THE copy OF A LETTER Sent from France by Mr. Walter Mountagu to his Father the Lord privy seal, with his answer thereunto.  
❧ Also a second answer to the same Letter by the Lord Faukland.  
Imprinted, 1641.   

My Lord,  
AFter much debate concerning the fittest expression of my duty to your Lordship, whether I ought by silence seek to suspend the belief of the declaration of myself, I have made here, or by a clear profession of it assure you of what I may only fear to present you with, as apprehensive of a misinterpreted affection, I concluded what was most satisfactory to my first, and immediate duty to God, was most justifiable to my second, and derivative to Nature, therefore I resolved so soon to give you this ingenuous account of myself; The greatest part of my life capable of distinction of Religions hath been employed in places and conversant with persons opposite to the faith I was bred in, therefore it had been strange if natural curiosity without any spiritual provocation had not invited me to the desire of looking with mine own eyes upon the foundation I stood upon, rather there holding fast blindfold by my education to agree to be carried away always after it insensible of all shocks I met to unfasten me, and besides I was solicited with the reproaches Protestants press upon Catholics, that they blindly believe all the impostures of the Church, without any illumination of their judgements; this methought enjoined the clearest information of myself of the differences between us I could propose to my capacity. So at my last journey into Italy, I did employ all my leisure to a more justifiable settlement of my belief, as I then imagined to a confirmation of my judgement, in what had been introduced by my birth and education; I began with this consideration, that there were two sorts of questions between the Catholics and Protestants, the one of right or doctrine, the other of fact or story; as this, whether Luther were the first erector of the Protestants Faith; whether it had a visible appearance of Pastors and Teachers before his time? I resolved to begin my enquiry with the matter of fact, for these Reasons; first because they were so few, and so comprehensible by all capacities; and the controversies of doctrine intricate, and so many, as they required much time, and learning for their disquisition only, and I found myself unprovided of both those Requisitions, for this undertaking: and for the decision of the other, I needed not much presumption to believe myself a competent Judge when it consisteth only in a perusal of authentic testimonies; Secondly, I considered that there was no one part of controverted Doctrine, whereon all the rest depended, but that this one question of fact was such as the decision of it determined all the rest; for if Luther could be proved to be the Innovator of the Protestants faith, it was necessarily evicted of not being the true, ancient, and apostolical Religion, therefore I began with this enquiry which Protestants are bound to make, to answer this Objection, to find out an existence of some Professors of the Reformed Doctrine before Luther's time; for finding the Catholics were not obliged to prove the Negative, it was my part to prove to myself the Affirmative, that our Religion was no Innovation by some Pre-existence before that, but in the perusal of all the Stories or Records ecclesiastical or civil, as I could choose, I could find no ancienter a dissension from the Roman Church, than Waldo, Wickliff, and huff, whose cause had relation to the now-professed protestancy, so as I could find an interval of about 800 years from the time that all Protestants confess an unity with the Church of Rome, down to those persons without any apparent profession of different faith: to answer myself in this point, I read many of our Protestant authors who treated of it, and I found most of them reply to this sense, in which I cite here one of the most authentic, Doctor Whitaker, in his controversy 2. 3.. pag. 479. Where they ask of us where our Church was heretofore for so many ages? We answer that it was in secret solitude, that is to say, it was concealed and lay hid from the sight of men; and further the same Doctor Chap. 4. pag. 502. Our Church always was, but you say it was not visible, doth that prove that it was not? No, for it lay in a solitary concealment To this direct sense all the answers were that ever I could meet with, to this objection, I repeat no more; those places being so positive to our point, this confession of Invisibility in our Church for so many ages did much perplex me, it seemed even to offend natural Reason, such a derogation from God's power or providence, as the sufferance of so great an eclipse of the light of this true Church, and such a Church as this is described to be, seeming to me repugnant to the main reason why God hath a Church upon earth, to be a conserver of the doctrine of Christ, and his precepts, and to convey it from age to age, until the end of the World: therefore I applied my study to peruse such Arguments as the Catholics brought for the proof of the necessity of a continual visibility of the true Church down from the Apostles time in all ages, and appearance of Doctors teaching and administering the Sacraments; in proof of this I found they brought many provisoes of Scripture, but this Text most literal of the fourth of the Ephesians: Christ hath placed in his Church Pastors and Doctors to the consummation of the Saints, till we meet in the unity of the faith: and next the discourse upon which they infer this necessary visible succession of the Church, seemed to me to be a most rational and convincing one, which is to this effect. Natural reason not being able to proportion to a man a course that might certainly bring him to a state of supernatural happiness, and that such a course being necessary to mankind, which otherwise would totally fail of the end it was created for, there remained no other way, but that it must be proposed unto us by one whose authority we could not doubt of, and that in so plain a manner, as even the simplest might be capable of it as well as the Learned. This work was performed by our Saviour, from whose mouth all our faith is originally derived. But this succeeding age not being able to receive it immediate from thence, it was necessary it should be conveyed unto them that lived in it by those that did receive it from Christ's own mouth, and so from age to age until the end of the World; and in what age soever this thread of doctrine should be broken, it must needs be acknowledged, for the reason above mentioned, that the light which should convey mankind through the darkness of this world was extinguished, and we left without a guide to inevitable ruin, which cannot stand with God's providence and goodness; which Saint Augustine affirms for his opinion directly in his book de vtil. cred. cap. 16. saying if divine providence does preside over our human affairs, it is not to be doubted but that there is some authority constituted by the same God upon which going as upon certain steps we are carried to God; Nor can it be said he meant the Scripture only by these steps, since experience shows us by the continual altercation about the right sense of several of the most important places of it, that what is contained there cannot be a competent rule to mankind, which consisteth more of simple then learned men; and besides the Scripture must have supposed to have been kept in some hands whose authority must beget our acceptance of them; which being no other than the Church of all ages, we have no more reason to believe that it hath preserved the Scripture free from all corruption then that it hath maintained itself in a continua●● 〈…〉 isibility which Saint Augustine concludeth to be a mark of the true Church in these words in his book contra Cecil. 104. The true Church hath this certain sign that it cannot be hid, therefore it must be known to all Nations, but that part of the Protestant Donatist is unknown to many, therefore cannot be the true; No inference can be stronger than from hence that the concealment of a Church disproves the truth of it; Lastly, not to insist upon the allegation of the sense of all the Fathers of the Church in several ages, which seemed to me most clear; that which in this cause weighed much with me was the Confession and Testimony of the approved Doctors themselves of the Protestant Church, as Hooker in his book of Eccles. Pol. pag. 126. God always had and must have some visible Church upon earth. And Doctor Field the first of Eccle. cap. 10. It cannot be but those that are the true Church must be known by the Profession, and further the same Doctor says how should the Church be in the World, and nobody profess openly the saving truth of God? And Doctor White in his defence of the way, cap. 4. pag. 790. The providence of God hath left monuments and stories for the confirmation of our Faith, and I confess truly that our Religion is false, if a continual descent of it cannot be demonstrated by these monuments down from Christ's time; this appeareth unto me a direct submission of themselves to produce those apparent testimonies of the public profession of their faith, as the Catholics demand, but this I could never read, nor know of any that performed; For D. White himself for want of proof of this, is fain to say in another place in his way to the Church p. 520. The Doctors of our faith have had a continual succession though not visible to the world, so that he flies from his undertaking of a conspicuous demonstration of the monuments of his faith to an invisible subterfuge, or a belief without appearance: for he saith in the same Book in an other place pag. 4. All the external government of the Church may fail so as a local and personal succession of Pastors may be interrupted, and pag. 40●. We do not contest for an external succession, it sufficeth ●hat they succeed in the Doctrine of the Apostles, and faithful who in all ages did embrace the same truth; so as here he removeth absolutely all external proofs of succession which before he consented to be guided by; I cannot say I have verbally cited these Authors, because I have translated these places, though the original be in English, yet I am sure their sense is no way injured, and I have chosen to allege Doctor White's authority, because he is an Orthodox professor of the Protestant Church; the reflection of the state of this question wherein I found the Protestants defend themselves only by flying out of sight, by confessing a long invisibility in their Church in appearance of Pastors and Doctors, left me much loosened from the fastness of my professed Religion, but had not yet transported me to the Catholic Church; for I had an opinion that our Divines might yet fill up this vacuity with some more substantial matter than I could meet with, so I came back into England, with a purpose of seeking nothing so intentively as this satisfaction, and to this purpose, I did covertly (under another man's name) send this my scruple to one in whose learning & sufficiency I had much affiance, in these terms, Whether there was no visible succession to be proved in the Protestant Church since the Apostles time down to Luther, and what was to be answered to that objection? Besides the confession of invisibility for so many ages; to this I could get no other answer, but that the point had been largely, and learnedly handled by Doctor White, and many others of our Church: upon this I resolved to inform myself in some other points which seemed to me unwarrantable and superstitious in the Ceremónies of the Church of Rome, since I had such an inducement, & so little satisfaction in a point which seemed to me so essential, and in all these scruples I found mine own mistake in the belief of the Tenets of the Roman Church gave me the only occasion of scandal, not the practice of their doctrine, and to confirm me in the satisfaction of all them, I found the practice and authority of most of the ancient Fathers, and in the Protestant Refutation of these Doctrines, the Recusation of their Authorities, as men that might err, so that the question seemed then to me whether I would rather hazard the erring with them, then with the later Reformers which consequently might err also in dissenting from them; since than my resolution of reconciling myself to the Roman Church is not liable to any suspicion of too forward or precipitate resignation of myself, my judgement may perchance be censured of seducement, my affection cannot be of corruption.  
Upon these Reasons I did soon after my return last into England, reconcile myself to the Roman Catholic Church, in the belief and convincement of it to be the true, ancient, and apostolical Church, by her external marks, and her internal objects of faith and doctrine, and in her I resolve to live and die, as the best way to salvation; when I was in England, I did not study dissimulation so dexterously as if my fortune had read it to me, nor do I now profess it so desperately as if it were my fortune's legacy, for I do not believe it so dangerous, but it may recover, for I know the King's wisdom is rightly informed that the Catholic Faith doth not tend to the alienation of the subject, it rather super-infuseth a reverence and obedience to monarchy, and strengtheneth the bands of our obedience to our natural Prince, and his grace and goodness shall never find any other occasion of diversion of them, from the natural and usual exercise of themselves upon those that have had the honour to have been bred with approbation of fidelity in his service, nor can I fear that your Lordship should apprehend any change in my duty, even your displeasure (which I may apprehend upon this misinterpreted occasion) shall never give me any of the least recession from my duty, in which profession I humbly ask your blessing as  
Your lordship's obedient son, W. Mountagu.   

The Answer.  
Walter,  
YOur Letter sent from Paris tells me how much debate you had with yourself, whether with silence to suspend my belief, or by a clear profession to assure me what you feared to present me; but what was most satisfactory to the first duty to GOD, that you thought most justifiable to your derivative duty to nature, therefore resolved to give me an ingenuous account of the declaration you had made then: had you asked my counsel, before you signified the resolution, it would have showed more duty in you, and bred less discontent in me; but think how welcome that Letter could be, that at once tells of the intention, and signifies the resolution.  
Say you could not expect from me so much theological Learning as to satisfy your scruples, yet it had been a fair address, of a son to a Father in a matter of that importance; nor are you ignorant of my care, I dare say knowledge studied, for the settlement of my children in that true faith which their father professed, and the Church of England hath established: Therefore it would have been your greater justification, and my less sorrow, so to have lost yourself with love, that I could not have held you in with religious reason. Happily you will return upon me the misconstruction of that speech, If any man come to me, and hate not his father, he cannot be my Disciple. But I must tell you that by this post-dated duty you have trespassed upon love's duty, for you have robbed me of the means of helping you with mine advice; which as it is the best part of a father's portion to give, so it is not the least testimony of filial duty to ask.  
Now to lay such a blemish upon all the cares of your former education, as not to think me worthy to see the aim, until you have set up your rest, is such a neglect that without overmuch fatherly candour cannot be forced into an excusable interpretation: It makes me suspect that some politic respects or private seducements, if not discontentments, have wrought upon you.  
Policy and Religion as they do well together, so do they as ill asunder, the one being too cunning to be good; the other being too simple to be safe: But upon policy to change Religion, there is no warrant for that, less for discontentments, or upon seducements.  
When I look upon your Letter, which you termed an ingenuous account of yourself, it seems to me not an account of your new professed Religion, but rather an exprobration of mine, and so of ours of the Church of England.  
Had I known the doubts before, I might have been an adviser, but objecting them after you had resolved, you call me up now to be a Disputer: although I be of his opinion, who thought that truth did oftentimes suffer by too much altercation, it being a common error amongst great Clerks, to contend more for victory, than for verity: yet since you have so punctually led me into it, though it be contrary to my first resolution of silence (else you had heard from me sooner) and finding that the Letter you sent me had a farther reach then to give me satisfaction, (else the copies of it would have not been divulged before I came to receive it, and uses made of it to my discomfort) I therefore thought myself tied to give you an answer, lest those of your new profession should think (as some of them say) that a new lapsorian, was more able by a few days discipline to oppose our Religion, than an old Father and long professor was able to defend it.  
Having this tie upon me, I hope, on the one side, our learned Divines will pardon me, if for my son's sake I dip my pen in their ink; and you on the other side will lay mine arguments more to heart, as proceeding from the bowels of a Father, then if they had been framed by the brains of a learned Divine.  
In this case also I have some advantage of other men, who though they might write more learnedly, yet cannot do it so feelingly: for mine interest is not only in the cause, but in the person, for whom I might give an account, if there be failing in my part to reduce him to truth: A person whose Letter I take into mine hands, as he did the urn of his son's ashes to shed over it veras lachrymas, as arguments of the truth, both which I hope shall persuade forceably, if there be any of that blood left in you that I gave you, It is true, affection is not to rule Religion: yet in this way nature may cooperate with grace.  
Your Letter says truly, the greatest part of your life capable of distinctions of Religions hath been in places, and conversant with persons opposite to the faith I bred you in, therefore you say, it had been strange if natural curiosity without any spiritual provocation had not invited you with desire of looking upon the foundation I trod on, rather than holding fast blindfold by your education to be always carried away after it.  
In your education, God knows my first care was to season you with true Religion, wherein from a boy you attained unto such knowledge as Spain will witness, (when you were but a youth) how strong a champion you were for the Protestant profession. The Court of France, nor yet all the Prince's Courts of Christendom (most of which you have visited) could never till now taint your faith, but always rendered you sound in the Religion which you carried with you hence.  
But now Italy hath turned you, because England hath discontented you.  
In the last journey into Italy, as you said, you applied all your leisure to confirm your judgement in the doctrine introduced by your education, which if you had done seriously, you could not so soon, nor would not at all, upon so weak motives, have let go your hold; for of all other their tenants the two you mentioned are the weakest, and have received clearest satisfaction: whereby it appears, that you were resolved to give up the cause, before you came at it; and what you would not hold blindfold, to give up blindfold which is worst.  
Could that be a motive to your desertion of our Church, as persuaded that Luther was the Father of our faith? yourself cannot forget, but how that we build our faith upon Christ, not upon Luther, upon the doctrine of the Scriptures, not upon the inventions of men; Could it be proved against us that Luther or any other man how gray-headed soever were the inventor of our faith, there needed no more to be said, we would contend no longer.  
But we renounce all men alike as inventors of Religion, or any part of it, but hold only the apostolical doctrine, of the ancient Primitive and Catholic Church, & presume not to coin any new Creed.  
Yet we are not unwilling to grant that Luther was one, but not the first of many that restored the purity of the doctrine, which had been long smothered by the papacy; our faith if you take in the whole is no other but what is exiconized in the Apostles Creed, included in the Scriptures: If you take it in a lower and straighter way, for so much of it as is opposed to the corruption of popery, you must remember that these points are neither the whole nor greatest points of faith, there are not any points of our faith, but we are able to show they had maintainers few or many in all ages since the Apostles time; and every of these ages, those substructures of Popery opposed, some by one man, some by an other.  
I wonder therefore to see you carried away with that common and trivial calumny, that Luther was the inventor of our faith; and why say you that for the interval of 800 years before there was no apparent profession of faith different from Rome? and this you collect by historical search of all the stories and Records ecclesiastical and civil.  
It seems Italy affords you no copies of our Writers, else might you see in them a list which they carry out through all these spaces, and show you, that most of our tenants have had the suffrage of the learned of Rome's side, and how many men in the decursion of time, from the ancientest of Fathers, have declared themselves, and some of them apparently, ye earnestly contended for the truth of our doctrine.  
And where you object that Waldo, Wickliff, & Hus, had scarce any relation to the professed protestancy, if you mean because we disclaim those horrid opinions which are put upon them (how true God knows) therein you say truly, Neither they to us, nor we to them have any relation: but in the main points of doctrine touching faith and opposition of the superstitions and usurpation of the papacy, we have a joint consent of all the best Writers, Historians, and Divines, of both sides, that they and we consent in one.  
It is strange therefore to say, that these and we had no relation to the Protestant profession, who for substance of Religion held as we do, their errors only we own not: and the consent of times do all agree, that the Waldenses flew out against their corruptions 400 years before Luther was borne, nay, saith Renerus, Quidam dicunt quòd secta illa duraverie à tempore Silvestri, alii quod à tempore Apostolorum, deriving their fundamental doctrine from the time of the Apostles: nor were they few, sed multiplicati super arenas maris; nor plebeians only, sed principum favore armati, As the Kings of Arragon, the Earls of Tholouse, and many more. So that, there are witnesses more than sufficient, that there were many who opposed themselves to the papacy in the Protestants tenants long before Luther. This is the first supposition failing, I will now let you see the mistakes in the subsequent passages, and open to you myself, hoping yet that I may draw you again to me.  
You as you conceive having showed a defect of visibility in our Church till Luther's time, labour to prove a necessity of visibility to every true Church: if it were granted that it were simply necessary to the essentiating of a Church to be able to demonstrate in all times, both the visible number of professors of the truth, as also a visible succession of Pastors, we are able to demonstrate both these for our defence to be as unquestionable in our Church as in the Church of Rome: they that are otherwise minded will account this a bold undertaking, but it is no hard matter to do: Wherefore the vanity of that question, to ask, where our Church was before Luther, becomes not any man that hath read any thing of our Church monuments.  
But you would seem to me to prove it two ways; first, by the testimony of our own Divines; Secondly, by argument.  
By testimonies of our Divines you would have Doctor Field, Doctor White, and Master Hooks, to confess needfulness of visibility: and yet for their own Church fly to latency.  
For the second you instance Doctor Whitaker, and Doctor White, one of them, to confess our Church for many ages to have been in a secret solitude; and the other to let go his defence of visible succession by flying to an invisible subterfuge of non-apparency: if you had better perused the truth of those Writers, they would have given you full satisfaction, but you mistake both the persons and the points.  
These made a demonstration of those 3 points: First, that neither the church's obscurity is repugnant to the visibility of it: Secondly, nor the visibility of it such as excludes all latency: Nor yet the latency of Orthodox Christians in the swaying time of Popery, such as had not requisite lineaments of an accountable visibility.  
But you must know that visibility doth not always carry the same height, but admits of degrees, so that we cannot say, that that wants visibility which hath it in a lower degree. The Sun compared with itself is in a degree visible, though in a mist, yet not so clearly visible as when it shines out: so it is with the state of the Church, because her splendour is not in termino, but such as receives degrees by augmentation or diminution; like as the Sun is as truly visible under a cloud as in his brightness, though not so clearly visible; though not to admit the Church to be visible, except she be glorious, is an error; for there's a variation of the church's visibility in respect of her object: the want of which consideration, I believe is one cause why so many deceive themselves in this point. secondly, there is another diversity, which ariseth from the visible object, some may see and will not, there the fault is not in the object, but in the beholders. Philosophers say, Visibilia non sunt minus visibilia cum non videntur, quam quando videntur, The objects of sight remain still discernible, when they are not discerned: so it is with the Church, there are strictures of visibility discernible in her obscure condition, but it is possibile non visum, which falls out when men will not open their eyes, or they shut them on purpose, which happened in the prevailing times of popery, when this notwithstanding, yet there were lights which appeared by the defence of the truth, and the discovery of error, in every age of the interval.  
But sure our men labour in vain to demonstrate that visibility, whilst they of the papacy are so disaffected, as not to acknowledge it upon any terms, otherwise this controversy had long since been ended, if they had been as well disposed to see, as we ready to show our visibility: in this question men are to consider that there is a double splendour of the Church, which makes way for the visibility of it.  
The proper splendour of a Church consists in purity of doctrine.  
The common splendour of a Church consists in the outward accommodations which appertain not to the being, but the well being of the Church, as temporal peace, multitude of professors, local succession of Pastors; yet persecution may interrupt this succession of Pastors, it may cut off the multitude of professors, heresy may so far prevail as to make the Orthodox Church pull in her head, witness the time of Arianism, when few but godly Athanasius, and some with him were fain to keep in corners, and of this our Divines are to be understood when they speak of our latency, that for this outward splendour it suffered a great obscurity, for divers hundred years, yet when it was at the lowest, the doctrine was visible, and some professors still in the eye of the World, I would wish you well to consider the things which I shall tell you.  
The state of the Church is so ordered by our great Master Christ, that she is to expect her times of obscurity, as well as her times of splendour, he hath made her estate militant, and appointed her to a passive condition, as well as an active: designed her to vicissitudes of obscurity, as well as luster, and shows her no less glorious in her obscurity then in her triumph, as Tertullian saith of virtue. 
Extruitur duritia: destruitur mollitia.   
2 This visibility represented by an innumerous multitude, local Succession, Secular estate, these were not considered in the first times, when the Church stood sound, nor in the later times, when she got some recovery, only in the intermediate, when she lay under the cross; and were these the probates of Faith, it had been ill with the Israelites Church in the time of Elias, worse with the apostolical Church, when the Scribes and Pharisees sat in Moses chair, worst in the time of Arianism, and in times of Antichristianism, which shall come as most Writers say.  
3 This glorious succession which Rome so much brags of is a deceitful medium whereby to measure the truth of a Church, because a Church may be a true Church without it: and be also a false Church with it.  
Non colligitur ibi necessariò esse Ecclesiam ubi est successio, saith Bellarmine, though Stapleton be of another mind: Alexandria challengeth succession, as well as Rome, the Church of Constantinople takes her pedigree from Saint Andrew the Apostle, and brings it down to our times.  
A false Church may have succession, and a true Church may want it, otherwise you will grant that Rome is no true Church: the Church of Rome hath sometimes lain empty; sometimes it hath carried double, and both of them have been deposed, these broken links mar the chain of that succession. But because this rather concerns the persons not the thing, It is otherwise to be clearly showed, that it may be a true Church that hath not this uninterrupted succession: for else no Church at all could be true in her first plantation. For successions are by descent, descents have no place in first originals, whereas the orthodox faith doth the very first day put her in possession of Apostolical succession, as Tertullian well saith, That Churches which have not their original descent from the Apostles are apostolical, propter consanguinitatem doctrinae.  
The place which you cite out of the fourth to the Ephesians proves clearly the necessity of orthodox Pastors, not of local Succession, you may hereby see how in the informing of yourself in this particular you are overtaken; this thing also much troubles me, that your Letters said, that when you last came back out of Italy, you sought nothing so attentively as satisfaction in these points of controversy, especially that touching the visibility of our Church in all ages, but could receive none.  
Could you never in all the while of your last being in England find the time to acquaint me with your desire? doubtless, I must say, you did in this time study the dissimulation of your intention, otherwise I must have known it.  
I was heretofore more indulgent towards you, for God knows it Walter, the son of my body was never so dear unto me, as the salvation of my son Welter's soul, your younger years can witness how I showed you the way which I myself took to settle mine own salvation: for though it was my happiness to be derived from virtuous and religious parents; yet I took not my Religion merely by descent, but studied and examined the ground on which I was to found my faith; I read both Papists and Protestants, I found both confident, and contradictory.  
Et quoties palpitavit mihi tremulum cor, before I settled either way? sometimes thinking safest to mean well, and to keep unsettled either way, yet I saw a necessity laid on me, to be one of the two Churches, but how to find out which of them was the true Church, whereof I must be a member if I would secure my salvation, hic labour hoc opus est: I easily resolved there was not two Churches whereof a man might choose which to be of, and after long study I found clearly that to be the true Church, which constantly held the common faith, which faith had the Scripture for the rule, this known and resolved, which is undoubted, than I was not scared with that fearful censure of the Roman Church, which pronounced all damned that are not of that Church.  
But how much am I distasted to find several arguments made in the Letter, all to insinuate that the Scriptures are not a competent rule of faith? and first, variety of interpretation, secondly, obscurity of some places, thirdly, inauthentiquences of themselves, fourthly, their authority dependent on the Church, fiftly, the purity of them warranted by the visibility of the Church, sixthly, made authentic by the church's authority: strange assertions, as if the true Church were not to be tried by the true faith, but the true faith by the Church. I know myself bound to believe the authority of that Church which makes Scripture the rule of faith; but as for the act of any Church, though it be a fit Ministry to show me the way, yet it is not of authority sufficient of itself to secure me of my salvation; from true faith the true Church is inferred, and which is the true Church when all is done must be tried by the Scripture: but it is now with us, as it was in the time of Chrysostom, when there was so much question, which was the true Church, and men were of so many different opinions about it as none could tell what Church to be of, or what Religion was safest to trust to, so saith the Father of the Scriptures, which in matters of faith necessary to salvation speak so truly, so fully, so plainly, as it is but a shift for a man to say, he understands them not; and good Saint Austin finding that from controversies in Religion, there came no other fruit, but indeterminata luctatio, said with sorrow, Why do we strive about our father's Will? Nos fuimus fratres, and our Father is not dead intestate, but hath left his Will and Testament in writing: let it be followed and all controversies will soon be ended. Flatter not yourself Walter, the Remonstrance you make shows that the resignation you made of yourself to the church of Rome was precipitate, than the resolution to live and die there desperate, yet you give some hopes when you say, nor do you now so desperately profess, as if it were your fortune's legacy, for you do not believe it so dangerous but it may recover.  
The King's benignity and goodness is always to interpret the best, but know that his majesty hath a better opinion of those who are bred such, then of those who become such by relapse; nor am I willing to apprehend any change of your duty, yet take this for a caveat, that commonly all changes follow change of faith. I never traveled of you till now, and it is with a great deal of pain, I thought you should have wept over me, when Nature had called for her due, but you have prevented me, And yet my son you may yet return to me, but I shall never go to you in this way, nor had I ever gone so far into this question, but to fetch you again my son otherwise a lost child.  
Thus as your Letter began so do I end, after much debate concerning a fit expression of myself, whether was better by not writing to show my dislike, or by long writing to labour your recovery; this last was most satisfactory to my conscience, though the other more agreeable to nature displeased; I have therefore resolved as you see to give you this answer, and I pray God that he may bless you and me so in it, that my pen may have the fruit my heart wishes.  
Your Loving Father, Manchester.   

My Lord Faulkland's Answer.  
A Letter of Master Mountagu, justifying his change of Religion, being dispersed in many copies, I was desired to give my opinion of the Reasons, and my reason if I misliked them; having read and considered it, I was brought to be persuaded, First, because having been sometimes in some degrees moved with the same inducements, I thought that what satisfied me might possibly have the same effect upon him: Secondly, because I being a Layman, a youngman, and an ignorant man, I thought a little reason might in likelihood work more from my pen, then more from theirs, whose profession, age, and studies might make him suspect that it is they are too hard for him, and not their cause for his: Thirdly, because I was very desirous to do him service, not only as a man, and a Christian, but as one whom all that know him inwardly esteem of great parts (and I am desirous somewhat to make up my great want of them by my respects to those that have them) and as an impartial seeker of Truth which I trust he is, and I profess myself to be; and so much for the cause of this paper: I come now to that which it opposeth.  
First then, whereas he defends his search, I suppose he is rather for that to receive praise, then to make apologies, all men having cause to suspect that gold which were given with this condition, that the Receiver should not try it by any touchstone.  
Secondly, he saith, that there being two sorts of questions, the one of right or doctrine, the other of fact or story, as whether the Protestants faith had a visible appearance before Luther, he resolved to begin his enquiry with the matter of fact, as being sooner to be found (because but one) & easier to be comprehended: to this I answer by saying, that if they would not appeal from the right tribunal, or rather rule, which is the Scripture, those many might easier be ended then this one (we building our faith only upon plain places, and all reasonable men being sufficient judges of what is plain) but if they appeal to a consent of Fathers, or counsels, whereof many are lost, many, not lost, not to be gotten, many uncertain whether Fathers or no Fathers, and those which we have being too many for almost any industry to read over, and absolutely for any memory to remember, which yet is necessary (because any one clause of any one Father destroys a consent) and being besides liable to all the exceptions which can be brought against the Scriptures being the rule, as difficulty, want of an infallible interpreter, and such like, and being denied to have any infallibility (especially when they speak as witnesses, which a consent of them never doth against us) by one party, which the Scripture is allowed to have by both, than I wonder not if he think such a way so uncertain, and so long, that he was willing to choose any shorter cut rather then travel it. Neither do I believe this to be so short, or so concluding as he imagines, for if he consider the large extent of Christian Religion, so that we know little from any indifferent Relator of the opinions of the Abyssines, so great a part of Christendom, if he consider the great industry of his church in extinguishing those whom they have called heretics, and also their Books, so that we know scarce any thing of any of them but from themselves (who are too partial to make good Historians) if he consider how carefully they stop men's mouths (even those of their own) with their Indices Expurgatorii, it will then appear to him both a long work to seek, and a hard one to find, whether any thought like Luther in all ages, and that he concludes very rashly who resolves there was none because he cannot find any, since they might have been visible in their time, & yet not so to us (for men are not the less visible when they are so, for not being after remembered) as a man may be a Gentleman, though he know not his pedidigree: so that as I will not affirm that there were always such, because I cannot prove it, so neither ought they to make themselves sure there were none without they could prove that which is impossible, and therefore no argument can be drawn from thence: and if it could be proved that such a noways erring church must at all times be, I had rather believe that there were still such, though we know them not, which may be true, then that theirs is it, which in my opinion cannot.  
Thirdly, He says, he could find no one point of controverted doctrine, whereupon all the rest depended, but that this one question of fact was such as the decision of it determined all the rest. To this I answer, that the question of the infallibility of the Pope, at least of those who adhere to him, which they call the church is such a one as if determined must determine all the rest, and not only so to us but to all men; whereas this (though granted necessary, & determined to his wish) would indeed conclude against us, but not for them, since the Greek Church would put in as good plea upon the title of visibility as that of Rome, and he would be to begin anew with them, when he had ended with us.  
Fourthly, He gives his reason. If Luther could be evicted to be the Innovator, his Religion was then evicted of not being the true Ancient and apostolical; To this I answer, by confessing the consequence, but he might be the Renovator, and not the Innovator, and then no such consequence follows.  
Fifthly, He saith, we are bound to find an existence of some Professors of the Reformed Religion before Luther, which requiry is grounded upon his supposition of the necessity of a continual succession of a visible and no ways erroneous Church. Now I will first examine the sense of his terms: By the first I conceive by a place he citys out of Saint Augustine, that he means visible to all Nations, but I pray hath his been always so, I mean (at least for many Centuries) to those Nations which Columbus hath not long since discovered? By the second term Church, I suppose he means a company of Christians holding neither more or less than Christ taught (for in a more large sense no man denies the Church to have been always in some degrees visible) and in this sense I not only deny it necessary, that it should always be visible, but that it should always be, for I doubt whether there be, or for a long while have been any such. Next that such a one as he means appears, because when catalogues have been brought of some who in all ages have differed from them in things which we hold, his side would not accept of them, because they agreed not with us in all things, & yet when Campian intends to prove all the Fathers to be his, he useth only this course of instancing in some wherein they agree with him (though sometimes not so much, but rather the contrary aught to be inferred, as in the instance of Polycarpus, for comparing his words with the History it will appear that he concluded him a Papist for not being persuaded by the Pope) though they differed from them in many other, as indeed all the notable Fathers do in more than one point. I will therefore say, that if this be required to showing that a Church hath been ever visible, it is more than either part can do, and therefore I hope they will come upon better consideration, to confess that not necessary for us to do, which is impossible for themselves: For let any man look into antiquity, I will not say without all prejudice, but without an absolute Resolution of seeing nothing in it that contradicts his present belief, and if he find not some opinions of the Church of Rome, as unknown to Antiquity, as either he or I, as the Pope's Indulgenges having power to deliver out of Purgatory (Confessed by Bishop Fisher, and Alphonsus de Castro, where they treat of Indulgences) if he find not others at first unknown after known, but not held de fide, which are yet so at Rome, as prayer to Saints, their enjoying the beatifical vision before the day of judgement, the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin, and her being free from all actual sin; If he find not some wholly unknown & absolutely condemned which we condemn, as the lawfulness of picturing of God the Father, whereof the first is confessed by Baronius in the margin, to an Epistle of a Pope, which says the same, and the latter is to be found in 
Tom. 9 An 72. De fide & 〈◊〉. 2. lib. 2. c.  many places of Saint Austin, Lactantius, and others; nay, if he find not that all the Doctors, Saints, and Martyrs of the two first ages (I mean as many as are now extant, and speak of it) held something which both parties condemned, as the opinion of the Chiliasts, if I say he find not this, or I show him not that he might have found it, I profess I will be ready to spend my life for the Church against which I now employ my pen: So that this will be the end, neither of our Churches have been always visible, only this is the difference, that we are troubled to show our Church in the latter and more corrupt ages, and they theirs in the first and purest, that we can least find ours at night, and they theirs at noon: And whereas he expects that D. White should stand to this to confess his Religion false if a continual descent of it could not be demonstrated, if he himself please to grant as much as he exacts, if he but continue in this Resolution, and in this search, I doubt no more but that he will soon leave to be a Papist, than I should doubt if I saw him now receiving the Communion in the King's chapel, that he had done it already.  
Sixthly, his reason for the necessity of the visibility follows, because the contrary were a derogation from God's power or providence, I answer, to say he could not keep the truth exactly in men's belief, were to derogate from God's power, to say he had not given sufficient means to find the truth, and yet damned men for error, the first would be a derogation from his providence, the second from his Justice, but to say he suffers men to err who neglect the means of not erring, and that he damns none for a mere error, in which the will hath no part, and consequently the man no fault, derogates from none of the three, but says he, this is repugnant to the main reason why God hath a Church upon earth to be the conserver of the doctrine of Christ, and to convey it from age to age, I answer to conserve it is every man's duty, but such as they may all fail in, and is indeed rather the form of the Church than the end of the Church, an exact conservation making an exact Church, as a less perfect conserving a less perfect Church. As for conveyance of doctrine, the whole Church conveys none, whereof many (if his be it) have had but little conveyed to them. Particular Christians (especially Pastors) teach others which it is every man's duty to do when he meets with them who want instruction which he can give, and they are likely to receive, yet is not the instruction of others every man's main end. But I know Master Montague persuades himself that some body of men are appointed to convey this doctrine which men are to receive, only because they deliver it, and this I absolutely deny, for we receive no doctrine from the Church upon the church's authority, because we know her not to be the Church, till we have examined her doctrine, and so receive rather her for it, than it for her. Neither for the conveyance of the Truth is it necessary that any company of men in all times hold it all, because some may convey some truths, and others other, out of which by comparing their doctrine with the Scripture, men may draw a perfect body of Truths: and though they delivered few other Truths, yet in delivering Scripture (wherein all necessary Truths is contained) they deliver all, and by that rule whosoever regulates his life and doctrine, I am confident that though he may mistake error for Truth in the way, he shall never mistake Hell for Heaven in the end.  
Seventhly, His next reason is their common Achilles, the fourth of the Ephesians, which he chooseth only to employ like his Triarios, his main battle, leaving his Velites, his light armed soldiers, some places too allegorical, even in his own opinion, to stand examination. The words are these. He hath given some Prophets, some Apostles, some Evangelists, some Pastors, and some Doctors, for the instauration of the Saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edification of the body of Christ, till we all meet in the unity of Faith, and the knowledge of the son of God unto a perfect man, and unto the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ, That we may be no more children tossed and carried away with every wind of doctrine, &c. Verse 11, 12, 13. Now out of this place I see not how a succession may be evinced, rather I think it may that the Apostle meant none: For first, he saith, not he will give, but he hath given, and who could suppose that the Apostle could say that Christ had given then the present Pope, and the Doctors who now adhere to him; Secondly, allow that by he hath given, were meant, he hath promised (which would be a gloss not much unlike to that which one of the most witty and most eloquent of our modern Divines Doctor Dun notes of Statuimus i. Abrogamus) yet since these several nouns are all governed by the same Verb, and no distinction put, it would prove as well a necessity of a continual succession of Apostles, Prophets and Evangelists, as of Pastors, and Doctors, which is more then either they can show or pretend they can, so that it seemeth to me to follow that these were then given to do this, till then, and not a succession of them promised till then, to do this; and so we receiving and retaining the Scriptures, wherein what they taught is contained (as we would any thing else, that had as general and ancient a tradition if there were any such) need no more, for if he say that men are tossed for all the Scriptures, I answer so are they for all these Doctors, nay, if these keep any from being tossed, it is the Scripture which does it, upon which their authority is by them founded upon their own interpretation, and reason, who yet will not give us leave to build any thing upon ours out of plainer places, and though they tell us that we cannot know the Scripture, but from the Church, they are yet fain (as appears) to prove the authority of the Church out of Scripture, which makes me ask them in the words of their own Campian, and with much more cause, Nihilne pudet Labyrinthi?  
Eigthly, there follows an other reason to this sense, that Reason not being able to show away to eternal happiness, and without such an one man would fail of the end to which he was ordained, it must be proposed by an infallible authority, in so plain a manner as even the simple might be capable of it, which being performed by our Saviour, it must be conveyed to succeeding ages by those who heard it from him, and whensoever this thread failed mankind was left without a guide to inevitable ruin; I answer, that though all this be granted, it proves not against us, for we have the Scripture come down to us relating Christ's Doctrine, and written by those that heard it, and which the simple are capable of understanding (I mean as much as is plain, and more is not necessary, since other Questions may as well be suffered without harm as those between the Jesuits and Dominicans about Predetermination, and between the Dominicans, and almost all the rest about the Immacultate conception) and those who are not neither are they capable out of Scripture to discern the true Church; Much less by any of these notes, which require much understanding and large learning, as conformity with the Ancients, and such like.  
Ninthly, the same answer I give to this serves also to the following words of Saint Austin, for whereas Master Montague concludeth, that he could not mean the Scriptures as a competent rule to mankind, which consisteth most of simple persons, because there hath been continual altercations about the sense of important places, I answer that I may as well conclude by the same logic, that neither is the Church a competent guide, because in all ages there have also been disputes, not only about her authority but even which was she, and to whatsoever reason he imputes this, to the same may we the other, as to negligence, pride, prejudication and the like; and if he please to search, I verily believe he will find that the Scriptures are both easier to be known then the Church, and that it is as easy to know what these teach as when that hath defined, since they hold no Decrees binding de fide without a confirmation of the popes, who can never be known infallibly to be a Pope, because a secret simony makes him none, no not to be a Christian, because want of due intention in the Baptizer makes him none, whereof the latter is always possible, and the first in some ages likely, and in hard Questions, a readiness to yield to the Scriptures when they shall be explained methinks should serve, as well as a readiness to assent to the decrees of the Church when those shall be pronounced.  
Tenthly, he saith the Scripture must be kept safe in some hands, whose authority must beget our acceptance of them, which being no other than the Church of all ages, we have no more reason to believe that it hath preserved that free from corruption then its self in a continual visibility: I answer that neither to giving authority to Scripture nor to the keeping of them is required a continual visibility of a no ways erring body of Christians, the writers of them give them their authority amongst Christians, nor can the Church move any other, and that they were the writers of them, we receive from the general Tradition, and testimony of the first Christians, not from any following Church, who could know nothing of it but from them (for for those parts which were then doubted of by such as were not condemned for it by the rest why may not we remain in the same suspense of them that they did) & for their being kept and conveyed this was not done only by their Church, but by the Greeks, and there is no reason to say that to the keeping, and transmitting of Records safely it is required to understand them perfectly, since the old Testament was kept & transmitted by the Jews, who yet were so capable of erring, that out of it they looked for a temporal King, when it spoke of a spiritual: & methinks the testimony is greater of a church that contradicts the Scripture than which doth not, since no man's witnessing is so soon to be taken as when against himself, and so their testimony is greater of a Church that contradicts the Scripture by which themselves are condemned: Besides the general reverence which ever hath been given to the Books, & the continual use of them (together with several parties having always their eyes upon each other ready and desirous to have somewhat to accuse in their Adversaries) gives us greater certainty that these are the same writings, than we have that any other ancient Book is any other ancient Authors, and we need not to have any other unerring company preserved to make us surer of it: yet the Church of Rome as infallible a depositary as she is, hath suffered some varieties to creep into the Copies in some less material things, nay and some whole Books (as they themselves say) to be lost, and if they say how then can that be the rule whereof part is lost, I answer, that we are excused if we walk by all the rule that we have, and this makes much against Traditions being the rule, since the Church hath not looked better to God's unwritten word then to his written, and if she pretend she hath, let her tell us the cause why Antichrists coming was deferred, which was a Tradition of St. Paul to the Thessalonians, and which without impudence she cannot pretend not to have lost, and if again they say God hath preserved all necessary Traditions, I reply so hath he all necessary Scripture, for by not being preserved it became to us not necessary, since we cannot be bound to believe and follow what we cannot find. But besides, I believe that all which was ever necessary is contained in what remains, for Pappias says of S. Mark, that he writ all that S. Peter preached, as Iraeneus doth that Luke writ all that S. Paul preached, nay Vincentius Lirinensis though he would have the Scripture expounded by ancient Tradition, yet confesseth that all is there that is necessary (and yet then there was no more Scripture than we now have) as indeed by such a Tradition as he speaks of no more can be proved then is plainly there, and almost all Christians confent in, and truly I wonder that they should brag so much of that Author, since both in this and other things he makes much against them, especially in not sending men to the present Roman Church, a much readier way (if he had known it) than such a long and doubtful one as he prescribes, which indeed it is impossible that almost any question should be ended by.  
Eleventhly, He brings S. Austin's authority to prove, that the true Church must be always visible; but if he understood Church in Master Mountagu's sense, I think he was deceived. Neither is this impudence for me to say, since I have cause to think it but his particular opinion, by his saying (which Card. Perr. quotes) that before the Donatists the question of the Church had never been exactly disputed of, and by this being one of his main grounds against them, and yet claiming no Tradition, but only places of Scripture most of them allegorical, and if it were no more, than I may better dissent from it, than he from all the first Fathers, (for Dionysius Areopagita was not as yet hatched) in the point of the Chiliasts, though some of them (Pappias and Iraeneus) claimed a direct Tradition, and Christ's own words. Secondly, as he useth this kind of liberty, so he professeth it in his 19 Epistle, where he saith, that to canonical Scriptures he had only learned to give that reverence, as not to doubt of what they said, because they said it, and from all others he expected proof from Scriptures, or reason. Thirdly, the Church of Rome condemns several opinions of him, and therefore she ought not to find fault with them who imitate her examples.  
Twelfthly, He adds two reasons more, the consent of the Fathers of all ages, and the confession of Protestants: To the first I answer, that I know not of any such, and am the more unapt to believe it, because M. Montague vouchsafes not to insist upon it, nor to quote any, which I guess he would have done, but that he misdoubted their strength. Secondly, suppose that all the Fathers which speak of this did say so, yet if they say it, as private Doctors, and claim no Tradition for it, I know not why they should weigh more than so many of the now-learned, who having more help from Art, and no fewer from Nature, are not worse searchers into what is truth, though less capable of being witnesses to what was tradition. Thirdly, they themselves often profess they expect not to be read as Judges, but as to be judged, by their and our rule, the canonical Scriptures. Fourthly, Let him please to read about the immaculate conception Posa, Salmeron, & Wadding, and he will find me as submissive to antiquity, even whilst I reject it, as those of his own Party, for they to prefer new opinions before old, are fain to prefer new Doctors before old, and to confess the latter more perspicacious, and to differ from those of former times, with as little scruple as he would from Calvin (whom Maldonat on purpose to oppose confesseth he chooseth a new Interpretation before that of all 
In 6 cap. Ioh.  the Ancients, which no witness but my eyes could have made me believe) nay, and produce other points wherein their Church hath decreed against the Fathers, to persuade her to do so again, although Campian with an eloquent brag would persuade us that they are all as much for him as Greg. the 13, who was then Pope. To the second I answer, that infallibility is not by us denied to the Church of Rome, with an intention of allowing it to particular Protestants, how wise and learned soever.  
Thirteenthly, he says next, that he after informed himself in other points which seemed to him unwarrantable, and superstitious, and found only his own mistakes gave him occasion of scandal; to this I answer that I cannot well answer any thing, unless he had specified the points, but I can say that there are many, as picturing God the Father (which is generally thought lawful, and as generally practised) their offerings to the Virgin Mary (which only differs from the heresy of the Colliridians in that a candle is not a cake) their praying to Saints, and believing de fide that they hear us, though no-way made certain that they do so, and many more which without any mistake of his might have given him occasion to be still scandalised; for whereas he saith that these points were grounded upon the authority of the ancient Fathers, which was refused as insufficient by Protestants, I answer, that none of these I name have any ground in the Ancientest, nay, the first is by them disallowed, and if any other superstition of theirs have from them any ground, yet they who depart from so many of the Ancients in several opinions cannot by any reason be excused for retaining any error, because therein they have consent, nor have the Protestants cause to receive it from them, as a sufficient apology, neither hath he to follow the Fathers rather than Protestants, in a case in which not the persons, but the reasons were to be considered: For when Saint Jerome was by this way both brought into, and held in a strange error, though he spoke something like Master Montague's patiaris me errare cum talibus, suffer me to err with such men, yet he could not obtain Saint Augustine's leave, who would not suffer him, but answered their reasons, and neglected their authorities.  
Fourteenthly, he speaks of his Religion super-infusing loyalty, and if he had only said it destroyed, or weakened it not, I (who wish that no doubt of his allegiance may once enter his mind to whom we all owe it, but profess myself his humble servant, and no ways his enemy though his adversary) would then have made no answer, but since he speaks as if Popery were the way to obedience, I cannot but say, that though no tenet of their whole Church (which I know) makes at all against it, yet there are prevailing opinions of that side, which are not fit to make good subjects, when their King and they are of different persuasions. For besides that Cardinal D'Ossat (an Author which I know Master Montague hath read, because whosoever hath but considered state matters must be as well skilled in him as any Priest in his Breviary) tells us that it is the Spaniards maxim, that faith is not to be kept with heretics, and more that the Pope intimated as much in a discourse intended to persuade the King of France to forsake the Queen of England, he says moreover speaking in an other place about the Marquizat of Saluces, that they hold at Rome that the Pope to avoid a probable danger of the increasing of heresy may take away a territory from the true owner and dispose of it to an other, and many also defend that he hath power to depose a heretical Prince, and of heresy he makes himself the Judge: so that though I had rather my tongue should cleave to the roof of my mouth, then that I should deny that a Papist may be a good Subject, even to a King whom he counts a heretic, since I verily believe that I myself know very many very good, yet Popery is like to an ill air, wherein though many keep their healths, yet many are infected (so that at most they are good subjects but during the Pope's pleasure) and the rest are in more danger than if they were out of it.  
To conclude, I believe that what I have said may at least serve (if he will descend to consider it) to move Master Moungue to a further search, and for Memorandums in it, which if he do, he will be soon able to give as much better reasons for my conclusion (that such a visible Church neither need, nor can be showed) as his understanding is degrees above mine. I hope also by comparing the body of their belief, and the ground of their authority, that little that can be drawn out of the fourth of the Ephesians, with the Myriads of contradiction in Transubstantion, he will come to see that their pillars are too weak to hold up any building be it never so light, and their building is too heavy to be held up by any pillars be they never so strong, and trust he will return to us whom he will then find that he hath causesly left, if he be (which I doubt not) so ingenuous, as not to hold an opinion, because he turned to it, nor to stay, only because he went.   

Errata.  
Pag. 30. line ult. for, is greater of &c. read, is more receivable which is given to the Scripture  
FINIS.