upon the point of merit, but only upon the mercy of God, as we do, 
o Bellar. lib. 5. de justif. c. 7. Propter incertitudinem propriae iustitiae & periculum inanis gloriae, tutissimum est, fiduciam totam in sola Dei misericordia & benignitate reponere.  they judge it to be not only profitable, but also commend it as most secure. Now, what would a man require more of a Christian, then to believe well, pray well, live well and die well?  
The fourth consideration is, that those points of theirs whereof we hold the Negative, were not received as articles of faith, nor the contrary judged heretical by the Church of Rome for many hundred years after Christ. For that Church could not judge us to be enemies of her faith, or oppugners of that foundation whereon she was built: which first, by our Adversaries own confessions, held 
p Bellar. lib. 4. de verbo Dei, cap. 11. §. Nota secundo.  all those things which the Apostles used to preach openly, and which were necessary and profitable for all men, to be contained in the Scriptures. 2. Which until the time of 
q Bellar. lib. 1. de verbo Dei, cap. 10. §. Respondeo B. Augustinum. & §. ult. Sixtus Senens. biblioth. l. 8. c. 9 Dowists in their Preface to the old Testament.  Saint Hierome and Austen, had not received the Apocrypha books to be Canonical, nor in many Ages as well after as before, wanted learned writers to oppose their authority. 3. Which 
r Bellar. lib. 2. de verb. Dei, cap. 19  saw not that latin vulgar edition of the Bible, which she now equalizeth with the originals, before the time of Saint Hierome, nor 
s Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. ●unct. 7. §. 43.  established it in such manner, that men might not call the words of it into question and doubt, until the Council of Trent. 4. Which 
t Bellar. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 2. §. ult.  made not those Heretics which deny the Pope to have infallible judgement, 
u Bellar. lib. 2. de Concil. c. 13 §. deinde. & cap. 17. §. Ad hunc locum.  or to be above a General Council. 5. Wherein 
x Roffensis cont. assert. Luth. art. 18.  Purgatory for a time was not known, and not for a long time after resolved which way it concerned salvation, 
y Bellar. lib. 2. de Purg. cap. 1. Valent. tom. 4. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 2. §. 8.  either in regard of the persons thereby to be purged, to wit, the damned, justest, or only the middle sort, 
z Harding against jewels Apology, 2. part. cap. 16 divis. 2.  or in regard of the ends and effects which it hath, whether to satisfy God's justice, and to punish sin past, or by correcting the souls of the dead in such wise as temporal pains are wont to do, to diminish and take away the affections of sin yet remaining. 6. Wherein 
a Durand. Antonius, Roffensis, apud Bellar. lib. 2. de Indulg. c. 17. §. Sed ut a primo.  Popish Indulgences for many ages were not known, nor 
b Bellar. ibid.  any one instance given of the Pope's dispencing them for a thousand years after Christ. 7. Which 
c Suarez ex Alano. disp. 54. sect. 1. Faventinus in 3. sent. disp. 22. c. 6. Bellar. lib. 2. de Imagine. cap. 9 §. Nicholaus lib. 2. de cultu imaginum, cap. 4. & Bellar. cap. 8. §. Ego dico tria.  worshipped not Images, nor ever approved the Image of God to be lawfully made. 8. Wherein 
d Bellar. lib. 1. de Sanct. beat. cap. 8. § ult.  there was no Law which enjoined the worshipping of Saints, and 
e Bellarm. ibid. cap. 10.  whereas it is forbidden in the Church of Rome publicly to worship an uncanonized Saint, 
f Bell. ibid. c. 9 §. dices plurimi Sancti sunt.  the first Pope which they ever read to have canonised a Saint was Leo. the third who lived eight hundred years after our Saviour. 9 Wherein the 
g Vide Missam pro defunctis. ubi haec leguntur. Libera animas omnium fidelium de poenis inferni, & de profundo lacu: libera eas de ore Leonis, ne absorbeat eas tartarus, ne cadant in obscurum. it is not said, ne maneant in obscuro, as if they were there already, but ne cadant in obscurum, whereas to those which are in purgatory there is no fear or danger of falling into hell, they being according to the Papists, sure of their salvation. Bell. lib. 2. de purge. cap. 4.  Church admmitted no prayer into her public Liturgy for the release of souls from the pains of purgatory, but only for their acquital & absolution at God's tribunal, as the forms of prayer for the dead expressed in the Popish liturgy unto this day do sufficiently testify. 10. Wherein 
h Bell. lib. 1. de cleric. cap. 18. §. At Beatus Thomas. & §. Non esse autem iure, etc.  the marriage of Priests was held not to be forbidden, iure divino, by the Law of God, but was allowed and permitted to be practised. 11. 
i Bell. lib. 2. de sacrament. cap. 24 & Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. q. 6. p. 2.  Wherein, the number of seven Sacraments was not by any writer once mentioned, but where they are purposely handled by the Fathers, there are mentioned but two, Baptism, and the Lords Supper. 12. 
k Scotus. Vid. Bell. lib. 3. de Eucharist. c. 23.  Wherein Transubstantiation was neither named, nor made an article of Faith, until the Council of Lateran. 13. 
l P. Lomb. sent. lib. 4. c. 12. & Aquin. 3. part. q. 83. art. 1.  Which a thousand years after Christ and more defined the sacrifice in the Eucharist, to be only a memorial and representation of our Saviour's sacrifice upon the Cross. 14. Which administered the Cup to the Laity. 15. Which 
n The Latin tongue was then vulgar. See also Hardings answer to jewels articles. art. 3. diuis. 28.  celebrated divine service in the vulgar tongue which the people understood. 16. And lastly, Wherein 
o Valent. sup.  the Priests received not the Eucharist alone, but together with the people.  
The fifth consideration is, that if we were for the first ages after our Saviour in possession as well of our 
m Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 7. §. 44. Albasp. obseruat. lib. 1. cap. 14.  Negatives as of our Affirmatives, it concerns our adversaries to show when they dispossessed us, and what prescription they have against us, for by their own law, 
p Vid. Gloss. in 8. reg. iuris in fine 6.  they which at the first are no heretics in their belief, are presumed to be none, until they can be convinced to be such, semel bonus semper praesumitur esse bonus. Now because it is a necessary condition required by the Jesuits to an Article of faith, that it be lawfully propounded by the Church and it is not fully resolved amongst our Adversaries themselves, when the Church openeth her mouth to define and propound but in a general Council, we require of them 
q Valent in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 7. §. 24. Quaerimus enim quando Apostolica doctrina adulterari caeperit non per eos errores, quos fine controversia sub initium Ecclesiae serpere caepisse, sed per eam doctrinam quam hodie Romana Ecclesia profitetur; neque id quidem tantum privata unius aut paucorum opinion, sed authoritate & decretosummorum Pontificum, & communi eius caetus consensu, qui vera ante Christi Ecclesia fuisset, quique proinde, deficiens communiter a vera fidei doctrina, vera etiam esse Christi Ecclesia desierit.  in answer to Greg. de Valentia's own challenge, to show when those doctrines of theirs which we deny, were in such manner ratified and confirmed, and when to hold the contrary, became damnable and heretical? And this we challenge them that they do according to the laws prescribed by themselves, whereof the first is, that the Counsels alleged by them be general; for particular (by their own consents) may err; the second that those general be received for lawful, and not either rejected as was the Constantinopolitan against Photius, and the second Nicen which established Images, (this by that of Frankford; the other by the Lateran under Pope john. Anno Dom. 879.) or be doubtful, for as 
r Bell. lib. 2. de Concil. auctorit. c. ult. §. respondeo. 2.  Bellarmine saith of the Pope that dubius Papa habetur pro non Papa, a doubtful Pope is held for no Pope, so we may by the same reason say of Counsels, that doubtful ones are held for none; The third (which is 
s Bell. lib. 2. de Concil. cap. 12. Atin Concilijs maxima pars actorum ad fidem non pertinet. Non enim sunt de fide disputationes quae praemittuntur, neque rationes quae adduntur, neque ea quae ad explicandum & illustrandum adferuntur, sed tantum ipsa nuda decreta, & ea non omnia, sed tantum quae proponuntur tanquam de fide— quando autem decretum proponatur tanquam de fide, facile cognoscitur ex verbis Concilij, semper enim dicere solent, se explicare fidem Catholicam, vel haereticos habendos qui contrarium sentiunt— quando autem nihil horum dicunt, non est certum rem esse de fide  Bellarmine's own rule) that neither such disputations as are premitted, nor such reasons as are added, nor such things as are brought for explication and illustration sake, but only the naked decrees themselves be counted de fide, of faith, and not all those neither, but such only as are propounded tanquam de fide, as it were of faith, as when they say that they explain the Catholic faith, or that they are to be counted for Heretics which think the contrary, or that they pronounce an anathema, and exclude such from the Church as think the contrary. For when they use none of these phrases, it is not certain (saith he) that it is a matter of faith which they propound. This if they do it will soon appear that the Church of Rome for a 1000 years after our Saviour, professed no other Faith nor published any other belief in points fundamental, either Negative or Affirmative than we do.  
The fifth, that after a thousand and some few years more were expired (Transubstantiation and Adoration of the Host, with other dregs of Antichrist being established) though we cannot say that the Church of Rome was from thenceforth absolutely our Church, yet we may boldly say, that our Church was from that time, until Luther both within the Roman Church and without it For the clearer demonstration whereof, we are to note, that our Church had in those days a twofold subsistency, the one separate from the Church of Rome, the other mixed and conjoined with it.  
Separate, so it was in the 
* About the year 1160.  Albigences and Waldenses, a people, who so soon as the Church of Rome had interpreted herself touching sundry of those main points of difference between us, and that a man could no longer communicate with her in the public worship of God, by reason of some Idolatrous rites and customs which she had established, arose in France, Savoy, and the places near adjoining, and professed the same substantial Negatives and Affirmatives which we do, in a state separate from the Church of Rome, having Pastors and Congregations apart to themselves, even unto this day. From these descended the Wicklefists in England, and the Hussites in Germany, and others in other Countries, who maugre the fury of fire and sword maintained the same doctrine that they did. And if any be desirous to be more particularly informed touching what they held and taught, because they are out of malice (as 
i Haillan. Hist. Gallican. l. 10. Thuan. hist. sui temp. lib. 6.  some Popish writers more ingenious do testify) branded with new and unheard of opinions, (which their confessions, Catechisms and other writings to be seen at this present, do disclaim) as were also the Christians in the Primitive Church by the Pagans, and we in like manner by the Romanists, let the testimonies of their Adversary's themselves which are strong (
k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  as one spoke once of Porphyryes) and admit no contradiction, clear them. For points of doctrine therefore 
l Reiner. cont. Waldenses. cap. 3.  Reynerius an inquisitor against them, and one that lived three hundred years agone, will tell you, that they believed all things well of God, and all the articles of which are contained in the Creed, only the Church of Rome, they hated and blasphemed. 
m Seysellus adversus errores & Sanctan Waidensium  Claudius' Seysellus Archbishop of Turin in Piedmont, who died more than an hundred years since, and (being their neighbour laboured most carefully both to inform himself concerning their positions, and also to confute them) lays no more to their charge then what Alphonsus a Castro, Prateolus, Cardinal Bellarmine, Gregory de Valentia, Gaulterus, and other of the Roman Pale do in their writings acknowledge, viz. that they denied.  

1. The invocation of Saints. Bell. de cultu. sanct. lib. 3. cap. 7.  
2. The placing of Images in Churches or worshipping of them. Bell. de reliq. sanct. lib. 2. cap. 6.  
3. Confirmation to be a Sacrament. Castro. v. confirmatio.  
4. Auricular confession. Castro. v. confessio.  
5. Popish Indulgences. Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 7. q. 20. p. 2.  
6. Purgatory. Valent. in Thom. tom. 4. disp. 11. q. 1. §. 6. Bell. lib. 1. de purge. cap. 2.  
7. Masses for the dead. Prat. v. Waldenses.  
8. Merits. Castro. v. ieiunium. Gaulterus in Cronolog. ad an. 1200.  
9 Orders of begging Friars. Castro. v. Monachatus.  
10. Extreme unction to be a Sacrament. Castro. v. extrema unctio.  
11. Exorcisms in Baptism. Castro. v. exorcismus Gault. cron. loc. citat.  
12. The consecrating of Oil, Salt, Frankincense, Boughs, etc. Castro. v. benedictio.  
13. Transubstantiation. Bellarm. lib. 1. de Eucharist. cap. 2. Valent. tom. 4. in Thom. disp. 6. quaest. 3. punct. 1. 6.  
14. The Pope's supremacy, Bellar. in Praefat. ad lib. de Rom. Pont.  
15. Unwritten Traditions to be the rule of faith. Seissel. p. 4. with many others of like nature.   
For Discipline I cannot tell what the necessity of the times might force them to practise, this we are taught by Sanders, haeres. 150. and by Gaulterius in his Chronologie, ad an. 1200. (both Romanists) that they held three Orders to be in the Church, viz. of Deacons, Priests, and Bishops, nay, the Hussites which descended from them, did so highly esteem of these Orders, that as 
n Bellar. lib. 1. de Sacram. ca 26. Valent. in Thom. tom. 4. disp. 6. q. 11. p. 1.  Bellarmine and Gregory de Valentia do acknowledge, they received none into the Office of Pastors, but such as were ordained by Bishops.  
The state of the Church mixed and conjoined with the Church of Rome itself, consisted of those, who making no visible separation from the Roman profession, as not perceiving the mystery of iniquity which wrought in it, did yet mislike the grosser errors, which at this day she maintaineth, and desired a reformation.  
For there may be a Church, which in respect of her chief Prelates, and a predominant faction therein, may be false and Antichristian, yet may contain some members of the true Church within her Pale, who though they refuse not to communicate with her; nay more, are infected with some smaller errors of the time, yet swallow not down all untruths without difference, but keep still the foundation of faith entire and vnshaken. Thus it was with the Church of the jews at the coming of our Saviour. They which fate in Moses chair, were the Scribes and the pharisees, who perverted the doctrine of the Law, and were the professed enemies of our Saviour, yet many there were, who though they communicated with them in the outward Sacraments and discipline of the Church, yet were the flock of another fold, and like a few Olives at the end of a twig, after the shaking of the tree, clave to the right stock, and waited for the redemption of Israel by Christ. And thus doubtless it was with some, which being outwardly of the Church of Rome, we may justly notwithstanding challenge to ourselves.  
1. For first, there was baptism, which admitted them to the rights and privileges of our Church, for they were baptised unto Christ's Truth, and not the Pope's errors.  
Secondly, 
o In the ordination of Popish Bishops, it is said. Interrogamus te, sl omnem prudentiam tuam quantum tua capax est natura divinae Scripturae sensibus accommodare volueris? Vis ea quae ex divinis Scripturis intelligis, plebem cui ordinandus es, & verbis docere & exemplis? Accipe Euangelia, vade & praedica populo tibi commisso.  There was true & lawful ordination, wherein their Pastors received commission, and did promise to teach the people, not the Pope's legends, but out of the holy Scriptures, and to intend wholly to the sense thereof. So that both Pastor and flock, were ours by admission, promise and engagement, theirs by abuse and practise; for howsoever the Priest at the baptising, or the Bishop at the ordination, had another meaning, yet the words wherewith they baptised and ordained being the words of Christ, are to be taken in Christ's meaning, inasmuch as he which receiveth a thing from another, is to receive it according to the intention of the principal Giver, and not the instrumental giver. He which confers Baptism and Orders as the principal Donor is Christ, the Bishop or Pastor confers them only as his instruments.  
Thirdly, There were sufficient means of Calling beside, to supply the Pastor's negligence and default, as first, profitable parcels of God's Word read in the Church, and the whole body of the Scriptures at hand, which though it were in Latin, yet many might understand it, and this our Saviour pointed at, when he brings in Abraham in the Parable, thus speaking to the rich man touching his brethren, habent Mosen & Prophetas, they have Moses and the Prophets. Secondly, The Writings and Commentaries of the Fathers, to whose interpretations their 
p Concil. Trident. Sess. 2.  Counsels bind them to adhere, and out of whom diverse of the Papists both ancient and modern, do confess (as you have heard) that many of the chief articles of Popery were not for a long time brought into the Church, nor believed. Thirdly, Schoolmen and others of their own side, which taught publicly in their Universities, our very doctrine (not, I confess so entirely as they should) but some in one point, others in another, whereby there was both pregnant means to know the truth, and strong reasons to think at least the doctrines so controverted, and diversely resolved, to be in the Popish sense at most no article of faith.  
Lastly, there were no Counsels generally received by all, and not excepted at by some, which so expressly delivered the grounds and Tenets of Popery as now they are, until the Council of Trent.  
So than who can deny, that they were ours by Calling, ours by Ordination, by institution and admission ours, and why should any doubt, but that some were by practice and obedience ours; surely, God which called job amongst the Heathen, and the Queen of the South by the bare report of Solomon, would not suffer this Calling to be still in vain; the Ordination to be wholly unprofitable; or that Admission in baptism to be always frustrate; that is, to be the savour of death unto death, and in none the savour of life unto life. For if sheep in a pasture, where venomous herbs are mixed with wholesome, can by the instinct of nature make choice of that which is proper for them, and abstain from the contrary; what marvel is it, if the flock of Christ, who know the voice of the true Shepherd from the voice of strangers, should by the guidance of Gods assisting Spirit do the same. Who can deny that God hath his Temple where Antichrist hath his Throne, seeing, 
* 2. Thess. 2. Reuel. 18. 4.  Antichrist (as the Apostle tells us) is to sit in it? or that some of God's people may be in Babylon, seeing such are warned by the Spirit to come out of her: and it were in vain to command a man to depart a place if he were not there.  
Now, if any shall think these motives and considerations of ours, especially touching the last six hundred years, not to be altogether so exact as the Papists require, who challenge us to produce the names of such visible Protestants in all ages, as professed the same entire doctrine in all respects, that we do; I answer, first, that it is not our hold that the Church never erreth or discordeth from itself in minoribus, in matters of less moment, and therefore it is sufficient for us to show who professed our faith entirely, in majoribus, that is, such points as of themselves are fundamental. Secondly, we say, that whereas we find a twofold state of the Church in the 
r Reuel. 20. 2.  Apocalypse: the one before the losing of Satan, whilst the old Dragon was shut up in the bottomless pit for a thousand years: the other after his losing, when the Devil was to be let free to go and deceive the Nations, not in one petty Hamlet, but in the four quarters of the earth, that is, (as Saint 
s Aug. de Ciuit. Dei, lib. 20. cap. 8. & 9 Vid. Bellar. lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. c. 7.  Austen expounds it) under the reign and tyranny of Antichrist; We are not bound to give so strict a reckoning and account of our Professors, under the second state of the Church, as under the first. The reason is, because the Church in her first estate was glorious to behold, appearing like a 
t Reuel. 12. 1.  Woman clothed with the Sun. But in the latter she was to be under the thraldom of Antichrist, and our Adversaries themselves tell us, that then we are not to inquire for visible Professors of the true faith, or for the public exercise of Religion, so 
u Suarez lib. 5. cont. sect. Angl. cap. 21. Bellar. lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. c. 7.  Suarez, Bellarmine, and others. In a word, than was the time that the Church was to flee into the wilderness, as was foretold, Revel. 12. Now, to expect multitudes 
x Reuel. 12. 14.  of people, frequent cities, pompous splendour, affluence of food and provision in a wilderness, were extreme madness; this were to suppose a wilderness to be no wilderness. In Deserts there may be assemblies of men, but they are rare; there may be food, but we know it is but little, and such happily as is but absolutely necessary for the life of man; and there may be buildings & edifices, but through the thickets of trees, and shades of leaves hardly to be discerned. And so did it far with the Church under the tyranny of Antichrist. There were some always of it, but few; there were assemblies, but not so evident to the eye of the world; and there was the food of the Word and Sacraments, but not so plentiful, nor every where so pure as before times.  
But who would think that the Jesuits were all this while but in jest, and that they are conscious to themselves, that the task which they require to be performed on our part, is not feasible on their own. For let me but question them from their own grounds; whether the entire articles of faith, which the Church of Rome now holds, are found mentioned by Writers in all ages? The Cardinal and others of the Jesuits ingeniously confess they were not, and namely Indulgences, the Church's treasury, the Pope's canonising of Saints, etc. only they answer, that it follows not, that they were not believed because they are not mentioned: Be it so; but if their articles of faith be not mentioned, how will they make it appear by the testimonies of writers in all ages (as they undertake to do) that such Tenets were from the time of the blessed Apostles held without interruption. 
z Bellar. lib. 4. de verbo Dei, cap. 9 §. Quarta regula.  Bellarmine therefore answers, that the concurrent testimonies of some Writers of greatest note, affirming such a Doctrine to have been professed & believed by the Church in all ages, none gainsaying it, will serve the turn. But here, besides that they stand not to their first bargain, which was to produce the testimonies of Writers in all ages; I demand of what ages they mean that their writers shall be, to whose concurrent judgement they will adhere; if of the primative Church, we accept the offer, but this will little advantage them: for neither are many points of difference between us and them mentioned by those writers, as above was specified, much less affirmed to be Apostolical Traditions: neither are those which are mentioned, allowed of in that sense which they deliver. If the writers of the after Church, and namely the Schoolmen, let them hear 
a Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 7. §. 46. Solum est in eo discrimen, quod si quid universi patres de religione tradunt concorditer, id statim, tanquam dogma commune doctorum omnium, qui varijs aetatibus vixerunt, recipitur, quoniam illud etiam scholastici doctores (saltem pro maiore parte) recipiunt, ut qui in materia fidei atque religionis sanctos patres duces sequuntur. At non vicissim quicquid scholastici doctores concorditer tradunt, id existimandum est Ecclesiae alios doctores omnes, qui varijs aetatibus vixerunt, tradidisse. Multa enim scholastici ad doctrinam patrum explicatius addiderunt.  Gregory de Valentia's own censure concerning them. Whatsoever all the Fathers (saith he) do uniformly deliver, that is to be held for the opinion of the Doctors of all times, because the Schoolmen do follow the holy Fathers as their guides; But not on the contrary, whatsoever the Schoolmen do deliver uniformly, is to be thought to have been believed by the Doctors in all ages; because the Schoolmen have added many things more explicatly to the doctrine of the Fathers. Seeing therefore, neither ancient writers will serve their turn, no latter may be admitted, I demand by what other authority they hope now to make good their brag? By what (do the 
b Bellar. lib. 4. de verbo Dei, cap. 9 5. Quinta regula. Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 7. §. 44.  Jesuits answer) but by the testimony of the Church, and chiefly the present, affirming such a doctrine to have been universally believed in all ages. And this indeed is their last refuge, whereby it may plainly appear, that after they have so loudly dared us to show the perpetuity of our Church in all ages, a posteriori, by producing the names of our several Professors, they can be contented quietly to relinquish that title themselves, and to fly to the testimony of the Church, which being with them the foundation and principle of their faith, is not properly to argue a posteriori, but a priori, the difference between our arguing in that kind and theirs, being but this, that we proceed descending downwards from the Scriptures, they ascending upwards from the present Church. But I ask now, will the Church's testimony in this case serve their turns, to prove, that whatsoever is held at this present as an article of faith in the Roman Consistory, was always so believed in the Church. No, do 
c Bellar. lib. 1. de verbo Dei, cap 10. Valent. in Thom. tom. 3. disp. 1. q. 1. p. 6.  Bellarmine, Valentia, and other Jesuits inform us: for some points (say they) were not heretofore defined by the Church (in which to err was then no heresy) which now are; and Thomas tells us that the Pope may make a new Creed: But we ask then, how their articles of faith were held in all ages? They reply, that these new additions of theirs, though they were not as then made articles of faith, nor believed by the Fathers explicitly, yet were they implicitly believed. But this plungeth them then into another gulf, for if implicitly only, than the profession thereof was not visible; for an implicit belief is like seed buried in the ground, and cannot serve for any of those proofs, whereby the visibility of the Church which is in question, may be tried. But haply (will some say) those points which in former times were not mentioned or not expressly believed, or not defined, are but matters of less moment, and such as the present Church of Rome makes not to be fundamental. No, do the Jesuits answer; for they are even such as are by the Tridentine and other General Counsels, commanded under pain of an Anathema to be believed, and to deny the which is by their Constitutions made damnable heresy.  
Thus, whatsoever they pretend, they find no harbour, but in their present Church, and that like the Sirtes too, troublesome and tempestuous. For our parts, God hath afforded us a quiet Haven where in to anchor, the holy Scriptures, which teach us, that if we cannot discern the Church Catholic, fide oculorum, with the faith of our eyes, and say videmus, we see it: we should yet apprehend it, oculis fidei, with the eyes of our faith, and say, credimus, we believe it.  Credo Ecclesiam Catholicam. I believe the Catholic Church.   


Vnde Zizania? THE ORIGINAL AND PROGRESS of Heresy.  
Handled and applied before his late MAJESTY at THEOBALD'S. An. Dom. 1624.  
By EDWARD CHALONER, Dr. in Divinity, and Principal of ALBAN Hall in OXFORD.  
LONDON Printed by William Stansby.    

Vnde Zizania? The Original and Progress of HERESY.  MATTH. 13. 27. So the Servants of the Housholder came and said unto him, Sir, Didst not thou sow good Seed in thy field? From whence then hath it Tares? 
THe Progeny of Heresies, begotten by the Prince of darkness, and conceived in the conclave of Hell, cannot be seen by mortal eyes, but in aenigmate, in a riddle or Parable, and therefore most fitly in a Parable, is here set forth, the original and progesse of them. First, You have their Antecedent, to wit, the sowing of good Seed before them. For, howsoever Heresies may be antiqua, ancient; yet they are not prima, the first and most ancient, and therefore is Christ the Husbandman, first presented in the Narration, as seminans, sowing good Seed in his field, before the Enemy is produced reseminans, resowing the same Acres with unprofitable grain. Secondly, their Efficient or Author, the Devil, who is pointed out by two remarkable properties, his malice, in that he is termed inimicus, the Enemy, and his subtlety, which appeared by those advantages which he took in sowing. The first was the opportunity of the time, for he wrought not his mischief in the face of the Sun, whilst the Servants of the Husbandman might bear him witness, but in the dead of night; not whilst the Husbandman himself slept; for he which keepeth Israel, neither slumbreth nor sleepeth, but, Cum dormirent homines (saith the Text) whilst men slept, that is, whilst the Pastors and overseers of the flock, those to whom the Master had let out his Vineyard, were supine and negligent in their charge. The second, was the nature of the grain which he sowed, sympathising and according with the good Seed in the manner and likeness of growth, that is, Heresies bearing the Image and Superscription of Truth: He took not therefore Acorns, or Mast, or Kernels, or Fruit-stones, but Tares; nor set them with their stalk or bulk, but buried them in the Seed, that they might appear with a Copy of old-age, being not espied till they had taken root, and then displaying themselves gradatim, by little and little. The third, was the conveniency of the place for such a purpose, being free from suspicion (among the Wheat) and the last his hypocritical covering of his action, abijt, he went away, id est latuit (saith an Interpreter) he lay hid under the fair penthouse of zeal and seeming devotion. For had either his venom spawned in any other soil then where the Husbandman had bestowed his Wheat, or had he been spied traversing the field in his proper shape and complexion, the servants of the Housholder could not have been so surprised with admiration; so soon as the first bud had saluted the light, they would have said, behold Tares, behold the Enemy: now that the field had been manured and cultivated with God's Husbandry, the earth made to travel with the fruits of his Garner, and the Enemy's footings undiscerned, these second seeds must spring up, those sprouts become to blade, that blade bring forth fruit, ere the servants will believe the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or quod, as Logicians speak, that they are Tares, and yet for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or propter quod, that is, the Author and Sower of them, they are still ignorant, they come to the Housholder and say unto him, Sir, Didst not thou sow good Seed in thy field, from whence then hath it Tares?  
The case being thus put to the Husbandman by way of question or problem, and the Servants like Scholars in the Mathematics requiring a sensible demonstration of the same, my Text may be not unfitly divided into these two parts, datum & quaesitum. Viz. 

1. First, Datum, the thing given or granted, Sir, Didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? For Interrogatives in holy Writ are oftentimes equivalent to affirmations and assertions, and not notes of doubt or dubitation.  
2. Secondly, Quaesitum, the thing demanded, from whence then hath it Tares?    
The first is here, and hath been by all good Christians ever granted, and therefore shall not by me be disputed; Far be it from any to question the Seed of the good Husbandman, or to suspect his Grain. Bellarmine & Becanus two jesuits, would fain lay the aspersion upon us; the one, that we teach directly, the other that we affirm by consequence, God to be the Author of Sin, and so to fasten the Tares upon his sleeve. But let them know that we receive this, datum, this granted Proposition, that God ever sows good Seed in his field, with no more scruple than did these Servants. Our Controversy is only the same that theirs was, touching the Quaesitum, the thing demanded, from whence the Tares are. And here we that are Servants of the Housholder are no more exempted from Cavils, than his field from adulterate Grain. The Devil hath scattered his Seed amongst the Wheat, the World beholds it not only in the blade, but also bearing fruit, & yet the Servants of the Enemy deny that it is Tares, unless we can show unde, from whence they are? This is the Riddle wherewith the Antichristian Sphinxes do assault us. But alas, how is the Text perverted, the Scene altered? serui non Patrisfamilias, sed inimici, the Servants, not of the Housholder, but of the Enemy, of him which is conscious to his own act, veniunt & dicunt, they come and say; and to whom do they say? non illi, not to the Oedipus that can resolve them, the Husbandman, but nobis, to us, dormientibus, us that slept, they ask us the question, they require of us to dissolve the knot; Name the Heresy (say they) whereof we cannot record the Brochers, describe the place, date the time 
Bellar. l. 4. de Eccles. cap. 5.  of its Nativity? Could Arius, or Nestorius, or Macedonius, play their prizes unspyed by our Sentinels? Could they, or any other Heretic ever scape the Eyes and Ears of our Intelligencers? Thus they insult before the Victory. They indeed which are of the Enemy's Council, may be privy to his Plots: we that are of the Householders retinue, may decern the Tares, and yet not know the sowing, and we may say without prejudice either to our cause or skill with these men, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From whence hath it Tares?  
But the ground hereof will yet better appear, if we compare the Enemy's carriage in this Parable with his wiles and legerdemain at other times. All creatures which inhabit this Globe of Earth are subject to a vicissitude of Light and Darkness, Day and Night, and to the necessary actions thereof, waking and sleeping. That which properly in this kind belongs to man considered in his Naturals, the same by a certain symmetry and proportion is found also in his Intellectuals, that waking in the one, he may be said sometimes to sleep in the other. 
Gen. 2.  This advantage the Devil took in his first Masterpiece, sowing the Seeds of original transgression in the fairest of God's fields, our Mother Eue. For the 
Verse. ●.  man being absent and deficient in his watch, the Enemy assaulted the woman (as here in this Parable) in a manner unseen, appearing not in the colours of an Enemy, but of the Serpent, who whilst Adam the common Citizen of the Earth continued in his integrity, was a Domestic creature and parcel of his Family. And it is worth our noting, how in the whole Story, God conceals the Devil's name, because the Devil ever in such cases conceals his nature. In this disguise therefore, tendering matter of argument and discourse unto the woman, he scattered a seed so small at the first, that it exceeded not a grain of Muster-seed, only of question and doubt, Yea, hath God said, ye shall not eat of every tree of the Garden? Who would have thought a naked question could harbour so much poison in its bowels? yet so dangerous is it to entertain a question of God's peremptory Injunctions, that this alone in the next reply, brought forth the blade, which was incredulity, and emboldened the Devil to give God the lie, saying, Ye shall not dye. This blade at length 
Vers. 4.  shot up so high, that the Prince of the Air doth now therein nestle himself, and yielded that bitter fruit, And she did eat, and gave unto her Husband, 
Vers. 6.  who did eat.  
Thus he sowed the Seeds of Heresy in the Church of the jews at the coming of our Saviour. The Prophets which had successively tended the flock of Israel, were now asleep in their Sepulchers, and the watchmen which remained, slumbered upon their Couches of carnal and temporal projects, dreaming of an earthly Messias, and Kingdoms of this World; when lo, the Enemy shrouding himself in the frock of men venerable for their profession, [Scribes and pharisees] seasoned with the leaven of seeming devotion (long Prayers and Hypocrisy) remarkable for their industry, in compassing two vast Elements Sea and Land to gain one Proselyte, instilled those Errors which at the first unseen did in a while send forth an ominous blade, and that blade a worse fruit, observing still the same rule of progression, that if the Masters were one, their Proselytes should be two fold more children of Hell than themselves, Matth. 23. And to be brief, thus is the Enemy prophesied to sow the Seeds of those great defections and fall away from the truth towards the latter day, when the whole world almost was to sleep, being intoxicated with the wine of the Whore of Babylon: What part thereof wherein he expounds not this Parable with his act, and wherein those stratagems of deluding men, so slumbering with counterfeit devotion, appearing truths, and insensible growthes lie not buried? Would you understand the kind of doctrine which he should insinuate? know, that it was not a professed opposition of the Truth, but a secret undermining of it; and therefore, both by Saint Paul and also in the Revelation it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Mystery 
2. Thess. 2. 7. Reuel. 17. 5. Reuel. 13. 18.  which none but the wise and he which hath understanding can penetrate; Would you take a view of the Actors? Imagine not that you see the faces of Nero's or Dioclesian's, but what we read in Daniel of Antiochus the type of Antichrist, that he should 
Dan. 11. 21.  get the Kingdom by flatteries, the same in holy Writ is affirmed of Antichrist himself and his Complices. The Teachers which in the last and perilous times must arise (saith Saint Paul) are men having the form of godliness, but denying the power thereof, 2. Tim. 3. The Beast in the Revelation is described with two horns like the Lamb, but withal having the voice of a Dragon, Chap. 13. The woman which sits upon many waters is an Whore, and enticeth with dalliances like another Dalilah; and with a Cup of abomination makes drunk the Inhabitants of the earth, Chap. 17. Her Army are Locusts, whose faces are as the faces of men, whose hair as the hair of women, but look either within, and then see teeth as the teeth of Lions, or behind, and behold there tails like unto the tails of Scorpions, Chap. 9 Lastly would you see the manner how his poisonous doctrine is to gain upon the Church? Then as before you beheld not the faces of Nero's, so neither must you here expect the marches of Iehu's. Away with that fond imagination of Bellarmine and other 
Bellar. l. 3. de Rom. Pont. c. 8.  Romanists, who imagine that Antichrist, must defer his war upon the Church until the end of the World, and that he must dispatch all his conquests, and finish his reign within the short space of three years and an half. No; Saint john tells us that Antichrist was already come, and Saint Paul, that in his days the mystery of iniquity did already work, but how? not that the servants of the householder could take notice of it, for that, he that did let, would let (saith he) until he were taken away, and then (and not till then) should that wicked one be revealed. 2. Thes. 2. For as it is true in morality, that nemo repentè fit pessimus, no man at the first push becomes extremely bad, so the Apostle saith, it shall far with these Seducers, they shall not renounce the truth at once, but decline from the sincerity of it by degrees, growing (as the Text hath it) worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. 2. Tim. 3. 13. What therefore is observed, touching the methodical disposition of the seven Churches in the Revelation (though it cannot be typically or prophetically applied (as some have fond imagined, to any Churches in particular) 
Beda. Lyra. Gloss. ordin. Alphonsus Conrade. in Apoc. the Rhem. upon the 1. Re.  yet the Ronanists (who by these parts understand the whole) may observe the same, in the several states and conditions of the Church universal. If Ephesus the first and mother Church of lesser Asia, leave her first love, chap. 2. verse 4. this defect of love in Smyrna, the second Church, begets counterfeit professors, them, which say they are jews and are not, but are the Synagogue of Satan, v. 9 Smyrnas counterfeits in Pergamus the third Church, prove Balaams, and cast a stumbling block to those of the covenant, even the Orthodox believers, pointed out by the Children of Israel. v. 14. Now what is but a stumbling block in Pergamus, the third Church, procures a toleration for jesabel to preach it in Theatira the fourth, v. 20. and lo, what in Theatira the fourth is preached, and as it were sowed, the same springs up in Sardis the fifth, and chokes a great part of the good corn, and the praecipe to the Angel (that is, the Bishop thereof) is, strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to dye. chap. 3. verse 2.  
Whereby we may note the difference between the particular heresies of Arius, Nestorius, and the like, whose Authors and beginners, the Papists brag that they can assign, and this general defection or falling away under Antichrist, of which they challenge us to nominate the time, and Authors. For first, those backslidings were of them, of whom S. john saith, they went out from us, but they were not of 
2. john. 2. 19  us, and therefore making a rent and separation from the Church, were the more remarkable, this of Antichrist (who is to sit in the Temple of God) is to be of 
2. Thes. 4.  those who were of us, and went not out from us, and therefore making no visible rent from the Church, must needs be the less noted. Secondly, those being but of some few, left Sentinels enough behind to eye them; this was to be universal, of the Sentinels and Watchmen themselves, even of the stars which the Dragon was to pull down from heaven with his tail; and if the Watchmen themselves sleep, who shall discover the approach of the enemy? Thirdly those made open invasion upon the truth, and oppugned the bulwarks of Faith with hostile fury, as Arius the divinity of Christ, Macedonius the divinity of the Holy Ghost and the like; this is a claudestine conspiracy, and opposeth of the faith, not directly, but obliquely, not formally, but virtually, not in express terms, but by consequences, and therefore until the trumpets sounded the alarm, and the thunders in the Revelation gave warning, few sufpected it. Lastly, those were like the gourd of jonas, 
Jon. ●. 10.  which sprang up in a night; this was like the tares, first but a seed, than a blade, and lastly a fruit; and therefore approaching by unsensible degrees, was the less observed and discovered.  
And to apply these things more home to the Church of Rome, let any speak whether the tower of this second Babel mounted not by the same steps and ascents unto the battlements? How many things at the first were but stumbling blocks, that in time became stairs to lift jesabel into the Pulpit? how many positions in the infancy of the Gospel unknown, that after a while were disputed, then sided, and at length ratified and confirmed? What opinions that at first were but dogmata scholae, tenants of the schools, that in their riper age were made dogmata Ecclesiae, Constitutions of the Church, & last dogmata fidei, Articles of faith? What errors, but Pigmies in their birth, that became grand heresies and sons of Anak in their growth? So that we may truly say of the master builders, which upon a foundation happily of gold of silver, laid rows of stone or brick, and their prentices which thereon advanced a second story of slime or rubbish, as Vincentius Lyrinensis 
Vincent. Liren cont. haereses.  did of the Donatists, building their heresy upon the authority of Cyprian. O marvellous change of things, the authors of the opinions are judged Catholics, but the followers thereof are Heretics; the masters are pardoned, but the scholars or learners are condemned; the writers of the books shall without doubt be the Children of the Kingdom, but Hell shall be the place for the abettors and maintainers thereof. And truly it is an observation no less judicious than true of Albaspinus, Bishop of Orleans, that scarce any error 
Albaspin. de veteribus Ecclesiae ritibus. lib. 1. cap. 9  hath crept into the Church which took not its original and source from the ancient approved Discipline of the Church, not that the institution was bad, but that the application is now amiss, the servants of the Housholder made the laws, but the servants of the enemy added the gloss. Harken what Ferus a Friar saith upon the eighth of judges, speaking of Gedeon. There was (saith he) a double sin in Gedeon, 
Fer. Annot. in. Jud. c. 8. Colon. 1571. Duplex. igitur peccatum eius fuit, & quoth Ephod contra verbum Dei fecit, & quod ipsius abusum videns, non iterum abolevit. Quis autem non videt similia in Ecclesia contingere? Quam multa instituerunt sancti bona intention, quae tamen nunc videmus partim in abusum, partim in superstitionem verti? Exemplo sint festa, ceremoniae, imagines, miss●, monasteria, etc. Nihil horum ea intentione institutum fuit qua nunc habentur, etc. & tamen Gedeones nostri tacent, non absolent abusus non auferunt superstitiones.  both in that he made an Ephod contrary to the Word of God, and in that seeing the abuse thereof he took it not away. Now who sees not, that the like happeneth in the Church? how many things did the Saints ordain with a good intent, which we see at this day changed, partly by abuse and partly by superstition? The feasts, Ceremonies, Images, Monasteries and the like, none of them were instituted in that sort at the first, as now they are used, and yet we gedeon's hold our peace, they take not away the abuse, they take not away the superstition.  
For if we take a review of what was anciently practised in the Primitive Church, we shall find that the Discipline thereof had the same scope touching the soul, which Physic hath for the body, and may accordingly be divided into that which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is, tending to the preservation of health, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which aims at the restoring of health, the one conducing to the preventing, the other to the removing of Diseases. Now, as there be in a Christian man three principal virtues, from whence as from so many vital parts, all graces in man do flow, to wit, Faith, Hope, and Charity, so this parcel of Church Discipline which concerned the preservation of health, was employed in prescribing such Cordials and Antidotes, as were behooveful to preserve, fortify, or increase some one of these.  
For the benefit of Faith, in respect of knowledge, and to season it with a true sense and apprehension of divine matters, the Church did apply diverse instruments.  
First Books, and those principally the holy Scriptures, comprising such writings only as we style by the name of Canonical. To them the jews of the dispersion, called Hellenists, added in their Greek translations the Apocrypha books, as profitable, partly for their matters sake, partly for the supply of the history of the Bible. Now the Greek and Latin Church receiving their translations of the old Testament, not of the jews inhabiting judea (who never mixed the Apocrypha with the other) but of those of the dispersion, and being loath to distaste them to whom they were beholding for their pains, were in the beginning contented only not to sever them from the Canonical Books in binding, howsoever they did in authority; afterwards they began to cite them in their Sermons & Works, though not as divine, yet as venerable and familiar writings, than permitted them to be read (as Athanasius 
Athanas●in Synopsi.  affirms) to the Catechumenists, in length of time, to the Congregation, and in the end, custom giving them credit; they were doubtfully in the Florentine, but more palpably in the Tridentine 
Concil. Florent. in decret. sup. un. jacob. & Armenian. Trident. Concil. sess. 2.  Council canonised with the style of Canonical, and made equal in authority to the other.  
Secondly, Translations; for books in an unknown language are like Trumpets giving an uncertain sound. And therefore, no sooner was the Gospel preached, but the Scriptures had their translations. The universal Church by custom, established none, because none could be of universal use. Yet amidst such variety as was then extant, that which passeth under the name of the Septuagint, found best entertainment in the Greek Church, and a translation made out of the same into Latin, by an uncertain Author, found somewhat the like in the Latin. The chief cause whereof seems to be 
Hieron. praefat. in lib. job.  this, that for a long time there wanted in the West, those who being skilled in the Hebrew could supply their wants from thence with a better. This Latin translation was afterwards partly mended, partly 
Bellar. lib. 2. de verbo Dei, c. 9  patched with fragments and phrases picked out of Hierome; winning authority in the Western Church by two means, Custom and Ignorance of the Originals, and at length in the Council of Trent made authentical, and by two Popes, Sixtus 
Concil. Trident. sess. 2. Bellar. lib. 2. de verbo Dei, c. 2. §. Dices. Sixtus Senens. lib. ult. cap. ult.  Quintus, and Clement the eighth, confirmed by two contrary Editions, with the solecisms of the Translators, and errors of the Transcribers.  
Ceremonies were the third instrument; whereby, as by certain outward signs and characters, the Church would imprint in the minds of ignorant people, the use and effects of the Sacraments. These at the first were performed by expressions rather verbal then real, as Exhortations, Prayers, Interrogations, and such like, as we use in baptism. But after awhile, to these verbal and audible ceremonies, real and visible were added, and that without any bad meaning or intention of their first founders; but see how Tares in the end displayed themselves amongst the Wheat. For what were at the first but few, by Saint Austin's time were so multiplied, that in his 119. Epist. he complaineth of their burden, and now are so increased, that they are more than can be borne; what were then but 
Bellar. lib. 2. de Sacram. cap. 31 §. Quinta.  things accessory, and helps to the worship of God, are now become parts of the worship of God and meritorious; what were then but signs, and had only usum significandi, a use to signify, are now 
Bellarm. ibid. §. Secunda, & §. Tertia.  become causes, and have usum efficiendi, a use to produce supernatural effects.  
From these Ceremonies, in process of time, abused and misunderstood, many gross errors had their original. For to begin with Baptism, it borrowing a ceremony from Exorcising, which in those days was a gift in the Church of casting out Devils by adjuration, it signified thereby (not that men before Baptism are possessed with the Devil) but first, what they are by Nature, that is, children 
Aug. de Nupt. & Concupisc. cap. 29. & Epist. 105. ad Sixtum. Socrat. histor. Ecclesiast. lib. 5 cap. 21. joseph. Vicecomes de antiquis baptismi ritib. lib. 1. cap. 19 & 20. Hieron. dialog. lib. 3. adverse. Pelag. in fine. August. lib. 2. de Nupt. & Concupisc. cap. 18. Item, libris quaruor, ad Bonifacium, & sex libris contra julian, etc.  of wrath, and servants of the Devil; and secondly, what we are by Grace (whereof Baptism is a Sacrament) that is, freed from the bondage of Satan, and made Coheirs of the Kingdom of heaven. But howsoever, Baptism was not held for a long time so absolutely necessary to salvation, that setting contempt or wilful negligence aside in the party which dies unbaptized, a man might not be saved without it, witness the custom of the church, which was to have but one or two times in the year at the most (to wit, Easter & Whitsuntide) assigned for the same, yet this exorcising at length began to work so far with some, especially after that diverse of the Fathers spoke hyperbolically of baptism in eagerness against Pelagius the Heretic, who taking away original sin, took also away with it by consequence the necessity of baptism, that what was at the first held necessary, necessitate 
Bellar. lib. 1. de Baptism. cap. 4.  precepti, by the necessity of a precept, was made to be necessary, necessitate medij, by the necessity of a means; and in conclusion, the Schoolmen having taken a more distinct survey of Hell, than was 
Bellar. lib. 2. de Purgat. cap. 6.  done afore-time, assigned lodgings in the third story for children which die without baptism, wherein they award them poenam damni, pain of loss, though not poenam sensus, pain of sense, affirming 
Bellar. lib. 1. de Baptism. cap. 4.  farther this pain to be eternal.  
As it fared with Baptism, so did it with the Eucharist; For what was Transubstantiation therein at the first, but non ens, a thing neither provable by the Scriptures, as many of the learnedst Romanists 
Biel in Can. Missae. lect. 40. Cajetan. in 3. Quaest. 72. art. 1. Faventin▪ in 4. sent. disp. 45. dist. 11. c 3. Camaracens. & Scot apud Bellar. lib. 3. de Sacram. Eucharist. c. 23. Scotus apud Bellar. ibid. Vid. August. in de Catechizandis rudibus, c. 9  do confess, nor (as some of them do also grant) received for diverse hundred years into the articles of Christian faith. The Fathers indeed acknowledged a change of the Bread and Wine, but it was a change not of their substance, but of their use, for of common elements, they become Sacraments. This change of their use by occasion of Altars and other ceremonies which crept in, as also by reason of the figurative speeches of the Ancients, uttered partly imprint a lively apprehension of the things exhibited, and partly to breed a reverend opinion of the Sacraments, as containing in them so great mysteries, produced in the end a doubt of the change of the substance, but what kind of change it was, was sooner defined then understood. For Berengarius was forced in his abjuration, to acknowledge a sensual change, wherein the body of Christ is touched by the hands, and broken by the 
De consecrat. dist. 2. Can. Ego Berengarius. Bellar. l. 1. de Eucharist. c. 2. §. Quinta Gloss. ad Can. Ego Berengar. Bell. de Imag. sanct. l. 2. c. 22. §. Secundo. Lomb. l. 4. sent. dist. 11. A. Scot 4. sent. dist. 11. q. 6. Cajet. 3. part. q. 75 art. 6. Soto. 4. sent. d. 9 q. 2. Marginist. Scoti. Theor. 1. & 2. Durand. 4. sent. d. 11. q. 3. Suarez Metaphys. disp. 31. §. 6. Fonsec. Metaph. l. 4. c. 2 q. 4. & lib. 5. c. 8. q. 5. Goffred. quolibet. 8. q. 16. Mirandul. in Apolog. q 9 Henric. quolib. 9 q. 9 & quolib. 11 q. 4. Fab. Favent. in 4. sent. disp. 16. c. 6. Thoma & Thomistae volunt transubstantiationem esse ad substantiam, & per ipsam accipientem esse, quae dicitur transubstantiatio productiva. Tho. 3. part. q. 75. art. 4.  teeth of the Receiver, which the new Romanists do disclaim, and the gloss tells us, that unless we cautelously understand his words, we shall fall into a worse heresy than that wherein Berengarius himself was, whereas there are no exacter forms of speaking in matters of faith (saith Bellarmine) than those which they use that abjure heresy. Peter Lombard, the father of the Schoolmen, though he acknowledgeth a change of the Bread and Wine, yet what kind of change it is, whether formal or substantial, or of any other kind, he professed he was not able to define; much less could he call it Transubstantiation, which term in his days was not coined. Many of the ancient Schoolmen which succeeded him, being loath (as it seems) to quit all the truth at once, held only a partial change, that is, either of the matter without the form, which opinion by some is attributed to Scotus, or of the form without the matter, as Aegidius and Durand, or of the matter and form without the subsistency (which the Jesuits in their Metaphysics make not to differ really from the essence) as Goffred, and after him Picus Mirandula; or lastly, of the specifical nature without the individual, as Henricus. Thomas Aquinas, the first that set Popery in joint, and to whom the present Church of Rome owes for many Tenets, held a total change, and added withal, that this change is conversio productiva, a conversion whereby one thing is produced of the other; but the Jesuits, though they hold the change to be total, yet they say, it is not conversio productiva, a conversion whereby one thing is made of the other, but only conversio adductiva, a conversion whereby 
Bell. l. 3. de Eucharist. c. 18. §. Ex his colligimus conversionem panis in corpus Domini, non esse productivam, nec conseruativam, sed adductivam.  one thing is brought into the place of the other, and so instead of Transubstantiation, which was confirmed in the Lateran Council, they have invented in respect of the Bread and Wine a Desubstantiation, or Annihilation, and in respect of Christ's body a Translocation.  
Ceremonies and the exorbitant Phrases of Rhetoricians having brought Transubstantion into the World, their Infant turned Midwife to the Mother, and delivered her of two other Monsters, adoration and the Sacrifice of the Mass, though her travel of this later seems to have been both hard and tedious, for as the Master of the Sentences, and also Aquinas 
P. Lomb. sent. l. 4. dist. 12. g. Thom. 3. part. q. 83. art. 1.  long after him defined it, the proper and propitiatory Sacrifice for the living and the dead, was not then received, but only, the commemorative and Eucharistical which we acknowledge.  
To leave other fruit of the same tree untasted; by the same wicket of Ceremonies, crept Images into the Church. For Ceremonies which at the first were no more than representations of accidents, and symbola virtutum, descriptions and pictures of virtues, became afterwards to be representations of 
Bellar. l. 2. de imag. c. 9 Sanderus l. 2. de cultu imag. c. 4 Faventin. in 3. sent. c. 6. Suarez ex Alano. disp. 54. §. 1. Euseb. l. 7. hist. c. 14.  substances, and imagines personarum, Images of persons. Howsoever it was, these personal representations in their birth, were more modest, being only of Christ's humanity, or of the Saints, and those in private houses, or profane places, not in public Churches. But after three hundred years, the custom which (Eusebius saith) sprang from Gentilism, of erecting Images in honour of those whom 
Epiphan. Epist. ad johan. Epis. Hieroso. tom. 2  men esteemed Saviour's, brought them to find entrance (though not without opposition) into some Churches, but to this end only, as having an Historical use to recall to mind the memory of things past. About six hundred years after Christ, besides the Historical use to inform the understanding, they acquired also a Rhetorical use to stir up 
Greg. l. 7. Ep. 53. ad Secundinum, in fine. Bel. l. 2. de imagine. c. 12. Septima Synodus definivit, imagines esse venerandas, non quidem cultu latriae, sed honore illo, quo etiam prosequimur sacras literas etc. Vid. Bell. l. 2. de imagine. sanct. cap. 20. Alex. 3. part. q. 30. art. ult. Durand. l. 3. sent. dist. 9 q. 2. Alphonsus a Castro, verbo, Imag. Thom. 3. part. q 25. art. 3. Caiet ibid. Bonavent. Carthus. Ailman. Capreolus in 3. sent. dist. 9 Bell. l. 2. de imagine. c. 20. 2●  devotion, and Gregory the Great, though he misliked worshipping of them, yet he allowed worshipping before them. This worshipping before them in the second Nicen Council gained them the honour, though not of adoration, yet of veneration, and this veneration in the end by Thomas Aquinas and others came to be interpreted adoration, but with this difference, that some spoke more doubtfully, teaching the Image not to be worshipped in it self, but only the person before, or by the Image, as Alex. de Hales, Durand and Alphonsus à Castro. Others more bluntly, that the Image is to be worshipped in itself, and that with the same worship that the person is which it represents, as Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, Caietan, Carthusianus, Ailman and Capreolus. But the jesuits walking the middle way, have invented an Idolatry more sublimated and refined, saying that the Image is not to be worshipped with the same worship that the person himself is which it figures, understanding by the same, the same for its own sake, but yet it may and aught to be (say they) with the same for the persons sake which it represents; with the same, though not of itself, yet by accident; though not properly, yet improperly; though not perfectly, yet imperfectly; though not directly, yet reductively; though not univocally, yet anologically; the one sending his Scholars to Hell by Sunshine, the other through a mist of distinctions.  
Now as the Primative Church was studious to benefit and advance faith in the point of knowledge, so was it no less solicitous to arm and fortify it against the battery of temptations. Hence it was, that during the heat of persecutions, the custom of the Christians was, daily to receive the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, as a sovereign Antidote against the fear of death. But the persecutions being ended, and the people's devotion (as in prosperity it comes to pass) somewhat abated, this daily communicating was retained only by the Clergy, not that the Laity might not receive with them de iure, of right, but, that they did it not the facto, in deed. Now, because there were not in all places store of Clergy to communicate together, as in private Parish Churches, Hermitages and the like, for a while the Priests in those places, (imitating the 
Socrat. l. 5. ●. 21  Alexandrian custom) read only the Prayers and Gospels of the Communion, and received not, but afterwards fearing to be defrauded of their Offerings (if they read only and not received) they began to receive alone, teaching that this action of theirs being performed in the name of others, was applied and as beneficial unto them as if they did it themselves; and hence grew private Masses in the Church of Rome, wherein the Priest communicates or excommunicates rather without the people.  
The second Christian virtue which the Primitive Church laboured, by her best Medicines to support and preserve, was Hope, which reflects upon the future bliss, and the joys of the World to come. For excitement whereunto, two customs were entertained; the one pointing at that happiness which the Saints enjoy immediately after their departure hence; the other, at the fullness of glory which they shall participate at the end and cosummation of the World.  
That which pointed at the joy and bliss which the Saints enjoy immediately after their departure hence, consisted partly in thanksgivings unto God for the glory bestowed upon them, partly in other remembrances, to excite and stir up men from consideration of their reward, to be imitators of their Virtues. For deeper impression whereof, there were wont to be yearly Solemnities at their Sepulchers, Commemorations of their names, and Orations made in their praises. Now it being the custom of them which fell in persecution, to implore the Prayers of Martyrs in Prison for them: Saint Cyprian 
Cypr. l. 1. Ep. 3. l 3. Ep. 18.  upon supposition that Saints departed hence do pray for the particular behoof of those whom they know they left behind them, did desire some Martyrs and others, not after, but before their deaths, that if they prevented him and went before him into their Master's presence that then they would not forget to remember him unto God. This soliciting of Martyrs before their deaths, brought in the next Age a custom to call upon them after their deaths, and this calling upon them after it, howsoever it may be accounted rather amongst the strains of Rhetoric (being done in their Aniversarie Declamations) than the Aphorisms of Faith, yet by Gregory the great time, it woven Prayers into the liturgy, that God would hear their Intercessions; but afterwards when the Glass of the Trinity was perfected, wherein the Schoolmen conceive the Saints to see whatsoever is done upon earth, than these Prayers to God to hear the Intercessions of the Saints, were changed into Prayers, to the Saints, to hear our Intercessions themselues, which is the practice of the present Church of Rome, and came in (saith 
Bell. l. 1. de sanctor. beatitud. c. 8.  Bellar.) consuetudine non lege, by a custom not a law.  
The other Custom that aimed at the fullness of glory which the Saints shall enjoy at the end and consummation of the World, was performed by Prayers for their glorious Resurrection, and their public acquittal in the last Day, the one being an exemplification of the Petition, Thy Kingdom come, the other of that which follows after it, Thy will be done. For the greater solemnity whereof, Oblations at Funerals and sometimes yearly, by the friends of the deceased were made, not (as some Popish Writers do conceive) of the Eucharist, but (as Albaspinus notes) of common Bread or other things, 
Albaspin. de vet. Eccles. ritibus, l. 1 c. 10.  of which the Congregation eating and communicating, acknowledged the deceased by that action (as a sign of Communion) to be co-members with them of the same mystical Body the Church, and interested in the Common Prayers touching the last day. The which produced sundry opinions amongst 
Sixt. Senens. bibliothec. li. 6. annot. 345.  the Ancients; for justin Martyr, Tertullian, Clemens Romanus, Lactantius and others were from hence of opinion, that no particular judgement passeth upon the Saints until the last day; but the church following, being loath as it seems to put off this particular judgement wholly until then, and yet not willing to determine, that it should be given immediately upon the passage hence, but allowing an indefinite 
Vid. officium pro defunctis, & Bell. lib. 2. de purge. cap. 5. Offic. de funct. ibid. Libera domine animas omnium defunctorum de ore Leonis, de profundo lacu, ne absorbeat eas tartarus, ne cadant in obscurum, he saith not, ne maneant in obscuro, as if they were there already, but ne cadant in obscurum, of which fear they who are presumed to be in purgatory are by the Jesuits own confessions, altogether freed▪  time for the same, did apply the Church's prayers and well-wishes, (besides their former reference to the final judgement) to this interim also allotted for the particular; in the which they thought they might accompany them to God's Tribunal, and pray for their deliverance from hell, and the jaws of the Lyon. At last the doctrine of purgatory, which (as I shall now declare) for a long time passed as an uncertain or particular opinion amongst private men, getting sway, the self same prayers were interpreted neither of a general, nor of the particular judgement, but of the jail delivery of souls out of purgatory, and so established in the Florentine Council celebrated. An. 1438.  
Another opinion which the oblations and prayers for the public acquittal of the dead wrought amongst some of the ancients, was, that (seeing few died which by the bounty of their friends enjoyed not that honour more or less) all men, good and bad were either at the general judgement, or before, to be purged by fire, the pain whereof, if need were should by these prayers of the living be either diminished or taken away. And hence it is that purgatory got entrance into the Church, which being at the first like the unknown land at the South of America called terra del fogo, was by Origen upon misconstruction of the prayers aforesaid, and an overweening opinion of advancing the mercy of God, translated out of their Academy of Plato into the Schools of Christians. Long it was ere this misshapen Monster could be brought into any probable form. For Origen who first embraced it, taught that the Devils themselves should be saved by it. Others 
Vid. August. de civitate Dei. lib. 21. cap. 17. & 23. cap. 18. & 24. cap. 19 &. 25. cap. 20. &. 25. cap. 25. & 26. cap. 22. &. 27.  to correct that extremity, said, not the Devils, but yet all men. A third, not all men, but all Christians and such as are baptised. A fourth, not all Christians nor all such as are baptised, yet all such as have been once in their lives true believers. A fifth, not all such as have been once in their lives true believers, but yet all such as persevere in the Orthodox faith until their death. A sixth, not all that persevere in the Orthodox faith until their death, but yet all such as persevering do give alms; for these (say they) how great sinners soever they be otherwise, shall have judgement with mercy. A seaventh, not all that show mercy, but yet all that have Christ for their foundation, that is, all 
Bell. lib. 2. de  that die in the state of grace, which opinion is 
purge. cap. 1. Harding. cont. Apollogiam juelli. cap. 16. Divis. 2. Bell. lib. 1. de purge. cap. ult. §. respondet.  attributed unto Saint Ambrose, Hierome, Rupertus, and others. Saint Austen who complains that his age was full of presumptions, being not able to resist the stream of these overflowing errors, thought yet to use the same policy touching purgatory, which he did in other points, as prayer for the dead invocation of Saints, and the like, that is, either to moderate it, or make it doubtful, thinking by degrees to make it incredible. Sometimes therefore he seems to allow it, but yet by the Papists own confession under this proviso, that if any such place should be, yet it is uncertain what end or effect it hath, whether to satisfy God's justice for the sin past, or whether to diminish (as temporal pains use to do) the evil affections of sin still remaining. Again sometimes 
Aug. Enchirid. cap. 67. Item de civitat. Dei. lib. 21. cap. 26. Hypognost. l. 5. Bell. lib. 2. de purge. cap. 1.  he denies the thing itself, sometimes he doubts of it. Nor is it yet agreed amongst the Papists either for the fire, or the place, or the time of it; only thus far they seem at length to concur, that souls do therein satisfy both for venial sins, and for the guilt of punishment due unto mortal sins, when the guilt of the sin itself is remitted and forgiven; which, how contrary both to reason and the ancient purgatory of the Fathers it is, I leave to the judicious to consider. It was first confirmed in the Florentine Council above mentioned.  
Charity succeedeth, for the maintenance and increase whereof, they used the best policy they could to plant Unity and Concord both in the Church Universal, and also in particular Churches, that so 
dist. 99 cap. 1. Vbi primates erant seculi, ac primaiu diciaria potestas— ipsis quoque in civitatibus vellocis nostros patriarchas, etc. Berterius, diatrib. 2. cap. 12. Septem sunt in oriente. & diat. 1. cap. 3 Occidens omnis 6. habet.  if possibly they could, all schisms and contentions amongst Christians, might be removed, & the bond of peace might be kept inviolable.  
For the preservation hereof in the Church universal, it was thought good, that according to the secular division of the Empire, the Church should be divided into certain Dioceses, whereof there were at the first (by Berterius account) thirteen in number, who under the names of Patriarches and Bishops of the first Seas, should join in care and counsel for the good of the Christian Commonwealth. Amongst these, three were (in regard of the Cities wherein they resided) more eminent than 
Hegesippus de excid. urb. Hierosolim. l. 3. cap. 3.  the rest, and began to encroach upon the others jurisdiction, to wit, Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, to which in the second general Council was added for the same cause, Constantinople and afterwards jerusalem, though this last had indeed until the fifth general Council, but a title without substance as being subject to Caesaria, his Metropolitan and in last resort unto Antioch. Now because all things should be done in order, it was thought fit that the Pope, because he was Bishop of Rome, the imperial City should have the precedency, though not 
Concil. gen. 5. Vid. Cyprian. epist▪ 55. & 68 edit. Pamel. Item Aenaeum. Silui. ep. 288.  of authority super reliquos, over the rest, yet of place, inter reliquos, amongst the rest. This precedency of place won him in time a precedency in power, but it was at the first but potestas honoraria, a kind of courtesy authority, not long after it came to be claimed, as ordinaria, as an ordinary power and so was confirmed in the Florentine Council. Lastly, this ordinary power bare sway awhile, because the Pope was great in general Counsels, but now since the last Lateran Council, under Leo the 
Bell. lib. 2. de Concil. cap. 17.  tenth, the Jesuits will have it to bear sway, by another title; because the Pope is great over general Counsels, which adds a farther degree to his greatness, that whereas he was heretofore heard de facto in deed, for that he was judged Orthodox, he now challengeth to be believed de iure, of right, because he cannot be heretical.  
For the preservation of unity and concord in particular Churches, there was a kind of Communion amongst the Ancients, which they celebrated by Eulogies, that is, by Bread, not consecrated for 
Albaspin. de vet. Eccles. rit. lib. 1. cap. 8.  the use of the Sacrament, but otherwise blessed by the Bishop, the which howsoever it was not at the beginning exported forth of the Church where it was offered, yet afterwards it came to be sent upon solemn festivals from the Mother Church unto the Parishes and Villages thereto belonging, by communicating whereof (as by a lively symbol) the fellowship and communion between all the faithful of the same Diocese was represented, and the people acknowledged themselves to compose the same body of Christ together. Now, some being possessed (as Albaspinus observes) with a religious 
Alb. ibid.  conceit of this ceremony, began to deal in like manner with the Eucharist, as may be gathered out of the fourteenth Canon of the Laodicean Council, where the practice thereof is expressly forbidden. But partly the custom which some particulars, in the time of persecution (especially Hermit's (who seldom had the opportunity of receiving) took up, of carrying part of the Sacrament home with them, to partake thereof when they pleased, and partly the charity which in some places was showed in like manner to the sick, bringing 
Euseb. hist. lib. 6. cap. 36.  unto them the remainder of the Bread and Wine, in token of their Communion with the rest, prevailed so far at length with the Roman Church, that what was then but voluntary, and sprang from private devotion, is now made necessary, and enjoined by public injunction; and what then was used sacramentally and for a sign of Communion, is now ordained for other uses, as circumgestation, adoration, and the like.  
Thus having given a taste of some principal errors in Popery, which sprang from that part of Church discipline, which consisted in the conservation of the soul's health; it follows that something should be said of that which belonged to the restoring of the same in such as had impaired it by their falls. This part consisted in two principal ingredients, Corrasives, and Lenitives. The Corrasives were such medicines as were applied to those that fell, for purging out of the old corruption, and keeping of others from the like infection, the which was performed, partly by confessions, and partly other satisfactions.  
Confessions, were nothing else at the first, but public recognitions, for public scandals; which being found useful to Penitents, made Origen and 
Origen. homil. 2. in Psal. 37.  others to persuade men to do the like to their Ministers for private offences, to the end that making known their griefs, they might have plasters for their wounds. But these public confessions through the abating of zeal and avoiding of shame, being turned into private, some began to confound the one private confession, which was imposed by Church discipline, with the other which was voluntary, and so in time, of Consilium Ecclesiasticorum, an advice of Churchmen, it became Praeceptum Ecclesiae, the precept of the Church; and this again, which beforetime was only a Confession of sins, quoad substantiam, for their substance, was by 
Concil. Lateran. sub. Innocent. 3. cap. 21.  the Lateran Council under Innocent the third, farther clogged with an Inquisition of sins, etiam quoad circumstantias, even together with all their particular circumstances.  
Satisfactions which properly come under the Law of Church Discipline, were certain outward remonstrances of sorrow and repentance, wherewith for the trial of Penitents and example of others, the Primitive Church did exercise those that fell, before they restored them to the same state of Communion wherein aforetimes they did stand. divers of the Fathers, that they might breed a willingness in men to undergo them, spoke somewhat Hyperbolically in their commendations, saying, that offences were thereby redeemed, purged, and expiated, which being understood (as the Master of the Sentences expounds them) not of purgations 
P. Lomb. sent. l. 4. d. 18. I.  from the offence as it is an offence to God, or from the punishment due to sin (both which are opposed unto justification) but only of the macula, or spot (which the Schoolmen making to consist in an habitual pravity is opposed chiefly to Sanctification) can little advantage the Popish cause. For who doubts, but that Repentance and Sorrow, though they are not meritorious causes, yet are instrumental, whereby grace takes her speedier effect in diminishing the evil affections and vain desires 
Guilford Duobus modis sumitur remissio peccatorum, Primo, pro non imputatione eorum, secundo pro abolitione macularum ipsorum. Dionys. Carthus. in 4. sent. dist, 16. q. 2.  which dwell in us? But the ancient rites of Satisfaction degenerating with the Times, & the Schoolmen, beginning to confounded justification with Sanctification, (First, by adding the purgation of the macula, or spot unto that which is truly termed justification, as a Species of it, & afterwards forgetting to distinguish them at all) another kind of Satisfaction succeeded in the former's place, differing from it, First, in the matter, as building upon Works of Supererogation, viz. Pilgrimages, Whip, Vows with the like. Secondly, in the end, being not imposed to satisfy the Church in case of scandal, but to transact with God upon terms of justice. Thirdly, in the time, not being now performed before absolution (as formerly was used) but after it. Lastly, in the object being not so much for sin in itself, as for temporal punishment due unto it, when the offence is remitted.  
The Lenetives which the Church applied to such as she perceived to be truly contrite and sorrowful for their sins committed, resided chiefly in absolutions which were exercised either in foro conscientiae, in the Court of the Conscience, whereby the penitent was certified of his reconciliation to God, or in foro Ecclesiae, in the Court of the Church, whereby they who had given public offence by their fall, were reconciled unto the Congregation.  
For the first of these, as the Church never denied the benefit of it to those who rightly desire it, so the Popish necessity and other positions concerning it, are but doctrines of a new Edition. For most 
Lomb. 3. sent. dist. 18. Occam in 4. sent. q. 8. & 9 ad 1. arg. Scoti. Alex. de Hales, Sum. part. 4. q. 21. membr. 1. Thom. in 4. sent. dist. 18. Richardus, apud Dion. Carthus. in 4. sent. dist 18. q. 3. Bonauent. ib.  of the ancient Schoolmen held the absolution to be but either declarative, as Peter Lombard, Occam, Alexander de Hales, or at most but dispositive, whereby faith is ingenerated in the minds of the hearers, by the which they are made capable of remission, as Thomas Aquinas, and Richardus, to whom Bonaventure may be added, who saith, that the power of the Keys extends itself to the remission of the fault by way of deprecation, not by way of imparting it. The Council of Trent sends a ban after them, which deny the Priests to have that power of remittting sins which the Church understands them to have, but was so wise in the mean time, as to conceal what the Church's meaning should be, yet if we would know by the jesuits, what it is at this present, they will you, that the Priests do absolve from sin, not by declaring or preaching, but by extingishing and dissolving it; as blowing doth the fire, or the wind doth the clouds, that is by a true and Physical efficiency, so Bellarmine, Suarez, 
Bell. de poenit. lib. 3. c. 2. Suar. 3. d. 9 §. 2. Tollet. Com. Luc. 5. annot. 41 Concil. Elib. Can. 1. 36. 22. Nicen. Can. 11, 12.  Tollet, etc.  
The second sort of Lenetives, consisted in relaxations, or releasements from Ecclesiastical Censures. For whereas, during the heat of persecutions, the severity of Church Discipline was such, that for some offences, ten years, for some the whole life after was adjudged to the doing of penance; the satisfaction notwithstanding, which some gave the Church by outward signs of penitency, and requests 
Albaspin. 1. 1. cap. 20.  of Martyrs in Prison for them, caused the Bishops to release them either of all or of part of those years wherein they stood bound to undergo their penance, and these were the Indulgences of those days. But the times growing more loose and licentious, and withal the esteem held of Church Censures diminishing, the Clergy was sane to remit much of their rigour; and to change public penances into private, or other good works, and so to bring in that which we call commutations. Now these also in the end being slighted, the Bishops who had let go and quitted the true reins, took hold by the false, and taught, that whatsoever a man omits to perform of his commutations in this life, the same he shall pay full dearly in Purgatory, in the the World to come; which brought an eager and fresh desire in men to procure with all cost and charges, Pardons for the neglect thereof; and because some cases were reserved to the Popes own power of dispensing (every man being desirous to have a plenary or full pardon) they began to neglect other Bishops, and established the Pope (by that means) in the sole right of granting Indulgences, which being at the first, but absolutions in the Consistory of the Church, and that for the living only, became a thousand years and more after Christ, to be absolutions in the Chancery of Heaven, and that also for the dead.  
By these few examples it may appear, how from the misconstruction and wrested Interpretations of Primitive Discipline, the body of Popery is descended, and withal the degrees whereby it sprang up to this stature which now it hath, to the end that the Devil's policy being ripped up, our ignorance of the first Founders of Romish Cockle, may seem as pardonable, as was this of the Servants in my Text of the Sour of Tares: and withal that our Adversaries may not think us so stupid as to know nothing, though we be not so skilful as they require, to know every thing. The basterdly brood of a common Strumpet may have his reputed father known, though not his natural, and there may be Acts and Records to show by whom it was legitimated, though not authentic Registers, by whom it was begotten; and so can we show, when, by whom, and in which of the Pope's Markets or Counsels these Tares were first allowed and sold for good Wheat, though we be not so cunning in the black Art, as to know the Devil or his Disciples name that sowed them; we know them as the Servants did in facto esse, being shot up and bearing fruit, though we may be ignorant for their fieri, by what evil Genius they were planted, or under what malignant Planet they took root; for what shall we say? doth a thing desist to be what it is, because the time and original of it is not known? Old-age, is it not old-age, because the hour or day wherein it begins cannot be given? Doth a Consumption cease to be a Consumption, because the moment when one falls into it cannot be assigned? Is not the shadow of the Dial towards night removed from the place it possessed at noon, because the moving of it cannot be discerned? Are no Customs of force, because the Authors and Commencers of them be not written? Or may any conclude against the Apostle, that he erred in saying the mystery of iniquity did already work, because he teacheth 
2. Thess. 2. 7, 8.  in the same place, that the wicked man was not then revealed? But how should we hope to discover fully the practices of Satan and the proceedings of Antichrist, which is de regno tenebrarum, of the Kingdom of darkness, when as our Saviour tells us, that the Kingdom of God, which is regnum lucis, the Kingdom of light, is as if a man should cast seed into the ground, and should sleep, and rise night and day, yet should the Seed spring and grow up, he knoweth not how? Mark 4. 27. That which Saint 
Aug. Epist. 29. ad Hieronymum.  Austen therefore in his 29. Epistle hath touching the propagation of original sin, may teach us what use to make of the births and propagations of Heresies, that when a certain man had fallen into a pit wherein was much water ready to choke him, another passing by that way, and wondering at the chance, said, how fellest thou in, the poor man being in more need of relief than discourse, answers, cogita quomodo hinc me liberes, non quomodo huc ceciderim quaeras, it is but a superfluous question to ask how I fell in, think rather I beseech thee, by what means thou mayst help me out. The Servants in my Text, propounded the like question (as you see) when they demanded, From whence the Tares are? But what answer did the Housholder shape them? Did he name the Author, or describe him (as the Jesuits require of us) by individual differences, saying, Such an one hath done it? No, only in general, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Enemy, or as Beza renders it, inimicus quispiam, some Enemy hath done it; as who would say; it concerns you rather to use all possible diligence you can to root them up, and to look upon that which is before, then with too thriftless expense of time, tolooke at that which is behind, and to study unde, From whence they are.  
Nor doth it any whit impugn our industry employed this way, that the Servants ask the Husbandman, if they should gather them up, he answered, Nay, lest whilst you gather up the Tares, you root 
Verse 29.  up the wheat with them; for he saith not, ne cohibeatis, you may not restrain them, nor doth he say, ne dispergatis, you may not disperse them (for as chrysostom upon this place notes, The Conventicles of Heretics are to be dissolved) but ne colligatis, you may not gather them up at once; ne colligetis, you may not bind them in bundles. There are in this Parable two sorts of Taskers mentioned; Operarij ad messem, Labourers to prepare the Harvest, and Operarij messis, Labourers of the Harvest. The former are we, who in this Parable are called Servants; the later are the Angels, which are here termed reapers. 
Verse 27. Verse, 30. & 39  To us, the Servants, he saith now, Plantate, rigate, amputate, Plant, water, prune, for preservation. At the Harvest, he will say, non nobis (as Saint Austen notes) sed messoribus, not unto us, but to the reapers, colligite ad iudicium, gather together unto judgement, colligate in fasciculis ad supplicium, bind in bundles unto punishment, but congregate in horreum ad praemium, gather the wheat into my barn, for the reward; which God of his infinite mercy grant unto us, through jesus Christ our Lord, to whom with the Father and holy Spirit, one Essence and three Persons, be rendered all praise, honour and glory, might, majesty and dominion, now and for evermore.  
Amen.  
FINIS.