A LOST SHEEP RETURNED HOME: OR, THE MOTIVES OF THE Conversion to the Catholic Faith, OF THOMAS VANE, Doctor of Divinity, and lately Chaplain to His Majesty the King of England, etc.  
The third Edition, with Additions.  PSAL. 118.176. 
I have gone astray like a sheep that is lost; seek thy servant, for I do not forget thy commandments.  S. Aug. Solil. cap. 33. 
Gratias tibi ago illuminator & liberator meus, quoniam illuminâsti me, & cognovi te. Serò cognovi te veritas antiqua, serò te cognovi veritas aeterna.  
PRINTED AT PARIS.  
M.DC.XLVIII.   

TO THE MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY OF HENRIETTE MARIE, QUEEN OF ENGLAND, etc.  
MADAM,  
To be a nursing Mother to the Church, is the dignity and duty of a QUEEN; to which attribute seeing you have a right, as well by your virtue as your honour, I am emboldened to prostrate myself, with this small Treatise, at your Royal feet. It hath pleased God out of his infinite, and by me, never-to-be-forgotten mercy, to call me to the Communion of the Catholic Church; for which I have also been called to account, and that in your Majesty's family; which hath moved me (with other considerations) as to publish this my defence, so to crave your Majesty's Patronage both of it & me. Never did persecution against Catholics in England rage as now it doth; where like Herod, who as soon as Christ was borne, sent forth men to destroy him; So they, as soon as one is made a Catholic, or known to be so, seek his destruction. And as Herod because he would be sure (as he thought) to destroy Christ, destroyed all the Children that were about his age; So do they pursue the legal Protestants, as having a little resemblance with Catholics, that so they may (as they hope) sponge out all the remains and memory of the Catholic religion.  
And as God sent our Saviour into the world, and subjected him to all humane infirmities (except sin) like unto us, that he might be merciful; So hath he humbled your Majesty, even to a lower descent of suffering (considering your exaltation, from whence it must take its measure) than any other, who like an invaluable Diamond, were made to be firmly set in the most precious esteem of mankind; but by the unrelenting malice of monsters have been brought to extreme degrees of calamity: whose excellence as it is endeared to us all by your sufferings; so our sufferings (your heart being the more intendred by the sense of your own) we hope, shall render your Majesty the more propitious to us; who suffer not only as good subjects to the King, but to God also in the Catholic religion. Your gracious soul hath more antidote in it, than all the world hath poison; which will therefore in your affliction make you like the Sun, which shows his greatest countenance in his lowest declension; and bring you out of it, like gold out of the fire, refined, not consumed; which when it doth, as the good thief did our Saviour on the Cross; So we beseech you Madam, remember us when you come into your Kingdom. In the mean time, we will remember you in our prayers; That your fortune may surmount your greatness, and your virtue your fortune; That your greatness may be above envy, your goodness above detraction; That your illustrious example may darken the ages past, and lighten them to come; that you may live beloved and die lamented; lamented by earth, but joyed by heaven; of which you shall be a part as well as a partaker, in giving the happiness of your presence, and receive as a reward of all your sufferings a never fading Diadem of glory: So prays,  
MADAM, Your Majesty's Most humble, most loyal, and most devoted servant, THO. VANE.   

APPROBATIO DOCTORUM.  
NOS infra scripti in Sacra Facultate Parisiensi Doctores Theologi, obtentâ veniâ, libellum Anglicum, cui titulus est, A lost sheep returned home, or, The motives of the conversion to the Catholic faith of Thomas Vane, Doctor of Divinity and lately Chaplain to the King of England: id est, Ovis perditae ad ovile reditus, seu, Motiva conversionis ad Fidem Catholicam Thomae Vani, S. Theologiae Doctoris, & Serenissimo Magnae Britaniae Regi nuper à Sacello, perlegimus & examinavimus: In quo orthodoxa sunt omnia, Christianae scilicet veritati ac pietati consona, immo sicut argumentis fidei haud parum attulisse luminis testamur, ita & errantibus à fide non minus allaturum utilitatis speramus. Authorem, aliunde celebrem & magni nominis, denotat verè Doctum. Qui re plenè cognitâ, omnia ut stercus arbitratus demisit, quo sibi aliisque Christum lucrifaceret. Nec credere fas est latitare diu praeclarum hoc (pusillum licèt) opusculum; exui etenim auguramur peregrino & ignoto quo jam cernitur habitu; & communem reddi tum Gallico tum Latino vestitum sermone. Ita censemus.  
Parisiis 3. Aprilis 1645. 

H. HOLDEN.  
I. CALLAGHAN.     

The same in English.  
WE whose names are under-written, Doctors of Divinity, of the Faculty of Paris, having obtained leave, have read and examined an English book bearing this title, A LOST SHEEP RETURNED HOME, or the motives of the conversion to the Catholic Faith, of THOMAS VANE Doctor of Divinity, and lately Chaplain to the King of England. In which all things are orthodoxal; to wit, agreeable to Christian truth and piety. Yea we testify, that as it hath given no little light to the arguments of faith; so we hope it will bring no less profit to those that wander from the Faith. It speaks the Author (by other titles honourable) truly learned; Who fully understanding the matter, hath abandoned all the world, accounting it but dross, that he might purchase Christ both to himself and others. Nor can we think that this excellent, though little work, will long lie hid; but believe that besides this foreign and unknown habit wherein it is now shrouded, it will be rendered more public, apparelled both in the French and Latin tongue.  
Paris April 3. 1645. 

H. HOLDEN.  
I. CALLAGHAN.     

A Prefatory Address to the Protestant Reader.  
I Need not write much by way of Epistle to you, seeing the whole Book is but an Epistle to the Reader; wherein I declare those Motives which led me to the Catholic Roman Church, and which (I hope) will have the same influence upon many others. For I neither think myself so weak, as that I alone should be seduced, if the Motives be insufficient; nor so strong, they being true, that I alone should comprehend them, and conquer all opposition either of the understanding or the will, which might bar obedience thereunto.  
All that I desire is, that the Reader will address himself to the reading of this Book, with the same disposition of mind, that I did to the meditation and search of the things contained therein, before I wrote it; And that is, to divest his mind of all prepossessed opinions and worldly interests, in favour of any other Religion, and dislike of this; That so his Soul may be now, as the Philosophers say it is, when it comes into the world, like a smooth table or white paper, wherein there is nothing painted or written; And having read, understood, and considered, let him make his choice, and I doubt not but he will (by the assistance of God's grace, which is never wanting to those, that are not wanting to themselves,) imprint in his Soul the characters of this eternal truth. But if he harbour contrary opinions with obstinacy of will, and a belief of their impossibility of being erroneous, he cannot be a meet judge in this cause; Seeing according to the rule of Philosophy, INTUS EXISTENS PROHIBET ALIENUM, That which is within, stops the entrance of that which is without; Even as he that hath the crystalline humour of his eye tainted, cannot see any thing in its own true colours; And such a man's partial understanding is like a judge that is already bribed on one side. So also if there lie hid in his heart any sinister and inordinate affection, it will check the entrance of the true and saving faith, maugre all the most powerful persuasions that can be used to introduce it; like as a piece of iron or other matter remaining in a wound, will control the efficacy of any remedy applied thereunto. Our Saviour saith of the Jews, How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that is of God only? John 5. 44. And in the Parable of the Supper (Luke 14.24.) the Master of the feast professeth that none of them that were invited should taste thereof, because they coloured their denials with the excuses of farming, marrying, and the like. By which you may see, that the honours, pleasures, and profits of the world, and their contraries, poverty, disgrace and pain, are, the one sort like Syrenes, which (melting our hearts in delight) arrest us here, and divert us from prosecuting our christian course; and the other, (as the Giants, the sons of Anak did the Israelites,) fright us from entering into the land of Canaan, Numb. 12.33.  
But if having truly deposed all obstinate prepossessions of judgement and worldly interests; and so having read this book, you are not yet thereby persuaded that the Roman Catholic is the only true Religion, wherein salvation is to be had, and therefore at any peril to be embraced, this must proceed from want of understanding in you, and capacity of the reasons here alleged; to which I can apply no cure, but my prayers, saying as S. Paul did to Timothy, Consider what I say, and our Lord give thee understanding in all things, 2. Tim. 2.7. To which if you add your own frequent and zealous prayers also, I assure myself you shall find the same effect which the servant of the prophet Elisha did, that your eyes shall be opened, and you shall see, that they that be with us, are more, than they that be with them; 4. Kings 6.16. you shall understand that the reasons on the Catholic side, are far more, and more powerful, than the reasons of all other Religions whatsoever.  
And if after the reading of this Treatise, there remain in any one's judgement, any objection against the sufficiency of any argument and motive here alleged, or any argument against the Catholic Faith, which is not here taken away, or any defence of your own religion, whatsoever the religion or argument of defence be, if you please to seek, you may find those amongst you, that can (much better than I) clear all your doubts, or if you have a mind, (being unlearned,) to receive further information from me, or (being learned) to oppose me, I oblige myself to answer both the one and the other, and that with due circumstances and respects, aiming at nothing else, but the Glory of God, and the good of your souls. And to this end, I have in this later Edition added the discussion of two particular points of controversy more largely than the rest, though more briefly than they might be, being such as I know most Protestants do much stumble at, to wit, of the lawfulness of communion in one kind; And of prayer both public and private in the Latin tongue.  
Nor let any of you think (or show that he thinks so by his practice) that to pursue this quest of the true Religion, and drive it home to its issue, is not worth his time; or not so much worth it, as the pursuit of pleasure, profit or other worldly avails; seeing you all well know what our Saviour saith in the Gospel, what doth it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul. Math. 16.26. Suffer not yourselves through the seducing of others, or your own obstinacy, to be undone by your too much confidence, continuing still in darkness, like that of Egypt, Exod. 10.23. wherein no man rose from his place; nor say with the Laodiceans, I am rich and increased with goods, and have need of nothing, etc. Rev. 3.17. But according to the Apostles direction, Prove all things, hold fast that which is good, 1 Thes. 5.21. And adjourn not this trial to a future time, seeing the present, is that only which is in your power. Say not as Felix said to S. Paul, putting him off for the present, when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee; Acts 24.25. For this is but a suggestion of the devil to retard your return unto God. The foolish virgins you know, while they delayed their preparations, and too late went to buy their oil, the bridegroom passed by, and they were excluded: Mat. 25. therefore, to day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, Psal. 94.8.  
Lastly, think upon the difference betwixt this life and the future; that this is but of the endurance of a few score of years, and that therein, even to the happiest, misery is their freehold, their inheritance, as Job saith, Man borne of a woman, living but a short time, is filled with many miseries, Job. 14.1. and that the next life is eternal, either in unutterable felicity or torment, according as men do here seal up their lives: Which infinity of time, and extremity of good or evil, without any mixture of the contrary, are two such circumstances, that their consideration should make a man sleight and contemn all things that concern him for this moment of time, in comparison of those things which concern the settling of that future estate, which is never to receive an end or change; and he that doth not so, is surely worse than profane Esau, that neglected his birthright for a mess of pottage, or the wicked Jews that preferred Barrabas before Christ. O who can comprehend eternity! Or know what it is to be damned for ever? Yet to reflect often thereon, me thinks should make a man never to pause, or rest in his mind, till he had put himself into such a condition as by which he might have just ground to hope to escape that miserable and endless end.  
Now seeing in the opinion of all men, there are but two sorts of things required in this matter, that is, things to be believed, and things to be done; and that the things to be done are consequences of the former, it behoveth you in the first place to be assured of the things you ought to believe; seeing, as our Saviour saith, Mark 16.16. that He that believeth not, shall be damned. Which words, in reason, cannot be understood of some one, or few, yea or many points of faith, excluding any one, but of all that our Saviour commanded to be believed, according to his Commission given to his Apostles, saying, Go ye therefore and teach all nations, or teaching them to keep all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and according to the exhortation of S. Judas to the Church in his time, That ye earnestly endeavour for the faith which was once delivered to the Saints, (Ep. jude v. 3.) Nor can you be probably assured that you have the faith once delivered to the Saints, the whole faith which the Apostles taught all nations, but by examining (according to your ability) the pleas for it on both sides; seeing it is granted by all, that the Roman Faith was the true and perfect faith, as the Apostle himself by consequence confesseth, where he saith, I thank my God that your faith is published throughout the whole world, Rom. 1.8. And if the Church of Rome have not changed her faith, as in this Treatise is proved, than you that differ and separate from her, must be accused of novelty and change, in forsaking her doctrine and communion, which formerly in your predecessors you held. Your return unto both which, must be the means, in the first place, to deliver you from eternity of torments, and advance you to the glorious liberty and felicity of the sons of God: And that you may do so, shall be the daily prayer and endeavour of  
From Paris, August 4. 1648. Your humble servant in Christ jesus, THO. VANE.   

A LOST SHEEP RETURNED HOME. OR, The motives of the Conversion to the Catholic Faith, OF THOMAS VANE.  

CHAP. I.  
The introduction; And that the knowledge of the means to arrive unto eternal life, is not otherwise attaineable, then by Faith grounded on the Word of God.  
§. 1. SAINT Peter the Prince of the Apostles doth thus comfort, encourage and command us, 1 Pet. 3.14.15. But and if you suffer for righteousness sake, happy are ye. But be not afraid of their fear, neither be troubled. But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear.  
§. 2. This happiness and comfort of suffering for a good cause is remarkably expressed by our Saviour in the fift of S. Matthew, where the blessings of other virtues are placed in the future time, that they that mourn shall be comforted, they that are merciful shall obtain mercy, and so of the rest; but of the poor in spirit, and of the poor absolutely, (as S. Luke hath it, ch. 6.20.) and of those that suffer for righteousness sake, it is affirmed in the present time, that theirs is the Kingdom of God, Mat. 5.10. the other Beatitudes are but in reversion, but this in present possession.  
§. 3. And this by the mercy of God I feel in myself; for heaven is more the joy then the place, and this joy, because God thinks it not fit, as yet, to call me to it, he hath sent to me; so that I can say with S. Paul, Rom. 5.3. I glory in tribulation. The Apostles encouragement to abandon fear, and to sanctify the Lord, I will by his grace daily put in practice. But my present undertaking is the Apostles command, to give an answer to every one that asketh me a reason of the hope (and faith from whence the hope springs) that is in me; and this with the enjoined circumstances of meekness towards men, and the fear of God.  
§. 4. And as some men here have asked me a reason; so if I were in England, I assure myself many more would do so; and having heard of my change do ask one another, and that with as much wonder and sorrow, as belief thereof. To these therefore, and to all other both Catholics and Protestants, I give this ensuing answer for satisfaction. To Catholics, that they may quit all fear of my recoiling; to Protestants, that they may be invited to follow my example, which though it be founded in an unworthy person, yet in so glorious an action, as coming to the bosom of the Catholic Church, they have no reason to disdain to follow me.  
§. 5. In this affair it is much more easy to find an entrance then an end. For, what time since the beginning of Christian Religion, what place, what thing doth not bear witness to the Catholic Faith? Solomon saith, Cant. 4.4. that the neck of the Spouse the Church, is like the Tower of David, builded for an armoury, whereon there hang a thousand shields, a thousand arguments of defence of the Catholic Doctrines; which the many excellent books of controversy written both by those of our own and other Nations, do most abundantly declare. It shall therefore suffice me to say only so much, as may witness that I did not make this change without sufficient Motives: wherein I will make choice of a little of much, and say as much as I can in a little.  
§. 6. Entering then into a serious consideration of the end for which I and all men were created, to wit, the glory of God, and our own eternal happiness; and of the knowledge of the means to attain thereunto, I found that by the consent of all Christians, this was not to be gotten by clear & evident sight, nor by humane discourse founded on the principles of reason, nor by reliance upon authority merely humane; but only by Faith grounded on the word of God, revealing unto men things that are otherwise only known to his infinite wisdom. Secondly that God revealed all these things to Jesus Christ, and he to his Apostles, as he saith, John 15.15. All things which I have heard of my Father, I have made known unto you; and this partly by word of mouth, but principally by the immediate teaching of the holy Spirit, to the end that they should deliver them unto mankind, to be received, believed, and obeyed over the whole world, even to the end thereof; as he saith, Math. 28.19. Go teach all nations. Thirdly that the Apostles did accordingly preach to all nations; as S. Mark saith, Chap. 16.20. They going forth preached everywhere. And planted an universal Christian company, charging them to keep inviolably, and to deliver unto their posterity what they had received of them the first messengers of the Gospel, as S. Paul saith to, Timothy, 2 Tim. 2.2. The things that thou hast heard of me amongst many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who may instruct others. Fourthly that though the Apostles & their hearers be departed out of this life, yet there still remains a means in the world, by which all men may assuredly know what the Apostles preached, and the primitive Church received of them, seeing the Church to the world's end must be built on the Apostles, and believe nothing as matter of Faith, besides that which was delivered of them; as S. Paul saith; Ephes. 2.20. and are built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ being the chief corner stone.   

CHAP. II.  
Of the means to know, which is the Word of God. And that all the Protestants Arguments to prove that the Scripture (and it only) is the Word of God, are insufficient; And that the general Tradition of the Catholic Church, is the only assured proof thereof.  
§. 1. THese things being supposed, the chief difficulty to my seeming consisted in this, how we might certainly know now adays, so many ages after the Apostles death, what, & all necessary points that they taught and preached: the Protestants said that this was to be found in the Scriptures which were written by them; but this did not satisfy my doubt; for supposing the Scriptures to be the word of God, delivered by the Apostles, and others inspired by him, yet I wanted some sufficient witness or proof to assure me so much, for of myself I could not find it. The bare word of the Protestants I saw I had no reason to take, because they confess that they may err, and I in this matter not being able to discover whether they did err or no, relying upon a fallible guide must, always remain in uncertainty and fear. I observed moreover that although in most of their assertions they might upon examination prove false; yet in saying that the Church might err, and taking themselves for the Church, they had said most true; finding that they indeed had erred in this most important Particular of declareing what is the word of God and what not; the Lutherans affirming much less for the word of God than the Calvinists, and the Church of England doth.  
§. 2. Now of necessity one of these sorts of Protestants must err, and that most dangerously; the one by believing that to be the word of God which is not, but the invention of men, and perhaps false and foolish, 
Praefat. in Epist. jac. in Edi●. levens.  as Luther said of S. james his Epistle, or the other by renouncing that which is indeed the Word of God, and so not believing what God himself hath spoken. Their Authority being by themselves in their evident disagreement thus broken, I descended to consider the reasons by them alleged to induce men to believe that the Scriptures are the Word of God, which in general I apprehended to be insufficient, because they did not lead the Protestants themselves to an agreement in the quantity thereof. But I further weighed them particularly, the principal whereof are these.  
§. 3. First, they say the Scriptures are known to be divine by their own light shining in them, 
Cal. lib. 1. Inst. cap. 7. Sect. 2. infine.  Even as sweet and bitter are known by the taste, white and black by the sight: which assertion to me seemed very absurd. I confess indeed much of the Scripture is but the amplification of the Moral Law, which is a knowledge engrafted in man by nature, by the light whereof we may see that it is true; but this proves it not to be the Word of God. For though all truth be from God, as he is the prime verity, and so may be called in some sense, his Word: yet by the Word of God in this case is meant, truth revealed by God immediately unto the penmen thereof: and though we find much thereof to be true, as agreeing with the engrafted principles of reason, yet this proveth not that it was revealed immediately and extraordinarily, which is the circumstance that makes it the Word of God, in the sense of those that dispute about it. As for the historical parts both of the Old and New Testament, the institution of Sacraments, with the like, they have no affinity with the inborn principles of reason, and are therefore not known to be so much as true by any light they carry with them, much less to be extraordinarily revealed by God, and so to be his Word. Besides, if it could be discerned what were the Word of God, and what not, by the resplendent light thereof, as easily as the light is known from darkness, (as some of them say) how could there be so much dissension about the parts thereof, as it is known there is? the Calvinists seeing more to be the Word of God than the Lutherans do, and less than the Catholics: and yet if it show itself by its own light, the Turks may see it, as well as any of them.  
And here I observed that many had blinded themselves with looking on the light, and could not see so far as to discern between corporal and spiritual light, but because the Prophet David saith, Thy word is a lantern unto my feet and a light unto my paths, Psal. 118.105. they conceived the Scripture was as easily discerned by its own light as the Sun. True it is that every corporal light that doth enlighten the eye of the body must be evident in itself, and originally clear, but not so every truth that doth illustrate men's understanding. The reason is, because the eye of the body cannot by things seen infer and conclude things that are hidden, but can only apprehend what doth directly and immediately show itself: but man's understanding apprehends not only what shows itself, but by things known infers and breeds in itself the knowledge of things hidden. Hence though things showing themselves directly and by their own light, be prime principles of the understanding, and the means to know other things; yet also things hidden in themselves being formerly known by the light of authority, may thereby become lights, that is, means to increase our knowledge of hidden things. So that speaking of spiritual and intellectual lights, it is false that all lights that enlighten man's understanding to know other things, are evident in themselves; yea some secondary principles and lights there are, which must be showed by a superior light, before they become lights themselves. In which kind is the Scripture, being a light only to the faithful, because known by the Church's Tradition to be from the Apostles; by the Apostles authority confirmed by miracles, to be of God; by God's supreme verity, who cannot deceive nor be deceived, to be the truth. Moreover this conceit of theirs doth utterly extinguish faith, and belief of the word of God; for every thing is so far forth the object of faith, that it is not seen, as S. Paul saith, Faith is the argument of things not seen, Hebr. 11.1. 
In Evang. joan. Tract. 40.  and S. Augustine, What is faith but to believe that which thou dost not see? If therefore they do see it, they cannot properly be said to believe it, but to know it: and if so, what excellency, what virtue, what merit, what pious affection towards God, to believe that which they see plainly before their eyes? A bold presumption also it is in them to claim a clearer degree of knowledge than the Apostles had, for they did but see through a glass darkly, 1 Corinth. 13.12. but these men are convicted of the divine truth of the things they believe, 
Fran White Orthodox p. 107.  by the lustre and resplendent verity of the matter of Scripture; which is a privilege, which whosoever hath, equals the blessed Saints in heaven, whose happiness it is to see what we believe, especially seeing one point of the Doctrine Protestants pretend to see, is the mystery of the Blessed Trinity, the true light & resplendent verity whereof, no man can see manifestly out of the state of Bliss.  
§. 4. Secondly, they pretend to know the Scriptures, to be the Word of God, by the 
* Whites Reply, p. 16.30.68. Feild Appendix, pag. 34. Cal. Inst l. 1. c. 7.  majesty of the matter, and purity of the Doctrine; but I conceived that though some mysteries of the Scripture carry a majesty in them in respect of natural reason, and an elevation above it, as of the B. Trinity; yet other matters of Scripture seem unto reason ridiculous; as the Serpents talking with Eve, and Balaams' Ass reproving of his master, with many others. Nor could the purity of the doctrine convince me; seeing we know that many learned and godly men have written very holily, whose writings are not therefore accounted the word of God: Besides there are many historical parts of the Scripture which do not at all touch upon purity, & therefore cannot be discerned by it. Again they affirm that the Scripture may be known by the stile; but I considered that God hath no proper stile or phrase of his own, but can at his pleasure all styles, & that he did use the pens of those whom it pleased him to inspire, couching his heavenly conceits under their usual language and ability of expression; whence issueth so great difference of styles (as is on all sides acknowledged amongst sacred Writers) and that God did only guide them in the truth they wrote, not in the stile; for then all their styles in likelihood should have been alike. Indeed God hath an eternal increated manner of speaking, which is the production of the eternal word, by which the blessed do discern him from all other speakers, by the evidence of blissful learning, but no created manner of speaking, (no not his speaking inwardly to the soul) is so proper to God, as that it can be known to be his speaking by the mere sound of the voice or by the stile, without especial revelation or some consequent miraculous effect.  
§. 5. Thirdly, the 
* Whites Reply, p. 19  Harmony of the Scriptures is alleged by some as an argument to prove them to be the Word of God. But though this Harmony appear in divers things, yet it is most certain that there are very many seeming contradictions, many of which are but probably answered by Commentaetors, by assuming some things without proof, because otherwise they must admit contradictions; some places are not fully answered, but the Fathers were forced to fly from literal to allegorical senses, as appears particularly in the four first Chapters of Genesis, the Genealogy of our Saviour, and in the reconciling of the Chronologies of the Kings. And seeing no man is infallibly sure, that all the answers used to reconcile the seeming contradictions of Scriptures are true, no man can be assured by the evidence of the thing, that there is this perfect harmony in them; nor consequently, that they are thereby known to be the Word of God. Moreover if we were infallibly assured, that there were this perfect harmony in the Scriptures, yet this to me seemed not a sufficient proof that they are the Word of God, because there is no reason forbids me to believe, that it may not be also found in the writings of some men; yea I make no question, but it is to be found, and that with less seeming contradiction than is in the Scripture; yet no man accounts that this proves their writings to be the Word of God. Neither as I saw, could these pretences, before mentioned, be laid hold on by the unlearned multitude, an innumerable company whereof cannot read at all, and when they hear them read, if they were asked, would say, that they see not this light, this majesty, stile and harmony, which their learned men talk of, nor do they know what it means, nor that a tittle of it is the word of God, but only because they are told so; Indeed S. Peter saith in the behalf of the old Testament, 2 Pet. 1.21. That holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the holy Ghost. But we are as uncertain by any thing in the words themselves, that S. Peter said this, as of all the rest, that is altogether.  
§. 6. So that I could not find that there was any more than probable arguments to be drawn from the Scriptures themselves to prove them to be the word of God. For that which is the word of God, and the rule of faith, must be certain not only in some parts, but in every part and particle, book, chapter, and line thereof, which is impossible to be known by the light and evidence of the sense and doctrine, seeing many places even by 
* Field of the Church lib. 4. cap. 15. Whites Reply. p. 35  Protestants confessions are dark, obscure, and full of difficulties, and how can that be known to be the Word of God by the light thereof, when the light thereof is not known? As useless also to their purpose, is the majesty, purity, stile, harmomony, or any the like; for we believe it to be harmonious, because it is the Word of God, not to be the Word of God, because it is harmonious, which we do not infallibly see. So that upon these considerations I saw no evident certainty out of the Scriptures that they were the Word of God; but that they are believed to be such without being seen, upon some other Word of God, more clearly appearing to be the Word of God, and less liable to corruption then the Scriptures are, assuring us so much, and that is the Tradition of the Church: according to the saying of S. Augustine, 
* Aug. contra Epist. fundament. c. 5.  I would not believe the Gospel, unless the Authority of the Catholic Church did move me. To which Hooker, one of the learnedest men that ever the Protestant party could boast of, agreeth, saying, 
* Eccl. Pol. lib. 1. sec. 14 p. 36.  Of things necessary, the very chiefest is to know what books we are bound to esteem holy, which point is confessed impossible for the Scripture itself to teach, 
* Ibid. l. 2 sec. 4.102.  for if any one book of Scripture did give testimony to all, yet still that Scripture which giveth credit to the rest, would require another Scripture to give credit to it: 
* Ibid. p. 103.  neither could we ever come to any pause whereon to rest, unless besides Scripture there were something else acknowledged. And this something is as he saith, 
* Lib. 2. ca 4. p. 300.  The Ecclesiastical tradition, an argument whereby may be argued and convinced what books be Canonical, and what not.  
§. 8. Lastly, some say, they know the Scripture to be the Word of God, by the Spirit of God prompting it to their souls. And this of all the rest seemed to me most absurd. For first, I durst not arrogate this Spirit to myself, nor could I know it was in any other. His saying, the Spirit told him the Scripture was the Word of God, did not prove it, nor had I reason to believe he had the Spirit more than I, without some proof. If a man's testimony in his own case might thus be admitted, I saw that no Heretic would want it to support his impiety, by ascribing it to the Spirit, as 
* Epiphanhaer. 21.  Simon Magus did; only this H. Spirit he believed to be his Concubine Helena; and Protestants ascribe the title of the Spirit to their private fancies. If I should have said, that I know by the suggestion of God's Spirit that this or that part of Scripture, or that none of it was the Word of God, my proof was as good to him, as his to me. For although the testimony of the Spirit of God be a sure witness to him that hath it, yet it is none to others, unless he can prove he hath it, by some miraculous effect. And without this kind of proof every prudent man hath reason to believe that such a boaster is a liar, and intends to deceive others (as it is likely of the first Authors of Heresies) or else that he deceives himself by a strong operation of his fancy, which he calls the Spirit; because he is told by the doctrine of some Protestants, that he must feel that he hath the Spirit, (as in particular concerning the assurance of his salvation) desirous then to be in the right way, that which he would have, he persuades himself he hath, because else he finds himself at a loss, which begets a horror in him. Which to avoid, he flies to this pitiful refuge, being the best he is instructed to, that he may have some stay for his belief, and repose for his soul. And this happens commonly, and most strongly to those that have some zeal, but little wit; on whom therefore the reflection of their fancy is the stronger, and works upon them, as upon some I have read and heard of, who by their eager desire to be so, have strongly conceited themselves to be indeed Kings and Princes, and other kind of great and rich men, when truly, and in all other men's judgements, they were either madmen or fools. So that this I perceived was to open a gap to any man's fantastical pretence whatsoever, who had the impudence to ascribe it to the Spirit of God.  
Nor is there any peaceable way to compose the differences amongst men of this nature; for each one pretending the Spirit, he hath no reason to yield to another, the holy Spirit being an infallible director wheresoever it is; yet when it is different in different men who pretend to it, as it often falls out, it is a certain sign that one of them is deceived, and both are deceived in the opinion of each other; yet neither yielding to other, the contention ends in the action of Zedekiah against the Prophet Micheas, who gave him a box on the ear and said. 2 Chron. 18.23. Which way passed the Spirit of our Lord from me, that it should speak to thee. And so it hath fallen out amongst those that derive their knowledge this way, that they end their differences by blows and conquests, not by Counsels and miracles. 
Plut.  And as the sons of Pyrrhus ask him who should succeed him in his Kingdom, he answered, he that hath the sharpest sword: so if it be demanded amongst them, who hath the Spirit of God, and consequently the true Religion; It must be answered, He that hath the most strength of arms to maintain it. But S. Peter did otherwise, who provoked by Simon Magus, proved that he had the Spirit of God, by raising up a child from death, 
Egesippus.  which the other with all his Magic could not do: who also challenging S. Peter to fly from the Capitol to Mount Aventine, while he was doing so, by the prayer of S. Peter, he came tumbling down and broke his leg, whereof he soon after died. If men that boast of the Spirit cannot this way prove it, the saying of S. Augustine, is appliable unto them, 
* Tract. 45. in joan.  There are innumerable who do not only boast that they are Videntes or Prophets, but will seem to be illuminated, or enlightened by Christ, but indeed are Heretics.  
§. 5. Yet most certain it is, that no man can believe the Scriptures to be the Word of God, but by the Spirit of God inclining him thereunto; for as the Apostle saith, Ephes. 2.8. Faith is the gift of God. But there are two kinds of inspiration of the Spirit of God; one immediate without the concourse of any external ground of assurance; the other mediate, moving the heart to adhere to an external ground of assurance, making it to apprehend divinely of the authority thereof: they that challenge the first are Enthusiasts, and run into all the  absurdities; they that take the latter way, must besides their inward persuasion, have an external ground of belief; and than what is there so high and sufficient, as the testimony of Universal Tradition? Agreeable whereunto Hooker saith, 
* Eccles. Pol lib. 2. sect. 7.8.  The outward letter sealed with the inward witness of the Spirit, is not a sufficient warrant, for every particular man to judge and approve the Scripture to be Canonical, the Gospel itself to be the Gospel of Christ: 
* lib. 3. sect. 3.  but the authority of God's Church, (as he saith) is necessarily required thereunto.  
§. 9 And though it were true, that we might know the Scripture to be the word of God, without the testimony of the Church, yet it doth no where appear that the Scripture is the whole word of God, and contains all that the Apostles left unto the Church for their direction; so that my first Quere would still be unsatisfied, to wit, how we should know the whole word of God, which the Apostles taught? For even that word which is written doth tell us that all is not written; and therefore doth S. Paul exhort us to keep both the written and unwritten, Stand fast (saith he) and keep the traditions which you have learned; whether by word or by our Epistle, 2 Thes. 2.15. It is manifest that the first Church of God from the creation until Moses, which was about the space of two thousand years, had no word of God, but that which was unwritten, which we call Tradition; the Church of the Jews had Scripture, but with it Tradition, as the prayer of Elias concerning rain, Jam. 5.15. The contention of the Archangel S. Michael and the Devil about the body of Moses, Judas v. 9 with others; and of the Scripture both Old and New, many books are lost, as many Parables and Verses of Solomon, 3 King. 3.32. with many other books; and S. Paul wrote an Epistle to the Laodiceans, Col. 4.16. and another to the Corinthians, which are not extant, 1 Cor. 5.9. And seeing we have not the whole Canon of the Scripture, how can we be sure that that part which we have, containeth all that we are bound to believe and do? we do not read that the Apostles were sent to write, but to preach: and S. John denies that he had expressed in writing all that he had to say, Having more things to write unto you (saith he) I would not by paper and ink, for I hope that I shall be with you and speak mouth to mouth that your joy may be full. Now that these things that the Apostles did not write, but teach by word of mouth, were matters also of weight, and belonging to Faith, S. Paul assures us in these words, Night and day more abundantly praying, that we may see your face, and may accomplish those things that want of your faith, 1 Thes. 3.10. By which it is evident, that the Apostles besides their writings, did preach other things which were wanting to their faith.  
§. 10. Nor did the Apostles surely intent to write all points of faith; for if they had, it is probable that they all together, or some one of them, would have done it purposely, punctually and methodically; and declared so much unto the world. But we know the contrary, to wit, that they did not write all, by their own confession; and that which they did write was but accidental and upon particular occasions, as Hooker affirms, 
Eccles. Pol. l. 1. sect. 15. p. 37.  The several Books of Scripture are written upon several occasions, and particular purpose; which occasions if they had not happened, it is most likely that they had not written that which they did. For instance, the Epistles of S. Peter, James, John and Judas, were written against certain Heretics, who, misunderstanding S. Paul, did thereupon teach, That faith only without works sufficed to salvation; of which very point S. Augustine saith, Because this opinion was then begun, 
De fide & operibus c. 14.  other Apostolical Epistles of Peter, John, James, Judas, do chief direct their intentions against it, that they might strongly confirm, Faith without works to profit nothing. S. John also did preach the Gospel till his last age (which was very long) without writing any Scripture, and took occasion to write (as S. Jerome affirms) by reason of the heresy of the Ebionites, 
De Scriptoribus Eccles.  which then broke out. The like might be showed of all the rest. And lastly (which is worth the observation) all the Epistles are written to such persons only as were already converted to the Christian Faith; therefore they were written not so much to instruct, 
Tom. 2. l. de Eccles. fol. 43.  as to confirm, as Zuinglius also confesseth.  
§. 11. By all which it is evident, so far as we can see, that the Apostles and Evangelists did write their books, not by any command from Christ, but upon some accidental occasion moving them thereunto. Wherein one and the same matter is often repeated, as in S. Paul's Epistle to the Romans and to the Galatians; and also in all the Evangelists; and many other things are omitted, as a world of works which our Saviour did, as S. John testifieth, 2. John 21.25. and which the Apostles did also (the small book of their Acts being too little to express all their actions) and also the things which S. Paul ordained in the Church of the Corinthians, 1 Cor. 11.34. by which it is manifest that they neither intended any complete Ecclesiastical history, nor body of divinity containing all matters of faith and practice. So that it did neither appear to me that the Scripture contained all the doctrine of salvation that the Apostles taught, nor yet any of it; because I could not see by the directions that Protestants gave me, whether the Scripture were the Word of God or no.   

CHAP. III.  
Of the insufficiency of the Protestants means to find out the true sense of the Scriptures: And of the absurdity of their assertion, that all points necessary to salvation are clear and manifest.  
§. 1. AS to know the letter of the Scripture, so to know the meaning thereof, I found a matter of great difficulty; agreeable to S. Peter, who saith, speaking of S. Paul's Epistles, 2 Pet. 3.16. In which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable deprave, as also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own damnation: But 
* Falke Con. Rhen. Test. in 2 Pet. cap. 3. Morton Apol. part 1. lib. 1. cap. 19 Whitaker control. 2. q. 5. c. 7. p. 513.  Protestants, to avoid their dependence on the Church for the interpretation thereof, say, that all things necessity to salvation are easy to be understood, even by the most unlearned Reader. But they never yet expressed what points were necessary to salvation and what not, nor have given any rule by by which it might be found out, but have left themselves the liberty of adding to, or substracting from that title, what and whensoever they pleased. And who seethe not that, with this device, they may exclude (if they please) almost all the points of Christian belief and practise?  
§. 2. Wonderful confusion I found herein; for here the understanding of the most unlearned Reader is made the size of things necessary to salvation: and if it be a measure unto all men, than the most learned Clerk is bound to believe no more than the most unlearned peasant that can but read; and the most unlearned need not the help of the learned for the understanding of things necessary, but can find them out by his own reading. So that you must take the arrantest dunce in their Church that can read, and after he hath diligently perused the Bible, and prayed for understanding therein, that which he understands, must be accounted necessary to salvation, and no more. Surely me thinks they are to blame, that have not for the greater credit and clearness of their cause, made this trial upon some silly fellow, and from his mouth have set down their points necessary to salvation. But by this it appears that they are willing to draw the matters necessary to salvation, for their great ease, into a very narrow compass, and make the same measure serve the silliest clown and the greatest Clerk, which is uncomely. And (coming closer to the matter) I have known some affirm, (which I believe is the opinion of very many) that to believe in Jesus Christ, without any distinct belief of his divine and humane nature, and that he died for the sins of the world, and that a man must repent before he die, is all that is necessarily required either for belief or practice of any man. As for those that cannot read, which are I believe the greatest number, or very little inferior, they deal most unkindly with them, not providing a certain means whereby they may be brought up to read, which they that can read think all are bound to, with references to the Scriptures, by the commandment of Christ, and whereby they are to find out the things necessary to salvation; but leave them (if at all) to be saved by the cruel blind Popery (as they please to call it) of an implicit faith.  
§. 3. I then considered that there was much ambiguity in these words, [necessary to salvation] there being divers kinds of necessity that have place in matters of Religion. First there is an absolute necessity, and a conditional necessity; Absolute necessity is that which admits no excuse of impossibility, nor any exception of place, time, or person; as in regard of those that are of age capable of knowledge: The belief of Christ mediator betwixt God and man: and to this kind of necessity there are some that would restrain all things to be believed, leaving themselves the liberty of all matters else to believe what they please: but with as much reason they may restrain this necessity to the believing only, that there is a God, and so renounce their Christianity. Conditional necessity is that which obligeth not, but in case of possibility, and receives exception of time, place and person: Thus there are many points necessary to be believed, if a man be in place where he may be instructed in them, and hath time to receive instruction, which are not necessary for a man living in the wilderness, or so ready to be attached by death, as he hath no leisure to be instructed, or apprehension to receive it; as that Christ was borne of a Virgin, and crucified under Pontius Pilate. And many things are necessary for Pastors to believe, which are not for common people; as that the persons of the Trinity are the same in essence, but distinct in subsistence; that in Christ there are two natures, and but one person, with many the like: And in matter of practice, there are many things necessary in case of possibility, and opportunity of time, and place, which are not necessary, if the conveniency to accomplish them be wanting: as the assistance at Church service, and participation of the Eucharist.  
Secondly, there is a necessity of means; and a necessity of precept; Necessity of means is in those things to which God hath obliged us, if we will attain the end; as of the Sacraments, to which God hath given power to confer grace; and of the Commandments, whose necessity is imposed upon us, if we will enter into life; and of repentance of sins, which is a means necessary to obtain their remission. Necessity of Precept is that which only obliges in regard that it is commanded, contributing otherwise no real advancement to our salvation; as the celebrating the Lords day, and other such like observations; the omission whereof could be no hindrance to salvation, but in respect of disobedience and breach of the Commandment.  
Thirdly there is a necessity of special belief, and a necessity of general belief: Necessity of special belief is of those points which all faithful (if they be not prevented by death) are obliged to believe with faith express, distinct, & determinate, which the Schoolmen call explicit faith; as the twelve Articles of the Creed. Necessity of general belief is of those things which every particular man is not bound to believe with a distinct and explicit faith; as that Baptism given by Heretics, is true Baptism; and that Heretics which have received Baptism, must not be baptised again when they return to the Church, with many such like; in which it will suffice the unlearned multitude to believe them implicitly, that is, to adhere to the Church that doth believe them, and by a general belief embrace them, by believing as the Church doth, and referring themselves to her, prepared always to believe them explicitly when they shall be declared to them, and themselves are capable to apprehend them.  
Lastly, there is a Necessity of act, and a Necessity of approbation: Necessity of act is of those things which every particular person is obliged actually to perform; as to profess the name of Christ, to forgive offences committed against him, with the like. Necessity of approbation is of those things which every man is not bound actually to perform, but only not to contradict them, nor to condemn those that do them, nor the Church that allows them, nor to separate themselves from her upon this occasion; as the choice to live in virginity and single life, with the like.  
§. 4. Now according to these several kinds of Necessity, I accounted it meet to hold for necessary to salvation, all those things that the Fathers have holden necessary in that degree, and according to those kinds of necessity, as they have holden them. And this I did not perceive to be a matter of such ease to find out, as Protestants did under their title of necessary to salvation affirm. I found innumerable places of Scripture were obscure and hard to be understood; and that their distinction of things necessary to salvation was more obscure and uncertain than any thing; having no limits or determination, but like the Gladius Delphicus, was fitted for all turns, but indeed served none, but to cousin themselves; who, presented with a point of belief or practice which they did not like, would wave it with saying, it was not necessary to salvation, Therefore as S. Philip asked the Eunuch, whether he understood what he read; who said, how can I, without some body to interpret it? So I answered myself, and had reason to believe that others could not truly answer better for themselves.  
An interpreter than was necessary who might judge of the true meaning of the Scripture, against the corruption of heretics, who all take their protection from thence; and which should determine all emergent controversies, which were needful for the preservation of peace and unity. And in bestowing of this Office I observed that the Protestants voices were divided; 
* Har. Confess. p. 5.  some gave it to the Scripture itself, saying that it must interpret itself, and be the Judge of all controversies. 
* Whites way to the Church, p. 6.27.  Others that the Spirit of God doth interpret to every private man, both which I apprehended absurd and unreasonable. The former, because nothing (if it speak obscurely) can interpret itself, but that which hath a living voice, which the Scripture not having, cannot possibly interpret itself. As for the assertion of some, that the obscure places are interpreted by plain places speaking to the same purpose, it is false; there being no such plain places in many cases to be found, which they themselves prove by their disagreement about the sense of many places. Therefore to allay the unreasonableness of this assertion, they add, that it is Scripture diligently read by us, and one place conferred with another, all circumstances weighed, and much prayer used; which is in effect, that (not the Scripture itself, but) they interpret the Scripture by the aforesaid means.  
§. 6. But all these ways of study, and conference, skill in the tongues, or the like, are but humane endeavours, and subject to error, yea though much fervour of prayer be mixed therewith; and such as the means are, such of necessity must be the interpretation and determination; but the means are uncertain, doubtful and fallible, therefore such must be the interpretation; and if it be uncertain, it may be false; and whether it be so or no, Protestants have no way to discover, but by the Spirit, as he instructs every particular man; whose insufficiency I found in my former consideration of the means to know the Scripture to be the Word of God. And if it cannot assure me of the letter of God's Word, no more can it of the meaning; considering that I can neither know whether another have the Spirit, nor yet whether I have it myself or no, without some miraculous revelation: for all other proofs of having the direction of the Spirit, are but humane, and so subject to deceit, but miracles we are sure are from God, because they exceed all humane and created power.  
§. 7. And seeing Protestants ground their salvation upon faith only, which as they say, doth only justify; and faith upon Scripture only, which according to them, contains all things necessary to be believed; and the Scripture and sense thereof upon the private Spirit only, by which they expound the Scripture; it follows, that the private Spirit is the sole or principal ground to them of the sense of Scripture; the Scriptures sense the like ground of their faith; and this their faith the like ground of their salvation; therefore no Protestant can have greater certainty of his faith or salvation, than he hath of this private Spirit, whereof seeing he hath none, either from Scripture, Church, Counsels, Fathers, common sense or experience, it must needs follow that he hath certainty of nothing: and that this relying upon the private Spirit must needs plunge him into infinite and abominable errors.   

CHAP. IU.  
Of the vanity and impiety of those, who affirm, that each man's particular reason is the last Judge and Interpreter of Scripture, and his guide in all things, which he is bound to believe and know. And that the Catholic Church is the sole Judge.  
§. 1. FInally, Chillingworth the last reformer and calciner of the Protestant Religion, seeing the weakness of all the former pretences, hath boldly and roundly reduced all to one only principle, and that is of natural reason: affirming that our belief of the Scripture to be the Word of God; and also our belief of the Scripture in every particular part thereof, depends upon each man's reason and discourse, beyond which, or different from which, he is not bound to believe a title. Yet he doth not say that this way is infallible; but because all ways else are fallible (as he supposes) and this the only way God hath given us to be guided by, we must be herewith contented, and God also must be contented herewith in us, and give salvation to those that believe and do according to their best understanding. And this opinion I observed had got a large possession in the minds of Protestants, especially of the Clergy and Gentry, whose ingenuous education gave them the highest claim to the exercise of reason: who were therefore very glad to embrace such a principle of Religion, as of which they accounted themselves the chiefest Masters.  
§. 2. This conceit seemed to me no less absurd, and much more insolent than any of the other; for the other did seem at least to ascribe our knowledge of the Scripture and sense thereof to God, either speaking in the Scripture, or by his Spirit speaking to their souls, or concurring with their humane endeavours; though in conclusion they drew it to the determination of their own fancies. But this man more impiously hardy than all that went before him, doth directly and in plain terms attribute all the assurance we have of the Word of God (the director to salvation) unto ourselves, and that too, as we are mere men. And this resolving of faith not into Authority, but into reason, and that not as preparing or inducing us to believe (which Catholics allow) but as the main ground and strongest pillar of our faith, and the dependence of faith upon reason, as the Conclusion on the premises, is a doctrine incredibly pernicious, and the source of monstrous impieties. And for this purpose he builds much upon this 
* Pag. 36. n. 8.  Axiom, we cannot possibly by natural means be more certain of the conclusion, than of the weaker of the premises, as a river will not rise higher than the fountain from whence it flows: Hence in the same place he infers, that the certainty of Christian faith can be but moral and humane, and not absolutely infallible.  
Therefore as an instance to the same purpose, he saith, 
* Pag. 116.  We have as great reason to believe there was such a man as Henry the eight King of England, as that Jesus Christ suffered under Pontius Pilate. And in larger explication of this his doctrine he saith, If upon reasons seeming to my understanding very good, I have made choice of a guide or rule for my directions in matters of faith; when afterwards I discover that this guide or rule leads me to believe one or more points, which in the best judgement that I can frame, I have stronger reason to reject, than I had to accept my former rule, I may and aught to forsake that rule as false and erroneous; otherwise I should be convinced not to follow reason, but some settled resolution to hold fast whatsoever I had once apprehended. From which wild and vast principle doth follow, that if the Scripture (for example) propound things seeming more contrary to any man's reason and opinion, than the inducements which first moved him to believe Scripture, were in his opinion strong and convincing, he must reject the Scripture as an erroneus rule, and adhere to his own reason and discourse, as his last and safest guide. Especially considering that (according to him) the motives for which we believe the Scripture are but probable, and by consequence subject to falsehood; which in all reason must give place to reasons seeming demonstrative and convincing; as there will not want many such, against the highest mysteries of Christian faith, if once we profess our assent to them, must be resolved into natural discourse; For, for what reason do the Socinians, and such like deny the mysteries of the blessed Trinity, the Deity of our blessed Saviour, and divers other points, but only because they seem repugnant unto reason? And in these horrible opinions do these reasonably unreasonable men fall by just consequence from their own principles.  
For if (as they say) there be no Christian Church assisted with Infallibility, fit to teach any man even such Articles as they count fundamental, and necessary to salvation, but that in every particular, even one may, and must follow the direction of his own reason, be he never so unlearned; what will follow but an unhappy liberty, yea, necessity for men to reject the highest and most divine mysteries of Christian faith, unless they can compose all repugnancies after an intelligible manner (as he speaks) even to every ignorant and simple person, which is impossible; or else say that it is reasonable for men to believe contradictions at the same time, which (as he saith) is very unreasonable. For doubtless in true Philosophy, the objections which may be made against the mystery of the Blessed Trinity and the Incarnation of God, are much more difficult, than any that can be brought against Transubstantiation; he than that will follow these new principles, must, if he deny the one, deny the other also; which as yet the greatest part of Protestants will not do; in time perhaps they may: or which is much better, observing the impiety of this opinion, confess both.  
§. 3. This I conceive was the reason why S. Paul saith, 1. Cor. 1.23. that the Apostles did preach foolishness in the opinion of the Grecians, namely because they sought wisdom; and what was that wisdom but humane, the dictates of natural reason? which the mysteries of the Gospel exceeding, they counted them foolishness: but to those that were called, it was the power of God, and the wisdom of God. By which it appears that the wisdom of God, and the wisdom of the Grecians which was humane wisdom, the light of natural reason and discourse, were very different; wherein the Apostle gives (as it is meet these wise men should do) the pre-eminence to God; for that which seems foolish in God, is wiser than whatsoever is in men; and so the mysteries of faith, which seem so contrary to humane reason, have more wisdom in them, than their reasons have that oppose them; who do therefore but prove themselves cum ratione insanire, to be mad with reason. This doctrine also of giving reason the tribunal in matters of faith, and that, as it is in every particular man, is an inlet for every man to be of a several Religion, by differing from others in what points soever, according to the direction of his own reason; yea possibly to be of no Christian Religion at all. For what makes the Jew to continue such, but only because he sees no reason to believe the New Testament? and if a Christian should chance to be endued with the same reason that a Jew is, he must then become a Jew: or if of a Heathen, he must become a Heathen. And for the ignorant and unlearned people, to whom this is a rule as well as to others, what pitiful absurd Religions, or none at all, will be amongst them, who have so small abilities of reason, as the world knows they have?  
§. 4. Though reason be in its own nature the same, and as it proceeds from God, the author thereof, in whose mind the universal idea thereof is placed; yet as it exerciseth itself in several men (since the ruin thereof in Adam's fall) it is of several dimensions, according to their natural constitution, moral education, and industry; whence it must needs follow that according to the different latitude of men's understandings; they must embrace more or less of divine truths, and so be every one of a larger or stricter belief, and of as many several Religions as they are of different degrees of understanding. Yet notwithstanding this admirable variety of Religion, charitable Chillingworth doth not doubt, but that God (considering humane frailty, and the power of education, which instils in us many false apprehensions, and that hereby excellent judgements are corrupted) will not condemn men for such errors, as by reason of the former circumstances, were unavoidable, but conceives that they are in a Religion, whatsoever it be, in which they may attain salvation. So that by consequence any man may be saved, following but the direction of his own reason, although that reason direct him to deny not only one point, but even all the Christian faith; thus Jew, Turk, or Heathen, may by this platform be saved.  
§. 5. And truly if a man do not believe upon this one (and virtually all) reason, to wit, that the Church is to be believed, he according to my reason, should be a Heathen rather than any thing else; because their Religion ariseth only from the principles of reason implanted in man by God's Commissary, Nature; wherein all men, whose understandings are not by accident eclipsed, do agree; as that there is a God, that he is to be worshipped, that we must do as we would be done unto, with the like: but all other Religions depend upon testimony, as the Jews and Turks and their testimony far inferior to that of the Christians; so that if I were not a Catholic, according to the direction of my reason, I ought to be a Heathen. But if I will be a Christian, I ought to be such a one, as will according to our Saviour's command) deny himself; Math. 16.24. And a man's understanding is a chief part of himself, even the chiefest according to most men's account, as we may perceive, in that they do more abhor to be counted fools, which is a defect contrary to the understanding, than to be counted vicious, which is a defect contrary to the will: yet this must be denied; and is by all good Christians, who submit to that, which (as the Apostle saith) brings into captivity all understandings to the obedience of Christ. 2 Cor. 10.5.  
§. 6. Besides, whatsoever Religion any of them that are guided by this principle is of for the present, no man is sure nor he himself, that he shall hold it to morrow; for if his reason (howsoever deluded with false apparitions) guide him to the belief of any thing contrary to that which he now holdeth, he is presently obliged to follow it, though it be to the denial of his whole present faith; and to change his purpose in matters of Religion, as oft as he doth his apparel; and so float in a giddy irresolution and inconstancy, led by the ignis fatuus the foolish fire of his own reason, until at last he sink into the depth of Atheism and damnation. Now how suitable this doctrine is to the peace and tranquillity of Commonwealths, and Kingdoms, (wherein every man is left to his own liberty in the choice and change of Religion) though it be to Arrianisme, to the Heresy of the Macedonians, Manicheans, or to any the most blasphemous, absurd or turbulent, and that with impunity (as he challengeth) they that sit at the helm of government can best determine.  
§ 7. Lastly, if any of these  ways of Protestants, for the knowledge of the Word of God, the guide to eternal life, were sufficient, what need were there of preaching, and instructing of the people, at least of them that can read? but let them take the Bible, and let nature work, which in the co-operation of their own wise fancies, will hatch a goodly Religion no doubt, borne like Minerva of the brain of Jupiter, and be as comely as a Chimaera of many several shapes tacked together; and to them instead of the ancient heathens household-gods, which every one must adore as his private God within himself: O sacras gentes quibus haec nascuntur in ipsis Numina!  
Who prove the truth of this saying in themselves, that,  
He that is Schoolmaster to himself, is Scholar to a fool.  
§ 8. Observing thus the weakness and absurdity of all the Protestants alleged, in proof that the Scripture, is the Word of God, & easy to be understood, at least in all things necessary to salvation; and that it is to be interpreted by itself, or by the Spirit to every particular man; so making way for as much variety in Religion, as there may be diversity of opinion; I saw that although some probable arguments may be drawn from the Scriptures to prove them to be of God, yet there was no other infallible way to know what is the true Word of God, first taught by the Apostles and their hearers, but by the testimony of some sure, certain, and agreeing witnesses, and what is the meaning of this Word of God, in case there should be any important difference about it, thereby to give a period to all controversies, but by some society of men renowned for their wisdom: And this I conceived in common prudence a far better way than for a man to rely upon himself. But though this were a better way than those of the Protestants, yet if this society of men were not in these matters free from error, although it is more likely they should tell truth than the Protestants, yet I could not have an immovable foundation for my saith, but it would be subject to wavering and inconstancy; and so there could be no prudent settledness in Religion, nor any well-built hope of the end thereof, eternal life.  
I saw then that it was needful that there should be a faithful witness a wise judge, and so wise and faithful, that he should not be subject to falsehood or error; otherwise it seemed to me, that God had not contrived a competent way to his own glory or man's salvation; which to be wanting in, is neither suitable to his wisdom nor his goodness. I therefore concluded that there was some society of men who must instruct us in the premises; and that this society in reason ought to be infallible; and that none could with any colour pretend to be this society, but that which we call the Catholic Church, which all Christians profess to believe, according to the Creed of the Apostles. But before I could proceed any further, I was cast upon the examination of the sense of the words Church, and Catholic, finding therein much difference amongst the pretenders to these titles.   

CHAP. V.  
Of the meaning of these words Church and Catholic; and that neither of them belong to Protestants.  
§. 1. THere were seven Cities that strove for the body of Homer; And very many societies of Christians there are, that lay claim to the body of Christ, which is his Church. And as when Telesius a young Grecian (having won the prize in the Pythian games) was to be led in triumph, there arose such a dispute between the several Nations there present, every one being covetous to have him for their own, that one drawing one way, another another, instead of receiving the honour that was prepared for him, he was torn in pieces, even by those who seemed most ambitious to honour him: So happens it to the Church; all those that bear the name of Christians avow, that to her only appertains the victory over hell, and that whosoever will have part in the prize and glory of this triumph, must serve under her Ensign: but when they come to debate about the body of this society, than every Sect (desirous to draw her to themselves) they rend and tear her in pieces; and instead of embracing the Church, which consists in unity, they embrace Schism and Division, which is the death and ruin of the Church.  
§. 2. The Protestants do sometimes give a strict definition of a Church, sometimes a large; sometimes they restrain her to the number of the predestinate only, sometimes they enlarge her so far, that they embrace within her compass (because they will be sure not to leave out themselves) all the variety of Christians whatsoever. But by all the former they exclude the visibility of the Church, which is an inseparable companion thereof, as I shall show hereafter; for the predistinate are not known to any body, nor ordinary unto themselves. But those that are so presumptuous (as very many are) to assume unto themselves the assurance of their predestination, do easily lay hold on this tenure, which they do the more boldly, by how much it is more difficult for another to disprove; but as it is not easy for another to disprove, so it is as hard for them to prove; and concludes nothing therefore in the behalf of the Church's description in general, or of their share in particular. Beside, the word Ecclesia, Church, is derived from a verb, which signifies to call, not to predestinate: And the Church is a society, but the predestinate are a multitude; and there is this difference between a society and a multitude, that a society hath a certain form and virtue whereby they communicate together, which the other without this association have not.  
Now predestinaton, as it is mere predestination, establisheth nothing in the predestinate, nor is it made in them, but in God only; and by consequence doth not make them actual parts of the society called the Church. It is not the union of predestination, but of vocation that builds men into a Church. By the later definition of a Church, they deny the very being of Heresy and Schism; for if the whole Mass of Christians be the Church, notwithstanding the errors in faith which some of them hold, or separation in communion which they make, than there are none that can be called Heretics or Schismatics; or else (which is equally absurd) all Heretics and Schismatics are of the Church; and this destroys the holiness of the Church in doctrine, which is another inseparable ornament thereof. Others, which are some of the subdivisions of sects amongst the Protestants, as Brownists, Anabaptists, and the like say (each sect for itself) that that is the Church, excluding all others from that title, even their fellow Protestants; but this excludes the universality of the Church, another inseparable companion thereof, at least after the Apostles had propagated it. But the Church (having in it the property of heat, which (as Philosophers say) is to gather together things that are of the same nature, and separate things that are of different natures) includes all that are of the same faith, and admitteth no other.  
§. 3. I therefore conceived (according to the judgement of the most learned) the Church to be a society of those that God hath called to salvation by the profession of the true faith, the sincere adminstration of the Sacraments, and the adherence to lawful Pastors: Which description of the Church is so fitted and proportioned to her that it resembles the nest of the Haltion, which (as Plutarch saith) is of such a just and exact size for the measure of her body, that it can serve for no other bird either greater or less.  
Then for the meaning of the word Catholic, the Protestants say that that Church is Catholic, which holdeth the true faith, which though it be not spread universally over the world, yet it ought to be so, say they, and therefore it is Catholic. By which they leave men in a labyrinth of finding out the true faith in all the particulars thereof, which, (as they say) must guide a man to the Church that is truly Catholic, which being the object of the understanding, is much more difficult to find out, than that which is the object of the sense, as is its being Catholic. And therefore it seemed to me as preposterous as to set the cart before the horse, to prove a Church, Catholic, because it is true; whereas it should be proved true, because it is Catholic. Beside the name Catholic is not a name of belief only, but of communion also; else antiquity would not have refused that title to those which were not separated from the belief, but only from the communion of the Church; 
S. Aug. Ep. 50.  nor would they have affirmed that out of the Catholic Church the faith and Sacraments may he had, but not salvation. So that Catholic imports thus much, both the vast extension of doctrine to persons and places different, and the union of all those places and persons in Communion. Therefore albeit the Protestants should hold the same belief that the ancient Church did, yet if they did not communicate with the same ancient Church, which by succession of Pastors and People is derived down to this present time, I could not see how they could with justice assume to themselves the title of Catholics.   

CHAP. VI  
Of the Infallibility of the Church.  
§. 1. NOw that the Catholic Church (which society of Christians soever it be, of which we shall deliberate hereafter) is the only faithful and true witness of the matter of God's Word, to tell us what it is and what is not it; the only true interpreter of the meaning of God's word, and the last and final judge of all controversies that may arise in matters of Religion; and that she is not only true, but that she cannot be otherwise seeing she is infallible, I was persuaded to believe by many reasons. In the alleging of which, I will avoid the accusation of Protestants, of the circular disputation of Catholics, saying, they believe the Scripture, because the Church says it is so, and the Church, because the Scripture bids them do so.  
First, then without dependence on the Scripture, I conceived the Catholic Church to be infallible in her Traditions, in that which she declareth to us concerning the doctrine of Christ, and the Apostles, and that even in the very nature of her testimony and tradition: For Tradition being a full report of what was evident to sense, namely what doctrines the Apostles taught, what Scripture they wrote, it is impossible it should be false. Worlds of men cannot be universally deceived in matters evident to sense, as are the things men hear and see, and not being so, it is impossible they should either negligently suffer it, or maliciously agree to deceive others, being so many in number, so distant in place, so different in affections, conditions and interests. Wherefore it is impossible, that what is delivered by full Catholic Tradition from the Apostles, should be by the deliverers first devised, as Tertullian saith; 
Tert. de praesc. cap. 28.  That which is found one and the same amongst many, is not an error, but a Tradition. Yet supposing universal Tradition as it is merely humane, be in its nature fallible, yet the Tradition of the Catholic Church, is by God himself preserved from error; which is thus demonstrated. God being infinitely good, and ardently desiring the salvation of mankind, cannot permit the means which should convey the Apostles doctrine to posterity, by the belief whereof men must be saved, to be poisoned with damnable error; to the destruction of their salvation: now the only means to convey this doctrine, is the Tradition of the Catholic Church; 
Tert. de Praes. cap. 21.  as Tertullian saith, what the Apostles taught, I will prescribe aught no other ways to be proved than by those Churches which the Apostles founded. All other means, as I have showed you before, are insufficient, and if this Tradition of the Church should be insufficient also, by reason of its liableness unto error; then were there no certainty at all of the truth of Christian Religion, no not so much as that there was such a man as Jesus Christ; but all men would be left to grope in the wand'ring uncertainty of their own imaginations, which for God to suffer, cannot fall under any prudent man's belief.  
§. 2. Secondly, that which bindeth men to believe a thing to be God's Word, God cannot suffer to delude men into error, whereby for their devotion unto his truth, they may fall into damnation; now Catholic Tradition from the Apostles is that which binds men to believe the same to be the Word of God, and that because it is thereby sufficiently proposed, the World affording no higher nor surer proposal; so that either this must be infallible, or else God hath left us to the guidance of our own weak understandings (the weakness of which conceit I shown even now) and all Christians to that confusion, which all different opinions (yet reputed the Word of God by them that hold them) may produce.  
§. 3. Thirdly, God being the Prime Verity, he cannot so much as connive at falsehood, whereby he becomes accessary of deceiving them, who simply, readily, and religiously believe what they have just reason to think to be his Word: but there is most just and sufficient reason to believe that the doctrine delivered by full and perpetual Tradition, from hand to hand, even from the Apostles, is undoubtedly their doctrine, and the Word of God; therefore he cannot suffer Catholic Tradition to be falsified. Nor can (as I conceive) any prudent man imagine that God having sent his Son into the world, to teach men the way to heaven, every moment of whose life was made notable, by doing or suffering something to that end, should suffer the efficacy and power thereof to be extinguished, by permitting damnable errors in the whole Church, and that soon after his departure, (as some Protestants say) and not to recover light for twelve or fourteen hundred years together; especially considering there was no possible means for any man to know the contrary; there was no society of men that taught otherwise, and if at any time there started up any, they were condemned of error by all their fellow- Christians, and in process of time melted from the face of the earth: The Scripture (if that were the means, as Protestants pretend) not being printed, the invention of Printing not being in the world till about two hundred years ago; and the Bible's that were written being but few, by reason of the great labour of writing them; and those that were, not purchaseable but by few, because of their price, nor legible but by fewer, because they were not printed, but written; and lastly, not to be known to be the Word of God (as I have showed before) but by the testimony of those men, who (they say) were corrupted; who having corrupted the doctrine, might with much more ease have extinguished, or corrupted the Text, and made them speak what they pleased, it being known to far fewer than the doctrine was; it being difficult to obtain, uncertain whether it were right, and very obscure in its meaning; so that if they had been guilty of changing the Apostles doctrine, they could easily have razed out all those places which Protestants urge against them, and so have prevented the strange and notable discovery that the Protestants think they have made of their errors. And if they say that God by his providence preserved the Scripture both from extinction and corruption; may not we much more reasonably say, (having warrant for it out of the Scripture also, whereas they have no warrant for the preservation of the Text) that God by the same providence did, and will always preserve his Church from corruption, which is a thing much more easily known than the Scripture, & consisting of a living multitude can express itself more plainly: This infallibility in the mouth and Tradition of the Church, the Prophet assureth, Esa. 59.21. My Spirit which is upon thee, and the words which I have put into thy mouth, shall not departed out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seeds seed from hence forth for ever. And therefore S. Augustine saith, 
Aug. Ep. 118.  that to dispute against the whole Church is insolent madness.  
§. 4. To know divine and supernatural truth by the light and lustre of the doctrine, belongs to the Church triumphant; Inward assurance without an external infallible ground, is proper to Prophets and Apostles, the first publishers of Religion: and seeing that God doth not now instruct either of these ways (as I have showed) but by an external infallible ground, and this being the Tradition of the Church, it follows, that he must preserve it from error, and likewise render the Church itself always conspicuous that it may be discerned by sensible marks, of which we shall speak anon. And he is also bound by his providence, to assist men in the finding out of this Church, when they apply their best diligence thereunto, that so they be not deceived.  
And whereas some of the more learned Protestants say, that though they have no infallible ground, besides the teaching of the Spirit, yet they are not taught immediately by prophetical manner, because they are also taught by an external probable, though not infallible motive; to wit, the Church's tradition; I conceive that except they assign an external infallible means besides Gods inward teaching, they cannot avoid the challenging of immediate revelation. For whosoever knows things assuredly by the inward teaching of the Spirit, without an external infallible motive, unto which he doth adhere is assured prophetically, though he have some external probable motives to direct his belief. S. Peter had some come conjectural signs of Simon Magus his preversenesse and incorrigible malice, yet seeing he knew it assuredly, we believe he knew it by the light of prophecy, because beside inward assurance he had no external infallible ground. If one see a man give alms publicly, though he see probable signs and tokens that he doth it out of vain glory, yet cannot he be sure thereof, but by the light of immediate revelation, because the other tokens are not grounds sufficient to make him certain. For if a man be sure, and have no certain ground of this assurance out of his own heart, it is clear, that he is assured immediately, and only by Gods inward inspiration. Wherefore Protestants, if they will disclaim immediate revelation in deed, & not in words only, they must either grant Tradition to be infallible, or else assign some external infallible ground besides Tradition, whereby they are taught what Scriptures the Apostles delivered.  
Lastly, I was persuaded of the Church's infallibility in her Traditions and Doctrines, because she is endowed with the power of miracles; which wheresoever they are (which I shall hereafter examine) do both prove, that that society of Christians is the true Church, and that that Church is infallible in all that she proposes as the Word of God. And the reason is, because God (who is truth itself) cannot set his hand and seal, that is miracles, and works proper to himself, to warrant and authorise a falsehood invented by men. Against which 
* Field lib. 3. cap 15. Whites Reply p 216.  Protestants object and say, that miracles are only probable, and not sufficient testimonies of divine doctrine; alleging Bellarmine who saith, we cannot know evidently that miracles are true, for if we did, we should know evidently that our faith is true, and so it should not be faith. To which may be answered, that such evidence as doth exclude the necessity of pious affection, and reverence to God's Word, evidence that (considering the imperfection of humane understanding) may enforce men to believe, cannot stand with true faith. If we know by Mathematical or Metaphysical evidence, that the miracles done in the Church were true, this evidence would compel men to believe, and to overcome the natural obscurity and seeming impossibility of the Catholic Doctrine; therefore as Bellarmine saith, we cannot be Mathematically and altogether infallibly sure by the light of nature, that miracles are true. Notwithstanding it cannot be denied in reason, what our Saviour affirms, that miracles are a sufficient testimony binding men to believe, the very works that I do, do bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me, Joh. 5.36. and consequently that we may know them to be true by Physical evidence, as we are sure of things we see with our eyes, and handle with our hands; as S. John saith, 1 Epist. 1.1. what we have seen with our eyes, what we have beheld, and our hands have handled of the word of life. Or we may be as sure of Miracles, as we are of such things as being once evident to the world, are by the world's full report declared unto us; which is a moral infallibility. So that if we have not a Metaphysical or Mathematical infallibility of the truth of Miracles, yet we have a Physical and moral infallibility, as much as we have of any thing we either hear or see.  
Nor doth this Physical evidence take away the merit of faith, because this evidence not being altogether and in the highest degree infallible in itself (for our senses may sometimes be deceived) it is not sufficient to conquer the natural obscurity, darkness, and seeming falsehood of things to be believed, upon the testimony of those miracles. For the mystery of the Trinity, of the Incarnation, Real presence, and the like, seem as far above the reach of reason as any Miracle can seem evident to sense; hence when faith is proposed by Miracles, there ariseth a conflict betwixt the seeming evidence of the Miracles, and the seeming falsehood and darkness of Catholic Doctrine; against which obscurity a man cannot get the victory by the sole evidence of miracles, except he be inwardly assisted by the light of God's Spirit, moving him by pious affection to cleave to the Doctrine, which is by so clear testimony proved to be his Word. Even as a man shut up in a chamber, with two lights, whereof the one makes the wall seem white, the other blew, cannot be firmly assured what colour it is until daylight enter, and obscuring both those lights, discover the truth: so a man looking upon Christian Doctrines, by the light of miracles done to prove them, will be moved to judge them to be truth; but looking upon them through the evidence of their seeming impossibilities unto reason, they will seem false: nor will he be able firmly to resolve for the side of faith, until the light of divine grace enter into his heart, making him prefer, through pious reverence to God, the so-proposed authority of his Word, before the seeming impossibility to man's reason.   

CHAP. VII.  
That Catholic Tradition is the only firm foundation and motive to induce us to believe, that the Apostles received their doctrine from Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ from God the Father; And what are the means, by which this doctrine is derived down to us.  
§. 1. AS Catholic Tradition is infallible in itself, so is it most necessary for us, there being no other certain testimony to any prudent man, no firm ground or motive to believe, that the Primitive Church received her doctrine from the Apostles, the Apostles from Christ, Christ from God; nor no way to bring it down from those times to these, but only the Tradition of the Church. For we may observe three properties of the doctrine of faith; to be true, to be revealed of God, to be preached and delivered by the Apostles. The highest ground by which a man is persuaded that his faith is true, is the authority of God speaking and revealing it; the highest proof by which a man is assured that his faith is revealed, is the authority of Christ and his Apostles, who delivered the same, as descending from God; but the highest ground that moveth a man to believe that his faith was preached by the Apostles, is the perpetual Tradition of the Church succeeding the Apostles unto this day, assuring him so much; according to the saying of 
* De praescr. c. 21. & 37.  Tertullian, who maketh this ladder of belief in this sort; what I believe, I received from the present Church, the present from the Primitive, the Primitive Church from the Apostles, the Apostles from Christ, Christ from God, and God the prime verity, from no other fountain different from his own infallible knowledge: So that he that cleaveth not to the present Church, firmly believing the Tradition thereof, as being come down by succession, is not so much as on the lowest step of the ladder that leads unto God, the revealer of saving truth; successive Tradition unwritten being the last and final ground whereon we believe that the points of our belief came from the Apostles, which may be proved by these arguments.  
§. 2. First, if the main points of faith be to be believed to come from the Apostles because they are written in Scriptures, and the Scriptures are believed to be the Word of God, upon the report of universal Tradition, than our belief that the things which we believe come from the Apostles, and from God, resteth upon the Tradition of the Church; but it is most certain that the Scriptures cannot be proved to have been delivered unto the Church by the Apostles, but by the perpetual Tradition unwritten conserved in the Church succeeding the Apostles; all the other ways by which the Protestants endeavour to prove the Scripture to be the word of God being vain and insufficient, as I have proved before.  
Secondly, common and unlearned people, which comprehend the greatest part of Christians, may have true faith, yet they cannot have it grounded on the Scripture, for they can neither understand, nor read it; or if read it, yet but in a vulgar language, of the truth of whose translation they are not assured, therefore must rely upon the testimony of the present Church, that that which they believe is the Word of God.  
Thirdly, if all the main and substantial points of Christian faith must be believed, before we can securely read and truly understand the holy Scripture, than they are believed not upon Scripture, but upon Tradition going before Scripture; and that it is so is manifest, because true faith is not built, but upon Scripture truly understood according to the right sense thereof, nor can we understand the Scripture aright, unless we first know the main Articles of Faith, which all are bound expressly to believe, by which as by a rule, we must regulate ourselves in the interpretation of the Scripture; otherwise without being settled in the rule of faith by Tradition, men are apt to fall into grievous errors, even against the main articles of the faith, as of the Blessed Trinity, and Incarnation of the Son of God, as experience doth sufficiently testify; so that reading and interpreting Scripture, doth not make men Christians, but supposeth them to be made so by Tradition; at least for the main points, such as every one is bound expressly to know.  
Fourthly they to whom the Apostles wrote and delivered the Scripture, were already converted to Christianity; and instructed in all necessary points of faith, and in the common practices of Christianity; and so, by what they knew by Tradition, could easily interpret what was written, but otherwise might easily have failed in the mainest points, as some forsaking Tradition did; for example the Arrians, who were confuted by the Catholics, not by bare Scripture, for of that the Arrians had plenty, but as it was interpreted by Tradition; Therefore none can be supposed to understand the Scripture aright, & so to know the true word and will of God, but by being such as they were, to whom the Apostles delivered the Scripture; that is, first instructed by Tradition: Otherwise they may easily err in some chief articles of Faith, any of which to err in, is damnable. And I would feign know, whether any understanding Protestant doth believe, that if a Bible were given to a heathen, or to one borne amongst themselves (supposing he had not been trained up by Catechism and other traditional instruction) whether I say he could out of that extract, as points clearly expressed therein, the thirty nine Articles of the Church of England, or the book called the Harmony of Confessions, which is the profession of the faith of most of the Protestants of the world?  
Lastly, we cannot with modesty say, that we are more able to understand Scripture, than were our forefathers, the ancient Doctors of the Church; but they thought themselves unable to interpret Scripture, by conference of places, or such like humane means, without the light of Christian Doctrine beforehand known, and firmly believed upon the Tradition of the Church, witness 
* Ruf. Eccl. hist. l. 2. c 9  S. Basil, S. Gregory Nazianzene, and 
* Orig. tract. in Mat. 29. c. 23.  Origen, who thus writeth, In our understanding of Scriptures, we must not departed from the first Ecclesiastical Tradition, nor believe otherwise but as the Church of God hath by succession delivered to us; therefore no man is able to interpret Scripture, without the light and assistance of Christian faith, aforehand received by the voice of the Church, delivering what she received from her ancestors. Dangerously and high boldness than it is, for men of this age, so to presume on their own interpretations of Scripture, gotten by humane means, as to make them overbalance a thousand 
* Luther de captain. Babil. Tom. 2. Wittenberg. p. 344.  Cyprians, Augustine's, Churches and Traditions.  
§. 3. From all which I observed, that the Protestants do not well understand that place of Scripture, so frequently urged by them against Tradition, where S. Paul saith to Timothy, Thou hast known the holy Scriptures from thy childhood, which are able to instruct thee, or make thee wise unto salvation; Inferring from hence, that the Scriptures are able to make all men wise unto salvation; whereas this was spoken with relation to Timothy only, and to such as agree with him in the cause, for which this saying is true in him, that is, such as were aforehand instructed by Tradition, and did firmly believe all substantial Doctrines of faith, and know the necessary practices of Christian Discipline, even as what God said to Abraham, I am thy protector, and thy exceeding great reward, Gen. 15.1. is not appliable to all men absolutely, but only to all men that were of the same qualification, that is, faithful and devout, as he was. Moreover the Apostle in that place speaketh only of the Scriptures of the Old Testament, for the New was not written in the infancy of Timothy, nor some of it at this very time that these words were written; and these Scriptures he affirms also to instruct Timothy, not by themselves alone, but by faith, which is in Christ Jesus, that is, joined with the doctrine of the Christian faith, which Timothy had heard, and believed on the voice of Tradition.  
And the following words of the Apostle are with equal confidence insisted on, All Scripture inspired of God is profitable to teach, etc. is very unprofitable for their purpose, seeing that profitable can by no means be stretched to signify sufficient, as they would have it, and that for every man, but particularly for him that is HOMO DEI, a man of God, that is, one already instructed by Tradition, in all the main points of Christian faith and godly life, such an one as Timothy was. Thus indeed the Scriptures may be granted sufficient, joined with Tradition, but not alone. And whereas there are some places of the Fathers alleged by Protestants to prove the Scriptures to be clear in all substantial points, they are to be understood as the Apostles words are, with reference to such men who have been before instructed by Tradition; even as they that hear Aristotle explicate himself by word of mouth, may easily understand his books of nature, which are very hard to be understood of them that never heard his explication, either from his own mouth, or by Tradition from his Scholars.  
§ 4. Whereas some Protestants say, that the difficult places of Scripture are unfolded 
a Wootton trial of the Romish, etc. p. 88 l. ●9.  by Scripture, and the rules of Logic, 
b Field p. 281. lin. 20.  and by other things beside Scripture evident in the light of nature, it seems to me very incongruous: First, because the rule of faith must be for the capacity of the unlearned as well as the learned; and unlearned men cannot be sure of the enfolded sense of the Scripture by Logical deductions. Secondly, the Scripture itself sends us to supply her wants, not to the rules of Logic, but unto Tradition, saying, Hold the Traditions which ye have received by word or our Epistle, 2 Thes. 2.15. It sendeth us to the Church, the pillar and ground of truth, 1 Tim. 3.15. which whosoever doth not hear, is as a Heathen and a Publican, Matth. 18.17. It did the same to the Jews, who had the Scriptures also, saying, Remember the old days, think upon every generation: ask thy father and he will declare unto thee, the elders and they will tell thee, Deut. 32.7. The same do the Fathers, as I shall show hereafter.  
§ 5. And whereas it is further objected, that the Fathers disputed negatively from the Scripture, against Heretics, thus; Doctrine is not clearly delivered in Scripture, therefore it is not to be received as a matter of Faith; we must know that the Fathers proceeded upon this supposition that was known to all, and granted by the Heretics themselves, namely that the Doctrines they disputed against, were not the Traditions of the Church: and in this case they required the testimony of Scripture. Yea more, the Fathers did not only require places of Scripture from the Heretics, by way of deduction and Logical inference (for to such all ancient Heretics and Protestants now pretend, wherewith they delude ignorant people) but they required of them to show their Doctrine in Scripture, saith Irenaeus, expressly and in terms; and to prove it, not by texts 
* Aug. de unitat. Eccles. cap. 5.  which require sharpness of wit in the Auditors to judge, who doth more probably interpret them, not by places which require an interpreter, one to make Logical inferences upon the text, but by places plain, manifest, clear, which leave no place to contrary exposition, and that no Sophistry can wrest them to other sense; to the end that controversies which concern the salvation of souls, be defined by God's formal Word, and not by deductions from it by rules of Logic. And even by this way of the Father's arguing negatively from the Scripture, the Protestant Religion is quite overthrown; for seeing nothing is to be reputed a matter of faith, which is not formally and expressly to be proved by the Word of God, either written, or unwritten, and delivered by full Ecclesiastical Tradition; and seeing the Protestants do not, nor can pretend to this Tradition, nor yet can prove their tenets by Scripture in express and evident terms, but such as themselves confess to receive probable solutions, it must hence necessarily follow that their doctrines are false, without foundation, and to be rejected by every Christian.  
§. 6. Lastly whereas Protestants object that the Pharisees are reproved by Christ for the observation of Traditions, it is altogether impertinent; for the Scripture doth not say that their Traditions were derived by succession from Moses the first deliverer of their law, nor did the Pharisees pretend to it, but they were Traditions of their own, whereof some were frivolous and superstitious, some impious, some pious,: The frivolous and superstitious were their washing of hands, pots, dishes, & the like, supposing that otherwise they might have some spiritual impurity in them; which our Saviour confutes saying, There is nothing without a man entering into him which can defile him. Mark 7.15. The impious were such, as whereby they violated the commandments of God, under the pretence of observing their Traditions, as when they allowed a man under pretence of giving something to the Church to neglect his duty to his parents; Mar. 7.11. Neither of these kinds is the Catholic Church guilty of. Of their pious, we have an example in their paying Tithes of mint, a very small herb, which was a Tradition of their owne not commanded in their law, yet this our Saviour approves and binds them to it, saying, this you ought to have done, Luc. 11.42. And it is worth the observation, that the thing most of all objected against our Saviour, was the written word and Tradition of God by Moses about keeping the Sabbath day (as appears in all the Evangelists) from which precept, not by Tradition unwritten, but by logical inferences of their own, they concluded that our Saviour broke the Sabbath by healing or doing some small labour thereon. So that the Pharisaical Traditions were not pretended to be doctrines unwritten, derived from the first deliverer of their religion, but doctrines concluded from the Scripture, by the rules of Logic and reason (as they conceived) according to the present manner of the Protestants.   

CHAP. VIII.  
That the Church is infallible in whatsoever she proposeth, as the Word of God written or unwritten, whether of great or small consequence. That to doubt of any one point, is to destroy the foundation of faith. And that Protestants distinction between points fundamental and non-fundamentall, is ridiculous and deceitful.  
§. 1. HAving thus found out that the Church was she, from whom I was to receive assurance what is the word of God; and that otherwise it was impossible for me to know it, and that she could not mistake nor err in her directions, I conceived then, that I was bound to believe all that she propounded to me as the word of God, whether it were written or not written (writing being no testimony of the truth of any thing, seeing it may be false as well as speaking) and that to doubt of any thing, was to call all into question, and to dissolve the whole nature of divine faith. For to believe hath a threefold signification in speech; first it is taken for knowledge; as where our Saviour saith, Thomas because thou hast seen me thou believest, John 20.29. to wit, that I am risen: now he that sees one, knows so much. Secondly, for opinion; which is an assent begot by probable reason, so men delivering their opinions, use to say, I believe thus, or thus. Thirdly and most properly, for an assent unto such things as do not appear, but are assented unto by a firm reliance on the truth of him that reports them, as S. Paul saith, Faith is the argument of things not seen, Heb, 11.1.  
And this reliance on an Author, such as cannot deceive or be deceived (at least in those things which he propounds unto us to be believed) must beget in us an equal belief of things that have humane possibility or probability on their side, and of things that are clean against it; the matter propounded makes no matter, nor yet the manner of propounding; it is the Author, and our apprehension of him that controls all opposition. By this do we believe the inexplicable mystery of the Trinity, the Incarnation of God, the Mother-hood and yet Virginity of the B. Virgin Mother, with many others, with as much ease, as we believe that Noah had three sons, or that S. Peter had neither silver nor gold: and by this do we believe the latter with as much strength and firmness as the former. For he that believes a thing because such an one says it, who he believes cannot lie, must believe all that he says, and that with the same firmness, because the reason of his belief still remains, namely, the inerrability of the speaker. But if he apply his belief according to the probability of the thing spoken, and no further, than he doth not believe, because of the truth of the speaker, but of the thing spoken, which he must gather from probabilities of reason, wherein he doth not believe the thing for the truth sake of the speakers testimony, but for the likelihood thereof, which he finds by the measure of his own understanding; which is not to believe the other, but himself; and the other no more than he would do the arrantest liar in the world, yea the Devil himself, that is, so far as he by his reason conceives that he speaks the truth. Which reason of his, if it be infallible, he doth not believe the thing properly, but he knows it; if it be but probable, he believes it not properly, but hath an opinion of it; and no more assurance than of other humane reports, whose authors have no security from error; which as they may be true, so they may also be false. And thus to believe, is not to believe by divine and infallible faith, but by humane and fallible; and so it cancels divine supernatural faith, the first in order of the three theological virtues, without which no man can be saved.  
§. 3. So that all the place that reason hath in the government of our faith is this, to lead us to believe that testimony which cannot deceive us, and for the particular objects of belief, to take them upon trust of that testimony, without checking at them whatsoever they be; and though they be bones to Philosophy, yet make them milk to faith; and not as Heretics do, make us demand a reason of every particular point of faith, which if it square not to their apprehensions, they cashier: This is not faith, but fancy. For, to rely upon a humane basis such as reason is, will not support such a mighty statue as divine faith: And, to use Chillingworths own similitude, Water will not rise higher than the fountain from whence it springs: if therefore particular reason be the governor of our faith, which reason is a humane and fallible thing, it cannot rise to, nor support a divine faith: But divine faith is that which God requires of us in the business of Religion, and that which is not such, is none. And it is convenient, that as God ordained man to a supernatural end, namely the blissful vision of himself, which is a thing far above all excellencies of nature; so he should bring him to this bliss, by believing things above the reach of reason, which in man is his nature; and to beget this faith by Miracles, his own acts, which are above the power of nature; and by the testimony of those that do those supernatural acts; to whom, if he have given his deeds, it cannot be doubted but he hath given his word, of any part whereof to make any doubt, is to call the credit of all into question; the house of Faith being like some artificial buildings, whereof if you pull out one pin, you loosen the whole frame: So if a man disbelieve any one point delivered him by the Catholic Church, he unjoynts the whole frame of faith, and virtually denies it all; and that because they have all the same height of proof, to wit, the testimony of the Church; which if she can lie in one thing, she may (for aught we know) in another, and so in all, and thus bring a man to doubt of all, and then to deny all: And that those men that do deny some one point of Catholic Tradition (though unwritten) do not deny all, is not for that they have any faith, but out of secular ends, and deceitful reason.  
§ 4. Indeed some Protestants grant that if Tradition be universal, and perfectly Catholic, it doth oblige to the belief thereof, but not otherwise; by which universal Tradition they mean, such as never any one gainsaid. But if such only are to be called Catholic Traditions, there is scarce any thing left for Christians to believe, (and indeed to that pass have many brought it;) for some have denied the distinction of Persons in the Trinity, others the Divinity of our Saviour, others his humanity, others the Deity of the Holy Ghost, and a hundred more: now if no Tradition be to be called Catholic, but such as was never denied by any one, or some number of Christians, than a man may deny the , and many other points and Articles of faith, because their Tradition hath not been so universal, but that some have denied it; yea some books of the Scripture itself were not universally received, till about four hundred years after Christ.  
By Catholic or universal Tradition than must be understood, that which the Catholic Church hath always taught, not which all Christians, for than we must look for Tradition in the mouths of Heretics, whose property it is to deny some Tradition or other, under pretence that it is opposite to Scripture. And if any have taught contrary, the Catholic Church hath condemned them for Heretics, which is a sufficient proof that until such Heretical Spirits opposed some one or more Traditions of the Church, they were universally believed. As for example, the Doctrine of Christ's consubstantiality, or being of the same substance with the Father, no reasonable man will deny, but that it was generally believed in the Church, before the days of the Arch-heretic Arrius, and that the Council of Nice condemning of him, was a sufficient proof that the doctrine he opposed was the universal Tradition of the Church, by force whereof he was overthrown, and not by Scripture only, there being no place of Scripture so plain, but he would give some answer to it, and likewise allege plenty of Scripture in the proof of his own Heresy, while he took upon him to interpret it himself, (forfaking the traditional sense thereof) and would receive no answer to it. And if Arrius his denial of that point of Faith, will make it universal for place, or the doctrine itself new, and so universal for time; (as some in other instances do allege) because it was then first declared by reason of that opposition, than it may be lawful under the same pretence for men to deny all the Traditions of the Church, all the decrees of General Counsels of the Church, and to revive all the Heresies that were in the Church.  
§. 5. Moreover to attribute conditional infallibility to the Church, and not absolute in all that she delivers (
* Chillingworth pag. 118. Pet. Martyr loc. Com. clas. 4. c 4. sect. 21. Confess. Helvet. c. 17.  as some Protestants do) making her infallible only while she follows the Scripture and Universal Tradition, is to give her no more privilege than to a child or fool, who are also infallible while they affirm nothing, but what is agreeable to Scripture and universal Tradition. But if we know not Scripture nor Tradition but by the Church's direction, how shall we know in her exposition of Scripture, and deciding of controversies, that she doth err, unless we know it from her also? seeing her authority in the one is as good as in the other, and by those reasons that we may deny the truth of the one, we may deny the other. And if she say, she have expounded Scripture truly, and decided controversies aright, by the rule of Scripture and Tradition, who shall gainsay her? Can any man be so foolish as to think his word is of more credit than the whole Churches? Or that his reason is better than hers? Or that if she may err from her rule, he may not do so also? And if their infallibilities be both of the same strength, who in his right mind would not believe millions affirming the same thing, rather than one, or some few affirming the contrary? If there were a rule so plain and clear that all men understood it, and none could pervert it, than there were no need of a judge or director; but if the rule be obscure, or liable to misinterpretation, as all words are, let them be expressed never so plainly, than it is meet that there should not only be a Judge, but that this Judge should be infallible, seeing the business concerns the salvation of mankind, and not be subject to the petty after-examinations of proud and discontented people, as if one or more of them did know the meaning of the rule better than the Judge, when that Judge is the universal Church. And that which these men affirm in this matter amounts to this wise Maxim; That the Church is infallible, while she is infallible: and so is the Devil.  
§. 6. Frivolous then and without foundation, is that late started distinction of points fundamental and not fundamental, and the assertion built thereon; That the Church may err in the one and not in the other; and so by consequence we are not bound to believe her in all things. Indeed in regard of the material object or thing to be believed, some points are fundamental, others not; that is, some points are to be believed explicitly and distinctly, others not: and more points are to be believed explicitly, by some than by others, as I have showed before, speaking of points necessary to salvation. But in regard of the formal object and motive for which we believe, namely, the truth of God revealing it by his Church, there is no distinction of points of faith, we being equally bound to believe all that is sufficiently proposed unto us, as revealed by God, whether the matter be great or small: and whether the points be fundamental in their matter or no, yet they are proposed unto us by the same authority; therefore we are bound equally, with the same firmness of faith, to believe every one as any one. For example, the Creed of the Apostles contains divers fundamental points, as the Deity, Trinity of Persons, Incarnation, Passion and Resurrection of our Saviour; it contains also some points for their matter and nature in themselves not fundamental, as under what judge he suffered, that he was buried, and the circumstance of time when he risen again, to wit, the third day; Now whosoever knows these to be contained in the Apostles Creed, is bound to believe them as firmly as the other, and the denial of any one of them, is a fundamental and damnable error, a giving of God the lie. For the nature of faith doth not arise from the greatness or smallness of the thing believed, for then there should be as many different faiths, as there are points to be believed, but from the motive for which a man believes, which is God's revelation testified by the Church, which being alike for all objects, it is manifest, that they that in things equally revealed by God, do grant one thing and deny another, do forsake the very formal motive of faith, God's revelation, and so have no true divine faith at all.  
§. 7. Moreover if the Church's infallibility be tied to a certain matter in Religion, than it is meet we should know that first, that so we may accordingly apply our belief, if it be fundamental, then without doubt to embrace it, if not, to exercise our liberty, and believe it so far as we see cause; but then we must know the matter wherein she is infallible, distinctly and particularly, as also infallibly, or else we may mistake, and believe, when we need not, and disbelieve when we ought not. Now from whence shall we have this knowledge? God hath no where revealed it; and it ought to have been revealed together with the Commission given to the Church to teach, or else she might have deceived us before the caution came; but the Church itself hath told us no such matter; we have no such Tradition; therefore we must have this most fundamental point of all the rest, which is, to know what is fundamental and what not, either by inspiration, or by the strength of reason, both which are ridiculous; or by some authority coequal to the Churches, and yet not hers, which is most absurd. And in this business, the Protestants seemed unto me, to deal as obscurely and deceitfully, as did once Richard the second King of England, who in a return to peace betwixt him and his subjects, granted pardon to all, except fifteen, but would not declare what their names were; but if at any time he had a mind, out of some new displeasure, to cut off any man, he would say, he was one of the fifteen, whom he excepted from the benefit of his pardon: In like manner the Protestants say, we will believe the Church in all points, but those that are not fundamental, not expressing what they are; and when they have a wanton disposition to deny their belief to something that the Church hath declared, they shelter their denial under the protection of this unlimited distinction, and say, it is a point not fundamental. And if on the other side they find it for their advantage to close with other Churches, they say, they are all one Church with them, because forsooth they agree, in they know not what, that is, in their inexplicable fundamentals.  
§ 8. But Chillingworth hath undertaken to give us, though not a catalogue, yet a description, (as he supposes) by which we may discern between fundamentals, & not fundamentals, or circumstantials, as he calls them. 
pag. 137. sect. 20.  The former being such as are revealed by God, and commanded to be preached to all, and believed by all. The later such, as though God hath revealed them, yet the Pastors of the Church are not bound under pain of damnation, particularly to teach them unto all, and the people may securely be ignorant of them. And this is even the same obscurity in more words; for what is to be preached to all, and believed by all, and what the Pastors may forbear to preach, and the people may be ignorant of (especially seeing the same degree of ignorance is not secure to all people alike, but receives infinite variety, according to their means of knowledge) is as undeterminable, as what is fundamental and what not. But suppose the Pastors do preach more than they are bound to preach and reveal that truth, which if it had not been revealed, the people might safely have been ignorant of, may they be ignorant or unbelieving now it is revealed to them? If they be, than they deny that very authority upon which they believed the most fundamental points, which is the ground of all belief, and by consequence deny the whole faith: From whence we may see, that the Pastors teaching is not to be stinted by the things the people ought necessarily to believe; but the people's necessity of believing aught to be enlarged according to the measure of the Pastors preaching. The Church is not confined to the teaching of fundamentals only for the matter, but whatsoever she teacheth is fundamental for the form, and motive of belief. The circumstantials are (as he confesseth) revealed by God to the Church; and if the Church reveal them to the people, the people must either believe them, or deny to believe God. And though common people, and others also, may safely be ignorant, before they have been instructed, yet they may not be so after; nor hath God confined the Pastors instructing of the people to any certain matter, to fundamentals only; for Christ bids his Apostles teach all nations, to observe all things, whatsoever he commanded them. Matth. 28.20. And though common people may safely be ignorant of many things, yet they must not be unbelieving of any thing; but by an implicit faith at the least, believe all that the Church believes, by adhering, and resigning themselves to her, being prepared to believe explicitly what and when she shall declare it to them: Which faith is originally and fundamentally built upon the Word of God, not as written, but as delivered by the Tradition of the Church, successively from the Apostles; upon the authority whereof, we believe that both Scriptures and all other Articles of faith were delivered to them by the Apostles; to the Apostles, by Christ; to Christ, by God, the fountain of all truth.   

CHAP. IX.  
That there is and ever shall be a visible Church upon earth; And that this Church is one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic.  
§ 1. NOw considering all that hath been said before, the sum whereof is this; That we have no means to know certainly the doctrines of the Apostles; but only the Tradition of the Church, and that that Tradition is, and aught to be infallible; hence I conceived, that this consequence was necessary, that there should be, and is always, a visible Church in the world, to whose Traditions men might cleave; and that this Church is one, universal, Apostolical, Holy.  
First there is always a true Church of Christ in the world; for if there be no means for men to know that Scriptures, and all other Articles came from Christ and his Apostles, and so consequently from God, but the Tradition of the Church, than there must needs be in all ages a Church, receiving and delivering these Traditions, else men in some age since Christ, should have been destitute of the ordinary means of salvation, because they had no means to know assuredly the doctrines of Christianity, without assured faith whereof, no man can be saved. And although a false Church may deliver the true Word of God, as it is contained in the Scripture and the Creed, yea even a Jew or Heathen may do so, for this is but casual; yet none but a true Church can deliver the Word of God, with assurance to the receiver that the text is incorrupt, thereby binding him to the belief thereof; Now it is necessary that men have the true Scripture, not only casually, but they must be sure the Text thereof be uncorrupt; therefore there must be a true unerring Church, whose authority is so aut hentique, that it is a sufficient warrant for men to believe the doctrine she delivers, to come from the Apostles.  
Secondly, this Church must be always visible, and conspicuous; For the Traditions of the Church, must ever be famous, and most notoriously known in the world, that a Christian may truly say with S. Augustine, 
De utilit Cred. c. 14.  I believe nothing but the consent of Nations, and Countries, and most celebrious fame. Now if the Church were at any time invisible, or very secret and hidden, then could not her Traditions be famously known, nor could men that were willing to submit themselves to her directions, know where to find her, out of whose communion they cannot attain salvation.  
Thirdly, this Church is Apostolical, that is, derived from the Apostolical Sea, by the succession of Bishops and Pastors; for else how can we be assured that we have the Apostles doctrine? It must be one generation that must certify another; and if there should be any interruption, in that time, all might be lost and changed. And how could the Tradition of Christian Doctrine be notoriously Apostolical, if the Church, delivering the same, hath not a manifest and conspicuous pedigree and derivation from the Apostles? Which is a convincing argument used by S. Augustine; 
Epist. 48. circa med.  How do we trust out of the divine writings, that we have manifestly received Christ, if we have not also from thence manifestly received his Church? The Church that hath a lineal succession of Bishops from the Apostles, famous and illustrious, whereof not one hath been opposite in Religion to his immediate predecessor, proves evidently that this Church hath the Doctrine of the Apostles. For as in the rank of three hundred stones ranged in order, if no two stones be found in that line of different colour, then if the first be white, the second is white, and so the rest unto the last; even so if there be a succession of three hundred Bishops all of the same Religion, if the first have the Religion of the Apostles and S. Peter, the second hath, and so the rest even unto the last.  
Fourthly, this Church is one, that is, all the Pastors and Preachers deliver, and consequently all her Disciples and children believe one and the same Faith. For if the Preachers and Pastors of the Church disagree about matters which they preach as necessary points of Faith, they lose all their credit and authority; for who will believe witnesses on their own words, if they disagree in their testimony?  
Fifthly, I infer, that this Church is universal, spread over all Nations, that she may be said to be every where, morally speaking (that is, according to common humane account, by which a thing diffused over a great part of the world, and famously known, is said to be every where; In this manner, the Apostle said, that the faith of the Romans, was renowned in the whole world.) Rom. 1.12. that so the whole world may take notice of her, as of a worthy and credible witness of Christian Tradition, howsoever her outward glory and splendour, peace and tranquillity, in some places and at some times be more or less eclipsed, and she be not always in all places at once. And the reason of this perpetual visible universality is, because the Tradition of the Church is the sole ordinary means of faith toward the Word of God. This Tradition therefore must be so delivered, as that it may be known to all men, seeing God will have all men (without exception of any nation) to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth, 1. Tim. 2.4. which they cannot do, unless the Church be so diffused in the world, that all known nations may take notice of her. And Gods will that all men should be saved, though it be but an antecedent will, as Schoolmen call it, yet it inferreth two things, which some Protestants deny; first the salvation of all men; secondly the means of their salvation. In respect of the means, the will of God is absolute, that all men in some sort or other have sufficient means of salvation. In respect of the end, to wit, the salvation of all men, the will of God is not absolute, but as Schoolmen say, virtually conditional; that is, God hath a will that all men be saved, as much as lies in him, if the course of his providence be not intercepted, and men will cooperate with his grace. And the reason why some Nations hear not the Gospel and Word of God, is not the defect of his Church, but the want of working in the natural causes, to discover such Countries; which defect God will not ever miraculously supply. But if the Church were invisible to the world, and hoarded up her Religion to herself, either not daring, or not willing to profess and preach the same unto others; Nations may be known, and yet the Word of God not known to them. If therefore this Church should be hidden for a long time, men's souls should perish, not through defect in the natural causes, but only through the hiddenness, obscurity, and wretchedness of the supernatural means, to wit, of the Church; not endued with so much zeal and courage, as to profess her Religion, and to propagate it in the world, which cannot be; Therefore it is impossible that the true Church should not be ever universal, and famously known.  
Sixthly, this Church is holy, both in life and Doctrine. Holy for life, shining in all admirable sanctity, the rays whereof do overcome the hearts of the beholders; such as the Holy Apostles gave example of, as of poverty, chastity, obedience, charity in undergoing all forms of labour, and danger for the safety of souls; patience invincible in the rough handling of themselves by wonderful fastings, and all kind of austerities; fortitude heroical in suffering martyrdom, not only with patience, but with joy, though given them in all the most hideous shapes, that man's imagination steeled with malice, could invent. And although this kind of sanctity does not shine in all the members of the Church, but in the more eminent professors, and principally in the Pastors, yet if this kind of sanctity together with Miracles were wanting, she could not be so sufficient a witness to Infidels, who ordinarily are not won to the affection, and admiration of Christianity, but by beholding such wonders of power, and sanctity in the Professors thereof. Holy she is also for doctrine, in regard her traditions are divine and holy, without commixture of error; for if the Church could deliver any one, or few errors, intermingled with many truths, her Traditions even of the truth were questionable, and could not be believed upon her word: Even as if we admit in Scripture, any error in smaller matters, we cannot be sure of its infallibility in matters of greatest moment; as he that shall say, Gods written word is false, or uncertain, when it tells him, that S. Paul left his cloak at Troas, may also say with as much reason, that it is false or uncertain, when it tells him that Christ was borne of the Virgin Mary: Even so he that grants that some part of Traditions or the Word of God unwritten, may be false, infers by consequence, that every part thereof may be so; and that because we have no antecedent ground or touchstone to try Traditions by, but they must be believed for their own sakes, being therein more fundamental than the Scriptures, which are not known to be Apostolical, but by Tradition; whereas perpetual Tradition is known to come from the Apostles by its own light; for what can be more evident, then that that is from the Apostles, which is delivered as Apostolical by perpetual succession of Priests and people, affirming and believing the same.  
§. 2. But against this truth, that if the Church may err in one thing, neither we, nor she can be sure that she speaks truth in any thing, Chillingworth makes these (in my judgement) impertinent interrogations: A Judge may possibly err in Judgement, can he therefore never have assurance that he hath judged right? A travailer may possibly mistake his way, must I therefore be doubtful whether I am in the right way from my hall to my chamber? 
pag. 117. sect. 106.  In which he weakly falls into comparison betwixt matters which are the object of the sense, or of the understanding, and of faith; which in this case have no proportion betwixt them. For the doctrines of faith, (as they are of faith, being altogether, and all equally, without the reach of our knowledge) we have no way to attain to, but by the help of others, whom we must absolutely believe; and if we know that they may deliver that which is false to us, we can never be sure that any thing they deliver to us, is not false, unless we had some superior rule to try and examine their Traditions by, which certainly we have not. Nor can the Church it self, if she may err in the delivery of one thing, be sure that she doth not err in every thing, because she hath no infallible rule to examine her doctrines by, out of herself; who if she be assisted by the Holy Ghost cannot err in any thing, if not, for aught she knows, she doth in all things. Now that the Church is assisted by God, and that man's reason cannot be the highest judge, to whom the last appeal is made in matters of faith, which descend from God, I have showed before. As for a humane Judge, as he may err through ignorance, wilfulness, or negligence, which to conceive of the Church, is absurd, yea blasphemous, she having Christ for her Head, and the Holy Ghost for her Spirit; so he cannot be more certain of the truth of his judgement, than his reason can make him, which will not reach to an absolute infallibility. And as a travailer may mistake his way in one journey, so he may in another, if he have no more certainty nor better guide of the one way, than of the other; which is the Church's case in propounding and believing matters of faith, revealed to her by God, which, like the Circumference from the Centre, are all equally distant from our knowledge, and the Church hath an equal Prerogative of infallibility by the guidance of the Holy Ghost in all, who therefore can err in nothing, or in all things, which she saith she so receives, and delivers. Yet Chillingworth saith, that his consequences are as like the other, as an egg to an egg, or milk to milk; but more truly, they are as like as an egg to an oyster, or milk to ink.  
§. 3. And lest any Protestant, who honours the Scriptures much with his lips, though he be far removed with his heart, should think that I am injurious to the Scripture, in saying that Tradition is more fundamental, than Scripture itself, I desire him to take notice, that Tradition and Scripture, according to different comparisons, are equal and superior the one to the other. Compare them in respect of certainty of truth, they are equal, both being the Word of God, the one written, the other unwritten, and so both infinitely certain. Compare them in respect of depth, of sublimity, and variety of doctrine the Scripture is far superior to Tradition, Tradition being plain and easy doctrine, concerning the common, capital, and practical Articles of Christianity, whereas the Scripture is full of high & hidden senses, and furnished with great variety of examples, discourses, and all manner of learning. Compare them in respect of antiquity, and evidence of being the Apostles, the Scripture is inferior to Tradition, in time and knowledge, and cannot be proved directly to be the Apostles, and therefore Gods, but by Tradition. As Philosophy is more perfect than Logic, and Rhetoric than Grammar, in respect of high and excellent knowledge; yet Logic is more prime, original, and fundamental than Philosophy, Grammar than Rhetoric, without the rules and principles whereof they cannot be learned: Even so Tradition is more prime and original than Scripture, though Scripture in respect of depth, and sublimity of discourse, be more excellent than Tradition.   

CHAP. X.  
That the Roman is that one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church  
THese premises considered, I looked round about to see amongst all the societies of the world professing the name of Christ, to which of them the title and dignity of the Church, might most justly be applied; and I found that the Roman Church, that is the multitude of Christians spread over the face of the known world, adhering to the doctrine of the Church of Rome, is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. The vulgar objection against the title of Catholic Roman, that is, say they, universal, and yet but particular, seemed very childish; the one title being applied in regard of the doctrine, and the extent thereof, which is universal; the other of the discipline, and the fountain, and head thereof, which is particular, from the Bishop of Rome. For the word Catholic is taken three ways, to wit, formally, causally, and participatively. Formally, the universal Church only, that is to say, the society of all the true particular Churches, united in lemma ourself Communion, is called Catholic. Causally, the Roman Church is called Catholic, for as much as she infuseth universality into all the whole body of the Catholic Church. For to constitute universality there must be two things, one that may be instead of matter thereto, to wit, the multitude; and the other instead of form thereto, to wit, unity; for a multitude without unity, do not properly make universality; Take away unity from the multitude (saith S. Augustine) and it is a tumult, 
De verb. Dom. sceundum Luc. Serm. 26.  but bring in unity, and it is a people. Therefore the Roman Church (which as the centre and beginning of the Ecclesiastical Communion, infuseth unity, which is the form of universality, into the Catholic Church) may be called Catholic causally, though in her own being, she be particular: Even as the chief Captain of an army, on whom all the inferior Captains, Officers, and common Soldiers have their dependency, and with whom they hold correspondency, is called The General, though he be but one particular man, because it is he, that (by the relation that all others have to him) gives unity to the whole body of the Army. And thirdly, particular Churches are called Catholic, participatively, because they agree and participate in doctrine and Communion with the Catholic Church.  
§ 2. Now I was induced to believe, that the Roman Church, is the only true Catholic Church; by these ensuing reasons. First God being the Prime Verity, revealing truth, cannot suffer the knowledge of saving doctrine to be impossible, but it is impossible, if it be hidden; or if a false means of knowledge thereof, be so dressed with the marks of the true, as that the true become undiscernible from it: And if the Roman be not the true Catholic Church and Tradition, than the true Catholic Church and Tradition is hidden, and a false Church hath the marks of the true so clearly, that no other can with any colour pretend to be Catholic rather than it; that is, to have doctrine delivered from the Apostles by whole worlds of Christian Fathers, to whole worlds of Christian children. Hence either there is no means left assuredly to know the saving truth, or else it must be inward teaching by immediate revelation, without any external infallible means; or the Scripture, known to be the Word of God, and truly interpreted, by the light and evidence of the things, or by the force of natural reason, the vanity and falsehood whereof I have already showed: for knowledge of supernatural truth, by the light and lustre of the doctrine, is proper to the Church triumphant, inward assurance without an external infallible ground is proper unto Prophets and the first publishers of Religion. Hence it may be concluded, that if God be the Prime Verity, teaching Christian Religion darkly, without making men see the light of things believed; and mediately, by some external infallible means, upon which inward assurance must rely, than he must ever conserve the Catholic Church and Tradition visible and conspicuous, that the same may be by sensible marks discerned.  
And if any object, that the senses of men in this search may be deceived, through natural invincible fallibility of their organs, and so be no ground of faith, that is altogether infallible; I answer, that evidence had by sense, being but the private sense of one man, is not ordinarily fallible; but when the same is also public & general, that is, when a whole world of men concur with him, than his evidence is altogether infallible. Besides, seeing God will not teach men immediately, but will have them cleave to an external infallible means, and to find out this means by the sensible evidence of the thing, he is in a manner bound by the perfection of his veracity to assist men's senses with his providence, that therein they be not deceived, when they use such diligence, as men ordinarily use, that they be not deceived by their senses. Now what greater evidence can one have, that he is not deceived in this matter of sense, that the Roman doctrine is the Catholic, that is, doctrine delivered from the Apostles, by worlds of Christian Ancestors, unanimous amongst themselves in all matters of faith: what greater assurance (I say) can one have, that herein he sees aright, than a whole world of men professing to see the same that he doth? And surely this was the meaning of God by the Prophet Esay, when speaking of the Church of Christ, he calls it a direct way, so that fools cannot err therein, Esa. 35.8. which cannot be, but by following a world of Ancestors going before them in the same Tract. Otherwise it is not only possible for fools, but even for them that seem to be wisest to err, yea in this case it is impossible to be otherwise.  
And if it be further objected, that I believe the Catholic Church, is an Article of Faith, and Faith is the argument of things not seen. I answer, an Article of Faith may be visible according to the substance of the thing, and yet invisible according to the manner it is believed in the Creed. The third Article, He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried, according to the substance of the thing, was evident to sense, and seen of the Jews, and is now believed of their posterity; but according to the manner that it is believed in the Creed, to wit, that herein the Word of God by his Prophets was fulfilled, and that it was done for the salvation of man; in this manner this visible Article is invisible, and so it is believed in the Creed. In like manner that there is in the world a Catholic Church, and that the Roman is this Catholic Church, Pagans, Jews, and Heretics, (if they shut not their eyes against the light) do clearly behold; but that herein the Word of God, concerning the perpetual amplitude of his Church, is accomplished, that this is an effect of God's varacity, to the end that the means to learn saving truth may not be hidden, this is a thing invisible; and according to this notion the Catholic Church is proposed in the Creed. Secondly, propositions of Faith must be invisible according to the Predicate or thing believed, but not always according to the Subject, or thing whereof we believe some other thing. The things the Apostles believed of Christ, to wit, that he was the Son of God, the Saviour of the world, were things invisible; but the subject and person of whom they did believe these things, was visible to them; yea God did of purpose by his Prophets foretell certain tokens, whereby that subject might by sense be seen and discerned from all other, that might pretend the name of Christ; or else his coming into the world to teach the truth, had been to little purpose. In this sort the Predicate or thing believed in this Article, the Holy Catholic Church, to wit, Holy, is invisible, but the Subject, to wit, the Catholic Church, which we affirm and believe to be holy in her doctrine, is visible and conspicuous to all. Yea God hath of purpose foretold signs & tokens, whereby she may by sense be clearly discerned from all other that may pretend to the title of Catholic. For, were not this subject, the Holy Catholic Church, which we believe to be holy and infallible in her teaching, visible and discernible from all other that pretend to that title, of what use were it to believe that there is such an infallible teaching Church in the world, hidden we know not where, like a Candle under a Bushel, or a needle in a bottle of hey?  
§ 3. Secondly, if there must be always in the world (as was proved before) one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, that is, a Church delivering doctrines uniformly, thereby making them credible; universally, thereby making them famously known to mankind; holily, so making them certain, and such, as that on them we may securely rely; Apostolically, so making them flow in the channel of a never-interrupted succession of Bisbops from the Apostles; then this Church must be either the Roman, or the Protestant, or some other opposite to both. Protestants cannot say a Church opposite to both, for than they should be condemned in their own judgement, and be bound to conform themselves to that Church, which can be no other but the Grecian; a Church holding as many doctrines which the Protestants dislike, as the Church of Rome; as might easily be proved if need were. It is further manifest, that the Protestants are not this One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, since their revolt and separation from the Church of Rome; because in that very act of separation they did extinguish all these titles; for they changed the doctrines they once held, they forsook the body whereof they were Members, broke off from the stock of that tree whereof they were branches; neither in their departure did they join themselves with any other Church different from the Roman, professing the particular Protestant doctrines; so that they made a new Church of their own not agreeing in all points of faith, with any that went before; neither have they which have come after them (as there are very many Sects risen out of the first Protestant) agreed with them. And therefore there is none, or the Roman is the One, Holy Catholic, and Apostolic Church.  
§. 4. Thirdly the Protestants had the Holy Scripture from the Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, otherwise they cannot be sure that they are the true Scriptures of the Apostles; because the testimony and Tradition of any other Church is fallible, and may deceive them; And if it may, for aught they know it hath, seeing they lived not in the Apostles days, thereby to make themselves certain thereof; and so they will be altogether uncertain of that which they make the only object of their faith. 
Luther count. Anab. To. 7. German. jen fol. 169. whitaker de Eccles. l. 3. p. 369.  Now it is most certain that they had the Scriptures from the Roman Church, acknowledged by Luther himself, and also by Doctor Whitaker; only they took the wicked boldness to cancel some parts thereof; therefore, they must either acknowledge, that they are not sure that the Scripture is the Word of God, or that the Church of Rome, from whom they received it, is the true Church. And if the true Church hath delivered the true Text of Scripture, then hath she also, together with the true Text, delivered the true Apostolical sense; because the Apostles themselves did not deliver to her the bare Text, but with it the true sense, to be delivered perpetually to posterity; not by making a large and entire comment of all difficult places, but by delivering with the Text the sense also, about the main and principal points; So that they who by Tradition receive from the Apostles the true Text, must together with it receive the true sense. Now principal 
* Chemnit. exam. Cont. Trid. p. 1. fol. 74. Doctor Bancroft in the Survey, p. 379.  Protestants affirm the former, saying, No man doubteth, but the Primitive Church received from the Apostles, and Apostolical men, not only the Text of Scripture, but also the right and native sense; Which is agreeable to the Doctrine of the 
* Vincentius Lyrinens. cap. 2.  Fathers, that from the Apostles, together with the Text, descends the line of Apostolical interpretation, squared according to the Ecclesiastical and Catholic sense. Whereupon 
* Aug. de util. cred. c. 14.  S. Augustine affirms the later, that they that deliver the Text of Christ's Gospel, must also deliver the Exposition, saying, that he would sooner refuse to believe Christ, than learn any thing concerning him, but of those by whom he was brought to believe Christ. For they that can deliver by uniform Tradition a false sense, may also deliver a false Text, as received from the Apostles; their freedom from, or liableness to error in both being equal. If therefore the Church of Rome have delivered the true Text, than she hath also delivered and preserved the true sense, or else we are sure of neither; and so she only is the true, holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church; or else there is none.  
§. 5. Fourthly, it is granted by Protestants, that the Roman Church was once the true Church, and it cannot be proved that she hath changed her doctrine since the Apostles time, therefore she is still the same true Church. And that she hath not changed her Doctrine is thus proved; the Doctrines that have continued for divers ages in the Christian Church, and no time of their beginning can be assigned, must needs be Doctrines descending from the Apostles, and unchanged; and such are the Doctrines of the Church of Rome. Than the Doctrines of the Roman Church which Protestants reject, have been universally received for many hundreds of years, is by many learned Protestants confessed. Perkins saith, 
* Expos. of the Creed, p. 307. & 400.  during the space of nine hundred years, the Popish Heresy hath spread itself over the whole world, and for many hundred years an universal Apostasy overspread the whole face of the earth, so that our Protestant Church was not then visible to the world. Fulk saith, 
* Treatise ag. Stapleton, & Marshal. p. 25.  the Pope hath blinded the world these many hundred years, some say 900. some 1000 some 1200. And 
* On the Revelat. p 64.  Napier saith, The Antichristian and Papistical reign began about the year three hundred and sixteen after Christ, (which is now above 1300. years ago) reigning universally without debateable contradiction, God's true Church abiding certainly hidden and latent. Secondly, Protestant's cannot tell the time when the Church of Rome began to change and swerve from the Apostolical doctrine, therefore doubtless she hath never changed her faith. Now that doctrines universally received, although they be not written, are Doctrines derived from the Apostles, is affirmed by 
* De Baptis. lib. 5. c. 23.  S. Augustine, and allowed by 
* D. sense p. 351. 352.  D. Whitguift, Archbishop of Canterbury, who in his book against Puritans, citing divers Protestants, as concurring in opinion with him, saith, whatsoever opinions are not known to have begun since the Apostles time, the same are not new or secundary, but received their original from the Apostles. But because this principle of Christian divinity brings in (as Cartwright the Puritan there alleged speaks) all Popery in the judgement of all men, I will further demonstrate it, though of itself it be clear enough.  
Christ by his Spirit being still present with his Church, cannot permit errors in Faith so to creep into the Church, as that by the very principles of Christianity they become unreformable; but if errors so creep into the Church, as that their beginning cannot be known, and their progress become universal, then do they so enter and prevail, that by the principles of Christianity, they are past reformation; and that because whosoever undertakes to reform them, is to be condemned as an Heretic; for he that will undertake to reform Doctrines universally received by the Church, opposeth himself against the whole Church, and is therefore by a known and received Principle of Christianity and Christ's own precept, to be accounted as a Heathen and a Publican, Mat. 18.17. 
Epist. 118.  And as S. Augustine saith, To dispute against the whole Church is insolent madness: For, the Church by Christ is appointed the Judge and corrector of all others, as our Saviour saith, Tell the Church, and therefore is not to be judged nor corrected by any; he that hath the high presumption to do so, presently pulls on himself the censure of a Heathen. And justly too, for (like the Giants amongst the Poets who waged war against the Gods) he doth not only oppose the present Church, but the Church of all ages, even the Apostles themselves; and who is sufficient for these things? And he gins a new course of Christianity, seeking to overthrow that Doctrine which is universally received, and cannot be proved by any Tradition of Ancestors to be otherwise planted in the world, than by the Apostles themselves, through the power of innumerable miracles. Wherefore these Doctrines, if they be errors, are errors, whose reformation no man by the principles of Christianity ought to attempt. And seeing it is impossible there should be any such errors, the Principle of S. Augustine stands firm, That Doctrines received universally in the Church without any known beginning, are truly Apostolical, and of this kind are the Roman Doctrines, from which Protestants have revolted.  
But some Protestants object, that the errors of the Pharisees were universally received in the Jewish Church, yet reform by our Saviour. To which may be answered that Protestants (out of their desire to make Catholics seem like the Pharisees) make themselves seem, as if they did not any whit understand the Gospel. For the Traditions of the Pharisees were not universal Traditions, but certain practices of piety invented by themselves, and deducted by their skill from Scripture, whereby they would seem singularly religions, and not as other men. Secondly, Christ Jesus proving himself to be true God, might reform errors universally received; and the Church of the Jews falling, erect a new Church of Christians as he did; which is not lawful for any one else to do. For Christian Religion must continue to the world's end, by virtue of the first Tradition thereof, and must never be interrupted without extraordinary and prophetical beginning, by immediate revelation and Miracles; If therefore errors be delivered by the full consent of Christian Tradition, they are irreformable. Again some Protestants say, that one may oppose the whole Church, and confute her errors by Scripture, & not be as an Heathen or Heretic; for not every one that opposeth the Church is to be accounted an Heathen, 
Whites Reply, p. 136.  but only such as inordinately and without just cause oppose it. And who I pray shall judge of the justness of the cause? By this doctrine, every man is made an examiner and judge of the whole Church, & hellish confusion brought in thereby. For if against the sentence of perpetual universal Tradition, a private man may, without the guilt of heresy, pretend Scripture, and stand obstinately therein, & though the Church do give seeming and appearing answers (as some of them confess) to his Scripture, yet condemn her answers, saying they are sophistical, (as some of them do) what can be more disorderly? or what is Heretical obstinacy, if this be not? Wherefore S. Augustine saith absolutely, 
Epist. 48.  it is impossible men should have just cause, to departed from, & impugn the whole Christian Church. And why? but because it is a ruled case in Christianity, he that heareth not the Church is an Heretic.  
Yet notwithstanding this, the Protestants do charge the Church of Rome, DE FACTO, to have fall'n into errors, and to have changed her faith; and that because points of doctrine undefined, (about which Doctors have disputed, and held different opinions) have been afterwards defined by the Church, so that it was not lawful for any after that, to make doubt thereof; the Church by this means hath held in later ages, that to be DE FIDE, a matter of faith, which the former ages did not, and so (say they) hath changed the faith, and believes and delivers more than she received from the Apostles. But this I found to be no change of faith, but only a declaration of some point explicitly, which was implicitly and involvedly believed before. For all the Articles of faith were immediately re-revealed by Christ to his Apostles, and by them again delivered to their posterity; so that since, there have been no new and particular revelations, but the first being laid up in the treasury of the Church, (for which cause S. Paul calls it a depositum, a stock, or pawn,) other truths have been deduced from thence, as occasion hath required. For when any one endeavours to corrupt the doctrine delivered by the Apostles, the Church calls her Pastors and Doctors to examine the matter, and being infallibly assisted by the Spirit of truth (which our Saviour promised should be with his Apostles to the end of the world, that is, with the Church their Successor, which was to continue to the world's end) she declares what is true, and what is false; as agreeing with, or disagreeing from that doctrine which she hath received from her Forefathers the Prophets and Apostles, upon whom she is built; as S. Paul saith, built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Ephes. 2.20. For as in a building there is not the least stone which rests not upon the foundation; so in the doctrine of the Catholic Church, there is not the least point which is not grounded on, or contained in that which was delivered by the Apostles.  
For example, in the principles of every Science are contained divers truths, which may be drawn out of them, by many several conclusions, one following another; These conclusions were truths in themselves before, though they did not so appear to us, till we saw the connexion they had with the premises, and how they were contained in them; And by the many several conclusions so drawn, the truth of those principles doth more show itself, but doth not receive any change in itself thereby: even so in the prime principles of our faith, revealed immediately by God, and delivered to the Church, are contained all truths, that any way belong to our faith; but it was not necessary that the Church should manifest all these, at their first meeting in Council, but only so much in every several Council, as should concern the present occasion of their meeting; which is some particular heresy, or heresies then sprung up, and so more according to the successive growth of heresies; which when she hath done, she cannot be charged with creating of a new faith, or altering of the old; but she doth only, out of old grounds and premises draw such conclusions, as may serve to destroy new heresies, and show them to be contrary to the ancient faith. In this manner the Church hath grown and increased in knowledge by degrees, and shall still do so to the end of the world. And as the sun spreads the rays of his light more and more betwixt morning and noon, and his beams display themselves in a valley, or some room of a house, where they did not before, without any change of light in the sun himself; So may the Church spread the light of her faith, showing such or such a point to be a divine truth; which before was not known to be so; or which though it were a divine truth in itself, yet it was not so to us, for want of sufficient proposal, that is, of the Churches; wherein the Church resembles our Blessed Saviour, her Lord and Spouse; who though he never received the least increase of grace and knowledge, from the first moment of his being conceived, yet the Scripture saith, He grew in wisdom and age, and in favour with God and men, Luc. 2.52. to wit, because he shown it more and more, in his words and actions.  
This also further appears by the method which Catholic Fathers and Doctors observe in and out of Counsels, in proving and defining points of faith; namely by having recourse to the authority of God's Word, contained both in Scripture and Tradition, and to the belief and practice of the Church; in searching whereof, the Holy Church joins humane industry with God's grace and assistance. For when any question or doubt of faith ariseth, particular Doctors severally dispute and write thereof; then if further cause require, the Holy Church assembles her Pastors and Doctors together in a general Council, to examine and discuss the matter more fully, as in that first Council of the Apostles whereof the Scripture saith, The Apostles and Elders assembled together, to consider of this word, Acts 15.6. The Pastors being thus come together, and having the presence of our Saviour, and his Holy Spirit (according to his promise) amongst them, out of Scripture and Traditions, joining therewith the consent of holy Fathers and Doctors of foregoing times, she doth infallibly resolve and determine the matter; not as new, but as ancient, orthodox, and derived from her forefathers; making that which was ever in itself a divine truth, so to appear to us, that now we may no more make question thereof. So that from hence it appears, that the Church makes no new Articles of faith, such as then may be said to have their beginning, but only explications and collections out of the old, which were delivered to the Apostles, and by them to us.  
And though the Church do thus grow in the knowledge of points of faith, yet this is no newness of faith, but a maintenance of the old, with a kind of increase, by way of explicating that which was involved, clearing that which was obscure, defining that which was undefined, & obliging men to believe more firmly and explicitly, that which before they were not bound so to believe.  
That is only to be called a new faith, which is contrary to that which was held before, or hath no connexion with it; and when we cease to believe that which we believed before; this indeed is change of faith, the other is but increase. And if this increase of faith by the declaration of Counsels, may be called a change and innovation of faith, there is no Heretic but may challenge antiquity to himself, and put novelty on the score of the Church. For he may say such a thing, for example, that the Son is of the same substance with the Father, was not held de fide, a matter of faith, before the Council of Nice, therefore it is new. That Baptism administered by Heretics is good baptism, was not held as a matter of faith before the days of S. Cyprian, therefore it is new. And the Heretic may say, that he believes only that which was believed before such or such a Council (which he please, for the case is alike in all) and therefore he believes the ancient Faith: By which way of arguing, he may renounce the decrees of all Counsels, as Novelties, and maintain many Heresies, as the ancient Faith. Yea by this absurdity a man may deny divers Books of the Scripture, as the Epistle to the Hebrews, the second Epistle of S. Peter, the Epistle of S. james, of S. jude, and the Apocalypse, with some others, because they were not admitted for Canonical, until 300. or 400. years after they were written. Yet when they were declared to be Canonical, there was no change of faith in the Church thereby: for the believing of these Books was involved in this revealed Article, I believe in God; and the believing of them to be Canonical, was involved in this revealed Article, I believe the holy Catholic Church: only hereby was an increase of the material object of our faith to us, not in itself; we being bound upon the declaration of the Church, to believe that thing firmly and without dispute, which before perhaps we were not so obliged to do.  
§ 6. A fifth argument moving me to believe that the Roman Church is the Catholic, was this: That doctrine which hath been delivered by Tradition, as the doctrine of our Ancestors, without any opposition made by any known Catholic Fathers and Doctors: and if any did oppose the doctrine, he was censured of Novelty, and after admonition (if he persisted therein) was condemned of Heresy, such doctrine is derived from the Apostles and unchanged, and such is the doctrine of the Roman Church.  
'Tis true indeed, that divers points of the Roman doctrine have been opposed, as by Arrius, Pelagius, Berengarius, Waldo, Wickliff, Husse, and many others, but these were not accounted orthodox Fathers, but were taxed of Novelty and innovation, and for such are delivered to us, by Tradition and history of the times wherein they lived. And it cannot be prudenty imagined; that if the Church of Rome had (like these men) attempted to change the doctrine of the Apostles, there should be no Tradition of it, no historical narration of it, but that all the good and true Catholics should be asleep, to this great business of defending the flock from Wolves; or (which is more absurd) should against their knowledge, and conscience suffer damnable errors to steal in, to the destruction of themselves, and all the world that should succeed them. Now the opposition of the Church in the forementioned manner, is so far from obscuring the Church's doctrine, that it makes it far more famous, and illustrious, and apparently Apostolical; even as the sun struggling with a misty morning, breaking through it, appears more beautifully glorious, and unconquerable. And this Doctor Feild a learned Protestant confesseth, when a doctrine is in any age constantly delivered as a matter of faith, 
Field of the Church, l. 4. c. 14  and as received from ancestors, in such sort as the contradictors thereof were in the beginning noted for novelty, and if they persisted in contradiction, in the end charged with heresy, it is impossible but such a doctrine should come by succession from the Apostles.  
But Protestants think it sufficient, that they find (as they say) the Roman doctrine contradicted in the writings of orthodox Fathers, though their opposition was not noted by antiquity, nor by the fame of Tradition delivered to posterity. But this answer leaves no means to common people to know certainly the perpetual Tradition of God's Church, which is the guide of their faith, but by reading and examining the Fathers, which to them is impossible. Besides if that some few obscure and hard passages out of the Fathers, may suffice to call the Tradition of the Church into question, than there is nothing so clearly and unanimously delivered by Tradition, but may fall under a new examination; seeing nothing is or can be writ so plainly, especially where there is very much also written, but that some obscure and obliqne passages may be raked out, to make show of a contradiction; and if this counterpart may have the title of antiquity set over it, what Heresy will want its defence out of the Fathers? What Tradition was more constantly delivered by the Christian Fathers and Doctors, than our Saviour's Consubstantiality with his Father? Yet the new Arrians (as we may see in Bellarmine) bring divers testimonies out of the ancient Fathers, 
Lib. 2. de Christ. c. 19  to prove, that in this point they contradicted themselves and one another. In like manner, do the Protestants now bring some obscure places out of the Fathers, in the defence of their heresies, which yet in a true sense do import no such thing, but being a little obscure, they more easily wrest them to their corrupted meaning. But on the contrary, the Fathers are abundant and clear, in those places which maintain the Catholic doctrines, and none of the Fathers of those times did accuse other of error in those points, which if they had thought them so, there is no doubt they would. For we cannot imagine, the true believers of those times less vigilant than of these; and we see now, that no man can broach an error against faith, but presently he hath abundant opposition, and further questioning, if the cause require.  
Therefore it is apparent, that Protestants when they allege the Fathers, as contradicting themselves, and one another in the Catholic Doctrines of those times, either misalledge their words, or mistake their meaning. For, if those contradictions were real, why did not antiquity note them, as it noted their differences about smaller disputable matters. S. Hierome and Epiphanius took pains to note the errors of Origen; yet amongst them all they did not note any, which the Church of Rome now holds, though his writings be full thereof. If the sentences of the Fathers be true in the sense that Protestants allege them, why did not some charge them for maintaining the contrary Roman Doctrines, a thousand times more frequently mentioned in their writings? And on the other side, if the Roman Doctrines were true, why did not some tax them for maintaining of Protestantisme? doubtless they would if they had understood them in the sense that Protestants now do. It is manifest therefore that they that lived in those times (who were therefore better able to understand their meanings, than the Protestants that are sprung up so many hundred years after) did not conceive that the Fathers maintained the Protestant doctrines in their writings; for if they had, they would quickly have been reproved seeing the current of Christian Religion even of those times, was agreeable to the present Roman; for as 
* Napier On the Revelat. p. 191. also Cent. Mag. cent. 2. c. 4. col. 55.  Napier saith, during even the second and third ages, the true temple of God and light of the Gospel was obscured by the Roman Antichrist himself. And according to 
* Treatise of Antichrist, lib. 2. c. 2. p. 25.  Downeham, the general defection of the visible Church foretell, 2 Thess. 2. began to work in the Apostles time.  
§. 7. On the contrary, we find in the writings of the Orthodox Fathers, that the Doctrines which Protestant's now hold, were condemned as heretical in those persons that then held them, and they were not therein opposed by any other Orthodox Fathers. For example, the Protestants hold that the Church may err, so did the Donatists, for which they are frequently reproved by * S. Augustine. 
Passim. count. Donat.  Protestants deny unwritten Traditions, & urge Scripture only, so did the Arrians, and are condemned for it by 
* Epiphan. Her. 75. Aug. count. Maximin. l. 1. c. 2. & ult.  S. Epiphanius, and S. Augustine. Protestants teach that Priests may marry; so did Vigilantius, and for it is condemned by 
* Cont. Vigilant. c. 1.  S. Hierome. Protestants deny prayer for the dead; so did Arrius, for which he is condemned by 
* Aug. haer. 53. Epiphan. har. 75.  S. Augustine and S. Epiphanius. Protestants deny invocations of Saints; so did Vigilantius, for which he is condemned by S. 
* Hier. count. Vigil. c. 3.  Hierome. Protestants deny reverence to Images; so did Xenaias, for which he is rereproved by 
* Hist. lib. 16. c. 27.  Nicephorus in these words, Xenaias' first (O audacious soul, and impudent mouth) vomited forth that speech, that the Images of Christ and those who have pleased him, are not to be worshipped. Protestants deny the real presence; so did the Capernaites, who were, saith 
* In Psal. 54. & 55.  S. Augustine, the first Heretics that denied the real presence, and that Judas was the first suborner and maintainer of this heresy. Protestants deny confession of sins to a Priest; so did the Novatian Heretics, for which they are reproved by 
* Lib. de poenit. c. 7.  S. Ambrose. So did the Montanists, and are reproved by Saint 
* Hieron. Epist. ad Marcell. 54.  Hierome. Protestants say that a man is justified by faith only; so did the Pseudo-Apostles, for which they are condemned by S. 
* De fide & oper. c. 14.  Augustine. I might increase this Catalogue by the addition of many other, and make the new Protestant Religion appear but a frippery of old Heresies: but these shall suffice. From all which it appears, that the Fathers held the same faith with the present Roman Church, and that there was no opposition of Fathers against Fathers, nor of any one Father against himself, at least in matters of faith; but that they all held the unity of the faith; that they that held the contrary were by them condemned of Heresy; that in bringing any places out of the Fathers to confirm their Heresies, they did misinterpret them, as the Protestants now do; that therefore the Doctrine of the Roman Church is Apostolical and unchanged; and therefore she is the true Church.   

CHAP. XI.  
That the true Church may be known by evident marks; and that such marks agree only to the Roman Church. And first of Universality, the first mark of the Church.  
§. 1. IN further pursuit of the true Church, I addressed myself, by the marks thereof to find it out. For I accounted it vain to try by the Scripture, whether the particular doctrines of Protestants, were the doctrines of the Apostles, unless I could find their Church to be the true Church, by the marks of the true Church set down in Scripture. For either the Scripure can clear all controversies, or it canntot; if it cannot, there will be no end of controversy amongst them that rely only on Scripture; if it can, then surely it can clear this most important one, which is the true Church, by the marks thereof; and if so, it is fit that that should be determined in the first place, on which all the rest depends, 
Ep. dedic.  as Doctor Feild acknowledgeth. And whereas some Protestants make the truth of the doctrine to be the only mark of the Church, it is preposterous, being the declaration of a thing obscure, or pretended to be so, by a thing more obscure; in as much as to know the truth of the doctrine in all the particular instances, is harder than to know the society of the Church. And it is necessary to know the truth of doctrine in all the particulars, before we can thereby know the true Church, because if she err in any one point of faith, she thereby falls from the title of the true Church. Now who is he that can boast to know the integrity of the doctrine of the Church, in all the particular controversies, against every society that holds the contrary, by infallible proofs of Scripture, and invincible answers to all their objections? If any could do this, who knows not that ignorant and unlearned people (of whose salvation notwithstanding God hath the same care, as of the learned, and to whom the marks of the Church should be equally common, since they are equally obliged to obey her) are not capable of this examination? 
Cont. Ep. Fund. c. 4.  For the rest of the people (saith S. Augustine) it is not the quickness of understanding, but the simplicity of belief that secure them.  
Therefore it is manifest, that they must have other marks to know the Church by, than that of her Doctrine; namely, marks proportionable to their capacity; to wit, external and sensible marks, as eminency, antiquity, perpetuity, with the like; even as children and ignorant people must have external and sensible marks, and other than the essential form of a man, to know and discern a man from other living creatures. Else how could S. Paul say, God hath made in the Church Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors and Doctors, to the end we should be no more little children, blown about with every wind of doctrine, Ephes. chap. 4. ver. 11. if he had not given us other marks to know the Church than the purity of the Doctrine? Besides purity of Doctrine being the essential form of the Church, cannot be a mark of it, because they are commonly repugnant and incompatible conditions. For the mark doth commonly demonstrate the thing to the sense, and the essential form doth show it to the understanding; the mark designs the thing in existence, the essential form designs it in essence; the mark shows where the thing is, the essential form teaches what it is; the mark is sooner known than the thing; and contrariwise the thing is sooner known than the essential form of the thing; 
1 Phys. c. 1.  for the thing defined (as Aristotle saith) is known before the definition. A Mark then must have three conditions; The first is to be more known than the thing, since it is that, which makes the thing to be known. The second, that the thing be never found without it. The third, that it be never found without the thing, either alone, if it be a total mark, or with its fellows, if it be a mark in part. According to these conditions, I found divers Marks set down in Scripture appliable only to the Church of Rome.  
§. 2. Of which the first is to be Catholic, that is, universal; which was foretell by the Prophet Esay, saying, All Nations shall flow unto it, Esay 2.2. And by the Psalmist, that it should have the Heathen for its inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for its possession, Psal. 2.2. And by our Saviour saying, This Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness to all Nations, and then shall the end come And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his Name amongst all Nations, beginning at Jerusalem, Mat. 24.14. Luc. 24.47. Therefore to distinguish Christ's true Church from all Heretical Sects, the Apostles in their Creed, and the ancient Fathers in their Writings, have given her the Surname of Catholic; a name ever insisted upon by the Fathers against Heretics, no less than now.  
And that the Roman Church is this Catholic Church dispersed over the whole world, is manifest to all those that have either read the histories of the world, or have been eye-witnesses of the several Countries thereof; wherein though the public profession thereof be Heretical, mahometical, or Heathenish, yet even there hath the Roman Catholic Church both Fathers and children, Pastors and people. And like the Sea, what she loseth in one place, she wins in another; what she hath lost by the falling away of the Protestants in Europe, she hath gained with increase, by the propagation of her faith in the East and West Indies, where whole Kingdoms are converted thereunto; as a Protestant Author confesseth, saying, 
Simon Lythus in respons. altera ad alteram Gretseri Apologiam. p. 333.  The Jesuits within the compass of a few years, not content with the bounds of Europe, have filled Asia, Africa, and America with their Idols. And thus she was Catholic, by Napier a Protestant Writers confession forementioned, and others, for 12. or 1300. years ago, and ever since.  
And whereas Protestants say that this universality is no true mark of the Church, because it is appliable to Turks and Pagans, it is doubtless a very poor objection; for the marks of the Church are not given her by God, to distinguish her from all sorts of Religions, but only from those that are contained equivocally under the same next kind, and may be supposed and taken for Churches; that is to say, from other Christian societies, to wit, from Heretical and shismatical Sects, which challenge by false marks the title of the true Church: To which purpose S. Augustine saith, disputing with the Donatists, Thou askest of a stranger whether he be a Pagan or a Christian, he answers thee, a Christian; thou askest him whether he be a catechumene, 
Aug de Pastor c. 13.  or one of the faithful; he answers thee, one of the faithful; thou askest him of what communion he is, he answers thee, a Christian Catholic.  
Besides, the Roman Church hath this form of universality, beyond all Religions of the world, even Turks or Heathens; That there is no place of the known world where there are not Roman Catholics, propagating their Religion, by converting the people of the land, whosoever they are; which is manifestly wanting to all other Religions, and is therefore in this regard also more universally spread over the face of the earth than any other. Others say that this universal spreading of the Church is antedated by Roman Catholics with application to themselves, for that it was not to take beginning, but from the time of Luther, because some places of Scripture which speak of the largeness of the Church, say it shall be in the later days. But it is manifest, that by later days, is meant all the space of time from christ to the end of the world; as S. Peter (interpreting a prophecy of Joel, which saith, that it shall come to pass in the last days, that God will pour his Spirit upon all flesh, Acts 2.17. by which is intended the amplitude of the Church) applies it to that present time when the holy Ghost descended upon the Apostles. Nor can any reasonable man imagine that it can sort with the goodness of God, and his tender love to mankind, to suffer the light of his truth (in the not spreading of his Church) to be eclipsed for 14. or 1500. years, seeing that according to the opinion of some learned men, grounded upon fair probabilities, the world is likely to last but 2000 years after Christ. Howsoever this universality of the Protestant Religion is but begun, it is not perfected; for the Roman Church is yet actually exceeding larger; and Protestants that allow this for a mark of the true Church, & now begin hopefully to apply it to themselves, are bound to be of the Roman, till they see their expectation satisfied, in the Protestant Churches exceeding her in latitude; which I dare boldly say will not be as long as they live, and therefore they ought to die in the Roman Faith.  
§ 3. But if we examine the matter a little more strictly, we shall find, that the Protestants plea for universality willbe cut very short, when we consider, that though they make themselves all of one Church, when they would vie for multitude with the Roman Church; yet compared with one another, we shall find that they are very many Churches; not distinguished by nation only, but by doctrine and points of faith; and that there are many Churches in one Nation, as in England for example, and will be many more, if the desired Independency be advanced. Now it is not sufficient that the Protestant Religion in general be enlarged, but it must be the true Protestant Religion, which every particular Sect thinking itself to be of, and denying it (the most of them) to the rest, the universality of the Religion willbe mightily abated. Indeed when they muster their strengths together, and make boast of their greatness, than they rake all into the title of Protestantisme, who have revolted from the Roman Church & count them on their side; as if the definition of a Protestant were, one that is opposite to the Church of Rome; So that if there were a thousand sorts of Heretics in the world, they would in this case account them but one Church. But the word Catholic being a note of Communion, (as I have showed already;) as the Roman Church calls none a Catholic that doth not communicate with her; so cannot the Protestant Church of Engl. count any to be of her Religion, thereby (by enlarging of her bounds) to prove herself Catholic, unless they will communicate with her, which the Grecian Churches will not, the Lutheran Churhes will not, many of the Sects within the Kingdom will not, as Presbyterians, Antinomians, Anabaptists, Brownists, Familists, Erastians', Socinians, Arminians, Seekers, Adamites, Shakers', Independents, with many others; These I say will not communicate with the Protestant Church of England, nor will they communicate each with other, but have, at least most frequently, their Congregations (as they call them) separate and apart; so that these are all to be accounted several Churches and Religions, and no one is further universal, than the communion thereof doth spread; which is so little a way, that none of them is (nay though they were all united together, would they be) able to stand in competition with the Roman Church; under whose Communion are many entire Kingdoms, and in all known parts of the world an infinity of people, even in Asia, Africa, and America, where the name of Protestant, much more any particular Sect thereof, is altogether unknown. Besides, all the Christian Churches, which are now separated from the Roman, were once united to her, both in faith and communion, and then either she was the Catholic Church, or there was none in the world, which is impossible; therefore they that departed from her, departing from the Catholic Church, became Schismatics, and departing from the faith they received from her, become Heretics.  
§ 4 Lastly, the very possession of the name Catholic is a proof, that it doth belong to her, seeing no sort of Christians else can usurp it from her. For howsoever some, when being so hard pressed, that they cannot claim the title of true Chritian, unless they assume the name of Catholic, do then arrogate it to themselves, and say, that they are Catholics; yet in ordinary speech if you speak of a Catholic, every one understands thereby a Roman Catholic; all other Sects voluntarily taking to themselves the name of some men for their founder, as of Luther, Calvin, whom they call their Reformers, or of some place, as the Albigenses: or from some accident of their pretended reformation, as Protestants; by which the legal Protestants delight to style themselves, with this addition, of the Church of England, renouncing therein (as they suppose) Luther and Calvin, as ashamed, or seeming to scorn to derive themselves from any one man; as though the Church of England in this matter, namely, in opposition to the whole Church, both present and precedent, were of more consideration than one single man; Moreover, certain enough it is, that the Reformation of the Church of England began by one man, and he no God neither (except it were such an one as Jupiter was, who transformed himself into a beast for the love of women) before it filled the whole Kingdom, and arrived at that high pitch of perfection, that some suppose. And who that man was, is well enough known, and what godly motives he had; which they must confess, or else, that their Church is like Melchizedek, without Father or Mother; or like a Mushroom, started up in a night, no man knows how.  
On the contrary, the true believer will own no name, but that of the Catholic Faith, which was first devised by the Apostles in the Creed, and which the successors of the Apostles in that Faith have always worn; As the Ancient Father 
a Pacianus ad. Symp. Ep. 1.  S. Pacianus saith, in an Epistle to Sympronianus a Novatian Heretic, Christian is my name, Catholic is my Surname; that names me, this marks me out; by that I am manifested, by this I am distinguished. And Saint 
b Cyrill. Hieros'. Catech. 15.  Cyrill of Jerusalem expounding the Creed; For this cause (saith he) thy faith hath given thee this Article to hold undoubtedly, and in the holy Catholic Church, to the end, thou shouldest fly the polluted Conventicles of Heretics. And a little after," when thou comest into a Town, inquire, not simply where the Temple of our Lord is, for the Heresies of impious persons, do likewise call their dens, the Temples of the Lord; neither ask simply where the Church is, but where is the Catholic Church? For that name is the proper name of this holy Church. And on the contrary, 
c Hieron. count. Lucifer. c. 9  S. Hierome saith, If in any part thou hearest of men denominated from any but from Christ, as Marcionites, Valentinians, etc. know that it is not the Church of Christ, but the Synagogve of Antichrist. And 
d Lib. deutilitat. cred. cap. 7.  S. Augustine fully, Although there be many heresies of Christians, and that all would be called Catholics; yet there is always one Church, if you cast your eyes upon the extent of the whole world, more abundant in multitude, and also as those that know themselves to be of it, more sincere in truth, than all the rest: but of the truth, that is another dispute. That which sufficeth for the question is, that there is one Church, to which different Heresies impose different names, whereas they are all called by their particular names that they dare not disavow: from whence it appears in the judgement of any not preoccupate with favour, to whom the name of Catholic, whereof they are all ambitious, aught to be attributed. And again, 
e De vera relig. cap. 6.  We must hold the Christian Religion, and the communion of that Church, which is called Catholic, both by her own and by strangers: for whether Heretics and Schismatics will or will not, when they speak not with their own, but with strangers, they call the Catholics no otherwise than Catholics. As for the Protestants, it is certain, that neither by others, nor yet by themselves in ordinary speaking, are they called Catholics. No nor yet in their most solemn and serious speaking; as appears by the several Acts both of the King of England, and of the Houses of Parliament, wherein both sides publish to the world (and yet in a sense different from one another) that they will maintain the Protestant Religion. But the Roman Church hath always possessed the name of Catholic, and therefore she is such.   

CHAP. XII.  
Of the second Mark of the Church, viz. Antiquity both of persons and doctrines,  
§ 1. THe second mark of the Church is Antiquity; as God saith by the Prophet Jeremy, Stand in the ways & see, & inquire of the old paths, which is the good way, and walk therein, jer. 6.16. And our Saviour saith, Mat. 13. that the good seed was sown first, and afterwards the tares. And even in nature truth is before falsehood. And this Antiquity I found appliable in the highest degree to the Roman Religion; for though some heresies are very ancient, as is intimated, in that the tares were sown soon after the good seed, yet the truth is more ancient, and so is the Church of Rome. This antiquity of hers, for the greatest part of time, is confessed by Protestants, Perkins, (whom I alleged before) grants it for 900. years; Napier goes higher, and saith it reigned universally and without any debateable contradiction 12. hundred and 60. years. And seeing this reign of the Catholic Religion, which Protestants call Popery, was then universal, it is apparent that it did not then begin; for such an universal possession could not be got on the sudden, as they may perceive by the Protestant Religion, which is not improved to near that universality in above a hundred years; so that in all probability (even according to the opinion of Protestants) the beginning thereof must be in, or near the Apostles times.  
Now whether we take the Roman Church for the society of Christians that acknowledge the Bishop of Rome for their head, or whether we take it for Fathers and Doctors holding the doctrines of the present Church of Rome, in both respects it will appear that the Church of Rome is most ancient and Apostolical. The former is proved by the testimony of S. 
* Iren. count. Val. lib. 3. c. 3.  Irenaeus, who calls the Roman Church, the greatest and ancientest Church founded at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul. And of S. Augustine, 
* Aug. Epist. 162.  who saith, In the Roman Church hath always flourished the Principality of the Apostolic Seat: This word [always] including all the time upward, from that present, to S. Peter. So that by this it is manifest, that there was a Roman Church, even from S. Peter's time, who was the first Bishop and Pope thereof. Which S. Augustine confirms in another place saying, Number the Priests even from the Sea of Peter, 
De Baptis. count. Don. lib. 2. c. 1.  etc. that is the rock which the gates of hell do not overcome. Nor do the Protestants deny the antiquity of the Church of Rome, but only some of them deny S. Peter to have been Bishop there, or indeed ever to have been there in person; which I count a fancy not worth the confuting, and they may with as much truth, and more reason, deny King William the Conqueror to have been King of England, or so much as to have been in England, seeing there is much more, and more noble testimony of that, than of this.  
The main thing that they deny is the Antiquity of the doctrine of the Church of Rome; for they say the Primitive Fathers taught the Protestant Doctrine and not that which the Church of Rome now teacheth; Which I found to be false, by the examination of particulars; all which if I should here set down, I should swell this intended little Treatise into a huge Volume. It shall suffice me therefore to give a scant map of the Church's doctrine in the Primitive times, and the testimony of some Fathers of the first five hundred years, of every several age some, in the proof of some of the present Catholic doctrines, most strongly opposed by Protestants; referring him that is desirous of larger proof, to the painful volumes of Coccius and Gualterus. Noting first two things by the way: The former, that it is not necessary that Catholics should give this proof; For it is sufficient that they are in possession of this faith, and that they all say they received it from their Ancestors, and they from theirs, and so upward to the first beginning of Christian Religion; and that the Protestant cannot by any sufficient testimony of Fathers or histories prove the contrary; a thing which the Protestants no doubt would highly boast of, if they were able to perform it in their own behalf. The latter is, that many Protestants do confess, that the ancient Fathers did hold many points of belief of the present Roman Church; Whitguift Archbishop of Canterbury saith, (and that without exception of the very first times) 
* Defence against Cartwright p. 472. 473.  almost all the Bishops and Writers of the Greek Church, and Latin also, for the most part, were spotted with the doctrines of free will, of merit, of invocation of Saints, and such like. And the like is affirmed by many others, in many other points; as is largely showed by the book entitled, The Protestants Apology for the Roman Church. Against which the Protestants have nothing to say, but that which is worse than nothing, to wit, that they were the spots and blemishes of the Fathers. And who I pray are they that undertake to correct Magnificat (as we say) and like Goliath to defy the whole host of Israel? But they say, that a dwarf standing upon a Giants shoulders, may see further than the Giant can; and so they by perusing the Fathers, may see further than the Fathers could; Further perhaps they may, in some cases, but never contrary; they cannot by their help see that to be black, which they saw to be white; that to be false, which they saw to be true.  
§ 2. Let us then take a view of the Roman Doctrines, as they were held in the days of S. Augustine, and the four first general Counsels, which were held between the years 315. and 457. to which first four Counsels some Protestants seem to give much honour, and to subscribe to their Decrees, but they do but seem. In those times the Church believed the true and real presence, and the eating with the mouth of the Body of Christ in the Sacrament, as Zuinglius, the Prince of the Sacramentarians, acknowledges in these words: 
a lib. de vera & falsa relig. cap. de Eucharist.  From the time of S. Augustine the opinion of corporal flesh had already get the mastery. And in this quality she 
b Chrys. in 1. Cor. Hon. 24  adored the Eucharist with outward gestures and adoration, as the true and proper body of Christ. The Church then believed the Body of Christ to be in the Sacrament, 
c Cyril. Alex. ep. ad Caesar. Pat.  even besides the time that it was in use; and for this cause kept it after Consecration for 
d Cypr. de laps.  domestical Communions, 
e Euseb. hist. l. 7.  to give to sick, 
f Amb. de obit. Sayr.  to carry upon the Sea, 
g Euseb. hist. l. 5.  to send into far Provinces. She than believed 
h Paulin. in vita Ambr. Tertul. ad ux●c. 55. Basil. Ep. ad Caes. Pat.  that Communion under both kinds was not necessary for the sufficiency of participation, but that all the body and all the blood was taken in either kind: And for this cause, in domestical Communions, in Communions for children, for sick persons, by Sea, and at the hour of death, it was distributed under one kind only.  
In those times the Church believed 
i Cyp. ad Coecil. ep. 63  that the Eucharist was a true, full, and entire Sacrifice, not only Eucharistical, but 
k Euseb. de vita Const. l. 4.  propitiatory, and offered it as well for the living 
l Chrys. in 1 Cor. hom. 41.  as the dead. The faithful and devout people of the Church in those times made pilgrimages to 
m Basil. in 40. Martyr.  the bodies of the Martyrs, 
n Ambr. de vid.  prayed to the Martyrs to pray to God for them, 
o Aug. in Psa. 63. & 88  celebrated their Feasts, 
p Hier. ad Marcell. Ep. 17.  reverenced their Relics in all honourable forms. And when they had received help from God, by the intercession of the said Martyrs, 
q Theod. de Grac. aff. l. 8.  they hung up in the Temples, and upon the Altars erected to their memory, Images of those parts of their bodies that had been healed. The Church of those times held 
r Basil. de sanct. Spir.  the Apostolical Traditions to be equal to the Apostolical Writings; and held for Apostolical Traditions all that the Church of Rome now embraceth under that title. She also offered prayers for the 
a Tertul. de Mon. Aug. de verb. Ap.  dead, both public and private, to the end to procure for them ease and rest, and held this custom as a thing 
b Aug. de cura pro mort.  necessary for the refreshing of their souls. The Church then held the 
c Hier. ad Marcel. Ep. 54.  fast of the forty days of Lent for a custom, not free but necessary, and of Apostolical Tradition. And out of the time of Pentecost, fasted all the Fridays of the years, in memory of the death of Christ, except Christmas day fell on a Friday, 
d Epiph. in compend.  which she excepted as an Apostolical Tradition. That Church held 
e Epiph. count. Apostol. Haeres. 51.  marriage after the vow of Virginity to be a sin, and reputed 
f Chrys. ad Theod. Hier. cont. jov. lib. 1.  those that married together after their vows, not only for Adulterers, but also for incestuous persons.  
That Church held the 
g Cyp. Cacil. Ep 63.  mingling of water with Wine in the Sacrifice of the Eucharist, for a thing necessary, and of divine and Apostolical Tradition. She held 
h Aug. de pecc. orig. cap. 40.  Exorcisms, Exsufflations and renuntiations, which are made in Baptism, for sacred Ceremonies and of Apostolical Tradition. She, besides Baptism and the Eucharist, held 
i Aug. count. Petil lib. 3. cap. 4.  Confirmation, 
k Aug. de nupt. & conc c. 17.  Marriage, 
l Amb. de poenit. c. 7.  Penance, 
m Leo 1. Epist.  or auricular Confession, 
n Aug. count. Parm. l. 2. c. 13.  Orders, and Extreme-Vnction, for true & proper Sacraments: which are the seven Sacraments which the Church of Rome now acknowledgeth. That Church in the Ceremonies of Baptism used 
o Cyp. Epist. 70.  Oil, 
p Conc. Carth. 3. c. 5  Salt, 
q Gr. Naz. de Bapt.  Wax-lights, 
r Aug. Ep. 101.  Exorcisms, the 
s Aug. count. jul. lib. 6. cap. 8.  sign of the Cross, 
a Amb. de Sacra. l. 1.  word Ephata, and other things that accompany it; none of them without reason and excellent signification. She also held 
b Aug. de an. & ejus orig. l. 3. c 15  Baptism for infants of absolute necessity, and for this cause permitted 
c Tertul. de Bapt.  Laymen to baptise in the danger of death. That Church used Holy Water, consecrated by certain words and ceremonies, and made use of it both for 
d Basil. de S. Spirit. c. 17.  Baptism, and 
e Epiph. har. 30.  against Enchantments, and to make 
f Theod. hist. Eccles. l. 5. c. 3.  Exorcisms, and conjurations against evil spirits. That Church held divers degrees in the Ecclesiastical Regiment, to wit, 
g Concil. Lacd c. 24. Conc. Carth. 4. c. 2.  Bishops, Priests, Deacons, Subdeacons, the Acolyte, Exorcist, Reader and the Porter; consecrated and blessed them, with divers forms and ceremonies. And in the Episcopal Order, acknowledged divers seats of Jurisdiction of positive right, to wit, Archbishops, Primates, Patriarches, and 
h Hieron. ad Damas'. Ep. 57 Concil. Chal. Ep. ad Leon.  one supereminent by divine Law, which was the Pope; without whom nothing could be decided appertaining to the universal Church; and the want of whose presence either by himself or his Legates, or his Confirmation, made all Counsels (pretended to be universal) unlawful.  
In that Church their service was said throughout the 
i Hier. praef. in Paralip.  East in Greek, and throughout the 
k Aug. Ep. 57 de doct. Christ. l. 2. c. 13.  West as well in Africa as Europe, in Latin: although that in none of the Provinces (except in Italy, and in the Cities where the Roman Colonies resided) the Latin tongue was understood by the common people. She also observed the distinction of 
k Aug. Ep. 118. & Psa 63. & 83.  Feasts, and ordinary days, the distinction of 
l Hier. ad Helis. Ep. 3. Theod. hist. Ec. l. 2. c. 27  Ecclesiastical and Lay habits, the 
m Optat. l. 1. p. 19  reverence of sacred vessels, the custom of 
n Theod. hist. l. 5. c. 8. Isod de Diu. Off. l. 1. c. 4.  shaving and 
o Greg. Naz. de pac. or. 1.  unction for the collation of Orders, the ceremony of the 
p Cyrill. Hier. Cac. Mart. 5.  Priest washing his hands at the Altar before the consecration of the mysteries; 
q Concil. Lacd. c. 13.  pronounced a part of the Service at the Altar with a low voice; made 
r Aug. de. Civit. Dei l. 22. c. 8.  processions with the Relics of Martyrs, 
s Hier. count. Vigil.  kissed them, 
t Hier. count. Vigil.  carried them in  of silk, and vessels of gold, 
u Hier. c. Vi.  took and esteemed the dust from under their Reliquaries, accompanied the dead to their sepulchers with 
w Greg. Naz. in lul. Orat. 3.  Wax Tapers in sign of joy for the certainty of their future resurrection. The Church of those days had the pictures of Christ and his Saints, both 
x Euseb. de. vita Const. l. 3.  out of Churches 
y Paulin. Ep. 12. Basil. in Martyr. Barlaam.  and in them, and upon the very 
z Prudent. in S. Cassian.  Altars of Martyrs; not to adore them with Godlike Worship, but by them to reverence the Soldiers and Champions of Christ. The faithful then used the 
a Tert. de Coron. milit.  sign of the Cross in all their conversations, 
b Cyril. count. jul. l. 6.  painted it on the portal of all the houses of the faithful, 
c Hier. in vit. Hil.  gave their blessing to the people with their hand by the sign of the Cross, 
d Athan. count. Idol.  employed it to drive away evil spirits, 
e Paul. Ep. 11.  proposed in Jerusalem the very Cross to be adored on Good-Friday. In brief, that Church used either directly or proportionably, the very same Ceremonies, that the Roman Church useth at this day. And finally that Church held, 
f Tert. de Prescript. Iren. l. 3. c. 3. & l. 4. c. 32.  that to the Catholic Church only belongs the keeping of the Apostolical Traditions, the authority of the interpretation of Scripture, and the decision of controversies of faith; and that out of the succession 
a Cyp de unit. Eccles. Conc. Car. 4. c. 1.  of her Communion, of 
b Hier. count. Lucif. Aug. de util. cred. c. 8.  her Doctrine, ᶜ and her Ministry, there was neither Church nor salvation. 
d Cyp. ad Pup. Ep. 63 ad Mag. Ep. 76. Hier. ad Tit. c. 3.  And let the indifferent Reader now judge, whether by this face we may know the Roman, or the Protestant Church.  
§ 3. But because there is between two or three hundred years, from the time of the first general Council, to the Apostles, and that some Protestants say, that as Mephibosheth in his infancy fell from his nurse's lap, whereby he became lame, and halted all his life after: So the Church in the most primitive times fell from the true faith, whereby she hath ever since gone awry: we will still go on in the quest of the Roman Churches Antiquity even to the times of the Apostles, alleging some one (amongst many) of every age of the first five hundred years, (to make the proof the fuller) in confirmation of some Roman doctrines that are most mainly gainsaid by Protestants; Wherein will appear that false and vain challenge of Bishop Jewel, renewed by D. Whitaker, who to the glorious Martyr Campian writes thus. 
* Resp. ad. Rat. Camp.  Attend Campian, the speech of Jewel was most true and constant, when provoking you to the antiquity of the first six hundred years, he offered that if you could show by any one clear and plain saying, out of any one Father or Council, he would grant you the victory: it is the offer of us all the same do we all promise, and we will all, perform it. Indeed in the first three, of the first six hundred years, the Church was almost under continual persecution, and so the writers of those times were few, and much of that which they wrote did perish in those great shipwrecks of persecution; and the matters that they wrote of, most commonly, were of another quality than concerns our present differences, the Heresies of those days being for the most part different from the present; and much of their writings being spent in Apologies for themselves against the Heathen. Yet all these advantages of the Protestants are too narrow to cover their design; For in those ages (to retort the former boast of the Protestants) there is not one single proof, out of any one Father (rightly interpreted) for any one point of doctrine, held by Protestants opposite to the Roman Catholic; and for the Roman Catholic there is abundance. In the alleging whereof, I will begin at the bottom, and so go upward, in some of which testimonies there shall be intermingling the interpretation of some Scriptures to the same purpose, whereby I will include the testimony of Scripture also, as it is interpreted by these Fathers, who were doubtless better expositors than John Calvin, or any of his followers.  
And first of the Real and corporal presence of our Saviour in the Holy Eucahrist, and of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. In the fift age or hundred of years, S. Augustine expounding the title of the Psalm, in which it is written, And he was carried in his own hands, saith, 
* Aug. Conc. 1. in Ps. 33.  Brethren who can understand how this could be done in man? for who is carried in his own hands? a man may be carried in the hands of another. How this may be understood in David himself, according to the letter, we find not; but in Christ we find. For Christ was carried in his own hands, when commending his own body, he said, This is my Body, for he carried that body in his hands. Nor have the Protestants more reason to deny this place to intent the true, real, natural body and person of our Saviour, because Turtullian saith, it is a figure of his body; than the Manichees and other Heretics had to deny a real body to our Saviour, when he lived upon earth, because the Scripture saith, He took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men, Philip. 2.7. From which place they inferred, that he was not a man really and indeed, but had only the form and likeness of a man. And if they would ' not stand to the judgement of the Church for the sense and meaning of these words, who could convince them? For they drew all other places to the sense of this, and would not suffer this to yield unto them, though they were never so many, or never so plain.  
In the fourth age, S. Ambrose saith 
* Lib. 4. de Sacram c. 5.  Before it be consecrated it is but bread, but when the words of consecration come, it is the body of Christ. To conclude, hear him saying, Take and eat of it all, for this i● my body: and before the words of Christ, the chalice is full of wine and water; when the words of Christ have wrought there it is made blood which redeemed the people. Therefore mark in how great matters the word of Christ is potent to convert all things. Moreover our very Lord Jesus testifieth unto us that we receive his body and blood, what ought we to doubt of his fidelity and testimony. And again he saith, 
* Lib. de iis qui misteriis initiantur. c. 9  Perhaps you may say, I see another thing, how do you affirm to me that I shall receive the body of Christ. This yet remains to us to prove. How great examples therefore do we use, to prove that it is not this which nature hath form, but which benediction hath consecrated, and that there is greater force of benediction than of nature, because by the benediction the nature itself is changed. Moses held a Rod, he cast it down, and it is made a Serpent etc. which if humane benediction were so powerful that it converted nature, what say we of the divine consecration itself, where the very words of our Lord and Saviour do work.  
In the third age, S. Cyprian tells us plainly, if the former be not plain enough for Transubstantiation; that, 
* Serm. de Coena Dom. prope init.  That bread which the Lord did give to his disciples, being changed not in shape but in nature, by the omnipotency of the word is made flesh; and as in the person of Christ his humanity was seen, his divinity lay hid; so in the visible Sacrament, the divine essence doth infuse itself after an expressible manner.  
In the second age we find S. Iraeneus speaking thus; 
* Lib. 4. c. 32. in fine.  But giving council unto his diciples to offer unto God the first fruits of his creatures, not as to one that wanted, but that they might be neither unfruitful nor ungrateful, he took that which is bread of the creature, and he gave thanks, saying, this is my body. And the cup in like manner, which is of that creature, which is according to us, he confesseth his blood, and taught a new oblation of the new Testament, which the Church receiving from the Apostles, offers to God through all the world, to him that maketh the first fruits of his gifts in the new Testament nourishments to us; of which in the twelve Prophets: Malachy 1.10.11. hath thus fore-signified, I have no will to you saith the Lord Omnipotent, and I will not receive a sacrifice of your hands; for from the rising of the sun unto the going down, my name is glorified amongst the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to my Name, and a pure sacrifice, because my name is great amongst the Gentiles, saith the Lord Almighty. Manifestly signifying by these words that the former people ceased to offer to God, but in every place sacrifice is offered to God, and this pure, but his name is glorified in the nations.  
Nor can this be meant of the Sacrifice of all Christians in general, but only of the Priests, (because as by the Chapter it doth appear) God speaks of rejecting the Priests of the old law and their Sacrifice, and choosing a new priesthood, whom he calls the sons of Levi, Mal. 3.3. by which figuratively is meant, the Priests of the new Law, and so do the Ministers of England frequently style themselves, the Tribe of Levi. Besides Protestants confess that their 
* Whitak. count. Dur. l. 8. p. 572.  prayers and best actions are impure and sinful, it cannot therefore be meant of such Sacrifices, for this is a pure sacrifice and proper, which none but Priests can offer, & is therefore according to the exposition of S. Irenaeus, the Sacrifice of the Body and blood of Christ, the purest sacrifice that can be imagined. In this age also Justin Martyr saith, 
In Apol. 2. ad Anton. Imperat prope finem.  * For we do not take those things as common bread, and common drink, but as Jesus Christ our Saviour made flesh by the word of God, had both flesh and blood for our Salvation; so the bread and wine being made the Eucharist by the prayer of the word proceeding from him, by which our flesh and blood are nourished by change, we are taught, that it is the flesh and blood of the same Jesus Christ incarnate.  
Lastly in the first age, S. Ignatius, Martyr and Disciple of S. John the Evangelist, speaking of the error of the Saturnians saith, 
a Epist. ad Smynium, ut citatur à Theodoreto▪ Dial. 3.  They do not admit Eucharists and oblations, because they do not confess the Eucharist to be the flesh of the Saviour, which suffered for our sins, which the Father by his ●ounty raised. And S. Andrew the Apostle saith, 
b lib. pass. S. Andreae, apud Surium.  I daily sacrifice an immaculate Lamb to the omnipotent God: which when it is truly sacrificed, and the flesh thereof truly eaten of the people, doth continue whole and alive.  
Concerning the honour and Invocations of Saints, in the fift age S. Augustine saith, 
c Serm. 17. de verbis Apost. prope init.  It is an injury to pray for a Martyr, to whose prayers we ought to be commended. And accordingly he did commend himself in these words, 
d Meditat. c. 40.  Holy & immaculate Virgin Mary, Mother of God, and Mother of our Lord Jesus Christ, vouchsafe to intercede for me to him whose Temple thou hast deserved to be made. Holy Michael, holy Gabriel, holy Raphael, holy Quires of Angels and archangels, of Patriarches and Prophets, of Apostles, Evangelists, Martyrs, Confessors, Priests, Levites, Monks, Virgins, and all the just, both by him who hath chosen you, and in whose contemplation you rejoice, I presume to ask, that you would deign to beseech God for me a sinner, that I may deserve to be delivered from the jaw of the Devil and from eternal death. And again he saith, 
a Lib. de locutionibus in Gen. prope finem.  Jacob blessing his Nephews the sons of Joseph, among other things he saith, and my name shall be invoked in these, and the name of my Fathers. Whence it is to be noted, that not only hearing, but also invocation is sometimes said, which are not things pertaining unto God (only) but unto men.  
In the fourth age we find S. Gregory Nazianzene speaking thus to S. Basil the great 
b In Orat. 20. quae est in laudem Basilii Magni.  But thou holy and heavenly head, I pray thee behold us from heaven, and either with thy prayers stop the provocation of the flesh, which God hath given us for instruction; or truly persuade, that we may bear (it) with a valiant mind: and direct all our life to that which is most available; and after that we shall pass out of this life, receive us also there in thy Tabernacles. And S. Hierome against Vigilantius saith, 
c Cont. Vigilant. c. 3. initio.  Thou sayest in thy book, that while we live we may pray for one another, but after we shall be dead, the prayer of no man is to be heard for another, especially seeing the Martyrs regarding the revenge of their blood, shall not be able to obtain; to which he answers, ' If the Apostles and Martyrs being yet in the body can pray for others, when as yet they ought to be solicitors for themselves, how much more after crowns, victories and triumphs? And a little after he answers to the objection of their being dead, saying, To conclude, the Saints are not said to be dead, but asleep.  
In the third age Origen gives us this example, 
d Initio sui Lamenti.  I will begin to prostrate myself on my knees, and to beseech all the Saints, that they help me, who dare not beg of God, by reason of the abundance of (my) sin. O Saints of God I beseech you with tears and weeping full of grief, that you fall down to his mercies for me miserable wretch; And after; woe is me, Father Abraham pray for me, that I be not estranged from thy bosom, which I have greatly desired, not condignly truly, by reason of my great sin.  
In the second age, Justin Martyr speaks thus, 
d Apol. 2. ad Anton. Pium Imper. non longe ab initio.  Moreover we do worship and adore him (to wit God;) and the Son who came from him, and taught us these things, and the Army of others that followed, and of the good Angels assimilated, and the prophetical Spirit, reverencing in word and truth, and fairly delivering it as we are taught, to all that will learn.  
And in the first age, in the Liturgy of S. James the less, 
Ante Med.  we have these words, ᵉ Let us make commemoration of the most holy, immaculate, most glorious, our blessed Lady, Mother of God, and always Virgin Mary, and of all Saints and just ones, that we may all obtain mercy by their prayers and intercessions.  
§. 5. Thirdly, for the use and veneration of holy Relics and Images, and chief of the holy Cross, hear what S. Augustine saith in the fift age, 
* Tract. 118. in joan. fine  What is the sign of Christ which all have known, but the Cross of Christ? which sign unless it be applied, whether to the foreheads of believers, or to the water wherewith they are regenerated, or to the oil wherewith they are anointed with the chrism: or to the Sacrifice wherewith they are nourished, nothing of them is rightly performed.  
In the fourth age we shall find Athanasius speaking thus, and expressing the manner of Catholics worship of Images; 
* ad Antiochum Principem.  Let it be far from us, that we Christians adore images as Gods, as the Greeks do; we declare only our affection, and the care of our love towards the figure of the person expressed by his image: therefore oftentimes we burn as unprofitable the wood which ere while was an image, if the figure be worn out. Therefore as Jacob when he was to die, adored the top of joseph's rod, not honouring the rod itself, but him who held the rod; So we Christians do not otherwise adore images, but even as moreover when we kiss our Fathers and children, we declare the desire of our mind. Even as the Jew also did adore in times past, the Tables of the law, and the two golden Cherubins, and certain other Images, not worshipping the nature of the stone, or gold, but our Lord who commanded them to be made.  

a Homil. 8. in diversos Evangelii locos.  In the third age * Origen saith thus: To conclude, * in Ezekiel the Prophet, ch. 9 v. 4. when the Angel who was sent had slain all, and the slaughter had begun from the Saints, they only are kept safe, whom the letter TAU, that is, the picture of the Cross had signed. Let us rejoice therefore most dear brethren, and let us lift up holy hands to heaven in the form of a Cross: when the devils shall see us so armed they shall be vanquished. And note I pray by the way, that some English Bibles do leave out the letter TAU, in this place of Ezekiel, but how justly let any indifferent reader judge.  
In the second age, hear S. Justin Martyr speaking of the parts of dead beasts, thus arguing, 
e Ad quaest. 28. Gentilium.  How, is it not most absurd, to account these things clean, by reason of the profit which is reaped of them, and that the Greeks do detest the bodies and sepulchers of holy Martyrs, which have power both to defend men from the snares of the Devils, and to cure diseases which cannot be cured by the art of the Physician.  
In the first age, S. Ignatius speaks thus: 
f Epist. ad Phil. ante med.  For the Prince of the world rejoiceth when one shall deny the Cross: For he knows the confession of the Cross to be his overthrow: For that is a trophy against his power, which when he shall see, he trembles, and hearing, he fears.  
§. 6. Fourthly, concerning Confession and Priestly Absolution, in the fift age S. Augustine thus exhorteth, 
g Homil. 49. aunt med.  Do penance such as is done in the Church. Let no man say to himself, I do secretly, I do to God, God knows (who pardons me) that I do in my heart. Is it therefore without cause said, what you shall lose in earth, shall be loosed in heaven? Mat. 18.18. Are therefore the keys given to the Church of God, to no purpose? Do we frustrate the Gospel of God? do we frustrate the words of Christ?  
In the fourth age, S. Basil the great speaks thus, 
i Suis regulis brevioribus inter. 288.  Men ought necessarily to open sins to them who are entrusted with the dispensation of the mysteries of God. For truly we see, that even those ancients did follow this order in penance, after which manner it is written in the Gospel, that they did confess their sins to John, Mat. 3.6. and in the Acts ch. 18. v. 18. to the Apostles themselves, by whom also all were baptised.  
In the third age, S. Cyprian beseecheth them saying, 
m Serm. de lapsis.  Let every one confess his fault I entreat you brethren, while as yet he that hath offended is in this life, while his confession can be admitted, while satisfaction, and remission given by the Priests, is grateful to the Lord.  
In the second age Tertullian speaking against men's concealing part of their sins in Confession, thus reproves them, 
n lib. de poenit. c. 10.  The hiding of a sin doth promise plainly a great profit of bashfulness: To wit surely, if we shall steal any thing from humane knowledge, we shall then also hid it from God. The esteem of men and the knowledge of God are they so compared? Is it better to lie hid damned, than to be openly absolved? It is a miserable thing so to come to Confession.  
And in the first age S. Clement adviseth thus, 
a Clem. Ro. Epist. 1  If peradventure envy or infidelity, or some of these evils which we have remembered above, shall privily steal into any body's hearts, he that hath a care of his soul, let him not be ashamed to confess these things, to him that hath authority, that he may be cured by him, by the Word of God, and wholesome Counsel, whereby he may, by found faith and good works avoid the pains of eternal fire, and attain to the everlasting rewards of life.  
Now concerning Purgatory and Prayer for the dead, in the fift age S. Augustine saith, 
b De civet. Dei l. 20. c. 24. & l. 21. c. ●3.  Neither could it be truly said of some Matth. 22.32. That they are not forgiven neither in this life, nor in the life to come, unless there were some who though they are not forgiven in this life, yet should be in the life to come. And again, 
e Serm 41. de Sanct. prope initium.  ' There are many who not rightly understanding this reading, are deceived with false security, whilst they believe that if they build capital sins upon the foundation, Christ, those sins may be purged by transitory fire, and they afterward come to life everlasting. This understanding, etc. is to be corrected, because they deceive themselves, who so flatter themselves, for with that transitory fire whereof the Apostle said, 1. Cor. 3.15. He shallbe saved, yet so as by fire, not capital but little sins are purged. And concerning Prayers for the dead, he saith, 
d Serm. 32. de verb. Apost.  It is not to be doubted, that the dead are helped by the prayers of the Church, and the saving Sacrifice, and by alms which are given for their souls, that God would deal more mercifully with them, than their sins have deserved.  
In the fourth age S. Ambrose in his interpretation of the  place of S. Paul, saith, 
a Amb. in 1 Cor. 3.  But whereas S. Paul saith, yet so as by fire, he showeth indeed that he shall be saved, but yet shall suffer the punishment of fire, that being purged by fire, he may be saved, and not be tormented for ever, as the Infidels are with everlasting fire. And S. Hierome saith, there are some, 
b In Comment. in cap 11. Prover.  who may be absolved after death of lighter sins, of which they die guilty, either being punished with pains, or by the prayers and alms of their friends, and the celebration of Masses.  
In the third age we shall find S. Cyprian speaking thus, 
c Epist. 52. ad Anton. post. med.  It is one thing to stay for pardon, another to attain to glory; one thing being cast into prison, not to go out thence until he do pay the uttermost farthing, Mat. 5.27. another thing presently to receive the reward of faith and virtue: one thing being afflicted with long pain for sins, to be mended and purged long with fire, another thing to have purged all sins by suffering: to conclude, it is one thing to depend upon the sentence of the Judge in the day of Judgement, another thing to be presently crowned of the Lord.  
In the second age, Tertullian in agreement with the rest, saith, 
d lib. de anima cap. 58.  In sum, seeing we understand that Prison, which the Gospel doth demonstrate, to be places below, and the last farthing we interpret every small fault, there to be punished by the delay of the Resurrection; no man will doubt, but that the soul doth recompense something in the places below, saving the fullness of the Resurrection by the flesh also. And in his book De corona militis, he saith, 
e cap. 3.  ' we make yearly oblations, for the dead. And a little after, 
f cap. 4.  If you require a Law of Scripture, for these and other the like Disciplines, you shall find none. Tradition is showed thee for the Author, custom the confirmer, and faith the observer.  
And in the first age S. Clement speaking of S. Peter, reports thus of him, 
g Clem. Ro. Ep. 1. de S. Petre prope fin.  His daily preaching amongst other divine commandments, was this &c. every one as fare as he understands and is able, to love God with all his heart, and his neighbour as himself, to relieve the poor, to  the naked, to visit the sick, to give drink to the thirsty, to bury the dead, and diligently to perform their funerals, and to pray and give alms for them.  
§. 8. Concerning Traditions in the fift age, S. Augustine saith, 
h Lib. 4. de bapt. con. Donat. c. 24.  That which the whole Church doth hold, and is not instituted by Counsels, but is always retained, is rightly believed not to be delivered, but by Apostolic authority. And S. chrysostom, 
i In 1 Thes. 2. In 1 Thes. hom. 4.  It is manifest, that the Apostles did not deliver all things by Epistle, but many things without writing. And as well these as those are worthy of the same credit; wherefore let us esteem the Tradition of the Church to be believed. It is a Tradition, seek no further.  
In the fourth age, S. Basil speaks thus, 
k Lib. de Spirit. sancto c. 27.  The opinions which are kept and preached in the Church, we have partly out of written Doctrine, partly we have received by the Tradition of the Apostles, brought to us in a mystery. Both which have the same power to piety, and no man contradicted these, who hath but mean experience of Ecclesiastical rights.  
In the third age, 
* Heres. 61.  we must use Traditions (saith S. Epiphanius) for all things cannot be received from divine Scripture, wherefore the holy Apostles have delivered some things by Tradition, even as the holy Apostle saith. As I have delivered to you, and elsewhere, so I teach, and have delivered in Churches.  
In the second age, S. Irenaeus thus expostulateth; 
* lib. 3. c. 4.  But what if the Apostles neither had left Scriptures unto us, ought we not to follow the order of Tradition, which they delivered to them, to whom they committed the Churches?  
And in the first age S. Dennys tells us, that 
c Areopag. c. 1. Eccles. Hierar.  those first leaders of our Priestly Office, delivered to us those chief and supersubstantial things, partly in writings, partly in unwritten institutions.  
I could give plenty of proofs in all other particulars; But as the cluster of grapes (which was brought out of Canaan to the Israelites) was a testimony of the fruit the Land brought forth, Numb. 13.23. So this small parcel of antiquity taken out of their great store, is proof sufficient that the most ancient Church, even in all the first ages, and the Scripture itself in the judgement of those Fathers, did teach the same Doctrines that the Roman Church now doth, and hath had a perpetual and uninterrupted succession in those Doctrines, and her Pastors; and is therefore the selfsame Church with the Apostles. A thing foretell by Daniel, who calls it a Kingdom which shall never be dissolved, Dan. 7.14. And in which the Maxim of wise Gamaliel is verified; if this counsel or work be of men, it will come to nought, but if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it, Act. 5.38, 39  
§ 9 But among the Protestant Churches I found no such thing; neither Antiquity in their Doctrine, (but contrariwise their Doctrine condemned by Antiquity, as I have showed before) nor yet in the body of their Professors. And though they allege some places of the Fathers in proof of their Doctrines, yet they corrupt the meaning, as may easily appear to those, that divesting themselves of all interest, can and will indifferently examine the places; who shall find that they make not for them. Nor indeed can they, for my former alleged reason; namely, that if Antiquity had understood them so, to wit, in the Protestant sense, some or other would either have reproved them for so frequently elsewhere affirming the Roman Doctrines (as Protestants confess they did, as I have showed) or for affirming those Protestant doctrines, which were contradictory to them; which seeing they did not, 'tis manifest they believed no such contradictions in their writings, but understood those places which Protestant's allege as Catholics now do, as making nothing to the Protestants purpose. But for their Catholic doctrines, it is manifest that they cannot be interpreted to comply with the Protestant Religion; for if they could, why do the most learned Protestants accuse them of Popery? It is a rule of 
* De doct. Christ. lib. 3. cap. 25. 26.  S. Augustine in the interpretation of Scripture, which is also as proper for the Fathers, and agreeable to reason, that where there are many clear places on the one side, and some few obscure places on the other, the obscure must give place to the clear, and be reduced to an agreement with them in meaning; which rule if it be observed, it will easily appear whether the Fathers were of the Roman or the Protestant Church.  
As for the Antiquity of the body of the Professors of the Protestant religion, it whom the ancient Apostolical Church hath her resurrection, which like Epimenid● (they say) fell asleep when she was young and waked not till she was old, no man knowing what was become of her in the mean while, I could not indeed find i● more ancient than some very old men somewhat above sixscore years; old Pa● that died in England but few years ago, might have been grandfather to the Religion, or at least elder brother to the Father thereof Martin Luther, who in the year 1517. (like a prodigious Comet) began to appear, and engendering with the devil, blasted the beauty of the Spouse of Christ, and filled the Christian world with Heresy and blood. And in the year 1529. Luther and his Disciples received the name of Protestants, from their Protestation and Appeal from the decree of the Diet of Spira; in which title, the nation of England (I think) doth more triumph, than any of Luther's offspring.  
And whereas they do pretend, some of them, to have always had a Being before that time, it will fitly be examined in the next mark of the Church, which is, visibility. For the maxim of law will hold good in this case, IDEM EST, NON ESSE, ET NON APPARERE, it is all one, not to be, and not to appear. For the present, seeing no more of them than yet we do; we may speak to them in the words of Tertullian 
* Tertul. de prescript. 17.  QUI ESTIS VOS, UNDE ET QUANDO VENISTIS? who are you, from whence and when came you? for either they are as young as Luther's Apostasy, or else older than Christ and his Apostles, even Jews, and so old, that the mark is quite worn out of their mouth.   

CHAP. XIII.  
Of visibility, the third mark of the Church; And of the vanity of Protestants supposition, that the true Church is sometimes invisible. That Protestant Churches have not always been visible.  
§. 1. The third mark we will seek the true Church by, is Visibility; which was foretold by the Prophet Esay 2.2. & Micah 4.1. It shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lords house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills, and all nations shall flow unto it. Also Ezek. 37.28. The nations shall know that I am the sanctifier of Israel, when my sanctification shall be in the middle of them for ever. And S. Augustine resembles it, (according to the saying of our Saviour Matth. 5.14.) A city placed on a hill that cannot be hid. And he hath placed his tabernacle in the sun, Psal. 18.6. that is in open view etc. his tabernacle, his Church, is placed in the Sun, not in the night, but in the day. Tom. 9 in Epist. Jo. Tract. 2. And further saith of the Church, that 
e Cont. Petil. l. 2. c. 104.  she hath this most certain mark, that she cannot be hid; she is then known to all Nations: the sect of Donatus is unknown to many Nations, that than cannot be she.  
To the children of the Church it is appointed by Christ, that for the redress of their grievances, they tell the Church, Mat. 81.17. which were a delusion unless the Church were always visible: who did also forewarn us against all obscure congregations, saying, If therefore they shall say unto you, behold he is in the desert, go you not forth, behold he is in secret places, believe it not, Mat. 24.26. Now according to these assurances, I found, that the Roman Church was always and eminently visible, but the Protestant never eminent, and for the most part, not visible at all. Concerning the visibility of the Church of Rome, it is proved before, by those testimonies which show the antiquity, & perpetual continuance thereof, which cannot be proved but with the granting of her visibility. Nor have I found the Protestants denying it, the thing being so visible, that it leaves no place for objections. But they think to wipe out this mark, by saying, that it is not necessary to a true Church to be always visible: but others disliking that assertion, by reason of the absurdity thereof, do affirm, (to counterpoise the Roman) that the Protestant Church hath been always visible.  
§. 2. And first, they that hold that the Church hath been invisible, and that therefore visibility is not a certain mark of the Church, endeavour to prove it by the example of the Church of the Jews in the days of Elias, 3 King. 19.10.18. who complained that the Prophets were slain, and he only was left alive, and God answered, that there were left seven thousand that had not bowed the knee to Baal. To which objection I found the answer of Catholics very true, namely, that this complaint of Elias was uttered with relation to the Kingdom of Israel only, wherein Elias then was, and was persecuted by King Ahab; but in the Kingdom of Judah, the Church did flourish, and was sufficiently known to him, and all men, under the reigns of Asa and Joshaphat 3 Kings 22.41. who reigned in Judah when Achab reigned in Israel. As what time the number of true believers was so great, 2 Chron. 17.14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 that the men of war only, did amount to many hundred thousands.  
And whereas M. Meade makes reply to this answer, saying, that the Church was invisible, in the Kingdom of judah also, in the days of Manasses because it is said, 2 Chron. 33. that Manasses set up Idolatry, committed all impiety, and caused Judah and Jerusalem to err; I answer, that this comes short of a proof; for though the King's example in all cases, though never so bad, have a mighty influence on the people, yet this proves not but that the Kingdom, or an eminent part, or at least a visible part both of Priests and people, was still untainted; even as it was in the days of the persecution of Antiochus against the Jews, who set up the Abomination of desolation, the Idol of Olympic Jupiter, in the Temple, and compelled men to worship it. Besides, if it were as he would have it, the case is much different between a very short time of the invisibility of the Church of the Jews, (for we read in the same Chapter, that Manasses quickly repent, and amended all) and the invisibility of the Protestant Church, which by their own confessions was above a thousand years. Also the comparison between the Church of the Jews and Christians is not equal: the New Testament being established in better promises, Heb. 8.6. and therefore that may be incident to the one, which is not to the other. Moreover if there had been this total eclipse, it had relation but to the Nation of the Jews only, besides which were many other faithful people, in all ages, as appears by the examples of Melchizedek, Job, etc. in the Old Testament; and in the New of Cornelius, and the Eunuch to the Queen of Candace, amongst which the Church might be visible, though amongst the Jews invisible.  
§ 3. Others I have heard say, that by Catholics own confession, in the days of Antichrist, the Church shall be invisible; But I never have read any Catholic that said so, yet on the contrary, I have found Protestants affirm 
a Bullinger. in Apoc. 20. Fulk against Rhen. in Thes. 2. sect. 5.  the visibility of the Church, and that universally even all the days of Antichrist, which makes against themselves if they account the Pope Antichrist (as most of them do) and themselves the Church. Yet Doctor White, contrary to his brethren, saith, that 
b F. Whites Reply, p. 61. lin. 15. & 26.  in time of persecution, the true Church may be reputed an impious Sect by the multitude, and so not be known by the notion of true and holy, nor can her truth be discerned by sense and common reason. To which I answer: that as there are four properties of Church-doctrine, so there are four notions of the Church. The first is to be Mistress of saving truth; and according to this notion, the Church is invisible to the natural understanding both of men and Angels; for God only and his Blessed see our Religion to be the truth. The second is to be Mistress of Doctrine truly revealed by secret inspiration: according to this notion (ordinarily speaking) the Church is invisible to almost all men that are, or ever were, the Apostles and Prophets only excepted. The third, to be Mistress of the Doctrine which Christ and his Apostles by their preaching and miracles planted in the world: according to this notion, the Church was visible to the first and Primitive times; but now is not. The fourth is to be Mistress of Catholic doctrine; that is, of Doctrine delivered & received by full Tradition and profession, all the adversaries thereof (that are under the title of Christian) being divided amongst themselves, and notorious changers; and according to this notion the Church is ever visible and sensible to all men, even to her enemies. Otherwise there is no ordinary means left for men to know what the Apostles taught, nor consequently what God by inspiration revealed to them. And if she and the light of truth she carries with her, should be hidden and lost, we must begin again anew, from a second fountain of immediate revelation from God, and build upon the new planting thereof with Miracles in the world, by some new Apostles. And if this be absurd; then there must ever be in the world a Church visible, whose Traditions are famously Catholic, and consequently showing themselves to be the Apostles, to all men that will not be obstinate.  
And that the Church shall be universally visible even in the days of Antichrist, may be gathered out of the Scripture, Rev. 20.8. For she shall then be every where persecuted, which could not be, unless she were visible, and conspicuous even to the wicked. And even during the first 300. years after Christ, wherein the Church endured incomparably more universal and raging persecutions than ever were, yet the 
a Magd. cent. 1, 2, 3. Fulke cont. Stapleton de success. Eccl. p. 246.  Century-writers, and sundry others do take certain and particular notice of the Catholic Bishops and Pastors, by name, in those very ages; of their administration of the Word and Sacraments, and their open impugning of Heresies. And surely our Lord himself had been (which is blasphemy to think of him, who is the eternal wisdom of the Father) the most imprudent of all Lawmakers, to have a Law so obscure, and exposed to so many suppositions, depravations, and false expositions, whereto the malice of the Heretics of all ages hath subjected it, without leaving a depository to keep it, and a judge to interpret it, or to leave it to such a keeper, and such a judge as should be invisible.  
§. 4. Other Protestants I have observed, who though they confess the invisibility of their Church, yet profess the being thereof, and assign the place for it, to be in the Roman Church, mixed like a great deal of over with a very little pure gold, so that it was not discernible. But this assignation of their Church seemed to me very unreasonable; for either those Protestants did profess their own faith, or they did not; if they did, then doubtless they were visible, and the Roman Church would soon have taken notice of them, as she did in all ages of such (though it were but one man) that differed from her. If they did not make profession of their faith, what wretched sons of fear were they, that to preserve their temporal security durst not publicly avow their own Religion; but comply in all things with a Religion (in their opinion) false and impious, and dissemblingly do all the external acts thereof, and this, all their lives, for many generations successively.  
This was not the part of a true Church, or of any true member thereof; who will surely die, rather than deny his Saviour; as he doth, who believing himself to be of the true Religion, makes profession of that which he deems to be false. Nor did they fulfil the Prophecy of Esay concerning the true Church, which saith, I have set watchmen upon thy walls, which shall never hold their peace day nor night, Esay 62.6. But Doctor Feild hath a new fancy of his own, which I never observed in any but himself, who saith to this purpose, that before the separation of the Protestants from the Church of Rome, the Church of Rome itself was the Protestant Church, and that the Papists were but a faction of the Court of Rome; an assertion so grossly false, that all the world is a witness against it, yea even (I think) all other Protestants themselves, and needs no confutation.  
§. 5. Others taking all these Pleas for insufficient, do affirm that their Church was in being, and in sight also in all ages, but that through the injury of later times no testimony thereof is now remaining, but that all their records through the violence of the Pope and his Clergy, have been utterly suppressed: Of which vain conceit there is no proof at all; and if the assertion without proof will serve their turn, it may serve also for any other Religion, Christian, or not Christian, who if they please, may say the same thing, but are never like to be believed by any man of common understanding. Besides it thwarteth all experience, as appears by the example of hus and Wickliff whose writings are yet extant, of Charlemaine's pretended Book against Images, and bertram's concerning the Sacrament. Also by the decrees of Catholic Counsels, and the large writings of Catholic Doctors, reciting and condemning all opinions contrary to the Roman faith. Lastly by the Ecclesiastical Historiographers of every age, who make this the argument of their writings; yea even from them, the Protestant * Centurists of Magdeburg, 
Cent. Madg. Osiand. Ep. Illyricus Catol. Whitak. count. Duraeum pag. 276. &. 469.  and others, do recite the opinions mentioned and condemned in every age by the Church of Rome; of which some were the very same, that have since been revived by Protestants; So that the Church of Rome hath been so far from extinguishing their records; that she hath been the chief recorder of them and their doctrines.  
§. 6. The last and most valiant attempt of Protestants, is to affirm that as the Church must be always visible, so theirs hath been in persons distinct from the Roman Church; and thereby invite us to 
* A Protestants book so entitled.  look beyond Luther. Which barren endeavour of theirs hath been like Peter's fishing all night, and catching nothing. For they whom the Protestants claim for their predecessors, were neither of their Religion, nor yet always visible, there happening huge gaps betwixt them, nor can the Protestants by any art or industry bring both ends together. First they were not of the same Religion; for to be of the same Religion or Church with another imports an agreement in all points of faith; for the truth of doctrine being of the essence of the Church, whosoever errs in any little thereof, he ceaseth to participate of the soul of the Church, which is the Spirit of truth, and is but a dead member, one equivocally and in name, but not in truth. We see that the Arrians, Macedonians, and many other Heretics, were accounted, (and are so by many Protestants) not of the Catholic Church, for one single error against faith: now the Protestants disagreeing in many points, not only from one another at this present, but from all that went before them, and that in points which they believe to be revealed in the Scripture, their only rule; are neither one Church amongst themselves at this present, nor any one of them one, with any society that hath gone before.  
In particular, the Grecians whom they court to their faction, are no Protestants; for they hold damnable errors in the judgement of Protestants; to wit; Invocation of Saints; Adoration of Images; Transubstantiation; Communion in one kind for the sick, with many others. So that Protestants are in great penury of professors of their Religion before Luther; that are forced to call the Grecians in, as Protestants in essence; for they may even as well name the Pope himself. As for John hus and his followers, who broke out about the year 1400. and are claimed to be Predecessors in the Protestant Religion, it is certain that they were no Protestants, but held such Doctrines that if they were now in England, they should suffer as Papists. For they held 
a p. 216.  seven Sacraments, 
b p. 209.  Transubstantiation, 
c p. 217. art. 7, 8.  the Pope's primacy, and the 
d Luther in Colloq. Ger. c. de Missa.  Mass itself, as Fox in his Acts and Monuments acknowledgeth.  
No greater title have they to Wickliff, who appeared about the year 1370. in whom some Protestants say their visibility was maintained; for he did visibly maintain Popery, as 
e Wiclerus de blasphemia c. 17.  holy water; the 
f Idem de Eucharist. c. 9  worship of Relics, and Images; the 
g Idem in Ser. de assumpt. Mariae.  intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary; 
h Idem de apostosia. c. 18.  the Rites and ceremonies of the Mass, all the 
i Idem in postil. sup. c. 15. Marci.  7. Sacraments, with all the points of Catholic doctrine now in question. Moreover he held errors in the condemnation whereof both Catholics and Protestants do agree, as that 
k Acts & Mon. p. 96. a. art. 4.  if a Bishop or Priest be in mortal sin, he doth not order, consecrate, or baptise. 
l Idem p. 96 fine.  That Ecclesiastical Ministers should not have temporal possessions. He 
m Osiand. Epit. hist. Eccl. p. 459 art. 43.  condemned lawful oaths with the Anabaptists, and held many other pernicious doctrines. Let any man then judge whether this man and his followers were Protestants or no.  
Then they ascend higher, and claim on Waldo a merchant of Lions, who broke out of the Sheepfold about the year 1220. with his followers, as men in whom the Protestant Church was visible; But these men were no more of kin to them, than the former: For they held the 
n In Ep. 244. p. 450.  real presence in the B. Sacrament, for which they are reproved by Calvin, who therefore understood them in the Catholic sense, not in the Protestant. And the most essential Doctrine of the Waldenses was their extolling of the merit of 
* Illiri●us Catolog. Test. p. 1498.  voluntary poverty, affirming all Ministers to be damned that had rents and possessions, and that the Church perished under Pope Silvester, and the Emperor Constantine, through the poison of temporal goods, which Clergymen began then to enjoy (as they said) against the Law of God. Surely Protestant's do not account this an Article of their faith. Moreover the Waldenses held 
* Idem Catol Test. p. 1502.  these anabaptistical Errors: That children are not to be baptised; That there is no difference between a Bishop and a Priest; a Priest and a Lay man; That the Apostles were Laymen; and that every Layman that is virtuous is a Priest, may preach and administer Sacraments; That a woman pronouncing the words of consecration in the vulgar tongue doth consecrate, yea transubstantiate bread into the body of Christ; That it is a mortal sin to swear in any case; That Magistrates being in mortal sin do lose in their office, and no man is to obey them: with many other absurdities too tedious to be recited.  
The like may be said of the Albigenses; and also of Beringarius, who broached his Heresy about the year 1048. who was a Protestant but only in the point against Transubstantiation, which he also recanted, and died a Catholic. And what do any of these, or all these together avail the Protestants? every one of them extending but to some part of time between this and the Primitive Church, and is also but the example of some one or other private man, in whom the revolt first began, who was first a Catholic, and beginning afterwards to hold some one or few points of the Protestant faith, continued in all other matters of controversy a Catholic.  
By all which it appears, that none of these were Protestants, and that therefore in them the visibility of the Protestant Church is not maintained: And that if it were, yet seeing they lived at several times, ununited by a line of time one to another, (but jumping over several ages, against the Law of nature, which non facit saltum) and that therefore in the between-spaces, there was an invisibility of the Protestant Church; the main question of their Churches perpetual visibility is yet unsatisfied: Especially when we consider that for about a thousand years, which was the time betwixt Beringarius and the Apostles, the Protestants pretend to no predecessors. As for the most Primitive Fathers, whom they affirm to maintain the Protestant Doctrine, I have in brief shown it to be false already, and they that will search shall more largely find it so. Also they all died members of the Roman Church. So that the Protestants have not in them (to wit the Fathers) a visible Church, distinct from the Roman, nor was the Roman theirs. From whence it is manifest, that there is not any one Protestant Church in the world, that can show her visibility in any Kingdom, city, poor country village, or particular person from the Apostles time to Luther; the truth whereof M. Wotton is not ashamed to confess, where he saith (in his answer to a Popish Pamphlet p. 11.) You will say; show us where the faith & religion you profess were held? Nay prove you they were held no where, etc. and what if it could not be showed? yet we know by the Articles of our Creed, that there hath been always a Church, in which we say, this Religion we now profess must of necessity be held, & with us it is no inconvenience to have the true Church hid. This stands you upon to disprove, which when you attempt to do by any particular records, you shall have particular answer. Than which saying, what more ridiculous? To presume that their Church was always visible (in the land of Utopia sure, where no man ever saw it) because it is the true Church, whereas they should prove it the true Church, because it hath been always visible; the knowledge of her visibility being much more easy than of her truth, which is the main thing in controversy. And to require of Catholics proof, that they were not visible, by particular records, is extreme foolish; records being memorials of things that were, not of things that were not.  
§. 7. All which considerations, shaking the confidence of many Protestants in the visibility of their Church before Luther, after they have thus fluttered up and down, finding (like the Dove out of the Ark) no rest for the sole of their foot, they at last fly to the Scriptures, & think to perch upon that; under whose obscurity, and their corruption of them, while they will admit none to interpret them but themselves, they frame what sense they please, as any body else may do, & with great confidence, but little judgement (as all Heretics do) assure themselves thereof. But if they will allow the Fathers for good interpreters, as none but those that are puffed up with the Spirit of Pride, will refuse to do; then we find (as I shown before) that even Christ and his Apostles were of the Roman, not the Protestant Religion, and the first Founders and publishers thereof.  
But Doctor White (in his Reply. p. 105.) concludes thus, that this notwithstanding if Protestants be able to demonstrate by Scripture, that they maintain the same faith and religion which the Apostles taught, this alone is sufficient to prove them to be the true Church. But they that cannot by the marks of the Church set down in Scripture, clear themselves to be the true Church, do most fond appeal to Scripture to show the truth of their particular points. For what more vain, than to appeal from Scripture, setting things down clearly, unto Scripture, teaching matters obscurely, or not so clearly? Now no particular point of doctrine, is in holy Scripture so manifestly set down, as is the Church and the marks whereby we may know her. No matters about which the Scripture is more copious and perspicuous than about the visibility, perpetuity, amplitude the Church was to enjoy; so that as S. Augustine saith, the Scriptures are more clear about the Church, than even about Christ, in Psal. 30. Conc. 2. and (De unitat. Eccles. c. 5.) that the Scripture in this point is so clear, that by no shift of false interpretation it can be avoided, the impudence of any forehead that will stand against this evidence, is confounded. 
a Tract. 1. in 1. Ep. joan.  That it is a prodigious blindness not to see which is the true Church. For 
b Aug. l. 1. cont. Crescon. c. 33. & l. 13. cont. Faust. cap. 13.  God would have his Church to be described in Scripture without any ambiguity, as clear as the beams of the Sun, that the controversy about the true Church being clearly decided, when questions about particular Doctrines that are obscure, arise; we may fly to her, and rest in her judgement; and that this visibility is a manifest sign whereby even the rude and ignorant may discern the true Church from the false. What vanity then is it for Protestants, not being able to clear by Scripture the clearest of all points, to appeal to her for the clearing of other points, by less evident places?   

CHAP. XIV.  
Of the fourth mark of the true Church (viz.) a lawful succession and ordinary vocation and mission of Pastors; And that it is ridiculous to affirm, that Catholics and Protestants are the same Church.  
§. 1. A Fourth mark of the Church is personal succession of Pastors, and their mission by ordinary callings; which is always to be found in the true Church, as is foretold by the Prophet Esay, ch. 59 v. 2. My spirit which is upon thee, and the words which I have put into thy mouth, shall not departed out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seeds seed, from henceforth for ever. And the Apostle saith of our Saviour, Ephes. 4.11.12. that he appointed Pastors and Teachers in the Church, to the consummation of the Saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all meet in the unity of the faith. And this charge is not to be undertaken by usurpation, but by lawful calling and mission; as the Apostle saith, Heb. 5.4. No man takes to himself this honour, but he that is called of God, as Aron was, to wit visibly, and by peculiar consecration. And again, How shall they preach except they be sent? Rom. 10.15. And our Saviour saith, who so entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth another way, is a thief, John 10.5. And God in the old Testament reproves those that went without mission, saying, I have not sent these Prophets, yet they ran, Jeremy 23.21. I have not sent them, saith the Lord, yet they prophesy falsely in my name, Jer. 27.15. And this is a note of the Church so pertinent, that S. Augustine (Lib. count. Epist. Fundament. c. 4.) saith, the succession of Priests, from the very Seat of Peter the Apostle, to whom the Lord committed his sheep to be fed, even to the present Bishopric, doth hold me in the Church. And Optatus Milevitanus reckons all the Roman Bishops from S. Peter to Syricius, who then was Pope, to show that the Church was not then with the Donatists, who by like succeson could not ascend up to the Apostles; and then (lib. 2. cont. Parmenianum) he adds, Show you the original of your chair, who challenge the holy Church to yourselves.  
Now that this mark is found upon the Church of Rome, I know no man that denies. But the Bishops (where they are) and Ministers of Protestant Churches, cannot thus derive themselves from the Apostles. The Roman Church indeed made Luther Priest, and gave him Commission to preach her Doctrine, but to preach against her Religion, who gave him order? That Commission (seeing he had it not from any Church) he had either from himself, minting a Religion out of his own brain, coloured with abused Scripture, which he then proudly pretended to know better than all the Christian world beside; 
g Tom 7. Wittenberg. fo. 228  or from the Devil, with whom he conferred, and to whose arguments he yielded, as himself confesseth.  
Also the succession of the English Bishops and Ministers was interrupted upon their pretended Reformation; the lawful Bishops being turned out, and others preferred to their place, by the temporal authority of the Kingdom in chief; which had no power to choose or consecrate Bishops, and ordain Priests. Or if they were at first consecrated by lawful Bishops of the Church of Rome, as for their credit they pretend, yet they had not thereby Commission to preach their new Doctrine differing from the Church of Rome, nor howsoever is their succession lawful; for in a lawful succession, it is required that the former Bishops be dead, or lawfully deposed; but these conditions were not observed in Enland, the Catholic Bishops being violently cast out, by the Authority of Q. Elizabeth, assuming to herself the title of head of the Church, a thing never arrogated by any temporal Prince of the world, until her Father King Henry the eight gave the example.  
But it is worth the observation, that the Bishops and Ministers of England, to maintain the lawfulness of their succession, do affirm, that they were consecrated by Catholic Bishops, their predecessors, which while they do not prove, it shows the interruption of their succession, and while they affirm, it shows that they believe their succession and calling insufficient, unless they derive it from the Church of Rome; thereby acknowledging the Church of Rome the true Church, which they in their Doctrine and dependence have forsaken; and there can be no reason to forsake the true Church upon what pretence soever. For the errors of the Church of Rome are but supposed, and their Reformation, neither is but supposed, they being infallibily sure of nothing, since they hold their Church may err, and so for aught ought they certainly know, it did, in accu- and forsaking the Church of Rome, and in their own imaginary amendment, and instead of Christ have chosen Barrabas. And what can be more inconsiderate, than to forsake the true Church (by their own confession) upon pretences, of whose truth they are (by their own confession also) uncertain. For he that confesseth he may err, in that wherein he may err (being an object of the understanding, not of the sense) cannot be sure that he doth not err. And so they are altogether at a loss, and a ground, not infallibly, no nor prudently sure of the least tittle they affirm. They cannot be infallibly sure, because they may err, as themselves confess; they cannot be prudently sure, seeing there is a hundred voices and judgements of men for the Roman Church, to one for any Protestant Church: They had therefore done much more wisely, to have followed the admonition of S. Paul to Timothy, DEPOSITUM CUSTODI, keep that which is committed to thy charge, 1. Tim. 6.20. and what is that, saith Vincentius Lirinensis? He answereth, (Comomnit. advers. haer. c. 27.) It is that which thou art trusted with, not that which is found out by thee: that which thou hast received, not which thou hast devised: a thing not of wit, (that is of thine own fancy) but of learning, (that is, which thou hast learned:) not of private usurpation, but of public Tradition: a thing brought to thee, not brought forth by thee; wherein thou oughtest to be, not the Author, but the keeper; not a Master, but a Scholar; not a leader, but a follower.  
§. 2. As for their assertion, who say, that Roman Catholics and Protestants are all one Church, it is both false & foolish. False it is, because the differing in any one point of faith proposed by the Church, makes one party not to be of the true Church; & it is certain, that the Church of Rome and England differ in many. Doth not the Church of England account the four grand Heretics, who were condemned in the first four General Counsels, to be out of the Church, and not one with her that condemned them? and they held each of them but some one, or very few points different from the Church of Rome. So that either they must confess themselves also, not to be one with the Roman Church, or else that all Hretiques are of it, which is absurd; and contrary to the mind of 
d De fide & Symbolo. c. 10.  S. Augustine, who saith, that neither Heretics nor Schismatics are of the Church.  
If Protestants say, that they that were condemned in those Counsels did indeed hold Heresies, and so were not the Church, but their own are truths and amendments of the Doctrine of the Church; I answer, so did those Heretics also say, yea and prove it by Scriptures and Fathers, in their own sense, and did believe their Doctrines to be the pure Word of God, as confidently as any Protestants in the world do theirs; who cannot say more for themselves than they did, and they were (some of them) as numerous and as learned, as Protestants are; nor was there more authority against them than against the Protestants; which is, The Catholic Roman Church, guided by the Spirit of God, and the Word of God written & unwritten. Moreover they were the parties accused, so are the Protestants, it is not fit therefore that they should be the Judges.  
If they say, that they also accuse the Church of Rome of errors, and therefore it is not fit that she should be Judge; I answer, some body must, if ever we will have an end of controversy, and then whether the whole society of Christians, or some one or few men, (for so all Heresies began, and so did the Protestant Religion in one Luther) let any indifferent man judge. Moreover, God hath made the Church the Judge, saying, tell the Church, and that is the Church of Rome, as those Protestants must grant, who say, they are one with it, and that it was the Church, when they revolted from her.  
And to consider the matter, according to reason, seen in the practice of all societies and bodies, whether Ecclesiasticalll or Civil; if any one or few members break the law and rule of the whole, who shall judge whether it be well or ill done? Surely either the head, or the head and whole representative body together. And this was the proceeding against Luther and the Protestants in a General Council, by which they were condemned, and cast out of the Church. Which judgement if it be not sufficient; but that the condemned party (justifying himself by his own bare affirmation, or interpretation of the Law, according to his own particular fancy, contrary to the whole body, whereof he is or was a member) may be admitted, what Heretic or Rebel will ever be found guilty? or will not in despite of all mankind, be accounted a true Christian, and loyal subject, and the soundest member of the whole body? Secondly, it is both poor, and absurd for Protestants to seek for shelter and countenance, under that Church which they have abandoned, disgraced, and cruelly wounded, (though to their own destruction;) thereby also abusively persuading many people to keep still in the Protestant Church, while they think they are of the Roman, they being (as their new Masters teach them) both but one Church.  
§. 3. But Catholics, whose consent it is very fit should be taken in this matter, acknowledge no such union of Churches, betwixt themselves and Protestants; for Catholics do not allow their Ordination, and Consecration of Bishops, and Priests for good, which appears, in that if a Priest of the Roman Church revolt to the Protestant party, he is allowed by them to be a lawful Priest, but not so if a Protestant Minister return to the Roman Church. Also some Protestants grant, that Roman Catholics may be saved in their Religion, but Catholics do not grant the like to Protestants; which they would do surely, if they thought they were all one Church. Besides, the denying to communicate with each other, is a proof, that, in the opinion of both, they are not all one Church.  
And whereas Protestants magnify their own charity, in this kind conceit of theirs, and accuse Catholics of the want thereof, it is very idle; for the controversy about the means of salvation, and the Church wherein it is to be had, is not to be determined by the judgement of charity, but of discretion. Catholics judge no particular man to be damned, because they know not the operations of God upon his soul in his latest minutes; but they judge that all men out of the Roman Catholic Church are out of the road of salvation, because they are assured thereof by the word of God. And if to grant the possibility of salvation to others, be such a testimony of charity, as they conceive; then surely Origen was of all men most charitable, who held that at the last, even the devils themselves should be saved, and yet I find no man agreeing with him in this charitable opinion. But the truth is, (as I conceive) that Protestants are thus kind to Catholics for their own ends; which are, to provoke Catholics to show the same favour to them, that so they may have the better security in their way, by the concurrent opinions of others: and also for fear, lest by denying salvation to the Church of Rome, they cut off the hope thereof from themselves, who acknowledge no lawful ministry, by consequence no Church, and by consequence no salvation, but that which they derive from the Church of Rome. Which seeing they do indeed want, they are neither united with her, nor can justly hope for salvation without her.   

CHAP. XV.  
Of the fifth Mark of the true Church (viz.) Unity in doctrine; And of horrible dissensions among Protestants.  
§. 1. A Fifth Mark of the Church is unity in doctrine: of which it is said by S. Paul, I beseech you that all speak one thing, be ye knit together in one mind, and one judgement; 1. Cor. 1.10. endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, Ephes. 4.3. Continue in one Spirit and one mind, Philip. 1.27. of one accord and one judgement, Philip 2.2. Thus in the first times were the multitude of them that believed of one heart and one soul, Acts 4.32. Thus our Saviour prayeth (and no doubt was heard) that they may be one: John 17.11. and the effect of that prayer, we see in the Church of Rome, and no where else. Thus also the Holy Ghost describes the Church of Christ, saying, my dove is one, Cant. 6.8. And the want of this unity is so improper to God, that he is therefore termed, the God, not of dissension, but of peace, 1 Cor. 14.33. And it is such an assured means to shorten continuance, that the Scripture saith, if you by't and devour one another, take heed that you be not consumed one of another, Galat. 5.15. and that a kingdom divided against itself shall perish, Luc. 11.17. And by the want of this mark of unity, did the ancient Fathers discover the Heretics of their times. S. Crysostome saith, (Op. imperfect. in Math. Hom. 20.) All infidels that are under the devil, are not united nor hold the same things, but are dispersed by divers opinions; one saith so, and another so, etc. in the same manner are the falsehoods of Heretics, who never hold the same things, but have so many opinions, as there are persons. To the same purpose speaks Jrenaeus, Tertullian, and others, (Iren. l. 1. c. 5. Tertull. de praesc. advers. haer. 42.)  
And this unity I found apparently in the Church of Rome; and the contrary as apparent amongst Protestants. Thus the ancient writers do wonderfully agree in all matters of faith; so also do all the decrees of all lawful Counsels and Popes; though they were men living in several ages, in several countries, and wrote in several languages: And now also all Catholics in the world, howsoever otherwise divided by country, language, particular interest, civil dissensions, or war, yet agree exactly in all points of faith. And this because they have a certain compass to steer by, to wit the general Tradition of the Church, and the decrees of General Counsels, who they have reason to believe, do preserve that which was delivered by the Apostles; and if any doubt arise about the sense of Scripture, are better able to interpret it than any other persons; to which therefore they do modestly and wisely submit their judgements. But no such agreement was ever found, or ever can be found amongst Protestants, or any sort of Heretics. S. Irenaeus (lib. 1. cap. 21.) saith of Simon Magus his Heresy, that it was divided into several sects. S. Augustine of the Donatists, (lib. 1. de Bapt. c. 6.) that in his time it was cut into small threads. And particularly the same is happened to Protestants, who soon after their separation from the Church of Rome, were divided amongst themselves, and have ever since so continued, multiplying daily in their divisions; insomuch that even in the one Kingdom of England, and even in the one City of London, there are very many: And in many particular houses there are some different Sects of Religion, each pretending to be the true Protestant, and denying that title to the other.  
Nor is there any means to reconcile their differences, but they are rather likely to grow more, and greater, as we see at this day. For no Sect will acknowledge another its superior in matter of Religion, nor stand to its judgement, except it be by force; no not any one particular person thinks himself obliged to submit to the whole world; therefore they use to say, that they will not pin their faith upon another man's sleeve,; but all pretend to be guided by the Word of God, which each one will interpret for himself, and accuse all others of error so far as they descent from him. And though Sects and Heresies do first arise out of the Catholic Church, as the Apostle saith, There must be Heresies; 1 Cor. 11.19. yet the Church doth not lose her unity hereby; because she having a certain Touchstone whereby to try them, namely, the judgement of the Church; if they will not submit to that, they are excommunicated, and by judicial sentence cut off from that body, from which they first cut themselves by mis-belief; as the Apostle saith, an heretical man after the first and second admonition avoid, Tit. 3.10. whereby they preserve the rest of the body entire, and at unity within itself. So that the Heresies do not arise from the Doctrine of the Church, but from the malice of the Devil.  
But amongst Protestants the liberty of reading and interpreting Scripture, and the examining and judging the Preachers Doctrine thereby, being given to every silly soul, (as Doctor Bilson saith, 
c True difference, part. 2. p. 353.  The people (are) discerners and judges of that which is taught, as with good reason they ought; for it was upon this ground that they first separated from the Church of Rome, undertaking to be judges of her Doctrine; and if the present Clergy should not continue this liberty to the people against themselves, who are no more infallible than the other, nor can pretend to it; they would play very foul play with the people, and (instead of giving them liberty of conscience, which they promised, only translate them from one Tyrant over their consciences (so they called the Church of Rome) to another the Church of England) there must needs arise varieties of Sects in Religion, according to the various conceit and apprehension of people, even out of the very nature of this their Doctrine, which is the groundwork for all the rest; and is the most exercised in those who are most conversant in the reading of Scriptures, to wit, the Puritans and Sectaries.  
And in the many differences that are amongst them, they call no General Counsels, nor indeed can they, by way of authority, no Sect acknowledging itself subject to another's Jurisdiction, if it be under another temporal Governor; but constitutes a Church by itself absolute, and independent. And in the variety of Sects in any one Kingdom or Government, neither party believing itself justly subject to another in matter of conscience; But supposing themselves always in the truth, they think they are bound to maintain that truth, with the hazard of their lives, and to oppose their lawful Sovereigns in the defence thereof; and whensoever they have power they put it in execution, and turn Rebels for God's sake; As we see many have done heretofore, and the English are (many of them) now in the accursed act. Nor can the men, under whose conduct the people do this, hope for more calm obedience from them, longer than by force they are subdued to it, unless they give them that in possession, which now they have in hope, and for which they have all been united in their service, to wit, Liberty of Conscience to every particular person, to be of what Religion soever he shall make to himself out of the Bible, free, & independent on the jurisdiction of any other.  
And with very good reason, for seeing they have all shaken off Christ's yoke, why should any man put a yoke upon another man's conscience, and oblige him to believe, or do, or suffer that which is against his Word of God? Thus, as their Religion is divisible according to their several senses of the Scripture, so Kingdoms are divisible according to their Religions: So that there must still be division, either in Religion, or in War for the defence thereof. Yea so accurately doth Heresy teach to run division, that it is merely by accident that any two Protestants are of the same Religion in any one point; for seeing they do not oblige themselves to agree in any one Principle, but only the letter of the Scripture, and refer the interpretation to themselves, (as Chillingworth (Preface fine) saith, Let all men believe the Scripture, and that only, & endeavour to believe it in the true sense, and require no more of others,) it is but by the constitution of their brains, and the grain of their fancy running the same way, that brings any two of them to an union in the same belief, concerning any point of Religion; which constitution, as it was accidental in their generation, so it is daily changeable by age, education, and many other occurrences; and so also as uncertain for the future, as accidental at the present.  
Thus all tends, to division amongst them, through the nature of their doctrines and the method of knowing and preserving them. And this division of theirs in doctrine and opinion, is the reason, why when I mention the belief of Protestants, I usually say, some Protestants, because they are not all of a mind, scarce in any one point, wherein they differ from Catholics. And some of them are so silly as to think, that if they themselves do not believe such a point, no Protestant else doth, supposing all Protestancy included in their own breasts; which indeed is nothing so: only they have reason, according to their principles, to believe (as they do) that that which every particular man holds, is the true Protestancy, and aught to be a rule to all the world beside.  
§. 2. The Catholic Roman Church hath in it the propriety of heat, and doth congregare homogenea, gather together things of the same kind, and disgregare heterogenea, separate things that are of different natures; casting out of her Communion all sorts of Heretics. And on the contrary the Protestant Religion hath the property of cold, which is congregare heterogenea, to gather together things of different natures, enfoulding under her name a miscellane of Religions, freezing them altogether, and withal making them so brittle, that every chance breaks them into smaller sects and sub-divisions, which in the end will be the destruction of the whole, as it hath been of all foregoing heresies.  
And this truth Sir Edwin Sandys, a learned Protestant (In his Relation of Religion of the Western parts) confesseth, saying, The Papists have the Pope, as a common father, adviser, and conductor, to reconcile their jars, to decide their differences, to draw their Religion by consent of Counsels unto unity, etc. whereas on the other side, Protestants are like severed or rather scattered troops, each drawing adverse way, without any means to pacify their quarrels, no Patriarch one or more, to have a common superintendency or care of their Churches, for correspondency and unity: no ordinary way to assemble a general Council on their part, the only hope remaining ever to assuage their contentions. Of which seeing there is no hope, the sword must be the Umpire. Which if it should in England prevail on the Puritan or Roundheads side, as they now style them, (which God forbidden) I think I may without rashness say, that it falls out by the just judgement of God, that they that cast out the Catholic Religion and Catholic Bishops their predecessors, upon pretence of the Reformation of Errors, which they discovered (as they said) by the pure word of God, are upon the same pretences cast out themselves, and are forced to say with Adonibezek in the first of the book of Judges, As I have done, so God hath rewarded me. So true a rule it is, that he that practices disobedience to his superiors, teaches it to his inferiors.  
§. 3. But the Protestants say that they do not differ from one another in fundamentals, no not from the Catholics, so much at unity with all the world do they profess to be. The impertinency of their distinction of fundamentals and unfundamentalls I have before discovered; and little reason have they to use it in this case. For to my apprehension all their differences are in fundamentals, yea all that they believe they account fundamental: For the Church of England saith in her sixth Article, That whatsoever is not read in Scripture, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any ma that it should be believed as an Article of Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation: & as nothing but what may be proved by the Scripture, is by her accounted necessary to salvation, which is the same with fundamental; so I suppose that all that can be proved by the Scripture is necessary to salvation, even in their own opinion; for I think they will not say, but that it is necessary and fundamental to believe God, in all that he saith, whether the matter be great or small; now Protestant's professing to believe nothing necessarily, but what may be proved by the Scripture, and their differences being in the things which they believe, it follows, that their differences are in things, which are proved by Scripture, that are the pure Word of God, and the meaning of the Holy Ghost, (as they use to speak) and therefore must needs be (in the several opinions of them that hold them) fundamental, and necessary to salvation.  
To instance in some particulars of their disagreement; (for to speak of all, were to enter into a Labyrinth) First concerning Scripture itself, I think they will grant it is a fundamental point, I am sure, their learned Hooker doth so, (Eccles. Pol. lib. 1. sect. 14.) who saith, Of things necessary the very chief is to know what books we are bound to esteem holy, and as sure I am that in this there is great disagreement; for the Lutherans) do deny (besides those books of the Old Testament which the Calvinists also deny) 
* Ch●mnit. exam. conc. Trid. part. 1. pag. 55. also Enchyrid. p. 63.  the second Epistle of S. Peter, the second and third Epistle of S. John, the Epistle to the Hebrews, of S. James, of S. Judas, and the Revelation; all which the Calvinists and the Church of England do undoubtedly believe to be the Word of God. And if they disagree about their prime Principle, how can agreement be expected in the things that they derive from thence? Secondly concerning their translation of Scriptures, in the truth whereof consists the truth of God's Word, to those that understand it not, but as it is translated; very great are the disagreements, and bitter the reprehensions between Luther and Zuinglius, between Calvin and Molineus, between Beza and Castalio, between legal Protestants, and Puritans of England, each party condemning the others translation. I will instance chief in the English.  
The Ministers of Lincoln Diocese, in a book delivered to King James, being an abridgement of their grievances, say (pag. 11.13.14.) that the English translation of the Bible is, a translation that takes away from the text, that adds to the text, and that sometimes, to the changing or obscuring the meaning of the holy Ghost. And Broughton the great Linguist, in his Advertisement of Corruptions, tells the Bishops, that their public translations of Scripture into English, is such, as that it perverts the text of the old Testament in 848 places, and that it causeth millions of millions to reject the new Testament, and to run into eternal flames. And yet the translators of the Bible, and the Bishops were of another mind; or else surely they would not have commended it to the use of the people. And what a woeful condition were the people in, who must be guided by such a Bible, in which either there was certain falsehood, or they were not certain that it was the truth.  
Secondly the Real presence of Christ's body in the Eucharist by consubstantiation, and to the bodily mouth of the receiver, is affirmed by the Lutherans, but denied by the Calvinists. Thirdly that Christ descended into Hell, which is an article of the Creed, is affirmed by Hill in a Treatise of that subject, by Nowell, and by many Protestants, but is denied by Carlisle, in a book written to that purpose, and commonly by all Puritans. Fourthly Evangelicall Counsels are affirmed by Hooker, (Eccles. Pol. l. 3. sect. 8. p. 140.) but are denied by Perkins (Reform Cath. p. 241.) and most of the Church of England. Fiftly concerning the head of the Church, or the supreme governor in causes Ecclesiastical (which one would think a fundamental matter) the Church of England holds that the King, or Queen (when the Kingdom is governed by a Woman) is the head thereof; but the Church of Helvetia saith, 
f Harmony of Confess p. 308. & forward.  we acknowledge no other head of the Church but Christ, and that he hath no deputy on earth; and many there are in England of the same opinion, who are not afraid to say so now, though it be by law a capital offence. Sixtly the government of the Church by Bishops, one would think were a fundamental point, for it is affirmed to be jure divino, by divine law, by many Protestants in England; and particularly Bishop Hall wrote a book (a few years since) to that purpose; and yet this is denied by a great party in England, as the Bishops by woeful experience do know.  
A hundred other differences might be named, in the maintenance whereof books have been written one against another, one side holding with the Catholics; so that there is scarce any point of Catholic doctrine, but is maintained by some or other Protestants, & amongst them all, almost the whole Catholic doctrine: If therefore they differ from the Church of Rome, they differ from one another. And that their differences are not light, but about most important matters (in their own opinions, being about matters (as they conceive) revealed in the word of God, to which all men are bound to adhere,) even their pursuit of those differences doth plainly demonstrate; which stretcheth to the 
g Luth. con. art. Lovan. Thes. 27.  condemning of one another for Heretics, 
h Osiander spit. Eccl. hist. count. 16 par. altera p. 805.  and banishing each other from their several territories, 
i Hospi. hist. Sacrament. par. alt fol. 393. 395. 397. 398.  forbidding the reading of each others books, imprisoning of their persons; and finally breaking into open Arms one against another: & are not all these tragical particulars (to our infinite grief) now acted on the stage of England? & the chief pretence is Religion. And surely they are guilty of extreme folly, that will fight, to the fundamental overthrow of themselves & families (& for aught they know, of the whole Kingdom) for matters which they hold not-fundamental.  
§. 4. But the Protestants think to wipe off this stain of disagreement by retorting it upon the Catholics, accusing them of as great disagreement, as is amongst themselves, which when I considered, I found altogether impertinent. For amongst Catholics there are two sorts of points, some defined by the Church in a General Council, and so infallibly certain; others not defined; In the former they all exactly agree, in the later each man follows the direction of his particular reason. Like to this, there are amongst Protestants certain Articles (as they call them) which are agreed upon in each several dominion of Protestants, which are set down in their Harmony of confessions; concerning which, first it is to be noted, that there is great disagreement in general betwixt their Churches, they never meeting all together in any one Council to determine any one thing; so that they are not united in any one point by consent. Then in particular dominions the decrees that they publish are not firmly believed by all under those dominions, but are accounted as directions only, not obligations; Therefore in England many both of the people and Clergy also, do deny, some one, some another particular, according to their pleasure; and yet the General Church of Protestants, and the particular of England, doth suffer men, teaching and professing contrary doctrines, as points of faith, to abide in her communion, and pass under the name of Protestants. And seeing that of contrary doctrines one side must needs be false, while the Protestant Church permits both sides to be preached, as matter of faith, and the Word of God, she knowingly suffers the profession of false doctrine, and so is the mother of falsehood, as much as truth, and therefore cannot be the true Church.  
The Church of Rome doth not so, but if any preach or profess contrary to that which is decreed, she shuts them out of her Communion, and disinherits them of the title of Catholic. As for other points, which are without the compass of her decrees (wherein there is a mighty latitude according to the extent of men's reasons) she permits every man to hold, as his particular understanding shall direct him. The Puritans will have all governed by the written word of God; The Chillingworthians will have all guided by particular reason, and both sorts differ amongst themselves. The Church of Rome more wisely in matters of faith and Religion is directed by the Word of God, either written, or unwritten, and therein her children never differ; or if they do, are renounced; In School points and things undefined her children are guided by their particular reason; and herein they do and may differ, yet without disunion, as well as in points of Philosophy: For, School points are not points of Religion properly; religion being derived à RELIGANDO, from binding; but in School points men are not bound to the belief of either side, but have free liberty to hold, or change, as they think they have cause, until it be otherwise determined by a Council. And this may be done, without the just imputation of division, as S. Augustine (De Bapt. cont. Donat. l. 1. c. 18. & l. 2. c. 4.) saith, Divers men be of divers judgements, without breach of peace, until a general Council allow some one part for pure and clear. Thus doth he excuse S. Cyprians disagreement and error concerning the baptising of such as were baptised by Heretics, saying, that himself durst not have condemned the same, unless I had been strengthened with the most agreeable authority of the Catholic Church, to which Cyprian himself no doubt would have yielded, if at that time the truth of the question had been made clear and manifest by a general Council. Which some refusing to do, after that that opinion of Cyprians was by a Council condemned; to show the difference of holding against a point defined, and not defined, Vincentius Lyrinensis chap. 9 thus breaks out, O admirable change, the authors of one self opinion, are called Catholics, and the followers of it heretics!  
Secondly there is in doctrines a difference between the conclusion or point of faith itself, and the reason or manner thereof; in the former of these, unity is required, and is performed most axactly amongst Catholics; but in the later (which concerns but the reason of that conclusion, which reason is for the most part reduced to some Scholastical subtlety) learned men have in all ages, and may (without breach of unity) maintain their difference. For although all men be bound to the decreed point of faith, yet they are not so, to the reason and manner thereof, unless the same also be defined by the Church.  
And hereby are answered all the objections of Protestants concerning the disagreement of Catholics, as of the Thomists and Scotists concerning the Conception of our Blessed Lady; of the Dominicans and Jesuits about the concurrence of Grace and Freewill, with such like, in which the Church hath not yet interposed her Decree. And some Protestants affirm (out of their profound political insight) that she never will; and that because (forsooth) she dares not; out of fear to displease so mighty a party, as each opinion hath. And yet they know, that the Church was not afraid to decree against the opinions of Luther and his brood, notwithstanding she lost some Kings, and much people thereby; but the loss was not only hers, but theirs much more; she lost some incurable members, but they lost themselves. And doubtless when she sees it meet to determine any of the controversies amongst the learned, she will do it without any fear, but of God.  
In the mean time we see that their differences of opinions breed no more disturbance in the Church, nor rancour amongst themselves, than their different colours and shapes of apparel. Brotherly charity is not violated amongst them: they will all go to the same Church, they will communicate together, and confess to one another; nor is there any of them but if he be asked, will say, that he will stand to a General Council in any of the points of difference amongst them, and submit his judgement to hers. But Protestants have no Counsels, nor any authority to call a Council out of the extent of their temporal dominions; the Articles of Religion which they have agreed upon apart, are very different one from another, as may be seen in their Harmony of Confessions; nor in the same Dominion will they stand to any determination of Convocation, Synod, or Assembly, further than it decrees according to the Word of God, of which every one will be a judge for himself. And in the mean time they violate brotherly charity, make schisms and separations one from another, refuse to go to Church, or communicate together, and in defence of their differences, wage war one against another. So that their Harmony of Confessions may more truly be called the confusion of Confessions; and their Churches, the tumults of Religion.  
The greatest unity they have is not in believing, but in not believing; (though therein they are not exact, as I have showed before:) their faith (as they call it) being for the most part negative, consisting in denying what Catholics affirm; as denying and not believing the infallibility of the Church, the Real Corporal presence, seven Sacraments, Invocation of Saints, Purgatory and Prayer for the dead, with many other, abating their positive faith almost to nothing: now not-believing is not believing; and their profession and union in the most, is not of faith, but of infidelity. And for their positive belief, I think it consists in two Articles only, That there is a God, and that Jesus Christ died for the sins of the world; and whosoever affirms more than this, it will be no hard matter to find some other Protestants that will deny it: what union then is there amongst them, but that which was betwixt simeon and Levi, to be brethren in evil? and in writing the Articles of their Religion, as Draco did his laws, in blood? For what nation is there, where the Protestant Religion hath settled her foot, where they did not in the settling thereof fill their hands with blood? And by Rebellion and unutterable cruelties propagate (as they thought) the Gospel of peace? The Kingdom of England only excepted, where the change was made by the Princes. Which change not having gone far enough from the Catholic Roman Religion, the people, having got the sword into their hands, do now attempt (according to the pattern of all their fellow Protestants) to make a second Reformation, with such witty Rebellion and cruelty (the only things wherein they did ever excercise any wit) that as no posterity willbe able to imitate, so no posterity will keep it silent; but blazon it throughout the world, to their eternal infamy; when the Religion, their Idol, to whom they sacrifice all this humane blood shall be sunk (from whence it came) to hell.   

CHAP. XVI.  
Of the sixth Mark of the true Church (viz.) Miracles; And that there are no true Miracles among Protestants.  
§. 1. ANother mark of the Church is Miracles; of which our Saviour saith, John 14.10. He that believes in me, the works that I do he shall do, and greater; of which words, the marginal notes of the English Bibles printed Anno 1576. say, This is referred to the whole Body of the Church, in whom this virtue doth shine for ever. And again Christ saith, Mar. 16.17.18. These signs shall follow them that believe; in my name they shall cast out devils, they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. In so much that S. Augustine (Cont. Ep. Fund. c. 4.) reckons this (amongst many things forementioned) that holds him in the Church's bosom, saying, The consent of people and nations retains me: the authority begun by Miracles, nourished by hope, increased by charity, confirmed by antiquity, retains me: the succession of Prelates since the Sea of Peter (to whom our Lord consigned the feeding of his sheep after his resurrection) to the present Bishop's Sea, retains me; & finally the very name of Catholic retains me, which not without cause, this Church alone, amongst so many & so great heresies, hath so maintained; as when a stranger asks where they assemble to communicate in the Catholic Church, there is no heretic that dares show him his own Temple, or his own house.  
§. 2. Now concerning Miracles, the Protestants say that they are ceased, and it is true; to wit, amongst them, since they ceased to be members of the true Church; and is therefore a sign that they have ceased to be so. For this promise hath no limitation of time, but is to continue for ever in the Church. Nor do they prove the contrary by Scripture; and if they cannot prove it by Scripture, according to their own principles, they are not to be believed.  
And whereas some do allege Fathers and Schoolmen to prove that Miracles are ceased, they ought to distinguish, and to know that there are two manners of being of Miracles, to wit, ordinary and extraordinary; concerning which three things are affirmed. First that in the Primitive Church Miracles were absolutely necessary for the planting of the Gospel in the world; John. 5.36. Acts 4.29.30. and then the gift of Miracles was ordinarily annexed to the ministry of preaching; so that most Christians commonly had that gift in one kind or other, 1 Cor. 12.28. Acts 8.17. Secondly that since the planting of the Gospel by 12. fishermen, which was the Miracle of Miracles, no further Miracle is absolutely necessary for men to whom this is known; and therefore the gift of miracles is ceased to be ordinarily annexed to the office of preaching, or common almost to all Christians, as before it was. Thirdly notwithstanding this; in all ages there were, are, and ever shall be some special places and persons extraordinarily endued with the gift of Miracles, for the comfort of Christians, and conversion of remote nations, to whom the same of the first miraculous planting of our Religion is not come: And of Miracles of this kind 
c Aug. de. civet lib. 22. c. 8. Greg. Dial.  the writings of the Fathers and all Christian histories are full, in so much that S. Augustine having mentioned many Miracles saith, what shall I do? I am not able to remember all that I know, and doubtless sundry of ours, when they read these, will grieve that I have omitted so many, which likewise they know aswell as I And concludes, that it would require many books to set down the Miracles of healing done only at the monument of S. Stephen.  

* Beda hist. l. 1. c. 26.  Many Miracles also were done by S. Augustine the Monk; who being sent from Pope Gregory above a thousand years ago, converted the Kingdom of England the third time to the Roman Catholic faith. Yea, many Miracles were done in several ages and several places by Roman Catholics, by the confession of Protestant writers themselves; In so much that the Centurists of Magdeburg do make report thereof in their 13. Chapter of every several Century, for thirteen hundred years after Christ, out of the credible writers of those several times. In particular, 
e Antonius' 3. part. Hi●. tit. 23. 24.  S. Francis, S. Dominick, and other holy men about their times did abound in Miracles; also S. Katherine of Sienna, and S. Bernard, who being a Roman Catholic is yet acknowledged by 
f De Ecclés. p. 369. post. med.  Whitaker for a true Saint. So did 
g Hackluit Navigat. vol. 2. part. 2. p. 88 & Hartwell of the Kingdom of Congo, in the Epist.  S. Xaverius in his conversion of the Indies of late years; and many other Romish Priests, in the conversion of the Kingdom of Congo in Africa; and the same so credible, that they are published to the world by Protestants themselves.  
I will instance in some few, that have been done in confirmation of some particular points of the Roman Faith. Concerning Prayers to Saints, S. Augustine (de civet. Dei, l. 22. c. 8.) saith, that a devout woman called Palladia, being diseased, did in the presence of him and others, pray to S. Stephen, at his monument, and was presently made whole. Concerning Images, Eusebius (l. 7. c. 14.) reports, that the woman mentioned in the Gospel, whom our Saviour cured of a bloodyflux by the touch of the hem of his garment, erected the Image of our Saviour, at the foot whereof there sprang up an herb, which when it grew so high, as to touch the bottom of the garment of the Image, had power to cure all diseases: 
c De passione imaginis Christi in Berito, alleged in the 2 Council of Nice, Act. 4.  Athanasius also, and 
d De gloria Martyr. l. 1. c. 22.  Gregorius Turonensis make mention, that upon violence offered by the Jews to the Image of Christ, blood did miraculously issue from thence. The Miracles done by the sign of the Cross, by report of the Fathers are almost infinite; in so much as Covell the Protestant in his Answer to Burgess (pag. 138.) saith, No man can deny, but that God after the death of his Son, manifested his power to the amazement of the world, in this contemptible sign, being the instrument of many Miracles.  
Concerning the neglect of Confession, we read divers Miracles in S. Bedes History, (l. 5. c. 14.) S. Francis and S. Dominick, preached against the Albigenses, who (denied Purgatory, Prayer for the dead, Confession, Extreme Unction, the Pope's authority, Indulgences, Images, Ceremonies, Traditions, with many other, and are by the Protestants claimed for their Predecessors in the Protestant Faith;) and wrought many Miracles, whereof one of S. Francis is most notable to this purpose, and is recorded by Matthew Paris (an approved Author amongst Protestants, who thus relates it, (pag. 319.) The fifteenth day before his death there appeared wounds in his hands freshly bleeding, such as appeared in the Saviour of the world hanging on the Cross. Also his right side appeared so open and bloody, that the inward parts of his heart were to be discerned, whereupon there repaired to him great store of people; amongst whom the Cardinals themselves demanded of him what this sight imported? to whom he said, This sight is therefore showed in me to them, to whom I preached the mystery of the Cross, that you may believe in him, who for the salvation of the world suffered upon the Cross these wounds that you see; and that ye may know me to be the servant of him whom I preached, etc. And to the end, that you may without doubt persevere in this constancy of faith, these wounds which you see in me so open and bloody, shall immediately after I am dead be whole, and close like to my other flesh. Afterwards he yielded up his soul to his Creator, without all anguish or pain of body; and being dead there remained no marks of his foresaid wounds.  
Lastly, for confirmation of the Real Presence, it is reported, that in a town called Knobloch, in the year 1510. one Paul Form a Sacrilegious person, went secretly into the Church by night, broke the Pyx, and stole from thence two consecrated Hosts, one of which he sold to a Jew, who in disdainful malice said, If thou be the God of Christians manifest thyself; and thereupon pierced the Sacrament with his dagger, whereupon blood did miraculously flow forth. This Miracle was so public and evident, that 38. were thereupon apprehended, and burned in the Marquisate of Brandenburg, and all other Jews banished out of the said Territory. And this is reported for credible, not only by 
a Surius in Chron. Pontanus l. 5. rerum memorab.  Catholic, but by 
b joan. Manlius loc. Come p. 87. Osiander Epit. cent. 16. c. 14. p. 28. fine.  Protestant writers.  
If I should undertake to set down all the Miracles that have been done in the Catholic Church, I might say, as S. john did of our Saviour's do, that if they were all written, the whole world could not contain the books, joh. 21.25. To all which Protestants answer, as the Blasphemous jews did to our Saviour, that they were done by the Devil. To whom Catholics cannot give that answer our Saviour did, If I, by Belzebub cast out Devils, by whom do your children cast them out? Mat. 12.27. For your children cast out none. And truly I believe that they that do thus accuse the Miracles done by so many holy Catholic men and women, would have done the same to our Saviour, if they had lived in his days. For Miracles being the last and highest proof of other things, can have no proof for themselves, but the evidence of sense, to them that see them, and their testimony and report to others.  
But if (as Protestants say) the Miracles of Catholics were done by the Devil, how were they Miracles? For the Devil can do none, though he can do wonders; & if they were Miracles, how were they done by the Devil? Now that they were Miracles, many Protestants do grant, and therefore Chillingworth their Paragon doth also confess, that they are done by God; whence any reasonable man would infer, that his next word would be, the profession of himself, a Roman Catholic, in which Church God works Miracles, the last and highest motive of belief. But instead hereof (O the accursed power of the devil) he belcheth forth the most blasphemous speech against God, that ever struck the tender sense of a pious ear: and saith 
a In the preface of his book, fine.  that it seems most strange to him that God in his justice should permit some true Miracles to be wrought to delude them who have forged so many to delude the world. As if God, the Father of truth, would set his seal, which is Miracles, to confirm falsehood, to delude the souls of men into sin, and so change titles with the Devil, and be the father of lies, and deceiver of mankind: Than which, what can be imagined more hellish? More true and pious was the saying of Nicodemus, and appliable to our workers of Miracles; we know that thou art a teacher come from God, for no man could do these miracles that thou dost, except God were with him, John 3.2.  
But we may take up the complaint of the Prophet Esay; who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? Esay 53.1. Protestants will not believe these things; and in matter of proof Catholics can go no further; our Saviour himself did not; so that now nothing remains, but for God to touch their hearts with his grace, and to move them to believe that which they have most reason to think to be his word: which God of his great mercy grant. And if they consider it, they shall find it the most unreasonable thing in the world to deny Miracles in the Roman Church, for that there are and shall be Miracles in the world no prudent man (I suppose) will deny, at least for the conversion of the people; Yea we read of many Miracles done in the Church of the Jews, amongst those that were of the true faith, and therefore were not intended for conversion, but for confirmation, or to some other end; And why may it not be so in the Church of the Christians? Now Protestant's or any other Christians do not so much as pretend to Miracles, therefore they that are, are amongst Roman Catholics. Indeed I have read of Calvin that for the credit of his new doctrine, he would make show to the people of doing a Miracle; and hired one that was sick to counterfeit himself dead, who when Calvin should speak certain words, was to rise up, as it were from the dead; but he not stirring nor answering at his cue, they looked, and found him dead indeed; 
b Capcavil. in chronicis Pontificum Leodiensium  But on the other side, the son of Calvin being bit by a mad dog, and his father not able to cure him, he was sent to S. Hubert in Ardenne, where the body of that Saint is kept with great veneration, and frequent Miracles wrought thereby, and there was he made perfectly whole, and thereupon abjured the Religion, wherein his father brought him up, and became a Roman Catholic.  
§. 3. Now for the Miracles that are said to be done in the Roman Church, we have as high humane Testimony as can be imagined; So that Protestants may with as much reason deny all humane story, as that there were Henry's and Edward's Kings of England, whom they never saw; yea they may as justly deny or doubt of the truth of their own names, which they do not know, but by report, and men's calling them so, and the poor record of a Church-book; but Miracles have much more famous Records, and more people that believe them. And can they prudently imagine all Christians (but themselves) so stupid and foolish to believe these things without sufficient proof? who in all other matters, they must (without the help of modesty) acknowledge more wise and learned then themselves. What did Christ and his Apostles do more, than the Roman Church hath since done? and what can Protestants say more against her, than the unbelieving Jews or Gentiles might say against them? And because some feigned Miracles are sometimes discovered, from thence to charge all with the same accusation, as it is unjust, so it is absurd, and destroys all humane faith; they may as well deny all that is, or hath been done in the world, whereof they have not been eye-witnesses, because some of those reports have been false. Therefore as they believe Catholics, when they say some were feigned; so in justice they ought to believe them, when they say others are not so. Otherwise by the same way of reasoning, they may say that the Miracles of Moses were not true, because the Magicians were counterfeit; or that the new Testament is not the word of God, because there were many Gospels & Epistles counterfeited under the names of the Apostles. And surely Catholics would never endeavour to discover feigned Miracles, if they were not sure that some were true, but rather by one act condemn all that have been since the Apostles, that are, or shall be, for false and counterfeit, as Protestants in effect do, when they say, that Miracles are ceased.  
Moreover to affirm that Miracles are Antichristian, as some Protestants do, is improper; first because it is yet in question betwixt us, whether Antichrist be come or no, which Protestants have not proved, nor never will with reference to the Pope. Secondly it is granted on both sides, that Antichrist shall do no Miracles properly, but only some signs and wonders; not exceeding the power of nature and the devil's art; whereof one is to cause fire to come down from heaven, Apoc. 13.13. which never any Pope did; but the Miracles done in the Church do exceed all created power. And lastly many Miracles were done in the Roman Church before the time or times, (for they agree not in their reckoning) that Protestants say Antichrist did first appear; as at the relics of 
d Chrysost. in lib. cont. Gentiles.  Babylas, 
e Nazian. in Cyprian.  Cyprian, 
f jeron. in vita Hilar.  Hilarion, and many others. So that all Catholics may say with Richardus de Sancto Victore (not with doubt or fear of being deceived, but with assurance to the contrary) 
g Lib. 1. de Trinit. c. 2.  O Lord if it be error that we believe, we are deceived by thee, for thou hast confirmed these things to us with signs and wonders, which could not be done but by thee.   

CHAP. XVII.  
Of the seventh Mark of the true Church, (viz.) Conversion of Kingdoms and Monarches.  
§. 1. ANother Mark of the true Church, is, the conversion of Kingdoms and Nations from Heathenism, to the faith of Christ: As the Prophet Esay saith, Kings shall be thy nursing-fathers', and Queens thy Mothers, Esay 49.23. thou shalt suck the milk of the Gentiles, and the breasts of Kings, Esay 60.61. Their Kings shall minister to thee, and thy gates shall be continually open, that men may bring to thee the riches of the Gentiles, and that their Kings may be brought, etc. Esay. 60.10, 11. And the English Bible printed Anno, 1576. upon the 49. of Esay, vers. 23. saith, The meaning is, that Kings shall be converted to the Gospel, and bestow their power and authority for the preservation of the Church. And this Mark I found on the Roman Catholic, but not upon the Protestant Church.  
The first three hundred years after Christ, being a time of great persecution, there were few or no Kings converted to Christianity; and from Constantine to Boniface the third, which was almost 300. years more, there were few Kings converted, except the Emperors of the East and West; and they were converted to the Roman Catholic, not to the Protstant Faith, as Napier (in his Treatise on the Rev. p. 145.) confesseth, saying, After the year of God 300. the Emperor Constantine subdued all Christian Churches to Pope Sylvester, from which time till these our days, the Pope and his Clergy hath possessed the outward and visible Church. Now since the year 600. these Prophecies have been accomplishing, and they have been done by the Roman Church, not by the Protestant Churches; which were (until Luther's days) under hatches, and invisible, by their own confession before mentioned.  
And if we look upon the conversion of Kings and Nations in these later times since their ignis fatuus (which they call the glorious light of the Gospel) hath appeared, we shall find it performed not by Protestants but by Roman Catholics, in the remote and divided parts of the 
m Joan. Petrus Maffeus' hist. Indicarum. 16.  East and 
n Jos. Acosta de nature. novi orbis.  West Indies, and of 
o Hartwell of Congo, Epist. to Reader.  Africa, as by sufficient testimony appears. In so much that Simon Lythus a Protestant before alleged, saith, The Jesuits within the space of a few years have filled Asia, Africa, & America with their Idols. And whereas it is objected that the Goths were converted to the Christian Religion by the Arrians; first 
p Cap. 22. de not. Eccl.  Bellarmine proves it to be false; secondly if it were true, yet it is of no moment to prove the power of any other Religion but the Roman Catholic, for the converting of nations, and the fulfilling of the large Prophecies of the Scripture therein; seeing they that are pretended to be converted by the Arrians, were but the lesser part of the Goths, most of them having been Catholics before. Thirdly this example doth rather make for the Roman faith, in that of all the world converted to Christian Religion, there is but one poor half example of conversion (and that false too) wrought by any other Religion. Which when it is observed, that this pretended conversion was wrought by Arrians, who (even in the opinion of most Protestant's) were Heretics, it will turn to the shame and reproach of Protestants, who pretending to be the true Religion, cannot show so much.  
As for their affirming of converting some to their faith, who before were Catholics, it is impertinent, for so any Heretics, that ever were, and had the unhappy success (as some have had) of drawing any King or Kingdom to their Heresy, might say, that they converted them; so that by the mark thus placed, the true Church could not be discerned from the false. That therefore which doth distinguish them, is the Conversion of Heathen, which hath been performed throughout the world, by Roman Catholics only. And that which the Protestants have done is no more than what other Heretics have done before them, and what is the practice of all novelists, of whom Tertullian affirms, (Prescript. cap. 42.) That their employment is not to convert Heathens, but to pervert them, who are already converted. And how barren their attempts have been in the other and true way of Conversion from Heathenism, is by their own 
* Phil. Nicol. Com. de Regno Christi. l. 1. p. 395. Richer. inter Epist. Calv. Epist. 237.  Authors, to their shame, confessed.  
And doubtless it must needs seem a prodigious thing, that Protestants or any other Heretics should have so little zeal or meet with so ill success in the converting of the world to Christ, if they alone be the true Christians; or that the Prophecies of dilating the Church of Christ, should be performed by the endeavour of Catholics, and yet they not be the true Christians; or that the Roman Catholic doctrine should be false, and yet it alone have the vigour and efficacy to convert souls, which the Prophet David Psal. 18. ascribes to the doctrine and law of God. As for the Protestants, it is not to any reasonable man probable, that they shall ever convert any Nation, or so much as any one single person, except some poor wretch or other whom fear or gain will drive or draw to any thing, seeing they have not means amongst them proportionable to such an end; wanting both Miracles, and also that admirable sanctity of life with which many Catholics, especially those who have converted Nations, have been endowed; For what prudent Heathen will believe the stories of the Creation, of Adam's fall by eating of an Apple, of God's Incarnation and death, of his Mother's Virginity, with the rest, being so disproportioned to corrupted humane reason, unless they be proved unto him by some visible acts, which are in his judgement, as high above nature, as are the points proposed him to believe? such are Miracles, above the power of nature; and high Sanctity, above the reach of flesh and blood. Or who can blame them if they do not without these signs believe? seeing our Saviour saith of the Jews, If I had not done works in them, which no other man hath done, they should not have sin, John 15.24. Which works seeing ehe Protestant's cannot show, there is no hope left to them ever to convert a Nation; but if they do, they may also convert me to them again.   

CHAH. XVIII.  
Of the eighth and ninth Marks of the true Church (viz.) sanctity of doctrine and life.  
§. 1. ANother Mark of the true Church is holiness of doctrine; of which our Saviour saith Math. 7.13.14. Straight is the gate and narrow is the way which leads to life: and wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction. Now it is evident by the known doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church, that the way through which she directs her children, is very straight and narrow. She enjoins Confession of sins not only to God, but to his Priest: also; not only Contrition and sorrow for sin, but also Satisfaction by doing of Penance, and restitution of real damages done to our neighbours. She obliges to set times of fasting & prayer, & magnifies the merit of good works; propounding also and commending the sublimer acts of voluntary Poverty, Chastity, and Obedience, and the excercising of other great acts of austerity for the subduing of sin in the flesh, and to express our love to Christ who suffered so much for us: And to this end hath set forth a world of books of admirable devotion, and direction of every moment of a man's life to holiness, and height of purity.  
On the contrary look upon the Protestants and we find a wide gate of liberty set open, through which every one naturally delights to pass. They deny Confession, Purgatory, or any Satisfaction for the temporal punishment due to sin, after it is remitted by Contrition; as also all merit of works, whereby they make all fasting, prayers, mortifications, and good works useless, and quench the fear of committing sin; for out of doubt, next to the pure love of God, and fear to Hell, the fear of temporal punishment, and the Confession of our sins to men, are the greatest restrainers of vice. They teach that chastity is not in our power, co-operating with God's grace; 
a Luther to. 5. wit. Serm. de matrim. fol. 119.  that it is not in our power to be without a woman, etc. it is not in their power that it should be stayed or omitted; but is as necessary as to eat, drink, purge, etc.  
Now what a floodgate of liberty doth this set open to young men and maids, yea to all single persons, who have not every day the opportunity of Marriage; as also to all married people in the absence or infirmity one of another? For who (if he be taught that he cannot abstain) will strive to reach at an impossibility?  
Again, they teach that the Commandments are impossible to be kept; and this ordinarily slackens all endeavours to that end. That men are justified by faith only; which ushers in the neglect of all good works. That men have not free will, no not by the grace of God; and this makes all exhortations to virtue, and dissuasions from vice fruitless in them. And that all that are saved are assured thereof in this life, than which, what greater temptation to presumption and the boldness of sinning? And if there be any in whom these principles do not take this effect, it is not because the doctrines do not afford it, but because they are restrained by some other motives.  
Therefore Sir Edwin Sandys (in his Relation sect. 48.) saith, Let the Protestants look with the eye of charity upon them of the Papacy, as well as of severity, and they shall find some excellent orders of government, some singular helps for the increase of godliness and devotion, for the conquering of sin, for the profiting in virtue: and contrariwise in themselves, looking with a more single and less indulgent eye, they shall find there is no such absolute perfection in their Doctrine and Reformation: yea to speak more truly and fully, they shall find nothing but imperfection.  
§. 2. Another Mark of the true Church is holiness of life; to which purpose our Saviour saith, A good tree brings forth good fruit: and again, Beware of false Prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravening wolves, by their fruits you shall know them, Mat. 7.15, 16, 17. Accordingly I found the sanctity of the lives of Roman Catholics to be highly extolled, especially of those who were the Converters of Nations, or Founders of Religious Orders; and that by Protestants themselves. Of S. Augustine and his companions who converted England the last time to the Roman Faith, it is thus recorded, 
b Holinshead Chron. part. 1 p. 100 Stow's Annals, p 64.  After they were received into Canterbury they began to follow the trade of life which the Apostles used, exercising themselves in continual prayer, watching and preaching, despising all worldly things, living in all points according to the Doctrine which they set forth.  
The like honourable testimony is afforded to the several Converters of Nations to the Roman Faith; which for brevity's sake I pass over: Only I will mention the approved Sanctity of S. Xaverius, who in the last age converted sundry Nations of the East Indians, expressed by Hackluit in his book of Navigations (2. vol. 2. par. p. 81.) in this manner That godly Professor, and painful Doctor of the Indian Nation in matters concerning Religion, Francis Xaverius after great labours, injuries, and calamities suffered with much patience, departed, endued with all spiritual blessings, out of this life, Anno 1552. after that many thousands were by him brought to the knowledge of Christ. In like manner concerning the first Authors of the several Orders of Religion, S. Benedict, S. Dominick, S. Francis, and others, their sanctity of life was most eminent, and is testified by good authority, and confessed by 
b Cent. Mag. cent 13. ●ol. ●1 79 also 〈…〉 p. 117.  Protestants themselves.  
And since I have had the happiness 〈◊〉 come amongst them, I may say of the Clergy in general, as the Queen of Sheba said to Solomon, that the one half of the goodness I find amongst them, was not told me. How many rare and excellent men are there, both Secular and Religious, full of admired Sanctity? who as our Saviour faith of himself, make it their meat and drink to do the will of him that sent them; who despising all worldly honour, wealth, and pleasure, exercise a more noble and virtuous ambition, in aspiring to a high place in the Kingdom of heaven, by the service and love of the King thereof, exercising that service in the lowest and humblest undertake of the body, and that love in the strongest and highest raptures and languishments of the soul, unexpressible in themselves, and unknown to all, but those that have them. Such powerful influence hath the soul of Catholic Relegion on the members of the body thereof, that it invites great plenty in all ages, and of all conditions, Emperors, Kings, Princes, and all sorts of Nobility and Gentry, to divest themselves of all worldly interest, to renounce the world with as much eagerness, as others embrace it, to take up the Cross of Christ, to serve him in Poverty, Chastity, and Obedience. And even the weak sex of woman, whose natural delicacy, tenderness, and infirmities, may seem to carry with them a Patent of exemption from extraordinary severities and mortifications of themselves, yet such is the omnipotency of Catholic Religion, that even these do equal, if not excel the men, in the tough exercise of denying themselves, of taking up their Cross and imitating of Christ; invited hereunto more by pure love of God, and gratitude for his doing and suffering for them, than for the expectation of reward.  
And though perhaps there are some Clergy and Religious people, that do not make good that title with their deeds, yet they are but few in comparison of the other, and no impeachment to them, or to the Religion, more than Judas was to the rest of the Apostles. The common people are also generally more devout toward God, less injurious to their neighbours, as Protestants acknowledge, who speaking of them in former times, when God's worship (as they said) was darkened with man's Traditions and superstitions, 
c Cent. Mag. cent. 7. c. 7. col. 181.  yet the study to serve God, and to live Godly and justly, was not wanting to the miserable common people, etc. they were so attentive to their prayers, as they bestowed almost the whole daytherin, etc. they did exhibit to the magistrate due obedience, they were most studious of amity, concord, and society, so as they would easily remit injuries: all of them were careful to spend their time in honest vocation and labour; to the poor and strangers they were most courteous and liberal, and in their judgements and contracts most true. And the like is affirmed of Roman Catholics of later times by Luther (in Dominic. 26. post Trin.) and by Stubbs in his Motive to good works, pag. 43.  
§. 3. Now concerning the want of sanctity in the Protestants, both Clergy and Laity, I will say nothing in particular of these present times, and of ancient times I can say nothing, they being but a novice Religion. They are extreme apt to blazon one another's faults, as is manifest by the bitter invectives that past betwixt the Lutherans and Calvinists, and at this present in the Kingdom of England betwixt the Presbyterians and Independents, Malignants and well affected, & the Cavaliers and Roundheads, as they call each other. I confess there are many amongst them stored with moral goodness, especially in the Kingdom of England, and especially amongst the legal Protestants; but the devotion and zeal is amongst the Puritans, which hath eaten up almost all moral honesty among them. I will only instance in the want of sanctity of some of them who are the Converters of the world (as they say) to the purity of the Gospel; whose unhallowed actions, if they could be objected against the Apostles, the first publishers of the Catholic Religion, it might (without a second objection) breed a stand in those infidels that were approaching to the belief thereof.  
Luther, the Lucifer and morning star of the Protestant Religion, doth thus proclaim his own lustfulness, (To. 5. Wit. Ser. de. matrim. fol. 119. a. versus finem) As it is not in my power to be no man, so it is not in my power to be without a woman. And (Tom. 1. Epist. fol. 334 ad. Phil.) I am burned with the great flames of my untamed lust; I, who ought to be fervent in Spirit, am fervent in the flesh, in lust, sloth etc. with much more to this purpose. And to make himself more famously impious, he married a vowed Nun, adding to lust, Sacrilege, both in himself and her. He is also by his fellow Protestants charged with 
a Zuinglius to 2. in Res. ad confess. Lutheri fol. 878. a. ante med. Oecolam. pad. in resp. ad confess. Lutheri.  arrogancy, insolency, and pride, for which (say they) God withdrew his true Spirit from him; which he exercised against persons of the highest quality, particularly against Henry the eighth King of England, and said, 
b in l. cont. Angliae Regem.  The divine Majesty is on my side, so that I do not care though a thousand Augustine's, a thousand Cyprians, a thousand Henricane Churches stood against me. And in his defence of his Translation of the new Testament, he saith, If thy Papist will prattle concerning this word (alone) which he added to the text, where it is said that we are justified by faith) presently answer, Doctor Martin Luther will have it so, and saith, a Papist and an ass are the same. So I will, so I command, my will be a law. For we will not be the scholars of the Papists, but the Masters and Judges. And Sleydan his dear Scholar (l. 3. fol. 29. b. initio. & l. 2. fol. 22. a.) doth report, that he himself acknowledged his profession not to be of life or manners, but of doctrine; wishing that he were removed from the office of preaching, because his manners and life did not answer his profession; In so much that it gained the place of a Proverb amongst the Protestants of those days; to express their riot and intemperance, by saying, 
c Morgensterne in ●ra. de Eccl. p. 225.  HODIE LUTHERANICE VIVEMUS, to day we will live like Lutherans. His impudent railing, his foul, filthy, and Bedlam-like expressions have bred a stench through all his writings; and it is no wonder: for who would look for better language, or  life from one who was such a darling of the devil, 
Luther in Conc. Dom. Reminis. fo. 19 apud Cochleum Idem in Colloq. Germ. fo. 275. 281.  that he knew him very well (as he to his great credit confesses) that he had eat more than one measure of salt with him, and that the devil slept with him oftener than his wife Katherine.  
Concerning Calvin, that admired Apostle of Protestants, it is affirmed by Conradus Schlusselburg (in Theol. Calvinistar. l. 2. fol. 72.) a man of eminence in the Protestant Church, and certainly a great enemy to the Church of Rome, that God in the rod of his fury visiting Calvin, did horribly punish him before the fearful hour of his unhappy death; for he so struck this Heretic with his mighty hand, that being in despair, and calling upon the Devil, he gave up his wicked soul, swearing, cursing, and blaspheming. He died of the disease of louse and worms, increasing in a most loathsome ulcer about his privy parts, so as none present could endure the stench. These things are declared concerning his lasciviousness, his sundry abominable vices, and Sodomitical lusts; for which he was by the Magistrate, under whom he lived, branded on the shoulder with a hot burning iron; unto which I yet see not any sound and clear refutation made. Thus far he.  
Of Beza also another Father of the Protestant Religion, many foul and impious things are recorded; his odious conspiracies and seditious books are mentioned by Bolseck in his book of Beza's life, and by Bancroft in his Survey, pag. 127. 54. 59 219. 220. By whom also he is taxed of insolency, pride, and impudence, in being too bold with the ancient Fathers. Lastly, he wrote 
a Faius de vita & obitu Beza p. 19  many lascivious Poems (and that after he was turned Protestant) and one Epigram amongst the rest most infamous; wherein debating with himself, whether he should prefer his lust with Candida his wench, or Andebertus his boy; in conclusion he prefers the later, and of two evil do, both of which he ought to have avoided, he doth deliberately choose one, and that the most foul and unnatural. These things and much more to this purpose are recorded of these, and others the supposed Apostles, converters of the world, and restorers of the purity of Evangelicall Doctrine, of whom we may say, as joseph's brethren did to Jacob of his Coat all smeered with blood, VIDE UTRUM TUNICA FILII TUI SIT, AN NON, See whether it be thy son's coat or no, Gen. 37.32. Judge whether these be the lives of the Sons of God, sent to control the world, to reform and lead out of error the misguided sons of men. Surely any prudent man will believe, that either God never intended the change they have made, or if he did he would have chosen other kind of men than these: such as Moses and the Prophets, who gave the Law unto the Jews; and Christ and his Apostles who brought the Gospel to the Gentiles.  
As for the common multitude, Luther (to the credit of his Doctrine) confesses, (Postill. super. Evang. Dominicae 1. Advent.) that the world grows daily worse, men are now more revengeful, covetous, licentious, than they were ever before in the Papacy. And again he saith, (Domin. 26. post Trin.) before (when we were seduced by the Pope) every man did willingly follow good works; and now every one neither saith, nor knows any thing, but how to get all things to himself by exactions, pillage, theft, lying, usury, etc. And of those that have changed from the Catholic Roman to the Protestant Religion, it is confessed by Luther (in Serm. convivial. Germ. fol. 55.) & Musculus, (Loc. Com. cap. de Decal. in explanat. 3. praecepti p. 62. circa med.) That they have changed their lives into worse: Which made Paulus Eberus, a Protestant writer of note complain, saying, (in praefat. Comment. Philip. in Ep. ad Cor.) which evils seeing every one doth behold with his proper eyes, he doubts (not without cause) whether our Evangelicall congregation be the true Church. Which also with the other reasons forementioned hath made me not at all to doubt thereof, but to believe assuredly, that it is not the true Church.  
§. 3. As for the recriminattion of the Protestants, and charging the lives of some Popes, and many of the Clergy and Religious, with great impiety, as it is not denied, so far forth as it is true, so it is in itself impertinent; for what Church pretends to have every particular person, though of the highest rank, blameless? Let them look upon the heads of their own Churches, whosoever they be that they count so, and see whether by their own members they are accounted spotless; particularly the first head of the Church of England, King Henry the eight. And upon their own Clergy, of whom not I, but Doctor King, Bishop of London, (in Jonam. Lecture 45.) saith, that scarce the tenth man of the Ministry is morally honest. But howsoever the successors may fail, yet it is a matter highly suspicious, yea altogether convincing, that they that pretend to be the first revealers or revivers of the forsaken truth of God, if they be not of godly lives are counterfeit Messengers and false Prophets. And the Protestants have no reason to make an inventory of the faults of Catholics, for so many hundred years as they confess Catholics have possessed the Church, and that throughout the world, and compare it with their own faults, whose Church is little above one hundred year old, and possessing but some corners of the world.  
Nor is the sanctity of the Church (I confess) to be measured exactly by the zealous complaints against sin on either side; for zealous complaint is hyperbolical, even in holy Scripture. But it is manifest that the Protestant Religion hath not that sanctity of life in it that the Catholic hath, when neither the founders thereof had any at all, nor the followers any more, but much less, than when they were Catholics. In fine, compare the lives of Roman Catholics and Protestants both Clergy and Laity, and of the same Nation, (for that some Nations perhaps are addicted to vice in general more than others, and every Nation to some one or few particular vices more than another,) the best to the best, and the major part to the major part, we shall find (so have I done) and I have heard even Protestants themselves confess, that they are exceedingly overbalanced by the Catholics.   

CHAP. XIX.  
Of the tenth and last (here mentioned) Mark of the Church, (viz.) That the true Church hath never been separated from any society of Christians more ancient than herself.  
§. 1. THe last Mark of the Church which I will mention is, her never going forth out of any visible society of Christians, elder than herself; of which going out, as a note of error and falsehood, the Apostles say, They went forth from us, 1 Joh. 2.19. Certain that went forth from us, Acts 15.14. Out of yourselves shall arise men speaking perverse things, Acts 20.30. These are they that separate themselves, Judas verse. 19 Certain it is, that the true Church is most ancient, as truth itself is elder than falsehood, if therefore there have risen in the Church men of indifferent judgements or affections from the true Church, they have presently made a separation, gone out of the Church, wherein they were, and erected a new Church to themselves; As S. Augustine saith, (Tract. 3. in Ep. Joan. de Sym. ad eateth. l. 1. c. 5.) All Heretics went out from us, that is, they go out of the Church; and again, The Church Catholic fight against all Heresies may be opposed, but she cannot be overthrown: all heresies are come out from her, as unprofitable branches out from the Vine, but she remains in her vine, in her root, in her charity. A vain thing therefore it is for Protestants to charge the Church of Rome with departing from the Word of God, and the Doctrine of the Apostles, unless they can prove that she departed from some former Church that held other doctrine than she doth. But certain it is, that this cannot be proved, seeing she was planted by the Apostles S. Peter and S. Paul, and never separated herself from any precedent Church.  
It is true indeed that there were Churches elder than she in time, as she is a particular Church, as the Church of jerusalem, where the Gospel was first preached, and of Antioch, where S. Peter was first Bishop, with other Churches in Asia, but these all agreed in the unity of Faith, and were all subject to the Church of Rome, after it was planted, in union under the head thereof S. Peter and his successors, as I shall show by and by. And the Church of Rome did never separate from any of these, but many of these from her, in the Heresy of Arius and others, as Protestants will not deny. If then she did never separate from any elder Church, so that men might say here is a Church, and there is the Church of Rome, once the same with her, and now separated from her, she must still be the first and true Church, or there is none upon earth.  
But certain it is on the contrary side, that all the former Churches, which Protestants themselves will call Heretics, as Arrians, Macedonians, Nestorians, Entychians, Donatists, with many others, did separate from the Church of Rome, and she can tell when, and why; and no less certain is it, that all that are now called Protestants, and all the pedigree of their forefathers, Waldo, Wickliff, Husse, Luther, Calvin, and all the Kingdoms wherein their followers are, were once, and first of the Roman Catholic Church, and have forsaken her Communion and departed from her, and have not joined to any other Church more ancient, and subsistent apart from her, by which she was condemned of novelty and separation, nor are they able to show any such Church; therefore the Roman must needs be the true Church: Or else (which is a most absurd and impossible imagination) the true Church hath been utterly extinguished, and revived again; and that not by the service of such men, as proved their calling by miracles or sanctity of life (as Roman Catholics have done, to all the nations they have converted) but were men notable only for their wickedness.  
And these amongst many others which might be added, and of which much more might be said, are those infallible Marks that prove the Church of Rome, and those that communicate with her to be the one, true, holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. That Church of whose infallible and never-erring Judgement, the Scripture assures us, calling it, The ground and pillar of truth; which hath the Spirit of God to lead it into all truth; which is built upon a rock, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail; wherein Christ placed Apostles, Prophets, Doctors and Pastors, to the consummation and full perfection of the whole body, that in the mean time we be not carried away with every blast of doctrine, 1 Tim. 3.15. John 16.13. Mat. 16.18. Ephes. 4.11.12. That Church which whatsoever it says, God commands us to do, and he that will not, is an heathen and a Publican; which whatsoever she shall bind on earth, is bound in heaven, and whatsoever she shall lose one earth, is loosed in heaven; which is the spouse of Christ, his body, his lot, Kingdom and inheritance given him in this world, Math. 23.3. and 18.17.18. Of which S. Cyprian (Epist. 55.) saith, To S. Peter's chair and the principal Church infidelity or false faith cannot have access. And S. Hierome, (Apol. advers. Ruff. l. 3. c. 4.) That the Roman faith commanded by the Apostles cannot be changed. And S. Gregory Nazianzen, (Carm. de vita sua) 'Old Rome from ancient times hath the right faith, and always keepeth it, as it becomes the city which overrules the world. Which being so, what remains to every man, but laying aside endless dispute about particulars, to cast himself into the arms of this Holy mother Church, and wholly rely upon her infallible judgement, wherein Christ Jesus her husband hath promised, and hath reason to preserve her. And to submit themselves to the visible head thereof the Pope of Rome, of whose authority, as I did myself particularly inquire, and was moved thereby, so I will briefly propound it to others.   

CHAP. XX.  
That the Pope is the head of the Church.  
§. 1. THe Protestants do usually blaspheme the Pope and Sea of Rome with the title of Antichrist, of the Whore of Babylon, of the Mother of Abominations, of the Beast with seven heads and ten horns, and many other like courteous compellations; and it is the main design of some of the Clergy to persuade the people into a belief that he is Antichrist; which conceit when it hath once strongly seized them, as it doth, yet by very weak and silly arguments, they care not to inquire any further, but conclude from thence (and that justly, if it were true, that neither he nor his adherents, are either Head or members of the Church. But the contrary I found most evident by the testimony of all antiquity. First that our Saviour appointed S. Peter his Vicar & Head of his Church here on earth; and after him, his successors in the Sea of Rome, nor do we read either in Scriptures, Counsels, Fathers or histories, that any other of the Apostles but Peter, was thought, or pretended by any, to be the chiefest over the rest, and over the whole Church; and that it is necessary that some one be Head, both reason and authority do convince.  
Nor is it a denial of Christ to be the Head, while we say, that S. Peter was, and the Pope is so. For Christ we confess is the Head originally and immediately, the Pope derivatively from and by him; Christ is the principal, the Pope but his deputy, and representer; and these two headships do not contradict (as some Protestants imagine) but are subordinate the one to the other. And with as much reason they may deny a King to be head of his Kingdom, because the Scripture saith, Psal. 46.8. God is King over all the earth, as deny the Pope to be head of the Church, because Christ is so. S. Basil (Concione de poenit.) shows us the difference of their headships: Though Peter be a rock (saith he) he is not a rock, as Christ is; for Christ is the true immovable rock of himself, Peter is  by Christ the rock, for Jesus doth communicate and impart his dignities not voiding himself of them; but holding them to himself, bestows them also on others: He is the light, and yet you are the lights; He is the Priest, and yet he makes Priests; He is the Rock, and he made a rock. Therefore our Saviour saith to Peter, (Math. 16.18.19.) Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And, I will give unto thee the Keys of the Kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt lose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.  
Nor is it contrary to this (as Protestants imagine) to say (as the Fathers sometimes do) that the Church was built upon the confession of Peter, these two expositions not excluding, but including one another. For they intent that the Church was built causally on the confession of Peter, and formally on the ministry of the Person of Peter; that is to say the confession of Peter was the cause wherefore Christ chose him, to constitute him the foundation of the ministry of the Church: and that the person of S. Peter was that, on which our Lord did properly build his Church; as S. Hilary (in Mat. c. 16.) saith, The confession of S. Peter hath received a worthy reward. So that to say, the Church is built upon the confession of Peter, is not to deny that it is built on the person of Peter, but it is to express the cause wherefore it is built upon him; as when S. Hierome (ad Pammach. advers. error. Joan. Hierosol. Ep. 91.) said, that Peter walked not on the waters, but faith; it is not to deny that S. Peter walked truly on the water; but it is to express that the cause that made him walk there, was not the natural activity of his body, but the faith that he had given to the words of Christ. So that these two propositions are both true, Peter's faith walked on the water; and Peter's person walked on the water; so likewise these, the Church is built on the faith of Peter, and the Church is built on the person of Peter: the confession of Peter's faith being the cause why Christ built his Church upon Peter's person.  
Again our Saviour said to Peter, Simon son of Ionas lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, yea Lord thou knowest that I love thee. He said unto him feed my lambs, John 21.15. And thus the second and the third time. Which speed was directed to Peter alone, as appears by these words [more than these] whereby he is separated from the rest; and by these words is given to him the Ecclesiastical power to feed, and also to govern, as the word in the original doth signify; and that not some alone, but all the whole flock of Christ. Of which the Fathers give abundant testimony: S. Aug. saith (Serm. 5. in fest. Pet. & Pauli.) speaking of S. Peter, that he only amongst the Apostles deserved to hear, verily I say unto thee thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, worthy truly, who to the people, who were to be builded in the house of God, might be a stone for their foundation, a pillar for their stay, a key to open the gates of the Kingdom of heaven. And again, (Quaestion. vet. &. nov. Test. q. 7●.) Our Saviour when he commands to pay for himself and Peter, seems to have paid for all; because as in our Saviour were all the causes of superiority; so after him all are contained in Peter; for he ordained him the head of them, that he might be the head of our Lords flock. S. Gregory also (lib. 4. Ep. 32.) saith, ' It is clear to all that know the Gospel, that by our Lord's mouth, the care of the whole Church is committed to Holy Peter, the Prince of all the Apostles, for to him it is said, Peter lovest thou me? feed my sheep; and further he applies the places of Scripture spoken to S. Peter above mentioned, to this end. And S. chrysostom (Hom. 87. in Joan. 21.) saith, that Peter was the mouth of the Apostles, and the Prince and top of the company, and therefore Paul went to see him above others. As for S. Paul's reproving of S. Peter, it was for an error of conversation not of doctrine, as Tertullian saith, nor doth it any way diminish his Primacy, but only shows, that an inferior may reprove his superior, if the matter require it, and the manner be not unseemly; which no man will deny: Therefore this instance is nothing to the purpose, being thus also answered by S. Augustine. lib. 2. de. Bapt. c. 1.  
§. 2. And as Christ ordained S. Peter to be the supreme Pastor and Head of the Church, so it was his will, that that office should continue in S. Peter's successors in the Sea of Rome. That there should be one chief Pastor always in the Church for the government thereof, and deciding of controversies, Gods practise in the Church of the Jews (Numb. 20.28. Exod. 18.15. etc. Deut. 17.8. etc.) gives us reason to believe; who appointed the High Priests therein to succeed one another, to this end. That the office of a Pastor is always needful, our Saviour implies in calling his people, his sheep; and sheep without a shepherd are like to be but il provided for: and as they are always sheep, so they ought always to have a shepherd; which office in ordinary being given to S. Peter first, aught to continue out of the necessity of the cause thereof, so long as the sheep continue, which will be to the end of the world: Which S. Peter not being now able to do in person; reason requires that it should be done by his Successors. The Apostle 1 Cor. 12.21. compares the Church to a body, and saith, The head cannot say to the feet, I have no need of you; which cannot be understood of Christ our head, for he may truly say to us all, that he hath no need of us; it must therefore be meant of some Head here on earth, which must continue as long as the Church continues a body, and that is to the world's end.  
And that the successors of S. Peter are this Head, S. chrysostom doubts not to affirm who demanding why Christ shed his blood, 
De Saterdot. l. 2. initio Leo Serm. 2. de Annivers. assump sua ad Pontific.  answers, It was to gain that flock, the care whereof he committed to Peter & to Peter's successors. And S. Leo, Peter continues and lives in his Successors. And that his successors are the Bishops of Rome is out of doubt; none but they ever assuming it to themselves, or having it granted by others. For the Bishop of Antioch succeeded not S. Peter in the government of the whole Church, but of that diocese; for succession to any in his whole right, is not but to him that leaves his place either by natural death, deposition or voluntary resignation; now S. Peter living and ruling left the Church of Antioch, and placed his Sea at Rome, where he also died; so that he that succeeds him in that Sea, must succeed him both as he was Bishop thereof, and likewise as he was Head of the whole Church: as for the Bishop of Antioch he did never either possess, or pretend to higher than the third place amongst the Patriarches. (Cone. Nic. Can. 6.)  
Gelasius (In decret. cum 70. Episcopis) affirms that the Roman Church is preferred before other Churches, not by any constitutions of Counsels, but she obtained Primacy by the Evangelicall voice of our Lord; saying, thou art 〈◊〉 upon this rock I will build m●… 〈◊〉 And S. Hierome in his 59 Epistle 〈…〉 to Pope Dam●sus saith, To 〈◊〉 she 〈◊〉 require from the Priest the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ●●●tion, and from the Pastor 〈…〉 I speak with the successor of th● 〈◊〉 sho●● etc. I following none but Christ in 〈◊〉 joined in Communion to your holyn sse, that is to the chair of Peter; upon that, rock I know the Church to be builded 3. whosoever out of this house eats the lamb, is profane, whosoever shall not be in the Ark of No shall perish in the deluge. And S. Aug. writing to Pope Innocentius (Epist 92.) saith, we think that by the Authority of your Holiness: derived from the authority of Holy Scriptures, they will more easily yield, who believe such perverse and pernicious: things. Wherein he derives the Pope's authority from the Scriptures. And S Bernard writing to Pope Eugenius saith thus, Thou alone art not only the Pastor of sheep, 
De consider. l. 3 cap. 8. &. Epist. 190. ad Innoc. PP.  but also of Pastors. Thou demandest how I prove this?  
Out of the word of our Lord. For to whom, I do not say Bishops, but also of the Apostles, were all the sheep so absolutely and indeterminately committed? Peter if thou lovest me feed my sheep: which? the people of this or that city, country, or Kingdom? He saith, my sheep. To whom, is it not plain, that he did not assign some, but all? Nothing is excepted where nothing is distinguished, etc. To conclude, James (who seemed a pillar for the Church) was content with Jerusalem only, yielding the universality to Peter. And with the Fathers apart, do concur the Father's united in Council, by whom in many Counsels this truth hath been declared, as in the Council of 
a Sess. 14. c. 7.  Trent, the Council of Florence, 
b Sess. ult.  the Council of 
c Respons. Synod de authoritat. Conc. general.  Basil, the Council of 
d Part. 2. Act. 3.  Ephesus, the Council of 
e Sub. Innoc. 3. e. 5.  Lateran, the second Council of 
f Act. 2.  Nice, the Council of 
g Conc. Chal. Act. 1. &. Act. 3. tom. 2. p. 252 edit. Venet.  Chalcedon, as is easy to show at large if need required.  
§. 3. As for the attempt of the Bishop of Constantinople against the Pope, it was not for the Primacy and headship of the Church Catholic, but only of the Churches of the East; And the title of universal Bishop which he claimed, was not with intent of superiority over the Pope, but over the other Patriarches, who were all of the Eastern Empire, and in association with the Pope for those parts, yet with subjection to the Pope, acknowledging him the root and stock of the universality; even as Menas Patriarch of Constantinople in the time of this contention acknowledges, saying, 
Concil. Constant. sub. Men. Act. 4.  we will in all things follow and obey the sea Apostolic. And as the Emperor and Patriarch both acknowledge; as S. Gregory (lib. 7. indict. 2. ep. 93.) reports in these words; Who is it that doubts but that the Church of Constantinople is subject to the Sea Apostolic, which the most religious Lord the Emperor, and our brother Bishop of the same city continually protest. And if it were true (as Protestants imagine) that the Bishop of Constantinople contended with the Pope for the absolute Primacy over the Christian world, this doth no more prove his right, than Perkin Warbecks' pretention in the days of King Henry the seventh, did prove his right to the crown of England. And certain it is that neither the one, nor the other did obtain that which he aspired to, but were rejected by the voice of mankind, which is an argument that their claim was unjust.  
§. 4. Another great objection of Protestants against the Pope's Primacy, is fetched from S. Gregory, who was Pope himself; and is this, That he that entitled himself universal Bishop, exalted himself like Lucifer above his brethren, and was a forerunner of Antichrist. To the understanding of which words, I found that the word universal hath two meanings,; the one proper, literal and grammatical, whereby it signifies Only Bishops excluding all others; the other transferred and Metaphorical, whereby it signifies the supreme over all Bishops: and S. Gregory censured this title in the first sense; because that from hence it would have ensued, that there had been but one Bishop only, and that all the rest had been but his Deputies and not true Bishops, and true Officers of Christ; as he saith, (l. 7. ind. 2. Ep. 96.) If there be one that is universal Bishop, all the rest are no more Bishops. Now S. Gregory maintained that all Bishops were true Bishops, Ministers and officers of Christ, although concerning jurisdiction, they were subordinate the one to the other. He therefore that usurps that title wholly to himself, exalts himself (with relation to the Episcopal order) above his brethren, denying him the essence and propriety of Bishops, and officers of Christ, and makes them only Commissioners to him, as if they had the original of that office from him; and not from God.  
And in this sense S. Gregory withstood the title of universal Bishop, and not to deny (in case of jurisdiction) the superiority of one Bishop over another, and the Bishop of Rome over all: For that he maintains (Lib. 7. ind. 2. Ep. 62.) saying, If there be any crime found in Bishops, I know no Bishop but is subject to the Sea Apostolic. He also adds for explication of the matter in hand, (Lib. 4. ind. 13. Ep. 32.) that The care of the Church hath been committed to the holy Apostle, and Prince of all the Apostles, S. Peter; the care and Principality hath been committed to him, and yet he is not called universal Apostle. In which words he ascribes the Primacy and headship of the Church to S. Peter, & yet denies the universality: it must therefore needs be, that the word universal in S. Gregory's sense, in this case, is not the denial of the Primacy of Jurisdiction over the whole Church, but of his being the only Apostle, as if there were none but he, & such as should derive their authority originally from him, & not from God. And with application to the Pope, it is the denial of his being the only Bishop, as if there were no Bishop in the world but he, or such as he should constitute his deputies, as from himself, and not by command from God, and as the Officers of God.  
Moreover the Histories of all ages beat record, that the Bishop of Rome hath exercised authority over all other Bishops in the world, even in all Foreign Nations, (both before S. Gregory and after, and even in his person, and therefore he cannot mean the universal Government, when he reproves the title of universal Bishop;) as by creating them himself; by confirming them, created by others; by deposing them, by restoring them, being deposed by others; by appointing them his Vicars, by final deciding their controversies; by accepting their Appeals; by making Laws over all the Church; by dispensing with them; by inflicting his censures; by being Precedent in General Counsels; by calling of Counsels, so far as concerned the Ecclesiastical authority, which is the chiefest; though the Emperors concurred therein in regard of temporal authority, and of that only, to make them obligatory to the secular tribunal, and executory by the Ministry of the Officers of the Emperor; as witnesseth the sixth General Council, (Act 18.) speaking of the first General Council of Nice, which saith, The most sacred Constantine and the Praiseworthy Sylvester called the famous Council of Nice: which may also be proved of all the rest. And by the saying of Athanasius (ad solit.) That an Emperor presiding in Ecclesiastical judgements is the Abomination of Desolation, foretell by Daniel. And of Osius the Bishop of Cordua, in an Epistle of his to Constantius the Emperor; Go not about to meddle in Ecclesiastical affairs; and command not us in such matters, but rather learn of us; God hath committed the Empire to thee, and the government of the Church to us. And by the Protestation of the Emperor Constantine, Pogonat sent to Rome for the holding of the sixth General Council, I will not sit as Emperor amongst them, I will not speak imperiously, 
In Epist. Greg. 2. ad Leon. Imp. Ep. 1.  but as one of them, and what the Prelates shall ordain, I will execute.  
All which do undoubtedly prove the Pope of Rome both by divine and humane Law, and by the right of prescription in all ages, to be the supreme Pastor and Head of the Church. And all the objections urged by Calvin, & all other invaders of this Sea, are but like water furiously beating against a Rock, broken into drops, and forced creepingly to recoil, and to foam and cry through shame and indignation at their vain and impossible attempts: impossible indeed, unless they have more force than the gates of hell, for they shall never prevail against this Rock.   

CHAP. XXI.  
That English Protestants do much mistake Catholic Doctrine, being abused by the malice or ignorance of many of their Ministers; And that upon their own grounds they are obliged to inform themselves more exactly of the truth.  
§. 1. AFter all these foregoing considerations, for my more explicit satisfaction, I descended to the examination of all the particular Doctrines in controversy betwixt the Church of Rome and the Protestants; whom I found in all things to be exceedingly over-weighed both by Scripture, Counsels, Fathers, and reason. Of which I will say no more than I have done, but only to show in some few particulars, how our poor English people are abused by their ordinary Preachers, and made to believe monstrous things of the Doctrine and practice of the Church of Rome, who for the most part stating the question false, and laying to the Catholics charge the things that they do not teach, raise an error out of their own fancy, and then fight against it most courageously, under the title of Popery. And every young Minister is so valiant herein, that he thinks he baffles the most learned Cardinal Bellarmine, as Goliath thought he could have done David; and in this case for the most part the most ignorant and imprudent are the forwardest. And this I add to rectify the opinions of the less learned, and to reconcile them so far to the Catholic doctrines, as to believe they are not so monstrous as they are vulgarly imagined.  
First then they tell the people that the Papists (as they call them) are Idolaters, in that they worship Images, stocks, and stones, little painted babies and puppets, with many such like titles, wherewith they make themselves merry; and then allege all the places of the Scripture, or Fathers, wherein the Idolatry of the Heathen is reproved. Now it is most certain that this is an unjust charge against Catholics; first because the worship of Images and Idols is not all one, seeing the words are of different signification, as is manifest by those places where it is said, Let us make man after our Image, (Gen. 1.26.) And a man ought not to cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God. (1 Cor. 11.7.) with many the like; wherein if they say that Image & Idol were all one, they must say also that when God made Adam, he made to himself an Idol. Secondly Catholics do not worship Images, as God, which the Heathen and Jews, when they had committed Idolatry, did, as appears by Elias who saith unto them, 3. Kings 18.21. If the Lord be God, follow him, if Baal be God, follow him; clearly intimating thereby, that they that followed Baal, followed and worshipped him as God. Thirdly it is only the worship of Images for God, which is by God forbidden, as appears, Exod. 20.23. where it is said, you shall not make to yourselves Gods of silver and Gods of gold, and Leu. 26.1. you shall make no Idols and graven Images, etc. to bow down thereto, for I am the Lord, and my glory I will not give to another, neither my praise to graven images, Esay 24.8.  
By which places (as by all other) is forbidden that kind of bowing, honour, and worship which is due to God only, because it is said, I am the Lord, therefore Images are not; and my praise and my glory I will not give to another, that is, that praise and glory which is due to me only; for otherwise (seeing man is another thing from God) it would be unlawful to give any kind of praise, or bow down to men, which no body I think will affirm. This and this only, is properly Idolatry; namely, to worship a creature, believing it to be God, and giving to it the divine incommunicable attributes, and in that imagination to exercise devotion to it; which is far from the belief or practice of Catholics. But that holy creatures, as Saints and Angels are to be worshipped, with such worship as we give to persons of several qualities here on earth, as bowing and kneeling; or such as we give to all whose help we desire, as praying; and these (in the absence of the parties) by and through their Images; and that the Images themselves are to be reverently handled for their sakes, whom they represent, no rational man can deny.  
§. 2. And whereas many Protestants stumble at the word worship, and think that it imports a thing that is to be done to God only, they are therein mistaken; worship signifying any kind of reverence and respect either of body or mind; and is communicable to all creatures according to their dignity: therefore in the English Phrase we call all eminent Gentlemen, worshipful, that is, men that deserve reverence or worship; and all men do worship others, when they put off their hats, or bow their bodies to them. And whereas they say, it is but civil worship which they give to men, it is impertinent; for civil and religious worship do not differ in the outward act or expression, but in the object that is worshipped; that being civil worship which is given to a civil person or thing, which is religious worship, being directed to a holy person or thing. Now Saints, being holy persons, their Images or other things that belong to them may be said to be holy; first because they have relation to them; as the Scripture saith, put off thy shoes from thy feet; for the place where thou standest is holy ground, Exod. 3.5. which was in regard of the presence of the Angels by whom the Law was delivered, Gal. 3.19. Secondly because Images are dedicated to honour God withal, by and through them whom they represent, of which the Scripture saith, whatsoever shall once be consecrated, shall be most holy to the Lord, Levit. 27.28. for which cause all the Vestments and Utensils of the Temples were called holy; therefore the reverence and respect done to Images is and aught to be holy or religious worship; for whatsoever is holy, is religiously honourable or worshipful, and that so far, and in that sense that it is holy; and so are Images of religious persons.  
The Council of Trent (Sess. 25. decret. de Sanct. Imag.) hath expressed the doctrine of the Catholic Church herein, in these words, The Image of Christ, of the Virgin Mother of God, and of other Saints are to be had and retained, especially in Churches; and due honour and worship is to be imparted to them; not for that any Divinity is to be believed to be in them, or virtue for which they are worshipped; or that any thing is to be begged of them, or that hope is to be put in them, as in times past the Pagans did, who put their trust in Idols; but because the honour which is exhibited to them, is referred to the first pattern, which they resemble. So that by the Images which we kiss, and before whom we uncover our heads and kneel, we adore Christ and his Saints, whose likeness they bear. Whatsoever is more than this, are but School-points, which no man is bound to believe further than his particular reason guides him.  
But howsoever the belief is (say the Protestants) yet the practice is otherwise, and some ignorant people do pray to Images believing them to be very God, and so seek succour from them, as from God; and it is better (say they) that the worship of Images should be abolished, than that it should be the occasion of Idolatry. Their affirmation as it is not to be believed, considering the plentiful means of instruction in all places, and the easiness of the thing to be apprehended, so their inference is false; for (passing by their preferring their own judgement herein, before all the world of Catholics, which objection lies against them in all that they say, and is a great one) I answer, the good use of a thing is not to be taken away because of the abuse, especially when the good use is very abundant, and the abuse very rare, and easily amended by instruction; otherwise all good things must be abolished, because by some or other they are abused. These men that argue thus, will not say that wine is to be destroyed, because some men are drunk therewith; or the use of swords forbidden, because some men commit murder with them; especially, that the reading of the Bible should is be prohibited, because some men pervert it (as the Apostle saith) to their own damnation. The use of Jmages then (notwithstanding this objection) is lawful, and unfit to be abolished.  
Nor truly can any man, whose natural understanding is not corrupted by his corrupting of Scripture, boggle at it. It is a Principle in nature, gathered out of Aristotle, IDEM EST MOTUS IN IMAGINEM ET EXEMPLAR, that the image may and aught to stand for the person whose image it is, and is by imagination to be taken as if it were the person, and what we do to the Image, is done by imagination to the person. And this is expressed by the Prophet David saying, Adore his footstool, (which the Protestants of England falsely translate at his footstool) because he is holy, Psal. 98.5. God appointed that the Tabernacle should be taken by imagination for his house, the Mercy-seat for his Throne, and the Ark for his footstool, and so he imagined there present, as sitting with his feet on the Ark; and this ordination being supposed, the Prophet saith, Adore his footstool; yet taking of the Ark, as a place where God is present, 〈◊〉 but a positive ordinance (whereas Images by the law of nature stand for those whose images they are) yet this positive ordinance supposed, the law of nature also binds men to worship and adore it, with reference to God, imagined to sit thereon.  
This ever hath been and is the opinion and practice of all the world, except it be of those who under the show of grace have extinguished the light of nature, and yet even these in their humane practices do the same things; as if Christ and his Saints were the only men that after death or in absence were incapable of honour. It is well known that the Kings and Queens of England are honoured by uncovering of the head in all places, where they are but supposed to be present; and when they are dead, until their funerals are solemnised, there is the same respect exhibited to their Images as to themselves. And what Puritan lover is there that will not in the ardour of his affection, kiss, lay in his bosom, and talk to, not only the picture (which doth more immediately and directly represent a person, than any thing else) but even the handkerchief, glove, or letter, which are but relics of her whom he desires in marriage? And is it less Idolatry to do these things to mortal men than to immortal Saints, though there be as much difference observed in the degree of honour, as there is between the dignity of the persons? Surely if they consider it duly, they will find that they must either leave their religion in this point, or their manners and civility in all points, seeing either both or neither are Idolatry.  
§. 3. Secondly they teach the people, and the people ordinarily believe, that Catholics think to be saved by their good works, and that without being beholding to Christ; For they make an opposition between these two assertions; we are saved by Christ's merits; And we are saved by our own merits: Hence they believe that Catholics are the proudest and most ungrateful to God of all people in the world. But this doctrine is misliked amongst them, because it is misunderstood.  
For Catholics hold that no work is meritorious with God of its own nature; but to make the same meritorious many graces are required. First the grace of adoption in Baptism, whereby souls are supernaturally beautified by participation of the divine nature, whence a triple dignity redounds to works: One from God the Father, who in respect of adoption, regards good works, as the works of his children: Another from God the holy Ghost dwelling in us, by whom good works are honoured, as by the principal author of them; so that he rather than we, doth the works: Thirdly they receive dignity from God the Son, whose members we are made by grace, which grace he by his merits purchased for us, so that the works we do, are reputed not so much ours, or his; as the work of a particular member is attributed principally to the head. Secondly there is required grace prevenient whereby God stirs up men's hearts to pious works; and grace adjuvant to assist us in the performancee of the works, making our freewill produce works that are supernatural; and above the reach of mere man. Thirdly there is required the grace of merciful indulgence, in not using us in the rigour of his justice; for God might require the good works we do, as his own by many titles: as by the title of justice, being the works of his servants and bondmen; by the title of religion, as being the works of his creatures; by the title of gratitude, as being the works of persons infinitely obliged to him; by which titles if God did exact upon works with uttermost rigour, no goodness would be left in them to be offered for meriting of heaven; But his infinite benignity remitting this rigour, moved thereunto through the merits of Christ, is content that we make use of our good works for the purchasing of glory, and doth not exact them as wholly due by all his titles. The fourth is the favour of God's liberal promise, by which he obligeth himself to reward the good works of his children according to the measure of their goodness, without which the most excellent works of Saints could not establish an obligation on him. And finally there is required the grace of perseverance, without which no man is crowned.  
And so far are Catholics from boasting or trusting in their merits, that the Council of Trent (Sess. 6. Can. 16.) faith, God forbidden that a Christian should either boast or trust in himself, and not in our Lord, whose goodness is so great towards all men, as that those things which are his gifts, he will have to be our merits. To be worthy of a thing, to deserve or merit it, signify all one; and that by our works we deserve and are worthy of heaven, is the frequent phrase of Scripture: The workman is worthy of his hire, saith our Saviour; Luke 10.7. And S. Paul, That you may be counted worthy of the Kingdom of God; for which also ye suffer, 2. Thes. 1.5. And again, That you may walk worthy of God, in all things pleasing, fructifying in all Good works, Colos. 1.10. And our Saviour, They shall walk with me in white, for they are worthy, Revel. 3.4. And again, Come ye blessed of my Father possess the kingdom etc. for I was hungry and ye gave me meat etc. Math. 25.34. alleging these as the cause why God received them into everlasting habitations; with plenty of other places to this purpose.  
As for the most frequently objected place of Luc. 17.10. when you have done all those things that are commanded you, say we are unprofitable servants, we have done that which was our duty to do; According to S. Ambrose (lib. 8. in Luc.) Christ commands hereby to acknowledge what we are of ourselves, to wit, unprofitable, not what we are by his grace, for that is profitable; according to the Apostle, 2 Tim. 2.21. If any man therefore shall cleanse himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified and profitable to our Lord, prepared to every good work; according to S. Augustine, (Serm. 3. de verb. Dom.) we may be said to be unprofitable servants, because in doing all that is commanded, we do but our duty, we are Gods servants and slaves, and own him all, nor could we look for reward had he not voluntarily covenanted with us. And to this base and poor condition of ours, for the preservation of our humility, Christ in these words sends back our thoughts: which hinders not, but that (supposing God's bountiful promise and covenant) we may through his grace truly merit and expect reward; himself saying, Mat. 20.14. Didst thou not covenant with me for a penny? take that which is thine own, and go thy way. S. chrysostom observes, that Christ saith not, you are unprofitable servants, but bids them to say, they are; willing us thereby, after our good deeds, to think humbly, lest they be corrupted with pride; for that otherwise they only that work evil are by God accounted unprofitable, but they that do good, profitable, as our Saviour saith, Mat. 25.21. well done good and faithful servant, because thou hast been faithful over a few things. 〈◊〉 place thee over many things; enter 〈…〉 the joy of thy Master. And the 〈…〉 servant cast ye into utter darkness 〈…〉 if all Protestants be unprofitable 〈…〉 they must expect the sequel there 〈…〉 darkness, that is damnation.  
§. 4. Thirdly many Protestant Ministers teach, and the people ordinarily believe, that Catholics hold that there is nothing required to the remission of sins, but only to confess them to a Priest, and the business is done. Whereas indeed they teach, that not only Confession to a Priest, but also Contrition and sorrow for their sins, (which is all that Protestants require,) as also Satisfaction for the temporal punishment due to sin, is requisite, and so make it a matter of far greater pain than the Protestants do, who reproach it for the easiness thereof. Now all these parts of Penance are plainly expressed in Scripture; our Saviour saith to the Priests, whose sins ye shall forgive, they are forgiven, and whose sins ye shall retain, they are retained, Joh. 20.23. and S. James bids us confess our sins one to another, Jam. 5.16. and if to another, to whom but to him that hath power to forgive?  
The Jews did object against our Saviour, as Protestants do now against Priests, saying, who can forgive sins, but God only? Mark 2.7. which error of theirs to confute, he miraculously cured the man sick of the Palsy, That ye may know the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, as our Saviour faith to them; which had been no crossing of their erroneous conceit, as the word [But] doth intimate it was, unless he had pardoned him, as man, with Commission from God, and not as God immediate; for otherwise he should have said, why, I am God, and so I pardon him, but he did it as man, doubtless with delegation from God; as another Evangelist expresseth it, saying, that the multitude glorified God, which had given such power to men, Mat. 9.8.  
Nor need the simplest Protestants wonder that men should forgive sins, seeing Catholics teach that they do it not by their own power, but by power given them from God; to whom it belongs originally and by his own power to forgive sins, and to them but derivatively and ministerially from him. So it is said, that God only doth wondrous things, Psal. 72.18. and yet we read in Scripture of many men that wrought Miracles, 3 Kings 8.39. So it is said, that God only knows the hearts of men, 4 Kings 5.16. and yet we read of others that knew the secrets of the heart. Nor can this forgiveness of sins (the power whereof God hath given to men) be interpreted of power only to declare forgiveness (as Protestants would have it) for this a child, or an Infidel may do aswell as any other; they may tell them that if they repent God will forgive them; nor needed such a power as this only, be ushered by Christ, by breathing on them and saying, Receive the Holy Ghost, Joh. 20.22. nor by these words, As my Father sent me, so I send you; for surely his Father sent him to do more than barely to declare and tell them they were forgiven if they repent; and our Saviour should have changed the form of his words, and not have said, whose sins ye remit they are remitted; but whose sins ye remit, they were remitted before by God.  
And that this power should be given only to the Apostles, if it be taken for absolute power of forgiveness, (as some: Protestants affirm) is unreasonable; For seeing the reason and use of it, which is to reconcile God and man together, after man's offending him by sin, will remain to the world's end, therefore to the world's end is committed to them the Ministry of reconciliation, 2 Cor. 5.18. 19.20. For this power of forgiving sins, was not given to the Apostles as a particular privilege wherewith to dignify their persons above other Priests, but for the use and benefit of Christ's Church, which will always in this world stand in need thereof, & therefore doth he in their Successors always continue the power.  
§. 5. As for Satisfaction, which Protestants are taught to believe is needless; it is plain in Scripture; as first, that after the sin is pardoned, which is in regard of our reconciliation to God, and freedom from eternal punishment, yet there remains a liableness to temporal punishment; as appears in David, whom after he had repent; and God pardoned his sins, yet he punished one sin with the death of his child, another with three day's pestilence, 2 King. 12.13.14. & 24.10, 12, 13. Nor can this punishment be only for admonition & not of justice, seeing the Text saith it was, because he had made the enemies of God to blaspheme. Moses and Aaron died both in God's favour, yet were punished with death before they entered into the land of Canaan, for their offence at Meribah; now where death is the punishment, it cannot be intended for their admonition and amendment in time to come, but as a scourge for their offences. And the Psalmist saith plainly, Thou forgavest their sins and didst punish their inventions; Psal. 98.8. If he forgave them, why did he punish them? If he did punish them, how did he forgive them? He forgave the eternal punishment, and inflicted the temporal. Also the Apostle saith, whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also; for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it, in the person of Christ: 2. Cor. 2.10. Which words cannot concern the remission of the fault, seeing that was pardoned before by the parties great sorrow, mentioned in the 7. verse, but must be meant of the temporal punishment, which was imposed in the name of Christ. This truth Calvin doth not deny, nor Beza upon this place, who saith, that the abatement of this rigour was afterwards called Indulgence.  
And wherefore (I wonder) do Protestant's when they would divert some present or near approaching danger, fast, and pray, and preach, and give alms, (when yet by their contrition they think their sins forgiven,) if they did not hope by these means to prevent or remove their temporal evils, which in their prayers they confess to be inflicted for their sins? Thus doth the force of reason drive them to the practice of that, which out of opposition to the Church of Rome, in their doctrine they contradict. And though Christ's satisfaction was sufficient for all the punishment due to our sins, yet if he hath appointed that we shall also satisfy, as knowing it in his wisdom a thing most meet, who shall gainsay it? His prayers also and his obedience was sufficient to obtain heaven for us, shall we therefore neither pray nor obey? You will say we shall, because we are commanded; so also are we commanded to satisfy, as the Prophet Daniel saith, Redeem, thy sins with alms, and thine iniquities with mercy towards the poor, Dan. 4.24. which Text to avoid, the Protestants do corrupt. Now to redeem sins is the same in effect as to satisfy for them, for how is any thing redeemed, but by satisfying the price of its redemption? Why then should Protestant's (under the pretence of magnifying the operation of Christ's satisfaction, without our concurrence, which Catholics yet acknowledge to proceed from him) disobey him, and leave him thereby the less satisfied with us? But this was Luther's most acceptable way to flesh and blood, to cast all the burden on Christ, and leave nothing to themselves, but the pleasing liberty of sin, which though it should infinitely extend itself, needs no other cure amongst them, but only their barren faith.  
§. 6. Again, Protestants are taught to believe that to entreat God's favour by the merits of Saints (as Catholics do) is a great derogation from the merits of Christ. But why? Catholics do not deny, but that the merits of Christ are of infinite value, and there is motive enough in them for God to bestow all favour on us; yet seeing the Saints have merited of God, it is lawful also to entreat him by those merits; and what he doth sometimes do and not by Miracle, it is lawful at any time to entreat him to do: Now he did bless the house of Potiphar for joseph's sake, therefore doubtless it was lawful for Potiphar to entreat God to bless him for joseph's sake; and if so, then much more for the sake of Saints in heaven, who are more in God's favour, than Joseph could be here in this life. Thus Moses desires God to assuage his wrath against the Israelites, saying, Remember Abraham Isaac, and Israel thy servants; Exod. 32.13. and for what should he remember them but for the good works and service they had done? and for that to spare their children.  
Calvin's shift in answer to this and the like places is trifling, when he saith that God is only entreated to remember his Covenant with the Patriarches, whereby he promised to bless their posterity; for there is mention not only of God's Covenant, but of the righteousness and merits of the Saints. Solomon prays thus, Psal. 131.1. Lord remember David and all his meekness, his afflictions, as the Protestants read it, which is all one for our present purpose, both being meritorious; and a little after he saith, For thy servant David's sake turn not away the face of thine anointed; where God is invocated by the merits of David, who was dead and gone: and God likewise for David's sake did hear and prosper Abia, as the Scripture saith, For David's sake did our Lord his God give him a lamp in Jerusalem, that he might raise up his son after him, and establish jerusalem, because David had done right in the eyes of the Lord, 3. Kings 15.4.5. Much more is found in Scripture to this purpose. Nor can it be a derogation from the merits of Christ, whose value, as it is infinite in itself, so it gives all the tincture to all the merits of all Saints; like the Elixir, which turns all into gold, that it touches; And like the radiant Sun enkindles all other celestial fires; yea so far is it from being a dishonour to him, that it adds to him a great increase of honour; by being able to raise his servants to such a pitch of excellency, that they can merit favours both for themselves and others.  
§. 7. Again Protestants are taught to believe that it is an arrogant thing to think that a man may do more than he is commanded, (as Catholics teach) whereas they think he cannot do so much. Yet what more plain in Scriptures? What more evident in reason? That we are commanded to give alms is true, but the proportion is not expressed; let a man give so much daily, as that he may justly think he hath discharged his duty, and sins not, though he give no more; and then may he give more, and so do more than he is commanded. Suppose a man bound to fast and pray in such or such a measure, which when he hath done, he hath discharged the duty of a Christian; yet when this is done, he may take some of the time wherein he may lawfully feed and recreate himself, and bestow this also in fasting and prayer; doth not he in this do more, than he is commanded? I think no impartial man will say the contrary: Else there were no compass or latitude of goodness wherein men might move, excelling one another in degrees, yet the lowest void of sin: Else he that were not most good must be evil; there would be no medium betwixt sin and excellency; And men that were desirous to please God would abound in scruples that could never be satisfied; it being impossible in every man's condition, to find out that indivisible point of prayer, fasting, alms, and the like, beyond or short of which, he must be guilty of sin.  
Our Saviour saith, There are Eunuches, who have made themselves Eunuches for the Kingdom of heaven, Mat. 19.12. & 21. and this is more than any man is bound to, for he may marry if he will, and yet go to heaven. He saith again, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell all that thou hast, and give it to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven. No man can reasonably suppose this to be a command, for then all men were bound to obey it; and if not, than he that obeys it, doth more than he is commanded. And to think that this was a personal command to this man only (as many do) is ridiculous; our Saviour had spoke of the Commandments before, which when the young man said he had observed, Christ gives him this counsel of perfection; and the Apostles immediately after affirmed, that they had observed it, in leaving all things to follow him. Concerning Virgins (saith the Apostle) I have no command, but I give counsel, 1 Cor. 7.25. plainly distinguishing betwixt counsel & command; betwixt that we must do, and what we may do; betwixt well & better, He that marries doth well, but he that marries not, doth better, 1 Cor. 7.38. and he that doth well, doth not sin, doth not break a Commandment; but he that doth better, doth more than not sin, doth more than he is commanded. And though it be harder indeed to do all that is commanded, than in some degrees to do more than is commanded; yet the highest degrees of acts of perfection and things uncommanded, are harder than the highest of things commanded; yet neither impossible by the grace of God, as the Apostle saith, I am able to do all things through him that enableth me, Phil. 4.13. So that the doctrine of doing more than is commanded, is not so fraught with pride, as Protestants imagine.  
Catholics say, that God doth not require of us all the good that he inables us to do, as is proved; and this is the ground of works of supererogation, and doing more than is commanded: Protestants say that God requires of us all that he enables us to do, yea and more, commanding things impossible, and then punishes us for not doing them, which is most tyrannical. Now if God do not require all, but only thus much, to do well; then the doing better than well, is a stock which God of his great bounty gives us to improve for ourselves in a higher measure, and to offer him liberalities, beyond the bond of duty. And what pride is it for man to acknowledge this sweet providence of his creator, & to praise his merciful indulgence in not exacting so much as he might, but giving him a way & means to show his voluntary & unexacted love to him? Especially believing that this divine favour (not to exact the uttermost of man's performance, and consequently man's ability to present to God more perfect and excellent service than he requires) is given through the merits of Christ.  
§. 8. But above all, the Real presence is the prodigy of opinions in the conceit of Protestants; whose plainness in Scripture notwithstanding leaves not where to add to it with clearer proof; as appears by Christ's words of institution, This is my body, so often repeated, Mat. 26.26. Mar. 14.22. Luc. 22.19. They fight against it therefore with arguments drawn from the power of nature, & think, because it exceeds the power of nature, therefore it cannot be. To whom it may be said, as our Saviour said to the Jews, who thought that men's bodies in heaven were like their bodies here on earth, ye err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God, Mat. 22.29. And why then do Protestants believe, that God was in the form of a man, a thing as impossible in nature, as for God & man together to be under the form of bread or wine. And because they would make sure work if they could, the former objection being in the opinion of many of them insufficient, they say that it doth not only exceed the power of nature, but of God also, in that it implies a contradiction; but this the most learned of them have never been able to prove, nor never will, I hope they will all take Luther's judgement herein, whom they will not deny to be learned enough to discern a contradiction, 
Tom. Wittemb. 1557. defence. verb. Coenae fol. 388  and he saith, what Scripture have they to prove that these two Propositions be directly contrary? Christ sitteth in heaven, & Christ is in the Supper. The contradiction is in their carnal imagination, not in faith, or the word of God.  
They also fright the people from this belief, by presenting to them the uncomeliness and inconveniences that may ensue; which objections are but raked out of the ashes of the old Heathen and Heretics, who made the like against Gods taking our flesh upon him, as that it was undecent that God should lie in a woman's womb nine months, that he should be circumcised, whipped and spit upon, and finally suffer a most shameful and painful death. But seeing Protestants do believe, that Christ, when he was on earth, was subject to all humane infirmities except sin, why should his liableness to such infirmities make them forbear to believe that he is in the Sacrament? But to acquit them of that trouble, they may take notice, that Christ's body in the Sacrament is not subject to those inconveniences that it was before his death, because it is now a glorified body, and not subject to suffer any thing; For as the Sun shining on a dunghill is not defiled therewith, and as the Deity itself is every where, and yet suffers no infection from the foulness of any place; So the body of Christ being immortal and impassable, cannot be defiled or hurt with the touch or impression of any unclean or hurtful thing, more than a man can hurt or defile a Spirit; for of that nature are all glorified bodies, as the Apostle saith, It is sown a natural body; it shall rise a spiritual body. 1. Cor. 15.44. So that in this respect, Protestants have more reason to believe the real presence of Christ's body in the Sacrament, than that he once had a real body conversant here on earth.  
But some of them again do acknowledge (as they say themselves) the Real presence of Christ's body in the Sacrament, and therein seem to be Catholics; and please themselves in seeming to be so, and think we can desire no more; but they do but cousin both themselves and us; for when their Presence is sifted, we find no reality in it. They say that Christ is really present in the Sacrament, but not corporally or bodily: by which bodily they mean, either that his body itself is not there, or that it is not there with the circumstances and accidents of a body, as quantity and the like. If they mean the former, to wit, that he is really there, and yet his body is not there, I would feign know how this may be; For a body to be really in any thing, must signify to be bodily or in body there, or nothing. Therefore to say that Christ is really there, who is a body, and yet not there bodily, is the contradiction they speak of, and is in their real presence, not in the Catholics; For it is as much as if they should say, his body is there, and it is not there. If by not bodily they mean not with the accidents of his body, as quantity, figure and the like, and that so Christ is not bodily in the Sacrament, but spiritually, that is, after the nature of a Spirit, than they agree with Catholics, who say the same, and in this sense he may be, and is both corporally and spiritually present in the Sacrament. Now if by really they mean in regard of his Deity, which is every where, this is true, but is not the true meaning of really; for he is no more there in this sense, than he is every where else, & so their confession of a real presence imports nothing distinctly, and is but a delusion. For Christ being a man as well as God, & the body of a man as well as the Godhead concurring to the making of his person, he that is whole Christ and unseparated, cannot be said to be any where really, unless he be there also bodily; and if his body be there, his body is by us received, and that not only spiritually, that is, under the conditions of a Spirit, or spiritually, by receiving the grace of his holy Spirit into our Spirits, and souls; but also corporally, in regard of himself, who is a body, and in regard of us, who receive his body into our bodies; and this not by faith, but with faith; that is, not by an imaginary conceit that he is there, or that the benefits of his passion are conveyed to the receiver that thinks so, which is the Protestant saith in this case; but with faith, that is, faith and charity also abiding in our souls, without which though we do receive him truly & really, yet we do not receive him worthily & profitably.  
But according to the Protestant way of receiving, it is impossible to receive him unworthily, which is contrary to the Scripture, and the common belief of all Christians; for according to them, none receive him, but they that receive him worthily, faith being the means with them, which makes them receive him both really and worthily, which who so wants, doth not receive at all: so that every one that receives him really, receives worthily, and the rest receive nothing but bread and wine, and so do not receive Christ unworthily, but only bread and wine at the most unworthily; and how this should, make them properly guilty of the body and blood of our Lord, which they do not receive, and liable to damnation thereby, as the Apostle saith it doth, is beyond the reach of my apprehension.  
Others coming yet nearer, say, that they believe the real and corporal presence, but they do not believe Transubstantiation; they believe that Christ is truly there, but the manner (they say) is unknown and unexpressible. But they ought to know that men ought firmly to believe the manner of a mystery revealed, when the same belongs to the substance of the mystery, so that rejecting the manner, we reject also the substance of the mystery. Now the mystery in substance is, that the body of Christ is present in the Sacrament, in such sort that the Priest (the Minister thereof,) showing what seems bread, may truly say thereof in the person of Christ, this is my body. This supposed as the substance of the mystery, I infer that two Catholic doctrines concerning the manner thereof, belong to the substance of this mystery, and cannot be called in question without danger of misbelief. First the real presence of the whole body of Christ under the form of bread. Secondly that this is done by Transubstantiation, because it cannot be done otherwise. Even as he that believes the mystery of the Incarnation, the substance whereof is, that in Jesus Christ the nature of God and the nature of man were so united, that God is truly man, and man God; he must necessarily believe that this union is not metaphorical and in affection only, but true and real: Secondly that this union is substantial, not accidental; Thirdly that this union of natures is not by making one nature of both (as Eutyches taught) but hypostatical, whereby the nature of God and man is united in one person. This mystery is high, subtle, and incomprehensible to flagging reason, yet must be believed seeing it belongs to the substance of the mystery, which could not be true, if it were not thus: so it is in the real presence.  
As for the novelty of the word, which some object, they have little reason to do so, knowing it is some hundreds of years older than the name Protestant, and for the thing, it is as ancient as our Saviour's celebrating his last supper. And had not the Catholic doctrine been opposed by Heretics, perhaps the word had not yet been in use: no more had consubstantial, used in the Nicene Creed, had not Arrius denied the Son to be consubstantial, or of the same substance with the Father. For the Church doth, and may make fit words to explicate the truth of her doctrine, as occasion requires; wherein she doth not change the doctrine, but expresseth it more plainly or significantly.   

(CHAP. XXII.)  
Of Communion in one kind.  
§. 1. I Will instance in two particulars more, because I know that Protestants do mightily check at them; the former is Communion in one kind; the later, Prayer in an unknown tongue. Concerning the former, Protestants are by their Ministers instructed to believe, that in this matter, Catholics are sacrilegious against God, and injurious to men, robbing the Church of the precious blood of Christ, and giving the people a lame and half Sacrament, instead of one whole and entire. But to rectify their understandings, they may be pleased to take notice, that the Catholic Church doth not count it in itself unlawful to receive in both kinds, nor yet doth she hold it necessary, but in its own nature indifferent; and so by consequence determinable to one or both kinds, according to the differences of persons, times, and places, as she in her wisdom shall think fit. But Protestants think it absolutely necessary for the Laity to receive in both kinds, first because it was so instituted, secondly because it was (as they think) so commanded. These being the two hinges of this their opinion, we must here a while arrest our considerations; wherein I shall show, that there is no precept of receiving under both kinds, and that the institution hath not the force of a precept.  
§. 2. To begin with the institution, we must know, that for a man to be bound to use any institution of God, two things are required. First that the end of the institution be necessary, and that it be necessary for every particular person to endeavour the attaining thereof: whence all men hold, that though the propagation of mankind by marriage, be an institution of God, necessary for the continuation of the world; yet while there are enough that comply with that duty, to which mankind is in general bound, every particular person is not obliged to marry. Secondly that if every particular person be bound to endeavour to attain the end of an institution, that also the whole thing instituted be necessary for the attaining of that end; for if there be variety of means ordained, sufficient for the attaining of that end, a man is not bound to use all that which is instituted, but it is sufficient to use so much thereof, as will lead a man to that end. Whence all men again hold, that although God created and instituted variety of meats and drinks, for the maintenance of man's corporal life, yet no man is bound to use them all, but he dischargeth his duty sufficiently, if he use so much of any of them, as will suffice to arrive at that end, for which they were instituted, to wit, the maintainanee of his corporal life: so that if a man can live of two or three sorts of meat, he is not bound to use ten or twenty; and if he can live of meat without drink, he may without offence choose whether he will ever drink or no.  
To apply this to our present purpose, it is apparent enough that by the force of divine institution only, no man is bound to use Communion under both kinds. For though the end why Christ did institute the Sacrament in both kinds be necessary, and all must endeavour the attaining thereunto, to wit, maintenance and increase in grace, which is the life of the soul; yet there are other means of God's institution also, by which we may attain to this end. Whence it is, that learned Divines hold, that though the Sacrament of the Eucharist be necessary NECESSETATE PRAECEPTI, by the necessity of precept, yet it is not necessary, NECESSITATE MEDII, as they speak, that is, the use thereof is not such a necessary means, for the maintenance of spiritual life, but that a man wanting means of sacred communion, may by other means preserve himself in the state of Grace.  
And though we should suppose that actual Communion were a necessary means to preserve spiritual life, yet Communion in one kind is abundantly sufficient thereunto, as I shall presently show; and if so, by force of the institution there is no more required. For we must know, that there is a great difference between an institution and a precept; the precept of both kinds (if Christ gave any) doth bind, whether both kinds be necessary for the maintenance of man's soul in grace or no; but the institution of both kinds doth not bind to the use, further than the thing instituted is necessary to the maintenance of the said spiritual life; to which seeing one kind is sufficient, the institution of both kinds, doth not oblige us to the use of both.  
§. 3. Now that Communion in one kind is sufficient, (Transubstantiation being supposed) easily appears; in that the Sacrament in the sole form of bread, (seeing it contains the author and fountain of life, whole and entire, according to body, soul, blood, and his infinite person,) is abundantly sufficient for the refection of the soul, yea no less than Communion under both kinds. For this one kind containeth in it no less than is contained in both, that is, whole Christ, God and man. His body is there by force of these words, This is my body, and by concomitance there is the blood, the soul, the divinity, for there is the person of Christ alive, which implies all these particulars, it being impossible he should be there otherwise, as S. Paul saith, Christ rising again from the dead, now dieth no more, death shall have no more dominion over him, Rom. 6.9. And to the receivers of Christ; by eating only, he promiseth the end of the Sacrament, which is life; He that eateth me, he shall live by me: John 6.58.59. and to the sole reception of him under the form of bread; He that eateth this bread shall live for ever. And this surely he would not have said, if receiving in both kinds had been necessary.  
§. 4. But because Protestants deny Transubstantiation, I will, without that supposition, prove, that to receive in one kind is sufficient. First because that in one kind is contained the whole substance, essence, and parts of the Sacrament; and secondly because it is not against any divine precept. As for the institution, I have proved already, that it hath not the force of a precept.  
First in one kind alone is contained the whole substance and essence of the Sacrament; which are these four; matter; word, signification, causality. First there is the element or matter of the Sacrament, which is consecrated bread and manducation thereof: secondly, there is the word or form of speech, showing the divine and supernatural purpose, whereto the element is consecrated, This is my body; and these two make a Sacrament, according to S. Aug: Accedit verbum ad elementum, & fit Sacramentum. Thirdly there is a sign or signification therein, and that threefold: first of spiritual food, for the nourishment of the soul; secondly of union and conjunctions between Christ and his Church, and between the faithful one with another, even as in the bread there is a mixture of flower and water, and in the flower of many grains together. Thirdly the death and passion of Christ is hereby signified; For as by the wine we have a motive to remember his blood, shed and separated from his body; so by the bread we may conceive his body deprived of blood, by the effusion thereof upon the cross: whereupon Christ, as S. Paul testifies, 1. Cor. 11.24.25. did after the consecration of each kind, particularly recommend the memory of his passion; as knowing, that in each of them alone, was a sufficient memorial thereof. Lastly there is causality, that is, a working in the soul the spiritual effects it signifies; as our Saviour saith, He that eateth this bread shall live for ever, Joh. 6.59.  
And if any object, that though there be all the essential parts of the Sacrament in one kind, yet there are not all the integral parts: I answer, that bread and wine are not two integral parts of the Sacrament, more than the several particles of the bread and wine are integral parts; and as the Sacrament is sufficient, whether it be in a greater or less quantity of bread or wine, so is it, whether it be in bread only, or wine only; for our Saviour instituted the whole Sacrament both in bread, and in wine, as two distinct entire matters thereof, not as integral parts thereof, and gave us leave to use or both, or either; as shall appear, in that he hath not obliged us by any precept to the use of both. And thus it appeareth, that the Sacrament in one kind is full, entire, and complete in substance, and that by participation thereof, prepared consciences do receive the benefits of Christ's death, and passion.  
Neither doth it hereupon follow, that because the Sacrament is essentially and entirely contained under either kind, therefore the Priest receiving underboth, receiveth two Sacraments, for being received both at once, they make but one, as being ordained to one refection, signifying one thing, and producing one effect; Even as six or seven dishes of meat set upon a table do make but one dinner, whereas part thereof being served one day, and part another, would make two. And the reason why Priests receive under both kinds is, because they offer up a Sacrifice, representing the Sacrifice of Christ upon the Cross, which were not perfectly represented, but by both kinds, wherefore also in this sort was it prefigured in the Sacrifice of Melchizedek, offering bread and wine. It being thus proved that whole Christ, and the true essence and parts of the Sacrament are under either kind, it followeth, that in distributing it in one kind only, there is no irreverence offered to the Sacrament, it not being given (as Protestants think) half or maimed, but essentially and entirely whole: nor is any injury done to the people, by depriving them of any grace meet to salvation, seeing the very fountain of grace is no less received under either kind, than under both. Nor is it the opinion of the greater part of Catholic Divines, that more grace is obtained by communicating in both kinds, than in one; yet if it were, this advantage might be easily balanced by other means; as by the more frequent receiving in one kind, and by our obedience to the Church. Now by the premises it is evident, that whether we respect the institution of the Sacrament, or the nature thereof, no obligation or necessity ariseth of receiving in both kinds. The only question therefore remaining is, whether we be bound thereunto by any express Precept of our Saviour, or his Apostles.  
Protestants believe we are, and for proof thereof allege these places: Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man; and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you, Joh. 6.54. And, taking the Chalice he gave thanks, and gave to them, saying, drink ye all of this, Mat. 26.27. Also, In like manner the Chalice after he had supped, saying, this Chalice is the New Testament in my blood, this do ye, as often as ye shall drink, in remembrance of me, 1 Cor. 11.25. But none of these places rightly understood, nor any other, do prove, what the Protestants pretend to. Particularly to the first of these places I answer, that seeing the Protestants do generally interpret this Chapter of S. John, not of receiving the Sacrament of the Eucharist, but only of believing in Christ, it is no objection for them; but because most Catholic Divines do interpret it of the Blessed Sacrament, it is an objection against us; to which therefore I further answer: First, that all words of Scripture, that in their form seem to import a Precept, do not so indeed; as where our Saviour saith to his Apostles, that they ought to wash one another's feet, Joh. 13.14. yet no man ever held it for a matter of necessity. But supposing for the present that it include a Precept, I further answer, that as we distinguish in the Sacrament, the substance and the manner, the substance being to receive Christ, the manner to receive him in both kinds, by formal eating and drinking; So the same distinction is to be made in our Saviour's Precept about this Sacrament. For howsoever his words may sound of the manner of receiving in both kinds, yet his intention is to command no more than the substance, to wit, that we really receive his body and blood, which may be done under one kind.  
The truth whereof will appear if we consider, first the occasion of the words objected, which was the incredulity of the Capernaites, whose doubt was not whether the Sacrament was to be given in one or both kinds, but (as Protestants still doubt) whether he could give us his flesh to eat. Secondly the manner of his speech, which was not by making mention of any kind at all in the said words, but only of the things themselves; for he doth not say, unless you eat the bread and drink the wine, you have no life, but, unless you eat the flesh and drink the blood; both which are equally contained under either bread or wine; So that if a man receive the form of bread only, or of wine only, he doth therein both eat and drink the flesh and blood of Christ. And in other places of this Chapter, where he makes mention of one kind, it is of bread only, and not at all of wine: so that this place is of no force, for the form of wine, unless the body and blood of Christ be separated, and that receiving the form of bread, we receive the body only, and of wine the blood only, which must suppose Christ still dead, which is most impious and impossible.  
§. 5. And if any think, that because it is said, unless you drink, therefore Christ must be received under a form that may be drunk as well as eaten, or else it is not drinking his blood, but eating his blood, as well as his body; I answer, it is called eating and drinking, not so much in regard of the action, as the subject; so that flesh being the usual subject of eating, when the Sacrament is called flesh, the action is called eating; and blood being the usual subject of drinking, when there is mention of receiving the blood, the action is called drinking; and we are not bound to receive him in a drinkable form, because we are bid, to drink his blood, but we may be said to drink, because we receive that which is in its nature drinkable, to wit, blood, which we do, when we receive the body. And if this will not serve the turn, they may further argue against us, that if we swallow the Host whole, we do not eat it, eating implying, chewing, more or less, and so do not fulfil the precept of eating the flesh. And we may argue in like manner against them, that if they do not take wine enough to make a draught, they do not drink, but only taste or sip thereof, and therein also do not fulfil that which they think they are here commanded. But as a Protestant (I suppose if the bread and wine should be so mixed together in a cup, that both might be drunk together, or else eaten with a spoon, or in the manner of a moist piece of past, or swallowed like a pill,) will believe that he receives in both kinds, and fulfils this (in his opinion) Precept of drinking the blood; So the body and blood being joined together in either kind, to us that believe Transubstantiation, we receive both, when we receive either kind, which act of receiving with relation to the flesh may be called eating, to the blood, drinking, yea though it should be taken in such a manner, as strictly speaking, should be neither eating nor drinking.  
I add moreover, (with relation to them that do not believe Transubstantiation,) that the conjunctive particle [And] doth frequently signify disjunctively, that is, [Or:] For example, the Apostle saith, (Acts 3.6.) Silver and gold have I none, where it is manifest that the sense is, silver or gold I have none; for if he had had either, he had had no excuse of want, for his not giving of alms. So also S. Paul speaketh of this very Sacrament, 1 Cor. 11.29. 27. He that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgement to himself; which he interpreteth in the same Chapter, saying, Whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the cup of our Lord unworthily. In like manner those words, Except ye eat the flesh, and drink the blood, if they be taken for eating and drinking under the several forms of bread and wine, are to be understood disjunctively, thus, Except ye eat the flesh, or drink the blood of the son of man, you shall not have life in you. Which disjunctive sense is proved to be the sense intended in this place, because else Christ should contradict himself; for he promiseth in this same Chapter life eternal to eating only, He that eateth me, the same shall live by me, and, he that eateth this bread shall live for ever; now if he require unto life eternal, eating and drinking both, under distinct forms and kinds, it is manifest he should contradict himself: and because this is impossible, we must necessarily interpret this place, with relation to the several forms of bread and wine, disjunctively, thus, unless you eat or drink.  
The second text urged for Communion in both kinds, is, Drinks ye all of this, Mat. 26.27. which being rightly understood, will appear to be spoken, neither to all mankind, as to Jews, Turks, Infidels; as Protestants also acknowledge, nor yet to all the faithful, but to all the Apostles, and to them all only: Which is manifest out of the Text itself; for what one Evangelist saith was commanded to all, another relates to have been answerably performed by all, They drank all thereof, Mark 14.23. But the second All is restrained to all the Apostles, what reason then is there to extend the former words further than to all the Apostles? And the reason why Christ said, drink ye all of this, and did not say, eat ye all of this, was not, as Protestants vainly imagine, because Christ foresaw that some would deny the use of the Chalice to the Communicants, but that the first to whom our Saviour gave the cup, and so the rest until the last, were to know, that they were not to drink all, but were to leave so much, as might suffice for them or him that was to drink after, without new filling and consecration. Which form of words, he used most plainly a little before the supper of the Pasche: for as S. Luke saith, Luke 22.17. Taking the chalice he gave thanks, and said, take it, and divide it amongst you; whereas breaking the bread himself, and giving to every one his part, and not the whole to be divided amongst them, there was no such necessity of the said words.  
§. 6. As for the words of our Saviour, do this in remembrance of me, they do no ways infer a precept of receiving in both kinds. First because our Saviour said these words absolutely only of the Sacrament in the form of bread, but in the form of wine only conditionally, do this, as oft as ye shall drink, in remembrance of me; not commanding them to drink, but in case they did drink, (which was lawful and usual in those times, but not so now, as I shall show by and by,) that then they should do it in memory of Christ. So that this precept, do this, being the only precept given by Christ to his Church concerning this matter, and given absolutely of the form of bread, conditionally of the form of wine, there is no colour to accuse the Church of doing against Christ's precept, by communion under one kind only. S. Augustine saith (Epist. 1 18.) that, Our Lord did not appoint in what order the Sacrament of the Eucharist was to be taken afterward, but left authority unto the Apostles to make such appointments, by whom he was to dispose and order his Churches. But suppose Christ had spoken these imperative words, do this, after the giving of the cup, yet are they to be understood with restriction to those things that belong to the essence and substance of this action; for if we extend it further, to the accidentary circumstances thereof, in which Christ did then institute and give the Sacrament, many absurdities will follow. For by this rule we must always celebrate the Eucharist after supper, and in unleavened bread, the receivers must take it into their hands, and the Priest must wash the feet of those to whom he administers it, with the like. Now seeing to bind men to these circumstances of our Saviour's action, is (in all men's judgements) very absurd, we must not extend the precept, do this, to the said, or the like circumstances, but acknowledge that the precept includes only the doing of that which pertains to the substance of the Sacrament, of which kind, communion in both kinds cannot be, it being also a circumstance, the substance thereof being entire in one only kind, as hath been proved. So that the Protestants wrangling thus for the cup, do but fulfil in themselves (though in a different sense) the prophecy of Isaiah, ERIT CLAMOUR IN PLATEIS SUPER VINO; there shall be crying for wine in the streets, Isay 24.11.  
Thus it appears, that Communion in both kinds is not of the essence or integrity of the Sacrament, nor necessary by any divine precept; from whence it follows, that as a thing indifferent, it may be permitted, or restrained, according as the wisdom of the Church shall think fit. For the precinct of humane power streacheth to things indifferent, and only to them. Things absolutely commanded, man cannot forbid; things absolutely forbidden, man cannot command; and therefore the territory of humane legislative power, must be in things indifferent, or else there is none at all; which is against Scripture, reason, and the most general belief and practice of mankind. The Apostles practised this power upon the Gentiles, by imposing upon them a new law of abstinence for a time, from things offered to Idols, and blood, and that which is strangled; Acts 15.29. which yet Christ himself never imposed, but left it indifferent; whereas after the Apostles decree, it became necessary; wherefore it is said, that S. Paul walked through Syria and Cilicia confirming the Churches, commanding them to keep the precepts of the Apostles and Elders, Acts 15.41.  
§. 7. Now the reasons moving the Church to restrain communion to one kind, were many and weighty. First to prevent thereby the occasion of error; for whereas in the primitive Church, the use of one or both kinds was indifferently practised, as is apparent by testimonies of antiquity, yea by the example of the Apostles, Acts 2.42. and our Saviour himself Luke 26.30. yet. when as the Manichean heretics risen, 
b see Aug. lib. de haer. c. 46. Leo Serm. 4. de Quadrag.  who abstained from wine as a thing in itself unlawful to be drunk, and by consequence abstained from it also in the Sacrament; holy Bishops did hereupon much commend the use of the chalice. But this error being extinguished, and another arising 
c Aeneas Silvius hist. Bohem. captain. 3.5.  against the integrity of Christ under either kind, as also avouching the absolute necessity of both, the Church of God hereupon began more universally to practise communion under one kind; and withal, in declaration of the truth, and for prevention of Schism, did absolutely decree the lawfulness thereof, with prohibition to the contrary. So in more ancient times when the Ebionites taught unleavened bread to be necessary in consecration of the Eucharist, the Church commanded the consecration thereof to be made in leavened bread; And when the heretic Nestorius denied our Blessed Lady to be the mother of God, and only to be called the mother of Christ, the Church condemned him, and commanded that she should be called Mother of God. And the Church hath ever found this the most effectual means, for the confutation and extirpation of heresy, namely, by contrary decrees and practise to declare and publish the truth.  
A second reason moving the Church to forbid the use of the cup, was the deserved reverence due to this highest Sacrament; in consideration whereof, the Holy Fathers did appoint most diligent care to be used, lest any little particle of the Host, or drop of the Chalice should fall to the ground. Now the multitude of Christians in laterages being very great, & the negligence of many in sacred things as great, through the coldness of their zeal & devotion, it could not morally be possible, but that frequent spilling of the blood would happen, if the Chalice were to be given ordinarily to the people, 
d Aeneas Silvius Ep. 13. de errore Bohem. & Narrat. de Bohem. ad Conc. Basil.  of which profanation there hath been over frequent experience.   

(CHAP. XXIII.)  
Of the Liturgy and private prayers for the ignorant in an unknown tongue.  
§. 1. PRayer in an unknown tongue hath two branches, one concerning public prayer in a tongue, which the people that are present do not understand; the other private prayer, in a tongue, which the party praying doth not understand; both which Protestants think absurd in reason, and contrary to Scripture; but Catholics believe truly that they are neither. For maintenance whereof, let us consider the meaning of S. Paul (1 Cor. ch. 14.) the place by them violently, but impertinently objected against us.  
We must then know, that as the gift of tongues was given to the Apostles by the Holy Spirit, when he in the shape of tongues descended upon them; so the same gift, with divers others, was continued amongst the Christians for some time after. This gift, amongst the other, they did exercise in their public Church-meetings, where they assembled for the benefit & edification of the hearers, speaking some extemporary prayer, or other holy discourse, both for matter and language, as the Spirit gave them utterance, with great affection & elevation of the mind towards God. Yea the language many times was such, as no man present understood, as is intimated verse 2. for he that speaketh in an unknown tongue, etc. no man understands him; no nor many times did the speaker understand himself; for the gift of tongues, and the gift of interpretation of tongues were two distinct gifts, as we see in the 12. ch. and did not always meet together, as we may gather from the 13. verse of this chapter, where the Apostle exhorteth him that speaketh in an unknown tongue, to pray that he may interpret, which was a sign that ordinarily they could not; & by verse 14. where he saith, If I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful; now this must be meant of a tongue, which he himself did not understand, otherwise his own understanding could not be unfruitful. And thus also doth S. Augustine (de Genes. ad lit. lib. 12. cap. 8.9.) and other Fathers interpret S. Paul.  
By this it is manifest that the Apostle doth not here reprove the practice of the Church of Rome, in her Latin Liturgy directly, seeing this here reproved, and that are extremely different. Therefore ours can be only so far reprovable, as it agrees with the other in the reasons for which it was reproved, which are want of interpretation, & thereby want of edification to the auditors, & of sufficient warrant to the unlearned, through want of understanding of what was said, to say thereto Amen. Now seeing ours doth not agree with that, in any of these, it is therefore irreproveable. Yet if it should agree with that in any of these, it should not notwithstanding be unlawful; because they differ in the main and principal part, the end; for these Church-meetings were intended for the instruction & edification of the auditors, therefore it was fit the exercises thereof should be in a tongue which they that were to be instructed, understood, but the public Liturgy of the Church was instituted for the service & praise of God, & therefore may be, without unlawfulness, in any tongue that he understands, to whom it is dedicated.  
The truth of all this will appear, if we consider the differences between that case and ours. The languages then spoken were utterly unknown many times to any man there present, even to the speaker himself, but the Liturgy of the Church is in a language or languages known to very many, as the Latin in the Latin Church to all Scholars, to most Gentlemen, & youths bred in Grammar Schools, & in some countries to most Mechanics; it cannot therefore absolutely be said to be an unknown tongue. And though it cannot be proved unlawful to have the Liturgy in a tongue absolutely unknown, yet where the Latin tongue hath been unknown to all or most of the better sort, the Church hath dispensed with the use thereof; as appears by the dispensation of Pope Paul 5. to turn the Liturgy of the Mass into the vulgar language of China, & to use the same until the Latin tongue grew more known & familiar in that country. Moreover the prayers & other spiritual exercises which S. Paul speaks against, were extemporal, made in public meetings, according to the present inspired devotion of the speaker; So that the unlearned hearer, or he that supplied his place, the Clerk, except he understood the language, & consequently the matter, could not prudently say Amen to it, seeing he knew not whether the thing that was spoken, were good and lawful or no. But the Liturgy & Service of the Church hath set offices for every day, approved by the Church, & therefore from hence a man may be confidently assured that it is good & lawful, and therefore he may boldly say Amen. Besides there are means applied to the ignorant multitude, by which they are, or may be (if they use diligence therein) made to understand the public Prayers of the Church; namely Sermons, Exhortations, Catechisms, private instructions, manuals & Primers in vulgar languages, where the Prayers used in the Church are found: So that the ordinary & common passages of the public Service may be, and are easily understood even by women & children, & they may understandingly say Amen. Therefore as the Apostle did allow of an unknown tongue in the exercises of the Corinthians, provided there were some to interpret it; so the Service in Latin is very allowable even under this notion, while there are the aforesaid means used for the interpretation thereof.  
And the Congregation is edified, as the Apostle appoints it should be, by the things that are done & said in the Church, while the people have but a general understanding of the several passages thereof. And if they were in a vulgar language, the difference for matter of understanding would be but in a little more or less; for that every woman, boy, & girl in a Church, should be able to understand word by word the Liturgy thereof, be it in what language it will, is morally impossible; seeing there are great store of words in every tongue in common use amongst the better sort, which common people do not understand. And suppose this might be avoided in those parts of the Liturgy, which are composed by the Church, by making choice of the most vulgar words that might be found, yet it is impossible to be so in that which makes the greatest part of the Liturgy, to wit, the Scripture. And if yet all the words of the Scripture could be bowed to their understanding, for the Grammatical signification thereof, yet without all paradventure, the sense, (which is the chief thing to be understood, and for which only the language doth serve, by reason of the innumerable figurative speeches therein) is altogether impossible. For example let any unlearned Englishman say, whether these following places in English, for so much as concerns the full sense thereof, be not all one to him, as if they were in Hebrew. I will set them down according to the English Protestant translation, and their number of the Psalms. Moab is my washpot, over Edom will I cast out my shoe, Psal. 60.8. Also this, Though ye have lain among the pots, yet shall ye be as the wings of a dove covered with silver, and her feathers with yellow gold, Psal. 68 v. 13. And this in the same Psalm, v. 30. Rebuke the company of spearemen; or as it is in the margin, the beasts of the reeds, the multitude of the bulls with the calves of the people etc. Also this as it is in the Service book; Or ever your pots be made hot with thorns, so let indignation vex him even as a thing that is raw, Psal. 58.8. Therefore when Protestants read these and the like unintelligible places of Scripture to the unlearned people, without interpreting them, their end in reading being only the instruction of the people, they truly fall into that error, of which they untruly accuse us, of speaking in the Church without the edification of the people. So have many of them alone in their Sermons also, speaking Latin, or some other more unknown tongue, without interpreting it.  
Moreover, the end of the Church meetings here spoken of by the Apostle, was to instruct the ignorant, and convert the infidels, as may be gathered out of the 23. and 24. verses. But the drift of the Church in appointing Liturgies, and set forms of public prayer, and readings in the Mass, was not for the people's instruction, though that as I have showed be not neglected, but for other reasons: as first, that by this public service, a continual daily tribute or homage of prayer and thanksgiving might be publicly offered and paid unto God by his Priests: Secondly, that Christians by their personal assistance at this public Service, might profess & exercise exterior acts of religion common with the whole Church, represented by the Synaxis or ecclesiastical meeting of every Christian Parish. Finally, that every Christian by his presence yielding consent unto the public prayers, praises & thanksgiving of the Church, might participate of the graces, benefits, & fruits, which the Church doth ordinarily obtain by her Liturgies & public oblations. Now for these ends there is no need that every one should understand word by word the prayers that are said in the public Liturgy, but it sufficeth that the Church in general, and in particular, Pastors & Ecclesiastical persons dedicated to the Ministeries of the Church, have particular notice of all the prayers that are said, and that all may be taught, and instructed in particular, if they desire it, and will be diligent therein.  
But Protestants are more easily lead into this error, of believing, that the Church Service must be said in the vulgar tongue, because they conceive the principal intent thereof with us, is, as it is with them, for the instruction of the people. For with them they do not usually read the Church Prayers, unless there be company to hear, not is there any receiving of their Communion, unless there be a number of the people to communicate; But in the Catholic Church it is not so; for with us the Office of the Church is said, though there should be no people present, for it is the Priest's Office, & not the peoples; and the daily Sacrifice is offered, though there be no people present; these are done to the service & honour of God, and for the benefit of the people too, (though not for their instruction,) and they are bound to be present at Mass only upon Sundays & other Holidays, yet may be present at any other time, and are present more frequently & numerously than the Protestants are at their Service or Sermons: and for the substance of things done or said, understand much more. And all women & children in their answers to the Priest are as ready, (if not more) than ever they were in the use of the Liturgy of England. And while they understand the general purport of that which is said, though they cannot apply every Latin word to its proper signification in the vulgar, yet I suppose their understandings are more edified, then theirs that know the signification of most of the words, but not a jot of the inward sense & meaning thereof, as happens to the unlearned Protestants, while they hear most parts of the Scripture read in the vulgar tongue.  
Moreover most certain it is, that the present custom of the Roman Church, to have their Liturgy in a tongue not vulgar, is agreeable to the custom of the Church in all ages, and also of all Churches now in the world, bearing the name of Christian, (though opposite to the Roman) only those of the pretended Reformation excepted: which constant concurrence is a great sign that the same is very conform unto reason, & not any where forbidden in the Word of God. The Scripture was not read in any language but Greek over all the Churches of the East, as S. Jerom (praefat. in Paralip.) witnesseth. Also the Greek Liturgy of S. Basil was used in all the Churches of the East, yet the Grecian was the vulgar language of all the countries of the East, as is apparent by many testimonies, particularly of the 
b Basil. de Spiritu Sancto. c. 19  Capadocians, 
c d Hieron. in Proem. 2. lib. come. ad Galat. & Act. Apost. c. 1. v. 10, 11.  Mesapotamians, ᵈ Galathians, 
e Theodoret. in histor SS. Patrum hist. 13.  Lycaonians, 
f Hieron de Script. Eccles. in Anton.  Egyptians, Syrians: yea that all these Countries, & most of the Orient, had their proper language distinct from the Greek, is manifest out of Acts 2. where divers nations of the East being assembled in Jerusalem at Pentecoste, & hearing the Apostles speak with tongues, said, How hear we every man in our own tongue wherein we were born? Acts 2.8. No less manifest is it, that the Latin Liturgy was common anciently to all those of the Western parts, yea even in afric, as appears by testimonies of S. Augustine (Epist. 57 the doct. Christ. l. 2. c. 13. in Psal. 123. & in Exposit. Ep. ad Rom. & Ep. 173.) Yet was not the Latin the vulgar language of all the nations of the West, but every one had his own distinct, as now they have, & particularly in England the British language was then in use. Nor yet was the Latin language vulgarly known in all these nations, though understood by the beteer sort, as it is at this day; & in all likelihood more generally known now, than then, in as much as the study of Arts & Sciences, & communion in Religion, are fit means to spread a language, than the sword of a Conqueror. So that it is manifest that the Christian Church did never judge it requisite, that the public Liturgy should be turned into the mother tongue of every nation, nor necessary that it should be presently understood word by word by every one of the vulgar assistants; neither doth the end of the public Service require it: As for those Sects that use no Liturgy at all, but in their Church-meetings do only make an extemporal prayer before & after Sermon, (as the custom is now for the most part in England) that the people may pray with them, they do as they ought in using the vulgar tongue; & Catholics (if they used such exercise) no doubt would do it in like manner.  
§. 2. As for the comfort & more plentiful edification of the understanding which some few want, in that they do not so perfectly understand all the particulars of divine Service, it may by other means abundantly be supplied, without turning the public Liturgy into innumerable vulgar languages, which would bring great confusion into the Christian Church. For first the Church could not be able to judge of the Liturgy of every country, when differences arose about the translation thereof; and so divers errors & heresies might creep into particular countries, and the whole Church never able to take notice thereof. Secondly, particular countries could not be certain that they had the parts of the Scripture used in the Liturgy truly translated; for they can have no other assured proof thereof, than the Church's approbation; nor can she approve what she herself doth not understand. Thirdly, if there were as many translations of the Liturgy, as there be several languages in the world, it could not be avoided, but that some would in many places be ridiculous, incongruous, and full of mistaking, to the great prejudice of souls, especially in languages that have no great extent, nor many learned men that naturally speak them. Fourthly, the Liturgy must of necessity be often changed, together with the language, which doth much altar in every age, as is very well known. Fifthly, in the same country, by reason of different dialects, some provinces understand not one another; and in the Island of Japonia (as some writ) there is one language for men, another for women; one language for Gentlemen, another for rustics: into what language then should the Liturgy of Japonia be translated? So that it is clear, that the inconveniences of divine Service translated in all vulgar languages are insuperable, the commodity is but to the most ignorant part, and that but in part, and to be recompensed by other means, and is so, by prayer books, and other instructions in abundance in the vulgar tongue; In so much that I dare boldly say, (for I have been an eyewitness) that in the cities of Paris and Rome there is five times as much preaching, and ten times as much catechising of youth and ignorant people, as is in London; so that blindness & ignorance to Catholics, is ignorantly & blindly objected. Lastly we cannot imagine that if S. Paul had intended, that which the Protestants labour to enforce out of the  chapter to the Corinthians, that both he and his fellow Apostles would have practised the contrary at the writing thereof, and all their lives after; for we do not find that they or any after them did use any Liturgy, but in one of the learned languages, which though they were vulgar to some people in those times, yet but to a small part, in comparison of all the nations of the world, amongst whom they celebrated Mass.  
§. 3. As for private prayer, the Catholic Church permits all men, whether out of the Churches, or in them, to pray in what language they please; yea the Pater, the Ave, and the Creed, are commanded by divers Counsels to be learned in the vulgar tongue; and divers books of prayers in the vulgar tongue are published and used in all Catholic Countries. Yet those Catholics that do pray or sing Psalms in Latin, which they do not understand, either by choice or obligation, are not to be condemned. For either they understand the prayer in the whole mass thereof, as the PATER NOSTER, for example, though they know not perhaps whether PATER signify our, and NOSTER, father, or the contrary, yet saying this prayer with due devotion, and knowing that it is our Lord's prayer, which they can very well repeat in their mother tongue, no man I suppose can be so absurd to think this prayer is not acceptable to God, though the pious thoughts be not measured geometrically to the words. Or else they understand only more generally, that such or such a prayer or Psalm, for example, MISERERE, is a Psalm full of penitent affections, and this they say with much inward sorrow and contrition for their sins; and who can deny that this pious affection is pleasing to God, though the thoughts and words do not mathematically correspond the one to the other, I am sure the Apostle approved the like, saying in the 17. verse of the forementioned chapter, Thou verily givest thanks well; And to conclude, he doth absolutely allow it, in the 28. verse saying, But if there be no interpreter let him keep silence in the Church, and let him speak to God and himself. And in this matter, as well as the rest, the Protestants also may keep silence, unless they could speak more to the purpose.  
§. 4. These points & all other I examined with diligence, and found that Protestants ordinarily did not truly apprehend many of the Catholic doctrines, nor justly oppose any of them. But I have only touched these few particulars, to let the unlearned Protestant Reader see, that the Catholic doctrines are not such monstrous things, as they ordinarily conceive them, but rather that it is monstrous in them not to believe them. And to awaken the further diligence of all Protestants to search into the truth of all points, so far as they are able either by themselves or others, (if they will not at the first cast themselves upon the infallibility of the Church, which I conceive I have sufficiently proved in the former part of this Treatise, and is the shortest and surest way) and to read the Books of Catholics set forth to this purpose; & not to exercise an implicit faith to the Protestant Religion, and even against the rule of it, to their hurt, seeing they will not yet do it to the Catholic Religion, to their advantage: In which Catholic books they shall find all the Pleas for Protestancy, all their objections against Catholic doctrine answered, with that learning and solidity, with that clearness and fullness, that were not faith also required (which is the gift of God only) to the apprehension of those things, which the Church teaches, it were impossible (in my judgement) impossible (I say) that any reasonable man should continue (in his judgement) a Protestant.  
Yet many there are I fear, who though they be in belief and judgement Catholics, yet in outward profession are Protestants. Who like the inferior spheres, which are moved one way by the PRIMUM MOBILE, and a contrary way by their own peculiar motion; So they are moved to believe the Catholic verities by the influence of God upon their souls, but to remain in the Protestant Communion by the private instigations of flesh and blood; Who wanting the seasoning of Charity, do warp and shrink from that, to which their judgement hath joined them; Whose faith like bullion though it be good metal in itself, yet wanting the stamp of of Catholic Communion and obedience, is not currant in the Kingdom of heaven, nor will serve in their journey to defray them thither. But they (according to the condition of all weak minds) accounting the Present evil (as loss of goods, friends, and the like) the most intolerable, desire to avoid that, and put to adventure the ensuing: And so while they sail through the troublesome Sea of this life, unskilful of steerage in a storm, do strike and split their souls upon the flats of fear, and rocks of presumption: forgetful of that dreadful threatening of our Saviour, He that shall deny me before men, shall be denied before the Angels of God, Luc. 12.9.  
Now to the diligence of examination before mentioned, for those that are not yet convinced in their judgements, a Protestant is bound by Chillingworths own rule; who (though he say that for as much as there is no infallible guide, and that therefore a man must follow the choice of his own reason in what he doth believe, and that God will be contented with that, be it more or less, true or false, being as much as he can attain to, yet) adds withal, that a man must employ his uttermost endeavours to the finding out of the truth. And who is it amongst the Protestants that hath done that? Who hath spent all his spare time, much less, who hath spared all the time he could to this enquiry? I think no Protestants conscience can acquit him in this case; and if not, he must not think to quiet himself by saying, that to the best of his understanding the Protestant Religion seems true, if he have not employed all his endeavours to find whether it be so or no; which cannot be, unless (with King Philip of Macedon he keep one ear for the party accused) he equally hear both sides.  
Wherefore divesting themselves of all prejudice and prepossessed opinions, like white paper, wherein there is nothing written, let them address themselves with all their spare time, yea they ought to make spare time, rather than to want it, to a sad and serious consideration of the great business of Religion, the truth whereof who so gains, though with the loss of all temporal felicity, doth highly improve his estate; considering that, as our Saviour saith, what will it profit a man to gain the whole world, and to lose his own soul? Math. 16.16. And let no man defer this most important affair, and put it off to the later end of his life, (which how soon it will happen, the youngest know not;) as if the Kingdom of heaven were like a market, cheapest at the later end of the day; or that because nature hath placed the seat of his memory in the hindermost part of his head, therefore he may defer the remembrance of God, and of coming to him by the path of true Religion, to the hindermost part of his life. But as God himself saith, while it is called to day, harden not your hearts, Psal. 94.8. lest his delay pull upon himself the forsaking of God, and steel his forehead to the perpetual refusal of his merciful invitation; and so he (and especially the City of London, which hath been purpled with the blood of so many martyrs) hear the complaint and curse of our Saviour sounding in his ear, O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the Prophets, and stonest them that are sent to thee; how often would I have gathered thy children as the hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and you would not behold your habitation shall be left unto you desolate, Math. 23.37.   

CHAP. XXII.  
Of the foolish, deceitful and absurd proceed and behaviour of Protestants in matter of Religion; And of the vanity and injustice of their pretext of conscience for their separation from the Roman Church.  
§. 1. HE that will apply himself to this inquest as I have done, shall find, that the objections of Protestants against Catholic Doctrines are very weak and slight, they are but paper-pellets, and make more noise than hurt; the works also that they raise for their own defence are as weak, and easily dismantled. I found that their objections were answered again and again, which a later writer would take no notice of, but retrieve the first arguments and urge them as fresh, as if they had never been urged before, or at least had never been answered; forgetting to make reply to the Catholic Answers, which was indeed because they could not do it. And in their writings I found much abuse of all Authors, even from the Bible itself to the Authors of latest times, either misalledging the words, ●or misconstruing the meaning, or urging that for their purpose, which was indeed to no purpose.  
§. 2. Particularly for their mistranslating of Scripture, (wherein they grievously accuse one another, as I shown before) I will allege two or three places (of a great many) for a taste, wherein their unfaithfulness is apparent; as first that notable depravation of their Master Luther, which I have mentioned before, in adding the word [only] where the Apostle saith, that a man is justified by faith without the works of the Law, Rom. 3.28. Also where the Apostle saith, give diligence by good works to make your calling and election sure, 2 Pet. 1.10. the English Bibles leave out these words, by good works, and yet Beza in his notes upon the place, acknowledges these words to be in almost all the ancient Greek Copies. Also in the same Chapter & fifteenth Verse, these words are read according to the original, I will do my diligence also, you to have often after my decease, that you may have a remembrance of these things: showing thereby that he would pray for them after he was dead; as S. chrysostom expounds it, saying, Rejoice ever (you blessed Apostles) in our Lord, without intermission pray for us, fulfil your promises; for o Blessed Peter thou criest out speaking thus, I will do my diligence after my coming to make mention of you, 2 Pet. 1.10. Now the English Bibles read this place thus, Moreover I will endeavour, that you may be able after my decease, to have these things always in remembrance, corrupting the sense, and making it signify only that he would endeavour that they should remember those things, when he was dead; whereas he saith, that he would endeavour after he was dead, that they should remember those things; and thereby it proves that he prayed for them after be was dead; a Doctrine which many Protestants will not allow. Also in the first Epistle to the Corinthians, Chap. 11. v. 27. where the Apostle saith, whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the cup of the Lord unworthily shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord, the English translates it thus, whosoever shall eat this bread and drink the cup of the Lord unworthily, putting and for or, thereby making the Apostle speak of the receiving of the bread and wine unworthily in an united sense, whereas he speaks of them in a divided sense.  
Thus in very many places do they deal with the Scripture, like the Elephant when he goes to drink, who troubles the clear water with his feet, because he will not see the deformity of his face; So they trouble and defile the sense of Scripture either in words or exposition, because they would not see the deformity of their Errors. Many falsifications also and corruptions of Catholic Authors, by the Protestant writers, I have met with; as where they speaking something by way of supposition, they allege them as if they speak it positively and absolutely; where they bring the objections of Heretics, they allege them as speaking the words in their own names; where they relate with reprehension the say of wicked men, they allege them as saying those words themselves; which is, as if they should charge S. Matthew himself with the words of the Pharisees against our Saviour, Behold a glutton and a drinker of wine. Math. 11.19. But I will not be particular in this matter, because many that have been guilty in this case, have been called to a strict account by their Catholic answerers.  
And when they are pressed by Catholics with plain and direct proofs, O what serpentine wriglings and wind, to escape the assaulters, do they make! O what perverse, ridiculous, & contradictory answers and evasions do some of them make! in which they do at once show both much wit, and much folly; for fools could not speak as they do, and wise men would not. In so much that 
a Answer to a Jesuits challenge, chapped. of limb Patrum  Bishop Usher Primate of Armagh, a very learned man, to avoid the confession of Christ's descent into hell, according to the Article of the Creed, in the plain sense thereof, doth so turn it and wind it, that he makes the sense of the words, He descended into hell to be, He ascended into heaven: to such pitiful refuges doth the weakness of a bad cause drive them. And thus they that have the most learning amongst them, being by unhappy accident bred up in an erroneous Religion, and thereby presuming it to be true, do bend all the endeavours of their learning to the maintenance of their errors, and the obscuring of the truth; which learning, if it were directed to the right end, might by just title claim a place in the first file of desert: even like a torch which turned downward, is extinguished with that wax, which held upward would make it bright and glorious. But though their learning were a hundred times doubled, yet as Aaron's serpent devoured the Magician's serpents, Exod. 7.12. so the wisdom of God, which is in his Church, will confound the sensual wisdom of all her opposers; seeing there is no wisdom, nor prudence, nor council against God, Prov. 21.30.  
§. 3. I further observed that the arguments of Protestants for themselves were very fallacious; most frequently in that which the Logicians call FALLACIA CONSEqUENCIA, which is when the consequence is not justly inferred; for example, they argue thus; the Sacrament is called a figure of Christ's body, therefore it is not his true and real body; which is a false Consequence, for it may be both; even as Christ is called a figure of the substance of his father, Heb. 1.3. and yet is also the same substance. Christ saith, come unto me, therefore we may go to no body else, which is false; for we may go to him and others also. The Apostle saith, that we are Justified by faith, therefore say they not by works; whereas we are justified by both. We must confess our sins to God, therefore not to a Priest; whereas we must do both, Christ is the head of the Church, therefore the Pope is not; whereas both are in several capacities. The like might be said in many others; by which kind of arguing, unlearned people are exceedingly deluded, & think that while one thing must be done, that must be done only; the vein of that word (only) invented by Luther in the matter of justification by faith running through the whole body of their Religion.  
§. 4. Moreover I found this contradiction amongst the Patrons of Protestancy; that some of them reject the Fathers, and accuse them of being infected with the errors which prevailed in their times; and what were their errors? even all that they taught contrary to their Protestant doctrines; so making themselves the rule to judge the Fathers by, and not the Fathers (which any wise man would think more fit) a rule to themselves; who no doubt knew the Scriptures also, and what was agreeable or contrary to them better than they: Protestant's being herein like carpenters who wear their rule at their backs, casting behind them & neglecting those that should guide their belief. But other Protestants ashamed of this insolency, pretend for the credit of their cause, that the Fathers are altogether on their side; and then with much labour hunt out some obscure passages, most liable to be wrested, and triumph therein, as if they had found a demonstration, which when they are sifted, either they make nothing for them or else quite against them: who in this case are like to a man ready to be drowned, who to save himself will catch hold on a naked sword, with which he cuts his fingers; So Protestant's sunk into the despair of their cause, think to save themselves by that which serves but to increase their overthrow.  
They pretend also to answer many plaes of the Fathers alleged by Catholics, and to give their words a Protestant meaning, and thereby run the Fathers into manifest contradiction of themselves; in regard that the Fathers have but some obliqne passages which seem (and but seem) to make for them, (as whoever spoke so exactly, nay who can possibly speak so exactly, as that his words may not be made to seem different from his meaning?) but they have whole Books, Sermons, Tractates, and a world of dispersed places, of purpose, in the maintenance of Catholic truths. And though they say that the Fathers taught Protestant doctrine, and they give a Protestant sense (though very incongruous) to many of the places of the Fathers alleged by Catholics, yet they dare not use those words and Phrases of the Fathers, as of the▪ Mass, the Altar, the Sacrifice, concerning real presence, prayers to Saints and for the dead, merits, satisfaction, and Purgatory, with the like, in their prayers, Sermons, and books which if they speak Protestant Doctrine, in the true sense of the Fathers, (as they say they do) why do they not with the sense, make use of the words and speeches also? I can conceive no other reason, but for fear the people's understandings (not so fraught with prejudice, nor acquainted with their uncouth evasions,) should carry them to the direct meaning thereof, and so either in those things become Popish themselves, or accuse their teachers of Popery.  
§. 5. Another fraud I have observed amongst the Canonical Protestants, which is, that when they dispute against Catholics, they have recourse to the Scripture, and will be tried by that only; but when they dispute against the Puritans and other Sects amongst them, who deal with them at their own weapon of Scripture only, than they have recourse to the Fathers, and the Tradition of the Church, and use the same arguments against Sectaries, that Catholics do against them; and particularly in the points of baptising of Infants, against the Anabaptists; and the keeping of the first day of the week holy, against the Sabbatarians, who would have Saturday; for either of which there is not any command in Scripture. And shall Tradition serve them in those cases, and not in others? Or shall Scripture with them prove all other points, and not those? And this shift is such a one, as S. Augustine (in Psal. 80.) witnesss to be common to Foxes and Heretics. For as Foxes have two holes to save themselves by, one, when they are driven from the other; so Heretics (whom the Scripture figures out by Foxes, when the Spouse saith, Let us take the young Foxes that destroy the vines, Cant. 2.15.) have a double passage to save themselves by; the one, when they are assaulted by the other; so that he that will catch them, must set his nets before both issues, and besiege both passages, as the excellent Catholic Writers have done, and have left them neither Tradition nor Scripture whereby to escape.  
For although the Scripture do not teach all in direct and particular terms that Caliques do, yet it teaches nothing that Protestants do, in the things they differ from Catholics. And in general the Scripture teaches all that Catholics do, by referring us to Tradition. And this is sufficient; for it is not required, that all that we believe or do, be expressly set down in Scripture, it is enough, that there be no Scripture against it, for what is not forbidden is lawful; as the Apostle saith, where there is no law, there is no transgression, Rom. 4.15. If then there be no law of Scripture against it, it is lawful; especially if it be warranted by the Tradition of the Church, to which the Scripture refers us, and is to us more evident to come from God, than the Scripture is, which we do not know to do so, but by the Church's testimony.  
So that I found the Protestants were like to the Giant Procustus, mentioned by Plutarch, who having a great iron bed fit for himself, all strangers that he took he laid therein, and if they were too long for the bed, he cut off so much of their legs, if too short, he stretched them out till they came even; So the Protestants having built a Religion after the model of their own fancy, do examine Scriptures, Counsels, Fathers, and all authority by it, whereof some they cut off, as being too long, in affirming more than they do; and others being too short for their purpose, they miserably serve, tenter, and rack, till they come to the length they desire. And had I the wicked ambition by impiety to make myself famous, I believe, I could conjure up new opinions, which (laying aside the authority of the Church) I could varnish with as much reason and Scripture, as any they profess; Whose attempts have had no better success than Achelous had in fight with Hercules, who took upon him several shapes, hoping in one or other to overcome him; but was by Hercules beaten through all his shapes, and forced at last to take his own proper shape, and yield: So Protestants fight against Catholics, are by them beaten through all their changes, and forms, and shifts through which they wander, and are forced at last to take the true form of Protestancy, which is obstinately to deny the plain and manifest truth; But I hearty pray that it would please God to bring them to the true form, which they ought to have, which is of Roman Catholic; until which they will (like the blinded Sodomites) perpetually roll, wander and grope in the darkness of uncertainty, and instability, till eternal darkness seize upon them. For by embarquing themselves in such an enterprise as is the boarding of the Ship of Peter, they are like to arrive at no other port, but ruin and destruction.  
§. 6. Moreover I found this proceeding of the Protestants to be most uneasonable, and full of pride, in that they being but few in number, especially in their beginning, yea but one, one infinitely audacious, Luther, once a child of the Roman Church, should presume to correct or reform the whole Christian world; a thing which no man would admit in the private regiment of his own family, that a son or servant should presume to find fault with, and change the customs of the house against the consent of the Father, Master, and all the rest, and assume to himself alone to be judge of the cause.  
One earnestly desiring Lycurgus to establish a popular State in Lacedaemon, that the basest might have as great authority as the highest, answered, Begin to do so first in thine own house; which he refused, and thereby saw the injustice of his own demand: So these men that will not admit within themselves, either in matters Ecclesiastical or civil, that they whose duty it is to obey, should command, they whose duty it is to learn, should teach, withwhat face can they defend the practice thereof in the Church, which is the house of God; of which our predecessors were guilty in the first attempt, and this present generation in the continuance of their Rebellion? Nor let them think that their having of the Bible in the Mother-tongue will save them, as if it were like the Palladium to the Trojans, a thing dropped down from heaven, no man knows how, with this condition annexed, that while they kept it in their city they should never perish; while in the mean time they extremely pollute it with two things, their interpretation and their conversation; whereas the Church of Rome hath not only the word, but the meaning of God also, as the Apostle saith, we have the sense of Christ, 1 Cor. 2.16. both proved by never-erring authority.  
And lastly weighing all the Protestants arguments with all impartiality, or if there were any inclination of the balance, it was to their side, with whose doctrines I had been from my childhood seasoned, and had been a teacher of others for the space of near twenty years, and to whom to receive contrary impressions, I knew must prove extremely prejudicial; who therefore addressed myself to this enquiry, with the disposition of a jealous husband, seeking that which I was most loath to find; yet all this notwithstanding, I found that all their pleas and pretences, and their answers to Catholics were weak, sleight, false or impertinent; and (like to a certain fish called Sleve, mentioned by Plutarch, which hath a body like a sword, but wants a heart,) they had (at least in the opinion of some) a show of strength and sharpness, but inwardly had no power, Spirit, or vigour. And that all their specious shows of purity, Reformation, and Evangelicall truth, were but like a shallow brook or plash of water, wherein we may discern the Sun, or moon and stars, with the whole face of heaven, as if it were as deep as heaven is high, when if we but sound it with our little finger, we pierce it through even to the earth: So their pretences of the pure Word of God, heavenly truth, and nothing but the truth, (as if like Prometheus they had fetched it themselves from heaven) being fathomed, I found no deeper than the shallow conceits of private heads; And that like Micol they had sent away David, and laid an Image in his place, 1 Kings 19 they had renounced the true and living Word of God, which is the true sense thereof, and laid an image of their own fancy, dressed in the same letter, in the room thereof; and so were (though not of Saints and Images which they ought, yet) worshippers of their own imaginations, which they ought not, as being a high Idolatry.  
§. 8. These, these are the motives, which have inclined me to believe that the Church of England and all other Protestant Churches, are guilty both of Heresy and Schism; two sins of highest nature, the one against God, the other against our neighbour, the one against faith, the other against charity, by denying their belief to doctrines revealed by God the supreme Author, and proposed by the Catholic Church, the supreme witness of divine truth; and by rending the seamlesse coat of Christ, separating from the Communion of his Church, and that (as some of their most learned say,) for things not fundamental; and what can be more imprudent, than for an unfundamentall error to commit a fundamental sin? And such it is to separate from the true Church, as the learned amongst them confess the Church of Rome to be.  
And as the pretended errors for which they did separate, (they confess) were not fundamental, so for aught they know (for they confess that the judgement of their Church may err) they were no errors at all; and so again, for aught they know, they have not reform, but deformed themselves; and are gone out of God's blessing (as we say) into the warm Sun. What madesse it is to make, or continue a separation from a true Church, so acknowledged by all Christians, upon pretences not accounted true by any but themselves, and nor certainly known to be true, so much as by themselves. And as S. Augustine (de unit. Eccles. c. 3.) argues against the Donatists; If both sides were true they had no cause to separate, and to fly from those whom they had in possession: If both false, there was no cause of separation, that they should fly from those who were no more faulty than themselves. If our doctrines are true and theirs false, there was no cause of their separation, because they ought rather to have amended themselves and continued in unity: and if ours are false and theirs true, there was no cause of their separation, because they ought not to have forsaken the innocent world, to whom either they would not, or they could not demonstrate their truth. Nor can it excuse them to say, that such or such things are against their conscience; for as much as they ought to regulate their consciences by the Word of God in the mouth of the Church, not of themselves, (otherwise contentious and self-willed Spirits will never want this plea, to separate from the Church, and so to serve God with their Will-worship,) and not to demand of the Church, that she make her conscience stoop to a compliance with theirs, which is insolent and unreasonable.  
'Tis true that he that doth any thing against his conscience sins, so also if he do not that which he is commanded, he sins; therefore to reconcile this conflict of conscience, men may and must (though it go against the grain of their private judgement) submit themselves by an implicit faith to the Church, by believing her to be wiser than themselves, and so believing what she saith to be true. Otherwise this conscience would be a plea for all disobedience and impiety; when wicked men might say, that they could not be persuaded in their conscience, that the things they were commanded to believe or do, were good, but rather the contrary were so, and therefore they would do them. Thus erroneous men may think it lawful to commit murder or adultery, as all Rebels do the one, and Familists and Adamites the other. And we see that Protestants (who make conscience their Plea against the Church of Rome, and a ground of Separation) will not admit this from others that are under their command.  
The legal Protestants of England would not permit any man, under pretence of conscience, to refuse the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy, but thought all men bound to submit their beliefs therein to them. And now the Reformers of the reformed, who heretofore complained of it as an Egyptian burden, to have any thing imposed on them against their conscience, make no scruple to impose upon other men's consciences, in their oaths, Protestations and Covenants of conspiracy and Rebellion against their lawful Prince, and of believing a Religion not only now in Being, but whatsoever hereafter shall be by them contrived; nor will they suffer any man's tenderness of conscience, to be a ground for the separation of his obedience. So that the separation of all Protestants from the Church of Rome under pretence of conscience, as it hath no ground of truth, so hath it not either of prudence or justice.  
§. 9 And if the Protestants, especially the Chilling worthians, will be (as they pretend) the servants of reason, and follow her whither she shall guide them, I cannot see how they can avoid coming to the Catholic Roman Church. For seeing that (according to them) there is no infallible certainty of the truth of any point of Faith, (for if there be so, it is in their fundamentals; yet seeing they have no infallible knowledge what those fundamentals are, they must needs slide back again to their former universal uncertainty:) all the assurance they have in matter of religion, can be but probable: Now Aristotle the great Master of reason, gives this rule of probability; That (saith he) is probable, which seems so to all, or to the most, or to the most wise; and amongst them, to all, or to the most, or to the most famous and eminent; which rule is so consonant to reason, as I think no reasonable creature will deny it. Nor can any Protestant (except pride and ignorance shut the door of his confession) deny that this rule of probability, amongst all sorts of Christians is appliable only to the Roman Catholic Church; there having been infinitely more, and more wise and learned people of her Communion, than of any other; yea many times there have been, when she hath enfolded all Christians in her arms, and not one to be found out of her Communion, her doctrines then (in reason) are to be received as most probable.  
And (as some Philosophers say) natural bodies do neglect the laws and rules of of their particular motions, to serve and follow the laws of universal nature; of which one is, That there must be no Vacuum, or place utterly empty; which law to observe, we see that heavy bodies will rise upward, which otherwise would fall downward: So the particular rules of reason, in particular men, (if they will show themselves the dutiful children of reason) must give place to this general and universal rule of reason implanted in mankind; and when they are inclined one way to an opinion, by their own private and domestic reason, they must suspend that inclination, and conquer the provocations thereof, and readily yield unto the fundamental and universal law of reason; which is, that in matters of whose truth there is no infallible certainty, that is most likely to be true, and hath the most reason on its side, wherein the most, and the most reasonable of reasonable creatures do agree Which if they do, they shall not run upon the rock of believing contradictions, (as some of them imagine;) but shall find themselves obliged by the train of their own principles, to become Roman Catholics.  
These considerations, together with the great assistance of God's grace, have caused me to forsake the Communion of all Protestant Churches, who, like those mentioned in S. John, say they are Jews, the true Church, and are not, but are the Synagogue of Satan, Revel. 2.9. And not to content myself to be a Catholic in opinion only, keeping it private to myself, to save my temporal interest; nor with the two Tribes and half, forbear to enter into the land of Canaan, but stay on the other side of Jordan, tempted thereunto by the pleasantness of the land; but, disdaining to match my love so low, as of this creeping world, with the renouncing of all I possessed, or that my hopes could reach at, to the pulling on myself the displeasure of my friends and kindred, the reproach and hatred of the Protestant party, to the abandoning of myself, my wife and children, to all the calamities (which are all) that beggary, and perpetual banishment could throw upon us; launching forth into the deep of this wide world, without rudder, anchor, sails or tackling, to humble ourselves at the feet of our Holy Mother the Church of Rome, which is the one, true, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church; and will be so, and will be accounted so, when these, like their predecessors, revolters from the Church of Rome, shall be no more; And to choose to perish for want (if it be the will of God) in communion with the Catholic Church, rather than to have the Empire of the world stoop under my command, and be a Protestant: And to say, as Themistocles did to his wife and children, though in a different sense, PERIISSEMUS NISI PERIISSEMUS, we had perished, if we had not perished, if we had not perished temporally, we had perished eternally: nor would I sell the inward peace and consolation I here find, though at such a rate as would undo the world to buy it; for he that purchaseth worldly prosperity with the loss of the true faith, out-buyes it, and will prove a bankrupt; with which the tendries of the whole world being counterpoized, prove too light: as our Saviour saith, What shall it profit a man to gain the whole world, and to lose his own soul? Math. 16.20.  
And all this, because they that are out of the true Church are outlaws against: God, are without Christ, and without God in the world, as the Apostle speaks, Ephes. 2.12. and because (as all antiquity testifies) that 
b Concil. Cart. 4. c. 1.  out of the Catholic Church there is no salvation. 
c Aug. Ep. 152.  That whosoever is not in the Catholic Church cannot have life. 
d Aug. de Sym, ad Catech. lib. 4.  That he shall not have God for his Father, who will not have the Church for his Mother. 
e Cyp. de unit Eccl,  That Christ is not with those that assemble out of the Church. 
f Ibidem.  That though they should be slain for the confession of Christ, this spot is not washed away even with blood. 
g Ibidem.  That he cannot be a Martyr that is not in the Church. 
h Aug de gest. cum. Emerito.  That out of the Catholic Church one may have Faith, Sacraments, and in sum every thing except salvation. 
i Prosp. promis. & praedic. Dei par. 4. c. 5.  That he that communicates not with the Catholic Church is an Heretic and Antichrist. 
k Fulgent. de fide ad Pet. c. 19  That no Heretic nor Schismatique, that is not restored to the Catholic Church before the end of his life, can be saved.  
And this Catholic Church is the Roman Church, because the Bishop of Rome is the head thereof, appointed so by God, and received by the Christian world in all ages (as I have proved before) and that not only for a time, but at this time, and for ever. And this being the Rock on which the Church is built, surely it shall never be removed, nor he, that like the wiseman, builds thereon; as our Saviour saith, the rain fell, the floods came, the winds blue; and rushed upon the house, and it fell not, for it was founded on a rock: Matth. 7.25, 26, 27. On the other side all other Churches are built upon the sandy foundation of humane invention, and must expect the fate of the fool's house, on which the the rain fell, the floods came, the winds blue, and rushed thereon, and it fell, and the ruin thereof was great,   

CHAP. XXIII.  
The Conclusion; wherein is represented on the one side the splendour and orderly composure of the Roman Catholic Church: And on the other side the deformity and confusion of Protestant Congregations.  
§. 1. NOw for a Conclusion, let me invite the Reader to stand (as it were) upon mount Nebo, as Moses did, and take a view of the Land of Canaan, the Roman Catholic Church, on the one side, and the wilderness of the Protestant Churches on the other.  
Here amongst Catholics, you shall see a Church like the cloud that appeared to Elisha, as big as a man's hand, which by and by spread over the face of the earth; a Church which hath encircled in her arms (at least in their predecessors) all that ever wore the name of Christians; which hath stretched her dominions, as far as the Sun his beams, and wheresoever he hath bestowed his corporal, she hath bestowed her spiritual light.  
There amongst Protestants, you shall see Churches that have got possession only of the most obscure places, and that by patches, like a poor man's land; and those too usurped by fraud, and violence from the just owners thereof; not purchased, but stolen.  
Here you shall see a Church that hath continued without interruption since the first planting thereof; that hath kept perpetual Term without Vacation; that in all the rough tempests of this world's persecution, hath still rid out the storm: and though by the tyranny of heathen and heretics millions of her children did fall, it was but like the morning dew, watering thereby the seeds of grace, which themselves had sown; and when they calmly bled, it was but oil to the Apostles lamps, whose bright flames may yet serve to light posterity to heaven. And as the enemies of the city of Rome were wont to weep to see it on fire, because it would afterwards be fairer built; so the devil (though he caused it, yet) did mourn to see the Church of Rome on fire in her Martyrs, which was ever repaired by a greater increase of converts, who constantly kept the faith, till they lost themselves in keeping it, like Naboth who kept his possession, with the loss of his blood.  
There you shall see Churches like Castor and Pollux rising and setting by turns, sometimes alive, sometimes dead; with such huge great gaps between the times of their subsisting, that for any succour they could have from them, millions of souls might in the interim have dropped into hell. And as the Moabites when they saw the waters look ruddy, thought they had been mingled with blood, when it was but the reflection of the morning sun beams on them; so when they suffered any thing, they called it persecution for their obedience to God, when it was indeed but the effect of justice on them, for their Rebellion against God's deputies Ecclesiastical and civil, the high Priest and the Prince: and instead of giving them increase, as persecution hath always done to the Church, it did (with the aid of their inward discords) utterly extingnish them. Who have had none, but have made many Martyrs; reviving even in these later & present times, the ancient copies of cruelty against Catholics; blindly believing that by kill Gods servants, they do God service: Whose meek spirits have paid as large a tribute of patience unto heaven and sufferance to the world, as any that went before them; and have proved in themselves, the truth of the Spouses saying in the Canticles; ch. 5. v. 10. My beloved is white and ruddy, being blanched with the whiteness of innocence, & guled with the blood of martyrdom, the fury of whose malice and persecution hath pursued many even through the gates of death, adding profanation to their cruelty, by disturbing the dead bodies, and silent urns of Saints departed. A poor revenge and foolish, which doth more express their hatred, than satisfy it; and shows that their malice doth more afflict their own minds before it is executed, than it can do their enemy's bodies in the execution: So eager, so importunate is sin, ever to its own shame.  
§. 2. Here you shall see a Church that hath always been in view; whom neither fear nor coyness hath made to hid her head, and whose admired beauty hath invited all men to her chaste embraces, and like Medusa's head hath turned them to stones of this living building, by the admiration of her surpassing beauty.  
There you shall see Churches, such (which is very strange) as were never seen, or very seldom; keeping such unkind and retired state, that men (like Diogenes who went about Athens with a candle and a lantern at noon day, to seek an honest man) must do so about the world to find them out, and in the mean time perish for want of spiritual aid: who never had any beauty, riches, or rarity amongst them, but only Gyges' his ring, whereby they did for the most part walk invisible. The English Proverb saith, that where God hath his Church, the devil hath his Chapel; and so he hath always had in Heretics, who in regard of place have been mingled with Catholics; but that the devil should have all the Church, and God not so much as the Chapel, (as they pretend) is most incredible.  
§. 3. Here you shall see a Church like the city of Jerusalem, that is at unity within itself; and like the walls of Byzantium, so closely united, that they seem to be all but one entire stone. And as God spoke of old, By the mouth of his Prophets, Luc. 1.70. intimating, that though they were many Prophets, yet they had all but one mouth, in regard of the unity and agreement of their say; so speaks he now by the mouth of the Priests in the Catholic Church: A body having Christ for the head, from whom (as the Apostle saith) the whole body being fitly joined together, and compacted by that which every joint supplies, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, makes increase of the body to the edifying of itself in love; Whose powerful union, like the Bundle of Arrows presented by the Emperor Saladine to his sons, as the Emblem of united strength, cannot be broken by the assault of any force; which like the floating Lands, or the stone Tyrrhenus, being unbroken, floats still aloft, and keeps her head above the main; when others like clods of earth rend from the Jland, or broken in pieces of that stone, sink to the bottom and perish.  
There you shall see Churches stand like the stones in some high ways to measure their length, a mile asunder from each other; And as the Chameleon changes itself into all colours except white; So they wander through all the forms of opinions that fancy can imagine, saving only truth; Which need no external disasters to try their strength, no foreign enemies to attempt their destruction; For like the Serpent's teeth sown by Cadmus, or the eternally-hating brethren Eteocles and Polynices, they with mutual cruelties destroy each other. Here a Church that for the admirable effects of her unity, deserves the name of that precious stone, which for the rarity thereof is called Unity. There such, as for the variety and deformity wherewith they are possessed, may be termed Legion.  
§. 4. Here you shall see a Church that religiously triumphs over all Christian Kings and Kingdoms of the world, making them the Trophies of her spiritual victories and conversions; whose powerful influence hath cast a charm upon the fierce and lionly natures of barbarous Princes; and hath not only made the Lion and the lamb to live together, (as was foretold by the Prophet) but hath turned the Lions into Lambs. Alexander the great being asked if he would run at the Olympic games, said, I could be content, so I might run with Kings; Here then may be exercised a virtuous ambition, and truly worthy of the majesty of the most excellent King of England, who if he will honour the Church and himself to run this way, shall run with almost all Kings of the Christian world, both his own and other King's predecessors, and that at the true Olympic exercises, the exercises of heaven.  
There you shall see Churches that never had the power to invite a King or nation to their Communion, but such as were born to it; or at first compelled to it, by the violence of some prevailing faction; or moved to it, by obliqne and self-reflecting ends. Barren and in jurious Churches, that live not by their own labour, and the gains they make thereof, but boast only of that which they have ravished from others; and convert not from Heathenism, but nearer to it.  
§. 5. Here you shall see a Church working wonders far above the power of all created Being's; commanding (by the rich dowry of her husband and Saviour) heaven, earth and hell, and all the frame of the creation; making them bow their fixed and stubborn natures, and meekly yield to the dreadful command of man, propped by omnipotent Divinity. In which the miracle of miracles, Transubstantiation, is most frequently wrought, even millions of times a day, and sufficiently proved to be so, by the frequent effusion of blood that it hath made (like murdered bodies many times bleeding afresh in the presence of the murderers) to confute the incredulity of Jews and Heretics; which if it do not so, to those that do not see it (having credible testimony thereof) as well as to those that see it, shall one day, with the rest of his most precious soul-healing balm, be required at their unhappy hands, when he shall come encircled with flames, and armed with dreadful thunder, to throw down vengeance on the impious and unbelievers; who shall remedilessly feel that which heretofore they would not believe, that he that believeth not shall be damned, Mark. 16.16.  
There you shall see Churches that do wonders indeed, but they are wondrous evils; the foulest in all the stock and brood of villainy; too many to be repeated, but not to be forgiven; for that therefore I will always pray. Churches that are so poor in proof of their Doctrine, that they neither come near the Church of Christ, nor yet do so much as the accursed Antichrist; for he shall do some wonders, but they do none: Or at least it is but one only Miracle that they do, and that is, that being (as they say) the true pure Church of God, they do no Miracle. And one Miracle I beseech God to do amongst them, (and especially in the once-every-way happy, and the now-every-way miserable Kingdom of England;) that is, once more to convert them to his true faith, and Catholic Roman Church, where it is only to be had; that they may see and submit, before it be too late, to him whom they have pierced; and may (as Christ admonisheth the Church of Ephesus) remember from whence they are fallen, repent and do their first works, (Rev. 2.5.) before all hope, to see the Kingdom flourish, be withered; and that by their falling from bad to worse; there remain nothing but a fearful expectation of seeing it overrun, and possessed by some barbarous Nation, as the Greek Churches are by the Turks, (for their Heresies most likely, and Schism from the Church of Rome,) or else, that they will become such themselves.  
§. 6. Here you may see a Church that is the worlds SANCTUM SANCTORUM, most holy place, guilded with the lives of innumerable (both men and women) persons of matchless sanctity, shining through the veils of their corpse cloth, and neglected flesh; yea in the feebler Sex, God making his power (as he saith to S. Paul) perfect through weakness. People so charitable to others, that they will forgive every one, but themselves; and so severe to themselves, that they had rather lose the reward of their well-doing, than the punishment of their evil. Whose fasting and prayers, like empty-bellied instruments send up harmonious music to heaven, and exceed the Spheres. Who suffer no mutiny of passions against reason, or of reason against God. Who disdain to stoop to the lure of sense, or to serve it in any thing beyond the margin of necessity; but ascending up to the mount Tabor of heavenly contemplation, do there abide with Christ, and are transfigured with the beauty of holiness; on whose hearts is written (that which was on the breastplate of Aaron) Holiness to the Lord. These are those noble Worthies of God, who like Vriah one of David's Worthies, are ashamed to enjoy the pleasures and delicacies of this life, while they consider that their great General wanted them; but like him spend all their time in suffering evil, and doing good; and are therein like to arched roofs, whereon the more weight is laid, the firmer and stronger they are. And are (many of them) so ecstasied with heavenly raptures, that their unbodied souls leave them forgetful of all things that may tend to their temporal preservation. Having such strong impressions of the presence of God, that wheresoever they are, or whatsoever doing, they so behave themselves, as if with S. Hierome, they heard the sound of the Archangells' trump summoning them to judgement: Which high degrees of holiness they underprop with the basis of humility; and (like the weightiest ears of corn) bow down their heads the lowest to the earth; and stand like figures in Arithmetic, where the last in place is greatest in account. So that this alone may persuade infidels that God was made man, while they see men thus made Gods. Into their secrets O Lord let my soul come, let my glory be joined to their assemblies.  
There you shall see Churches calculated only for the meridian of flesh and blood; whose Apocryphal Priesthood cannot beget Canonical, much less super-canonicall virtues; whose Priests (like antics which we see carved on the sides of sumptuous buildings, seem with their bowed shoulders to bear up the house, when they are indeed borne up by it: so they pretend to be the only Pillars of the house of God, but indeed have no share therein, but what they derive from this Church of Rome; Thou bearest not the root, but the root thee, Rom. 11.18. And what remains of the perfume of goodness yet amongst the people, (bating the disposition of nature) is but the relics of the Roman scent, perhaps not yet utterly faded.  
§. 7. Lastly look upon the Roman Catholic Church, and you shall see a thing so complete and perfect in all her dimensions, as if it had been (as indeed it was) moulded on a heavenly frame, many members built up into one body, and that body united under one head, maintaining most sweet and admirable correspondence, having in itself all fit means for the spiritual conservation both of the individuum, and species, of the particular body, and of the kind: For birth here is Baptism; Confirmation for strength and advancement in the state of grace: The sacred Eucharist for our daily stock of spiritual improvement and increase. And so our spiritual sicknesses and wounds, which we receive in our Christian warfare, here are Physicians with the balm of Gilead, the good Samaritans with wine and oil to pour into our wounds, the holy Priests after the order of Melchisedeck with the Sacrament of Penance to cure all our maladies. And thereceipts for these cures contrived with wondrous art; for as bodily evils are cured either with things of the same quality or the contrary, so here. For wounds given by the world, here is a cure by giving the world away in alms. For wounds received from the flesh, a cure by mortifying the flesh with fasting and other austerities. A cure for the fiery darts of the devil, by the darts of prayers shot up to heaven. And when we depart this life (for this warfare must not always last) here is precious oil to embalm our souls with grace; which like the oil to the ancient Roman wrestlers, makes us nimble & agile in our latest wrestlings with the devil, that we may slip out of his hands, and be presented, rendering a sweet smelling savour unto God. And that this holy Church may continue in succession, until her royal Bridegroom call her up to his own throne, here is Holy Sacramental Matrimony, both to represent that union, and by grace to increase it. And that this multitude may not beget confusion, here are holy Orders, by virtue whereof, they that are ordained do govern this society, as spiritual Magistrates, and conduct it, as spiritual Captains, through the wilderness of this world, to the land of Canaan, the heavenly Jerusalem, which is above. Here is the true Communion of Saints both of those in heaven, in earth, and under the earth, by the participations of each others Prayers, Merits, and Satisfactions. Here is, as in all well-governed Commonwealths, Justice both commutative, and distributive: Commutative betwixt God and Christ, who paid a ransom for us, and purchased an estate for us, and we take possession upon the conditions required: distributive in rendering rewards and punishments according to the geometrical proportion of men's merits or offences.  
§. 8. Here are the Arcana imperii, high and mysterious things, such as are worthy the wisdom and contrivance of God. Things to be believed, by the world, thought incredible; things done by God, and to be done by us, by the world thought impossible, things to be suffered, by the world thought intolerable: and they are believed, done, and suffered, which could not be effected, but by a power omnipotent. And because they are so difficult, none but God could subdue mortals to the belief and practice of them; and therefore, even because they are such, they prove him only to be their author. For who can imagine that Confession, a thing so much against the bias of flesh and blood, or the belief of Transubstantiation, a thing so far above the reach of humane reason, could have got such possession in the souls of Christian mankind, and that without any external violence, had not the finger of God writ it on men's hearts. In doctrines of this Church, that will admit the use of reason for their proportionableness, no things seem more reasonable; and where they are above reason nothing can be more sublime, and befitting God the Author of this Religion, and Christ Jesus the husband of this Church. God, who is the God of reason, (of which that small portion which man is Master of, which yet ennobles him above all bodily creatures, is but a ray from the splendour of his allseeing sun-light, a spark from his celestial fire) worketh all things according to the counsel of his will, Ephes. 1.11. which counsel implies prudence, and reason in his actions; according to the type of that eternal law whereby he works himself, and commands all his creatures to work. And by this character the doctrines and the discipline of the Catholic Church proclaim him for their Author; and are not therefore to be disgraced (as they are by Protestants) by the ill-sensed name of policy; giving to the virtue of highest wisdom, the superscription of deceitful cunning. And the knowledge of those things, which in the government of this noblest Kingdom of Christ surmount the reach of present reason, are reserved for a reward of our humble belief, in the life to come; when our faith shall be happily turned into sight; and we shall clearly see, and be fully and eternally satisfied, with the reason of all those things, which now our short understandings have not line enough to fathom. Excellent things are spoken of thee thou city of God, Psal. 86.3. And as it is written of Alexander the Great, that his body was of such an excellent composition, that it sent forth sweet vapours that perfumed all his clothes; and our Saviour we know had such abundant virtue flowing from him, that it cured such as touched him; such is the body of the Church, of so rare, so holy, and so rational a composure, that virtue goes out of her, and sanctifies; and wisdom, and makes reasonable all her garments, all her utensils, and whatsoever appertains to her, the smell of thy garment is like the smell of Frankincense, Cant. 4.11.  
And if any third party that were neither of the Roman, nor of any Protestant Church, should observe the admirable frame of this Church, both in regard of the doctrine & discipline, he would surely say, as the Apostle to the Corinthians, (1 Cor. 14.25.) God is truly in you; and with the Patriarch Jacob, How dreadful is this place? this is no other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven; Gen. 28.17. and as in the Canticles 6.10. this is she that goeth forth like the springing morn, fair as the moon, choice as the sun, terrible as an army in battle array.  
But looking on the Churches of Protestants or any sort of Heretics, he should see a body without a head; or (which is as monstrous) an hydra, a beast with many heads, and that possibly may have as many more, if Kingdoms should be lessened and increased: having a law without a Judge; but every one that is a party, claiming that power, in his own cause. Where they have no assurance that their law is uncorrupt, but by the testimony of those they account their adversaries, and the greatest liars and seducers of the world. Who have amongst them no faith but opinion, no charity, but humanity, no hope fitly tempered with fear, but bold presumption and pretended assurance; for which, they that are the most confident, have the least cause of any men in the world. Where there is no beauty, comeliness, or order worthy the Bride of Christ, not yet of the design or owning of any generous, or wise and prudent man. But as some Philosophers hold that the world was made by the accidental concourse of Atoms; So they seem to be made by chance, and by chance to come together, not being united by any internal form, but only in a political opposition of her, who is their Mother and Mistress.  
The Senate of Rome having chosen three men to go on an Embassy, whereof the one had his head full of cuts and gashes, the other was a fool, and the third had the Gout; Cato laughing said, that the Sen●● had sent an Ambassador, which had neither head, heart, nor feet; And even such imperfect things are all heretical and deformed Churches, which want faith for their head, charity for their heart, firmness and perseverance for their feet. Holding such monstrous and absurd opinions, that they make up a bundle of Heathenism, Turkism, Heresy, and contradictions to commonsense. Can then any indifferent and prudent man, who knows that God made the world with wisdom, in number, weight and measure, can he think that they are the Church of God, the dear Spouse of Christ, for whose sake he descended from his heavenly Throne, and took and lost humane life? Or will he not rather say, that they are mad? 1 Cor. 14.26. Who are framed neither in number, weight, nor measure; their societies and Churches being (or being possible to be, according to their principles) as many as their persons; their opinions vain and foolish; and their government confused and misshapen, seeming rather a chaos than a creation. In sum there is nothing that can be said for a true Catholic Church, but may be truly said for the Roman; & there is ●othing that the Protestant Churches have said, or can say for themselves, but have been, or may be said by Heretics; and are said by those who subdivide and separate from them; which pretences if they be good in them against the Church of Rome, they are good in others against them; which yet they will not admit. So that the Church of Rome is the true Church, or there never was any true Church; and all Protestants are Heretics, or there never were any that deserved that name.  
§. 9 What remains then for all Protestants of what sort or title soever, but to listen to the voice which sayeth, Go out of her my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. Revel. 18.4. To redeem their souls from forfeiture, that have been thus long mortgaged to eternal death: and with the Prodigal son to return home to the Catholic Church, their mother, and thereby to God their Father, in whose house there is plenty of celestial Manna, while they perish for want of food, or become fellow commoners with the hogs, and feed upon husks and draught: and thereby to give joy both to earth and heaven in their conversion; seeing that as the elements never rest contentedly but in their proper place● so they will find no rest, but in the bosom of the true Church, which is the proper place of every Christian. To listen to the voice which crieth, Return, return o Sunamite, return, return, Cant 6.13. And the Spirit and the Bride say, come: And let him that heareth say, come: and let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely; Revel. 22.17. by coming to Mount Zion, and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of Angels: to the general assembly and Church of the first borne which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the Spirits of just men made perfect, and to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, Heb. 12.22.23.24. before he come to them as a terrible Judge, revealed from heaven with his mighty Angels in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, 2. Thess. 1.7.8. And that they may all do so, especially the Kingdom of England, and most especially the most excellent King thereof; Strike, o strike their and his soul, (O Lord) with thy omnipotent grace, whose magnetic virtue may draw his Royal heart to thee, and make him a glorious and happy instrument of drawing others, till they all meet in the unity of the faith; so to continue, until their mortality shall put on immortality, and his temporal crown of thorns be exchanged for an eternal crown of glory, Amen.   
FINIS.  S. Ambr. Ep. 31. ad Valent. Imp. 
Non erubesco cum toto orbe longaevo converti, verum certè est, quia nulla aetas ad perdiscendum sera est. Erubescat senectus, quae emendare se non potest. Non annorum canities est laudanda, sed morum. Nullus pudor est ad meliora transire.   

A Table of the Contents of the several Chapters contained in this Book.  

Chap. 1. THe Introduction; And that the knowledge of the means to arrive unto eternal life, is not otherwise attaineable then by faith, grounded on the Word of God. pag. 1.  
Chap. 2. Of the means to know which is the Word of God; And that all the arguments employed by Protestants to prove that the Scripture (and it only) is the Word of God, are insufficient; And that the General Tradition of the Catholic Church, is the only assured proof thereof. p. 6.  
Chap. 3. Of the insufficiency of means used by Protestants to find out the true sense of Scripture. The absurdity of that assertion of theirs, That all points necessary to salvation are clear and manifest. p. 26.  
Chap. 4. Of the vanity and impiety of those, who affirm that each man's particular reason is the last Judge and interpreter of Scripture, and his guide in all things which he is obliged to believe and know. And that the Catholic Church is the only Judge. p. 36.  
Chap. 5. Of the meaning of those words Church and Catholic, and that neither of them belong to Protestants. p. 49.  
Chap. 6. Of the Infallibility of the Church. p. 54.  
Chap. 7. That Catholic Tradition is the only firm foundation and motive to induce us to believe, that the Apostles received their Doctrine from Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ from God the Father. And what are the means by which this Doctrine is derived down to us. p. 66.  
Chap. 8. That the Church is infallible in whatsoever she proposeth as the Word of God written, or unwritten, whether of great or small consequence. That to doubt of any one point is to destroy the foundation of Faith. And that Protestants distinction between points fundamental and non-fundamentall is ridiculous and deceitful. p. 78.  
Chap' 9 That there is and ever shall be a visible Church upon earth. And that this Church is one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic. p. 94.  
Chap. 10. That the Roman is that one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. p. 105.  
Chap. 11. That the true Church may be known by evident marks, and that such marks agree only to the Roman Church. And first of Universality, the first mark of the Church. p. 137.  
Chap. 12. Of the second mark of the Church, viz. Antiquity, both of persons and Doctrine. p. 151.  
Chap. 13. Of Visibility, the third mark of the Church. And of the vanity of Protestants supposition, that the true Church is sometimes invisible. That Protestant Churches have not always been visible. p. 188.  
Chap. 14. Of the fourth mark of the true Church, viz. a lawful succession, and ordinary vocation and mission of Pastors. And that it is ridiculous to affirm that Catholics and Protestants are the same Church. p. 208.  
Chap. 15. Of the fifth Mark of the true Church, viz. Unity in Doctrine, and of the horrible dissensions among protestants. p. 216.  
Chap. 16. Of the sixth Mark of the true Church, viz. Miracles. And that there are no true Miracles among Protestants. p. 240.  
Chap. 17. Of the seventh Mark of the true Church, viz. Conversion of Kingdoms and Monarches. p. 254  
Chap. 18. Of the eighth and ninth Marks of the true Church, viz. Sanctity of Doctrine and life. p. 260.  
Chap. 19 Of the tenth and last (here mentioned) Mark of the Church, viz. That the true Church hath never been separated from any society of Christians more ancient than her . p. 276.  
Chap. 20. That the Pope is the head of the Church. p. 281.  
Chap. 21. That English Protestants do much mistake Catholic Doctrine, being abused by the malice or ignorance of many of their Ministers. And that upon their own grounds they are obliged to inform themselves more exactly of the truth. p. 297.  
(Chap. 22.) Of Communion in one kind. (p. 331.)  
(Chap. 23.) Of the Liturgy and private prayers for the ignorant in an unknown tongue. (p. 351.)  
Chap. 22. Of the foolish, deceitful and absurd proceed and behaviour of Protestants in matter of Religion. And of the vanity and injustice of their pretext of conscience, for their separation from the Roman Church. p. 336  
Chap. 23. The Conclusion; wherein is represented on the one side the splendour and orderly composure of the Roman Catholic Church: And on the other side, the deformity and confusion of Protestant Congregations. p. 362.    

The faults made by the Printer, I desire the Reader thus to correct.  
Page 21. line 1. deal §. 5. p. 37. l. 2. r. tittle. p. 47. l. 25 r. faith. p. 61. l. 18. deal come. p. 71. l 19 r. dangerous. p. 85. l. 14. & 15. r. ununiversall. p. 140. l. 24. r. Psal: 2.8. p. 147 l. 3. r. became. & l. 17. r. man. p. 165. l. 9 r. intermingled. p. 168. l. 11. r. unexpressible. p. 188. l. 23. r. to a City. p. 199. l. 9 r. tittle. p. 201. l. 21. r. one. p. 208. l. 22. r. all meet. p. 210. l. 4. deal ought, & r. accusing. p. 221. l. 13. r. call. p. 261. l. 17. r. of hell. & l. 25. r. in our. p. 276. l. 23. r. different. p. 290. l. 2. r. say of. & l. 12. r. pillar of. p. 293. l. 8. r. denying them. p. 292. l. 18. r. Bishop, p. 307. l. 12. r. as his. p. 341. l. 15. r. consequentiae. p. (358. l. 12. r. done in. p. 358. l. 14. r. to this. p. 367. l. 15. deal in. p. 368. l. 5. r. Union   

Postscript. The French Printer to the English Reader.  
WHilst this piece (so generally and deservedly liked and applauded both in the English Original, and in the French Version) was reprinting here at Paris, the learned Author (returning hither from Rome in the very nick of time) hath thought fit to add a Preface and two new Chapters to it, the first, Of Communion in one kind; the other, Of praying in an unknown tongue; both no less requisite, then abundantly satisfactory; So that I make no question, but the contentment and benefit you will receive thereby, will easily reconcile you aswell to the misnumbring of some Chapters & pages, occasioned by the Addition, as to some other Erratas, for which my ignorance in your language craves the benefit of a pardon.  
Adieu.