One God, One Faith. OR A DISCOURSE AGAINST. Those Lukewarm-Christians, who extend Salvation to all kinds of Faith and Religion; so, that the Professors do believe in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion &c. howsoever they differ in other inferior Articles. Written by W. B. Priest.  One Lord, one Faith, one God. Ephes. 4. Because thou are Lukewarm, & neither cold, nor hot, I will vomit thee out of my mouth. Apoc. 3. Permissu Superiorum. 
M.DC.XXV.   

THE PREFACE to the Reader.  
GOOD READER.  
Such are the lamentable Time's, wherein we live, as that, they not only bring forth Men, who with great contention and heat of dispute, do undertake to maintain particular Errors, directly repugnant to the Scriptures, and the judgement of Christ his Church; But also they afford some others (as my own experience assureth me, taken from my conversing with diverse such, during my long endurance in England, and before my departure from thence) who are not afraid to entertain all Religions, with such a cold Indifferency, as that they hold, that Salvation may be obtained in any Religion, if so the Professors thereof do believe only in the Trinity, the Incarnation, and such fundamental points of Christianity; whether they be Papists, Protestants, Anabaptists, Brownists, or any other of these la●er Sects. They heerupon further teach, that we are not obliged, under pain of any spiritual loss, to embrace any one of these Religions, before another; scornfully traducing all others, who exact a more particular, and articulate belief of our Christian misteryes.  
And thus these ADIAPHORISTS in Religion (whose secret pulse doth indeed beat upon Atheism) disclaim from all necessity of Truth, even justifying the defence of Errors, under the title of Errors; and holding only this One main Controversy in Christian Religion; to wit, That in Christian Religion, there are no main CONTROVERSIES.  
Against these Ambidexter Christians, (so to call them) who draw their Souls perdition in the ropes of a supine and careless security, I have thought good to undergo the writing of this short ensuing Treatise, styling it; One God, one Faith, according to the words of the 
(1) Ephes. 4.  Apostle; implying hereby, That, as there is but one God, and not many; so this one God willbe truly worshipped (for the saving of our Souls) with one, only, entire, and perfect Faith, and not with multiplicity of Religions.  
Now to make the passage more even to this discourse, by taking away some  Objections, much insisted upon to the contrary by our Omni fidians in Religion, these men thus dispute: God is most merciful, & therefore it would be much repugnant to his infinite Mercy, to damn for all eternity, any Man that beleiueth in him, and in jesus Christ as his Redeemer; so that withal, he forbear doing of all wrong, and do lead a virtuous (at least a moral) life; though ●n other Articles of lesser importance, perhaps he may err.  
To this I answer with the Apostle: 
(2) Rom. 11.  O altitudo divitiarum sapientiae & scientiae ●ei? God's judgements are inscrutable, and ●re to be admired, not to be searched af●er. If it was his divine pleasure, for one ●nly Sin (and that but in thought committed, as Divines hold) to damn ●any thousands of Angels for ever; If ●arther he did not forbear to punish all Mankind with infinite Miseries for his first Parent's fault, committed only in eating of a forbidden Apple; if lastly it pleased him, during several thousands of years, to make choice only of the jewish Nation (a handful of the whole earth) for his elected People, and to suffer all the rest of the world (till our Saviour's coming) to lie drowned in Idolatry, and to be damned, some few Gentills only excepted: And if also after our Saviour's Incarnation, he vouchsafed not for the space of many ages to enlighten whole Countries, with the Gospel of Christ, but permitted th●m to continue (to their Soule● eternal damnation) in their former Idolatry & Heathenism, yea suffering to thi● very day (& how long yet after, his divine Majesty only knoweth) diverse va● Countries to persevere in their foresaid Infidelity:  
If now (I say) this proceeding in God is best liking to himself, and tha● for the same, it were blasphemy to charge him with Injustice, or Cruelty (For 
(3) Esay. 45.  shall the Clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou?) then dare any man expostulate God of Injustice, and want of Mercy (for his divine Goodness is nothing but Mercy and justice: 
(4) Psalm. 84.  misericordia & veritas obuiaverunt sibi, justitia & Pax osculatae sunt:) If he suffer men to pe●ish eternally for want of an entire, complete, and perfect faith in all the Articles of Christianity, especially in these times, when no Christian can pretend for excuse any invincible ignorance in mat●ers of Faith, by reason, that all the true Articles of Christian Religion are sufficiently propounded, and diuulged by God's Church to all Christians whome●oeuer? Therefore thouch Gods secret ●udgments, and disposal in these mat●ers, we will conclude, and confess with the Prophet Esay: 
(5) Psalm. 30.  Deus iudicij Do●inus.  
This then being most true, from hence it appeareth, that diverse cold Protestants much wrong the Catholics, in charging ●hem with want of Charity, because ●hey will not acknowledge, that Protestant's ●ying Protestants, can be saved; whereas ●n the contrary part many learned Protestant's (say they) do grant the hope of Salvation to Catholics, dying Catholics, or (as now a days they term them) papists.  
To this we reply: That here is no want of charity in the Catholics, but rather a most vehement and burning Charity. For what greater Charity can there be, seeing it is an undeniable Truth, That Men dying in a false Faith, cannot be saved, then to premonish, and forewarn with all convenient sedulity and endeavour 
(6) 1. Timoth. 4.  opportunè, importunè, their Christian Brethren of so great a danger, as the everlasting loss of their Souls comes unto? No; the souls interminable weal or woe is not a matter of Compliment, that so for Ceremony, the remembrance thereof is to be forborn to be inculcated, and often spoken of; especially where the most certain truth of the matter insisted upon, and the charitable intention of the speaker, do warrant the discourse.  
And if Catholics must be censure● uncharitable, for these their so wholesome Admonitions; then by the sam● reason, the Apostle himself is to b● included within the like fault, who severely 
(7) Tit. c. 3.  chargeth us, to fly the company & society of an Heretic; & of him who 
(8) Galat. 5.  rangeth Schisms & heresies among those sins, the workers whereof shal● not attain the Kingdom of God. In like sort, the ancient Fathers of Christ's Church (I mean, Augustin, Ambrose, Jerome, Cyprian, Epiphanius, & the rest) must stand chargeable with the like want of Charity, for their anathematising and condemning (both in general Counsels, and in their particular writings, & Catalogues of Heresies) all such men, as did hold any erroneous opinions touching Faith, against the then present Church of God.  
But to return more particularly to the Subject of this Treatise. The source from whence this Libertinism in belief (impugned here by me) did take it origen and beginning, is the contempt of the authority of Christ's Church, and the assumed authority of each man's private Spirit. For thus reasoneth the Neutrallist in Religion: Both the Papists and Protestants do agree in believing the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion etc. But they mainly descent touching Purgatory, praying to Saints, Freewill, Sacrifice of the Mass etc. Therefore I will embrace and follow the acknowledged doctrine of them both (meaning the Doctrine of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion) and hold it necessary only to Salvation, since in it all sides do conspire. But seeing the dissensions in religion among the Papists and the Protestants, are of these secondary and less principal points only, (to wit, Purgatory, prayer to Saints &c.) and seeing it is impossible, that both the Protestant and the Papist should teach truly in the said Articles (for they teach mere contrary doctrines therein, so as if the one side teach true, it necessarily followeth, that the other side teacheth false:) And further; seeing I have no more reason (once rejecting the authority of God's visible Church) to believe the one party, more than the other, and it is impossible for me to believe them both: Therefore my private Spirit biddeth me to believe neither; but to hold the doctrines of Purgatory, prayer to Saints, Freewill, etc. and all other controverted points of Faith, at this day, between the Papist and the Protestant, to be matters merely accessary, and of such indifferency, as that neither the true, or false belief of them can further, nor hinder my Salvation.  
Thus fare argueth our Newtrallist, who whiles he willbe of all Religions, is indeed of no Religion. Then which (as if Religion were but a mere abstracted Notion in the mind) what can be excogitated to be more impious and Athiestical in itself? more repugnant to the sacred Scriptures? more cross to the practice of all Antiquity? and (as hereafter shall be proved) more adverse to all natural Reason?  
But (good Reader) as unwilling to transgress the accustomed limits of a Preface, I will detain thee no longer; only for some delibation, and taste of the Subject hereafter handled, I will conclude with the sentence and judgement of S. Augustin, passed upon the Pelagians, who believed in the Trinity, in Christ, and his Passion, were men of honest and moral conversation; yet for holding, That only by the force of Nature, without the assistance of God's grace, a Man was able to exercise virtue, & fly vice (a point no more fundamental, than most of the Controversies between the Catholics & the Prostants) they are registered for Heretics by S. Augustin, and consequently not to be (in his judgement) in state of Salvation: His words are these: 
(9) Epist. 120. c. 37.  Nec tales sunt Pelagiani, quos facilè contemnas, sed continenter viventes, atque in omnibus operibus laudabiles: Nec falsum Christum, sed unum, verum, aequalemque Patri, & coaeternum, veraciterque hominem factum, & venisse credentes, & venturum expectantes; sed tamen ignorantes Dei iustitiam, suam constituere volentes, Haeretici sunt. Thus S. Augustin, with whom I end, leaving thee (Courteous Reader) to the deliberate, and studious perusal of these ensuing Leaves, and entreating most earnestly the prayer of all good Catholics, for the remission of my infinite sins, & for a happy hour● of the dissolution of my old, and decayed Body.  
Thy Souls wellwishing friend. W. B. P.   

The Contents of the ensuing Treatise.  

THAT a man, who believeth in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion, etc. And yet believeth not all other Articles of Christian Faith, cannot be saved. And first of the definition of Heresy, and of an Heretic. Chap. 1.  
The foresaid Verity proved, from the Holy Scripture. Cap 2.  
The same proved from the definition, nature, and propriety of Unity in Faith. Cap. 3.  
The same proved, from the want of Unity in Faith, between the Catholic and the Protestant, touching the Articles of the Creed. Cap. 4.  
The same evident, from the like want of unity of Faith between the Catholic and Protestant, in Articles necessarily to be believed, and yet not expressed in the Creed. Cap. 5.  
The same proved from the authority, or privilege of God's Church in not erring, either in her definitions of Faith, or condemnation of Heresies; and first by Counsels. Chap. 6.  
The same proved from the like infallillible authority of the Church in not erring, manifested from the testimonies of particular Fathers. Cap. 7.  
The foresaid Truth evicted, from that Principle, that neither Heretics, nor Schismatics are members of the Church of God. Chap. 8.  
The same proved, from the punishment anciently inflicted upon Heretics, by the Church. Chap. 9  
The same proved, by arguments drawn from Reason. Chap. 10.  
The same proved, from the different effects of Catholic Religion and Protestancy, touching Virtue and Vice. Chap. 11.  
The same Verity proved, from the fearful deaths of the first broachers of Protestancy. Ch. 12  
The same confirmed from the doctrine of Recusancy, taught by Catholics & Protestant's. Ch. 13  
The same manifested, from the writings of the Catholics and Protestants, reciprocally charging one another with Heresy; and from the Insurrections, Wars, and Rebellions begun only for Religion. Chap. 14.  
The same proved from the Protestants mutually condemning one another of Heresy. Chap. 15.  
The same demonstrated, from the many absurdities, necessarily accompanying the contrary doctrine. Chap. 16.  
The Conclusion of the whole. Chap. 17.    

THAT A MAN, WHO BELIEVETH IN the Trinity, Incarnation, Passion etc. And yet believeth not all other Articles of Christian faith, cannot be saved. And first, of the definition of Heresy, and an Heretic. CHAP. I.  
BEFORE we come (good Reader) to dispute particularly of the Subject of this Discourse, I hold it most convenient in place of a short Prolegomenon, or Preface, to prefix, and set down the true definition of Heresy, or an Heretic, since this method will give light to this whole ensuing Treatise, (diverse passages thereof being principally founded upon the definition, and nature of Heresy,) and will best manifest, what opinions be heresies, and what men, Heretics; and consequently, (seeing Heresy is incompatible with salvation, and cannot stand with the purchase of Heaven) will demonstrate, that not any one Religion (professing the name of Christians) which doth maintain but one Heresy, can justly promi●● to itself, the hope of Eternal life.  
Well then, Heresy, or Haeresis, as w● term it in Latin, is a Greek word, ●●gnifying as much as, Electio, Election 〈◊〉 Choice; coming of the Greek ver●● 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in Latin, Eligo, to Choose, or ma●● Choice of, as 
(a) lib. de prescript. c. ●.  Tertullian, and S. Jerome 
(b) in c. 5. Epist. ad Galat.  do well note; so that this wo●● Haeresis, originally, & primitively signifies Election or Choice (as is said) in general● yet because they, who divide themselu●● by maintaining false opinions from t●● Church of Christ, do make choice 〈◊〉 these their new opinions, and so thereby do separate themselves from the Church therefore this word Haeresis (losing it fo●mer general signification) is restrayn● by the Apostles, and the Ancient Father through an Ecclesiastical use, acceptanc● and appropriation (which course we fin● holden in diverse other words, no● taken by the Church, in a secondary acception) to signify any false, or ne● opinion in Religion among Christian of which a man maketh choice, & pertinaciously defendeth against the Chur●● of God; and the maintainers thereof a● commonly styled, Heretics. Thus three things necessarily concur, to make any false opinion, Heresy, and the defendours ●herof Heretics. First, it must be some error touching the Faith of Christ: And the ●eason hereof is, because he that never pro●essed or embraced the Christian Faith, is not an Heretic, though he err, but a jew, or a Pagan, and Heathen. This is the doctrine of S. 
(c) quast. 11. art. ●.  Thomas, & of all learned men. The second condition necessarily concurring to every Heresy is, that there ●e an erreneous judgement in the understanding of him, who maintaineth the Heresy; from whence it followeth, that ●n external denial of a man's Faith, is not Heresy, except it proceed from an inter●all error of the understanding; but is ra●her to be accounted dissimulation, or schism, as S. Thomas 
(d) quaest. 10. 2. 2.  teacheth.  
The third and last condition is, that this ●rrour be maintained with great obstinacy ●gainst the authority of Christ's Church, ●eaching the contrary doctrine, and that ●he defendor thereof being admonished of ●is error, will nevertheless openly resist ●he authority of the Church therein, seeing, ●f he be admonished by the Church of his Error, and instantly thereupon do forsake ●is false opinion, he is to be accounted, only erroneous, and his false doctrine only an Error.  
This agreeth to that of S. Augustine: 
(e) l. 18. de civet. Dei. c. 51.  Qui in Ecclesia Christi aliquid prawm sapiunt, si correpti, ut sanum rectumque sapiant, resistant contumaciter, suaque pestifera & mortisera dogmata emendare nolunt, sed defensare persistant, Haeretici● fiunt; & foraes exeuntes, habentur in exercentibus Haereticis. That is, Who believe any false or wrong opinion in the Church of Christ, and being counselled and admonished thereof, do contumaciously and stubbornly resist, and will not recall their pestiferous and deadly opinions, but do persist in defending of them, they are thereby become Heretics; and so departing out of the Church, they are taken for such, as vent forth open, and wilful Heresies. Thus S. Augustine.  
This Construction (both touching the foresaid definition of Heresy, in taking the words Haeresis, and Haereticus, in an evil restrained, and appropriated sense) is warranted by the Apostle, by the Ancient Fathers, and lastly (to omit the like acknowledged judgement of the Catholics) by the learned Protestants. By the 
(f) 1. Cor. 21.  Apostle: for thus we find him to say: There must be Heresies among you, that they which are approved among you, may be known. Again; 
(g) Galat. 5.19. vid e Testam. nowm. 1576.  The works of the flesh are manifest, which are adultery, fornication etc. seditions, Heresies etc. As also 
(h) Tit. 3.  A man, that is an Heretic, after the first & second admonition, avoid. And 
(i) Act. 5.  finally: Those, which were of the Heresy of the Sadduces &c. laid hands upon the Apostles.  
By the Ancient Fathers: For S. Jerome 
(k) in ca 3. ad Titum.  showing the difference between Heresy and Schism, thus defineth Heresy: ●aeresis est, quae perversum dogma habet. Heresy is ●at which containeth a perverse & froward opinion. And S. Augustine 
(l) l. de fide & simbolo. ca 10.  defineth Here●kes in these words: Haeretici sunt qui de Deo ●●sa sentiendo, fidem violant. Heretics are those, ●ho do violate their faith, by holding false opi●ons touching God.  
By the Protestants: For to name one or woe among many, M. 
(m) Dial. 2.  Ormerod a most ●orward Protestant, thus defineth an Heretic: He is an Heretic, who so swerveth from the ●holesome doctrine, as contemning the judgement ●●th of God, and the Church, persisteth in his opinion etc. With whom conspireth D. Covell 〈◊〉 saying: Heretics are they, who directly gain● some article of our faith.  
Now, out of this former definition of heresy, I am to promonish the Reader of ●ee points (the which in the perusing of is Treatise, I would have him often to ●ll to remembrance:) first that every He●y is maintained (as is above taught) ●●th obstinacy, against the authority of the Church of God, and therefore the maintainers thereof are said by the Apostle, 
(o) joan. 2.29.  that they went out of us, that is, out of God Church: and for the same reason the Apostle 
(p) Tit. 3.  doth pronounce an Heretic, to 〈◊〉 condemned by his own judgement; because h● preferreth his judgement, before the judgement of the whole Church. From whic● consideration it followeth, that what ma● soever holdeth an erroneous opinion ● touching Christian Faith, and being advertized thereof by God's Church, and n● captivating his judgement in all humility thereto, is thereby become an Heretic. An● such is the state of Catholics and Protestants; since the one doth ever reciprocal charge and condemn the other with fal● doctrine; and therefore seeing the Church 〈◊〉 Christ must be with the one of them, it followeth, that the other not submitting the judgement to it, are proclaimed thereby Heretics. And thus it may sometimes fall o●● that the first Inuentour of a false opini●● may be no Heretic, as maintaining it b●fore it be condemned by the Church whereas the Professors of it, after its condemnation, are become Heretics; acceding to that of 
(q) l. adversus Haeres.  Vincentius Lyrinen● O admirable change of things! the authors of 〈◊〉 and the same opinion are esteemed Catholics; 〈◊〉 their followers are judged Heretics: Thus we see that pertinacity of judgement doth ever consummate an Heresy.  
The second, that the denial of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion etc. are not properly called Heresies, but rather blasphemies; & the deniers of them not to be accouned Heretics, but Infidels, jews or Pagans. From whence it proceedeth that what places of Scripture, or of the Father's are spoken of Heretics, the same cannot be truly applied to the deniers of the Trinity, the Incarnation, Passion etc.  
The third is, that the foresaid definition ●f Heresy (being the only true definition, ●nd acknowledged for such on all sides) is ●ot restrained either in itself, or by the ●eaning of the Apostle, only to the most supreme, & (as they are called) fundamental ●oints of Christian Faith, as of the Trinity, ●●e Incarnation of Christ, his passion, the decalogue, and the Articles of the Creed; ●●t it is extended, in it own nature (considering that according to all Art, the definitiō●●d the thing defined, aught to be of an equal latitude or extent) to any erroneous ●●inion whatsoever, frowardly defended 〈◊〉 a man, and impugned by the Church of ●od: So, as it is as perfect an Heresy (and ●e believers thereof are as true Heretics) to deny that there is a Purgatory, or to deny Freewill, praying to Saints, the doctrine o● Indulgences, the necessity of Baptism, o● any other Article affirmed by Catholics (granting the doctrine of Catholics in these Articles to be true) as to deny the Trinity the Incarnation of Christ, his death, Passion etc. supposing the denial of these to b● but Heresies. And a man shallbe aswell damned in Hell for denying these former, as fo● these other; though the denial of these l●ter do exceed the other in malice, since th● blasphemies of them are in themselves mo● wicked & heinous. And thus much touching the definition of Heresy, or an Heretik● which being justly premised, we will con● now to the main Controversy handle● in this Treatise.   

THAT EVERY CHRISTIAN CANNO● be saved in his own Religion: Proved from t● holy Scripture. CHAP. II.  
NOw then to begin to fortify an● warrant this undoubted truth, that eu●ry Christian cannot be saved in his own Religion I will draw my first kind of Proof from t● sacred words of holy Scripture. And the● testimonies shallbe of three sorts; One concerning Heretics texts which are not-restr●ned to any particular Heresies, but delivered of Heresy in general. The second branch of authorities shall touch Heretics, even for certain particular Heresies, different from denying the Trinity, the Incarnation of our Saviour, his Passion, & other like principal and fundamental articles of Christian Religion. The third shall contain the necessity and dignity of Faith, without any restriction to the points or articles, which are to be believed.  
And first to begin with the first: We read the Apostle thus to speak of an Heretic in general: 
(a) Epist. ad Tit. c. 3.  A man that is an Heretic, after the first or second admonition avoid, knowing that he, that is such, is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned by his own judgement. Where (we see) the Apostle commandeth us to avoid an Heretic; which he would never have done, if the said Heretic had been in state of Salvation: The Apostle further adding this reason, in that he sinneth, and in that such a man, as being a pertinacious & wilful Heretic, is condemned by his own proper judgement; that is, because he advanceth his own judgement above the judgement of God's Church; and because he needeth not that public condemnation of the Church, which upon other offenders by way of Excommunication is inflicted. Of which text of the Apostle, Tertullian both pithily and excellently giveth his gloss saying: 
(b) Lib. de prescript. c. 6.  Quia & in qu● damnatur, sibi elegit.  
Moreover the Apostle elsewhere coniureth (as it were) in the name of Christ, tha● we should avoid all false believers in these words: 
(c) 2. Thess. cap. 3.  We denounce unto you (Brethren) i● the name of our Lord jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every Brother walking in ordinately, and not according to the Tradition, whic● they have received of us. This place concerns Faith and doctrine (as the whole Chapter showeth:) But if those men here to be eschewed, were in state of Salvation, the● ought not then to be eschewed. Again this text cannot have reference to those, wh● deny the Trinity, Incarnation, and Passion seeing the deniers of those high Article● are not Brethren in Christ; and yet the Apostle styleth them Brethren, whom he hee● reprehendeth. The Apostle also in another place thus forewarneth: 
(d) Epist. ad Galat. c. 5.  The works of th● flesh be manifest, which are fornication, vncleane● impurity etc. dissensions 
(*) or Heresies, according to the Testament of an. 1576.  Sects etc. They whic● do these things shall not obtain the kingdom of Go● where we see, there is express mention made of Sects, and that the maintainers o● any Sects in opinion of Faith, much mor● of any Heresy (which is ever averred wit● greater contumacy and forwardness, an● with neglect to the Church's Authority) shall not enter into the kingdom of Heaven: From which testimony we may further conclude, that as one only act of fornication barreth a man from the kingdom of God, so also one Heresy excludeth him from the same.  
A fourth place is this: 
(e) Epist. ad Rom. c. 16.  I desire you Brothers, to mark them that make dissensions and scandals, contrary to the doctrine which you have learned, and avoid them; for such do not serve Christ our Lord. But if such men be to be avoided, and do not serve Christ, than no doubt they continuing in that state, cannot be saved.  
Fiftly, the Apostle speaketh of certain men, saying of them: 
(f) 1. Tim. 1.  Quidam circa fidem maufragaverunt: Certain men have made shipwreck of their Faith. Where the Apostle useth the Metaphor of shipwreck, thereby to express more fully, that Heretics once falling out of the ship of the Church of Christ, are cast into the sea of eternal damnation.  
To conclude, the Evangelist S. john speaketh of all Heretics in general, not embracing the Doctrine of Christ (within which all secondary questions of Christian Religion are contained) in this sort: If any 
(g) 2. joan.  man come to you, and bring not the doctrine of Christ, receive him not into your house, nor s●● God save you, unto him. But a man is bound ● charity to suffer any one, which is in sta● of Salvation, to come into his house and ● salute him, or say, God save him. Now wh● can be replied against these former texts? ● cannot be said, that they are meant only ● such Heretics, as deny the mysteries of t● Trinity, the Incarnation of Christ, h● Passion, and such like supreme points ● Christian Religion. This (I say) cannot 〈◊〉 averred, for these reasons following: Fi● because those, who in the Apostles tym● denied these principal points of Christi●nity, could not be truly termed Heretics but rather jews or Heathens; seeing he 〈◊〉 an Heretic truly (as is above shown) wh● was once a member of Christ's Church b● Faith, 
〈◊〉. 1  but after ceaseth to be thereof, by erring in some secondary points, touching Christian Faith. Secondly, by reason tha● (according to the true definition of Heres●● or Heretics, above set down) the forme● texts have a necessary reference to all Heresies and Heretics whatsoever, whethe● the subject of the said false opinions be sma●● or great. Thirdly, because that in the former texts of Scripture there is no restriction of the word Haereticus, or Haeresis, to the chief or highest points of Christian Religion; but it is extended to all kind of Heretics and Heresies whatsoever, even by the Apostle without exception; who (no doubt) ●f he had understood Heretics, or Heresies only in the greatest points (admitting such men for Heretics) would accordingly have restrained his words (at least in some one ●ext or other among so many) only to these kind of Heretics. But not to leave the least ●hew of refuge or evasion herein, I will produce some passage of holy Scripture, in whiche ●he maintainers of particular errors, even ●n lesser points, than the highest articles of Christianity, are censured by Christ's Apostles, to be deprived of eternal Salvation.  
And first we find S. Paul thus to prophesy: In the later 
(h) 1. Tim. cap. 4.  times, certain shall departed from the Faith, attending to spirits of error, and doctrine of devils, and forbidding to marry, and to abstain from meats etc. Hear the Apostle prophesieth (according to the judgement of 
(i) Hom. 12. in 1. Tim.  S. Chrysostom 
(k) Upon this place.  Ambrose 
(l) l. contra jovin. cap. 1.  jerom, & 
(m) Haer. 25. & 40.  Augustin) of the Heretics Encratites, Marcionistes, Ebionites etc. who denied matrimony, as a thing altogether unlawful, & prohibited absolutely, and at all times the eating of certain meats, as creatures impure: Now these Heretics believed in the Trinity, the Incarnation etc. yet even for these two former Heresies, touching marriage and eating of meats, they are said b● the Apostle to departed from the Faith of Chris● and to attend to the doctrine of devils. But suc● as leave the Faith of Christ, and atten● to the doctrine of Devils, are not i● state of Salvation. In my judgement, th● one authority alone is sufficient to overthrew this fantasy of our Newtrallists 〈◊〉 since the words are divine Scripture, th● Heresies reprehended no fundamentals points of Religion, but of as little or lesse● consequence, than the Controversies betwixt the Catholics and the Protestants: & yet the maintainers of them are accounted to departed from the Faith of Christ, and to attend to the doctrine of devils.  
A second place shallbe that of the former Apostle; who writing of certain Heretics erring, touching the Resurrection of the Body (though the article of the Resurrection itself they believed) saith thus: 
(n) 2. Tim. cap. ●.  Their speech spreadeth like a Canker, of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have erred from the truth, saying, That the Resurrection is already past, and have subverted the Faith of some. These men believed all the mysteries of the Trinity, the Incarnation etc. yet for erring only, touching the Resurrection of the body, they are said to err from the truth, to subvert the Faith of some: and that as Canker never leaveth the body, till ●y little and little it wasteth it away; so ●heir speeches by degrees, poison and kill ●he souls of the hearers. From which it evidently followeth, that these Heretics continuing and dying in the foresaid Here●ie could not be saved: since that faith, which ●rreth from the truth, which subverteth the true ●aith of Christ in others, and which in killing and destroying resembleth a Canker, cannot afford Salvation to its Professors.  
Another passage, which here I will urge, ●s that of S. john, who calleth certain Heretics, Antichrists, saying: 
(o) 1. joan. c. 2.  Now there are become many Antichrists, who went out of us, & were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would surely have remained with us. These Heretics believed in the Trinity, in the Incarnation of Christ, that he died for the salvation of the whole world; & only they erred touching the Person & Natures of Christ; & yet they are figuratively styled Antichrists, and are said to departed out of the Church of Christ; but no salvation is reserved for Antichrists and Apostates, leaving the Church of Christ. And thus much out of God's holy Writ, expressly touching Heresy in general, & particular.  
To these Texts I will adjoin (though not immediately and directly ranged under the former head) a place or two of Scripture, in my judgement most unanswerable, and by necessary inference, evicting the point here undertaken. The first place is those words of S. Peter, where he saith: 
(p) 2. Ep. c. 3.  In the Epistles of S. Paul, there are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable do pervert unto their own destruction. Now here I thus argue: But these things hard to be understood in S. Paul his Epistles, did not concern the doctrine of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion etc. and yet the misunderstanding of them doth cause (as the text saith) the destruction, that is the damnation of them, who misunderstand them. Therefore fare lesser points than the denial of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion etc. do justly threaten to the false believers of them, damnation; and consequently it followeth, that a bare belief of those supreme points is not sufficient to Salvation.  
That those difficulties in S. Paul's Epistles, intimated by S. Peter, did not concern the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion etc. I prove several ways: first because S. Peter maketh no such mention, which no doubt he would have done, if the subject of them had only touched those supreme mysteries, and were not to be extended to other inferior points. Secondly, it is acknowledged by the writings and commentaries of all the Fathers (besides ●at the Epistles themselves show no less) ●at S. Paul is most evident and clear in 〈◊〉 his Epistles touching the Trinity, the ●carnation, the Passion etc. and therefore ●ere is no reason, why the difficulties of ●hem should be applied to those articles, such less restrained to them alone.  
Thirdly, the Fathers do understand these difficulties in S. Paul his Epistles mentioned by S. Peter, chief touching Iustifica●ō, as appareth by the testimony even of S. agustine 
(q) l. de fide & operibus. c. 15. & 16.  himself, who particularly ●tanceth in that place 1. Corinth. 3. If ● man build upon this foundation, gold, silver, 〈◊〉. (which text intreateth of justification ●nd works) and expressly saith, that this is he of the difficult passages intended, and ●ant by S. Peter. With S. Augustine, S. ●ome may seem well to agree in these ●ords: 
(r) Epist. ad Algasiam quae. 8.  Epistola ad Romanos nimijs obscuri●bus involuta est: The Epistle to the Ro●●ns is involved with many obscurities, or ●ake places: for it is found, that the Epistle to the Romans most entreateth of Iu●fication, and of faith, and works. Four●ly and lastly, the Protestants themselves 〈◊〉 understand the said obscurities of S. Paul 〈◊〉 Epistles touching justification, as appeareth (to omit the testimonies of ● others herein) from the words, and Co●ment of Doctor Fulke against the Rh●mish Testament, upon the foresaid pla●● of S. Peter. And this fare of this text, whe● we find by an inevitable deduction, that false Faith touching justification only, ca●not stand with Salvation.  
The second text of scripture is contain● in those words of the Apostle, where thus saith: 
(c) c. 11. ad Hebraeos.  (s) Credere oportet accedentem ad D● quia est, & inquirentibus se remunerator sit: 〈◊〉 that cometh to God, must believe that God i● and is a rewarder to them that seek him. He is imposed a necessity (as appeareth by t●● word Oportet) to believe not only, that the is a God, but that this God giveth reward to such as seek him, to wit, eternal ly● But to believe, that God is a rewarder of go● men, is an article in itself wholly distinct, 〈◊〉 different from the articles of the Trinity, th● Incarnation, the Passion etc. and in nature independent of these other: for a man ma● believe, that God is a rewarder of good me● with eternal felicity, and yet not belieu● these other supreme mysteries, as man virtuous men (no doubt) did in the law o● nature, and in the time of the old Testament; and on the contrary side, a man ma● believe those chief articles of Christianity and yet not particularly believe, that God is a rewarder of such as seek him. And yet we see, the belief of this later point is necessarily exacted by the Apostle of all those, who come to God; & consequently of all those who shallbe saved, seeing no man can be saved, but such as come to God.   

THE SAME PROVED, FROM THE DEfinition, Nature, and Propriety of Faith. CHAP. III.  
IN this place we shall first take into our consideration the definition of faith set down by S. Paul. Secondly, the dignity & worth of ●ayth, much celebrated by diverse of the Apostles. Thirdly, the inseparable propriety ●f Faith, which is Unity, for so doth the scripture delineate, and describe Faith: ●●om all which it will inevitably follow, ●hat, that Faith which saveth man, is not ●o be restrained only to the Trinity, the incarnation, and other such sublime points ●f Christian Religion (though in other points it be erroneous) but to all points whatsoever, which the Church of God propoundeth to be believed.  
And to begin with the definition of Faith given by the Apostle: He thus deigneth Faith: 
(a) c. 11. ad Hebraeos.  Faith is the substance of thi● to be hoped for, the argument of things not appearing. The sense whereof is this: first, th● Faith through an infallible certainty, causeth those things to subsist, and have a b●ing in the mind of man, which are y● to come, but hoped and looked for. S●condly, that faith causeth the understanding to give an assent to those points whi● it understandeth not; acknowledging the● to be more certain, than any other thin● whatsoever, according to those words of 〈◊〉 Thomas: 
(b) quaest. 4. art. 8.  Multo magis homo certior est de eo q●● audit à Deo, qui falli non potest, quàm de eo qu● videt propria ratione, quae falli potest. Now hee● I trust no man will deny, but the Apostle defined that Faith of a Christian, which s●ueth him. This being granted (for to den● it were both impious in the denier, & mo● injurious to the Apostle) we are to remember the nature of every true definition, s● down by the Logicians, to wit (as is above intimated) that the thing defined, an● the definition be of one and the same exten● & latitude, so as whatsoever is comprehended under the definition, the same is also contained under the thing defined. This the● being presupposed by force of all reason (fo● Logic is but an artificial handmaid to Reason) we find, that this definition of Faith ●mpriseth in itself, not only the Doctri●e of the Trinity, of the Incarnation, etc. ●nd this, not articulately, but only by way ●deduction) but also it containeth all secondary points of Religion: seeing the for●r definition doth predicate, or may be ●●d of all the said secondary and less prindall points of Religion, controverted between Christians at any time. Therefore the ●ng here defined, which is the saving ●ayth of a Christian, is in like sort to ex●●nd itself to all the said secondary points ● Religion, how indifferent soever they ●●me in man's judgement. This inference is 〈◊〉 demonstrative, being taken from the for●er definition of Faith, as that the Apostle ●●mselfe presently after the former words, ●●ginning to instance the several Object of ●●yth (among diverse other examples) set●h down, that to believe Noah's flood, 〈◊〉 the deluge of the world by water, for ●ne, is an article of Faith: for thus he ●●yth: By Faith 
(c) Hebr. 11.  Noah having received an answer concerning those things, which as yet were ●ot seen, fearing, framed the Ark for the saving of ●is house.  
But to proceed further; If the Articles of he Trinity, the Incarnation, and the like 〈◊〉 the only essential points of a true Christian Faith, it is more than wonderful that the Apostle undertaking to set down the true definition of an available Faith and exemplifying it in it several Objects should wholly and silently omit the say articles of the Trinity, Incarnation, Passion etc. he in that Chapter not expressly speaking one word of them.  
And thus much touching the definition of Faith given by the Apostle; from whic● definition we conclude, that whosoever seeketh to have a true Faith necessary to salvation, must believe (besides the mysteri● of the Trinity, the Incarnation etc.) diue● others dogmatic articles of Christian Religion. And therefore answereably ther● we assure ourselves, that when our Saviour said: He 
(d) Marc. 16.  that believeth not, shallbe condemne● he did speak of the believing of the who● corpse of Christian Faith and Doctrine, a● not only of any part thereof; for so in this l●ter manner it would be both false & absurd In like fort, where our Blessed Saviour 〈◊〉 the same Chapter saith to his Apostle Preach the Gospel to all creatures etc. He d● understand the whole Gospel, which containeth many other points, besides the T●●nity, Incarnation, and Passion, etc.  
In this next place we will descend 〈◊〉 those passages of holy Scripture, which much magnify the efficacy and virtue of ●●yth: And accordingly heerto we find it 〈◊〉 said: 
(e) Marc. vlt.  He that believeth, and is baptised, ●●albe saved; but he that believeth not, shallbe con●●mned. Again our Saviour said to the ●ind men, praying to receive their sight: According to your faith be it done unto you: 
(f) Mat. 9  ●nd further: 
(g) Hebr. c. 11.  Without faith it is impossible to ●ase God. And more: 
(h) 1. joan. c. 5.  Our faith is the virie, which overcometh the world: Now in ●●ese and many other such texts, for brevity ●itted, I demand, what faith is undergod or meant? If it be answered, a true, ●yre & perfect faith, believing all points Christian Religion proposed by God's ●●urch; it is true, and that, which I hear ●e to prove: If an unperfect and mun●l faith, believing some points of Chri●●●●● Religion, and rejecting others, and so ●rroneus faith, being partly true, partly ●; I say it can never deserve these praises ●n by the Evangelists and Apostles, nei●●● can it produce such supernatural ef● above specified; no more than darke● an produce light: since Truth himself 〈◊〉 taught us: 
(i) Luc. 6.  That we cannot gather figs ●ornes, nor grapes of bushes. And hence by premises we are to understand, that we ●n entire & perfect faith, that, by the ●h we believe all supreme articles of the Trinity, Incarnation, Passion etc. an● all the articles of the Creed, expressly & articulately in their true sense; and do believe all other inferior articles, at least implicitly; that is, that we have a ready preparation of mind to believe all other articles, which the Church of Christ dot● propound to be believed; so as, that though we do not believe every article of Christian Religion with an explicit and express faith, yet we are bound under pain● of damnation, nor to believe any doctrine contrary or repugnant to the said article● which the Church of Christ doth propound to be believed: from which it avoidable followeth, that once granting that the Church of Christ propoundeth 〈◊〉 be believed, that there is a Purgatory, ● that we may pray to the Saints, he incureth damnation who believeth that the● is no Purgatory, or that we ought not 〈◊〉 pray to Saints.  
Now in this third place, we will touch that inseparable Attribute of true Christian faith, which is Unity in faith 〈◊〉 doctrine. This mark is so indissolub●● annexed to the true faith of Christ, as th● we find his Apostles ever ready most ●●riously to inculcate the same to their d●ciples. Thus accordingly the Apos●● exhorteth the Ephesians, saying: 
(k) Ephes. 4.  Be you careful to keep the unity of the spirit, in the bond of peace. And immediately again. 
(l) Ephes. ubi supra.  There is one Lord, one faith, one Baptism. Where we see, that Unity in faith is expressly set down. As also in another place: 
(m) Ephes. loc. cit.  I beseech you, that you speak all one thing: be you k●it together in one mind and one judgement. And as this was the exhortation of the Apostle, To we read that the first believers followed ●he same, of whom S. Luke thus saith: The 
(n) Act. 4.  multitude that believed, were of one hart, and ●ne soul. And hence it proceedeth, that the Church of Christ (which comprehendeth the Professors of this unanimous faith) is styled by God's holy writ, 
(o) Rom. 12.  One Body, one 
(p) Cant. 6.  Spouse, &, 
(q) joan. 10.  & one flock of sheep. A truth ●o evident, as that (besides the frequent testimonies of the Father's 
(r) Athanasius orat. 1. con. Ani. Chrysost. opere imperfecto in Mat. Hom. 20. Tertullian de prescript. Irenaeus l r. c. 5.  confirming the ●ame) ever the Protestants subscribe in judgement heerto. For thus 
(s) Luther tom. 3. Wittenberg in psal. 5. fol. 166.  Luther himself to omit 
(t) see herself the Divines of Mansfeild against the Sacramentaries; And the Divines of Heidelberg against the Anabaptists.  others) writeth: A kingdom deui●ed in itself, shall not stand; neither have any heretics at any time been overcome by force or ●btility, but by mutual dissension; neither doth ●hrist fight with them otherwise, then with a spi●●t of giddiness, and disagreement.  
Now then, this Unity of faith is so to be ●nderstood, as that it is not repugnant thereto, that one and the same point should at one time, not be holden as necessary to be believed; the which after it hath undergone a definitive & sententionall decree of God's Church, is necessarily to be believed. As for example, it was not necessary in the beginning of Christianity to believe, that the book of the Maccabees, the Epistle of S. james, S. jude, the second Epistle of S. Peter, the second and third of S. john to be Canonical Scripture, till they were defined so to be by the third Council 
(u) Can. 47.  of Carthage, at which S. Augustine was present; But after this Council had, by the assistance of the holy Ghost, defined them to be Canonical, and this after confirmed by the consent of the whole Church; than it was, and is Heresy to deny them to be Canonical. And the reason of this disparity is, because it is Gods good pleasure & wisdom, not to reveal to his Church all articles of faith in the beginning, and at one time, but at several times, and upon several occasions, as to his divine Majesty best seemeth expedient.  
Thus the faith of a Christian is capable of dilatation, and of a more large vnfoulding, or exposition; but not of any contrariety in belief, change, or alteration. An● thus (to insist in the former example) y● may well stand with Christian faith, in the beginning not to accept the former books or Canonical, till the authority of the Church had pronounced them for such. But it standeth not with sound faith, that one man should positively believe (now after the Church's definition thereof given) as an article of faith, that the Maccabees and the rest of the books above specified, are not Canonical Scripture, but the profane writings of man; and another man should believe, as an article of Faith, that they are Canonical Scripture; since the one of these contrary beliefs must be Heretical.  
This verity of the Unity of faith being warranted by the word both of God and man (as is above said) we will take into our consideration the Catholic and Protestant Religions, both which jointly do profess to believe in general, in the Trinity, in Christ's Incarnation, his Passion, and the Creed of the Apostles; and so we shall discern whether the faith of all these several Professors doth enjoy the foresaid mark of unity in doctrine or Noah. But seeing this Subject is most ample and large, I will therefore sepose this ensuing chapter for the more full and exact discovery of the many and great disagreements between the Catholics and the Protestants in their faith and Religion.   

THE SAME PROVED FRO● want of unity in faith, between Catholics an● Protestants, touching the Articles of the Creed CHAP. FOUR  
UNDERTAKING in this place t● set down the multiplicity of opinions, between Catholics an● Protestants, though they all jointly believe in the Trinity, the Incarnation o● Christ, his Passion, and the like; and consequently, that this their general belief wanteth that true Unity of faith, which out of th● holy Scriptures, Fathers, & the Protestants I have above showed to be most necessary to Salvation; I will first examine, how the Protestants and Catholics do differ touching the belief of the Creed, made by the Apostles. Next I will demonstrate, that supposing all Professors of both Religions should agree in the true sense and meaning of the Creed; yet there are diverse other dogmatic points necessarily to be believed, (and are at this instant believed both by Protestants and Catholics) which are not expressed or mentioned in the Creed, nor by any immediate inference can be drawn from thence. Lastly I will set down the great difference between Catholics & Protestant's in other points of faith, of which the Creed makes no intimation or mention at all; and yet the different belief of them is holden necessary to Salvation, both by Catholic & Protestant. From all which it shall appear, how fare distant the Catholic and Protestant Religion are from that unity in doctrine, so necessarily required to that faith, whereby a Christian is to be saved.  
I do here begin with the Apostles Creed: first because the articles of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion, are included in the Creed. Secondly, by reason there are many Adiaphorists in Religion (as I may term them) who seem to deal more largely and liberally heerin; seeing they are content to extend the necessary Object of Faith, not only to the articles of the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the Passion, but to all points set down in the Creed, who assure themselves, that God exacteth at our hands, the belief of no other articles, then are contained in the Creed.  
Now here aforehand we are to conceive, that true Faith resteth in the true sense & meaning of the words of the Creed which was intended by the Apostles, and not in the words themselves; seeing both in the judgement of all learned Catholics and Protestants, to believe the words of the Creed in a sense different from the intended sense of the Apostles (and consequently in a false sense) is no better, than not to believe the Creed at all. And the reason hereof is, because a false construction drawn from the Creed (no less than from the Scripture) is not the word of God, but of man; and consequently the said letter of the Creed so interpreted, is subject to the same censure, whereunto the word of man is liable: from whence it followeth, that whosoever believeth the words of the Creed in another sense, than was intended by the holy Ghost and the Apostles, doth not believe the Creed at all; but only believeth the word of man, which ever standeth subject to error and mistaking. So as, that sentence of S. Jerome delivered only of the Scripture, may justly be applied to the Creed: 
(a) In Epistola ad Paulinum.  Scripturae non in legendo, sed in intelligendo consistunt: Scriptures (or Creed) do not consist in the letter, but in the sense and true understanding of the letter.  
This then being thus justly presupposed, let us begin to examine the articles of the Creed, and see, how we Catholics and Protestants do differ in the construction & understanding thereof. And first touching the first article of our Belief in God, observe how different it is. The Catholics do believe, that their God no way formally cooperateth or willeth sin in man; that he hath but one simple and expressed will touching Sin, and this in detesting or hating of Sin: that he will not punish us for not keeping of such precepts, the which are not in our power to keep; that he imputeth sins to every man that committeth sin; briefly that he giveth to all sufficient grace to save their souls, and desireth that all men may be saved. Whereas the Protestants believe the mere contrary to all these points: for they believe, that God 
(b) Beza his display of Popish practices p. 102. saith: God exciteth the wicked will of one thief to kill another: see Swinglius tom. 1. the Providen. c. 6. fol. 365. Calu. Instit. l. 2. c. 18. sect. 1.  cooperateth, forceth, and willeth a man to sin: That he hath a double will (and therefore a dissembling will) the one expressed in Scripture, according to which he forbiddeth man to sin, the other concealed to himself, by the which he impelleth man to sin; that he will 
(d) D. Reynolds in his 2. Conclusion annexed to his Conference p. 697.  punish us for transgressing the ten Commandments, it not being in our power to keep the said Commandments; 
(e) Luther tom. 2. wittenb. de capt. Babylon. fol. 74. D. Whitaker de Eccl. contra Bellarm. controversia 2. quaest. 5. p. 301.  that to the faithful, sinning never so wickedly, no sin shallbe imputed.  
Finally, that to 
(f) Calu. de Inst. l. 30. 23. saith: Confilio nutuque etc. God doth ordain by his counsel, that among men some be borne to certain damnation from their mother's womb. See willet's Synopsis p. 554. affirming the same.  certain men he giveth not sufficient means of Salvation, but purposeth and decreeth from all eternity, that some men (living in the eye of the world & in their own consciences never so virtuously) shallbe damned, & thrall to sempiternal perdition. Thus we see, how great a difference there is between the Catholics and the Protestants, in believing the first article of the Creed. And how necessarily it followeth, that either the Catholics or Protestants, do stand subject and obnoxious to that saying of S. Augustin: 
(g) q. 29. sup. joshua.  Who imagineth God such as God is not, he carrieth every where another God, a false God in his mind.  
Touching the second article, which is And in jesus Christ his only Son: We 
(h) Concil. Trid.  Catholics believe in Christ, who is God of God, and equal to his Father; a Saviour, who suffered death, quoad sufficientiam, for all mankind, and who accomplished the function of his Saviourship, only according to hi● humanity; a Saviour, who died only in body and not in soul; finally a Saviour, who from his first conception was endued with all knowledge, wisdom, and providence, and exempt from all ignorance, passion and perturbation. Whereas diverse chief Protestants do believe in Christ, as their Saviour, who according to their faith, is God of 
(i) D. Whitaker approveth this opinion, alleging Caluin in proof thereof, Contra Campianum p. 121.  himself, and 
(k) Melancton in loc. comm. edit. 1561. p. 41.  inferior to the Father; who died only for the 
(l) So doth D. Willet teach in Sinopsi, printed anno 1600. p. 780. as also Caluin and Beza in whole Treatises.  Elect; who performed his mediation, not only according to his humanity, but also according to his divinity (though in the judgement of all earned men true Divinity is impassable) who in the time of his Passion (besides the death of the body, as insufficient for our valuation) suffered in soul the torments 
(m) Melancton ubi supra. D. fulke in his retent. p. 89.  
(m) So teacheth Caluin Instit. l 2. c. 16. sect. 10. & D. Whit. contra Duraeum l. 8. p. 556.  of Hell; briefly who laboured with ignorance, 
(n) So teacheth Beza in resp. ad act Colloq. Montisb. part. 1. p. 147. D. Willet Synop. p. 599. & 600.  passion, and even desperation itself.  
Touching the Article of Christ's descending into Hell, the Catholics do believe ●●ereby, that Christ descended in soul after his Passion, into that part of Hell, with is called Lymbus Patrum, to deliver from thence the souls of the Just, there detained till ●is coming; of which judgement are also some learned Protestants. But the greatest part of 
(o) So D. Bilson in his Survey of ●●●ists suffering etc. p. 650. 651. 652. The Lutherans are generally ●he same opinion.  Protestants do interpret this article of Christ's descending into his 
(p) D. Willet in his Lymbomastix. D. Fulke aged by D. Willet in Synop. p. 605. 606.  ●●aue; so by the word, Hell, understanding ●●e grave. But 
(q) l. 2. Instit. c. 16. §. 20.  Caluin teacheth, that by Christ's descending into Hell, is undertood, that Christ apprehended God to be ●ost angry and offended with him for our ●akes; and that thereupon Christ suffered ●●eat anxiety and grief of soul; and which is more, most blasphemously Caluin teacheth, that Christ uttered words of desperation in saying: O God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me.  
Touching the article of Christ's ascending into Heaven, we Catholics and the Caluinists do believe hereby, that Christ truly in body ascended up into Heaven: whera● all Lutherans 
(r) Luther in l. de Sacrament. Coenae Domini, tom. 2. fol. 112. where he saith: Credimus quòd Christus iuxta humanitatem est ubique praesens. The same is taught by Brentius in Apolog. pro Confess. Wittenberg. And finally by all the Lutherans.  do teach, that Christ's Body is in all places with the divinity, and that therefore it did not really, after his Passion, ascend up into Heaven, it being there both before and after his Passion. Thus the Lutherans, both in ours, and the Protestants judgements, do destroy, by this their construction, the whole Creed, and particularly Christ's Incarnation, Nativity, Passion, death, ascending to Heaven, and his coming to judgement; for supposing Christ's body to be in all places, all these articles were but apparently, or fantastically, and not truly and really performed.  
Touching the article of Christ's judging the quick and dead: We Catholics do believe, that Christ at his coming to judgement, will so judge man, as that his good works, receiving all their force from our Saviour's Passion, shallbe rewarded: whereas the Protestants denying all 
(s) Calu. l. 3. Instit. c. 5. §. ●. Bucer. in acts Colloq. Ratisbon. Beza, Zwinglius and most Protestant's.  merit of works (as injurious and derogatory to his death and Passion) do hold, that Christ shall then reward only a bare and special 
(t) Calu. in Antidoto Conc. Tri. Kemnitius in examen Conc. Trident. and most other Protestants.  faith.  
Concerning the article, I believe in the holy Ghost: Whereas all Catholics and many Protestants, do believe, that the holy Ghost is the third Person in the most Blessed Trinity; Caluin how ever he was persuaded of the truth or falsehood thereof, much laboureth notwithstanding to avoid the force of arguments drawn from the chiefest places of scripture, and usually alleged by all Antiquity, in proof of the holy Ghost being the third Person in the Trinity. Thus we find, that Caluin 
(u) Instit. l. 1. c. 13. §. 15.  will not have (contrary to all Antiquity) that passage of Scripture, Psal. 33. By the word of the Lord the Heavens were made, and all the Host of them by the spirit of his mouth, to be understood of the divinity of the holy Ghost: In like sort he rejecteth the argument 
(x) See of this Subject against the Trinity, Aegidius Hunnius a Protestant, in his book entitled Caluinus judaizans.  drawn from that other most remarkable text, john 5. There be three, that give testimony in Heaven, the Father, the word, & the holy Ghost, and these three be one; Caluin upon this place thus saying (hereby to take away from thence the proof of the holy Ghost:) Quòd dicit tres esse unum, ad essentiam non refertur, sed ad consensum potiùs. Finally Luther was so far from acknowledging the holy Ghost to be the third Person in the Trinity, or to confess the Trinity itself, that thus he writeth: 
(*) Luther Confut ration, Lat.  Anima mea odit hoc verbum Homoousion, vel Consubstantialis. My very soul doth hate the word Homoousion, or Consubstantial.  
Concerning the article, I believe the holy Catholic Church: The Catholics do believe this Church to be a visible company of men, professing the present Roman Catholic faith, of which some are predestinated, others reprobated, The Protestants do believe this Church to consist only of the 
(y) Confess. Augustana Art. 7. Luther. l. de Conc & Eccles. Cal. l. 4. Inst. c. 1. §. 2.  Elect and Predestinate.  
Touching the Article, the Communion of Saints: The Catholics do hereby believe such a Communion to be betwixt the Saints in Heaven, the Souls in Purgatory, & men upon earth, that the one part doth help the other with their most available prayers and Intercessions. The Protestants deny all such intercourse of benefits between these several parts ●f the Church of Christ; 
(z) Calu. l. 3. Instit. c. 5. §. 6. Centuriatores Cent. 1. l. 2. c. 4. col. 460. Brentius in confess. wittenberg. c. de Purgatorio.  accounting the Catholics doctrine herein, superstitious & sacrilegious.  
Lastly, touching the Article of forgiveness of Sins, we Catholics do believe, that this remission of sins, is performed when the soul by a true and inherent justice, and by the infused gifts of God enjoyeth a renovation of herself, and thereby becometh truly just in the sight of God. The Protestants disallowing all inherent justice, do only acknowledge an 
(a) Ke●nit. in Examen. Concil. Trident. Cal. l. 3. Instit. c. 11.  imputative justice or righteousness, which consists in that the justice of Christ is (as they teach) only imputed unto sinners; so as we remain still sinners, though our sin be not imputed unto us, through Christ's justice. A doctrine injurious to the most meritorious Passion, and death of Christ.  
Thus have we run over the chief articles of the Creed, from whence we collect, that seeing (as is above demonstrated) He only believeth availably, & truly the Creed, who believeth it in that sense, in which the Apostles did write it; & seeing there are mere different or rather contrary constructions of every Article, given by the Catholics and the Protestants; so as if the construction of the Catholics be true, it followeth necessarily that the other of the Protestant's be false, or contrariwise; we may therefore justly conclude, that it is not sufficient to salvation for any one to say, that he beliueth the Creed, who believeth the words of it in general (without restraining them to any peculiar construction given either by Catholics or Protestants) except he believe it in that one particular sense (and none other) which was intended by the holy Ghost, when it was first framed by the Apostles.  
Now in this next place, we are to demonstrate, that granting for a time, by an Hypothesis, or supposal, that a man did believe all the Articles of the Creed in their true sense and construction; yet followeth it not, that this belief (though it be most necessary) were sufficient for a man, to obtain his salvation hereby; and the reason hereof is, because it is most certain, that there are diverse points of Christian Religion holds necessarily to be believed in judgement both of Catholics and Protestants (and accordingly are believed iontly both by protestants and Catholics) & yet the said point● are not contained or expressed in the Creed▪ Among others I will insist in these following.  
First, That there are certain divine writings o● infallible authority, which we commonly call● the Scriptures of the old & new Testament of which Testaments we find no mention in the Creed, and yet all men are bound under pain of damnation, to believe tha● there are such writings; since other waye● (abstracting from the authority of th● Church) there were not sufficient mean left, to believe that it were a sin to breaks any of the ten Commandments, o● (which is more) that Christ jesus was th● true Saviour of the world; for though w● read in the Creed, that he suffered and died, yet we read not expressly there, that he died to redeem man.  
2. That there are spiritual Substances, which we call Angels, which now enjoy the most happy sight of God; and that many thousands of them did fall presently after their Creation, and are become those malignant Spirits, which usually are termed Devils.  
3. That there is any material place of Hell, where the wicked are tormented, of which we find nothing in the Creed, in the judgement of the Protestants; for though the word, Hell, be mentioned in that Article He descended into Hell; yet by the word, Hell, the grave is understood by most of the Protestants.  
4. That the pains of the damned shallbe for all eternity, and not for a certain time only.  
5. That Adam did presently upon his Creation fall from the grace of God, and thereby transferred Original sin upon all mankind; so as by reason of his fall, all men are borne in Original sin.  
6. That the world was once drowned for sin: which Inundation is commonly called Noës' flood.  
7. That, our Saviour whiles he conversed here upon earth, did any miracles.  
8. That S. john Baptist was our Saviour's Precursor, or forerunner; and that our Saviour did choose unto him certain men for his Apostles, which did first preach, and plant the Christian faith, throughout the world.  
9 That Circumcision is now forbidden, as a thing most unlawful & .  
10. That there are any Sacraments of the new Testament, (as the Sacrament of Baptism, or Eucharist) and instituted by Christ for the spiritual good of man's soul.  
These points (besides some others) all christians (aswell Protestants as catholics') do believe, and do hold that their belief of these points is necessary to salvation; & yet not any one of all these Articles is expressed or set down in the Apostles creed. From whence I would conclude, that the Apostles Creed cannot be a sufficient boundary, to contain and limit an available faith: For what hope can that man have of his salvation, who believeth, that there are neither any divine scriptures, nor Angels, nor Devils; nor any Decalogue, commonly called the Ten commandments, nor that Christ did work any miracles; nor that he died for man; nor that he instituted any Sacrament, and particularly the Sacraments of Baptism, and the Eucharist; nor finally (to omit the rest) that there is any place of Hell, or any eternity of punishment for the damned?  
And here I am to premonish the Reader, that it is no sufficient answer to reply, that most of all the foresaid points are expressed in the Scripture, and therefore are to be believed; This (I say) availeth not, seeing here I dispute against those, who maintain with wonderful pertinacity of judgement, that it is sufficient to salvation to believe only the Articles, (and nothing else) which are contained in he Creed: bu● not any of the former Articles are contained therein. Again, seeing to believe that there are any divine scriptures, is not expressed in the Creed, it conduceth nothing to the answering of this our argument, to say, that the forementioned articles are proved out of Scripture, and therefore are to be believed.  
Neither secondly, can the force of our said argument be avoided in replying, that all the former articles are virtually and potentially comprehended in that article, I believe the holy Church; because the Church teacheth that all these articles are to be believed. This is no warantable answer, by reason that, as these may be reduced to this Ar●icle of the creed, so also may all other points controverted between the catholics and the Protestants be in like manner reduced to the said Article; seeing the church of God setteth down what is the truth, and what is to be believed in the said controversies; binding her children under pain of damnation, aswell to believe the truth in the controversies of our days, as to believe the former mentioned articles, which are not expressed in the creed. And yet these our Newtrallists in Religion, who make the Creed the sole square of their Faith, do not think that those questions of Religion insisted upon between the Catholics and the Protestants, are in believing or not believing of them, any way hurtful to their Salvation.   

THE SAME PROVED FROM the want of unity in faith, between Catholics and Protestants, in Articles necessary to be believed, and yet not expressed in the Creed. CHAP. V.  
IN this third and last place, we will insist in certain controversies of Religion, necessarily to be believed (the one way) both in the judgement of catholics and Protestants, and not contained in the creed; and yet so differently maintained by Catholics and Protestants, as that granting the maintainers on the one side hold the truth, it followeth, that the other party vphouldeth falsehood and Heresy. Now for the more dangerous wounding of our Newtralizing Christians herein, I will omit here to speak of the controversies touching Purgatory, Praying to Saints, Freewill, Monachisme, and diverse other such like, & will restrain myself only to those Controversies, the subject of which Controversies are taught by the one side to be (under Christ) the immediate means of our grace and Salvation; & denied by the other party to be of any such force or efficacy for the souls everlasting good: So as if it be showed, that the Protestants and the Catholics do mainly descent in the means of obtaining grace, and purchasing of salvation, it must of necessity be inferred, that both the Protestants and Catholics (continuing in such their contrary faiths) cannot attain grace and salvation: since not only Philosophy, but even natural reason teacheth us, that he never shall attain the end, who useth either not the same means, or contrary to those means, which are only and necessarily instituted to the gaining of the said end.  
But to proceed to these points: first, Concerning the Sacraments in general; the Catholics do believe, that all of them (where no just impediment is) do confer grace into the soul of man; by the help and continuance of which grace, the soul in the end obtaineth salvation: The Protestants do not ascribe any such supernatural effect or operation of grace to them.  
And to come more particularly to the Sacraments: Touching Baptism, the Catholics believe, that Children, as being borne in Original sin, cannot be saved, except they be baptised with water, according to those words of S. 
(1) joan. 3.  john: Unless a man be borne again of water and the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. The 
(2) Willet in his meditation upon the 122. Psalm, and Caluin and Beza most frequently.  Protestants believe, that Infants dying unbaptized, may be saved.  
Touching the Sacrament of Penance, or Confession: The Catholics believe, that after a Christian hath committed any one mortal sin, that sin cannot be forgiven him, but by means of confessing the said sin to a Priest of the new Testament, and receiving absolution thereof from him; answereably to that of S. 
(3) Ca 20.  john: whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained. The Protestants believe, that neither the confession of sins to man, nor the absolution of man is necessary for the remitting of sin unto them, but that it is suficient to confess them only to God. And thus according to this their diversity of doctrine, either the Protestants, for want of this Sacrament, granting it to be necessary (after he hath once mortally sinned) cannot be saved; or the Catholic for practising a false & superstitious manner of seeking to have his sins remitted (supposing it to be repugnant to the Institution of Christ) cannot have them remitted, and consequently cannot be saved.  
Touching the most blessed Eucharist; The Catholics believe, that the very body and blood doth lie ineffably, and latently under the forms of bread and wine, according to that: 
(4) Mat. 26.  This is my Body, This is my blood. That 
(5) joan. 6.  Unless we eat his Body and drink his blood, we shall not have life everlasting: Lastly, that we are to Adore Christ his Body, being accompanied with his Divinity in the said Sacrament. The Protestants do believe, that his true Body, as never leaving heaven, cannot possibly be truly and really under the forms of bread and wine; and consequently they believe that the eating of his body and drinking of his blood, is not necessary to Salvation; finally they hold our Adoration of the Sacrament, to be open Idolatry; and term Catholics Idolaters for the adoring of it. And thus the Protestants, as not feeding upon this Celestial food, shall not have life everlasting, if the Catholics doctrine heerin be true; or else Catholics, suppose they should err, for teaching and practising Idolatry heerin, should incur damnation.  
Touching the means of our justification: the Catholics believe, that not only faith, but works also do justify: The Protestants reject all works from justification, teaching that only faith doth justify man: yea they further proceed, affirming, that who once hath true faith, is most assured, and 
(a) Caluin. in Instit. passim. Kemnitius in exam. Concilij Trident.  certain of his salvation; whereas the Catholics, reputing this as mere presumption, are willing according to the 
(b) Phil. 2.  Apostle, to work their salvation with fear and trembling. To be short the Protestants 
(*) so Luther in art. 10. 11. 12. Caluin. in Antidote. Concil. Trident. sess. 6. Melancthon in locis. tit. de fide.  do teach, that a man by thinking himself to be Just, is by this means become Just; whereas the Catholics do hold this doctrine not only to be fantastical, but also in 
(c) Vide Bellarm. l. 3. de justificat.  reason most absurd.  
Touching grace, without which man cannot be saved: The Catholics believe, that God out of the abyss and depth of his infinite mercy, offereth to every Christian sufficient grace, whereby he may be saved, and therefore they do encourage every one to endeavour to seek their salvation: The 
(d) This is taught by Caluin and Beza in whole Treatises, and by D. Willet in his Synopsis of anno. 1600. p. 589.  Protestants teach, that God giveth not this sufficiency of grace to every one, but to certain men only, and that diverse there are, who, notwithstanding all their endeavour to believe truly, and live virtuously, yet cannot, nor shall not be saved.  
Touching the Decalogue, or ten Commaundments: The Catholics believe, that except a Christian do keep them, he cannot be saved, according to that saying of our Saviour: 
(d) Mat. 19  If thou wilt enter into life, keep the Commaundments: The 
(e) D. Reynolds in his 2. Conclus. annexed to his Conference p. 697. D. Willet in his Synopsis p. 564.  Protestants do absolutely teach an impossibility of keeping them; And thereupon 
(f) Serm. de Moyse.  Luther thus affirmeth: The ten Commandments appertain not to us.  
Lastly, Touching the Pope, or Bishop of Rome, The Catholics do believe, that he is, under Christ, the supreme Pastor upon Earth; that who doth not communicate with him in Sacraments and doctrine, not yielding him all due obedience, in subiecting their judgements in matters of faith to his judgement and sententionall definitions, set down in a general Council, cannot be saved: The Protestants do teach, the Bishop of Rome is that Antichrist, which is deciphered by the 
(g) 2. Thes. 2. & Apocal. 13. & 17.  Apostle, and which is the designed enemy of Christ; and that whosoever embraceth his doctrine, or enthralleth (as they writ) their assents to his Cathedral decrees in points of Religion, cannot obtain Salvation.  
Thus far of these points, in which I have made particular choice to insist (omitting some others of like nature) because we see, that most or all of them do immediately & principally (as is above said) touch the means of purchasing of grace, of remission of our Sins, and of obtaining our Salvation, being maintained for such by the Catholics; but utterly denied and rejected by the Protestants. And here I now urge two things. First, if these former doctrines, as they are believed by the Catholics do immediately concern Salvation, & become necessary means thereof, as instituted by Christ; then cannot the Protestants, as rejecting all such Doctrines and such means both in belief and practice, be saved: If by a supposal, they be not of that nature, but false in themselves, and the contrary doctrines of Protestants true, then cannot the Catholics (as believing false doctrines immediately touching man's Salvation, and accordingly practising them) be saved: from which forked argument, it may demonstratively be inferred, that it is impossible that both Catholics and Protestants (the one part believing, the other not believing the foresaid doctrines) should both be saved.  
Secondly I urge, that a false belief not only in these articles, but also in all other Controversies between the Catholic and Protestant, is plain Heresy: And this because this false belief is comprehended within the definition of Heresy, as being in itself an Election and choice of a new or false doctrine, wilfully maintained against the Church of God; and therefore it followeth, that either the Catholics or Protestants, for their persisting in this false belief or Heresy, & maintaining it against God's Church shallbe damned. But here I will stay myself, wading no further in the disquisition, and search of the great dissensions between Catholics and Protestants, touching faith and belief; only I will reflect a little upon the premises. And here it is made most evident; first, that the Catholics and Protestants do mainly differ in the sense and construction of the Articles of the Creed; and consequently (seeing the sense and not the words do make the Creed) that they both do not believe one and the same Creed, but have to themselves several Creeds; from which point is sufficiently discovered the want of Unity in faith among them both, which Unity is so necessarily required to man's salvation, as in the precedent chapter is demonstrated. Secondly, that though by supposition, they did believe the Creed, and the true sense thereof with an unanimous consent; yet it is proved, there are diverse other articles not contained in the Creed, which are indifferently believed, as necessary to salvation, both by Catholic and Protestant.  
Thirdly, seeing also there are sundry Controversies in Religion (as is above exemplified) which immediately concern salvation, being holden as necessary means thereof by Catholics, but disclaimed from, and abandoned by the Protestants, as main errors and false doctrines; Therefore from all the former premises I do aver, that it is a manifest error to make the Creed the sole rule of Faith, and that he who maintains, that both the Catholics and Protestants (notwithstanding their great disparity of belief and faith, the one side necessarily believing & maintaining Heresy) can be saved, or enjoy one heaven; is wholly deprived of all true judgement, reason, and discourse; and for want thereof may deservedly be ranged among them, of whom the psalmist speaketh: 
(h) Psal. 11.  nolite fieri sicut equus & mulus, quibus non est intellectus.   

THE SAME PROVED FROM the authority and privilege of the Church, in not erring in her definitions, and condemnation of Heresies: and first of Counsels. CHAP. VI  
FROM the inviolable unity of faith, we will next descend to the privileges of Gods true Church: Of which privileges I will at this time take only one into my consideration; that is, that the Church of God is endued with a supreme privilege and prerogative of not erring in her definitions of faith, or condemnation of heresy. This point is warranted by innumerable texts of holy Scripture, as where it is said: 
(i) Esay. 72.  Upon thy wall, o Jerusalem, I have set watchmen, all the day and all the night, they shall not be silent. But God did not set watchmen over his Church to teach error. And again, The 
(a) 2. Tim. 3.  Church of God is the pillar and foundation of the truth: what more perspicuous? And further, whereas each man ●s commanded to repair in difficulties & matters of small consequences to the Church; it is threatened by Christ himself, that who will not hear the Church, shallbe accounted ●s an Heathen, or Publican, according to ●hat his commination: Si Ecclesiam non au●ierit, 
(b) Mat. 18.  sit tibi sicut Ethnicus & Publicanus: where we find no restriction, but that in all things we are to hear the Church.  
Again, Christ himself speaketh to his Apostles, and in them to the whole Church: He 
(c) Luc. 10.  that heareth you, heareth me; But if the church could err, neither would Christ refer us to the church (especially under so great a penalty,) neither by hearing the church, could we be justly said to hear Christ. Finally, the Church is so governed by Christ as its head or spouse, and by the holy Ghost as its soul, as therefore we find the Apostle thus to write 
(d) Ephes. 1.  thereof: God hath made him head (speaking of Christ) over all the Church, which is his body. And again: 
(e) Ephes. 4.  One body and one spirit; & yet more: The 
(f) Ephes. 5.  man is the head of the woman, as Christ is head of the Church. From which texts it followeth, that if the church should err in its definitions or resolutions of faith and condemnation of Heresy, this erring might well be ascribed to Christ and to the holy Ghost; and consequently it followeth, that the Apostles in making the creed, would have omitted that Article: I believe in the Catholic Church. For why should we be bound to believe the church, if the church could err?  
This truth (I mean, that the church of Christ cannot err in her sententionall decrees) is so illustrious and evident, that Tertullian speaking of certain Heretics of his time, objecting the erring of the whole church, thus figuratively or Ironically writeth: Age; Omnes 
(g) in l. de prescript. c. 28.  Ecclesiae erraverunt, nullam respexit spiritus Sanctus, uti eam in veritatem deduceret, ad hoc missus à Christo, ad hoc postulatus de Patre, ut esset doctor veritatis etc. That is, Go to; Belike all the Churches have erred, and the holy Ghost hath regarded no Church, that be might lead it into truth, being sent for this purpose by Christ, and to the same end begged by Christ of the Father, ●hat it might be the teacher of truth. And S. Augustine: Disputare 
(h) Epist. 118.  contra id quod Ecclesia universae sentit, insolentissimae insaniae est: To dispute against any point maintained by the whole Church is extreme madness. To whose judgement herein, most of the more sober and learned Protestants do indisputably subscribe; since diverse of them do with all fervour & earnestness maintain, that 
(i) D. Bancrost in his Sermon printed anno 1588. Fox Act. mon. fol. 464. b. art. 4. The divines of Geneva in their propositions and principles, disputed etc. p. 141. and diverse others.  the church of Christ cannot err, and that what she defineth for truth, is most true; or what for Heresy or falsehood, is heretical, and to be condemned.  
This Basis, or foundation of the church not erring, being thus firmly laid, we are hereupon to conclude, that what points of Religion the catholic church of Christ hath condemned for Heresies, the same are by us to be reputed for Heresies (since the church's condemnation or approbation is most infallible) and the maintainers of the said Heresies, for Heretics; and consequently that such Heretics, as departing out of the Church of God, by their holding of the said Heretical opinions, cannot be saved. Now, because the judgement of the Church in matters of faith is discovered two ways; first by the sentence of general Counsels; secondly by the frequent attestations of the said chief Doctors of the Church in every age, in their particular writings, they not being contradicted therein by any other Orthodoxal Fathers, or Doctors of the same age: I will therefore distributively handle both these ways, showing that both in general by Counsels, and also by the particular judgement of the learned Fathers, many opinions, though not touching the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion, or the express Articles of the Apostles creed, have been condemned for plain Heresies, and the believers of them anathematised for Heretics.  
And first, to begin with counsels, the infallible authority of which even Christ himself hath by his own words often ratifyed; as where he saith: Where 
(k) Mat. 18.  two or three (much more where many hundreds of venerable Bishops) are gathered together in my name, I am in the midst of them: And again, speaking to the Church, and in it to the assembled Doctors and Pastors thereof: I am 
(l) Mat. 28.  with you all days, even to the consummation of the world: which counsels are ever directed and governed by the holy Ghost, according to those words in the Acts: 
(*) c. 15.  Visum est Spiritui Sancto & nobis; and therefore are worthily received and admitted for the supremest sentence of God's church, not only by the ancient 
(n) Atha. Ep. ad Epictetum. August. in Epist. 162. Greg. Nazian. orat. in Athan. Cyril l. de Trinit. etc.  Fathers, but even by the more learned Protestants; since to omit others, one of the most remarkable of them thus writeth: 
(o) D. Bilson in his perpetual government. p. 370.  Synods are an external judicial means to discern error: and 
(p) D. Bills. ubi supra p. 374.  the surest means to decide doubts.  
But to proceed forward, and to begin with these. And first with the council of the Apostles; This council was assembled, as we read in S. 
(1) Act. 15.  Luke, by reason of certain contentious men, maintaining that the Gentiles converted to the christian Faith might eat meat offered up to Idols, blood, and strangled beasts, contrary to the custom of the jews. The Apostles being assembled, and bearing with the weakness of the jews in the infancy of the church, decreed all prohibition of eating blood & strangled meats: After which decree once established, it is certain, that it had been a mortal sin immediately to have eaten of blood, & strangled meats; so as before it being a point of indifferency, is now made necessary. This appeareth from the text; First from those words: Certain going forth from us, have troubled you with words, subverting your souls. But men do neither depart out of the Church by maintaining certain opinions, nor by their example therein can they subvert other men's souls, if their doctrine and practice thereof do still remain about things indifferent. Secondly from that other passage: It hath seemed good to the holy Ghost and us, to lay no further burden upon you, than these necessary things; where we find, that the prohibition of such meats is ranged by the Apostles, in regard of those times, among those things which are necessary.  
Again, neither would the Apostles have gathered themselves together so solemnly, neither would they have ascribed the decreeing of it to the work of the holy Ghost, if the Subject of the question, and difficulty then discussed by them, had concerned matters only of Indifferency, after such their decree made. Now from the example of this council, I do gather, That if a council by it own authority may decree, that the eating of certain meats (being otherways of their own nature indifferently to be eaten without sin) shallbe unlawful, and shall repute and hold the impugners thereof for men departed out of the Church of Christ; then, à fortiori, what doctrine soever a council shall condemn of it own nature for Heresy, the same is to be reputed by all good christians for Heresy, and the defendours thereof for Heretics.  
Secondly, the council of Nice was celebrated (though principally for the repressing of Arius his Heresy, denying the Divinity of Christ;) yet withal touching the controversy of keeping the feast of Easter, as ●t is apparent out of 
(q) l. 3. de vit. Const.  Eusebius, 
(r) in lib. de Synod. Arim. & Seleuciae.  Athanasius, & 
(s) Haeres. 70. uz. Audianorum.  Epiphanius. Now this council pronounceth Anathema to all those, who (besides the denying of the Divinity of Christ) should deny, that the feast of Easter was not to be kept according to the custom of the church; but according to the custom of the jews. And these Heretics were called, Quartadecimani, of whom see Tertullian libro de prescript. Augustine Haeresi 29. And here we are to understand, that the word, Anathema, used and pronounced by this council (which word is also almost every where used in all general counsels) signifieth as much as, accursed: and in this sense we find this word Anathema, to be used by the Apostle in several 
(t) Rom. 1. Cor. 12  places; so as when a council pronounceth Anathema to any, for believing such or such Heresies, or not believing such and such true doctrines, it intendeth to say, that those men so doing are to be accursed, and abandoned from God: But no man is to be accursed or abandoned from God, for believing, or not believing points of Indifferency, but for believing of such Errors, as cannot stand with his Souls salvation.  
The third Council of Carthage (whereat S. Augustine was present) decreed, that the book of the Maccabees, with some other books should be acknowledged, as canonical, and pronounceth Anathema, and condemnation to all those, who should not believe them, as canonical Scripture. From whence it may be concluded, that seeing the book of the Maccabees teacheth Prayer 
(*) 2. Macab. c. 1.  for the dead, that therefore this council alloweth that doctrine, condemning the contrary doctrine for Heresy.  
The doctrine of the Novatians, who taught, That there was not power in the church to reconcile men to God, but only by Baptism (excluding and denying thereby the Sacrament of Penance) was condemned with the brand of Anathema, in the council of Rome, holden under Pope Cornelius, as 
(x) lib. 6. hist. c. 33.  Eusebius reporteth. At which time also was condemned for Heresy the error of Anabaptism, as the same 
(y) l. 7. hist. cap. 2.  Eusebius relateth.  
The council of Chalcedon condemned the Heresy of Eutiches, who taught that there was but only one 
(z) ut patet in act. 1. Conc.  Nature in Christ after his Incarnation. In like sort the first council of Ephesus condemned the heresy of Nestorius, teaching two Persons to be in Christ, as appeareth out of 
(a) in Chronico.  Prosper and 
(b) l. 7. c. 34.  Socrates. Now touching both these last Heresies, we are to understand, that both Nestorius & Eutiches did believe in Christ jesus our Saviour, as the Redeemer of the world, yet they were registered and branded for Heretics only for their pertinacious erring, touching the Person and Natures of Christ; as now the Protestants may be reputed Heretics, for their ascribing of Ignorance, Passion, and Desperation to Christ.  
The council of Chalcedon also decreed, that vowed Virgins and Monks could not marry, condemning those with an Anathema, and for Heretics, that should hold and maintain the Contrary, as is to be seen out of the Council itself.  
The fourth 
(c) Can. 79.  council of Carthage (whereat S. Austin was present) pronounced, that the doctrine of prayer and Sacrifice for the dead, was according to the true faith of Christ's Church, and condemned the contrary opinion for Heresy, and the maintainers thereof for Heretics.  
The Council of Constantinople, under Pope Vigilius, condemned Origen for his Heresy, in which he taught that the Devils should in the end be saved; as 
(d) in vita justiniani.  Zonaras, and 
(e) lib. 17. c. 27.  Nicephorus relate. Finally the seaventh Synod or Council of Nice condemned all them for Heretics, who taught that the Images of Christ & his Saints were to be deprived of all due respect and reverence, and to be contemned and broken: Of this point, see Paulus 
(f) l. 23. Rerum Rom●narum.  Diaconus, and 
(g) in Compendio Historiarum.  Cedrenus.  
Thus far concerning Counsels condemning for Heresies, fals● opinions touching faith and Religion; where I have restrained myself only to those Counsels (this last only excepted) which were within the first five hundred years or little more, because those times are more prized and esteemed, than later times. I have also made choice to exemplify some of the Controversies of these days condemned in these Counsels.  
The like course was continued by Counsels for condemning & resisting of Innovations and false doctrines, (though not concerning the Trinity, the Incarnation, or the Apostles Creed) in the succeeding ages, which I purposely omit. But now I hear demand; First, how can it stand with the infallible authority of God's Church, in not erring in matters of faith (of which privilege I have entreated in the beginning of this chapter) if so she shall define the former Errors for condemned Heresies, and anathematise & curse the maintainers of them for wicked Heretics (though otherwise they believed in the Trinity, Incarnation, Passion etc.) if the Doctrines be but only matters of indifferency, and such as may stand with Salvation? Secondly I ask, how both the defenders & impugners of the said Doctrines can be freed from the brand of Heresy? seeing the true definition of Heresy nessarily agreeth to the Doctrines maintained by the one side; for it is certain, that either the Catholics, or Protestants do make choice of new opinions heerin, and do stubbornly maintain these their Innovations against God's Church.   

THE SAME PROVED FROM the Authority of God's Church, condemning Heresies; manifested by the writings of particular Fathers. CHAP. VII.  
NOw to come to the second way of discovering the Church's sentence in the foresaid points, which, by the particular judgement of the Ancient and learned Fathers (who were in their several ages the shining lamps of God's Church, and whose authorities all succeeding ages are to reverence) is easily evicted from God's holy written: for answereably hereto we read in 
(b) Ca 32.  Deuteronomie: Remember the old days, think upon every generation; ask thy fathers and they will tell thee, thy Elders and they will declare unto thee. And the Protestant Confession of Bohemia conspireth thereunto saying: The Ancient 
(i) In the Harmony of Confessions. p. 400.  Church is the true, and best mistress of Posterity, and going before leadeth the way. Coming then to the Fathers, I will first insist in the particular Errors (not touching either the Trinity, the Incarnation, or Passion of our Saviour, or the Articles of the creed, but points seeming of more indifferency) condemned by them for open and damnable Heresies.  
Next, I will set down diverse of the Father's sayings and sentences, pronounced of Heresy and Heretics in general. But before we come to the condemnation of particular Heresies, we must conceive that reason itself, and reverence due to the chief Doctors & Fathers of the Primitive Church, must presuppose, that in those times all those opinions were generally acknowledged for damnable Heresies, which are placed in the Catalogue of Heresies, by Ireneus, Hierome, Epiphanius, Philastrius, Augustine, Theodoret, and other approved authors. This by drift of all reason is to be acknowledged for two respects: first, because we cannot find any Doctor or wyter of the same ages, who contradicted the foresaid Fathers, for placing in their Catalogues, any opinion, for Heresy, which was not Heresy: Secondly, in that the forenamed Fathers and Authors of the Catalogues of Heresies were godly and learned men, and therefore neither would nor durst brand any opinion with the note & mark of Heresy, which the whole church of God did not then take as Heresy.  
All this then justly and truly presupposed, let us proceed to the particular Heresies so registered for such by some of the foresaid fathers; where (for the fuller convincing of our Newtralists in Religion) my greatest choice (some few only excepted) shallbe of the controversies remaining still at this day, between the Catholics and Protestants.  
1. That God was the author of sin, was maintained by Florinus, & condemned for Heresy or rather Blasphemy, by 
(k) as Eusebius relateth l. 5. Hist. c. 20.  Irenaeus, and Vincentius 
(l) in suo Commonitorio.  Lyrinensis.  
2. The opinion touching the Impossibility of the Commaundments, was maintained by certain Novellists of those times, and condemned for Heresy by 
(m) in explanat. Simbol. ad Damasum.  Jerome in these words: Execramur etc. We do execrate and abhor the blasphemy of those, who say, that any impossible thing is commanded by God to be kept, and observed by man. See also the like condemnation thereof given by 
(n) de tempore, serm. 101.  Augustine.  
3. That man had not freewill, is averted by the Manichees, and condemned for an explorate Heresy by 
(o) in prefat. dial. contra Pelag.  Jerome, in these words: Manichaeorum est hominum damnare naturam, & liberum auferre arbitrium: The Manichees do condemn man's nature, & do take away freewill. As also by S. 
(p) l. de haeres. c. 46.  Augustine saying: Peccatorum originem non tribuunt Manichaei libero arbitrio: The Manichees do not ascribe the beginning o sin to Freewill:  
4. That Faith doth only justify, was condemned for an Heresy in the Eunomians by Saint Augustine, 
(q) l. de haeres. c. 54.  who further saith, 
(r) l. de fide & operibus c. 14.  That it first proceeded from the false understanding of S. Paul in his Epistles.  
5. That Prayer or Sacrifice could not be offered up for the dead, is maintained by Aërius & his followers, who also taught, that no set fasting-dais are to be appointed by the church: yet were these two opinions condemned for Heresies by 
(s) haeres. 75.  Epiphanius, and Saint 
(t) lib. de haeres. c. 33.  Augustine, who thus writeth: Aëriani Haeretici docent, non oportere orare, aut offerre sacrificium pro mortuis, nec statuta solemniter celebranda esse ieiunia, sed cùm quisque voluerit, ieiunandum, ne videatur esse sub lege. The Aërian Heretics do teach, that we ought not to pray, or offer sacrifice foe the dead, that solemn fasting days are not to be celebrated, but that every one is to fast, when it pleaseth him, lest otherways he might seem to live under the law. Thus far S. Augustine.  
6. That Priests might marry, was condemned in Vigilantius for Heresy, by Jerome, who in his book against Vigilantius thus writeth: Quid faciunt Orientis Ecclesia etc. What do the Churches of the East in this point? what the Church of Egypt, and the Apostolical Sea? they admit for Priests, men, who are either Virgins, or continent, or if they have wives, do cease to become husbands.  
7. That Marriage and Virginity were of equal dignity, was defended by jovinian; who also absolutely denied all diversity o● merits; yet was this his error condemne● for heresy by 
(u) lib. 1. adversus jovin. c. 2.  S. Hierome, and S. 
(x) de tempore. serm. 191.  Augustine, thus writing hereof: joviniani damnamus errorem, qui dicit nullam in futuro meritorum distantiam: We condemn the error of jovinian, who teacheth that there is no disparity or difference of merits in time to come.  
8. That the Church was not ever visible▪ was taught by the Donatists, but condemned for a most wicked Heresy by S. Augustine, who thus discourseth thereof: Donatistae detorque● Scripturas in Ecclesia Dei, ut tanquam defeci● & perijsse de toto orbe videatur. The 
(x) lib. de unitat. Eccles. c. 22. & Epist. 170. add Sever.  Donatis● do detort the Scripture, and apply it to the Church of God, that the Church thereby may seem to ha● suffered defect, or perished out of the whole world.  
9 That Baptism of Children was not necessary, was taught by the Pelagians, but condemned for a manifest heresy, by 
(y) in Rescripto ad Milevit. Concil.  Innocentius, by S. Augustine 
(z) haeres. 86. , and by S. 
(a) in Ep. 86. ad Epis. Aquileiensem.  Leo.  
10. The Religious use of Images of Christ o● his Saints, was sacrilegiously denied by Zenaias Persa, as 
(b) l. 16. c. 27.  Nicephorus witnesseth, writing thus: Xenaias iste primus (o audace● animam, & os impudens!) vocem illam evomuri Christi & eorum, qui illi placuere, imagines venirandas non esse. That is this: Xenaias was the firs● that vomited forth this word (o bold soul & impudent mouth!) that the Images of Christ and his servants were not to be worshipped.  
11. That we ought not to pray to Saints, or to worship their Relics, was justified by Vigilantius, but condemned for heresy by S. Jerome 
(c) Li. contra Vigil. c. 1. & 3.  and by S. Augustine, who of this latter branch thus writeth: Sanctorum 
(d) Lib. de Eccles. Dog. c. 73.  corporum, & praecipue Beatorum Martyrum Reliquias, ac si Christi membra, sincerissimè honoranda credimus; Si quis contra hanc sententiam venerit, non Christianus, sed Eunomianus aut Vigilantianus creditur. We believe, that the Relics of holy bodies (but especially of martyrs) as the members of Christ, are to be honoured most sincerely; and who shall come to impugn this doctrine, is to be accounted no Christian, but an Eunomian, or a Vigilantian.  
12 The overthrowing of Altars, and casting away of holy Chrism, was taught & practised by the Donatists, yet was this their sacrilegious proceeding condemned, and themselves branded for heretics by S. 
(e) Lib. 2. cont. Petila c. 52. & l. 3. c. 40. & Epist. 163.  Augustine, and by Optatus, who speaking to the Donatists, discourseth thereof in this manuner: Quid 
(f) Lib. 6. contra Donatistas'.  est tam sacrilegum, quàm altaria Dei (inquibus & vos aliquando obtulistis) frangere, radere, removere? Quid enim est Altar, nisi sedes sanguinis & corporis Christi? Quid vos offenderit Christus, cuius illic per certa momenta corpus & sanguis habitabat? What is so sacrilegious (O you Donatists) as to break, deface, and cast down the Altars of God, whereupon yourselves have sometimes offered up sacrifice? What other thing is an Altar, than the seat of the body and blood of Christ? In what hath Christ so offended you, whose body & blood for certain moments or short times, did dwell or remain upon the Altar?  
To be short, I pass over (as less pertinent to the Controversies of these times) how the Error of Origen touching the salvation of the Devils was condemned for Heresy by 
(g) Haeres. 43.  S. Augustine; the Error of Tertullian denying 2. marriages was in like sort mightily reprehended and condemned by the said 
(h) Haeres. 86.  S. Augustine: though both these Doctors (I mean Tertullian and Origen) had otherways by their learned writings, deserved well of the church of God; and though the Heresies taught by them, might seem partly to be excused, to wit, the one in the defence of chastity, the other of mercy.  
Thus far touching the foresaid controversies condemned for Heresies by the fathers of the Primitive church, though the subject of the said Heresies was neither touching the Trinity, the Incarnation, Passion of our Saviour, or the Articles of the creed; A poin● so evident and confessed even by the Protestants, as that many of the foresaid examples are collected out of the Fathers, and confessed so to be condemned by diverse learned Protestants; as by the Centurists in their fourth chapter of every several century; by Osiander in his several centuries, as also by Pantaleon in his chronology. Besides which condemnation of the church, either these Doctrines, or the contrary to them, are necessarily proved to be Heresies, even from ●he definition of Heresy above set down; ●nd from whence it followeth, that both ●he catholics and the Protestants (the one ●elieuing them, the other not believing them) cannot be saved, seeing Heretics continuing Heretics cannot be saved.  
Now, to come to the sentences of the ●athers, poured out in great heat and fer●our of zeal, against Heretics and Heresy ●n general. And first to begin with Saint ●ohn the Evangelist; S. 
(k) Lib. 3. c. 3. & apud Euseb. l. 4. c. 23.  Irenaeus relateth to set down Irenaeus his own words) that ●olicarpus the martyr, who was scholar to ●he Apostles, was wont to tell, how that ●. john (the Apostle of our Saviour) being ●t a certain time in Ephesus, going into 〈◊〉 public Bath, and finding Cerinthus the Heretic to be within the bath, ran presently out of the bath, saying to them, that were with him; let us fly from hence, for fearelest the ●ath fall upon us, & kill us, in which the enemy of God Cerinthus abideth. The same Author 
(l) Vbi supra.  Irenaeus in like sort relateth in these words following, how that the foresaid Policarpus, meeting at Rome by chance Martion the Heretic, and he demanding of Policarpe, whether he knew him or not? Policarpe answered, I know thee for the first begotten child of Satan.  
To conclude with the testimony of this Father, the said Irenaeus writing to Florinus an Heretic, who once was Scholar to S. Policarpe with him, thus saith: 
(m) Iren. Epist. ad Florin.  These opinions of thine (O Florinus) to speak friendly, are not true, nor wholesome. These opinions are repugnant to the Church, etc. I may truly protest, that if the holy and Apostolical Priest Policarpus had heard of such opinions as thou defendest, he would have stopped his ears & cried out (according to his fashion) o good God, unto what miserable times hast thou reserved me, t● hear these things! and presently would have run● forth of the place, where he had been standing or s●ting, where such doctrine had been uttered. Bu● now to reflect a little upon the premises Cerinthus, Martion, & Florinus did all believe in the Trinity, the Incarnation of o●● Saviour, and received the Apostles creed and erred only in lesser points; For if the had erred in denying the Trinity, Incarnation, Passion etc. they had not been repute for Heretics, but rather for jews, Pagans, ●or Infidels, as above is noted: and yet we ●ee, what sharp reprehensions were used against them by S. john and S. Policarpe his scholar, (as to fly out of their company: to acknowledge them to be the Children of the Devil: to stop their own ears for not hearing of their Errors &c.) all which speeches had been over much aggravated, and transcended the bond of Charity, if their Errors had rested only upon matters of Indifferency, and had been ●ut such, as had been compatible with man's Salvation.  
But to proceed to the sentences of other Fathers in this point, S. Jerome expressly thus writeth: 
(n) Lib. 3. Apolg. contr. Ruffin.  For one word or two contrary to the ●ayth, many have been cast out of the Church. Yea ●e pronounceth and proceedeth further, expressly thus writing: Haeretici quicumque, Chri●tiani non sunt: whosoever are Heretics, those men ●re not Christians. Basill was wont to say, as 
(o) Lib. 4. hist. c. 17.  Theodoret recordeth: Those who are truly instructed in the divine doctrine, will not suffer any ●llable of the divine decrees to be corrupted, but for ●s defence (if necessity forceth them) will undergo ●ny kind of death. 
(p) Lib. de prescript.  Tertullian (that Ancient Father) hath a sentence not much differing from that of the former Father 
(q) Lib. 4. contra Do. cap. 8.  S. Augustine: Imagine a man to be chaste, continent, ●●t covetous, not serving Idols, ministering hospitality to the poor, enemy to none, maligning no body, sober, frugal etc. But yet if he be an Heretic, certainly no man doubteth, but for this alone, that he i● an Heretic, he shall not possess the Kingdom o● God. A dreadful saying of so learned & godly a Father.  
The Donatists for disagreeing from S. Augustine in some Traditions; not specified in the Scripture, (much less in the Creed) are thus reprehended by him: In 
(r) Aug. in explan. psal. 54.  these points those Heretics were with me, in Heresy not wit● me; in many things with me, in a few not wit● me; the many could not help them, in which they we●● with me. And yet these Donatists believed, with Saint Augustine, the Trinity, the Incarnation, and recited with him the Apostles creed.  
Briefly S. Augustine in q. 11. in Matt. thus describeth an Heretic: Hereticus est, qui de aliqua parte doctrinae Christianae falsum credit. He i● an Heretic, who believeth any false thing touching any part of Christian faith: within which definition it necessarily followeth, that either the Protestants for not believing Purgatory▪ Prayer to Saints, freewill, merit of work etc. or the Catholics for believing of them are to be included. S. Gregory Nazianze● orat. 37. Vnum uni coharet etc. One point o● faith agreeth with another, so as of them altogether there is made a certain golden and wholesome chain; therefore if but one opinion or article be taken away, or made doubtful, the whole chain of faith will become broken. S. 
(s) Lib. 1. ad Mag.  Cyprian: Dominus noster Iesus Christus etc. When our Lord jesus Christ did testify in the Gospel, that those were his enemies, who were not with him, he noted not any one Heresy, but he manifestly showeth, that all Heretics whatsoever are his enemies; saying: He that is not with me, is against me, and he that doth not gather with me, disperseth. S. 
(t) In Epist. ad Galat. c. 10.  chrysostom saith: Quemadmodum moneta Regia etc. Even as, who pareth away a little of the King's silver, maketh the whole piece to be adulterate; Even so, who overthroweth the least branch or part of true Faith, may be said to corrupt the whole, he proceeding from these small beginnings to worse courses.  
To come to an end of the Father's judgements in this point, S. Ambrose shall 
(u) Lib. 6. in Luc. c. 9  conclude all, who thus plainly writeth hereof: Si unum horum retraxeris etc. If thou shalt recall, or deny any of these points, thou hast retracted thy own Salvation: for even Heretics seem to challenge Christ to them; for no man will deny the name of Christ: nevertheless he indeed denyeth Christ, who doth not confess all points of saith, instituted by Christ.  
Thus far of the Father's judgements in this matter, where I am to advertise the Reader; first (as above I have touched in the Counsels) that if all false Doctrines whatsoever pertinaciously defended against the church of God be heresies, as the definition of Heresy above explicated, proveth them to be, and as the Fathers of the Primitive church, (and in them the whole church of God) have maintained; then either the Protestants, or Catholics, for their different holding of contrary Doctrines, touching Freewill, Purgatory, Prayer to Saints, Sacrifice etc. are to be accounted Heretics, & consequently both cannot be saved in their Religion. For that Heretics (continuing Heretics) cannot be saved, is demonstrated, first, from the fearful threats and comminations of the Apostles, thundered out against Heretics (of which point I have discoursed above.) Secondly, from the Authority of the church of Christ, which excludeth all Heretics (as I have showed) from all hope of salvation; and lastly (to omit many other reasons) from that principle, that Heretics are no members of Christ his Church, of which point we are to dispute in the next place. The Second thing to be advertised is, that not any of the former authorities of the fathers against Heresy, are restrained by them to Heresies touching the Trinity, the Incarnation of Christ, hi● Passion, or the Articles of the creed; supposing the denial of them to be heresies, a● indeed they are not, but rather blasphemies & Infidelity, (for of these there is made no mention, or intimation in their authorities) within which compass our formalists in Religion seek to confine their faith; but they are implicitly extended by the fathers to all Heresies whatsoever, whether they concern the supreme and fundamental points of Christian Religion, or any other secondary, and less principal points of the said Religion.   

THE SAME PROVED, FROM that Principle, That neither Heretics nor Schismatiks are members of Christ's Church. CHAP. VIII.  
IN this last place concerning the church, we will set down another Principle of Christian faith, and after will deduce from thence by way of most necessary inference, our conclusion here handled. The Principle is this: That Heretics holding any Heresies whatsoever, are no members of the Church of Christ: the deduction is, that Heretics therefore cannot be saved; since none can be saved, but such as are members of Christ's church. This principle is proved (as above is intimated) out of God's holy word: as where it is 
(a) 1. Tim. 1.  said: Certain men made shipwreck touching faith, that is, they fell out of the ship of the church by forging of Heresies. And again: 
(b) 1. joan. 2.  They went out of us; that is, as S. Augustine expounds it, out of the church, whereof we are. The exposition of which texts are warranted even by force of Reason: for seeing the church is an united multitude (for it is one kingdom, one people, and one body) and this union chiefly resteth in the profession of one faith; it is repugnant to reason, that they should be reputed as members of the body of the church, who have no conjunction at all in the chiefest matters with the body.  
If we proceed to the testimony of the Ancient Fathers, we shall find them of an unanimous judgement herein; to wit, that Heretics are no members of Christ's church, & therefore cannot be saved. And first occurreth 
(c) Lib. 3. c. 3.  S. Irenaeus, who saith, that Policarpe did convert many Heretics to the Church: therefore it may be concluded, that those Heretics before their conversion, were not of the church.  
S. 
(d) Epist. ad jubaianum.  Cyprian saith: Heretics, though they be out of the Church, do challenge to themselves the authority of the Church, after the manner of Apes, who not being men, would be accounted to be men. The same father thus in another place writeth: Cum 
(e) Lib. de unitate Ecclesiae.  Deo manner non possunt, qui in Ecclesia Dei unanimes esse noluerunt. They cannot remain with God, who descent in judgement from the Church of God. And yet more fully in the same place: Non pervenit ad Christi praemia etc. He arriveth not to the rewards of Christ, who leaveth the Church of Christ; he is an alien; he is profane; he is an enemy; he shall not have God for his father, who hath not the Church for his mother.  
S. Jerome: Qui non à Domino jesu Christo, sed ab alio 
(f) In dialogo contra Luciferiam.  etc. Who take their denomination, or name not from our Lord jesus Christ, but from some other (as the Marcionists, Valentinians, Montanists,) etc. are not the Church of God, but the Synagoge of Antichrist.  
Finally S. Augustine (for I have already dwelled over long in the authority of the fathers) pronounceth, that: Nihil sic formidare debet etc. 
(g) tract. 27. in joannem.  A Christian ought to fear nothing so much as to be separated from the body of Christ, which is his Church, and which is one, and Catholic; for if he be separated from the body of Christ, he is not a member of Christ; then is he not strengthened with his spirit. But who hath not the spirit of God, the same man is not of God. Thus far S. Augustine, with whom even the Protestants do join herein in judgement, for D. Dove thus saith: This proposition, that Heretics are not to be communicated withal, is undoubtedly true. And D. Sutcliffe in his examen p. 9 allegeth the Laodicean council Can. 31.32.33. in proof thereof, thus concluding: The Laodicean Council doth directly condemn Communion with Heretics, either in Marriage or Prayer.  
This already alleged may serve to prove, that Heretics are no members of the Church of Christ, and consequently cannot attain salvation; since it is agreed amongst all learned men, that only the members of the church of Christ, can find Salvation in Christ. Now here by Heretics, we cannot understand those, who deny the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion etc. seeing the denvers of these Articles are not Heretics (as is above shown in the definition of Heresy) but they are either jews, Pagans, or Infidels: from which it followeth, that the father's authorities above set down against Heretics, cannot be applied to the denvers of the Trinity, the Incarnation, etc. but they are to be limited to such Heretyks, who maintain lesser errors touching Christian faith. We will in this place descend to Schismatiks, who if they be neither of the church of God, nor can justly expect any salvation (during such their state) than a fortiori, no Heretic can expect any salvation; since a schismatic believing all articles of Christian faith, doth only in will divide himself by disobedience in not communicating with the church in Prayers and Sacraments; whereas an Heretic with greater malice (as is above said) wilfully and contumaciously maintaineth in his judgement Errors and false opinions, condemned by the church.  
Now that a Schismatic is not a member of Christ's church, is first proved from those texts of scripture (above in part touched) where the church is called one sold of sheep. john 10. one Body, Rom. 12. one spouse, and one Dove▪ Cant. 6. But now Schism, according to its Etymology, divideth that which was one, into parts; for Schisma, being a greek word cometh of the verb, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is scindere; therefore as a member being cut from the body, is no longer a part of the body; so a schismatic dividing himself by his own disobedience from the communion of the church, is no longer a member of the said church. This verity, to wit, that Schismatiks are not members of Christ's church, is (besides the former proofs) warranted with the authority & sentences of the Ancient fathers. And first S. Cyprian thus purposely writeth of Schismatics: 
(h) Lib. 41 Epist. ●. ad Florinum.  Qui cum Episcopo non sunt, in Ecclesia non sunt. Those who agree not with the Bishop (meaning the supreme Bishop of God's church) are 〈◊〉 in the Church.  
The said 
(i) Lib. de unitate Ecclesiae.  Father most elegantly compareth Schismatics, to beams divided fro● the sun, to boughs cut from the tree▪ and to Rivers wholly separated from thei● springs.  
S. chrysostom discoursing of Schismatics, thus 
(k) Hom. 1. in Epist. 1. ad Cor.  saith: Schismatis significatio sati● eos arguit etc. The very signification of the wo●● Schism, doth sufficiently reprehend them, or rath●● the very name of Schism is a vehement condemnation of them etc. which Father in another 
(l) Homil. 13. in Epist. ad Ephes.  place compareth a Schismatic to the han● cut from the body, which thereupon ceaseth to be a member; and expressly affirmeth, that Schismatics, though they consent with the Church of Christ in Doctrine, yet an● not in Christ's church, but in altera Ecclesia, meaning in a Church differing from Christ's Church.  
S. Jerome distinguishing Schism from Heresy, thus discourseth: Inter 
(m) In c. 3. ad Titum.  Haeresim & Schisma hoc interesse arbitramur etc. We take this to be the difference between Heresy and Schism; That Heresy maintaineth a perverse and false Doctrine; whereas Schism, ab Ecclesia pariter separat, in like manner separateth a man from the Church, in regard of dissension and disobedience i● our Bishops.  
S. Augustine thus woundeth a Schismatic: 
(n) Lib. de fide & sym. c. ro.  Haeretici & Schismatici congregationes ●as Ecclesias vocant etc. Heretics and Schismatics do call their congregations, the Churches. But heretics do violate their faith in believing falsely ●●uching God; whereas Schismatics, though they ●●lieue the same points, which we believe, yet through ●●eir dissensions, they do not keep fraternal Charity: ●herfore we conclude that neither an Heretic be●ogeth to the Catholic Church, because he loveth 〈◊〉 God; nor a Schismatic, because he loveth not ●s neighbour.  
To conclude, 
(o) Lib de fide ad. Pet. c. ● S. & 3●.  Fulgentius agreeth ●ith the former reverend Fathers, thus saying: Firmissimè tene etc. Believe for certain, and doubt not, that not only Pagans, but also jews, He●●tikes, & Schismatics who die out of the Church, ●e to go into everlasting fire.  
And thus far concerning Schismatics, ●ho because they be not of the Church, cannot obtain salvation; which point being ●ade evident by so many authorities both equine & humane; then much more strong●● may we conclude, that Heretics (as ex●●eding the schismatics in pravity and ma●e, and being excluded with them in like ●●rt out of Christ's Church) cannot be sa●ed.  
But before I end this Chapter, give me ●aue (good Reader) to expatiate a little beyond my designed limits: O than you Schismatic here in our own Country, whose soule● are wholly absorbed in earthy and muddy considerations, cast your eyes upon you own states, and use some small introversion upon yourselves. You see here, wha● a dangerous censure the Ancient church of Christ, by the mouths of its chief Pastor● and Doctors, hath thundered against you: It saith, you are not of Christ's Church; you a● aliens, & strangers thereunto. It further pronounceth, that dying in such your state, yo● are deprived of all hope of salvation. Goo● God what stupor, and dulness of yours ● this! Are you Christians? prefer than Chri●● before the world. Fear you God more the● man? Give then to God, what is Gods, and to Casaer, what is Caesar's. Reflect upon three principles of the Catholic (and therefore you own) Religion.  
The first, that God ordinarily deriue● his grace into man's soul by the conduits o● the Sacraments, and giveth absolution o● once sins particularly by the Sacrament 〈◊〉 Penance and confession, & not otherwise you wilfully deprive yourselves of the participation of the Sacraments, and thereby 〈◊〉 grace, and of the remission of your sins: are you not then as dried branches, void that heavenly juice, which giveth life the soul? you want this grace and forgiveness of your sins; where then is your hope of eternal life? remember the Apostles words, ●nd be afraid: gratia Dei, vitae aeterna; and do not disjoin those asunder, which S. Paul ●ath so inseparably united.  
The second is, The uncertainty of any particular man's salvation, which point is able ●o strike you dead through fear; and the ●ather, since it is no small sign of a man's fu●ure damnation, deliberately and wilfully year after year) to divide himself from Christ's church, and from all the spiritual influences streaming from thence.  
The third, That there is a Purgatory, the ●aynes whereof, though terminable, yet are ●nsupportable. Suppose then the best, that 〈◊〉, that you finally dye with true Repentance ●nd reconciled to Christ's church (which ●et is not in your own power, but out of ●he main Ocean of God's mercy) nevertheless your own faith assureth you, that you must suffer in that place even insufferable ●orments for your former disunction; & that ●our continuance in dissembling thus with God, serves but as bellowes the more to ●low that dreadful fire. O how great interest then are you to pay in the end, for the ●nioying of this your misspent time? If you ●●e Catholics (though but in hart) you believe all here said, and therefore may the more assuredly presage of your own future misery. If you do not believe these three points of Catholic Religion, then are you● damned no less for want of true Faith in Christ, then otherwise by your unchaungeable Schismatical lives, for want of due comformity to the church of Christ: Therefore I wish you to awake out of that spiritual letargy of the soul, & daily meditate on tha● of the Apostle: Cord creditur ad iustitiam, or● fit confessio ad salutem. 
(q) Rom. 10.  With the hart we belieu● unto justice, but with the mouth Confession is ma●● unto salvation. And lest that dreadful commination and threat of our Lord and Saviour prevail with you herein: 
(r) Luke. 12.  〈◊〉 that denyeth me before men, shallbe denied before the Angels of God. But I will stay myself, remembering my undertaken Subject, and will proceed to the next Head.   

THE FORMER TRUTH PROVED, from the consideration of the punishments anciently inflicted upon Heretics, by the Church of Christ. CHAP. IX.  
HAVING in the precedent Chapters shown the judgement of t●● church of Christ, by way of doctrine & speculation against Heresy and Heretics in general; we will in ●his place insist in relating the practice of the ●ayd church against Heretics, consisting in ●he punishments anciently inflicted upon Heretics, by the authority of God's church; from the consideration whereof we may easily gather, that the church of Christ in those ●ymes infallibly taught, that Heretics so living, and dying, could not be saved; seeing ●t would never impose such multiplicity of ●euere punishments upon men, for their houlling of those doctrines, which might stand with the salvation of the believers of them. And first we are here to observe, that the punishments inflicted upon offenders by the church, were either Ecclesiastical, or Political, & Civil.  
The first of Ecclesiastical punishments ●or Heretics was Excommunication, by the which Heretics were driven away from ●he Sacraments, were deprived of the common suffrages and prayers of the whole church; and finally banished from the community & comfort of the godly and faithful. This censure of Excommunication of Heretics is most ancient; seeing that it had 〈◊〉 beginning from the first times that coun●ells began to be celebrated for the extirpation and rooting out of Heresies; & is founded upon all those places of Scripture in the foregoing chapters alleged, against Heresy and Heretics.  
Another Ecclesiastical censure against Heretics, is the depriving them of all the use of spiritual power, and authority, whether it be of order or jurisdiction. This kind of power belongeth only to Ecclesiastical Persons or the Clergy: according hereto, if a Priest became an open Heretic, he was commanded by the church, not to perform the public lyturgy of the church, & if he did contrary thereto he was adjudged by the church, to sin mortally. In like sort a Bishop, leaving his Faith and maintaining any one Heresy, did thereby lose all his authority of jurisdiction, and thereupon during such his state, all his Absolutions, censures, punishments, and sentences practised by him towards any Person, were adjudged by the church of God, to be of no force or validity. To which practice of the church 
(a) In 3. p. q. 39 ar. 3.  Saint Thomas subscribeth in these words. Haeretici non possunt absoluere, nec excommunicare, nec Indulgentias facere, aut aliquid huiuscemodi; quod si fecerint, nihil actum est. Heretics (speaking of Clergy men) cannot absolve any one, nor excommunicate, nor give Indulgences, nor exercise any such like point of spiritual jurisdiction; and if they attempt contrary hereto, they do but practice in vain.  
Touching Political or civil censures, or punishments, anciently inflicted upon Heretics. The first may be, that such men were forbidden to contract any marriage with other Religious and faithful Christians; and such of the faithful christians as did marry with them, did sin mortally. This is proved out of the 
(b) Can. 31.32.33.  Laodicean council (above touched) prohibiting all such marriages, also all praying and communicating in Sacraments with Heretics; of which point I will hereafter entreat more fully.  
Another punishment was, that Heretics were wholly restrained by the church, from all practice of their Religion. This appeareth from the actions of Constantine the Great, who was so fare from granting liberty of Religion to the Arians, as that he threatened banishment to all who would not subscribe to the Nicene council. The same is proved from the like judgement of jovinianus, who being elected Emperor by the soldiers, admitted the acceptance thereof with this condition, and not otherways; to wit, that all the subjects of the Empire would promise to keep an entire unity of christian belief & practice. The like judgement herein is of the Ancient Fathers. And first S. 
(c) Epist. 33. ad Mar. cell. soror.  Ambrose (though solicited thereunto by the Emperor Valentinianus) would not suffer the Arians to have within his jurisdiction any one Church, for the practice of their Religion, to be allotted for them. 
(d) As appeareth out of Theodor. l. 5. c. 32.  S. chrysostom being moved by the Emperor of his time, to grant a Church to one Gain as a Duke, for the practice of his Heresy, with great Christian courage openly withstood the same. 
(e) Ep. 76.  S. Leo did much reprehend Anatholius (Bishop of Constantinople) for permitting Heretics to live promiscuously with Catholics. Finally 
(f) Ep. 29.  S. Augustine did vehemently persuade one Olympius an Earl, that he would diuulge and put in practice the laws of the Emperor, made against the Heretics Donatists (who taught the Inuisibility of the Church) that so through force of the laws they might not be suffered to make any profession of their Religion.  
A third punishment concerneth th● books of Heretics, which the Church 〈◊〉 God ever prohibited to be read indifferently of all; but only by such learned men, 〈◊〉 were able to refute the Errors and Heresy contained in the said books. And hence 〈◊〉 is, that we find, that the fourth Counceil of 
(g) Ca 18.  Carthage admonished the Bishop that they would read the books of Heretics, 〈◊〉 only for necessity. In like sort the seaventh Council prohibited the books of the I conoch Heretics, who did write virulent Treatises against the Religious use of Images. To proceed further; there were diverse other chasticements appointed for Heretics in the ancient Church, 
(h) Whereof see L. Ariani ca de Haereticis.  and by the ancient Christian Emperors in their laws; as banishment, a pecuniary 
(i) L. Cuncti Haeretici.  mulct, or fine; the loss 
(k) L. Manichaeri.  of all their goods; And lastly, when the insolency of Heretics did grow insufferable, even death itself; which punishment of death Valentinian and Marcian (the Emperors) did first decree: of which point see the judgement of the Council 
(l) Act. 1.  of Chalcedon, of 
(m) In c. 5. ad Galat.  Jerome, and lastly of 
(n) Li. 2. contra literas Petiliaeni c. 83.  Augustine, who ex professo proveth, that Magistrates have power to punish Heretics, even which the sword.  
Thus far touching the punishments aunciently appointed by the church of God, against Heretics. Now to apply this to our purpose, I do here wish the reader, to take into his consideration two things: first, that here is no mention made in the former authorities, what the Heresies were, against which such severe proceed were put in execution; neither is there any intimation in them of the denial of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion etc. but the said punishments were extended to all Heretics indifferently, and without any limitation of peculiar Heresies.  
Now that these punishments were not ordained for the deniers of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion etc. is evident for two reasons: first, because (as is often above said) the deniers of these supreme points are not Heretics, but Infidels or jews: secondly, because the punishment of death only (and no inferior punishment above mentioned) was apppointed by the church for those, who once were Christians, but after did fall into Infidelity, by denying those supreme points of Christian faith.  
Secondly, the Reader is to observe, that seeing Heretics, though not denying the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion, the Decalogue etc. did undergo the foresaid punishments; the whole Church o● God (with is governed with the spirit of the holy Ghost) would never have inflicted upon them, erring only in lesser matter than about the Trinity, Incarnation, Passion etc. such severe and rigorous punishments, a● are above mentioned, if she had thought, tha● the defence of those errors (how small soever they seemed) could have stood with th● salvation of man's soul: since otherways th● church should have discovered herself 〈◊〉 be a most cruel Tyrant, and not an Indulgent mother to her Children & members.   

THE SAME PROVED FROM Arguments, drawn from Reason. CHAP. X.  
TO pass from the authority of God's sacred word, his holy church, & the Ancient Fathers (the pillars thereof) touching the nature of Heresy and Heretics, as also touching the unity and Infallibility of the same church, and the persons disincorporated & separated from it; from all which heads it hath been evidently evicted, that a man obstinately defending any one Error in faith and Religion, cannot expect salvation; It now remains, that the same be made evident even by force of reason, that thereby all men enjoying the faculty of reason, may the more easily subscribe to so undeniable a verity, & say with the Psalmist heerin: 
(i) Psa. 91.  Testimonia tua credibilia facta sunt nimis.  
Well then, the first and chiefest reason is taken from the causes of true faith, where for the better conceiving thereof, we are to understand, that faith is a supernatural habit, not obtained by the force of nature. Therefore to the belief of any one Article or point of faith two things concur: the one is the first revealing Verity (as Schoolmen speak) which is God Himself: the second is the Church propounding the article to be believed. Now when we believe any point of faith, God, who is the first revealing Verity (as is said) revealeth it to the church, and the church propounds it, so revealed to us, to be believed. And thus we believe a point of faith, through the authority of God revealing, & the church propounding; and where we believe any thing, though it be true, & not through this authority, this is not supernatural belief in us, but only an opinion grounded upon other reasons & inducements: Even as the Turk believeth, that there is a God, Creator of the world, yet this his belief is no true faith, but only a mere opinion of a thing which is true; since this his belief is grounded not upon God's authority revealing this, but only upon his Koran, being otherways a fabulous book, though of the being of one God it speaketh truly.  
Now to apply this. This first revealing Verity, which is God, (through whose authority we ought to believe every article) doth with one & the like authority reveal all Articles of Christian Religion to the church; so as it is as forcibly revealed to be believed that there is (for example) a Purgatory, or that we ought to pray to Saints, (granting these articles to be true) as that there is a Trinity, or that Christ was Incarnate; from whence it avoidable followeth, that who believeth in the Trinity, and yet doth not believe, that there is a Purgatory, or that we may pray to Saints, hath no true and supernatural belief of the Trinity; but only believeth that there is a Trinity, because he so understandeth, or is persuaded thereto only by his own reason, or through some other humane motives, according to that sentence of S. Augustine lib. de utilitate credendi cap. 11. Quod intelligimus aliquid, rationi debemus; quod autem credimus, authoritati. For if he did believe, that there is a Trinity, or that Christ was Incarnate, through God's authority so revealing this truth to be believed, by the same authority he would have believed that there is a Purgatory, or that we ought to pray to Saints; seeing both the Articles of the Trinity, and Purgatory, or praying to Saints are equally & indifferently a like propounded by God and his Church to be believed. Thus we may demonstratively conclude, that what Protestant doth believe in the Trinity, and yet doth not believe that there is a Purgatory, praying to Saints, Freewill, the Real presence (admitting them once to be true) or any other point controverted between Catholics and Protestants, the sam● man hath no true faith at all of the Trinity or Incarnation, and consequently for wan● of a true and supernatural faith, cannot b● saved; since we read 
(a) Marc. 16.  Qui non credit, condemnabitur. Who believeth not, shallbe condemned. And from this former ground it proceedeth; tha● 
(b) 2. 2. q. 5. ar. 3.  S. Thomas, & all other learned Schoolmen teach, that who believeth not only for God's authority, so revealing any poin● whatsoever, great or small, fundamental or not fundamental, the same man believeth not any other Article at all, with a true and supernatural faith: and hereto accord those words of 
(c) Lib. de prescript.  Tertullian against Valentinus the Heretic: Some things of the law and Prophets Valentinus approveth, some things he disalloweth; That is, he disalloweth all, whilst he disproveth some. Which sentence of Tertullian must of necessity be true; since who rejecteth the authority of God in not believing any one article propounded by God to be believed, the same man begetteth a suspicion or doubt of God's authority, for the believing of any other article, how fundamental soever.  
Another reason may be taken from a distinction of faith, which according to the learned is of two sorts; The one they call explicit faith, the other implicit. Explicite faith is that, which all men under pain of damnation are bound to believe; As, according to most of the Schoolmen, the Trinity, the Incarnation of our Saviour, his Passion, the Decalogue or ten Commandments, the articles of the Creed. Implicit faith comprehendeth all those points, which every unlearned man is not bound expressly & distinctly to believe and know in particular (though he be expressly bound not to believe any thing contrary thereto) but is to ●est in the judgement of the church concerning all such points; and what the church of Christ holdeth therein, he is bound implicitly to believe. This distinction is warranted not only in the judgement of all Catholic Schoolmen, but also of the most ●earned 
(d) D. Bar. l. defied & eius ortis. p 40. Hooker in his Ecclesiast. policy in the preface p. 28. by Melancton l. 1. Epist. Epist. ad Regem Angliae.  Protestants, though they commonly forbear the phrase of explicit & implicit faith; & particularly of D. Feild, who ●n these words following, giveth the reason ●hereof, saying: For 
(e) In his Treatise of the Church in his Epist. Dedicat. to the L. Archbishop.  seeing the Controversies of Religion in our time are grown in number so many, ●nd in nature so intricate, that few have time and ●●asure, fewer strength of understanding to examine them, what remaineth for men desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence, but diligently ● search out which amongst all the Societies of men ●s the world, is that blessed Company of holy ones; 〈◊〉 at househould of faith, that spouse of Christ, and Church of the living God, which is the Pillar and ground of truth, that so they may embrace her communion, follow her directions, & rest in her judgements? Thus D. Feild.  
Now this distinction being presupposed, I thus argue: Both these kinds of faith are necessary to salvation: Explicite faith, because it comprehendeth all those fundamental and supreme points of Christian Religion, without which, and the express and articulate belief of which, a man cannot be saved: And these be those only, which our Newtrallists in Religion hold necessary to be believed: Implicit faith of other points also is necessary to salvation, because otherwise then believing implicitly & inuoluedly what the church teacheth therein, we cannot (according to the former Doctors words) range our selves to the blessed company of holy ones, the househould of faith, the spouse of Christ, and Church of the living God. Again, seeing Implicit faith is necessary to salvation, we must grant, that this Implicit faith hath some Object; This Object is not the Articles of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Decalogue &c. (according to the foresaid judgement of the Schoolmen) since these are th● objects of explicit faith (as is above mentioned) therefore Articles of seeming lesser importance are the object of implicit faith; th● which articles as a man is bound implicitly to believe in the faith of the church; so ●he is bound expressly not to believe any thing contrary to the said articles. Seeing then diverse Controversies between the Catholics & the Protestants are included under this implicit faith, and that the church of God holdeth of them but one way; It manifestly followeth, that the contrary believers of those points do err in their belief, and consequently for want of this true implicit and necessary Faith, cannot be saved.  
3. A third reason may be this; It is proper and peculiar to virtues infused (& such ●e Faith, Hope, & Charity) that every such virtue is wholly extinguished by any one act contrary to the said virtue. Thus (for example) one mortal sin taketh away all cha●ity and grace, according to that, 
(f) Matth. 28.  He that offendeth moan, is made guilty of all. One act of Despair destroyeth the whole virtue of Hope; then by the same reason one Heresy wholly corrupteth & extinguisheth all true ●ayth: Therefore seeing Faith is a Theological and infused Virtue, this faith is de●royed with one act of Heresy, whether it ●e about Purgatory, Prayer to Saints, Freewill, or any other Controversy between the Catholics & the Protestant's: Therefore whosoever denyeth Purgatory, or any of the rest (granting their doctrines to be true) is deprived of all infused faith touching any articles of Christian Religion; whether they concern the Trinity, or the Incarnation, or any other fundamental point, which he may seem to believe: But without 
(f) Hebr. 11.  Faith that is, without true, infused, and Theological Faith) it is impossible to please God, as the Apostle assureth us.  
4. A fourth reason shallbe this, It is most certain, that what general propension nature (or rather God himself by nature, as by his instrument) hath engrafted in all men, the same is in itself most true, certain, and warrantable. As for example, Nature hath implanted in each man's soul, a secret remorse of conscience for sins & transgressions committed, as also a fear of future punishment to be inflicted for the said sins perpetrated: therefore from hence it may infallibly be concluded, that sin itself is to be avoided, and that after this life there is a retribution of punishment for our offences acted in this world: since otherwise it would follow, God should insert in man's soul (idly, vainly, and as directed to no end certain natural impressions and instincts which to affirm were most derogatory to his divine Wisdom, and repugnant to that anciently received Axiom: God & Nature worketh nothing in vain.  
Now to apply this; we find both by history and by experience, that diverse zealous & fervent Professors of all Religions whatsoever (both true and false) have been most ready to expose their lives in defence of any impugned part, or branch of their Religion. From which undaunted resolution of theirs we certainly collect, that this their constant determination of defending the least point of their Religion, proceedeth from a general instinct of God, impressed in man's soul, teaching each man, that death itself is rather to be suffered, than we are to deny any part of our Faith and Religion. And thus according hereto we find, that even the Athenians, who were Heathens (though they did err touching the particular Object heerin, as worshipping false Gods) were most cautelous, that no one point should be infringed or violated, touching the worship of their Gods. The like Religious severity was practised by the jews, as josephus witnesseth. And God himself even in his own written word, threatneth, that 
(g) Apoc. 22.  Whosoever ●hall either add, or diminish to the book of the Apocalypse, written by the Evangelist, from him he will take away his part out of the book of life. Now ●f such danger be threatened for adding to, or taking from, more or less, than was set down by the Evangelist in this one book, how can then both the Catholics and Protestants have their names written in the book of life? Since it is certain & granted on all sides, that either the Catholic addeth more to the faith of Christ, then was by him instituted, or the Protestant taketh from the said faith diverse Articles, which Christ and his Apostles did teach. But to return to our former reason. From all this we deduce, that no points of true Christian Religion are of such cold Indifferency, as that they are not much to be regarded, or that they may be maintained contrary ways by contrary spirits, without any danger to man's Salvation; but that they are of that nature, worth, and dignity, as man is to undergo all kind of torments, (yea death itself) before he yield, or suffer the least relapse in denying any of the said verityes.  
5. The fift and last reason, to prove that the maintaining of false doctrines, now questioned between the Christians of these times, are most prejudicial, and hurtful to the obtaining of our Heavenly bliss, wherein at this time I will insist, may be taken from the consideration of the different effects, which the contrary doctrines particularly between the Protestants and Catholics produce in men's souls, touching the exercising of virtue or vice: Since most undoubted it is, that the believing of such opinions, which of their own nature do impel, and (as it were) violently draw the soul to vice, looseness, and impurity of manners and conversation, cannot stand (considering God's infinite hate to sin and sinners) with the hope of eternal happiness. And the chief reason hereof (besides others) is this: In that the Will (which is the seat of virtue or vice) doth necessarily & irresistably work, as the Understanding (in which resideth Faith, & all false doctrine) doth dictate to the Will. Now then the Understanding being infected with Heresies, tending directly to the planting of vice, and eradicating of all virtue in the soul, it of necessity followeth, that the Will must work and exercise itself according to those false principles, which the Understanding suggesteth to the will for true; & this with the greater facility in regard of the proneness of man's nature (through our first Parents fall) inclined to liberty, pleasure, and sensuality. But because the subject of this reason is a large field to walk in, and the truth thereof is to appear by several instances, drawn from diverse particular doctrines maintained at this present by the Protestants, and all breathing nothing but vice, dissolution, and all turpitude in manners; therefore I will reserve the ensuing Chapter, for the fuller manifestation of the truth in this point.   

THE SAME PROVED, FROM the different effects of Virtue and Vice, which Catholic and Protestant Religion do cause in their Professors. CHAP. XI.  
THE first doctrine of this Nature, wherein we will insist, maintained by the Protestants, & denied by the Catholics, is the Impossibility of keeping Gods commandments, according heerto 
(a) Ser. de Moyse.  Luther saith: The ten commandments appertain not to Christians: with whom Fox conspireth in 
(b) Act. mon. p. 1335.  these words: The Commandments were given not to do them, but 〈◊〉 know our damnation, and to call for mercy to God Doctor Willet also saying: The 
(c) In Sinop. Papismi p. 564.  law remaineth still impossible to be kept by us, through the weakness of our flesh: neither doth God give us ability● keep it, but Christ hath fulfilled it for us. And ●●nally Doctor Whitaker in that his sentence 
(d) Contra Camp. rat. 8. : Qui credunt, ij non sunt sub lege sed sub gratia. Quid plura? Christiani execr●tione legis liberantur. They, who believe, are 〈◊〉 under the law, but under grace. What more in this point is to be said? Christians are freed from the curse of the law. Now then, if Christians be freed from the curse of the law (wherein the ten Commaundments are contained) how can the breach of them be any way hurtful to the violators of them? And if the Commandments were neither given us to keep, nor we have power to keep them, to what end should any man endeavour to keep them? Why should the Thief forbear to steal, or the Homicide to commit murder? whoseeth not how this doctrine discourageth a man from living virtuously, by bridling his unruly and sensual desires?  
2. Touching Chastity: The Protestants do teach, that Chastity is not in our power: And hence it is, that Luther thus writeth: It is 
(e) Tom. 5. Wittenb. ser. de matrimonio.  not in our power to be without a woman etc. It is not in our power, that it should be stayed or omitted▪ but it is as necessary, as to eat, drink, purge, make clean the nose etc. To whom (omitting all others for greater brevity) M. Perkins subscribeth saying: The vow of 
(f) In his reformed Catholic pag. 161.  Continency is not in the power of him that voweth. Now this doctrine being embraced for true, how forcibly doth it invite (or rather impel) all people unmaryed (both men or women) to satisfy their lust, by their own incontinent lives? In like sort, what great encouragement doth it give to married persons to violate the bond of matrimony, when either of the persons, through absence or long sickness, or some other sudden and accidental impotency, cannot render the act and due of matrimony? And the parties thus sinning (either married or unmarried) being expostulated and charged with their offence therein, may they not justly reply in excuse of themselves, that they are not to be blamed or rebuked for their incontinency, seeing by their own doctrine and Religion they are expressly taught, that they have not the guilt of chastity, and that it is not in their power to live chastely, & continently?  
3. The Protestants doctrine of Venial and Mortal sin, doth wonderfully extenuate, and lessen the atrocity and malice of sin, in the believers of that doctrine. For the Protestants do teach, that there is no● such difference of sins in themselves, bu● that the most grievous sins whatsoever, being perpetrated, and committed by any one that hath true faith, are but venial; & their reason hereof is, because in their doctrine no sins are imputed to those, wh● have true faith. Thus accordingly D. Whitaker teacheth: 
(g) De Eccles. count. Bellarm. Controuer. ●. q. 5. p. 301.  Si quis actum fidei habet, 〈◊〉 peccata non nocent. Sin is not hurtful to him, wh● actually believeth: who did learn this of his great master Luther, thus writing of this point: 
(h) Luther in his sermons Englished & printed 1578. pag. 176.  No work is disallowed of God, unless the author thereof be disallowed before. All which being granted as true doctrine, it must needs follow, that who shall take himself to be one of the Faithful (as every Protestant is bound by his own Religion to believe of himself) shall make small account of committing any sin; considering he is taught by the former doctrine to believe, that (to use the words of one of their own masters) 
(i) Wotton in his answer to the lute Popish Articles pag. 92.  Sin is pardoned him, as soon as it is committed.  
4. The Protestants doctrine of Reprobation and denial of Freewill, mightily disanimateth and discourageth the believers thereof, from embracing of virtue and eschewing of sin; for if it be true (as this their Doctrine suggesteth) that some men are borne even from their mother's womb Reprobats and thrall to damnation, and cannot be saved; to what end should they seek their own salvation by a true Faith, avoiding of sin, and practising of a penitential & virtuous life? Or if we have not Freewill, with the concurrence of God's grace to do well (as the former doctrine instructeth) why should we give our best endeavours to embrace virtue and fly all vice? Since it is not in our power (according to the Protestants faith) to exercise the one, and fly the other.  
5. To this may be adjoined the Protestant's like doctrine of Predestination, and their supposed certainty of Salvation. For admit, that men be Predestinated without any respect or reference to their works and lyues, and that do what wickedness they can imagine, yet certain it is, that they shallbe saved; is not this Doctrine most potent and forcible to dissuade all the believers thereof, from exercising an austere, pious, and Religious life, and to engulfe them easily in all kind of enormities and sins? and the rather, considering how precipitious & headlong man's nature is to sin, & to decline all rigorous and exemplar courses of virtue; especially if so the case stands, that man can neither advantage or hurt himself, by any such different manner of life. Now, that by the Protestants Doctrine no sin can endanger the Predestinate, in regard of their certainty of Salvation, appeareth, seeing according heerin we find D. Fulke thus to say of David's adultery: 
(k) In his tower disput. with Edm. Campian the 2. days conference.  David when he committed adultery, was and remained the child of God. And Beza himself to the like purpose thus writeth thereof: 
(l) In Respons. ad Colloq. Montisbel. part. altera p. 71.  David by his adultery and murder did not lose the holy Ghost. So powerfully do these their positions incline men to satisfy their desires in all vice, impiety, and sensuality.  
6. Touching the Protestants Doctrine of justification by Faith only, which potentially includes diverse of the other points here set down, and which position of it own nature excludeth from justification all works (how virtuous and pious soever,) we find the Protestants thus to say. And first Luther speaking hereof, bursteth forth with wonderful rashness saying: 
(*) Tom. 1. prop. 3.  Fides nisi sit sine &c Unless faith be without the least Good works, it doth not justify, nay it is not faith. That justification by faith only extinguisheth all exercise of virtue, is justified not only by experience of these days, but also by the acknowledgement even of some learned Protestants: for thus jacobus Andraeas (a famous Protestant) complaining and disliking this Doctrine, writeth: 
(m) Conc. 4. in c. 21. Lucae.  A serious and Christian discipline is censured with us, as a new Papacy, & a monachisme: they say we have now learned to be saved by only faith in Christ, and we cannot satisfy by our fasting and prayer, and therefore permit that we may give over these, seeing we may be saved otherwise by the only grace of God.  
And to the end (saith this Author further) that all the world may know, they be no Papists, nor trust in good works they take course to put none in practice. With whose true judgement heerin M. Stubbs (an English Protestant) seemeth to conspire, saying: 
(n) In his Motives to good works. printed 1566. p. 42.  The Protestant trusteth to be saved by a bare and naked fay● (deceiving himself) without good works, & therefore either careth not for them, or at least setteth little by them. And thus much touching goo● works, wholly exiled, and banished by th● Doctrine of justification by faith only.  
Now that this Doctrine of justification by only faith doth incorporate (as it were within itself, and admit all kind of sins appeareth no less, by the frequent acknowledgements of the most learned Protestants And first, Luther thus writeth thereof: 
(o) Tom. 2. wittenb. de capt. Babylon. fol. 74.  A Christian baptised is so rich, that although h● would, he cannot lose his salvation, by any sinn● how great soever, unless he will not believe. An● Luther in another place: 
(q) Luther in loc. come. class. 5. c. 27.  As nothing iustifyeth, but belief; so nothing sinneth, but unbelief.  
To which Doctrine D. Whtaker (as above is showed) accordeth saying: 
(r) Vbi supra.  Sins are not hurtful to him that believeth: And thus much now touching the Doctrine of justification by faith, where we see, even by the confession of the Protestants, that this Doctrine prevaileth in the professors thereof no less for the committing of all sin and iniquity; then for the expelling and banishing of all good works, virtue, and devotion.  
7. Touching the Protestants particular Doctrines of Fasting, voluntary Poverty, and Chastity or Virginity, the three steps of jacobs' adder, by the which a virtuous soul ascen●eth to Heaven: And first of fasting, Perkins reaches thus; 
(s) In his Reformed Catholic p. 220.  fasting in itself, is but a thing ●ndifferent, as is eating and drinking: with whom conspireth D. Willet in more full tearnes saying: 
(t) In Synops. pag. 243.  Neither is God better worshipped by ea●ing, or not eating. Voluntary poverty is so debased by the Protestants Doctrine, as that the foresaid Willet thus teacheth thereof: 
(u) In Synops. pag. 245.  He is an enemy to the glory of God, who changeth his rich estate, wherein he may serve God for a poor: So contrary he is to the judgement of our Saviour saying: 
(x) Mat. 19  If thou wilt be perfect, go sell thy substance, & give to the poor, and thou shalt have a treasure in Heaven.  
Lastly, touching single life in comparison of Marriage, Luther thus saith: 
(y) Tom. 5. wittenb. in exeg. ad c. 7. 1. Cor. fol. 107.  We conclude, that Marriage is as gold, and spiritual or single life as dung. And D. Whitaker, likewise teacheth thereof in this manner saying: 
(z) Contra Camp. rat. 8.  Virginity is not simply good, but after a certain manner: it is never better than Marriage, but in regard of the circumstance, that is, of the troubles accompanying Marriage. Now, I here demand with what encouragement can any man go about to practise these foresaid virtues of fasting, voluntary poverty, and perpetual virginity, if he be firmly and inwardly persuaded, that the Protestants former positions 〈◊〉 Doctrines, touching the said virtues, b● true, and agreeable to Christ's sacred Institutions.  
8. But to hasten to an end in this matter, I will conclude with the Protestant Doctrines touching Purgatory, and Confession o● Sins. And as concerning confession of Sins it is found by experience, that (besides the first Institution thereof by 
(a) Mat. 18. & Io●n. 20.  Christ) a man is much debarred from sinning, through the shame that he is to endure by confessing his most secret sins to a Priest; as on the contrary, it much enbouldeneth one to sin, if he be persuaded by his own Religion, that confession of them alone to God is sufficient.  
Touching the Doctrine of Purgatory: How doth the denial of this Doctrine open the sluice to all liberty and injustice? Since by the Protestants teaching, that no temporal punishment remaineth for sins once remitted, it taketh away all restitution of things wrongfully detained, all satisfaction for committing of former sins, and finally all mortification of body and soul; and to conclude it freeth a man of all fear of suffering any punishment after this life; and this under colour, that Christ hath satisfied for the sins of all the world; by which reason we might take away prayer, or that Christ prayed for all in the garden.  
But now to cast our eye back upon the foresaid Doctrines. If all the different opinions of faith, in Controversy between the Catholics & the Protestants, were merely speculative, without any reference to the virtuous or vicious working & operation of the Will, derived from them; then with greater show of reason in a vulgar judgement, it might be averred, (that supposing they teach not the fundamental points of Christian faith) they might be either affirmatively or negatively holden, without any danger of salvation: such were the heresies of 
(b) See hereof S. Augustine Haeres. 43.  Origen, teaching, that the Devils in the end of the world should be saved: Of Cyprian touching Rebaptization, and diverse such like, from the maintaining of which points either way, the Will in respect of any external working or operation drawn from thence, can suck no poison.  
But the Case is fare different in the former Doctrines set down above; for we find that the said Doctrines (which breathe nothing but all dissolution and turpitude of manners) even in speculation do most forcibly & immediately touch the pulse of the Will; the Will strongly beating, and indeed breaking out into outward actions of vic● and liberty, according as she remaineth afore infected with the contagion and poison of the former Doctrinal speculations. Well then, this upon necessary inference being granted, so as the working, effect, and force of the said Doctrines are in the Will, nothing but liberty, dissolution of manners, improbity, sensuality and sin, I refer to the judgement of any man, whether the said Doctrines be but points of Indifferency o● no, and may be defended either way, without prejudice to the beleivers faith, and danger to his Salvation, as our formalists do aver. For can it possibly be conceived that these Doctrines should be reputed as indifferent to man's Salvation, or in themselves true, which (as is proved) most strongly draw the will to all vice, against which God hath thundered out such dreadful threats, as where it is said: Psal. 91. All they that work● iniquity, shallbe confounded. And again, Ecclesiast. 40. Death, blood, contention, edge of sword, oppression, hunger, contrition, whips are created for sinners. And further, Psal. 9.10. God sha● reign snares of fire upon sinners, brimstone with tempestuous wynds shallbe the portion of their cupp● 
(c) Matth. 25.  & our Saviour speaking of Sinners saith▪ Depart you accursed, into everlasting fire. Beside infinite other places of like nature.  
Now to the former Premises, may I adjoin the Confessions even of Protestants themselves, who confess that the lives of Catholics are commonly fare more virtuous and of better edification, than the life's ●f the Protestants, who by their own acknowledgements, lie grovelling in all sensuality: For thus even Luther saith hereof: When we were 
(d) Dominica 26. post Trinitatem.  seduced by the Pope, every man ●id willingly follow good works; and now every ●an neither saith, nor knoweth any thing, but how 〈◊〉 get all to himself by exaction, pillage, theft, lying, ●sury etc. to which Confession (to omit diverse others) 
(e) In loc. come. cap. de Decalogo. in explanat. tertij praecepti.  Musculus a forward Protestant subcribeth, saying:  verum fateor etc. That 〈◊〉 may confess the truth herein, they are become 〈◊〉 unlike to themselves, that whereas in the Papacy ●hey were Religious in their Errors and Superstition; now in the light of the known truth, they are ●ore profane, than the very Sons of the world. Which disparity of lives and conversation ●an be justly ascribed to no other cause, than ●n that the Protestants were ready to put in ●ractise, what afore they had learned by speculation of their own Doctrines: which ●oint then being thus, I mean that the Doctrine of the Protestants do depress virtue, ●nd blandish, countenance, and exalt vice, ●nd thereupon the lives of the Protestants by confession of themselves, and to the disedyfying of their followers) are become actually fare worse, and less virtuous, the● the lives of the Catholics; I here demand how it can be warranted by any show o● reason, that these Doctrines of the Protestants (begetting so great a change fro● virtue to vice, in their professors) can b● reputed, but as points of Indifferency? O● that men believing them, practising the● in their conversation, and finally dying i● them can be saved? So contrary it is to o● Saviour's prescript: If thou 
(f) Mat. 19  wilt enter into lif● keep the Commandments. Sin being inde● so great an enemy to man's Salvation, as th● God himself vouchsafed to be incarnate, 〈◊〉 to suffer an opprobrious death, only for th● taking away of the sins of the world.   

THE SAME PROVED FRO● the fearful deaths of the first broachers of Protestancy. CHAP. XII.  
IN this next place, we will briefly take a survey of the particular deaths of some few of the chief● Protestants, who have been th● first stampers or broachers of the Controversies between the Catholics and the Protestant's; & then we will leave to the judgement of others, whether those kinds of death 〈◊〉 befall (in God's accustomed proceed) 〈◊〉 men, who first did set on foot and main●yne points and positions of Religion of ●at Indifferency, as that either the believing 〈◊〉 not believing of them, may well com●ort, and stand together with man's sal●ation.  
To begin with Luther, omitting to ●eake either of his vicious life, or of the life's ●f others hereafter set down, though con●●ssed and displayed for such, by many of ●●eir own Brethren; It is certain, that ●uther 
(g) Cochlaeus in vita Lutheri. Whose sudden death is also confessed by David Chitracus (an eminent Protestant) in orat. funebri Christophori Ducis Megapolitanis, these words: Lutherus ipse vesperi mensae assidens, paucis post diam noctem horis decessit.  died very suddenly: for when at ●●pper being in good health, he had fed ●uteously upon great variety of meats, & ●ntertayned his guests then with him, with ●itty (but dissolute) discourses, the very ●●me night he died.  
Zwinglius was slain in the wars of Ger●any, undertaken for Religion only, in ●hich wars he died not as a Preacher, but 〈◊〉 a warrior & armed in the field; and yet 〈◊〉 such sort, that Gualterus (an earnest Pro●●stant) saith thus of him: 
(h) Gualterus in his book entitled, Apologia pro Zwinglio. p. 31.  Nostri illi etc. ●iuers of us are not afraid to pronounce Zwinglius have died in sin, and therefore to have died the ●●me of Hell.  

(i) Cochlaeus in Actis Lutheri 1537.  Oecolampadius (the reputed Bishop of Basill, where he lieth buried, and a man most forward in spreading the points of Protestancy) went healthful to bed, but was found by his wife, dead in the morning in his bed.  
Andrea's Carolstadius an eminent Protestant, and a great advancer of the supposed Gospel, was killed by the Devil, as certain 
(k) In their Epistle de morte Carolstadij.  ministers, even of Basill, do justify.  
jacobus Andreas a famous Lutheran, and in other points an earnest Protestant, lyves and died (as 
(l) Hospinian. in histor. Sacra. part. 2. fol. 389.  Hospinian the Protestant writeth,) as if he had had no God, but Mammon & Bacchus; he never praying neither going to bed, norysing from thence, and that in the residue of hi● life he shown no Godliness. Who 
(*) So Zanchius the Protestant affirmeth in his Epistles printed. 1609. l. 2. p. 340.  also was once taken in Adultery.  
Caluin (the refiner of all Protestancy, and chief supporter of all controverted points against the Catholics) died being consumed with lice and worms, extremely blaspheming against God: of whose death 
(m) In Theolog. Caluinist. l. 1. fol. 72. This particular manner of Caluins' death is witnessed by joannes Herennius (a Caluinist preacher) who was present as Caluins' death, as he witnesseth in his libello de vita Caluini.  Conradus Schlusselburg (a famous Protestant) thus writeth: Deus manu sua potents etc. God with his mighty hand did visit Caluin; for he despaired of his salvation, called upon the Devils, and gave up his soul swearing and blaspheming. Caluin died being eaten away with lice; for they s●bred about his privy members, that none about him could endure the stench, and smell. Thus far the foresaid Protestant.  
Finally Melancthon (a great pillar of Protestancy) made so bad an end, as that Morlinus (his own scholar, and a forward Protestant) despaired of his salvation, thus writing in his public Lectures: Si possem redimere etc. If I could redeem the Salvation of our master Philip Melancthon with the peril of my life, I would do it: But he is carried to the horrible tribunal of God, to plead his cause there etc. See hereof also Slusselburge in Theolog. Calu. l. 2. art. 10.  
Now then, seeing all these men believed all the fundamental points of Christian Religion (as the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion, etc.) seeing also they were the most principal men, that first introduced & disseminated Protestancy throughout the world; spending their whole lives in spreading and defending the same, by their writings: Finally seeing God did cut them off by such calamitous, miserable and prodigious deaths (which is to be feared were but presages of the eternal deaths of their souls) who can otherwise be persuaded, but that all this was wrought by the just hand of God; not so much for their personal sins, proceeding of humane frailty (for there were and are many others as great sinners as they, and yet escaped such dreadful ends) but for their first inventing, maintaining, and preaching of the Protestant faith and Religion, and empoisoning almost all Countries with such their false & sensual doctrines: which being granted, how then can it with any truth of reason be supposed, that the positions of Protestancy impugned by the Catholics, should contain nothing but matters of Indifferency, or that a man whether he believe them, or not believe them, may alike and indifferently be saved?   

THE SAME PROVED FROM the doctrine of Recusancy, taught both by Catholics and Protestants. CHAP. XIII.  
I Have thought good to draw another argument from the common, taught and approved doctrine of Recusancy in every Religion; though this head may seem to have a special reference to the reason afore touched, & in part be therein implicity included; wherein is showed that nature herself hath imprinted in the professors of all Religions, a Religious care punctually to keep and preserve every article of their Religion.  
Now here we are to premonish, that if in the judgement of all learned men (both Catholic and Protestant) it is thought an action most wicked, & unlawful, and not to be performed but (without final repentance) under pain of eternal damnation, that a man should communicate only in going to the Church, and in hearing but a sermen, contrary to that Religion which himself believeth for true; (though this may seem to be coloured under pretence of observing the Prince's commandment, & for fear of losing our temporal estates,) I say, if this action be thought unlawful, wherein nevertheless the performers thereof do not punctually undertake to maintain or believe any one Heretical or erroneous position; how then can it be reputed as consonant to reason or Religion, that men believing different opinions of faith, and promiscuously communicating in prayer with a contrary Religion to their own, should nevertheless all be saved? since the first fault consists (as some would interpret, though falsely) only in an external and material (as the Schoolmen speak) going to the Church of a different Religion; whereas this other doth directly and openly rest in defending articles (at least in its own judgement) of a Religion contrary to the truth of Christian Religion: for such is the case herein either of Catholics or Protestants. But before we particularly enter into this discourse, we will here insist (as most pertinent to our purpose) in relating the two most religious Examples of Eleazar, and the Widow with her seven Sons, recorded in the Books of the Maccabees.  
Touching the first, we read, 
(1) 2. Machab. c. 6.  that Eleazar (being a most ancient, grave, and learned Man) was so far from eating of the meats sacrificed to Idols (according to the prohibition of the jewish law) that when certain men, as tendering his old age, and moved thereto, as the Text saith, iniqua miseratione, through unlawful pity, proffered him other flesh to eat, under colour whereof they would tell the Tyrant King (thereby to save his life) that he had eaten of the sacrificed meats; that he did choose rather to undergo a most cruel death, then to feign, that he had eaten of the said sacrificed flesh. And so accordingly he suffered ● most glorious Martyrdom; thus speaking to God in the midst of his torments: 
(2) Vbi supra.  For thy fear (o Lord) I do suffer these things.  
As concerning the 
(3) 2. Machab. c. 7.  Widow with b● seven Sons: O what spiritual resolution appeared in them all? Indeed able to upbraid us Christians with our luk-warmnest in professing our faith. They all suffered most exquisite torments, and in the end most bloody deaths, only because they would not at the King's command, eat of Swine flesh, which was contrary to the Law of Moses. And this both the Mother (still exhorting her sons to constancy herein) & all her seven Sons performed with such an admirable resolution, both in their answers to the Tyrant during their torments, and in their patience of suffering death, as that considering her sex, and the tenderness of their years, it might be truly said, that weakness was here able to instruct strength, and youth old age.  
Now from these two most remarkable Examples, I thus argue: The time of the old Testament was much inferior in worth, dignity, and many privileges to the new testament, seeing to them in the Old, things (as the 
(4) 1. Cor. 10.  Apostle witnesseth) did happen, as in a figure; whereas the new Testament 
(5) Hebr. 8.  (as the said Apostle affirmeth) is established in better promises. But now if in the old Testament, men did choose to endure most cruel deaths, rather than they would (contrary to the Law) eat forbidden Meats, which in themselves were lawfully to be eaten, were it not for the prohibition annexed unto them; And seeing though they had consented to the eating of them, yet this being but an● external Act or Ceremony, they might nevertheless inwardly have retained and kept their true belief touching the Law yet since the performance of so small a matte● as it appeared in outward show, could no● be without great sin, and damnation o● the party so offending; Shall any Christian think, that now in the time of Grace, an● of the New Testament, which time exacteth more perfection at our hauds (for 〈◊〉 
(6) Luc. 12.  whom much is given, of him much shallbe required;) that men professing to belieu● (with contempt of the Church's authority interposed therein) contrary articles touching Christian Religion, and dying suc● their different faiths (in which the one side must of necessity maintain a false faith: that men (I say) of both these sides can b● saved, it is against all force of Reason, against the judgement of the Primitive Church, ● finally against God's justice.  
And thus far concerning the two fore said examples in the Maccabees: Which Book admitting them for the time, not to be divine Scripture; yet it is acknowledged o● all sides, that the Histories recorded in the are true; and that Eleazar, and the Wid● with her seven Sons, performed most worth examples of piety and Religion; and that they had yielded to the Kings Command in eating of forbidden meats, they had (as violating the law given to them by God) without repentance, incurred damnation. And this is the judgement of the ancient Fathers, Catholic Doctors, and the learned Protestants. But let us descend more particularly to the doctrine of Recusancy, and examine whether it be lawful to exhibit ourselves present at that Church in time of divine service or of preaching, the doctrine of which Church, we hold in our Conscience to be erroneous, and false.  
Now, that this kind of going to the Church of a different Religion, is wholly condemned as most unlawful and wicked; I first prove from the judgement of the Protestants, secondly from the resolutions of the Catholics. And to begin with the Protestants, we find this kind of Recusancy (I mean to be present at the Sermons or prayers of a different Religion) is taught by 
(a) De vitandis superstition. extant in Caluini Tract. Theolog. p. 584.  Caluin, the 
(b) Alleged by Sleydan Com. Englished. l. 7. fol. 87.  Divines of Germany, by 
(c) In Concil. Theolog. p. 628.  Melancton, by Peter 
(*) In his discourse hereof recited by Melancton, in his Treatise of Concil. Theolog. p. 634. 635.  Martyr, & finally (to omit others) by Doctor Willet, 
(d) In his Synops. printed 1600. p. 612. 613. etc.  who for the better fortifying and warranting of the said opinion, produceth his Testimonies from the authorities of Latimer, Bradford, Philpot, Ridley & others, diverse of which according to this their doctrine suffered death in Queen Mary's time, as appeareth out of the Acts and monuments of john fox. And thus much for the Protestants.  
That the Catholics do with the like or greater fervour teach & practise this recusancy, is clear by the example of our own Country; where since Protestancy was first planted, many scores of venerable & learned Priests have chosen rather to suffer death, then that they would change their Religion, or go once to the Protestants Church; their lives being commonly proffered them, if so they would conforme themselves, and leave their recusancy. In like sort many hundreds of the Laity pay yearly great sums of money for their recusancy; diverse of them enduring further oppressions disgraces, and imprisonments only for the same cause, through the malice, rigour, and covetousness of certain subordinate Magistrates under his Majesty (whose clemency is most remarkable, and whom God long preserve in a holy government over us) being herein mightily wronged through the false and most injurious informations of their Adversaries.  
Now, that the doctrine of learned Catholics is answeareable to the practice herein, appeareth from the frequent testimonies of diverse learned men of the Catholic Church of this time: yet for greater brevity, I will insist in the Authorities only of three, to wit, of Cardinal Baronius, Cardinal Bellarmine, (the two late lamps of God's Church) and of Mutius Vitellescus, then but Provincial, now General and Head of the jesuits dispersed throughout Christendom. For some years past, their judgement being demanded, whether the Catholics of England for the saving of their goods, livings, and liberty, might go to the Protestants Church or no, to hear a sermon only, though otherways they did not communicate in Prayer & Sacraments with the Protestants; for the warranting or disallowing whereof there were several reasons brought on either side, all which reasons were proposed and expressed to these three worthy men. These three learned & holy men then (besides diverse others eminent Doctors and writers, whom I hear omit) did give their negative sentence therein, whose particular words in Latin, I have thought good here to set down.  
The judgement of Cardinal Baronius  

VISIS, & consideratis quae superiùs diligen● peruestigatione in utramque partem sunt disputata, reiectis omnino & exsufflatis, quae pro par● affirmativa fuêre proposita, quod scilicet liceret Catholicis adire Ecclesias Haereticorum, ut superiùs su●● proposita, inhaeremus saniori sententiae posteriori, 〈◊〉 Ecclesia Catholica antiquitùs receptae, & usu prob●tae; quod scilicet id facere pijs non liceat. Quam rog● nostros Catholicos Anglos amplecti ex animo.  
C. Card. Baronius, tit. S. Nerei & Achillei Presb.   

That is, I having seen and considered (meaning in the Question of English Catholic going to church) all those points which have by● disputed of on both sides, but rejecting and wholly abandoning all the reasons alleged for the affirmative part (to wit, to prove that it was lawful f● Catholics to go to the Heretics Church,) I do 〈◊〉 hereto the more sound and later opinion, which ●●ciently was received of the Catholic Church, a● allowed by use and custom; That is, that it is 〈◊〉 lawful for pious and godly men so to do. And I 〈◊〉 treat all our English catholics to embrace this 〈◊〉 opinion and judgement.  
Caesar Cardinal Baronius, Priest of the ti● of the Church of SS. Nereus & Achille●   
The judgement of Cardinal Bellarmine.  

CONSIDERATIS rationibus pro utraque parte allatis, existimo non licere viris Ca●icis in Anglia Haereticorum Ecclesias adire; mulminùs concionibus illorum interesse; minimè au● omnium cum ipsis in precibus & psalmodia, ●sque ipsorum Ecclesiasticis ritibus convenire. I● me propria manu subscripsi.  
R. Bellarminus, S. R. L. Prew. Card. Tit. S. Ma. in via.   

Thus in English. The reasons brought upon ●h sides considered (meaning touching the lawful or unlawfulness of English catholics going to the protestant's Church) I am persuaded, that it is not ●full for English Catholics to go to the Church's Heretics; much less to be present at their Ser●●ns; but least of all to communicate with them in ●yers, and singing of psalms, and other their Ec●siasticall rites and customs. And therefore this my ●gment herein I have subscribed with my own ●nd,  
Robert Bellarmyne, Priest & Cardinal of the holy Roman Church, of the Title of the Church of S. Maria in via.   
The Sentence of Mutius Vitelleseus then Provincial, but now General, & Head of the Order 〈◊〉 the jesuites.  

VIDI rationes, quae in hoc scripto pro vtraq● parte afferuntur, & existimo non licere vi● Catholicis in Anglia Ecclesias Haereticorum adire● puto hoc debere esse extra Controversiam.  
Mutius Vitellescus Prou. R●● Soc. JESV.   

In English. I have seen the reasons, whi●● are alleged in this book or writing, for both par● (meaning for going, or not going to the Protestant Church) & I am of opinion that it is not lawful f●● Catholics in England to go to the Churches of Heretics: and I am persuaded, that this point aught to be out of all Controversy.  
Mutius Vitellescus Provincial 〈◊〉 the Society of jesus in Rom●   
And thus far touching the sentences 〈◊〉 these three learned men, delivered in warranting the doctrine of Recusancy in Catholics.  
Now to reflect back upon the promise● If the going to the Church of another Religion (for avoiding of temporal losses, (and only to hear a sermon of the said Religion) be to be accounted a Sin, not be done under pain of damnation, as being presumed to bear an external conformity to a false Religion (as by all the former testimonies above alleged is plentifully proved) though the party so offending, may perhaps truly believe all points of Christian Religion: with what reason then can it be warranted, that both Catholics and Protestants, conspiring only in the fundamental points of the Trinity, Incarnation etc. but differing mainly in all other points of Religion, yet nevertheless promiscuously communicating one with another in prayer and the Sacraments, can jointly be saved? especially seeing it is certain, that the one part defendeth not matters of Indifferency (as is commonly supposed) but iniustifiable errors, or rather (to speak as the truth is) manifest and gross Heresies.   

THE SAME PROVED FROM the writings of the Catholics and Protestants, wherein reciprocally they charge one another with Heresy. Also from the Insurrections, War and Rebellions, begun only for Religion. CHAP. XIIII.  
IF there were no other reason to be alleged, in disproof & confutation of this plurality of Religions, them this following, it might seem fully prevailing in all clear judgements, not wholly darkened with the mist of earthly and temporal respects. It is this. First, the wonderful and implacable Bookwarrs between Catholics and Protestants, wholly undertaken in defence of their several Religions: and yet both the Catholics and the Protestants profess to believe in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion etc. Secondly, the pressures and calamities, with which diverse states and countries do afflict other states, as also the Insurrection of Subjects against their natural Princes, only for difference of Religion; not containing themselves, till they burst forth into open hostility and arms for defending their own Religion, & subverting of the others.  
Touching the first, good God how many men on all sides, since the first appearing of Luther, have spent their whole times, & all their serviceable years, in writing, disputing, and preaching in defence of their own Religion, & impugning of their adversary's; accounting the maintainers & believers thereof, as Heretics, & pronouncing eternal damnation against them? Witnesses hereof are the Libraries of all the famous universities of Christendom; the Stationer's shops in all great Cities, and lastly the Annual Mart of Books returned these many years from Frankford. And is ●t possible, that so much pains, travail, & labour of writing and otherwise, accompanied with so great charges, should be undertaken for questions only of Indifferency, & such, as it importeth nothing at all, touching ●he gaining of Heaven, and avoiding of Hell, what a man believeth therein, or of what side he relieth?  
Concerning the second point, which is ●he calamities, afflictions, & wars, which livers States, Countries, and Kingdoms ●oe prosecute against their neighbours, and ●ll originally for matter of Religion; ●s also touching the open rebellion of the Subjects against their lawful Sovereigns, ●nly for the said occasion; the last fifty years, as also these very times do give overlamentable examples hereof. Witnesses of this matter (purposely to forbear the precedents of our own Country) is Scotland, into which Country, Knox, Goodman, and Bucanan, with other their Agents and confederates first introduced Protestancy by force, and arms: A point so acknowledged, that Doctor Bancroft late pretended A chbishop of Canterbury, as wholly inu●yghing against suc● violent proceed, made a book of tha● subject, entituling it: Of the proceed of th● Scottish ministers, according to the Genevian rule of Reformation.  
Touching France, who knoweth not that for this last fifty years, till the last King of France became Catholic, there have by always almost open wars, between the State of France, & the Hugnotts of France undertaken by the Hugnotts only for Religion. And doth not the City of Rochel, with some other Cities at this day, stand out against their King, under pretext of defence of their Gospel?  
The occurrents of the Low Countries, & the Hollanders are no less remarkable herein of whose first taking of arms against thei● lawful King only for Religion, 
(a) In Epitome. Cent. 16. p. 941.  Osiander, an earnest Protestant, thus confesseth They of the low Countries by public writings renounced all subjection and obedience to Philip their Lord & King. And 
(b) Osiand. ubi sup. 81.  again. When four hundred of them, of good respect, had sued for liberty of Religion, and could not prevail; the impatient people stirred up with fury, at Antwerp, and other places of Holland Zealand, and Flanders, did throw and break down Images. But of the proceed & Rebellion's of the low Countrymen against their King only for cause of Religion, it is needles to speak further, seeing it is too well known to all men of any impartial judgement and understanding.  
I will not much insist in the Example of Switzerland, which consisting of twelve or thirteen Cantons, or Shires, half of the number of them did 
* See of this Osiander in Epitome. Eccles. histor. Cen. 16. pag. 103. as also D. Bancroft in his survey, p. 13. and Cochlaeus in acts Lutheri.  rise up in arms against the other, and by force of arms did set up the Protestant Religion among them. And so the half of the Cantons do continue Protestant to this very day. The battalls fought among them (only for Religion) were many and most cruel; and in one of them Zwinglius (the chief inciter of the rest) was slain.  
I pass over Geneva, which City (as the whole world knoweth) did first withdraw itself from the allegiance of their temporal Liege Lord, only by reason that against his will and pleasure, they would profess the Protestant Religion; and so accordingly to this day they have made themselves a State or Commonwealth, wholly independent of Savoy; of which City thus D. 
(b) In his answer to a certain libel supplicatory. pag. 194.  Sutcliffe confessedly writeth: They of Geneva did depose their Catholic Liege Lord and Prince, from his temporal right, albeit he was by right of succession their temporal Lord, and owner of that City & Territory.  
In like sort, I pretermit the many like examples of the Commons, rising against their lawful Princes and magistrates in 
(c) See Chitraeus in Chron 1593. & 1594.  Sueveland, 
(d) See hereof the acknowledgement of M. Fulke in his answer to Farines' declamations. p. 35.  Denmark, 
(e) See Osiander hereof in Epitome. Cent. 16. pag. 115.  Poland, and 
(f) See the acknowledgement hereof by D. Bilson in his true defence part. 3. pag. 270. & 273.  Germany; And which risings, Insurrections, and rebellions were originally undertaken only for Religion; and have no doubt (since Luther's first breach) cost the lives in all places of many hundred thousand men; & have actually deposed & disthroned diverse Kings and Princes of their states and territoryes.  
These things then, for their evidency being confessed for true & undeniable (many of which yet remain fresh in our own memory) of the nature of which Actions I will not here dispute; only I here urge, that it is more than incredible, that such rebellions and devastations of Countries, besieging of Cities, deposing of Princes, slaughter of so many hundred thousands of men, should be practised almost throughout all Christendom, within this last threescore years, o●ly for admitting, or not admitting the differences between the Protestants & Catholics Religion, if both the contrary parties were not persuaded, that upon the true or false belief of these Controversies in Religion, their soul's Salvation or damnation for all eternity were to depend; For it is certain, that all these contrary parties did agree and conspire in the general belief of the Trinity, Incarnation, Passion, death of our Saviour, and reciting of the Apostles Creed: And therefore for these doctrines such bloody proceed were not attempted.   

THE SAME PROVED, FROM the Protestants mutually condemning one another of Heresy, and for Heretics. CHAP. XV.  
IF Protestants do maintain, that their different opinions severally holden among themselves be Heresies, and that the believers of them, are for such their false belief (if they so dye therein) not capable of salvation; than à fortiori, may we be bold to pronounce, that the Controversies of faith between the Catholics and Protestants are not of that middle nature, but that the opinions and sentences on the one side are to be reputed for manifest Heresies, and such as cannot stand with man's salvation. This inference is most necessary, since on all sides it is acknowledged, that there is a fare greater disparity in Religion between the Catholics and the Protestants, then there is between the Protestants among themselves.  
Now, that the Protestants do hold one another for Heretics, it cannot be denied: for to insist first in the Controversies touching the real Presence, maintained in their sense by the Lutherans, but denied by the Sacramentaries; we find, that Luther thus writeth of the Sacramentaries: 
(h) Contra articulos Lovanienses. Thes. 27. tom. 2.  We censure in earnest the Zwinglians, and all the Sacramentaries for Heretics, and alienated from the Church of God. And again, the same Luther thus writeth, tom. 7. Wittenb. fol. 381. I do protest before God and the world, that I do not agree with the Zwinglians, nor ever will while the world standeth, but will have my hands clear from the blood of the sheep, which these Heretics (mark his words) do drive from Christ, deceive, & kill. And again in the former place; Cursed be the charity & concord of the Sacramentaries for ever and ever, to all eternity. But Heretics, and men alienated from the Church of God, and which do kill the sheep of Christ, during such their condition, are not in state of Salvation. Now, of Luther and his doctrine, we find this bitter recrimination used by the Tigurine Divines, who were Zwinglians or Caluinists: 
(i) Tigurini tract. 3. contra supremam Lutheri Confessionem. p. 61.  Nos condemnatam & execrabilem sectam vocat etc. Luther calleth us a damnable and execrable sect; but let him look, lest he doth not declare himself an Archheretic being he cannot, nor will not have society with those that confess Christ. And Zwinglius in tom. 2. ad Respons. Lutheri, thus writeth: Behold how Satan endeavours to possess this man, meaning Luther.  
But to proceed to other points: Nicolaus 
(1) In his Thesib. & Hypothesib.  Gallus (an eminent Protestant and Superintendent at Ratisbone) thus writeth of the contentions between the Protestants themselves. Non sunt leaves etc. The dissensions that are among us, are not light, nor of light matters; but of the greatest articles of Christian doctrine, of the Law and the Gospel, of justification and good works, of the Sacraments, and use of Ceremonies.  
Conradus 
(2) In Theolog. Caluin. l. 1. art. 23.  Schlussenburge (an other famous Protestant) allegeth Pappus a Protestant) thus complaining against the Caluinists: Etsi initio de uno tantum articulo etc. Although in the beginning one only article was called into doubt etc. Not withstanding the Caluinists are now so far gone, as that they call in doubt neither few, neither the least articles of Christian Doctrine: for now we descent from them, touching the Omnipotency of God, the Personal union of two Natures in Christ etc.  
But to come nearer home: The 
(3) In their mild defence of the silenced ministers supplication, to the Court of Parliament.  Puritans here of England thus complain of the Protestants: Do we vary from the sincere Doctrine of the Scriptures? Nay rather many of them do much more swerve from the same etc. And thus answereably we find, that the Puritans hold the Bishops of England Antichristian; whereas the Protestants do teach, that of necessity Bishops are to be in the Church of God.  
D. Willet 
(4) In his Meditation upon the 122. Psalm.  speaking of diverse opinions, taught by the more moderate Protestants, as Hooker, D. Covell, and others, thus writeth: From this foundation have sprung forth these and other such wirlepooles and bubbles of new doctrine; as that Christ is not originally God: & then after he thus concludeth: Thus have some been bold to teach and write, who as some Schismatics (meaning hereby the Puritans) have disturbed the peace of the Church one way in external matters concerning discipline, so they have troubled the Church another way, in opposing themselves, by new quirks & devices, to the soundness of Doctrine among Protestants.  
M. Parks in his book dedicated to the then Archbishop D. Bancroft, thus writeth of the proceed of some Protestants here in England: 
(5) Epist. dedicat.  They are headstrong & hardened in Error, they strike at the main points of faith, shaking the foundation itself, and ca●ling to question Heaven and Hell the divinity & humanity, yea the very soul, and salvation of our Saviour himself. And again more plainly in the former place, he saith thus: They have pestilent Heresies: and yet more, They are Heretical & sacrilegious.  
To conclude this point of their particular sayings and redargutions herein, D. 
(6) In his defence of Hocker pag. 65. & 74. & 75.  Covell repeating & registering the Positions of the Puritans here in England, among other of their positions setteth down these following: The Statute congregations of England are no true Churches. And again. The Protestant Church of England is no Church at all. And yet more: The Protestant Church of England hath no form of a Church.  
Now, that all these dissensions among English Protestants cannot be interpreted only about indifferencyes & Ceremonies, or about Government (as some Protestants do answer, when they are charged herewith by the Catholics,) besides that their own former Confessions are extended to diverse high articles, the foresaid M. 
(7) Vbi supra pag. 3.  Parks plainly and truly confesseth the contrary, saying: The Protestants deceive the world, and make men believe, there is agreement in all substantial points; they affirm, there is no question among them of the truth.  
Now the former point is furthermore made evident, by the reciprocal deportment and demeanour of Protestants amongst themselues; for first (besides the cha●ging one another with flat Heresy (as is above shown) they do not only prohibit the 
(8) In Concil. Theolog. part. 1. pag. 249.  reading of each others books, but also they set down articles of visitation for the enquiry and apprehending 
(k) Hospinian. ubi supra.  of such their adversary's; & being apprehended they commit them to prison; yea further they proceed, not allowing the 
(m) So relateth Osiander in Epitome. Cent. 16. pag. 608. etc. Conradus Schlussenb. Catalogue. Haeret. l. 13. & ultimo.  travailers of either party common entertainment, due in all nations to strangers. 
(l) Hospinian. ubi supra.  Finally their dissensions are so implacable among them (though all be Protestants) as that in defence of their several doctrines they have with great hostility taken 
(n) This is showed and exemplifyed by Hospinian ubi supra fol. 395. & 397. in like sort by Osiander in Epitome. p. 735.  arms one against another, as appeareth (to omit for brevity all other Precedents) by the late memorable example in Holland, of the Arminians and Gomorists, who only for some difference touching Freewill between them, did rise in hostile manner against their adversary's; and ceased not that course, ●till Barnevelt the chief of one side and faction was beheaded. All which violence and extremity of courses would never have been undertaken, if the diversity of doctrine (which is the cause of such & so great exorbitancies) did consist only in things in different of themselues, and such as did not concern the necessity of salvation.  
The said point touching the Protestants dissensions in essential articles of faith, is lastly clearly manifested, by taking a view of their books written one against another: (though this method is partly involved in the displaying of their particular condemning sentences above alleged) the number whereof of amounteth to diverse hundreds; yet as desirous to be short & compendious, I will set down the Titles only of twenty of them; even from which Titles the Indifferent Reader may judge, whether the Authors of them (being all eminent Protestants) did maintain the subjects of their said books, to be matters of Indifferency, and such as may be either way holden without breach of that true faith which is necessary to man's Salvation. And further I will forbear to reckon within this number any book written either for, or against the real Presence maintained by the Lutherans, because therein they conspire partly with us Catholics, & consequently the controversy herein ariseth not only between the Protestants themselves, but also between them and us. And for more satisfaction of the Reader, I have also Englished the said twenty Titles, from which, conjecture may easily be made, in what bitter style the books were written.  
First then may be reckoned that book entitled: Oratio de Incarnatione filij Dei, contra impios & blasphemos errores Zwinglianorum & Caluinistarun, printed Tubingae, Anno Domini. 1586.  
An Oration, or Speech of the Incarnation of the Son of God, against the wicked and blasphemous errors of the Swinglians and Caluinists.  
Alberti Graveri Bellum Iohannis Caluini, & jesu Christi. Braptae, 1598. in 4.  
The war of john Caluin and jesus Christ, written by Albertus Graverus.  
Anti-Paraeus: Hoc est. Refutatio venenati scripti à Davide Paraeo editi, in defension stropharum, & corrup●elarum, quibus Iohannes Caluinus illustrissima Scripturae testimonia de mysterio Trinitatis, nec non oracula Prophetarum de Christo, detestandum in modum corrupit. Francofurti▪ 1598.  
Anti-Paraeus, that is, a Refutation of a venomous book, written by David Pareus ●n defence of the Deceits & Corruptions, ●y the which john Caluin hath detestably abused, or wrested the most clear testimonies of Scripture, touching the Mystery of ●he Trinity, and the Oracles of the Prophet's touching Christ.  
AEgidij Hunnij Caluinus judaizans: Hoc est, ●udaicae glossae & corruptelae, quibus Iohannes Cal●inus illustrissima Scripturae sacrae loca & testimony a de gloriosa Trinitate Deitate Christi, & Spiri●●s Sancti, cum primis autem vaticinia Propheta●●m de adventu Messiae, & Nativitate eius, Passio●e, Resurrectione, Assensione ad caelos, & Sessione ●d dextram Dei, detestandum in modum corrumpe●● non abhorrutt. Wittenbergae. 1593.  
Caluinus judaizans, or Caluin playing ●he jew: That is, A discovery (written by Aegidius Hunnius) of the jewish interpeta●ions and Corruptions, by the which john Caluin hath not been afraid to corrupt & abuse the most evident places and testimonies of holy Scripture, against the glorious trinity, the Deity of Christ, and the Holy Ghost; as also the Predictions of the Prophet's touching the coming of the Messiah, ●s Nativity, Passion, Resurrection, Ascen●●on, and his Sitting at the right Hand of ●od.  
Conradi Schlussenburgij Theologiae Caluinisticae libri tres, in quibus, seu in tabula quadam quasi ad oculum, plusquam ex ducentis viginti tribus Sacramentariorum publicis scriptis, pagellis, verbis proprijs, & Authorum nominibus indicatis demonstratur, eos de nullo ferè Christianae fidei articulo rectè sentire. Francofurti. 1594.  
Three Books touching Caluinisticall Divinity, written by Conradus Schlussenburge, in which books it is showed (as i● a Table to the eye) even out of two hundred twenty and three public writings of the Sacramentaryes, with special noting o● the pages, the particular words, and name of the Authors, that the Sacramentaryes have no true belief almost of any one Article of Christian faith.  
Pia defensio adversus Iohannis Caluini, Pe●● Boquini, Theodori Bezae, Gulihelmi Clebitij & ● & similium calumnias. Item refutatio Pelagianis● Anabaptistici Caluinistarum erroris, de Baptismo 〈◊〉 Peccato Originali. Adduntur Collectancae plurim●rum Caluini, contra Deum, eius Providentiam 〈◊〉 Predestinationem. Erfordiae. 1583.  
A godly defence against the deceits 〈◊〉 john Caluin, Peter Boquinus, Theodor● Beza, Wilhelmus Clebitius, and their Associates. Also a Refutation of the Pelagian ● anabaptistical error, taught by the Cal●●nists, touching Baptism & Original sinn● Hear are also added certain Collections out of Caluins' writings, against God, his Providence, and Predestination.  
Denominatio Imposturarum ac fraudum, quibus AEgidius Hunnius Ecclesiae Orthodoxae Doctrinam petulanter corrumpere pergit. Bremae. 1592.  
A Catalogue of the Impostures & deceptes, wherewith Aegidius Hunnius doth insolently go about to corrupt the doctrine of the Orthodox Church.  
Argumentorum & obiectionum de praecipuis articulis Doctrinae Christianae, cum responsionibus, quae sunt collectae ex scriptis Philippi Melancthonis: additis Scholijs illustrantibus usum singularum responsionum, Parts 7. Neapoli. 1578.  
Arguments & Objections concerning the chief Articles of Christian Doctrine, with the Answers gathered out of the writings of Philip Melancthon: together with Commentaries upon every Answer, divided into seven Parts.  
Gulihelmi Zepperi Dillenbergensis Ecclesiae Pastoris Institutio, de tribus Religionis summis capitibus, quae inter Euangelicos in Controversiam vocantur. Hanoviae. 1596.  
In Instruction about three chief heads of Religion, called into Controversy among the Gospelers: by William Zepperus Pastor of the Church of Dillenberge.  
Responsio triplex ad fratres Tubingenses, & triplex eorum scriptum de tribus gravissimis qu●stionibus etc. De Coena Domini, de maiestate hominis Christi, & de non damnandis Ecclesijs Dei nec auditis, nec vocatis. Genevae. 1582.  
A threefold Answer to the Brethren of Tubinga & their threefold writing, concerning three most weighty Questions etc. Of the supper of the Lord; Of the Majesty of Christ, as Man; And of not condemning the Churches of God, before they be heard, or called.  
Ad Iohannis Brentij argumenta, & jacobi Andreae Theses, quibus carnis Christi omni praesentiam nituntur confirmare, id est, adversum renovatos Nestorij & Eutichetis errores, Responsum. Genevae. 1570.  
An Answer to the Arguments of john Brentius, & to the Conclusions of jacobus Andreas, by which they endeavour to confirm the ubiquity or presence of Christ's flesh every where: that is to say, against the renewed Errors of Nestorius & Eutiches.  
Apologia ad omnes Germaniae Ecclesias reformatas, quae sub Zwingliani & Caluiniani nominis invidia, vim & iniuriam patiuntur. Tiguri. 1578.  
An Apology of all the Reformed churches of Germany, which through the Envy of the Name of Zuinglius & Caluin, do suffer violence & injury.  
Christopheri Pezelij Apologia verae doctrina, de d●●●itione Euangelij: apposita Thrasonicis praestigijs Iohannis Wigandi. Wittenbergae. 1572.  
An Apology of the true Doctrine concerning the Definition of the Gospel, against the Thrasonical enchantments of joannes Wigandus: by Christophorus Pezelius.  
Colloquij Montisbelgardensis inter jacobum Andreae, & Theodorum Bezam Acta. Tubingae. 1584.  
The Acts of the Colloquy at Montbelgard, between james Andrew, & Theodore Beza.  
Veritatis victoria, & ruina Papatus Saxonici, Losannae. 1563.  
The Victory of Truth, & the Ruin of the Popedom of Saxony.  
Hamelmannia: siue Aries Theologizans. Dia●gus oppositus duabus narrationibus historicis Her●anni Hamelmanni. Neostadij. 1582.  
Hamelmannia: or the Theologizing Ram. A Dialogue against two Historical Narrations of Hermanus Hamelmannus.  
Christiani Kittelmanni decem graves & per●iciosi errores Zwinglianorum, in Doctrina de pec●atis, & Baptismo: ex proprijs ipsorum libris colle●i, & refutati. Magdeburgae. 1562.  
Ten weighty & pernicious Errors of ●he Zwinglians, in the Doctrine concerning Sin & Baptism. Collected out of their own books & refuted: by Christianus Kittleman.  
johannis Mosellani Praeseruativa contra venenum Zwinglianorum. Tubingae. 1586.  
An Antidote, or Preseruative against the poison of the Zwinglians: by Ioann●● Mosellanus.  
De Vnitate personali & supernaturali duar●● Naturarum in Christo: contra blasphemam Disp●tationem Eusebij Cleberi Pastoris Saugalensis i● Helvetia. Tubingae. 1586.  
Of the Personal & Supernatural Unity of two Natures in Christ; against the blasphemous Disputation of Eusebius Cleberus Pastor of Saugall, in Suitzerland.  
De gaudijs aeternae vitae: & quomodo Sacramentarij nobis illa gaudia imminuant. Erfordia. 1585.  
Of the joys of Eternal life: And how the Sacramentaries, do in part defraud 〈◊〉 of them.  
Now from all the premises above, I hau● conclude, that if the several opinions among the Protestants be not in their judgement matters of Indifferency; but are by themselues truly reputed for Heresies, & the maintainers of them not houldden to be in state of Salvation; as appeareth both from the Protestants reciprocal condemnations of one another, as also from the former Titles of their own Books written against one another; then with much more reason may the same sentence be pronounced of the many irreconciliable Controversies, differently believed and holden by the Catholics and Protestants: And the rather since (as is above said) there is a fare greater disparity and difference of doctrine between the Catholics and the Protestants, then between the Protestant, & the Protestant.   

THE TRUTH OF THIS FORMER Doctrine, demonstrated from the many Absurdityes, necessarily accompanying the contrary doctrine. CHAP. XVI.  
SUCH is the sweet Providence of the Divine Majesty, in disposal of things, as that he ever causeth truth to be warranted with many irrefragable reasons, and falsehood to be attended on with diverse gross and inevitable absurdityes; that so the judgement of man may be the better secured for the embracing of truth, and remain the less excusable, if in place of truth it entertain falsehood & Error. Of the reason's convincing the infallible truth of our doctrine maintained in this treatise, I have already discussed above, in the tenth Chapter. Now here I will a little insist in disclosing the many and palpable absurdities, accompanying the contrary doctrine: which point will chief rest (besides some other short insertions) in a recapitulation of most of the former heads or branches, above handled.  
For if this doctrine were true, to wit, that every one might be saved in his own Religion; or that the belief only of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion, or the Creed were sufficient thereto, notwithstanding the belief of other erroneous opinions and heresies; Then would it follow, First, that the holy Scriptures of Christ and his Apostles were most false, which have inveyghed so much against Heresies, and have denounced the heavy judgement of damnation against the professors of them, as above is showed; which comminations and threats the scripture in some places not only extendeth to all Hersies or Heretics in general, without 
(a) Tit. 3. Gal. c. 5. Rom. c. 16. 1. Tim. 1.  any limitation; but also in some other, they are particularly restrayded to certain Heresies, seeming of smaller importance than the denial of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion, the Creed, etc. as is evident touching the denying 
(b) 1. Tim. cap. 4.2. Tim. c. 2.1. joan. c. 2.  of marriage, and of eating of certain meats, and touching the Natures of Christ etc.  
Now, that the denial of other inferior articles of faith then of the Trinity, & Incarnation etc. is plain Heresy, is demonstrated above, both from the definition of Heresy, and from the judgement of the Primitive Church.  
Secondly, the foresaid doctrine impugneth the definition of Faith, given by the 
(f) Hebr. c. 11.  Apostle; which definition of faith comprehendeth a general belief of all articles of Christian Religion, and is not therefore to be limited to any one kind of them. In like sort, it destroyeth the privileges & dignity of faith, set down by the foresaid Apostle; who 
(g) Mat. ultimo & Hebr. 11.  promiseth salvation to him, that hath faith, as also that without faith we cannot 
(h) Ephes. 4. Act. 4. Rom. 12. etc.  please God: but such excellencies cannot be ascribed to a Bastard faith, which believeth some things true, others false; they are therefore either to be given to a true entire, and perfect faith in all points, or else the Apostle grossly erred in assigning to faith the aforesaid privileges; seeing a false faith is no better, than no faith at all. Again it depriveth a Christian faith of its true mark or character of Unity, so much celebrated by the 
(h) Ephes. 4. Rom. 12. vide Cant. c. 6.  Apostle.  
Now than if Unity of faith be necessary to Salvation, how can both Protestants and Catholics expect salvation, seeing there is no greater distance between the opposite parts of a Diameter, than there is repugnancy betwixt both their beliefs. Therefore if both of them though wanting this Unity, can be saved, then hath the Apostle falsely and erroneously described and delineated the faith of a Christian.  
But to reflect upon the former passages, is any man so stupid, as to dream, that, that doctrine should be true, which giveth so open a lie to so many unanswerable texts of Gods holy writ, touching the condemning of Heretics in general, as also touching the definition, excellency, and propriety of true Faith? It is impossible, it is not to be imagined. God's word is like himself, most true, sacred, and inviolable, and therefore it justly witnesseth of itself, that 
(i) joan. 2.  scriptura 〈◊〉 potest solui. And again: 
(k) Mat. 24.  Caelum & terra transibunt, verba autem mea non transibunt: Heaven and earth shall pass, but my words shall 〈◊〉 pass.  
But to proceed further touching the for●sayd want of unity, and disagreements i● Faith; If every Christian might be saved i● his own Religion, then might those be saved, which believe the Articles of the cre●● in a most different sense and manner; the● which what can be more rashly and exorbitantly spoken? seeing there is but one true intended sense, by the Apostles, of the creed; the which if we attain not, then do we believe that, which is false; but to believe the creed in a false sense, is no better, than not to believe it at all. And therefore it would follow by way of inference, that he might be saved, who believed not any one article of the creed at all. Now, that the Catholics & Protestants do believe the articles of the creed in different, or rather contrary senses (and consequently that the one side believeth it in a false and erroneous sense) is above proved in the fourth chapter.  
If it be here replied, that the maintainers of this doctrine do so far yield, that they only are to be saved, which in a true sense believe the creed; yet by this their restraint they condemn all those others, who believe ●t in any other sense, different from that intended by the holy Ghost and the Apostles; ●nd consequently they condemn in their ●udgement and deprive of salvation, either ●he Catholics or Protestants; since of necessity the one of these do believe the creed not in the true, but in a false and heretical ●ense and construction, different from that of the Apostles. But supposing that the Catholics and Protestants believed the creed in that true sense, intended by the holy Ghost; yet if our Newtrallists would have the creed the square or rule, thereby to measure our faith, then mark the Absurdities following.  
For by this doctrine one might be saved, who believed not, that there were any Scriptures at all, written by the Prophets & Apostles (since the creed maketh no mention of any such divine writings ..) In like sort he might be saved, who did not believe there were any Angels or Devils; or that there is a material place of Hell; or that the pains thereof are eternal; or that Adam did presently upon his creation fall from grace, & thereby transferred Original sin upon all his posterity; or that our Saviour, whilst he conversed here on earth, wrought any miracles; or made choice of certain men to be his Apostles, to preach the Christian faith throughout all the whole world; or that he died for the salvation of mankind (for though we read in the creed, that he died and suffered, yet the end why he died is not expressed in the creed; Or that circumcision is now forbiddem & antiquated; or finally, that there are any Sacraments of the new Testament, as Baptism, the Eucharist etc. I say by our Newtrallists Religion, he should be saved, who believed none of the foresaid articles; seeing not any one of them is expressed, or set down in the Apostles creed; and yet the belief of the said Articles is necessarily exacted and required to Salvation, in the judgement both of Catholics and Protestants; both which parties do with an unanimous consent, teach the necessity of believing the said articles. But to proceed further and to come to the different Articles of faith, differenly believed by the Catholic and Protestant, and yet not expressed in the creed; and articles of such nature, as that they are holden by the catholics to be instituted by our Saviour, as subordinate (yet necessary) means of the grace of God, and of our Salvation; whereas the Protestants, as not believing at all the said articles, do wholly disclaim from acknowledging any such means:  
These Articles I have recited above, to wit: That Sacraments in general do confer grace: That a Child dying without Baptism, cannot be saved; That mortal sin is not remitted without the Sacrament of Penance and Confession; That we are to adore with supreme Honour the blessed Sacrament; That not only faith, but also works do justify man; That a Christian by thinking himself just, is not thereby become just; That every Christian hath by God sufficient grace offered to save his soul; And that therefore God on his part would have all men saved; That without keeping the ten Commandments a man cannot be saved; Finally, that all Christians ought upon pain of eternal damnation, to communicate in Sacraments and doctrine with the Church of Rome, and to submit themselves in all due obedience to the supreme Pastor of that Church: In all which points the Protestants do believe directly the contrary, condemning us of Heresy, Superstition, yea Idolatry, for our believing the foresaid points. Now I say, seeing the former articles do immediately touch and concern either remission of our sins; or grace of our soul; or our justification; or our due honour and adoration to our Saviour's Body, being accompanied with his divinity; or Lastly our communion with Christ his church and head thereof; in any of which (as concerning so nearly our eternal happiness) who erreth, cannot possibly be saved; And seeing the Protestants (as is said) do in all the said points maintain the just contrary to the catholics, and thereby do abandon the catholics acknowledged means of their Salvation:  
I here ask in all soberness of judgement, what can be reputed for a greater absurdity, then to affirm with our Newtrallists, that the Catholics and Protestants (notwithstanding their so different & contrary belief & answerable practice in the former Articles, so nearly touching man's Salvation) may both be saved?  it must needs be, that either the catholics shallbe damned for setting down certain means of our Salvation, contrary to Christ's mind and Institution (supposing the said articles to be false;) or that the Protestants shallbe damned for rejecting the former means of Salvation, instituted by Christ, admitting them to be true.  
But to pass forward. If every Christian might be saved in his Religion, in believing only the fundamental points of the Trinity, the Incarnation etc. then hath the church of Christ even in her Primitive days (at what time the 
(*) D. jewel in his defence of the Apology. Kennitius in exam. Concil. Trident. part. 1. p. 74. & diverse others.  Protestants themselves exempt her from error) most truly & insufferably erred, in condemning certain opinions (which are not fundamental) for heresies, and their maintainers for Heretics; and consequently the Scripture and Christ himself have deceived us, by ascribing to the church an 
(m) Mat. 18. Luc. 10. 1. Tim. 3. etc.  infallibility of erring in her definitions of faith, and condemnation of Heresies, and by commanding us to obey the church's authority and sentence in all things, as styling her the pillar and foundation of truth. And further it should follow, that the Church should thus intolerably err both in general counsels, (the highest Tribunals here upon earth) as also in the private Authorities and sentences of all the learned Fathers, in those firster times.  
And thus for example, the council of the 
(n) Act. 15.  Apostles should have erred, in decreeing it unlawful to eat in those times blood & strangled meats.  
In like sort the first council of 
(o) Euseb. l. 3. de vita Constant. Epiphan. haeres. 70.  Nice should have erred, in condemning the Quartadecimani for Heretics, because they would not keep Easter day, according to the custom of the Church. And to pretermit all the other Counsels, above alleged, the Council 
(p) Euseb. l. 6. Hist. cap. 33.  of Rome under Cornelius, for condemning the Heresy of the Novatians (who rejected the Sacrament of Penance) as also for condemning of Anabaptism.  
And thus fare of Counsels condemning points of seeming Indifferency, for open & wicked Heresies. But now here granting that the said points (as they were holden by the maintaining of them) were not heresies, & that the believers of them be saved, than two main absurdities do immediately follow: the first, (as is said) is the erring of the whole Church of God in condemning them for Heresies, they being not Heresies, but true doctrines.  
The second: the inconsiderate carriage of the Church in these matters. For to what end or purpose were all these Counsels (consisting of many hundreds of the most grave and Reverend men of all Christendom) celebrated with such labour, travail out of all countries, & infinite charges, if the doctrines (for the impugning, resistng, and condemning whereof they were gathered) might be indifferently maintained & defended on all sides, without breach of true faith, or danger of Salvation? The erring of the church is no less manifested, in the sentences and condemnations given by many of the most ancient, famous, & learned Fathers in the Primitive Church (not any one Orthodoxal Father contradicting them therein) against diverse, maintaining opinions that seemed, in regard of the Trinity, Incarnation, etc. of small importance; ●f so those opinions be not Heresies, nor the believers of them Heretics, but men in state of Salvation. And thus according heerto Flo●inus, though he taught God to be the Author of sin, might be saved.  
In like sort the Heretics, who in S. Ie●ome his days denied the possibility of the Commandments; The Manichees, who denied freewill; The Eunomians, who ●aught that only faith doth justify; The Ae●ians, who denied prayer & sacrifice for the ●ead, and took away all fasting days; Vigilantius, who taught that Priests might marry, and that we ought not to pray to Saints; jovinian, who held marriage better than virginity; The Donatists, who taught the Inuisibility of the Church; And finally (to omit many others for brevity sake) the Pelagians, who denied the necessity of Baptism in Children. All these men (I say) might be saved, notwithstanding their former doctrines, if so it be, that every man might expect Salvation in their Religion▪ And yet we find, that the foresaid men were branded for wicked Heretics, & their doctrines for damnable Heresies (as in the seaventh chapter above is showed) by Ireneus, Jerome, Epiphanius, Philastrius, Augustine, Theodoret, and others; diverse of which holy Fathers, writing catalogues o● Heresies did place the foresaid doctrines & their Authors within the said catalogues, & this they did without any reluctation o● gainsaying of any other ancient and learned Father of their times.  
From which consideration I do gather, if those opinions were not justly condemned for Heresies, and their Author for Heretics; Than not only the church did foully err in so great a matter; but al● even the aforesaid alleged Fathers, to wi● Ireneus, Jerome, Epiphanius, Austin, wit● many such others, should deservedly be reputed for Heretics, for their condemning of true Doctrines for Heresies, and the believers of them for Heretics; and on the contrary side, Florinus, the Manichees, the Eunomians, Vigilantius, jovinian, the Donatists, Pelagius, & many other such, should be accounted for their teaching of true Doctrines, Orthodoxal Authors; and might have justly complained of their insupportable wrongs, and indignities proceeding from the pens of the foresaid fathers: An absurdity, which I think no man, enjoying the benefit of his five senses, will allow; And yet the admittance of our Newtrallists Paradox, inanoidably draweth on this inference.  
Another Absurdity accompanying the former doctrine is this; that Heretics should be true members of Christ's church. This I thus deduce; for seeing by the consent of all learned men, none can be saved, but such as are true members of Christ's church, (for otherwise Turks and jews dying in the state of Turkism and judaisme, might be saved) and seeing the foresaid registered Doctrines and their Authors are condemned for Heresies & Heretics, both according to the Authority of God's church, & according to the true definition of Heresy, above in the beginning set down, (for the said Heretics have made choice of those their heresies, and do maintain them most frowardly against the whole church of God, not submitting their judgements to it) must of necessity follow, that if those men could be saved, than Heretics (continuing Heretics) are members of Christ's true church: than which, what Paradox can in itself be accounted more absurd? or in the judgement of learned men more incredible? considering with what acerbity of comportement, the Apostles and all the Orthodoxal, learned, & pious Fathers, both in their writings and otherwise, have in all ages entertained Heretics, as above I have manifested.  
Furthermore, if an Heretic (continuing an Heretic) can be saved, then hath the ancient church of Christ used great tyranny to diverse such Professors, by undeservedly punishing such men with loss of Goods, Imprisonments, Excommunication, Banishment, & sometimes with death itself; for such were the punishments appointed by the ancient church, and Christian Emperors against Heretyks, as I have showed in the nynth chapter. Again, supposing the truth of the doctrine of these Omnifidians, yet observe how repugnant it is to all reason, and otherwise absurd eue● in it own nature. I will here pass over diverse reasons alleged in the precedent Chapters, & insist a little in some few of them.  
The first: It is certain, that that Faith which believeth some articles, and yet believeth not other articles, which are no less true (and such is the faith of our Newtrallists) is no true supernatural faith, seeing it beleiueth nothing through the authority of God and his church, both which reveal & propound all articles alike and indifferently to all men to be believed: Now what more cross to reason, then that a bare opinion not relying upon any supernatural grounds (as neither having God for its Revealer, nor the Church for its Propounder) conceived only through moral inducements (and therefore ever standing obnoxious to error and mistaking) should be able to purchase eternal Salvation to man's soul?  
Again, how adverse is it to all true judgement, to aver, that it is no prejudice or hindrance to man's salvation, to believe those principles of Religion, which teach & advance all liberty & sensuality in conversation & manners, & do depress & disparage all Chastity, Fasting, voluntary Poverty, keeping of the Commandments, and finally all serious and painful labours and works of virtue, piety, and mortification? for it is most contradictory in the very terms, and no less repugnant to God's sacred word, that, that doctrine which 
(u) 2. Pet. 3.  promiseth liberty, and 
(x) judae vers. 4.  transferreth the grace of God into wantonness, should be accounted the 
(y) Mat. 7. Luc. 13.  straight way which leadeth unto life.  
Furthermore, can it be conceived, as sorting to Gods most merciful proceeding with man, that he should cut off the lives of those men with most fearful, sudden, and prodigious deaths (and particularly of Caluin, who was eaten away with lice; a death, peculiar to diverse of Gods most capital Enemies, as to Antiochus, Herod, Maximinus & others) who first broached the Doctrines of Protestancy, if the said Doctrines had either been true in themselves, or at least of that coldness and indifferency, as that they might comport and stand with the soul's salvation? No. God is just, & withal merciful, & therefore never extraordinarily punisheth, but for extraordinary sins. Poor men that they were, who comparted (as it should seem) both in the diuulging of their mendacious and lying Doctrines, as also in their unexpected and sudden deaths with the false Prophets 
(z) 3. Reg.  of Achab! But to hasten to an end, in the enumeration of the Absurdities, following the foresaid Paradox of salvation in every Religion; and to come to that, which, within its own largeness, involueth many improbabilities.  
If Catholics & Protestants (notwithstanding the disparity of their faith) can both attain to Heaven; in vain then is the doctrine of Recusancy jointly taught on both sides; & in vain have so many scores of Reverend and Learned Priests, and others of the Laiety, in our own Country (whose blessed souls I beseech to pray to God daily, for the remission of my many sins) suffered cruel deaths, in the late Queen's reign, only because they refused to present themselves at the service of the Protestants. But they are gone, and most happily gone; for 
(a) Tertul. de Praeser.  Clavis Paradisi sanguis Martyrum. In vain likewise, these later years have diverse lay Persons endured (contrary to his Majesty's natural inclination, most prone to mercy and commiseration) great losses, disgraces, and imprisonments only for the said cause.  
But who can think that virtuous and learned men are so prodigal of their lyues and blood, and English Lay Catholics so insensible of their temporal states, children, and posterity, as that they would wilfully precipitate, and cast themselves into those miseries, only for not believing, and exercising points of Indifferency, and such as may stand with their souls eternal Happiness?  
In vain also then have the Learned men on both sides, spent out their whole lives in defending, each man his own Religion, in their most painful, and voluminous books and writings, if so they dissented one from another in matters of such supposed small importance.  
In vain, and without just cause (and therefore most cruelly) have many States in Christendom in our age imposed proscription, banishments, and other insupportable disgraces to such of their own subjects, as will not embrace their own doctrine; though both sides did conspire and agree in the fundamental points of faith.  
In vain also, both ever since Luther's revolt, as also at this present, have there been and still are, such Insurrections of Subjects against their Princes; such bloody and implacable wars between absolute Princes themselves; such devastation and depopulation of whole Countries; such main battles and fields fought with loss of diverse hundred thousand lyues; and lastly such incessant and interrupted besieging and taking of great Cities & towns, with effusion (for the most part) of much innocent blood, of Women and Children; and all this originally and principally for matter of Religion: I say, in vain, and most injuriously have all these attempts & actions been undertaken, if the disagreements in Religion (for which they were undertaken) between Catholics and Protestants, were of that reconcileable nature, as that the professors on both sides (notwithstanding their diversity of faith) might jointly be saved.  
What can we now reply hereto in the behalf of our Newtrallists? Shall we say, that the most learned men of all Religions, that Kings, Princes, States, and many hundred thousand subjects of Christendom, were (and still are) actually mad, and out of their senses, in menaging these their deplorable attempts for Religion? & that the all-reconciling & peaceable Newtrallist, who (through his pliable stern of disposition in these spiritual matters) is become of the halfe-bloud with the Atheist; and who wanteth (as is commonly noted) both learning, grace, & virtue, is particularly enlightened by God, in setting down what articles of faith are only necessary to man's Salvation, and what are to be reputed but as accessary, and of smaller importance? To such straits (we see) is the defence of the former doctrine driven unto. Seeing therefore this doctrine of our Omnifidians, or rather Nullifidians (for indeed, while they seem to allow all Religions, they take away all Religion) is encompassed on all sides with so many notorious absurdityes (as are displayed in this Chapter,) and seeing it cannot be true, except there be a retrogradation of all matters here on earth, and a turning of the world (as they say) upside down; that is, except the most learned become most mad, and the most ignorant most wise; Therefore since such comportment and carriage of things is not sorting to God's Providence and Charity towards mankind, let every man (who thinketh he hath a soul to save, or lose) undoubtedly assure himself, that there is but one true Faith or Religion, wherein he may availeably expect salvation; and that the saving faith of Christ (wherewith the soul is clothed) is like unto the inconsutible garment of Christ, both being incapable of division, renting, or partition.  
Now for the greater illustration of this point by way of similitude, and as tending towards the closure of this treatise; Imagine that a man pretendeth right and title to certain Lands, & taketh advice of all the learned Lawyers & Counselors of the whole Realm, to whom he showeth all his Evidences; some of which Evidences do carry a title only in gross and in general, others prove a more particular, & more restrained right to the said Lands: Imagine further, that upon the diligent perusal of these Evidences, the joint consent and judgement of all the said Lawyers, should after their long and serious Demurs, conspire in this one point; to wit, that for the recovering & obtaining of the said Lands, the foreshowed Evidences in general are not sufficient alone, seeing diverse other men, not having any true interest in the said Lands, may nevertheless insist and urge their like general claim; but that with the help of the said Common Evidences, he must more punctually rely, for the gaining of his presumed inheritance, upon other more particular, and personal Conveyances and Assigments.  
Now all these learned Counselors agreeing in this sentence, & fortyfying their judgements herein, with their own experience in the like case, with the new Reports warranting the same, with the authority of all the ancient, learned, & Reverend judges before them, & lastly with the force of reason confirming no less; If some one Empiric Attorney or other (skilful only by a little experience in making a Noverint universi) should step forth (armed only with impudence and ignorance) & pronounce the foresaid sentence of all those learned Sages to be false; and that the party pretending right to the said lands were sure by his general Title and Evidences only, to obtain the same, all other his more particular Evidences being but unnecessary & needless theerunto; who might not here justly contemn, and reject the rash censure of such a fellow? Or could not the party claiming the former inheritance, be worthily reprehended, if by rejecting the grave Counsel of the learned Lawyers, and following the advice of this ignorant man, should finally lose all claim, title, and possibility to his said Inheritance?  
Our case is not much unlike heerto: We all pretend a right to the Inheritance of the kingdom of Heaven (for we read, 
(*) lac. 1.  Coronam vitae praeparavit Dominus diligentibus se.) Our title in general thereto is our belief in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion, etc. (the belief whereof is most necessary, but not sufficient.) All eminent men for learning (both Catholics and Protestants) do prove from the Scriptures, from the authority of God's Church, from the nature of Heresy, from the definition of true faith, & from diverse other principles and reasons above expressed, that no man can attain to his heavenly Inheritance, by believing only the former fundamental points of Christianity, if so he have not a true, and particular faith of many other less principal Articles of Christian Religion.  
Now cometh here a dissolute, gamnelesse, & ignorant fellow, not practised in any kind of good literature (for it is observed (as above is said) that all our most forward Neutrallists are men for the most part void of Learning, Virtue, and Conscience) who peremptorily out of his Pythagorean chair (that is, without any proof) affirmeth, that a belief in general of the Articles of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion, is only sufficient to man's salvation; & that the doctrines of Purgatory, Freewill. Real Presence, and other Controversies between the Catholics & Protestants, are not in any sort necessary to the purchasing of our eternal welfare, what way soever we hold, but are to be reputed (in respect of that end) points indifferent, unavayleable, and as the Greek is, merely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or Bye-matters: Who would here not commiserate the folly, and ignorance of such a man; but especially pity the souls seduced by so blind a Guide?   

THE CONCLUSION of the whole Treatise. CHAP. XVII.  
HITHERTO (Good Reader) it is sufficiently (I hope) demonstrated, that every Religion, though professing the name of Christ, and believing in the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the like fundamental points of christian Faith (if their belief in other secondary & less principal points be erroneous) cannot promise to itself any security of Salvation; and consequently that the controverted articles at this day between Catholics and Protestants touching Purgatory, Freewill, Praying to Saints, Sacrifice etc. are of that great importance, as that the professors on both sides (to use the phrase of a blessed martyr 
(*) Camp. in decem rationib. rat. 10.  in the same case) unum caelum capere non potest.  
It now remaineth to show, that seeing at this day, there are originally but two different Religions among christians, to wit, the catholic Religion and the Protestant, (within which are included all its branches and descendants;) whether the catholic or the Protestant Religion is that, wherein a man may be saved. But seeing this Subject is most learnedly and painfully entreated ●f, by many Catholic writers, who from 〈◊〉 authorities both Divine & humane have ●efragably evicted the truth of their own religion, and falsehood of the Protestants ●ofession, (and consequently that in the catholic, not in the Protestant faith, the ●ules eternal happiness is to be purchased;) herefore I do remit the reader for his grea●er satisfaction therein to the perusal of the said ●ookes; & particularly to the studying (ra●er than to the reading only) of that most elaborate, learned, and unanswerable Work ●f the Protestants Apology of the Roman Church.  
Only before I here end, I must make ●ould to put the Reader in remembrance, with that the Protestant Religion in this former Treatise (though but casually and incidently) is most truly charged; to wit, First, with particular condemnations passed upon diverse ●f its chiefest articles, even by several sentē●es & judgements of the Primitime church; ●nd that therefore those doctrines so condemned, & yet after defended with all froward pertinacy against the church of God, are hereby discovered for plain and manifest Heresies: this point being further evicted implicitly both from the testimonies of ho●y Scripture, as also from the definition of Heresy above expressed. Secondly, that the doctrinal speculations and positions in th● Protestant's faith most strongly move t● Wills of such, as belief them, to all vice, ●●berty, and sensuality. Thirdly, that God o● of the infinite abysm of his justice, hath punished even in this world (as earnest given 〈◊〉 far greater punishment, reserved in the ly● to come) with most fearful, unnatural, 〈◊〉 prodigious deaths, the first Inventors' in o● age, & Promulgatours of the said doctrines and such deaths, as his divine Majesty is accustomed to send to his professed enemies Fourthly, that Protestancy is torn asunder with intestine divisions; diverse Professors of it, charging their Brethren-Professour● with Heresy, & despairing of their future salvation. From all which we may conclude that except Heresy, dissolution of manners, most infamous and calamitous deaths, an● disagreements in doctrine between one & the same sect, be good dispositions & mean● to purchase Heaven, the Protestant Religion can never bring her Believers thereto.  
What then remaineth, but who will expect salvation, should seek it only in the Catholic Church? it being that Ark erected by our second Noë, within which who truly believe and live virtuously, are exempted from that universal deluge of eternal damnation. For only in this Church is professed 〈◊〉 taught that Faith, to which by long pres●iption, & a continued hand of time, is pe●liarly ascribed the name Catholic: 
(a) Pacian. Epist. ad Symphron. quae est de Nomine Catholico.  Ca●olicum istud, nec Marcionem, nec Apellem, nec Monnum sonat, nec Haereticos sumit autores. That ●yth, which was prophesied to be of that ●lating and spreading nature, as that to it all 
(b) Esa. 2. & expounded in the English Bibles of the year 1566. Of the universality of the Church or faith of Christ.  Nations shall follow, & which shall have the 
(c) Psal. 2. & expounded of the Church's universality, by the foresaid English Bibles of the year 1576.  end of the earth for its possession, from sea to sea, 
(d) Psal. 72.  beginning 
(e) Luc. 4.  at Jerusalem, among all nations. ●hat Faith, the Professors whereof shallbe 
(f) Dan. 2. in which is included the vninterrupted continuance of the Church.  Kingdom, that shall never be destroyed, but ●all stand for ever; contrary to the short cur●nts of all heresies, of which S. Augustine ●us writeth: 
(g) In psal. 57  Many Heresies are already dead; ●ey have continued their stream, as long as they ●ere able; now they are run out, and their rivers ●e dried up; the memory of then: (that ever they ●ere) is now scarce extant. That faith, the members whereof, in regard of their ever visible eminency, are styled by the holy Ghost, A 
(h) Esa. 2. whereby is proved ●he Churches ever visibility.  mountain prepared in the top of mountains, & ●alted above Hills: with reference whereto ●o wit, in respect of the Churches continual visibility) the foresaid S. 
(i) Tom. 9 in Ep. joan. tract. 2.  Augustine compareth it, to a Tabernacle in the Sun. That ●ayth, whose union in doctrine both among the professors thereof, and with their head is even celebrated by God's holy writ; sin● the Church of God is therefore 
(k) Rom. 12. Cant. 6. joan. 10. which places prove the Church's unity.  called o● Body, one spouse, and one sheepfould: which pr●uiledge S. 
(l) Epist. ad Damasum.  Hierome acknowledgeth b● his own submission, in these words: I d● consociate, or unite myself in Communion with th● Chair of Peter; I know the Church to be builde● upon that Rock; whosoever doth eat the Lamb out of this house, is become profane.  
That faith, for the greater confirmation whereof, God hath vouchsafed to disioyn● the settled course of Nature, by working deuers stupendious & astonishing 
(*) See examples hereof in Jerome in vita Hilarionis. Athanasius in vita Antoniuses. Theodoret. hist. l. 5. c. 21. Eusebius histor. l. 7. c. 14. Zozomenus hist. l. 3. c. 13. August. l. de civet. Dei 22. c. 8. & l. 9 Confess. c. 7. & 8.  miracles according to those words of our Saviour 
(m) Mat. 10. in which words o● Saviour maketh miracles a sign of true faith, or of th● Church.  Go, preach you, cure the sick, raise the dead cleanse the lepers, cast out devils etc. A Prerogative so powerful and efficacious with S▪ Augustine, as that he expressly thus confesses of himself: 
(n) Tom. 6. contra Epist. Manichaei cap. 4.  Miracles are among those things which most justly have holden me in the Church● bosom.  
To conclude, omitting diverse other Characters (as I may term them) or signs o● the true faith; That faith, which is of th● force, as to extort testimony, and warra● for itself, even from it most capital and designed enemies; answereably to that, 
(o) Deuteron. 32. which words include the confession of the Adversary to be a note of truth.  Our God is not as their Gods are, our enemies are even witnesses; since the Protestants no less from their own 
(p) This is proved, in that Protestants, do not rebaptize Infants or children of Catholic Parents, afore baptised: now these Infants are baptised in the faith of their Parents, as all children are, even by the doctrine of all Protestants. But if this faith of Catholic Parents be sufficient for the Salvation of their Children dying baptised therein, then much more is it sufficient for the salvation of the Parents themselves: since it is most absurd to say, that the Catholic faith of Parents should be available for their Children or Infants, dying baptised therein, & yet not available for the Parents themselves.  practice, then from their 
(q) According heerto (to omit the like testimonies of many other Protestants) D. Some in his defence against Penry. p. 182. thus writeth: If you think, that all the Popish sort, which died in the Popish Church, be damned, you think absurdly, & descent from the judgement of all learned Protestants. With whom D. Covell in his defence of M. hooker's five books of Ecclesiastical Policy p. 77. thus conspireth, saying: We affirm, that those who live & dye in the Church of Rome, may be saved.  acknowledgement in words, do ascribe to our Roman faith the hope of Salvation. Of which subject see most amply in the foresaid learned book of the Protestants Apology, Tract. 1. Sect. 6. subdivis. 1. & 2. & 3. as also Tract. 2. cap. 2. Sect. 14.  
To this Faith then, with an indubious assent, adhere both living & dying; fly Newtrallisme in doctrine, as the bane of all Religion; fly Protestancy, as the bane of Christ's true Religion, and say with 
(r) Pacian. Ep. ad Symphron.  Pacianus; Christianus mihi nomen est, Catholicus verò cognomen; illud me nuncupat, istud me ostendit: A Christian is my name, a Catholic my surname; that doth denominate me, this doth demonstrate me.  
FINIS.